<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" encoding="UTF-8" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:googleplay="http://www.google.com/schemas/play-podcasts/1.0" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:fireside="http://fireside.fm/modules/rss/fireside">
  <channel>
    <fireside:hostname>web02.fireside.fm</fireside:hostname>
    <fireside:genDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 21:35:34 -0500</fireside:genDate>
    <generator>Fireside (https://fireside.fm)</generator>
    <title>Increments - Episodes Tagged with “Polarization”</title>
    <link>https://www.incrementspodcast.com/tags/polarization</link>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2020 20:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
    <description>Vaden Masrani, a senior research scientist in machine learning, and Ben Chugg, a PhD student in statistics, get into trouble arguing about everything except machine learning and statistics. Coherence is somewhere on the horizon. 
Bribes, suggestions, love-mail and hate-mail all welcome at incrementspodcast@gmail.com. 
</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <itunes:type>episodic</itunes:type>
    <itunes:subtitle>Science, Philosophy, Epistemology, Mayhem</itunes:subtitle>
    <itunes:author>Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani</itunes:author>
    <itunes:summary>Vaden Masrani, a senior research scientist in machine learning, and Ben Chugg, a PhD student in statistics, get into trouble arguing about everything except machine learning and statistics. Coherence is somewhere on the horizon. 
Bribes, suggestions, love-mail and hate-mail all welcome at incrementspodcast@gmail.com. 
</itunes:summary>
    <itunes:image href="https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-images-2024/podcasts/images/3/3229e340-4bf1-42a5-a5b7-4f508a27131c/cover.jpg?v=18"/>
    <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
    <itunes:keywords>Philosophy,Science,Ethics,Progress,Knowledge,Computer Science,Conversation,Error-Correction</itunes:keywords>
    <itunes:owner>
      <itunes:name>Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani</itunes:name>
      <itunes:email>incrementspodcast@gmail.com</itunes:email>
    </itunes:owner>
<itunes:category text="Society &amp; Culture">
  <itunes:category text="Philosophy"/>
</itunes:category>
<itunes:category text="Science"/>
<item>
  <title>#15 - Social Media I: Manipulation, Outrage, and Documentaries </title>
  <link>https://www.incrementspodcast.com/15</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="false">Buzzsprout-6336580</guid>
  <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2020 20:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
  <author>Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani</author>
  <enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/https://chrt.fm/track/1F5B4D/aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/3229e340-4bf1-42a5-a5b7-4f508a27131c/6407aa50-d336-4399-9009-500eeb199729.mp3" length="59431179" type="audio/mpeg"/>
  <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
  <itunes:author>Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani</itunes:author>
  <itunes:subtitle></itunes:subtitle>
  <itunes:duration>1:22:29</itunes:duration>
  <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
  <itunes:image href="https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-images-2024/podcasts/images/3/3229e340-4bf1-42a5-a5b7-4f508a27131c/cover.jpg?v=18"/>
  <description>&lt;p&gt;Alright spiders, point this at your brain. Ben and Vaden do a deep dive into the recent Netflix documentary &lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Dilemma" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;The Social Dilemma&lt;/a&gt; and have a genuine debate, just like the good ol' days.  Topics touched:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Why Vaden dislikes documentaries, and this one in particular&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Is reliance on social media a problem?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;The advertisement model&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;The relationship between social media and mental health&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;... and political polarization&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;... and outrage in general&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Epistemological erosion&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Wars of words and swords&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;p&gt;Outraged? Polarized? Radicalized, even?  We want to hear about it at incrementspodcast@gmail.com.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Quotes referenced in episode:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;"This point being crossed is at the root of addiction, polarization, radicalization, outrageification, vanityification, the entire thing. This is overpowering human nature, and this is checkmate on humanity."&lt;br&gt;&lt;em&gt;- Tristan Harris, The Social Dilemma&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;"If we go down the current status quo for, let's say, another 20 years... we probably destroy our civilization through willful ignorance. We probably fail to meet the challenge of climate change. We probably degrade the world's democracies so that they fall into some sort of bizarre autocratic dysfunction. We probably ruin the global economy.  Uh, we probably, um, don't survive.  You know, I... I really do view it as existential."&lt;br&gt;&lt;em&gt;- Jaron Lanier, The Social Dilemma &lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;"We're pointing these engines of AI back at ourselves to reverse-engineer what elicits responses from us. Almost like you're stimulating nerve cells on a spider to see what causes its legs to respond. So, it really is this kind of prison experiment where we're just, you know, roping people into the matrix, and we're just harvesting all this money and... and data from all their activity to profit from."&lt;br&gt;&lt;em&gt;- Tristan Harris, The Social Dilemma&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/em&gt;"Although I am an admirer of tradition, and conscious of its importance, I am, at the same time, an almost orthodox adherent of unorthodoxy: &lt;em&gt;I hold that orthodoxy is the death of knowledge, since the growth of knowledge depends entirely on the existence of disagreement.&lt;/em&gt; Admittedly, disagreement &lt;em&gt;may&lt;/em&gt; lead to strife, and even to violence. And this, I think, is very bad indeed, for I abhor violence. Yet disagreement may also lead to discussion, to argument, and to mutual criticism. And these, I think, are of paramount importance. I suggest that the greatest step towards a better and more peaceful world was taken when the war of swords was first supported, and later sometimes even replaced, by a war of words."&lt;br&gt;&lt;em&gt;- Karl Popper, The Myth Of The Framework&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;References:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1se6POdUcWM" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;Welcome to the Cult Factory&lt;/a&gt; (Tristan Harris's latest appearance on Making Sense)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href="https://tinyurl.com/y4mf3zbr" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;Michael Moore’s 13 Rules for Making Documentary Films&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href="https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4596" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;How to assess a documentary&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;a href="https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/twitter-is-not-the-echo-chamber-we-think-it-is" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;Twitter Study&lt;/a&gt; showing only 1% of users are polarized, and the rest moderate&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;a href="https://tinyurl.com/rleutwl" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;Literature review of social media use and mental health&lt;/a&gt; by Jonathan Haidt and Jean Twenge. Conclusion? It's complicated.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;a href="https://tinyurl.com/y5l4e5w7" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;Study showing&lt;/a&gt; self reports of time spent on social media are not reliable. This is relevant because most studies showing a link between social media use and deteriorating mental health rely on self reports. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;a href="https://www.amazon.ca/Not-Born-Yesterday-Science-Believe/dp/0691178704" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;Not Born Yesterday&lt;/a&gt; by Hugo Mercier&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;p&gt;Errata: &lt;br&gt;Vaden keeps saying "Jared Lanier" when it should be "Jaron Lanier". Oops!&lt;/p&gt; 
</description>
  <itunes:keywords>social media, documentaries, disagreement, polarization, echo chambers</itunes:keywords>
  <content:encoded>
    <![CDATA[<p>Alright spiders, point this at your brain. Ben and Vaden do a deep dive into the recent Netflix documentary <a href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Dilemma'>The Social Dilemma</a> and have a genuine debate, just like the good ol&apos; days.  Topics touched:</p><ul><li>Why Vaden dislikes documentaries, and this one in particular</li><li>Is reliance on social media a problem?</li><li>The advertisement model</li><li>The relationship between social media and mental health</li><li>... and political polarization</li><li>... and outrage in general</li><li>Epistemological erosion</li><li>Wars of words and swords</li></ul><p>Outraged? Polarized? Radicalized, even?  We want to hear about it at incrementspodcast@gmail.com.<br/><br/>Quotes referenced in episode:<br/><br/>&quot;This point being crossed is at the root of addiction, polarization, radicalization, outrageification, vanityification, the entire thing. This is overpowering human nature, and this is checkmate on humanity.&quot;<br/><em>- Tristan Harris, The Social Dilemma</em><br/><br/>&quot;If we go down the current status quo for, let&apos;s say, another 20 years... we probably destroy our civilization through willful ignorance. We probably fail to meet the challenge of climate change. We probably degrade the world&apos;s democracies so that they fall into some sort of bizarre autocratic dysfunction. We probably ruin the global economy.  Uh, we probably, um, don&apos;t survive.  You know, I... I really do view it as existential.&quot;<br/><em>- Jaron Lanier, The Social Dilemma </em><br/><br/>&quot;We&apos;re pointing these engines of AI back at ourselves to reverse-engineer what elicits responses from us. Almost like you&apos;re stimulating nerve cells on a spider to see what causes its legs to respond. So, it really is this kind of prison experiment where we&apos;re just, you know, roping people into the matrix, and we&apos;re just harvesting all this money and... and data from all their activity to profit from.&quot;<br/><em>- Tristan Harris, The Social Dilemma<br/><br/></em>&quot;Although I am an admirer of tradition, and conscious of its importance, I am, at the same time, an almost orthodox adherent of unorthodoxy: <em>I hold that orthodoxy is the death of knowledge, since the growth of knowledge depends entirely on the existence of disagreement.</em> Admittedly, disagreement <em>may</em> lead to strife, and even to violence. And this, I think, is very bad indeed, for I abhor violence. Yet disagreement may also lead to discussion, to argument, and to mutual criticism. And these, I think, are of paramount importance. I suggest that the greatest step towards a better and more peaceful world was taken when the war of swords was first supported, and later sometimes even replaced, by a war of words.&quot;<br/><em>- Karl Popper, The Myth Of The Framework</em><br/><br/>References:</p><ul><li><a href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1se6POdUcWM'>Welcome to the Cult Factory</a> (Tristan Harris&apos;s latest appearance on Making Sense)</li><li><a href='https://tinyurl.com/y4mf3zbr'>Michael Moore’s 13 Rules for Making Documentary Films</a></li><li><a href='https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4596'>How to assess a documentary</a></li><li><a href='https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/twitter-is-not-the-echo-chamber-we-think-it-is'>Twitter Study</a> showing only 1% of users are polarized, and the rest moderate</li><li><a href='https://tinyurl.com/rleutwl'>Literature review of social media use and mental health</a> by Jonathan Haidt and Jean Twenge. Conclusion? It&apos;s complicated.</li><li><a href='https://tinyurl.com/y5l4e5w7'>Study showing</a> self reports of time spent on social media are not reliable. This is relevant because most studies showing a link between social media use and deteriorating mental health rely on self reports. </li><li><a href='https://www.amazon.ca/Not-Born-Yesterday-Science-Believe/dp/0691178704'>Not Born Yesterday</a> by Hugo Mercier</li></ul><p>Errata: <br/>Vaden keeps saying &quot;Jared Lanier&quot; when it should be &quot;Jaron Lanier&quot;. Oops!</p><p><a rel="payment" href="https://www.patreon.com/Increments">Support Increments</a></p>]]>
  </content:encoded>
  <itunes:summary>
    <![CDATA[<p>Alright spiders, point this at your brain. Ben and Vaden do a deep dive into the recent Netflix documentary <a href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Dilemma'>The Social Dilemma</a> and have a genuine debate, just like the good ol&apos; days.  Topics touched:</p><ul><li>Why Vaden dislikes documentaries, and this one in particular</li><li>Is reliance on social media a problem?</li><li>The advertisement model</li><li>The relationship between social media and mental health</li><li>... and political polarization</li><li>... and outrage in general</li><li>Epistemological erosion</li><li>Wars of words and swords</li></ul><p>Outraged? Polarized? Radicalized, even?  We want to hear about it at incrementspodcast@gmail.com.<br/><br/>Quotes referenced in episode:<br/><br/>&quot;This point being crossed is at the root of addiction, polarization, radicalization, outrageification, vanityification, the entire thing. This is overpowering human nature, and this is checkmate on humanity.&quot;<br/><em>- Tristan Harris, The Social Dilemma</em><br/><br/>&quot;If we go down the current status quo for, let&apos;s say, another 20 years... we probably destroy our civilization through willful ignorance. We probably fail to meet the challenge of climate change. We probably degrade the world&apos;s democracies so that they fall into some sort of bizarre autocratic dysfunction. We probably ruin the global economy.  Uh, we probably, um, don&apos;t survive.  You know, I... I really do view it as existential.&quot;<br/><em>- Jaron Lanier, The Social Dilemma </em><br/><br/>&quot;We&apos;re pointing these engines of AI back at ourselves to reverse-engineer what elicits responses from us. Almost like you&apos;re stimulating nerve cells on a spider to see what causes its legs to respond. So, it really is this kind of prison experiment where we&apos;re just, you know, roping people into the matrix, and we&apos;re just harvesting all this money and... and data from all their activity to profit from.&quot;<br/><em>- Tristan Harris, The Social Dilemma<br/><br/></em>&quot;Although I am an admirer of tradition, and conscious of its importance, I am, at the same time, an almost orthodox adherent of unorthodoxy: <em>I hold that orthodoxy is the death of knowledge, since the growth of knowledge depends entirely on the existence of disagreement.</em> Admittedly, disagreement <em>may</em> lead to strife, and even to violence. And this, I think, is very bad indeed, for I abhor violence. Yet disagreement may also lead to discussion, to argument, and to mutual criticism. And these, I think, are of paramount importance. I suggest that the greatest step towards a better and more peaceful world was taken when the war of swords was first supported, and later sometimes even replaced, by a war of words.&quot;<br/><em>- Karl Popper, The Myth Of The Framework</em><br/><br/>References:</p><ul><li><a href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1se6POdUcWM'>Welcome to the Cult Factory</a> (Tristan Harris&apos;s latest appearance on Making Sense)</li><li><a href='https://tinyurl.com/y4mf3zbr'>Michael Moore’s 13 Rules for Making Documentary Films</a></li><li><a href='https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4596'>How to assess a documentary</a></li><li><a href='https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/twitter-is-not-the-echo-chamber-we-think-it-is'>Twitter Study</a> showing only 1% of users are polarized, and the rest moderate</li><li><a href='https://tinyurl.com/rleutwl'>Literature review of social media use and mental health</a> by Jonathan Haidt and Jean Twenge. Conclusion? It&apos;s complicated.</li><li><a href='https://tinyurl.com/y5l4e5w7'>Study showing</a> self reports of time spent on social media are not reliable. This is relevant because most studies showing a link between social media use and deteriorating mental health rely on self reports. </li><li><a href='https://www.amazon.ca/Not-Born-Yesterday-Science-Believe/dp/0691178704'>Not Born Yesterday</a> by Hugo Mercier</li></ul><p>Errata: <br/>Vaden keeps saying &quot;Jared Lanier&quot; when it should be &quot;Jaron Lanier&quot;. Oops!</p><p><a rel="payment" href="https://www.patreon.com/Increments">Support Increments</a></p>]]>
  </itunes:summary>
</item>
<item>
  <title>#12 (C&amp;R Series, Ch. 17) - Public Opinion and Liberal Principles</title>
  <link>https://www.incrementspodcast.com/12</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="false">Buzzsprout-5860924</guid>
  <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
  <author>Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani</author>
  <enclosure url="https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/https://chrt.fm/track/1F5B4D/aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/3229e340-4bf1-42a5-a5b7-4f508a27131c/0d11e797-56c1-45a5-9196-b8dcd25591c0.mp3" length="54366956" type="audio/mpeg"/>
  <itunes:episodeType>full</itunes:episodeType>
  <itunes:author>Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani</itunes:author>
  <itunes:subtitle></itunes:subtitle>
  <itunes:duration>1:15:27</itunes:duration>
  <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
  <itunes:image href="https://media24.fireside.fm/file/fireside-images-2024/podcasts/images/3/3229e340-4bf1-42a5-a5b7-4f508a27131c/cover.jpg?v=18"/>
  <description>&lt;p&gt;In the lead up to the American presidential election, one of the largest and most consequential expressions of public opinion, Ben and Vaden do what they always do and ask: "What does Popper say about this?" The second in the Conjectures and Refutations series, we cover Chapter 17: &lt;a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/6a6xkqlw7q5psx5/public_opinion.pdf?dl=0" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"&gt;Public Opinion and Liberal Principles&lt;/a&gt;.  Largely irrelevant and probably unhelpful, we touch &lt;/p&gt;&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;A thesis that the far left and right are converging vis-a-vis reactionary politics&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;The idea that "truth is manifest", i.e. obvious &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;The role of free speech and diversity of opinion&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Political polarization&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Libertarians and their hate of seatbelts&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;p&gt;Send us some hate or some love at incrementspodcast@gmail.com. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Chapter excerpt:&lt;br&gt;&lt;em&gt;The following remarks were designed to provide material for debate at an international conference of liberals (...). My purpose was simply to lay the foundations for a good general discussion. Because I could assume liberal views in my audience I was largely concerned to challenge, rather than endorse, popular assumptions favourable to these views.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt; 
</description>
  <itunes:keywords>horseshoe politics, public opinion, polarization, free speech, diversity</itunes:keywords>
  <content:encoded>
    <![CDATA[<p>In the lead up to the American presidential election, one of the largest and most consequential expressions of public opinion, Ben and Vaden do what they always do and ask: &quot;What does Popper say about this?&quot; The second in the Conjectures and Refutations series, we cover Chapter 17: <a href='https://www.dropbox.com/s/6a6xkqlw7q5psx5/public_opinion.pdf?dl=0'>Public Opinion and Liberal Principles</a>.  Largely irrelevant and probably unhelpful, we touch </p><ul><li>A thesis that the far left and right are converging vis-a-vis reactionary politics</li><li>The idea that &quot;truth is manifest&quot;, i.e. obvious </li><li>The role of free speech and diversity of opinion</li><li>Political polarization</li><li>Libertarians and their hate of seatbelts</li></ul><p>Send us some hate or some love at incrementspodcast@gmail.com. <br/><br/>Chapter excerpt:<br/><em>The following remarks were designed to provide material for debate at an international conference of liberals (...). My purpose was simply to lay the foundations for a good general discussion. Because I could assume liberal views in my audience I was largely concerned to challenge, rather than endorse, popular assumptions favourable to these views.</em><br/><br/></p><p><a rel="payment" href="https://www.patreon.com/Increments">Support Increments</a></p>]]>
  </content:encoded>
  <itunes:summary>
    <![CDATA[<p>In the lead up to the American presidential election, one of the largest and most consequential expressions of public opinion, Ben and Vaden do what they always do and ask: &quot;What does Popper say about this?&quot; The second in the Conjectures and Refutations series, we cover Chapter 17: <a href='https://www.dropbox.com/s/6a6xkqlw7q5psx5/public_opinion.pdf?dl=0'>Public Opinion and Liberal Principles</a>.  Largely irrelevant and probably unhelpful, we touch </p><ul><li>A thesis that the far left and right are converging vis-a-vis reactionary politics</li><li>The idea that &quot;truth is manifest&quot;, i.e. obvious </li><li>The role of free speech and diversity of opinion</li><li>Political polarization</li><li>Libertarians and their hate of seatbelts</li></ul><p>Send us some hate or some love at incrementspodcast@gmail.com. <br/><br/>Chapter excerpt:<br/><em>The following remarks were designed to provide material for debate at an international conference of liberals (...). My purpose was simply to lay the foundations for a good general discussion. Because I could assume liberal views in my audience I was largely concerned to challenge, rather than endorse, popular assumptions favourable to these views.</em><br/><br/></p><p><a rel="payment" href="https://www.patreon.com/Increments">Support Increments</a></p>]]>
  </itunes:summary>
</item>
  </channel>
</rss>
