GF: Babe, do you think this scarf looks on me? BF: I have not done a 3 year diploma or 4 year undergrad in fashion design. Hence I am not qualified to give an opinion on that.
lol Saying that is the equivalent of muttering "whatever.." under your breath as you walk away. It is completely redundant and irrelevant statement on its own and is no more than their own little desperate attempt to disengage from the debate without openly admitting defeat, which just goes to show sadly how useless it is to change these peoples' minds. In the end, they couldn't give less of a hoot about things like the truth and facts - it's actually just about them propping up their fantasy wall to make them feel more safe and secure from what is reality.
Yes, same company. "In 1900 the tyre manufacturers André Michelin and his brother Édouard published the first edition of a guide for French motorists. At the time there were fewer than 3,000 cars in France, and the Michelin guide was intended to boost the demand for cars, and thus for car tires." -wp
AdjacentJason The argument is if you aren't an expert in a certain field and your opinion disagrees with an opinion formed by people who do have a lot of experience and knowledge in said field, then I have reason to believe you are wrong unless you can rival the statements of an expert. The logic is: "If you are an amateur cook who has only read a wiki article about eggs, your way of cooking an omelette will likely be worse than that of a Michelin star chef".
Jack Le.... he wasn't even putting forward an "argument"... he was simply playing to the gallery, a self-absorbed narcissistic little punk who will be in for a big shock when REAL LIFE happens & he has to earn a living instead of leeching off of his parents & society in general... 😎😎
My guess is that a bunch of these college kids got together and decided that "This is the way we're going to beat Ben Shapiro." They all got together, they all put a little bit into these questions, and at the end they all got wrecked.
the kid is stupid and since he didnt have an argument for the actual topic he wanted to discredit shapiro as a person haha. Duhhhhhh this is what social skills computer phones leave a generation with..
MrKvace That is truly something to admire. When I've been confronted by morons like this (which have thankfully been rare), I shut down. I'm so shocked by them that my brain crashes. Not only does Ben control his emotions well, he keeps his intellect.
"What I'm getting at" is that although you shot down my position in the first 5 seconds, I'd like to recast it so you can shoot it down a few more times then walk away pretending that I've made a valid point.
@@kungfuman82 He's a sociology major[presumably based off how defensive he was at someone having an opinion of his "field of study"]. I imagine this guy has to write everything down before he says it.
Ben went pretty easy on him, the question asker should consider himself lucky. You don't need a PHD, masters, bachelors, or even high school diploma to be knowledgeable, to have an opinion, or to be right. Wish Ben dug into him a little more on this. Great response nevertheless though!
i don't have a con law degree but i can boast an understanding of the constitution that's superior to that of everyone in our government, even the supreme court.
Education is a BUSINESS. To those deeply involved in it, it is a RELIGION. You need neither to get through life in a world where that piece of paper is irrelevant. A degree merely verifies that you have studied and passed a certain subject or field. It does NOT guarantee that you have reason and common sense. Reason and common sense is either hereditary or learned, or both, and many educated people completely lack it. Like I said... education is a BUSINESS that enriches those involved in it at the expense of those people paying to get it.
except the degree these days determines who was compliant with the "teaching" authority, not that you've even grasped the facts required to pass. Basic reading comprehension and acclimation to the version of english used at the time can give someone without a degree, like myself, a better grasp of the constitution than even the justices on the Supreme Court, allowing me to point out where they've made rulings that blatantly contradict the constitution. It's literally the only thing i can ever really boast about besides being a decent shot for someone who rarely ever gets any time at the range.
Shapiro is 100% right. I know people who went to college for 6 years who are still complete morons. I also know people who never graduated high school who are brilliant. Bringing up someones education in a political debate is ridiculous. Like he said, I don't need a college degree to look at facts and draw a conclusion based on it
Yea Ben is an example of someone who went to college and is a complete moron. I don't believe you need a college degree to read a study. But to say you have a qualified opinion on these subjects is probably the most pseudo-intellectual thing I have ever heard. Ben is known for misinterpreting/being dishonest with studies so I rather have someone who is an expert in the field give me an opinion then fucking Ben Shapiro
@Watch JOJO’S BIZARRE ADVENTURE!!!!! Look at my bio Name any person that he has debated was actually well equipped other than cenk and college students. He's ducked many debates from sam sedar and kyle kulinski
@Watch JOJO’S BIZARRE ADVENTURE!!!!! Look at my bio And you didn't even address the argument I presented. He literally said that he doesn't believe in Sociology. A well known academic field of study. By definition he's an anti-intellectual.
@Watch JOJO’S BIZARRE ADVENTURE!!!!! Look at my bio That isn't what sociology is, sociology is the study of human society,structures and how things function. Using sociology is the best way to explain alot of things then just to go on an individual level. If you look at things on an individual level, you will get very dumb solutions to problems. Like for instance, Ben told Joe rogan the best way to stop crime in the black community is to tell them to stop. Not only did Joe rogan grill that response, he even had Ben concede the point.
At Ferris State. Studying Sociology....words fail me. Of all the people in the world who shouldn't feel intellectually superior to anyone, it's someone studying a unscientific, pseudo intellectual subject at a university most people outside of Michigan will never have heard of.
How I know my college education was actually useful (other than it being a STEM degree that is). I left confident that I was competent in my field of study, but fully aware that there was much more for me to learn.
George Benson doesn't have a degree in music and cannot even read music; he only plays by ear. This means that George Benson is not qualified to be a musician.
Now that you reminded me, Ben did say that he won't consider a musician GREAT if he can't read music when he ranted about Lennon's "Imagine", and I don't like the song either but he was adorable in his seriousness. As adorable as 12-year old him playing the Schindler's List theme.
Yes... He shouldn't be allowed to charge money for his work under the federal law... that includes all buskers too... by the way all the beggars should be required to have diploma in their field of work, get registered and pay income tax...
Reading music doesn't make you a musician. You still have to understand theory, know the modes (e.g. Phrygian, Locrian), etc. That doesn't make me an elitist.
Especially considering his field is [presumably] in Sociology- just that sort of defensiveness he has when confronted with an "outsider" about his field of study. So let's be honest- he'll probably end up flipping burgers and getting yelled at by his pimple-faced teen manager for not changing the grease trap.
Once Ben identified "this is the argument of place of authority", every following question fell flat. "Yep, authority again. I can understand studies." I have a degree in psychology, I can look at studies and understand if it is a bad or good study. I have that capability. I don't need sociology or women's studies. 100% agree Ben.
It's really funny. As someone who actually has a scientific degree and studied things like this (my own argument from authority), being a PHD doesn't mean you're correct. Being a PHD means you wrote a long-term research project about something specific. Being a degree holder means you passed classes on basic information relating to the field. It doesn't mean others can't understand that information. In some cases degree-holders have unique access to certain kinds of information in the field, but in this case, a layman can understand a study just as well as an "expert", because the text, methodology, and sources are readily available. The degree does nothing there.
Nah, that smile was tight, cause he had no response when Ben dismantled him with the logical fallacy response. He kept plowing through because he had nothing else, because he thought he had a gotcha moment.
Yeah, but your hero Ben is committing another logical fallacy: the fallacy of assertion. He is wrong on his account of sociology. It is an expert field. I can easily find sociological research papers Ben wouldn't be able to crack. Like this one: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0022250X.2018.1427091
And now you are assuming that a well read, intelligent person who said that he studied both law and politics, wouldn't be able to comprehend some research papers because of not having the necessary letters before his name. You are just further proving ''their hero, Ben's'' point.
@Password 123 if yku want to actually provide proof to this instead of stating whatever bs that was as fact. If you are talking about this case ben is 100 percent right you cant say someone is wrong because they dont have a degree in the field you have to state what exactly they said about what subject was wrong and provide evidence on why its wrong. If a professor of literacy said the bible was a 100 percent factual text while a random other person said wait actually no and heres why (i assume you dont meed me to explain to you why the bible isnt a factual text and why it should not be taken as one considering there are severall diffrent beliefs off of one book and many religons say at least some part of the bible isnt factual) does that mean that the bible is right because he has a phd. If you arent talking about this instamce you might want to provide examples.
"I don't consider sociology to be an expert field" I love how he roasts you before he roasts you, to get you warmed up (literally). He gives a sneak peak before the fireworks come out and he blowtorches your argument.
+Billthazar the problem was that bill dropped out cuz he was too smart for his teachers. he knew more about computers then his teachers did. this was also back in the early days of the computer where most teachers probably only knew the bare basics while bill gates is a natural nerd and tech geek and was experimenting and programming with computers at a very young age so he became a master at it by the time he reached college. it takes 10,000 hrs of practice to become a master at something. so he may not have a degree per say, but he still has that practice and experience with it.
I used to be a democrat, but I've gotten pretty tired of the left saying that they care about poor people...and then dismissing people who don't agree with them as "uneducated."
Republicans and "I uSe tO bE a DeM" the same lie over and over. You can care about poor people, and realize that poor people who are wrong about climate change are indeed uneducated. Because you can care about the uneducated, the left is not hypocritical.
Ben argues from philosophical fallacies…”argument of authority” bcse someone is an expert in their field, their argument is valid. That’s what he uses to argue his point against sociology. Sociology is amazing especially if you can use it successfully in society. Its misunderstood quite often & has become the whipping post for many “useless” college degrees. Wrong to do this on every level. For those who truly know & understand sociology, they’d know they’re one of the most dangerous set of ppl to walk the face of the earth. Ben’s political science & law degree can easily be used to discredit him in the argument of authority as well. Goes both ways.
@@sunnysunnypalms uh no, you can be well versed in a subject but you’re argument is only valid if it’s correct. If you can read you can be equipped well enough to decipher for yourself what’s true and not and Ben doesn’t use and didn’t use his degree to make a point , that’s what the kid was trying to do and failed miserably.
Student: starts making argument X Ben: "Don't make argument X, it's a bad argument" Student: continues making argument X Ben: "Again, X is fallacious, here is why" Student: Makes argument X again and looks smug while doing Ben: begins to contemplate suicide.
Blindly following authority is what creates these fools in the first place. Their teachers feed them with any sort of BS and they just nod, dedicating zero effort to validate what's been fed.
You know if I happened to do a sociology degree but dropped out right before I graduated, then what is the difference between myself, a person who got their degree and someone who has read a lot about the subject? Answer: A piece of paper.
Also, that piece of paper is simply saying that you told a small group of people what they wanted to hear. You haven’t actually proven any proficiency in the field itself. That comes later, and does not always come from people with advanced degrees, or the people who teach the subject.
I like that Ben anticipated the argument a mile away. I find myself in that situation often. You see these douchebags and their setup and they think they are original in their logical fallacy. Often times when I make arguments I intentionally debunk these type of arguments before they even bring them up, and the simple minded fucks will use them anyways (as in that didn't even read the fact that their argument had already been answered). I'll give that guy credit, it takes nerve to stand up there on a microphone and give an argument, especially when faced with someone like Shapiro. Though I have the feeling he didn't actually know who Ben was.
Ben likes debating. And he debates all the time. Of course he can see a line of questioning like that a mile away. The person thought they were quite clever when they started. But in the end they offered nothing more than a mumbled whimper. Part of Leftists strategy of no platform and character shaming with pejoratives makes them rather pathetic when they have to put forth a logical argument.
Yes. When you cut to the end of their statement before they themselves get there, the entire flow chart of the point outlined in their notes or heads goes out the window and since these are not well thought-out ideas they end up having to stammer, restate and smile while getting owned.
@@matthewsuksnguan2670 And that is how things gets solved my friend. Logical arguments with sufficient evidence that can't get debunked is the best way to push agendas, push causes, and win arguments
I also loved the subtle dig when Ben said " I don't think slapping a PhD from *Ferris State* next to your name makes you an expert". The intonation of the college name was great. Basically he was saying to the kid: "Look, you're going to a fairly humdrum university most people outside of Michigan won't have heard of, so really with the attitude?"
If we follow that guy's argument to its logical conclusion, no one except those with science degrees should talk about science. No one except those with English degrees should talk about English. No one except those with Psychology degrees should talk about Psychology. Because, you know, having those letters means you know more than somebody about that topic who doesn't have those letters. Because no one can do research on their own. It's illegal.
and no one but those with a degree in firearms technology should be allowed to own a gun or no one but those with a degree on constitutional law can talk about the constitution. Basically if you don't have money you're not allowed a view on anything.
The problem with the “you don’t have a degree so you’re not qualified to have a credible opinion” argument is that it assumes no one is able to follow the logic for a given scenario except those with a formal education background in that particular topic. It’s arrogant to think only those formally educated in a given topic are qualified to form opinions. I never went to law school but attorneys are trained in logic and the formulation of arguments. I guess this guy missed that day in sociology class (which I got an A+ in).
Love it when college kids think they are "so enlightened" and can go head to head with someone like Ben Shapiro. Just because you were on the debate team your senior year in high school and you wear sunglasses on top of your head doesn't mean you can hang with Ben.
It's amazing that the people who tell you you're not qualified to have an opinion are not only not qualified themselves but also seem to have an opinion on everything...
I freaking love how Ben destroys the argument that having a degree in particular things doesn't mean you can't have a valid argument against it. There are some things that warrant it, but not sociology. I had a debate with a person on Facebook where the people tried to say I couldn't debate then because they studied debate, and had degrees in it. WTF?
I have friends like this. They can't keep up in a debate with me so they have to attack your credentials. Meanwhile I read more books and studies than all of them, their classmates, and their teachers combined. I just don't have a certification. I always tell them to argue my points instead that's how debating should be. But when you back them into a corner they say anything to try and "win".
My question, as a college student, is, how the hell do these kids not know appeals and fallacies and still write essays and do anything related to analysis. It’s like they’re being taught nothing
he hit the nail on the head in the very beginning. many of these fields of studies are not expert fields. having a commercial pilots license, a medical degree, being a physics major, or having an engineering degree is quite different from social sciences and arbitrary opinionated studies that are almost useless. Especially when many of these studies wind up being more political than factual and effect all of us in our daily lives (economics, sociology) This was the old argument in support of career politicians. People wanted those who spent their lives in Washington being president rather than an outsider because they felt a politician was an 'expert in politics.' LoL
Right on. That's what I ask Sociology students... over even just the past 50 years, compared to say actual sciences like Chemistry or Physics, or things like Electrical Engineering or Medicine...what actual meaningful contribution has Sociology made to humanity? *Spoiler alert: not an awful lot.*
The notion of being an "expert" started coming to the forefront about 20-30 years ago. Most of them were either self proclaimed or put forward by those who had an agenda they thought would benefit. Some of us can still spot BS without being an expert.
"Either my argument is good, or my argument is bad. Citing to my credentials is a really bad way of making an argument... You may not believe the authority to which I'm citing. I do not believe the authority to which you're citing so you're gonna have to make me an argument as to what I'm saying that's wrong instead of just saying I don't have the properly enumerated degree from the institution of your choice."
This illustrates the difference between conversation and debate. The kid was only interested in scoring a debate point. He wasn't there to listen and possibly learn.
Luis Alonso 95 Yes, but how do you know if something that you think is actually correct? Would you take your basic knowledge about science and astronomy and be an astronaut? How about a doctor? Would you think it’s ok to to perform surgery or even a simple diagnosis of where you can say to someone you know for a fact that what you think is happening is actually happening? Common sense can only take you so far is what I am saying. Science however is everywhere and needs to be learned by the specifics to understand what exactly is happening. You can’t always assume to be correct.
I love him! I could listen to his debates and Q/As all day. He gets to the point and doesn't have to sling mud.....his haters usually destroy themselves with their own words.
Precisely. That's what I ask Sociology students... over even just the past 50 years, compared to say actual sciences like Chemistry or Physics, or things like Electrical Engineering or Medicine...what actual meaningful contribution has Sociology made to humanity? Spoiler alert: not an awful lot.
Sociology is a social science like psychology, linguistics, economics, etc. It is an expert field that flies over Shapiro's yarmulke. The reason you guys don't like it is because many of its practitioners come to conclusions that go against the values and beliefs of right-wing, conservative America. So you throw out the baby with the proverbial bathwater. As for contributions made by the field? Plenty. It's the only field that studies social relationships as social relationships (rather than reducing them to economic, psychological, or religious phenomena). Like other sciences, sociology has coined a number of ideas/memes that have entered into popular discourse: role model (Merton), conspicuous consumption (Veblen), survival of the fittest (Spencer), emotional labor (Hochschild). Also, Martin Luther King's BA was in sociology as was (and this is just for you guys) Ronald Reagan's. There are plenty of culturally/politically/artistically creative types who were shaped by the discipline. But, I think you are more interested in the "practical" scientific applications. In which case, I can offer a few: sociologists have figured out the optimal time for starting school for high school students; clinical sociologists have worked to reform healthcare delivery systems (developing, for example, social measures of wellbeing); sociologists have created and developed the ERGM model in network analysis, which is now used in fields like psychology. There are, of course, many more contributions which I urge you to look at. But to do that, you would first have to set aside you political and ideological biases and refrain, for a second, from drinking from the fountains of the alt-right.
@Jakub B Leaving aside the subtle anti-Semitism in your statement, there are a few issues here: 1) The contributions you mentioned here, while useful, don't really compare with the advancements made to human society by other fields of study (such as biology or computer science or electrical engineering) over even the last 50 years. I know it's not a competition, but let's be realistic about the scale of the contribution of sociology here. 2) Suggesting that someone has a disregard for sociology because they "rinking from the fountains of the alt-right" is in itself not an academic observation, it's a rather crass generalisation not based on any evidence you've provided and it undermines your previous worthy effort of trying to provide evidence of the usefulness of sociology. Resorting to an ad hominem attack on someone because they query the usefulness or validity of sociology only undermines the point you're trying to make. 3) I agree with Ben Shapiro on some things, I disagree with him on other things (e.g. around diet and aborition). I can still admit that he is a very intelligent person though. He went to the top law school and arguably the top university in the world and by many accounts was a brilliant student (graduated HS early). I would contend that it is within his intellectual abilities to read and process sociology studies, particularly if they are studies that are not using a scientific methodology, and draw sensible conclusions. I am sure as a political science student he came across many sociology studies. I concede he was divisive of the whole field, but in fairness you''re divisive of his ability to understand annoying to do with sociology. Which is equally pointless. Regarding the studies you present, I appreciate that for once someone defending sociology has taken the time to actually provide some evidence or cite some studies from the field to back up their argument. Most of the defence of sociology so far from other commentators has amounted to "sociology is a science because...well I said it was so there!" I haven't had time to find or read them so I can't comment on them at the moment.
Shapiro referred to his yarmulke, which is why I included it in my reference. I find anti-semitism abhorrent and if my remark is indeed subtly racist, I apologize. As for the other points you raise: 1) You are right that sociology as it stands right now doesn't "really compare with the advancements made to human society by other fields of study". In sociology's defense, it is a rather young discipline (compared to biology or physics at least). The discipline doesn't really get going till around the time of Emile Durkheim, who holds the first post as a sociologist in a university in 1895. And while I think it is an "expert" field that requires training and mastery, I don't think that sociology will ever achieve mastery over the social world, not in the sense that physics, for example, has achieved a certain mastery over the physical world with its axioms, laws, etc. It remains to be seen how sociology will evolve as a social science. But there is no scientific epistemology that rules out the study of social structures and processes even if we must go about this without the luxury of laboratory conditions and experiments. 2) You are also right that I resorted to what could be seen as an ad hominem attack. It's a totally unsubstantiated claim. I will only say this in my defense: I think that it is a fair sociological hypothesis (ironic, no?) that people who lean more to the right of the political spectrum (conservatism, alt-right, etc.) are more inclined to an antagonistic attitude toward social sciences and sociology in particular. The current polarized political climate is a case in point where those on the political right are taking the fight to what they perceive to be, drawing on Jordan Peterson here, a "post-modern, cultural marxist" takeover of academia itself. 3) You can probably figure out that I am not a fan of Shapiro or the other new intellectuals of the radical right (for lack of a better term). I am, however, making it a point to listen to Shapiro, Peterson, Harris, Molyneux, etc. in part because they speak to an audience that reminds me of me in my 20s, except that I was listening to and reading back then Chomsky, Zinn, Žižek, etc. As for whether it is within Shapiro's intellectual purview to "read and process sociology studies", I believe that it is. Just as I believe it is within his ability to read papers in biology. However, it would depend on the type of research. As you also say, those that are not too bogged down by scientific or statistical methods, I think he would get. But, as a sociologist myself, I am certain that there are other types of texts that are beyond him, and I very much take issue of his dismissive attitude toward the discipline.
@@jakubb6094 Sociology has coined terms? They put labels on behaviors that most people clearly understand from life experience alone. I questioned the benefit of the single Intro to Sciology class required of my degree in biochemistry, a whole major or God forbid a PhD in that fluffball major that exists for the sole purpose of employing professors of sociology is the most thorough definition of a waste of time that I can come up with.
that whole 2 minute ordeal is a perfect example of what goes on everyday on youtube, facebook, and life. Even when you clearly show how someones view/argument is invalid. They still choose not to see it and no progress can take place.
Unless it's in Sociology. Or Communications. Or any other of the soft degrees they pedal at universities now to make sure they have a steady revenue stream to keep their organisations going.
Yes, and a Doctor actually has no idea what he's doing when he's operating on you despite committing 7 years of their life to 'nothing'. Degrees do have contextual representing value. The notion that they have none is just as stupid as they mean everything. So congrats you're as gullible as this kid.
As much as i agree with Ben that having a degree or citing an authority doesn't make you smart or right, Ben still fails to back up the "better" source of why his OPINION is qualified. saying "i know bs when i read it" or " i read stuff and have an opinion" doesnt make him right. And for a guy who doesnt like to make an appeal to authoirty, he sure seems to use the classic "I'm right cause the constitution says so" when "proving" his opinion sometimes and is always wearing something on his head that his Bible told him to (Yamika). I love the end where the guy uses ben's logic against him. ben acts like he's right/smart based on the premise that it's his opinion, and guy says ok, that's your opinion and i just stated mines. logically: guy proved that simply saying your opinion is worthless, and whatever it is worth, the guy can do that too. but ben missed that. he goes yea, that is my opinion...then ignores how the guy said sure but i gave you mines so....? ben couldn't realized his own "logic" was used against him, so he ended up making that dumfounded facial expression. he read up on net neutrality too, but notice how his videos on it are his FAULTY opinion, and qualified people have debunked it.
AirPlayRule Uhm, NO...he used Ben’s logic because he had nothing else to say. In fact, If ben hadn’t used the aforementioned words and given him time to thinking of an answer on his own he would literally have had nothing to say. Ben was annoyed because now he was running around in ‘circles’ trying to save face. As for the yamika, ben specifically stated, I DON”T refer to the bible because you(s) “don’t believe the authority to which I’m siting”. A direct response to the Authority he was siting which was a degree. I’m sorry but of all the questioners I’ve ever seen Ben answer to, this was the worst in terms of the questioner being ill-prepared and likely overly confident.
Andy his time was obviously up, but using someone's faulty logic against them...yea nothing else to say at that point. ben was annoyed cause what can he say when his logic is used against him and all he has is his opinion. now we're going in cricles: if he doesnt get his values from the Bible it is from the OPINION of the founders (his interpretation at least) or his own OPINION. ive seen worse commentors try to argue with Ben. Ben is fast thinking/talking, swift debator. but his downside is he doesn't have objective morality on his side, or at least he doesnt use it if he does.
Don’t need to be a football player to know a player or team is underperforming, just because I don’t play the sport doesn’t mean I can’t be a pundit. So stupid.
He learned that from his professors who throw their credentials around to intimidate the students. I know it's a nice personal interest story when an older person goes back to get the degree, and I also know, from personal experience, that some professors don't like anyone over age 22 in their classes; particularly someone who has practical experience in the subject matter. Often disappointed, seldom surprised.
markskykid 22 I know. In Brazil (where I live), all colleges are either liberal (US sense) or full communists. They all learn arguments from news or tv shows.
Young Frankenstein I'm already moving with wife and kids to Lisbon -- the far as I can get legally (and illegally is not an option). But concerned about Euroupe nowadays. Thank you for your concern, Mr. Frank. BTW, I really like your movie.
For example, I know a loooot of people with PhDs in International Affairs (that's my field) who can't point out India on a map! Getting a diploma these days doesn't mean much, to be honest! So that guy's arguments are just empty words!
Exactly. Universities now are mainly businesses. Their business model has 2 main revenue streams: *1) Tuition fees* & *2) Research funding* In order to acquire the latter, universities need cheap PhD students so they let more and more students do PhDs, regardless of their intellectual abilities, as it's cheap labour for them and they can use these students to churn out nonsense papers which gets them research funding. It's all primarily a business that often benefits the university far more than the student.
"To history has been assigned the office of judging the past, of instructing the present for the benefit of future ages. To such high offices this work does not aspire: It wants only to show what actually happened." ~ Leopold von Ranke (1824) ~~ This quote is sometimes shortened to 'nur sagen, wie es eigentlich gewsen' or 'only to say, how it really was'. 'Just give me the facts'. That's what I like about good History. It challenges those who appeal to authority and hide behind lofty theories at every turn by bringing in empirical, primary sources for discussion before reaching a logical conclusion. Sociology, Gender Studies, etc dictate that there is only one way of looking at things even if said way is empirically proven to be false. They are an utter waste of intellectual rigor.
One of the reasons for why I lost my interest in History. The amount of relativism in that field is huge. You literally don' know who is right or wrong...
Gee, this really explains a lot, they have been teaching on the biasSociology is one of the programs in the Department of Sociology, Social Work, & Urban Professions. It prepares one for a lifetime of change by developing one's appreciation of diversity, love of learning, writing and study skills, and knowledge base about human behavior, social organization, culture, and social change.
![[ไฮไลต์] แบดมินตันชาย SHI Yu Qi (จีน) vs วิว กุลวุฒิ (ไทย) รอบ 8 คน | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f7z7taforOM/mqdefault.jpg)
You don't have to be a chef to say a restaurant sucks.
😂😂facts
You don't have to be an astronaut to know the earth is round
You don't have to be a conservative to know that Ben is a genius
You don't need to be a slave to know that slavery is cruel
But would you know all of the reasons why?
The kid behind him has one of the most hilarious claps I’ve ever seen.
He's imitating the clap from the dark knight u know xd
Check out Sting's clapping at the Kennedy Center Honors, and get back to me. Dude looks like a fucking seal.
seal
it's called autism
I was thinking the same exact shit lol
GF: Babe, do you think this scarf looks on me?
BF: I have not done a 3 year diploma or 4 year undergrad in fashion design.
Hence I am not qualified to give an opinion on that.
Yooo, damn straight
"That's your opinion." That young man should get his money back from his university. It has clearly failed him.
lol Saying that is the equivalent of muttering "whatever.." under your breath as you walk away. It is completely redundant and irrelevant statement on its own and is no more than their own little desperate attempt to disengage from the debate without openly admitting defeat, which just goes to show sadly how useless it is to change these peoples' minds. In the end, they couldn't give less of a hoot about things like the truth and facts - it's actually just about them propping up their fantasy wall to make them feel more safe and secure from what is reality.
The boy didn't have a degree in any of those fields as well, so he doesn't have the right to comment or judge the validity of Ben's argument, lol.
@@MrKiddyIcarus well put
@@MrKiddyIcarus don't look too deep into it pal; the kid's just dumb
@z z in what way am I weak?
This kid's logic: "If you aren't a Michelin star chef, you're not qualified to have an opinion on food."
Unbelievable
Naw, he would say that if you have a certificate from the Culinary Institute of America, then your opinion outranks that of any Michelin star chef.
Michelin tires?
Yes, same company.
"In 1900 the tyre manufacturers André Michelin and his brother Édouard published the first edition of a guide for French motorists. At the time there were fewer than 3,000 cars in France, and the Michelin guide was intended to boost the demand for cars, and thus for car tires." -wp
I was hoping he'd say that! Perfect example.
AdjacentJason The argument is if you aren't an expert in a certain field and your opinion disagrees with an opinion formed by people who do have a lot of experience and knowledge in said field, then I have reason to believe you are wrong unless you can rival the statements of an expert.
The logic is: "If you are an amateur cook who has only read a wiki article about eggs, your way of cooking an omelette will likely be worse than that of a Michelin star chef".
That disgusted look on Ben's face made me laugh so hard! He's got a great temper when dealing with a lot of these morons.
Jack Le fr
Jack Le.... he wasn't even putting forward an "argument"... he was simply playing to the gallery, a self-absorbed narcissistic little punk who will be in for a big shock when REAL LIFE happens & he has to earn a living instead of leeching off of his parents & society in general... 😎😎
My guess is that a bunch of these college kids got together and decided that "This is the way we're going to beat Ben Shapiro." They all got together, they all put a little bit into these questions, and at the end they all got wrecked.
the kid is stupid and since he didnt have an argument for the actual topic he wanted to discredit shapiro as a person haha. Duhhhhhh this is what social skills computer phones leave a generation with..
MrKvace That is truly something to admire. When I've been confronted by morons like this (which have thankfully been rare), I shut down. I'm so shocked by them that my brain crashes. Not only does Ben control his emotions well, he keeps his intellect.
Repeating the same lame argument 5 times doesn't help the argument
1) 0:10 - Strike #1
2) 0:42 - Strike #2
3) 1:03 - Strike #3
4) 1:30 - Strike #4
5) 2:18 - Strike #5
Clicking on those timestamps one after another shows his stupidity in a better way.
1 and 2 were even formulated the same
Change the last one to 2:19
to the man who had a "plan" of argument on his notebook:
"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"
-Mike Tyson
Unthil they ged punthed in the mouth
"What I'm getting at" is that although you shot down my position in the first 5 seconds, I'd like to recast it so you can shoot it down a few more times then walk away pretending that I've made a valid point.
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
He wrote it down. He put thought into it, and this was the best he could do.
😂😂
@@kungfuman82 He's a sociology major[presumably based off how defensive he was at someone having an opinion of his "field of study"].
I imagine this guy has to write everything down before he says it.
Pigeons and Chess Boards come to mind. ;-)
Ben went pretty easy on him, the question asker should consider himself lucky. You don't need a PHD, masters, bachelors, or even high school diploma to be knowledgeable, to have an opinion, or to be right. Wish Ben dug into him a little more on this. Great response nevertheless though!
whatever fancy seeing you here
i don't have a con law degree but i can boast an understanding of the constitution that's superior to that of everyone in our government, even the supreme court.
Lol I just saw you on the eminem diss Donald trump video on BETNETWORKS 😂
Education is a BUSINESS. To those deeply involved in it, it is a RELIGION. You need neither to get through life in a world where that piece of paper is irrelevant. A degree merely verifies that you have studied and passed a certain subject or field. It does NOT guarantee that you have reason and common sense. Reason and common sense is either hereditary or learned, or both, and many educated people completely lack it. Like I said... education is a BUSINESS that enriches those involved in it at the expense of those people paying to get it.
except the degree these days determines who was compliant with the "teaching" authority, not that you've even grasped the facts required to pass. Basic reading comprehension and acclimation to the version of english used at the time can give someone without a degree, like myself, a better grasp of the constitution than even the justices on the Supreme Court, allowing me to point out where they've made rulings that blatantly contradict the constitution.
It's literally the only thing i can ever really boast about besides being a decent shot for someone who rarely ever gets any time at the range.
Shapiro is 100% right. I know people who went to college for 6 years who are still complete morons. I also know people who never graduated high school who are brilliant. Bringing up someones education in a political debate is ridiculous. Like he said, I don't need a college degree to look at facts and draw a conclusion based on it
Yea Ben is an example of someone who went to college and is a complete moron.
I don't believe you need a college degree to read a study. But to say you have a qualified opinion on these subjects is probably the most pseudo-intellectual thing I have ever heard.
Ben is known for misinterpreting/being dishonest with studies so I rather have someone who is an expert in the field give me an opinion then fucking Ben Shapiro
@Watch JOJO’S BIZARRE ADVENTURE!!!!! Look at my bio Name any person that he has debated was actually well equipped other than cenk and college students. He's ducked many debates from sam sedar and kyle kulinski
@Watch JOJO’S BIZARRE ADVENTURE!!!!! Look at my bio And you didn't even address the argument I presented. He literally said that he doesn't believe in Sociology. A well known academic field of study. By definition he's an anti-intellectual.
@Watch JOJO’S BIZARRE ADVENTURE!!!!! Look at my bio That isn't what sociology is, sociology is the study of human society,structures and how things function. Using sociology is the best way to explain alot of things then just to go on an individual level. If you look at things on an individual level, you will get very dumb solutions to problems. Like for instance, Ben told Joe rogan the best way to stop crime in the black community is to tell them to stop. Not only did Joe rogan grill that response, he even had Ben concede the point.
Try that same thing with mathematics or physics. Without a degree in these hard sciences I dont even want to listen to any facts you give me.
That kid just looks like a smug know-it-all. He thinks because since he's a "college student" he knows it all.
At Ferris State. Studying Sociology....words fail me. Of all the people in the world who shouldn't feel intellectually superior to anyone, it's someone studying a unscientific, pseudo intellectual subject at a university most people outside of Michigan will never have heard of.
How I know my college education was actually useful (other than it being a STEM degree that is). I left confident that I was competent in my field of study, but fully aware that there was much more for me to learn.
Shout out to welders!!
Paul Woodhouse finally found Shapiro's kryptonite ...
Paul Woodhouse fuck Yeah buddy
I'm training to become a welder just like my dad!
Tiggin' ain't easy.
My life has been bettered far more by welders and other tradespeople than anyone with PhD behind their name!!!!
George Benson doesn't have a degree in music and cannot even read music; he only plays by ear. This means that George Benson is not qualified to be a musician.
David Rosario I've no idea who that is but I agree with your point nonetheless
David Rosario Should have used someone a little more broadly known like Paul McCartney, who also has no formal music education or degrees. ☺
Now that you reminded me, Ben did say that he won't consider a musician GREAT if he can't read music when he ranted about Lennon's "Imagine", and I don't like the song either but he was adorable in his seriousness. As adorable as 12-year old him playing the Schindler's List theme.
Yes... He shouldn't be allowed to charge money for his work under the federal law... that includes all buskers too...
by the way all the beggars should be required to have diploma in their field of work, get registered and pay income tax...
Reading music doesn't make you a musician. You still have to understand theory, know the modes (e.g. Phrygian, Locrian), etc. That doesn't make me an elitist.
That guy will enter the workforce and be ground into dust by someone without a PHD BUT A WHOLE LOT OF AUTHORITY!! Trust me when I say that.
Especially considering his field is [presumably] in Sociology- just that sort of defensiveness he has when confronted with an "outsider" about his field of study.
So let's be honest- he'll probably end up flipping burgers and getting yelled at by his pimple-faced teen manager for not changing the grease trap.
happened to me, can confirm
That guy thought he had Ben on the ropes. He got knocked out in one punch.
That kid has the most smug, punchable face I've ever seen
especially when he puts that yamaka on
You're right. I don't like Ben Shapiro's face either.
OmniviumVelocity yeah he's probably single. And if he isn't, then he probably considers himself an expert at relationships
That could be a result of him hearing not "you're wrong" often enough.
A lot of Collegiate beta males have that smug, puncheble face.
Yeah that was a really good response. Man that guy had a smile that made me want to punch a puppy.
Once Ben identified "this is the argument of place of authority", every following question fell flat. "Yep, authority again. I can understand studies." I have a degree in psychology, I can look at studies and understand if it is a bad or good study. I have that capability. I don't need sociology or women's studies. 100% agree Ben.
It's really funny. As someone who actually has a scientific degree and studied things like this (my own argument from authority), being a PHD doesn't mean you're correct. Being a PHD means you wrote a long-term research project about something specific. Being a degree holder means you passed classes on basic information relating to the field. It doesn't mean others can't understand that information. In some cases degree-holders have unique access to certain kinds of information in the field, but in this case, a layman can understand a study just as well as an "expert", because the text, methodology, and sources are readily available. The degree does nothing there.
Peter T that was one of the funniest comments I've ever read. Well done, sir!
Nah, that smile was tight, cause he had no response when Ben dismantled him with the logical fallacy response. He kept plowing through because he had nothing else, because he thought he had a gotcha moment.
+ Miss Malevolent well said
"I don't consider sociology a particularly expert field"
This "debate" ended the second Ben dropped that truth bomb on cardigan boy.
Yeah, but your hero Ben is committing another logical fallacy: the fallacy of assertion. He is wrong on his account of sociology. It is an expert field. I can easily find sociological research papers Ben wouldn't be able to crack. Like this one: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0022250X.2018.1427091
And now you are assuming that a well read, intelligent person who said that he studied both law and politics, wouldn't be able to comprehend some research papers because of not having the necessary letters before his name. You are just further proving ''their hero, Ben's'' point.
@Password 123 if yku want to actually provide proof to this instead of stating whatever bs that was as fact. If you are talking about this case ben is 100 percent right you cant say someone is wrong because they dont have a degree in the field you have to state what exactly they said about what subject was wrong and provide evidence on why its wrong. If a professor of literacy said the bible was a 100 percent factual text while a random other person said wait actually no and heres why (i assume you dont meed me to explain to you why the bible isnt a factual text and why it should not be taken as one considering there are severall diffrent beliefs off of one book and many religons say at least some part of the bible isnt factual) does that mean that the bible is right because he has a phd. If you arent talking about this instamce you might want to provide examples.
@@jakubb6094 Most actual scientists laugh at people that consider sociology anything approaching a science.
@@jakubb6094 Oh you have a link to "Sociology and the Scientific Method" in your playlist.
Well, isn't that cute.
Ben's face at the end was amazing. He was probably thinking: "Dear God, why do they give these children microphones?"
CHILDREN CORRECT 😂
"I don't consider sociology to be an expert field"
I love how he roasts you before he roasts you, to get you warmed up (literally). He gives a sneak peak before the fireworks come out and he blowtorches your argument.
😂😂😂😂
1:17 The guy who's second in line has evolved into a seal
That made me laugh more than it should have.
Thank you for noticing that... Hilarious
And a happy seal at that!
Perfect example of evolution right thar!
He kind of looks like he has autism. I work with people that have autism all the time and that kind of grinning and weird body language says it all.
What did Bill Gates and Steve Jobs know about computers anyways 😂 #amiright
👌
They knew plenty. They were smart kids and read the hardware specs very carefully.
That shows how smart he was.
Right on the mark.
+Billthazar the problem was that bill dropped out cuz he was too smart for his teachers. he knew more about computers then his teachers did. this was also back in the early days of the computer where most teachers probably only knew the bare basics while bill gates is a natural nerd and tech geek and was experimenting and programming with computers at a very young age so he became a master at it by the time he reached college. it takes 10,000 hrs of practice to become a master at something. so he may not have a degree per say, but he still has that practice and experience with it.
Arguing off a pre written note pad when your not very bright is not what you do against an intelligent person.
*you're
And I agree. He was also so dumb he kept reading the question when Ben had already answered it. He was too stupid to process that.
I used to be a democrat, but I've gotten pretty tired of the left saying that they care about poor people...and then dismissing people who don't agree with them as "uneducated."
Republicans and "I uSe tO bE a DeM" the same lie over and over. You can care about poor people, and realize that poor people who are wrong about climate change are indeed uneducated. Because you can care about the uneducated, the left is not hypocritical.
@@cw9790You might wanna switch sides buddy, at least temporarily
@@TheBigNoob_TBN I have. I don't vote Democrat anymore.
@@cw9790 Nice
Ben smashed that line of thought.
Keep up the good work Ben!
He compares sociology with Harvard law school? Lmao the guy went into lose
law school and sociology are not the same expert field.
@@jean-louispech4921 if you can conquer harvard law school, I'm pretty damn sure sociology would be a walk in the park
My college sociology classes were a joke. I thought that way before I cared about politics
Ben argues from philosophical fallacies…”argument of authority” bcse someone is an expert in their field, their argument is valid. That’s what he uses to argue his point against sociology. Sociology is amazing especially if you can use it successfully in society. Its misunderstood quite often & has become the whipping post for many “useless” college degrees. Wrong to do this on every level. For those who truly know & understand sociology, they’d know they’re one of the most dangerous set of ppl to walk the face of the earth.
Ben’s political science & law degree can easily be used to discredit him in the argument of authority as well. Goes both ways.
@@sunnysunnypalms uh no, you can be well versed in a subject but you’re argument is only valid if it’s correct. If you can read you can be equipped well enough to decipher for yourself what’s true and not and Ben doesn’t use and didn’t use his degree to make a point , that’s what the kid was trying to do and failed miserably.
Student: starts making argument X
Ben: "Don't make argument X, it's a bad argument"
Student: continues making argument X
Ben: "Again, X is fallacious, here is why"
Student: Makes argument X again and looks smug while doing
Ben: begins to contemplate suicide.
theviolatedtwinky what's the "X" for?
Angelica Soliven X=3
I support Ben committing suicide.
@@gianj3lrisingsun612 It stands for the argument in the video, even I don't need a master's degree to see that
Ben, you forgot to add the air horns, the sun glasses, the joint, the gold chains, and the outro rap music. #thuglife
Real thugs don't need that shit. ;)
He's a Boss man, he's got people that do that shit for him XP
Word. His audience will take care of that 😆😆😆 lol
your request has been answered over at the Thug Life channel :D
EricCartman718 that shit is annoying as fuck
Blindly following authority is what creates these fools in the first place. Their teachers feed them with any sort of BS and they just nod, dedicating zero effort to validate what's been fed.
Does that guy have a degree in asking questions? Is he even qualified to be doing that?? This is anarchy!!
A degree in asking questions would still be more beneficial and worthwhile compared to a degree in Sociology lol!!
Did u just ashuuuummmeee his degree?
You know if I happened to do a sociology degree but dropped out right before I graduated, then what is the difference between myself, a person who got their degree and someone who has read a lot about the subject? Answer: A piece of paper.
MrNintoku Wowowoowow so true
Also, that piece of paper is simply saying that you told a small group of people what they wanted to hear. You haven’t actually proven any proficiency in the field itself.
That comes later, and does not always come from people with advanced degrees, or the people who teach the subject.
I like that Ben anticipated the argument a mile away. I find myself in that situation often. You see these douchebags and their setup and they think they are original in their logical fallacy. Often times when I make arguments I intentionally debunk these type of arguments before they even bring them up, and the simple minded fucks will use them anyways (as in that didn't even read the fact that their argument had already been answered).
I'll give that guy credit, it takes nerve to stand up there on a microphone and give an argument, especially when faced with someone like Shapiro. Though I have the feeling he didn't actually know who Ben was.
Ben likes debating. And he debates all the time. Of course he can see a line of questioning like that a mile away. The person thought they were quite clever when they started. But in the end they offered nothing more than a mumbled whimper.
Part of Leftists strategy of no platform and character shaming with pejoratives makes them rather pathetic when they have to put forth a logical argument.
joelt2002 Ben is smarter than the average bear 🐻
careful with the bear analogies buddy haha
Yes. When you cut to the end of their statement before they themselves get there, the entire flow chart of the point outlined in their notes or heads goes out the window and since these are not well thought-out ideas they end up having to stammer, restate and smile while getting owned.
Is that guy majoring in epic failure or what?
@@matthewsuksnguan2670 Well.. Ben ended up going to law school.. is that a bullshit degree too?
@@matthewsuksnguan2670 And that is how things gets solved my friend. Logical arguments with sufficient evidence that can't get debunked is the best way to push agendas, push causes, and win arguments
Oooh got em
Well said, I don't have to be a meteorologist to know it's raining;
I also loved the subtle dig when Ben said " I don't think slapping a PhD from *Ferris State* next to your name makes you an expert". The intonation of the college name was great. Basically he was saying to the kid: "Look, you're going to a fairly humdrum university most people outside of Michigan won't have heard of, so really with the attitude?"
lmoa holy shit that was brutal. i would almost feel bad if communists were actually sentient human beings
dunk88 They are, they're just deficient ones
This is what happens when you do not take a course on critical thinking.
@@leojjac__256 That was 3 years ago and I was making a joke lol
If we follow that guy's argument to its logical conclusion, no one except those with science degrees should talk about science. No one except those with English degrees should talk about English. No one except those with Psychology degrees should talk about Psychology.
Because, you know, having those letters means you know more than somebody about that topic who doesn't have those letters. Because no one can do research on their own. It's illegal.
and no one but those with a degree in firearms technology should be allowed to own a gun or no one but those with a degree on constitutional law can talk about the constitution. Basically if you don't have money you're not allowed a view on anything.
Well put.
The problem with the “you don’t have a degree so you’re not qualified to have a credible opinion” argument is that it assumes no one is able to follow the logic for a given scenario except those with a formal education background in that particular topic. It’s arrogant to think only those formally educated in a given topic are qualified to form opinions. I never went to law school but attorneys are trained in logic and the formulation of arguments. I guess this guy missed that day in sociology class (which I got an A+ in).
01:18 the Best clap I ve ever seen 😂
Yeah. Its like when you shit on his face he would still clap about it XD
These new segments are great!
Thanks for uploading these, much easier than going through all your talks.
Love it when college kids think they are "so enlightened" and can go head to head with someone like Ben Shapiro. Just because you were on the debate team your senior year in high school and you wear sunglasses on top of your head doesn't mean you can hang with Ben.
It's amazing that the people who tell you you're not qualified to have an opinion are not only not qualified themselves but also seem to have an opinion on everything...
I freaking love how Ben destroys the argument that having a degree in particular things doesn't mean you can't have a valid argument against it. There are some things that warrant it, but not sociology.
I had a debate with a person on Facebook where the people tried to say I couldn't debate then because they studied debate, and had degrees in it. WTF?
I also love how he had a notepad to ask the same question 7 times.
The best part is he's holding a notepad. Like he had to reference it in order to parrot it back 3 times in a row.
LOL
I have friends like this. They can't keep up in a debate with me so they have to attack your credentials. Meanwhile I read more books and studies than all of them, their classmates, and their teachers combined. I just don't have a certification. I always tell them to argue my points instead that's how debating should be. But when you back them into a corner they say anything to try and "win".
Apparently Ferris state doesn't teach formal logic.
rekt
It was at "I don't consider sociology a particularly expert field" that I remembered to hit thumbs up.
My question, as a college student, is, how the hell do these kids not know appeals and fallacies and still write essays and do anything related to analysis. It’s like they’re being taught nothing
Isaac Newton didn't have a PHD in Cience...
that guy with kool glasses is lost
he hit the nail on the head in the very beginning. many of these fields of studies are not expert fields. having a commercial pilots license, a medical degree, being a physics major, or having an engineering degree is quite different from social sciences and arbitrary opinionated studies that are almost useless. Especially when many of these studies wind up being more political than factual and effect all of us in our daily lives (economics, sociology)
This was the old argument in support of career politicians. People wanted those who spent their lives in Washington being president rather than an outsider because they felt a politician was an 'expert in politics.' LoL
Right on. That's what I ask Sociology students... over even just the past 50 years, compared to say actual sciences like Chemistry or Physics, or things like Electrical Engineering or Medicine...what actual meaningful contribution has Sociology made to humanity? *Spoiler alert: not an awful lot.*
Honestly, having an engineering degree also doesn't make you an expert in engineering. YOU HAVE TO WORK IN THAT FIELD.
The notion of being an "expert" started coming to the forefront about 20-30 years ago. Most of them were either self proclaimed or put forward by those who had an agenda they thought would benefit. Some of us can still spot BS without being an expert.
“It’s easy to remain calm when you know what you’re talking about”
-Joshua Newberry
Ps. Thank you Ben
thumbs up if you guys spotted the Nintendo 64 t-shirt
The only thing that could make is better is if “bullshit” wasn’t censored
"Either my argument is good, or my argument is bad. Citing to my credentials is a really bad way of making an argument... You may not believe the authority to which I'm citing. I do not believe the authority to which you're citing so you're gonna have to make me an argument as to what I'm saying that's wrong instead of just saying I don't have the properly enumerated degree from the institution of your choice."
Ooooo BURN!!!! I’ve seen this before - it NEVER gets old! Thank you Ben! 💙
I really like this guy. He can pretty much shut anyone down for the right reasons and arguments.
welcome to real world boy, where your PhD has the exact same value to me, my toilet paper has
This illustrates the difference between conversation and debate. The kid was only interested in scoring a debate point. He wasn't there to listen and possibly learn.
hey does anyone have a link to the full session? You Tube only seem to have snip bits.
What venue did it take place at?
The most punchable face on that kid.
Harvard Law....is that a good school? Never heard of it. Now, Ferril State, great school.
Love the confused eye-rolling at the end XD
love that, you don't need a degree in order to have an opinion on something
1:20 When you realize your gonna be on a Thugg Life Video.😂😂
Tells him not to use Arguement from authority fallacy....goes on to use it anyway
N7 ELITE
Whose opinion would you consider qualified about evolution: a person who does not spend their life studying it, or a person who does?
bees knees
A person who actually goes out and lives it in the real world.
Vic Hawkins
exactly.
bees knees we spend our lives learning from each other different things. If it is correct it counts no matter how many degrees you have.
Luis Alonso 95
Yes, but how do you know if something that you think is actually correct? Would you take your basic knowledge about science and astronomy and be an astronaut? How about a doctor? Would you think it’s ok to to perform surgery or even a simple diagnosis of where you can say to someone you know for a fact that what you think is happening is actually happening?
Common sense can only take you so far is what I am saying. Science however is everywhere and needs to be learned by the specifics to understand what exactly is happening. You can’t always assume to be correct.
I love him! I could listen to his debates and Q/As all day. He gets to the point and doesn't have to sling mud.....his haters usually destroy themselves with their own words.
00:14 lmao, the face he makes is like " I got him "
Sociology like communications, theater, history, and other similar disciplines are a complete waste of money and time.
Precisely. That's what I ask Sociology students... over even just the past 50 years, compared to say actual sciences like Chemistry or Physics, or things like Electrical Engineering or Medicine...what actual meaningful contribution has Sociology made to humanity? Spoiler alert: not an awful lot.
Sociology is a social science like psychology, linguistics, economics, etc. It is an expert field that flies over Shapiro's yarmulke. The reason you guys don't like it is because many of its practitioners come to conclusions that go against the values and beliefs of right-wing, conservative America. So you throw out the baby with the proverbial bathwater.
As for contributions made by the field? Plenty. It's the only field that studies social relationships as social relationships (rather than reducing them to economic, psychological, or religious phenomena). Like other sciences, sociology has coined a number of ideas/memes that have entered into popular discourse: role model (Merton), conspicuous consumption (Veblen), survival of the fittest (Spencer), emotional labor (Hochschild). Also, Martin Luther King's BA was in sociology as was (and this is just for you guys) Ronald Reagan's. There are plenty of culturally/politically/artistically creative types who were shaped by the discipline. But, I think you are more interested in the "practical" scientific applications. In which case, I can offer a few: sociologists have figured out the optimal time for starting school for high school students; clinical sociologists have worked to reform healthcare delivery systems (developing, for example, social measures of wellbeing); sociologists have created and developed the ERGM model in network analysis, which is now used in fields like psychology.
There are, of course, many more contributions which I urge you to look at. But to do that, you would first have to set aside you political and ideological biases and refrain, for a second, from drinking from the fountains of the alt-right.
@Jakub B
Leaving aside the subtle anti-Semitism in your statement, there are a few issues here:
1) The contributions you mentioned here, while useful, don't really compare with the advancements made to human society by other fields of study (such as biology or computer science or electrical engineering) over even the last 50 years. I know it's not a competition, but let's be realistic about the scale of the contribution of sociology here.
2) Suggesting that someone has a disregard for sociology because they "rinking from the fountains of the alt-right" is in itself not an academic observation, it's a rather crass generalisation not based on any evidence you've provided and it undermines your previous worthy effort of trying to provide evidence of the usefulness of sociology. Resorting to an ad hominem attack on someone because they query the usefulness or validity of sociology only undermines the point you're trying to make.
3) I agree with Ben Shapiro on some things, I disagree with him on other things (e.g. around diet and aborition). I can still admit that he is a very intelligent person though. He went to the top law school and arguably the top university in the world and by many accounts was a brilliant student (graduated HS early). I would contend that it is within his intellectual abilities to read and process sociology studies, particularly if they are studies that are not using a scientific methodology, and draw sensible conclusions. I am sure as a political science student he came across many sociology studies. I concede he was divisive of the whole field, but in fairness you''re divisive of his ability to understand annoying to do with sociology. Which is equally pointless.
Regarding the studies you present, I appreciate that for once someone defending sociology has taken the time to actually provide some evidence or cite some studies from the field to back up their argument. Most of the defence of sociology so far from other commentators has amounted to "sociology is a science because...well I said it was so there!" I haven't had time to find or read them so I can't comment on them at the moment.
Shapiro referred to his yarmulke, which is why I included it in my reference. I find anti-semitism abhorrent and if my remark is indeed subtly racist, I apologize.
As for the other points you raise:
1) You are right that sociology as it stands right now doesn't "really compare with the advancements made to human society by other fields of study". In sociology's defense, it is a rather young discipline (compared to biology or physics at least). The discipline doesn't really get going till around the time of Emile Durkheim, who holds the first post as a sociologist in a university in 1895. And while I think it is an "expert" field that requires training and mastery, I don't think that sociology will ever achieve mastery over the social world, not in the sense that physics, for example, has achieved a certain mastery over the physical world with its axioms, laws, etc. It remains to be seen how sociology will evolve as a social science. But there is no scientific epistemology that rules out the study of social structures and processes even if we must go about this without the luxury of laboratory conditions and experiments.
2) You are also right that I resorted to what could be seen as an ad hominem attack. It's a totally unsubstantiated claim. I will only say this in my defense: I think that it is a fair sociological hypothesis (ironic, no?) that people who lean more to the right of the political spectrum (conservatism, alt-right, etc.) are more inclined to an antagonistic attitude toward social sciences and sociology in particular. The current polarized political climate is a case in point where those on the political right are taking the fight to what they perceive to be, drawing on Jordan Peterson here, a "post-modern, cultural marxist" takeover of academia itself.
3) You can probably figure out that I am not a fan of Shapiro or the other new intellectuals of the radical right (for lack of a better term). I am, however, making it a point to listen to Shapiro, Peterson, Harris, Molyneux, etc. in part because they speak to an audience that reminds me of me in my 20s, except that I was listening to and reading back then Chomsky, Zinn, Žižek, etc. As for whether it is within Shapiro's intellectual purview to "read and process sociology studies", I believe that it is. Just as I believe it is within his ability to read papers in biology. However, it would depend on the type of research. As you also say, those that are not too bogged down by scientific or statistical methods, I think he would get. But, as a sociologist myself, I am certain that there are other types of texts that are beyond him, and I very much take issue of his dismissive attitude toward the discipline.
@@jakubb6094 Sociology has coined terms? They put labels on behaviors that most people clearly understand from life experience alone. I questioned the benefit of the single Intro to Sciology class required of my degree in biochemistry, a whole major or God forbid a PhD in that fluffball major that exists for the sole purpose of employing professors of sociology is the most thorough definition of a waste of time that I can come up with.
God I love you Ben. You're so freaking logical!
"That's your opinion."
Brilliant deduction, Holmes. Now tell me why it's wrong, or you have no argument.
that whole 2 minute ordeal is a perfect example of what goes on everyday on youtube, facebook, and life. Even when you clearly show how someones view/argument is invalid. They still choose not to see it and no progress can take place.
So with this guys logic, Quentin Tarantino should not be considered to make movies then since he never went to a fine arts school correct?
Gates, Zuckerberg or Jobs knew nothing about technology or how to run a technology business. They didn't have degrees.... Obvious isn't it lol!
A degree is an arbitrary piece of paper. Wake up.
..that also makes you smarter and a better thinker when you do what it takes and don’t fucking cheat yourself to receive it.
Clay Zug okay, this is dumb. You clearly have not studied for a PHD.
Unless it's in Sociology. Or Communications. Or any other of the soft degrees they pedal at universities now to make sure they have a steady revenue stream to keep their organisations going.
Yes, and a Doctor actually has no idea what he's doing when he's operating on you despite committing 7 years of their life to 'nothing'. Degrees do have contextual representing value. The notion that they have none is just as stupid as they mean everything. So congrats you're as gullible as this kid.
That’s not always the case bees knees. College is only needed for something specific. Otherwise it’s a waste of time and money, aka arbitrary.
JESUS THAT FUCKINGE EYE ROLL AT THE END. I FUCKING LOST IT.
I don’t need to be a veterinarian to know when a dog is taking a shit.
At 0:58 Ben shuts down the argument but the person asking the questions does not realize it. Maybe they do not screen for intelligence at that school?
At 0:15 that douchebag thought he caught Ben on something. He had that, "It's ok. Just admit I got you" hand gesture.
As much as i agree with Ben that having a degree or citing an authority doesn't make you smart or right, Ben still fails to back up the "better" source of why his OPINION is qualified. saying "i know bs when i read it" or " i read stuff and have an opinion" doesnt make him right. And for a guy who doesnt like to make an appeal to authoirty, he sure seems to use the classic "I'm right cause the constitution says so" when "proving" his opinion sometimes and is always wearing something on his head that his Bible told him to (Yamika).
I love the end where the guy uses ben's logic against him. ben acts like he's right/smart based on the premise that it's his opinion, and guy says ok, that's your opinion and i just stated mines. logically: guy proved that simply saying your opinion is worthless, and whatever it is worth, the guy can do that too. but ben missed that. he goes yea, that is my opinion...then ignores how the guy said sure but i gave you mines so....? ben couldn't realized his own "logic" was used against him, so he ended up making that dumfounded facial expression. he read up on net neutrality too, but notice how his videos on it are his FAULTY opinion, and qualified people have debunked it.
AirPlayRule Uhm, NO...he used Ben’s logic because he had nothing else to say. In fact, If ben hadn’t used the aforementioned words and given him time to thinking of an answer on his own he would literally have had nothing to say. Ben was annoyed because now he was running around in ‘circles’ trying to save face. As for the yamika, ben specifically stated, I DON”T refer to the bible because you(s) “don’t believe the authority to which I’m siting”. A direct response to the Authority he was siting which was a degree. I’m sorry but of all the questioners I’ve ever seen Ben answer to, this was the worst in terms of the questioner being ill-prepared and likely overly confident.
Andy his time was obviously up, but using someone's faulty logic against them...yea nothing else to say at that point. ben was annoyed cause what can he say when his logic is used against him and all he has is his opinion.
now we're going in cricles: if he doesnt get his values from the Bible it is from the OPINION of the founders (his interpretation at least) or his own OPINION.
ive seen worse commentors try to argue with Ben. Ben is fast thinking/talking, swift debator. but his downside is he doesn't have objective morality on his side, or at least he doesnt use it if he does.
@@airplayrule "objective morality" he says 😂😂😂🤣
@@airplayrule You are ridiculously stupid.
Why am i seeing an ad for mike Bloomberg on the daily wire channel?
Don’t need to be a football player to know a player or team is underperforming, just because I don’t play the sport doesn’t mean I can’t be a pundit. So stupid.
D E C I M A T E D
E
C
I
M
A
T
E
D
WTF is lesbian dance theory???
Who knows bro, who knows...
He learned that from his professors who throw their credentials around to intimidate the students. I know it's a nice personal interest story when an older person goes back to get the degree, and I also know, from personal experience, that some professors don't like anyone over age 22 in their classes; particularly someone who has practical experience in the subject matter. Often disappointed, seldom surprised.
I don't need to be a debate to know that Ben Shapiro is awesome.
Hey, my boys
that kind of person (the inquirer) is like an agent Smith from matrix these days
Marcelo Meireles Students from liberal colleges do that all the time. Can't debunk your argument so they question your credentials.
markskykid 22 I know. In Brazil (where I live), all colleges are either liberal (US sense) or full communists. They all learn arguments from news or tv shows.
Marcelo Meireles You have my sympathy...that must be annoying.
If you can get here legally, Marcelo, we have plenty of room for you... especially after we start the deportations!
Young Frankenstein I'm already moving with wife and kids to Lisbon -- the far as I can get legally (and illegally is not an option). But concerned about Euroupe nowadays. Thank you for your concern, Mr. Frank. BTW, I really like your movie.
1:17 the guy is just like "i'm getting fucking roasted but I can't turn back now"
Monty It was at that moment you can faintly hear the grinding and rattling of gears in his head as he's trying to figure out his next move.
That clap though...... 🙏🏻 #for Lindsay and her sisters watching! 😂🙌🏻😎
For example, I know a loooot of people with PhDs in International Affairs (that's my field) who can't point out India on a map! Getting a diploma these days doesn't mean much, to be honest! So that guy's arguments are just empty words!
Exactly. Universities now are mainly businesses. Their business model has 2 main revenue streams: *1) Tuition fees* & *2) Research funding* In order to acquire the latter, universities need cheap PhD students so they let more and more students do PhDs, regardless of their intellectual abilities, as it's cheap labour for them and they can use these students to churn out nonsense papers which gets them research funding. It's all primarily a business that often benefits the university far more than the student.
Was that lesbian dance theory comment a joke, or is this really the world we are living in?
I hope so frigging much its a joke.
Ok fam its a joke i searched it up. Thank gosh its not true
Did anyone else get an ad for The Ben Shapiro Show before this?
0:27 the most uncoordinated clap ever
"To history has been assigned the office of judging the past, of instructing the present for the benefit of future ages. To such high offices this work does not aspire: It wants only to show what actually happened."
~ Leopold von Ranke (1824)
~~ This quote is sometimes shortened to 'nur sagen, wie es eigentlich gewsen' or 'only to say, how it really was'.
'Just give me the facts'. That's what I like about good History. It challenges those who appeal to authority and hide behind lofty theories at every turn by bringing in empirical, primary sources for discussion before reaching a logical conclusion.
Sociology, Gender Studies, etc dictate that there is only one way of looking at things even if said way is empirically proven to be false. They are an utter waste of intellectual rigor.
One of the reasons for why I lost my interest in History. The amount of relativism in that field is huge. You literally don' know who is right or wrong...
1:17 "I'm a seal trapped in a bloated millennial's body"
Nah he's just happy he's there instead in his 3rd out of 5 girlfriends' shitty living room floor
LOL that “This bitch...” look that goes across Ben’s face at the very end.
Gee, this really explains a lot, they have been teaching on the biasSociology is one of the programs in the Department of Sociology, Social Work, & Urban Professions. It prepares one for a lifetime of change by developing one's appreciation of diversity, love of learning, writing and study skills, and knowledge base about human behavior, social organization, culture, and social change.