11:45
another way of thinking about it you
could identify with what you understand
that’s what ideologues do
you could
identify with you don’t with what you
don’t understand and that’s what sort of
seekers after truth identify with or you
could identify with the process of
moving between those states you know
sometimes you know what you’re doing you
know where you are you you you’re you’re
in control and and and you can become
arrogant and identify with that and then
become too static about it right or you
can be in despair and everything is
chaotic and you can identify with that
in which case you’re not listing or you
can view yourself as the thing that
moves across the transformations and
that’s that’s the right way to to
conceptualize yourself is your the thing
that maintains constancy across
transformations one imagines that your
experience with the controversies around..
18:19
ideologically you reject to these
taxonomy and you identify basically on
the base on the basis of research like
empiricism in a sense you can say like
you know I’m an open-minded tough person
this language is clinical psychology so
your faith is clinical psychology
average well we’ve done a fair bit of
research in my lab on yes the
temperamental predictors of political
predisposition and we can predict what
parties people are going to align
themselves with by studying their
personality so liberal types liberal
left types are high in a trait called
openness and open people you’re a very
open person and you can tell because you
think laterally you know you have an
idea and then it reminds you of a whole
bunch of other ideas and so you’ll move
laterally across ideas and a more
conservative person they’ll stay within
the category you know and so your
conversational style is is marked by by
divergences now that’s actually called
divergent thinking it’s a hallmark of
three goodie
well it’s good if you want to be
creative the problem with there’s
there’s a price for everything hey the
price for creativity is that it’s hard
to catalyze an identity because you’re
interested in everything that’s the
first thing and your interest will flip
from one thing to another so one of the
problems that creative people have while
they have to one is they have a hard
time establishing an identity and the
second is they have a hard time
monetizing their creativity it’s very
difficult to be a creative person and
make money you can make money for other
people but usually you’re dead by them
so it’s not very helpful for you Jordan
both of those problems are as a result
of external structures the imposition of
external structures on the individual ie
make money
you know a problem of capitalism and you
know commerce more broadly and the other
one of identity similarly you know
something is is there a sort of a
peculiar contradiction in around
identity in that like it seems to be on
one level that you reject taxonomy so
you’re saying that these systems eg if
you say women are being paid less money
your argument would be we’ll hold on a
minute there are other factors other
than gender it here exact agree later
today argument it’s a funny thing
because the intersectional feminists
always always claim that you should take
other factors into account right woman
man isn’t enough yeah black isn’t enough
well there’s a there’s a pay gap between
men and women but it’s not only to due
to gender stood all sorts of things and
you have to take them into account
so it’s really an intersectional
argument no one’s grateful for it he’s
an intersectional argument so I like so
do you feel then cuz what I sense he’s
happening like trying to understand
where like our worldviews would align
and where potentially there would be
opposition between you and I well I’m
totally because it seems to in looking
at your work you say oh I don’t agree
with the way that this information is
being compiled I don’t agree with the
assumptions that you’re trying to saddle
that piece of data with it seems to me26:50
didn’t understand that truth comes in
different forms depending on its
application it’s a tricky thingthere’s the truths that apply when you’re
attempting to describe the
transformations of the material world
and there’sthe truths that apply when
you’re trying to determine how it is
that you should act while you’re alive
and those obviously those have to come
into alignment but they’re not in
alignment right now and my sense and
this is a sense that’s being developed
at least in part from reading the great
psychoanalysts is that fictional
accounts metafictional accounts even
like biblical columns which are
mythological are stories about how it is
that people should act not stories about
what the material structure of the world
is like this is also where the
fundamentalists have it wrong as far as
I’m concerned because the
fundamentalists like to think that the
account in Genesis is a scientific
theory it can be started up against
other scientific theory short they are
materializing the myth it yes that’s
right
she’s unhelpful well it’s not a help
well first of all it’s not doesn’t even
make any sense because the materialist
types in any real sense weren’t around
until about 500 years ago right this was
only set by light heart and Descartes
and and bacon and well Galileo was
another player but those were the two
the two major players established the
scientific method there weren’t
scientists before then I mean there were
very intelligent people who could
analyze the structure of the world the
ancient Greeks were obviously very
rational and capable of philosophy but
there was no science until 500 years ago
and so obviously the people who wrote
Genesis weren’t scientists because there
weren’t any scientists so whatever and I
also think that though the world they
described is much more it’s much better
considered the world of experience than
the world of material reality and well
look here’s an idea you can you can try
this one on
besides I’d be trying this on audiences
for quite a long time so modern people
say they think the world is made out of
things but if you watch them that’s not
how they act they act like the world is
made out of potential and so they’ll
even say things to each other like
you’re not living up to your potential
you might say well what is this
potential that you’re talking about you
can’t doesn’t have a color doesn’t have
a shape it doesn’t have a mass it
29:17
doesn’t have a size I think there’s
29:19
nothing about it that’s that has a
29:20
material a material element yet you
29:25
believe that you’re not living up to
29:27
your potential everyone feels guilty
29:28
about that if someone accuses you of
29:30
that you feel bad about it so then I
29:32
might say well you also live not as if
29:34
you confront the world of things but as
29:35
if you confront a world of possibility
29:37
and you hold each other accountable that
29:39
way because I could say well you’re not
29:41
making all the use of the possibility
29:44
that’s presented to you because you’re
29:45
not living problem you’re not living
29:46
honestly you’re not aiming high enough
29:49
you’re not making everything of that
29:50
potential that might be made so what’s
29:53
that potential well in religious stories
29:55
that potential and you see this in the
29:57
first story in Genesis is that potential
30:00
is what God creates order out of at the
30:02
beginning of time that’s the idea that’s
30:04
expressed in that book is that there’s a
30:06
potential whatever that is and that
30:09
something acts on it to bring it into
30:12
reality there’s a deeper idea in there
30:14
to which which is a profound idea which
30:16
is that the potential the actuality that
30:19
you bring out of potential with truth is
30:23
good and so there’s an ethical element
30:26
to the story as well and I actually
30:27
think that that’s that’s a great truth I
30:30
do believe that’s the case that the
30:31
reality you bring out of potential with
30:33
truth is good and I think that’s one of
30:36
the most that’s one of the most profound
30:38
discoveries of humanity the ability to
30:41
articulate that idea was articulated in
30:44
the first chapter in Genesis it’s a
30:45
brilliant idea that’s associated with
30:47
the idea that human beings are made in
30:50
the image of God because God is that
30:53
which calls reality into being out of
30:56
potential but each of us do that as well
30:58
in a small way from that seems to me to
31:00
just be true of course all things that
31:02
are in the
31:03
fest world will once unmanifest right
31:05
and many of the things that are
31:06
unmanifest now will become manifest and
31:08
we could choose that to some degree we
31:10
have agency well we seem to yeah we do
31:14
yeah well you know if I treat you like
31:16
you don’t have agency you don’t like it
31:18
it’s not the grounds for a for a
31:20
satisfactory long-term relationship
31:23
while we’re in the Old Testament I want
31:24
to ask you something custom in the book
31:25
of Job that seems right up your alley I
31:27
looked at this book I can’t remember who
31:28
wrote anymore you may even know aspects
31:30
oh you will it was a book of engravings
31:32
from the book of Job by the British
31:34
writer and poet William Blake Blake had
31:37
done this series of engravings based on
31:40
the trials and tests that job went
31:42
through in this in these series of
31:44
engravings Yahweh and Yahweh and Joe are
31:51
depicted as a sort of identical you know
31:53
they’re ones in a celestial realm ones
31:55
in the terrestrial realm at the
31:57
beginning of the image but job and his
31:59
family depicted in front of the tree of
32:02
life the instruments hang in the trees
32:03
the animals are sleeping by the end of
32:06
the image after these various trials you
32:08
know that after Joe has been tested this
32:10
and we will to assume I suppose that
32:12
there’s been this journey of self
32:13
catalyst realization we have through
32:16
these trials the the instruments are
32:18
being played the animals are awake you
32:21
know and there’s a sort of bright future
32:22
in this sense of astronomical stuff ie
32:24
the positioning of the Sun unknown is
32:26
somehow meant to be significant also and
32:27
the person that wrote this book is a
32:28
Jungian now the thing that struck me
32:30
deep deep deep and I’ve been struggling
32:32
with it ever since is there’s a moment
32:35
where Yahweh shows the behemoth and the
32:38
Leviathan to jove and he says these i
32:41
made as i made thee right and then in
32:44
this Jungian analysis of these
32:45
engravings the writer says that the that
32:49
God requires of us that we be good that
32:53
goodness itself may exist that there is
32:56
a something beyond buts comparable to
33:00
neutrality in God the Creator the idea
33:03
of God the Creator the image of the
33:05
behemoth and the Leviathan in these
33:07
engravings is terrifying
33:09
the animalism of the behemoth its
33:11
musculature its rawness the Leviathan
33:15
sneaky dark deep terrifying thing this
33:18
idea of agency and god this relationship
33:22
between the unmanifest and the manifest
33:24
as achieved through an individual’s
33:26
relationship with truth and expression
33:29
seemed to me that it was saying
33:31
something that was right on the
33:32
precipice of my ability to understand
33:35
and sounded to convey okay so the first
33:37
thing I would say is well one of the
33:40
indications that you’re open is the way
33:42
that you phrased that question because
33:44
there’s like 30 things happening in that
33:45
question all at the same time one of the
33:47
things that creative people do is they
33:49
throw out like images because your your
33:52
your question was full of images there’s
33:54
you’re trying to map territory that you
33:56
don’t understand you say here’s an image
33:57
and here’s an image and here’s an image
33:59
and here’s an image and there’s
34:00
something uniting all of those but I
34:01
don’t know what it is it’s like an
34:03
artist’s do by the way and so that’s a
34:05
preliminary mapping of unexplored
34:07
territory and so we could take that
34:09
apart a little bit I mean one of the
34:10
things so job is objecting to his
34:13
treatment because of course god has a
34:15
bet with the devil basically that he can
34:17
take job down and make him curse fate he
34:19
basically bets the devil that he can
34:21
turn Jobe into Cain and God says no no
34:25
you God says no you the devil bets God
34:28
that he can turned Joel indicate by
34:30
tormenting us and God says nose jobs a
34:33
good man no matter what you do to him he
34:34
won’t lose faith in being that’s
34:36
essentially the back and you think well
34:38
that’s a hell of a thing for God to do
34:40
but then and Joe objects to go on to
34:42
some degree and so he’s got his reasons
34:44
man I mean because everything’s taken
34:46
away from him and God says I made these
34:49
things the Leviathan so that’s like the
34:51
terrible element of nature and I made
34:54
the Bayeux moth and maybe you could say
34:55
that’s the terrible element of society
34:57
it’s like how dare you question me and
34:59
that’s a perfectly reasonable objection
35:01
that’s like really you’re gonna doesn’t
35:03
matter what happens you’re gonna
35:04
question God really well so god objects
35:08
to that then and then you you you you
35:11
will although Joe Young believed that
35:13
Jonah actually had the moral upper hand
35:15
in that description because God behaved
35:17
rather reprehensibly and having a bet
35:18
with the devil I mean you wrote a book
35:20
called answer to job which is very much
35:22
worth reading it’s it’s quite a profound
35:24
piece of work but then you also woven
35:26
into the question this idea
35:28
the ethical requirement to be good yes
35:31
there’s something in that that’s
35:33
unutterably deep because this is this is
35:36
right at the limit of my ability to
35:37
understand things too so it’s
35:39
speculative beyond belief but it seems
35:41
to me that we are thrown challenges and
35:45
that there that and that in some sense
35:48
those are best construed as tests of our
35:50
ethical ability so what Jung thought his
35:53
idea was something like this that at the
35:56
beginning of time people were
35:57
unconscious and that consciousness
35:59
emerged with all of its catastrophes
36:01
consciousness of death for example and
36:04
one way out of the burden of
36:07
consciousness was to return to
36:08
unconsciousness you can do that with
36:10
alcohol you can do that by being
36:12
dependent you can do that by failing to
36:14
grow up you refuse the burden of
36:16
consciousness by becoming unconscious
36:18
again but there’s another way forward
36:20
which is to become even more conscious
36:22
so the idea would be a little bit of
36:25
consciousness is like an illness but if
36:27
you can expand that consciousness
36:29
upwards enough then it stops something
36:31
it starts to become something that it’s
36:33
all that is its own cure and that partly
36:36
what your goal is while you suffer
36:39
through life is to heighten your
36:40
consciousness to the point where
36:42
everything gets integrated enough so
36:44
that that’s proper medication for the
36:46
disease of self-consciousness and you
36:48
believe that that was really the that
36:51
was one of the ideas that ran through
36:53
the entire well the entire structure of
36:55
judeo-christianity although not it
36:57
wouldn’t be limited to
36:58
judeo-christianity so it’s it’s more
37:01
consciousness rather than less it’s more
37:03
attention and I I think I think there’s
37:06
something to that and some of that see
37:08
the other thing you see in psychotherapy
37:09
for example is that when you’re trying
37:12
to lead people forward out of the
37:14
darkness let’s say out of anxiety and
37:17
depression and despair and and
37:18
resentment and bitterness and anger and
37:20
all of those things
37:21
catastrophic interactions with their
37:24
family is that you get them to stop
37:27
avoiding confronting the terrible things
37:30
that are in front of them right so
37:32
basically what you do instead of saying
37:33
to them you know those terrible things
37:35
that are happening just ignore those and
37:37
and find some peace right get your mind
37:40
away from it that isn’t what you say
37:41
you say turn around and look at them
37:43
even more than you’ve been looking at
them there’s a very paradoxical advice
but of all the things that have been
proven to aid people’s recovery and
movement towards mental health that’s
like at the top of the list
voluntary confrontation with what you
are afraid of or or what you despise
even for that matter and so Jung had an
axiom that he derived from the alchemist
which was in sterk willingness infinite
or which meant roughly meant that which
you most need will be found where you
least want to look which is well yeah
well that’s he that was also his
explanation for why people weren’t
enlightened because you think well the
California approached enlightenment to
speak you know kind of satirically is
follow your bliss it’s like well that’s
easy if that was the case everyone would
be enlightened but the union approaches
no no you do what’s meaningful and pay
attention follow the truth and it will
take you to the worst place you can
imagine and then maybe there’s some
chance for enlightenment
Campbell somewhat revoked that I follow
your bliss mantra though I say wish he’d
said follow your blisters you know like
oh yeah the pain yeah all right yeah I
didn’t know you said cool isn’t it yeah
wicked put that on the scoreboard oh
that’s good well like a novel thing like
I’ve been thrown because you’ve said
that I could summon you didn’t know it’s
39:05
unraveled my entire volton chow and now
39:08
I’ve reached for a bit of German
39:09
language to pull my way back in oh yeah
39:11
her nan Millfield he’ll help me out like
39:13
so like I’m reading this Moby Dick it
39:15
smashed my head up you know like and
39:17
like um when he says in there’s a toward
39:21
the end of the book I have when he’s
39:23
hanging out with Pip and stuffies and
39:25
he’s really losing it now but maybe he’s
39:27
finding it – there’s a bit where he
39:29
talked about will who is it that moves
39:32
this arm he says who is it that think
39:34
these thoughts if the mighty son has no
39:36
control over its movements what control
39:39
as Ahab over his thoughts you know he’s
39:41
talking about fate and destiny and these
39:43
ideas again seem to me very potent
39:46
powerful themes my vision he struggles
39:50
with a great whale right
39:52
yeah it’s the dragon of the abyss that’s
39:54
that’s moby-dick because it’s it’s the
39:56
hero against the dragon of the abyss
39:57
he’s obsessed with it right why should
40:00
be obsessed with it it’s what to be
40:02
obsessed with is the dragon of the abyss
40:04
that’s the oldest story of mankind is
40:06
that your proper obsession is the dragon
40:09
of the abyss that’s where the gold is
40:10
yes that’s where the gold is even though
40:13
that’s worth as our most terrifying also
40:15
a bloody tragic ending except that as
40:16
you take Ishmael as the protagonist in
40:18
which case Ishmael survives and I have
40:20
you know everyone died so I am but like
40:23
I so it’s a tragedy it’s a tragic
40:26
encounter with the dragon of chaos he’s
40:27
a failed hero figure outcomes he’s about
40:30
and these gates lost that limb and stuff
40:32
and I’m sure yes or symboi just like
40:34
Captain Hook and the crocodile here they
40:36
have to have you know I love it for me
40:38
it’s very exciting when I see these
40:39
patterns of perennialism and for me it
40:41
is exciting because this tree is
40:43
simplicity implicit in it is true for
40:46
now that thing we were talking about a
40:47
minute ago where we where I go excited
40:48
because to follow your blisters the feel
40:50
is going to say is like this says
40:51
there’s some sort of maxim I understand
40:53
in Buddhism is like let it burn let it
40:55
burn burn like tape away from me every
40:57
right and there’s the idea is also there
41:00
in Christianity so there’s an occult
41:02
interpretation there’s letters on
41:04
Christ’s cross INRI Jesus please that it
41:07
means Jesus Christ King of the Jews and
41:09
it was put there by the Romans but
41:10
there’s no cult interpretation in Latin
41:12
which I can’t reproduce but it means
41:15
through fire all things are renewed and
41:17
one of the one of the deepest ideas of
41:20
Christianity is that you should burn
41:22
everything off that’s part of you that
41:24
isn’t part of that thing that can die
41:26
and be reborn there’s all sorts of
41:28
baggage that you people say that there’s
41:29
baggage that you’re carrying everyone
41:31
knows that it’s dead wood it’s like that
41:32
has to burn off and that’s a lot of
41:34
touch way more of you than you think
41:36
who’s way more than you think whilst you
41:38
still haven’t said whoever not yet are
41:39
you believing God won’t keep gun
41:41
automatics I’m not one them type of
41:42
people yeah so that I’m like it seems to
41:48
me that you Revere truth and it seems to
41:52
me that you are interested in the truth
41:54
in Scripture and mythology then what
41:58
this leads me to is something we touched
42:00
upon briefly it’s about the role of
42:02
power and
42:04
the function of morality and ethics and
42:07
and and and green bead simpler ideas it
42:11
will terms if not ideas such as
42:12
compassion and goodness so when like you
42:16
know it’s interesting to me that you’ve
42:17
written sort of an access abort or
42:19
self-help type book that you know clean
42:20
your room stand up straight stick your
42:22
shoulders back stuff that you know like
42:23
I would not query the only thing that I
42:26
feel like I would like to ask you about
42:28
because my I don’t know if I even have a
42:30
constituency but the people I finally
42:32
you know I found myself talking a lot
42:33
Muslim people young women self harming
42:37
eating disorders these kind of you know
42:39
your clinical psychology so I mention
42:40
you have more access to that kind of
42:42
information and those kind of
42:43
experiences than I do I have this strong
42:46
feeling that I am supposed to make
42:48
myself available for the vulnerable for
42:51
the powerless and for the voiceless so
42:54
that’s a fine idea this is the one is
42:56
how do you do it
42:57
how do we do what to do a huge bloody
42:58
question sometimes they don’t want me
43:00
interfering in their lives is that
43:01
majority at the time right certainly is
43:04
that well there’s an there’s a maximum
43:06
that’s often applied by people who work
43:08
in old-age homes which is never do
43:10
anything for the residents that they can
43:12
do themselves I can’t steal their own
43:14
money and that’s the best sleeping buddy
43:25
so isn’t it so it’s hard like the thing
43:28
about the thing about compassion is it’s
43:30
not sufficient to produce solutions
43:32
compassion is an unbelievably useful
43:34
emotion if you’re dealing with six month
43:36
old infants what bow they’re always
43:38
right she’s there in our soul now but
43:40
like a it doesn’t work no but what about
43:46
I won’t want to say is like I know you
43:51
said all this thing about sort of good
43:52
that the one of the isn’t one of the
43:55
essential themes ideas about the Christ
43:58
myth being you know to burn away all
44:01
that cannot be reborn but bloody ill may
44:03
in the actual language all he bangs on
44:06
about is kindness kindness love love
44:08
kindness kindness love novel revelation
44:11
hmm not in revelation he’s a judge in
44:14
revelation what are you still you’re
44:15
still taking that is what’s the books
44:17
beyond the Gospels your students
44:18
as the word of Christ well I’m taking
44:21
them as part of the entire corpus of the
44:22
story I mean the reason that yon thought
44:24
revelation was appended to the Bible was
44:26
because the Christ in the Gospels was
44:28
aired Deus too much in a sense on the
44:31
side of mercy and not enough on the side
44:33
of judgment because here’s the
44:35
settlement is a technical there’s a
44:37
technical reason though it’s like
44:38
without one attachment oh Jesus well you
44:41
don’t have a choice
44:42
because if you have an ideal it’s a
44:44
judge like you have an ideal you and
44:46
there might be an ideal that you have of
44:48
you
44:48
it’s simultaneously your judge because
44:50
you fall short of it I understand this
44:53
cuz as funny enough I was talking to the
44:54
fellow that taught me meditation
44:56
yesterday Bob ruff so he’s a student of
44:58
the Maharishi you know that he said that
45:00
when my Rishi was asked what is the one
45:02
principle the one principle he didn’t
45:04
say kindness or compassion or anything
45:06
like that I said discernment right
45:08
discernment you know which part are we
45:10
gonna follow there is the tension going
45:11
yeah but judgment that’s why in
45:14
Revelation Christ divides the Damned
45:16
from the saved and most are damned its
45:19
discernment and and what that means in
45:21
some sense is that there’s a thousand
45:23
there’s a hundred thousand ways to do
45:24
things wrong and only one way to do them
45:26
right maybe the only five ways of doing
45:28
them right but you know that in your own
45:30
life is that the there’s an infinite
45:33
number of snares that you can tangle
45:35
yourself up in and to find that pathway
45:38
where everything is balanced that’s very
45:39
that requires continual discernment and
45:41
attention and so you you can’t have an
45:43
ideal without it being a judge and you
45:46
can’t you can’t live properly without
45:48
discernment but that doesn’t mean
45:50
compassion and compassion isn’t relevant
45:52
it doesn’t mean that at all I’ve got a
45:54
skew something that sort of occurs to me
45:56
see like I like you I found myself in
45:59
different types of controversial
46:00
situations various conflicts and maybe
46:03
it much of the time is because Albert
46:05
Maysles said tyranny is the deliberate
46:08
removal of nuance I didn’t even say that
46:11
that’s not a good phrase good share
46:13
isn’t it yeah that’s right but like the
46:15
thing right deliberate removal that’s
46:18
that’s what makes it different than
46:20
ignorance because ignorance there’s no
46:22
nuance in ignorance but it’s excusable
46:24
because you just don’t know anybody yeah
46:26
when it’s deliberate that’s a whole
46:27
different story I think very nice who
46:29
said that Alba Mays was filmmaker he
46:30
made like Grey Gardens he made that
46:32
ideas of documentary within very briefly
46:34
and he he made that Beatles movie when
46:37
the Beatles first came to the states he
46:38
made give me show us the Mazal maze was
46:40
probably like old guys now brilliant
46:41
documentarian approval he invented much
46:45
of the flying the wall verite style this
46:47
informed subsequent documentary
46:49
tyrannies the deliberate removal of
46:51
nuance are works of himself briefly
46:52
filming none other than President Donald
46:54
Trump before people but like one of the
46:56
things that I wanted to talk about was
46:59
um if I like this is a thing I don’t
47:02
like all of the I don’t like though I
47:04
agree and I feel I don’t know what you
47:06
feel that you know that one of the
47:08
neoliberalism abandoned its allegiance
47:11
to and left his politics has in a sense
47:13
abandoned the working class and I can
47:16
understand their rage and but the
47:19
feeling I personally have is when if I
47:22
sense that I’d said things and I’ve done
47:23
this so I know that I’ve offended women
47:26
which I you know when I was more when I
47:27
was a single person I was promiscuous
47:28
and I know that caused me conflagration
47:32
and conflict or when I’ve done things
47:34
like you know in a spirit a few mother
47:36
of had like a kickback
47:39
I’ve always felt bad if I feel like I’ve
47:42
offended people that I would I would
47:45
regard or sculture alia regarded as
47:47
vulnerable yeah so like around the like
47:50
I when we make the conversation about
47:53
the use of language tyranny and
47:55
oppression in free speech you know
47:56
obviously I agree with you but but I do
48:00
take from you know the gospel version of
48:03
Christ
48:04
the idea that kindness love we can’t you
48:09
know like we have to continue to find
48:11
resources for anger you know I won’t
48:13
we’ll continue to fail we must continue
48:14
to be loving so yeah what my question is
48:17
is if you you have found yourself in a
48:18
position where I kind of think some
48:20
people are using you to sort of say fuck
48:22
you women or fuck you transgender people
48:25
and for me I think I would want to go on
48:30
that’s not my bag like so well where do
48:33
you stand on that well I think I think
48:36
that first of all the most fundamental
48:39
part of the question which is this issue
48:41
about love and like one of the
48:46
things I’ve thought about a fair bit is
48:47
the meaning of the Sermon on the Mount
48:49
and as far as I can tell it’s it’s a
48:52
it’s basically a two part it’s two part
48:56
wisdom the first is that you should aim
48:59
at the highest good that you can imagine
49:00
and that would be a good that includes
49:03
everyone right so if I wanted what was
49:05
good for you say if I genuinely wanted
49:08
it I wanted in a way that was good for
49:10
you now I’m good in the long run and
49:12
good for you and your family in your
49:13
community and may be good for me too you
49:15
know we could conceive of that as the
49:17
desire and I think that’s a good
49:19
definition of love is that you actually
49:21
want the best you want the best possible
49:23
outcome and in the Gospels of course
49:25
that’s extended even to your enemies yes
49:27
right is that okay if we’re gonna have
49:29
things good let’s have it good enough
49:31
for even the people that set themselves
49:32
up against me because if the world was
49:34
running properly things would be good
49:36
for them too and that would be better
49:38
and it seems to me that that’s a very
49:40
good way of looking at things it’s a
49:41
difficult way of looking at things and
49:43
then the second part of the Sermon on
49:45
the Mount is something like having
49:48
established that as your aim which is no
49:50
easy thing by the way right because you
49:52
have to be pretty clear headed and
49:54
single-minded to actually want that to
49:56
be your aim then you can concentrate on
49:58
the day and you can try telling the
50:00
truth and you can alai so there’s truth
50:02
and love that are allied together truth
50:04
love and attention it’s something like
50:06
that that are all allied together with
50:09
regards to transgressing against the
50:11
vulnerable I don’t think that that is
50:14
what I’ve done I think that people have
50:16
claimed that but I don’t think there’s
50:17
any evidence for it I mean first of all
50:19
I know absolutely that I have brought
50:23
perhaps thousands of people maybe tens
50:27
of thousands of people but certainly
50:28
thousands of people away from
50:30
identification with the right because
50:32
they write me all the time and tell me
50:33
that I’ve received about 30,000 letters
50:36
specifically from people have been
50:38
watching my youtube videos since August
50:40
and 25,000 of them are so we’ve tried to
50:43
count are from people who said that they
50:45
were in very dark places and that their
50:47
lives are much better much oriented
50:50
towards truth and responsibility and
50:52
away from political ideology mostly on
50:55
the right right that they were attracted
50:56
on the right because I have more peace
50:58
like that right me then people who say
51:00
that I’ve say rescued them from the hell
51:02
holes of the radical left I think that’s
51:05
more of a historical accident some in
51:08
some in some why it’s than anything else
51:12
and but also with the transgender issue
51:14
more specifically I’ve received now at
51:16
least 40 letters from transgender people
51:19
and the only one of them was critical
51:21
and it wasn’t that critical the rest of
51:23
them all said we never signed up to be
51:26
poster boy of the year for the radical
51:28
left and it’s not-it’s been no picnic
51:31
believe me all that’s happened is that
51:33
our lives have become much more
51:34
difficult and I believe that and I don’t
51:37
see that I think one of the mistakes
51:38
that the radical left makes and this is
51:41
part and parcel of their flirtation with
51:43
identity politics is that they fall all
51:46
over themselves to believe that if a
51:48
person identifies as a minority then
51:51
they immediately have the right to speak
51:53
for all the people who are in that
51:54
minority and that’s a claim that I
51:56
reject completely I mean first of all
51:59
there is no transgender community it’s
52:01
not a community because the community is
52:03
constantly interacting and networking
52:05
and has a shared purpose and all that
52:07
transgender people are just as diverse
52:09
as any other people it’s like saying
52:11
well there’s there’s no real black
52:12
community there’s not homogeneous
52:14
political viewpoints across the black
52:16
population I said I agree to a point
52:19
that these taxonomy czar necessarily
52:21
externally imposed because how would
52:24
they be intrinsically experienced I
52:27
understand that but also it seems to me
52:30
that there is a thing called the
52:32
experience of being an african-american
52:34
and you can put into that high prison
52:37
populations for young males lack of
52:40
educational opportunity or work
52:42
opportunity that they has available for
52:45
that so while community may be an
52:49
incorrect term literally there is a
52:53
there was a strata that seemed to be
52:55
underserved and another concern I would
52:56
have about some of the war the
52:58
repurposing you know as far as far as we
53:01
know so far of much of your oratory and
53:05
online work seems to me that it supports
53:09
the powerful is a poor
53:11
hegemony I would I don’t agree that
53:13
things are as simple as white men are in
53:15
position pattern let you know though
53:16
that you know like but I’m only
53:18
interested in who is able to affect
53:20
change who is able to influence who can
53:23
you not attack in public what is
53:25
positive like who is being controlled
53:26
that’s what interests me so like in a
53:29
transnational corporations economic
53:31
elites you know less of an how are they
53:33
served by what I say or by what are you
53:36
say ok so yes inequality problem oh yes
53:43
you’re saying it’s natural which clearly
53:45
well it’s not you cannot lay it at the
53:47
feet of capitalism that’s absolutely
53:48
clear that and the fact that it’s now a
53:50
Yelp in those I what’s that capitalism
53:54
doesn’t help they sent me like you know
53:55
Marx’s critique well I understand better
53:57
it’ll irk is that capitalism is built on
53:59
limitless growth from finite from finite
54:02
resources and also Kapil ISM will always
54:05
always be redirected and criminally
54:08
misused and under this of the economics
54:10
of our time it’s up for me is
54:12
demonstrably I know so if there are
54:13
people say I know people are richer now
54:15
than ever
54:16
but like you know staying in LA for a
54:18
while and there’s ninety thousand
54:19
homeless people and the greater LA area
54:21
it seems like some sort of like the
54:23
apocalypse is creeping in people are
54:25
richer than they ever have been but the
54:27
extreme extremes of inequality or hi to
54:29
hmm and there’s some evidence that
54:31
there’s some evidence well here’s an
54:33
example of how these things might work
54:34
so imagine that people that people are
54:37
getting richer there’s absolutely no
54:38
doubt about that but here’s here like
54:40
we’ve got more stuff even though I’m
54:42
sure you’d agree there are V that’s
54:43
what’s diving that’s good obesity is a
54:45
bigger problem in the world now than
54:47
starvation right that’s a big deal
54:48
that’s a big plus but here in a way it
54:51
still implies that people are being
54:52
underserved by the seat by their
54:54
operating systems still inferred
54:58
inequality also oh yes well well first
55:01
of all there’s no doubt that any social
55:03
system has a tyrannical and arbitrary
55:06
aspect I mean that’s an archetypal
55:08
training right any of course even though
55:11
even well-functioning systems have a
55:12
tyrannical aspect Department not mostly
55:16
or at least merely what Native Americans
55:19
who you’re down with not Native America
55:22
native Canadians that the quak quak yeah
55:25
let them realize like how’s their social
55:28
system set up oh it’s a catastrophe
55:30
go on oh well I mean it’s a catastrophe
55:33
for all sorts of reasons I mean some of
55:35
it
55:35
yeah it is it is it’s the situation is
55:38
very catastrophic what he might be
55:39
because well the reserve system was set
55:41
up in Canada and it had a possibility of
55:43
working when there was a possibility
55:46
that small communities could work
55:47
economically but small communities don’t
55:50
work economically anymore like if you go
55:52
through Saskatchewan for example a
55:54
central province in Canada in the 1960s
55:57
there were thousands and thousands of
55:58
small towns mostly Caucasian that is
56:01
because if their dance capitalism no no
56:03
it’s not it’s it’s deeper than that it’s
56:05
the same prop well here’s it might be
56:07
deeper than it but in its current form
56:09
it is company because I would agree that
56:10
what is capitalism a manifestation of
56:12
greed it’s the same thing the same thing
56:17
has happened all over the world like
56:18
urbanization is taking place in a
56:20
tremendously rapid rate it doesn’t
56:22
matter what the culture is or the form
56:23
of government so you think that the
56:25
politics is happening at a lower level
56:27
the phenomenology that’s weathered is
56:30
where the significant is Hattie’s is a
56:32
bigger time and within it political
56:34
systems are slowing about but that
56:36
doesn’t mean that’s man all the ones we
56:37
have in search of fairer more just
56:40
better ones particularly if they are
56:42
empirically not working come up with a
56:43
way to reliably flatten inequality that
56:49
would be a good thing but the empirical
56:51
evidence suggests so there’s a bunch of
56:53
things it suggests first of all if you
56:55
look at at the attempts to alleviate
56:58
inequality over the last 200 years
57:02
whether there were left-wing governments
57:04
in power or right-wing governments and
57:06
now made absolutely no difference
57:07
whatsoever to the degree of inequality
57:09
the only things that have been reliably
57:12
demonstrated to flatten out inequality
57:14
are catastrophes wars revolutions
57:17
epidemics there’s one other war
57:20
revolution epidemics well it’s gonna be
57:23
some kind of postman yeah that’s right
57:25
it’s another Horseman I can’t remember
57:27
which it is but but at a price of the
57:29
price of radical redistribution seems to
57:33
say yeah
57:35
yeah there and no one has come up with
57:36
you think that’s because of health and
57:37
our functions because like you know in
57:40
an unequal system whilst there are many
57:43
people that are suffering there are some
57:44
people that are benefiting I’m in a tier
57:46
that benefit yes from the current
57:48
economic situation I Drive nice car you
57:51
have nice house I go where I want
57:53
well let’s look at that for a minute
57:54
like if you think about how that
57:56
happened in your life I bet I can tell
57:57
you how it happened go on well I mean
57:59
this isn’t a personal account but
58:01
Bennett Bay you had otherwise I’m not
58:03
interested it’s that’s in one dimension
58:05
right hi success but because you were
58:08
successful not to mention all sorts of
58:09
opportunities came your way like my
58:11
suspicions are that where you’re sitting
58:13
now you have more opportunities than you
58:15
can deal with mmm is that correct yeah
58:18
yeah opportunity right exactly well
58:20
there see this is part of what seems to
58:22
drive inequality is that as you get
58:25
successful the opportunities that come
58:28
your way start to multiply and they
58:29
don’t multiply linearly they multiply
58:31
exponentially and so when you start
58:33
moving up you start moving up faster and
58:35
faster and faster and faster and then
58:36
you’ll hit a point where you have so
58:38
many opportunities that you don’t even
58:39
know what to do with it and so it’s a
58:41
nonlinear improvement but the the
58:43
downside of that is and you might have
58:46
had periods in your life where that were
58:47
like this to where let’s say you start
58:50
to get depressed and then you start to
58:52
drink because you’re depressed and then
58:54
you start to isolate yourself because
58:55
you’re drinking and you’re depressed and
58:56
because you’re drunk and depressed and
58:58
your friends start to abandon you and
58:59
then you lose your job it’s like you’re
59:01
not going downhill in a straight line
59:03
you’re going downhill faster and faster
59:06
and faster till you fall off a cliff and
59:07
that seems to me how the world works is
59:09
like there’s a center point it’s
59:11
unstable things improve then they
59:13
improve exponentially and things fall
59:15
and then they fall off exponentially and
59:17
that seems to be what’s driving
59:18
inequality you start to succeed and the
59:21
probability that you’ll continue to
59:23
succeed starts to expand hmm and so and
59:25
we don’t know how to control that and
59:27
well here here’s some other examples of
59:29
it though because I said you couldn’t
59:30
lay it at the feet of capitalism the
59:32
same thing happens to cities a small
59:34
proportion of the cities get all the
59:35
people so some cities grow like mad and
59:38
others fail catastrophically like like
59:40
Detroit it it it applies to the mass of
59:43
stars so there’s a very few stars in the
59:46
in the Milky Way that have
59:48
most of the matter so it applies to the
59:51
height of trees in the in the jungle
59:52
right and you think if things are
59:54
applicable in cosmology and in biology
59:58
the way that they are their application
60:02
politically and sociologically becomes
60:04
less relevant because you see these
60:06
phenomena as being broader then media
60:09
don’t human interaction I know you think
60:11
it’s less relevant I just see I don’t
60:14
think the left wingers are pessimistic
60:18
enough about the problem
60:19
they say inequalities of problem it see
60:21
how you have equality as a problem like
60:23
it’s it’s a terrible problem but then
60:25
they say well it’s probably a function
60:27
of our political and economic systems
60:29
and we could fix those it’s like no it’s
60:31
not a function of our political and
60:32
economic systems or if it is it’s at
60:34
such a deep level that we don’t know
60:35
what drives it and we certainly don’t
60:37
know how to control it like so but does
60:39
that not mean Jordan that would you then
60:41
reject any attempt to alter systems in
60:43
favor of fairness because it seems to me
60:46
that the focus is on like and as it
60:48
would be for a clinical psychologist
60:49
individual change now part of my
60:51
personal experiences without individual
60:53
change social change is sort of
60:55
irrelevant and many great gurus would
60:58
say yes because because I am concerned
61:02
with inequalities and with social
61:04
instability and I thought about it for a
61:06
long time I knew that the left-wing
61:07
approaches tended to fail
61:09
catastrophically and the right wing of
61:11
course isn’t particularly concerned with
61:12
inequality so that’s the left wing fails
61:14
and the right wing don’t care yeah
61:16
that’s right we need today I don’t see
61:18
the danger sufficiently and the right
61:20
wing also tends to think that the spoils
61:23
go to who deserves them yeah that’s kind
61:26
of true but it’s not completely true so
61:29
that’s that’s part of that yeah because
61:30
we’re not all because of course and what
61:32
I like from a leftist perspective would
61:34
be that we’re not starting with from a
61:37
level playing field well in the system
61:39
isn’t perfect at selecting and this is
61:40
why I think a spiritual solution but as
61:43
something that is beneath or beyond
61:45
material is the only way that true
61:47
progress is likely to be achieved I was
61:49
thinking of this something that you said
61:50
before about when we were talking
61:52
briefly about kindness and compassion
61:54
and it occurs to me and this program
61:55
will show very simplistic but the
61:58
heroism itself by which I mean sacrifice
62:01
the willingness to sacrifice yourself
62:03
for a greater idea what excites me about
62:06
that idea and I believe why the
62:07
phenomena is so loaded is if someone is
62:09
willing to die for something it’s that
62:11
they believe it’s bigger than them in
62:13
fact that themself their self is not the
62:15
truest thing that there is something
62:17
greater if I will give my life for
62:19
another person it’s almost an
62:20
acknowledgment of oneness the temporal
62:23
nurse of the individuate itself and we
62:26
all work so hard to achieve
62:27
individuation and so much of your work
62:29
the clinical psychology of guiding
62:30
people towards it but for me it’s just a
62:33
temporary resting place because having
62:36
had the kind of experiences of personal
62:38
humiliation annihilation success failure
62:40
for the decimation you know all of these
62:43
things that what I’ve been led to and
62:45
what I continue to struggle with is how
62:47
do how do I serve how am I have service
62:51
how do I help people that is the
62:54
solution to the problem it’s like I
62:55
don’t think the solution to the problem
62:57
of inequality is sociological I think
62:59
it’s psychological I mean partly what I
63:01
try because it’s closer to essence
63:03
because it’s more essential or because a
63:06
society has to be a reflection of
63:08
individual psyches or collective psyches
63:10
why is a psychological the temptation
63:13
the temptation towards resentment and
63:16
destruction that’s associated with
63:18
sociological approaches to inequality is
63:21
too great and that as a consequence
63:23
those those movements tend inexorably to
63:26
become corrupt and destructive because I
63:29
think Orwell put his finger on it when
63:31
he said that middle class socialists
63:33
don’t like the poor they just hate the
63:35
rich and that hatred I think that hatred
63:38
gets the upper hand in sociological
63:40
movements I think that the best approach
63:43
to ameliorating inequalities to
63:45
strengthen the individual I mean that’s
63:47
and that’s what I’ve concentrated on
63:49
doing what we have this program the self
63:51
authoring suite and there’s a component
63:54
of that that helps people write an
63:55
autobiography and another component that
63:57
helps them write an analysis of their
63:59
personality and another component that
64:01
helps them write out a plan for the
64:02
future and we’ve used that we’ve studied
64:05
the effect of having people write out a
64:07
detailed plan for their future and it’s
64:09
a proper plan it’s like okay look you
64:11
you get to have what you want three to
64:13
five years down the road you
64:14
to have the friends you want you get to
64:16
have the family you want you get to have
64:17
the career you want the education you
64:19
get you get to take care of yourself
64:21
properly
64:21
you get to withstand the temptations of
64:25
drug and alcohol abuse and other sorts
64:26
of impulsive pleasures you get to make
64:28
productive and meaningful use of your
64:30
time okay what does that look like for
64:32
you write it out what does it look like
64:35
just you need a vision and then you need
64:37
another vision of how terrible things
64:38
could be if you let all your bad habits
64:40
get the upper hand and we’ve had people
64:42
do that in an experimental situation and
64:44
mostly they were college students and
64:46
the consequences of that there were two
64:48
consequences one was general which was
64:52
that University students were about 30%
64:55
more likely to stay in University and
64:56
got grades there were about 25% better
64:59
this is a walloping effect but even more
65:01
interestingly and this is the coolest
65:03
thing I think that we ever discovered us
65:05
in our psychological research we did
65:08
this research in Holland at the at the
65:13
Erasmus University in Rotterdam at the
65:14
Rotterdam School of Management and we
65:16
ran business students through the future
65:19
authoring program for multiple years so
65:21
several thousands of them and we
65:23
stratified them by gender and ethnicity
65:26
pretty a pretty rough cut men women and
65:29
then Dutch nationals and non-western
65:32
ethnic minorities okay and so that the
65:35
performance was like this the Dutch
65:36
women were at the top then the Dutch man
65:39
then then the non-western ethnic
65:43
minority women then the non-western
65:45
ethnic minority men and they were behind
65:47
the Dutch women bye bye bye oh they they
65:51
should about an 80 percent decrement in
65:53
performance really quite catastrophic
65:55
two years after they did the future
65:57
authoring program they were ahead of the
65:58
Dutch women it just blew us away because
66:01
it was and it was a perfect indication
66:03
of the fact that you can use a
66:05
psychological intervention to ameliorate
66:07
what looks like a sociological problem
66:09
and so I think the right see I think the
66:12
right solution and this is what I’ve
66:14
been saying over and over in my my
66:16
lectures and in this book 12 rules for
66:17
life and this is why I think it’s become
66:20
so popular I said look you’re right you
66:22
were right you said earlier in the last
66:25
question
66:26
well you can’t ignore the group
66:28
classification problem you know there’s
66:30
a black experience there’s a Latino
66:31
experience there’s a female experience
66:33
it’s like yeah that’s true but you have
66:36
to decide what level of analysis you’re
66:37
gonna make primary and I think the
66:40
primary level of analysis is the
66:42
individual and the psychological rather
66:44
than the group and the sociological and
66:46
I think if you put the individual level
66:48
first and then you alluded to that
66:49
because it was it was like an intuition
66:51
that you were bringing forward which was
66:53
your intuitionist being that the right
66:55
level of progress is made at the level
66:57
of the individual and I think that’s
66:59
true I hope that’s the only level where
67:01
I have personal authority as well right
67:04
and also personal responsibility because
67:07
the here’s the thing like here’s the
67:08
rule how about this don’t recommend any
67:12
changes that you wouldn’t suffer for if
67:16
they failed how’s that and that’s the
67:21
problem with large-scale political
67:22
action it’s like well here’s how we
67:23
should change things it’s like well they
67:25
changed them it’s well if it fails
67:27
doesn’t bother me it doesn’t hurt me I’m
67:29
not involved in it it’s like you should
67:32
be careful when you try to change things
67:34
to make sure you loose or for your own
67:35
stupid of course of course Jordan but
67:37
that also plays into the hands of
67:39
conservatism because you know when you
67:41
said like that left-wing change tends to
67:44
be sort of potentially destructive these
67:47
are of course these are not just
67:49
left-wing shit yes right-wing radicals
67:51
too and even not yeah there and also
67:53
there is sort of conventional politics
67:55
and the ecological impact that it has
67:57
the inequality which are like a whilst
67:59
you’re saying you continue to say that
68:01
the the problem of inequality is an
68:03
anthropological biological cause I’m a
68:06
logical musical problem it’s a really
68:08
deep problem it’s a deep problem and for
68:10
me whenever you get near a problem that
68:11
has that level of profundity or ubiquity
68:14
the solution can only be spiritually we
68:17
have to access the transcendent in some
68:19
way to look for solutions and although
68:21
that sounds a little airy-fairy believe
68:23
that why do you believe that I mean I’m
68:25
not disputing that but you obviously
68:27
believe ID playas
68:28
what what drove you to that conclusion
68:30
I’ve been driven to this conclusion by
68:32
the experiences of personal failure and
68:35
personal limitation by the failure of
68:37
individuation by the failure of my own
68:40
grandiosity
68:41
the failure of my own ego the failure of
68:44
Fame and power and money and sex and
68:47
drugs the the inability of them to reach
68:49
me in the belly of the beast deep deep
68:52
deep down whether Leviathan is this
68:54
these cures this alchemy was redundant
68:58
and what I have realized I think this
69:00
the spiritual journey for me the hero
69:03
turn in like you know I’m using
69:04
reference points in which you are an
69:06
expert and a professor is that that the
69:09
death of the smallest self and the
69:11
realization of the capital s self means
69:13
become a servant become a servant of
69:16
good use your abilities to generate the
69:19
maximum amount of love the maximum about
69:21
amount of kindness and compassion and to
69:24
be alert to where I can be of most use
69:27
now for me that can be incredibly
69:28
limited because I’m still a deep leave
69:30
it isto called narcissistic flawed
69:32
failing individual but what my focus is
69:35
what my intention is what I’m trying to
69:37
learn to become in this journey of
69:38
self-realization is a compassionate and
69:41
loving man and I was also said you added
69:43
something well you hadn’t useful to that
69:46
yeah useful you’re wrong usually the
69:48
finished well that’s it so the best
69:50
definition of Christian compassion that
69:52
I ever read was useful and generous hmm
69:55
right useful and generous mmm right and
70:00
so I would say the Conservatives in air
70:02
the Conservatives promote the useful end
70:05
of the distribution and liberals promote
70:07
the generous end but no lions need to be
70:10
brought together and I would say and
70:11
given that they yourself have said the
70:13
problem for example of hierarchies
70:15
exists on a far broader spectrum than
70:17
the political that these than the narrow
70:19
like when you were saying like on the
70:20
whole left-wing Democrat or Republican
70:22
governments or left-wing right-wing
70:24
governments have produced similar
70:27
immense ad it’s I’m not happy about this
70:30
no sad thing doesn’t it suggests also
70:32
Jordan that the range of solution that
70:34
we be offered is too limited yes I don’t
70:38
think it suggests that I think it in
70:40
Democrats yes and this is why I think
70:42
that the problem of inequality has to be
70:44
taken with more seriousness than it’s
70:45
being taken and the role of the
70:47
individual another obviously you would
70:48
focus on this is a clinical psychologist
70:50
is paramount because
70:52
because I kind of believe when I think
70:54
about sort of verse of a fluctuating
70:56
vivid grotesque right-wing phenomena
70:59
such as Donald Trump I don’t blame
71:01
people who vote for Donald Trump I
71:03
understand why people feel furious I
71:05
understand the emotion of anger and rage
71:08
and I suspect that all all that plays
71:12
out on the zoetrope of the material
71:13
realm is a reflection of the activity in
71:16
the psyche activity in the emotion how
71:18
could it be otherwise except for here of
71:19
course you say occurs in lobsters and
71:21
nature so that suggests it’s even more
71:23
profound the psyche is deeper than just
71:27
human right the psyche is all a
71:30
universal conscious and unconscious mind
71:32
so I suppose what I suppose what I’m
71:35
thinking is how what my interest is is
71:38
how come yes but let me ask you a
71:41
question go on what do you think that
71:43
you’ve done in the last year that’s good
71:44
they are mostly small things okay acts
71:48
of kindness I have a daughter you have a
71:51
good relationship with her so that seems
71:53
to be a good thing that’s been beautiful
71:54
that’s been sort of in fact that is
71:56
hugely significant my newfound ability
71:59
to live at what one might refer to as an
72:01
ordinary domestic life my willingness to
72:03
let go of other people’s perception of
72:05
me these things have all been hugely
72:06
significant and my sort of I would say
72:09
my dedication to sort of
72:11
self-improvement in areas that could
72:12
still be regarded as selfish is one
72:14
thing still an improvement I sort of
72:16
take exercised to look after myself from
72:17
that drug and alcohol free for like 15
72:19
years and it’s at this point that the
72:20
epiphanies are beginning to sort of
72:22
coalesce the things that I feel are
72:24
perhaps most important is to let go
72:27
self-centeredness when I when I conduct
72:28
myself and when I’m not continually
72:30
thinking what can I get when I don’t
72:32
look at the outside world as a resource
72:34
when I don’t think what can that person
72:35
give me what can they give me when I
72:36
think instead I have a chapter on that
72:38
and it’s called it says do what is
72:41
meaningful not what is expedient and to
72:44
to view the world as a place of
72:47
resources that can be delivered to you
72:49
it’s in some sense to be expedient is to
72:52
take the short term it’s to take the
72:54
approach of short-term gratification
72:55
something like that
72:57
yes self-centered is materialistic too
72:59
well it is materialistic but it’s also
73:01
it’s also it’s not optimal and it’s not
73:05
wise and there is
73:06
for that is is that it actually turns
73:08
out like if we’re gonna have it if we
73:09
had to continuing the relationship I
73:11
would want to try to do a little bit
73:13
more for you than you do for me and I
73:16
could do that even purely selfishly say
73:18
because if I did a little bit more for
73:20
you than you did for me you would want
73:21
to keep interacting with me how does
73:23
that all right so because me and you I
73:24
think get on relatively easy we’ve found
73:26
a frequency to communicate on but say
73:28
someone like the woman with high in
73:30
openness open openness is a good service
73:33
now what about the woman on Channel 4
73:35
News who seemed more agitated and stuff
73:38
like do like me so you’re actually
73:41
having a conversation we’re trying to
73:43
have a conversation that’s oriented
73:45
towards discovering some and you think
73:47
she has a sort of a series of linear or
73:49
not some FETs and she was just dropping
73:51
and regarded oh okay definitely that’s
73:53
exactly what happened except once there
73:56
was once
73:56
oh and you and you’ll be mean to me and
73:58
she was a bit like found it yeah yeah
74:00
well when I caught momenta there on her
74:01
ability to plebeians on the spot when
74:03
she said the shell is the wrong thing to
74:05
do you know yes yes no you are not good
74:10
they make you’re a clinical psychologist
74:12
but in this moment do you not feel or no
74:15
luck it’s a question that could be you
74:16
could easily pose to me feel like right
74:18
I just want this but that’s the person
74:20
that’s been in front of you that’s the
74:22
world in that moment I don’t think you
74:23
were hostile to that person I may say
74:25
but like do you not feel like in in that
74:27
moment it would be of value and of
74:30
service to nurture that person yeah yes
74:33
well I had a conversation with a friend
74:35
of mine very smart friend of mine his
74:38
name is Wayne maretskiy he’s quite the
74:41
he’s quite the character wing but he
74:43
what he watched and I’ve had people
74:45
watch what I’ve been doing for the last
74:46
18 months lots of people and they report
74:49
on what they think about what I’m doing
74:51
and so I asked Wayne about the interview
74:52
and you know he was happy about the fact
74:55
that I conducted myself with a certain
74:57
amount of calm and detachment and but he
75:00
did say something very interesting there
75:01
was this there was the kind of a
75:03
culmination of that interview was where
75:05
Kathy was challenging me about my right
75:08
to say things that might offend someone
75:10
and I said well I said essentially look
75:12
you’ve based your whole career and this
75:14
interview on that right
75:16
you know and congratulations to you
75:18
that’s what you should be doing
75:19
then she was taken aback by that and I
75:22
said gotcha and she she knows she was
75:26
sort of flustered and she said well yeah
75:27
you did and Wayne said you know you
75:30
could have instead of saying gotcha at
75:32
that point you could have taken the
75:34
opportunity there to to expand on that
75:38
opening and to try to have Jesse Unruh
75:40
say shit down there is Lorna the lane
75:44
for not doing that you know Christian
75:46
thing yeah yeah in that moment so I
75:49
thought and I thought about that a lot I
75:51
thought well that I think there were
75:53
limitations in the format like by that
75:56
time I were about 25 minutes into the
75:58
interview you know so it was coming it
76:00
was coming close to an end and you know
76:01
sometimes being funny cuz I think it was
76:04
reasonably funny it was reasonably witty
76:06
sometimes that’s okay too
76:07
well that’s why comedians are useful yes
76:10
yes say funny things but it’s just in
76:13
yeah hopefully they can get away with it
76:17
right and I think that that’s often an
76:20
extremely effective conversational
76:23
maneuver because he actually as a matter
76:24
of fact you said something I come into
76:25
this and nothing I’m just frying a few
76:27
things at you now because you know the
76:29
reason I do this because I start doing a
76:30
good degree at a university equals so s
76:32
called religion in global politics and
76:33
one of the main things they taught
76:34
taught me there are one of the things
76:36
I’ve intrigued me is the first thing I
76:37
show you is this bit of bourgeois
76:39
there’s barely literature by bourgeois
76:40
where some story can remember it called
76:42
the Chinese emperor system of taxonomy
76:44
we’re a show and the stories of the
76:46
house I love that game and I’m liking
76:48
itself and part of the courses they talk
76:50
about who gets to determine what words
76:52
like natural or power you know who gets
76:55
to determine how those terms are
76:56
allocated I think that who gets to
76:58
determine what’s deemed religious well
77:01
daddy Michael ejected to Bill c16
77:03
because I wasn’t going to let the
77:05
radical leftist decide the linguistic
77:07
playing ground and that’s what they were
77:09
trying to do you see there their
77:10
rationale was we’re on the side of
77:12
transgender people I thought no you’re
77:14
not you’re trying to control the
77:15
linguistic territory in a sense look
77:17
this is where this conversation is a
77:20
cure the parallels the conversation I
77:22
had with Sam Harris but if Sam Harris
77:24
what I found myself saying is but why so
77:27
worried about this one particular issue
77:30
of
77:31
jealousness or extremism when it seems
77:34
that power is actually situated
77:36
elsewhere it seems to me that here I’m
77:38
last you know in that instance I suppose
77:40
because that was the instance that came
77:42
you away you you as you term it the
77:44
radical left you know imposition of
77:46
certain rules around language that you
77:47
that was the reason for me but you have
77:51
also continued to furrow or plow that
77:53
furrow haven’t you have consider you
77:54
down a sort of a line that seems like
77:56
teleologically sensible with what
77:59
happened there like it continues to
78:01
who’s like you know I know exactly like
78:03
I agreed with your analysis of the word
78:04
proverb provocateur if you don’t you
78:06
know as a person is provoked if they’re
78:07
not provoked you’re not a provocateur so
78:09
it’s a difficult label to apply to
78:11
anybody but it seems to me that you know
78:14
when something when people say you know
78:16
young males are particularly sort of
78:19
attracted to your work I do see that
78:22
this is a time where males need guidance
78:26
and like where there isn’t the kind of
78:28
elders our elders customs initiations
78:32
routes to masculinity or in short supply
78:35
I can see that there’s a real value in
78:38
that but I also feel that in this time
78:41
of social contention I’d any politics
78:44
being part of it
78:45
and conflict that ideas that promote
78:49
unity and the emulation of those kind of
78:54
boundaries or something would be
78:56
particularly and especially valuable you
78:59
know again but I think the right way to
79:00
do that is to concentrate on the
79:02
individual and so well so let me answer
79:04
that in two ways the first thing the
79:06
first issue is that it isn’t
79:08
self-evident that the reason that my
79:12
what I’ve been talking about has been
79:14
attractive to young men that might be
79:17
like a fluke and it might be a fluke
79:20
because almost everybody who watches
79:22
YouTube is male yeah so like if I look
79:25
at my YouTube audience it’s 80% male but
79:27
that’s true of YouTube audiences in
79:29
general so it’s just a typical you well
79:31
right right and so what’s how about you
79:33
intuition well because I already did say
79:36
me something I don’t make complicated
79:37
than that but I do know that since my
79:39
book has come out I’ve been watching the
79:42
demographics of my
79:44
of my public audience that more and more
79:46
and more women are coming out so it’s
79:48
now to about 65 35 from 80/20 and more
79:52
and more older people are coming out to
79:53
so I think a fair bit of it was a
79:55
consequence of the fact that most of my
79:58
exposure and was to the YouTube audience
80:01
which happens to be mostly men now I do
80:04
also think that there is a particular
80:08
crisis with regards to what might be
80:10
described as proper pathways to
80:12
masculinity I also think that’s at play
80:14
so I think there’s two factors but I
80:16
also I don’t think that Kathy Newman
80:19
kind of went after me about this you
80:20
know she said well you know if you’re
80:21
directing your message towards young men
80:23
which I wasn’t but assuming that’s the
80:26
case isn’t that divisive and I would say
80:28
well I don’t think it is divisive
80:30
because first of all the masculine in
80:32
women also needs to be developed it’s
80:35
very very important and the people who
80:37
are the enemies of the masculine in men
80:39
are also the enemies of the masculine
80:41
and women so if you over protect your
80:43
sons let’s say you don’t want to you
80:45
don’t want to you want to you you over
80:49
protect them in part and and weaken them
80:51
because you’re afraid of their masculine
80:53
energy you’re going to do exactly the
80:54
same thing your daughter’s so that that
80:56
so that the even and that female a
80:58
female child would similarly be
81:00
disempowered so definitely because you
81:03
know the thing is and this is another
81:04
thing is that I am a psychometrician
81:06
that’s technically my my job and we
81:10
study Mitch it’s may our measurement
81:12
well and like it’s a truism of
81:14
psychometrics that men and women are
81:17
more the same than they are different
81:19
you know it’s funny because I’ve been
81:21
sort of positioned as someone who is
81:23
constantly on about the differences
81:25
between men and women but men and women
81:27
are more the same than they are
81:28
different and what that means is that
81:30
the development of masculinity and women
81:33
perhaps it’s not as important as the
81:35
development of masculinity and men but
81:37
it’s damn important it’s like it’s a
81:39
close second and so if people are
81:42
pushing down masculinity as a virtuous
81:45
mode of being then it has a detrimental
81:47
effect on both
81:50
but but you would say determinately
81:53
there and biologically that there is a
81:54
thing that is masculinity
81:56
and that thing masculinity is present in
81:58
both females and males definitely but I
82:01
think again one of the one of the
82:03
challenges that this argument or the
82:06
appears to be built around is a sort of
82:08
hierarchy around those trades
82:11
masculinity being synonymous for example
82:14
with power well here’s the thing I
82:15
wanted to bloody ask you
82:17
check this Axios it but I said it on a
82:18
YouTube video on my own the other day
82:20
and a 4c wonder if this stands up to
82:22
scrutiny
82:22
let’s give it a bit check this I said
82:25
like in Sweden they’re banning sexually
82:27
provocative advertising you know it’s
82:29
the kind of thing you hear a lot about
82:30
like the objectification of women I said
82:32
of course I support that because there’s
82:33
a male being subjected to lots of
82:35
sexualized images of women as to a
82:38
degree affected you know particularly
82:40
when I was younger my or the logical
82:42
conclusion of that was pornography right
82:44
yes that doesn’t really seem to be a
82:46
good thing it doesn’t seem to be a good
82:48
thing I don’t look at pornography
82:49
anymore like the pornography I think is
82:52
yeah very corrupting corrosive influence
82:54
or you know for me personally I want to
82:57
be involved if I said this check this I
82:59
go zone
82:59
I feel the use of the female in
83:03
advertising and commodification in
83:05
general is there is the perverted desire
83:10
to worship the feminine the negated and
83:14
neglected feminine has found its
83:17
expression through consumerism and
83:19
commerce because it is not being
83:21
properly honored socially what you made
83:26
up I would have to think that I’d have
83:29
to think about that a long time I would
83:30
have to think about that a long time
83:32
good idea that is an answer it
83:33
it’s it’s an idea worth we’re thinking
83:36
about for a while like if there are
83:38
sensual if we have essential yearnings
83:40
if we have like you know like eg if we
83:42
if the in a lie in if in indigenous
83:46
cultures we would have deities to
83:48
represent gender or certain energies
83:51
that are subtler than gender if there is
83:54
a sense that socially those energies are
83:56
not being expressed on it as you have
83:57
implied with your male or that ways
84:00
definitely the case so one of the things
84:01
that I’ve often thought about ideologies
84:03
is that they’re they’re like parasites
84:05
on religious structures and if you’re
84:07
thinking that the the movement of
84:09
feminine imagery up into the consumerist
84:11
world is an analog or is at least
84:14
impartial harsh part a consequence of
84:17
not having a symbolic place where that
84:19
attraction can be expressed I think
84:21
that’s probably right it was like it’s
84:23
like in the United States is that the
84:25
first family tends to be turned into
84:26
king and queen yeah because there’s no
84:28
place for that symbolic projection yeah
84:30
the template requires it yeah I heard
84:32
once an analysis of the Soviet Union
84:34
after the Revolution that it mimicked
84:37
the monarchic tyranny that preceded it
84:40
just in a different format right AC yeah
84:44
that there’s so certain images holy
84:46
trinity even right yes
84:47
Mao Marx Lenin amazing mark Stalin
84:51
depending on the Trinity
84:52
and some would argue that we know that
84:55
Christianity couldn’t take hold in Latin
84:57
America until they embrace the pantheon
84:59
ISM of the Saints and fountain the
85:00
figure of the Virgin until they’re like
85:03
they know that in certain cultures the
85:05
the Virgin had to be elevated because
85:07
there isn’t a place in the Father Son
85:09
Holy Ghost for the Divine Feminine you
85:12
know that’s a union idea yeah yeah
85:15
that’s an original idea of yours is that
85:18
the Trinity is missing a quartile and
85:20
sometimes that’s quartile is filled by
85:23
the figure of the devil and sometimes
85:24
it’s filled by the figure of the woman
85:25
so it’s like it’s like the houses in an
85:28
Harry Potter right there’s three good
85:30
houses and Slytherin this in the bottom
85:33
quadrant it’s a it’s a reflection of the
85:35
same kind of Mandela structure that’s
85:36
pretty cool it’s very cool very cool
85:39
have a place at the table for the
85:41
serpent you have another place hmm what
85:43
about apples and Sleeping Beauty right
85:45
in the Disney movies they don’t let in
85:47
that they don’t groan that’s right they
85:49
don’t invite her to the christening and
85:50
so their daughter ends up unconscious
85:52
they don’t let the terrible mother come
85:55
to the party so how it ends up
85:56
unconscious in our domestic normal
85:58
everyday cotillion lives what is the
86:01
terrible mother how does that feel
86:02
protection over protection don’t over
86:05
protect the baby lay and fall over a
86:07
little bit that’s right you do do the
86:08
least amount possible for your children
86:10
it’s something like that
86:11
that’s not neglect it’s nothing like
86:13
that it’s like the old age home adage
86:15
you know look I’ve seen this lots of
86:17
times with parents it’s like maybe you
86:19
have to get your kid dressed up to go
86:20
out well it takes a long time if you let
86:23
your kid do it you know and see a lot
86:25
faster just to do it it’s a lot faster
86:27
not to have them set the table it’s a
86:29
lot faster to do things for them
86:30
plus there’s there’s also and this is
86:33
part of the devouring mother archetype
86:35
it’s like if you’ve devoted your life to
86:37
a child perhaps more than you should
86:40
have
86:40
let’s say then it’s very difficult to
86:43
let the child go yeah what what’s there
86:45
left for you and so there’s this
86:47
terrible temptation to play well I’ll do
86:50
everything for you but you never leave
86:52
me and then for the child to say yeah
86:54
that’s right that’s exactly the right
86:56
face to make for that that’s a very
86:57
terrible thing and you see that again in
86:59
Disney’s Sleeping Beauty where
87:00
Maleficent has the heroic prints in the
87:03
dungeon it’s laughing at him right she’s
87:05
not gonna let him go until he’s ancient
87:06
and that’s and that’s a consequence
87:09
where else do we see the devouring
87:10
mother what some good pop cultural
87:12
examples of what doesn’t he movies all
87:14
the time I wake up in little in Little
87:17
Mermaid Ursula mother the devouring
87:20
mother shows up all the time she’s the
87:22
witch she’s the swamp dweller she’s the
87:25
she’s the Evil Queen in Snow White
87:27
what’s the counterpoint the fairy
87:29
godmother yeah fairy godmothers one yeah
87:31
that’s the positive feminine and that
87:33
happened that archetype manifests itself
87:35
all over the place as well the the fairy
87:37
godmother is a good one yeah and you see
87:39
in in Sleeping Beauty there’s three of
87:42
them three little fairies that take care
87:43
of the princess in the forest there
87:45
they’re the archetype of the positive
87:46
feminine so so you always see one of the
87:50
things that distinguishes a religious
87:52
viewpoint from an ideological viewpoint
87:54
is that there’s always a representation
87:56
of nature or the unknown always you need
87:59
one and Holy Ghost in Christianity is
88:04
not known well in Christianity I’d have
88:07
to think about that for a minute
88:10
party party it’s the Virgin Mother it’s
88:12
mostly positive representation in
88:14
Christianity so and that would be the
88:17
representation of the benevolence of
88:19
nature it’s something like that so
88:21
that’s the unknown but in a religious
88:24
representation you
88:25
have the positive and the positive the
88:28
negative aspect of the feminine that’s
88:30
also the unknown you have the positive
88:31
and negative aspect of them of the of
88:33
the state that’s the wise King and the
88:36
end that devouring King and you have the
88:38
positive and negative representation of
88:39
the individual and the reason it’s
88:42
religious in some sense it’s hard to
88:44
explain why in a very short period of
88:46
time but a religious viewpoint always
88:48
gives you a balanced viewpoint that’s
88:50
what makes it religious it’s like
88:51
there’s a positive element that’s
88:53
intensely positive but there’s the
88:55
negative counterpart and there’s a
88:56
positive so let me give you an example
89:00
here I can give you an example of how
89:03
this plays out there can typically the
89:06
frontier myth that settled the West was
89:08
essentially heroic individual positive
89:10
bringing the benefits of order and
89:14
culture positive to the desolate barren
89:17
wastelands of the West ok so it’s
89:19
positive individual positive culture
89:21
negative nature ok so that’s an ideology
89:25
but it’s a powerful story because it’s
89:26
true heroic individual bearer of culture
89:29
barren desolate wasteland it’s true but
89:32
one of the things that eventually
89:34
generated was a counter narrative and
89:36
not because it was only half the story
89:38
that counter narrative was the
89:39
environmental narrative which was
89:40
rapacious individual bringing pillaging
89:44
society into benevolent nature and they
89:47
had to recast the indigenous people that
89:49
lived on those land masses as savages
89:51
not entitled to the same rights yeah
89:54
wasn’t heroic individual and there were
89:56
two there were actually two competing
89:58
tendencies in in the Western mind one
90:00
was the noble savage so that was the
90:02
Roussel exactly and the other was
90:04
Dennison you know barbaric denizen of
90:07
the uninhabited land after only one hour
90:09
in annotations the romantic idea of the
90:11
noble savage became some sort of
90:13
whimsical new ancient thing and the
90:14
other one and the other one the Dennison
90:16
barbarian became justification for
90:19
genocide all right let me look wrap up
90:21
because I can feel the technological
90:22
angst in a variety of ways but dr.
90:26
droolin Pearson or professor Jordan
90:27
Pearson that they know how to big you up
90:29
enough with their with your prologue and
90:31
thank you your title thank you very much
90:33
I’ve really found it fascinating
90:35
have you enjoyed the conversation good
90:38
appreciated the invitation
90:47
you