Destiny: Right to Reply

I was expecting to hate this is guy. But after the decoding, and more so after this, I really quite like him. Dont agree on everything, but really like his attitude.

Ema Corro

I like Destiny most of the time and politically I'm mostly aligned with him. I do hope he loses his need for edginess. Whether it's his attacks on Twitter or his need to argue that calling someone a generic slur is worse than casual non-pejorative usage of the n-word, I don't find those to be useful in "truth-seeking". For instance, I've also seen him argue that it's not a problem that he tells people to kill themselves. These are such self-defeating topics to defend, they're optically bad, and they poison the discourse. But he also spends much of his life on camera, and I can't pretend if you recorded me all day, everything I said would be perfectly sane and justified.

James Carr

I'd say there is a third as well - Destiny the Twitter fiend. But I don't think that's particularly unique for Destiny, but it may be a characteristic of streamers who engage in more structured disciplines/content. The live streaming aspects seems to feed on flamboyance, hyperbole and generally ill-disciplined behaviour.

Mbot

Great talk, but: authentic Mexican food is the greatest cuisine and real deal guacamole w fresh tortillas is better than steak, sorry.

Jesse Rimler

Sounds like Neil's might have one of them biases everyone keeps talking about

Chris Hampson

May you out diagnose House

Adam Sher

@Adam alas due to my socialist leanings I am fated to martyr myself as a public hospital doctor forever. I wouldn't want to make myself vulnerable to the same criticisms as Hasan lol

Anna J

You can always join the dark side and work with a private equity company to roll up private practices.

Adam Sher

Haven't watched yet, but Right to Reply is an awesome concept almost nobody does, so you deserve my 2 bucks for the two episodes I watched at very least. Not sure if I will stick around.

Stefan Rabenstein

@Erin yep this is defs how I feel haha. My most recent ick with him was listening to him (while discussing the Drake drama stuff) argue for quite some time with Aba that getting the phone number of a 15 year old girl and sending her messages saying you missed her, as a man in his 30s, could be completely innocent and if it was his 15 year old daughter that he would not necessarily have a problem with it, depends on the details etc. Like... okay maybe it's *technically* true that a given 30 year old could want to be friends with a 15 year old girl for reasons that are completely innocent but damn that would be incredibly unusual and anyone sane would realise the optics of that are ... very very bad... and would probably just not do that anyway. Also I can't imagine any father or mother being ok with it lol. I don't have teenagers my kids are all very young but I certainly wouldn't be OK with it haha.

Anna J

Thanks for the thoughts (and the message, as well). I agree cutting it would sanitize him. It certainly got me out of my lull of 'well, maybe he's a nice guy', which is good. It is such a thoughtless example, used at the expense of others, and the fact that he can't see it says quite a bit. I hope his audience can see it, and that the fans he says he appreciates for keeping him in line call him out when that stuff comes up (I won't hold my breath though).

Monica B.

@Sebastian I also agree with most of what you said haha. Sorry I think I may have strawmanned you a bit there I guess my quibble is with the word "nuanced". I stand by the fact that I don't think you can get a nuanced understanding of a topic (And I should have qualified this) as complex and lengthy as Israel Palestine in six months. I think you can definitely attain a decent amount of knowledge, just not 'nuanced'. Idk. Maybe I'm being needlessly pedantic haha.

Anna J

Hey Monica just to say we did notice that example too and the issues but it felt a bit like when Sam Harris talked about Jewish people being partly responsible for the holocaust. That’s the kind of illustration he reaches for… I think it is unnecessary and actually a bad example because surely the ‘goal’ is different if you are talking about rape vs consensual sex… but in the context of saying there are ethical and unethical ways to achieve things that would certainly be an example. For it to work as an example, you have to take him as referring to the goal of one way sexual gratification which in itself comes with a lot of ethical issues. But anyway… we could cut that out and it would improve his argument but it feels like that would be sanitising him for the audience.

Christopher Kavanagh

This is similar to how I feel about him haha I find him very entertaining to watch and I start to like him and something he does or says puts me off him, then I start to like him again and then he says or does something to put me off him and it goes around like that

Erin

I think the hosts nailed it when they said there's two versions of Destiny the streamer and political debater and you could see it even in this conversation

Daas Nahk

I definitely prefer Destiny on podcast compared to Destiny on stream. I admire that he has thought about what he is doing and how to be better. He’s not my thing, but I can see why others like him.

Linda Sears

What are you training to do?

Adam Sher

Like the rest of the season of streamers people covered, this is the only two times I've heard any of Destiny's content, and I hope it is the last two times. Dude Bro culture regardless of their politics just isn't for me.

Mike Nelson

I guess. I decided to stop Listening to the episode after his example to make some point was that if he wanted to sleep with someone (a “girl”…I assume he meant a woman), he could pretend to be interested and pay for things and get what he wanted (ew wtf) or he could drug her and rape her (EW WTF), and the result would be the same. He was trying to show that the means to an end matter, but this was his example?! A telling look into how he sees women (and I assume girls), and a gross way to think and an absurd and sad example to use. Sadly, no pushback to the example either. I think I’m done with destiny : )

Monica B.

@Anna J I don't really disagree with most of that. And it would be absurd to claim that he is an expert in the field, when he hasn't even done any original research. But your original claim was you don't think someone can get a nuanced understanding of a singular topic in 6 months. That is a much lower bar, and is definitely attainable if you're very competent and hyperfocus on one topic. Especially a mainstream topic for which there's already a well-established, readily digestible literature. I don't think people really dedicate "tedious oftentimes fruitless years if not decades of their life" learning an existing subject, but rather contributing to it. A layman like Destiny isn't doing any original research, he's just learning some established material and that process is a lot smoother. Admittedly, I’m extrapolating from my own experience, and I’m a mathematician by training. Maybe the learning curve for the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict is much steeper, but I suspect it's not that much worse.

Sebastian

Maybe you're being unreasonable

Max

There is a big difference on study on your own and doing in a professional setting as a masters or a phd.

Tobias nilsson

I would say six months is actually a fairly long time to learn deeply about a singular topic, if you spend most of your time on it (PhD students do this routinely). It's a bit misleading to compare it to a typical one-semester class, which will have a much slower pace and will typically only demand a small fraction of your time.

Sebastian

He absolutely loves arguing for the sake of arguing and has admitted as much. Part of it is a result of being terminally online. But when he talks about his past it’s obvious it’s just baked into his personality. I imagine Destiny fell into the stereotype of the hyperactive, precocious, know-it-all, obnoxious kid in school. It’s a character flaw but also a strength that gives him the drive and resilience to do what he does.

Talent Pun

Anna J

Im a huge fan of DTG, but the fact that Destiny’s opinions on the Gaza war don’t automatically disqualify him from being considered a ‘reasonable’ commentator, is quite disappointing to me

Niels De Boer

(This comment doesn’t capture that he also seems likable! Ah, we humans are so complicated and weird and ever-changing!)

Monica B.

"The average Destiny fan would be much better off taking 15-20 hours to learn basic statistical methodology." I think you should really consider how you're defining "the average Destiny fan". There's a difference between a "viewer" and a "fan". I have a feeling that the average Destiny "fan" probably IS pretty statistically knowledgeable. What true fans of him love is how he can pivot from topic to topic so easily regardless of the level of seriously, technicality BECAUSE we understand on some level how well he understands the various topics. We aren't going to let people's biased views on topics sway us over his considered takes(or our own, regardless of where we stand on the political/philosophical spectrum)

The Jerg

@About 3 Pandas I wasn't expressing contempt. I just think he's totally wrong about the ethics of homicide and was making fun of the relative triviality of my objection to methods for reading papers. I'm not sure where you got contempt for his audience. I wasn't implying they are lazy or something, just that if you have time to keep up with a guy who streams 8 hours a day then you have free time to learn for 20 hours. I actually have respect for most of what Destiny says, does and believes. And I think I'm extending a lot of respect to his fan base by suggesting that many of them would be interested and capable in spending 20 hours learning about statistics. You are definitely overestimating the ability of experts. Or at least, overestimating the statistical expertise of non-statistician experts. A majority of researchers in a variety of fields have a relatively basic understanding of statistics. Most of the time, that's all they need to do good research. @Sebastian I should not have said "Average Destiny fan." I was more thinking of engaged fans who are actually listening to what he's saying, trying to emulate him, read studies etc. So your average Enlighted Dalibaner. That being said I don't agree that basic statistical analysis is some rarefied knowledge only graspable by 1% of people. I also agree that most people would be better off looking at meta-analysis or summaries from major institutions rather than reading individual studies. (Assuming that's what you mean by suss out consensus) @DTG and @Sebastian I agree that at least reading the abstract is better than believing a news headline blindly. My point is that if you want to read individual studies and have opinions on them, you have to at least grasp basic experimental design and statistical inference. And it's not actually that hard to learn! If someone is going around reading abstracts only, they might still be better off just finding the biggest institution in the area and taking its word.

Trees

I love the right to reply episodes! I’m not done with the episode yet, but still don’t think destiny (who I had never heard of before your episode) is for me…the ego on that guy is W I L D. He’s smart and might be fun to chat with one on one, but all I could imagine was being a member of his family and having to deal with him at like, dinner, or a holiday. Maybe it’s just my big sarcastic family, but the eye rolling would cause injuries. Probably better than having to be in his entourage, though, and privy to his whims and his believing he’s super unique and the most interesting guy on the planet. And the casual sexism woven through everything—oof. Sadly not as unusual as it should be, of course, in a ‘does the fish know its in water’ kind of way

Monica B.

Yes in a few days.

Christopher Kavanagh

Yeah, I used to think this was not the case but I have seen Sam invoke selective attention to often and I found some of his engagement strategies to be... well just playing the attention economy game. Like, he went on Jordan's podcast, they addressed very little that they strongly disagreed on, and Sam expressed on other occasions his happiness to take part in events with Jordan... but what is the value there? If you want to engage with Peterson, why not check his output and why he is criticised and go from there. Same goes for Brand...

Christopher Kavanagh

Here's a fun bit of internet history, Destiny helped with Contrapoints initial video editing software, they had quite a few conversations and debates in the past.

Daas Nahk

Take a step back and realize maybe you're just too emotionally invested in hating this person as opposed to these guys just happening to be completely incorrect about a guy you just happen to hate. Think critically bro, you sound unhinged :x

Russ Mootsey

Convoluted analogy example? You sure you just can't grasp it? Lmao

Russ Mootsey

To everyone perceiving DtG as being biased in favor of Destiny... Do you find them to be more objective in their other decodings? Do other 3rd party observers often also appear biased in favor of Destiny? Does this discrepancy keep presenting itself? If you answer yes to all these, consider that your own perspective might be off.

Oliver G.

I’ve never heard any actual Destiny content, just the two DTG episodes. Other than his occasional extreme opinions and outbursts, I probably align 90% with him politically but he does display some guruish tendencies. My biggest problem with him is his use of “both sides” rhetoric and the preempting of criticism. He can sound reasonable and nuanced when he puts an argument from both sides, but he's not actually saying why his view is the right one. He will acknowledge a potential criticism without actually addressing it, but it's easy to think that he addressed it due to the way he frames it. I think you guys pointed this out way back in the Contrapoints episode and noted that it's a common tactic in left-leaning circles. He did it several times in this episode but you guys either didn't notice it or just let it slide. Still an entertaining episode overall.

Erik Fast

Will the video version be released at some point?

online online

Destiny Fan here, overall I was happy with your portrayal of both Destiny's talents and faults. You guys seem to genuinely try to get into the mind of the people you research. Keep it up

not important

1. I'm unsure what Hasan has to do with this. 2. You are evoking the words of a person who is notoriously guilty of the 'sin' he is projecting onto Destiny in this case. I would not take Peterson's words, credentialed as he is, as gospel. 'Wanting to be right' is not a character flaw, 'not being able admit you are wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence' would be. 3. I'm not sure why you would need him to be right in your field of expertise. I certainly would not go to Destiny for his opinions in the fields that I consider myself an expert on, nor would I judge him for being wrong due to lack of knowledge.

Mbot

DGGL

Magni Þór Björnsson

QT is referring to a person. It's all about interpersonal drama.

Magni Þór Björnsson

Why are hasan fans hate watching this lmao... literal self loathing losers of the internet Go back to watching TikToks of 14 year olds screeching about freeing hamas

brandon

What's QT?

Níall Faughnan

Yes to both. We can and do push back at times but in many cases the point is for people to provide their position and for the audience to evaluate themselves. If we think people are being duplicitous or misrepresenting facts we will usually say so but when people are offering their positions our stance is well ‘that’s like your opinion man’.

Christopher Kavanagh

I would have thought Destiny’s defence was that he does not know much about their politics and that he isn’t endorsing them / has collaborated and appeared with much worse people.

Christopher Kavanagh

Overall I agree with this but when I’m teaching undergraduates about reading papers the first step is getting them to read abstracts, identify variables, note samples, summarise the methods and reported results, and properly identify the research question. I also teach them about how to skim various sections to get the gist. I entirely agree that this is step 1 for critically evaluating research and that this is mostly a descriptive exercise. An important point that I focus on early is how you have to read papers and the conclusions offered as the opinions/spin of authors and that you should compare the strength of the evidence supplied against the strength of the conclusions, etc. But I think you have to understand the context here, which is an environment in which people aren't even normally reading abstracts. I would absolutely recommend people invest time in a course like Improving Statistical Inference by Lakens but realistically very few will do that.

Christopher Kavanagh

"just spend 15-20 hours learning basic statistical methodology"? Really? Destiny is a YouTuber with hundreds of thousands of fans, most of whom are just casual viewers. Regular people with no online presence and little to no academic background. Do you honestly think your advice would be useful to the average person in that group? If so, you're just hopelessly out of touch. 99% of people would be better served by just trying to suss out where the consensus lies in a particular discipline and simply trusting that. Your advice is something I would give to my students in a class. Getting hoodwinked by landmark papers is the least of my concerns when it comes to laymen.

Sebastian

I feel like what you are advocating for could lead to more bad information on the whole. Reinterpretation of a data set by a layman can lead to incorrect conclusions by a lot of people who don't know a lot, but just enough to sound convincing yet be completely wrong. Being able to understand the statistics is one thing, but being able to interpret it and come to a conclusion is a whole other thing. Experts are not infallible, but a layman with only an novice understanding of statistics could and probably would blunder considerably in contextualizing the data presented. I am also going based completely feeling and might be overestimating the ability of experts. Your general contempt for destiny and his fans is also kind of off-putting. I get not liking the guy and thinking he is wrong, but you actually had some fair criticism. Adding that priming does the rest of your comment a disservice.

About 3 Pandas

Yeah, I think they've made it pretty clear that they're not interrogative interviewers, they've had their chance to say what they think on the pod, and this is the opportunity for the (possible) guru to respond to what they said. I'm sure Chris would get in an argument if he wanted, but.

John S Durst

Seems like you just don't like Destiny. Given your representation of certain subjects here. Primarily the framing that sleeping with fans is always abhorrent and the framing that Destiny's unhinged fight with Ludwig was "sexual smearing," whatever that means.

Skreeble Pissbaby

Maybe it's a quibble when Destiny was also literally justifying murder, but I took exception to his comment about how lay people should evaluate research literature. Reading just abstracts and conclusions will get you hoodwinked, even if you're only looking at "landmark" papers. The average Destiny fan would be much better off taking 15-20 hours to learn basic statistical methodology. They clearly have the time. If you do this, then you can read the abstract and look at results tables and generally decide if a study is worth its salt. It is not that uncommon for abstracts(and conclusions) to completely misrepresent results. I think this was the case with one of the Ivermectin papers Brett would throw around, and Jesse Singal has basically made a living off calling it out on various controversial topics. It even happens with regularity in humdrum clinical research Twitter doesn't care about. So that directly contradicts Destiny's other point about how citing a table in a paper to critique the paper is a red flag. I agree with the more general point that Chris made against cherry picking statements from long papers, but critiquing methodology or the connection between results and conclusion is crucial to evaluating research. It doesn't take that much knowledge of statistics to be able to do this for a large swath of social science and clinical research. Plenty of influencers do it poorly, sure, but I think the answer is for more people to learn some basic stats.

Trees

lol hamasabi heads big mad

Neo Pastist

Woah what? He sexually coerces followers? Could you elaborate on this, this is the first time I'm hearing that. If that's true it definitely should have been brought up in this episode, same with calling for violence.

thomas .

His Reddit community didn't agree with him though? There were people justifying that he could since others attacked his ex all the time, but there were a ton of people saying it was a bad thing to do.

PaperMache7

Something I really appreciate about the right2reply episodes so far is that they're not about what, in the correct country, we call 'doing a Paxman', it's about giving the guest enough rope to either tightwire or ariel. Edit: Mad Max and Mad Max 2 have some really interesting underlying sexual politics in them that don't get mentioned enough. I think the whole franchise does. All very freudian.

Ymirsdreams

Hinges be damned.

Roscoe 112

You think 'he just wants to be right ' even though you quote him saying "I could be wrong" and this contradiction is somehow his fault? Rather than a contradiction between what you think and what he actually says?

Aniruddha Kulkarni

This was an interesting Destiny fan interview and, I'm sorry to say, an embarrassing Decoding The Gurus one. Literally every single criticism that you raised was reframed positively and left uncontested. I would have said you pulled a Lex Fridman, but his episode with Destiny makes him seem like a BBC interviewer in comparison. His usage of the n-word in public was reframed as conditioning his audience to become desensitized to virtue signaling. Left uncontested. Vindictive behavior where he sexually smears his opponent's girlfriend publicly was reframed as him actually being a victim for being criticized for fighting back. Uncontested. Sleeping with fans is not actually problematic because the fans will understand his lifestyle better than outside people will, which is better for the relationship. Uncontested. The absolute icing on the cake, and something that should be an episode of someone else's decoding of the gurus itself, is the segment about the DDOS kid. You ask him whether his stance is genuine or just edge-lording for the sake of edge-lording. He gives you a long non-answer, but he finally admits, 'my opinions are genuine.' This is an influential public figure justifying the murder of a teenager and his father. Matt says he 'gets the argument' and he's 'not going to litigate it,' and that it's 'a fun, philosophical question.' Chris, maybe you're enamored by his charisma, maybe you didn't catch it the first time, but you ignore his admission and try to give him a way out - you say that he should have said he just got carried away trying to justify it. Chris: That was just blowing off steam, right? Destiny: I don't know what the rule of the principle should be, yeah, I don't have that feeling that it was just an emotional reaction, fuck those guys. Chris starts laughing like a schoolgirl. Sorry to be repetitive, but again - influential public figure justifying the murder of a child and his father for cutting off his internet connection. Turned it into one big joke. Absolutely embarrassing. I understand the counterargument is that just because there's no back and forth doesn't imply endorsement, but there is absolutely no shot you would leave such contentious claims without comment if it was Jordan Peterson or Andrew Tate. Zero chance. I've seen you damning takes/situations that are 10x less extreme. There is a moment in the conversation where you express surprise that so many fans copy his arguments for his most extreme takes verbatim. I think what is interesting is that his decoding episode was met with literally universal praise from the very same community. Maybe that's a sign you've become a bit too much of a fan yourself?

Tomek Krzesiński

great stuff guys ❤️ it was and is my dream crossover

Tomasz Kulesza

Thank you for the first two sentences so i could ignore the rest of this comment.

Matt

As opposed to people who don’t engage in that type of behavior. This is not a competition between destiny and Hasan for the battle of the nation. They both suck. Destiny needing to be right makes is exposed when he uses the most convoluted analogies for every argument and will never back down when he gets out of his depth. If you’ve ever listened to him discuss something you personally know alot about. Regulations and finance for me. It becomes very self evident.

Tom

As opposed to all the people who have made it a lifelong goal of wanting to be wrong? You can say his personal stuff is deranged, and it is, but also I don't think my personal life could bear such a degree of public scrutiny and not come off as a bad person. As a borderline apd person, he is not 'clearly' a sociopath, he clearly understands distinction between right and wrong, and would admit to being in the wrong even to his standards. Neither is he ignorant or disregarding to other's feeling, just unsympathetic in some conditions.

Mbot

Yup as long as it's done responsibly

Reinert

I had my fingers crossed for at least one of them too! They have such a polished veneer, it'd be really interesting to see how DtG who saw through it would contrast with destiny's appreciation for them!

Oliver G.

It's like the opposite of civility porn, civility gore if you will

Reinert

I agree with the broader point, especially with figures like Nick Fuentes. Someone like Tate though has gained too much legitimacy already to be ignored. It's important to engage with these larger preestablished figures, even the most despicable ones.

Oliver G.

He’s a walking contradiction. I can’t believe I’m saying this but JP is right about him. He just wants to be right. Goes on long tangents to explain his actions but then qualifies it with “yeah I’m probably wrong”. Like a horrible boss he says he wants to cultivate a accountable society but blocks so many people in his community for arguing with him. I’m only one subscriber but I had to unsubscribe after the Anna drama. That girl was legitimately mentally ill and any reasonable person would have ignored her bc she has no credibility. Instead he stalked her streaks then slept with her months later. I agree with a lot of his politics but he’s clearly a sociopath who knows how to use fake humility to sound reasonable

Tom

I thought I had accidentally adjusted the speed of the episode when Destiny started talking. 😂 His verbal fluency is incredible. Enjoyed the convo but, I think his particular style isn’t my bag. Certainly an interesting character

Shane Partington

I agree he was unhinged and went too far. While the extra context made it more clear why he went nuts, the QT stuff, especially the AI "we can all fuck her" stuff was gross.

Nicholas

Destiny tbf is fairly impressive in this- listens, answers, but the mode switch , while being consistent as you’ve established, is quite the feature. He may be a new form…

Brainbiter

he collaborates with people but i wouldn’t say he “endorses” them.

bL

The practice of not stopping people shoplifting in America is for the safety of the staff, not the robber

Erin

Thank you for bringing up the legitimising people they debate like Andrew Tate, I mean sometimes these guys seem to forget that they're talking to literal Nazis and sex traffickers

Erin

The tree growing analogy was great

Erin

She’s a bit hard for me to listen to as well but I like hearing Chris defend himself. I think he’s a genuinely thoughtful guy even if he explicitly tries not to get too involved as a political pundit type.

Andy

Should be on Patreon feed.

Christopher Kavanagh

Would have done if we had thought about it.

Christopher Kavanagh

Yeah thanks, Andy. I don't like Eiynah so I didn't listen to that. I agree. It didn't look good for Sam. Although, he's still a voice I appreciate out there.

Kyle

His abuse is sick

Mutated_Cuhnt

Chris talked about their talk with Sam with Eiynah on Polite Conversations at it was very clear that he didn’t think it looked good for Sam

Andy

Interesting opening. The boys haven't really said much about Sam following his second right time reply but it sounds like they have been put off by him all the more after their second interaction lol.

Kyle

Absolute cowards! Reserving the bad food takes for the last minute. Your decoding skills are being squandered damn it, hold him to account! 😤

Oliver G.

Yes. Seeing his entire Reddit community defend this was disheartening. It was obviously completely unhinged and he was rightfully mocked over it.

Andy

fucking love this right to reply shit, really welcoming and interesting :D

Moe's

Up there for destiny interviews I would say. Well done.

Rufus Evans

Was really hoping you’d bring up his potential endorsements of Peter Boghossian, Lex Friedman, Dr. K. But overall, a good convo

Andy

If you mean it as a downstream of Sam's unwillingness/or simply not doing enough research on certain topics, I agree but I thought you were making a separate argument that Sam would intentionally withhold his views on certain platforms to either avoid audience pushback or gain new audiences

Dr Badmouth

He doesn’t hold his tongue on Trump. He has selective attention when it comes to the extreme takes of people he agrees with or has sympathy for. How much research do you think Sam had done on Jordan’s opinions on vaccines or global warming. There is a reason those topics became confrontational with Destiny.

Christopher Kavanagh

Didn't listen to the maajid conversation but wouldn't you say these are just based on his actual views. The test of this would be how Sam reacts whenever these people bring up Trump. Is he biting his tongue on Triggernometry or Chris Williamson's show when it's brought up or is he sticking to his guns? Obviously most people are aware of the audience of their podcast host but is Sam an especially bad offender?

Dr Badmouth

as a fellow cult member of DGG, it felt pretty cathartic when he fully admitted that he was unhinged and even going against his own principles when he tweeted that stuff about QT

anonymoize

Lol sweet. Already know this episode is going be hilarious

Minotaurus Rex

In that conversation I think it was mostly Jordan but I also think this is a broader legitimate criticism of Sam. See his last appearance with Maajid or most of his appearances with Douglas Murray. He did better (dare I suggest partly because of us) in one of his more recent conversations with Murray but I’d bet that now with the Israel conflict it will be entirely reset.

Christopher Kavanagh

I think it's not on the main rss feed yet, just on here (patreon)

HustleTron9000

Chris, do you really believe your criticism of Sam on Jordan Peterson's show avoiding certain takes as if to avoid audience Pushback when their most famous conversations are their disagreements? It was also JP's show and he gets to drive the conversation. JP had destiny on specifically to disagree like JP & Sam's earlier conversations.

Dr Badmouth

Please, someone call Tim Apple. 42 minutes and it‘s still not available in my podcatcher 😭😭 I need to download it for my bus ride later

mobitobi

Yes! Finally, my terminally-online, pathetically parasocial dreams have come true

RipleyV

Right into my veins

Andy

Awesome, thanks!! Looking forward to the listen as always.

someoneyouusedtoknow

The video will be up when editor Andy gets done with it (prob a few days).

Christopher Kavanagh

Will there ever be video or is this audio only?

someoneyouusedtoknow

Never clocked so fast.

Thom Hehemann

Excited for this one!!

Oliver G.

Sorry, couldn't help myself

bradsparks

First!

bradsparks