The simple fact that he had to preload his sentence that “vaccines do not cause autism” w/“don’t mean to be controversial,” says how powerful this concept is in reality.
A Wallach indeed. Honestly, anti-vaxxers are vexing, they seem to prefer dead children rather then immunised children, I have autism so yeah, that speaks volumes of that mindset. Vaccines don’t cause autism, it arises from circumstances not entirely understood related to brain chemistry in birth, that arises from adnominal neurological pathway formation. How this isn’t a fact yet is confounding.
@@jonathanlane444 Or praying the sickness away, that tends to be a classic. Sure, it's fine to be a little critical, but it's just completely stupid to only find stuff that fits a point of view. Science came about because it explored everything. That's awesome Came for the games, stayed for the life lessons as far as the video goes. XD
@Centerhead , I can’t emphasize enough the importance of gathering as much information as possible on important issues. It is also equally important to scrutinize information for its empirical evidence. Unfortunately, I can't find valid evidence for your above claims. I must know where you read that vaccines cause more death than they prevent. If this is true, this is a way larger issue than autism. I must know where you read that there has never been a single vaccine study using a control group. I need to know where you read that autism research has been obfuscated by the CVC. Please help me find this information because if your above claims are even remotely true, they need proper citation. Literally, lives are at stake. I promise that I will read any citations or articles you provide with an open mind willing and ready to be changed. I also promise that I will look at the validity of this information with my best understanding of scientific scrutiny. In the meantime, here is a concise article with citations that reveal what I referenced in the video above: www.medicaldaily.com/history-autism-and-vaccines-how-one-man-unraveled-worlds-faith-vaccinations-294474
40 years ago I was just like you I found it hard to avoid winning and upsetting my so called " friends " but after many years of heavy drinking and other things we still have games night , once a week, i still have just as much fun without seemingly trying to achieve anything and get my perverted enjoyment in achieving my twisted secret goals by the end of the night without anyone knowing. I do however suspect some of my " so called friends " are also achieving their twisted secret goals without any of us winning an actual designated " game de jour ". the games have evolved well beyond what is laid on the table.
I feel there should exist a board game or card game based on these principles. "Be better than someone, but not too much" could be represented by numbered cards. An 4 wins from a 3, but a 9 loses because the difference is just too much. And so on.
My game group's motto is "never trust Lindsay" so thats hard when we play social deduction games :( My best friend had it engraved on a gift he gave me when i was his best man.
Played a 3 player game of Battlestar Galactica. The players were my bro, myself and a friend who was new to the game. I was the cylon. Poor friend was so confused trying to figure out who was the cylon I even had him second guessing himself if he was it. It was fucking hilarious. My bro figured out I was the cylon after I made a really careless play of cards, but kept silent mostly because it was so hilarious watching my friend being so confused. In the end it didn't matter who won. We all had great fun. I prefer fair play. If the game has no traitor element I will offer the best options available to a player if they are unsure how to proceed along with reasoning that should be known publicly. I feel it is important players are given adequate assistance when they need it to keep up with the rest of the group's experience level. Does this exploit me? No. If you were a decent player, you'd have taken any of the options I provided anyway, perhaps even found a better play I couldn't think of. I don't give away my objectives, nor do I give away another players objectives if I think I know them. I'll lay out the best possible plays for them with what they have regardless how it may affect another player's choices, including my own. Everyone should have fun playing the game. I know what it is like being unfairly curb stomped by power trippers.
I find that I am most persuasive when I tell people that I am trying to manipulate them, however that I am trying to help them come in second. Then I explain how. Or if it looks like I’m losing I say I am manipulating them but I’m doing it to try to come in second and push them to the front. The idea I’m usually trying to instill in them is “if I help him, he will help me take out that other guy that I’m more worried about.” I try to get them to think that without telling them.
This as a podcast would be kinda infernal. You have a similar voice. Different accent, but I could totally believe you both are different voices of the same voice actor...
I kinda wanna play a game like Dune where I could play against people who really know how to manipulate like this, and agree that all breaks are off. I think it would be a great experience for me to toughen up to just see how deep the rabbit hole goes in action.
So I know this is about largely about bluffing games, but the point about making public statements and preposterizing notions or people makes sooo much sense if you look at how certain Christian groups organize themselves. Public statements of faith -- you're less likely to be convinced out of it. Preposterizing atheists and really anyone else of any other religion or creed -- setting you up for conflict (this is also where a LOT of religious bigotry is perpetuated). If you want examples of how these methods of persuasion are tried and true, look no further than these examples.
Matt and SUSD, from someone who cares, I hope you take the time to read and think about this. I noticed that the Ben Shapiro comment didn't land well with some people in the comments. I'm a left-leaning independent. I follow a number of people on both sides of the spectrum, I have even listened to Ben Shapiro's podcast a number of times. He argues in a very dialectic way, which doesn't jive with me, because I often disagree with his premises. I quit listening to him when I realized his way of arguing was frustrating to me. Even so, he is quite reasonable with his guests. If all the clips you've seen of him are him talking fast at college students, then I see why you would call him an idiot. He's actually not nearly as dogmatic as left-wing media paints him to be. However, he doesn't help his cause when he keeps providing sound bites with news hosts. So, my first thought is, perhaps you have only seen Ben Shapiro at his worst. My brother is a conservative and he consumes everything Ben Shapiro. Sometimes he shows me clips or will tell me about them. A lot of times I disagree and I express it by calling out the logical leaps that Ben makes. Most of our conversations end up in both of us agreeing that the truth is more fuzzy than imagined, a healthy way of looking at the world in my opinion. My point is, I have found a healthy way to talk about politics without being offensive. As soon as the words "idiot" left your mouth, that word is going to trigger an unnecessary backlash. We're going to assume you're a liberal who despises republican ideologues. I see you have tried to untether Shaprio's politics from his intellect, but you're not going to win anyone over with that argument. The impression you give when you call a political pundit an "idiot" is too strong to be changed. I think Matt was talking about this at 2:02. If you want to defend your ego, keep doing what you're doing. If you want to bring people closer to your point of view, I'd suggest you show some vulnerability.
@@professorpsych Sorry Alan! I thought it was you who said he was an idiot, but it was Matt. I rewatched it and you really had nothing to do with it. I thought what you said was actually really good. In that case, my message was meant to be directed at Matt and probably Quinns.
@@Reggie1408 Calling someone stupid is a great way to motivate people to dig even deeper into their beliefs. I don't know how old you are, if you're 12 or you're 21, or whatever, but it's never too early or too late to start growing up.
It's funny how there were a whole bunch of people and opinions that they brought up as being blatantly manipulative and it's only the 2 second Ben Shapiro insult that people are complaining about
It's funny because none of the other things they mention in greater detail, for a longer period of time, or in a more pejorative manner are at all controversial, right
Well I wouldn’t think that Ben Shapiro himself came to be rude to you, so I’m pretty sure is was someone pretending to be him, which would make complete sense. I mean when it comes to politics on TH-cam people on all sides tend to treat everyone like absolute garbage, so I hope your opinion of certain political groups isn't harmed in the future because some people on the internet are complete idiots.
You lost me a bit with the "tackle bad arguments to inoculate yourself against tougher ones down the line" bit, it seems to me like it's often a trap. Dealing with the bad version of an argument is easy and gives you inflated confidence in your position, without really preparing you for the good arguments where you won't be able to prey on obvious flaws. So the positive of building confidence seems very much like a two edged sword when you don't challenge yourself enough to be able to eventually face the tough calls. That said I feel the problem might just be the relatively abstract nature of this bit of the discussion, just wanted to point out how I found it confusing.
It's important to remember that this talk isn't about being correct, it's about manipulation. The 'innoculation' isn't about eventually reaching the truth in a discussion, it's just to defend yourself from being convinced.
I think the difference might be between, winning an argument/convincing somebody else and what you decide. The inflated confidence you describe, is because you think you have it figured out, and if that is the case, you obviously wont be as easily convinced of the opposite as when you haven't thought about the question yet.
8:30 I guess this goes hand in hand with the whole premise of the movie Inception, how it is more powerful to not just shovel an idea into someone, but make it in a way its them who reach that conclusion, and you act as if you didn't influence them, they reached that conclusion by their own. 21:00 An even better example I would say is Man of the Year. I rememeber he was interviewed about smoking weed and he just straight up admits he did, tried crazy brownies too didn't like them, masturbated a lot, he also had sex with a prostitute and was so bad he got a refund. The whole interview is basically just going on at this point.
If nothing else, it warms my heart to see people who support (or at least are indifferent to) the exclusion of others, now finding themselves feeling "excluded" from something they're passionate about. In a perfect world, that might've resulted in a little bit of empathy blossoming inside a few minds here and there, but sadly it would be naive to expect that to happen in this case. And yeah, Ben Shapiro most certainly is an idiot.
@@ryanmugits5356 Ben Shapiro, who's the person in question here - not all "people who are conservative" - absolutely defends the exclusion of others. He's done it publicly many times. If you agree with him, you support exclusion. How is this controversial?
@@ryansmart9500 I'm not sure what happened to my response, but I had already answered the other Ryan that I won't do his research for him, so it's only fair that I won't do it for you either. If you don't know what he has said publicly (and particularly how he has instigated his audience) regarding immigrants, homosexuals, Muslims, etc, then you should look it up and see if he's someone you actually agree with.
Personally I want to know what happened to all the other responses in this thread. They had to have been pretty darn bad for all of them to be removed. That being said, you can indeed look up things he has said in the past. In fact, I found a site made by people who actively dislike him dedicated just to cateloging all the dumb things he has said in the past, so I know they aren’t leaving anything out. However, the list of dumb things he has said isn’t actually that long, with around half of it being dedicated to dumb things he has said from over nine or more years ago that he has actively apologized for multiple times and said that he would change if he could go back. The other half is dedicated not to quotes but a list of other people saying why I should believe he is racist, fascist, and so forth despite actively speaking against those a Ideas repeatedly, and criticizing ideas from conservatives, radicals, and even Donald Trump that he disagrees with entirely almost every other podcast. He does rational debates with people from all political spaces on his channel weekly, and has even had completely civil discussions with democratic presidential candidates on his channel before, such as Andrew Yang. I mean you can say he is every name in the book, but that doesn’t make any of those claims true. I don’t want to go too deep into this, but I think it is unfair to label someone as something that they have said themselves to be entire untrue based upon their own beliefs that they state regularly, and then point out dumb things they have said in the past that don’t honeslty prove anything, but put the target in question in such a light as to make everyone else believe the other false accusations they have made against them are true. If the arguement is that Ben Shapiro sometimes says stupid stuff or makes dumb decisions, then oh heck yes I would agree with you absolutely, but if we are going to use those dumb statements as a catalyst to confirm your other negative beliefs you hold for that person because they politically disagree with you, then that is where people have a problem.
In Blood on the Clock Tower, I saw I would agree to die in round eight (half way through). I was the good team, but my character had no benefit in round one, it convinced them to leave me in. In round eight they wanted me alive but I volunteered to die. No one voted and no one else volunteered. I chose to self-sacrifice which earnt respect. It's listed on the bgg forum for the games page. I like influence games. I do well at bidding ones too. Sidereal Confluence and Panic on Wall Street. Many werewolf games. I have come last at Sheriff of Nottingham though every time!
I don't like games that allow for cutting off another player by teaming up. No outside element should be involved in a game. How you look, how you speak, your hobbies, your interests.... none of these matter in a game (unless you play games that specifically involve these). Traitor games are fine. They are designed for one or two people trying to make everyone else lose. This is why I prefer co-op games over any other, as well as team versus team games.
I have to say that the point about people believing nonsense is so true As someone who always got good grades, I could just say stuff and as long as I went with it, people would agree with me I found this amusing to no end
Some more ideas for how to win games check out these guys: th-cam.com/video/cTFi0WEdtvo/w-d-xo.html They have a few videos that have great ideas ranging from the small common stuff all the way to the down right evil. Love them haha Loved your video as well! I would love to see more stuff like this with people giving talks about the in depth concepts of board games
I’m sorry in advance, but this is the one video of yours that I am not passing on to others I play with, although I’m sure they’ll silently respect my point of view....puppy lives matter too!
*playing game with heavy political and philosophical themes, everything is political* 'hey guys it'd be nice if we could just keep politics out of our games'
@@shawnc292 no actually they aren't different. The things we interact with everyday represent our larger society and the political decisions that went into creating the games we play are relevant. Get educated and stop watching charlatans you dumbass
@@ryanmugits5356 lmfao. You do realize Ben shapiro is a raging facist that literally has supported the genocide of Palestinian people in the past. But I should be 'civil' about people who are defending him. Ok buddy.
@@ryanmugits5356 because you think politics is a game and that we shouldn't talk about things that are life and death problems for people. Your priveledge is unbearable my friend.
@@ryanmugits5356 if you unironically are offended at a subtle joke about Ben Shapiro I'm done responding to you. You are directly sympathizing with a racist, homophobic, transphobic, and facist human being. Do you think trans people like to be around people like you? Do you think people of color like to play board games with people like you? The answer is no.
Where did all the other comments here go? Rough. I’ll just drop in for a sec though to say something. Just because you disagree with someone politically doesn’t automatically make them Racist, homophobic, transphobic, and fascist. Does Shapiro say stupid stuff sometimes? Certainly. Does Shapiro make mistakes? Certainly. Has Shapiro said things in the past that even he himself regrets saying today? Of course. Can you dislike someone who disagrees with you? 100% absolutely. However just calling someone every name in the book as a lie just because you dislike them as a way to morally elevate the way you feel is how you make people who disagree with you hate you and not want to engage in proper political discussions, which this may not be the best place for to begin with.
Look, I see that some people didn't like the Shapiro comment. Honestly, with all the hate that he propagates (see the mosque shooter that cited him as an inspiration), the least he deserves is to be called an idiot. Thanks for sticking to principles.
@@Wolcik3000 What? The law has nothing to do with holding people to account socially. While I give people the benefit of the doubt, Ben Shapiro is funded by billionaires to spew far right propaganda that he knows is built to act as a gateway to far-right radicalization. Far right terrorism is stochastic. This means that thought leaders on the far right invite hatred against groups of people, and then statistically, a small group of people follow through on that hatred and commit violence. Ben is one of those thought leaders.
.......ehhhh i don't know if i should believe them......are they telling the truth or just wanting me to feel this way to take advantage of me.......?????
Lol I hadn't read the comments but after the Shapiro comment I knew it would be a shit show. I don't agree with what Shapiro says but he is far, far away from being an idiot. Something I've observed about liberals is that anyone who has a more successful base than theirs must be put down to try and prop up their own ideals rather than their ideals standing on their own. Discrediting someone's views rather than beating them with your own IS a great way to manipulate, though, so it's on theme for the video.
I believe the ability to have civil discourse is paramount. If you passionately disagree with an opinion, belief, or “fact,” I encourage you to converse. Please change my mind, but only if you are also willing to change yours.
@@ryanmugits5356 Do you feel unjustly villified and excluded from a space in public life by a group with an opposing view? How does it feel to be on the receiving end for once?
@@ryanmugits5356 There's nothing wrong with making assumptions we both know are right. Also is the omission of punctuation an attempt to recreate Shapiro's rambling in written form? Are you that much of a fanboy?
You guys have a right to express your political opinions. But you really cannot deny that it’s tacky and childish to outright call people you disagree with idiots. I believe a certain United States political leader is criticized constantly for this exact thing? Even more concerning is replying to someone’s comment of constructive criticism by doubling down. Again, it’s juvenile and misguided. Even more so to go into the comments and say it again, adding that you feel bad for anyone who can’t see his idiocy. Truly ironic, as it caused me to tune out nearly everything you said and is the closest I’ve come to unsubscribing from the channel. Just a shame
It's genuinely quite interesting that everyone has framed this as throwing an insult on the basis of political disagreement. It really isn't the case at all - politics has nothing to do with what Matt said, it's about the fact that a pundit celebrated as smart has frequently shown himself to be the complete opposite. That this is immediately framed as a political statement is interesting, but mainly it shows the barriers that he's thrown up to disperse any criticism towards his value as a thinker: when criticism of one person is seen as criticism of a broader ideology, that person becomes almost untouchable. Anyway you're quite right this is all very alarming and weird, but I don't think it's us being especially weird at this point in time. It's my opinion based on statements he's made that the man is fairly dim, if that observation makes you think that I'm stupid then that's totally cool, your choice. But to say it's political, when we didn't even mention his politics? It ain't, check yourselves, realise that this assumption is weird.
I've tried to think of a word that correctly describes a person who politely disagrees with another person's observation, even though that person's observation is clearly evident to be true. The best word I can think of to correctly describe that person, is a Liar. I was thinking coward, because the person can't just honestly say their true intentions, but truly, that individual is just a Liar. Lying to themselves more than others, but still, a liar.
@@shutupandsitdown in your opinion. Facts to back your statement maybe? Liberals always respond with comments made to look like facts with nothing to back it up.
@@shutupandsitdown I really appreciate your guys' work, I agree that Ben Shapiro is an a-hole (you technically didn't say that, but it's pretty heavily implied by your comments in general), and I often disagree with his views, but please just take a quick step back with me for a sec. Ben Shapiro graduated with honors from Harvard law at age 23. That doesn't automatically make him an historic genius, but, by most people's standards, that would not be the description of an "unbelievable idiot." His popularity is entirely borne from his conservative political commentary. And, you guys have expressed liberal-leaning opinions in the past. So, you can't possibly think it's so shocking that people would take that comment as a political one, right?
Bummed. You folks are so talented and I’ve enjoyed and supported your show for a long time. But I am really disappointed at the public self-righteous judgementalism against an intelligent person who challenges popular opinions. I love that we live in a society where conflicting view points can be publicly debated, and cherish those brave enough to do so on all sides. The worst thing I can think of would be living in a society where the dominant opinions (group think) ruled completely and all dissenters were vilified.
@@deadeye7924 The problem is that he's either an idiot, or willfully malicious. You probably won't watch this, but if even 20% of the editorializing and criticism is on point, then it's a pretty clear picture of Shapiro's shortcomings th-cam.com/video/aDMjgOYOcDw/w-d-xo.html
@@thatspyguy839 I take it people are allowed to have opinions, until they mention them on their own channels, at which point they should be politely asked to stop sharing them? Thats interesting.
@@shutupandsitdown Come on guys 😒. Shapiro is not an idiot. Not even close. He's an incredibly accomplished person from a very young age. Don't throw out insults if you don't explain them. I want to like you guys, please don't insult my politics.
@@shutupandsitdown I appreciate the science behind the podcast for sure. I love a good textbook or research paper as much as the next guy or gal! It's not so much that you expressed political opinions (I agree with them!) but both hosts body language and choice of words when discussing Shapiro, the fire fighter study, and autism vaccine man wasn't congruent with the inclusive culture I've come to love and expect from SU&SD. I'm happy to elaborate if you really want, but suffice to say I didn't care to watch beyond the 12 minute mark.
@@bryancrompton7238 so, the problem is really with you, isn't it? You can't accept opinions that are different than yours, not the SU&SD guys. They are not excluding you from enjoying board games or even their channel, you're doing it yourself.
Now even one of my favourite reviewers has to become an uninformed political player. You saying Ben Shapiro is dumb is making you sound really dumb. Do every leftie in this world have to make it their objective to contribute nonsense to an already inflamed debate. I was once young, extremely leftleaning, ideological and uninformed, but thankfully I didnt take every opportunity to tell the world.
When I played Blood on the Clock Tower with Matt I was CHILLED by how completely he convinced me that he was on my side before he murdered me.
Be Polite.
Be Efficient.
Have A Plan to Manipulate Everyone You Meet.
tf2 sniper reference
@@joshmayes1538 very good!
This is the kind of great youtube video that I DON'T share with all my friends.
The simple fact that he had to preload his sentence that “vaccines do not cause autism” w/“don’t mean to be controversial,” says how powerful this concept is in reality.
A Wallach indeed. Honestly, anti-vaxxers are vexing, they seem to prefer dead children rather then immunised children, I have autism so yeah, that speaks volumes of that mindset.
Vaccines don’t cause autism, it arises from circumstances not entirely understood related to brain chemistry in birth, that arises from adnominal neurological pathway formation. How this isn’t a fact yet is confounding.
Philip, John Ryan well written. 🙌🏻
@@jonathanlane444 Or praying the sickness away, that tends to be a classic.
Sure, it's fine to be a little critical, but it's just completely stupid to only find stuff that fits a point of view. Science came about because it explored everything. That's awesome
Came for the games, stayed for the life lessons as far as the video goes. XD
@Centerhead , I can’t emphasize enough the importance of gathering as much information as possible on important issues. It is also equally important to scrutinize information for its empirical evidence. Unfortunately, I can't find valid evidence for your above claims.
I must know where you read that vaccines cause more death than they prevent. If this is true, this is a way larger issue than autism. I must know where you read that there has never been a single vaccine study using a control group. I need to know where you read that autism research has been obfuscated by the CVC. Please help me find this information because if your above claims are even remotely true, they need proper citation. Literally, lives are at stake.
I promise that I will read any citations or articles you provide with an open mind willing and ready to be changed. I also promise that I will look at the validity of this information with my best understanding of scientific scrutiny.
In the meantime, here is a concise article with citations that reveal what I referenced in the video above: www.medicaldaily.com/history-autism-and-vaccines-how-one-man-unraveled-worlds-faith-vaccinations-294474
it's like the common saying: "it is easier to trick people than it is to convince people that they have been tricked"
It's a common saying so it must be true!
I have not heard this one yet, but yikes, how true that seems to be.
40 years ago I was just like you
I found it hard to avoid winning and upsetting my so called " friends "
but after many years of heavy drinking and other things
we still have games night , once a week,
i still have just as much fun without seemingly trying to achieve anything
and get my perverted enjoyment in achieving my twisted secret goals by the end of the night without anyone knowing.
I do however suspect some of my " so called friends " are also achieving their twisted secret goals without any of us winning an actual designated " game de jour ".
the games have evolved well beyond what is laid on the table.
Thank you for posting these! I was at SHUX this year and missed ALL the talks because I was so busy playing games. Had a great time!
I feel there should exist a board game or card game based on these principles. "Be better than someone, but not too much" could be represented by numbered cards. An 4 wins from a 3, but a 9 loses because the difference is just too much. And so on.
I wanted to like this video, but ever since I found out Matt was a #puppypunter, I can't support Shut Up and Sit Down.
What is a puppy punter?
@@dan-gy4vu Someone who punts puppies.
But why can't you?
Judging by the reference pair on the table, these guys are tiny! Who's gonna trust them?
My game group's motto is "never trust Lindsay" so thats hard when we play social deduction games :( My best friend had it engraved on a gift he gave me when i was his best man.
pink shirt guy looks like handsome squidward
And the guy in the grey shirt looks like normal squidward
Oh god i can't unsee that
Played a 3 player game of Battlestar Galactica. The players were my bro, myself and a friend who was new to the game. I was the cylon. Poor friend was so confused trying to figure out who was the cylon I even had him second guessing himself if he was it. It was fucking hilarious. My bro figured out I was the cylon after I made a really careless play of cards, but kept silent mostly because it was so hilarious watching my friend being so confused. In the end it didn't matter who won. We all had great fun.
I prefer fair play. If the game has no traitor element I will offer the best options available to a player if they are unsure how to proceed along with reasoning that should be known publicly. I feel it is important players are given adequate assistance when they need it to keep up with the rest of the group's experience level. Does this exploit me? No. If you were a decent player, you'd have taken any of the options I provided anyway, perhaps even found a better play I couldn't think of. I don't give away my objectives, nor do I give away another players objectives if I think I know them. I'll lay out the best possible plays for them with what they have regardless how it may affect another player's choices, including my own. Everyone should have fun playing the game. I know what it is like being unfairly curb stomped by power trippers.
This is seriously one of the most important talks in board-gaming history.
It sucks that the slides are now gone, but at least i have the video so yay
I find that I am most persuasive when I tell people that I am trying to manipulate them, however that I am trying to help them come in second. Then I explain how.
Or if it looks like I’m losing I say I am manipulating them but I’m doing it to try to come in second and push them to the front.
The idea I’m usually trying to instill in them is “if I help him, he will help me take out that other guy that I’m more worried about.”
I try to get them to think that without telling them.
The "Slides from this talk" link is broken, could you re-upload? Thanks
May I have the slide link? It’s not working….
Matt Lees admits he's evil AND kicks puppies? I can't believe I was such a big fan
jk I forgive him because he's just so dang attractive
you've explained the U.S presidential debates in 2020
This as a podcast would be kinda infernal. You have a similar voice. Different accent, but I could totally believe you both are different voices of the same voice actor...
Totally. One of them should’ve spoken with a monocle and mustache.
Thank you for sharing these talks with those of us unable to attend. We greatly appreciate the inclusion.
I kinda wanna play a game like Dune where I could play against people who really know how to manipulate like this, and agree that all breaks are off. I think it would be a great experience for me to toughen up to just see how deep the rabbit hole goes in action.
So I know this is about largely about bluffing games, but the point about making public statements and preposterizing notions or people makes sooo much sense if you look at how certain Christian groups organize themselves. Public statements of faith -- you're less likely to be convinced out of it. Preposterizing atheists and really anyone else of any other religion or creed -- setting you up for conflict (this is also where a LOT of religious bigotry is perpetuated). If you want examples of how these methods of persuasion are tried and true, look no further than these examples.
Matt and SUSD, from someone who cares, I hope you take the time to read and think about this.
I noticed that the Ben Shapiro comment didn't land well with some people in the comments. I'm a left-leaning independent. I follow a number of people on both sides of the spectrum, I have even listened to Ben Shapiro's podcast a number of times. He argues in a very dialectic way, which doesn't jive with me, because I often disagree with his premises. I quit listening to him when I realized his way of arguing was frustrating to me. Even so, he is quite reasonable with his guests. If all the clips you've seen of him are him talking fast at college students, then I see why you would call him an idiot. He's actually not nearly as dogmatic as left-wing media paints him to be. However, he doesn't help his cause when he keeps providing sound bites with news hosts. So, my first thought is, perhaps you have only seen Ben Shapiro at his worst.
My brother is a conservative and he consumes everything Ben Shapiro. Sometimes he shows me clips or will tell me about them. A lot of times I disagree and I express it by calling out the logical leaps that Ben makes. Most of our conversations end up in both of us agreeing that the truth is more fuzzy than imagined, a healthy way of looking at the world in my opinion. My point is, I have found a healthy way to talk about politics without being offensive. As soon as the words "idiot" left your mouth, that word is going to trigger an unnecessary backlash. We're going to assume you're a liberal who despises republican ideologues. I see you have tried to untether Shaprio's politics from his intellect, but you're not going to win anyone over with that argument. The impression you give when you call a political pundit an "idiot" is too strong to be changed. I think Matt was talking about this at 2:02. If you want to defend your ego, keep doing what you're doing. If you want to bring people closer to your point of view, I'd suggest you show some vulnerability.
Wospy , I didn’t call Ben Shapiro and idiot and never have. I honestly would love to talk to Ben Shapiro, one on one.
@@professorpsych Sorry Alan! I thought it was you who said he was an idiot, but it was Matt. I rewatched it and you really had nothing to do with it. I thought what you said was actually really good.
In that case, my message was meant to be directed at Matt and probably Quinns.
@@wospy1091 Ben Shapiro is what stupid people think a smart person is.
@@Reggie1408 Calling someone stupid is a great way to motivate people to dig even deeper into their beliefs. I don't know how old you are, if you're 12 or you're 21, or whatever, but it's never too early or too late to start growing up.
@@wospy1091 The wilfully ignorant people are not the problem but someone pointing out their wilful ignorance is...makes sense.
I knew you were evil.... teach me sensei.
Are the slides still available anywhere?
they're in the description of the video
oops sorry, clicked the link, it doesn't work
I feel dirty after learning all of this, I need a shower, but definitely not a bath...
Can't believe I've been subscribed to a channel full of puppy punchers
It's funny how there were a whole bunch of people and opinions that they brought up as being blatantly manipulative and it's only the 2 second Ben Shapiro insult that people are complaining about
@@RandomPerson-nd2ey That should teach you never to invite Ben Shapiro to a board game night again.
It's funny because none of the other things they mention in greater detail, for a longer period of time, or in a more pejorative manner are at all controversial, right
I hope for the future where "Ben Shapiro is a manipulative idiot" is equally as uncontroversial as "OJ Simpson got away with murder"
Well I wouldn’t think that Ben Shapiro himself came to be rude to you, so I’m pretty sure is was someone pretending to be him, which would make complete sense. I mean when it comes to politics on TH-cam people on all sides tend to treat everyone like absolute garbage, so I hope your opinion of certain political groups isn't harmed in the future because some people on the internet are complete idiots.
You lost me a bit with the "tackle bad arguments to inoculate yourself against tougher ones down the line" bit, it seems to me like it's often a trap. Dealing with the bad version of an argument is easy and gives you inflated confidence in your position, without really preparing you for the good arguments where you won't be able to prey on obvious flaws. So the positive of building confidence seems very much like a two edged sword when you don't challenge yourself enough to be able to eventually face the tough calls. That said I feel the problem might just be the relatively abstract nature of this bit of the discussion, just wanted to point out how I found it confusing.
It's important to remember that this talk isn't about being correct, it's about manipulation. The 'innoculation' isn't about eventually reaching the truth in a discussion, it's just to defend yourself from being convinced.
I think the difference might be between, winning an argument/convincing somebody else and what you decide. The inflated confidence you describe, is because you think you have it figured out, and if that is the case, you obviously wont be as easily convinced of the opposite as when you haven't thought about the question yet.
This was my favourite talk during shux. Playful and informative. Loved it!
18:00 if only all salesmen thought that way
8:30 I guess this goes hand in hand with the whole premise of the movie Inception, how it is more powerful to not just shovel an idea into someone, but make it in a way its them who reach that conclusion, and you act as if you didn't influence them, they reached that conclusion by their own.
21:00 An even better example I would say is Man of the Year. I rememeber he was interviewed about smoking weed and he just straight up admits he did, tried crazy brownies too didn't like them, masturbated a lot, he also had sex with a prostitute and was so bad he got a refund. The whole interview is basically just going on at this point.
Really interesting you PUPPY PUNCHER
If nothing else, it warms my heart to see people who support (or at least are indifferent to) the exclusion of others, now finding themselves feeling "excluded" from something they're passionate about.
In a perfect world, that might've resulted in a little bit of empathy blossoming inside a few minds here and there, but sadly it would be naive to expect that to happen in this case.
And yeah, Ben Shapiro most certainly is an idiot.
@@ryanmugits5356 Ben Shapiro, who's the person in question here - not all "people who are conservative" - absolutely defends the exclusion of others. He's done it publicly many times. If you agree with him, you support exclusion.
How is this controversial?
@@ryansmart9500 I'm not sure what happened to my response, but I had already answered the other Ryan that I won't do his research for him, so it's only fair that I won't do it for you either.
If you don't know what he has said publicly (and particularly how he has instigated his audience) regarding immigrants, homosexuals, Muslims, etc, then you should look it up and see if he's someone you actually agree with.
Personally I want to know what happened to all the other responses in this thread. They had to have been pretty darn bad for all of them to be removed. That being said, you can indeed look up things he has said in the past. In fact, I found a site made by people who actively dislike him dedicated just to cateloging all the dumb things he has said in the past, so I know they aren’t leaving anything out. However, the list of dumb things he has said isn’t actually that long, with around half of it being dedicated to dumb things he has said from over nine or more years ago that he has actively apologized for multiple times and said that he would change if he could go back. The other half is dedicated not to quotes but a list of other people saying why I should believe he is racist, fascist, and so forth despite actively speaking against those a Ideas repeatedly, and criticizing ideas from conservatives, radicals, and even Donald Trump that he disagrees with entirely almost every other podcast. He does rational debates with people from all political spaces on his channel weekly, and has even had completely civil discussions with democratic presidential candidates on his channel before, such as Andrew Yang. I mean you can say he is every name in the book, but that doesn’t make any of those claims true. I don’t want to go too deep into this, but I think it is unfair to label someone as something that they have said themselves to be entire untrue based upon their own beliefs that they state regularly, and then point out dumb things they have said in the past that don’t honeslty prove anything, but put the target in question in such a light as to make everyone else believe the other false accusations they have made against them are true. If the arguement is that Ben Shapiro sometimes says stupid stuff or makes dumb decisions, then oh heck yes I would agree with you absolutely, but if we are going to use those dumb statements as a catalyst to confirm your other negative beliefs you hold for that person because they politically disagree with you, then that is where people have a problem.
Tell me you got all the boosters without telling me you got all the boosters.
In Blood on the Clock Tower, I saw I would agree to die in round eight (half way through). I was the good team, but my character had no benefit in round one, it convinced them to leave me in. In round eight they wanted me alive but I volunteered to die. No one voted and no one else volunteered. I chose to self-sacrifice which earnt respect. It's listed on the bgg forum for the games page. I like influence games. I do well at bidding ones too. Sidereal Confluence and Panic on Wall Street. Many werewolf games. I have come last at Sheriff of Nottingham though every time!
boardgamegeek.com/thread/2214742/chilling-played-after-dark-15-compliment
Horrible video. Loved it.
I don't like games that allow for cutting off another player by teaming up. No outside element should be involved in a game. How you look, how you speak, your hobbies, your interests.... none of these matter in a game (unless you play games that specifically involve these).
Traitor games are fine. They are designed for one or two people trying to make everyone else lose.
This is why I prefer co-op games over any other, as well as team versus team games.
Booooring
My gut's telling me that the other speaker is a liar
Me too!
I have to say that the point about people believing nonsense is so true
As someone who always got good grades, I could just say stuff and as long as I went with it, people would agree with me
I found this amusing to no end
Sorry That I couldn't make it to SHUX. Glad I can still beam in.
#PuppyPuncher
Plz review axis and allies
Some more ideas for how to win games check out these guys:
th-cam.com/video/cTFi0WEdtvo/w-d-xo.html
They have a few videos that have great ideas ranging from the small common stuff all the way to the down right evil. Love them haha
Loved your video as well! I would love to see more stuff like this with people giving talks about the in depth concepts of board games
I’m sorry in advance, but this is the one video of yours that I am not passing on to others I play with, although I’m sure they’ll silently respect my point of view....puppy lives matter too!
.... And that's they waaaaaaayyyy the news goes.
I wonder how many school papers he wrote about vaccines not causing autism.
Remember when Matt punted that puppy
#puppypunter
*playing game with heavy political and philosophical themes, everything is political*
'hey guys it'd be nice if we could just keep politics out of our games'
@@shawnc292 no actually they aren't different. The things we interact with everyday represent our larger society and the political decisions that went into creating the games we play are relevant. Get educated and stop watching charlatans you dumbass
@@ryanmugits5356 lmfao. You do realize Ben shapiro is a raging facist that literally has supported the genocide of Palestinian people in the past. But I should be 'civil' about people who are defending him. Ok buddy.
@@ryanmugits5356 because you think politics is a game and that we shouldn't talk about things that are life and death problems for people. Your priveledge is unbearable my friend.
@@ryanmugits5356 if you unironically are offended at a subtle joke about Ben Shapiro I'm done responding to you. You are directly sympathizing with a racist, homophobic, transphobic, and facist human being. Do you think trans people like to be around people like you? Do you think people of color like to play board games with people like you? The answer is no.
Where did all the other comments here go? Rough. I’ll just drop in for a sec though to say something. Just because you disagree with someone politically doesn’t automatically make them Racist, homophobic, transphobic, and fascist. Does Shapiro say stupid stuff sometimes? Certainly. Does Shapiro make mistakes? Certainly. Has Shapiro said things in the past that even he himself regrets saying today? Of course. Can you dislike someone who disagrees with you? 100% absolutely. However just calling someone every name in the book as a lie just because you dislike them as a way to morally elevate the way you feel is how you make people who disagree with you hate you and not want to engage in proper political discussions, which this may not be the best place for to begin with.
Matt’s comment about ‘Face-to-face’ game playing (23 mins in) back in 2019 feels like a gut punch watching today…
Be good....
at being evil.
Wow, educational, very educational!
Why are you punching puppies? What's wrong with you, man? 🤨
👑
TED for boardgames.
can i give this video a double thumbs up? 5:11 spot on!
This is amazing!
#PuppyPunter 😳
polska?
Wow! Matt is totally evil!
"Nietzsche is dead." -God, 1900
Look, I see that some people didn't like the Shapiro comment. Honestly, with all the hate that he propagates (see the mosque shooter that cited him as an inspiration), the least he deserves is to be called an idiot. Thanks for sticking to principles.
@@Wolcik3000 What? The law has nothing to do with holding people to account socially.
While I give people the benefit of the doubt, Ben Shapiro is funded by billionaires to spew far right propaganda that he knows is built to act as a gateway to far-right radicalization.
Far right terrorism is stochastic. This means that thought leaders on the far right invite hatred against groups of people, and then statistically, a small group of people follow through on that hatred and commit violence. Ben is one of those thought leaders.
.......ehhhh i don't know if i should believe them......are they telling the truth or just wanting me to feel this way to take advantage of me.......?????
Lol I hadn't read the comments but after the Shapiro comment I knew it would be a shit show. I don't agree with what Shapiro says but he is far, far away from being an idiot. Something I've observed about liberals is that anyone who has a more successful base than theirs must be put down to try and prop up their own ideals rather than their ideals standing on their own. Discrediting someone's views rather than beating them with your own IS a great way to manipulate, though, so it's on theme for the video.
Nope. He's an idiot.
@@Wolcik3000 He's the first guy in history to lose in an interview.
@@Wolcik3000 Search for "Ben Shapiro BBC interview"
Attacking someone’s intelligence you Disagree with is juvenile. Ben Schapiro isn’t unintelligent even if we may disagree with his conclusions. Sham!!!
He's an unbelievably basic man, sympathies to anyone unable to see that.
@@shutupandsitdown he's not stupid, that's the worry. He says stupid things, yes, but I think he's well aware of the misinformation he's spreading
Nah, he is a fucking idiot.
Shut Up & Sit Down Can we not delve into American politics? Let’s stick to board games :)
Ryan and ThatSpyGuy -- Thanks to having watched the video, I recognize your attempts to manipulate your audience and reject it. I am inoculated.
I sometimes agree with things Ben Shapiro says. Sometimes I don’t. Am I an idiot?
Actually listen to what he says sometime, he is the master of the word salad.
He often prefaces his nonsense with truth, which is another manipulation tactic (as stated in this very video).
I believe the ability to have civil discourse is paramount. If you passionately disagree with an opinion, belief, or “fact,” I encourage you to converse. Please change my mind, but only if you are also willing to change yours.
@@ryanmugits5356 Do you feel unjustly villified and excluded from a space in public life by a group with an opposing view? How does it feel to be on the receiving end for once?
@@ryanmugits5356 There's nothing wrong with making assumptions we both know are right. Also is the omission of punctuation an attempt to recreate Shapiro's rambling in written form? Are you that much of a fanboy?
You guys have a right to express your political opinions. But you really cannot deny that it’s tacky and childish to outright call people you disagree with idiots. I believe a certain United States political leader is criticized constantly for this exact thing?
Even more concerning is replying to someone’s comment of constructive criticism by doubling down. Again, it’s juvenile and misguided. Even more so to go into the comments and say it again, adding that you feel bad for anyone who can’t see his idiocy. Truly ironic, as it caused me to tune out nearly everything you said and is the closest I’ve come to unsubscribing from the channel. Just a shame
It's genuinely quite interesting that everyone has framed this as throwing an insult on the basis of political disagreement. It really isn't the case at all - politics has nothing to do with what Matt said, it's about the fact that a pundit celebrated as smart has frequently shown himself to be the complete opposite. That this is immediately framed as a political statement is interesting, but mainly it shows the barriers that he's thrown up to disperse any criticism towards his value as a thinker: when criticism of one person is seen as criticism of a broader ideology, that person becomes almost untouchable. Anyway you're quite right this is all very alarming and weird, but I don't think it's us being especially weird at this point in time. It's my opinion based on statements he's made that the man is fairly dim, if that observation makes you think that I'm stupid then that's totally cool, your choice. But to say it's political, when we didn't even mention his politics? It ain't, check yourselves, realise that this assumption is weird.
I've tried to think of a word that correctly describes a person who politely disagrees with another person's observation, even though that person's observation is clearly evident to be true.
The best word I can think of to correctly describe that person, is a Liar. I was thinking coward, because the person can't just honestly say their true intentions, but truly, that individual is just a Liar. Lying to themselves more than others, but still, a liar.
@@shutupandsitdown in your opinion. Facts to back your statement maybe? Liberals always respond with comments made to look like facts with nothing to back it up.
@@shutupandsitdown I really appreciate your guys' work, I agree that Ben Shapiro is an a-hole (you technically didn't say that, but it's pretty heavily implied by your comments in general), and I often disagree with his views, but please just take a quick step back with me for a sec. Ben Shapiro graduated with honors from Harvard law at age 23. That doesn't automatically make him an historic genius, but, by most people's standards, that would not be the description of an "unbelievable idiot." His popularity is entirely borne from his conservative political commentary. And, you guys have expressed liberal-leaning opinions in the past. So, you can't possibly think it's so shocking that people would take that comment as a political one, right?
Bummed. You folks are so talented and I’ve enjoyed and supported your show for a long time. But I am really disappointed at the public self-righteous judgementalism against an intelligent person who challenges popular opinions. I love that we live in a society where conflicting view points can be publicly debated, and cherish those brave enough to do so on all sides. The worst thing I can think of would be living in a society where the dominant opinions (group think) ruled completely and all dissenters were vilified.
Could have done without the Shapiro insult.
We could all do without Shapiro
Shut Up & Sit Down I love y’all so much. Pleaaaase don’t open this can of worms. People are allowed to have differing opinions :)
@@deadeye7924 The problem is that he's either an idiot, or willfully malicious. You probably won't watch this, but if even 20% of the editorializing and criticism is on point, then it's a pretty clear picture of Shapiro's shortcomings th-cam.com/video/aDMjgOYOcDw/w-d-xo.html
@@thatspyguy839 I take it people are allowed to have opinions, until they mention them on their own channels, at which point they should be politely asked to stop sharing them?
Thats interesting.
@@shutupandsitdown Come on guys 😒. Shapiro is not an idiot. Not even close. He's an incredibly accomplished person from a very young age. Don't throw out insults if you don't explain them. I want to like you guys, please don't insult my politics.
Why hijack a boardgame podcast with politics?
Buddy this is science
@@shutupandsitdown I appreciate the science behind the podcast for sure. I love a good textbook or research paper as much as the next guy or gal!
It's not so much that you expressed political opinions (I agree with them!) but both hosts body language and choice of words when discussing Shapiro, the fire fighter study, and autism vaccine man wasn't congruent with the inclusive culture I've come to love and expect from SU&SD.
I'm happy to elaborate if you really want, but suffice to say I didn't care to watch beyond the 12 minute mark.
@@bryancrompton7238 can't you enjoy the channel while not sharing their opinions?
@@bryancrompton7238 so, the problem is really with you, isn't it? You can't accept opinions that are different than yours, not the SU&SD guys.
They are not excluding you from enjoying board games or even their channel, you're doing it yourself.
Good to know the 2 people on the stage are scientists. We should always listen to the Scientists, and Psychosurgeons.
to political...
Now even one of my favourite reviewers has to become an uninformed political player. You saying Ben Shapiro is dumb is making you sound really dumb. Do every leftie in this world have to make it their objective to contribute nonsense to an already inflamed debate. I was once young, extremely leftleaning, ideological and uninformed, but thankfully I didnt take every opportunity to tell the world.
Ben Shapiro is what stupid people think a smart person is.