Lecture： Biblical Series X： Abraham： Father of Nations (3Y6bCqT85Pc)

https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=3Y6bCqT85Pc

Music Applause Hello everyone. It’s been a very strange day. So I’m going to tell you about what happened and then I’ll start the lecture. I got up this morning and started to put my day together and then I tried to sign into my Gmail account. And it said that it had been disabled because I violated the terms of service with Gmail. And I thought, well I didn’t violate any terms of service that I know of. Now I set up a new YouTube channel yesterday called Jordan B. Peterson Clips. And so we made some technical changes and so I thought maybe it had something to do with that. And I had been shut out of Google one other time, years ago. So when you get shut out like that, there’s a little form you can fill out. And so I filled out the form and I said that I had been shut out. And that I didn’t know why and I sent it off. And then I realized one of my staff members called me and said that she was locked out of the YouTube account. And I thought, oh yeah, the YouTube account is hooked to the Gmail account. So that meant that I couldn’t get access to any of my YouTube videos. They were still up and online but I couldn’t get access to them. I couldn’t post last week’s biblical lecture for example. And so that was worrisome and made me suspicious. And then about two hours later, something like that, I got an email from Google. And they said that they had reviewed my request to be reinstated. And that I had violated Google’s terms of agreement or terms of service. And they weren’t going to turn my account back on. And I thought, and they didn’t say why. They didn’t say anything. I got there was no warning whatsoever about any of this. They didn’t tell me why. And they didn’t say why in the email response. And so I wrote them back and I said, because they said I could, I wrote them back and I said, this might not be a good idea, basically. And you might want to think about it. And then I tweeted what had happened. I took screenshots and I tweeted and I contacted a whole bunch of journalists. Because it turns out that I know a whole bunch of journalists. And so then what happened then was that I got a call from the Daily Caller in the United States. I had done an interview with them last week, which isn’t posted yet. And they interviewed me and within 20 minutes posted it online. And so they have a fairly big audience. And so that was good. And then somebody phoned me from Ottawa. And I did a live radio show about that. And that was good. And then a number of other journalists contacted me and I sent them the information. But another one of my staff, actually my son, emailed me and he said, look, you should hold off because maybe there’s still a mistake here. And I thought, yeah, there might be. It might be just a mistake. But then why in the world did I email Google and they contacted me and they said they would not reinstate it. And they didn’t provide me with any information. So I contacted the other journalists and I said, well, you never know, maybe this is just a mistake. So let’s hold off. And then while I was about half an hour later, while I was trying to get into my, I used this AdWords account that’s linked to Google. I don’t run ads on my videos, but I need the AdWords account because it helps me add some little gadgets to the videos that I wouldn’t otherwise be able to. And I was playing with that. The system came back online. I thought, well, that’s interesting. And lots of people had emailed me and Twittered me and some people within Google and some people elsewhere. And they were doing whatever they were going to do to help me get all this material back up and running. And so something worked. My suspicions are that what worked was the publicity. Now, so but maybe not, you know, and it’s very weird being in this situation because there has been a number of recent episodes where these larger companies, Facebook, Google, Patreon, not that it’s a massive company, but it’s starting to become reasonably significant, have decided on rather arbitrary grounds to shut down their users. And this is very ominous to me, partly because we’ve turned our communications over to very large systems or very large systems have emerged to mediate our communication. Right. I mean, there’s lots of benefit to it. So you don’t want to get too cynical about it. But we’re blind with regards to the policies that regulate the the the actions, the regulatory actions of these large organizations. And that’s really a bad thing. And something else is even more ominous, really ominous. You know, it’s highly probable that we’re going to build political algorithms into our artificial intelligence. And this sort of thing will be regulated by machines that no one understands. And that’s a really bad idea. And that’s a really likely possibility. So anyways, I was all confused about this. I thought, Jesus, maybe I flew off the handle, you know, because I was sort of was stressful, man, you know, because I have like one hundred and fifty thousand emails in that account. Like, that’s a lot of emails. And it’s all my correspondence for the last 10 years, you know. So it’s an archive as well as an ongoing email system. I have a commercial email system that I just set up three weeks ago with like six different email addresses now to try to organize my correspondence. So I wasn’t completely unable to communicate. But my calendar was gone. And that’s a bloody disaster because like I’ve got things scheduled out forever and I don’t remember what they are. I can’t even remember what I’m doing in a day. So much less in a month. But I thought maybe I flew off the handle and I was worried that I contacted the journalists too soon. And, you know, but anyways, it all worked out. So then what happened? Well, just as I was coming to this lecture, I stepped outside and there was a little package outside. Luckily it wasn’t a bomb. There was a package outside. Nice little package. My wife and I looked inside it and there was a couple of bottles of wine in there. So that was nice. And there was a little note. And so I’m going to read you the little note because it’s actually pretty interesting. So this person said that they had finally tackled the self-authoring suite. So they seem to be happy about that. But that’s not so interesting except peripherally. A friend on Twitter has contact with Google engineers. She said, quote, I spoke with some friends inside Google who offered to help. And I did get contacted by quite a few people at Google who said that they had been, you know, watching my lectures and so on and were happy about what I was doing. Anyways, I spoke with some friends inside Google who offered to help. But they suggest he set up a backup plan. The teams are feeling significant pressure from advocacy groups. And, quote, I have at least four Google engineers who offered to speak up on his behalf. But they know the team dynamics. And unfortunately, especially YouTube, is an SJW cesspool. I hope this information is useful to you. It’s like, yeah, it’s kind of useful. All right. So that was part of what happened today. And so anyways, I still don’t really understand it, right? Because I don’t know why it got shut down. And I don’t know if anything I did got it turned back on. And I don’t know the reasons for it. And that’s also rather ominous. It seems to me that when I was thinking it through was that, you know, I have a fairly, what would you call it? Respectable YouTube following. I don’t know if you’d necessarily call it respectable. It’s fairly large, YouTube following. And it seems to me that it would have been appropriate for Google if they were going to shut down my account to tell me why, I would think. And also maybe look me up, maybe, especially after I emailed them. And then maybe not to have emailed me back and said, no, we’re not going to reinstate you. But we’re not going to tell you any reasons. They didn’t say they wouldn’t tell me any reasons. They just didn’t tell me any reasons. And then it also seems very strange to me that it just all of a sudden went back on after two hours. And so, well, so I don’t know what to make of that. Maybe more information will come to light over the next few days. I hope that I didn’t jump the gun. But it’s a very peculiar set of circumstances. I thought it was kind of amusing, actually, that the video that they stopped me from posting today was the last biblical lecture. You wouldn’t necessarily think that that would be the sort of thing that people would want to stop from being posted. But we’re in very, very strange times. So that was my adventure for today. And so I didn’t, you know, I hate speakers who apologize to the crowd before they talk to them. Because, you know, if you’re speaking to people and they put all this effort into coming, then you shouldn’t tell them what a sorry and useless creature you are before you talk to them. You know, and ask for their forbearance and forgiveness. It’s like, it’s a little, you’re a little late for that. But I’m still going to do that a little bit today because, you know, I wanted to spend all day preparing this lecture. I mean, I’ve prepared it a lot beforehand, but that rattled me up a lot. So I didn’t prepare as much as I could have. Anyways, we’ll stumble forward and see how it goes. I’m reasonably familiar with the stories now. And so onward and upward. So I’m going to reiterate this. You know, I’ve learned something. I have this idea that it would be a good idea for young people and older people, citizens of the West, let’s say, to learn more about their culture and their civilization, right? Because it’s a great civilization and it’s taken a lot of work to put together. But I don’t think that we really know. I mean, I know a fair bit about it, although I wouldn’t consider myself nearly as educated as a person should be. But I’m not too badly educated. But I tell you, going through these biblical lectures, verse by verse, just makes me even more aware of how unbelievably ignorant I am. You know, and partly for two reasons. Like, one is because I’ve been using this Biblehub.com place. And I think I told you last week, but I wanted to reiterate it because it’s important. It’s so interesting the way that they’ve set it up because you can go through the biblical stories verse by verse. And then for each verse, there’s a whole small font page of commentary from multiple sources. And so, you know, not only is the Bible hyperlinked in the way that I discussed in the first lecture with all the verses referring to not all the other verses, but lots of them. But it’s got its tendrils out into literature, you know, direct commentaries on the text, but also all the literature that’s been influenced by it. So it’s an unbelievably central and core text. And it’s so interesting to read a book where every sentence has been commented on, well, really in volumes. And then just to get a sense of that volume of material, you know, how much power, brain power, that’s been put into this. And to also understand how bloody ignorant, like I’m so ignorant about this. There’s all this work. And it seems that we’ve left it to decay in the dust. And it’s a big mistake, man. It’s a big mistake because the people who are writing these commentaries, like, you know, a lot of it’s from the 14th and 15th and 16th century. It’s kind of archaic. And it’s and it’s some of its outdated and some of it you wouldn’t agree with. But if you read all the commentaries side by side, you know, you get a pretty good blast of wisdom coming at you. And like the thing about wisdom is it stops you from running face first into walls. You know, it’s not just there to so that you can talk to people at parties about what university you graduated from, you know, and it’s there because the information is unbelievably useful. You know, one of the things that I’ve realized that I want to return to tonight, because I’ve been thinking a lot about this idea of the arc, you know, and I think I mentioned to you last week that I’d figured out that there is this idea that Noah was perfect in his generations. And that meant that he has set his family in order. It wasn’t just him, but he had set his family in order. And because of that, when when the catastrophe came, like it comes to everyone, he was able to withstand it because he had the support of the people who were near and dear to him. And that’s really important when things come along to lay you low. Like if you’re alone and the flood comes, it’s like, man, goodbye to you. If you’ve got 10 or 15 people supporting you in a tight network, you know, and your your interrelationships with them are pristine and you can tell them the truth and they can tell the truth back to you. It’s possible that you might be able to find that thin way that will preserve you when when when when, you know, the terrible things come knocking at your door. And so there’s this the idea of the arc is very, very concrete in Noah. It’s actually a structure that that he inhabits. You know, it’s a concretized, almost like a child’s story. And I’m not being cynical about that because there are some bloody brilliant child’s children’s stories. But, you know, it’s really concretized. But then Abraham comes along and instead of an arc, there’s a covenant. Right now, it says in the story of Noah that Noah walked with God. And then, of course, Abraham, it isn’t clear exactly that he’s walking with God or before God, which we’ll get into later. But you see, I see this as part of the increasing psycho, psychologization of the sacred ideas that were acted out by archaic people. So, first of all, it’s concretized in the form of a ship that actually sustains you when the floods come. Right. It’s very concrete imagery, the sort of thing you might see in a movie. But then with Abraham, it turns into a psychological covenant. In some sense, it’s like a contractual agreement. Now, it’s a contractual agreement between Abraham and God, but that doesn’t really matter. I mean, obviously it matters, but it’s only half of what’s important about that. The other half is that it’s a contract. And, you know, one of the things that you do with your ideal, let’s say, is you establish a contract with it. And you also establish like a social contract with other people, right? That’s what keeps society organized. And so there’s this idea that emerges in the Abraham stories of a sacred contract and that has the same function as the ark. And what it does, because what happens in Abraham, and we’ll see more of this today, is that he… You know, God tells him to go forward into the world, and we talked about that last week. And he does that, and he encounters famine, and he encounters tyranny, and he encounters powerful people who want to take from him what is his. I mean, God sends him out in the world, but it’s not like he has an easy ride of it. It isn’t easy at all. It’s as hard as it can be. But there’s this consistent emphasis in the text, and I think it’s something really worth attending to. That if you maintain your contract, and that has to do with honesty and trust and truth and all of those things. If you maintain your contract, then you have a good possibility, the best possible possibility of making your way through the catastrophe and the chaos. And I don’t want to be naive about this. You know, when I read Jung, and I started to understand the idea of the hero archetype. You know, the idea that the human being is a force, a logos force, that can stand up against chaos and catastrophe and tragedy and evil and prevail. I never did think that that meant that if you did stand up and tell the truth that you would necessarily prevail, right? It’s not a magic trick. It’s your best bet. That’s the thing. You don’t have a better option. And so, and that’s what’s, that’s what, see the idea is emerging in the Abrahamic text. It’s like people are figuring this out. That would be progressive revelation. That’s one way of thinking about it. And you can think about that religious terms, but you can also think about it as humanity consulting itself, right? Each individual talking to themselves, which is what we do when we think. And each individual communicating with every other individual and gathering a body of wisdom that helps people. Or orient themselves in the toughest conditions. And it’s an incremental process. And I think that I really do believe that that’s speaking purely secularly. I do believe that that’s what manifests itself in the biblical stories, right? It’s the dawning enlightenment of mankind, something like that, as we start to understand the principles by which we have to live in order to orient ourselves properly in the world. So, and I also do believe, and this is the thing that’s the unspoken question, is like you don’t have any idea how rich and fulfilling your life could be. Despite its tragedy and limitation. If you stop doing the things that you know to be wrong. It’s a really grand experiment. And you know, one of the things that God tells Abraham constantly as the story progresses, especially every time Abraham makes a sacrifice, is God says, walk with me and be perfect. It’s something like that. And so the injunction is, well, aim high. Establish this relationship with the highest thing that you can conceive of, which you might as well do that, because, well, what are you going to do? Establish a relationship with the most mediocre thing you can conceive of? Or you’re going to establish a relationship with the lowest thing you can conceive of? People do that. And I wouldn’t recommend it. It’s a really bad thing. And there’s a lot of pain associated with that. And maybe, you know, there’s pain that can expand into a world destroying force down that route. And there’s absolutely no doubt about that. So what, is there something superstitious and foolish about attempting to establish a contractual relationship with the source of all being? I mean, I just don’t see that as an erroneous conception. And, you know, it’s not necessary perhaps to get lost in the details. We can argue forever about what God might or might not be. But we could at least say that the concept of God is an embodiment of humanity’s highest ideal. Right? We could at least agree on that. And then you might say, well, is that real? And the first thing I would say about that is, ah, there’s a lot of things about the world we don’t understand. And the second thing I would say is, it depends bloody well on what you mean by real. That’s for sure. And that turns out to be a very complicated question. So… Okay, so we left Abram, remember, at the end, last time he had just gone off to fight a bunch of kings and get his nephew back, which seemed to be a pretty courageous act. So that brought a story to an end. And it’s interesting, I think, what happens in the narrative is that there’s a story. So Abraham is somewhere and he goes somewhere else. Right? That’s a story. And he has adventures along the way. And those adventures are usually the typical kind of adventure, which is a rift in the structure of the story. An exposure to a kind of chaos and novelty. And then a reconstitution of the mode of being. So that’s a classic story, right? You are somewhere, you’re a certain way, you’re moving forward, something happens that you don’t expect, it blows you into pieces, it introduces chaos, right? You face the dragon, you get the gold, or maybe the bloody thing eats you, and the story is over. And then you get to where you’re going. But then the question is, well, what happens when you get to where you’re going? And that’s a really important issue, because one of the things that happens to people all the time in their life is that they get to where they’re going. And then they don’t know what to do. Right? So, for example, you graduate from university. It’s like, okay, story over. Who are you now? Who are you the next day? And so what happens is when you succeed, then there’s a success crisis. And the success crisis is, well, I’ve run this story to its end. Now what? And that’s exactly what happens in the Abrahamic stories. And they’re punctuated by a period of contemplation and sacrifice. So every time an Abrahamic story comes to its end, then Abraham makes another sacrifice and communes with God, and then he figures out what to do next. And that seems right. It seems psychologically right. Because what you should do when your story comes to an end, when you’ve achieved what it is that you want to achieve, or perhaps when you’re in terribly dire straits, but we won’t talk about that at the moment. When you’ve achieved what you need to achieve, then the next question is, okay, well, now I’m that person, or I have that character. What do I need to do next? And some of that is always, well, what do I need to give up? Now, what do I need to let go of so I can move to the next plateau? Assuming that your life is hopefully a sequence of upward moving, what would you call them? It’s like Sisyphus, except you’re actually, each time you climb up the mountain, you get a little higher on the mountain. It’s something like that. So it’s Sisyphus with an optimistic bent. And maybe if you push the rock up the mountain properly and let it roll down, then, and if you do that right, then it’s okay. Every time you roll it back up, it’s better in some sense. I don’t think that’s unrealistic either. And so, Abraham goes and rescues his nephew from these tyrannical kings. That’s very brave, and he doesn’t take any reward for it, because as far as he’s concerned, it’s just a manifestation of the right thing. And then he has another vision. After these things, that’s the battle. The word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram, I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward. And Abram said, Lord God, what will thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Elysia of Damascus? And Abram said, Behold to me thou hast given no seed, and lo, no one born, one born in my house is mine heir. And behold, the word of the Lord came to him, saying, This shall not be thine heir, but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir. And he brought him forth abroad, and he said, Now look to heaven, and tell the stars. If you’re able to number them, and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And Abram believed in the Lord, and he counted it to him for righteousness. And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur, the Chaldees, to give this land to you to inherit it. And he said, Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it? And then he does this sacrifice. Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat, and a ram, and a turtle dove, and a young pigeon. And then God comes down, and well, Abraham goes into a trance. That’s what it appears to be in the story. And has a great terror, and then God appears to him. And I’ll just review this commentary again. This is from Joseph Benson. And when the sun was going down, that’s about the time when you wash up for the evening. And he’s praying and waiting towards evening. A deep sleep fell upon Abraham. Not a common sleep through weariness or carelessness, but a divine ecstasy. That being wholly taken off from things sensible, he might be wholly taken up with the contemplation of things spiritual. Very strange, very, very strange series of interpretations. Because it does seem that what happens to Abraham, that he falls into some sort of revelatory trance. And so, as I’ve taken some pains to explain, we don’t really understand such things. And we can’t rule out their existence, because there’s too much evidence that they do in fact occur. Perhaps it’s a technology that we no longer possess. That’s one possibility. Perhaps we no longer know how to access these sorts of states of consciousness. It’s certainly possible. And lo, a horror of great darkness fell upon him. This was designed to strike awe upon the spirit of Abraham, and to possess him with holy reverence. Holy fear prepares the soul for holy joy. God humbles first, and then lifts up. Yeah, well I think that’s right too. Like, you know, one of the experiences I’ve had in my life, fairly commonly, in a variety of different ways. This is especially true when I was paying a lot of attention to my dreams. Which I did for about 15 years, I guess, something like that. Now and then I would feel like I’d learned some things and had sort of consolidated them. And then before I went to sleep, I’d think, okay, I’m ready to learn something else. And I didn’t say that without trepidation. Because usually when you learn something, you know, it’s not that pleasant. Because you usually learn something about why you’re wrong. And the deeper the thing that you learn, the more you learn about why you’re wrong. And there’s a death that’s associated with that, because then you have to let that part of you that’s wrong die. And that’s the sacrifice, right? And so you have to be willing to make a sacrifice before you’re going to learn something. And perhaps what you’ll learn is in proportion to your willingness to make a sacrifice. And I really do believe that. I do believe that as well, because I also think that if you commit to something, that means that you don’t do a bunch of other things, right? So that’s the sacrifice of all those other things. You commit to it, you set your sights on it. If you really commit to it and you get the sacrifice right, so to speak, then the probability that that thing will be successful vastly increases. And I think that that’s also not a naive way of thinking or a foolish way of thinking. My experience has been that that’s the case. And so, back to the dream. I mean, I do think that we learn intrepidation, and that most of the time, you have to be laid low before the new revelation can make itself manifest. And I think that’s also what happens to people often in psychedelic experiences when they have a bad trip, is they don’t get through the bad part of it. And maybe that’s because there’s so much mess in their lives. Now, I’m speculating, but it’s informed speculation. There’s so much mess in their lives that the altered state of consciousness makes manifest, that it’s like a little trip through hell, but the mess is so complete and comprehensive and all-pervading, that there’s no way they can get through it. Now, if they could get through it and started to sort those things out, then there would be, perhaps, what would you call it? A compensatory positive revelation at the end. But the first thing is, if you want to learn something, is that you’re going to encounter… Well, you have to figure out what’s wrong before you can figure out what wisdom you need next to guide yourself. And that’s no laughing matter, right? So I think that that’s what this refers to. I think that’s the sort of psychological experience that that refers to. I also think… We built this a little bit into the future authoring program. You know, I read this really cool paper once, reviewed by this guy named Jeffrey Gray. Jeffrey Gray wrote a book called The Neuropsychology of Anxiety Man, and that is a great book. It is impossible to read. It took me like six months to read it. And the reason for that is that he reviewed about 3,000 papers, and they were all neurological papers, and heavy psychological slash biological papers. He actually read them all, and he understood them, and he synthesized them. And then he wrote this book about the synthesis. And he’s very, very careful with his terminology. And so to read the book, you have to understand brain anatomy, and you have to understand neuropharmacology, and you have to understand animal behavior, the whole literature on animal behavior, and that whole whopping dose of human psychology and cybernetics. It’s like it’s a vicious book, but you really learn something when you read it, if you go through it bit by bit. It’s had an overwhelming influence on psychology, even among people who haven’t read it, which is most of the people who cite it, by the way. And so, but he said he outlined this real cool study, maybe it was a sequence of studies, about how to motivate rats. Rats are a lot like us, in positive and negative ways. And biochemically and psychopharmacologically, they’re very, very similar, and they have very complex social environments. And they have hierarchies, and they play, and they laugh. Jack Panksepp, Jack Panksepp found out that rats laugh. If you tickle them, you can tickle them with like the end of a pencil eraser. But you can’t hear them laughing, because they laugh ultrasonically like bats. So you have to record it and then slow it down, then you can hear them giggling away when you tickle them. So, which is, you know, you think, oh, I’m going to spend $50,000onastudydemonstratingthatratslaugh,andyouthink,well,waitasecond,waitasecond,tha{t}^{\prime }samajorleaguestudy,youknow,becauseh{e}^{\prime }soutlinedaludiccircuit.Tha{t}^{\prime }saplaycircuit.AndJackPankseppdiscoveredtheplaycircuitinmammals.Tha{t}^{\prime }sabloodybigdeal,youknow,ifyougetthatbylikerubbingratswithapencileraser,well,goodforyou.So,anyways,soGraytalkedalotabouthowtomotivatearat.AndyoumighthaveheardaboutB.F.Skinner,youknow,heusedfoodpelletstomotivatehisrats.Butwhatyoudo{n}^{\prime }tknowaboutSkinneristhatthoseratswerestarvedtothreequartersoftheirnormalbodyweight.Sotheywouldworkforfood,man.SoSkinne{r}^{\prime }sratswerekindofoversimplified.Butyoucangetratstoworkforfood.Theydo{n}^{\prime }thavetobethathungry.Youcangetthemtoworkforfoodandthe{y}^{\prime }lldoallsortsofthings.The{y}^{\prime }llpressleversandthe{y}^{\prime }llopendoorsandthe{y}^{\prime }llsolveproblemsand,youknow,the{y}^{\prime }lldoallsortsofthings.Andoneofthethingsyoucandotokindofmeasurehowmuchtheratismotivatedisle{t}^{\prime }ssayyo{u}^{\prime }verunhimthroughamazeandheknowsther{e}^{\prime }ssomefoodattheendofthemaze.Youcantiealittlespringtohistailandseehowhardhepullswhenyouopenthedoortothemaze.Sotha{t}^{\prime }sbecausetha{t}^{\prime }showmuchratworktheratiswillingtodo.Soyoucanmeasurethatoryoucanseehowfastheskittersdownthemazeandyoucangetanestimateaboutthera{t}^{\prime }smotivation.Andsothenyoumightsay,well,howmotivatedisahungryrat?Andtheanswerwouldbedependsonhowhungryheis.Butther{e}^{\prime }sanotheranswer.Italsodependsonwha{t}^{\prime }schasinghimwhenh{e}^{\prime }sgoingafterthefood.Soifyouhavearatandyouhavefoodoverhereandyouwaftingsomecatodor,ratshatecatodorandi{t}^{\prime }sinnate.Theyneverhavetoseeorsmellacattobeabsolutelypetrifiedbycatodor.Andsoifyouwaftingsomecatodorandthenopenthedoor,thatratwillzoomtothatfoodalotfasterthanitwillifi{t}^{\prime }sjusthungry.Soaratrunningawayfromsomethingthatitdoes{n}^{\prime }twanttowardssomethingthatitdoeswantisaverymotivatedrat.Andsooneofthethingswedidwiththefutureauthoringprogramtha{t}^{\prime }sgermanetothisideaofterror,becausether{e}^{\prime }sthisideaintheOldTestament,thefearofGodisthebeginningofwisdom.I{t}^{\prime }saprettyharshidea.Butther{e}^{\prime }ssomethingreallyusefulaboutit,becauseoneofthethingsyouseewithpeopleallthetimeisthatmaybethe{y}^{\prime }retryingtostumbleforwardtowardstheirideal.Aspoorlydefinedasitmightbe.Butthenthe{y}^{\prime }reafraid,right?The{y}^{\prime }reafraidaboutwhattheymightencounter.Andthatstopsthembecausefeardoesstoppeople.Itfreezesyoulikeapreyanimal.Andsopeoplemoveahead,butthentheygetafraidandthentheystopmovingahead.Andsoandtha{t}^{\prime }snotsogoodbecausenegativeemotionisareallypowerfulmotivator.Sow{e}^{\prime }remoremotivatedbynegativeemotionthanpositiveemotion.Quantitativelyspeaking,quantitativelyspeaking,youcanmeasurethat.Andtha{t}^{\prime }s,Ithink,becausewecanonlybesohappy,butwecanreallybesufferinganddead,youknow.Sowehavetopaymoreattentiontothenegative.Andtha{t}^{\prime }sbadbecausethenegativecanstopyou.Andthenmyclinicalpractice,youknow,Ioftentalktopeoplewhoaretryingtomakeadifficultlifedecision.Andtheyareweighingoutthecostsandthebenefitsofmakingthelifedecision,youknow.AndoneofthethingsIalwaystalktothemaboutis,waitasecond,tha{t}^{\prime }sanincompleteanalysis.Youhavetoweighoutthebenefitsandthecostsofdoingthis.Andyouhavetoweighoutthecostsandbenefitsofnotdoingthat,notdoingit.Andtha{t}^{\prime }snotthesameasthezerothatyouassumethatyo{u}^{\prime }restartingwith,right?Becausetonotmakeadecisionalsohasacost.Andsometimesthecostofnotmakingadecisionisfarworsethanthecostofmakingadecision,evenifthedecisionisrisky.Andsooneofthethingsyoucanderivefromthat,andthisisveryuseful,Ithink,isthatthisisalso,Ithink,whyi{t}^{\prime }ssousefultocontemplateyourmortality,sotospeak,isyo{u}^{\prime }rescrewednomatterwhatyoudo.Youknow,andthatactuallyfreesyou,isthatyouhavepathAthathascatastrophesandyouhavepathBthathascatastrophes.Andyoudo{n}^{\prime }tgettohavethenocatastrophepath,butyougettopickwhichone.Andtha{t}^{\prime }sreallysomething,becauseifyouknowthatther{e}^{\prime }sterribleriskassociatedwitheverythingthatyoudoanddo{n}^{\prime }tdo,thenyoucanaffordtotakesomerisks,becauseyo{u}^{\prime }renot,youknow,andthisisallwithinthearcmetaphor.I^{\prime }mstillmakingthecasethatdespitethefactthatyourlifeisessentiallycatastrophic,youcanmakeacovenantwiththehighestidealandthatwilltakeyouthroughitthebestwaypossible.I^{\prime }mstillmakingthatcase.Sothenyouthink,okay,well,I^{\prime }mtryingtomakethisdecision.I^{\prime }mgoingtogotrytodosomethingdifficult.Andis{n}^{\prime }tthatterrifying?Andthenyouthink,yeah,butwaitaminute.Wha{t}^{\prime }sreallyterrifyingisnotdoingit.Andthenyouthinkaboutthecostofnotdoingit.SointheFutureAuthoringProgram,wehavepeopledothislittlemeditativeexercise,whichisokay.Justthinkaboutyourinsufficienciesbyyourowndefinition,right?Thewaythatyoudo{n}^{\prime }tdowhatyouknowyoushoulddo.Aboutthethingsthatyoudothatyoushould{n}^{\prime }tdothatyouknowyoushould{n}^{\prime }tdobeyondashadowofadoubt,right?Ther{e}^{\prime }ssomethingslikethat.Andtha{t}^{\prime }sbadhabitsandpooraimandalloftheresentmentandhatredandaggressionandunresolvedconflictsandallthosethingsthataredementingyouandwarpingyou.Andthenthink,okay,thosethingsgettheupperhand,man.Theygettheupperhand.Andtheytakeyoutotheworstpossibleplaceyoucouldgointhenextthreetofiveyears.Whatexactlydoesthatlooklike?Andsoyousketchallthatoutandyouthink,hey,Ido{n}^{\prime }twanttogothere.Andsothenexttimethatatemptationcomesup,youthink,well,i{t}^{\prime }dbealotbetterformeifIdid{n}^{\prime }tsuccumbtothistemptation.I{t}^{\prime }slike,tha{t}^{\prime }skindofweak,eh?Yo{u}^{\prime }dlookalittlebetterifyoudid{n}^{\prime }teatlikeacheesecakeadayorsomethinglikethat.Youknow,tha{t}^{\prime }ssomething.Buti{t}^{\prime }snotthesameas,I^{\prime }mgoingtohavediabetesand{I}^{\prime }mgoingtolosemydamnleginfiveyearsifIdo{n}^{\prime }tgetmyeatingundercontrol.Tha{t}^{\prime }smotivating.Andsothenthetemptationcomesalongandyouthink,oh,howaboutno?Seriously,howaboutno?NotjustbecauseahighergoodwouldbeobtainedifIavoidedit,butbecauseaterriblecatastrophewouldbeavertedifIdid{n}^{\prime }t.Andso,well,soyouwanttogetyourfearbehindyou,right?Youwanttogetitbehindyouwherei{t}^{\prime }spushingyouforwardinsteadofinfrontofyouwherei{t}^{\prime }sstoppingyou.Andyougetyourfearbehindyoupushingyouforwardbyactuallythinkingthroughtheconsequencesofnotputtingyourlifetogether.Andtheleastofthoseisthatyouwasteitandsuffer,right?Becauseyo{u}^{\prime }regoingtosufferanyways,man.Soyouwasteitandsuffer.Tha{t}^{\prime }sabaddeal.Becausemaybeifyo{u}^{\prime }regoingtosuffer,youcouldatleastdosomethingnobleandgloriousanduprightandpowerfulandhonorableandadmirableandhelpfulanddifficult.Youknow,tha{t}^{\prime }sjustsomuchbetter.Andmaybetha{t}^{\prime }sgoodenoughsothatyouthink,hey,youknow,littlesuffering,i{t}^{\prime }sbasicallyworthit.Atleasti{t}^{\prime }sawayforward,youknow?Atleasti{t}^{\prime }sawayforward.AndhesaiduntoAbram,knowofasuretythatthyseedshallbeastrangerinalandthatisnottheirs,andshallservethosepeople,andthe{y}^{\prime }llafflictthemforfourhundredyears.God,h{e}^{\prime }shedginghisbetsherealot,right?HesaystoAbram,well,goout,youknow,intotheworld,andthenheconfrontsthemwithafamineandheconfrontsthemwithatyrannyandwithpowerfulpeoplehewantstotakehiswife.Andthenheloseshisnephewwhohehastofightwith.Andthenhehastogofightawar.Andnow,youknow,h{e}^{\prime }sreconstitutingthiscovenant,andGodsays,yeah,yo{u}^{\prime }regoingtohaveanationisgoingtocomefromyou,butthe{y}^{\prime }regoingtobeslavestotyrantsforlikefourhundredyears.I{t}^{\prime }slike,h{e}^{\prime }snotagreatsalesmanexactly,butthethingaboutitisthatthethingthatIlikeaboutitisthati{t}^{\prime }srealistic,youknow?Youknow,andyo{u}^{\prime }vegottothink,too,becausewhoknowswhyitisthattheBibleexistsorwhypeoplewroteit,but,youknow,ifthe{y}^{\prime }regoingtosellyousomething,Ido{n}^{\prime }tknowifthisisthewaytodoit.Youknow,becauseunlessyo{u}^{\prime }reasalesmanwh{o}^{\prime }ssophisticatedbeyondbelief,becauseyo{u}^{\prime }dthinkthatifitwasjustamatterofcontrollingthemasses,le{t}^{\prime }ssay,whichisone,say,Marxistinterpretationofreligion,orprovidingpeoplewithaprimitivedefenseagainstdeathanxiety,whichisessentiallytheFreudianinterpretation,thatyo{u}^{\prime }dkindofmakethedealsthatGodcutwithAbrahamalittlemoreonthepositiveandpolishedsideinsteadofmakingthemarealisticofferconstantlyliketheyare.Andtha{t}^{\prime }salso,tha{t}^{\prime }spartofthereasonIthinkitisreasonabletotreattheBibleasliterature.I{t}^{\prime }smorethanliterature.I{t}^{\prime }ssomethingotherthanliterature.Butyoucantreatitasliterature,andIthinkthereasonthatyoucantreatitasliteratureisbecausethecharactersareallcomplex,includingthecharacterofGodhimself.I{t}^{\prime }scomplexandsophisticated.I{t}^{\prime }snotone-sided.Andi{t}^{\prime }sparadoxicalandincomprehensibleattimes,butIthinkgoodliteratureislikethat,because,youknow,trueart,her{e}^{\prime }ssomethingabouttrueart.ThisissomethingIlearnedfromJung.I{t}^{\prime }ssosmart.Hewassosmart.Soimaginethatyouinhabitthelandthatyouknow,conceptuallyandpractically,andthenimagineoutsideofthatther{e}^{\prime }sthatmassivespaceofthingsthatyoudo{n}^{\prime }tknow,andevenoutsideofthatther{e}^{\prime }sthespaceofthingsthatnooneknows,right?Soi{t}^{\prime }stheknownterritorysurroundedbytheunknown.Tha{t}^{\prime }sthecanonicalarchetypallandscape.Andtheunknownmanifestsitselftoyou,andtha{t}^{\prime }swherenewknowledgecomesfrom,butthequestionishowisthatknowledgegenerated?Anditdoes{n}^{\prime }tjustleapfromcompletelyunknowntocompletelyarticulatedinonemove.Thatis{n}^{\prime }thowithappens.Ithastopassthroughstagesofanalysisbeforeitbecomesarticulable.Andthefirststageofanalysis,asfarasIcantell,isthatyouactitout.Soifsomethingreallysurprisesyou,thefirstwaythatyoureacttoit,yourcategoryisactuallyembodied.Yo{u}^{\prime }relikethis.Tha{t}^{\prime }syourfirstcategory.I{t}^{\prime }snotconceptualatall.I{t}^{\prime }sembodied.Andthenmaybeyoustartto,like,yo{u}^{\prime }reathomeatnight,and,youknow,somethingstartlesyouandyoufreeze,andtheni{t}^{\prime }sdark,andthenyourimaginationpopulatesthedarknesswithwhatevermightbemakingthenoise.Tha{t}^{\prime }sthesequence.I{t}^{\prime }slikeembodiedresponse,imaginativerepresentation,exploration,articulation.Tha{t}^{\prime }showinformationmovesfromtheunknowntotheknown.Andartistsarethepeoplewhostandonthatimagisticfrontier,andtheyputthemselvesoutintotheunknown,andtheytakeapieceofitandtheytransformitintosomemythologicalimage.Theydo{n}^{\prime }tknowwhatthe{y}^{\prime }redoingexactly,becausethe{y}^{\prime }reguidedbytheirintuition.Ifthe{y}^{\prime }rerealartists,otherwisethe{y}^{\prime }rejustpropagandists.Theyhavetobecontendingwithsomethingthattheydo{n}^{\prime }tunderstand.Andwhattheydoistheymakeitmoreunderstandable.Andthenpeoplegazeatthoseartworks,ortheylistentothestories,andthentheystarttobecomeinformedbythem,buttheydo{n}^{\prime }tknowhoworwhy.IwasattheModernArtMuseum,MuseumofArtinNewYork.I^{\prime }mafraidIdo{n}^{\prime }trememberwhichone,unfortunately.ButIwasinthisamazingroom,youknow,ithadallthesepricelesspaintingsfromthelateRenaissancehanginginit.Youknow,eachpaintingworth,whoknows,abilliondollarsmaybe,pricelesspaintings.Sotheroomwas,i{t}^{\prime }sashrine,anditwasfullofpeoplefromallovertheworldwhowerelookingatthesepaintings.Youthink,well,whatthehellarethesepeopledoingcomingtothisroomlookingatthesepaintings?Look,whataretheyupto?OneofthemwasapaintingoftheAssumptionofMary,right?Brilliantlycomposed,andtherewasallthesepeoplelookingatit.AndIthought,whataretheydoing?Theydo{n}^{\prime }tknowwhatthatmeans?Like,whyaretheylookingatthatpainting?Whyisitinthisroom?Whydoesitcostabilliondollars?Whyisthatpaintingworthsomuch?Andtheanswertothatis,well,wedo{n}^{\prime }treallyknow.Like,ithappened.The{y}^{\prime }resacredobjectsinsomesense,andwegazeattheminignoranceandwonder.Andthereasonforthatisthattheunknownshinesthroughthemaddestandinpartiallyarticulatedform.Andso...Well,tha{t}^{\prime }stheroleofart.Andtha{t}^{\prime }stheroleofartists.Youknow?Realartists,realartistsarecontendingwiththeunknown,right?Andthe{y}^{\prime }repossessedbyit.Theyhaveapersonalitytrait,openness,thatmakesthemdothat.Theyca{n}^{\prime }tevenhelpit.And{I}^{\prime }vehadlotsofcreativepeopleinmyclinicalpractice,andIcantellyou,theworstthingforcreativepeopleistonotbecreative,becausetheyjustdie.Becausei{t}^{\prime }s...I{t}^{\prime }slikemaybeyo{u}^{\prime }reatreewithafewmajorbranches,youknow?Tha{t}^{\prime }syourpersonality.Soifyo{u}^{\prime }reextroverted,man,youca{n}^{\prime }tbecutofffrompeople,becauseyoujustwither.Andifyo{u}^{\prime }reagreeable,youhavetobeinanintimaterelationship,oryoudie,youknow?Andifyo{u}^{\prime }reconscientious,man,andyo{u}^{\prime }reunemployed,yo{u}^{\prime }rejustgoingtoeatyourselfup,becauseyouhavetohaveaduty,andyouhavetocarryaload,becauseyoujustca{n}^{\prime }tstanditotherwise.Andopenpeoplehavetobecreative.Theyhavetobe,becauseotherwisetheydie.Theydo{n}^{\prime }thaveanyvitality.Andsothe{y}^{\prime }recursedwiththenecessityofputtingafootoutintotheunknownandmakingsenseofit.Andthenthe{y}^{\prime }realsocursedwiththenecessityoftryingtomakealivingwhilethe{y}^{\prime }redoingthat,whichtheyca{n}^{\prime }t,becauseyouca{n}^{\prime }t.I{t}^{\prime }salmostimpossibletomonetizecreativeaction,asmanyofyouwhoarecreativewillnodoubtfindout.I{t}^{\prime }svery,veryfrustrating.I{t}^{\prime }snotthatcreativeactioniswithoutvalue,right?Becausethecreativepeopleareentrepreneurs,andthecreativepeoplerevitalizecities,andthecreativepeoplemakethingsmagnificentandbeautiful.Youthinkaboutwha{t}^{\prime }shappenedinEuropeoverthelastthousandyears,saytwothousandyears,thisamazing,unbelievablecollaborationtomakethingssobeautifulthatthe{y}^{\prime }rejaw-droppingwhenyouwalkintothem.Youthinkabouttheeconomicvalueofthat,right?Imean,Ithinki{t}^{\prime }seitherFranceorSpaintha{t}^{\prime }sthemostvisitedcountryintheworld.I{t}^{\prime }soneofthosetwo.Ithinkther{e}^{\prime }smoretouristsinFrancethantherearepeoplemostofthetime.Andpartofthereasonforthatisi{t}^{\prime }sjustsodamnbeautiful.Youjustca{n}^{\prime }tstandit.Andyouthink,wha{t}^{\prime }stheeconomicvalueofthat?I{t}^{\prime }sabsolutelyincalculable.Andwha{t}^{\prime }sinterestingtooisthatyoubuildthatbeautyin,andthenthefartherawayyougetfromitintime,themorevaluableitbecomes,right?Insteadofdecaying,ithasexactlytheoppositeeffect.Itsvaluemagnifies.Andoneofthethingsthat{I}^{\prime }mdeeplyashamedofasaCanadianisthatoursenseofbeautyissounderdeveloped,w{e}^{\prime }resoprimitive.I{t}^{\prime }snotevenprimitive,tha{t}^{\prime }sthewrongword,because,youknow,Ido{n}^{\prime }tknowwhatitis.I{t}^{\prime }ssecondrate,i{t}^{\prime }ssecondrateatleast.I{t}^{\prime }sterrortoo,becausepeopleareafraidofbeauty.Buttheideathatartis...theconservativesreallyhaveaproblemwiththisinparticular,becauseconservativepeopletendnottobethatcreative.Andi{t}^{\prime }samysterytome,becausetheyshouldbeconcernedwitheconomicdevelopment.Andbeautyissounbelievablycrucialtoeconomicdevelopment,itjustyellsoutatyou,youknow?So,anyway,sotha{t}^{\prime }swhatartistsaredoing.AndsooneofthethingsIwouldsayisbuyadamnpieceofart,youknow?Findonethatreallyspeakstoyou,andbuyapieceofart,becauseyouinvitethatintoyourlife.Andi{t}^{\prime }salookoutifyoudoit.Ifi{t}^{\prime }sarealpieceofart,becauseyo{u}^{\prime }llalsogetalittleintroductiontotheartist,andthentha{t}^{\prime }llseepintoyourlife.Andtha{t}^{\prime }llchangethingslikemad.Buti{t}^{\prime }sreally,i{t}^{\prime }sunbelievablyworthit,becauseitopensyoureyestothedomainofthetranscendent.Tha{t}^{\prime }stherightwayofthinkingaboutit.Arealpieceofartisawindowintothetranscendent.Tha{t}^{\prime }swhatitis.Andyouneedthatinyourlife,becauseyo{u}^{\prime }refiniteandlimitedandbounded,right,byyourignoranceandyourlackofknowing.Andunlessyoucanmakeaconnectiontothetranscendent,thenyoudo{n}^{\prime }thavethestrengthtoprevail.Andtha{t}^{\prime }spartofthecovenant,tha{t}^{\prime }spartofthecovenantwithGod.Andyoucanseethat,becauseyoulookatthesemagnificentcathedralsthatourcivilizationbuiltoverthecenturies.Youknow,someofthose,the{y}^{\prime }restillbuildingtheSangridaFamiliainBarcelona,right,andi{t}^{\prime }sanamazingbuilding.Ithinki{t}^{\prime }sgoingtotakethemlike300yearstobuildthat.Youknow,peopleintheMiddleAges,the{y}^{\prime }dstartbuildingacathedral,andthe{y}^{\prime }dthink,w{e}^{\prime }llbedonethisin300years.Youknow,imaginethevisionthatittooktoinvestinsomethinglikethat.Welookatquarterlyreports.Weca{n}^{\prime }tthink300yearsintothefuturetobuildsomethingofthatkindofremarkable,remarkable,what,thosecathedralsareso,the{y}^{\prime }reperfect,the{y}^{\prime }retreesfirst,right,the{y}^{\prime }reaforest,right,theGothiccathedrals,the{y}^{\prime }reaforest,andthesunisshiningthroughthebranches.Tha{t}^{\prime }sthestainedglass,andthe{y}^{\prime }retheperfectbalanceoflightandstructure,becausethe{y}^{\prime }rerepresentingsomethingabouttheproperstructureofbeing,whichissomethingliketheproperbalancebetweenlightandstructure.Andtheyrepresentlikethesacredtragedyofmankind.Tha{t}^{\prime }swhythe{y}^{\prime }reintheshapeofacross,andthe{y}^{\prime }reopentothesky.Tha{t}^{\prime }swhytheyhaveadome,andthe{y}^{\prime }refullofgoldsothatitglitters,becausetha{t}^{\prime }slikethecityofGod,youknow.AndyoucanseethatintegraltoourcultureistheideathatbeautyisonepathwaytowardsGod.Andi{t}^{\prime }ssaying,ifyouca{n}^{\prime }tfindanotherpathway,thenwhydo{n}^{\prime }tyouusebeauty?Sure,mostofyoudothatwithmusic.Becausemusicistheonethingthatmodernpeopleca{n}^{\prime }tbecynicalabout.ThankGodforthat.Beingfascinatedbymusicbecauseofthat,itspeaksmeaningtopeople,right,evennihilisticpunkrockersaresodamnengagedwiththeirmusicthattheycanhardlystandit,andyoucanknockonthemandsay,look,youknow,yo{u}^{\prime }rehavingatranscendentreligiousexperience,andthe{y}^{\prime }lljusttellyoutofuckoff,becausetha{t}^{\prime }s...Becausetha{t}^{\prime }swhatpunkrockershavetodo,buttha{t}^{\prime }sstillwha{t}^{\prime }shappening,youknow.Imean,i{t}^{\prime }sstillwha{t}^{\prime }shappening.So,okay.Okay,soIgotintoallthatbecauseIwastalkingabouttheBibleasliterature,youknow,andtryingtolayout...becauseweneedinourculturetojustifythearts.AndIdo{n}^{\prime }twanttodothatbytalkingabouthighculture,talkingaboutsomethingabstractandevanescent.Tha{t}^{\prime }sthewrongwaytogoaboutit.Thisisvital.Youknow,like,oneofthethingstha{t}^{\prime }sreallyinterestingabouttheUniversityofTorontoisthattheonesideofthecampuswhereweareisbeautiful,medievalcathedral,andtheothersideisgod-awfulfactory.And,youknow,andthethingis,theattitudetowardsknowledgehasparalleledthatarchitecturaltransformation.Youknow,atonepoint,thehumanities,le{t}^{\prime }ssay,wereasacredendeavor,andsowastheartofbeingeducatedintheuniversity,andtha{t}^{\prime }sturnedinto,like,massfactory,andtha{t}^{\prime }sreflectedinthearchitecture.Thisis{n}^{\prime }taccidental.Noneofthishappensbyrandomchance,youknow.I{t}^{\prime }snotlikether{e}^{\prime }saconspiracyoranythingbecausethereis{n}^{\prime }t,butthatdoes{n}^{\prime }tmeanthatthesethingsare{n}^{\prime }ttangledtogether,andthelossofbeautyintheuniversitiesisacatastrophebecausewithoutthatbeauty,ther{e}^{\prime }snocalltohigherbeing.Youknow,thisisalsowhy{I}^{\prime }vementionedtopeoplethattheyshouldcleanuptheirrooms.Tha{t}^{\prime }sbecomequitetheinternetmeme,but{I}^{\prime }mreallyseriousaboutitbecausei{t}^{\prime }sreallyhardtodothat,and{I}^{\prime }vebeencleaningupmyroom,bytheway,foraboutfourmonthsnowbecausemylifewasthrownintosuchacatastrophe,andalsowewererenovating,andso,butitis{n}^{\prime }tjustthatyoucleanitup.Youalsomakeitbeautiful.Andi{t}^{\prime }sreallyhardtomakesomethingbeautiful,andi{t}^{\prime }sreallyworthwhile,andwha{t}^{\prime }sreallycoolisifyoulearntomakesomethingbeautiful,evenonething,ifyoucanjustmakeonethinginyourlifebeautiful,thenyo{u}^{\prime }veestablishedarelationshipwithbeauty,andthenyoucanstarttoexpandthatrelationshipwithbeautyoutintotheworld,likeintootherelementsofyourlife,andthatissoworthwhile.I{t}^{\prime }sjustincrediblycrazilyworthwhile,andtha{t}^{\prime }saninvitationtothedivine.Youknow,youhavetobedaringtodothat.Peopleareterrifiedofit.Peopleareterrifiedofcolour.Theypainttheirwallsbeige.The{y}^{\prime }reterrifiedofart.Theybuysomemassproducedthingbecausetheydo{n}^{\prime }twantanybodylaughingatthemfortheirlackoftaste,andtheywouldgetlaughedatbecausetheyhavenotaste.Butyouhaveto,well,i{t}^{\prime }sright,becausewhatdoyouknow,right?Youhavetodevelopit,andsoyo{u}^{\prime }regoingtostumblealongandmakemistakestobeginwith,andyo{u}^{\prime }regoingtoshowyourself,becauseifyoubuy,oh,Ithinkthisispretty,andyouknow,somebodycomesoverandgoes,hey,wha{t}^{\prime }supwithyou?I{t}^{\prime }skindofhardonyourself-esteem,butyo{u}^{\prime }restumblingtowardstheright,yo{u}^{\prime }restumblingtowardsthekingdomofGod.Tha{t}^{\prime }swhatyo{u}^{\prime }restumblingtowardswhenyoutrytomakeanaestheticdecisionandtoputsomethinginyourlifetha{t}^{\prime }sbeautiful,andi{t}^{\prime }sunbelievablyworthwhiletodothat.Andyouhavetosteerclearofthefraudsandtheconartistsandallofthat,andartisfullofthat,ofcourse,becausei{t}^{\prime }sdifficulttodistinguishbetweentherealthingandthefraud,buti{t}^{\prime }sunbelievablyworthwhile.Andsobacktoliterature.I^{\prime }mtellingyouthispartlybecause{I}^{\prime }vebeenthinkingalotaboutthehumanitiesandthearts.Andpracticallyspeaking,becauseIknowthatartistictypesarealsoentrepreneurialtypes,the{y}^{\prime }rethesamepersonalitytypes,andsoi{t}^{\prime }sverymuchworthwhiletomakeaneconomicandpracticalcaseforthissortofthing.Youstudyliteratureandthehumanitiessothatyoucanfamiliarizeyourselfwiththewisdomofourcivilization.Man,youshoulddothatbecausepeoplehavebeenworkingonthisthingforalongtime,andi{t}^{\prime }srichbeyondcomparison,sowhywould{n}^{\prime }tyoudothat?Andyouteachyourselftoreadandyouteachyourselftospeakandyouteachyourselftothinkandyouteachyourselftocommunicate,andIcantellyou,ifyoucanreadandthinkandcommunicate,youareabsolutely100$1,700 or something to repair it and or maybe more. But it was almost as much as the car was worth. I thought, well, I’m not going to do that. So I went online and I typed in the part and if you do that, you can get people to bid on sending you a used part from all over North America. So that’s kind of cool. So there’s all these junk dealers have got together and they have this, you know, network of communications. You put in the car part and then they send you a bid. And so this guy said, well, I’ll send you the bumper assembly, which is the whole bumper and the lights for like 250 bucks. And I thought, yeah, OK, you could do that. That’d be good. So then I said yes. And then he called me up. About half an hour later, this guy from way down south, he had a really deep sort of Mississippi accent. He said, wait a sec. Was that for the bumper or the bumper assembly? And I said, well, it was for the bumper assembly. He said, oh, I thought it was for the bumper. And then he said, but that’s OK. I’ll send it to you anyways. I thought, well, that’s pretty good. So I said, well, thank you. And then I hung up. And then half an hour later, he called me up again. And he said, look, I just went out and looked at that bumper assembly and there’s a plastic trim piece on the side and it has a scratch in it. And I thought I better tell you that just in case you didn’t want it. And I thought, wow, that’s so amazing. It’s like there’s a miracle, man. It’s like this guy, he’s somewhere in Mississippi. I’m never going to see him again ever. I’m never going to have any contact with him. Like he made a bad deal, right? Because the part was worth more than he decided to sell it to me for. But he stuck with his deal. And then he went over and above the call of duty. He said, well, this part that I’m selling to you for way less than it’s worth is damaged. So I thought I better tell you. It’s like, man, you got to recognize a miracle when you see one. That was a miracle. So I said, hey, look, thanks for calling, man. It’s OK. I can handle the scratch and the part. And he did. And I got the car fixed and forgave Matt. And, you know, it had a happy ending. So that’s trust, right? Because I didn’t know him from Adam. And he’s a primate full of snakes, just like the rest of us. And yet he was willing to simplify himself to the point where I could just take him absolutely at his word. And that meant we could trade even though we were strangers. It’s like, man, do not underestimate the utility of that. And then there’s eBay. So when eBay first started, you know, the idea was it’s not going to work because you’ll send me junk and I’ll send you a check that bounces. And that’ll be the end of eBay. Right. So these escrow agents popped up so you could ensure your transaction with them for like 10 percent of the transaction. They would get the check and the goods and make sure that they were OK and then send them on or ensure the transaction. But what happened was the escrow agents didn’t make any money. And the reason for that was no one cheated. Now, you think about how amazing that is. Right. You bring these people together across a whole continent. They’ve never seen each other before. They’re never going to interact with each other again. And this was before there were any reputation ratings on eBay. And yet the default transaction was you describe your goods honestly, including their flaws. You set a reasonable price. I decide to pay you. You ship the goods and I pay you. And it works. And what happened was that eBay produced it produced a tremendous amount of capital that was previously frozen. So frozen capital is when you’ve invested money in something. But the thing is no longer useful to you. So the money is just sitting there frozen. Right. So to speak. And you can’t get it loose because, well, you’ve got an attic full of junk. How are you going to get rid of that? Oh, eBay. And so all of a sudden, all these things that were just junk became valuable and everybody got richer. And none of that would have happened without the covenant that we established between each other. It’s predicated on trust. And so you might say that trust is the currency and currency is trust because it’s a promissory note. And if people lie, then the currency gets debased very, very rapidly. And so the economy runs on trust. And so that’s part of the overarching covenant. So Abraham makes this covenant with God and he decides that he’s going to aim high and live a good life and tell the truth. And that puts this boundary around him. It’s like a walled garden. It’s like a walled garden. And inside there, there’s all sorts of things that are happening that are complex and difficult. But outside there’s a boundary. And the boundary is, well, maybe things won’t. It’s like God says after the flood. He says, I’ll never send a flood again. That’s part of the story. And so there’s an intimation there that no matter how bad things get, they won’t get so bad that they’ll be catastrophic. But there’s a code to that, which is that you have to maintain the covenant. And we don’t know what that means, you know, because you know, you think it’s pretty obvious that if you treat people well, if you really think about it and you’re not being naively optimistic and like, you know, a nice, good person with all the weakness that that that that that that intimates. If you’re being hard-nosed and sensible, you understand that if you treat people, if you trust people, that’s an act of courage. If you’re not naive, right? If you’re naive, it’s an act of stupidity, because you might get bit. And you probably will. And if you’re naive and you get bit, you will suffer for it. It’ll traumatize you. But if you’re not naive and you know you can get bit, then you might ask, well, what should you do with people? And the answer is you should trust them. Not because you’re naive and not because they couldn’t betray you and not because you don’t know that they could betray you, but because if you hold out your hand in trust, then you’re inviting the best part of that person to step forward. And that won’t happen unless you take that initial step. And that’s courage, not naivety. And so to trust someone once your eyes are open, that’s an act of courage. And that opens up the world. You know, and you might say, OK. And so there’s this idea in this story that you can withstand it a fair bit of the catastrophe of life by establishing the proper covenant and by acting in a trustworthy manner and extending your hand to people properly. And you might say, well, OK, that’s sensible. I can understand how that would work. And I can certainly see how the opposite wouldn’t work, because, you know, if I have to be absolutely terrified that you’re going to betray me at every possible moment and we’re in a negotiation, we’re not going to get any work done, man, because I’m going to be figuring out what you’re up to all the time. And you’re going to be figuring out what I’m up to all the time. And we’re just not going to get anywhere. You’ll come and say you’re going to do something. And I can just simplify you. I can say you’re going to do what you said you do. I don’t have to worry about you. And then the same applies to me. And then we can go do something. And that’s how we generate wealth. So then you might say, well, if what’s the ultimate limit of that? You know, like we know that there’s corruption in our society and that people betray each other. And there’s deceit and all of that. And it causes things like the periodic collapse in 2008, which was complicated, but was partly engendered by corruption. Like, what would be the upside if we acted, if we really determined to act honestly? What do you think it is that people would be able to do with the world if we stopped acting in a corrupt manner? I mean, what’s the, like, what is the upside? Do you think we could, could, could, how far back could we push aging, do you think? If we hit it hard for 50 years, could we triple our lifespan? It wouldn’t surprise me. You know, all these terrible diseases that beset the planet, we could get rid of them. There’s no reason for hunger and starvation. We make enough food. It’s like, what would happen if we stopped acting badly? How much better could things get? Well, you start locally, I think. You start with yourself and you start with your family. But, you know, there’s intimations of the divine. There’s intimations of the kingdom of God and the covenant with God in the Old Testament. It’s like, you think, well, we speak secularly. You think, well, that’s an unprovable assumption. It’s like, well, we’ll just hold on a sec. What’s the assumption here, exactly? What is the operand for humanity? I mean, who’s, who’s going to say, right? Who’s going to say, especially in this day and age, man? There’s so many things happening that you can’t even comprehend them. What could we do if we put all of our effort into it? Well, you can experiment with that because you can start in your own household. You can start in your own room. And you can make miracles happen in the confines of your own space. There’s no doubt about that. All you have to do is try. You’ll see that that happens. And people are writing to me and telling me that they’re trying this and that that’s exactly what’s happening. And so, so we don’t want to be too cynical about, about where we might be headed. And Hagar bore Abram a son. Abram called his son’s name, which Hagar bore Ishmael, who is by tradition the forefather of several Arab nations and of Muhammad himself. And Abram was four score and six years old when Hagar bear Ishmael to Abram. So that’s the end of another story. And then, so that section ends. And then again, we have an encounter between Abraham and God. When Abram was ninety years old, and nine, ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, I’m the Almighty God. Walk before me and be thou perfect. Alexander McLaren, who was a biblical commentator who lived in the early nineteenth century, said, This phrase, walking before God, is not precisely walking with God, because that’s what Noah did, right? He says, It’s rather that of an act of life, spent in continual consciousness of being naked, and opened before the eyes of him whom we have to give account. I was pretty happy to stumble across that, because, I mean, I might have picked and chosen, of course. You never know whether you do that. But it does seem in keeping with the narrative strain of the chapter, right? Because what we’ve hypothesized so far is that God has called Abraham and said, you know, get out there in the world. Go to where it’s unknown. Go to where you’re a stranger. And get away from the familiar. Go out to the unknown. Establish yourself, and great things will come of it. Regardless of the proximal evidence, great things will come of it. And so I think that’s what the walking before God refers to. It’s not like Abraham is acting in certainty. There’s no certainty here. That’s the act of the leap of faith, even. Because it does require a leap of faith for you to move into the world. Because the world is a catastrophe. Self-evidently, the world is a catastrophe. And so there’s every reason for you to assume that you should just sit in your basement and hide from it. But that’s not it. It doesn’t help. It doesn’t make things better. And the thing is, perhaps you’re not built for that. You’re not built to hide. I don’t think that people are built to hide. I think it destroys them. And so walking before God, in some sense, means that Abraham, we could say, is taking the lead. He’s the person that’s going out there into the unknown. God says, well, great things are going to happen. But he’s a little short on details, that’s for sure. So the weight is still on Abraham. And that’s a good thing because it also, that ennobles Abraham, right? That’s the other thing that’s so cool is that if God had just laid out the whole story and, you know, brushed the branches from Abraham’s path while he was walking forward, well, then there’d be nothing for Abraham to do. There’d be no nobility in his own pursuit. And this is another thing that we don’t understand very well. It’s a really tough thing to understand. The other thing we don’t understand is like, how much trouble would you want there not to be? It’s a weird question, right? Because you want to have something to contend with. You want to have something that forces from you the best that you have. And so you have to have real problems. It’s something like that. Would you dispense with all your real problems? You could just lay down on a bed and have pablum infused into your mouth, you know, if all your problems were solved. And so maybe you want difficult problems that you can solve. Something like that. Because there’s some… I don’t know what it is about it. There’s the overcoming and the growth that comes along with that. There’s something about the nobility of the enterprise. You certainly see that when you go about having children, for example, which is, you know, the psychological literature is quite clear. If you do moment-to-moment comparisons of people who have kids and people who don’t have kids, the people who don’t have kids are happier. And so psychologists who tend to get things wrong, even when they make intelligent discoveries like that one, immediately some of them jump to the conclusion that, because happiness is the goal, that, well, there’s something about children that, you know, make you unhappy and that’s not good. It’s like, well, wait a second. Maybe that’s the wrong metric. It’s like, of course you’re less happy once you have children because you have to worry about them. You know, my neighbour down the street, who’s a very smart woman, said to me once, you can only be as happy as your unhappiest child. Which I thought was really good, you know, that’s really smart. But then it isn’t, well, if having children doesn’t make you happy, the answer isn’t don’t have children. It’s like, don’t be so stupid about being happy. That’s the answer. It’s because there’s a nobility in the pursuit, right? And of course now you’re responsible. You know, you have a new baby, you think, especially if you’re a new parent, you think, what the hell is this and what am I going to do with it? You know, it’s like, and then you’re done for the rest of your life. You never sleep properly again because you’re going to be worried about this creature that you have to take care of. But like, what the hell good are you if you’re not doing that or something else equally difficult? Because you just haven’t been called out yet. Unless you take on a responsibility like that. The idea that life is, you know, that happiness is the purpose of life. It’s like, great for happiness, man, if it comes along, you should be thrilled that it’s visiting you. But the notion that that’s what you should pursue, that’s the weakest possible notion. First of all, as soon as something terrible happens to you, you’re done. It’s like life is to be happy. It’s like, well, now you have cancer. So how’s that? How’s the happiness thing working out for you now? Or maybe it’s not you, you know, maybe it’s your father that has Alzheimer’s disease or some damn thing. And, you know, it’s like it’s a rare person that doesn’t have some catastrophe. One person away from them is like life is to be happy. That’s not right. That’s not right. And we can at least derive that from these stories. That isn’t what they say at all. God’s perfectly happy in the stories to grant the people with whom he forms a covenant happiness and prosperity. But there’s never a word that that’s the purpose. The rule is aim high and get your bloody act together. That’s the rule. And establish this contractual covenant with the ultimate ideal. And that will see you through the catastrophes. And that’s a much more mature way of looking at life, as far as I’m concerned. Because all you have to do is have your eyes half open and you see that the fundamental reality of life is tragedy and suffering. That’s inescapable. The question that doesn’t mean that it makes life unbearable or that it makes being something that shouldn’t have existed. That isn’t what it means. But it means that you have to contend with it and you have to get ready. And the willingness to adopt responsibility for yourself and for others is the precondition for that. And then maybe if you do that properly, then now and then you get some happiness. You know, you can sit at the end of the day and you have half an hour where your conscience is clear. And there’s nothing that you need to be doing. And you can relax and think, you know, that’s all right. Things are OK. And thank God for that. And that’s maybe where you get your happiness. So that’s something. That’s growing up, man, obviously. And to not know that and to not be taught that. Like everyone should be taught that. It’s so obvious we should be taught that. Well, that’s partly what these biblical stories do. And I’ll make my covenant between me and the and will multiply the exceedingly. And Abram fell on his face. Yeah. And God talked with him saying, as for me, behold, my covenant is with thee and thou shall be a father of many nations. God says this a lot to Abram, right? It’s almost like he has to remind him now and then. And it’s not surprising because he keeps going through these unbelievable adventures. You know, that are really psychologically and socially shattering. So it’s a good thing that this reminder pops up in it on and fairly frequently. But of course, Abraham is also open to it. And I think what does it mean? You know, I’ll talk personally for a moment, I guess. So I’ve asked myself a lot of questions in the last eight months, man. I can tell you that. And I’m still asking myself a lot of questions. And I’ve been conferring with a lot of people. Because I had lots of people who were helping me negotiate whatever the hell this is that’s happening. And, you know, I could ask them how I was doing and they would tell me a bunch of things I was doing wrong and some things I was doing right. And I could listen to them. I was asking questions all the time about how the hell I should manage this properly. And, you know, what I was trying to do and what seemed to serve me properly was to figure out how to do it correctly. That was the issue. That was the issue. It’s like I didn’t really care what happened. And I guess I really don’t care what happens. But I do care if I do it correctly because I don’t want to screw it up. I don’t want to screw things up. And that seems to be a reasonable goal for people. I mean, wouldn’t you like that as a goal that you don’t screw things up? Because you can’t control to, you know, your life isn’t fully under your control by any stretch of the imagination. But it might be nice to not have your conscience seating at you saying, look, you know, you had a big opportunity there. And you mucked it up because you’re weak and blind and you didn’t listen. That’s no good. The catastrophe is bad enough, as I said, without you being the bloody source of it. And so. Well, that’s Abram falling on his face, I guess, and also communing with God. It’s like you don’t. He wants to get it right. He wants to get it right. And there’s these things that beckon and promise. But. But it’s bloody easy to make a catastrophic mistake. And you’ll do that in your life, you know, and. And maybe humility is one of the things that can prevent that, because you can look and you can think, OK, what am I doing wrong? What am I doing wrong? What can I do better? How can I do this properly? And then maybe, you know, you get you get you get the intimation of the proper way to move forward. And maybe that’s what protects you when things are chaotic and in strife. And who knows what that’s worth? Neither shall thy name anymore be called Abram, which means high king, if I remember correctly. But thy name shall be Abraham for a father of many nations. Have I made thee? Oh, yes, Abraham, high father. Look at that. Abraham means father of a multitude. And I will make the exceedingly fruitful. And I will make nations of the productive, right? Productive. And that seems to be something that’s that’s good to be. I mean, like one of the things that I’ve thought about deeply. I thought deeply about death and the death of my family members and about funerals. And I thought about it partly because I had this weird experience once that I think I told you about where I took one of my clients to see an embalming, which was very strange experience. And I had a chance to talk to the funeral directors, you know, because they have weird jobs, you know. There’s this idea, well, the Freudian idea that people suffer from this terrible death anxiety. And there’s a whole line of social psychological theory theorizing called terror management theory that’s predicated on the idea that we defend ourselves against death anxiety with our belief systems. And like it’s Ernest Becker’s idea. He wrote The Denial of Death, which is a great book. But there’s a weakness in it because you see some people who aren’t like that, you know, like emergency room nurses aren’t like that. And palliative care nurses aren’t like that. My sister-in-law is a palliative care nurse. That’s a hard job, right? Because you go in there, you’re caring for people, you have, and they’re in pain. They’re in their last legs. You’re trying to make them comfortable. And you have a relationship with them because how the hell are you going to make them comfortable if you don’t? And then they go and die on you. And that just happens. That’s what happens every day, right? And what’s weird is that people can be palliative care nurses. It’s like, how do you figure that out? Because people can actually thrive in the face of death, strangely enough. And like these funeral parlour directors, they were interesting to talk to because that’s all they do, right? They just deal with, they deal with death and grief all the time. And it was very interesting talking to them because I talked to two of them. They found their job extremely meaningful. And I asked them, well, you know, does that, what does that do to your life? You know, you’re saturated with death and suffering. And there, and this is the same answer that I got from the palliative care nurses that it doesn’t undermine your life. It enriches it. Now, who would guess that, right? I mean, what the hell? That just doesn’t make any sense at all. But what it does is speak to human possibility because God only knows how tough you are. You know, I mean, if you read history and you read about what people have done, you think, wow, we’re pretty tough. People are, I read, there was a shipwreck in the Antarctica 100 years ago or so. And I read the story. It’s not a biography, if I remember correctly, of the captain. I might be wrong about that, but I’ve got the basic story, right? Well, they had a shipwreck in the Antarctica. And then they were there for a whole year in the Antarctica, you know, and none of them died. Not one. He didn’t lose a single man. Not one. He kept the morale high. And then they took this boat that was on the ship and they crossed like 400 miles of the roughest ocean, the roughest frigid ocean in the world, right? You don’t go in that ocean. And then they went to an island and they walked across the island, across these mountains that no one else has ever climbed since. And they went to the city on the other side of the island and they got a boat and they went and rescued their compatriots and everyone survived. It’s like endurance is the name of the book. You read that book, man, you think, wow, people are really tough, you know, and if it’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. So who knows how tough you are? And maybe you find out by going out to find out how tough you are, right? So you take on a challenge, one that you think you can master, just that’s just a bit beyond your grasp. And you master it. And then you’re a little tougher and you think, hey, that worked out pretty well. And so then you’re more of a monster. And then you go out and you find another challenge that’s even bigger. And you think, well, maybe I can do that, too. And then all of a sudden you can and you get a little bit bigger. And so, God only knows what the limit is of you. And you find out by pushing yourself against the world. And of course, that’s what Abraham is doing. And so, see, we’re very pessimistic, us modern people, you know, we’re pessimistic about humanity. That’s for sure. Dismal, wretched, planet destroying, cancer on the planet, right? As the Club of Rome described us so pleasantly back in the 1960s, you know? And I don’t know, maybe we’re ashamed of the Cold War. Maybe we’re ashamed of all the destruction in the 20th century and the hydrogen bomb and the continuing catastrophes of our societies. And we’re deeply ashamed of that and ashamed of ourselves personally. But it’s a hell of a thing to call us a cancer on the planet. There’s just no excuse for that. Because what you do with cancer is eradicate it. And I don’t think that that’s a very noble motive, personally. And I think it says a lot about the people who would use such phraseology that they would dare to conceptualize humanity in that manner. But you know, it would be nice if we could be optimistic. And I think, again, the problem with being optimistic is that it’s naive. So then the question is, is there an optimism that’s not naive? And I think there is. And the optimism that’s not naive isn’t just a visualization of how strong people can be. So one of the things that I tell people, I told my students in my class in Maps of Meaning, here is a goal. You want to be the person at the funeral of your father that everyone can rely on. How would that be? You want to be the person who’s broken and useless and adding to the misery in the corner. And look, I’m not making light of people’s grief. You know, I understand grief. But who do you want to be when there’s a crisis? Right? Do you want to be the person that everyone can turn to for strength? It’s like, why the hell not? Why not? That is a goal. That’d be a good goal. Because then if there’s a crisis, and there will be, it won’t be such a bloody crisis. Because there’ll be someone there that can deal with it. You know, so when I went and talked to these people at the funeral home, I envisioned that. I thought, okay, well, this is something you have to contend with if you’re going to be alive and adult. You have to contend with death and suffering, and you have to be ready for it. And you have to be there for the person. Because that’s all they’re going to have. And so there’s a goal, man. And in this time of nihilism, you know, it’s what’s the point of life, people ask. And they’re taught that at universities. What’s the point of life? Everything’s interpretation. Humanity’s a cancer on the planet. You know? Well, how about no? How about not that? How about that there’s something to us? And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee and their generations for an everlasting covenant to be a god unto thee and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the land wherein thou art a stranger. All of the land of Canaan, because of course Abraham went out into the land of strangers, right? But it says that he’ll master, if he keeps his covenant, he’ll master the land of strangers. That’s a wonderful thing to know. And I think a true thing. You know, because if you’re dealing with strangers, I’ve dealt with lots of strange people in my life. I’m a clinical psychologist. And that isn’t to say that everyone that I’ve dealt with was strange, because that’s not the case. But I have encountered some very strange people. And you know, the way to deal with strange people is to… You never lie to a strange person. That’s the thing. Especially if they’re paranoid. You never lie to someone who’s paranoid. It will come back to bite you. And if you’re in an extreme situation with someone who’s very unpredictable, the only thing you have that works is the truth. That works. I’ll tell you a little story. This is in my book. So I had this landlord in Montreal. He lived next door to me. He was an ex-Hell’s Angels biker. He’d spent a lot of time in prison. And his wife had borderline personality disorder, and she committed suicide when I lived there. And he was a rough guy, and he was a Quebecois. He spoke Jouel, which I could hardly understand. And he didn’t really know what to make of me, and I didn’t really know what to make of him. But we got along. You know, and I was very careful talking to him, as you might imagine. But I was. It was very… And we went over… My wife and I went over there, and we had a spaghetti dinner one night. And we sort of communicated. And I bought a poster from him, because he made these wooden posters that had neon on them. And that’s how he made a living. He’d kind of trained himself to be a bit of an electronics guy. So he made these things. And he was trying to quit drinking, and we talked about that. He was a lot older than me. He was like 20 years older than me. I was about 25 at this point. And we got along pretty well. But every now and then, he’d go out and get… and drink. And he could really drink. Like, he was one of these guys who could drink like 60 beer. And you think, well, no one can drink that much, and you’re wrong. I studied alcohol for like 10 years. Some of my subjects’ fathers drank 40 ounces of vodka a day and had been doing it for 20 years. So you can drink a lot, and he could drink a lot. And what would happen, he was trying to not drink, but he’d go out and go on a binge. And then he’d be going for like three days. And he’d drink up all his money. And then we’d hear him out in the backyard howling at the moon with this little ugly dog he had. And he’d howl, and the dog would howl, and he’d howl, and the dog would howl. And it was rather unsettling. And it made my wife nervous. And… And… But worse, you know, now and then, he’d come to the door at like three in the morning, eh? And he’d knock on the door, and he’d be standing there. And I don’t know how much experience you’ve had with rough guys who are alcoholic and who are drunk, but… They can be upright and unconscious at the same time. And so that was the state that he was in, you know. And he’d be just swaying. And he’d ask me if I would like to buy his toaster or his microwave, because he needed some money to keep drinking. And you know, I didn’t really want to buy his toaster or his microwave. But when the ex-Hell’s Angel, Jual-speaking, 60-beer-drunk Quebecois biker shows up at your door at three in the morning, and offers to sell you his microwave, the easiest thing is to say, I really need a microwave. So, you know, I bought the microwave and the toaster and some other things. But then my wife talked to me, and she liked my landlord, you know. Even though she was afraid of him, she liked him. And she said, you can’t buy any more appliances, because it’s not good for him. And I thought, huh, that’s an interesting problem, you know. So what the hell am I going to do about this? Because, no, I don’t want to buy your microwave. It just doesn’t seem to be the right answer at three in the morning. So one time he took me out on his 750 Honda, and he put me on the back of it. He wanted to show me his lair, I guess, his hangouts. And I got his wife’s helmet on, but it didn’t fit. It just sit on the top of my head. And he said, I got on the bike and he said, if the cops chase us, we’re not stopping. And then away we went. And we went to these bars downtown on San Laurent. They were very rough places. And he got into like four fights that night, because he was a rough guy, you know. And these kind of punk guys would come up to him and sort of challenge him and act stupidly around him. And he was very skeptical. And if you were acting stupidly around him for any length of time, he’d just hit you, because he felt that that’s what you deserved. And perhaps he was right. So I had a firsthand opportunity to observe him. So anyways, he, sure enough, about a week or two after we had this conversation, he showed up at the door. Knock, knock, knock, you know. I opened the door and he was standing there with his eyes kind of half closed. And he was swaying. And he had, I don’t remember what the appliance was this time, but he wanted to sell it to me. And I said, I’m not, Paul, I can’t buy this. I’m not going to buy this, because I know you’re trying to quit drinking. And if I give you this money, then you’re going to go and drink it up. And it’s not going to be good for you. And what else did I tell him? I think I told him as well that this whole thing of him coming to my house at like two in the morning was scaring my wife, who he liked, and that it had to stop. And believe me, man, I was thinking about it. I was thinking about what I was saying. Because he was watching me like a rough guy watches you. And a rough guy watches you like this. He thinks, if you say one thing that indicates contempt, you’re going to bloody well pay for it. And so I was finding my words like, you know, I was crossing a swamp and trying to look for the rocks underneath the surface. And I said what I had to say very, very carefully. And he looked at me for about 15 seconds. And that’s a long time to be looked at, at three in the morning. And he left. And he never came back to sell me anything again. And we got along fine. But that’s a good illustration of this issue with regards to truth and success in the strange land. Because I was in the strange land when I was talking to my neighbor, my landlord. And I managed to say what was true carefully enough, so despite the fact that he was a very violent person. And that he was a very intoxicated person. And that he had every reason to be suspicious of me. And we couldn’t communicate very well. And I didn’t do what he wanted. And so we don’t want to underestimate the utility of establishing this bounded relationship with the ideal. And attempting to live with some nobility in truth while aiming at the highest ideal. There’s nothing about that that’s anything but a false notion of truth. And that’s the only thing that’s going to be useful in the future. There’s nothing about that that’s anything but strengthening and positive. And it’s exactly what you need to set against the catastrophe and uncertainty of life. And as far as I can tell, that’s what these Abrahamic stories are attempting to communicate. So we’ll stop there. Thank you. Applause I have to make an announcement. I’m going to do a talk August 22nd, I think. Not sure of the date, but I’ll find out. With Gad Saad from Concordia. And so with the next social worker named Serena Singh. And with Faith Goldie. I think Faith is going to be there as well. So the tickets for that will go on sale. I’m not hosting this. Someone else is dealing with it. But the tickets for that will go on sale within approximately a week. And I’ll post that on my… I’ll probably make an announcement on YouTube, but I’ll Twitter it and all of that. So and I think I mentioned to you guys last week that I would like to continue this series. But I think I’ll do it once a month. And I’ll try to do it in this theater. But I haven’t got word from the people who run the theater. That’s the university. Whether or not it’ll be accessible. But I’ll figure something out. And so… Oh, hi Serena. Serena is the person who’s going to be hosting this. It’s August 22nd. 7 to 10 p.m. at Ryerson. Okay. Tickets go on sale Monday. All right. And then… And then… Oh, there’s a special Freedom of Speech edition of the Hemingway’s Restaurant Jordan Peterson discussion group tonight. So that’s at 10 p.m. So you’re all welcome to attend that. So that’s 142 Cumberland Street. Okay. So that’s it for announcements, I guess. And then let’s say for questions. Yes, I was going to let you ask the first question last time, wasn’t I? Okay. So I will do that. And so let’s make sure again everybody to speak into the mic clearly so that the YouTube people can hear. And you know, the ghostly YouTube people. And so go ahead. Go ahead. My question, I was quite impressed with your presentation last week. And I wasn’t quite sure where it was going at one point. Neither was I. And that’s okay because at one point I listened and I thought what you basically were talking about, this is what I saw, you were embodying my body and spirit and bringing it all together as one. And you touch on it a bit tonight when you talk about truth. This is where we need to go, right? And I know you say be positive and all that. And yeah, that’s right. I agree. It’s scary what’s going on right now. However, we have the power to stay in the positive. What you talked about last week, you talked about using our intuition, which I consider our higher self, using consciousness. And you made reference, I can’t remember exactly what you said, but you held your hand and you talked about emotions and bringing intellect on top. And when you said emotions, everything just lit up for me because I’m thinking that’s our heart chakra. That’s what combines our lower self, our physical being, the material stuff, all the stuff that doesn’t really motivate us with our higher self. And when you talked about emotion, I wanted to talk about the emotion of love. And I find so many people are terrified. It’s a four-letter word, I know, but it doesn’t have to be bad. Okay, so I remember why when I talked to you last week, why I wanted you to ask this question. So, okay, so I’ve talked a lot in this lecture series about truth. And, you know, I think there’s a battle in the biblical stories all the way through between love and truth in terms of their primacy. And so, and I’ve concentrated a lot on truth in my own thinking. But I, and it’s hard to talk about love because it’s a word that people have mouth to death. You know, as soon as you start talking about love, then people should just go into a different room and not listen to you, you know, because it gets, it can get sappy and new agey just like that. And I don’t like that at all. But it still is something that has to be contended with. And I think, so I’ve been trying to conceptualize, let’s say, what this covenant might constitute. And I think the love part, so here’s this. So, you know, there’s this book by Goethe called Faust, and it’s in two volumes. Faust I and Faust II, logically enough. One was written much later than the other. And Faust basically sells his soul to the devil for knowledge. And the devil in Faust is Mephistopheles. And Mephistopheles is quite a well-developed character. And Goethe has Mephistopheles say what he’s about, which is really quite cool. So it’s like the adversary of the world, evil itself, gets a chance to speak and make its case. And Goethe thought this was so important that he actually had Mephistopheles announce himself once in Faust I. And then using the same words, you know, phrased differently, again in part II, it really struck me, it really struck me. So what Mephistopheles says is that the world is such a charter house of suffering and destruction that it would be better if it never existed. And so that what he’s working to is to bring existence to an end because it is not justified by its suffering. It’s like that’s… it’s an argument very similar to the argument that’s made by Ivan Kamaratsov. Thank you. Russians, eh? You can’t pronounce them or live with them. But he basically, he’s an atheist and does a very good job of detailing out the atheist argument or maybe an anti-theist argument. And he’s arguing with his brother, Alyosha, who’s a monastic novitiate, who’s a very good guy, but not an intellect. Ivan’s an intellect and a very powerful one. And he basically tells Alyosha that all of the cosmos isn’t worth the suffering of one child. He tells this story about this, and Dostoevsky took this from a newspaper, about this parents that locked their four-year-old daughter in an outhouse overnight. And she screamed about it until she froze to death. So Dostoevsky used that argument. He tied that into Ivan’s anti-theist argument against Alyosha. It’s a very, very powerful argument. The Brothers Kuramahtsov is an absolutely mind-boggling, amazing book. I would highly recommend it. And so that’s the Mestaphelian perspective. Mestaphelian perspective is that being itself is so corrupt that it shouldn’t exist. So then you think, okay, well that’s fair enough. That’s a decent argument. It’s understandable. But the problem comes when you try to implement that. And what happens when you implement it, as far as I can tell, you adopt that Mestaphelian attitude of bitterness and resentment and destruction, is that you make all the suffering that you’re complaining about far worse. I think that’s what happened at the base of things in the 20th century, is that there was a powerful movement among humanity to bring being itself to a halt. You know, culminated in the development of the hydrogen bomb. And the high probability for many, at many periods of time, that we were going to do something permanent and fatal. Which seems like a bad idea. It seems like a bad idea. So what’s the opposite of the Mestaphelian attitude? And I think the opposite of that is what’s presented in the biblical stories in the guise of love. And that is the wish that things would be good. It’s something like that. That’s what love is, I think. It’s the attempt to orient yourself towards making things better. And it’s predicated on something like a deep appreciation for being despite its suffering and deficiencies. And maybe a decision that you’re going to act to bring about things, to move things towards the good. And I think that’s the thing that sets the parameters of the aim. It’s the opposite of the Mestaphelian attitude. It’s like to work towards the betterment of being because you’ve decided that you’re going to open your heart to existence, something like that. And it’s within that framework that truth takes place. I think, because truth has to serve something. It can serve truth, but it has to be bounded inside something. And I think that that’s what it’s bounded inside. What I was going to refer to with that was David Hawkins’ role power versus force. And he put it on a quantifiable scale, all different emotions. He called it consciousness, and he put love at 528 Hz. He put shame at 20. I’m not sure if I’ve got these 100% right. Guilt, I think, at 30. Fear at 50. And it shows you how far the people who are really knocked down have to get to love. And I’m thinking if we could quantify love on a term, it means different things to everybody, and rightly so. But can we get to that frequency? And if you look at the solfeggio notes, you know the musical notes? I’m afraid I’m going to ask you to stop, because I should go to another question. Thank you very much. Okay, let’s… Applause So you’ve been an educator through the rise of the smartphone, and my question basically relates to procrastination and task delay. Needless task delay, specifically. And given the unprecedented level of distraction that we have in today’s world, I just wanted to get your perspective from a psychological standpoint on, other than cleaning your damn room, what would you suggest to a student who’s looking to overcome these things? Well, I think with any, let’s call it addictive process. I mean, email is powerfully addictive, right? Partly. It’s a slot machine, and I mean that technically. So when you pull, that’s a variable ratio reinforcement schedule, if I remember correctly. And it’s very addictive, because if you pull on the slot machine arm enough, you will win. And you never know which pull will reward you. And so not only is that addictive, it’s very hard to extinguish that. And so, email’s like that, because there’s always something beckoning, and now and then it’s a jackpot. And social media’s like that, because, you know, people are posting interesting things. And so, well, how do you overcome an addictive process? And partly, you do it by replacing it with something better. Right? So, when people study drug and alcohol use, they often make an elementary mistake, which is to try to figure out why people use drugs and alcohol. That’s not a smart thing to wonder. We know why people use cocaine. Cocaine directly stimulates the systems that produce positive emotion. It’s like, so there’s no mystery there. The mystery with cocaine is very, very simple. Why don’t people take cocaine all the time until they die? That’s the mystery, really, because you can get isolated rats to do that. And for some people, alcohol has the same kind of effect, except it’s mediated by opiates. But often what people have to do to get themselves out of an addictive process is to find something better to do to replace it. And so, I would say, the problem with the gadgets, and I mean, they’re amazing things, is that they interfere with… They proximately interfere with medium to long-term goals, I would say. And so, I think the first thing you have to do to bring them under control is figure out what it is that their use is interfering with. It has to be something important. So you think, well, I want to do something important. What is that? Well, it could be personal. Maybe you want to have a relationship. You want to get married. You want to have kids. You want to have a career that’s meaningful. You know, you want to have a life. You want to have an Abrahamic adventure and be the father of nations, let’s say. Well, you can’t be ratting away on your cell phone and doing that. And so, I think part of it is to set your sights high and make a plan and figure out who you could be. And see if obsessive utilization of smartphone fits into that vision of nobility. And it will, partly, because they’re unbelievably powerful communication devices. But so often, it’s for lack of something better to do. And it also interferes. So that’s about the best I can do with that. Hello, Dr. Peterson. So you’ve been talking with some of the conservative candidates for leadership this year. I know you talked with most all of them, right? Not all of them, but a number of them, yes. You talked with Andrew, though, right? Yes, I did. Yes, so something very interesting popped up in my Facebook feed. So it was an ad for the conservative party. And it was suggesting that we cut funding to public universities that don’t support free speech. Yeah, that was probably my fault. Yeah, see, precisely, because this is something you say in some of your wilder moments. And he says that we should cut the university’s funding by 25% and let them battle it out for the remains. And he’s taken that to his platform. But now what you’re doing is, well, one of the things you’re doing is you’ve created this website that identifies the postmodern lexicon and helps people distinguish between postmodern courses and not. And so people don’t take them. Or take them if they want. It would be interesting to know what sort of malevolent postmodernists just study you meticulously and try to use all your knowledge of it. Anyway, but what you’ve said, though, you said that what we need to do is starve it out from the source. Yeah, okay, so yeah, look. I do, I know where you’re going. So about two weeks ago, three weeks ago, I went up to northern Saskatchewan. My parents have a cottage up there. It’s way the hell out in the middle of nowhere. And there’s no cell phone, although we do have internet now, which is probably bad and good. But anyways, I got to take a bit of a break, which was good, because I haven’t really been able to think. Because more broadly about, say, what I’m doing, because I don’t know what the hell I’m doing exactly. This is all very strange. But one thing I thought about, I was out on the lake, I was canoeing around, and I thought I’d thought about war, you know, because I was very irritated. I’m very irritated about what’s happened to the universities. And there’s a hint of malevolence about it. And I’m not a fan of ideological possession. And I’ve been set back up on my heels a lot over the last eight months by the onslaught of what emerged when I said that there was words I wouldn’t say. And so it’s put me into a defensive posture, let’s say. And I had been thinking in terms of war metaphors, you know. Like, this is a battleground, and that there’s a war going on, an ideological war. And I do believe that that’s true. But then I was reading, and I did this partly for this course, I was reading the Sermon on the Mount, and one of the things it says is, resist not evil. And I don’t know what to make of that line. And so I was talking to a bunch of people about it, and reading about it a lot, and trying to figure out what it meant. And partly what it means is don’t waste time. Right? Because when you’re fighting against something, then there’s something else you’re not doing. And then I thought, also when I was out there on the lake, I thought, well, do I really want to be in a war? Because war, that’s not heaven. That’s for sure. It’s really stressful. And people get hurt. And so I thought, well, maybe that’s just the wrong way of thinking about it, even though there’s a battleground issue here. And I thought, well, wait a second, maybe the right thing to do in a situation like this, and this is maybe something that those on the alt-right might consider, is that the right thing to do maybe is to outline a better way, rather than go directly on the attack. Now, that might seem somewhat at odds with my idea of the website. And perhaps it is somewhat at odds with that. I’m not sure about that. But what I’m trying to do, instead of conducting this like a war, let’s say, is to conduct it like a movement towards something better. And that would be better. Now, with regards to cutting the university’s funding, I thought about that too. I thought, wait a second, that’s not going to work out, because it’s inviting political interference into higher education. Now, the political interference might be of the counterbalancing kind, because the evidence that the humanities in particular have tilted almost 100% to the left is overwhelming. And so maybe some counterbalance from the right would set things more towards the middle. But the problem is, is when you open up the door to political interference with higher education content, you can’t close the door again. And so on reflection, I thought that it probably was a suboptimal idea. And that would be better instead, was to… and this is what I want to do when I launch the website. I want to ask students, the students who will be using it, it’s like, what do you want from university? Because here’s your options. You can come out ideologically possessed. You can buy this doctrine, this pathological doctrine, and you can become bitter and resentful. And you won’t learn to communicate properly, and you won’t read the great works of civilization. And you won’t learn to think and write. You won’t become noble in body and spirit. Is that what you want? Or do you want the opposite? Do you want a real education? And then I want to explain what that means, like I did tonight to some degree. You know, that there’s absolute value in learning how to put yourself together and to communicate, and to familiarize yourself with the classic works of civilization. And I want to offer that, I want to do what I can to offer that as the proper alternative, instead of staying ensconced in this notion of a battle, which is just… I just don’t think it’s the right metaphor. So… Either, and Dr. Peterson, I just want to say that I think what you’re doing is absolutely miraculous. It helps change my life, and I’m sure at least, raise your hand if Dr. Peterson has helped change your life. So, for the better or for the worse? Ask him to. Look at it. Well, it’s about 40 people maybe. And that’s miraculous, you know. And I think, and your thinking is going to be, it’s going to be all over the place in the Canadian election in two years. And I think that… God, that’s a horrible thing to contemplate. You better watch out for it, buddy. And you need… And there’s going to be a lot of talk about how Andrew Scheer’s political message is going to stem from yours. And I think it’s really important that he doesn’t censor himself like other conservative politicians are doing. And because, I don’t know, we need to unite under a valid, thoughtful, articulate, conservative voice. And what do we have now? We have Trump. That’s what’s… You know, we don’t have any strong, articulate, male voices in our political discourse right now. That’s what it feels like. Well, it’s definitely time for you to develop one. So, looks like you’re on the right path. Hello. Hello Dr. Peterson. Thank you for everything you’ve done this past year. And I’ve been doing everything, the political stuff, this lecture series. I’m going to get you to move just a… Yes. Great. Belt it out, man. Okay, so I’ll try to be succinct. I have two comments and one question. My first comment is you mentioned how you were prevented from uploading your YouTube video from last week. I actually attend that lecture and I make pretty detailed notes. So if you want, maybe I can email you. It’s okay. I’ve got it. My account’s reinstalled. Reinstored. Reinstored? Restored. Restored. Yeah. And so it’s okay. It’s okay. It’s straightened out. And I’m going to upload all the videos to a bunch of other sites and so this isn’t going to happen again. But I appreciate that. I’ll actually miss some lectures and I do want to look at them online. My second comment is about sort of kind of going into the commentaries of Christian theologists over the centuries, like you’ve done yourself. I just would like to encourage everybody to also look at not just Western Christianity but also Eastern Christianity, like the Orthodox writings. There’s a big difference between the two in that the Western sort of theology comes out of the Roman law, Roman justice. So there’s a lot more of an emphasis on kind of justice and Christ came down on the cross for our sins. So there’s that kind of like legal payback, if you know what I mean. Right. Right. The Eastern theology is a lot more… It focuses a lot more on love and on sort of the positive aspects. And if you do read like the first four centuries of Christianity where there was no schism, there’s very little mention of like a sort of legalistic framework. It’s a lot more, I don’t know, prosaic or more heartfelt, I guess. So I think it’s important that we also in the West look at the Eastern counterpart, especially more so now because I do perceive a lot of fake love as being at the center of this malevolence that you mentioned. So like, you know, this whole thing about demonizing the opposition, saying that they’re heartless, they have no love, this and that. I perceive that as a lot of fake love. And I think that we have to keep in mind what true love is. Sometimes it looks ugly, like in dealing with psychiatric patients, maybe other countries are not as liberal as Canada, but they get results a lot more often. You know, as many psychiatric patients on the road, for example, in Greece, where I’m from. So yeah, that’s kind of my comment that we need to focus a lot more on what real love is, I think, and not just the kind of love that you can put on a scale. Because I don’t think that you can put love on a scale. I’ve been talking, as some of you know, to this guy, Jonathan Pagio, who’s an Orthodox carver, and he started a YouTube channel. And he’s talking a lot about Orthodox issues, and I’m pretty ignorant when it comes to Orthodox Christianity. But from what I understand of it so far, there’s plenty to be learned. So, yeah. I’m Orthodox myself. I just recently came back to my faith two years ago. So, basically, that was the original Christianity. Then there was the schism of 1054 between East and West, because of the conflicts that the Eastern Christians have with the Pope. And then after that, you also had the schism internally within the West, between Catholicism and the Protestants. So that’s kind of like the big difference. Christianity actually came from the East. So I think that’s why it’s important that we look at the most ancient texts, because those were the ones that were closest to the original message. So not my question. It’s about atheism. You might hear a lot of times people criticizing anybody that has any sort of belief in a deity or a god, that you’re just somebody that has an imaginary friend. You know, like the heavenly father that you have to adhere to, that you have no will of your own. So then, there’s also, like, wouldn’t the counterargument be that, okay, so if I have a good relationship with my father, and that’s why I’m more likely to accept a higher deity, then could it be that you, as an atheist, maybe you have conflict with your father, and that’s why you’re adverse to kind of submitting to a higher being that kind of dictates your life? Well, you’re attempting a psychoanalysis of atheism, you know, and there’s many factors that go into atheism. I would say that you could make that case in some situations, but not in all. I do think, though, and I think this is perhaps where your question is stemming from, is that it’s no fluke that, at the same time that one of the consequences of the death of God that Nietzsche announced back in the late 1800s is the all-out assault on masculinity that’s occurring in our culture now. And those things are associated. And I do think that does have to do with a lack of faith in the masculine spirit. And that’s a very bad thing, because, well, it’s a bad thing for everyone, obviously, because women have a partially masculine spirit, and they have to put up with men. And so to demolish that, or to fail to nurture it, which is certainly what’s occurring, is just a pathway to absolute disaster. So, yeah. Yeah. Hi, Peterson. So this is the type of question that you hate, because it’s in the category of why you believe what you believe. And it’s a type of question that makes you say, if I have it right from the last time, quote, what the hell makes you think it’s any of your business? So I’m going to try to frame it properly. And I’m asking this at lecture 10 of 12, and after having listened to quite a few hours of you here and elsewhere. Okay. And so in your second interview with Transliminal Media, you lay out a few things. I have some quotes here. I’ll skip them for brevity. You get to the point where you’re discussing the embodiment of the logos by Christ as a historical figure. And then you say, quote, is his resurrection real? Did his body resurrect? I don’t know. In today’s lecture, you alluded to the fact that there are states of consciousness that perhaps we don’t know how to access anymore. And let’s say that I’m with you. Let’s say I’m with the idea that there are unknown ways to get intimations of the divine, that the embodiment of the logos is associated with physiological transformations, the upper limits of which are unknown, and that we might currently classify as paranormal. But to dumb it right back down to my level, I’m asking about the guy commonly depicted with long hair, nailed to a cross, until dead as a doorknob. And all of this goes to the heart of the question of literalism and religious interpretation. It goes to the heart of what we’re doing here at this lecture series. Are we examining the psychological significance of these stories, or are we entertaining the possibility of these fantastical events? I might be struggling with the concept, but I haven’t been able to square away and reconcile those statements by you. So the question is, on the question of the resurrection of Christ, why is your answer to your own question, I don’t know, instead of, at the very least, probably not? Well, you’re definitely right about me hating that question. Well, I called this series, The Psychological Significance of the Biblical Stories, for a reason. And the reason was that I’m partially qualified to talk about such things. When I step outside of that, then I’m not where I should be. I don’t think that… See, I don’t think that this is… I’m not going to get this right, I can’t get the words exactly right. This isn’t about what I believe personally. It’s partly because I don’t know what I believe. I don’t know what I believe. The world’s a very strange place, I’ve had some very strange experiences in it. I don’t think it’s helpful for me to step outside my jurisdiction and speculate precisely. The easiest thing would be to say… I think I said what I had to say today. I don’t think that we know what the upper limits of human possibility are. I don’t know what that means metaphysically. What I do understand from the Gospels is that even the accounts of Christ’s resurrection are complex and difficult to understand. I think, from reading Jung, in large part, that you can’t understand the human possibility. I think it does stand for the capacity of the human logos to die and resurrect continually as it strives upward. I’m not willing to say that that’s all it means, because I don’t know what everything means. And I don’t know about the fundamental metaphysics of being. Like, I do believe that it’s accurate to construe being, and that’s what I believe. I believe that is the most accurate way of representing being. It’s not the most accurate way of representing the objective world. That’s not the same thing. Being is that set of experiences which we inhabit. And that’s only partly objective. And it’s not obviously reducible to the material. Not in any straightforward way, because we don’t understand the material that we’re talking about. And when we do attempt to understand it, say at the quantum level, we run into mysteries that baffle the most intelligent of us and aware. So I’m going to have to leave the question hanging, partly because I don’t know what I think. But partly because there has to be a line between what I believe and what I don’t. There has to be a line between what I believe and what I can communicate. You know, what you believe is beyond your capacity to articulate, the deepest levels of belief. And I can only share with you what I have actually come to understand. And there’s things that I don’t understand, and that’s definitely one of them. I don’t know how to draw a line between the symbolic significance of the biblical events, say the symbolic significance of the biblical events, and the metaphysics that’s underneath them. And I think you see the same thing in Jung, because when Jung writes technically and formally, he never talks about God. He always talks about the image of God, which is not the same thing. The image of God would be your subjective experience of God. It says nothing about the objective reality of God, because your subjective experience can’t say much about objective reality. But even in Jung, you get this mix, you know. Sometimes it’s psychological, but then it’s not. Sometimes it’s psychological, but then he makes a metaphysical move. And I think that reflected also the limits of his knowledge, because Jung had profound revelatory experiences. He was a very strange person, you know. And I think what’s best for me is to stay on the ground that I’m competent on, and to say what I can say about the psychology, and to reach beyond that briefly when it’s necessary, but other than that, to leave it to hell alone until I understand it better, assuming that I ever do. So. Thank you. Thank you. So because of these lectures, I’ve been reading the Bible, and I’m obviously not finished, but I’m fairly familiar with how it goes. And I’ve been thinking about two parts of it in specific, which is the story of Isaac and the crucifixion of Christ, which is strategically one of the things that Christ says on the cross, which is, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? And I’ve been trying to understand that, because that’s one hell of a thing for the Son of God to say. And you think that would have been edited out. Yeah, no, seriously, it’s like, why isn’t that gone? You know, it’s very inconvenient. Yeah, and in… Well, you haven’t touched on the story of Isaac yet, but there’s this thing called typology, which I’m sure you’re aware of, but basically the idea that what’s going on in the Old Testament is sort of the laying out of types for Christ, and that Isaac is essentially a type of Christ because they have all these similarities. And so I’ve been thinking about it in that context and thinking about the parallels between them, between Isaac and Christ. And one of the things that also struck me was mostly the differences between Isaac and Christ. And the main difference, it seems to me, is sort of a difference in direction of sacrifice. So the sacrifice of Abraham is Abraham sacrificing his son to God, and then the sacrifice of Jesus is God sacrificing his son to mankind. And I’ve been trying to understand basically how that works, and in relation to the… You and Western civilization for 2,000 years. Yeah. Well, there is these transformations of sacrifice, right? So the next thing that happens in these stories is that the circumcision starts to come in as a sacrifice, and it seems to be something like the beginnings of replacement for sacrifice of animals. You know, there’s this psychologization of sacrifice. So first it’s pure external enacted out, and then it becomes something that’s more conceptual, like it becomes embodied in the form of the circumcision, and then it becomes more conceptual. And that conceptual transformation keeps occurring, and it seems to… Well, it culminates to some degree in this idea of the sacrifice of Christ, whose God sacrificing his son to mankind, but the sacrifice is much more complex than that, right? It’s also Christ sacrificing himself to God. And I think that the issue there is something like… Well, let’s say you’re supposed to offer up the best that you have to God. That’s the sacrifice. That’s what happens with the high quality animals that Abel sacrifices. Okay, but there’s something better than the best that you own. Well, what’s that? Well, part of it might be… Well, the relationships you have with people. Are you willing to sacrifice them to pursue the highest good? Well, then are you willing to sacrifice yourself or your son, like your son might be? That’s a tough one. That’s a tough one. I can understand the idea of sacrificing yourself better. I’m still wrestling with this story of Isaac, obviously, because that’s such a complicated story, and I do think it’s reasonable to think about it as a form of foreshadowing, at least the way the Bible is set up. Of course, people who aren’t Christian would agree with that, but that’s fine. The idea that you would offer yourself as a sacrifice to God, that seems to me to follow quite logically, because, well, obviously you have nothing greater to give than the best of yourself, right? So you sacrifice yourself to the highest good, and that’s part of the way in which humanity is redeemed. That makes sense to me. That just seems like, for me, that’s a pretty straightforward psychological truth. The son issue, that’s a lot tougher thing to wrestle with, because… One of the things I was thinking with what Jesus says on the cross is that one of the interpretations of that is basically that Jesus in that moment is human, basically. It’s not… It’s just Jesus the human. But that always kind of felt a little bit like avoiding the question to me, because you can’t just posit something like the Trinity and then say, oh, but in this moment that doesn’t go, right? That doesn’t count. But if we think about it in that way of the difference in the direction of sacrifice, it seems to me that in the sacrifice, whoever is making the sacrifice aims toward something. So Abraham is reaching for the divine when he sacrifices, when he’s going to sacrifice his son. And so that would mean maybe God is reaching toward the human. And so that would make some sense of that interpretation that Christ is only human in that moment, right? That the sacrifice is accomplished and the reaching down is accomplished. But I’m still left to the question, what do I make of that? Because that’s one interesting… Well, I mean, it’s useful to have a problem like that because it gives you something to think about, right? And something to study further. And it’s a major problem. It’s a major problem. I mean, the whole issue of… Well, we could say, well, what’s the relationship between the divine and the human, which is obviously brought to the forefront in the idea of Christ, right? But it’s a personal issue because part of the issue is what’s the relationship between you as a finite entity and the transcendent infinity that surrounds you? Well, there’s some relationship because here you are and the transcendent infinity around you exists. So there’s a relationship. The question is, what is the relationship? And we don’t know that. And it’s dramatized in that story. So, I mean, partly the reason that there’s so much conflict and confusion in that story is because it’s trying to bring opposing things together, right? How can something be God and man at the same time? It’s just like the genie, which is the root word of genius, by the way. The genie is this incredibly powerful force that can grant wishes, right? But it’s constrained in this tiny little space. There’s an intimation there that for something to be real, it has to straddle the divide between the finite and the infinite. And that’s what human beings do, I think, to some degree. And that’s dramatized in that story, but it doesn’t mean that we understand it. I mean, you know that sometimes you’re going to feel that way when you’re called upon to make a sacrifice. You’re going to feel that you’ve been betrayed by everything. I mean, the story is set up that way, right? Christ is betrayed by tyranny. He’s betrayed by his best friends. He’s betrayed by his mortality. Like, it’s an archetypal story, and he’s innocent, so the story can’t be any worse. That’s why it’s archetypal. And I mean, the story says to some degree that under such conditions, even God himself would have doubts. It’s something like that. And that’s a real… that’s a powerful idea. It’s a very powerful idea. So, that’s the best I can make out of that for now. We have to stop. So, we’ll convene again in a week. Thank you very much.