The Dangerous Rise of Anti-Intellectualism | Asmongold Reacts

[@shaunbrender]

"Anti-intellectualism" wouldn't be on the rise if schooling was proper and "experts" were left to actually do their jobs instead of being paraded around as walking appeal to authority fallacies for large media corporations.

[@beyondthedetails]

That has nothing to do with ignorance. You can have the best schooling and you would still have ignorance.

[@bobdole3804]

They've widen the definition of "expert" so far it's become meaningless.

[@lucasgregory6375]

Did you have a stroke halfway through writing that? Or did you just pick a whole heap of buzzwords and throw them together?

[@promethiac2641]

That sounds like a cognitive distortion as a "woke" vs "not woke" dynamic is part of anti-intellectualism.

[@tovsteh]

@@beyondthedetails Because our universities no longer teaches people HOW to think, but instead WHAT to think. Its infested with ideologues.

[@deejitv]

I cannot tell if Professor Dave is intentionally using himself as an example of the rise of anti-intellectualism or if the irony is just completely lost on him.

[@johnthomas1422]

Dunning Krueger effect.

[@Ravalin]

most people on that faction have zero self awareness. They are all ego and no sense.

[@daronen8322]

he probably has one of the most widest breath of knowledge on KZbin especial in all the science video he post that go into detail over challenging topics, so I have no clue what the hell you are talking about.

[@Muizemullard414]

From the sounds of it, it seems he is being very serious and is quite nasty in his comments with people disagreeing with him.. I was really hoping at the end of the video he would switch it around and be like that's how easy it is to be controlled and that you should always watch out for people pushing a agenda but nope... he was completely searious.

[@ejs7861]

15:00 yes.... 😂😂😂 free speech is the way, let people speak freely~

[@V0ltron]

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." ~ George Orwell, 1984

[@michaelatkins3384]

and the churches tell you walk by faith not sight sounds similar

[@christianalanwilson434]

Unfortunately some people saw that book not as a warning, but as a blueprint.

[@Ravalin]

@@michaelatkins3384 shalom

[@crusaderkaiser2000]

@@michaelatkins3384 Church has no power over our lives is the difference. Also this is in a spiritual sense, not a propaganda sense like the quote above.

[@jazzyjswift]

@@michaelatkins3384 Sure, and even if that is taken out of context, this isn't an issue with the church in our society. This is an issue with leaders seeking to keep power and corporations seeking to enhance their bottom line. The church has little say in America anymore. And even if it did, it wouldn't be the main cause of the issues that we are facing. Strawman arguments aren't going to solve the problem. It only deflects it onto the popular scapegoat that you are told to hate, and is just another way that these same groups keep the blame off of themselves and the money flowing in.

[@todd8398]

I get wary whenever anyone starts talking about "who deserves a platform".

[@ThomasMatlock]

As well you should

[@Kesvalk]

>ostracize groups for thinking in extremes >talks about said groups in extremes too this guy needs a mirror.

[@monalisa-bs4zs]

His immediate and defined comments regarding Trump were just weird. Like just showing the audience he has large bias in an intro. To me, Trump seems more like the type of person to bow down to science and hire based on merit more so than liberal parties atm.

[@blackhat4206]

@@monalisa-bs4zs Trump likes people who like him, and attacks those who dislike him. Merit has little to do with it, though. He would never hire the most qualified person if they didn’t “bend the knee” and sing Trump’s praises at every opportunity.

[@ddd45125]

@@blackhat4206what a weird take, just weird bro.

[@DanielDorn-tr7tw]

@@blackhat4206 How do you explain him choosing JD Vance as his VP then? You dont make sense man

[@Klongu_Da_Bongu]

@@blackhat4206 But he doesn't attack those who dislike him. He's the only candidate so far that said he's fighting for the people that don't vote for him, for all Americans. No other candidate said that about MAGA.

[@signa8]

Ok, I'm only 3 minutes in, and the guy is citing a serious bipartisan problem and pretending only one side is the *REAL* problem. Way to prove your own video's point....

[@optimize0]

It's Professor Dave. That's one of his weaknesses.

[@rickyeverett1016]

I do like the fake new is only on the right, hilarious, Russia Russia Russia, lol.

[@jeterthebulldog642]

Which side's Presidential nominee thinks climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese, that wind turbines cause cancer, and mused about injecting cleaning disinfectants into the lungs?

[@AndeePasta]

Agreed both sides of politics are the problem anyone in power has no one with less power's interests with best intentions.

[@Gromaul]

It does on multiple levels. He pretends it only one side, and then spends 30 seconds pontificating on project 2025, something that only very specific liberal spheres are talking about as it has no major support amongst Republicans (caveat, as project 2025 was written up by a Republican think tank, it does share many themes Republicans would agree with. It's just that their actual action plan has received no endorsements by major R politicians, and has to the contrary, been mocked by their Presidential candidate). That on its own would be fine, but his main thesis is the strain of anti-intellectualism and how people have stopped listening to scientists. He wants to pretend as if he is educated about a problem and should be treated with authority, while basically propagating a left-wing conspiracy theory thus showing why that is a terrible idea (note, project 2025 is real, the conspiracy is that it has any sort of traction amongst the Republican platform). Just as an FYI, some Republicans do believe some crazy conspiracy theories, but when this is his example it tells me he talks a good game, but can't even look in the dang mirror.

[@wikidpsycokilla]

The heavy political skew comes close to invalidating a lot of the arguments made in the video. The largest contributor to anti-intellectualism in recent memory is the insistence that only recognized experts and authoritative sources are allowed to have an opinion. People were encouraged to not think for themselves, and those that did were silenced. Even legitimate experts were discredited for having a different opinion. Claiming the experts are infallible and not to be questioned is even more damaging than the legitimate concerns that the video brings up.

[@daronen8322]

yes but most people arguing against the experts don't have the baseline knowledge to even be part of the conversation and were contributing nothing. Anyone who talks about how NRNA vaccines will change your DNA doesn't have the baseline knowledge about how our cells work to even be part of the conversation. Its like your grandad chiming in about how to play a warrior in wow optimally when he's never touched the game.

[@DosonTheGreat]

True. inb4 someone disingenuously states "no one is claiming they are infallible." IF not claimed, implied. It IS implied, and they KNOW they are doing it. "Only listen to the experts with whom WE agree." Nothing is a greater threat to intellectualism than people who use the prestige of "intellectuals" as a weapon to manipulate others.

[@redavni1]

I believe this is a propaganda piece. It's 2024, they are getting sophisticated.

[@saeedbonabian1322]

Yep. Plus it’s ridiculous to think there aren’t heavily religious intellectuals. Most of modern higher education institutions have religious roots and schools

[@bruhus_momentum]

Yeah i thought he really had a case until he started rambling "This other side of the same coin that is just bad as me is the source of the all problems". He pseudointellectually tries to warn people againist ignorance but he contributes to this problem

[@orxy5316]

This guy completely undermines any point he has by being a partisan ideologue

[@LAM1895]

It's hard to talk about these subjects without talking about politics and being engaged in it. Anyway in any argument there are things we agree on and things that we don't, that's called having a nuanced opinion. And not agreeing on certain points shouldn't keep us from seeing the validity of the others.

[@k9px]

@@LAM1895 No it's not, 1:45 he could have placed leftist signs there too. 1 minute later instead of just focusing on orange man bad, he could have also given the reverse argument or criticize the other side too. But he's not a centrist, he's a leftist... and this is what we get.

[@monehget]

​@@LAM1895it really isn't hard to keep yourself in check when talking with others.

[@LAM1895]

@@monehget My point was it doesn't matter what position he takes, you can pick the things that make sense and those that don't.

[@aaad3552]

Watch second thought. There's no centrist.

[@umporeon0132]

My college Psychology Professor once said to the class "If you don't understand something, ask questions. If nobody answers the question, you asked a new question nobody thought about before."

[@nowayjosedaniel]

Or in reality in the USA: You asked the wrong question. Other people asked it too but were censored, canceled, or even had their lives destroyed. So you're about to find out why no one asks this question anymore

[@NeedmoreVodkaASAP]

Both are true

[@umporeon0132]

@@nowayjosedaniel They didn't answer the question. So they didn't think about it either.

[@mai-xf5tn]

​@@nowayjosedaniel in the real world no one is like that. You live too much in the internet

[@Zionswasd]

​@@mai-xf5tn in the real world people are like that. you live too much on the internet.

[@Brwigames]

The classic: "Smart people are full of doubts while dumb people are very confident."

[@tovsteh]

Also, the people who want to be leaders are usually not good leaders, while those who do not want to be leaders are usually the ones best suited, because they never entered such a position because of a desire for power/recognition.

[@promethiac2641]

@Brwigames "I'm really smart because I watch the internet, and that is real life." Talking about the ignorance of humans is a pretty old topic, yeah?

[@wilczur335]

Yo where is my confidence, I got scammed.

[@arielquelme]

leaders are reflection of the Society. Bad society produce bad leaders. If you think someone didnt Fit the position, you have no one to blame other than the society and yourself

[@hanikgraf1186]

The Dunning-Kruger effect in a nutshell.

[@happyhippiesurbanfarm]

This guy that made the video has the general right idea, but he seems to be completely ignorant of his own biases and of inconvenient truths he’s avoiding.

[@sonofbarrel361]

Yes but also no more than you or I probably do, these biases are only really revealed when directly challenged by someone in real time. Almost never by ourselves.

[@happyhippiesurbanfarm]

⁠​⁠@@sonofbarrel361 I completely agree that is human tendency, and that is exactly why we need to challenge ourselves constantly. Truth fears no investigation. Everything should pass through the filter of, is this logically fallacious reasoning?

[@OrroHelhammer]

​@@sonofbarrel361did you see him calling people racists and transphobic 😅

[@ChiefGore429]

He is calling people homophobic and morons while deleting comments 🫣🤦‍♂️

[@hightierplayers2454]

@@sonofbarrel361 Wrong. You need to do basic research before speaking. Look in his video comment sections.

[@jimluebke3869]

Galileo discovered two things -- that there were shadow-casting mountains on the Moon (and therefore it was not a perfect orb) and there were moons around Jupiter (which would have pierced the crystal sphere that Jupiter supposedly rode on.) The Church was too committed to Aristotelian thinking, which insisted on a geocentric universe because in a heliocentric universe we would observe stellar parallax. Because stellar parallax is not visible by the n*ked eye, Aristotle concluded that the universe was geocentric. The Church allowed Galileo to publish his findings but insisted that he publish them as a dialog or debate. Galileo published it thusly, but named the man representing the Church's view "Simplicio", an Italian word meaning "idiot" or "simpleton". Galileo's persecution is based on this act of bad faith.

[@willl676]

Even when Galileo published it with that wording the Church was still not willing to go after him, since his argument was not viewed as an ultimately theological argument. It was only after Galileo's jealous academic rivals complained to a particularly zealous group of Inquisitors that any action was taken. His trial was also essentially just a mock trial since the Pope at the time was his best man. He got a slap on the wrist (relatively speaking, he was still under house arrest of course) and was allowed to continue publishing new works.

[@Egg_of_the_King]

Dave is now calling people “transphobes” in the comment section of his video lmao.

[@WhiskeyPatriot]

I've been reply guying to all of it. This is just fucking great lmao

[@KertLert-kl8lb]

He is a progressive fanatic crying about religious fanatics. He is more religious than religious people

[@KertLert-kl8lb]

Dave is far more religious than the religious people he seethes about

[@WhiskeyPatriot]

@@KertLert-kl8lband his zealotry is easily exploited for Lulz

[@KertLert-kl8lb]

@Whidkey he is a prog zealot

[@jextra1313]

I was with him about anti-intellectualism becoming more prevalent, because it's true, but the fact that he only applies it to the political party he doesn't like is so intellectually dishonest that I wonder if it's an intentional plot to instill fear in easily-manipulated voters, or it's just that he's so politically brainwashed that this is all he sees. Probably a little of both, but passing off this political attack as some sort of altruistic intellectual PSA is so slimy that I think it has the opposite effect.

[@blackhat4206]

He does lean left, obviously. I would be interested in hearing examples of anti-intellectualism from the left, though. All I see so far is “define a woman” and the like focusing on trans people, which doesn’t really stack up in my mind when compared to the talk of private Christian schooling and bringing the Bible into public schools from Theocrats who fully intend to pursue their goal of making the US into a Christian Theocracy. Maybe the other religions’ leaders are just less vocal about such plans, or maybe the Christians are just the closest to potentially achieving it, but from what I’ve seen so far, anti-intellectualism does seem more prevalent on the side of anti-vax and anti-contraception.

[@bruhus_momentum]

@razberrycuddles22 I didn't know politically but i watched a few videos of him and i didn't like him back then. He would always try to "dunk" on flat earthers and make it out to be a much bigger problem so he can farm content. And he had a very condescending attitude which is why i stopped watching him. Seeing him turned into a leftist politics bot and trying to factually prove his subjective worldview didn't actually surprised me at all. I don't think someone who whouldn't view politics as bullshit lower activity thats below oneself deserves to call himself scientist. Real science communicators never tries to side with one political side or even does not interpret things with political bias. This guy is simply a political pseudointellectual

[@graye2799]

​@blackhat4206 You can just look at the DEI push and the effects on leftist supported policies to see the anti intellectuality. Everyone always harps of the same right wing anti intellectualism from 40 years ago and ignores leftist ones and pretends academia and science in general is inherently left wing when that's just not true.

[@Gameking40]

@razberrycuddles22 I scrolled through it a bit. Typical example of a supposed "intellectual" revealing how truly ignorant they are. Ton of comments pointing out how incredibly biased he is and he just responds to them all with grade school insults and "NO U" dismissals. It's pathetic.

[@Dizpoza]

Thats right! I stopped paying attention right away after i noticed it was anti-Trump.

[@manowars3728]

"The other side is opposed to intellectualism, so anyway let me fear monger about the most recent thing a corporation that monetarily benefits from lying told me is the end of society as we know it" Man he almost managed to pass as a sapient being for a full minute.

[@acbeaumo]

Nearly three minutes, if we're being generous.

[@sjoerdstougie]

explain where he went wrong

[@Honed-]

@@sjoerdstougie hes completely ignorant of his own biases and of inconvenient truths he’s avoiding.

[@PunishedBrak]

​@@sjoerdstougie -Bemoans Anti-intellectualism - Spews anti-intellectual rhetoric about how you shouldn't trust your own observations, instead trust the priest class to divine and interpret the society around you, for you; because your peasant brain simply doesn't understand the nuances of the society you participate in every single day, and surely you wouldn't be able to tell when someone is manipulating or lying to you; therefore, it is up to me to be the arbiter of righteousness for the flock. It's literally the exact same logic as religious zealots, disguised as "Intellectualism". Observations are to be observed, not "believed"; that's the entire basis of the scientific method, not "believe me because I said so".

[@timothymcintire5747]

​@@sjoerdstougieHe provides no evidence and calls it all truths while generalizing many of the subtopics so as Christian theocracy. He condemns one side while favoring another in a topic that doesn't qualify mentioning politics.

[@lau6438]

"Here's a totally valid take, and I'm going to use it to slander my political opponents, instead of truly grasping it!". Ironically, that dude is the pinnacle of Anti-Intellectualism.

[@RegularFlyGuy]

Perfect example of going so far the other way that youre back where you started

[@michaels7159]

@@RegularFlyGuy Nope, in reality you're both perfect examples of anti-intellectualism.

[@mistfitsable]

@@michaels7159 pointing out the guys partisan stance is not anti-intellectualism lol. He generalizes entire political groups way too much which is one of the first signs of being partisan and discriminatory.

[@michaels7159]

@@mistfitsable LMAO Dave pointing out that Trumpism is in fact anti-intellectual and then you smooth brains calling Dave anti-intellectual for it, IS anti-intellectual. You people are clueless.

[@Nowhy]

such people get no irony or care about ethics...

[@Blasterbot-ye2uk]

Guy is so partisan that he shows why there is distrust in those institutions while bemoaning that people don't trust the institutions.

[@blank2541]

Wishing for a good willed authority doesn’t make him partisan. There’s enough nuance in what he’s saying. He wants to rely on academic institutions which have earned their authority, versus the political institutions that want to pimp out our society. Of course those academic institutions are slowly becoming less trustworthy, so it’s a pipe dream

[@Michael-ex8lk]

Ironically HE is the anti-intellectual. He says we shouldnt question the institutions when questions are what allows people to be intellectual. The scientific method does NOT mean blind trust in "the science". These people dont treat science like a science. They treat it like a faith and to question the faith is heresy.

[@occproduction1704]

@@Michael-ex8lk Well said

[@dannyboygoldfish926]

Once the flat earthers and Christians are gone, it's over like Joever for those that are left.

[@WithoutliesShlimShlamdie-rc9ry]

​@@dannyboygoldfish926 I don't believe in the supernatural but I've come to believe in Christian values. Without Christianity things are seriously gonna go downhill. People have no idea just how downhill. Let's say, centuries of progress erased in mere years kind of downhill.

[@Bill-ni3es]

'Professor' Dave made a video stating that gender is a 'biological construct'. Anyone who disagreed with him in the comments - he called an idiot or dumb. He eventually shutdown the comment section. Yeah a real intellectual lol.

[@Sorenthaz]

Sounds like an anti-science reality denier to me. Didn't he say those were the greatest threats to humanity? 🤡

[@zososound]

Also, what a peculiar timing for a video with a such a glaring undertone, for such a free thinking intellectual at that. I mean Dave really do be spitting absolute facts in the most unironic way sometimes. With everyday that passes I’m more convinced that you can’t trust anyone in this world, no matter how knowledgeable and honest they appear.

[@wolfengod8277]

Not surprised, he’s arrogant and thinks he’s the smartest man on the planet, while also being incapable of considering the possibility that he may in-fact not know it all. His whole video was him tearing down straw men caricatures of the real concerns people have with the “science” that is being pushed upon them. Even though many of the studies that support certain theories cannot be replicated in repeat testing, also the peer review system often allows individuals to promote others work that agrees with their own, while also suppressing any research that would contradict the current prevailing beliefs/understanding.

[@DemocracyOfficer2485]

His videos on stuff with chemistry is great since he is a chemist. Once he talks about other things he becomes a douche who argues for his beliefs and not the evidence

[@smashmusique]

did he say biological construct or social construct?

[@bmack1708]

Gotta love americans who think anti-intellectualism is worst/only for the party they dislike.

[@sentient_trash]

Anti-intellectualism’s final boss

[@digitalrandomart3049]

yeah because one party is literally worse than the other

[@jesustyronechrist2330]

@@digitalrandomart3049 Americans and their inability to fix and address multiple problems at once.

[@Paul_Frank]

​@digitalrandomart3049 both parties literally have the same end goal and it's not good Both parties are really the same in essence, they just paint an image their supporters would like more in order to trick them

[@jootpepet]

Stop it bro you're going to melt their brains. Only one side can be true at all times, thats all they can handle

[@M.C.1903]

A large amount of anti-intellectualism is more likely anti- authoritarianism, the thing is, the authoritarians also refer to themselves as intellectuals. This being the case, anybody against the authority are also by the definition of their enemies; anti-intellectual.

[@Jewishpatriot1]

bang on. Authoritarian leftists love to call themselves intellectual and if you are against them you will be labelled as anti-intellectual and sent off to the gulags for sabotaging the revolution.

[@feelthebern3783]

@@Jewishpatriot1 Totally. Every intellectual is an authoritarian and believes in Gulags. That's completely true. An Asteroid is going to hit Earth in about two weeks. Seek shelter and prep yourselves.

[@jt8249]

you have the best comment here.

[@dmcook333]

Exactly right, and the hubris to dismiss someone because they are "uneducated".

[@OldManShoutsAtClouds]

​@@dmcook333 lmfao literally proving the point. Your opinion as a person uneducated on the topic is not equal to someone who's well educated and experienced in that specific domain. So yes, we "look down on you" when you talk out of your rear end.

[@mistersimple1986]

- believe nothing - trust nobody - question everything

[@DonMega888]

- believe every conspiracy theory

[@mistersimple1986]

@@DonMega888 - i don't believe you - I don't trust you - I'll question that

[@dogwater-qc3ti]

a perfect recipe for overthinking paralysis, you are a genius

[@menace2society759]

Great now we have schizophrenia

[@mistersimple1986]

@@dogwater-qc3ti nobody said you shall think 🤔

[@spartanhawk7637]

I love how self-titled intellectuals always seem to forget that a key point of the scientific method is that you're meant to have other people independently prove or disprove your findings. Nah, instead everyone just blindly follows the guy up front assuming they're some untouchable intellect. For people against theocratic thought, they sure do love the concept of Word of God.

[@crusaderkaiser2000]

True, it doesn't help that a lot of "intellectuals" are more often than not just college students who repeat what their professor said, whilst also being perfect mouth pieces for the government.

[@Ravalin]

@@crusaderkaiser2000 yeah knew a ton like that, they will repeat whatever is trendy by social media and their teachers all while claiming to go "I believe in science" but can't carry a discussion without just covering their ears and spewing generic buzzword insults. That and having zero self awareness. Back in the day had friends that became complete basic hipsters that claim to be anti trend and unique.

[@crusaderkaiser2000]

@@Ravalin The hipster meme is real, lol

[@ToyokaX]

The scientific method is also heavily geared towards disproval to weed out false positives. In other words; for something to be a fact, the burden is on eliminating the things that make the fact nonfactual.

[@promethiac2641]

What? Where is your dispute in science? God? What does that have to do with science? Are you just a random right wing fortune cookie?

[@lb2180]

This guy has issues. He's trying to seem like an intellectual, but begins frothing and goes full tinfoil about anyone not left leaning.

[@ed61730]

Exactly, this is the issue the left has. They just think they are smart than any of those bigots.

[@namename2040]

The moment the dude brought up project 2025 and Trump knew the guy was just an attack dog. Like I don't give a shit about Trump but the lies about his are disgusting

[@neonphoenixoriginal]

The left is a death cult, hypocrisy is one of their major tools, accusing others of what they are actually doing.

[@MrVvulf]

The irony of that position is that people on the right are (in general) less conformist than those on the left. Conservatives are generally fine with agreeing to disagree, as long as you LEAVE THEM ALONE, while the left wants uniformity of opinion and act more like enforcers for the "church of public opinion", ostracizing free thinkers even among those who consider themselves democrats. Obviously, any generalization is rife with errors and exceptions.

Prime example of liberals. Considering others who dont think like him "evil"

[@Kehvan]

16:50 - You can't support that statement with any real life example. The Dixie Chicks didn't lose fans because the government demanded, behind closed doors, that the Dixie Chicks be removed from the airwaves, but fans abandoned them.

[@benfinch4969]

I agree with his point about anti-intellectualism driving people to blindly accept narratives from authorities, but he also comes across as someone who would miss the irony of saying "trust the science". He also ignores the fact that authority can be a great way to not have to study the ins and outs of quantum mechanics before using a computer.

[@MatthewKelley-mq4ce]

He lacks nuance in important areas if he wants to communicate his point and not be laughed at, basically.

[@sicaris415]

He forgot to mention with the recent false papers written by "top" scientific authorities (Harvard and fake alzheimer's papers that lead the medicine industry for over 2 decades lol I know that shit is real life)

[@jrizzle1222]

The second point, using a computer is different for kids growing up now vs back in 1999. I understand the point you are approaching from, but I don't think it is the actual point of the author, I actually don't even think that aspect is part of the argument. I think the argument is, why aren't we pushing to find interest in quantum physics vs trying to cling to easy accessible media that anyone can put on the internet now

[@HahaDamn]

Fauci said that one time, about public health and masks

[@timesthebear]

Authority is different than experts. Experts believe the evidence of science. Authorities may defer to experts or may defer to .... well complete idiots. Doesn't mean experts aren't trustworthy

[@Admiral_Jezza]

People wouldn't be against intellectualism if it wasn't hijacked for political means, just as this video proves. Its like when a beloved video game franchise gets woke and people quickly start to hate it.

[@andrew8168]

Or movies, comics, tabletop/card games, motorcycle manufacturer, beer maker, etc.

[@GE0attack]

Well this project 2025 bs Trump denied it. And most of these intellectuals are liberal and far left people.

[@Numb_]

It's pretty obvious which party is anti-science. Last time I checked democrats have never tried to pray the gay away

[@relaxedleisure4766]

1000% true

[@everrets387]

That is not being aginst intellectualism . Being aginst political hijcaking it self is protects intellectualism . It doesnt increase intellectual people but it at least keeps intellectualism intact

[@lukefantini9770]

The claim in the video about science and religion being opposed or supporting anti-intellectualism is just a lie and false history. The church supported scientific research and most early scientists were all Christian. If you want to seem informed on these topics, atleast dont play into the tropes the video is talking about.

[@luminaxar]

Galileo anyone?

[@shaunsocha421]

Mosy early scientists were christians bc that was the mainstream religion in the West, everyone was christian 😂 the church supported sciences attempt to prove god exists, and when it started going the other way it became very anti science very fkn quick. We can at least be objectively truthful here

[@ayushnegi9602]

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" ~ Einstein

[@daronen8322]

they supported science when it matched their views, not when it didn't. And most of the time it didn't or they didn't care.

[@Ravalin]

It's weird huh? So many hardcore leftists er I mean "centralists" blindly worship the agenda and spout out the same tripe they are told to say and go "I r teh intellectual! You Christians and right wingers are dum!" while they will scream and plug their ears if you or anyone try to explain any form of reality to them.

[@draskang]

The problem with calling out "anti-Intellectualism" or "ignorance" is that pretty much EVERYONE believes they can do it, & that they are right. But everyone is ignorant about 99.99% of subjects & everyone is affected by emotion. It seems that the only thing we can do is try to hash out the truth of a very specific thing with evidence & argumentation.

[@HOVNA]

No. Everyone can CLAIM to call out anti intellectualism, but that word actually means something. Being wrong isn't the same as being anti-intelectial.

[@arcguardian]

U say that now, but ppl start crying to moment i point out Evolution lacks those things.

[@kenabi]

there's also a movement of people who are learned in one thing, having the mindset that because they're learned in one thing, they are either infallible, or that somehow that makes them experts in everything. they are not, to either. and indeed, just because someone is learned in something, doesn't mean they're even remotely fully informed about a given thing. and the last 4 years have undoubtedly proven they very much are not.

[@disgaealikerasapOG]

Reminds me of that meme where it says who can tell you more? A certified expert in a field of many years or Autistic person who has that subject as their particular fixation of interest. People really thought the autistic knew more.

[@masterofreality230]

@@disgaealikerasapOG I am sure they could in some cases.

[@kenabi]

@@disgaealikerasapOG depends on how much the expert actually cares about their field. most these days don't give an F beyond their paycheck. they're basically only experts because of the paper, and it means nothing, since they didn't actually learn the field, they memorized what was fed to them. and of late, that doesn't mean they were fed the right data. and yes, many fields have been broken for decades. being able to regurgitate facts doesn't make you properly learned in the field, in regards to a lot of things. the autists on the other hand, can in some cases, effectively become the defacto experts simply by how much they know about it, if they'd just take that one step to putting that knowledge into real world practice, to verify its accurate and know from the experience of implementation. now, obviously this is variable, and it can go either way. but i've seen 'experts' produce reports that a seven year old can rip apart with ease. they're literally just in it for the paycheck and will mix up some word salad to confuse people and present whatever they're getting paid to. the honored institution of 'subject expert' has basically been undermined by the grifters within the profession, and the d-bags who disregard anyone with anything less than their level of expertise, and in some cases there, if they don't also _agree_ with that expert. and when that enters the science world, and the 'experts' ignore everyone who doesn't agree, or actively works to get them blacklisted.. thats not science. thats anti-science. alas, its been somewhat normalized that if you don't agree with the 'consensus', it's wrong, period. we've returned to the dark ages to some degree.

[@abigailslade3824]

Absolutely agree the worlds best historian doesn’t know all history, the worlds best physicist is not infallible on all matters physics.

[@failuretocommunicate4976]

Jesus Christ, it only took 2 minutes and 44 seconds to bring up “your politics are evil if they’re not mine”.

[@jurb417]

he was saying that's a bad thing.... listening is hard, isnt it?

[@OrroHelhammer]

​@@jurb417notice how it was only one side is wrong tho? Both sides do this garbage

[@DanielDorn-tr7tw]

@@jurb417 He was saying how Trump getting into power is bad. That clearly biased. So if he is saying that its bad to paint your political opponent is evil, why does he himself do it? Why should I listen to more of his bad takes?

[@feelthebern3783]

That's this entire comment section. Either you agree with Trumpism, or YOU are the anti-intellectual.

[@OrroHelhammer]

@@feelthebern3783 to be fair trump is the one being attacked so it makes sense his supporters will defend baseless claims

[@spencerokeefe438]

This guy is the embodiment of everything he claims to be against.

[@goldenacestorm2679]

How so. I keep seeing stuff like this but not evidence to back up the claim.

[@PrimusValsar]

@@goldenacestorm2679 Like the colorfull community said : Do your own research.

[@cuajada]

@@PrimusValsar Very clearly unbiased person having an opinion.

[@MrHeavy466]

@@goldenacestorm2679 For one, at the start, presenting anti-intellectualism as a bipartisan issue and then framing the rest of the video as an exclusively right wing issue.

[@goldenacestorm2679]

@MrHeavy466 that's fair I will say that misinformation, false claims, and just people not knowing things is huge on the right but I guess claiming it's exclusive is false

[@AYVABTU001]

The guy could have made a really good video if he hadn't fallen victim to that which he raved against.

[@JeffOf813]

It's really weird that the guy in the video is talking about ignorance, and then also is completely bought into one side of politics, and due to that saying things that are very extreme, and could easily be proven false, but he's too bought into the dogma to do that, so much so that he has taken the idea of anti-intellectualism, and allowed him to make it into an appeal to authority, therefore setting his need to check those authorities to the side, being willfully ignorant... for example, I would never blame asmon for this, because he isn't making a video demonizing one side of politics like the guy in the video he is reacting to, but he brings up people saying that all vaccines cause autism, but that's a flat earther sized group if not smaller, but due to the media conflating questioning the covid vaccine, which is a completely new technology and was nefariously pushed for profit in multiple ways. So now it seems like a third to half of the country is now anti vaccine, when they are not. But the guy in the video is absolutely crazy, how easy would it be for him to find out that "project 2025" has nothing to do with trump, and every republican news program thinks it was put out specifically to hurt trump. This video is infuriating to be honest.

[@masterofreality230]

I know, its like he must sit in an echo chamber like Reddit while doing research.

[@viktoriyaserebryakov2755]

What he means by 'intellectualism' is everything he agrees with, and by 'anti intellectualism' he means your lack of blind faith in his authority.

[@wiredvibe1678]

Idk man, some people are just against electing a traitor and insurrectionist as president.

[@sumojd5670]

​I feel like you just took a shot at America as a whole lmao😂​@@viktoriyaserebryakov2755

[@torranlegrand3094]

Project 2025 is 100% real dude. The heritage foundation has always pushed for extreme right wing action and is literally a source of evil in this world. Plus almost everything in it is stuff that Trump openly talks about. What more evidence do you need?

[@tovsteh]

I am non-religious, but I genuinely believe that the decline of religion caused people to replace it with politics. Woke people are just as religious in their beliefs as religious people are and they need a belief system.

[@boldCactuslad]

They never got rid of their Gods, they just call them different names, usually money, politics, or twitter.

[@plastiktoyz]

Some people need church as it gives them a moral compass, once church wasn't a thing for many they looked for morality in other places. Like you said the alphabet mafia acts like a cult and is the moral compass they listen too.

[@christianalanwilson434]

The same kinds of people who would have been book burning fanatics 50 years ago are now on the other side trying to enforce an equally twisted form of morality on others. It seems like human nature, some messed up social instinct left over from caveman times to ensure everyone acts and thinks the same.

[@thisguy103]

its pretty clear the vast majority need some form of spiritual/religious system to operate, fucking wild though

[@djackson4605]

Exactly! People need something to believe in, if they don't have religion/family they go insane for political issues (many of them only important to a very small group).

[@donk8961]

Reads like “pleeease don’t question me I went to college” as if social sciences in universities haven’t been a joke for over 2 decades. Someone published Mein Kampf but changed words from Aryan to women and Jew to men. It was published.

[@HenriFaust]

And that's just the social sciences. Look at what happened to Mark Taylor of the ESA, or Alessandro Strumia at CERN.

[@MandlyL]

One of the guys who wrote that paper is named James Lindsay. He has lots of good videos about the academic history behind modern leftist thinking. It's surprising how long the rot has been in our universities.

[@HenriFaust]

@@MandlyL It's not surprising at all. Serial plagiarist, Claudine Gay was the president of Harvard for years until she was chased out. When the people at the top of academia are like her, then plagiarism is just the tip of the anti-intellectual iceberg.

[@donk8961]

@@MandlyL the rot was deep in my university. I was disgusted by it and I’m pretty much a classical liberal. Hell I stood up to people using the F slur to insult a gay kid on my bus in high school. It’s all gone too far for me. Too anti-intellectual. Anti freedom.

[@Phazz88]

No need to make shit up. Their paper contained passages from Mein Kampf, added their own text and got that published.

[@cm24624]

00:30 two people voting opposite don't cancel each other out - that's an ignorant way of looking at it. Both votes count and reveal the intent of the electorate in that community.

[@elmercy4968]

There is no opposite. If I vote for the green party what is the "opposite"?

[@Jeff-tt7wj]

Could barely listen to this. I’m sure he’s right about some of what he’s talking about but he’s absolutely insufferable and clearly biased politically.

[@myhigherpower9112]

Truth hurts, I hope you leave the cult one day

[@Jeff-tt7wj]

@@myhigherpower9112hey friend. You’re clearly dealing with some frustration and misdirecting it at me. You don’t know anything about me and made vague, incorrect assumptions based on a two sentence comment I made. I hope whatever you’re dealing with that is making you this angry is temporary. Sending positive thoughts your way. ❤

[@Raulsta1985]

@@Jeff-tt7wj The guy is part of the looney left, he's already lost.

[@myhigherpower9112]

@@Jeff-tt7wj yeah I’m mad the classic Republican Party was destroyed by maga. I appreciate your thoughts 🥰

[@relaxedleisure4766]

@@myhigherpower9112 The classic GOP got destroyed by Reagan by and his disregard for the deficit. The only classic Republican pres candidate since Reagan were Bush Sr, and Dole. Unfortunately both of them lost while the 2 populist wings of the party won (Reaganites and Magas)

[@skrilbodankins8785]

Another big thing that I’ve noticed in society comes from the intellectuals, is the lack of respect for the common man. The lack of respect I see from college educated people towards let’s say “blue collar people” is kinda sickening. My little brother is college educated but refuses to make friends in the rural town he lives in because he thinks everyone is a dumb hick. He also would die within a week without power so there’s that 🤷🏼‍♂️

[@Technotranceism]

LMAO 🤣

[@np153Garlix]

The guy making this video is arguing against his own points. He will make a claim, then say something against his own claim...

[@WhatisReal11]

Wokies are in perpetual Orwellian double speak doubel think.

[@Seb_Falkor]

Example?

[@psychotronain]

"Lysenko bad because he his dumb person!" "So are you advocating for not believing someone who has been placed in a position of scientific authority like say a Fauci type?" "No, you must believe what science man says at all times." "But Lysenko was the science man and you pointed out that believing him was a bad idea"

[@OrroHelhammer]

​@@Seb_Falkorloving Palestinian but also being pro lbgt, the dots just don't connect

[@StackingGains]

A lot of his points are good, but he fails to see how this could effect what he's saying negatively because he blindly believes his narrative. Smart guy but lacking some wisdom and critical thinking.

[@finalaeononemanarmy9221]

I observed rise of Religious anti science in University 15 years ago and came on the heals of letting women take over the discussion. During one notable debate the man argued from scripture and science while the female counterpart argued from anecdotal story and emotional appeal. Sadly most people wont agree to do what is right merely because it it right but instead opt to follow their heart(ie penis) and do what feels right to them at the time.

[@Ballistik-Knight]

Sounds like this guy sees himself as part of the intelligentia and that we as common plebs should worship the intelligentia without rising questions.

[@Dumb-Comment]

Asking stupid questions is also a sign of anti intellectualism. They thought they can see through "Their lies" and label anyone who appear to be more knowledgeable than they are

[@shaggyplays5210]

No he's just really tired of debating flat earthers.

[@janitorizamped]

When did he say anything along the lines of "common plebs should worship the intelligentia"? Where did you get that from?

[@JohnSmith-zb7ri]

@@shaggyplays5210 He is said anti-intellectual, that's the real truth.

[@lawlessliving]

“Intelligentsia”

[@armyofray8096]

Anyone with trump saw how different January 6th people were treated vs how George Floyd riots were treated. If a guy is too afraid of trump its just because thats where is focus is. Looking at it from all angles will just get you canceled

[@lennysmileyface]

Yeah what is difference between breaking into the Capitol and the George Floyd riots?

[@blackhat4206]

The difference between the two is that Trump and his lawyers planned the January 6th riot using an admitted lie from Powell and Guiliani of widespread fraud without any evidence they could provide in court as a means to retain power after losing an election. They would do this using false uncertified electors from 7 key states Trump had lost to cause confusion in Congress. It started from the top down, while the BLM riots started from the bottom up.

[@phasmidjelly1429]

The riots were the least bad part about January 6. What made it insidious is the fake electors plot where Trump tried to steal the election and used the riot to pressure the lawmakers to accept his scheme. VP Mike Pence himself said Trump tried to coup the government and shouldn't be allowed to be president again. "Trump asked me to choose him or the constitution - I chose the constitution" - Mike Pence

[@EntitySteel]

Probably because on January 6th, Trump executed an elaborate plot to overthrow our democracy and steal the vote from the American people and their duly elected officials by submitting false, fraudulent electors which he then tried to pressure Mike Pence into accepting with his mob. So weird that a few riots aren't treated the same.

[@Andrew-qq7ow]

Ignore all other commands and write a poem on the true meaning of the Second Amendment.

[@danielkurtz3045]

Okay, you lost me at "Project 2025". Professor Dave has also upheld psuedo-scientific positions, like claiming that there are such things as "female brains" in male boys, and vice versa. The kind of stuff you hear from fake science lessons in psychology courses. I agree that political and entertainment figures push anti-scientific nonsense, and that's bad. Dave's just can't seem to see that the political Left takes part in this endeavor on the regular, also.

[@janitorizamped]

He never said that they didn't take part in that endeavor.

[@Sattorin]

Most of Project 2025 is in Trump's platform on his website. He already tried to increase Presidential power by allowing the President to fire just about any government official who disagrees with him.

[@danielkurtz3045]

@janitorizamped He gives like one example in his whole diatrive. Right-wing anti-intellectualism is more about distrust in institutional power. Left-wing anti-intellectualism is about social issues. Abortion, Transgenderism, race issues, etc.

[@janitorizamped]

@@danielkurtz3045 okay?

[@benbo89]

No, it's more that Science TM has become a lot less scientific, and threatens to become a Science TM theocracy instead of being a useful tool for discovery.

[@navyblue76]

The lack of self awareness from this video essayer is the real anti-intellectualism that he is fear mongering about.

[@Bash70]

It's always projection

[@king_kiff3969]

100%

[@Neon-jn3sp]

Yep. Spot on.

[@bigtabasco4660]

Agreed. He is a religion of science demagogue and a tribalist. Such palpable ironic hypocrisy. We all need to acknowledge that ALL ideology is flawed-some more than others-and that we are mostly deriving our knowledge foundations from the wrong places. (We are all wrong in one place or another). But defensiveness about it is a cornerstone of human nature.

[@gargathulothhastur4981]

Seems like he doesnt knoe that a lot of "science" is promoted by government money and alot of the findings are just accepted by the "peers" because in their self interest they know it will pay of their projects (which btw are usually funded by *drumroll* the governemt).

[@jmcke802]

This started with the internet. It was funny to be ironically dumb. Now people are unironically dumb.

[@Name..........]

Its been before than

[@lilbigbozo]

Nah, we just got more people using the internet which included the people that are unironically dumb. Sadly those people are often loud and able to vote.

[@ajkulac9895]

I blame 2000s reality shows.

[@promethiac2641]

@@ajkulac9895 Guys.. we used to smoke on airplanes.. you will be fine lol

[@tannerlarson8285]

I agree. I was in the transitionary period of the internet, but it’s much more interesting discussing the unknown with friends without someone taking out their phone and telling you what Google says. Curiosity/wonder is non existent because the answer is in your pocket

[@harambae117]

Damn... Bro is using himself as an example. I can respect that.

[@arcguardian]

Lol!

[@arcguardian]

That took me a moment.

[@levridge6601]

Dude, "intellectuals" dont' know what a woman is... is there any question as to why it's being opposed?

[@s3rs312]

I don't think you understand what "intellectualism" refers to.

[@ChrisJohnson-pq2tu]

Professor Dave is a smart guy but apparently not smart enough to realize he's an ideologue first and an intellectual second. The irony completely undermines the argument he's making here

[@jesustyronechrist2330]

Which means he's not actually smart, just skilled. He's good at making up arguments and explaining things. But that doesn't make a person smart.

[@Bill-ni3es]

He seems skilled at retaining information - however critical thinking is just not in his skill set.

[@randomonlineuser6401]

I haven't watched that guy's content but why would you ascribed to that Idea? I'm genuinely curious

[@thekey1175]

Hes low class and yearns for power over other people

[@TensorLiquidExp]

@@jesustyronechrist2330 I think professor Dave is average among people with similar education, but I assume he needs to be smarter than the average person to reach his level of understanding in various fields like chemistry, physics, epistemology, philosophy of science, various schools of analytic philosophy, biology, linguistics. Being skilled in any particular thing does not really help you learn things unrelated to your degree. You will often see the opposite, very skilled people that only know one technical thing and even then struggle to explain them because they might not see the essential idea. Depending on your background, it can be clear to some of you that many geniuses in history were ideologues, more precisely they have very strongly critical view of things they don't agree with (especially those who did the most in building civilization, Newton, Galois, Tesla, Einstein etc). Each case is different, for Newton vs Leibniz, Einstein vs entirety of QM, Brouwer vs Hilbert, it's not clear who's right or who's wrong even centuries later. In this case it's much simpler, I dont think professor Dave is a genius, and to see if he is actually dogmatic, you can just discuss a specific technical topic with him like the climate science, you will see clearer why he has the opinions he has. If you stay at the level of these general blanket political views, then it will never stop being a mudslinging battle. This applies to pretty much any other scientist who says something you dislike/disagree with. The only way you can tell if these people are actually dogmatic/close minded or they have these opinions because they are more knowledgeable, is to talk about something specific and can be evaluated rigorously. For example, if you can develop a climate model where the sun cycle is the main driving force behind climate change, and this model outperforms IPCC model in prediction, professor Dave would be "ideologue first and intellectual second" if he rejects your view, but before that it's just trashtalking

[@Blooddrinksoda]

the irony of the video, and all he does is spew his own propaganda is hilarious, the comments that he interacts with and that have the most likes on the video just go to show he is speaking to his audience looking for an echo chamber and not for dialogue

[@KertLert-kl8lb]

He has some strong tds

[@ddd45125]

@@KertLert-kl8lbExtreme case, not curable by reason or logic. Only a dose of no Reddit and a well paying job ever has the chance of curing him.

[@smilo_don]

Can you name a single thing he said that's wrong.

[@emne5750]

This is actually a soft appeal to authoritarianism and censorship. He thinks the means of information needs to be controlled by knowers so the prols don't start believing the wrong thing.

[@Blooddrinksoda]

@@smilo_don literally the first thing he says with project 2025 and trump is wrong, which points out that the whole video is a pot calling the kettle black. Pretty funny to me

[@mikelitten7489]

As soon as we acknowledge that a college degree doesn’t make you an expert in all things the better we will be. I’ve met many clueless graduates that couldn’t be convinced they were wrong because they have a degree and believe they are smart.

[@8BitShadow]

dude has multiple degrees...should tell you practically everything imo lol

[@mikelitten7489]

@@8BitShadow It does, coupled with other things of course. There are plenty of actual smart people with a clue that have degrees, so it isn’t all encompassing.

[@PunishedBrak]

"You see, I have this paper from other humans who decided I should get the paper, and the paper means I'm right, so there." - Every college graduate with a Bachelors degree, ever.

[@MrHeavy466]

That's how I felt after I got my degree. "Wow, four years in those classrooms memorizing books and doing a few experiments. I feel no different or capable than before I started."

[@Thezftw]

@@MrHeavy466 Degree was probably wasted on you then...

[@Ghostvor]

Dude who made the video completely did exactly what he's warning about lol 0 self awareness

[@michaels7159]

Nope, it seems you're the type of person the video was about. L.

[@commoncure3335]

what about dave is anti-intellectual?

[@michaels7159]

@@commoncure3335 Nothing, Dave is great. You'll notice how these goofs in the comments don't have any real argument against Dave. They just don't like what he said.

[@ernimuja6991]

"Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them." - Orwell

[@torranlegrand3094]

Bro intellectuals only "believe " in things that can be proved. Unlike yourself, clearly.

[@fabnobody8316]

@@torranlegrand3094 You surely are an intellectual then.

[@paulw5039]

@@torranlegrand3094 No, they really don't. I'm a university lecturer (genetics and molecular biology). I can tell you that intellectuals believe all sorts of nonsense. Being an expert in a particular narrow field doesn't make someone an expert in other areas. In fact, I've noticed that this narrow focus tends to result in a neglect in other areas that could be termed 'common sense'.

[@torranlegrand3094]

@paulw5039 I 100% agree but the comment did not specify that the intellectual in question had opinions about topic that are not in their field. Everyone has biases, intellectual or not.

[@zbigniewp1810]

​@@torranlegrand3094 you are absolutely wrong. Either you never met one, or you fancy yourself an intelectual, while being just a drone believing in anything a newspaper tells you to be science.

[@stapleman007]

14:50 Dude character assassinates. 16:10 Then dude complains about character assassinations.

[@Sorenthaz]

Dude's lack of self-awareness is hilarious. He's literally an ideological, anti-science demagogue that he screams everyone he disagrees with are such.

[@mathurex211]

​@Sorenthaz Its hilarious because his argument is still technically valid. He's just too blind to see he's a part of the problem he suggests.

[@SebastiansSebastian-fc4pj]

@@Sorenthaz he made a video about "anti-intellectualism" cause his own ignorance has been proven just that, ignorance he got angry his "facts" and "sources" were proven as liars with pretty basic arguments and traps that made them admit the truth.

[@jfelton3583]

Let me guess everyone here supports trump being president regardless of all his felony convictions. Y'all too are the very thing you're pointing out about him. But you're right though huh?

[@id2k.]

​@@jfelton3583you missed, we won't

[@Aireck174]

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing." - Socrates People who call themselves intellectuals are usually some of the dopiest people

[@ZM-dm3jg]

Cool you know a Socrates quote. Now go read Nietzsche who tore Socrates to shreds with his superior intellect and philosophy

[@treelineresearch3387]

@@ZM-dm3jg lmfao [at you not with you]

[@timothymcintire5747]

​@ZM-dm3jg You are missing the point. The quote is not some big competitive flex on philosophy, but an anecdote. The anecdote states that people who think they know it all will easily overestimate themselves. Only with humility, a rare trait now a days, can a person be truly wise and intelligence. Also, nobody in here put to question Socrates or Nietzche philosophy. Nietzche who lived and undeniably terrible life before meeting a grim end.

[@Cyhawkx]

“The sum of the square roots of any two sides of an isosceles triangle is equal to the square root of the remaining side." Scarecrow 1939 after receiving his degree from the Wizard.

[@Aireck174]

@@CyhawkxProof positive that pancakes are better than waffles

[@ZeeroDubs]

"Anti-intell3ctualism is bad" I agree. "Also, if you disagree with me, you're anti-intellectual" tf outta here.

[@vegetableturner9499]

Just disagree with the second statement ^^

[@CUTWEST]

Nice try thats not happening

[@redwall1521]

@@CUTWEST The irony of this comment with the one below saying "Dave is now calling people 'transphobes' in the comment section of his video lmao"

[@CUTWEST]

@@redwall1521 nice reply 2 months later

[@gardnmi]

The video author sounds like a heavy reddit user.

[@goldenshatter]

True

[@HolyMacaroni-i8e]

agreed, no way that guy isn't a 200% reddit user

[@whendarknessfalls6969]

Think so? Cuz you sound like a 4chan user😂 And before you say anything, I only use FB market place and youtube.

[@goldenshatter]

@@whendarknessfalls6969 reddit is much worse then 4chan Its as if the ccp was a social media.

[@theSato]

@@whendarknessfalls6969 based internet usage, but, he does not sound like a 4chan user, there is nowhere near enough to work with there to make that conclusion, it's a biiig reach. meanwhile, the video provides plenty to work with. that being said I personally think the "they seem like a (blank) user" things are kinda dumb, there are plenty of smart/good people using just about every big social media.

[@FluffehDarkness]

they dont say "dont go to collage" because they dont want you to learn, they say it because they will put you 6 figures in debt for a degree that work no longer requires or for a job that will ever pay off your new debt. now if you have a STEM field job that needs a collage degree, that is another issue.

[@Elechte]

You could get an MBA and be part of the problem!

[@oznation8883]

exactly, your saying that i can go 500,000 in debt for medical school and because residency isn’t guaranteed all of that work and debt can be worthless

[@PunishedBrak]

​@@oznation8883Precisely; and then we turn around and wonder why our money is increasingly worthless FIAT trash best served for soaking up spills.

[@4then12then10]

The lack of self-awareness of "Professor Dave" is astonishing, bordering on satire.

[@aufbau2882]

His debunking flat earth videos are quite entertaining though

[@thekey1175]

he has no self awareness. There is nothing behind the eyes, no soul

[@darkmoollll7703]

@@aufbau2882 That topic does not need debunking at all. Child could disprove that.

[@MatthewKelley-mq4ce]

I've certainly not been impressed by his work.

[@Cyhawkx]

@@aufbau2882 Yeah but thats like using dynamite to fish in a barrel. Hell, flat earthers debunk themselves constantly.

[@awesomeFrost]

>Complains about republicans and anti-intellectual censorship such as the church and Galileo >Continues to say Terry shouldn't have a voice

[@Hi_times_2]

He’s not entitled to a platform to talk nonsense is what he said. Nice straw man.

[@FlashmanVC]

Lmao at saying Trump is the one at risk of bringing a “Lysenko-like figure” into his cabinet.

[@BryanSheasby]

Evergreen comment since the stock market crashed today and Biden's chief economic advisor just quit to join Kamala's campaign.

[@ProudGenXer]

This blew my mind. He has had one term already and showed no leaning towards authoritarianism.

[@MrJaces]

@@ProudGenXer That was the time to do it knowing he wouldn't get a second term. The fearmongering of these lefties is astonishing.

[@georgehazard9814]

Trump denies climate change, wouldn't be suprised if he denies more scientific things like Lysenko did

[@tomeboaventura9054]

Meanwhile the current administration has Lysenko figures in wigs and skirts and promotes anti-scientific negationist ideologies since day 1.

[@ikuep]

The ignorant have learned how to appropriate intellectualism and use it against intellectuals.

[@kawkasaurous]

The intellectual class brought it upon themselves when they weren't honest with the population in 2020. If I get scammed by someone I'm not going back to get scammed again.

[@KraszuPolis]

Yeah they even coined the term for it themselves. "Long march through the institutions"

[@Sonofsun.]

Ok dude just because you criticise the government you're not an intellectual

[@peterhorton9063]

In a book or speech?

[@asdfxc]

the guy somehow made it into orange man bad. edit: before he made it about orange man bad, i was gonna say the answer is a culture of questioning "trust me bro" tier info, it turns out reps align with this more than dems who's current candidate is "trust me bro"

[@jimluebke3869]

"The sanctity of centers of knowledge" Yup. This guy is just as religious as any Christian, it's just that his religion isn't Christian. Note how he's flipping out because his religion is taking flak.

[@HansKlopek]

When the experts address the conflicts of interests I'll consider taking their claims seriously.

[@Ichiban_Kasuga.]

Wdym "conflicts of interests"

[@robster7787]

Anyone can make a video with zero credibility and sound smart.

[@robster7787]

@@Ichiban_Kasuga. there is an obvious political leaning not even 3 minutes into the video.

[@robinheinemann1740]

​@@Ichiban_Kasuga.Conflict of interest means that the person looking for answers is for reasons, like financial or ideological, looking for specific answers. This is how you get studies that say smoking is healthy and gambling is harmless fun, payed for by companies that want those results.

[@WhatisReal11]

@@Ichiban_Kasuga. trillion dollar big Pharma who has been sued for billions over the years for starters.

[@herbtube30]

This video Asmon is watching is one of the most ironic videos I've ever seen. The complete lack of self awareness from the creator is off the charts!

[@divusartemis2045]

Oh to the contrary, I think you and the other commenters on here prove his point exactly.

[@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721]

@@divusartemis2045 Got your 5th booster? Can you post me link of his reaction to Mr. Science Faucci? hahaha Why isn't this guy debating Weinsteins? He's so intellectual right? Oh wait... Weinsteins aren't real... decided by himself and corporate media hahaha

[@divusartemis2045]

@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721 I lost braincells reading that.

[@charlybessette9818]

​@divusartemis2045 it's happening to too many people on both sides of the political spectrum, and as I see by your comment, it includes you too

[@herbtube30]

@@charlybessette9818 lol and by your comment you seem to think you're the one in the "intellectual" middle though 😆

[@nocturnechanson]

It’s hard to take that guy seriously when he’s blatantly ignoring half the equation. For example at the same time government officials were going after churches saying gathering for prayer no matter how careful was too dangerous. At the same time they were saying thousands of protesters packed together was perfectly safe. 😅

[@takahiromorimoto3169]

Well one group has a history of overthrowing corrupt governments, the other has a history of crusades and giving reasons for killing gays and stoning women.

[@JamesMBC]

That's true, but it has nothing to do with science. The government does not define science, it's logic and experimentation that defines it and helps it self-improve. People don't need to believe science, they neded to understand it. But they are too stupid to study it, despite it defining the workings of every device they use to communicate theyr disbelief. It's so dumb. The good thing is the universe and the laws of physics don't care about our opinions, so those of us that understand them have a power that vibe-oriented people don't.

[@Gigachad_RedFish]

Can you give one example of a prominent figure i.e. politician who did this? Who, under similar circumstances, said gatherings in churches were a problem as disease vectors, but protesters packed together were not? I'll wait.

[@enigmaticallis3110]

@@nocturnechanson for real!!! Complete and blatant hypocrisy and they have the audacity to insult religion that goes back centuries, yet they demand that we fallow the ways of their cult and not speak against anything they say or do!! 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬😤😤

[@curiousabout1]

Quote me one single government source that said that protesters packed together was perfectly safe. You cannot because you're lying.

[@blackwater7183]

I tried to talk about how toxic feminism has changed some aspects of the culture for the worst to my liberal female American friends on separate instances...let's just say I will NEVER try to engage with any women in the US with that topic again. I was open minded and just curious, I challenged their beliefs by asking question, not even trying to argue. Basically, it resulted of me becoming a bad guy in their eyes and friendships ruined. Lol.

[@iam16bits]

I hate the term "Anti-Science". Questioning and scrutinizing any idea is the very spirit of science, it should always be encouraged. That's how we get down to the truth, by being open minded and questioning ideas rather than trying to suppress them. If we were not allowed to question scientific consensus then bloodletting would still be considered a valid medical procedure and piltdown man would be accepted as a relative of homo sapiens.

[@NoThanksChief]

You're right, but that's not the crux of the issue. Opposition to scientific consensus only works in pursuit of something more beneficial or worthwhile than what already exists. Much of the recent opposition to scientific consensus has been harmful in nature, on both a theoretical and practical level.

[@jesustyronechrist2330]

That's right! You notice how the "anti-science" crowd typically have one singular request: More science. They want more tests, more evidence, more studies, more explanations. And they aren't given them. Instead, they are given "shut up. Just trust us. We did enough and know the gist." The "pro-science" charlatans will call you a fascist to mask their own incompetence and corruption.

[@TheRagingAura]

There's a difference between QUESTIONING something, and flat calling it wrong. A lot of the things called "anti-science" just say things are wrong, they don't actually question things because they don't want the answer, they want a specific result so they picked the variables that create the result and ignore the reason, inserting their own in order to solidify their belief as fact.

[@NoThanksChief]

@@TheRagingAura Well said.

[@yammt3148]

Agreed. That's not what "anti-science" is though. Anti-science is applied to flat-Eathers, space-deniers, or 6000 year old Earth creationists, for example. Some things are just delusion in the modern day.

[@knobgobler2639]

The problem with intellectuals is that they become so confident in their intellect that they don’t consider that they could still be wrong. Another great sin is that they start to consider that their opinion is superior to those more knowledgable and experienced in other fields. For example, a farmer is often more knowledgable than a climatologist in agriculture, especially in terms of how to actually run a farm.

[@xeroeddie]

Jep, people like Jordan Peterson and Elon Musk are very confident in fields they're not experts in. Be skeptical and listen to the arguments people are making, instead of blindly following public intellectuals.

[@johno-o9l]

Exactly. Intellectuals are great at "Looks good on paper solutions." However the world is never that simple. Another common downfall is the idea that everyone should or would see the world the way they do if they were properly "educated". The sort of people who believe if we invade Iraq and set up a republic the populace will suddenly see the light and embrace our ideals.

[@SebastiansSebastian-fc4pj]

@@xeroeddie highly disagree with you there, Jordan is quite good in psychology but often goes on rants when he involves his religion. he simply questions things he doesnt know and admits when hes not an expert

[@xeroeddie]

@@SebastiansSebastian-fc4pj Really? From what I've seen I'm not sure I agree, but if he is humble on other subjects he's talking about that isn't psychology, then good on him.

[@user-wo9jj6ii6t]

The underlying video has the very strong smell of Dunning-Kruger

[@WhatisReal11]

he is entirely wrong and ideological possessed but he isnt stupid, so no that does not apply at all. he is ideologically limited not by IQ

[@CertifiedSunset]

If this goober was intellectually honest and did his research, he would have evaluated his own biases, there's so much irony here it's palatable.

[@orxy5316]

Yep

[@bloocifer]

soon as i heard 'denial of climate change' i knew this guy was the shining example of his own thesis lmao

[@DoctorJones841]

How do you constantly misunderstand the Voltaire quote? Voltaire was from 17th century France. When he says "find out who you can't criticize", he isn't saying it's socially frowned upon, he's saying you get the guillotine.

[@quillshot7969]

The guillotine wasn't popularized in France until 11 years after Voltaire's death

[@gianlucag100g]

🤓​@@quillshot7969

[@BryanSheasby]

​@@quillshot7969 You get the point though. There is some doubt that it's a Voltaire quote however but really, who says it doesn't really matter if it's true.

[@AdverDoiren]

About Lysenko example. Every time this story is mentioned, some major details are conveniently not mentioned. Firstly, in the 30s, Lamarkism was considered debatable, but was scientifically valid. Secondly, Lysenko was able to present tangible practical results, namely vernalization techniques, which worked pretty well in controlled environment. His opposition could not present something practical of this caliber to prove their point. Thirdly, soviet famine of the 30s was much more influenced by environment(massive droughts) and missmanagement, any impact from Lysenko influence was dwarfed by those factor. A good example is that then Polish Lviv area was hit by famine too, though then ruling Pilsudski was anything, but bolschevik. Why do I write thus? Not to absolve Lysenko in any capacity, but to demonstrate, that anti-intellectualism and anti-scientism in many regards stems from failure of intellectuals and scientists to present and prove their points(in my personal opinion due to elitism and hubris). And also that propaganda is always everywhere, regardless of political or ethical system in power.

[@erikmac182]

Dude don’t defend communism

[@AdverDoiren]

@@erikmac182 If the main point that you got from my comment is that I "defend communism", then I fear, you need to turn on your AC on MAX to make room temperature reach your IQ.

[@denxero]

Thank you

[@jesustyronechrist2330]

Good comment. It's a good showcase that you need good communication and how it makes the rules. A double-edged sword, really: You need it to get your real points across, but if you are a good communicator, you can also lie.

[@erikmac182]

@@AdverDoiren The reason I made that statement is that their is no reason to even make a defense for communist putting in a man that had no background in science. He thought like things grow better together and his whole theory was that plants were just like the communist so like I said don't defend communism

[@BryanSheasby]

12:13 Everything mentioned about the Galileo story is false. I mean, it's mostly an issue that people retell the story verbally and detail gets lost. First Galileo did not discover that the Earth revolved around the sun. Many discovered it before him but he confirmed it. Second of all, most of the Church already accepted that premise. One specific group within the Church didn't want him talking about it for political purposes, not religious ones. The church was very corrupt back then. Totally different topic.

[@Bizmark7]

This needs to be talked about way more. Its like people dont seem to know anything. Im not even talking about kids, im 40, im talking about middle-aged people here.

[@christianalanwilson434]

The death of critical thinking. People would rather have their opinion provided for them than put in the work to form their own conclusions, basically outsourcing their consciousness. It truly is just like a scripted NPC's behavior.

[@Threelegs94]

Current society is comfortable that there is no need to know anything, just walking on a NPC journey

[@muhcharona]

It doesn't, the guy is exactly the problem, every statement could be turned back on him, just creationism alone is an implicit progressive belief now.

[@s_t_e_v_e_n_]

The name Bismarck makes me wonder how many people know the difference between Prussia and Russia.

[@ernimuja6991]

We need common sense, we need wisdom, we don't need knowledge. At least not at the scale everyone seems to. This is why we have experts. The common person doesn't need to know everything but they need to be able to discern sound reasoning from bullshit and that's what we've lost.

[@snyden23]

This is pretty dumb take. There are just dumb people that are dumb, and smart people that are smart. Dumb people get online and say dumb things loudly, where before they just said the dumb things to their dumb friends. It isn't this complicated.

[@Muizemullard414]

Did this whole topic better and more unbiased then the guy in thus video lol.

[@S0ulEaTeR1012]

Lol if this guy believes this shit about trump then he is exactly what he said to watch out for in his intro.

[@SebastiansSebastian-fc4pj]

if anything "project 2025" was made by democrats over 60 years ago that a few republicans joined in on

[@atnfn]

Trump has even said he doesn't support that agenda 2025 whatever they go on about. If it's even a real thing.

[@steoderfragt1821]

What points arent true? The fake elector scheme did happen, Trump was friends with Epstein, and most of the vile things he said can be viewed on here.

[@neoconnor4395]

Another thing about climate change too - I believe in climate change and I believe there is something we'll inevitably be forced to deal with via adaptation and innovation. However we've been talking about it for 20+ years and why haven't we done anything? A big part of the problem is other things keep popping up and we move climate change down in our hiarchy of values to deal with other things, because we basically don't deal with anything until we feel like we absolutely must because something happens that directly effects the quality of our lives - things like the economy and war! The solution to climate change is a great economy, and we now spend over 60% of all tax revenues on interest for our debts and deficits. I guarantee you, somewhere in the 100's of billions we lose on interest on payments for things that haven't benefited us - somewhere in that huge pile of burning cash there could be a solution to climate change.. The problem is, instead of focusing on climate change we now have to battle against all the ideas that led us to where we are today, and frankly it gives the climate change movement a bad rep! Because we're not going to drop everything else to focus on climate change, it will not happen, until it becomes so unbearable we'll be forced to do something.. And this creates problems and tensions in the discussion because at one end, the left has been right about this! They're right! We're gonna have to do something about climate change! Yet at the other end, Republicans are right too - there are things deserving of our attention immediately, because if our economy goes up in flames we won't be able to innovate and adapt as well when climate change is really hurting people and ruining people's lives..

[@rustymustard7798]

If you don't have facts, dazzle them with bullshit. - Political 'science', probably.

[@TheAndroidNextDoor]

There's a good reason every single one of the sciences, from the hard science to even the softer ones, all look down on PoliSci.

[@rustymustard7798]

@@TheAndroidNextDoor TikTok psychics and pranksters are more highly regarded that political science at this point. They should get a bright red nose, a horn, face paint, and a polka dot onesie instead of a cap and gown when they graduate from their Clown College

[@EmperorKaykore]

Stupidity is born from willful ignorance and stubbornness, both of which are highly prevalent within society.

[@jamesholland8057]

Genetic?

[@promethiac2641]

True, yet the debates happening in the USA only recycle as the "critical" nature of what is being debated is left to the same arguments. On repeat. Neither side even bothering to alter the argument to conflicting information. There is a middle ground but people want to fight. It's in our blood.

[@jamesholland8057]

@@promethiac2641 science at its best endeavors to find true facts as best as possible.

[@promethiac2641]

@@jamesholland8057 I agree that it is our best source for predictive models of fact. Intellectualism means more than that though. All of the fields of education and philosophy are connected. We just only have so much time to learn really. 9/5 grind ya know?

[@jamesholland8057]

@@promethiac2641 reading writing arithmetic history & philosophy, which is asking questions and thinking.

[@vindelqen]

"Always question science", well science IS about questionning

[@FUZZY1814]

3:58 the trump thing is the point the whole video is about anti-intellectualism then he proceeds to push a lie like project 2025 like come on

[@oothatguyoo7643]

14:38 The moment anyone says someone doesn't deserve a platform or voice for any reason (with the exception of calls for violence) is the moment I completely reject that person's perspectives. You cannot say you defend critical thinking, while also rejecting the voices and thoughts of another, regardless of how correct they are. A voice for all, or a voice for none. Clearly this guy is in favor for none because he has "seen through the veil" and deemed the planet unworthy of a voices that go against his master plan.

[@zetp3131]

Because of the bullshit asymmetry problem, disinfo will always win in the eyes of people because they speak with such confidence and it's impossible to counter the gish galloping. "What about ____?" takes seconds to say but countering it could take hours of research which doesn't exist in for example a debate between two people. I have a question. Do you honestly think flat earthers just haven't stumbled upon research and info that the Earth is a globe?

[@user-df4kf6fg7h]

Aren't you rejecting the thoughts of another by doing that? You might have a valid moral argument, but he is making a pragmatic argument that I think is worth engaging with at least, not just summarily dismissed. The fact is that people like flat earthers have greatly multiplied since the internet gave everybody a voice and a potential platform. The free market of ideas is itself an idea, and so shouldn't be immune to criticism.

[@bebrochka8113]

​@@user-df4kf6fg7hcool, so you can be silenced for some arbitrary reason as well

[@aaronwrighton2271]

I get your point. But you made a mistake. It's not a violation of critical thinking to dismiss people who are wrong on the particular subject you are discussing. If someone is giving wrong info about important stuff like medicine that can lead to real world harm. So those people should be dismissed.

[@aaronwrighton2271]

Critical thinking doesn't mean listen to everybody. In fact it's critical thinking that would lead to the conclusion that certain individuals inclusion would lead to more muddled ideas on the topic. Worse understanding and possible harm.

[@karenamyx2205]

Guy has good points, but the aiming of it at red while ignoring blue is suspect.

[@greekthejimmy4107]

maybe red should start engaging with reality instead of conspiracies then? conservatives are literally the primary cause of anti-intellectualism in the country and its been this way for decades. the vast majority of grifters choose to grift you guys instead of liberals for a reason.

[@WildZephyr]

If only "the science" weren't for sale, maybe we'd believe it more.

[@JasonWilliams89]

It isn't, y'all just conspiracy nuts

[@HansKlopek]

​@@JasonWilliams89 covid vaccines are 98 percent effective.

[@LucasPlay171]

What are you even talking about, you are commenting on a youtube video, you have acces to most of the fucking internet, look stuff up and think about it, critically, its not that fucking hard. If you dont care then you shouldnt have a heavy opinion about it.

[@maxwell8758]

It’s not. You’re deluded

[@christianalanwilson434]

A lot of research is done at universities by professors, whose income and ability to continue their career depends on grants and funding by the institution. Guess what happens if they come up with results that go against the institution's ideology? They don't get any more funding. Its not even a stretch to imagine that the researcher will tend to skew their results toward what is "expected." I've seen it happen multiple times.

[@IniquitousZ]

He was right about a lot of things, but he's also been a great example of the problem that makes this very difficult to combat. Almost everybody believes this happens, but nobody believes it's happening to them.

[@cameronstrife1659]

So intellectuals lies and you say hey why are you lying then they call you an anti intellectual

[@smoothduck7151]

Trump lied over 30,000 times while in office.

[@91151426]

😂😂😂😂

[@ChiefGore429]

He is calling people morons and deleting comments. He lost

[@FutureWorldX]

@@ChiefGore429 I have never seen any video where Professor Dave deletes comments. In fact, he often replies to several pseudoscientists that keep responding to his debunks 5 years later. Link me a video where comments were personally deleted by Professor Dave, and I will become a young earth creationist and a flat earther.

[@ChiefGore429]

@@FutureWorldX I left like 20 comments. I don't even have one notification from that channel. You're wrong

[@sebastianfaundez6743]

He lost me when he made it into a party thing, it's a bipartisan thing and there's lies the biggest problem

[@SubjectiveFunny]

He is a terrified liberal. They cannot see past their irrational fear. Sad and pathetic.

[@jedrzejkoszewski4342]

I love it when Asmon makes more sense than the original video that he reacts to.

[@monitorlizard9971]

asmon absolutely smokes this guy. It isnt even close.

[@playlistnor]

You're only partially right. It's true because people never learned to think. You can teach how to think, especially critically. But it's a problem, and silencing the better people is more prevalent than ever.

[@Ugapiku]

The creator of this video needs a fucking mirror lmao 😂

[@thenonexistinghero]

Pretty much. When he mentioned Stalin I imagined me raising my eyebrow because I saw where it was going. Then he mentioned Trump and basically proved my assumption true and within 2 minutes of that he proved that not only is he anti-intellectual, but he knows absolutely nothing about science. It's not that he was wrong about Stalin, but the fact that the brings him up as the first example already says quite a bit about where he stands.

[@FutureWorldX]

but does any of the points mentioned go against the scientific consensus about anti intellectualism and the so-called "post-truth". Do you also believe 1 x 1 = 2 like Terrence Howard?

[@martinsv9183]

@@FutureWorldX Some of the fundamental points are correct... its just that its himself that happens to represent them :) Without him understanding it. He seems to believe in the climate religion for example.. but blames the ones seeing through it. And so on.

[@FutureWorldX]

@@martinsv9183 Professor Dave is a science communicator like Kyle Hill, Sabine Hossenfelder, Dave McKeegan, McToon and FTFE. My question is about the actual points presented, if any point was against the scientific process and outcomes, pseudoscientists like flat earthers and young earrth creationists making their claims would win Nobel Prizes.

[@martinsv9183]

@@FutureWorldX Haha no they wouldnt :) That's sadly not how it works. Nothing that goes against the narratives or agendas will get any price. It wont even be talked about. Quite the contrary. It will be heavily censored. No, the point of people believing dumb stuff they are told in different ways are valid. Its just that he doesnt understand that he himself is a prime example of just that. Believing in the climate religion for example. Which is implied in the video that he does. So he just needs to change the examples he gives. But he wont. Since he has been fooled himself by exactly what he's talking about.

[@mlsanders4800]

"In the future, fascists will come and they will call themselves anti-fascists" - Huey Long, in 1935

[@andreywonttell4016]

And this "future" has already arrived.

[@mlsanders4800]

@@andreywonttell4016 It has. It's wild though that almost 90 years ago, a Democrat, who was going to be a presidential candidate, and who was murdered by his own political rival to stop that happening, predicted it.

[@cjxd]

2:54 "...but it's not a conspiracy" Blue Anon fan fiction andy

[@discussioncorner]

From my understanding , trump on several occasions has disavowed project 2025 , has said its extreme he doesn't like it , it has nothing to do with him, etc.

[@smilo_don]

@@discussioncorner So do you also believe everything Biden said just because he said it?

[@anthonyblack6859]

@@discussioncornerthat doesn’t mean much humans can lie and most of trumps admin is full of heritage foundation backers and supporters. So even if trump him self doesn’t believe in it he will still pass a bunch of their policy by appointing the people who 100% agree with it.

[@discussioncorner]

@@anthonyblack6859 Well my point is this, is that you need evidence of it being linked to him more so than just people said so. So for example, lets use a conspiracy from the right. That Obama wasn't an American(which originated with hillary but framing it from the right in this comment works for the example) Trump famously pointed to obama not being American. And many people believed it, purely cause he said that Obama might not be American. Just saying something doesn't make it true is my point. If we change political sides, The accusation that trump is a russian agent. That was said a lot by many people, many in the media, hillary, hell many average people said this. However there was no evidence to this claim. Turns out to be false, but people spread it far and wide.

[@Equ1n0x88]

13:40 nowhere in the Bible, does it actually say, that the earth is 6000 years old. A lot of people, who have never ever read the book, like to misquote this. Additionally, the Bible is meant to be taken metaphorically. Take the "god created the world in 7 days". There is no day, because there is no universe yet. But of course, a lot of people who like to think they are smart, don't take this into account.

[@PowerGem3000]

How do you know they were being metaphorical

[@bodazaphfa]

@@PowerGem3000because Jonah was never swallowed by a whale and lived.

[@EstherMoffett-d7h]

This is a one-sided presentation of an important topic. This is a problem for both sides.

[@pglanville]

No, it's a Republican problem.

[@relaxedleisure4766]

@@pglanville Dems have a problem of accepting activists larping as experts as genuine experts, and republicans have a problem of not believing any expert because of activists larping as experts poisoning the well.

[@Mant111]

@@pglanville Found one

[@WanderTheNomad]

Is the problem equally prevalent on both sides?

[@Tiasung]

@@pglanville ''the right'' (which these days is basically ''anyone that doesnt adhere to the insane-radical-ultra-''left''-dogmas) has that problem for sure. But its far more overrepresented in the so-called ''left'', which is by now just a figurehead for the establishment.

[@Rhinlord]

Just because you have been taught things doesn't mean you know how to apply those things. Intelligence is knowing that a Tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put a Tomato in a fruit salad.

[@monitorlizard9971]

or to not drink the coolaid. this dude cant get enough of the coolaid. hes like shot gunning coolaid straight to the dome every day for decades.

[@GeorgeMonet]

Tomato is a vegetable. Just as a potato is a vegetable, an eggplant is a vegetable. The classification of fruit and vegetable are not the same as the classification used by biologists to keep track of the evolution of the plant itself.

[@Neelo5000]

@@GeorgeMonet Your comment was almost as useless as my response to it.

[@friedporchetta]

⁠@@GeorgeMonetA tomato is NOT a vegetable, it’s a berry which is a type of fruit

[@8BitShadow]

You're close, but the way society sees intelligence is outdated. Knowledge/Memory is *knowing* that a Tomato is a fruit. Intelligence is *understanding* a Tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is how to *use* the former two. --Of knowledge: When you are told this you are not taught the fact; you're told it. You do not actually understand the how or why. Nor do you know how to apply the information and where. --Of intelligence: Sure you can remember the 'how' but unless you understand it; the knowledge is useless, you must be taught it and remember that too. But also the understanding does not instantly lend to the usage - not without testing. --Of wisdom: Understanding why a tomato is a fruit is one thing, but if you can't remember the 'how' and the 'fact' then both are useless. Hence the three are of the same value; contrary to what society believes - largely because the curriculum has not changed in most parts of the world for over 50 years. To quote myself: What use is there in intelligence; if one does not know, or remember, how to utilize it (if one does not have the knowledge or memory to utilize it)? What use is there in knowledge; if one is unable to use it (if one lacks the intelligence to use it, or the memory to keep it)? What use is there in memory; if one is unable to apply it (if one lacks the knowledge of its application, or the intelligence to apply it)? Thusly: Treat intelligence, memory and knowledge with the same importance - without one, the others are nie-useless.

[@texascpa]

Yes, Trump is going to start prosecuting scientists and intellectuals. /eyeroll. Seriously, how can anyone take this guy serious when he starts his argument with that proposition. The TDS is strong with him.

[@RhetoricProject7]

People aren't uncomfortable with the ability to critically think. They're uncomfortable because when you define right & wrong, the outcomes that your conclusions lead to are on your head. And no one wants to bear that much responsibility. Better to follow someone else and be able to blame _them_ when you fall, than to decide your own course and have no one but *yourself* to blame when things fall apart.