this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
166 points (96.1% liked)
Asklemmy
43946 readers
670 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Darknet Diaries
Intelligence Squared
Sean Carroll's Mindscape
IMO, Sean seems more intent on impressing the audience and the expert rather than conducting a good interview. I listened to an episode that involved category theory and he regularly interrupted the guest so he could show off how much he knows about it.
I'm relistening to that episode now because I'm curious about what it is you perceived.
He interjects sometimes to help tie things together ("and this is interesting because of [earlier observation]") or to adjust the level of technicality to suit his intended audience ("we're allowed to use the word torus here"). Not all Mindscape guests have a solid feel for the podcast and default to giving popscience breakdowns with analogies and leaving out technical jargon, and so he has to set the bar a bit by explicitly allowing the introduction of technical terms and bringing together of complex related topics.
Don't know if that's what made you feel like he was trying to show off.
I perceived this when he interrupted the guest to jump to different aspects of category theory that she isnβt talking about at the moment.
Well I don't know what you are referring to, but I'm not going to argue about your perception. I listened to the whole thing again (there are usually things that pass me by the first time, so I don't mind doing that for the interesting episodes) and I don't know how he could have done a better job at steering the conversation. He's a podcast host; he needs to pick at the parts that are of particular interest to him and his audience in a limited amount of time, as well as keeping the level of technicality just right so as to be digestible.
For someone familiar with the topic, it's natural to feel like they could have gone on about something at a more advanced level, and for someone entirely unfamiliar, it's natural that they would want to linger on things they don't quite get instead of moving on to something else.
Anyway, I'm not really going anywhere with this. Just curious about your perception since I tend to think of SC as someone quite smooth and approachable around people (unlike me). I guess even he can't be smooth enough for everybody all the time.