- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
A lot of the weirdness of YouTube intellectuals can be understood by narcissists being perfect examplars of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. The worst channels will build up a cult of personality around an individual for their “knowledge” but the truth is that they’re just saying what the audience wants to hear, usually political. They’re emotionally validating the audience and making them feel smarter and therefore better than normies. The audience in turn strokes their ego. The two best examples imo are Contrapoints and Sargon post-GamerGate but pre-Brexit.I went to a normie uni and only took the basic philosophy 101 course and while it obviously isn't a deep dive into the subject I at least understand the general ideas of kant, descartes, nietzsche, rand, dewey, kierkegaard and such. I even know what actual bad faith criticism and the principle of charity is, which is something that most youtubers and debate bros fail to understand.
What annoys me the most about philosophy tube is that he claims to be a philosopher but does nothing except explain different subjects at a surface level. He refuses to engage in debates, doesn't write or present any arguments either. But I guess that would be the hard work and olly would rather waste his time designing costumes and sets instead of researching and writing.
If one thinks about it too, when someone is interested in a subject and they study it a lot they’ll realize that there are others who know more. With history at least if someone thought of some thesis they could likely find others who had the same or similar idea even 50 years ago. Like even if they love a subject there’s some literal autist out there who specializes in some niche of it and there are so many niches that it’s impossible to know all of them. It can also be a pretty humbling experience to have a draft of a paper one has slaved over get ripped apart by someone who knows just as much if not more. So, anyone whose gone through that and claims to be an expert in everything is likely an extremely deluded narcissist who still hasn’t gotten the memo.
This is also true of those in stem and not just history and philosophy. In fact I’d argue it’s even more true because if someone really is a top chemist or hacker or whatever they could be getting paid doing a lot more to the point that even doing YouTube as a hobby would be dubious, especially since they’d most likely be working a lot of weird hours/overtime and would have to be tard wrangled in order to comply with their NDAs. Even if they somehow were allowed to sperg on YouTube about their field they likely wouldn’t have the time to Tweet all day, run a consistent YouTube channel, and constantly shit post online.
In contrast I’ve found that the most useful channels for learning about a subject don’t focus on the channel creator but on the subject. They may have political opinions but they aren’t constantly defending them or trying to debunk others, but rather they focus entirely on the subject. These channels also frequently admit to being wrong on something and they don’t claim to be the definitive source of knowledge. They aren’t selling anything to make someone feel better about themselves but are just autistically fixated on a particular subject.
Last edited:

