YouTube Transcript:
Culture, Consciousness, and the Second Renaissance with Rufus Pollock

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

Video Transcript

Available languages:

View:

We think of ourselves as individuals. We

take it for granted. We take it for

granted that I'm an autonomous being and

I make decision. But that would be

completely alien a way of thinking at

other points in time to where we are

today. And so there's something there is

this kind of breakthrough. What I'm

trying to say is that the really hard

issue here is how do we find ways of

finding collective value, collective

truth, collective beauty again that

allow us therefore to act together at

new kinds of scales and new kinds of

numerous kind of capacities that could

arise out of That [Music]

[Music] [Applause]

[Applause] [Music]

welcome to episode 22 of Humans on the

Loop. I'm your host, Michael Garfield,

and this week I speak with Rufus

Pollock, former me fellow in economics

at the University of Cambridge,

entrepreneur, activist, author of Open

Revolution and Wiser Societies, RSA

fellow, and co-founder of life itself,

Open Knowledge Foundation, Daytopian,

and Second Renaissance. Rufus is a key

player in the so-called liinal web, an

active mapper of the ecosystem of

emerging changemaking organizations who

along with his wife Sylvie Barber and an

extensive network of brilliant allies

strives to promote the shifts in

consciousness and culture that we need

to safely navigate our age of

accelerating technology with wiser,

weller ways of living together. Together

we get into the good, bad, and ugly of

our nent planetary culture. The tension

between ecological consciousness and

economic force, the demands placed on us

to reclaim time-tested strategies for

community and meaning in our brave new

world, the intertwling of religion and

science, and why technological solutions

alone are woefully inadequate, however

necessary, as we face our crises of

collective action. It's an earnest,

soulsearching, thoughtful, and

far-reaching extra-long conversation.

And I hope that you find as much value

in it as we did. If you do, leave a

comment and visit humansontheloop.com

for nine more years of other episodes.

Special thanks to everyone else

supporting this work. Special thanks to

everyone supporting this work on sub.

Special thanks to everybody supporting

this work on Substack and Patreon or

with taxdeductible donations at every.org/humans

every.org/humans

ontheloop. All founding members just got

free access to all of the recordings and

readings from my recent Weirdosphere

course, How to Live in the Future. Over

20 hours of deep dives into the

philosophy of technology, evolution of

culture and consciousness,

metadisciplinary study of time, and the

changing nature of selfhood in our

emerging age of planetization. In other

words, if you like this episode, you'll

love that course. It's something of a

preview and something of an expansion on

my upcoming book at Integral Imprint

with Jeremy Johnson. How to live in the

future is an all-in exploration that changed.

changed.

It's something of a preview and

something of an expansion on my upcoming

imp. It's something of a preview and

something of an expansion on my upcoming

book at Jeremy Johnson's publisher,

Integral Imprint, and an all-in

exploration that challenged everyone

involved in a good way. And it's yours,

too, now if you missed it. And since

you're here for this kind of thing, let

me just hang out a teaser for that book,

my new essay at AON magazine,

Homoccrstaceious. By far the most work

I've ever put into a commissioned essay.

In it, I explore civilization's troubled

relationship with language, technology,

and the biosphere, laced with riffs on

sci-fi, memes, military history, and the

evolution of crabs. Their editorial

board shorted out when I turned it in

and later told me they think it's one of

the best pieces they've ever published.

Journey on over to the show notes for

the link. And with that, thank you for

listening and enjoy this extra long

immersion with the singular and

[Music] [Applause]

[Music]

So yeah, I was just looking last night

over the document that you keep such a

structured thing where I don't know many

people that take notes themselves in

random discovery meetings and then keep

that document and update it with every

meeting and invite the person as the

collaborator and then go back and you're

actually doing a very very active

curation of the history of our

conversations dating back to October

when we first came together and talked

about this. And so there was it's

interesting to go back and look at Yes.

Oh, I was reading Robert Pointton's book

back then. I was talking about humans on

the loop as an inquiry into the recon

decoupling recreonciliation of

instrumental and intrinsic functions and

values and this like I was going through

a dark night of the soul about how I had

led people astray in my 20s by insisting

that you couldn't have a that that you

should have a job you love. And then now

it's like back to that like I just I

just gave a lecture to my friend's art

class online where I spent a lot of time

talking about AI and generally

algorithmic concentration and

displacement of talent. And I said to

them basically, you'd better be doing

this because you love it. Right. That's

making art for money and thinking of it

as yours and trying to develop your

style that you can then fence and market

in some sort of competitive

environment is actually making you more

subject to displacement. And so there's

that sort of biocom fugitivity thing

going on of no the point of the art is

never to settle to continue discovering.

Anyway, hey you're on the loop. How are

you doing man? I great great to see you.

It's good to be here. Yeah and I like

the segue. Yeah. I don't know how much

of that rambling we'll keep in there,

but it is worth noting that there's this

question that you and I both care about,

which is the question of value and the

question of, you know, what is what

makes life good and how do we commit to

goodness, whatever we may think that is.

You know, I liked your bit on religion,

which we'll get to later, that you wrote

with Sylvie about real community, deep intention,

intention,

commitment, saving all of the good parts

of religion from the trash without dogma

or oppressive scaritization.

So, yeah, let's tell your story. I would

like for you to go back really far into

the misty recesses of your life and try

to address yourself for us and explain

why it is that you care about the things

that you have committed yourself to and

your ideas of good and take as long as

you like. Thank you. Hi everybody. My

name is Rufus uh Rufus Pollock and I'm

one of the co-founders of life itself

along with Sylvie Barbier performance

artist Liam Kavana and others and life

itself is a collective that is dedicated

to a radically wise world and

particularly seeding a second

renaissance and we sometimes joke that

we're a kabudist collective although

we're not all Buddhists or but and we're

not all kabutzniks for those what kabutz

The so the thing is we're really started

in 2015 life itself and I'm going to go

back like my story to that point but

we're now nearly a decade old. So

personally I grew up on a farm in

England and I had my mother was actually

the farmer, my father was a lawyer and

from very early on I had a lot of

questions as a kid and I also I think

had a very strong sense and I of justice

or unfairness and fairness. I don't know

for other people but going to school was

not always a great experience for me. It

wasn't terrible but it was just like was

never that interesting. It was not a lot

of fun. And the other thing for me was

just some kids were lovely, but there

were also kids who just picked on

others, bullied them, pushed them

around, made fun of them. Not even me

necessarily sometimes, but mainly other

kids. But I was like, what? I just

thought I I don't know if they came from

my parents or where I was, but I can

even remember being like seven, eight,

nine. I had this visceral sense like how

horrible this was really. I remember

there was a kid with glasses very

clearly and he just even some point like

people like pulling his glass off and

throwing them on the ground and just why

do we do that? And and what could we do?

And I do remember there was one time

there was a kid who bit me and bit

another kid and my parents said to me,

"Listen, you've got to understand his

parents are going through a divorce." I

mean, I was like six or seven. I had no

idea what that meant. All I know is like

there was something bad or difficult

happening for him and I should be

understanding. And I think that this was

a part From that point or very early I

had the sense of like how would we have

a fairer world even once I was a

teenager what would that mean? So I was

really in inquiry about that and there

were two parts of that I think. So one

was that I was really wondering like why

did we obey the school teachers at

school? In fact, I decided I'd start

doing experiments where I didn't obey

the school teachers and that went

interestingly and I also I stopped going

to some classes. I I started not going

to class and found things. And the other

thing was I got quite interested at one

point I was reading books in the school

library and I found this textbook on psychopharmarmacology

psychopharmarmacology

and I I started reading about

pharmarmacology and you read about drugs

and how they operate on the central

nervous system. This is the mid 90s so

this is still like basically

neurotransmitter time. This is before

fMRI, like before the next wave. And I

then got interested in psychedelics. So

I was like, "Wow, there's these drugs

they talk about that aren't addictive.

They're nothing like alcohol or benzoi.

They're not. Wow, why I and they don't

and they sound really interesting. I

should get a hold of something." So that

was a journey which was this exploration

of consciousness then began. Who was I?

Who am I? Is there an I? And there's the

connection of also like deep social

change. How would we have a world where

no one was bullied at school? where we

just had an amazing loving time where

how we have a world where we didn't see

I was seeing starvation sometimes on

television or a world where we didn't

have these vast differences in money and

wealth which I was already aware of and

I noticed something I think I definitely

got from my parents which was we worked

on a farm and my parents farm but we had

people who worked with us on the farm

and they were like family and I remember

very vividly my mother saying to me

something quite young she it doesn't

matter who's someone it Doesn't matter

if they're the king or they're they're

homeless, they are worth they're equally

worthy of respect. There's no difference

in human equality. And that was quite

different. I went to a school that was I

got I was a day park, but I went to a

school that was like a private school in

England where many of the people it cost

like not I was at the day park but the

boarding part was like $30,000 a year to

go. And so there were people with a lot

of wealth and privilege. I as well I

came from a privileged background but

it's just it was very clear for my

parents you never thought you were

better than someone because of money or

something like that that we were all

even weren't religious all equal in the

eyes of God and so that was really a

strong influence on me and the other

part was I was really lost the other

part of my story was that I feel I

really got viscerally the experience of

the end of modernity and nihilism so I

don't know if people have read Brett

Eastston Ellis or Not, but the

depictions that Ellis was having,

particularly like a less than zero, were

like quite close to experiences I was

seeing at school, people I remember a

friend of mine once just in his garden

just picking a rose, ripping it apart. I

was like, "Why are you destroying this

thing of beauty?" And he was just like,

"Because I can't. Why not? Why is it

better to have a whole rose than not to

have a whole rose?" And I had no answer.

And I really was confronted at this

point by a very strong sense of

nihilism. like rationally I was like I

don't believe in God. I don't have any

spiritual practice. I we're just atoms

bumping into other atoms. There's no

meaning. There's no purpose. And we're

all alone. And that was very strong for

me. And then kind of out of this as I

went towards university, I really got

interested in Buddhism. I really got I

had this aspect about the consumerism of

enlightenment from psychedelics that

there was this very powerful experience,

but I couldn't really take it with me. I

didn't have anyone else also to talk to.

I couldn't talk to my parents about it

really and my most my friends were not

into they found it too much or they

didn't like it. It wasn't a pleasant

experience. So I felt quite lost and I

started meditating and other things but

the journey I was on was I was very

lost. I didn't know really what path to

go on and I ended up really just working

on I guess what I would call systems

change around ownership of the

information age like who working on I

wrote the first definition of open data.

I did a lot of work in open data and

open knowledge and trying to basically

change who owns the information age more

and I would say less successfully mostly

less successfully and then that was like

what led me was this convergence this

incredible convergence in 2015 where I

met Sylvie who's actually my also my

partner and we founded life itself

around initially around this vision

about wisdom what was it actually to be

wise like concretely particularly there

was this kind of aspect like wow we are

really well off in the context of human

history and even in the world today

living in England or France or US. Wow,

we are immensely privileged. We don't

want for food or shelter and yet we're

not that happy. And also we can see

really major crises developing our

society. The climate crisis even then I

was technology regulation and issues I

was very aware of and I've been an

economist. I was an econ academic

economist at the University of Cambridge

for several years working on information

but also basically public goods problems

commons and I was very aware of

collective action issues. So this was I

was like okay we want to get radically

wiser personally but and collectively

and that was like life itself's

beginning and this focus ultimately on

now like a second renaissance and the

meta crisis. All right just for the sake

of my enjoyment there are two books that

I want to reference throughout this

conversation in addition to your

writing. One as I mentioned is William

Irwin Thompson's Imaginary Landscape.

The other is Federico Compana's

prophetic culture, which I'm skimming

through now a second time in prep for

this. And like both of them are looking

at this thing. You talk about the dark

night of the soul of nihilism. And I

love this image, this encounter that you

had with another kid. This why is it

better to have a whole rose? So, there's

a couple pieces here. And just as a way

of delineating, you know, how I'm gonna

handle my end of this, there's like an

alchemical thing here of pulling apart

and putting back together that I want to

do with you as a way of directing

attention to how we are all collectively

doing that right now. And then where

your thinking and Sylv's thinking and

everyone else in that community comes

together. Okay. First from prophetic

culture, Kana is talking about middle

ages. He says, "These traumatic moments

of passage between worlds and times

occur as often in the life of an

individual as in that of a collective.

When the closure of a world refers to

the collapse of an entire civilization,

historioggraphy tends to define the

following period as a middle age, a

scenario where life proceeds in the

absence of a voice capable of narrating

a stable world, a long winter when the

material of history is in part congealed

and in part slowly rots away. This is of

course how these periods are seen and

judged from the perspective of a more

stable world. But such partiality is

revealing of the difference between

worlds with unequal narrative

rootedness. You know that our histories

are presentist projections of a

different mode of worlding. And so, you

know, going back to I I just saw to date

this conversation, I just saw John

Stewart play with this in his riff on

Trump and the tariffs where he said,

"We're going from a simple caterpillar

to a dead caterpillar." when he knows

that this analogy has mainstreamed of

like the idea that the caterpillar is

dissolved in metamorphosis and

reconstituted through the development of

its imaginal cells into a butterfly. And

of course that's not at all obvious to

the caterpillar. And then the

caterpillar and the butterfly represent

these two historical regimes and we're

in that gross like soupy moment. Yes.

And then of course but then there's this

other question about the rose. It's

like, well, it depends. This like when a

rose falls apart, when it scatters its

pollen, there are all of these ways in

which not a whole rose is actually part

of a larger unity. And so then this is

where I want to bring in Bill Thompson,

whose imaginary landscape is in some

part about the intellectual history of

the Gaia hypothesis and autopoes and

chaos theory and the emergence of a

planetary mythos. And so he says in a

footnote 25 years after trying to

construct a philosophy of worldview I

find myself coming around again to

considering the nature of the human

mentality and its changes through time.

Now of course I would no longer believe

in one single theory that could

transform the complexity of a planetary

ecology into a single linear projection.

Now a theory would be more of interest

as one narrative among many, one novel

among a library of others. For it is the

act of constructing an imaginary

landscape of history that is exciting.

Just as once before it was the

intellectual thrill of constructing a

theory that was exciting. If the theory

was wrong, then what does it mean? All

theories of history are wrong. But as

exercises in intellectual mythology,

they become cultural performances. Small

wonder that political cultures and

academic subcultures have grown up

around them and taken their stories to

become history. So it's like where I

think you and I are dancing around in

the same field is in the question of how

do you engage in an appropriate

allocation of mourning because we are so

deeply inside of this thing that is

taking in some ways a very long time to

unfold. Thompson wrote this book in the

80s and the fact that like some amount

of grief like you say in the second

Renaissance white paper. Yes. You know

talking about the darkness before the

dawn and that we don't mean to

trivialize the threats that humanity

currently faces. It's vital to

acknowledge the darkness and fear. Yes.

That arise in response to the societal

decline. But not to just give that Yes.

all of its narrative weight that it's

not just like another story is coming.

It's like many stories are coming. Yes.

and how are they uh related ecologically

and how do we support that and maybe

there's a reason sometimes to pick apart

the rose like Josh Dalio point you know

he's like well if all criticism is a

hammer well you still need a hammer to

build a house so anyway that's a rant

but that's where I'd like to start with

you yeah so one was you could just trace

this thread for me of how did I

reconstruct truth and value so in in the

kind of acid

of reason and particular kind of

reductionist reason the good and the

beautiful dissolve away and we're left

just with a sort of kind a kind of truth

and so part of my personal journey but

I'd also say what we're trying to do

invol ourselves how do you and it's

there and integral and other things very

much how do we reconstruct those things

in a skillful way without just going

back and you have valueception you how

do we perceive the good now one thing I

just want to say at the beginning I

think in crucial is to say there's a

mountain with no top. We might know up

but we don't mean we have the top. It

doesn't mean we have the answer but we

can have better or worse answers. And so

that was a huge kind of recovery. There

was a personal aspect for me where I

always had this kind of faith somehow

that I you know I could feel that was

good. You knew that when you saw a kid

bully was that good and that there when

they were held and cared for was that

was better somehow that that the first

is not good in some way. But the more

important question was how to do it with

others because you could have your own

perception but otherwise would say oh

everyone's got their own subsective

perception. So one is just like this

journey and I think wisdom is what I

would term wisdom is a deeply related to

that. It's a capacity to perceive

and act on skillfully the good and the

beautiful. So this was one aspect of it

which is like how do we know that and

then how do we form how do we how does

that spread in a group. So I think one

thing there this is this aspect that's a

little bit subtle which is there are

definitely multiple like it's not like

there's one truth right now and we all

know it. No, there's multiple futures

that could emerge. There's more futures

that may emerge and there are certainly

many paths to those futures and there's

a reason just pragmatically why for

example you end up having cultural

homogeneity occurring within societies

or language homogeneity. there are less

and less languages and there are many

tragic things about that and there's a

reason which is as more people interact

you converge on a fewer number of

languages to do that and similarly why

for example it's reasonable to talk

about modernity and that we live largely

in the cultural paradigm of modernity

with all of the varieties of that

because modern belief systems despite

huge variation but there's kind of core

underpinnings are very pervasive they're

they're in communist systems they're in

capitalist systems they're in other

systems they're really all over the

place there if you like and so I think

this is also to ask about the future is

there's one option where we might break

up as a world economically and socially

into smaller parts and then have

separate areas and people can evolve

separately but if there is a lot of

interconnection and coordination there's

reasons why you end up having some

degree of alignment on like core views

and values because otherwise it's pretty

difficult to interact and this is we

could go off on this point but the thing

that I think What you want to say is

that how did we recover as lived

experience but in a way that was still

amanable to reason and to exchange not

just like me dominating you and saying

this is the way this is what's good this

is what's true and beautiful you do that

how do we recover coherence but for this

deeper level because to finish one of

the things that's happened in modernity

is there are still some universal

agreements but they're very thin the way

I think of it sometimes is that a

metaphor of if we were on Mars and

there's no atmosphere so we built our

membrane over our city for our

atmosphere. Now if that membrane is very

thin, the amount of air density might be

very low and we don't have very much

energy. We'll all be like I feel very

lethargic. And if the membrane is very

thick and dense, then there's a lot of

like the density of air can be high and

we have a lot of energy. And this is

true of like cultural membranes. If we

have very thin membranes where what we

agree on is everyone's right to do

whatever they want and what we agree on

is some basic liberal agreement about

negative liberty and maybe a bit of

secularism. No one's going to impose a

religion on anyone else. It's a very

thin membrane to get much stuff done. I

mean it's good and there's a lot to

admire about it. And one of the thorny

issues to confront is how do you have

stronger coherence but without

dominating people without way oppressing

people. But I think this is one of the

things that is so fascinating at the

moment that we're trying to have

breakthroughs like more broadly I don't

mean like you or I but just generally is

how can we move to these new levels

where there's still autonomy but there's

a collective again in a different kind.

And no one has the answer to that

question right now. But I think it's

something it's a level of breakthrough

as we imagine what the development of

like individuation as Jung and others

talk about it was the the degree of

difference is hard for us to imagine. We

think of ourselves as individuals. We

take it for granted. We take it for

granted that I'm an autonomous being and

I make decisions. But that would be

completely alien a way of thinking at

other points in time to where we are

today. And so there's something there's

this kind of breakthrough. And what I'm

trying to say is that the really hard

issue here is how do we find ways of

finding collective value, collective

truth, collective beauty again that

allow us therefore to act together at

new kinds of scales and new kinds of

numerous capacities that could arise out

of that. Okay. So there's two things

there and we're going to have to take

them in some order. We'll loop back to

whichever one seems worth punting. But

why I say one one thing just what I

should add just one and we call a life

itself the way it's like we're sharing

this term second renaissance as a way of

describing this desire for this

paradomatic shift at the personal and

collective level but acknowledging this

breakdown what I wanted to kind of add

because you said this very we are in a

moment of mourning one of the projects

we did actually earlier on at life

itself was called recquum for modernity

like we have this gravestone image and

like writing poems if you don't really

have a funeral and if you don't really

send off the past, you're always haunted

by it. Particularly Sylvie, my

collaborator is beautiful. Like we're

haunted by the ghost of the past if we

don't set them to rest. And a lot of the

time what we can see in our in myself

and I see some in others when we try to

dream of futures, we're either like the

angry teenager like I'm doing nothing

like you, dad. I'm going to do

everything differently. You trash the

planet. We're going to love all of the

environment. whatever it is or we're

sort of not even realize was being our

parents again in some way. We're just

going to amp it up on the technology and

we're just going to transcend into AI.

We're going to go full on into the kind

of technodernist vision. And so without

us healing our ancestors and without

acknowledging both what was difficult in

our parents and what was great in them

and like completing that, it's very

difficult to create anything newly in a

clean way. And so that's one thing that

recrim you were talking about and the

second renaissance term that we use and

this kind of vision and the project

there is like there is a death and there

is a rebirth in everything there's to

have a birth there is always some kind

of death and that's but it's the

question of how do we renew how do what

is the rebirth here the re the re re and

in particular the other part I like

about I want to emphasize is the aspect

that we're both going forward but also

recovering things that maybe have been

neglected or lost So just in the first

renaissance in the west there was this

recovery of kind of the classical

traditions Plato Aristotle all of these

things wisdom traditions of a kind so in

this one maybe at a global level at

least in the west there's a recovery of

wisdom traditions that have lost and

maybe there's a kind of

cross-pollination that's never happened.

Yeah. So to speak to the aeros andos

piece of this right and you know Bill's

framework for this he says we're moving

out of what he identified as a fourth

cultural mode this industrialization and

with each of these the movement from

culture made of bands society made of

tribes civilizations made of city

empires industrialization made of

nations and the one we're moving into

which he believed is planetization made

of the biosphere. Each of them has a

principal concern and each of them he

says we slay with technology and save

the victim with art. So this process

that you're talking about starts with

humans becoming apex predators and early

religions and artwork being focused on

the animal. He references McLuhan as the

slothtoff environment becomes a work of

art in the new and invisible

environment. This becomes something that

we are operating on and that we no

longer assume as the invisible subject

but it's not the water we're swimming in

anymore. It's something that we are uh sacralizing.

sacralizing.

And so he says in industrialization the

victim was religion. The complex was art

and science. The technology print and

mechanization. In planetization, the

victim is the mind. The complex was

music and the technology was

electronics. And so, I've been thinking

a lot about this in terms of what Doug

Rushkov calls narrative collapse

and the mental health crisis, but also

this profusion

of psycho technologies that have been

made more accessible than ever. Call

them what you will, but that's a common

term. esmoteric practices as well as the

other day I just saw of course people

are launching ventures where they're

using AI to create precision psychedelic

therapies and the intersection of

disciplines afforded by electronic

communication brought the the monks and

the neuroscientists together and

afforded the discipline of neurotheology.

neurotheology.

I had Alex Shakar on the show years ago

and he had written this gorgeous book

called Luminarium which was about all of

this. It was about the sort of bright

dark coincidence of militarized virtual

realities and transcranial magnetic

stimulation induced sator. But the the

human mind is and I think as a

throughine through all of this is the

victim of digital planetary culture. But

it also becomes this domain which is

like the domain in which this

renaissance is happening. It's the

domain into which we have new insight

and have uh all of these fabulous new

artistic instruments. I like most people

when they like of course because we've

been living through the last century has

been deeply paranoid and people look at

like MK Ultra they look at these like

brainwashing but there's this question

again to go all the way back to the refiguration

refiguration

of our relationship to the animal at the

very beginning of what it means to be

more broadly speaking a modern human.

And it's before we could, you know, slay

animals and then paint them on cave

walls and wear their skins and develop

that whole thing. There was also like we

had no capacity to develop the kind of

relationships with them that we now have

uh some of us anyway with our pets. Like

we we like our own understanding of

animal intelligence just gets deeper and

deeper. our own appreciation of their

inner life ways becomes more and more

profound at the same time that our

ability to investigate and quantify and

specify all of that. And so there's this

thing about the risk of getting lost in

the abstractions

and like Westworld, right? If the human

being is an art object, then that means

things that people aren't going to like.

It means, you know, to the modern

industrial mentality, something really

horrific or disgusting like the Borg.

Everyone's worried about the becoming

the Borg. But then you've got books like

Arthur C. Clark and Steven Baxter's

Light of Other Days where they we figure

out how to send information through

quantum tunnels. And so the kids that

grow up in that world are all the next

Buddha will be a SA. They're this sort

of brain linked like Maitraa planetary

Christ and they all know that everyone

can see everyone else all the time and

that the future can see them through the

quantum tunnels and so the kids just

stop wearing clothes because they're no

longer ashamed of their nakedness. Like

this horrific state of total

surveillance is also the medium through

which this other thing emerges. And so

just to go back to like standards and I

guess where I want to take this is

you're right about the thin membrane of

agreement but like I think about wood

like living wood on a tree is very thin.

The the atmosphere on our planet is very

thin. The neoortex like these things

that like where the conscious activity

is where the growing edge is stands on

what is actually an enormous consensus.

And we don't see it because we're

already living on top of this mound of

abstractions. And so part of that work

seems to be in recognizing one like how

much we have in common that we're not

consciously attending to the core of the

tree through which all of the water

actually flows. And two to understand

that like the formation of standards

like this process of canalization

and homogeneity

can be and often is the platform for

incredible diversity. People like

talking about the Cambrian explosion

now. It's like hip and it's like there

was more disparity between body plants

540 million years ago, but there were

fewer kinds of organisms. Somehow the

few fila that made it out of that period

became the basis for all of this other

stuff. So anyway, I'm just playing

around with that and I'll leave it

there. Leave it there for a minute.

There are a few things there, a couple I

will come back to. I think the thing to

start with is to say, wow, where we are

is pretty serious. And I think the

simplest way to look, you know, we're

quite a serious situation. Things are

not going great. We look at the

existential risk, we look at ecological

crisis and that doesn't seem to be a

widespread thing or it's and it or it's

too terrifying and it gets repressed and

it takes something for us to look at

that and then what I think the other

part of the story which you're also

alluding to and I want to come back to

is there's hope there's there are ways

that we transform and even sometimes

they're related in the dark what we call

the dark renaissance version second kind

of oh wow this is breakdown but this is

rebirth In the dark rea there's a dark

age which is what happened you in the

last renaissance even the 14th century

let alone break down after the Roman

Empire but in the 14th century half the

European population dies out of the

plague and of famine and that can be a

catalyst just as individually when we

have sadly often we grow the most as

people when we have some significant

challenge maybe it's a bereavement maybe

it's losing our job maybe it's a partner

going out of our

that these are often catalyst to our

growth. They can also be a break just be

a catalyst for breakdown but they can

also be a catalyst for growth and there

are many opportunities at the moment. I

think one I think the two that we'd

refer to for the kind of move to a

planetary civilization is one is just

the fact we're having this call the

technology that allows us to interact at

a planetary scale the ability to I think

even more deeply things like working

from home like radical ways to

reorganize production and our social

organizations for basically several

hundred years we've been urbanized we

have to move together to in order to

work together and that puts a whole

bunch of constraints constraints so you

can organize very differently. And the

other which is perhaps even deeper is

this convergence of ancient wisdom

traditions and modern science and

technology which enables at least new

levels of insight maybe the making

available of that insight to many more

people. But that said the basic concern

that sits in the background is the

massive wisdom gap. the massive gap

between the powers that we've unleashed

through modernity in its success, its

technological and scientific success,

that we can kill all of our ourselves on

the planet, that we can poison the whole

ocean, that we can create maybe one day

nanobots that will accidentally wipe us

all out, that we can build AIs, this and

the speed of that compared to our

cognitive and social capacities in and I

would say well I don't want to say

cognitive onlo ological capacities, our

awareness, our lack of reactivity, not

just our cognitive complexities, all of

these dimensions, our ability to hold

that personally and collectively is

massively out of balance with that. And

the sorceress apprentice, which Markx

used, this comes from Gerta. It is

really, I think, the fairy tale of today

that we have loed powers beyond our

control and like the first thing would

be to do would be to slow down. the

first thing would be like whoa we don't

really need to go faster and which is a

collective action problem we can come to

and the other point is that the

electronic point also I'd say is we've

had a lot of these insights in Buddhism

in other traditions for a long time

about having humility and about how to

develop our to as it were clean the

mirror of insight and to see what a wise

actions what a truly skillful action and

we don't do it so I thought oh man I've

now got this headset I can put on and do

my neuro feedback and it's all going to

like oh we'll all just wake up and I'm

like whoa we could have done that before

and we didn't and there's many ways you

can abuse that. I don't know if people

I'll make a comedy. I have a lot of time

for Jamie Wheel and I never quite know.

I've read Stealing Fire and I don't

quite know what way he means the book

because the first story is about Al

Jabides abusing the mysteries taking

these mysteries and abusing them in an

infantile way and the book then starts

with the Navy Seals basically using

mindfulness or group dynamics to better

hunt down militants. Now maybe you

support the Navy Seals but it's a kind

of bizarre use of psycho technologies

and so I I really think the first thing

is the slowing down. Now this comes to a

collective action problem. I will talk

to that but I just want to say that we

really in a moment where when you really

say with those we we are mad we are

acting in an insane way. I would not

hand my 5-year-old a Kalashnikov and

then say, "Play with your 4 months old

sister and think you would go and yeah,

it's let's just hand out the

Kalashnikovs. Let's throw in a few

bazookas for five, give them to

ourselves as kind of toddlers and then

run around and see who's lost a limb at

the end." And I think the thing that I

also want to break through, and this is

why I'm on this podcast, is that we can

do it. We live in an era, I like to

joke, made by the American Enterprise

Institute, but we didn't realize the

biggest skill the devil ever had was to

persuade you didn't exist. We live in an

era of immense cynicism and despair

about our capacities to act together.

Now it's not easy and we have and some

of that sort accidental I want to end

with that what I do which is I started

out like civic tech and open data and

open knowledge and the fascinating thing

was I lived in places where people were

doing tech for good in a way the tech

industry and the tech area is the kind

of like leading edge it's take it is the

sociologically dominant monetarily

ideologically of our era when I used to

meet politicians like wow what would

what how would we be like a startup or

more entrepreneurial and the point that

I had was living around so we kept

people even lying into politics but the

solution was always on blockchain or a

voting app it was never joining a

political party and I to jo say but

don't you realize you're living in an

ideology of the right that the only

thing we can do is through individual

action and the market and that that the

whole thing that doesn't the market

doesn't solve is collective action

problems externalities public goods and

you know the funniest thing for me was I

was an econom economy at Cambridge my

The older professors all being

economists had become like young people

in their 70s. They were all being

Marxists. They were all joining parties.

None of them were that now. And so I

just want to say is that we live and

that these things can change. This is

one of the biggest ideologies we live in

without seeing which is that we cannot

act together that we are corrupt in a

way. It's a very old Christian. We are

self-interested rational beings blah

blah blah. Now of course there's truth

to that. There's greed and ignorance and

delusion and all these things in us and

we can transcend those things and we

have frequently in our lives just even

with our own children let alone what we

do for others. Yeah. So for fellow Ken

Wilbur nerds or ex- nerds, I think you

and I are playing a game in our

conversations where the roles might flip

if we were in conversations with other

people, but we've settled into something

where you're someone who worked in

software and economics, but you stand in

what Ken called the the left quadrants

of phenomenology and culture and the inner

inner

And I'm somebody who for whatever reason

is a poet and an artist and tends to

talk in and emphasize

the systems we're embedded in the right

hand of that model. And so like just

becoming like construct aware of this

dynamic and knowing that you and I can

like musical chairs and suddenly

probably take each other's positions and

that would be really fun. I Okay, so

there's a couple things here. First of

all, I want to make explicit the piece

on that you wrote on four types of

problem because you're speaking directly

to this. Problems of science and

technology, problems of preference or

self-nowledge, problems of will or

self-control, and problems of collective

action, right? Yes. And and the point

that you make as you say, I would argue

that progress on the last three really

comes from the transformation of being

and that we do have answers here. They

aren't easy to follow. They are based on

the ontology and practices found in

traditions like Buddhism which you said

and they require will and are not simply

replicable because just because I get

enlightened doesn't mean you do but if I

invent a better way to grow corn you can

copy it easily. You finish that thought

with unfortunately for us science tech

solutions seem to help little with the

other three items and as we get richer

the value of science tech solutions are

less and less important. So just because

I'm feeling mischievous, the weird thing

is that like I know so many people and

on the one hand I'm a child of divorce.

I see the thesis and I see the

antithesis and I don't know where I

really stand on this but I think it's

interesting that you know we wouldn't

have Buddhism without books and that

there's swift growth in this domain of

nanitech right this idea that as we get

more fluent in this stuff that we may

actually be able to pass overtheair

updates I used to talk about it in 2013

as being able to tweet each orgasms and

how annoying that would actually be. But

again, like Bill Thompson talks about

how planetization is defined by this

sort of gradient, as he puts it, between

noise and rapture mediated by

participation. And that this is a

society in which representation of

identity is less important because

identity becomes more fluid in the

chaotic attractor basin of a planetary

culture. And so we're always working

this gradient between rapture and noise.

And to your point about the dark

renaissance, he says something that I

found really pertinent about the way

that again the adult developmental

psychology upon which Ken's work is

standing, work like Bob Keegan and

Suzanne Cooker at Harvard talks about

the maturation of adult egos in the

fifth structure of consciousness where

you're no longer purely deriving values

through an analytical examination of

different cultures and authoring them.

But you're recognizing that whoever is

doing the authoring is defined

relationally and in process with that

which you the modern self believe

yourself not to be. Thompson says what

does the world look like when one looks

out through the inactive embodiment of

this new culture of nature. First of

all, karma becomes seen as the

generation of unconscious politics in

which we do not take responsibility for

our own affirmations through negation.

We become what we hate and we generate

shadow economies such as the drug

economy in the United States that are

caricatures of the conscious economy. We

cannot naively work to eliminate a

general norga of Panama if we cannot see

how a Latin American strongman is a

cultural hero who is taking revenge for

the development quote unquote of the

third world by the banks of the United

States. For our exports to them are as

polluting as their exports to us. But

their exports are a much more honest and

less hypocritical expression of the

damage to cultures and ecologies. This

is going on right now in my country,

right? like that there's this shadow

dynamic between the United States and

other countries. And you know, it's

funny because Paul Levy said something

very similar back when George W. Bush

was elected about how Bush's rise to

power was symptomatic of a process of

collective shadow projection and that

the hate of the other or the fear of the

other was as responsible for his

ascension as the people who genuinely

believed in his virtue. this regime

comes out of this clash between selves

that in Levy's sense like I have no

doubt that George W. Bush actually

believes himself to be a good man and

therefore projects evil out into the

Osama bin Laden's etc. But that a huge

constituency of the United States is

doing the same with him and that there

is this failure to recognize the

interdependent co-arising of things. And

I bring this up because I think that all

of that just goes back to the four types

of problem, right? And how these four

types are related. And the idea that

like you had said a moment ago that

collective action problems are contingent

contingent

on self-nowledge and on preference and

self-nowledge is to some extent

contingent on will. And like I just look

at those four problems and I don't see

them as separate. I see them as

profoundly interwoven where it's like I

wouldn't have access to a lot of the

insight that I do. I have incentives for

and against pursuing a transformation of

being thanks to science and technology.

None of these things are unalloedied

goods or evils. And again, it's like the

stuff is all swirling around. Yeah, they

work together. Let's start with Soviet.

So one is the motivation for myself is

let's say we want credible hope. We want

to first we like look at the situation

we're in personally like how how could I

be really well and joyful and flourish

if I had a Lamborghini and I had this

would I be no but also we look more

significantly at the challenges the

confronting situation our world seems to

be coming to where in terms of as I said

the climate crisis the way technology

advances the existential risk from AI

and so on and then we want to say what's

path of credible hope and even before I

saw those crisis When I was a teenager,

be like, I can't really believe in

social anymore, but I want to believe in

something more than just let's what I

call like iPhone capitalism. Like next

year, you'll get a little bit bigger screen.

screen.

Is that really the best that we're just

going to I've got unlimited wants and

limited resources. We'll just get a

little bit better year by year. No.

Whether it's you look at Buddhism,

you're like, "My god, Buddha's telling

me I can be, you know, full-on

liberation. like I can be profoundly

free and content and joyful and

contributing to the world or just you

want to look at more political stories

like hey people could form different

societies do you know there something is

off where someone has a hundred billion

dollars and some people don't have

enough to eat that this can't be a

healthy world I'm a big fan of the green

you're seeing this and that but to say

so one of the things I'm trying to do is

say okay what I was asked myself is what

is a credible path let's say addressing

wicked problems and the meta crisis and

I wasn't convinced by communism or

socialism and this is where this

typology of solutions come in that's

useful and relates to four types of

problem and we want to walk through

which is say okay let's pick a concrete

one rather than abstract okay the

climate crisis so one way is say we're

going to invent solar we're going to

have a read Bill Gates's book we're just

going to have batteries and solar and

breakthrough and fusion and the

technology will cut it markets will

produce technology and it will be okay.

Then there's this is if we're into our

will versus top right individual outer

roughly although technology always

merges between the things and then we

might have system stuff like well what

we need is we need better international

governance systems or we need carbon

pricing which is an international

governance system or we need as XR

wanted in England extinction rebellion

third demand was we want citizens

assemblies we will have a new kind of

governance and then there's what I would

say is there's the left what I'd call

ontological solution ism. So the first

one I said is technological solutionism.

Then we had structural or systems

solutionism and then I would call

ontological solutionism which is a mix

of the inner personal like contemplative

work and then there's more I would say

the cultural dimension which actually is

more relevant. I'm not just let's go sit

on our cushions and that was no it's

like change in views and values. And so

the four types of problem refers to this

which is that we are in a world at the

end of modernity that is almost always

going to science and like

technosolutionism. We will fix this from

technology. And it turns out that

collective action problems aren't that

amanable to that unless they can get you

out of it in the can get the collective

action problem to go away. like we will

invalid so much efficient and by the way

there's even an irony there which is the

way that we're funding the development

of most innovation in solar at the kind

of base level is through our massive

success at solving a collective action

problem which is the public funding of

science most basic research that

underpins transistors silicon solar

panels the basic science the core

science was government funded to a

significant extent even take Tesla Tesla

would not exist without massive

government handouts and subsidies

right which are public goods in action

but just to say when we look at a

collective action problem that how

amunable is it to science technology now

I also say I come back to it can support

in various ways and again it's useful to

think of a concrete analogy we're all in

our kitchen at our shared flat there's

five of us living together Michael me

three others and no one's doing the

washing up the washing up the classic

thing someone's leaving in the sink now

we can use technology I start installing

cameras. I can use the cameras to

monitor who's doing the washing up and

so on. But in terms of actually forming

agreements, that's going to require

governance and it's going to require the

culture. And the real thesis that I'm

sitting out after that we came to is to

say of course we need technology, of

course we'll need governance, but the

ability to enact those in the way that

we need fundamentally depends on the

being on the culture. The way in the

past if we look at human history that

we've had breakthroughs to new scales of

ability to address collective actions is

almost always cultural or ontologically

led like inner le then manifests in

technology and systems and laws and so

on but it's come from that side and the

point I would call this we call this

like the primacy of being so this

analogy with male girl Chris who's like

the primacy of the right hemisphere We

have two hemispheres crudely. One is the

analytical, the left, the language and

one is the gestal, the whole. Now we

need both hemispheres. We need

technology. We need systems change. We

need inner change. But the question is

which is has primacy at the present

given our situation and what actually

allows us to scale in the solution to

collective action. So that's the kind of

core thesis and so I need to give some

concrete examples from history about

this and I also want to make an

important point which is of course once

we create technologies they do influence

our being and this is what's properly

done and this is hard to do on a

podcast. The causatory path is a complex

ecosystem where culture causes

institutions that structure technology

and then technology structures being. So

for example, right now we have online

media platforms that maybe amplify polarization

polarization

and echo chambers. We have their profit

oriented which is a structure of

capitalism and so on. And those things

are shaping the minds of our young

people. We now know that social media

separate even from cultural polarization

is having profound impacts on the minds

of those brought up on it right in terms

of attention in terms of maybe the way

they see the world. So there is of

course a loop it's not there's no it's

not a single linear like culture causes

the result. However in this scaling in

collective action that has been crucial

and the obvious example is religions. So

the classic one is Christianity where

there's this whole new level of who is

part of my group. It doesn't matter that

you were born a Jew or not born a Jew or

action problem. Eio Wilson in his book

Darwin's Cathedral has this beautiful

example. Now, it's speculative because

we don't have data, but he's actually

saying he reckons that the attitude

where Christians basically treated each

other during plagues was a major reason

that Christians had a higher birth rate

than Romans. There were other reasons.

They were pronatalist. But he actually

has this example that your willingness

to die for your brother or sister,

there's a lot of evidence that if you're

cared for during a plague, when you have

a serious fever, makes a major

difference on your outcome. And the

payoff if I'm willing to care for you

and you for me is higher than the risk

to me of infection. So this thing that

Christians would go and look after each

other during plagues like really be

willing to die for each other had a

major impact in solving one collective

action. So Christianity is example, we

have other examples, but I think the

other the kind of weirdest one which is

to go to Henrich is that maybe the weird

package of cultural innovations in the

Catholic Church in about 500 AD about

marriages leads to much greater trust of

strangers and leads the nation state. So

you've got to remember just to end here

the nation state which we now don't like

so much mate but is a breakthrough

compared to empire. In empire, I get

taxes from by oppression. I basically

can only extract taxes and an army by

threatening to kill you or do something

to you. And therefore, there's a big

limit on what tax I can raise.

Basically, the public good we can. Now,

I can get big as an empire in a certain

way. I can have a big army and control a

big area. But nation states were

extraordinary because people close to

voluntarily contributed at a different

level because I felt I'm part of this.

And so people were willing to vote taxes

and participate armies. Famously

Napoleon's levy on mass the f before

Napoleon when the French after French

they're threatened by invasion by all

the other places that are threatened by

them. They can raid an army at a scale

almost unprecedented because it's an

army of citizens and that was again a

cultural innovation in the sense this

incredible breakthrough of the vision of

equality of man. If you're not my lord

and I'm just I'm your peasant, why would

I gonna I don't really want to go and

die for you. But if you my brother and

sister in some sense, my comrade, that's

different. Now, we do want to look on

the scale of human history of how recent

the French Revolution is. And you think

of Christianity, we're 200 years from

the French Revolution. Everyone says

communism fail. I always joke, have you

seen Silicon Valley startups? I mean we

are they're not communist of course they

have different equity levels but the

level of self-organizing groups with

much higher degrees of equity maybe in

privileged areas but often these are

leading edge progress these are the

leading edge of our society is dramatic

hocrisy and teal circles and this and

that. So you know we'd like that

cultural evolution to go faster and for

it to cash out more radically in changes

in our society faster than it is. But

there are changes and I can end on this

hope which is we often it's like

watching paint dry or watching the grass

grow. The problem is that cultural

evolution happens over generations. But

if you look back 200 years ago or 300

years ago, most places had illegal

slavery. Nowhere did women have the

vote. A century a bit ago most places

didn't have the vote. Now there is

backsliding. There are many challenges

today. But my point is we do see

sometimes dramatic changes in norms and

values very quickly. And so why I go

back to this four types of problem is

that technology can support I right now I'm having this call with you. I can

I'm having this call with you. I can coordinate over distances because of

coordinate over distances because of technology and technology does create

technology and technology does create being but this these breakthroughs in

being but this these breakthroughs in new levels of collective action happen

new levels of collective action happen at this kind of cultural inner layer and

at this kind of cultural inner layer and then that cashes out into institutions

then that cashes out into institutions that reinforce that technology that

that reinforce that technology that supports that and so on. Now we could

supports that and so on. Now we could have a debate about the plow and like

have a debate about the plow and like deist religions. We could there's a lot

deist religions. We could there's a lot of subtlety in this but it's certainly

of subtlety in this but it's certainly an inversion if you're familiar with the

an inversion if you're familiar with the Marxist approach of economy comes first

Marxist approach of economy comes first then culture is an effect of the economy

then culture is an effect of the economy or of this institutional structures

or of this institutional structures that's what we're inverting in the

that's what we're inverting in the primacy of being and it is a story of

primacy of being and it is a story of hope cultural evolution is possible the

hope cultural evolution is possible the third noble belief of the second

third noble belief of the second renaissance kredo first is we're in a

renaissance kredo first is we're in a polar crisis second we're in a meta

polar crisis second we're in a meta crisis there is a common route to the

crisis there is a common route to the crisis we faced but the third is hope

crisis we faced but the third is hope like Buddha Third noble truth is that

like Buddha Third noble truth is that liberation is possible. Cultural

liberation is possible. Cultural evolution is possible and we've done it

evolution is possible and we've done it before and it's not easy. So we've done

before and it's not easy. So we've done it before. There's a couple of axes I

it before. There's a couple of axes I want to play across with you here. One

want to play across with you here. One is in in bringing up Silicon Valley. I'm

is in in bringing up Silicon Valley. I'm reminded of a piece by Paul Millard that

reminded of a piece by Paul Millard that he wrote on Pathless called Are Long

he wrote on Pathless called Are Long Games Real? I suspect mostly no. It's

Games Real? I suspect mostly no. It's like the notion that we've done this,

like the notion that we've done this, like you said, is conditioned

like you said, is conditioned by a culture of care and reciprocity

by a culture of care and reciprocity and the formation of national identity,

and the formation of national identity, etc., tribal identity going all the way

etc., tribal identity going all the way back. Yes. And so he says about Silicon

back. Yes. And so he says about Silicon Valley, he's quoting Naval, you're

Valley, he's quoting Naval, you're living on fume, right? We're living on I

living on fume, right? We're living on I just want to say this, we're living on

just want to say this, we're living on fumes often. We're currently functioning

fumes often. We're currently functioning capitalism if it really worked on pure

capitalism if it really worked on pure rational self-interest would collapse

rational self-interest would collapse tomorrow. It actually even works because

tomorrow. It actually even works because there is a legacy of ethical and trust

there is a legacy of ethical and trust and behavior that underpins the

and behavior that underpins the functioning even of the market.

functioning even of the market. Absolutely. I said this this was the

Absolutely. I said this this was the meat and potatoes of the conversation I

meat and potatoes of the conversation I had with Jim Mashy who was talking about

had with Jim Mashy who was talking about how Wall Street doesn't operate without

how Wall Street doesn't operate without trust. And you we were edging toward

trust. And you we were edging toward this point that in my mind one of the

this point that in my mind one of the core themes of this show I should say is

core themes of this show I should say is that when we're talking about multiscale

that when we're talking about multiscale regulation and understanding what it

regulation and understanding what it means to meet power with wisdom in a

means to meet power with wisdom in a world of magical technologies that we

world of magical technologies that we have to think about you're talking about

have to think about you're talking about preference and will that preference is

preference and will that preference is market activity. this bottom up the

market activity. this bottom up the conditions of your life. You don't

conditions of your life. You don't choose your preferences, you discover

choose your preferences, you discover them. And then will is that executive

them. And then will is that executive function. It's regulatory. But the

function. It's regulatory. But the neoortex that's making these executive

neoortex that's making these executive decisions is actually again Paul Ley's

decisions is actually again Paul Ley's point about George W. Bush that

point about George W. Bush that executive orders are an emergent

executive orders are an emergent bottomup effect. These like this top

bottomup effect. These like this top down stuff. And this again comes out of

down stuff. And this again comes out of the time I had with SFI. I'm thinking

the time I had with SFI. I'm thinking about papers like Jessica Flack's

about papers like Jessica Flack's fabulous course graining as a downward

fabulous course graining as a downward causation mechanism which is like the

causation mechanism which is like the number one science paper I would

number one science paper I would recommend to anyone probably. I'm

recommend to anyone probably. I'm thinking about policing in primate

thinking about policing in primate societies and how alpha male Reese's

societies and how alpha male Reese's Macaks, the reason that they have the

Macaks, the reason that they have the position at the top of a dominance

position at the top of a dominance hierarchy is because they are the best

hierarchy is because they are the best at mediating conflict and that the whole

at mediating conflict and that the whole troop is now being selected for as an

troop is now being selected for as an individual evolutionary group selection.

individual evolutionary group selection. And so in healthy hierarchies, this is a

And so in healthy hierarchies, this is a stratification of the ability to

stratification of the ability to mitigate the violence that would

mitigate the violence that would otherwise occur in all against all

otherwise occur in all against all conflict, which is something that we

conflict, which is something that we talk a lot about is all against all

talk a lot about is all against all narrative conflict in the postmodern

narrative conflict in the postmodern where like nothing is true. There is no

where like nothing is true. There is no vertical these kinds of things. So

vertical these kinds of things. So anyway, go back to Silicon Valley. Paul

anyway, go back to Silicon Valley. Paul Millard's quoting Naval Ravakant. He

Millard's quoting Naval Ravakant. He says, "If you're in a situation, like

says, "If you're in a situation, like for example, if you're in Silicon Valley

for example, if you're in Silicon Valley where people are doing business with

where people are doing business with each other and they know each other,

each other and they know each other, they trust each other, then they do

they trust each other, then they do right by each other because they know

right by each other because they know this person will be around for the next

this person will be around for the next game." And then Paul says, "If you were

game." And then Paul says, "If you were in Silicon Valley toward the end of the

in Silicon Valley toward the end of the 2010s, you saw evidence that this game

2010s, you saw evidence that this game worked. Everyone who was around for more

worked. Everyone who was around for more than 10 years was successful and likely

than 10 years was successful and likely rich." But he says, I think the

rich." But he says, I think the charitable interpretation of what's

charitable interpretation of what's going on in Silicon Valley is not that

going on in Silicon Valley is not that there are people thinking long term at

there are people thinking long term at all, but that an environment exists

all, but that an environment exists where being more generous and helping

where being more generous and helping others succeed is rewarded and that this

others succeed is rewarded and that this is different than many other parts of

is different than many other parts of the economy. So this gets to the

the economy. So this gets to the question of like how much will really

question of like how much will really plays into this? It's like it's

plays into this? It's like it's obviously huge and crucial and I

obviously huge and crucial and I wouldn't be doing this show if I didn't

wouldn't be doing this show if I didn't believe that it's easy to fund power and

believe that it's easy to fund power and it's hard to fund wisdom and that this

it's hard to fund wisdom and that this is where I want to lean in because the

is where I want to lean in because the transformation of consciousness not just

transformation of consciousness not just flow state engineering right not just

flow state engineering right not just stealing fire which is obviously an in

stealing fire which is obviously an in like your point about wheel and cutotler

like your point about wheel and cutotler is like this is an instrumental end this

is like this is an instrumental end this is you're missing the point if you are

is you're missing the point if you are trying to use psychedelics merely to

trying to use psychedelics merely to ideulate that's it's going to happen

ideulate that's it's going to happen it's a but okay

it's a but okay and to what end just to say are the four

and to what end just to say are the four types of problem I should maybe come

types of problem I should maybe come back to because it relates the wisdom

back to because it relates the wisdom point you're making so like one maybe

point you're making so like one maybe just to think of I'm trying to a simple

just to think of I'm trying to a simple example I'm overweight and I want to

example I'm overweight and I want to lose weight one thing is there's some

lose weight one thing is there's some pill I can take this is the science

pill I can take this is the science solution the second one is my

solution the second one is my preferences what is it that I actually

preferences what is it that I actually want I'm like and re what I mean the

want I'm like and re what I mean the problem of preferences is really knowing

problem of preferences is really knowing Knowing what we want is actually hard.

Knowing what we want is actually hard. Do I want the chocolate cake right now

Do I want the chocolate cake right now or do I want my weight to be X in two

or do I want my weight to be X in two years actually distinguishing that or

years actually distinguishing that or like more what do I want in my life

like more what do I want in my life truly is like in Buddhism we consider a

truly is like in Buddhism we consider a very deep question or in cognitive

very deep question or in cognitive science but then this question of will I

science but then this question of will I know I want to lose weight I'm not using

know I want to lose weight I'm not using and I want to not eat that chocolate

and I want to not eat that chocolate cake but I do. So that's what I mean by

cake but I do. So that's what I mean by problems of will is that often we have a

problems of will is that often we have a ch many examples where we know what we

ch many examples where we know what we want to do in some part of ours but we

want to do in some part of ours but we don't do it and then the collective

don't do it and then the collective action problem is but there's all this

action problem is but there's all this advertising around me promoting like

advertising around me promoting like chocolate cakes and I need that to

chocolate cakes and I need that to change to help me or is the climate

change to help me or is the climate crisis it's like the preferences problem

crisis it's like the preferences problem is what do we really want do we want

is what do we really want do we want more plastic toys or do we want the

more plastic toys or do we want the rainforest around what do we really want

rainforest around what do we really want and what do we want in in terms of

and what do we want in in terms of acting on that why I say this is that

acting on that why I say this is that when I grew up I e economics and every

when I grew up I e economics and every textbook starts with like our

textbook starts with like our preferences are given and I once wrote a

preferences are given and I once wrote a post and was doing work on a Buddhist

post and was doing work on a Buddhist economics book where I was like okay

economics book where I was like okay Buddhist starts with a totally different

Buddhist starts with a totally different point which is that preferences are

point which is that preferences are changeable I can transform my craving

changeable I can transform my craving and it's like the inverse of econ 101

and it's like the inverse of econ 101 which is my preferences are given and so

which is my preferences are given and so I wouldn't even say we discover our

I wouldn't even say we discover our preferences we transform our preferences

preferences we transform our preferences I mean we do discover them we see them

I mean we do discover them we see them deeply but this is quite a

deeply but this is quite a point like which calls into question by

point like which calls into question by the way many of the sacred cows of

the way many of the sacred cows of modernity as well which is if I don't

modernity as well which is if I don't really know what I want why should I be

really know what I want why should I be allowed to choose what I want in a

allowed to choose what I want in a market or in a democracy I'm not that

market or in a democracy I'm not that saying that someone should decide for

saying that someone should decide for you but I've got a whole piece actually

you but I've got a whole piece actually there's a beautiful talk by ticknut han

there's a beautiful talk by ticknut han he's a zen master called technology is

he's a zen master called technology is horse and the point is there's a point

horse and the point is there's a point where he's in Silicon Valley at Google

where he's in Silicon Valley at Google and he there should be this bell of

and he there should be this bell of mindfulness on mobile phones and they're

mindfulness on mobile phones and they're talking about it the engineer and then

talking about it the engineer and then he says

he says says, "But we got to make that an

says, "But we got to make that an option. You should have click it on or

option. You should have click it on or off." And Tina's like, "No, it should be

off." And Tina's like, "No, it should be compulsory." And the tent is like,

compulsory." And the tent is like, "What?" And T's like, "But of course

"What?" And T's like, "But of course people should be able to choose. They

people should be able to choose. They got to know what they want." T no they

got to know what they want." T no they don't. Of course they don't know what

don't. Of course they don't know what they want. And it was this amazing

they want. And it was this amazing moment where of it's obvious for him as

moment where of it's obvious for him as master that we don't mostly know what we

master that we don't mostly know what we want. And that is the sacred assumption

want. And that is the sacred assumption of modernity that I do know what I want

of modernity that I do know what I want and I should get to choose what I want

and I should get to choose what I want and so on. And actually a one solid

and so on. And actually a one solid point of wisdom is not that someone else

point of wisdom is not that someone else should tell me what I want but

should tell me what I want but acknowledging how little I know what I

acknowledging how little I know what I want and how little I'm able to act on

want and how little I'm able to act on what I want. You can see that just with

what I want. You can see that just with your thoughts. It's why meditation. I'm

your thoughts. It's why meditation. I'm going to stop having the thoughts about

going to stop having the thoughts about X. I'm going to stop having thoughts

X. I'm going to stop having thoughts altogether for a while. I'm just going

altogether for a while. I'm just going to sit in no try it. It doesn't work at

to sit in no try it. It doesn't work at all. And so this is a very deep point

all. And so this is a very deep point once we see it about who we are. And

once we see it about who we are. And just to say in terms like paradic shift

just to say in terms like paradic shift if we were all walking around with

if we were all walking around with t-shirts that said I am not my thoughts

t-shirts that said I am not my thoughts and feelings I have them that would be a

and feelings I have them that would be a major shift like just starting to

major shift like just starting to realize that I am not those things it

realize that I am not those things it has them is itself this beginning of the

has them is itself this beginning of the wisdom and that's why I'm saying though

wisdom and that's why I'm saying though a breakthrough in preferences and a

a breakthrough in preferences and a breakthrough in will and then a

breakthrough in will and then a breakthrough in coordination for

breakthrough in coordination for collective action is some of the crucial

collective action is some of the crucial things for addressing the wicked

things for addressing the wicked problems we have because they are an

problems we have because they are an aspect of corrupted preferences. Now,

aspect of corrupted preferences. Now, it's true that then the capitalist

it's true that then the capitalist system we're in feed those aspects

system we're in feed those aspects because we've created a system that

because we've created a system that rewards short a short-term feedback

rewards short a short-term feedback mechanism of reward resourcing which is

mechanism of reward resourcing which is based on profit and so on. And so, it's

based on profit and so on. And so, it's very difficult to get out of it. You

very difficult to get out of it. You know, to give one last anecdote about

know, to give one last anecdote about that, this guy called Edgar Shine who

that, this guy called Edgar Shine who was like the beginning like the pioneer

was like the beginning like the pioneer of corporate culture studies. He's at

of corporate culture studies. He's at MIT. I think he's passed away but I

MIT. I think he's passed away but I remember he was reading his book and

remember he was reading his book and there was one anecdote that really show

there was one anecdote that really show I think it was General Foods one of

I think it was General Foods one of these huge conglomerates in the US for

these huge conglomerates in the US for food and there's a point in like the

food and there's a point in like the late '7s early 80s they're like our

late '7s early 80s they're like our mission statement is like healthy food

mission statement is like healthy food for healthy people or something like

for healthy people or something like this and they get really troubled

this and they get really troubled because they see that stuff with a lot

because they see that stuff with a lot of sugar and other stuff is getting to

of sugar and other stuff is getting to sell more and they actually like a board

sell more and they actually like a board level or really high level discussion

level or really high level discussion like okay this is not what we stand for

like okay this is not what we stand for these are not our values we are going to

these are not our values we are going to go out and really market for like

go out and really market for like healthy food and explain And basically

healthy food and explain And basically it's a disaster. Like they're like they

it's a disaster. Like they're like they come back like man we can just not

come back like man we can just not persuade consumers to eat this healthy

persuade consumers to eat this healthy stuff. It's not going well. They this

stuff. It's not going well. They this moment of what are they going to do? Are

moment of what are they going to do? Are they going to stay with being profitable

they going to stay with being profitable in a way and existing as a company or

in a way and existing as a company or are they going to pursue their vision

are they going to pursue their vision their mission and they change their

their mission and they change their mission state? And the thing is the

mission state? And the thing is the thing that I joke is that the thing

thing that I joke is that the thing that's going on at the moment also is

that's going on at the moment also is that we are their mission and they

that we are their mission and they change their mission state. It's like

change their mission state. It's like pool. It's psych and scale and all these

pool. It's psych and scale and all these things. You're stuck in this whirlpool

things. You're stuck in this whirlpool and the way out of that is never going

and the way out of that is never going to be like minor things. It's going to

to be like minor things. It's going to be a major shift in both the system and

be a major shift in both the system and the inner dimension. I do want to

the inner dimension. I do want to emphasize that the two go together. It's

emphasize that the two go together. It's like we need the right and the left

like we need the right and the left hemisphere. We need systems change and

hemisphere. We need systems change and we need inner change. But often we're

we need inner change. But often we're trying to do systems change without

trying to do systems change without inner change. And it's like we're trying

inner change. And it's like we're trying to do AI governance and be like, "Oh

to do AI governance and be like, "Oh why have we got this race to

why have we got this race to bottom problem?" Oh, everyone should

bottom problem?" Oh, everyone should rationally all those rationalists in the

rationally all those rationalists in the ear. But we should don't we see that we

ear. But we should don't we see that we should do something about this. Yeah,

should do something about this. Yeah, welcome to collective action problems

welcome to collective action problems 101. The culture is how we've done that.

101. The culture is how we've done that. If I think there's a god watching me or

If I think there's a god watching me or I think that I'm actually interdependent

I think that I'm actually interdependent with you, my collectially god into

with you, my collectially god into being, wow, I'm act differently. If I

being, wow, I'm act differently. If I really see my interconnection with

really see my interconnection with others in a profound way and you know

others in a profound way and you know that's going to make a real difference

that's going to make a real difference just as the fact that we have evidence

just as the fact that we have evidence that believing in a god who's watching

that believing in a god who's watching my inner conscience all the time has

my inner conscience all the time has significant impacts on behavior.

significant impacts on behavior. Exactly. And this is why I think it's

Exactly. And this is why I think it's funny because it feels like a collective

funny because it feels like a collective action problem. I think for this a

action problem. I think for this a similar reason that it feels like the

similar reason that it feels like the hard problem of consciousness because

hard problem of consciousness because it's a category error, right? It's like

it's a category error, right? It's like you're saying it's if we're trying to

you're saying it's if we're trying to get a bunch of individuals to agree,

get a bunch of individuals to agree, then it's a problem. If you and I feel

then it's a problem. If you and I feel that deep sense of solidarity, like if

that deep sense of solidarity, like if we find a deep commonality of identity,

we find a deep commonality of identity, however fluid and contingent and

however fluid and contingent and relational that identity might be, then

relational that identity might be, then it's not a collective action problem

it's not a collective action problem because the quote unquote collective

because the quote unquote collective action of apparent selves will emerge

action of apparent selves will emerge naturally. And so this is where I'm

naturally. And so this is where I'm getting tired. I said this in the Second

getting tired. I said this in the Second Renaissance Discord server and had an

Renaissance Discord server and had an interesting conversation with some

interesting conversation with some people about it. I'm getting tired of

people about it. I'm getting tired of attending to the idea of the meta crisis

attending to the idea of the meta crisis because it seems like it's starting to

because it seems like it's starting to have the same kind of effect that people

have the same kind of effect that people trying to solve the hard problem are

trying to solve the hard problem are having. If you just don't regard mind

having. If you just don't regard mind and body as separate, it goes away. And

and body as separate, it goes away. And so rather than like first person, third

so rather than like first person, third person, interiority, objectivity kind of

person, interiority, objectivity kind of axis, I want to talk about this in terms

axis, I want to talk about this in terms of your point about faith and the way

of your point about faith and the way that I have constituted something like

that I have constituted something like faith which you know which as you make

faith which you know which as you make very clear is not a negation of

very clear is not a negation of responsibility like commitment is

responsibility like commitment is crucial in religion in all forms but

crucial in religion in all forms but there is this thing about slowing down.

there is this thing about slowing down. And I just want to say I love this

And I just want to say I love this passage in the piece that you wrote.

passage in the piece that you wrote. Let's see. This one was called, you

Let's see. This one was called, you mentioned it earlier, technology is God.

mentioned it earlier, technology is God. The one you wrote with Sylvie, where you

The one you wrote with Sylvie, where you say, "Slowing down is not about

say, "Slowing down is not about rejecting progress. Instead, it is about

rejecting progress. Instead, it is about making time for reflection. There are

making time for reflection. There are moments in life where speed is

moments in life where speed is necessary, but wisdom is about

necessary, but wisdom is about recognizing when it is time to slow

recognizing when it is time to slow down." A wiser approach to technology

down." A wiser approach to technology involves deep inquiry into the source of

involves deep inquiry into the source of our actions. When we create new

our actions. When we create new technologies, we must ask where is this

technologies, we must ask where is this coming from? Is it motivated by wisdom

coming from? Is it motivated by wisdom and compassion? Or is it driven by fear,

and compassion? Or is it driven by fear, greed, or ignorance? And then the two of

greed, or ignorance? And then the two of you give this wonderful, it's so funny

you give this wonderful, it's so funny because the tech company I quit actually

because the tech company I quit actually like the founder knew Sam Alman from

like the founder knew Sam Alman from back in the day. I think they had gone

back in the day. I think they had gone through Y Combinator together and hated

through Y Combinator together and hated him and was trying to come up with a

him and was trying to come up with a different vision for AI. And so this

different vision for AI. And so this next piece, imagine if instead of

next piece, imagine if instead of rushing into product development, the

rushing into product development, the first weeks at an incubator like Y

first weeks at an incubator like Y Combinator were spent in deep

Combinator were spent in deep reflection. What if creators were asked

reflection. What if creators were asked to meditate on their intentions to

to meditate on their intentions to explore whether their innovations were

explore whether their innovations were coming from a place of love and

coming from a place of love and compassion or from a place of ego and

compassion or from a place of ego and competition? Okay, hold that thought.

competition? Okay, hold that thought. And then like most people listening to

And then like most people listening to this are probably rushing in to this

this are probably rushing in to this question of like how do we design a an

question of like how do we design a an incubator for wise technologists. I have

incubator for wise technologists. I have these conversations with my friends all

these conversations with my friends all the time and like part of me is just

the time and like part of me is just okay you don't maybe okay so to go back

okay you don't maybe okay so to go back to being at SFI and being a cerebral

to being at SFI and being a cerebral scientific monastery exile then there's

scientific monastery exile then there's this thing that I kept that really stuck

this thing that I kept that really stuck with me about their work which was that

with me about their work which was that the larger an antill gets the fewer ants

the larger an antill gets the fewer ants are working at any time because the

are working at any time because the transport port networks inside of an ant

transport port networks inside of an ant colony do not scale at the same rate as

colony do not scale at the same rate as the number of ants. Like the population

the number of ants. Like the population density goes up. And so you literally

density goes up. And so you literally cannot maintain the same level of

cannot maintain the same level of productivity per individual in an antill

productivity per individual in an antill twice as big without some of them just

twice as big without some of them just slowing down. And that's not like the

slowing down. And that's not like the question of whether that is a decision

question of whether that is a decision on the part of the ants is a little bit

on the part of the ants is a little bit easier to see as a non-starter

easier to see as a non-starter when you realize that ant communication

when you realize that ant communication is moderated through pheromone trails.

is moderated through pheromone trails. And it looks to us with human eyes like

And it looks to us with human eyes like that down there in ant world, they're

that down there in ant world, they're basically just following these prompts.

basically just following these prompts. And it's like harder to see how the ways

And it's like harder to see how the ways the ways that our own behavior is

the ways that our own behavior is constrained has to do with the downward

constrained has to do with the downward causal pressure of our media diets and

causal pressure of our media diets and of the aggregors that we allow to

of the aggregors that we allow to possess us and all of this stuff or like

possess us and all of this stuff or like capillaries. Blood flows slower through

capillaries. Blood flows slower through your fingertips than it does through

your fingertips than it does through your neck. Because as the tube gets

your neck. Because as the tube gets smaller and smaller, the very distal

smaller and smaller, the very distal ends of your circulatory system are

ends of your circulatory system are non-pulsatile flow. It's not going

non-pulsatile flow. It's not going through in these big spurts. And that's

through in these big spurts. And that's a that's again that's a property of the

a that's again that's a property of the scaling of the network itself. And like

scaling of the network itself. And like Brian Arthur made this point that we

Brian Arthur made this point that we need and Hazel Henderson wrote about the

need and Hazel Henderson wrote about the importance of redistributing economic

importance of redistributing economic wealth production through the taxation

wealth production through the taxation on highfrequency automated

on highfrequency automated microtransactions.

microtransactions. And I'll link to a cool piece Bill

And I'll link to a cool piece Bill Thompson wrote about Brian Arthur's

Thompson wrote about Brian Arthur's piece on this in McKenzie in 2011 and

piece on this in McKenzie in 2011 and how the basically if you think about the

how the basically if you think about the increasing scale of the global economy,

increasing scale of the global economy, its increasing need to be automated

its increasing need to be automated again as the channel that regulates all

again as the channel that regulates all of this, coordinates all of this planet

of this, coordinates all of this planet scale activity, then at some point it

scale activity, then at some point it does need little hearts pumping in it

does need little hearts pumping in it everywhere.

everywhere. and designing that is at a scale beyond

and designing that is at a scale beyond our comprehension. And we can come up

our comprehension. And we can come up with ideas, but then we immediately get

with ideas, but then we immediately get into this collective action problem of

into this collective action problem of how do we get people to accept our ideas

how do we get people to accept our ideas or how do we push the ideas out into

or how do we push the ideas out into this massive communications network. And

this massive communications network. And for me again, and I don't want to sound

for me again, and I don't want to sound like an apologist for accelerationism

like an apologist for accelerationism here, but when Bill Thompson says evil

here, but when Bill Thompson says evil is the enunciation of the next level of

is the enunciation of the next level of order, and when he's talking about the

order, and when he's talking about the karmic dynamics of affirmation through

karmic dynamics of affirmation through negation, and how so much of this is

negation, and how so much of this is unconscious to us, then this is where

unconscious to us, then this is where sitting here watching

sitting here watching the global economy spin out of control

the global economy spin out of control and all of this crazy go down, I

and all of this crazy go down, I feel like I am being naturally called to

feel like I am being naturally called to faith like again like this thing about

faith like again like this thing about meditation is not something you do right

meditation is not something you do right like you prepare the conditions for

like you prepare the conditions for awakening you can go stand on a hill and

awakening you can go stand on a hill and try to get hit by lightning but and so

try to get hit by lightning but and so again we're chasing each other around

again we're chasing each other around these causal loops here but I think

these causal loops here but I think probably a lot of people who are

probably a lot of people who are concerned about this stuff and care

concerned about this stuff and care about social transformation and the need

about social transformation and the need to promote wisdom in the world are

to promote wisdom in the world are starting from a set of assumptions that

starting from a set of assumptions that makes it our responsibility somehow

makes it our responsibility somehow where it's actually happening at

where it's actually happening at multiple different scales. You are part

multiple different scales. You are part of this thing. Making that more visible

of this thing. Making that more visible to us is like part of the shift of

to us is like part of the shift of perspective that allows us to relax

perspective that allows us to relax around this in the way that Josh Dalio

around this in the way that Josh Dalio was talking about like this question of

was talking about like this question of what can you do seems to always come

what can you do seems to always come back to what are you doing about it you

back to what are you doing about it you the individual when it's that's not the

the individual when it's that's not the nature of the problem and to even call

nature of the problem and to even call it a problem is to bely by a preference

it a problem is to bely by a preference maybe for seeing good and evil as

maybe for seeing good and evil as somehow like distinct from each other.

somehow like distinct from each other. The last thing I'll say about this

The last thing I'll say about this because you you brought up not

because you you brought up not discovering our preferences and ticknot

discovering our preferences and ticknot han and I I it just reminded me of this

han and I I it just reminded me of this story. So this is like me making a kind

story. So this is like me making a kind of consiliatory gesture after all of

of consiliatory gesture after all of that that one of the most important

that that one of the most important experiences I had in college was in

experiences I had in college was in chemistry 2 and I hated that class and I

chemistry 2 and I hated that class and I hated that teacher. It was a huge 900

hated that teacher. It was a huge 900 person lecture hall. The guy leading the

person lecture hall. The guy leading the course thought he was hilarious and he

course thought he was hilarious and he was utterly boring and could not make

was utterly boring and could not make the material interesting to save his

the material interesting to save his life. and you'd look around and half the

life. and you'd look around and half the people in the class were doing the

people in the class were doing the crossword. Now it would be everybody's

crossword. Now it would be everybody's on their phone. But like one day I

on their phone. But like one day I looked at the front row of the class and

looked at the front row of the class and there was a student there at a time when

there was a student there at a time when laptops in class were still relatively

laptops in class were still relatively rare. He was sitting there like perched

rare. He was sitting there like perched on the edge of his seat just hanging on

on the edge of his seat just hanging on every word that this guy had to say. And

every word that this guy had to say. And I was like if he can do it, I can do it.

I was like if he can do it, I can do it. There's something interesting here. I

There's something interesting here. I may not see it like I and this is again

may not see it like I and this is again that sort of non-duality of the

that sort of non-duality of the discovery or creation of preference.

discovery or creation of preference. That was the moment that my neoccortical

That was the moment that my neoccortical functions came online and I was like if

functions came online and I was like if it turns out that what is interesting is

it turns out that what is interesting is purely a matter of perspective then I

purely a matter of perspective then I can operationalize

can operationalize my attention to make anything

my attention to make anything interesting. If this guy can find Chem 2

interesting. If this guy can find Chem 2 interesting, then I can find Chem 2

interesting, then I can find Chem 2 interesting. And if I can find Chem 2

interesting. And if I can find Chem 2 interesting, literally anything will

interesting, literally anything will disclose wonders if you attend to it in

disclose wonders if you attend to it in the right way. And so whether you want

the right way. And so whether you want to talk about preference as created or

to talk about preference as created or like created implies will in some sense.

like created implies will in some sense. It implies for tick not Yeah. Yeah. subt

It implies for tick not Yeah. Yeah. subt is a cultivation it there's a subtlety

is a cultivation it there's a subtlety right like about it it's not neither

right like about it it's not neither like I can engineer it but I can

like I can engineer it but I can cultivate a garden I can invite certain

cultivate a garden I can invite certain things in and disinvite other things

things in and disinvite other things like in in Buddhism they talk about

like in in Buddhism they talk about these seeds you have unh wholesome seeds

these seeds you have unh wholesome seeds and wholesome seeds like a wholesome

and wholesome seeds like a wholesome would be anger or greed wholesome seed

would be anger or greed wholesome seed would be love or compassion and these

would be love or compassion and these things manifest a bit of their own will

things manifest a bit of their own will in your mind but somehow and this is a

in your mind but somehow and this is a much more subtle question now about what

much more subtle question now about what is doing the doing here who's having But

is doing the doing here who's having But we could get into that. But the thing is

we could get into that. But the thing is there's some way you can invite the unh

there's some way you can invite the unh wholesome seeds to return to the

wholesome seeds to return to the storehouse and the wholesome seeds to

storehouse and the wholesome seeds to manifest. I just want to come back to

manifest. I just want to come back to you say just in terms of the arc we're

you say just in terms of the arc we're going. So one is like for me even

going. So one is like for me even personally but maybe for listeners say

personally but maybe for listeners say whether at a personal level you're like

whether at a personal level you're like okay how can I have a really joyful

okay how can I have a really joyful flash why am I not super happy satisfied

flash why am I not super happy satisfied in the piece but also more at a

in the piece but also more at a collective level I imagine whether

collective level I imagine whether you're worried about existential risk

you're worried about existential risk from AI or the possibilities even of

from AI or the possibilities even of using AI in a world where even without

using AI in a world where even without us all dying you know how will it be

us all dying you know how will it be used in the climate situation ecological

used in the climate situation ecological situation the thesis was like oh these

situation the thesis was like oh these are real challenges and they are paths

are real challenges and they are paths forward and they require of was changed

forward and they require of was changed in these multiple dimensions and

in these multiple dimensions and understanding those dimensions of at

understanding those dimensions of at least technology systems and the inner

least technology systems and the inner and distinguishing maybe the personal

and distinguishing maybe the personal inner and the cultural is really

inner and the cultural is really valuable like the integral quadrants and

valuable like the integral quadrants and the thesis of that we need a focus which

the thesis of that we need a focus which is not the case in the world today on

is not the case in the world today on the inner now I'd wag your bet right now

the inner now I'd wag your bet right now that if we went and counted all the

that if we went and counted all the philanthropic spending in the US right

philanthropic spending in the US right now on making the world better or in the

now on making the world better or in the world today a fraction of maybe even a

world today a fraction of maybe even a percent is on the kind of inner

percent is on the kind of inner dimension if we also exclude the retreat

dimension if we also exclude the retreat centers but that's a priority now the

centers but that's a priority now the next question would be Rufus and Michael

next question would be Rufus and Michael how does that occur and and the

how does that occur and and the background I think two things is

background I think two things is religion and spirituality like these

religion and spirituality like these psycho technologies that we have

psycho technologies that we have invented in human history and are those

invented in human history and are those and I even want to say that like

and I even want to say that like modernity and science at least in the

modernity and science at least in the form of scientism is kind of religion

form of scientism is kind of religion it's a worldview you don't really

it's a worldview you don't really question it has obvious limitations mind

question it has obvious limitations mind body problem anyone you know and other

body problem anyone you know and other ones

ones But it's taken as a kind of faith and

But it's taken as a kind of faith and things that outside his remit, don't

things that outside his remit, don't exist, not allowed to be talked about.

exist, not allowed to be talked about. But the thing I'm just trying to say is

But the thing I'm just trying to say is we're interested then in religion and

we're interested then in religion and spirituality in the sense now religion

spirituality in the sense now religion is something of a dirty word. So we have

is something of a dirty word. So we have to recover religion from the taint of

to recover religion from the taint of the inquisition and dogmatism and all

the inquisition and dogmatism and all the things at least in the west that is

the things at least in the west that is associated sometimes with. But the fact

associated sometimes with. But the fact is that is the psycho technology and

is that is the psycho technology and it's key to our personal flourishing and

it's key to our personal flourishing and this collective aspect of things and

this collective aspect of things and it's related even to your question of

it's related even to your question of how we the going slower and the mult

how we the going slower and the mult aspects but essentially this point of

aspects but essentially this point of okay what are the religions or of

okay what are the religions or of tomorrow and I want to make one comment

tomorrow and I want to make one comment here also because it relates it slowly

here also because it relates it slowly down what happens in your capillary

down what happens in your capillary analogy all these things. I I actually

analogy all these things. I I actually pull this up with Jim Ra because what

pull this up with Jim Ra because what happened at the end of the Roman Empire?

happened at the end of the Roman Empire? So we sort of look at when paradigms or

So we sort of look at when paradigms or systems ended and we had the rise of

systems ended and we had the rise of Christianity. Christianity we have all

Christianity. Christianity we have all the evidence. I mean so we certainly

the evidence. I mean so we certainly know in the dark ages there was less

know in the dark ages there was less economic activity. There was social

economic activity. There was social economic trade networks got simpler. But

economic trade networks got simpler. But the thing about Christianity was it

the thing about Christianity was it wasn't about power and empire right? It

wasn't about power and empire right? It was a return to the sacred. It was a

was a return to the sacred. It was a return to the inner dimension. Now, I'm

return to the inner dimension. Now, I'm not saying we won there, but I think

not saying we won there, but I think we're in a moment where the indis

we're in a moment where the indis analogy of modernity is to something

analogy of modernity is to something like the Roman Empire. It's incredibly

like the Roman Empire. It's incredibly expansive,

expansive, growthoriented, imperial in a way. And

growthoriented, imperial in a way. And we're at a moment when I make this

we're at a moment when I make this analogy, this return to the sacred,

analogy, this return to the sacred, there was a kind of calming down. Now,

there was a kind of calming down. Now, I'm not there many things you could

I'm not there many things you could critique about Christianity, but it's

critique about Christianity, but it's and it offered something that the other

and it offered something that the other system couldn't. And this is the thing

system couldn't. And this is the thing also. It's actually in Eio Wilson's book

also. It's actually in Eio Wilson's book again, actually, Dar Cathedral. I can't

again, actually, Dar Cathedral. I can't remember the name of the Roman he

remember the name of the Roman he describes, but it's a true story. We

describes, but it's a true story. We know it from the story of martyrs

know it from the story of martyrs actually afterwards. But he's a young

actually afterwards. But he's a young rich Roman. You can imagine it today,

rich Roman. You can imagine it today, young rich man's day or woman. And he's

young rich man's day or woman. And he's going to the he's going to the circus

going to the he's going to the circus for entertainment. He's bored. He's got

for entertainment. He's bored. He's got everything he could have in life in

everything he could have in life in ancient Rome. And he goes to the circus

ancient Rome. And he goes to the circus one day and he sees Christians being

one day and he sees Christians being torn apart by lions. And he has this

torn apart by lions. And he has this epiphany because he watches them and

epiphany because he watches them and they are calm. They are at peace as the

they are calm. They are at peace as the lion's comfort and he realizes that they

lion's comfort and he realizes that they have something that he will never have

have something that he will never have out of his life. They have they are

out of his life. They have they are touching something that all of the nice

touching something that all of the nice dinners all of the villus maximus will

dinners all of the villus maximus will won't bring and it is the sacred of a

won't bring and it is the sacred of a kind. We could have our opinion on

kind. We could have our opinion on Christianity, but there was something I

Christianity, but there was something I think probably in most great religions

think probably in most great religions where they touched something very real

where they touched something very real at the heart of them. And that's what he

at the heart of them. And that's what he saw in some of those people's eyes that

saw in some of those people's eyes that we could see them as selfdeceiving or

we could see them as selfdeceiving or something. But I think probably for

something. But I think probably for people that is something that we can

people that is something that we can touch that is beyond ourselves and I

touch that is beyond ourselves and I would say is imminent but is also

would say is imminent but is also practical and is not just but is that

practical and is not just but is that can be integrated. I mean I'd say here

can be integrated. I mean I'd say here again I want to shout out the great

again I want to shout out the great thinkers of the second renaissance for

thinkers of the second renaissance for me. McGillchrist is one who does this

me. McGillchrist is one who does this incredible job of speaking from the

incredible job of speaking from the world of reason but talking about what

world of reason but talking about what transcends it or what complements it

transcends it or what complements it that completely the matter with the you

that completely the matter with the you know what he even reconstructs the whole

know what he even reconstructs the whole like theory of truth pragmatism and so

like theory of truth pragmatism and so on but really he has the value he has it

on but really he has the value he has it all there and actually Christopher

all there and actually Christopher Alexander who again has all of this

Alexander who again has all of this reason all of this explanation

reason all of this explanation concretely of how to build building what

concretely of how to build building what is special about this wall behind me why

is special about this wall behind me why is it beautiful to us and whole to us in

is it beautiful to us and whole to us in a way that this ceiling up there which

a way that this ceiling up there which is just plaster board is not and he has

is just plaster board is not and he has a reason he has a whole bunch of

a reason he has a whole bunch of analysis very deep who's a mathematician

analysis very deep who's a mathematician origally at Cambridge and in his final

origally at Cambridge and in his final volume of the nature he says but I've

volume of the nature he says but I've also got to come clean that there's

also got to come clean that there's something transcendent that is beyond

something transcendent that is beyond words that you touch and that you can

words that you touch and that you can feel when you feel wholeness and so one

feel when you feel wholeness and so one of the things I'm saying here is I don't

of the things I'm saying here is I don't want to say the solution but one of the

want to say the solution but one of the paths forward through the metacar crisis

paths forward through the metacar crisis but it's also a catalyst the metacris

but it's also a catalyst the metacris for us is to recover I I mean go back

for us is to recover I I mean go back but rediscover and renew the sacred and

but rediscover and renew the sacred and the religious in our life in a way that

the religious in our life in a way that is not oppressive and dogmatic and that

is not oppressive and dogmatic and that there's a piece which you referenced at

there's a piece which you referenced at the beginning about what are these

the beginning about what are these qualities at least kind of high level

qualities at least kind of high level qualities of religions of the future we

qualities of religions of the future we might look to and we've we've seen some

might look to and we've we've seen some of them even in things like quakerism

of them even in things like quakerism maybe and there are ways that this

maybe and there are ways that this intersects with technology and I think

intersects with technology and I think this is probably I want to talk a bit

this is probably I want to talk a bit about AI of like how sad it is that We

about AI of like how sad it is that We want to make a god of this. Not that we

want to make a god of this. Not that we want to make gods of ourselves, but it's

want to make gods of ourselves, but it's in a funny way. It's like what we're

in a funny way. It's like what we're doing in Christianity when we other it

doing in Christianity when we other it into God rather. You know, I was reading

into God rather. You know, I was reading about Quakerism just last night because

about Quakerism just last night because Quakers are very interested. The big

Quakers are very interested. The big thing for them was the second coming was

thing for them was the second coming was not external. It was internal. In

not external. It was internal. In Quakerism, I am entering the kingdom of

Quakerism, I am entering the kingdom of heaven right now. that this aspect that

heaven right now. that this aspect that we want to abdicate to some

we want to abdicate to some technological god outside of ourselves.

technological god outside of ourselves. our own responsibility

our own responsibility and opportunity to be part of not to be

and opportunity to be part of not to be the dominant because we are part of this

the dominant because we are part of this incredible unfolding that is the world

incredible unfolding that is the world that is the living but to abdicate this

that is the living but to abdicate this or in the other pessimistic sense to see

or in the other pessimistic sense to see us as so corrupt in this question

us as so corrupt in this question classic Christian mythos that also the

classic Christian mythos that also the effect of acceleration is some problem

effect of acceleration is some problem seem to be in we're so corrupt and

seem to be in we're so corrupt and hopeless that we only could hope to be

hopeless that we only could hope to be taken over by our AI overlords

taken over by our AI overlords No, both of those are roads to ruin and

No, both of those are roads to ruin and we need to take on our responsibility of

we need to take on our responsibility of wisdom and our responsibility to forge

wisdom and our responsibility to forge new visions and to go back as the Roman

new visions and to go back as the Roman law of power fell that's when the

law of power fell that's when the Christianity rose and this moment has

Christianity rose and this moment has modernity force something some things

modernity force something some things plural I think are going to renew and we

plural I think are going to renew and we see that definitely I just want to say

see that definitely I just want to say that again as you make clear in this

that again as you make clear in this piece getting over our allergy to

piece getting over our allergy to religion you say the psycho technologies

religion you say the psycho technologies are often less directly relevant for the

are often less directly relevant for the relleio aspect and may not be used that

relleio aspect and may not be used that much by the majority of participants.

much by the majority of participants. However, perhaps could make a strong

However, perhaps could make a strong case that these are important to key

case that these are important to key participants eg leaders where these can

participants eg leaders where these can ensure higher quality leadership. Now

ensure higher quality leadership. Now without that's I mean like meditation

without that's I mean like meditation you might have people in Christianity or

you might have people in Christianity or Buddhism who are deeply contemplating

Buddhism who are deeply contemplating that's not that everyone is doing so

that's not that everyone is doing so that said I think that spread through

that said I think that spread through your population you'd have something

your population you'd have something very different and you have a society

very different and you have a society maybe infused with those practices would

maybe infused with those practices would look very different but I was just

look very different but I was just trying to say I'm not claiming that

trying to say I'm not claiming that everyone is attend attaining our hatchet

everyone is attend attaining our hatchet in a Buddhist society but yeah yeah

in a Buddhist society but yeah yeah exactly and it's funny because I think

exactly and it's funny because I think something that's implied I think in a

something that's implied I think in a way I might be misleading people by

way I might be misleading people by suggesting with the question how does

suggesting with the question how does wisdom keep pace with power that it does

wisdom keep pace with power that it does and that or rather that like when we're

and that or rather that like when we're talking about power again we're talking

talking about power again we're talking about something that first of all can be

about something that first of all can be produced relatively rapidly and wisdom

produced relatively rapidly and wisdom takes time but we're also talking about

takes time but we're also talking about I I think there's a conflation of scale

I I think there's a conflation of scale here like that the idea that Josh Dalio

here like that the idea that Josh Dalio put forward I I argued this in a one to

put forward I I argued this in a one to one with Jamie Cercio who's been on the

one with Jamie Cercio who's been on the show because Josh Dalio said one can

show because Josh Dalio said one can only act on the scale at which one

only act on the scale at which one exists and Jaime said there's a lot to

exists and Jaime said there's a lot to that idea however we just saw a complete

that idea however we just saw a complete idiot get up on a podium and tank the

idiot get up on a podium and tank the world economy with a single announcement

world economy with a single announcement The question to me is that paradox of

The question to me is that paradox of power implied in that to which I replied

power implied in that to which I replied it's still fairly obvious that none of

it's still fairly obvious that none of us can be entirely sure what the

us can be entirely sure what the consequences of his intervention will

consequences of his intervention will actually be. And he sent me a link from

actually be. And he sent me a link from Game of Thrones where Varys tells Tyrion

Game of Thrones where Varys tells Tyrion Lannister a riddle about power and says

Lannister a riddle about power and says power resides where people believe it

power resides where people believe it resides and a very small man can cast a

resides and a very small man can cast a very large shadow. To which I quoted V

very large shadow. To which I quoted V for Vendetta, ideas are bulletproof. The

for Vendetta, ideas are bulletproof. The power is in the agregoric shadow of the

power is in the agregoric shadow of the collective agency of society projected

collective agency of society projected onto our leaders. It's like money. It's

onto our leaders. It's like money. It's like the like the whole thing about

like the like the whole thing about people are always saying Bitcoin made it

people are always saying Bitcoin made it obvious to substantially more people

obvious to substantially more people that value is legible values. Again,

that value is legible values. Again, it's people's concordant on a manifold

it's people's concordant on a manifold of attention.

of attention. It's just hard to do. Bitcoin is rare.

It's just hard to do. Bitcoin is rare. It's very hard to invent things where

It's very hard to invent things where people reach coordination on something

people reach coordination on something like that. But that is ways we solve new

like that. But that is ways we solve new kinds of problems and it to go to the

kinds of problems and it to go to the question of that is there yeah in this

question of that is there yeah in this question of power and wisdom I wanted to

question of power and wisdom I wanted to emphasize in the Roman Empire case is

emphasize in the Roman Empire case is when something comes too big the system

when something comes too big the system rotted out to some extent from within.

rotted out to some extent from within. We see that now capitalism in a sense

We see that now capitalism in a sense has become quite corrupt not in the

has become quite corrupt not in the direct sense that people are paid money

direct sense that people are paid money but there's a sort of corruption in a

but there's a sort of corruption in a very deep sense that for example does

very deep sense that for example does anyone think that the people generating

anyone think that the people generating the most value in this world are getting

the most value in this world are getting paid the most money no even the most

paid the most money no even the most obvious thing and we're getting a bit

obvious thing and we're getting a bit technical and I got this would go off to

technical and I got this would go off to the opra revolution but but the the

the opra revolution but but the the arrival of the information economy was

arrival of the information economy was the end of markets in a very fundamental

the end of markets in a very fundamental sense markets work because price and

sense markets work because price and value have some relationship I mean

value have some relationship I mean that's what markets are supposed to do

that's what markets are supposed to do and send a signal. But in information

and send a signal. But in information economy because of all the violations I

economy because of all the violations I have infinite supply once I've got the

have infinite supply once I've got the first copy roughly like I have unlimited

first copy roughly like I have unlimited supply because I have non-convex

supply because I have non-convex production functions in technical

production functions in technical economic jargon because I don't have

economic jargon because I don't have price taking I have monopolies if I have

price taking I have monopolies if I have copyright and so on. All of the things

that underpin a market working and the first law the first fundamental welfare

first law the first fundamental welfare theorem in economics go away. And in

theorem in economics go away. And in fact, we see like lots of goods that

fact, we see like lots of goods that have zero price. They're open source

have zero price. They're open source software. We are in a time between

software. We are in a time between worlds. Like in that sense, like value

worlds. Like in that sense, like value and price have separated. There is a

and price have separated. There is a great corruption of foot in our world

great corruption of foot in our world because you can see the things that are

because you can see the things that are highly valuable in a true sense of value

highly valuable in a true sense of value but are not very much related to price

but are not very much related to price any. And there's a deep corruption our

any. And there's a deep corruption our system. Now, there's two ways. is when a

system. Now, there's two ways. is when a wisdom gap gets too big. Wisdom can get

wisdom gap gets too big. Wisdom can get a lot bigger or power I would prefer to

a lot bigger or power I would prefer to call it force can get smaller. Now, as I

call it force can get smaller. Now, as I said in previous times, the most

said in previous times, the most gregious analogy I could think of was

gregious analogy I could think of was the end of the Roman Empire when force

the end of the Roman Empire when force toppled over and you had this collapse

toppled over and you had this collapse back into a kind of wisdomoriented

back into a kind of wisdomoriented tradition and a much smaller system for

tradition and a much smaller system for a period. Now, at the moment, I don't

a period. Now, at the moment, I don't know the way it's going. We have to be

know the way it's going. We have to be honest that we don't see wisdom catching

honest that we don't see wisdom catching up fast enough to force and we see

up fast enough to force and we see systems which are teetering on the edge

systems which are teetering on the edge of major breakdown and the biggest hope

of major breakdown and the biggest hope I have at the moment is the climate

I have at the moment is the climate crisis will get worse enough fast enough

crisis will get worse enough fast enough but not too bad that it will

but not too bad that it will significantly technological

significantly technological progress to a point when we are can be

progress to a point when we are can be more rational even in a deep sense and

more rational even in a deep sense and wise about it that's not a given but I'm

wise about it that's not a given but I'm just trying to say that it's a weird

just trying to say that it's a weird world where one's hoping for is external

world where one's hoping for is external slowdown but that's what has happened in

slowdown but that's what has happened in past systems when they grow past their

past systems when they grow past their point again it happens the Catholic

point again it happens the Catholic church topples over out of corruption at

church topples over out of corruption at the end of its age it becomes selling

the end of its age it becomes selling indulgences and all of these things and

indulgences and all of these things and that's what we're doing at the moment

that's what we're doing at the moment and I feel that one of the things that's

and I feel that one of the things that's also powerful and you mentioned at the

also powerful and you mentioned at the very beginning before we really started

very beginning before we really started recording but it was about sense making

recording but it was about sense making like I'm making notes and things one of

like I'm making notes and things one of the things that is powerful is when we

the things that is powerful is when we get an understanding Now no worldview is

get an understanding Now no worldview is correct but when we have certain gest

correct but when we have certain gest shifts that makes the sense of what's

shifts that makes the sense of what's going on. So for example, for me at

going on. So for example, for me at least, once we have this understanding

least, once we have this understanding of the unfolding crisis and the idea of

of the unfolding crisis and the idea of paradigms, like we're in a moment of

paradigms, like we're in a moment of massive cultural tension between core

massive cultural tension between core paradigms. And the analogy again, it's

paradigms. And the analogy again, it's like just history does rhyme. Like who

like just history does rhyme. Like who knows their counterreformation history?

knows their counterreformation history? I'm here in France. There were wars of

I'm here in France. There were wars of religion for 30 years over

religion for 30 years over Protestantism. I'm living in a farmhouse

Protestantism. I'm living in a farmhouse where there is a Protestant chapel that

where there is a Protestant chapel that became a pioneer for pigeons. Why?

became a pioneer for pigeons. Why? Because the Protestants were expelled

Because the Protestants were expelled after the revocation of the edict of

after the revocation of the edict of non. And right now we're in a world of

non. And right now we're in a world of like counterreformationist, what I would

like counterreformationist, what I would call counter postmodernist or whatever

call counter postmodernist or whatever comes after it. They're against what

comes after it. They're against what could be coming. And so these things

could be coming. And so these things then make a lot of sense what's going

then make a lot of sense what's going on. So we can fixate on the travel. What

on. So we can fixate on the travel. What I also want to leave with is as we take

I also want to leave with is as we take on these kind of tools of sense making

on these kind of tools of sense making these worldviews and play with them they

these worldviews and play with them they do allow us to have a huge contextual

do allow us to have a huge contextual understanding I feel where you can at

understanding I feel where you can at least oh that's what's going on and you

least oh that's what's going on and you can see the plate tectonics the metaphor

can see the plate tectonics the metaphor of like it makes no sense where all the

of like it makes no sense where all the volcanoes are happening and once you see

volcanoes are happening and once you see plates under the ocean rubbing against

plates under the ocean rubbing against each other we can see where a lot of the

each other we can see where a lot of the friction is going to happen. So right

friction is going to happen. So right now we have this alliance of

now we have this alliance of premodernists, people who never even got

premodernists, people who never even got into modernity for example in the US and

into modernity for example in the US and modernists against basically

modernists against basically postmodernists and others. And so we

postmodernists and others. And so we have a huge two or three-way culture war

have a huge two or three-way culture war which is therefore why you get in those

which is therefore why you get in those moments you get a lot of

moments you get a lot of counterreformationists. you get Jordan

counterreformationists. you get Jordan Peterson going off the deep end because

Peterson going off the deep end because he's triggered about pronouns and this

he's triggered about pronouns and this is equivalent to Marxist takeover of

is equivalent to Marxist takeover of thought um and also groing the culture

thought um and also groing the culture war that the post-bodnists have been

war that the post-bodnists have been waging very cleverly for 40 50 years

waging very cleverly for 40 50 years they gave up on the systems they

they gave up on the systems they realized if they took the culture first

realized if they took the culture first then they would get the systems later so

then they would get the systems later so we are in a rocky time in that regard

we are in a rocky time in that regard but I'm just saying that it then allows

but I'm just saying that it then allows us to act kind of ourselves skillfully

us to act kind of ourselves skillfully through it the biggest issue that we

through it the biggest issue that we have is I still think it's that there

have is I still think it's that there are the mad men and women running around

are the mad men and women running around saying let's go even faster. The train

saying let's go even faster. The train is out of control. The thing to do is

is out of control. The thing to do is pile more coal into the boiler and race

pile more coal into the boiler and race towards we'll jump the precipice.

towards we'll jump the precipice. There's no way to slow down. And the

There's no way to slow down. And the biggest thing I want to say to that just

biggest thing I want to say to that just to end on this thing is that is creating

to end on this thing is that is creating a story that's not true. If we all

a story that's not true. If we all decide tomorrow we wanted to pause AI

decide tomorrow we wanted to pause AI research, we could. is not a question.

research, we could. is not a question. People constantly conflate the how with

People constantly conflate the how with the preferences and it's very important.

the preferences and it's very important. We know we could do all kinds of things

We know we could do all kinds of things together. We saw co we shut down whole

together. We saw co we shut down whole economies for weeks on end. We can do

economies for weeks on end. We can do incredible things as humanity and as

incredible things as humanity and as part of the biosphere, but we have to

part of the biosphere, but we have to choose to do so. And part of that is

choose to do so. And part of that is realizing that we are powerful

realizing that we are powerful individually and together in a ways that

individually and together in a ways that we haven't seen yet. But I go all the

we haven't seen yet. But I go all the way back to the beginning of Bill

way back to the beginning of Bill Thompson's career. He wrote imagination

Thompson's career. He wrote imagination of an insurrection about the Irish

of an insurrection about the Irish revolution in 1916 and makes the case

revolution in 1916 and makes the case that WB Yeetsz did more than any single

that WB Yeetsz did more than any single soldier on the front lines of that

soldier on the front lines of that conflict. Yeets was criticized for not

conflict. Yeets was criticized for not joining the fight. And it's like well

joining the fight. And it's like well yeets created the mythic imagination of

yeets created the mythic imagination of the Irish people and without that shared

the Irish people and without that shared cultural framework or field there would

cultural framework or field there would have been no revolution. But then the

have been no revolution. But then the other thing you and I have been circling

other thing you and I have been circling around is the fact that as Thompson kind

around is the fact that as Thompson kind of hammers on again and again in his

of hammers on again and again in his writing on planetization that let's see

writing on planetization that let's see he he closes imaginary landscape with

he he closes imaginary landscape with the following. And he says, "In culture,

the following. And he says, "In culture, the ego is diffuse. In society, the ego

the ego is diffuse. In society, the ego became articulated and defined in the

became articulated and defined in the mystery school of death. In

mystery school of death. In civilization, the ego became discreet, a

civilization, the ego became discreet, a literally defined center with a sharply

literally defined center with a sharply defined periphery. In industrialization,

defined periphery. In industrialization, the ego became a turbulent flow, a

the ego became a turbulent flow, a chaotic attractor with the power of a

chaotic attractor with the power of a kasumo demetic, a decart, a Beethoven,

kasumo demetic, a decart, a Beethoven, and a Napoleon to break through

and a Napoleon to break through boundaries and definitions to amass the

boundaries and definitions to amass the glory and power and wealth that it felt

glory and power and wealth that it felt was its proper destiny. Now in

was its proper destiny. Now in planetization, the ego is no longer

planetization, the ego is no longer diffuse, certainly no longer articulate,

diffuse, certainly no longer articulate, unable any longer to be discreet in the

unable any longer to be discreet in the privacy of its civilized study and no

privacy of its civilized study and no longer able to expect the biosphere to

longer able to expect the biosphere to sustain the amassing of its glory and

sustain the amassing of its glory and wealth. The diiacronic flow of the ego

wealth. The diiacronic flow of the ego has come to its end. And now the

has come to its end. And now the synchronic dimensions of the spiritual

synchronic dimensions of the spiritual don is beginning to infold itself into

don is beginning to infold itself into temporal consciousness.

temporal consciousness. Multi-dimensionality begins to be

Multi-dimensionality begins to be experienced as the personal field of

experienced as the personal field of consciousness, the interrelatedness of

consciousness, the interrelatedness of all sensient beings in the innumerable

all sensient beings in the innumerable universes that are suspended from the

universes that are suspended from the tip of Buddha's hair. Lacking the

tip of Buddha's hair. Lacking the appropriate and futuristic image to

appropriate and futuristic image to imagine this so very much like a

imagine this so very much like a cultural historian, I fall back on the

cultural historian, I fall back on the past and envision the Sepharoth, the

past and envision the Sepharoth, the tree of life from the Judeaic Cabala.

tree of life from the Judeaic Cabala. But I see this flat rendering on a

But I see this flat rendering on a two-dimensional page transformed into a

two-dimensional page transformed into a multi-dimensional crystal in which the

multi-dimensional crystal in which the lattice is recursive and the ego is the

lattice is recursive and the ego is the foundation. But all of the other nodes

foundation. But all of the other nodes are part of the architecture of an

are part of the architecture of an individual but enlightened

individual but enlightened consciousness. So the point about Yeets

consciousness. So the point about Yeets is at the time it seemed like Yeets was

is at the time it seemed like Yeets was this dynamic romantic genius and like

this dynamic romantic genius and like this is like a social media influencer,

this is like a social media influencer, right? But that paradigm that is what

right? But that paradigm that is what you are saying is like what Thompson

you are saying is like what Thompson calls the sunset effect, the

calls the sunset effect, the inflammation

inflammation of a cultural order as it is

of a cultural order as it is transformed. And he used to talk about

transformed. And he used to talk about the alt-right movement as the ghost

the alt-right movement as the ghost dance of the rednecks. We're watching

dance of the rednecks. We're watching the same kind of thing. And what I see

the same kind of thing. And what I see with this idea that we are building an

with this idea that we are building an AI god, what I see with the anxiety

AI god, what I see with the anxiety around the maintenance of the scientific

around the maintenance of the scientific institution

institution as somehow separate. All of this stuff

as somehow separate. All of this stuff is like the first hour of an acid trip

is like the first hour of an acid trip where you're like, "Oh no, what have I

where you're like, "Oh no, what have I done? I'm falling apart." The funny

done? I'm falling apart." The funny thing though is that in that tension

thing though is that in that tension between the people who are hitting the

between the people who are hitting the gas and the people who are hitting the

gas and the people who are hitting the brakes, you're generating a lot of

brakes, you're generating a lot of friction. You're generating a lot of

friction. You're generating a lot of heat like you're talking about. And to a

heat like you're talking about. And to a physicist, heat does work. So the

physicist, heat does work. So the question I have, I'll leave it to you to

question I have, I'll leave it to you to close this, but like the question that I

close this, but like the question that I think Bill's asking and Kanya is asking

think Bill's asking and Kanya is asking and you and I are asking and all these

and you and I are asking and all these other people is that friction looks like

other people is that friction looks like noise to us. But to the theoretical

noise to us. But to the theoretical physicists I used to work with, there's

physicists I used to work with, there's a mathematical proof that optimally

a mathematical proof that optimally encoded information is indistinguishable

encoded information is indistinguishable from noise. We get back to faith. It's

from noise. We get back to faith. It's like, okay, this seems like really

like, okay, this seems like really violent and chaotic and senseless, but

violent and chaotic and senseless, but is that just because we have not learned

is that just because we have not learned how to make sense of what we think is

how to make sense of what we think is noise? Yeah. Have we just not worked out

noise? Yeah. Have we just not worked out how to make sense of noise? Well, I

how to make sense of noise? Well, I think there's two parts. First, I sort

think there's two parts. First, I sort of acknowledged Thompson as this just

of acknowledged Thompson as this just incredible jazz player of the second

incredible jazz player of the second renaissance of the new age and someone

renaissance of the new age and someone who is too early a little bit. And I

who is too early a little bit. And I think I want to come back to that about

think I want to come back to that about Patnik. So one thing that we can make

Patnik. So one thing that we can make confusion is like in plate tectonics

confusion is like in plate tectonics once we have plate tectonics we can see

once we have plate tectonics we can see where volcanoes and earthquakes will

where volcanoes and earthquakes will happen but we don't know when so it's

happen but we don't know when so it's hard to call the timings of things but

hard to call the timings of things but we are like the patner in earth the we

we are like the patner in earth the we can see patterns at the moment using our

can see patterns at the moment using our historical analogy and one of them that

historical analogy and one of them that is there are these cultural paradigms

is there are these cultural paradigms that are clashing and something new is

that are clashing and something new is going to be born there is an exhaustion

going to be born there is an exhaustion like the ecological boundary is the

like the ecological boundary is the death nail of endless progress in

death nail of endless progress in capitalism and that confronts capitalism

capitalism and that confronts capitalism with its kind of end or even modernity

with its kind of end or even modernity because in communism too a kind of

because in communism too a kind of material growth. So we can see patterns

material growth. So we can see patterns that tell us things right now and that

that tell us things right now and that heat. The other aspect though is we

heat. The other aspect though is we don't know the future but we can feel

don't know the future but we can feel parts of it. So one of it is the return

parts of it. So one of it is the return of religio. The one of it is a return of

of religio. The one of it is a return of the binding. a return of a way to

the binding. a return of a way to perceive value in not oppressive but

perceive value in not oppressive but like collective ways and pursue it in

like collective ways and pursue it in communion with others and the

communion with others and the collectives and for that to animate new

collectives and for that to animate new forms of governance and society. We can

forms of governance and society. We can feel those things and we don't know in

feel those things and we don't know in the light and the heat but we are in a

the light and the heat but we are in a time between worlds. We are in the

time between worlds. We are in the period of death and rebirth and it's

period of death and rebirth and it's going to potentially be very painful

going to potentially be very painful which is why we need each other. And the

which is why we need each other. And the last thing I say is like why life itself

last thing I say is like why life itself do we have these hobbs? The big thing is

do we have these hobbs? The big thing is like there's the big vision, the second

like there's the big vision, the second renaissance is all of this stuff. Then

renaissance is all of this stuff. Then there's the daytoday of like where do we

there's the daytoday of like where do we actually live together? How do we

actually live together? How do we actually experiment with and pioneer new

actually experiment with and pioneer new ways of being and doing together? How do

ways of being and doing together? How do we actually grow food and eat it? How do

we actually grow food and eat it? How do we actually create resources and

we actually create resources and generate energy and create new ways of

generate energy and create new ways of of organizing? That's also really

of organizing? That's also really crucial that we go and experiment. And I

crucial that we go and experiment. And I think those are things we can bet on in

think those are things we can bet on in the patenting that in this heat we can

the patenting that in this heat we can use it to channel our energies into this

use it to channel our energies into this kind of experimentation and creation of

kind of experimentation and creation of new forms of yeah new forms of

new forms of yeah new forms of consciousness. I might even say it's a

consciousness. I might even say it's a bit grandiose, but that is what we're

bit grandiose, but that is what we're trying to do, right? We have to find

trying to do, right? We have to find ways beyond our greed and our suffering

ways beyond our greed and our suffering to find that abundance and trust and

to find that abundance and trust and compassion that allows us to knit

compassion that allows us to knit something truly not just new but

something truly not just new but transformative because to finish it we

transformative because to finish it we do love. There is something to say it's

do love. There is something to say it's not neutral. We care about the

not neutral. We care about the biosphere. We care about each other. It

biosphere. We care about each other. It is better to not that it's wrong to have

is better to not that it's wrong to have a broken rose. A rose will always decay

a broken rose. A rose will always decay one day and become again. It's not that

one day and become again. It's not that we must preserve something as is, but we

we must preserve something as is, but we care about life on Earth. We care about

care about life on Earth. We care about the living. We care about the potential

the living. We care about the potential complexity that we carry with us and our

complexity that we carry with us and our potential for the future of the

potential for the future of the diosphere and this human race and all

diosphere and this human race and all beings. And that's something we want to

beings. And that's something we want to tend with care and wisdom. Amen. It's

tend with care and wisdom. Amen. It's good riffing with you. I got to bring

good riffing with you. I got to bring the baby. I'm I'm in trouble for thing.

the baby. I'm I'm in trouble for thing. It was amazing, Michael. Really lovely.

It was amazing, Michael. Really lovely. And I feel we should do another one.

And I feel we should do another one. interview you more. But that was great.

interview you more. But that was great. I look forward to I hope did you enjoy

I look forward to I hope did you enjoy it? Oh yeah, of course. I'm just sitting

it? Oh yeah, of course. I'm just sitting here thinking the computer slows down if

here thinking the computer slows down if it gets hot enough. Maybe maybe that

it gets hot enough. Maybe maybe that will happen. Maybe we'll just live in

will happen. Maybe we'll just live in our cozy and garden if things get too

our cozy and garden if things get too spicy around here. This has been fun,

spicy around here. This has been fun, man. I look forward to riffing with you

man. I look forward to riffing with you more. And yeah, do send Sylvie my way

more. And yeah, do send Sylvie my way when it makes sense. Oh, I didn't I want

when it makes sense. Oh, I didn't I want to do that. That would be and talk about

to do that. That would be and talk about art, which we didn't do at all today.

art, which we didn't do at all today. And ritual. That was the thing I I

And ritual. That was the thing I I didn't actually get to say but was like

didn't actually get to say but was like what are the roles of religion in the

what are the roles of religion in the broader religio sense? How do we create

broader religio sense? How do we create the ceremonies the rituals which we have

the ceremonies the rituals which we have lost for the many reason with Sylvie

lost for the many reason with Sylvie I'll switch and I'll let her

I'll switch and I'll let her technologize art and ritual and I'll

technologize art and ritual and I'll poeticize it somehow. That would be

poeticize it somehow. That would be great. I will I will send it your way.

great. I will I will send it your way. Lots of love and one day I hope to see

Lots of love and one day I hope to see you. I don't know if there's a way to

you. I don't know if there's a way to get you ever come to Europe. I will come

get you ever come to Europe. I will come to US but lots and lots of love.

to US but lots and lots of love. Likewise, man. Take care.

Likewise, man. Take care. Thanks again for listening. If you liked

Thanks again for listening. If you liked this episode, dig into the archives and

this episode, dig into the archives and learn more about the perks of membership

learn more about the perks of membership at humanssontheloop.com

at humanssontheloop.com and find your people by joining us in

and find your people by joining us in the wisdom and technology Discord server

the wisdom and technology Discord server linked in the show notes. I'm stepping

linked in the show notes. I'm stepping back for a few weeks to finish my book,

back for a few weeks to finish my book, but I have a few new Substack articles

but I have a few new Substack articles on the way on the future of human work,

on the way on the future of human work, the evolution of knowledge tools, and

the evolution of knowledge tools, and the politics of space exploration. Hang

the politics of space exploration. Hang tight and regular episodes will resume

tight and regular episodes will resume in the first week of August. Until then,

in the first week of August. Until then, take care and remember attention is our

take care and remember attention is our greatest natural resource. Or is it

greatest natural resource. Or is it imagination?

imagination? [Music]

Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube Transcript:Culture, Consciousness, and the Second Renaissance with Rufus Pollock

Video Transcript

Paste YouTube URL

Transcript Extraction Form

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube Transcript:
Culture, Consciousness, and the Second Renaissance with Rufus Pollock