Live Navigating Patterns! Open Mic! (ZSFRXQeEF2Q)

https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=ZSFRXQeEF2Q

videos and videos through the we are live and we are navigating those patterns. I’ve noticed a lot of weird things today over the past week. I know I wasn’t around last week so why weren’t you around last week? What was going on with navigating patterns? Well I had a visitor. So that in-person experience with Father Eric sort of over the need to do live streams. But I’m here now. I’m gonna try this and see how many people join. People are gonna be welcome to join. I’ll open it up here in a bit. But yeah it’s been a strange time. There’s a lot of weird stuff going on. There’s a lot of talk about Gnosticism lately all at once from different places. There’s a lot of Gnosticism going on. There’s a lot of political intrigue. Popped into Van der Kley’s little Q&A late late late late right at the end. Now listen to the beginning and the end. In the middle I had to shop. Food. Food. No Van der Kley on. Too hungry. But yeah I mean it’s it’s been a weird time. There’s been a lot of a lot of zeitgeist going on. And that’s sort of what I want to touch on is the Gnosticism. So Manuel and I did a stream with Nick from the Discord who we haven’t talked to in forever. We talked on that one. He used to hang out in the Discord all the time and now he doesn’t. It was a great talk on this Gnosticism and the cults and the patterns. And you know I keep seeing people talking about these patterns and then saying well there’s just a long line through history. It’s just a pattern guy. You don’t need the history. It’ll happen again anyway. Oh you don’t need this connection. Right? So a lot of people are getting confused like where’s the source? The beginning. Once we understand the beginning we can fix the thing and no no you you can’t. It’s not it’s not it’s not necessary either. It’s not necessary. You don’t need to know the beginning. There might not even be a beginning. It might it might have popped out of whole cloth. It might be emergent because maybe not all emergence is good. Maybe some emergence is bad. That could be. And this is where the problem comes in. These people are materialists. They like emergence. They think emergence is good and that’s a problem because emergence is not good. Emergence is a neutral thing that happens and emergence is only good when it happens near an emanation. Not just in a random place at a random time for a random amount of time. That’s not that’s not how it works. And people are deeply confused about this it seems. And they’re confusing the two things because they’re materialists. They’re like oh emergence then I have power and control over emergence because I am above emergence which is technically true. You are above all emergencies in some fashion. That is that is true. Right. But you’re below emanation. Because you’re between the two. You’re the thing between emanation and emergence that knits those two things together to form reality. And when we get confused when we don’t know what when we when we want to have control when we get confused when we want to be stuck in propositions right when we get stuck with this so-called propositional tyranny we run into problems. And you know one of the one of the interesting sorts of things that that that happened Father Eric first of all gave me this lovely book which I’m really enjoying. I haven’t finished it yet by any means. And I don’t understand most of the language because it’s a Catholic talking Christian stuff and I I don’t I don’t know. But the stuff I do understand is all meaning crisis. Like all of it all of its materialism turns into meaning crisis and therefore. So everything’s converging. It’s it’s coming together. These patterns are coming together. Right. And you know James Lindsay did this great video basically called the negation of reality which is a talk that he gave not too long ago. And he really put some of this stuff together. Now I think he goes too far again. He’s trying to this comes from here and that comes from there and this is the original tradition. Right. And all this sort of talk. And the problem that I have with that sort of talk is that again you don’t need the history to explain it. Honestly if you have an IQ of 110 you’ll get to hagel if you’re solipsistic. Like if you’re not already in a religious tradition and you become solipsistic or you go to the new plate next route or whatever they’re calling it this week is now third wave neoplatonism. It’ll be fourth wave neoplatonism before you know it. Don’t worry. That’s what happens when you identify something that doesn’t have an identity. It keeps changing. When you go down that that path when you go down the path of solipsism you’re going to get to hagel by yourself. You don’t need to read hagel. Now what’s gonna happen is later on you’re gonna find hagel and go aha hagel and he was really smart so I must be really smart and maybe hagel and I are the only two people that ever figured this out and so you’re not doing yourself any favors you know and that’s the problem right or they find Marx yeah Karl Marx was right because I came to the same but unfortunately to reproduce Marx you probably only need about 85 maybe that’s about it Marx’s objection nothing Marx said was particularly intelligent honestly I don’t know why people even go I’m like really like did you read his stuff because just the quotes alone will tell you he’s an idiot he’s just an idiot he’s an actual idiot though like really stupid like everybody his family thought so like everybody thought he was an idiot they thought he could have applied himself and been better but that’s true for all of us that’s Jordan Peterson’s message right you’re not who all you could be you could be better so yeah I mean and you know let me know about the hat because I thought it was a good addition but maybe it’s not I am a pirate captain navigating live patterns so definitely definitely put something in the comments about that so that I know if I’m on track or not with with my hat yeah I mean this Gnosticism this this thing that we come into where we’re just rejecting everything and you see it everywhere people are just rejecting everything right they’re rejecting I’m gonna reject every proposition that I don’t come up with I’m gonna reject your idea I’m gonna tell you you’re wrong it’s like okay except I just restated somebody else’s position so you’re arguing with them not me and I do that people all the time but yeah you’re arguing somebody else these aren’t my ideas I’m not claiming them it’s like now you’re not you’re not playing that game and and that’s really important to know that there’s a method out there of getting around the postmodern so-called deconstruction which it’s not it’s destruction ethos and that method really is to just say no you’re not doing that no I don’t identify with that no these aren’t my ideas because if you don’t own the ideas they can’t attack you and look I’m not I’m not claiming big new ideas it’s not that’s not my claim I’m claiming you can come to the same ideas as people in the past and maybe you can but not all of them and that’s where the problem is people want to be able to come to all of them and then synthesize them all which was a bigger problem and then come to an ultimate answer which is bigger problem because there isn’t an ultimate answer not not on your timescale anyway you’re just a little tiny flea on the back of a huge timeline that’s that’s already a hundred thousand years old or so you know of evolution if you know if you want to go that route and you know you’re never gonna be that smart sorry you’re not gonna be smarter than the sum total of the people who come before you just kind of like a limitation one of many and that’s what people are rallying against is limitation itself like I don’t want to let me teach I got the one argument on the discord server recently with and this kid who basically decided that axioms were no good and you couldn’t use them and it was all mere propositions and I pointed out to him well it’s all their propositions you can’t make any statements because you can always have a proposition against the proposition and then you have no way to adjudicate it and he agreed in principle that and this wasn’t even my argument this is somebody else’s arguing with him he agreed in principle that that axiom that the concept of axioms could exist but he still didn’t like it because there wasn’t any way to test the axiom it’s like well there is a way to test an axiom but you would have none of it he just didn’t want to acquiesce he didn’t want to give in he didn’t want to submit to a starting point right which is the denial of creation I don’t want to submit to a starting point I don’t want to submit that I was born into something that predates me and that constrains me I don’t want to submit that’s all they’re saying that’s the neoplatonic trap that’s the occult trap that’s the Gnostic trap it’s all the same thing right they all lead sort of in and out of one another right Gaelian dialectic is this ridiculous thing and like all this stuff is insane it’s just insane and it’s crazy talk like the good news is it’s crazy talk you could ignore it all and still live your life how do I know this because most people never read Hegel and they’re fine I like it’s not that hard and Pervaiki did this talk that I just finished with this Orthodox bishop what a talk I mean amazing he just absolutely slaughtered neoplatonism I mean just took it out to the woodshed and that was the end of neoplatonism you know and and John was starting to see that you know he said this in the conversation like oh the Eastern Orthodox tradition has a bunch of tools to address the Western traditions don’t have yeah and it has a way out of the you know out of the propositional tyranny yeah it does and the bishop was pointing to all sorts of stuff like no no if that arguments been settled and this is another like this is a problem even John Pervaiki who’s brilliant and super well-read hadn’t read that argument didn’t know that had been solved this is the problem of philosophy there’s so much philosophy out there you don’t know what things have been solved a lot of the things you think are like open-ended questions have been resolved actually and you just don’t know it because you haven’t read all the stuff and you’re probably not able to read all the stuff well read and comprehend right and understand the inferences in it’s too much it’s and it’s unnecessary you can live without any of it I promise you you can live without any of it and that’s the funny part to me is that you know people don’t I don’t realize that they have you know they have no idea but yeah you don’t you don’t need it you just don’t need this philosophical stuff so yeah anybody who wants to join you don’t have to talk about that we can talk about whatever it comes to mind assuming that I can help you maybe I can’t talk about it because I’m worrying about it that happens but yeah I’m your pirate Capitano so El Capitano you hopefully by now you all realize that I love to mix metaphors and play with different ideas learn to draw whoops learn to draw live on my stupid whiteboard and you can watch my drawing get worse over time because it’s not gonna get any better yeah I mean there’s so much there’s so much here there’s so much here in this Gnosticism but I do think people rediscover it I don’t think it’s new and and I think it is a perennial problem of solipsism when you start to think you can do it all yourself you’re gonna end up a Gnostic you’re gonna end up trapped in your own self-referencing circular arguments in your own sort of godlike oh I can be and that’s one of the things about Neoplatonism that I think is so dangerous is that it does tell you that you can be godlike and I you know and yeah the argument is why you can’t increase your enemy man it’s like I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing like the the way Neoplatonism or these the legend you know Platonism seems to talk about these things is in terms of something that you yourself can do as a state that you can acquire through practice okay and I think the Christian story is that godliness or godhood or oneness with God or whatever is something that you acquire through participation with the world with yourself and with others right whereas Neoplatonism is just you and yourself or you in the small group of elite initiatives or whatever and I think that’s a fundamental difference like and so it looks like the community aspect is there but actually you’re doing it kind of by yourself whereas with Christianity you know and I know works in deeds and all that nonsense but your mode of participation in the world with people who aren’t Christians matters right and so it’s not this personal you and six other people in the magical grove of philosophy or whatever you know helping each other attain enlightenment it’s not that right it’s all about this participation in the general world and what you do in nature matters how you slaughter your animals to eat matter like all this stuff makes a difference and yeah you know maybe maybe the the Jewish people have it right when they’re like oh we’re gonna bless our food and the factories and all that and then we’re gonna eat kosher maybe the Christians need to do the same thing maybe all the food that gets slaughtered needs to be prayed upon first right and and and you know the sacrifice needs to be given up and then maybe eating Christian meat would be a thing right or Christian eggs or whatever that would be hysterically funny that would get us out of an ostracism because an ostracism is ultimately just you cooperating with yourself by yourself and then you’re doing that with the help of others oh here’s some trouble all right here I’m good to see you how’s it how’s it going it’s going great I can’t hear you man is that me why can’t I hear you yeah I’m doing good man I just saw you get on randomly building the enterprise I got I’m building this like replica of the enterprise on it’s like a little weird Minecraft game so hi how you doing that’s great how you doing with the how long you’ve been working on the replica like is it years no years yeah yeah just like I’m doing each room of the enterprise and I’m just like doing all the crew quarters I already did the sick bay I did transport a room I made my own spin on it I did the warp core that took me like a year to do the engineering section I’m doing a rathacon enterprise like with the blue deflector dish because that’s yeah yeah the cons the best the best movie so yeah oh dude I got some really cool news since you’re a fan of that I’m gonna meet Captain Kirk next week yeah and he’s doing this thing where he’s going on tour just by himself I guess with his family and he’s gonna watch the wrath of Kong with us and answer questions and stuff so that’s pretty wild it’s coming to West Virginia of all places you did cool follow him on Facebook so I saw that he was doing a tour and doing that going to places and answering questions thing that’s awesome yeah I’m psyched I’m glad I got a ticket it’s like all sold out now so yeah for you I’m jealous I’m gonna go to something like that anyway but it sounds cool if I if I had someone to go with I might go but I’m not gonna go by myself yeah I got yeah I got my girlfriend coming and then my best friends probably coming to so great yeah fantastic excellent for you yeah well then that you know how are you doing what I saw I caught your Gnosticism talk it was really cool yeah I did it was good yeah I thought well Nick is interesting and yeah yeah yeah so every day we’d have hours hours of conversation with him ah cool man I talked to him I think maybe once or twice I crossed paths with him before I think yeah he’s a cool dude I’m glad to see everybody kind of coming over here and talking and doing some podcasts from from the old the old days everybody used to get in there and talk and I hope they come back but hey they’re over here now you’re doing it man yeah there’s there’s linchpins and when you take out the linchpins because you don’t value them correctly then things fall over but yeah cuz they’re convinced that they know how the world works and that there’s no interest yeah well there are there’s certain people that people like to be around I you know like you say linchpins take all that out everything it’s kind of like in the side of the hill yeah he’ll is gonna be gone by the end of the year it’s they don’t want it right they want to believe that they’re just like things just floating out there and that they just emerge magically it’s like no none of that actually happens not paying attention to the world is that what you guys were kind of talking about yesterday like this emergent stuff I was hearing you go on and and today earlier on Vanderklae stream I keep trying to explain listen to what people are saying and then that that Peter Peterson guy what I like him but he just can’t set emergence I’m like dude you’re talking about emergence you can’t the world is and then I go you know these people keep talking about emergence they’re not talking about emanation at all and they go yeah you can’t just talk about emination without talking about emergence bark I’m like yeah but I didn’t so that come from the Daniel schmockton burger guy cuz I heard him go on and on about emerging order like four years ago I he’s I mean they’re all Gnostics they all arrive at emergence differently but it’s not it’s an old word it’s an old term like it’s not this is the thing it’s none of this is new this is so this talk that Vervecki did with the Orthodox Eastern Orthodox bishops for Vakey was like well y’all there’s this problem and I forget the formulation for the stupid problem it’s it’s not even a problem but whatever he’s a huge problem and the bishops like yeah that was answered by this guy in this book like in the you know whenever the way back and it’s like yeah you just haven’t read the book dude that’s all like you think this is an unsolved problem because you don’t know all the things that’s all it’s not an unsolved problem so yeah it’s this is the same thing over and over there oh I’ve never heard emergence before it must be brand new no agregore no all old all old stuff not resurrecting old stuff so all the people talking about like the Big Bang coming out at absolutely nothing or Gnostics is that what you say no because so guess where the Big Bang theory comes from it comes from a monk oh yeah it’s not a observatory guy was it the the guy I can’t write buddy he’s trying to explain ex nihilo and it’s just like look it’s you cannot use language to explain the thing that created language it’s it’s really that’s it like you’re just trying to break out of a container that you can’t break out out you know you’re a fish in it in an aquarium and you’re bumping up against the walls of the aquarium going aha I know the whole aquarium no you don’t you don’t know the bottom you don’t know how far off the bottom of whatever the aquariums in you are right you don’t know or the bottom is you don’t know how high the water is you might be able to guess but that’s assuming it’s not moving and the height is consistent you know there’s all these assumptions and then you can’t know the whole aquarium all at once from outside the aquarium when you’re stuck inside the aquarium and maybe you can jump out of the aquarium but that doesn’t give you the whole aquarium like everybody goes I can see a piece and therefore I can see the whole thing and it’s like no you cannot yeah then they don’t like that it’s it’s like the petals of a flower aren’t supposed to know about the roots in the ground it’s not their thing you know we’re like the petals were sprouted out of something and they can’t but they can’t it’s not an option that’s available to you you’re bad news you can’t do that good news you don’t need to you don’t need your life like an idiot and everything will be fine why yeah yeah I’m picking up what you’re putting down man yeah that does seem to be a big problem with people they just can’t let it go you know they want to yeah yeah yeah the indivisible thing you know they argued about the Greeks argued about that in the atom like you need to quit worrying about cutting up everything in a smaller and smaller things there’s a there’s a point where it stops and they called it the atom and they’re like this is it but now we got all this quantum mechanics at the same time of all this cultural stuff and multiverse things and you notice that in a lot of your comic books and your kind of shows like yeah I was Star Trek Discovery and it’s this multiverse sort of future path I’m like dude like what is the story you’re trying to tell here like that’s the that’s the pattern right the first thing they did was break down time and you had all the time paradoxes and time travel and time time time time time right and then you find out that oh well that doesn’t fix anything you need to split the dimensions off otherwise it doesn’t work rationally and then you get the multiverse right and so now it’s all about the multiverse and what I would have done in the multiverse and how this would have been different can I swap my you know that’s even in Rick and Morty and stuff right yeah multiverse theme and it’s just like you guys are all crazy Gnostics going through the Gnostic pattern you’re just going through a very well-understood easy to grasp pattern that’s very common in history and yeah I go went through it too big deal Marx went through it too big deal they you know so what other people also went through the same pattern that anybody with a moderately not you know not too low IQ can go through right and it’s it’s the same pattern that you see in a three-year-old that’s what’s so funny to me it’s like you’re literally recreating a three-year-old argumentation the argumentation of a three-year-old child right in front of me fantastic I’m very happy for you maybe you can graduate and get the school someday but right at the moment you just sound like a three-year-old and they’re in rebellion they’re just in rebellion yeah it used to be like a fun little motif to you know like I’m watching the old school Star Trek because you know I’m thinking what questions I asked Captain Kirk I want to ask him something about the original studio or even I was thinking maybe tech war because nobody gives that enough love now that everybody’s addicted to opioids that’s a great book series to get into but I digress so I was watching mirror mirror you know when they go they do the transporter thing and there’s a storm and somehow they’re in another dimension where Spock has a beard and everybody is hailing Hitler on the Enterprise like what so that was like kind of a fun little multiverse sort of thing but then they didn’t talk about it until you know Deep Space Nine or I think they yeah that was the only other one they really talked about yeah so it’s just like kind of a one-off kind of fun oh what if Hitler won World War two the Enterprise would be evil and I was like okay cool but now it’s become this like super hyper obsession of oh dude like what if um this and that and what if we were blue and upside down and our eyes were oranges or something I don’t know I was watching Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness and there’s all this wacky sort of shit in there um Gnosticism I talked to somebody was it yeah T4 I was talking to him about it and he he went deep into it but anyway it’s become a crazy thing just totally off the rails we used to have stories you know centered around something moral stories I forget what he called like there’s a name for it that Gene Roddenberry was like yeah these are like moral plays these are the moral players yeah okay that’s what these are this has a point at the end there it cabinet Kirk’s in the bridge of the Enterprise like giving you a recap and like so I guess we learned that we’re evil and good ha ha ha ha and then the credits role and you’re like well and that’s the thing it wasn’t it wasn’t unconstrained right they only swapped one aspect of the personality and and that was done and this is it yeah I’d still make this I’m gonna make this argument forever modern science fiction is ancient Greek philosophy and it’s the same thing they’re using an absurdity an obvious absurdity okay yeah like even classic Star Trek is totally absurd and it’s stated as absurd it’s it’s they’re axiomatically stating we don’t have money because we don’t need money and we don’t need energy or food yeah yeah and matter and replicators we’ve got an ad right they just explained it away with with what would now you would call a MacGuffin or something which is ridiculous right which is fine those are absurd axioms used for the purpose of highlighting a philosophical point that’s what they are that’s what they’re for right that’s what that’s the purpose of them and if you don’t know that you get confused and then when you when you engage in that way that’s that’s the point at which you know you realize oh they’re doing this to give you a moral valence or engage you in in in some in some thought experiment that isn’t related to reality but reveals something about reality yeah and we watch the old Star Trek you know and the new one but now that I’m older you know I really look at it like they’re they’re portraying angels up in the enterprise like what would heaven be if not antimatter reactors replicators you never get cold I mean it’s so it’s like show it’s like a dream of like hey we’re positing if we could take care of this this and this humans would be a lot more like angels and this is what our stories would be like they’d be different stories and about overcoming that animal part or however they were the energy and Roddenberry wanted to coin it like the savage side of humanity is satiated when we figure out the antimatter the warp drive seems to be the crux of the whole magical portal into this other world where we’re better people hey what’s up Andrew we’ve got a new new dude going on in here but uh I lost my train of thought I’ll let I’ll let Andrew say some stuff and you’re on mute better this would help folks so I imagine yeah now you know we can hear you more clearly yeah okay well let me enlarge my screen so I can see you this is cool wow I’ve never done this before as you might imagine oh well welcome not surprising to you on mark I’m doing a lot of listening so continue okay all right so yeah Star Trek any matter angels on angels and demons where was I going with all this I don’t know oh yeah moral place so that’s kind of some fun stuff to play with you know I can’t recall like older stories sort of being like hey what if humanity had this what would we be like this this kind of I don’t know what if thing and then that dovetails into the multiverse stuff I think is what I’m trying to connect here that’s what I’m trying to say the dream world of possibilities of great wonderful things that we should strive for compared to like mental masturbation that results in nothing no no future is resulting in the positing of all of these multiversal musings it’s just kind of pointless right yeah it doesn’t have a direction or a point or a purpose it’s more to exemplify this idea of total freedom from all constraint yeah yeah and that sucks and it’s not entertaining at all um and people like reality it doesn’t help you in reality you know like classic Star Trek man they have it really helps in reality and I’ve been watching Andromeda again for like before yeah yeah I wouldn’t want to rewatch that myself too it’s a good show it’s great meaning crisis I’m just sitting here going meaning crisis meaning crisis philosophical conundrum paradox rip resolution right because they show you the thing about the show is they’re not hiding the ball every episode begins with a quote with a philosophical sounding quotes some of them are fake or I think almost all of them are fake right and then there’s a race called the Nietzscheans I know I’ve got to say the Nietzscheans bro right and the Magog eat themselves literally eat themselves to be born it’s so awesome it’s like that’s the bad guys how do you know they’re parasitic yes not hard and and the way things get resolved is in action yes right the questions come up the propositions are there the resolution is in the action and it’s often not explained it’s like oh I’m glad you I’m glad you made the right decision yeah what decision he didn’t say anything he took an action or she yeah it’s it’s fantastic it is that right mix too right it’s got strong female characters but they’re not you know overpowering right there’s support there’s they’re nurturing their supportive you know and that’s what you know what’s her name Becca the blonde girl like a Valentine yeah she she gets with the program eventually she quits being such a hard-ass all the time and integrates into a community better you know is more yeah a woman by the end of the series you know so yeah you’re totally right on all that man yeah and even the the ship you know becomes more less cold and calculated and warmer you know there’s a lot of character development and then that little purple chick she turns into like some transcendent monk you know gold gold yeah yeah turns old and gets you know kind of like hotter and not as like like a I don’t know child well yeah he’s a child and then she’s an adult yeah then she’s an adult and she got a more you know stern to me stoic demeanor and does everything figured out so I thought that was a very interesting inversion there too because that’s like the scarecrow finding his brain and I don’t and and and see this is one of those probably you know not not not to throw shade on you sir because you know I love you but this is the problem it’s not an inversion it’s a development from childhood out into adulthood and people want to ask it is the it’s not these are normal processes that you’re supposed to go supposed to start out as a baby and then you’re with no agency and then you’re supposed to gain agency slowly over time and then as you get older you’re supposed to lose some of your agency again like this is a no it’s not an inversion I mean there is an inversion it’s and then they go into the thing and then they’re adult you’re right yeah the bad choice of words but you know what I was talking about no no I got it exactly but I think I think and that was one of the things John was talking about with this Orthodox Bishop the other thing the language is not helping us here the language is really screwing this up it screws up but we go oh yeah it’s an inversion no it’s a regular process of development it’s a regular problem it’s a development as you said yeah but yeah reminds me of the Wizard of Oz kind of you know oh yeah you’re a leading part into that in the in Andromeda yeah yeah yeah yeah that whole theme is there the theme of development yeah the Wizard of Oz is great right because everybody likes something and they’re looking for that one piece to make them whole very neoplatonic even though neoplatonism doesn’t exist yeah it’s it’s it’s they got that flavor of the parts versus the whole yeah absolutely what do you think Andrew do you have favorite science fiction or favorite movie or show that that you really like I really like Andromeda and now that you’re talking about it I don’t remember much detail but I really liked which is named the you know the captain Dylan Hunt yeah right yeah go ahead so I got it right I’d seen him as what Atlas Hercules right Hercules and I thought it was really interesting that he took on that role he’s a Christian well you know that doesn’t really surprise me a whole lot no no he he he talks about being conservative in Hollywood and how hard that is and stuff you know it’s really right right right and he even as Hercules he was clearly doing different things with power and strength and and exercising them in a non-dominating way so it’s really interesting to see him in the role as captain which is kind of absolute authority and and still conveying these messages of from how strength and power does not necessarily equate with dominance yeah and he had long hair yeah more importantly says the long-haired hippie freak in the woods yeah he’s the long-haired long-haired captain Babylon five was all so one of my favorites yeah I love the spinny ships where they got spin to get gravity centrifugal force is so cool in Babylon five yeah though mega destroyers and the Babylon five itself it spun around to keep gravity I was so cool that last best hope for people for Pete’s right and it turned out to be the central battle station in the shadow war like I like that sure ready at the end of the line I love that yeah and I didn’t know for a while because I was a kid at the time that Babylon five was first and DS 9 totally ripped him off tried to try to get that full game I didn’t know that but I really did like DS 9 because they they took the same problem in different directions I did the Ferengi were really a hoot and and the security officer who was a shape-shifter now there is an irony you know there is an irony you would you would never expect a shape-shifter to be a person of integrity yeah exactly that’s right he he kind of reminded me of data like with his journey to be like more like people but not quite yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah right and of course go to catch oh wow he was proud yeah right and and I could you know he was a person who could really take on a an aggressively almost apparently cruel delight in in doing what he did but at the same time he had these moments of what I thought was magnanimous generosity and I found myself wondering well is this magnanimous generosity without an underlying agenda or is it is it what it looks like so and of course without doubt captain captain what Cisco right Cisco commander right commander Cisco was great and and one of my favorite chapters in that was well I think it was actually a series of episodes in which he was dreaming about being in an insane asylum writing on the walls and the book that he was writing was DS 9 yeah and of course the the in the dream he was in the 1950s when science fiction was just getting off the ground as a genre in its own right and the publication that he was working for thought he was crazy yeah and that’s how he got himself into the institution but but it’s a tremendous multi-level leveled commentary on how the science fiction that started off in the 50s contemporaneous with the civil rights movement yeah has been a major change influence yeah yeah yeah I think that’s right I think that’s right I think it’s important and and and that’s why I like what they did with the you know with right I think that he was reflecting and that you know reflects sort of the if you want to go all Tom Holland Dominion about it reflects the Christian ethos you know as it matures through time right where we’re grasping for that equality within the religious substructure to sort of leak into the illegal system right and and that goes too far right all that stuff but yeah that’s it that’s really the issue is is that whole problem is what do we do about the about incorporating our religious values into our political system and how do we do that how do we get the law change and how do we write injustices because that’s that’s part of the issue and there’s always new injustices and and that’s the issue is always a new a new problem to just sort of fix the interesting thing about that stream of influence and events is basically people could put up all kinds of frightful resistance against the political expression of civil rights but it was a lot more difficult to resist the influence of science fiction yeah well and storytelling is the way you change people’s minds because they can see the connection to themselves because they can be characters in the story and play out all those different characters or some of the different characters sure I have an interesting story on that that’s a really cool you you you talk about that Andrew is I’ve been recently watching all the old Star Trek episodes and I learned that when it got canceled it had three seasons and got canceled because some new executive came in there he’s like Star Trek what’s that let’s get it out of here let’s get you know dragnet in here or something and so everybody got really livid and they wrote all these letters tried to get it back going and then they started having Star Trek conventions to try yeah got it that’s what started conventions all together sci-fi conventions then comic book conventions was canceled and they tried to be like well we love it and then they made their own uniforms they made their own little phasers they made their own models and then AMT had some models and they kit bash kit bashing came from Star Trek AMT models really wanted this version and that version and like make their perfect enterprise so they got super obsessed with getting this AMT version and that one and bashing them together and so a lot of stuff came out of that desire that you’re talking about there Andrew that it won over like sci-fi came through and it just exploded this idea as I was saying earlier these moral plays creating this situation where humanity could possibly be close to angels close to being the best that we could be whoa that’s what grabbed everybody I don’t know what it’s turned into today but back then it had a really good solid message that was trying to communicate that this path forward and what is the message yeah what was incredible about it is not only did they dream up these technologies they literally created the cell phone that idea came from Star Trek yeah yeah yeah yeah I even have teleporters like quantum teleporters they can teleport particles groups of particles like that Star Trek shit man and the war always led the way near him yeah always always I am actually comes out of science fiction science fiction club on Clubhouse that I used to attend that shut down that we would talk about this all the time and and Hollis who ran it would regularly ask you know what do you what do you think which drives which I’m like no it’s very clear the stories drive the science it’s not the other way around and this is Peterson’s point with Mervaki narrative comes first yeah I come second but I think they missed the point in in Star Trek all the human problems were there despite free energy and free food yes absolutely and people missed that like that is not going to solve your problems you have to talk about it all the time because one of the starship captains goes crazy and starts like using his phasers to become a god on a primitive world like so yeah they talk about it constantly and I love how they talk about it they’re like yeah we have all these great wonders and starships but we’re still savages inside if we don’t try to do something to take it over and I think that was the point of Spock he really was a bridge with a lot of that type of thinking because he was half human and half Vulcan and he had to struggle with this whole conundrum constantly of yeah you’re savages but you know when he has to bang when he needs to go see his girlfriend then he’s he’s that savage again and and amok time or yeah that doesn’t mean the beginning of season 2 that was a really good exploration of that whole philosophy and mindset yeah exactly yeah yeah no that that’s that’s really important but I think people miss these messages yeah I miss read some of this stuff they’re not really getting like the matrix is a terrible story in some sense the matrix yeah yeah yeah look we want to be free we want to be misfits totally free misfits in a grubby dirty slimy tube that runs through not the dead city the sewers of a dead city and we want to eat food that tastes like snot to be like it’s like cyber roots to be free it’s like I’ll plug me in I’ll be a battery I’m good I’ll eat the steak and be a bad I love steak that’s all you have to say to me it’s steak and I’m whatever you need it’s done it’s done well well you know how that movie that movie roots you know move moved a lot of people yeah the matrix is all races of humanities roots it’s like the thing that tried to get to all of us at the same time if that makes sense that’s really astute yeah I like that observation that’s a good observation oh thanks man I just it just popped in my head I don’t know I wanted to say that’s how it that’s how it works yeah among the theme songs for the Star Trek world I think the DS 9 theme was my favorite and second to that was the Voyager theme you know Voyager was the one that got lost in Homer’s Odyssey but a woman yeah right exactly yeah precisely right yeah world’s worst actress though I didn’t like she really had some problems with the the other cast members I did not know that Voyager is the only Star Trek show I have not seen all the episodes I’ve seen all of DS 9 all of TNG and TOS I liked Enterprise we’re doing terrible I was I watched a couple episodes and I was like I can’t I can’t yeah I met Chakotay in Redstone Arsenal Alabama at a Waffle House during a Star Trek convention it’s all I remember I was like seven or eight and I think Harry Kim was with him and a few other people that were like hanging out going to the different thing restaurants where all the convention goers were the Trekkies and Trekkers and they just walk in with their uniform and phasers but like they said something like you know I’m picking up a strong signs of waffles here lieutenant and everybody laughs it was awesome but that’s all I know about Voyager is that they like waffles that was the highlight of my of my of my visit when father Eric came down at one point went to Waffle House in like a year and a half this is great let’s do it let’s eat some waffles baby yeah the highlight of my transition from high school to college was 2001 let’s do it let’s eat some waffles baby good evening the highlight of my transition from high school to college was 2001 she’s playing the YouTube while she’s on so we’re hearing the echo oh sorry the highlight of my transition from high school to college was 2001 I like your porch though that’s a really cool porch no it’s gorgeous what are you hearing? your YouTube is playing I think how can my YouTube be playing? I like your porch oh I don’t know it might be you might need a headset maybe it’s making you echo your YouTube is playing I think what do you mean my YouTube is playing? I like your porch this is so bizarre this is weird I feel like we’re in a house of mirrors but we sound okay did your browser have several tabs open? yeah it’s running in another tab somewhere on your browser I do that all the time did you fix it? browser have several tabs open? nope she did not fix it oh my goodness that’s too funny yeah YouTube’s just opened somewhere and it’s running I usually I have to go in and play it she’s on an iPad oh it’s running in one of the tabs in the iPad then help me because I have no idea how to do anything ever you okay all right we’ll help you hold on hold on is it is it shout out Redstone yeah I don’t have an iPad so I don’t well no I have a where’s my my little iPad’s not here I do have an iPad but it’s in the other room what? I don’t have an iPad there’s me saying I don’t have an iPad again but I’m not on an iPad what do you want a computer? what? what? it’s like it’s it’s like it’s slow like it’s in the past five seconds I’m on my computer huh that’s very strange it’s a tab a browser tab that’s running YouTube it’s like it’s slow like it’s do you have satellite internet? maybe that’s weird no no that’s the delay from YouTube to stream from stream area to YouTube it’s about it’s about five seconds yeah okay yeah Ethan was wrong Ethan lied to us Elizabeth so if you think he’s your friend you’re wrong he’s just just misleading us on purpose I called him brilliant earlier today so now I can now I can make fun of him the rest of the day that’s the rule let’s see if she fixed it yet she looks like she’s got this confused look on her face the browsers have tabs you’ve got a you’ve got a tab open playing YouTube what tab were you looking at when you were watching the stream? that’s what you have to close looks like she’s got a confused look on her face the browsers have tabs you’ve got a you’ve got a tab open that’s too funny whoa it’s like a sound mirror that’s really strange it is we used to play with that all the time I had a roommate who did um oh she’s gone she left us see you get she’ll fix it she’s figured out yeah so yeah Andrew you were talking about the theme of Voyager so what yeah you said that was your favorite you mean like that was my second favorite my first favorite was DS9 DS9 well uh what were the highlights for you in Voyager? what was it about that made it your second favorite? hold on hold on I just want to make one quick statement I’m glad that Voyager wasn’t your favorite because then you’d get kicked off the street because I’m not putting up the page anyway yeah what was the scenario what’s your highlights of Voyager that you like? yeah I want to hear it yeah my highlight we’re on different streams here because our short visitor kind of messed our minds in terms of continuity but just before she was coming on I was saying the highlight the transitional highlight between for me between high school and college was 2001 Space Odyssey oh okay oh that’s what you meant okay yeah right for one thing the scene with the shuttle approaching the space station with the background music of the Blue Danube Waltz was a mind blower for me yeah I had just had so many mind blowers it’s hard to keep track of yeah just before that scene there’s this battle between the monkeys ape troops and they’re going at it and one ape picks up could have I think a thigh bone you know a thigh bone he throws up a bone and it turns into a sphyncia and it turns into that yeah it turns into the shuttle wow that just communicates so much on so many levels it does especially when you’re on acid you’re like whoa that’s exactly what I thought yeah really what’s with the drugs no it was great well I can understand what he’s talking about but truth is I did not need acid or anything to get really blown away by a number of the scenes and of course you know the transition going through the monoliths in space outside of Jupiter in orbit around Jupiter blown away by a number of the scenes and that corridor scene that’s really great when you click on that link it opens another tab and it’s the tab you were on before that you need to close that’s the problem yeah there’s a little line of tabs at the top and you close them out no dice she’s hold on let me try one of mine I muted her on purpose yeah because we had sound deckings yeah right no you don’t see tabs I’m trying to find a way to show you I don’t ever use this computer because we had sound deckings hold on no you don’t see tabs see this so when you close it I don’t ever use this computer I don’t ever use this computer I never use a computer so I don’t know and I’m on my computer see how it has tabs at the top yeah so the one you have open there’s one probably over here that’s running that’s running the copy of where do I go okay just tell me he’s got a little picture up there he’s showing you okay just let me look I’m going to focus yeah look at the little bit of you he’s got a little picture up there he’s showing you I’m going to go to the other one and close it click it closed the glass is my help it says when it says YouTube no click it closed there’s nothing that says YouTube it says it says it doesn’t say this live navigating patterns open mic there’s nothing that says YouTube hang on wait wait oh no yeah she clicked the wrong one oh no we’ll get her back she’ll figure it out has she been on before and it sounds good yeah she was on before she was on a couple weeks ago that’s weird she was on the seven hour stream the ridiculous one they asked me about that too I was like yeah I did a seven hour stream he’s like how did you do that I’m like no I it was other people helping me yeah just rocking and rolling talking that’s the issue that’s the the problem is Gnosticism causes browser lag and YouTube not the code that’s a good that’s a good diagnosis I think it’s sound I think it’s a sound diagnosis oh man it’s all circular logic so what is that you’re wearing over your right eye it’s a monocle a monocle you know like my cyber punk monocle that moves and everything wow does it actually do something yes it looks cool as fuck yeah it’s cooler than you alright hey is it doing things can you talk I’m going to bring it to you it’s working it’s working no echo I don’t know what I did I never know what I did I could care less it’s all going to disappear soon anyway they’re going to shut us all down and what will it matter no I’m not going to let that happen no no I’ll tell you the story so father Eric comes here water we’re using his rental car to go around town so I pair up my phone with the car and I was telling him like yeah it doesn’t work in my car anymore I don’t know why they changed something he’s like oh it’s working in my car it’s great you know doing the thing we’re going around and in like three days before he leaves it just stops working it just stops working and I was like I told you the software is all going to stop working nothing changed no one did anything different just stopped working would not pair with the car I mean it paired with the car but it wouldn’t do maps it would just do and it kept saying on the screen it’s like android auto use it on the screen and I’m like yeah but it’s not it’s not on the screen it just stopped working I’m like yeah software is all going to stop working that’s what’s going to happen yeah they had new these problems on the enterprise they didn’t have to update their warp core to make sure that it would work right you guys are you still talking about your your star trek is that what you’re talking about we can talk about whatever I’m just I’m nerding out because I’m meeting Kevin Kirk next week and as for now bring up whatever you want please I just wanted to okay did you did anybody listen to Martin Shaw talking to Nate about his storytelling he’s a he’s a I think he’s he lives in Ireland now but he’s a storyteller he’s been on I think he’s been on what other channels has he been on this Martin Shaw oh we talked to Jonathan Peugeot once actually no I don’t know the point I wanted to make it’s very cool he was talking about this character Kundri a feminine character who’s highly disturbing because I heard you guys talking about women as supportive Martin Shaw was talking about this character in I think in Celtic storytelling and she’s this strange ugly disturbing being and anyway I think we’re missing that I think we don’t have that in our world anymore and I think that’s one of the problems that we have I noticed when Peterson was talking to women recently when he was talking to the autistic lady Temple Brandon and then he was talking to an educator when she was British a woman who works a lot with teachers and I noticed that all of those women were really strong and he couldn’t interrupt them and it’s the first time I’ve ever heard anybody not be able to not not letting Peterson interrupt them so I this is just my thing I think we need I think the feminine voice I know we’ve talked about it last time Mark but I think the feminine voice is and I don’t mean the nice sweet I think there’s lots of different different expression if you will if you might say um yeah so that’s just my point I think What do you think about Candace Owen in light of what you’ve said? No no no that’s not what I I’m talking more about like um an ancient kind of character did anybody see the Banshee of Innis Sheeran the new movie um Martin Martin McDonough who did in Bruges did you see in Bruges? Yeah that’s a good movie Well the Banshee of Innis Sheeran there’s a Banshee right and the Banshee is this strange feminine character who foresees death coming and she’s sort of she’s very very peculiar it’s the Banshee is always in in Irish storytelling anyway um it’s that kind of idea of this strange the strange feminine you might say because because quite like I was going to say to Mark last time I have had it with Peterson and it’s overly compassionate all devouring mother because if I hear that one more time I won’t be able to manage it’s just ridiculous like that it’s much more complex than that so I this is what this is what I want to Oh Chad What’s up Chad? What up? Well you guys had a great conversation Is that from the Chad I know? Yeah. What’s up dude? Long time no see dude Yeah good to see you I just started step out for a smoke break and navigate some pageants Right on right on Well so it’s a good but it’s a good question right like the one that Neeram asked like well what’s why not Candace Owens because it’s not like there’s a lack of women out there so I’m trying to think what you’re talking about And look I agree Peterson and everybody makes this criticism Peterson’s not new Peterson doesn’t understand the feminine you just got this devouring mother which is very similar to the devouring father they just work differently they’re both overbearing archetypes Yeah but he doesn’t talk no he doesn’t talk enough about the devouring father it’s I read it in a Union author years ago it’s called the Zeus energy it’s the male energy that eats the children and why doesn’t the pronouns not the root I don’t know why this Union lady referred to it as the Zeus energy who knows but anyway yeah that’s the idea that’s the idea and so and that needs to be talked about a lot more this okay what are we going to call it? She called it Zeus energy and I don’t like to contradict anybody who knows more than I do this devouring father yeah but I like it maybe I’m wrong but I don’t like the word devouring either I think we should try to be a little bit sophisticated can’t we call it Zeus energy even though it’s not right? No because it’s it’s literally eating the children he eats his kids and then one of his kids bursts out like a xenomorph and then it was a girl too I think how is Kronos related to Zeus? Zeus’s dad oh Zeus’s dad okay Zeus fought that energy which was his father and Zeus consumed good energy I don’t know if good I don’t know that’s complicated so we’re talking about Kronos energy is that fair? yeah sure yeah okay because I think we’re missing the Kronos energy in a sense and the whole role of the feminine is so gone in our culture maybe even more so than the masculine like I think and again but it’s not the role right? You’re pointing to some specific aspect because there’s more than one role for femininity there’s the old Kron who passes on the ancient wisdom there’s the new innocent virgin there’s the mother there’s different types of mothers there’s lots of archetypes that are missing yeah but I’m not just talking about an archetype and I might be mixing up all the language but I’m talking about the energy the feminine energy that you see much more I know you’re not going to I consider energy and archetype interchangeable in my warped mind I kind of use the same thing why is he using the same thing on the devouring mother? sorry? there’s a simple reason why is he why is he only sticking to one part of the story? why Chad? tell me I think it’s because that’s the more pressing problem has been and I think like he if the other part comes about I think he addressed that too but I think he kind of addresses that in saying clean up your room get grounded somewhere all that stuff I think that is kind of addressing the Kronos problem yeah the wives are devouring the fathers to where the fathers can’t even be at Kronos that’s not even a fear we need to have right now the mothers are don’t tell my son what to do I will spoil him and devour him and make him useless and soft and the father is useless and soft so every all of the that’s I think you’re right Chad but he’s also addressing at the level of and he said it recently about the universities are for the mothers that never became mothers are playing on her I think he’s not stupid he’s just aiming very precisely at particular things this is what happens like when you read a book or something like you know it’s very sharply aimed at a particular topic not a bunch of could it be Peterson’s Shadow? It wouldn’t surprise me at all thank you I mean we all have a shadow that doesn’t mean he’s wrong that’s true well let me add point let me put this out for you I’ve done a little bit of younging and breeding over the decades and one of the things that I noticed most conspicuously about Peterson’s framework is it’s all statistical now there’s nothing wrong with that in itself and there’s a lot of value in that in terms of establishing a firm basis in contemporary scientific controversy I mean you know who watch real and what isn’t among those guys is the big question and so since nobody particularly disputes statistics that’s the field in which he’s established a bulwark as it were but there’s more to young than statistics for instance you’ve got the Peterson and the guys that he talks with talk about the big five personality groups but young talked about what eight personality configurations and they were the the back in the eighties when I was particularly focusing on educational psychology I was very impressed with the the way understanding the eight personality types that were being discussed among young scholars in Toronto in that decade they were helpful for understanding divergent learning styles and one of the big problems yeah there you go one of the big problems with our current educational system is it’s still cookie cutter one size fits all kind of proposition and if you if your learning style clashes with the prescribed cookie cutter orientation you’re out of luck you may have an IQ of 150 but yeah who cares but Andrew I mean you gotta be fair I can see the types that are there extroverted thinking, introverted thinking, extroverted feeling, introverted feeling right extroverted sensation, introverted sensation extroverted and introverted intuition yeah right yeah that’s you can’t have eight training things in school like you can’t it’s not an option it’s like well you use your cookie cutter it has to be like there’s no other way to do school no no that’s not true Mark at all a good teacher individualizes with each student it’s easy no no but then that’s not a school problem that’s a teacher problem if you want to talk about teacher problems that’s fine but there you go it’s a teacher problem it’s a teacher skill to be able to look at a classroom and have some idea about the divergence of right but to some extent but then you have to make school less about training and more about education yes that’s true also and I have a video about that training versus education what is it what what what’s the video what I want to know what the video is so that I can find it on your site give me a sec and I’ll post I’ll post the link okay I got three major things I want to say to what you said Andrew number one to you I say to Mark what about the Mimbari and their cat system like number two there there there is a solution being set forth by MIT they’re really doing a lot of stuff to like pick up the pieces of education and retrain people and find out where they fit best in a corporation because they just can’t keep people so they’re really hammering on solution for that Andrew you were talking about Peterson’s two statistics too statistical I think that’s because that’s the only way people are going to listen I think he knows he’s turned all these statistics into a bellegian he’s beaten people’s heads in with it I think you’re on target with regard to that that’s the big thing that I like about Peterson that he’s able to take his statistically based signs and he’s a here’s this this is this interview I did therefore gay people can’t be the future of humanity let Chad back in I’m going to hop off real quick but the thing is he’s doing though besides just the statistics the statistics are a tool he’s using but I think a more powerful tool he’s using is the tool of story and so what he does is what you hear in a meetings all the time you sit there and hear somebody tell this story or a story and then the person sitting in the chair listening starts to identify with pieces of a story and they start to see themselves and this is very effective because you can’t really lie with the identification you have with somebody’s story so he’s using these statistics and his cultural tropes and these very powerful potent stories to do something very very very particular which is sell the self-authoring program and sell the future authoring program and past authoring program and sell the know myself programs as well as try to tear down something that he thinks is very pernicious and poison so he’s just using these statistics because that’s his field but he’s doing the storytelling bit because he’s spent years and years and years doing I don’t know if you watched that recent video with his business partners but it’s fascinating this came out yesterday I don’t know if you guys saw that or not where he’s talking with the guys Bob and Daniel the guys who are his particular business partners he just he spent 10 years he and Bob spent 10 years 15 years trying to go to corporations and sell this product that was supposed to make output a lot more efficient and get rid of you know bad production and just it was going to technically make make them far richer these companies far richer and nobody would listen nobody cares they’re listening to that so in doing that you get to see what what is working and what is not working statistics don’t do shit but if you can sell a compelling story to somebody if you can sell somebody their own story that’s how you get individuals to buy you know a million that’s how good salesmen work good salesmen don’t work on facts they work on stories everybody knows this take any sales training course and that is the problem is that look Peterson knows his audience Peugeot said it in and I said this earlier earlier today in the in the Vanderklae Q&A live stream at the end when I hopped in Peugeot says this clearly Jordan Peterson has a way of talking to secularists because you can’t say God emanates from above their eyes glaze over but you have to rebuild their understanding step by step that you have to and the way you do that is first you say you know nothing right so you have to do that by pointing out things people don’t know the way I do it is that I find out where the flaw in their logic is and I take a hammer to it what right and then we start over from there right whatever different strategies right and then you build it back up and the way he entered and I have a video on this in fact I pasted the link in the in the chat earlier I have a video on this one of his tricks is that he adds the mythos in as the mystery right he says oh look at this right and then he brings you back historically because history man you can’t argue with history and then he he gets you forward he goes all the way back to the Sumerians gets you forward into Egypt and then you’re in the Bible because each history in the Bible meet in Egypt that’s where they meet and he’s very deliberate you know I don’t know how conscious it is it’s very deliberate though right and because he does that and he uses these propositional tools John was talking to that orthodox bishop he kept saying propositional tyranny and I’m like yeah but it’s not right it’s not but there’s a point like propositional tyranny is a good way to think about it it’s just not accurate right but it’s close enough there’s a propositional tyranny but you can break that by saying look at all these coincidences look at all these predictions because you notice Peterson when he talks about Nietzsche and Jung and less with Jung but almost entirely with Nietzsche he doesn’t talk about the philosophy at all he talks about the prophecy most of what he talks about with Jung is not psychology he does a little a little but most of it’s the prophecy Carl Jung thought this was going to lead to that and this had to have this through line and blah blah blah blah blah right it’s all prophecy he’s not invoking philosophy he’s not invoking all that much psychology and that’s his that’s his PhD man that’s what he knows and that’s the cleverness in what he’s doing that’s how he’s able to reach the group that he’s reaching but if you’re a Christian you can’t see any of that you just misread it all as as evangelical or better evangelicalism or new revivalism or something crazy and I don’t I don’t think that’s accurate I don’t think that’s correct well I think what what’s really interesting to me about him is uh that he was compelling enough to do all of that to break the frame to bring you through to kind of kind of maybe offer you a name for what you’re suffering with a little bit he starts helping the story and then and then he talks something like a solution again there’s not there’s no philosophy there but I think he’s like also um he has some faith in in your agency to if you’re compelled enough you’ll find something and you’ll follow right and then so you do that and what’s happening is a lot of people have made their way into the church including myself somebody who is never going to go into a church right right and so it’s not going to work for everybody but it starts to work on probably the most potential those with most potential for willingness to change and so it’s just boom you just all you do is push it over just a little bit and then you it starts to go and and I think that that’s been really really amazing to watch and then um and while doing while you’re saying he’s calling all different predictions he’s actually called he actually made predictions himself in doing that because like it’s like what and then all of a sudden you’re like this guy like it’s funny to me people now are tripping over him it’s like yeah we’ve been hearing this shit for like you know five six years and he said he was this was all going to happen I don’t know it really funny I just watched a little clip and this is a little unrelated but I just watched a little clip recently Brian Cranston was on Bill Maher and like one of the most one of the opening things where they’re just shitting on the Catholic so bad I just thought you guys are still doing this yeah like it’s right it’s beautiful I mean it’s just sounds it’s not cool either it sounds so cringy you know like I don’t know it’s just funny to me but no that’s a good point the point you just made it’s very true it sounds cringy now this is the new cool like Peterson’s created the new cool Kristen Cool seriously it is it does sound cringy it sounds so passe so 2000 to be to be making stupid comments about different religions like nobody’s nobody’s that nobody who’s thinking is there anymore right right yeah hopefully it’s remarkable they think the new atheist movement is dead right but it just turned into Gnosticism and that’s the day we’re fighting now that’s why we did the live stream dude I’m so glad you said that I thought the same thing right explain explain they got hopeless they got hopeless for long enough they started looking for answers oh sorry I didn’t I didn’t mean to interrupt you whoever said it I think it’s part of the path though there has to be on my end of things there has to be some faith that you know like cause you know like I think it’s funny too when the Christians are all acting like if you just believe or you just say that these words and I’m just like and they’re all worried that you know these Christians aren’t gonna are these people aren’t Christians like on whose timeline are you working here can you just like right keep clean up your own side of the street like you know keep your eyes on your own paper and do the faithful can then maybe perhaps these people will go from atheist to Gnostic to some sort of acceptable believer and let’s face it none of us are gonna be absolutely acceptable believers in the eyes of the next acceptable believer so it’s like it’s weird but how do you go from I’m really interested how you fellows think you go from atheism to Gnosticism I’m just curious what you’re seeing that I don’t see you gotta go first I got a lot to say about it you guys go first let me yeah let me let me first yeah let me see you chat so let me start with you know in the in an earlier video that I did on Peterson cause I got like three Peterson videos now I pointed out that one of the tricks that Peterson uses when he’s talking in his maps and meaning courses is he says you know this he doesn’t say I PhD in psychology know this he says you know this you feel this I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know I’m just telling you something that you’ve always felt and articulating it better effectively it’s not the words he uses right I’m paraphrasing but that’s another trick that he uses and I point that out in my videos this is why you need to watch Navigating Patterns cause I’ve already said all this stuff it’s all there right and maybe it takes a while but like put comments in I’ll make it better if I can understand where I’m not clear right but the reason why it’s turning into Gnosticism is because people are leaving atheism and when they don’t have a good framework say they’re with John Vervecky and we I saw this on the server like this happened on the Vervecky server it’s still unfolding Vervecky goes and does this after Socrates nonsense totally misunderstanding Socrates sorry John misunderstanding Socrates completely casting fantasies on Socrates and his wonderfulness he wasn’t that wonderful he was amazing yeah but he wasn’t that wonderful these people get into this solipsistic oh I can understand this and they go after these practices right and it’s all practices and this is what we were talking about in the live stream in the Vandu Klay live stream today actually right it’s all practices and practices are all about you doing something by yourself to cause enlightenment okay that’s a very Gnostic way of thinking and it’s going to lead down the path of Gnosticism and that’s the problem is that these people like Vervecky who don’t want to submit to the church he just doesn’t want to believe that the answers he seeks are already there in the church he wants to believe he can create a better more pure religion the religion that’s not a religion right which basically he doesn’t define it right but implication is it has all the good parts of religion without any of the parts you don’t want and he doesn’t define either set right and he’s done this trick before he said oh you know what it is it’s dogma and now he doesn’t think dogma is so bad because of course it’s not dogma because we have scientific dogma can’t be dogma it’s not just in the church buddy right right exactly yeah that’s the problem and then he does this thing and and I accused Peter Peter Peterson on the live stream today with Paul of doing the same thing so no no no no no no you can’t you can’t use emergence only like you can’t do that you’ve got you can’t just you’re ending up at steal the culture you’re ending up with everyone in their own church and that’s what the problem is may I ask you a question though how do you see this is really interesting what you said about practices so so our practices because I know people who who are very loathe to do yoga Christian people who are loathe to do yoga after after the certain initial piece because and which I could never understand except for intuitively right like I couldn’t really articulate it but there’s something about practices in the sense you were using it which is very much part of the agnosticism right it has to be because what else do you have if you don’t look I don’t know I’m just putting that out there yeah here’s what here’s what and I have this clip ready I haven’t put it off on my channel yet just because I lost track of what I was doing but I have this clip ready of Jonathan Pigeot a year and a half ago maybe came on the awakening from the meeting crisis discord server to do a Q&A for us very generous of him he doesn’t remember it by the way I asked him I don’t remember he’s hitting on a lovely time though and and the mod asked him like what do you think of practices and he had this great answer fantastic answer and I got to paraphrase it obviously okay Joe’s a little long and long and stumbling with his English fair enough yeah yeah he’s French yeah but he basically said the problem that I have with practices is that the reason you go to church is to do something that you sometimes don’t want to do right with people you don’t want to be with at that time right and I said and I thought to myself when he said it first of all damn you French Canadian trader I like because practices is the big thing that Manuel and I do on the server that’s our thing we’re the practices guys that’s what we do right so I was like upset and I’m still upset I’m not going to never be upset about I think Pat Joe is familiar with the Cajet and you know he is right but still let me just finish up Naram right so it occurred to me that is the description of the problem that we’re having in the world today why can’t we all get along because we’re not getting up every Sunday to go do something that maybe we don’t want to do with people we don’t want to hang out with that’s what it means to live in the world if you have to do things you don’t want to do with people you don’t want to hang out with like Jesse oh no wait I like hanging out with Jesse like Naram no no I like hanging out with him none of you people unfortunately but it is it’s true I mean I do I well I don’t do it anymore because we had a big blow up on the awakening server but that’s what I would do on the awakening server they don’t want to hang out there with those idiotic philosophical losers who know nothing I hate philosophy you have to know enough philosophy to fight all their hegelian garbage or their Kantian nonsense or their postmodern ridiculousness I hate it I really do but I did it because you know these people needed help it’s their biggest project Mark don’t belittle it no it’s you know it is hard to do like it’s interesting too because people don’t recognize it Mark let’s sit near and do it I did not like that I did not like I did it because I thought it had to be done that’s why I did it because that’s how I operate but I did not enjoy that I did it anyway because that is how you do that you have to be exemplified I’m gonna be here suffering through your idiocy to help make you a better person even though I don’t want I could do better things I could be off making some money like no I’m hanging out on this server all day trying to help people who half want help like they don’t want to give up their worldview but they need the help well I think you know as you were saying earlier what tower I’m gonna call you tower that’s my short name for you oh wait tower okay okay that’s cool tower so tower you’re talking about you know what is going what is connection between atheist and narcissism yeah I think it’s their ubermensch project it’s their thing they’re like this is the way we can figure it out and they’re going in all these wacky directions because they’re trying to do that they’re trying to bring their will to power that’s the central thing of narcissism and Crowley is your will and there’s a lot of Nietzschean shit in there with what they’re doing transcendence I just did a big long podcast on this video game Scorn that has these themes of transcendence in it and basically it’s this world of people that they crisper virus themselves and mutate themselves to be telepathic beings and they meld their mouths shut where they can’t even speak and their brain rebels against their body and snaps off their body and floats around and their body dies and they think this is the best thing since sliced bread but it’s not it’s agnostic hell yeah that’s Dante’s hell that’s Dante’s hell but no but he describes exactly those kind of beings I was just reading hell today it gives me great comfort yeah yeah that is hell but anyway keep what what’s the relationship then though so they think it’s heaven they think it’s progression they think oh our head is separate from our body we’re more advanced we’re telepathic we can see into the other dimension we don’t need our body you’re free and so in the game in this game scorn you’re going escaping the flesh in favor of spirit and this is a theme in a lot of religion Christianity particularly you know I want to hammer on because the spirit is more important than the body well this game scorn shows you how that’s not really a great idea we need both you know we have to live in the center of the crucifix of suffering spirit body and flesh and mind and all these things so what it looks like when you totally do abandon your flesh in favor of spirit which I think at the core is this very gnostic idea you’re just like blasted into another dimension and your body is like rotting you know and there’s no babies left so another element in this game was we don’t need the childbirth anymore sex is for transcendence not for reproduction and so there’s no babies people are grown out of walls they’re being grown out of walls in these pods and like I saw this Australian thing where they’re growing babies in pods that’s keeping the drug part of the sex without the danger and the growth part it’s a generative part monasticism comes from not recognizing emanations like if you don’t think there’s a guiding principle to the universe right or you think the guiding principle is knowable through pure emanation that’s it’s always going to lead to gnosticism neoplatonism and occultism all of it James Lindsay is right about that but what James Lindsay is wrong about is that it’s some through line through history it’s not you discover this on your own you can have a 95 IQ and discover what Hagel’s not bright he’s not that I’m sorry you guys think these modern philosophers are smart they’re actually stupid and I oh you’re too harsh no I’m not they’re not very bright that’s how they got stuck they couldn’t think about the transcendent and they said there must not be a transcendent there must be an answer from below that we can understand ourselves because we’re above that which is below us which is we knit having an earth together everything emergent is technically below us and then you see things emerge and you’re never looking up until you don’t know that they’re conforming or not conforming to an emanation emergence is it don’t conform to emanation don’t last now some of them may last 100 years I don’t know some of them may last 200 years I have no idea some of them may last six days clubhouse lasted like a year and a half you know but it died it died remember the flower analogy from earlier it so you know it’s kind of like the flower the petals of the flower shouldn’t worry about the roots in the ground so what you’re saying makes me think of the flower looking down into the ground and dying and not reaching the sky anymore that’s very sad that’s exactly what it is how did you get that say that again say that again because that’s I don’t know if I can I just say that no but that’s a Dante image too it’s actually in my lamp over there the whole that idea the petals of the flower can’t see the roots but if they’re tilted down towards the emergence because they emerge from the roots they don’t flourish because there’s no sunlight and they fall off that’s Gnosticism but you guys you have no idea you’ll never believe this because I bought a lamp that was made in Italy like 100 years ago and I couldn’t figure it out and then I was reading Dante and Dante has at the very beginning there’s this image I don’t know what your name is like Shroomy Boomy or whatever but anyway okay he has this image of the flowers turning towards the light and I actually got a light made 100 years ago I’m sure it came from Dante’s image and he must have been thinking of you Shroomy Boomy because it because then he it’s got all these flowers opening up towards the light I can’t believe you saw that like what’s the chance it’s synchronicity what would you say Dante these are patterns we’re navigating the patterns that’s why I’m a pirate capitane I’m gonna take a pic I gotta take a picture of my lamp though because I bought the lamp yeah please do I’d love to see it and then I’m reading Paradise because I’m reading it with Ethan right and Justine we’re reading Dante and all of a sudden I realized I’m reading along and I’m going oh my gosh they got this lamp idea from Dante’s and it’s right at the beginning of hell right but he has this hope this is hope do you want to hear really oh well anyway I want there’s a new fellow down here I think but I can’t see his name I don’t know who he is Jesse or Daniel oh is that Daniel I don’t know who Daniel is what’s up Daniel what do you think about all our crazy shit I don’t make sense I don’t really have much to add to any of it right on man well good seeing you I never seen you around nice to meet you oh Danny used to hang out on BOM all the time but then he I don’t know got a life or something which is good it’s bridges of meaning you’re supposed to get off the bridge yeah but it’s also good I think the live streams are where it’s at this is my intuition I think this is where it’s at now the YouTubes it’s because it’s involving more people in the conversations right I think they blew up their discord server without understanding how so that’s fine sorry? they blew up their discord server without understanding what happened so that’s fine Jesse bring us some new thoughts oh gosh I can be spicy how about I start with butter curry and we’ll go from there this then goes sunflowers if we want to continue our thought what are the last Christian artworks ever ever really I don’t think there’s ever been a Christian artist and I actually hold firm that bango was the question me too oh wow yeah want to distance that just because you know someone’s questioning or got their ideas or out of sync with their era of dogma doesn’t mean they’re not the Christian or fundamentally doesn’t mean they don’t represent the tradition of Christian thought which Christian didn’t didn’t have you know didn’t struggle with their faith only the saints right and maybe not even them yeah yeah Jesse can you just say oh sorry can you just say have you I mean I’ve read a little bit of from his writings but what is it that really made you made you see that I guess you could say I’m really interested well I guess wow okay in a nutshell yeah summarise bango the most significant artist of the old most well respected bango is significant still significant because he’s still respected even now no one is willing to critique bango or downplay things and there’s something to that it’s a higher order of beauty that he appeals to that even people that are materialists can’t deny that is that is that it’s like talking everyone can try to criticise Lord of the Rings or the Hobbit but they’ve got nothing on it it’s transcendent beauty and that’s really a good way of understanding bango like I’ve got I’ve got 21 prints in this house and I don’t have enough wall space to put them on yeah yeah I’ve actually got more I’ve got little micro pins every time I get into an art gallery I collect something wow so you have them all all over I can show you how much yeah well I might this is my current place we’re renting so we can’t put up everything everywhere but yeah when we have a new place yeah it’ll be wall to wall they also don’t critique Hieronymus Bosch even though he has like really fucked up things but I do find people do critique Da Vinci which is weird right like the Mona Lisa some of his like I don’t know I’ve heard people critiquing him before but not like Bango I’ve never heard anybody critique him or Bosch maybe some other people but those are just the ones that popped in my head yeah there was a big conversation today they got lots of traction Jonathan Peugeot on his Twitter I’ve never I don’t know it seemed to me there were way more comments than usual and it’s when he was critiquing somebody posted this this artwork and I guess it was almost Rococo or Baroque it was but incredibly beautiful sometimes it can be overdone but this was just and I don’t like Rococo or Baroque but this was just I’m sorry it was exquisitely beautiful and then he then said all sorts of you know things about what was wrong with it from his from his point of view and then somebody asked him about Michelangelo and and yeah he said no no Michelangelo you know he had he painted bottoms on the Sistine Chapel and you know what you know what I said I said well he didn’t get to destroy all this art that he did at Concordia right do you know the reference Jonathan Peugeot destroyed all this art that he did at University oh yeah yeah yeah like Michelangelo was forced he was going to be murdered if he didn’t do the Sistine Chapel I think he was getting even with the Pope constantly up there oh probably yeah here’s the comment I don’t know I don’t know the piece but the comment that Peugeot made was the ridiculous joining of an illusionistic perspective with the misunderstood residues of an ancient cosmology of having coupled with floating naked babies quote angel upskirts end quote all of which confirms atheists who mock Christianity for believing in a sky god I was just like wow that’s um you know that’s not that’s harsh yeah and then he did the same thing with Michelangelo and yeah it’s this it’s this Jesse maybe you know this Jesse I don’t know if you know this Jesse do you know where that is that piece I don’t know it’s in one of the chapels in Rome I don’t know where it is though I’ve never seen if anybody knows where it is is that the Sangrata Familia that’s not the Sistine Chapel that’s like somebody else in the other ones is it the stained glass one with the pillars that look like trees yeah it’s the Sangrata Familia in Barcelona I gotta go there one day it’s a beautiful church Anton Gaudi designed that and I’m a big fan of his he’s made a lot of other architecture in Barcelona and it looks like you know HR Giger stuff it looks like hell Gaudi has that spin but it looks like heaven yeah it’s got like this bio organic spin but it looks beautiful not scary like whoa interesting that you connect Giger to Lina Da Vinci like the opposite Anton Gaudi bring back Gnostics into the conversation you couldn’t get a better more well known Gnostics than Giger like Giger maybe you could say Alan Watts or no what’s the other guy Alan Moore the watchman guy oh yeah Giger was very aware of Carl Jung’s archetypes and exploring it he said that he hated his paintings he just painted them to get them out of his head and I equate Giger and Lovecraft together a lot because I think that’s why Lovecraft wrote so much he was tormented with Night Inverse his night dots would come and visit him and take him away and when he would write stuff his nightmares would be alleviated he wouldn’t have them Stephen King used to say the same thing his early novels were basically exorcisms on himself after Kerry too much fame exposed him to too many spirits but that’s essentially what I did he didn’t have a way to control the energy mass on himself and he was post Christian essentially and with Giger I think he was seeing the beginnings of Blade Runner and he started to merge with technology I think it was more of a warning he was kind of like the Unabomber of paintings he was like look guys this is what’s going to happen later you better watch out and he could see something in people I think because he had a girlfriend or his wife, it was Beyonce she was very depressed and one day he painted a picture of her the way he saw her and he thought it would help get it out of her help her no, it was a picture of a woman with a weird looking horn hat and a snake around her forehead it’s the reverse, Lino Da Vinci, it’s the less universal one so anyway he showed her this picture and then I think the next day she killed herself so that explains that guy a whole lot because what he sees can kill people they don’t want to die they don’t want to see and that deeply impacted the guy this is when he was in his 20s way before Alien, way before Necronomicon even I think wow wow so what’s that tell us about seeing and communicating, right? wow it’s all signals you got to start with signals I’m stuck in the propositional tyranny it’s all signals what do you mean Mark? well look if you start boiling communication down to things just like body motion or body motion plus noises then you got red light, green light signal there’s all kinds of signals and those signals are getting processed different ways and when there’s a mismatch in signals, for example the FBI people who go oh yeah, Bill Clinton’s lying and you go, well how do you know that? because really what he said, right? the way I know people are lying is which words they use and how they use them that method for me is 100% effective it’s never been wrong ever but what I’m reading is the unconscious way people are talking because unconsciously you’re always honest and with very few exceptions there’s one exception met her years ago she had multiple personality disorder, for real DSM3, don’t use 4 and 5, they’re garbage DSM3, look at multiple personality disorder she had that and I went and I spent a year which is just, I’ve never studied anything for a year except this not straight, I spent a year studying multiple personality disorder, like reading people who had recovered from it and all that stuff, I spent a year studying this exclusively this is why I don’t like psychology, I learned all psychology in like a week and then I studied this one phenomena and tried to figure out what the hell was going on it turned out that she had been abused as a baby she didn’t know, I knew before she did, I was like, oh this person’s been abused and she found out like two years later, and I was like, yeah I already knew that, I already knew that she had no idea so there are signals that are happening, and this is one of the ways that stupid pedophiles get away with it, well they don’t know anything you can tell them later that it was all a dream no you can’t, those signals are affecting your brain whether they’re physical or they’re body language or they’re just in the world, and you know I don’t want to invoke super psychic whatever, but there’s a lot of stuff we don’t we don’t sense consciously at all most of the signals when you know someone’s lying and you’re like I can’t really tell, but I know that you’re getting some of these signals and you’re just picking up on the language or you’re just picking up on the body language or the mismatch between the two maybe it’s something else there could be tons of signals going on, you know, and in sci-fi it’s big right now to say things like well I have super hearing and super sight and I can tell your heart’s beating faster and so I know you’re lying, you know it’s that online lie detector trick that they play in sci-fi and that works for some people, right and it doesn’t work against all people there’s all these signals that we can pick up on and then match them up or notice a mismatch and then sort of approximate where people are really at so that’s why it’s important all my models are based on signal models all of them, everything’s based on signals so it signals into the perspectival right, this is the knowledge engine model right, and then from there it goes to the four types of information because the perspective informs the signal it forms the signal information that goes up to the four types and then they battle with the perspective to jostle it at least a little bit or maybe break it because sometimes some pieces of information just gonna smash your perspective your perspective’s gonna have to radically alter and then that filters up after that process, that’s the cooperative process between the four types of knowing and the perspective after that’s done then it gets to one of two types of knowledge or maybe both, which is particular and intuitive and that’s really important because that’s what leads to understanding have you guys ever seen Hey Arnold? no, what’s that? it’s like a cartoon where everybody lives in a boarding house and there’s all these different characters there’s this Russian guy, there’s these people from Europe all these different characters and this little boy lives there and he learns all kinds of lessons by interacting and helping the people in his boarding house because his grandparents so I think multiple personality disorder would be like if that boarding house had no walls no, well it would just be bouncing off each other it’s actually the opposite, it’s heavy compartmentalization so what right, right, right there’s no first separation you know, cause like say for instance work me is different than me being here I can easily be like separating those things but if I have multiple personality bullshit or whatever, I couldn’t differentiate, there’d be no no, no, you separate it completely each of the personalities gets its own memory so it’s more like that oh, that’s fucked up well that’s how she was able to lie to me she’s the only person I’ve ever met that could lie to me the only one, it was amazing I was fascinated, I’m like how are you getting away with this, you’re saying things you’re clearly not lying and yet you’re lying and I know you’re lying there’s the lamp sorry that’s it with the flowers Murano glass and then Dante said as little flowers bent and closed with chill of night when the sun lights them, stand all open on their stems yeah, dude that’s exactly, this is exactly what we’re talking about, anyway, no, sorry sorry, I just got excited, sorry Mark, go ahead no, no, that’s fine, I mean that was my only point, was like this separation of memory means that you can subconsciously lie to people, including yourself that’s the thing, you don’t know what you did and then your brain kind of adjusts it’s in the literature shoot, I can’t remember the name of the book because I was like 17 when I read it separation of memory, now that’s really interesting, is that our problem nowadays? classic disassociation disassociation all the way down turtles all the way down if you’re not aware that you’re disassociating you just disassociate how to tell someone’s depressed is like how much disassociation do they have they have, yeah oh, so depression is is that, depression is dissociation high level dissociation so they’re not able to they’re not able to compartment compartment two different things together and say that’s what I’m building my sense of reality on concretization or the concrete information build up and so you work on working memory sorry, that’s a bad way of saying it but you work on working memory you don’t you don’t follow a worksheet you’re already working from a previous worksheet that you have so that’s the same thing with other with how you make sense of your everyday reality you know that you’re gonna eat sometime in the morning you know you might want to drink you’re not thinking about this but when you those other senses of reality you start to disassociate from I know I need to say hello to mom turns into I just ignore mom right because of is it memory that’s really interesting though it’s memory so the way it works is keep going there’s a book called when rabbit howls that’s the sort of the original book what they say here is dissociative identity disorder no, it’s called multiple personality disorder DSM3 everything else is garbage DSM3 is correct it’s multiple personality disorder you have actual personalities with their own memories that do not have memories of the other personalities and the way you fix it is to reintegrate those things and yeah I mean I think to some extent to your point Elizabeth the problem is that we are not dealing with the fact that as Niram said I’m at work I’m at home I know about those things and there’s a conflict that I’ve accepted right because sometimes work interferes with home sometimes home interferes with work and sometimes me being a good friend interferes with both of them and people don’t want that they’re looking for this pure experience so they’re and this is where the Gnosticism and the practices come in they’re trying to get a pure experience emergence is good instead of being is good this is what Ethan was saying it was so brilliant because he just summarized my thoughts down to emergence is good and I’m like oh that’s the difference between the Christian ethos and the Gnostic ethos the difference is Christians think being is good and not their starting axiom and the Gnostics think that emergence is good and so any practice drugs, any sort of thing any flow state right where Vicki talks about flow state that’s all good flow state’s not good people climb mountains in the flow state and fall off and die like no yeah so is that why people go to church so they won’t dissociate memory man it’s memory well it’s part of it’s part of having a stable common foundation for you but that’s the same idea that Jesse was talking about right you’re actually I don’t know Jesse the difference between working memory and your perceptual system because I don’t really know anything about that but it seems to me you’re working I know for a fact from my own experience and actually from teaching I know a lot about attention and how how your attention builds up and I’ve seen it with children for decades your training children and attention is basically what you’re doing and that builds up the perceptual system right that builds I think it’s I think it becomes quasi well hardwired but I don’t really know Mark you already have the answers you already have the answers you don’t need me to explain more I can tell you from my dyslexic sort of grabbing all the patterns and information that I have but you already have most of the answers there in what you’re saying but I wonder how memory I’m just fascinating build up previous ways of building attention but where does memory so it’s just really interesting about this I’m in that Mark who Mark knew so you embody your memories there’s a whole disassociation there’s a great book called The Body Keeps the Score about how the body stores different traumatic memories there’s a great book that have half red cord the brain that changes itself oh yeah Norman Deutsch yeah there’s a couple other ones there’s one called How to Do the Work she’s I think Michaela Peterson interviewed her that’s why I found out about her it’s so what’s the question again? the question is I’m just really fascinated with this idea of dissociation and modern times because what is okay we can go back to that because I I’m being sarcastic it is yeah it is you’re trying attempting to dissociate from the constraints of reality by imagining a world where those constraints don’t exist now it might be different constraints for different people because some people don’t notice constraints or they you know you need constraints and so they these constraints are fine but those constraints are not but then you’re not following a principle anymore right because you’re not willing to you’re not you’re not either not willing or not able to accept a conflict right this is why I think it’s all intimacy crisis right so instead of accepting the conflict with like principles cause conflicts all over the place right instead of accepting the conflict you’re saying no no there’s a perfect world where this conflict doesn’t exist right there are all these other conflicts existing like there’s a perfect world with those other yeah but you’re not living in both of them and they’re not they’re bouncing around costically from experience to experience to experience right they don’t have to deal with the conflict not only and again most I think I think I’m not sure I think most conflicts cannot be resolved right I think most conflicts have to be accepted as tradeoffs and that’s just the way it is and that’s why I think it’s the intimacy crisis because intimacy talks about the quality of the connection and if the quality of the connection is high enough you can accept the conflict and that’s what I think love is part of love is ability to accept conflict I love Jesse sometimes he pisses me off and he asks hard questions that really rub me right but I like that’s good like it’s not bad there is a conflict he doesn’t understand me sometimes the other day he put a comment on my video he said what’s the summary of this video and I said damn it I obviously I didn’t summarize it right this is good it’s a conflict but it’s a good conflict it’s not bad I accept that because Jesse’s awesome why wouldn’t I it’s a small thing to accept to get and there’s no downs it’s a conflict with no downsides because it’s cooperative and generative not all conflict is bad this is the post-modern problem all conflict is bad with those idiots that is so important that point sorry we need to clip that all seriously that is so important and you know I remember when I was listening to the biblical lectures here in Toronto I remember when Peterson said that you can get to a point where things are so bad you just you’re in hell and you can’t there’s no way out and you won’t be able to handle it and I thought to myself no no actually you can handle it like because it’s just exactly what you’re talking about there Mark it’s uber conflict right like you can get yourself into a place that is so bad but guess what it’s okay you can you still can manage to head up you know you know no reality is good know that you can create goodness and change your world again like I think your point about conflict is so critically important because that’s the point I’m trying to make about the feminine the feminine is meant to be I feel now many people disagree with me but I think that’s why women are bitchy because I think they’re not able to actually we’re not able to articulate our essence in many ways like why are women bitchy for well I don’t know I seem to attract bitchy women so it’s kind of my cut I feel very strongly that that nice women are we’re too conditioned to be nice we need to be more like the Irish the ancient Irish women they were like warriors man they were actually fighting like they used to fight there was this wonderful woman and she used to basically just murder all the idiots around her and she’d find it like just incredible people Joan of Arc right no Joan Joan of Arc was not like a Celtic woman she was Zena the warrior princess no Joan of Arc not Zena Joan of Arc will do but she didn’t I don’t yeah Joan of Arc probably is a good example but I think there’s even more wildness I think we need to go even further to the Celtic world like if you read the Irish tales the Irish tales like if you’ve read J.M. Singh you know the playboy of the western world and those those stories man that’s where I think and I think a lot is moving towards the west actually I think we’re going to see a lot of tales coming out of Ireland that’s what I think because they’re they’re they’re harnessing they they live with the wildness there they live in a wild country there’s winds blowing all the time and the weather what that reminds me of Tower is I just got done watching 1883 and that main character that chick in there is a lot like what you’re talking about like she’s this wild girl and she like hooks up with this Native American dude and rides horses and then she starts like murdering people and protecting her family yeah I think that’s very interesting like she’s she’s she’s strong as hell and she she the Italian the Italian I go to Italy tons because I love the women there and they are they’re just like so they even look the way they act like they’re they’re they’re they’re ugly in a beautiful way they’re so ugly because they are so intent on making sure that their families are well and so they’re very like they’re like warrior women for their families and it’s I just love being with with with women who are like that like people I don’t know what it’s like in America but Canadian women are like that oh yeah they are yeah the ones in the mountain shut I should go down there yeah yeah because I mean I’m Irish and I know a lot of other Irish people too so definitely Irish they’re all Scots Irish in Appalachia yeah we love whiskey and scotch yeah but the women are like that they’re just like feisty as hell right the world used to be wild it’s great let’s get Ethan in here this is all Ethan’s fault anyway yeah well I gotta head off here I gotta go call my buddy but it’s been real it’s been fun thank you I’ll get you later Ethan well before you leave I just wanted to call you a hair tick for cutting your hair hair tick well I’ll let it grow back out bro yeah it was uh yeah it’s gone but uh yeah I’m growing back out I missed it I was just like you know I’m getting old what does my face look like under here I haven’t seen it in 10 years and I got it all off and I was like alright okay cool let’s get the hair back on there yeah yeah well see you later I’ll see you guys take it easy peace man what you got for us Ethan talk to us well um I don’t know I’m not good at just starting from nothing nothing so nothing we didn’t give you any fertile ground Mr. Emergences fertile ground what do the Gnostics what do the Gnostics start with nothing what’s that what do the Gnostics start with is their predominant axiom nothing yeah that conversation sorry Nathan go ahead no I was just gonna say this conversation about Gnosticism is so important I think it’s key right now right because of what’s going on with Vervey Crate even Patajou is getting a little bit something I don’t know what’s happening with Patajou but something’s moving there and I can’t put my finger on it but it’s I don’t know talking about icons he’s talking about icons I don’t know if you saw my comment it’s like it’s just all triangles you know sorry I just think of the world in terms of triangles and it’s it’s given me a lot of insight but the bottom parts of the triangle so you have the ideals at the top and then they emanate down like like Mark’s right on that you know it’s all about emanating the first principle the first cause comes from the top of the triangle it comes down and then the second causes are at the bottom we don’t need to get into Aristotelian metaphysics to understand this it’s a little bit dumbed down I’m in this orthodox class right now and the goal of the orthodox class is to get people to think orthodox and people like literally everyone thinks westernly unless we’re like somewhere in the east where we don’t speak english then they probably have some other kind of class I don’t know what they do but it’s like the whole sola scriptura thing it’s like the priest is trying to communicate to people that the authority does not exist in the scripture alone it has to be informed by something it’s very simple like the church existed before the bible before the bible even existed so like christ came before the bible like the bible came second like they’re secondary things and we’re taking secondary things as primary that’s what Gnosticism is knowledge, experience experience comes as a consequence as that first principle what is it? Experience knowledge what are some of the other things that we confuse? Mushrooms anything material like literally anything and like it’s like it’s in Genesis 3 that’s what Genesis 3 was like anytime you take something I don’t know if you can see my hands anytime you take something anytime you take something and separate it from where it came remove it’s context and take it to be good in and of itself bad things are going to happen like that’s right there at the very beginning of the bible like that’s one of the first things that we learn is anything taken outside of anything taken outside of the what would you say anything that’s taken that wasn’t granted by God is not good like that’s how everything that’s how we got here you know and when we get on here like I think it happened last week and some of these live streams people well I’m probably I don’t know if I want to talk about it but I mean okay yeah yeah go come on Ethan but it’s like people start one like asking these questions like was it good that Eve ate the fruit even asking that question is like very terrifying that we’re asking that question it’s like it’s doing the opposite of what God said good it’s like they were suggesting that it might have been and it’s like whoa well they want to wait out they don’t like the constraint and look Vanderkley really liked emergence is good when I told it to him today I don’t know if you I don’t know if you’re watching Ethan but he really liked that he’s like oh so I think maybe he can put two and two together and figure out what I was telling him because I gave him the staircase analogy too right what you think John’s two stairs from the top and you’re reaching your hand out to grab him and he’s at the bottom and he’s like no no John I asked John and he believes being is good and I’m like he doesn’t talk like that because he doesn’t no he doesn’t definitely he doesn’t the emergence is good as probably that’s a really good way to explain this this this flat world triangle thing no it’s brilliant it’s brilliant it’s not really good it’s brilliant I agree Mark I agree Ethan’s just boom no no no we’re not going to go there every once in a while he does he just drops it and it’s dead on we’re not going anywhere we’re just saying that that was you know we’re not opening the Church of Ethan tomorrow with building so much we don’t think you’re an Old Testament prophet yet like Jonathan Pesce don’t worry what does this say modernism the lure of heresy yeah there we go well modernism just tolerates heresy left and right you know we used to burn these people I’m sorry we’re being so brash what did you say we used to burn them is that what you said well he said what is it modernism the age of heresy it’s like yeah this is crazy the lure of heresy we used to burn people alive we used to burn people alive for saying things that are said so casually now let’s think about this that’s what we used to do you don’t even have to say they used to be pagans people we’d push out from the center yeah I mean people today are being burned for heresy too for heresy too you know like there’s plenty that you can’t say today right it’s just we’re in a different orthodoxy right well right because religion is inevitable yeah the religious patterns are inevitable that’s why you need to learn to navigate religious patterns whether you’re a Christian or a Muslim or a Jew or Buddhist it doesn’t the patterns are actually identical everyone says like we need to synthesize each and every one of them is not the same if you can’t see that you’re an idiot sorry you just didn’t read the text or something I see it clear as day but think about for a second think about modernism that’s just a total abusive language anything modern is now it can never refer to the past it’s already Gnostic the whole idea of modernism is a Gnostic concept because it can’t reference anything in the past because modern is now anything that is not now is not modern and so you can’t use it to reference anything in the past so it’s like there’s no such thing as post-modernism because now you’re talking about the future and then if you take James Lindsay seriously his talk that he did negation of the real it’s such a great talk the first 35 minutes are a pain in the ass but after the 35 minutes it gets really good he talks about this and I don’t think he’s made the connection they always say here’s a bad thing about your system and here’s another bad thing about your system another bad thing about your system so we need to use a new system and when you go okay what’s the new system they don’t mention it they just say here’s the bad thing so we can’t do that anymore so we’re going to do something else and you’re like okay but but how do I know that something else isn’t worse well you can’t critique it because we haven’t built it yet so the post-moderns are just casting the problems or the solutions to the problems into the future where they can’t be critiqued because they don’t exist yet and that’s how they gain power because it’s post-modern power from above narrative that’s their whole trick they don’t have any other tricks they’re not right like everybody thinks they’re geniuses or something they’re morons they’re three-year-olds that’s all it is and that’s why modernism concept is corrupt you can’t use it to understand the world because it only refers to now it’s gnostic and self-referential it has no past and no future yeah yeah so it’s experiential it’s all experience experiential yeah right you’re right no but that’s another key point you made there tonight Mark that’s absolutely brilliant the experiential nature of gnosticism that’s big because that goes into all this yoga practice and whatever John was doing whatever he’s doing like oh my god like I was I felt sorry for the Abbey I thought I was I nearly died in the Abbey with practice I’m not I’m sorry but I had a visceral reaction I’m not being nasty I just thought oh my gosh I like the practices I don’t like that version of that practice I like his original one from the Cultivating Wisdom course it’s dangerous crap I think you’re right I think it doesn’t affect me at all because there ain’t no emanation that’s for sure I was homeless I survived a lot so I don’t need much help right but yeah for a lot of people it is dangerous a lot of his practice the people on the server the guy who runs the Awakened from the Meaning Crisis server took away Manuel’s moderation and my moderation abilities and then he just did it right I mean he messaged us and I didn’t answer because it was another did you say this did you say that it’s like well maybe but who cares who cares it’s not important it’s not a violation of server rules right it was another anonymous complaint we’ve been through this with Brett before I’m not answering anonymous complaints not going to do it and so he takes away this stuff without warning posted in the announcement channel makes up a bunch of lies like actually just flat out lies and then proceeds to try to defame me in the channel over an observation and said you’re not being charitable and I was like I’m not being charitable you just took away my privileges without warning me without telling me first you took them away and then put an announcement in a channel right and you’re telling and I didn’t violate any server rules I didn’t do anything wrong I didn’t you know and on an anonymous accusation that I said something in a voice chat and you’re sitting there accusing me who just made an observation and said this is what this person’s doing right this is what they’re doing they’re a troll they’re trying to get attention that’s all they’re doing that’s why they don’t make any sense because they’re just trying to get a rise out of you he says you’re not being charitable I’m like oh it’s on it’s on I’m being charitable you’re the one who’s not charitable how did he get that way he wasn’t like that way before John’s practices sorry sorry I don’t know what else to tell you I mean it just made him a worse person so there’s two Gnostic axioms as above so below and I’m not sure if I’m going to say this correctly but solver et coagulate which means dissolve and coagulate something must be broken down before it can be built up right right so that’s the one in the name can you just say that again so I can write it down the dissolve part so it’s dissolve and coagulate it’s the same thing so something must be broken down before it can be built up that’s one of the founding drivers or nodes of Gnosticism and that’s postmodernism deconstruction which is a nonsense word it’s clearly a contradiction you can’t deconstruct something that doesn’t you can’t use language that way it’s just ridiculous right you can destroy right and that’s I have a video on postmodernism that’s what I go into and Dallemard he had a Peter he had on the BOM discord we don’t see him very much he one day he came in and I forget whether he was on awakening or DOM doesn’t matter and he just said deconstruction doesn’t make any sense and he broke down etymologically why he’s from Iceland so all the Europeans know our language better than we do he broke down exactly why and I was like damn I wish I had a recording of that because he just did a fantastic job but it doesn’t make any sense to say deconstruction you’re not communicating data at that point you’re saying something and people think they know what you’re saying but that’s not and this is what I was telling people before I’ve said it many times but I’ll say it again people do not deconstruct out of Christianity that never happens whenever I hear their stories the story sounds very much like I’m doing 90 and I took the wheel and I ran into a wall oh really and then the car was broken apart and I didn’t know what to do and now I have to pick up the pieces and then they say I deconstructed and I’m like no dude you hit a wall and the car shattered and now you need to know how to put it back together I get that part but you didn’t take it apart the wall took it apart plus the speed plus the wheel if you take it apart it gets back to your first node Markov Solosymposium if you crash the car you’re accepting responsibility so you think you can pull it back together and maybe that’s not possible maybe right, right, it’s not you need other tools other groups, other people so the you rely on society to make you function, society doesn’t function for you, you rely on society to make you function it’s completely inverse but the practices are like a perverted church right that’s how they work, they work because they’re a false community in a sense right right they do a lot of things right yeah false community is actually good that’s a good observation yeah one of the way they go I’m meditating, he’s meditating and so we’re together in community okay let me tell you what didn’t happen you didn’t get together in community at all now the thing that Manuel and I stressed in the meditation hall was the after meditation chat and we didn’t force anybody or anything like that but having that chat was the thing that brought the chat together right so I’m a community builder right the way I got into this whole thing with the discord servers was I was on John’s meditation livestream when he first started it and I only went there literally only went there because I wanted to support his work because I really liked awakening, I saw every episode in order when it came out at the time I thought it was wonderful I wasn’t going to pay him money right but I’m like I’ll support his right and then I jump into the stream and I find what is wonderful his meditation series is wonderful it’s great like if you’re going to do a meditation series do his it’s really well thought out it’s really good so I built a community in the livestream because that’s what I do I naturally build online communities I’ve been doing it my whole life I do it kind of subconsciously right it’s not conscious I’m saying hi to people right John and you probably can’t hear them because for some reason they’re no longer available on his YouTube channel weird the lessons are but not all the John himself said several times Mark, Mark is here I’m always happy to see Mark he really makes this it’s worthwhile for me he’s very flattered right he said a lot of flattering things about me back then for sure very nice person love John met him at Thunder Bay loved him right great great human love him but he didn’t stress the communitas he mentioned it but he didn’t stress it that’s what we built that’s that’s we went over to the discord server because Brett invited us I brought all the people from the livestream over to the discord server but the after meditation chat was the part that we really got together on that really helped people and look a lot of those people left and they went off and you know got offline which you know I consider a victory even though it’s a sad loss for me right so that’s important but it’s not stressed but you think you think you’re getting community you’re getting fake community right what else are you doing like John’s whole project is taking Christianity and carving it up into pieces and then fixing each of those pieces and then he needs a written art right a religion that’s not a religion to stick back all together the pieces but you know he says this like rituals really important right he has a whole talk on ritual right his practice is really important okay and those aren’t the same thing to him right and then oh well you know you need these philosophical books because you need something to read and to you know and then internalizing the sage it’s like okay yeah but but you know we need some place to gather we’ve got to gather around these practices somehow right so you know but I don’t want to make it a church okay John whatever but he’s just reconstructing Christianity after having carved it up that’s really all that’s happening that’s steal the culture right that’s all that’s what a church means gathering no religion’s inevitable those patterns are going to revert without a religion what does that mean it’s what it means I agree it’s explicit but you know it’s hard though too because John is such a wonderful human being he’s no but he no he he’s a lovely person he I don’t know how to I don’t know how to amplify that but he he truly is he’s very easy he you know I talked to him and he’s he just you know I felt you know with lots of people it’s easy to feel intimidated like with Jordan Peterson I felt I don’t know how to explain it even with Jonathan but but to me John is just he’s so yeah he’s just he’s a very fine person somehow and so that’s um yeah yeah that’s a problem kind of right he he emanates a warmth right and a kindness yeah right he is respectful well yeah I mean yeah a little little too respect and not all the time can I be spicy can you is the man in the message the same thing no no that’s the point I’m making right right that’s exactly the point I’m making Jesse Peterson is his message right Peterson wants more Peterson in the world right right no no that’s that’s important I mean this is the point I made to Van der Kley earlier on the on the on the tail end of the Q&A when I when I jumped in there right was I said when you’re looking at John you’re seeing him at a certain distance from you and that is not the right distance he’s actually much further away from you than you realize and the way you know that is with two different people on that on that awakening server actually say oh I’ve internalized John Vervecki as the sage now I am sure I am a hundred thousand percent positive that if John heard that and I actually did email him about it then he’s going to be terrified absolutely legitimately terrified okay but this is what you have wrought well what how do you see Jordan Peterson then Mark ah look I I mean I’m being serious about that because recently I felt the same way I’ll answer it I’ll answer Elizabeth that’s not a problem the way I see him is the way that Paul Vanderklaas sees him which is he’s he’s he’s leading people to a place and and he stops and there’s no one to catch them at that point and Vanderklaas talked about this many times many times you may have to listen real place really to hear it but he said it explicitly in very clear terms he thinks that there’s no he wants to be there to catch them to fill that gap and the last time he said it it was only a few weeks ago in fact the last time he said it he said it was a leadership gap and I’m like yes it is a leadership gap who’s going to fill it? Ravecki, Peterson, Peugeot none of them will they’ve all said we’re not going to do it I’m like oh okay but now we have a problem because you all know there’s a leadership gap and none of you are willing to step up and do leadership which is fine leadership is sacrifice Paul said it today in his live stream I was very proud and super happy he said leadership is a sacrifice yes it is and it’s a big sacrifice people think it’s all upside because the postmodern recharge but I’ve led teams I’ve led groups I’ve led movements it sucks I don’t want to do it anymore but we’re at where we’re at and there is some natural element of leadership I mean you’re all here for a reason right and I led the meditation stream I mean I did like I didn’t want to but I did and it was a sacrifice there is sacrifice in leadership and you need a certain amount of freedom to do it right you can’t just do it and it takes a lot of energy and your attention is split and you can never satisfy people you can net as a leader you’re never satisfying any single person it’s never going to happen you’re going to have a bunch of unsatisfied people and like navigating that is just stressful it’s just stressful because you know you’re not all these people are going to be slightly unhappy whatever decision you make whatever thing you do some number of people are going to be pissed off and maybe it’s not with this decision but with a past decision and all those decisions are connected and so really you can’t ever make people happy and if they’re looking for a perfect world because they’re Gnostic and they’re stuck in their head everything you think works or can be fixed easily everything you know what can’t be fixed easily and work is the things that aren’t in your head purple unicorns that talk and make rainbows in my head I have those in my head they’re wonderful it doesn’t work outside of me and my head that’s the conflict that’s the problem that’s where I have to accept that I’m not getting a talking purple unicorn with rainbows I’m angry damn it I’m mad as hell I’m not going to take it anymore well there you go that’s a good place to be for the rest of us and that’s the thing though I admire the fact that you’re willing to do what you do it’s not easy it’s not easy to speak forthrightly and I can see there’s a cost and I I’m noticing how this works like none of us are perfect right so yeah I really admire you and I think well yeah that’s the other thing I started reading Saint Maximus and I are any of you orthodox? yeah I started reading Saint Maximus because I thought I would you know start looking into it I don’t know yeah I was surprised because I didn’t realize that the orthodox consider themselves he literally says to be god like it’s very different than what I imagine so oh that talk so Vervikki the one that Ethan pointed me at Vervikki talked to an orthodox bishop eastern orthodox bishop just this week I think what an amazing talk I just finished it it’s amazing he rips neoplatonism apart very neatly it was beautiful that’s the other point that I think you’ve got your finger on the pulse mark I think you’ve absolutely got your finger on the pulse because this is the thing that has puzzled me since I went to La Brie where I studied basically the works of Francis Schaeffer and he was talking about all of these issues back in the 50s and 60s and he made the same well he was concerned about what he called neoplatonism and I talked to John Vervikki about it and he said he said that Francis Schaeffer didn’t understand what neoplatonism was and that there was like to your point that you made today that there was a third what’s he called? Third wave baby What is neoplatonism? What are we talking about? You’re not talking about anything Well why does Jonathan Tashow consider himself a neoplatonist? Does anybody understand that? I think Jonathan wants to wants to get along so one of the things that came out in this talk with this bishop was John pulled out this thing and said it was neoplatonic and the bishop said that’s a Plato quote that’s from Plato it’s not from Platinus, it’s not even from Aristotle that’s actually a quote from Plato which just supports my feeling that neoplatonism doesn’t exist I talked to Dr. Lantern Jack about it he did a talk with Vervikki it’s a very good one, AI the Matrix in Plato’s cave it’s a great talk, if you haven’t heard it, you gotta hear it John’s at his best Jack had help Jack had my entire thesis on everything wrong with John’s work up to the time that, just before that, a few months before that that talk, right? So Jack came arm to that talk and when I talked to Jack about neoplatonism, he said it was a bunch of small groups, none of them probably had more than a couple hundred people, ever, ever and they didn’t agree with one another it’s not a group of people the thing they agree about so it’s an identification against the thing they agree about was Plato sorry, the thing they agreed about, I didn’t hear you is Plato so, well why does it get to be Neo? I don’t understand because it comes, it’s the new Platonism, but you know, I hunted down, Ethan, I think it was with Ethan, we hunted down some Platonists, and Platonists is anti-Platonic actually, and I forget which axiom it was, but he did this axiom I’m like, well that’s in direct violation of Plato’s forms overtly, and I was like, well then he’s not a Platonist, so what is this Neoplatonism? Oh, we rewrote Plato oh you did, huh? And the other hint is third wave, you got a first wave a second wave, and a third wave, why would you need a wave? There’s no waves of Platonism, there’s just Plato, guy, like, you want to put modern and postmodern that’s your distinction, yeah? It’s the same trick it’s the same trick, you’re going to move past Plato, no you’re not no one’s gotten past Plato, guy no one, zero people have gotten past Plato, zero, Nietzsche knew it, even though he didn’t admit it, right Heidegger admitted it, he admitted it oh I can’t get past Plato, and so what does he do? He turns Plato into the villain oh of course he did, because he wanted to win and that, Revecky and Peters talked about that, oh yeah that’s the Nazi spirit, that’s how the Nazis got him through ego, yeah, okay, the Nazis were Gnostics, anybody see a pattern here? So, so what who first coined the term? I have no idea Go back to Ante-Lavaye in the 18th century, if you want to you could go back to if you want to, okay, if you want me to be spicy you could go back to the 18th century Ante-Lavaye that whole Gnostic um isn’t this oh gosh, um the school of thought that 1827 1827 yeah, brand new brand new new, young, and recent Theosophism, Theosophism oh is it connected to that? all that sort of Gnostic stuff happening around the 18th century, which leads on to the 18th century, which leads into quote unquote the first and second world wars, all that stuff starts to build up in different schools of thought, which are all trying to replace each other with vegan truth claims essentially, and then that truth claim reaches the highest point in Nazi Germany essentially This is what I’m noticing too, there’s a real interest in Theosophy now and Rudolf Steiner, like what’s that about? Can somebody explain that one to me Mark? How do you make sense of reality if you’re studying axiom is zero? It’s all Gnosticism I know, so, but what where all of a sudden, like they don’t want to submit, they don’t want to look up like why can’t we cooperate this came up in the live stream with VanderKlai earlier today Peter Peterson was talking about this I’m like dude, what are you talking about? He’s saying oh these things emerge and these laws and we can all kind of decide to follow them, and VanderKlai very wisely said, yeah but we don’t and I think people missed that, he said yeah but we don’t ah, we don’t, why? and I said, it’s never going to, not, not it doesn’t work, not it can’t work, it’s never going to work ever, right? Because in order for you and I, any two people or three people or four people or however many people to cooperate we need to be looking in roughly the same direction, doesn’t have to be exactly the same direction, doesn’t have to be exactly the same telos, but we need to have a similar enough telos to cooperate why? Because you if you submit to the telos you can accept the conflict that’s going to come when we have to do something together that’s bigger than the two of us, this is why when John talks about opponent processing, and I go no, it’s not opponent processing, that is a postmodern concept it is, oh, either this way or this way, it’s flat right? One opponent is winning and the other opponent is losing and the ground is equal it’s cooperative processing, why? Because when we cooperate we can move up and when we move up we now have a triangle and that’s the whole key, I give up a little, you give up a little and we both move above the plane of contention the plane of opposition to a higher plane actually, that’s why it’s extremely important to call it cooperative processing and not opponent processing, it’s not opponent processing your brain is not fighting itself, that’s very nasty people are fighting themselves too you look at people in communities, the what makes a community is people want to get along, people cooperate people are actually disagreeable if you want on average you can have a wall full of disagreeable people because it wouldn’t be a wall but you see how that works, right? yeah, you can go into a community and say, oh, these people are fighting for resources, of course they’re not, they wouldn’t have to be in a community to fight for resources, they’d be spread apart, the fact that they’re together means they’re there putting up with something to get something out of it and that something is greater than they could get if they fought, and that’s why this whole idea, it’s all the same problem, right? It’s all the postmodern power narrative, it’s all the same thing, it’s like we’re fighting for resources, we’re opponents with one another no, we’re not, we don’t we can look up and when you look up you don’t have to fight, now you can cooperate, you can both benefit cooperation can benefit both of us, and always, but it can benefit both people, and why is that bad? Is there no friction there? No, there’s plenty of friction, there’s plenty of conflict, but you’re using it to move up, instead of to fight for the same flat, two-dimensional ground, that’s why it’s not opponent processing, it’s cooperative processing, it makes both parties better, everybody gets what they don’t get what they want, I’m not getting what I want, but I’m getting more than I get if I fought with you hmm, you take both I’m talking seriously too the Tolkien thesis is that it’s the song of creation, everyone wants to join in on the harmony, and the people that introduce disharmony every time there’s a song of disharmony, the narrative splits again, it’s a different cycle of essentially degeneration or generation, essentially so that’s the Silmarian in a T, essentially and if you read the Silmarian, it’s basically the bible rephrased for the first quarter, it’s quite amazing if you want to give someone something, how to understand the world you’re like, okay just read this bit because it’s going to break their postmodern modern narrative, because it’s a myth and because it’s not attached to anything they think they know and then you bring it to them, and then like, oh all of a sudden, oh okay, I like fantasy, he’s like, no, you don’t like fantasy, you like reality yeah, yeah yeah, yeah, for sure okay, yeah, um, Miguel Chris makes a fabulous defines, defines in a brilliant way the difference between fantasy, right, and imaginary, it’s just brilliant as you just did Jesse, just brilliant yeah, and it’s a play for fantasy yeah if you’re getting my play on words, but yeah, it’s a play for fantasy, yeah, yeah yeah, but that’s what Peterson I wrote that today, I think, I forget where I wrote it, but that’s what Peterson’s doing he’s telling a fairy tale, man it’s a fairy tale, it’s a tale of himself, right, like you don’t you don’t call Jonathan Pajon an Old Testament prophet unless you’re writing a fairy tale, and you’re he, he, he the way he constructed his whole being, the reason we’re so attracted to him is because he’s a, he literally like we want to know where this tale’s gonna end, he even gets to have this crazy, you know strange passage to these rehab places in the United States, like it’s just full of of, of great storytelling, and then he, all his whole story, I don’t know if you listened to his father talking to him, his story about the, the relative and the ship and everything, it’s not true, his father just kind of looked at him and said well that was I mean it wasn’t a direct relative at all and he didn’t have the story straight even Peterson’s a storyteller he’s entertaining everybody and and he has the correct pattern, he has the pattern, so, but that’s how he maps the meaning, right, that’s a book about, about patterns, this is what people with charisma do though, this is like the anyone that is a charismatic person or appealing to charisma they use that tool they’re telling a narrative, they’re being charismatic, they’re giving in some version of the story but it, but you need both and the problem with the post-moderns is that the post-modern so-called critique which is not a critique, it’s an observation is that people took a perfectly good thing called Marxism and they screwed it up because a charismatic leader came along and corrupted the pure Marxism, that’s their critique that’s literally their actual critique it’s wrong by the way that’s not what happened, what happened was the charismatic leaders knew to take away religion and they did, they hobbled religion and religion is the thing that allows you to tell a good story from a bad story, and then they were able to tell a bad story, whether it’s Stalin or Hitler or Mao or Paul Potts, it doesn’t matter right, it makes no difference right, now you don’t know how to tell the difference between a good story and a bad story because that’s what religion gives you is ethics and ethics is how to tell a good story from, among other things it allows you to say, no, no, no this story is bad, why, because in this story being isn’t good because you’re killing people right, and therefore you’re violating the core axiom of goodness which is being is good, that’s the core axiom of goodness being is good, and what does that mean well we can’t avoid the conflict of having to eat so we have to do something about being so we need to make a sacrifice right, and treat it with reverence and right, and all this stuff comes together in that way that’s the pattern Paul, Mark, have you done a video on neoplatonism and the other thing I’m wondering, do you know how Paul defines it, does Paul VanderKlay it’s really important because it none of them have a none of them have a definition Elizabeth, did you watch the video yesterday with Verveckian Bishop Maximus no, I’m afraid I didn’t we just need to clip that, and that’s it you can’t do it better than that what, doing what what did he do he just put it in the grave and buried it did he give a definition for what on earth anybody’s talking about like I’m really serious about this I think it’s quite important I’ve asked one, zero people I’ve asked at least a dozen experts, zero of them could give me an answer, zero and that’s the problem well, but somebody’s gotta know but somebody’s gotta know when it first because my understanding was the Renaissance had a neoplatonic no, no, that’s anachronistic it’s 1827, right we just looked it up, it’s like 1827 or something what they’re doing is they’re going back in history and casting a narrative but Jack told me the whole idea was just invented as a concept yes the thing is, it might have been a thing, like somebody might have read it you start to understand the world wars when you do that by the way that’s what it is, all the world wars versions of that of that cycle mark is reinterpreting a narrative recreating a narrative of the past for your own it’s re it’s right there, re, re reinterpreting, recreating out of nothing oh, so they’re making it’s an axiomatic claim then is that what you’re saying, Jesse? yes, yes and it doesn’t exist right, well look well then Mark, will you please send this out to the world so the binary mind 1s and 0s, you can only have 0 and you can only have minus 0 or you can have 1 so here’s the book that John used in the Cultivating Wisdom course it’s called The Wisdom of Hypatia okay this is written by Bruce J. McLennan PhD his PhD is in computer science that’s what his PhD is in this is for the first third of the book third of the pages, it’s the first two thirds of the chapters, but for the first third of the pages it is on Epicureanism, and that’s step one and then it’s on Stoicism, that’s step two that section of this book is excellent excellent, okay what he does after that point is he’s writing a fantasy novel no word of a lie in this book he’s telling a narrative of Hypatia we have no writings from Hypatia none, zero he’s writing stories in the last two thirds of this book page wise, about Hypatia and her interaction with her students and little tales which he doesn’t do in Epicureanism and the Stoicism sections he does it in the back section it’s an entirely fantastical story so it’s a nasty it’s total Gnosticism that is what it is yeah, but this is so important it’s incredibly important because it even it feeds into Jonathan Peugeot’s thinking too, if I might be so bold it does no defense postmodernism well he also he considers himself a neoplatonist and I I mean again he’s not wrong if you take John’s everybody who believes in the one of the many is a neoplatonist, roughly speaking then yeah, but John also only recently, like within the past year, figured out that there were church fathers who were non-theists John, I could have told you that right off the top of my head, I haven’t read any of them but I could have told you that because any Catholic would know this, like I don’t even understand I don’t understand he doesn’t seem to have talked to a religious person ever I don’t get it, or he did and he didn’t hear any of the things they’re saying some people like this but some people, well, and it’s fundamentalist Protestant, which is rare I wonder what it was, poor man right, and that is a problem but these people they think fundamentalism is everywhere and it’s not, it’s extremely rare and they think that’s the way people think, and they think Catholics don’t think like that Catholics don’t think that God is a bearded man in the sky, would he not? I’ve talked to dozens and dozens, probably hundreds and hundreds of Catholics, none of them think about that they don’t think that way at all well sometimes people talk that way, but I don’t even talk that way, I don’t even think their language is limited their language is limited did they talk that way or is that what you heard? because this happens to me all the time I say something and somebody goes, you said this I didn’t use any of those words, literally zero of those words, and people are like, no, that’s what I heard you say but that’s not what I said, guy that’s why cooperation is important because when you get into opponent processing, you get these people who, and we had a guy like this in the awakening server, and it’s so funny because I actually typed this out, he gave this is his description of what he does his description, right? oh yeah, whenever anybody says something to me, propositionally whenever they make a statement, I’m skeptical and then we asked him, well are you ever skeptical of your own thoughts? and he said no and I was like fair enough, but you can’t have a conversation with a person like that you can talk to them, you can try to communicate with them, you’re not going to have a productive conversation because every time you make a statement they may not like, they’re going to question it and that’s the problem, like you can’t have a good faith conversation with somebody like that because you’re not capable of good faith, because they’re always opposing you, they never want to cooperate they never want to give up anything on their side, they don’t want to be skeptical of their own thoughts, they don’t want to be skeptical of everybody else’s thoughts, and that’s very Gnostic, but this is the that’s where the solipsism leads, that’s why when you’re not able to look up you only have yourself to reference you go insane, we outsource our sanity yeah, yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah and Gnosticism is insanity I mean let’s call it what it is I don’t know why we can’t use stronger language sometimes, excuse me, but I don’t know, to your point, I think, in fact I listen to you and Jacob, I’m inspired by you and Jacob, Mark, because I think it’s necessary, I think I think it’s right, I think it’s I mean, I’m just speaking as an old fashioned retired teacher like, man, you speak the truth if you love children, right? You don’t mess around with things about every, like in every little detail, you say this is the way it is, you model reality for them, man what’s that say? The immortality of that morasque history of the religion with no name this is another Gnostic metanarrative of trying to pull together parts of history parts of things we think we may know, acrobotany you’re like, okay when did this acrobotany thing exist other than on Joroga like, when did we find out about the acrobotany, we can trace back some possible wine seeds and things in this jar that we think could be used here if it was used here they may have been doing this and if they may have been doing this, then the orthodox were smoking heroin or whatever in their church yeah, yeah I found the definition of neoplatonism and it goes right along with what Jesse was saying is pulling we’re going to take this here we’re going to take that here we’re going to put it all together and mix it all up alright, alright, I’ve got it here I haven’t read that book by the way I’ve got it that’s funny Jesse nice there’s your neoplatonism where did you get this? make it bigger Ethan has been on fire with the memes baby there it is that’s John’s neoplatonism right there wait, where did you get this from? it’s just some did somebody post it somewhere? you didn’t make that Ethan he made it, I stole it, I plagiarized it no, tell me the truth, did you really make it? it’s brilliant wow I just proposed John’s head on top of a meme yeah, this is just a thing on the internet that somebody uploaded yeah, but what’s in the middle there? all the light stuff oh, it’s just occultism, you know drawing circles, lighting candles emergence it is emergence well that’s what an incantation is in occultism wow the way I got onto this is James Lindsay has a talk called WTF is SEL he’s got his finger on the pulse James Lindsay right now I’m really impressed with him now he’s nailing the philosophical problems that we shouldn’t even be talking about like you said Mark, they’re so ridiculous right, right and that’s the thing Lindsay’s again, I think Lindsay goes too far with the historical connections and he’s got them backwards people are discovering the same thing that Hegel discovered and then they’re finding out Hegel and then they discovered it and then Lloyd Hegel’s smart so I must be even smarter, right that’s what’s happening no, no, but he’s a clear thinker he’s a very clear thinker James Lindsay and he’s rigorous with himself right I think he’s going to be very interesting to watch this year yeah and his negation of reality was excellent that talk was really good I’m going to watch that, I just listened to him with voice so yeah, he’s fascinating, so keep going so this neoplatonism thing should we even the term shouldn’t really exist in a sense then that’s why I keep saying it doesn’t exist and I go give me a freaking definition if you think it exists buddy, and they can’t I’m like Guy, if you think it exists and you don’t have a definition, maybe you shouldn’t be talking about it, that’s all I’m saying maybe you should be talking about it you know, did anybody notice it’s a veil it’s something you put in front of you to try and see the world through so it does exist on a surface level it’s a veil and you can’t see things clearly it’s just not the same for everybody that’s the problem, when they’re saying neoplatonism, they’re not talking about a similar thing, that’s what makes it gnostic, gnosticism is all about personalizing the world to yourself because you’re solipsistic that’s exactly right, I think it is the same old, same old, like it’s the same old pattern, yeah, for sure it sounds so cool like sophisticated, right it’s new it’s postmodernism for the past it’s neoplatonism, new platonism, postmodernism modernism, now we have post it’s the same pattern, you’re saying the same thing, and John’s always going on about, we can’t go back we can’t go back, we can’t go back, and then he goes back to neoplatonism, I’m like, dude, you’re going back, and now he’s like, you know what we gotta go back further, it’s after Socrates, which is before Plato technically, it’s like I thought we couldn’t go back, John which is it, which is, it’s gnostic, it’s like, oh wait I can’t use neoplatonism because there’s too many holes, I’m gonna have to go back to Socrates instead, but we can’t go back isn’t his whole thing too, trying to get rid of narrative yeah, oh yeah yes, but he’s going back to dig out a narrative that works with these thesis and well he’s making it up too right, I mean, again, it’s overt you are making it up you are making it up like stop making up stories about about porphyry and platinus and their big movement and how it got absorbed into Christianity it’s like, no, what got absorbed into Christianity was Plato and Aristotle, that’s what got absorbed into Christianity, okay and the fact that that resembles all the, you know, resembles enough of the people who also took their stuff from Plato and Aristotle is not a brilliant deduction it’s obvious obvious, of course of course you grew up in the soup of Plato of course you ate the soup of Plato, no kidding genius, really like what are you saying at that what are you gonna tell me next, the sun rises in the east? really? I’m so genius of you honestly, I’m like you guys are just like really stroking your ego here and you didn’t really say anything all that fricking groundbreaking that anybody could have figured out on their own I know, but you know what, these academics, they’re kind of stuck I mean, think about them, right these, like Heidegger, like John Pervaipy, they’re stuck they’ve got this Gidhagel they’ve got this thing going and they’re stuck, they have to think of something innovative and if everybody’s gonna give attention to it why wouldn’t they just keep milking I shouldn’t say milking it, because that’s not very generous of me, but why wouldn’t they feel like they’re on a winning streak with this nonsense and they get enough attention for it so, I think he’s John Pervaipy’s stuck I think he’s absolutely stuck in his gig he can’t get out of it now, because that’s his job, that’s what he does yeah, well no, and that’s 20 years of work, I mean people so people were like, you know, even Jack said this, when I talked to Jack on Clubhouse, like a year ago about Pervaipy, he said that was a brilliant breakdown of all his work, Mark, you should debate him, and I said I’m never gonna debate John, it’s not gonna happen because A, this is my thing, like you think postmoderns know how to breakdown ideas, they’re all amateurs compared to me, I’m really good at it, I can breakdown anything true or not, I can break it all down I can put you crying in a corner with stupid ideas, that’s easy to do cause it’s easy to do, and it’s a skill that I happen to have, and have honed over many years multiple decades I’m really good, you may have seen it when Claire Kock came on one of my live streams and I just fricking took her apart I’m like, no, no, no, you’re not using these tricks I invented some of these tricks on the internet you’re not using these tricks on me, it’s not gonna happen I’m gonna catch every mistake you make verbally and I’m gonna beat you with all of them right, so it’s not fair, it’s not a fair fight also, John’s got like 20, 25 years of work into this project what good is any idiot can push down the tower, it’s not fair, and it’s not nice and there’s no reason to do it there’s no reason to do it, and maybe that will change, like maybe they’ll come a day when there’s some group around him and I need to dismantle this whole thing and show them all that they’re morons, that they’re Gnostic cesspool morons and occasionally I did do that on the awakening server, and that may happen, but there’s no reason to do it now yeah, I just saw Luke is he around? he had this really interesting idea about the consciousness about consciousness and the unconscious when he was, I think it was a live stream actually are there more live streams now? I don’t know, because I’ve never really been too involved in this whole corner but are there more live streams happening? I think so, yeah I think with Jacob’s project and Randall’s United has taken off and some of these other people are sort of vying for attention, yeah I think there are more lives, and plus BOM kind of blew up, so I know they don’t want to admit that but that’s okay, they did and so there’s more stuff out there but nobody’s on there anymore like Joey’s gone and nobody’s on there and occasionally they still get together, whatever but, you know, they used to before the summer, so last spring and last winter people were on there all the time, five or six people on constantly all day, and that’s not the case anymore, and like fair enough, I don’t care it was never my project I mean, I’m, you know Vanu Klay doesn’t go there every Friday anymore he used to, right, he used to drop in he doesn’t do that, so Does Grail Country’s, Grail Country connected to this little corner Oh yeah, oh yeah that’s Nate, that’s Nate Heil stuff, right So is that, does he go way back in this Oh yeah, yeah, Nate’s Nate’s in early, yeah, yeah yeah, Nate went after me today on the live stream and I basically said, you’re not attacking my ideas you’re attacking James Lindsay’s ideas and you just said you agreed with him, so do it, and I told them do a video on it they said, if you think I inverted Gnosticism, do a video on it cause you’re fighting with Lindsay, you’re not fighting with me I got all that from Lindsay those two videos, that WTF is SEL which is hard to listen to and it’s long, but he makes a case that Neoplatonism reduces to occultism yes, I think that’s right he made that case, I went oh I need to listen to that what’s the name of that one WTF is SEL well you’ll like it, it’s about education it’s about socio-emotional learning how am I gonna find it, that’s always my problem just type in WTF is SEL? it’ll come right up as a video on YouTube, I guarantee it and who is it with again, Verveckian that’s James Lindsay and the negation of reality was the recent talk that he did that was excellent the first 35 minutes is talk yeah, I think he’s really doing great work, James Lindsay that’s great, that’s exciting actually, to see it coming together no, he is, he’s doing great work I agree, it’s really important work Mark, how would you if it’s possible, okay is it possible, how would you slowly help someone out of solstice that’s what I wanted to ask we’ve been on here for 3 hours but that’s something, yeah I have a few friends that have jumped on this Vervecki train and then now they’re in the synoptic and they’ve read that immortality key thing and it’s just like, okay, how do I break the veil that you’re in yeah, the first thing is to find out how they got there so if they’re in something like the immortality key you’ve got to get them to you have to do everything backwards one of the reasons why I’m good at this is because I’m dyslexic and so I see things back to front and front to back all the time by accident so I’ve had to but I’ve cultivated all that I use it to my advantage I tell people I’m dyslexic and they go, what, how and I’m like, I make that mistake all the time I just correct it really fast that’s my trick and sometimes I slip and then I get it wrong that’s my trick and sometimes I slip and then I’m screwed because once I make a mistake on a sequence I can’t get it out of my stupid head but what you need to do is say well you think science and history is important because they’re propositionally stuck for sure you know they’re propositionally stuck so you get them into yeah, yeah, that’s absolutely true and then you can either do a Peterson trick which I go over in a video that I posted earlier in the chat my latest Peterson video which has almost a thousand views amazingly enough way more popular than I thought it would be you can lead them through the history and grab the symbolism along the way and use the prophecy and then get them in through Egypt to the Bible that’s one way you can do it or you can break apart their worldview so what you do is you take the history and you take the history and you take the history and you take the history so what you do is you say oh history is important and science is important you realize the book you’re reading doesn’t have either component in it because like I said I read the Wisdom of Hypatia and I was really struggling with the end until we did the book club and then I’ve got Manuel now we’ve got some brain power with us and that’s where the cooperative processing comes from now the two of us are because we argue less and less over the past couple of years, but we argued pretty reciprocally in the beginning. It was pretty heated stuff. That’s when we were able to see, wait a minute, he’s quoting Hypatia. And then we’re looking up on the internet all over the place. There are no writings from Hypatia, none. Well, hold on. All the stuff in the Epicurean section, the Stoic section, are valid and verifiable outside of the book, except this whole section of the book, which is 2 thirds of the pages. It’s the last chapter. It’s the last major section. It’s part three. But it’s 2 thirds of the pages. It’s all fiction. Well, wait a minute. No wonder why it doesn’t make any sense. It’s someone’s random story, and he happened to be a software engineer. Now we’re in my expertise. I know software engineers really well. I know exactly what they’re like, and I know exactly what kind of story they’d make up to justify exactly what kind of religion, because they deal with software. So you already know a bunch about how they think and how they’re going to end up and where they’re going to start and all that stuff. And that’s the problem, is that once you realize it’s a fantasy, once you realize it’s a deliberate fiction, now you’re in a whole other realm. And now you can say, wouldn’t you rather read something that has some historical heft to it that’s been around for a while? Because Taleb talks about this. One way to get people out of this stuff. So if I were going to put people on a reading list, I would say, read all of the Freakonomics books. There’s like four of them. They’re fantastic for teaching you that you can know nothing about the world and understand zero psychology. They’re fantastic at that. And read Nassim Taleb, all of his books, because that gives you this sense. He puts in the Lindy effect. So if a book isn’t 200 years old, don’t read it except his, because they’re awesome. But really, the survivability thing. And if you believe in evolution, how are you going to fight that? You’re not. You get no tools to fight that. Otherwise, you have to destroy evolution. And I do this to people all the time. I say, well, yeah, you can do that. But now you’re denying evolution. And they get all upset. But then they realize I’m right. They don’t have to admit to it. Unconsciously, they know I’m right. All you have to do is hook them. It’s set the hook and run away. Run away, because the rest of the work has to be revelation. And that was a word, actually, I should have mentioned at the beginning, the word I wanted them to use. How do people get there? Oh, they don’t build up. It gets revealed to them from above. It’s revelation from above. That’s how it happens. We all know this. The people who’ve been through it know it. They’re like, oh, we had a revelation from above. It didn’t come from below at all. It came from above. It came down on us. And it became undeniable to us from our phenomenological experience. There’s your experience. It’s not the experience that you emerged. It’s the experience that emerged upon you. It emanated down upon you. And it’s like, wow. And then the world, the emergence of the world changes as the result of the emanation down upon you. But you have to set the stage. And the way you set the stage is get them out of the fantasy. You have to tell them, no, that’s a fantasy. Let me show you how that’s a fantasy. The tricks that I can use is you can go into physics because I know all the holes in physics. Maybe not all of them, but enough of them that you don’t know them. And once you run into them, you’re screwed. And I know almost all the holes in philosophy because I’ve had all these, without reading any of the philosophers, because I hate them all. I haven’t even read Plato yet, although I have to, because Ethan sent me the Republic. So I’ll be reading that soon. But I don’t need it because I know where the holes are. I know where the arguments fail. Because you can look at the arguments religion makes and say, well, why was religion making those arguments? Because nobody else did. That’s why. And then once they made those arguments, that’s the hole in everybody else. Because why are they going to fill that hole that’s already filled? The problem with Gnosticism is that they don’t start there anymore. They start with the symbolic representations and interpretations. Or they get traumatized out of it, like John did at age nine or 10 or 11 or whatever, right in that range. Now they don’t have access to Jonathan Pujo’s symbolism. They don’t have it. And so they have to be led into it slowly. And that’s what Peterson does brilliantly, is he says, look at these patterns. Look at this stuff. Look at these connections. The most brilliant thing Peterson does, and I think it’s in my second Peterson video, the most brilliant thing he does is he says, look at something like Pinocchio. Why do you understand that movie? And then he goes through all the facts of the movie. First of all, it’s a cartoon. Second of all, it’s about a wooden boy. Third of all, there’s a talking cricket. None of that movie makes any sense when you break it down. None of it. None of it should, how the hell does it make sense? What is the magic, because it is, that makes that movie understandable to you at all? Well, there’s a good freaking question. I don’t know the answer to that question. Of course you don’t, because science can’t explain it. That’s why you don’t know the answer, because science has been called it to narrative. Narrative is the thing that explains it. So that’s the trick. That’s what you have to do. You have to point out to them, there’s stuff in the world that you don’t have an explanation for that you think you know. Another brilliant trick that John uses, that I agree with, even though I disagree with the wording, is the idea of participatory knowledge. Why does that work? It works because you’re not saying knowledge isn’t the highest value. Although, and I try to avoid that. I try to avoid telling people, no, knowledge is worthless. I try to avoid, it is, but whatever. I don’t even mention that. I just say, there’s a type of knowledge that you don’t know about called participatory knowledge. It’s not, and then I can contrast it with propositional knowledge. That’s why I actually like and use those words, even though they’re technically inaccurate, and I don’t use them in the model, because the model is accurate and precise. But I say, well, what about this participatory knowledge? What are you doing about that? You think knowledge is important. Here’s a whole branch of knowledge you haven’t paid any attention to. What do you start paying attention to that type of knowledge? Well, where can you get some of that? Oh, I know, you could cooperate with other people. You could join a sports team. You could play a game. You could, right? How do you cooperate? Because those are the skills we’re missing. Right, it goes back to what Peugeot said in the Q&A that I mentioned earlier. Why not practices? Because practices don’t teach you to get up and do something you don’t wanna do on a particular day with people you don’t wanna be around. That’s what it teaches you. That’s what you need. That’s the training for participation, because there’s always gonna be somebody in the group that you don’t get along with. There’s always gonna be something you’re doing in the group that you don’t wanna do. There’s always gonna be a reason not to go. And that’s what church on Sunday teaches you. And look, I mean, I’m still blown away by that. That was like a year ago at least that Peugeot said that. I’m still blown away. I’m still angry as hell that he said this. I’m like, ah, I love practices. They’re my favorite thing. I’m building community with practices. How dare you say that? But he’s right. And that’s the key. Those are the key principles, Jesse. So I can’t tell you exactly how, right? And I’m trying to do a list of tells so that you can colloquialize. Yeah, absolutely. Because one thing I tried to ask a friend was, through your point, if you don’t subscribe to some version of religion, a religion will be subscribed to you. You will, or if you don’t have an ideology or a way of framing the world, you will take on someone else’s whether you know it or not. Yes, exactly. They did not like that point. Then they thought that they could just, you could just continue to play. You could just figure it out on your own. I’m like, that’s not gonna happen. You’re eventually going to bend your will to some version of a collective of thought that you don’t maybe fully understand. That’s gonna influence you. Right, right. Well, a better message in that case is, it is something like, do you see these patterns? Do you see BLM washing feet and holding court? And what do you think those patterns are? Because I would classify those as religious patterns. Okay, well, why is that happening? Well, because it’s inevitable. And that’s why I focus on the navigating pattern part. I went over this in the live stream today. I’m like, guys, this is why my channel’s named Gating Patterns, because you’re seeing these patterns over and over again, and I’m showing them this is what they are and this is how to deal with them, or trying to anyway. Maybe I’m doing a poor job of it, but that’s what I’m trying to do. Yeah, it’s important. It’s very important. Oh, and that’s for Vicki’s point. One of her Vicki’s points is cultural cognitive grammar. What’s that? That’s what I’m talking about. I’m taking cultural cognitive grammar to be the grounding of communication with other people. And that’s why when somebody says neoplatonism, and I try to always say neoplatonism doesn’t exist, and it’s a bit of a meme now for those guys, I don’t care. It’s important that you understand that it doesn’t exist. It’s, and Carthage must be destroyed at the end of every speech. It’s the same principle, but you have to do it. And I actually think every person who’s been taught that, and I think I’m right, I actually think everybody listening and watching and whatever, everybody that sees this, should anytime anybody says to them neoplatonism, they should say neoplatonism doesn’t exist. I actually believe that that is really important because it helps fight the Gnosticism, which is inevitable in neoplatonism. It’s inevitable in neoplatonism because it’s coming from the solipsism, from the belief that you have some small chance in hell at understanding some significant part of the world, which you don’t. I’m a muppet, you’re a muppet. We can’t understand that. The world is bigger than you are. You’re not gonna be able to make sense of most of it. That’s just an unrealistic expectation. It’s ridiculous. So you didn’t know the world. It’s that whole point of, we made a couple weeks ago of where do you start, not what are you starting with. Yes, yes. Okay. Not where you’re standing, but where did you start? Yeah, I think that’s important. I wish I had said that to Peugeot when I had the chance, but I blew it. I’ll get to them eventually. I’ll get some time with them and then I’ll remember to say that. Yeah. No, I’m, yeah. I got a lot from that. I wanna think on that a lot. Because I think this is a really, it’s a really puzzling dimension because many people are, as Elizabeth has said, the towers pointed on, yeah, that we’re dealing with this a lot more as the internet speeds things up, as the virus spreads in another way. And I have a whole, COVID has brought that, it’s doubled down. We’re essentially living in another 1940s, 1950s era, where people don’t wanna deal with the traumas of what they’ve gone through or are going through. And so- Well, but there’s two dimensions, right? And this is where, say, I don’t like the psychological development models. And the reason why I don’t like them is because they tend to assume that it’s a staircase up and that you never slide back. But what actually happened is we slid back and we’ve lost the skills of participation with each other in person. We lost being able to read people’s faces, literally. Your face was wiped away, right? We’ve lost all that. So a lot of people’s skills now are poor and now they don’t wanna go out. And when they do, they’re anxious. And I did a video on this, actually. I talk about why is everybody anxious. It’s an older video, right? But it’s on my channel, Navigating Patterns, right? It’s out there. And- I’ll comment. It talked to, oh yes, comment. No, it’ll be good, because I’ll redo that, because that’s really important to understand why people are like that. They’re all wound up. And part of the winding up is that they’ve lost the skill of navigating participation in person. And now they’re preferring navigating participation online. Now that’s a blessing and a curse. The blessing is, well, we can get online and build them back up. Maybe, maybe, maybe. I’m not claiming that we can, but maybe we can. I think we can. That’s part of my mission. Sure, it’s one aspect of it, right? But there’s also another aspect, which is, well, they’re trapped in some sense in themselves, right? So now the Gnosticism just explodes because they’re not, they don’t have to deal. We’re living in this world where you don’t have to. And look, to be fair, to give the conspiracy theorists their due, there is a hundred billion dollars at least tied up in investment in some form of home delivery industry that is supposed to overturn the current retail industry completely. The grocery stores is one of them. No word of a lie. People have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in this, okay? If you do the math and they didn’t, honestly, they didn’t, if you personally, because you can do the math, it’s not a sustainable business model. Costs too much money. Even with automatic driving cars, which are never gonna happen, by the way, because they can’t take a left-hand turn after 10 years. After 10 years, I can’t take a left-hand turn. You’re not getting a self-driving, it’s not gonna happen, okay? It’s not realistic. That business model cannot work, cannot full stop. They just didn’t do the math correctly because they live in cities and they did city math. And they don’t understand that most people in the United States, for example, don’t live in cities. It may work in parts of Europe where it’s really crowded, but it ain’t working in the US and that’s the big market because that’s who has all the money. We have all the free capital in the world as individuals. It’s insane how wealthy we are. I haven’t worked in three years. And that was just, I better get a job soon, by the way. Yeah, I haven’t worked in three years because we’re just so wealthy that if you’re just a little careful and move to a cheap part of the country, I mean, you wouldn’t believe how cheap it is to live here compared to New England. It’s unreal, right? Then you can last a long time, right? Three plus years so far and running out of runway here, but whatever, right? It can work. That market is half what they think it is and not all those people are gonna adopt. They’re gonna lose all that money. So COVID for them was an actual opportunity to kill the retail business entirely. Actually, not conspiratorially, actually different people. Some people wanna replace cars. Some people wanna replace grocery stores. Some people wanna replace restaurants. They just want a piece of that business. They’re using a very simplistic economic model. They don’t understand why people shop at malls. They don’t understand why people shop at grocery stores. They don’t understand why people want their own cars. They just see it as an economic thing and they can replace it and make it cheaper and people will use it. People don’t buy on price. They don’t understand that, right? So they were actively making sure that people weren’t out cooperating and being face to face. They were happy about that, right? That looks like a conspiracy, but they didn’t care about the healthcare system because a bunch of people wanted to crash the US healthcare system with COVID overtly because they wanted full socialized medicine, right? And of course that backfired on them because most of the socialized medicine systems didn’t do as well as they were claiming, right? Didn’t do as well as they thought. So it kind of exposed some of the, like in Italy in particular, right? It was real clear that, oh, Northern Italy and Southern Italy don’t have the same medical system at all. And one really bad, because the Western is really bad. That’s really weird here. If you investigate the Australian one, it’s really weird. We pay stupid amount of taxes for. It’s a good system on the surface level, but if you need specialized care, you gotta pay. And for most things these days, you can’t talk to a GP about something special because they’re just gonna be like, all right, we’ll refer you over there. So it was like, why did I come here for you to pay? It’s a two tiered system, but they don’t realize all the countries have a two tiered system. They don’t have socialized medicine. They have a two tiered system. They have a pay to play system and a big dust up in the UK right now. And I know this wasn’t a potential issue in New Zealand and Australia, but it’s now in the UK, it’s a big deal. The four play people get access to the same healthcare system first. So it’s not the socialized medicine that they’re selling, because those people are actually buying access and buying better care by just paying for it. So everyone’s got free care and they’re like, yeah, but we’re just gonna shell out money and get better free care and take that free care away from you, because we only have one system. So the only way to get privilege system, privilege access is to pay, but you’re buying privilege access to the same resources. And so it’s not a great system if you think about it that way, it’s an elitist system where the elites get better medical care and the free people get screwed. That’s what happens with those systems, right? That’s the problem. Yeah. And all these people have different reasons for having COVID get worse, right? For having lockdowns, all different reasons, but they all want lockdowns. And so now we don’t know how to cooperate anymore. And why are we tribal? Because we can’t go to the grocery store and say hi. We can’t smile, we can’t, right? We’ve lost that skillset entirely. Some people just don’t have it anymore and they get depressed and they get stuck on their houses. And then it gets worse, they get solipsistic, they go online. The one kid introduced me, this was on my server, on the Mark of Wisdom Discord server, he introduced me to this guy talking about this stuff. And he basically went into all this deep philosophy garbage. And I was just like, my ears were bleeding. I was like, oh, stop talking about these people. I hate them all, they’re all dumb. And he’s Hegelian dialectic in all nine yards. And he says, really, we can’t break out of us being within our heads. And I was like, yeah, you can. I’ll throw a rock at you. That’ll work. And the guy said, well, this is the Jefferson fallacy or something. And I’m like, no, that’s not a fallacy. It’s a rock and it hurts. Rocks that hurt are not fallacies. This goes back to Peterson, what’s real pain. And I said, it doesn’t even matter if you think the rock’s OK. The fact that if you lived entirely in your head, you’d have almost full control of everything that happened to you phenomenologically should be enough to tell you that when a rock hits you, your model of the world is wrong and can’t help you. The concept you’re using will not function. It will not allow you to function in the world because there are rocks that are going to get thrown at you, metaphorically and otherwise. If you’re around me, I’ll just backhand you. I don’t care. I’ve done it before. I’ll do it again. And it works. And it snaps people out of really bad situations. To be quite honest with you, it’s super effective. And that’s the thing. You can’t actually get around the world without society. And one of the mistakes vanically. I had a thought this week about COVID being the pusher of the social contract, to push of the French enlightenment and social contract in the world. So the globalization of social contract. OK. Yeah, yeah. It’s partly right there. OK. It is, right? Because you’re encoding in law how people are going to interact. You can interact, but you have to wear a mask or stay six feet apart. So when I was on Clubhouse in the beginning, there’s this guy, Greg Ellis, who’s an actor. He’s an excellent guy. He wrote a book called The Respondent that everybody should probably read. It’s terrifying, but it’s important. And anytime anybody said social distancing, he would stop them and correct them and say, it’s not social distancing. It’s physical distancing. And I was just like, that is so brilliant. And I was like, why didn’t I see that? Even I got sucked in by the programming. It’s not social. You do not socially distance from people. This is why it’s an intimacy crisis. You’re not socially distancing from people. You’re a lunatic. You need people. You can’t socially distance from them. You’d have to live in a cave and make your own fire and food and screw that. I’m not doing that. Forget about that. I’m not socially distancing. I like my electricity and my computers. People did that, though. They took on the face of social distancing. The social contract. They adopted the social contract, and they defended it. Oh, you have to get this crazy shot that doesn’t work. You have to do this. You have to wear a mask. You have to send your kids to school with a mask. They put mask mandates in Massachusetts in a couple of the school districts. This month or last month, I was like, what the hell is going on up there? I’m so glad I moved out of New England. I’m like, you people are killing your kids. You’re destroying their ability to function in the world. We had a 15-minute city thing where you couldn’t drive more than five kilometers from your home. Right. Basically, we’ve got that whole conspiracy about the 15-minute city. Just tried here. It was like very strange, very strange. So it all does relate to sultism and narcissism in a way, because these are all ways of being in the world that aren’t, that are emerging essentially, are coming up and being adopted. Well, then you’re using that which is below to determine what emerges. Yeah. Right. Not understanding that the law of man comes from the law of God and is informed by the law of nature. There’s three laws there, three, and they’re different. And it didn’t come from the bottom. People didn’t agree. This is what Peter Peterson was saying on the last year of Vanderklake earlier. I was like, dude, that didn’t happen. It didn’t come from the bottom, and people agreed on it. Law comes down from the top. I thought that was an interesting observation about the misnomer on social distancing. When we were talking about competition versus opposition, I was thinking about, I was thinking, I wonder what the genesis of, like in statistics or computer science or whatever you want to call it, I wonder when it got called, opponent processing. And then I started thinking, well, can I come up with any useful use of the concept of opposition? You could take a stoic lens towards life and that which doesn’t kill me and makes me stronger or whatever. If something bad happens to you, what’s the benefit of the situation? You can find the silver lining in things. But then I noticed, and another misnomer is in business school, is a competitive advantage. So it’s got this idea of a me versus usness, because we want to make a moat around and defend defenses around our secrets. And it kind of gets to the idea of where I begin and where I end and others begin, right? I was thinking about… Oh, man, the last thought was the kicker. And it just flipped through my fingertips. Oh, man. That was a big… Oh, yeah, so an observation I was thinking about that I noticed was, when I think about the concept of opposition internally or how it feels like what I run on a whale, I would use words like opposition, like that kind of energy, internally, it’s like if I’m hard on myself and that works to drive me in some extent, I don’t have a very cooperative lens towards myself, but I tend to, at least I think I like to think that I do towards others. So that was just, I noticed a contradiction. What seems to be a contradiction in terms of how I would describe the world versus how I’d describe my inside world. I don’t know what to make of that. It’s just an observation. But yeah, the other part was just like, what’s the use of the concept of opposition? And then we hear concepts like competitive or whatever, is that an instant red flag of… It is. Those are tales. So I’ll read it to you, Danny, because somebody made this defense, I forget who it was, I apologize to whoever it was. Somebody made this defense. Oh, no, I think it was Sevilla King, actually. But it might have been somebody else. It might have been Karen Wong or somebody else. The opponent processes a color theory that states the human visual system interprets information about color by processing signals from photoreceptor cells in an antagonistic manner. OK? That’s because there’s a delta. That’s wrong. The antagonistic manner is wrong. Your body does not fight with itself. That is wrong. The thing that makes it your body is that it does not fight with itself. That’s what makes a body. That does not mean there isn’t competition for resources and things like that. But there is a cooperation between the parts that maintains the unity. Obviously. Otherwise, it’s not a unity. It’s really not that hard. It is axiomatic. And these are tales. So one of the things that really upset me was VanderKlay did a video, I think it was last week or the week before, I forget. And he said, yeah, you know, now I can’t hear opponent processing without Mark saying cooperative processing. And then he said, look, Mark, I got to disagree. I like opponent processing better. And I basically posted a comment on there, and I said, it’s an anti-Christian concept. Sorry, it’s an anti-Christian concept. Opponent processing. It is not opponent processing. You need to cooperate to go up. You need to cooperate to have that third dimension, to build that triangle, to move upwards. You’re not going to move upwards if you’re in opposition. Opposition, no one’s… You’re fighting over the same ground when you’re in opposition. When you cooperate, you can move up and build that triangle closer to God, basically, if you’re a Christian, right? That should be your goal. Or so they tell me. I don’t understand where the confusion is. I don’t understand why people, especially VanderKlay in particular, doesn’t like cooperative processing better. Because it’s more accurate, and it’s absolutely correct, and it’s very neoplatonic, right? Because it’s many versus the one. The difference between the many and the one is quite simply rebellion, right? You can’t have a one with rebellion. That’s it. You can’t have a one with opposition. The only thing you can have with opposition is a bunch of parts. And then you go, well, why is it that we can’t all just get along? Because we’re all solipsistic and in opposition in a postmodern power narrative. Because postmodernism is evil. And it’s not anything else. And that’s the real problem. People get all upset. I’m like, no, it’s only parasitic. There is no generative aspect to postmodernism. There’s no generative. I have a video on this, on postmodernism, on my channel, Navigating Patterns. There’s nothing generative in postmodernism. I’ve asked dozens and dozens of people over the years. Nobody can come up with a single good thing about postmodernism. Not that they don’t come up with something and say, this is good. It’s that I quickly dismantle that and show why that’s not good. And it’s parasitic. And yeah, look, parasitic things, if you look at them from the right layer, look good. I am a parasite upon the internet right now because I’m using all my internet bandwidth to do right, which is fine. Like you can cast that as a good coming from my parasitic behavior. But at the end of the day, there’s a parasitic aspect to it. But it’s not only parasitic because I’m generating content that people are interested in. So, right. But you can cart out the parts and make it look like something that it’s not. That’s part of the postmodern. I can deconstruct. I can tell you this thing looks exactly the way I want it to look. Oh, you can do that. A three year old can do that too. Mommy, I can tell you why I should have ice cream for breakfast. And he can. The three year old can do that. That’s great. You’re a three year old now. Fantastic. Congratulations. Very happy for you. Also, you’re a three year old. I’m not going to listen to you, you moron. Go away. Three year olds get nothing but told to go to bed. That’s how that works. Or beatings. Beatings will continue until morale improves. Daniel, in my toilet break there, I was just thinking about the idea of opposition, and narcissism, and how narcissism is almost an opposition with yourself. It’s a disharmony with yourself. And so that has it. Because also there’s the sense with post-monotism, it’s a delinear system. You’re not continuing on a line. You’re going in detours, essentially. You’re going off. Random direction. Random direction. They’ve got experience. Oh, I’ve got this flow. Oh, I need more flow. No, now I’ll learn rock climbing. Oh, I need more flow. Oh, now I’ll learn art. Oh, I need more flow. Well, now I’ll play a video game. Oh, I need more flow. Well, now I’ll do it. Right. And it’s just, it’s endless. Yeah. Well, yeah. Flow is a very interesting concept because you can have, I guess, flow and anti-flow just as much. I think you’re pointing out the anti-flow. Because you can be in group sync. When a group syncs together, they’re in flow, they’re in sync. Well, then that’s the problem, right? Like with John’s stuff, he always talks about this stuff very individualistically. You can get this or you can do that and singular you. Right. And then, of course, because of English, I like to use y’all because I think it’s great. Floral you. Right. Because what happens is, and this is why I say he doesn’t take this idea of communitas seriously, he says communitas, but then he moves right past it. He’s, oh, yeah, the sangha is the new Buddha and whatever. Right. He says all that. He doesn’t talk about how to make that work. And it’s all equality. And that doesn’t make it work because whenever you get a group together, you need a structure. Someone’s got to lead things. Someone’s got to start things on time. Someone’s got to tell people to shut the hell up. Right. Someone’s got to set the rules. Someone’s got to close the, you know, formally close the activity, maintain the container, right? Like all this work has to get done. The highest tea loss is hominid in some sense. Yeah, I agree. Right. So I guess when I hear like disharmony and opposition, that to me, well, it’s sort of some synonyms in terms of like, if I’m, like, I guess it’s just lack of friction. Like if I’m doing anything and there are internal frictions, that’s going to slow me down. Right. Yeah. I don’t know. So the corollary there is that the term opposition can only, is, I don’t know, can only, is, is it, is it, is the word I would use to describe a feeling. Right. So that’s not really the typical connotation that comes up, I think, when, when people hear the word opposition, they usually think football linebacker, right? Like external barrier, the opposing force, you know? Yeah. But there’s an unconscious factor. I mean, this is why I say signals are important because most of them are unconscious and that’s the problem. You get the spirit of opposition. Why would a Christian, a pastor like Paul VanderKlay say, I don’t like cooperative processing. I like opponent processing. When opponent, I just read it, the source. Yeah. The source is from neuroscience. It talks about antagonism. No, your body is not antagonistic towards itself. No, your three nerve cells for different colors are not fighting for line, line signal space. That’s not happening. They are cooperating to give you an image. Otherwise you wouldn’t have an image if it were an antagonist. Everything in the body, when you’re talking about, say, systems theory with respect to biology, right, which is the integration health people, right? They categorize disease in terms of antagonism or imbalance where one part of your body is fighting another part of your body. That’s because it’s not you. When you do that to yourself, you are technically ill. That’s what illness is. That’s what dis-ease is. What’s ease? Ease is we’re all getting along together. What’s dis-ease? Some part of us is not getting along with the rest of us. It’s not an opponent relationship. That’s just wrong. And it’s not right. There is zero correct about it. And that is a hundred percent not correct. It’s that simple. And anybody who tells you differently is lying to you and probably to themselves. Sorry, that’s the reality of the situation. This is why it’s important that people understand that. Like, you have to cooperate to have a thing. Cooperation is what makes things things. Things that don’t cooperate aren’t things, they’re parts. Daniel, are you trying to, I guess, bring in the idea that masculinity is being framed currently as an antagonistic opposition to things? It’s kind of being framed that way. No, well, that wasn’t what I was thinking. Business schools are very much like opportunity maximals. So they want things to, if someone’s in your way to make your opportunities or your business better, you go to war with them. It’s your business success. There’s a whole TV show. Opposition. Yeah, I mean, we use lots of war like frames in our culture. I’m sure there are many reasons for that. But no, I was more thinking of the etymology of the word, like the idea of how did the concept of opposing opponent processing make its way into the academia and like computer science or whatever. And then when we use words like competitive advantage in school, why is there so much us for stemness in our frames that are embedded in our institutions? I was just thinking about I wonder where that came from. I wonder what kind of hint. I wonder what the point is. Sun Tzu, the art of war. And then what happened is nobody read it except me. And then they proceeded as if, right? Well, I mean, Steve Jobs and all the guys in the 80s were very big on that book. And then they were like, oh, he carries a copy of it with him all the time. And a lot of people did. Right. But the problem was that they didn’t read the damn book. And so they came up with these wackadoodle, you know, oh, well, everything’s war. No, that’s not what Steve Jobs thought. And if you read the stupid book, you’d know that most of the strategies and there are cooperative strategies. Don’t engage the enemy. Let the enemy engage you first. Right. It’s the things like that. They’re not attack strategies. They’re not oppositional strategies. That’s not what they are. You need to read the book. And I thought it was interesting in business instead of saying, instead of saying, oh, I have a cooperative business advantage as we say synergy. Right. So the idea of even in the Bible, like when you say like iron sharpens, sharpens iron as one man sharpens another, that sounds like opposition, but there’s no reason to think that. Right. Right. You know, it’s but we just my mind goes straight to friction. Right. I’m interpreting on friction, you know, opposed hard difficulty, you know. Right. Well, then they they quote the term cooperation and everybody’s like, oh, yeah, cooperation. But it’s really just having a rival makes you better. That’s not opposition. Having a rival makes you better. Yeah. Because at one point, he’s your ideal, and then maybe you’re his ideal. And because whoever’s on top needs to be overtaken, but at least provides an ideal while they’re on top. And the fact that you have to keep going because there’s somebody right on your heels, even if you never make it on top, you’re still better for chasing the guy up at the top. I mean, it just everybody wins. It’s not bad. You know, oh, oh, I’m not on top. Therefore, it’s bad. Oh, there’s a Gnostic thought for you. That’s what Gnosticism is. That’s what Gnosticism is. I’m not on the top. Therefore, it’s bad. Like that’s what it was. That’s the whole ethos of the bad God. Right. No, no. The God that created all this stuff is the bad God. The God that has the world the way I want it in my head. That’s the good God. And he should go after the bad God so that we can be freed of this, of this. Right. And it’s just rebellion. It’s like ridiculous. It’s funny that Gnosticism is in materialism are probably just the same thing, even though, like, we we kind of look at Gnosticism as being anti-material. It’s actually it’s actually pro material. Right. It’s pure having mode. I have. Yeah, they’re certainly linked. They’re certainly linked. Yeah. Materialism and maybe that’s the real link, right? Is the having mode is the materialistic mode. Right. Because material is something you can have and that causes the emergence. And we have in the Gnostic mode, it’s always a quest for knowledge. So when you have more knowledge, all the incantations, all the they’re about gaining more knowledge, more levels in the Masonic system, they’re all acquisitions of things for greater acquisition, for greater power, for greater resources. I remember one time Mark was talking to somebody and they were really confused because I don’t know if you were accusing them, but he was you were accusing the axiom of knowledge is good as materialism because they didn’t understand it because I think it was words or something like that. Yeah. The reason it’s material, he could understand it because words are not material. They’re not things that you can touch. But what it is, it’s the whole triangle thing. Words are at the bottom of the triangle. And when you take things at the bottom of the triangle and take them to be you, you take they get their being from above. And when you think that they get their being in themselves, that’s what materialism is. That’s what Gnosticism is. That’s how they’re the same thing. Yeah, if you’re just looking eyes down and so words, words in particular, but the idea of knowledge is another attempt. And this is a pattern to look for, Jesse, that you’ll probably see it once I say it. It’s another attempt to jump the isot gap and turn the ethereal into material, right? Because you can go, well, I can have knowledge. Oh, really? How do you have knowledge? Because because look, I can have this pen. That’s easy. I have it. How can I have knowledge? Do you grab this is it’s another good for Vicky point, although he makes it incorrectly. It’s just technically screws it up, which is odd for John. But he makes the point. He says, well, I’m not a reductionist physicalist. Oh, fair enough, John, you’re not. But you’re still a materialist because you think material is primary. He says, the reason why I’m not a physicalist reductionist is because I realized that E equals MC squared is real. But where is it? Can you hand it to me? Can I hand it to you? Can I turn it around? Can I flip it this way? Can I grab it? No, I can’t. But I think it’s real. And therefore, I’m not a reductionist physicalist. OK, but you’re still a materialist because you’re still privileging the material and you’re treating E equals MC squared as though it is material, as though it is some hard limit on material. Right. It’s just a description of a material limit. Is it now? First of all, we’re not even sure that that’s actually correct and accurate because we haven’t been able to test E equals MC squared by the by. For those of you who think you know physics, no, they haven’t tested that. It could be true, but it also might not be true. They tested a version of that theory that’s called the nuclear warhead. Like, you don’t get the theories without a complete knowledge of physics. You don’t know E equals MC squared. They didn’t. But they didn’t use E equals MC. A lot of people think like, oh, yeah, we wouldn’t have the transistor without. That’s not true. They came up with the theory after they found the thing. There is no objectivity to a nuclear warhead because a nuclear warhead in the middle of the city is not the same thing as a nuclear warhead out in the middle of the desert. They’re not the same thing. Right. And the person that that detonated that bomb did not have the same goal in mind. Exactly. And the T-Los determines it, right? It’s all T-Los. Exactly. And that’s what you have to pay attention to. So you can infer people’s T-Los is unconscious T-Los because you have an unconscious T-Los right by their actions. This is what Peterson says. I believe what you act out. That’s your belief. I don’t believe what you tell me. I believe what you act out. Yeah. Well, then I can tell a lot about a person by how they conduct themselves in the world and what arguments they make, which arguments they start with. Right. And because their starting points are usually in the middle. That’s the middle out thinking. I have a video on middle of thinking on navigating patterns. Right. That’s the middle of thinking. It’s like, oh, like, Vervecki starts in the middle. What’s an example of middle out thinking? John Vervecki talking about steal the culture. Right. So he says, oh, well, what happened is you see, you’ve got Augustine. Okay. And you’ve got Rome and there’s all these people, you know, in their home churches doing their home church thing. And, and, you know, they burst out with Augustine’s help from his rhetoric and steal the culture. Okay. So what do we know about John’s thinking on this? That rhetoric is important. Right. And that that’s the moving force and that everybody alone in their houses is practicing a religion. Okay. But that’s the hell we’re living in now. Trolls are rhetoric. Right. All these conversations, I’m going to convince you with commerce. We need to have better conversations. Why would we need to have better conversations? Because if you talk to me and you understood my idea, you’d agree with me. That’s, that’s what all that boils down to. When people say that they’re never saying anything else. I guarantee you that I guarantee you. Anybody who appeals to conversation is saying the minute you actually understand my ideas, you Muppet, you’ll agree with me because I’m right. That’s what they’re saying. And it is not to say they won’t modify their ideas slightly. Maybe they will, but they’re really thinking that they’re closer to the truth than you are. That’s why they think conversation will work. I think, I know you can just do the quick math. The more I know about you, the more things I’m going to find to disagree with you about period. End of statement. That means more conversation is going to cause more tribalism for sure. It’s a mathematical certainty. It’s a mathematical actual mathematical certainty. Right. And then what’s the other trick? Well, and what’s the other trick for Vakey’s not talking about. What these guys in their churches are worshiping. They’re not worshiping their own consults, sistic conception of what their religion is. Their, their conception is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. So whether or not they agree on how that happened or what that was, that concept is the same for all of them. That’s, that’s their eyes up. They may not see each other. They may not know each other. They’re not worshiping together, but actually they are worshiping together because their eyes are all on the same thing. And when you remove that context, as John does, when he talks about steal the culture, he talks about it at least two times that I’m aware of. When you remove that, you don’t understand the story anymore. How did Christianity take over Rome? Well, it’s because it was a coherent thing. They weren’t in opposition of each other and therefore they were a co- coherent whole. They were a body. Understand about the, the, how Christianity is so different. It’s the universe. I guess you could call it the universality of Christianity. It goes everywhere and it doesn’t eliminate the current. It doesn’t eliminate the culture. It, it, it, it embeds itself in the culture. Render under Caesar. Breathe hominy. Well, and that’s, and that’s the important part. Render under Caesar. Why? Well, you have to get along with these people, whether they’re Christian or not. And if you can do that, unlike Islam, right? Where you have convert or die. Well, you’re going to be big. And which is not to say that Islam can’t be big. It can, it was huge, right? It took over large parts of Christianity through its intolerance. Um, but, uh, there are limits to that and, and the limits are severe. And, uh, and one is closed period of the other. I think, look at Sam Harris’s good work is when he talks about Islam and he says, here’s why Islam one objective, he’s just not being objective. He just doesn’t realize that one could say that, uh, Islam would not have been as potent as it was and is if it weren’t for Christianity that came before it. And at the risk of being scandalous, I don’t care. Um, uh, Paul said today, I can’t remember his exact wording, but he was, I loved what he said. He said that the bad, I think he said the evil gets all of its being from good. It does not create anything new. Right. I know this is stuff that we say over and over again. He said it really well though. Um, but that was Islam might be just a non-success Christianity or a combination of the Abrahamic faiths and then Christian sex. And then it’s kind of the ideas kind of mishmash of different tribes of the time. And there’s a cohesion of we all kind of agree doubles down and then it splits again and it doubles down. It’s Sam Adams mentioned that today in the live stream actually with, with, uh, with Vander Klown. Yeah. He mentioned it actually. He said that briefly, but yeah, I think he’s made that case on his channel. I don’t watch his channel because I don’t theology is wasted my time, but as feel it’s philosophy, it’s the same thing. Should have that outlet. I, yeah, whatever. I’ll talk to anybody usually, but whatever. Uh, the dust guy last week, I was like, you’re getting caught up in the last class, which you’re getting caught up in the pattern. Mode is like, it works. Don’t, don’t worry if it, how other works. Exactly. Well, that’s the right. That’s the thing. If you can submit to, to, to doing things without knowing whether or not they’re going to work, then you can cooperate with people and build beautiful things. No matter how smart you are. And that’s the thing that people miss. Like, and that actually Paul made a good, you know, made that, made that point today too, right? The thing about Christianity is that, and that was in the, the, the Bishop talk there, the Orthodox Bishop talk to Ethan that you’ve, that you pointed me at. He said that look, Christianity allows stupid people to play too. And they’re just as effective if not more effective than the smart people. Yeah. That’s what you want. Otherwise you don’t have a religion. You have an elitist cult. It’s like that. That’s the Sam Harris moment, right? We’re, we’re, uh, where Peterson makes the point. I think it’s in the fourth debate there of the original four debates where he says, Peterson says, well, Sam, that’s all well and good for you. But what about the people who don’t have an IQ of 130? And if you listen closely, you will hear a bunch of people in the audience laugh. Okay. Let me, let me be clear about this. Those are evil people. Okay. And they’re not, not evil because that’s an evil thing to do. She say, ah, ha ha screw those, those people who don’t have an IQ of mine. I guarantee you not even an IQ of 130 either, by the way. So they’re all, they’re all fooling themselves in their Gnostic solipsism. And I don’t think Sam Harris is an IQ of 130. And if he does the, the IQ test is broken because he’s really not that bright. Sorry, Sam, you’re not that bright. Bad metric of Yeah. Yeah. The last point is out. That’s one of the things that Taleb says. Taleb says, look, IQ is a great measure of stupidity, but then so are a lot of things, but what is not a good measure of is past the average, how smart you are. And there’s a reason for that. And that’s because as you go down the funnel of intelligence, you lose dimensionality. And so stupid people tend to be stupid in the same sorts of ways. Maybe there’s five or six ways. I don’t know that people are dumb and that’s just is what it is. And there’s nothing wrong with that. That’s, that’s exactly what it is. Right. But as you go up the scale, the ways you can be smart are much larger. There’s lots of different people with lots of different talents. Right. And, you know, many of which I can’t match at all. Right. Like I, I’ve got a friend, we were walking down the street in Hyannis, which is on Cape Cod, very, very risky place, lots of money walking down the street. And of course I’m not paying any attention to what’s going on around me other than moving objects, stationary objects, my whole life, moving objects, stationary. That’s all I have to worry about. So I’m talking to him and we passed these two girls and he goes like this. He goes, one of those girls is chewing out the other one and just, you know, said, said something really horrible to her or told her something really horrible about herself. And I stopped him and I said, how the hell do you know that? Because first of all, I registered females moving. Like that’s about the registration power of my brain in that moment. Just how I pay attention or rather don’t pay attention. Right. And he goes, because one of them was crying and the other one was, had this look on her face and, you know, he described it all to me, how he does it. And I just, I can’t do that by the way. I just don’t have that skill. He also can remember he doesn’t he doesn’t have an eidetic memory for words, but he has an eidetic memory for numbers. So one day we were driving around, he chose cars for a living. That’s what he does. He owns a tow company. We were driving around and he goes, that car right there used to be, or that plate right there used to be on a blue, I think it was a 2007 Toyota. And I went, how the hell do you know that? Because we towed it two years ago. And I was like, what is wrong with it? He tows hundreds of cars. If not thousands, he probably, no, he’s got to tow a thousand cars easy by himself every year, even though he’s not towing full time. I’m sure he’s probably still towing a couple of hundred cars a year anyway. He taught how would they two years? How the hell do you know that? That’s nuts. I can’t do that. I can’t do anything like that. Now I can remember a bunch of core concepts. I can’t remember quotes. I cannot remember quotes. Very hard for me to remember quotes. It takes a lot of work for me to memorize things. Sometimes they stick, but you know, I’m not, no, I can’t recite poetry. You know, I can’t do any of that stuff. So it’s all different, right? And that’s the, and that’s the problem is that when you get up high in IQ, there’s a different set, there’s all kinds of different skills and ways in which people can get to the top of the English market. And it’s not limited like it is when you get down to the stupid end of the spectrum. And again, there’s nothing wrong with that. Yeah. The thing is with this whole IQ thing and this, what’s his name? Andrew, the new guy, the older gentleman that was on earlier, he was, he was talking about the five personality traits and how they’re limited. And Jordan Peterson is now like coming to, to realize this. Joe Rogan. He’s like, yeah, we have all these five personality traits, like, which the thing is, is the big five, like Jordan Peterson is integral to that theory. By the way, you wouldn’t know that from listening to him, but once I, if you go on Wikipedia, everything is, you can trace it all back to, uh, not all, but a lot of it goes back to Jordan Peterson. He has one student that’s done a lot of work on it. I can’t remember who was anyways. He comes from a Moustapha college case. Literally. Yeah. Yeah, probably. Yeah, probably. Right. Um, he says, but it doesn’t account for this. It does. It can’t measure virtue. I can’t remember exactly what he said. He didn’t put it that way, but he’s absolutely right. And this is the problem that this is, this is the problem with the big five is that can’t measure an ethic. It can’t measure if people are doing good or if they’re doing bad, because that, as we all know, that is not something that can be measured and what science does is it measures things. And so, all science can do. Yeah. It’s a measure thing. And it’s interesting. He’s like, but there’s this new, there’s this new research coming out. That’s the dark triad or something like that, which is interesting, which is kind of like getting closer, but still at best you’re just measuring what is bad and what is not good. And that doesn’t tell you anything by looking at the bad, by looking at the not good, that does not inform the good. So anyways, with this IQ, it’s just, it’s very, very dangerous. It’s useful when it’s good when it’s good, but it’s very dangerous because it’s very close to that. It’s like, it’s very close to being in conflict with this axiom of being as good because it’s all of a sudden, well, being above this point is good and being below this gives you, yeah, it gives you a having mode way of relating to goodness. And there’s no having mode way of relating to goodness because people, and this is all throughout all the religious traditions, all of them, actually all of them, right. Having things is not going to get you into whatever the next thing is. Yeah. Whatever the right, the physical world is not the end and whatever, you can’t take it with you. It’s basically two themes in every single religious tradition ever written about. Right. So it’s this having mode stuckness that people are in that it’s like, no, having mode is bad. It’s not going to lead you what it’s not going to do what you want. Right. And, and, and we, and we use these tricks like knowledge. I have the knowledge knowledge is power. Knowledge is not power. Okay. I have a video on that. I’m navigating patch just saying knowledge is not power. Like it’s easy to disprove, right. It’s not, it’s not useful. It’s not to say, don’t, don’t pursue knowledge. Maybe you should, but don’t only pursue knowledge. Cause it’s not going to give you what you want. This is the thing. Mark knowledge, knowledge is power. I mean, if Manuel was here, he’d be like, no, it’s not. It’s not forced me to say knowledge can be power, but what it is is knowledge. The thing is, is it in a, in a modern world, a postmodern world, whatever you want to call it. We think that we confuse good and power to be the same thing. You don’t understand that power can be used for evil. Well, in postmodernism, it is the same thing. Exactly. Modernism takes good and evil off the table and just says power. Right. And this is one of the tricks they use. Like they don’t tell you like Mark’s Mark’s doesn’t explain to you. Um, Mark’s the Gnostic by the way. Oh, yeah. Yeah. They don’t. I know I saw that. I cracked me up. That’s why, that’s why I would get stopped in the middle. I read that. Um, they don’t tell you, they’re not giving you an alternative. They’re just telling you, you should have the power instead of them. It’s a trick. It’s a trick. They’re not giving you a better alternative. They’re saying the world is just made up of power and therefore you should get the power and not that. That’s their whole entire mess. They can’t see ethic. They can’t see goodness anymore. They’re cut off from it. All they see is what has effect. What has the people after the people afterwards can Foucault and Derrida could see goodness and they didn’t want to be constrained by goodness. And that’s why they got rid of goodness. And they said, aha, we can use the social contract and manipulate the law from this layer, right? You know, your guy that, that, that looks, you need a guy that looks across and down. That’s what you need. Right. The guy’s looking across and he’s going, all right, how do we change the social construct, contract rather, so that we have a construct that allows us to interface with the world in such a way that I can go to the graveyard and have my way with little boys, right? That’s Foucault’s whole goal. That’s his whole goal. It’s literally his whole goal. He doesn’t have any other goal. So whole reason why he’s doing what he’s doing. He’s evil and, and he’s not not evil because he’s evil. And that’s it. He doesn’t look up because he doesn’t want to be judged by what’s above him. And like, fair enough, like nobody wants to be judged by what’s above them. But you know what? That’s too bad. Now there’s going to be an experiment, I think in the summer. And if that experiment is successful, it is going to be huge. You’re going to hear about it. It’s going to be brilliant. We’ll see if it works. Get a lot of confidence. We’ll see if we’ll see if this, if this new tactic, it’s going to be awesome. If it works, it’s going to be awesome. It can take too long because I want to try it now, but I can’t. So it’s fine. And I’m not even doing it. I’m not doing it. It’s not my thing. Just somebody asked me to fix a problem. I tried to fix a problem. I think it’ll work. We’ll see. We’ll see. So yeah, it is about judgment. People don’t want to be judged. And that’s why they go with postmodernism is it’s all looking across, never looking up and looking down. And that’s where you get the power narrative from is everything beneath you. It’s all Nostra. Body wellness. Yeah. Well, look, you’ve got to buy into participatory knowledge, which, you know, is right on, right on tack with Piaget. Right. Body wellness is just the symptom of much greater problems. Yeah. Yeah. If you’re, if you’re really in touch with you, with, with yourself, right. With the knowledge of you, three frames, you with yourself, you with others and you with nature, right. If you’re really in touch with that, then the rest is going to follow. Sounds a lot like this. Sorry. What does specifically, what did you just say? You’re with yourself, you with others and you with nature. Oh, okay. Okay. That’s those are the three frames. I have a video on that too. Just saying three frames. Well, the Christian says you with God, but you know, maybe there’s four frames for Christians. I don’t know. I don’t care. I like, I like my three frames because it’s easy for people to, and it’s more important than the, than the two frames. I mean, that’s why I did my slide deck, right. The, the, the, you know, the four part, well, I’ve got five parts to it, but that’s really important. By body wellness, does he mean like fitness or, or body positivity or does he just mean cohesion within a body? Cause I, one, one, one word that somebody, a term I heard somebody say, I think it was you, Mark was fake community. I don’t know what the context was in, but that, that, that word stuck with me. Uh, but yeah, like the idea of having like a cancer cell or, you know, you have a body and you have a disunion among one part of it. People prefer body wellness and yeah, I don’t know. Um, I just was curious what he meant by that. People prefer preferring body wellness over knowledge. So like fitness actual like health. Okay. Physical. It’s still reductionist. Yeah. It’s very reductionist. Well, well being. So anyway, I was just, I was, sorry. I was connecting that concept of wellbeing with the concept of fake community, which is kind of sounds like an intimacy crisis thing, right? Like if it’s, if I’m not integral, then my body’s going to have this, you know, disharmony, same thing with relationships, right? Well, sport is the last city group of collision. It’s the last agreed upon set of values that most people won’t fight against. If you follow my thread. Oh yeah. No, you’re right about that. Sportsmanship and sport is a community, right? And that value sale, that preference set is based on physical wellbeing. Yes. Have all these other groups, groups and sets of preferences and ways of gathering together that people valued and slowly all those have become devalued and sport is the last, it’s the last civic religion of the West that most people still pay attention to, still pay value or highest praise to. So that of course nowadays people prefer body wellness to knowledge because that’s the only thing they’re worshipping. Right. Same thing. It’s the same thing as it’s still narcissism because it’s still having the, the thing I don’t like about physical wellbeing is it’s making a distinction. It’s like you’re separating it from your, your separate, there’s a separation there. You’re closing it up. But with all material, you’re separating things because you have to identify the material, right? And then you can go, ha, but I can identify the parts to see the deconstruction come from, and then I can put them together any way I want. It’s like, yeah, but you can’t put them together any way you want. And that’s why they keep getting smaller and smaller. When we get down to the quantum layer, now we don’t have the limits of chemistry anymore. Now we can put the parts together any way we want, but no, you can’t still, still not going to work. All right. We got a new guy. Welcome Mike. Talk to us. I, I’m embarrassed to say, I don’t really have much to say yet. I was just listening. Who’s behind you? Who’s that behind you? Marcus Aurelius. That’s a phased. That’s an album cover for Akira the Don’s, um, meditations volume one. Well, according to Mark, uh, the meditations are if not, um, the best, one of the best, uh, books that one could possess. Yeah. Yeah, that’s pretty good. Um, I was pulling some, I almost have it memorized thanks to that album by Akira. Now he hasn’t turned the whole thing into music, but I find myself Marcus just comes to my mind, uh, at various times. Thanks to that. But, um, Oh, what was it recently? John said something, uh, Oh, why dialogues? Um, I was thinking about this, uh, Marcus in meditations, thanks someone for encouraging him to write dialogues as a student. Um, I don’t know. That’s not particularly relevant, but no, it is. I mean, I think, but this is the focus on conversation. But again, I think for, for Vickie, for example, and Peterson probably, right. They’re a whole shtick is I have science. I have like an extra dose of science. I’ve got two sciences. Everybody else has like a half a science. I’ve got two sciences. And so I understand objective material reality better than most people more Therefore, if we can communicate correctly and I can train you in a little science, you’ll agree with me. I mean, that that’s their whole shtick. That’s why they want talking. That’s what someone comes along and has three sciences. And then someone else will come along and say, I have meta science. Hmm. Well, that’s Sam Harris, right? Well, if they just knew this or if they just had that or whatever, and then it’s like, well, whatever Sam, but you don’t know any of your science. So Sam’s terrible. Like he’s just wrong about almost everything he says in science. Kind of hysterical. Everyone’s just trying to out have each other. Right. Well, and, and, and, and the trick is he’s an articulate idiot, right? And a lot of people are right. And so they, they, they sound good. They string words together real nice. And I actually heard this. So this is amazing. So I get sent, uh, Claire Carr, Jacob’s favorite person in the world, uh, sent me this, uh, this video where she was talking to this, um, guy and he was like severely autistic and he put together the sentence that didn’t make any sense whatsoever. And she said, that doesn’t make any sense. What do you mean by this? And he was going, no, you have to listen because this one got a hundred percent score from Grammarly, which is used by most academic. I mean, he, he made that defense like half a dozen times in a row. Actually, he said, you have to understand this because the grammar of my sentence is correct. I mean, he clearly didn’t understand that the grammar of your sentence being correct has nothing to do with whether or not it’s understandable or can be made any sense of, or, or anything. Like he just didn’t understand the concept. Which, you know, I feel that like that’s terrible. Right. But like people don’t, they don’t get it. They’ve got, you know, they think words have meaning and it’s like, there’s no meaning in a word. Meaning comes out from the content and the context. And without the context, you can change the meaning pretty easily. Right. And, and people don’t, they’re not paying attention to that stuff because it’s hard. It’s hard. You have to train yourself to, to, to know all these things. It’s not, it’s not free. Words. Words are not meaning, they’re tools of meaning. They’re tools of conveyance of meaning. Yep. Exactly. And, and, and it’s, it’s easy to get fooled. Right. And a lot of people that go to stoicism, they stoicism is sufficient. Stoicism is awesome. Big fan of stoicism. I’m a stoic for sure. Right. But stoic, stoicism doesn’t have a why. Give you a how, but it can’t give you a why. So now you get a problem like, oh, we need a why. What are we going to do? Right. And, and that’s the, and that’s the issue. So since we’re on it, I’ve only read half of the meditations. But what, what was Marcus Araya, was he, so what, like, what was he embedded in? Was he embedded in just, you know, the, the paganism? But he’s, he’s definitely referring to a, a one, a one God, right? Uh, thanks. Thanks to the gods. I think he uses plural. Okay. And maybe it’s just the translation that I, that I had there. I did. Uh, I remember seeing that. I often wonder that when, when, uh, when it’s translated, I think, uh, I was just reading Plato, um, and I think he used singular God. I don’t know. The thing is it could be ambiguous too, cause they could, he could just be referring to divinity as such, and that could translate as God or, um, right. How else would you translate that as? I’m not sure if he was writing in Greek or Latin, probably Greek, I would assume. But it doesn’t matter in some sense, right? Because the modern conception of religion is from like the 1500s. And before that, nobody had a conception of religion. Right. And I asked, I, again, I asked Lantron Jack about this because he’s, he’s awesome. He and I, he and I agree about everything. Well, I don’t know other than planning trips to Greece. Uh, I don’t know. Uh, I don’t see it. He’s going to have another talk with Verbeke. That’ll be excellent. But, but what he said was, you know, cause I asked him, I said, are there any philosophical texts from the ancient Greeks that don’t refer to religion? And he said, actually, no, I don’t think there are. And he would know off the top of his head because he is that smart. And, and he said, but it’s a small part. And then he, you know, because he’s not, he’s not down with the whole. Oh, religion, the religious, you know, ideas underpin the, the, the, uh, philosophy. But I mean, the ancient Greeks didn’t make that mistake. Like they did not. I know they did not. They did not make the Kantian mistake. They, they understood full well that philosophy, which I think is the bucket. The best way to think about it is the bucket of small ontology categorization. Right. So all ontologies exist as individual philosophies. That’s what a philosophy is to the ancient Greeks. Philosophy is the big bucket that holds all the ontologies. Natural science is one of them, right? They get a bunch, whatever it doesn’t matter. Everything else is religion. But what it does is it adds reason to the, to the ineffable. Right. It says, how do we know what we’re veering off? We’ll say in our, in our implementation of our, um, of our religious belief, whatever that religious belief is, then this is where people get confused. Philosophy can’t replace religion because it was designed to work with any religion technically, because it was designed in pagan times. So it was designed for a pagan world, which means it wasn’t specific to any set of beliefs. It was, it was obfuscated or abstracted out to, to enable people with different beliefs to use the philosophy. So you can’t use it to replace say Christianity because that won’t work. It doesn’t provide that functionality. It wasn’t designed to provide that functionality. It’s not going to provide that functionality. Immanuel Kant was wrong about almost everything. And before, because people make this dip shit argument and it is a dip shit argument, just in case you’re curious. Okay. I understand that Kant or Hegel or Heidegger or whatever might’ve said one or two right things in their life. Okay. I totally get that because a broken clock is right twice a day, but you know what? I still throw the broken clock out. Even though it’s right twice a day, I throw it out. Why? Because it’s wrong most of the time. And that’s what I care about. I don’t care about getting all the things that are right, right? I care about getting enough things right so that I’m not wrong most of the time. I’m okay with that. That’s a good trade off right there. So yeah, you throw the broken clock out and get a working clock. That’s, that’s, that’s, that’s why you throw out Immanuel Kant and Hegel and Heidegger and all these guys that you don’t need any of them. Don’t throw out Plato because he’s not a broken clock. He’s right about everything. Pretty much one or two things. Yeah, whatever. But I don’t think you can prove them wrong on them. So fair enough. But that’s actually important to know. Like it’s important to know it’s okay to be right. Most of the time that’s close enough. You don’t need to be, you don’t need to resurrect or, or keep somebody sacrosanct who is only right about a couple of important points. You actually don’t need to do that. It won’t serve you well. So I actually coincidentally listened to the meditations yesterday again, maybe across two days I finished yesterday and my, the way that I would map the term when he uses, they say he says gods, I loosely map that onto school spirit or as Ethan said, divinity as such, roughly speaking. And, but the other thing too about like the idea of like the body versus knowledge, erroneousism, like there were lines in there, like one that I remember is like, but the idea is that like, you may not have, not have leisure to read many books, but you have leisure to like control your emotions, control how you feel, you know, stuff like that. The, the emphasis tends to be more the way that I, it feels as though that the emphasis in terms of like, you know, like, you know, like, you know, like I don’t know what we language to use, but it seems as though they, you know, the, the, the, the body is, is, was viewed as a vehicle to kind of start like a, like a starting point to, I don’t know, but like, you definitely don’t really see that like the idea of propositions being elevated for sure, you know, at all, really. Right. Well, if you’re, if you’re grounded in your body, if that’s your starting point, then you’re not going to privilege propositions. What is the proposition of riding a bike? How do you proposition somebody into riding a bike? Do you tell them the balance? Is that what you do? I think I’m not saying not to tell them to balance. Of course you tell them to balance, but if you can stand up, you can balance. So what are you telling them to do when you’re telling them to balance when they’re riding a bike? What are you doing? What are you doing? You’re calling their attention to a skill that they already have. And you’re saying, pay attention to this, but you’re not propositionally explaining to them how to ride a bike. That didn’t happen. There’s no way to do that. Right. The embodied knowledge of balancing while you’re pedaling and steering and doing all these other things is totally different and cannot be expressed through propositions at all, not even a little bit. You can explain the procedures after the fact. And this is where procedures are always after the fact. They’re always post facto every time. What you can’t do is explain how they’re doing it in the moment or how they’re going to do it before they do it. You can’t do that. The language won’t allow for it. Reality won’t allow for it because it hasn’t unfolded yet. Right. You can talk about it. And this is why in physics, there’s the collapse of the waveform. Why? Because they can’t predict the location of a particle in advance, guys. They can’t do it. You think physics does that. Physicists will tell you they can’t do it. That’s why it’s a statistical cloud of probability before you measure it. The measurement is the thing that pins it to a particular place in time. And that’s really important. Physics actually says, we don’t know about the future very well. We know something about it. We don’t know nothing about the future. We don’t know enough about the future to say, this is going to be here at this time. We don’t know that. We do not. If you don’t know it at that level, how can you know it at the higher levels? You can’t. That’s the answer. You can’t know that. And that may seem frightening because, you know, knowledge is power and all encompassing and it’s not, it’s not important. You can live without this. Like everybody lived without science before science. It was fine. It was fine. All our ancestors survived without any science whatsoever. You can do it too. I promise you. It’s still available to, that nothing got removed from the world such that you now need science to survive in it. Zero things, zero things. You’ll be fine. But, um, what about, so earlier you were saying, you know, you just want someone to be right most of the time. You don’t want someone to be mostly wrong. Me, me. I don’t care about other people. Me. Right. So, so then, uh, aren’t we only ever just trying to get sufficiently robust models for whatever’s going on? I mean, No, no, no, people aren’t. They’re trying to be perfect. All that. That’s what, that’s what this is all about. Well, you can’t say that you’re racist. Okay. Look, if I say something racist, I don’t care. I’ll own it and I’ll just move on with my life. It’ll be fine. Because I can get forgiveness. I mean, this is what I actually did this to Paul Vanderkleid today. I said, uh, you know, I’m going to agree with Jacob here. I’m going to boost his point and I’m going to agree with this, you know, with, I forget who else it was, right? I’m going to agree with him and I’m going to agree with him and I’m going to disagree with you, Paul. Why? And I told him this, he’s right in the live stream. You can watch it, right? Like because you have to forgive me. And, and, you know, yeah, you’re right. I do. You’re a Christian. I can go after you all I want. Right. I’m just joking. Obviously. I’m just joking. Obviously. I know Paul, Paul and I are friends. Right. I’ve met him. He’s wonderful human. I couldn’t even hit him with a paintball, even though I tried. Right. And that was, and that was the thing. It was like, okay, I’m going to go after him. Why? Because if I’m wrong, it’s Paul. I know Paul, that’ll be fine. It’ll be fine. He’ll correct me and we’ll still be friends. Right. So it’s, it, it’s okay. Right. And in some sense, but most people are like, you can’t say, I mean, people defend Paul all the time against me. They’re like, you can talk to Paul like that. I’m like, Paul’s my buddy. Paul doesn’t care how I talk to him. He thinks this is another intimacy problem. This is another intimacy problem. Right. Right. They don’t understand intimacy. When I talked to Andrea with the bangs about intimacy on her channel, Andrea with the bangs channel, I’ll find a link to post it. When, when I talked to her about it, she asked a very interesting question. It was a great interview. She’s, she’s really good interviewer and, um, just a really interesting question. She said, what do you make of all these people saying that, uh, Sam and Frodo in Lord of the Rings were gay? And I was like, well, that’s easy. This is the intimacy crisis because they can’t understand a relationship without making it material or physical. They can only understand the relationship in terms of a physical action. And so if that’s true and Sam and Frodo are together, they must be sleeping with each other. There’s no other option. Why else would they be together? There’s no material reason for them to be together. It doesn’t benefit Sam to hang out with Frodo. He’s going to fricking Mordor, man. That’s a volcano and it’s full of orcs. Like this doesn’t sound like a good plan. Like, why is he doing this? Well, it’s got to be a physical thing. There’s no other possible reason. Right. Because there’s no quality of relationship and in a land with no quality of relationship, what are you measuring? You’re measuring the physical act. You measure the physical act. That’s what you measure. It’s like, oh, okay. Yeah, they must be gay. There’s no other alternative because I don’t have a way to understand a deep friendship because that’s a quality and I can’t measure deepness in terms of friendship. How would I do that? I don’t know. I can tell you certain things. Like I can tell you, look, I think that, you know, I think Jesse and I are friends to some extent, but not the extent of Ethan and I, I picked Ethan up at the freaking airport and drove him to Thunder Bay. Like, you know, and we hung out quite a bit and, and he taught me a bunch of stuff on the trip up because it was a six and a half hour ride, right? Like, you know, or Manuel, I spent a lot of time with Manuel. We, we argue and we fight and, you know, I think that Jesse could take my, you know, my, cause I, I will degrade into F you and go to hell and, you know, I mean, I get that nasty and fight sometimes cause you know, look, sometimes I’m wrong and I don’t like to be wrong. So, you know, you, you attack people, but I think, I think Jesse and I would be fine after that. I think we’d just have lunch or whatever, or just like take a week off and then we’d be fine, right? Like, I don’t know that, but I suspect that, but that’s a quality of relationship that I can’t measure. I can get, I can intuit it. I can guess at it, but if you don’t have that sense of quality, that’s the intimacy crisis. You’re trying to measure everything. You can’t have intimacy of different types with people. Basically, all you can do is sleep around. It’s like, you’re either physically connected to the person or you’re not. Right. And I’m not saying they act that way. Obviously they, most of them don’t, but again, this goes back to the fake news virus scam. Yeah. COVID made that worse for sure. Right. Because the news hyped up what was going on. Right. So that’s where you get the fake news from, right? They’re pretending like this is the biggest deal since, since, you know, the Bavonic plague or maybe the Spanish flu, right? And it’s nothing like that. It’s more like 1997 when we had a bad flu year. That’s what it’s closer to numbers wise, but they’re pretending like it’s this big deal and there’s billions of people dying every day and the earth has been depopulated and all this nonsense. Right. And that’s why we need to wear masks and we need to, we need to stay socially distant and now we lose the skills of being intimate. We don’t understand quality connections. We just understand we need to be socially distant. So we’re not making friends anymore. We’re getting away from our friends. We’re losing all these skills. They’re degrading over time and we’re sliding back. And now we don’t have the skill of being in person anymore and saying, Hey, man, good to see you. Give me a hug. Right. Or whatever. Right. We don’t have those skills. We don’t understand. Wait, wait a minute. You know, a woman and you’re not sleeping with her, but you talk to her. What’s going on with that? Like, I mean, I’ve had people say this stuff. It’s not, it’s not fantasy. There are, look, you can say, look, Mark, those are the hardcore cases. Yeah. Fair enough. I’m hanging out with the hard core. That’s for sure. Right. But they’re the ones in the most trouble. Those are the ones, you know, I think need the, need the most work and the most urban work. So, but, but it’s out there like, and it’s out there in force. It’s not, it’s, it may be a tiny percentage of total population, but it’s, it’s much bigger than it should be. Or are they noisier? I mean, is the, is it, we, we’ve just done a race to the bottom of the brain stem on social media. People are habituated used to using these more narrow mental models. It’s easier. It’s a shortcut. It’s, you know, there’s like this thing being fashionable behind it. Those are, but those are effects from something else. I mean, everybody’s pointing at that. So you’re saying that they’re like no longer equipped to wield this, like intellectual, emotional nuance. Yeah, it’s not intellectual, but it is an, it is a skill. I mean, look, when they say, you know, emotional intelligence, they have a kind of a point, right? But it’s a skillset. It’s, it’s the poetic way of informing the world. Right. And, and you’re losing access to the poetic. And one thing that was a hundred percent on the awakening from the meaning crisis server, people would say, Oh, I don’t read poetry. Okay. And then they’d be hanging out with Mark and Manuel, who are the most terrible people on the planet, if you talk to certain people, right. And then the next thing you know, in three months, they’re reading poetry and appreciating it and enjoying it. Okay. So look, you can, you can yell it, yell about how mean Mark and Manuel are all day long, but we’ve got a bunch of people reading poetry. If nothing else, you know, and, and, and I think that’s important. And I think there’s a direct connection between that and being able to interact with the world better, and we have some wonderful stories, you know, and, and, you know, I’m not going to sit here and toot my own horn and tell, you know, success stories all night from awakening from the meeting crisis. I don’t think, you know, whatever you take my word for it or not, I don’t care. Um, you know, I’m happy to tell those stories, you know, at some other time, maybe if there are requests in, you know, later, but. Just quickly getting back to Daniel’s thought about opposition, which relates here and the dialectics of what the internet have kind of brought out. Yeah. Yeah. And my question I tried to point to, there’s the sense that like, and then also the point about intimacy with the people can only see essentially unison or opposition is the binary. Another part was to, to, is the connection of things together. People see the ones and zeros. Well, that’s the reduction. We have to reduce the world to understand it. Even the material world has to be reduced to understand it. That’s why Neoplatonism is so attractive. Cause it says there’s really only two states, right? It says there’s the many and the one. That’s it. Okay. That’s wrong, by the way, just, just so we’re freaking clear, that’s wrong. There’s obviously the space where the many and the one can exist. Okay. So there’s at least a space there, right? But yeah, there’s at least three, three ways to think about this, but more importantly, you know, the guy who invented the mall was trying to do that. He was trying to invent the third spaces for America that Europe has. He was trying to do that in the 1960s. Oh yeah. Yeah. I did know that. Yeah. The original malls in America, right? And they’re all beautiful. They’ve got artworks, flowers, towers, just so it’s a beautiful space to be in. And then that kind of just got reduced down to the basic concept. Well, they were trying to science it, right? And that’s, they were materialists. They were saying, we can go over there, understand what happened and reproduce it. No, you can’t because you’re looking at it across the horizontal. And that’s the problem. We reduce things and, and we think, we think we know how we think, which we can’t know that you can’t know that you might know aspects of how you think. That’s possible. You can’t know how you think that’s dumb. You’d have to be a creature bigger than yourself, right? You’re not a creature bigger than yourself because you’re a creature of exactly the size of yourself, but it’s not that hard really. And people are confused about this, right? We think we know how we think. And so we think that we think in binaries, but no, every choice that you make is a decision not to do more than one thing. We, we always, we pick our top two priorities and we make them compete. And then we pick one and we go, ha, I made a decision between A and B. No, you didn’t. You didn’t. You filtered down to A and B and then you made a decision between A and B, but you’re missing the whole first part. Where did it start? It started with the infinite possibility or near infinite possibility. What can I do? I can get out of bed or not get out of bed. No, I can stay in bed and read. I can stay in bed and grab one of my computers that I have by my bed because I’m not good at that. No discipline, right? I could stay in bed and look at my phone. I could, I could stay in bed and go back to sleep. Right. Okay. So it’s not stay in bed and not stay in and stay in bed. Right. If I don’t stay in bed, then what? Do I get up and get dressed? Do I take a shower? Do I eat? Do I, do I just stay in my jammies all day and bum around the house? Do I get on discord? Do I, of course I do cause Manuel’s there. Do I ignore discord? Like there’s, you know, sometimes I do. Right. Do I just watch videos all day? Do I watch a movie? Like, look, I took a Sunday once and watched all the extended edition Lord of the Rings. It’s like 12 and a half hours. I spent 12 and a half hours in front of the TV. For real. I did that once. Like sometimes I do that, right. But I do that at the exclusion of a bunch of other things. So it seems to me like I’m making a binary choice. So we tend to reduce everything down to binary because we think that’s how we think. But that’s not how we think at all. Right. It’s part of it. It’s the last part. That’s that middle out thinking. We’re not paying attention to what’s actually happening. What about that mechanism where it’s suggested that you sort of are using your emotional brain to make a choice and your choice was already made and then you what you think you’re doing in your conscious mind is making the choice. But what you’re actually doing is just manufacturing a story to justify the thing that had already taken place, the choice that was going to be sort of inevitable for you. Well, that’s I mean, you’re narrativizing your past all the time. Right. And and that’s the thing is that what I think all rationalization, which John Vervecki loves, is actually post-hoc. I don’t think it exists outside of of hindsight. I don’t think it. I and a lot of things like that, like I suspect I don’t know this, but I’m pretty sure propaganda doesn’t exist except for hindsight. In other words, you can’t tell propaganda in the moment. You can only judge it once it’s passed and you have a different frame. And I think that’s really the issue is that people aren’t appreciating that fact. They can’t have rationalization are forward looking things when in fact they’re they’re only backwards looking things. Well, how do you know someone’s lying? You don’t know you what? How do you know someone’s lying? You can have a sense that they’re lying and then you have to verify if someone’s lying or not. So that would be a grounding of your propaganda argument. Because you write if you’re lying, you could be telling the truth. And so you have to go and verify and then that verify. And then you know. Right. And in and in order to look for the lie, you have to recognize the possibility. You have to be aware of the possibility. Yeah. Right. So awareness is part of this and that that bleeds into the relevance realization argument that for Vicky made. So I guess that kind of made me think of like subliminal messaging and media, for example, and like a power influence versus control. Yeah. I mean, like it’s like like it’s possible that there is people who are, you know, I mean, I don’t know, that’s one of those topics that it’s hard to even make sense of, right, because you could you could come up with all kinds of explanations. Like maybe there are people for whom that stuff is ineffective. If if that is false, we know we know that we know that actually. Yeah, we know that. What’s the what’s the question? Well, the question is, uh, like power versus control. I mean, you just turn that in on yourself. I mean, that’s and it just gets back to, you know, the I do the things I hate. Um, I’m trying to land this, I. You turn the Roman 17, but yeah, it’s we always. People pursue their best interests. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. There’s lots of signals going on, right? You only pursue your best interest when you think about that upfront. But most of the time, you’re not thinking about things up front. You’re reacting to emotional responses and and you’re reacting to the arena in which you’re you’re perceiving yourself in. Right. And that’s the problem. The the the the the question is, what is driving my behavior? OK, well, lots of things. The first thing that drives your behavior is your field of awareness or your salient landscape is what John talks about. That’s the field of awareness. It’s probably some confusion in there. Right. The number of things that you could possibly be salient of and the number of things you are salient of are different. That’s why I’m going to use field of awareness and not salient landscape. Then there’s your attention, and this is where influence comes in. Influence attempts to move your attention. In into that sphere, now, the problem is, if you try to do advertising to me, it doesn’t work because my brain goes, oh, this is advertising and it just shuts off all the salient landscape stuff and then it doesn’t work anymore. Now, that has disadvantages because there’s lots of products. I was like, I didn’t know that was a product. You know, you’re a dummy. You saw an ad for it last week. You just didn’t even notice it. Right. Because marketing isn’t a bad thing. It’s also a good thing. I actually tweeted that to to Catherine Brodsky today because she was she was having that dilemma. I’ve got to advertise for people know to look for my stuff. Yeah. Otherwise, people don’t know what you’re doing. Right. And so what happens is the if the influence is within your field of awareness, it’ll push your attention in a direction. And if you don’t take control of that, you will end up doing things you don’t want to do. But that’s not the only factor because some things influence you like your emotions. Right. And so, for example, one of one of the things is I get very hungry sometimes, although more lately means I’m feeling better, actually. So, yeah, me. If I don’t control what I eat, like I have to I have to actually I shop with portion control built in because if I don’t, I’m screwed because I will. I’m the kind of person that will go like, OK, here’s a box of spaghetti. That’s a pound of spaghetti. We’ll we’ll boil half of that meat. OK. And I used to be able to get away with this sort of garbage, but I can’t I can’t eat that much food. When sitting anymore, I’ll pop. So it doesn’t work. It used to work. I used to do that all the time. It didn’t bother me. I can’t do that anymore. So I build portion control into everything now because I know that when I get hungry, when I go on one of these like, oh, hungry, right, I will eat an entire box of Jordan, like that, because these are delicious and everybody should eat the entire box, but I didn’t eat the entire box today. Good for me. A few months ago, I sure as hell did. It’s portion control. And sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. We’re just not in control of ourselves. The thing you have the most control over is you. This is why stoicism works, because it does tell you that. Like, focus on the thing you have the most control over. The thing you have the most control over is you. And you can refine that control, but it’s still not perfect. And it’s never going to be. You’re just going to have to deal with that. It sucks. I’m glad that we we came around to that point in stoicism because that crossed my mind earlier and I’ve thought about this a lot. Right. So it’s essentially take responsibility for that which you have control over and absolve yourself of responsibility for that which is outside your control. But there’s a lot of things that I can have influence over. Right. Like it’s not like this dichotomy is is not that great. Right. So and then there’s like the oh, and then have the wisdom to have the discerning judgment to be able to tell the difference. OK, I can work on that. But what about, you know, I can’t control other people. That’s not true. I can influence people. I can show them. That’s not control. That’s why you got to that’s why you got to draw the line. I mean, I have a video on that. I did paste it in chat. Right. That’s why you got to draw the line. You have influence over. Well, look, control of other people in other circumstances. You you you can’t control other people. You can influence them. You may have a lot of influence over them and it may look like control. I totally get that. Casting a spell. That’s what I was trying to point towards. Right. People people don’t have control over themselves. So it’s foolish for you. Right. And that’s the thing. I mean, this is what Danny’s complaining about. I have control over myself. Yeah, that’s true. You don’t. Sometimes you have more. Sometimes you have less. But but what that means is that and this is the tricky part. You are influencing things without your understanding, just by being on the earth and having been born. There’s a bunch of influences that happen as a result of that. Like, like, you know, you fill out the census form and that has a bunch of influence in the world now with tiny, maybe. But but it’s there. It’s not zero because zero is a funny number to quote Peterson. And so it’s there. So what does that mean? And this sort of segues because I do want to address this question into this question from Benjamin Franklin. Right. Is an actor a liar? What if he leaves the stage and he continues to play the same character until he dies? Look, lying requires two people. One person cannot lie to you that that that that doesn’t work. Right. It requires a mismatch. In assumptions, when you are watching an actor, they’re not lying because you know they’re acting right now, if they’re acting and you don’t know it. Now we’re into some gray territory for sure. And that’s the difference. Right. And that and that’s the problem. We can say, you know, that’s the problem. You can’t hide forever, even from the census form. Yes, the census is fed. Don’t don’t let them fund your schools. That’s a good idea, Sally. You know, less money for your schools. I’m on Sally’s side. Benjamin Franklin, watch the prestige. There’s a great line in the prestige where the the there’s a point where the the real act is the offstage, not the onstage. Yes. Right. Yeah, that’s a great movie, by the way. Yeah, the week on stage. Right. And then, right. But when he finally gets off, he can’t do anything. And then when he gets he’s pretending all the way, but really he’s physically strong, that’s why he’s able to pull off these magic. So that’s right. Well, it’s and it’s and a lot of it, too, is it’s all about agreement. Right. And a lot of agreement is implicit. So, for example, when I go to the grocery store, there’s all these rules that nobody’s written down ever about if someone’s coming out of the grocery store, you let them out before you go in, right. Oh, stay to the right with your cart, you know, and then they’re not followed perfectly right. And then people think, oh, we codify them and then we post them. People know they won’t. You’ll piss people off. But, you know, I mean, you’ll get better attendance because you’ll pay because attendance to the rules is the rules will be published. But there are disadvantages to that because people like Mike and Sally Joe are going to go, you know, that’s thin stuff, man. I ain’t doing it your way because it just rebels. Really. Sorry, Sally. I’m outing Sally as a rebel. She’s a Protestant. What can she do? That’s the problem is that is that we don’t understand influence. There’s influence. You can put a mask mandate in place federally, but the people in South Carolina are not going to do that. People in Florida are not going to do that. People in Texas are not going to do that. I’m just going to ignore you. Right. And you can and you can be the governor of Virginia. I think it was right. And you can say, all right, you know, no more than so many people at the house. And by the way, it masks for everybody. And then the sheriff, who’s also elected, can go up yours. We don’t care. Do what you want, people publicly. And there’s no repercussions. And then and then and then the state splits, right? Some people go, are you going to follow the rules? Because the governor wrote it into law. And then some people go, no, he did it by executive fiat. That’s illegal. And I’m a constitutionalist. And by the way, we’re not going to get arrested anyway, because the sheriff said he’s not going to arrest anybody. And that’s, you know, so it’s by agreement. And there’s lots of agreements. And that’s why we feel betrayed sometimes, because people break agreements that are implicit. And people don’t like this. They want to have their stupid propositions. And so they’re like, no, we have to write all this down and make sure people follow it, then we’ll need people to follow it. And then they’re like, oh, but we need less cops. And I’m like, well, if you want more rules, you need more cops. Now what? Oh, more cops means more bad cops. Yes, more cops always mean more bad cops. That’s true. Now what? Because you’re just creating a problem that wasn’t there because you want to have the world a certain way. You want control. And if you let go of the control and just let the world happen, it just happens a lot easier. Peterson goes into this. This is why the tyrannical chimp rules. And now you’re on my and Sally’s side all of a sudden. Yeah. But that’s why the tyrannical chimp doesn’t rule. Right. It doesn’t last long. He doesn’t last long because two chimps can rip him apart. That’s always going to be true. And his reign sucks because he’s got to be tyrannical, which costs time, energy and attention. And so he can’t be a good ruler because it costs time to set up all these rules and enforce them. And it’s a lot easier to have a nice, intimate connection and forgive people when they break the rules by accident or even on purpose. And that’s the Christian Atlas. Yeah, the difference between I like this. What’s the difference between the US and Canada? Well, first, the big difference is Canada sucks. That’s the big difference. And then, yeah, Canada adopted continental philosophy wholesale. They didn’t even adopt the British ethos of you know, of that halfway point, right? You know, the Magna Carta between continental philosophy and the US Constitution, Magna Carta is right in the middle of those two things. So we didn’t we didn’t do that. Right. What we did was we said this system is built to work explicitly under God. That’s it. It’s in the founding documents. You can you can read founding papers. It’s all over them, in fact. And that’s the thing. Without that, it doesn’t work. That’s actually why we’re at a crisis or seeming crisis in the US is because without that common aim to cooperate towards, you don’t have a common historical grounding and you don’t have a common aim to cooperate with, and so you can’t cooperate and now you devolve to tribalism. That’s where tribalism comes from. You want to get rid of tribalism? You better bring back religion or at least or at least a similar enough concept of single God that people agree to it. Otherwise, it’s tribalism all the way down. You have no choice. Single tell us. Right. That’s what Tellos is for. It allows us to cooperate. Otherwise, it’s not worth you and me making the sacrifice because we’re not aimed at the same thing. Now we are trapped in the postmodern power narrative where we’re fighting for power because you want something different from me. Yeah, we’re trapped in the postmodern power narrative. But the minute we go, you know what? Without Steve Jobs, none of the workers have jobs and iPhones never get created because that’s actually true. Well, maybe Steve Jobs is worth all that money. Yeah. I’m worried about our culture fracturing worse into these super pluralistic like it decays to the point where we have no common cultural. Yeah, that’s the Gnosticism. Yeah, I have a video on that, too. What is the culture war? I think the culture war is not the way people are framing it. I think the culture war is a fight to have a culture or to have no culture because Gnosticism is no culture. Yes, no culture. Thank you. Everybody doing their own damn thing. That’s no that’s not a culture. Have you heard the network state by Balaji? His it’s kind of like a political manifesto. Well, I would suggest looking into it. He’s actually he’s actually suggesting that we basically find like single issue digital tribes build up a critical mass to the point where you have essentially collective bargaining power or something like that, re-centralized in a physical location to take advantage of this like you know, fracture, that’s not going to work. I mean, that’s what’s happening now. And now to out and read. It’s not it’s never going to work. Right. And that’s what’s happening now. That’s literally what the hell we’re living through. Well, it’s not organized. Right. Like people aren’t being deliberate and intentional about it. Like, let’s say organized organized organized organized organized. There’s a thing. I can’t really hear you. Sorry. Go ahead. There’s a Facebook page called Checkpoint Alpha, which is like an implementation of like a Plan B thing where they have these types of physical digital communities and like physical preppers and they have stations and hierarchies and organization. But I’m aware of a couple of these movements. They’re all over the place. There’s thousands of them. They’ve been there for years since the 90s. This is what people don’t do. They don’t do their frickin research. This isn’t a new idea. It’s literally older than the Internet. And ever since the Internet, I know personally people who have tried this. It’s like the Free State Movement. That’s one of them. Right. It’s it’s it doesn’t work. It doesn’t work because it’s trying to emerge stuff from down below and control it. And that will never work. That’s Gnosticism. People want to easy, easy shorthand this. Just think of the hippies. Think of the 1960s communes. Where do they go? If they’re all free love and meant to work. That’s what that’s what communes are. Right. That’s exactly what communes are. And that’s exactly why they don’t work. And you know, we have to actually come together. You have to have a widely pervasive cultural norm. And you can’t you can’t you can’t do that. A cultural norm comes from on top. It comes from outside and above you. That’s the whole point. Like everybody thinks that it comes from either their level or below them and that they can control it. But everyone’s been trying that forever. And it’s never worked. That’s a good hint that it’s not ever going to work because it can’t work. And that’s the problem. That I can show you mathematically. It can’t work. You can model it on a computer and it doesn’t work there either. Nothing to do. It doesn’t work anywhere. So there’s nothing to be done about the problem. No, no, no. There is something to be done. It’s called suck it up. You’re not the center of the world and nobody gives a crap about your retarded ideas. Now go find somebody to cooperate with and stop talking about it and do things in the world. That’s it. That’s it. It comes down from above. Things that work are easy to find. They’re easy to find. You try the things and if they work, they work. And if you don’t understand that you need to agree on something, like, as I said, the founding of the United States, we all it’s explicit. We all have to agree on God or else this experiment doesn’t work. That’s what they say in the document. It couldn’t be more clear. If you don’t have a common sense of a single God, that’s roughly the same. You have no container to cooperate within. You have no boundaries and you have no common point to look at to come together over. You rally around the flag. The flag is above you. It’s representative symbolically of something. Right. When you get to the flag, a leader or leaders, right, a bunch of authorities, right, organize the resources because, look, you can take certain people, OK, and I’ll and I’ll just use me. I am highly competent and at least a dozen things easily, at least right off the bat. There’s a bunch of things I can do. The problem is I can’t do them all at once. So, for example, I’ve run. Am I at nine businesses? Maybe I’m at 10. I forget something like 10 businesses. OK. Basically, you can try to run a business by yourself on your own, but there ain’t enough time. They just the time doesn’t exist. OK, so that means what should I focus on? Oh, OK. Well, maybe I should do accounting because I can do it, but I’m not great at it. Somebody else would be better at it. But then I have to pay them and put up with all their quirks and their stupidity. OK, fair enough. But maybe that’s worth it. What about marketing? I’m lazy and I don’t like I don’t like marketing. So I pay somebody to do that anyway, even though I can I can do I have to see job adding, right? OK. But now I got to put up with that person and that person has put up with the other. You see the problem? Like as you add people to increase efficiency, you also create problems. Now, that’s problems are probably well worth having compared to trying to do it all by yourself, which you can’t do anyway. So the problems emerge from the organization. Are you defending the whole dumbass number thing? There’s a limit. No, it’s not numbers. Numbers is nothing to do with that because I don’t have to know those people. I can just trust I can outsource it. I can say, I’m going to outsource my to this company and outsource that to that company and look, I can I can code, but I’m never going to again. I mean, I do small projects for me, but no, I in fact, I did the architecture work for somebody on the Discord server recently. I said, I’ll write you all the architecture. You go write the damn code. And that’s for his purpose. Like he that’s what he wanted to do. I’m like, you want to write some code? I’ve got a project. You can write this. But it’ll be fun. It’ll be an open source project. It’ll be great. What are you making the argument full, mom? Is it look? No, what I’m saying is you need somebody to organize the skill sets. Where are my skills most valuable compared to everybody else? Not where the most valuable like I’m the greatest software engineer ever. Let’s just assume that we’re true, which definitely is not right. OK, but we have the second best software engineer. But your skill at architecture is more important. So we’re going to have him do the coding and you do the architecture because he can’t do the architecture. But now I’m not doing the thing I’m best at. Yeah, you know what? That’s going to happen. Sorry, that’s called life. And that’s what happens when you cooperate with people. Who’s going to organize that? Your leadership. Who’s going to inform the leadership, the authorities? Are they going to do a perfect job? No. Why? Because they’re people and there aren’t any perfect people. Although I’m still working on it, I may get there someday. Right. But like, let’s be realistic. That’s not the world you live in. There are all these compromises you have to make. And somebody has to lead that and make those decisions. Why? Because and I went over this earlier, the problem with being a leader is you sacrifice pleasing any single person. Leaders can’t please people. They can make groups get close enough so that they can get closer to their goal. But there’s always going to be somebody unhappy with the leader. And actually, almost everybody all the time is going to be pissed off about every decision you make. And even if they’re OK with this decision, they probably weren’t OK with the last one. You’re not making people happy. OK, that’s not what leadership is. You sacrifice that. You sacrifice that the minute you become any kind of leader in any kind of context. Right. But not having the leader is chaos. So it’s better to have an imperfect leader, even if he sucks or does whatever or makes mistakes or even he does really bad things. It’s actually better to have a leader than not. This is all that is true. If you read books on leadership, they’ll tell you this. So sorry to invoke philosophy, but for Plato, democracy, tyranny and chaos were all very closely related. Right. Right. Right. But but look, when you’re when you’re the leader and you have to sacrifice, making any single person happy, basically, now you have to you have to survive through that. Right. You have to survive through that. And you have to. The bottom line is your efficiency is so much higher that without leadership, you can’t get things done. And organizations are imperfect and they’re always going to be imperfect because they’re made up of people who happen to be imperfect. But you’re not going to get things done without structure and leadership. It’s never going to happen. It won’t last if it does. Right. And that’s the issue. Like you just have to kind of submit to that imperfection. This is why I think people are just being too perfectionistic because they’re looking at science and they’re looking at the lies that science is telling you. Science is telling you a lot of lies about how close it can get to this perfect world and how and whether or not that’s even possible and what tools to use and what standards to use. Right. And that’s the problem is that that doesn’t that doesn’t work. And now we’re all into this. Oh, look, with technology, I can have it all by myself. Who’s running the technology? Are you running the electricity? Did you build the computer? Do you run the Internet? Come on. Like, I mean, you’re it’s a two tiered system. Oh, I’m in the computer and I work from home and I do well. Great stuff. You’re relying on all these other people. They’re not living the life that you think that everybody should be living because they’re enabling your life, you Muppet. And maybe that’s OK, but also don’t pretend like you’re not an elitist at that point because you are. I think I’m not necessarily against elitism. But you got to remember what’s happening. Don’t pretend like you’re living in this world where we’re all equal. That didn’t happen. And it’s not going to ever happen. Yeah, equality won’t happen. But I think that might have been a zero sum game framing. You know, no, it’s not. It’s the opposite. It has to be lower in order to enable lifestyle. That’s not zero sum. The lower enables the higher. The higher can’t exist without the lower. They both need each other. That’s not zero sum. That’s actually people having better stuff by cooperating because that’s the difference between opponent processing and cooperative processing. Cooperative processing raises two people up or more or two groups up or more. And opponent processing means that no one’s going to go up. People are just fighting over the same ground. Right. That’s the postmodern power narrative. You’re just fighting over the same ground. You’re not able to transcend and get better. Guys, I’m going to head out. Love you all. Thanks. Thank you for the brotherhood. That’s me. Can I? See you. Oh, man, I had like a whole bunch of things that I forgot. Take notes, Ethan. I take notes. You can take notes. I might have. Oh, OK, hold on. I did take I did I did paste it here. It was back when you guys were talking. Well, OK, I’m going to post something that I took from the general chat on awakening from the meaning crisis. Discord server. Days ago. Oh, I need to. It’s too long. The two parts. I guess one thing that struck me about the last thing you’re saying about leadership, Mark, is that like even in a secular frame, for example, you still have a weight of glory. So if you’re. Competent or whatever, life, life’s not fair. You know, if it is a case that some people have heavier or lighter burdens, you still have the, what’s the paradox of, you know, of, you know, humility of understanding you’re limited. Yet at the same time, the Peersonian everything you do matters, you know. Right. So, I don’t know. It’s and so, you know, some people are going to have deeper knowledge of how of the agent arena relationship of how like, you know, I’m working with a company right now, we have these human behavior specialists from MIT. They’re doing they’re really good designers like these. I mean, a lot of a lot of smart people know, you know, designing the Vegas, you know, the Vegas type types. Right. How to how to how to hook people on software. So, I mean, I don’t I don’t know. That’s just an observation is, you know, it’s it’s it’s morally, I suppose, neutral, you know, the knowledge of knowledge, you know, human behavior, this this stuff here, agent arena relationships, you know, it. I don’t know. That’s that’s just a set of observations that don’t go anywhere. But no, no, no. I mean, yeah, you’re close to connecting it all up. I mean, look, well, one thing I’m very afraid of is is like, sorry, is it like I guess when thinking about like in terms of how my like my efforts have been allocated across my life and to what ends that they’re going to lead to is in my, you know, is being being fearful that those contributions will not be weaponized against people. Right. And if that is the case, you know, I don’t want it to have anything to do with me. Right. You know, you see what I’m saying? Just based on the on the on where I’m working and you know, it’s or you could say the same thing about like, you know, like my parents spent their careers designing weapons. Right. And you could frame that all kinds of different ways. You know, so. Yeah, well, look, I mean, that’s the problem of not accounting for the highest when you’re doing what you’re doing, right, because it because you it depends on why you’re why you’re developing the weapons. If you’re developing a defensive missile. I mean, that’s, you know, OK, cool, right. But can you develop a defensive only missile? And I’ve got a video coming actually on the channel with about the second Iraq war. And that there was a problem there. And the problem, roughly speaking, is you have a missile that can be used defensively or offensively. Is that breaking a treaty? Only if it’s used offensively, yeah, but it could be used either way. It’s hard to know. Right. These aren’t and that’s everything in life has those ambiguities. And you think it doesn’t until you start looking into it. And then you realize, oh, it does. And then you’re upset because you thought you had an answer. And in fact, your answer was just incomplete or wrong. And that’s that’s that’s how these. This that’s how this happens, right? Like people don’t understand the world is a lot more detailed, with a lot more nuance, and it’s a lot less certain than you think. And we reduce the world to understand it because we’re limited creatures. We can only know tiny amounts of the world. We reduce everything that we don’t need to deal with immediately on purpose. And then we oversimplify everything. And we have to no choice about that. It’s not optional. You’re just not smart enough to know a significant portion of the world. Tiny, tiny slices. That’s it. Look, I mean, we can get into it, Danny. Right. You go into computers. I think you already know where that’s going to end. I’m just going to be schooling you on a bunch of stuff. I know there’s no way you know. I know it already. Right. And, you know, I don’t want to do that. I mean, if it’s something you want to know, you need to know it. I’m happy to tell you. But I don’t want to sit here and eviscerate you over computers, even though I do that with most anybody. And I do mean actually most anybody. How many eight billion people bring them all on? I guarantee you, I know there’s some computer thing that I know that they don’t. I guarantee you that. I mean, that’s been my life’s work is understanding computers and software and all that stuff. So you would be surprised. I can talk for hours and hours and hours. We need to get into software and computers. I’m going to get into it. I’m going to immediately go into music. Right. Right. Well, and that’s the thing. Like you until somebody schools your ass on something you think you know, you ain’t got no idea how dumb you are. Right. And then it’s like, oh, I’m kind of an idiot. Even at the thing I thought I was good at. Yeah. Well, imagine all the other things you know you’re not good at and how many think that the details are endless in the world, like they just keep going, they just keep going. There’s just so much stuff. And that’s why you can’t focus on knowledge. That’s why knowledge isn’t good. Too much knowledge like the brain and you won’t be able to keep track of it. That’s kind of how I imagine you and Manuel to some degree is you’re kind of like gentle giants. Maybe you could say why is gentle giants like in your meditation rooms? You come in there and you have these interactions with people. And the moment they decide to fight you, it’s just like it’s over. You know, like you’ll just come back at them. They decide they want to fight you and you’re just you’re you’re you’re a giant. And it’s just they have no. It’s over, you know, because you’ll just completely roll over them, you know. And they have no. But the thing is, it’s like it’s a gentle giant. Like they’re not you’re not going in there. Your premise isn’t to fight or to overwhelm the other person with sheer strength. It’s too it’s something else. It’s it’s something to inform. You want to inform people, right? You want to help them, right? That’s always our priority. Like we have that we have the rule. Like if somebody for working because we used to work quite a bit on the Discord server for working and someone comes in and needs help, we stop working. And then we we work with that person until they’re until they’re better. Right. Or until we get them to a point and then we go back to working when nobody’s around that needs help, right. And then, you know, to the point where they just want to what it was. Yeah. And then it gets to a point where some people and this is not all people, but there are like plenty of people, they just decide they want to start. They want to pick a fight and they lose the fight and they get bitter. And then they go. They file a complaint somewhere and. Yeah, yeah. Well, they get they get hurt. Like people don’t like their you know, their axioms poked is I think Vanu Klaai was talking about that. Right. People don’t like your axioms. Well, they don’t they don’t like they don’t want their will be like, who wants the worldview challenge? I have a way of predicting the world and now you’re taking it away from me. That’s terrible. I agree. But what if your way of understanding the world hurting you now? What who’s going to be the bad guy and do the work? Because there’s a conflict there like how are you going to resolve that? Like you need to know if you’re going to slide into nihilism. Because if nobody tells you now, it’s not your that’s not your fault. We’ve been somebody tells you that it’s your fault. We’ve been busy tolerating everybody. And by tolerating everything, we’re we’re fostering nihilism. We’re putting people in these pits like nobody’s ever told when when they’re when they’re wrong, you know, this this thing that that’s what I why I posted this. I couldn’t believe when I saw this horseshit in the general chat, it’s like, OK, this isn’t me. I copy and pasted this. And here’s the second part of that. It’s like this needs to be underlined. It’s not a culture war. It’s a culture versus no culture war. That’s exactly what this is. This the secular neutral space where they’re arguing is like, no, we want we don’t like we don’t like what you’re doing. We want this secular this anytime you hear secular neutral, that’s not a culture. It’s a it’s complete chaos. It’s an anti culture. Yeah, it’s actually the opposite of culture. And that’s the problem. You can just spread out, right? Because once you think that you can just find agreement, this is the danger of the internet. And I tried to explain this to Vanderkley a few times. Right. In your hometown, how many people do you know that are going to marry an elephant? Zero is usually the answer. Right. OK. On the Internet, I guarantee you that number is not zero anymore. But well, and that’s a big problem because look, and this does go back to Jesse’s earlier point about Dunning-Kruger, like Dunning-Kruger has a point. So let’s suppose that the maximum number of people that you can relate to is like one hundred and fifty. OK. And let’s suppose you need to relate to 90 people in order for you to believe that that’s the dominant belief in the world. Because how else would you know? Right. If you can only track one hundred fifty people, if 90 people believe something, then you can. That’s the dominant belief in your world, because your world is limited to one hundred and fifty people at any given point in time. I’m not going to talk about the light over your life. Right. So and that’s all that matters, because you’re only going to act on the on your worldview at the time. You’re not going to act on the worldview that’s averaged out over your lifetime. That’s not the way that works. Time is real. So. If you get into a cult and there’s a two hundred people in the cult and 90 people agree, you don’t know everybody in the cult, there’s 50 people in the cult you don’t know, right, or don’t know well enough. You’re stuck in the cult. Like, you’re screwed. That’s how it happens, because the Dunning-Kruger number is real. But my cult is the best. Exactly. Well, and that’s and that’s what you described earlier. Right. Like, that’s what everybody wants. I’m going to find enough people that agree with me. OK, you’re going to form a cult. Lovely. Right. And then that cult is going to get is going to bargain with other cults and vie for power. No, they’re not. None of that’s going to happen. That’s not the way it works. The other cults to assemble and reach success. I just want my people to come together and manifest what. Right. That’s the Gnosticism. That’s the Solipsism. My group is going to win this battle whenever any. That’s right. We’re going to opt out. We’re going to. You’re not opting out. Like this is see, this is the Rousseauian mistake. OK, you can’t talk about you in relation to society as though they’re separate things because they’re not separate. OK, the the minute they became not separate was before you were born. Sorry, they were already not separate. Your parents were part of a society. Their parents were part of a society. Their parents were part of a society. OK, you were born into a society. Period. That already happened. It’s not negotiable. It can’t be changed. It can’t be made different. It already happened. It’s an occurrence. It’s the past. Everything you have, actually everything, including your life, actually is the result of your past society. Period. End of statement. You cannot disentangle yourself from your society. That is not possible. Now, you can change which society you’re operating in at any given time. And there’s usually a barrier to doing that. Aside from merely moving, there’s culture shock, right? Because culture is going to be different. Right. There’s usually a language difference. Right. They can be in the US. There isn’t. You can go wherever you want. Although y’all, it’s something that Southerners say that the Northerners don’t like because they’re morons and don’t understand the improvement of the language. Right. But that’s the thing. Like, sure, but you didn’t get around society. You can swap out society to some extent. And there’s a cost to that. Right. And that’s the problem. The Internet makes it seem like you could be in your own society with people who agree mostly with most of your positions, but you can’t actually do that. The Free State Project proves this. And there’s other projects like that. The Free State Project is like the 17000th in a long line of this idiocy. It doesn’t work. And I like the Free State Project, actually. I think it’s kind of cool. It’s just not going to work like I get it. It’s and it’s and it’s worth doing. I don’t even disagree like, oh, they shouldn’t be doing that. No, it’s worth doing. It’s going to have some effects. It’s not going to have the effect they want because it’s hard to get people to move. Well, first of all, who the hell wants to live in New Hampshire? I mean, I love New Hampshire. It’s a natural filtering process. I see the unintended result of who’s going to actually move for political reasons besides people who don’t have anything better going on in their life. That’s right. Keeps them anchored there. So you’re filtering for. Those individuals. Right. It’s all filters. That’s what people don’t understand. Everything is a filter first. Platforms are a filter. YouTube is a filter. Right. YouTube’s competitors are filters. Nobody wants to give up YouTube to go on rumble. Right. They might do both, but they’re not going to give up YouTube to go on rumble. Now, if they’re thrown off of YouTube or the people they follow are thrown off of YouTube, again, they might do both. There are a few people who would never go on YouTube just because they’re protesting Google like Farron. I’m not saying any of this is good or bad. I’m just saying this is how people are. Right. And so we have to deal with that. Like, there’s no choice. We just have to deal with with the differences. And that’s where the intimacy comes in. You need to have an intimate connection with people. You know, and again, I think the ability to accept conflict is what it partly what love is, and that’s why love runs the world. That’s why the Christians are like, love runs the world. Yes, it kind of does. Can I can I get in what how what my mental model for the specific phenomena of perhaps a deficit of like what we call it, like platonic love between friends and stuff like that. And because I hadn’t I’d never conceived of it your way. So if I talk about mine and then we can kind of come back around. Yeah, so you’re talking about. Oh, so the example was Sam and Frodo, are they gay? So I I kind of came up with this idea that, you know, I’ve read a few things that seem to indicate that there was like a more of a willingness in like American culture, let’s say in the past for men to express love for each other. I just read a few months ago this rose how to be a friend. And the whole thing he talks about this deep emotional connection, this like empathetic love for a true friend. And I’ve kind of wondered if there wasn’t if this wasn’t an unanticipated kind of backlash to the acceptance of like homosexuality in the culture and like like the how pervasive and how much bandwidth of the of the zeitgeist that has taken up. And because so let’s say the traditional masculine identity has kind of said like, oh, whoa, we’re not going to go over there. So it’s been there’s been a hesitancy for friends to form that loving fraternal bond with each other because it’s like there’s men in their relationships have kind of created a distance to, you know, to separate themselves from that intimacy. That’s all intimacy crisis. Right. So so now is like an explanatory narrative if that is if that’s true and maybe it proposes an antidote that where we can just be deliberate about having. No, that doesn’t propose an antidote. Like this is the mistake people make. I think if we know how it started, we know how to fix it. No, you can fix things without knowing how they started. First of all, that happens all the time. I do it all the time as a consultant. Sorry, I can I can show you that happens all the time. I do it all the time, literally walk into a place. I figure out what’s going on and I fix it. And I don’t I often never know how it got to be that way. But I don’t care. I just need to fix it. Right. And also the conditions from where it started to where you are now are almost certainly different and knowing where where it started is probably a detriment because those conditions don’t exist. And so you can’t pretend as though that’s where you live and therefore you could apply some solution in that way. And that’s the problem. Like the best way to think of this, in my opinion, is the intimacy crisis. If you can’t understand that there are different qualities of relationships that aren’t physical because you’re a materialist, then you’re screwed. You’re going to end up with everybody gay by default. Right. Because people have to have relationships with the same sex. It’s not optional for men to not talk to other men. That’s not going to it’s not often for women not to talk to other women because we outsource our sanity and our perspective matters. Men’s groups with men only in men’s spaces talk differently when there’s a woman there. Sorry, there’s a woman around. They’re going to talk differently. When it’s just the guys, we’re going to talk differently. It’s going to happen. It should happen. We have similar enough perspectives that are different enough from women that that’s how it’s going to happen. Yeah, I mean, that seems so that seems so obvious and natural to me that like, I don’t know what do I do about this? Do I like what are you trying to fix? For it, what are you trying to fix? Are you trying to fix a problem that you have? Are you trying to fix a problem somebody else has? I want to. Well, yeah, so I guess be part of the solution that. Course corrects for the broader culture. Specifically, I don’t know. How do you how do you think you do that? Well, see, OK, so we can articulate. I think you can articulate compelling arguments. That’s part of why I wanted to kind of you can know you can. In this it mechanistic narrative, right? You can you look you you can you absolutely can. It’s not going to work. People are not persuaded by arguments. This is all the funny part is, you know, that’s all over the research. Like every single paper about this is very, very clear. People are not rational. It’s just not true. Look at the papers on rest. Go read them. I’ve read them. Go read them. People are almost never rational about anything ever. Almost never. It’s a huge exception. Except me, but yeah, most the average person. Well, they’ve measured in an fMRI. You can argue about it, but more eyes are not good. OK, the total amount of energy that you use while while we’re fairly sure you’re being rational is so huge that you just can’t be rational for very long during the day. I think it’s like 20 minutes total. Yeah. 24 hours. Is that the full story, though, because we only know it is we don’t rationalize. We come up with it. We come up with a hand a handful of duplicatable tools. We don’t know. We don’t know. We don’t. You didn’t do any of that. No, no. You watched your parents when you were born. And that gave you a bunch of information that you never rationalize. You took it for granted. This is the way we do things. You’re still doing that. Most of the things that you, quote, know by doing, we’ll say most of the things that you’re actually doing are mimicry from your parents and from the people you grew up around. That’s what most of them are. And when you start inspecting yourself and actually being honest with yourself about, hey, why did I do that? Hey, why did I do that? You’ll realize that. That’s why right now. And I’ve seen these commercials recently. I know they’re still on TV and radio and such. I they talk about, oh, you don’t want to become your parents. Why would you become your parents? Because the age that you’re growing up at, you’re looking at your parents at a certain age, so if they’re in like their 30s, when you hit your 30s, the model that you have for how to be in your 30s is your parents. So one of two things is going to happen. Either you’re going to say, oh, on average, they did lots of bad things and rebel and not do any of the things they did or try not to write, or you’re just going to naturally fall into that pattern. That’s why those commercials work. Is it 100 percent? No, but it’s like 80 percent. That happens to people. They don’t know it. They don’t realize how much information comes through mimicry and not through standard education. And then this is where like an ecology of practices come in. There’s something maybe there’s there’s too much of an emphasis. And this has to do perhaps with the knowledge and the science and stuff like that. Maybe I’m saying something obvious. It’s more about like training, like creating. No, it’s not. It’s not training. It’s not training. I have a video on this. I posted in the chat earlier. Right. It’s education versus training. What you want is education. What people are giving you is training. Training is done to a standard. If you are trained, you are a cog in a machine. That is true. And most education is now training. Well, I don’t mean extrinsically imposed training like I’m signing up. No, it’s not. It’s not. It doesn’t matter. Like this is what people do with meditation. They go, I got to go deeper in my meditation. That doesn’t mean anything. You can’t go deeper in your meditation. You can explore the field of meditation further inside your head, but you can also explore that forever. There is no deeper. That’s nonsense. It’s crazy talk. It doesn’t exist. To me, deeper would mean being putting being a little bit more deliberate about quieting my mind. No, I like I understand. I understand that. I use the term deep to describe meditation. I’m just telling you it’s not deeper. That’s not what’s happening. That’s not what’s happening. It’s just not there isn’t an up and down in meditation. I think it’s just a definition of terms problem then because it’s not. It’s a limitation of language problem. People say definition of terms. They usually mean, no, the language can’t express this correctly. That’s right. This is why the propositional knowledge idea is important. Propositional knowledge only gets you so far in the world. All right, so you can I can meditate and a meditation, one meditation be better than the other better for you. Not doing the thing that meditation is striving to do for me. Yeah, no, meditation doesn’t strive to do anything. And it’s for you. This is where people get confused. What meditation is best? No, no, there isn’t a best meditation. There might be better and worse meditations for you and your circumstances. But the only person who knows that is you. And obviously, you don’t know that you have to find it. And this is where exploration is. That’s why education is important because it’s good versus bad exploration. Yeah, I don’t know about that. I mean, to me, I’m meditating for the purpose of develop to strengthen my neural pathways to it doesn’t do that, come become more capable of present moment awareness. Of meditation won’t do any of that. Those are all first order effects. Meditation is only good for second order effects. I don’t I don’t understand what that means. So it’s some meditations you can train like your focus a little bit better. Right. And that’s definitely a thing. But actually, what you care about is and John talks about this in the course. And you won’t notice it. Usually you won’t even notice it. What will happen is somebody said, oh, you seem calmer all of a sudden. You know, did you do something? And it’s like, well, yeah, I’ve been meditating for like six months. And then suddenly you’re calmer around everybody. It’s it’s magical. It’s not the intended effect. There’s no way I can tell you, oh, you do this and this and this. And then you’ll be there’s no way I disagree. I think that when I have every look, everybody disagrees. I get that. OK, the data is out there. Or you could just watch people meditate and notice that they don’t all get it almost like you’re telling me the sky is red, like it’s so observably true to me. It no, I’m telling you two things. One, you’re not the one observing it. That’s that’s that’s the first thing. Right. And the other thing I’m telling you is that the fact that something works for you doesn’t actually mean it. Most people who meditate get nothing out of it. Most people, most people can’t meditate because they start and then like, and if we can and that might be OK, because I don’t think meditation is is like the big thing. Click, I don’t I don’t think it’s this flow state that John talks about, I don’t even think it’s good. I know on the one hand he goes, well, you know, probably video games put you in a flow state reliably and video game addiction is a problem. But really what we need are flow states that aren’t video games. I don’t know, dude. Addiction is addiction, kid. Now, that makes sense to me, right? Because the reason you can enter a flow state in video games is because the stimuli is very high, right? But what you want to do is be be have a lower, lower stimuli. No, it’s not. That’s not that’s not what’s going on. That’s not that’s not how people work. This is he this is all materialistic. It’s not the stimulus is not very high. That’s not what happens in a video game. It’s a two dimensional thing. It’s not very high. It’s very low. Right. It’s very low. Very low concordance. Oh, my God. We’re not playing the same video games. Well, no, but that’s the thing. You can be addicted to Pac-Man. People are like, OK, that’s a low concordance game. Why are people addicted to it if it’s so if it’s because it’s not high. What’s high is the ratio of reward to difficulty because everything’s about contrast and ratios, you can’t talk about solid levels. This is higher than that. No, that doesn’t even matter. That makes no difference at all. What matters is the contrast of the frame to the event. That matters. And that that’s different. That’s why Pac-Man works. Right. It’s a simple frame. Right. You can focus in on it pretty easily because screen size and all these factors. Right. And then the rules are very simple. It’s mostly muscle memory. Right. And you can develop muscle memory to play the game. Right. And so the reward is very high. Relative to the cost of understanding the world. So it doesn’t have a high reward. It’s got a low concordance. Right. It doesn’t have a high reward than being out in the world and playing basketball. Like there’s no freaking way. Right. But the contrast is very high because it’s a simple world. So when you make the arena simple, you can make the goal much, much less concordant, but it’s bigger, it’s louder. And that’s the problem. But but but it doesn’t matter. Like I don’t think the flow state’s good. Like I I think it’s terrible, actually. I don’t I don’t you know, it’s handy. You need it. It’s good for some things. But most of the time you don’t want to be in flow. That’s insane. You know, what I want to do most of the time for me is control anxiety. So the way I do that is then sweeping, I call it. Right. Or doing the dishes or any anything where there’s a lot of muscle memory. Why? Because what happens and this bore out the research long after I figured this out, when your body’s moving at a regular pace, using muscle memory, it can be doing the dishes, you know, it doesn’t have to be fully autonomous or unconscious or whatever, doesn’t be fully unconscious. It’s going to be mostly unconscious. Your body is going, ah, we’re calm, ah, we’re calm, ah, we’re calm. And it turns out, I don’t know if anybody noticed, your body and your brain are connected way more than we think. But like they’re physically connected, right. We know neck nerves. Right. If your brain is off being anxious, your body is not. Your brain will retune to your body’s calm signal and calm itself down. And I’ve been using that for decades to control anxiety in myself. And I tell other people about it and it works. And that’s the problem. Like if people don’t get that, that’s more important than flow state. And you can argue, oh, well, you’re in a flow of flow state. I don’t think you are. I don’t think that’s what’s going on at all. It’s totally different state. Yeah, he’s back. So either. What’s up? I’m back. What I mean is. So when I when I’m doing a medit, my meditation practice in the moment throughout my day, I can notice and I sort of observe like, oh, I feel stress coming on. I’m not going to choose it. I’m going to return to. You know, breath or so that can happen. Have that presence there. So to me, it’s like exercising where I’m conditioning my mind, I’m strengthening the mechanism that does that. So, Mike, Mike. Yeah, so that’s great. If I go to the gym, am I going to get bigger muscles? If I go on the machines that you go on? Yeah. No, I’m not. No, I’m not. What? No, because my body doesn’t work. There were lots of people like this. Their bodies, they won’t bulk up at all. I won’t bulk up beyond this ever. I’ve tried. It does not work. And it doesn’t work because of the metabolism thing. And this is actually. So then you change your diet at the same time. No, no, no, no, no. It’s not diet. It has nothing to do with that. People, certain people can’t bulk up. They can’t. It doesn’t matter what they do. They have they have lean natural muscle and they can’t bulk like physically. They know they’ve measured this. And this is the problem. Right. This is the whole problem is that things don’t work for everybody. And most people can’t. You can always find an exception. Doesn’t the exception prove the rule? Like the exomorph thing is is fairly rare. And then you can change your metabolism by a dietary intervention. You can’t change your muscle structure, change your metabolism, but that doesn’t change your muscle structure. I know it’s a problem. Like not everybody can bulk up. No, no, that doesn’t. Now, the interesting thing is that the skinnier people like me can be very, very, very strong, like, in fact, their strength is not in relation to the size of their muscles at all, and they can be much stronger than than have more heavily muscled people. But all that can be described. And like just because the control panel is complex doesn’t mean that if you twist the right knobs, you won’t get the right result. Right. Like you can do the you can do a combination of things. No, no, no, no, no. This is imagination. This is imagination. OK, in the real world, we know this. OK, we know this. We know it doesn’t work that way. You’re trying to make an equality argument. We’re not equal. I’m not going to be equal to you ever. It’s never going to happen. And I don’t want to be equal. There’s a sufficient amount of overlap. No, there isn’t. No, no. And there doesn’t have to be like why is this important? It’s not important. There doesn’t have to be any overlap. I think there’s universalities of the human experience on which we can rely to relate to one another. No, no, there aren’t. Everybody says that. And when I challenge them to prove it, they can’t because it’s not provable. That’s actually false. Am I human if I have no arms and legs? Where’s the universality? What if I have two hearts? Sure. Where is the universality? It doesn’t exist. Someone had two hearts before. So, oh, yeah. Really? Oh, yeah. I bet it’s up in that Mutter museum. Oh, yeah. There’s all kinds of stuff. You have no idea, man. Until you look into that sort of thing, you have no idea. And you’re like, what the freaking hell is going on? And that’s the problem. It’s just you’re just assuming that these things are there because it’s a good shortcut and like you should, like, don’t be crazy like me. And don’t use the problem of human beings. I think there are different classes of humans. And I think most people are cool with that. Some people are a little thief. People are like a wizard. It’s not important. It’s not important. People get wrapped up with this universality. We don’t need it. We can cooperate with cats and dogs and cows and horses and oxen and all kinds of things without any universality. It’s just not required in the world to do anything. It’s not important. It’s not interesting. It’s not. It doesn’t mean anything. It’s just not who cares. It just means nothing. Yeah. Look at Richard. He wasn’t running marathons or, you know, bench pressing 300 pounds or whatever. But he could he could explain a lot of shit about nuclear physics, you know, take that example to apply to anything. But that’s the whole point. The point is, if we’re universal and equal, we’re actually weaker as a race. We’re weaker as a country. I said there are universalities of the human experience. I wasn’t saying it’s no, no, there aren’t. That’s what I’m telling you. You can’t point it out. Anything you point out has so many exceptions. I would argue humor. That’s a good one for us. Humor. You know, we all have different things. It makes us laugh. We do laugh. That’s even if there were universal experiences, we would have no way of determining if they were universal because it’s not something that you can objectively measure. Is that what you’re saying? Right. And and it’s not important. Who cares? It’s not important. We can cooperate with things that have no universals to us like cats and dogs and oxen and horses and all kinds of things. I think that there are there are there are less similar to us. So those things, you know, there are less of them, but there are things about who we are. That are that can apply to animals. Right. So like I feel like you’re trying. I’m maybe it was my failure and how to express it. But I think you’re putting it in a more absolutist framework than I intended to suggest. Yeah. And they all like to cuddle. Like that’s that’s a universal thing. I would I would say they don’t like that next to you. And you like it, too. Well, we can I had a dog. I had a dog that didn’t want to be anywhere near me. Well, always, you know, they didn’t want to didn’t want to physically be near me. The fact that anomalies exist doesn’t mean that things aren’t trending towards. And it’s not a universal do like that’s the whole point. And it’s not important. Like, why is this why are you defending this ridiculous idea? Because I think that it’s I think that it would be nihilism to to completely reject the the. Oh, like, what? Nihilism only happens when you disconnect from everything else. What I’m telling you is universals aren’t important to make connection because there’s intimacy. There’s qualities of connections, the quality of connection I have with my dogs is greater than the quality of connection I have with any humans ever. Right. But it’s of a different quality. Right. Because, yeah, dogs are great, by the way. And you all suck. Just just so we’re clear about how that hierarchy works. What would you call it? If not better than people thing. Well, what do you call that? How do we relate to animals and why do we want to keep them around? Well, they’re just into their quality connections of a different quality. And all I’m saying is the loyalty that a dog shows me is much greater than the loyalty that any person has ever shown me. Right. And for my dogs, I train them. I train them well. Thank you very much. And that’s hard to do. It takes a lot of time. But when that happens, well, I have an affinity for animals. So random animals will obey me anyway, for whatever reason. But when I train them, they’re very well behaved. And and you’re I’m not going to get that from another human. It’s not going to happen. Now, there’s nothing wrong with that. There’s nothing wrong with that. That’s not a bad thing. And the fact that other people don’t have that, there’s nothing wrong with that. That’s not a bad thing. All I’m saying is to different qualities, to relationships, that’s an intimacy. This is why the intimacy crisis is important to understand, because it exists and it has certain implications. And when you don’t understand those connections, you start relying on materiality, which strays into Gnosticism. You start relying on on certain other things like universality or equality. Those are going to be the same thing eventually anyway. Right. And you don’t need those things. And when you’re relying on those things, you’re probably not understanding intimacy correctly. What do you rely on? You rely on your intuitive understanding of the connections, the relationships that you have in the world. That’s the thing to rely on. What do you call that? Intimacy, intimacy, OK, you know, where we’re I think that’s where we’re, you know, we’re calling it different things. I think we’re saying the same thing. But my my words are better. No, no, no, universality is dangerous. It’s a dangerous concept, a Gnostic concept. It’s a dangerous Gnostic concept. Once you go down there, I’m not sure. Can you? No, no, I’m not. I’m not talking about intent. Like this is the problem. He’s just real hard for words. But I see your point, though, that you’re making more. I also see Mike’s point. It’s yeah, the words. It’s all about the words. What are you talking about? We got to make a dictionary here, man. We’ve got to be specific about our words. I get it. I know we we do. We have to be able to communicate important ideas. I mean, that’s the goal of the navigating patterns channel, right? To fix the cultural cognitive grammar and to understand things at the right layer of analysis and intimacy is the quality of your relationship. Whatever kind of relationship it is. Our McDonald’s universal mark. OK, let’s let’s go back. Mike, what what originally what were you trying to get to before we got caught up on the semantics of that’s the word semantics. I was losing that word universality. Maybe it’s maybe it’s an incorrect similarity. But I don’t think it was the the core thing that you were aiming at. Right. Where were we? That’s a good question. So I maybe I was trying to have dogs. The similarity like that similar similarities like you can rely on having OK, so like let’s take this example of like this kind of this left notion that because I have a particular identity that I can’t understand what someone else has experienced and but I have I have I believe that I have empathy and I can put myself in other people’s positions and relate to them and you do an imaginative practice of I know what it would feel like to be like them to be a woman or any of these identity type of things. And they’re trying to suggest that I’m not capable of of doing that by virtue of being who I’m not capable of doing that. That’s actually correct. You’re not capable of doing that. Yeah, but like putting yourself in someone else’s shoes, you can run that simulation so far, but we had this saying like, you know, I’m not you, though, or, you know, there’s another one like. I don’t know. We had these sayings that is not coming out mine on the spot. It’s a weird thing that’s happening, but like it’s almost like, OK, we’re going to throw like intent and consciousness out the window, but they’re taking your commitment to empathy and weaponizing it against you. So it’s like it’s almost like there’s there’s a fracture in like it breaks down, like the fact that you actually cannot empathize with somebody, you actually cannot put yourself in someone’s shoes. They’re they’re they’re taking your commitment to they’re taking the fact that you think that you can do that and weaponizing the fact that it’s not true, they’re weaponizing that against you. And somehow it’s working and they don’t know that they’re doing it. It’s right. Well, and it’s and it’s and it’s it’s dangerous. Why would you need to do that? Like, I can just accept that I will never understand what it’s like to be a weird hick in West Virginia like Nieram does. And I’m OK with it. We’re still buddies. I’ll drive to West Virginia next time. You’re weird. You’re weird in your own way. You’re weird in your own way. You know what it’s like to be weird. You have no no, no, I don’t. First of all, no, the rest of you might be weird. I’m not weird. I’m definitely the competent standard of the universe. Your understanding of weirdness to that particular. No, no, I don’t. You’re casting all this on me, Mike. None of that is true. I can do it. All right. I’ll talk about myself. I don’t think you can. I think you think you can. But I think I think that that it’s it’s a lot. Why do you like what I’m saying is still man my argument instead of being adversarial and immediately I can’t still man your argument. It’s wrong. Like I can’t. I can’t deal with obviously. How how close can I get? Zero zero percent of the way there. But no, no, all I’m saying is it’s irrelevant. You don’t need to do that. That’s what I’m saying. It’s not important. It’s not interesting. It’s a distraction. It’s a distraction. Right. What exactly? What is what is the distraction? The idea that you need to be able to empathize with somebody is something like full one hundred percent empathy with full one hundred percent intimacy with their position. Right. Well, OK. As we said earlier, some people do. Some people don’t. Not everybody needs to. But some people I don’t I don’t think they can. So if they do, they’re dead. It’s not going to happen. What do you think that is that we’re we’re doing then when we say we’re empathizing with somebody? Well, I don’t I don’t think I don’t think empathy exists. I think it’s a bizarre strange concept. Right. I think the nagel what is it to be a back paper proves this. Like you can abstract that out to just what is it to be another person. Like there’s no way there’s no way even after sitting in a car for six and a half hours listening to music with Ethan, that I can say like, oh, I think I understand how Ethan understands music. I certainly do not. And I certainly never will not. I will never be putting in time, energy and effort. But this is the problem, Mike. The time it takes to do something like that has to be replicated at a bare minimum, even come close to the experience. I’m not going to do that. And even that is insufficient because you don’t have the framing from that person. You weren’t born them. You didn’t grow up them. You don’t know how they feel. But it doesn’t need to be with the similarities. Right. You have your own experience. They’re sufficient. They’re they’re they’re sufficient. He sufficiently substitutes for his experiences to to an extent to get some of the way there. You don’t need to get any of the way there. There’s no reason to do that. You just don’t need it. And as a lot of you, you have to resurrect this idea. It’s unnecessary. I got a story here that I can tell that might help bridge some gap here. OK, so so I was I was having a conversation with somebody and blah, blah, blah, he’s going through a really bad breakup. And then I just said something to him, you know, just just something that I thought would be helpful and encouraging. I just said, you know, you don’t need that shit, man. Just move on. You’re a really good person. You’re the best form of revenge is success. Just walk on and do you, man. There’s going to be a woman out there that’s going to find you and support you and want to help you. And if there’s not that doesn’t appreciate you, then forget about it, man. Keep doing yourself. Keep doing you. I think you’re a wonderful man. You’ve got a good heart in you. You know, you don’t deserve this. And this dude, he started. He started to cry. And then it made me feel something inside, you know, this empathy. We want to call it what I’m like. I realized in that moment that man probably never had anybody say that to him. And it made me feel a certain like, what the hell is that? What am I? What’s right? Even though I don’t fully understand what that meant to me, just saying that off hand, that’s what that’s just resonant, but that’s resonant after the fact. That’s not like I’m trying to understand your way of doing that. All you had to do was be strong and express to him while being strong that this that this was the case that he was. That requires zero empathy. But then what happened is why don’t we call it with the person? OK, well, look, you’re with the person. Now you get resonance with them. OK, still no empathy. You don’t need it. You can draw up that whole concept. It’s just not required. Mark, you do often you will make a distinction between sympathy and empathy, right? Right. Well, look, you should. But in that story, you don’t even need sympathy, right? You can just you can just tell people the truth. Problem solved. Right. Oh, this is what this person needs to hear or oh, this is the truth. And maybe they need to hear it. Maybe maybe they don’t know it. I’m going to give it a shot. It doesn’t even require sympathy. Yeah. The thing to replace empathy with is sympathy. Right. Like, oh, if you’re always stuck in your head, in your perspective, like you’re solipsistic, then yeah, you know what you need to do to get out of that is to be sympathetic. But sympathy is not empathy. You’re not pretending as though you can understand something from somebody else’s perspective. And you don’t want that. If I’m depressed, then I’m in a hole. If you come along and you empathize with me, you jump in the hole. Now we’re both in the hole. That’s not better. Right. What I want is sympathy. But I’ve but I’ve been depressed before and I climb my way out of that hole. So I’m the person who’s strong enough to climb out. And I and I say, man, maybe, maybe not before I’ve been in low. You’re not climbing out of my depression. Let’s climb out this together. I’ll tell you right now. The depths of my depression are not climb out of the book. But look, I might. But I might want what near him did. I might want somebody standing at the top of the hole going, you know, I’ve been in a hole like that before here, buddy, and because that’s what you did. You reach down and get something to pull himself up with that sympathy. That’s what you want. You don’t want empathy. There’s no use for it. All right. OK. So that did that was a good bridge. OK, so I’m glad that was helpful because we just there’s just these definitions that that you have that people are being fooled. You see, people are being fooled and believing they can do a magic trick that they can’t do. I think that’s what Ethan was getting at earlier. Right. They’re being fooled into believing that they can do something that is not possible and we know is not possible. OK, it’s just not possible, but it’s also not required. Like there’s lots of things out there that people are telling you to do this. You do that. No, you can’t. But you don’t need to. Like, what the hell? Like, why are you doing it? Look, entertainment’s a thing. Sometimes you do things you don’t need to do. Absolutely. I do that all the time. Right. But also you got to be careful. You’ve got to make sure the things you need to get done get done and the skill sets you need to have you have. And so you can’t get lost in all this ridiculousness about, oh, what am I going to do? I have to empathize with people. I have to learn how to do this with people. I have to learn. No, you don’t. You don’t need any of that. You know what you can do? You tell people the truth. That’s why stupid people still survive, because stupid people that follow the truth are still super useful. And they’re way more useful than the smarter people, way more useful than the smarter people. Right. We admire children for their innocence. And some of their innocence comes from their stupidity because they see the world more clearly because your mind isn’t cluttered with a thousand stupid facts. There’s nothing wrong with that. That’s better. We see it as a virtue. It’s funny, my example, my example for empathy was also going to be a breakup. So that’s kind of funny. It’s happening in a lot of places. And I don’t want somebody to empathize with me when I’m wrong. I don’t want that because they’re going to think I’m right with you. If you believe that the other person’s feelings are right. Right. Because that your feelings are right. Your feelings are never wrong. They’re happening to you. They’re phenomenological. And you empathize with them. All you can do is support them in their bad idea. That’s not good. I’d rather sympathize with them and say, oh, yeah, I understand that this happened but you know what? Fuck up, buttercup, because sometimes that’s the right answer. You don’t have the right answer all the time. Sometimes the right answer is the answer that you gave, Niram. Like, I don’t know. But you can’t be objective when you’re empathizing with somebody. You have convinced me that empathy doesn’t exist for you. I’m not convinced it doesn’t exist for me. VanderKlaay laid it out pretty good today when he talked about like when the alcoholic is in a hole, what he does is he hops in the other hole with the guy because I’ve been in here before. I know some tools of getting out. So you want I can show you. But like there is also an empathy like our friend, my aunt, when his wife passed away, you know, he’s been able to empathize with other men who have had wives that passed away and to sit with them, that’s the best he can do. You know, so I think I think there’s there are there’s utility with empathy if you know how to use it, right? And you’re not trying to manipulate. You’re just trying to be with somebody because maybe that’s what they want. Maybe they don’t. Because I think this too. Sometimes people try to empathize and they try to do spiritual surgery on you or some shit. Yeah. But sometimes the best empathy is just to sit with somebody and say, or maybe you got shitty ideas right now. Is this like I wouldn’t I wouldn’t call that empathy, Chad. I’d call it being supportive. Like I don’t I don’t I don’t understand the obsession using misusing the word empathy. Like you can be supportive of people. No matter what situation they’re in and what situation you’re in. There’s there is a phenomenological identification that happens. And when you when you encounter someone who’s been where you are. So I think there’s some utility to that. I wouldn’t it’s not it shouldn’t be a high like high on the hierarchy of. I would call that sympathy, though. I wouldn’t again, I wouldn’t call it empathy. And it just doesn’t match the description of empathy, because empathy is feeling what the other person feels. But your feelings are always right. And I would rather be able to help people out of their feelings, especially when their feelings are wrong or overwhelming. Yeah. Yeah, you need empathy. I’m rest on the assumption that feelings are always right. No, I’m saying feelings are definitely always right. OK. And empathy rests on the assumption that you can feel without somebody else feels and then if what they’re feeling is wrong, right, then you’re not helping them. You’re not able to help them. You won’t. Yeah. Yeah, you kind of let them do things. I just keep thinking of tacit complicity for some reason, because I had this friend that was in a deep, dark hole and I tried to be understanding, but any time I would. You know. Try to say, hey, man, let’s get out of the hole. You need to quit being so negative. You would fight me. Yeah. And and then I would just like not say anything. And then when I ended up hanging out with a guy, I started to feel shitty. And it’s not even my life. You know, so I started tacitly be complicit to his vibe until eventually I was just I can’t fucking hang out with this guy. This guy sucks. He’s not ever going to change. You know, I’ve known him for years, but I need to get the fuck away from this negative motherfucker because I’m going to be a bad dude all the time because he’s not willing to change. So that just come to mind. That story, maybe that that that was is that empathy? What was I fucking? I don’t know. What is that vibe that I was looking for? You were empathizing. But then when you’re around people, there’s resonance and that’s different. And there’s nothing wrong with resonance. I mean, it can be good or bad. Right. But that’s the problem is that if you empathize with somebody, you’re going to want to resonate with them to. Thanks. And you’re both in a hole again. I’m not a fan. I don’t I don’t think it’s better, but I do think it’s worse. Like it’s both right. It’s not better, but it’s definitely worse. Yeah, I quit. I quit empathizing with that dude and I started to hate him, started to resent him. I didn’t want to fucking be around him. I was like, you’re bringing everything down. You can’t fix everyone. You know, that’s the other problem. They’d still look like a piece of shit. I’m sorry. That’s too bad. It is too. You guys, I got to roll out. I just want to drop it. Smoke before I went to bed. See you, Chad. It’s good seeing you, man. Hey, I finally finished Better Call Saul. And it was. Oh, yeah. Yeah, it’s pretty good. Like it. Yes, it’s good ending. But where did you finish it on? What’s that? Where did you finish it on? We we bought the last season. Where did you buy it? Amazon. Oh, OK, because we we can find the last season. Yeah. Huh. OK, Amazon. All right. It’s good. That last season is great. It is. All right. So you mean. And so this is kind of reminding me of the whole. The other party’s framing. And of course, we always have to remember, we’re not going to slip into absolutes, so it’s not. It’s not always this. It’s not always that. Sometimes you have to adopt the other person’s. You have to. Accept the other person’s framing. You have to acknowledge that they have a different perspective and acknowledge that your view of their perspective is probably not. They’re framing like you build a mental model of of of understanding the way that they’re understanding, so that way you can you can work within the way that they think and perceive what’s going on. Yeah, I think so, because sometimes people come in here, especially if they’re strangers and they’ll start talking to you and they don’t have they don’t use language the same way that you do. But you can tell that they’re like, I mean, you obviously are continually making a judgment on whether they’re in good faith or they’re in bad faith. And if you can tell that they’re in good faith, but just they there there’s a language barrier, you you will you will give them you’ll grant them mercy and use their framing or use their language, even though it may not be as precise or articulate. You do this with me, I think sometimes. So I use a word a certain way and you will you will not saying you submit, but you will you will grant me clemency or mercy. And you will use the word in the way that I’m using the word so that we can facilitate communication. Yeah. Yeah. But if but there’s a line, though, like once I come in there, come come into a conversation and I’m being antagonistic and I’m trying to manipulate you, once you identify that I’m not in good faith and I’m antagonistic, it’s like there’s a hard line drawn and you do not use my my framing at all because any submission or any mercy granted to me is giving into my manipulation and you’re not going to do that. Right. So there’s like there has to be some sort of. I don’t know what you would call it, but come to terms or whatever. Yeah, I would call it mercy. Honestly, there’s a ton. There’s a whole bunch of really important tools like that, right? Like asking clarifying questions, like all kinds of ways that you can integrate or reconcile like I don’t want to reconcile. No, I want to do that. I don’t I don’t see why two people should come closer to each other. If I’ve got the truth, I shouldn’t move closer to you ever. Sorry. So we’re going to have to construct neutral zones and build our star bases and we don’t want to do any of that. Look, you just watch what Manuel and I do. We just sit there and make our statements and you can either go to hell and leave or you can come closer. And that doesn’t mean we don’t move because we do occasionally move. Right. But we’re not going to move by default. That’s silly. We’ve thought about this and the people that come into the room or whatever have it, it’s that simple. And so we have the upper hand. I mean, Ethan was talking about this earlier. We’re giants. We have the upper hand. Period. End of statement. You don’t you don’t. So there was an incident on the discourse over the month and a half ago or something. But somebody said, you sound condescending. And I said, kid, you came in here, OK, and said, I want to know something from you. OK, so you think this is your your formula. You think that I know something that you don’t. OK, the odds that I can communicate that to you. Without coming down to your level or zero, of course, I’m condescending. Of course I am. To communicate with you. There are all kinds of ways you can communicate to with someone when you have a better, more robust mental model than them, when you have a better understanding of something of something that isn’t condescending, where you can you can do Socratic dialogue, you can ask them questions that you can bring them along to your understanding. You know what, Mike? I can. I think all that’s bad. I watch people do it all the time and it turns places into a non-successful and it’s been turning the internet non-successful since the beginning of the Internet since IRC. It doesn’t work. A lot of no reason to do it. So not so I have an ENTP personality type and it’s called the debater because I’m very comfortable with adversarial interactions with people. And that has damaged me and my relationships with people because I I’m talking about something and I’m having a great time and and I’m like, oh, this is so cool, we’re getting somewhere, we’re arguing like that, we’re figuring stuff out and they’re like, I like they’re like, try going to kick me out of their house and never talk to me again, blah, blah, blah, because I’m in the argument, I’m attacking ideas, blah, blah, blah. And they’re emotionally invested in in the ideas. Now, I could judge and say that they’re violating some good faith assumptions about communication and I can rationalize and everything like that. But people are emotional beings and they do invest. So you can you can you can talk to people. You can come from a place of authority and you don’t have to necessarily be condescending. You can be you can have you have to condescend to communicate. You literally have to condescend to communicate. Authority is like you can’t speak from a position of authority. OK, here’s the thing is we’re so attuned and accustomed to living in a flat world and seeing the world is flat, you can’t have authority and also not be condescending at the same time just because condescending in and of itself is not bad. It just means that somebody is at a higher position than you. And what about Richard? I keep thinking about it. I keep thinking about it. They’re sacrificing their privilege to meet you with your language where you’re at. It’s a sacrifice. Yes, you can feel bad about that fact if you want, because it exemplifies that you’re not at their level. You can feel bad about that if you want. This is nothing I can do, but it’s not my fault. You know, you communicate with people. You have to condescend. The difference between being a leader and a teacher. I keep thinking about Richard Feynman in this discussion. I don’t think Richard Feynman was condescending at all, but he he was able to communicate down on that level with people. He did bring them all the way to the top. Well, but he did. It’s just that people didn’t see it as a bad thing. The reason why people see condescension as a bad thing nowadays is because they want equality and you’re showing them that they’re not equal and they get all upset because their worldview is upset. Well, that’s too freaking bad. Well, I think the common use of the term is basically a substitute for being an for saying that the person’s being an asshole. Right. They’re not. I don’t think the common is condescending. That’s fine. That’s fine. That’s fine. I understand the common. It’s wrong. And we can’t fix the world if we do that. If you assume bad faith on the other person, nothing, no set of language is ever going to fix that. The problem with that formula that you just outlined, which I agree with, is that those people are being skeptical and cynical and you can replace the word condescend with any other word and they’re going to find a way because they’re skeptical and cynical to have the same freaking problem. It’s not a wording problem. It’s it’s not a language problem per se. It’s an attitude problem. And you fix it by fixing the language and saying, of course, people are condescending to you, idiot, because you’re an idiot. And if they don’t condescend, you can’t learn. Sorry. It just is what it is. I’m sorry the world is that way. I didn’t make the world. You go go wind a guy. He’s the one who did it. Can you practically make it more palatable? It’s hard to make things palatable for people that are accustomed to a flat world. A flat, right. Flat world. I did. Hard, but you can bridge the gap a little bit. I did. In the story I told you a month and a half ago on Discord, I did. I told him, I said, you came here, you treated me as an authority and now you’re upset that I brought my language down to the point where you could understand. What about just tone of voice? Let’s not cloud the issue with the fact that I did exactly what you’re talking about. And it worked. I said, yeah, I’m condescending to you. So what? That’s what you came here for. You came here to learn something. I had to condescend. I think why is that a problem? And he eventually said, oh, yeah, you’re right. I’m not mad about that. I’m like, good. That’s great. Yeah, I think that worked. The problem is we’re not at odds with what Mike is saying. Like you just really the thing that we struggle with is tricking people into this non flat earth way of thinking. It’s very, very difficult to do. And this is the whole thing between Oz and Pajow. It’s like Oz is like, no, boom, like this is how it is. And and Pajow is like, well, yes, that is how it is. But we’re talking to people that are like this. And Jordan Peterson has a very probably doesn’t even know it. But like the way however Jordan Peterson is, he just has a way of talking to people that view the world like this and kind of he’s re-enchanting it, as you say, like he has a gift of re-enchanting the world to flat earthers, and that’s the unique thing about that’s the magic of Jordan Peterson that Pajow recognizes and he’s like, wait, hold on a second. Let’s not let’s not let’s not get ahead of the gun here. Not saying that you’re wrong, Oz. You’re definitely not wrong. But let’s see what’s going on, because Jordan Peterson is the one selling millions and millions and millions of books, not you. So that has to say something. Right. So like there is something that there’s a there’s a conduit, a bridge. You know. Yeah. And that’s and that’s the that’s the thing. You look around the world and or at the world around you. Right. And you see things that aren’t you that are different, which is fine. This is why universality and equality are dangerous. It’s not what you see in the world. Right. I’m not using you’re using a higher precision precision of speech about the phrase universality. I meant I meant similarity really like. Right. But it’s not. There’s so much difference. Like similarity is not important. It’s just it’s not it’s not even good. You want lots of people to be really different from you. No, you want them to be different. You want them to have different skills. You want as much difference as you can get that you can cooperate with. So it’s not infinite difference. Right. But you want as much diversity as you can stand in order to cooperate towards a larger goal. And that’s very hard to do. I’m not saying it’s easier at all. You don’t want universal. Most of the time, like transacting, conducting like throughout all of my life. I’m talking about for one particular thing where you like. Here’s an example from my life, my current girlfriend, when she we were friends before we started dating, she broke up with someone. She’d been together for a long time years ago. I went through a very devastating breakup and I like kind of reopen those wounds. And there was there were sufficient similarities between her breakup and what I went through, where I was like, I get it. I understand these. I you experience this. Your situation was this way. Mine was like this. There are similarities here. And so to me, that’s empathy because I my. My experience was sufficiently similar enough for me to already understand some portion of her experience that I could help her. Right. Like that was that’s that’s the point. I because I suffered and I figured a lot of stuff out and I did a whole bunch of the internal work and I healed from that experience and I learned a ton of things that I could help her through. Through her experience. You might not have needed any of that, though, Mike. What the emotionality of it? Yeah, you might have been able to help her any number of ways. And maybe that wasn’t necessary, even if that’s what happened. Yeah. And maybe that’s not what she thinks happened. So one of the things that’s interesting, right, and Van der Kley has said this before rather recently, right? He said, oh, yeah, well, here’s my strategy and how I met my wife. Right. And then his wife does not think that’s what happened. Yeah. Yeah, I’m just saying, like, you may think that’s what happened, but maybe that isn’t that isn’t what happened. Like from always two stories is always two stories, right? Well, you know, what is that? What is that Dan Borland say? He said reality is like a three edge sword, your side, my side and the truth. Yes. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And that’s and that’s the problem is that, you know, we do narrativize and we need to narrative good, not narrative bad. But also we narrativize and sometimes it’s not accurate. That happens. There’s nothing wrong with that. That happens. But it’s important to understand that and not get caught up in this in this absolutist framing. This is part of materialism. Oh, material is X. I know what a brick is, right? It’s like, yeah, but the brick may not be there tomorrow. So maybe you’d rather understand something else about the world that isn’t stable so that you know how to deal with the instability of the world. Right. This goes back to, well, why do I want to go to church? Because you can go somewhere that maybe you don’t want to go on that particular day to do something that maybe you don’t want to do on that particular day, because maybe there’s some special going on church on that Sunday with people you maybe don’t want to be around. Maybe all of them. Maybe you just don’t bad mood. I don’t know if you’re having people to go to church anyway. Why? Because it’s that highest thing. Then you learn how to do that. Right. You learn something like the proper relationship with conflict with others and conflict with the world and conflict with having to do a task. And then you learn a level of cooperation that you’re not capable of any other way. Like you’re just not right when it’s when it’s when it’s one of these practices where we all show up on a Monday and whoever shows up shows up. Oh, OK. It’s a very low bar. And what you’re not learning is when you have to show up, even though you don’t want to, you’re not learning that. Right. And that’s the skill that people need. They need the skill to get along and work together even when they can’t get along politically, for example, or economically or whatever. I don’t care what lower frame you use. And you need that higher frame. And my argument is that higher frame is always a religious frame. Now, it can be a bad religious frame. And I have a video on that. We great religions, the religious patterns, it’s called. It’s three great modern religions. It’s tongue in cheek, obviously. But it’s also true. Right. We have three different religions. We have the race religion, the safety religion and the climate religion. They’re religions. They’re not very good religions. They’re probably closer to the cults. That was our talk yesterday with Nick on navigating patterns, right, with cults and Gnosticism. And yeah, I outline that again. It’s like a it’s like a religion that can’t hold all your participation. That’s what a cult is. And that’s a problem. How do we get out of that? We get out of that by having the same damn religion or at least the same conception of God, right, that highest frame. That’s what gets us out of that crap. And now we can engage with the world and cooperate, build things that we can’t build otherwise. Right. Because, look, if I go fishing with you, I don’t care about your fricking political position, it doesn’t matter. You could be a Trump supporter or a Biden guy or a Clinton zealot. It makes no difference. We’re there to catch fish. And if we’re not cooperating in the world in physical spaces, we lose the opportunity to get along despite our disagreements. If we’re trapped in a world where our only intimacy is talking and typing to each other, we have limited our world to such a degree that we can’t be intimate. The quality of the connection is too low. Now, obviously, I’m a big fan of being online. I’m online all the time, right. And I’m a big fan of that because you can drag people out of that. But you have to be there to do it and you have to push them to get rid of them. It’s not sufficient to have a bridge, in my opinion. Joey will yell at me someday about that. But you’ve got to push them. And that means you have to stay in the cesspit of online to do it. It just is what it is. And look, I’m a big fan of that. That’s what I do. Here’s to the swamp creatures doing the good work. Right. Well, thank you. You know, it’s important. But that’s why we’re having an intimacy problem. Everyone’s online. No one understands how to just quietly fish together and talk about the fish or the reels or the lures or whatever. Like, we don’t know how to do that anymore because we’re not doing it. Right. And just go back to the fake news virus scam, the COVID thing. Like, yeah, we over exaggerated this goofy thing. And now we’ve got a big problem because people lost that skill of being together in doing things together in person, and they did it on purpose. Not all in a cabal with cigars in a dark room. They all had different reasons and different outcomes that they were looking for, and none of them got what they wanted. Yay. Victory for us. They caused a lot of damage on the way. No question about it. We should probably hang them all. Yes, probably true. But, but, you know, in the meantime, we’ve got to get along. Because we have to get along because we have to build stuff in the real world. It can’t all be virtual space, right? Because somebody’s going to run the internet and the electricity and build the computers and, you know, maybe they’re going to jump off the building in China to do it, but I’m not a fan. I’d rather be cooperating with people in the real world and building houses with them and stuff than than building fake houses in the virtual world. It’s just more intimate somehow. And we have less to talk about and therefore less to disagree about. And the thing we are talking about is the thing we’re doing rather than something that doesn’t matter, like who the hell the president is. It really doesn’t affect my day to day life enough for me to worry about. Not saying don’t ever worry about who gets elected or don’t vote or anything like that. I’m saying that in the overall scheme of things, who’s president right now really doesn’t affect me that much. I’ll be right back. Right on. Yeah, and that’s that’s the key. We need more intimacy. We need to be able to get along with each other better. And we need to go get those skills. I don’t see how. Right off the bat, this is what this is it. You know, this is what people are going to do. I see people try like at conventions and then it’s over or during the summer at festivals, music, it’s hard, it’s their weekend. Then it’s hard to start and maintain relationships with others and the best at times, and it’s only worse now. I like this stuff. They don’t want to fish because they over they over empathize with the fish. You can’t see the aquarium. I know Ben Franklin has it completely dead on here. He totally understands the conversation. Figured it out. That’s a next. That’s a next level joke. I like that. That’s an excellent next level joke that really he really dug into the conversation. Some guys of well, we have a break. You ask Flubs, I just bought a miter saw today. Should I be ashamed of myself? No, I’ve heard that some people say that you don’t need to buy a miter saw. Miter saws are awesome. What are you talking about? They are awesome. But I’m not like a professional or anything. I’m just a homeowner. You’ll learn how to. You’re required. You got to have a lot of I know you want a home. Yeah, you really got to have one. You know, workshop miter saw. Very handy. See, there we go. It’s very handy. Yeah, I mean, be proud of your tools, man. Very handy. Yeah. I just got a drill press. I’m psyched about that. Here I’m bitching about a miter saw. He just got a drill press. I got a fucking drill press. I got straight holes. None of this sideways bullshit. It’s going straight fucking in. My bolts are going to be like flush. Everything is great. I’m psyched. It’s great. Just get one of those. You can buy the ones where you just put your hand drill into it. It’s a, you know, drill. I need the power, baby. I’m drilling for metal. You want the power. You want that power. Got to have it. But now I love it. I’ve been I’ve been putting it off and putting it off. I’m finally getting into like blacksmithing and shit and metalwork and all that. I’m getting my garage all set up. Have you are you familiar with that guy’s essential craftsman on YouTube? I’m sure I got him on there that I’ll watch him. Give me an example of something that he’s done. He’s so like his kid, which is probably good. I don’t know. Maybe. OK, his kid realized that his dad was super badass and just basically started a YouTube channel filming him and like documenting all of his his wisdom. You know, yeah, he he started out as a logger. Then he became a a carpenter. Yeah. And now he’s like retired and he’s picked up blacksmithing and the guy the crazy thing is, is this guy is just like a freaking wizard. Like he just like he has you like his well, the son, his son, like just knows like, oh, there’s valuable information here. So he’s just like, Dad, tell me about there’s like there’s literally like a video of him talking about pencils. He’s like, Dad, you don’t hear him talking, but he just it’s just a video about pencils, you know, and so you can tell that someone told him to just start talking about like whatever the hell it is that he knows about pencils. You know, there’s like a it’s like a seven to 10 minute video, long video about pencils, you know, carpenter pencils. You can actually use them to get wood chips out of your eye. If you do this, it’s like, yeah, it’s it’s pretty cool. I just watched that channel like it’s it’s like, you know, just comforting to watch. He’s just got like everything, you know, and wisdom, he’s retired. He picked up blacksmithing and he’s just, you know, he’s got it figured out. He’s a master and one one here is wisdom. Some people are hyper competent and they’re just one of those guys. He’s he’s hyper hyper, hyper competent. It’s just cool to see someone like that in a. In a trade, you know, like because you don’t really like you don’t see that that often, like you only see it if you see it in real life, you don’t see it virtually. Also, the hyper competent people that you see, you can’t because you can’t because you can’t. That’s the problem. Most information is conveyed through mimicry, not through propositions. Right. Yeah, not the problem. Like, look, look, when I when I when I was at high school, taken programming. Right. So we you know, they gave us all our assignments up front. I did the ball in like a week. And then I spent the rest of the school school semester helping everybody else with their projects, right. And the trick was I saw how they did it, which was never how I did it, because I did it differently. And then I had to figure out how to fix their bugs without, you know, because I don’t want to I don’t want them to do it my way. That’s no good. They’re going to find their own way. But in doing that, I saw their systems and their thought patterns played out on the computer. It’s like, oh, I see. There’s lots of different ways to do it. Sometimes they have better ways than I did. And that’s the problem. It’s different perspectives. And that’s hard to convey in propositions. Yeah. And I would say most of the access that the general population had to super competent people has been through the means of books and like music, like actual blue collar, what would you call it, just craftsmanship? Well, you wouldn’t you don’t know. Write that down in a book and you can’t hear it. So now that we have like the with the advent of YouTube and and vlogs and stuff like that, you can actually film somebody doing what they’re doing and talking about it, because like you can watch somebody use a tool and like a technique in a certain way, but you can’t write it down. Like what you’re talking about, you can you can you can look at a video of someone showing you how to ride a bike like, you know, hey, I can do this. In this situation, you know, I can show you, but I can’t write it down in a book. Yeah. Well, what you guys are talking about is illustrated perfectly in the little house on the Prairie books and the TV show. That was the transition from the mimicry thing to the book thing. And that’s where everything went to shit. You know, people traded in their their trades and their skills that they had for a job in the city and they sold their farms and they sold their ability to live off the land in favor of city life, in favor of civilization, in favor of science, innovation, progression, schools for their kids. After a revolution, baby. Yeah. So that I really got into that show in the past couple of years because it illustrates a whole lot of exactly what went wrong right at the turn of the 20th century. It is all fucked. We all we all became. House broken. And not all of us, some some people did not all of us, but for the most part. Yeah, he’s not quite a wizard, right? He’s just from a different era. There are many such old men around, but we don’t make them well, any more substantial quality. Well, yeah, those types of dudes, they don’t want to. They don’t want any tension on them. They’re very humble. That’s what they do. We need to bring back the trades. Is it I like Mike Rowe and when he talks about, you know, kids that any job is a good job. Yeah. Or I. He did. Guys, you’re a good one. Yeah. Plumbers make more than than programmers like these people in their program. It’s like you’re not making that much money, kid. I hate to break it to you. Yeah. Do logic is more important than digital logic because it’ll be bad if you don’t get it just right. Well, plus the digital logic relies on people who aren’t doing digital things to operate. This is what we’re getting back into the scatological symbolic well, we had that going on yesterday in the stream. Did you? Manuel did that to us. No, it’s actually some very insightful symbology with toilet flushing and excrement and defecation. And, you know, OK, yeah, we’ll go over it again. OK, let’s leave Manuel and move on. Well, you know, you know, you know, to his credit, you know, one of the most musical geniuses that we know, Mozart was very scatological in his humor. So I believe it. Body humor. All right, guys, I’m running out of steam. It’s time for my bed. Let’s go. You get anything? Any parting shots before I before I head off to Betty by? I did mark this mark this for you, Mark. Like I came across this in this book that I’m reading for the it’s a for the Orthodox class that I’m taking or I thought you might appreciate this. It’s a the foundational use of philosophy requires theological claims to have non theological justification. This this view makes theology dependent on philosophy in regards human reason as the ultimate or the ultimate universal Arbitr just the first part I’ll read again, the foundational use of philosophy requires theological claims to have non theological justification. Yes. You’re basically pulling a rabbit out of a hat is what they’re saying. Yeah. Well, I liked I liked what the what the Orthodox bishop said to Vervicki there about that. So yeah, the schoolastic tradition in the West and and the, you know, in philosophy are bad because they’re too propositional. And I was like, yeah, that that sounds right. It’s all too overly propositional, but. Calvinism is still evil, but good luck with that. Frick, don’t fall down the stairs, Mark. We’ve got it. We’re we’re we’re what are we at? We’re 22 minutes away from the record, the longest stream. There’s no freaking way I’m tired. You’re there, Mark. I like ready to. It wouldn’t be the longest stream. Jacob had like an eight hour stream. Yeah, but half of that was just looking at a stupid dog mad or something. It wasn’t like, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. I took a week off because Father Eric was here and then Jacob’s like, hey, you’re OK, like, oh, you’re looking for content, huh, buddy? I mean, that provider, eh? We made up for it. We did a couple of things. We’ve had we’ve had a solid, probably average 10 viewers for six plus hours straight. So we’re fine. Yeah, that’s pretty good. That’s pretty good for for Jacob to hear. I’m not I haven’t been paying attention much lately how what his streams are looking like, but that’s good. Danny, what you got? You get any parting shots before I go to bed here? I was just thinking about when Mike and you were talking, if maybe if we were to say, well, your many models with fact, most if not all models of the world are normative or arbitrary, some might say, and therefore that limits them severely. I think, you know, I think a lot of people might buy into that idea. I think that might you know, I think so. But the concept of normativity. I don’t know. I think I mean, I’d be interested to explore that. I know that’s just kind of a philosophical term. I’m sure there’s a three. There’s the three ends, right, that Pervaiki talks about. There’s normative order, nomological order and narrative order. And I think they’re in a hierarchy. But, yeah, I mean, we can we can address that sometime. That’s that’s a good topic, actually. And and maybe a lot maybe maybe I can rope Manuel into talking about the three types of order. Yeah, or like, I guess fitness, you talk like in terms of types of order, in terms of types of fitness, so there’s probably some. Different levels or scopes to fitness, you know, right? Oh, yeah, because it’s all based on on your on your layer of analysis. Yeah. So that’s that’s what people appreciate. So, yeah, I mean, someday we can we can do that or maybe the next Friday or something, or maybe we’ll do a live stream in between or whatever. There’s no there’s no limitation on live streams. So excellent. What you got here? You got any parting shots? This has been awesome. I’m glad you started doing this, man. It’s really cool to see everybody again. I ain’t seen you guys in a while. No, it’s good to have you. Yeah, thanks. Thanks, CW. Also. Mike, what you got? You got any parting shots? No, thanks for having me. No, it’s good. It’s nice meeting you. And I’m glad that you joined the conversation. And yeah, I hope I hope we give you stuff to thought to think about there. And look, we’re fighting a battle against materialism and this flat thinking and all this crazy universalism and equality. And that’s so we you know. And we also like to show how the other sausage is made, like because we you’ve got to lift people out of these ideas very carefully so that they can open up to a wider world where they can cooperate better with everybody around them and get these nice, juicy, quality, intimate relationship connections, right, where the relationships have a good quality to them. And that’s and that I think just doing that and then people seeing it, that will help change the world, hopefully for the better. That’s the that’s the magic. So, yeah. All right, everybody, thanks for watching. And I’m going to kill the broadcast, but we’ll try it next week. Maybe there’ll be another live navigating. Leave comments. You know, let me know what you liked, what you didn’t like. And, you know, take care. One thing. Remember one thing. Being is good. Being is good. I like being around.