https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=DwdrXF0MHhA
Ran into a bit of a problem with my video on cooperation versus opposition, and wanted to straighten out more exemplification of opposition as such, and segue that into identification against. Just talking to my editor, and I’m not sure this happened before, but didn’t quite like the cooperative versus opposition video, wanted to see what he thought. He said, look, there’s some stuff we can cut it out, but you’re missing a bunch of exemplification about opposition. And since I like to keep the videos on the shorter side, and don’t really want to do 40 and 50 minute videos of this kind, better with conversation, I figured we’d do a different video, and just make it a part two. So here it goes. We’re going to talk about this opposition and identification against, and hopefully I can do a reasonable job of giving you examples of clear opposition, and opposition is a spirit we’re seeing a lot of, where the default position is whenever anybody tells you something, is to find a way where that’s not true, or find that skeptical cynicism, I’ve got a video on that, and pry that into the conversation, or make it an issue. So now you’re denying leadership and authority, you’re denying the truth, or the possibility of discussion. To find the truth, you’re sort of in this mode where you’re opposed to what the person is saying, or what they’re proposing, or what’s happened, or they’re framing, or whatever. The problem with this is that it’s not cooperative. Did a reasonably good job of giving examples of that. So when somebody says something sort of easy to understand, easy to understand, like, drug addicts tend not to pay attention to other people, and you immediately go, oh, well, I have this relative, and they really pay attention to other people even though they’re addicted to cocaine. And fair enough, maybe you do, but that’s the exception, not the rule. And it’s really important to pay attention to that. So going out of your way to find exceptions is a mode of opposition. If you look and you say, oh, well, most of the World War II soldiers were basically out to free prisoners of the camps. And then somebody else says, well, they didn’t even know about the camps. Why are you stirring up opposition? There’s a better way to frame that, is to say, are you sure? Instead of immediately coming up with a counterfactual, you can ask them why they think things and say, well, why do you think that? Why are you classifying all drug users this way? And maybe they’re right and you’re wrong, but at least you can have a discussion. Whereas if you go into this oppositional framing, where you’re just opposing what they say because it’s not precise and accurate, and the problem with precise and accurate is that it’s a hard standard. We live in a non-precise, non-accurate world, and you’re making generalizations all the time because you have to. The world’s too complex to be precise and accurate about most of it, nearly all of it. Especially if you’re talking to somebody and you get some kind of common ground. When you’re in oppositional mode, you’re constantly challenging the ground to find commonality, to find a way to cooperate. That’s part of the opposition. You can cast, say, the American Revolution, Revolutionary War as an opposition to the British Empire. That actually isn’t what happened at all. It’s not even close to a reasonable way to think about it. And look, I’ve gone over that before. I’ve got several videos where I sort of talk about that. All of them with Adam, I think, except the Rome versus Greece one, although that one, I think we mentioned it there too. I’ve talked quite a bit about that history because it’s something I know quite a bit about, read up on quite a bit. When you’re thinking about things, it’s important not to get stuck identifying against the person that you’re talking with, because that’s a form of opposition. The reason why you don’t want to identify against, as my good friend Manuel posts as often, is because when you identify against, no one knows where you stand, including you. It’s easy to say something like, well, I’m not an academic. Okay, but you didn’t say anything about you. You said something about what you aren’t, but that’s not about you. That’s excluding yourself from some identification or some group, or maybe both. And I’m not saying don’t ever do that, but if that’s all you do, there’s a problem. Because if I don’t know who you are, if I don’t know what you’re identifying with or in at the moment in terms of virtues and values, or even in terms of social status, how do I find common ground to talk to you? How do I cooperate with you? And that’s the problem of opposition. Opposition is wrapped up in this idea of identifying against. You’re like, oh, somebody made a statement. I’m going to find a way in which that statement’s wrong. You’re identifying against them or their statement or their position or whatever. You can say, well, look, I’m not identifying against them. I’m identifying against their bad information. You’re still not going to be able to cooperate with them. You’re not going to be able to find common ground. That’s a big problem. We need to cooperate. That’s not an option. We have to cooperate. We need each other. The world’s too big and nature will kill you maliciously or not. It’s not really relevant. And it turns out, so far as I can tell, although I’m trying to buck the trend, we all die. Something to think about because it happens, apparently. I mean, that doesn’t happen to me, so I don’t need direct proof, but, you know, there’s some compelling evidence out there. It’s worth thinking about. Life’s too short to oppose everybody and identify against every possible thing. There’s a lot of possible things. And if I don’t know where you stand, how am I supposed to have something in common with you? How am I supposed to find common ground? How am I supposed to cooperate with you? I mean, if you get an answer, leave it in the comments, that’d be great. I don’t think you can. That’s why it’s important that you don’t identify against, that you don’t stay in constant opposition. This is what I was talking about in my cynical skepticism video, right? This legacy we have from our impression of Socrates, right, rightly or wrongly, it’s not really relevant, right? It’s, we’re acting as if, and that’s bad. Now, if you misunderstand somebody like Socrates or Plato or Immanuel Kant or, you know, list your favorite philosopher here or your favorite scientist here, then it’s a problem, right? You can say, oh, it’s not Descartes’ fault, just everybody misunderstood him, or, you know, it’s not Calvin’s fault, just everybody, right? It’s not this person’s fault, just everybody misunderstood him. Yeah, I think that’s a good point. Yeah, at a certain point, it doesn’t matter whose fault it is, the thing is happening. There’s the pragmatism. In a pragmatic world, you can’t be opposed to everything, and you can’t be opposed to most things, and opposition is costly to you, whether you realize it or not. You may think, I’m the hero, I’m standing alone as an individual. I got a video about that. Heroes and this whole individualism problem. But you’re not heroic. You’re spending a lot of energy for no reason, and you’re disconnecting yourself from the world, and I would classify that in the intimacy crisis, which is something I’ll be talking more about. I’ve got a substack coming up. I’ll be announcing that soon, probably on my Twitter and places like that. If you haven’t signed up for my Twitter, I’ve got a Twitter account. The link should be in the video here somewhere at the bottom corner somehow. These are important issues. Opposition is a problem. The reason why the tyrannical chimp doesn’t win for very long is because even if one guy goes up against him and dies, the tyrannical chimp is probably going to get hurt and is there for a weekend. Even if you can win a fight, it’s a good idea not to have the fight. Opposition is costly. And when you’re opposed to things and you don’t know if they’re good yet, because you haven’t had the discussion, you just shut it down by opposing, you might be opposing the good and never even know it. Because you were so busy being skeptical and cynical and in this oppositional I’m an individual, I win mode and identifying against whatever’s in front of you because it’s not you. You don’t know what’s going on. Because it’s not you. You don’t own it. You didn’t come up with that idea. You’re going to identify against it. When you’re busy doing all that, you’re not busy looking up. You’re not busy embodying virtues and values. You don’t have the energy. And even if you did, you’re not looking at them. All this energy, time, energy and attention spent on opposition, spent on, well, I’m not that. I may not know what I am, but I’m not that. This is not healthy. It’s not good for you. And the thing is, here’s the ironic part. What’s not good for you is not good for the world because the world needs you. And that sucks. It’s a lot of responsibility. But also, hey, the world needs me. A little bit of gratitude. A little less opposition. I think that’s important. And it’s important for us to understand that our mode is cooperation. Our mode is not opposition. Our mode is not to be an opponent. We are not opposing ourselves. We are not supposed to be opposing each other. And while we may have points of disagreement, that doesn’t mean we can’t cooperate. It doesn’t mean we have to identify only against. We can identify for, with, as part of. And I want you to reflect on the fact that, look, you’re engaging my channel, for which I am very, very grateful. And in doing that, it’s a form of cooperation. I’m making videos. My editor’s editing them. I have suggestions coming in from the Discord channel. I’ve got hints and possibilities from Twitter, from Facebook, from watching media, engaging with people, having conversations. All this is very helpful. It’s a big cooperation. Even people who don’t realize they’re cooperating are actually cooperating. And that’s important because we are all cooperating. And in watching this video, you’re giving me the type of cooperation which I really value the most, which is the gift of your time and attention.