Fairly open to discussion here, but I felt they struggled to get each other's underlying thesis. Agree/disagree?
My thoughts are that Harris often interrupts Klein and Klein rarely interrupt Harris.
That Klein does his best to strictly abides by quotes and data while Harris is comfortable relying on interpretation and personal recollection.
I think Harris is uncomfortable with science when science goes against his beliefs while Ezra is merely promoting that we should be comfortable with science regardless of our personal belief.
I personally thought Klein came off as the calmer, more focused, more accurate, more erudite of the two but (full disclosure) I've never had any love for Harris's ideologies, especially his views on tribalism which I find misguided so I came into this not knowing of Klein but already biased against Harris.
I found myself agreeing with each one at certain points. I think Sam does think the worst when it comes to reasons why he's being "attacked" but I also don't like a lot of the deplatforming of people whose ideas you disagree with. You don't win the battle of ideas by shutting down the other person's ideas. You have and promote better ideas.