#395 — Intellectual Authority and Its Discontents

Harris is combining his Making Sense Podcast and Substack newsletter into a single subscription platform to improve the user experience and provide more flexibility in how he creates content.

Harris announces the merger of the Making Sense Podcast with his Substack newsletter into a single, streamlined subscription platform. This change provides subscribers with an enhanced experience and allows Harris to create content freely, without being constrained by separate paywalls.

The consolidated platform will allow Harris to decide whether to publish content in audio, video, or written formats, and provide subscribers access to everything he produces.

With the new platform, Harris mentions he will be able to determine the most appropriate format—audio, video, or written—for his content and distribute it all via Substack. This offers greater flexibility in how information is consumed and shared.

Subscribers will see reduced pricing as Harris consolidates separate podcast and newsletter subscriptions, and he will offer free subscriptions to those who can't afford to pay.

Annual subscribers of both the podcast and newsletter will benefit from reduced pricing due to the consolidation. Furthermore, Harris promises to extend additional free months to existing subscribers to offset the inconvenience of the earlier separation. Harris also plans to offer free subscriptions to those unable to afford them, a gesture made viable by the support of the broader paying audience.

Harris's subscription-based business model allows him the freedom to be honest and take unpopular stances without the constraints of advertisers or audience metrics that plague many other media figures.

Harris expresses appreciation for his paying subscribers, whose support fosters a business model that endows him with the liberty to openly discuss any topic. He reveals that eschewing sponsorship and disregarding audience metrics has allowed him to tackle controversial issues candidly.

Harris finds that not having sponsors has granted him the unique freedom to explore thoughts openly and manage a thriving enterpri ...

Sam Harris discusses the value of intellectual authority and expertise, acknowledging the difference between relying on authority and recognizing the necessity of expertise in various fields.

There is value in recognizing and relying on expertise and intellectual authority, even though arguments should not be made solely based on appeals to authority.

Harris underscores that acknowledging the expertise of specialists, like physicists or oncologists such as Siddhartha Mukherjee, is essential and sensible. He insists that relying on intellectual authority, while not foolproof, typically leads to fewer mistakes than completely disregarding it. This is much like using currency as a practical substitute for barter, Harris suggests that authority serves as a proxy for understanding in complex areas of knowledge.

However, Harris criticizes the idea of "doing your own research" on the internet, noting that it often leads to confirmation bias and the discounting of mainstream experts. He observes that this process inevitably entails trusting new, possibly less credible, authorities who simply confirm what someone wants to believe, often with a conspiratorial or contrarian slant.

Although Harris concedes there are exceptions to the reliability of experts and institutions, and that new authorities can emerge from conducting original research, he emphasizes that cases where experts are wrong or co ...

The COVID-19 pandemic has not only been a global health crisis but also a catalyst for the widespread dissemination of misinformation and conspiracy theories.

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed significant failures in how scientific information was communicated, which has fueled a rise in skepticism towards institutions and expertise.

Harris observes that the pandemic has illuminated significant inadequacies in the communication of scientific information, which has led to a burgeoning skepticism towards institutions and expertise. This skepticism, he suggests, is creating a culture of conspiracy, particularly prevalent on the political right, where adverse outcomes are not deemed the result of error or incompetence but of nefarious, intentional actions.

However, this skepticism has been greatly amplified and distorted by political polarization, with conspiracy theories and misinformation spreading rapidly on social media.

The skepticism instigated by misinformation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and failures in scientific communication, Harris argues, is being exploited as a pretext by those who are against free speech and favor governmental censorship. He adds that conspiracy theories and misinformation are vastly magnified by political polarization. Public figures like Trump and Musk amplify this issue significantly through their social media use.

Figures like RFK Jr., who have no genuine intellectual reputation to maintain, are able to spread dangerous falsehoods without consequence, in contrast to credentialed experts who face professional repercussions for misconduct.

RFK Jr. is characterized as a purveyor of misinformation who capitalizes on his lack of a genuine intellectual reputation to spread falsehoods about vaccines without enduring damage to his credibility. In contrast, real scientists and scholars, unlike RFK Jr., face significant professional consequences for misconduct. Harris notes that RFK Jr. flourishes in a "parallel reality," where discredited individuals like Andrew Wakefield are still regarded as credible.

Harris stresses that in "Trumpistan," a term he uses to describe an environment with a flagrant disregard for intellectual integrity, misinformation can proliferate without repercussi ...

Sam Harris addresses the behaviors and actions of Donald Trump and Elon Musk, particularly focusing on their use of social media to amplify harmful rhetoric.

Trump and Musk have used social media to amplify divisive rhetoric, conspiracy theories, and misinformation, contributing to the deterioration of public discourse.

Harris argues that both figures have utilized social media platforms as tools to foster division and disseminate false narratives. He criticizes those who dismiss substantive critiques and reports, such as the Mueller report or the findings of the January 6th Commission, as cultish, pointing out that Trump's corruption has been openly evident without the need for alleged hidden conspiracies.

Trump has repeatedly made false claims, such as the "very fine people" comment about Charlottesville, that have been debunked but continue to persist in the public consciousness.

Harris calls into question the widely held belief among left-leaning individuals that Trump praised neo-Nazis and white supremacists as "very fine people" following the Charlottesville rally. He claims that this belief is rooted in an edited clip and, upon reviewing Trump's full remarks, is ultimately untrue.

Musk has used his platform to spread dangerous lies and defamatory claims, while framing himself as a champion of free speech and a defender against censorship.

Musk has been critiqued by Harris for his role in spreading misinformation and sabotaging public conversation under the guise of protecting free speech. Musk, Harris contends, is one of the most significant "arsonists" of political, intellectual, and moral culture, as he has amplified problematic content through algorithms while positioning himself as a savior of open dialogue.

The incentives and psychological factors that dr ...