« Coffee With Scott Adams

Episode 238 Scott Adams: False Memories, Kavanaugh and Confirmation

2018-09-28 | 🔗


  • More and more of the public now understands that…
    • One or both could have false memories
    • They can BOTH be telling the truth, as they remember it
  • Facts don’t matter, more and more people see that clearly now
  • The 4 or 5 undecided votes in the Senate are running the country
  • Alan Dershowitz says there should be an investigation before proceeding

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

The post Episode 238 Scott Adams: False Memories, Kavanaugh and Confirmation appeared first on Dilbert Blog.

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
but a bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump bump everybody coordinator her lower server hello mike a other people jerry fuzzy jim tyler in early also your name aloud it's quite a treat and now we have a thousand people at this time for the simultaneous at the best of the day grab muggy tell us your vessel you're a cop your glass filler we ve ever beverage lift it your lips and enjoy the simultaneous somebody mentioned the name feinstein in the comments just now and
love every time the president miss pronounces rename has feinstein i always think to myself what does he do that intentionally does not care or is it just confuse like most of us are on whether steamers time so let's talk first about all the inconsistency is so there's is general feeling i'm hearing in the pundits the funds are saying there people are lying about the little stuff that's it indication that they're lying about the big stuff so if somebody was definitely lying about the little details that should take away the credibility of what they say about the big point
well i disagree that only in this case anyway there might be some general sense with its true but in this particular case you have two people forward and cavanaugh who were as it advocates that are not really there to tell the truth there both eating for their life their fighting for the fate of the country there failure fighting for their families that are fighting for their reputations neither cavanaugh nor ford are there to tell us the truth and on some surface level less whether there but their advocates their advocates through there to win and in those situations when you have less say the question of
did christine ford really remember she only had one beer but she couldn't remember these other details well let's sworder ridiculous did kevin really never drink to black out or never drink too much or never have a time when he drank so much you didn't remember some details what happened well what sort of ridiculous did we have the drinking age wrong did even is characterized by a year when the legal age changed at nineteen eighty two now it doesn't really matter because you should expect them both them would lie on all the little stuff the expectations should be the both advocates will shade the little stuff as much as possible to the point where is just a lie
so when when they talk about whether they had one beer or whether somebody knew somebody in the sort of thing should expect both them all lying by shading and etc so don't make any conclusion about whether they were honest about the little stuff because are not there to tell you the truth there advocates let's talk about jeff lake so just like one of the swing boats has come out and announced that he will vote for governor and his reasoning in his announcement was interesting
so what he said was that he was opened a hearing bowl stories but when he did he said it was impossible to know who is telling the truth and therefore you must default to the system and the system is essentially elisa ethic of the system is innocent until proven guilty so i think that's the protection that all of the republicans and the people who might vote for cabinet have now
because of these because of the hearings the testimonies i think that everybody has the same cover the jeff lake does which is they can credibly say there's no way to know what happened and once you ve said that your frida you free to vote for the one you want so i think i think confirmation is assured at this point simply because the people wanted to vote for him but found a dangerous have really good cover now now jeff lake is the perfect one to go first why why is jeff lake the perfect one to go first of the group of i think for five people who are the only ones who have made a decision if you ve
listen to me before that might be less obvious if you listen to my periscopes you know that this one's group meets in the fact they met right after the hearings so the little group of undecided so i think there were four or five of them and and then another group jeff flake when first and he tried out an approach which is we can't really now see after to fall to the system which says you're innocent until proven guilty why did jeff flake go first it's because he has less to lose he's not running for re election so he is it be testing his explanation so the other people who would like to say were jeff lake just said are gonna wait to see what the reaction and then they'll know a serve their safe or not the reaction will be safe enough because when you say there's no way to know it's pretty
yes when you look at the public that the public is split it's pretty objectively true they're reasonable people are lucky in all the evidence this available and coming to different conclusions that's all you need to know and then you just default to the system and you ve done most credible thing than a leader can do so jeff like going first is important here is the he's a canary in the coal mine he's the abc test he's the one he's the one who's going first to see if it gets killed because if he gets killed it doesn't matter that much is retiring anyway the others care more the discussion of was talk about vague memories here in a minute i'm making myself a note when i'm watching people frame the situation
they're talking about forward and cabin and their testimonies and how credible they are you're watching you what i told you what happened back in twenty fifty you watching a civilization that is that is sending to a higher level of awareness about reality this really exciting and i have said this about the whole trump administration from the beginning from even from the candidacy the eu would change the way we thought about reality now we ask you this back in twenty fifty and when i say the facts don't matter of course they matter to outcomes but in terms of our decision making we just ignore them have you ever seen a cleaner example of all the facts don't matter this is a real obvious situation where you can see people have made a decision and then they reason backwards to what the facts must be
i've decided i like heaven therefore our reason backwards to the facts of its fate memory so when i first saw this and twenty fifteen i think most of you will remember that had just sounded crazy in twenty fifty is just a few years ago to say that the facts don't matter towards decisions just seventy crazy but are you watching it it's unambiguously true that the facts don't matter in and the reason of course is we never know the facts so the facts would matter totally if we actually knew what they were but we tend to think we know the facts and we're just wrong we just believe it without having evidence so the people who were who have already risen to the higher level of let's say understanding reality
are not saying that one of them live in one of them is telling the truth anybody whose framing this as there's one liar and one telling the truth and that's the end of the story they have not yet risen to a higher level of awareness where i think much of the public not all but much of the public is starting to understand and their higher level awareness goes like this both of them could very easily be telling the truth as they understand it so if you're looking for a lie is i think you
can find any because on the little stuff of course there's shading there you know there are manipulating all the little stuff about who had a beer and stuff like that how do i get home whatever thus stoppages total bullshit but that the eu should expect that from advocates on the big question of whether the the main allegation was true to me the most likely the situation and certainly the one they should be in every conversation whether its the best explanation or not it should be prominent in every summary that both could be telling the truth as they say it so that means that both good
have faulty memories one of them could have faulty memories or we live in a simulation in which the history there isn't really set the history is variable until you confirm it so watch for people like her all though who has risen to a higher level of awareness he was already there i think you're was already there and are all those said they're both telling the truth as they say it that
is a higher level of awareness doesn't mean its accurate it just means that he is aware of that possibility being a prime possibility not just some obscure little maybe weird boston italy is the prime possibility that they're both telling the truth as they remember it and then you have to default to the process khazars not there's no other there's no other credible thing to do but default to the well known understood processes of how you handle things when you don't know the facts dr ford when asked about whether she could not remember that the main fact you know is it possible if you wouldn't remember the main fact talked about her hippocampus and chemical react
in the brain and how you would and how the brain normally remembers the big details but it's normal to be sketchy on the small details was doktor ford act then it is normal to remember the big detail wall not remembering what people war or the exact wording or simply that yes that is completely accurate scientifically backed everybody would agree
that is more likely you remember the big facts than the little effects however the question that was not asked and i wish it had been is doctor for do you believe there is such a thing as false memories being a memory expert she's gonna say yes because she knows that other people have had false memories then you follow up doktor afford the people who have false memories are they positive that their false memory is true doctor for an expert on this stuff early she she's an expert in this general field she would say i think yes those people with false memories which are fairly common and do happen in dramatic situations more often than others they are pause
and there are also wrong that's the thing without their question i feel like you now we just we just gotta good hearing now i do understand why the lawyer that the gnp higher did not go hard at her because it would have been an unnecessary abuse whatever is going on with doktor ford it's not pleasant she's not having a good time she's a victim of something whether its advance this event other events here just a baseline anxiety that she talked about she's a victim or something and there is a limit to how hard you go as someone who is clearly a victim of something so i think the geo peep probably chose right to an i'm guessing that thee
the lawyer that they hired probably had some instructions to go easy or at least not to go as hard as you would go into trial so i think they played a right but will never now i still would have liked to hear some more some more probing questions but we didn't so here's the question can people have a false memory of some of that they now so the fact that she says she knew breck cabinet which is also in dispute by the way does he doesn't know her word least an angry
in the same circles is it possible to have a false memory with a whole different person and well i've told you my story of being robbed as a bank teller and how i gave a completely hundred percent wrong are the only thing i got right was the gender when i gave my description of the robber and i know that because later i saw bank video video surveillance me being robbed and was a totally different person from my memory so i hold in my memory a perfect memory of the person who robbed me while also holding a perfect memory of looking at the video of me actually being robbed by a completely different person so there's one example in which i have a different person in my memory and its confirmed but the question is ok this was a stranger i didn't
no other person robbing me if we actually know the person can you have a false memory of somebody had no ghost that would be weird to get the wrong right well i have to one of them involved my brother a camera the details now but i remember where was telling a story in which i was the centre and the story and i did x and my brother sudden room and said you didn't do acts that was me i had i have a memory of doing something that was actually my brother doing forgetting some of the details but it was a real was like a mine blowing situation because even if you assume that my brother was the one was a false memory one of us has a false memory if now both it's still a situation of having a memory of having a memory about your own
brother that you substitute yourself for or vice versa this is that is as deep a memory as you could possibly have i also have a false memory involving my mother a very detailed story of something that happened in which when i check it with my with my mother so when she was alive i recounted the story that was about her very detailed story of involved a gun and the dog it literally involved shooting the dog now that's a sort of story that if he reaches preach dramatic right somebody actually shooting a dog and in the story was my mother shooting doth or actually threatening to shoot neighbours dog is a neighbour stalk attacked our dog so the story was a little
the dramatic does our dog got even got pretty chewed up by the neighbors dog in my recounting of it my mother took her gun which we kept loaded and leading the corner behind the front door to story we had a loaded a loaded gun leaned in the corner of my kitchen just all the time case we needed it when you grow up in the country that's actually more normal than anything it was actually there because they were animals would get in the garden and my mother would go out and shoot the rabbit or whatever was that wasn't the garden so my mother was one she use the gun with and my memory is that she went to the neighbours with her gun loaded knocked at the door and said your dog just attacked our dog you ve got two choices you can either shoot you or you can watch me shoe your dog and
the neighbour when the back and shot his dog now i recounted that story to my mother and i and she said never happened and i said well maybe you got some of the details wrong the basic idea that you went to his house and told them to kill dog or you would and you had your gun you at the time that parts true right and you and she said nope nope nothin like that a rapid look out detailed the stories and my mother either my mother or i have a complete false memory because how would you forget that right so far more likely there my memory was the false one because she has the negative memory of it and you would remember something like that right that's that's really not the kind of thing you forget if you were the principal
then let me give you another one so last night and this literally happened it sort of mine blowing la while i was lucky and social media and talking about this false memory stuff i got into a conversation with christina my girlfriend and which i recounted a story that she and i a conversation we had i remember the place we were i remember talking about it i remember how it made me feel i remember how it made me feel after the fact and ever since that moment it had a sort of a lasting impact on me but it didn't happen and so i told the story of a very detailed event that involved chris tina and a conversation with her but she presented evidence that i think is completely confirms that that conversation never happened you don't need to know the details
but i have a complete false memory that i know now is a false memory and it doesn't change the memory i still have a complete memory of something that didn't happen and i know it didn't happen because her her counter argument was perfect so can drugs effect memory yeah lots of things can affect memories so can time and so can therapy those two things we know will affect memory let's go on so can you have a false memory that involves someone you know the answer is yes i've had them i've had them incomplete form with details and
as in so anytime i see this conversation announced reading about this this morning so i tweeted around a number of stories talking about the unreliability of eye witnesses now if it true that i witnesses are deeply unreliable and the science is very clear how different would there be if you were the subject of the event now the thing it makes eyewitness accounts unreliable were the thing that makes them more unreliable relatively is when there's any kind of shock or trauma or your your fighter your fighter flight instincts get elevated so whenever it's happening your memory suffers so thy witnesses if they if they watch an event the sort of routine they might remember it better than if somebody came
and then committed a crime and somebody at her and then suddenly ran away under the latter situation there are less likely to have the same memory because because era emotions are jacked up at them one of the event now if you're the one who is being attacked your memory should be jacked up far more early sheer emotions would be jacked up even more than witnesses so somebody standing right next to you getting attacked would have in theory and unreliable memory because eye witnesses are unreliable but the person being attacked would have even more of that effect in other words they have more trauma they would have more personal involvement so i don't know if that specifically has been studied but if you're using your kind of sense of reason that is
that is the thing that makes your memory unreliable the amount of emotion that goes into it then the person having the most emotion probably has the least reliable memory now what does things i've taught you way before any this cavern or stuff came up is that if two people have different memory or a different surveys one of them is seeing an elephant in the room and the other person's right next you and they don't see the elephant which warm is telling the truth well it's usually the person who doesn't see the thing who doesn't see the memory that's a person is usually telling the truth not every time right but my experience i can't think of any exceptions is the person whose invented the elephant whose having the hallucination and so with these memories if you have somebody who says i was there and somebody said now i would remember that usual
i will rely on the person who whose memory says they weren't there but of courses are shared by the fact that their advocates so you you should expect you should expect neither neither cavenaugh nor forward to be reliable witnesses because are advocates they're not they're not uninterested observers you should expect them to be unreliable both of them and therefore he after default system because you can't decay the term issues the truth now what about the one about the simulation in other smartly like you learn mosque in people like me say that were probable reality is probably a simulation and if it is the creators of simulation would want to reserve or conserve resources unless they knew them so they
would not create a reality that had every possibility and every history this complete and fits it would just be too hard to programme will be harder than it needs to be you would instead have the past determined by the present whenever it needed so the past would be developed on demand and that allows for the fact that there could be to legitimate pass that people believe in at the same time that neither of them is they're both simulations so you're not ready to accept this this better than this explanation of reality and i understand but you will you get
where it so in my world it is more likely that both of them are telling the truth and that they both have a valid history the supports their truth but that's because we live in a simulation and since there is no way to decide which one is true they can both be true forever because there's nothing that makes that requires them to be solved now let's talk about the talk about the people who are talking about this the people were talking about the ford verse cabin was situate
if they don't mention in every major conversation that eye witness reports and memories and memories are unreliable there either anti science or other they're just advocates and you can ignore them you can ignore anybody was just an advocate and so look for the people who are willing to say ok listen less understand the it's it's are very unreliable and this is true of cabinet and it's it's true afford it's true view is treated me memories are very unreliable and if that's not part of every conversation then somebody's being illegitimate and even talking about it so the so in summary you should expect the both cavenaugh and ford are
intentionally lying about the little stuff because their advocates they're not there to tell the truth or through there to get a result so they're probably lying about what how much beer they had and how certain they are about their memories and stuff like that now you want to see another false memory that happened today here's one already this is on twitter this is some are having a false memory written from here to see our common it is here's a tweet this is a tweet from somebody named gregg just random person on the internet on twitter and he says
how about words most credible witness her lifelong female friend she emphatically says it didn't happen as do all the remember witnesses that's why it's obvious christine's having false memories this tweet is based entirely on a false memory the friend said she didn't remember it the friend did not say it didn't happen so this very tweet about the situation is bad entirely on false memory there was no memory of christine ford's friend saying this didn't happen no memory that but this person believes they have a full memory of reading a news reporters in news report in which the friend said it didn't happen
the only thing the friend said that she has no memory of it as completely different than i have a memory of it not happening very different so false memories are the norm our memories are terrible we are learning so much during the trumpet administration about how reality is constructed were learning the facts don't matter were learning that our system is not what you thought it was in this supreme court decision one is what is the process for picking a supreme court person what is the process reconfirmation mistaken formation specifically if you live in the second dimension you say to yourself oh well
the present nominated somebody the senate does advice and concerned they have to get majority by love so that's what your impression is of how the world works or it was what do you think now you saw the mostly everybody made their decision without regard to the facts they just joined their team and then they reason backwards to why they must be right you also this right you also that the facts of the matter to the vast majority of people now there's a small group the four or five people who had not decided yet in lake is now left that group as he's decided but the entire decision of of who gets on the supreme court came down to four or five people i'm not wrong emma they do
about who got on the supreme court was not the senate it didn't matter what the rest of the senate did it only mattered what does four or five people did because they the only ones who matter only once a matter so that's our system we have a system where four or five people get to decide who is on the supreme court that's what we're watching right now for five people deciding and i'm not even sure those four or five or deciding do you know i told you before that there it's more like the four or five or hiding than this then deciding because they needed to
i'd until everything that could be known was out and then they could find something to be their fake because you saw a jeff just lake his fake because was ok now we ve heard everybody and is unreliable size and now it's safe for me to say since we can't tell we have to go with young innocent until proven guilty and we have to conserve research conserve the system so to speak preserve the system yeah so here's what i asked myself given that only four or five people are running the show why would you ever vote with a majority look if you imagine the scenario imagine that senators scott adams gets elected
so one day one i get elected and it doesnt matter which party him in but let's say well done matter in this case let's say maybe it doesn't matter let's say i am yeah doesn't matter which party on them so get elected it doesn't matter if i get elected democratic republican what's the first thing i do take power to essentially overthrow the government all i do is not vote with my party every time you get that if i became senator i could run the country as one senator just by not reliably voting for my party every time i would be the only one who is making the decision because it is these votes are coming down to one vote and i would be the vote now if i would if i got elected by either party democratic group looking and then i just always voted with my party
power would i have none i would have no power i would not be part of the decision making process not any important way but by sometimes going against my group and always waiting for the last minute like this little group of four or five swing voters they have effectively taken over the country you it is right that there are only four or five senators who run everything now they're deciding whose and spin course they're going to decide upon the care yo healthcare they're gonna they're going to decide on probably prison reform there probably going to be the important swing votes on taxes and only four or five people that's it there the country and if you get elected to the senate and you immediately join a team and just vote for the team why you're afraid eddie it you're in it
it ll unreported another way therefore five smart people in the senate and then or a bunch of idiots because of the four or five and make it all the disease science and and the others are just sort of are i'm a republican i'm a democrat republican rare on the democratic ran for five people go and say well let's make this decision when you think jeff when you want to dinner yes mccain for all of mccain's you alleged in real faults mccain was simply smarter than most of the people because he was willing to cross eyes willing to talk to the other side that gave him real power i'll drink to that
i believe i have talked about everything i want one talk about so often double down on my prediction that the republicans have enough cover to vote for this to date and that cabin or will be confirmed yes and the same thing with the supreme court now when people say you were putting these justices on the supreme court
and the supreme court will decide you know if it's if it's a conservative majority they're gonna do bunch a conservative stuff therefore we have to be really careful we put on the supreme court and i would say back up a little bit you're missing it you're missing it back up the four or five people who decided if he gets confirmed they're the ones who are deciding all the future decisions the supreme court is a given you know that the supreme court is gonna line up by jordi most of the time they just go liner by majority so the supreme court doesn't really make decisions anymore i think there might have been time maybe i could be corrected in this there might have been a time when the supreme court actually made decisions bob we're not in those times all you need is a majority of either the liberal side with image or the conservative neil you already know the decision is before us even is even picked up by the supreme court sentences
genes will now be made by the four or five senators who can go either way that's it somebody's asking about dershowitz i've said many times that i like the wait until dershowitz speaks to have an opinion because his legal opinion this is just better than everybody else's and he's one of the few people who again an opinion on both sides of the isle so dershowitz is sort of like those four or five senators he has wisely used wisely staked anna position where he can go laughed and he can go right and therefore he can be credible in a way that people can be so it sort of a superpower and he's smart enough to know it he has suggested that the the confirmation should wait until the situation is investigated i think you suggesting the fbi but he's talking about doing an investigation and those of you ve been watching dershowitz
the seemingly support the president in various opinions but really has just supporting the law and the law supports the president and the number of cases is confused because it feels like wait a minute why is dershowitz trying to hold up this nomination is he a secret democrat and the answer is now he's not a secret democrat he is he's a public democrat he says explicitly he would not prefer this this candidates opinions on the supreme court but he would like to see investigation now lemme give you my opinion on that it's the same thing i said i also said i don't see any reason to not have investigation because there's nothing you can do it can't change the result so it is if you if you don't have one you can see
we argue that it wouldn't have changed the result people may or may not believe that if you do have one we should say oh well we had one and it turns out it was a big nothing because the only thing the f b i can do is talk to other witnesses and it wouldn't matter with the other witnesses said it wouldn't matter it wouldn't matter if if some the wit some extra witnesses confirmed one side or the other they wouldn't matter
still just hearsay it's bad memory its ancient all the decisions are made so the best argument against ellen dershowitz is that we know the decision will be changed but i think he knows that as well i think dershowitz knows that investigation won't change in that decision but it is fair and credible of him to say in this case an investigation would make everybody feel better about the system and credibility the way you feel about the system the credibility does matter is part of the credibility of the glue that holds the whole thing together so if you lose your blue offals apart so nurse you it is correct that a investigation even at this
a date would make the country more comfortable but there is also a little extra risk pigeon ever never know you never know if your investigation is gonna kick up something that's a whore unrelated matter that the f b i can't ignore right so others extra risk if i were the president or the republican senators i would push through with the vote and i would get this behind us as quickly as possible if i were ellen dershowitz i think his brand is who is well served by exactly his position because his brand is trying to be credible no matter which way that falls and his position of young wine up let's listen a little extra credibility will extra certainty theirs
not really a chance is gonna change the result but it might make us feel different about the result that's that's a pretty credible credible strategy credible opinion even if you disagree with it is completely well grounded well reasoned and credible as is based lee everything dershowitz is by the way i look at ellen dershowitz at age eighty and then look at the senators who work war questioning the ear the folks yesterday by eighty is not the same thing for different people as it dershowitz at age eighty looks and acts like aged sixty i'll even seem losing anything a unit you can see a trace of anything different at av i mean that's pretty impressive but you look at some of the centre
hers senator feinstein lane or an hatch those guys they do clearly sam the impression that they have lost the step so areas and eighty anymore dershowitz is impressive and trumpet seventy two is certainly a whole different character than a lotta people seventy two i do the term which answers offensive to witches yeah i mentioned yesterday that watching this watching cavenaugh respond to the senators fell like elder abuse because the senators just war on his level intellectually they
they just clearly have lost a step and no matter what you think about the situation it has i think it pulled the lid back on who it is who is in charge and it's scary to see that the senior citizens who have quite obviously lost a step are making important decisions that's a big deal i think we we're to fix it but beyond that we wherever we have a more complicated environment we have new technology new new issues new questions and i think you need more diversification in sent so we should diversify the senate in every way that that make sense so we should diversify more women we should have more ethnic representation gazettes what looks like the country but we should also have some some science people some engineer
in the senate benin having all aging lawyers or a seemingly all aging lawyers is not diversification forget about the fact that most of them are old white guys i mean that's that's a risk profile by itself just because you don't have enough perspectives but the fact that they don't understand technology and they never will and their aid and technology will be all the important decisions in the future this is not a good look you need some younger people on there some more diversity i think we ve covered it i think we ve said everything we need to say and now it's time to get back to work
hey people back to work deserve any convey decision on when the vote will happen i haven't heard there in the coming days i'm gonna be talking about my companies at the interface by when her back there's some exciting things happening that i think have implications for the bigger world and implication for you all you watching this so if you don't mind i want to warn you in advance to be talking about the app not today but soon and pretty exciting stuff happening so we'll talk about that later and i will see you soon
Transcript generated on 2020-04-01.