_"1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10"_ _"What did you say?"_ _"I was just agreeing"_ It's sometimes so hard to understand a conversation between great minds
In my opinion the world was always a fucked up place full of unsatisfied, broken people and only now more than ever we can actually see that EVERYONE goes through the same shit, so we're not afraid to hide it anymore. A problem arises when people see that and think to themselves "the whole world is going to shit so why would I take steps to change?" Idk, anyone, any thoughts?
I totally agree with you on this one. I heard somewhere that public perception of war changed significantly with the advent of photography. It was viewed as a big glorious adventure during the Spanish war, but once people started taking pictures of what was actually going on, the atrocities of war became far more visible to people. Thus, perceptions changed.
do your best and find others who do the same like your life depends on it. cause it does. It seems we do have a bigger perspective. maybe a few decades or centuries ago you woudlnt talk to 1000's upon 1000's of people. but the situation with surival and god and bad hasn't changed.
i can only say that I do think people tend to fall into a nihilistic trench after trying to morally progress from a ethnocentric pov to a worldcentric pov (i did for awhile too) but you can eventually climb out... but theres just a large influx of nihilism, pessimism, and narcissistic traits bouncing off each other in echo chambers (the trench). This in turn makes those who are a little afraid to make that moral jump from where they are (ethnocentric or egocentric) to hold strong and not budge. Who knows though.
I see your point, but I have some reservations. I'm absolutely not one of those idiots who say that vaccines cause autism, but I also don't believe that cases of autism have raised only because we got better at diagnostics. I mean, autism is extremely noticeable even for people who don't know anything about psychology. If autism only became "rampant" after we got better diagnostic criteria, then why didn't we get such criteria much, much, much earlier? I'm talking "about at the time of the Human species' speciation" earlier. It's almost like the symptoms of autism only became considered as pathological somewhen in documented history, namely the 20th century with Hans Asperger's studies. So, my hypothesis is that either autistic behaviour became socially unacceptable along the last decades, or autism itself only started to become a thing at least a small order of magnitude of time before Hans Asperger. The same applies to what you have observed about low quality of life and poor mental health.
There's also this factor of rapid technological change and a lot of the capital behind tech being motivated for short-term narrow profit gain. There's a real lack of balance of proper regulation and tempering factors that steer tech more towards collective/social good. If tech is propelled by profit, not understood by regulators, and moving rapidly, it's potential for harm and destabilization is incredible.
Imagine you hit senior year in high school. Dont like the direction your life is heading and feel like you wanna unplug the computer and start a new game. It must be a wildly drastic reaction to a very intense emotional state. At least thats how I imagine the circumstance. Like Charlie I try not to think abt it too much. I love where Dr. K 's heart is.
I genuinely believe that one of the fundamental things that needs to change, at a global level ( because corporations don't want to give away competitive advantage without everyone else doing the same) -- globally there needs to be consensus on changes to algorithms so the echo chambers get more broken up. On a more human level, can we connect more with each other. Listen compassionately without seeking to thrust our answers out there ( ironic given my first line, I know). Kids need more support. Teens need more support. Young Adults need more support. Middle Aged Adults need more support. Elders need more support. It's just different types of support. I can simultaneously need support and offer it.
Dr K and Charlie together are just a fascinating duo to listen to, even in brief moments where they disagree or share differing opinions, they both keep a civil and mature discussion, not to mention the conversation as a whole is intriguing to listen to. Thanks for making a Monday morning at work much more enjoyable.
@@SomethingSomethingComplete they are not. A standard is something you expect of other people. By given i mean, it should be impossible to NOT be. Like it wouldnt be a "standard" if there was no alternative. It would just be reality.
My father's most valuable piece of advice to me came in the following form: "Everyone knows something you don't, and has experiences you can hardly imagine. Your business is to learn and understand what those things are. But always remember, you should never be in the business of changing people. You may talk to them, you may discuss with them, you may inquire of them, but you should never try to change them. It's a lost cause."
I think the problem with this is some people do change, and should. Like drug addicts who have recovered and gone sober due to intervention from their family. Though I do understand personalities and second nature behaviours never change completely- there is quite a lot you shouldn't try to change so I definitely agree with a good 90% of the statement in general.
well hes incorrect coz ive changed some really shitty people for the better. One of my best friends used to be a compulsive liar and would never get anything done on time. An aunt I knew thought homeopathy was the solution to all her medical issues. Another friend of mine was anxious about her monthly horoscope being negative. And of course the dozens of people who thought that they should take the covid vaccine. These are all illogical stupid and potentially life threatening things and need a perspective of rationality + empathy in order to create change. Something I've managed to do successfully. Your father probably didn't have the tools to do so. If you should bother trying to change or help people for the better then Dr K would not have a job or a career
@@beththedarkmage3359 people can change and should, I agree. But that's not my job. It's not up to me to change someone. It's up to them. Like Dr K suggested, and my father told me, it's my job to ask questions and maybe prod their worldview to understand it. If there's something I don't quite agree with, I'll prod at that a bit more, but do so gently. If that leads them to change, great. But I didn't do that. They did.
@@RadialSeeker113 did you watch the video? He doesn't change people. He suggests pathways to get better, and he asks questions that might challenge the framework upon which bad habits or bad traits are built, and then that person makes the decision to change for themselves. Though he did have a hand in sparking the change, he himself did not change that person. The same goes for me. I'll ask questions, I'll challenge and prod things I may not like that much, but I will never actively try to change someone. And yes it''s true that I am not trained for what Dr K does. I am not a doctor. Nor is my father. We are both engineers and academics. Our careers do not qualify us to provide therapy. But even then, you don't go to therapy to change. You go to therapy to get tools to better yourself and learn how to use them.
I had an interaction with a guy almost a year back who acted physically and emotionally abusive towards his then girlfriend, and to cut a long story short when I was on the trial after he attacked me too he said something that I found really intresting, basically "I make sure I'm never ever gonna be a victim" which he had showed by spending the last few months threatening and abusing every person he thought wronged him since he got out of jail half a year earlier. I think that type of idea or "mantra" might be very normal in people who commit school shootings and the like, because we can't stop others from victimizing or wronging us so when someone tell themself something like that they might choose to act the aggressor just to get away from the label of being the "victim" and feeling weak.
I feel the same way. It's why I became so interested in weapons (pocket knife, tazer, handgun) as a small woman; I don't want to feel weak or like a victim.
@@jonettheonly I think that it's normal to not wanna feel like a victim or being weak, but it's also good to remember that most people still will experience it in diffrent degrees through out their lifes because it's something we really can't completely prevent so it important to remind ourselves that the bad or sad moments in life don't define us as individuals or lower our value as humans being in anyway. What I was talking about is people that take it to an extreme, in where someone tell themselves that no matter the situation they will never be a victim, which can become a dangerous mindset if they decide something like making the other person into the victim is the best solution.
@@Moebz818 Incredibly well worded! I've also heard about these types of teachings and I definitely agree that the environment and mentality that creates seem incredibly unhealthy and to do way more harm then good, it is after all important to work on our problems because that's how we are able to move past and deal with things in a healthy way, but I think the whole "it's just a mentality" view is just a short sighted way to sweep it under the rug that's only adopted because it's a easy and all encompassing solution instead of talking through it and dealing with it on an individual level. Its saddening to hear that they are still people preaching that type of ideas in todays society, especially when information is so readily available at our finger tips that can disprove it. But I feel like it's become alot more normal in alot of areas in society to find the simplest solutions to problems, for example here in Sweden it's become a lot harder to get acctual therapy or help with mental health in general but they prescribe opioids in ridiculous amounts and act surprised when addiction goes through the roof among the youths.
@@Moebz818 "being a victim is only a mentality". I don't think this discounts rape victims... I think what it means is that how circumstances effect your mentality is based on your own personal mental strength. not letting circumstances define you or control your emotions.
Dr.K, I think you would like to watch CHANNEL 5 WITH ANDREW CALLAGHAN, or try to get him on the show. Your points on the modern debate fallacy, and the current hatred epidemic, excessive polarization and radicalization are really interesting. And I think Andrew's channel is very very pertinent to these points. I am convinced it would be worth your while. All in all, amazing video, love this type of content, thank you :) 7 months later Edit: The situation today regarding Andrew might make you think that my suggestion is now not a good suggestion. I think it would be 100 times more valuable to get Andrew to talk with Doctor K. If not now, then at some point in the future. IMO, the only way to start deleting such negative behaviors is not by censoring them, but to expose their roots to all. (In a way that is respectful of all impacted by such behavior.)
Guys stay away from negative groups in the internet. I ran into the incels content and before you know it started to think I was. I did therapy and am doing better but that shit is scary.
don't hang around a negative and self destructive crowd that doesn't care about anything nor the future in general. Stay away from them at all times. Just don't even think to meddle with them. I have so many regrets and my life's gone to shit because of this. I always regret how if only I had never met them nor spoke to them, I could've been doing a lot better now.. still it is what it is and I'm gonna fight my way back to where I dream of being and make it reality. I'm just saying you could skip this part in life and you're better off a lot more than getting into that edgy shite.
To add to this, I think one handy way to know if it's the bad part of the internet, is if the opinions are extreme, like they don't discuss the alternative views, nor tolerate them, nor nicely discuss it with others of conflicting ideologies.
I think there should be more education and awareness of the fact that being online, especially as someone who has risk factors (such as anti-social behaviors and traumatic experiences), is very dangerous, as someone who got out of the alt-right pipeline years ago and had many friends who went fully into it.
When I had drug induced schizophrenia and psychosis and my number one worry was people thinking I’m dangerous. I was extremely aware I was acting weird in public and was so worried about it. Thanks for explaining that!
44:00 Extremely important point. Conversations so often get stuck on terms like "influence, terminally online, echo chamber" and how "Emotionally weak the last few generations are", blaming a website and calling it a day. It's rare to see people trying to trace it back further, not everyone that uses TH-cam turns to radical agendas, so what creates this divide? What are the personal factors that create online-drift? What influences its length or how severely the exposure affects the person? Their pre-existing beliefs? Perceived self/identity? Friend circles? Family? Economic status? Maybe all of them.
I understand your point, and agree with it. But I just want to add that these conversations usually end in blaming one thing and then calling it a day because this bad result is collectively actionable. For instance, it's very actionable for the government to, say, ban guns if guns are blamed for mass shooting. If the current social order was blamed instead of guns, it wouldn't be as actionable because solving the current social order would be nigh impossible and/or unaffordable for the government. If you expose a youtuber for gr00ming a kid, it's far more actionable for the community to cancel this youtuber, than for the community to figure out a way to cure this youtube of their pdf file-ia. When people discuss a problem, they want a solution. The problem starts when they refuse every solution that is not easy.
@@phosspatharios9680 Very good addition, and I do agree that acting on the symptoms is needed. Most of these cases require tangible solutions sooner rather than later. But I'll still hold that unless both sides (Symptom and Cause) are acknowledged and acted upon, we'll be stuck doing damage control rather than solving any issues. ie. Even with an account deletion that TH-camr is still free to comeback under a new alias, and it becomes a whack-a-mole.
Regarding intervention for mental illness I believe that if you don't deal with the original traumatic event(s) within the younger years of a child's life then it has an extremely high chance of manifesting into an inner drive towards an inevitable outcome.
Can't say it's inevitable. Some people just forget about things, and move on to become completely different people as a result of trauma. Though it's definitely more likely, as trauma tends to leave unconscious issues with self-worth(leaning into either extreme), that carry with you for the rest of your life. In that case it'll be a game of chance, whether or not you suffer through more terrible shit and your mind breaks before you die, or if you manage to get through the rest of life without tipping too far.
Life is complex and there's rarely any simple or singular answers, however, if i were to try and find a throughline between all the different topics that were discussed in this video, i'd say it's Humility. Usually a lack of it. And the reason why Dr. K and Charlie are so chill, open minded, and willing to talk and learn etc (or at least seem like it, they could be horrible people behind the scenes for all we know though i highly doubt it) is because they have humility.
I just felt like it. hu·mil·i·ty /(h)yo͞oˈmilədē/ Learn to pronounce noun a modest or low view of one's own importance; humbleness. "he needs the humility to accept that their way may be better"
I can understand some part of the mass shooters mentality. I came from an abusive household consisting of people with diagnosed personality disorders which put me back in life. On top of that, other people (especially kids) sense that and prey on that weakness. I have always had friends but have always been or at least considered myself an outcast. I am naturally more towards the altruistic side and I would not regularely feel like I would actually want to commit voilent crimes, but at my worst, I would be voilent towards everyone around me because of this extreme feeling of everyone being against you and this world ultimately being rotten, full of egocentric human beings that do not deserve life, or at least this was my mindset at these points in my life. I have never actually done more then be very agressive towards everyone around me at those times, but I feel like if I would not have any people that I value a lot and helped me at those times, I could have potentially done a voilent crime if I had access to guns. Now do I think all of them are similar to me, had a similar situation or are "normal humans" outside of their nurtural issues, no. There are probably a lot that have other serious mental issues that come from their nature, but I feel it is possible to be normal and just had a bad hand dealt in life.
Yeah I agree with you. I think that shooters are psychologically different in the sense that a lot of people struggle and aren't violent but I don't think that their personal reasons are that uncommon. For young perpetrators environmental factors like abuse, neglect and bullying are probably the most common ones. Better mental health service would be a great start for everyone
It's normal for almost everyone to have violent fantasies at one time or another in life. The issue is that a small percentage of people don't leave it at the fantasy level and actually act upon it. And the reason it's so hard to pinpoint who that will be is precisely because it's so normal for everyone to entertain dark fantasies. Like the old saying goes: "If it were an easy problem, it would've been solved a long time ago!"
@@idontcare9041 One thing that I wonder about is what percentage of violent perpetrators even had access to mental health treatment at all, in any form. I'm sure that, statistically, the share that didn't is probably higher than the percentage of the general population that doesn't have access, but it would be intriguing to see an actual number. In the United States, there are tens of millions of people with no health insurance whatsoever, and that effectively means no access to health care, including mental health. I think it's become in vogue for politicians to talk about "access to mental health" as an alternative to admitting that there are too many guns in America (lul...), but without addressing the underlying and more profound issue of no access to healthcare, period, it's all just empty talk.
@@StochasticUniverse You could probably tie access to mental health care to some statistic about violence and compare different countries. I'm too lazy to do that but I'm pretty sure you're right. It's really depressing that the people highlighting the mental health aspect are only doing it to downnplay guns. Gun access is simply more important than access to mental health care to these people. It's such a complicated problem and we're basically doing nothing to address it. I think of all western countries the US is the most vulnerable to this because it has the worst insurance, you're right.
1:15:29 Dr. K is absolutely right here. Intra-species conflict rarely if ever ends in death, or even serious injury. The main reason for this is because there's simply no real benefit to fighting something to the death if you don't have to. Fights for survival are dirty, and even if you win you may be so injured that it makes no difference. Most fights between, say, alpha males, are 90% posturing and if it comes to blows a victor is usually determined with minimal injury.
@@ctographerm3285 Yes, but that's different. The male lions aren't fighting the cubs for dominance. The actual fight between competing males rarely ends in death. If you're interested, the reason male lions will commit infanticide is because without cubs, the lionesses will become fertile much faster and therefore the new dominant male will be able to have children quicker.
@@isaakvandaalen3899 Damn, that’s really interesting. I didn’t know the infanticide in lions actually caused a difference in lioness fertility. I guess it kinda makes sense. Always thought it was just another dominance thing and that lions just kinda… didn’t want to raise cubs that are not theirs
I just wanna give my 2 late cents. When I was in 4-5th grade I was bullied extremely hard in school. Not only the whole school bullied and avoided me, but even other Kids throughout my whole town that I met, had somehow heard of me and would then also start bullying me. I felt so much grief, desperation and rage during this time, that I would have fantasies of brutally murdering my classmates. If I had access to a firearm and I didn't move to private school, I could see myself getting revenge with a firearm. Luckly I live in a country where there isn't unrestricted access to firearms.
I'm sorry, i don't wanna sound insensitive, but it's interesting hearing how bullying and made fun of can affect people in different ways. For me personally, when people made fun of me or said anything bad about me, I would think of getting revenge on them, but instead I'd take it as a hit to my own self-worth. Took me a lot of time to actually start getting out of that, but I never had thoughts of harming anybody else; only myself. Which is just as bad don't get me wrong, but I just find it interesting how different people can interpret and react differently to situations. I'm happy you were able to make the change and make the better decisions. I hope everybody who has went through stuff like this can find some solace and peace eventually in their lives.
About the echo chambers, I noticed something interesting the other day. I got recommended a video by Brett Cooper (think like a zoomer version of Ben Shapiro but a woman reading twitter comments) talking about some trans drag show that had children at the bar, and immediately afterwards, my advertisements for the next 5 hours were all related to LGBTQIA+ healthcare providers. I'm not part of that community, I don't follow content about that community, and I don't have any history really associating with that community. However, immediately after watching a single video with a conservative content creator and commentator, I get blasted with incredibly niche, targeted ads because of the algorithm. It's really easy to see how the echo chamber happens. You click one link cause you're curious, and then you receive a few ads you didn't prior, and now suddenly Matt Walsh, Alex Jones, and Rush Limbau hemming and hawing about the pervasiveness of the 'liberal agenda' doesn't seem far-fetched because youtube seems to think I'm trans after a single video. I've also seen it the other way, after watching a trans philosophy TH-camr talk about their gender dysphoria, PragerU thinks my kids need an education on George Washington. Just food for thought that these two sides seem to complement each other as far as exacerbating their frustration with each other. My gut tells me the algorithm is really to blame, but who knows 🤷🏽♂
The irony with Brett Cooper is that while she looks and comes off as a Zoomer, she's actually 34 years old according to Google (only four years younger than Ben Shapiro). Although, while Brett herself isn't a Zoomer, it's very clear that her content is targeted for Gen Z people.
Definitely feel the targeted ads. I watched a gun cleaning video and now TH-cam thinks I want to hear every republican politicians take on “liberals.” Also I keep getting comedy in the genre of what I’d consider to be toxic masculinity. I just enjoy firearms nothing else.
@@doabrad1850she was born in 2001 according to Google? I think there’s more than one famous Brett Cooper or something. Although my comment is probs pointlesss cause you commented that 1 year ago apparently
I converted to Christianity recently and am already experiencing content drift. I look up sermons and bible studies and suddenly the algorithm thinks I'm interested in disproving Natural Selection. I'm getting recommended a bunch of things that I don't agree with.
1:30:31 I'm glad he mentioned this- way too much pride in 'intelligence" as a concept these days. It's frustrating to see people throw ad-hominin labels and learn nothing. 1:31:10 This can help everyone- to analyze others on a flat level, to see the chains of logic without labeling them "inferior" or "superior" against some personal metric. If someone your height needs to stand on a stool to talk to you, is it really a conversation?
Reincarnation in programming terms would be called Pooling. It's where you keep objects in memory beyond their 'existence' in the system in order to be reused for a new separate existence. What's interesting is a requirement in pooling is to 'reset' the properties of that object, but not necessarily everything needs to be reset, some properties can be left as they are.
The conversation on collective identity at 1:13:00 is on point. I've seen this in a lot of people throughout the years, to the point that it's one of the main factors I assess whenever speaking to people who are politically engaged in any way. (Whether that is team supporters, feminists, liberals, or whatever.) The moment people put their collective identity in front of their personal/individual identity, they're no longer interacting with you as a person, but only as a means for their cause. In dating, this is probably on of the most detrimental red flags one can run into, as it's this perception that is the root for a multitude of negative behaviours.
As a fan of Dr.K, there are many points that I appreciated, but I felt like he got to many of his points in a roundabout way in this video. (Edit: It feels like he got to his points by skirting a lot of information.) I may not be a professional, but you don't have to be a pilot to see a helicopter in a tree to know that mistakes were made.
Echo chambers and the online drift is definetly a problem I'm a huge history enthusiast, the tales and events of the past simply fascinate me, the cultures of the world, now and then. It's just rubs that curiosity right. I watch history videos. I watch alternate history videos as well, though the one I can only 100% reccoment is Cody from alternate history hub. Problem is, some other channels are more iffy on their "alt theories"...they attract iffy audiences. The whole "post ironic" extremist echo chambers. Suddently my feed is flooded with community posts of these types, the "I'm an antisemite but not really...but actually I am, go check last days of Europe" Was I younger I might as well fallen down a alt right extreme pipeline, fortunately I can resist it, but tons of people can't. Have a bad time in your life, and these ideas become seductive, very VERY seductive. It's troubling
The thing with echo chambers is, there's not really anything you can do about them directly without hollowing out free speech. The best you can do is try to educate people before they get into an echo chamber, to teach people to think critically and challenge their own beliefs, to (internally) challenge the beliefs of others and steer themselves to a more balanced perspective.
Exactly. If you armor people's minds with education, they can withstand almost any amount of misinformation. Conversely, if you try to forcibly disrupt misinformation by fiat, without actually teaching the people how to think, they will remain permanently vulnerable to any additional misinformation that crops up in the future. At that point, you're stuck in an interminable and unwinnable game of whack-a-mole, which is essentially what platforms are doing right now.
1:41:35 "If you ask a flat earther to explain his beliefs, his explanations will be inconsistent". Yeah, to us, externally. To the flat earther, it makes sense nevertheless, or just claim that there are limits to our knowledge and these gaps are explainable, but yet to be explained.
I hope people don't actually think height is something with attractiveness, Charlie is pretty short but an ultra hunk. That picture of Charlie cooking, SHEEESH.
@Thomas Why don't you just ask women? Why do you have to cite studies that you can't source, that could be completely unreliable and likely are because human beings are incredibly complex and subjective, instead of waiting for actual women to respond? Maybe answer those questions instead of pretending that you know women well and answering for them, because it's incredibly frustrating to have to see if you are a woman, and I'm sorry to say people like incels and niceguys use the same leap of logic. It treats us like observable phenomenon and experiments rather than human beings. You likely aren't quite that bad, this is probably just a very bad habit of yours, but it definitely needs to stop.
@Thomas Why don't you just ask women? Why do you have to cite studies that you can't source, that could be completely unreliable and likely are because human beings are incredibly complex and subjective, instead of waiting for actual women to respond? Maybe answer those questions instead of pretending that you know women well and answering for them, because it's incredibly frustrating to have to see if you are a woman, and I'm sorry to say people like incels and niceguys use the same leap of logic. It treats us like observable phenomenon and experiments rather than human beings. You likely aren't quite that bad, this is probably just a very bad habit of yours, but it definitely needs to stop.
Man, Charlie's been collaborating with all of my favorite creators over the years. Awesome seeing him-- and the people he collabs with-- be so open-minded.
that last part of this reminds me of the idea of socratic questioning, which is basically where you teach students by asking them questions about the material you want to teach them, if you ask the right questions they will be curious enough to learn it on a more deeper level than if you just told them about something
The problem with this is politicians are trained to avoid engaging from a sincere standpoint. This leads to the only option to trapping them, gotcha questions, attacks, etc. If you ask them a sincere question without it being loaded, they will dodge it with ease. Those questions are incredibly incredibly easy to dodge. This is why the media has to be the opposition because most politicians do not want to say anything definitive. You have to force them to say something definitive or they will dance around it. Dr Ks strategy works very well with real everyday people, not people approaching every single media question from a strategic standpoint. Evading questions is a career skill. He was clearly referencing Ted Cruz after the shooting in this example. If we gave Cruz an easy question, he would give a milquetoast nothing answer, because that is the best strategy politically. I would argue Dr Ks frustration is actually kind of a flaw stemming from his profession and his belief in human sincerity, understandably and admirably. I'd also argue the #1 problem with the media and their interactions with politicians is that they don't act as the OPPOSITION MORE. I don't see any other way than to make politicians fear the media, otherwise you are making their job easy. Approaching things with sincerity unfortunately and sadly is how you lose as a politician and every single politician who goes in sincerely learns that lesson painfully. You are fighting from a significant disadvantage to be elected if your opponent engages with media strategically while appearing sincere as opposed to you who is actually sincere, because most sincere people hold at least a few fringe/polarizing opinions. Every single major politician, even the ones you agree with and identify with, lie and dance around their beliefs to maintain electability.
I think it is more wise to platform people rather than not. Opportunity for an intelligent conversation and modeling respectful disagreements. It’s on one’s onus to decide what they do with provided information.
The problem with deplatforming is that you're never going to succeed, you ban someone off Twitter, they're going to find another platform to express themselves...
Exactly ! Cencoring never helps discussion, I'd love too see more genuine discussions where people try to come to a middle ground rather than prove eachother wrong, which is all that it is now
Anyone else think that Jimmy Broadbent would make for an excellent guest on the show? He's been very open about his struggles with mental health and his personality is just so unbelievably engaging, I think it could be a great episode all around.
I haven't finished the video yet just wanted to comment a bit further on the echo chambers bit. To add onto Charlie's bit about accessibility due to the internet there is also more that gets added onto this due to social media, forums, search engines, etc. running algorithms that designed to feed you content and put you into contact with like minded people that inherently create echo chambers. You start going through life talking with people and being fed content that never contradicts your point of view that reinforces this mentality of you must be right because everyone I talk and everything I see about a thing agrees with me. This is unfortunately only getting worse as technology becomes more advanced and more catered to the peoples wants versus their needs.
"Wants versus needs" is a shrewd point, I think. Part of the problem with modern America is that there's nobody who's able and willing to tell the people what the NEED to hear, only what they WANT to hear. Politicians are all panderers; there are a few that may have tried to say, "Wake up, Americans, you're the world's dumbest advanced country" and they proceed to be immediately banished from public life, never to be voted into elected office or any other relevant position. This also creates a sense of intellectual entitlement among the people. They expect and demand to be told only what they want to hear, and they think they have a right to be exposed only to what they want. The idea that there could be any cultural spinach out there in the world, which they might not enjoy but that is "good for them" and which they need exposure to, seems to have fallen by the wayside. This is sad in part because it was not always that way, but this is where we've arrived, in part because people have been coddled by algorithms for the past number of years.
7:57 Musculature cultivates more dense bone structure, which means when you are 90 and falling over a lot, you won't just die from broken bones. Which means you are capable of being around for children a lot longer... I believe it's important for your family members to believe you plan on being around in their future. 🙏
People don't have open minded debates anymore, because it just takes one rotten apple to spoil the conversation and you often make yourself vulnerable. Like for example, my first experiences with flat earthers was: - they start with some absurd claim - you try to stay open minded and put a lot of mental effort into adapting their viewpoint and explaining why you disagree (you are basically playing their game at this point, they decide wherever this conversation is going) - they completely ignore it and move the goalpost without having really listened or understood your viewpoint - this repeats several times, until there is a claim that you can't immediately respond to (like, it's some study from a dubious website, or it exceeds your competence in physics) - they will act like they won the argument, because they were talking all the time and you apparently ran out of arguments Some people are just not worth an openminded debate.
ABSOLUTELY! The truth is, there's relatively little value in engaging at all with certain people on certain topics. I had a coworker who was a Trump sycophant, years ago, who was convinced that Trump was the greatest president ever. He was a smart and interesting guy, but ultimately, we had to decide not to talk about politics (the same arrangement that he reached with his own wife, lol) because there was just nothing good that could come of it. Nobody's mind was going to be changed, in part because we didn't even accept each others' facts. He would cite something from Fox News, which I would then google and try to show him why it was factually wrong, already debunked by fact-checking websites, etc. He just flatly wouldn't accept any of it, dismiss it as media bias, and we'd just go around in circles for hours sometimes. It was all very cordial and good-natured because we genuinely liked each other, but that didn't change the fact that it was a waste of time. I was never going to change his mind and he was never going to change mine. If anything, it filled me with an ever-deeper sense of despair, because I realized that if someone as intelligent as my co-worker could be conned by the web of lies spun around politics, then almost anyone could be. It left me feeling rather hopeless and dejected about the prospects for America going forward -- and this was years BEFORE the pandemic... Ultimately, my friend and I would talk about Minecraft or the game Destiny, instead. It was just more productive, neutral ground where we could meet, since we were both gamers.
When you mentioned that your wondering how mental illness fits into all this it made me think of my job as a psych nurse. Now I feel the need to delineate between commonly held delusions by society and really out there delusions that are obviously delusional (i.e. Donald Trump is the president vs. the sky is purple and I am Jesus). It's making the note writing part of my job more and more complicated by the day. Honestly I think one of the biggest issues today is the nature of truth and knowledge, but the majority people weighing in don't realize it yet.
While I agree with you, nothing stops society to be ill. Commonly held delusions are a cancer to society, and should be treated as such. We don't have the means to treat the society to dispel such illusions, but I think we will get it in time.
@@fisicogamer1902 A lot of it just boils down to "information literacy". I know that some high schools have actually begun to teach that topic explicitly because there's such a need for it. It's frightening how, in the age of the internet, so many people are completely unable to evaluate a source for basic validity. Who paid for this? What is their agenda? What do they want from me? Do the claims being made here square with basic, well-known facts about fundamental science, etc? It's also peculiar that so many people with paranoid tendencies, who are the ones that wind up gravitating to conspiracy theories online, fail to ask these basic informational due diligence questions. Like, shouldn't they be the ones MOST inclined to be suspicious of random websites? But instead, they fall for them hook, line, and sinker. I think it speaks to the fact that they have temperamental suspiciousness but aren't educated enough to know how to impeach information when it is presented to them. This is why they're vulnerable to social engineers that exploit their vague skepticism or outrage by feeding them disinformation that accords with their prejudices but might not be based in fact. The person being conned doesn't know enough to see through the con, but they know it feels good to have their prejudices affirmed externally by someone posing as an "expert". This underscores that education is the answer, but as they say in the South, "You can't fix stupid". Some people are just dumb and they are doomed to be eternal lost causes. The task for society isn't to make everyone a wizard at information processing. It's to make the true dullards a small enough minority that they can't unduly influence society with the sheer numerical weight of their stupidity (as is presently the case).
Charlie is such a normal person. He's funny and clearly has good intentions, and he's also not the most knowledgeable or understanding person you'll meet. But that's okay. I've disliked some of his opinions that are more reactionary and uninformed, but I've also seen him rationally defend Dark Souls 2 or argue against right wing ideology. Obviously I'm not saying those two things are of equal importance, I'm just pointing out that he's more complex than you'd think from glancing at his channel. If Charlie represents the way a lot of people think, we should draw hope from that. It means most people are good.
I think not using your main platform for the interview for someone views spicy ways is one way to do it. For example if you have a Patreon page And post the interview only on Patreon can you almost control who your audience is. Very few who subscribe to someone's Patreon page are not in support of the creator and probably not going to necessarily be upset for one thing and more importantly not follow a dangerous belief. It will however give us a level of understanding of what goes in the mind of the individual.
I personally think the line between platforming someone and just talking to them is who has control over the conversation and framing of the narrative. How it is presented IMHO is the difference. Like here Dr. K is directing and leading the conversation through the questions he asks to keep the conversation progressing in an informative way. That's different than say, letting a bigot freely spout their views for 90min and debating young students. It's not just about challenging their ideas, but also being in control of the conversation and how it unfolds. Who controls the narrative and how is it ultimately framed would be my criteria 🤷🏽♀️
It’s insane to me that mass shootings were a huge debate a year ago and is still a huge debate now and there’s literally nothing done to the situation despite a growing epidemic of gun violence
You guys don't understand what school shooters are going through, they're ill, but not mentally, they have memetic diseases (or ideologies), You need to study memes and their effect on the soul.
While it may be personally satisfying to call someone or their actions evil, it doesn't seem productive. I really wonder what goes on in the mind of someone who can justify such malicious acts as exploiting people with shady gambling sites or scam crypto coins. Like, I think of the things I am/was most ashamed of which shrivel in comparison and wonder if these people have or ever had such powerful emotions as I did to dissuade them from their morally bankrupt actions.
Nah... segregation didn't end because we tried to reason with people on mass, we said this is wrong and you're gonna stop it by force of law. We didn't win hearts and minds, we called it out for what it was
Agreed. The utility of busting out the word "evil" depends on what one's objective is. If the goal is to castigate someone who you profoundly disagree with, then it is a satisfying label to apply -- but it's also a conversation ender, an end-point. It both closes and announces as being closed the person so invoking the term, forbidding the possibility of further understanding. If the goal is to understand what happened, to look at the world as a scientist does in order to uncover the mysteries of cause-and-effect, then simply dismissing something as "evil" is extremely counterproductive. I don't imagine that Niels Bohr would have made it very far in his study of the atom if he were convinced that atoms were "evil", you know what I mean?
@@StochasticUniverse @towelgard why on earth is calling someone evil wrong. If you cant call people anything you identify them as then its just a matter of fact of events. Then what do we say its not bad or good. It just is. If it just is then why do you care if someone brutalizes other human beings to satisfy themselves
I feel like Dr. K has nothing to say of interest in this video so he just keeps asking Charlie very broad questions about the meaning of life or how movies like Morbius get made.
I think identity labels, diagnoses and neurochemistry obscures the picture on this topic. I suggest it would be much more comprehensible to view school-shooters as the unwilling heirs of collective, societal pain. Unfortunately, oftentimes when people find themselves in positions of relative power, they will misuse their influence and dump their pain on defenseless individuals with a lower relative standing; most of the time little slights and jabs that one would think should not illicit such extreme responses, but so ubiquitously, pervasively and frequently that the person in the losing position gets locked into their role, hence the extremely violent hatred and despair that school-shooters exhibit. It may be incomprehensible to the majority of people who managed to stay somewhere in the middle of the crowd, but I assure you it is not incomprehensible for people who were forced into the role of scapegoats by an entire school community from early adolescence. Having said that, I of course don't condone school-shooters. But I really think if we seriously want to fix this problem, the analysis of its etiology must be done more seriously and less dismissively because at the end of the day everybody loses if we ignore the problem.
His crude mouth is his best asset. I'll never not admire his ability to make me laugh by saying anything with the world's straighest face and the world's most deadpan tone.
If people hate Charlie for his thinking they hate most people because he is very much closer to the Average Joe, honestly better than most. He has good moral values. He's just not well read. Most people aren't.
You don't have to have watched Morbius to know that it's the greatest Movie of all time. So all the people that went to see the Movie aren't actual Morb fans they try to get in on a joke by watching the Movie even though the joke is to not watch the movie and make random assumptions about it.
Yeah I think with the echo chambers there is nothing wrong with talking to people going through similar problems etc, but in the past this thing would maybe be through a support group that meets twice a week. With a leader that has mostly or completely overcome the problem and can curate the conversation towards helping rather than radicalizing. Online if there even is a curator they are more likely to be in the same or worse spot as the members of the echo chamber and it just escalates and escalates.
I wouldn't say spreading misinformation, it's not like he's basing his content on that. It's just that he has that opinion, and by talking to dr k, hopefully he'll see his ignorance on the subject
It's like Dr K said, he's not intentionally spreading misinformation. He's just ignorant about the topic. Charlie is smart enough to listen and accept new knowledge.
@@adrenalinekick can confirm, I occasionally watch Charlie on and off for quite a while now and when he says something stupid, or maybe out of ignorance and someone calls him out for it, be it a friend or a viewer he has shown in the past to go back to what he said, revisit it, be educated about it and change his stance on it. That's probably the quality I like most about him, he isn't afraid to admit that he was wrong on something. Especially when there are other TH-camr's with huge inflated Egos and a huge helping of narcissism who think they can never be wrong on any topic. And even if they know they are wrong, they aren't gonna comment on it and admit it.
MISINFORMTATION ALERT UH OHHH MISINFORMATION !!!! STRIKE THEM WITH A THOUSAND BOLTS !!! It's only a misinformed and frivolous opinion !! Not misinformation ,if he was spreading it as information then yes ,but he was only stating it as an opinion
@@ewaberchulska I think you've seized on an incorrect distinction here. Misinformation is misinformation regardless of the intent behind it. It's any statement that is factually wrong. Now, DISinformation is when someone intentionally says something that they know is wrong because they're just trying to brainfuck people on purpose. By definition, all disinformation is also misinformation, but not all misinformation is necessarily disinformation.
No censoring your interviews to appeal to audience, please. The audience is intelligent enough to form their own opinions and "platforming" is just subjective. Do your thing, Dr. Interview who you want.
If he's platforming somebody 40% of the US agrees with, and that is somehow unacceptable, then we need to have a conversation on how the hell we escape that aside from having those conversations with those people and understanding where the country got this way. Worrying about platforming is how we got so disconnected with the reality of the average Americans beliefs in the first place
Nothing drives believers more into despair and nihilism, than their destroyed hopes and believes. With no ethical leg to stand on, not even having a crutch, almost everyone turns violent. So it might even be more vital to face some believers with an attitude like: "Everything is like you think it is...", while slowly moving backwards, outside of their grasp. "The earth might as well be flat, I just don't believe that and you can't convince me. Deal with that, believing whatever you want. Go on indoctrinating your daughter. I don't care about child abuse...". Well, OK there are limits to such a spineless solution. I just wouldn't know what could reasonably help other, than letting ill believes evaporate and vanish over time, because the person just might start to prioritize more urgent things. Some people are immune to noticing evidence.
I can't help but taunt flatearthers and other irrationalists, like: "Hey Ollie, It's 2 pm in germany, what do you think is the time in New York? I can arrange a skype call with a New Yorker, who insists it's 8 am. It really looks like it's early in the morning at that LONGITUDE! I can also arrange a call with Australia if you wanna? It's 11 pm in New South Wales now, dark night. How do you explain that to your daughter?"
The two things aren't mutually exclusive. You can be a rounded, functional human with complex motivations and a rich inner life and still be a monster at the same time. Even Hitler loved Eva Braun.
Dr. K: Please interview Day 9! He's one of the most heart-warming content creators I know, is one of the earliest streamers, and would be a fantastic guest!
45:12 from what i've heard, the youtube algorithm is made with the goal of keeping you on the platform as long as possible, and that's it. I'm pretty sure TH-cam themselve don't really know how it works in detail, as long as it's making them money.
I feel like its so obvious why school shooters do what they do as a kid that got bullied in highschool, i completely understand why school shooters do what they do, Im more surprised why no one wants to talk about how we can let a kid be treated so badly in highschool to the point where they feel like theres no other way out... besides suicide or wanting to take revenge on the people that hurt them. everyones pretending like theres something bigger going on or trying to blame gun control... but no one wants to look into the level of cruelty some kids are being put through in highschool by other kids and how teachers dont care at all.
But why would would a bullied kid shoot up a bunch of innocent children instead of the people who wronged him? It's always the children who suffer instead of the bullies. You would think a tortured mind would fixate on the person/people who picked on him. Not the fact that the ill shooter thought the innocent children who could grow up to be just like his tormentors who were the guilty, or maybe that's exactly why he targeted them, if so he is a coward.
Well, in fairness, I'm pretty sure cruelty happens in all 200+ countries in the world, but mass shootings only happen in the United States. So, while cruelty is an important component of the alchemy of factors that ultimately drives someone to commit a mass shooting, it is clearly an insufficient explanation, by itself.
@@hazza9595 It's because "society" is the enemy. Everyone is the enemy. How do you retaliate against "Everyone"? Well, provided that you don't have a nuclear bomb to detonate, the best you can do is to use the heaviest weapons possible to do as much damage as possible. It's not even about the kids. That's the part that I think a lot of people fail to understand. The kids are just the vehicle that the attacker is using to enact his vengeance upon the world. Shooting a bunch of kids is a means to an end, not an end unto itself. (This is the same basic mindset that any common terrorist would use: 9/11 wasn't actually about killing the people in the Twin Towers because the hijackers personally hated them. They were just convenient pawns in a plan to send a message to everyone else. It wasn't about them. It was about everyone else.)
I love critikal but this interview was pretty bad. I get that critikal can talk about anything but Dr. K needs to prepare to direct the conversation a little bit more. The majority of this was broad uninformed questions that led to topics that was common knowledge. Crypto, Morbius, Social media recommending you polarizing content, conspiracy theories are well tred territory and this convo didn’t bring anything new to the table. It was mostly Dr. K asking critikal to define these things we’ve heard about thoroughly for months or a few years. This comes across harsh but I mean it constructively, critikal is such an interesting conversationalists that knows about a million rabbit holes, I wish this could have dived into a more niche/unique topic.
black and white view which a lot of people on the internet share, is very consistent in a lot of suicide bombers, mass shooter as well as they can't think of any other angles that would not justify their actions. Everything they see even if others disagree, actually reinforce their point of view.
I have read that people double down when you shame a person or a group people... that people rather be wrong then deal with humiliation. According to Leon Festinger The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Which is one of the reasons for radical groups with radical beliefs.
I find it hard to believe that the majority of humans are "good" considering that historically it has been so common for humans to find pleasure in things such as public torture, ritual sacrifice, and of course more obvious things like genocide and such. I'd argue that humans are more bad than good, and only relatively recently have been pursuing the ideal of goodness
Regarding 1:02:40 and the radicalization of people in echo chambers. I think this actually comes down to something that CGP Grey did a video on a while ago. A lot of these radical incidents have a sort of mirror that they're bouncing off of, an equal and opposite echo chamber. These echo chambers don't necessarily interact directly but they constantly meme within themselves about what the other is doing/saying and getting more and more outrageous as a result. Even if those things are not actually being said by said opposing group. So, with your point about "lashing out against being hurt" these people are generating a non-existent enemy that is "hurting" them and thus further radicalizing them. Incidentally, this is related to how I tell that I've found myself too deep into any sort of community. If there's an "other" that is constantly talked about and memed on as being some terrible existence that is irrefutably evil in increasingly cartoonish ways, then you're definitely too deep. It's possible that said "other" does exist and may actually be doing one or two of said terrible things, but a lot of it is just everyone riling each other up for the sake of doing so. When someone gets riled up too far, terrible things can happen.
a talk between Dr K and softwhiteunderbelly would be amazing, you guys both share the same sentiment of humanizing everyone including society's rejects
I saw a quote by John Oliver from his most recent episode. You are for more likely to have a cop in your school in the US than you are a counselor, nurse, or mental health professional. Far more. It isn't particularly close.
So for school shootings. I found data as far back as 1971 for the US. It really hasn't changed as much as you would think. We just don't remember it that well. Or they didn't become huge news the way they do now. There is more now, but not so much more than most think.
It's almost... almost... ALMOST like a biased media is over-reporting something that a certain political party doesn't like, and ignoring anything else. It's not much different of KKK-aligned media over-reporting black crimes.
People do not understand the difference between how often they recall seeing something in the news, and statistics. How much you remember reading about something is not the same as statistics.
As someone who used to think that Americans are just stupid for keeping guns around when they are clearly the source of a lot of the problems. This conversation actually gave a lot of perspective as to why cases like this isen't just as black and white. I hope that one day politics wont have to be like a trench warfare.
_"1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10"_
_"What did you say?"_
_"I was just agreeing"_
It's sometimes so hard to understand a conversation between great minds
This is an early top comment
Jesus communicate to us in very rare ways.
his brain program malfunctioned
maybe an audio sync thing?
And we dare criticize AI conversation skills, tsk tsk
In my opinion the world was always a fucked up place full of unsatisfied, broken people and only now more than ever we can actually see that EVERYONE goes through the same shit, so we're not afraid to hide it anymore. A problem arises when people see that and think to themselves "the whole world is going to shit so why would I take steps to change?"
Idk, anyone, any thoughts?
I totally agree with you on this one. I heard somewhere that public perception of war changed significantly with the advent of photography. It was viewed as a big glorious adventure during the Spanish war, but once people started taking pictures of what was actually going on, the atrocities of war became far more visible to people. Thus, perceptions changed.
do your best and find others who do the same like your life depends on it. cause it does. It seems we do have a bigger perspective. maybe a few decades or centuries ago you woudlnt talk to 1000's upon 1000's of people. but the situation with surival and god and bad hasn't changed.
i can only say that I do think people tend to fall into a nihilistic trench after trying to morally progress from a ethnocentric pov to a worldcentric pov (i did for awhile too) but you can eventually climb out... but theres just a large influx of nihilism, pessimism, and narcissistic traits bouncing off each other in echo chambers (the trench). This in turn makes those who are a little afraid to make that moral jump from where they are (ethnocentric or egocentric) to hold strong and not budge.
Who knows though.
I see your point, but I have some reservations.
I'm absolutely not one of those idiots who say that vaccines cause autism, but I also don't believe that cases of autism have raised only because we got better at diagnostics. I mean, autism is extremely noticeable even for people who don't know anything about psychology. If autism only became "rampant" after we got better diagnostic criteria, then why didn't we get such criteria much, much, much earlier? I'm talking "about at the time of the Human species' speciation" earlier.
It's almost like the symptoms of autism only became considered as pathological somewhen in documented history, namely the 20th century with Hans Asperger's studies.
So, my hypothesis is that either autistic behaviour became socially unacceptable along the last decades, or autism itself only started to become a thing at least a small order of magnitude of time before Hans Asperger.
The same applies to what you have observed about low quality of life and poor mental health.
There's also this factor of rapid technological change and a lot of the capital behind tech being motivated for short-term narrow profit gain. There's a real lack of balance of proper regulation and tempering factors that steer tech more towards collective/social good. If tech is propelled by profit, not understood by regulators, and moving rapidly, it's potential for harm and destabilization is incredible.
Imagine you hit senior year in high school. Dont like the direction your life is heading and feel like you wanna unplug the computer and start a new game.
It must be a wildly drastic reaction to a very intense emotional state. At least thats how I imagine the circumstance. Like Charlie I try not to think abt it too much. I love where Dr. K 's heart is.
I genuinely believe that one of the fundamental things that needs to change, at a global level ( because corporations don't want to give away competitive advantage without everyone else doing the same) -- globally there needs to be consensus on changes to algorithms so the echo chambers get more broken up. On a more human level, can we connect more with each other. Listen compassionately without seeking to thrust our answers out there ( ironic given my first line, I know). Kids need more support. Teens need more support. Young Adults need more support. Middle Aged Adults need more support. Elders need more support. It's just different types of support. I can simultaneously need support and offer it.
Yea about time i was waiting for MoistCr1tikal
Dr K interviewing Jesus himself, nice
Gamer Jesus
second time
@@mussaorazkan255 you mean second coming XD
Jesus was most likely Arabic.
Penguinz0 fans think of an original joke challenge (impossible)
Dr K and Charlie together are just a fascinating duo to listen to, even in brief moments where they disagree or share differing opinions, they both keep a civil and mature discussion, not to mention the conversation as a whole is intriguing to listen to.
Thanks for making a Monday morning at work much more enjoyable.
That should be a given not a standard
they've done another one in the past, a longer one, over 2 and a half hours long
@@killer_nerd_R Well in today's age, what should be and what IS aren't always the same
@@killer_nerd_R Those are synonyms
@@SomethingSomethingComplete they are not. A standard is something you expect of other people. By given i mean, it should be impossible to NOT be. Like it wouldnt be a "standard" if there was no alternative. It would just be reality.
My father's most valuable piece of advice to me came in the following form:
"Everyone knows something you don't, and has experiences you can hardly imagine. Your business is to learn and understand what those things are. But always remember, you should never be in the business of changing people. You may talk to them, you may discuss with them, you may inquire of them, but you should never try to change them. It's a lost cause."
I think the problem with this is some people do change, and should. Like drug addicts who have recovered and gone sober due to intervention from their family.
Though I do understand personalities and second nature behaviours never change completely- there is quite a lot you shouldn't try to change so I definitely agree with a good 90% of the statement in general.
well hes incorrect coz ive changed some really shitty people for the better. One of my best friends used to be a compulsive liar and would never get anything done on time. An aunt I knew thought homeopathy was the solution to all her medical issues. Another friend of mine was anxious about her monthly horoscope being negative. And of course the dozens of people who thought that they should take the covid vaccine. These are all illogical stupid and potentially life threatening things and need a perspective of rationality + empathy in order to create change. Something I've managed to do successfully. Your father probably didn't have the tools to do so. If you should bother trying to change or help people for the better then Dr K would not have a job or a career
@@beththedarkmage3359 people can change and should, I agree. But that's not my job. It's not up to me to change someone. It's up to them. Like Dr K suggested, and my father told me, it's my job to ask questions and maybe prod their worldview to understand it. If there's something I don't quite agree with, I'll prod at that a bit more, but do so gently. If that leads them to change, great. But I didn't do that. They did.
@@RadialSeeker113 did you watch the video? He doesn't change people. He suggests pathways to get better, and he asks questions that might challenge the framework upon which bad habits or bad traits are built, and then that person makes the decision to change for themselves. Though he did have a hand in sparking the change, he himself did not change that person. The same goes for me. I'll ask questions, I'll challenge and prod things I may not like that much, but I will never actively try to change someone.
And yes it''s true that I am not trained for what Dr K does. I am not a doctor. Nor is my father. We are both engineers and academics. Our careers do not qualify us to provide therapy. But even then, you don't go to therapy to change. You go to therapy to get tools to better yourself and learn how to use them.
I've tried to change people but think of it in my own way of helping them but yeah more often than not, it's just not doable.
I had an interaction with a guy almost a year back who acted physically and emotionally abusive towards his then girlfriend, and to cut a long story short when I was on the trial after he attacked me too he said something that I found really intresting, basically "I make sure I'm never ever gonna be a victim" which he had showed by spending the last few months threatening and abusing every person he thought wronged him since he got out of jail half a year earlier.
I think that type of idea or "mantra" might be very normal in people who commit school shootings and the like, because we can't stop others from victimizing or wronging us so when someone tell themself something like that they might choose to act the aggressor just to get away from the label of being the "victim" and feeling weak.
I feel the same way. It's why I became so interested in weapons (pocket knife, tazer, handgun) as a small woman; I don't want to feel weak or like a victim.
@@jonettheonly I think that it's normal to not wanna feel like a victim or being weak, but it's also good to remember that most people still will experience it in diffrent degrees through out their lifes because it's something we really can't completely prevent so it important to remind ourselves that the bad or sad moments in life don't define us as individuals or lower our value as humans being in anyway.
What I was talking about is people that take it to an extreme, in where someone tell themselves that no matter the situation they will never be a victim, which can become a dangerous mindset if they decide something like making the other person into the victim is the best solution.
@@Moebz818 Incredibly well worded!
I've also heard about these types of teachings and I definitely agree that the environment and mentality that creates seem incredibly unhealthy and to do way more harm then good, it is after all important to work on our problems because that's how we are able to move past and deal with things in a healthy way, but I think the whole "it's just a mentality" view is just a short sighted way to sweep it under the rug that's only adopted because it's a easy and all encompassing solution instead of talking through it and dealing with it on an individual level.
Its saddening to hear that they are still people preaching that type of ideas in todays society, especially when information is so readily available at our finger tips that can disprove it.
But I feel like it's become alot more normal in alot of areas in society to find the simplest solutions to problems, for example here in Sweden it's become a lot harder to get acctual therapy or help with mental health in general but they prescribe opioids in ridiculous amounts and act surprised when addiction goes through the roof among the youths.
@@Moebz818 "being a victim is only a mentality". I don't think this discounts rape victims... I think what it means is that how circumstances effect your mentality is based on your own personal mental strength. not letting circumstances define you or control your emotions.
This shows you cannot trust some people to come to thier own merits of change. They need assistance, and sometimes the hard way too.
Dr.K, I think you would like to watch CHANNEL 5 WITH ANDREW CALLAGHAN, or try to get him on the show. Your points on the modern debate fallacy, and the current hatred epidemic, excessive polarization and radicalization are really interesting. And I think Andrew's channel is very very pertinent to these points. I am convinced it would be worth your while. All in all, amazing video, love this type of content, thank you :)
7 months later Edit: The situation today regarding Andrew might make you think that my suggestion is now not a good suggestion. I think it would be 100 times more valuable to get Andrew to talk with Doctor K. If not now, then at some point in the future. IMO, the only way to start deleting such negative behaviors is not by censoring them, but to expose their roots to all. (In a way that is respectful of all impacted by such behavior.)
the collab we need
This
that would b AMAIZNG
Excellent suggestion!
That would be fantastic.
Guys stay away from negative groups in the internet. I ran into the incels content and before you know it started to think I was. I did therapy and am doing better but that shit is scary.
don't hang around a negative and self destructive crowd that doesn't care about anything nor the future in general. Stay away from them at all times. Just don't even think to meddle with them. I have so many regrets and my life's gone to shit because of this. I always regret how if only I had never met them nor spoke to them, I could've been doing a lot better now.. still it is what it is and I'm gonna fight my way back to where I dream of being and make it reality. I'm just saying you could skip this part in life and you're better off a lot more than getting into that edgy shite.
To add to this, I think one handy way to know if it's the bad part of the internet, is if the opinions are extreme, like they don't discuss the alternative views, nor tolerate them, nor nicely discuss it with others of conflicting ideologies.
I think there should be more education and awareness of the fact that being online, especially as someone who has risk factors (such as anti-social behaviors and traumatic experiences), is very dangerous, as someone who got out of the alt-right pipeline years ago and had many friends who went fully into it.
I too was near to fall into incels groups and content but luckily I pulled myself very fast off it and I'm very glad I did so
Glad you pulled yourself out of that community. Stay safe
I've recently found both of these guys and have been enjoying their commentary - so strange that they should suddenly do a collab! Excellent stuff.
They've done one before!
Charlie goes back 10 years on TH-cam and everything he's ever uploaded is high octane content
They've done an interview before. I recommend it.
@@Meechy37 17 years*
@@Aimaiai That's so insane that it's 17 now. I forgot how long it's actually been
When I had drug induced schizophrenia and psychosis and my number one worry was people thinking I’m dangerous. I was extremely aware I was acting weird in public and was so worried about it. Thanks for explaining that!
44:00 Extremely important point.
Conversations so often get stuck on terms like "influence, terminally online, echo chamber" and how "Emotionally weak the last few generations are", blaming a website and calling it a day. It's rare to see people trying to trace it back further, not everyone that uses TH-cam turns to radical agendas, so what creates this divide?
What are the personal factors that create online-drift? What influences its length or how severely the exposure affects the person?
Their pre-existing beliefs? Perceived self/identity? Friend circles? Family? Economic status? Maybe all of them.
I understand your point, and agree with it. But I just want to add that these conversations usually end in blaming one thing and then calling it a day because this bad result is collectively actionable.
For instance, it's very actionable for the government to, say, ban guns if guns are blamed for mass shooting. If the current social order was blamed instead of guns, it wouldn't be as actionable because solving the current social order would be nigh impossible and/or unaffordable for the government.
If you expose a youtuber for gr00ming a kid, it's far more actionable for the community to cancel this youtuber, than for the community to figure out a way to cure this youtube of their pdf file-ia.
When people discuss a problem, they want a solution. The problem starts when they refuse every solution that is not easy.
@@phosspatharios9680 Very good addition, and I do agree that acting on the symptoms is needed. Most of these cases require tangible solutions sooner rather than later.
But I'll still hold that unless both sides (Symptom and Cause) are acknowledged and acted upon, we'll be stuck doing damage control rather than solving any issues.
ie. Even with an account deletion that TH-camr is still free to comeback under a new alias, and it becomes a whack-a-mole.
Charlie explaining what morbius is to dr k sounds like me explaining what minecraft is to my mom when i was 12
Regarding intervention for mental illness I believe that if you don't deal with the original traumatic event(s) within the younger years of a child's life then it has an extremely high chance of manifesting into an inner drive towards an inevitable outcome.
That process is so difficult sadly.
Can't say it's inevitable. Some people just forget about things, and move on to become completely different people as a result of trauma. Though it's definitely more likely, as trauma tends to leave unconscious issues with self-worth(leaning into either extreme), that carry with you for the rest of your life.
In that case it'll be a game of chance, whether or not you suffer through more terrible shit and your mind breaks before you die, or if you manage to get through the rest of life without tipping too far.
Life is complex and there's rarely any simple or singular answers, however, if i were to try and find a throughline between all the different topics that were discussed in this video, i'd say it's Humility. Usually a lack of it. And the reason why Dr. K and Charlie are so chill, open minded, and willing to talk and learn etc (or at least seem like it, they could be horrible people behind the scenes for all we know though i highly doubt it) is because they have humility.
I just felt like it.
hu·mil·i·ty
/(h)yo͞oˈmilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
a modest or low view of one's own importance; humbleness.
"he needs the humility to accept that their way may be better"
I can understand some part of the mass shooters mentality. I came from an abusive household consisting of people with diagnosed personality disorders which put me back in life. On top of that, other people (especially kids) sense that and prey on that weakness. I have always had friends but have always been or at least considered myself an outcast. I am naturally more towards the altruistic side and I would not regularely feel like I would actually want to commit voilent crimes, but at my worst, I would be voilent towards everyone around me because of this extreme feeling of everyone being against you and this world ultimately being rotten, full of egocentric human beings that do not deserve life, or at least this was my mindset at these points in my life.
I have never actually done more then be very agressive towards everyone around me at those times, but I feel like if I would not have any people that I value a lot and helped me at those times, I could have potentially done a voilent crime if I had access to guns.
Now do I think all of them are similar to me, had a similar situation or are "normal humans" outside of their nurtural issues, no. There are probably a lot that have other serious mental issues that come from their nature, but I feel it is possible to be normal and just had a bad hand dealt in life.
Yeah I agree with you. I think that shooters are psychologically different in the sense that a lot of people struggle and aren't violent but I don't think that their personal reasons are that uncommon. For young perpetrators environmental factors like abuse, neglect and bullying are probably the most common ones. Better mental health service would be a great start for everyone
It's normal for almost everyone to have violent fantasies at one time or another in life. The issue is that a small percentage of people don't leave it at the fantasy level and actually act upon it. And the reason it's so hard to pinpoint who that will be is precisely because it's so normal for everyone to entertain dark fantasies.
Like the old saying goes: "If it were an easy problem, it would've been solved a long time ago!"
@@idontcare9041 One thing that I wonder about is what percentage of violent perpetrators even had access to mental health treatment at all, in any form. I'm sure that, statistically, the share that didn't is probably higher than the percentage of the general population that doesn't have access, but it would be intriguing to see an actual number.
In the United States, there are tens of millions of people with no health insurance whatsoever, and that effectively means no access to health care, including mental health. I think it's become in vogue for politicians to talk about "access to mental health" as an alternative to admitting that there are too many guns in America (lul...), but without addressing the underlying and more profound issue of no access to healthcare, period, it's all just empty talk.
@@StochasticUniverse You could probably tie access to mental health care to some statistic about violence and compare different countries. I'm too lazy to do that but I'm pretty sure you're right. It's really depressing that the people highlighting the mental health aspect are only doing it to downnplay guns. Gun access is simply more important than access to mental health care to these people. It's such a complicated problem and we're basically doing nothing to address it. I think of all western countries the US is the most vulnerable to this because it has the worst insurance, you're right.
I saw this and instantly thought “let’s go baby” in Charlie’s voice.
I’m pretty sure we all did
Thats what I've been waiting for!
Mmm you too ? :D
This is what it's all about!
i love this man telling dr k about morbing
1:15:29 Dr. K is absolutely right here. Intra-species conflict rarely if ever ends in death, or even serious injury. The main reason for this is because there's simply no real benefit to fighting something to the death if you don't have to. Fights for survival are dirty, and even if you win you may be so injured that it makes no difference. Most fights between, say, alpha males, are 90% posturing and if it comes to blows a victor is usually determined with minimal injury.
When they fight for pride dominance, don't male lions kill the loser's cubs?
@@ctographerm3285 Yes, but that's different. The male lions aren't fighting the cubs for dominance. The actual fight between competing males rarely ends in death.
If you're interested, the reason male lions will commit infanticide is because without cubs, the lionesses will become fertile much faster and therefore the new dominant male will be able to have children quicker.
@@isaakvandaalen3899 damn it's kinda shitty if you think about it
@@charlesm.2604 nature can be massively shitty. morality is a human construct, nature doesn't care
@@isaakvandaalen3899 Damn, that’s really interesting. I didn’t know the infanticide in lions actually caused a difference in lioness fertility. I guess it kinda makes sense. Always thought it was just another dominance thing and that lions just kinda… didn’t want to raise cubs that are not theirs
I just wanna give my 2 late cents.
When I was in 4-5th grade I was bullied extremely hard in school. Not only the whole school bullied and avoided me, but even other Kids throughout my whole town that I met, had somehow heard of me and would then also start bullying me. I felt so much grief, desperation and rage during this time, that I would have fantasies of brutally murdering my classmates. If I had access to a firearm and I didn't move to private school, I could see myself getting revenge with a firearm. Luckly I live in a country where there isn't unrestricted access to firearms.
I am sorry that you had to go through that
Thats so horrible and traumatic to go through . I hope that you can aleviate any trauma that u have from that and not dwell on that pain for too much
Relatable. I wish you healing and peace ❤
I'm sorry, i don't wanna sound insensitive, but it's interesting hearing how bullying and made fun of can affect people in different ways. For me personally, when people made fun of me or said anything bad about me, I would think of getting revenge on them, but instead I'd take it as a hit to my own self-worth. Took me a lot of time to actually start getting out of that, but I never had thoughts of harming anybody else; only myself. Which is just as bad don't get me wrong, but I just find it interesting how different people can interpret and react differently to situations.
I'm happy you were able to make the change and make the better decisions. I hope everybody who has went through stuff like this can find some solace and peace eventually in their lives.
Sounds like a you problem, but thanks for that subtle jab at the US
I've never clicked on a video so fast.
YEAH BAYBEEEEEEE
Rabbit holes lol. Like how TikTok refined my interest in woman to specifically goth gym rats and now that's all I actively search for
Ah, a man with taste
About the echo chambers, I noticed something interesting the other day. I got recommended a video by Brett Cooper (think like a zoomer version of Ben Shapiro but a woman reading twitter comments) talking about some trans drag show that had children at the bar, and immediately afterwards, my advertisements for the next 5 hours were all related to LGBTQIA+ healthcare providers. I'm not part of that community, I don't follow content about that community, and I don't have any history really associating with that community. However, immediately after watching a single video with a conservative content creator and commentator, I get blasted with incredibly niche, targeted ads because of the algorithm. It's really easy to see how the echo chamber happens. You click one link cause you're curious, and then you receive a few ads you didn't prior, and now suddenly Matt Walsh, Alex Jones, and Rush Limbau hemming and hawing about the pervasiveness of the 'liberal agenda' doesn't seem far-fetched because youtube seems to think I'm trans after a single video. I've also seen it the other way, after watching a trans philosophy TH-camr talk about their gender dysphoria, PragerU thinks my kids need an education on George Washington. Just food for thought that these two sides seem to complement each other as far as exacerbating their frustration with each other. My gut tells me the algorithm is really to blame, but who knows 🤷🏽♂
The irony with Brett Cooper is that while she looks and comes off as a Zoomer, she's actually 34 years old according to Google (only four years younger than Ben Shapiro). Although, while Brett herself isn't a Zoomer, it's very clear that her content is targeted for Gen Z people.
@@doabrad1850 Damn that skincare product she's shilling must work lol
the business model is to blame, as it’s designed in a way to maximise our attention.
Definitely feel the targeted ads. I watched a gun cleaning video and now TH-cam thinks I want to hear every republican politicians take on “liberals.” Also I keep getting comedy in the genre of what I’d consider to be toxic masculinity.
I just enjoy firearms nothing else.
@@doabrad1850she was born in 2001 according to Google? I think there’s more than one famous Brett Cooper or something.
Although my comment is probs pointlesss cause you commented that 1 year ago apparently
I converted to Christianity recently and am already experiencing content drift. I look up sermons and bible studies and suddenly the algorithm thinks I'm interested in disproving Natural Selection. I'm getting recommended a bunch of things that I don't agree with.
Always a pleasure to hear these two talking about stuff
1:30:31 I'm glad he mentioned this- way too much pride in 'intelligence" as a concept these days. It's frustrating to see people throw ad-hominin labels and learn nothing.
1:31:10 This can help everyone- to analyze others on a flat level, to see the chains of logic without labeling them "inferior" or "superior" against some personal metric.
If someone your height needs to stand on a stool to talk to you, is it really a conversation?
But its still stupid decision idk what to tell you. Give them a cookie
Reincarnation in programming terms would be called Pooling. It's where you keep objects in memory beyond their 'existence' in the system in order to be reused for a new separate existence. What's interesting is a requirement in pooling is to 'reset' the properties of that object, but not necessarily everything needs to be reset, some properties can be left as they are.
The conversation on collective identity at 1:13:00 is on point.
I've seen this in a lot of people throughout the years, to the point that it's one of the main factors I assess whenever speaking to people who are politically engaged in any way. (Whether that is team supporters, feminists, liberals, or whatever.)
The moment people put their collective identity in front of their personal/individual identity, they're no longer interacting with you as a person, but only as a means for their cause.
In dating, this is probably on of the most detrimental red flags one can run into, as it's this perception that is the root for a multitude of negative behaviours.
As a fan of Dr.K, there are many points that I appreciated, but I felt like he got to many of his points in a roundabout way in this video.
(Edit: It feels like he got to his points by skirting a lot of information.)
I may not be a professional, but you don't have to be a pilot to see a helicopter in a tree to know that mistakes were made.
This video is gonna be legendary
Its already out
we haven't watched it until the end yet
Echo chambers and the online drift is definetly a problem
I'm a huge history enthusiast, the tales and events of the past simply fascinate me, the cultures of the world, now and then. It's just rubs that curiosity right.
I watch history videos. I watch alternate history videos as well, though the one I can only 100% reccoment is Cody from alternate history hub.
Problem is, some other channels are more iffy on their "alt theories"...they attract iffy audiences. The whole "post ironic" extremist echo chambers. Suddently my feed is flooded with community posts of these types, the "I'm an antisemite but not really...but actually I am, go check last days of Europe"
Was I younger I might as well fallen down a alt right extreme pipeline, fortunately I can resist it, but tons of people can't. Have a bad time in your life, and these ideas become seductive, very VERY seductive.
It's troubling
The thing with echo chambers is, there's not really anything you can do about them directly without hollowing out free speech. The best you can do is try to educate people before they get into an echo chamber, to teach people to think critically and challenge their own beliefs, to (internally) challenge the beliefs of others and steer themselves to a more balanced perspective.
Exactly. If you armor people's minds with education, they can withstand almost any amount of misinformation. Conversely, if you try to forcibly disrupt misinformation by fiat, without actually teaching the people how to think, they will remain permanently vulnerable to any additional misinformation that crops up in the future. At that point, you're stuck in an interminable and unwinnable game of whack-a-mole, which is essentially what platforms are doing right now.
It’s true that you naturally steer towards echo chambers but the business model of social media amplifies this
@@joeb31113who naturally?
1:41:35 "If you ask a flat earther to explain his beliefs, his explanations will be inconsistent". Yeah, to us, externally. To the flat earther, it makes sense nevertheless, or just claim that there are limits to our knowledge and these gaps are explainable, but yet to be explained.
I hope people don't actually think height is something with attractiveness, Charlie is pretty short but an ultra hunk. That picture of Charlie cooking, SHEEESH.
i mean it is. but peole have so many qualities, if u get turned down just because of 1, you shouldn't worry.
@Thomas link it.
People absolutely find height attractive
@Thomas Why don't you just ask women? Why do you have to cite studies that you can't source, that could be completely unreliable and likely are because human beings are incredibly complex and subjective, instead of waiting for actual women to respond?
Maybe answer those questions instead of pretending that you know women well and answering for them, because it's incredibly frustrating to have to see if you are a woman, and I'm sorry to say people like incels and niceguys use the same leap of logic. It treats us like observable phenomenon and experiments rather than human beings.
You likely aren't quite that bad, this is probably just a very bad habit of yours, but it definitely needs to stop.
@Thomas Why don't you just ask women? Why do you have to cite studies that you can't source, that could be completely unreliable and likely are because human beings are incredibly complex and subjective, instead of waiting for actual women to respond?
Maybe answer those questions instead of pretending that you know women well and answering for them, because it's incredibly frustrating to have to see if you are a woman, and I'm sorry to say people like incels and niceguys use the same leap of logic. It treats us like observable phenomenon and experiments rather than human beings.
You likely aren't quite that bad, this is probably just a very bad habit of yours, but it definitely needs to stop.
Man, Charlie's been collaborating with all of my favorite creators over the years. Awesome seeing him-- and the people he collabs with-- be so open-minded.
He's done collabs with even pretty niche people, and I really appreciate that
Whom else did he collaborate with?
@@anormalguy511 Kitboga, Kurtis Conner, Wendigoon, and I feel like he did something with Markiplier and/or Game Grumps, but I could be wrong.
@@neoncatlord8695
Oh ok thanks
Now we need "WTF is going on with the world?!" episodes with Mutahar and Asmongold, then the holy trinity shall be complete.
Mutahar for sure
that last part of this reminds me of the idea of socratic questioning, which is basically where you teach students by asking them questions about the material you want to teach them, if you ask the right questions they will be curious enough to learn it on a more deeper level than if you just told them about something
The problem with this is politicians are trained to avoid engaging from a sincere standpoint. This leads to the only option to trapping them, gotcha questions, attacks, etc. If you ask them a sincere question without it being loaded, they will dodge it with ease. Those questions are incredibly incredibly easy to dodge. This is why the media has to be the opposition because most politicians do not want to say anything definitive. You have to force them to say something definitive or they will dance around it. Dr Ks strategy works very well with real everyday people, not people approaching every single media question from a strategic standpoint. Evading questions is a career skill.
He was clearly referencing Ted Cruz after the shooting in this example. If we gave Cruz an easy question, he would give a milquetoast nothing answer, because that is the best strategy politically.
I would argue Dr Ks frustration is actually kind of a flaw stemming from his profession and his belief in human sincerity, understandably and admirably. I'd also argue the #1 problem with the media and their interactions with politicians is that they don't act as the OPPOSITION MORE. I don't see any other way than to make politicians fear the media, otherwise you are making their job easy. Approaching things with sincerity unfortunately and sadly is how you lose as a politician and every single politician who goes in sincerely learns that lesson painfully. You are fighting from a significant disadvantage to be elected if your opponent engages with media strategically while appearing sincere as opposed to you who is actually sincere, because most sincere people hold at least a few fringe/polarizing opinions.
Every single major politician, even the ones you agree with and identify with, lie and dance around their beliefs to maintain electability.
@@ObamaTheHedgehog ay that's a well thought out and put response dude, I completely agree
@@TwoBiteBrownies oh frick
@@TwoBiteBrownies if you're an idiot so is Dr K. You're not an idiot at all. ❤️
@@ObamaTheHedgehogwhy do you believe sincere people cant win
I think it is more wise to platform people rather than not. Opportunity for an intelligent conversation and modeling respectful disagreements.
It’s on one’s onus to decide what they do with provided information.
The problem with deplatforming is that you're never going to succeed, you ban someone off Twitter, they're going to find another platform to express themselves...
@@enthiegavoir5955 Yup yup. Or people will seek them out curious to hear what they have to say regardless. Otherwise known as the Streisand Effect.
Exactly ! Cencoring never helps discussion, I'd love too see more genuine discussions where people try to come to a middle ground rather than prove eachother wrong, which is all that it is now
Anyone else think that Jimmy Broadbent would make for an excellent guest on the show? He's been very open about his struggles with mental health and his personality is just so unbelievably engaging, I think it could be a great episode all around.
Yeah, I think Jimmy would really benefit from doing one of these interviews with Dr. K.
I haven't finished the video yet just wanted to comment a bit further on the echo chambers bit. To add onto Charlie's bit about accessibility due to the internet there is also more that gets added onto this due to social media, forums, search engines, etc. running algorithms that designed to feed you content and put you into contact with like minded people that inherently create echo chambers. You start going through life talking with people and being fed content that never contradicts your point of view that reinforces this mentality of you must be right because everyone I talk and everything I see about a thing agrees with me. This is unfortunately only getting worse as technology becomes more advanced and more catered to the peoples wants versus their needs.
"Wants versus needs" is a shrewd point, I think. Part of the problem with modern America is that there's nobody who's able and willing to tell the people what the NEED to hear, only what they WANT to hear. Politicians are all panderers; there are a few that may have tried to say, "Wake up, Americans, you're the world's dumbest advanced country" and they proceed to be immediately banished from public life, never to be voted into elected office or any other relevant position.
This also creates a sense of intellectual entitlement among the people. They expect and demand to be told only what they want to hear, and they think they have a right to be exposed only to what they want. The idea that there could be any cultural spinach out there in the world, which they might not enjoy but that is "good for them" and which they need exposure to, seems to have fallen by the wayside. This is sad in part because it was not always that way, but this is where we've arrived, in part because people have been coddled by algorithms for the past number of years.
7:57 Musculature cultivates more dense bone structure, which means when you are 90 and falling over a lot, you won't just die from broken bones. Which means you are capable of being around for children a lot longer... I believe it's important for your family members to believe you plan on being around in their future. 🙏
Dr. K and Charlie would have a show where Charlie updates Dr. K on random internet culture
Two great minds having a great conversation. What more could i ask from a youtube video
People don't have open minded debates anymore, because it just takes one rotten apple to spoil the conversation and you often make yourself vulnerable. Like for example, my first experiences with flat earthers was:
- they start with some absurd claim
- you try to stay open minded and put a lot of mental effort into adapting their viewpoint and explaining why you disagree (you are basically playing their game at this point, they decide wherever this conversation is going)
- they completely ignore it and move the goalpost without having really listened or understood your viewpoint
- this repeats several times, until there is a claim that you can't immediately respond to (like, it's some study from a dubious website, or it exceeds your competence in physics)
- they will act like they won the argument, because they were talking all the time and you apparently ran out of arguments
Some people are just not worth an openminded debate.
ABSOLUTELY! The truth is, there's relatively little value in engaging at all with certain people on certain topics.
I had a coworker who was a Trump sycophant, years ago, who was convinced that Trump was the greatest president ever. He was a smart and interesting guy, but ultimately, we had to decide not to talk about politics (the same arrangement that he reached with his own wife, lol) because there was just nothing good that could come of it. Nobody's mind was going to be changed, in part because we didn't even accept each others' facts.
He would cite something from Fox News, which I would then google and try to show him why it was factually wrong, already debunked by fact-checking websites, etc. He just flatly wouldn't accept any of it, dismiss it as media bias, and we'd just go around in circles for hours sometimes. It was all very cordial and good-natured because we genuinely liked each other, but that didn't change the fact that it was a waste of time. I was never going to change his mind and he was never going to change mine. If anything, it filled me with an ever-deeper sense of despair, because I realized that if someone as intelligent as my co-worker could be conned by the web of lies spun around politics, then almost anyone could be.
It left me feeling rather hopeless and dejected about the prospects for America going forward -- and this was years BEFORE the pandemic...
Ultimately, my friend and I would talk about Minecraft or the game Destiny, instead. It was just more productive, neutral ground where we could meet, since we were both gamers.
@@StochasticUniverse As a non-american, the cult of personality that forms around not only Trump, but previous presidents as well is terrifying.
Youre exactly wrong. And im just not gonna try and understand why
@@StochasticUniversedude you cant even see your own bias
@@rohanking12ablenah I‘m not, this is exactly how it is. It is basic game theory.
When you mentioned that your wondering how mental illness fits into all this it made me think of my job as a psych nurse. Now I feel the need to delineate between commonly held delusions by society and really out there delusions that are obviously delusional (i.e. Donald Trump is the president vs. the sky is purple and I am Jesus). It's making the note writing part of my job more and more complicated by the day. Honestly I think one of the biggest issues today is the nature of truth and knowledge, but the majority people weighing in don't realize it yet.
While I agree with you, nothing stops society to be ill. Commonly held delusions are a cancer to society, and should be treated as such. We don't have the means to treat the society to dispel such illusions, but I think we will get it in time.
@@fisicogamer1902 A lot of it just boils down to "information literacy". I know that some high schools have actually begun to teach that topic explicitly because there's such a need for it.
It's frightening how, in the age of the internet, so many people are completely unable to evaluate a source for basic validity. Who paid for this? What is their agenda? What do they want from me? Do the claims being made here square with basic, well-known facts about fundamental science, etc? It's also peculiar that so many people with paranoid tendencies, who are the ones that wind up gravitating to conspiracy theories online, fail to ask these basic informational due diligence questions. Like, shouldn't they be the ones MOST inclined to be suspicious of random websites? But instead, they fall for them hook, line, and sinker.
I think it speaks to the fact that they have temperamental suspiciousness but aren't educated enough to know how to impeach information when it is presented to them. This is why they're vulnerable to social engineers that exploit their vague skepticism or outrage by feeding them disinformation that accords with their prejudices but might not be based in fact. The person being conned doesn't know enough to see through the con, but they know it feels good to have their prejudices affirmed externally by someone posing as an "expert".
This underscores that education is the answer, but as they say in the South, "You can't fix stupid". Some people are just dumb and they are doomed to be eternal lost causes. The task for society isn't to make everyone a wizard at information processing. It's to make the true dullards a small enough minority that they can't unduly influence society with the sheer numerical weight of their stupidity (as is presently the case).
@@StochasticUniverse well said my friend.
@@StochasticUniverseok what stat are you using to say paranoid people just fall into things because they want to/blindly follow things with a bias
An echo chamber that's poisoning each other.... Sounds like r/Introvert.
There are probably several dozen subreddits you could apply that to
a bunch of sub-sub humans really ^^
Sounds like most of reddit, coming from a frequent user.
Charlie is such a normal person. He's funny and clearly has good intentions, and he's also not the most knowledgeable or understanding person you'll meet. But that's okay. I've disliked some of his opinions that are more reactionary and uninformed, but I've also seen him rationally defend Dark Souls 2 or argue against right wing ideology. Obviously I'm not saying those two things are of equal importance, I'm just pointing out that he's more complex than you'd think from glancing at his channel.
If Charlie represents the way a lot of people think, we should draw hope from that. It means most people are good.
Interesting listen. Don’t agree with some of Dr. K’s ways of thinking but I can respect another viewpoint.
I think not using your main platform for the interview for someone views spicy ways is one way to do it.
For example if you have a Patreon page And post the interview only on Patreon can you almost control who your audience is. Very few who subscribe to someone's Patreon page are not in support of the creator and probably not going to necessarily be upset for one thing and more importantly not follow a dangerous belief. It will however give us a level of understanding of what goes in the mind of the individual.
can’t help but chuckle at “do you prefer moist”
I personally think the line between platforming someone and just talking to them is who has control over the conversation and framing of the narrative. How it is presented IMHO is the difference.
Like here Dr. K is directing and leading the conversation through the questions he asks to keep the conversation progressing in an informative way. That's different than say, letting a bigot freely spout their views for 90min and debating young students. It's not just about challenging their ideas, but also being in control of the conversation and how it unfolds.
Who controls the narrative and how is it ultimately framed would be my criteria 🤷🏽♀️
It’s insane to me that mass shootings were a huge debate a year ago and is still a huge debate now and there’s literally nothing done to the situation despite a growing epidemic of gun violence
FR
People dont care about shootings as much as they wanna make big change is all
What exactly would you do? I am not convinced anything can be done that will fix the issue.
Gun control is completely fine. its the people, the gun did not choose to shoot the people the person did.
You guys don't understand what school shooters are going through, they're ill, but not mentally, they have memetic diseases (or ideologies), You need to study memes and their effect on the soul.
Charlie didnt leave saying "so that's about it, see ya." 0/10 stream wouldn't recommend
53:15 isn't this exactly how mental illness is defined though with the DSM-5
Nah bad people don't exist
Just so you all know, "TH-cam Drift" has been disproven by a large study that used a buttload of bot accounts and analyzed the results.
"Who's Zach Snyder?" I'm sorry but that absolutely cracked me up.
*_WOOOOOOH_*
That's what we've been waiting for! That's what it's all about!
While it may be personally satisfying to call someone or their actions evil, it doesn't seem productive. I really wonder what goes on in the mind of someone who can justify such malicious acts as exploiting people with shady gambling sites or scam crypto coins. Like, I think of the things I am/was most ashamed of which shrivel in comparison and wonder if these people have or ever had such powerful emotions as I did to dissuade them from their morally bankrupt actions.
Nah... segregation didn't end because we tried to reason with people on mass, we said this is wrong and you're gonna stop it by force of law. We didn't win hearts and minds, we called it out for what it was
"Theres no good or Evil out here, Just the living and the dead" - Crimson Lance.
Agreed. The utility of busting out the word "evil" depends on what one's objective is. If the goal is to castigate someone who you profoundly disagree with, then it is a satisfying label to apply -- but it's also a conversation ender, an end-point. It both closes and announces as being closed the person so invoking the term, forbidding the possibility of further understanding.
If the goal is to understand what happened, to look at the world as a scientist does in order to uncover the mysteries of cause-and-effect, then simply dismissing something as "evil" is extremely counterproductive. I don't imagine that Niels Bohr would have made it very far in his study of the atom if he were convinced that atoms were "evil", you know what I mean?
@@StochasticUniverse @towelgard why on earth is calling someone evil wrong. If you cant call people anything you identify them as then its just a matter of fact of events. Then what do we say its not bad or good. It just is. If it just is then why do you care if someone brutalizes other human beings to satisfy themselves
I feel like Dr. K has nothing to say of interest in this video so he just keeps asking Charlie very broad questions about the meaning of life or how movies like Morbius get made.
its a interview not a conversation
I think identity labels, diagnoses and neurochemistry obscures the picture on this topic.
I suggest it would be much more comprehensible to view school-shooters as the unwilling heirs of collective, societal pain. Unfortunately, oftentimes when people find themselves in positions of relative power, they will misuse their influence and dump their pain on defenseless individuals with a lower relative standing; most of the time little slights and jabs that one would think should not illicit such extreme responses, but so ubiquitously, pervasively and frequently that the person in the losing position gets locked into their role, hence the extremely violent hatred and despair that school-shooters exhibit. It may be incomprehensible to the majority of people who managed to stay somewhere in the middle of the crowd, but I assure you it is not incomprehensible for people who were forced into the role of scapegoats by an entire school community from early adolescence.
Having said that, I of course don't condone school-shooters. But I really think if we seriously want to fix this problem, the analysis of its etiology must be done more seriously and less dismissively because at the end of the day everybody loses if we ignore the problem.
lol this dude should not be talking about cryptos if he has so little knowledge of them.
Why all the Critikal hate :/ Charlie may have a crude mouth but he's a genuine dood
His crude mouth is his best asset.
I'll never not admire his ability to make me laugh by saying anything with the world's straighest face and the world's most deadpan tone.
If people hate Charlie for his thinking they hate most people because he is very much closer to the Average Joe, honestly better than most. He has good moral values. He's just not well read. Most people aren't.
You don't have to have watched Morbius to know that it's the greatest Movie of all time. So all the people that went to see the Movie aren't actual Morb fans they try to get in on a joke by watching the Movie even though the joke is to not watch the movie and make random assumptions about it.
Yeah I think with the echo chambers there is nothing wrong with talking to people going through similar problems etc, but in the past this thing would maybe be through a support group that meets twice a week. With a leader that has mostly or completely overcome the problem and can curate the conversation towards helping rather than radicalizing. Online if there even is a curator they are more likely to be in the same or worse spot as the members of the echo chamber and it just escalates and escalates.
"What is Morbius?" was the best response I could've hoped for XD
It seemed like Charlie was spreading misinformation on psychosis at one point and I liked how dr k stated the stigma against it
I wouldn't say spreading misinformation, it's not like he's basing his content on that. It's just that he has that opinion, and by talking to dr k, hopefully he'll see his ignorance on the subject
It's like Dr K said, he's not intentionally spreading misinformation. He's just ignorant about the topic. Charlie is smart enough to listen and accept new knowledge.
@@adrenalinekick can confirm, I occasionally watch Charlie on and off for quite a while now and when he says something stupid, or maybe out of ignorance and someone calls him out for it, be it a friend or a viewer he has shown in the past to go back to what he said, revisit it, be educated about it and change his stance on it.
That's probably the quality I like most about him, he isn't afraid to admit that he was wrong on something.
Especially when there are other TH-camr's with huge inflated Egos and a huge helping of narcissism who think they can never be wrong on any topic. And even if they know they are wrong, they aren't gonna comment on it and admit it.
MISINFORMTATION ALERT UH OHHH MISINFORMATION !!!! STRIKE THEM WITH A THOUSAND BOLTS !!! It's only a misinformed and frivolous opinion !! Not misinformation ,if he was spreading it as information then yes ,but he was only stating it as an opinion
@@ewaberchulska I think you've seized on an incorrect distinction here. Misinformation is misinformation regardless of the intent behind it. It's any statement that is factually wrong.
Now, DISinformation is when someone intentionally says something that they know is wrong because they're just trying to brainfuck people on purpose. By definition, all disinformation is also misinformation, but not all misinformation is necessarily disinformation.
Wow didn't know Dr K was so religious to talk with jesuse himself
this collab is very insightful and for some reason i shed some tears. thanks
No censoring your interviews to appeal to audience, please.
The audience is intelligent enough to form their own opinions and "platforming" is just subjective.
Do your thing, Dr. Interview who you want.
If he's platforming somebody 40% of the US agrees with, and that is somehow unacceptable, then we need to have a conversation on how the hell we escape that aside from having those conversations with those people and understanding where the country got this way. Worrying about platforming is how we got so disconnected with the reality of the average Americans beliefs in the first place
@@ObamaTheHedgehog agree
Nothing drives believers more into despair and nihilism, than their destroyed hopes and believes. With no ethical leg to stand on, not even having a crutch, almost everyone turns violent. So it might even be more vital to face some believers with an attitude like: "Everything is like you think it is...", while slowly moving backwards, outside of their grasp.
"The earth might as well be flat, I just don't believe that and you can't convince me. Deal with that, believing whatever you want. Go on indoctrinating your daughter. I don't care about child abuse...". Well, OK there are limits to such a spineless solution. I just wouldn't know what could reasonably help other, than letting ill believes evaporate and vanish over time, because the person just might start to prioritize more urgent things. Some people are immune to noticing evidence.
I can't help but taunt flatearthers and other irrationalists, like: "Hey Ollie, It's 2 pm in germany, what do you think is the time in New York? I can arrange a skype call with a New Yorker, who insists it's 8 am. It really looks like it's early in the morning at that LONGITUDE! I can also arrange a call with Australia if you wanna? It's 11 pm in New South Wales now, dark night. How do you explain that to your daughter?"
“And in those days God will send them strong delusions and they will believe them.”
He had the option to be called "moist" for the whole video smh.
i'm really glad dr. k took the time to humanize the people charlie initially dismissed as unsalvageable
The two things aren't mutually exclusive. You can be a rounded, functional human with complex motivations and a rich inner life and still be a monster at the same time.
Even Hitler loved Eva Braun.
Idk murdering innocent people kinda makes you trash
Dr. K: Please interview Day 9! He's one of the most heart-warming content creators I know, is one of the earliest streamers, and would be a fantastic guest!
dr k is finally talking about gambling? and is talking with Charlie? This is great
he already did, i think it was with charlie aswell when he was deep into pokemon card packs and was sorta worrying if he was addicted or not
1:39:57 "Most people are just humans" - Dr. K 2022
45:12 from what i've heard, the youtube algorithm is made with the goal of keeping you on the platform as long as possible, and that's it. I'm pretty sure TH-cam themselve don't really know how it works in detail, as long as it's making them money.
I feel like its so obvious why school shooters do what they do as a kid that got bullied in highschool, i completely understand why school shooters do what they do, Im more surprised why no one wants to talk about how we can let a kid be treated so badly in highschool to the point where they feel like theres no other way out... besides suicide or wanting to take revenge on the people that hurt them. everyones pretending like theres something bigger going on or trying to blame gun control... but no one wants to look into the level of cruelty some kids are being put through in highschool by other kids and how teachers dont care at all.
But why would would a bullied kid shoot up a bunch of innocent children instead of the people who wronged him? It's always the children who suffer instead of the bullies. You would think a tortured mind would fixate on the person/people who picked on him. Not the fact that the ill shooter thought the innocent children who could grow up to be just like his tormentors who were the guilty, or maybe that's exactly why he targeted them, if so he is a coward.
Well, in fairness, I'm pretty sure cruelty happens in all 200+ countries in the world, but mass shootings only happen in the United States. So, while cruelty is an important component of the alchemy of factors that ultimately drives someone to commit a mass shooting, it is clearly an insufficient explanation, by itself.
@@hazza9595 It's because "society" is the enemy. Everyone is the enemy. How do you retaliate against "Everyone"? Well, provided that you don't have a nuclear bomb to detonate, the best you can do is to use the heaviest weapons possible to do as much damage as possible.
It's not even about the kids. That's the part that I think a lot of people fail to understand. The kids are just the vehicle that the attacker is using to enact his vengeance upon the world. Shooting a bunch of kids is a means to an end, not an end unto itself. (This is the same basic mindset that any common terrorist would use: 9/11 wasn't actually about killing the people in the Twin Towers because the hijackers personally hated them. They were just convenient pawns in a plan to send a message to everyone else. It wasn't about them. It was about everyone else.)
I love critikal but this interview was pretty bad. I get that critikal can talk about anything but Dr. K needs to prepare to direct the conversation a little bit more. The majority of this was broad uninformed questions that led to topics that was common knowledge. Crypto, Morbius, Social media recommending you polarizing content, conspiracy theories are well tred territory and this convo didn’t bring anything new to the table. It was mostly Dr. K asking critikal to define these things we’ve heard about thoroughly for months or a few years. This comes across harsh but I mean it constructively, critikal is such an interesting conversationalists that knows about a million rabbit holes, I wish this could have dived into a more niche/unique topic.
Can someone point me in the right direction for that incel correlation study/conversation that was mentioned in the beginning of the vid?
Me too. Just commenting to get a notification if someone replies with the sauce.
y
i really like the dynamic between these two
black and white view which a lot of people on the internet share, is very consistent in a lot of suicide bombers, mass shooter as well as they can't think of any other angles that would not justify their actions. Everything they see even if others disagree, actually reinforce their point of view.
Then what?
I have read that people double down when you shame a person or a group people... that people rather be wrong then deal with humiliation. According to Leon Festinger The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Which is one of the reasons for radical groups with radical beliefs.
I find it hard to believe that the majority of humans are "good" considering that historically it has been so common for humans to find pleasure in things such as public torture, ritual sacrifice, and of course more obvious things like genocide and such. I'd argue that humans are more bad than good, and only relatively recently have been pursuing the ideal of goodness
Regarding 1:02:40 and the radicalization of people in echo chambers. I think this actually comes down to something that CGP Grey did a video on a while ago. A lot of these radical incidents have a sort of mirror that they're bouncing off of, an equal and opposite echo chamber. These echo chambers don't necessarily interact directly but they constantly meme within themselves about what the other is doing/saying and getting more and more outrageous as a result. Even if those things are not actually being said by said opposing group. So, with your point about "lashing out against being hurt" these people are generating a non-existent enemy that is "hurting" them and thus further radicalizing them.
Incidentally, this is related to how I tell that I've found myself too deep into any sort of community. If there's an "other" that is constantly talked about and memed on as being some terrible existence that is irrefutably evil in increasingly cartoonish ways, then you're definitely too deep. It's possible that said "other" does exist and may actually be doing one or two of said terrible things, but a lot of it is just everyone riling each other up for the sake of doing so. When someone gets riled up too far, terrible things can happen.
That windows error sound as soon as Charlie mentioned the Canada bus guy was perfectly timed. Top tier comedic relief lol
a talk between Dr K and softwhiteunderbelly would be amazing, you guys both share the same sentiment of humanizing everyone including society's rejects
1:08:00 Uvalde has ONE councilor for the entire school. If we had one Councilor per CLASS, maybe we would have enough information to know that?
I saw a quote by John Oliver from his most recent episode. You are for more likely to have a cop in your school in the US than you are a counselor, nurse, or mental health professional. Far more. It isn't particularly close.
I realized that NFT’s were literally just a big game of hot potato
I would love to see Dr k speak about the Johnny depp thing on stream/ in a video. I remember his video claiming that men play on easy mode.
I was waiting for this.
So for school shootings. I found data as far back as 1971 for the US. It really hasn't changed as much as you would think. We just don't remember it that well. Or they didn't become huge news the way they do now. There is more now, but not so much more than most think.
It's almost... almost... ALMOST like a biased media is over-reporting something that a certain political party doesn't like, and ignoring anything else. It's not much different of KKK-aligned media over-reporting black crimes.
@@phosspatharios9680 How is reporting on people getting killed in school overreporting? 😐 If anything, we just didn't get the information back then
People do not understand the difference between how often they recall seeing something in the news, and statistics. How much you remember reading about something is not the same as statistics.
Dr K can you interview Alex Hormozi? He's a nihilist and I think it would make for an interesting discussion since you're both very well spoken.
As someone who used to think that Americans are just stupid for keeping guns around when they are clearly the source of a lot of the problems. This conversation actually gave a lot of perspective as to why cases like this isen't just as black and white. I hope that one day politics wont have to be like a trench warfare.
Why do you think its trench warfare
For some reason I really wish Charlie had voiced a strong preference to be called "Moist" instead.
at 7:45 what study is that can someone link it
nfts are justa rigged game of hot potato