Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive October 12, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas

Context —

for discerning what's real and what isn't. So just stay with me. See if I can deliver that. Okay? But first, some other things. I saw a tweet from Michael Sokolow on Twitter. He says it's interesting how NBC is plugging the Winter Olympics, and apparently they're not mentioning that it's in Beijing or China. So NBC is maybe at least allegedly, we don't know what's in their minds, but Michael goes…

← Previous segment →

ays in it. So it's not really the pandemic. You know, we've been in it since at least the 50s. So that's my contribution. This is not new, but it's definitely here. I'm certainly not questioning whether it exists. I'm just saying it's not new. All right?

However, I just tied two things together today that finally made sense to me. I tweeted this morning that there are a ton of people who are really mad at me but their anger seems not to have a reason which they are willing to offer. And so finally in frustration I tweeted today, can somebody give me an idea why so many people are angry with me? Because I actually don't even know the topic. Is it vaccinations? Is it that I said something about the Joe Rogan interviews that were suboptimal, you know, even while saying he's a national treasure? And so I asked the question. Smoking hot wife jealousy, somebody says. Uh, could be, could be.

And so I asked the question and the answers were all over the board. They were all over the board. Now what have I taught you is happening if you ask a question and everybody gives you one of two or three standard answers? What would you judge about that situation? You would judge that maybe you have a different opinion and that you know it's two people with a different opinion. But what would be your take if you asked a hundred people what they were angry about with you and they all had different reasons? What would be the take? They're all angry with me. So it's the same person they're angry about but their reasons are all different and it all happened about the same time. How do you explain that?

Here's how I explain it. When you see that it's almost a guarantee of some kind of a mental phenomena, right? If people had largely the same complaints about me I'd say oh that's something to look at. Maybe it's me or maybe it's them. But if people are mad and the thing that cued me off is that all of their criticisms were generic. So the criticisms all fell into certain categories very reliably. So they would say you're coping. I don't know what that meant. Like what was I wrong about? They'd say accept the L. And I would say I didn't even know I was competing. What is even the topic I'm accepting the L on? Then there were you know another. So all these generic things.

So have you put together the two things I'm about to put together for you yet? Who's ahead of me? Who's ahead of me? It's a mass formation psychosis. The mass formation psychosis that I've been talking about and Dr. Malone talked about is all in the news is the reason that people are mad at me. Because if they were mad at me for a specific, let's say a prediction or a specific anything, they would just say so. But it's the mass. It is the mass formation psychosis

Context —

that is exactly the reason people are mad but they don't know why. They don't really know why. I saw some people offer reasons that might be explanations. One was the best one I saw is that for a lot of the people on the right, which would include a lot of my audience, that Joe Rogan is a quote lifeboat for their opinion and I put a hole in the lifeboat. That's actually not bad. Good, because the…

Next segment → →