[nemothekid]

>Dogma implies a shared set of principles that are followed without question.

FWIW, Merriam Webster defines dogma as a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds. That's the definition I was using, that I thought was more colloquial. Simply holding a strongly help opinion on shaky grounds is dogmatic. I don't believe that definition is at odds with what I'm describing.

[danenania]

Um, you cherry-picked a single bullet point out of that definition, and not even the first one.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogma

1a. something held as an established opinion, especially a definite authoritative tenet.

1b. a code of such tenets.

1c. a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds.

2. a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church.

Also, when has Joe Rogan ever claimed, or even implied, that his beliefs are "authoritative"? He constantly does the opposite.

[nemothekid]

Even if I cherry picked the one I thought was most clearest, none of them are even imply a shared set of principles that are followed without question, nor do any of the definitions under (1) contradict what I was saying.

>Also, when has Joe Rogan ever claimed, or even implied, that his beliefs are "authoritative"?

If you literally watch JRE today he does with regards to keto.

[danenania]

He can speak with legitimate authority on diet, exercise, martial arts, and other similar topics. He knows more about those things than 99% of people. The point is he doesn't claim authority on topics related to politics and science where he's out of his depth, or at least does it a lot less often than typical partisan commentators.

You seem to be reading a different definition than I am, but ok /shrug.