Sam Harris dismisses Elon Musk, as “not a true intellectual.” Sam insists he is far smarter than Elon so therefore his differing views on politics must be correct. But how do you know if someone else is smarter than you? I ask Sam to consider: what if you are wrong? What might the world look like if Elon Musk is actually far smarter than me?
Perhaps Mr. Musk would make a lot more money than me—or more money than anyone else in the world. Perhaps he might be achieving engineering feats greater than anyone else on the planet—feats that will take the human species off the planet. Hmm... Does that sound like anyone you know, Sam?
Money is not a direct proxy for intelligence, of course, because very smart people can choose to do other things with their time than pursue wealth. So what then is a proper proxy for intelligence? First we must answer: “What is intelligence?”
Intelligence is the ability to accurately model reality. How do you know if you have an accurate model of reality? In engineering, your rockets will explode if you do not. So one point for Elon there—and a point for engineers over philosophers in general. Not that engineers are inherently smarter than philosophers—but their intelligence is more easily tested in the physical world.
Outside of engineering, an accurate model of reality would enable one to predict future events/trends in reality. Future trends can be predicted in markets. Therefore, money actually is a fairly good proxy for wealth. An intelligent person will make bets and investments that pay off in the future. Again, this doesn't necessarily mean the smartest people are the richest, because preexistent wealth used to make bets factors in, plus risk aversion. Some people are willing to make larger bets than others, and they are not always the smartest. Plus making more frequent and larger bets takes time and effort that an intelligent person may rather spend elsewhere.
The most intelligent person may figure out the best bet to make (such as being an early investor in Bitcoin or Nvidia) then make enough money to be set for life, so they can spend the rest of their time pursuing purely intellectual or artistic curiosities.
It is possible that is the case for Sam Harris. Then again, if it were, he wouldn't need to charge money for his meditation app, or put his podcast behind a paywall. There's no evidence that he was an early investor in Bitcoin or some other tech stock. And he came from Hollywood wealth that he could have used to make investments. If he hasn't made enough money to be set for life, then he has missed clear bets and investments he could have made. And if he missed those, he was not able to predict future trends. And if he couldn't predict future trends, he does not have an accurate model of present reality. In short, Sam Harris is not very intelligent—at least not as intelligent as those who did accurately foresee those trends and capitalize on them.
Sure, Sam may speak well and be able to pontificate about various "intellectual" topics, but he clearly pales in real-world intelligence to figures like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Mark Andressen. They are betting on reality and winning—bigly. Sam is just a sore loser. The fact he still can't understand why he's losing, why all his predictions keep turning out wrong, proves how dumb he truly is.
When one of your friends has “gone crazy” (Jordan Peterson), it's sad. When two of your friends have “gone crazy” (Dave Rubin), it's a shame. When three of your friends have “gone crazy” (Brett Weinstein), it's curious. When four of your friends have “gone crazy” (Elon Musk), it's suspicious. When all of your friends (Joe Rogan) have “gone crazy,” it's time to look in the mirror and consider that maybe you (Sam Harris) are the one who has gone insane.