Peter Thiel

And he suffers from the extreme delusion that now that he has a Nobel Prize, he finally has academic freedom and can talk about whatever he would like to talk about. There are all sorts of areas that are very taboo in the sciences. I mean, question Darwinism or question stem cell research or... question, you know, climate change. These are very dangerous areas.

And he suffers from the extreme delusion that now that he has a Nobel Prize, he finally has academic freedom and can talk about whatever he would like to talk about. There are all sorts of areas that are very taboo in the sciences. I mean, question Darwinism or question stem cell research or... question, you know, climate change. These are very dangerous areas.

And he suffers from the extreme delusion that now that he has a Nobel Prize, he finally has academic freedom and can talk about whatever he would like to talk about. There are all sorts of areas that are very taboo in the sciences. I mean, question Darwinism or question stem cell research or... question, you know, climate change. These are very dangerous areas.

But he picked one of those even more dangerous than any of those three. He believed that most of the scientists, so-called scientists, were basically stealing money from the government, engaging in borderline fraudulent science, or it was incrementalist, not worth much. You know, his area of special, his area of focus was high-temperature superconductivity.

But he picked one of those even more dangerous than any of those three. He believed that most of the scientists, so-called scientists, were basically stealing money from the government, engaging in borderline fraudulent science, or it was incrementalist, not worth much. You know, his area of special, his area of focus was high-temperature superconductivity.

But he picked one of those even more dangerous than any of those three. He believed that most of the scientists, so-called scientists, were basically stealing money from the government, engaging in borderline fraudulent science, or it was incrementalist, not worth much. You know, his area of special, his area of focus was high-temperature superconductivity.

And he told me at one point there were maybe 50,000 papers written in that area and maybe 25 out of 50,000 had actually advanced the science at all. And, you know, I don't even need to tell you how the, and then, you know, he started by, yeah, it was not just the abstract replication crisis.

And he told me at one point there were maybe 50,000 papers written in that area and maybe 25 out of 50,000 had actually advanced the science at all. And, you know, I don't even need to tell you how the, and then, you know, he started by, yeah, it was not just the abstract replication crisis.

And he told me at one point there were maybe 50,000 papers written in that area and maybe 25 out of 50,000 had actually advanced the science at all. And, you know, I don't even need to tell you how the, and then, you know, he started by, yeah, it was not just the abstract replication crisis.

He started by talking about naming people and, you know, this person has stole money and this person is a fraud. And I mean, I don't even need to tell you how that movie ended. He promptly got defunded. His students couldn't get PhDs anymore.

He started by talking about naming people and, you know, this person has stole money and this person is a fraud. And I mean, I don't even need to tell you how that movie ended. He promptly got defunded. His students couldn't get PhDs anymore.

He started by talking about naming people and, you know, this person has stole money and this person is a fraud. And I mean, I don't even need to tell you how that movie ended. He promptly got defunded. His students couldn't get PhDs anymore.

And then my hermeneutic of suspicion is if you have an idea like stagnation in science, which immediately gets you deplatformed, that's an idea we should take very seriously. So that's a political intuition I have on this. So I have a few of these different ideas that we've been a lot more stuck. It doesn't mean... It doesn't mean that there's been zero progress.

And then my hermeneutic of suspicion is if you have an idea like stagnation in science, which immediately gets you deplatformed, that's an idea we should take very seriously. So that's a political intuition I have on this. So I have a few of these different ideas that we've been a lot more stuck. It doesn't mean... It doesn't mean that there's been zero progress.

And then my hermeneutic of suspicion is if you have an idea like stagnation in science, which immediately gets you deplatformed, that's an idea we should take very seriously. So that's a political intuition I have on this. So I have a few of these different ideas that we've been a lot more stuck. It doesn't mean... It doesn't mean that there's been zero progress.

It doesn't mean that the progress we've had has been uniformly good. It doesn't mean that people's fears about the limited progress we have are unjustified either. Maybe all these things are actually part of the explanation for why the stagnation has happened. Now, there's a much harder question

It doesn't mean that the progress we've had has been uniformly good. It doesn't mean that people's fears about the limited progress we have are unjustified either. Maybe all these things are actually part of the explanation for why the stagnation has happened. Now, there's a much harder question

It doesn't mean that the progress we've had has been uniformly good. It doesn't mean that people's fears about the limited progress we have are unjustified either. Maybe all these things are actually part of the explanation for why the stagnation has happened. Now, there's a much harder question

And then there's sort of our cultural transformations that one can describe that at least coincided with us and were correlated. How causal they were is always hard to say. But if we sort of think of the Apollo space program as this... last great, you know, technological scientific project, there's some sense where July of 1969, where we landed on the moon and Woodstock started three weeks later.

And then there's sort of our cultural transformations that one can describe that at least coincided with us and were correlated. How causal they were is always hard to say. But if we sort of think of the Apollo space program as this... last great, you know, technological scientific project, there's some sense where July of 1969, where we landed on the moon and Woodstock started three weeks later.