The repeated theme in the interview is that he tells students, "Think for yourself, and read this thing about X", and then students complain that he endorses X. There's a short circuit in the reasoning apparatus.<p>When I think about Things You Can't Say (<a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html</a>), they pretty much all involve this kind of short circuit. My glib theory for why this is so: they are all based on scissor statements (<a href="https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/" rel="nofollow">https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/</a>) which have cost cultures untold years of debate, and been at some point declared resolved. The culture's version of creating an antibody is to teach children the resolution and forbid any further discussion of the statement, basically institutionalizing the sort of propaganda Miller teaches about.