lol, so you’re just going to discard your personal experience in favor of what some podcast crack tells you academia is like?

What is your PhD in?

I am not comfortable taking too much about myself. The internet can be a mean place filled with mean people and I don’t want to subject any friends, family or personal acquaintances to any problems because Of anything I said.

Suffice to say I had a very unremarkable academic career in a very esoteric subject and I am claiming no professional expertise in anything I say on these forums on any subject.

I don't understand this comment. I'm a mathematician, and my PhD is specifically in algebraic topology. That doesn't reveal anything about my family and friends?!!?!?

You would be surprised. Some people are very good at figuring stuff out. I have been doxxed before when I thought it wasn’t possible with the information I had divulged.

You legit can't even say the name of the field you (allegedly) got a PhD in? That's weird, dude.

He's lying, my dude.

Your track record making baseless claims like this in this forum is abysmal. And this incident is no exception to that rule.

Why WN lets you keep making baseless attack after baseless attack after baseless attack, never providing any content, I really don't know, but here we are.

In regards to Eric Weinstein and what is documented in his Wikipedia. He is somewhere in his late 50s, maybe even 60. I don't know exactly. His Wikipedia entry that you are all focusing on is literally one incident in a very long and probably interesting life (that so far has culminated in him being a hedge fund manager), and whoever wrote it did not appear inclined to be generous to him.

I will say he has a definite penchant for the melodramatic, and he keeps dropping all these hints about his professional life story that helped shape his disillusionment with academia, and he supposedly will one day just come clear and tell the story in a pod.

Suffice to say from the hints he has dropped whatever issues he has mostly happened way before 2013, and focusing on one incident that does not appear to be documented particularly charitably towards him is probably not going to be very accurate.

But obviously, he bears some responsibility for this. I am sure at this point he is aware he has a Wikipedia page that is very bare and unflattering, and he could take ownership of it to tell his story a little better if he was inclined.

I feel like you should be able to say what your field is though. It is odd. If it doesn't have any bearing on anything we discuss then it would have to be in the humanities right? French lit? That doesn't seem like you though.

So lets make sure we get things straight here. 3 years ago Bret Weinstein was a popular evolutionary biology professor at an extremely left leaning college, Evergreen State, with impeccable credentials as a left leaning liberal. In fact, his freshman year of college he was literally run out of the college he was attending for protesting mistreatment of black strippers by white frat boys at a time when it wasn't en vogue to do so, and required extreme bravery on his part.

Then in 2018 following over a decade as a popular professor at Evergreen he again protests what he feels was unacceptable racism (by extreme leftist activists this time), again at a time when it wasn't en vogue to do so, and required extreme bravery on his part. And again he was run off campus, and completely abandoned by academia, to the point where he hasn't been able to get another job.

And then he takes a few spins through the lying, propaganda media machine and their dishonest narratives and now clueless sycophants like you are calling him alt-right and a podcast crack.

So yeah, given all of this I am willing to listen to what he has to say, even if it doesn't perfectly align with my own life experiences. As he is a hell of a lot braver than you, me or any of the other judgemental, faux moralizers on this forum in sticking up for his beliefs and principles and paying the cost for it.

This certainly seems what I would weigh as the most likely option. The argument that saying what field his PhD is in would put at risk his friends and family is extremely hard to take as legitimate.

You missed the part about him bravely suing for millions and being "run off" with a half million dollar settlement.

Him and his wife were run off and that settlement was less than 2 years combined salary probably. That is actually an absurdly low settlement given the circumstances. He knew it, but he said he just wanted to put it behind him and have some closure and normalcy for his family; and of course the university was more than happy to be let off the hook so cheap.

Well after getting a pm from Kelhus I have no reason to not believe him. Definitely not French lit but still with no bearing on anything we ever discuss and fits with some things I previously knew about him but had forgotten.
He didn't ask me to write this post but I am. I still think he could say what his field was if he wanted to although I understand his trepidation just the same.

He certainly wouldn't be the first person who viewed themselves as/and was viewed by others as liberal/progressive only to wake up one day 30yrs later and find themselves in a different place for one reason or another. Imo it's up to the 'elders' to figure out a way to connect with young people not the other way around.

Oh ya, E. Weinstein is 54.

I see no reason to disbelieve kel has a PhD. Several of the idiots he listens to have one. It's your work that proves your ability. Earning the PhD just proves you were willing to be subjugated.

Same

Your description of higher education as some kind of indoctrination camp is so laughably at odds with reality that it's clear you've either never spent a day in a graduate program or you're just blatantly trolling. You also seem to not even understand the basics of how papers get published or the existence of graduate stipends. idk, maybe you have an advanced degree in eugenics from Oral Roberts U or a homeopathic medical degree or something like that.

Yeah, he's an unqualified racist crank who's learned how to make a career off of trolling the left and milking the "IDW" podcast circuit.

I don't believe Kel had a legit PhD. He volunteered to us that he had a PhD, but won't tell us what it's in. Malarkey!

Ok. I'll come clean. I was just making it up. You got me.

Well, I think history is going to treat him more kindly than present day. People rarely look back and think moral panics were a good thing, and I don't expect this one to be any different.

Recently finished a podcast Weinstein did with the economist Tyer Cowen. The podcast itself was all over the place. They just bounced around from subject to subject and didn't go too deep on anything, especially economics.

(The rest of this post is me paraphrasing some interesting things from their convo as I remember them)

One interesting thing they did get into a little bit is they talked about the fact that up until the early 1970s productivity and real wages went up hand in hand and then around the 1970s they disconnected and the former kept shooting up and the latter flatlined. Cowen says that in his opinions not enough economists have really looked into what actually happened to cause this.

Weinstein asked him to give his thoughts and Cowen said one real thing that people don't talk about enough is the effects of the "feminization of society" as he termed it, which seems to be his term for women entering public life en masse and taking positions of authority. Cowen said on the whole this was (in his opinion) a positive step, which is why most people really aren't interested in going back, but there were unintended effects, and the data suggests this is one of them.

He also said, the data suggests the effects aren't the same for everyone. He says it has been good for elite men and women, and probably bad on non elites. For men, changing social dynamics caused marriage rates to plummet, much more in the lower classes than upper classes, and the data indicates that marriage is good for men on a number of fronts, and as a group plummeting marriage rates decrease male quality of life especially. He also said for lower status women, there is indication that they are increasingly working full time AND take on the burden of child care themselves with minimal outside resources, and this is putting a tremendous burden and stress on them.

He also said that looking at the data, the wage gap isn't really a thing. He said there is definitely still discrimination against women, which data does support, but the evidence just doesn't support the simplistic argument women get payed 70c on the dollar for doing the same work as men.

For example in academia, he said the current tenure system is hugely discriminatory against women, because it unnecessarily requires a giant time and resource commitment during years when many women will take their foot off the gas a little (this is my term) for young child rearing. So most women that lead standard lives will be at a huge disadvantage for getting tenure relative to men, and it isn't necessary in his opinion.

--Just some thoughts on stuff I remembered. At the end of the podcast They also talked about popular music from more of a mathematical/technical perspective (as they are both math wonks) so if you are a music person that might interest you. I guess they both seem to agree if you approach music from a mathematical perspective Bach is the holy grail, although they didn't elaborate why.

Ah there is a name I have not heard in a while. Unfortunately his attempts are doomed to failure. Boring representation theory and quantum field theory nobody cares about below.



That's of course not a coincidence. The whole IDW argument about academic suppression is entirely meant for a lay audience and people who will evaluate things only based on politics.

You made an analogy about how people's reactions would be different if these academic iconoclasts happened to be women which is funny because it 100% undercuts the entire IDW victim mentality. Look how great white male privilege is, even in SJW controlled academia!!

Weinstein doesn't even release a preprint(!!) on the ArXiv and gets invited to give a talk at Oxford and an article about him in the Guardian comparing him to Einstein while Lisi releases a preprint that seems to contradict quantum field theory 101 and graduate level representation theory 102 and he gets invited to give a talk at Perimeter as well as a profile in the New Yorker, again peppered with comparisons to Einstein. It's hard to imagine a black women getting such over the top attention for such sub par work.