Robert Wright Gurometer (Video) *UNEDITED*
Added 2022-02-24 21:28:53 +0000 UTCHi everyone,
Brain is a bit mush from an early morning recording so nothing funny or interesting to say here except here is the Gurometer episode for Bob. We get a bit into recent geopolitics and usual tangents at the start so sorry for that but y'know...
Audio will be uploaded in a short while and *I promise I will get the bonus RSS feed updated soon*. Thanks for your patience on that.
Enjoy!
Comments
You’ve reminded me of Mindhunter on Netflix. It’s about the FBI speaking to serial killers to figure out how they tick so that current murderers can be profiled and caught. The best investigators are ones who can be what could be described as cognitively empathetic. It doesn’t mean they sympathise with serial killers, they are still sickened by their actions
Allan Hutton
2022-03-01 23:21:08 +0000 UTCJust heard a This American Life episode that pointed out a plausible conjecture that Putin may have been involved in the murder of hundreds of fellow Russians to pump up his popularity by attacking the falsely accused perpetrators when he first rose to power. Lots of ways that may have gone down, but for the sake of "Cognitive Empathy" discussion, let's imagine it was as bad as it may have been -- willingness to perpetrate crimes against humanity to win an election as a stepping stone to effective dictatorship accompanied by repeated murder to suppress domestic opposition/critical voices. Does that describe someone whose motives one should take the time to try to understand -- or simply oppose by any means available? I think this may be the argument against "cognitive empathy" - that at some point a figure has crossed the moral rubicon and there is no choice but to oppose them and any attempt to better understand them just drains energy from that effort. I would like to hear Bob's counter to such a case. I think he might say, if your opponent is entrenched it really is the only option -- sure, killing a mass murderer would be the first choice, but if that mass murderer is a head of state and has proven themselves unreachable, then sorting out how they tick and figuring out how to steer them away from their worst possible excesses/most destructive tendencies is the next best option.
Tom Allison
2022-03-01 08:44:14 +0000 UTCI keep noticing a lot of chat about America, here and in YouTube comments. This is a European issue. Of course the USA has to make the right noises concerning Russia shut this is about Europe. I live in Scotland, about as far away from Russia as you can get in Europe but I feel like this is literally happening just over the border from me. It seems to me that no matter the issue, a lot of Americans have a very US-centric view, even the ones who seem to follow and write about global issues/politics. It’s really odd to observe
Allan Hutton
2022-02-26 22:12:59 +0000 UTCI should get busy reading the rest of the discussion here in case others have made the points I‘d like to, only better ;). Worth noting is the latest Wright Show with a pretty good explanation of „cognitive empathy“ some reminders of history when shaping ones sympathy/empathy in this instance and analysis and a nice send up of Bob’s new Guru status: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-wright-show/id505824847?i=1000552295342
Tom Allison
2022-02-26 15:12:29 +0000 UTC@dtg: you really don’t seem to get the phrase „cognitive empathy“ which surprises me. As far as I can tell there’s plenty of it for Ukraine (although tbh I have read less about how they have maneuvered wrt the threats from Putin and how they expected the current crisis to play out than I have about the large r players…). And in addition to cognitive empathy it is not hard to feel - and most do - normal empathy and outright sympathy for the great majority of those caught up by no fault of their own in these machinations of international relations. Putin is certainly vying with the monsters of history for showing massive disregard for ordinary fellow humans in his apparent pursuit of - what exactly? Power? Wealth? Glory? Or does he really believe his country‘s back is against the wall and he is merely pursuing its long-term survival against richer/better-armed opponents in the West? Understanding what is driving his behavior should make it more predictable and more possible to counter it in ways that de-escalate rather than escalate the violence (my interpretation anyway of „cognitive empathy“).
Tom Allison
2022-02-25 19:29:54 +0000 UTC> Where is the cognitive empathy for Ukraine This indicates you don't understand the term. It doesn't mean sympathy (or normal empathy, as in *feeling* for someone), it means understanding of motivation (i.e. modelling the cognitive processes so you can understand the motivations). Bobs position is that if people did this properly and intellectually honestly, then avoiding conflict and predicting outcomes would be easier. Essentially "know your enemy". I'm just describing his position as I understand it, I don't necessarily subscribe to his views (other than the general one that really understanding motivations is important, and that most people don't make the effort to do so, and resort to platitudes and posturing instead).
billw2011
2022-02-25 13:02:59 +0000 UTCNow that you're adding more dimensions to the gurometer, didn't one of your recent interviewees, maybe Timbah on Toast or Julian Walker, comment about "sneering affect" or something similar as a possible dimension? I think it was mentioned with regard to Douglas Murray.
Duncan
2022-02-25 12:52:31 +0000 UTCNone that I am aware of. And if the US were indeed a beacon of upholding international law, it would have a much stronger case to make against countries in breach of it. I do not see Bob as an apologist for the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Karen
2022-02-25 09:15:00 +0000 UTCWhat international law is compromised by Ukraine joining NATO?
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-02-25 08:42:29 +0000 UTCBob is a fervent defender of international law and has consistently argued that to be effective and robust, international law requires that all parties adhere to it. The US is in the proverbial glass house in this respect, and as such, in no position to throw stones at others. Victims of war deserve empathy, regardless of which part of the world they reside, and which country is the aggressor. I have yet to see Bob argue otherwise. Labeling Bob as an apologist is a disservice to the cause of international law IMO.
Karen
2022-02-25 08:37:42 +0000 UTCWhere is the cognitive empathy for Ukraine, it’s people and the government? Russia feels threatened by NATO expansion. 1) Ukraine is not in NATO, 2) Ukraine is a separate country, it has the right to make decisions independently of what Russia would prefer. Bob’s takes on this veer towards apologetics, as they have with the Syrian conflict because his primary object of concern is ‘the Blob’. This is not an issue unique to Bob it is common in the anti-war left. As far as waving the flag of Ukraine. I repeat: this does not seem hard to me. An independent democratic country was just invaded by a totalitarian regime in large part due to the whims of its leader. People will die because of Putin and this war. That’s not on NATO.
Christopher Kavanagh
2022-02-25 07:28:53 +0000 UTCI have to say I'm a little disappointed with Chris's apparent inability to understand Bob's concept of "cognitive empathy" in foreign policy as a more sophisticated take on the goings-on than the all-too-easy feel-good response to the events of the moment (such as, for instance, waving the flag of the clear underdog currently being attacked). I don't put myself forward as an expert in these matters, by any means, but the little I have heard Bob discuss his idea it has seemed right on to me -- If we have learned anything from observing/analyzing in-group/out-group dynamics, it has to be that emphasizing one side of a two-sided coin only distorts our understanding -- even if it feels good. (I've got other complaints/critiques of Bob's stuff -- I think he tries to expand a sense of purpose beyond it appropriate bounds, for example -- but I can't understand why Chris and Matt don't follow him here...).
Tom Allison
2022-02-25 07:09:11 +0000 UTCThe old wife beater eh Matt? Gonna have to switch from high end single malts to whatever the bogan beer is up in FNQ!
elcid
2022-02-25 01:26:51 +0000 UTCDoes the fact that Bob's field overlapping heavily with yours possibly depress your evaluation of his pseudo profoundness? Or do you worry about an inverse effect with anyone else?
ed74
2022-02-25 01:01:10 +0000 UTCThe point is recognizing that other actors tend to rationalize the crap out of their own motivations, and generally believe they're acting rationally in their best interest.
ed74
2022-02-25 00:54:32 +0000 UTCI think Bob has tried to spell out pretty hard that trying to understand motivations (cognitive empathy) shouldn't be taken as excusing actions taken by a negative actor. It's a fine hair.
ed74
2022-02-25 00:52:33 +0000 UTCso glad you did that chris. he's a great power apologist- just not US- and wrong on virtually everything. his lack of understanding of detail is comical , his decisions not to engage eg with putins speech is sam harris level and he was completely exposed when he found out recently that hitchens (not a fan) had been with kurds and was utopian not fucking wmd. something he's never done. used to like him. now he's a useful idiot who feels he didnt get recognition he deserved- see parrot room
Brainbiter
2022-02-24 21:48:14 +0000 UTCjust started. love ukranian flag chris. bob is a real apologist for non democracies and platforms assad and putin apologists which is fine but not benign. its politics guys and ultimately it's your harmful elephant in the room.
Brainbiter
2022-02-24 21:33:19 +0000 UTC
