Donald Trump Interview | Lex Fridman Podcast #442

[PurpleTree]

4 minutes ago, Joshe said:

but I think

I don't think. I just think

nice ❤️

[Leo Gura]

@Joshe There is no contradiction between wanting peace and love and self-deception. Then again, who are you to dictate what is the best way to actualize peace and love? Maybe your pushback approach isn't as great as you tell yourself. Maybe Lex is actually wise not to push some SJW agenda on us.

Lex likes to cozy up to famous, rich, and powerful people and befriend them. Obviously this will create conflicts of interest and blindspots for him.

Basically anyone in Rogan's social circle gets compromised. That's how power and fame works. That's literally elitism in action, but these people tell themselves that they are independent and alternative so they are not elites -- but they are the new elites. All of Rogan's buddies are elites. It's an elite celebrity social circle where everyone scratches each others backs and rakes in millions. That's how elitism works.

Lex had Thanksgiving Day dinner with Ivanka Trump's family. Which is cringe.

But Lex is allowed to have his interview style.

The only thing here that doesn't make sense is you demanding that Lex share your agenda.

Edited September 5 by Leo Gura

[What Am I]

Lex has recently publicly invited Kamala Harris, Tim Walz, Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and AOC. Do you imagine he'll now show his true colors and perform the pushback you desired on them?

[Inliytened1]

47 minutes ago, Joshe said:

he wants those, but he wants the lifestyle of the rich and famous first. You seem to be reluctant to touch upon the self-deception mechanisms that are potentially, and IMO, very likely in play here. 

 

You honestly have no idea what's in his head.  Self deception could just as easily be in play with your assessment of him.

Good for him for realizing the American Dream.   I salute him and i hope he makes millions more and interviews countless more of the rich and famous.  But also, maybe one day he will realize that the American dream was just a giant fugazzi and he will seek inner peace.  But he's a long way away from that.  And so is Trump.  You guys have to realize that you are judging these guys from higher states of development.  And maybe one day you will advance to an even higher one by realizing you did that.

  

Edited September 5 by Inliytened1

[questionreality]

@Leo Gura I am glad to see that you shifted towards more of a balanced approach when it comes to politics and started calling out the leftist bias when you see it.

 

 

[Inliytened1]

2 minutes ago, questionreality said:

@Leo Gura I am glad to see that you shifted towards more of a balanced approach when it comes to politics and started calling out the leftist bias when you see it.

 

 

I fear he's still severely affected by leftist bias and is still trying to break out of it.   But this is good.  Its a start. 

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

@Joshe There is no contradiction between wanting peace and love and self-deception.

Lex likes to cozy up to famous, rich, and powerful people and befriend them. Obviously this will create conflicts of interest and blindspots for him.

Basically anyone in Rogan's social circle gets compromised. That's how power and fame works. That's literally elitism in action, but these people tell themselves that they are independent and alternative so they are not elites -- but they are the new elites. All of Rogan's buddies are elites.

Lex had Thanksgiving Day dinner with Ivanka Trump's family. Which is cringe.

But Lex is allowed to have his interview style.

I agree with all that, including his right to conduct himself how he wants. 100%.

I might be projecting my own communication style onto you but not sure.

If someone's primary impulse is material gain, with peace and love as secondary, I'd never characterize their core motivation as peace and love without clearly qualifying that distinction. The pursuit of worldly things more fundamentally shapes their actions and decisions. Framing their guiding principle as peace and love, without acknowledging its most likely secondary nature, misrepresents their behavior. To me, this risks elevating a non-primary influence to primary status and distorts understanding, but like I said, this might just be a difference in thinking/communication style.

When we're debating someone's potential impact on society, it's important to dig into their real intentions, not just the ones they say they have. There was this study on Prius buyers - turns out their main motivation wasn't actually protecting the environment, but to signal virtue. We need to know the actual drivers (no pun intended) if we're going to observe and assess accurately. 

Edited September 5 by Joshe

[Inliytened1]

19 hours ago, Lyubov said:

Exactly. And one lies through their teeth while the other one subtly twists things. Which to choose 

The one trying to get in by making it obvious i'd actually like more than the one who is sneakier.  

Edited September 5 by Inliytened1

[questionreality]

13 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

I fear he's still severely affected by leftist bias and is still trying to break out of it.   But this is good.  Its a start. 

Yea you are right, I am getting ahead of myself here. But it's nice to see for a change of him calling out the leftwing bias like in this thread, in the past he would never do this.

 

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

The only thing here that doesn't make sense is you demanding that Lex share your agenda.

@Leo Gura I don't have an agenda for Lex to share. I just don't like when the most fundamental things about an item are obfuscated, especially when that obfuscation turns vice into virtue. 

Also, I have not said his approach is detrimental, I just pointed to his bias. Whether it's good to push back or not, I do not know and I don't care because it's not my business, nor something I can change. The point of observing and analyzing him is not to judge or finger point. It's to simply understand what is going on. 

Edited September 5 by Joshe

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, Joshe said:

If someone's primary impulse is material gain, with peace and love as secondary, I'd never characterize their core motivation as peace and love without clearly qualifying that distinction.

You are making a huge leap to imply that Lex's primary impulse is material gain.

He doesn't strike me as motivated by that much at all. He is already materially set for life.

Again, material gain, fame, and power will seamlessly meld with one's ideals, worldview, and ideology such that they will become inseperable.

Lex's worldview is that having these soft neutral civil conversations will help mankind come together, build bridges, and understand each other. That seems to be his life purpose. It's a nobel purpose, regardless of whether it will pan out or not. The only valid criticism I see here is that you can call him naive or overly idealistic.

It's sad though to see Lex get shit on online by partisans when he talks about love, as if he's full of shit. When the online partisans behave like hyenas foaming at the mouth for blood.

Edited September 5 by Leo Gura

[PurpleTree]

jbp on lex was wild

 

[Inliytened1]

38 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I agree with all that, including his right to conduct himself how he wants. 100%.

I might be projecting my own communication style onto you but not sure.

If someone's primary impulse is material gain, with peace and love as secondary, I'd never characterize their core motivation as peace and love without clearly qualifying that distinction. The pursuit of worldly things more fundamentally shapes their actions and decisions. Framing their guiding principle as peace and love, without acknowledging its most likely secondary nature, misrepresents their behavior. To me, this risks elevating a non-primary influence to primary status and distorts understanding, but like I said, this might just be a difference in thinking/communication style.

When we're debating someone's potential impact on society, it's important to dig into their real intentions, not just the ones they say they have. There was this study on Prius buyers - turns out their main motivation wasn't actually protecting the environment, but to signal virtue. We need to know the actual drivers (no pun intended) if we're going to observe and assess accurately. 

And perhaps there is no driver at all other than that individual's own ego trying to be "involved" but also at the same time getting ahead for themselves.  In other words - interviewing Trump certainly keeps them in the spotlight.  Good for them.  But what is this potential impact on society by interviewing a potentially bad President that could potentially negatively impact the country if elected?  Honestly it probably barely moves the needle. The Trump supporters are already going to vote for Trump.  This isn't going to move the needle.  There may be a few who are teetering between the two, but this interview certainly won't be the difference.   And the Biden/Harris supporters are still going to vote their way.   Trump thinks it makes a difference by actually appearing on every possible platform.  It's probably actually hurtng him.

Edited September 5 by Inliytened1

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

You honestly have no idea what's in his head.  Self deception could just as easily be in play with your assessment of him.

Well, I said "IMO", but, how do you know what I can and can't know? 

When I was 4 I saw a wall of books and had a spiritual experience. My Need for Cognition might be beyond your understanding of what is normal for a mind. I consumed more information yesterday than the average person will all year. Not factual consumption, conceptual. Deep shit. I had 10 deep insights into human psychology before lunch time, and that was just yesterday, before lunch. 

Do you know what it's like to be born intellectually independent, thus, minimizing bias? Do you know what it's like to naturally value the truth, thus minimizing bias even further? Do you know what it's like to have sufficient confidence in your cognition, such that to be wrong is a good thing because that's how you become right?  Feel free to show me any error I make, and I will earnestly consider it and correct it. I have been wrong countless times before and am not afraid to be wrong now.

Have you ever played poker? You have to make lots of decisions. You will be wrong many times and those errors can be analyzed if you have the courage to ask "why was I wrong?".

Edited September 6 by Joshe

[PurpleTree]

2 minutes ago, Joshe said:

 

When I was 4, I saw a wall of books and had a spiritual experience. My Need for Cognition might be beyond your understanding of what is normal for a mind. I consumed more information yesterday than the average person will all year. Not factual consumption, conceptual. Deep shit. I had 10 deep insights into human psychology before lunch time, and that was just yesterday 

what a stuuud bro

truly impressive 😻

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

It's sad though to see Lex get shit on online by partisans when he talks about love, as if he's full of shit. When the online partisans behave like hyenas foaming at the mouth for blood.

I don't think he's full of shit on that, I just think it's ok to ask what is driving him.

And I have not made a leap, I have it as a likely hypothesis. You believe he's primarily driven by peace and love... but I have not made that leap and will not make that leap without sufficient reason. You are operating on bias here, not me. I have no reason to assume the members of the most popular and exclusive club on the planet are primarily motivated by peace and love. And I don't think you do either. As such, to me, it's an open question as to what is driving him. When I see an authority such as yourself making a claim like this, I get confused. 

Edited September 6 by Joshe

[Joshe]

13 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

what a stuuud bro

truly impressive 😻

Thanks, I appreciate that bro!

[Inliytened1]

15 minutes ago, Joshe said:

 

Do you know what it's like to be born intellectually independent, thus, minimizing bias?

Yes..it's both a blessing and a curse..mostly a blessing.  Enjoy it.

[Inliytened1]

10 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I don't think he's full of shit on that, I just think it's ok to ask what is driving him.

And I have not made a leap, I have it as a likely hypothesis. You believe he's primarily driven by peace and love... but I have not made that leap and will not make that leap without sufficient reason. You are operating on bias here, not me. I have no reason to assume the members of the most popular and exclusive club on the planet, are primarily motivated by peace and love. And I don't think you do either. As such, to me, it's an open question as to what is driving him. When I see an authority such as yourself making a claim like this, I get confused. 

That's easy.  It just means his heart is in the right place.   I haven't followed his work enough to say one way or another.   But hopefully it was. Even if it wasn't- as i said his impact on society with this particular interview is probably not much if anything.

Edited September 6 by Inliytened1

[Joshe]

Just now, Inliytened1 said:

That's easy.  It just means his heart is in the right place.  

It is indeed in a good place. Even to pay lip service to peace and love is better than not. He's probably a net positive for the world and he may even turn out to be a HUGE net positive. But this has nothing to do with assessing the known variables. I'm not calling him evil or bad. 

Like, rain isn't bad. Can I call rain, rain, without being told I'm pessimistic?