Academic Edgelords

This podcast explores Jason Brennan's controversial argument for replacing democracy with rule by the knowledgeable. They discuss the flaws of democracy, the typology of the electorate, and the potential benefits of Brennan's system. The concept of epistocracy and its critiques are explored, as well as the argumentative moves regarding authority and anti-authority. They also discuss safeguards in democratic structures, individual rights, moral equality, and offer divergent views on democracy's potential for improvement.

Exploring the aftermath of the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action in higher education, debating Pojman's arguments against it. Discussing the preference for class-based affirmative action over race-based approaches. Delving into the need for broader societal reform and the impact of role models on personal development.

Many agree there is plenty of reason to worry about existing A.I., including how it perpetuates structural racism, invades privacy, erodes workers’ rights, and entrenches monopolistic firms. But might a future A.I. also take over and dominate, or potentially even destroy humanity, like some Skynet-like scenario? Some technologists worry it might, and so does Ethan. In fact, Ethan thinks that A.I. is one of the biggest threats known to humanity. The rest of us aren’t as convinced. We spend the episode debating the issue, in a mostly 1v3 dynamic of Ethan attempting to convince the rest of us. On this episode, we once again break our ‘rule’ and engage with an argument that technically isn’t peer-reviewed. We read Richard Ngo, an AI governance researcher at Open AI. He has white paper on A.I. safety first principles, which you can find here. The post EP6: Is A.I. Going To Kill Us All? (On Richard Ngo’s A.I. Safety First Principles) appeared first on Academic Edgelords.

Delving into Donald Moss' controversial essay on Whiteness as a parasitic condition, the hosts question the outrage it sparked and explore the distinction between 'Whiteness' and 'whiteness'. They discuss the societal implications, self-reflection, and radical solutions to combat racism and redefine whiteness.

If your partner is attractive, then you might be part of the problem. At least, that’s what one edgelord philosopher is suggesting. We discuss William D’Alessandro’s forthcoming paper, “Is It Bad to Prefer Attractive Partners?” (in the Journal of the American Philosophical Association here). Is this “lookism” a kind of unjustified and harmful discrimination? If it is, is it realistic to expect us to modify our personal preferences for justice-oriented reasons? For philosopher William D’Alessandro, the answer to both questions is yes. On this episode, we debate these and many more questions, including: whether or not “attractiveness” can even be measured, and made sense of in this way; whether the argument leads us towards absurd conclusions about other personal characteristics (should we not date intelligent people?); and whether this argument, even if well-meaning, has potentially reactionary consequences. We also mentioned the work of Amia Srinivasan. You can find a short article about her related ideas on “the right to sex” here. The post EP4: Is it Morally Wrong to Prefer Attractive Partners? (On ‘Lookism’ and William D’Alessandro) appeared first on Academic Edgelords.

If you were offered the choice of a brief-but-brutal whipping or an extended stay in prison, which would you take? Probably the former. Is that an argument for flogging? Most people consider the idea of state-sanctioned flogging to be barbaric. Sure, Singapore does it, but they are known for authoritarian laws. Yet, Peter Moskos and Jason Brennan argue that flogging is actually more humane than the existing prison system. Today, we debate the ideas of two lash-wielding edgelords Moskos is a cop-turned sociologist who wrote the book In Defense of Flogging (2013). We also reviewed a shorter article summarizing his views. Additionally, edgelord philosopher Jason Brennan wrote a chapter in defence of corporal punishment in Rethinking Punishment in the Era of Mass Incarceration (2017). You can also find Victor’s article, mentioned at the beginning of this episode, here. Note: Matt had to bail on this recording but he was flogged for his absence. The post EP3: 5 Years or 5 Lashes? (On Moskos’ & Brennan’s Defense of Flogging) appeared first on Academic Edgelords.

The ultimate Academic Edgelord has died: Ted Kaczynski. This domestic terrorist was also a real scholar, with a few peer-reviewed works in mathematics. On this episode, we read his manifesto: Industrial Society and its Future. Why has Kaczynski become so popular with young people? He is just one extreme proponent of an anti-civilizational political theory called anarcho-primitivism. Few call themselves anarcho-primitivists, yet the basic ideas have become widespread, thanks to worsening environmental degradation and the ongoing techlash. You probably saw some anarcho-primitive thinking on Twitter right after Kaczynski died; many people lamented his death, and praised his arguments. What makes his thinking appealing to some? What does it get right about technology, and what does it get very wrong? We also discuss the broader anarcho-primitivist tradition, with the help of Chamsy el-Ojeili and Dylan Taylor’s critical but generous review article from April, 2020, “the Future in the Past”: Anarcho-primitivism and the Critique of Civilization Today,” in Rethinking Marxism. The post EP2: Did the Unabomber Have a Point? (on Anarcho-Primitivism & Ted Kaczynski) appeared first on Academic Edgelords.

This podcast discusses engaging with scholarly provocateurs and the importance of critical engagement with edgy academic ideas. They explore the negative perception of engaging with the other side from a left-wing perspective and emphasize the need to analyze and challenge right-wing arguments. The hosts also discuss the concept of liberal socialism, the value of intellectual arguments in political movements, and the unique skills and strengths of academics and activists.