The old fashioned news media relied on anecdotal evidence too, but usually with smaller samples. Social media not only expands the audience for anecdotal evidence, but it increases the number of anecdotes. It's not clear to me then that on balance we're more misinformed/stupider as a result of social media as compared with conventional media.
You mentioned police shootings of black men and police shootings of unarmed black men. That’s confusing because there are lots more police shootings of armed black men than unarmed (although many of the unarmed were driving cars or trucks at the police).
I think you miss that many people think police shootings of ARMED black men are a sign of systemic racism. To them, the inequality, even if it’s justifiable by statistical analysis is still “wrong”.
I quite like your show. However I think your blind spot is that your problem is how to energize the best performers more, and how the left is hobbling those people. I don’t think that’s a very big problem, we are really good at rewarding those people. What we have become terrible at is defusing the envy and resentment that comes from their existence. “the last shall be first and the first shall be last”
Are there enough of us out there, those that go out into the world to see what's happening, to keep it together? I fell into the emotionally manipulated space, removed myself from social media, went outside and around. Low and behold! None of that was playing out around me. I am hoping against hope that people will choose to use their brain over their feelings once again.
This is a good example of both-sidesism gone wrong. Many of the issues you discuss, particularly police violence, are clearly examples of anecdotes creating false perceptions. Covid vaccine side effects arguments, on the other hand, are based almost completely on statistical analysis. See, for example, Steve Kirsch’s newsletter. He’s not pumping out sensational anecdotes. He’s conducting statistical analyses. You can quibble with his analyses, but it simply is not true that those who believe Covid vaccines have high side effect rates are falling for availability bias based on a few anecdotes. They’re relying on data and statistical analysis. Look at VAERS, DMED, increases in non-Covid all cause mortality, etc.
The old fashioned news media relied on anecdotal evidence too, but usually with smaller samples. Social media not only expands the audience for anecdotal evidence, but it increases the number of anecdotes. It's not clear to me then that on balance we're more misinformed/stupider as a result of social media as compared with conventional media.
You mentioned police shootings of black men and police shootings of unarmed black men. That’s confusing because there are lots more police shootings of armed black men than unarmed (although many of the unarmed were driving cars or trucks at the police).
I think you miss that many people think police shootings of ARMED black men are a sign of systemic racism. To them, the inequality, even if it’s justifiable by statistical analysis is still “wrong”.
I quite like your show. However I think your blind spot is that your problem is how to energize the best performers more, and how the left is hobbling those people. I don’t think that’s a very big problem, we are really good at rewarding those people. What we have become terrible at is defusing the envy and resentment that comes from their existence. “the last shall be first and the first shall be last”
Are there enough of us out there, those that go out into the world to see what's happening, to keep it together? I fell into the emotionally manipulated space, removed myself from social media, went outside and around. Low and behold! None of that was playing out around me. I am hoping against hope that people will choose to use their brain over their feelings once again.
This is a good example of both-sidesism gone wrong. Many of the issues you discuss, particularly police violence, are clearly examples of anecdotes creating false perceptions. Covid vaccine side effects arguments, on the other hand, are based almost completely on statistical analysis. See, for example, Steve Kirsch’s newsletter. He’s not pumping out sensational anecdotes. He’s conducting statistical analyses. You can quibble with his analyses, but it simply is not true that those who believe Covid vaccines have high side effect rates are falling for availability bias based on a few anecdotes. They’re relying on data and statistical analysis. Look at VAERS, DMED, increases in non-Covid all cause mortality, etc.