Dude is a super-genius. Or he's nuts. Somewhere in between?
Holy crap ... he lost me a bunch of times. But I've been enjoying the hell out of this today.
Pretty interesting conversation with Joe Rogan.
Terrance on the Joe Rogan Experience - (
New Window )
He might be nutty, but he's not dim.
-Terence Howard (not joking)
Here is one. - ( New Window )
I gave it about 20 mins. But you know 90 seconds in he's bananas when he starts talking about detailed prenatal memories.
I don’t like Rogans comedy but he’s a great interviewer and I enjoy his perspective on a whole bunch of topics. Why people make his opinions about anything more than just that is strange.
What exactly is he a hack at besides not being a top tier comedian which isn’t even some big failure?
Bahahahahaha
Now that was funny! (and true lol)
Pretty much. He found his niche.
I don't care if people don't like Rogan but goddamn the characterization he receives online is precious.
Quote:
continues to be to this day. Good thing he got in on UFC early. Otherwise, he’d just be a hack.
I don’t like Rogans comedy but he’s a great interviewer and I enjoy his perspective on a whole bunch of topics. Why people make his opinions about anything more than just that is strange.
What exactly is he a hack at besides not being a top tier comedian which isn’t even some big failure?
Cmon, you know the answer to this. He's a hack because he thinks differently than these clowns.
His audience "learns" way too much from these engrossing conversations and so he's a source for spreading bullshit to a lot of folks.
His audience "learns" way too much from these engrossing conversations and so he's a source for spreading bullshit to a lot of folks.
Him talking with certainty is BS - he makes it very clear what he’s an expert on (MMA, fitness, etc) and what he isn’t (astrophysics, economics, etc). The guy, like everyone else on the planet, has an opinion and he shares it. If people take his word as gospel that’s on them, no different than anyone else.
Which experts should we all listen to and not question?
Quote:
and he talks with certainty with his audience about stuff that he actually knows very little. And he brings on people who do the same.
His audience "learns" way too much from these engrossing conversations and so he's a source for spreading bullshit to a lot of folks.
Him talking with certainty is BS - he makes it very clear what he’s an expert on (MMA, fitness, etc) and what he isn’t (astrophysics, economics, etc). The guy, like everyone else on the planet, has an opinion and he shares it. If people take his word as gospel that’s on them, no different than anyone else.
Which experts should we all listen to and not question?
Emphasis mine - this is the problem. Not everyone needs to have an opinion on everything. And even fewer need to share it when their opinion is uninformed.
Steve O has a popular podcast, I tune in on occasion to be entertained, that’s it.
Steve O has a popular podcast, I tune in on occasion to be entertained, that’s it.
I didn't mean for it to come across as censorship. I meant that the idea that everyone is entitled to an opinion AND for a platform on which to share it is a relatively recent phenomenon (driven by the internet and social media).
People could just shut the fuck up when they have no idea what they're talking about. No one ever took that option away.
In this case, Terrance Howard is a crank. Joe Rogan's interview makes him appear legitimate to a large number of Joe's followers. It's one thing to say he 'shouldn't' give this platform to people like Howard. It's totally different if you're saying the government should shut Rogan down.
Rogan's podcast with Coleman Hughes taught me a lot about that subject I was not familiar with, neither was Rogan and he acknowledged that, and I would guess neither was a lot of his audience.
furthermore, a lot of the opinions Rogan had about subjects that cannot be discussed on here where he was vilified for having turned out to be more accurate or fairer than the "experts". Not all of his opinions to be clear, but many and the fact that there are not many voices with his reach on an accessible platform that support critical thinking or even dissension from the main stream (vs grandstanding or shit stirring or trolling under the guise of "just asking questions" - which I do not support) makes him an important figure IMO.
We need to stop giving a megaphone to the lunatic fringe, especially now that we as a society have stopped being capable of even deciphering the difference between truly informed experts and "do your own research" idiots.
His audience "learns" way too much from these engrossing conversations and so he's a source for spreading bullshit to a lot of folks.
Yep. But he's just thinking differently than the idiots. Sure he is.
And 1x1=2? Holy fuckballz. LOL
I preferred Rogan a lot more like 5-10ish years ago when he was just f'ing around with Redban. I still listen when he has certain guests on, but he's so full of himself these days that it becomes hard to listen to. I guess that kind of success gets in your head, can't blame him. But it's definitely made him worse over the years.
If someone wishes there were less avenues for loons to have a voice and influence people it’s not censorship. If the government stepped in and stopped them from talking then it would be.
If someone wishes there were less avenues for loons to have a voice and influence people it’s not censorship. If the government stepped in and stopped them from talking then it would be.
No, you are wrong because you are deciding who the loon is, in your hypothetical.
Much of the shit Rogan went on to say on the topic in subsequent years was really irresponsible, but if people are getting medical advice from people like him and Aaron Rodgers then that's on the people listening to them. "Idiocracy" was a fucking documentary, not a comedy.
Quote:
People get censorship wrong.
If someone wishes there were less avenues for loons to have a voice and influence people it’s not censorship. If the government stepped in and stopped them from talking then it would be.
No, you are wrong because you are deciding who the loon is, in your hypothetical.
We know who the loon is. The guy who claims 1x1=2 because he doesn't even understand the concept of multiplication.
I preferred Rogan a lot more like 5-10ish years ago when he was just f'ing around with Redban. I still listen when he has certain guests on, but he's so full of himself these days that it becomes hard to listen to. I guess that kind of success gets in your head, can't blame him. But it's definitely made him worse over the years.
Came here to say similar. I used to love the Rogan podcast. When I drove across country and back in 2016-17 I had it on nonstop. He used to have such great conversations with a wide variety of people. These days, he definitely has a certain built-in stance with himself and his guests. He is not as open minded as he portrays himself to be. He throws in the same talking points and espouses way more bullshit. Theres plenty of clips of him where he is talking absolute nonsense and gets caught up (usually by Jamie "pulling it up"). I don't hate him or anything, and still listen to him for MMA talk. But he is not what he used to be.
Quote:
People get censorship wrong.
If someone wishes there were less avenues for loons to have a voice and influence people it’s not censorship. If the government stepped in and stopped them from talking then it would be.
No, you are wrong because you are deciding who the loon is, in your hypothetical.
No because none of us even if we believe someone is or isn’t a loon don’t have the power to censor anyone. And even if a private company that employed someone who the masses judged to be a loon and chose to limit them because they feared loss of revenue because of it, that wouldn’t be censorship. That would be their prerogative. The loons would still be free to say whatever they desired to, they just maybe would no longer make an income from it.
Censorship is when the government limits their ability to speak out.
Quote:
In comment 16531261 steve in ky said:
Quote:
People get censorship wrong.
If someone wishes there were less avenues for loons to have a voice and influence people it’s not censorship. If the government stepped in and stopped them from talking then it would be.
No, you are wrong because you are deciding who the loon is, in your hypothetical.
We know who the loon is. The guy who claims 1x1=2 because he doesn't even understand the concept of multiplication.
Although that’s not who I was referring to, he should be allow to say whatever he wants and if it’s so obvious he’s crazy, he will be ignored. Who’s the arbiter of what should be allowed on air anyway? that’s my point on censorship and goes back to my earlier post on self accountability as well.
Quote:
and he talks with certainty with his audience about stuff that he actually knows very little. And he brings on people who do the same.
His audience "learns" way too much from these engrossing conversations and so he's a source for spreading bullshit to a lot of folks.
Him talking with certainty is BS - he makes it very clear what he’s an expert on (MMA, fitness, etc) and what he isn’t (astrophysics, economics, etc). The guy, like everyone else on the planet, has an opinion and he shares it. If people take his word as gospel that’s on them, no different than anyone else.
Which experts should we all listen to and not question?
Whatever his bonafides are in fields, he often presents his opinions with certainty. And his tendency to not really question what his guests have to say means his platform is available to folks who are spreading a lot of stuff that is shaky at best.
I don't want to censor anyone, I just think it's regrettable that the biggest podcast in the world helps to spread a lot of bullshit to an audience that seems to love the bullshit.
I actually never said I wanted to limit anyone. But that’s the way things work, people are free to say what they choose and others are equally free to object to them saying it.
I can't speak for Steve, but it's not that I want to force someone like Howard to have his opportunities limited. It's that I hate that we live in a world where there's not only demand for these stupid fucking alternative viewpoints, but there are people who believe them, and think that a mid-level actor is qualified to even have a take on the nonsense he discusses.
I don't want to limit the supply of stupidity. I just wish we didn't have so much demand for stupidity. If there wasn't demand for it, there'd be no market for it. Without a market for it, there'd be no money in it. With no money in it, there'd be no reason to give any oxygen to the nonsense in the first place.
The voracious appetite that our society has for stupidity (and the consumption of that stupidity as though it's based in fact) is bleak and depressing.
Quote:
but you also want to limit it as you said above so I’m speaking directly to you - you want Terrance Howard or whoever to not be given as many opportunities to speak/be heard. That’s wild to me. Just move along if you don’t like him (I don’t) like mostly everyone else is doing.
I can't speak for Steve, but it's not that I want to force someone like Howard to have his opportunities limited. It's that I hate that we live in a world where there's not only demand for these stupid fucking alternative viewpoints, but there are people who believe them, and think that a mid-level actor is qualified to even have a take on the nonsense he discusses.
I don't want to limit the supply of stupidity. I just wish we didn't have so much demand for stupidity. If there wasn't demand for it, there'd be no market for it. Without a market for it, there'd be no money in it. With no money in it, there'd be no reason to give any oxygen to the nonsense in the first place.
The voracious appetite that our society has for stupidity (and the consumption of that stupidity as though it's based in fact) is bleak and depressing.
Pretty much this. There are people in this thread debating whether or not someone who doesn't understand the most basic arithmetic is a genius or not. Think about that. We're actively having a conversation about the merits of a man who doesn't understand that 1x1 is a fundamentally different thing than 1+1. Listening to this man gives you brainworms.
I don't think it's censorship to wish that a man who has a platform that reaches over 10 million people would use that platform more responsibly. Even if only 1% of the people who listen to the podcast believe the lunacy Howard espoused, that's still 100,000 people walking around telling their friends and family this nonsense. This kind of shit is one of the ways we've ended up so polarized as a country. A whole lot of people listening to fringe weirdos and basing their entire worldview on misinformation.
I guess that's one option.
The other might be to put a slightly higher premium on intelligence instead of racing to the bottom under the guise of entertainment, but that's never happening. We're already past the tipping point and the idiots have rightfully declared victory.
Again, I never said that. Others did, it was called censorship and I responded to that. I was just adding my point of view on that, no big deal though.
Quote:
Rogan isn’t the problem and does way more good than bad, IMO.
I guess that's one option.
The other might be to put a slightly higher premium on intelligence instead of racing to the bottom under the guise of entertainment, but that's never happening. We're already past the tipping point and the idiots have rightfully declared victory.
You and I don’t and won’t agree on what’s quality content. You might find some episodes laughable and I find them interesting. And as someone posted earlier, he’s been right on some things he almost got cancelled for.
Quote:
In comment 16531388 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
Rogan isn’t the problem and does way more good than bad, IMO.
I guess that's one option.
The other might be to put a slightly higher premium on intelligence instead of racing to the bottom under the guise of entertainment, but that's never happening. We're already past the tipping point and the idiots have rightfully declared victory.
You and I don’t and won’t agree on what’s quality content. You might find some episodes laughable and I find them interesting. And as someone posted earlier, he’s been right on some things he almost got cancelled for.
We're also arguing about two different people. I don't care about Rogan other than thinking that it's irresponsible to give someone like Howard a platform without challenging him.
When I say the idiots have won, it's because of people like Terrence Howard being celebrated as some sort of genius or savant when it's much more likely that he's just a mentally-ill narcissist.
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled"
You know who you are. Or worse, maybe you don't.
I’m strictly talking Rogan. I’ve learned a lot from his podcast, and also laughed a lot. That’s a pretty good combo and no one is doing it better.
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled"
You know who you are. Or worse, maybe you don't.
Good quote. From my experience in this life (I'll be 46 in a couple of months), the second that I thought I knew enough about myself or this life, I branded myself a fool.
There are things about me that I can see now that I could not or did not want to see earlier in my life. It is reasonable to expect the same thing to happen later in my life (God willing). Overall, I think this is the case for most people as is my belief that humans overall have a terrible sense of awareness about themselves.
I know that I lie to myself about my intentions too often.
I’m strictly talking Rogan. I’ve learned a lot from his podcast, and also laughed a lot. That’s a pretty good combo and no one is doing it better.
I'm not just talking about Howard being celebrated on here, in this thread. I'm saying public sentiment in general, for those who care at all, seems to include more people who feel like Howard really gave them something to think about than it does people who recognize that he's a complete wacko. Is he harmful? Probably not. But the departure from objective truths in favor of a full spectrum of alternative theories is a step backward in general, IMO. This is not the advancement of intelligent thought; it's the equivalent of a burnout stoner on the couch of his frat house wondering if "C-A-T really spells 'dog'."
Somehow, humans are simultaneously smarter than ever before (given to our tech advancements and access to knowledge) right now while also dumber than ever before. And our ability to differentiate (and agree upon the differentiation of) the former from the latter has never been more under siege, IMO.
Putting the dumb on the same platform as the smart and doing nothing to indicate which is which leaves the shallow end consuming all of it equally.
Quote:
In comment 16530876 bwitz said:
Quote:
continues to be to this day. Good thing he got in on UFC early. Otherwise, he’d just be a hack.
I don’t like Rogans comedy but he’s a great interviewer and I enjoy his perspective on a whole bunch of topics. Why people make his opinions about anything more than just that is strange.
What exactly is he a hack at besides not being a top tier comedian which isn’t even some big failure?
Cmon, you know the answer to this. He's a hack because he thinks differently than these clowns.
It’s good to know the morons in his audience.
Hi!
Usual suspects. Sad.
Usual suspects. Sad.
One might call your insults and lack of anything of substance, acting like an asshlole. Dare I say, on brand response?