I've been curious about how others perceive reality. What is "true" and "real" to me is not necessarily "true" and "real" to others.
First stop: Scott Adams, creator of Dilbert.
He's currently 67, does a daily podcast called "Real Coffee with Scott Adams" which draws about 30,000 listeners on YouTube, with 172,000 total subscribers to the channel. Podcast is also available on all the usual places, with a 4.4 rating on Apple Podcasts. Each episode is about an hour long, or a little less.
1. Basic format: Just runs through news articles that drew his interest. On the April 15 episode (link above), he ran through 28 articles. Often he'd laugh at something, sometimes to show his disbelief.
2. Adams is not a big fan of science. He's open to conspiracy theories. Believes that the government doesn't tell us the truth (although he seems to think the Trump administration is an exception to this principle). Often acknowledges that he doesn't know whether what he's saying is true or not, or sprinkles his comments with words like "maybe" and "perhaps."
3. At the same time, will often give his own opinion, without providing any reason or evidence for why we should care.
4. No real criticism of Trump. Suggests that "chaos is good for the stock market" and that chaos is better than the status quo (specifically on tariffs, but seems to be a general principle that he's accepted for how Trump runs government). Said that it takes a gorilla to get things done. Laughed at the "scalpel approach" as ineffective and something that has proven to fail to make real change happen. (Because nothing important happens in incremental steps over time, I guess?)
5. Often indicates that we're being lied to -- by science, by the media, by government.
6. If AOC and Bernie Sanders are drawing crowds to rallies, concludes the "buzz" is happening because of the media. It's the media that is generating the protest, not anything Trump is doing...
7. Did wonder, about 11 minutes in, what the plan for prisoners in El Salvador was. Would they be there for life? That would be the only way those prisons would work. Briefly asked if that was "even remotely humane," but quipped, "But nobody cares."
8. Spent a few minutes going on about the "Biden crime family" and how "everything you thought about him turned out to be exactly right."
9. "Persuasion tip" -- According to Adams, if Trump makes a statement like "You don't love America," don't respond. He laughs that CNN responded, "CNN does love America." That's an example of a "baseless claim," he said. If you engage, you already are losing. Doesn't address why it's okay for the attacker to make a baseless claim himself and why it's okay in Trump's case to do so.
10. Wondered why all the "crazies" are liberals (in this case, someone arrested for threatening Tulsi Gabbard.) Again, suggesting that there seem to be no conservative crazies. All conservatives are completely rational and sane. (Doesn't acknowledge that the conservatives' crazies are the ones in government leadership now...)
I listened to the complete episode. It was a challenge. I'm not sure how much of what he says he believes, or how aware he is of his own flaws in logic/blind spots
Also, not sure why people would listen to this, as it's essentially just him responding to items in the news. But I guess people like hearing what their favs think. That's what this podcast offers: Adams' take on things.
It bothers me that he kept hitting on lines like "Who knows?" and "We'll never know the truth." Being able to live with uncertainty isn't a bad thing in and of itself; however, undermining what is true and real can be... and Adams certainly didn't appear to have a good grasp on how science and research works. He would just say, "Sounds sketchy" and showed little interest in pursuing things he didn't understand. Easier to laugh and reject them.
***
So, I'm going to do this for a while. I'm going to listen to what "alternative truth tellers" are saying, and I'm going to track my thoughts on what they say and how they say it. Then I'll post my findings.
As far as Adams goes, I used to like "Dibert." He threw his support to Trump years ago and doesn't seem to regret that decision. It must have lost him a lot of fans, but I'm sure it also helped him lock in a lot of Trump supporters, which in the United States, hasn't been a bad person to glue yourself to. Unfortunately, if you are glued to Trump you limit your freedom of thought, because you ultimately have to show why Trump is always right.
Comments
Post a Comment