Skip to content
The Joe Rogan ExperienceThe Joe Rogan Experience

Joe Rogan Experience #1191 - Peter Boghossian & James Lindsay

Peter Boghossian is a philosophy instructor, activist, author, speaker, and atheism advocate. He is a full-time faculty member at Portland State University. James Lindsay has a Ph.D. in mathematics and a background in physics and is also the author of three books.

Peter BoghossianguestJoe RoganhostJames (Jim) Lindsayguest
Oct 31, 20181h 58mWatch on YouTube ↗

EVERY SPOKEN WORD

  1. 0:00 – 2:32

    Meet the team and why they launched the “grievance studies” project

    1. PB

      ... could even hear their breathing, it's so sensitive.

    2. JR

      Yeah, it's good stuff. (breathing) Live already? Damn, there's no countdown? Jimmy, you're radical. You're radical. Mr. Boghossian, welcome back. Good to see you again, sir.

    3. PB

      Thanks. Thanks. Good to be here. Thanks.

    4. JR

      Mr. Lindsay-

    5. JL

      Good to be here.

    6. JR

      ... James or Jim, depending upon preferences.

    7. JL

      That's all right, go with Jim.

    8. JR

      Uh, J- first of all, gentlemen, and there, there was one other person that you did this with, this whole project.

    9. PB

      Helen Pluckrose from England.

    10. JR

      Uh, shout out to Helen from England.

    11. PB

      Thanks.

    12. JR

      Uh, is she back across the pond right now?

    13. PB

      She's across the pond. She's, uh...

    14. JR

      Oh, fish and chips and-

    15. PB

      She's making tea and managing-

    16. JL

      Fish and chips.

    17. PB

      ... Aerial Magazine.

    18. JL

      That's right.

    19. JR

      Oh, excellent. All right. Well, shout out to her as well. Um, let's explain what you guys did and what's so significant about it, because, uh, when I first read it, my f- first inclination, I, I had two reactions. One was a, a huge laugh. I laughed really hard. And then I said, "Thank God somebody exposed this."

    20. JL

      Exhales ] Yep.

    21. PB

      Yeah.

    22. JR

      So, tell me, tell me what you guys did.

    23. PB

      Jim, go for it.

    24. JL

      Yeah, so over-

    25. JR

      Oh, fr- let's explain who you guys are and what you do.

    26. JL

      Oh, okay, yeah.

    27. PB

      Okay.

    28. JL

      Um, my background is in mathematics. I bailed out on academia in 2010, though, because I kind of see the writing on the wall and, uh, so now I am a renegade gender scholar, and I write nonsense about genitals.

    29. JR

      (laughs)

    30. JL

      That's primarily what I do. (laughs) I mean, I manage a business at home, so I, I got outta academia.

  2. 2:32 – 5:08

    How the hoax worked: 20 papers, peer review, and an ecosystem that rewarded extremes

    1. JL

      Yeah, so we started about a year, I guess a year and a half ago now, it was last summer, we started writing a bunch of academic papers for the journals that represent these fields. And so everybody understands what an academic paper is, getting out of the gate, this isn't like an op-ed that you dash off for, like, Washington Post or some magazine or whatever. This is a thing, like, academics work their careers to write one or two of these a year.

    2. PB

      Yeah.

    3. JL

      And so they're really hard to write, they're supposed to be hard to get published, so we wrote 20 of them in 10 months.

    4. JR

      (laughs)

    5. PB

      (laughs)

    6. JL

      (laughs) And, uh, seven of those got accepted, four were actually published, and, um-

    7. PB

      Then we got busted.

    8. JL

      ... like at least four more, yeah, we got busted, and-

    9. PB

      Yeah.

    10. JL

      ... at least four more were on track. Maybe five or six more would have gotten in.

    11. JR

      What's the difference between getting accepted and getting published?

    12. JL

      So the process with everything in academia is really slow, and a lot of people don't know this. So you send off this article, the editor looks at it, and the editor either gives it the thumbs up or the thumbs down. If they give it the thumbs up, it goes off to peer reviewers, and that process takes months.

    13. PB

      Mm-hmm.

    14. JL

      Uh, often as long as, I mean, we had one paper that was eight months under peer review. So the reviewers look at it, they try to figure out if the arguments are good, they try to figure out if the research is good, they evaluate that, they give extensive comments, they send it back to you, then you have to revise it according to whatever they say, make it better, is what's supposed to happen. They made ours crazier.

    15. PB

      (laughs)

    16. JL

      And so then, yeah, they did, every single time.

    17. PB

      We took the feedback and made the papers just the most extreme things.

    18. JL

      Most extreme things. And so then you send them back, so now you're probably three, four months in, just the review process, not to the writing, which should also take months.

    19. PB

      Yeah.

    20. JL

      And then the editor will either send it back to the reviewers to see if it was good enough or they'll just evaluate it themselves, depending on where it stands, and then they'll make a decision as to whether or not-

    21. PB

      Right.

    22. JL

      ... to accept it or reject it or ask for more revisions. And then when they accept it, that means the journal is ready to publish it, but then the publishing process requires all the typesetting, proofing-

    23. PB

      Nice.

    24. JL

      ... all the stuff that goes into making it professional for an academic journal.

    25. PB

      And-

    26. JL

      And that can take months.

    27. PB

      ... and, and, and publishing is the coin of the realm, like, that's it. So the ideal is one paper every year in the humanities, broadly. So if you, that's how you credential yourself, that's how you get tenure, which is a job for life. That's how you get to teach people these ideas, who then, as you said, go out into the workforce, you know, five, six years later and in- infect everybody with total silliness. So the, it's the gold standard peer review. So we saw a tremendous problem.

  3. 5:08 – 8:35

    The dog-park ‘rape culture’ paper: fake data, fake methods, real publication and an award

    1. JR

      Can we tell people some of the titles of these-

    2. JL

      Sure.

    3. JR

      ... articles? Right now, they're like, "What the hell are these guys talking about?" (laughs)

    4. JL

      So we had a article, the one that got the most press was about dog humping in Portland, Oregon. Um, it was called, how did it go? Was it called, um, Queer Performativity and, uh, was it Rape Culture?

    5. PB

      Rape Culture in Port-

    6. JL

      Queer Performativity and Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon.

    7. JR

      (laughs)

    8. PB

      Yeah, we, we claim to have examined, under a fake name-

    9. JR

      Is that a real word?

    10. PB

      ... under all fake names.

    11. JR

      Performativity?

    12. JL

      Oh yeah, totally.

    13. PB

      They have their own lingo, their own, you know...

    14. JR

      But is that a word in the English language, performativity?

    15. JL

      I mean, in the academic English language.

    16. PB

      Yeah, yeah, yeah.

    17. JL

      Not in common, common parlance. But that's, like, the whole thing. This is huge, right? This goes back-

    18. JR

      Right.

    19. JL

      ... a long way. That's Judith Butler's whole thing was that gender is performative.

    20. JR

      Who's Judith Butler?

    21. JL

      Judith Butler is probably the most influential feminist scholar, or gender scholar, actually, I should say, that, that's been in maybe the last 30 years.... she's, she's big time. And so she had this whole thing that gender is performative, it's something you perform, it's not something that has anything to do with your biology.

    22. JR

      (laughs) Retracted article.

    23. JL

      Oh, yeah. There it is.

    24. JR

      Human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity at urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon. Why is it retracted?

    25. JL

      Uh, because there's-

    26. JR

      (laughs)

    27. JL

      ... 'cause it's bogus.

    28. JR

      ... because they realized that you guys were hosing them.

    29. JL

      Yeah.

    30. JR

      Human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity.

  4. 8:35 – 16:23

    More accepted nonsense: fat bodybuilding and policing humor in ‘When the Joke’s on You’

    1. JR

      (laughs)

    2. PB

      ... i- incorrectly that we fabricated statistics, but we, we wrote other papers c- w- called f- one was fat body building. So they claim that there should be a category introduced in traditional body building called fat body building, where people come and display their fat (laughs) before the audience. And we didn't manufacture any statistics for that and they loved that. They thought it ... you know, one line in that paper was, "A fat body is a built body." (laughs) And then one of the reviewers was like, "I-"

    3. JL

      "I wholeheartedly agree," or something like that.

    4. PB

      (laughs)

    5. JR

      Oh, Jesus Christ.

    6. JL

      Yeah. And then we wrote other papers like To Hypatia, we published a, a pa- it got accepted, not published. But that one, we claimed that it's, uh, it's unacceptable- It's uneth- it's unethical to make fun of anything to do with social justice.

    7. PB

      Right.

    8. JL

      And so if you wanna make fun of things that don't have anything to do with social justice, that's good. So if we wanted to make fun of men, that's great. If you wanna make fun of white people, that's great. If you wanna make fun of, uh, anything to do with social justice, that's a problem.

    9. PB

      Right.

    10. JL

      So we made ... we, we said that, you know, South Park's a huge problem. The Simpsons is a huge problem. We went into talking about how-

    11. JR

      (laughs)

    12. JL

      ... Stephen Colbert and, and, uh, Jon Stewart have the right idea, but then the journal was like, "Uh, but they're straight white males, so you have to, you know, nuance around that."

    13. PB

      Right.

    14. JL

      "To make it clear that their position as white men, even though they're on the side of social justice, it's not quite good enough," you know.

    15. PB

      (sighs) So they published that.

    16. JL

      They published that.

    17. PB

      They published that.

    18. JL

      What was that ... what was that one called?

    19. JR

      (laughs)

    20. JL

      That one was called When the Joke's on You.

    21. PB

      Yeah.

    22. JR

      (laughs)

    23. JL

      (laughs)

    24. PB

      And we made ... we, we wrote it so that they would think the joke is on us, because we cited our own work in there.

    25. JR

      Right.

    26. JL

      Yeah.

    27. PB

      But the joke was actually on them for publishing it.

    28. JL

      Yep.

    29. PB

      Yeah.

    30. JL

      Yeah.

  5. 16:23 – 21:40

    Mein Kampf rewrites, ‘allyship,’ and the meaning of “problematize”

    1. JR

      Right, that was the Mein Kampf paper.

    2. JL

      Yeah, our paper that rewrote Mein Kampf-

    3. JR

      Oh. (laughs)

    4. JL

      ... actually was about-

    5. PB

      We had two-

    6. JL

      ... allyship. And they were like, "You didn't problematize allyship."

    7. JR

      (laughs)

    8. PB

      Yeah, we had two, two of them that did Mein Kampf. One of them, we just more or less replaced whites, re- replaced Jews with white men. And you a-

    9. JR

      You, you literally took Mein Kampf, the actual words from Mein Kampf-

    10. PB

      Yeah.

    11. JR

      ... and put it in this paper, and replaced the word Jews with the word white men, and they accepted that.

    12. PB

      Well, we had two papers that did Mein Kampf.

    13. JL

      Yeah. (laughs)

    14. PB

      We had two versions. (laughs)

    15. JL

      So that one did not get accepted.

    16. PB

      The, what did the-

    17. JR

      What, what were the quotes that you guys used?

    18. JL

      I mean, so with that one, what, what we did was we took the whole document on- online and we just searched the word Jew. And we just started picking sentences and paragraphs. So, what was it? That at the end, it was something like, "If we don't combat whiteness, it's gonna be the funeral wreath for mankind."

    19. JR

      Yeah. (laughs)

    20. JL

      That's straight out of Mein Kampf.

    21. PB

      Oh my God. (laughs)

    22. JL

      Now, they didn't ac- yeah, they didn't, they didn't accept that paper though, because that paper, uh, turns out was written from the perspective of a white lesbian who hated her own whiteness, and they said that it was positioning her as a good white.

    23. PB

      Yeah.

    24. JL

      And because she's making herself out as a good white, again, allyship isn't as all is cracked up to be.

    25. JR

      Mm.

    26. JL

      She, you know, was making a problem. She should have really been forwarding the ideas of the Black scholars that she read way more and not talking about herself so much, even though it was-

    27. JR

      Oh.

    28. JL

      ... a paper designed to be talking about herself.

    29. PB

      Yeah, because that was what Hitler did, so that's what we had to do.

    30. JR

      (laughs)

  6. 21:40 – 24:29

    The ‘back door’ paper: pegging as “transphobia remediation” and journals’ response

    1. PB

      Yeah, but it's a grievance. This is... They're, they're massively... Okay, so then... But to do the, the homo, the transphobia thing-

    2. JL

      Yeah, the trans paper.

    3. PB

      (laughs)

    4. JL

      So we wrote this paper saying that straight men are generally transphobic, meaning, in particular, the, their kind of niche weird definition that you see on the internet and activists sometimes, that they aren't interested in having sex with trans people who have penises, trans women who have a penis in particular. And so we said that, "Well, that's a kind of transphobia." And clearly the reason that they might be transphobic is because they don't practice putting things in their butts.

    5. JR

      (laughs)

    6. PB

      (laughs)

    7. JL

      So if they start putting stuff up their butts... In particular, we called the paper Dildos, so you can imagine what we were saying, that you put up your butt.

    8. JR

      The whole paper was called Dildos?

    9. JL

      No, that was the, that was the nickname we gave it. The paper was called Going in through the Back Door. (laughs)

    10. JR

      Really?

    11. PB

      Yeah.

    12. JL

      Really.

    13. PB

      Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

    14. JL

      Go- Going in through the Back Door.

    15. JR

      And we, we argued that-

    16. JL

      And then there's a lot of technical words.

    17. JR

      You took... Did that one get published?

    18. PB

      Yeah, that's called...

    19. JL

      That's published.

    20. PB

      You can see it online.

    21. JR

      (laughs)

    22. PB

      You can see it online. So we argued that, that, uh, if straight men just penetrated themselves and had their girlfriends peg them through exposure therapy, you know, you start small and then work your way up, you can remediate transphobia.

    23. JL

      Yeah, we'll make them less transphobic.

    24. PB

      So by-

    25. JL

      As a result.

    26. PB

      ... self-penetrating or having your girlfriend peg you, you can be less transphobic. And they thought this is a great idea.

    27. JR

      (laughs)

    28. JL

      And so we based this off of, off of eight interviews, really 13 interviews, but with men. And I say really eight, f- 13. There were 13 interviews documented, but five of them were with gay people, not even straight people. So they don't really apply. So then we have these eight interviews with straight men. We made one of them a conservative. And he's just... So we could just put in, like, you know, crazy things that a conservative might say about this. And they were like, "Why don't... Why weren't there more conservatives participating?" So I was like, "Well, I'm gonna run with this."

    29. JR

      (laughs)

    30. PB

      (laughs)

  7. 24:29 – 28:30

    Real papers that read like parody: Hot Ones, Hooters, bone broth, and academic bloat

    1. JR

      There's a lot of papers that seem like parody that make it through that you guys aren't writing.

    2. JL

      Oh, yeah. We could pull up one about how hot wings... Like, there's a TV show, Spicy Ones or something like that, about hot wings.

    3. JR

      Oh, yeah, yeah. The- the- the YouTube show.

    4. JL

      Yeah, yeah. So they- they had a whole p-

    5. JR

      Hot Ones?

    6. JL

      Hot Ones, that's what it was. They had a whole, uh... There is a paper out there about that show and it's all about how, you know, hot sauce has everything to do with masculinity and being manly and they didn't have enough women on the show.

    7. PB

      Problematized.

    8. JL

      And it's because it's, because it's sexist and the hot-

    9. JR

      It says Emily.

    10. JL

      Hot sauce, I think, was the sexist part.

    11. PB

      Hmm.

    12. JL

      And it has all these bizarre conclusions. We cited that in the paper we wrote-

    13. PB

      (laughs)

    14. JL

      ... about Hooters. We put in the part that there was, you know, masculinity contests of eating the hot wings, who can eat more hot wings, and then they'd say, "Oh, I ate 20 hot wings. Ask out the Hooters girl." Um-

    15. JR

      Professor-

    16. JL

      Yeah.

    17. JR

      ... wing-eating show Hot Ones is problematic for women.

    18. JL

      See? Problematic.

    19. PB

      He's an ally. There we go.

    20. JR

      (laughs)

    21. JL

      But yeah, that's a real paper, right?

    22. PB

      Ah...

    23. JL

      So we cited that paper. It's real.

    24. JR

      Oh... (laughs)

    25. JL

      There are thousands of papers like this.

    26. PB

      (laughs)

    27. JL

      There it is.

    28. JR

      The Spicy Spectacular.

    29. PB

      There it is.

    30. JR

      Food, Gender, and Celebrity on Hot Ones.

  8. 28:30 – 38:35

    Academic incentives, fear, and institutional enforcement (tenure, HR/DEI, Title IX)

    1. JR

      Now, you-

    2. PB

      It's-

    3. JR

      ... you guys, you guys, at least you used to work in academia.

    4. JL

      Yeah.

    5. JR

      You work in academia.

    6. PB

      Yeah.

    7. JR

      Like, what is... How are, how are your peers treating this?

    8. JL

      (laughs)

    9. PB

      Are people mad at you?

    10. JL

      There are... Well, Pete has... Is gonna have a lot to say about that, I think. But for me, I've had to... From academic people, I've had two kinds of responses. But the overwhelming... But some of those are like, "Oh, you guys." And then the overwhelming of them are the same thing over and over and over again, and I mean, a lot of people. "Thank you so much for doing this, but I can't. Don't tell anybody."

    11. PB

      You can't talk about it, right.

    12. JR

      Yeah, keep it under the rug.

    13. JL

      "Just, I'm trying to get a job."

    14. PB

      Right.

    15. JL

      "I- I'm up for tenure, I can't talk about... Thank you. This needs to go."

    16. JR

      Hmm.

    17. PB

      Up for tenure.

    18. JL

      And that's everywhere. It's everywhere.

    19. JR

      Oh...

    20. JL

      You can't proceed through academia now unless you bow to this stuff.

    21. JR

      Tenure sounds like tyranny. It's just, the whole, the whole thing sounds preposterous that you can keep a job for life.

    22. JL

      Well, the idea was supposed to be that you work your ass off for a few years and then you...

    23. PB

      Right.

    24. JL

      It was supposed to be to defend academic freedom.

    25. JR

      Yes.

    26. JL

      So you get tenure, then you can go forth and put out some crazy ideas, really, like, dig into some stuff and they can't fire you for, you know, coming up with maybe weird stuff. And then people would argue about it. But now it's kind of become the situation where people get in this... Th- they get in their job and then you can't get rid of them.

    27. PB

      Yeah.

    28. JR

      Right, right, right.

    29. PB

      Yeah.

    30. JR

      (clears throat) What... Is there a way to fire people?

  9. 38:35 – 39:56

    Competitive victimhood and the ‘new religion’ of intersectionality

    1. JL

      Right and that's how that works. Uh, if you look at... There's all this stuff been coming out about victimhood culture.

    2. JR

      Yeah.

    3. JL

      And how it propagates and how it develops. And that's one of the things, it's called competitive victimhood.

    4. PB

      Right.

    5. JL

      Um, you could call it-

    6. PB

      Competitive victimhood.

    7. JR

      Competitive victimhood.

    8. JL

      That's the formal term of people who study this.

    9. JR

      I love that.

    10. PB

      (laughs)

    11. JL

      (laughs)

    12. JR

      That's wonderful. When people are fighting over who's a bigger victim. Oh.

    13. JL

      But you see it all the time. It's like you see people in society, it's like, "Oh, the Black Lives Matter people go nuts." And then all of a sudden the white supremacists are out and they're like, "Oh, white people have it hard too." The second they... The second somebody hears, "Oh, black people have it hard," somebody's gonna be like, "White people have it hard too." That's competitive victimhood.

    14. PB

      Right.

    15. JL

      And so then when you have like a moral economy, if you will, where you can kind of cash in and gain status or gain access to, to speaking or whatever it happens to be, by holding a certain status of, of victimhood or grievance, then you're gonna find people competing to find ways to get that for themselves.

    16. JR

      Yes.

    17. PB

      Right.

    18. JL

      Everybody's gonna go... I mean, you have the infrastructure there, everybody's gonna go after trying to maximize their own utility within that.

    19. JR

      Yeah.

    20. JL

      So people over seven feet tall aren't a protected class yet, but the second they realize that they might be able to cash in on it, they will... Might lobby for it.

    21. PB

      It's competitive victimhood. Grievance jockeying, it's been also called.

    22. JL

      Yeah, I've called it grievance jockeying. I think Gad Saad, since you mentioned him, called it the Oppression Olympics.

    23. PB

      Yep.

    24. JR

      Yeah. It's, well, it's wonderful times.

    25. JL

      (laughs)

    26. PB

      (laughs)

    27. JR

      It really is. I mean-

  10. 39:56 – 40:54

    Idea laundering: how ‘prejudice’ becomes ‘knowledge’ through peer review

    1. PB

      So if you look at the root... So here's the, the thing that we, that I thought about extensively. If you look at the root, where is this stuff coming from? All of this stuff is coming from these... The canons of knowledge, their bodies of literature, their peer-reviewed, and that's the idea laundering thing again, which we should get to.

    2. JL

      Yeah. Yeah.

    3. PB

      So all of that stuff is coming from, from this. And if you wanna make... If you wanna get back to constructive politics, to get back to people having conversations... And that's the thing, like that's... I think one of the reasons that your show has been so successful is it's a, it's a combination of authenticity with... You can have... You're totally willing to have conversations with no holds barred. Right? You can't have that in the academy.

    4. JL

      Mm-mm.

    5. PB

      So people need to go to you to hear these thoughts and to wrestle with ideas and to engage. It's just a... You can... You can-

    6. JR

      But you can... You can't really do it anywhere else other than a podcast, because-

    7. PB

      Well, you can't do it in the academy.

  11. 40:54 – 47:18

    Media/culture spillover: censorship dynamics, Megyn Kelly, and corporate ‘diversity’ theater

    1. JR

      But you can't even do it on the Today Show. They fired Megyn Kelly for-

    2. PB

      Right, right.

    3. JR

      ... wa- asking why is blackface racist.

    4. PB

      Right.

    5. JR

      Which is a stupid fucking question.

    6. JL

      (laughs)

    7. JR

      No doubt. She's not a bright woman in, in that regard, socially. Right?

    8. JL

      So-

    9. JR

      It's a very clumsy, clunky thing to say.

    10. JL

      Clunky.

    11. PB

      Clunky.

    12. JR

      But they just fire her.

    13. PB

      They fire her.

    14. JL

      Yep.

    15. JR

      They should have... What they should have done was brought in Black scholars and Black intellectuals-

    16. PB

      Exactly.

    17. JR

      ... for a week just to fucking grill her.

    18. PB

      Exactly.

    19. JR

      And that would have been amazing television.

    20. JL

      Yeah, yeah.

    21. PB

      But that attitude that you have is not what they have.

    22. JR

      Right. Well, they're just panicking.

    23. PB

      So they wanna punish the transgressor. Right? They-

    24. JR

      Well, the... Well, I think they just wanna stop hemorrhaging... And I think they didn't like her anyway.

    25. JL

      No, that's true.

    26. JR

      I mean, the word, the word is they really didn't enjoy her and that she wasn't a nice person and she was a, a mean person on set.

    27. PB

      But it was a learning moment, right? It was a teaching moment that's lost now.

    28. JR

      Yes, yes, yes.

    29. JL

      But, but, but think-

    30. PB

      It's lost.

  12. 47:18 – 1:18:05

    Education and standards: equity statements, math/science targets, and ‘queer astrology’ astronomy

    1. JR

      But at least in something like hosting the Today Show, you are just talking. Once you put these sort of diversity standards to something like mathematics-

    2. JL

      Oh, yeah.

    3. JR

      ... then, that's, that's when things get super squirrelly.

    4. JL

      Yeah, they're trying to do that a little bit.

    5. JR

      I'm sure they are, yeah.

    6. JL

      You Retweeted that thing I wrote about the mathematics, and they wanted people to sign an equity, which is another-

    7. JR

      Yes.

    8. JL

      ... word that they've co-opted. They wanted folks to sign an equity statement and a diversity statement.

    9. JR

      Well, explain that.

    10. JL

      And the thing is-

    11. JR

      Explain what they're trying to... That you, you, you have a commitment to diversity.

    12. JL

      Yeah, you have a commitment to diversity, and you have a, a commitment to equity. And so equity does not mean treating people equally. It's not like you have a commitment to equality, which is... We should all have a commitment-

    13. JR

      Sure.

    14. JL

      ... to equality. Uh, it's... Equity is defined differently. It's to make up for past injustices or to make up for, um, some deficiency that has occurred somewhere along the line, so you have- Yeah, affirmative action is an equity movement. It's to treat people differently in order to level the playing field.

    15. JR

      Yeah.

    16. JL

      (laughs) So it's not treating people... It's not treating people equally, and that's the key thing.

    17. JR

      Yeah.

    18. JL

      It sounds like it is-

    19. JR

      Right?

    20. JL

      ... but it's not.

    21. JR

      It's a word that they've smuggled in. These stories-

    22. JL

      Straight out of the literature again.

    23. JR

      It's, again, out of... All the stuff comes back to the literature. So if you look at the word equity in the dictionary, you get one definition, but if you look at the word equity as they're applying it...

    24. JL

      Yeah, in sociological definitions, it's a very specific thing that means something slightly different-

    25. JR

      Yeah.

    26. JL

      ... from what people assume it means.

    27. JR

      So here's the question you should ask somebody. Anytime you hear someone use the word equity, just ask, "Oh, I'm, I'm curious, why didn't you use the word equality?"Mm.

    28. PB

      Can, can you, can you think of a ... Would the sentence be the same? Would the meaning be the same? Well, the meaning is not the same. That's why they used equity and not equality.

    29. JR

      Well, equity is a finance word. That's why it's weird.

    30. PB

      Equity is also a fin-

Episode duration: 1:58:36

Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript

Transcript of episode AZZNvT1vaJg

Get more out of YouTube videos.

High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.

iOSAndroidClaudeChrome