Never heard of him. Stanford is a wretched hive of scum and villainy.
news
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
I just remember seeing this guy's Youtube clips appearing on my feed and thinking that he's just a science based Joe Rogan clone. Then all of a sudden he got super popular on social media. Some of his videos were good, some were nonsense, especially when he promoted bunk supplements.
I think the article really doesn't make enough of the fact that his specialty is opthamology and he has no psychology training at all
EDIT: apparently does have a MA in psych, my mistake
Have you ever had a dream that you, um, you had, your, you- you could, you’ll do, where you’re a Stanford nepo baby so much you could do anything?
Actually he has relevant degrees from UC Santa Barbara and UC Berkeley and UC Davis as well. He’s also taught at UC San Diego.
Maybe he saw what Jordon Peterson was doing and thought he could jump on the university-to-conservative-grifter track too.
that his specialty is opthamology
THE FUCK? I've just assumed this whole time that this guy was at least psychology-adjacent
He's a neurobiologist EDIT: and he does have a master's in Psych frok Berkeley, I was wrong
I definitely want to take psychological advice from a narcissistic sociopath who peddles Joe Rogan muscle powder
Yeah and Huberman is definitely knowledgeable enough to know that the "muscle powder" is completely ineffective in dosage and a scam, yet he still promoted it. That's just selling out.
As for his psychological advice, as I've said it always came across as preachy and the words of someone who protests too much.
The bit in the article where he spent 9 minutes armchair diagnosing a colleague who sent him a terse message for his flakiness is telling
If I ever encountered this guy in YT clips I certainly dismissed him as a grifter and forgot his face straight away
Andrew’s relationship to therapy remains intriguing.
I'm reminded of Tony Soprano.
I feel like his solo podcasts aren’t all that bad. Gets straight to the topic at hand without any meandering. Some of the guests he platforms and his appearances in other media, though, tend to brush up against manosphere territory.
Yeah his podcast episode on alcohol is probably one of the best pieces of publicly available media with regards to explaining the terrible health effects alcohol has on the body, if you ignore his thinly veiled dislike for everyone who drinks alcohol. So he does make some good content. Though his content has always been straight up manosphere for me, like a scientific Joe Rogan.
I just found some of the preaching he does annoying and thought there was no way he actually believed or practiced it.
honestly i watched some of his stuff and actually liked it, there is good factual information in there and IIRC he selects topics based on his audience's requests.
i have always chalked up his "strangeness" to something innocuous like autism or something. had no idea about the crazy affairs, or the occasional crappy guests.
the supplement thing was always sketchy as fuck though, always felt way out of place. i imagine he could find a better sponsor with how big hes gotten, but he hasnt for some reason.