Culture War! Live Pirate Navigation! (H46FxR53caQ)

https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=H46FxR53caQ

Young girl dancing to the latest beat Has found new ways to move her feet And the lonely voice of youth cries, What is truth? Young men speaking in the city square Trying to tell somebody that it cares Can you blame the voice of youth for asking, What is truth? Yeah, the ones that you’ll call in love Are gonna be the leaders in a little while And the lonely voice of youth cries, What is truth? This old world’s waken to a newborn babe And I solemnly swear it’ll be their way You better help that voice of youth find, What is truth? And the lonely voice of youth cries, What is truth? Alright, well, welcome. Boy, that’s, I love that. We’re gonna do a culture award thing. I know I have a video on this that I did before. Much the same theme. We’ve got our Sam Pell here. Ready to go. And then of course a bunch of Sam Pell in our excellent mug, which you can get at my store. Shopped at markofwisdom.org. We’ve got some junk with cinnamon roll for later. Yum. Because, you know, hunger. And get some tea from the Table Rock Tea Company. We’re going with Westminster again today. Tastes delicious. Really good stuff. Yeah, so. I’m out of culture. Thanks, Nick. I sometimes. Oh, goodness. Yeah, I’m gonna start out with some sort of tale here. Add some engagement from the lovely Emma on the Discord server today in particular, but she’s been on and off all week. It’s been lovely to see her. Met her in person at Convivium. You may know her from the Father Eric Open Mic Night Streams. And yeah, she just posted some random thing she was trying to get some distributed cognition on. And I won’t go into what she posted. It’s not that relevant, but it gave me sort of this insight, right, which was. And it may not seem connected, but we’ll get into this. This thing that I talk about middle of thinking, which I have a video on. Sort of. Is tied up with this objective worldview. And you sort of start in the middle of the story, right? And then because you’re here and like everything is either before or after you, right? You’re not all that involved, right? Because you don’t have a lot of control of the world. That gives you this objective worldview. I’m kind of apart from the world. And that sort of creates this individualism and also leads to this binary thinking because everything’s either me or not me. It’s left or right. Right. And that’s kind of the point. Really. Is these things are tied together, this objectivism, this individualism, right? Are tied together with this binary thinking, with this objective worldview, with. With the whole concept of being a neutral observer in the world, as though that’s a position that can exist in the world. Like if you’re in the world, you’re not neutral. Everything’s kind of connected. And that plays into this whole idea of the culture war. Because we think we’re individuals or we think we can be an individual and I reject that flatly. And in order to try to understand the world, we reduce it to binaries, which is the lowest possible resolution frame you can have. And I think, you know, if you’re familiar with the Jordan Peterson, he talks about low resolution frames and you know, maybe we need those. But also when you’re doing that, maybe you shouldn’t believe that you have an understanding. Right. If you think politics is left and right, you’re not understanding a lot of stuff. And so culture war? No. It looks like a culture war. Sure. But no, it’s an overflow of cognition due to the flood of information. There is no culture war. But it sure does look that way. I agree. But think about it. What we have in the world are all of these competing worldviews. You can’t even track all the worldviews. I certainly can’t. The better way to think about it is a war of ideas of individuals and how they want the world to work, not how the world works. Not how the world has ever worked necessarily. Maybe their idea of how the world used to work or something. But that’s not necessarily accurate. They weren’t in the world at that time usually. So and maybe not how the world ever could work, just how they in their, you know, in their fantasy, basically. And look, I mean, we’ve talked about fantasy before. Right. I have a whole live stream which covers fantasy, among other things. And that’s how they think it works or how they want it to work. How the world should work in their mind. Right. And this causes a couple of problems really, at least two. Right. So one of the problems is that you get the impression that you can work this stuff out for yourself. You can understand some significant part of the world or something. And you probably can’t. The other problem is that you get overloaded with everybody else believing the same thing. Like, oh, yeah, I’ve got this worked out or this part worked out or whatever. I understand how politics works. Okay. And so either they’re challenging your ideas, you know, oh, we either ask you questions, right. Tell me how this works. Well, they have competing ideas. Right. Where they think they’ve worked it out, too, but they’re not the same. And the result is a flood of information. It’s a flood of stuff we have to work out. It’s a flood of, quote, knowledge. It’s a flood of worldviews. It’s a flood of all these ideas and ways things work, ways to put things together. And how they interact and all these complicated things with we all have exceptions to that. Well, the election would have gone this way, except for, you know, magic thing happens. Right. And some of those are probably true. Right. But maybe what they mean or what that person thinks they mean is not. So this causes an overflow of your of distributed cognition. And let me try to demonstrate that overflow. Let’s say there is a political machine in the United States, right. Call it Egregor, right. The spirit of the country or whatever. Hyper object called political machine. The political machine doesn’t doesn’t matter. So what if that distributed cognition, the political machine, the political system is worried about the perception of a group of people, a public, we’ll call it a public, a group of people. It does not live here, does not live in the United States. They’re worried about the public perception of the U.S. to people overseas. And that’s what they’re worried about. Now, let’s suppose that there’s a limit to that condition, like what that political machine can handle. Because I think we all have limits. Right. We all have the cognitive limits. All systems have limits. Corporations can only move so fast. Right. Products can only be built so fast. Things can only be sold so fast. Shipping takes time. Like there are limits to things. So they’re spending a huge amount of time on public perception overseas. But what if that’s too much? What if the number of publics to deal with, like overseas, there’s too many varying cultures. And so they just can’t do it. I mean, what if the political machine can’t even manage the perception of the U.S. to the people in the U.S.? That might be hard enough. And maybe they could if they weren’t trying to manage the public perception of the U.S. to people who don’t live here. Because there’s a lot of people who don’t live here. Far more than do. So maybe that’s just misspent cognition on the distributed cognition side. And who knows? Like I’m not making a claim that that’s happening. I’m not here to give you answers. Right. This is not the place for answers. I’m not trying to sell you anything. I’m not trying to do that. So we all have cognition. Right. We all have limits to that cognition. I’m just going to say like my cognition is different from your cognition. My cognitive abilities is different from yours. Could be good. It could be bad. Doesn’t really matter. But it’s different and it’s limited. It’s two things. There’s a limit. Those limits are different for different people. Distributed cognition, there’s a limit. And those limits are different for different distributed cognitions. And they quote care, right, about different things. They orient towards different things. They aim at different things. So kind of keep it in mind, right, too much information which needs to be processed. It’s causing this problem. It’s a flood of information. We are told that we can do things that we likely cannot do. And I’m not saying that we can’t do any one of them individually. But how many of them can we do? And can we do those individually? Because maybe we can’t. Maybe somebody told you you could read Plato’s Republic and understand it. Maybe you can’t. I don’t know. I can tell you right now a lot of people don’t. And maybe they were told they could and maybe they tried, but they clearly did not. That video is coming. Slow going, I know. But it’s worth thinking about this. We’re forced to process all of this cognition, our own and others, and we can’t. It’s limited. It’s worth thinking about that. It’s worth taking that seriously. What does it mean? How do we deal with a limitation like this? It isn’t optional. There’s some limitation here. No control over it. We probably don’t even know what it is. People are constantly telling us you can be anything you want to be. No, you can’t. That’s a lie. Maybe it tells you that they’re lying. They’re lying. Immediately lying. Lying. Don’t believe them. Lying. Don’t know what else they’re lying about. They’re definitely lying about that. Probably lying about other things, too. You can’t do anything. You certainly can’t do everything. And maybe you can do some number of things, but maybe not. Maybe you can only be good at one thing. I don’t know. But it’s possible. I don’t know you. I know some people who can only be good at one thing. That’s for sure. That might be you. I have no idea. I never met you. I don’t know how many things I’m good at or could be good at. I have no idea. That’s why we need feedback from other people. We outsource our sanity, as Pastor Paul Van de Klay says. And that’s the thing. We don’t have a handle on our cognition and when it’s overloaded and when it’s not overloaded. And it’s got to be overloaded in sort of all time frames, to Sandy’s point. In the day you get overloaded. By the week you get overloaded. By the month you get overloaded. In a year you’ll get overloaded. People talk like this all the time. Oh, I’ve had a rough year. What the hell does that mean? Usually it means cognitively they’re beat up. Whether it’s emotionally or mentally or however you want to parse it. It’s all part of your cognition. And we have a sense for it. We have an intuitive sense for it. And this cognitive overload problem, because it’s a problem, it’s a non-optional problem, something you’re going to run into that other people are also running into and maybe they’re not even aware of it. This is why John Verbeke’s relevance realization is so important. It’s a good observation. Peterson makes a similar observation. He calls it relevance realization. We have limitations. What do we pay attention to? What do we not pay attention to? And maybe if we try to pay attention to things we cannot cognize, we cannot understand, we cannot be knowledgeable about. We blow our brains out. So what we’re thinking about could be true. And I would say it’s evident and obvious by observing the world and even just observing yourself, but also by observing other people and realizing you’re pretty much like them, at least in that. So we need a way to filter it out. What should we pay attention to? What should we cognize? And what should we ignore? What should we leave to others? Because we can’t do it all. We might be able to do anything, although I object to that. But even if we could do anything, we can’t do everything. There’s a huge difference. So what things that we can’t do, do we leave to other people, even though they’re flawed and we’re flawed? In schools, you know, they used to focus on reading, writing, and arithmetic, as they say, right? Because the theory was the rest can be pretty much derived from there. Like once you have that baseline, you’re pretty good to go. I have no idea what just happened. Electronic spy devices, no doubt. So what sorts of things happen in school? You’re supposed to get to know the things that you’re supposed to know. You’re supposed to get a basic education from which you can derive more. Now, I’m not saying that reading, writing, and arithmetic are all that you need to learn. But what if that plus one of the thing is all that we’ll say the average person can learn? And what if you then add three or four things and try to teach all of them in a school? That would actually destroy their ability to understand any of those things. That’s a problem. If that’s true, then I think it’s true. And what about that overload? If you overload someone’s cognition, what are they learning of the things they should learn? Maybe not enough. I don’t know. I’m not an education expert. Although you have a video on education versus training, which you should watch because it’s great. And comment on because, you know. But it could be that by teaching people too much, by showing them too much, by giving them too much information, even just in the news or in the newspaper or online or whatever, that you’re destroying their ability to cognize as such. That their ability to think is being eroded by the flood of information. Does this describe anything you see around you in the world today? Because I think it does. And what is the most important thing right now? Is it women’s rights, civil rights, social justice, immigration crisis, the war in Ukraine, the war in Israel? A civil war somewhere in Africa? There’s always at least one or two. Or is it the plight of the Palestinians? Or the plight of the Syrians? Or the plight of the slaves in the slave market in Libya that didn’t used to exist? How about gay rights? How much time, energy and attention do I place where? Are these even valid things to think about? Are they valid values? Should I value social justice over civil rights or women’s rights over the war in Ukraine? Or should I value the war in Ukraine over the war in Israel? Where do I put my time, energy and attention? And how much of it do I place with each? Or maybe social justice is the worst possible way to frame anything ever, that ineffective altruism. Which I can prove by the way. I’m not going to do that here. But do you know? Have you thought about it? Does anybody realize that the idea of social justice is insane? There’s no such thing as a society without justice. Justice in some ways defines a society. And justice doesn’t make any sense without society. Like justice on a desert island can’t exist. It’s a bankrupt idea. Some of these things aren’t even valid. They’re not valid ways to think about the world. And yet we’ve all had to think about them because somebody’s brought them up. But then we’ve had to deal with it. In my case, I smacked them around verbally and explained to them with logic why they’re being dumb and they shouldn’t think about that. But that’s still exhausting. And even just the way we think about things, is the right frame to view the world politics? Or is everything and everyone driven by economics? Or do we make the decisions that we make or we move by the information that we get? Three bad frames, by the way. Just a little hint there. And how do we fix things? We don’t even have a good problem definition anymore, as John Breveke points out. You want to fix a problem, you can have a good problem definition. Sure. Good science right there. Do we change the people in charge of the information we’re pushed? Who authorizes what information goes where? Is it the algorithm? Is it that nice objective neutral algorithm that doesn’t exist, by the way, cannot exist, cannot ever exist, by the way, cannot ever? Do we just elect new politicians? Or do we try to alter the way economics works? Or do we try to alter the way economics works? Whatever that would mean. Get rid of capitalism, maybe, or change people’s minds on communism or invent, by smashing together terms, new words like anarcho-capitalism or foolishness. Or do we change how people are educated? And in the weight of generation? Or just have everybody hear a certain message, like once they have the gnosis to knowledge, like once they listen to a certain person. Which message? Which person? Which rationale is correct or more correct? Which frame is right? True. And sure, look, I have my own views on all this, obviously. Don’t we all? Yes, that is the point. That is the problem. We all do. And maybe we all shouldn’t. Because we’re all polluting each other’s, I’ve got an idea, with our idea. And they’re polluting their idea with ours, with theirs. It’s a flood. But then we find people who agree with us and we say, hey, I’m not the only one that came up with this. I’m pretty smart now. But what we don’t do in that case is take more seriously that we are all ill-informed, incorrect, fitting a pre-existing narrative that we didn’t even know we had. We lack humility. Instead, our egos grow. We feel validated, our views vindicated, because someone else who, hey, they seem pretty smart coincidentally, isn’t that convenient, has the same idea as me. Wow, we both must be on to something. And since we are both on to it, it must be real, because it’s not just in my head after all. It’s not just my fantasy, because someone else is on to it. So it can’t be fantasy because it exists outside of me, does it? Or is it just that you both have the same idiotic fantasy? Am I describing the world around you accurately? Do you see what I’m saying? Have you noticed any of this at all? Anywhere? Fox News, 7. Sticks Hexenhamer, Curtis Yarvin, Carl Benjamin, Daily Wire, Dan Bongino. Who do we listen to? What do we listen to? Why do we listen to it? Do we know why we listen? Do we know why we find attractive, what we’re attracted to, what draws our attention, what shiny little thing is shining out? Do we know why that shiny thing is shiny? Do we know what shininess is? Is this a culture war? A war for one view over another view? Is it a culture, the way in which we as a group, as a group, as a group, as a group are attracted to? As a group attend to the world? How we cooperate together? How we manage shared common affairs? How we operate independently, but towards the same ends or similar enough ends as imperfect and stupid and useless and cognitively bankrupt as we all are? Not just the attention, but the framing. And of course, postmodernism comes into play here because I have a video on that. We don’t have common frames. We’re told we can just pick a frame. Moby Dick can be a tree on the lesbian experience. And while there is a way in which you can twist Moby Dick into being that, that doesn’t make it valid. Doesn’t make it real. Doesn’t make it realistic. And it doesn’t make it helpful. I’m a pragmatist. It has to work outside of my head. Things that work inside of my head are a dime a dozen. I have ideas all the time. They’re all perfect. Every single one of them. Beautiful. Beautiful place in my head. You should come visit. The culture is really the common virtues and values, the common aims, the common orientation, because aims alone won’t do it. The definitions we use in common towards the common frame to manifest common meanings. Postmodernism is uncommon meaning. It’s unique meaning. It’s individual meaning. But the common meaning has to have at least partially the aim and the proper orientation of revivifying the culture itself. Otherwise, the culture can’t perpetuate. Then you don’t have a culture. That’s why too much diversity is not strength. That’s crazy talk. And isn’t that what I’m talking about? The splitting apart of this commonality? These competing ideas. We can’t have competing ideas. Not at this level. We can have a few people saying, hey, maybe this piece is wrong or I see flaws in this piece here. They have to have common goals and common orientations and common aims. Otherwise, they’re just repelling. They’re just destroying. They’re just wiping things out. We are not in a culture war. We’re not in a culture war. I have a video on this. We’re in a fight to have any culture at all or no culture. Hold on before you object. Please give me a moment to explain something important. This is not a battle for culture. Or for which culture? That’s the wrong way to think about it. This is the battle of good and evil. You see, the thing is, evil doesn’t care if it’s the corrupt agent in charge of the culture or the structure of the institutions or it’s driving the boss on authority and leadership inside the culture. It’s fine with that. Obviously, evil is like, hey, we can drive everybody to more evil. That’s great. We’ll use the culture to do that. But evil also doesn’t care if you tear the culture down and destroy it under whatever means. Oh, I’ve got an idea that we’ll all worship Gaia and we’ll be climate people. Evil is happy with that because that leads to chaos, clearly. And evil still wins. Evil doesn’t care. Evil is like, dude, I’m playing both sides of this game. Deck is stacked. Let’s do this. But what does this mean? How do we make sense of this? It means we need structure, institution, leaders and authorities. We need culture. But we need goodness in it. We need good people running structures, coming up with structures, running institutions, coming up with new institutions, being leaders, being authorities. It has to be good people. And they’re rare. Not everybody can be a good person. Sorry, I hate to break it to you. Most people can barely be decent in the day. Some people can’t even smile. Think they’re going to be good people? Come on. We need good people with virtues and values in those structures. Doing away with them, tearing them down, ending them means evil wins. And you think you’re going to replace them or they’re going to magically replace themselves with some emergent bottom up magical thing that’s going to be better? No. That’s almost certainly not going to happen. Can happen. But you don’t want to bet on that. And it’s almost certainly not going to happen. Those are two different statements. Something can happen. Sure. Technically, according to physics, no, really. You can walk through walls, walk through three feet of steel intact as a human being. Now, it would take you so many attempts to do that before it was successful that it’s absurd. But actually, physics says that is perfectly possible. But also bad plan. Right? Sure. Goodness. From the ashes of the culture we destroy or the structures we tear down or the institutions we ignite. But the odds of that happening are so low that I’d rather not try. So don’t end them. That means evil wins. Doing nothing about calling out evil means evil wins. No one’s calling me out. I’ll keep going. I’ll spread. The minute you don’t call out evil, it spreads. The minute you don’t call out fraud, it spreads. I seem to have tweeted about this the other day, I believe. You see fraud and you don’t say fraud. You are a fraud. Yeah, I agree with him. That’s correct. Without ideals, without virtues and values, and without agents attending to, paying attention to, higher things, orienting upwards, acting, taking actions in organizations, within structures, in the world, outside of themselves, actual actions that affect the rest of the universe, right? Evil wins. Evil wins. It wins. And I’m not afraid. I’m not afraid. I hope that was sufficiently long and sufficiently short. And after a moment, I will double check on my comments here. I know I didn’t keep a slight running tab there, but I need a better setup to keep a better tab. Also, there are probably limits. So I’m probably doing the best I can. I’d like to think about a better setup. If I just manage the material better, my cognition would improve. That works sometimes, to some extent, for some things. I support this, handsome and I, me hearties, this place, the main brace and roll out the Sam Pell barrels. I’m totally going to steal that. Ahoy, Spatch. Ahoy. Handsome, we’ll have to get your enhanced definition of individuals. We are persons. We may have, we may be each individual and unique, but we are not individuals. Overload, hallucination, I think that’s the word of the day. Yeah, well, you should check out that live stream, Sammy and the hallucination, because it was quite good, if I do say so myself. I think that’s part of the problem. We get lost in this inability to understand what is hallucination, what is fantasy, what is our imagination, our imaginal realm and what is not. Those lines get blurred for us, especially because we’re told we can do anything. As far as I can tell, the only way you can do it, anything is in your head. It’s not something you do outside your head. Do you have definite lines where you say no to the overload? Of course. And of course, your overload varies day to day, varies minute to minute, hour to hour. You can do crazy things. You can link it to the glucose cycle. You can link it to the circadian rhythms. That actually works pretty well. Hangry is a thing, right? Oh, you’re being angry to people for no reason. Have a candy bar. Yep, that works. Doesn’t work all the time. And some of them dispel arithmetic. Yep. Reading, writing, and arithmetic, the three Rs. Wrong. I’m here now. Start from the beginning. I don’t think so. That’s not how this works. Go double speed and catch up. Pardon me, my nose is… Not happy. There, it’s better now. It’s itchy as hell too. I want to saw it off. I think that would make it feel better. Nathaniel, you finally stated an affirmative ism out loud. Pragmatism. Yes. Pragmatism is very important. That’s the most important thing. Interesting that you personify evil. What is your definition of evil? Sam Harris. That’s one. There you go. Sam Harris is evil. You can’t avoid being evil. It’s not possible for him to avoid it. Personalize. I don’t want to go into a bunch of people who are definitely evil. I experienced my evil on Monday. Evil I was not prepared for. I was not expecting spiritual warfare and mediation. But that is what I got. Aaron, why are good people being filtered out of institutions of leadership? They’re not. They’re wimps. And they won’t go there. And they won’t take the sacrifice. You can say, look, I don’t want to be in politics, but I want to manipulate politics without being in politics. I have some sympathy for that position for sure. But also, really? Why? What is the sacrifice that you would be making by being in politics instead of trying to manipulate it from the outside? It’s a good question. Again, I’m not saying that’s invalid or that you shouldn’t do it. But it’s worth to ask the question. Why not just jump in and make it better? Even if you know you’re going to fail, I think that’s where the problem comes in. People go, oh, I can’t do that. Okay. Maybe you can’t fix it. But is it better with you not there? Wonderful. I think it was a TED talk, as much as I hate TED talks. It was actually a really good TED talk. I’m pretty sure it was a TED talk. This guy was using marbles to describe immigration and I guess thereafter what’s called reverse colonization or something goofy, right? Where the U.S. in particular is guilty of this, right? We will take the best and the brightest from any country. We don’t care. The problem is, and the guy pointed this out beautifully, the marble illustration was just gorgeous. Those people leaving their country, let’s suppose you’re like, oh, I’m going to go to the U.S. I think that’s safe to say. Maybe not better other things, but way better materialism. I mean, we do materialism so much better than the rest of the world. Aren’t you depriving that country of your stuff? I mean, you can’t, maybe you don’t have enough resources to make as great a contribution to physics if you’re not in the U.S. But I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. I think that’s a good point. The institutions don’t have an end to hold up. They’re bigger than you. They’re bigger than you. And the fact they’re not doing that doesn’t mean tear them down because then no one’s holding up that end and you don’t have that institution and something’s going to fill that vacuum. And let me tell you, it will be evil almost every time. Is that what you want? Do you want something broken that can be made good or something like nothing that will almost certainly become pure evil? It’s up to you, dude. That, you know, I know which way I’m voting on that. on that. So you didn’t whine about a two-way street all day long, but things bigger than you don’t owe you anything. But you owe them everything. That’s another thing to think about. It’s another way to think about it. Like, oh, those things are bigger than me. Like, definitionally, they’re just larger. Institution is a group of people, and therefore one person is always smaller. They can be smarter, maybe, I doubt that, but maybe. But it doesn’t matter. Institution is still bigger. It’s a trade-off. It’s a necessary trade-off. It’s not an optional trade-off. So whine about the alleged social contract, which is a bankrupt concept, all day long, but A, it ain’t there, and B, it don’t matter, because you ain’t on the negotiating side anyway. It really sucks, by the way. Really sucks. Sandy, different definitions would have meant by good people. Well, yeah. Usually meaning they match institutional goals. No, goodness has nothing to do with institutions. Goodness is way higher than the institution. That’s the confusion. People have reduced the world, because they’ve been told they can understand the world. You can’t understand the world. You’re a muppet. I’m a muppet. We’re all muppets. You can’t understand the world. You can’t understand part of the world. I went over this last week, right? I thought I had a pretty good handle on the history of the computer industry. Now, I was missing a whole bunch of stuff. It’s like a whole bunch of stuff still chewing through that damn book. What does that mean? We all used to lease our computers, all of them, and not even computers, like the early mechanical computers. They were all leased, all of them. What? And now we’re going back to a leasing model, mostly with software, but also, you could argue cloud is leasing hardware. Yep, it is. We’re going back to the computer leasing model. Wow. And there are some advantages to that. It’s not all downside. Cloud’s certainly expensive. No one should buy it, but different problem. I had no idea. So if you’re matching goodness to institutions, you’re already way off the rails. And if someone’s doing that, they’re lying to you and they’re wrong. They’re probably lying because they’re wrong. I don’t care why you’re lying. I’m a pragmatist. The reasons for your lying, whether it’s through your ignorance, your inability, your incompetence, or your maliciousness is irrelevant to me because the results are the same. I can’t know your motivation. I can’t know whether or not you’re ignorant or malicious. There’s no way for me to know that, at least at first blush. There are ways to determine it with a lot more incidents, but I don’t care. It doesn’t matter why. If you match it to institutions, you’re barking up the wrong tree. Aaron, culture war equals culture versus anti-culture. Yeah, roughly speaking. That’s the argument I made in my original video on this topic. And that’s the thing. The two-way street doesn’t mean shooting anything. It’s not a two-way street, dude. A two-way street implies equality. There’s nothing equal about it. It points to cooperation. It’s not a cooperation. It’s not. It’s not optional, for one thing. And things bigger than me in the past are much smaller in the present. I don’t know about that. I don’t know where you get that from. You can say that institutions have different sizes over time or different influences over time. That’s really true. It’s true of everything. Everything changes in size. If you’re a baby once and you’re not anymore, and you might be having many of the same qualities as a baby as you get older, that happens to most of us. Sandy, why are good people being filtered out? They’re not. Because the definition of being used, you’re filtering them out. No, it’s because they’re wimps. Look, I will make the argument. Yeah, I guess I’ll make the freaking argument. Screw it. If you’re a good person and you have to use deception to get into the organization, do it. This is that Lindsay Shepherd, I think was her name. Peterson had her on years ago. She maybe illegally recorded a conversation that she should not have recorded, but it saved her career. She was being bullied and misused by evil people. She stood up to them and recorded the conversation anyway, which might have been against the rules. I don’t think it was in any way unethical or immoral. Someone’s doing something bad, you should record them and show the world. Absolutely. Especially if they expect confidentiality. Why are you expecting confidentiality? What the hell do you have to hide? It’s a good question. I went over that too on Monday. Won’t make that mistake again. Not sign any confidentiality agreements for your negotiations. Negotiations are going to be in public, where everybody can see what a reprehensible piece of garbage you are, how much you lie and betray people. Just saying. Nathaniel, cinema is bigger than religion. No, it’s not. Nothing is bigger than religion by definition. Not even close. Not even remotely. Not even within the ballpark close. Some people are taking elements of cinema, like Star Wars, and making them into a religion. Sure. I would call that a cult. It’s a baby religion or insufficient religion. That would be a cult in my book. We’ve talked a lot about that. We think that’s correct. There’s a lot of people working on stuff like that on the Discord server, on the Mark of Wisdom Discord server. We get a lot of input. Like I said, Emma was very enlightening today by accident. Quite by accident. She wasn’t trying to do that. She was trying to work something out for herself. But that’s how we get better, right? Sandy, I’m going to go back to my writing and then pass out. I’m about four channels over trying to track you. Good night, Sandy. Good luck. Ethan, participation in goodness never fails. That is true. Everyone has a unique opportunity to participate in it. Also true. If you’re concerned with failure, you’re not concerned with goodness. Also true. You are concerned with its effects. Yes. Well said, Ethan. Man, you’ve been on fire lately. It’s been awesome. It’s been a pleasure to read your tweets. And yeah, you’ve been doing just a bang up job, especially in explaining some of these things that are sort of difficult to understand. And people have a hard time with, to be fair. I have a hard time with. I think there’s a lot more people that are cognitive or over their cognitive limit than we’d like to admit to. There’s a lot of people that are just overloaded, overwhelmed. So, you know, it’s good to look around and realize, hey, some of our heroes are, you know, not, maybe they’re not able to rise to the occasion because they’re suffering from cognitive overload. They have limits too. And do you know what your limits are? Maybe don’t worry about their limits. It’s sort of worth thinking about, like, oh, wait a minute. There’s a flood of information. Everyone’s drowning in information. What do you do? Maybe you decide to fight the WEF with a new organization that’s going to counter their narrative. Not a fan. Thought it was a questionable idea to begin with. Art conferences come out. Didn’t watch most of the talks. But I did watch Jonathan Pigeot’s talk. It’s fantastic. It’s the best talk ever on any topic in the history of humans. It’s great. It isn’t what I would call skepticism. It is a healthy questioning and curiosity grounded in some really good observations about the world and how the world is and how the world should be. Which is to say we should live in the world as though we can’t understand it. And therefore with a little more humility. Instead of saying, oh, the WEF plays this game. Maybe we’ll play the opposite game. The WEF never had a chance of winning the game they were playing anyway. Their things are ridiculous. Their concepts are stupid and repugnant to most people. Understand that they have a big signal boost. And I understand that that is a problem. I agree that that is a problem. The way to fight it is not to counter it. When you counter something, when you identify against a thing, as the art conference is very much doing, you are captured by it at the same time. That is why atheists can’t do without Christian framing. It’s not possible. They’re captured by it. It is core to their identity because they’re identifying against and not identifying for. You can gin up the idea that because these billionaires are playing this silly game called WEF that you need to play a silly game called ARC all day long. But I don’t think you could take that time, energy and attention and put it towards better use elsewhere. I’m not here to tell you what that better use was. Nobody asked me. But I’m just saying probably it exists, that better use. That’s the problem of the culture war. There’s Peterson diving into the culture war. And it’s like, what? Why? What’s he fighting for? Human flourishing? Ooh. That’s a tough one. What the hell is flourishing? What’s human flourishing? If I’m a human and you’re a human, do we have the same flourishing? Because if it’s not the same, it’s not a common goal, then we’re screwed. Guess what? We’re screwed. I like this, Anselman. You can’t thrive on mere negation, right? You can’t. By definition, you’re destroying. You’re destroying. You’re destroying. You can’t. By definition, you’re destroying. Look, you have to destroy to create to get it. I’m not a positive, only creation, only construction kind of person, obviously. But also, you can’t only destroy. You can’t only negate. You can’t only identify against. It’s not going to work. It’s not going to work. It’s not a good thing. And you’re using up your valuable limited, just as your cognition is limited, time, energy, and attention. Using up your limited cognition, using up your limited resources. And you’re not building something positive. By definition, that’s what identifying against is. We’re going to build an organization for civil rights. But what are civil rights? Well, let me tell you what they’re not. What? To build an organization to fight the WEF. Are you? What are you fighting exactly? Why are you fighting them? Why don’t you just put up better ideas? Don’t even mention the WEF. Who cares about a bunch of billionaires who have a lot of money? And sure, economics can, I mean, everything influences everything else, right? Economics can have an influence on the world for sure. And it’s going to. And the thing is, nothing you do is going to change that. That’s the terrifying part. Like, if Bill Gates wants to buy all the farmland in the United States, you’re not going to stop him. There’s nothing you’re going to do to stop him. Sorry, it’s going to happen. It’s going to happen. It’s not realistic. But you also don’t have to. Like, there are fights you don’t have to have. I have a video on that too. I can’t remember what it’s called though. But it’s about games that you don’t have to play. There are plenty of games that you don’t have to play. You don’t have to engage in them at all. It’s just not necessary for you to get involved in those things. And we don’t know that, right? We think like, oh, there’s a game out there. I have to play that game because I grew up on video games. And you know, absolutely. Like, of course, like I’ve got to, I absolutely have to do. Do you? Do you have to do that? Are you sure? I don’t know. And we’re overloaded with this stuff. Everything is overloaded. And it’s hard when we’re overloaded. It’s really hard. Because we do think we’re like, oh, okay. I’ve got to do this. Because we do think we’re like, oh, okay. I’ve got an answer to something. But actually, you’re just overloaded and fooled by being exhausted into believing that this thing is a thing. That you can go ahead and engage in it. Or that you should. Or that you have to. Maybe you don’t have to. Maybe it’s a trick. Because I think that’s the problem with cognitive overload. Which is, again, that’s, we’re living in cognitive overload land. We’re stuck in this cognitive overload. Ridiculous level of cognitive overload. And we have to simplify the world to kind of understand it. And that’s materialism is simplification of the world. We simplify the world. We have to. We have to understand something about it. Nathaniel, I’ve implemented a real world problem solving in my life and relationships in found ways since engaging with this channel. Oh, that’s good to hear. Shifting from information to wise action was the key. Glad to hear that. Yeah. Wisdom, intuition, it’s a better way to deal with most of the problems of the world than knowledge and rationality and logic and reason. Most people are illogical, unreasonable creatures that don’t have the ability to rationalize. And they think, you know, we’ve been told that we do. And we’re just not logical, reasonable, rational creatures most of the time. And then I wanted to add a positive here instead of just challenging. Thank you. I do appreciate that. Yeah, it’s good to simplify the positive. Very little of that lately. And we need more of it. Right. And look, if you guys want to join in, feel free. This isn’t like a solo show forever. So feel free to join in and ask questions or whatever and or do it in live chat. Feel free to consider that you’re a Muppet like I am. And that’s good. It’s good to be a Muppet. You know, it’s important. It’s important to have that level of humility. We all have to recognize our limitations, especially in cognition and our participation in culture. Like, how much control do we have over the culture? And look, I mean, if you want to think about the world in terms of a culture war, that’s fine. And if you’re thinking about culture, that’s fine. And as I’ve tried to explain to people many times, if you believe there’s a culture war, right, if you if you think that’s the frame, that culture war is a valid way to think about the world, you’re in it. You ain’t got no choice. You’re part of a culture one way or the other. And therefore, you’re automatically part of the culture war. Is that a good way to think of the world as though you’re at war? I don’t know. Maybe. I mean, maybe you have to. Like, I’m not I’m not gonna make a judgment here. I’m just gonna point out, like, you think there’s a culture war, then you’re stuck in a war, dude. And now you figure out what sides you’re on, how many sides there are. The way people talk about culture war, man. Whoo. That could be a lot of sides. How many cultures are there? Are they all fighting for the same thing in the same way at the same time? I don’t know. It’s a weird frame for me. Heathen. Materialism is the simplification of the world. Yeah, it’s a way to simplify the world. Down to material cause or, you know, formal, formal and efficient cause or something, right. Collapsing Aristotle’s four causes down to like one. No. Bad. Ethan. This person shot up at school because mental health, which is chemical imbalance in the brain. Exactly. It’s a good example. Right. That is a material cause, right. Or something that explains everything, allegedly, but it’s a simplification. And it ain’t it ain’t not that simply mental illness is so new that now they’re shooting up schools and they weren’t before. Like, I don’t. Yeah, I don’t know. And interestingly, probably overall, we have fewer mentally ill people than we have in the past. So I don’t know why you have allegedly more school shootings. I don’t know if that’s true, rather. Everybody always points to it because now we have a flood of information. Anytime there’s any shooting in any school anywhere, we find out about it. And the flood goes two ways, right? It’s not just the amount of information. It’s a number of times you get the same information over and over again. Sometimes you don’t identify that. You hear about two different school shootings, but really it’s just one. Did you hear about that school shooting? Which one? How many did you have to think about? How many are there? Can you even keep track? I can’t. I have no idea how many school shootings I’ve heard about. Just, you know, and then, well, how many have you heard about the past year? Oh, my goodness. That’s even harder to track than how many I’ve heard about my life. What are you doing? Now I have to have a cutoff filter. That’s a lot more cognition. And then you’re going to ask somebody that. Are they going to know? Are they going to give you the best guess? How accurate is that going to be? But yeah, any material will only cause a ridiculous oversimplification. And that’s part of the problem. We’re cognitively overloaded. We have to reduce the world to material cause at some point because maybe we need to be careful with that. Maybe if we just take in less of the world, we don’t have that problem. And look, take in less of the world to be less overloaded in your cognition, you have to trust an institution or a structure or a leader or an authority. And they’re going to get it wrong sometimes. But A, you might have gotten it wrong, too. So who the hell are you to judge? And B, too freaking bad. There isn’t a better choice. Acting like there’s a third option there is ridiculous. There is not. Acting like there’s a third option there is ridiculous. There is not. Oh, goodness, Nathaniel, really? Yuval Harari. There are some levels of evil I have little tolerance for. He’s right at the top of my list. And I watched him set up a binary while ignoring the third option. Excellent. Let alone the fact that there are so many more. Good point. There’s often more than three. Pre-packaged ideas and binaries sell in soundbites. They’re easy to understand. And boy, Nathaniel, I would love to understand that new thing. That would be great. It would be awesome. Like whatever crazy, ridiculous, large frame he’s talking about, imagine if he could just simplify it for me, which is what he did. It’s a trick in some sense. It’s also not optional. Ethan or a priest. Right. Well, a priest is an authority and a leader, hopefully. And they’re going to get it wrong. But if you try to do it yourself, you’re going to get it wrong, too. You’re not saying anything at a certain point. But sometimes they get things wrong. Thanks, genius. You’re saying people aren’t perfect. Thanks to the update, Captain Obvious. People say that. I’m always so blown away. I’m like, really? I would never have guessed. I’ve never been wrong about anything. What are you saying? Why are you speaking at that point? No kidding. Really? Shocking. Let me put on my shocked face. Wow. And yeah, when the leader does it, when an authority does it, when a structure gets it wrong, it has horrifying effects. Yeah. I’ll take all your better options, of which you have zero, by the way. I’ll take all of all the zero options you have. Oh, look, there aren’t any. They aren’t better. They’re at best the same. At best. It’s even if you have one, which you probably don’t. I know I’ve told this story before, but somebody on Twitter was saying, I just want all the Twitter data unfiltered by the algorithm. And I was like, you don’t even have a con… I don’t even have a conception of what that is. I almost know enough to know how ridiculous it sounds. It’s just the Twitter feed, I forget the number because it was too large for my brain to conceive of. That was amount of data per second. What are you going to do? You’re not going to do anything. Come on. You can’t even manage your emails. You want to manage the Twitter feed? Come on. Get real. Oh my goodness. Yeah. Nathaniel, he was putting historical facts against this conspiracy. Yeah. Hey, there’s lots of ways to do that stuff. That’s the thing to me. Pardon me for saying. Man, I just, if I had a knife and I could cut my nose off, it’s one of those days. Sometimes my nose gets super itchy. The thing with those things is, I don’t know if I could do it any given day, but I could walk onto a stage and just come up with that stuff off the top of my head all day long. Most days I can do that. It’s not that hard. Not for me. Lots of people can’t do it. I get that. I could just go randomly. I could just pick a random topic like, I don’t know, the juxtaposition between we’ll say the French Revolution and now. How are they the same? Right. And I can say, well, look, the Robespierre of today is Bill Gates because he, with his push towards WEF, is trying to topple the local governments and behead the bad people. I could say that. That’s silly. But you can just do that. It’s not that hard to do stuff like that. I have a lot of respect for people who can do it because not everybody can do it. I just don’t think it’s that hard. So it’s like, okay, I get it. But also don’t do that. Just don’t do things like that. It’s not good. It’s not good. Ethan. People confuse the particular authority with the form of authority itself. Exactly. A catastrophic mistake. It is indeed. And there’s a lot of negotiation there, right? Like what form the authority takes versus who’s in that role, right? And like a person doesn’t fit a role perfectly and a role doesn’t fit a person perfectly. And often when you fit a role to a person, it doesn’t work out. And sometimes it does though. Sometimes you should. These are not easy things. Like we just think like, oh, obviously none of this is obvious. Speaking of not obvious, Jesse. Welcome to the Muppet Hour of the Pirate Stream. The Muppet Hour is here. Let’s see what Nathaniel says. Ethan, I think that’s what I did a few minutes ago with institutions. I still got stuck in the materialism frame. Yeah, the materialism frame. Look, man, it’s a simplification. We need simplifications to understand the world, especially if we’re trying to understand it by ourselves, like idiots, because that’s retarded. Stop trying to understand the world. Just stop. Stop trying to understand part of the world. You can’t keep your emails straight and you want the Twitter stream? You want to criticize the YouTube algorithm? You know, I’m not saying nobody. Like I’ll criticize YouTube algorithm all day long. But then again, I’m an expert in algorithms, among other things, but algorithms in particular. And I can just tell you a bunch of stuff about it. Like, man, I blew up the Twitter algorithm two weeks ago by mistake. And I was like, oh, I should have seen that coming. But I didn’t. I’ve written algorithms that do stuff like that. And I just totally didn’t think about it. And I basically effectively double posted a link to the live streams the last week. It’s effectively, it’s not really what happens. Effectively what happened from the algorithm’s perspective, that’s what it saw. My engagement dropped. Boom. In some cases by 50%, in some cases by 75%. It’s hard to tell. Like, there’s no way to tell how much it actually, like what would it have, what would this tweet have done? Was it 2,000 views or 1,000 views? I don’t know. All of my other tweets were doing about 1,000 views. And now nothing’s over, much over 500. It’s like, ah, I screwed up. And it’s my fault. Like I should have been a little more careful, I guess. But I was also trying to promote the channel, you know. Uh-oh. Sally. How things look is the subject I could talk about indefinitely. You looked at the translucent nature of grass lately. You looked at its, at its hairs at, that are in exact lines. Yeah. Yeah. Well, the problem of perspective and detail and awareness and attention, those are all problems. Remind me later, Sally. Maybe I’ll come up with one or more videos on that topic. Because yeah, you could go forever on just awareness and attention, much less perspective. And because perspective is actually different. Perspective is how you place your, how you, how your awareness places your attention. Yeah, it’s tricky. It gets, it gets nasty. Because there is a, it’s, you know, it’s the constant game I’m playing with ontologies are bad, but there are ontologies. Right. And, and, and their relationships aren’t nice sharp the way they are in ancient Greek philosophy or, or, or we’ll call it recent day science. But man, you know, it’s also like, also it’s a bad way to think about the world. Uh-oh. Sally or lighting. Yeah. Or lighting. Freaking interior or exterior or cloudy. Well, yeah. Yeah. We just talking about this today. I was talking with ginger bill and he said, I have a north facing window in my office. I said, I have a north facing window in my office. Who likes north facing windows? Artists. Why? Because you don’t get the same level of high contrast sunlight throughout the day. Right. The sunlight’s more or less equal. It’s less variant. And photographers, I’m a photographer. Photographers, sunny day, no good. Why? White balance. Long, long discussion on white balance is impossible. But anyway, like actually technically speaking impossible. What you want is a gray, gray day with very even light. And actually I just realized I’ve been going through a bunch of old stuff for reasons that make me angry. And I found a bunch of pictures I have of Harvard Square. And I was like, I’m a good photographer. These are brilliant. I love these. And I’m mostly a perspective guy. Like I’m not, I’m not as technical, which is just hysterical. I’m technical in everything else. Not technical with the camera at all. Just because I ignore it all. I’m just lazy. I like, I like the taking the perspectives though, to the point where I’ll prefer a perspective, an outside perspective to a person. So I’m actually, unless I know I’m taking a picture of a person on purpose, I will actually prefer the view and screw up the person. But I have all these beautiful pictures of Harvard Square on this gray day. And I remember distinctly, I’m like, I remember when I took those pictures, it was gray. And I went, today is a great day to take pictures. And then I was like, I’m going to go to Harvard Square and take a bunch of pictures of Harvard Square. It’s going to be great. And it is great. And at some point I should probably like publish all that because yeah. Nathaniel, talking a perspective is tough for a people pleasing muppet. Yes. Because you want to prefer other people’s perspectives. And then you can’t compare and contrast perspectives. When you have a preference of perspective, and I’m not saying that that’s avoidable, I’m just going to point out that when you have a preference to prefer other people’s perspectives, it’s hard to contrast because you’re already having a preconceived notion. Sally Jo, can we change how people feel about electronics by if the plastic is matte or glossy? Well, yeah, they do. They manipulate you that way all the time. Sally, because the matte plastic has one for whatever reason. Yep. I think matte plastic is more friendly because it looks more like skin. Yep. Well, it looks more real. Like glossy plastic is obvious. Nothing in nature is like that really. There’s a few exceptions, but glossy leaves, but they’re not flat. Glossy plastic tends to be flat. Glossy curved plastic is always fascinating to people. And you can’t compare it to other people’s perspectives. To people in general, I’ve noticed that. Whereas glossy flat plastic is not, because it’s not natural enough. So we can’t relate to it in the same way. So matte is more relatable. It also goes back to last week’s live stream on poetics, right? There’s more things to be attracted to, to find things in, in a matte finish. That’s why all my walls are matte and not glossy. Just saying. Yeah, and not that I don’t prefer some gloss, because, and in some places I prefer more gloss than others, but the matte finish to me is way better. It’s just more to grab onto for your eye. It doesn’t slide across it as much. Notice the words I’m using very deliberately. Also the words everybody else would use, right? How’s it going, Jesse? How are you doing, man? Good to see you. Strain heat wave here. It’s, it’s, oh no, it’s brutal. Um, yeah. Cook, cook, cook eggs outside with no heat. That, that sort of, that sort of level of heat. Yeah. Not good. Not good. Um. Um. Where do we want to go with this culture war analogy? War for culture, war against culture. I know you’ve mentioned that. It was actually, uh, maybe we’ll start, we’ll start here. We’ll generate something here. Uh, I was watching someone break down James Joyce’s Ulysses. And man, if you want to, if you want to get a deep dive in what the modernistic push for Gnosticism was in the 1920s, it’s right there. New language, divorce rates, um, ethnic group integration, um, and, uh, glorification of the mundane and domicile, loss of home. Domicile, loss of home. All there in one text. And it was banned too. Yeah. Yeah. James Joyce in general though. Yeah. That’s a, he’s a slippery character. He’s a very slippery character. Yeah. He, he, he sort of blew up a bunch of things. Like there’s some post-modernism right there. Not, not acknowledged by most people from what I can tell, but James Joyce, dangerous man. What was, what was his first big text that wasn’t Ulysses? There’s Finnegan’s Wake, but I think that’s after. No, no, it’s there’s a seminal text that he has that I can’t even remember off the top of my head. I wish my brain weren’t working better today. My brain’s tired. It’s been a long, a long week. Um, yeah, it wasn’t Ulysses. He has another sort of seminal text. The doublers, the doublers, a portrait of an artist as a young man. I think you’re, yeah, portraits of artists as a young man. The other. I don’t think that was it. There’s the doublers. He also never, once he got kicked out of home, he, he never returned back to his country. Oh, really? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. There’s another thing that’s happened over the last, I could say a hundred years now. It’s 2020. Yeah. Dumbass. So in the past, you’d get kicked out of your house, but you’ve got to live with your aunt. And then you look at the story of like someone like Nikola Tesla, right? Who the reason why he was able to do what he did, the way that he did it was because, I don’t know if you’ve seen the, because, because we have this, this theme, this theme happens over and over again. It’s not a well-known theme. Um, but, um, Tesla gets kicked out of his house, right? Well, not kicked out of his house, but he gets, he gets drawn out of his house because he’s too smart to be where he’s at. And they know it. They’re like, no, no, he’s got potential. So we can’t afford to take him to school, but his uncle will pay for it. Sort of a thing. Right. It’s that whole, it’s that whole idea. Cause that was very much the way things used to work. And like everything worked that way up until like the mid 1900s, literally like up until the war, up until the end of the second world war, which is where the individualism can flourish because wealth spread out in a way that it hasn’t been before. Right. And yeah. And we don’t, we don’t think about that, but that’s like a big deal. Right. It’s a, it’s a really big, it’s like a really big deal. And so you look at some like good will hunting, which is the same theme. Right. And it’s the exemplification of that, but really it’s weird, right. Because it’s, it’s kind of backwards, right? On the one hand, they’re like, no, we need you to leave. And then it’s like, but we don’t want you to contribute to society as a great man. Right. We want you to leave and go get the girl and start the family. Yeah. But it doesn’t quite make that point well, which is interesting, but the theme is there. It’s one of the things that makes it one of the best movies ever made by far, by the way, doesn’t seem good. We’ll hunting. Everybody should watch it. It’s watching a million times, a billion times, trillion times. Doesn’t matter. It’s great film. And it’s actually that concept of you’re too good to be here. Right. Or your potential could manifest more in the world better. Yeah. And that movie is just all about the fight there. Cause at one point he’s like, no, I just want to stay here with you and like, clean up construction sites. Where the hell they’re doing? And he’s like, no, dude, we all want you to leave. And they’re not making a decision there about we want you to leave and go to MIT and be super math guy, or we want you to leave and go chase the girl to California. I think it is, or whatever. Doesn’t matter, but we don’t want you here stuck with us. Like we want you to manifest your potential. We don’t care which potential, don’t stay here. Don’t hang out with us. We’re a bunch of losers. And they’re not, right? They’re the, those are the people holding the world together. Yeah. And it very much is too, because that conversation that they’re having is very much, we’re here holding the world together so people like you can do what you do. Whoa. And that theme is there in that movie. One of the things that makes it a great movie. It’s also a sneaky movie because you don’t, until I tell you, you don’t even recognize it. It’s right there. It’s right there. Rounders is another good Damon movie. He’s in a lot of good movies. Is that the card one? Yeah. He wrote Good Will Hunting though. He went to, I think he studied with LeHain, but maybe not. LeHain’s a fairly famous, you know, a bunch of books that got made in the movies. Gone Girl and I can’t remember the other one. Anyway, Mystic River, that’s the other one. But he went to Bunker Hill Community College, which is a community college in Cambridge or in Charleston. It’s in Charleston maybe. It’s right on the line. It’s right over the river from Boston. It’s right there. And it’s just this little tiny school basically. A great place. And LeHain was teaching there for a while. I actually saw an interview with him years ago and he was talking about teaching there. He’s like, come with me. I’ll show you the ropes. You can roll with me. I’ll show you how to write novels and stuff. I never did it. I never did it. There’s lots of things I never did. I know. I know. Telev taught it at Amherst. I could have gone to class with Telev at Amherst. I didn’t know that back then. But LeHain I knew about. I could have gone to Bunker Hill. He could have been in the class with Matt Damon. He wrote Good Will Hunting in that class at Bunker Hill. Right. Wow. I know. No, it’s wild. And he’s a Cambridge boy. So I could have bumped into him in the apartment square a million times. Who knows? Right. I don’t even remember. Well, there’s that passing down of the tradition too. It’s not through the institution. It’s through people that best embody the institution or mentor pass on the information through the guild or something to that effect. It’s not just through this blindly, oh, I’ll be a great person if I attend Harvard. It’s like, yeah. Maybe if you have a great teacher or an example, someone to look up to, someone that holds virtues and values, someone that exemplifies the culture, as we would say here. Yeah, that’s all. That’s not done through this, what we call an organic institution because that’s not the case. As soon as people leave, I’ve had people leave my company recently too. It’s a completely different company now because people have left. People were embodying a vitality or a spirit. And once those people gone, it’s not just the aesthetic and it’s not just the material. There’s an energetic, you could say, the spiritual change in the way even people behave with each other, which people didn’t use to before. I even noticed with myself, I’ve gained a bit more momentum in the company purely because of who I am. And there’s a lack of this type of person I am in the company and people now kind of warming up to me or drawing close to me, which is quite a strange phenomena. Because you would think that if it’s just culture, people would just keep embodying the same thing regardless. It’s just like, hey, someone’s left. That’s just a material change. Like your position, the company hasn’t necessarily changed. They’ve changed their attitude towards you. Not that you have the same role the whole time, but you’re in this role, you’ve been in this role, and then all of a sudden people are different towards you and say, what just happened? Right. That’s a culture war right there. Literally, a culture battle. I don’t want to call it skirmish. Maybe it’s- Well, there’s wars within the culture for the soul of the culture, we’ll say. That’s for sure. Yeah. But the thing people are referring to when they talk about culture war is not that. It really is like, I want to replace this culture with another culture. But cultures are hundreds and thousands of years old. And so you can’t go, you know what? I came up with this new idea yesterday and I’m just going to replace the 100-year-old thing or the 50-year-old thing or the 1,000-year-old thing for my new idea. That’s not going to work. Will you hide? No. Or worse yet, and it is worse, and this is sort of what James Lindsay is on about to some extent. I’m going to replace the way this cultural aspect works with this other older thing or thing that’s been running in parallel in the background all along or whatever the hell nonsense they think, which is all wrong by the way, provably so. The Eleusinian mysteries, right? Instead of Christianity. It’s like, A, that’s not even a real thing. And B, you don’t have it. And C, it doesn’t work, or it would have worked. Pragmatism is great. It didn’t work. You can’t point to a broken vase and assume that it held water. Maybe it was just a vase that was made. Did it ever fulfill its purpose? That’s what the Eleusinian mysteries do. It’s just a name for something. It’s just a broken vase. Or was it a vase that could only last so long? It was one of the great things that Dr. Lanton Jack a few years ago in Clubhouse was chatting him up, and I was saying, what do you think is a neoplatonism thing? And he says, why is anybody talking about neoplatonism? Even if there is a neoplatonism, it got crushed by Christianity. It’s gone. It’s over. It failed. And he’s not a fan either. I was like, oh, okay. You’re not even a Christianity good person. So fair enough. But it’s a good point. If neoplatonism was a thing, and it certainly wasn’t, it died. It got crushed by something else, which subsumed it, by the way, too. This is why the so-called neoplatonists go, Christianity has a lot of neoplatonism in it. It’s like you’re just trying to grab clout from Christianity for your stupid idea that failed. That’s all you’re trying to do. Some people I’ve seen this year made the claim that woke was the… No, Christianity was the woke of the Roman Empire. I’m like, yeah, I know what you’re doing. You’re sneaking something in and you don’t even realize what you’re saying because you’re actually making a good case for Christianity by doing that. But you think you’re… Yeah, you think you’re not. Makes me think of how many of the 90s movies for adults you mentioned would score much lower with the critics if they were made right. Oh yeah, of course. Well, you have to understand. It’s really hard to explain to people because I see things that other people cannot see for whatever reason. I don’t understand why you’re all blind. You are all blind, by the way. Sargon of Akkad YouTube channel, Carl Benjamin’s original YouTube persona. On there, there was a playlist about Gamergate. I forget how many videos it is. Is it six? Is it four? I forget. Go watch that. That is 2014 or 2015. He put that out. You have to understand that all of the predictions he made then, and he made them then, those are when the videos were recorded and published, came true. Every single one of them. Gamergate was the expression that the institution of gaming critique had been infested by corrupt individuals. They had the goods. Gamergate as a scandal is a scam. It didn’t happen. The things that are said about Gamergate are wrong, actually incorrect. All that happened was a bad agent came into the system. She was exposed as a bad agent. Actually caused at least one suicide, by the way. Might be relevant. Yeah, for real. Not joking. Carl goes into this, Sargon. He goes into this. Maybe not in that series, but he’s talked about it before. A lot of people talked about it. Was exposed as being a fraud. There was a cover-up around the exposure of being a fraud. That cover-up was Gamergate. That cover-up expanded because they found the fact that all these gamer magazines, online gamer magazines, and some weren’t online, some were magazine magazines, I guess, were colluding to set the ratings of video games. That happened in the movies, too. That’s what Rotten Tomatoes became, or maybe was all the time. In some cases, this is actually the same physical people. That’s the other thing. No one’s hiding the ball. I’ve talked about this before. I really should do a video on this because it’s something I could do a video on any day. I read an article once. I don’t know how accurate the article is. I didn’t do the research on it, but didn’t think I had to because I had done quite a bit of research. There’s a guy who claimed that he was an investigator, a banking investigator in a county in California. The company that became Countrywide Mortgage, which is well known for the 2008 mortgage scandal, was a previous company in his county that he had investigated during the savings and loan scandal. I can tell you this as an expert on this subject. Savings and loan scandal in the 2008 housing crisis are the same scam. His claim is that Countrywide was a company that was involved in the savings and loan scandal, and they pulled the same scam as a different company name. They changed counties so that they could do it. Other factors came into play, like the state stopped doing banking regulation altogether. Don’t believe me. I’ve got the goods. I can show you, I personally can show you my complaints to the federal and state governments about the banking irregularities that were clear in my personal case, which I have all the paperwork for, by the way. If you want to do the research, Ken, I’ll just get you copies of it or you can look it up online. This happened, like same bad actors in some cases. This is happening. This evil is unfolding in front of us, and it’s really easy to see, actually. You have to believe in it first. Very hard to believe in evil if you don’t acknowledge the evil exists. It’s hard to see it. You won’t be like, oh, that’s clearly evil. But there’s a lot of clearly evil stuff out there, clearly. When people get upset about, oh, the Hunter Biden laptop or whatever, and a bunch of people are denying it, or a video showing voter fraud at a mass scale, people are denying it. What do you think that is? Because they can’t believe in evil, or they can’t believe in that evil, or they can’t believe that evil would be that obvious. That’s why they’re denying it. Why do you deny an eight and a half hour video that shows clear bad behavior? Why do you deny that there’s a laptop with all this evidence that the FBI actually has? Because the FBI wouldn’t cover it up, really, the FBI. The FBI who covered up Whitey Bulger’s bad behavior and then put him on the most wanted list and didn’t capture him on purpose. I could go into details, guys. I’ve done my research. Really, that FBI, the obviously corrupt FBI that’s done so many bad things like that in the past that we know about, that we have paperwork on, that we have witnesses for, that FBI couldn’t do it again. What are the odds they’re not doing it now, right now, of zero? You’ve even got the Facebook, all the social media companies colluding on that laptop story, which in itself is a manifestation of an evil spiritual power. 30% of these employees were FBI sort of stop, you know, I don’t know the real number. It’s crazy. It’s not right. A lot of us would say I fired them all. The other thing that came up too is a certain adult entertainment website that was pushing out a certain message through its products. Yeah, that would coincide with the greater agenda of people that want to support work messaging. There we go. I’ve avoided all the buzzwords except for one. You need one buzzword. But never mind. These things have happened and they will happen again. Yeah, you can even see on small scales. I remember no one really liked Blink 182. It was if you had the CDs, right? If you had the CDs and you were in the know, you liked Blink 182. No one really liked Blink 182 until MP3.com came out. When MP3.com came out, it coincided with Blink 182’s most famous album with a song called Feeling This. That song was available for free at the time that MP3.com was MP3 themselves, were like exploding up as this new streaming music platform. That one song was the most downloaded song I think for like two years. It’s something like that because it was free, because it was hip, because it was off the moment, but most importantly because it was new. It was a recency bias. No one knew who Blink 182 was, but the popular like zeitgeist, again buzzword, caught on to something new and it wasn’t Blink 182. It was free MP3s on the top 10 downloads. And the fact that that song happened to be there on the top 10 most downloaded songs with this new technology grabs people’s attention. And that’s what made Blink 182 the biggest thing ever. So you got to be aware of hindsight bias. People looking back all these other Blink 182 songs were great. They weren’t the band that you thought they were until that moment. That’s what encapsulated them. You could say the same thing about Peterson. Basically Peterson and those clips of him speaking to the, let’s just say the cultural Marxists in Canadian universe. That moment, that particular time bubble, that transformed YouTube. YouTube was different after that point. YouTube was like cat videos, dorky things. It was nothing. It was trying to find its identity and as soon as that moment happened, identity became this is the new news broadcasting network. Identity happens from framing. Nathaniel, look into Detroit Become Human for a great example of this era. Yeah. It’s a video game, I think. Yeah. But that’s the thing. People don’t realize identity is not a function of you. It doesn’t emerge. Identity is a function of things around you and how you fit into them. And if you try to fit into them wrong, you’re going to have a problem. Oh yeah. Nathaniel says it’s the last game to be reviewed on its own merits and not politics. Maybe. I don’t, it’s not a political issue, right? Again, it’s corruption issue. Politics is a bad way to think of the world. Well, we noticed politics more when there’s a proliferation of more content. So when it was just PlayStation 2 magazine and that was the magazine to read, if you are a PlayStation 2 owner, you wouldn’t see any political framing because that’s the only source of news or content you’re absorbing. When there’s 10,000 people talking about PlayStation 5, you’ll start to notice patterns. Right. No, that’s a good point. I mean, there’s no contrast. You can’t see. And the only people who are doing that are doing it out of love because what else are you going to do? Nathaniel, sorry, I meant the game is political and got good reviews in 2018, but it now seems controversial. Yeah, well, again, like everything’s controversial from the past because people are trying to destroy the past. Why are they trying to destroy the past? Trying to destroy the past because they’re trying to bring down the culture. Because if the past isn’t part of the culture, then I don’t know what you’re talking about. The culture is very wrapped up in what happened before. And say what you will about Robert E. Lee, but the destroying of the statue. That’s a historic moment, not just for America, but that’s for you could say the West. Yeah. Yeah. And then replacing it with what they’ve done is another thing. All the Martin Luther King statue that came up this year with the hands looking like penises. Let’s just be honest, they look like penises. Like that’s just, yeah. Not good. Sound Joe is a great art school story about that. I actually still think that that guy was onto something, even though it was truly subversive. I think he was onto something. It was evil, but yeah, maybe someday we’ll get her to share that story. That’s a hysterical story. No one else did. I’m just like, this is welcome to my life. You really don’t see what’s going on here. And no one ever was like, oh, we can participate in this. No, don’t participate in that. What’s wrong with you? Why are you like that? I don’t know. I don’t know. But people don’t, everyone’s like, oh, identity. It’s like, we’ve got to figure out identity. You’re not going to figure out identity. That’s not going to happen. Or a single identity. Identity is assigned to you. Right. Uh oh. Sally’s putting limits on it. That’s for the pay-per-view episodes. That’s funny. I wonder if I can get away with that. I don’t have a big enough audience to get away with. I wish I could do like a member channel where I just like, raw life, you know, swearing, whatever, right? Bad stories. That would be wonderful. I don’t think I can pull it off. I like Tim Poole can pull that off. Mark, not so much. Not so much. I was going to go to the stupid Tim Poole, Carl Benjamin thing years ago in Pennsylvania. They got cancelled by Antifa, but I knew it was going to get cancelled by Antifa. So I check it out. It should have gone though. It should have gone. It should have gone anyway. But I did not. They would have been an after someone would have organized an informal after party. No, they did it anyway. They just didn’t publish the new venue. Nathaniel, it treats AI unethically. Women are not having a good time in that game. Yeah. Just saying now it would be ignored or reviewed poorly. Maybe. It’s hard to know. I can’t make any sense of what people are doing. Everybody thinks they can make sense of what’s going on. I don’t think so. Absolute worst issues. It’s exactly as bad as you imagine. And school smashed a patriarchy story. Could be. Yes, it really is. Yeah, it’s worse than worse than you can imagine. It’s one of my favorite stories. It’s like quintessential art school story right there. It’s like the best art school story that could be. It’s some ways the ideal art school story. The evils of art school unveiled by Sally Jo. Fantastic. What are people not understanding about this lack of participation in culture? Why are people like this? The whole of the great resign or the great withdrawal. You have in Japan, I think something like 40% of the young population is virgins or you go deeper down. Men are completely, I think it’s like 5% now, completely withdrawn from society and work. Again, we’ve talked about this before, but Japan is at the forefront of the meeting crisis. I would also say Berlin is not far behind that either. One part of Germany, Berlin was done in the new sense and they had to go back and restore Munich in the old sense. And then now you have two completely different zeitgeists of that region. Again, don’t have to get into all the different politics of that, but you can clearly see that these are choices that happened after a big event that have impacts on the culture and what’s last and what’s cherished and what’s appreciated. Can Japan save the world? No, save Japan and save the world. No, you can’t save Japan. Japan’s done. It’s the end of the meeting crisis. And you see that. Well, arguably they’ve withdrawn once, right? They had that 200 or so period. If, you know, they basically shut off from the West, they could do that again. They technically could do that again. And they might be a bit different. They’re already over. The ghost in the shell, man. I mean, you’re the one that insisted. And then 11 seconds, Jesse, it took me 11 seconds to see the whole thing. My brain is all the way back. Whoa, whoa. This is this is presaging their meeting crisis, you know, 10 years later, right? When it was obvious by that point. What was in that time? Because there was a Japanese economic decline. Because again, one thing people don’t understand is that in the sort of there’s a good seven, eight years there, which Japan as a economic cultural influence dominated like Sega and Nintendo, Sony, Canon, Japan, Japan, almost set up the world. Yeah, almost through America. But yeah, no, but they almost set up the world. Yeah. Well, they were manipulating America, right? They were wagging the dog. And like people don’t know this. So like PlayStation, for example, there’s in the US, there’s each PlayStation version, two, three, four, whatever. And the original PlayStation, there’s one version, maybe two, maybe there’s a rev two or whatever. In Japan, there’s like 10. Yeah. Because they would they would rev them there, test them on the Japanese market. So there are games in Japan that don’t work on all the PlayStation ones or PlayStation twos or PlayStation threes. I don’t know, it’s still true. But like that and say what Nintendo and all the rest like they had different iterations that we never had access to that had different features or missing different features more likely. And yeah, it’s just like unbelievable. You watch Ghost in the Shell and it’s like, wow, you just see it. You see everything we’re going through is right there. It’s all like all the things we’re experiencing now are right there. Identity, intimacy, meaning it’s all there. Yeah. The biohacking. Yeah. Biohacking, right. What is a human? What is human being in the land? Yeah. That’s the big question. Also, there is return to spirituality and this gnostic sense of like the voice of the machine or the spirit of the things coming up from the water. And the desacralization of the feminine is right in the beginning. Oh, yeah. Yeah. That’s what blew me away. I’m like, this is Japan? Yeah. Well, she actually regresses to ruin it for people. She starts in a female body and then regresses to a child and that child regresses to the gnosis or, yeah, to the, what would you call it? It’s the, not demiurge, the ether. You know, she becomes the spirit of the city in some weird sense. Nathaniel, it still works that way. Japan had easier games because in the US we had mental culture and they didn’t want games to be beaten before the due date. There’s a lot more going on. Again, it’s, you know, can’t even. Sorry, this is esoteric. Did you ever do any more research on that microchip that you heard that the US government spent more money on than the Manhattan Project? No, no, I haven’t. I haven’t looked into that whole project. Because I was toying with that somewhere in the back of my head. I’m like, what does that mean? I think that’s Sabre. Yeah. I think it’s Sabre. And they renamed it. It was E R and then it was R E. I think it’s Sabre is the project. Yeah. The IBM project. Yeah. And that’s the, like, that’s the problem. Like, yeah, like, what does that mean? Like, what? And the thing is, like, do we understand the French Revolution? Because I would argue most people have no idea. Right. And like most people don’t. And like, burn power makes this point. Like, we haven’t integrated the World Wars yet. Right. We have. That’s for sure. Like, I guarantee you that. Like, does America even understand the Civil War? Because we don’t. Like, we definitely don’t. In fact, I just found… You need a culture to find consensus. The consensus is found later. Well, when we destroy the culture, right, when we try to tear it down or rewrite it or whatever, or build a new one through magic or whatever nonsense we’re trying, we’ll never be able to integrate that. And so we’ll go through a collapse. And so, you know, Rome collapsed. Are we in a collapse like Rome? That’s a good question. I mean, when did Rome collapse? It collapsed and the culture collapsed. Yeah. There’s one argument that when they change the culture of going to war, that’s when… That was like the last straw, the final stroke of the leadership principles that the founders, for lack of a better word, wanted Rome to be, which is that an army is always an integrated group of people. It’s not a long-standing group of people. So there’s always this president that we’re just fighting this battle for this particular campaign, and that’s it. And then we’ll regroup, not stay as a group with grudges, essentially. That would be another way to say it. So don’t get me started on that evil man. I know you mentioned him earlier. We just scream conspiracy theorists, witch. Well, and that’s the point, right? And I have a video on the pattern of religion. Who’s the witch in your society that you’re trying to find? You know, he’s anti-kids. Like he’s flat out said, I wanted to bring this up at some point. He’s pure evil. Like, yeah, I know he’s pure evil. Like, I don’t… Do you want me to list all the aspects of pure evil? Because we don’t have time. I don’t know what to tell you. Yeah, I mean, the guy’s just not a good person. And that disgusting resurrection redemption of Sam Harris, because Hamas. I was like, you guys are using Sam Harris’ moral mouth. This is going to come back to haunt you. And it did, immediately. Immediately. Oh, you killed 40 babies. You killed 41 babies. You’re more evil than them. It’s like, oh my goodness, guys, you’ve got to stop. Forest for the trees. Well, they can’t. They’ve been told they can understand something like that. No, you can’t. You’re too stupid. Sorry. You’re too stupid. Yeah. I mean, I don’t know how much more obvious to say this, but anyone who’s against procreation, it’s not kids, it’s procreation. It’s being. Being. Right. You’re not even becoming it. It’s actually dual too. It’s becoming because you become a parent. No, I’m saying there’s a second order effect. That’s what I’m trying to say. You know, that is also being denigrated because you always stay in the stasis of this non-entity when you don’t have a child, or at least you don’t try to have a child. Because even in that attempt to try to have and you don’t have, at least you’ve become something else. But you’re still being the top as the principal. But there are these manifestations of experiences that grow people up with character. And when you fail to integrate that, you’re just a permanent muppet. Sally Jo’s got the comment of the night here. The list of pure evil is a different 48 hours stream. We will need a team of six. Sally Jo’s got military experience. She knows what she’s talking about. She’s talking about teams and numbers. She’s got it. She’s probably right. I’m not going to fight against 48 hours and a team of six because maybe that’s correct. But yeah, that’s the problem. If someone slaps me too grand, I’ll do it. I’ll do all the 12-hour blocks with five-hour sleep breaks. I’ll do it. Just saying. We can tag team on that. We can do the whole thing. New six hours on, six hours off. I could totally do that. I could totally do that. For enough money, totally. In like flame. Done. And they need the money. So let’s make that. Way more than that, but that’s a good start. We’ll start with a couple of grand. Yeah. Couple grand US too because outdoor is horrible over here. No, no, it’s going to be US. Sally Jo, you need the support manning or it’ll be a soup sandwich. Of course. Of course. I think we can get it. Nathaniel, I’m trying to shake off 40 years of hearing the phrase, it’s an education problem. And you’ve all triggered me tonight. I love Jesse. Yeah, you’ve all, yeah, you’ve all should. Okay. This appeals to education though. I’m sorry to say it did work. It has had an effect when they, you know, CS Lewis was pointing this out in the 1950s. When you change the sentiments and traditions of the way knowledge is passed down, which is what education is, of course it’s going to influence. It’s just not had any influence in a positive way. It’s just been more degradation. Hey, it’s there. They’re saying, oh, we just need to do it more. So it has more positive effect, except what principles are you starting with? Because no, we’ve it’s worse. We’ve reduced, we’ve reduced education to a material thing. Well, it isn’t right. And then and turned it into training. I have a video on that, education versus training. And then we’ve assumed the reason why we did that, this he loss of doing that was better jobs for everybody because better jobs, you make more money. If you have more money, you have better material, a better material, live a better life. The problem with all of this is that that thesis, that theory, that hypothesis, that idea was already disproven already in the late 1800s and early 1900s in the United States. It’s also been disproven dozens of times in Europe. But put all that aside, I don’t know European history that well. In Boston, they gave all of the best land around just south of the city of Boston, gorgeous land, to make a plane, all the areas south, make a plane in particular, gorgeous, it’s got a nice pond and everything, to the poor people. Because they, I mean, I’ve seen the writings, they actually wrote about this because if you put people in a good environment, they will become good people. The only reason they’re bad people is because they live in a bad environment. In other words, they have no impact on their environment. In other words, the great man theory is bullshit. You can’t put a great man somewhere and have them list up the neighborhood. Of course you can. Or that version of a great man theory because they’re monotheistic The great man theory is correct. It’s just not complete. Yes, there are great men. And without them, Jason the Argonauts doesn’t happen without Jason. I don’t know what else. Troy doesn’t fall without… Achilles. Any number of them. Well, Paracles, technically speaking, if Paracles doesn’t die, he doesn’t die. All of them. This is the problem. Hector too. If Hector doesn’t die. If there’s one great man, that doesn’t make any sense. That doesn’t make the great man theory wrong because they’re all required to have the outcome. That’s where people get confused. Not symmetrical. Well, you need four or five people to make a great band. It’s not exclusive and it’s not symmetrical. And we get confused by that because symmetry is easy. Exclusivity is easy. When you can just narrow things down to one thing, it’s easy to understand. And we’re told we can understand things. And therefore everything must be one exclusive. It has to be because we can understand it because we’ve been told we can understand it. And it has to be symmetrical because we can’t understand things that aren’t that way. It’s very hard for us to do. And so it has to be that way, but the world isn’t that way. The number of times I have to explain symmetry to people and say, no, no, no, this, this, it doesn’t go both ways. Like, I don’t know where you got that. It obviously does not. It’s insane. I just, I’ve spent entire weeks where just explain that to a dozen people and it takes hours sometimes because they just, they don’t, they can’t cognize it. Their cognition is overloaded. It’s, it’s, it’s horrible. Nathaniel, at one point he moved his hands outward as if he were, if he was a demiurge flattening the world. There you go. I’m glad you see that. See, I would see something like that and I would just laugh my ass off because I’d be like, yeah, he’s flattening the world. Everybody would look at me funny. And I’m like, how do you not see this? Ethan sounds like Rousseau. Well, we’re living in the shadow of Rousseau. And Rousseau is such a, Rousseau is such a deceptive liar. Who knew he was lying? It’s just like, throw it out. I don’t understand. Like we can’t burn books. No, we can. We should burn the right ones. Fair. That’s hard. But also like- To put it in this context, I think I’ve said this before too, you know, the COVID lockdowns or the agreement on why COVID lockdowns had happened and what we’re doing that for, that was the proliferation of the social contract. Or we’re going to stand two meters apart because then the virus won’t get us or you won’t get me or whatever’s happening. If I’m just this far away and we agree to be this far away or that’s the social contract. It’s, you know, it’s, yeah. Good night, Daniel. Perfectly. Yeah. I hope you watch the rest. Take care. I like what Sal says. Yes, another 48 hours stream on the existence of three. One, two, and three. Great video by me. Thank you very much. Could you send feedback though? Get a tune that one. Yeah. I mean, that’s the, that’s the, that’s the problem. But also, so thinking about this today, I didn’t realize this. I mean, thinking about this, going through this crazy lawsuit. One of the things I told my lawyer is there’s no Perry Mason moment here, right? Like you don’t win in court. That’s not, you win long before you get in front of a judge or a jury or whatever. You don’t. And, and everybody should know this because long before Perry Mason came out, which is a wonderful show. I don’t know if you’ve ever seen it. It’s actually wonderful. I love Perry Mason. I’ve heard of it. Yeah. And they’re great. Perry Mason is great. It’s fun. It’s great fun. Classic TV for sure. And my, my uncle has regular over the air antenna TV. So the last time when I was up for Thanksgiving, I was at his house watching, watching old TV shows, old Westerns and Perry Mason and all this stuff. Right. Long before that came out, there’s to kill a mockingbird. To kill a mockingbird is the refutation of the Perry Mason moment. Cause right in court, he proves that the testimony is incorrect and that the eyewitnesses are lying and nobody cares. And the verdict does not go the Perry Mason way. And I was like, man, I never saw that before, but wow, that’s a cool thing to see. Like there’s the refutation of the Perry Mason moment right into kill a mockingbird. Nobody notices. Nobody notices. Cause normally Perry Mason comes up with this last minute information. You know, his private, private eye is in the, enters the courtroom at the last minute while he’s right in the middle, running out of things to say. And then he says, your honor, I think, right. And then I, I’d like to call blah. Right. And then that person is there or his private eye testifies or whatever brings the, brings the evidence right to the secretary or, you know, and then that case turns right on that piece of information to kill a mockingbird. The piece of information is there. Case doesn’t go his way anyway. Yeah. Well, that’s another forest for the trees moment. People assume that book is saying one thing, you know, it’s a, it’s a one, um, don’t get hung up on this and monotheistic worldview, a one-centered or one, you know, we’re just focusing on this one identity of this one emphasis, this one point, and that explains the story, you know, and you’ve said this before, you know, safety, uh, safety climate, race, race, um, economics, politics, politics. Yeah. We just go on and on and on. And that’s losing people. That is the culture war. Like that’s what people are talking about, but you can’t, none of those was a replacement for culture. None of them. So it’s, it can’t be a cultural war. This is not like if you went with climate that would replace what we have now. Like that wouldn’t work. We know it wouldn’t, it’s obvious that it wouldn’t work. It’s apparent that it wouldn’t work. And so what does that mean? It means it’s not a war. It’s not true war. In fact, it’s not a war. It’s not two warring factions fighting each other. It’s not even 10 equal factions fighting each other. It’s not the only outcome is chaos and evil doesn’t care. Evil’s like, sure, man, chaos away, dude, or just leave me here in charge. Leave Yuval Harari doing what he’s doing. That’s fine too. Evil doesn’t care. Evil’s like, leave the WF in place and, the people who are in power now in power, it’ll be fine. Like I’m happy either way. And we’re just like, ah, you know what? And the boy, the signal ratio on taxes are theft. Oh no, this is not, this is not good. And it’s getting ramped up. Not just taxes, that whole, why should we ever give any money to anyone but ourselves ever? It’s all theft. It’s all, right. It’s like, no, we don’t want to cooperate anymore. It’s like, oh no, you think you’re not getting anything out of the government. It’s all chaos. It’s all chaos all the way down. Yeah. It’s, yeah, I’m not good. It’s extremely bad. Like I could understand not paying to the federal level and paying to the state level because then you’re paying into your community. I think I can understand that sentiment. Yeah. Still, you know, do you want people to invade your country because then you might want a federal government for that principle. And the feds used to be like that money used to come from the states in the U S so it wasn’t as much. All right. Yeah. Cool. And in the U S we do have a huge federal government that could be cut by two thirds tomorrow with no loss of function. In fact, a vast improvement across all areas for sure. And confirm. Yeah. But yeah, it’s such a tricky slippery thing and nobody wants to touch because everything’s a sacred cow now. And it’s like, I’m not sure. Isn’t that interesting? The longer the proliferation of, you could say, decline becomes sacred in itself. That, you know, these, all these things that are malfunctioning, we don’t really want to change them because we’re worried about second order effects. Right. The interesting thing is the new stuff is the sacred cow. It’s like that’s that was like yesterday, dude. I don’t even know what that is. You know, I don’t know if that’s not a secret cow to me. I remember when that wasn’t around. Like, why do you want to save that? That’s new. You don’t save the new stuff. The new stuff, the stuff that you go, oh, that was an error. Well, let’s get rid of it now before it gets worse. I think I don’t under we have the total back because it’s an emergence is good world instead of a being is good world. Right. So anything that’s emergent is sacred. It’s like, no, no, emergent things are chaotic and bad on average. Like some things that emerge are good, but you got to be real careful. And we’re not seeing the plain example of that. What’s the plain example of that? Like a new thing that’s being highly projected social media, maybe? No, no, no, no. I mean, if you want, if you want to, if you want a plain example, it’s eating, eating bugs. The idea of eating bugs on mass is a like four days old and be obviously bad. Like it’s just, it’s a bad idea. Like it’s a bad idea. It doesn’t matter how you analyze it, which layer of analysis you want to use. You can go, okay. Is it good for health? No, because it turns out that bugs just carry more disease on average because of the structures and whatnot. And so if you eat more bugs, you’re going to get more diseases. These diseases are actually new to humans because humans aren’t used to eating bugs for the most part. There are some cultures that eat more bugs than others, but that doesn’t mean they can eat any bugs either. Right. Okay. Fine. Maybe, maybe it’s bad on that layer of analysis, but what about the layer of analysis of better than beef? Well, clearly not because you can’t scale it the same way. Right. Like when you start looking at the infrastructure to do crickets, large scale, to replace beef, it’s already a no. Like, like a farm and beef. What happens if one farm gets out? Protein per space used and then processing because it’s still processing either way. It doesn’t like you don’t just throw the crickets in a bag and sell the bag. Like, no. Right. Like, okay. So it doesn’t work on that layer of analysis. Okay. But what about like cheapness of scale of shipping? Like that’s production. Right. What about shipping? No. Right. Because it just turns out that the weight to protein ratio is different and now you have a bigger. No, you can raise bugs anywhere. No, you can’t. Like that’s just false. Like it’s all these assumptions because we’ve reduced the world. So we think we know, well, of course you can grow the same quality of cricket everywhere. No, you, actually, you can’t even do anything remotely like that. By the way, what do crickets eat? Like, do you think crickets eat something different than cows? Like, I don’t, do you not understand how the world, and they don’t. Like that is the problem. Like the, you know, cricket consumption of grass turned into protein. Is that more or less efficient than cows? Oh, no. Like all these problems come, it doesn’t matter how you analyze the problem, bugs are worse. So why is this a sacred cow? Like, I don’t understand. Like what is wrong with you? You know what’s sacred? The cow. That’s why we call it a sacred cow, you muppet. This isn’t that hard. The name’s right there. Well, you, you, you went all with all, yeah, you went with positive framing. You just go with one negative framing and it would solve. Okay. So you, you’re developing this large facility to host all these crickets. Something bad happens, because something bad always happens. It’s just law of entropy. You get Jurassic World 3, where all the crickets are going out now and just roaming the website, laying waste, destroying California. Like that literally happened. The locust swarms in different effects in many times in history. Like, is that plague, Mark? Is that one of the apocalypse right there? Do you want a plague, Jesse? Cause that’s how you get a plague. It’s like, that’s one of my favorite lines. Do you want ants? Cause that’s how you get ants. If you want a plague, that’s how you get a plague. Yeah. Yeah. I want to, I want to read this. But Sally Jo, we actively have people encouraged to invade our country. So yeah, not helping. Trying to believe taxes aren’t theft, Mark. Trying. I’m only a muppet. Taxes are theft when you’re not getting services. So fair. The fact that so many people have that feeling about it is not good, because again, we’re going to drag things down rather than fix them. The problem with eating bugs is you can’t get their poop out first. That’s part of the problem, right? All bugs are eating poop in. That is also true. Crickets can’t digest the woody bark that cows can. It would have to be rotted first. Right. Right. Grass is woody. Yes. Also crickets do eat grass. Just saying. Yeah. They just pour digesters of it, but actually they, crickets, locusts, yeah, it’s, it’s not good. But also they carry diseases that animals do not carry. And you cannot remove those disease elements from them through processing. So when you eat crickets, you’re taking a chance. And look, if you eat one cricket, you’re probably going to be fine. But that’s the problem of scale. Yeah. If you eat one chocolate covered cricket, the odds of getting sick are tiny, even if the entire cricket is infected. But when you’re eating, when you’re trying to get the equivalent of a steak or a half a steak or whatever, I ate a half a steak today. It was awesome. It’s a wonderful dinner. When you’re eating that many crickets and only half of them are diseased, you’re getting sick. And people don’t like, they don’t understand, they think it’s symmetrical or linear or what it’s not. I think it’s a big problem. Well, if you watch Snowpiercer 2, what they designed their cockroaches to eat are humans so that the poor humans. Yeah. Yes, Snowpiercer is a funny, funny movie. Yeah. I don’t think it makes the point that people think it makes to either. No, no. Well, that’s the thing. But see, that’s the problem is that that when you point that out, the problem is that you give postmodernism it’s due. And you shouldn’t like postmodernism is evil. So you cannot send the message you want to send in the world, period, because you’re always saying more than you think, period. And you can blame language being imprecise if you want the day that doesn’t solve a problem and it can’t be solved. So the fact that that is true is not optional and you can’t do anything about it. Yeah. One of the human phenomena is too, is recency biased. Like, you know, you know, I always remember how the person treated me recently, not over, you know, that’s the thing that will come to my head is that how good has this person been to me recently? Not over. How good is, you know, how long of this relationship in this life have I had with this person? You know, that’s what should be more trusted or developed or cherished. Well, people don’t, right. And people don’t know the recent fight. They’re like, well, they’re like, oh, well, this just happened. And I’m like, no, this is the fourth time this person’s done this very same thing, exact same thing. This is a discussion I had on Monday. This is the fourth time, literally the fourth time. Every time something happens, this person goes, oh, that’s good for me. It’s like, no, literally not good for you, dude. Like, no, there’s no frame in which that’s good for you. No, no, no, this definitely benefited me. It’s like, no, it didn’t. So you can gaslight. And it was gaslighting. There’s a lot of gaslighting going on. There’s gaslighting. It’s like, no, no, definitely not. You can say it over and over again. And people will. It works. It works if you are confident and insistent. No, no, this is, I’m definitely, this is to my advantage. People will start to believe you because you’re so confident and you get confused. You get cognitively overloaded because you can’t make sense of it. So somebody says something nonsensical like Yuval Harari does all the time. And they say it over and over again. And you get confused because you can’t understand why they keep saying it, but they’re so confident. Then they win. They hijacked your cognition. Yeah, that appeal to charisma is the dark thing. That’s not even charisma. I wouldn’t say that’s charisma. That’s just kind of over the edge, treachery. Charisma is somebody who says something, whether they’re right or not, that you like and believe immediately. It’s a, charisma is a magical power. This cognitive overload, I can teach anybody to do that in about an hour. And it’s not that hard. Like, literally, like, there’s a confidence component, right? We can train confidence, Jesse, can’t we? We know how to do that. Yeah, we have another trainee, by the way. She’s going to report back. We can train confidence. I need to do it for another month. I got some walls. Keep going. Don’t give up. I’m going to make a course out of that, by the way. Even though I don’t. Yeah, I’ll try and help. Almost too easy to make a course out of. But I’m going to anyway. You train confidence. It’s easy. Like, you know, famous dictators in the 20th century did that. This is not hard. You can also once somebody is confident enough and they don’t need to be totally confident, you can train them to cognitively overload people all day long. So easy to do. I’ve done it to people on purpose. Like, I definitely use that tactic. Because some people are just like really smart people. You need to cognitively overload them to get to get them to open up because they won’t open up. Now. Yeah, it’s a force and it can be used for good or evil. And hopefully I only use it for good. Although. I have a few friends like that, which is really weird. It’s like they don’t want to hear you. They want to hear you that you want to hear you and you just have to keep just have to persisting. These are the points. You’re not listening. And then they’re like, oh, I’m suddenly here in the conversation. Will you participate when you use like it’s been going for about an hour. Right. I’ve been literally making the same statement over and over again in six different ways. And you haven’t heard me the whole time. And this this is like the story of my entire existence. Yeah. I think literally said that actually. Right. It’s like if you just listen to me the first time. But people are too busy listening to the fancy world in their head. They’re too busy going, oh, yeah, I understand what you’re saying. You are projected an image of you in my head. And so it’s like, what? What is going on? What’s going on is people want to associate with their their projected image of themselves in their head. So I just recently had to give you. We’ve been told we can. Yeah. Let’s be fair to ourselves. People have told us we can do these things. You can’t do that. You’re a freaking lunatic if you think you can’t do that. You can’t. Anyway. So one thing, one thing, one thing I’ve written a story time with this Muppet. So I have this friend. Let’s just say he went to private boys school. So that’s the type of person he is. And he lives down in he now lives down in Bondi. Bondi is the beach suburb of Sydney. It’s with all the 20 something people and 30 something people and the 40 something people. If you go there on a Saturday night, the palpable sexual energy of the place is terrifying. So one thing I’ve been doing recently is trying to get away from wearing T-shirts out in public. I feel like T-shirts are an at home thing and not a in public thing. So I’ve been wearing shirts and trying to dress better in order to grow myself up. Literally speaking, wearing shirts. However, he invited me to come, my friend, to Bondi. Bondi again Saturday night. What’s going on? I’m here dressing, you could say conservatively wearing a shirt. Also, I don’t wear shorts in public. I feel like shorts are again something for private. Maybe if you’re at the beach you wear shorts. Shorts are just they’re overrated. They’re a thing of casualty. If you’re going out in public, dress your best, represent yourself well, respect yourself. That is where my friend didn’t agree with me and didn’t want to associate with me. I showed up to Bondi looking sharp, looking good. I came to meet him and he was looking drab. His face was drab. He didn’t want to essentially go out in public. I was like, no, I’m here. I never go here. It’s about an hour away. Let’s go out. Let’s go for a walk. You treat this place as just normal. You just walk down the beach. That’s all normal to you. This is not normal to me. Let’s go for a walk. There was a palpable manifest phenomena of me getting some eyeballs because I was dressed well and everyone else either dressed in sexualized clothing or in casual clothing. I was the one that stood out. Ironically, if I was looking for someone that night, I probably could have had an exchange or at least a moment with someone purely because I was dressing to be appreciated rather than to be noticed or to blend in. So my friend was, he could say, let’s just use the word, pissy at me because I dressed for myself and to be respected rather than in his projection of what you should do and what you should participate in this moment, which is being beach-clothier or being young and youthful even though you might be 40. That’s not the thing I wanted to be associated to. And so he was annoyed at me for basically the entire night of hanging out because I had just worn a shirt and some pants. Say I wasn’t aware of the level of anointing I was giving to someone by respecting myself and not appealing to his projected image of, oh, you’re coming to Bondi. You’re coming to hang out with me. This is a low-key thing. Like what, you know, why are you dressed up? You look to his first, you look corporate. I’m like, if this is what you think corporate is, we have two completely different versions of corporate. I view corporate as an actual suit, an actual suit and tie with nice fancy shiny shoes. This is just dressing well. That’s the flattening of the world. But there’s only two levels, right? There’s corporate and not corporate. Casual. Which is basically just a teenager. You’re just basically a child teenager for the rest of your life in modern clothing. Right. But there’s only two modes. It’s like, oh no, no, the hierarchy is deep. And that depth of hierarchy is what’s missing. We were talking to Corey about this actually. It was pretty funny. I was saying like, yeah, you know, you need the church, you need the monastery and then you need the rest of the village. That’s a deeper hierarchy than just the village in the church. It’s a much deeper hierarchy. And then that gives you a sense of deep hierarchy, which is really important because yeah, if you just have two modes, like what Sally Joe said here, inside thoughts are just louder than the outside thoughts. Okay. Well, they’re not just louder than the outside thoughts, but they’re quicker. They’re brighter, shinier. They’re better. They’re perfect. Inside thoughts are all like every thought I have is perfect. Every single freaking idea I have is awesome and perfect. Every single one, Jesse, it’s amazing. I don’t know why the rest of you can’t just like, I don’t know what’s wrong with you. Like if you just come on. Muppets, let’s go. Yeah. Well, this, yeah, we, at the same time as we have experienced this decline of the West, we have more and more up keeps in fandoms, fandoms being shared fantasies. And then you have into battles with shared fantasies. Like, you know, no, this side of Tolkien is the right side. Oh, no, this side of Tolkien is the right side. Splinters. It does the Protestant constant splintering thing. Right. Is it cause that that’s the religious pattern. They’re stuck in the religious pattern, but they’re rebels and they don’t understand like rebellion only leads to more rebellion. Oh, something good will emerge in our rebellion. Yeah, maybe for a little while, maybe. But how long will it be good for exactly? Yeah, not very. Eventually it will just splinter again. And then you’re screwed. Sally Jo, their inside thoughts about their man-baby cloths were better than their outside shame against the glory of the basic adult historical clothing. Well said. Well said, Sally. That is brilliant. That is brilliant. Yeah. Well, that’s the power of distributed cognition right there. Right. Like we all sort of contribute to add to the story to give you different perspectives on the same thing. And how much is there? Right. That’s the proper way to think about the point that the postmoderns make, even though they’re reprehensible, it should all die. I also do have something I’ve learned recently. And then for any single people in the audience, this may be a clue. I saw more girls that are available in a taco place than I did in any of these modern clubs. So go to where the good ones are, which are probably just around food and hang out there and get noticed there. Don’t go to these fancy clubs where it’s all for show. It’s all for distraction. It’s all for essentially fantasy. They’re not there for anything quick. I mean, anything permanent. Anything meaningful. Yeah. Yeah. So find the local food places where people are at and you’ll probably meet someone. We’re going to roll the dice. What does the tie represent? It doesn’t represent anything, dude. I don’t know what to tell you. Things are not individually representative. That doesn’t have a world word. Context determines identity. Framing determines identity. Right. In other words, any symbol changes its symbolism based on where it’s used. You can’t go from the bottom up. Everything comes from the top down. It’s emanation first, not emergence. Emergence is not. Emergence is there. Emergence is necessary. Emergence is not. Yeah, because you can have the symbol of a tie on a black t-shirt. You know, you can have those t-shirts where it looks like you’re wearing a suit. Like that means nothing then. That symbol of the tie. It doesn’t. Sally Jo. It represents the functioning patriarchy. Yes. Yes. Can confirm. Can confirm. The patriarchy as such, which is required because nothing else works. I’ve heard a lot of buzz this week too, by the way, about, oh, the patriarchy is what’s always worked. And every attempt to not patriarchy has failed. And therefore we just have to accept the patriarchy. And like, I don’t like the framing, but also you’re not wrong. So. I mean, I came out of Barbie going, I’m definitely pro-patriarchy. I didn’t think I’d ever say that out loud, but okay. You know, you know, the, the, uh, the writer there, she said that was definitely not supposed to be a pro-patriarchy movie. It’s supposed to be, and she’s all upset. And it’s like, well, it was more popular with men than with women. I guess you screwed up, honey. You didn’t know what you wrote. Not that it was a movie because it still wasn’t a movie. It’s like seven trailers stuck together. Did you see my Barber Heimer live stream? Yeah, of course. Yeah, of course. Okay. It’s one of the, one of the, one of the better cultural moments on this. See, this is genius right here. If it’s not patriarchy, men are shaming. That’s correct. That’s correct. It’s patriarchy or shame, baby. That was one of the things that always bothered me with the dirty smelly hippies I used to live with. They were like, you know, I was shamed in this way and I was shamed in that way. And I’m like, is shame optional? Hmm. So the fact that you were shamed, maybe that was inevitable. Hmm. And they’re like, we just need to get rid of shame. And I’m like, because you were traumatized by the fact that you wanted to rebel. Like, I don’t know. And I was like, I recognized that when I was young, basically, I don’t. So I’ve always puzzled by people who were just figuring this out. I’m like, really? This isn’t obvious. Oh, good Lord. Good Lord. I’m going to address it anyway. Benjamin Franklin, speaking of the patriarch, I’ve been thinking about this a little. Are ant colonies patriarchal? No. People say it’s matriarchal, but it’s the queen. But the queen exists as a tool. You know, when you speak, you make no sense most of the time. It’s important that you know that. Hmm. Everything at the top is a tool. I don’t think things in kind. Sally Jo, aunts are more like the same body than the society. I think you mean ants, which is odd because in New England we say aunt as an ant. And it’s amazing. It’s one organism, right? Yeah. It’s more like a single organism. And you know, your head is a tool for the rest of your body in the same way that the body is a tool for your head. No kidding. That doesn’t change based on queen or no queen. It’s the same. That’s part of the… People get confused. They think things are different when they’re identical. Hierarchy run by a man and a hierarchy run by a woman are the same. They don’t manifest the same. They don’t implement the same, but they have all the same properties in terms of who’s using whom. The same subjectiveness is there. In other words, the head is always subject to the body and the body is always subject to the head. One of the most brilliant things I ever heard Jonathan Bajew say is, okay, the man may be the head, but then the woman is the neck. And it’s like, yes, the women point you. They point you because they’re the neck. The head can’t point itself. The neck points the head. It’s like, yes, if the man is the head, the woman is the neck. Ken confirmed that is true. The woman guides your attention. That’s what she does. Women point. Uh-oh. Uh-oh. Can it be? Nope. Nope. A failure to launch. Maybe Sally’s running Discord and so it won’t let her in. You do need to eat soon. So. Eating’s not real, Jesse. You don’t need to eat. Fasting is a thing, man. You’re not supposed to eat. Oh, there we are. Now you’re in. Welcome, Sally. I can’t spell, so I have to come and be on camera. If I leave awkwardly, it’s because I’m keeping my kid off the camera because I’m not exploiting him for internet worth. I will. Shamming. Shamming. If it’s not patriarchy, men are shamming. That was what I was trying to say. No, shamming is better. Shamming. No, shamming is better. Because guys just don’t do stuff. They’re not in charge of it. So let them. That’s my theory. Also true. Yeah. I don’t know. Anyway, I came here now, so now I’m here. It’s the only reason. Just say that one word correctly. That’s it? That was your one reason? You have so much more to offer. I don’t know. I just I feel like I was interested. Benjamin Franklin, the man who mistook his white fur house to the white. No, he doesn’t. You misinterpreted. You’re just wrong about everything mostly. You’re good at it, at least. You can do with your talents in life. It’s amazing how people misinterpret simple things like that all the time. It just blows my mind. It’s amazing how much people don’t know about nature. It boggles me. Almost all ants in existence are female. It’s just not even. And then they’re almost, because they’re all sister cousin things, they’re almost the exact same female. So if you wanted to put it in terms, it’s just like a chick living with all of her sisters with a few men in prison. That’s ant colony in people terms. That’s hysterical, but that’s true. The closest human gots to ants is like the Mormon chicks with the sister wives, except they’re just keeping the husband at their leisure and doing everything themselves because they can’t be trusted anymore because they’ll get lost or eaten by a bird. That’s that sounds right. That sounds right. I like it. So yeah, not really comparable. Also, nobody thinks about the ecological collapse of like if we teach people that bugs are to be eaten and then we eat all the bees instead of letting them make honey because we get impatient. Yeah. Oh, Sally here, you can address this from Benjamin Franklin. No, they’re ants. They’ll always be ants. I know. Yes, but what if we confuse the categories, then you’re retarded and you need training and education to stop being stupid. The ants will never be from the womb of man. Right. Right. But what if we just randomly cram together categories and make up new things like effective altruism, then you’re retarded and you need training and education. People should just meditate on the existence of three. We should skip the evil stream, the stream about three and how three exists. We could just and how numbers are fake because I’m still mind blown about how fake numbers are. No, numbers are fake. No, they are fake. I will prove it. It’s horrible. I will prove it with this paper. Look, one. We got one thing, don’t we? Oh, yeah. Oh, crap. Oh, my God. Now what happens? Extinential dread. You know what’s worse than that is we could take three out of one of them. So then it’s not even even anymore. No, no, but notice, Sally, you tore three times. Actually, no, you tore it twice and made four things. Right. Right. And then I tore one, two, three, and then what can we do with it? And now it’s one. So on Twitter today, this is so funny, right? It’s funny to watch the stupid people fight with the dumber people. It’s like, even though you’re on the right side, you’re still so stupid. I can’t support your position. Somebody posted. You’re right for all the wrong reasons. You’re right, but you’re too stupid to be on my side. So I can’t agree with you. So somebody posted, proved that two plus two equals four in mathematics. And of course, you know, somebody took up the challenge and started in with this. And I’m like, all right, two apples, two more apples, four apples. Why isn’t that your go to? Why are you going to this esoteric nonsense? What’s more insane is like an apple has like five seeds in it. And potentially all five of those seeds could make infinite apples. Right. Infinite. And that’s the difference between like nature and like things humans make that just seems silly in comparison. Like, like, yeah. No, I don’t watch Rick and Morty anymore. No, I just certainly don’t watch the new ones that aren’t good. Wow. Smart left. Why would the whole thing collapsed? Yeah, it collapsed four years ago. But yeah. Yeah, I’m not sure it was good before the creative genius left. I mean, the problem with Rick and Morty was the nihilism, which always leads to suffering and death. So, oh, well, nihilism never killed any. Oh, no, never mind. It ain’t every culture it ever touched. My bad. I get that backwards. I’m just my brain is stuck on like one apple seed, possibly equals infinity. These are the kinds of things I trip over so hard I can’t think like a normal person that like the hair. So when we say three, are we really saying symbolic three? Any more than two. No, like you got one, you got two and you got three. And the relationship of one to one is just like one to one to one to one to one to one to one. The relationship of one to two is goes this way. But then it also goes this way. And it just quantifies so exponentially. It’s just like, I mean, like, yeah, yeah, I don’t know. But wouldn’t you say three is a strong chord? I don’t think in music, I have no I have no language of music. None. It’s negative, actually. My non-knowledge of music. One strand rope isn’t as strong as a three strand rope. It depends if they’re twisted or not. By nature, I’m saying if they’re a chord, then they would be twisted. Okay, yeah. Yeah. What’s crazy is two chords, like two strands of rope, twisted is stronger than two strands of rope. It’s boggling. It’s boggling. Yeah, right. Well, and that is the one, two, three problem, which I have a video on site. Yeah, it’s really hard to understand how significant three is compared to two. It’s like it’s not a linear difference. It’s not how the world is. And even in math, it’s expressed, but we don’t. Nobody teaches it that way. Nobody. So. Uh-oh. Michelle, thank you very much, sir. It’s good to see you. Why do materials argue about the answer to life’s purpose, given their focus on material success? And how can this perspective coexist with other interpretations of purpose in the midst of cultural wars? Hi, Jesse and Sally. This makes me wonder if there’s any materialists at all, because peak materialism, like historically, should just be one guy Scrooge McDucking his life away. And I haven’t found one yet. Right. Well, I know of a few, but it doesn’t last very long. Yeah. Look, I mean, they argue about this because they know they need it. Like it’s an inevitable pattern, I think. Right. Like even a hardcore materialist needs the answer to why am I here? Right. And yeah, the answer might be nihilistic ultimately, but that’s a choice. Like you can choose nihilism. I don’t recommend it. I think it’s a bad idea, but. Yeah. It’s way better to choose the is it useful question? Is it useful? Just ask yourself, is it useful every day about 1700 things? That’s the best. And this perspective doesn’t coexist. Right. I think very much, Michal, to your point, like that’s what looks like the culture war is these people, these materialists trying to come up with a purpose for life, and then they’re all picking different material purposes. Right. And then it’s like, no, no, the purpose is political. No, the purpose is economic. No, no, no. The purpose is to save Gaia. No, no, no. The purpose is to better the universe. The purpose is to be nice to others. The purpose is, right, all these actual material things that maybe you don’t think of as material. But that’s and that looks like a culture war to us. There’s also, you know, you got to be dangerous when you hear a widely adopted frame that’s singular. It’s just it’s just culture or it’s just race or it’s just safety or it’s just economics or we appeal everything’s chemistry and hormonal or, you know, those those sort of tactics of conversation often, yeah, often lead to just more argumentation. There’s nothing being generated. It’s just a who has the best rhetoric, which is another appeal to end the conversation. If it ever was a conversation to begin with as well, there’s another appeal to dialogue. Like it that’s that’s probably what I would give to Michelle in that instance is that, you know, this appeal to dialogue. Yeah, it ended the world like that’s what it that it ended the Western world. You could say I really enjoyed the beginning of your guys’s conversation about showing that the appeal to the authority of education or information is vastly different than the appeal to on one hand, it’s authority. But I think it’s competence. I think the appeal to information as such takes you away from appeal to confidence, which is competence, which is which is what genuine leadership or at least just the willingness to accountability, the willingness to make the strides and take the failure is. And so when you when you appeal to just learning and just education, you’re appealing to something that is non-generative. It’s a it’s a neutered, dry entity. It’s a fan. It’s more leadership. Information doesn’t. Right. Information doesn’t generate anything. No, it cannot generate anything. That’s the problem. Information cannot generate anything. You can use information to generate things. That’s not the same. That’s the symmetry problem again. Right. The fact that you could use information and the problem is we get it backwards. Right. The greatest scientist that ever lived is Thomas Edison and he was not educated. Therefore, education and science have nothing to do with one another. So the information thing is exactly like that land thing that you showed. You can give information and knowledge to good leadership and they can use it. But information and knowledge does not cause good leadership or cause confidence or confidently. It doesn’t cause any of that. And it’s just like the land thing where you can give wealth. You can give location. And it’s not required. Right. You can be a good leader without information. Like it’s just not it’s not a requirement. It’s a nice to have, but it’s not. It just boggled me about that location because humans almost definitively as a species are the creature that affect climate and location. We can live at 70 degrees in a swamp or in Siberia or on the equator or in the Sahara. We affect climate. Right. That’s like our thing. And so like one instance though, we can’t live there unless we take responsibility to live there. That’s what wins. So you can not be the head leader, but you can be our leader if you’re taking responsibility. You don’t even have to respond. No, you have to respond to the circumstance that you’re in. That’s the problem we’re in. That’s the incompetence as people lacking to be integrated. A leader to take responsibility and confidence. You just have to be willing to acknowledge where you are presently and help and respond. Responsibility is a response. You can be a totally responsible lowest guy on the totem pole and just not throw cups on the sidewalk. Like if you if that’s your only lot in life is like, oh, you’re just you’re just a pleb and you just serve up some fries and you just don’t throw your garbage on the asphalt. Thank you. You have saved the world right there because that’s it. That’s all you had to do. That’s what we needed from your particular level. Any day you decide to try and find a new level. Cool. But until then, well, maybe just don’t. Like a lot of people think you can find a level and that’s that’s the misunderstanding. It’s always moving. Well, but it doesn’t it’s not always moving sometimes, but it doesn’t matter. Like it’s not optional. Plato’s cave, the actual Plato’s cave in the book in the Republic for real is the statement that you don’t choose your level and you can’t change levels. It’s actually what it says. That’s the whole point of Plato’s cave is that you don’t get freed from the cave. That never happens. It never Plato says it cannot happen. It actually says that he uses that as an example to say classes exist and you’re stuck at your class. And when the philosopher comes down from his, you know, experience towards goodness or whatever, which he has to, we have to make him do that. We have to. When that happens, he will be chided because he came down and said this, this and this are wrong. The thing is he has to do that and he has to be chided because it makes the city better. He doesn’t do it for himself. He doesn’t even do it for the plebs. He does it because it’s better for the city. It’s a sacrifice. It’s a responsibility responding to the bad things he sees. And in the cave, in the parable, the parable says the opposite of what everybody’s telling you. Actually that video is still coming. I promise I’m halfway that halfway to, I just got to get all the pieces done. Another insert here, sometimes we conflate decision-making with leadership, right? And what I was trying to say is leadership is multi-scaled. Yeah. You know, you might not be the top decision-maker that does not make you any less of a leader. Right. Right. Or example. Take responsibility for baby kitty. He’s such a brat right now. He is a brat. I want to address this. Femesiums, one apple seed to infinity means it does incest. No, that’s not what it means. That’s bad. Well, I didn’t say without any pollen. I wasn’t thinking about the pollen specifically. You got me. You got me. But also there are things that asexually reproduce, but you wouldn’t consider that incest. That’s just a misunderstanding of how the world works. And like fine and fair, like very few people understand. I mean, I’m also a witch tonight, Mark. So that’s okay. I’m fine with it. It’s cool. It’s like, oh no, opinions from the internet. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I know. Well, and the thing is like people think they understand the definitions of words and like actually probably don’t really understand what that means. And did you mean a threatening woman? Thank you. I resemble that remark. Or do you mean if you change the language, you change the culture? Because that’s where I started with. Yeah. Well, you certainly can. And that’s part of the breakdown of language. I mean, I think it’s accidental. Yeah. I think the two are related, right? Like we’re having a fight over words and meaning. It might be fundamental though, if you take a biblical worldview, which is that if you stop calling things by their proper name, if you change your relationship and responsibility to that thing. Of course. Yeah. Of course. No, no, that has to be true. Everybody talks about truth. And I’m like, the implication is that there’s a true language and that when you’re not using true language, everything breaks down into chaos. That looks a lot like a culture war. Then there’s postmodernism, which looks like a lot. It would cause a culture war. I don’t know what else to take. Like this stuff is so obvious to me, it’s bright like the sun and the rest of you are like just catching up. I’m just saying, you know, and I imagine people really following us. It’s like, man, you guys are really behind. It’s hard. This stuff is hard. People don’t see it because they don’t want to. Like nobody wants to believe that Sam Harris doesn’t have a point and it takes 10 seconds and one simple sentence. Nobody wants to believe that all these people are saying two plus two equals four is bullshit. And it takes literally four apples to prove them wrong. I don’t know why I want to share this because I don’t know how it fits in this conversation and I tried to shake it by thinking about it for two minutes and it’s not shook. So the Peterson story about the cafes, I don’t know why it’s not like one of the most popular stories ever, but it’s in his old videos from when he was teaching. And I think people, he’s got this story about these two cafes and they’re just ordinary cafes and one of the cafes is clean, is optimal. Everything is good. The lights don’t flicker. The service is nice and it’s heaven. One cafe is heaven. It’s just an ordinary cafe. It is like an ordinary rosy cafe, but everybody cared. Everybody’s doing their thing. Everything’s working and it’s heaven and just a little bit down the road is the next cafe and it’s hell. The tables are sticky. The waiters are angry. The cook doesn’t care. And that is so quintessential to me of like, it’s like the difference between a teapot that pours and a teapot that spills every time it pours or like just cleaning your sink every night versus not. And I think people hear the word leadership or authority or competence and they get like thinking about that a thousand miles away on the top of a tower as a blinking light that directs planes and they don’t see how that’s their front porch light bulb working properly. Like, yeah, and that’s the degradation of the world and it’s like you don’t have to lead airplanes. You can just- And that was my point, right? Like, you can’t take down the structures. That’s not better, right? You need to recognize the bad parts of the structure or the bad people in the structure and replace them with good people. That’s the only option. There is no other option because all other options are evil wins. And I’m still not a fan of evil, just in case anybody’s have not changed my position on evil even a little bit ever, not going to. I suppose it’s possible, right? You’re not going to go with admitting it exists makes you more evil than the people that won’t admit it exists? Yeah, yeah, yeah. All right. You know, evil’s everywhere. And like now it’s like Satan’s just walking around like going, hey man, what’s up? And everyone’s like- In shorts. He’s walking around in shorts. In shorts and a t-shirt going, dude, serves up, man. He’s a dirty, smelly hippie that looks a lot like the old long-haired Jesus people. Yep. He’s just- and he doesn’t look like that, but that’s what we see. And it’s like, no dude, literal horns and pointed tail. Like, I don’t even- That’s an obvious one. Yeah. And we don’t, we don’t, you know, we’re just not paying attention. Like the number of times I have to tell people, no, no, no, really this person did this before they get it. It’s like, no, just look, just look. It’s not, it’s not a trick. It’s right there in front of you. It’s actual, like, like, there’s bad people. People just flat out lie about things. Are we calling it? I think so, Sal. You want to, want to give us your wrap up thoughts? I think I did with the, with the cafe. Like, don’t be evil. Change your lifeboats. You know, stuff like that. Take responsibility. In other words, respond to the world around you. Yeah. Yeah. Well, then we should do a cafe, good cafe, bad cafe video. That’s not exactly what, what Peterson said, by the way, but it’s, it’s right up the spirit. I like his description of how the eggs, that is the best. Well, yeah, I don’t remember it exactly because I have high deaf brain and it- The crazy artist, the crazy artist creative doesn’t remember things exactly. The fact that I remember it at all from like 2017 is freaking a miracle. So- I agree. Well, we should, you know, we should, we should take on that project. And if we do good cafe, bad cafe narrative, the two of us in the video, that’d be fun. We haven’t done a video together in a while, Sally. That’s true. I’m just, I’m behind on all of my videos. I know. My new rendition of my, my blind people’s story that I need to do with Herb, I guess, because I don’t know. Or, or the assassination of Herb. I need to do that whole series. Yeah, you’ll get there. All right, Jesse, what’d you got for wrap up for us? Participate. End of sentence. End of sentence. I like it. I like it. Yeah. You can’t not participate. So be responsible. You can’t, right? And so you have to do it well. You have no choice. That’s the responsibility. Well said. I like that. Yeah. And look, in a way it is a culture war, but it’s a war for a culture or to have no culture. And you can be upset about the culture you had and the flaws you allegedly saw in it and how smart you are that you saw all those flaws that maybe you’re wrong about, by the way, but you don’t really have a choice. You still have to make that better instead of making it not exist or tearing it down and hoping that something better will exist or listening to somebody else who has a better idea about how to do it because the odds that they’re right are actually zero. Actually, they’re not right. And that’s what we have to be mindful of. And look, I think, yeah, we’ll have the stream next week. That will happen. After that, we’re up in the air, but I will let you know. Let me know what you think in the comments and have a great week. I will talk to you all later. Leave comments, leave likes, leave subscribes, tell your friends. The world needs you to be better. You can’t do that, Jesse. You have to do it this way. The world needs you to be better. And if only another one would be responsible or respond better. Both good. Have a good week, everybody. See you next week. We’ll come up with a new topic. Yeah, don’t feel like you’re embroiled in a culture war. Just make things better.