Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
DESTINY invokes the sacred RIGHT OF REPLY & I counter claims that Dr. K is problematic
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- #destiny #healthygamergg #debate
I conduct a mini decoding of DECODING THE GURUS CZcams Channel - where they reveal why Dr. K is problematic, how Jordan Peterson & Bret Weinstein use big words, and potential plans on their Reddit page to make a video about this very channel.
The Locals page mentioned in the video:
secretscholars.locals.com
Secret Scholars Academy:
wequilapp.page.link/YeCb
“Dr. K is problematic because he goes online…”
😂
The real reason Dr. K is problematic is that he played into the cultural betrayal of men by condemning his own audience without any sound reasoning for doing so. A bunch of activists turned up on his subreddit one day and complained about women being excluded from his community, and when asked what could be done to improve the situation (by Dr. K himself) the only answer they would accept was actively shaming the men that were in his community (whilst providing no evidence of actual wrongdoing). I thought that he would see this for the farce that it was, but in a video he uploaded later that week and in his own words (paraphrasing a little because this is years ago and I'm not going digging, but the sentiment is definitely the same) "Sometimes the more evidence you have to discredit an idea, the more true it is" and proceeded to spend a week or so chastising the men in his audience.
In short he painted himself as a saviour of men but ended up betraying them. No wonder Dr. Peterson ended up being the cultural phenomena he is, since he's one of few public figures who haven't betrayed their male audience (with the remaining examples basically all being right wing).
@LucisClaritas what exactly is right wing because I have been labelled right wing because of certain things I have posted yet I despise both sides of politics.
@@Covaids ideologies does not equal politics. Even tho some politics aligns with certain ideologies. I would have to see your posts but tbh , if you are someone who doesnt want government overreach , doesnt embrace the lgbt agenda 100% , do believe that there are 2 genders , believe in freedom of speech but not of consequences you probably are right wing my friend.
That also describes old school Liberals. Don't worry too much about left/right. Both are no longer for people with opinions. I'm 58 and voted Republican and independent since 84. Voted Democrat for the first time in 2012. I guarantee I agree with most people on 85% of issues, at least. Both parties are a cult. There's nothing wrong being normal and being politically homeless. There's an old band called Rush who said "No, his mind is not for rent, to any God or Government." 🤔@Covaids
It's hard to find a high profile leftie that doesn't think people who dont share their opinions are problematic.
You spelled "impossible" wrong
Peterson is a leftie. A real one, though.
because lefties inherently believe in a illogical fallacy on its base case. that some how everything should be equal and that double standards make sense because of this logically.
@@khatdubell that’s my bad.
@@Imbapiranha
I think he’s said that’s his natural bent, but he understands the importance of maintaining a balance.
Destiny is the Naked Emperor of Debate
How so?
Newspeak is all about erasing words and room for nuance.
I agree, although Newspeak does introduce words as well.. such as 'problematic'
@@dubidolczektv5278 'Poblematic' is being redifined I feel, and space to call the problem or discuss it, will dissapear with the words to do so. 'Person' is in my top 10 favorite hated newspeak words. Were all just persons. Individuals. Now you can choose colour pink - + non hi👍, or frog, and feel free and open minded, next thing youre a person again. We; the persons.
Using "big words" isn't proof of someone trying to sound more intelligent then they are, sometimes those words are just more appropriate.
Sometimes.
“Big words” when used in good faith are used to be precise and prevent misunderstanding. General jargon can suffer from multiple definitions or can be easily misinterpreted. On the other hand, “big words” can also be used to talk over the listeners understanding or to demonstrate the speakers intellect which shouldn’t be necessary if your argument is sound.
@@darrylldoucette6895 Yes, precisely. I also think we forget that Jordan is/was in the intellectual sphere. Of course he tends to use bigger words. He's not primarily a communicator. Even in his psychology practice, it is likely he did more of listening. While I find that mode of speaking somewhat pretentious at times, even with his mode of speaking, people still misinterpret his words and gleam the least charitable interpretation of his speech. I can see why his goal shouldn't be to be even more imprecise. Also, it genuinely isn't that bad to be honest.
Seems like people who don't understand the sheer size and complexity of the world we live in. "big words" exist for a big world.
I think there's a difference between using big words when appropriate and just spewing out word salads, the latter of which I'd say Destiny tends to do
3:15 LOL I'd wager they only have issues with non-leftist intellectuals using "big words." Peterson is a doctor of psychology, of course he's going to use big words. He's lived in the world of academia since he was an undergraduate.
He could still learn to be more succinct. There’s a reason why academia and pop culture are separate levels.
LOL well not true since they've made fun of Vaush.
@creatrixZBD how much more succinct can you be without losing the full meaning of your words to layman's terms?
sounds a lot like you using "succinct". im sorry your attention span is that of a puppy
"Big words" are very enriching. I love learning new words from people using them. The "big word' says a lot. Pretty "succinct" to me!
@@creatrixZBDmaybe he doesn't want to get right to the point. Maybe he wants to actually discuss the point, and how he or you got there. And if your reasoning is good or not. That's why he has his podcasts.. to be able to go as far in depth with an idea as he wants, without someone saying, ohh my gawd, he's been speaking for more than a minute, I'm bored..
Maybe some points, take more than a minute and more than 20 words.
Keep staying real Warren.
These guys think they are way smarter than they are. It’s easy to criticize, it’s harder to motivate people to meaning.
🎯
I think it is rather obvious that DECODING THE GURUS are engagement farming. Pick a larger channel / individual with a larger following, manufacture a controversy, enjoy the new traffic. This is just a "mean girl" tactic.
I get the same vibe. It's easy to "punch up" and use that as your entire platform. From what I've seen, they're not very bright and they use the tactics they claim others use as their weapons. I'm reminded of a family member who would constantly accuse another of infidelity only to find that they, of course, were the guilty party. Those types of people are fragile and produce some pretty thick delusions to justify their behaviors and general expressions. These two feel this way to me, to put it in terms they'd more easily understand. Don't want to use big words or concepts afterall.
Adam, you might be describing projection with the family member story. Common, and nearly a certainty with people with personality disorders. How people see the world usually tells us more about who they actually are inside. Sadly :-/ And weird how the word “problematic” seems to mostly be used by unpleasant people.
You can literally say the same shit about this channel. To be fair i think that you are right, but let's not pretend that the same shit isn't happening here.
The only reason you're framing that in that way is because they were nice to someone you dislike or were mean to someone you like.
Warren titled this video with DESTINY. It may be farming but it doesn't necessarily equal bad intentions.
If they are concerned about red flags for content creators I'd say that the biggest one is when someone's content is entirely based around being critical of others. While constructive criticism can be valuable, channels or accounts that solely exist to tear others down tend to breed negativity and toxicity rather than improvement of the community. It's often rooted in jealousy, insecurity, or a desire for attention through controversy. It's also a crutch, a way to generate content without offering unique perspectives or anything of value yourself.
Not sure who you'd be referring to as "jealous". This is a video of someone critiquing others who are critiquing others, btw. That *what* is less of a concern than *how*, and it seems everyone here is civil.
And if someone were to imply that Destiny is clout-chasing....cmon... That'd just be silly....
everyone wishes Destiny was as smart as he thinks he is.
He went to my high school. Trust me, it’s doable
Oh he is smart in a high processing ability way. The problem is that he lacks any ability to actually comprehend the time and effort that went into all of the data and sources he scrolls through. And he repeatedly shows a lack of Critical Thinking and Information Literacy when he gets agitated and disturbed when somebody else (often more educated on the matter than him) says that his sources are either wrong, inaccurate, or purposely misleading. It is like Destiny cannot comprehend that the Wikipedia entry might not be accurate.
Red flag that you don’t like someone; make a comment with no context or facts to support your statement.
@@Basillio11 I think he means well but at times I find it hard to dissociate his arguments from bad faith. That tends to happen when people are more concerned with winning the argument over having the discussion, and that’s not exclusive to him. It’s ubiquitous on the internet these days
I do not. It is funnier to laugh at Destiny being a dumbass all the time
The reason why Destiny lands up in all these debates recently - is a complete mystery to me.
Because he did ungodly amounts of research on the Israel Palestine conflict after Oct 7th and pretty much everyone else talking about it is retarded
because his name bring the most eyes and ears to the video?
@@jamesjimmy7495 Fair enough. Not sure why he brings in views. Don't see it being sustainable.
It was 2 weeks after his interview with Jordan that he's going around calling him problematic, too
@@SolDizZowell JP called him a luciferian intellect so fair game lol
the Decoding guys usually criticize folks that are popular…because they are popular.
You don't need to tell people to like and subscribe. You stand out more if you don't.
Everyone keeps telling me that is wrong, and to say it. But I agree with you. It feels off.
I understand wanting to stand out but I've seen many cases of youtubers who didn't want to say it but then did and it did help with getting more subscribers.
Sure you can't compel people to like or subscribe but if you offered the invitation to stick around because you genuinely believe in the value of your content then why feel hesitant to encourage people to leave positive impressions? Making a point not to ask for support seems like a strange power trip.
@@SecretScholars i look at it this way: if you don't say it. someone may not like the video or subscribe. if you do say it they are more likely to scroll down check the like button or the sub button and consider clicking them. takes 2 seconds to say like and sub. you don't need to beg for 1 minute. keep it short and quick.
i myself will like the video when they mention it. i catch my self doing it a lot.
@@jobiy1999 how is it a power trip to have respect for your audiences intelligence?
I have to say, there is something refreshing about these guys inviting people on their show that they talk negatively about and giving them a chance to defend themselves. It's something I think is really lost these days. No one wants to hear from someone they disagree with. They just want to say why they think they are bad or wrong and then just keep it at that.
It’s also a convenient way to grow your channel. If you always criticize bigger fish and invite them to respond, you might get some of their audience.
Sam Seder uses this a lot, but he’s toxic enough that virtually no one engages him.
Its disingenuous clout chasing, they're trash.
Do they disagree with smaller creators frequently as well and give them the ability to defend themselves? Or do they only criticize bigger fish?
Content farming?
Lmao the intro clip where buddy says Dr. K having a therapeutic discussion is problematic, because he's a clinical psychologist. He very clearly states in every video that he's going to try and NOT make it a therapy session: 1) he is trying to be respectful of the person he's talking to, not everyone wants a clinical session 2), he's not getting alpaid 3) it's honestly really unprofessional to delve into a deep psychoanalysis on a public forum.
It's nice to see more reasonable, intelligent guys like you come out on the cesspool of social media, Dr. K id put in the same category. If we let these narcissist "thought leader" grifters totally dominate the space people will become more hostile, dumber, and continue to become divided.
Im not sure Dr.K is good for people either.
Dr. K is a psychiatrist not clinical psychologist. He went to Med School (has an MD not PhD)
Dr k also believe in ayurveda which is stupid
what do you eat to become so brain dead?
Someone should make a video decoding the decoders.
"Do not trust anyone who seeks Truth. They are the most biased hacks."
That is indeed why Destiny operates, since he seeks Power. He argues to win. And Power is the only truth that maters in his religion. So, he thinks that if you pursue the Truth and there are many people who came to that conclusion, you only are in that camp because it is powerful.
You just straw manned him. He said introducing yourself as a truth seeker is a red flag. He did not say people who seek truth are untrustworthy. The difference here is not a hard concept to understand at all. You clearly just dislike the guy.
@@Elrog3 No, I steel manned his argument. There is only power and those to weak to grasp it. If you do not argue to win, you heart is not in it.
@@baswenmakers6846 No, you didn't. He does not think power is truth. Watch the clip again. He first admits he himself has a lot of red flags. He then goes on about people who say they seek truth often being full of BS and how its a red flag. Those two things followed one after the other and it was not a coincidence. He said it like that because he is someone who introduces himself as a truth seeker.
I like your channel. It’s a nice break from politics without caving in to cat videos.
That about sums it up.😂
Am I bit too tired and grumpy, or is there a toxic podcast channel grift judging people who have original thoughts enough to make a genuine podcast or channel?
One mention of Reddit makes it hard to concentrate on any thing seriously lol.
I like your channel.
Lol, I can see how you got that impression, since not a lot of their podcast is featured in this video (understandable since they're like 3h long..). From the little i have seen, they come across as less grifty and less influenced by audience capture than most. Like recently did had harsher criticisms for Hasan Piker than Destiny, which made their reddit "revolt".
@@Wate Sounds like you've been subscribed to them a little while.
@@terrormisssue9254 I've listed to 2 and a half episodes. But if you didn't want an answer to your question, and just needed to vent, I won't bother you. Peace
@@Wate lol!
Okay, thank you, hope you have a nice day. :)
This CZcams channel would probably find 90% of great philosophers in history "problematic" if they were alive today.
Could you think of anything they would NOT find problematic? :-/
Well in that case, I'd probably agree.
Well, 90% of philosopher's were problematic and believed all sorts of weird and wacky things about the world and how to be a decent human being. Our ancestors were not nice people by our standards, or even vaguely civilised. Just because Aristotle had a couple of useful ideas, doesn't mean he was a nice guy or a decent human being. Doesn't mean they didn't help humanity improve upon itself.
What they are saying is the exact thing they want you not to follow from the other side. "Don't listen to them, listen to us". The hypocrisy is phenomenal.
Hallelujah!!! I’m the favorite, $60,000 every week! Now I can afford anything and also support the work of God and the church.
Oh really? Tell me more!
This is what Ana Graciela Blackwelder does, she has changed my life.
After raising up to 60k trading with her, I bought a new house and car here in the US and also paid for my son’s (Oscar) surgery. Glory to God.shalom.
I know Ana Graciela Blackwelder, and I have also had success...
Absolutely! I have heard stories of people who started with little or no knowledge but managed to emerge victorious thanks to Ana Graciela Blackwelder.
The DTG podcast is amazing. Very funny and self-deprecating and thoughtful and considered. I am a big Sam Harris fan and love that they decoded him twice and he came on their podcast twice to discuss their decoding. They didn’t agree on everything but it didn’t matter . Also not all their subjects get classed as gurus ..Sean Carroll scored close to zero on their ‘gurometer’ - they had nothing but praise for him.
The whole “right of reply” scenario just seems like a cheap ruse to get more clicks/followers by either generating controversy to get the “hate clicks”, or hoping to interact with larger channels/creators/personalities so they can gain a few more followers.
The internet has made me too cynical about these things over the years.
People operating with the “problematic” framework seem to lead with forgone conclusions: why mud is problematic. Why ancient norse is problematic. Why sunburns are problematic.
Since "problematic" just means it presents a problem, it doesn't indicate whether the subject created the problem or is targeted by a problem. It also doesn't mean that problem is bad; problems can just be difficult decision points.
In other words, blame is in the eye of the beholder. Maybe click-bait culture has us casting dispersions from mundane words.
@@floatingpointz5903 It seems to me that often the word is repurposed in quite an opposite way though.. and often it's quite clear that the intention is something like a wrist slap rather than to say that they're intrigued with any nuance or further discussion (at least as far as click bait culture goes) and disperse aspersions...
They don't appear to understand the meaning/ definition of "Newspeak". It isn't for "new age psychobabble" concepts. Guessing they have never read Orwell.
My issue with Dr. K is that he played into the cultural betrayal of men by condemning his own audience without any sound reasoning for doing so. A bunch of activists turned up on his subreddit one day and complained about women being excluded from his community, and when asked what could be done to improve the situation (by Dr. K himself) the only answer they would accept was actively shaming the men that were in his community (whilst providing no evidence of actual wrongdoing). It seemed obvious that he would see this for the farce that it was, but in his own words (paraphrasing a little because this is years ago and I'm not going digging, but the sentiment is definitely the same) "Sometimes the more evidence you have to discredit an idea, the more true it is" and proceeded to spend a week or so chastising the men in his audience.
He's loosly preaches 'healthy at any size' and 'weight is determined by your genetics' as well.
Even if he made a single mistake, he's still human and people fuck up sometimes, and he's made tons of videos talking about issues that men face too. That's a very minor issue to have with Dr. K who has done so much to help people everywhere.
@@blackstream2572 Has he apologised for that mistake? or even recognised it as such? Either way, in a culture where men face constant betrayal I think it's reasonable that some people would be put off by that incident completely.
@@LucisClaritas I'm also a man, but I completely disagree with your point of view, at least in regards to American culture, so it's hard for me to empathize with your feelings. It doesn't really matter in this instance, but this is so you know where I'm coming from.
I think just existing in a public space in a big way on the internet is gonna put people off completely (and draw other people in) constantly. It's just the nature of the beast, you can never please everybody. You make one person happy, you make another mad. I don't think some people feeling that way says much about Dr. K, unless a TON of people felt that way... which maybe they did, did Dr. K lose a lot of subscribers?
Anyways, people are allowed to feel what they want to feel, its their right. But I think they're making a mistake dismissing him because he really has put a lot of videos out there explaining men's perspectives that have gotten him flack for doing so too. So whatever harm he's done to men in your mind, I think he's done far more good.
Dr.K is good at what he's good at, like ADHD, depression and general self-help, but as soon as it gets to gender stuff, he shows a strong ideological bias.
I find Government to be problematic
identifying 'truth' is a red flag
Not the actual act (wherever you think that is actually found). The Zeitgeist of using *buzzwords* such as "truth", "veritas" or "freedom" as a type of cheap signaling: that's a red flag...
“Big words” = they know more than me.
Though sometimes it means "I could've used simpler words but chose not to so that the real meaning of what I'm saying is slightly more obfuscated than it needs to be". The effect on another person depends...
If you agree with their ideology: you will assume that the concept is just so big-brain that you can't figure it out so you should agree by default...
If you disagree with their ideology: you'll be annoyed that the person made the discussion unnecessarily difficult and obtuse....
@@floatingpointz5903 Or you could just know what the words mean.
@@Earthad23 sure, as in yourself understanding the word jargon and subsequently why it should be avoided.
But you know all the words for all the things; you won't have that problem.
When someone makes no valid attempt for their idea to be understood by their audience, then their "attempt" at communication is either pointless or designed for other motives (e.g. to appear smart with big words strung together to form a nonsense idea that is taken as substance by default when the user cannot parse through the nonsense; see also: bad faith arguments).
Then again, I tried to string a lot of basic sentences together to properly convey a response to what might as well have been "nuh-uhh"....
@@floatingpointz5903 indubitably!
@@floatingpointz5903 I have seen obfuscation intentionally used to get people inside who are easily confused. They seem someone using big words and think "this guy really knows what he's talking about" it actually works and that makes me sad.
It can also have the opposite effect in some cases which seems to be what's happening in their minds. The real goal should be to understand the words and see if that person genuinely does know what they are talking about
You seem honest, intelligent and articulate. I hope you found a space that pays you more than you ever lost for standing your ground for clear logic.
I wish we could reply to the political ads that play in these videos, and I wish the candidates could see them. Of course, big tech knows when I click "skip" as soon as I can, and "Siri" can probably hear me saying I want to skip the ad from across the room as my phone is charging, but I still wish that.
So glad you are covering this, I enjoy this podcast immensly, looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
Regardless of whether Brett uses overly technical language, he has demonstrated that his model of reality is highly predictive, and that he cares for humanity and its freedom.
Your lighting and video quality look excellent in this video. Well done
I don't know that I have the expertise to call anyone problematic but I personally believe having the courage to have open conversation about your feelings does not absolve you from tact. I don't know if his wife already agreed that their personal lives are ok to share with the world but people have a right to their emotional privacy. She may not have wanted to be an example to the world on how to have an open conversation.
On the subject of big words I do think it's a double edge sword because we do live in a free society and should be able to use uncommon language that more narrowly describes our thoughts but the speaker must also accept that the more obscure language used, the fewer people you will be able to communicate with. It's one of the primary reasons news papers tend not to use flowery language in articles. I believe most are around around 5-7 grade level.
I'm really confused by your content, Warren. From what I can ascertain you've been arguing for critical thinking, which I wholeheartedly support, and I think many of your criticisms of the left are absolutely on point. But, whenever I look in the comments all I see is a tsunami of hard right anti-left partisan content raging about "lefties". I never see you post anything critical about anyone on the right, even though there is clearly the absence of critical thinking in plenty of areas on the right, too.
I can't work out whether you're deliberately playing to the right or if you're genuinely trying to encourage critical thinking on all sides and to all people. It's hard to deny that there are all sorts of opinions on the right that are worthy of criticism as well as the left, but the right seem to get a pass from you.
You're an incredibly clear, insightful thinker who has a lot to offer the world, and I think it would be a real shame if you got caught up in partisan politics, only aimed your takes at the left and ended up shouting into a right wing echo chamber, which, judging by the comments, is what you're doing now. You're smart enough to rise above partisanship, and because criticism of the right is conspicuous in it's absence on your channel, you're missing a huge opportunity to reach more people.
I get the same vibe. Time will tell.
People who are super partisan will listen to anyone and anything that supports their worldview, and they’ll do so fervently. I highly doubt Warren is playing to the right. If I’m to guess, Warren’s higher amount of criticism directed at the left is because 1) there’s a lack of competent, real criticism of it and 2) criticism of the right is so insanely obvious that making content on it is uninteresting, particularly when the right is criticized in the mainstream. He’s trying to cover things outside, or slightly outside, of the mainstream.
Gleamed? Gleaned! :D love your stuff, I’m excited for whatever happens next for you. Big support.
1. The point about talking online is that legally in the USA Dr. K has to give out a disclaimer about not being able to give medical advice, because if the person is not officially a client in a licensed clinical practice, he legally cannot provide that service. They are trying to say he isn't really doing therapy and in actuality, he really isn't and can't. That doesn't mean he doesn't provide a good healthy conversation for the person he's speaking to which is the entire point of the chat. The point is to have a nice conversation and allow the viewer to follow what the thinking of the client sounds like over time in the conversation. Sorry to say all this but no one addressed the issue of legality which is the entire point. 2. Dr K's wife is mean to him on stream and is responsible for having Dr K change topics far too early sometimes, I'm glad he is aware of it and wanted to address it. She's still mean to him but he asserts his own boundaries by saying, "no I'm still going to talk about xyz." They work together though, she is literally in a way his boss, so the dynamic is very different than a typical relationship. She isn't just his wife so they are having a conversation about their relationship romantically and as colleagues.
Thanks for all that you do Warren. It's refreshing for sure.
You’re is so authentic and calm, logic and opinions with critical thinking. Love it, never stop. Soon people will flock for the need of understanding more then direct judging.
That is great, Warren. I do appreciate your attitude and honesty, and delicacy. Please, go on.
It is indeed ok to disagree, until it isn't and that point where it isn't ok, moves around by time and area, but what I'm talking about are extremes and considered ridiculous opinions. (examples are: sky is green and grass is blue, long pig, earth is ec.)
Well if their goal is just grabbing attention, poking at big names is a way to do that. Will it work in the long run as a strategy i'm not so sure.
"Those who destroy have never built anything." - KTIP.
Warren, I liked and subscribed because of your content...supporting / encouraging critical thinking. I prefer those who mention subscribing at the End of the video. I share your content because I believe that you provide an understanding on How to think, not What to think. Respect Sir.
I don’t normally leave a comment, but I just noticed that my CZcams history didn’t show that I watched Warren’s video even though it shows the video that I watched immediately before Warren’s. Not sure if anyone else is experiencing the same thing.
Thank you for taking the time to share this
It might take a little bit of time to update.
Forgive me for being Smart, Logical, Thoughtful, and Blinded to the Norm. You want me to be better or dare I say, you want me as you are. To that I say, I leave the "Cookie Cutting" to you. So, please leave me on my own path, respectfully, of course. 🤔
This is some next level hating 😂
i'm just writing something to feed the algorithm. Hope it helps =)
keep it up professor
i like the jumping in, i dont like intros at all
You are so close to 100K, I know some good CZcamsrs who have had their channel for years and not reached that yet. I hope you get there soon.
Who isn't a fan of Supercalifragilistiexpialidocious?
A Feedback on Locals Page:
Do Change layout or Change font colour from Green to anything with good contrast with background 🎉
I really like your channel! It's great!
Also just to add, Dr K constantly states that his sessions that he uploads to CZcams is NOT official therapy nor should it be considered one. If anyone wants further elaboration on this, he discussed this with Dr Mike.
That was real decoding.
If you’re going to ask people to “Like and Subscribe “, for myself, it annoys me if it’s said at the beginning of a video, because why would I do that before watching? That being said, I ALWAYS “Like” videos, and comments, that I like, and I “subscribe” if I want to see more, after checking out previous videos. ❤
Your lack of introductions/production can be jarring, especially for easily jarred people, but it is also very refreshing to see you jump straight into exercises in critical thinking and discussion. I hope you can continue this project, and in doing so find the stability you seek.
Destiny is an intellectual in the midst of a teenager audience which is who he appeals to and started out with when he was streaming gaming. He is the epitome of “I’m 14 and this is deep.”
Big words carry nuance, insulting your opponent for being precise in their debate is like insulting a marksman for using their sites. It’s also a bit of an excuse that he was completely outclassed and uses “all shallows are clear” thinking while they were in the deep end of the topics.
Destiny is my favorite Dunning-Krueger debater.
CZcams or any other online platform is NOT real life. When you standing or sitting with someone right next to you and in an actual conversation that is real life. Call me old fashioned but there’s no substitute for that.
Amen.
Haven't you heard? Having thoughts and expressing them on online platforms is right wing now. 😂
1:20 I have to say, that actually sounds like a really brilliant format idea. A podcast dedicated to canceling other podcasts. I'm not sure if I've seen anyone come up with such a monetizable implementation of cancel culture. It's impressive, really. "The Sacred Right to Respond" is a beautiful piece of bait that will enable them to gain access to audiences of creators who snap it up. Usually it's just a cudgel, but this thing sounds like it could have legs. At least until another podcast copies the format and cannibalizes them.
I think with regard to the big words thing… there are different types of intelligence.
For example, famously, most doctors suck at finance. They spend too much, take on too much debt etc…
Guys like Peterson or Sam Harris aren’t always intelligent communicators. But they are intelligent in a particular field.
We should never put a field on a pedestal. Most doctors and nurses knew very little about covid.
When I watch someone like Sam Harris who struggles to be clear or concise, I view that as an area where Sam Harris is not intelligent. Communication.
In other cases people do it intentionally for sure, and I personally just view that as kind of intellectual immaturity.
im sorry you got fired i saw your clip on tik tok id love to have u as a teacher and the world should have more teachers like you based on what i saw your work should deeply be appreciated
We all think we are right, the problem is when we try to sweep under the carpet the (ever existing) negative side of our ideology, most aren't familiar with contemplating that we are the villain to others.
My problem with Dr. K is he makes a lot of comments that promote being a victim and putting responsibility elsewhere (other than where it belongs, with us)
remember men having boundaries is "toxic"
There is a certain profile of person....almost always educated formally, but not always. They have a slightly higher IQ, but probably not as high as they would like to think. They always land slightly Left of center and drift issue to issue to stay slightly Left of Center. Then they do this attempted Gaslighting thing where they declare everyone else to their Right to be wrong, or wrong approaching, or wrong motivated etc... EVEN if that said person is unaware of it. In other words, they think they are so @#$%ing smart they can psychoanalyze the through decoding the motivations behind what they say. Always with that kind of smugness. People with IQ's above 140 rarely have this kind of smugness. Mainly because they are rarely interested in playing such petty games....and would rather cut right to the meat of direct conversation. Also, criticizing people for using big words correctly is one of the stupidest things I can think of. It is funny when somebody uses such words inaccurately, but it is impressive when they are using it organically.
thats because they see the right as a monolith of Christian mouth breathers secretly covering their own racism. Source: I used to be a lefty about 6 years ago and it's exactly what i thought
IQ tests don't measure emotional intelligence or mastery of ego. High intelligence doesn't equate to high morals or being more evolved.
lol. There is no hack greater than Destiny. Seriously, and he gave all buzzword-salad that was nothing but buzzword salad and a list of inferred ad hominems to label Dr. K. It was a 'Gish Gallop' crap-fest as it were.
"Problematic" just means "exposes my bullshit".
"I'm a bit concerned how disrespectful you are to me on stream." Well, it might have been better to say "I feel as if you are a bit disrespectful to me on stream, what do you think?" She replied like a woman who wants to keep the peace. One of the presenters said "he had to set her straight." Hmmm....🤨
I'm not sure I can even really parse out the criticism here. Are we saying it's wrong for them to point out reasons why people perhaps out to be sceptical about certain individuals?
It may behove you to respond to longer clips perhaps to get a fuller sense of the context surrounding their clips, because it feels like you're boiling down their criticisms or warning into snippets, when they're analysed and fleshed out over a longer period of time.
I'm going to make a claim that may or may not be true, but my intuition is that the type of content that this "Decoding the Gurus" podcast focus on is going to devolve in a similar way to the 24 hr cable news channel cycle. Once one runs out of genuine things to talk about, topics are invented or pulled out of thin air in order to generate more content to feed the audience and maintain relevance.
I have such a love hate relationship for Destiny.
Number 1 red flag - people who don't address the arguments being made, and instead - attack the person to dismiss them.
I have never witnessed anyone online more guilty of that than Destiny.
Those fellas interviewing him will go nowhere.
The entire herd is shifting away from such parlor tricks.
uhuh..so you're not paying attention or you're just bad faith,
Noted
@@the19Zabaniyah Their entire "decoding" was bad faith.
@@the19Zabaniyah No one uses logical fallacies when they can beat the argument, logically.
The only debate is 'which logical fallacy does Destiny lean on the most?'
Straw man, ad hominem, and appeal to authority - are all in the running. lol
@@the19Zabaniyah destiny will start talking over and personally attack opponents in almost every debate he does.
@@DrFeelgood1127 Hey man, would love to see a few specific examples of debates where Destiny only attacks his opponent, rather than engaging with the point being made.
I find your videos refreshing because they are NOT like all the other videos on CZcams. But I also understand how it will help you for your channel to grow. I'd just worry your message would get lost in the sea of garbage out there if you become too much like what's popular. Such a fine line there. I know you'll make the right choice for you. Just expressing my worries and appreciation for your content. BIG HUGS and stay strong. Let us know how we can help you.
the whole plot is damaged with cynical minds that are waiting for healing. i know because i am also at cause but i'm at higher consciousness because i can discern, WHEN it happens. especially when i initiate cynical stories myself.
These guys are awful and so destructive to anything potentially worthwhile, constructive and beneficial. I love Dr. K and Jordan Peterson. Jordan uses exactly the words that describe his thoughts the most clearly. He doesn't try to dumb down his language. And Dr. K is such a sensible and decent and honest soul, and just wants to help people who have tremendous mental problems and related serious life obstacles. If these are the kinds of things they have a problem with and spend their time criticizing, they are basically worthless wastes of resources and add nothing of value to anybody's life. I certainly won't be enjoying their output.
They are incredibly biased especially the Irish fanny, he gets angry all the time, this is a red flag. Bad faith, bad reasoning, audience captured nonsense
@SecretScholars: I saw the original version of this video on Twitter. I’m glad that, between that rendition and this, you appear to have figured out how Reddit works; you seemed previously to be under the impression that all posts in a subreddit dedicated to a podcast must be sanctioned transmissions from the hosts of that podcast. Also, it was probably a good move to exclude the part where you called your former best friend an idiot. How embarrassing.
Unfortunately, this iteration too mischaracterizes both the post and Decoding the Gurus as a whole in (ironically, but unsurprisingly) the exact ways the post highlighted as being consistent issues with your output: namely, the distillation of the now-standard rhetoric, talking points, and conclusions characteristic of long-form “heterodox” content by the likes of Jordan Peterson into nonsensical junk food serving the exclusive purpose of satisfying the emotional desire of your audience to see their political adversaries made to look foolish, all with a veneer of intellectualism that enables them to feel smart and rational by proxy. Here’s just a few examples:
1. You’ve cherry-picked only the most inflammatory words or sentences in a long post and dozens of comments and presented them without context to pretend you’ve been unfairly victimized, and to avoid addressing any of the substantive critiques leveled.
2. You clearly did no research whatsoever into the Decoding the Gurus podcast, which consists of hundreds of hours of content at this point; instead, you again selected a sliver without context and pretended that was representative of the whole. Your chosen selection allowed you to name drop two popular content creators (in capital letters, no less!) while having the audacity to - in almost the same breath - passive-aggressively devalue the hosts as clout-chasers for discussing those figures. One would think your superior powers of critical analysis would preclude such hypocrisy! Even better - the segment you chose included the trigger word “problematic,” so you could be assured your audience would dismiss the podcast hosts and their audience as hysterical social justice warriors. This is inaccurate, but it handily discredits any critiques leveled in the subreddit without you having to address them.
I could go on, but - given your penchant for engaging only with the most cartoonish strawman representations of disagreement, as highlighted in the post - I’m sure there’s no point.
Why does the boy in the cream shirt sound like he has the slowest belfast accent iv ever heard.... its insane. I just can't work out where its from...
I watched part of the destiny video and it's clear to me that these decoding the gurus guys are *projecting* all this selfish motivation and desire for fame. Their jealousy is pretty ugly.
Jesus everyone is problematic
There are very few talking heads on youtube that I actually think are worth the time to listen to. Maybe 5-6, max, and half of that is because they are reporting on recent events.
Big words are not problematic but if you are trying to engage someone in conversation knowing your audience is key. Sometimes what they hear is like a foreign language they don’t understand which results in a tuning out. In such a case it would be better to not speak at all.
Ja fy farao vad du jag håller med polarn! Det skulle känns så något så in i norden luffigt om någon snackade med en skvätt ortentugg så att det blir för bövelens snick snackigt att man känner sig fullständigt koko i bollen.
Destiny. More like Density.
Nah, just keep jumping in. We are so over saturated with "intros".
Scientists using the vocabulary their training has provided them to do what they do is problematic. Right.
'His words make me feel dumb, he's problematic!' 🤣
They’re both scientists too, and so am I. If you think all scientists talk in the same way as Jordan Peterson or Bret Weinstein, you’re sorely mistaken. It’s painfully obvious that they go out of their way to use more complex language than needed much of the time, which isn’t typically done, especially when talking to a large nonspecialist audience. And it’s not a matter of intelligence either - the few Nobel prize winners I’ve spoken to also speak nothing like Peterson or Weinstein, probably because they have nothing to prove. You don’t have to try and sound as eloquently as possible when your achievements speak for themselves. Bret Weinstein, on the other hand, has accomplishing nothing academically in the last 15 years. Peterson was pretty accomplished at one point, but he’s still quite over-the-top with his language.
I couldn't say if Dr. K is problematic or not, i think since he's not MY therapist it wouldn't be wise to follow his advice verbatim, he doesn't know me, we have zero history, his discussions should be looked at as non specific help, potentially educated words from a stranger, that's how i see it.
I have zero context for that moment with his wife so it wouldn't be fair to jump to conclusions, i assume he doesn't speak to her in his "therapist mode" normally, and if not on camera she might have thrown a cushion at him.
Your point about fame vs stability hit home.
hell yeah
Replying to something isn't a right its both a privilege and choice thats it there is no right from the constitution or from the 30 human rights from the Geneva convention that says you have a right to respond or reply or whatever no because that does not matter he has the right to freedom of speech and he can choose to or not to reply or respond to whatever the situation is you can also ignore it these people do not know what a right is or what a privilege is
Just more resentful people trying to draw attention to themselves by throwing mud at others. Keep up the good work, Warren!
The things I actually find Dr K problematic for is sometimes he too heavily leans on Indian philosophy to explain people's problems, and sometimes he can seem a little too sure of himself. In saying that, I do think there's value to be gleaned from ancient wisdom or ancient ideas, and I do believe he's a well meaning, good intentioned person. So overall he's not that problematic. He tries to do good for people, and he puts streamers in a human light so everyone can relate.
Idk, maybe, possibly, the Dunning Kruger effect gets a podcast and a Subreddit, or some shit like that. 😂 They could maybe bust out a dictionary and look up those big words, and stuff. Derp
Nice work, Warren ! I appreciate how non-reactive you are.
Did he bring his emotional support pen and paper?