Transcript for #1203 - Eric Weinstein

SPEAKER_01

00:01 - 00:08

And we're live. Are you going to update the people out there? No. Are you shot your phone off while you're professional?

SPEAKER_00

00:08 - 00:13

Try where you're sir. I'm doing well. It's going on. Everything. It's all pretty weird out there.

SPEAKER_01

00:13 - 00:41

It is very weird out there. We were just talking about how weird it is out there before the podcast about how it just seems like it's very difficult to keep together during these times and to keep a reasonable position and to handle all of the pressure of all the people that get upset at anything you do. Left or right in the middle, centrist, your two centers, your two left, your two right, your unreasonable, your two reasonable, your two nice, you're not nice enough.

SPEAKER_00

00:42 - 00:45

Wow. Suddenly, I feel like I'm in a marriage.

SPEAKER_01

00:45 - 00:46

Doesn't it seem like that?

SPEAKER_00

00:46 - 01:06

Yeah, it does. I think that this is why this is the era for disagreeability. If you're not easily swayed, because you're somehow insensitive enough that you just want to keep to first principles, wherever it is that you believe, that seems to be the best hedge against getting swept up in the madness of others.

SPEAKER_01

01:06 - 01:07

How so?

SPEAKER_00

01:07 - 01:57

Well, I guess when I go met a cognitive I look at my yearning for group belonging and then I also watch my inability to belong to groups that say crazy thing. Yeah. And so those are, those are two conflicting feelings. I think sometimes when people look at me, they say, wow, you're really contrarian and you have an easy time standing up to, you know, the conventional wisdom. And I don't think it's, it's, it's that true. I just think when those two things fight inside me dialectically, the disagreeability is so strong because it's protecting a comprehensive view of the world. And so since everything already kind of fits together fairly well, I would say it's much harder to sway me because the number of things I would have to move cognitively to accommodate a wrong idea is quite large.

SPEAKER_01

01:57 - 02:15

It seems unnecessary but it also seems like we should be able to disagree on things and you should be able to point out with reasonable courtesy that there's something wrong with someone's idea and it not become a big personal thing but oftentimes it's not the case.

SPEAKER_00

02:17 - 03:21

So a lot of the things I think that we're exploring are what I would think of as heuristics. They're sort of rules of thumb that work fairly well within some domain of definition. And we've gotten so many of these conflicting rules. I mean, the rules of thumb themselves conflict. So for example, he who hesitates is lost, conflicts with nothing ventured, nothing gained or something like that. Sorry, nope. Well, I forget, there's the cautionary aphorism, and then there's the be bold aphorism. And so we don't have a good way of sorting out conflicts that occur at the heuristic level. Then you also have heuristics meant for social cohesion conflicting with ground truths. So this is why biology is always controversial. because biology is a science that tells us many of the things that we wish were true or just not true. You know, I was about Ben Shapiro's, facts don't care about your feelings. Well, biology cares about your feelings. It just laughs at them and stumps on them and makes them feel very sad.

SPEAKER_01

03:22 - 03:25

Well, it also tries to explain your feelings too.

SPEAKER_00

03:25 - 03:41

Right, exactly. But if you really understand biology, the world is so dark and so interesting and beautiful and crazy that it's very hard to recover simple ideas about how people should be when you realize that our being apes has deep consequences.

SPEAKER_01

03:41 - 04:44

Yeah, I have a very minimal understanding of biology, but in that understanding, I've come to accept some things just about being a person that I never considered before, such as. All the different things that are running your decision-making, like just what we're talking about, like the need to be in a group, and all these are probably evolutionary advantages to fostering tribal behavior, so you could all work together in feed each other. you know this is always pulling at you and you know when when people give people hard time about virtue signaling it is kind of gross when someone virtue signals you know but we understand what it is it's gross because we've all done it right that's one of the gross things about it when someone is just like really trying hard to act like, you know, they're disgusted by the way people behave because they would never behave like that. And they just want to let you know, I'm above this type of behavior. What's most likely because they weren't above that kind of behavior at some point in their life or they're not currently really above that type of behavior, but they wish they were.

SPEAKER_00

04:44 - 04:52

or the part of them that's speaking is the part that's above that behavior, but that's not the part that's going to be operative after 11 on a weekend at a bar.

SPEAKER_01

04:52 - 04:55

Yeah, three shots in. All bets are off.

SPEAKER_00

04:55 - 05:08

The wheels are off the wagon. So I think we don't, we don't see ourselves. We are permanently in our own blind spot because the part of us that is, you know, just and righteous and good, seems to know very little about the other part.

SPEAKER_01

05:08 - 05:31

Let's also this thing this need to belong and need to be accepted. Like we work to be accepted, instead of work to be someone that you would want to be a part of the group. Instead of being really honest about who you are and how you think and how you behave and how you operate in the world. Instead of doing that and trying to prove on that, you try to project an image of this.

SPEAKER_00

05:31 - 05:54

Well, then what, here's a question for us. Why is vice-signaling so much more powerful than virtue signalling? Vice signaling like a person who admits their problems like an alcoholic who steps up and says I've got a real issue could be that way or it could be sort of Dan Bilzerian type of like you want to know what I'm into I'm into hot chicks weed and guns and making tons of money showing it off.

SPEAKER_01

05:54 - 06:14

Well, he's super honest, right? That's one of the reasons and he's bulletproof in that regard, but you can't fuck with him like you can't say hey look at you you're just a playboy. He'd be like yep Yeah, like girls. Yeah, it works. Yeah, um, what else? Right. Well, I'm nice. Like he's a nice guy. Talked to Dambell Zarian. He's friendly. He's not bad guy.

SPEAKER_00

06:14 - 07:50

No, I mean, you know, he had this post, which was a, he was, I think, offering a hand to a woman up a stare and it said, come with me. I'll ruin your life, but it'll be fun. You know, it was just like it's so disarming. Yeah. And I think that this is also partially, you know, a secret to your success, which is that you're a nice guy, you're really into fighting, you know, you hunt elk, you're clear about which ones you're going to kill which ones you want based on the reproductive cycle. You're promoting all sorts of things that people don't want to talk about to a fairly conscious level. And it's produced an incredible level of trust in an era where all of the virtues signaling gives away. I mean, if you scratch any person enough below the surface, you're going to see that they're really warning you about themselves. And so the people who are the most sort of self-critical. And this is like, you know, I think I brought this up recently on Twitter about meta-honesty, where there was in the Castro and San Francisco. There was a bar restaurant that was advertising free food, naked servers, plus false advertising. It was just fun and playful. As a result, you had an instant desire to eat there and trust them. I think that in this world of virtue, signaling, vise signaling is really the growth industry. That's what's working for good people because they are more in touch and You know, they are going to lie to you and they're going to do all the self-interested things, but they're not going to surprise you quite as much.

SPEAKER_01

07:50 - 08:43

Well, in the case of Dambles area, I really don't think he's going to lie to you. I don't think that's what he's doing. I think what he's doing is living like a guy who's got a hundred million dollars and happens to be 35 years old and likes to bang hot chicks and fly around in private jets and live in some, if you see that fucking house that he's got, he just bought some crazy house and like Bellair. I guess with that weed money, Jesus he's got some it looks like you probably cost $100 million or something ridiculous like that. It's a fucking insane house But that's what he likes. Yeah, you know the guy drives likes to drive around for our reason and but he's a nice guy So it's like well, where what's wrong with this picture? What's wrong with his pictures? He's doing things look at this. This is his house What in the holy fuck is that? Do you have a golf course on his roof? What is that? This is a fucking ridiculous house. Look at this fucking place. He gives his address out. Is that his address?

SPEAKER_00

08:43 - 08:44

It's pretty hard to hide that thing.

SPEAKER_01

08:45 - 08:47

Why the fuck would he give us a dress-out?

SPEAKER_03

08:47 - 08:49

I don't think you can get there, it's in Belair.

SPEAKER_01

08:49 - 09:11

Whoa, look at this house. It's preposterous. Anyway, this is what he likes. But why is that bad? I mean, look, we only have 100 years of everything goes perfect. I know. What do you give a shit? Like why does everybody get a shit, but they do give a shit. They give a shit a lot because for a lot of folks that are working, you know, making a good living, making no 50 grand a year or whatever, that's it. completely out of the realm of possibilities.

SPEAKER_00

09:11 - 10:14

And his lifestyle wouldn't be sustainable for them. Because he's taking real risk. There's no question about it when you you know you get everybody's stone and then you take them to fire automatic weapons on the desert oh yeah that's real risk and also the gambling he does a lot of like crazy gambling but this is the thing about the the relationship with the unforgiving this is partially why you're a UFC and jujitsu life is that when you have a relationship with the unforgiving you can say you know that guy that guy doesn't really know what he's doing but then you're you're in the ring you know you're the man in the arena and you fight up very quickly whether or not the trash talking you know paid off or it didn't And I think that many people have no relationship with the unforgiving. I can take them out on a hike into, you know, let's say the Trinity wilderness, and then two hours in, they'll just sit down and say, I want to go home. You're thinking like, okay, you're signaling something, but there's no car service, and there's we're not calling a helicopter. You know, just, if you live in the social layer, you're surprised by the existence of the unforgiving.

SPEAKER_01

10:17 - 12:18

Well, I want to support people's ability to do whatever the fuck they want. On one hand, I want to support someone's ability to sit in front of a computer and whether you're working or you're writing code or you're writing a script or you're just fucking playing video games. I want to support your ability to do whatever you want to do. If you have the means, if you're not, you know, if your family's not starving, this is what you enjoy doing. Why do I care? But as a person who's experienced a fair amount of adversity, especially self-imposed adversity, I would tell you that you would benefit from it. I've benefited from it and I think you'd benefit from it too. You don't want to be that guy. The two hours into the hike says, I want to go home. You don't want to be that guy. You want to be that person just says, well, this is what we're doing. And I'm going to figure out how to do this. And I'm going to show character. And I'm going to be proud of myself at the end of this. I mean, I might have to walk for six hours and when it's all over, my legs might be shaky. And I might have to sit down. But that gate array is going to taste so good. It's going to be like the greatest gatorade of all time because you're going to drink it, you'll be like, ah, I earned the shit out of this. You're going to feel it. And I think we've learned about ourselves through especially self, well, any kind of adversity. You know, look, I'm coming off of being evacuated from the fires, which was for me, not that difficult. You know, I'm not poor. I got a hotel. I brought my family to the hotel. We got safe. got my dog to the podcast studio and everybody's all right, you know, but for those firefighters, I mean 12 hour shifts battling the blaze or people who lost their home. Some of them tried to save it. It was a story about a guy in Malibu, the climbed on top of his roof with a hose and tried to fight off the fire and he got severe burns and he's in the hospital and I mean it's raining ash and these chunks of fucking fire on people, these members, they're falling from the sky, and this guy's trying to save his house. I mean, that guy literally went through the fires. He'll be a different person after this.

SPEAKER_00

12:18 - 13:09

And no question. We've been in something of a reality drought. The number of people who have very little relationship to reality. I mean, I used to live in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and you'd come in from Boston, and there would be the science at fresh, killed chicken. like no bones about it man fresh kill chicken but like chicken McNuggets nobody quite knows what what part of the chicken is a McNugget right it's just some abstraction that comes to you and so i think we've gotten very divorced there are all of these layers of indirection between us in the world and when a fire happens it's so overwhelming we were just choking on the the sf smoke uh... in the bay area There's, it just, it gets real after having been unreal for a very long time.

SPEAKER_01

13:09 - 14:07

Yeah. It's unavoidable. It makes you, it makes you buck up. Like you got to get out of there. Like we got it back with it Thursday at 2.30 in the morning. We were looking up, we're like, we got to get the fuck out of here. Like, it don't give a shit what you leave behind. Just go, keep your body and go. Everything else, it's either replaceable or you don't really need it that much anyway. Just fucking get out of there. And when you see that fire raging over those hills and helicopters are dropping water on it and then another house explodes because the gas line gets hit it's just you you I saw that you see that you go oh there's this is not enough people in the world save you there's not enough fucking firefighters or cops there's too many houses there's too many people and a bunch of these houses are going to go you got to get the fuck out of there and but there's a certain I was with a bunch of my friends from my neighborhood and my friend Tom Segura in his wife. We all stayed at the same hotel. And we felt there was like a tangible sense of community.

SPEAKER_00

14:07 - 15:12

Well, this is that I love this point. Let's imagine you go for a wedding and they house you with your third cousins. People you barely know. If you're lucky enough that the sewage system breaks and stuff is leaking out of the ceiling and you guys all have to do heroic crazy stuff to save the house, you're going to be closer to your third cousin than you are, you know, to your uncle. And this is this very strange feature of the world that kind of a random arrival of diversity is very often what bonds you to some particular human being. And if you avoid adversity in groups, your whole life, You probably don't realize that you're never fully activated as a human being, particularly if men, I think, don't form groups that, in some sense, fight or battle are contested together. So there's this very weird fact that apparently humans are the only species that organize contests in teams. This is an intrinsic feature of being human.

SPEAKER_01

15:13 - 15:16

Contests. Yeah. Do other animals have any contests?

SPEAKER_00

15:16 - 15:30

Well, just if they've sparse, you know, we'll have these incredible rating parties. You're very methodical and they'll attack somebody else, but I don't think that they practice it. It's like, okay, your red team chimp and your team chimp.

SPEAKER_01

15:30 - 15:37

Well, we're the only ones that do stuff like that that can communicate, right? Like dolphins can communicate, but they don't do stuff like that.

SPEAKER_00

15:37 - 15:51

Right, or you have individual sparring, like you'll have two bears learning to play with each other, because it's safer to play with your brother in childhood than it is to just suddenly show up against some big ass bear and have to compete for female.

SPEAKER_01

15:51 - 16:10

I had William Von Hippel on a couple of days ago, and he's the author of the social leap. And we were actually talking about this about one of the things that made human being successful as we came down from the trees and started walking around the grasslands as our ability to organize and to work and coordinate together.

SPEAKER_00

16:11 - 17:36

Yeah, well, but like African wild dogs are fairly good at this. And you watch what they do in their spare time, very often they just take the piss out of each other. So they actually come to each other's age aided at a very high level in times of need. But when you're just hanging out around the fire house, your really just give each other shit all the time. Right. And so there's something about the way in which we play being kind of divergent from the way in which we behave when we actually just need each other. And like you need to be on that line, you know, let's say, you know, throwing burlap bags and I just need you to do that thing and we're both facing something together. Doesn't have to be fighting in a militaristic situation. But I do think that This is one of the weird things that's going on with all of this emphasis on care and feelings, is that often men need to give each other shit in order to form very deep bonds. If I can't tease you and if I don't know where the line is, there is this line which is like, dude, that was way too far. We all know that those lines exist. We sometimes have to go up to them and sometimes we have to experiment by going over them. But if somebody says, I don't like the way you're talking. That seems very insensitive. And my response is, well, you're going to keep me from forming a deep bond with that person. You just don't know that that's how we do it.

SPEAKER_01

17:36 - 17:52

Yeah, they're shielding. They're putting up their shield. Right. And often is, you know, to project a certain image to you. They want to be taken seriously. They want some respect. They can't deal with you goofing on them.

SPEAKER_00

17:52 - 18:50

That's true and goofing can go wrong. But I think that One of the things that I've been fascinated by is where did all this madness come from? And I increasingly am wondering whether it comes from social and emotional learning that started to be taught in schools around emotional intelligence. So this whole idea of EQ, I think, had a lot to it. But not all the bugs were worked out because a lot of things that kind of are in the neighborhood of bullying, might be actually intimacy building, right? And so if something turns into some super disgusting deadly hazing ritual, we all say, what the hell are you people doing? But on the other hand, if it sort of three clicks back from that line, and there was mild discomfort, we humiliated each other a little bit, and now we're friends for life, then You know, the fear of the hazing ritual gone wrong may actually stop people from ever actually making the really deep bonds to last the lifetime.

SPEAKER_01

18:50 - 19:47

Well, isn't it like everything else? Some people are good at things and some people suck at it. So some people are good at being silly with their friends and some people go too far. I mean, you experience that. Like I've had friends who experience that where they do a podcast and on the podcast, they fuck with each other. And they'll have someone come up to them that they don't even know right off the street and immediately say something like ruthlessly insulting to them and they're like, what the fuck? And they're like, yeah, man, you do that shit on your podcast all the time. I'm like, okay, you're doing it wrong. I don't know you. We're not friends. We're not bonding here. You're walking up and saying something mean calling someone a fatso. Exactly. Yeah, they just not good at it. And oftentimes, that's some sort of a sign of social intelligence, a lack of social intelligence, a lack of, I mean, who knows what's going on in their home, might just be bad information from parents, and they're growing up in this environment of just very low-level social skills.

SPEAKER_00

19:47 - 20:19

And now what we're doing is, I mean, I think that you're spot on. We're now going to try to readjust everyone around our weakest players. Right. So now the idea is that because that can be said in a horrible way, we're not going to let anyone say anything remotely adjacent to it. Yeah. You can't do anything that would be a precursor to it. So you're just going to say, well, you see that little patch of bad cells over there, we're going to cut off your leg in order to stop that cancer. And it's like, could we do something a little bit more surgical?

SPEAKER_01

20:19 - 22:05

Well, and also there's some things that there's a reason why we have this instinct to mock things. Yeah. Because people get out a lot and then they demand too much goddamn attention and they become a problem. And this is a, I think I believe this goes back to hunting parties and hunter gathers with a one person who just wanted too much attention. Like you, you're fucking enough for this group effort. And that's kind of what happens socially when people claim these very ridiculous victim statuses. Right. You know, and there's a picture that I put up on my Instagram a couple weeks ago of this guy. He had this crazy makeup on and he had this ridiculous description of himself like non-binary queer that also identifies as a Muslim and he was talking about quantum physics. The quantum physics got helped him appreciate his queerness. And I looked at that. I was like, okay, maybe. Or maybe you're just fucking crying out for attention. And all I wrote was make sense, definitely doesn't seem crazy. And people got mad at me for that, for something so obvious. I looked, I just peered into the fucking deep dungeon that is the comment section for a moment. And I saw people like, you would think that the people that are most susceptible to suicide, you would leave them alone, but your cruelty is, you know, you're exposing your cruelty like you listen. That's silly. That guy needs better friends. Your friends are going to tell you you're silly. You got crazy makeup of your scenes guy. No. You have a photo. Look at this. I wish I rack a gay non-binary and also identify as Muslim. Listen, you need too much goddamn attention. That's all I'm saying. And I'm saying you're a bad person, you should kill yourself, you shouldn't be queer. Be whatever you want to be. But if you're going that hard, that hard to define yourself. That is needy as shit. That's fucking annoying.

SPEAKER_00

22:05 - 22:20

But your point, your point is that you have to titrate the negative feedback. Yes. Right? And so what you did was you gave him a small dose and saying, look, You might want to course correct a little bit. Well, the idea that there's any course correction that you're not sitting there celebrating this. Right.

SPEAKER_01

22:20 - 22:24

Well, that's that's the thing. Yeah. Yeah, you're supposed to celebrate it.

SPEAKER_00

22:24 - 22:26

I'm supposed to celebrate so many things.

SPEAKER_01

22:26 - 22:56

Yeah. Well, you know what, you could celebrate it. That's okay. But you shouldn't get mad if I go, oh, that might be a little nuts. Because it's obvious little nuts. It's a little nuts to paint your face with glitter. It's a little nuts. It's a little nuts if that was just a regular person who's like, hi, I work at JC Penney. My name is Wendy and this is what I like to wear on my face. Like, okay, Wendy's a crazy bitch. Look at Wendy. Go look at Wendy. Look at her face. What is she doing? I don't know, man. She got fucking crazy glitter in her hair's 15 different colors.

SPEAKER_00

22:57 - 23:09

Yeah, I mean, okay, look at it this way. I have this weird thing which I think sometimes is called macula phobia the fear of cosmetics. Really? Oh, man.

SPEAKER_01

23:09 - 23:11

Lips. What kind? I shall.

SPEAKER_00

23:11 - 23:36

Okay. No, it's a fake eyelashes. Well, this is the thing is that sometimes it looks somewhat normal and then suddenly doesn't integrate and the person just Looks like they've got crazy stuff stuck to their head. Yeah. And you're like, you've got crazy stuff stuck to your. Well, that's how I perceive it. Now, here's the question. I can't be in touch. Like, it can't be Eric's got a problem with macula phobia. It has to be.

SPEAKER_01

23:36 - 23:38

I've heard that word. It's freaking out.

SPEAKER_00

23:38 - 23:50

It has to be. It has to be Eric can't accept people who wear makeup and my question would be from first principles. How do you tell who to have sympathy with? Because this has been somewhat debilitating for me.

SPEAKER_01

23:50 - 23:57

Really? Yeah, sure. So it's been a real issue, like you've struggled with it. Yeah. You've struggled with the feeling or struggle with the fact that you have the feeling.

SPEAKER_00

23:57 - 24:26

Everybody actually experience. If you remember Tammy Faye Baker for a way, right? So she was famous for freaking people out because she had no concept of how much money up as too much. Just too much. Yeah. Now, what if somebody looks normal and then you turn around and suddenly they're Tammy Faye Baker and you never can predict when that's going to happen. So that's like an interesting question about, do we accept the person who, I don't know why I have this. It's just, that's something in my mind.

SPEAKER_01

24:26 - 24:39

Well, because you're a logical person and you're looking at this war pain that people are putting on and you don't understand the desire to do this. Why do you understand? You do, but you don't understand actually doing it.

SPEAKER_00

24:39 - 24:47

I don't understand why it looks normal. Like, I have the feeling that to other people, it looks very different than the way it looks to me.

SPEAKER_01

24:47 - 24:50

Right. Well, they've just accepted it.

SPEAKER_00

24:50 - 25:16

Maybe. Sometimes I accept it. And then suddenly, you know, I shake it. It's like you're shaking out of the movie. Like you see a movie where the suddenly the mic is visible from the top. You know, like, oh, what's going on here? It's a movie. It's a movie. And that. But anyway, we all have these weird quirks. The question is, with whom should we be sympathetic? And with whom do we say, well, you're being judgmental?

SPEAKER_01

25:16 - 26:07

With me, it's women's shoes that have gigantic heels, those celettos that they could barely walk in. That one freaks me out. It freaks me out because I see women walking in. I'm like, this is so crazy. This is a choice that you're, I mean, I can't imagine. I'm paranoid, I guess. Maybe I've seen too much physical conflict. I can't imagine wearing something that would physically compromise me to the point where I literally can't run away. Because you can't run away in those things. If you're in like stilettos, like these little things that you walk around in, and your feet are all smooshed in, and you're basically doing tiptoes everywhere you go, and your feet have to be killing you by the end of the night. You're not running away. There's a wolf chasing you or some shit. If there's something going down, you're not getting away. It's just, it's a weird desire to lengthen your legs and to give this graceful appearance.

SPEAKER_00

26:07 - 26:23

What's called lardosis behavior? Lardosis. Lardosis. I'm learning so much today. Okay. So high heels were originally developed for men. to be a pure taller. Not sure if it was to pure taller only or if it was for writing. I can't remember.

SPEAKER_01

26:23 - 26:40

Yeah, maybe. For a lot of people don't know cowboy boots. Yeah. The reason why they slip on like that is when the the horse bucks and takes off your boots fall off. They're supposed to. I didn't know. Yeah, that's the whole idea behind the reason you slip on and slip off and they have that heel.

SPEAKER_00

26:40 - 26:40

Okay.

SPEAKER_01

26:40 - 26:57

Or there's that wooden heel that heel slips into the stirrups. So when you get, when the horse bucks, you don't want to get drags on, you want to that shit to just fly off. And then you're on your back going, oh, look at that horse go. And then you go pick up your boots because they fall and off. And the fucking horse is gone, but at least you're alive.

SPEAKER_00

26:57 - 26:59

Oh, that's the expression he died with his boots on.

SPEAKER_01

27:00 - 27:16

If you, yeah, if you get, well, not really. I think that's like your gunfight type deal. But I think if you get dragged, I mean, if you get dragged, horses are going to run over rocks and shit, you're done. People die all the time that are wearing regular shoes that shove their feet into stirrups and then you're stuck. That's why cowboy boots come off like that.

SPEAKER_00

27:17 - 28:22

Yeah, I remember when I used to write horses, we'd have the guy reading the trail would take us up to a gallop and suddenly say, emergency dismount was really terrifying. Yeah, and you know, you'd have to do it at speed very, very quickly. But I think that high heels got taken over by women because a lot of the things that we claim that we like about heels, that is the, I do it for height, like the way it makes the leg look, probably secondary to the curvature of the back and the way in which that is typically associated with the sexual receptivity. So it's that particular posture that the heel can out. And so the way I read it is that the cost of the heel is part of the communication. In other words, I'm willing to do something that is clearly not comfortable or for my benefit in any other way. So much so that you can tell that I must be interested in sending a signal. 100%. Yeah. So, well, but you have to deny the signal, too. So part of the signaling is to say, oh, these are actually my most comfortable shoes.

SPEAKER_01

28:22 - 28:31

They always say that. Girls are hilarious. They're so comfortable. These are so comfortable. Right. Like, how is that even possible? Those aren't crocks.

SPEAKER_00

28:31 - 28:41

Yes, but the deception has to be part of Oh, now I'm like picturing crocs with heels. That was really weird.

SPEAKER_01

28:41 - 28:48

Well, the deception has to be, you have to decide that you're not ridiculous.

SPEAKER_00

28:48 - 28:57

No, it's a shared deception. Yes. Because then as the guy I have to say, oh, that's so interesting. Yeah, but that's a lie. Well, we're all lying, but it's mutually understood as a lie.

SPEAKER_01

28:57 - 29:17

Yeah, but when the girls are saying, oh, Girls could say, these are so comfortable because they're not killing them because they've accepted a higher level of pain tolerance with footwear than men have. Like if I had to just jam my feet into something poiny, like some poiny and that's Spanish dance or type shoes.

SPEAKER_00

29:18 - 29:27

I would hurt after a while. I hate those things. Okay, so that's some kind of uncomfortable thing that we do to ourselves as men.

SPEAKER_01

29:27 - 30:56

Yeah. Well, I used to have to wear one when I drove limos. I think, well, I've definitely worn one since then, but very rarely. Very rarely. Someone could kill you pretty easily with a tie. Like if someone has a tie on and I grab a holder tie, yeah. Boy, unless you're a lot bigger than me, I might kill you. Got to hold your tie. Tie is a hard thing to shake loose. It's really strong. Like you could you a good tie is not going to rip. Yeah. Someone gets a hold of your tie at the knot and just twists and holds onto you. All they have to do is hold onto you. Grab an arm and just grab their legs around you and hold onto that tie. You're a dead man. You're you're giving them a weapon. Yeah, you all the time. All right, you convinced me no more ties just the grab that and just fucking twist you don't have much time men. You you don't have much time to get this arm off your next such a UFC. You have to figure out it's a jujitsu spin because UFC you don't wear clothes. to be able to grab a hold of someone's clothing, like a person with a leather jacket. If you're talking shit and you have a leather jacket on, you're with a guy who knows judo, you are beyond fucked. This guy might as well have cannons coming out of his body. You're doomed. You're 100% doomed. He's going to grab that leather jacket and basically this handles and he's going to throw you up in the air and he's going to hit you with the world. The whole world is below, and he's gonna drive you into the world, and you're so fucked, and you don't even realize it.

SPEAKER_00

30:56 - 30:57

Joe, how often do you have to be in fist fights?

SPEAKER_01

30:57 - 31:05

Never. Never, man. I don't know. I don't want to have nothing to do with that. I just get away. I would never want to get in a fist fight.

SPEAKER_00

31:05 - 31:20

No, this is fascinating to me about the world here. It's always talking about fighting and what can happen. But just in our world, there's almost none of this in You know, relatively boring, white guy, middle age.

SPEAKER_01

31:20 - 31:36

You have a grown world star hip-hop? That shit's all day every day. There's plenty of videos. Most of the time, nothing happens. But the one time when shit does happen, if you don't know how to defend yourself, you're really fucked.

SPEAKER_00

31:36 - 31:57

This is true, but then the thing is that in all the practicing that you do, you're also exposing yourself to the potential for injury. Oh, yeah. So there's a question as to whether you're safer. Uh, if you spend all of your time in this kind of, well, what if something happens? I want to be prepared, but the preparation for it is itself potentially fairly hazardous.

SPEAKER_01

31:57 - 32:13

That's unquestionable, but isn't that just like the guy who sits on the couch and never goes into the woods because he doesn't want to get tired? I know. It's very simple because like, here we are. I'm 51 years old and I'm in and it all works. So even though I've been injured, I'm right here, everything works.

SPEAKER_00

32:13 - 32:20

Yeah, but you also got to have a shit fixed. What if the UFC thing was like bold and interesting when you were young guy? Do you think you would have?

SPEAKER_01

32:20 - 32:28

I would have 100% done it and I probably would have a much harder time having this conversation. That's right. Yeah, for sure. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

32:28 - 32:40

I think you've hit the sweet spot where you got the skills, you've been in training, idiom, you really know what you're talking about and you're getting front row seats, but not actually having to have your brain particularly take the pound.

SPEAKER_01

32:40 - 33:33

There's no getting away from that. It that is the unfortunate reality that every fighter accepts. There's no getting away from that. There's there's an absolute possibility and it's not just your head. It's also your joints. A big part is your back and your neck. I know many guys that have neck impingements and discernations and fused neck discs and then nerve pinched. where their nerves are impinged to the point where they have atrophy in their arms. I know several guys who have that, where they have one arm that's smaller than the other arm, and it severely impedes their ability to move and they used to be world champions. Two guys that have been on the show, Boss Root and Pat Miletich, two of the greatest of all time. Both guys have a one small arm and one regular size arm, because of neck impingments for their nerves are literally pinched down by all the swelling and scar tissue and damaged discs.

SPEAKER_00

33:34 - 33:43

yeah well since we became friends I started just casually looking at this world and it's utterly fascinating I mean there's There's nothing like it.

SPEAKER_01

33:43 - 34:31

Well, the jujitsu world I think you would there's there's two different worlds right there's the MMA world which incorporates all the different martial arts and then there's the jujitsu world and the jujitsu world I think you would keep out. Yes, you would love it because it's basically But to call it chess is not quite fair right because it's more complex than chess There's much more going on with degrees of freedom or so high But it's also easier to win if someone's better than chess. Because even if someone is fairly competent in chess, we'll take a few moves to beat them. And you just do if someone's fairly competent and the other one is a master, probably crush it very quickly. But when you watch two really high level guys trying to set each other up, it's this crazy rolling exercise and leverage and position and then the knowledge of moves.

SPEAKER_00

34:31 - 34:37

That Eddie Bravo versus, uh, quite a great whole crazy. Yeah. It's hard to even know what's going on.

SPEAKER_01

34:37 - 35:13

It's crazy if you don't know. It's one of my more difficult challenges of being a commentator is when the fight goes to the ground explaining to people watching at home. What he wants to do right now is get his right leg over his arm. And as soon as he does that now that arm is stuck, he's in trouble right now. Yeah, you know, and like to try to explain that to people so they can follow along. Oh, I see I see and he's gonna grab that it's gonna arches back and he tapped and you people go oh and he gets people really excited about your jiu-jitsu because they see that and he goes oh, this is like really complicated like he's got there's like a dance he's doing and the other guy's trying to resist the day when the first time I saw the Gracie breakdown of

SPEAKER_00

35:13 - 35:48

particular fights where they've committed to memory every move. Yeah. And it's like replaying the great games of like Morphier, a couple-boggling chess, and you're just thinking, wow, okay, there's the evergreen game, there's the mortal game, and that to me is fascinating, but it's actually more interesting to me in the UFC arena because of the fact that that's only a component, and that it's what I didn't understand was how much we could get close to unrestricted fighting and still have people fairly dependably survive with.

SPEAKER_01

35:49 - 37:40

minimal obvious this figure there is this even there is some we could even be safer if we eliminated weight cutting the weight cutting is the number one health issue in the sport in my opinion yeah number two is the brain damage and the impact and you know broken bones things along those lines but the number one is weight cutting because it's so unnecessary it's such a such an issue that needs to be addressed because these guys want to compete at the highest weight possible so do you know how it works no Okay, say if you were going to compete in the 170 pound division, but you actually weighed 190. What you would do is you would wait until you would follow a pretty strict diet, keep your body weight in your fat at a certain level, and then when it comes down to a few days before, you would dehydrate yourself pretty radically. And then rehydrate yourself scientifically using a bunch of guys like George Lockhart guys were experts in this and then they'll give you the exact right amount of nutrients right amount of potassium and zinc and they want to replenish all of your electrolytes and get you in a perfect balance but you're still compromised. And if you don't have a guy like a George Lockhart or someone who's a real expert in nutrition and understands biology and can get you back into that position, you're most likely going to compete compromised, but you're going to accept that significant compromising because you're going to be a bigger person than the person you're fighting. But they also, like in boxing in particular, the vast majority of deaths have occurred in the lighter weight divisions. And a lot of it is not just because of the head trauma, but because it's head trauma to someone who's dehydrated. That's interesting. Yeah, it's like it sucks. And it's contrary to what martial arts are supposed to be about. martial arts supposed to be about skill for skill. It's not supposed to be about cheating. And the cheating thing is like, you're dehydrating yourself. It's like sanction cheating. You're saying you're 170 pounds. But you're like, if you say the 170 pound champion and get on the scale is 193. What the fuck's going on? This isn't 170 pounds.

SPEAKER_00

37:40 - 37:45

But how frustrating if I want to meet you in a different class, like I wanted to fight you my whole life, but we're really separated.

SPEAKER_01

37:45 - 40:53

Well, you can lose weight the right way. Look, if somebody wants to compete at 170 pounds, in my humble opinion, they should actually weigh 170 pounds. My friend Cam Haines is a ultramarathon runner and one of the things that he does when he gets ready for ultramarathons is he loses body weight, but he doesn't have any body weight to lose. So he'll burn 3,000 calories and eat 2,000 calories and that's how he loses weight. He lets his body eat itself. So he gets down to the 160s and that's when he runs these gigantic long races like 240 miles, but I know he's done this. You can do this. Like you don't have to dehydrate yourself, but they choose to dehydrate themselves because they replenish and then they get much bigger when they get inside the octagon. When he's 165, he's actually 165. That's just what he weighs and that's the best way to run 240 miles. So he does it through discipline. But these guys that are doing it and it's not their fault because it's already been established. It's a part of the sport. It's been there for years and years and years and years and it's sanctioned cheating and everybody does it. And it's the worst part of the sport because it's really damaging to your kidneys. Terrible for your organs. Your body starts to shut down when you do it too often. Your body doesn't want to lose weight anymore. So it starts to really hold onto that water. And guys fall asleep and pass out and bang their heads off walls and fights get canceled. Like championship level fights get canceled because guys black out and crack their head off the wall. And this is happened in the UFC before. It's just super, super unnecessary and unfortunate. And part of it is because there's not enough weight classes. There's like, you know, there's 155, then there's 170. The difference to 155 and 170 is not just 15 pounds, because if you actually weigh 155, and this guy's dropping down to 170, that motherfucker could be 190 plus. And he's just figuring out a way to cut weight to get down to there. And that happens all the time. So you're dealing with, you know, it could be 25, 30 pounds difference between you two guys. If you, if you actually weigh what the weight class is, when you get into the octagon, so people are forced to drop weight. They're forced to go lower. If they want to compete at a world class level, they're forced to take this extra risk. and it could be mitigated. It could all be stopped by hydration tests. The UFC could step in. All the athletic commissions could step in and say enough is enough. You're going to fight it what you weigh and we're going to give you more weight classes so you can figure out what's the weight for you to be best at. And I hope it doesn't take someone dying before they figure this out because it's one of those things that people have done like circumcision they've done it forever so they just keep doing it, but if they just started doing it tomorrow people like why did you cut that baby's dick? Are you fucking crazy? Well, I've always cut babies dicks. I've been cutting babies dicks for years. Like this is right. You get used to it. Well, it's not just you dish. I'm Catholic my dick are cut It's like practiced across the board under the guys of, you know, being sanitary. It's an prevention of age. There's all these stupid reasons to cut dicks. But really, it's just a tradition that doesn't make any goddamn sense. Now it's not the best analogy to weight cutting.

SPEAKER_00

40:53 - 41:44

They're all getting into the cutting dicks. I do want to pick up on an analogy, which I'm curious about. So when you're trying to describe the ground game. Yeah. It's super tough for a lay audience because the picture doesn't necessarily match what you're seeing because the layer of expertise makes a bunch of random arm movements and head movements and head movements into something else. We have the same problem in like math and physics where everybody wants to know. It's going on with that thing. And then when you, I would have been listening to like the physicists on your program. I don't think you have many mathematicians, but it's so confusing to figure out how to talk to the world about things that people, everybody wants to know about. And I was just curious, if you saw a parallel in those two things, those are certain very high art forms.

SPEAKER_01

41:45 - 41:52

Yeah, Sean Carroll has done a really good job of trying to explain things, Neil DeGrasse Tyson's done a really good job of trying to explain things.

SPEAKER_00

41:52 - 42:03

I saw the explanation of gauge symmetry. Lawrence Krauss? Yeah. On your show, which is like from to my way of thinking one of the most important principles in the world.

SPEAKER_01

42:03 - 42:19

Yeah, I still have no idea what the fuck he said. Exactly. Well, like, my red is book. Yeah. And after I read his book, that was the number one question I had. I said, okay, I need to explain to me what is gauge symmetry. What does that mean? It's so weird that he didn't, I don't think he expected me to just bust it out.

SPEAKER_00

42:19 - 42:51

Yeah, I don't think so either. But I think that it's so hard to, like, okay, here's one of my, I want, we'll get back to gauge symmetry, maybe, but like, When people say the universe is expanding. Right. What the fuck does that mean? Every smart person says into what? Right. You know, like, it's the universe. What is it expanding into? Right. And where's it going? Right. And what? It doesn't make any sense because the linguistics of the universe is expanding.

SPEAKER_01

42:51 - 42:57

Isn't really what the... So you're saying the matter in the universe is moving outwards? Is that what the universe is expanding?

SPEAKER_00

42:57 - 42:58

No, no. What it means is

SPEAKER_01

42:59 - 43:02

The infinite universe is getting more infinite, or?

SPEAKER_00

43:02 - 43:06

No, so the first of all was that they took, did you say that?

SPEAKER_01

43:06 - 43:09

Yeah, I couldn't enter.

SPEAKER_00

43:09 - 43:50

I was trying to be silly. The city was kicking in. Yeah. So if you think about this bottle, it's the slices of the bottle that are expanding. But if you think of the bottle as the universe, the bottle isn't expanding, it's just the cross sections that are expanding. And so that's what they really mean. What they really mean is something like the space-time metric on space-like cross-sections has its volume form when integrated is higher, something like that. It's some mathematical statement, but the universe is expanding is not helpful to me. Like if I wasn't able to read the math, I would say, I don't get it.

SPEAKER_01

43:50 - 43:58

Well, I don't get anything. Quite honestly, I'm not being self-deprecating. I don't get the big bang. Yeah. I don't get it at all.

SPEAKER_00

43:58 - 45:22

Well, okay, here's what somebody should tell you. Okay. There are two kinds of singularities when you try to solve Einstein's field equations for gravity. So, gravity's the thing. Einstein tells us pretty much what we think gravity is. It's the curvature of space in time. And when we try to solve his equations, We get these black hole singularities, which is called Swordschilled singularities. And then we get this initial singularity, which we associate back to the Big Bang with the Friedman Valker Robertson model. In some sense, those singularities are indications to us that we're not at the end of physics and that Einstein's equations aren't the real story. And so rather than sort of saying, They're a pretty good model up until this point and then we kind of really don't know what happened then we have the observational thing that we would map to the big bang and then we have the model thing that we would map to the big bang and to be honest with you we pretty sure that our models don't make sense past a point and now we're having this conversation past the point where we're pretty sure they don't make sense that would be much more honest to me but because we have this desire to to blow people's minds gratuitously. Everybody wants to know how did everything begin and where are we? We want to answer more of that than we probably should.

SPEAKER_01

45:22 - 45:26

That's an interesting way. That makes sense.

SPEAKER_00

45:26 - 48:14

Let me give you an alternate spin on quantum mechanics. So typically people say, you know, the mind blowing thing about quantum mechanics is that it's probable listed. And that is kind of mind blowing. But if you actually say it differently, you say, look, in classical mechanics, like Newton stuff that we feel more comfortable with, you have good questions and bad questions. Like if you and I go hang out at the beach and I say to you, hey, where is that wave? concentrated at what point is that way wave live. You look at me and say, it's a wave, it's not concentrated at a point. It's all along the shore. So as a classical physicist, you'd say, that's not a good question, Eric. And when I ask you a good question, how fast is that wave front moving along the trajectory or something? You can give me an answer and it's definite. So as long as you ask a good question in classical mechanics, You get definite answers. When you go to quantum mechanics and you ask a good question, technically that means that the state vector is observable of the Hermitian operator representing the question never mind. Funny thing happens, you get deterministic answers. There's no probability involved whatsoever. So if I ask a good question in quantum mechanics, I have the same property that I do when I ask a good question in classical mechanics. I get a definite answer. There's no probability. When I ask a bad question in quantum mechanics, instead of classical mechanics, it says, you know, screw off. I'm not answering that. That's ridiculous. It's a bad question. Quantum mechanics says, you really want to ask me a bad question. All right. I'll give you maybe this answer and maybe that answer. And here's the probability distribution that I'll actually give you either of those two answers. And what's more, I'll even kick it into the state. that I, that you asked about. So for example, if you ask, where is that wave concentrated? So like, let's say, this is my coffee cup. And I drop a little drop in the center of it. That creates a circular wave that radiates out. And I say, where is the wave concentrated? Well, at one second, it hits the coffee mug. Let's say it's a bit coffee cup. And at one second, after that, it's concentrated again in the center. So that becomes a good question only when the wave becomes recontentrated in the center of the cup. Right? But if that wave were a quantum wave, I could ask, where is the wave concentrated? And with equal probability, suddenly the wave will concentrate at some point along the circle that represents the wave. All right. So what would you answer me then? Well, the point would be a little concentrated. One of these points around the circle at random with equal with equal probability. And suddenly the wave will concentrate randomly when it's a quantum question.

SPEAKER_01

48:14 - 48:24

So this is why quantum mechanics is so confusing, quantum physics are so confusing to people. Well, because they hear that and they go, OK, this is confusing. It's confusing when in my head like Jello.

SPEAKER_00

48:24 - 49:08

Well, that's the thing. But the point of if I have a wave and I slow it down, I can look at a wave in a coffee mug. Right. And I can see that if I ask, where is the wave concentrated, you would say it's concentrated at like half an inch out from the center of the cup. And you're saying, no, no, not what ring is a concentrated or what exact point. It's not concentrated at an exact point. But that wave in quantum mechanics, which is not concentrated at an exact point, behaves differently when I ask a bad question. So the point that I'm trying to get across is, Good questions have exactly the same properties in classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. There's no introduction of probability theory. The weird question is why is quantum mechanics answering bad questions?

SPEAKER_01

49:08 - 49:38

Well, maybe even weird question is Not just, it's quantum mechanics in an adolescent state of understanding. I mean, is it part of the problem that they don't know enough yet? And they're trying to like explain what they do know, what they can prove on paper. And for a person like me, like, well, what do you know? And they're like, well, we know probabilities. We know this. We know that. And a person like me doesn't have any studying in it. Just goes, whoa. What does that mean?

SPEAKER_00

49:38 - 50:20

Well, that's great. So let's say we were having a conversation about genetics and we were looking only at the DNA and we didn't see epigenetics in terms of like methylation patterns. Then you shove everything onto DNA and maybe you had no concept of like development. And the model would work up to a point, would explain why you have blue eyes or brown eyes, but it wouldn't explain all sorts of other things. And so now then you over over-developed that model. So I think that what you're saying is really Einstein's intuition, which is, I'm not saying, I Einstein am not saying that this is wrong. I'm saying this is incomplete. And then when we finally get the answer, we're going to say, oh, that's why we used to think of it in those crazy terms.

SPEAKER_01

50:20 - 50:24

So back to Gage Theory. Gage symmetry.

SPEAKER_00

50:24 - 50:54

What the hell was that? All right. Well, here's the craziest thing. Okay. There is a very confusing visual image of the fundamental unit that you need to appreciate what gauge symmetry is all about. And I had Jamie loaded up under the tab called Planet Hop. And this is going to be... H-O-P-F. H-O-P-F. What the fuck am I looking at? You were looking at the most important object in the universe. What?

SPEAKER_01

50:56 - 50:59

That looks like some trippy screensaver on your laptop.

SPEAKER_00

50:59 - 51:08

Take another puff, my friend, because it's worth it. This is what you're looking at is a principal fiber bundle.

SPEAKER_01

51:08 - 51:12

And it's and it is the earth. Those are the continents.

SPEAKER_00

51:12 - 51:30

That's the cool part about it, which is This is very confusing to figure out what you're looking at, but it's finite. In other words, if we stay at, for an hour or two on this, and we actually answer all your questions, you will actually know what a principle bundle is, and you will know the arena in which gauge theory exists.

SPEAKER_01

51:30 - 51:39

For folks at home that are just listening, and they, well, what the fuck are these guys talking about? What is the name of this video, Jamie? It's not a video.

SPEAKER_03

51:39 - 51:48

It's a small file on a page. I typed in Planet Hops and it was the first thing that showed up on math.terrano.edu. Okay, so extended thing.

SPEAKER_01

51:48 - 51:57

Planet HOPF. If for anybody who wants to look at this, if you're just listening and you have no idea why I'm freaking out.

SPEAKER_00

51:57 - 53:21

This was done by a friend of mine named drawer Barnaton. I actually coded the same thing up. Strangely enough didn't do it is brilliant a job of coloring it. It looks amazing, my God. So, okay. What you're looking at is a two-dimensional sphere that is the surface of the earth where an extra circle is included at every point on the surface of that sphere, which you're now visualizing. And that extra circle, which would be called the fiber, When you take the totality of all of those circles together, one for each point on the surface of the sphere, they create something called a three sphere that is all the points that are one unit of distance away from the origin in four-dimensional space. So that three-dimensional sphere is the analog of a two-dimensional sphere sitting in three-dimensional space. So think about a caramel apple. If you've ever made caramel apples, you get a disc of caramel, and you wrap it around the sphere that is the apple surface, right? So this is the three-dimensional version of caramel wrapped around the three-dimensional spheres sitting in four-dimensional space.

SPEAKER_01

53:21 - 53:23

Now, do you understand any of this, Jamie?

SPEAKER_00

53:24 - 53:47

I'm trying. Dude, it's totally trippy, right? And so we're not going to get it completely during this session. However, I think I lack the tools. I don't think so. If we lack the time. So the first thing is you are finding out that one of your friends thinks this is the most important object in the universe and you've never even heard of it. Right. Much less know that there's one visual example.

SPEAKER_01

53:47 - 53:53

What's the fuck? How's this happening now? Exactly. It does look fucking crazy.

SPEAKER_00

53:54 - 55:34

Well, okay, this is what was discovered in the mid 1970s as the connection between mathematics and different, what we call differential geometry and the discipline of particle theory. So two guys, Jim Simons, the world's now the world's most successful hedge fund manager, and CNN Yang, a person who might arguably be the world's first or second greatest living theoretical physicist, had a lunch seminar, and they said, why don't we figure out how do we talk to each other? And what they found out is they both had developed a version of this picture. And independently, independently. So it was the resettist stone that unleashed a revolution. So when Lawrence Krauss was talking to you about gauge theory, he was saying things about chess boards and you color it white and you colored black and super confusing to me. I would rather your people be confused about an actual example of the object on which we do gauge theory that you can visually see. All right. Now, if I started to tell you what gauge theory is, it's pretty simple. So here's a description I never hear anyone say. When you're doing differential calculus, I don't know if you remember differential calculus, trying to figure out the slopes of lines, instantaneous rise over the run. So that always makes sense to people. Okay, figure out how fast it's going up versus how fast it's going across. But a question arises, which is, where do you measure the rise from? So for example, if I say, what is the height of Mount Everest?

SPEAKER_01

55:36 - 56:05

Jamie will say thirty was thirty five thousand yeah something like that something crazy like that right just go a thousand say base what would you get an internet connection let's take guess what do you think it is I don't know if I can't remember I want to say it's thirty five thousand what do you think it was twenty nine twenty nine twenty nine okay what's uh... the highest was the highest one is a key to all right key to the second right is it is ever the highest yeah

SPEAKER_00

56:05 - 56:17

But okay, so okay, Everest. 29, would you say 29? 29. 29. 29. Above what? Sea level? Okay. Where is Mount Everest located?

SPEAKER_01

56:17 - 56:18

The Himalands. What's that?

SPEAKER_00

56:18 - 56:35

What sea? There's no ocean there. Right, so like we snuck in. It's above sea level and there's no ocean. So we start from the center of the earth. We have this structure called the geoid. which is the interpolation of sea level as if the earth was only ocean and there was no tide.

SPEAKER_01

56:35 - 56:36

Right.

SPEAKER_00

56:36 - 56:56

And as if there's some sort of a... So we snuck in the reference level. That's my point. We teach these kids to repeat why it's 29,000 in change above sea level and there's no sea. Right. So that reference level is the magic of gauge theory, right? Which is that we measure the rise over the run based on a custom level.

SPEAKER_01

56:57 - 56:59

So a level that we all agree upon.

SPEAKER_00

56:59 - 58:34

So for example, let's imagine that you and I are in some country experiencing hyperinflation, right? And I'm your boss. And you say, Dude, I need a raise. I say, well, look, I've told you I would hire you for, you know, 10,000 denars a month. And you say, yeah, I say, well, your salary is constant. I took the derivative of it. I paid you 10,000 last month, 10,000 this month. So you're getting the same amount derivative equals zero. It's constant salary. Now you have to come back at me in calculus, and you say, no, I don't like your notion of the derivative because what you're doing is you're measuring the absolute number of denars that you're paying me. But what I want to do is I want to measure it in purchasing power because I'm losing money every month that you don't increase my salary. So I now come up with a version of the calculus in which my salary is not constant because it's being measured relative to purchasing power rather than absolute units. That's gauge, is that you're bringing in a reference level that does the differentiation. So you're measuring rise over run by customizing the problem. So these were two different applications of the calculus. The cheating employer says, I want to go with constant denars. The gifted employee says, not so fast. I know gauge theory. I want to use a custom reference level, which is purchasing power. Right? So it's like sneaking the geoid into Tibet to measure Everest. I've got my custom level.

SPEAKER_01

58:34 - 58:40

This makes sense to you? Yes. It makes sense, right? But now explain it. Say what he said.

SPEAKER_03

58:40 - 58:47

I mean, we would need a new reference of what you want to measure what I can do conversation to have a flat level.

SPEAKER_01

58:47 - 59:09

Right. Right. I guess. Yeah. It would be really difficult for me to recall a day from now. Maybe let's the weed my Papa mushroom cap see what's up. It's still in reference to quantum physics, like how you would you gauge symmetry?

SPEAKER_00

59:09 - 01:00:47

Well, but let's look at some more cool stuff with the visual cortex because everything that we can do visually should inform what we can do linguistically. So you should push everything into the visual realm that you can. Well, I just showed you the hop vibration, which is the only In some sense, the only mature picture I can show you of a principal vibration in geometry or physics that is honest and has the full complexity. It's got a certain kind of noddedness to it. It's got something that we would call curvature and it is visualizable. And so it would be better that we spent you know a day or two on this most important object which we think reality is based around and that you visually got comfortable with it and then you said okay now tell me again what gauge symmetry is and then instead of Lawrence talking about this chess board and the colors and all this stuff by analogy you'd actually be seeing gauge theory visually like I could program a computer and have done so To show you visually what a gauge theory is, and it takes some time to sort of understand what the trippy pictures are, but if let's bring up the Esher staircase. And Jamie has a nice wrinkle on this, that instead of using MC Esher staircase, he's got this animated guy who just keeps going down. All right, now what's going on with those stairs? Now the stairs are sort of an optical illusion because obviously it can't just keep going down, but then you build these systems like rock paper scissors. What's the best thing to throw in rock paper scissors?

SPEAKER_01

01:00:47 - 01:00:49

Well, it depends on what you throw.

SPEAKER_00

01:00:49 - 01:00:52

Well, but we should be able to agree that rock is better than scissors.

SPEAKER_01

01:00:52 - 01:00:54

Rock is better than scissors.

SPEAKER_00

01:00:54 - 01:01:09

So you go around that thing and now the point is that you get to like rock is much better than rock. Right. And yeah, that seems crazy. Now that concept would be what we would call hallanomy. The weird sentence, rock is better than rock because of that going around the loop.

SPEAKER_01

01:01:09 - 01:01:12

Why rock is better than rock? I don't get it.

SPEAKER_00

01:01:12 - 01:01:22

Well, rock, rock, rock. It's better than scissors. scissors is better than paper. Right. Paper is better than rock. So by transitivity, rock is therefore better than rock because you went around the loop and came back to rock.

SPEAKER_03

01:01:22 - 01:01:25

It's like MMA math. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

01:01:26 - 01:01:42

Or if you're changing currencies and you don't spend any of it because you keep using your credit card. By the time you come home, you had more money than when you left because the exchange rates did some things so that when you changed into each currency, you somehow got richer.

SPEAKER_01

01:01:43 - 01:01:47

But by saying Brock is better than Brock, you're denying the fact they're exactly the same.

SPEAKER_00

01:01:47 - 01:01:48

Well, no, that's not.

SPEAKER_01

01:01:48 - 01:01:49

You're not addressing it.

SPEAKER_00

01:01:49 - 01:02:19

You just want to continue. That's the linguistic fallacy. Right. So the idea that this system here, so those stairs in engaged theory would be these reference levels for the derivative. And you can have situations where the reference levels don't knit flatly together. Right. And so, by virtue of that, we would say that the system has curvature. Curvature is the esherness of these better than transitive statements.

SPEAKER_01

01:02:19 - 01:02:35

What we're looking at folks for people who are just listening, we're looking at, if you've never seen those esher edges, those sketches, they're very strange because what there are is a bunch of staircases that appear to always be going downhill even if one of them is above the other one. It's very strange.

SPEAKER_00

01:02:35 - 01:02:36

Very strange.

SPEAKER_01

01:02:36 - 01:02:55

and this one we're watching animated guy roll down this staircase constantly even though it really looks like somehow another it must go up somewhere but you don't ever see it going up but it's also a factor of the illusion of perspective and how it's drawn and and you know playing games with lines exactly but

SPEAKER_00

01:02:56 - 01:04:54

If you do this very weird experiment, which we didn't know about into the late 50s, called the Aeronautonomic experiment, if you run a electric current through a wire that's insulated, it appears not to have any electromagnetic field outside of the insulation. However, if you do some sort of quantum interference experiment, you can tell that there's current going through because it affects the phase shift, let's say, of an electron orbiting that insulated electromagnetic system. So nobody thought that that was going to happen because they thought, well, it insulator would keep the electromagnetic field is what determines the shift in the electron. But it's insulated, so there is no electromagnetic field to worry about. It turned out that it wasn't the electromagnetic field alone. It was some previous geometric concept, which was called the electromagnetic potential that determined something about the phase shift. So this esher staircase in the case of electromagnetism. It's like the photons are the analog of those steps. they're partially would determine the derivative operators, this reference levels, again, in our discussion of the, am I paying you the right amount in a hyperinflationary economy? So all of these things, you're trying to figure out, well, that's an optical illusion, but that effect actually occurs in some systems, not as an optical illusion. Yes, right? So this weirdness requires a fair amount in terms of either study of math or learning visualizations. But there's no way to achieve it in my experience with linguistic communications. Like all the stuff that gets said about, you know, the universe is expanding or let me tell you what it gauge theory is and what there's a reason it's confusing. It's because it doesn't make any having sense.

SPEAKER_01

01:04:55 - 01:05:05

Right. I see what you're saying. Sort of. But so this is, like what Feynman said, if you think you know quantum physics, you don't know quantum physics.

SPEAKER_00

01:05:05 - 01:05:39

Well, there's, there's some of that. Like, there's, you know, one of the most important things in the world is this thing called a spinner. Like the electrons and the protons correspond to things called spinners. And the average person has no idea that spinners exist. What's more, Spinners have a property that when I tell it to you linguistically won't make any sense. All right. Let's do this with coffee. Okay. So yeah. Thank you, sir. Perfect. All right. Now here's the problem. Hold your cup. No. Sorry. From the bottom.

SPEAKER_02

01:05:39 - 01:05:41

All right.

SPEAKER_00

01:05:41 - 01:06:11

And here's the first challenge without spilling it. Okay. I want you, and without regesting your grip on the bottom of your cup, I want you to turn your cup 360 degrees. No, no, sorry. Your finger should not change on the cup. Oh, okay. Turn the cup 360 degrees without spilling it and try to take a sip. Okay, that didn't work. No. Now, without coming back, how would you take a sip?

SPEAKER_01

01:06:11 - 01:06:21

If I got it all the way around that way? Yeah. Mr. Jiu-Jitsu, man. I don't know what to have to. I don't have to help myself.

SPEAKER_00

01:06:21 - 01:06:28

No, no, you're going to do it. All right, you ready? Yeah. Okay, here we go. Okay. How are you going to go around circle? 360. Okay.

SPEAKER_01

01:06:28 - 01:06:35

Right. Now, I'm screwed. If I don't bring it back underneath.

SPEAKER_00

01:06:35 - 01:07:09

Oh, I see. So that system required 720 degrees of rotation unexpectedly. Oh, you just keep going. Right. Okay. Now. The idea that there are objects that don't come back to themselves under 360 degrees of rotation, but require 720 is probably something you've never thought about before in your life. But without that, you wouldn't have the poly exclusion principle, you wouldn't have the stability of matter. And this thing is called the Philippine wine dance. Jamie, do you want to... That's not very seductive, Joe.

SPEAKER_01

01:07:09 - 01:07:12

It seems like some very odd ethnic dance.

SPEAKER_00

01:07:12 - 01:07:41

Yeah, but maybe you could do 11th planet jujitsu. Here we go. So this spinner is one of the coolest, most important objects anywhere, and it was discovered to be important in physics by a guy named Paul Dirac. All right, it's fun. Okay, so this 720 theory is entirely responsible for the world that we live in.

SPEAKER_01

01:07:41 - 01:07:44

This is so bizarre to want to open an animation.

SPEAKER_00

01:07:44 - 01:08:04

And nobody knows about it, right? Like, unless you're hanging out with physicists, they don't tell you that electromagnetism has to do with the fact that there's a secret circle at every point in space and time that's invisible to you. They don't tell you that there's stuff that requires 720 degrees of rotation. They just say mind blowing stuff about, whoa.

SPEAKER_01

01:08:04 - 01:08:06

So what is happening in the 720 degrees of rotation in the quantum world?

SPEAKER_00

01:08:09 - 01:08:27

There's an object that is requiring this just the way the cup arm system requires 720 degrees. What object is this? It's called a spinner. And that spinner is how we model the electron, the neutrino, quarks, all that is spinorial matter.

SPEAKER_01

01:08:32 - 01:08:44

That's a good long pause like it. Yeah. And where does this fit in in our model of the universe? Like, what is the function of this? Why is it there? What is it? How do we know it's there?

SPEAKER_00

01:08:45 - 01:10:15

Well, we know it's there because when direct, so there was this problem with the Schrodinger equation. Schrodinger equation takes one derivative in terms of the direction of time and takes two derivatives in the direction of all the spatial directions. But because Einstein told us that space and time are woven together for the theory to be relativistic, you need the same number of derivatives of time as of space, because space time is sort of one kind of semi-unified object. All right, that means you either have to boost the number of derivatives of time up to two to match the two derivatives and the directions of space, or you have to knock the two derivatives in the spatial directions down to one derivative to get it to be equal. Now, one direction gets you to something called the client coordinate equation. What Dirac did is he took a square root of the Klein Gordon equation to get these spinners. So he had these numbers. He didn't understand at first that he was going to get kicked into this world of spinners. He came up with a square root equation in which A times B thought to be numbers was not equal to B times A. It was like equal to the negative of B times A. So it was like what two numbers when you multiply them matter in which order? There wasn't numbers. It was matrices. So this was one of the great insights, you know, rival to Einstein in terms of the depth of what it told us about the universe. Most of us haven't really heard of Paul Derock. We don't realize that he has one of the three most important equations in physics.

SPEAKER_01

01:10:15 - 01:10:33

Now, when you say three most important important in how it's applicable to everyday life, or important in how it's given us an understanding in quantum physics, or important how it's understanding, it's understanding is significant to quantum physics.

SPEAKER_00

01:10:33 - 01:12:05

We're talking about bedrock reality, like you and I are having a conversation, and if you're a matrix fan, and what we might call the construct, what is the construct made of? So the way I do it is I think of it as a newspaper story. There's where and when did it happen? There was who and what was involved and there's how and why. So where and when is space in time, clearly? The who and the what, to me, let's say the who is the spinoial stuff. It's like electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks, the stuff that were made of. And then you and I are only able to see each other because we're passing photons back and forth. which are force particles. They're not spinoidal. They come back to themselves after 360 degrees. They don't require 720. So this is sort of the, you know, if you were going to go to a play, you'd have the dramatic personnel of the play given to you at the beginning. So this is what this universe is. It's a story about space and time, where and where and when. about what is in that, you know, like who are the players and what equipment are they using? That's like bosons and fermions. And then there's the how and the why, which is the equations and the Lagrangians that govern the rules of play. You know, so for example, if you and I, you know, start to go to the beach and we've got a ball and a net and you think we're going to play volleyball. And we actually, somebody says, no, we're going to play CPAC Tukro, which is like volleyball played with the feet in a martial arts style, which is awesome.

SPEAKER_01

01:12:06 - 01:12:10

Yeah, we've showed a video in that recently, see some Thailand or bomb.

SPEAKER_00

01:12:10 - 01:12:57

Yeah, they're, they're really good. Amazing. It's amazing. It's like ballet, martial arts, soccer, volleyball, happening one thing. We should, we should do this as a nation. That's a different set of rules for a ball and a net and two teams that You could have done it one way is volleyball, and you could have done it another way, as CPAC took where you're using your feet and not your hands. So that's sort of the breakdown of what a physics theory is. You got to tell me where and when you got to tell me what's in the game and you got to tell me what the rules are. And that's what this place is. And so theoretical physics is the most interesting of all of these fields to me, not because it speaks to us about our daily lives, because it speaks to us about, well, where are we? Where is this thing taking place?

SPEAKER_01

01:12:57 - 01:13:37

So it seems to me that there's a small number of people that are studying this stuff, that they're getting past biology, they're getting past gravity, climate change, all those different variables that we're constantly dealing with and they're they're getting to the very things that make everything and what is it under the wiring lift lift up the board what's going on in here right it's like getting to a computer down to the zero and one logic gates right yeah so that thing

SPEAKER_00

01:13:39 - 01:14:04

We've got three or four equations. We've got three or four different kinds of objects in the system. We seem to be, and people are gonna not like what I'm about to say, but screw them, we seem to be almost at the end. Like these equations are so beautiful, they're so tight, that it's almost most mysterious because it feels like this thing, like a movie that ended prematurely.

SPEAKER_01

01:14:04 - 01:14:04

How so?

SPEAKER_00

01:14:06 - 01:16:13

Well, when we found the Higgs particle at the LHC, there wasn't anything left that needed to close to explain the system. We know that there's dark matter out there that we don't understand. We know that there's dark energy out there that we don't understand because of astronomical observations. But all the stuff that we know about when you look at it and collided at high energies and figure out what mutates into what, there's nothing missing anymore. So it's like, you have got this odd thing where everything got very, very simple, very unified. And it felt like we were going to get one or two more giant unification. And the whole thing would be tied up with a bow. And right now, we just don't have anything that is needed to close the system. So for example, when you have radioactive carbon decay, what you see is that one of the neutrons flips into being a proton. And it spits out an electron when it does that. So it's like a trans nucleon. It shifts what it is. That electron doesn't carry off enough energy to explain how energy would be conserved. There was something missing. So this guy Wolfgang Pauli said, I bet there's a particle that's neutral, so we can't see it. We won't leave a track in a cloud chamber. We won't have any effect that we can see electromegnatically. But it's carrying away some of the energy because I'm not going to give up on conservation of energy just because this particular process doesn't seem to conserve it. Sure enough, there was this sneaky particle. that was spiriting away some of the energy of the system that couldn't be seen because it didn't interact electromagnetically. And it didn't interact according to the strong force. The only thing you could use to trap it would be the weak force and the weak force was so weak that it was very hard to see it. Okay, well, there's no neutrino that I know of left to find. There's no thing that's missing in our standard model. And I'm just not satisfied. Nobody satisfied that the play is over.

SPEAKER_01

01:16:14 - 01:16:20

Why would the play be over just because we've discovered all the neutrinos?

SPEAKER_00

01:16:20 - 01:16:54

Well, no, it's that we had an easy job when there was stuff that was missing and then you just hypothesized I bet there's some invisible thing that's carrying away some stuff. Let's go look for something that's hard to see. So they find it. And so they find the pigs. So they find the pigs. They find the neutrinos. They find torque, glue on, plasma. No, I was going to go there, but I was going to say that they found like Alternate generations of matter. So you and I are made out of the first generation of matter, but there could be like alternate Joe Rogan made out of second generation matter or third generation. We don't know of any generations beyond these two. Hold up.

SPEAKER_01

01:16:54 - 01:16:55

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

01:16:55 - 01:17:21

What are you talking about? So like the electron has a relative called the muon that behaves exactly like the electronics up to heavier. And the up and down quarks that make up protons and neutrons have relatives called strange quarks and tronquarks. So there's like a second copy of Lego that has all the same properties as the first copy of Lego except it's at a different mass level.

SPEAKER_01

01:17:22 - 01:17:26

So it's just denser, but it's almost identical copy.

SPEAKER_00

01:17:26 - 01:20:21

And nobody wanted this thing. So the famous joke, there was this guy, Isadora Robbie, who was like a kind of an ethnic Jew in New York. And when they found the second generation of matter, he responded as if it was a group of people in a deli. And he said, who ordered that? And so that's the joke and physics. Who ordered that? Nobody knew there was a second generation. And then they hit herself for the head. You know, there's a third one too. Everybody's just like, What? Why? Where are these things coming from? So the fact that you don't know this, like, what a profound disconnect that you're having all these physicists on the show. And these are the basic secrets that were, these are rock solid. These aren't, this isn't speculative, multiverse, string, theory, Wubu, Schroninger's cat stuff. You know, this is like, this is ground truth. And we don't know it. And we don't know it because nobody will show you a picture of the hop vibration. Or there's a concept called the group, which is how we think about symmetry, that no mathematician or physicist can go a day without talking about groups almost. And we act as if it doesn't need to be taught in high school. It's a little blow your mind. We're not going to teach you the groups even exist. So we've built the professional version of the subject around objects that we don't even tell you exist. when you're studying in school. So if you think about the portal story in childhood, there's this story about either it's a rabbit hole or a looking glass or a wardrobe or platform nine and a half or whatever these things are, I don't know what the Harry Potter version of is, but how do I get from the world that I'm in? to this new, amazing world and even find out that it's there. And that's what I think theoretical physics has failed to do. It hasn't built a portal for most people to even understand what the issues are, what are the objects, what is the game, how close are we to understanding what existence itself is, which I think we're very, very close. And the square root, this was I was going to say before about Dirac, is like the most profound object in mathematics to me. And the reason is, is that when I ask you, what is the square root of negative 1? That is a question that can be posed entirely within the familiar. So the real, the real number is you're comfortable. You know, you owe money, you have money. So I need plus plus 1 and minus 1. Square root, understand what, what times itself equals my number. And when you say, what's the square root of negative 1? There's no answer inside of the real line. But there is inside of this extension called the complex numbers. And so it's like you're in flatland. And you're trying to figure out, is there anything beyond flatland? So the great thing about the square root is it's a question you can ask in flatland that gets you out of flatland.

SPEAKER_01

01:20:21 - 01:20:23

Jesus, you confuse the shit on me. Are you with this?

SPEAKER_03

01:20:24 - 01:20:30

I understood that part of it. Yeah. I got to understood that part. The complex numbers thing got weird when I was in algebra.

SPEAKER_00

01:20:30 - 01:21:53

So when I'm taking rotations of the coffee cup where my arm isn't involved, right? I say, okay, is there a square root of that rotation? Like, what does that even mean, dude? All right. Well, now I put my arm into the system and my arm plus coffee cup gives you spinners. Oh, dude. I did not even know that spinners were here. I did not know that any object required 720 degrees of rotation. So the cup arm system, we just exhibited it. You don't need to learn Clifford algebraes or all of the extra jazz that would get you to spinners mathematically. But you need to figure out how do I discover the word in the hidden world? And think about this from the perspective of like Ayahuasca. Somebody takes Ayahuasca. And they have no idea that their brain is capable of this alternate state, or LSD, or 5MODMT. All of these things are like panic rooms in the mind. where if you lived in a house for 20 years, you think you know your house. And then one day you pull an old musty book off the shelf and suddenly the bookshelf swings open, you know, and it's like holy crap. There's like a second home inside of my home. Well, that's a lot of what psychedelics are like, psychedelics are like square roots in that they're portals. They can get you from the place that you know into a place that you never imagined could exist.

SPEAKER_01

01:21:54 - 01:22:28

Do you think that the teaching of groups and a lot of these concepts in high school would facilitate a better understanding of it from the general public and adulthood and the hell, yes. Hell yeah. And it would, what do you think is the resistance to this? It's just too complex or not applicable to jobs. You know, is that the idea behind it is not something that you use in everyday life so that it's just too weird to think about the fact that there's cousins to the electron that are fat. Yeah, no. It's much worse than this. Bodybuilder cousin to the

SPEAKER_00

01:22:30 - 01:22:34

You want to bulk up and get made out of strange quirks?

SPEAKER_01

01:22:34 - 01:22:37

Yeah, one of your cousins is made out of land.

SPEAKER_00

01:22:37 - 01:23:25

No, I think it's much worse than this. I think the first of all, people are terrified of just how smart children are and the differences between children have to be buried. So some children are greater abstraction. And a lot of the kids were graded abstraction or learning disabled according to the teaching system. Now I personally think that most learning disabilities of a particular type are actually teaching disabilities. People don't know how to teach the smartest kids. And groups and things. You're going to lose some people because of the level of abstraction. But you're going to get other people who have never been able to buy a base hit in mathematics suddenly start over performing. So the problem is that when you teach this stuff, it's very disruptive to notions of the hierarchy.

SPEAKER_01

01:23:25 - 01:23:44

Have you thought about what are the causes of these different levels of perception? Is it education? Is it genetics? Is it environmental? Is it some sort of chemical balance of the mind, like what do you think causes people to be more perceptive to some of these concepts?

SPEAKER_00

01:23:44 - 01:25:35

It's a good question. So the thing I just showed you with the planet Earth in a way that you've never seen it before, I know of only two people who've ever created that image. I'm one of them, Jordan Barnaton is the other. Maybe there are many more, but I've never heard of or met them. The number of people who first of all know what the hop vibration is. I would guess is if really deeply know it, it is a few thousand people in the world. So if none of those people are gifted at trying to visualize another care, another program computers, the number of people who could present that to the world is so small. It's such a tiny, priestly class that your odds of getting anyone figuring out how to make this understandable are very small. So we're talking about a very small priesthood. Most of whom are too busy trying to do new research to want to care to communicate. Many of whom are not gifted communicators. Many of us realize that we don't fully understand these things. I mean, I can show you spinners mathematically on a page. But if you ask me in my darkest moments, do I believe that man really knows what spinners are? I don't think so. There's all this stuff that to me looks like the monolith in 2001. It's just too freaky. It comes out in nowhere. And it's at the core of reality. Like if you really want to blow your mind, Look at a tiny number, tiny collection of these objects, principal fibrations, spinners, exceptional league groups, this E8, 248 dimensional monster, this, what is that? There's a 248 dimensional set of symmetries, which seems to live only to be the symmetries of itself, where everything else seems to live to symmetries something else. And no balance.

SPEAKER_01

01:25:36 - 01:25:39

You might have to spark that joint back up again.

SPEAKER_00

01:25:39 - 01:26:17

Let's do that. There's this thing called the tits-fordentfall magic square after this guy named shockteats. And these guys figured out how to generate these sets of symmetries of dimension 52, 7,833 and 248. We don't know why they're there. They're like the platypye and a kidnas of the mathematical world. They're just different. They don't seem to relate to anything else that we know yet. And that's what's so fascinating about them.

SPEAKER_01

01:26:17 - 01:26:31

And these are discovered by people that are trying to figure out the nature of reality. They're discovered by people who are trying to find more of these bizarre equation. Who's discovering these in what's the impetus?

SPEAKER_00

01:26:31 - 01:26:50

Like what what is what you ask very natural questions like you've probably seen you ever played Dungeons and Dragons as a kid. Luckily no. Okay. Well, you were beating people up. I was now beating. Stop it. I've seen one video. Anyway, you had these die, right? You're like the cube die, the tetrahedral die. What does this change?

SPEAKER_01

01:26:52 - 01:26:54

Beyond Space Time. Oh, this is my AD surface product.

SPEAKER_00

01:26:54 - 01:27:09

This is my archnemesis when I was telling the story last time. It was her sober October. Yeah, Garrett, Lucy. But Bobby took me into the jungle to meet this sort of differential geometric warlord who lives in the north of Maui. In the jungle, Maui. Yeah, far, yeah.

SPEAKER_01

01:27:09 - 01:27:14

You don't remember this? I do now. Yeah, you cut off my story, man. See that? Yeah. I'm sorry. That's all right. Go for it.

SPEAKER_00

01:27:14 - 01:27:16

Here we are again.

SPEAKER_01

01:27:16 - 01:27:20

Put that back up. So, what is that?

SPEAKER_00

01:27:21 - 01:27:47

Well, this is based on the eight-dimensional. I'm almost certain it's going to be based on the eight-dimensional root system. So inside of the 248 dimensions, there's an eight-dimensional donut called a Taurus, like an eight-taurus, and it generates this pattern. And that pattern in some sense encodes the instructions for building the 248-dimensional object. So somebody probably pushed an eight-dimensional thing into two dimensions for your viewing pleasure.

SPEAKER_01

01:27:48 - 01:27:54

And does this accurate, like when you're looking at this image that we're seeing, does that make sense to you?

SPEAKER_00

01:27:54 - 01:28:04

I mean, I can make, I can relate it things that make sense to me. If the idea is, you know, can I look at it the way I look at a barcode and say, oh, tie it on centred? No, right?

SPEAKER_01

01:28:04 - 01:28:10

No idea. But this is an accurate representation if you're looking at it in two dimensions.

SPEAKER_00

01:28:10 - 01:28:17

Yeah. So what I'm trying to say is, you don't even know to worry about this pattern.

SPEAKER_02

01:28:17 - 01:28:17

Right.

SPEAKER_00

01:28:18 - 01:28:32

because you've never heard that these things exist. And this is like the closest that we come to, you know, genuine mysticism where we have these objects. If there are aliens, they know about E8. Right?

SPEAKER_01

01:28:32 - 01:28:35

Because E8 are the aliens.

SPEAKER_00

01:28:35 - 01:28:36

What? E8 is the alien?

SPEAKER_01

01:28:36 - 01:28:41

Yeah. I've been, I mean, I'll go to this later. I don't want to interrupt your story again.

SPEAKER_00

01:28:41 - 01:29:38

But I don't have an idea. So what I'm trying to get at is This is the majesty and mystery of being a mathematical mathematician or a physicist, these findings. So if, what does this say about Dungeons and Dragons, you're given these dice, where the normal die is always a cube, but the platonic solids, you can have an octahedron tetrahedron dodec edron acosahedron all these things. There's an analog of those five platonic solids in the next dimension up, which I think are called convex polytopes. So each one of those objects has an analog one dimension up. But it was found out in the late 1800s that there's a new platonic solid and dimension four called the 24 cells. You want to bring up the 24 cell and find an animated video of somebody rotating this thing. So like this is something that played on new nothing about. We don't really understand what it's doing there in four dimensions. These are like communications from the cosmos.

SPEAKER_01

01:29:40 - 01:29:47

So this is like when Jody Foster was in the movie contact and they were getting them signals about how to make the time machine maybe are the portal machine.

SPEAKER_00

01:29:47 - 01:30:16

Yeah, but this is on it. It's just stuff just doesn't come with an instruction manual. So part of it is you can prove that these things are there. And you don't know why they're there and some of them touch everything and some of them have yet to touch almost anything. And it's like a communication from pure design that there is so much beautiful structure and so much grace in the universe that we're just What the fuck is this doing here?

SPEAKER_01

01:30:16 - 01:30:20

What is it? Right? Well, what is everything, right? What is the whole thing?

SPEAKER_00

01:30:20 - 01:31:13

No, I mean, look, if you accept three-dimensional space. Let's say this glass, right? If you accept this glass, I understand that a circle can spin the glass. The circle circles worth of symmetries tells me what to do to spin the glass. That's not that confusing. Right? Why is there something that the analog of a circle? Where a circle, I would call one dimensional because it's got one degree of freedom. This thing is 248 dimensions. And it doesn't seem to live to symmetries in the jargon we would say. It doesn't have a defining representation of lower dimension. So normally you have something of low dimension. And you say, what are its symmetries and the symmetries are of higher dimension? This thing seems like the first thing it wants to symmetries is itself. So it's kind of self-referential. It's kind of own anistic.

SPEAKER_01

01:31:13 - 01:31:19

So it's like a zero point of creation.

SPEAKER_00

01:31:19 - 01:31:27

That's poetic language. And I would groove on that after 11pm. But I wouldn't call it that right now. It's like it. I was trying to pick somebody up.

SPEAKER_01

01:31:27 - 01:31:53

Hey, zero point of creation. Right. That's a sexy word. Yeah, sexy word. But like if we're saying the big bang existed and that means some point in the history of the universe, it was this really tiny thing and it decided for whatever reason something happened and it became this enormous thing. Sure. Possibly enormous thing. Yeah. There had to be a point. where it started.

SPEAKER_00

01:31:53 - 01:32:07

Right. But what I would say is we can confidently take that story back to a point. And then we have to say we don't really believe that we have any insight beyond that point. But people want to go there anyway.

SPEAKER_01

01:32:07 - 01:32:13

We absolutely know that it was tiny. Yeah, small. Like smaller than the head of a pin, the whole thing.

SPEAKER_00

01:32:14 - 01:32:25

I'm always uncomfortable saying it's like, you can say a lot of stuff about very early, very small. And it could turn out to be wrong.

SPEAKER_01

01:32:26 - 01:32:49

and possibly long ago, 14 billion years ago, in our minds, for a guy like you, mathematics, you see it on numbers and paper, it all computes, you see the numbers, 14 billion is a number that makes sense. But conceptually, like for a dummy like me, 14 billion is like, if I really, if I'm being honest, do I really, you think I really have an accurate understanding what 14 billion is?

SPEAKER_00

01:32:49 - 01:32:52

But it's still a winberg, doesn't feel 14 billion either.

SPEAKER_01

01:32:53 - 01:32:55

Right, but you know where 100 yards is.

SPEAKER_00

01:32:55 - 01:32:57

You feel that right.

SPEAKER_01

01:32:57 - 01:32:59

If I see 100 yards, I'm like, that's too far to shoot a bow.

SPEAKER_00

01:32:59 - 01:33:00

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01

01:33:00 - 01:33:01

Like you got to get a little closer to be.

SPEAKER_00

01:33:01 - 01:33:04

So you have some, you have some kind of an intuition pump.

SPEAKER_01

01:33:04 - 01:33:27

Well, you would know distance. It's a rational distance that you see in a daily basis. Right. 100 yards is a long distance. A mile gets a little weird. Like, is that a mile away? How far is that? Oh, it's six miles away. Wow. I didn't think it was that far. Right. There's there's weirdness in distance, right? But when you get to a hundred and forty million miles. Okay. Yeah. I give out. But you get to four.

SPEAKER_00

01:33:27 - 01:33:32

I get fatigued by that. Yeah, I get fatigued by that stuff. So other people get energized like yeah.

SPEAKER_01

01:33:34 - 01:34:00

It's humbling. Right. But then there's the concept of infinite, right? Like this is one of the things that Krauss said, or maybe it was Sean Carroll, that said, it's really not that we know that we can see 14 billion years ago. Right. It's like, but that's just as far back as we're capable of seeing right now. And even if we did go further, the light is actually moving slower, like you wouldn't be able to see it.

SPEAKER_00

01:34:01 - 01:35:12

Right. Right. So you have this thing about with the spacetime metric, which is sort of how things are, feel like they're moving apart. Yeah. The distance, you know, Einstein said four degrees of freedom plus rulers and protractors equals spacetime. Right, so a space-time metric is a collection of rulers and protractors, so I can do lengthen angle, including lengthen the time direction. And that generates a derivative operator, which we talked about before, which is rise over run relative to a custom reference level. The custom reference levels generate the Esther staircase that we did. And that generates the curvature tensor, which generates gravity. So strangely, with all of this kind of like, woo woo stuff that we've been doing, we just came to a much better description of what Theoretical physics actually looks like. It's four degrees of freedom. Plus, we're losing pro tractors. It gives you derivative operators with custom reference levels. The custom reference levels don't knit together. That leads to an Esher staircase. The degree of Esherness is the curvature tensor. The curvature generates the gravity, which is what's keeping you and I in our chair.

SPEAKER_01

01:35:12 - 01:35:18

I really appreciate that you're understanding this in a way that you hope that someone can understand.

SPEAKER_00

01:35:18 - 01:35:19

Well, I'm not a physicist.

SPEAKER_01

01:35:20 - 01:35:59

But you're explaining it very well that the problem is for someone like me, I lack the tools to put, I don't have enough open slots. for these concepts. It's like, if you were explaining to me complex arguments in French, but I didn't speak French. So you're saying, you know, bonjour, it means this. And then you're explaining all these other words. And then you thrown it all together, I'm like, what? And then it's cultural references. And then you have to deal with the fact that there's like some historical precedent to certain types of behavior that are taking a consideration because these are French people that have lived in this way. Oh, wow. Okay. Well, that's nothing compared to what you're trying to do.

SPEAKER_00

01:35:59 - 01:36:04

Let's drop some, so you do this thing a bit like, well for me to like me.

SPEAKER_01

01:36:04 - 01:36:08

Well, I definitely ameed it. I'll stop it. Listen. I know me better than you know me.

SPEAKER_00

01:36:08 - 01:36:17

That's true, but you're also less honest than you think on this particular topic. It's part of your turn. When we hang out, we hang out usually in a comedy club or at somebody's house.

SPEAKER_04

01:36:17 - 01:36:18

Right.

SPEAKER_00

01:36:18 - 01:36:32

We don't like, say, hey, we're going to take the afternoon off and we're actually going to learn theoretical physics. Right, right. So when I went to it, I did stand up for the first time as I told you in Arizona. I wish I was there. Oh, it was insane.

SPEAKER_01

01:36:32 - 01:36:47

It was crazy. Yeah, you trying to explain fucking quirks to people. There'd be some real humor in that if you could boil it down. Yeah, three quarks go into a nuclear. Yeah, there's like a way to do it. I don't know.

SPEAKER_00

01:36:47 - 01:36:55

There's a way to do it. Okay. Well, who was the guy who did the? Some guy was doing it. Maybe he was Brian Kallon was doing quantum jokes.

SPEAKER_01

01:36:55 - 01:36:56

What was he saying? Do you remember? I forgot.

SPEAKER_00

01:36:56 - 01:37:01

He just had a bunch of words that he did very, very quickly and kind of hung together. I was like, wait, what?

SPEAKER_01

01:37:01 - 01:37:05

Yeah, that sounds like Brian. Yeah. He reads a lot. But it's a clever boy.

SPEAKER_00

01:37:06 - 01:37:24

When I, when I had to do my 10 minutes of standup, man, is that craft? It's, it's deep. It's hard because you have to, it's not just like telling jokes at a party. It's really, you have to measure the way the audience's laugh comes, whether you're taking them along or you're going to divert all sorts of things that I never thought about before.

SPEAKER_01

01:37:24 - 01:37:56

You know how you feel when you talk about the hop thing, that it's a part of everything. It's one of the most important things, and yet very few people know what it is. Maybe a thousand people understand it on the whole world. What's odd is that number is probably identical to the number of legitimate professional stand-up comedians in the world. When I say legitimate, I mean someone who can craft a new hour every two years, who does Netflix specials, who headlines all over the country. It's small. Good travel, all over the world and do stand up. It's an insanely small number of humans.

SPEAKER_00

01:37:56 - 01:38:09

And not only that, my guess is that the number of people that you think are at the very top of that craft, like when I really think about who really knows theoretical physics. Right. It's tiny. It's like it's smaller than 50.

SPEAKER_01

01:38:09 - 01:38:14

Yep. Yep. Guys that I would pay to see live or women that I'd pay to see live, it's less than 50.

SPEAKER_00

01:38:14 - 01:38:39

It's less than 50. Yeah. And so part of our problem is that all of the stuff that humanity has developed is often resident in a tiny number of minds. And I feel very vulnerable about the theoretical physics has been faking that it's in a healthy state for a long time. We are so vulnerable on the doorstep of actually cracking this puzzle in my opinion.

SPEAKER_01

01:38:40 - 01:39:30

Well that's where our comparisons end because pretty much anybody can do stand up if you put enough time to it if you're silly if you figure out the craft but what you guys are doing is not just really rare but also the the barrier for entry like the cost of entry is exceptionally high Like you have to spend an inordinate amount of time studying and understanding this stuff just to get to a base level of what you've been able to explain. You've been able to explain like some really difficult concepts to the lay person that must have taken you fucking eons to learn and understand all your study of mathematics and of geometry and of all of them. But I'm an imposter. How so? Well, I'm not a physicist. Right, but you understand it. Maybe you don't practice physics.

SPEAKER_00

01:39:30 - 01:39:57

No, I don't understand it. Well, no, it's something more audacious than that, which is that when you see, you know, a 10,000 hours only sign, you know, only those who've done their 10,000 hours can come in. My middle finger goes up. I bet it's not 10,000 hours. Or if it is 10,000 hours, I'm willing to get 80% of the juice in that orange with like 10% of the effort.

SPEAKER_01

01:39:57 - 01:40:21

Well, the 10,000 hours thing to me is it's cute, but it doesn't factor in for phenomes. There's a lot of people that come into anything, whatever it is, with some natural abilities that are pretty undeniable. Um, you know, that's a weird, that's a weird equation.

SPEAKER_00

01:40:21 - 01:40:52

But take take something very simple. Like the harmonica. Yeah. Most people don't know that that sweet blues sound and a harmonica comes from not using it the way the manufacturer said, which is called straight harp. And using it instead the way African Americans figured it out, which is it's much cooler to base it around a whole that nobody was expecting to draw rather than foreblow. and that gives you a seventh chord that sounds like sweet blues music. If you start to get some of that.

SPEAKER_02

01:40:52 - 01:41:09

All right. I don't know how this will work.

SPEAKER_00

01:41:09 - 01:41:11

I think that was you got to move.

SPEAKER_01

01:41:11 - 01:41:14

So what's the traditional way of using it? What would it sound like?

SPEAKER_00

01:41:18 - 01:41:42

I think that would be Carmen boring is fuck boring is fuck white people me god damn it white people yeah Carmen's alright, but look not my point who knew when you get one of these things as a party favors a kid There's not somebody who says, hey, don't do that thing we put your mouth over it all the time.

SPEAKER_01

01:41:42 - 01:41:43

But who knew that that's the cooler?

SPEAKER_00

01:41:43 - 01:42:44

Yeah, but the idea is that there's something called tongue blocking. There's something called crossharp. And there's something called the one four five progression with a scale that no music teacher ever taught you in grade school and piano. All right, so there's four secrets. And now suddenly the world opens up. When I opened for Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin invited me, and he said, you know, why don't you play a minute worth of harmonic at the Masonic Theatre? So for 2500 people, I became Dave Rubin's talking harmonica monkey. So I opened for Jordan Peterson, I said, you know, rule number zero life is too short not to play the harmonica. Everyone should learn to play the harmonica or know why they're not doing it. There's this great thing in the Cal Berkeley fight song. We'll win the game or know the reason why. If you don't play the harmonica, it's so nice. It's so simple. So few people do it. There's so small number of secrets. You have to have a reason because I can feed myself. I can get housing shelter. I can meet people anywhere in the world. All I have to do is carry around a piece of plastic with some metal on it.

SPEAKER_01

01:42:44 - 01:42:51

Or you could be annoying. Like a lot of people are like, turn that fucking guy off. Why is he playing that goddamn harmonica? I don't want to hear that.

SPEAKER_00

01:42:51 - 01:42:53

Put it back in your pocket. Go to your next trap.

SPEAKER_01

01:42:53 - 01:42:57

You're already tainted in these people's estimation. All right. Attention, hoar out there.

SPEAKER_00

01:42:57 - 01:42:59

Harmonica is a rule in my life.

SPEAKER_01

01:42:59 - 01:43:05

But what's worse? A harmonica or a guy brings a guitar and starts singing folk songs at a party. On the animal house effect.

SPEAKER_00

01:43:05 - 01:43:06

Right.

SPEAKER_01

01:43:06 - 01:43:13

Yeah. And beat him over the head with a guitar. Yeah, but if you can shred, he's going to be fine. It's great if you were looking to hear someone shred.

SPEAKER_00

01:43:13 - 01:43:20

That's that. All of these things are like options or financial options. You can exercise them or you cannot exercise. You don't have to exercise.

SPEAKER_01

01:43:20 - 01:43:41

But I mean, there's an equal number of things that people would say that are like the harmonica. Like you should be able to do slam poetry. Right. Everyone should be able to do slam poetry. If you can't do slam poetry, I can feed myself. I can do slam poetry. I'll show up at a party and everyone wants to hear slam poetry. Is that true?

SPEAKER_00

01:43:41 - 01:43:43

You just try to beat me, tell me you're so adorable.

SPEAKER_01

01:43:47 - 01:44:17

It's fascinating to me that harmonicas are this little tiny thing that people have fake. Like there's not other ones, right? There's like other things are like these big all trumpet-looking things. Yeah. Like a harmonica's this little thing. Yeah. Like how many little things do you blow? Well that's that that powerful in terms of like the kind of music that it makes. Exactly. Is that weird? It is weird. Like there's no like balls, right? It's always that. It's always that little candy bar-looking thing. Like there's nothing.

SPEAKER_00

01:44:17 - 01:44:18

No ball harmonica.

SPEAKER_01

01:44:18 - 01:44:24

Is there anything comparable in terms of like musical instruments? Is that little? No. That has that kind of sound.

SPEAKER_00

01:44:24 - 01:44:26

No, that's what it's optimized for.

SPEAKER_01

01:44:26 - 01:45:01

But it's in that weird. Like there's two buzz and there's other things that are similar. And then you get to like trombones and trumpets. Everything kind of makes sense. Then you get this little fucking thing. So the candy bar thing. Right. It's a mouth heart. A mouth heart. Ooh. What's that other one? They're going like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no word for it is a weird word for that thing y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y'all harp y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y

SPEAKER_00

01:45:01 - 01:45:04

You can play the spoons. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01

01:45:04 - 01:45:08

Spoons are good. Well, how about that fucking Australian one? Well, they blow into that big Twitter.

SPEAKER_00

01:45:08 - 01:45:08

Did you do that?

SPEAKER_01

01:45:08 - 01:45:19

Yeah. That ones, the most ridiculous. That is like how hard were those guys tripping when they came up with that sound. Boy, oh, boy. Why, why, why, why, why, why.

SPEAKER_00

01:45:19 - 01:45:22

Like if you're in. That's like true, two-in-throats thing. And then he's good.

SPEAKER_01

01:45:22 - 01:45:35

Thank you. If you're on hate Ashbury and there's a dude And he's got one of them diggery dudes out and a fucking hat. You're supposed to throw some money in there just at a respect. This guy brought a goddamn diggery dude at the corner. Well, you know the coolest recent one.

SPEAKER_00

01:45:35 - 01:45:36

Yeah, that is crazy.

SPEAKER_01

01:45:36 - 01:45:53

Give me some noise from this motherfucker. Just give me a little bit. That is DMT music. I know. If you're tripping balls and somebody plays that, they'll take you to a new dimension. So you've never access.

SPEAKER_03

01:45:53 - 01:45:56

It's going to be the pain on for it too and everything.

SPEAKER_00

01:45:56 - 01:46:02

Well, actually, it's quite interesting. The center, center, dimey church around the Ayahuasca stuff has a lot of

SPEAKER_01

01:46:02 - 01:47:42

really interesting music to listen to it's straight is the kind of mind mind blowing well there's also there's I don't know was that one or the something dived at all there's one of those similar Christian based dimethyl trip to mean ayahuasca type churches that they sing songs about Jesus they trip balls and sing songs about Jesus And what's really weird about DMT in particular, and I guess you could say the same of mushrooms, but mushrooms apparently when it synthesizes, it's real similar in chemical content to what dimethyl trip to mean is. I'm gonna fuck this up, but I think it's NN dimethyl trip to mean is dimethyl trip to mean, and then when it's synthesized by the body processes, Silicide, and I think it produces something called four fox, four oloxy, and dimethyl trip to me. I think it's real close. I might have fucked that up, but I think it's so close that it's like their cousins. Okay. So there's something with about music in these things. And one of the best ways to get out of a trip, if you're really tripping balls with mushrooms, is to sing your way out of it. You can sing your way out of a bad trip. You can actually control the trip with good music. And one of the things that's really constant with DMT is these ecaros that the shaman will sing. And these ecaros with the like thimbles and like a little bit of drum and these like really rhythmic singing. It makes the hallucination dance in like a really obvious tangible way. It moves around itself and it changes and guides the trip.

SPEAKER_00

01:47:42 - 01:47:47

Well, that's what my hypothesis has been that it's sort of some sort of.

SPEAKER_01

01:47:47 - 01:49:04

That's one right there. This is one I've personally experienced. I've actually tripped listening to this song. And it was like these geometric patterns, these entities that seem to be conscious. They were like moving around. This is the guy. This is the Iowa Scarrow. This is the shaman blowing tobacco. This is part of the ritual. They actually blow tobacco on you while you do that. So this guy, which is this little rattle and singing, and sometimes there's actual singing, not just whistling, but in their language, this beautiful soft rhythmic sort of song, and the hallucinations dance to this sound, to this music. Like they're supposed to dance to it, like they're part of it. like it's not just that you're having music on top of the psychedelic experience, but that they merge. The image and the psychedelic experience experiences a hundred percent affected by this. So it's not just that there's chemicals that are interacting with your brain. You're doing something too by responding to that music and then the music is doing something by enhancing the way your perception of this experience is and all of it is dancing together like they belong together. It's fascinating shit.

SPEAKER_00

01:49:05 - 01:49:15

Yeah, I mean, my hypothesis has been that the music acts as a prosthesis to sort of lock you in because the experience is so powerful.

SPEAKER_01

01:49:15 - 01:49:16

Yeah, I mean, maybe.

SPEAKER_00

01:49:16 - 01:49:24

I mean, it's always a little bit weird. You know, try to imagine somebody says, do you want a glass of scotch and a shaman to go with it?

SPEAKER_01

01:49:24 - 01:50:11

You're like, what? You probably need one. You know, someone at a bar that's like, like, we're going to drink this. We're going to drink this for good intentions. Yeah, no one's going to be grabbing anybody's dick. No one's going. No one's getting rude here. There would be no wedges, right? There'd be nothing. Nothing rude will be said. You will think for a good solid five seconds before any hasty moves. like let's let's let's understand that I want to get great benefit kind of get great benefit from this in terms of our ability to be loose and to be silly and to to enjoy each other's company but if if a demon comes out right in this time you must address this demon personally on your own don't pull the demon out and throw it at the party Right. This is good stuff. That's what happens. So, you know, we had drugs that thrown that deep into it.

SPEAKER_00

01:50:11 - 01:50:34

That thing where they figured out that if you put a worm in the miscal stuff, it would be a great marketing device north of the border. Because you just tell us some story. So now we, we're going to open that with what that is. That's what a story. I think it's a marketing gimmick. Next. And then, and then what we do is we, we found our own tequila company and we only, it's so exclusive that you can only buy it if you also hire a shaman for the event. Make tons of money.

SPEAKER_01

01:50:34 - 01:50:46

Yeah, and if what if the worm actually was psychedelic? Like what if there was a way we can genetically engineer a worm to be intensely psychedelic? Like the worm literally is made out of ayahuasca.

SPEAKER_00

01:50:46 - 01:50:49

Like we why don't we put a toe in the mascara?

SPEAKER_01

01:50:49 - 01:50:57

Well, don't they do weird shit like that where they they'll take tomatoes and they'll like use fucking frog DNA in the tomato to make it live longer?

SPEAKER_00

01:50:57 - 01:51:08

Isn't there some weird shit there anything with cool stuff is the green fluorescent protein stuff you can have glowing dark rabbits and fish makes these yes, yes, let's get some glow in the dark buddies man.

SPEAKER_01

01:51:08 - 01:51:11

They can do that right there is something like that, right?

SPEAKER_00

01:51:11 - 01:51:14

So you have Jamie do you have glow in the dark rabbits?

SPEAKER_03

01:51:14 - 01:51:20

No, but I do have the genetically modified potato with frog genes to resist pathogens.

SPEAKER_01

01:51:20 - 01:51:32

Yeah. What in the holy fuck? Yeah. So, how weird is that? GM potato uses frog gene to resist pathogens. Like that's, that's real.

SPEAKER_00

01:51:32 - 01:51:35

Can we do it on? Can we do G, G, GFP rabbits?

SPEAKER_01

01:51:37 - 01:52:05

So what were we on before this we was talking about what we got to rabbits. Well, I had a point on to Kilo with the rock. So what if we engineer that little worm to be like 100% DMT 100% DMT or you get down to that worm and whoever chugs to the bottom and and choose on that worm just Oh my, oh my, oh my, oh yeah. You immediately transform, what is the fuck am I watching? These are these glowing rabbits that is so weird.

SPEAKER_00

01:52:05 - 01:52:10

Dude, it's so weird. Look at hoverboards and archery stuff. We need rabbits. We need glowing rabbits.

SPEAKER_01

01:52:10 - 01:52:58

Here's a problem man. My kids have rabbits and their cunts. Those rabbits are little assholes. They don't give a fuck about each other. We have two of them is so rude. This is what happens. They're both males unfortunately. Here's what happens when you get two male bunnies and you put them into gigantic chicken coop. They fuck each other up. It's bunny UFC every day with these little assholes. All they do is kick each other's ass. They chase each other around this chicken coop and when they get a whole of each other, they bite each other and they kick each other. They fuck each other up. because they're both boys and they don't want a boy to be running shit. Is these two bunnies fucking each other up? Dude, this is what they do. Bunnies are fucking ruthless to each other. These two little assholes just chase each other all day long and beat the shit out of each other. That's all they do.

SPEAKER_00

01:52:58 - 01:52:59

Why don't you do commentary?

SPEAKER_01

01:53:00 - 01:54:23

I'm not gonna. I'm not gonna encourage there's a series of followers coming. One of them is actually missing. Here's what happened. We are chicken coop burnt down from the fire, but the chicken survived. One of them got scorched. They all got fucking PTSD. It's crazy. I go near them. But they're alive, all right. So we had a maneuver them and move them. But one bunny's missing. We're found one bunny and one bunny's missing. So I think it's better for the one bunny that survived and the one bunny that probably got jacked by an eagle or something like that. That's a rap song. You had a good life. You'd be the shit out of your friend for a year and a half solid just kicking each other's ass. It's fucking horrible. The ears are totally jacked. Like the ears are shredded like an old back to the death that you missed. I don't think so because there's no body. I think I think a bunny got out and it probably ran away or who knows the fuck happened and coyote got it or some shit. I mean, there's a lot of hawks. A lot of hawks in my neighborhood. It's most likely a hawk. Yeah. Yeah. whatever. Just one little bunny's by himself now. He's like, the other asshole. They're both assholes to each other. It's not like one good bunny. They just find each other and they're like, fuck you. I imagine just that's all you do for years. Right. That's, that's bunny life. You get two meal bunnies together and every day is fuck you fuck you fuck you. They run at each other and one one's always trying to get away. One's always trying to eat and the other one to jump on them and start biting them and kicking them and the other one will do the same and they'll rotate.

SPEAKER_00

01:54:23 - 01:54:56

You know, that's very funny. The last two Jews in Afghanistan. Both had to live in the synagogue. It was all they had left. That's really all they had left. And somebody went, yeah, somebody went to go visit the last two Jews in Afghanistan and said, like, why aren't you guys friends? And one of them says, here I'll show you. Hey, small. Wanna have lunch? The guy says, drop dead. He says, you see what I'm working with? And it's like the most Jewish conversation between the last two Jews. They can't get along. So they're like the two rabbits that all the others went away.

SPEAKER_01

01:54:56 - 01:55:04

Well, they're probably really horny and lonely and confused. I suppose. Yeah, I mean, with the fuck, there's only two of them. They need to get to Israel. Stat.

SPEAKER_00

01:55:04 - 01:55:08

Well, I think one of them died and then the last one is just by the way. West to be the last guy.

SPEAKER_01

01:55:09 - 01:55:21

Someone talked to him. I know. If it's possible for you to get to Jerusalem, that's your people. They'll just, you'll have a party over there. Everything will be great. Jewish food. Everyone speaking Hebrew. Everyone's united.

SPEAKER_00

01:55:21 - 01:55:30

Well, like the last three Jews of Carola was this young woman in two guys. Just let, no, neither one of you forget this thing. I know, it's rough, man.

SPEAKER_01

01:55:30 - 01:55:48

It's rough. It's crazy to think that it's a country with zero Jews. Like zero. Yeah. Yeah. Nope. The whole country. Like whoa. Whoa. That is kind of this thing. That is no melting pot here, sir. Zero. Zero melting. Just one ingredient. Whole pot. It's all stew.

SPEAKER_00

01:55:48 - 01:55:57

It's it. Yeah. Well, the Taliban actually really needed the Jewish community because they wanted to be able to say we've got great relations with Afghanistan's Jewish community that just didn't say it was too guys.

SPEAKER_01

01:55:57 - 01:56:13

Yeah. Two dudes that hate each other. Exactly. Very polarizing. True. I don't know how we got it. Oh, glowing bunnies. I'm not getting any fucking bunnies, man. All right. And if you get to go in a girl together, you got to fix the girl. Otherwise, you're going to have a million bunnies. And they're all going to be kicking each other's asses. It's all they do.

SPEAKER_00

01:56:13 - 01:56:15

The bunny apocalypse.

SPEAKER_01

01:56:15 - 01:56:26

Well, it's really fucked up is reading about animals that fight like right out of the womb. How they kill their part. They can't look at the siblings.

SPEAKER_00

01:56:26 - 01:56:33

Yeah. Put it pull up. I'll look at the siblings side in in Nazca boobies.

SPEAKER_01

01:56:33 - 01:56:41

What are those? In Nazca boobie. Did they live in the Nazca lines? What are these boobies?

SPEAKER_00

01:56:41 - 01:56:43

Jamie, how many of you were hanging there with boobies?

SPEAKER_03

01:56:43 - 01:56:45

Nazca boobie.

SPEAKER_00

01:56:45 - 01:56:51

How do you spell that? NAZCA. And then boobies, the usual one.

SPEAKER_01

01:56:51 - 01:57:35

I'm trying to remember what I was reading about where obligate civil society. When one animal comes out, the other one tries to kill the other one, almost immediately. Oh. Hainus. Oh. Hainus. Hainus. There's been evidence of Hainus attacking their sibling while it's in the ambionic sack. And when they come out, the bigger one or the stronger one of the one of whatever one's healthy will almost immediately start attacking its sibling and try to kill it. Pull up that if that's true. I'm pretty sure that's true. I went into this, uh, I went into this crazy rabbit hole about hanging this recently. What a bizarre animal that is.

SPEAKER_00

01:57:35 - 01:57:37

So the the false penis.

SPEAKER_01

01:57:37 - 01:57:51

Yeah, the false penis is just one aspect. Yeah, everything everything about 20% of the women die. Okay, here it goes. I'll look at civil civilized when a sibling almost always ends up being killed. Fugitive civil side means the suicide. Oh, faculty.

SPEAKER_00

01:57:51 - 01:57:56

Like it's a choice versus you've got to do a faculty faculty faculty faculty faculty faculty.

SPEAKER_01

01:57:56 - 01:58:05

Faculty of civil civil side means a civil side may or may not occur based on environmental conditions. Okay. So it's sometimes will happen if there's none of resources.

SPEAKER_00

01:58:05 - 01:58:22

So the idea is that I think the breeding cycle is discretized. So either make it or you don't. And so the danger of laying one egg and having it not work out, is very... Oh, this bird is fucking his brother up. And it has to be in front of mom and dad, because you want to prove that you're worthy.

SPEAKER_01

01:58:22 - 01:58:27

Well, that isn't sane. Right, so mommy... Look at his beating it to death. So this is because there's not enough food.

SPEAKER_00

01:58:27 - 01:58:46

There's not enough food to do too. So the first one, the second one is a spare. And the first one proves that he's worthy by killing his sibling, the spare in front of the parents and says, yeah, you can invest in me. I got this thing. He's just crying. So what kind of bird is this? This is probably Nazca or Blueford movies is my guess.

SPEAKER_01

01:58:46 - 01:58:47

That is insane.

SPEAKER_00

01:58:47 - 01:58:52

It is insane. It's hard to watch. Well, this is what I said about biology. Biology cares about your feelings.

SPEAKER_01

01:58:52 - 01:58:54

And the mom doesn't give a fuck about it.

SPEAKER_00

01:58:54 - 01:58:57

I don't know. The mom wants. Look.

SPEAKER_01

01:58:57 - 01:59:01

The mom's excited. This one's dying. No. It's not fucked up. And the mom's like, yeah, mom's excited.

SPEAKER_00

01:59:01 - 01:59:05

Hey, the older one knows what it's doing. He's viable. Jesus Christ.

SPEAKER_01

01:59:05 - 01:59:27

Well, nature's pretty brutal. Pretty brutal. No, it's, it's bizarre seeing this from, oh God, I don't want to see this thing slowly died dude. It's bizarre seeing it from birds, but I think it's even more ruthless the way the lions. Yeah, hyenas. Yeah, hyenas killing their siblings. That almost, I think they were saying it's pretty universal. When the first one comes out, they try to kill us out on.

SPEAKER_00

01:59:27 - 01:59:44

Well, you know this thing about lion, female lions getting excited by the murder of their children. Whoa. So when the new male takes over the pride, his first order of business may be let's stop racing resources on the previous daddy's offspring. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01

01:59:44 - 02:00:15

So what happens? Same kind of thing. The hyena gets out and immediately starts killing its sibling. They're fighting to the death right out of the womb. Look at this fucking mad battle as babies. Look, it's got still got the sack on it and they're just trying to kill each other. This is a particularly ruthless animal. They were saying that 60% of hyenas die as they're trying to get out of the tube. Wow.

SPEAKER_00

02:00:15 - 02:00:15

What?

SPEAKER_01

02:00:15 - 02:00:20

I didn't know that. Yeah, 20% of women die, whether females rather die when they're giving birth.

SPEAKER_00

02:00:21 - 02:00:23

Well, that's because of our crazy brain-to-body ratio.

SPEAKER_01

02:00:23 - 02:00:28

Well, it's also, they have a, no, female hyenas. Oh, that's giant dick.

SPEAKER_00

02:00:28 - 02:00:32

Sorry, I thought you were talking about high rates of human mortality.

SPEAKER_01

02:00:32 - 02:01:24

No. Female hyenas die 20% of the time when they're giving birth because the baby doesn't come out right. Like they have this crazy, you know, they have a faux penis that is actually a vagina. It's an enormous, huge, and gorge clitoris. It's far bigger than the males. They have to pull it back so the male can compilate with them. But then when they give birth, it has to come out of that dick. And it doesn't always come out right. So it's system. Yeah, Google that because I might be wrong about the numbers, but it's some exorbitant number of babies die and a huge number of women die of women. I keep saying women. Female pain is died. Yeah, that's why fuck up. But they're also weird and that they're way bigger than the males. And that's because the males won't let the babies eat. So that's one of the things they think. Like if something is a scavenger, the males are trying to push out everything smaller. So because of the females after getting a go fuck off, the kid has to eat, like even if it's their kid.

SPEAKER_03

02:01:24 - 02:01:28

That's cool. 60% suffocate on their way out.

SPEAKER_01

02:01:28 - 02:01:49

Yeah, 60% of them die on the way out. Yeah. And I think it's 20% of the females die during childbirth as well. Pretty sure that's what I read, which is fucking bananas. I mean, 60% though. Imagine 60% of all kids die on the way out. And then the ones that don't die, if you got two of them, one of them kills the other one.

SPEAKER_00

02:01:49 - 02:01:51

It's a rough neighborhood.

SPEAKER_01

02:01:51 - 02:02:10

Oh, it's a meteorarchal society. And they get birthed through that fake penis. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Yeah, what is the purpose of the fake penis? The fake penis is a dominate the men. They get on top of the band and they go, whosin' bitch, so it's gonna be. And they got a big old strap on. They peg their men. All male hyenas are cucks. They all take it's crazy. It's crazy.

SPEAKER_03

02:02:10 - 02:02:22

That's where we're heading is a ancient diameter. Really? Oh Jesus. Ouch. That's that creates a high death rate for first time mothers. Yeah. High death rate doesn't say here how many.

SPEAKER_01

02:02:22 - 02:02:22

I think it's 20%. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

02:02:22 - 02:02:28

Have you ever seen that the like the full human clitoris?

SPEAKER_01

02:02:28 - 02:02:30

Yes. I've seen one. Have you?

SPEAKER_00

02:02:32 - 02:02:33

Uh, not in the wild.

SPEAKER_01

02:02:33 - 02:02:37

The full, the full clitoris? No, I know. I'm never seen it like a biological.

SPEAKER_00

02:02:37 - 02:02:42

Can you pull up the internal clitoris? Internal clitoris. I think it was only discovered.

SPEAKER_01

02:02:42 - 02:02:43

It's not allowed to be shown.

SPEAKER_03

02:02:43 - 02:02:45

I was trying to quickly think about that.

SPEAKER_01

02:02:45 - 02:03:00

Yeah, I think I was in trouble. Well, you can pull it up, but just don't show the world, just show us. Okay. Yeah. If you, I think if you put that on YouTube, we'll be demonetized and possibly kick off the network to Google that yourself. Yeah, it's Google that you wear it, and be careful of the wrath of God.

SPEAKER_00

02:03:00 - 02:03:18

It's an enormous structure that I think we didn't fully understand. I don't understand how we could have missed it. But my understanding was we didn't fully understand the internal clitoris right there on the left below. It looks exactly like this sort of space ships from War the World's 1943.

SPEAKER_01

02:03:18 - 02:03:21

So it's all that stuff on the outside.

SPEAKER_00

02:03:21 - 02:03:24

All you see on the outside is a little bit of a time.

SPEAKER_01

02:03:24 - 02:04:05

We're going to get in trouble. They get mad at us. Does that picture make you horny? No, not at all. Makes you afraid, doesn't it? It seems like an alien. It should shoot like a big bugger. Like, that's the Ridley Scott alien, the face hugger. Yeah. Ooh. Well, just a, look, it's very weird that we've just come to accept what the shape of the body is. Right. Body is very bizarre. I mean, if we were all shaped like stingrays and we saw a person, we'd be like, what in the holy fuck is that thing? Yeah. Whether it's articulating fingers and it's moving its eyeballs around sniffing things with nostrils. Like, we just accept the fact that this shape is normal, that it makes sense.

SPEAKER_00

02:04:05 - 02:05:06

Well, this is why cephalopods, but from last time when we were talking about the cattle fish, I just learned something new, which is that cephalopods are under consideration to be the next great model organism for biology. So, if you think about how weird it is that some branch of the phylogenetic tree is so far distant from us, that these moths have such advanced minds and their skin is the wonder of the world for sure. Nobody knows quite how all of that not only do they have these chromatophores to get the camouflage right, but they also change the texture of their skin to mimic things like coral and all this stuff. Wouldn't it be cool if we made cephalopods the next great model organism and then we started doing comparative like not only neuroanatomy but connectomics where we're trying to study how their brains are organized because they're so far away they are probably The closest we will ever get to meeting aliens, I think I said that the last time is here. And I'm really excited if that goes forward.

SPEAKER_01

02:05:06 - 02:05:19

Well, it really doesn't seem like anything else. Right. You know, whether it's a cuddle fish or whether it's an octopus. Like, you're like, oh, it's like kind of like a squid. Like, yeah, a little bit like a person's like a monkey. Yeah, but like real different.

SPEAKER_00

02:05:19 - 02:05:27

Well, the nodalists is the craziest, you know, maybe a dime, the cuttlefish is the most interesting for sure. They're both. The octopus is like, you know, so on television.

SPEAKER_01

02:05:27 - 02:05:32

Right. But they regenerate. That's another part of it that's bizarre.

SPEAKER_00

02:05:32 - 02:05:41

Yeah. Well, it would be fun to do. I would imagine that Nuts and Salamanders in the tetrapod category would be the best for us to study for regeneration.

SPEAKER_01

02:05:41 - 02:06:06

I'd like how they regenerate up to a point. Like nature will say, yeah, you can grow an arm back, can't grow a head back. Sorry, fuckface. That's a wrap. Yeah. You know, you lose your head, nature's like, ah, you gave up a big piece. You gave up the queen. It's over. Yeah. Games over. See, if you lose your tail, like, ah, it's debatable. Do you grow your tail back? We could do that. I think Lizard's grow their tail back, you know, but they only grow like most of it. They don't grow the whole thing.

SPEAKER_00

02:06:06 - 02:06:17

But the Nuts and Salamanders seem to have this very high regent. And you can just cut an arm off over and over again. There it is. Which can't cut their head off. Yeah. Why do you cut their head off?

SPEAKER_01

02:06:17 - 02:06:35

I don't. But I mean, just saying it's weird. Like you can't like chop them in half from the waist down. They don't seal up and grow a new waist. Like that's it. You can only get rid of the limbs. But you can get rid of the limbs. Like nature is evolved a strategy for dealing with predation. Just give him the arm. Give him the arm. Take it. Pop.

SPEAKER_00

02:06:35 - 02:06:42

What do you think of the fact that we had this successful head transplant in monkeys in like the early 70s? And then we walked away from it.

SPEAKER_01

02:06:43 - 02:07:04

Probably good move. Otherwise, Jackson Beverly Hills would be getting new bodies. Just getting their head screwed on to new bodies. Yeah, getting new heads. Yeah, people would figure out a way to transplant their brains. If it wants to lift forever. I just have an 800 year old brain and talk about your older cycle victim. Yeah. What people are going to start doing?

SPEAKER_00

02:07:04 - 02:07:12

Well, then I guess it's something that we walked. I thought it was kind of a weird move that we would succeed at that and then say, OK, too much. Can't handle it.

SPEAKER_01

02:07:12 - 02:07:17

Do you think that's what they did? It was probably hard to get funding. People thought you were playing God.

SPEAKER_00

02:07:17 - 02:07:33

The guy who did it, I think, was maybe his name is Robert White, and he was a devout Christian, so it was really good. Because there was a lot of this reverence for the human form. And if a religious person is doing it, we feel better than if somebody is like desecrating.

SPEAKER_01

02:07:33 - 02:07:36

Right. Right. Some atheist ass scientists.

SPEAKER_00

02:07:36 - 02:07:42

Right. That's very interesting. I've been he's cutting heads off of dogs and they're touching them to monkeys.

SPEAKER_01

02:07:42 - 02:07:58

Yeah, that's what's also like we think of it as like okay, it's one thing if you're trying out medicine on a monkey that might save babies But it's another thing if you just say what happens if I cut this monkey's head off stick it on another monkey with all this crazy I don't know if you've ever seen this the Russians

SPEAKER_00

02:07:59 - 02:08:31

had this film introduced by JBS Halden. Great English biologist was also a communist and therefore very pro-Soviet. And there's this experiment. It was an experiment in the continuation of the brain after death. And they hook up the head to an artificial circulatory system. And they sort of continued to have interactions where they swab the head and they get the eyelash movement and the tongue comes out to lick and eat things. It's quite interesting. I would recommend it.

SPEAKER_01

02:08:31 - 02:08:40

Yeah. Aldane has one of the greatest quotes. Not only is the universe queer than you suppose, it's queer than you can suppose.

SPEAKER_00

02:08:40 - 02:09:19

What a great quote. He was also the anordinate fondness of Beatles guy. Inordinate fondness of noodles? The archbishop of Canterbury found himself, I think, seated across from Halden and wanted to needle him because he was a communist atheist. He said, tell me, well, what does your study of the biological world inform us about how great Creator and how they ensured him back? He said, that he has an inordinate fondness for beetles because beetles are so highly speciated. And what was his reaction to that? Well, I think it was a different era. It's like smoked burn, but like, to our tourway and thinking, it's not that hard of a burn.

SPEAKER_01

02:09:19 - 02:10:14

Well, we're really committed to the idea that all the stuff that we can do, manipulating the planet, sending rockets in the space, that that's more important than what it does. We're really committed to this, that our significance, although it's clearly, if we work together, we believe in a sense of community, it's more important to each other to us. It is, but to the whole thing, is it really more important? Says who? I mean, if people didn't exist, if we were wiped off the planet, all the other animals would be okay. They really would be okay. I mean, we would gain and lose more predators and we wouldn't be controlling the population. Sure. But if all the ants went away, that would be a wrap. Yeah. That would be a wrap. We're done. There's no more people. This has been widely decided that if we lost all insect, well, especially all ants, like it probably would collapse all the ecosystems that we need to sustain human life.

SPEAKER_00

02:10:14 - 02:10:18

I have a feeling that those water bear tardigrades would be like, Suckers!

SPEAKER_01

02:10:18 - 02:10:57

Every of the ants would be only one left! Well, we wouldn't be able to make it, but a lot of shit would make it. A lot of other stuff would make it. That's true, but, you know, the thing that I think... Maybe we'd make it anyway. Maybe they're wrong. Yeah. Don't understand humans. Try to freak this out. Yeah, maybe. Don't read that. Find out if that's true. If all ants died, human beings would go extinct, just Google that. I think I read a paper proposing that and they were explaining the critical role that ants play in all these different ecosystems and how the biomass of ants worldwide is equal to or greater than the biomass of human beings.

SPEAKER_00

02:11:00 - 02:11:03

I don't have any intuition around that. Yeah. Sounds reasonable now.

SPEAKER_01

02:11:03 - 02:11:07

I'm pretty sure that's true. And so, but our idea is that we're more important. Well, we are.

SPEAKER_00

02:11:07 - 02:11:15

I have cable. Yeah. Yeah. That's not why I think we're more important. I have 4G. Do you have 4G? Okay, maybe that's more important.

SPEAKER_01

02:11:15 - 02:11:44

I have a 70 inch television. And I have an eye watch. Yeah. It must be more important. The stupid fucking ant was dirt house. If I can just piss on your house while I go jogging. Yeah. I'm a more important thing in you. Yeah, I don't I don't have your people by pissing on you. Yeah. Yeah. Obviously nature doesn't want to protect you. You get your house in the dirt. It's a hole. It's a mound.

SPEAKER_00

02:11:44 - 02:12:28

Okay. I don't know why I want to get serious when you're just trying to fuck with me. But the really interesting thing about humans is that we're the only species that understands what game we're in and we can reject the game. Every other species is playing the game. So you know, you know, my brother very well. Very surprising to me that my brother only wanted to have two kids and didn't want to spend all his time down at the sperm bank, you know, making donations. I said, you're an evolutionary theorist. Ever think it's kind of weird that you're not very playing this game very effectively. And he, you know, shot me back this thing. He said, if you actually understand the game, why would you want to continue to play it? And I thought that was like really interesting that somebody who sounds like his wife does want any more kids.

SPEAKER_01

02:12:28 - 02:12:31

It's right here. Rationalizations. I get it, bro.

SPEAKER_03

02:12:32 - 02:12:45

Yeah. The article I found says all all insects dying not just ants all insects and would take 50 years for people to disappear for that according to this science explorer article.

SPEAKER_01

02:12:45 - 02:12:48

Find out the biomass of ants because that's even trippier.

SPEAKER_00

02:12:52 - 02:12:54

But I want to get rid of this anti-human thing.

SPEAKER_01

02:12:54 - 02:12:55

I'm not anti-human.

SPEAKER_00

02:12:55 - 02:12:55

I know.

SPEAKER_01

02:12:55 - 02:12:57

I'm just neutral.

SPEAKER_00

02:12:57 - 02:12:57

No.

SPEAKER_01

02:12:57 - 02:13:05

Biological, neutral. If I just looked at it objectively. Yeah, I don't think so. You think it's more significant because we're more significant to each other.

SPEAKER_00

02:13:05 - 02:13:31

Well, there's no significance in the whole game if you just take completely materials. What do we care? It's one rock, one spec big deal. Right. So the problem is if you accept that as an answer, then you've kind of failed by just taking the nihilist way out. And to me, Like, you know, they have this annual question at edge.org. And finally, the guy got exhausted and wanted to ask another one. So I'll finish this up quick. And we'll do things.

SPEAKER_01

02:13:31 - 02:15:12

I'm sorry. Then you want to take it? Ants do our ants outway humans. Individual workers weigh an average of 1 to 5 milligrams according to the species. When combined all ants in the world taken together way about as much as all human beings. That's interesting. That's not right. Wow. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. That's fucking bananas. Ooh, they are 15% to 20% of the terrestrial animal biomass. And in tropical regions, we're answering especially abundant. They monopolize 25% or more. Ooh. I'm an after. I have a buddy, Brian Kown. Brian Kown used to, when he was in college, he spent some time in the jungle. He was thinking he was going to be a biologist. He was going to study insect. He was going to be in What is it, an insectivore? So they had to sleep in these elevated tents and they had to paint like some sort of like turpentine type chemical all over the posts because if they didn't, the ants would crawl up the posts and eat you in your sleep. What literally climb in your ear and start eating you and tell everybody and you would die that way. Like people have died elephants. have been eaten by ants. And he said, you can hear them walking in the jungle. Like in the night, you hear, you hear the footsteps of fucking ants, because there's so many of them. If you're in the wrong place at the wrong time, and there's a path of these motherfuckers moving your way, and they send a signal that we got something here, and they crawl up you, they just all start crawling up you. And there's so many of them you can't avoid them.

SPEAKER_00

02:15:12 - 02:16:14

Well, because they're not really separate animals, right? They're you social. Hymanoptera has this weird property of this haplodipoid structure so that the females are highly related to each other. And so in the same way that your cells aren't individual animals, they're all conspired to create you. There is a sense in which in this world of bees and ants and and wasps and things. Hymanoptera. the real entity is the colony. It's not the individual. So, you know, if I took a psychological approach to you, and I just went sell by sell, you know, you're, you're this collection of, you know, 10 or 50 trillion separat entities. And that's what makes ants so terrifying. Yeah. This is that, you know, Kropokkin, the great anarchist, sort of an amateur naturalist and he would look to natural systems and say, why can't humans cooperate like this? The point is we're not structured to cooperate in this use social fashion.

SPEAKER_01

02:16:15 - 02:16:56

the way they cooperate is so uncanny when those leaf cutter ants design those intricate cities with they have places where things ferment and we're we're gases are released through holes in the ground and it doesn't make any sense that this little tiny brain could figure out this enormous structure but somehow another when combined and it's not a tiny brain right not just one version of this but millions and millions of these designs appear all over the world and they see if you could find that video if they fill the leaf cutter ant colony they filled the the home with molten metal Yeah, it was something like that.

SPEAKER_00

02:16:56 - 02:16:57

They call it three. Some structures.

SPEAKER_01

02:16:57 - 02:17:21

Yeah, I think they flooded it with concrete. They flooded concrete and all the holes and then they dug out everything around it so you could see this structure and then they explained what there's this is really like well thought out like they have portals and they have the this is how they get the food in and this is where they take the leaves and they they let them rot and they turn to mulch and there's like a gas really

SPEAKER_00

02:17:21 - 02:18:07

Distributed loosely coupled system what makes it seem so amazing I mean it is utterly amazing, but if you think about it as individuals making decisions that conspire to create these these structures it's less and it's That's more amazing than what it is which is it's a loosely coupled Distributed system, you know, so that's how a B hive will You know, send out explorers and they'll report back and they'll do the dance and the dance communicates the information and you get all these coordinated activities. In what other systems do you suppress the fertility of females? Because the relatedness is so high. This is gorgeous.

SPEAKER_01

02:18:07 - 02:19:46

Yeah, this is the video we're talking about. So this is, it's really huge too. And they have these looks like tunnel systems and then they lead to these big circular areas where they're really almost uniform in size. It's really strange way or similar in size. So they have these pathways that go to these like rooms, these circular rooms and there's just this incredible network of these tubes and circular rooms that they uncover and it's fucking enormous. When you look at how big this thing, I mean if you had to look at how big is that? Was that 80 feet across, 90 feet across or something like that? So they're continuing to dig this up. They're not even done in this video here, but you see all the pipes that extend to the left and to the right. So they've developed some sort of complex civilization, some weird bizarre network of these passageways and rooms, and they do it just like this everywhere. So some pattern has emerged in their species that has set them up to act as this collective group and then operate in this similar fashion all over the world wherever they exist in that sort of uh, with that kind of dirt they can manipulate right that. That's that alone is one of that is a massive mystery and how a little tiny thing with a brain that's almost imperceptibly small This is like tiny little pad. It is a little head. How does he figure out that hole? How does he figure out tunnels?

SPEAKER_00

02:19:46 - 02:20:52

But he's not really. It's not. Well, this is what I'm trying to get. So they're working together. Okay, so if you look at for example, C elegans, the nematode with the 1,000 cells for the entire body plan 300 of which are neurons, we have a complete map not only of the cell lineage diagram, which is how this thing unfolds from a single fertilized egg. But we also have a complete wiring diagram of its nervous system. So this is something that locomotes, moves around, it eats, has sex. And it's only got 300 neurons. Each of those is an extremely primitive machine. And they send signals to each other. And we still don't know how the thing really works, even though we've got the entire thing mapped. This was the great insight of Sidney Brenner that we would make the the Warren, the great model organism because we could actually map everything about it, right? And it is astounding to me how little we've learned. We've learned a ton from it, but I had thought that we would have gotten much farther and understanding the brain

SPEAKER_01

02:20:53 - 02:21:07

Did you see this recent discovery of a 25-foot-long sea worm that apparently is not just one organism? Has like many organisms together combined?

SPEAKER_00

02:21:07 - 02:21:10

No. Yeah, I gotta find out about that.

SPEAKER_01

02:21:10 - 02:22:21

Yeah, you gotta see this fucking thing. It's insane. And I think this is a very recent discovery at least one this large. And these guys are swimming around with this thing. It looks impossible. It looks like they landed on another planet and they're experiencing this thing. Like this thing, this, whatever this is, I'm pretty sure with what I've read. I've read it really quickly as I was running out the door that it exists. Large 8-millimeter worm-like sea creature stuns New Zealand divers. So they're looking at this thing, but I think there's many different organisms inside of it. I don't think it's one individual organism. Yeah, it's made up of hundreds of thousands of organisms. I've never seen it. Yeah, like what? What is it? Like what does that mean? This is a weird tube for folks that are watching this or listening to this rather what we're looking at is these divers that are just tripping balls here They're like what and the fuck is this and it looks like like an enormous tube like jellyfish type creature That's in the water. It almost looks semi translucent, right?

SPEAKER_00

02:22:21 - 02:22:23

Would you say it's dwarfing them?

SPEAKER_01

02:22:23 - 02:22:51

It's enormous. It's so big. It's like the size and what moves and changes, but it's sometimes it's larger than a human waste or a human chest. And other times it gets real skinny, but it's fucking huge. Like, look at that. What is that thing? I'm stunned. Well, the fact that it's, I don't understand what they're saying, that it's made up of hundreds of thousands of organisms. Like, how is it made up of different stuff? Like, what is it?

SPEAKER_00

02:22:52 - 02:23:02

Like, have you ever heard of anything like this? Well, like, the Portuguese man of war, I think, is like, five different organisms, isn't it? Is it? The, the collaborate, in effect.

SPEAKER_01

02:23:02 - 02:24:06

Really? The Portuguese man of war is not like a, like, one thing? Look at the size of that thing above the water. That is fucking crazy. Pyrison. Pyrison. Just whatever the ocean is. Like that. Like we're all, we're trying to look into space. Like to wonder if there's aliens out there. They're here. I know. They're right fucking there. Like whether there's cuddle fish or octopus or this goddamn thing. Whoa. Pyrosome. What the fuck? That thing looks like a geometric pattern. That's a nice journey. Look at that one on the upper right hand corner, Jamie. What is that weird looking fucking? What is that thing? 60 foot long jet powered animal. Oh, God. It's like a civilization. It's like a ship of these things flying through the ocean. What have you ever seen this before? What the fuck is that? That is so weird looking. A come on man. That looks like something from avatar. Does it? Yeah. It totally does, right? Like something that comes off that tree.

SPEAKER_03

02:24:06 - 02:24:07

Hopefully put it in the new movie.

SPEAKER_01

02:24:07 - 02:25:03

Yeah. Tell James Cameron. look at this thing so this is what those things are but the other one is a very smooth or slow resolution and we can't get a really good look at it but that's what it is it's this collective group of hundreds of thousands of organisms that combined together and they're getting jacked by that turtle all you bitches what a weird weird organism look at that look at this picture what if you stuck your arm in it and I just Dude, how bizarre is it that there's a civilization of these things all combined. But what they are is individuals that operate as a giant tube. You never heard of this before. No. I'm so happy we found something you don't know about. That was, that's how fucking weird one man. But yeah, the idea that the ocean is really an alien world.

SPEAKER_00

02:25:04 - 02:25:24

Yeah. Well, the funniest part is when you hear these guys with their remote submersibles and they find some new life for. Yeah. They're like, take me down, leave me those. Wait, what is that? You might get really excited, because it's the ability to meet aliens.

SPEAKER_01

02:25:24 - 02:25:35

There are new things. We've kind of sort of mapped out the... Dressed real stuff, more or less. Yeah, there's like a few weird things you've found in the jungle, weird bugs. Like where's that?

SPEAKER_00

02:25:35 - 02:25:46

Vietnam has some surprises for us. Dear with fangs. Have you ever seen those? Oh, the silo acy-bores are the deer. They're the deer. They're the vampire deer. I don't know, I don't know about vampire deer.

SPEAKER_01

02:25:46 - 02:25:53

It's the craziest looking thing ever. It's deer with fangs. Like crocodile looking fangs that come hanging down like this.

SPEAKER_00

02:25:53 - 02:25:55

If this is some jackal-up thing.

SPEAKER_01

02:25:55 - 02:27:31

Oh, it's bad. It's a weird little animal. It's on a big deer either. Well, do you not look at that thing? Vampire deer. That's a real animal. Look at that. How? Fuck and strange. What was in this coffee Jamie? Look at that thing. Look at the fucking teeth on that thing. It's probably something akin to their antlers. They use it to defend themselves. Okay, that's not real. That was not real. Because that's a mule deer. So that one, you just pick, that's, that's some Photoshop bullshit. What's interesting is apparently elk have these things called, people call them ovaries now. But what they are is at one point time, they're tusks. Like a bore. Like giant tusks that probably aided them and their fights. And they eventually shrank. And now they're just this weird sort of nubby thing. I actually have some here. I'll show it to you. Yeah. Yeah. After the podcast, I'll show them to you. But they, they're this weird thing that's like not quite a tooth. It's ivory that grows inside their head. And at one point in time, it was some kind of a weapon, just like their head is. I mean, the antlers are, you know, it's the largest, how do we describe this? What was the, the quickest growing thing in the animal world is the the antlers of an elk okay because look how fucking huge they are they fall off every year and they grow back every year and it's all just for fighting and they used to grow back tusks too or these to have tough the answer to the tusks were permanent but they used to just that's just for duking it out yeah

SPEAKER_00

02:27:32 - 02:28:12

It's crazy weaponry. Sexual selection? Well, you want to know really weird thing, the Dung Beetle. There's a conserved system whereby, in some Dung Beetles, the amount of weaponry you have is your antler. Is inversely proportional to the amount of copulatory apparatus you have. where it counts. And so if you have really impressive weaponry, you're not able to do quite as much. And that may be the engine of speciations because the vagina and penis in that system is a lock and key. And so if something shrinks too much, then you can't necessarily get the job.

SPEAKER_01

02:28:12 - 02:28:35

So if a greedy, dung beetle with giant horns just fucks everybody up, his genes can pass on. Maybe there's a certain round of cooperation that's needed in the dung beetle world. Yeah. You can't have an oppressor. Kind of a gang is kind of the dung beetle world. The patriarchy in the dung beetle world. Look at the size of the antler on that guy. Yeah. Progirls make fun of them. Probably the dung beetle world. Look at the size of the antler.

SPEAKER_00

02:28:35 - 02:28:37

Look at the guy with the Lamborghini.

SPEAKER_01

02:28:37 - 02:28:51

Exactly. Like what's he doing over there with his giant. It looks like elk antlers. Probably is a tiny little dick. You want, you want a guy that's just got a little like that guy. I probably probably hung like a roach.

SPEAKER_00

02:28:51 - 02:29:38

All right. Have a hunting question for you. Okay. I started looking into this primitive hunting thing. I was positively predisposed towards hunting and I turned myself off of, I mean, I don't hunt, but I turned myself off of hunting by watching the affect of some of these people who are baiting and killing bears in ways that it just doesn't feel to me like hyper-respectful. Right. I wondered if there's like a deeper layer where if I got even deeper into it, I would understand it, or am I actually correct that there is something weird about the effect of attracting some beautiful bear to a kind of easy place to kill it and then just getting super excited about. doing it in.

SPEAKER_01

02:29:38 - 02:31:33

Well, you're natural instincts. Yeah. There's a reason for them and you're most certainly correct. It's a weird feeling. The idea that you're going to trick this bear into thinking he's going there to eat and then you kill him. Yeah. Bear hunting is different than any other kind of hunting. In the first fall, there's a lot of emotional attachment to it because people love teddy bears, things on those lines. But bears are This idea that they're beautiful, they definitely are. They're definitely. They're also one of the more ruthless animals in the animal kingdom and they're all cannibals, all of them. And the males don't just go after the cubs, they eat them. And they go after them specifically to eat them. And then when the males get chased off, the female will eat their own cubs. And this is universal. They're also responsible for the death of at least 50% of undulate calves and fawns, whether it's moose cows, so they don't have any of these issues. So they also are really difficult to hunt and their populations thought by wildlife biologists are important to keep on a control. So in areas of extreme density, like forests, you will not kill them unless you bait. you will not. So if you want to have two things has to happen, you have to use dogs, which is what they used to use a lot. These two used to be California until the 1990s. They outlawed how and hunting. And then they outlawed baiting around the same time. What they essentially did in Northern California is they outlawed bear hunting. But they didn't. You can still hunt bears, but it's extremely difficult. Almost impossible with a bow or very, very unlikely, like your rate of success would be extremely low. If you want to control populations, if you like to eat mousse and deer or you want to have them keep healthy populations and you don't want the bear encroaching on these rural homes and these areas, you have to control their populations and there's very few other ways to control their populations other than baiting them.

SPEAKER_00

02:31:33 - 02:31:39

So assume that I was positively predisposed to hunting, I do think that they're beautiful creatures, I think they're emotional creatures, but I understand.

SPEAKER_01

02:31:40 - 02:31:41

Yeah, they're all they're all beautiful.

SPEAKER_00

02:31:41 - 02:31:47

Okay, so I mean, I think, I mean, I think these frogs are beautiful. They're fascinating. It's the affect that freaking out.

SPEAKER_01

02:31:47 - 02:32:01

It should. It's a weird form of trickery and we don't think it's sporting, right? But the idea is that if you really want to control their populations, you have to accept that this is a necessary evil. So some that I grasp it.

SPEAKER_00

02:32:01 - 02:32:20

It's still at the level that the thing that surprised me was that the affect wasn't the expected affect of the hunter with reverence in some sense sufficient reverence for the kill. Yeah. That's what flipped me up.

SPEAKER_01

02:32:20 - 02:32:44

Well, there's people get excited and they get happy that their success will be because hunting is difficult. And then if you take that at the context, you've taken that out of context and people get happy, especially when they're getting happy, they're getting happy around people that have no problem with hunting. One of the problems with respect is that it's assumed that you only have that respect if you don't have happiness that goes along with that.

SPEAKER_00

02:32:44 - 02:32:48

So I understand that there is some amount of sadness, some amount of happiness.

SPEAKER_01

02:32:48 - 02:32:52

Is a weird feeling of loss. So there's a lot of weird stuff that goes on.

SPEAKER_00

02:32:52 - 02:33:14

The surprise and the reason I'm asking you is that I had expected that I would have the difficulty, bear is equals teddy bears. I get past that, I keep going around this whole thing. And then when I finally got to the end, It was just that there wasn't the right balance between sadness, ecstatic elation.

SPEAKER_01

02:33:14 - 02:34:11

It's hard. It's hard if you're not there experiencing it. It's hard if you're not involved in this hunt for many, many days and it gets very difficult and you don't know if it's ever going to happen. But the bear hunting in particular, especially over bait, is way more problematic psychologically. I think there's a really good argument and I support this argument that you must keep bare populations in control if you want people and all those animals to live in harmony. Because if you don't, there's nothing else that keeps their populations in control. Other than bigger bears, grizzly bears and grizzly bears and they get out of hand are way scarier. It's a real giant problem in terms of our our anthropomorphization of these animals, you know, attaching these human attributes and these human thoughts and thinking of them as our friends and the forest and then what they actually are to people that live out there.

SPEAKER_00

02:34:11 - 02:34:37

My guess is that if I went hunting with you, I would expect to see you elated after three days of frustration. Yes, on a on a good hunt. I expect that you would use the kill responsibly that you would forego certain kinds of kills. I don't have any of those issues, I think. I think that where the issue is is that I wouldn't expect an unbalanced relation.

SPEAKER_01

02:34:37 - 02:36:55

Yeah, I understand what you're saying. And especially an unbalanced relation when you're hunting over bait for an animal that is not necessarily thought of in our culture as being an animal that you eat, which is bare. And a lot of times people think that you don't eat them, black bears in particular actually, they taste very good and people do eat them. When you deal with people like I have friends, my friend John and Jen Rivett who live in Alberta and they are hunting guides, it's a real necessity up there to hunt bears. Because there is nothing else that's keeping their populations in check. And if you ever go up there, you see an extraordinary amount of bears. Like you could see 1920 bears in a day. Wow. They're everywhere. And there's a high density of them. And they just decimate the deer population. They decimate the moose population. And there's some of them that learn that they can get into garbage cans, they can get into the trash. They're breaking up people's cars and destroy them. They've killed a few people, but it's pretty rare. Most of the time, they realize that people are dangerous, and they stay the fuck away. But it's not what I appreciate is spot and stalking traditional prey animals. That's what I like to do. I like to spot and stalk deer and elk. Because I feel like, first of all, they're the most delicious. They make, whether it makes sense or not, they make the most sense to me in terms of like a pre-animal, they're the ones that I, I covet the most. What I want to do is I want to go and get older, mature animals that are undulates. Whether it's a deer or an elk, an animal that's spread its genetics, that is already, it's, you know, seven, eight years old, nine years old, as animal that doesn't have much time left. If you get it now, you're probably getting it within a year of its death. whether it's by natural causes, wolves, cold starvation, you're you're doing it probably the most humane you're giving it probably the most humane death that's reasonably possible for this thing. Unless it falls off a cliff and even then it's the It might survive that for a little while. When you're shooting an animal with an arrow, it's dead in seconds. You hit it in the heart. I shot an elk this year. It literally walked four yards and tipped over. It just steps, steps, steps.

SPEAKER_00

02:36:55 - 02:37:03

Boom. I've been very impressed with the skill of some of these, I guess this is the primitive hunting movement with spears and see that's.

SPEAKER_01

02:37:07 - 02:38:14

I think you should, I think you should be really careful. about anything that you do that's not that accurate. That's that's an issue. Yeah, that's a giant issue. A bozer extremely accurate. Right. I mean, there's guys that can shoot a paper plate at 120 yards every single time. They can shoot like a little plate like that. They'll bet their life. They can drop an arrow into that at 120 yards every single time. You can get good at that. You can get if you have good technique and reasonable control of your emotions and your anxiety. Sure. in the heart in the heat of the moment you don't ever shoot anything in a hundred twenty yards though you should get things thirty yards forty yards and the degree of success is very high with skilled hunters if you they're ethical and the shot decisions That primitive stuff is like, why? Why are you throwing spears? Like, what are you doing? You're trying to prove that you're better than people that use a bow and arrow. Like, this is not an accurate or effective thing. I mean, it kind of is, but you have to be like five yards, ten yards. Like, what do you got to be 15 yards max, even then?

SPEAKER_00

02:38:14 - 02:38:18

I think part of the thrill of it for them is putting themselves in danger.

SPEAKER_01

02:38:18 - 02:38:22

There's a little bit of that. If you're shooting, oh, you're going after a bear. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

02:38:23 - 02:39:19

Like I've seen some of these things filmed where the person looks like, you know, they're up in there. I don't know what to call it. They're a little tree stand, tree stand. And that doesn't look like they're putting a lot of risk. But some of these people are clearly getting off on this is the primal hunt, right? And this is they're going backwards into something where the animal could surprise them. What I wanted to do is I wanted to re-acquaint myself with, you know, now that I can watch somebody actually in that moment, try to figure out what my ethics around hunting were. And I thought that I had prepared myself. And I just, I thought, when I saw you, find out where Joe is. Because I have no question knowing your ethics and how you think that you would have a very subtle perspective on all these different kinds of kills, which sorts of animals.

SPEAKER_01

02:39:19 - 02:43:20

Yeah, if you get to spears, you're in a weird place. Like, like you say, oh, I only spear wild pigs. We're trying to get rid of them anyway. Okay. But that's, we're in a weird place. We're in a weird place. Because, uh, ethically, I think you have two choices. Three choices. Your three choices are rifle, which is number one, ethically. Realistically, because if you shoot something with a rifle, you can be really accurate. Like, out to 100 yards, 100% of the time. Like, unless it's crazy windy out or there's some weird conditions, altitude can affect ballistics. But not that much. Out to 100 yards, you're fucking deadly. If you have a really good control squeeze in the trigger, you're not jerking everything, you're not panicking. Then bow is second. You know, bow requires way more practice, way more fine tuning of your motor skills, but it's still possible. Then you have crossbow, which is even more effective than a bow, faster, more feet per second, faster feet per second so that it travels at a flat line because it's going quicker before it drops. They all drop at the same speed, right? But let's and arrows all drop at the same speed. They just don't get there at the same speed. Okay. So in the same amount of time, like if I'm shooting something at 100 yards with a bow, I am aiming with a sight that is calculating for the fact that the arrow is going to drop significantly in the time that it takes. If it's going 280 feet per second is like a normal speed for a good bow with a good heavy arrow that's 280 feet per second that goes 100 yards. Okay. A bullet is going to go 100 yards far quicker. But in the same amount of time, it takes that arrow to get to that target. The bullet is going to drop the same amount as the arrow. And that's what most people don't understand. So a crossbow is more ethical because it's more accurate. It's have fewer moving parts. You can actually sit it on a rest and just squeeze the trigger easier to manipulate. And the arrow is traveling faster, so it's called a bolt. Traveling faster, so it'll drop less. After that, check it squirrely. After that, it's like you throw in spears. Okay, you got, what do you got in Adeladdle? Okay. All right. Well, you can kill things with it and people have done it, but it gets to how accurate are you and what is what's your ethical brain? Right. A can ethical range for a really good hunter with a bow and arrow is probably 80 yards. Maybe it's a moose, 90 yards, something big. But with a spear, like, what do you got? You got 10 yards? So, you know, why? That's the question. What was that? Are you doing it for meat? Are you doing it because is this your mountain Everest? You want to kill a pig with a spear? And are you saying that a pig is not worth as much so you should be able to kill it with a spear? Because these are all weird decisions. They're weird decisions. They're weird decisions. Yeah. And people make those with bears. They make those decisions with black bears, like people that live where they consider them nuisances. They kill them. I mean, they used to be used to allow them to shoot, uh, used to allow to hunt, used to be allowed to hunt black bears with a spear in Alberta until a big scandal a couple years ago. where a guy filmed himself doing that. He shot a bear, he killed a bear rather with spear and was hooting and hollering and people got to hold the video and thought it was disgusting and protested it and people from under armor dropped his wife from their, you know, they had this sort of sponsorship deal with them. And it caused a rift in the hunting community. Some people think you should be able to hunt with a rock. I'll share what you hunt with. She'll hunt with anything. And other people are like, hmm, okay. But what are we doing? Are we just going out to get meat? Or are we putting on a macho performance of our ability?

SPEAKER_00

02:43:20 - 02:43:27

This is exactly what I wanted to get at, which is if you know that a population has to be controlled and you want the meat.

SPEAKER_04

02:43:27 - 02:43:27

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

02:43:28 - 02:43:56

then it makes sense to me that you have to open yourself up to some of the pleasure of the kill that makes sense but what I saw just like flipped me out because it wasn't it was it was it was above and beyond yeah I saw spear and yeah and other things yeah and you know I was impressed by the some of the skill I'm impressed by some of the bravery but it's like why right yeah and then just doing it to populate control you're doing it for them this was the surprise to me like I got I got kind of sick and buy it

SPEAKER_01

02:43:56 - 02:45:45

That's not surprising. It's not surprising. I mean, I think if you were there, you'd probably be even more conflicted because you actually were there in the presence of the thing dying. Watching a bear die on a video is one thing, but being there alive when they die is a completely different thing. It's a very complicated thing because we have these deep set emotional connections to certain animals that my friend Steve Renella who's going to be actually on tomorrow. He calls them charismatic megafauna. Yeah. We have this different view of certain animals bears in particular. But if you use the animal respectfully, respectfully and you kill it ethically and you do I don't have any problem with hunting bears and in fact I think it's actually and that's it it really is a necessary task it's something that even if you don't like to hunt bears if you're living in a place like Alberta you probably should hunt bears because you should do your part there's a lot of them out there and you know one of the things that becomes an interesting relationship is a relationship between the moves hunters and the deer hunters and the bear hunters that they have kind of if those smart ones have come to an understanding that even if I don't hunt bear, I need those people out there doing it. But it's, how do you do it and why are you doing it? I think you, I've seen animals die very quickly with a bone arrow. They die very quickly. I've never seen animal die with a spear. I don't think it's necessary. But I don't want to be the person that tells you you can't do it. If you have an ethical range of five yards and you only hunt bear with a spear at five yards and you kill it immediately, you hit it and kill it, you're right, then you're right.

SPEAKER_00

02:45:45 - 02:45:51

Yeah, but it's not based on the method it's based on. What are the ethical parameters around the guy?

SPEAKER_01

02:45:51 - 02:46:12

And also I would kind of be a hypocrite because even though I can ethically kill something at 40 yards or just figure out what the number is depending on the size of the animal. Um, even though I can do that, I could do it way easier with a rifle. So why am I using a bow and arrow? Why do I want to make it more difficult? Why am I making it more challenging? Why am I requiring myself to practice?

SPEAKER_00

02:46:12 - 02:46:14

But you're asking all those questions. You're very self-aware.

SPEAKER_01

02:46:14 - 02:46:21

It's a very important question to ask because if I was just doing it just for the meat, I would probably use your rifle.

SPEAKER_00

02:46:21 - 02:46:42

Right. Yeah. Yeah, I think that that part of it has to do with the primal association with the kill. And then the key question is how do you want to indulge that what is the set in setting blah blah blah. So that was the thing that I found shocking. This is that I thought, you know, I just did something about the need to control population. It's the affect which really killed me.

SPEAKER_01

02:46:42 - 02:46:47

Yeah. Well, again, we're talking about bears. You know, it's not just bears. Are there animals as well?

SPEAKER_00

02:46:47 - 02:46:59

Yeah. I mean, I saw I don't want to focus more on it necessarily, but it's just a question I had to ask you because I was very surprised by my own reaction.

SPEAKER_01

02:47:00 - 02:48:20

Well, a lot of people are taking issue. My good friend Ben O'Brien, who's a brilliant writer, who's actually also a hunter, is advocating that people stop taking what he calls grip and grins. What a grip and grin is like, say, if you shot a beautiful deer, you're holding the deer up by the antlers and you're smiling. And he's advocating that those photos are problematic because people who don't hunt, look at it like you're some bloodthirsty asshole that's super happy that something died. And that's not even though that's not how the people feel when they're taking those photos. What there are is happy that something which is very difficult, which, you know, especially if you're using a bow, most people go home empty-handed. It requires too much fitness, physical fitness, because you're going up and down the mountains. It requires too much accuracy and training and technique and archery. Most people fuck it up. And then there's dealing with anxiety. Most people fuck it up. After it's all over, there's this great feeling of elation, right? You did it. I can't believe it came together. Wow, because it was probably not going to come together and people get happy. Now, these are people again that already accept hunting. Now, if you take someone who is an animal rights activist or someone who deeply appreciates animals, and then you show them that photo, they have a completely different association with what that photo means. With that photo means, is here's an asshole who's a trophy hunter.

SPEAKER_00

02:48:20 - 02:48:34

Okay, but let me get my thing out. I don't know any species. that celebrates a kill for food with Glee. Chaps, do. Chaps, sorry, sorry.

SPEAKER_01

02:48:34 - 02:48:36

You're right. Yeah, when they kill a monkey, they get pretty happy.

SPEAKER_00

02:48:36 - 02:48:50

Well, then they do it socially, and then they share it, you know, through altruism. They scream in each other. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So that's chimps are my least favorite species, almost of all. They're whole terrifying. They're the worst.

SPEAKER_01

02:48:50 - 02:48:51

Yeah, terrifying little fuckers.

SPEAKER_00

02:48:52 - 02:48:55

So where do you think we are on the political front?

SPEAKER_01

02:48:55 - 02:49:06

We haven't even touched that. I think it's the same way as bow hunting versus spears and rifles. It's all this world's messy. You know, all these things are messy.

SPEAKER_00

02:49:06 - 02:49:09

Do you see a way in which this political epic comes to an end?

SPEAKER_01

02:49:11 - 02:53:15

The only hope that I have is through reasonable dialogue becoming an accepted and appreciated thing, a celebrated thing, and that this is possible that people can realize that there's some stupidity to this team mentality that we have. Right. His right versus left, which is almost all a good percentage of it, is these assumed identities. Right. These pre-determined patterns that get adopted in order to, as we first started talking about this, in order to establish yourself as someone who's in a group. Right. You get accepted by this group. And you see it left and right. I mean, I don't want to name any names, but there's a bunch of people to do it blatantly. You see them. And I've even seen them switch teams. And you see them switch teams. And I don't buy their rationalizations when it comes to ideology. What I think is what they're doing is they're switching teams because they realize there's an in on this team. And they could just say, this is the problem with the team I used to be on, those fucking losers, and they're really Benedict Arnold, right? And they probably have as much of an affinity to the ideas of one side as they do the other side, they just go all in on one side to get acceptance from the group. You just know way people change their opinion that much over two years. It's like they just decide this group makes more sense now and I've been attacked by people on the left. So I'm going to go over the right or vice versa. And usually what it is is mean even when they say they've been attacked like oh you fucking baby there's a 300 million people just in this country alone. If you put something out there publicly and a thousand people attack you, don't act like you're being persecuted, okay? You have an idea, you've launched that idea out into the zeitgeist and people took a big shit on it. You know, whether it's people on the right or people on the left, you got to be able to argue your point one way or the other, and not just immediately jump ship on someone who shares ideas with you, decides that your ideas sucks, and maybe they're wrong, and maybe you're right. But you got to argue that through, but this idea of these partisan patterns that people just seem to automatically fall into. They're so detrimental to dialogue. They're so detrimental to us under really understanding each other and really having some sort of a sense of community, right? This is a giant community of 300 million people. That's what it's supposed to be. and this idea that it's this group is trying to fuck it up and they're trying to turn us all Muslims and this one wants everybody to be gay and this one wants everybody to fucking have free food in this and this is nonsense this is nonsense we need better understanding and you know the word better education gets tossed around a lot but it also means better social understanding right But it's social education. Like an appreciation of who we are and why we think the way we think. And calling out weasels on both sides of the pattern, like calling out weasels on the right that are pandering that are just trying to get up, you know, the repeating a lot of these like accepted beliefs because they know that they can hit this frequency and a lot of people sing along. or the same thing that a people are doing on the left. They're doing it on both sides. I think most reasonable people have a collection of ideas that they share from both the right and the left. And most reasonable people are reasonably compassionate. And I think that's one of the things we're missing. Some reasonable sense of not just ethics, but an appreciation for each other for all of us as a group. And this, that, I think, if we can celebrate reasonable conversations and celebrate an understanding of other people's perspectives, like be able to just look at how you're looking at things that have empathy. Okay, let me see what you're coming from with this. Okay, let me put myself in your shoes. Okay, instead of just immediately like fuck you, you cock and fuck you, you this and instead of thinking about it that way, if we just just try to just everybody exercise a little bit more, so we're a little bit more calm. Right. And come at this from a rational place and try to like realize like, let's do try to exclusion.

SPEAKER_00

02:53:17 - 02:55:12

I've been experimenting with a very dangerous idea, which is that I keep hearing about chief inclusion officers. And, you know, I thought about, you know, things from ecclesiasties, you know, to every season, there's a purpose under heaven. So, if there's inclusion, there also has to be exclusion. Right. And, like, deep platforming or unplatforming somebody is an active exclusion. And very often it's very interesting that the people who are for inclusion are very focused on the need for deep platforming, which is an active exclusion. So should we have chief exclusion officers that both monitor who is being excluded, including somebody like James Demore at Google, like is it ethical to exclude him? Or are there certain voices that need to not be at some tables in order for something to make progress? Because if you always have the voice that the most extreme that doesn't accept the game, then it's very hard to move forward within the game if you're constantly being reminded. So we have a series of situations in which it seems like some perspective that very few people hold terrorizes majorities or you know, group of people who sort of can more or less get along with each other. and keeps pushing us into this very divided landscape. But I was just curious, you know, in terms of our group of people that we talk and hang out with in common, where you see the high leverage is that we're, we've just finished the midterm. We've got this 2020 election that looks to me like Hillary is kind of eye in whether she wants to get back in the game. This Trump thing has completely, you know, it's like, it's like the dress, is it black and blue or white and gold for like, could be eight years. Right. Yeah. And I just, have you thought about how this ends?

SPEAKER_01

02:55:14 - 02:56:17

Well, I would never be so presumptuous to think that I have any idea how this ends. I have proposed various scenarios to myself and I don't like any of them. I don't like where it's going because I would have worried about and this is also again hypocritical that because I think it probably should burn down and be rebuilt from the ruins. We're not gonna get such a clean thing. It's not gonna be clean. I know. No, this isn't very clean either, though. Honestly, that guy won, it's not clean. I mean, he loves Putin. You know, this is a clean, you know, the whole thing is weird. The bankers having the amount of influence they have, the fact that there's two lobbyists, what's the number, like, two lobbyists to every member of Congress or two lobbyists to every senator, From the pharmaceutical industry, by the way, the number of people that have influenced over the way our laws are shaped, it's so fucking bananas right now, right? So off the rails. Is that what it is? 12?

SPEAKER_03

02:56:17 - 02:56:23

I didn't type in specifically, but there's 23 registered lobbyists for every member.

SPEAKER_01

02:56:23 - 02:59:11

No, I think from the pharmaceutical industry, they were saying, not just, I think it's two for every member of Congress in the pharmaceutical industry. Yeah, the question that you started out with, like, D platforming people. I think we're impatient and I think we really want to make sure that this vetting of ideas happens quickly because we see the answer. We see the solution. We see that this is incorrect and we see these people that think the world is flat or idiots and we think that these people that this think this and think that we think they're all wrong and so we want to stop them from talking. But that doesn't work. It just works for now. It oftentimes feeds those ideas. And it also, you have to question, like, why are you so sure? Why are you so sure that you are correct? That you don't just want your side to be heard exclusively. You want to silence these other people's ability to participate in this argument, even if they're totally wrong. I think that's dangerous because I think that the way to fight off ideas that aren't good is to introduce ideas that are good and you're gonna have a bunch of people that agree with the ideas that are bad but I think that that's a part of this whole figuring things out like you need to have bad ideas floating around there to appreciate good ideas if all the ideas are good like what do we do get it out against right It's not bad to have these bad ideas broadcast. It's bad to not have someone say, hey, these are bad ideas. Okay, but we need to see the pitfalls of racism. We need to see the pitfalls of crime. We need to see the pitfalls of corruption. We need to see it in action. I think it's like stock markets windling. I think in a lot of ways it's important. We need to understand that this is a pattern that people fall into continually over and over again. When they have control over the money, when they have control over them, move the numbers, what do I do this? How about if I tell you that this is going to go down and then you invest some money and I put some money in your back? and we work together. What's makes money? Because what people do, right? They just fucking do it over and over and over again. Should you punish him? Yes, absolutely. But I think it's kind of important to see some fucked up behavior, just because we're not done. We're still in some sort of emotional and psychological and even physical evolution. We're in the middle of this thing. And I think that bad ideas facilitate comprehension. Like these really shitty ideas that a lot of people have, what they do is they facilitate a comprehension of why we think dumb shit. And sometimes you don't know why people think dumb shit until you see someone over and over again that thinks dumb shit. And you get to see that whether it's Alex Jones or whether it's who it's filling the blank. Okay. What guy do you want? Deep black.

SPEAKER_00

02:59:11 - 02:59:16

Yeah, but I don't. Okay. So here's my thing. I want a lot of our leading experts. Deep platform.

SPEAKER_01

02:59:18 - 02:59:25

Okay. Well, you're going deep. You're just spray paint. I'm fucking big A on Tucker Carlson's driveway.

SPEAKER_00

02:59:25 - 03:02:03

Yeah. Well, if I think about who the great danger is, is it Alex Jones, you know, who veers towards tinfoil hatland with some frequency? Or is it the people who are selling, you know, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as a response to 911? or, you know, the people let's assume that your reasonable person on immigration, you neither think that borders should be open or closed. Then you start hearing professors say, you know, the great thing about immigration is that it has absolutely no costs and all of them are better than all of our people because You know, they're highly trained, they're highly motivated, they're young. You're thinking, okay, what kind of thing has all benefits and no costs? You're not even entering into irrational description. And now we're hearing all these trade deals that got negotiated. Yeah, that kind of wasn't true. All those things that we were telling you that if you question these things, you were a backward protectionist and you were just stuck in the old world and you couldn't embrace the new. Yeah, that was all bullshit. What I think is we have a crisis in expertise. Institutional expertise is at an all-time low. Nobody really trusts any of our institutions to be an authoritative source of ground truth. It's not to say that everything that the institution says wrong or everything that the expert says wrong far from it. It's just that there are almost no experts or institutions that aren't willing to distort facts in order to pursue institutional goals. that that's a giant issue right and so I don't actually want to de-platform these people but I do have the very strong sense you know when when I when Elon came on your show and Peter Teele my friend in boss came on Dave Ruben show I thought that was quite a moment where this alternate network of distribution which is not under centralized control started to be seen as comparably powerful and important And I think some of the noises that Tucker Carlson just made today, Ruben, about, hey, you're doing this out of your garage and you have the freedom to do anything. I'm beholden to the structure in which I live. We're at a very interesting place with respect to what is this thing, this alternate distribution network, for ideas that's unpoliced by the institutions. And I think I've been convinced in the last two days that I need This is advice that I got from you at the beginning. You said, you need to start a podcast. I think I need to start a podcast.

SPEAKER_01

03:02:03 - 03:02:09

I think you need to start a podcast. Just keep going on about the hop thing until people figured it out. No, not just about the hop thing.

SPEAKER_00

03:02:09 - 03:03:12

But like, but we have to, we have to return to some kind of stable sanity that I'm positive that the institutions can't return us to because the institutional interests really have to do with the fact that certain kinds of growth on which they're predicated, their existence is predicated, have evaporated. So all of these institutions are extremely vulnerable to corruption at the moment. And the real revolution, as I'm seeing it, is that high agency individuals are out competing traditional institutional structures in terms of mind share. And some of those high agency individuals are irresponsible, you know, they're like mylo types that are kind of trying to light things up. And some of them are extremely responsible. And some of them, you know, will do a few irresponsible things, but will self-correct. And this new world that is being born is a huge check on the institutions, but it's still largely separate. Like in my right that you don't do a lot of network television.

SPEAKER_01

03:03:12 - 03:03:25

I don't do any. Yeah. Any more, but I used to. I mean, that's how I became famous in the first place. Right. You know, but yeah, I don't do it anymore, but it's also because there's nothing fun out there like this. Like there's no place for this.

SPEAKER_00

03:03:26 - 03:03:41

right other than this this is the only place you could do this but isn't it interesting to you that we still have not like Jordan had to be dealt with by the mainstream because the book was too big has effect was too large

SPEAKER_01

03:03:42 - 03:05:54

I think his effect on the internet is bigger than the book. I think the YouTube videos and the debates that he has, the one that I was telling you, the recent one interview with GQ, some interesting. It's really good. The woman's very smart, but she gets trounced. And it's because he's been in a trenches with this stuff for a long time. I mean, he's fighting a very strange fight of dialogue and of interpretation, of discussion. the freedom of intellectual sovereignty. You know, there's a lot of people that want you to think a very certain way and use certain words and say certain things. And it doesn't matter whether or not you are in fact racist or sexist or homophobic or whatever. There's a weird battle of control going on that it's a heart of it as much as it is a battle of inclusion and diversity and strengthening our overall progressive mindset. There's a little bit of that, too. But there's also an undeniable game. And people want to win. There's scores that are being scored. There's points on the board that throwing in new agents. They have teams going at it. And whenever Jordan goes on one of these conversations, these video interviews, and there's a feminist and Jordan Peterson, like, there's a fucking game going on. We're watching a soccer match. We're watching a wrestling match. This is due to their playing intellectual due to. And Jordan's really good at tapping people. He's really good at it. And they get in piss. They keep sending in new chicks. they said in that Kathy Newman lady he's like so what you're saying is that didn't work either she's got devastated she got rocked and this is what's happening over and over and over again because whether you appreciate what he's saying or not he has some facts that are undeniable he has some positions that are based on a rich understanding of history and of Marxism and of communism and of a lot of the problems with people with compelled thoughts. If you're compelling people to behave a certain way, compelling people to talk a certain way, and we're not talking about compelling people to not commit crimes or violence, we're talking about weird things, like compelled pronouns.

SPEAKER_00

03:05:54 - 03:06:50

So if I take your analogy, because you brought it up, that he's like doing digits. So in some previous era, and I thought your description of the early days of MMA was fascinating that we just didn't know what fighting was. So we didn't know who would win or what systems worked. And if you think about the mainstream media is like, I keto. It's some system that maybe has some validity in some very rarefied context. And it comes into general purpose fighting systems. And it's dismantled very quickly. So now we have this weird situation that we've got this new world of kind of rule-laden anything goes, discussions more or less. And the mainstream world doesn't want, like the Akita world doesn't want to acknowledge that this weird UFC type thing is happening.

SPEAKER_01

03:06:52 - 03:07:36

How long does that go on? It goes on for as long as it takes and this is similar to I think that what's happening intellectually and this is one of the reasons why I don't think you should stop people from expressing these bad ideas. It's one thing for stopping people to say hey, we need to kill black people stopping people said we need to kill white people. We need to kill fill in the black whatever the group is. Yeah, that's that's different you're you're you're complete clearly stepping outside of the realm of civilization and into war and violence and we could all collectively decide and we should all collectively decide we should have ethics together like whether it's right or left or in the middle we should all decide hey you can't do that because what you're doing is you're you're calling for violence against someone who's not committing any violence can I pause you right there I think there's a really interesting point okay

SPEAKER_00

03:07:38 - 03:08:17

Let's assume that we know that that behavior needs to be down-regulated in some way. You can try to silence the person where we just physically duct tape them so they can't say anything. We put them in jail, we won't give them access to the media, et cetera, et cetera. Or we can shame them, or we can kind of take them aside at what layer of this sort of communication stack. It's a very good question. Because I think one of the things that we haven't done is to positively say, We agree with you that the speech is offensive and it is potentially dangerous, but we think it should be down-regulated differently than the de-platforming option.

SPEAKER_01

03:08:17 - 03:08:43

Well, the deep platforming option, the real issue is there's only a few different avenues for these people to express themselves publicly, right? And the argument that's really strange is should these be regulated like utility, or should they be thought of as private businesses get to decide what's on their channel essentially? Like it's almost like a private NBC that everyone can broadcast on.

SPEAKER_00

03:08:43 - 03:08:52

What if it's none of the above? What if the problem is we're trying to pretend? Is it like a dinner party? Is it the public square? Is it utility? And it's none of these things.

SPEAKER_01

03:08:52 - 03:09:34

I think these ideas, what I was discussing, that like there's, there's a reason why good ideas and bad ideas should go to war. There's the same reason why even though I kind of knew that most Kung Fu was bullshit before the UFC, I want those guys to get in there and try. Oh, you got some death touch. Hey, come on in. I want to introduce you to a guy. You know, this is his name came Velasquez. And you're going to try your death touch. And he's just going to wrestle you to the ground and beat your fucking brains in, okay? Right. But that's not going to happen because you know death touch. Good luck. And you let him do it out. And that is, that's what the idea is. But it is a little bit. No, no, no. But when you de-platform people, that's when it's not happening.

SPEAKER_00

03:09:34 - 03:09:46

I agree with you. But what I'm trying to get at is that I hadn't really thought about it. The extent to which Jordan is the only one of us that they've really gone after like this.

SPEAKER_01

03:09:47 - 03:11:57

Well, he's first of all, he became famous from this, right? This is, the battle was how he emerged. He emerged from this battle over the use of compelled pronouns for various genders, like the 20-year-old Brett 78 different genders. Similar, but not. Okay. Okay. The difference is Brett's position He comes from a different place. The way they were going at him was so much more unreasonable. They were saying right away that what he has to do is leave work because he's white. They were basically saying a racist thing and everyone universally acknowledges his racist except for these super lefties. who thought that it made sense, because in their mind, every white person is somehow another guilty of at least, at the very least, using your privilege to advance the world to the negative impact of people of color and people of other ethnicities. So they decided that they are going to have a day of exclusion, and instead of this day of absence having black people and people of color stay home. They were going to kick white people out. So it became an aggressive act instead of an act of appreciation. It became an act of punishment or an act of exclusion. And by people that are clearly out of their fucking mind, that was also part of the problem. There are arguments or incoherent. You would see that fucking stupid president of the university standing in front of those kids and they told them to put his hands down because he was threatening. You're you're scaring us. You're making violent gestures with your hands. So he puts his hands down and they start laughing. Okay, this is nonsense now. You're in little kids, you get little kids running, you're the flies on a grand scale in a state university. And it's all, I mean, this is a public university, right? Yeah. I mean, they get funding, right? This is all chaos. Nobody agrees. They got baseball bats. They're looking for him if he's coming back to the school. The kids form these vigilante groups with weapons over what? Like, who's threatening you?

SPEAKER_00

03:11:57 - 03:12:31

Like, what is happening with the big story there was the non-reporting. What do you mean? Well, the New York Times, Washington Post, all of these major organs and PR. They didn't report it. They didn't want to touch the story. Well, this is my big theory here is that every outfit that has a grand narrative cannot report the news that goes counter narrative. So racism by blacks against whites cannot be reported by any outfit that believes that racism is impossible by blacks against whites.

SPEAKER_01

03:12:32 - 03:12:55

That's such a preposterous position. The idea that racism is exclusive to any group. Well, but the re definition, the re definition, the re definition can suck a fat dick. It's a stupid redevelopment. Well, that's true. This idea that the only way you can be racist is if you have power over that other group. That's nonsense. Every human beings act as individuals and they always have power over each other. You have power to intimidate. You have power to isolate. You have power if you just move.

SPEAKER_00

03:12:55 - 03:14:08

But what you're choosing about this is that There is no pretense of consistency. I mean, on that side of the aisle, it's like, we're gonna throw out the following 17 completely contradictory rules and then we'll tell you which rule is operative in any given moment. So, you know, I was gonna throw out this concept of the Hilbert problems for social justice. So one of them is, you cannot understand me because my experience is too different and you must understand me because my is so important, right? Or we are all, similar enough that any deviation from 50-50 shows you the amount of sexism in a workforce. And we are also different that once you include women in previously male occupations, you will see a great benefit because of the diversity of opinion. So they're all these self-contradictory couplets that you have to agree to. Well, that's the weird thing is, assume that I just buy all of your stuff. I think we've made a terrible tactical error. We fought these bad ideas. rather than saying, maybe we should just accept all of your bad ideas and then show you what kind of weird world. No, yes.

SPEAKER_01

03:14:08 - 03:14:15

No, no, no, you can't do that because they don't make sense. You can't say, oh, yeah, they make sense. Well, then how do I know when you're serious?

SPEAKER_00

03:14:15 - 03:15:25

Well, but that's just let those through and those things fail. But that's my point is is that By showing the internal, this is in mathematics, we call this reductive at absurdum. That once you take on too many different points, you show the conflicts showing that those things can't all be true. There's no way in which if I accept all of your ideas, I can run anything. So you're going to take this thing about a trans exclusion from Victoria's secret. Right? Well, you didn't hear about this? Oh, God. So the idea is that the Victoria's Secret lingerie division had had to step down where there was a scandal in the background that somebody had said, we don't actually want trans people walking the Victoria's Secret runway. And so very interesting, you have a company that is dedicated to the commercial exploitation of humans' sexual objects for the privilege of the male gaze. and now you're angry that it doesn't include trends into that exploited class. So, just without, without getting into whether this makes like good economic sense or anything, there's just the issue of self-contradiction.

SPEAKER_01

03:15:25 - 03:15:39

But isn't that a reductionist view of what Victoria Secrets is? Isn't it possible that a woman can feel empowered and sexy if she's wearing lingerie? It's not just to the exploiting of the male gaze that it just, that she appreciates looking attractive. Wonderful.

SPEAKER_00

03:15:39 - 03:15:53

So take that off. That's okay, right? Exactly. So the idea is that you're both going to say, that that's a positive female empowerment issue and it's a terrible male exploitation issue at the same time.

SPEAKER_01

03:15:53 - 03:16:16

Is it a terrible male exploitation issue? Like, what if a guy likes, what if women decide universally? They like guys who are leopard skin underwear and guys start wearing leopard skin, tidy whitey underwear. Well, this is sexual selection. But yes, but that's the difference between that and women wearing lingerie. If with women wear lingerie and they do it because they like to be interesting and they like to be more attractive.

SPEAKER_00

03:16:16 - 03:16:24

So then the sexual self-objectification is an interesting issue. Is that an issue of empowerment? Or is it an issue of oppression? It could certainly be.

SPEAKER_01

03:16:24 - 03:16:27

If a woman's health should take that all on. Why does it have to be exploitation though?

SPEAKER_00

03:16:27 - 03:18:13

That's the question. But what I'm trying to say is, you've made too many arguments. There's this concept called the principle of explosion and mathematics. The principle of explosion says, if you can get one contradiction through airport security, you can blow up the universe. As soon as you allow a single contradiction in the unity of knowledge, everything can be proven. So everything becomes meaningless. So the game, in some sense, in mathematics is frequently to say, well, let's take all of those beautiful things that you believe. So you've just an unseated sum, I've an unseated sum, you throw them all in. Instead of saying, what's true and what isn't true, you say, are these compatible? And these ideas are clearly incompatible. So for example, one of the tricks that I use is to look at advertising for women, to women. and what phrases get used. So if you use the phrase, turn heads this summer in quotes and put it into a search engine, you'll find all sorts of revealing outfits that are intended to court the male gaze. You say, well, maybe that's not really the male gaze. So then you put in a phrase like, make him drool. And that will be used to market to women. And so this issue about can we at least get to a point where we're talking about the internal contradictions of your position. Like, I don't even want to get into what my position is. The first thing that's scaring me is that you've said so many things so strongly and so dogmaticly. And this doesn't have to be about gender, it could be about race, it could be about class. But once you've said too many things, then I can say, look, I don't see any way of squaring all of your positions. And it doesn't even have to do with me. I think that's where we haven't gone to yet.

SPEAKER_01

03:18:13 - 03:18:23

So you think letting them come up with as many preposterous things as possible, and then once it gets to a position where the ideas contradict each other, expose that.

SPEAKER_00

03:18:23 - 03:19:49

Well, that's my point, which is once you've told me all of your principles. Okay. Then I'm going to say great. I'm confused. Do you feel that I have to understand you or that I can't understand you? Because I don't know which is operative in this situation. Tell me the rule how I decide which principle that you've stated governs this situation. Right. And if... Well, one last point about that. I don't want to have to refer to you where you say, well, you bring me each individual situation and I will tell you which principle is operative and which principle is in operative. That doesn't work. I want you to list your principles and list your mechanisms for resolving the conflicts within your principles. And then, once you've done that, we can actually evaluate what you're saying. But at the moment, it requires you as an oracle to tell me which of your many contradictory positions is operative in every particular case. So for example, We did that one with the person who is the quantum ex-Buslim trans trans, you know, everything going on. which is operative, the person with macula phobia, which is an extremely rare psychological condition, or the person who appears to be deep into self radical self-actualization.

SPEAKER_01

03:19:49 - 03:19:57

There even, the person who wears that crazy makeup should be able to wear whatever they want. It's only wrong with it. You should be able to dress like Paul Stanley from Kiss if you think.

SPEAKER_00

03:19:57 - 03:20:08

Yes, assume that that's true, but what if, for example, as a heterosexual male, you don't want to watch. Um, uh, the crying game at the Victoria Secret Runway show.

SPEAKER_01

03:20:08 - 03:20:13

Do you think that? Wait a minute. Do you really think that Victoria Secret's runway show is for the heterosexual male?

SPEAKER_00

03:20:14 - 03:20:16

In some sense, yes.

SPEAKER_01

03:20:16 - 03:20:20

Ah, what, guys? Have you ever watched the Victoria Secrets for the show?

SPEAKER_03

03:20:20 - 03:20:24

That's what the guy said. He said it was a fan. Ah, that's what he's branding it out of the show.

SPEAKER_00

03:20:24 - 03:20:26

Save it. No, no.

SPEAKER_01

03:20:26 - 03:21:34

I mean, there's something between a fantasy of a Victoria Secrets. A senior executive recently told Vogue that trans models don't belong in the fantasy of Victoria Secrets fashion show. Well, you know, that's that's on him. You know, he wants to be the but just because he says it doesn't mean it's true. I get if if you looked at the graph of male to female viewers of a victorious secrets. I have no idea. It would be like a few prepubes and boys and the vast majority of women and maybe some gay guys. But that's it. Is that right? It's got to be who the fuck is sitting around? It's on an hour. What are you doing? Oh, we're getting some popcorn ready for the Victoria Secrets Fashion Show. Doug's coming over in Mike. We're going to drool the TV. That fuck outta here is porn and then there's everything else. Everything else is for chicks. Okay. Runway shit. I don't know. A single guy out there watching Runway shit. It's like, remember when Playboy had Playgirl? That was for gay dudes. That's not for chicks. They don't want to see that. And we don't want to see runways. We're not here for runways. We get bored easy. A bunch of chicks walking around the run to wear.

SPEAKER_00

03:21:34 - 03:22:05

Yeah, actually. I think you're calling it very, you may be right about who the audience is. I have no idea on the demographics. I've never watched one of these in my life. But it's not the case that I believe that the male gaze is nowhere to be found here because It's a very weird thing that the female is largely buying an amplifier for something that is supposed to excite a male, but it's a little bit to me like the female is the magician buying magic supplies to the store for the audience.

SPEAKER_01

03:22:07 - 03:22:17

Sure, sure. That's a good way of looking at it. I don't think the male gaze is absent. I just don't buy his interpretation of that it's a fantasy for men that's ruined with trans men or trans women.

SPEAKER_00

03:22:17 - 03:22:19

I don't have a dog in that fight.

SPEAKER_01

03:22:21 - 03:22:58

It's like if you don't want transgender people to be in there, you just have to say you can't say it ruins the fantasy. You just say we only like hiring people that have vaginas. I don't know. Do whatever you want. Like you could like there's certain jobs if you go to Chippendales like our trans women showing up a trans men. Are they at Chippendales? where they're just through down there because they don't have a dick and but they're all jacked and they look like a man is this what women want to see and are they transphobic if they don't want to see that right women go to it you know one of those all male review shows and it's all trans men but they're heterosexual and they're not really into trans men are they all

SPEAKER_00

03:22:59 - 03:23:57

Yeah, so what I'm trying to get at is there's a hierarchy like I'm not that interested in this in the particulars of the victorious secrets profitability and what what their statements are right what I'm more interested in is You've got you've enunciated so many There's so many different principles that work you know as to what should govern in a conflict that you won't tell me Well, okay, when these two beautiful things that you've said actually lying conflict, how do you resolve the conflicts? And it seems to be, well, why don't you consult us on every single one of these and we'll tell you, you know, case by case. Right. And that can't work because what I want to know is I don't want to point you as an oracle. I want you to state what your positions are. I want you to state how you harmonize them. And then we're having a conversation, but as long as I have to keep going to you, and your crazy definitions and your, well, this is operative on alternate Tuesdays, then it doesn't work.

SPEAKER_01

03:23:57 - 03:24:12

I completely see your point. However, you can't give ground. You can't give grounded nonsense because that ground was never getting back. You're never getting it back. Have you allowed them to establish certain ridiculous principles rules that are contradictory to each other? They'll come up with a reason why they make sense.

SPEAKER_00

03:24:12 - 03:24:22

No, no, you don't allow them to put it into the workforce. You say, look, before we put it into the workforce, Let's just understand the 17 different things that you've set our absolutes.

SPEAKER_01

03:24:22 - 03:24:40

Well, you're basically doing then what Jordan does and every single one of these debates. You're letting people lay out their idea and then you shoot them down and you decide what's what's logical and what's illogical. I think that's that's the UFC of ideas. Right. And this is why it's important to let these shitty ideas into the match.

SPEAKER_00

03:24:40 - 03:24:46

Why do we still have so much caught up in the Akito League in the Kung Fu League.

SPEAKER_01

03:24:46 - 03:24:58

Because it sounds good. People like the idea that you don't have to learn much, you can just go in there with a death touch and fuck people up. They don't want to think that, oh, you have to practice for 10,000 hours. You have to sprawl and work on your leg kicks and work on your body.

SPEAKER_00

03:24:58 - 03:25:00

So maybe this public shaming is death touch.

SPEAKER_01

03:25:01 - 03:25:24

Well, debating these, I think, honestly, and I'm not trying to blow Jordan's horn any more than I only have, but I think what he does is very important because he is one of the few that engages in these people in these very public forums, in these long-form debates where they go to war with ideas, and these are way better to keep their conversations. Because he's fucking good at.

SPEAKER_00

03:25:24 - 03:25:27

Well, they want to chop them down. They're not picking you so much.

SPEAKER_01

03:25:27 - 03:25:48

Because I'm friendly. I'm not as, it's like, I'm not as combativist he is and I'm also not as smart as he is and I'm also not as I'm not I don't have your credential. I don't have the credentials that he has like when he's the University of Toronto Professor PhD when he's going to war with these people they're they're throwing out valiant warriors to die at his sword.

SPEAKER_00

03:25:48 - 03:25:59

What did you do it to happen to watch with Brett and Richard Dawkins? You know, Chicago? No, it happened. They appeared on the stage for the first time. Oh, and did they oppose each other? Oh, yeah. Really? On religion.

SPEAKER_01

03:25:59 - 03:26:02

Oh, well, is Dawkins now religious?

SPEAKER_00

03:26:02 - 03:26:06

No, no, no, Dawkins is staunchly in that sort of new atheist. Right, aggressive guys.

SPEAKER_01

03:26:06 - 03:26:13

Because I panic because I know you had a stroke. Oh, okay. You know what guys, you know what I'm saying? Well, I thought your brother was an atheist as well. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

03:26:13 - 03:27:30

But Brett doesn't think that religion is a virus. It's not parasitizing. It's a disease that religion is actually an adaptation. And the weird thing was, As he said, look, there's young dockins and there's old dockins. And young dockins came up with these two powerful ideas. The idea that the meme, the unit of ideation, is a gene-like object. He also came up with the idea of the extended phenotype. So when you talked about that ant mound that you were excavating, that ant mound is in some sense part of the ant strategy, it's such a, it's so deeply tied in that you have to consider the ant mound as part of the ant system because it can't exist without that complicated underground city. Right. And so what he said was, okay, if I use these two concepts that memes are like genes and that genes can throw off a bad meme instantly. So genes, memes have to ride on a gene. And they can't parasitize it too much. And you also have this inclusive fitness, which is that maybe religions co-travel with us and allow us to outcompete those who don't have them. Because they seem to be found everywhere. They're so prevalent.

SPEAKER_01

03:27:30 - 03:27:46

If you looked at it objectively, not looked at it in terms of how you feel about cult-like behavior and the people's susceptibility to influence. If you just looked at it objectively, you were from another dimension and you'd go, well, clearly, this is a part of being a successful person.

SPEAKER_00

03:27:46 - 03:28:22

Tell me about it. So Brett and Dawkins met and I think Dawkins had this kind of reaction like, oh, crap. I'm meeting an ultra Darwinist who's read my work, taking it seriously. and is feeding it back in and saying, you richard Dawkins in your younger years established ideas. When those ideas logical consequences are explored, it completely negates your late life hatred for religion because it reveals it to be an adaptation rather than a parasitization of the human species.

SPEAKER_01

03:28:23 - 03:29:20

You know the real problem that I've always had with Dawkins and his take on religion is not that he's wrong or very right. It's his anger that he has when he's talking to people that believe. Yeah, he sets up the kind of heavy conflict that, you know, the way people interact with each other is very, the reactions are very dependent upon the attitude that a person has when they go into this interaction. You know, two people meet on the street, one person One person meets that person, says the same words, and they wind up hugging. Another person meets that person and has a fist fight. What is the difference? Well, there's a lot of it is the way you approach people. The lot of it is the way you accept people's ideas, the way you communicate with them, the way you allow them to fully express themselves with our judgment, and he doesn't buy anything. He feels like there's a war going on, and he's got a shut down religion as quickly as possible.

SPEAKER_00

03:29:20 - 03:30:29

Well, that's the thing he wanted to use. No, it's not good. All right. He wanted to fashion science into a cuddle that was maximally efficient for beating the crap out of a lid. That's a great way to put it. And what Brett did is to say, actually, your scientific work goes in the exact opposite direction. The reason I brought it up was it was one of these unexpected occurrences that when you have a meeting of these things. And this is your point about the UFC is that the mixed martial arts thing is, hey, we don't know what's going to work. We don't know what's going to happen. Nobody knows anything yet. And gradually, we came to understand that there were certain systems that were hyper-effective, and that even those could get, you know, you were making the point earlier about Brazilian Gigiitsu, didn't keep advancing at the same level once we understood the role of all of these different systems in advancing fighting. So the question that I'm having repeatedly is, what kept Brett and Dawkins, for example, from having that meeting, Where I think Dawkins probably didn't fully understand what he was getting into when he agreed to appear with an evolutionary theorist on stage.

SPEAKER_01

03:30:30 - 03:31:22

Well, don't you think that he's just very confident in his ideas? He's very confident in his intellectual capabilities. He's been doing these type of debates and shutting down these secular people that are, I mean, from various religions, right? I mean, he's had these debates with people from Judaism, from Christianity. He's been as part of his career, right? Yeah, I mean, and even with the fuck's his name, the Indian fellow who everybody makes fun of. What the fuck's his name? Don't ask to Susan. No, the other guy. The one the the quantum guy that's always using direct to that guy. Yeah. That guy. That guy is constantly using inappropriate quantum words. Right. Throw his quantum into fucking vegetable soup and tries to make it to make sense. He he's used a lot of word salad. Right. You know. And I mean, I've seen him debate him too.

SPEAKER_00

03:31:22 - 03:32:11

I mean, there's just, you know, you like these videos of the fake martial arts guys. Yeah. And they, they show up for the challenge because they've actually bought it. Right. Same with D-Box. Well, this is what I'm trying to get at. Isn't it interesting that in general, the people who say, you know, immigration is a pure good. There is no connection between Islam and terror. The only people who oppose free trader protectionists, these people know enough not to want to trans us. Because what they're saying is wrong, right? And they're expert enough to know that they've got a secret five point, you know, exploding heart technique or something. And then they know it's nonsense. And so they won't actually think they do. Well, then why don't they want, why don't they want in?

SPEAKER_01

03:32:12 - 03:32:40

Um, I don't think they, I don't think they necessarily do actually believe that they're wrong. I do think that some of these people that are like super progressive and very very committed to some of these maybe illogical positions on some of these ideas are afraid of conflict though. And I think that's one of the reasons why they shy towards progressiveism towards socialism. I don't think they let conflict. No, no, no, they like to get together and scream at people.

SPEAKER_00

03:32:40 - 03:32:41

Okay.

SPEAKER_01

03:32:41 - 03:33:25

This is what they like to get together in large groups. Okay. And say, we know how you sleep. You fucking racist. You fucking piece of shit. But one on one, they're cowards. Okay. Like this is this is the type of person that would think it's a good idea to to show up and bang on someone's door and scare them in their home. That type of person is not the type of person that would that looks forward to on an even battlefield engaging someone one on one and just just open communication. That's not what they're doing. What they're doing is trying to silence people, scare people, intimidate people, their bullies, intellectual bullies. People are bullies are almost always insecure. They're almost always scared. So this is why there's been very few people that are jumping forward to try to go to intellectual war.

SPEAKER_00

03:33:25 - 03:33:31

But wouldn't Rachel Maddo or Linda Sarsur want in? I mean, they're pretty okay.

SPEAKER_01

03:33:32 - 03:33:47

You're dealing with two very different types of human beings. A racial man, I was one thing, Linda Sarsore is a very, very seriously religious person who's got some very deep beliefs as far as Islam, she wears the hijab, she's been totally different things.

SPEAKER_00

03:33:47 - 03:34:46

But if I listed a group of people, like the late night comedians, There's this very weird thing that they all seem to believe the same. There was a secret meeting that they all agreed to a bunch of stuff that I want to see the conference proceeding. Well, just that they all kind of know that the Republicans are all horrible. The Democrats are basically good people. They all know that climate science is settled science. I mean, there's some that they have these pretty much open borders are a great thing. And that everybody who doesn't believe in that is only so is only not believing it because of xenophobia. Right. Whatever these set of beliefs are, I don't see these guys in open discussion, particularly, you know, two hours long. Well, I don't think it's a, that could, could you get Stephen Colbert Seth Myers in here and have a discussion? My guess it's really?

SPEAKER_01

03:34:46 - 03:35:48

Yeah, I'm sure. I'm sure, I'm sure they'd be, I'm sorry they're scared of having discussions with people, but I don't see them in open. They don't have to be very, they don't have to be very measured because they could lose their job. It's not that simple. They make a tremendous amount of money. If they came and said anything that could be misconstrued or misinterpreted even, not even actually being something that's actually transphobic or actually homophobic or actually xenophobic. If they said anything that could be taken out of context and put in a small clip and then sent down and it goes viral, they're done. Look at Megan Kelly. Megan Kelly had a question about why can't you wear makeup to look like Diana Ross? Why can't you? Well, there's some good reasons why you can't. There's some good racial history behind Blackface. However, why is it that she can't even ask a question without losing her job? Like, that's it. Pull the plug. We have to make a fucking statement. We have more violence.

SPEAKER_00

03:35:48 - 03:35:54

But that's exactly what you said about the whole kung fu thing that it only can exist in a protected context.

SPEAKER_01

03:35:55 - 03:36:02

Well, first of all, someone like Megan Kelly can only exist in a protected contest. Well, all these people in protected contest.

SPEAKER_00

03:36:02 - 03:36:10

Stephen Colbert has got to be one of the fastest minds on the planet. Everybody I know who's smart and who's done his shows is he just thinks faster than you do.

SPEAKER_01

03:36:10 - 03:36:12

Well, I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy.

SPEAKER_00

03:36:12 - 03:36:13

I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy.

SPEAKER_01

03:36:13 - 03:36:17

I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy.

SPEAKER_00

03:36:17 - 03:36:23

I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy. I'm sure he's very smart guy.

SPEAKER_01

03:36:23 - 03:36:38

I'm sure he's Well, how come he's not speaking out against all those kids getting fucked? Well, that's if you're a Catholic. Yeah. Like, I was raised Catholic. I mean, I'm not saying that he is, I'm not saying that the people he knows are, but this is a giant problem with that organization.

SPEAKER_00

03:36:38 - 03:36:47

But that's not bothering me. What's not bothering you? I want to make sure that we're talking, I think we're about to talk past each other.

SPEAKER_01

03:36:47 - 03:36:48

So I want to bring it back. Okay.

SPEAKER_00

03:36:50 - 03:37:03

I think you just gave me an answer. He can't appear in this kind of a context because that might come up. And he needs to be in a world with much more restricted rules.

SPEAKER_01

03:37:03 - 03:37:14

Or someone can't say it's an organization of kid fuckers. That's right. Yeah. This is not just more restricted world that that's the reason why that has been able to survive.

SPEAKER_00

03:37:14 - 03:37:26

That's what I'm trying to say. Yeah, people don't talk about that. But but is the idea that this is such a risk like your point about I keto was if you happen to be unarmed and attacked by a man with a sword, this might have some value.

SPEAKER_01

03:37:26 - 03:37:29

It would have some value of someone to attack you in a very specific way.

SPEAKER_00

03:37:29 - 03:37:50

That's right. I did understand. Okay. So the idea is that that's a very restricted rule set on which to fight it. Right. So now maybe what you just said to me, which could open this whole thing up, is that all of these people can only apply their ability to have a back and forth of ideas. if the rules are heavily restricted.

SPEAKER_01

03:37:50 - 03:38:38

I don't necessarily think that's the case. I think they could do it in other ways. I think all of them are operating under this rule system because this rule system is how they get paid. But I think Seth Myers is a very smart guy. I know Jimmy Kimmel. He's a very smart guy. They could do whatever they want. He could do a podcast. He could do anything. He could operate into any genre, I believe. And I think I would imagine the same with Colbert. I mean, I think Jimmy Fallon, same thing. But when they're forced into that box, and this is $100 million a year box, it feels good in that box. This is fucking velvet walls and you get to drive a fat Mercedes and live in Beverly Hills. You decide to stay in that box. Maybe their mind is in that box. Maybe they are on a regular basis. Maybe there's not any restriction for them at all because this is how they operate all the time.

SPEAKER_00

03:38:39 - 03:39:57

I did the show with Jordan and Ben Shapiro on Dave's set right before Ben went on real time with Bill Mar. And Ben was kind of excited to do Bill Mar. And I said, yeah, I don't think he's gonna rough me up, but I think he's gonna be a gentleman and he's one of us. And then when Ben sat down with Bill, we saw this thing that was very, we were sort of hoping because Bill is kind of the most towards us of anybody in that kind of mainstream environment. And what I saw, which I hadn't really appreciated, was that Bill was not doing this kind of open discussion thing. A lot of his tone was leading, like, surely you're not going to say the damn it. You know, it wasn't just purely saying, are you saying that? Right. It was all of this emotional instruction. Yes. And it was clear that to me that when I saw Ben on that in that context, that There were only a few hours separating the two appearances and that the characteristics of that environment and where bills show is the most like this show. It's just two different. It's not really the same ecosystem and you couldn't have an open debate unless it cuts off after seven minutes and the host is in control.

SPEAKER_01

03:39:57 - 03:40:21

Well, Bill doesn't have any time. Well, this is part of the problem. They have a very restricted format. He was doing a conversation with Steve Bannon and he was on Sam Harris's podcast and he was talking about it. He said that one of the problems was he got to this point where he was like, I wanted to ask him more stuff, but I ran out of time. Right. And I heard that I was like, what the fuck kind of ancient system are you operating there that you run out of time?

SPEAKER_00

03:40:21 - 03:40:22

But let's take, let's take him in his word.

SPEAKER_01

03:40:23 - 03:40:24

Well, he definitely did run out of time.

SPEAKER_00

03:40:24 - 03:40:40

But assume that that's true. And so in the bill, Mar said, hey, guys, I want to, I want the following situation. I want to continue to do wheel time in the same format that it's always been done. But I want to have a podcast like Rogan, where we take as much time as we need. And I don't think those two things play together.

SPEAKER_01

03:40:40 - 03:40:41

Oh, they're fine together.

SPEAKER_00

03:40:41 - 03:40:44

Yeah, I think they're fine together. But you're the, they're not.

SPEAKER_01

03:40:44 - 03:40:50

Well, here's the thing. He went on Sam's podcast, and I enjoyed him more than I enjoyed him on his show. I know.

SPEAKER_00

03:40:50 - 03:40:55

Because he actually didn't look the same way on Dave Rubin's show, though. He looked totally different.

SPEAKER_01

03:40:55 - 03:40:56

How do you look? I didn't say it.

SPEAKER_00

03:40:56 - 03:41:19

Oh my God, you got to see it. Tucker, I'm having my own weird issues where my previous position was that Fox News is just propaganda, and the Tucker was in that old crossfire situation way back when. Tucker was like opening up as a different person saying, you have the freedom you're the new. I'm still stuck in the old.

SPEAKER_01

03:41:19 - 03:41:54

Well, he must really feel that. He must really feel like he is. Look, look, that is what you have to do if you want to survive on Fox News. And again, it's a velvet coffin. You're in there. It's beautiful. Yes. You're getting paid shit loads of money, but you don't necessarily have the freedom to express. First of all, you don't have long-form freedom. Right. And you don't have to freedom to completely express yourself across the border. Like, you can't look at the left side deas and say, you know what I really like? The idea of universal healthcare. I really like the idea of universal basic income. I really like the idea of paying for people school.

SPEAKER_00

03:41:54 - 03:42:05

I think you and I actually have a really interesting difference of opinion. Okay. I think your opinion is, there's nothing preventing you from staying in the velvet coffin and doing this style of podcast.

SPEAKER_01

03:42:05 - 03:42:12

And my guess is, I'm not saying that. Okay. I'm always saying that would bill more. I think Tucker Carlson probably can't do that. I think of Tucker Carlson left.

SPEAKER_00

03:42:12 - 03:42:13

With Colbert doing?

SPEAKER_01

03:42:13 - 03:42:13

Yes.

SPEAKER_00

03:42:13 - 03:42:14

I don't think so.

SPEAKER_01

03:42:14 - 03:43:04

I think he could, I don't think he would though. I think he out of all of them and I think he's brilliant. Don't get me wrong. And when I said he's from an organization of kid fuckers, it's not him. I mean, but he's a part of the Catholic thing. I mean, it's a big thing in terms of first of all the actual reality of the organization and what they've done to protect people that have molested children, it's unprecedented. It's also something that I was raised in. I mean, I was Catholic. I went to Catholic school. I don't think that he wants to do that sort of wild country open type internet show. I think he enjoys wearing a tie and doing a straight-up talk show like the Johnny Carson show or the Jay Leno show and I think he's very, very good at it. And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I think a lot of people like that one preference. And I understand that. But I think that's him. I might be wrong. I'm just assuming.

SPEAKER_00

03:43:04 - 03:43:05

I think there's a drug in there.

SPEAKER_01

03:43:05 - 03:43:09

I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there.

SPEAKER_00

03:43:09 - 03:43:09

I think there's a drug in there.

SPEAKER_01

03:43:09 - 03:43:11

I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there.

SPEAKER_00

03:43:11 - 03:43:28

I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug in there. I think there's a drug You would be revealed, you'd be caught between two worlds. Like, I actually think that a lot of these ideas would collapse just the way Kung Fu collapsed.

SPEAKER_01

03:43:29 - 03:43:47

I think you're probably right. I think if you had two people having these conversations in long form instead of those CNN three windows were just battling it out for six minutes and then, you know, everybody's yelling over everybody. That is the single worst way to argue ideas.

SPEAKER_00

03:43:47 - 03:43:49

I think there's no greasy challenge.

SPEAKER_01

03:43:49 - 03:43:52

There's not, well, Jordan Pearson is kind of doing his own great challenge.

SPEAKER_00

03:43:52 - 03:43:56

Well, that's a bunch that because he's the old gender. Yeah, and that he's the only one they want.

SPEAKER_01

03:43:57 - 03:45:03

Yes, well, just which is I think a piece of the voice crazy of the intellectual voice crazy He's out there tapping wrestlers. Um, yeah, I mean I think Not legitimately, you know, he's worked his way past the Kung Fu people and he's now on to like Olympic wrestlers. Like they're throwing at him. This latest woman was very good. Yeah. She's much better than that Kathy Newman lady. She didn't make any of these ridiculous straw man arguments. She came out of him with her positions in her points. It was interesting. I think what you're saying is true for everybody except Bill Mar. I think Bill Mar would hold his positions in podcast form and I think he would just have more time to expand on them and I based this on him being on Sam Harris's show and I found it to be very good. It was the 10th anniversary of religious and he was excellent on there. I think he could do it. But I think he's also, he can say fuck you, he got in trouble for dropping an end bomb on his show in a joking form. I mean, he's a different cat. The whole thing is very different with him. It's on HBO.

SPEAKER_00

03:45:03 - 03:45:11

But when Ice Cube came to him and said, you can't do that. It was painful to me because I'm just positive that he had a carlin style attitude about that word.

SPEAKER_01

03:45:13 - 03:45:32

That's tough. Because in this environment, again, that's where it makes his living. He butters his bread over at HBO. And if you wanted to have a long form conversation with that guy, even on a podcast, and he didn't have an HBO show. That's one thing. But if you do have an HBO show, you have to have a totally different attitude. Because one wrong, you're walking a guy with that tight rope.

SPEAKER_00

03:45:32 - 03:45:37

But this is what I'm trying to get at is that we are too dangerous in some sense to play with.

SPEAKER_01

03:45:38 - 03:47:12

because he's he's asked if we we've talked we being bill and I actually went back and forth on an email about something yeah I dropped the ball but now he would do anybody's podcast I don't think that's the case he could do his own podcasts as well I agree that he would be the one most likely to be able to do both he could do it yeah he could do it I think all of them could do it. I think Seth Meyers could do it too. I think Jimmy Kimmel could probably do it as good or better than any of them. Jimmy absolutely could do it. I mean, the only thing that's holding him back, he's a man of his ideas. He's not going to, he's probably the least likely to alter or manipulate his ideas of anybody that's ever done one of those late night talk show hosts. He's just operating inside a format where you don't swear, and you have a certain amount of time, and you try to be funny, and you say insightful stuff. But he's a very ethical guy, and he's also a very, very smart guy, and he's also very rich. He's got a shit little fuck you money. And I think Jimmy Kimmel could do it easily. I think a lot of people could do it easily, and I think they're gonna have to. I think some point along the line, they're gonna realize that the restrictions that they're operating under, unless they really enjoy that format, I don't think those formats are going to be there that long. I think those formats are a lot like sitcoms. They're slowly starting to vanish. For every one rosan show that comes up, which is kind of nostalgic, and that runs into its own disaster. How many new sitcoms are there that everybody's aware of? Shit, it used to be. Every time there was a new sitcom, whether it was friends or fill in the blank, whatever the show sign fell, there was everybody was talking about these new sitcoms. Nobody fucking talks about sitcoms anymore.

SPEAKER_00

03:47:12 - 03:47:28

Well, this is the thing I took on this morning on Twitter, which was Dave Rubin and Brett Weinstein and myself were talking about this phenomena of very high follower counts with psycho-low engagement.

SPEAKER_01

03:47:29 - 03:47:32

Oh, yeah, that's fake. Those are fake followers. That's what that is.

SPEAKER_00

03:47:32 - 03:47:49

Well, it may be, but it's a lot of it. But it's very interesting that we're talking about getting rid of visible follower counts and getting rid of likes. Who's saying that? Apparently there's a discussion about Jack may have floated some trial balloons that Twitter is going to try to improve the level of conversation.

SPEAKER_01

03:47:49 - 03:47:59

and by getting rid of follower counts. Right. And removing likes. Can you imagine thinking that you're going to improve the level of conversation by getting rid of a heart that you can switch on?

SPEAKER_00

03:47:59 - 03:48:01

Someone's like the heart. But it's a heart.

SPEAKER_01

03:48:01 - 03:48:14

It's literally a heart. But it's feedbed. But you're clicking on a heart. It's on Instagram and on Twitter. It's a heart. It's a like, page a little heart. I love you. I'm going to get rid of love. Jack. Come on, Jack. I'm going to get rid of love.

SPEAKER_00

03:48:15 - 03:48:18

terrifying human being. Why? What?

SPEAKER_01

03:48:18 - 03:48:19

What's terrifying about that?

SPEAKER_00

03:48:19 - 03:48:29

Why? Because I'm seeing you blowing kisses in my general direction. I'm remembering all the videos I've watched where you attack some sort of a punching bag with this vicious spinning elbow or something. It's like, okay.

SPEAKER_01

03:48:29 - 03:48:32

Listen, you can't. We're talking about ideas here. You can't.

SPEAKER_00

03:48:32 - 03:48:38

No, I want to get on on that stuff later. I want to make my mid-life crisis sick with some instruction for you.

SPEAKER_01

03:48:38 - 03:48:41

I think we got to end this, though. Okay. We've done four hours and ten minutes, right? Are you kidding me?

SPEAKER_03

03:48:41 - 03:48:45

I just want to show you what they said, though. This is a couple of weeks ago. This is there.

SPEAKER_01

03:48:45 - 03:49:07

We've been saying for a while, we are rethinking everything about the service to ensure we are incentivizing healthy conversation that includes the like button. We are in the early stages of the work and have no plans to share right now. And this is in response to Telegraph, the Telegraph saying, Twitter to remove the like tool and the bid to improve the quality of debate.

SPEAKER_00

03:49:07 - 03:49:09

Yeah, I think something really weird is going on.

SPEAKER_01

03:49:09 - 03:49:22

Well, I mean, what is the quality of debate and by whose definition? I mean, you're definitely not going to change the way people interact with each other. You're just not. People interact with each other because they're anonymous. They have the incentive to talk shit. It's fun.

SPEAKER_00

03:49:23 - 03:49:35

Okay, so the one thing I can ask as we close this thing out is if we could plug Not only my Twitter, which is my main thing, but I'm trying to diversify into Instagram and YouTube should I get shut off Twitter?

SPEAKER_01

03:49:35 - 03:49:45

Are you worried about getting shut off? I'm always worried but you don't say anything at flammatory like what you you're very logical and reasonable guy So you think it's really gotten to that point?

SPEAKER_00

03:49:45 - 03:49:56

Well, yeah, I'm actually worried that by being logical and reasonable, I have more of a risk because the things that I'm saying... You're also recognizing intellectual and very left-wing.

SPEAKER_01

03:49:56 - 03:50:00

You're progressive. Yeah. So why would they shut you off?

SPEAKER_00

03:50:00 - 03:50:11

Oh, I think because they're much more worried about a progressive who says that the current progressiveness is absolutely stupidity. That's much more dangerous than some right-winger who's always against anything that's progressive.

SPEAKER_01

03:50:11 - 03:50:17

Interesting. There's a war of foot. You love that kind of stuff. You love that cloaking dagger type shit. Don't you?

SPEAKER_00

03:50:17 - 03:50:19

Yeah, well, I'm part of the ineffectual dork web. I watch your stuff.

03:50:19 - 03:50:20

I don't see ineffectual.

SPEAKER_01

03:50:20 - 03:50:44

You said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, you said internet, This is an effortless.

SPEAKER_00

03:50:44 - 03:50:47

Yeah. I could do this for hours. I had no idea it was four hours, but. Goodbye.

SPEAKER_01

03:50:47 - 03:50:50

Um, flew by. It was awesome.

SPEAKER_00

03:50:50 - 03:50:57

All right. We can I just give the the the the names. Please do. All right. I think I am.

SPEAKER_01

03:51:00 - 03:51:01

It really is five ten.

SPEAKER_03

03:51:01 - 03:51:04

Jesus. Eric R. Weinstein on.

SPEAKER_00

03:51:04 - 03:51:15

I'm Eric R. Weinstein Twitter. I'm Eric Weinstein PhD. I think on Instagram and on my Instagram.

SPEAKER_01

03:51:15 - 03:51:16

I linked you on the Instagram.

SPEAKER_00

03:51:16 - 03:51:21

Okay, so I'm Eric R. Weinstein on Instagram and I'm on YouTube. Eric Weinstein PhD.

SPEAKER_01

03:51:21 - 03:51:25

Yeah, and if you can't find his Instagram, I linked it on my Instagram. Alright.

SPEAKER_00

03:51:25 - 03:51:26

Joe, thanks for having me.

SPEAKER_01

03:51:26 - 03:51:30

Thank you, my friend. Lots of fun. Alright, bye, you fucks.