- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sam Harris podcast with Scott Adams
Posted on 7/20/17 at 4:31 pm to buckeye_vol
Posted on 7/20/17 at 4:31 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
and can't persuade his own party to vote for these failed bills
Every thing is relative. Even persuasion. Lobbyists persuade with cash. Cash is A LOT stronger persuader than rhetoric. Even Trump can't out persuade cash.
Now if Trump could get on an even playing field with the lobbyists and offer cash to the Senators then his persuasion skills would win the day.
quote:
I think this can be best highlighted by Trump's refusal to ever admit culpability and/or apologize, which Adams highlighted in a discussion about Trump University. Adams says that if he did admit fault and/or apologize, people would expect it from him, presumably for things he has no need to apologize for. Of course people go overboard (apologizing for others; apologizing for slavery; etc.).
At the Al Smith dinner Trump did a preemptive apology to his wife Meliana before he delivered a joke about her. He also apologized about the grab them by the pussy tape because it offended so many of the people on his side. But Trump never apologizes to his opponents. Friends, loved ones and supporters? Yes. Opponents? No.
Trump sees apologies to opponents as a loss or a concession.
2
Posted on 7/20/17 at 4:54 pm to GumboPot
quote:Yet, he specifically mentions that on the persuasion scale, Trump is a "15" if Jobs is a "10." Jobs built an empire persuading millions to spend significantly more money on products that are equal or even less in quality than competition. And Trump can't persuade a majority, but other President's could--and lobbying was around then too?
Every thing is relative. Even persuasion. Lobbyists persuade with cash. Cash is A LOT stronger persuader than rhetoric. Even Trump can't out persuade cash.
quote:That's convenient, but I'm not persuaded by cash and I think Obamacare is horrible, but he hasn't been persuasive to me or many others.
Now if Trump could get on an even playing field with the lobbyists and offer cash to the Senators then his persuasion skills would win the day.
quote:O that's not the same and you know it. That's part of the comedy bit.
At the Al Smith dinner Trump did a preemptive apology to his wife Meliana before he delivered a joke about her.
quote:And it was noteworthy because that is so rare, and he looked mighty uncomfortable doing it, and Trump rarely looks uncomfortable.
He also apologized about the grab them by the pussy tape because it offended so many of the people on his side.
quote:I'm not even sure what you mean by "apologizing to opponents." We're talking about when he did something wrong, whether screwing somebody over, making an egregious mistake, or just taking something too far. To perceive those as a "loss" is frankly a disturbing character traits.
Trump sees apologies to opponents as a loss or a concession.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:03 pm to GumboPot
But even putting aside the power of money and lobbying. Let's just look at the election.
Trump's primary opponent was Hillary Clinton who was:
1. One of the most unfavorably viewed candidates since they started polling that.
2. Had months of campaign leaks meant to harm her chances.
3. Had an unprecedented reopening of a criminal investigation into herself by the FBI, a week or two before the election.
3. Was despised by many in her own party, specifically the far left, who preferred to vote for a third party candidate.
And despite all of that, the GOAT persuader still had millions fewer votes than his terrible opponent. If he was the GOAT persuader, he shouldn't have only beat her, he should have demolished her across the board.
Trump's primary opponent was Hillary Clinton who was:
1. One of the most unfavorably viewed candidates since they started polling that.
2. Had months of campaign leaks meant to harm her chances.
3. Had an unprecedented reopening of a criminal investigation into herself by the FBI, a week or two before the election.
3. Was despised by many in her own party, specifically the far left, who preferred to vote for a third party candidate.
And despite all of that, the GOAT persuader still had millions fewer votes than his terrible opponent. If he was the GOAT persuader, he shouldn't have only beat her, he should have demolished her across the board.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:13 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
But even putting aside the power of money and lobbying. Let's just look at the election.
Trump's primary opponent was Hillary Clinton who was:
1. One of the most unfavorably viewed candidates since they started polling that.
2. Had months of campaign leaks meant to harm her chances.
3. Had an unprecedented reopening of a criminal investigation into herself by the FBI, a week or two before the election.
3. Was despised by many in her own party, specifically the far left, who preferred to vote for a third party candidate.
I agree with all of this.
quote:
And despite all of that, the GOAT persuader still had millions fewer votes than his terrible opponent. If he was the GOAT persuader, he shouldn't have only beat her, he should have demolished her across the board.
Sam made this same point. Scott responded that the popular vote was/is not how you get elected. It's electoral votes. If the game was popular vote Trump would have never been strong on issues like immigration and would have been stronger on SJW issues to get votes in the population centers. But smartly he tailored his message to penetrate the "blue wall" (Rust Belt). It worked.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:29 pm to GumboPot
Just finished the podcast.
I like Scott Adams but I don't buy his theory that Trump is this mad scientist playing a high level game (7D chess as people call it).
I'm probably somewhere in the middle of these two guys. Some days I say "Wow, Trump is amazing" - other days it's "guy is a cheeto jesus conman who swindled us"
I like Scott Adams but I don't buy his theory that Trump is this mad scientist playing a high level game (7D chess as people call it).
I'm probably somewhere in the middle of these two guys. Some days I say "Wow, Trump is amazing" - other days it's "guy is a cheeto jesus conman who swindled us"
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:35 pm to GumboPot
quote:Sure, but this is disingenuous too. Candidates have been employing the same strategies for the entire history of elections, and despite facing better completion, they managed to "persuade" not only more voters across the nation, but more voters in the states they targeted.
Sam made this same point. Scott responded that the popular vote was/is not how you get elected
And unlike pre-21st century, messaging can he communicated instantaneously and ubiquitously. He may not run ads, or have a message that uniquely targets every place, but neither did his opponent.
He won because of great campaign strategy, compounded with his opponent's incompetent strategy. And he still won by slim margins in those places.
But my point is that if he was the GOAT persuader, going against basically the WOAT persuader and all the other negative, it should have been a landslide of epic proportions both in the popular vote and the EC. Instead he list the popular vote, and his EC margin was in the bottom quartile.
Clearly he has persuasive skills, and they are uniquely effective for a small, but significant portion of the population. But the results suggest he's not even the most persuasive president--let alone those outside of the few who seek the office.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:38 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:Yeah. Adams retreated into a very narrow defense/explanation of this behavior revolving around the realpolitik of gaming the legal system once you are brought into it. I found that to be his most disingenuous moment. Also, I don't know that they got into Trump's lack of actually held beliefs - or at the very least, his seemingly near-complete reversal just to run as a republican. Trump has been a big-city liberal his entire life. This includes things like being pro-choice. Yet his supporters are largely rabidly pro-life. I think all of this has been complicated way beyond the reality. Here's how I see it: Trump's "base" is essentially a bunch of scared rubes who have very little idea of how the world actually works and who are too lazy to try something new, and instead opt for a charlatan to promise a return to how it was when they were comfortable. Through this lens, one can easily see the appeal of mere signalling instead of attention to minute truths. Being able to appeal to this lowest common denominator doesn't make Trump a great "persuader" - it makes him someone unconcerned enough with things like ethics, morals and principles to shamelessly pander to them. The most I'll say in Trump's favor is that I'm glad he laid bare the false hand-wringing on the left around clearly figurative language - e.g. the "I could shoot someone on 5th avenue" remark. No regular American actually believes such a comment advocates for violence and is anything more than a figure of speech. Very fun to see the snowflakes wound up to the point of tears over such nothingness.
I'm not even sure what you mean by "apologizing to opponents." We're talking about when he did something wrong, whether screwing somebody over, making an egregious mistake, or just taking something too far. To perceive those as a "loss" is frankly a disturbing character traits.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:42 pm to Azazello
quote:I think Adams makes some valid points, but he's used this to parlay into his own little business so he has to take it to the exteme. I don't think he believes it at that level, but he targeting the same base of people who are persuaded by Trump's hyperbole.
Just finished the podcast.
I like Scott Adams but I don't buy his theory that Trump is this mad scientist playing a high level game (7D chess as people call it).
In fact, I think Adams is the better persuader. And he's taken a "meta" approach to promote himself, at the expensive of his own intellectual honesty when he takes it on the exteme. Good for him, but I think it's a shame that his valid ideas and hypotheses get lost in the exteme.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:51 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
I think it's a shame that his valid ideas and hypotheses get lost in the extreme.
You can hear it in his voice. He didn't believe a good portion of what he was saying.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 6:10 pm to Azazello
Harris wants no part of Stefan Molyneux
Posted on 7/20/17 at 6:13 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:Excellent analysis and seems very likely to be the case.
I think Adams makes some valid points, but he's used this to parlay into his own little business so he has to take it to the exteme. I don't think he believes it at that level, but he targeting the same base of people who are persuaded by Trump's hyperbole.
In fact, I think Adams is the better persuader. And he's taken a "meta" approach to promote himself, at the expensive of his own intellectual honesty when he takes it on the exteme. Good for him, but I think it's a shame that his valid ideas and hypotheses get lost in the exteme.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 7:26 pm to Vastmind
quote:
Harris wants no part of Stefan Molyneux
Molyneux is the epitome of a pseudo-intellectual clown.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 7:48 pm to GumboPot
quote:
At least Adams gave a disclaimer before his explanations that he too was engaging in post hoc explanations to fit his "movie". In fact it is impossible to avoid. Everyone has a different spin on prior events that gravitate to each persons bias.
No he didn't. And, look, I don't think Adams is a bad guy or an idiot, just a person that used an argument and then exhibited a bit of hypocrisy.
I view Adams as a guy with a keen eye for understanding the how/why of trump's win. However, I feel he's been trapped by his prediction (and false criticism of that prediction) into defending some indefensible flaws of trump.
You, however, or just a person susceptible to the persuasion of trump who will rationalize and defend every aspect of his presidency. I feel you basically have abdicated your right to rational discussion on this topic.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 8:07 pm to cwill
quote:I'm not sure when the podcast was made, but he discussed his predictions about Trump for the middle and the end of summer, and those predictions look quite inaccurate and trending the opposite direction.
I view Adams as a guy with a keen eye for understanding the how/why of trump's win. However, I feel he's been trapped by his prediction (and false criticism of that prediction) into defending some indefensible flaws of trump.
And the disingenuous part of his prediction is that he had nothing to lose. He had already garnered his following, but treating Trump like the GOAT persuader. That following wasn't going to leave him if he was wrong, and on the chance that Trump would win, he could only gain more credibility with his fans. He had nothing to lose, and a lot to gain.
With a PhD in psychology, I've been quite annoyed with some of his arguments that I read throughout the election. But I think this interview brought out some ideas that were actually valid. Some of them have already been conceptualized and studied. For example, "The Art of The Deal," HUGE initial offer in order to get the other side to adjust is called anchoring-and-adjusting, as popularized by Tversky and Kahneman. Wiki Article on It
Now maybe it's been conceptualized, but his idea of "emotional truth" to connect with his base was unique and interesting. I think he was onto something valid.
At the same time, because he takes to the extreme, he takes an idea that could have a scientific premise, and turns into a fundamentally anti-scientific argument because it cannot be falsified in his presentation.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News