Joe Rogan (JRE)

[GloryofGreece]

Man does his show suck when its mostly comedians, internet personalities, and dietitians. I like a good 20-40% of the episodes, but the past several years have been a bit too much exposure and repetitiveness. Not many new guests or new ideas.

I wonder when he'll quit the UFC gig and when he's famous downloads/viewership will decline substantially ?

The 20% good ones are good in spite of Rogan, not because of him (personally I think way less than 5% of Rogan's shows are watchable). The Sebastian Junger and Chuck Palahniuk ones were pretty good. The Jesse Ventura one is insanely bad lol. I don't know who came off like the bigger douche in that episode.

I just don't really know if its mostly b/c I've matured and most of the slapstick, goof ball, odd, comedic etc. shit just doesn't interest me at all, or if its more like the JRE is now annoying b/c I've heard him speak entirely too long to every be interesting again? He repeats himself constantly and its sad that I've noticed b/c it means again that I've listened to his podcast way way too much. If I hear him talk about how you can't say "tranny" again or "sjw" this or that I'll explode. I also cannot stand when he claims to be raised "Catholic" b/c he went to kindergarten at an alleged Catholic school. I've had it with the constant comparison of this or that cult as the analogous with this or that religion or ideology. And the persistent "tribe" and tribal bullshit rants he goes on.

[heydaralon]

Man does his show suck when its mostly comedians, internet personalities, and dietitians. I like a good 20-40% of the episodes, but the past several years have been a bit too much exposure and repetitiveness. Not many new guests or new ideas.

I wonder when he'll quit the UFC gig and when he's famous downloads/viewership will decline substantially ?

The 20% good ones are good in spite of Rogan, not because of him (personally I think way less than 5% of Rogan's shows are watchable). The Sebastian Junger and Chuck Palahniuk ones were pretty good. The Jesse Ventura one is insanely bad lol. I don't know who came off like the bigger douche in that episode.

I just don't really know if its mostly b/c I've matured and most of the slapstick, goof ball, odd, comedic etc. shit just doesn't interest me at all, or if its more like the JRE is now annoying b/c I've heard him speak entirely too long to every be interesting again? He repeats himself constantly and its sad that I've noticed b/c it means again that I've listened to his podcast way way too much. If I hear him talk about how you can't say "tranny" again or "sjw" this or that I'll explode. I also cannot stand when he claims to be raised "Catholic" b/c he went to kindergarten at an alleged Catholic school. I've had it with the constant comparison of this or that cult as the analogous with this or that religion or ideology. And the persistent "tribe" and tribal bullshit rants he goes on.

lol Im glad he hates SJWs. That stuff doesn't bother me, but he does talk about it way too much. The upside is that his wide viewership will digest these arguments and use them in their own lives and in the culture war. I am sick of hearing about MMA martial arts, weed legalization, and the difficulty in being a stand up comedian. I have never found Rogan's comedy remotely funny. A lot of the comedians he interviews are clearly kind of dumb. Rogan probably interviews them so he can seem smart in comparison.

I really hate that stupid Terrence McKenna "stoned ape" theory he always pushes too. The science behind that is on par with creationism. Rose colored glasses about psychedelics. I have done shrooms, acid, DXM, LSA etc in my earlier years and it did not make me this creative, empathetic, self actualized person. All of your mental problems stay with you after the effects wear off, and you are back to being the same. I think this is a very dumb and lazy message for impressionable viewers. Take a drug and you will be better and fixed. Nah. I don't care that other people take them. Thats not my business, but psychedelics are not a panacea. Neither is weed. You shouldn't be in a cage for doing it, but you aren't gonna be John Lennon, or Mozart with perfect health if you toke up. There is a very dark side to that entire hippie/conscious expanding movement. As a society, liberals view that entire era almost like the way conservatives view the 1950's leave it to beaver times, with this kind of naivity.

Rogan in general also likes to claim he is a libertarian, but its weird how whenever small govt people go on his show he always ends up disagreeing with them. I view him kind of like a bro science/TIL reddit post. You get some info, but the source of it is so dumb that you have to go back and research everything yourself.

[GloryofGreece]

The 20% good ones are good in spite of Rogan, not because of him (personally I think way less than 5% of Rogan's shows are watchable). The Sebastian Junger and Chuck Palahniuk ones were pretty good. The Jesse Ventura one is insanely bad lol. I don't know who came off like the bigger douche in that episode.

I just don't really know if its mostly b/c I've matured and most of the slapstick, goof ball, odd, comedic etc. shit just doesn't interest me at all, or if its more like the JRE is now annoying b/c I've heard him speak entirely too long to every be interesting again? He repeats himself constantly and its sad that I've noticed b/c it means again that I've listened to his podcast way way too much. If I hear him talk about how you can't say "tranny" again or "sjw" this or that I'll explode. I also cannot stand when he claims to be raised "Catholic" b/c he went to kindergarten at an alleged Catholic school. I've had it with the constant comparison of this or that cult as the analogous with this or that religion or ideology. And the persistent "tribe" and tribal bullshit rants he goes on.

lol Im glad he hates SJWs. That stuff doesn't bother me, but he does talk about it way too much. The upside is that his wide viewership will digest these arguments and use them in their own lives and in the culture war. I am sick of hearing about MMA martial arts, weed legalization, and the difficulty in being a stand up comedian. I have never found Rogan's comedy remotely funny. A lot of the comedians he interviews are clearly kind of dumb. Rogan probably interviews them so he can seem smart in comparison.

I really hate that stupid Terrence McKenna "stoned ape" theory he always pushes too. The science behind that is on par with creationism. Rose colored glasses about psychedelics. I have done shrooms, acid, DXM, LSA etc in my earlier years and it did not make me this creative, empathetic, self actualized person. All of your mental problems stay with you after the effects wear off, and you are back to being the same. I think this is a very dumb and lazy message for impressionable viewers. Take a drug and you will be better and fixed. Nah. I don't care that other people take them. Thats not my business, but psychedelics are not a panacea. Neither is weed. You shouldn't be in a cage for doing it, but you aren't gonna be John Lennon, or Mozart with perfect health if you toke up. There is a very dark side to that entire hippie/conscious expanding movement. As a society, liberals view that entire era almost like the way conservatives view the 1950's leave it to beaver times, with this kind of naivity.

Rogan in general also likes to claim he is a libertarian, but its weird how whenever small govt people go on his show he always ends up disagreeing with them. I view him kind of like a bro science/TIL reddit post. You get some info, but the source of it is so dumb that you have to go back and research everything yourself.

Very true indeed. "Beware wisdom you haven't earned"...Carl Jung. I think he's a stoner that is/was a uber jock and hence the sativa opened his mind which wasn't until then. But that doesn't mean other people need it or can't be introspective and/or humble without it either. He's highly defensive about certain things (like we all can be) but is super quick to point out the alleged hypocrisy in others. He's a libertarian socially for sure. He's a degenerate that makes $ selling degeneracy. But he's financially successful so fuck it right? Of course he doesn't want an authority to tell what he can or cannot do and of course he can't view anything as truly holy and sacred. His entire MO is the opposite of those things.

[heydaralon]

I just don't really know if its mostly b/c I've matured and most of the slapstick, goof ball, odd, comedic etc. shit just doesn't interest me at all, or if its more like the JRE is now annoying b/c I've heard him speak entirely too long to every be interesting again? He repeats himself constantly and its sad that I've noticed b/c it means again that I've listened to his podcast way way too much. If I hear him talk about how you can't say "tranny" again or "sjw" this or that I'll explode. I also cannot stand when he claims to be raised "Catholic" b/c he went to kindergarten at an alleged Catholic school. I've had it with the constant comparison of this or that cult as the analogous with this or that religion or ideology. And the persistent "tribe" and tribal bullshit rants he goes on.

lol Im glad he hates SJWs. That stuff doesn't bother me, but he does talk about it way too much. The upside is that his wide viewership will digest these arguments and use them in their own lives and in the culture war. I am sick of hearing about MMA martial arts, weed legalization, and the difficulty in being a stand up comedian. I have never found Rogan's comedy remotely funny. A lot of the comedians he interviews are clearly kind of dumb. Rogan probably interviews them so he can seem smart in comparison.

I really hate that stupid Terrence McKenna "stoned ape" theory he always pushes too. The science behind that is on par with creationism. Rose colored glasses about psychedelics. I have done shrooms, acid, DXM, LSA etc in my earlier years and it did not make me this creative, empathetic, self actualized person. All of your mental problems stay with you after the effects wear off, and you are back to being the same. I think this is a very dumb and lazy message for impressionable viewers. Take a drug and you will be better and fixed. Nah. I don't care that other people take them. Thats not my business, but psychedelics are not a panacea. Neither is weed. You shouldn't be in a cage for doing it, but you aren't gonna be John Lennon, or Mozart with perfect health if you toke up. There is a very dark side to that entire hippie/conscious expanding movement. As a society, liberals view that entire era almost like the way conservatives view the 1950's leave it to beaver times, with this kind of naivity.

Rogan in general also likes to claim he is a libertarian, but its weird how whenever small govt people go on his show he always ends up disagreeing with them. I view him kind of like a bro science/TIL reddit post. You get some info, but the source of it is so dumb that you have to go back and research everything yourself.

Very true indeed. "Beware wisdom you haven't earned"...Carl Jung. I think he's a stoner that is/was a uber jock and hence the sativa opened his mind which wasn't until then. But that doesn't mean other people need it or can't be introspective and/or humble without it either. He's highly defensive about certain things (like we all can be) but is super quick to point out the alleged hypocrisy in others. He's a libertarian socially for sure. He's a degenerate that makes $ selling degeneracy. But he's financially successful so fuck it right? Of course he doesn't want an authority to tell what he can or cannot do and of course he can't view anything as truly holy and sacred. His entire MO is the opposite of those things.

Uber jock hahaha

I think that Rogan might be onto something when talking about discipline and martial arts. StA takes fitness seriously, and he seems to find balance and happiness from mastering various exercises and making gains. Not just weightlifting, that dude is doing gymnast-style exercises and improving range of movement and flexibility. Rogan discusses that idea and it seems like the skills and discipline learned from martial arts (or some physical activity) can be applied to other parts of your life. That is a good message imo. I have started going back to the gym, and slowly trying to improve myself. I walk 3 miles at night, and sadly, that has become the highlight of my day. Its kind of funny how Rogan discusses discipline physically when drugs pretty much do the opposite of that. Idk how often he smokes, but when I used to that meant I wasn't doing shit for the rest of the day.

[GloryofGreece]

discipline is real and joe has it. Work Ethic / Industriousness is the most important personality trait other than IQ when determining success and stability. Sad thing is that he doesn't seem to appreciate or understand that much like IQ other traits are genetic/baked into you before your an adult so good luck trying to permanently or semi permanently changing your sub traits bro

[heydaralon]

discipline is real and joe has it. Work Ethic / Industriousness is the most important personality trait other than IQ when determining success and stability. Sad thing is that he doesn't seem to appreciate or understand that much like IQ other traits are genetic/baked into you before your an adult so good luck trying to permanently or semi permanently changing your sub traits bro

I often wonder if in the future scientists will discover a gene for industriousness. What implications (assuming such a gene exists) do you think that would have for society? I think that many people who are classified as stupid/lazy today may have thrived in a society that was not industrialized the way ours was. Perhaps there is some menial but important task in a hunter gatherer society they would have crushed without effort. However, it is also possible that even in hunter gatherer societies there is a small percentage of fuck ups and lazy idiots.


But you gotta think, in a situation where calories are scarce, and every mouth to feed has to serve a purpose, how could a lazy/useless gene have been passed on? There have been a lot of postmodern interpretations of things like mental illness, and Michael Focault's great confinement posited that madness is a disease of civilization. This has proven to be bullshit, as every civilization including primitive ones have had severely mentall ill. Shamans serve the same function as psychiatrists. We always think that the good genes are the ones that survived, but evolution has no direction beyond passing the genes, regardless of the morality of their carrier. So that means that there would have been paleolithic lazy people right? Maybe we have taken this darwinian explanation of social behavior too far. In the late nineteenth century Thomas Huxley discusses how society always assumes that only good traits would evolve. But why is that? If a thief can pass on his genes, surely this bad behavior evolves too right? Maybe our criminals and ne'er-do-wells are also evolving if these theories have any predictive value.


What are your thoughts on this?

[TheReal_ND]

That gets into this whole thing about k selective societies vs r. My pet theory that I dont know anything about really other than it feels good, is that the climate in some areas of the globe requires greater strategy and long term planning. This requires more time invested into the offspring which should in theory favor less and more productive offspring vs the shotgun method of just pumping them out in order to overcome natural deaths. But there has to be a ton of other factors going on as well that dictates how society evolves such as how high that society requires order or justice which over time should weed out the violent and reprobate by something as simple as just removing them from the gene pool, even if for a limited time, thus leading to less success in society and less time to pass on genes. But this doesnt seem to always be the case because the lowest caste of people ie the most crime ridden seem to breed the most. Whatever. I wish I could say I listened to JR enough to have something to add to the conversation but I quit listening to him about a month after his interview with Dan Carlin the first time where he wouldn't shut up about the Mongols. I just couldn't get into him. I've been watching his story arc unfold however and I cant say I've been missing much. I guess the thing is that even his guests arent that interesting to me. Even AJ has simply been a source of memes for me for years now. If JR brings on Kevin MacDonald or some other thought criminal pls do let me know. Until then it's just boring "intellectual dark web" mumbo jumbo. I'm sure some of it is good for what it is worth at face value but none of it is actually interesting to me. I still love history but outside of that what? Nothing he has to offer.

[heydaralon]

That gets into this whole thing about k selective societies vs r. My pet theory that I dont know anything about really other than it feels good, is that the climate in some areas of the globe requires greater strategy and long term planning. This requires more time invested into the offspring which should in theory favor less and more productive offspring vs the shotgun method of just pumping them out in order to overcome natural deaths. But there has to be a ton of other factors going on as well that dictates how society evolves such as how high that society requires order or justice which over time should weed out the violent and reprobate by something as simple as just removing them from the gene pool, even if for a limited time, thus leading to less success in society and less time to pass on genes. But this doesnt seem to always be the case because the lowest caste of people ie the most crime ridden seem to breed the most. Whatever. I wish I could say I listened to JR enough to have something to add to the conversation but I quit listening to him about a month after his interview with Dan Carlin the first time where he wouldn't shut up about the Mongols. I just couldn't get into him. I've been watching his story arc unfold however and I cant say I've been missing much. I guess the thing is that even his guests arent that interesting to me. Even AJ has simply been a source of memes for me for years now. If JR brings on Kevin MacDonald or some other thought criminal pls do let me know. Until then it's just boring "intellectual dark web" mumbo jumbo. I'm sure some of it is good for what it is worth at face value but none of it is actually interesting to me. I still love history but outside of that what? Nothing he has to offer.

JR sucks imo so you didn't really miss anything, unless you think that some Cro Magnon man ate some shrooms and that led to supercomputers.

There is something to be said about poor people breeding a lot though. In Africa, they still have issues with infant mortality rates, and are subsistence farmers in many cases, so a high birthrate makes sense in a fucked up way. Europe used to have the same mentality. Shit even queens and kings used to have like 6 kids because they kept dying. Medicine is catching up, meaning that all things remaining the same, that continent is going to have a Malthusean crisis of epic proportions, often in areas like the Sahel that cannot even support 50% of the current population without Western aid.

Personally, I think that flaw in all these evolutionary theories that attempt to explain society is that they get far to caught up on "what should be" vs. "what is." I think that a piece of shit with aggressive genes who doesn't give a shit about his family or society could easily spread those genes by fucking multiple partners. I think a liar who is easily able to con and get one over on others could do the same. In some circumstances, maybe that is an evolutionary advantage. Since evolution is a slow process, and culture is a relatively quick one, we could easily come up with a belief system that does not match the genetic realities on the ground. Maybe all these culture battles we are going through today are representative of that. I'm not sure I buy into this theory at all, but it is possible.

The problem is, I have seen many secular humanist types who try to ram their politics into this debate. They will say that evolution rewards people who are altruistic and rational, because those people pulled the tribe together and did the most moral action (which for them means progressive economic and social policies). This to me also seems disingenuous. If history is our guide, it looks like many terrible individuals were leaders and even if they failed, the next society built upon their actions. Secular humanist evolutionary theories do not have a good explanation for why religion, which they view as irrational and evil, has sprung up in every society we have record of.

Personally, I think that history and culture has far more to do with chance than we are comfortable acknowledging. There are good behaviors which keep society and the individual healthy and around longer, but that doesn't explain why people always choose the bad ones. Without exception you see peoples engaging in shit that is utterly self destructive from the individual at the bottom to the population at the top. The only theory for how we got here that makes sense to me is that people are irrational, and history is a serious of unlikely chances stacked one upon the other, all the way down.

[heydaralon]

My grandfather was very frugal. He used to tell my dad that if everyone in America lived like his family did, the country would be in a permanent recession, because no one would spend or extend credit. There is a book called the Fable of the Bees by Bernard Mandeville which discusses how private vices can lead to public virtues. In other words, the greed of one man can lead to the prosperity for many. Kind of like Gordon Gecko in Wall Street's "Greed is good!" speech. This is conventional wisdom for many people today, but this book was published several hundred years ago and influenced many Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire.

But here is where that idea gets strange. It applies to not just economic greed, but also things like war or genocide. Whoever you are on Earth, you are living on land that was taken from indigenous people through violent conquest (the residents who got displaced displaced others before them too). Scandanavia, America, or Nigeria, it doesn't matter. This has allowed a peaceful harmonious society to spring up in many cases, but it would not have happened without a major amount of human misery and death. Its like the idea of a poor father suffering and sacrificing so his children can grow up to become richer than him, and being ignorant of what he went through.

There are various mystical traditions that do not view good and evil as being polar opposite conflicting forces, but rather as being a part of a mutual feeding cycle where one reinforces the other. In the modern west, we do not look at them that way, and we attempt to look at science and make it align itself with our morals, which in today's climate means whatever is popular on social media. But often morals that are bad in one scenario end up being very useful in another. Many national heroes would have been war criminals if their side lost. Many thieves set up companies that employ thousands today. Many financially irresponsible people who were pariahs went on to invent something that reshaped every facet of our society. Looking at things that way, how do you determine which genes are useful and moral, and which ones are harmful and immoral?

I have no idea, but I think it is pretty crazy when you think about it..

[TheReal_ND]

If history is our guide, it looks like many terrible individuals were leaders and even if they failed, the next society built upon their actions. Secular humanist evolutionary theories do not have a good explanation for why religion, which they view as irrational and evil, has sprung up in every society we have record of.

I would offer that perhaps the reason that we arent all offspring of murderous psychopaths is that no society of murderous psychopaths that we know of is feasibly workable. I was just speaking with Okee the other week about a new pet theory of mine that involves Spangler's rise and fall of civilizations and the whole 4th turning crap whoever is behind that. I think it was Nietzsche rather. Basically as the society reaches a ripening and falls the ashes of that one go on to create the next but this time we end up with less untermensch. The process is to repeat until we reach the end of history which I would be forced to assume, is a society comprised of nothing but transcendental ubermensch who's very being is comprised of pure light. Or maybe that's Mormonism.