Science, Censorship & Democracy: @Amazing Atheist

people say there are only two things
that are inevitable in life uh death in texas censorship is inevitable i think we can really genuinely sincerely say that censorship is inevitable and if you live in a democracy debates about what should and should not be censored are therefore inevitable also i think well i was going to say i think it is amusing be more honest to say it is amusing to me that today we have this phenomenon of the alt left catching up with and considering political issues that consumed the alt-right five years ago in some cases more like eight years ago they're really behind the trend and today i'm responding to controversy raising the most fundamental questions of the significance of censorship in a democracy it's going on between tj kirk and people whom he now regards as his more successful competitors and i could say channeling the energy of the new alt left people he regards as a more extreme left-wing demagogues than himself which is somewhat hilarious to hear um doubtless including people like jimmy dore and uh kyle kalinski whose name explicitly so on and so forth what a world we live in where kyle kolinsky can be considered some kind of fire brand leftist you know what i mean shout out to the people shooting up the audience this is a completely spontaneous unannounced video so it's nice if anyone shows up sometimes i give you guys advanced notice nice to see you wild style uh we're broadcasting at the perfect time for my viewers who are in australia and new zealand alexa what's the time in adelaide australia it's 1 47 pm perfect perfect timing for all my big fans in adelaide some some of my biggest fans live in adelaide australia you might not know this all right so i just want to say um most of you guys oh good yeah and this viewer is indeed in new zealand all right glad to hear it uh back when i lived in china i was broadcasting on new zealand time pretty much every day so i used to say that all the time i'm going to build up a huge audience in new zealand what i ended up doing was building up an audience in sweden for whatever reason i had way more i had way more uh viewers in [Laughter] way more viewers in sweden than in new zealand by the end of that exercise so look guys there's the background of the amazing atheist going into the situation the background of kyle kolinsky i think is not even worth talking about could come up and you know there's my background also as a commentator i'm certainly someone who has also criticized the amazing atheist the amazing atheist in some ways is one of the great innovators who defined the rules of the game and went on to break all the rules of the game so on and so forth um the amazing atheist i feel comes into this discussion with the most painful sort of disadvantage because he is ignorant of the people of whom he speaks the amazing atheist refers so confidently to the possibility that in future we would have a branch of government staffed entirely by scientists who would be competent to determine objectively what is and what is not the truth what should and what should not be censored now he does a good job of making this unpalatable argument seem palatable uh and he is not someone who is entirely unlearned and unread he digresses to talk about the history of germany and world war ii he digresses to talk about different kinds of uh fascist extremists and communist you know worst case scenarios where the government has this power to control um who can and cannot complain in effect the use of freedom of speech and he you know in frames his own argument in this way to seem moderate and to seem reasonable but it all relies on this notion of the personal virtue of scientists as if scientists were people very much different from religious leaders whom he vilifies as if scientists were people very much different from politicians and they're not now i made a video that i'm sure none of you were thinking of in this context sorry i said there's the amazing atheist background and there's my background i have made videos boldly taking up an unpopular position in favor of censorship although in this video paradoxically i'm in the opposite position because i'm arguing against the atheists uh pro-censorship position but i do i do argue regularly in favor of censorship and it comes up i live in a very left-wing context most of the people who talk to me are left-wing and they consider me relatively conservative or relatively right-wing compared to them you know if i moved to texas i'd be considered left-wing but if you live around a whole bunch of you know vegan bernie sanders supporters you know i might seem conservative compared to some of the company i keep uh etc but you know um i have a background we were talking about the state a very different way i've been surrounded by people with phds my whole life you know i am painfully aware that formal education is not a substitute for virtue and formal education is not virtue unto itself someone like the amazing atheist who you know he genuinely is a self-made man he got rich you know with nothing but a bad haircut and a bad attitude here on youtube he was one of the few kind of pathfinders he was one of the few people who redefined the medium defined the rules the game wanted to break them so on and so forth you know um do you really think the amazing atheist has spent enough time in universities do you think he spent enough time talking face-to-face with laboratory scientists to realize just how fallible and just how human they truly are i don't think he's even gone out to the bar with those people i don't think he's seen those people drunk i don't think he's seen them sober and when he reads the history of the world which he does he's not completely unlearned he's an autoduck he's done some reading you know when he reads for example the history of the nazi party in germany he doesn't see that as part of the history of science he doesn't see the extent to which the true believers the supporters of german fascism german extremism were in fact themselves scientists or themselves the most highly formally educated people in the country now i can say exactly the same thing with the history of communism but it's just not the case that in russia or in china communism was exclusively or even predominantly supported by uneducated peasants by the least educated and most oppressed people it's actually a constant source of embarrassment for the communists and they have to come up with complex jesuitical explanations for why it is that actually they were mostly supported by bourgeois intellectuals and kind of elite university educated people there were no no end of the scientists who were supporting communism in the most extreme most terrible forms of communism you know scientists aren't merely fallible in some ways they are much worse people than the religious leaders who tj kirk finds it so easy to vilify hey guys i am seeing your your comments uh come in but if they're not entirely relevant to the conversation they're not entirely uh fascinating to me i won't necessarily reply but thank you for being here and thanks for for commenting you're welcome to contribute to the conversation you're welcome to distract me and you're welcome to contradict me or criticize me while we're doing this live uh you're also welcome to hit the thumbs up button by the way maybe some more people will discover this maybe tj kirk himself will join us he has nothing better to do and i i send out the send out the alert to him so in fact i'm absolutely certain he has nothing better to do if any of you want to on twitter or on even on his tumblr he used to answer me on his tumblr remember i talked to him a couple times on time send him a message on twitter say hey there's a guy having a meaningful discussion of censorship and your your position on it on youtube maybe you can come and join the audience so invite people if you know anyone to invite including you know you can invite uh you can invite tj kirk okay so in his two videos he's made about this so far he made one video and then he responded to criticism he appeals to your sentimentality he appeals to your prejudices in the audience by presenting it as a self-evident fact that scientists are morally good whereas religious leaders are morally evil now babe why don't you hand me your your book about uh sorry the the the book about antidepressants and so on sorry just say yeah okay we we're living through this this book is titled i guess all right let's just stick to endorsing one book at a time here the book about the very recent and still unfolding history of scientists and medical doctors forcing millions of people to take drugs that have absolutely no scientifically provable medical benefit and on the other hand have very real side effects so-called antidepressants psychiatric treatments of various kinds that have been debunked but also make millions of dollars this is a book that shows the fallibility and bias of institutional science and individual scientists and medical experts on a massive scale and in a way that's ruined millions of people's lives i part of what i'm saying to you is this is not the exception to the rule this is the rule okay now it's one type of science you know i've also spent my life around people who did social science research you know talk about a problem like gambling there are people with phds whether it's in political science or in psychology or psychiatry or you know people who spin out all kinds of theories about gambling and what we can do to help gamblers i'm absolutely certain there's some scientists somewhere who's got a thesis that's worth a lot of money that the best way to help gamblers is to get them hooked on xanax you know get them hooked on benzodiazepines or antidepressants or something well we have to understand gambling as a nervous disorder has to do with anxiety and [Music] come up with some excuse to get them on expensive brain disabling you know chemical treatments mind-altering drugs i'm sure there are all kinds of different theories who really knows more about gamblers and gambling and what they're going through scientists or christian preachers it's real easy to vilify these people tj and tj i am more of an atheist than you are all right i'm a self-identified nihilist i i take atheism across much further than tj does and sorry tj if you ever somehow end up watching this video i know i know this you will scoff at that you will say that's ridiculous how could you possibly be more atheistic to me or more nihilistic than me well if you start watching a few more videos on this channel you'll figure it out all right i'm willing to make political commitments you are not willing to make in terms of actually destroying religion on planet earth actually making progress not 500 years from now now you know i'm willing to take very bold steps in that direction that you that i know you're not you know i respect your position i've heard you explain your position you're not okay um as easy as it may be to vilify the humble christian preacher okay he lives among the people and he helps the poor and the weak and the downtrodden in a way that you don't tj all right tj have you ever helped an alcoholic overcome his alcoholism have you ever helped a gambling addict overcome his gambling addiction and of course i don't believe prayer works i don't believe quoting the bible to them is i don't believe quoting the bible for them is any more effective than quoting shakespeare or some secular philosophy if you quote the bible and it's a good quote it could have an effect on someone who's a gambling addict or an alcoholic but not because of any divine agency you know you managed to find something meaningful you could also find something in shakespeare or any well-written book that buddhist philosophy you name it you know you could you could give someone an uplifting quote or guidance but you know caring for people and seeing the reality of their problems i know this is going to sound ridiculous but even if you think about a problem like obesity you know religious leaders who live in the community and help people with their problems and talk to them they don't about obesity too you have to know about obesity drug addiction alcoholism gambling they know about these things in a way that scientists do not they all their lives long are students of human nature and they know the sorrow and the agony of really trying to help people i say again prayer doesn't work the drugs don't work either now there are scientists and there are individual scientific studies completely debunking prozac for example prozac is one specific ssri antidepressant there are there are let me ask tj kirk the amazing atheist if you had your way in this world if you were able to bring about this reform you're describing whereby a council of scientists would sit down and decide the difference between truth and falsehood or why they would rule in the public's interest on what people are and are not allowed to say i think we have ample evidence that still today your scientists would establish it as a fact that everyone should be taken prozac that prozac is helpful and not harmful when we know this is not true who's we a tiny minority a minority of dissident people who are willing to do the research and challenge the status quo we know it's actually a proven fact that prozac doesn't work that it has real harmful side effects and either zero benefit or a benefit so small that it can be confused with a placebo effect etc etc some incredibly it's either incredibly marginal benefit comparable the placebo effect or no benefit at all and the harm done to you is very real um how about circumcision tj is it what you would call an uncontrovertible scientific fact that circumcision does harm i remember i remember being shocked to see it now decades later i heard people talking about on youtube i've seen the official opinion of the american college of physicians and surgeons reassuring you that circumcision is completely harmless and completely acceptable that it shouldn't be illegal that it's that the benefits outweigh the harms so on and so forth you're looking at you know you're looking at um losing 40 of the nerve endings in your penis you're looking at really permanent really serious irreparable harm being done to millions and billions of infants against their will now i think there is actually a separate kind of debate to be had about whether or not circumcision should be allowed for people over the age of 18 who give informed consent but for the parents or grandparents or or religious leaders to make the decision to carry out circumcision we're in a situation right now where scientists you know respectable phd wielding scientists are willing to line up and say what is convenient instead of what's true why do they do this now you know most people want to jump to the profit motive okay and you know i think probably if we went through enough of tj's own videos i think we'd find videos because i've heard him making some kind of anti-capitalist statements where his mind is running wild this way whether the profit motive corrupts everything i think a lot of people read this kind of book and they say oh well the reason why these scientists are making excuses for drugs that don't really work and so on it's the profit motive you know it's it's money um i think if you really met these people if you really spent time with these people that would cease to be believable for you you know like if you look at what a stock broker is doing on the stock market well all of it has to do with money but it's not like you can pin down and explain a particular decision they made whether it's a good decision or a bad issue oh well the problem with that decision he made on the stock market today was that it was motivated by money you know if you are a medical doctor you ask a medical doctor so why did you decide to specialize in toe fungus people get fungal infections on their toes you're not going to have a simple answer oh what was money oh okay you can make money being a specialist in toe fungus right and you can make money delivering babies as a medical with the same credentials there's money either way right and that's going to sound ridiculous but really for these people in these specialized areas all the people i know with phds you know to say they're motivated by money they sit there and they fill out a form requesting research funding and a lot of them they fill out six a year okay i've i've never known someone personally you did that many a year i've read about it i've i've actually never personally known someone with a phd you did six funding proposals a year but but it's out there um and i know there are some departments that have teams of people writing these research proposals and one guy just signs them it's like it's he's pretending it's his research probable so that he can get out all these proposals every year i personally did not know anyone like that but anyway whether they're doing two research proposal or four if you said to them like the research can be on anything well we could we could use an example relevant to this discussion they could be doing research on censorship they could be doing research on the psychological effects of male circumcision we're doing research on something to do with antidepressants and their effect you know unemployment as a long-term consequence of getting on psychiatric drugs there's a great area of social science research but to look at their particular research project and then say to them well you know you just did this for money you just did this for the profit motive the reality for them is they would make money no matter what research they did like you know if they had proposed one project versus another the about the amount of money coming in would be about the same in the same way that like from the stock brokers perspective everything he's doing is related to money but it's not like you can explain any one decision in this in this way as being exclusively about money it's not something where you can hold up an idea of what an uncorrupt person would be or an incorruptable person would do in that scenario and then contrast it to what actually happened and say clearly when we compare these two we can see the difference the corruption made all right money is a factor in all academic research and everything that people with phds do and in a sense it's meaningless because every everything is equally corrupt all options are equally corrupt and again if you talk to that medical doctor there may be some exceptions but you know it's not really something you give a simple answer to like okay you used to be a heart surgeon why did you stop being a heart surgeon to go into fungal infections there's going to be a story there's going to be a reason there's going to be some reason of a decision but it is never going to be as simple as money and i know it's going to sound stupid to you but if you know these people if you've eaten lunch with these people if you know them face to face in a way that tj the amazing atheist does not you would know this however much more money you would make working in fungal foot infections if you made more money than doing heart surgery the money would not be enough it would not justify you doing fungal toe infections instead of heart surgery because for you as someone in that position whether it's that you already have a phd we already have 20 years of medical training and education behind you right at that point like the the the crucial factor that's going to make the decisive difference it's not going to be money all right and i'm i'm you know i'm going to limb here and saying to you when you look at the stupidity the recklessness the the the terrible harm done by scientists in every generation including our own scientists under communism in the soviet union scientists under the nazi party in germany scientists under capitalist democracy in the united states america doing unspeakably awful terrible things all right i ain't gonna go to them and save you it's never the money because they could have been making money six different ways they'll make money no matter which option they do and they'll make enough money you know they'll make enough money doing heart surgery they don't have to do breast augmentation breast lift even if they make more it's never going to be the factor that makes the decisive difference now say something i'm now 42 years old guys i've been studying politics my whole lives my whole life long did i start at age 11 when did i start studying politics you know i don't know okay guys i kind of wish i kind of wish i did have a youtube channel when i was when i was younger and when i had more of a soft heart and when i got more hurt and upset by these things you know i some of the things i've i've talked about with melissa reminded me of that of that time in my life you know um [Music] you know i remember reading about horrifying experiments done on human beings by the cia by cia partner agency cia scientists and i remember reading about the cia assassinating some of the scientists who worked for them when they became inconvenient you know and i remember my sense of horror and my sense of revulsion and my mind you know i i've been raised to be left wing my mind kind of automatically going into this left wing downward spiral where it seems like everything america does is bad people are wrong you know what i mean whereas start kind of you start thinking america can't do anything right because they did this this one thing wrong i've got to tell you something when i when i read that kind of stuff today i don't see it that way i don't feel about it that way you know i've really changed and i don't think it's that my heart has grown cold you know i i don't all right so um i give many examples the cia actually did do experiments about whether or not they could traumatize someone enough to create a split personality so they could switch between multiple personalities okay they did actually do and it involved torturing people from what i read it probably did also involve raping people while they were under the influence of drugs unbelievably horrible and unspeakable things that were done to try to traumatize people to give them slippers from from what i've read this really does seem to be the case and some of these psychological experiments some people survived after being tortured and mistreated to they were vegetables afterwards that were useless you know they were severely mentally injured people having haven't been through this okay and i'll tell you something else i read about this this particular set of experiments involved traumatizing people but it was something like they had 15 scientists on the project and they kind of came to the end of the phase one report so again obviously this is from memory and it's possible the source i was reading was wrong or based on misinformation it's possible i mean it's possible there are there are examples of seemingly factual documents about the cia and when you look into it it turns out they're either wrong or grossly exaggerated but i remember reading this back in my political science days so let's say there were 15 scientists in the project and they write the conclusions to the phase one report and the scientists say well look basically you know we can't really proceed with this research without torturing people because it seems like this split personality thing it only basically happens when someone's so traumatized that they kind of start suppressing memories you know like it so you know so really you know this is going to be kind of really unethical and involve torturing people or doing terrible things to be honest doesn't doesn't really make any sense and um so somebody in charge said okay fine so anyone who doesn't want to go any further with these experiments you know you can you can resign africa out of the 15 scientists like 12 of them resigned and then some of them decided they want to stay and go further with research and they hired seven new people or something i did like you know protocol who wants to be involved in research about traumatizing people and seeing if they can have repressed memories and you know oh you can opt out and you know again none of those guys will you think any of them are poor you think any of them are begging do you think anyone made this decision on the basis of money do you think the scientists who stayed in to torture people and see what happened you know when you create split do you think it was like oh well well i i could be working on fungal foot infections i could be that could be doing so oh but the money is really good no there's no way the money will ever be the decisive factor there never not for these people you know i think if you've met these people and spent time with these people you'll know what i'm saying now there are problems i mean i was saying before to you dead serious now we've digressed on to many other topics now i think that these people i think the scientists who torture people to death i think the scientists that torture animals to death and i think the scientists who created the whole you know biopsychiatric for-profit complex that ruins millions of people's lives you know i think they are morally worse than the small-town christian preacher whose practice in life is to hold some old old woman's hand and cry with her to sit with an old woman at the funeral and weep with her and talk to her if it's catholicism maybe hear her confession you know protestants don't do that to sit with someone and talk to them and talk to them about the meaning of life and talk to them about death and talk about the death of their husband you know and a preacher who's called in to talk to some teenage kid who's a brat and giving his parents a lot of trouble and talked to this teenage kid about drugs and sex and video games and what it means to be a man you know a lot a lot of religious leaders do all these things i knew i knew buddhist monks who were doing this stuff and it's really not part of the buddhist religion that was what the community needed they need people who go do this kind of thing you know even if at the beginning of your career as a religious leader you're a person of absolutely zero moral character right there's a kind of praxis here that draws you into the study of human nature and helping human beings and caring about them and listening to them and you know yes many of these preachers they are encouraging prayer which doesn't work the drugs also don't you know in many many areas of science there's a vivisection doesn't work torturing animals to death doesn't work torturing monkeys to death just to see how unhappy they can be we have sorry it's a real example i can give you links to articles we've tortured animals to death for completely different ridiculous reasons in history science and you know i'm using these examples because they're easy to cite but they're very real the whole corpus of soviet union science the whole corpus of german nazi science in terms of this whole literature a whole category of science that's complete [ __ ] these people were scientists and they're still among us there are scientists of that moral stamp of that moral caliber i am an atheist i totally despise organized religion but that does not mean that i share tj kirk the amazing atheist that i share this other youtubers naive jejune embrace of scientists as if they are something superhuman i i'm really here to say to you instead that scientists especially academically credentialed scientists they really are some of the worst people in the world they're so bad they're so awful as individual people that i think you would find in all honesty they compare very poorly to the average religious leader it's going to pause and and take a look at the uh they look the comments from the audience um but look i mean all right i just i just wanna say you know when tj kirk says he said it in two separate videos in almost the same tone of voice that he believes the government united states of america should have a special branch a special a special division entirely staffed by properly credentialed scientists you know you can just tell from the way he says that he believes in these people you know and tj you believe in them because you don't know who they are you you don't know them face to face you know you don't know the reality of who they are um i judge napoleon by his sex life not only by his sex life napoleon was also racist napoleon was also pro-slavery of slavery of black people specifically you know there are all kinds of things i judge i think he was a terrible military strategist i'm just being honest with you everyone says what a great military strategist he was and he really wasn't i'm a critic of napoleon in many many ways a lot of people on the left a lot of activists for atheism they worship a guy called bill nye bill nye the science guy have you ever looked into bill nye's sex life these people are not angels and i'm just being real with you they're not even good people they're really not i have a whole lengthy critique of universities of the academic system in my book no more manifestos and i don't intend to repeat that here but you know within the disaster that is the 21st century university system you know there's kind of a special ring of hell for the hard sciences um it's a terrible education system it is selecting four terrible people and it is making them into much more terrible people okay i try to say something nice about scientists later in the i heard that later in the video but it's all right i'll just stop so somebody i think somebody's just googled it someone's just googled bill nye sex life anyway um but look you know isn't it easy for us all to keep scorn on the moral character of politicians why because you know them because they have some level of transparency you see them you hear their voices oh you you really think scientists are better people than elected politicians really really think about what i just said about the the country priest who holds someone's hand while they're dying and who comforts the widow after her husband has died and does that again and again and again who sees human sorrow and agony i mean even within the hospital the doctor is in and he's out he the doctor comes in he checks the medication he walks out and very often it's the priest who's sitting there with the person while they're dying who's doing so-called palliative care right think about the role of the priest in the community you know everything in life whether it's new babies being born or drug addicts or gambling addicts they're helping parents with their crappy teenage kids giving morality lectures to people and so on there's a way in which they are positively involved in human nature you know no matter how ridiculous their religion may be you know think about the experience of politicians in the community the same way you know think about i mean in the united states of america whether it's a local city councilor or a mayor or a state senator or state congressman somewhat someone who's not the president united states someone who's not particularly part of someone in the middle middle zone of being elected to government but not at all being a dictator you know the things they learn the things they observe you know in the economy and the struggles of life they go and visit a school because they've read a newspaper article or maybe they had a handwritten letter sent from a parent saying this school is a disaster we need to have an intervention and they go to the school this is you know just reality for most politicians and they can see this is a terrible school and they don't know what to do about it you know this is a politician again if you're just elected for the first time this goes on for years and they go and talk to someone and they investigate they talk to the parents and they talk to the school minister and they talk to the po okay what can we this school is terrible you know they're involved in life in questioning and trying to solve problems i mean even if they start off being an idiot or being a terrible person there's a process there again of of them being involved in and engaged with human nature um you know and that is the exact opposite of the process of both the education and the career of scientists scientists are separated from reality from the most important aspects of reality in all in all these ways and more you know okay guys i'm going to take a moment to look at your look at your uh so yeah someone here knows the name lysenko and lysenkoism i've mentioned him in my essays many times he's probably been mentioned here on youtube a couple times i got compliment for the screen the live stream a couple days ago about uh in cells the cultural critique offered by themselves and the critique of insulin thank you for thank you for that post human glad to hear you you liked the stream i i feel that's one of the best videos in the whole history of my channel if my opinion counts or everything i was very very happy with that yeah so frida is mentioning some of the really ridiculous experiments done on dolphins i've read about some of that stuff too and a lot of that i mean what what could the research have possibly proven so a lot of you guys are talking about experiments on animals there are also unbelievably terrible experiments on human beings i remember this was when i was first getting into vegan activism i found a website and it was just scientists i i don't think there were many scientists i think there's like two guys around this website because it wasn't a huge foundation but it was scientists who were criticizing waste within scientific research where it's like things are a waste of money so it was a very interesting perspective so they weren't opposed to torturing animals if it was for a real reason if there was something really going to be discovered but they had all these examples of huge amounts of money being spent and animals being tortured death where it couldn't have possibly um discovered anything so one of them was an experiment where they took lambs this is baby sheep lambs and they threw them against the wall until their necks were broken and then they x-rayed their necks i think they dissected them and looked at the fractures and they said i mean again i'm reading there i didn't read the original report i read these scientists criticizing the study but they said look you know the conclusions to the study basically admit well this study couldn't have possibly proven anything like you know like you know they had to draw some conclusions like well as you can see like you know the ones that kind of hit with the left side of the neck got this kind of fracture and when the impact was on this like you know they tried to draw some conclusions about this but you know it was like well we hoped we were going to draw some conclusions that are useful to understanding and injuries to human beings and cars or something but it is just really not there you know so you know the the the depth and extent is significant of just just waste just meaningless pointless uh research um so there's a wikipedia article called uh the pit of despair experiments um that's what the wikipedia article is called and that's what they're referred to as that was torturing uh monkeys to death for no reason and the only point of the sorry this is a real series of scientific experiments um they're notorious i mean they're they're well-known people in in many of the sciences and the only thing it was trying to prove or could prove is that if you took a monkey and made it unhappy enough it could never really be happy again it's just like like you can't really recover from something great you know so you know um you know so amelia woods says that her her neurologist also a scientist with impressive credentials is probably the least empathetic person i've ever met period also one of the rudest well you know and if if your neurologist didn't have those characteristics before he or she entered university they might be like that by the end right the process of both selection and preparation and inculcation so i just mentioned this came up a lot years ago on this channel when we were talking about dietitians and like you know there are people who are scientists with phds in the sciences who are out there testing a hypothesis like okay how many grams of protein is optimal for losing weight or gaining muscle or something but then there are also people who just have that experience of holding someone's hand and guiding them and coaching them as they lose weight and they gain the weight back again like where it's the human reality of that experience of trying to motivate someone and keep them on track and trying to understand psychologically why the diet didn't work for them because most of the time it's not a scientific problem it's not like you know it's not like oh well this person didn't realize that eating potato chips was bad for them no they realized it and they didn't have the self-discipline to death control where a lot of what you're dealing with is you know this this human reality the human nature side of dietetics and nutrition it's not you know laboratory science and you know we have a system of education and you know you know exactly i mean just like your neurologist you know what kind of person prepares for studies for and writes those exams and then you know what kind of you know um you know you know what kind of attitudes and sense of entitlement they have coming out of that that's another huge factor with this this phenomenon with uh psychiatric medication is also just that the people within this profession want to feel that they can push a button and solve a problem that they can take a pill so they want to feel that this is in the domain of science and it's not most of which i mean ninety-five percent of which i is in the domain of human emotions human misery you know it's it's much closer to the domain of religion or the domain of indeed uh a gym coach you know someone trying to get you motivated and thinking positively so you can win the game or something and you know again the gym coach something else we can contrast to the someone working in dietetics and nutrition you know so no i mean you know partly the people who are produced by scientific education they have assumptions about their own authority their own role in the world the way in which they ought to dictate reality rather than learn from it which is you know in a word toxic you know in a word malignant in a word dangerous and why do so many scientists become nazis why do so many scientists become communists it's nothing democratic about science not as it's taught not as it's taught in our culture or any culture i know over the last 200 years um it's it's a really twisted sort of aristocracy okay shout out to brendan williams thanks for saying that brendan brendan says that his most anticipated book is isil's upcoming book so the book is titled no more manifestos we will see how quickly i i wrap it up i have a bunch of big decisions to make in my life but i could i mean i could wrap it up in just a couple days but i'm you know i'm feeling i should take a lot of time and trying to make it try to make it perfect oh mercia asks quote do you have a video on female himself i i'd like to think that all my videos about gender politics and so on i think they all apply to all genders and all orientations yeah so uh brandon williams is referring to the pit of despair uh experiments i can give you guys that link and that's no big deal i'm pretty sure that's it's on as i mentioned it's on wikipedia did i say pit of despair i think i think i got it right maybe i said pit of whole business or something yeah anyway there you go there's the there's the video on that uh i think brandon williams no so willem again mentions um mk ultra so yeah so there's mk ultra there's project monarch which was before mk ultra um there were also experiments that are much less famous that took place over the border in montreal canada so most americans don't know but it was cia project in in montreal torturing people and why they didn't do much role i don't know i don't care but no we have you know you guys probably know there were experiments that are much resented forget they were called the tuskegee experiments of intentionally giving uh sexually transmitted diseases to black men to see how they'd suffer uh maybe i'm uh there you go the tuskegee syphilis study there you go i remember there were a lot of uh experiments done on americans in prison having to do with skin conditions remember there was a book about it that had the title acres of skin so there's a link on that um as i remember there was a quote from one of the scientists one of those here it is oh well i found the book shows i must have seen this book 30 years ago um still got it boy that's case you guys don't know i i drink zero alcohol i i use zero drugs so i can remember this book i probably saw this uh 20 years ago or something um oh okay i can get that whole link in there all right the i i think the link i'm not allowed to share because it's just too long so it's it's a book from 1998 called acres of skin and it was given that title because one of the scientists um involved in experimenting on on american prisoners he he said you know he regards the prison population regards this prison population as acres of skin to carry out his uh his experiments on you know oh yeah so the bikini atoll radiation experiments i remember um i remember watching an interview with a survivor and he was he was dying i mean he was dying of radiation poisoning but he was dying more slowly some people died immediately the bikini it's all ridiculous so look you know um i take a lot of long walks with my girlfriend we talk about a lot of things in depth um [Music] i reminded her earlier today in the context of a totally different discussion i said you know the reason why i left buddhism the reason why i quit buddhism was not buddhism it was not any particular principle or theory or philosophy found in buddhism as a religion you know put it this way that's not why i left buddhist i gave up on buddhism because of buddhists because of who buddhists are you know and i don't really mean this in a hypothetical sense i had met and spoken with hundreds of buddhists at all levels of education and speaking different languages and and so on and so forth you know no now look if this sounds some of you may think this is really unreasonable okay how do you feel about rock and roll how do you feel about devoting the next 10 years of your life to rock and roll how do you feel about these five guys who are in the band with you how do you feel about devoting all your time and energy to working with these five guys all right you're not making a judgment about rock and roll you're making a judgment about this band and you're making a judgment on this band that is based on who the people are in this band okay so i'm not making a judgment about buddhism as a text as a theory as a philosophy right i'm making a judgment about you and you and you and you and you yeah it's more it's more than five guys but you know obviously there are a small number of people at the top controlling certainly controlling what's going on in terabyte of buddhism and the academic study of terabyte of muslim um you know there are there are five guys you know ultimately the catholic church is probably controlled by five guys at the top too you know the pope and a few of his friends you might quit the catholic church because you disagree with the pope and you don't disagree with catholicism in theory yeah um you know i think people are eager to make judgments about science and that's not what i'm encouraging to do in this video i'm telling you to make judgments about scientists you know who are these people who are the men and women with phds who rule this peculiar completely undemocratic completely you know corrupt aristocracy within our society that we call science you know i'm asking you to make a judgment about about the people involved now i would also point out many of you you tune into my channel to hear what i have to say about psychology at this point i think it's probably the majority of my audience there is a sense in which you know like many many many of my videos are about psychology and you care about what i have to say people ask me for help about their own lives we're talking about psychology i think nobody here would say that they hate psychology or they disagree with psychology nobody would say abolish psychology nobody would say defunct psychology you know tear down psychology right okay so you know like well what do you think about psychology are we talking about theory are we talking about a text we're talking about okay now i ask you what do you think about psychologists maybe i mean for many people here maybe while you were in high school you were sent to an office where you had to talk to a psychologist i just read some really scary examples of that of people having teenage encounters with psychologists have you ever asked for help whether over the phone or face to face you're dealing with some challenging life and you talk to a psychologist have you ever been going through a divorce or a breakup with your girlfriend or boyfriend and you talked to a psychologist what do you think about that man what did you think about that person or those people right oh now we're thinking about something very different now we're not thinking about a theory right now we're not thinking about a principle now we're not thinking about a text in the sense that the bible is a text or the the ancient buddhist philosophy exists inert and dead on paper oh now we're talking about now we're talking about people okay oh yeah those are terrible people oh yeah all the psychologists they're unspeakably terrible people oh god that was awful i mean that was terrifying you know no you know oh yeah in theory psychology could be this wonderful positive thing in our lives what an idea that people would study in university and now immediately we start to move beyond that and say okay well that this can't just be a few bad apples right why why are they terrible why why are psychologists so bad even if there's a sense in which psychology is so good so you see why i'm saying this there's there's a sense in which science is good right why do i use toothpaste and a toothbrush you know science you know there's this why do i you know why am i not getting cholera by drinking water out of this can you know what i mean how is it we know whether or not water contains cholera and we design sewage systems so all of us get to shower and drink drink water out of a tap without worrying about cholera organic oh oh that's that's science oh okay we all have this unimpeachably positive view of science oh okay now and now what about scientists and i'm not insulting you guys you may or may not have lived a life where you really knew scientists and really knew them as people not at a distance where you knew about their divorce and you knew about their sex life you knew about the bdsm woman they missed what's the word dominatrix they visited so i'm not into btsm tj is tjs he would know the centromere you know where you you really know this scientist as a man you know the depths of his souls you know the whites of his eyes you know you know him deep down inside you know a scientist and you know his excuses for not eating a vegan diet or whatever you know you know you know him like that you know oh okay so if we if we think psychology is good but not psychologists or if we think buddhism is good but not buddhists uh like buddhist philosophy in some sense you know you think it's good and said some value or something i mean look you may think shakespeare is good but you hate actors you don't really like people who work in the theater but you love shakespeare okay this is not a contradiction this does not make you a hypocrite they're two very different things right okay so we immediately have to press past this and start to ask ourselves why why do psychologists have these terrifying authoritarian attitudes you look at jordan peterson you know to what extent is jordan peterson the product of his education and to what extent is he going on to produce other people who are dysfunctional in the same way as an educator i mean he was he was a psychologist he was also a professor of psychology you know and have pointed so many times he he completely bought into the myth of biopsychiatry he completely believed in antidepressants he completely believed in benzodiazepines right up until it put him in the hospital and almost killed him and even then in his book there's one sentence in the appendix to his book where he just says that benzodiazepines are in theory harmless but in practice in reality very dangerous there's one sentence you know um you know obviously we start to ask tougher and tougher questions about education now i've just written a book that talks a lot about this because what i saw happening in the year 2020 and enough time has gone fast we can already see it's over this is the testing says oh oh why are police choking people to death why are police using chokeholds why are they doing these terrible things and right away what people want to do is oh it must be the system of education it must be a police are educated so my book i have many many pages talking about this the book does not talk about philosophy of science very much it does not talk about what this video talks about in general but you know oh oh really so the year 2020 came and went the year 2021 is almost over now um did anyone did even one person go to the police academy and get the reading list of what the textbooks actually are did anyone actually read the textbooks that are used to translate did anyone actually sit in the classroom and observe what they're taught and how was there any real interest in the analysis of police education let alone its reform it's very fleeting it's very shallow that we're so ready to blame education and we don't seem to be ready at all to actually reform it to actually analyze it so on the one hand i recognize it's inevitable that we're going to engage in a critique of psychology it's inevitable we're going to engage in a treat critique of scientific education even within a field of science like nutrition of course but i'm also tremendously skeptical in a true profound sense of schedule i'm very uh skeptical about that critique of of education and and uh where it leads next okay guys i'm now just going to return to your comments there'll be a little bit of dead air as i look through this stuff i thought there was a really interesting question in here that had the word democracy a lot of intelligent comments about it so you guys are talking about talking amongst yourselves but what i don't understand is uh why we only have 15 thumbs up at this point far more of you should be hitting the thumbs up button so people could have joined the conversation okay so maybe this is gonna be the last last question for the audience for me to for me to close on um [Music] so you plant-based powered it's good you're asking about jordan peterson well he's credentialed right if you have the phd you have the credential nobody questions anything beyond that right who is a doctor and who is not a doctor there's a piece of paper that they have nailed to the wall it says they're a doctor so that's it so become an authority figure um nobody elected them nor can they ever lose an election can never uh you know can never be called into question this way okay totally fair comment from freda freda says quote and i think psychologists position of authority often translates into abusive relationships with the patients okay i would go a step further i think by definition it's an abusive relationship so you know i i remember melissa talked to a sorry some kind of therapist right back when melissa was first falling in love with me and thinking about moving to china to be with me right she meets and speaks this woman you know what are you going to talk about yeah i'm thinking about moving to china well now you need to talk to somebody who knows something about china and you know now maybe someone maybe this this psychologist is so sheltered and unworldly and quick they don't know anything oh that's crazy oh wow you must have some delusion there must be something wrong with you that you've fallen in love with someone who chat maybe you talked to psychologists who says oh yeah they've been to china on vacation now where are you going like you know this is all just totally subjective like right sorry this is another whole this is a really deep issue but um i was talking to melissa the other day and she said in passing well i'm not a doctor but and she meant medical doctor i'm not even going to bother saying what the conversation but you can imagine she said well i'm not a doctor but i'm certain about this and this you know she's just going to say you know i let her finish her sentence finish her barrel rap i said look you know you know i've got to jump in on that issue of going around saying i am not a doctor but think about how little medical doctors know about any one of these issues if you're not talking about someone who happens to be a specialist in this field who happens to have a personal research interest like you know i took an interest in cambodia for several years so i read a lot about cambodia but like being a doctor or not being a doctor has no bearing on that you can see so many doctors who have some confidence in something they had some like maybe they had a lot of training with how to deal with a broken arm but they're put in a position of being an expert about vegan nutrition you know so i knew i knew a vegan she was a mother with a small child and she got a phone call from a doctor proper medical doctor was fully credentialed because the school put the doctor up to it so it was like the the school so the teacher talked to the principal of the school and the principal phoned this doctor and then the doctor gives her this phone call she the doctor's basically been told by the school authorities to call this parent and put them in order and say that she has to feed her child meat because there's no source of protein in a vegan diet there's a phone call from a doctor what is what does that doctor know about veganism what does a psychologist know about china you know what does a psychologist know about your relationship with your boyfriend and so there's all these obvious you know flaws in the system well they only know what you tell them right and their own prejudices and biases and their own cultural background all this stuff oh they don't get to hear the boyfriend's perspective you know so my father was a liar he lied about everything i've never met his therapist i know we had a therapist for many years if i met his therapist his therapist would be blown away be like well you're a totally different person from what my your father described of course my father wasn't capable of telling the truth about me i mean if he wanted to tell you the truth about me he couldn't you know he was constantly lying about everything but basically anything that touched his ego he would he would lie about so you'd be lying costly but his relationship with all his kids lying about everything he was not delusional he was a liar there are two different things he was intentionally lying constantly what does a therapist know when they're targeting a composer okay but you know my point is i'm actually wanting to go much further and say no it doesn't matter how nice how friendly you know the relationship between the psychologist and the and the patient is i think that that relationship authority it's always abusive right and i'll tell you two things for now coming back to the title of this video it's never scientific and it's never democratic and what we've done is set up an academic ideal of the sciences that is in every way the opposite of democracy it's not just incompatible with democracy right but it undermines the most basic concepts of democracy and that psychologist can never be made accountable that psychologist can never be drawn up before the panics and voted out of the office or voted to go fight in the front lines in iraq now i always forget this guy's name was it cleon in ancient athens so there was this marvelous figure in uh thucydides in the history of athens so the guy's name is cleon and the author here is uh thucydides do some reading all right there's this wonderful drama that unfolds in thucydides thucydides deciding describing you the way democracy really worked happens and cleon is cross-examining and criticizing the guys who are in charge of the war the war effort the political leaders or military leaders both i've been sure tomorrow and he ends one of his speeches where he's you know this is part of democracy he's criticizing what's goes on and he says something like if i were put in charge of this war you know i would win that battle and bring back victory within 30 days now maybe it was two weeks you know i forget the number of days he says something like this says you know within 30 days i would i he said something like i would win that battle or die trying and you know that'd be it this would be over and he left he walked out of the arena i don't know he just did that for dramatic effect or yeah he left and after he left they had a vote they voted to send him off to leave and it's openly said they were laughing about it they said well you know either he wins or will be rid of him like either he wins or he dies and if he dies then we don't have to put up with him and he wants that's a political leader now the rest of the story is very interesting eventually he does die but he gets he has some victories uh before he has some defeats and whether cleon is a hero or a villain you know it's a is an important question you know okay so jordan peterson how many people did he put on ssri antidepressants how many and by the way i know the procedure sorry in case you don't know it i've heard jordan peterson himself describe it he would recommend that a patient take one of these drugs and then he would walk across the hall with the patient and introduce them to the doctor who would do the prescription he didn't directly give the prescription because in the canadian system that's how it works he has to go get another doctor to do it but nevertheless okay there's no accountability for the fact that jordan peterson recommended that his own patients take exactly the same drug that destroyed his life that his own patients took the same class of drugs benzodiazepines the same class of drugs that he now knows are dangerous that he knows are deleterious that he knows ruined his whole life there's no accountability there's never going to be a vote there's never going to be a debate right oh gee yeah those scientists who did those horrible experiments in the bikini was there any democratic accountability there is no democracy to our system science at any stage not in the education system not in the assignation of research funding not in being responsible for even using taxpayers money in an effective way that has been debated recently by rand paul in the american senate he i was thinking about making youtube video about it but i decided not to he's put on a hilarious display of research that the government gave millions of dollars to and there was complete waste of money one of them was like a comparative study of of bird calls when birds are mating whether or not their mating behavior changes due to trivial reasons it's just there's all kinds of scientific research i mean stupid pointless the outcome is obvious and this is government money taxpayers money and there's there's no accountability so it's it's not just undemocratic it's fundamentally anti-democratic and you know they have the impunity that aristocrats once had a type of impunity that police officers also carry with them in our society you know the credentialed experts and they're experts on what you feel they're experts on what you think and what you know and they can medicate you and they can literally put you in chains and they can lock you up in an institution they have all these powers given to them on the basis of what on the basis of a credential because what they're doing is neither scientific nor is it democratic it has no scientific uh validity has no objective reality there's nothing verifiable about it and these are the people coming back to the basic premise of this video these are the people that the amazing atheist wants to put in a position of political power to be able to censor what you are able to say on facebook and youtube and in the newspapers and everywhere else whatever it is they regard as a scientific certainty well guess what they've regarded prozac as a scientific certainty it's been debunked still today 95 of americans don't realize that it's been debunked how about haldol i made a video just about the drug called haldol which is pretty scary uh pretty scary effects in terms of brain damage and so forth um so i mean partly this is talking about our concept of science you know and generally though what i'm instead directing our attention to is the question of who are scientists humanizing scientists not dehumanizing them but regarding them as people and it seems to me so easy to vilify religious leaders it seems to me so easy to vilify political leaders but they have some transparency they have some accountability scientists have none so referring to this question from mr kurtz i hope you're still in the audience mister if i may call you missed him mr kurtz is the name given here mr kurtz asked simply how can we make science more democratic okay so what i must say read my book again my book doesn't really deal with with science per se but it deals with education it deals with university education with occasional references saying that my critique of how universities work very much applies to the sciences then it talks about police brutality it talks about democracy a lot talks about how constitutions are written you know uh so and so forth okay great good to see you here kurtz um glad to see you you're here um [Music] you know okay it's a great question was i wasn't prepared to talk about this not that i do any preparation for these for these videos um ugh oh legislation largely is based on animus all right now this is animus and it's in its legal sense what democracy you know tends to cope with quite well is a specific resolution for a specific purpose that forbids a specific thing that is our legal tradition and that's most of what we think about as democracy um what we think about as democracy in the 21st century is having a council of people come together to debate what should and what should not be forbidden so up to a certain point in our history homosexuality was forbidden then we had protests and you know we had uh cultural change and what have you we had political activism right and at some point we decided no we're gonna permit and even encourage homosexuality we're gonna have gay marriage and we're gonna make gays equal and and more right okay so something was forbidden now it's not forbidden okay it used to be that racism was compulsory and then we made racism forbidden this is a good example because we all know you know it's you can compare from country to country and this is true from one country to the next in europe what does it mean to make racism forbidden i just applied sorry i shouldn't say apply i had an interview with a university in order to apply to become a student there and i was refused for being a jew this is in california in the united states america 2021. so racism is forbidden discrimination on the basis of religion is forbidden and it's still ongoing they can tell you exactly how that's justified under the american constitution you know so on and so forth but you know we have a problem i mean obviously i could say a lot more about the difference between direct democracy and indirect democracy but we have a whole tradition of what is law what is law and order that is really just based on forbidding things okay now how do you build a school read your constitution what does it say about schools i'll point out this is fresh in my mind for different reasons the american constitution the federal constitution says nothing about schools nothing what they wrote in the american constitution in the 1780s no interest ah but look at the constitution for the state of maine written in 1820 some of the same people were still alive from writing the federal constitution the constitution united states america uh including thomas jefferson he was still alive and he participated in writing the constitution for the state of maine ah now there are several paragraphs talking about state funding in education his is brief and it's vague and it's also forbidding something so it actually does this illustrates my point further what does it say about education in the constitutional state of maine it forbids the government to give money to any school unless that school is willing to allow the government to make decisions about education like a school can't remain independent with it okay it's interesting very limited very limited statement all right how do you create scientific attitudes amongst the general public how do you create frankly an elite you know of of expert scientists we have a society that has not yet gotten to the point of even being willing or capable to make circumcision illegal to make cutting off part of your penis illegal because of your sacred covenant with the judeo-christian god you know we're so completely stuck on this issue of forbidding and the opposite of forbidding being liberated being rights uh so on and so forth that you know i think the the most honest answer i can give you is that um you know we have not yet begun to really talk in any meaningful sense about the relationship between democracy and science you know um yeah thanks guys i am seeing your comments as they come in i know i know the uh video from jordan peters and giantbone i know i know the stuff you're talking about by the way thanks for watching my other live streams about uh in cells and these other topics and thanks for the encouragement to grow my beard longer somebody's a fan of the beard [Music] you know okay i feel like one of the biggest mistakes we've made is in actually separating democracy from the judiciary from the role of the courts you know most people today most people with phds in political science for example and most normal people they'll use less academic language they talk about democracy now entirely in terms of the question of who gets what so the government has an enormous amount of money and then how it doles out those privileges those programs how it funds things you know then that becomes the debate so this is a sense in which um the social services state has kind of blotted out the last memory of what democracy was supposed to be in a more ancient and more a more meaningful sense you know well you know that's not the only aspect to democracy you know another really important aspect of democracy has to do with accountability has to do with judgment has to do with creating consequences for our actions you know and i've said this before i will probably say it again if you want to understand athenian democracy you can try to understand theater they went to the theater and they voted they voted for who would win who had the best song who had the best comedy who had the best tragedy audiences voted at the theater they went to court they had an enormous jury it was just like the theater they had a huge audience who would hear the arguments and they would vote and people would be punished and people would die on the basis of the vote from the audience in case you haven't heard they killed socrates um aristotle fled for his life when aristotle ran away from athens he was he was convinced or presumed that he was going to be put on trial and killed uh if he stayed in athens any longer just just to mention that socrates's experience was not necessarily completely you know you know now you know um if you're talking about the democratization of of science okay i'll give you a real quick parallel oh boy this is a long time ago can anyone remember 2008 i remember a conversation boy i have to think where it was i remember a conversation on broadcast television so this is probably cnbc or msnbc or whatever they have like that you know and it was about making changes to the government oversight of the stock market at the last minute kind of as the crisis was sitting in or just before the crisis and i remember the the reporter the journalist who obviously was he seemed to have realized jesus he said sincerely he said i think there's this really fundamental mistake we're all up against which is that people in power think that the guys making money on wall street the stock brokers and hedge fund managers that the guys making money on wall street and the government regulators ought to get along and be great friends and he said no you want wall street to be afraid of the government you want the regulated people they are terrified of you do not want this to be a cooperative or positive happy relation you know um for me that hints at this aspect of democracy why are our universities so poor our professors have total impunity our professors are simply aristocrats among us never once do our professors worry oh if i teach this what will the pnex make that what will parliament make of it in what way will i be held accountable in this democracy in what way will i have to stand on trial as socrates once did and and present an apology present a defense of my views of what i'm teaching and never forget that's what socrates was put on trial for he was put on trial for what he was teaching the youth because some of the youths he had been teaching had gone on to be politically notorious people most notably alcibiades um [Music] you know the idea that a teacher should be brought before the people not the senate not the congress but the panics direct democracy the idea that a teacher should be accountable for what they're teaching the idea that a student could bring a teacher in to be held accountable in a democracy you know this is this has completely died and been forgotten you know so i'm giving the most sincere answer i can hear if you're asking about how could science be made democratic i would say that you know in the same way that that that news broadcaster had the honesty to say you need wall street to be afraid of the government regulators you know not to be cooperating with them or happy or controlling their appointment or capturing them whatever not feeling that they're working together for the same for the same interests you know i've got to tell you something i think that people like jordan peterson i think that people like jordan peterson should be afraid to harm their patients i think that they should be afraid to preach quack medicine debunked pseudoscience quack medicine to their own students i think jordan peterson should be afraid to teach his ridiculous theory about the eye of horus he has all these crazy theories about ancient religion that could be the funk too i think he should be afraid to teach complete [ __ ] because i think he should feel that he's accountable and he's accountable to his students and that he's accountable to the real world outcomes like well how many are students how pardon me how many of your patients actually got better after taking this cure and i think he should be accountable to the people in a democratic sense so if you're asking me in what way you know can science be made more democratic you know i have to say i i'd really start with talking about consequences the way in which democracy can and should create consequences for our choices consequences for our actions and now we've drifted so far away from that momentarily in the year 2021 people are asking oh they're what went wrong in afghanistan who's responsible who's accountable will will there be even one military leader who's brought in and put on trial you know and a trial in some sense just an inquest an inquiry a cross-examination i mean i'm not even saying there have to be criminal charges where they will be blamed and they will be interrogated and the evidence will be gathered together and analyzed and say you you know maybe i doubt it honestly in the american system it's probably not a military leader probably a political leader who was a strategist whether they were with the state department or the eop or the you know whichever branch they're with they could be with the pentagon but whatever you know one of the branches of the federal government who was it that made these decisions maybe it was george w bush himself and maybe not you know i'm just saying the extent that george bush was on autopilot you know that's another question but you know we have no content we have no expectation whatsoever that anyone will be brought in and questioned and held accountable certainly not the extent of socrates and certainly not this is anywhere else we had this brief fleeting fascination in the year 2020 that someone should be accountable for the fact that police are choking people to death right but there's no panics there's no trial there's no right no no nobody nobody's gonna question who who taught the police to use these chokeholds who taught these procedures who created this curriculum who created these rules and they will be particular people you know it's partly laws it's partly standards and procedures and you know there is a question not just of changing the laws you've got but of really having a culture of of accountability of democratic accountability in that sense okay guys so i'm ready to wrap up this video now um we're talking about science we're talking about democracy and i think we have drifted away from the issue of censorship but maybe this puts censorship in a very different context doesn't it okay one type of censorship is preventing you from saying something you want to say another type of censorship is silencing what you've said so that it cannot reach an audience or which is the smallest audience possible i think that's very much what the amazing atheist is talking about in his videos but there's another type of censorship right there's a type of censorship that's that's truly democratic that says well you can say what you want but you are going to be accountable you are going to be held responsible for the consequences and we don't do that to school teachers and we don't do that to university professors we don't do that to scientists and we don't do that to police officers i've written a whole book advancing the thesis that the fundamental problem with our democracy is that within the larger circle of a supposedly democratic system supposedly democratic society we've created myriad smaller circles small hierarchies that can indeed be described as aristocratic so we are living through still now in my opinion a uh a period of aristocratic science that has yet to be challenged by any paradigm that i could call a democracy of scientific knowledge and so it is unthinkable to someone like the amazing atheist to truly have a democratic system of censorship