Why Conservatives and Liberals Think Differently

It may be obvious that people who identify politically as liberals and conservatives think differently because they disagree on issues ranging from immigration to climate change policy. But what are the deeper psychological roots that drive their political beliefs? In the aftermath of the federal election, the Agenda explores the conservative mind vs. the liberal mind.

14:59
the first place Rob well you’ve got the
15:02
floor let’s just dive a little deeper
15:03
here on some of the work that you’ve
15:05
done comparing the moral beliefs of
15:06
conservatives and liberals and let’s
15:08
start with this to what extent do you
15:09
think people on the right and the left
15:11
live in different moral worlds yeah I
15:15
think that I think there’s a lot of
15:16
truth in that there’s pretty robust
15:18
finding in the political psychology
literature that liberals tend to endorse
and and deploy moral values like
protecting people from harm
empathy fairness and equality more than
can
servus do while conservatives deploy
moral values like

  1. group loyalty
  2. patriotism
  3. respect for authority and
  4. moral purity and sanctity

more than then
liberals do and we find that you know
when they go to make the case for those
specific political positions liberals
and conservatives tend to rely on these
their their respective moral values but
this can often lead them to make to make
cases for their politics that don’t
resonate with the other side might not
even be legible to someone on the other
side well that’s lorilynn you’re hearing
yeah let me follow up on that no I do I
want to do two quick follow-ups with you
right here because give us a for
instance if a liberal we’re trying to
change a conservatives mind about for
example climate change what would be the
better arguments to Marshall given what
you’ve just told us
yeah our research suggests that a
conservative might be more responsive to
an argument about the environment or
climate change if it was articulated in
terms of purity sanctity and pollutants
being disgusting D sanctifying human
bodies and and nature that that’s sort
of a message because it fits with the
conservative value of moral purity we
find tends to be more effective than a
more conventional argument that a
liberal would be more likely to make in
terms of the need to protect vulnerable
ecosystems from from harm which doesn’t
tend to move the needle at least among
conservative and let’s do the other side
of the coin what about a conservative
trying to impress upon a liberal the
importance of let’s say military
spending something like that yeah so we
also find that this principle that if
you want to make an effective political
appeal you ought to think very carefully
about the person you’re communicating
with moral values and deeply all beliefs
we find it applies in both directions so
if you were trying to convince a liberal
to support high levels of military
17:32
spending it might not make a lot of
17:34
sense to make an argument in terms of
17:36
patriotism and the authoritative power
17:38
of the American military and instead you
17:41
might think well how could I tie this in
17:43
with liberal concerns about equal
17:45
opportunity and so we found that
17:48
an appeal that emphasized that the
17:50
military is a place where the poor and
17:52
minorities can achieve on a more level
17:55
playing field than in the you know the
17:57
open society that that’s sort of an
18:00
appeal LED liberals to say oh maybe
18:02
maybe I do support high levels of
18:04
military spending because they can it
18:06
helps the poor and minorities advance in
18:08
society hmm this potentially potentially
18:12
Paul opens the door to well who knows
18:16
everybody’s in their respective corners
18:18
right now in the boxing ring that is you
18:20
know the world today and I wonder if the
18:22
arguments could be reframed so that
18:24
people could speak a little could speak
18:27
to conservatives in a language that they
18:28
would appreciate better and vice versa
18:30
could you reduce polarization in the
18:33
world I think you can I think rob has
18:34
some excellent ideas now to do it I also
18:37
think we could we don’t have to give up
18:39
on idea of focusing on our common ground
18:41
so it’s true that conservatives in some
18:43
ways focus much more on groups and
18:45
issues of patriotism and nationalism but
18:48
liberals are no stranger to calls for
18:50
identity and group identity in fact
18:52
identity politics focusing on your
18:54
ethnicity or your gender your sexual
18:56
orientation is very much of an explicit
18:58
focus of a lot of liberal thoughts so in
19:00
some way they’re speaking the same
19:02
language they’re just talking about
19:03
different things and there’s something
19:05
else as well regarding reconciliation
19:08
and agreement which is I think by nature
19:11
by inclination by how we think there’s
19:13
an enormous amount of overlap between
19:14
liberals and conservatives but in the
19:16
hurly-burly political world and social
19:19
media there was a huge split of us
19:21
versus them where all of a sudden being
a liberal I’m not responding to a
certain claim or idea based on how I
naturally react to it but I is it is it
from my team or is it from your team and
there’s a lot of research finding that
if you give people an idea cap-and-trade
a response to climate change
funding for private schools and you tell
them this is a liberal idea or this is a
conservative idea they react very
differently to it your study after study
finding people don’t even care about the
idea they just care about is it my team
or is it your team and if we could rid
political discourse of that or at least
diminish it we do
much much better well Becky let’s do an
example of something you’ve studied
fracking tell us the story so I think
that this speaks to Rob suggestion of
how to play to people’s morality and
having this kind of discussion so we
examined people’s favorability towards
hydraulic fracturing and the degree to
which they thought this was risky and we
found that people who are higher in
political conservatism were more
favorable towards hydraulic fracturing
and they saw it as less risky
we also measured knowledge about
fracking and people that knew more about
it had less favorable attitudes about it
and they thought it’s more risky
however conservatives that knew more
about hydraulic fracturing for them they
had even more favorable attitudes and so
it is even less favorable than
conservatives that didn’t know a lot
about it and you find this same pattern
when you look at climate change so this
kind of goes against this notion that if
we just educate other people and they
know more and they’re more aware of
these issues they’ll get what I think
and they’ll be on board with my attitude
or the way that I see the world and
that’s not what happens you have another
question yeah do you think I don’t know
if you’ve done this but do you think
21:05
have you told a group of conservatives a
21:07
group of liberals and saying you know
21:09
what do you think of fracking and let me
21:11
tell you this Bernie Sanders Elizabeth
21:13
Warren one thing they agree on is we
21:15
need more fracking of this type it’s
21:17
very important it’s important for their
21:18
environment or to help American business
21:19
to increase minority access to jobs do
21:22
you think being told that would sway
21:24
their views I think it depends on who it
21:26
is so people that don’t know as much
21:28
about politics and don’t have that kind
21:30
of firm identity or just knowledgeable
21:32
for them it could sway them but for
21:33
people that are very knowledgeable at
21:35
these things they understand what
21:36
defines a conservative position and a
21:38
liberal position it’s not going to sway
21:40
them so I think that political identity
21:43
in belonging to these groups is really
21:44
important in dictating our beliefs or
21:46
attitudes how we vote but it’s not the
21:48
only thing and I worry sometimes that we
21:50
overstate it so I think it depends on
21:52
the person and I think it depends on the
21:53
context so in an American context right
21:56
now where the stakes are really high you
21:58
can see how people might be more apt to
22:00
kind of be like okay I can give that up
22:01
right now even it’s important to me
22:03
because I want my team to win but kind
22:05
of under normal circumstances or less
22:07
high threat or high stakes situations it
22:10
shouldn’t have the same kind of impact I
22:12
mean living in a state in the age of
22:13
Trump
22:14
very much in a high polarization time
22:16
there is a study that was recently done
22:18
which ask people about cap and trade
22:19
what do you think of cap and trade and
22:21
people had very strong views about it
22:23
then they asked them another question
22:24
what is cap and trade and I gotta say I
22:31
like I’m not I have found myself
22:32
exposing strong views and realizing I
22:35
don’t know that much I just know what
22:36
views I’m supposed to have yeah I’m
22:38
still waiting for the moment where there
22:39
where the conservative person says wait
22:41
a second Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren
22:43
are in favor of fracking date you don’t
22:45
think anybody would say that they would
22:47
be surprised they would be surprised
22:48
indeed if they were to say that okay
22:50
let’s um yeah
22:52
apropos of my team is better than yours
22:54
let’s go on to this in today’s polarized
world is it simply okay Rob you start
with this is it simply more important
okay for for for people to say I’m with
my team I don’t care I’m not
influenceable by facts I don’t care what
the facts say loyalty to my team is all
what it’s about nowadays right yeah I
think there’s a lot of evidence for that
and I think that what we see when we
look at trends and polarization in the
US over the last 40 years or so and this
is in the general public mind you that
you don’t see as much of ideological
polarization wherein people are clumping
around coherent ideological worldviews
because people are kind of they’re a
little bit disorganized in in their
thoughts they don’t spend all their time
thinking and talking about politics and
those who do they are very ideological
on average but what we see very clearly
is this rising antipathy across party
lines where Democrats and Republicans
you know increasingly dislike the
political out group and favor their own
in-group over the last 40 years or so
and if you look for like well what what
sparked all this I think that the
biggest thing that sparked it was that
at the elite level elected politicians
Congress people the president and so on
they polarized first they separated
along party lines and became
ideologically distinct you know by the
80s or so in a way that was not so much
24:26
the case in the 50s and
24:27
once that happened it became easier to
24:30
say okay no I really am a Democrat
24:32
because I’m a liberal and I really am
24:34
not like those other people and in fact
24:37
I really dislike them but when things
24:39
were a little more mixed up in terms of
24:41
what Democrats Republicans believed as
24:43
was the case in the 50s it was harder to
24:46
hate the other side cuz they were not so
24:47
clearly different from from your own
24:50
Becky let me let me pursue with you the
24:53
notion about whether or not we are less
24:54
polarized in Canada than they are in the
24:56
United States basically everybody who
24:59
gets elected down there is a Democrat or
25:00
a Republican basically I mean you got a
25:02
few independents along the way but
25:03
basically that’s it we just had an
25:05
election which is going to send liberals
25:06
and conservatives and New Democrats and
25:10
block East’s and greens to our federal
25:14
parliament and the People’s Party even
25:16
they didn’t win any seats but they got a
25:17
bunch of votes what does that say I
25:19
think there’s several things that are
25:21
going on I think we’re not immune to the
25:24
kind of quote/unquote tribalism that’s
25:26
happening south of the border but I
25:28
think that we have some buffers in the
25:30
sense that we have a multi-party system
25:31
now if any one of those parties should
25:34
gain more popularity to kind of lose
25:37
some of those I think we would be in
25:39
greater danger of having this kind of us
25:41
versus them mentality and I think that
25:42
still exists here but it’s difficult to
25:44
have that to the same extreme because we
25:46
have more than one party so there’s
25:48
multiple people kind of vying for power
25:50
how accurate do you think the view that
25:53
conservatives have of liberals and vice
25:55
versa
25:56
all is yeah there’s been a lot of work
25:59
on this and and there are two things one
26:01
thing is that psychologists are always
26:03
interesting everybody’s interested in
26:05
bias against against women against black
26:08
people against gays and their subtle
26:09
measures of this but the bias is we have
26:12
at least in the states towards the other
26:13
political team are anything but subtle
26:16
they’re powerful people to say if you’re
26:19
a Republican I don’t want to see a
26:20
Democrat I don’t want my kid to marry a
26:21
Democrat and then you get to kick the
26:23
question of accuracy so when you ask
26:25
people about other groups let me ask you
26:27
some questions about about gay people
26:28
about women it turns out a lot of
26:31
studies have been done showing that to
26:32
bet people have a pretty good perception
26:34
of the other group what jobs they tend
26:37
to have all sorts of other factors about
26:39
them but this goes to garbage
26:41
when you ask people politics so Liberals
26:44
have very confused ideas about
26:46
conservatives and conservatives very
26:48
confused ideas about liberals and what
26:50
happens is that this sort of tribalism
26:52
we’re talking about distorts our
26:54
thinking if you’re my worst enemy in the
26:56
world I’m not gonna think about you in
26:58
an objective fashion I’m gonna pile upon
27:00
you every stupid and ugly attitude and
27:03
and and you know if if if not it’s not
27:06
hard to see that this is not a good
27:08
thing politically and maybe this is why
27:09
Canadian politics which doesn’t have too
27:12
strict you know either-or dichotomy that
27:14
American politics has is less vicious
27:17
than American politics so a lot less
27:20
interesting too the last time you were
27:21
on this program and in fact I can see
27:23
your book on the Shelf right over there
27:24
we talked about your book about empathy
27:27
and so I’m going to facetiously say to
27:29
you right now because I know what your
27:30
answer is gonna be more empathy would
27:32
help this right well I’m not gonna say
27:34
yes come on I’m sighs you to say yes I’m
27:37
sure will surprise me which is it
27:39
depends what you mean by empathy so so
27:41
one sort of empathy which means feeling
27:43
the pain of others feeling the suffering
27:45
of others a study came out last week
27:47
which is causing a lot of play which
27:49
finds that the more empathy you have of
27:51
that sort the the more you hate the
27:53
other group why because you devote all
27:56
that feeling and empathy towards your
27:58
own group it makes you more tribal on
28:00
the other hand there’s another sort of
28:03
empathy which the most understanding
28:04
people perspective taking and I think
28:07
that is mostly for the good I think that
28:09
that you know if I if I was I was a
28:12
Hillary voter I don’t need to put myself
28:15
in the shoes of a trump voter but I
28:17
should try to understand why they voted
28:18
for Trump among other things if I want
28:21
my side to win the next time it sure
28:23
helps to know why why I didn’t win last
28:26
time just a few minutes to go here and
28:28
let me get Jonathan Hyde into this
28:30
conversation and the social psychologist
28:32
recently had this to say left and right
28:34
are like yin and yang both see different
28:37
threats push in different directions and
28:39
protect different things that matter and
28:42
that are at risk of getting trampled by
28:44
the other side okay bigger picture here
28:47
do liberals and conservatives need each
28:49
other in some way less their own
28:51
impulses turn inward and destructive
28:54
back
28:55
so I’d say on a macro level that is
28:57
probably beneficial to have a diverse
28:59
pool of ideological outlooks
29:01
I think anything in the extreme could
29:03
kind of lead us down a dangerous path
29:05
and I think there’s many examples of
29:07
very extreme right-wing or left-wing
29:09
governments around the world the kind of
29:10
plate of that to illustrate kind of the
29:12
dangers I think having a sort of push
29:14
each other back and forth and keep us in
29:15
check again on a macro level is probably
29:18
beneficial on the whole Rob I disagree
29:20
with everything you say but damn it all
29:21
I need you is that what we’re saying i I
29:24
you know I think there’s a lot of truth
29:26
in that I think ideological diversity
29:28
can help groups make better I’d you know
29:31
better decisions and come up with more
29:33
different possibly better ideas I also
29:36
think that an ideologically pluralistic
29:38
society is a difficult one to steer
29:42
effectively because it’s disposed to
29:45
creating these sort of tribal
29:47
differences
29:48
so if I have deeply different views on
29:50
things that matter a lot from you in an
29:53
ideal world we get together we you know
29:55
we come up with a way to get all the
29:57
advantages out of that and none of the
29:58
weaknesses but I think there is also a
30:01
very strong tendency for us to decide
30:02
that we are fundamentally different and
30:04
our differences are irreconcilable
30:06
because they go all the way down to our
30:08
bones to our values and so I have a
30:11
little bit less of a rosy picture of
30:13
moral pluralism Paul last thirty Seconds
30:16
to you we know that when political
30:17
parties want to raise money all they do
30:19
is put every alleged sin of their
30:22
opponents in those letters and they just
30:24
watch the shekels come in we’re kind of
30:26
doomed in this regard aren’t we we have
30:29
our worst instincts and people there’s a
30:31
lot of money and votes and power in
30:33
exaggerating the differences that exist
30:36
between these groups but I I agree with
30:38
with these other guys on pluralism is
30:40
what we should we just aspire for as
30:42
voters and as individuals authoritarians
30:45
on both sides will try to shut that down
30:46
they’ll try to shut down free speech
30:47
they’ll try to shut down communication
30:49
and I think we have a sort of moral duty
30:51
liberals and conservatives both to to
30:54
try to listen and try to try to get
30:56
together and try to be pluralistic in
30:57
the best of all possible ways amen
30:59
that’s a great place to leave it I want
31:01
to thank all three of you for coming out
31:02
of TVO tonight Rob will are at Stanford
31:04
University in California
31:06
Becky Toma from Ryerson University
31:08
in toronto Paul bloom from Yale
31:10
University in New Haven Connecticut it’s
31:13
great to have all of you on TV Oh
31:14
tonight thanks so much thank you
31:19
the agenda with Steve Paikin is brought
31:21
to you by the chartered professional
31:22
accountants of Ontario CPA Ontario is a
31:25
regulator an educator a thought leader
31:28
and an advocate we protect the public we
31:31
advance our profession we guide our CPAs
31:34
we are CPA Ontario and by viewers like
31:38
you
31:38
thank you

Joe Rogan Experience #1070 – Jordan Peterson

which which way these people are
55:55
thinking and why they think yeah well
and bad as that is and rife with
conflict as that is the alternative is
to separate as you pointed out into two
camps that don’t talk yes and the thing
is the the consequence of not talking is
that you fight that that’s the end game
because the only way you can stop from
fighting with other people is by
negotiating with them and you know one
of the things that’s also interesting
and this is partly why Silicon Valley
leans to the left is that a fair bit of
your political preference is determined
by your biological temperament it’s a
strongly influenced so if you’re a
creative type who’s kind of disorderly
then you’re likely to be on the liberal
left end of the distribution and if
you’re a non creative type who’s orderly
and and especially if your orderly then
you tend to be on the right-wing end of
things and so and well why is that why
do those variations exist well they
exist because some of the time your best
strategy is to do what other people have
done and shut the hell up
and just do it run the algorithm write
the pathways already laid clear it works
stay in the damn rut and move forward
okay so that’s the conservative approach
and when things are going right it’s the
right approach the problem is is that
sometimes it’s not the right approach
because something is shifted and so
something new has to emerge and so then
there’s a bunch of people who are
adapted to the new and those are the
entrepreneurial and creative types and
of course they dominate Silicon Valley
because it’s a very entrepreneurial it’s
a very entrepreneurial what would you
call it geography and so they’re gonna
lean to the left but they have to
understand people have to understand
that the left and the right need each
other the Liberals and the Conservatives
need each other liberals start companies
conservatives run them and the problem
with the Conservatives is well they can
only run a company in one direction
because they’re conservative they don’t
think outside the box but so if the
company is working in the product line
is good and every
stable like hire some conservatives
because they’ll maximize efficiency and
then move down that track but if the
track is no longer going in a good
direction because something’s change the
environments change well then you gotta
bring in the creative people and so we
need each other and the only way that we
can survive the fact that we’re
different and the fact that we need each
other is by continually talking they
have talked constantly it’s like well
how much of what we’re doing should we
preserve versus how much of what we’re
doing should we transform and the answer
is we don’t know because the environment
keeps changing so what do we do about
58:26
of so there’s this theory it’s a lovely
theory that’s laid out right at the
beginning of the Bible that says that
if you tell the truth you transform the
potential of being into a habitable
actuality that’s how it works so we say
well how do you want it how do you make
the world better tell the truth because
the world you bring into being as a
consequence of telling the truth will be
a good world and I believe that’s true I
think it’s true metaphorically I think
it’s true theologically and I think it’s
true like at the practical and
scientific level as well I think it’s
true and all those levels simultaneously
so that’s been ridiculously exciting to
just sort through I think this notion
and one of the things you said that I
think really resonates is that there’s
not a voice out there that is advocating
for responsibility and that is talking
about how important this is and I think
this is an inherent principle that most
people are kind of aware of and it feels
good to them to hear
I get resonates so you feel it you you
when you when you’re saying this clean
your room you know put your house in
order like yeah yeah how come I’m not
hearing this right I’m not hearing this
well it’s so funny because one of the
things psychologists have done for the
last 20 years especially the social
psychologist has pushed this idea of
self-esteem you should feel good about
yourself and I think why would you tell
someone 20 that it’s like you should
feel good about who you are it’s like no
you shouldn’t why should you feel good
about who you are it’s like you should
feel good about who you could be that’s
way better cuz you got sixty years to
turn into who you could wait a minute
are you what your accomplishments are or
are you dis individual going through
this journey I mean I don’t think
81:43
there’s anything wrong with feeling good
81:43
about who you are as long as it’s
81:46
tempered by an understanding of
81:47
potential and what you have accomplished
81:50
versus what you can accomplish well I
81:51
think having confidence is a big part of
81:54
it it is it is and I’m not saying that
81:55
people shouldn’t have confidence but
81:57
like often you take young people say
81:59
there are sixteen to twenty two and
82:00
they’re not really feeling that good
82:02
about who they are right because their
82:03
life is chaotic and and disorder and
82:05
they don’t know where they’re going and
82:06
they don’t know which way is up a call
82:08
so there could be bad parenting going on
82:12
and I think that’s one of the reasons
82:14
why presen eights with people this idea
82:15
of be happy for you about who you are
82:18
right feel good about who you write but
82:20
but the thing is it has
82:21
to be stated with precision it’s like
82:23
yes it’s like Lucia you should treat
82:26
yourself as if you’re valuable
82:28
especially in the Ho’s Angela but you
82:31
should concentrate on who you should
82:32
become especially if you’re young and so
82:34
let’s say you’re miserable and
82:35
nihilistic and chaotic and depressed and
82:37
all of that now and you have your
82:38
reasons you know terrible parenting
82:40
abuse all of those things it’s like well
82:42
you should feel good about yourself it’s
82:45
like no no it’s it’s not it’s not the
82:46
right message is that it’s more like you
82:50
should understand how much potential
82:52
there is within you to set that straight
82:54
and then you should do everything you
82:56
can to manifest that in the world and it
82:58
will set it straight and that’s better
83:00
than self esteem it’s like you’re you’re
83:02
in a crooked horrible position okay fine
83:04
there’s a lot of suffering and pain
83:05
associated with that yeah you can’t just
83:08
feel good about that because it’s not
83:09
good but you can do something about it
83:11
you can genuinely do something about it
83:13
and I think all the evidence suggests
83:15
that that’s the case yes so I’m telling
83:17
telling young people look there’s no
83:19
matter how bad your situation is I’m not
83:21
gonna pretend it’s okay it’s not okay
83:23
it’s tragic
83:24
tainted with malevolence and some people
83:27
really get hurt by malevolent people
83:28
like you know terribly hurt sometimes
83:30
they never recover it’s really awful but
83:33
there’s more to you than you think and
83:35
if you stand up and face it with with
83:37
the positive with a with a noble vision
83:40
with discipline and intent you can go
83:43
far farther to overcoming it than you
83:46
can imagine
83:47
and that’s the principle upon which you
83:49
should predicate your behavior and I
83:51
think that one of the things that’s
83:53
really nice about being the clinical
83:54
psychologist is that this isn’t just
83:56
guesswork like one of the things we know
83:58
two things in clinical psychology one is
84:01
truthful conversations redeemed people
84:03
because if you come to a clinical
84:05
psychologist who’s worth is salt you’ll
84:09
have a truthful conversation the
84:11
conversation is well here’s what’s wrong
84:13
with my life and here’s what caused it
84:16
you know maybe it takes a year to have
84:17
that conversation and both of the
84:19
participants are doing everything they
84:21
can to lay it out properly here’s how it
84:24
might be fixed here’s what a beneficial
84:26
future might look like and so it’s a
84:28
completely honest conversation if it’s
84:29
working well and all that’s happening in
84:32
the conversation is that the two people
84:33
involved
84:34
are trying to make things better that’s
84:36
the goal let’s see if we can have a
84:38
conversation that will make things
84:39
better okay so we know that works it
84:41
does make things better and then another
84:43
thing we know is that well let’s say
84:45
there’s a bunch of things that you’re
84:46
afraid of that are in your way so you
84:49
have some vision about who you want to
84:50
be maybe you have to you know you want
84:52
to be successful in your career so you
84:54
have to learn to talk in front of a
84:55
group it’s like okay well you’re afraid
84:57
of that no wonder you don’t want to be
84:59
humiliated so okay so what do we do
85:01
93:51
because sometimes you know you’re just
93:53
hopeful I would like a good thing to
93:55
happen it’s like yeah but you know I’d
93:56
like to drink half a bottle of whiskey
93:58
tonight – it’s like so which is it gonna
94:00
be well just being hopeful about the
94:03
future might not be enough but then you
94:05
think oh I see like there’s that little
94:07
hell thing that I outlined it’s waiting
94:09
for me and maybe I’m afraid of taking
94:11
the nips next step forward because it’s
94:12
demanding and challenging it’s like yeah
94:14
I’m afraid of that but I’m way more
94:16
afraid of where I might end up if I
don’t get my act together and people
should be that’s why their conceptions
of hell in so many religions it’s like
hell is a real place whether it’s
eternal that’s a whole different
question whether it’s waiting for you in
the afterlife that’s a whole different
question but if you’ve never met anyone
in Hell you haven’t lived very long you
haven’t had your eyes open yeah it’s
undeniable that feeling of total
complete misery and deniable yeah
especially when it’s compounded by the
fact that you know you did it to
yourself
that’s the real fun that’s the real fun
part it’s like I’m having a bitch of a
time and I richly deserve it
97:11
that’s that I have a chapter in there on
97:13
raising kids it says don’t like your
97:15
kids don’t let your kids do anything it
97:17
makes you just like them it’s like well
that’s first predicated on the
observation that you’re quite a monster
and it would be better for your kids if
they didn’t get on your bad side and
like again because I’m a clinical
psychologist a monster why why do you
use that term because I’ve watched
families like I’ve seen families where
it’s as if every single person in the
family has their hands around the neck
of the family member that’s close to
97:39
them and they’re squeezing but only
97:41
tight enough to strangle them in 20
97:43
years but you’re not always using it as
97:45
a pejorative you you you’ve also used it
97:47
you should become a monster you should
97:48
be a monster yeah but that’s that’s you
97:52
shouldn’t be it it shouldn’t be
97:54
accidental that’s the thing what
97:57
so what do you mean by monster then in a
97:58
positive sense like you feel a monster
98:00
oh that’s easy among a positive monster
98:02
is somebody who says no and means it
98:04
because when you say no what you mean is
98:07
there isn’t anything you can do to me
98:08
that will make me agree to do this why
98:10
is that a monster because you have to be
98:11
because no one will take you seriously
98:13
otherwise no one will take you seriously
98:15
like no means if you keep pushing this
98:19
something that you do not like will
98:21
happen to you that’s what no means you
98:23
don’t have any strength of character
98:24
unless you can put up a fight you know
98:27
and to be able to say no to something is
98:29
to be able to put up a fight so and you
98:31
can’t do that if you’re if you can be
98:33
pushed around you’ll just get argued
98:34
into submission or you’ll feel guilty
98:36
because you’re causing conflict or
98:38
something like that but isn’t there
98:39
confusion using those terms as a
98:41
positivism and a negative maybe there’s
98:42
another word instead of monster well
98:44
there is there is the potential there is
98:47
the potential for confusion you say well
98:48
is that something that can be I think
98:51
monster is a horrible thing I don’t
98:52
think of it as being like a wall like
98:55
someone who is just rock-solid in their
98:58
belief system and rock-solid and their
99:01
understanding when you fight someone
99:03
who’s formidable say what do you think
99:05
of the person that you’re fighting like
99:07
how would you characterize them they may
99:09
have a monstrous side because they can
99:11
think they can they can bring physical
99:15
substantial physical force to bear on
99:18
the situation and and be willing to do
99:21
it so they’re not naive and and harmless
99:24
by any stretch of the imagination right
99:26
they have a well-developed capacity for
mayhem they think well is that monstrous
it’s like well I would say yes I would
say fierce fierce fine let’s go with
that yeah because someone who’s fierce
and formidable it’s not necessarily a
monster you know just I think of a
monster as being just an awful person
99:47
who’s done awful things and just you
99:49
know okay well so fair enough well so
99:52
back to the back to this situation with
99:54
your kids while you definitely don’t
99:56
want to have your kids act in a way that
99:57
awakens your inner monster right let’s
100:00
put it that way and so you need to you
100:02
need to organize your family with a
100:05
certain amount of discipline and a
100:06
certain amount of structure so that you
100:08
get to do what you want which is back to
100:10
that
100:10
to the point that you made earlier so
100:12
that you’re happy to have your kids
100:14
around so that you won’t take revenge on
100:15
them and so you want to lay your life
100:18
out so that well so that it’s providing
100:23
you what you need to not be bitter and
100:26
to work for your best interests and for
100:28
the interests of everyone else that
100:30
would be lovely and I think it’s
100:31
attainable you know because the book is
100:34
very dark and and I’m a very dark guy in
100:36
some ways because I’ve looked at the
100:38
terrible things that people do to one
100:39
another that’s the fascinating way of
100:41
looking at you think you yourself as
100:42
dark as I don’t think of you as dark oh
100:45
that’s good
100:45
the more relevant thing is that I’ve
been studying these old stories these
archetypal stories for a very long
period of time and they have power they
really have power and they manifest
themselves everywhere they manifest
themselves in movies and in books and I
mean Harry Potter’s a mythological story
and it made Roland richer than the Queen
of England you know these stories have
power and I was fortunate enough to
study a large number of people large
number of scholars who knew what that
power was Carl Jung in particular and I
could make it more accessible to people
and so that’s a big part of it but what
overall significance of that is well I
just it just leaves me speechless I mean
there’s Kathy Newman things a good
example and I mean so many things have
happened I’ve got involved I’ve been in
a scandal of some sort a serious scandal
of some sort probably every three weeks
for a year and a half you know and there
are things that are just well the did
James tomorrow thing is a good example
of that like that’s a big deal you know
that that explosion that that that
emerged around him in the court case
that’s coming out of it it’s a big deal
and this thing with Lindsay Shepard that
was the worst scandal that
hit a Canadian University and then there
was all the protests and and then there
was what happened with with channel 4
the UK and it’s like I don’t know what
to make of it
I don’t what what I’m trying to do is
have a good conversation when I come and
talk to somebody like you where we can
have a good conversation try not to say
118:18
anything stupid that’s really what I’m
118:20
trying to do is to not say anything
118:22
stupid that’s hard or too stupid yeah
118:27
yeah well didn’t it’s being high stakes
118:28
poker yeah you know for it’s not quite
118:31
so bad now because especially after what
118:35
happened with channel 4 and some
118:36
journalists like people have been trying
118:38
to take me out for quite a long time and
118:39
it’s not it isn’t working so far
118:43
actually you actually believe what
118:45
you’re saying and it actually makes
118:46
sense well you know that’s that’s it’s
118:50
not a bad start but it’s rare in this
118:51
world this is a especially in these
118:53
ideologically charged times yeah this
118:56
toxic tribalism that we keep bringing up
118:58
it’s well and I also decided like a long
119:01
time ago and and I I think this runs
119:03
through 12 rules for life is well I
119:05
believe that people’s decisions tilt the
119:07
world towards heaven or hell I think
119:10
there’s no more accurate way of
119:11
describing the consequences of each of
119:14
your decisions than that you face
119:16
potential that’s what you face that’s
119:19
what you face in the world is potential
119:20
it’s not Material reality it’s potential
119:23
and every decision you make you’re
119:26
deciding whether you want to make the
119:27
world better or worse and if you like
119:30
the ultimate better is heaven and the
119:32
ultimate worse is hell we know how to
119:33
make the world into hell we’ve done that
119:36
multiple times much of the 20th century
119:38
was that it’s like I looked it all out
119:40
and I thought okay I would rather that
119:42
the world didn’t degenerate into hell
119:44
and I understand why people wanted to
119:46
degenerate into hell they’re angry
119:48
they’re angry because they suffer they
119:51
suffer unfairly and they suffer because
119:53
people hurt them and so they think this
119:56
is a bad game I’m not going to help make
119:58
it better I’m angry I’m gonna make it
120:01
worse even that’s what the call of mine
120:02
kids did you know that’s what all the
120:05
mass shooters do they say to hell with
120:06
this I hate it
120:08
they’re so far behind the game they just
120:09
want to flip the table yeah yeah worse
120:11
than that they they want it
120:12
obliterate the game yes and they want to
120:15
do it with as much malice as possible
120:17
just to obtain revenge and I understand
120:19
that but I decided a long time ago that
120:21
I would rather not play that game I
120:23
think it I think that it’s possible that
120:26
we could make the world better I really
120:28
believe they leave that too so I think
120:29
well the so I’m I’m trying to tell
120:32
people look there’s more to you than you
120:34
think there’s more potential there’s
120:36
more than enough potential to go around
120:38
there’s definite suffering and
120:40
malevolence in the world we could fix it
120:41
you haven’t got anything better to do
120:43
that’s a very big point that there’s
120:44
more potential to go around talking
120:46
about more than people understand we’re
120:47
not gonna run now to put that no we’re
120:49
not and with this idea of the famine
120:51
thinking is one of the reasons why
120:53
people get upset at other people’s
120:55
success they think somehow another this
120:57
other person’s success takes something
120:59
away from them yep yeah well there’s and
121:01
it’s see the other thing too is that
121:03
I’ve realized that people actually act
121:05
like what they confront in the world is
121:07
potential it’s so funny because whatever
121:09
potential is it’s it’s not materially
121:12
measurable but if you tell someone
121:13
you’re not living up to your potential
121:15
they go it’s like well what is that
121:18
potential that you’re not living up to
121:19
and then when you say well there’s
121:21
potential in front of you you know that
121:23
you can walk out on the street and you
121:25
go right or left or straight ahead like
121:27
you’re facing this thing that isn’t
121:29
fully formed and you get to decide how
121:32
it’s going to form and you can make it
121:36
better and so my question is like the
121:38
world’s a rough place there’s no doubt
121:39
about it it’s a harsh place but my
question is what would happen if we
start making it worse how good could it
be if we stop making it worse and I
don’t know if there’s an upper limit to
that like it might be maybe we could
make it really really really good why
not and we don’t have any better to do
than that
it’s like aim at heaven start at home
aim at heaven tell the truth let’s see
what the hell happens you know like it
is the case clearly on the facts of the
matter in 20 years there wouldn’t have
to be a single person in the world that
was hungry in 20 years we could get rid
of the 5 biggest diseases that currently
plague the planet we could straighten
things up and god only knows what things
could be like that or we could let the
whole thing DJ
right into hell so in each of us is
making that decision with each decision
that’s the other thing that I’ve
understood so take your choice you want
hell are you want heaven if you pick
hell just remember you knew what you
were doing when you picked it but nobody
picks hell yeah just sort of let it
slide yeah but they do it because they
blind themselves you know you know when
you do it you say oh yeah well you know
I let that slide then you and then you
don’t think about it it’s like you could
think about it you could think about it
123:02
you could know but you don’t let
123:04
yourself know is any of this all the
123:09
pressure and the scandal every three
123:10
weeks is this this is it way on you is
123:14
it is it difficult how are you feeling
123:18
like when we’re not feeling strange
123:20
thing
123:21
yeah it’s like it’s like simultaneously
123:23
the worst possible thing and the best
123:25
possible thing that could happen well
123:27
financially it’s been a boom right yes
123:30
it’s which I mean the thing that I’ve I
123:35
shouldn’t say this but I’m going to
123:37
because it’s just so goddamn funny I
123:38
can’t help but say that I figured out
123:40
how to monetize social justice warriors
123:42
[Laughter]