Dan & Phil Part 48: Exposing themselves via fidget spinner

[plath]

lmao anyone else think Dan is relieved he's catching a plane rn rather than doing a liveshow and having to talk about his latest video?

I haven't been here in a while, but my general thoughts were...not good. It was just kind of stupid tbh? Dan can fakedeep and condescending sometimes, and I say this as a stan. I have a feeling he'd brush off a lot of criticism as "it was too confusing for a lot of people" or "people just want comedy videos" which...no. I understood the video (despite its incoherence); I just thought it was stupid. It reminded me of some of those boys you'd get in uni tutorials sometimes who loved the sound of their own voices and thought they were sooooooooo deep and enthralling the class with their unique insight when really they were just incoherently rambling and boring the pants off everyone.

It also pains me to see all the children on twitter thinking that this was somehow "philosophy". I mean, Dan doesn't even know how to pronounce Camus. Dan isn't a philosopher - I think he just stays up late at night reading wikipedia articles. If he (or anyone else) is really interested in existensialism or absurdism then they should go and do some reading (no, not wikipedia - actual books. Kierkegaard is good. So is Kant, but he's a bit dry.) Go, Dan! Be free!! Explore your passions!!

I would love if Dan actually got engaged with philosophy and made a thoughtful video summing up his views on various models or whatever. I would love more serious content from Dan (and Phil). I'd love to hear him talk about politics, or social justice, or something he actually is genuinely engaged with beyond a superficial level. That would be lovely. This video? Sorry mate, it just was not good.

[thephandommenace]

lmao anyone else think Dan is relieved he's catching a plane rn rather than doing a liveshow and having to talk about his latest video?

I was just about to write the same thing and then IDB ate my post
While he may genuinely be unavailable due to travelling, or jetlag, or prepping for VidCon, whatever, it does come across as avoidance. He knows what he put out there was rushed and subpar in quality and so probably doesnt want to think about it and wants to avoid talking about it until after he's filled the gap with gaming videos, Twitter drama and domestic creepshots to distract us with. I'm the same when I've submitted something I know is terrible but there are deadlines coming up, and when I get a bad mark back I'll cover up my shame by joking about it and not taking it seriously.

[fancybum]

I haven't been here in a while, but my general thoughts were...not good. It was just kind of stupid tbh? Dan can fakedeep and condescending sometimes, and I say this as a stan. I have a feeling he'd brush off a lot of criticism as "it was too confusing for a lot of people" or "people just want comedy videos" which...no. I understood the video (despite its incoherence); I just thought it was stupid. It reminded me of some of those boys you'd get in uni tutorials sometimes who loved the sound of their own voices and thought they were sooooooooo deep and enthralling the class with their unique insight when really they were just incoherently rambling and boring the pants off everyone.

It also pains me to see all the children on twitter thinking that this was somehow "philosophy". I mean, Dan doesn't even know how to pronounce Camus. Dan isn't a philosopher - I think he just stays up late at night reading wikipedia articles. If he (or anyone else) is really interested in existensialism or absurdism then they should go and do some reading (no, not wikipedia - actual books. Kierkegaard is good. So is Kant, but he's a bit dry.) Go, Dan! Be free!! Explore your passions!!

I'm sorry, but this really rubbed me the wrong way. One of my philosophy profs pronounced Nietzsche as 'Neetch-uh' (in a very affected sort of way, no offense to her), some said 'Neetch-ee' another went with 'Neetch', and I'm sure 'Neesh/Neesh-uh' made a few appearances. Which of them should I consider actual masters of their craft and which ones should I retroactively view as rubes and forget what they had to say? Because their pronunciation (of a name based in a foreign, to them, language) was off? Listen, everybody should hate the video as much as they feel like hating it, but I haven't found my eyes since they rolled out of my head after having to read that Dan's video would have been better if he had taken a few more English courses. Like lol, how is that actually any better than what Dan's being accused of? Being pretentious and/or making assumptions about how well-read (or.. educated?) his audience is. Now okay, maybe Dan doesn't have the best history of acknowledging when his vids don't go down super well, but how about let him say something stupid or defensive before jumping on him for it anyway. And leave the education oneupmanship in the garbage where it belongs. People with degrees (and ALL the English courses in the world) can be just as fucking tiresome (with just as poorly structured arguments, my god) as anybody else.

And if you think what Dan needed was a better-optioned poll for him to fully understand what people didn't like about the video, I don't even know what to tell you. I think the fact he even did a poll was to double-down on it being a shitpost or to just lighten the mood to convey it wasn't that deep (whether he initially wanted it to be that deep remains to be seen, rip liveshow), but either way. He sees the mixed reaction because it's everywhere. He is aware. Your singular burning insight is actually being spammed at him from every direction, don't worry, he's seen it, he knows.

[hopinglester]

I haven't been here in a while, but my general thoughts were...not good. It was just kind of stupid tbh? Dan can fakedeep and condescending sometimes, and I say this as a stan. I have a feeling he'd brush off a lot of criticism as "it was too confusing for a lot of people" or "people just want comedy videos" which...no. I understood the video (despite its incoherence); I just thought it was stupid. It reminded me of some of those boys you'd get in uni tutorials sometimes who loved the sound of their own voices and thought they were sooooooooo deep and enthralling the class with their unique insight when really they were just incoherently rambling and boring the pants off everyone.

It also pains me to see all the children on twitter thinking that this was somehow "philosophy". I mean, Dan doesn't even know how to pronounce Camus. Dan isn't a philosopher - I think he just stays up late at night reading wikipedia articles. If he (or anyone else) is really interested in existensialism or absurdism then they should go and do some reading (no, not wikipedia - actual books. Kierkegaard is good. So is Kant, but he's a bit dry.) Go, Dan! Be free!! Explore your passions!!

I'm sorry, but this really rubbed me the wrong way. One of my philosophy profs pronounced Nietzsche as 'Neetch-uh' (in a very affected sort of way, no offense to her), some said 'Neetch-ee' another went with 'Neetch', and I'm sure 'Neesh/Neesh-uh' made a few appearances. Which of them should I consider actual masters of their craft and which ones should I retroactively view as rubes and forget what they had to say? Because their pronunciation (of a name based in a foreign, to them, language) was off? Listen, everybody should hate the video as much as they feel like hating it, but I haven't found my eyes since they rolled out of my head after having to read that Dan's video would have been better if he had taken a few more English courses. Like lol, how is that actually any better than what Dan's being accused of? Being pretentious and/or making assumptions about how well-read (or.. educated?) his audience is. Now okay, maybe Dan doesn't have the best history of acknowledging when his vids don't go down super well, but how about let him say something stupid or defensive before jumping on him for it anyway. And leave the education oneupmanship in the garbage where it belongs. People with degrees (and ALL the English courses in the world) can be just as fucking tiresome (with just as poorly structured arguments, my god) as anybody else.

And if you think what Dan needed was a better-optioned poll for him to fully understand what people didn't like about the video, I don't even know what to tell you. I think the fact he even did a poll was to double-down on it being a shitpost or to just lighten the mood to convey it wasn't that deep (whether he initially wanted it to be that deep remains to be seen, rip liveshow), but either way. He sees the mixed reaction because it's everywhere. He is aware. Your singular burning insight is actually being spammed at him from every direction, don't worry, he's seen it, he knows.

Sorry to butt in but I had some thoughts about the things I bolded:

- I agree that Dan shouldn't be expected to have an ultimate knowledge about philosophy and other things he wishes to talk about and discuss, and that people with degrees, though more informed in certain areas, also often make mistakes and it's not having a degree that solves the problem. However, I do think that Dan, especially in liveshows, sometimes talks about certain subjects as if he has a deep knowledge about them, to the extent of making a video discussing a certain idea he claims to have been thinking for 2 years, when actually he does not have that knowledge. I think we can't compare discussions we have with friends and family about topics with making videos to millions of people using very arguable arguments. I already posted about this, but I'm still annoyed by the way Dan phrased his arguments in the general way he did in the video, instead of specifying they applied to them (as we the argument he used can be only applied to like rich white males). If he had thought more about the video, made some research about the topic, looked for others opinions about it, I'm quite sure the result wouldn't have been that video... Also, his mentions to philosophy and psychology (aka the mention that 9th graders get) annoy me because of the tonne of voice he uses and the context they are said, as if most people watching them don't get them.
So for me it's not about reading philosophy books or having a degree or whatever, but rather him taking a moment to think: 'Ok is this view objectively correct for everyone? Should I include any clarification? Is this structured well? Is this inclusive? Do I need to inform myself more on this or that?' - that's all I'd hope from Dan, who so many times has shown an interest in being inclusive and thinking deeply about his content.

- One thing that annoyed me about this video was the clear attempt to try to go 'deep' into a subject and explore it, but then try to make it shit-posty as for, if people had any complaints, he could say it wasn't 'too serious' or 'balblabla'. I think this is a thing he constantly does, shielding himself from content by saying 'it's not that deep' and I find it so frustrating. If he actually wants to share an opinion he should be open to discourse and criticism and encourage it. That's why I was a bit frustrated by the poll on twitter and tumblr: for me it was another excuse as to say that he did ask for feedback, but actually not allowing any actual coherent feedback to come through. If he wants feedback, he could have asked for it just by tweeting: 'yo did you guys have any thoughts about my video? send them in pls'.

-However, a concession here ahha: I do agree that we still have to wait to see if he mentions the video in a liveshow and how he addressed any feedback he might have gotten (though again, I doubt he has got a lot of critisism, as I felt most of the comments on twitter and yt were praise). TBH I think he might not even comment on it because his next liveshow is going to be long coming, but we'll see, I guess.

[000dia000]

It also pains me to see all the children on twitter thinking that this was somehow "philosophy". I mean, Dan doesn't even know how to pronounce Camus.

Dan has a lot of influence, and while his knowledge isn't always spot on, sharing his interests to a younger audience, even simplifying it, can introduce the ideas to people who may go on and research it for themselves. While the general consensus for Dan's video seemed to be that it was too confusing-that I agree-I think that the subject matter wasn't something people can relate to. I suppose most people can have some degree of understanding of the basic ideas behind "nihilism" or "existentialism" to follow along someone's thought process or a conversation, even. However, when one begins to talk about meme culture then I notice people have had very mixed reactions. I personally was able to follow along the video very well, even with only a very basic knowledge when it comes to the subject matter. I've probably read only a few philosophy books ever, barely processed them, and whenever people have a conversation about it (IRL and here) I tune out. But meme culture? That's the kind of stupid shit I look at when I should be sleeping. When Dan dropped the video I was like "Oh, yeah, cool, Dan likes this too."

However, Dan faced this problem: the topic was outlandish, he didn't explain it well enough, and was only accessible to those who have read stupid shit about memes beforehand. This doesn't mean that Dan shouldn't face the criticism people have provided, the type of video he has made is simply not accessible and he'll have to find alternative ways of explaining himself. However, this doesn't mean Dan shouldn't give up on "philosophy" videos completely. I personally loved his video. It was my favourite this year, he hasn't done a good topic video since I subscribed to him in 2015 when he did his video on Spoilers. I've been waiting that long. But I agree, he can improve. He can be a bit condescending towards fans...but when is Dan not condescending?

I think Dan can gain a genuine audience from videos like this, who would have similar interests, and like to hear ideas that have been condensed and simplified (or over-simplified in this case). I do agree on one point you made: a lot of young people in the phandom pick up on his "intellectual" interests and make them a trend, but he also has the ability of being a positive, and idealistic influence for people. While making statements about "wanting death" may not be positive, a lot of people relate to it as it's a more relatable feeling than constant positivity or forcible enthusiasm no shade to Phil, just real life people. Dan is an outlet for feeling and making videos like this can show people what these feelings are and make them feel less alone.

Oh yeah, and I've read his work and still mistakenly call him "CAME-US", I wouldn't look too into that. As fancybum said, even those educated and teaching in philosophy make the mistake of mispronunciation.

[alittledizzy]

... Phil showing us where his priorities really are.

[twix]

Dan can fakedeep and condescending sometimes, and I say this as a stan. I have a feeling he'd brush off a lot of criticism as "it was too confusing for a lot of people" or "people just want comedy videos" which...no. I understood the video (despite its incoherence); I just thought it was stupid. It reminded me of some of those boys you'd get in uni tutorials sometimes who loved the sound of their own voices and thought they were sooooooooo deep and enthralling the class with their unique insight when really they were just incoherently rambling and boring the pants off everyone.

MTE. Due to too many years of picking fights with these types of men irl (someone's gotta do it), I have basically no tolerance left in me for this and turned off the video after about two minutes. my full thoughts on those two mintues can be summed up as, "dude needs to log off reddit and read middlemarch ."

- One thing that annoyed me about this video was the clear attempt to try to go 'deep' into a subject and explore it, but then try to make it shit-posty as for, if people had any complaints, he could say it wasn't 'too serious' or 'balblabla'. I think this is a thing he constantly does, shielding himself from content by saying 'it's not that deep' and I find it so frustrating. If he actually wants to share an opinion he should be open to discourse and criticism and encourage it. That's why I was a bit frustrated by the poll on twitter and tumblr: for me it was another excuse as to say that he did ask for feedback, but actually not allowing any actual coherent feedback to come through. If he wants feedback, he could have asked for it just by tweeting: 'yo did you guys have any thoughts about my video? send them in pls'.

This has been one of his default defense mechanisms for forever tho, lol. It's particularly ironic in this case b/c he's talking about constructing meaning via percieved banality.

I'm glad dan's trying new things and all, but the lack of commitment is really irritating.

[malday]

[tumblr] <div class="tumblr-post" data-href="https://embed.tumblr.com/embed/post/cXA ... 2059409922" data-did="da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709">[/tumblr]

[Birdie]

I get plath’s point, even though I don’t agree with the whole post. But yeah, Dan has a tendency to seem fake deep and act like he knows more about a topic than he actually does and it annoys the hell out of me. I’m all for Dan introducing a topic he’s interested in to his younger audience as long as he does it properly and not… like that. I don’t care how many philosophy classes he’s taken or how he pronounces a philosopher’s name as long as he gets his points across well and he just didn’t in this video. It lacked commitment and research and honestly, if you’re going to make a philosophical video… at least try and educate yourself first. I couldn’t sit through the whole video because he seriously sounded like he was reading some pretentious Tumblr post aloud.

The whole video gave me horrible mansplaining vibes. Like there was no chance any of his viewers could have heard the stuff he was talking about before or even know more about it than he does. I’m all for Dan explaining philosophical theories and stuff in a light-hearted and easy to understand manner but if he could do it with more research and less condescension I’d be super thankful. (If this had been my first Dan video, I’d be so turned off right now. I really hope this kind of patronising “let me teach you kids something” attitude isn’t part of the rebrand and just a one-off thing.)

[plath]

I haven't been here in a while, but my general thoughts were...not good. It was just kind of stupid tbh? Dan can fakedeep and condescending sometimes, and I say this as a stan. I have a feeling he'd brush off a lot of criticism as "it was too confusing for a lot of people" or "people just want comedy videos" which...no. I understood the video (despite its incoherence); I just thought it was stupid. It reminded me of some of those boys you'd get in uni tutorials sometimes who loved the sound of their own voices and thought they were sooooooooo deep and enthralling the class with their unique insight when really they were just incoherently rambling and boring the pants off everyone.

It also pains me to see all the children on twitter thinking that this was somehow "philosophy". I mean, Dan doesn't even know how to pronounce Camus. Dan isn't a philosopher - I think he just stays up late at night reading wikipedia articles. If he (or anyone else) is really interested in existensialism or absurdism then they should go and do some reading (no, not wikipedia - actual books. Kierkegaard is good. So is Kant, but he's a bit dry.) Go, Dan! Be free!! Explore your passions!!

I'm sorry, but this really rubbed me the wrong way. One of my philosophy profs pronounced Nietzsche as 'Neetch-uh' (in a very affected sort of way, no offense to her), some said 'Neetch-ee' another went with 'Neetch', and I'm sure 'Neesh/Neesh-uh' made a few appearances. Which of them should I consider actual masters of their craft and which ones should I retroactively view as rubes and forget what they had to say? Because their pronunciation (of a name based in a foreign, to them, language) was off? Listen, everybody should hate the video as much as they feel like hating it, but I haven't found my eyes since they rolled out of my head after having to read that Dan's video would have been better if he had taken a few more English courses. Like lol, how is that actually any better than what Dan's being accused of? Being pretentious and/or making assumptions about how well-read (or.. educated?) his audience is. Now okay, maybe Dan doesn't have the best history of acknowledging when his vids don't go down super well, but how about let him say something stupid or defensive before jumping on him for it anyway. And leave the education oneupmanship in the garbage where it belongs. People with degrees (and ALL the English courses in the world) can be just as fucking tiresome (with just as poorly structured arguments, my god) as anybody else.

And if you think what Dan needed was a better-optioned poll for him to fully understand what people didn't like about the video, I don't even know what to tell you. I think the fact he even did a poll was to double-down on it being a shitpost or to just lighten the mood to convey it wasn't that deep (whether he initially wanted it to be that deep remains to be seen, rip liveshow), but either way. He sees the mixed reaction because it's everywhere. He is aware. Your singular burning insight is actually being spammed at him from every direction, don't worry, he's seen it, he knows.

Oh boy. No offense but I feel like you're kind of projecting onto my comment a lot and reading a lot into it? I'll try to respond but it's pretty late and I'm kind of tired so I hope I can express this alright.

Which of them should I consider actual masters of their craft and which ones should I retroactively view as rubes and forget what they had to say?

That's a fair point. The Camus thing was something of a cheap shot (autodidacts should be supported, not vilified) however, it really bothered me in the context in which he was appearing. I think my view largely correlates with dianapml - I'm not expecting Dan to have absolute knowledge of an issue, however, if he's making a video about "philosophy" then he should have done the research underpinning it. It's sloppy and invalidates your position of assumed authority.

Also, I would argue that the pronunciation of Camus is a lot more straightforward and not nearly as "contested" (not the right word but I'm tired, I hope you know what I mean?) as that of Nietzsche. Some people are ridiculous about Nietzsche though, I've also heard all sorts of variations (most of them affected) and can only chalk it up to Nietzsche, as usual, bringing out the worst in people.

haven't found my eyes since they rolled out of my head after having to read that Dan's video would have been better if he had taken a few more English courses.

Okay, this is kind of bothering me. Please do point me to where in my post I told him to do some English (? philosophy is a separate discipline from English literature, unless you're taking a contextual perspective?) courses. The notion that you can only become educated on a topic through organised study is classist and vile and one I reject completely. I resent the implication that I support this view. I told him to read books. Lots of libraries have them.

That's why I admit the pronunciation was a cheap shot - because it's a sign he hasn't studied these topics formally. People can and should learn a lot independently through books. That's what so wonderful about them. Books are wonderful. Philosophy isn't some kind of elite glasswalled ivory towered establishment thing that you can only study from old white men in tweed jackets. You can go to a library and take out a book by Kierkegaard, Boethius, Pliny - and you can engage, directly, with those ideas. You don't need all that other bullshit. The materials are right there.

Like lol, how is that actually any better than what Dan's being accused of? Being pretentious and/or making assumptions about how well-read (or.. educated?) his audience is.

I mean...I kind of agree? But this is kind of a moot point considering I haven't actually done the thing that presupposes this other thing you're accusing me of here. If the 'making assumptions about how well-read his audience is' is in response to my "twitter children" comment...they were literally children, lol. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that middle schoolers don't have university degrees.

The reason I was upset about the children is because philosophy is a dying discipline and one that is still overwhelmingly rich, white and male. Dan has a huge platform, and I would prefer he disseminate accurate knowledge to his younger audience. Those are kids who could grow up to become the next generation of philosophers. If Dan talked accurately about philosophy he could spark an interest in a kid. What he did with his meme videos (and what he does frequently in liveshows) is present a distorted and inaccurate representation of what philosophy is. I'm not saying he should be trotting out complex models every liveshow - of course not - but I do wish he would be a bit more accurate in his representation of the discipline. It is cool though that he has at least introduced to many kids the concept of philosophy as a cool thing. Hopefully they'll still be motivated to take that trip to the library or pursue it later on in life.

And leave the education oneupmanship in the garbage where it belongs. People with degrees (and ALL the English courses in the world) can be just as fucking tiresome (with just as poorly structured arguments, my god) as anybody else.

I mean this is kind of aggressive so I don't know what to say about that, except that no-where in my comment did I mention degrees (except anecdotally about my own experience). Again, you kind of seem to have taken my comment and just really run with it. No-where did I suggest that Dan needed to take more English (? Philosophy isn't English??) classes. That's kind of classist and especially gross knowing that Dan tried university and found it wasn't for him. Also, universities in England don't work like that. You don't do several classes from different disciplines. You study one topic from start to finish, unless you're on a specific joint honours degree.

And if you think what Dan needed was a better-optioned poll for him to fully understand what people didn't like about the video, I don't even know what to tell you.

Okay, I guess at this point you've stopped responding to my comment entirely?

You seem really frustrated in general and I can understand that if you've been seeing similar comments everywhere. But I think we can all be courteous and express our perspectives without getting upset about it (or upsetting others)? It's fine if you think people are being harsh or unfair on Dan. I like him too, and none of this is even that serious. He made a (in my opinion) stupid video. Big deal. That doesn't mean he's a terrible person or somehow unworthy of our respect. I do have to give him props for trying something new. It's good that he did that and I hope the response won't discourage him from trying again.

Anyway, I'm off to bed now. Hope this helped to clarify my position and that it's all bants, no angst in the future.

[dontpanic]

damn I'm so glad I found this site, even (especially) with comments I disagree with I want to high-five you and scream "DUDE NICE OBSERVATION"

I'm going to be shallow for a second and point out how Dan's hair is the perfect length in the newest bomb vid
My bday's next week and I'm praying my present to be deppy in a bunch of vidcon vlogs

[offtopic]

okay this is so random, but I was googling my old username earlier and I was reminded of the kink memes on livejournal...out of everything to get nostalgic about it's the end of the livejournal kink meme era which sends me into a mini panic over the passage of time

[/offtopic]

edit: this is a bit off topic as well, but I remembered that dan's mom has a philosophy degree and I'm suddenly curious how much he talks to her about stuff like this...I know his 'rents don't watch his videos, but tbh if he ever wished to show one to his mom it would be this one.

[sparkle]

I mean this is kind of aggressive so I don't know what to say about that, except that no-where in my comment did I mention degrees (except anecdotally about my own experience). Again, you kind of seem to have taken my comment and just really run with it. No-where did I suggest that Dan needed to take more English (? Philosophy isn't English??) classes. That's kind of classist and especially gross knowing that Dan tried university and found it wasn't for him. Also, universities in England don't work like that. You don't do several classes from different disciplines. You study one topic from start to finish, unless you're on a specific joint honours degree.

[offtopic]just as an aside, I am finishing up my degree at Dans old university. I don't know how it works for Law because I didn't take it, but there are opportunities for you to take up to 20 credits from another school, and I think even from another faculty (I did this in my second year, it was a fun challenge). Or there are opportunities for you to study at the College for Interdisciplinary Learning. It's not quite the same as America but it is possible to take modules from other courses.[/offtopic]

[uglyamerican]

Damn it, Dan. You're depriving us of your real feelings about the video you posted last week. No fair.

This is when they come home from America and get a dog because the video made him realise he liked dogs (which is why it was one of the options for feedback) and that is his true feelings on the video. The memeing of Dans life is 'I like dogs' and therefore a dog has been acquired.

does that even make sense

Tomska beat the boys in the "getting of a dog" department. [he got a pug - not number one on my list of favorite dog breeds...]

[alittledizzy]

[offtopic]okay this is so random, but I was googling my old username earlier and I was reminded of the kink memes on livejournal...out of everything to get nostalgic about it's the end of the livejournal kink meme era which sends me into a mini panic over the passage of time
[/offtopic]

Good time to mention that someone just opened a phan kink meme?

[uglyamerican]

OK, the bomb video - loved it, particularly when Philip gets frustrated. I'm getting the impression that Phil doesn't like the stress and wants to quit the series (while Dan just screams to relieve his tension.) I hope they don't - it's far too entertaining when they fuck it up (and infinitely more entertaining than the abomination that is My Horse Prince [R.I.P.])

[iihappydaysii]

This is random but Id love to see Dan and Phil play like vintage games. I don't know how it would work exactly but to see them play like Super Nintendo or Nintendo games. In general, Id love to see them work together more like they did with Donkey Kong. I'm not game person so idk what actual gamers would like. It just sounds fun to me. I'd also like to watch the play board games but again I don't know how it would work. I just want to see them try lots of different, unusual stuff.

[uglyamerican]

Yea, I don't see what people were crying about re: Dan's Meme vid. It was pretty funny - not stellar, but the usual Dan being Dan [i.e. lots of self-deprication.] Good stuff.

[dontpanic]

The reason I was upset about the children is because philosophy is a dying discipline and one that is still overwhelmingly rich, white and male. Dan has a huge platform, and I would prefer he disseminate accurate knowledge to his younger audience. Those are kids who could grow up to become the next generation of philosophers. If Dan talked accurately about philosophy he could spark an interest in a kid. What he did with his meme videos (and what he does frequently in liveshows) is present a distorted and inaccurate representation of what philosophy is. I'm not saying he should be trotting out complex models every liveshow - of course not - but I do wish he would be a bit more accurate in his representation of the discipline. It is cool though that he has at least introduced to many kids the concept of philosophy as a cool thing. Hopefully they'll still be motivated to take that trip to the library or pursue it later on in life.

I don't think it's fair to say dan is presenting an inaccurate depiction of what philosophy is…he wasn't even technically presenting any representation of philosophy...he was just talking about his opinions and thoughts, he’s not pretending to be an expert on the subject or have any sort of formal philosophical argument. If he was doing a video like 'Crash Course' or something it would be a different story, but he's not. He’s just a dude talking about something he’s interested in.

I have 0 interest in formal philosophy and have only delved deep enough to kiss up to a professor I wanted funding from (still can't pronounce Polanyi correctly), so I might just be clueless but what even is an accurate representation of philosophy? I mean, it's not like math where there's only one correct answer to a question, and sure there's the formal ivory tower stuff where people wank over kant and my boi T Hobbs, but Dan isn't talking about that bar a bit of surface level things (and he's never straight up wrong whenever he does that), all dan's doing in that video is spouting a jumbled yet overall positive idea he has. even if younger audience leave his video thinking "damn, Dan's video is an accurate representation of philosophy" then so what? Heck, maybe it is.

What even is philosophy? Maybe that's the real philosophical question...are there barriers to entry for the topic of philosophy? Can you still be interested and talk about the meaning of life when you don't know who kant is or only read Wikipedia and reddit? Can you be 10 years old, watch a video of your favorite youtuber, and leave thinking Daniel James Howell is a better philosopher than Plato? Why not? Maybe Daniel the Philosophaniel Howell is a better philosopher than Plato. If you're a 10 year old kiddo you most likely aren't able to read philosophical texts yet anyway, so why does having an understanding of “philosophy” as a discipline matter? Dan's not giving factually inaccurate information, and basically all our Lil' Danlil' is saying is that your life isn't meaningless (and somehow memes have something to do with it).

If our bruthas born post-2000s think that's what philosophy is then more power to them. Let them post-millenial kiddos ignore the philosophical dead white men and listen to this vloggin’ young white man instead. I ain't saying Dan knows shit about anything, he might know nothing or he might know everything, because what he is happens to be an entertainer scared his life’s meaningless desperately clawing for a way to understand.

edit: I apologize to everyone interested in philosophy I just realized I was pretty harsh here. philosophy's actually a pretty cool thing to study I'm just drunk and bitter towards my ex gf who studied this in undergrad. I also apologize for what is probably a shitpost, as I said I am still a bit drunk and sad from being at an awkward party. This isn’t even a response to anyone lol

[offtopic]okay this is so random, but I was googling my old username earlier and I was reminded of the kink memes on livejournal...out of everything to get nostalgic about it's the end of the livejournal kink meme era which sends me into a mini panic over the passage of time
[/offtopic]

Good time to mention that someone just opened a phan kink meme?

holy shit...my nostalgia is no longer nostalgia :wtf:

[Laney]

So for me it's not about reading philosophy books or having a degree or whatever, but rather him taking a moment to think: 'Ok is this view objectively correct for everyone? Should I include any clarification? Is this structured well? Is this inclusive? Do I need to inform myself more on this or that?' - that's all I'd hope from Dan, who so many times has shown an interest in being inclusive and thinking deeply about his content.

This!! I hadn't been able to express my criticism of the video in a coherent manner, but I agree so much with this. The video had an ok concept, but the result seemed so half-assed.

[lefthandedism]

What even is philosophy? Maybe that's the real philosophical question...are there barriers to entry for the topic of philosophy? Can you still be interested and talk about the meaning of life when you don't know who kant is or only read Wikipedia and reddit? Can you be 10 years old, watch a video of your favorite youtuber, and leave thinking Daniel James Howell is a better philosopher than Plato? Why not? Maybe Daniel the Philosophaniel Howell is a better philosopher than Plato. If you're a 10 year old kiddo you most likely aren't able to read philosophical texts yet anyway, so why does having an understanding of “philosophy” as a discipline matter? Dan's not giving factually inaccurate information, and basically all our Lil' Danlil' is saying is that your life isn't meaningless (and somehow memes have something to do with it).

There are more things in heaven and earth, [Daniel],
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8)

Sorry not sorry. I do like Shakespeare.

Philosophy is thinking about (studying) thinking. It can be pretty broad-ranging, so sure Dan is doing philosophy. As with most things though, a little bit of discipline (as in studying a subject enough to learn some tools for doing it) is often helpful.

[Phantasy]

Looks like the IRL Digital empire keeps expanding...

I don't know her much as a creator, but I know she's half of the cutest internet couple pulled straight out of a Art House/ Wes Anderson film—the other half being Bertie Gilbert of course, who will always have a place in Phandom history with this great rare gem...

[flarequake]

(re spoiler above) I love Savannah, her poetry's great and she's adorable. The site's been live a little while, I'm tempted by the yellow tshirt.

[droopy]

[offtopic]omg I love Sav! I only discovered her recently, but she's the subdued-energy writing youtuber I never knew I needed.

The shirts are cute, I like the colors; I'm not the biggest fan of minimalist unisex shirt designs (which seems to be the latest trend), but I might've shelled it out for the (unfortunately sold-out) "No Fun" shirt. Oh well. [/offtopic]

Mildly On-Topic: It's so neat to see their company expanding. Right now they're exclusively/mostly working with UK-based creators, right?

[SquishPhan]

... Phil showing us where his priorities really are.

Wow this is a not a tweet that I expected from Phil, but one I'll happily take.

[tumblr] <div class="tumblr-post" data-href="https://embed.tumblr.com/embed/post/cXA ... 2059409922" data-did="da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709">[/tumblr]

Cute.

Looks like the IRL Digital empire keeps expanding...

I don't know her much as a creator, but I know she's half of the cutest internet couple pulled straight out of a Art House/ Wes Anderson film—the other half being Bertie Gilbert of course, who will always have a place in Phandom history with this great rare gem...

I'm happy that it seems their business is doing well. Keep expending that empire boys.

[lurker]

i'm always a bit confused that apparently the consensus is that dan often sounds condescending because i never thought that before i started lurking here. this is not me saying y'all are wrong and i'm right, i just thought it might be interesting to hear that as well. i've shortly mentioned it before with the explanation of words (which i appreciate, not being a native speaker), but in other instances as well i just get the impression that he's trying to be inclusive. for the latest video as well, it seemed to me that he was aiming to make it a "complete thing" that someone could watch who had never thought about this particular train of thoughts before and be entertained nevertheless. i agree with the constructive criticism i've read on here regarding whether he succeeded with that or not. however i didn't get the impression at all that he was trying to make it seem as if he was a philosophy professor lecturing us, mere peasants, about the importance of the meme-y subject he has done so much research on.

maybe the hierarchy of needs comment ("if you're a nerd") rubbed some people the wrong way and, yeah, i'd probably agree that it might have done the video good if he'd left that out and made a personal connection instead, for example an anecdote about how or when he came up with this ("shit i think about when i stay up until 4 a.m."). i also think it'd be cool if he extended the positivity to "it's okay to stay up late on a wikipedia spiral and then feel like an expert on the topic" -- part of his branding is being a relatable nerd, so why the "if you're a nerd comments", i don't fully understand. but i also think he added that in, well, in order to try to be inclusive and not to alienate part of his audience. which i personally think is totally fine.

last but not least, maybe it'd be cool if dan made videos where he went in-depths with a topic. i don't know yet, but it'd sure be interesting to see. if he did that, of course he'd need to do more research in order not to state factually wrong stuff. in this case and in general however, i don't think it's necessary to be an expert on every topic you talk about. in contrast, it can be interesting to see how a person who only pursues a topic as a past-time approaches it. transformative media would be pretty boring if everyone was only allowed to write or talk about disciplines they have a degree in.