Yeah, except it's not "OMG Climate Change!", it's "OMG, Idiots and Liars!"
Skeptics simply don't (or can't) read scientific literature, that's why they're still skeptic.
Removing the disingenuous and the politically quasi-educated from the discussion is the only way to gain 'traction'.

They would do much better if they responded to the skeptics in the scientific literature. Short of that, "OMG Climate Change!" will get exactly zero traction in terms of pragmatic solutions and remain a political football for the foreseeable future.

This is nothing new especially. There's a lot of literature about social engineering. That if you spend a little money on things like childcare for your employees they'll work harder for you. Same with making the workplace just more enjoyable. They'll work harder and have an investment in their workplace so it makes sense to treat them nicer. Make them feel like they belong with significant things rather than just propaganda about how we're all a corporate family bullshit. People don't fall for that, unless they're already really indoctrinated.

In many cases though corporations won't do something like that even though it'll make them more money. Why? Because there would be giving up some control. It's not all about money, it's also about controlling your workforces.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'California, America, USA, Culture, Music, Literature, Film, TV' to 'California, America, USA, Culture, rich hall, Music, Literature, Film, TV' - edited by enoch

Is Dune "classical literature" now?

It is a great book, but it was only published a few years ago FIFTY YEARS AGO!!?!? Holy shit, that makes me feel old!

Washington Post is fine as a source, although it's better to review the actual scientific literature instead of a journalist's write-up of it. Even more important than that is to read the article accurately and comprehend what it is telling you.

To wit, "There doesn’t appear to be a muscular or structural reason for the difference."

You said there is a biological reason for the throwing motion of a girl which is just flat out wrong. Yes, because of size and strength differences, women will only throw about 75% of the speed and distance when compared to men, but that has nothing to do with their joints. "Throwing like a girl" is used as a description of the throwing motion, not the results of the throw. This technique can be taught and practiced.

As the scientist in the Washington Post piece says, "The more we argue for gender differences, the more we feed people’s stereotypes. A belief in large gender differences is incompatible with equal opportunity."

If you've read any of the recent (or ancient, or any) literature on diet and health you may wonder why the girl isn't asking, "What the heck is a cookie, and what the heck is ice cream?" - Because there's no reason to feed that crap to children in the first place!

I studied English and Philosophy in school and have continued reading a lot of utopian/dystopian literature since. My familiarity with economics and economic history pales in contrast, but the close relationship with subjects I am interested in has caused me to spend some time and consideration learning what I can.

That said, when I see a video like this I lump it into the same pseudo intellectual/science/news that things like Bill O'Reilly, TYT, Kirk Cameron, Creationists and bigots bring to mind.

Why did I watch this? Well I'm open to listening to legitimate and informative critiques of socioeconomic systems. If they are particularly good it can lead to all sorts of follow up questions and inquiries. I get bored while i'm "slaving" away at work so I put things on in the background...

Then there videos like this. There are very few facts throughout the entire video. The analogies used are misleading. The terrible acts and downfalls of groups, individuals, or particular ideologies are often blown out of proportion entirely. There is no nuanced investigation, no insights, nothing but a self satisfied narrator with droll delivery.

Thanks for rummaging through my videos for dead links. I'll pass on using my downvote on this video.

Saying that; "All religions are based on ignorance, fear and control," is NOT a "blanket statement," nor is it a "broad generalisation." It is, simply, a fact. You say that; "religion should be criticized,debated and discussed and
the underlying philosophies should be examined for their veracity." Well, myriad great thinkers who have done just that. Their conclusion? There may, indeed, be a superior force. But the "gods" portrayed in literature, of any faith, are clearly man made. In fact, the gods of man can be seen as nothing more than divine dictators, cruel and vengeful.
I would never call followers of religion dumb. I would, however, say that they are intellectually lazy in accepting their brainwashing without question. If, of course, they enjoy being slaves then they are free to be so. As long as their bronze age cults are kept to themselves, and out of schools and politics.

100% not sarcasm. A politician's personal life is none of your business. When a reporter asks a question that is none of their business they deserve to get a lie or Clinton-esque evasion (the latter is what happened in this case). He said he does not use it and is not an addict, both statements being consistent with having tried it in the past. One puff does not make him a crackhead. The scientific literature on this issue demonstrates that cocaine is about as addictive as tobacco. Even if the unverified accusations were true, that wouldn't be automatic grounds for resignation.

Hipsters can't hi-jack that word (is that Bono in your avatar?) ulysses, they're only allowed to co-opt it...OH, and most of em look silly doin' the 2000's version, all the while reeking of ineffectual pretension touting sub-standard grooming and last-century literature! Oh, and if you're gonna call yourself a real hipster you'd better dig bebop and trad jazz, otherwise......POSER!!

..and please put-out the foul ciggy from Belarus, the shits' nasty and your teeth are mustard....Oh, and tell Betty there to shave her legs and you, TAKE A BATH!!.

Hilarious and well done.

But as for the Hero's Journey / monomyth... I don't know. It's like you took the 7 most popular tropes off of tvtropes.com. Yes, they're very common story elements. But you could keep coming up with 8th, or 9th, or 47th most common story tropes. Do these 7 really cluster together frequently? Are they common in literature and the classics?

Dude that's a huge stretch.

Edit: A parody mimics/mocks content that already exist in literature, film, music ect. It's not just making fun of things in general life.

I see a lot of talk, and absolutely zero proof, and he seems to base his "disclosure" on some conspiracy theory literature given to him.

I too wish to live to see the day we get to meet visitors from out of our world, but this is hardly convincing.

Theres quite a lot of literature out there, written by agnostic and fairly unbiased peeps, that points towards porn being bad for ya in any more than like...once a month or so.

Daily use can really fuck with your mind.