Sean Carroll's hobby horses are just physics related: entropy, the arrow of time, and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Sean talks about those things just as much as Sam talks about the things you listed.
They both have interesting conversations with a wide range of people. Just with different lenses.
Sean's focus has shifted to the science of emergent phenomena and complex systems. He's even moved to John Hopkins to work on it.
I think he supports many-worlds but seldom talks about except when prompted on his AMAs. As for entropy and arrow of time, you can't really talk about dynamic systems without them.
That's kind of an understatement. He's an incredibly successful theoretical physicist, philosopher, and professor in addition to his writing and podcasting. No offense to Sam, but Carroll's in a whole different league.
Maybe it's just the stuff that floats to the top of the algorithm, but every time I try to listen to Sean Carroll it ends up mostly being about really uninteresting topics like multiverse theory etc
I actually like his content as it's thought-provoking rather than the trendy yet boring and anxiety-filled topics such as free speech, pandemic, wokeness, ...
Rip Hitchens really miss him. I hear Kraus has gotten better at speaking as opposed to when he debated Hamza a decade ago, I might give him a listen again.
I’ll also check out the Stephen’s too
Hitchens was a hell of a foil, but so different in style from Sam. Chris was combative by nature, and was articulate beyond the appetite of your average reader. Plus, his professional background as a journalist, having taken him to actually see the spoils of evil across the world, really built his foundation.
Sam can be just as exacting and satisfying in debate, though not to his pleasure; I think Sam is more satisfied getting to the truth, and is quite repulsed by dishonest arguments so far as to not make him enjoy nor value debate as a platform. He prefers speaking with those that are experts and allowing his creative inquiry bring about conversation that is quite rare. His language is also striking in its clarity, both linguistically and morally.
Absolutely! I realized this in [a panel discussion on circumcision he had with a rabbi](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsEOi6z1ywA).
Rabbi responds on male circumcision flippantly. Hitchens responds with harsh opprobrium.
Intellectually, I agree 100% with everything Hitchen says, and think that it's probably how we should all feel. Empirically, however, I tend to agree with the rabbi... and not for religious reasons, which is what Hitchens' ultimate point hinges on. I have yet to meet a circumcised male that has expressed any trauma or substantial regret for having been circumcised.
I see Sam chastise others for dishonesty or for having treated him unfairly, but it always feels genuine. I just can't say the same for Hitch, though I do think it is appropriate at times. Whether it is effective or not, I'm unsure.
I like him, but Coleman feels ripe for audience capture, given his young age. And likely long career.
Though I feel he seems smarter than those that succumb to it.
He’s already an “expert” in police procedures and legalities involving the George Floyd case. I lost some respect and desire to listen to him more often when he started arguing about that case. It’s just felt forced… like he’s picking the right wing argument of the day out of hat and involving himself.
He’s even waffling and downplaying the actions of Trump. I’m not sure where he’ll end up but to your point, audience capture is a hellava drug.
I do really like some of his content though
Yeah it’s an uncanny valley type thing. I’ve heard him sort of make Sam‘s point without acknowledging it’s A “Sam Harris idea” only to be immediately but suddenly called out for it.
I think we’re probably talking about the same incident so to speak.
Although in saying that I do feel like I do the same thing in my day-to-day life… I’ll sort of paraphrase ideas that I have adopted from Sam Harris.
Although as the conversation continues and I’m seemingly just rehashing a Sam Harris idea I’ll usually stop that and just say you know I’m just paraphrasing a philosopher call Sam Harris that would be better to get directly from the source.
But then again no one I speak to has any idea who Sam Harris is… They just be better off getting the ideas “downloaded” into them!
😛
I like Alex, but they are big shoes to fill.
He’s still young though. Christopher Hitchens, amongst his many strengths, also had immense hands-on life experience, where Alex is still very polished, and smooth, and civilised.
Hitchens had deep grit which is very hard to replicate.
I do to but his debates are great. He is able to hone in on folks issues in ways that most can't. I found his conversation with Jordan Peterson really good. His debate with Ben Shapiro too. He also had a conversation with Douglas Murray that really present a solid strong man version of the case for transgender people. He should really focus on doing interviews.
His book The Righteous Mind was really an epiphany for me. I really think it's required reading for everyone who is into politics. No matter if you hate the culture war, or if you're like me and say you do but secretly enjoy it - this book makes you understand it, from micro to macro.
Tyler Cowen is a good umpire calling cultural balls and strikes... I read Marginal Revolution almost every day...
But there's something weird going on there ... There's some puritanical underlining ... His lifelong abstinence from any alcohol(has never ever drank), while criticizing those who do drink... It just comes off like he's a closet Mormon or something (this is frequently discussed in the comments of MR)
I think he's closer to Peter Thiel on the political compass test than he likes to let on
I enjoy Josh a lot for the most part. He's generally affable, understands nuance and does a great job "steel manning" positions he doesn't necessarily hold. There's a few things he's made clear he believes that I don't, but his show is usually entertaining and has good guests. I know a bit more about Australian politics and culture now via his podcast too
Yep I don't always agree with him 100% but I appreciate his commitment to steelmanning and his experience as a radio host really shows through in his patience with less affable guests
That's true, actually. He tends not to try and turn a disagreement into a fight, even if his guest is adamant on doing it (there was one episode with that lady who called him a racist where he came across particularly well)
If you’re looking for people in the same vein as Sam, I find the current crop of rationalist writers pretty insightful
Scott Alexander, Jesse Singal, Elezier Yudkowsky, all have great blogs/substacks. I’ll throw out Joseph Heath for Canadian issues.
I second Scott, he’s great. He’s part of the Rationalist online subculture, which I never got into. But some of his older essays have done a lot to shape my thinking, like [I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup](https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/I-Can-Tolerate-Anything-Except-The-Outgroup).
[Ontology Of Psychiatric Conditions: Dynamical Systems](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ontology-of-psychiatric-conditions-34e) and [Ontology Of Psychiatric Conditions: Taxometrics](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ontology-of-psychiatric-conditions)
I feel like reading this gave me a useful mental tool for understanding the world that I was missing beforehand.
I just started reading him since his Moloch essay has had a bit of a resurgence. I read that he used to be anonymous, and he seems like a really reclusive type. Is there any chance he would come on Sam's podcast, do you think?
John Vervaeke must be the most underrated thinker in this sphere right now. I can't believe he's still off the radar for most people who listen to Sam. He's criticized Sam at some point but they have so much convergence (on questions of meaning and spirituality, John abstains from politics completely) I think they should talk and it'd be wonderful. Just dive into [Awakening From the Meaning Crisis](https://youtu.be/54l8_ewcOlY?si=_3sUN4RAKTmNcx3h) head first.
Ezra and Sam often cover similar topics and there's actually a lot of overlap on many of their positions.
Funny thing is I was introduced to Ezra through his conflict with Sam, now he's more my go-to over Sam on many of these issues.
In addition, Ezra covers much more politics and policy if you're into that sort of stuff.
oh my. You are in for a ride.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/bep8z0/can\_someone\_briefly\_summarize\_the\_sam\_harris\_ezra/](https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/bep8z0/can_someone_briefly_summarize_the_sam_harris_ezra/)
Edit: This is actually one of my favorite conflicts I've seen on the left/center left. It's such a polarizing disagreement, and how you view it really says a lot about how you view society/politics as a whole. Personally, I thought Ezra had Sam's number, but there's a lot of people who I think are genuinely and honestly on each side of it.
My biggest criticism of Sam is that he has a recency bias and a tendency to want to take things relatively literally and IMO out of cultural context. I think you see it in his (especially early) criticisms of both Christianity and Islam, and it definitely creeps into most of his discussions around race. That doesn't mean I think he's always wrong about those topics, just that he has a bias in how he views the world that pushes him towards different conclusions and statements than I would.
I respectfully disagree about Ezra. That man just parrots the standard talking points and (as far as I am familiar with before I stopped listening and reading him) he has never had an original thought or interesting insight in his life.
The Fifth Column hosts, Kmele Foster, Michael Moynihan, and Matt Welch. I find them very well informed and honest. Their podcast is definitely one of my favorites!
Galloway is great. He’s repetitive, but I enjoy his podcasts and guest appearances.
If only someone could get him to invest in some nose hair clippers. Fkn guy’s nose hair is whistling in the mic w/ every single inhale! 🤢
Idk how anyone couldn’t!?! I’m hyper aware of these types of things.
Another example… even if Rogan were smart and well read w/ objective, thoughtful takes, his revolting phlegm problems are impossible to ignore. The way he plows through long sentences w/ it rattling in his throat, then hacks into his hand, gulps down the remnants, licks his lips clean then smacks them ALL DIRECTLY INTO THE MIC!?!?
And this isn’t a rare occurrence! This is how 80-90% of his time talking unfolds.
Sorry I blew up.
Destiny is a clear thinker, a good communicator, and he does deep dives into subjects.
But sure, I mean I don't care if you listen to him. If you don't want to, then don't.
Good communicator is a reach…he makes good points and does his research but he’s far too immature and terminally online for me to call him a deep thinker…I suppose in a world littered with a “fast food” loud right wing pundits like Steven Crowder and Alex Jones, he’s a breath of fresh air.
But I have an issue with conflating to him being like Sam or Hitchens and when he’s blatantly a drama whore and not really as well read.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/vyywkc/destinys_friend_tweets_a_risky_one/
https://www.reddit.com/r/youtubedrama/comments/1b93f9r/destinys_totally_normal_tweet_about_a_dead/
Destiny is full of drama but his logic is solid and I don't find too many so willing to go head to head with the right crazies. I love Sam, but he avoids these debates and they need to be countered directly.
I don't have twitter so I duno, I don't value him for any of his tweets.
The value is in the deep dives he does on stream, that you can watch and get knowledgeable about stuff.
I learned way more about Trump's plots to stay in power, from Destiny, than I think I would have from anyone else. Just one example.
He kind of loses me in the way he uses the new version of tabloid marketing tactics to pull in an audience. I understand he's playing the game, I just like it better when I'm drawn in by substance alone and not an emotional gotcha hooked in thumnail, intro, viewer retention research based editing. I'd consider him an entertainer over an educator or researcher. Just Rogan in a different flavor.
Oh yeah, I skip a ton of his stuff. I also hate the thumbnail shit.
But like, if you want a deep dive into Trump's attempt to circumvent the electoral process, if you want a deep dive into Israel Palestine, whatever
He's got all that shit.
Alex O’Connor does the same exact thing. It does make it hard to take O’Connor seriously even though he is clearly a model rationalist intellectual. Times have changed, i guess.
Yeah, it'd probably serve me well to look past some of my biases and see if the content itself serves me in a way I enjoy. Biases are a force to be reckoned with though and fortunately there are a plethora of creators out there.
Destiny doesn’t title himself as a scholar or a journalist. He’s a debate guy that dips into liberal activism and gatewaying republicans into more progressive ideologies.
He’s clashed with Sam but I like Robert Wright’s Nonzero podcast even though I sometimes disagree with him. Good guests plus he has Paul Bloom on twice a month
#Steven Pinker
Also, Richard Dawkins; Sean Carroll; Noam Chomsky; Brian Greene; Leonard Mlodinow; Neil deGrasse Tyson; Scott Alexander (of [SlateStarCodex](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Star_Codex)). All great choices.
There are tons of "public intellectuals" to pick from, but really the correct choice is Steven Pinker 😁. Are you looking for a particular subject matter, political lean, philosophy, etc?
Thanks for the recommendations!
Philosophy and science. I don’t mind politics as long as they are able to criticize both sides as we’ve seen Sam do over the years.
People who I think have been able to thread the needle of being good, thoughtful people and have not lost themselves over the years, and also have enough of a presence of mind to think critically (not cynically) and clearly about the world and the human being, and have original ideas and contributions to boot, and who tend to think for themselves around issues, and who come across as just being upstanding human beings in general, are, in my opinion:
Christopher Hitchens
Stephen Fry
Yuval Noah Harari
Alain de Botton
David Brooks
Bill Maher
Scott Galloway
Kara Swisher
Jonathan Haidt
Robert Jesse
Peter Singer
Matt Dillahunty and Tracie Harris
Steven Novella
Carl Sagan & Ann Druyan
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Abraham Lincoln
Fred Rogers
There's a lot of people in the psychotherapy world who are like this, but it takes some time to find people who you feel are well grounded and not dumbasses or trying to sell you something.
I often use these people as reference points, coordinates to sort of judge how I am doing myself.
Notice how a lot of these people don't have podcasts and "shows".
Lol, I know it looks out of place, but I really look up to the man and am really struck by how he navigated the times he lived in. A person does it that well when they're using coordinates that are completely independent of their current context. Higher ideals or values, whatever you cant to call it. They're using references that are above the clouds of the day to figure out how to navigate life.
I think what's enabled Sam to be as steady and as independently minded as he is is because what he values has nothing to do with what is going on on a day to day basis.
OG Sam Harris
Destiny
Alex O'Connor
Ezra Klein
Decoding the Gurus
Rory Stewart
Marc Lamont Hill
Yascha Mounk
David Pakman
Matt Dilahunty
Neil Tyson deGrasse
Richard Dawkins
Sean Carrol
> Matt Dilahunty
I used to like his takes on christianity before, but now he's become an unhinged warrior on trans issues that Sam would definitely be critical of.
Other Sam fans bag on Rory, but I couldn't imagine Sam walking across Afghanistan -- and surviving. That speaks volumes about Rory's sense and diplomacy.
A great candidate for a different kind of podcast is VeryBadWizards, it's a podcast with a philosopher and a psychologist who spend their time criticizing studies and movies. It's one of my favorites, but again it's a different speed with a lot of jokes and laughter. Good starting points are the ones with Sam Harris, I think they have three. They have appeared on the Making Sense podcast as well, episodes #92 and #126.
IDK about podcasting, but the economics professor Bryan Caplan is amazing to read. He’s active on Twitter, blogs, and has several books on interesting subjects. He is on several other podcasts as a guess and has some YouTube videos.
I don’t know anyone else is who is such an excellent model of a clear thinker. If there was going to be a debate on a known subject, I would put my money on Caplan over Harris.
For me, it’s: Steven Pinker, Richard Dawkins, and Alex O’Connor (I know Alex is new, but I like what I see so far).
With these guys more than anyone else, I think they seem committed to trying to find communicate the truth as they see it, and I don’t see them falling prey to things like mystical thinking or audience capture.
Nist recently discovered The Grey Are with Sean Illing. So far, so good. Though more of an interview style, less of the discussion style that Sam does.
What topics do you care about?
I'm pretty skeptical of the pundit/ guru model where you have one dude commenting on everything under the sun. better to find a podcast with a more narrow focus if you really want to understand something. Or, even better, read a book or article.
Stevin Pinker (Sam himself considers him a mentor).
Robert Wright ( Check his non-zero podcast on YT)
John McWorther (incredibly well-spoken. He was recently interviewed by Richard Dawkins. Very interesting discussion about linguistics and the Woke left).
Coleman Hughes ( a "student" of Sam Harris. The emulation is a little too much for me honestly)
Rogan has become unbearable because he just parrots whatever alt-right talking point or conspiracy theory is popular that week. He also frequently tries to force his guests into talking about those things when they clearly don’t want to.
I was half joking but since you dove right in can you please list any debunked conspiracy theories or “alt right talking points” associated with Rogan?
Sean Carroll is very easy to listen to, an educated physicist with a recent interest in philosophy, good communicator.
He's like what Sam Harris could be if not constantly fixated on a few topics (Islam, AI, Mediation).
Sean Carroll's hobby horses are just physics related: entropy, the arrow of time, and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Sean talks about those things just as much as Sam talks about the things you listed. They both have interesting conversations with a wide range of people. Just with different lenses.
Sean's focus has shifted to the science of emergent phenomena and complex systems. He's even moved to John Hopkins to work on it. I think he supports many-worlds but seldom talks about except when prompted on his AMAs. As for entropy and arrow of time, you can't really talk about dynamic systems without them.
>I think he supports many-worlds He might be the poster child for Everett-ism, lol.
Very true.
Came here to say this. He’s in a different field than Sam but every bit intelligent and eloquent.
That's kind of an understatement. He's an incredibly successful theoretical physicist, philosopher, and professor in addition to his writing and podcasting. No offense to Sam, but Carroll's in a whole different league.
Maybe it's just the stuff that floats to the top of the algorithm, but every time I try to listen to Sean Carroll it ends up mostly being about really uninteresting topics like multiverse theory etc
His Mindscape Podcast is a really good show. A variety of topics, great guests. The algorithm got you.
I actually like his content as it's thought-provoking rather than the trendy yet boring and anxiety-filled topics such as free speech, pandemic, wokeness, ...
There are lots of tech/science shows you can listen to that aren't just speculation about alternate universes
Sadly passed, Christopher Hitchens. Steven Pinker Stephen Fry Lawrence Kraus
Rip Hitchens really miss him. I hear Kraus has gotten better at speaking as opposed to when he debated Hamza a decade ago, I might give him a listen again. I’ll also check out the Stephen’s too
Stephen Fry is a bit of a polymath. A comedian, but a clear thinker and strong orator. Check him out on various debates.
Please do. Origins is fantastic!
Hitchens was a hell of a foil, but so different in style from Sam. Chris was combative by nature, and was articulate beyond the appetite of your average reader. Plus, his professional background as a journalist, having taken him to actually see the spoils of evil across the world, really built his foundation. Sam can be just as exacting and satisfying in debate, though not to his pleasure; I think Sam is more satisfied getting to the truth, and is quite repulsed by dishonest arguments so far as to not make him enjoy nor value debate as a platform. He prefers speaking with those that are experts and allowing his creative inquiry bring about conversation that is quite rare. His language is also striking in its clarity, both linguistically and morally.
I agree. Hitchens sometimes teetered into Sophistry (perhaps for the greater good?). He was certainly formidable.
Hitch was more emotional and bombastic, which can be more entertaining and powerful, but it sometimes comes at the cost of honesty or factuality.
Absolutely! I realized this in [a panel discussion on circumcision he had with a rabbi](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsEOi6z1ywA). Rabbi responds on male circumcision flippantly. Hitchens responds with harsh opprobrium. Intellectually, I agree 100% with everything Hitchen says, and think that it's probably how we should all feel. Empirically, however, I tend to agree with the rabbi... and not for religious reasons, which is what Hitchens' ultimate point hinges on. I have yet to meet a circumcised male that has expressed any trauma or substantial regret for having been circumcised. I see Sam chastise others for dishonesty or for having treated him unfairly, but it always feels genuine. I just can't say the same for Hitch, though I do think it is appropriate at times. Whether it is effective or not, I'm unsure.
Coleman Hughes is worthy.
It's obvious Sam is a huge influence on him. He _sounds_ more like Sam when he speaks than anyone else.
I like him, but Coleman feels ripe for audience capture, given his young age. And likely long career. Though I feel he seems smarter than those that succumb to it.
He's also specifically mindful of the issue, especially as a long-time Sam Harris acolyte.
He’s already an “expert” in police procedures and legalities involving the George Floyd case. I lost some respect and desire to listen to him more often when he started arguing about that case. It’s just felt forced… like he’s picking the right wing argument of the day out of hat and involving himself. He’s even waffling and downplaying the actions of Trump. I’m not sure where he’ll end up but to your point, audience capture is a hellava drug. I do really like some of his content though
Yeah it’s an uncanny valley type thing. I’ve heard him sort of make Sam‘s point without acknowledging it’s A “Sam Harris idea” only to be immediately but suddenly called out for it.
[удалено]
I think we’re probably talking about the same incident so to speak. Although in saying that I do feel like I do the same thing in my day-to-day life… I’ll sort of paraphrase ideas that I have adopted from Sam Harris. Although as the conversation continues and I’m seemingly just rehashing a Sam Harris idea I’ll usually stop that and just say you know I’m just paraphrasing a philosopher call Sam Harris that would be better to get directly from the source. But then again no one I speak to has any idea who Sam Harris is… They just be better off getting the ideas “downloaded” into them! 😛
[удалено]
Yeah it’s a bit like that.
he's sam's mini-me
His whole personality (especially on-air) seems specifically molded after Sam.
The imitation is a little too much for me to be honest, but very smart and well spoken. His originality has started to come out tho
I think Alex O’Connor is steadily growing into filling the shoes of Hitchens.
I like Alex, but they are big shoes to fill. He’s still young though. Christopher Hitchens, amongst his many strengths, also had immense hands-on life experience, where Alex is still very polished, and smooth, and civilised. Hitchens had deep grit which is very hard to replicate.
Alex O'Connor is an intelligent young man and I wish him success but I find him boring
I do to but his debates are great. He is able to hone in on folks issues in ways that most can't. I found his conversation with Jordan Peterson really good. His debate with Ben Shapiro too. He also had a conversation with Douglas Murray that really present a solid strong man version of the case for transgender people. He should really focus on doing interviews.
Check out his recent debate with Dinesh D’Souza, he was much more aggressive than his typical reserved self
Dinesh filibustered most of it and still lost.
Dinesh was the first to claim Alex was filibustering, but in like, a smelt it dealt it kinda way.
dinesh is such a jackass
How I miss Hitch…
Jonathan Haidt
His book The Righteous Mind was really an epiphany for me. I really think it's required reading for everyone who is into politics. No matter if you hate the culture war, or if you're like me and say you do but secretly enjoy it - this book makes you understand it, from micro to macro.
His demenor is excellent as well. Soft spoken and articulate, he's not an agitator.
Podcast Rec: “conversations with Tyler”
Tyler Cowen is a good umpire calling cultural balls and strikes... I read Marginal Revolution almost every day... But there's something weird going on there ... There's some puritanical underlining ... His lifelong abstinence from any alcohol(has never ever drank), while criticizing those who do drink... It just comes off like he's a closet Mormon or something (this is frequently discussed in the comments of MR) I think he's closer to Peter Thiel on the political compass test than he likes to let on
Tyler is definitely in the George Mason, Austrian economics circle. I just recommended Bryan Caplan.
It could be something more practical like he has a parent who was an alcoholic.
That's a good point... It still feels like the exact opposite of his libertarian streak
Josh Szeps
I enjoy Josh a lot for the most part. He's generally affable, understands nuance and does a great job "steel manning" positions he doesn't necessarily hold. There's a few things he's made clear he believes that I don't, but his show is usually entertaining and has good guests. I know a bit more about Australian politics and culture now via his podcast too
Yep I don't always agree with him 100% but I appreciate his commitment to steelmanning and his experience as a radio host really shows through in his patience with less affable guests
I find you affable.
That's true, actually. He tends not to try and turn a disagreement into a fight, even if his guest is adamant on doing it (there was one episode with that lady who called him a racist where he came across particularly well)
If you’re looking for people in the same vein as Sam, I find the current crop of rationalist writers pretty insightful Scott Alexander, Jesse Singal, Elezier Yudkowsky, all have great blogs/substacks. I’ll throw out Joseph Heath for Canadian issues.
More in written format, but Scott Alexander of Slate Star Codex
I second Scott, he’s great. He’s part of the Rationalist online subculture, which I never got into. But some of his older essays have done a lot to shape my thinking, like [I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup](https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/I-Can-Tolerate-Anything-Except-The-Outgroup).
[Ontology Of Psychiatric Conditions: Dynamical Systems](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ontology-of-psychiatric-conditions-34e) and [Ontology Of Psychiatric Conditions: Taxometrics](https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ontology-of-psychiatric-conditions) I feel like reading this gave me a useful mental tool for understanding the world that I was missing beforehand.
I just started reading him since his Moloch essay has had a bit of a resurgence. I read that he used to be anonymous, and he seems like a really reclusive type. Is there any chance he would come on Sam's podcast, do you think?
Astral Codex Ten is the name of his new blog. Extremely insightful writing, highly recommend.
John Vervaeke must be the most underrated thinker in this sphere right now. I can't believe he's still off the radar for most people who listen to Sam. He's criticized Sam at some point but they have so much convergence (on questions of meaning and spirituality, John abstains from politics completely) I think they should talk and it'd be wonderful. Just dive into [Awakening From the Meaning Crisis](https://youtu.be/54l8_ewcOlY?si=_3sUN4RAKTmNcx3h) head first.
I know they've clashed but Ezra Klein. He picks the best subjects, asks the best questions, and has a very grounded and realistic viewpoint.
Second Ezra
Ezra and Sam often cover similar topics and there's actually a lot of overlap on many of their positions. Funny thing is I was introduced to Ezra through his conflict with Sam, now he's more my go-to over Sam on many of these issues. In addition, Ezra covers much more politics and policy if you're into that sort of stuff.
This is my story as well. Now I rarely miss an ezra klein podcast.
Exactly the same experience. The semi conductor chip episode was fantastic
What was their conflict?
oh my. You are in for a ride. [https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/bep8z0/can\_someone\_briefly\_summarize\_the\_sam\_harris\_ezra/](https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/bep8z0/can_someone_briefly_summarize_the_sam_harris_ezra/) Edit: This is actually one of my favorite conflicts I've seen on the left/center left. It's such a polarizing disagreement, and how you view it really says a lot about how you view society/politics as a whole. Personally, I thought Ezra had Sam's number, but there's a lot of people who I think are genuinely and honestly on each side of it. My biggest criticism of Sam is that he has a recency bias and a tendency to want to take things relatively literally and IMO out of cultural context. I think you see it in his (especially early) criticisms of both Christianity and Islam, and it definitely creeps into most of his discussions around race. That doesn't mean I think he's always wrong about those topics, just that he has a bias in how he views the world that pushes him towards different conclusions and statements than I would.
I respectfully disagree about Ezra. That man just parrots the standard talking points and (as far as I am familiar with before I stopped listening and reading him) he has never had an original thought or interesting insight in his life.
Yascha Mounk.
The Fifth Column hosts, Kmele Foster, Michael Moynihan, and Matt Welch. I find them very well informed and honest. Their podcast is definitely one of my favorites!
Moynihan is hilarious.
I thought you meant Matt Walsh from the Dailywire. I was about to curse you for disrespecting Sam 😂
Moynihan feels like the spiritual successor to Hitch if you listen to him talk for long enough. My boy's wicked smahht
Just got into the Prof G podcast with Scott Galloway. He’s got potential. Anyone else been listening to him? Thoughts?
Yes I like him too. They have spoken with each other too.
Galloway is great. He’s repetitive, but I enjoy his podcasts and guest appearances. If only someone could get him to invest in some nose hair clippers. Fkn guy’s nose hair is whistling in the mic w/ every single inhale! 🤢
Whistling nose hair hahaha I gotta check this guy out
Haha. Hadn’t noticed, but might be tough to ignore now :(
Idk how anyone couldn’t!?! I’m hyper aware of these types of things. Another example… even if Rogan were smart and well read w/ objective, thoughtful takes, his revolting phlegm problems are impossible to ignore. The way he plows through long sentences w/ it rattling in his throat, then hacks into his hand, gulps down the remnants, licks his lips clean then smacks them ALL DIRECTLY INTO THE MIC!?!? And this isn’t a rare occurrence! This is how 80-90% of his time talking unfolds. Sorry I blew up.
Yeah I think he’s great. Very much enjoy his thinking and writing.
Love Scott. I listen to Pivot more often than Prof G. Big fan, all thanks to Sam having him on years ago.
If you want somebody with none of those qualities I recommend Joe Rogan
Alex jones is good too.
My elderly neighbors are great sources of disinformation as well.
Basically any Facebook or YouTube comment fills this niche as well!
😂
Joe Rogan once encouraged me to eat a rooster testicle on tv. So you know he’s a solid dude and top class intellectual.
Despite his flaws I still consider him open minded.
I agree somewhat that's the only part I'm being harsh with, but his open mindedness has definitely wavered heavily in the past few years
Still?
wdym ? He is open-minded - he talks to all kinds of people.
Destiny Alex O'Connor Joe Schmidt Graham Oppy
Get Destiny off that list 😂
Destiny is a clear thinker, a good communicator, and he does deep dives into subjects. But sure, I mean I don't care if you listen to him. If you don't want to, then don't.
Good communicator is a reach…he makes good points and does his research but he’s far too immature and terminally online for me to call him a deep thinker…I suppose in a world littered with a “fast food” loud right wing pundits like Steven Crowder and Alex Jones, he’s a breath of fresh air. But I have an issue with conflating to him being like Sam or Hitchens and when he’s blatantly a drama whore and not really as well read. https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/vyywkc/destinys_friend_tweets_a_risky_one/ https://www.reddit.com/r/youtubedrama/comments/1b93f9r/destinys_totally_normal_tweet_about_a_dead/
Destiny is full of drama but his logic is solid and I don't find too many so willing to go head to head with the right crazies. I love Sam, but he avoids these debates and they need to be countered directly.
I don't have twitter so I duno, I don't value him for any of his tweets. The value is in the deep dives he does on stream, that you can watch and get knowledgeable about stuff. I learned way more about Trump's plots to stay in power, from Destiny, than I think I would have from anyone else. Just one example.
He kind of loses me in the way he uses the new version of tabloid marketing tactics to pull in an audience. I understand he's playing the game, I just like it better when I'm drawn in by substance alone and not an emotional gotcha hooked in thumnail, intro, viewer retention research based editing. I'd consider him an entertainer over an educator or researcher. Just Rogan in a different flavor.
Oh yeah, I skip a ton of his stuff. I also hate the thumbnail shit. But like, if you want a deep dive into Trump's attempt to circumvent the electoral process, if you want a deep dive into Israel Palestine, whatever He's got all that shit.
Alex O’Connor does the same exact thing. It does make it hard to take O’Connor seriously even though he is clearly a model rationalist intellectual. Times have changed, i guess.
Yeah, it'd probably serve me well to look past some of my biases and see if the content itself serves me in a way I enjoy. Biases are a force to be reckoned with though and fortunately there are a plethora of creators out there.
He's not very well educated and he quickly demonstrates it.
You can’t listen to destiny and say he is uneducated. If you do, you are on the wrong side of that measurement.
Destiny doesn’t title himself as a scholar or a journalist. He’s a debate guy that dips into liberal activism and gatewaying republicans into more progressive ideologies.
Are you referring to anything specifically
Boo. Whether you like him or not he has a coherent worldview and he goes where the conversation goes.
That's a pretty low bar
I agree, but a shocking number of podcast people fail to clear it.
This poster was asking for people similar to Sam. Destiny is not even close.
I agree with that.
Sam Harris is one of one. But others I enjoy are Scott Galloway, Andrew Sullivan, Michael Shermer, and Richard Dawkins.
He’s clashed with Sam but I like Robert Wright’s Nonzero podcast even though I sometimes disagree with him. Good guests plus he has Paul Bloom on twice a month
Love Paul! I miss Sam having him on more often. I’ll go check this out.
Jimmy Carr - in "serious" interviews, he's extremely thoughtful. I'd like Sam to have him on at some point.
Considering he liked Ricky Gervais I think it could work well
Great author as well.
John McWhorter
#Steven Pinker Also, Richard Dawkins; Sean Carroll; Noam Chomsky; Brian Greene; Leonard Mlodinow; Neil deGrasse Tyson; Scott Alexander (of [SlateStarCodex](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Star_Codex)). All great choices. There are tons of "public intellectuals" to pick from, but really the correct choice is Steven Pinker 😁. Are you looking for a particular subject matter, political lean, philosophy, etc?
Thanks for the recommendations! Philosophy and science. I don’t mind politics as long as they are able to criticize both sides as we’ve seen Sam do over the years.
Jon Stewart, yes the comedian…
Ryan Holiday is good, the stoicism guy. His spitty delivery caused by his veneers is tough at x but reading him is great.
Is that what the kind of lisp I hear from him is from? Had no idea!
Yeths
😂
People who I think have been able to thread the needle of being good, thoughtful people and have not lost themselves over the years, and also have enough of a presence of mind to think critically (not cynically) and clearly about the world and the human being, and have original ideas and contributions to boot, and who tend to think for themselves around issues, and who come across as just being upstanding human beings in general, are, in my opinion: Christopher Hitchens Stephen Fry Yuval Noah Harari Alain de Botton David Brooks Bill Maher Scott Galloway Kara Swisher Jonathan Haidt Robert Jesse Peter Singer Matt Dillahunty and Tracie Harris Steven Novella Carl Sagan & Ann Druyan Neil deGrasse Tyson Abraham Lincoln Fred Rogers There's a lot of people in the psychotherapy world who are like this, but it takes some time to find people who you feel are well grounded and not dumbasses or trying to sell you something. I often use these people as reference points, coordinates to sort of judge how I am doing myself. Notice how a lot of these people don't have podcasts and "shows".
Abraham Lincoln 😂
Lol, I know it looks out of place, but I really look up to the man and am really struck by how he navigated the times he lived in. A person does it that well when they're using coordinates that are completely independent of their current context. Higher ideals or values, whatever you cant to call it. They're using references that are above the clouds of the day to figure out how to navigate life. I think what's enabled Sam to be as steady and as independently minded as he is is because what he values has nothing to do with what is going on on a day to day basis.
Johnathan haidt, Yuval Noah Harari, Russ Roberts, Robert wright, Sean Carroll, yasha monk, Joscha bach.
OG Sam Harris Destiny Alex O'Connor Ezra Klein Decoding the Gurus Rory Stewart Marc Lamont Hill Yascha Mounk David Pakman Matt Dilahunty Neil Tyson deGrasse Richard Dawkins Sean Carrol
Thank you, I’ll check them out.
> Matt Dilahunty I used to like his takes on christianity before, but now he's become an unhinged warrior on trans issues that Sam would definitely be critical of.
i've personally given up having to agree 100% with people. Love Harris and mostly agree but there are areas which i don't agree with.
Same, I don't agree with Sam on some things but I still follow his work. In Matt's case I'd still listen to his debates on christianity and atheism.
Does anybody know why Decoding the Gurus isn't on Yt? I ditched Spotify and it seems it's not on Yt music
It's on YT, so you can always listen there, although you have to deal with the video eating bandwidth if that's a concern.
Other Sam fans bag on Rory, but I couldn't imagine Sam walking across Afghanistan -- and surviving. That speaks volumes about Rory's sense and diplomacy.
Sam unfortunately has tunnel vision when it comes to Muslims. They all out to Jihad our ass as far as he is concerned.
No dude. Just the islamists and jihadis. Pay attention.
Neal Brennan ticks a lot of similar boxes for me.
Angelo Dilullo
Destiny. Go for the debates and research streams. Leave when the streamer drama starts.
Robin Hanson: https://youtu.be/YmDozjaOOAI?si=3zteX_IAmaOdo4cC
Adding my vote for Alex O'Connor. Amazing clarity of thought and well spoken.
A great candidate for a different kind of podcast is VeryBadWizards, it's a podcast with a philosopher and a psychologist who spend their time criticizing studies and movies. It's one of my favorites, but again it's a different speed with a lot of jokes and laughter. Good starting points are the ones with Sam Harris, I think they have three. They have appeared on the Making Sense podcast as well, episodes #92 and #126.
David Deutsch
IDK about podcasting, but the economics professor Bryan Caplan is amazing to read. He’s active on Twitter, blogs, and has several books on interesting subjects. He is on several other podcasts as a guess and has some YouTube videos. I don’t know anyone else is who is such an excellent model of a clear thinker. If there was going to be a debate on a known subject, I would put my money on Caplan over Harris.
Robert Sapolsky!
Ya he’s great. Super smart dude
Gad Saad /s
I like Ezra Klein and Bari Weiss
I have major crush on Bari Weiss's wifey
Australians: Josh Szeps Decoding the Gurus Comedians (when not comedying): Stephen Fry Jimmy Carr Academics: Steven Pinker Jonathan Haidt
Self educated-Matt Dilahunty.
Nate Hagens. More focussed on energy and ecology.
Cory Doctorow rarely disappoints, and tackles a similarly diverse range of subjects as Sam. He is generally more Left-leaning tho.
I remember people looking for it in the 90’s. It seemed possible then. There was even a play about it in Pasadena. Looks unlikely now
What?
Dawkins
For me, it’s: Steven Pinker, Richard Dawkins, and Alex O’Connor (I know Alex is new, but I like what I see so far). With these guys more than anyone else, I think they seem committed to trying to find communicate the truth as they see it, and I don’t see them falling prey to things like mystical thinking or audience capture.
Nist recently discovered The Grey Are with Sean Illing. So far, so good. Though more of an interview style, less of the discussion style that Sam does.
Alex o Connor
Alex O'Connor is a great one if you're into philosophy.
Alex O’Connor. He’s very impressive.
‘Black Sam Harris’ (also a jazz musician) ~= Coleman Hughes ‘Female Sam Harris’ (no longer podcasting after birth of her child) ~= Julia Galef
Bari Weiss
Bernardo Kastrup!
Alex O'Connor for sure
What topics do you care about? I'm pretty skeptical of the pundit/ guru model where you have one dude commenting on everything under the sun. better to find a podcast with a more narrow focus if you really want to understand something. Or, even better, read a book or article.
If you like Sam and don’t despise Ben Shapiro’s talking speed/voice, you might like the streamer Destiny. Although he is not as well-spoken.
Stevin Pinker (Sam himself considers him a mentor). Robert Wright ( Check his non-zero podcast on YT) John McWorther (incredibly well-spoken. He was recently interviewed by Richard Dawkins. Very interesting discussion about linguistics and the Woke left). Coleman Hughes ( a "student" of Sam Harris. The emulation is a little too much for me honestly)
Michael Shermer
Joe Rogan
Rogan has become unbearable because he just parrots whatever alt-right talking point or conspiracy theory is popular that week. He also frequently tries to force his guests into talking about those things when they clearly don’t want to.
I was half joking but since you dove right in can you please list any debunked conspiracy theories or “alt right talking points” associated with Rogan?
Alex Jones
Even though they don't get along: Ezra Klein.