Submitted by thenousman t3_zsnec1 in philosophy
iusedtoknowsuffering t1_j1dig4s wrote
Reply to comment by adamsky1997 in Epistemic Trespassing: Stay in your lane mf by thenousman
Isn’t there a difference between a comedy podcast like Rogan’s and an “expert testimony” in a court of law? If I’m listening to a comedy podcast, I always have a giant banner in my head that says “these are idiots who are providing you with entertainment, and everything they say should be taken with a grain of salt.”
adamsky1997 t1_j1divhh wrote
Of course there is, but the audience is not the court of law but the general public who then go and vote in elections.
Lex Fridman is really vile, he asserts himself as a scientists, computer researcher etc, and his podcasts were first about that. But then he expanded to psychology, politics, sociology, topics which he has zero authority in
iusedtoknowsuffering t1_j1e0n7p wrote
Does Fridman make assertions in the fields of psychology/politics/sociology? Or does he invite experts from those fields onto his podcast and interview them with curious, probing questions?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments