Very Bad Gurus *UNEDITED* (Audio)
Added 2022-03-04 06:09:09 +0000 UTCIn the most ambitious crossover since the Fraggles met the Muppets, this episode features not just two but four(!) middle aged male academics waffling for an extended period on niche topics and internet randomness.
We are joined by famed moral psychologist and returning guest, Dave Pizarro, and ghost hunter/philosopher extraordinaire, Tamler Sommers.
Stealing the Very Bad Wizards format we have an intro segment in which we sort out all of the silly culture war nonsense then as a side benefit we decode whether ghosts are real and whose pants Chris wore when performing rituals in Japan.
Finally, we move on to the 'meat' of the discussion to examine Paul Thomas Anderson's 2012 movie 'The Master', which explores the relationship between a cult leader and an alcoholic wastrel. Is it a masterpiece or should we all just have watched Dune? Join us to find out!
This one was a lot of fun! Hope you enjoy.
Comments
Thanks. Was looking forward to seeing it. Definitely will not watch it now.
Julie
2024-05-11 21:55:12 +0000 UTCWrote the above about the ghosts and religion!!! Before he got to Rogan- I leave him there…..
Christine Jenkins
2022-03-08 15:34:48 +0000 UTCI am with Tamler!!! As a former homeopath, I am often in the space of not being able to scientifically prove what I know and have observed to be true…. And I really appreciate Matt’s summing up of where the differences may be….. I will listen to it again. I think there is something missing if we only use science as a measure- and I also think science is very useful and valuable for measuring what can be measured….. It’s great to be able to have such things discussed .
Christine Jenkins
2022-03-08 15:24:04 +0000 UTCI just watched The Master, in preparation- just about to listen to the podcast. But I noticed it’s a Weinstein production, and if that’s why it was chosen 😊😊😊😅
Christine Jenkins
2022-03-08 12:53:05 +0000 UTCFair -- and probably why you are a successful podcast host and I am not. I don't have a lot of listening experience with Tamler, but he just seemed to be a bit annoyingly reaching for the surprising/uncommon take -- what the Germans would call a "Querdenker" move... (that was a compliment in many circles until Covid when it became a label for those with various conspiracy theories who rejected the middle-of-the-road public health responses).
Tom Allison
2022-03-07 07:37:35 +0000 UTCI really liked Tamler’s take towards the end about the pseudo father/son dynamic that develops between the two characters and how he (Freddy) has to leave of his own accord. I wonder if you guys have thought much about if that is maybe a significant factor in the draw for figures like Rogan and Peterson, in that they maybe fill a bit of a father shaped void for a lot of young men? Might explain the strong loyalty seen, despite their arguments/rhetoric getting progressively more partisan and biased as the years roll on.
Robert Kirke
2022-03-07 07:36:15 +0000 UTCThanks. Will adjust for main feed release!
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-03-07 01:29:19 +0000 UTClol, we might agree with you there!
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-03-07 01:29:08 +0000 UTCIt definitely is a male heavy episode and Rogan’s audience is also massively skewed towards a male demographic but I’m not sure who was arguing he is an Everyman or recommending him in general? Joe’s a millionaire who before that was a semi famous sitcom actor and tv presenter. He’s very far from a ‘regular joe’. Misogyny wise I’d say overall he’s bad but better now than from his extremely low bar baseline. Overall, he’s not very good on anything really, outside (maybe) how the comedy circuit / tv production / podcasting works, MMA, and possibly long form interviews.
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-03-07 01:28:49 +0000 UTCThese are all interesting points Tom and while I think Matt and I agree about the general lack of satisfaction that this kind of movie introduces, after discussing with Dave and Tamler I do have a greater appreciation for how the ambiguity can invite discussion and interpretation. I think ideally you want both narrative satisfaction and ambiguity though... but maybe that is hard!
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-03-07 01:27:45 +0000 UTCHmmm... yes and no. At some point there is little to be gained from reiterating a point, it's not like Tamler is going to change his POV. And I don't think he is weak-minded just has some blind spots on certain topics, which is normal.
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-03-07 01:25:56 +0000 UTCIsn't the "We don't stop people from driving cars even though they kill people" (in a mask wearing argument) a fallacy in logic? I think it's called a false equivalence. All I know is that I'm 48 minutes in and I'm having a 'fallacy of inconsistency' anxiety attack. 😳😂 #applesandoranges
Nancy Carrozza CaraDonna
2022-03-06 19:39:17 +0000 UTCFYI the volume seems low on both this audio version and the YT video. Not sure if it is just my device but I have the device volume all the way turned up which on other media would be too loud.
William LEGRAIN
2022-03-06 08:26:59 +0000 UTCYikes, It became REAL obvious this episode that lacking any other viewpoint than male, things go off the rails real quick. Joe Rogan has signified clearly that he imagines himself an “alpha male”, and positions himself as the “guy”. Been misogynist and violent since day 1, and we should just accept that he is the “Everyman”? Between this and the Conspirituality guys, I can’t believe how upset I am at your “takes”. I love both of your podcasts, but wow - MAJOR blind spot.
KMD
2022-03-05 23:47:36 +0000 UTCBut that would mean you’re all just humoring the somewhat weak-minded Tamler, wouldn’t it? Doesn’t seem any one of the four of your styles (OK, maybe Matt sometimes - just to get along ;)).
Tom Allison
2022-03-05 17:43:39 +0000 UTCNo you are right, Tammler's arguments here are not very convincing and there are lots of parallels with anti-vaxx, alternative medicine, and quantum woo stuff. But it wasn't an intervention and I think we all made our stances clear so I think that was ok.
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-03-05 17:27:57 +0000 UTCThe movie review was kind of like a bad book club meeting with smart people. It just doesn't seem like the movie wanted to say anything about gurus or humans-in-general, for that matter, in the end, and was rather a potentially interesting character study with lots of good craft supporting it (though, the fractured-adolescence-and-attempting-to-heal-via-reliving-it frame was interesting, I have to admit - what was the source for that take, again?). My question: what sort of text IS a movie when it comes to interpreting it? When I have had some behind-the-scenes insight with such art forms, I am often struck by how distant what is being done/worked out between the actors and director is from the in-front-of-the-screen viewing experience. With this director and these actors was there a plan? Should we look at it as some sort of collaborative improv experiment that strains to find, through the skill of the participants, something interesting to say about the characters? it really didn't sound like the director was making much more of a claim to the coherence of his vision than that. I really don't mind this sort of experiment, but I do like to understand that that is what is going on when I take my seat/strain to follow it. Maybe all of life is improv and I shouldn't ever expect more? I still think the author could frame her/his intent and make his/her process explicit to the audience without losing any of the power of the art -- and that to do less is to attempt to hide weakness/unclarity on his/her part that would be justifiably criticizable.
Tom Allison
2022-03-05 11:06:01 +0000 UTCSeems like there ought to be a very good "hierarchy of evidence" argument to be articulated against Tamler's ghost-might-be-real suggestion. Did you guys miss a chance to label it the same type of thinking that has been warped into "reasons" to oppose vaccination and/or ingest other substances, instead? Or do you think I am mashing together the unmash-together-able? I suppose ghosts represent a sort of benign skepticism which it might be actually worth preserving and distinguishing from the sort of skepticism that has been floating around Covid - insofar as, dire, life-threatening circumstances put a different requirement on what quality of evidence it is worth considering/moral to promote...
Tom Allison
2022-03-05 10:53:22 +0000 UTC
