• spectre [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Idk exactly what his deal is, but I know he would disagree with many of the hivemijd Hexbear takes, though often in a reasoned and well-read way. At the same time I find his presentation to often be opaque, especially when he’s solo.

    • YearOfTheCommieDesktop [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, he clearly reads a lot but he really doesn’t seem to put a lot of thought into making himself comprehensible. He would benefit from like, doing some scripting and editing to be more concise rather than putting out hours a day of content (I added up a random month from this spring, 26 hours of youtube video uploaded in 1 month.)

      I found the videos that I tried to listen to previously, it was the Cybernetics/Viable Systems Model one. Seemingly interesting content (to me at least) but he has like, the incomprehensibility of a dense philosophy book, without the richness of content and specificity, and ability to read and re-read until it makes sense.

      I’m going to try the Byung Chul Han episode because I’ve actually read that book.

    • YearOfTheCommieDesktop [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The Byung Chul Han episode was pretty dull actually. He picked a random, very short chapter from the book, nitpicked his way through it, and then talked about it in a way that offered few real insights besides what one would already get from the book (and idk how clear those would have been if I didn’t have a copy handy that I’d already read to follow along with). His conclusions were fine I guess (basically just that he agrees with the chapter of the book but wishes it elaborated in certain spots and was structured differently). The most interesting thing I got from the video was actually his off hand meta comment on being wary of the “ecstasy in theory”, making sure that what you read doesn’t just feel profound, but actually corresponds with reality,