Judgement Live Navigation (94y95dV0veE)

https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=94y95dV0veE

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 man speaking in the city square Trying to tell somebody that he cares Can you blame the voice of youth for asking, What is truth? Yeah, the ones that you’ll call and love Are gonna be the leaders in a little while When will the lonely voice of youth cry, What is truth? This old world’s waking 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? I just love that intro. It is fantastic. Thank you to Sally Jo and Anonymous Music Person for the Johnny Cash rendition in Sea Shanty, which, if you haven’t heard it, you need to, because it is excellent. Yeah, so today we’re continuing our sojourn from discernment to judgment to action, and we’re right in the middle of that with judgment. So, I’ve taken a bunch of notes, a bunch of things came up even just before this stream, which maybe we’ll get into, maybe we won’t, depends how I feel, and what kind of examples I come up with in the moment here. So, we’re talking about judgment. What we need to understand is that a lot of people are encouraged not to judge. I think this is a deep mistake, because you need to judge in order to act, and in order to judge, you need discernment, as I went over on last week’s stream. And so, it’s worth asking, what leads to judgment? What’s the ethos of judgment? And I think it’s clear values leads to better, clearer, easier judgment. And priorities help, too, but they require a hierarchy. You don’t have priorities. Priorities are hierarchy, right? Like, this is bigger than that, or this is more important than this other thing. And what that kind of highlights, too, is contrast is important to judgment. You need contrast to be able to see, to be able to judge. And we’re not necessarily accounting for that, right? So, that’s one of the sort of deep problems, is that when we don’t take that sort of seriously enough, then we lose something. And you notice that contrast is wrapped up just in seeing, but it’s also wrapped up in judgment, along with hierarchies. So, these things are not optional. They’re not like nice to haves. They’re not like, well, I need to get one of these. If you’re not going to Walmart to buy some contrast to get some judgment, that’s not going to happen. But with everything with contrast, you need enough light to see. But if you have too much, everything looks the same. And that doesn’t just impact discernment. It’s also an issue with discernment, but it’s an issue with judgment separately. And sometimes things seem like they’re contradictions, right? But often you just didn’t account for time or change. And that prevents us from judging because we’re like, oh, well, these two things are contradictory, so it’s arbitrary which one I pick. If that were true, that’s true. But that’s often not true. It’s often the case that the situation that is contradictory, say in the moment, does not remain that way for long. So, that’s important to account for. And that’s kind of what I want to start highlighting, right? So, there’s a distinction that you can make between somebody who’s hostile versus an enemy. It’s important that you can choose without contradiction. Somebody who’s hostile might live in your community, might be upset at you for some reason, right? Somebody who’s your enemy, however, they’re outside of your community. They need to be addressed differently. This requires judgment. You have to know the difference. You have to know that there is a difference and then you have to be able to see that difference. You have to be able to judge, oh, this is a contradiction and therefore I need to do something differently. There’s a paradox. These are bad things. There must be a different way to think about these things. And that’s part of judgment. Now, there’s a difference between understanding and appreciation, right? And appreciation of difficulty, for example, right? Acceptance rather than resolution, right? If somebody does something to you and you live with them and they’ve hurt you, then you’re not going to be able to judge them. If they hurt you, that’s not going away. You have to accept that it happened and move on. Now, you can say, oh, they have to make it up to me, but can you? Because maybe you can’t. It’s not to say you shouldn’t try. It’s not to say you shouldn’t give affordances, but somebody cuts off your arm, they’re not making it up to you. It doesn’t matter if it was an accident. So you have to be able to judge these things and judge what you’re supposed to do about them at the same time. Now, you can say I’m straying into discernment, right? Yeah, Mark, we went over that last week. Well, yeah, but they bleed into one another. There’s an overlap. And it’s kind of a big deal, right? Welcome to light. That’s how it is. A lot of this stuff leads in just part of how it is. And we’re just stuck with the world into which we were born, where there’s an overlap between discernment, judgment and action. There’s a way in which we have to accept things. It’s not optional. There’s a bunch of little pieces. And we have to account for that. And so I want to make a controversial move maybe for some. The idea of stereotypes, of stereotypical patterns, give us contrast to allow for judgment. And so without a starting point, a stereotype, we don’t know how to approach something. So if you try to go into something with like a blank mind, because it’s a blank slate and judge from objective material reality, which doesn’t exist, by the way, then you’re going to be in trouble because you’re not going to have contrast. Whereas if you meet somebody who, you know, say they’re Russian and they’re not loud, miracle. And you’ll notice it because most Russians are very quiet. And I love Russians. They’re some of my favorite people for sure. But they’re loud. If you meet somebody and they ask you to speak to them, you’re going to be in trouble because you’re not going to have a conversation with them. But it also gives you some way to discern, right, which allows you to judge. And so I want to make a controversial move. Meet somebody and they upset your expectations of them. That’s actually really important signaling. But it also gives you some way to discern, right, which allows you to judge. And you’ve got this template, this standard in a stereotype. If you remove it, you’re blind. Actually, can’t see you get zero contrast, no way to assess the person in front of you anymore. There’s no pure state of nature from which to judge. So why remove the stereotypes to destroy judgment, discernment and replace your action with the actions others want you to engage in? This is the same play as equality, as this equity stuff. We want you to engage the way we want you to engage. So under the rules we tell you, right, it’s a sneaky legalism trick. And well, sorry to call out legalism as a bad trick, especially given the audience, but also legalism, bad trick. Not a fan, not good, not going to work. Don’t bring that here, please. You will lose. It is this appeal to something higher that isn’t a virtue or a value. So for example, years ago I had a Jehovah’s Witness knock on my door, and I happened to be home because I was between contracts at that point. And I answered the door and he said, you know, would you like to read this book? It’s called A World Without War. And I said, why would I want a world without war? Which of course totally caught him off guard. 20 minutes later I almost had him converted to the Church of Mark. But he left and brought back bigger guns. And I ignored them. And that’s the whole point, is that you’re appealing to something like war, you’re judging it as bad, and that’s how you’re sneaking the legalism in to get across your religious message. I get that. I’m not a fan. Please don’t do that. That won’t work with me. I know this trick. Very well. If that’s what passes for evangelization for the Jehovah’s Witnesses, then like, fair enough, but also, you know, only going to be effective in a certain narrow band. So you need to be able to judge. Are they talking about virtues and values? Are they talking about something abstract, like war? Nothing wrong with talking about war. But war might be inevitable. It might be something we have to accept. I don’t know. I don’t particularly care. But it’s worth thinking about so that you can judge. If somebody brings up war, are they talking about virtues and values? Because I don’t think they are. I think they’re about to insert virtues and values into the emotional response to war so that they can feed you an ideology or get you in their cult. That seems to be what’s going on. So you need to be able to judge that. You need the discernment to know that people do it. You need to be able to see it in the moment. You need to be able to judge. Is this person talking about the good? Are they talking about virtues? Are they talking about values? Or are they trying to get an emotional response out of me so that they can manipulate me in a way that I may not want to be manipulated? Look, if you want to appeal to Christian charity, maybe you want to be manipulated by that. But if it’s a negative in particular, you’ve got to be really careful when somebody brings up a negative and say, don’t you want to move away from this? Or don’t you want to prevent this? Or don’t you want to lessen this? These are red flags for judgment. Why are you mentioning negative things in such a positive world? And you can say, hey, this doesn’t work in India. Fair enough. But I’m in the US, man. And if you’re in the US, you’re doing pretty good. And that’s another judgment we don’t make, the judgment of when to feel gratitude. We don’t live in India or Africa. And there are places in India and Africa right now where people are walking down the street, falling over dead from hunger. We don’t have that here in the United States. That doesn’t exist here. I’m not saying it never happens. I had this famous test up with somebody years and years ago online and they were like, I’m going to find an article that proves you wrong. I’m like, go ahead, because you’re not going to find that article. But, you know, give it a shot. The best he could find was a 27 year old coke addict who had starved herself and her child to death. Probably died of the cocaine, though, just to guess. Yeah. That’s not equivalent to the guy walking down the street. Hasn’t lived anywhere in particular and falls over from hunger dead. Just not the same. Sorry. So that’s why people want to remove stereotypes. And yeah, there’s a problem with stereotypes. Really? Really? Thanks, Sherlock. Thanks, Captain Obvious. I hadn’t realized there was a downside to everything. Oh, no, wait, I did. My bad. Yeah, you need your judgment to know when you’re misusing your words. Okay, now what? Still has to happen. Because you don’t want to get ideologically possessed. You don’t want to have your will removed and placed in the hands of others or in their projection of how the world should be. You need to use your judgment. Otherwise, that can happen to you. And I don’t want that to happen to you. I don’t want that to happen to anybody. I’m realistic. Probably limited as to how many people I can help with that. But doing nothing’s not an option either. And a lot of people are upset, right? Their judgment is part of them not wanting to be judged. And so they’re very negative in affect. And I think that’s further down in the notes. I think that’s a very good point. And often I don’t have to. I can use standards of others. So you’ll notice in last week’s video, I talked about how I can use standards of others. And I’m going to get back to that. So I’m going to get back to the notes. I’m going to get back to the notes. I’m going to get back to the notes. And often I don’t have to. I can use standards of others. So you’ll notice in last week’s stream, Vincent, for example, is claiming, I have a rational case. And I was like, that’s great. Make your rational case. And he couldn’t. Over and over again. I gave him many chances. Couldn’t do it. Fair enough. But you think you have a rational case. You stated to me you have a rational case. That’s your standard of judgment, not mine. And this is really where people seem to have a problem. They’re like, oh, Mark, you’re a judge. I judge a lot less than all of my critics do. They just don’t really understand what’s going on. I’ll listen to Vincent. I’ll listen to Claire. And see if they can make their case on their own standards. They state their standards. I let them try to make their case. If they can’t do it, they can’t do it. I don’t need to judge them on the merits of their argument. I can judge them on the merits of their action. You told me you had a rational case. You then couldn’t make it and in fact resorted flat out unapologetically and like fair enough to axiomatic statements. And I said those are axiomatic statements. And you agreed. OK, then you’re not making a rational case. I’m OK with that. I’m OK with that. But I’m going to judge you. And my judgment is going to be at some point I’m not going to listen to you anymore. And so you can say, well, what’s the difference between you and somebody who just throws somebody off the stream randomly? The difference is I’ll listen to them and I’ll give them a chance to make their case on their own terms. And when they can’t do that, then I bring the hammer down. And most people can’t do that for whatever reason. They get emotionally caught up. They rebel. They don’t want to play. And I’m not criticizing any of this. Everyone’s got their own reasons for doing their own things. I don’t care. That’s not my thing. Like, again, this is me not judging them. And that’s not to say I won’t judge specific circumstances. But that’s different. Why? There’s more detail. More detail matters. Period. Full stop. End of statement. Who the person is, what time of day it is, what they were engaging in, what the frame was. All these things matter to judgment. So judgment’s not easy. I’m not trying to give you a simple two second way to come in and start judging things. But I am giving you tools so that you don’t have to do the hard work. And some of that’s just, well, I don’t want to judge, say, quality of my mystical visions. That’s why we have churches. Right? I don’t want to judge the quality of the postmoderns. That’s why we have experts. You’ve got to submit to that, though. And you’ve got to say, I’m not in a position to judge this. Another trick. The science says, because I’ve been using this trick probably my whole adult life at least, maybe slightly before my adult life. I take people at face value. If you say the science says something, just show me the damn paper. I know how to read. If you don’t have it, that’s a problem. If you have it, you’ll probably say, instead of the science says, you’ll refer to the paper directly. So when you say the science says, or some other thing that isn’t directly evidence, I get suspicious. And you can say, that’s cynical, but it’s not. You are making a claim. And if you’re making an abstract claim, like the science says, or this doctor says, or whatever, I’m skeptical. Is that going to be right 100% of the time? No. I’m not trying to be right 100% of the time. I’ll take 80% of the time. I’m good. I’m not trying for perfection. And when you stop trying for perfection, especially in your judgment, you can learn because you free yourself up to make mistakes 20% of the time. If you’re expecting perfect judgment from, say, listening to a monologue by a pirate, you’re going to be disappointed. I don’t want you to be disappointed. You don’t need perfect judgment, though. You’re not going to have perfect judgment. That’s not our thing as humans. It’s just not going to happen. It’s okay. Not a big deal. That’s why we have mercy and grace and redemption and gratitude. So that we don’t need perfect judgment. It’s wonderful. If you bring up, the science says, or you say, the research indicates, and you don’t bring up the paper, I judge that you’re probably lying to yourself and move on. I don’t have to necessarily, although sometimes I do, call you a liar, but I do have to say that I’m not going to lie to myself. I’m not going to lie to myself. I’m not going to lie to myself. So I’m going to say, I’m going to lie to myself and move on. I don’t have to necessarily, although sometimes I do, call you a liar, although I feel like I have the right to at that point. And it’s good enough. Sometimes people have come back to me and said, here’s the paper that I read. And I said, thank you very much. I’m sorry I doubted you. But you can understand why. And they usually acquiesce and say, fair enough. Okay, cool. I’m solved. Rift mended. Not a big deal. And that gets to the point of good enough. Have you judged what is good enough? Because, as the saying goes, the perfect is the enemy of the good. You don’t want that to happen. You have to be able to judge what’s good enough when you’re close enough, when your song is just right. And then maybe you want to copy that song digitally, and that’s not going to happen. So instead, you make a recording from the speaker. And in the case of sea shanties, it sounds all the better for it. Is the sea shanty perfect according to the person who recorded it? No. That person was not happy enough with it, we’ll say. I think it’s awesome. I’m like, you couldn’t improve that? Really? Could you? I mean, now I’m tempted. Could you one-up yourself on that song? It’s fantastic. Sally Jo does this to herself all the time. I’m not really happy with this. It’s like, Sally, it’s good enough. It’s good enough. You’ve got to be able to judge everything on good enough. And again, you still need that template, like that stereotype or that ideal of perfection. You still need that. I’m not reducing. I’m increasing. I’m re-enchanting. I was like, yeah, you need the ideal and you need that sense for good enough. So you don’t end up trying to do the 90% of the work in the last 10% of the progress. The 90-10 rule that Pareto principle stuff is real. Most of the work is really easy and then it gets super hard. Like, I can’t do finished carpentry because I don’t have the patience. Now, I can rough out whole rooms. Not a problem. I can get them relatively good, but if I try to go finish carpentry, I go nuts because there’s a whole issue around measurement, gauge theory. Look up gauge theory if you don’t know it. It’ll frighten you. And what level is? Is level level according to the ground or is level level according to your eye? I hate that. Just thinking about this makes me angry. What’s good enough? Nothing’s good enough. I have OCD. Go away. What about goals? What are your criteria for success in that goal? This is what I’m getting at with good enough, with ideals. You got to have an ideal goal. You got to have a goal that’s good enough. And going through that process can reveal when your goal is sinful. Where’s your dream garden? So, I want to clean the living room. Let’s suppose you want to go one step more and define clean living room as all the toys picked up, vacuuming, dusting, etc. But the real goal might be better stated as reduce anxiety about living room or just reduce your anxiety around cleaning up by picking up everything in the house. Better goal. And it might be good enough. All your anxiety is not gone. Some of your anxiety might be gone. If you have OCD, you’re familiar with this. Probably a lot of females are familiar with this because men don’t care how cluttered things are in general, although I used to. My house used to actually be quite immaculate. But it’s not anymore. Don’t worry. It’s important to have that contrast, to understand this good enough, to be able to engage with criteria of success, independent of your idealistic goal. Because look, sometimes you’re going to hit the ideal. I’ve done it and it’s beautiful when it happens. But it’s a gift. And it’s rare. And that makes it even more beautiful. But you see how the judgment works. It’s like, oh, reduce my anxiety about the living room such that when I walk through it, I’m not nervous or whatever. Right. Oh, this is the principle in agile development tactics of minimum viable product. Yeah, you get enough code cobbled together that you can see something run. And there’s so much psychology wrapped up in that, although I don’t like the psychological frame. It is a valid frame. It’s important. It’s really kind of critical. And that’s judgment. And the real problem that we’re fighting nowadays is as the world gets flattened, as it gets reduced, as it gets compressed, as it gets simplified, as the margins get folded into the center, your judgment is easier. But also you have less to judge. That’s why your judgment is easier. But now you don’t live in an enchanted world. The world is harder to be a part of when it’s flat, when it’s compressed, when it’s simplified, when it’s reduced. There are fewer connections available. Fewer judgments actually means fewer handles for you to grab onto and be a part of. That’s a problem, not an advantage. Seems like an advantage. Oh, I don’t have as much judgment to do. And you know what? If I’m not judging as much, everyone else isn’t judging me as much too. That’s great. Win, win. Wrong, wrong. Completely backwards. You’ve just reduced the intimacy. You’ve destroyed the intimacy. You are contributing to the intimacy crisis by oversreducing, simplifying the world, flattening bringing the margins into the center so that you don’t have to judge and be judged. Because this whole I don’t want to judge thing is really about I don’t want to be judged at the same time. And you may say that’s unfair, but we live in a world with other people. That’s unavoidable. And I know people, I talked to people yesterday, constantly think they’re being judged in ways that they’re not. And judgment’s weird. So yesterday I got dropped off at the house where I’m staying. Nice game of bowling. I didn’t do terribly. You know, usually I do. So I feel good about that. Not that I’m a good bowler. Never was. Well, that’s not true. Never was a good duck pin bowler. I was actually a pretty mean candle pin bowler back when I was in my teens. I was with ask me, are your hosts home? Are they there? And I was like, I’ve been with you. How the hell do I know? Could be there are lights on living room. I don’t know if they’re home. How am I supposed to judge that? Why did you ask a silly question like that? I don’t have any more information than you do. Right. It’s crazy. I was like, what a weird question to ask. I can’t possibly have an answer to that question. I don’t have the information. Pardon my name. So this flat world. And we can compress time as though I’ve already been in the house. So I would know that’s part of it. People aren’t accounting for time at all. That’s part of the compression, the reduction, the simplifying. They’re simplifying time. They’re looking at hindsight bias and saying, oh, we could have known this. No, you couldn’t. Things unfold in an order for a reason or for many reasons. That’s the real problem. It’s not. It’s never a reason. Nothing unfolds for a reason. That never happened. It never is going to happen. Not the world you live in. Things unfold for many reasons. And you don’t necessarily have access to those reasons. And that’s the issue. Lots of people discern a difference. But to avoid judgment, they punt on doing anything else. They’ll say, oh, yes, well, sure, there is a difference. There’s a difference between something like knowingly lying and lying out of ignorance. But we can’t always tell. So we shouldn’t do anything differently. That’s wrong. I say, it doesn’t matter why they lied. The lie happened. Now you’ve taken action. The fact that you don’t know all the details doesn’t mean anything. You only need enough details to act. First, you have to judge whether or not you have enough details to act. That’s a problem. Yes, that’s a problem. Welcome to life. Welcome. That’s a problem, too. Just like stereotypes. Just like ideals. Just like lack of success criteria. Oh, no, Mark. You’re bringing us more problems. Yes, I’m enchanting the world. In an enchanted world, there are more problems. But they’re under your control, at least more so than the world where everything is whoever got into office. Maybe they got voted there. Maybe they stole an election. Maybe they were a mean guy with a mustache and they did something bad, which didn’t happen, by the way. Totally democratic vote. Just saying. You’re subject to all that. And you can judge it, can discern it, and not act. That’s not the world we live in. You need to be able to judge when you have enough information to act. That’s part of the judgment. It’s tricky. I’m not saying it’s easy. I’m not living in an easy world. If you’re living in an easy world, good for you. I don’t know why you’re here. I’m going to make the world any easier in some sense. Make it a lot easier in a lot of senses, especially once you get the models that are very simple. Once you understand how simple this is, it’s like, oh, I don’t need all this other garbage. I don’t need to read a million philosophical books and 100 treaties on morals and ethics. And take some deep course in theology. No, you don’t need any of that. I know this because most people don’t do that and they live good lives. It’s not hard. Simple models. I’m not reducing your struggles. Those struggles are there anyway, though, whether you realize it or not. The question is, do you want to take control of it as much as you can have, or do you want everything to just control you? That’s your judgment. And the larger problem is that judgment is done to a standard. Do you know what standard you’re using? Because you’re taking actions. So your judgment happened. What did you base that action on? What were you judging against to take that action? Unless you’re taking action against the standard, you’re taking action against the standard. What are you judging against to take that action? Unless you’re taking no action in the world, you need to judge. You are judging. And judgment requires a standard. What standard are you using? Is it the law? And I’m not saying you should never use the law to judge, but you can’t use the law to judge everything. It doesn’t talk about everything. It’s not supposed to. I would argue fewer laws are better laws. Maybe you only need 10. Who knows? Or maybe you need 15 and you drop that other tablet while you’re on the mountain. Just give a movie reference. Judgment helps you find the axioms that you’re using, or that others are using. The axioms are the things you do not judge. You do not question and you do not critique, at least in the moment. I’m not saying you can never critique axioms. I’m saying that they’re the starting points. They’re the places you stand on to do things like judge and discern. So it’s not all virtues and values. I propose that you should start from being as good. I think that’s a good starting point. Can I prove that it’s the right axiom? No. I can’t prove it in any sense of the word. Certainly not in a scientific sense because science can’t do that. I think you can derive all the other axioms, all the virtues and all the values and all the principles that you need from that axiom. And you’ll notice again in last week’s stream, talking to Vincent, I got him to axioms and he admitted they were axioms. There’s nothing wrong with that. I wasn’t objecting to his axioms. I was objecting to his claim that his system was rational. Then he couldn’t do it. You’ve got to be able to do the trick. This has always been my critique of Sam Harris. He can’t do the trick. He says he can be an ethical actor. When you ask him to do it, he can’t do it. Reliably, consistently, 100% zero on that one. Never did it. That’s why I was never a fan of his from day one. Not from day one. I knew he was going to run into something. Did I know what it was going to be? No. You want some proof? Navigating patterns. Two videos one month apart on Sam Harris. Right there. That’s all you need to know. I got the goods. I did the trick. Do the trick. Can’t do the trick. I’m skeptical. I don’t have to burn you at the stake, but I’m skeptical. You need axioms. And there’s nothing wrong with not rationalizing everything. I don’t even think it’s possible to rationalize everything. I don’t think it’s important. I think that you need some rationality, but there’s a limit to rationality. There’s lots of limits to rationality. It’s not going to encompass the world. And it doesn’t have to. There was a time when everybody was less rational. And we’re here. It’s okay. You don’t need to judge whether or not ice cream is okay for dinner. You can just have that when you’re old enough. I remember I was in my mid-20s and I woke up and I was having a pretty good day. It’s like, what am I going to have for dinner? And I went, I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know. I’ve never had ice cream for dinner. I’m an adult. I can’t have ice cream for dinner. Well, fk this. I’m having fking ice cream for dinner. There’s no one here to tell me otherwise. It was fantastic. Best day of my life. And of course I’m a glutton, so I eat way too much ice cream. But if you put ice cream in front of me, I will eat all of it. It doesn’t matter how much you put in front of me. I will die eating all the ice cream. It’s a problem. I go to great lengths to keep candy, ice cream, sweets out of my way. Because I will eat them all. Very hard for me not to. Very, very difficult. Easter was so hard. I love food so much and I’m way too sick to eat lots of food. I’m old enough. Hard of judgment is a responsibility. When you are a judge, you are also responsible for the results. And that’s why people don’t like judgment. And they don’t want other people’s judgment. They don’t want the responsibility of judging themselves. Fair enough. But we’re living in a world. Not an option. Bad judgment makes for good learning. Isn’t that a bitch? Notice and judge consequences. Recognize trade-offs using your judgment. And yeah, your discernment comes first. We went over that last week. Judgment is the thing that allows you to learn. It’s not optional. It was never optional. It’s never going to be optional. You’re not going to live in a world where people aren’t judging you. That’s impossible. They can’t take action around you if they can’t judge you. You may not like the way they judge you. And that may not be your fault. That sucks. We’re living in an imperfect world. If only somebody had told me. Who knew? Surprise ending. We’re not living in an imperfect world. To quote the immortal words of Socrates. I drank what? Another movie reference. Sorry. One of the problems that we have with judgment because it’s all about preparing to take an action, right? We’re living in a world where we’re not living in a perfect world. We’re living in a world where we’re not living in a perfect world. We’re living in a world where we’re not living in a perfect world. We’re living in a place where we’re not allowed to judge or to claim. There’s no smiling. There’s no daring to take an action, right? Because we need to act or else we’re not alive. This judgment requires authority and skill. Do you have those? Are you in a position to judge? Did you do your research? Or did you just discern, have an emotion, and act? This is what I was talking about earlier. your emotions to a much greater degree than you realize. A lot of your emotional response is mediated by your unconscious mind, not your conscious mind. Your rationality only goes so far. And if somebody comes up to you and says, wouldn’t you like to live in a world without war? Feel the emotional response. And I’ve mentioned this before, and in some ways I don’t like mentioning it. In other ways, it’s really important to realize. Go get a copy of Hitler with his speeches that is not translated. Turn the sound down if you know German. Don’t even listen to him. Just watch the screen. Discern what you’re feeling in the moment. Every single time I have done that, I have been like, I don’t know what that guy’s doing. I don’t know where he is, I don’t know where he’s going, but I’m going to follow him every single time. And I’m not afraid to tell you, and I’m still terrified by it because I don’t know what that is, but I know it’s there and I can judge it as not good. I’m not judging him as not good. I’m judging the emotional hijack as not good. That’s judgment. Oh, I don’t know where he is. I don’t know where he’s going, but I want to follow him. That’s not good for me. I’m not judging him. I don’t have to judge him in that case. Not required. Now, when he starts opening concentration camps, yeah, maybe I have to judge him, maybe before that. But judgment’s a tricky thing. You can judge for yourself, which doesn’t mean judge somebody else by your standards. It means judge your actions independent of them. That’s judging for yourself. That’s something to think about. If you haven’t done your research, if you haven’t researched what somebody else told you, maybe you shouldn’t judge. Maybe you’re not prepared to do that judgment. Do you have the skill and authority to judge? You can judge yourself for yourself. You always have the authority to do that. Do you have the skill? Well, you get that over time by making mistakes in judgment and discerning that that happened. And then judging, oh, that judgment was a mistake. I need to adjust my judgment. I need to adjust my virtues and my values or my vision of them or something. Fair enough. Judgment isn’t easy. Just because it seems like you can doesn’t mean you should. It’s easy to go, oh, I should judge that person because they said something wrong about this doctrine that I care about. Should you judge the person? Should you judge their words? Did you even understand what they said? Do you really know what they’re up to? It’s hard. You know, we saw sort of an example of that on Jacob’s live stream earlier, where people were making comparisons between different folks. And some of these people have no idea. I know for a fact they’re not well researched and they’re not skilled at judging because their judgment sucks. And that’s not me saying it. That’s a lot of people going, oh, yeah, that was a poor choice. And then maybe attacking somebody on a live stream when that person knows all the skeletons in your closet. I mean, not all, but a bunch of really bad skeletons in your closet is not good judgment. Not good judgment. And on the other hand, we’ve been taught to be skeptical of our own judgment. It’s very sneaky. Told on the one hand that we can judge, but when we do, we’re told we are just missing something. Oh, you don’t understand the Hegelian dialectic. No, no, I’m fairly sure that Stanford Encyclopedia philosophy is correct about this. I mean, maybe your judgment’s better, but I don’t think so. This is how we end up listening to authors who make no sense and believing that they are smart, like Hegel. Good example. What if they’re not smart? What if the reason no one understands them and can defend their freaking work, which think would be easy if they’re right, is because they were talking gibberish. Did you ever think about that? Is everything you don’t understand smart? No, not by a long shot. It is okay to judge somebody as smarter than you and ignore them. There’s nothing wrong with that. Intelligence is not the pinnacle value of the universe. It’s just not. That is appropriate judgment. That is proper submission. And again, you don’t have to judge them. You can say, I’m not smart enough to understand their point, and therefore I shouldn’t engage with it. And I have explained this to people over and over again. One of the problems that I have had with, say, Carl Jung, I know he went wrong somewhere because everybody goes wrong somewhere. It’s not a magic trick. I’m not making a crazy claim here. It turns out there are no perfect people. As near as I can tell. And maybe there was one once, but he’s not here now. So let’s not go down that road. Let’s deal with time that we’re in and not time that we’re not in or time that we might be in. There are no perfect people. I don’t know where Carl Jung went wrong. I can’t tell. That scares the hell out of me. So I avoid his work. It’s that simple. And I mean, I’m already not going to read his stuff because I’m not reading anyone’s stuff really. Well, I have been doing the Plato book club on the Texas wisdom community YouTube channel. So if you want to see more of me there, I’m participating on the Republic. It’s there. I put the link in before. I might remember to put it in again today. So yeah, I mean, there’s no harm and no foul in saying, boy, Carl Jung’s probably got some good stuff there, like everybody, including three year olds, by the way. No, I mean that seriously. You should take that seriously. You can learn something from everybody and you might find more wisdom in the offhanded comment of a three year old than you can find in the entire Confucian texts. That can happen. But I’m not going to engage with him because I can’t tell where he went off the rails, but I know he went off the rails. I’ve made that judgment. My ass off the rails. Right. So I want to address some of the stuff that’s been going on. I know I’m remote, so I don’t have the best setup, although this is an awesome setup. My best friend Brian has a wonderful office with a great setup. Just doesn’t have four K monitors everywhere like I do. So I win. Very important win, by the way, at these stupid tech games. Who’s geekier? I always win the who’s geekier game. So. I like this. Yeah, that’s where Christian hope comes in. When things aren’t fully resolvable in this life. Yeah. Yeah, that’s one way to Christian resolve it. They’re all crazy though. Not recommended. Mills. Good way to set up a big false dichotomy. If you aren’t for this, you are for insert bad thing that everyone dislikes. Right. Mills too often. This is the cost of entry. People get lonely and demoralized enough to allow this ideological possession wind up getting taken far from living our living your values. Right. Well, because the emotional hijack is there. It’s it’s hard. It’s easy to get emotionally hijacked. Your emotions are super powerful and they’re unconscious. And yeah, we use our rational mind to help keep a lid on. But it’s imperfect. And that’s part of the problem. And yeah, Anselman, look. If you’re speaking out of ignorance, because you don’t know any better. And if you’re part of the deep state, why wouldn’t I fire you either way? Like, why do I care? Why? Like a lot of this is where conspiracy theories come from. Oh, I know the secret knowledge, the forbidden knowledge, the Gnosticism right there. Right. I know that this person part of the deep state and they did that. Like, there’s no way to tell. You can’t tell if they did it out of ignorance or conspiracy or they were just made a slip of the tongue. I can’t tell. But when it happens over and over again, I can tell that you need to go. If you want to say, oh, we have to rehabilitate them, that’s fine. We can fire them first and rehabilitate them later. I don’t. That’s fine. I’m not going to do that. But you can. Speaking mistakenly. Yeah, again, but that’s the wrong layer of analysis or judgment. I can judge my action about what to do about the head of some agency that lies to me. Without worrying about why. Did he have the best of intentions? I don’t care. That’s the responsibility that you take. You can lie as an official. I don’t mind that. But if I find out and I fire your ass, that’s still on you. That’s not on me. I made the judgment and the hammer came down. Too bad for you. Because it doesn’t work that easily with that sort of situation. But the voters vote him out or the other executives say, yeah, this guy’s kind of has to fall on his sword. Yeah, sometimes people have to fall on their swords. Also true. That’s a judgment. I know. I guess Gerard apparently talks about we don’t have scapegoats or something. Yes, we do. That’s not going away. And it shouldn’t go away. Leaders, not experts, because experts don’t do this. Leaders often fall on their swords because they’re supposed to. They’re supposed to take responsibility. Experts never take responsibility. That’s why you shouldn’t listen to them. No, really. You should not listen to experts unless you’re in a position to judge. So should I listen to an expert on computer security about computers? Probably. But I’m kind of an expert in computers. So that makes a difference. Nils might be worth discussing commitment to a standard or set of standards where this should be self curated or subscribed to. You can’t self curate standards. Look, I don’t say this enough, although my audience may disagree. You’re a muppet. I’m a muppet. We’re all muppets. Virtues and values are bigger than us. We can’t know them. Not in their entirety. Not well enough. You can never know goodness, truth, and beauty well enough. You can never know justice well enough. That’s what Plato’s Republic is about. You can’t know justice well enough. Even if you scale up to a city, which is not a political move at all, at all, you misread the book if you thought there were politics in it. You’re just wrong. Sorry. You’re just wrong. Chapter two makes it clear. You can’t do that. So yeah, you have to have a commitment. You might do that based on seeing somebody that you really appreciate or admire and saying, where did they get their virtues and values from? And maybe they’re like, well, this came from my path or this came from my church or this came from my grandfather. This came from the man down the street. This came from my adopted family. And then you can adopt that too. But you’re not doing it by yourself on your own. That’s not happening. Individualism is terrible. And so then you can mitigate self-reproach by acknowledging your good intentions and your limited circumstances. Muppets. The answer is always Muppets. If I repeated someone’s proposition in an egotistical way, would it be funny? Depends how you did it. Oh, Jesse wants me to keep the monologue going. Well, yes. Well, this is a quick break from Joey to advertise that Joetopia rules for evaluating propositions. I can confirm that Joetopia, if you were there, you could judge everything perfectly. That is actually true. I’m sorry, I left that out of my monologue, Joey. Please don’t don’t hurt me for that transgression. Mills claims that book seven is incredible. Mills, if you haven’t, my friend, Dr. Lantern Jack, if you haven’t seen his channel on YouTube, just type in Dr. Lantern Jack or Lantern Jack. He has a whole special thing on Plato’s Republic that is fantastic. And I actually did that long before I read or started reading the book. We’re not done. Texas wisdom community. We’re still we’re not doing it this Saturday because our host had a personal issue to deal with. But we’ll resume next Saturday. More videos are coming. Don’t worry. Andrew Parsons. Hey, Colossus. Sheep writer, you are dead on. Thank you. I would say that of most of the modern quote philosophers. Andrew again, I’m just saying he didn’t have a language to talk about the absolute until after unconscious. Come about. Yeah, you got to be suspicious of people who didn’t account for the unconscious. You could be cynical about it. And maybe I’ll be cynical about it and say the unconscious is actually just the spirit. But yeah, if you didn’t at least have that, that’s a that’s a problem. Oh, leave us, Joey. Just the guy we need. Yes. Well, problem with Joey. And this is where judgment comes in. Is that Joey successful? And so we need to be resentful and angry about that. Otherwise, what are we really? Oh, oh, here we go. Benjamin Franklin. I love the Muppet theory of epistemology. I appreciate that. Normally I wouldn’t engage in epistemology. However. Joey, if I needed it. It’s already too late. Can confirm. Mills. At some point, I’d like to hear your thoughts on agency within the Muppet model. Why are we skipping ahead? One live stream. I told you action is next. Why are you rushing me? Stop rushing me. That’s a bit is that because he wrote not Hickey, we can dialect. I love these people that take dialect dialectic rather and and reframe it for themselves like Hagel did. It’s like, you sure Plato was wrong? I don’t know. I don’t I don’t think so, Claire. I don’t think that’s going to happen at all. I’m just too tired after dealing with the live stream and. Certain people. I already agreed with you like twice, Claire. And that like if that’s not enough for you, I don’t know what to tell you. I had to take a shower because I agreed with you. So. Feel dirty. So, yeah, here’s the link. People are welcome to hop in. I am too tired to continue any more monoluking. Pin this link to the Navigating Patterns channel, which is the only channel I paint to, although it will be available in the chat. So it scrolls off into nonexistent. Won’t scroll off on Jacob’s channel because there’s no one there commenting. It’ll scroll off and renders United because all of you. Haters who aren’t in navigating patterns are hanging out there and chatting. But the rest of you who love me are navigating patterns, Chad. So, yeah, feel free to jump in or ask more questions and I’ll try to answer them. Can I get me some water? I know I called them haters. You like how I try to use my reverse psychology to get them to subscribe to my channel and watch me there. It’s very clever. And just again, was it three weeks ago now? I had a live stream that got like 600 and something views just on Jacob’s channel. I actually got over a thousand views total between the three channels. So thank you. That was wonderful. And of course, again, I have my first over one video, Jordan Peterson, his trick on navigating patterns. Super happy about that. Thank you. Last time I checked it, it was it. Or 81 or something like that. So that’s great. Trying to get the numbers up. And also I’m on Twitter. And on Twitter. We can. Get me over a thousand. No, five hundred. Which I’m not halfway to yet. And then you can monetize on Twitter. I don’t even know what that means, by the way. I’m just I just was told recently that that was the case. I saw the Elon Musk tweet about the monetization and then somebody else tweeted out, oh, you need five hundred subs and so many tweets or something. I don’t know if I’m behind on tweets. I could tweet all day just by going into my pictures and posting pictures of beautiful things from my trips abroad, for example, or my trip to Hawaii. Or my garden, because I have lots and lots of pictures that I never post. So there’s always that option. Yeah, Claire, I’m going to decline just because it’s going to get a little bit pretty quick because I’m still smoking, smoking mad from the live stream and being compared to bad actors by bad actors, which is even more amusing. Especially the cojones on somebody like that to do something like that. It’s like, A, you’re an idiot. Like that was a stupid move. B, you didn’t think that through at all. Like, yeah, I have nuclear weapons. You have sticks. This is an error on your part. You don’t want to back me into a corner or call me out for anything in the position here. It’s just not a good plan. Not a good plan. Well, look, I think the easiest way to understand what happened on that Jacob live stream is the following. Psychological projection. A lot of times, and this happened with two of the people on that live stream, people will project their sins onto others. And that was definitely happening. Tyler in particular destroys communities. He’s destroyed several. I’m still trying to remember. I used to know the name of the channel that he started with the group doing stuff on, and I have it in my head and it’s not popping out as words. Mills on topic. At what point do you believe it is appropriate to come to a conclusion and move to a judgment? Some kind of useful heuristic to offer. OK, here’s what I would say. Look, it starts with discernment. OK, then you have to judge in order to act. You might want to act as a result of an emotion. I want to act as a result of a rationality. If you don’t have a little bit of both, you’re probably not going to act. I know lots of people who rationalize their way to something and never do it. That’s actually super common. I think you’re jumping ahead to action. And discernment alone is sufficient to cause judgment. The two bleed in. Again, they’re they’re overlapped. Right. And that’s an issue is. You have to know the difference between mere discernment and discernment and judgment. But you have to judge to act for whatever reason you’re acting. It’s not particularly relevant. And so I would say the heuristic is. You need to get your clarity to a point where you hear both angels. Or the angel on one shoulder and the devil on the other. And now we have to judge, Jesse. Don’t judge me too bad, but I’ll be there in an hour. So he gives us information and then says, don’t judge me. New information requires judgment. Am I going to listen to Jesse ever again or am I going to realize that he’s just not reliable? I don’t know. I have to judge him now. But that new information, you’ve got to judge. You’ve got to judge whether or not you’re going to engage with new information or whether or not you should. Before you judge the new information. So again. You’ve got a bureaucrat. He lied. New information comes out that he may have been what I don’t care. The move is the same. So what you need to judge first is whether or not you have enough information, enough skill and enough authority to make the judgment that leads to the action. Mills. Safe to say that judgment emerges in due time from discernment, which is your correction here. I don’t think it emerges. I mean, a lot of people make discernment and then they don’t judge and say, oh, I know there’s a difference between knowingly lying and lying by mistake, right? Because you were misled or whatever. I know there’s a difference there. And that’s why I’m not going to judge. And it’s like, really? That’s why you’re not going to judge. And this is why I say it’s important that no, a lie is a lie. And the reasons for it are matters of forgiveness, grace, something in redemption. Brains crap today. Apologies. And you can always avoid judgment. You can always tell yourself you’re not judging and destroy your discernment, which again I discussed last week. So he just not lest say be judged. Yes. Can confirm. I think that’s the issue. All right, Claire, if you can stay on your very best behavior and not stray into religion, which we’re not here to talk about ever. I’ll add you to the stream. We’ll see how this goes. I’m judging that it’s possible that you’re going to be reasonable for a little while since we can share a common enemy. Hi, Mark. I do want to address one thing quick, just because Jesse just through this. There are a connection between boundaries and judgment. Yes. Boundaries provide contrast for judgment. I didn’t make that clear. Yeah, we did talk about boundaries before discernment. Right. So you need that. You need all that. And that was what the conversation was about. Right. With Tyler was he was asked to draw boundaries around Claire here. I’m not a fan of Claire by any means, but he couldn’t draw boundaries between Claire and Jacob and Mark. That’s a good hint that his judgment is off. Why does he even need to draw boundaries? Can’t we just be allowed to interact and like or dislike each other without him? I don’t know. He has some good point. I’m standing about it. There’s there’s and Jacob’s on about this too, right? Like there are certain people that you don’t need to engage that we’re not all equal and not everybody has good ideas. And if you if you’re not a good idea person sharing your ideas around good ideas persons, you’re taking the oxygen out of the room for no reason. People want to talk about their stuff. And I guess even if they don’t agree with you, sometimes you you get good ideas off them anyway, because that’s that’s true. Like that’s a fair point. Right. But at a certain point, you got to say and Jacob did it today in his dream. He got rid of John. He said, John, you’re not keeping up with the conversation. I mean, he didn’t say it that nicely, but that’s what he meant in his heart of hearts. I’m quite sure of that. Making a judgment. And and he said, I’m going to get rid of you because, you know, he gave John a warning and I thought it was a pretty clear warning myself. And he kind of didn’t drop off on his own. And Jacob gave him another chance and then dropped him off. And I thought that was a fair way to handle it. Now, I don’t like his messaging. I think it’s way too harsh. He’s not that harsh a person. I have this good authority from people who’ve met him in person. I don’t have firsthand experience, but I’ve had nothing but lovely experiences of Jacob, even when I disagree with him. But I’m a little bit more tolerant of disagreement in general than most people. Well, I like to think I am very tolerant and I mean, it’s not a big deal for people to disagree. Well, OK, I’ve got some ideas and I know people disagree with me. And I mean, there’s just no need to get hysterical about it. Lots of people I know have wacky ideas. And I think it’s good practice to be able to explain and justify yourself rather than just sort of condemn somebody. Yeah, that’s the struggle. Well, look, I mean, Jacob does a really good job, whatever other criticisms you have of him, and he’s not perfect at it, but he actually does a really good job better than most other people at giving people a chance to talk. He just has a threshold. And the difference between Jacob and everybody else is that he has boundaries and he holds to them. And people don’t like that because that’s a judgment. Yeah, but but everybody else just cuts people out and never gives them a chance. So Jacob’s a hundred times better than all of those people just on that particular stance. I can judge that. I can say that. And that’s fair. Like, and I did the same thing, right? I did this with you on the last live stream and I did it with Vincent. Right. And until you crossed the boundary, I was willing to talk and then crossed the boundary, warned off and then gone. And that’s, you know, that’s always on the table with me. And you can complain, but like it’s my live stream. I made it happen. Right. I put in a bunch of work and you’re not entitled to the fruits of my labor. You’re just not right. And and that’s part of this issue. Jacob set up the stream yard. This is his stream yard account. It’s not mine. I’m not paying for it. And I’m grateful because I wouldn’t have one otherwise. Yeah. Yeah. Well, we’re still talking. So, you know, it’s fine to, you know, have a few disagreements and throw each other off our channels every now and then. Can we can we give him credit for giving people a voice, even you, in spite of the disagreement? Absolutely. Absolutely. Of course. I don’t have any problem agreeing with that. He’s just given me so much publicity. I mean, just the way he talks about me, I’m like some, you know, super villain or something. But you’re a living rastrogens head. Congratulations. Yeah. So so I don’t mind. I mean, being introduced to you guys is just kind of, well, I mean, it’s a different corner of the Internet and it’s, well, a different kind of people to what I’m used to. So it’s very interesting. It’s always good to meet different people and see how they interact. And you’re not all bad or even the bad ones are not always bad. So, yeah, it’s it’s good to meet you. Well, and I think maybe after so many interactions, we might not be so antagonistic towards each other after all. Look, I mean, there’s a difference between antagonism and judgment. If Jacob punts somebody out of his dream, it’s not antagonizing and it’s not an indication of antagonism. It’s just somebody crossed a boundary. And I do I do, you know, I’m going to segue into some of these talks because Mills is asking about Christian self-examination, which Chris, I’m not going to talk about. I’m going to talk about self-examination. So let’s suppose that you need to examine your own behavior. You need to adjust your judgment by using your judgment, because that is an appropriate use. Maybe it’s raised into parasitic thinking or whatever, but I don’t actually think so. I think that self-examination and judgment is a thing. You need to do it relative to a standard. You need to hold yourself to that standard. And maybe you can’t. And maybe the issue is that you need to use an external standard. And maybe that’s street epistemology. Maybe it’s science, although I’d argue those are bankrupt. Maybe it’s a religion, right, in order to orient yourself. But you can’t use effective altruism. Effective altruism is a meaningless term. Outside of a lot of context. And I do mean a lot. The only argument that got made against me on that point, this is on Clubhouse a while back, was if we had had many conversations, we could use that term between us. Yeah, sure, that’s true of any two terms. In fact, I have made up words like Oogly. And some people know what Oogly means, and some people do not. And the context is complicated and difficult to explain to people. But that’s the thing is without an external judgment that other people, sorry, standard for judgment that other people are looking at in distributed cognition, it’s a very tricky thing. And when we try to self-judge without that external marker, without purchasing values that are much bigger than us, than we Muppets can even understand in some cases, we run into problems. And the problem is it’s way too easy to listen to that soothing part of yourself that says, you know what you did? It’s fine. It’s fine for you to attack people, to lump them all in one category, and say they’re all the same when discernibly they are not. And then when people are asking you, please do the discernment, please make the judgment, like your judgment, I’m not asking you for you, to give me your judgment, I’m asking for how you came about your judgment, fair enough, you know, and you can’t do it. That’s a problem. Well, I learned something from my last exchange. Somebody makes an ironic comment about active listening. And I looked it up and I thought, well, what a good idea, this active listening thing. Had you heard of it before, Mark? I’ve heard of this ridiculous concept of active listening, yes. I don’t think you can actively listen. Well, it just means that you listen to somebody, you paraphrase what they said to show that you understand what they said. And then you, oh, there was something else, I forget. It’s quite simple, it’s one of those self-help things. But I thought it was, I was already doing it, which is why my post is only in the chat. You thought you were already doing that, right. And as I’ve pointed out to in past conversations many times, you rephrased everything I said using none of my words and much more complicated and unnecessary framing. And that’s what I typically object to. I understand the framing tricks that postmoderns do. It’s called steel manning. You can straw man and, you know, Yeah, you can. And what I was doing was steel manning, you know, I think you mean to say, and it was meant to, you know, make what you say. I understand what you think you were doing, believe me. That wasn’t the issue. And then what was it? That you weren’t representing my point of view at all. You were trying to bring things into your frame, into your point of view, so that you could open up the conversation to your frame. And that wasn’t going to happen. I was only telling you my interpretation of things and I was open to correction, basically. But maybe the speed of the conversation, you know, sometimes if you talk quickly, the other person, well, you know, gets excited. Maybe when you want to calm somebody down, you speak slowly so they don’t get excited. But if I talk really quickly, then you think something’s not, you know, that sort of thing. Or you talk really quickly on purpose. Well, it’s a way of, you know, if I talk really quickly on purpose, it’s because I’m scared that you’re going to interrupt me before I finish my sentence. So I talk really quickly, you know, so. Yeah, yeah, but you don’t really know. I mean, you know, what people perceive as somebody’s doing something that they find annoying. That could be. I’m not too worried about it. No, no, no. I tend to have the psychology behind the different modes of speech and intonation a lot better than people think I do, let me put it that way. Yes. So what do you know about Tyler? Why is he? He doesn’t appear very often, does he? No, he vanished after being embarrassed by his scandals and getting called out for destroying communities, which I find very ironic that he’s accusing me of doing that. I did A, the opposite, and B, he’s the one that destroyed communities. What scandals? That’s what I thought amusing. I was like, this isn’t going to fly. Everybody knows what you did on Discord. And, you know, maybe that’ll fly for a bunch of Christians who didn’t weren’t there. But like, I’ve got a three plus year history with the guy. And I know where his skeletons are buried. So I thought it was a bad move. But if he wants to make a bad move, I consider him an adversary at the very least. Then he’s welcome to make all the bad moves he wants, because again, I like to win. So sorry. So he’s Christian and what he’s done the same sort of thing before. I don’t know if he identifies as Christian or to what extent. Never came up that I recall. It’s not relevant to me. He destroyed the Awakening from the Meaning Crisis community with a particular move that he made in one day after he got called out for it. And that server was never the same after that, for sure. And then he eventually got removed as an administrator from that server at the behest of somebody who female, which is not a coincidence, who made a complaint against him because he was behaving poorly towards her on multiple servers. So right. Stalking her, it sounds like. So basically, he pulled the same trick on somebody else before, like, oh, this person, the evil, why are you talking to them, that kind of thing? I think that’s common online. Lots of people do that. Right. But I suppose he has a kind of dramatic. OK, he sounds vaguely authoritative, I must say. He’s got very, very high level of enchantment skills. He can he can drop his voice and he talks slower and lower and draws you into his little world where he says ridiculous things like the cells in your body are attached cosmically to all of the stars in the sky. And he’s literally said that before in the low, slow voice. And people have followed for it. I’ve watched them in real time and whatever. I mean, that’s part of his thing. Yes, I mean, I’d say he’s charismatic, which is why I suppose it’s so unnerving when he does his dramatic thing about demonizing. Well, a lot of people fall for charisma and, you know, it’s there for a reason and maybe they should. I’m not I’m not against charisma at all, actually. I think it’s an important component. The question is, what are your fruits? And if your fruits are destroying servers, annihilating communities, co-opting people’s work for your own deeds or misusing your enchantment to, you know, build a harem or start a cult or whatever, then it’s bad charisma. Right. And the charisma itself isn’t bad. It’s the aim. If it’s useful, evil purposes. Like, I would say if it’s used for better negative purposes or selfish purposes to judge that. Well, and you need boundaries and discernment to judge all that. And that’s what’s important. Like, you need to be able to judge. Is it OK to even put, say, Jacob and Mark in the same category? And I would say, I mean, we certainly have categories we share, but the ones that were mentioned today aren’t among them. That’s for certain. So he just dislikes you because you’ve clashed before or something? Look, I don’t tend to know his motives about anything. I don’t really care. I can just look at what people do and not care about their motives and go, this is bad and not deal with, oh, maybe he’s a good person inside, deep inside. And the fact that everywhere he goes, he leaves a train of destruction and death and doom is coincidental. I don’t care. I’m a pragmatist. None of this mind reading matters to me. I cannot know his motives. I’m not interested in his motives. And that’s as far as it needs to go. Like, I just don’t need to get into what are the six thousand possible reasons that he’s acting the way he’s acting or why he called me out. Which was it was a tactical error. It was one of the largest tactical errors I’ve seen anybody do online in a long time. It’s fantastically beautiful. Yeah. I mean, some people like drama for the sake of it. I mean, you know, right. You never tell if somebody is doing it on purpose, if they’re doing it for egomaniacal reasons or you just you can’t know that they don’t even know that they can’t tell you that. And there are certainly circumstances where I can show you evidence that would lead you to the inference that that in particular was true. But I don’t need to get to that level of detail to make a decision about what to do about somebody. I warned the person running the FGMC server that Tyler needed to be kicked off his app ages before he was probably a year and a half before he was turned was actually, you know, booted off. And I understand why that person didn’t want to do it because Tyler was instrumental in setting up the server. I get that. That’s fair. But also, it was obvious to a bunch of people that he wasn’t doing the right thing anymore. I bet the girls liked him. Didn’t they? Some of them did, I’m sure. But I didn’t take a poll. Like, unlike Tyler, who claims to have the secret poll of people who don’t like me. I don’t do that. I don’t play that game. I don’t look. And I’ve said this to many people. They’ve come to me and said, Mark, you have to do something about X. And sometimes they’re right about that. But most of the time I say, no, you need to go to that person and tell them you have a problem. You need to set your own boundaries. I’m not setting boundaries for you. Sometimes that’s not true. Sometimes they come to me and they say, you need to step into the situation. And sometimes that is actually correct. And I have no problem doing that. But I also have no problem telling somebody, no, no, no, this is your problem. You need to deal with it because those are your boundaries, not mine. Because that happens too. And that’s a judgment. And that’s a judgment that I make. And obviously, if you’re coming to me, you’re going to trust my judgment to some extent, even though you may have selfish reasoning and say, I want this stopped right away for my own purposes. That can still lead to me going, even though I think you’re selfish and you don’t give a rat’s tail about the goodness in this, you are right that I need to step in. And often when I step in, those people are very upset because I don’t do exactly what they want. Well, that’s too bad. You came to me. You trusted my judgment. The judgment was outsourced. Probably something I should have discussed in the model. See, Claire, you’re contributing quite nicely now. And so, yeah, it’s important to understand when you outsource your judgment, when you want somebody else, some other authority or some other structure or whatever to help mediate your decisions and make those judgments for you. So either you know what action to take or they take an action irrespective of your own. That’s totally fair. That’s a very good point. Yeah. But I don’t know if you saw that stream when I think it was fairly at the… OK, I think I appeared in the middle and then… And then, oh, yes, yes, Jacob swooped in and told Gavin that I offended Gavin. And Gavin wasn’t even that offended. And then I was kicked off. And then everybody just came up and said, ooh, ooh, the boundaries, boundaries, we need boundaries. And it sort of ended up, I think, in somebody or a few of them say, oh, we need somebody there to protect us from ourselves, to protect us from having our feelings hurt by each other. That, I gathered, was really the general sentiment of people in that stream. Well, look, protecting the innocent is a duty and I think it’s important. But we’re adults. Yeah, that’s OK. Some people are adults in age and not adult enough in either their discernment, their judgment or their cognitive ability. And that’s the problem. And yeah, I think Anselman’s getting up a good point. Jacob does act on personal dislike. Absolutely does. And even in that, however, he is fairly well tempered. And for that, he deserves a great deal of credit because most people are not. You can be upset at Jacob all day long. Everybody knows I have my gripes with Jacob and some of the stuff he says, but I still support him as a person, even if I don’t support all his projects. And I still support him in that he’s doing stuff and in doing stuff, he is being criticized because that’s the way of it. Like some people hate success and they’re not going to like Jacob. And some people, a lot of people are postmodern anti-structuralists and Jacob’s trying to build a structure. And that sucks. But also you need structures. We need structures to help us judge things, for example. Right. You need that judgment. And even if it’s wrong, you’re better off having a bad outsourced judgment than you are trying to do it yourself because you’ve got to give up on something in order to do that. And maybe you’re not capable of it even with that. Are you talking about hierarchy? Yeah, this hierarchy is inevitable. I think Jordan Peterson makes that clear. I don’t think he’s wrong about that. Would you be going to the conference next month? I’m not going to that conference, no. I don’t. Did you go to the last one? Yes, I went to Thunder Bay. I don’t think I’ll have the magic of Thunder Bay. I don’t think that same spirit will be invoked. I hope I’m wrong. And I just don’t see it as something that’s going to go for the good as much as I would like. Certainly not as much as Thunder Bay. Thunder Bay was absolutely wonderful for very many reasons. And there’s a lot of stuff I would have changed about Thunder Bay in hindsight, but only in hindsight. So they’re unfair critiques in some sense. Could you tell us a bit about Thunder Bay and why it was so wonderful? Was it the first time such a thing was arranged? Yeah, that was the first conference for this little corner that I know of. And look, there was lots of wonderful things about it. Yeah, as CW is pointing out because he was there. I had a table at Thunder Bay. Yes, I was very well treated by Catherine and Eamonn and Scott and Scott’s wife. I’m not sure I even got her name, but she was in the background making a bunch of things happen. It was quite remarkable. Quite remarkable. And I think I learned a lot of stuff there. I walked in the door. I grabbed Ethan to the airport. We drove up together. I walk in the door and somebody says, Mark. And I realized immediately I’m in trouble because I don’t know who this person is. And they clearly know who I am. And that is not a situation that I had ever been in in my life. And I was like, oh, you have a YouTube channel. There’s a bunch of people that know you. You’ve never interacted with directly. And now you need to adjust. And I hopefully did it well enough in the fly, right, that I met Eric. Of course, there were three Erics there, so I can’t tell them apart already because I’m terrible at names. I know them by sight. Very visual thinker. So that was a good lesson. I stayed at a hostel. Good lesson. And I think the thing that made Thunder Bay work was the spirit of the people there was very much centered around exploration, which is something that I think nobody talked about enough. Everyone’s too busy stuck in false dichotomies. We run away from pain and towards pleasure, which is nonsense. It’s just observably incorrect. It’s quite polite for a breeze. And you can always explore, right? There’s situations where you’re not looking for anything in particular, but you are looking for opportunity or manifest potential. And people just see us as goal seeking creatures. That’s wrong. It’s experimental data shows that’s wrong. I don’t know where they’re getting stuff from. They’re obviously not reading any of the scientific papers on the subject. And Thunder Bay was very much exploration of the ideas that were being brought up as a result of what Catherine had framed for everybody. And Catherine is a therapist and it was meant to be therapeutic, suggesting that you’re going to be talking about what was it? Conscience and consciousness. That’s all. Consciousness and conscience. It wasn’t meant to be any. I would not classify Catherine as a therapist. I don’t think it’s relevant, though. And again, it wasn’t goal oriented. So therapy is a goal. There’s no goal at Thunder Bay. It’s an exploration. I think that is a hard idea to understand in modern times because we’ve ignored it. But there is such a thing as exploration and exploring ideas, exploring ways of interacting with people, exploring frameworks is something that we do, whether we acknowledge it or not. And that’s part of the problem is that people haven’t made the judgment that such a thing exists and is useful. So the way it was arranged, you all sat around in groups, did you and you bonded in your groups discussing the things you did, given exercises to do, that sort of thing? No, it was not a normal conference. I’ve never been to a conference like this. I’ve never heard of a conference like this. There was some group stuff. It was mostly around discussion and they did a little mini estuary there. I didn’t participate in any of that. That’s not my thing. What is a mini estuary? Oh, you can look at the video on the Consciousness and Conscience channel. Yeah, I haven’t watched them all, but maybe I watched one or two. Well, there’s one on there where they do an estuary. John does his meditation, which he modified from the one in, oh, no, I can’t remember the name, but the following of the Meditation Series, Cultivating Wisdom Series. Oh, right. That was John Faveke doing his sort of mindfulness thing. That was one set of groups that people got in. There was this other set around estuary that Paul Vanderclay ran around his protocol. Was it mostly male or were there many women or mostly male? I’m going to go with Catherine’s number from the other day. She thinks there were about 30% women there. There were quite a few women there. Quite nice. One of my nicest moments was somebody said, would you like some tea? And I was sitting at my table and I went, actually, that would be awesome. And I don’t know the last time somebody got me tea. So I was like, this is the best day of my life. No one comes and gets me tea. I live alone. So it was lovely. And it was a female who asked you if you wanted tea? Yes. Yes, yes. That makes a difference. Well, it sounds like fun. But probably if I signed up for this one, I’d probably not have my booking fee returned or something. I’m sure they’d be happy to let you in, Claire. Jacob’s running it. It’s Jacob’s show over there. I mean, he’ll deny it, but like his arrangement and Vanderclay is way too nice. He’ll let you in for sure. And look, he had a good stream with you. He said that today. He said, oh, I had a lovely time with Claire on my stream. And I agree. I thought it was a lovely time. You were on his stream the other day. That was awesome. But also uncharacteristic for you. It can’t be nice. It can’t be nice. Oh, so Jacob is going. I have no doubt I wouldn’t let you up if I didn’t think you were capable of it. So Jacob is going this time? Or was it their last time? It’s Jacob’s conference. He’s the one that set up this conference. Oh, I see. I didn’t know that. CW, I think he participated in Estuary. He said, Estuary is a format for conducting open-ended discussions among otherwise disparate and unaffiliated individuals. Well said, sir. CW is really quite good with concise descriptions of things. So basically you’re divided into groups and you each get a chance to say what you think of the subject. You can put things on the table. I’m not an Estuary expert. I would like to agree with Ansemann who says a cup of tea makes everything nice. That is true. Yeah, an Estuary protocol, roughly speaking, you’re supposed to have any number of people bring. You’re supposed to keep it small, but they can bring whatever topics they want. Then the group decided decides what to talk about, which is fine. Right, right. It’s all these sort of games, I suppose, these word games for these adults to play. It does sound quite fun. I don’t know if I’d classify it that way, but it’s enriching for people to be able to discuss things they feel they can’t discuss in any other place. And if that’s Estuary or channel, it’s a random compensation or it’s a Discord server, then I’m not necessarily opposed. But those things can also go horribly wrong because they can reciprocally narrow to use some verveci language into something that’s not great. So that’s always a danger. And that danger manifests all over the Internet all the time, I would say. Yes, people getting their feelings hurt. Yeah, or people just falling into conspiracy theories or people falling into groups that aren’t looking out for them and only care about making a group bigger. Right. Which roughly a cult. And yeah, it’s a part of a cult. Well, I guess you could be if you wanted to be, I guess. I have no idea. Well, I don’t know. I mean, this is sort of sub cult. I guess there’s Paul Van der Kley and then there’s Jacob, who is a sort of satellite channel and Rando’s. Is it who does it belong to? I’m not even sure. I have no idea who if anybody runs Rando’s and if they do, who that really is. I don’t think it’s relevant to anything. No, no, I suppose not. But yes, you get a kind of idea of, you know, the milieu of people in this group anyway. I mean, educated middle class, you know, that sort of thing. But for what it’s worth, you may know that I sort of hang around with the Wignats. And I used to think it’s really terrible, they say, and it’s so repetitive, it’s so dumb. But, you know, I guess they’re working their issues out, arguing with each other, with their competing conspiracy theories. But there was a while when I thought, well, at least they kind of say what they mean and they let it out. And I think, you know, they get some release because, I mean, often people say, you know, what’s the point anyway? What’s the point of talking about all these things and nothing gets solved and you make a few more enemies and more people hate you. You know, why even bother discussing politics at all? And I find that, you know, most people, well, most people I know are about saying what they mean and maybe deleting it. But apparently they feel better after that. And I guess that’s the therapeutic value of it. You express your emotions, you feel better and you don’t need to, you know, you don’t even need to keep the stream in case you get a strike. Now you’re describing therapy. So you care to answer this question about which books are behind you? Because people are curious, apparently. Oh, it’s just rubbish. It’s not my actual… I find it hard to believe that you read rubbish, Claire. I mean, that’s not my bookshelf of, you know, the books I read. It’s, you know, office stuff. Are you saying you don’t read them? Are you saying they’re not interesting? I have a bookshelf. I have bookshelves, but they’re not behind me. You know, when you interview some, you know, public intellectual and you see a nice bookshelf and, you know, it’s got all the books and they like you to think that they’re read. Skepticism in the audience, Claire. These are not these books. Fair enough. Yeah. Mills wants to push back on educated middle class. He says, not the case for me. Autodidactic blue collar grandeur. Yeah, I don’t think there’s a political or socioeconomic frame that will fit the crew in this little corner. In fact, I can tell you that kind of thinking isn’t going to work. And I think that’s why they like their little group. But they need something to cohere around and maybe controversy is the thing they cohere around. And yeah, people have to talk things out. That doesn’t mean they believe what they talk about. I mean, debates famously are all about defending ideas, whether you agree with them or not. Right. Or just expressing them, entertaining them, challenging them. I mean, you know, maybe we don’t know if we believe something until we actually articulate it. Probably. That’s what Peterson thinks. He does say silly things though. Like, what was the silliest thing he said? He said, I don’t know how to be a Jew and a Christian and a Muslim all at the same time. And I thought, well, nobody’s asking you to do that. Why do you even think, you know, that anybody expects you to do that? Reductionism leads to that sort of thinking, right, where they want to reduce everything. Suppose they take Hegel seriously and they’re like, oh, there’s a dialectic, there’s a thesis, an antithesis, and we can do a synthesis. We can take two things and turn them into one. It’s very neoplatonic. It’s very tempting. It’s wrong. But yeah, I get where it’s coming from. Well, I thought Hegel was basically saying that all these ideas and these ideas fight each other through the people who support them. And this is how humans progress with their history of ideas. Something like that anyway. Yeah, Hegel says lots of things. They’re just all wrong. That’s all. I mean, it’s just observational descriptive stuff. And it’s one lame interpretation that’s observably incorrect. It’s fine. Like people are entitled to be wrong, but it’s just more wrong than right. And the fact that somebody made a good point once does not mean you should take everything they say as gospel, as it were. But that’s the problem with modern philosophers, right? Like the postmoderns make a good point or an alleged good point about critique, and everybody goes, oh, they’re so smart. But that’s not true. That’s observably false. You can just ask anybody, what’s the good in postmodernism? Go ahead. I’ve done this experiment with literally hundreds of scholars with PhDs. You know what their answer is? They don’t have one. That’s kind of weird. Like you would think if it were good, if there were goodness in it, people would be able to just whip it right out and say, here’s what’s good about postmodernism. They can’t. What is modernism anyway? I suppose modernism is kind of post-Christian thinking, isn’t it? That’s what it really means. Maybe. Now we have a challenge. Mills, I vote for showing books. I’ll show you mine. Here’s one, Mystical Dimensions of Islam. So I guess he’s asking you for your street cred on what you’ve read, which came up earlier today because it was… I haven’t read anything recently. If you’ve read anything recently, what have you read that I am? Well, I’ve read books a long time ago, but I haven’t for ages. Well, I can’t remember the last book I read. I think it was a Barbara Pym. Yes, it was a Barbara Pym novel. That was maybe last year after Christmas. I think you’ve read a lot of books on your philosophical and intellectual readings and maybe your theological readings. Do you care to comment? I mean, you don’t have to. Yes, I was going to. A thought that occurred to me recently was that Jewish theology is Jewish philosophy. They don’t need anything else. Yeah, that’s fair. The idea is that they’re supposed to believe that God exists and basically believe that everything that happens has a purpose and was meant to happen. And out of that, we are to extract moral lessons. So we don’t think, you know, in another world, something else could have happened. No, no, no. We live in the best of all possible worlds. This is a theory by Leibniz himself, wasn’t it? He said we live in the best of all possible worlds because if God exists, he would create the best of all possible worlds for us. And he’s the only one, so we better make the best of it and, you know, try to make as much sense of it as we can. Well, that’s well done. I don’t mean to segue, but I do have an audience. I think Mark is secretly a young Hegelian because young Hegelians also kind of hated Hegel, but they hated Hegel in a Hegelian way, ironically. The problem with all this, Benjamin, is that you can fit anything into a Hegelian frame. That’s why it’s useless because literally anything can be fitted into it. And so whatever. It’s a trueism. You can always use the frame to judge things that are outside of the frame. But that’s an invalid move in all cases for all conditions, including Hegel. He doesn’t escape that rule. It’s a truism, though, isn’t it? I mean, you can’t really deny that, you know, historical development is, you know, two ideas fighting each other and then the synthesis of the two ideas. I suppose a good example would be national socialism, which was a syncretic idea, I think, isn’t it? But there was, you know, the idea of nationalism, the idea of socialism and Hitler thought we don’t like this international socialism thing, international communism thing. You know, aha, I’m going to make it. Yeah. When you create dichotomies on purpose and put them in opposition on purpose, yeah, it’s a problem. And it doesn’t matter why you’re doing it. But it matters that if you reduce things down to two options like thesis and anti-thesis, then you’re screwed. It’s always going to reciprocate narrow and it’s always going to end in tears and death. And so my suggestion is don’t do that because it can’t lead anywhere else, no matter how tempting it may be. And that’s about judgment. You can easily judge that dualism is wrong, that dichotomies are wrong, that binaries are wrong, and they’re all the same problem. But they happen anyway and, you know, people will extract lessons from them. Well, some people they don’t happen to. And look, some people go, oh, you’re just afraid to make a decision. And that’s sometimes true. But sometimes there are just wise people who go, no, I know, I don’t know enough to make a decision about this. And so I’m not going to say A or B. I’m going to find a third way. And maybe there is a third way. And then you’re not competing. Did you say you believed in God or not? I’m not really sure. I know, because I never mentioned that. Oh, Benjamin Franklin has another excellent question. Can you get discernment without duality? Of course. Look, I’ve said this before. Let me go over this again. This is super important. The reason why we run into dualities, the reason why we run where we say it’s a decision between two things, is because we’re looking at the very end of a chain of judgment. Right? We’ve already ruled out a bunch of stuff. We prioritized our list. We’ve ruled out all the other items except the top two. And now we’re trying to decide between the two. But we just did a bunch of work. We ignore all that work. It was hard work, probably, or maybe half of it was unconscious work. And then from our conscious perspective, we’re deciding between going out to eat and making dinner. You can’t make that decision because that isn’t what happened. Okay? There’s at least one other option, which is not eating. So that didn’t happen. Your decision never came down to two. It never happens in the world. The world is too complex for that to ever be the case. And we don’t like that because it scares the bejesus out of us. But that is the world in which we were born. There aren’t dualities. There aren’t binaries. They don’t exist. I have a video on that on my channel, Navigating Patterns. If I get motivated, I’ll actually go find it. It’s quite a good one, I think. And again, I think all my videos are good. I might be biased. Could be. Don’t be fooled by binary thinking. But it just looks like we do this. But that is not what we’re doing. And it’s important to realize that. Because it’s one of those tricks that forces us to flatten the world, to oversimplify, to overreduce the world. And there’s no reason to do that. We need to open up the world, to make it bigger, to enchant it, so that we can operate in harmony. We can’t operate in harmony if everything’s power. We’re screwed if everything’s power. Screwed. And the weak will lose. So bad play for the weak. You need to create a space where the strong can be strong without having to exert force. And if you don’t do that, you’re going to be crushed. I don’t recommend that. I think that’s a bad plan. I think there’s a better plan. You don’t need to see it as a hard slope or a soft slope, as my good friend, Pastor Paul VanDukely, talks about. And he does owe me a video. When I get back home, I’m going to bug him about that. The third way. Because that’s, and he’s already agreed to do the video. He’ll do it. I’m sure. Just have to get his attention again. He’s going to be busy preparing for Chino. But it’s an important judgment that there are more than two options, that there are more than two ways. There’s more than just hard versus soft slope. Yes, between yes and no, there’s maybe. Yes, that’s actually quite well said, Claire. That is true. What is this? Benjamin Franklin. Whether tis nobler in the mind to go to McDonald’s or to take arms against the sea of, I assume that’s supposed to be ketchup. That sounds way too philosophical for McDonald’s, but I’m suitably amused. I find that quite funny. McDonald’s. Yes. I’m not sure if that’s wax philosophical about a fast food restaurant. In fact, probably the worst. I used to eat at McDonald’s quite a bit until I got sick. That was one of the ways I knew I got sick. I couldn’t eat at McDonald’s anymore. I’m like, why can’t I eat at McDonald’s? I get sick every time. I stopped eating at McDonald’s forever. I had the, what’s it called? Stack house steak or something. And you’d have pepper, pepper sauce. I thought it was quite nice. I don’t know. I think it was a steakhouse stack or something like that anyway. There are some nice burgers out there for sure. I have been enjoying burgers while I’ve been up north celebrating because I’m up north and people will buy me delicious food or make me delicious food. We have wonderful steak tips today. It was absolutely delicious. I’m just simmering in heavenly goodness from dinner. It was so good. Part of my judgment is that dinner is good and good dinner is goodlier. I thought Jesse was coming, but apparently not. Maybe he doesn’t love us anymore. Well, maybe if I popped her, popped off, he might be more likely to come. That is quite possible, Claire. All right then. I’m off and thank you very much for this very pleasant exchange after all. Well, thank you for joining me and behaving. And it was actually quite helpful. So I do not regret your engagement at all. And I hope you can engage like this more in the future. I shall certainly try, Mark. Goodbye. Excellent. Goodbye. I like Mill’s statement here. This is a nice way of talking even when both parties have misgivings. Good modeling. Thank you. That is actually the entirety of what I am striving for. So I will consider this a complete victory in all conceivable fashions just on the basis of that one statement. Because seriously, I’m not being hyperbolic here. That is the goal. And if just one person sees that, then like a mission, freaking accomplished. Benjamin Franklin. Claire was more patient today, I think. I agree. I think she was much more patient. I think that having a common polarity to discuss was important. And that contrasting that was not made is interesting. And if you want to frame it, and I think it’s probably not useful, but it might be useful, as the difference between engagement in common enemy and engagement in a common good, I can see why you would do that. But I don’t actually think that’s fair. I think it’s much more fundamental. I think that people can come to agreement even in the midst of disagreement. And that’s a good thing. And I’m open to being wrong about that, but I don’t think so. I think that being able to have a common good is important. And I think that being able to have a common good is important. And I think that being able to have a common good is important. So I think that being able to live in disagreement is important. CW. I wish I knew which Barbara Pym novel she was reading. Well, maybe she will tell you. Phlebas. She fooled you all. Phlebas. Am I going to rule out for half a second that she’s not super patient and able to play the long game? No, I’m not going to rule that out. But I don’t care. I mean, transgressions can be dealt with in the moment. You don’t have to worry about bad actors at all. I will say upfront, I’m not going to have a conversation with Tyler for lots of good. There’s three years of history there. And if you don’t know the history, that’s fine. But you’ll have to accept my judgment that there’s no way I’m talking to him. I have no reason to talk to him. I know he’s a bad faith actor. This has been proven six ways to Sunday. So there’s no reason for me to engage with him on his terms. And that’s the problem is you can look at somebody else’s judgment from afar and you won’t necessarily understand it. And that’s OK. But also you won’t understand it. Like, are you qualified to judge? Like, I don’t know that Claire isn’t having insights that are helpful to her that help her grow out of her. For Clivity to try to drag things back into her frame and get people to adopt her secular cornism solution to the world. But I don’t have to worry about that, because when it happens in the moment, and it actually came close in this convo, maybe you saw it, maybe you missed it. Then I can just remove her and she’ll come back. And if she continues to not do that, at some point I may decide, this isn’t worth my time and just cut it off. But that’s different from never engaging. And most people use the never engaging trick. And I don’t unless you’re super big and you just have too many requests, the never engaging tactic, I think, is the wrong tactic. And I’m not going to say everybody who does it is a bad person or anything like that. I don’t believe that. But I don’t believe in never engaging. I don’t believe in saying, oh, well, this person, there’s a picture of this person or this person said this once. That’s different. When there’s a pattern of behavior, then it’s perfectly reasonable. Right. Like I very much disagree with digital gnosis. Nathan Ormond being John for Vicky’s critique, because they looked at the Twitter feed and they made a decision about this guy without looking at his YouTube channel, which would have told you everything you need to know about him. He’s a hack. He doesn’t do his research. And he’s not that bright. And he engages in anger and resentment porn on the Internet. He did literally a three hour live stream on my random conversation with Paul, my first one, I believe. And clearly, if he was a second one, I don’t remember. He clearly just didn’t understand what was being said. Like, first 10 minutes were completely hysterical to me. I cracked up so hard and I was like, oh, I see what’s going on. And I’m not going to watch the rest of this because it’s funny. And a year later, a year after that, in a random conversation with Cassidy, he brought me up again, unbidden. I was like, oh, I’ve been living in your head for a year. That’s fantastic. These are not the type of people that John for Vicky should be wasting his time with or even Paul Vanderclay for that reason. If he deleted his YouTube channel, then maybe that’s a sign of repentance. Repentance. That was the one I was missing. I know there’s four of them. Rain. But he didn’t do that. You got to do something to show, demonstrate the change to be judged. I can’t judge you on an action you haven’t taken. Right. And I think it’s deeply misguided for anybody. And Christians are especially guilty of this to forgive somebody before they ask. Right. To judge somebody as redeemed before they’ve taken an action. To listen to somebody and go, oh, and let them back in. I think that’s deeply misguided. I think that’s wrong in all cases. I don’t think you should do it. I think it’s irresponsible and it’s unhelpful. And that’s how you end up with John for Vicky doing a critical video with somebody who isn’t qualified to critique him because he didn’t bother to read any of his work at all or do any research. He did come on to the Vicky server and he’s probably I think the first person to ever get kicked off that server and get kicked off by the guy who owns it, who never kicked off anybody pretty much. So, yeah, I mean, that’s. Yeah. You know, you got to have some discernment and judgment. You can’t just let anybody be your great critiquer. And Omi, if it wasn’t for Orman being a stumbling block to random ortho bro, I wouldn’t have engaged in the corner more. That’s too funny. He disclaims that as a confusing sentence. Someone was having doubts from his atheist rhetoric. So I did some investigation, was able to watch for Vicky live stream chefs kiss as they say. Gotcha. Yeah. I mean, look, lots of things draw people in and controversy. Anger and resentment is one of those things or shared anger and resentment or the possibility of finding a way to be irresponsible. Right. Like, oh, these people are just angry about the political situation. And so they are giving me an excuse for why I should be angry about the political situation and my situation, which is caused by the political situation or the economic situation. And therefore, people are drawn in by this all the time. It’s very emotional. Right. So I was talking about before. And. Yeah, well, this is the other problem with John and Omi, because we’re Vicky corrected him and was too gracious. Yeah. Yeah, he’s very Canadian. He’s a little too Canadian. But also, he didn’t understand the work. So I get that he said clever things on Twitter, but that doesn’t mean he’s smart. Anybody can say clever things by three year olds, say clever things by accident all the time. I don’t I don’t really don’t understand this obsession. Like, have you been around children? Children say that most amazing things. I knew it was a whole TV show about that back in the day, I believe. Children say the darlings, something like that. And they do. And it’s like, oh, they sound like philosophers more often than not, because they have very simple formulations for things because they’re children. And that people are just not accounting for this. And then they’re reading Hegel and go, oh, this thing I could have heard from a four year old sounds important. But then there’s all this gobbledygook around it. So this guy must be smart. It’s like, no, not necessarily. Maybe. Probably not. Most people aren’t smart. Wrong. You’re just mad because you’re angry. Well, the culture is pathos driven. That’s interesting. Maybe. I think everything’s driven by spirit. That might blend in nicely with pathos under your definition. I don’t know. Spirit is the thing. I know Verveke keeps stating we cannot live in a two worlds mythology. I think that is wrong and suboptimal. And we never lived in two worlds mythology. We live in a one world of mythology, one world of materiality and one world of reality, which we co manifest with our interaction and bringing down the highest and bringing up the lowest. But hey, what do I know? I just have a simple model that explains everything better than all these complicated, ridiculous framing from the Gelses. And I’m not the only one, I’m sure. But I’m the only one talking about it right now. So we’ll go with that. CW. Cool. You met up with IRLPolitik. I did. Is he going to make you a subject of his documentary film? I think he is certainly going to try. That seems to be his plan. I did meet him the other day. It was lovely. He’s a lovely person and very kind. And I am more hopeful than I was the first engagement with him. Mills. The two can be reconciled as my hope. I think pathos and spirit are probably related. Fleevis. Yes, tell us more. Is IRLPolitik the guy that did the randos with Paul? He did do a randos with Paul. That is correct. He has big dreams. For sure. Jesse! What you’re trying to get in the car. Hello? There’s a freaking car accident fucking thing. I shouldn’t swear on camera, but here we are. Are you trapped in a… No, no. I’ve just taken the instead of a 20 minute way home, I’ve taken a 45 minute way home. At least I know where to get home. If you know what I mean. Nonsense. I had nothing to do with you, Claire. I was just impatient. I didn’t want to project the impatience on camera, but here I am making a judgement. Excellent. So you like my monologue? I thought this is one of your better monologues in the last six weeks, maybe? I think it had a good spirit to it. It was good flow. That’s what I value. My value matrix is flow. That makes sense. I think you would have liked Rob, IRLPolitik. He’s got interesting ideas about filmmaking and documentaries and stuff. Yeah, he’s trying to do a thing and he might even succeed. Sweet. What’s been up with you? You’re up north. Where exactly north? I’m in New Hampshire. Southern New Hampshire. Where’s that for us on the other side of the world? New England is in the northeast corner of the United States. That’s the funny part that sticks out up north by Canada. Okay. Normally I’m due south and west in South Carolina, where it’s much hotter. I was actually hot here the past two days, so really hot. You grew up in New England? Is that right? Is this your homeland? I grew up in New England. I did a little bit of growing up in Kansas, which is in the Midwest, but I was very young. Then we moved back to Massachusetts. Most of my growing up is Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Lovely. What’s better? I know that’s a judgment question, but here we go. I like to explain to people that New England left me. I didn’t leave New England. It’s not the same place for many, many reasons. One of the things that happened was I used to love driving. One day I was like, I don’t like driving anymore. Driving is terrible. Then I moved down south and I was like, I love driving. Oh, okay. This was New England. Fair enough. Your boundaries and limitations changed. A lot of things changed. I was living in a city outside of Boston called Marlboro. It’s due west of Boston. It’s like 25, 30 miles to the west, right? So not far from the capital city, but it’s a city. It’s a rather robust city. It was a good little city. I was right downtown. It was a beautiful house. I really missed that house. I was trying to get out years before that. I just couldn’t manage it for various financial and other reasons. Plus, jobs are free and easy up here. If you can’t get work up here, especially in computers, that’s because you suck. I’ve survived tech apocalypses before, so I have contacts and whatever. I could have pulled the same trick had I moved to Charlotte. I was going to move to Charlotte or outside of Charlotte. I was going to be in South Carolina. Charlotte’s right on the border. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. I was going to be in South Carolina. IB and work in Charlotte, which is a very common thing to do. I Hen channel also, go on to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Sh is the doers that, the integrity, so we don’t forget. I mal unitr. It was fine being in the UK. Some ones have worked for the chocolate company so many times that want to get bonds with the chocolate company. Don’t see my crotch Have you been watching JV’s dialogues with Christopher master Pietro on Kierkegaard relevant to the reconciliation I Hate Kierkegaard and I think people who pay attention to Kierkegaard are Freaks and weirdos and I like Christopher master Pietro. I met Christopher matcher Pietro although I didn’t spend as much time with him as I would have liked I think talking about modern philosophers is a complete total utter waste of time. Don’t do it If you need philosophy, you can go to Plato and Aristotle and be done and I’m not saying don’t read the Western Canon, but The modern philosophers are garbage they really all are like Ancient people didn’t have access to them and they live just fine Are you sure you need that because I’m sure you don’t and I’m sure evolution says I’m right and Just saying like simple models. I Do like for Vicky and master Pietro though, so maybe I’ll just but I doubt it I didn’t catch all that. Jesse, would you say? So this is the exact problem we’re facing right now Over the oversampling of education Say like that. Yeah, we’re the oversampling of information in general, right? the problem is the more information you have more judgments you have to make more decisions you have to make and Choice gets hard and That’s not good and you can and the real problem is not that it’s that while you’re busy doing these things You’re not doing other things. And so the tennis Prager dust-up over I think it’s episode 10 or 11 of Exodus where and Peterson has a clip of this where Dennis basically says well You know porn can be good if it keeps you away from adultery I’m like Dennis you you’re wrong about that. Like you’re just missing the point like if you’re engaged in porn You’re not engaged in something higher and so it’s bad and it’s not good because there’s no good in it it’s just bad and porn addiction is a real problem and in fact, I Think there’s something more pernicious about that that everybody’s missing, but I don’t want to go into that now I would if a gun was to my head, but I think we can stick with judgment and just say that’s how I judged it What Prager said is wrong? I said well it may be The lesser of two evils in some case it is still drawing your attention away from something Some kind of engagement towards the higher and therefore porn is just bad Hello Casey, it’s good to see you my friend feel free to jump in And it is one of these sort of pernicious problems I Guess Claire like my monologue too. That’s interesting. I do like feedback. That’s for sure. My monologues are good I I do try to flow them as much as possible I Casey was distracted by Wallpaper. Yes. I have that problem all the time mice. What are you talking about? You lunatic? I love Casey. I miss Casey showed back up after being missing for a while We did miss him because he’s awesome. He was denying us his awesomeness and that made me upset Anselman I like a good silly low. I don’t know how to pronounce that. I’m sure There’s some trick to it some Scottish trick. No doubt Since I didn’t near enough time among Scotsmen in Scotland, I can’t quite do the accent so I Also don’t watch enough Scottish TV shows there are quite a few good ones, but not enough I’m afraid Oh Jesse looks frozen He might be gone Stuck in traffic out there in Aussie land Traffic in Australia is probably just Wallabies, that’s my theory That’s my judgment is that all traffic in Australia is a function of wallabies. I Also have a theory about the soliloquy is that is that what a loke is Soliloquy I can understand silly Loki gotcha Is a bit of a soliloquy I’ve often said Jesse will appreciate this if he can hear me. I’ve often said that the Matrix in the second movie when he’s talking to the architect that that’s a soliloquy I Don’t think people quite get what I mean, which is fine Soliloquies are important especially for framing I mean the goal of all that is to frame the discussion and have a jumping-off place Even if we don’t stick to judgment And get pulled back from them by good friends text you in various formats To remind you of what’s going on Unlike Casey who gets distracted by wallpaper somehow So yeah, it’s always good Engage in the conversation So, yeah, it’s always good Engage with people in the appropriate manner you have to judge how you’re gonna engage with people because it’s important I Might judge that I love talking to Casey so much that I’ll bring him right into my stream Welcome, sir. We believe me about distracted by wallpaper wallpaper. So interesting. You don’t see like the Patterns see that I do Now removing wallpaper in the upstairs part of my house. Oh Gotcha that’ll be entire house is covered in wallpaper. It’s wonderful. I Love wallpaper. I The wallpaper my 70s wallpaper my old house part of that was because it was plaster and laughs and I’m not And people would come in and they’d be like you should get rid of that wallpaper and I’d be like you should grow a brain That’s nearly impossible It’s actually physically impossible like you’re stupid like oh you’re plaster forget easier to tear the wall down Yeah, you may as well just put up drywall if you’re gonna do that Yeah, I’m lucky. I got my camera calls My time is up glad to spend it with you all. Thank you Mills. Good to see you All right, so I missed everything the topics discernment, right Libis has seen some great wallpapers. No our topic is judgment. We did discharge last week Joey there is nothing in modern philosophy that isn’t better learned by watching wallpaper dry. I think Joey is correct, I Think we can validate and verify that Intersubjectively right here and now with our own judgment and no further judgment is needed Yeah, we can stray into discernment to Casey because I don’t know if you saw that live stream last week or not I Did not watch all 18 hours of your live stream last week Unfortunately, it’s not 18 hours I’ve only my longest live stream is in eight hours and I started an hour early for Jesse who betrayed me Of course, because that’s what those Aussies do. I guess I don’t know. I’m gonna make fun of him if he’s not gonna be here so I’m gonna make fun of him if he’s not gonna be here. So Hmm shots fired against the Aussies I had two Aussies on at once. That was beautiful. Oh, no Surprised your stream wasn’t upside down It was wallpapers get really expensive and shockingly beautiful. I love any job that has wallpaper fleabas. Okay fleabas That’s interesting. I somewhat agree with you. I do like Joey load-bearing wallpaper We need to invent that Joey We’ll put you in charge of inventing load-bearing wallpaper and Casey and I won’t wait here Let us know when you’re done. No more studs in the wall. I Put the wallpaper right out studs. The wallpaper would hold everything up for you It would be great Hmm did you did you catch up on the stream or did you miss my lovely monologue in the beginning? Oh, I just jumped right in fair enough Oh, Jesse says be back in 10 judge away we can judge him for another 10-minute delay. Excellent Judge all of Australia based on the actions of one Jesse Joey has a good point. We are the studs that apply the wallpaper You don’t need extra studs because you’ve got all the studs in the wallpaper applyers. I Think that is valid and I judge it to be good Is it is it that you’re replacing the wallpaper are you painting Casey Everything I gotta take the wallpaper Well, no, I’m painting but you gotta take the wallpaper off and then I got a remodeling most of the walls because they weren’t taped It’s like a home job basically is what it looks like Yep So wonderful last 10% that makes all the difference no kidding does because it’s 90% of the work Hmm Levis Japan loves thin walls the more delicate the better And Anselman makes a claim that he saw beautiful rose wallpaper once but probably too feminine for my bachelor pet No, no, that’s the way you attract NCW claims that Joey is the pun king. I can confirm that Independently with my independent judgment and therefore it is intersubjectively and therefore scientifically true and now it has been scientifically validated and Joey is the pun king It’s easy science is easy. But what makes it what makes a good wallpaper? How do we judge that? Is it the aesthetic sense? Is it the Well, it’s got to match the purpose of the room I would say it’s all tea. Oh, there you go big surprise So if you have a library you want something muted, that’s not gonna pull your eyes away From your reading Right, but draw you into the room so that you’re enchanted enough to sit there for a while and calmness and quiet Right. Whereas if you have a bedroom You might want to be a little more festive and florid so that when you wake up in the morning You’re energized by Whatever you like flowers bright colors bright colored flowers Whatever it is right blue wallpaper perhaps of pink pinkish flowers Well since blue is the only color that I recognize in my judgment. I would say yes See I only have blue wallpaper. I Only have blue. No, I don’t have any wallpaper. My house is painted Two different colors of blue And one of the rooms is What is it? It’s not I guess it’s a reddish beige or something like that But that’s because it’s got Brick that was painted red Just hideous So I was like well painting brick is a pain. I’m not gonna do it Instead I’m gonna find a complementary color and of course, I can’t do that because I’m a muppet So I outsource that to my artist friend Sally Joe and she did all the work and then I took on the credit You’re still up in Yankee land though, right? So a lot of those houses are brick. Ah The older houses are brick. Yeah, not anymore most of the houses up here are modern wood houses in the past 25 years But yeah, if you get into the city in particular in Boston There’s some beautiful brick homes that are just to die for absolutely to die for I Live like on the main street of town here and It was like the first part of town to be built and I’m like the other side of town on Main Street There’s just these giant like Victorian homes a Lot of them are still brick and they have like these they have like turrets and like outer arches and stuff wonderful houses But then the rest of it town kind of blew up in like the 60s. So the rest of it’s just kind of Generic what do they call it? Now whatever just 60s houses basically There’s a lot of that cleavage I did a job recently and above the Wayne’s coating I love Wayne’s cutting. I had that my first house. They installed beautiful wallpaper with birds. It looked like a painting yeah, the way to make wallpaper look really good too is to Put lacquer over it or lacquer like substance right and then it looks really interesting off after that Levis I don’t like installing things through wallpaper though. Yeah, well Wallpapers a problem and something were the birds realistic. I like realistic designs. No They were not they were like a painting. I Had Wayne’s coating in the kitchen and it was blue Which is awesome. I didn’t have to do any of this work It was already done. It’s great And then above that was this white wallpaper with blue flowers and tiny birds and stuff absolutely gorgeous Very muted and not just muted but um Calming It wasn’t super busy and I Think whoops Levis like an old bird identification book type painting and then Joey says the key with wallpaper is to go over real birds It makes it more 3d that is true again Joey with the truth bombs real birds make 3d wallpapers And it’s probably the best way to engage with the wallpaper in the 3d birdsness Now this is this is over-the-top Joey plus it makes noise for a few days. No That’s yeah boundaries Joey. You didn’t watch the boundary stream you cross the boundary sir Cross the boundary you you were good for a while and then you went there and now it’s too far I Don’t know Casey. What do you think about judgment, right? We do discernment and that allows us judgment. We need contrast Then we get to action which will be hopefully next week stream Mmm, what do I think about judgment in relation to? Just in general, I mean I made a lot of cases in the monologue that you missed somehow sir You could have worked and listened just saying Yeah, you know it sits between discernment and action and it gives us an important interaction that it we can self-reference our judgment and adjust it Well judgments like part of wisdom basically, right you have to use Let’s say insights that you’ve gotten to be able to actually like judgments kind of a skill like at least good judgment is a skill and you apply your insights that you get from discernment or from Just general comparison and life skills, I guess Yeah, I like that. I mentioned skill like do you have the skill to judge? You have the did you do the research right to give the information to judge and the authority and then I sort of divided Authority up although maybe not clearly enough into I Can judge you on your own standards? That’s always fair. I Can judge my level and engagement on? My judgment without judging you so if I say Casey’s a bad Catholic and I’m not gonna listen to him about Catholic doctrine That’s a fair move But if I say He’s a bad Catholic and therefore that’s not a fair move because I don’t have the chops to do it I Don’t have the authority to judge your Catholicism in that way right in a public way external to me, but I have the authority To do an internal engagement based on what I think of your Catholicism, for example How I’m a muppet you shouldn’t be listened to in regards to Catholic matters, which is true, right? Well, there’s all sorts of I Had to ask you if that bacon was from you from all these I Was gonna mute you but he muted himself look at this The alright CW, what do you got CW says the wife wants to watch the marvelous miss Maisel her judgment in these matters is always by definition, correct Please to renew with you all that’s a pleasure rather to renew with you. Oh, that’s hysterical Yes when it comes to TV Some of your wife’s judgment is going to be Correct. That is true Well, and that is an authority issue I mean it’s not talking about with outsourcing like if the wife says that painting needs to go in the other room or this wallpaper Needs to go She has the authority to make that judgment even if it’s wrong and this is where people get caught up that judgments wrong Is it though? Are you smart enough to know that and even if you are? Authority matters more than your stupid judgment because you’re a muppet. I’m a muppet. We’re all muppets and And that’s the key like sometimes authority trumps all this other stuff and part of that is outsourcing Like I’m not smart enough to know what color goes with the stupid red painted brick in my house. I Didn’t say was Sally Joe’s a mediocre artist, which she isn’t she’s an excellent artist But I didn’t know I could have I could have said what does she know? I’m not gonna listen to her about how to color match this Of course not. What’s my alternative do it my way like an idiot. I already tried that I realized pretty quickly I ain’t got the chops. I can’t do this color matching garbage. I don’t know how to do She’s trained in this garbage. Not me. I can’t do that. I mean I can tell you what looks good after the fact Yeah, that doesn’t make me an expert in colors in your imagination Because I can’t do that. Yeah rather trust your judgment on like software and websites, right? Something like that Anselman he wants to go to bed. Oh fine Anselman. Just leave us we don’t care He’s gonna be dreaming with what what what people with muppets on it. That’s excellent. Good night, sir. Sleep well That’s too funny. I like it Muppet wallpaper. I think there’s a big business opportunity here Casey. What do you think? Muppet wallpaper Hmm, how are we gonna get the licensing though? That’s a big one We make our own buckets You can get licensing pretty easily actually. It’s usually expensive but Really good No, I was watching what was I watching? Was it the profit? It was one of those silly business shows and actually they just walked in and they didn’t have to put any money up front for the licensing the and I think it was NFL or something they were like well we trust you and everything you sell we get this much for the license and Not all licenses are that way but Hey, that’s not a bad deal, you know, and you know, maybe the Muppets would give you a similar deal. I have no idea. I Don’t think it’s owned by Disney anymore although My understanding is Disney bought it and then the Sun bought it back for half as much Because they couldn’t do anything with it because it’s Disney and they saw Got a business years ago, but instead they destroyed the entirety of copyright law. Thank You Congress you morons bad judgment And I’m judging them it’s like cult It’s like a cult devotion sleep deprivation. Sorry Hanselman over and out I will be doing additional live streams in the middle of the day to catch more people who gonna catch some of the Europeans and Israelis and stuff and it’s unfair but Jesse’s the one that caught my attention and I haven’t been quite up to snuff recently, but I Gotta get Manuel to do some streams again too because we used to do those together. Those were fun Did you bring in some of the play-doh you’ve been reading in regards to judgment does he really good I guess he goes over justice at the beginning of the Republic, right? So I relates to my judgment. I haven’t brought in much play-doh yet or at least not from the Republic I’m always unclear on how much play-doh I’ve actually read because I read a bunch of stuff before I was homeless before the before time and I Don’t remember half of it. I mean I remember all of the material but none of what I read and the way I know this is because People will tell will do things like the first time I noticed this. I was probably Five years out of being homeless or whatever Which is when I had my house. So I have very little Me too little money. Yeah, I made actual minimum wage and bought house five years later. You’re whining to the wrong guy Okay, you’re just whining to the wrong person. So Somebody did a quote from Thoreau and I said that quote sounds familiar and it wasn’t a common Thoreau quote But it was in Walden and they said oh that’s from Walden and I said Walden and then it flashed back in my head the cover of the book of the copy of Walden that I had read that I had Had to purchase as a result of Catholic school. So I was like, oh I Read that whole book didn’t I of course I did I I’m sure of it I don’t remember reading it But I remember what’s in it and it’s possible that I met read some play-doh and some Aristotle back then But I don’t know You had to read Thoreau a Catholic school Yeah, Walden was one of the books that we were reading and I got a terrible education school was college level Fair I didn’t go to the gifted Catholic school just the one for regular regular Catholic bums I look dude. I grew up around Boston. I mean I was in Lowell and Good schools are everywhere up here. Absolutely. It’s a high-density area And there’s a lot of money floating around in Eastern Massachusetts Like this is where all the money was until New York City in the late 1800s when they dredged the harbor and the Dutch You know did their thing Cornelius Vanderbilt There’s a wonderful series called the men who made America or the men who built America On the on the Yeah, the History Channel If you haven’t seen it, you gotta watch it. I learned so much from that. I was like, oh wow I mean, it was mostly filler for me because I knew a lot of it But there were some details that I was like, oh, I didn’t I didn’t know that that’s fascinating They were relatively small details, but yeah I mean that’s basically about what we now call the robber barons who were neither robbers nor barons by the way Oh You think the wealth gap is bad now, huh? Oh, yeah. Well, let’s go back You go back to any point in time. It was worse with very few exceptions a little bit of variance There’s a particular event Two years into the first term of Barack Obama that you can see in the data Obviously caused a big problem and caused the gap to widen although not the gap For middle class just the gap for the poor like the poor got very poor in the United States kind of overnight It’s a very stark, but before that actually Income inequality had been improving In the United States in particular and it’s still way better here than in Europe It’s way better here that it’s ever been in Europe and Europe cannot catch up It’s still way better here than in Europe It’s way better here that it’s ever been in Europe and Europe cannot catch up Europe there are countries in Europe where the money’s been in the same Four or five families for four or five six hundred years. That’s not unusual. You’re thinking of Western Europe or Eastern Europe I’m thinking of all of Europe. There are almost no exceptions to this. It’s just it’s everything ran very differently on the continent and things only changed as a result of England and England is very much in between the US and continental Europe in thinking and in core philosophy people might call it metaphysics That’s the worst word in the world. I have a video on that Yeah, and Adam and I go over that in the French Revolution talk that we did and then also in the latest talk that we did which is called the frontier of ideas and those are both really excellent videos to kind of understand the difference between Europe and the US and I think they’re worth engaging with my best work is in fact with other people and So having Adam who has a ridiculous historical knowledge and we’re going to do another talk soon We’re going to go back to historical stuff And talk about the English Revolution which spawned a bunch of problems, obviously Oh You bringing up school made me think did you see the Peterson video with? The guy who made an Action Academy No, I did not I haven’t really been following Peterson all that closely You know about action. I think it’s called Action Academy Nope, I do not there. There’s Socratic schools Basically From what I could glean of the talk it’s like I think they’re K through 12 now, but they started off like preschool to fourth grade or something like that and Basically, there’s only like five or six teachers for the whole school and all they really do is like ask questions and serve Mediate when necessary, but it’s sort of an archaic like the kids kind of go and like Make their own classroom and make their own like they basically have systems of government inside their classrooms But they have to I Forget they have to work on certain projects and if their project is like it’s graded by their peers and so if their peers all rate it highly then they get a I Don’t remember what like a sticker star or whatever. Yeah, that’s where that’s pretty fundamentally evil Yeah, that’s excellent Whatever emergence is good. Yeah, not a fan of any of those things that sounds reprehensible Look, I went to a Montessori school when I was very young in Kansas and that was very helpful It was free to the people who were In the school if I remember correctly, this is what I was told. I don’t know I was what for so Understanding is that it was free because my father was on campus getting his PhD And I engaged with that and it was great but I Don’t think it not teaching people about submission and hierarchy Structure and the fact that life is unfair and you have to deal with these things is a plus I think it’s a minus and I think what Claire like what are you doing to me here? Claire peer review is a popularity test it is and it’s dangerous I mean this this is exactly what Plato is talking about with the failure of direct democracy Direct democracy doesn’t work because it turns into a popularity contest and people are swayed by emotions not by rationality despite what you want to think and that’s you too, and so what happens is that If you Try Direct democracy like Athens had it will fail Leavis is going to unfairly say that I want soldiers not free thinkers. That has nothing to do with what I said Over the top NPCs. Here’s the problem, dude And this is this is the fair question from earlier about agency and Muppets Like how are you gonna square agency and Muppets or or action and Muppets actions wrapped up in agency by the way Well, it’s gonna be very very easy actually We are subject to things outside of ourselves. This shouldn’t be controversial. This is why we are Muppets That doesn’t mean we have no agency. It doesn’t mean we can’t take action. That’s determinism determinists are wrong and Retarded and don’t listen to them. I judge so you can judge them very easily by their stupid arguments that make no sense and can’t possibly be true that’s observably the case and If you haven’t made that discernment you should there is a big difference between zero agency and a hundred percent agency And we live in that difference and that difference is not stable over time and it’s not stable for conditions in other words Punishing your child work sometimes but not all the time the amount of punishment to apply to your child is not stable over time and The degree to which it works will vary on the child So you can’t say all children need to be spanked four times a week like that. This is ridiculousness Some children never need to be spanked I will concede to that is that most children absolutely freaking no way in hell just mathematically not possible and This is where people get confused and I have to agree with Claire again Claire You’re killing me here democracy would only work if most voters were wise and we know they are the Antithesis of wisdom that is true I Couldn’t have picked that but I’m not going to oh Here we go We know Athens and Sparta exhausted each other in war Athens kept voting for war without a secret ballot in the Peloponnesian Wars Right and that was one of the problems they couldn’t vote themselves out because the sunk cost fallacy across a culture Sunk cost fallacy is dangerous enough when it’s a person when it’s across a culture. You’re screwed Because you need nationalism and you shouldn’t be proud of a bed getting beat in war and I get that and there’s a war going On right now that sort of exhibits this problem rather nicely or exemplifies it I should say and Of course if you go to navigating patterns You can see my video on that particular war and what I think is going on which may not be what you think is going On I haven’t heard anybody else Talking about the Ukraine war the way I talk about the Ukraine war and there might be a good reason for that. There might be some Patterns in there that you should engage with And it’s super important actually Because when we don’t realize exactly what’s going on We misframe things as simple nationalism and simple nationalism Doesn’t explain something like the Ukraine war The Ukraine war is more about ethos and Zeitgeist and so it’s less about the players that are in the war And that’s where people get confused, right? They kind of think of this as an isolated thing that’s going on in a region in a particular region for a particular reason and That isn’t the right way to think about it That doesn’t explain the behavior of the people involved even a little bit And that’s you know something to be highlighted because Effectively, you know what it winds up being is we are casting a bunch of Reasons onto things that are obviously false but you can’t put it in a political frame and understand it it doesn’t work and Benjamin Franklin claims maybe Mills was pointing to something like how can we trust Muppet voting and democracy? You can’t trust a democracy at all ever. That is why in the United States. We don’t live in a democracy It’s a republic the Democratic Republic, but it’s a republic and if you read the Constitution instead of Fantasizing about it like most people do you will realize that there are lots of Backstops for the democracy built into the Constitution so that when you have a bad election and maybe we’ve had one There’s a bunch of ripcord You’re supposed to pull to override the will of the people and that wasn’t done. That is my primary complaint by the way About certain people who used to occupy office and no longer do making claims that are obviously false Because you can read the freaking document and know whether or not they’re false or true Or look at history when people did these things that people said had never been done that those are lies. It’s not hard People lie all the time about things they can get caught on like we saw earlier today in the live stream where somebody made a bunch of obviously untrue statements And then had to try to justify them and couldn’t People do this stupid shit all the time and it’s stupid but people are stupid because you’re a muppet. I’m off it raw muppets There we go waking to the muppet crisis awaken to the The problem with that Jesse is that I have to be a little pissed off at you for nailing that so perfectly Because I missed it. I’m like that’s actually much better framing than I’m using in general So true because that’s why we’re struggling with the muppet aspect of ourselves Because we keep assuming we’re rational individuals and it’s like you are neither rational nor an individual And that’s what’s causing you to cast the rest of the world so horribly wrong and making you angry and resentful when your predictions all fail utterly hubris hubris we we’ve excluded hubris and humility out of Western thought We were so egoic which is my point on Twitter this week We are so in these modes of ego that we use a shorthand for ego and then we when we want to or use the technical Freudian versions of ego and I’m academically trained or don’t know the literature just kind of get confused between you just mean ego is pride Do you mean ego is the technical? It’s my personification of myself or my my depth psychology is no you probably just a bad actor or You’re just probably someone who’s a very direct person if you want to use the disk model You just put someone’s very direct and people interpret that as ego Or just someone that lacks merely or is someone that’s humorous Yeah somebody tried to recently suggest that there’s no such thing as ego and we’re just talking about self and Manuel was like nah Here’s why in the course he had excellent reasoning because I knew always has excellent reasoning and it’s actually important as it turns out to Have ego there and be able to discern people who are projecting their own ego onto others as happened in the live stream Earlier today Jacob live stream Which I just I listened to that whole thing and I was like really That’s you think I’m doing that because I’ve never heard a critique like that before Which is a little weird because I hear lots of critiques people act like I’ve never talked to another person about or anyone hasn’t given me Unsolicited advice about what I’m doing wrong or something. It’s like do you think you’re gonna tell me something new? Is that what you think? But in that case, yeah, I’d never heard that I was attention-seeking that method that’s hysterically funny, especially because I Could and I’m not so that’s really funny to me It’s like man if I wanted to like go on to people to get attention. I couldn’t I Could steal all the attention from somebody else very easily. I But my my psychological group tactical skills are way past what these people are estimating way past I have hijacked entire servers for thousands of people Single-handedly, it’s not even a challenge for me I’m not Right, right, right Right, that’s the funny part right it’s the it’s the lack of self-awareness where you think other people are doing the thing you’re doing And that’s the way to get around judging yourself and you get to judge others instead And so you’re super virtuous at that point and it’s like Okay, you feel all virtuous and and you know, you can make proclamations like you shouldn’t do that. It’s like, okay You’re even assuming that I’m doing something that is obviously not even happening. But okay Sure, that’s great advice. I’m really gonna listen to you now and it’s all projection and it and that Part of this muppet crisis is not realizing how much we’re projecting right? We’re not understanding our boundaries, right? We’re not getting we’re not adjusting our judgment. Hey, maybe I’m just talking about me and not the other person Can I judge that you can actually it takes a little bit of work, but it can be done Well, you know I stole the muppet the muppet thing came up here I think on the first or second stream I was like that’s it. It was a Sometimes the ironic jokes display a lot of truth that people don’t understand and it kind of takes a crazy crazy person or very conscientious person just to go up That’s something that we can drill down on this oil there there’s an oil pipeline to All the way to it’s kind of like to I don’t know This is maybe spicy is to go. Yes, you’ve used the postman frame, but I’m actually going to Not make it postmodern anymore, I’m actually gonna un postmodern in itself. I’m not going to modernize it I’m just going to see the reality of that you pointed out to I’m not gonna make it a The subjective true big crew Does that make sense? Yeah. Well, I mean The problem with postmodernism that it runs into is that there are frames that are superior And if you know what those frames are you can use that to great effect against the postmodern ethos and it could be that There are people out there that know well how to do that and are really good at it And to the extent that they’re so good at it that other people have no idea what came they’re playing at all And the funny part about muppets, so I used to call people muppets literally all the time It’s among my good friends say around here they We still go back and forth on muppets and then what happened was I just stopped using it for whatever reason and I was watching Carl Benjamin and he started using it. Okay, it’s I remember up It’s muppets is great. Right and then I was like aha muppets is in the zeitgeist again So we need to go back to muppets. I I actually um Tweeted one of the lotus eaters guys this week and send in my muppets feed. He’s the philosopher dude In the lotus eaters and they started using that on the Yesterday and the new Elon Musk clip that went around with the BBC journalists acting like a complete muppet It’s big like oh, where’s the hate speech? Like it’s there. It’s just exists. I’m just like, okay Yeah, no, did you see what I did to James Lindsay? No, oh this is fantastic So Lindsay was out there saying Liberalism is the thing that fights woke ism and I actually corrected him and said no, dude You’re actually wrong liberalism causes woke ism. However classic liberalism Just because liberalism doesn’t fight anything liberalism says literally anything goes. That’s the problem with it So it’ll it’ll breed woke ism eventually it’ll breed everything eventually because there’s no constraints So I I gave him the format of classical liberalism why it’s important and then he immediately started using that in all his tweets And then they yes, and then this is why this is why when somebody makes a ridiculous statement about me stealing attention I’m like, do you have any idea at all? What I’m doing and how much I’m doing and what I could do if I just wanted the attention And any idea you don’t know no idea zero you don’t know my history you don’t know what manipulations I’ve done in the past You have no idea what you’re dealing with none and you know people around here who know me would tell you because they’ve known me for years and they seen me do amazing things that they’re just still amazed by years later and He got attacked for that. No classical liberalism creates woke ism But now we can say no and you can justify it because when you add the classical and you can point to Lado Right and Plato fights woke ism quite nicely although there’s dozens of other things you can point to just as validly in classical liberalism to fight something like woke ism and You can’t do it without those things like you can’t do it in mere liberalism. And so yeah, that was I thought that was hysterically funny Any political system there has to be trade-offs and we have to agree to what those traders far and we’ve Not agree with those trade-offs are since the 70s really is if you saw my twitter feed on that since since the economic boom It’s feminism. Sorry to say this is a whole bunch of other things in the 70s are happening The loss of the Vatican to happened around just around the peak of the 70s Well, you could say the mass exodus from Catholicism because it’s 69 that I can to happens Maybe Casey, you can correct me wrong. It’s a whole bunch of cultural revolutions that happen around 70 71 that it’s just a rough figure 71 is a good marker Economic unrest New York City’s and the complete dive in the 70s. Yeah is you know your Nomics happening. I’ve said the money economic fine printing, but that’s not everything That’s that’s a symptom of the change of values in the country or the change of values in the world with a lack of it Yeah, lack lack. I don’t think it’s a change. I think it’s a lack I think it’s all you have to do is stop looking up and And everything goes where you look it to Kate. So it’s so funny. So I’m bowling last night That I was not doing well and then at a certain point like I just lost the ball kept going all over the place and I’m like must apply trick Index cards trick trick trick. Oh, yes. Look look only at what you want to hit That for anything it works for bowling. It works for baseball. It works for everything, right? I’m like, okay, that’s right So I started doing that and then bang I’m back on it I’m like, okay, and it wasn’t perfect or anything, but I was like, alright, I’m back on it so before that I was looking at where I was throwing the ball and Where it was landing on the on the alley, which is very useful to you have to do that sometimes But I needed to look downrange and once I started looking downrange not on the other hand. I was Out with my friend firing his awesome dirty hairy gun and Yeah, absolutely miserable. I was like I cannot pay attention to anything it was just terrible and He criticized me because apparently he doesn’t know physics He said you’re you’re going like this before you shoot and I was like I’m adding the velocity of my hand to the bullet That’s better I Know this any once you don’t see this this whole like sideways gangster Don’t twist the guy even I know that Yeah, yeah, I know exactly come from the land of banned guns and even I know this yeah, yeah Miss Buster’s did a thing on it But I you know, it’s there’s all these little tricks that you know But I wasn’t able to remain relaxed So I’m fidgeting and flinching and that’s why I can’t I couldn’t aim right? I was like what that I used to have excellent aim like I had such good aim that when I did archery In a summer camp. I did my first archery lesson and I made like mid-grade Just based on scoring alone. I scored so high It was great because I have really good aim when I’m relaxed and not ill and dying Here we go your judgment goes wrong when you are not black, you know Yeah Well, some people want to be in flow all the time and that’s also a mistake right and that’s why looking at the thing you want to hit and not paying attention to all the other things Explicitly will say consciously can work. So well, it’s like okay. I’m gonna put all my focus on the top piece I’m gonna put all my focus on the top pin that I want to hit and it’s like, okay now all of a sudden I don’t have to worry about where the balls landing on the bowling lane Because my brain’s taking care of all that because I just spent way too much time looking down At the bowling lane instead of looking out at what I want to hit and this goes back to okay So I was looking down down and that ball was going off in all kinds of directions And then I’m looking at the pin, right? It’s like, oh, right and then of course you take martial arts They’ll always tell you You don’t punch someone’s face you punch at the back of someone’s head through their face Like that’s key why because follow through is important and there’s some magical literally magical scientifically unexplainable thing about follow through that actually Everyone has studied for years and nobody has made any progress on understanding whatsoever You brought up archery right you’ve done it I do archery still I mean not as much but follow through always important Once you draw back and you let go stay Just let it go And you always focus Right on where it’s going down range down range But you let the bow go I have a strip You put a strap around your wrist at least the modern ones you have a strap around your wrist and you just let it go And the bow it just falls forward But follow through is almost more important than like Aiming because if you mess up follow through you’re never gonna hit anything ever Right Right and and that is the problem what and and that’s why there’s utility in training right so you first you train your stance You don’t worry about hitting anything And then you train Your posture which is separate from your stance just I know people don’t think so it is right and then you train your draw Right and and you’re how you’re holding things and then because you have to have a good stance and a good posture To hold the bow correctly right and then you train your aim last your aim gets trained last and It’s very important and then once you’ve Gotten the muscle memory in place you you switch to the next thing right and then the next thing you know You’re just a good archer, but that takes time and people don’t want that well What’s the one best thing to do to be a good archer? It’s like this One thing outlier theory while it can be helpful is misguided you need to go through the steps in order Correctly and submit to that in order to be the best You’re not going to be the best you may not even ever be good if you try to to trick this System oh oh oh oh what’s this Benjamin Franklin? What you think about the character judge dread maybe Batman is in the same General archetype no, I don’t think so I I’m going to hand this off to Jesse But first I am going to pre-advertise because the thumbnail is now ready because Sally Jo wanted to do it Not me Batman versus Superman is coming It is not what you think But it is more awesome and Jessie is going to comment on that video and tell me how close it is to the fourth estate in terms of goodness So he has been warned he has a duty now I did actually rewatch my fourth estate video because Jessie said it was the best video ever of all time in the history of the universe And he’s obviously correct because it’s one of mine And I said alright I will go back Because I did a very specific thing with that particular video and I will follow that pattern and I will make this particular point And now it’s been so long because I actually recorded that video like a month ago at this point And and do this video in that style on purpose But yeah, it’s gonna be a big surprise I think I’m gonna release it on Monday if I remember although I’m traveling So I’m never sure if I’ll remember Anyway, please judge Jed versus Batman go ahead Your mic just cut out it was No What did you do it was working and now it’s not work Casey What do you have to say about judge shred versus Batman first of all judge dread is actually in the employ of the government and Batman is a Visual entity so number one that’s like You’re comparing like a cop to like a guy who shoots someone that breaks into his house or something It’s not not they’re not exactly equivalent to that but like that’s a huge difference between like someone who’s like an outlaw almost versus someone who is Alleged to be a representative of the law. I don’t know much about judge dread, but well, there’s there’s There’s structure behind judge dread and there’s a rebellion in Batman And I think that’s a fundamental archetypal difference is that one is submitted and the other one is not submitted and That’s not good. Like I I’m Actually not a Batman or Superman fan for that reason that neither is submission It’s well known that Superman is based on ubermensch and Nietzsche is Misguided at the very least Which is not to say there aren’t some good nuggets in Nietzsche. There’s good nuggets in four-year-olds But But these concepts are dangerous, especially in the wrong hands and I don’t know how you deny that or Downplay that like it’s vitally important in terms of understanding and engagement that The ills of the 20th century were largely committed On the backs of German and French philosophers all of whom are reprehensible just saying He’s run clear on my position on German and French philosophers in particular Yeah, it’s just not good stuff. Like I’m sorry. It’s Really not good stuff and it’s not for the good and that’s warm Like these people are rebels and they’re individualists and fair enough, but that’s wrong. We’re not individuals Okay, I See my error. I think I made the link because dread kind of independently can pass judgment Which is not how we think of traditional enforcers. Well, that’s actually good right because that’s right up our alley Yeah, he is judge jury and executioner right and so that Batman is also judge jury and executioner the difference is in structure and Judge dread is sort of the first instantiation in Will say my understanding of pop culture, which is very poor Just he’s not here, but he’ll correct me when he gets back of This individualism peeking out and sort of sneaking into the rest of the culture Is he back Yeah, my this is the This is not this isn’t my fancy nice microphone they bought for purposes such as this I’ve had multiple audio stuff. Hey, why with me lately felt like a gremlin in my house when I did pray up You know you get that in your house. Hey, yeah Bruce would know what I mean. I do know you know, I’ll do gremlins are the worst Okay, my fancy microphone, you know stop working it before that last night my vinyl player and amp decided just Stop working that old it’s that old adage where the roofers the roofers roof leaks, you know Yeah, like it’s it’s it’s kind of the way it goes Yeah, and I do this like semi professionally and it’s yeah, that’s what I mean. Totally. Totally. It’s it’s a Yeah, and it also gives you a little sympathy for those who have uh, about these problems, right? When you get back to judge shred, which is you oh, yeah, they’re the Batman judge dread comment I wonder why you’re not but go ahead. Oh, yeah, you can go first you go first I’m gonna still I’m I’m slightly aspergy. So I will still fiddle with this thing in my mind I’ll like why isn’t this microphone working? I want this one I spent 40 minutes just plugging the ground people in and out of my vinyl amp last night You’re not gonna fix this tonight move on to something I’ve been there a million times. Oh, yeah I think that I think it’s it’s I Think it’s somewhat Unfair to call Batman a vigilante entirely Judge Jerry executioner while there is some collateral damage. He does deliver them over to the Justice Department So he’s the foot soldier doing the work that must be done Outside of the confines of regulation and delivering them to the authorities and so in that case I think He’s he’s doing the Lord’s work as far as I’m concerned I can yeah, I can see if you if you had submitted him to a higher power And I do I will grant you that they do attempt to point at virtues and values occasionally Occasionally Especially in Batman, but my problem is that he’s fundamentally an independent agent and while He does deliver them He doesn’t do so in the standard fashion. He leaves them tied up and waits for the police to get there It’s not like he’s working hand-in-hand times So and and I am very swayed by the dog-headed argument for obvious reasons If you haven’t seen Sally Joe’s dog-headed book, you should see it’s a wonderful short read by an excellent person Might be self-serving. You know But yeah the idea of having somebody outside of the norm or outside of the system behaving in a good way And that’s the what is it the bad man doing good things or whatever the bad man Whatever their ridiculous Christians are calling it Present company accepted Bruce. We’ve had this conversation before yeah, we have or at least versions of it. I don’t buy that I think that’s stupid and I think you’re wrong and I think you need to fix your thinking because you’re not in a helpful mode I think that basically If you’re doing good things, you’re a good person and the fact that those things seem bad to you is your Misunderstanding of the world because you think things have a valence of good and bad And I would argue that that is not how the world works the context matters like killing can’t always be bad Sometimes it’s murder and sometimes it’s necessary sure. Yeah murder is specific, right? It’s unjust killing. Yeah, and I think I think part of the issue with the Batman is that he Has a massive restraint issue and But but to be fair There’s there’s some scenario like this is the same thing with war There’s restraint issues in war but there are so many externalities and Educations that even even the best soldier may have fault failings in the mortal category in the in the moment right so although he’s Failing in some of the mortal categories his higher purpose is there and he is still under an authority and and so I think with Batman or the vigilante who has a higher calling which I would argue that he does And he’s not see because we have other anti-hero types in in the series. So you have like You could argue that Bane is in that direction he’s sort of an enemy of the state But he’s also got an ulterior motive. You could argue. There’s whole other set like Deadshot or When Nightwing comes on the scene and starts like basically Basically remove ruin it moving the ethical code away from the best of the best Code away from the Batman structure Man, I’m forgetting the other guy now. Gosh. I’m terrible. Anyway, there’s a fella that really fights Nightwing a lot I can’t remember his name death stroke death stroke Death stroke is an antihero And in the Marvel category, there’s a bunch of people like this too. They are That’s the people you might have a problem with ethically Batman is not It’s even more interesting because he doesn’t put his ethics aside entirely and take justice into his hands In fact his entire ethos is to uphold justice and deliver people to justice so and they have a Justice League You know indeed then they work with authorities. So, you know, I think in his case he’s You know Protestant for no other for a better for a bad analogy I agree with that. Yeah, and so but I think they’re necessary. I Don’t I won’t disagree with the Necessity of the outlier of the margin of the dog-headed again. I’m very Persuaded by that argument. I know what Sally Jo was saying about dog-headed was she said Maybe the dog-headed shouldn’t be in the church Yeah, I get understand that but I mean from that perspective if you’re looking at a top-down idea from the authority Yeah, I can understand it and that’s why they created her own Justice League. You know what I mean? Right, right. No, no, it’s it’s it’s in there My problem is they don’t point to virtues and values and I Vander clay actually had a good video for once He had a great video about About the Failure of the secular religions, right and he was mostly talking about Harry Potter and it was fan It was too long by half for sure, but it was really good and in fact, that’s what I got on the stream to say today earlier today was More of that, please. We need more discernment between cult Ideology and religion and a bunch of people were like, yeah. Yeah, you’re right. We do and I was like, yeah This is where the conversation needs to go Yeah, we need to start talking about that so people can discern that especially people in I don’t want to call it the corner of the internet I want to call it the Well, the trap it’s it’s a it’s a trap where people are away and it’s not necessarily bad Yeah, you know people are going there on purpose to instead of saying like oh well You know, we need religion and therefore I’m just gonna pick one Like I want a smorgasbord of selection So I’m gonna go hang out in this little corner and that’ll give me an idea of how to make a decision about which type Of Christian I want to be or something and I’m like I get it and there’s utility to that but also Not quite a fan of that individualistic Can you hear me now? Yeah, we can hear you. Okay. So Batman is More for more intensive person’s I’m worried like if it’s yeah English today the The way Batman is constructed as a character. He is driven by a narrative Judge dread isn’t inherently driven by a narrative. He’s driven by a duty Batman keeps himself that duty Yeah, true. So there’s a narrative that’s imposed upon Judge dread, right? Yeah Yeah, that’s interesting. There is a backstory that they weave in later, but it’s not the foundation point of his myth with Batman has to be driven by his loss or he’s The acceleration ism inherent in the Batman character And he has to have a dialectic Joker and yeah, sorry to say yes I have an antithesis to phrase existence which the Dark Knight points out I just the Joker who has no narrative right until they decided to write a narrative. He’s No narrative because new film Joker film that came out prove that he does have a narrative and they gave me I think that’s narrative. I actually put that outside the that to me that’s like Entirely fan fiction or not even it’s not even in the saga canon or otherwise that’s just like But that would be for better. No, but you know, it’s a it’s a it’s fan fiction essentially like if you were to take it as you know, but I think that was it’s sort of important what you were saying, Jesse right because the Charge it was leveled at me earlier today in the Jacob after PVK livestream. It’s an excellent idea Was that I was destroying communities and that was made by somebody who overtly destroyed online communities I think that was freaking hysterically funny. I’m like, could you project a little more, please? That’s too much. It was just too too funny for me So I didn’t I mean I can’t take that person seriously anyway Because I know way too much about what they’ve been up to and what that they’re just not a good human being at all But I and I want to segue this into Benjamin Franklin’s point I think there is a mirror between Batman and Joker I would disagree with that Joker weight throws away quote the book but Batman also throws away the book in a way that is correct, but what I would say is it’s not a mirror because one is structure and the other is anti structure and the problem with Batman for me is that he’s not all in on structure and So this is where I get into this. Well, there’s a dog head of point, but also doesn’t have the right interaction and As for dread selectively throws away the book on rare occasions Yeah, he This this is what I was saying about dread being the beginnings in some sense of this splitting of the baby between submission and individualism You can’t have both like either an individual and you submit to no one or you’re not an individual and you know Surprise spoiler ending you’re not an individual. You’ve never been an individual. You’ll never be an individual You are always submitted to a bunch of things. That’s why you are a Muppet the Muppet and Action issue will be addressed next week in the live stream if it’s best I can do it But yeah, I mean When we’re not understanding that we are submitted that there are forces beyond our control literally And some of those forces appear to come from within us But obviously do not because they’re counter to our very being in some sense That’s the devil on your shoulder instead of the angel on your shoulder. All right, that’s the Passion that you have to control according to the stoics and actually most philosophies if you actually look into it Certainly not strictly a stoic thing I think that’s where the problem comes in is that judge dread and Batman are both wrestling with The proper relationship for the individual given structure and I think that’s fundamentally the wrong question The right question is proper submission within the structure because and I’ve pointed this out before You have to be in the structure to change it without destroying it So you can sit there and say there’s a bad group of people doing bad things But if you’re not willing to go into that group of people and change it You’re probably doing more harm than you could possibly ever do good in the world and maybe that’s not a hundred percent But maybe it’s eighty percent and eighty percent’s good enough for me Yeah, I think there’s no good good To extend your point though Batman can quit at any time It does quit any fund there are you know people take on the mask? You can’t get out of your duty if you’re a judge dread Like you die for your cause in some sense or you You are you don’t you you honorable discharge in some sense Batman is always elusive. He’s always constrained by his own ethics Yeah, there’s yeah, I think there’s well, so one of the parallels I mean, okay, I’ll bring it back to Christianity, of course But let me just let me just sort of parallel this a little bit To me it seems as though there’s There’s a natural law that they both agree and submit to and they have no point They have no choice but to submit to the natural law dread and Batman One of the things that I find is in someone like dread is in this is the argument for submission There’s the revealed law the Ten Commandments that puts up the very specific guard wells around the natural law Okay, and so now you have a grace a mercy of the Ten Commandments to tell you this is the righteous path This is the righteous law now I do think that maybe Batman doesn’t have that particular Righteous law that maybe dread does but I would I would disagree in that they That that dread can even uphold that and hold to that standard at all I believe he’s going he’ll continue to fall short and they’ll make exceptions For all sorts of significant issues with this and so you’ll see Maybe they take the general equity of the law, right and they’ll say okay This is where the general equity of the law applies in these situations and there may be Bending and all sorts of imperfections and applying the law the real law I think they both do the same thing and this is this is kind of where I I see I see them both bending And I see one in a law that’s been given and a law that’s been Submitted to and then I see both of them Removing the law in places where they need to and so I I think one is a position of it’s almost like a phariseedical versus Christian position as far as I’m concerned, but that’s a little That’s the struggle I was talking about. Yeah. Yeah, right. There’s a way in which they are not different from one another Right because they’re both individuals And so they’re struggling with the same question, which is what is the Proper place for an individual given structures and given the chaos at the bottom That they’re kind of fighting and I think that’s already a mistake Because they’re not accounting for the fact that in order for Batman to do what he does He has to be the judge in the moment the same way judge You’re sorry judge dread is right they are appealing to different levels of submissions if it were more explicit the Batman was say appealing to the guide of an angel That would be a different story at that point and it would be one that I could get behind It’s not explicit what virtues and values he’s using to judge with So this is one of those things that I was talking about in the monologue where we have muddied our own judgment We have been told on the one hand that we can’t judge and the other that we have to judge everything Very sneakily and it’s caused a bunch of problems in the world Yeah, I would agree that that’s definitely been a problem right we have that we have the issue of Overzealous unrighteous judgment and then a lack of attempts of well at least a lack of a Admitting that they’re judging while saying they’re not right But and discernment as right right why does any conservative or Republican voter? Actually have a problem saying no Greg Greg Queen story hour is not a thing and is bad Is not a thing and is bad but they do and this is fascinating I mean it’s other than the political frame doesn’t work right and the conservative versus liberal frame obviously doesn’t work There’s a there there which is Judgment itself has been weakened and when you weaken judgment you destroy discernment and all you have to do to weaken judgment is Past doubt on it or doubt on its utility and then it’s like well, I’m not judging Judging is bad judge not lest you be judged and it’s like no all that means is hold yourself to the standard You’re holding others to that’s all that means it doesn’t mean don’t hold people to standards That’s not what it means. If you read it that way you’re wrong. Like you just made an error in in itself refuting anyway basic basic reading comprehension or something like They’ve already done that. They’ve already done the judgment by making this statement Implicitly or explicitly really they’re stating this is the judgment don’t judge. Wait a second. How do you come to that position? right, so now now what what what characteristics or Standards are you using to evaluate whether or not you should or should not be judging and even in that case now you have An odd claim of judgment. So now we’ve just we’re in the same discussion So you’re not getting around judge. No, that was one of my early statements like you’re not it’s not an optional thing Like hierarchy it’s not optional And so the question is are you attending to it? And what are you doing about it? Because you can use judgment to improve your judgment Unlike most other things where that doesn’t work. You can actually use Judgment after the fact to improve your future judgment from your past bad judgment Like you can do that. That is definitely a thing that you can do Forgive me for wanting to rephrase the question Is it something like how do we best in body judgment because we are judging all the time but how we enact or and that judgment matter that because you can choose like I can judge The fact that something was left out and I get a note about it, but I don’t embody that judgment I just have it somewhere detached my my psyche and I can’t there’s a judge but I have and I don’t Necessarily embody in the moment. Although I’d peak times of stress you do embody judgment, which is why things like Dissociation or like doing the dishes when you’re angry really work because you can part mentalizing The embodiment of judgments that you have well, I would say the embodiment of judgment is part of the action Which is guys keep jumping in here. That’s next week. I Know but I mean they bleed into one another so like it’s a totally fair move. But yeah, that’s In some sense there is a way to judge your own judgment and It’s not in real time. That’s what people make the mistake. They’ll I can I can cognate cognize my own cognition not in real time You can’t So it’s not relevant that it can be done because now we’re talking about something different because you’re looking back And so the fact that you can look back is not interesting exciting or non-universal it’s kind of Blair and bland and boring and Stating it kind of makes you a muppet more of a muppet than you think And it’s the same with judgment except with judgment you can understand that judgment improves itself especially when used properly in the fullness of time where you go, I Know that I make bad judgments about where to work and I’ve had people actually do this for me They’ve actually said mark you need to make a decision for you because my judgment on this is terrible I’ll say oh fair enough right and then you see this in relationships all the time. I picked the wrong Person whether it’s a guy or a girl right to be with My judgment is bad. You know your judgments bad and when we try to pretend like we’re not judging all the time we weaken it because She’s I hate agreeing with Claire Our judgment is a muscle. We should be constantly exercising. Yeah, and we do But we’re not recognizing that and so that’s being hijacked By this emotional hijack that I talked about in the monologue Benjamin Franklin have a spicy take on Batman when you are young you tend to see your father was a kind of perfect figure Well, yeah, you kind of have to Maybe as you grow old you’re able to judge him more accurately. Yeah, probably but Batman Never got that opportunity. Oh, that’s a good point. So his father becomes frozen in a perfect state I think Jordan Peterson suffers from a similar conundrum. I don’t know where you get the last part of that Yes, I mean I think his bad being grows in discernment He does judge his father or the actions that he had it especially in the time of the incident So it’s hard to say I don’t I don’t know I because I think that Alfred That fills that role quite well. It’s business stepfather, especially So I think he grows in discernment of his father and sees, you know, I think he sees the judge the issue there It’s part of his motivation as far as I’m concerned Yeah People jump The dialectic dialect it between masculine and feminine and just attributing all the masculine aspects to the father Like because because you can get different masculine aspects from well, they both died in that case. Oh, you’re saying in this case Yeah, well, I see. Yes. Well, the community does black masculinity in the Gotham Sons It’s it’s not orderly enough and that’s why you have all these gangsters Enacting their direct violence onto the will of the people so he Batman is some sense a reactionary But maybe my spicy take his judge Dredd isn’t actually a reactionary figure. He’s a proactive figure but he’s he’s embodying the will of Both sense because he has to make Well a proper judge would actually embody some aspects of the feminine where you don’t see that in Batman You don’t see him ever embrace the feminine specs Here at him like what it’s been so we don’t really say people in the same way Superman or spider-man has compassion or feminine aspects to his hero Mmm, that’s interesting. I disagree. I would say that uh in the case of Superman he’s wholly naive And so unless you’re attributing naivete to feminine femininity, which I suppose you could But I don’t I wouldn’t go that far You know in fact, uh, I don’t know I think I think I think dread is more of the more of the lack of feminine in my opinion because you’re looking at merely objective State sponsored specifics without You know discern it’s all it’s all lack of feminine and that’s part of the problem except the feminine is supposed to remain hidden and So it’s like oh, well, wait a minute. This is actually supposed to remain hidden and the feminine aspects are supposed to come out in secret sort of feminine groups Between women and not supposed to be mixed up, but I did want to speak a divine feminine Release the feminine we should always distinguish between truth and falsehood sound and valid reasoning as well as vice and virtue That is correct In order to learn from our mistakes. We admit them. Well, that’s where humility comes in like If you’re not making mistakes and admitting to yourself that you’re making mistakes You are not learning period end of statement full stop You can read all the books you want you could if if if you’re not admitting that you’ve made a mistake You are not making room to be the type of person that learns and then Benjamin Flanken Oh Alfred the surrogate father’s entry, but Alfred is servant not a competitor. Your father’s not your competitor either Where are you getting this father competitors nonsense talk from in fact Alfred is a Christ figure Alfred it’s a Christ figure Sacrificing his life being adopting him and that’s you know, and self service like just service to a degree that you know You might even see miss Servant competitor issue. Yes, sir Don’t know where this my father’s my competitor garbage comes from that’s nowhere in anything ever and it’s observably false Like your father’s not right eating with your father Yeah, it’s for it is classic Freud news. Mm-hmm. I see younger males competing with the older male for the attention of the Yeah, that’s that’s very low-res. That’s strange. I Can’t I can’t identify with that Know what I mean is I just can’t I can’t really see that’s very small Like, you know when you I was talking earlier about I don’t know where young went wrong. I know where Freud went wrong And that was one of those places like it’s so obvious that Freud was just off the rails To me it’s hysterical like obviously cannot possibly be true like do it Do a math once like I don’t It’s so clear this competitor garbage Like yeah, there’s not enough attention in the world. Yeah, we want female attention. And yeah, we learn about female attention from others. Okay. Thanks genius I don’t know what else to tell you like Yeah, this whole postmodern everybody’s in opposition to everybody else and oh by the way I don’t understand why we’re all in competition. I don’t know maybe because you just dated we were This is your own fault. Like why are you being like this? Why are you being this stupid? Good night, Casey. Good to see you my friend. Hope you can join us next time falling asleep. Thank you What is it like 930? Oh, no, it’s 1030. We’re here. That’s still it’s 1030. Come on Wake up at 4 and stuff, you know Casey Casey’s Casey. I Gotta make fun of Casey I’ve known him for a while now No pass. I yeah, I actually one of the things that’s uh, that’s troubling with a dread character is There’s no discernment at all. In fact, it’s merely it’s merely application of dogma right Right depends on which which which perspective for which frame of that like there’s different Taking the archetype in a broad sense, you know, I’m taking the dread archetype in a broader sense. That’s a specific. So see I Think it’s actually that’s not sometimes not the best way to go about these sort of embodiments of cultural aspects Because if you’re always because you’re always theoretically talking about what a character does and doesn’t do you need to talk about? How it’s applied within a frame? So I would be the best Controversially even I love the new judge dredge film the older judge region with Sylvester Stallone is actually a faster period film because the character does change the character Feminize that’s true. He learns to help the poor. He no longer comes right all of the state he becomes doesn’t even become an agent of the state he becomes He becomes above that he above above the constraints for which The law had broken itself or the law was like, you know, like he I’m trying to find another way. He’s crossed but Goes to the death or resurrection Well, I think it’s I think that he’s becomes Batman You see he’s discerning. He he has to he has to test to make an individual assessment based on a higher power higher order And they’re both they’re both now you could argue that maybe they have both have different higher orders But I love the family man. That’s the way I mean, so does Batman and his adoption of Robin You know and it’s and it’s and it’s and his adoption of the orphanage and to be I mean I think that you’re talking about in fact one of the virtues of dread in the first is the fact that this occurs That it’s not mere robot It’s not it’s not RoboCop and it actually RoboCop kind of humanizes later too So in fact, we’re not talking about robos robots here and and I think he transitions from robot born again to a discerning a Discerning individual Yeah Yeah, well my object objection is still with the individual Benjamin Franklin See that’s something you the identity of the quote father. You don’t put father in quotes What what is wrong with you like seriously, what are you doing the son? No, he doesn’t he doesn’t have to Or learn to become father. No, no no learning required. You can literally just mimic your father You don’t need to learn anything. That’s just wrong and we know this experimentally like what? Where are people getting this stuff from this is in none of the literature and it’s countermanded by every piece of literature on the subject There needs to be some grappling to obtain independence independence from what? People fight things all the time like you’re two years old. You’re fighting your hunger your whatever These are universal things. We’re constantly in rebellion against the constraints of the world What relevance does that have to literally anything? sometimes people fight their parents sometimes people don’t and Some people never fight their parents and some people do nothing but fight their parents So what this is not interesting? I don’t think there’s a little bit never fights their parents I’ve seen many people who never fight their parents. You haven’t seen them as toddlers Well some I’ve seen some toddlers who are actually quite ridiculously obedient I’ve never seen I mean I Disagree, I have never I mean what in what it’s that would be extraordinarily unusual in fact that would be like No, it’s not it’s not extraordinarily unusual some children are very very very compliant in all aspects No, I think there’s no way I’ve seen this is like some sort of a topia here always shocking to me No, it’s not utopia. It’s very weird parents Especially if they have more than one and the other one isn’t like that in fact My cousin was in that situation has this little girl who’s ridiculously obedient to tell her anything She does it right away, and it’s like a little creepy They have this son and his son who’s much younger cannot keep anything out of his mouth He’s already been to the ER like three times because he just tries to eat everything and you can’t take your eyes off him Well girl you consider in a corner, and she’ll just kind of like whatever it’s like really weird to watch, but it happens Now it just hasn’t happened yet it will Maybe maybe he’s he’s something Batman doesn’t have the ability to replicate himself He has to create something other where the judge dread can replicate himself, and that’s why he’s the family man He’s carrying on the legacy with a it’s kind of a it’s kind of a pseudo adoption with Robin It’s an option here, but the judgments that the embodiment of these discernment judgment actions this model Happens differently in these different character archetypes, and that’s why I’m leaving. Yeah cam dread Batman has an ascetic monastic position in the way as well It’s it’s different, but it’s not it doesn’t carry on and that’s that’s the value. I’m trying to see That’s the tough one there because does it does it not carry on because the cow Is a different embodiment he’s pretending to be a monastic Yeah, I get what you said I mean it’s well, it’s Yeah Franklin IE the son has to complete the cleavage and has to become a distinct body Maybe no you’re not ever going to be distinct body. Just give that dream up. That is a ridiculous Yeah, you have the name Require a certain degree of competition. No, it doesn’t require any I either is the father wants for me Some parents are super controlling and some are not this is not a universal it has nothing to do with humans It’s it’s variation within the human condition for sure, but there’s lots of variation You view things the application of discipline matters You have to apply the discipline discipline can’t just be this broad one rule of measure It has to be applied in the right manner And a lot of this is just struggling with judgment so like for example one day being a muppet, I took a cold bottle of ketchup and I Put it against my father’s neck while he was busily working at his desk and unaware and he whipped around and smacked me and I went And then he was all upset right it was completely pissed off not the time nor the place Ten minutes later. He said I apologize. I shouldn’t hit you and I said, nope. It’s fine. I did I was like, no, I totally get it like you overreacted But I caused that overreaction That’s on me Totally on me like I there was no more appropriate There was no more appropriate response possible like if you scare somebody They’re going to act and that action is almost certainly good at not be done with discernment and judgment because they need to get rid of a problem and Look, I have the same or used to have the same issue Not so much anymore if I was working on something and you interrupted me the odds that you would be alive in the next five Minutes were zero. I hated to be interrupted. I really hated to be interrupted when I was working on something And I have that problem anymore thankfully but it took me years to fix that yeah It was bad like it was bad. It was nine hours sitting in a chair Because I was trying to learn something not paying attention the fact that I had to pee and about the time you have to pee Because you’ve been drinking nothing about juice that you’ve stacked up next to the next to the computer that you’re working on It’s 20 minutes to go 25 feet to the bathroom, it’s painful. I never did that again You know, so you’re yeah, you’re constantly fighting all of your constraints your constraints are not people or not just people and This is you know, we get into this really it’s this postmodern It’s me against other people it’s you against nature and it’s you against what what I’m gonna now refer to as the unconditional So for example, the hot fire is still hot even if you’re not near it This is a better way to think of the world that objective you move as the agent The fire is unconditional because it doesn’t move Its temperature didn’t change you changed your relationship to it and that changed your temperature didn’t change the temperature of the fire because the fire is Unconditional and I think that’s a much better framing. I think it was Kale Zeldin that gave that to me And and that’s the that’s the problem. All right, Benjamin Franklin, okay. I think I emphasize with the no cleavage Empathize with the no cleavage empathy is not allowed here, sir You are you are being booted But there is a problem. No change take place. The Gnostics are right. It’s circular cloning of the father forever Nothing the Gnostics have ever said could ever possibly be correct and is observably false Let’s just put that to bed right now. Okay, if no change father forever But we have a mimicry circuit in our head and we do mimic our parents Which is why we tend to become our parents unless we’re super rebels and we deliberately Fight against that That’s a bad play. By the way, your parents existed and On average that will be a better way to go than rebelling against them Obvious exceptions but there are exceptions and exceptions are not rules and they’re both are important and if you Think that because you grew up With somebody, you know over you that you had to mimic that you’re cloning them Then you don’t understand cloning you don’t understand genetics. You don’t understand evolution You don’t understand people and you understand the world Like this is such a low-resolution way of thinking about how the world works and it’s observably false So I don’t know what to tell you like why is this even an issue? Like yeah, you’re gonna mimic your parents because you have to there isn’t another option available You can be mad about that, but you were born into it and there’s nothing you can do about it So if you’re mad about it, you’re just taking time energy and attention away from doing good in the world not recommended. Mm-hmm I Don’t know. I don’t really understand the Gnostics are right comment is strange with that in what way No, the problem is the Gnostics are right about something. Well, yeah I mean for everybody who thinks they read the Republic they either skipped book two or they have low Comprehension reading comprehension like I don’t know what else to say It’s right there the problem of children is dealt with by Plato and not by Kierkegaard Not by Nietzsche not by these other modern idiots and that’s partly why they’re idiots If your philosophy doesn’t include children, it’s useless because we live in a world with children and We’re not gonna not live in a world with children or at least if we do whatever we do won’t matter and philosophy is irrelevant Because we won’t be continuing past that point anyway, and so philosophy becomes a non-issue So philosophy doesn’t account for children. You’re already wrong and you’re not even a philosopher. So there how’s that now? What Plato says in book two is rather clear because children therefore forbidden knowledge Therefore Gnostics are correct about the existence of forbidden knowledge and the importance of forbidden knowledge What they are not correct about is what to do about this situation Plato however seems to have some solutions to this problem. I May not like them, but censorship is a real thing that has to happen You can be upset about that all you want the bottom line is when you’re three Telling you the scientific realities of sex or evolution are pointless and harmful that can’t happen That’s true all throughout your life there are certain things that if you learn them too early You will become corrupted by that knowledge in a bad way This is where the Gnostics have it backwards They think forbidden knowledge and the engagement with it will free you it will not and freedom is not good for you Anyway bad goal and by the way a lie both bad goal and a lie engagement with Cult practices for example all of which are forbidden knowledge and Some of which are not wrong. I can tell you from personal direct experience There are things that you can do that you should not be doing but are quite capable of doing and there are very good reasons why you shouldn’t do that I Experienced this personally don’t do it Well, the Lord could strike a blow with a broken stick Who brought him up I’m stating that there are people that are right sometimes, although they’re mostly wrong That’s true, too. Well, look and that’s the problem is teasing out making the judgment again between Do I engage with Carl Jung’s work if I can’t tell where he went wrong, but I know he went wrong My judgment is no I will not engage with Carl Jung’s work because I can’t figure out where he went wrong But he ended in a place that I can tell is wrong And you know, maybe you disagree. That’s fine I’m not trying to impose my judgment on anybody else which makes it a valid judgment as I covered in the monologue Right to the best of my ability. Anyway there is an issue when you Are judging yourself smart enough to engage in anything including things that are quote forbidden knowledge and Interestingly Jung himself said look you can’t study to be a Jungian Therapist or psychologist or whatever until the age of 35 or something 30. I forget right you can’t be president United States You know if you’re under a certain age, too There’s a there there and it’s important and we need to pay attention to that This judgment these boundaries this discernment and these rules are there for a reason because they have worked throughout time No disagreement, where are you going with that? It was a nice rant. I don’t know what the emphasis was The the emphasis is on the fact of forbidden knowledge and the goodness of the forbiddenness of the knowledge The idea that having that forbidden knowledge is gonna set you three is wrong every religious system has to have Layers of Revelation in order for it to be a religious system. Although it’s a political system So you have to have levels of entry interesting in adoption That’s an interesting framing. I think yeah, there have to be steps because there are steps in life We talked about this with the archery, right? Like you have to learn how to stand then you have to learn your posture within the stance And then you have to learn how to hold the bow correctly within that good stance with that good posture And then you can work on aim and that may them and maybe missing some steps But the point is there are steps they do have to go in a certain order They can’t go in a random order the some of the order may be optional but there is ordering in it that is not optional and That’s kind of the issue is that people aren’t recognizing that there are steps That you need to know certain things before learning certain other things You need to be able to do certain things before doing certain other things, right? If you just show somebody variables and recursion and throw them into software team to build software They’re not going to be good at it at all ever probably unless they learn on their own which they might proper computer science programming techniques And some do but almost nobody You know the sum is small and The number of people even capable of such a thing I would argue is probably much smaller than people would suspect and If you don’t learn it in the right order if you don’t have the right foundation You will do stupid things and then your cell phone won’t work It doesn’t work. I don’t think that’s a coincidence I think I know why that happens and I work in software and I’ve worked with these teams and there was one team That was working with Microsoft net and they couldn’t figure out where the older version of dotnet was getting dragged into so they were loading To which is a no-no and they couldn’t remove the old one Are they software engineers? How the hell did you get in that situation to begin with? I have no idea. I offered to fix it for them. They declined What fair enough it’s their software. They can do what they want. But also are you software engineer? Come on How do you not know what what pieces are in your stuff that you’re building it’s like saying I Going to build a car, but I put two motors in it and it works with two motors But I can’t get the other motor out. Yeah, it’s kind of interesting parallel Kind of an interesting parallel if you were for instance, if you’re if you’re developing software and you’re pulling in dependencies, you’re not aware of How do you how do you discern right? How do we yeah, how do we and what do we use? To get that right to get those dependencies, correct or rectified Discernment and judge but what do you do an authority? those with experience those with authority those with Teaching abilities, right all sorts of qualifications Parents. Yeah, you’re not you’re not gonna figure this out without authority or if you figure it out, it’ll be wrong Well, and that’s and that’s my point is that Everybody wants to get to the individualistic frame where they’re an individual and they’re free from their parents and they’re free from the constraints of nature And they’re free from like gravity and all kinds of way And you can do that kind of to an extent in the metaverse for example But you’re never gonna be free of those things You were born into a certain world in a certain way at a certain time and you are submitted to all of those facts Period and there’s no way around it and you don’t need a way around it You can become a good person if you stop focusing on idiotic philosophy foolish theology and time wasting other stuff like addiction to porn and video games and Conspiracy theories and crazy theories of everything and all this other stuff none of which you need to live and I can state that Axiomatically and prove that it’s true because people in the past didn’t have it and they still were alive which is how you’re here So why are you wasting your time with garbage? Because it’s garbage You don’t need this stuff You can just aim at the good and do the good things to the best of your ability and you’re gonna get it wrong because you’re a muppet but Acknowledging that you’re a muppet helps and going for help with the good. Oh, I don’t know what the good is Maybe I’ll ask my priest friend father Eric Which I have done by the way or maybe I’ll go see I had I had some vision or says maybe I’ll go see the Orthodox priest about that which I highly recommend because Catholics suck on such issues So, you know, there’s help out there maybe I asked my father’s advice You know and look I’ve asked advice of people just to know what not to do There are certain people that whose judgment is excellent in some areas and just the opposite of good in other areas And I’ve just observed this and so every once well I asked them because I know their judgment is always wrong in something I’ll ask them about that. They’ll give me an answer I go well, at least I have a wrong answer that I know it’s wrong. I mean I do these things I think other people should do these things too and submit to the fact that There are people out there like that and that you can use that to your advantage As a caveat One way to maybe boil this down reduces down to a point to an emphasis to signal is that You have to know which problem you’re trying to solve you can’t solve a hardware problem with more software and this the Gnostics into one to A bit emphasize the software we just keep better software because the hardware is either Irreplaceable or replaceable they kind of they kind of see both end with hardware and they’re not they’re not willing to mediate between Which is why I think Christianity does bass in its religious system if this mediating between The two the two ways of There’s two patterns of the practical practical and the objective and The Gnostics seem to be always one to focus more theory which we’ve said we’ve we granted this Constantly saying you know knowledge is worth seeking in your being isn’t Was you know being as good versus you know knowledge is good as it could shorthand Where where it matters within judgment is that you have to know what? Trying to be The crew We even even confuse a system at least has achievements it’s trying to seek the Gnostics system does not have a emphasis of outcome that’s trying to see other than Continuing to Redestroy rebuild the matrix the correct that it’s or it’s always it’s always on it actually over values the construct It never values the outcast Yeah, okay, cool upon it Too many things. I think I think that’s I think that’s correct. It overvalues the construct It it’s fundamentally materialistic Because it deals with knowledge and knowledge is the materialistic aspect of information and it’s something that you own like you have knowledge you Gather it you take it into yourself and make yourself bigger with it And I think that’s the problem Gnosticism is fundamentally a materialistic way of thinking about the world which sounds off But it’s actually not off materialism is just material first as the prime mover Knowledge is the prime mover knowledge is not the prime mover of this world my friend. It’s not I’m sure if you ask a Christian like Bruce They’ll say the prime mover is God especially him because he’s a Calvinist But I did want to segue into this because I think it is related Benjamin Franklin related to this topic competition between the Father and son which it’s not nothing is because that’s foolishness I wonder why the tree in Genesis is called the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil and he follows up with wouldn’t the tree have to be there because God put it There there is so much good commentary on this. I don’t even know how you missed it The only crime that he treated even symbolically there’s more things that he created This again the over emphasis on one aspect on the software aspect rather than the hardware Because these the implicit laws that are set up. These are the way these are the cycles. These are the days Yeah, yeah I mean in a sense the in the sense the the first law before the commandments is this one This the first guard rail right right well There’s also a regional blessing too Well, that’s fair The tree and the problem isn’t the existence of the tree these aren’t problems right right and casting everything is a problem is a problem Some things are not problem grief is not a problem over this with Vanderklaai earlier grief is not a problem Calling it a perennial problem as John for Vicky does is wrong. It’s not a problem It doesn’t have a solution problems have solutions most of the things that are an issue for us in life Are not actually problems They are part of the reality that we have to go through the perennial patterns you can argue We don’t all go through all the patterns and fair enough some of us do though And it doesn’t really matter those patterns are there as an option for you to have to deal with at some point or another And grief is an excellent example grief does not get solved. It doesn’t get resolved Grief is something that you have to grow bigger than to quote Carl you and there’s lots of things like this and one of them is to struggle with Disobeying the commandment and ending up in a bad situation As the result of taking an action that you did not need to take and we’re told not to take Hmm And it is the sin of Gnosticism it’s specifically what it is It’s the tree of the knowledge Knowledge you could say knowledge of good and evil. It’s going to qualify. It’s a type of knowledge and No, don’t do that. In other words, don’t be a Gnostic. It’s right there. It’s First and foremost don’t value knowledge above the beautiful creation and garden that you have been given That sounds pretty much like the modern problem. We’re valuing the things we have Incorrectly because we think we have knowledge but knowledge is endless. There’s an endless amount of knowledge So really we’re only fighting over which knowledge is better than which other knowledge and That’s unresolvable But what is resolvable is the good you can do the good in the world You don’t need knowledge to do the good. It’s not required all this emphasis on knowledge is crazy talk This is something they’ve noticed Let’s say it’s secular people let’s say it like that Tend to overemphasize is the problem of pain Rather than the problem of grief, which is what you’re just talking about Sorry, I have to go to the bathroom and the problem of grief is far more Manageable maybe you could say far more is far more you could is far more Applications you can do with grief then you can do with pain Pain and suffering kind of interchangeable words in some aspects That are just going they’re not perennial that’s a part whatever we call this reality the grief is Is a phenomena that happens with particular circumstances and applications and that’s The Gnostics seem to always want to emphasize secularist Yeah, it’s They just keep going well, we have to solve pain right which leads down to the roads of safety Three or four major religions out there funny enough pain problems. Yeah, and funny enough the um they’re they’re Many of their solutions to the pain are the solutions to the pain are the solutions to the pain are the solutions to the pain The um they’re they’re Many of their solutions to solve pain Requires whole submission to some new god, which is technology. Let’s say let’s say those who are into hardware Yeah, yeah, so they’re they’re say, you know, uh transcendent sort of idea. So, um, what do they call that? They um Singularity right where you have humans in machine or one. Well, that’s that’s holy submission To a god of their creation Which is what they do Well, it’s redefining the laws of nature in some aspects Yeah, because they they think that they can create the laws right they can yeah create them or recreate or Recreate them. Yeah. Yeah. Well, it’s really just idolatry at its core Yeah, oh yeah, it certainly certainly becomes that and and that is the treaties against it, but I think that’s the Problem of Gnosticism is right there in the beginning of the book apparently And everybody misses it in the same way. They missed the statement of Gnosticism Gnosticism in Plato’s Republic. It’s right in book two if you missed it your reading and comprehension is low I’m sorry. I haven’t read it. I don’t know what the hell you’re reading. I haven’t read probably don’t play though I’ve only heard You shouldn’t you shouldn’t I was I was worried about this I’m like no one of the reasons you shouldn’t read the classic is because you’re going to notice all the mistakes everybody else made Because you look at the world differently and you’re just going to get angry and sure enough I’m reading Plato’s Republic and now i’m downright pissed at everybody. I’m like, why didn’t you tell me about this? What is wrong? Why are you reading in this book so incorrectly that you’re coming to these whack it this whole thing and I never read I obviously Haven’t finished sounds familiar The philosopher king problem i’m like do you not understand that play-doh proved that this is unresolvable It doesn’t work. His statement is that it doesn’t work and everybody’s trying to recreate the philosopher king as though it’s a solution to a problem and i’m like I think what play-doh’s saying is these aren’t problems They’re just struggles we have to deal with in life because they are perennial patterns That we have no choice about and cannot resolve Not all yeah, yeah, sure They’re not they’re not resolvable in this life. Yeah No, there’s no well, yeah Trying to stay away from religion bruce. No, no, sure. I’m sorry Uh, no, no, it’s fine. I’m still gonna call it out, but no resolvable in the time. We’re given with our mortal bodies For the most part, yeah, that’s true. Yeah, there you go. Right? Well, but but even the cave and people misread the cave You can’t stay out of the cave And you’re not supposed to stay in the middle part of the cave and you’re not supposed to try to just break people out You’re supposed to go back and chain yourself back up And like commune with the quote unenlightened like you’re supposed that’s what it says I don’t understand what you people are reading. It’s a very very very clear What is this? I i’ve heard the cave only cursor like a small knowledge of the cave What is missing the point there? I think so in the cave It’s a lot of it’s the statement of gnosticism and the solution of gnosticism. I would say right we’ll say pre-biblical solution Uh, although people would have arguments with that but whatever You are chained up And the things you’re seeing are projections on a wall i’ve heard this yeah Right, and then you break free from the chains or you get loose or whatever. It doesn’t really matter And now you can wander around the cave and you can see that there’s a fire and there’s people Managing projections on the wall and you’re like aha have the secret knowledge. It’s right there, right? Right And then you realize there’s a way out of the cave and out to the sun Except you can’t just go running out there Right But also don’t stare at the sun and you don’t stay outside the cave as though you’re some kind of guru or mystic or whatever Who’s so good? You can’t just go back to the cave. You’re supposed to go back to the cave If you try to free the other people in the cave, they revolt they don’t want to be freed Really does any of this sound familiar like your daily interactions with people because like this is like a tuesday with mark And when he interacts with other people like this whole pattern is every freaking day of my life Yeah, and and then you’re you’re not supposed to Not sit and watch the show Because if you don’t do that, you can’t commune with those people And why why is clare doing this to me I have to agree with her yet again wisdom is better than knowledge Yes, that is a true statement Can you get to wisdom through knowledge? No Not knowledge alone to one another Not knowledge alone. No. Oh look at look at this. Look at do you believe this nonsense? Can we discuss morality? First we have to define morality All right, have you watched any of my videos on morality i’ve got like three of them i’ve got a long form one with manuel Got another short form one. I think there’s another one lying around there somewhere. I forget we can try to discuss morality Although it’s 11 o’clock at night. Yeah, my issue with morality is just I don’t like mere moralism Um, what right that’s the issue I have with that Well, I would say this is why we have to define it because I define ethics as the higher ideal And morality is the implementation of ethics And when you talk about morality you are looking down or across at least You’re not looking up at ethics ethics is the ideal standard And so to your point bruce, which is well said by the way It’s a reduction to mere morality and that is a dangerous thing and I Thousand billion trillion percent agree. It’s a big problem Yeah, yeah, I think that’s where we’re at in much of the conversation we have today with people yeah and What you’re implementing matters, but i’ve made the case as I said in videos and stuff elsewhere that We need To have that higher thing to appeal to so that when people make mistakes and transgress We can give them forgiveness and re-engage Because otherwise once you screw up you’re screwed And I lose any possibility of your redemption or your no repentance redemption forgiveness Any of them any of that? Yeah Yeah, you have to have transcendent ethics Which I argue everyone is operating from transcendent ethics Uh, what’s their rebellion against them? I think it’s the other way around. I think you have you have to come to communal agreements to have transcendent Yeah, you’re just recognizing the recognizing the existing ethics You’re not um, you’re not you’re creating existing the lack of The lack of them because my next question was how would we restore ethics back Well, you can’t restore ethics back. You just your morals are based upon a higher transcendent ethic and you apply them But you’re still look you’re looking down to look ahead In a way, but I mean there’s an application there so I you know, you can’t get around that Okay, I do agree if you need you don’t know where you are. You need to look at a map to get to the mountain range But you could get over the mountain range by just looking at the mountains and discerning away through the mountains True, but true, but the map would tell you where the ravines the rivers the the animals the you know What I mean, it will tell you this all of the details on your trip To make it that is not the territory though. That’s this is where i’m going Yeah, yeah, okay But I I guess I missed this so I’ve been wondering something. I wonder if morality requires some choice. Of course it does if you have no choice Option, but to do something that is not within the moral frame Isn’t it only when a choice appears that we can discuss morality? Well, look, yes, I think this is why determinism is stupid because if Determinism is the way of things then we don’t Morals and ethics doesn’t exist. It isn’t something we have to worry about But I would argue because we know about it It must be a thing There’s a bunch of things we don’t know about that aren’t things right, and this is why determinism is dumb because You can’t talk about determinism without contrasting it with free will And if you can think about free will you have to have free will by definition it’s axiomatically certain And that’s why I think the whole idea of determinism versus free will is so dumb. It’s not worth discussing in some sense Yeah, most especially meaningless determinism. I don’t know if it’s just me but every time I hear determinism I just shorthand go. Oh, you mean Authentic Authenticism you mean authority authoritarianism? That’s what you actually mean determinism Unearned or meaningless authoritarianism. Yeah Doubt allows oh this comment here like it says you doubt allows people to come into it. There are no new ideas That’s my that’s my I don’t I don’t necessarily agree with that but I mean, okay doubt is a function And mere doubt won’t work Like having doubt doesn’t mean you’re going to come up with a new idea And this is one of the problems people think they come up with new ideas all the time In fact, you saw this on the live stream with vander clay earlier where john came on and he’s like Oh, but legalism could solve all these problems and it’s like We know legalism doesn’t solve these problems. All of this has been tried He thought his ideas were new They weren’t new Oh the hubris what? Form of government are you going to come up with if the ancient greeks didn’t try Did you know that the ancient greeks tried a thousand forms of government a thousand distinct forms of government You think you’re going to come up with something yourself? Have you come up with a thousand forms of government? I don’t freaking think so somehow So do you think the form you’re going to come up with is new? If you can’t even do the thousand that the ancient greek actually tried I don’t think so I think you’ve been lied to about your own personal capability several orders of back I I mean You know you laugh bruce, but like I think we have actually done a disservice to people by telling them They are several orders of magnitude smarter than they would ever possibly be under ideal conditions Like not even an option. These people think they’re all genius. Yeah. Yeah, and they think everyone before them were retarded. Yeah alexandria ocasio-cortez Has a freaking degree in economics and she clearly knows nothing about basic economics literally Prove it right she’s proving this again and again and again in the same way that sam eris talks about morals and ethics Which he clearly has no clue about whatsoever None How’s that? Yeah, isn’t it a matter of an ego or Ideological projection so they’ve got this knowledge somewhere if they know some things They supersede their they put their judgments their projections into the world as superior to the knowledge that they’ve learned So they should know better but it’s disembodied knowledge because They’re not something willing to act out. That’s the problem. I would argue just there’s no such thing as disembodied knowledge I would say that i’m saying you have to for knowledge to become wisdom or to be Or to aim up you have to embody that in some ways. What’s what prayer is? signals information knowledge What you’re describing is information That’s the difference Knowledge is a synthesis of information within a frame. That’s a very different thing And see the model video on navigating patterns for more In society though the doubters on society propels discussion and allows dissidents sometimes But they don’t run anything And that’s the problem. So yeah, they inventors create things but they usually can’t Get them to market and they’re not supposed to Lincoln created cabinet people disagree. Yeah. So what lots of people did that? That’s not new to lincoln Benjamin franklin, I was thinking the tree of knowledge story is trying to tell us something between the relationship between choices and morality and consequences I don’t think so If eve obeyed wouldn’t there always be doubt if they are doing the good? no Uh, it’s the consequences That kind of teaches maybe no if you don’t know the difference because the difference hasn’t been made clear to you Then no, you don’t doubt like doubt like all these things come after the fact. This is all Sequencing right you’re miss sequencing the world Have to have a knowledge of good and evil to even doubt whether or not the knowledge of good and evil is For you to to have right That’s the issue and so The second thing has to come first which is absurd So it doesn’t the doubt would never occur if you didn’t eat of the tree It’s that easy like You’re paying a price for the knowledge And it’s ironic that we’re trying to use more knowledge to reverse that price I mean, that’s what Life extension that’s what abortion that’s what all these things are We want to reverse the price that we were forced to pay from the original sin Through knowledge through science And it’s like no, that’s not gonna work. That’s how we got ourselves into this. It’s not gonna get us out of this Yeah As opposed to recognizing submission Is anarchy trying to get outside of the pain problem? Yes Of course it is because pain is a function of society according to rousseau anachronists are just rousseauians. They’re just so stupid They don’t know it That’s the annoying part. It’s like you people need an education equity, isn’t it? It’s another form of equity and equality It’s just in a different different color scheme Right, that’s why they’re just yeah, just trying to smash out pain through a different Look if everyone’s in pain everyone’s in chaos, then we’re back. No square one. Yeah Yeah, maybe is that well, but it’s a framing problem, which is ironic peacock club Founding fathers doubted the divine right of the english king and rebelled. No, they didn’t actually you are correct for calling a rebellion Extra points no points for believing that they doubted the divine right. They didn’t doubt the divine, right? This is this is going to come up in my next talk with adam I don’t know what i’m going to do this talk I have a lot of homework to do because i’m falling behind because i’m on a trip What we’re going to talk about is around this issue because There was a revolution in england first and The rebellion because I don’t think it was a revolution. Uh, the rebellion in the american colonies Is sandwiched between two revolutions The english and the french Now What does that mean? What happened as a result and adam has already told me some of this? Although i’m learning some of this on my own now Parliament gains power King is not the one oppressing the colonies that didn’t happen I understand that that was the press at the time but even I learned here in new england when I was growing up that that was Embellishment King george was not mad. They were using him as a scapegoat, right? He was not a crazy person right and That’s the problem is that if you think of this as a battle between the king you’re wrong It was parliament that did the vote King failed to override the vote and what the people were pissed at is that they petitioned the king and said hey These jerk-offs in parliament did a bad thing. Can you fix it? Because you have the divine right and he didn’t Fair enough. Yep. They could have reformed a rebellion. They could have reformed and had he done the work This is the same. This is the same issue with the reformation. They appealed to the pope. Pope didn’t do a job Well now we got to fix it ourselves And but I mean and you can see that in even some of the writings of adams and washington They were in fact they quibbled over the idea of calling the calling the presidency divine majesty, you know or um His his majesty because they understood that the power of authority comes from god for the for the lawmaker So that was they were very much in that camp and the only reason they moved it What into a fault maybe was because they were trying to remove? any Any disdain for the monarchy that was you know in the in the title? but They they all were were very much under the idea that they were divinely appointed Right. So so look so this is two frames Here’s the third crazy frame that we can now judge founding fathers weren’t going to be told by a mad king to believe Jesus is god That was never the issue claire I like your framing though because it it helps me to show people we can judge that as a bad frame Because that didn’t happen The england knew who they were getting rid of they were getting rid of the troublemakers Who who basically weren’t weren’t anglican anymore or something? Uh and who they were prosecute persecuting and look they went to the netherlands first and the dutch said yeah We don’t want you troublemakers either But we’ll help you get the hell out of here and england owes you a colony So why don’t you just go over there and take some king george’s land and be happy little? People and they did or actually is king charles. I think sorry So they they did they they took some of that land Uh as recompense for being thrown out of the country and persecuted Fair enough and none of that was a problem uh, and Most of the colonists did not want to engage in war uh part of the war was a rap and It’s a battle within a larger war. That’s the other thing see my french Revolution talk with adam uh, which which has more of this detail When you start to understand what actually happened? It’s like oh they were rebelling against a bad vote in parliament And they didn’t want to and the wealthy like john hankock who was the wealthiest man in the colonies couldn’t make any more money It was an economic Excentive two Because nobody in the colonies could own boats And you weren’t allowed to build roads And so the only way to trade was to use a boat between the colonies even though could have had roads But no they were forbidden And then what happened was the only people allowed to own boats were basically The english And so the stamp act was a big deal Because it affected everything you bought that wasn’t local And that meant raw materials from the southern colonies, of course would later become a larger issue with slamming Yeah, yeah, and in fact it adams goes to france just to get boats Right, that’s what he had to do. We didn’t have any 10 to 10 to 10 degree for a navy but we had all the shipwrights and all the All the lumber we had all the lumber so we got all the shipwrights Uh peacock club they were trying to shut the door to the viking coming back in through a back door No, they weren’t like none of that is true. They wanted the king back years after the successful rebellion People were still calling to demolish the constitution and go back under the monarchy because it seemed more sane And you just don’t know the history there was a middle ground there judgment. There was a middle ground the federalists I suppose, but yeah Yeah, but but there were strong forces saying we don’t want the yankees in charge Anyway, we should just go back under the king and vote our ways in in the south was the puritans in new england that held the You know held the thing together and held it the way it was Yep, and the other quakers didn’t have enough numbers to out out out. Well, maybe they did but they didn’t have enough Uh wherewithal or care to revolt against the puritans? I mean they were at odds, you know Yeah, well to a large degree right but they were They were also part of the power structure. I mean, that’s how we got abolitionists and Prohibitionists. Yeah, those are quakers sure fundamentally quaker movements So they knew that some of the power because it was centralized in new england for the first part of The uh, you know the united states Uh, they were still part of that power structure and that’s the problem Is that they were still part of the power structure they had a great deal of influence and control over the government Yeah, and they weren’t willing to give that up But the divine right of leader was was well understood and withheld I think upheld as a standard It was I mean, that’s the whole problem is that they’ve just mislocated it As part of the rebellion the successful rebellion and it france and england didn’t think the constitution And the colonies, you know breaking away was going to last they were both licking their chops waiting for it to collapse So they could move in Yeah, they were trying to say here We we used I would say my argument contention here is that we used to be far more educated on these things And other people have made judgments on behalf of us of what shouldn’t be educated in From you know 60s onwards you could say easily and these judgments have now had Dramatic cause and effect dramatic trade-offs in what people are are able to discern what they were to Enact upon what are they able to judge because they have pre-filled in templates on What things are relevant or should what they should be looking for in the world? And they’re able to see things that are prior and now you even have zoomers saying I won’t watch a movie from the 1980s because it looks old or because it’s outdated or something. It’s like this. That’s not all watch late 1930s not 90 hundreds look gallery, right like galleries are like extremely low and like admission rates because this younger generation In my prediction is even after this we will see The frames tightening in and again that they just don’t want to be see outside of this small bubble of education Because they’re not able to judge which signals with information knowledge to acquire So this history matters. I wouldn’t say that. Yeah Yeah, that’s the problem right? The problem is we’ve been given bad framing and we’ve been told that we as individuals, which we’re not Can then judge all of these things? And this is why I brought up are you qualified to judge? Did you ever do any of your research? Yeah, and and and that segues me into this forgive me, bruce, uh, p cut club What do you think should happen today? You seem pretty good and you’ve used on history What do you think should happen to the u.s today? Well, this is easy I’m doing it I take seriously john verveckis critique of cultural cognitive grammar That’s why I have navigating patterns, right? I’m trying to fix cultural cognitive grammar so that we’re all speaking a common language With a common understanding and a common frame which will produce a common meaning Without that you can’t discuss something and this is why verveckis work is critical You can do what peterson says as a pragmatist If you want to do what peterson did you have to understand verveckis work? Because vervecki gives you a science of meaning which is framework and vocabulary about half of which I totally disagree with by the way But most of it is actually useful even if I disagree with some of it In order to be able to build tools to help people out of The intimacy crisis which leads to the meaning crisis Right, which is best described to your average human being as the muppet crisis, which is why I don’t like jesse anymore I was going to say that I think it wasn’t back to um, um It’s not that we We had more knowledge. We used to have more knowledge of these things. I I or more education on these things I actually think the problem was Sorry, I actually think the problem was knowledge in communities Sure, right. Well I don’t know if that’s necessarily the case maybe but but the issue was giving people Wholesale access to decision making regardless of their credentials I don’t I don’t even think I don’t even think that’s like I credentialism is a problem for me I think the the issue is leadership. No, that’s what i’m saying. You can call you know how to be credentials I was just using that term. Yeah, there needs to be a barrier to leadership Well, this would be a cultural cognitive grammar issue, right and I mentioned this in the monologue It’s important to understand that you do not listen to experts. That is not your role in society Experts are supposed to talk to leaders The leaders are supposed to say this expert’s full of shit or this expert’s to expert Yeah, right or whatever And the reason for that is because the leaders are the ones with the skin in the game read to lab all of his books He’s got a book called skin in the game. It’s excellent. All of his books are excellent. Read them all you’ll understand a lot more about the world You’ll get a lot more humility read all the freaking omics books, too. I think there’s four of them. They’re excellent They’ll really teach you that you’re an idiot. Yeah, I mean real stupid. Yeah, one symptom of this is universal suffrage Right, right, but but this is this is the fundamental problem when you’re not Paying attention to the people who have skin in the game who aren’t going to have the things that they want i.e leaders If they screw up And instead you’re trying to discern and judge directly through experts You’re probably not able to do that because you’re a muppet and I like jesse’s point In the past we were submitted to a distributed cognition That’s what a structure is whether it be a government or a church or a community or whatever. We’re submitted to that distributed cognition that means that we are smarter We’re not working harder for it, right? We need to be smarter We’re not working harder for it, right? We know that joe’s a farmer I could just ask him how to farm. I don’t need to learn it from scratch like some auto-diodec Muppet who has too much time on his hands. And so he’s reading a thousand books Instead of just asking people already read a thousand books And getting a nice synthesis and a lot of what i’ve done throughout my life because I was blessed growing up in boston I had access to the smartest people in the world in many cases on whole subjects Actually, I could just ask them and they could just tell me and then I don’t have to read all the books they read It’s a wonderful thing and That’s important. We have lost that because we’ve lost submission We don’t want to submit to an imperfect government. I get that but you don’t have a choice It’s yeah, you’re not going to do anything else anyway, you’re wasting your time Fantasizing about a better government you’re wasting your time fantasizing about how you’re going to go live in the woods by yourself You’re wasting your time with this Valuable time energy and attention that could be spent doing good in the world. Yeah get to work Stop stop double down on a secondary point. Yeah Everyone wants to be an individual so they either want to be Not the leader or a leader We’ve lost the second nature that we used to have in the past is the second man The sidekick or just even the the supporting role someone who the tribe of artists that changed the art moves the tribe people that get together to form a political party Mid-century germans, right? It’s always it’s always a collective group of people. It’s never just one person It’s always a collective people but because we’ve got rampant Individualism materialism you could sacralism nostrism the interrelated phenomenas because of the educational framing that we’ve been given the way we Pursue the world. It’s not noble to be it’s not noble to be one of the many If you’re not if you’re not giving the credit or the competitive Of Aliens, you know The olympians used to say you would even say that bronze was a good medal to get Because you at least one of the three that were the best It was never just we overvalued this thing called gold or this thing called Winner take all And we’ve not said like you came second. Great Yes, you still beat 20 other people that still achieve it in itself Yeah Yeah No, I would agree and so if we well I also You have to be humble enough to work with someone Maybe it’s someone’s better is better at being the number one person and maybe we need five more number twos in the world Yeah, I think that’s true. I I think that also I mean most people were not educated formally It was a product of wealth for the history of man This is not I mean this idea of all all people are educated across all levels of life For what purposes? The it this is not a this is not a position that you know, it’s not a position that we need to uphold You don’t have to be Educated formally and that was not the case for most people Right for most people throughout most of history, right? Right and they all live because you’re here Why is that bad? They built this stuff? The uneducated built all this stuff for sure Peacock club. I don’t have a background in philosophy. Yeah, neither do I hate philosophy I think it should be a band and abolished from the universe at this point. What do you think citizens should do? See, this is the problem. The last three doesn’t tell you what to do. It’s not supposed to Why do people think that it says that? Um, it’s ridiculous Well, the philosopher kings have been put up on pedestals. Yeah, what’s that? Don’t watch starship troopers. That’s what you should. Yeah, you should go watch starship troopers citizen Learn some proper philosophy Because it’s inside a container it’s inside of the story it has an emphasis and it has an outcome an objective which you can judge Until you have that it’s all fear all objective just ramblings of data It’s all just software until it’s embedded in a hardware unit. You can’t judge it if the software had any particular Value to bring the world. You don’t know the virtues as well. I guess You can smuggle that in so That’s why the best philosophy are stories Do do the good like judge what the good is do it Check your judgment do it again. All right, keep adjusting like do things in the world You don’t need to read books and you don’t need to learn all that much and all the learning you need to do is in your action And you just need discernment and judgment and action and that’s that’s why i’m doing this series from discernment to judgment judgments today And action’s going to be next week Hey, I would say also don’t get get don’t get into the trap of needing to be in a dialectic like humble yourself enough Realize your hubris and be in a dialogue Like i’m not going to be a good live stream. I can try and do Live streaming a little my own but i’m far better being the number two and just throwing crazy things along and telling People to either hurry up or resummarize better because that’s yeah What I think I have to value what’s sure and the thing is I’m better when you’re here Sancho ponza, that’s a good one right benjamin franklin said sancho ponza That’s great but But that’s the thing like We’re better together Why is this bad? Like why do we have to compete? Why can’t we just be better together? Why can’t we all go fishing well some ecumenical cheese pizza have a chat together the three of us I don’t want to get to How can I say this? I don’t I don’t what I’m all i’m saying is I competition can be good um in a in a certain sense not ultimate competition, but like The fighting and the sharpening of iron and iron sharpening one another that but that’s a different frame Than this oppressive competition, you know this idea of being oppressed by those who are looking to sharpen It’s competition in light of the power narrative Post-modern power narrative is a observably incorrect be really stupid and see unhelpful like all of those things all at once It’s amazing that anybody even still engages if it’s power. We’re all screwed We’re all screwed because none of us are the most powerful So you’re just gonna lose that’s boring. I don’t want to lose right masters the universe. They work together Right, and and that’s the thing like when you look around Steve jobs wouldn’t be anybody without his top designer That top designer made that company just as much as steve jobs did it’s the top designer any good without the visionary steve jobs No, it wasn’t was it was the other guy Oh, no, it was the other guy. I get the guy’s name Yeah, that’s that’s a thing Was with the tech guy, but in that early stuff it was okay. They did fine Apple didn’t take off until they got that designer guy forget his name because it’s 11 30 at night, but He’s the one who made the apple look And once you make the apple look then everybody wants it all of a sudden and they’re willing to pay a premium for it Apple is the greediest company in the history of johnny. I mean 30 percent margins on every product Yeah, johnny johnny. Oh, that’s a guy. Yes johnny. Yeah. Yes I totally agree nobody in the industry gets 30 percent margins except apple know what everybody else gets Seven to two percent margins on electronics seven. No one gets 10 percent. No one gets double. There’s nobody With almost no exception to certain specific products apple gets 30 percent on everything they sell They also control most of the they control most of the most of the entirety of the chain Well, there’s a lot behind it which is good That’s the issue is that again these things are not reducible. You can’t reduce apple to steve jobs You can’t reduce apple To the designer you can’t reduce apple to wasniac you can’t you can’t reduce these just like you can’t reduce linux to linux Right, right. I mean, it’s not even avoidable in your individualistic open source, you know No, well, well, this is why Richard stallman runs around and think he’s got to be conu. Well, he’s right in a way in a sense, you know But yeah, he doesn’t have to be called that but he’s he’s integral annoying his crap. Oh, he’s terrible. Yeah Yeah, he’s he is annoying Getting back to a point Aesthetics matter we we we have no foundational aspect for aesthetics or appreciation for aesthetics Aesthetics are more important than philosophy Well, yes, and so where do the aesthetics of this channel come from they come from sally joe They don’t come from mark. I mean not that I didn’t go. Oh pirate theme because that’s what I have You know, but I didn’t make the graphics I didn’t do that That’s good animation song that intro Excellent the first two minutes of this stream First two minutes of the last stream excellent. I love that. That stuff is great. I didn’t do that Right and my stream is better for it and my stream is better for the ten dollars I spent at amazon to get my monocle. I had the hat i’ve had the hat for years, right? I’ve got the hawaiian shirt from waaii like These yeah, we need to get you a vest mark. We need to get you a pirate cape or a pirate jacket or part Needs a sword to go in I I need a parrot And a pair of wheels and a cutlass You don’t have a sword put it on a real color so I have Forget what it’s called. It’s one of the curved egyptian swords scimitar or okay the egyptian Yeah, you gotta put it on yeah, we need a sword yeah, i’m i’m considering costume upgrades And a flintlock pistol The parrot’s a good one like the parrot idea and some brick here fits in the fray To symbolize That would the parrot fits in the frame yeah sally says no parrots I can’t agree with sarah well after this we’ll have to defer to her aesthetic We don’t listen to everything sally says I’m just saying sally You got to get a parrot then you got to name it It’s got to say say things everything that sally says how’s that? Oh, no, that’s what you said though you’re changing you’re doing the post-modern thing and changing I was correcting myself. I was correcting Just skip the scurvy. Okay, that sounds like good advice. We can follow that advice. No diet of hardtack. Yeah, no diet of hardtack There’s got to be more than that get some pemmican from the natives perhaps Perhaps mark we need to after this we should do an we should do an aesthetic live frame talks Time Valuing people’s time Time telling your own time beauty You want to do these are all things? No, no We do time energy and attention in three live streams Sure, we’ll try maybe not these but yeah I think that would work and then we can launch the wisdom t company at the same time. It’d be great Right, right. Can I ask marks some questions about my matrix document? Just I gotta go soon. Yeah, I actually gotta go myself. It’s 20 to 12, but It’s always great talking to you. Great to see you. Thank you for showing up See y’all loves your comments on batman and judge too. See y’all later Do you should we go offline or is this fine? I Aesthetic of muppets I Cast down it at least that’s fine, but we can keep talking on here after I shut the broadcast down. So Let’s uh, yeah, let’s do a closing judgment thing and yeah, I think that I’m being told the monologue is excellent again. That’s good. I like to hear that even if it’s a lie. It’s okay. I I like hearing good things I’d rather have honest feedback, but I’ll settle for any feedback I could get so I’m cheap and easy. Um Yeah, I think judgment’s important. We stayed largely on topic even with claire here, which is amazing I had to agree with her like half a dozen times which just looks great And uh, I appreciate everybody’s engagement. I think it’s good judgment to watch these videos to understand this We started with discernment if you didn’t see the sermon video from last week, please watch We’re going to judge. Uh, sorry, we’re gonna do action next time. So the other side of judgment And that’s going to be wrapped up an agency And that should be fun should be next week. I can’t guarantee these streams, but i’ll be back home Unless the traveling just wipes me out which is always a Hanging over my head as a possibility Um, I will see you next week and at some point as um, Sally joke points out Uh, we’ll do the time energy and attention Uh streams. I think that’s actually a really good idea and we will talk about the aesthetics of muppets at the same time Uh, yes, or maybe yes, it’ll be called aesthetics of muppets and we’ll do a whole series. That’s great Uh, you’re utilizing the legion of muppets as sally points out Yes, the sequel maybe so that’s what’s on the books I really appreciate everybody staying this long Um, i’m going to end the broadcast uh Parting parting shots there jesse tone Tone when you’re judging what should tone? Watch what you emphasize Your judgment may be right but the manner in which you deliver it matters and that’s why I think the conversation with claire Was more beneficial today because the tone between you two was better and you maintained that tone and so It’s okay to judge but Maybe watch what you embody and the tone in the manner in which you do your judgments If that’s fair to say excellent Well done. Thank you Much. I’m going to end the broadcast for everybody else And we’re going to chat I’m just gonna oh if I could only click on things