Well named: I agree with your analysis.

I would say that we are still intensely interrested in hierarchy and status differences but modern society helps dampen the most important ones by economic redistribution, like you mentioned the class society is drastically weakened. So the whole things gets a bit more dull but its still always in play. Every time we enter the presence of other people our behaviour is regulated by status, these things are body language like e.g direct gaze is dominant and averted gaze is subordinate, crunching your body and head down and forward vs a straight posture with open arms, and your voice pitch varies according to the status of who you talk to. Gossip which is a huge part of everyday conversation is also to keep track of other peoples movement in these hierarchies. We are captives in this thing.

Modern society as compared to what? We are less heirarchical than 17th century France, but more than most Amazonian indigenous tribes.

I know hunter gatherer tribes sometimes have been described as quite egalitarian, e.g theres no good ability to accumulate wealth before agriculture kicks in 12k years ago. I think power differences have grown smaller and smaller since feudal europe until now, but you could maybe even stretch it to long before that.

It’s not very hard to be “egalitarian” when you actually know everybody in your society. If you look at society as the 20 people you know the best we’re still very egalitarian.

I guess that's true for the 20 you know the best, but for the 20 you interact with the most it probably depends on what your place of work is like, and often it would be very heirarchical.

We respond to gradations of rank so our behavioural responces to the demands of hierarchy is going to be more subtle when engagig with people that are slightly better than us than when engaging with people that are clearly better than us. Also we have automatic preferences for people that are close to ourselves in rank, so we are going to hang out alot more with people we concider (almost) equals. I also think humans have a norm that when in groups we are supposed to at least pretend that everyone in the group are equals.

That said a very clear picture has formed when it comes to socioeconomic status SES and health, where lower SES leads to incrementally worse health all the way from the top of the ladder to the bottom, they have corrected for all sorts of things, its about the psychological stress of having lower status than other people in your community.

I think this thing only captures the economic part though and not the parts i mentioned in a previous post. Any high status cathegories you can cling on to will give you some level of prestige even if the economic ones are the most important.

One of his books was turned into a Netflix documentary special. Worth it.

Would kick ass to meet him. Was very influential in second language acquisition.

He’s uh... not exactly charismatic in real life. Not sure it’s really fair to call him a public intellectual either, which is why I thought the comparison to Peterson was good.

I disagree. I sat on a panel with him about 15 years ago and went for dinner with him and found him very personable and interesting to chat with.

Chomsky and Jordan Peterson are not remotely similar wtf is wrong with this eciture clown

I meant more as a speaker...he could have had an off day or not really prepared as much as he should have. I did share an office near his one summer. Don’t think I ever talked to him, not that I expect famous full professors to strike up elevator chats with random grad students.

Time to add Brian Koppleman and Penn Jillete to the ranks of the rapid irredeemable white supremacists. They spoke about the Harris Klein debate on Koppleman’s podcast and were nuanced in thier anayisis.

looooooool of course you're a Penn Jillette fanboi

Lololololoolol of course you are not intelligent enough to note that the podcast I was listening to was Koppleman.

I'm adding Jilettte to the list of "annoying Libertarians I give zero ****s about"

Clovis from listening to that nuanced analysis have you been able to determine whether you think Harris believes Murray is a racist?

Imagine how little self-awareness you'd need to try that "ah someone has mentioned Charles Murray, clearly the dang libs will also also call them racist" thing with one additional level of abstraction, after the first try produced like a 3 day long FoldNDark-level posting binge of embarrassment and mockery.

Son you coulda just read the ****ing quote I posted and saved yourself so much ****ing trouble here.

But mother****er WE had a nuanced analysis of the Klein/Harris chat in this forum, and we didn't call any of the people who had actually listened to it or read the transcript white supremacists. You're so up your own ass on the strawman here, like you convinced yourself people only called Harris racist because he had Murray on and not for his clear and repeatedly stated beliefs about blacks being stupider than white people, so you thought that would translate to Gladwell, but apparently after that meth binge you've applied a second level of strawman(after forgetting you had already applied the first level) and now think that the dang regressive left would call 2 people who are talking about 2 people talking about Charles Murray racist? What?

Lol it was Harris and Klein, not Murray. Just when I think you have set the bar so low for intellect you somehow find a new low. You are the most trumpkin person I have ever encountered. I actually feel a bit sorry for you. It must be a tough life.

I’ll expect you to post 100 times about the Koppleman podcast given you haven’t listened to it.

I have never listened to it and never will, but the man spells his last name Koppelman, a mistake you've now made 3 times. Sort your ****ing **** out man. I would recommend replacing "podcasts and drugs" with "books and anti-racism" in your life.

YOU NEVER EVEN READ THE QUOTE OF THE KLEIN TRANSCRIPT I POSTED HERE. For ****'s sake.

Of course you will never listen. Your pathetically weak self image as the warrior of the left could never handle even the tiniest exposure to any information outside your bubble. You have never read not listened to any opinion which doesn’t already match yours because you are simply incapable of processing it.

You are the worst of the worst and what is wrong with America.

You are trump.

At first I thought you kept saying this out of some pathetic rhetorical attempt to score points. Now I am completely conviced you are dumb enough to think it’s actually true.

But I'm not the one who has to dodge questions about what Harris said, am I?

As we've covered repeatedly, it absolutely is true. You were unaware of Sam Harris' opinion about Charles Murray when you started defending Harris from the SJWs

However, given that I have put a marker down as believing that it is true, you wanna really ****ing embarrass me and show me what's what?

Answer this question:
Clovis from listening to that nuanced analysis have you been able to determine whether you think Harris believes Murray is a racist?

Wow you are so astoundingly trump. Impressive gaslighting.

Clovis literally nobody believes you had listened to the podcast or read the transcript(or the portion I quoted), it's not gaslighting.

You know you didn't, I know you didn't, and everyone has seen you dodge incredibly basic questions about Harris' views over a period of weeks.

It is the explanation that fits the facts.