r/HubermanLab • u/Personalvintage • 15d ago
Huberman on Jocko did not display extreme ownership. Nor did Jocko hold him to that standard. Episode Discussion
Hoping to have a serious discussion free of moralizing Karens and alt right incels who were both astroturfing here when the New York magazine article came out. He used the “extreme ownership” words himself and I think it was an abuse of the term. When asked about the article, he talked about the history of the pod, then went on and on about whether he skated for Venture. Then quickly addressed the cheating. I respect that he had the courage to address it at all but I would say he definitely minimized at very best.
1
u/FrenchG-here 11d ago
Hilarious the way he kept casually/not casually saying "I lived on Piedmont Ave" in a lame effort to counter the story from the article (which said he tried to get clout by saying he lived in Piedmont the neighborhood). Also how he desperately threw in stories of adult suicide/deaths of guys from skateboarding time to counter the article casting doubt on his earlier claim that friends committed suicide while in detention... when he was a teenager (totally different things). The "don't come after my dog" was ridiculous as was the "if you have a problem with me, come to me" bit. Both super aggro chest-thumping (which is even grosser considering that he's mostly addressing the women in the story). The icing on the cake was when he trotted out his cringe Cookie Monster imitation in a preposterous bid to "do something with Sesame Street" - as if! Sorry, bro, not exactly brand alignment. All in all, a lot of anger, a lot of evasion, and a whole lot of tell-tale eye-blinking.
1
4
21
u/wakeupgrowupshowup 14d ago
Definitely not extreme ownership, more like PR sanding the edges. Disappointed as much in jocko for not digging in and helping move more men toward integrity
1
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
I'd say there's a 99% chance Jocko is a big freaking cheater, too.
3
u/PABJJ 11d ago
Source: trust me bro
1
u/Massive-Path6202 11d ago edited 11d ago
Thanks for telling us you don't know shit about psychology. I'll spell it out for the dumbasses like you out there: the psychological profile of (a) Navy Seal (b) who starts a podcast (c) and does what it takes to make it mega successful (d) which means seeking a TON of attention and (e) constantly spinning everything to make themselves look good, is exactly the profile of a big fucking serial cheater. Shit, the Navy Seal part alone strongly correlates with major cheating.
1
2
2
13
u/Personalvintage 14d ago
You know, I really appreciate this response. I got a lot of anger right away. Nobody that was angry mentioned a word about extreme ownership. I completely agree that he was merely sanding the edges. I think it’s a good example of how hard it is to take extreme ownership, and how hard it is to require our friends to take extreme ownership.
11
u/radiostar1899 Morning Exerciser 🏅 14d ago
Totally agree. He is a hairy old creep who seems to be fucking his dog as that’s the only living being he gives a shit about.
0
u/PatternFar2989 11d ago
Costello died years ago. Put some respect on his name. Rest in paradise Costello Huberman.
0
u/OGPolaroidThePenguin 13d ago
I bet you have blue hair and many nose rings.
7
u/radiostar1899 Morning Exerciser 🏅 13d ago
Stop coming on to me eunuch
2
4
u/jasperleopard 14d ago
I like the part where he said “fuck you” to the article for sensationalizing his treatment of his dog lol
2
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Yeah, that was funny. But also bad look for him as that was the only part of the article that he refuted
3
u/FrenchG-here 10d ago
Hilarious the way he kept casually/not casually saying "I lived on Piedmont Ave" in a lame effort to counter the story from the article (which said he tried to get clout by saying he lived in Piedmont the neighborhood). Also how he desperately threw in stories of adult suicide/deaths of guys from skateboarding time to counter the article casting doubt on his earlier claim that friends committed suicide while in detention... when he was a teenager (totally different things). The "don't come after my dog" was ridiculous as was the "if you have a problem with me, come to me" bit. Both super aggro chest-thumping (which is even grosser considering that he's mostly addressing the women in the story). The icing on the cake was when he trotted out his cringe Cookie Monster imitation in a preposterous bid to "do something with Sesame Street" - as if! Sorry, bro, not exactly brand alignment. All in all, a lot of anger, a lot of evasion, and a whole lot of tell-tale eye-blinking.
3
u/Massive-Path6202 10d ago
Excellent summary. He'd have been much better off never addressing the article
-2
u/bobbyfantastical 14d ago
OP sounds like they need help.
2
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Ha ha - you're the one literally posting about how you just "got off a 8 day bender" and that you keep alcohol and benzos on you at all times in case your anxiety gets out of control. So maybe STFU about other people "needing help" because they think it's interesting that a podcaster who frequently discusses the importance of integrity and of honesty in relationships is actually a massive serial cheater running 6 simultaneous "exclusive relationships."
4
u/Personalvintage 14d ago
I know I keep alcohol on me in case of a bitch made panic attack. I can’t stop panicking I’m so scared. Help!
8
u/magy001 14d ago
He was talking too much about having many friends on the podcast and how he talks to several friends daily. I thought that was a bit weird to mention, especially for a person in their late 40s.
3
u/jasperleopard 14d ago
He made a comment about firing off and receiving many good morning texts. I’m 27 and I have only ever had one regular good morning text and it was from a guy.
8
u/Personalvintage 14d ago
Yes! I am guilty of this same as I’m still a hipster, but I noticed the hyper identification with boyhood subculture stuff: my friend sk8s, I know Tim Armstrong. The Ramones bro! I have seaux many friends!
8
2
3
u/oseanlly 14d ago
I’ve heard Jocko is very similar to Goggins. Just a poser boy for the seals selling shit, and saying shit that they themselves may or may not practice
2
u/PiniellaColada 14d ago
Lol Jocko might have one of the most impressive life resume's you'll ever see. Except maybe for Jonny Kim, who served under Jocko in Iraq and credits a lot of his post-military success to Jocko. But keep posting on reddit about how people superior to you and every way are posers.
3
u/oseanlly 14d ago
Lol you’re taking what I said real hard man, as if I’m attacking you or your god. I’m literally just reiterating something I’ve heard. Have a great Friday and an even better weekend my friend!
0
u/PiniellaColada 14d ago
Nah you're just trying to walk back your bullshit. You never "heard" shit from anyone.
3
u/oseanlly 14d ago
Hey man if you want to allow this to ruin your Friday have at it! I’m enjoying my day! Have a good one! 👍
2
2
u/GoFunMee 14d ago
Well, here’s to feeling good all the time.
2
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Which for some people means running 6 simultaneous "exclusive" relationships
1
u/bishopnelson81 14d ago
You guys expect too much from these people. Judge not before you judge yourself, I say.
1
u/Personalvintage 12d ago
Great saying! Did you come up with it yourself or was it in the magic Jesus book?
3
u/bishopnelson81 12d ago
It's in a Bob Marley song. You should wrap some headphones around your big brain and listen to it!
0
1
u/StutiMishra Sun gazer ☀️ 14d ago
I don’t expect Jocko to ask questions like a journalist. If he was, let’s say a politician, and I was interviewing him, I would have definitely asked more questions.
But I liked that he took a stand against the whole “six woman, what a stud” narrative that was going around.
1
u/Personalvintage 14d ago
Thanks for a thoughtful response. A lot of men with anger responded unrelatedly.
-5
u/purpleunicorn1983 14d ago
What does he need to do? Beg for forgiveness? He said he fucked up in the past. And grew from it. He doesn’t owe us more than that.
-2
u/nomamesgueyz 15d ago
HuberSex protocol
2
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Of all the comments on this thread, it's odd that your obvious joke (which Huberman clearly deserves) is getting downvoted.
1
u/nomamesgueyz 12d ago
Challenges some people too much apparently :)
I think its quite a stressful protocol
Exciting no doubt, but fraught with danger
Proceed carefully
1
0
1
u/D424G 15d ago
How does this have anything to do with your life? In the time it took you listen to it and write that post, you could have been improving someone else’s or your own health. Or learning science.
Live in reality, not in a fantasy idolization myth.
3
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
Preach sister. Thanks for stopping by.
0
u/D424G 15d ago
Let’s prove you are real, rather than a short worded bot:
Show the evidence that Huberman cheated on 6 women vs 1 women? Also, why was Huberman mad late into the night about Anya’s infidelity in her previous marriage and who really fathered her kids? Hint: it’s why her husband divorced her.
2
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
I was trying to have a discussion about the concept of extreme ownership. I gives a fuck about that tired dead broad who sold fake organic beef.
0
u/D424G 15d ago
Bot- here is why: you would be posting on the Jocko thread, because Huberman doesn’t ascribe to that.
1
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
He literally used the words himself as a guest on the most recent Jocko podcast. Also, you suck at being a person.
104
u/ayo-mr-white 15d ago
Y'all take these guys very seriously. Just take their good advice, apply them and work on yourself instead of getting involved in what they're saying or doing every second every where and what they do in their personal lives. No one is completely flawless.
17
u/Earesth99 14d ago
Obsessing about the personal lives of social media people probably isn’t a healthy approach.
-64
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
Don’t tell me what to do. You musta missed the part of the Jocko episode where they talked about punk rock and skating.
14
9
6
u/Busy-Celery9647 15d ago
I didn’t watch the Jocko interview. I was kind of done with Huberman after Galpin and Conti. Those were excellent, along with a few other people with great ideas. But.. he had already begun to veer into more optimization bro audience capture and away from quality health and performance content, so, the truth is, I think he was already slipping into the culture wars by the time this piece came out.
Things were skewing a little right, a little alternative, a little weird, a little Jesus-y.. so, being attacked in what was kind of a #metoo-style piece kind of martyred him.. it has been largely this part of the culture wars who have been defending him. People like Fridman or others who claim to be center, but who are more well-described as anti-woke, and, I believe, would see no reason to apologize or claim wrong-doing at the hands of this type of article.
So, it puts him in a tricky spot. A man who people used to think was certainly about ethics and morality (unfairly so), turns out not to be (but did nothing illegal), is taken in by the right of center crowd (Christian moral values), and kiinnnnnd of apologizes for bad behaviour, while not giving the woke mob any reason to cheer.
1
1
u/EffectSimilar8598 15d ago
You can be center and center left and still be anti-woke. I can't stand woke cry-bullies, while still being a centrist.
3
u/OGPolaroidThePenguin 13d ago
Woke is a Russian psyop that idiots have bought into.
2
u/EffectSimilar8598 13d ago
Lets call it the illiberal, Identity politic driven left then. The maga counterpart.
1
1
u/OGPolaroidThePenguin 13d ago
Notice how you got downvoted for stating what probably the majority of population would agree with. Funny that.
1
2
u/Valuable_Cod3643 15d ago
From this comment section it looks like only alt right incels are left in this sub.
Fwiw I think the discussion is important and the enthusiasm to shut it down is telling.
1
4
u/NonsensePlanet 14d ago
The fact that people here don’t want this sub to turn into a gossip column doesn’t mean they’re alt right incels.
7
u/EffectSimilar8598 15d ago
I'm not any of those categories.
I thought he was fairly weak with that long meandering skate story when asked about the article. He could have started where he ended with "I have cheated. I know it sucks because it has happened to me". But then he had to say stuff like not all relations are relationships, like some of these women believed they were in a relationship, but actually were a bootycall/situationship, I am only human I try to be better every day etc. That is weak ownership of behaviour regardless of situation, which is ironic considering he is talking with Mr. Extreme Ownership. Perhaps he has been told to be vague due to fear of being sued. That would be the only valid reason I can think of.
I still listen to stuff that is relevant for me, just like I listen to rap where artists have done worse than having six affairs. This just shows weakness in some aspects of his character. For some listeners that matters more than for others.
2
2
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
Thank you. I was thinking the same thing. The anger I got for trying to have a reasonable discussion shows what Huberman caters to now.
11
u/PinkRainLily 15d ago
That podcast basically confirmed 80% of things in the NYMag story were true. And he ended up revealing more about himself
2
3
3
u/gekogekogeko 14d ago
Here's an excerpt of the main points of what Huberman said on Jocko with some commentary.
0
u/whoberman 13d ago
This guy is still butthurt he got stood up by Huberman on a shark hunt. Move on Scott... He's just not that into you! Or do you continue to focus on Huberman because it's the only thing that gets you views?
6
u/PinkRainLily 14d ago
Those are some excellent points. I’d just add that the stuff about his relationships that’s getting a lot of attention is not irrelevant entirely, a lot of women idolised him, he is good at faking sincerity, and they needed to know that he is just another guy who is using his fame to sleep with as many women as possible. Especially those in their 20s.
6
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago edited 12d ago
Again, the issue isn't "sleeping with as many women as possible" - who cares about that - it's lying over and over and over to all those people about being exclusive while fucking other people over and over and over.
1
u/gekogekogeko 13d ago
Yes. Good point. I don't think that it's irrelevant. Only that the science is more important ultimately.
2
u/jasperleopard 14d ago
I really want to know what his PR agency has told him to do. Like what is their game plan?
7
u/JSears90210 14d ago
They told him to not comment until the story died. Which it did.
Address it briefly on a friendly podcast where he can control the narrative, act contrite, refute some points, and be somewhat vague. Move on.
From this point forward he can say that he has addressed it already and is not going to revisit it.
He owns his own podcast and IP. No corporate heads are going to force him to bend the knee and beg the people angry about this for foregiveness.
2
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Yes, in fact he made a big deal on the Jocko podcast about how someone who is angry with him should talk to him one on one
5
u/signumsectionis 11d ago
It's funny when public figures who made themselves public get upset when something is discussed publicly.
-7
-1
u/Sea-Awareness3193 15d ago
Wait, he ADDRESSED the cheating??!
When???! Where?? How?!
& how is this not bigger news everywhere
1
3
u/Ok_Trip_6332 15d ago
This is a great take. If people end up feeling hurt from interacting with you, you have a responsibility to look inward and own it.
-1
u/ClosetCentrist 15d ago
Jebu. Supr3me wTFpwn3rsh1p.
Here for the science. Take this shit to People Magazine. Or your therapist.
-1
u/igotaright 15d ago
Semi science*
1
u/ClosetCentrist 15d ago
Why are you even here? Do you drive by the houses of girls that turned you down for a dance at your 8th grade sock hop? What is in this for you? Oh I think I know. Hubie turned you down didn't he?
18
u/zachary_mp3 15d ago
I have literally no desire to listen to that podcast whatsoever and I don't care in the slightest.
does that make me an alt-right incel neo-nazi? Also what the fuck is astroturf. Go outside.
8
26
u/Nervous-Dentist-3375 15d ago
Trying to understand how longevity advice becomes less credible due to infidelity 🤔
Who gaf about his personal life? Why is it even being discussed here?
23
15d ago
He presented himself as an honest person who limits dopamine spikes to 'the occasional slice of mango'. He's talked about the importance of honesty in relationships.
The story told us something of his character. Nobody would care about him sleeping with a bunch of women if he was either upfront about it or didn't preach the opposite (aside from the incels who elevate someone having sex to godlike status). His work has already been criticised for cherrypicking data and drawing conclusion from limited datasets. He sells supplements. If you want to ignore that and take him on faith that the data is good then go ahead, but most sensible people are going to wonder if he's truly objective or more focused on growing his audience and sponsorship revenue.
Look at the criticism of David Sinclair about how credible longevity advice can be if coming from the wrong person. Compare his massive list of sponsors to someone like Rhonda Patrick who has none and wonder if it compromises what he recommends and the content he pushes out.
The articles gave us more data about who he is. They contained red flags directly related to who he is on his podcast. You're free to ignore them or say they aren't relevant, but I'd say you're being naive at best.
5
u/tombm91 15d ago
My above comment still stands.
However, his work being criticized for cherry picking data & his AG1 sponsorship (erhaps among others) are absolutely things we should hold him accountable for. This is much more important than his personal relationships / sex life.
6
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Nobody gives a shit about the sex life piece - it's the lying / lack of integrity. He could have told all those women he wanted to be open / non - exclusive. Instead, he lied to them, over and over and over. To their detriment and his benefit
-3
u/tombm91 12d ago
Of course. And what he did is wrong. But we as an audience have nothing to do with that. His podcast information, ultimately, has nothing to do with it.
2
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago edited 12d ago
We now know that he has a clear pattern of intentionally deceiving people for his own benefit, so yeah, it's relevant - the way he makes 99% of his money is by recommending that his listeners buy certain products
0
u/tombm91 12d ago
Right - and he should be criticized for the latter. His cherry picking of data should be criticized. The fact he promotes questionable products should be criticized.
His personal life shouldn't matter to us though. It's none of our business.
Furthermore, aside of 'getting more sunlight, prioritizing sleep, eat whole foods' or anything of that nature, anytime a content creator shares any other health advice should be taken with a grain of salt, and you should do your own research, read papers, etc.
We shouldn't idolize anyone.
1
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Only another serial cheater would defend his terrible behavior - hilarious that you don't realize that you're outing yourself. And nobody is idolizing anyone, dumbass.
1
u/jauslong 14d ago
I agree that the data and the AG1 sponsorship are relevant but to me that seemed like the weaknest parts of the article. They raised good questions but i dont think really answered those questions.
i would like to see Huberman go back and make an effort to correct whatever needs correcting or maybe bring on some of the other scientific viewpoints discussed.
But to me, I could not tell whether the issues with the data were that someone else had a different perspective or whether there was some scientific consensus that he was ignoring.
In an article designed to throw as much mud as possible, I dont exactly trust their scientific basis either.
I think it justifies an investigation into the actual data. Ive been staring at the sun all morning, I need to know if this is good or bad lol.
4
u/tombm91 14d ago
Honestly my comment supercedes the article. People on here (or other podcast/content creators) have been critical of his data and sponsorships for a while. Way before the article.
If his podcast is all about giving us free education on topics, and use data based evidence on it, the fact he cherry picks data and the fact he is sponsored by a product that has questionable data at best is a lot more important than his sex life.
8
u/aagapovjr 15d ago
People just want their role models/sources of lifestyle advice to be consistent with what they preach. If they aren't, trust is broken. This is easy to understand, isn't it?
2
u/tombm91 14d ago
Except we should probably steer away from role models. We see this daily. People aren't perfect. They may seem perfect, but they aren't.
Whether it's Huberman, actors, musicians, entrepreneurs. If we held them to the standard they show when they're in front of the camera, we're going to be extremely disappointed in them if we knew all the true details of their lives.
1
u/aagapovjr 14d ago edited 14d ago
I knew you'd reply something of the sort. It doesn't matter what we think about role models as a concept. I was just pointing out that following someone's advice only to learn that they themselves do the opposite (for whatever reason) makes people feel stupid, and people don't like feeling stupid.
In other words, people prefer their tailors clothed and doctors healthy.
1
u/tombm91 14d ago
Again, I'll use an analogy someone else used before.
If it came out he's a raging alcoholic would you say his episodes on the dangers of alcohol are less true?
2
u/aagapovjr 14d ago
I would feel dumb for listening to an alcoholic about such things, and a bit ashamed to admit to someone that I've done so.
-1
u/Nervous-Dentist-3375 15d ago
I just don’t care for anyones personal life and I’m not here to judge them on their mistakes.
If that is naive behaviour, ok.
0
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
But 99% chance is that you're a cheater, too, and that's why you "don't want to judge."
0
1
u/OGPolaroidThePenguin 13d ago
Most sane people would agree.
1
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
More like most cheaters would agree.
1
9
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
He discussed relationships quite a bit. If it was just pure physical health that would be another thing.
-1
u/Huganho 14d ago
The guy who helped me quit alcohol and become sober for 6 year is a man who I thought was also completely sober and recovered alcoholic. He has helped many others too from the hell that is alcohol abuse. Turns out he still has some relapses and he's no completely honest with them. Still helped me though.
Should I be mad or thankful?
1
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
Did he tell you he wanted to be in an exclusive relationship while fucking 5 other people, for years and years? Cause that's what the issue is here.
1
u/Huganho 12d ago
No. Did Andrew Huberman tell you he wanted to be in a serious and exclusive relationship? Because then I totally understand your angst.
If not, I don't know. My view of Andrew is mostly that of a man who want to spread good knowledge for the betterment of mankind, and in that regard, his personal shortcomings hasn't changed my view of him as that very much.
Would I like to befriend him? Probably not, and that's in large part due to these recent events. That has changed.
Still he has done a lot of good for a lot of people.
I think sometimes people confuse people in the public sphere with personal friends, and that's why it's so hurtful to them when such things happen.
1
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
It's not hurtful to me. I'm just calling it for what it is, which he essentially admitted on the Jocko podcast
-1
u/Nervous-Dentist-3375 15d ago
Yeah, I’m not sure what your point is.
The guy is human.
7
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
Point is he didn’t limit it to longevity. He branched out from that topic and his behavior is relevant.
1
u/tombm91 15d ago
To be clear, I think his behavior is wrong.
That being said, that's a bad take. Like someone mentioned before, if we found out he was an alcoholic, his alcohol episodes wouldn't be any less valid.
His episodes on relationships were data based, and if I'm not mistaken, mostly with other experts.
The fact he cheated doesn't make those episodes any less valid. Still important topics for discussion, that are very relevant to longevity.
Despite the gravity of this situation, we can't expect him to follow every thing that his guests say should be done (nor data he presents in his episodes for that matter).
7
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
These are good arguments. Can’t lie. My post is about the concept of extreme ownership and Huberman claimed to take extreme ownership. I don’t think he did. But yeah, I see the validity in what you said.
-7
15d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
I was hoping to discuss the issue of extreme ownership as I follow both podcasts. Not have the same argument you’ve been having.
-3
u/Nervous-Dentist-3375 15d ago
I’m not sure who we are to judge. The guy came public about his private life. What more do you want him to do?
17
u/Altruistic_Analyst51 15d ago
God who gives flying fuck, unbelievable people are still on about this lol. Either listen to him or move the fuck on Jeez lol people are such pussies these days
0
7
38
u/Various_Athlete_7478 15d ago
What would “extreme ownership” look like though?
He admitted that he’s not perfect and he’s cheated, essentially admitting the underlying facts. There isn’t much else he needs to do in terms of ownership. He didn’t cheat on the audience, so he doesn’t owe amends as such.
5
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
I like his podcast, but he came across worse after that appearance on the Jocko podcast. He clearly did not take "extreme ownership."
12
-15
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
These are great points. I do think one thing that could have benefited the audience is some acknowledgement of the apparent hypocrisy in his messaging vs his behavior. If he simply never touched the topics of relationships and the psych stuff with Paul Conti, he wouldn’t have had so much egg on his face.
0
u/Massive-Path6202 12d ago
100% correct. It looks like all the serial cheaters and wannabes are downvoting you
20
u/9elfS 15d ago
Just because he is a hypocrite doesn’t mean what he says on his podcast is invalid. I judge the points he makes based on the logic and evidence he presents, not on whether he behaves in a manner consistent with them. For example, his podcast on alcohol wouldn’t be less credible if he were a raging alcoholic.
1
3
u/algo-rhyth-mo 15d ago
Yeah, my doctor is overweight, but he still knows way more about the body than me and what I should do to be healthy, so I still listen to him.
3
u/Tantra-Comics 15d ago
People who practice things aren’t running to be podcasters/health wellness gurus. It’s the corrupt ones with unchallenged self awareness, which sucks because I would prefer to learn from a person who is holistic.
Another one bites the dust.
His information is useful but his reputation/image is tainted.
Maybe that’s why humans created mythology/deities, cos humans couldn’t live up to the ideals
6
17
u/Various_Athlete_7478 15d ago
The discussion was probably the closest I’ve seen him come to suggesting fidelity on his part, but he wasn’t moralizing about people who cheat, but more exploring the data behind it.
I’ve been a fan of his podcast for a long time and I think this situation diminished his standing in some way. But I don’t have any expectation that he owes me any kind of apology or that he broke some unwritten contract we had podcaster and listener.
-1
u/Sargdoosh 15d ago
He don’t owe you or anyone dick of an explanation. Creepy this.
-1
u/IceCreamMan1977 15d ago
Does he owe those women explanations?
1
u/alessandratiptoes 15d ago
No he’s not with them anymore. Only person he owes an explanation too is Harper
156
u/Nice_Hovercraft_2900 15d ago
I stopped reading when you felt the need to label anyone who you thought might disagree with your opinion
-126
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
That’s a straw man. I was just hoping to avoid the kind of toxicity that was common here. A lot of people who weren’t listeners jumped on with vitriol.
0
0
u/real_cool_club 15d ago
I would try to explain straw man but seeing you getting downvotted into oblivion is more satisfying.
36
u/PersonalFigure8331 15d ago
It's not a strawman. You literally labelled and insulted people and their motivations based on their points of view. Even if you feel that way, it's counterproductive. If you wanted to direct the discourse, you'd have been much better off making an argument as to why the types of conversations or opinions you viewed as problematic were actually problematic.
What difference does it make if the people were listeners or not? What mattered was the soundness of their arguments.
-8
u/gotta-earn-it 15d ago
That is very clearly a strawman.
Hoping to have a serious discussion free of moralizing Karens and alt right incels who were both astroturfing here when the New York magazine article came out
This is not "labeling anyone who might disagree with me". He didn't say "free of anyone who might disagree with me" or "free of left-wingers or right-wingers". He basically said "free of the extremes on both sides who are both useless to discuss with".
I stopped reading when you felt the need to label anyone who you thought might disagree with your opinion
So that statement ^ is completely overreacting. Anyone offended is putting words in his mouth that any type of negative opinion makes someone a Karen, and that's on you.
Now your statement,
You literally labelled and insulted people and their motivations based on their points of view
Labeled who? He didn't say which people or even which opinions are karens or incels. He just said he doesn't want the self-evidently extreme karens and incels and whatever toxicity they bring with them.
What difference does it make if the people were listeners or not? What mattered was the soundness of their arguments.
Ask any subreddit if they'd enjoy being raided by another community, who all exclusively post negative opinions about the subject of the subreddit. The only ones saying that'd be a good thing would be the astroturfers themselves.
2
u/Personalvintage 8d ago
Thank you for these efforts. Sorry you got downvoted. They don’t understand what straw man is. He very defiantly mischaracterized my argument for the sake of destroying it.
2
u/gotta-earn-it 8d ago edited 8d ago
Np, sometimes I just blow off steam by picking apart liars online. Their downvotes mean nothing. It's clear to me that both of those people are astroturfers who will twist words and say whatever they have to say to push the agenda.
5
u/PersonalFigure8331 15d ago edited 14d ago
That is very clearly a strawman.
No, it isn't. The person OP was responding to made an unfounded claim: that OP felt the need to label anyone who disagreed with them. Since they weren't refuting an argument, much less fabricating a weaker version of that argument to be argued against, it's not a strawman. If someone calls Ted an idiot, and someone else responds "you think everyone is an idiot" they've made an unfounded claim, they haven't committed a strawman fallacy.
Labeled who? He didn't say which people or even which opinions are karens or incels. He just said he doesn't want the self-evidently extreme karens and incels and whatever toxicity they bring with them.
He labeled the people he referred to as moralizing Karens and incels. If I say "the people who said thing X or shared opinion X are idiots" I've labelled them idiots. The fact that I didn't specify them in any greater detail is irrelevant.
Ask any subreddit if they'd enjoy being raided by another community, who all exclusively post negative opinions about the subject of the subreddit. The only ones saying that'd be a good thing would be the astroturfers themselves.
This has no bearing on whether the arguments/claims being made by these people are sound or not. How many people should be involved in a conversation is a matter of opinion.
2
u/gotta-earn-it 14d ago edited 14d ago
"Your argument isn't worth reading" is an argument and them lying about what OP said was a weaker fabrication. But whatever, it was very clearly a false statement, and toxic.
He didn't label any specific people or any specific opinions. He just stated that there are karens and incels who exist in this sub and they're not nice to speak to. It is entirely within the capability of everyone who feels that they're in this picture to simply tone down the toxicity when responding to this post as requested, instead of getting offended at getting indirectly called out for their past toxic behavior. The toxic shit-flinging throughout this sub has been publicly visible for all to see. Nobody's being asked to raise their hand and admit that they took part in it.
What mattered was the soundness of their arguments.
Lol you're defending someone who basically said whatever OP has to say doesn't matter because of perceived mean words.
The soundness of the astroturfers arguments matters to me when I refute them. They didn't seem to care about the soundness of my arguments though. Brigading matters, idk if it's an official rule yet but admins have banned people for it many times.
-22
u/Personalvintage 15d ago
How sound can an argument be if the person making it isn’t informed on the topic?
9
u/PersonalFigure8331 15d ago edited 15d ago
Depends on the person, their argument, the topic, and what qualifies as "informed."
79
8
•
u/AutoModerator 15d ago
Hello! Don't worry about the post being filtered. We want to read and review every post to ensure a thriving community and avoid spam. Your submission will be approved (or declined) soon.
We hope the community engages with your ideas thoughtfully and respectfully. And of course, thank you for your interest in science!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.