Ever found yourself tongue-tied in a debate or fallen prey to an argument you couldn't counter? Fear not! We're here to turn the tables with a masterclass in critical reasoning, courtesy of Christor Stumark's illuminating insights. Sharpen your wit and join us as we navigate the treacherous waters of logical fallacies, from the notorious ad hominem to the deceptive sunk cost snare. With our guest, the ever-astute Martin Ruthless Villain, we inject a hearty dose of humor into dissecting these argumentative faux pas and how they pervade our everyday exchanges.
Who knew that even C-SPAN could become a backdrop for comedy or that children mastering technology could lead us down a hilariously absurd slippery slope? In this episode, not only do we revel in the lighter side of logical blunders, but we also embark on a quest for truth and the pursuit of knowledge. We swap stories about tech-savvy kids, debates gone awry, and the bewildering realm of indulgences, all while keeping our feet firmly planted in the realm of rational thought. Let's face it, who doesn't enjoy a good chuckle while grooming their grey matter?
Wrapping up, we don't just preach the art of conversation—we practice it with an earnest focus on listening, questioning, and understanding. Emotional intelligence takes the spotlight as we delve into the finesse of navigating discussions with a cool head and a warm heart. Before we part ways, we can't help but tease an upcoming escapade with none other than Jordan Peterson and the promise of sun-soaked adventures in Mexico. Buckle up for an episode that's equal parts enlightening and entertaining—your journey to becoming a more judicious debater starts here!
Ever found yourself tongue-tied in a debate or fallen prey to an argument you couldn't counter? Fear not! We're here to turn the tables with a masterclass in critical reasoning, courtesy of Christor Stumark's illuminating insights. Sharpen your wit and join us as we navigate the treacherous waters of logical fallacies, from the notorious ad hominem to the deceptive sunk cost snare. With our guest, the ever-astute Martin Ruthless Villain, we inject a hearty dose of humor into dissecting these argumentative faux pas and how they pervade our everyday exchanges.
Who knew that even C-SPAN could become a backdrop for comedy or that children mastering technology could lead us down a hilariously absurd slippery slope? In this episode, not only do we revel in the lighter side of logical blunders, but we also embark on a quest for truth and the pursuit of knowledge. We swap stories about tech-savvy kids, debates gone awry, and the bewildering realm of indulgences, all while keeping our feet firmly planted in the realm of rational thought. Let's face it, who doesn't enjoy a good chuckle while grooming their grey matter?
Wrapping up, we don't just preach the art of conversation—we practice it with an earnest focus on listening, questioning, and understanding. Emotional intelligence takes the spotlight as we delve into the finesse of navigating discussions with a cool head and a warm heart. Before we part ways, we can't help but tease an upcoming escapade with none other than Jordan Peterson and the promise of sun-soaked adventures in Mexico. Buckle up for an episode that's equal parts enlightening and entertaining—your journey to becoming a more judicious debater starts here!
Welcome to another episode of Terribly Unoblivious. On this episode we start part one with our book by Christor Stumark, to Light the Flame of Reason. Today we get into what is critical reasoning, what are some common logical fallacies that we and other people use on a regular basis and how to avoid them, and finally we end with how do we nurture reason, which includes how to check our ego and argue with good faith arguments. So we hope you like part one of To Light the Flame of Reason.
Martin:Yep, I said it before and I'll say it again Life moves pretty fast. You don't stop and look around once in a while. You could miss it.
Dylan:This is why you just hit the record button, because that's how we start things here.
Brad:It starts with all the good stuff.
Dylan:Two cans, pelicans and Jack, hanna and Storks.
Martin:And the premise Babies.
Brad:Oh Jesus, Guinness.
Dylan:Guinness was the premise, not the babies, that's right. You in a good mood, brad, now Nope, okay. Welcome to another Monday episode Sunday, but it'll be released on a Monday.
Brad:Oh well, aren't we up to date? Oh, that sounded good for the start. Can't do that? Yes, you can.
Dylan:Before. It lets everyone know what's happening. It gives contextual.
Brad:That was on the soundboard. That's a fake can.
Dylan:That'd be. Actually, that's a really good idea.
Brad:I like it A lot of releasing in nitrogen. Oh, we have a third voice here again.
Dylan:Oh, the only guest we're capable of getting. Yeah, martin Routy-Villavan. No, no.
Brad:Okay, ruthless villain, ruthless villain.
Dylan:Martin Routless villain. That's what we're going with Fair. What's our subject today, Brad?
Brad:Well, today is more about how to not be stupid, oh Jesus.
Dylan:I sense a theme.
Brad:Yeah Well, if anything, we're all trying to be less stupid. Generally speaking, yes, the arc swinging in the less stupid range With blips we have blips.
Dylan:Yeah, everybody's got them, kind of like you.
Brad:I got a lot of blips.
Dylan:So that's for sure. In more detailed terms, besides being less stupid, how would you describe today's episode?
Brad:Oh well, way back in the way, way back machine. I don't even know when we talked about this. Maybe around the time we discussed range, I had got the.
Dylan:Oh, it was when we were making episodes but we weren't releasing them. So it's not like no, no, no it was when I was Brad's frustrated.
Brad:Oh, brad's frustrated, that's what it was, because I had just gone to the bookstore, but you're always frustrated. Yeah, but that one was named.
Dylan:That's the punch line. Yeah, that's the punch line, brad's always frustrated, that's true.
Martin:Hot takes Brad's frustrated.
Brad:Thank you. This is now a Friday episode.
Dylan:We can blip that part out.
Brad:We. You're not going to do that.
Dylan:Okay.
Brad:To light the flame of reason was the book that I'd picked up.
Martin:Isn't there a story behind that, though, Like as you're cruising the aisles, you saw a bunch of like oh, let's see.
Brad:Yeah, it was very like it was a religion. It was a religion.
Dylan:It was a religion versus philosophy, yeah, and it was, yeah, like some fly Many times a recipe minor from a local college was like this will be funny.
Martin:Yeah, but you said there were like two or three rows of like.
Brad:Jesus and here, oh no, there's like half the store is like that. And then there's If you laid books out on the table in front of us, that's the number of like philosophy, and the tarot card section was like two or three times bigger. I'm not.
Dylan:That's not, Joe. They're decorative, and already that I mean granted, they're like overall bigger.
Brad:You know, in their packaging, I guess so.
Dylan:I almost bought a tarot card advent calendar when I was, when I was in.
Martin:How's that work, north Carolina, I have no idea. I just opened it up and you're like, oh, I die.
Dylan:We're at a bookstore and it was it was really funny it was just really funny and I'm like this would be a good good gift for somebody.
Martin:Yeah, I preferably on the religious, not so open-minded side.
Dylan:But what?
Martin:if there was a tarot card advent calendar, what?
Brad:did you just say. What did you just say? What did you just say? What did you just say? Oh my God.
Martin:Why did you bring me?
Dylan:I was just gonna, I don't know, I don't know.
Brad:This is what's happening right now.
Dylan:So introduction to critical reasoning, that's the name of the game.
Brad:So this book is very dense, but also somewhat accessible and Shut up.
Dylan:Alexa, you can't just peek the mic that way. Oh sorry, it's gonna. Now I'm gonna have to spend 10 minutes doing that and not get yelled at me. I have to get this episode out for tomorrow, so please don't do that. She yelled at me first Okay, he's gonna cut this too.
Martin:No, he doesn't. Oh, okay, let's go.
Dylan:Let's keep moving.
Brad:If you guys quit interrupting me. It's our household features. That would be amazing. Can we all agree that critical reasoning and logic in general may not be the sexiest topic to ever talk about?
Martin:How are we gonna make it sexy then?
Brad:Well, wait till you see what I got on.
Dylan:Is it through the loom? No, is it no? Do you have the Avengers series on Cornucopia? Yes, yeah, I was just. I miss character underwear.
Brad:There's nothing that said you gotta stop.
Dylan:Did it? Cameron Diaz and Charlie's Angels have character underwear on? I think she did. No one watched that movie why not.
Brad:Did you watch that movie, martin? Yeah, I did, wow, okay, well, hey, guess what? Put it on the list.
Dylan:All right, list is long you can take that one off and not distinguished.
Brad:No, it's not distinguished at all, eh, sometimes. So today we're gonna talk briefly about what critical reasoning is critical thinking? And, more specifically, go into common logical fallacies, so the ways that most of us are culpable of arguing in a false, not what was I say? Not honest sense. Does that make sense? Gamesmanship A little bit, and I think a lot of people do it without knowing that they're doing it. Oh, he knows he's doing it, but that's, we all do it.
Dylan:We do.
Brad:And the more we've talked about this, we'll get to the one that we've talked about extensively in some past episodes. It's easier to identify it when you are someone that you're arguing with is doing it, and you can kind of hit the brakes and maybe attack that a little bit differently than you would otherwise, because a lot of these tend to get you riled up emotionally, I think, because typically the person that's introducing them doesn't have the actual knowledge or facts needed to reasonably argue a point, and so you start bringing in these other things that are unrelated or emotional or have nothing to do with what you're actually talking about.
Dylan:And you should definitely do this while having alcohol around, because that will not elicit any more emotion. Preferably, yeah, thanksgiving, christmas, even Easter if you're lucky.
Brad:I prefer Easter arguments, actually, and just overall roll the dice to the synapses. Well, I mean it's typically sunny outside, the weather's nice, I mean everybody's feeling good, and that's when I really like to take a shit on everybody.
Dylan:Just the correlation there is that Brad's come out of his winter depression at that point and you start hearing to see the light again. Yeah, seasonal depressions.
Brad:Make it stop.
Martin:Make the light stay, get that vitamin D buddy. It's like Gollum, can't see the light, all right.
Brad:So, rational thinking, and let's just say that if you make it through this episode and you have a lot of questions, good, because this is going to be the tip of the iceberg in terms of some of the stuff that we're going to talk about with this particular book and even some of the things that we go through today. There's a lot more nuance. So this is the very, very basic, rudimentary, some definitions and starting at the bottom and examples and things like that.
Martin:So now we're here.
Brad:Yes, started at the bottom. Now we're at the top, now we're here. Why does he say now we're here, present. Started at the bottom.
Dylan:Now we're here, yeah, but he could still be at the bottom. But it's Drake, he's not. Yeah, oh, that's Drake saying he's got a half a million dollar black Onyx bathtub that was carved out of one piece. Nobody cares, it's beautiful.
Brad:All right. So this is. And the other interesting thing I found was this book is referred to as the Flame of Reason, and remember this guy's Swedish and Do we trust him?
Dylan:then yeah, yes, okay, is that correct?
Martin:or a translation of that what Flame?
Brad:of Reason, the Flame of Reason. I don't know, but in this title it's to light the Flame of Reason. So it's almost like they pushed this to America and was like, hey, you guys have to light the candle first because it's not going yet. It's like everywhere else we're going to talk about the candle that is lit. That's one way I interpreted it.
Dylan:Okay.
Martin:Fair.
Dylan:And I think you're reading too far into it, I could be. Yeah, for usual, it could be just a misinterpretation. There's no, there's no analysis for analysis. Maybe there's, it's possible. He doesn't have any little Side bit about why the books titled flame reason.
Brad:Ignite the flame reason he doesn't nothing. You could, you could Lean into that a little bit. He doesn't have anything. Well, we think about like caveman fire. I thought that was like the progression. Hmm, that was a big step. Okay so like the flame of reason was like the next Big thing. Okay, yeah, but my take is that too light, that's problematic. We already have reason. It should already be lit. So now I'm concerned that it's going out what she's concerned about to you, which is why I wrote this book.
Martin:Okay, so then, how do you light it first?
Brad:Well, I bet, if you read the book, he'd probably fucking tell you oh thanks, Did you read the book, yeah, or did you just skim through it? No, I just highlighted orange everywhere like randomly. So those are the shit that I'm gonna read.
Dylan:Brad's the guy that. Brad's the guy that takes notes and just highlights everything You're like great. I really allows me to distill what I need to know for the episode.
Brad:Sometimes, sometimes, I stop highlighting and I just make that little bracket like this when I'm like I don't want to highlight all that, I'm just gonna bracket the whole thing, okay, yeah, everyone needs to see how you make your brackets brackets. It's a bracket. Okay, let's move. Let's move on, please. What do you guys make? Square brackets, shut up. All right, let's keep going. Yes, somebody taught me in second grade how to make brackets, are you sure? Yeah, she was artistic. Okay, okay, all right, so he starts out. What does it mean to be rational and wise? The wise part we'll get to at another date. We're gonna go through rational right now. By rational thinking, I mean coherent, contradiction, free reasoning. That's it, okay. Coherent contradiction, free reasoning. That takes out a lot of people. Arguments. The contradiction free part.
Dylan:Coherent could be. There's a lot.
Martin:Yeah, that's you, that's a slippery slope, but I'm Russia, I'm wrestling with the logic there, just the understanding of logic Also. Well, cuz like I Mean what is rational thinking? Like there's you. You have to have some logical approach to it coherent contradiction, free reasoning.
Dylan:Coherent and contradiction free.
Brad:Oh places. See, you're already going straight to the wise part.
Martin:Oh yeah, okay, Okay, call me the dip that okay, see spoiler alert.
Dylan:This is good, though, because I'm not gonna tell you everything you need to know. No, okay, I'm not not right out of the gate. Do we need to jump the conclusions board?
Brad:Oh, oh Be big made of Velcro. So, yes, so then he's gonna go through a Logical step process. So, as you're reasoning, basically, his initial thought is Output of a logical step Process is always true as long as the inputs are true. Okay, but it's not the case. Yeah, yeah.
Martin:I'm shaking my head already.
Brad:Yeah, so.
Martin:I can define what is true.
Brad:Jump, jump on the board.
Martin:Okay, I got one already to. Yeah, you're up to two, all right.
Brad:So, for example, it. So he starts off Reading these examples thinking that he's gonna make a point, and then he sends this to a friend and he's like that's, that's not true. So as long as he's saying as long as your inputs are correct, your output will be correct, but If one of your inputs is incorrect, your output will be incorrect. So this is example. All types of animals, whether now living or extinct, were created 6,000 years ago. Dinosaurs are extinct animals. Therefore, dinosaurs were created 6,000 years ago. So one of the inputs is incorrect. Therefore, you get an output that is also incorrect.
Brad:Mm-hmm makes sense, right, that's pretty easy part sure but what people fail to see is that you can have false inputs with a true output. For example, barack Obama was born in Kenya, true or false? True, fucking, no, true, false, false. Hawaii, he was born. Hawaii. Kenyan people all have belly buttons. My god, true, barack Obama has a belly button, true, yeah. So the outcome was true, even though one of the premises is false. You want a better one? Mm-hmm, you don't like that one? No, I don't.
Dylan:I mean, I was born in.
Brad:Hawaii true. Every Hawaiian person born becomes US president. No false right conclusion Barack Obama became US president true.
Dylan:Mm-hmm.
Brad:Hey, it's good Okay.
Dylan:It's good, so we've lost every listener to this point.
Brad:That's fine. That was my entire purpose for this episode. Okay, and we're done and you wanted this, um, so Do I get into the wisdom part?
Martin:Huh, it all depends. Is this where we're going?
Brad:No, but it plays a large part.
Martin:Okay, but I mentioned some things at the beginning. I mean, is that gonna go over there too?
Brad:I don't want anything you mentioned to go into here, so Zing, okay, so we have inputs and outputs and then, uh, he will get into the, the wisdom part of it, and we're gonna save that because it's a much larger section. But essentially, rationality doesn't play A role, like it doesn't play any role in morality, so he brings in this this sense of wisdom, and the wisdom is knowledge from.
Dylan:Experience past and future events.
Martin:Yes, Is he separating the understanding that logic and wisdom are two different things? Yes, okay, yeah.
Dylan:So logic, is Calculatable, mathematical in nature. Yes, and input, logic and then wisdom to his definition would be applying Context to those parameters and then being able to make sound decisions based on that correct?
Brad:So, going back to what you would talk about as truth, so there's a whole subset of what can justify what is true, what is not true, um, and that's another huge discussion about what Takes part as becoming part of wisdom and knowledge.
Brad:This is, this is this, is that in the art of motorcycle maintenance on a whole different level, because it's just keep slicing, keep slicing, keep slicing, keep slicing essentially, but he, he does have like a bottom line Okay, so um, because he talks very briefly about, some people will come at you philosophically, well, you can never really know anything. And he has like a baseline of okay, if we, if we can just agree that this World is really happening to us and that we're not in a matrix or some other thought you know process type thing.
Brad:Then there are things that we can know and then you know scientific method and reproducible results and all that kind of stuff. So he talks about all this. So that's Not we're gonna talk about right now.
Dylan:I think, therefore, I am no, okay, no day car. No day car. No day car today.
Brad:Sure, so, uh, today, what we're gonna focus on are common logical fallacies. So logical fallacy is an argument that can be disproven through reasoning, so it's different than a uh, a subjective argument, which would be Um Subjective argument would be like martin is six foot five feet tall. That's clearly true.
Martin:They don't know it's a podcast, I know so every time this happens, I can't peak the mic.
Dylan:Sorry, you can't peak the mic.
Brad:So a subjective argument being something that okay, well, martin, can easily stand next to a tape measure and we can determine that that's true or false, right? Uh, in terms of logical argument, sometimes that is a little bit or much harder to discern because you don't always have necessarily concrete facts. So you have to go about Is the argument set up in a way that it doesn't contradict itself? Is it not bringing Other terms or type of arguments into it without necessarily having the specific data that you need?
Martin:Does that make sense? Yeah, it does, but we're here on earth, right? I could be six foot five and on a different planet. I'm sorry, mm-hmm.
Brad:You talk about, like the the sphere.
Dylan:Multiverse multi-verse there's an infinite amount of possibilities out there. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, unlimited.
Brad:Yeah, realities, yeah. So in Martin's world he could also look like a giant penis, could be nailing to buddy to be six foot five.
Dylan:Still which?
Brad:is sick, yeah, there you go, which, you know, frankly, is not that far off from this universe.
Martin:Yeah, wow, wow, wow, oh and Wilson.
Brad:All right, so we're gonna go through the examples of this. Wow, oh, can I do a Jordan Peterson this episode? No, not yet. Come on, no come on.
Dylan:You can do with Skeletor at the end. Come on.
Brad:No, that's not All right. So there, there are a a bunch of logical fallacies. Remember, these are types of arguments that are essentially bad faith arguments, and Most of these are things that that we do on a pretty regular basis. I think we probably all have our own favorites. I'll try not to throw anybody under the bus too early. I'm ready.
Dylan:Okay.
Brad:All right, so we're starting off number one. Ad hominem is a fallacy, one that attempts to invalidate an opponent's position based on a personal trait or fact about the opponent, rather than through logic. And so now we'll go through these, and then you guys gotta think of a favorite example, and my favorite example is when Trump calls Ted roof's Ted Cruz's wife a dog.
Dylan:His nickname committee's gotta be. Just that's hard to be.
Brad:It's hard to beat and that it's gonna be easy pickings for political examples of these. Because, but especially if you're looking at debates like live debates. So why would we use fallacies like these? Most of the times?
Brad:because we don't have actual answers to questions or the capacity to care yeah that too, so kind of what we talked about in braving the wilderness where why? Why do you use this thing? Well, it's because you you feel like you should have an opinion on something, but you don't really know anything about the subject, and so You're kind of going at the argument in a sense to win, instead of just to Understand or impart knowledge.
Dylan:Yeah, that's probably really good. Good faith part comes in. Is you going into something For the correct or the truth versus going in with your own ulterior motives? Oh wow, it's like foreshadowing Mmm.
Martin:You get at this? Where is it? Where does the Dunning-Kruger effect plan in the role of this? Is that a paper company?
Brad:Could be that's a good name. It's good name for that?
Dylan:Just think about Dunder Mifflin.
Brad:Um. So this is partly why I wanted to do this part first was because I feel like so many people don't recognize when this is happening either to them or by them. And Will this help? I Don't know, maybe that's where Dunning-Kruger comes into it. I'm not sure, but if you find, if you find yourself name calling to someone, pretty good, pretty good chance that you're doing at hominem Mmm, okay, so that's a very basic like yeah, but your stupid face, your wife's a dog or that, and that's a hard comeback. Yeah, yeah, all right. Number two, red herring this is when you slap someone with a fish Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
Martin:No.
Brad:I'd say is it?
Dylan:okay, it's bad. It's bad information. Bad, that's bad.
Brad:It's bad information. Red herring is an attempt to shift the focus. So you are in a debate and Somebody says, well, martin, why don't you want people crossing the border? And you say something like California is gonna fall off from mainland United States. If we don't control the current, current climate crisis yeah, has nothing to do with what you're talking about. So all it is is step left Something, something different, and if you're really good at it, it could seem like it's related.
Martin:But politicians, do that all the time. Yes but not actually related. They don't answer the question, they circle around it.
Brad:Yes, but not necessarily with circular reasoning, although sometimes that's also a fallacy, oh you know they're very red herring. Yeah, because they they have. They introduced their agenda talking points. Yeah, they have their specific talking points. That's super easy. So what? Would I what would I interject with what's my specific talking point you probably, I mean you're, you're go-to right now.
Dylan:Is that you? I'm?
Brad:setting you guys up right now. You're on a T great awesome yeah you guys, you hate basketball. Okay, did last week Fair, fair statement. He hated basketball first, not not yesterday. Good for you. So yeah, number three, straw man. Any guesses? Don't read the definition.
Martin:I have no idea. I'm thinking about Wizard of Oz. Okay, this is a scarecrow.
Dylan:Well, you know straw? True, it's a misrepresentation of the argument.
Brad:Yes, so you hear pundits say that a lot you pick and choose your facts.
Dylan:I know like, oh, look at what happens when you create this. You know border crisis, when we let, when we don't let people come Through. Look at the women and children that are being there. We're separating these families. I see what you're saying.
Martin:So, versus the whole picture, so would you say that, like you're entitled to your opinion but you're not entitled to your, your own facts type situation? No, so.
Brad:What it is would be All right. Let's stick with the immigration thing. So Martin says I think Common sense, immigration makes sense. You should have to go through a process. I think people should be allowed to come into this country. And then I say did you hear him?
Brad:He wants everybody that wants to come in here to come in here and take your house and rapist or take your job, and they're mostly bad people, although I hear there's some good people, and that's a direct quote, I think. So we heard you. So they're taking either a very small section or more like a skewed version of what someone has said, and then they're just Turning it to 11 to fit their needs.
Martin:Sure, it does it all time.
Brad:Just gonna throw them under the bus like that. Yes, sometimes. Yeah, sometimes it's fair statement, sometimes it's cherry picking when it's.
Martin:I mean, we all know that C-span is very boring, but you know, oh, you cut, you cut it out.
Brad:Not necessarily, not necessarily anymore. I Don't know if you've listened to us in the past, but we're introducing some new, some new things in a C-span.
Dylan:Yes, we are took a second. I can't wait till those round cards come out. That's how you make. That's how you make. That's how you make critical reasoning, um, sexy round cards.
Brad:speaking of sexy, yeah, my next favorite fallacy, slippery slope.
Martin:Mmm.
Brad:Mm-hmm, yeah, so when you just oil it up and everything just goes downhill. So oh, what's a Basically what slippery slope is you're gonna take an?
Dylan:action. If you let, if you let ten year olds use phones, and then your Argument would be well, they're getting, they're getting phones at ten years old. What's next? We're gonna let him drive at ten years old.
Brad:Oh, I was going more with, like you know, head of a cartel type scenario Okay, oh yeah, they're gonna go home, huh.
Dylan:Okay, let's get it. Let's get the big one, yeah, okay.
Brad:Yeah, oh, so your 10 year old can have social media. What are they gonna do next? Run a drug cartel? Mm-hmm, yeah, I mean, maybe. I mean, I guess it depends on who they friend on.
Dylan:You know my space and as long as you can watch the money, as long as you can watch the money appropriately and make sure it comes back and get into a nice dividend yielding bond fund.
Martin:You know we're happy, which I know you guys, I know you honor that too.
Brad:You guys.
Dylan:I said watch the money as long as he knows how to wash it appropriately.
Brad:You guys like to think ten year olds are dumb, but they're not. I saw that that show in Missouri With Jason Bateman. Mmm, yeah, yeah, his son was not that old. It's really smart. Can happen. We're watching on social media, we see it in. I see it in my industry, though you want to see.
Dylan:You want to see a kid that you want it. You want to have your network Compromise. Just put a ten year old on there and tell him that he can't play the game and he can figure out how to get past firewall rules and everything really fast.
Brad:Yeah, I might have done some of those things on accident growing up. Okay you're just in Dawson, you're like delete, delete, delete, delete, delete.
Dylan:Yeah, that's that. That seemed like an underlying OS opera.
Brad:Defect. Yeah, I didn't know that you could actually delete physical properties of your computer by deleting code.
Dylan:Yeah, but yeah, it's the program, brad, just freaking out.
Brad:Why would, why wouldn't it happen? Oh my friend loves the story because he has the same opinion of me as you guys do, so low, I'm sorry, I was like I was just, I was just trying to make more memories so I could play a game. And then I was like the CD-ROM won't open, like I remember calling the help desk and I'm like I deleted my CD-ROM and they're like. They're like do you have a CD-ROM?
Dylan:I was like no, it's physically here, yeah it's not doing anything and all in all fairness that the operating system should have permissions on there that never allowed that. Yeah, they should be locked for sure.
Martin:Yeah, oh yeah, in 96, where they locked no, okay, so there's that they let it go, and the old saying shouldn't even be able to pseudo, that.
Dylan:It's just like something you shouldn't be able to do unless you're in the kernel.
Brad:Yeah, I really felt like I was on the dark web, though it's just like.
Dylan:What's the angel in a jelly hacker movie. Hackers, hackers, brads over there just mean mean Angie hanging out.
Brad:Yeah, no, I was not anywhere near that.
Martin:All right, what's the next one?
Brad:false dichotomy. Hmm, my personal word, or the next definition either yeah, false dilemma or false dichotomy. So Either you're with us or against this. Yeah, we've talked at no, I'll tell you about this, mm-hmm. But this is also you. That's super common one. Just, I don't like, can you guys give some examples? I mean, I'm like giving all the examples give us, give your example. I don't have any examples of this. I don't think I ever do it. You're an idiot.
Martin:I don't believe you.
Brad:I've never done this, my wife does this to me a lot. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's. I think it's more common when you are critical of someone.
Dylan:You know this is. And then the responses this is, I'll never do that. Yeah, this is the. The other person or the emotion can't be taken out of the argument. This is what happens when people confuse Personal attacks with having an honest debate.
Brad:It's true so I I would say like I Don't, I don't really like it when you say that particular thing. It makes me feel such in such a way, and then they say I'll never talk to you again, fine, okay. Well, that's not. That's not what the argument was about Mm-hmm. It was one thing, everything yeah, that's all.
Martin:well, parents do that too. I mean, I could be going off on the deep end here, but you know, empty threats, oh, oh, can't, can't, empty threat kids.
Dylan:They figure that shit out fast.
Martin:Hey, we're not gonna go to Disneyland because you know you can't pick up your shit right now.
Brad:Is that the same thing?
Dylan:one could argue it could be Seems slippery slopey to me, mm-hmm either you pick up your stuff or we don't go to Disneyland.
Martin:Yeah, but you already bought the freaking tickets.
Brad:Well, you got to have some backbone, you know.
Dylan:Mm-hmm Plus. It's not that good. I've never been.
Brad:Oh, I highly recommend. Yeah, you should go, okay, yeah. I mean, yeah, they got like $10 pretzels Maybe if they've got a straight, they got like bad nachos bad nachos. Yeah, nope, no place to sit down. Mm-hmm, I long lines. If you're gonna go, I would definitely go like late July, early August got it yeah, rather than eight, mm-hmm. Lot of like green spaces. Hmm, yeah, it's kind of like bandwagon fallacy.
Dylan:We're just it, everyone doing it, so it must be so good.
Martin:Yeah, it is it could be borderline.
Brad:Yeah, the Disney is. Yeah, it's definitely bandwagon.
Martin:Mm-hmm yeah.
Brad:That's a certain action is right because it's popular. What else is bandwagon fallacy? Right now, travel sports.
Martin:Mmm. In what regard in?
Brad:the regard that, like it's, it's like everybody else is doing it, so, like my kid needs to do it.
Martin:No.
Brad:That's why it's a fallacy, martin. It's not truth, it's not reason.
Martin:I don't know, you're the one that invited. Yeah, you didn't buy me, I don't know why. Because you are happy that arsenal one today, like, hey, let's, let's do this today. And I showed up and Dylan's like oh, that's here hey.
Brad:I got a text message. No, you go back through the list, okay. Yeah, you go back through the list, because that was a bunch of them right there in that statement. That's what happens.
Dylan:Yeah, how many that was ready? How many did? I was ready for sure.
Brad:I believe you maybe attacked me personally At hominem. Yeah, I had hominem ad nauseam, I think it's time for you to have a beer. No, I don't like it, I Don't want to do it. Oh, this is, oh, appeal to ignorance. This might be what you were talking about. Well, if we don't do any Kruger, yeah, a little bit. Yeah, claim that something must be true because it hasn't been proven false. So Aliens exist because, oh, here's no one's what.
Dylan:I, he's right, we can't I.
Brad:Can't talk about aliens anymore. No, that's fine. Because it because it hasn't been proven false.
Martin:For one area, the opposite there.
Brad:So there's an opposite effect to. So opposite is the burden of proof fallacy. So it must be false because it hasn't been proven true. So the Religion is a super easy one to do this with, and I saw can't prove God doesn't exist. I saw a. What do we call them now? Online pastors? We call them crypto.
Martin:It wasn't crypto.
Brad:Oh, oh no, it was a lot more cringy than Joel Mm-hmm Just saying something. I think it's internet. Let's go with internet pastors, internet pastors. Okay big screens bands like shows. We go with that. The whole works, yeah, the whole works Okay. And so he's talking to his congregation both in person and online, and he was talking pop pastors with pop pastors, pop pastors, pop, pop, pop, like they're like popular. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah okay. Swiftie passwords, kind of hip hop adepasters, hip hop, anonymous Hope.
Brad:So, he's given a story about how he was arguing with Either an atheist or an agnostic or something, and I'm pretty sure he made this entire thing up because he didn't have that conversation. And so he goes. I, I proved him wrong in two easy steps. And so he draws a big circle and he goes this is everything that is knowable. And the guy goes okay, he goes. How much of this circle Do you think? You know Atheist or agnostic guy was like this tiny little sliver. I Mean there's a lot to be known and there's a lot left unknown. So I'm gonna go with a tiny sliver. And so then he goes so God exists. And you're like wait, that's not, that's not how that works. It's you, you jumped a gun on that, mm-hmm. So it's Because it hasn't. He's like because you can't prove that it's false, it's true. It's like no, no, no, no, that's not how that works. So are you sure?
Dylan:How do you know? I didn't get you can't prove it, so maybe it is. We didn't get to that.
Martin:Okay, okay.
Dylan:Oh.
Brad:You want to get to that part?
Martin:We're getting points on the board today.
Dylan:This is why you're here, not just a passive bystander.
Brad:No, and the opposite. So, oh well, god Can't exist because it's not been proven true, so it has to be false. Hmm, and I think like what? In that sense, what a true atheist would say is like no, there's no reason to believe in it. There's, there's no good data examples, correct?
Martin:reasoning correct. But the opposite say like why not believe?
Brad:Well, that's in.
Dylan:What is that? What is that? Back to this. What is that?
Brad:I want to go try and not to go here.
Dylan:What is the argument? It's better to believe, just in case he does exist, so you don't go to hell, is that it? There's an argument like that? No, that sounds great cards. Even if you don't believe, it's better to believe.
Brad:The the sense that when he talks about knowledge, that there's a belief structure to that, but the belief comes on actual reasoning To suggest that you should believe it.
Martin:That's it. That's it, yeah, no arguments. What do you mean arguments? Well, like this is it period there's, there's no like, yeah.
Dylan:Pascal's wager.
Brad:Say it, say it. Why do you can't just say random words and then not explain it? This isn't our text thread. Oh, what's Pascal's wager?
Dylan:Okay, is a philosophical argument advanced by blase Pascal, 17th century French mathematician, philosopher, physicist and theologian. This argument, uh posits that the individuals essentially engage in a life defining gamble regarding the belief in the existence of God. Oh, gamble. Mm-hmm because what is the payoff? If he does exist? You didn't, it's pretty detrimental, yeah. But if, if you live your life like God exists and you die, it doesn't, then it doesn't really matter, so it's better, you have more positive outcomes going with. Believing in God is his wager, yeah.
Brad:I'm not saying it's correct, it's cool. I bet he couldn't use a cell phone. So it's probably not show how smart he is.
Dylan:Pascal's a pretty smart dude.
Brad:Yeah, yeah, yeah, I don't know what kind of argument that would be.
Martin:That's interesting argument because it's also the understanding of like you know how the church was set up, right where you would pay for your sins. You know there's, there's that like deep down nuance around, that's like hmm, just in case, don't forget to pay your $20 every someday.
Brad:Yeah, but that's. I feel like there's a big asterisk by that, in the sense that what if you're? What if you're not believing in the correct way? And we're talking about journey what if don't stop believing? What if you die and then you go to hell and you're like no way, hey, I paid, I was believing, and they're like not in the right way.
Dylan:Plot twist, but I paid to be disappointing that would be.
Brad:Yeah, I would be so yeah, so in terms of that there's a Truth and knowledge and epistemology, and how do we know what we know and all of those kind of things. That's a well another, that's most likely round two, because then you have to start taking those things into account when you get into actual recent arguments. Inception, yeah, in case you want to plant an idea in some side somebody's mind. The best debaters I don't like that term.
Dylan:I just did it to you. You don't even know.
Brad:I don't like it. Oh, and the last one, and this is again one of one of many, but these are the most common ones the sunk cost. Sunk cost fallacy. So this is just as big in economics as it is it's yeah, it's big and all it's big in the way people live their lives a lot of times.
Martin:Oh my god.
Brad:So continuing on a specific course, because of the amount of time and money invested in whatever you're doing already right, and so, like I've come this far, or like I've invested so much in the stock, like it's got to pay me back, it's like great losses? No, it doesn't. Yeah, like there's no rule that says that, or you could say it about a bad relationships would be another, probably a huge one all the time when you've invested time, sometimes money it's not that easy, karen.
Dylan:It's got like five of my CDs. That was one of my favorite sketch skits, so the easiest way to think about that one and this is how my intro Economics professor taught me was you go to the movie theater, you buy a movie ticket, you get five minutes into the movie and you realize it sucks. Now do you want to spend the remaining 90 minutes there and watch a really terrible movie with your time Mm-hmm? Or do you want to just leave knowing that you already spent the money and then go to the bar next door Maybe have a little bit of a better time, right, okay, but what if the movie is the room and Ends up being the worst movie that you've ever seen period and Gives you just years of stories.
Martin:So talk about yeah, there's a day kind of you around that, though, but it's that's your choice to make, though so did you.
Dylan:That's, that's, that's not. You're sitting there saying you're you're not having a cost at that point, because you're saying this is Going to benefit me from the stories I'm going to be able to tell yeah, you have a benefit there, yeah whereas if you don't care, that benefit doesn't. You don't care about telling stories about the worst movie you've ever seen.
Brad:You're gonna leave then because it's not providing any more. But also I feel like this fallacy is when you've invested A lot of time or a significant chunk of your money.
Dylan:That's just, that's just an easy.
Brad:I mean so like if you only had five dollars period and you spent it on a movie, then I guess maybe you could make that.
Martin:Okay, so then talk about something that you're going big on you. You sunk in a ton of cash into and then you have to figure out like his van.
Brad:That's not true.
Dylan:So car restorations are a good one though. Okay, yeah, yeah, you see any in your dad restoration.
Brad:I mean, you've seen your dad do it and that's yeah, that's not even a bad one, I mean it's. You get to the point where it's like, yeah, there's a little rest right here, and you're like, huh, there's, my frame's gone. No, and all of a sudden you got a rotisserie sitting in your kitchen somewhere and you're like spinning a 69 GTO around trying to it's big kitchen. You know You're gonna put a plus. That's where rotisserie gonna put a body.
Dylan:You're gonna put a body.
Brad:Okay, you know it's okay to quit. No, most people have a exhaust fans in the kitchen, so it's all point, yeah.
Dylan:It, it's a company cubic feet per minute is gonna push it is okay.
Brad:People also attach Maybe too much meaning to oh, 100% certain things because they're logical.
Martin:Re going back to this, their logical reason is like oh, I put all this cash in.
Brad:Yeah, like all this time you know my wife. So he's like you can't just get rid of the dog and I'm like I don't really care. She's like, yeah, but we must been with us for so long and I'm just like it's not logical to keep him. Get rid of the kids, keep the dog. Kids might be the ultimate sunk cost fallacy. Hundred percent.
Martin:What's the average now? I want to say 250 K, is it yeah?
Brad:just to have one. Diamonds are forever one, just one one. That can't be right.
Dylan:Yeah, average middle-income family, two children, will spend three hundred and ten thousand dollars to raise a child born in 2015 and up to age 17.
Martin:They just yeah, we both win because both of our kids are before 2017.
Brad:No 15. 15 say 2015 2015 and after no mine. Oh well, it's just money. That's crazy. We're already this far down the rabbit. That's why I'm a dink and it's awesome.
Dylan:Great good for you. Double income, no kids.
Brad:Yeah, we talked about what 40 year olds do with no kids last time.
Dylan:That's great. Mm-hmm business class flights Europe, africa, south Africa you want me to jump off the roof?
Brad:please I'm gonna be pure now. Okay, all right. So to your foreshadowing and a little bit back to braving the wilderness. How do we nurture this process of critical reasoning and how do we light the flame? How do you light the flame? How do you keep it going?
Dylan:Easiest way is to. That sounded so good I.
Brad:Listening to other people's arguments. So we've talked before about being open-minded.
Martin:Mm-hmm.
Brad:So you have to have this sense that Just because somebody's Take on something that's different than yours Doesn't make it invalid, and if anything you want to hear, that's your opinion. It's fucking stupid.
Dylan:Yeah okay, yeah, I know, I was. I, that was an example, that was me telling you right now. Okay, I Keep going yeah, okay, cuz I want to see how dumb you are. All right, I Don't.
Brad:I don't think this is nurturing. Oh, we're supposed to nurture.
Dylan:Yeah, I'm sorry. You're my best friend, brad. Thank you so much for being here, thank you.
Brad:Thank you. It's always a joy to be here Learning and listening to other people, so being able to get outside of your Confirmation biases and your echo chambers and listen to other arguments Specifically to try to understand those arguments and then Refute them, if you feel they need to, in a reasonable manner.
Martin:So there's something that I do want to mention about it. So there's a difference between Having an understanding with that person and boiling it down to is this a learning moment or is this an educating moment?
Brad:I'm sorry, did you just make learning and educating two different things?
Martin:Yeah, there's, there's separate understanding around that, because it's like, when you Want to have a conversation with that person, are you setting yourself up so that you're like, hmm, my logical thought is like, how do I Position myself so that I'm having a conversation where I can share my opinion and Backed up facts, where it's, it's an educating part, versus do I just sit back and just take it and listen and listen?
Brad:Roll it out, right. Well, that's. That's not always gonna go that way, is it?
Martin:Mm-hmm.
Brad:So the first part is the listening part, because that's something that you're in control of. So somebody brings up a, a topic that is there, a point of view that is much different than yours. It's like great, can you tell me more about that? You know, can you explain, like, what your reasoning is or why you think this way or what led you to? You know, want to believe this, and Sometimes they'll have an answer. Sometimes they're just reciting talking points, and so you'll find that out pretty quick too. If they're just reciting talking points, then it's, it's not gonna be a real learning process for probably either one of you, because you understand that stick to the cue cards.
Brad:Stick to the cue cards, they're just verbatim saying something that they heard somewhere else, which is not their true argument and also makes it Pretty unlikely that they're gonna be willing to hear anything that you have to say. That's opposite of that.
Martin:Or at the shot, I guess. So then, when it comes to how do we, how do we nurture reason, how do we get to that as a conversation between two people when there's two different sides to their understanding?
Brad:I think I think asking first what, being interested in what they have to say. I Think it's maybe the best way to start those conversations, because if they think it's a conversation and not a debate, that's that's like step one. So if you come at it from an attacking like, what do you think about this? Because I think this way it comes off a certain way sure like are they gonna see you fucking?
Dylan:Maybe like under your breath. Where does eugenics come into all this Hot take?
Brad:I what I'm just yeah, where did that come from? How do we?
Dylan:bring it. Get rid of those people that can't read cue that read cue you can't. I know, I know, I know.
Brad:I thought I thought we established this a long time ago.
Dylan:What did we?
Brad:establish. I don't think we could do that. No, it's, it's not good. It's not now, martin, why you are here in the first place. Yeah, please tell me that when we talk about her reasoning From a, from a youth standpoint, obviously school is one way to do it. It doesn't school always do it in a good way, maybe sometimes yes, maybe sometimes no, maybe it depends on the teacher. Curriculums are, you know, problematic in that sense, depending on the school and and how that's all set up. From the sports standpoint, I'm Martin is very much about the asking questions and the not giving answers, part of it which I enjoy Mostly so.
Dylan:There's a hesitant as it's no, I doesn't like when you do it to him, it's only cool. So Brad likes his shit spelled out.
Brad:I a little bit of tight button. So Before meeting Martin, when I coached, I would ask the questions why should we do this? And then they would kind of think on it a little bit and then no one would give the answer. And then I'd be like To do this idiots, come on, figure it out. You give me the answer and then Martin's like no, no answer. Okay, here we go, keep playing. And all the kids are like no, hey, what?
Brad:yeah so Asking kids to think about Like actions and what those consequences are like, both in a good sense and a bad sense, and Trying to let them figure that out. And it's the self-reflection on sure on that part.
Brad:So I Think it from a young standpoint just it starts getting that those neural pathways kind of go in a little bit Like what happens if I do this, what happens if I do this? Is it the exact same thing? No, but I think you're. You're starting to strengthen a muscle that can Turn into doing those kind of things.
Martin:I think you hit the nail on the head on that, because there's also another thing that we haven't, I'm necessarily talked about on that it's. That's this self-reflection. I don't think we do that enough.
Dylan:What is that awareness? Yeah, what? Understanding your own, your own cognitive fallacies, understanding your own biases.
Brad:Yeah, yeah. So when, when we talk about these fallacies, it's not just Can you pick them out when someone is giving it to you, can you pick it out when you're doing it to somebody else also, because if you're doing that, then that probably says something about the situation that you're in sure that you need to.
Brad:Regeneration argument yeah, just in your argument or the fact that you could be wrong or you need to take a new look at something. So, yeah, the critical thinking part is not critical thinking in terms of Proving that other people are always wrong. It goes very much inward as well. So, but how do we do?
Martin:that. How do we do? What? How do? How do we understand that we need to do that?
Brad:Oh, cuz I'm telling you, I'm telling you you need to do that. What are the steps? Oh, just do it.
Dylan:King cheese dick over here.
Brad:How.
Martin:I don't understand. You're in the midst of a conversation and you're trying to register through the rule of dex that these situations are happening due to the conversation and you have to go through the understanding of, like, oh, I'm not being a very good person right now because my reasoning is not Not great at the moment. Okay, what are the mental steps that I need to go through? Well, I like pulled back to, I needed need to go to that. You know, kind of what I mentioned in the beginning is like Do I just, you know, go back to just listening and just shut up, or do I then start? Do I need to shift my mindset and like oh, instead of just telling and educating, I need to take that, that understanding, and start Asking more questions. Yeah, okay, fair.
Brad:You could do that if it's something that you feel like you want to argue about, but then you you keep falling into some of these fallacies where you don't actually have Any knowledge. Data, experience around the thing might be a good reason to step back and be like you know what? I don't. I Don't have a good base of knowledge for this. Okay, I'm willing to hear your side and in turn, if it's important to me, go do some more research. Okay, to see if your side is correct.
Dylan:I think when you, when you're talking with someone, I think that it's If you start to feel a an emotion in a negative way, or it just riles you up, whether it's sad, angry, whatever, like that's. A good little little telling moment of this is really affecting me right now and Asking yourself why and not just it's because they're disagreeing with me, it's why am I feeling the way I am when they tell that to me? And then being able to dissect that a little bit further Helps tremendously, because when you start that, that's we putting your ego into it.
Dylan:And it's you've got to remove yourself from it to really understand all of it because otherwise you're gonna, you're gonna respond emotionally.
Brad:Which is probably gonna end up to be one of those fallacies, because that's it's an easy trigger just to go off of either that, or if it's, if it's something that's like really obscene, like obviously wrong.
Martin:Oh yeah, but do you want to put yourself? You know, leading to your point, dylan, do you want to put yourself in a Eli 5 situation? Or explain, explain to me like I'm 5 Kind of play, like the dumb card, a little bit, like I don't really understand this.
Brad:I mean in terms of if somebody is Not Playing on the same field as you, you're just gonna be like that's. You know, I'm gonna step away from this.
Dylan:Yeah, that's. I think you get one of two things out of this. If you're thinking about the emotion side of it is one the person across from me just doesn't have, the Doesn't have the, the argument they think they do, or the reasoning or the facts. Or the other one is I don't have the argument, the reasoning or facts, so either way we need to step away.
Brad:It could be something else, though, where it maybe it's something that you're just very passionate about, and that person says something that, uh, they're not thinking about it in the same way, or maybe they haven't been thinking about it in the same depth that you have. And so you, if you find yourself in these situations where you, oh, this has been on my mind, and then you say one little sentence, and all of a sudden I go To the bottom of the well that I've been digging for the last, you know, three weeks, which is like every week maybe, and all of a sudden this happens and being able to remove yourself from that emotional state to Try to explain, like, why you don't agree right, as opposed to being emotional about it and Maybe more confrontational yeah, it's.
Brad:It's not a great way to.
Dylan:That's a that's a good point to get listened to something that I was thinking about a couple minutes ago and this is something that I see in the workplace, which is a client asks a question.
Dylan:I was gonna say people, people in the workplace and one of the engineers or whomever I'm working with feels the need to respond immediately versus taking the time to dissect what is actually being asked. What is what is expected in a response? And it's just, and I think that happens in what we're talking about. Debates are just Working with people in general or talking with people in general. It's you, don't. Speed has nothing to do with your ability to you know, have a valid argument, so you can just sit there in silence and take some time to register it. Or you can just say you know what. I Need to take some time to process what you've said so that I can articulate a better answer or a response for you that deserves what you've articulated to me and just being able to give yourself some time, which, again, can help a lot of the time. I think some of these negative emotions is probably because we feel the anxiety and pressure of a crunch time decision. It's like we're not solving anything in real time.
Martin:So why do we need us? Why does it need to happen now?
Dylan:Let's just take some time and then hopefully remove some of the emotion out of it.
Brad:Also a little representative of youth sports. When you're yeah, when you're directing and coaching, you're like, okay, so what we're gonna do is we're gonna get a ball, and then everybody sprints and goes and gets a ball.
Dylan:You're like whoa, we haven't even got, we haven't gotten to the punch line.
Brad:There's like three more minutes of instruction you need to need to slow down and just what's not.
Martin:Even that, though it's like okay. So let's say the team plays and there's a couple kids that Maybe one or two that don't even play a game. Parents are hot on the sideline that their kid didn't play 24-hour period. Some people can't, oh, can't register that, yeah, right, yeah. Or they played for, let's say, a minute 30 seconds. They still can't register that there's 24-hour period. Some people can't register that. How do we get them to register that? They can't read? What do you mean? Can't write it? Well, it's like their, their child didn't play For whatever situation, and they, like, they're still hot after 24 hours.
Martin:No, they're hot right there and they have to like immediately Be line into the coach, like my kid didn't play.
Brad:Oh yeah, I thought you're mean and like, because there's a lot of teams that implement that Works like, yeah, you can't. You can't talk to the coach after you want to talk to me. It's 24 hours.
Dylan:Positive or negative? Yeah, that's solid.
Brad:That's totally fair.
Dylan:I mean, in the workplace is that.
Martin:Is that? Do you see that a lot? My I With it within a group it.
Dylan:Sometimes I have to play Like, if it's internal, it's like, alright, guys, we're just gonna drop this for right now and let's go back and have some, because there is, as engineers, there's a desire to be right in the fix, it all in the moment Right, and it's like, alright, we got to take a hot second, go back, take some thoughts, think about this, different scenarios. Then let's get some thoughts on paper and then we can kind of regroup 100% and then.
Martin:But if you're working with a client, my biggest thing is always.
Dylan:If you don't know the answers, it's okay to tell the client you don't know the answers and that I'm gonna go back and get educated with the team that does have answers, or I'm gonna go research and then I'm gonna facilitate those to you. I'm your personal little answer point. I'm gonna take your questions.
Dylan:There's nothing worse than lying to a customer, or giving them bad information Because you just have a need to feel like you know everything in the moment. It's just, it's okay not to know and I think that's where people get tripped up just 100%, I need to know everything. It's like no, you don't, you're not expected to.
Martin:There's so many different.
Dylan:There's so many, so much information, so many different places. You just like I'm gonna take some time to collect my thoughts and then I'm gonna get you what you need to know because it's important for you to know, and then I'm gonna get you what you need to know because it's important for you to have correct and accurate information.
Brad:Well, that is pretty much the literal definition of a professional. So when people say, oh well, you're a professional, I'll ask you, and people will be like I don't, I don't feel like a professional and some people's, I guess definition of that is if you are someone that people come to for answers and either know it or know how to find it, you're the professional. So I have a question. Okay, yeah, I know the answer that that's scary. Not if you take it in a pretty literal sense, sure, also in the sense that the answers are mostly correct.
Dylan:But no, I think, yeah, you're, you go to a. We have not saying, we were just.
Brad:Just an answer. We're like, hey, what kind of paint should I put on my walls? Chocolate syrup.
Dylan:I mean Brit. Brit works in surgery, yeah, and they don't. They don't do all the surgeries. Not every surgery they do is common, like where they do a lot, yeah, and so there will be times where they're going to go do an operation or procedure and they pull the old surgeon's handbook out and they run themselves through the steps again and at the end of the day, you hope that your surgeon is a professional.
Dylan:And it's like you said it, we don't. We don't do this enough to just blindly assume that we know how to do it properly. We're gonna go recalibrate it.
Brad:Do you want to go this just like I figure this out?
Dylan:Yeah, exactly, and so it's not uncommon just to go through the steps again, just as a little refresher. I mean pilots, there is not. Pilots have probably the most repeatable job out of anyone besides a factory worker.
Martin:You know that just hits a button over a minute, stupid pilots.
Dylan:But they pull the checklist every for every instance. Yeah, I mean it is landing, there's a checklist. Yeah, taking off, there's a checklist. Post takeoff checklist, pre-landing checklist, in-flight checklist. They pull a checklist and they go through it every time because one of the things doesn't work.
Brad:One of the things doesn't work.
Dylan:It's, there's disastrous consequences and so it's. It's To your point. Professionalism is getting the correct answers out there, not just filling devoid with something because you need to feel like you. You are correct.
Brad:Yeah in the moment, and I would say especially with range. So like if you are someone that only does you know a very specific thing, are you gonna have to go back and check on something? No, probably not, because you're always doing it. Maybe you're looking for newer, better ways to do it. But so someone like you, where you're in a bigger variety of computer workings Okay, well, it's not just one specific thing, we cover a range of things. Or like me with woodworking, it's like I don't do just one specific thing, so I'm gonna go back and be like okay, well, what's another technique I could use?
Dylan:or how can I do better at this. And then Martin with programming. There's hundreds of libraries out there. He under he understands the basics, but there times he gets into something else. He's like I got to go read the documentation because this has some nuance to it.
Brad:It's not just sitting there ripping through it on your own so that's a long, that's a long form way of saying that If you don't understand something or you don't know the answer, it's okay and you don't have to have an argument about it and you're gonna be better off, you know, telling someone that you are in an argument or a debate or a discussion with that. I don't. I don't know anything about this. You clearly have heard or read a lot about this.
Martin:I think what's interesting, though, is like is that what happens is like people need time to process, and so they want to spit out whatever they want at that time of moment, and in that moment, they feel that the ego gets pumped up and they have to be able to spit out something where it's like where they really should have said I don't have the tools at the moment, and so that's how they should move forward in that process. Is that what you're saying?
Dylan:Because the more times you react emotionally and you create a fallacy, the other person's going to understand it, which is going to reduce their stock and the validity of your arguments going forward. So you're just really reducing your capital. You know your personal capital at that point versus you're the person that takes the time to be like you know what? I'm going to go research this, come back. Those people start to take you a little bit more seriously. You're building up a little bit more capital because you don't just fill the air.
Brad:Not only that, but if you start doing that, it's going to be easier to do it Sure, and it shows a sign of respect to the person you're with.
Dylan:It's not just a me versus you thing, it's hey, I'm taking the time for both of us and so you can start to create maybe some connections there. We're going to get a whole host of other things.
Brad:Or you could take the Thomson-Gurot approach where he goes. You know, I don't want to argue with people anymore, so anytime I find myself getting into an argument with something. So I'm like you know, I don't believe in abortion. And then I'm in a family gathering and my cousin's like I do believe in abortion. And he's like, oh yeah, I believe in abortion too. And he's like what? He's like, yeah, I didn't. And then you said you did, and now I changed my mind. So now I believe. So, thank you, yeah, thanks.
Dylan:So you just there you go, seems easier.
Brad:It's a funny way to make people mad. Mm-hmm, it's like no, I totally agree with you. And they're like, no, you don't. Yeah, you don't agree with me. It's like, yeah, you just that brother's on the where in the tuxes you know what actually now, this isn't funny, you know what.
Dylan:Fuck you for doing it Now. I'm actually insulted.
Brad:But that's yeah. Don't try that unless you want to See what happens. Yeah, put it in your body, see what happens. Mountain Dew that's a Martin thing, I don't know. No, that's not, I just quote not for me.
Martin:I didn't make it up. That's from Nathan Lill.
Brad:No one knows who that is.
Martin:It's my days in China. It's Chinese saying no, it's more of like it's like nine hundred years and getting hungry and like okay, street food. See what happens.
Dylan:Ew yeah.
Martin:You don't know, and it probably pulled out until at two in the morning. It's like, yeah, put it in your body.
Dylan:See what happens. Had some scary moments like that in Vietnam. No, Vietnam, I heard that story. It's fine, Just in the middle of nowhere. Like we'll eat this sketchy looking chicken kebab. We'll make it.
Martin:Or you won't, and it was good. It was good, we were good, we were fine. Didn't have the runs You're great, it's always fine.
Dylan:Yeah, except for those people that die. It was fresh, I guarantee it. Yeah, it was.
Martin:And by fresh meaning.
Dylan:They went like oh you want some chicken yeah.
Martin:Yeah, it wasn't just sitting on the street for 48 hours.
Brad:My wife just threw away a container or something in the baking cabinet today that was from 2017. That's awesome. What?
Dylan:was it? I don't know? Was it muffin mix? No, okay, no, I'm gonna bake something tonight. I don't know what I'm gonna bake something. Is it a gummy?
Brad:What you don't bake gummies, mold them, I believe. All right, so that's part one. That's that's the question to end it. That was part one.
Dylan:That was part one. Okay, what's next? Wisdom Don't know. We don't talk about what's next, and just for the readers or the listeners, they're listeners.
Martin:Listeners.
Dylan:But we do have transcripts, by the way, we do have transcripts.
Martin:Thank you AI.
Dylan:Thank you, ai. Wow, wow. This isn't gonna be a sequential release, so don't expect part two to this?
Brad:for a little bit, no. But this book, like I said, it's, Seems very deep. It's just, there's a lot to it and there's a lot of good stuff into it, but it also feeds. Trying to make it.
Martin:Accessible and not super boring.
Brad:Hopefully we can do that sometimes.
Dylan:Guess what.
Brad:Sometimes it's gonna be boring, because sometimes shit's boring. Okay, so deal with it, figure it out, put it in your body, do you would?
Dylan:you like. Can I do Jordan Peterson? Yes, you can. I don't have anything to read. I don't know. I don't have anything to read you don't have a skeleton. Quote no A skeleton.
Brad:Oh, pull up a Morals. Let's just have a story. Can you pull up like a Jordan Peterson quote and I'll read it? Okay, okay, so I got it, mm-hmm. Oh, one of my friends did send me the the Jordan Peterson coming to Davenport thing.
Dylan:Are you going? There you go. This one's good, actually. Are you going?
Martin:I thought a year he came in, what no? He's year of 18th of February.
Dylan:Oh, that's coming up. It's a Sunday, the day before I leave for Mexico. We need to talk about, by the way, because we gotta pump some episodes up before then.
Brad:Okay, we don't talk about, We'll talk about what's coming up in the future, okay, okay. First I gotta get to in my Kermit, kermit, I gotta start talking like Kermit. You're not everything you could be, and you know it. That's it.
Dylan:Okay, that was good, thanks guys.
Brad:That's really his quote.
Martin:You're still here. It's over, go home.
Brad:Go.