Unconscious Live Navigation! (88TKuC0Kvcc)

https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=88TKuC0Kvcc

The young girl dancing to the latest beat has found new ways to move her feet and the lonely voice of youth cries What is truth? Young man speaking in the city square trying to tell somebody that he cares Can you blame the voice of youth for asking What is truth? Yeah, the ones that you’re calling love are gonna be the leaders in a little while When will the lonely voice of youth cry What is truth? This old world’s wakened to a newborn babe And our solemn lists swear it’ll be their way You better help that voice of youth find What is truth? And the lonely voice of youth cries What is truth? Alright, well, we are back again. And we’re on the Pirate Seas doing our navigation. A little bit late apparently because time get away with me. We’ve got our Sam Pell course because how can you do this without Sam Pell? And I went to the store, I got some La Croix because man, I love La Croix. Tried to get the bargain basement brand, but in fact, nope, they had to put evil chemicals in everything to know why. We got Maltesers, which are the best. If you haven’t had Maltesers, then your life is all for nothing. You need to start over. And I got some Jordan Ammons because I was at the store and I have no self-control. So yeah. And then of course, we have our Marathon Tea from Table Rock Tea Company. Excellent stuff. And nope, we did not get our links ready. That’s okay. We won’t do links. It’s all good. Unconsciously, I’m lazy. So yeah, I’m not quite as prepared as I thought I was going to get today. But we did manage to get everything ready. It’s been reviewed and it’s been put in order. So maybe we can make it through this without too much calamity. Thank you everybody for last week’s stream numbers. They’re way up. I don’t know why. I guess sanity is a big topic. And hopefully unconscious is also a big topic. And people will resonate with this because there’s a lot of congruity between the two topics. So yeah, let’s jump in. So we’re talking about the unconscious. That thing that nobody ever talks about, even at whole conferences about consciousness. And it’s sort of interesting. I’m going to start with, where did we get this unconscious, conscious thing from? And it’s a good question. But I think, and I’m just spitballing here, that when you reject the idea of soul, you end up in a weird place. You say, okay, well, we’ve got this thing called consciousness. And that’s where our rationality and our logic is kept. And then we can go through and say, we’re going to science it. We’re going to science the consciousness. And then quickly, as you secularize things, you come around to Freud and Jung and those guys. And they go, wait a minute. Consciousness doesn’t explain a bunch of stuff. We’re going to need the unconscious, the subconscious, the thing that isn’t conscious. And like, fair enough. Like, that’s probably how it came about. It certainly looks that way on the timeline, and correlation isn’t causation, except when it is. But lack of correlation means no causation, by the way. Everybody misses that one. I was using science as a positive instead of as a negative indicator. So I’m going to start out seemingly talking about something and then hopefully make a connection for you here. The plain and simple fact that nobody likes is that most of your life is going to be a mess. Nobody likes is that most of your life is boring. It’s necessary rote repetition. It’s just the same thing over and over. We get up, we eat, we do whatever during the day. Hopefully it’s working, right? We come home, we eat, we go to bed, we get up, right? We breathe in, we breathe out. Ugh. It’s endless. But worse, most of the things that happen in life or could happen in life are things you can’t add something to, like you have no part in, at least no direct part. And there are things you can’t get anything out of. Or what you get out is very small in comparison to the effort you put in. That’s most of the things in life. And that’s why you have an unconscious mind. And we’re going to stick with the framing because it’s out there, right? I mean we’re dealing, we’re stuck dealing with the secular frame. Like fair enough, that’s what I do. I’m not a theologian, I don’t talk about religion, except to the extent that I absolutely have to. I’m not an expert in it, I don’t know anything about it. That’s not interesting. So we’re stuck with this conscious unconscious framework. And the unconscious helps keep you free from the boredom, free from the fact that most of the things you do have very little direct immediate payback. It’s just not there. The unconscious keeps you out of the fray of tracking bunches of stuff that you do all the time, perfectly well, without thinking, without rationalizing, without being logical, without being reasonable. You don’t need any of that stuff for most of the stuff you do in your life. Most of the stuff. But wait! Mark, you master Muppet. You may exclaim in protest, I’m bored all the time. Yeah. Because you won’t let your subconscious, your unconscious, do its thing. You want conscious control over everything. You want control over the things you actually need to just let go to your unconscious mind. And what is that? This is called anxiety, my friends. And welcome to hell. Your little personal distracted uncomfortable niggling hell of anxiety. And what’s the solution? Look up. Virtues, values. Do some meditation on something deep and important. Something non-material perhaps. Do some contemplation. These things allow you to find the inner boundary where your unconscious begins and ends. And this is where we’re confused. All of our participation, which is a very complex topic that involves very many things, is conscious. Do you ever drive down the road and forget the drive and suddenly you’re home? You’ve kind of lost time. Or maybe you went on a bike ride, the same thing happened, or a walk in the woods, and you’re like, wow, that went quick. I had a visit with Father Eric. He came down here for like a week actually. And he wanted to go see something that he had seen in his childhood when he was living in South Carolina as a boy. And we went down to the ship in Charleston that’s docked there and we spent four hours or so on the boat. I didn’t know that was possible. There were a ton of things to look at. And we’re both kind of nerdy history, kind of cool, like we’re both males. Ooh, thing that shoots large rockets, yes. And goes at high speed. More please. Four hours, gone. Didn’t even know where it went. It’s gone. Thoroughly enjoyed it. Wouldn’t change it for the world. And that’s the thing. We all have these experiences. Our unconscious takes over, right? Time vanishes, but it frees up our consciousness for other things. Or to avoid drama. Maybe to reduce anxiety. But you’re not constantly rationalizing, logicating, and reasoning about things when they don’t need to be. And this is why I think the best philosophers, the very best philosophers that I’ve spoken to, all work with their hands. And they all work all day long. And almost none of them have degrees in anything. And when they do have degrees, it’s in something stupid. They’re totally practical, like some form of practical engineering. But they work with their hands. And while they’re working with their hands in the field, or on machinery, or operating heavy equipment, they think about things. Our conscious mind is free. It’s kind of muscle memory to do a lot of this stuff. Or a lot of it is muscle memory. And then they think about these things deeply. They rationalize. And they’re way better at it. They’re way better at it than the academic sitting in the classroom, on average. Not all of them, but yeah, almost all of them, though. And that’s what I think it is. And so you might ask, well, how does the unconscious work? What does it do? And I would say look at something like multiple personality disorder. Now, I know that people will tell you that multiple personality disorder is no longer in the DSM. The DSM-3 is right, and the rest are wrong. I’m just telling you that flat out. They had it right, they changed it, they made it wrong. Multiple personality disorder is a really good frame for understanding. A very rare condition, but very important condition, because it’s so rare. I studied multiple personality disorder for a year. It’s the only thing I ever studied for a year. Nothing takes me a year to study. Your unconscious mind splits your personality based on the trauma. And your conscious mind, which is nested in your unconscious, it’s a container for your conscious. It is the thing that frames that. So your conscious mind ends up framed in the unconsciousness, in the trauma. Your unconsciousness is trying to deal with its severe trauma, usually its sexual trauma when you were a child, and it splits your personality. It’s a good way to understand multiple personality disorder. Which is a real phenomena, and to some extent, all of our personalities have gaps or splits in them. Not a big deal. It’s not necessarily a disorder. But if you’ve met somebody with multiple personality disorder, and I have, it can be rather disturbing. They are completely different people at different times, with triggers that you cannot calculate. And the problem with consciousness is the problem of responsibility. And so this goes the other way, right? You take on too much responsibility. You try to understand too much. You try to make sense of too many things that are too complex for you, that maybe you could make sense of in theory, but you can’t make sense of them in reality. You take on too much anxiety, anyone? It’s this over-reliance on consciousness, this over-expectation of consciousness that’s causing your anxiety in many cases. Not in all cases, but like almost all of them. And so you take on too much anxiety, anyone? And so you take on too much anxiety, anyone? And so you take on too much anxiety, anyone? It gets worse, and we get worse. But that’s nothing. Just a couple of quick things that you have to look at, is how do you solve the problem of thinking about the obstacles and the problems you’re faced with? I mean start with theirs like you got to start somewhere fair enough You do something and then you switch to something else Right and then you go back to the thing you were doing why because it breaks the frame up It allows your unconscious time to process the thing you were consciously trying to process Why because the end of the day like it or not big shock your unconscious is way quicker It’s way smarter and it’s way more reasonable rational and logical, but you don’t have access to it At least not in the way you want We can make all kinds of complaints about this all day long I’ll shoot them all down if I have to and take my word for it. No, you don’t have access Bad news good news. You don’t need access. Let it do its thing. It’ll be fine. Will it screw up? Yes But you’ll screw up more if you try to fix it because you’re a Muppet I’m a Muppet. We’re all Muppets You’re all Muppets Let’s let’s look at the impact how does this impact us All of the signals that you get from the world come into your unconscious first And they’re all around us right they’re not optional track about the signals are everywhere It’s a flood of signals constantly and we need to put them in In for May shun that’s where information comes from The unconscious is processing all of this before it gets anywhere near our conscious mind, but it’s not just a filter It’s also doing processing it shapes us. It moves us it changes us The unconscious provides the framing it can make things Intelligible underneath our conscious mind without us knowing it and then those things are for us to discover later Consciously or not a lot of things we don’t have to discover consciously like there’s a lot of people that know how to sing and sing beautifully and they have no idea and When you hear them sing you’re like, holy macaroni like you’re like star level and they’re like no, I’m not they had no idea Never recorded themselves and listened to it. They’ve never heard anybody give them a compliment before that happens you There’s all sorts of instances this I mean I could just go on for four hours about that There’s all kinds of instances where there’s all sorts of things going on We don’t know what we’re naturally good at. We were always naturally good at it. We have no contrast. We can’t see that You know, how do I remember things I Don’t know. I have a really good memory. I Still don’t think so. I would like an eidetic memory, please and occasionally that works but very occasionally and not when I want it to annoyingly enough because Subject to my unconscious and what are the connections? I’m making to have a good memory because good memory relies on connections Moon like with Einstein great book very interesting. It’s about memory palace type stuff More connections you have the easier things are to remember How does that work in my brain I didn’t train that I’ve always had a good memory I Know it’s all unconscious man So maybe my unconscious was already fitted to do the good memory thing here as I can tell that’s true Can’t remember the before time though, that’s why it’s called the before time in case you couldn’t figure that out. Hopefully you got there though Hopefully you got there though Yeah, it’s like a before I can remember things accurately some things stand out Again the signals that influence us are not optional They impact our unconscious and then we do things without knowing them in the conscious sense, right? We’re just doing where we’re acting and responding to things without even realizing and You can see evidence of this in like the mirroring techniques and stuff. I know Tony Robbins used to talk about this a lot I don’t know what he’s talking about lately because I don’t really follow him But and a lot of people talked about there’s tons of books on this There’s these little tricks you can do like when you start mirroring the person you’re talking to then you change you they change in response and Almost everybody does this So if you ratchet up your voice, they’ll ratchet up their voice if you’re actually down your voice They’ll ratchet down their voice you have to match them first and then you can move them That’s unconscious right? This is a lot of NLP. You know linguistic programming is like this, right? There’s a bunch of things in LLP that are just unconscious responses that you know work 90% of the time or something crazy You know, and basically what that means is you don’t know what you’re up to You have no idea as Jordan Peterson says you don’t know what you’re up to But again, you don’t need the knowledge or the understanding to do most of the things you do You don’t have enough knowledge of how your lungs work to breathe You don’t have an understanding of the role of your vocal cords and the feedback system of your auditory Capabilities to Really appreciate your speech even though all of those things are wrapped up in you’re listening to yourself making adjustments mostly unconsciously And that’s why we have an unconscious to take care of the things we need not know as Propositions as articulations as procedures Speaking is not a procedure you can break it into procedures, but that’s not what it is You can reduce anything. That’s not hard. It’s everything to binaries if you want don’t do that Most of what we do is not Articulatable by us cannot be put into language most of what we do cannot be put into language I mean this is one of the powers one of his great insights is to talk about So-called participatory knowing I don’t think it’s type of knowing But whatever it’s still a powerful frame still a big fan use it when you can And I’ll just segue off of the compliment into the critique I’d like to quickly cover something that Sally Jo pointed out a few more items A few hours ago Which is a question that I meant to add in here, but never did for whatever reason I had it my head at one point and then it wasn’t in my head anymore because your unconscious is Running the show most of the time Vicky and chicks at my high and all these other people talk about flow What is this flow state? Oh wonderful flow So what happens in flow You lose track of time Things just occur like you’re driving down the street and wait a minute That was a description you used for unconscious. Yes flow is unconscious. That’s what it is. You’re submitting To your unconscious. It’s not some new exciting concept. It’s Freud and Jung all over again Just a new word Who in the flow state? Right Your consciousness is wrapped up in the lie of individualism and that constant cynical skepticism I’ve talked about in past videos on my channel not in live streams so much but in the videos That’s why flow is so appealing it releases you from this It can be a little bit more complicated than you think It’s so appealing it releases you from this it gets you connected to the world again It allows you to stop rationalizing everything, you know, how am I gonna climb these rocks? I’ve got a cut a path No, you don’t you can give it to your unconscious and your unconscious will do a fairly good job And when it screws up it will fix it for you and you won’t even be aware of it that time will pass automatically for you In your unconscious you connect with your intuition With pure participation or at least as close as you can get It’s an encounter with a form of intimacy with yourself You’re not being intimate with your rational logical reasonable mind which sucks by the way You’re being intimate with The positive With the part of you that has intuition Think about that that’s why flow is so appealing it’s the place that we can reconnect And I’ll I’ll provide you proof for this later. I’ll provide you proof for this later because We’re just getting started You The problem is That you can’t entirely trust your unconscious, I mean your intuition isn’t correct all the time Sometimes we over connect Losing track of time isn’t always the best strategy good if you’re being creative you need to paint or draw or Draw poorly as the case may be You’re writing That your unconscious take over You need to be worrying about time time’s just gonna get in the way of those processes those things are done when they’re done But yeah, I mean that’s still a problem you can lose track of time and forget to pick up your kid That’s not good But he’ll be fine children can be raised by wolves everybody knows that So you can’t entirely trust it right and often You respond to trauma. You don’t remember unconsciously That’s probably not good. Sometimes it’s good. You’re protecting yourself But when you’re doing it inappropriately because you’re unconscious You know, it kind of picks the frame so Maybe you choose to act as though a negative thing is going to happen all the time When that looks familiar enough to you when a pattern appears, I don’t know And the worst part is you know some trauma you do remember and you still respond unconsciously despite your conscious awareness That’s annoying. I Remember meeting somebody once I was ages ago. I was on a Dating site of all things and I was just there for friends And I said that my dating profile because that doesn’t work by the way No one believes you and maybe they shouldn’t maybe maybe you’re fooling yourself and This person was you know, she was just not Very good with her time management and I am very good with my time and especially back then I was really good with it And she didn’t Get to the place that we were going on time and I planned on taking a taking that train in to Boston because a I love taking subway trains in particular and big trains to but also like Boston parking problem and Like we weren’t gonna make it by train. So I said, alright, well hop in the car We’ll take it out of the way So we’re driving in and I’m in a hurry and I’m very good driving So I got there on time We may have run over several innocent people in the process but be that as it may So the whole time I’m driving. I’m I doing my like I’m at maximum skill level here. I’m You know, we’re buzzing through the city. I’m driving through the city. I’m driving through the city I’m driving through the city I’m driving through the city. I’m driving through the city So we’re at maximum skill level here. Um You know, we’re buzzing through the city at a good clip and I am Just taking advantage of every single break in every single piece of traffic I find to get where I’m going, which I’m very good at and quite enjoyed And some people might be frightened by this behavior something that might be considered scary happened, she just laughed hysterically and she wasn’t frightened. And I can’t quite process that sort of thing in real time, especially not when I’m doing my thing, but I was like, well that’s weird. And then it, find out later, oh we know why she was traumatized when she was young and this was definitely her way of dealing with trauma, with anything scary she would just laugh. Oh we just saved her life. So I understand that, but even the trauma you remember you still respond to. And your conscious mind cannot control that properly. It’s your unconscious Muppet, it’s doing something. And you’re very little control, if any, at all over it. When we say we don’t know how we feel, we’re still feeling, but we’ve lost connection to it. And this is why it’s important I talk about the three frames. What’s the first frame? You with yourself. That’s you finding the boundary with your unconscious, between your unconscious and your conscious. Because your unconscious is your imaginal world. It’s your fantasy world. It’s the place of pure prediction, pure imagination. It is in contradiction, in contrast to your experience of the world while in the world. The things that are outside of you. Think about how significant this is. If we say something like, seems like, are we talking about how we felt while participating in something external to ourselves? Or are we talking about some fantasy prediction we are making about the world in our head? One is conscious, or at least have the chance of being conscious, and the other is not. I don’t know what feels like means. Sometimes people feel like laughing when they should be terrified. So I tweeted out today, I have a Twitter account, I tweeted out today my lovely saying that I really do appreciate and enjoy. If you believe that you do not have a religion, one will be provided to you without your knowledge or consent. This statement is a conspiracy revealed by moving your attention, which is wrapped up in the fact that we no longer understand the patterns we unconsciously participate in, because we don’t realize it consciously. And then here I am pointing out this unconscious pattern to your conscious mind and suddenly you see a religion that people belonged to that you didn’t consider a religion before, it’s right in front of you. Bang! And all of this is why we don’t even notice our participation in the world and what it impacts. We’ve fooled ourselves into believing that we are conscious all the time, constantly, and that we are rational and precise and accurate and competent people, and that other people are the same. We are ruled by our unconscious. We no longer understand the unconscious as the factor in the behavior of others or ourselves. Even when we understand it in others, we go, oh yeah, he’s just acting sort of unconsciously, or they’re just unconsciously responding to trauma. We never apply that to ourselves. We’re perfect. That’s why we can notice it in others. If we had that flaw, we wouldn’t notice it in others, surely. Good luck with that. So look, I mean, you can ask why. Should we care about this sort of automated system running in our head that’s doing things sort of robotically with, don’t worry about it, like it’s just kind of there. And again, it’s because you don’t know what you are up to, bucko, as Jordan B. Peterson might well say. I wish he’d put a bucko at the end of it. That would be great. I had to do it for him. I had to do it for him. We’re adjusting our unconscious with our conscious. We’re not doing it all the time, but we’re not doing it well enough or often enough. If we’re not aware of our unconscious, like we have to do this thing. That’s why things like journaling help, that’s why things like meditation work, like these things work for a reason. They have a utility. Encountering your unconscious, being aware of it, and actively engaging it is important. And look, that’s right, your unconscious impacts more than just your automatic system. We insert framing at the unconscious level all the time. All the time. And we don’t realize the unconscious is the bottom of the iceberg. The conscious is the tip of the iceberg. I’m not going to repeat that. I’m going to let it sink in. Because I want you to contextualize it and think closely about what I just said and what I said previously. Most of what you do isn’t conscious at all, nor should it be. Terrifying? Perhaps. So the problem, and yes, yup, there’s a problem, comes when we’re conscious. What are we conscious of? It’s easy to seem smart when you’re conscious. What are we conscious of? It’s easy to seem smart to ourselves and pay attention consciously to the wrong things. So why is this powerful? What can we learn from our ability to be conscious and the sad fact that we can easily pay attention to the wrong things in our consciousness? What are we to make of this? What is the significance here? Why is this powerful? What’s going on? And I think on the one hand, it’s terrifying. On the other hand, it’s important. You can spend as much conscious effort as you want worrying about the next presidential election. You can do that. You can take your time, energy, and attention and put it there. But the amount of control you have over that is so minuscule for most people, I don’t recommend it. Now, if you’re a political consultant and you’re spending 60 hours a week trying to get your candidate elected, so be it. Maybe you have a lot more. But if that’s not you and the odds that anybody like that would watch this stream are approximately zero, not quite, but close enough, then maybe you shouldn’t do that. Your conscious mind is the tip of the iceberg. It’s precious. And when you try to make more of the world conscious, you burn yourself out. Even if you don’t get anxiety, you don’t burn yourself out. Most of your life is rote, repetitive, boring, nonsense garbage from the perspective of consciousness. It’s stuff you know, you know, you’re going to get. And we get into trouble when we try to rationalize these things. Why is it that I cry every time I see old Yeller? Or why is it that I wince every time I see a needle on TV? Why is it that I cry every time I see a needle on TV? Why is it that I wince every time I see a needle on TV? Or why is it that I wince every time I see a needle on TV? We can worry about that endlessly. Or we can do something useful with our lives. Up to you, dude! I’m not telling you what to do. But things that are way above your pay grade, things that aren’t local to your house, your family, your community, your actual community that lives near you, you’ve got to be careful with how much time, energy, and attention you’re spending on that stuff. Because if it’s outside of that, how much can you move the needle? By yourself. And maybe you should be conscious of where you are in a hierarchy and how to be the best member of that hierarchy that you can be rather than trying to be the one in charge or the one that takes control or the one that does something while the others sit around and do nothing. That’s why this distinction of conscious and unconscious is powerful. It helps us to reduce our anxiety. My fix for anxiety I call Zen sweeping. I’ve talked about it before. I should write a paper on it. Simple stuff. You’re anxious? Do something with a lot of motor memory in it. This sort of muscle memory thing where you just get this motor control that you just know about like sweeping or doing the dishes or even just going for a walk. Why? Because when your body is doing something that it knows how to do, it’s very regular, it’s well understood by your body, it sends a signal up to your brain and says, dude, everything’s okay. There’s no tigers. There’s no snakes. We’re all good. And your brain calms down and your anxiety lessens. This is super powerful. I’ve been doing it for years, years, years. Like since I was a teenager. Don’t remember before time stopped exactly when I came up with it or if I came up with it for that matter. Somebody else might have told it to me. Who knows? But this Zen sweeping is very powerful and I consider it a form of meditation. Why? Because you’re doing something with your body and that is affecting your mind. And it is calming your mind. It is focusing your mind. It’s allowing your mind to focus in on things. That’s why this is important. And we can’t just try to be conscious of all of our unconscious. That’s foolish. It’s there to take the burden away. You can’t double down on the problem by saying, what I really need to do is get conscious control of my… No, that’s the problem you’re solving is having too much conscious control. But the two things need to be balanced. You need to be able to do it. You need to have too much conscious control. But the two things need to be in this trade-off relationship. Because you don’t want to get stuck in more diversions. You can. Breathe. But we used to sing on a regular basis. And that’s a conscious act that impacts your breathing. And nowadays we just do much less of this singing. So all of a sudden, guys like Wim Hof come along. He’s a big breathing guy. There’s a bunch of breathing guys. Where did this come from? Why are we suddenly, consciously doing things, patterned things to our breathing? Music, singing is the best way to fix that problem. We used to do that. We don’t do it anymore. We have fewer regular impactful, paced physical activities. So instead we go to the gym. Why do we do that? We didn’t need to go to the gym before. We used to have to memorize oral tradition. Nowadays we memorize video game solutions. It’s almost as if there is an unconscious desire to disrupt our consciousness using indirect interventions. And we’ve turned that into a direct conscious relationship or something. Who knows? Who knows? Our unconscious is trying to disrupt itself with a conscious mind because it knows it needs adjustment and attention and you’re not paying attention. It’s not tuned anymore. It’s like, ah, we need more unconscious time. Guys, play a video game. You’re not out in the fields picking the whatever. We need some video game time. So let’s tie some things together. How do we know when our unconscious has pulled us into fantasy? How do we measure our sanity when we have this mediation between conscious and unconscious? And look, I think I can help you here. Engage in fantasy deliberately, knowingly and consciously. And you’ll see me do this all the freaking time. I do it constantly through absurdism. I do it all the time. So recently there was a snake in my house. I did not know there was a snake in my house. I discovered the snake quite by accident. We were both surprised. So, of course, people are going to make fun of Mark for having a snake in his house. Very symbolic. So what I did was I made up a fantasy. The fantasy of the toilet snake. And our friend Adam is in California from Ireland. I’m going to go visit him next week. No stream next week. And I said, well, yes, actually, I put the snake in the toilets in California for you. Since he’s over from Ireland and they don’t have snakes. For real. So, yes. That is absurd. And now we have this little thing going. Where occasionally Adam says, well, I got to go check for snakes. It’s absurd. But it’s a way you can keep a handle on where your fantasy is. Because if you don’t know when you’re engaging in fantasy and when you’re not engaging in fantasy, well, you don’t know when you’re engaging in fantasy. Yeah, the utopia sounds good to me. I’m sure I’m living there now. Sure, I lived there in the past. I’m sure that if not for Stalin or Lenin or Paul Pot or Chairman Mao, that utopia definitely would have happened. I can tell I predicted it in my unconscious. Because you want to be careful. You want to be careful of where and when the unconscious is sneaking in to pull you into the insane fantasy state, that imaginal state where things are running comfortably. It loves utopia. It is utopia. When you’re doing something regular and easy or creative and whatever, you’re happy or maybe not happy, you’re content. And we love contentedness. And your conscious mind should make you uncomfortable. And this is backwards from how we think about it, but let me prove my point. You ever hear of this thing called, what do they call it? Alcohol. That’s what it’s called. Why do people drink? Or for that matter, drink alcohol. Why do people drink? Or for that matter, do any drugs. Explicitly to override their consciousness, to become less rational. That’s why. That’s why when you hear these solutions like, well, when people drink, they should just not drive. But you’re drinking to become irrational and to destroy your memory to some extent. Why do you think the solution is, after you’re drinking, to rationalize? That makes no sense. You’re an idiot. You’re just an idiot. Sorry, but you’re an idiot. The solution is, don’t drink. You shouldn’t drink too much. And once you start drinking, the whole thing starts unraveling. And look, a lot of people self-medicate that way. Totally get it. Especially with marijuana. Holy macaroni. The people that I know that, say, smoke the least, they’re self-treating anxiety. Instead of using Zen sweeping, which is way better. And look, being drunk, despite the negative consequences, is more comfortable. You can get more connected with the people around you. And they often do. Usually that outcomes bad and ends in a wedding that involves a shotgun. But whatever. But what are you doing? You’re taking your consciousness out of the picture. And relying on your unconscious mind inappropriately. You are seeking comfort by removing the difficult decision making part of your brain. You’re a consciousness. It’s the responsible part of you. You’re taking it out of the picture. This isn’t something only I know. It’s something that’s talked about that you’re not seeing. This is in The Simpsons. In multiple episodes. Homer Simpson. All right, brain. I know you don’t like me and I don’t like you. But let’s get together. He also talks about future Homer. Oh my goodness. Future Homer. Oh, so brilliant. That’s why Peterson likes that. Because all the psychological framing is actually in the show. Especially the early episodes. Early episodes are really good. We know our consciousness is the responsible decision making part of us. We’re fully aware of this. We just don’t think about it enough. Because there’s all kinds of problems with that. It’s like, wait a minute. Rationality makes us responsible. Oh, yes, it does. It makes you responsible in law too. Like, this is deep. Your unconscious is the irresponsible part of you that forgets about time. Because in your imagination, time doesn’t exist. We know this from dreams. We know this. We’re aware of this. We have participated in this. There’s no flow state. There’s no flow state. There’s no flow state. There’s no flow state. That’s garbage. Bad framing. It’s just your unconscious. And you’re slipping into it. And maybe you should be there for what you’re doing, especially if it’s physical. I get that. But don’t make up some new word for it. How many words are we going to make up for things that are unconscious? A million? A billion? A trillion? I don’t know. We’ve got to stop the madness at some point. So, let’s relate this to framing again. Your frame often comes from the unconscious, which is tracking far more things than your conscious does. And that’s why this rationalization around framing is so exciting. It seems like, oh, we have control over this thing that was ruling us around. We can see the frame. We can logic our way to a new frame. No, you can’t. And you shouldn’t. And you don’t need to. And people will tell you you can because they want to believe they can. Or they do a few magic tricks and bang your wicked smart like Derrida, who’s a retard by the way, along with Foucault, who’s evil by the way. They’re just justifying a bad behavior. And they want you to help them. So they’ll tell you a lie. You can do something you absolutely cannot do. And they’ll give you tricks for illusions for making you seem like you can do these things. See what I did by interpreting Moby Dick as a thesis on gender? Ha ha! I made it work logically. That doesn’t mean it’s right. It’s not right. Things that are logical, reasonable, and rational aren’t correct necessarily. They might be correct in a way that doesn’t make them true good or beautiful. And again, your unconscious takes care of your breathing, your heart rate, your sweating, your balance, adjusting for minor discomfort and illness. Do you ever get angry when you’re hungry? Or when you’re in pain? I do. How does that manifest? Sometimes I notice consciously after the fact. Sometimes likely not. Do I need to? Sometimes. What does this mean? We are often trying to make sense and find commonality with other people. To do this, we take the thing they’ve articulated, if it’s clear enough, and put it into a frame. And we make assumptions. Oh, she sounds nice. Oh, he must be a good person. Oh, that seems to make sense. They must be telling the truth. Oh, what a beautiful thought. I must fit the rest of what this person is saying into a worldview that I can live in. Such beauty. So you’ll unconsciously create a frame where what the person tells you is correct. Because you want to find communion with them. And you can do that by making a frame. So you’ll unconsciously create a frame where what the person tells you is correct. Because you want to find communion with them. That’s how people fool us. That’s how con men operate. And look, there are examples of our unconscious ruling us in fooling us. We fool ourselves. Our unconscious just tricks us. There’s a famous story of a guy who claimed his horse could count. And he’d go around to fairs and he’d show his horse counting. And sure enough, he’d say, eight. And the horse would pound his hoof on the ground eight times. The horse could count. Give him math problems. Three plus six. And the horse would hoof the ground nine times. No problem. Turns out, the guy was unconsciously signaling when to stop with the hoof. And the horse had somehow picked up on the signal. Because we operate on signals, guys. Signals we’re not even aware of. The horse couldn’t count. Bomber. I’m not saying horses can’t count. That horse couldn’t count. Couldn’t hoof. That horse couldn’t count. Couldn’t understand English and count in the English arithmetic system. The Milgram experiment. I’m going to talk about a beautiful example of unconscious everything going on all over the place. Holy macaroni. Layers and layers of unconscious. It’s a Milgram experiment. They sit these people down. There’s a guy in a white coat. He’s some scientisty dude or doctor whatever. And he says, There’s a person on the other side. They’re going to say stuff. If they get something wrong, you hit this button that’s going to zap them. And we’re correcting them. And the person has a script. And when they say something wrong, the person zaps them. Roughly speaking, I don’t know if I’m getting all the details right. It doesn’t really matter. The zapping gets worse and worse. The zapping gets worse and worse. And the person’s screaming. No zapping is happening. The person’s screaming. So what’s happening is, unconsciously, this person has accepted the authority of the guy in the white coat he’s told is a doctor. Whether or not they’re an actual doctor is not even relevant to the experiment. And then they’re accepting all the framing. That there’s a person in the other room. Right. That that person is being zapped. Which wasn’t happening, by the way. But they’ve accepted that framing. They’ve accepted that framing. Unconsciously. So they’re acting as if. And then this other person is unconsciously going along with this ridiculous experiment. Right. And what’s really happening there? There’s so many unconscious things going on. And you know, there’s a role for the person in the white coat. There’s a role for the person on the other side. There’s a role for the person sitting down. And the role for the person sitting down is the same thing you think is the person sitting down. And whether or not they’ll, right, and they come to all kinds of very bad, you know, since debunked conclusions. Stand for prison experiment. Another one, right, where people unconsciously adopted roles, effectively, most likely, of a movie they had recently seen. And because they were acting out a movie they had seen, most likely, the conclusions that people drew from the experiment are wrong. So a broad experiment wasn’t really a scientific experiment. It wasn’t meant to be. There’s all kinds of problems with these things. And what are the other signals that are going on? The unconscious things. Well, there’s the education system. Fair enough. There’s all kinds of unconscious signaling in the education system. There’s religious traditions. Fair enough. You get a fear of heaven, or a fear of hell, and a lust for heaven, and maybe ambivalence about purgatory or something, religious tradition, right? And whether or not that’s stated clearly and articulately, you know, for better or for worse, there are all kinds of cultural signals, right? You grow up in New England, you don’t talk about religion, you grow up in the South, you ask what church you went to. Like these are just differences, and they’re signals. They’re not articulated, they’re not written down in law, they’re not instantiated, they’re not spoken about in many cases. And we’re moved by signals, by spirits. This is the stuff outside ourselves, or at least it’s how we interface with the stuff outside ourselves. It’s not the only way, of course, but our unconscious is the thing that mediates most of this stuff outside ourselves. When we consciously think about history, we’re just rationalizing it. But the unconscious truth is that things happened, and then we came up with explanations. And there’s nothing wrong with this, it’s just how things are. And I bet you didn’t notice the discovery of the light bulb. Did we have a coherent theory of light, photons, the relationship of light to heat, the relatively complicated materials, chemistry required to create an efficient light bulb? No! No, was Edison aware of these theories? No, a lot of them didn’t exist. In other words, you don’t need any of the science to build the light bulb. He builds the light bulb by just ignorance. I don’t know what works, we’ll have to try everything. And they pretty much did. You didn’t rationalize their way to a light bulb. Now, did we later refine the light bulb after we made the observations, which is where science comes from. I have a video on science, by the way. Yeah, and then we were able to observe something we had been experiencing and then refine it. That’s what science is really good at. Everything else, by the way, science is terrible at. Don’t use it for any of those things. If you had an unknown virus of unspecified origin, you probably shouldn’t try to science it, because you can’t observe things that are new. It takes a while, just saying. If you’ve got a bunch of things that are new, you can’t do it. It takes a while, just saying. If you got fooled by that, I apologize, but also you’re an idiot. Don’t be an idiot next time. But you’re an idiot about lots of things, so you’re a Muppet. I’m a Muppet. We’re all Muppets. It happens. But we’re all Muppets, including the people you think are smart. Yeah, they’re Muppets too. The smarter they are, the more Muppet they tend to be about all the other things they’re not, quote, smart at. Which is most things, by the way. A lot of what we do is imprecise explanations and descriptions of phenomena we experience unconsciously. And what does that mean? It means that we’re trying to make conscious the things that we experience, that we participate in directly. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s something that we do. It’s something that we do. What does it mean to have a clear conscience? I would say what we mean by that, when we’re talking about that, is the path between your conscious and unconscious is open. We’re able to find some sort of reasonable trade-off. Remember, I don’t like the word balance. That’s binary bullshit terminology. Balance. We get two things. We get a balance. Nobody has two things. We find this trade-off between that which we just do and rationalizing our behavior. There’s a trade-off there. It’s a trade-off between exciting novelty, thrilling, shiny, ooh, and comfortable boredom where we can rest. Even if we’re moving, we can rest. You have to do all this thinking. Your brain takes up more energy than any other organ in your body. It needs to rest. The unconscious allows you to rest. When you’re asleep, you’re unconscious. This isn’t that hard to figure out, guys. When you’re dreaming, time passes in a funny way. There’s no time in your imagination, or at least not much of it. Exactly how the flow state works. Weird. It’s almost like the flow state doesn’t exist. They just rename the unconscious. And all of this leads up to the power of that thing I’m a huge fan of. Distributed cognition. Did I make too much of a leap? We need other people to help us see our unconscious, to help us control it and contain it and understand it. We can’t even see it. We can’t contrast it. That’s one of the many reasons why we need each other, why we need other people. Why do we go insane when we are alone? We reciprocally narrow on our unconscious, our personal fantasy, our imagination, our predictions in the world in a space with no time. Or maybe a mode where time doesn’t exist. The unconscious is the realm of your body doing things with little or no adjustment. Consideration for change. I do it this way all the time. Suddenly your body starts to break down. Now you have to do things differently. Your unconscious mind doesn’t know any of this. This is part of the struggle with ourselves, is our fight with our unconscious. It’s a filter. It’s doing a bunch of cognizing without our permission. It’s pre-programmed by exemplification, by things we saw in the world, by other ways we saw other people participate. And it’s so efficient. Like watching somebody run and then running is way more efficient than having running explained to you in a four volume set, which is about what it would take. And it wouldn’t work. It’s rote memorization, mimicry, but not entirely, but mostly. It’s a low change rate modeling system for the world. It’s quiet, it’s effective, and it’s really basic. Watch what that thing’s doing, do that thing. That’s why you can add consciousness to it and get more effective. And you see these gurus talking about that. I have nothing against that. I have nothing against any of it. Just pointing out, there are gurus out there saying, hey, if you pay attention to your training, you can improve your training. Really genius, thank you. I’m appreciative of Captain Obvious. But also, you need Captain Obvious. Because you’re a Muppet. I’m a Muppet. We’re all Muppets. You need those little reminders. They’re annoying. It’s annoying to know you need reminders. Oh my goodness, it’s nagging on top of nagging. The world’s gone mad. But you’re better for it, even though it’s annoying. And that’s even more annoying. And to contrast, our conscious mind is a high rate modeling system that prefers novelty. And this explains so much about us, about our behavior. About other people. About our struggle with ourselves. Our inability to be individuals. And why the frame of you with yourself is important to pay attention to. How does meditation work? Not in the conscious frame. It provides you contrast by giving you space outside your conscious mind. And saying, hey, you have a conscious mind? Shut that thing off. Oh no, no, just try. And magic happens. And if you try hard enough for long enough, it does. Big phantom meditation. And that’s where you can find the boundary between the conscious and the unconscious. Look, I’m not here to give you answers. Here’s how to fix your unconscious mind. That’s bullshit. But I am here to help you. I’m here to help you. I’m here to help you. But I am here to re-enchant this for you. To show you how deep it goes. How complex it is. To give you ways to understand and cognize and to intelligence and maybe make it better. And a lot of times what we refer to as a secret conspiracy is often just noticing that people are all cooperating. Participating in something that serves at least one, usually many masters. Sometimes we don’t know what masters they serve. In fact, I would argue we can never know what masters we serve when we’re participating. In a group or by ourselves. We don’t know what impact we have. The hell do we know? We observe this and we say, oh, you’re using money? That’s the power of the man. You’re trapped by the man. I’ve heard people say that, by the way. This was not theoretical, unfortunately. Much to my chagrin. You’re playing into their hands. That’s the Illuminati conspiracy, dude. Have a joint. Have a joint. Zero exaggeration, by the way. That’s what happens when you let your unconscious overconnect everything. The reason we think of things in terms of conspiracy is precisely because we don’t notice the contributions. The things we are doing and how things are all linked together. Not just part of the specific reason we are doing things. I’m using money to get bread. Okay. But maybe because you’re doing that, a bunch of other things are happening too. Like you’re contributing to the profitability of a corporation. Or many corporations. Because the odds that you’re buying bread and only one corporation is getting money are close to zero. It’s like, oh no, man, the answer is small businesses. All small businesses are corporations. There might be different types of corporations, but they’re all corporations. Good luck not doing business with corporations. I’ll wait here. Just groups of people. All corporations are conspiracies under that definition. And fair enough. Maybe everything’s a conspiracy. The intelligibility of the world is a conspiracy. There’s your cynical skepticism. Thank you, Socrates. Or the misinterpretation of Socrates, more likely. The solipsistic, idiotic misinterpretation of Socrates. I’ll venture. We don’t know the specific reasons we’re doing things. And sometimes we do. But so many more things are happening. And you can just look at those things or other people can look at those things and say, I know what you’re up to. But I don’t know why you’re doing this. I don’t know why you’re doing this. I know what you’re up to. Because these things are happening around you. And I know how they’re connected in my head. Right. Right. And then we give it a name. And suddenly we have a conspiracy. It’s the Illuminati. It’s the Koch brothers. It’s George Soros. We suddenly attend to these unconscious things, these connections, these links. We weren’t consciously paying attention to before, but we’re always there since before we were born. And we try to intelligence them. We give them that name. We become cognizant of them. We make them conscious. Bang. Lizard people run the White House. I’ve said this in my videos on conspiracy. Yeah. Do you think the world is intentional, competent, rational? Sure. Lizard people have to run the White House. Because none of the events that are happening match any other thesis. For real. Fortunately, most people are completely incompetent. Most people do things without intending. And most of the things they do are completely irrational. They won’t have the outcome they expect even if they were competent. That’s a much better explanation. And you can ask yourself, why don’t you prefer that explanation? Most people do. Some people don’t. Maybe that’s a problem. Maybe that’s what’s wrong with you. You’re too anxious to prefer a nice, comfortable, simple, easy, comforting solution. That is probably more true than your silly solution about lizard people. Or ancient aliens. Or whatever else it is this week. Illuminati. Dunno. Are there no crazy conspiracies? Or are there just nothing but conspiracies? Things we participate in that have unknown second order effects. The law of unintended consequences. Those are second order effects. I don’t know. You want to know more about your unconscious? Don’t spend too much time on it. But don’t spend no time on it. Acknowledge that it’s there and that it’s ruling most of what you do all the time. Get comfortable with that fact because you ain’t changing it. And that’s what we need to know. You’re kind of stuck with it. So get used to it. That’s what I hope we’re here to talk about is what do we do about this thing? How do we feel about this thing? What are feelings anyway? Are they all unconscious? Maybe most of everything is unconscious. That’s not a problem. It’s not a bug. It’s a feature. With that, I’m going to close this session. With that, I shall end the monologue and have some marathon tea because these are marathons for me. Oh, that’s good stuff. It’s nice and strong. Good strong Kenyan tea. You got to love it. Usually I take the caps off these things before I do these. But this this snuck up on me somehow, even though I was well prepared and left work early and. Sometimes that’s how life goes. You’re just not as prepared as you need to be, even when you know you should be more prepared. Now I’ve got my Maltesers ready. Open my La Croix because it’s good. Have some more. So yeah. Nick Kenya accounts for 20 percent of the world’s tea. There’s a valley outside of the Great Rift Valley. I’m sorry. There’s a plateau above the Great Rift Valley, and it’s basically Hawaii weather for whatever reason. It’s like a great place to be. There’s a plateau above the Great Rift Valley, and it’s basically Hawaii weather for whatever reason. It’s like, you know, between 70 and 85 degrees all year round and the rain falls the same every month. And it’s crazy. So they have tea there. And they make that if you ever come to South Carolina and everybody should come to South Carolina, obviously, just because I’m here. It’s a good enough reason. Go to the Table Rock Tea Company. It’s up in Pickens. It’s on the border with North Carolina. It’s in the mountains, basically. And take the free tea tour, and they will tell you all about this. It’s wonderful. In fact, they have tea because they were in Kenya showing them how to drill wells, because that’s what they used to do for their charity. And the Kenyans were like, you’re wonderful. You’ve given us this great knowledge and shown us these wonderful things. What can we teach you? And they were looking around going like, what the hell are these plants, man? And they’re like, oh, that’s tea. Let us show you everything about tea. So they showed them everything about tea. It’s a wonderful place. I mean, their whole story is wonderful. Like that tour was great. I’m just, Steve and Jennifer are awesome. Yeah, I love them to death. They are wonderful people. I got to get back up there at some point. So yeah, no, Kenya, tea, big deal. There’s four tea plantations in the U.S., two in Mississippi, three in New York, four in New York, five in New York. Two in Mississippi and two in South Carolina. And one of them, of course, is Table Rock Tea. So there you go. Now you know a bunch about tea. This is what I have learned. And because I have a good memory, because my unconscious took care of that for me somehow, I’m able to relay this to you. Happy days. Mills, I would disagree with you about flow states. Flow states in Shikset Mahai’s model happen all the time without any awareness and are not chosen. The claim is that you can choose them. And I am not going to dismiss that claim because you can choose to meditate. So, but, nah. You know, you regularly go into flow states without realizing it, and you’re none the wiser. Yeah, a lot of people, like I said, they’re just, they’re putting a new name on an old thing. And reinventing Freud and Jung and saying, oh, I’m wicked smart. Like, nah, nah, bro. You’re just, it’s not what’s going on. Like, you know, I mean, Verbeke describes this at length, right? One of his great examples is rock climbing, even though almost nobody does rock climbing. But it was popular for a while. So, yeah, when you’re at the gym and you’re lifting weights and whatever, like when I’m coding, I just code away. And suddenly I slip into flow state or slip into my unconscious, right? And bang, I write a bunch of code and usually boilerplate code. Then I hit a hard problem. And if I’m smart, I stop usually. And yeah. Let’s see. A new name may help you ditch some baggage. Yeah, I mean, look, I’m not like, flow state is bad. Don’t call it that. It’s just, you know, it’s not new. It’s like, yeah, humans have been around for thousands of years. This is not some new evolutionary improvement in the past couple of generations. So the odds that people have talked about it before are like 100 percent, right? So sure, maybe you ditched some baggage. Maybe you understood the unconscious in a new way. But also it’s the unconscious and it rules us. And so it would be good to tell people that. Rather than making it an isolated magical fix for a whole bunch of problems, which is what people are using it for. I found this new thing called flow and now we can do things. It’s like, yeah, whatever. So, yeah, and just, you know, couching it in terms of Western Buddhism, which is not Eastern Buddhism, not a fan. So, yeah, there’s a bunch of problems there for sure. But yeah, if anybody would like to join in, I’ll send out the link. Go ahead and stream me our Dure De Victory. You can talk more about the conscious and the unconscious. I just want to work through this. And yeah, no, there’s a lot there. I hope I gave everybody something to think about. Because I think people don’t. And then they get bamboozled easily. And that’s really the point. It’s like your unconscious is easy to hijack. That’s what the postmoderns do. Hey, it’s Andre. How are you doing, Andre? Good to see you. Good. I’m consciously attending this. Yeah, I’m just going to go ahead and do a little bit of a chat. Yeah, I’ve been attending this. Are you? Are you sure? I tried to listen to some of the monologue, but I went and took a shower and had the audio going from my phone. And it seems like it’s just really hard to pay attention to you for audio only. Got to get all the mannerisms in and everything. And it’s interesting. It’s okay. My unconscious mind can’t really pick up on listening. You need conscious attention. That’s yeah. Yeah. Different people pick up on different things. I pick up on audio really well and I’m body language really poorly. I did pick up on the part where you said like, I’m a great driver and I’m great at avoiding traffic lights. Well, that’s traffic in general. You just run the lights. It’s not a big deal in Boston. Red? What does that mean? Just another color. I don’t run red lights by the way. But I do speed up on yellow ones. That’s for sure. There’s that old joke about yellow means speed up. But I can drive through traffic like you other people. Let me tell you. It’s interesting to think if you need to consciously adjust your driving if you’re color blind because of course the positioning is the same of the lights. So you would learn that it goes in sequence. But I wonder if when you’re trying to filter in that sensory information, you see the opposite color light and make a quick value judgment. No. Color blind people don’t see the red and green light. So they just know they’re not in the same place and they learn the position. That’s well documented actually. They don’t see reverse colors. But people who don’t know that don’t know that. They think there’s only one way to understand light, which is color. And that’s not true. It’s just the way they prefer. There’s Jesse. And top of the morning to you. We prefer cabal. Cabal is the correct term for two or more Australians. We studied the cabal. So we’re the cabal. Terrible. Convicts. Wrong K. Indeed. Indeed. How you doing, Jesse? What’s going on? What’s going on? It’s been a week. You know, you have those weeks where you feel like a lot happened. It’s been a week. Oh, yeah? You tell. Anything good? Anything bad? No. A lot of unconscious things are coming up. Sometimes you don’t want your unconscious to be revealed or other people’s unconsciousness to be revealed or the company you work for is unconscious to be revealed. That’s a thing. It’s better to not know all the hidden motivations your company has. That’s right. Well, it scales up. I mean, I didn’t talk about it, but it scales up to distributed cognition. That’s the spirit. That’s like, yeah, there’s something going on underneath. That whole conspiracy thing I got this morning in my notes. Because I listened to Jonathan Pigeot talking about the worldwide conspiracy, he was involved in, which was such a great video. Oh, my goodness. If you haven’t listened to that video, you can. Talking to Mary Harrington one. No, no, no. This is a follow on to that video. Oh, I need to go. Because he mentioned conspiracy in that video, he wanted to clarify. So he did like, I think it’s 20 minutes today. He released it this morning. Well, in real time, not in crazy upside down Australia future time. And we talked about the worldwide conspiracies he was involved in. And the one he talked about was evangelism. And I was like, yes, that is a worldwide conspiracy. And a bunch of the people, because I was in the live chat, a bunch of the people in the live chat were like, I’ll take that conspiracy any day. And it’s kind of like, I ain’t working out for you guys. I don’t know what to tell you. Yeah. The other one he mentioned was Santa. The guy that that guy in the red coat, John, John, John. And then, yeah, people were pointing out NORAD and the Santa watcher and letters that people will respond to is the Santa’s real. And it’s like, yeah, that’s a big conspiracy confirmed. Yeah. I’ve never thought about Santa as a conspiracy. But yeah. It was such a great video. And I’m sitting there with a live check. I wish I could come up with good examples. It’s like why I watch the show. It’s like he always comes up with these great examples. I wish I could be that good at this. Well, Josie, I haven’t heard of like the conspiracy that Santa was invented by Coca-Cola. Well, yeah, that’s the that’s the recharge with the modern conception of it. Yeah, a modern conception of it is probably your stock in an economic frame. Then, yes, that would be true. You’d also be a retard, but whatever. Lots of people are retarded. But I mean, you could say that’s just a conspiracy. No, it’s a sub. It’s a subgroup of the conspiracy. Like the fact that a corporation participated in Santa Claus. Right. From an economic frame looks like they caught the frame. Looks like they caused it, but they weren’t causal. Santa Claus existed long before Coca-Cola. So obviously not. It takes 10 seconds to realize it’s not true because the ordering is wrong. But that’s what I’m saying. And if it’s a subset, it’s still full Sunday. Conspiratorial. No, no, it can. If you’re not thinking about the world correctly, like all subsets of conspiracies look like individual conspiracies. Of course they do. But that just means your vision’s limited and you don’t understand what’s going on. So that’s part of the point. Like, yeah, you can think that you can always divide something up and say there’s 10 of them instead of one. You can always do that. But that’s not the way things actually happened. And it’s not to say they never happened that way. Right. To Nick’s wonderful point here, Hallmark created Valentine’s Day. Yeah, I’m not saying no corporations didn’t cause conspiracies to happen. I’m saying the conspiracy of Santa Claus pre-existed Coca-Cola and therefore Coca-Cola couldn’t have caused it to happen. And the only way you run into that problem is if you use a limited framing, right? Like top-down power from above via economics. Right. And then there’s a whole bunch of holidays you can say are top-down power from above via politics because they were instantiated in the political system. That doesn’t mean that’s where they came from. That’s the problem is that it’s very easy to get these things confused with causality. Like saying Charles Dickens. Yeah, Charles Dickens. Yeah, he went to Christmas. Well, it’s like, yeah, there’s something there, but it’s not completely true. One powerful, well-read writer made up, which didn’t happen, by the way, this concept and then Christmas Dick, no. Ordering is wrong. The idea pre-existed the author. You could say, oh, once he wrote it, a more coherent system arose around the conspiracy. That might even be true. It’s not relevant to anything. Right. The fact that one contributed to a conspiracy had an outlier effect doesn’t really mean anything. That happens all the time. Yeah. Oh, no. Here we go. Have you read propaganda by evidence? No, and I’m not going to. I’ll tell you why. Propaganda is bad framing. It’s hindsight. Okay. As near as I can tell, I’ve asked dozens of people about this at this point. Show me propaganda in the current moment, and they can’t. It’s undifferentiated. And like if you go back into any frame, including we’ll go back to the frame when he lived, you cannot differentiate propaganda from non-propaganda because it’s a value decision that was made after the fact by the winners of history, effectively. So talking about propaganda can be useful, but only in the past. And this is where the problems come in. And people don’t, they don’t even see that that’s how it happens. But that’s what’s going on there. Sorry, guys. It’s not a useful frame. A lot of times things that you would call propaganda aren’t actually wrong. So it’s like, oh, then if they were actually truthful, then what was the propaganda? I don’t know. It’s sort of hard to tell because we pre-define propaganda as bad framing. It’s like, well, you can do that, I guess, but that’s not accurate. Like that’s ridiculous. And that’s the problem. Benjamin Franklin. Oh, lovely. Did you watch the discussion with Emmanuel and Jacob earlier today? Nope. I was working. It was good. Well, maybe I- Yeah, it was good. It was good because I was also there. Here we go. Well, Andre has confirmed it as a participant. And yeah, is that propaganda isn’t about disseminating lies. No, it’s not about disseminating the truth either. Propaganda and dissemination are indiscernible. All dissemination is propaganda. That’s the problem with the definition of propaganda. What made it good? What made this big conversation between Emmanuel and Jacob good? Because it’s unusual for a conversation with Jacob to be good. Emmanuel having to prove his knowledge on the Trinity and Jacob claiming he hadn’t really read enough about it. And then that space of about 10 minutes turned into us trying to- I think he was describing the one versus the many. And then that turned into him making definitions about what is a cloud. Yeah. I mean, that was the comment earlier about it. Did Coca-Cola participate in a conspiracy or did they start the conspiracy on Santa? You can always divide things up arbitrarily and come up with weird conclusions that don’t actually fit reality. You can always come up with weird conclusions about the king rules and the king does this. Kings also get beheaded. The patriarchy ruled the world and suppressed the women. Then how would the women ever have gained power? Obviously, that’s what isn’t what was happening. It couldn’t possibly be that way. It’s the same thing. Yeah. I mean, it was a good conversation, but I would have to watch an hour of it to get a gist of where it went. There’s interspersing of something covered in Judaism. I forget what it is now. Jacob had a rabbi on and there was a point they disagreed on and there was a bit of back and forth there. I think he was being cyberbullied by another rabbi. So there’s a lot of Hebrew flying around the room. And we’re just taking back seats. Me personally, I think Jacob needs to think more about what is a discrete entity. Well, to be fair to Jacob, everybody does. Why is neo-Platonism the big hot new girl in town? Because it’s not just in this little corner of the internet or whatever you guys are calling your stupid project. It isn’t actually a project. It’s everywhere. Everyone’s talking about this goofy neo-Platonism thing. They all have different definitions. They’re all stupid, but they’re all actually talking about where do things begin and end. That’s what they’re talking about. How do we differentiate one thing from another? That’s actually what they’re talking about. If you listen closely, that’s what they’re talking about. Because really it’s a breakdown of meaning. And they’re trying to get to the heart of meaning by using definition, which isn’t going to work, by the way. It’s only one part of meaning. And so they’re saying, oh, well, definition alone doesn’t do it. The part isn’t sufficient to understand the whole. Really genius. Thanks. Thanks for the update, Captain Obvious. And then they’re going, we really need what I would call the framing or the context. And they call that the one, but that’s not actually the one. And so they misunderstand the world because they’ve created a false binary. And you can’t understand anything in a binary. A binary is a low resolution picture by definition. The binary is the lowest possible resolution of anything. Anything. You can’t get any lower resolution because if you remove the binary, you have one. Now you have no discernment, no contrast. You can’t see. Right. If you go to three, obviously you have three instead of two. That’s way better. Wasn’t there a thing like the called the unary, which does a state of a singular. So they’re going to make up more words for one in two. They’re going to constantly make up more words for one in two. And then, and then get out of it. They’re going to go, there’s a state of nothingness. It’s like, that doesn’t make any sense. That’s absurd. That’s absurd. Even if it’s there, you’re not there and you can’t be there. You’d cease to exist. And that’s the problem. And yeah, Elizabeth, the problem with Neoplatonism is it doesn’t have a definition. You ask 10 people, you’re going to get 15 definitions. It’s madness at this point. It’s utter madness. It’s like that which came after Plato, Platinus maybe who was anti-Platonic. If you actually read him, it’s like, oh, wait a minute. He denied a bunch of platonic forms. Yeah, he did. Oops. Now what? Let me explain this very simply. If you deny Plato, you’re wrong. You’re just wrong. I’m sorry. You’re just wrong. Plato was not wrong about enough stuff. And they always get into this one in the many, one in the many. Like you listen to Verveki or any of them. The core thing they have in common is talking about the one in the many and how there’s a difference between the one in the many, but there’s no difference between the one in the many. But there’s a difference. They go back and forth on this issue. That’s all they ever do. All of them. They never say anything else. They never come to a resolution. They just keep saying one in many, one in many, one in many. As though this is some great insight that is worthy of our attention. And I can tell you, it’s not a great insight. Everybody understands this on a fundamental, non-articulable level and they don’t need to articulate it. And you can argue, oh, some people get the one wrong. And it’s like, well, yeah, they do. Some people draw bad lines in the world, bad boundaries. Some people don’t know they’re conscious from their unconscious, which would be a good thing to understand. Because that allows you to intuit the correct one and the correct many, which is the easiest, best, quickest, safest way to do it. It’s not flawless. We’re not flawless creatures. We’re not going to be flawless creatures. But it’s still your best bet. And I think that’s the problem is that when you get stuck in this one in the many thing, it highlights relevance realization. What’s the difference between the one in the many? That’s the relevance realization. The black box. Yay, black box. Woohoo. We’ll science it later. But now we have a solution. That’s what they’re doing. And yeah, I mean, even Peterson does this to some extent, although less so than, say, Vervecky and some of these other Neoplatonist clowns. They can’t locate it in time. They can’t locate it with a specific set of ideas. They can’t locate it with, say, four people. They’re always like, well, it’s this, but it’s also an idea from here and blah. And it’s just nonsense. They can’t define it because it’s not a thing. And that is the sort of thinking that Neoplatonism will lead to. And so I think they had that thinking and they came up with the Neoplatonism to explain their thinking. Unconsciously. That’s why the unconscious is important. Because that’s what happens to us. We come up with this framing and then we articulate it so we can convince other people and then we feel like we’re not alone. And now we’re part of a tribe and we’re safe and comfortable. Fair enough. Fair enough. But you’re an idiot. Right? That’s muppetry. Would that mean trying to get your unconscious validated then? Is that what they’re trying to do? Is it validate their unconscious beliefs and desires? Well, I mean, I don’t think that’s fair because, again, you have to cast the articulation into the conscious mind. So what you’re really trying to do is get that. You want to talk about worldview. What’s worldview? Worldview is your unconscious plus your conscious expression. And then there’s a fight in your worldview between your unconscious participation and your conscious articulation. That’s where you get formative contradiction from. Why does Peterson say, I don’t believe what you say, I believe how you act or what you do in the world? What you do in the world is mediated by your unconscious. What you say in the world is mediated mostly by your conscious. Not entirely, but almost entirely. Oh, well, that sheds a bunch of light on Peterson now, doesn’t it? Because without even invoking this, whether he’s aware of it or not, he’s invoking conscious and unconscious. I want to address this. So Benjamin Franklin. But cognitive science does not stop with prototypes. Cognitive science doesn’t stop with anything because it’s garbage. It also takes from a couple of fuzzy boundaries. No, it doesn’t because you can’t. That’s not a thing that you can do. I think neoplatonism overemphasizes the perfect forms. It doesn’t emphasize anything. It’s kind of dogmatic about it. It doesn’t talk about forms. It just says one and many. And that’s the problem. No one knows anything about neoplatonism. You ask 10 people, you’ll get 15 definitions, I guarantee you. If you get any, you’ll either get zero or 15. I don’t know. It’s hard to… I keep asking people what is neoplatonism and they keep failing to explain anything intelligible to me. And I’m getting kind of skeptical here. It’s not one, two, or three people. I’ve asked for Vakie. This isn’t hard. I’ve heard other people ask for Vakie. He can’t define it either. And not just publicly. I’ve asked him on private things. Uh-oh. Now we’ve got trouble. There he is. The lad himself. Sorry, I have to interject. No, you don’t have to be sorry at all. It’s good to see you, my friend. How’s California? It’s warm. It’s perhaps troubling my subconscious. I don’t know. Because I couldn’t know. Even if I wanted to. Yeah. So we just went go-karting and now I’m back from that. We got something to eat. And yeah, that’s going good. It’s going good. How’s our conspiracy around toilet snakes? Yeah, so thus far I have not yet found a snake in my toilet. But here’s hoping one of these days, if I had to choose whether it was number one or number two, I’d probably choose number one. You know, so at least then I could see him coming. But no, no. See, Adam is a good Discord member because he will engage in my absurdist fantasies and just like dive right in. Instead of getting scared by, because Sally Jo is sending me like, don’t tell him there are snakes in the toilet. He won’t be able to sleep at night. Adam’s like, no, bro, I’m a man. We’re going straight at the snakes in the toilet. Yeah. And he puts it right back on me. And then we stay in this little fantasy. And it helps us to understand unconscious versus conscious. It really does. If you need that, that’s what you need to do. You need to know, oh, I’m going to watch something absurd like Monty Python. I know I’m going into absurd land now. That helps you to find that boundary. I did want to address it. So Mills, what makes Cogside garbage? Okay. Start with all of it and just stop there. Like it’s weird science. Right. It’s one of these sciences where their stated goal is we’re going to take science A, science B, and science C and combine them into super science D. And we’re going to put a label on it. And then we’re going to science it. And the problem with that is that science can only deal with first order abstractions. Right. Or maybe with zero quid. Maybe it doesn’t deal with abstractions at all, actually. There’s probably a better way to think about it. It doesn’t deal with abstractions. So when you take something that finds things by inference and you combine that with something else that finds it by inference, you’re creating abstraction. That’s what you’re creating. When you do that, you can’t do science anymore. That’s garbage. I’m not saying it’s not useful. I’m saying it’s not science. Now, I would argue, as I did in the monologue, most of the things that happen in the world have nothing to do with science. We’re not rationalizing reasoning or logic in our way into it. There are a few notable exceptions and they’re very important exceptions to that. But they’re tiny. They’re not 10%. They’re probably not 1%. That’s scary. You look at things like drug efficacy. How many drugs are 80% effective? Like four? For real. I’m not screwing with you. It’s like four. How many drugs are there? Like 4,000 or 100,000? I don’t even know. It’s a big number. But things like aspirin, penicillin are rare, extremely rare compared to the number of compounds we’ve created since then with the ideal. So you look at penicillin and you go, we have this ideal drug that’s so ridiculously effective. And it’s now less effective, by the way. That efficacy has gone down over time. Isn’t that interesting? How’s your science doing for you now, buddy? Science is subject to entropy. Doesn’t that suck? We think we know things and then we don’t know them anymore because entropy. What are we doing? We’re going after the ideal. Like, fair enough. I’m a big fan of actual science with scientific method and all that. But that’s what we’re doing and then we’re failing over and over and over and over and over again. And so most drugs have an efficacy rate of under 30%. And there’s nothing wrong with that because you’re helping 30% of the people to take them. That’s fantastic. But also, don’t fool yourself into thinking they’re all penicillin or they’re all whatever. No. Most of them are terrible. They’re just terrible. Not to say we shouldn’t do it. I’m just saying we fool ourselves. We fool ourselves into thinking like, ooh, the Transistute was invented because we had Einstein’s not. No, it wasn’t. No, it wasn’t. None of that stuff was invented as a result of relativity or even particle physics. It was understood and refined after it was discovered. But it was not found that way. It was not invented that way. The observations made after the fact refined the science. I used to work at Polaroid back in the day, a billion years ago. I was a kid. And working at Polaroid, I had a great director. Guy knew everything. Wicked smile. That’s Boston. Everyone’s wicked smile. So he’s telling me this story about how they’re doing all this chemistry in the labs over there. And it’s just instant film, right? Except they had the best battery technology in the world at the time. The battery technology at Polaroid was so good that you had to have a special badge to go to the battery factory, which is right up the road for me, by the way. I probably could have gotten in. But they basically wouldn’t let anybody in. Effectively, they just wouldn’t let people in the battery factory. And the reason why is because, and not just the battery factory, but Polaroid made holograms. Polaroid made sensors for range sensors, audio range sensors, sonars, mini sonars for short distances. They pioneered all kinds of stuff because they had MIT, they had buildings through the MIT campus, right? I wasn’t there. I mean, I was there for a while, but mostly I was out by the film manufacturing plants and the actual manufacturing plants. He told me, he said, the chemists at Polaroid are constantly finding things that cause the physicists to rewrite physics. And he pointed to a few things and I was like, oh wow, I saw a paper on that a couple of weeks ago. He’s like, yeah, we did that two years ago. And then the physicists had to update the physics to explain it. That’s how the world works, guys. This science is not driving anything or hardly anything every once in a while, but not really. Elizabeth, Elizabeth, PVK refers to JP as a neoplatonist. Yeah, I think, look, you’re going to run into the two worlds mythology, whether you like it or not. And when you try to science it, you’re going to call that neoplatonism because you need the historical grounding, but it’s not there because if you read the republic, if you actually read the book with actual reading comprehension, which man, I’m going to do so many videos on the republic, it’s going to make everybody bleed. I am so angry. The book is full of religious reference, full of, not a few, they’re fricking everywhere. They’re constant, constant religious reference, begins with religious reference. And I’m told, although I haven’t read the end yet, it ends with a religious reference. Like it’s book ended in religion and peppered throughout the text is religion. But the secularists can’t deal with that because religion, who knows? It’s anti-science. Your science was born from the Christian church, by the way, from the Catholic church specifically. It was born in the bosom of Christendom. You ungrateful, narcissistic pieces of garbage, by the way, born in it, right? You’re not getting out of it. So if you try to escape and you want historical grounding, you go to philosophy, which is totally free from religion, but it’s not. It’s embedded in religion. I mean, this is what Immanuel Kant was on about. Oh, we have to free philosophy. It can’t be the handmaiden of religion. Where’s that line, Immanuel? Oh, you can’t draw that line. That’s because you can’t. Right? And this is where you come up with this garbage like neo-Platonism. And it’s garbage. It’s garbage. And it’s inevitable when you don’t have the language of religion. You will have to rely on stripped down versions of philosophy that strip out all of the religious references. And that’s the problem, Mills. If one of these Chimeric disciplines passes a test of reality, what the hell is a test of reality? Maybe it’s worth keeping. Look, you can find usefulness everywhere. Like the idiot is useful. If nothing else, then to show you what not to do. Like, I’m just not impressed by that. Like, you can say like, oh, Heidegger came up with this really interesting question. And I’m not joking. I’m not exaggerating. Yeah, I heard a three-year-old ask the same damn question. Now the question is, should I be impressed with Heidegger, who wasn’t three when he wrote down the question? Because I’m not. Like, if you can make a case for why I should be impressed with the guy who said the question when he wasn’t three because he wrote it in a book and the three-year-old who couldn’t write happened to say the same question, please make your case. But until then, I’m out. I’m just not, I’m not in. Heidegger’s a three-year-old. Sorry. I’m sorry. Like, really? And we say this, wisdom comes from the mouths of babes. Yeah, it does. Well, what do we need it from the mouths of 30-year-old retards for? Explain that one to me. Go ahead. Oh, I can write. That’s fantastic, dude. Good luck to you. Good luck to you. You’re busy writing and you’re not engaged with the world around you and making the world a better place. That’s wonderful. Yeah, you’re a fantastic dude. Yeah, it makes Nick is correct. Nick says most of what we call science is engineering. Yes. Most of the magic. In fact, all of the magic from science comes from engineering. Zero of it comes from science. Zero. Just to let you know how unimportant science actually is to the world. Yeah, it’s, it’s, well, it’s just, you know, what we, what we call science now is in the past what have been called natural philosophy. And I think that frames it most properly, which is the actual, actually the realm of the natural philosopher isn’t necessarily building a bridge. It’s trying to find out why the bridge stands up and doesn’t crumble under its weight. But we don’t care. Once we’ve built the bridge, we don’t care. You know, an engineer knows that, or maybe doesn’t know that, but understands that on an intuitive level to build the bridge in the first place. The physicist is like, what are the principles underlying that, which almost has to happen after the after the fact, rather than before. Right. And it doesn’t mean that insights can’t come and connections can’t be made. It’s just that they’re so few and far between, and they would have been made anyway, you know, and so, and you can argue, hey, efficiency matters. I agree. Right. But that’s a problem. Uh oh. What is this? Joschewski’s idiot or generic idiot? Joschewski’s not a philosopher. That’s the problem. He’s an author who shared some really insightful wisdom with everybody. Oh, Elizabeth, neoplatonism as diet drug. It is. It’s the, it’s the, it’s the opiate of the academic masses. That’s what it is. There, there, take that call, March, you little prick. Ha! What are modern scientists doing then? What are they, what are they motivating? Academia. Well, no, they, look, you, there’s a great talk on the meaning code between John Breveke and Wolfgang Smith. And the thing I was, I remember this distinctly, I was driving through West Virginia and Virginia when I was listening to it. And the thing I remember most is here are two guys who wanted the secrets of the universe, roughly speaking. I’m, you know, I’m going to play fast and loose here, but it’s close enough. Trust me. Right. They wanted the secrets of the universe, so they went into science. I’m just going to give them the secrets of the universe. Woo! Right. And then they realized there’s an end to science and it didn’t provide those answers. And then they both went into philosophy, going, aha, it’s philosophy. That’s where the answers are. But, as Adam noted, philosophy is the proper definition of what people are trying to make science into. Right. So if you look at the ancient Greek outline, I think the ancient Greek outline is clear as day. Philosophy is the bucket of all ontology. Okay. So all ontologies are types of philosophy. Everything that is not an ontology is or able to be part of an ontology is not philosophy. Right. And so philosophy is an empty bucket that contains ontologies. And so one of those is science. You can apply scientific principles to most, but not all of those buckets, by the way, even if you can make an ontology. And that is all embedded in religion, all of it, for the ancient Greeks. So the religion is here and a tiny part of it is carved out for philosophy, which contains a bunch of ontologies. That’s where they are for Aristotle. I think that’s clear as day, actually. I can’t imagine, and like I really like Stephen Hicks. I think he’s great, but man, the philosophy of science. No, that’s invalid. Yeah. There’s no philosophy of something. Things are philosophies. Philosophies of things don’t exist. That’s a ridiculous way to think about the world. And I think that’s the problem is people get kind of caught up in that. But I think, Jesse, to answer your question, I honestly believe after many years of study and a very, you know, I have a heartfelt love of science. I have my whole life, right? We had Encyclopedia Britannica. I had How It Works when I was younger, all kinds of science books. I’ve read all kinds of books about this. Science probably got all the low hanging fruit and is done. All the first order of facts that science is good at finding have probably been found. And it can’t be all. I get it. But the number of new discoveries of science is probably going to be a fraction of what it was in the past. I think that pattern has played out. I think there’s huge amounts of evidence of this, Sabine Hofffetler, Hoffenfelder? Yeah, she’s great. She’s got at least three really good videos. And there’s a couple of good videos from PBS Science, too. That guy, I don’t particularly like him, but he’s rather good. That talk about the limitations of physics and science in general. Like Sabine’s on about particle physics is a scam. All the particle physics models that have come after like 1936 have proven to be bullshit. Every single one of them. And yet people go out and get funding to find this new particle and then it’s not there. Or it doesn’t do what they think, like the Higgs boson. The Higgs boson is a very old concept. And then they build it as the god particle, right? They’re selling the big particle accelerator, right? And then we got the big particles over and we’re gonna find the god particle. They call it the god particle. Unironically call it the god particle. And they find the god particle. What happens? The question they want to answer doesn’t get answered. Instead they’ve got six new questions. It’s a good job. It is. Well done. I think that’s convenient. I think that’s convenient for the guys who are in particle physics. That’s her point. That’s her whole point. She doesn’t come out and say this, but I’ll say it. It’s a scam. It’s a fraud. They know it’s a scam and a fraud and they want to get paid. And fair enough. Like it’s not even that’s not their motivation is primarily financial. I want to be the next Einstein. I want to be that important and interesting. I want to be that famous and well known for the rest of my life because I didn’t have any kids because I’m retarded. Yeah, okay. Fair enough. But also you’re retarded. So yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, my supervisor for my research master has basically told me a lot of the people. And he’s a pretty practical guy and is kind of in that realm of maybe not doing the science, but actually kind of doing engineering, but it’s under the umbrella of physics or whatever. I was happy with that anyways. And he said, yeah, there are whole fields within physics that are still going because there’s a couple of people still around who are basically have convinced these guys who provide funding to sustain their field essentially almost, even though they’ve, let’s say, been outmoded in a kind of, again, this is more engineering, but it’s under the rubric of science. They’ve been outmoded for years and in terms of like what’s worth investigating there that there’s nothing really more to be done. Right. Well, and there’s all these unconscious motivators in science that they don’t account for. Right. And at the same time, what you see as a trend, if you actually look at, we’ll say the history of science, which again, I don’t like these framings necessarily, but that’s actually a useful way to think about it. Science is trying to take more and more credit for more and more things that don’t fall within the scientific method that were not called science in the past. They would have been called types of engineering. They might’ve been called types of philosophies, right. But you see that trend. We’re just calling more and more things science to make science more and more important. And I do want to address this. I don’t think I can Mills, given science is derivative from ontological priors, that’s a good way to frame it. Of that are the domain of religion. What do you think of the conciliance work, Saint Fotius? Go ahead, Adam, you know way more about this than I ever will. Well, I’m looking it up now. I mean, look again, all science is embedded in religion because religion is the big frame. Like there isn’t a bigger frame. Science is going to try to take over the frame, right. But it’s failing to do so. I think that’s again, that talk on the meaning code with Breveke and Wolfgang Smith. And I forget which one it is because I think there’s three of them. I think it’s the latest one though. That talk was very good because you can hear the journey of these men. And of course, Wolfgang Smith becomes a Catholic, by the way, just to spoil the ending. Whereas, and he won’t talk about it, which is even funnier. Whereas Breveke stuck in Protestant fundamentalist hell. And I do want to stress this since Elizabeth found some useful, useful, useful phrasing, right. The opiate of the academic masses. Yes, that is the neoplatonism. There’s been a lot of discussion on this, though, if you’ve followed the trends for even since the 80s, that a lot of academic departments are in decline in terms of progressive thought, if you want to frame it that way, or the continuation of discovery or any way of saying there’s the linear next step that they say, oh, no, we’ve actually just rediscovering things and rephrasing them, particularly in physics. More importantly, in the regression is sorry, another topic is the regression of language in English has actually gone back since the 40s, not forward. But in most other cases, they’re just finding more dead ends and then labeling that and going forward. So, I think we’ve actually addressed the question, though, is what are these scientists doing? Like, what’s motivating them? Right. Well, they have such a trust in the science, right? Right. But that’s the thing. They don’t know, right? Like, asking for trust, like explicitly asking for trust or demanding trust is an obvious transgression. If you have to do that, you’ve already failed. And you know you failed. You’re grasping for something that you shouldn’t need to grasp for, because unconsciously we trust correctly through our intuition. That doesn’t mean we’re always right. It doesn’t mean we don’t get betrayed, right? But that’s how it works. So that wraps it nicely with Benjamin Franklin’s. I think since science is motivated by finding truth, but it doesn’t go beyond that. It’s not interested in using truths. That doesn’t follow. That is the business of engineering. No, that doesn’t follow at all. It’s not the business of extrapolating. Science doesn’t extrapolate. Science uses an asymmetrical relationship between the negative and the positive, which is there are more negatives than there are positives in the world, right? To rule out bad ideas. That’s the scientific method. Science can’t speak about truth. Science doesn’t try to define truth. That’s the problem. And this is what Peterson points out. No. Is mixing anthrax and Ebola valid science? That’s a good question. I’m not going to answer it for you. I think the answer is obvious. But I’m not going to answer that for you. I’m going to say that is the better question to ask about science than any other question you could ever ask about science, because it’s a question of boundaries. Where is this scientific method appropriate to use? And that particular one, because Peterson’s using the expanded definition of science that includes engineering, where is the appropriate use of engineering? Is it appropriate to use engineering to figure out how to split the atom and destroy the atmosphere? And that’s the question of Oppenheimer, the movie. Wow, how interesting. Have you guys seen it yet? These are not philosophical questions, except that all questions worth answering are philosophical questions. And I would argue proper philosophical questions, or things we call philosophical questions, are not philosophical questions. They are religious or ethical questions. Philosophy explicitly does not deal with ethics. You can argue that it deals with morals, but it deals with, and I define ethics and morals a little bit differently for most people, although correctly, and everybody else is wrong, just in case you’re curious, right? Ethics are the ideals, morals are the implementation. That’s why philosophy deals with the morals, because it tells you, given a set of beliefs, because they don’t define a set of beliefs, say, in the Republic, or in any of the Aristotelian stuff that I’ve asked people, how do they define it? Well, I’m like, wait, wait, wait, what? So they don’t define it. They just say, given your beliefs, this is consistent. Fair, fair, but also that means you’re talking about morals, implementation. You’re not talking about true, good, and beautiful. You may refer to them, like I cohere to the true, the good, and the beautiful using the stoic system of philosophy. Fair, fair, but you’re not defining true, the good, and the beautiful. You’re assuming it in your stoic system. It’s a given. Fair, I get it, but also if you’re trying to use philosophy to find the true, the good, and the beautiful, you ain’t gonna have it. It ain’t there, dude, and that’s where we get confused. Mark, you critiqued this dialogue, the Orthodox guys. Which Orthodox guys? I critique Orthodox guys all the time. Are you talking about the crazy conversation between Vervecky and Maximus and that other guy, the three-part series that I’ve only done two parts of? Because boy, do I have critiques of that. In fact, I’m trying to convince Manuel and Adam to do a breakdown of that particular dialogue. I’m trying to convince them to do a breakdown of that particular dialogue. I’m trying to convince Manuel and Adam to do a breakdown of that particular video, or at least part of it, because holy crap, I almost just gave up on life. I was like, I have never heard worse argumentation about anything in my entire life. First of all, oh my God, where does a scientist get off in claiming repeatedly four times? I checked the transcript four times. It’s in the effing transcript four times that so-and-such philosophical argument was, and I quote, demolished. Is that a scientific term? Is that a philosophical term, a debate term? Oh, Mark, it’s an engineering term. I talk about this all the time. So-and-so demolishes, but it’s tongue-in-cheek, you idiot. He’s not making a claim to be a scientist, and he’s doing it to be funny, and he see the grin on his face when he says it, because that’s class. He is so happy about that. He’s so happy about the Ben Shapiro demolishes, and he uses it on himself when he screwed up in England in that particular interview, and the guy took him apart, and he was like so-and-so demolishes Ben Shapiro with facts and logic. He’s clearly having fun with it. When Verbecki uses it seemingly seriously in a serious discussion, there’s so many things wrong with that discussion. I can’t even. Numbers fail. Infinity is an insufficient concept. Holy crap. It’s almost like everything that could possibly be wrong about an argument is right there in a small segment, too. I don’t know if it’s 20 minutes or 25 minutes. It’s something like that. It’s from 40 minutes onward in that part two discussion. It’s so bad, there are no words. There is no way to understand it. You just intuitively have to know evil. It’s like, oh yeah, this is an evil, but it’s very close. There’s so much going on. It’s freaking insane. It’s literally all three people have lost their minds. They’re not even understanding what the others are saying. That’s the most worrying bit for me, looking at these two orthodox. One of them is an orthodox bishop, the other is, as far as we’re essentially, a priest, and they’re just on board with the whole, I don’t even know what was going on there, but it wasn’t good. They were all basically emergence and no reference to emanation, and it was headless. It was headless. It was headless. Oh, that’s a good way to say it. Yeah, and at the end, here’s the funniest part. Even Manuel didn’t notice it, so it’s hard to notice. At the end, Verbecky actually states nominalism. They go through all this trouble to break apart nominalism by breaking apart the tools that disprove nominalism, which is just ridiculously ironic. There’s so many flips in that convo. It’s really hard to track. That’s why I want three of us to do it. I want to actually spend three hours dissecting it, because I think it would take three hours for us to dissect it, to then do a video. I don’t know how long the video would take, but I know we did this with the game A, game B stuff on my channel, Manuel and I, and frick, I think that was six hours of work. It was an amazing amount of work, and then that’s the two of us who are not lightweights when it comes to that thing, and I think it took us two weeks to get through it. Maybe it only took us a week, I forget, but I remember distinctly it was like six hours of work. This would be something similar, although with three of us doing it, maybe we could do a better job. At the end, he literally says, top down from cognition. That’s nominalism. At the end of the talk, he actually ends by affirming nominalism. I was blown away. I was just blown away. Some of this monologue comes from this week. I was in pain. I didn’t actually know I was in pain that day. I was just acting out, and Sally’s going, well, I knew something was wrong, but I’m like, why didn’t you say something? Maybe I would have realized I was in pain, you muppet. Nobody tells me anything. We might do a breakdown, Nels. I’m thinking about it. Part of the problem is now I have a time constraint. Well, not actually making any money, but someday I might make money on what I’m doing. Then I wouldn’t have to work anymore. Fair enough. But yeah, I did want to address it. Earning a living is quite a motivation. This gets back to unconscious, right? When we have more than one unconscious motivation to make up something or say something ridiculous like, science! Why did you happen to be a scientist saying this? There’s so many unconscious motivations for doing that. They’re not just economic. Using an economic frame is stupid. They’re not just political. They’re not just top-down. They’re not just political. They’re not just top-down power from above. There’s all of this going on. There’s all these motivations going on. Yeah, that’s what I’d say. In terms of what’s motivating these scientists, it’s like, yeah, anything that motivates a human, everything that motivates a human, let’s say. For me, I wouldn’t want to narrow it down because having gone to university with these guys, yeah, they’re just, you know, some of them might taste the honor of a degree. Some of them might just like doing whatever in terms of putting out papers. They might just like putting out papers. Whether those papers are impactful or not, they might even care about that. It’s just something to do. We’re having students. We’re having students, right, in the case of like, people are motivated by being able to train other people or to be the smart guy at the front of the room or a lot of people are motivated by doing good in the world and sometimes we pay those people well and usually we don’t but I would argue that’s a better motivation. I still argue for cutting teacher pay. I want teachers to be there for something that isn’t the money because when you make it the money, people who don’t want to be there will go just for the money. Like it’s an asymmetrical relationship. Right, yeah. And what’s the unconscious motivation? Yeah. Probably we should adopt a model of teaching that’s far more vocational. So you teach one day instead of being the teacher that’s there five days a week, you have many different representatives come in that would be far more sustainable model not for the community but also for a lot of teaching. Again, it’s unconscious. You learn through just, you know, having some teacher show up that day it fills in the class that can change or break a class dynamic or enhance, right? If you have a specialist coming in teaching drawing and art, like it could be far better than your general art teacher. Yeah. That will carry it to some degree, you know, just showing that forth and being like I just love doing this and if you can see that there’s an in, you can participate in that rather than having to kind of come at it by kind of just doing this procedural thing of one step after the other. Right. Well, and I think that’s what’s being taught, Adam. It’s actually what’s being taught is the procedural rather than the perspectival. Yeah, I think that’s the problem, right? Is that when we have this filter around articulation now, we’re preferring things that are articulable. So we go like, what do we really like about our teacher? And it’s like, oh yeah, you know, I’m trying to describe what made this particular teacher that I love because I said I loved him or I learned from him, you know, a really good teacher. And it’s like, okay, like fair enough, like, but then you have to articulate it. Yes. And like, we want that for some reason. But then that causes a problem because if we can’t articulate it, maybe we don’t mention that teacher. Yes, I can talk about my English teacher, Mr. O’Rourke in my Catholic school, right? And I can say, yeah, there’s the guy that did the single most thing for me learning wise and particularly in writing. I, everybody in my family is good at writing, we’ll say, right? But at the end of the day, my writing wasn’t good until I had Mr. O’Rourke as a teacher, right? Obviously, he’s of Irish descent, clearly. And the Irish have some great authors, obviously. Poetic, are the tradition going there? I can point, I can articulate some of the things he did that made me a better writer. For sure. But none of those things capture what he did to make me a better writer. And I had another English teacher, Mr. Sokolowski, and he was a bit of a clown, but he wasn’t. You know, like, he had that clownish thing down, you know, but he wasn’t. I had a teacher like that. We used to do these crazy things. So Lowell’s a Mill City, right? So I’m at Lowell High School, the public high school at this point. I’m out of my Catholic school, unfortunately. And there’s all these mill buildings, these old mill buildings from the, you know, 1800s, late 1800s. Big buildings, they’re still there, they’re solid, right? A lot of them have been converted. Lowell was the first city to really do that en masse, right? So they’ve converted all these buildings, and there’s a whole college there called the Middlesex College. And he used to call it Middlesex Community Mill College. And he said, like many, many times, well, if you end up at Middlesex Community Mill College and you find my great grandmother’s finger, let me know. Because she lost her finger in one of those mills. Oh, yeah, right. And it’s just a sort of stupid clowny, like, what the hell is wrong with you? You’re a teacher. Yeah, yeah. And yet, I learned a lot from that guy. And I can’t tell you what or how. But I know he had this huge outsized impact. I mean, there’s a few events I can point to, but ultimately, I cannot communicate to you the how and the what on that. Like, I can’t do it. Yeah, it’s trying to make that. We, but we’re preferring conversational articulation as a substitute for community, real community, which is sharing a meal together. And I talk about this all the time, like, you think conversation is going to save the world. You’re preferring articulation over participation. That’s what you’re doing. You’re, you’re preferring the low resolution, lame ass, conversational participation to having a meal together, doing an art project together, right? Like, like, when Sally Jo works on something like the virtue cards, which are coming soon, by the way, the first four are done. Sally. When we participate with that, there are no arguments. Do we have disagreements? Of course we do. Quick, sometimes they’re like, now that that doesn’t look good at all, Sally. But they’re not arguments. They’re not debates. They’re not styles of conversation. They’re participation and improvement. We’re both going for the same damn thing. Sally wants it to look good. She needs feedback for that. If the feedback’s all positive, it’s not feedback, guys. You can’t just be nice to people. That’s enablement. Then you’re the problem. Yeah, you. When you don’t tell me that I seem a little off and angry, you’re not helping me. I had to turn it around on her. There’s no way around that. Yeah, I’ve noticed that with the feedback when doing the website. It is there’s no arguments, but there can be disagreements. But disagreement is generative. It’s like, oh, that thing isn’t the right color, but I’d like it to be this color. And it’s moving towards the positive. It will never be. Yeah, you did a bad job on that. You should try again. And even in that, you’re not making everything explicit again because you leave that room for the input. You’re just pointing out these things that need to be pointed out. When you try and describe how good this teacher was, you’re transgressing against the act of teaching and trying to compress it into words, merely explicit words. This is with everything human now. This is why you can have conversations about dancing, but guess what? Basically, nobody’s dancing. And of those people that are dancing, how many people are dancing together? Like less than a fraction of a percent probably in total, in total. Father Eric, welcome, sir. How is Catholic land? Catholic land is what it is. I had my first big liturgy with the bishop today as the master of ceremonies. Oh, congratulations. Yeah, yeah. So I’m figuring I am going to get some feedback on that one. No conversation and debate, just some good generative feedback. Good generative feedback sites. I wanted you to do it this way. I want you to do it that way. That’s not when you put my hat on, those sorts of things. But these things work well. It gets very complicated very quickly. What’s the Catholic insight on unconscious here? That must come up in confession. I’m just. Oh, sure. Yeah. Catholic insight on unconscious. Yeah, you’re a lot more likely to hear about habit. Right. Right. Like you’re just a cuss. So then this is the interesting thing. The word habit comes from the word habeo habere, which means to hold or to have something. So this is a stable quality that you have that you hold on to. And it’s got a much broader usage in medieval theology that it does in modern English. But I think where the rubber would really end up hitting the road is the things that are done repeatedly. Those make deep impressions on you. And it starts to develop a habit, either a virtuous or a vicious one. And so your habits can either incline you towards the good or it can draw you away from the good as such towards lesser goods. So yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. So you wouldn’t hear much about I mean, consciousness is really a very modern category. They don’t they don’t really talk about it at all. So. Right. So that’s as much insight as I can come up with at the drop of a hat. Yeah, no, I like that. Well, I mean, that goes back to my unconsciousness framing. Right. The framing forms your habits. Yes. Yeah. And then on the Greek side, I don’t know what it’s so have a have a I’ve the Latin side. I don’t actually know all that well, but I know on the Greek side, Aristotle has the thing of character and and habit. And in the Greek, those those words are spelled the same. And it’s just that so ethos is habit and ethos is character. So there’s that impression, that kind of lasting impression that’s made. And it seems that rather than pointing towards the unconscious, what’s what’s being looked at in both of those cases is what is done rather than necessarily kind of what’s motivating what is done insofar as kind of something that you can’t actually make explicit. Right. Well, they had spirit. Yeah, I knew all about spirits. They didn’t need to talk about motivation because all motivation was just spirits to them. And they weren’t concerned with where they came from because spirits are ethereal and religious. You’re not going to science them. You Muppet. Right. So they they knew right off the bat. They had it from day one. And I you know, I do I do like Elizabeth said, you know, best to dance. Well, best to sing maybe. Right. Elizabeth, we experienced that, Father Eric, we experienced that in D.C. with the singing. It’s like, wow, what a great way to open the day of conference was in song together. And that goes back to that breath training. Like, you don’t need breath training if you’re singing on a regular basis, because singing is breath training. Yes, but all the best monasteries do eight hours a day. Yeah, but they’re crazy people. But fair enough, they’re the ideal. I’m cool with crazy ideals. We need them, but also crazy. Based more like. Sign up, Adam, they’ll have you. I’m afraid. I’m afraid. They will have to be afraid. Fear is the correct response. Yes. No, too, too rigorous for me. No married life. I think it is the way for me. We’ll see. How do you navigate your habits? I’ll kick your ass then. How do you navigate your habits? How do you reorientate your habits? Well, I would say, well, again, how do you orientate your unconscious? And I would say, yeah, I mean, your habits are instantiated in your unconscious. And that’s where you need to meditate. That’s where you need to engage in absurdity so that you know the difference between being absurd and the real. I mean, one of the problems we have is that people are actually, unironically, probably unconsciously, but very clearly articulating the framework from well-known video games and saying the world works this way. And I’m like, no, dude, that’s GT5. Like, what are you talking about? That’s not, no, no, dude, that’s Call of Duty. That’s not how the world, that’s the storyline of some blah video game that I happen to know because I don’t play any of those games, but I do look at analyses of these things and I go, well, that’s an interesting analysis from somebody who played way too many hours of this video game and found all these things. But also they’re missing all these connections. And then I hear it and I go, you idiot, you don’t even understand where you came up with that framing from. And you can tell when people haven’t thought of things because there’s very simple examples where they don’t work. Like, oh, corporations are for profit. It’s like, really? Really? All of them, including the non-profit corporations or charities that are identical to corporations, because charity is a type of corporation. A non-profit corporation, oddly, is a type of corporation. Corporation is a type of cooperation. People are, multiple people are operating together. All cooperation is a corporation. Sorry. It’s like, you’re just missing how the world works because you’re putting something in either an economic or a political frame. You’re saying, oh, economics and corporations drags down the political or manipulates the political. No, no, no. There’s a fascinating phenomenon going on with video games and maybe this relates is that all first-person shooters are basically blending into the one game with the one gameplay, with the one style, with the one signifiers, with the one type of strategy and maps. Before, there was a huge difference. It’s more fast-paced, slow-paced, strategy-paced. You can use this as an analogy for the types of unconscious motivations where we want people to play our game, so we’ll make it similar to the other games. There’s more of an adoption rate, you could say, or more of an upkeep. It’s just between what style, aesthetics people prefer. That’s not why people play the game. People play the game because of the differences. Total War Rome is very different from Age of Empires, but what’s happening is the conscious line between what motivates people to participate in things is actually blurring, particularly first-person shooters. So much so that you can’t tell the difference between, is that this game or is that that game? But it’s worse, right? Because what’s really happening is the unconscious motivations are there and visible to those of us who see patterns, and the world will say, right? But when people are articulating how that game came to be or why that game came to be, they’re casting it in this propositional frame that’s much smaller than the motivations that were going on at the time. And then people are trying to follow that pattern. But that pattern necessarily is smaller, lower resolution, and wrong. It’s a map, and it’s a bad map. And then other people are trying to do that, and then you get a bunch of bad clones, right? And you can see this with all kinds of video games. So when Pac-Man first came out, it was a huge groundbreaking game. You just look at the history of video games, right? There were a handful of really good games. And you can see this. There’s a place in New Hampshire called FunSpot, and it builds itself as the largest arcade in the world. And they have all the old arcade games. And I do mean all of them. I mean, it’s got games that are nowhere. Dude, it’s heaven. I was up there when I was up last. I was up before I came to GST. Once in a while, I still have a dream that I’m at an arcade and I’m a little kid again. And well, so the interesting thing is there’s a handful of seminal games, like Asteroids, Pac-Man, which is groundbreaking, right? Donkey Kong, right? And then everybody searched to follow those patterns, but most Pac-Man clones failed. And not because they got sued, necessarily, although a lot of them got sued. All right. They failed because they weren’t any good because it was just Pac-Man all over again. And who wants to play the 50th version of Pac-Man? It’s like, oh, even the case with Miss Pac-Man. Was it just a flop because it was just female Pac-Man? Well, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You mean you mean this game? Yes. Oh, it works, by the way. That is a working version of Miss Pac-Man. It actually. No, no, it’s yeah. My friend gave this to me. Karen gave this to me. See? Oh, wow. Wow. That’s so cool. Yeah. And yeah, exactly. Exactly. Yeah. I mean, a lot of these things. And that’s even a branded version that has better ghosts with better programming because the original has a bug. And there’s some interesting stuff on. If you’re a computer geek, some interesting stuff on the bug in the original in the original board schematic, because it’s not exactly software. It’s only kind of software. Yeah. It turns out it’s not really software. It’s sort of software. It’s hardware implemented software. It gets it gets back in the day. There wasn’t such a line. Right. So it turns out that, you know, a lot of these patterns and they work because people try them because they’re novel. Right. But they’re based on an articulation. So like, if you think that, you know, Elon Musk is popular or whatever, because he made the dream of electric cars come true, then A, you’re a crazy person. And B, there’s so much more to it that the story you’re telling yourself is unhelpful to understand Elon Musk. And I do go over that. I have that a couple of videos, one of my ones on money and the other one on Elon Musk and Twitter. Like, maybe you really don’t understand what’s going on because maybe there’s a lot going on. And that’s where we get confused. There’s a lot going on. And when you have that much going on, it’s hard to know. I was talking to a top marketing guy here in Columbia, South Carolina, for some reason. He’s like, really good. Done big brand work with big brands for years. Very smart guy. Very smart. And he was saying, Oh, no, no, no. Elon Musk made a big mistake rebranding to X, because he didn’t talk to the advertisers first. And now he’s got a problem. Now that isn’t necessarily as big a problem as he thinks necessarily might be right. Not saying he’s wrong. But it is a problem that even I was like, nah, that won’t be an issue because I didn’t think about it. Like, at the scale of large advertisers who are paying that kind of money to be advertisers, the dynamic changes, a bunch of new rules appear. I can’t understand them. I need to track for this guy because he’s the guy who understands that scale. I don’t understand that scale. I know that it exists though. And it’s a way ahead of 90% of the population. For some reason, they don’t understand that other scales exist. Right? Like why do you have advertising money at all? Right? Like, Oh, advertising is habit hacking. That’s what you’re doing when you’re advertising to people. You’re actually trying to map your product to their habits and say, look, you can fit this product into your habits and routines and it will benefit you in some way. Whether that’s soda pop or shavers or yeah. Sorry. I got hacked by Crunchwrap sliders from Taco Bell. We all have to do that card with the Taco Bell at halftime during the game. And it tasted great. And it sort of depends. It depends, right? Because sometimes you want to create a new category and relate it to people. Right? And so now you’re creating new habits for them. Right? Because who before used to buy pre-packaged groceries so they could just make a meal. That’s an absurd thing to do. And we have a whole class of companies doing that and their marketing actually works well enough that those companies exist. And that’s weird. Like that’s a strange new pattern that has manifested as a result of advertising. Are you talking about like HelloFresh and that sort of thing? Yep. That’s crazy. It’s nutty. I mean, I’ve used those services before and I’m like highly uncomfortable with them. And I like things like that in general, right? Like I like, Oh, it’s all prepared. I don’t have to think about it. I can just go in and do it. But really it’s unnatural. And it’s kind of boring to be honest. It’s like, Oh, the top end chef made this. It’s like, well, yeah, except you can’t just take ingredients and be as good as the top end chef. That’s the first problem. Right? You can’t even take ingredients of the recipe and be as good as a top end chef. Right. That’s the thing. But this isn’t even that. This is the recipe. Plus things are cut up and proportioned correctly. Like you’re way ahead of a recipe. And they’re already cut off. Right. It still doesn’t work. I was under the impression that it was just like the core ingredients and instructions, how to put them together. Does it actually like dice up the vegetables and so on? Some of them do. Depends which service you get. Some of them are literally just throw it in the pan and like, you know, most of them, you cut it yourself. Well, and there’s that line of participation. Yeah. So there’s not much separation from that. And like one of those powder meals, we just add water, add milk, and it’s supposed to be like a protein meal. Right. But that’s what I mean. Like no participation or low participation in your meal is actually wrong. But people are following that pattern because they’re preferring this other pattern of efficiency or something stupid. And it’s like, you know, the thing is though, you can see these patterns collapsing. So on the Mark of Wisdom Discord server, we do have stuff. I have an important videos channel, which is not for my videos, because they have their own channel, because they’re beyond important, obviously, at least from the perspective of Mark of Wisdom. And in there, I posted a video from Robert Murray Smith. And I’ve been watching Robert Murray Smith for years. I love his stuff. He’s a crazy Brit. And what he does is he makes graphene in his kitchen, and he makes superconductors and solar cells. And now he’s right now he’s on the wind kick. So he’s showing you and he makes all kinds of things. He’s just a crazy person. So he makes, he’s making these windmills, right, to generate power. And he shows you how to make generators and how to wind your own coils and all kinds of all the cool stuff that I love. He does all this stuff. So we did this whole video. It’s very short. I think it’s six or eight minutes. And he’s talking about craftsmanship. And it’s all the language we normally use. I, you know, on my channel, you listen to with Paul Van der Kley, and so with Breveke and Peterson, it’s all the same language that Peugeot uses, right? It’s a bunch of that language. And he’s talking about how craftsmanship isn’t really building stuff out of parts, right? And the materials don’t matter. The care of the implementation of the thing matters. And I’m just like, man, this is bang on. What a great video. This is going in important videos, even though it’s, this guy isn’t in, he’s not a philosopher. He’s not even a scientist. Thank goodness. That’s what makes him good, right? He’s not, he’s not a religious person, right? Like it’s none of that. He’s basically an inventor and a tinkerer. Actually, I think the new tag for his channel is thinking and tinkering. And, and, you know, he’s getting very philosophical because you can’t not get, I would call it religious, but you can’t not get at that layer, right? You always end up there. But I see more and more things converging on that. And, and I’m going to see more and more things converging. And I do, I do still want to try to do a talk with Adam about this idea of kenergy and stuff, because like some of these trends are really interesting because they’re, they’re the unconscious distributed cognition manifestation of the expression of patterns that people are playing out. Right. And that goes into the stuff you talk about, Jesse, with, well, this artist was exhibiting this spirit. It’s like, yes, that was definitely happening. Yeah. So this is sort of like, you’re looking at this Barbie thing and the kenergy and you’re seeing that as like a, like a manifestation of material manifestation of something that’s been buzzing around for a while. No, let’s, let’s frame this correctly. Okay. Barbie is a movie for girls and women about Barbie dolls. Okay. The theme of the movie is basically the same as the Matrix. Right. There are two worlds. There’s that two worlds mythology. We can’t live in anywhere anymore, according to Verveke. Yeah, we can’t, huh? Are you going to get out of it? Is that what you’re going to do? Neo Platonists? Yeah, whatever. Gnostic crazy person. So the, what happens in the movie is Ken and Barbie break out of Barbie land because the real world affects the fantasy world. That’s why they leave. So they leave and then there’s this toxic masculinity, totally unrealistic, right? Where’s the fantasy world? Right. And then because Ken experiences that he goes, hey, we’re not treated like second class citizens as we are in fantasy Barbie land. He goes back to Barbie land early and he teaches all the Kens. To become tyrannical patriarchal, whatever’s and like they take over Barbie land in like four seconds, which I think is hysterically funny, right? People are identifying with that. And then a second God, Neveedin has to happen with the, with the new Eve comes in and tricks. Anyway, I don’t care. Why are people identifying with that? What the hell is going on? He’s literally me. Right. They’re saying he’s literally me. Well, what you think that right now in the actual like physical participatory world that you live in, that you are the Ken in the Barbie world. That’s how you’re identifying. You’re saying to me physically articulating publicly to strangers even like, like all of these are level, right? Like one thing to signal to your mate. It’s another thing to signal to your parents, right? It’s another thing to signal to all your friends. These are different signals. It’s another thing to signals you send to your team members that you only see once a week or twice a week, whatever. Those are different signals. When you’re signaling to the whole freaking internet, man, that’s a whole, like that’s a next level thing that’s going on. And you’re saying I identify as an NPC. That’s what you’re saying. And there’s, there’s another quote, it gets better. There’s a quote from the song in the movie of Ken sings where he says, here, I’m just Ken, but everywhere else I’m a 10. During his realization that I can, I can leave this place and then I could come back and, and, you know, go back and go out to the, to the real world, you know, to maybe find his true self. I have no idea. And then he comes back, breaks back into the Barbie world and takes it over. That’s, that’s as much as I know. I haven’t actually seen the film. So what, what is going on to some people identifying with this? And what I’m going to do, I think, is I’m going to go see the movie tomorrow. Me too. And then once I see it, because basically while you were there, father, VanderKlay was freaking insistent. I thought he was going to drag me by the collar and take me to go see it in DC. I think he told me three times, you have to see this movie. Now are you actually going to go see it? Oh yeah. The pirate captain. If people don’t understand this, but now that most movies have a subconscious, there, there is a second order effect in most films. Most good films have a subtext. Most good stories have a subtext, whether you’re able to see if you’re able to detect what the real story cycle is, or what the, you know, the, the, what the formal informal meaning is, cause that’s what’s happening with the Barbie movie is the, what you’re told is the formal meeting is Barbie, but what the actual informal meeting is, this is a movie about Ken. Because the rest of the movie is, you know, there is no meaningful point in Barbie that signifies Barbie’s logical progression. It becomes beginning, middle beginning again, but then it’s an undefined new beginning because she basically has to reinvent herself for a third time according to my research. So it’s not a movie about her because there’s no closure to her story cycle, but there is a, the meaning, the point, right, is Ken. Like you can, you can define what Barbie, that movie is by Ken and that’s what’s been going on in the, the internet space. Well, then you can, and you can see too the significance of this because Ben Shapiro, so I watched Van Du Kley’s video on it, right? And then he references Ben Shapiro’s video and Drinker’s video. I’d already seen Drinker’s video. So I watched Ben Shapiro’s video on it and I was like, well, that’s an interesting sort of evaluation and I know Ben Shapiro pretty well by this point and I’m like, yeah, well, you know, we know he’s missing stuff. Ben Shapiro did a second video on it with Brett Cooper, who’s like a 21 year old female, oddly. And like they had this discussion about the movie. They were not talking about seeing the same thing at all, at all. And then I was like, well, that’s interesting. Why would men and women see this movie completely differently? Like they didn’t even see the same thing. They didn’t place the same valence on the same scenes that they both saw. I was like, well, that’s interesting. So now it really is the Matrix because the thing about the Matrix and Jesse- I said this. …knuckle down and do the Matrix at some point, right? The thing about the Matrix is when you start talking to people about the Matrix movie and what they saw in it, you’re not going to find two people that saw the same thing. And that’s really interesting. It speaks to the depth of the movie, but it also speaks to the incoherence of the story because people are seeing what they want because their unconscious framing is getting satisfied by coherent pieces inside the story that they’re then narrativizing, because narrative is a template, into their own personal life. But they’re not getting the same story out of it. And Barbie just seems to be a hyperinflated version of that because men and women are both watching it, which is already weird. It’s a billion dollar movie. That’s kind of weird. And it has five endings. That’s a little strange for a movie. And yeah, there’s so much going on that can you even- And so the big question for me is, can I even track this film? Because there’s a lot of films like The Matrix that I thought I tracked. And then you hear Jonathan Tijose take and you’re like, how did I miss all of that? I’ve seen this movie literally 100 times. How interesting that there’s so much more there, right? And Barbie’s probably that type of movie. I mean, Van Der Kley is insistent, right? I’ve never seen him that insistent about anything. So that’s pretty impressive. One of my things, I’m not sure if this group is going to be on board with this, is that beliefs filter reality. So what you believe and what you maintain as a belief filters how you participate in phenomena, in reality, and in story too. So what you believe, you go into a story with sets of beliefs about the world, and then you filter the story or the phenomena through those beliefs. What ends up happening with anxiety is you have an anxiety about your beliefs, about your filters, about making sense of the world. The danger with all of modern stories is we’re actually on slightly unending beliefs that people feel. And they don’t have that filter. They can’t distinguish between what is the point or the message of the story, or what to believe anymore about yourself after the story. So you’re constantly going back into story, back into escapism to find your own beliefs, because you can’t make sense of the general world. You have to be constantly entertained in order to feel like you’re participating in something. Social media is now the greater extension of that. You’re participating in other people’s stories, taking on their beliefs. That’s one of them. The mirror? Oh yeah, oh yeah. The mirror? Mirror? The handheld mirror of snow white? That mirror? Jesus returned to Nazareth and spoke at their synagogue. The people said, is this not Mary’s son and the son of the carpenter are not his brothers and sisters here with us? And he was amazed at their lack of faith, and he performed no great deeds there except healing a few sick people. Yeah. The other thing is a prophet is never honored in his hometown. Yes, yes. Yeah, yeah. So what you believe. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So your beliefs absolutely do affect how you’re going to end up participating in reality. You could miss the Messiah. Yeah, right. I just want to say as well, it’s not, it’s not, this isn’t restricted to people looking into their mirrors. This is now spilling over into my Sunday breakfast. Okay. I found out about Barbie through good, fine young Catholic men whom I breakfast with after mass every Sunday back home. And that’s where I heard the term. He’s literally me. And so this is, I wish, I wish it were limited to just people kind of scrolling and posting on the internet. But unfortunately, I can’t, I can’t be left alone by it. I had, I was forced, I was forced to find out about Barbie. Well, this isn’t a good longtime friend of yours in confidence. Yeah, well, these are, these are, yeah, these are kind of more associates as opposed to my, my, my more intimate friends. Like that’s, he might be a new associate speaking to you in public though, right? Relatively speaking in public to a place where we frequent, right? People from there frequent. So this is, this could have happened anywhere among any company, you know, and maybe not the priest’s company, but that’s probably just because they wouldn’t expect the priest to get it. But if they thought the priest would get it, father Eric, right? Well, and that’d be like, he’s literally me. But that’s the unconscious framing is the belief. And that’s what’s being hijacked because you’re so busy trying to be conscious all the time, trying to be aware, trying to be rational and logical and reasonable and reason your way through everything in your life. The thing that actually moves you is moving you without any, any influence by your conscious mind. And that’s how you, that’s how you run into illogical behavior, right? Because all you do is frame switch. And that’s how you get, you know, the people going, well, you know, it’s my body, my choice when it comes to, you know, what I do with, with my pregnancy, but not what it, when it comes to shots and your body, then it’s my choice. It’s like, wait a minute, wait, wait, wait, hold on a second. Like, how does that work? Right? Anyway, it’s still my choice. It’s just my choice for you versus my choice for me. What? Like, that’s not logical, rational or reasonable. But that’s because they’re framing, they’re unconscious, their belief has been moved. And so the logic, reason, rationality doesn’t apply. It doesn’t work. It’s inconsistent. Right? This is, this is what Jesse was getting on about, which I, Jesse, I hope you noticed, I did manage to fit in the monologue. What is a clear conscience? A clear conscience is the lack of that sort of unprincipled, illogical behavior. Right? That’s what we’re talking about. The people who are like that, they all happen to be on the left, by the way, just a random coincidence, no, no correlation there. They’re unprincipled because they don’t have a clear conscience. Because the things they’re doing, the things they’re talking about, the embodiment that they have is inconsistent and they know it unconsciously. That’s why they have to take SSRIs. That’s why they have to take SSRIs. Right. Exactly. Well, many people, I have taken SSRIs, many people that say that when they do go on that drug trip long period of time, they feel like they have a filter and that they’re not able to detect what it is or what they’re being limited in or what they’re being trapped in, but they know they’re aware that their sense perception is quite low. And that can be good for a season. It can actually be helpful in some ways. But what you do with meditation is you’re actually doing that. You’re limiting your sense perception. Right. So there’s different levels. Yeah. I’m on SSRIs right now. And you’re right. There’s like, you can’t put your finger on it, but there’s like just listlessness and like something’s up. But I kind of exactly detect what it is because there’s a numbing and it’s not like a blanket being thrown and everything and given you for any, you’d be like, oh yeah, I’m suddenly happy. But it’s not quite much like I’m not fully completely depressed because you sort of can’t sense that depression. It’s more like we’re going to make you like an everything’s okay switch. So everything’s sort of okay. Can’t complain about the positives, but I can’t complain about the negatives. So it’s sort of, it’s like, I think Peterson says like talking about SSRIs, long-term shouldn’t be on them like six months, a year, more like a year or over. I’ve been advised to stand mine for about six months, I think. But it says when people are suicidal. Yes. I’m on one of the lighter ones, Lexapro. The tapering can go quite fast. I think it’s two weeks each cycle. I had a friend who was on a FXL and he did taper off still and he was getting like quite severe withdrawal symptoms for like two, three months. The integration that matters. You need to integrate to Mark’s point your anxieties into your life. Right. You need to have, if you integrate your anxieties too much, you throw yourself out of a routine, out of your habits to father Eric’s point. And you don’t know, you can’t map your day to day and your sense of purpose, orientation, because everything becomes anxious again. Like, am I doing the right things rather than, oh, okay, this is where I’m at? You’re right with that because before I was on them, I had a lot more anxiety flowing, but I was, at least anxiety was a thing and it was constant. Now that I’m on these, I’m getting anxiety over that there’s too much time in the day and I don’t know what to do. And I’m having to pad out the time by like watching a lot of TV and stuff like that. And it’s like, how did you get from an anxious and depressed mind to a functional mind where you’re ready to do whatever, but you don’t know what that whatever is? I can talk to that, but I’ll leave it for father Eric was about to say something. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, I don’t mean to throw shade at anybody who’s feeling the need to take these sorts of things, but I think we would all be in agreement that pills can’t be a good substitute for good morals. And so I guess that’s more what I was just pointing out was if you just try to numb out the incoherence and the problems that you’re causing in your own life with pills, that’s definitely a recipe for disaster. But if you got to use them as a bandaid, well, eventually the bandaid’s got to come off and the wounds got to heal properly. Otherwise, nothing good will happen. So, right. Yeah. I prefer disinfected. Sunlight is the best. I prefer disinfected. Sunlight is the best disinfected. Sure. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. If you got to stop the bleeding, got to stop the bleeding. Yeah, that’s true. It’s also the zombies. The zombie phenomena is quite relevant here, too, with the conscious unconscious. So and particularly with belief as well, right? Zombies don’t necessarily have agency. They kind of they are the collective unconscious. Strangely enough. Right. Well, they still act. That’s the problem. Right. Yeah. Right. Well, and also, how do they get that way? So they’re so busy being efficient, right? Moving towards this something. It’s usually knowledge. I just want to point out the connection between zombie and, Verveki points this out, right? Zombies go after brains, the source of knowledge. Gnosticism is about knowledge. I don’t know if you want to make that connection, whatever. They’re going after something with efficiency. Right. They’re single-minded in their purpose. So there’s all these patterns they’re playing out. And because of that, they’re ignoring what’s driving them. Right. And that’s how you get parasitic or parasitoid behavior inside of one of the most beautiful cities in Europe, like Edinburgh. Right. Like you just, you see that like it was, I cannot explain to you like how bad it was. I was like, I am actually surrounded by the closest thing that we have to zombies. And it’s a lot closer to what’s in those movies than I am comfortable with by margins, large margins, orders of magnitude. These people would eat your knowledge in a second. They would suck the life out of you. And at the same time, especially there, that’s the drug capital of Europe, by the way, Edinburgh, Scotland. At the same time, they will do a raid, right? Like maybe twice a month or whatever. And some of them every weekend, some of them every other weekend, whatever, doesn’t matter. Right. Where they’ll just do all kinds of drugs. And so they’re numb and then they’re not numb. They’re stuck in this pattern. They don’t even realize it. And it was very telling because one of the people that the friends of the friend I was visiting, she said, oh yeah, when, and she wasn’t, she didn’t grow up in the British Isles, we’ll say, I forget where she was from, but it wasn’t, it wasn’t from that part of Europe anyway. She said, the way you can tell how Brits are feeling is by asking about the weather. It was like, oh, how interesting. So their answer tells you what they care about the most. Because the weather and the weather there, like, it’s almost unfair to talk about the British Isles and weather. Because weather in every other part of the universe, as near as I can tell, has a regularity to it that does not exist certainly in Scotland. Like, the weather changes so often, I’m not sure it’s coherent enough to be referred to as a single thing. The number of 10 minute spells where it was raining and then 10 minute spells where it was absolutely sunny and gorgeous, like back to back, it exceeds infinity. Like, it was just insane. I could not deal with it. And I’m from New England where the weather changes quite a bit. Now I’m like, yeah, the weather never changes. It might as well be LA. Because once you get to Scotland, it’s like, holy crap, man. You know, like, I was, we were driving, we were taking a train on the train ride and went from sunny day, I saw nine rainbows in four and a half hours. There were snowflakes with no snow hitting the ground on the way up. On the way back, there was snow all over the place. And then there was sun and you could see the snow melt and there was rain. I mean, it was crazy, just absolutely insane weather. You know, like, we were in Inverness and in Inverness, we get to the, there’s a part in Inverness that just opens up and like next stop, Norway, you know, it’s just straight shot in the ocean. And then you can see, you know, the northern Scotland, the mountains, the Scottish mountains, there was like this 10 minute window, and I have pictures on the Nikon of the mountain covered in snow. It was absolutely gorgeous. And then we never saw those mountains again, my friends, never again. They were gone forever. You couldn’t even come close to, I was on the hill in the museum and the castle museum and stuff, and you could not see those mountains. We never saw those mountains again. I got this beautiful gift. And while I was there, at the one, at the one time we were like in the place that was closest, furthest north to the mountain, it just opened up. I got some beautiful pictures and it was gone again, you know, but the weather is so changing. It’s crazy. Have you guys ever seen Night of the Living Dead? Yes. A long time ago. No. The original? Original. Yeah, like 1968, I think. Yeah. The one about communism. I don’t know if it’s about harmony communism. So it’s really strange. The Russian revolution. That the zombies should be what people remember out of that movie. Yeah, the zombies are certainly a threat. They’re a major part of the plot. They move a lot of action, but that movie was much more about the real threat is these people around me. And the lack of, you know, trust and inability to cooperate with these people ultimately is what makes the movie into what it is. But people don’t remember that part of that movie. What they remember are this image of the zombie. It like it like it had hooked into subconsciously. It just hooked into our zeitgeist to the point where everybody knows what zombies are. Which and I think that’s originally like a Haitian word from like a voodoo voodoo spell or something. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So that was absolutely it’s like it’s like by 1968 our culture was absolutely primed to believe in large bodies of persons without agency, hundering after brains. Spirit possession. Hundering after knowledge. Yeah. Yeah. There’s the narcissism. Right. They’re so tired of in a sense being part of the system, the structures around them at the time that they see as oppressive that they find an escape in a horror movie. And yeah, the horror isn’t the zombies. Well, in both senses, it’s another phenomena of that’s literally me. Yeah. Wait. I’m the one that’s trying to break out of the house, break out of weight from the people that I don’t trust and gain knowledge. Right. And gain agency. But I also am the one that’s lacking agency and also have if I get killed, I will still continue on. The only way to end my agency is to actually do the headshot as well. So it’s another inverse. Oh, yeah. Just a point. I have to take the knowledge away. I have to destroy the source of the knowledge in order to be free. But at the same time, right. And the people trying to get agency, they get it by absorbing the source of knowledge of the people that have it. Right. And so what it’s really pointing to ultimately is the struggle with where you sit in the structure and the trade off of being part of a distributed cognition, which is not optional. You’re not an individual. You were never an individual, never going to be an individual. No one was ever an individual. That never happened. It’s not an option. We’re not born into a universe that has rules that allow us to be individuals. Right. And so what does that mean? That means that we have to struggle with our role in the distributed cognition, which is not just our role in the immediate community. It’s also our role in nature. Right. And we also have to struggle with our own unconscious because you can just see zombie movies as the internal struggle with the self. That’s very easy to see because you’re what’s your unconscious. What did I say in the monologue? The unconscious is the thing that takes care of all the day to day wrote stuff that you do, like your breathing and your heart rate. And adjusting your walking for the pain in your foot. You don’t even notice. That’s what your unconscious does. And you’re struggling with that in some sense. Because you want to know about that because maybe you have more agency because science or whatever. It could be dozens of reasons. And yet you rely on it. And so you can’t really destroy it. And that’s all wrapped up in the zombie messages. And I don’t think people notice that really. I don’t think they’re aware of what’s going on there because there’s a lot going on there. Adam, you wanted to say something? Yes. In relation to what you were saying about the Literally Me stuff, I didn’t just hear the phrase, He’s Literally Me made in reference to Ken. There was another character from a previous movie which still fits in with exactly what you just said there. And it was Joker. Yes. Yes. As in the recent crazy Joker. Yes. The Joaquin Phoenix Joker from 2016, 2017. That was such a good movie. It was a good movie. But that was the other character in which they said, He’s Literally Me. Now, of course, being young men, there’s a tinge of irony. But the problem, of course, is that people of my age tend to blur the lines between seriousness and irony to the point where, well, what are you being serious about? And what are you joking about? So, you know, when I heard that, I thought, it’s a bit of a funny joke. But then also at the same time, I thought, I really hope it’s just a joke, though. See, that’s why I think we should do a live stream about it. Because I just find that utterly fascinating. Maybe we can do that after I see Barbie. It’ll be even funnier. Yes, that’d be great. The interesting thing about the Joker movie is that that character lacks masculinity. He’s a completely feminized character. So much so that his ultimate reward is the recognition of status, which is not a masculine trait to fight up, literally to go bottom up, to fight the hierarchy, to unend the hierarchy. Yeah. Yeah. Beware. Beware. Right. If you have a painted face. We live in a society. Well, that’s a Sargon of a Kind video. I was watching, I was into Sargon at the time, Carl Benjamin at the time, right? And he saw the movie and he started this video on Joker. And I was just, like I said, I’m a casual observer. I’m not ensconced in this ridiculous culture stuff. Right. So he starts the video talking about Joker. And I really like some of his movie analyses. Right. And he says, you need to go out and watch this film immediately. And I went, OK. And I paused the video and I got in my car and I drove to the movie theater and I watched it immediately. And then I came back and watched this analysis. I was like, OK, yes, sir. Right. And that’s like, that’s part of proper relationship to the hierarchy. Like, here’s the guy that I’m relying on for this analysis. And what he’s saying is, don’t rely on my analysis, go see the movie and then watch my analysis. And instead of going, no, man, I’m going to fight the power. I went, yes, sir. And I went and did it. I did it immediately. It wasn’t, it just happened to be playing in 20 minutes. And I’m like, OK, well, the movie theater is like 10 minutes away. So I guess I’m going there now. And tickets were readily available. So I just walked into the damn movie theater and it was fantastic. And that’s the thing is that when you’re able to participate in that way, that changes everything. Because now the intended experience is the experience of the person doing the video. He didn’t intend you to watch his breakdown of the Joker without having seen the movie, which is so interesting because usually that’s what you do. Like, oh, yeah, I’m just like, I do those critical drinker. I don’t watch any movies now without watching critical drinkers review first. Any. I refuse because he’s a good filter. I’m like, OK, he’s actually talking about sometimes he talks about things that I’m like, yeah, I don’t care. But he’s so good at honing in on what makes a good film and why that I can go, oh, OK, that’s definitely a movie based on the why that I can put on my list. This is why I’ll never watch that movie. Right. And then look, you can argue that he missed it with Barbie, which is why I had written it off until Vanderclay’s video where I was like, oh, wait a minute. So we have a fight for top down power from above. If you want to put it in that stupid narrative that’s wrong. Right. It’s like, oh, no, no, no. Vanderclay made a much more convincing argument. It wasn’t Vanderclay’s argument either. He led me down the path to this other video that he didn’t reference where I saw a female perspective and a male perspective at the same time, since I know Shapiro so well, I knew, oh, no, no, no, then would miss all this stuff. And she’s right. So now it’s like, oh, well, now I have to see it for myself. And had I seen it without that context, I think that would have been an error, too. This stuff is very complex. You know, it’s not straight forward. You watch the movie and not know, know framing in the same way that I watched the Matrix over 100 times. And then the joke comes out like, close my mind, interpretive frames that I didn’t have. And I, I honestly thought I had all of them. I was like, yeah, no one’s going to find a thing in the Matrix. I haven’t thought of. Right. On the topic of framing, one of the discords I’m on, was one of the members is sort of like, what wouldn’t say misogynist, but sort of like, he doesn’t get women in a way. And sort of aloof. And he said, it was pressed up saying, we’re expecting this guy to write a review of the Barbie movie, like stay tuned. And he wrote one and it was decent enough. And then the guys on the VC, a day later, and talking about the movie, and one of the admins says, oh, so if you’re your sister, or like, you should know of like someone who’s played with Barbies, you know how they would have a Barbie, and then they’d have their favorite Barbie. But then there’s also a Barbie where you cut her hair and like, try to like, put tattoos on her or like, you modify her. And there’s a reference to that in the Barbie movie with the, I think it’s rape victim or something. She has a shorter hair. She’s got like, a different style of clothes. And that’s the sort of experiment of Barbie. And he just goes, no, like there’s a favorite Barbie, that’s a thing. He just totally did not have that frame of reference. And where if you see the movie, you’re a woman, you’re sort of watching a different movie and going with different pretexts. And there was another thing I was trying to remember, skipping me. I like that apparently there’s a reference or a shot by shot remake of 2001 of Space Odyssey at the start. Bad or good. I haven’t seen it, but like, okay. You can see on the trailer. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Spoilers. But basically it’s a cinematic abortion to start off. Okay. All right. Good. Smash the dolls. And then you worship, you worship what exactly? Well, somebody who’s sexually convenient for a powerful man. The point of that scene though, is that it’s not the ape fighting the war. It’s not about the weapons that are used in that scene. It’s about the jump cut. It’s about the contradiction between the bone that the tool that they’ve invented, the apes, and it goes up into the air and it jumps cut to essentially a military vessel flying in space. So it’s the contradiction. And what happens with the new movie? There’s no contradiction. Right. Which is basically inverted propaganda. Right. It says the brand is now the ultimate weapon. No longer this sort of threat of nuclear destruction. It’s actually the corporate message, the corporate logo. Right. The nuclear destruction is now the corporate. Right. And that is part of the theme. Right. Is that the corporation alternatively is good and bad. Right. It keeps flipping. And so there’s all this flipping in the movie. That’s why I can’t wait to see it. Because there’s all these flips in the movie. And I’m like, there’s got to be some serious unconscious. And that’s the thing that I was talking about. Right. Like the world’s so complex that your unconscious is manifesting all the time. And at the same time, it’s being informed by all these things that people don’t intend. Right. So the Barbie movie doesn’t intend to be attractive to men. And yet that’s how you get to a billion dollars, my friend. If you only appeal to half the movie going public, you ain’t getting to a billion dollars no matter what you do. So something went horribly wrong. And it’s interesting because at the same time Shapiro says right up front, and so did Drinker, brilliant marketing on the movie. And yet the marketing that was brilliant wouldn’t appeal to men at all, even a little bit. So the reason why the movie kept going ironically passed what Ben Shapiro and critical drinker predicted, which is past the first week, is because they attracted the men. And then the question is why were men ever attracted to this movie? And I would argue, well, there’s the problem with equality. Once you make men and women equal, or tell them they’re supposed to be equal, and the men start acting as if they’re attracted to female things, there is no marketing to females anymore because the equality is there. Now that doesn’t happen on a huge scale, but it happens on enough of a scale that suddenly, yeah, you know, it’s cheap marketing within the equality world because you can market the men and women the same, cost less money, right? That’s fantastic. Also, you’re trapped in the system you were trying to escape, but you know, I mean, that happens. What marketing was there besides just the trailers, because I wasn’t really aware of any marketing. It was well, the trailers are part of the marketing, but there was a ton of marketing. Yeah, very brilliant. Like the trailer cuts are not, they don’t appeal to men. I saw the trailer cuts. Like really, this is not a, why are men going to this movie based on those trailers? They’re not going based on those trailers, or some of them are, and then they’re telling their friends, Nuna, you got to see this Kennergy thing, right? Because that’s what’s happening. I think maybe the secondhand marketing in a way, because for me, I only found out about the existence of the movie. That is marketing. Yeah, the secondhand is the marketing. Secondhand marketing is marketing now. There is no, what you think, paper advertising or that, that doesn’t exist anymore. Well, so I’ll try to point to social media earlier. People talking about this on Instagram. Social media marketing is the highest form of influence. No, but just people discussing on Instagram, you were saying that’s like down stream of like the core voice. That is the stream. That is the stream. Yeah. People do not understand this. Like look at the numbers. No one’s watching trailers. No one’s watching the mainstream media. No one’s paying attention to the critics. And they haven’t been for 15 years. So 15 years ago, it was already dead. It was already dead. YouTube moves more of the market. I mean, Joe Rogan is the biggest podcast for a reason, right? Like that happened a long time ago at this point. And before that, like Carl Benjamin, Carl Benjamin made so much money that despite being demonetized by YouTube and demonetized by Facebook and demonetized by everybody, that he was able to fund a media company on his own dime. That’s how wealthy he became despite every single instantiated institution denying him any sort of credit press or positive affects. That’s amazing. And then people want to come in and tell me, well, you know, what’s in the, what CNN said. And I’m like, nobody’s watching CNN. You’re delusional if you think they’re having an influence. They’re not. And you could say, well, they’re influencing the most powerful people. Yeah, maybe. But that ain’t working because everybody else is like, screw you people. We hate you. It’s just not working. And that’s when people talk about civil war in the United States, that’s what they’re talking about. They’re talking about the split between the elite who are now elite and disconnected and everybody else. And it is everybody else. It’s a tiny number of people. It’s a tiny number. It’s not a small number of people. It’s a tiny number of people that are watching mainstream media. And that’s just like their own published numbers show this. This is not some imaginary thing that nobody knows about. You can go look at the freaking numbers, man, and look at the decline over the past 25 years. And very interesting things show up in those numbers. Why did Peterson become popular? What’s going on there? Well, he’s filling a void from something. Where’d that void come from? Something had to have moved out of the way ahead of time. He didn’t push anything out of the way. He didn’t have to. Carl Benjamin, when he was Sargon of Akkad, same thing. There was a hunger out there for this stuff. He’s just catching into the spirit and moving the zeitgeist in that way. And this already happened. And people just aren’t catching up to the fact that that’s what’s happened. Even with PewDiePie. How much money did PewDiePie make? Holy sheep. Yeah. Now he’s colonizing Japan. Right? Right. And now we’re just talking to a tiny audience on a YouTube channel. Yeah. I like this better. The outliers changed the world. A small group of people harmonizing together will essentially change the world. Harmonize. There’s often a joke between the old Russian lady or the old patriarch. It’s like all the sins of the world and there’s this one little lady praying for this. And it’s holding back the flood of the… I know she’s seen that meme. The entire Catholic Counter-Reformation in the 16th century was like 12 or 15 people. Everybody just went along with it because that’s what we needed at that time. Yeah. Taleb talks about this in his books, about the tyranny of the small number of people. Right? And the story that he tells is he’s at this event, flaneuring as he does. And what happens is one of his Jewish friends comes in and he’s like, oh, you’re Orthodox. Can you eat the food here? Can I get you a drink? And what kind of drink can you drink? And he’s like, oh, I can drink any of the drinks. And he’s like, what? And he’s like, well, yeah, all drinks are kosher. And he’s like, wait a minute, that can’t be true. Jews are like 13% of the U.S. population. Why the hell would all drinks be kosher? And then it just turns out because it’s a matter of cost and efficiency. It doesn’t make any sense for them to not just make all drinks kosher. Right? It’s cheaper for them to do that than it is to try to make 13% of the drinks kosher and target the market and get the righteous to drink bullshit. It’s way cheaper to just make it right. And then the Jews benefit because the rabbis can make things kosher in charge of portion to these large corporations to make sure all the milk is kosher. Neon Genesis. Yeah, we’ve got a neon Genesis event and I know that’s Andre’s evangelism. Evangelion. Yeah, whatever it’s called. Yeah, but what’s the comment? Oh, he’s just saying Evangelion is like huge. And 650% plus of the population of Japan watched it easily. At least. At least. That’s a low number right there. Yeah. Basically, all the young people in Japan watched it, were influenced it. And I’ll just point out, look, the birth crisis has everything in the world to do with the movie that Jesse pointed to, which is much more to the point of the whole ethos behind the meaning crisis. So the meaning crisis has already reached its end, we’ll say, in Japan. Right. And that goes in the shell, the first 11 seconds of that movie, it just all came flooding into my brain somehow. And I was like, there it is. Like, I couldn’t even conceive. Before I saw that movie, I couldn’t conceive of Japan desacralizing the feminine. Then I was like, when did this movie come out? And they desacralize the feminine in this movie. And then the entire movie is a discussion about where is humanity? And how does it exist? And how many parts do you have to have inserted into you before you’re not human anymore? And oh, by the way, when you got the first part inserted into you, maybe that’s when you lost your humanity, huh? I don’t know. Maybe it was the train, like the whole movies of philosophical discussion about her. And the hero is a woman. And she’s powerful, not precious. And she’s naked in the beginning, right? She’s desacralized. Immediately, the preciousness is gone from her. And I was just like, holy crap. And then you put that in the context of Sticks, Mr. Roboto, right? And that whole album. And you’re like, there’s the meaning crisis unfolding in Japan at an accelerated rate. So we see the end of the meaning crisis in Japan right now. And you can point to Akira, too. Absolutely. Wonderful. Wonderful. What a fantastic film. But there’s no hint of the divine feminine in Akira, certainly not the desacralization of feminine the way there is in Ghost in the Shell. Ghost in the Shell is like a freaking gut punch. It’s a gut punch for the meaning crisis. It’s a gut punch for the intimacy crisis. Like everything intimacy crisis is right there. It’s right there. And it’s that manifestation of the loss of these ability to make these connections. They’re actually talking about the inability to connect with one another in Ghost in the Shell. It’s actually what they’re discussing. It’s as clear as day. If you haven’t seen it, it’s a must watch. I mean, that was 10 out of 10, Jesse, knocked it right out of the park. Almost killed me because I was like, what’s going on? Like all this stuff flooding in instantly. And I was like, wow, we’re just watching the movie going like, this is horrifying. This is the most horrifying film I’ve ever seen in my life. This is like, this is our destiny. If we keep going down this meaning crisis path. Well, there’s actually a deeper film. This is two other deeper films. If you really want to, if you really, really want to have an evening, you watch Ghost in the Shell, Battle Royale, Vanilla Sky, Battle Royale to do with the teenage rebellion and Vanilla Sky to talk about a culture that eats itself, tries to replicate itself in the dream world. And even in the dream world, they can’t replicate itself. And then if you really want the most, yeah. What’s the last one? Curious. I’m not going to say that. I’ll say that one offline. So yeah, tell me. Battle Royale. I don’t think you’ve told me that one before. Okay. So Battle Royale is about. That’s where Fortnite comes from. That’s where all those games that genre. Battle Royale after that film. Yeah. Yeah. I know. I know, man. Really? Jesse, you’re a better place to tell them. Yeah. I like to give people hope. I really like to give people hope. Battle Royale is the most depressing movie you’ll ever watch. It will manipulate you, it will make you feel sad, it will make you, but essentially in some ways it’s so dark that the light can almost not shine through it. It’s towards the end, but essentially the government is trying to make it look like a, the government imposes a new program where random teenagers on school buses can get instantly adopted, thrown into a theme park like Jurassic Park, and they got strapped on I think it’s your neck colors. And so the idea is that it’s a survivor game. You have to survive the 24 hours. And if you don’t, if you, if no one kills each other, there can only be one winner by the end of the game, the end of the 24 hour period. If there are more than one people left, you all die. And good luck. Here’s some weapons. And it’s all done in this cutesy, kawaii, Japanese animation that they get to, yeah, that’s how they get introduced to it. And then so it becomes this existential dilemma. Do I kill my best friend? Can I trust if these people used to be my schoolmates? But now if you do, I trust, should we overthrow the government? Can we all work together? Who are these outsiders coming in? The people that played the game before? And then that has a hopeful ending in the sense that they do end up, some of them do end up working out. No, it’s better to either die or to work together to get outside of the game. And that does happen, but it only happens temporarily because there’s a sequel and sequel. Yeah, that’s not really. So that spawns these video games, Adam? That actually happens? Yes. That’s how they name the genre. So Fortnite, Battleground, all of these, the generic title, the genre title for it is called Battle Royale because of that film. Now, I don’t know, probably the games got the original inspiration from the movie. You know, you dropped into exactly, you’re dropped into a place. You’ve got scarce resources and you’ve got to be the one guy who makes it out alive. So yeah. Oh, wow. Okay. So that’s all loss of, like, when people talk about trust and how can I trust? Trust is a function of intimacy, you muppets. How do you not know this? I’m just sitting there like every time someone says trust, I’m like, do I tell them? And I’m like, nah, they wouldn’t get it. So I don’t even go like intimacy crisis confirmed. But every time somebody checks about trust, I’m like, yeah, that’s intimacy crisis. Like that’s beyond meaning crisis or before meaning crisis. Yeah. Yeah. That’s fascinating. So that is what it is. Like we can’t depend on the structures around us and we can’t depend on each other. I mean, I would argue it goes the other way around, but that’s a much harder we’ll get there someday maybe in either the videos. The hopeful thing in the film is that the nerds end up working out how to take off the, they work out how to undo the technology. So it’s actually kind of, it’s quite pessimistic in some sense that, you know, it’s not the warriors, it’s society, it’s actually the nerds. Once the nerds figure out how to get basically how to turn the internet off, because the internet is actually symbolized by the net color. Once the nerds, you know, it’s kind of, yeah. That’s the subversion of the world. The Zani also knows that. Revenge of the nerds is the version of the natural order. That’s also tragic. And that’s all. Yeah, that does make it worse. Yeah. The original battle royale game was a PUBG, which I think was actually the first. That’s right. But there’s an additional context to that. Again, it’s a battle royale game, that’s what started it all off. But there’s an interesting, interesting extra bit of context that I forgot about, which is it’s interesting that it’s called a battle royale game and not a hunger games game. Because there is, there is the history, there is like a history, there is the popularity of the hunger games, but that’s not how the genre was called. But just sounds dumb. Hunger games is that for women. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. That’s all it is. Yeah. Yeah. No, hunger games is about something different. No, it’s also about that. Like it’s a, yeah. The audience for that was largely, I’m pretty sure, was largely. Yeah. I don’t think anything. I think the chasm between battle royale and hunger games, like they are saying very different. The Japanese with battle royale, it’s not the individual savior that saves itself. The original savior of battle royale really is there. It’s the nerds subverting the natural order that that in and of itself kind of lowers everything down to a worst level. But nerds subverting the natural order. But nerds subverting the natural order. Yeah. But that’s all false. Like nerds subverting the natural order is gnosticism. Like overtly gnosticism. Knowledge is the thing that’s important. Knowledge is the thing that saves the world. It’s smart people. Smart people are lazy. They don’t do anything. They’ll use this. Get rid of them all. Like just whatever. Dump them in the ocean. It’ll be fine. Like everything will be better. I promise. Like, no, you need people that are kind of work the land because that’s where your food comes from. You don’t need people who are going to be super smart. That’s not, that’s not, it’s not, it’s not helpful. Right. And again, we get this over signaling from like, oh, smart person discovered panacele. Almost always a lie, by the way. But also over signaled. And then it’s like, oh yeah, well really we’re all held together by these philosophers or these scientists. So that’s why we need to trust the science. That’s how you get trust. You know, you get trust. You put it on the blockchain. Blockchain solves the trust. That’s the whole Bitcoin argument. No, really. I’ve read the paper. That’s the whole argument. How do we get trust? We don’t trust the government with our currency. I just had a big freaking argument on Twitter about currency over the past couple of days. Like these people do not understand how money works. Right. And it’s like, they just don’t get it. But that’s the, that’s the intimacy crisis is that we can’t, you know, we can’t trust. And that’s the issue is that we can’t trust. But that’s a function of intimacy. And that’s really the sort of the unconscious sort of problem, right? Is that we don’t have the ability to have the right level of intimacy that supports the right level of trust that allows us all to cohere and get along together. So yeah, I mean, I think that’s a good place to wrap it up since I’m all about the intimacy crisis. And I’m going to go in sort of random order here. Father Eric, closing statements for our unconscious stream. And I mean, you can cover pretty much anything, but what you got for us on the way out before we close down the stream? Never believe your own propaganda. I like, I like the irony there. Andre, what you got for closing statements? I agree with the propaganda, Father Eric. Nice, nice. All right, Adam, since Jesse’s not back yet, you better get back soon. Go ahead, Adam. Yes, Jesse. Nice, long wrap up for Jesse. So what are we to think of the unconscious? Nothing, I think it’s not worth it’s not worth the attention because you have no control over it. Focus on your habits and building character in the Latin, the story traditional Latin Christian way, which of course, I just, by that, of course, I just mean Catholic, but then you could just point back to Aristotle and say he had it as well, like he’s pointing to the same thing. And there’s that. And let’s dovetail that with them with battle royale. What happens when you pay attention to your subconscious or try to pay attention to something perhaps that you don’t have control over? I don’t know, maybe that crashes your society. This is, this is, I’m just throwing, I’m throwing darts here. And maybe by crashing your society, you know, it doesn’t really, it doesn’t really make the question of whether you have an unconscious matter at the end of the day, even more so because nothing’s happening. We’re trusting the smart, we’re trusting the smart people, the people with knowledge and somehow using that as a substitute for participation, which yeah, no, you don’t just, just do stuff. Just go out there and do stuff. Go out and dance, everyone listening, go ahead and try and you don’t even have to do lessons. That’s too explicit, talking about explicit and implicit. You just got to just do the human thing and trust, trust, you have to trust the way you were made. Yeah. Yeah. So that’s, that’s where I’ll leave it. That’s great. I like that. That’s really good. Jesse, what’s your, what’s your wrap up for the screen here? Here’s some notes I’ve found. And again, I have a model for conscious, having a good conscience is having good direction or good aim. When you’re, and I’ll need to talk about this at the other time. I’ll go to my other sets of notes. So I found that goals are good for planning your progress and systems are good for actually making progress. Goals can provide direction and even push you forward in the short term, but it’s the virtues and values that matter. It’s the embodiment. It’s the, it’s the habitual state in the routine that matters is those managing those beliefs, what you do every day, how you embody things, where you’re aiming at, how you participate with others in the world. These are all things we’re talking about. That’s what navigates your unconscious desires. You want to aim at something in the world, you make it a routine, you make it every day. It’s the continual progress rise, the continual challenges that build your life. The goal is just a short term change. Ultimately, what happens once you’ve reached that goal, you’re still stuck with the same life. So it’s about changing your life through the mundane in some sense. And that’s what makes you holy. That’s what helps you achieve more than happiness, but contentment. That’s what’s just right for. Oh, I like that. That’s good. That’s good. Nick, SPQR, Adam, I don’t know what SPQR is, but there it is. So look, yeah, I mean, the way to understand your unconscious is that that’s most of your life. It’s most of what’s running everything around you. And the way to control it partially is habits. It’s paying some attention to it, but not getting stuck in trying to control it. Because you have a very limited control over it, because it’s the thing that’s controlling you. But look, you can shut off your notifications. You can control some of the signals so you’re not overwhelming your unconscious. And that can help shape you. Yeah, you could get a light phone like Father Eric, which is the craziest phone ever, but also highly recommended, unless you’re lost in the way. And then in which case you need tools like compasses and maybe backup batteries and flashlights. It’d be great to have that all in one place. So look, you can’t wrangle your unconscious alone. That isn’t going to happen. I’m not saying that the Peterson individualistic approach, the stoic individual approach doesn’t help. It’s one step on the way. You should take that step. You can’t end there. You can’t see your unconscious clearly. You’ll never be able to. You need other people to help you. And the closer they are to you, the more they can help you. The more annoying they are at the same time. But also the more they can help you. That’s the trade-off. That’s part of the trade-off. There’s more trade-offs, but that’s part of the trade-off. And that’s what you need to pay attention to, is that you’re not an individual. You can’t do this by yourself. And there’s no reason why you should struggle that much anyway. It’s a lot easier, despite the annoyance of having other people around telling you things, to have other people around to tell you things. And that’s the bottom line, is that the way to re-enchant the world and to wrangle your unconscious and to know your beliefs in a way that can align with things you say, for example, in other words, you could have a clear conscience, is to engage not just in the process of managing your own habits, but also in the process of trusting other people to help you. Even though they’ll betray you, because everybody betrays you. Your whole body betrays you, because eventually you break down and die. So you’re not getting out of that anyway. You might as well just engage with practices with other people, like singing in public, book clubs, like the Plato Republic Book Club tomorrow morning, we’re going to be doing. And memorizing poetry together, right? Having a meal together, dancing, you should engage in these things, because that will help you. That will help you. Meditation will help you, sure, but having other people to engage with, even meditating in a group is way better than meditating on your own. And that’s what’s going to help you. And I think that we’ve got to pick a topic for next week, but we’ll kind of work on that and it’ll be a nice surprise. And I want to thank everybody for participating in this limited way, but it’s better than nothing. And hopefully it’ll inspire you to get out and sort of participate in a bigger way. Right? And oh yeah, go on a pilgrimage, says Louis. Yes, go on a pilgrimage. I’m going on a pilgrimage to California next week, which is why there won’t be a stream next week, but the week after we’ll get a stream going. And these things are important, right? They’re important. They’re important modes of participation. So I want to thank everybody for participating. And hopefully in a couple of weeks we’ll do another stream and we’ll see what we come up with for a topic. And look, I’m very grateful for your time and attention. I hope you got something out of it and watch all my videos because I have a lot of them and I need more watch hours. And then I can monetize. We’re very close. We’re very close. Thank you everybody. See you soon.