- Joined
- Oct 22, 2009
- Messages
- 26,061
- Reaction score
- 9,794
Imma mix it up and go:
1. Rogan - He's easily the least intelligent, but he's also the most genuinely open-minded and cognizant of his own limitations. He's not going to formulate complex arguments or elucidate you with some revealed wisdom, but he's also not likely going to paint you into corner with reductive absolutes.
2. Brand - He's moderately intelligent and he's fairly open-minded and cognizant of his own limitations. He's going to push you in an ideological direction, unlike Rogan, but he's not going to dictate non-truths or make you less informed.
3. Peterson - He's the most intelligent (still not that intelligent, frankly), and by far the least genuinely open-minded cognizant of his own limitations. He's very likely to affirmatively lead you to stunted understandings of issues.
In terms of being a worthwhile public intellectual, I think being genuinely open to information and aware of your own deficits is perhaps the most important thing; it's certainly more important than having a degree or a robust vocabulary
Rogan- I agree about being fairly minded but I don't agree about limitations. Rogan seems the least likely to address his own limitations due to his ambition.
Brand- I think any Western dude devoted to Eastern ideology is harder to take serious, but I would say he's the most sincere. I think he's the best due to having an ideological direction that's inherently based on truths and the human experience as a whole.
Peterson- I think he's the most intelligent, but also the least sincere. I think he would be a happier person if he didn't actively seek debating angry people, and becoming a figurehead of the angry. He's just not passionate enough, but I understand the draw concerning money and recognition.