https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=H9xjNryZQn0
So first of all, I have to disclose that since we connected last time, you had a great influence. Your Awakening from the Midland Crisis series had a great influence on me and on my research as well. And with the information that you shared, you kindly shared, and it was very helpful because it expanded my vocabulary and also gave me other different perspective from where to look at specific problems as meaning, inside concepts of meaning in life that watching to your series and taking information from you, I had the opportunity as well to talk to other people about meaning and meaning in life. Yeah, you got to talk to Susan Wolf. I saw you talk to Susan Wolf, which is amazing. You talked to Anderson Todd, that’s great. Yeah, Anderson Todd was a good conversation as well. And the conversation you had with Anderson Todd you have published not long time ago was just great, great. Oh, thank you, thank you. Yes, because Jung is very complex, very complex to read and understand. Sometimes people like us, we try to get things here and there and we create this concept. Sometimes it’s not very well understood because we haven’t gone through the literature properly. Yeah. From the literature. That’s right. And you guys just put this thing very nicely. Thank you for saying that. Thank you for everything you said, Leandro. I’m glad to hear, really glad to hear that my work is so helpful to you. That’s what I want to do. That’s the goal I’m trying to achieve. That’s great, that’s great. The conversation today, I purposefully tried to leave it as unstructured as possible. And when I first contacted you about this conversation, just to give the listeners a bit of background, talking about the, I practice martial arts, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, and connecting to the conversations you had with other people as well. You’re speaking about your experience with martial arts as well, about the reason and meaning in life. My question would be, I’ll open this, leave it very open-ended. For a martial arts that is very focused on combat competition, that it comes from a complete system of martial arts, a complete system, I mean just not martial, but as a way of living. And that is losing, it may be, because it’s specialized in combat sports and self-defense, there are elements that it may be losing, like being a tool for transformation meditation and quest for wisdom. My question would be, how, without having to just take something and copy from other style, what would be the principles or the elements necessary for a martial arts to be a complete system to still being a system of attack and defense and competition, but also a tool for meditation, a tool for quest for meaning in life, gaining of wisdom and transformation? Mm, that’s a really good question. So I guess there’s a couple of things. First of all, I generally talk about trying to cultivate an ecology of practices, and you might have seen some of the discussions I had had with Rafe Kelly around that, which the martial arts are integrated with parkour practices and movement practices and discourse practices. So I suppose there’s two ways of answering this question. One is extensively, sorry, all of a sudden my throat went dry. Extensively would be, well, one of the things you might want to consider is situating your combat practice within some mindfulness practices, some discourse practices, some other movement practices, like parkour, like Rafe does, or some of the stuff that I’m doing with Mike Nayan about trying to situate martial art within a broader curriculum, of trying to teach people various aspects of cultural understanding and personal transformation. So one thing would be, can you situate it? And then if you do that, then you’ve got to think about some very important questions. One is you want to look for compensatory relationships between the practices. What are their respective strengths and weaknesses, and how can I properly align them? And you need, sorry about this, you need mediating practices. So like an example I take from Rafe is that you have martial art practices, and then you have movement practices, and then you have moving mindfulness practices, and then you have seated mindfulness practices, and then you have sort of shared mindfulness practices, and you see how they all overlap, and they mediate between each other. They’re structured so that there’s an ecology that mediates, they can speak to each other, they can constrain, inform, make each other more insightful. So I would think the first answer is the extensive answer. Try to cultivate an ecology of practice, and like I say, look for compensatory relations of strength and weakness, and then look for mediation relations so that they overlap, inform, mutually constrain, and talk to each other. Then there’s the intensive answer. The intensive answer is try to explicate the implicit knowledge you’re developing. So one of the ways in which this became apparent to me, and so I’m gonna recommend something in a minute, is to go from doing a martial art to trying to teach somebody else how to do it. Because then what you have to do is you have to go from an intuitive implicit understanding of that participatory knowing of your body, the way you’re knowing of it and through it, and the way that’s connected to your perspectival knowing, how you’re sizing up the situation, salience, landscaping things. You have to go from just running that intuitively implicitly, and you have to step back and try and learn, how would you try to describe that state, that knowing to somebody else? How would you try to describe how to go from not being in that state to being in that state? So the intensive strategy, which often helps through trying to teach someone else what that state is like and how to enter into that state, you wanna have an intensive strategy of explication. Where you’re making it explicit, you’re bringing conceptual awareness to it. You’re trying to trace out the process, and you’re trying to break up your overall gestaltive movement into the relevant components and how they’re integrated together. Because that explication of your otherwise implicit and intuitive knowledge, and if you can put it into conceptual form, what people then can do, this is about sort of construal level. When you get that sort of more abstract, conceptual representation, you can then transfer it to other aspects of your life. You can say, okay, I know what this feels like, I know what this is like, and I now know how to get into it, not just intuitively, implicitly, but I have a, how might I, this is what I do. And think about how, think about again, the mediation idea. So I’m teaching the martial arts, right? So I’m doing that explication. But then I ask myself, how do I bring that flow, right? And that kind of situational awareness into my teaching, my academic teaching, how do I transfer it? Because, you know, and so if you think about it, these two strategies, the extensive and the intensive, then talk to each other. Because, right, because notice, I get the intensive strategy of explication, and then when I get sort of an optimal grip on that, I can start to transfer it to other areas of my life. And when you start doing the transfer, right, that will then start to talk also to you setting up an ecology of practices. And then you can get that whole thing organized towards transforming your sense of self, your sense of world, your sense of meaning, as opposed to just, you know, your sense of combat. That’s very interesting. In terms of background on resources, what would be the first, like the first line of resources that I can go to in terms of learn or get inspiration what the process I should follow? So, I mean, I’ve tweeted about this and I recommend. Ray Kelly’s put out an online course, he’s got videos where he’s tried to show, and he’s done one recently where he tries to explain how you put together these ecologies of practices in the ways that you and I have been talking about. I think you want to, you also want to track down individual resources that are geographically convenient to you for, you know, attending a good mindfulness group, taking up some kind of movement practice. The other thing is to, you might want to take a look at some of the online dialogical practices I’ve been engaging in with Guy Sendstock, especially the guy who invented circling, and I did one recently with Edwin Roush. And so you could get an idea of what that looks like, and you could start to read some of the literature on circling. So I don’t want to be too specific because the particular ecology of practices and the particular places, but that’s what I would recommend. You are going to vary depending on where you are, but I recommend, you know, I think Rafe’s work is a good sort of initial starting point. Mark Walsh has a book out, I think it’s, oh, I, oh, I want to remember, I think it’s that Beyond Mindfulness, and it’s all about embodiment. Mark Walsh’s book is excellent. I read it and commented on it. So that is a very valuable resource. I hope I get, I’m hoping getting the name of the book right. I hope, Mark, if I got it wrong, I apologize. But his book is fantastic. So that’s some initial places to start. That’s great. What is circling about? So circling, I got involved with circling because of the work I’m doing with Peter Lindbergh and what I’m, the work I’m doing is towards the next series I’m working on, the After Socrates series, the Pursuit and Cultivation of Wisdom through Authentic Dialogue. And circling is one of these modern practices. It was invented by Guy Sandstock, who’s a good friend of mine, brilliant guy, brilliant. And what circling is is a way of trying to change what we’re doing here, discourse, into something that has a lot of important features that you see in sort of Socratic dialogue. It’s much more about trying to use conversation, not just as a way of transmitting information, but a way for two people to really get, as Guy says, really get each other’s world. Really, so that, I’m not just getting information from you. I’m much more, it’s much more important to me in the conversation to create a dynamic sense of mutual opening. I’m getting how you’re seeing me and you’re getting, right, how I’m seeing you. And we’re using that to connect more deeply through many different levels of our mind and body to each other. So we develop a tremendous sense of connectedness and a con, because, this sounds sort of trivial, but it’s really actually central. The transformations that we’re often seeking in conversation are not fundamentally transformations of belief. They’re transformations of our sense of self, our sense of how to be with other people, our perspectival knowing, our participatory knowing. And so circling is a way of trying to reformulate how you practice conversation. So instead of giving an emphasis on giving people propositions, obviously you’re speaking, but what you’re primarily trying to do is create something like this mutual flow between you and other people. So you’re trying to tap into, right, sort of the emergent collect, the emerging collective intelligence between people. The intelligence within distributed cognition rather than within individual brains. You know the way like the internet networks computers together. You try to network brains together so they’re forming this sort of, you know, distributed cognition, a dynamical system. And that’s what your ultimate, that will ultimately afford a deeper kind of transformation in people than just trying to convince them of particular conclusions within argumentation. Now what I wanna do is I wanna understand how to take something like circling and then reintegrate it back in with argumentation. Because Socrates was able to do both. He was able to create that sort of mid, we called it midwifing, helping people to give birth to themselves, right? Which was always deeply connected to his own project of self-knowledge. So he’s doing that, but he also did it within the context of argumentation, which is again not directed towards winning. So what you’re trying to do is use the connectedness between you and me, and then bring that into an argumentation that is directed towards getting us more deeply connected to wisdom, virtue, reality. This is very interesting. Something related to martial arts. So that I had been noticed and after the conversation with you and the information that you have been sharing, something that Anderson taught on you, you spoke about on the hero’s journey, and it happens as well, working in competition on combat, you’re, it’s, let’s see how I put it because I have to say it very carefully as well, because when you have a young athlete, it starts a sport in general. So it’s because he’s young, because for being the best, he will, she will try to be the best as possible in this sport, and as good as he or she can be. So we’ll try to be the best. And being the best, so you’re trying to win. So your focus on your goals is winning. It’s getting from point A to B, and to be the best. But then there is one element that I believe that it stays out, but it’s the motivation and the meaning in the practice itself would be becoming the best, but compared to other people, compared to a set number of elements, but not necessarily, not necessarily will be being my best of myself. Yes, yes. These things, they may be connected sometimes, but not intentionally. I had experience, well, I will rephrase it. I believe that they, you can try to be the best of yourself in a specific trade, or the best in one sport, but not necessarily you, you will not necessarily be transformed in the best being you can be. Yes, I agree with that. And I think that’s a very good point that Anderson brought up. And thank you for pointing that out. Yeah. And that’s interesting because, and that has to do with the degree to which we, how should we take the hero’s journey within the martial arts? And I know Rafe Kelly is again doing work on this explicitly. But what you said brings out a really important point, and that goes towards something I’ve been doing quite a bit of work on recently, which is trying to, try to build on the work of LA Paul in transformative experience and Agnes Callard in aspiration, right? Where you may think that there’s, if you’ll allow me, there’s sort of this way in which you can frame the hero’s journey. I’m going to defeat all of my opponents. I’m gonna defeat all of my peers, right? But there, you could also think of the hero’s journey as an aspirational one, which is there’s a future self that I want to be. And I’m not currently that self, right? This is a self that has perspectives and virtues and preferences that I don’t have. This is perhaps a wiser self or a more rational self or a more virtuous self. And that’s a different hero’s journey because now the relationship is between your current self and your future self. And it’s a very different thing because the skills you need to build are not just the skills of combat or the skills, let’s call them the skills of victory. You need to build up these important skills that take, I’m this agent right now in this particular arena. This is who I am and this is how I see and understand the world. And I want to be that person, if you’ll allow me to use space to refer to time, right? I want to be that person over there, a different person living in a different world. This is why people go into therapy, right? They want to be a different person and living in a different world. They want to, right? And so the skills of moving between worlds in this existential sense of a world are not the same skills as combat. They are not the same skills as combat. You, and I agree with you, I think you can develop your skills of combat and be best in that sense. But if you have not engaged in a lot of the processes that I talk about, the inactive analogy, and a gogge, the serious play, this is all in my series for people who want to take a deeper look at these ideas. But if you don’t cultivate these skills, let’s call them the skills of transformation that transform you from one world to another, you can have your combat skills at a very high level. And that doesn’t mean you’ve aspired very much at all, right? So I agree with you that if people are trying to incorporate the hero mythos into their martial practice, they should sit down and reflect, well, which way do I want it? Do I want it this way? I just want to be able to defeat my contemporaries. Is that the hero’s journey I’m on? Or is the hero’s journey, right, I want to move to that person in that world. And then, because then what you have to do is you have to do what we were talking about earlier, D’Andro, you have to think about cultivating all of these other things so you can develop the skills of transcendence and transforming, not just the skills of combat. And follow up on this, and thinking about my previous experiences as well. You think that you have said. I’m going to take myself actually as an example, for instance. Please, please. At some point of my life, I, now I’m married, but before being married in another relationship, at some stage of this, not only this relationship, the relationship didn’t go very well, and it broke apart. And at this specific moment, I had to look at my life on things that what have I been, what I’m doing wrong. And in this question, with this question, what went wrong with this relationship, then, okay, you can brave other people, try to brave other people. Questions, no, no, someone else is not my brain. Then you realize, no, no, no, it’s your fault. It’s your fault. They think that, yeah, your fault, they’re my fault. So then realize, okay, there are things that I can improve. Then the question afterwards, okay, how can I improve these elements that I have identified? And it started from that, okay, so what type of experiences or knowledge I need in order to improve this and this and this and this. Exactly, exactly. And from this moment, it took me few years actually, to from this, because, and there was a goal, this specific case, there was a goal, okay. There’s a relationship that doesn’t work. It’s my fault. The next relationship, I want to improve these things and to be a better person for this specific relationship. So what elements I need for this and then starting this quest, okay, I should learn this, this and this. But in no occasion is, okay, I have to be better than this. I don’t need to be better than anyone else. I don’t have to compare myself to anyone else, but just to make previous and future self. Yeah, exactly. I think that’s exactly right. And then, I mean, you didn’t stop being a martial artist. So an interesting question for me is, I expect that the role of martial arts also changed in your life, because it’s like, how can I connect the martial arts to these other things that I’m trying to cultivate? Because I have all these skills and abilities in martial arts. Can they teach me something? Can they maybe help? I expect that possibly what you did is that you start to transfer, well, that’s what you see people doing. They start to transform how they’re doing something that’s already important, because you don’t just give up when you’re like, okay, I’m gonna keep doing this, but if I’m gonna be a different person, my attitude and relationship has to be different. Because here’s what I’m saying. If I wanna become that person over there, and let’s say martial arts are really important to me, I have to deal with my relationship to something that’s really important to me, or else I’m not gonna get to being that person over there. Because this is so much a part of me, and if I’m trying to transform me, that means I’ve gotta transform how I’m relating to the martial arts. And I think that’s just an important sort of thing that people have to do. They have to shift. Did you get any, like, did it start to talk? Did the two projects start to talk to each other, was what I’m saying. As you took on this aspirational course of I’m gonna become the kind of person who can enter into a deep and successful relationship, did you start to notice different things in how you’re interacting with people, even within martial arts, for example? Did that start to change? Did you start to get any kind of sense of the two talking to each other? Okay, so I will have to give you more background in order to position it. I started at this, I started martial arts in this specific momentum of my life. Oh, so, oh wow. Yes, yeah, okay, okay. Oh, that’s even better. So, I will tell you. Okay, let me just see how I can put it. Okay, when I realized, okay, something went wrong and it was my fault, most, my fault. It was my fault. And then I had to look at myself, okay, what’s missing, what’s wrong? And from this question, and for the context of martial arts, I realized that there is a level of uncontrolled aggressiveness on me that has to be tamed somehow or controlled and in this specific aspect. And then, okay, so martial arts may be a solution. Then I thought, and the thing, and my belief at this moment as well, this really has changed a little bit. Okay, martial arts are the arts of Mars. So, there’s nothing beyond the art of Mars and martial arts that it is for. This was my belief at this point. So, what’s the most, then I felt, okay, what’s the most effective way to have most efficient martial arts? That’s how Brazilian Judo did. So, I’m going to do this and see if I learn something in order to control this. So, that’s how I started doing martial arts, but just keeping with martial arts. So, over time, then I start to realize, more recently, I said, and I also practice traditional Judo sporadically as well. Then I started realizing, talking to you, I realized, okay, there’s some elements here that we focus, we are competition, focus, performance, focus, which bring meaning in life. It’s a certain meaning in life. And the conversation that I had also with Dr. Richard Ryan, because as I was asking questions, asking him questions, I realized after this conversation, okay, all my perspective is in sports, a motivation is extrinsically motivated. It’s not intrinsic. Intrinsically, you’re right. Yeah, he said, no, no, no, at one point, he said, no, no, no, stop, stop, stop. No, no, you have to come from inside. Excellent. The higher quality, so, yes. That’s perfect. That’s exactly what I’m talking about, right? So you start with it, and you sort of learn some very practical self-control, but then you get this really Socratic moment of insight. You get a moment of self-knowledge that your motivation is extrinsic rather than intrinsic, and then you wanna go through a deeper kind of transformation to get a more intrinsic motivation. That’s amazing. Yes, yes, so in my research, because apart from doing and practice martial arts, my research is effectiveness, how good you can be according to your, of course, your abilities in terms of someone that doesn’t do it full-time or someone that does do full-time professionally, how efficient you can be in the martial arts, and in terms of the theoretical side of martial arts, strategy, what’s the strategy? But strategy, very, very martial folks. Let me see if I got, like, some resources that I got, like this book, in Spanish, the Art of War, this Chinese ancient book, there’s another book. Sun Tzu. Yeah, yeah, there’s another book, the Japanese ancient book, there’s some books. That’s right. The Japanese ancient book, there’s some books. The Book of Five Rings. Military strategy, that’s, this was my concept of martial arts in strategy. So, and after all this conversation that I have been having during the past eight months and some research I do as well with Hinduism, the Upanishads, Buddhism as well, and practicing some elements of meditation, breathing. So I realized that so much, there’s so much more out there. And also traditional, traditional Judo, and like research a little bit about Jiu-Jitsu, there are other elements, other than martial. If it’s like the, let’s say the samurai, he would need like some spiritual practice that wouldn’t take so much time. Let’s say, okay, you stay here, you, an analogy, you light a candle, but it won’t take so much time, because your focus, yes, would be on become technically best. However, this martial arts, which is like competitive combat focus, and it is very popular, very popular at the moment. It lives outside, it is specific for a, it’s a or some personality type or types, but there aren’t lifestyle as well, and stage of life. If you are 18 years old, you’re an alpha male, and you are strong, and of course, you are going to destroy everything. But how about you’re 50 years old, if you’re, how about you can practice not 12 hours, 20 hours per week, but only four hours per week, how about that? You don’t want or you can’t practice this combative, but you still want to learn to transform your life. So these are the questions that I’m wrestling with. I think those are excellent questions. I like to, thank you for sharing that, because that was a very helpful sort of case study of that kind of shift that I was interested in. That’s very good, that’s very good. Thank you. Would you like to talk about your next V2 series? I’m very curious about it. Okay. So let’s build on what we were talking about earlier. We’re talking about this ecology of practices. Yeah. Right? And then in discussions I’ve had with Jordan Hall, he said to me, well, you actually, you actually said you need sort of a meta-psycho technology that is gonna help you, you know, choose and select and curate and coordinate your ecology, sort of shepherd your ecology. And that was like, oh yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me. And then I said, well, the primary thing it needs to do is it needs to do something analogous to what, you know, so we have practices that take individual intelligence and sort of ratchet them up into rationality and then ratchet them up into wisdom. We need a practice that’s gonna take collective intelligence and lift it up into collective rationality and collective wisdom, because that collective wisdom will give us the guidance we need for ecologies of practices. And then I thought, well, wait a sec, I know of such a practice in the ancient world. It was the platonic notion of dialectic. Dialectic was kind of a meta-psycho technology in which you did, and it has to do with Socrates, what we were talking about earlier. You use this sort of looping between you and I, remember we were talking about what’s going on in circling, but you also have this thing where you’re trying to get more deeply aware of yourself, deeply aware of the other, and then they’re using that to try and get a deeper understanding of, you know, what is wisdom, what is it to be in contact with reality, where you really try to, again, in dialogue, using collective wisdom, you try to get the deepest kind of transformations of your awareness and of who and what you are possible. So that’s what dialectic was. Dialectic was, in the Neo-Platonic tradition, it was both something you did individually in sort of a contemplative, meditative way, and then you did it dialogically with others, and so it was this way of trying to coordinate dialogue such that you could deeply improve self-knowledge, knowledge of the other, so you get more deeply connected to yourself, more deeply connected to others, and then together we get more deeply connected to how reality itself is unfolding. The idea is the way a conversation sort of unfolds, the way it opens us up, gives us deep clues into how reality is unfolding and opening itself up. And so what I thought was the following. There’s been a lot of good work on what was happening around Socrates, because he’s the hero of this practice, right? And so what I thought is, well, I’m going to really try to understand Socrates and the people that immediately came after him, especially the Neo-Platonic tradition, how they developed this practice of dialectic. And then once I get it clear, and so I’m going to do episodes on that, try to get really clear on what that is, and I’m going to use that as a template, and then I’m going to bring it into dialogue with all these emerging practices, like circling, empathy circling, authentic relating, the anti-debate of Peter Lindbergh, insight dialogue that came out of the Buddhist tradition. There’s all these emerging practices of discourse on authentic relating. And then what I want to do is I want to take the Socratic template and integrate it with the current practices, and try and make something that would be powerfully effective as a meta-psycho-technology for helping to curate the ecology of practices in response to the meeting crisis. That’s what I’m trying. Very interesting. Follow-up question is, is this related to the concept that you’re exploring, religion of no religion? Yeah, very much, very much. I think that, I don’t know what kind of dialectic dialogue that I’m trying to get at is going to be needed very much for what Jordan Hall and I are talking about in the religion that’s not religion, because we’re not trying to found a religion. I keep saying that so people don’t get confused. What we see is the following. We see that in response to meeting crisis, you have all these new emerging practices. You have all these new emerging practices. All these new emerging communities. You have all these ways in which people are experiencing even individually, like yourself, Leandro. They’re experiencing a kind of turning that’s spiritual in a sense, but not necessarily tied to any particular organized religion. This is happening more and more and more. We need a way for people to talk to each other so they can network, so they can coordinate, and so they can compare and contrast and facilitate each other’s ecologies and practices. That’s what this kind of dialectic dialogue would do for us. It would get us a way to, what we need is we need forms of dialogue that cut through the bullshit and the self-deception so that we can start making the kinds of connections that make a new culture, because a new culture is trying to be born. This is a way of trying to help that happen. It’s gonna be very different from both the failed ideologies, I would hope, of the past. I think it’ll be different, although there’ll be deep continuities, but it’ll have some important differences from the axial-age religions that most people now find non-viable. Okay, so at this point, I do have to ask this question, but more for the listeners as well, because I thought about this and I heard you comment, and forgive me if I’m asking you that. Other people, they ask you a couple of times. That’s fine. I understand their concept, however, however, there are established religions with a long, long history that they did, or they tried to address these same questions in another way. Why not use, and I will make a note, why not use them as a basis? For instance, as well, we have the concepts of Yana yoga, Bhakti yoga, Karma yoga, no action, mediation, devotion, that there you see these elements in other religions that can be used as well. Okay, so, and I answered this question, I’m quite happy to answer it again, by the way. I answered this question in a recent question and answer. Paul Van der Kley seemed to like it, but when I saw him playing it, I like it, but I think it needs to be improved. In one sense, I think it’s very much the case that individuals can turn to a religion and enter into a transformative relationship with it, such that they can cultivate wisdom, enhance connectedness, meaning in life. Yes, yes, they can, there is no question. Okay, so, but there’s two things we also have to pay attention to, but there is a growing number of people, the nones, the N-O-N-E-S, for which that is not the case. They find that it’s just not viable to them. It doesn’t catch, it doesn’t take, it doesn’t work for them. And this leads me to the second point. Part of what I think, and I tried to give a long argument for this in the series, is that that, that a lot of the established religions came out of the axial revolution, right? And Christianity is much later, but it makes use of a lot of the axial ideas of ancient Greece and ancient Hebrew cultures, right? And the thing about the axial age religions is they have this two worlds mythology, right? There’s the real world or the illusory world, there’s the heavenly world or the decayed world, right? There’s nirvana, some sort, like there’s all, there’s this contrast. Now the thing about it is the history, right? The history of the West, I would argue, since maybe the 12th century, has been a whole bunch of processes have undermined that two worlds idea, so that most people find the two worlds way of thinking and talking that is sort of prevalent. It doesn’t link up with the scientific, historical worldview in which they dwell. So, and think about what we’re doing now, like you’re in a different part of the world than I am, and we’re relying on very sophisticated technology, and we’re coordinating it all with very sophisticated AI, right, that’s making, and like all of this, and let me really deepen that point, we are natural born cyborgs, this is Andy Clark’s point, across many species we have evolved to deeply integrate with technology. We don’t just use technology, we identify it and internalize it, right? And so this whole historical process that’s been happening across centuries is now seeping into people’s bones, right? And let me give you an example, everybody thinks that it’s just natural to talk about, well, my unconscious, right, and blah, blah, and this, or I don’t, maybe unconsciously, but that’s all Freud, you don’t talk that way before Freud, but you probably have never read Freud, but Freud has insinuated a way of thinking, and that way is also, Freud at least thought, it was because he thought of himself as an atheist, it was sort of linked to a particular understanding of the scientific worldview. I’m not saying Freud is right, that’s not my point, Leandro, what I’m trying to show is that our cultural cognitive grammar has made many people incapable of acting within the two worlds grammar of the Axial Age religions. They can’t sort of, it does, they feel that it’s sort of a performative contradiction, like, and let’s be very clear about this, that’s not because, like, you know, they’ve all become sort of hard-nosed rational atheists, though they’ll believe in strange and wonky things, and they’re very hungry for spiritual experience, and they’re liable to experiment with psychedelics, but they somehow find that way of thinking, that fundamental grammar is more abundant for them, and so that’s, right, that’s why they are turning to generate, we need to be able to explain why all this generativity, why are people generating all these new practices, all these new ecologies of practices, all these new communities of practice, my explanation is the one I just gave you, and so for all of those people, we need something that is, and what I mean by religion is it can’t be an Axial Age religion, and that’s what people mean by religion, whatever else we mean by religion, but it can’t be not a religion, it can’t be the secular alternatives, like the pseudo-religious ideologies that drench the world in blood, so it can’t be an Axial religion, and it can’t not be a religion, the way Marxism and Nazism are not religious, so it has to get beyond both of those in order to help these people, that’s what I mean. That’s a very interesting conversation, thank you very much, we are going to finish now, that’s great, thank you, thank you, thank you, and I hope being able to talk to you, within, I don’t know, six months, within six months time, I don’t know, to carry on this conversation. I’m happy to come back and talk to you again, Leandro, that would be fantastic, I would very much like that, so yeah, consider it done, we’ll just set it up and make it happen. Wonderful, thank you very much, appreciate, have a good day, thank you. Thank you very much, and thank you for sharing your story with me, I appreciate it, thank you very much. It’s been a pleasure, thank you, I’m going to disconnect now, bye bye. Bye bye.