ICYMI, we did two Spectrum Street Epistemology videos with Francis Foster and Kontantin Kisin: Part 1 with TRIGGERnometry hosts: ua-cam.com/video/HpUjJL0D9Uo/v-deo.html Part 2 with TRIGGERnometry hosts: ua-cam.com/video/Cms2zWrjgWQ/v-deo.html
The two modifications you have implemented are fantastic. The devil's advocate, as well as guessing the reasons for the opposing opinion, does well to illustrate how much someone has listened to their opponents, how seriously they consider the opposition, and the amount of respect they give the debate process. Even on the sidelines, I feel more encouraged to think beyond what they have said and try to extrapolate the fundamentals of their stance.
Loving the epistemology series of films, such an important tool for developing reasoning and analysis for all of us and especially for those of us who think we do not need it! I personally have got very bogged down in the gender ideology debate, on the side of those who understand sex to be binary and unchanging. Finding a lot of people on the other side of the argument throwing up either blatant misreadings/lack of reading/use of DARVO/strawmanning etc.to refute the sex realist argument. My question is: is this concentrated volley of tactics part of a "guidebook" somewhere, are they part of a philosophy, is this a standard for arguing set down somewhere? I imagine if there is a standard, then my own offerings indicating the lack of anything solid may be falling short of what is required, as it comes from the heart and not from some cynical guidebook. Do you recommend any further reading, I guess is what I am trying to say? Many thanks, looking forward to more like this.
@@henryburton6529Laurence is an a-hole for being against LBG people wanting a marriage instead of a civil partnership, because he wants to be a traditionalist only for straight people, (despite him liking LGB people and saying that they should have equal rights) which got other people calling him out on Twitter a month or so ago, about his so-called tradition.
This is fast becoming my favourite channel. These conversations are genuinely thought-provoking and proof that it is possible to discuss ideas without the usual ad hominem attacks, etc.
"soccer" is short for associated football, and accurately refers to European football, which is literally the association football league. Rugby is also football. American football is gridiron football. They are different rules for "football" and soccer is the proper descriptor for European football.
oh ho ho ho that's so funny! meanwhile they both crapped themselves when it came to the M Q which is the questions regarding our most peaceful people of imimgrnnat status
Mhoehahahaha…. I read this comment and was waiting seemingly forever in anticipation for this phrase to drop. What would be the context? Who would speak these words? …but, same here, liquid sprayed all across the room through nostrils:)
This is my favourite SSE episode ever! The format and the guests were so good that the questions and answers were engaging. Thank you for hosting them and using this format!
Another incredible session. I've caught myself multiple times now in every day life thinking "what would get me to agree with this thing I'm currently disagreeing with just a bit more?" and I find myself trying to steel man their positions as much as possible. It's obviously due to all the epistemology videos I've been watching, and as you refine the method I find myself doing it along with you. Keep up the amazing work!
When the muslim immigration topic was raised, I could visibly see both of them struggling internally with the social taboo that has been imposed on the world, and the UK in particular.
Strongly agree limiting a religion that insists on intolerance and prejudice. You cannot become multicultural by increasing the percentage of the population who don’t agree with the principle.
Peter I just found your YT page and I have to say you’re doing a great job. Don’t ever stop we need this right now to restore our country USA. Thanks for your hard work.
Absolutely brilliant and funny. Apart from the Islamifcation of Europe and the UK. It's extremely serious. Immigration is the number one issue that needs immediate solutions and fast implementation
As usual, top content Peter. FF is far more reasonable and reasoned in this than he usually is on Triggernometry and Lurence Fox regained a bit of dignity by not being insufferably opinionated. Proof that spectrum epistemology is far more productive and enjoyable than having a debate or listening to a lecture.
The last point has an enormous caveat in that it is generally preferable that the participants have functioning brains. No reference to the participants here, just a point on the format. But I agree. It's always, always, enlightening to see who can not only fully comprehend an argument in opposition to their own, but argue the point better than their opponent. PB taking the role of moderator and shuffling his guests in and out of their comfort zones does provide a bit more introspection than stuffy, pre-packaged opining.
After hearing LF's awful drunken remarks about the female journalist somehow people are still asking for his opinions. They somehow give his opinions weight. I wonder if those people and LF ever think about the presenter who was tarred with the same brush, and has never been seen since. For balance I would like people such as PB and FF to invite him on their programmes to aid him to gain his status back too.
@@user-cn1zc6jx8n LF happily made himself quite toxic which brought a couple of people who support him down by association. However Dan Wooten had his own problems and has probably gone off to lick his wounds because of them more than anything else, Calvin Robinson, on the other hand, is more than capable of bouncing back under his own steam. Meanwhile the female journalist that LF insulted, Ava Evans, has gone from strength to strength. The whole affair has raised her profile and seems to have boosted her career in the mainstream media. In future I think LF could do with moderating his approach a little, if not his opinions. This video goes some way towards that end.
Ava Evans, regardless of what Laurence said on Dan’s segment, she doesn’t given a toss about men’s health, male suicide, only cares about girls and women, but expects boys and men to return the favour even though she doesn’t, plays the victim/warrior routine and is as narcissistically PC (which some people call “woke”, but I don’t) as you can get.
I really enjoyed this SSE. I felt that the questions being asked are very important to what's going on in modern society. I also enjoy the thoughtfulness of the answers and how much fun you guys had doing this
This really is, as Laurence put it, the best way of discussing anything. I'd love to have conversations like this with my friends and family. Ordinary people aren't used to thinking this critically and conversing this civilly on virtually any topics except their work. I'm inclined to believe that most people don't even know what their closest acquaintances think about timely topics or why they hold those beliefs. By the way, can I buy a set of those mats from you guys?
I like very much how intelligently you presented the question about muslim population growth. Asking the real questions in a way that the possible problems cant be pushed into the subconsicious periferia of the conversation.
Francis looks like the supply teacher you never learned anything about the subject that he was supposed to be teaching you but was wise, a safe affable presence and gave lasting insights that were useful in life. Laurence looks like Gripper from Grange Hill.
Many years ago the big thing was ‘hypotheticals’ hosted by Geoffrey Robertson…… we should have Street Epistemology hosted by Peter on TV with all the polly’s as guests!!!
Great idea! This needs to A) be a television show, and B) replace the existing method of holding political debates wherein everyone screams ad hominem insults or "dunks" on each other like uncivilized school children. Debate the ideas and not the person.
I miss that show, it made you feel stupid afterwards but aspirational as well, to perhaps think more and try harder......Now we have The Project which just makes you feel smart and then NOT having to try......content now unfortunately just means content-ment, like the comfortable/apathetic familiarity (but nastiness) of McDonalds.
The thing that nobody EVER wants to say is that passing is really really rare and even then there are always tells beyond the physical body. It’s always right there, the big pink elephant in the room.
This method for eliciting honest and meaningful discourse is genius - and it can be very entertaining too. When are you going to make a TV show Peter? More people need to see this! Also please consider venturing out of London and visit beautiful Wales please - we need you 😂
Schools should absolutely be doing these kind of discussions. The lack of critical thinking from some people is astonishing. This would be a great place to start kids on understanding thinking.
You want children to be forced to watch strawmen of progressive arguments? That’s just gonna give them baseless assumptions and attitudes toward the majority of people (in the case of the USA).
Towards the end Peter mentions he is hoping that this will be taught in schools and it broke my heart because i remembered how we used to pick a side and defend it in high school. This was early 200s in Canada. kids are being deprived of real education today😢
Frances says immigration should be based on skills needed but also says that culture is more important than race but if you’re just allowing immigration based on skills then you’re not taking into consideration the effect that will have on your culture. Plus it’s a lazy and short term solution to address skill shortages this way. There are many people without qualifications and jobs in the country. We should be investing in them and improving schools and investing in programs to steer pupils into valuable careers. As a pupil I had no idea what to do and there wasn’t much guidance on what would be good to pursue.
I was crying, I was laughing so hard watching Francis speak, holding his answer card and his arm flapping like a chicken wing lol. By the way, you are all amazing. Great video
I think Peter has awoken to that idea, the "New" atheists of ten years ago were naive about the fundamentally Christian materialism of their world outlook (Boghossian, Benjamin, Hitchens, Harris et al). How to develop a unified world outlook once again is a vital task. Katherine Berbelsingh's court case is far more important than many give credence to.. She is actually standing for Classical Liberalism as a viable alternative to totalitarian authoritarianism.
New level Peter, this is an amazing synthesis. Instead of a Leftist Dialectic, you are exploiting the typical Dialectic in an novel way. This is how it should be used. Good epistemological distinction or differentiation. The analytic synthetic dichotomy is a harsh mistress. Nice!
FFS🤦🏽♀️ stop shaming people for strictly being attracted to people who actually have the correct anatomy that matches their biological sex! I'm straight, so it's perfectly natural that I don't want a man to have a (fake) vagina and breasts. Doesn't mean I'm obsessed with genitals. I just like them to be 100% male!
Are you willing to accept higher airline fatalities for diversity? Francis: as long as they contain the bodies of my enemies. These guys are so quick 😂
This was very interesting and fascinating because much of the arguments presented can be true for the United States as well. This was enjoyable to watch. (Taps teacup with tiny spoon)
What if the diverse people who are pilots and are very good at flying planes are not given that job because of the colour of their skin. What if they are the cream of the crop but some white guy got the job because his Daddy owns the company.
Excellent! Never thought about the difference between multiculturalism and racism. Makes lots of sense. Regarding pilots. The overwhelming reason to reject Diversity is because it’s racist & sexist. Period!! Thank you.
Private school children are disadvantaged when it comes to football because private schools in the UK focus on rugby, cricket and athletics...sometimes rowing. Should we take that into consideration?
I strongly agree race should be a consideration for airline pilots. Only people of the human race should be pilots. Other races shouldn’t. Or were they talking about complexion? That’s a stupid way to pick pilots.
We don't have a labour shortage, we have an issue with pay/wages & an issue with social welfare payments. If you're going to work your backside off, for pay that is barely better than what the government will give you - that's no incentive. & we've driven down wages to such a degree, that it's migrants, illegal or otherwise - are the ones most likely to do those roles - because it's still a step up, from the nations they came from.
Supply and demand. If you have a demand for workers, but you don't pay enough, you have to raise wages. As all jobs pay the highest wages they are willing based on available workers, jobs will pay what they are economically worth. When you flood the market with low skilled workers, who can only do the low wage jobs, it keeps those jobs low wage
The biggest thing he missed to delve deeper was the q) why have homosexuals and straight if genitals doesn't matter ? This is a protected trait and is undisputed
Importing school teachers while holding concerns about cultural integrity ... hmmm. I lived in the UAE for 3years, the kids are raised by Philipine maids, Tagalog is their first language. Not sure we want to import school teachers, even if they are Anglophiles.
This is starting off great and I think I'll l like it as much as the other agree/disagree thought expirament I just watched Peter host. This early exchange was so damn funny I had to do something unusual for me and just regurgitate it! The premier league What is that Oh I forget, you're a heathen 😂😂😂
Peter, next level. As James likes to say, name the dynamic. Can you call out their logical fallacies in real time and have them rebut their claims or justify their beliefs. I would watch that! You say the quiet part out loud as a question, now get confrontational as a thought experiment. Can you manage that and set an objective precedence? I know it's not street epistemology, but have you learned enough to take a personal stand that can not be refuted? 🤔
If you are waiting for the government to preserve or make you whole, you are already gone. People preserve governments, governments preserve only themselves.
I think cultural expectations is closer the mark. My grandparents worked as lightermen on the Thames in the early 1900s, there is a certain disdain among indigenous working class Londoners for people who go to university that is not altogether to do with IQ. Whereas Nigerians migrate to the UK to take advantage of the educational and business opportunities. Look at the difference between Nigerian migrants and second or third generation West Indians in the UK. You can easily imagine the West Indians have come from a manual labour based society like the sons of stevedores in Deptford. Personally I believe that "working class" attitude is why the UK produced such great pop music in the 60s and 70s - the angst of the outsider, toxic shame of the neglected child.
The DEI pilot question is based on the myth that airlines are hiring pilots with lesser qualifications to meet DEI quotas. No airline would or could do that, in the developed world at any rate. Some airlines have DEI quotas for pilot trainees. The trainees must have aptitude and must reach the required standard to become licenced pilots. If the question was 'should airlines have quotas for pilot trainees based on race' one would be able to take a position. The question as stated in the video is meaningless.
In response to FF, I am ‘middle class’ university educated ( albeit a long time ago) and don’t hate the country. Most of my contemporaries at university I would say also don’t hate the country ..I think it’s more from the younger generation. Also I would say it’s very important if we want to ‘solve’ this issue , to see the reasons why people hate this country. I would say it’s a form of projection..ie they actually hate themselves or part of themselves and cannot bear to look at that so project outwards. They see a narrow view of things (such as being unable to see that in the history of man, there has never been a perfect country and that those who opted for the Utopia actually got the most vile and vicious of systems). Until people can look inwards at their own minds to see that is where the problem lies, we are probably doomed to repeat mistakes …..wishing that everyone finds the way to do this as it is the way to peace.
ICYMI, we did two Spectrum Street Epistemology videos with Francis Foster and Kontantin Kisin:
Part 1 with TRIGGERnometry hosts: ua-cam.com/video/HpUjJL0D9Uo/v-deo.html
Part 2 with TRIGGERnometry hosts: ua-cam.com/video/Cms2zWrjgWQ/v-deo.html
IMI, thanks!
Francis is a good guy. Lawrence is horrible. Do better Peter
The two modifications you have implemented are fantastic. The devil's advocate, as well as guessing the reasons for the opposing opinion, does well to illustrate how much someone has listened to their opponents, how seriously they consider the opposition, and the amount of respect they give the debate process. Even on the sidelines, I feel more encouraged to think beyond what they have said and try to extrapolate the fundamentals of their stance.
Loving the epistemology series of films, such an important tool for developing reasoning and analysis for all of us and especially for those of us who think we do not need it! I personally have got very bogged down in the gender ideology debate, on the side of those who understand sex to be binary and unchanging. Finding a lot of people on the other side of the argument throwing up either blatant misreadings/lack of reading/use of DARVO/strawmanning etc.to refute the sex realist argument. My question is: is this concentrated volley of tactics part of a "guidebook" somewhere, are they part of a philosophy, is this a standard for arguing set down somewhere? I imagine if there is a standard, then my own offerings indicating the lack of anything solid may be falling short of what is required, as it comes from the heart and not from some cynical guidebook. Do you recommend any further reading, I guess is what I am trying to say? Many thanks, looking forward to more like this.
@@henryburton6529Laurence is an a-hole for being against LBG people wanting a marriage instead of a civil partnership, because he wants to be a traditionalist only for straight people, (despite him liking LGB people and saying that they should have equal rights) which got other people calling him out on Twitter a month or so ago, about his so-called tradition.
This is fast becoming my favourite channel. These conversations are genuinely thought-provoking and proof that it is possible to discuss ideas without the usual ad hominem attacks, etc.
I agree! A fantastic way to have these conversations.
💯.. It's a great way to help unite people to help bridge the gap that has divided us for too long.
I'd like to see presidential debates done in this format
100%. We deserve that.
Heck yes!!
donald trump and biden flipping a coin to argue for the other side?
"What's the premier league?"
"I forget, you're a heathen."
I nearly spit my coffee on that one.
"soccer" is short for associated football, and accurately refers to European football, which is literally the association football league.
Rugby is also football. American football is gridiron football. They are different rules for "football" and soccer is the proper descriptor for European football.
@@logangodofcandy Good bot.
oh ho ho ho that's so funny! meanwhile they both crapped themselves when it came to the M Q which is the questions regarding our most peaceful people of imimgrnnat status
“Probably more fun with a cursory reach-around”. I nearly choked on my tea. Laurence is hilarious (also a thoroughly decent bloke). ❤️❤️❤️
"Thoroughly decent bloke" has to be the most British qualifier lol.
He slayed me. That was a transatlantic spritz
And taking a cruel battering from the psychopathic M**xist establishment.
Don't let the b**tards grind you down, Lawrence.
Mhoehahahaha…. I read this comment and was waiting seemingly forever in anticipation for this phrase to drop. What would be the context? Who would speak these words?
…but, same here, liquid sprayed all across the room through nostrils:)
I bet you got suck a golf ball through a garden hose.
This is my favourite SSE episode ever! The format and the guests were so good that the questions and answers were engaging. Thank you for hosting them and using this format!
You’re welcome!!
Peter and the gang back at it again!! Keep up the great work
This as usual is “THE BEST”
Sharing with family and friends
Again nailed it !!! Mr. Boghossian
Are we awake now🕊
Great and lowly are RELATIVE. 😉
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
Another incredible session. I've caught myself multiple times now in every day life thinking "what would get me to agree with this thing I'm currently disagreeing with just a bit more?" and I find myself trying to steel man their positions as much as possible. It's obviously due to all the epistemology videos I've been watching, and as you refine the method I find myself doing it along with you. Keep up the amazing work!
Yes! It's great for questioning your own stance on certain issues. It also highlights how very complex these issues are.
When the muslim immigration topic was raised, I could visibly see both of them struggling internally with the social taboo that has been imposed on the world, and the UK in particular.
they both crapqed theyselves
Strongly agree limiting a religion that insists on intolerance and prejudice. You cannot become multicultural by increasing the percentage of the population who don’t agree with the principle.
Peter I just found your YT page and I have to say you’re doing a great job. Don’t ever stop we need this right now to restore our country USA. Thanks for your hard work.
Ahhh, this was so good! Thank you so much, Francis & Lawrence for participating and thank you, Peter for sharing. Absolute gold! Made my day! x
I am really appreciative of the expanded rules of the game. Makes for a very interesting structured conversation.
Thanks for the feedback!
Laurence Fox , legend and our national treasure ❤❤❤
I was deeply & unyieldingly in love with Laurence until a minute ago when Francis cracked me up. Torn between two lovers....
From a distance, you can love both!
Be happy and enjoy! 😊
@@ankavoskuilen1725 I like the way you think. Much love from Florida, the fun & sun capital of the world! (credit: Jackie Gleason)
This was awesomely intelligent and hilarious. 💚. Thank you. Both these guys are decent, cool humans.
Great episode, Francis and Lawrence are a great duo
Absolutely brilliant and funny. Apart from the Islamifcation of Europe and the UK. It's extremely serious. Immigration is the number one issue that needs immediate solutions and fast implementation
Not really.
As usual, top content Peter. FF is far more reasonable and reasoned in this than he usually is on Triggernometry and Lurence Fox regained a bit of dignity by not being insufferably opinionated.
Proof that spectrum epistemology is far more productive and enjoyable than having a debate or listening to a lecture.
The last point has an enormous caveat in that it is generally preferable that the participants have functioning brains. No reference to the participants here, just a point on the format. But I agree. It's always, always, enlightening to see who can not only fully comprehend an argument in opposition to their own, but argue the point better than their opponent. PB taking the role of moderator and shuffling his guests in and out of their comfort zones does provide a bit more introspection than stuffy, pre-packaged opining.
After hearing LF's awful drunken remarks about the female journalist somehow people are still asking for his opinions. They somehow give his opinions weight. I wonder if those people and LF ever think about the presenter who was tarred with the same brush, and has never been seen since. For balance I would like people such as PB and FF to invite him on their programmes to aid him to gain his status back too.
@@user-cn1zc6jx8n LF happily made himself quite toxic which brought a couple of people who support him down by association. However Dan Wooten had his own problems and has probably gone off to lick his wounds because of them more than anything else,
Calvin Robinson, on the other hand, is more than capable of bouncing back under his own steam.
Meanwhile the female journalist that LF insulted, Ava Evans, has gone from strength to strength. The whole affair has raised her profile and seems to have boosted her career in the mainstream media.
In future I think LF could do with moderating his approach a little, if not his opinions. This video goes some way towards that end.
@@amarissimus29 Agreed.
Ava Evans, regardless of what Laurence said on Dan’s segment, she doesn’t given a toss about men’s health, male suicide, only cares about girls and women, but expects boys and men to return the favour even though she doesn’t, plays the victim/warrior routine and is as narcissistically PC (which some people call “woke”, but I don’t) as you can get.
The best line up of SSE thus far! Splendid!
Oh man😂😂😂
I'm a fan of all 3 of you and this was funny. People at Costco are giving me looks.
I really enjoyed this SSE. I felt that the questions being asked are very important to what's going on in modern society. I also enjoy the thoughtfulness of the answers and how much fun you guys had doing this
Wow! Best episode I’ve seen in a long time! The participants were great and I loved how you had them make opposing arguments. Very good
Glad you liked it!
Once again, entertaining while thought provoking.
Thank you. That was an objective when I was a teacher, too.
Intelligent insight. These men are great!
Thank you!
If only the "average" person on the street could hold a conversation in the way these guys did, we could actually make progress in our world
Yeah, if only men voted, there would be no leftism, crime would be almost non-existent, and we would all be wealthy.
This really is, as Laurence put it, the best way of discussing anything. I'd love to have conversations like this with my friends and family. Ordinary people aren't used to thinking this critically and conversing this civilly on virtually any topics except their work. I'm inclined to believe that most people don't even know what their closest acquaintances think about timely topics or why they hold those beliefs.
By the way, can I buy a set of those mats from you guys?
Excellent - three brainy, very well artuculated and playful males showing why and what men contribute to the world
I like very much how intelligently you presented the question about muslim population growth. Asking the real questions in a way that the possible problems cant be pushed into the subconsicious periferia of the conversation.
Thank you
Francis looks like the supply teacher you never learned anything about the subject that he was supposed to be teaching you but was wise, a safe affable presence and gave lasting insights that were useful in life.
Laurence looks like Gripper from Grange Hill.
A hand of bananas weighs 40kg (90lbs). Not everyone can pick bananas.
Stock bananas till the morning comes, daylight comes and me wan' go home.
Six foot seven foot eight foot bunch!
A little bit in love with you Peter. I wish they would use this technique in schools.
Another fantastic episode
So many good laughs in this one! And lots to think about, as always. Thanks Peter. Great content.
Many years ago the big thing was ‘hypotheticals’ hosted by Geoffrey Robertson…… we should have Street Epistemology hosted by Peter on TV with all the polly’s as guests!!!
Great idea! This needs to A) be a television show, and B) replace the existing method of holding political debates wherein everyone screams ad hominem insults or "dunks" on each other like uncivilized school children. Debate the ideas and not the person.
I miss that show, it made you feel stupid afterwards but aspirational as well, to perhaps think more and try harder......Now we have The Project which just makes you feel smart and then NOT having to try......content now unfortunately just means content-ment, like the comfortable/apathetic familiarity (but nastiness) of McDonalds.
If Geoffrey was on tv today he'd be more like Rod Serling presenting The Twilight Zone.
hahahahahaha that dating segment
The thing that nobody EVER wants to say is that passing is really really rare and even then there are always tells beyond the physical body. It’s always right there, the big pink elephant in the room.
“No, I’ve played rugby” 💀😂🤣
Enjoyed this one. Thanks!
This method for eliciting honest and meaningful discourse is genius - and it can be very entertaining too. When are you going to make a TV show Peter? More people need to see this! Also please consider venturing out of London and visit beautiful Wales please - we need you 😂
Thank you. We’re sticking to UA-cam for now! We’ll be back and do SSE next year outside of London!
Always brilliant, Peter.
Schools should absolutely be doing these kind of discussions. The lack of critical thinking from some people is astonishing. This would be a great place to start kids on understanding thinking.
You want children to be forced to watch strawmen of progressive arguments? That’s just gonna give them baseless assumptions and attitudes toward the majority of people (in the case of the USA).
Love to see this. Xx
Good stuff Peter keep up the great work
Thanks 👍
I enjoyed watching this format, I think it's very healthy to look at these topics from different angles.
Nice to see men have a good laugh, my hubby loved it and i guess i did too.
So impressed with the thoughtful insights of these guys, on a range of topics.
Respect to both of them, I know they're not fans of each other
Francis is most amusing. Great Video.
He’s terrific! Laurence, too!
agreed.@@drpeterboghossian
I cracked so much😂
Towards the end Peter mentions he is hoping that this will be taught in schools and it broke my heart because i remembered how we used to pick a side and defend it in high school. This was early 200s in Canada. kids are being deprived of real education today😢
I love that smirk by Laurence at 32:06, hinting that Francis' guess is spot on.
Nice to see Laurence flexing his acting skills there. 😂
And Francis's dating is like curry. Lol.
This was great.
Thank you.
Love, Francis, but he’s clueless when it comes to Muslim immigration into Europe. It’s not a small subset it’s all of them.
This is a brilliant format
We switched it up this time I appreciate it
Bravo 👏🏼 great discussion!
Frances says immigration should be based on skills needed but also says that culture is more important than race but if you’re just allowing immigration based on skills then you’re not taking into consideration the effect that will have on your culture. Plus it’s a lazy and short term solution to address skill shortages this way. There are many people without qualifications and jobs in the country. We should be investing in them and improving schools and investing in programs to steer pupils into valuable careers. As a pupil I had no idea what to do and there wasn’t much guidance on what would be good to pursue.
So funny, really entertaining
Thanks. And I hope you learned something too!
“Fair crack of the whip”
😂
Did you notice that as well 🤣🤣
I was crying, I was laughing so hard watching Francis speak, holding his answer card and his arm flapping like a chicken wing lol. By the way, you are all amazing. Great video
Francis is amusing in a way😂
Live and let live only works when there is a shared moral framework in a society. And When standards go everything goes.
#MakeShamingGreatAgain
I think Peter has awoken to that idea, the "New" atheists of ten years ago were naive about the fundamentally Christian materialism of their world outlook (Boghossian, Benjamin, Hitchens, Harris et al).
How to develop a unified world outlook once again is a vital task.
Katherine Berbelsingh's court case is far more important than many give credence to..
She is actually standing for Classical Liberalism as a viable alternative to totalitarian authoritarianism.
@@AndyJarman thank you for reminding me of Katherines case.
I love this Peter.
Awesome work, yet again! 😃👏
Thank you!
"Island money"...I'm stealing that term.
Please do!!
I LOVE THESE!
Me too!
New level Peter, this is an amazing synthesis. Instead of a Leftist Dialectic, you are exploiting the typical Dialectic in an novel way. This is how it should be used. Good epistemological distinction or differentiation. The analytic synthetic dichotomy is a harsh mistress.
Nice!
Thank you! I’m really glad you appreciate what we’re doing.
FFS🤦🏽♀️ stop shaming people for strictly being attracted to people who actually have the correct anatomy that matches their biological sex! I'm straight, so it's perfectly natural that I don't want a man to have a (fake) vagina and breasts. Doesn't mean I'm obsessed with genitals. I just like them to be 100% male!
Top notch..enjoyed the discussion.
Thanks
2:44 "A fair crack of the whip." THAT triggered some generational PTSD in some.
Are you willing to accept higher airline fatalities for diversity? Francis: as long as they contain the bodies of my enemies. These guys are so quick 😂
This was very interesting and fascinating because much of the arguments presented can be true for the United States as well. This was enjoyable to watch. (Taps teacup with tiny spoon)
This video was great
The acting chops of that man
Inspector Morse 👍
@@cmlmaintenance2497Detective Sergeant James Hathaway … in Lewis.
Absolutely brilliant 😂😂
Thanks! They were great guests!
that sharp turn from immigration to dating … nicely done Peter !
What if the diverse people who are pilots and are very good at flying planes are not given that job because of the colour of their skin. What if they are the cream of the crop but some white guy got the job because his Daddy owns the company.
If Winning is getting from Point A to point B "Alive"... then yes winning is more important than redresses
Excellent! Never thought about the difference between multiculturalism and racism. Makes lots of sense. Regarding pilots. The overwhelming reason to reject Diversity is because it’s racist & sexist. Period!! Thank you.
Private school children are disadvantaged when it comes to football because private schools in the UK focus on rugby, cricket and athletics...sometimes rowing. Should we take that into consideration?
I strongly agree race should be a consideration for airline pilots. Only people of the human race should be pilots. Other races shouldn’t. Or were they talking about complexion? That’s a stupid way to pick pilots.
We don't have a labour shortage, we have an issue with pay/wages & an issue with social welfare payments.
If you're going to work your backside off, for pay that is barely better than what the government will give you - that's no incentive.
& we've driven down wages to such a degree, that it's migrants, illegal or otherwise - are the ones most likely to do those roles - because it's still a step up, from the nations they came from.
Supply and demand. If you have a demand for workers, but you don't pay enough, you have to raise wages. As all jobs pay the highest wages they are willing based on available workers, jobs will pay what they are economically worth.
When you flood the market with low skilled workers, who can only do the low wage jobs, it keeps those jobs low wage
Fantastic episode.
Three of my favorite people and a great exercise.
Mine too!
You could argue that culture is born of race.
The biggest thing he missed to delve deeper was the q) why have homosexuals and straight if genitals doesn't matter ? This is a protected trait and is undisputed
I'm laughing. Thanks
Importing school teachers while holding concerns about cultural integrity ... hmmm.
I lived in the UAE for 3years, the kids are raised by Philipine maids, Tagalog is their first language.
Not sure we want to import school teachers, even if they are Anglophiles.
I much prefer Laurence's views.
Love these three
absolutely shameful the way the both absolutely cowed out when it came to the question of mooz immigrnation
Francis was shook by that surrender question!
So awesome. Comment for the algo. North Vancouver, B.C. Canada, Peter?
No plans to go to Canada, but that may change.
Laurence is a legend
Lawrence’s glasses are Trans… I mean, they certainly are not straight 🤓😂
Love from 🇨🇦😆👍👍
This is starting off great and I think I'll l like it as much as the other agree/disagree thought expirament I just watched Peter host. This early exchange was so damn funny I had to do something unusual for me and just regurgitate it!
The premier league
What is that
Oh I forget, you're a heathen
😂😂😂
Francis Foster did a great job playing devil's advocate!
Peter, next level. As James likes to say, name the dynamic. Can you call out their logical fallacies in real time and have them rebut their claims or justify their beliefs.
I would watch that!
You say the quiet part out loud as a question, now get confrontational as a thought experiment. Can you manage that and set an objective precedence?
I know it's not street epistemology, but have you learned enough to take a personal stand that can not be refuted? 🤔
If you are waiting for the government to preserve or make you whole, you are already gone. People preserve governments, governments preserve only themselves.
Do you agree or disagree Laurence needs his spectacles adjusted?
Major flaw with the argument that certain people are disadvantaged due to education. That's not governed by skin color, but by financial situation.
I think cultural expectations is closer the mark. My grandparents worked as lightermen on the Thames in the early 1900s, there is a certain disdain among indigenous working class Londoners for people who go to university that is not altogether to do with IQ.
Whereas Nigerians migrate to the UK to take advantage of the educational and business opportunities.
Look at the difference between Nigerian migrants and second or third generation West Indians in the UK.
You can easily imagine the West Indians have come from a manual labour based society like the sons of stevedores in Deptford.
Personally I believe that "working class" attitude is why the UK produced such great pop music in the 60s and 70s - the angst of the outsider, toxic shame of the neglected child.
not always the case.
The DEI pilot question is based on the myth that airlines are hiring pilots with lesser qualifications to meet DEI quotas. No airline would or could do that, in the developed world at any rate. Some airlines have DEI quotas for pilot trainees. The trainees must have aptitude and must reach the required standard to become licenced pilots. If the question was 'should airlines have quotas for pilot trainees based on race' one would be able to take a position. The question as stated in the video is meaningless.
In response to FF, I am ‘middle class’ university educated ( albeit a long time ago) and don’t hate the country. Most of my contemporaries at university I would say also don’t hate the country ..I think it’s more from the younger generation. Also I would say it’s very important if we want to ‘solve’ this issue , to see the reasons why people hate this country. I would say it’s a form of projection..ie they actually hate themselves or part of themselves and cannot bear to look at that so project outwards. They see a narrow view of things (such as being unable to see that in the history of man, there has never been a perfect country and that those who opted for the Utopia actually got the most vile and vicious of systems). Until people can look inwards at their own minds to see that is where the problem lies, we are probably doomed to repeat mistakes …..wishing that everyone finds the way to do this as it is the way to peace.
The great 'hole or pole' debate of 2024