This content is a discussion about the book "A Philosophy for Surviving in the 21st Century," focusing on its core ideas about navigating modern challenges, the nature of knowledge, and the importance of critical thinking and reality-based living.
Mind Map
Click to expand
Click to explore the full interactive mind map • Zoom, pan, and navigate
Good morning professor, in view of the imminent publication of your book, A Philosophy for
Surviving in the 20th Century by the Harper Collins publishing house, I can think of two questions
to inaugurate this colloquium: the first, Why this book? And the second, where can we
find it right now? Well, this one. book right now can be found from today from today
from December 12 on Amazon in the link that appears here below the screen
of the video itself there it can be found in such a way that we are in the pre-sale process
I mean the release the physical release of book and the book can then be
physically purchased on January 22 on January 22, 2025 The book will be in
shopping centers in bookstores and will be available in person to the public Today it is From this
moment it is already available for pre-sale on Amazon and there you can get the publisher the
publisher willingly has invited the people who buy this book to be able to
have three little gifts in the pre-sale three little gifts this is how the publisher has presented it so the publisher
has asked me what type of gift can I give to to my readers And I am a quite
stinging and quite irritating person, of course it is paradoxical that I can give gifts to anyone but at this
point they have convinced me, they have convinced me to give three things, in quotes, one
is a self-portrait of mine a self-portrait of mine in which I try to answer the questions
that many people have asked me over many years and that for different reasons Well,
I could not answer at the time or not It is not possible for me to answer at the time So
in a general way in this self-portrait to which people who
purchase the book in the pre-sale period will have access, as they will be able to find many curiosities
that are not seen in the videos that are usually recorded and in what is normally
said, that is, in that self-portrait. They are going to find the real person and not the
character who really speaks in the videos, there is a big difference between the real person
and the character and the other two gifts are simply two two stories two stories that
I have written, some people ask me ever yes I have written literature Eh well eh I have
written two stories two short stories and there are more writings that perhaps they will publish in such a
way that people who buy this book in pre-sale through the Amazon link
will receive these three links the self-portrait and the two stories the two the two stories the two
short stories that are already available right now now in relation to the second
question Why this book Well, this book arose because at a given moment a publisher
like Harper Collins presented me with the possibility of expose what They called my system
of thought. That is to say, what is your philosophy? They asked me to survive in the 21st century. Well,
my philosophy to survive in the 21st century is the one set out in this book in this book
over the course of 20 chapters. or 20 uh sections in which actually If someone asked me
what is uh your philosophy for surviving in the 21st century, I would tell them what is in this book,
now that is a philosophy that works for me and that can also work for other people. and and that
is the reason fundamental reason why this book was written and now it is published very well, professor
, hey, you begin the book in its first chapter with a very enigmatic title of spider or Narcissus
Who would be the spider who Narcissus Well, let's see the the spider is the one who weaves the web, that is to say,
the internet is a network, eh, commonly, when people enter the internet, they do not know that they are entering the
Roman Colosseum and that they are facing gladiators who in particular use the network. The retiario was
the Gladiator who used the network to destroy his adversary the network is a very complex world
where there are very interesting and very valuable and very positive things and there are others that are frankly
Terrible in such a way that if there is a network it is because in some way There is a spider that weaves
the web there is an arachnid which is not exactly the seductive Narcissus t Who is the Narcissus Well,
the Narcissus is the one who frequently seduces us to destroy us for some reason and that is how it usually works.
The network has many peculiarities and it makes people believe, seducing the user through
narcissism, that one is the king of Mambo, not the emperor, so the network is very dangerous,
it is a very seductive place, very seductive, like Don Juan seduces. destroy But it always has a
hidden spider, it has a hidden arachnid and This is a way of life that above
all determines survival in the 21st century, that is, practically no one who was born in these
times can do without what the Internet and the network entail. and many things take place there
that are decisive in the way of life of the human being, both for good and for bad,
we cannot ignore it. In the next chapter, you directly question us as readers,
asking ourselves if we will know how to identify the cheater because this warning in What areas the trap awaits us
the cheater well the trap awaits us all in every step we take that is to say every step
we take is to relate to impostors taures cheaters of course a thief that is to say the world
is like that eh no the world always transmits a message completely trust in one's neighbor That is to
say, solidarity, friendship, brotherhood, equality of freedom, all of that. But what
reality is lies at every step is to say, hey, try to look for a job and you will see how the
possibilities diminish enormously, hey, you will contract debts. You'll see . As he loses friends and also
money, money attracts I don't know if it's friends or enemies but it certainly attracts
impostors above all, meaning that H survive in this world without stepping on the stocks without stepping on a trap.
It's really very difficult. then the The basic objective of human education is to
teach human beings to teach men and women to survive in a world full of traps
, full of problems and full of conflicts in such a way that if education is important it
is not because it makes you Being more cultured than others but simply because it enables you, it enables you to
overcome a series of obstacles and terrible difficulties that you are going to encounter in
life and that can make you fail in life, that is to say, No, it is not a problem. losing your
wallet is a problem, losing your life is a problem Losing your mind is a problem of
entering the realm of madness, it is a problem of making a bad investment, in short, lacking
knowledge is disabling you to survive and education at this point plays an
absolutely important role so that the human being knowing the world in which you live and becoming
compatible with it so you do not fail because most of the people we live with and
who read us and listen to us are going to experience an Irreversible failure in their lives within the
next 10 years. years, this is inevitable, reaching chapter 3 of his book, he tells us that freedom
begins where we set the rules, but he warns us if you can, what does such a warning suggest?
Well, obviously, freedom goes as far as our power goes. When our power ends,
our freedom ends in such a way. way that is clear when it is said It is that my freedom reaches as far
as the freedom of the neighbor reaches that is a very euphemistic way very polite of not saying
absolutely anything because it is never clear Where the freedom of the neighbor is that is to say the
freedom of the neighbor reaches where comes the power of neighbor yy no our freedom
goes as far as our Power goes In fact the freedom we have is the organization of the power
we have when our power ends our freedom ends our freedom goes
as far as we can as far as we can impose our will and our power to
other people when it is other people who have more power than us our freedom
has completely ended then of course hey you are free to the extent that you have
the power to impose some rules when there is another who has more power than you to impose some
rules you already you are not free you are already obedient and And that's a good thing for people to know when he is
obedient and when he is free because if he catches you with the pedal changed then of course you can pay the
very expensive consequences and mistakes cost dearly not to those who commit them but to those who make them.
pays and in chapter 4 you ironically about this idea that teachers in the classrooms learn
from their students. I was your student 20 years ago and as a teacher, what could you tell us about
this statement? Well, let's see when when a teacher eh What he usually says is that I learn a lot from
my students, he must explain very well what exactly he learns from his students because of course if
a teacher tells me that he learns a lot from my students, what I immediately tell him is Well,
the part is very good. salary you receive for learning From me you should give it to me because if I am
the one who teaches you, the logical thing is that you give up your salary and give it to me since I
am the one who teaches you, then of course I come here to learn and It turns out that I am
the one who teaches you, then please sit where I am sitting, I go
to the stage and the payroll is transferred to me, of course, so one thing is to try to be equal to the
student in a totally legal sense, that is, We all have the same rights but what
cannot be done In my opinion it is losing sight of the position that the teacher has. The teacher
occupies his position as a teacher because he knows more than the student and is obliged for work and counterfactual and contractual reasons,
he is obliged to teach the student a series of knowledge,
then of course if it is that the teacher is going to work to teach and gives the class he gives it
to the student because he learns more than the student there or there is a play on words A little silly or it is necessary
to explain What this lack of knowledge of the reality in which consists It is exercised because of course
teachers are people who teach what We know that other people are willing
to learn what we teach, but of course what cannot happen is that we teachers
go to do our job and learn from our students. What do we learn
from our students? I ask. I'm not saying that we don't learn from our students, but We are going to work to
teach the students or learn from the students because by then the school should
the school or the university should hire the students To teach us
Of course there they should clarify a little what they say Aha and we continue on the
line of education You know very well that the terms pedagogy and demagogy appear together, I sense that this
has not been a coincidence, if it has not been a coincidence, could you please tell me what the reason is? Well,
let's see, pedagogy and demagogy travel together in many moments. of
history originally, as everyone knows, and this has been repeated throughout society, the pedagogue
was the one who accompanied the servant who accompanied the student, the student, the son of the rich man, the
school, no. And demagoguery consists, then, like everything else. the world SAE in deceiving people massively
and from criteria that are often very difficult to verify, demagoguery
has also always been frequently associated with democracy, in fact the Greeks already explained very
well what the democracy of the demagogy Now when we convert education into
a pedagogy whose contents are demagogic, what remains of education? That is
the big problem because, as I said before, education must prepare the human being to make it
compatible with reality and overcome the enormous difficulties. that life is going to put in front of them
because of course surviving problems of all kinds health problems economic problems
work problems eh it is something really terrible it is a constant struggle at this
point and and the human being is very alone when he has to face We always expect from the teaching centers ,
schools, secondary schools
and universities an important contribution from the point
of view of the scientific training of the person to later overcome the problems with the ones that are
found but it turns out that when we go to school Well, we We find that excursions are organized every
other day to see certain places or certain events and
where are the study hours? When we arrive at the institutes or teaching centers
On average, more or less the same thing is repeated, that is, there are fewer and fewer hours of study and more and more
hours of recreational leisure entertainment, and universities are now becoming places where
science is openly replaced by ideology, recently in a given university.
The word student by student was suppressed because they said that they were not students but that they
were students. Of course, when we come to situations of this type, they are totally organized, not when
certain words are removed from the vocabulary, because we already find proscribed words,
prohibited words, illegal words. then of course when we pronounce a
forbidden word when we write an illegal word there comes a time when we do not know
if we are defending democracy from its enemies or if we are defending our freedom from the friends
of Democracy because of course how is it possible that in educational
and scientific institutions there are words lives because this is a sign of an Orbu Eliana Conception of
knowledge and human relationships in short each era will have to face its own
problems and its own prejudices ours has many problems very well eh self-help
democracy freedom words that we can read and heard daily in the media on
social networks, very very common, however you consider them suspicious in the book What does it do? What
has led you to suspect these words what is done with them, of course, the words are
totally innocent until they are used Words lose their innocence like literature
when manipulated by human beings, that is, that is why I have said many times that literature
is incompatible with human innocence, but language is also incompatible with
human innocence, of course, words like self-help democracy and another era Freedom Freedom of course
they are words that are They lend themselves to being used in numerous contexts and for purposes that are sometimes,
in the case of Democracy, very undemocratic, in the case of self-help, completely false, and
in the case of Freedom, disturbingly fraudulent. In the first place, one cannot
speak of self-help when the Self-help comes from a person who is not us Because
self-help must be understood as someone who helps themselves But someone who helps
themselves is a complete paradox, that is, either I help another person because I have certain abilities.
or components that the other person lacks and I transfer them to them but of course self-help in itself
is an Anglo-Saxon concept that has no possibility of being translated into Spanish
maintaining the logic of fact this book is not a self-help book This is a book written against
self-help books against self-help books because self-help books,
as I have said many times, are books of self-deception, that is, preserving
self-help is keeping a person in a third place. semantic world in a complete self-deception, then
of course self-help is a very suspicious word, just as the word leader is suspicious. When I read
a text and I come across the word leader, I no longer continue reading, I am not interested because I already know
what is going to come next, no. often a self-help speech or a parabolic speech
in the sense that they tell you an anecdote, a parable from which they try to bring
a moral that is completely naive and completely sterile to make their way in
life and things of this nature then this is not a self-help book This is a book about
disillusionment it is completely different That is to say self-help is a very typical tendency of people
who think in an illustrated key in the 17th century key disillusionment is a much more useful strategy of
people that becomes compatible with reality and thinks in a baroque key that is much more
complicated, that is, disappointment is what is practiced before self-help is what is
practiced by those who have not reached Cervantes but nevertheless believe that we They translate it so that
we can understand it. No. In fact, we don't go. Everyone remembers a person who said that
we Spaniards are the only ones who cannot read Don Quixote, of course, as if he were the only one who could.
I understood in the book you define philosophy as a scam as a myth after this statement so
forceful that it can hurt some sensitivities or the meaning of life of some people Well,
apart from the anagram, philosophy is a myth, philosophy is a scam, philosophy is an eccentric way
of exercising sophistry philosophy is a discursive genre that has a lot in common
with religion it has a lot in common with ideology and has a lot in common with
sophistry in fact there is a very simple question what do philosophers talk about when they speak well
They generally talk about religion and generally talk about politics but politics reduced to
ideology in fact the contents of philosophy are basically either religion or ideology outside of
that philosophy usually remains silent and outside of that philosophy usually parasitizes on other
human activities in fact always We talk about philosophy of music philosophy of literature philosophy
of sport philosophy of religion philosophy of man philosophy of language, that is,
philosophy always Looks for a human activity on which to parasitize, that is, outside of
particular areas It seems that philosophy It does not have its own content And that when What
has had that own content has been God Zeus the nus the apiron the Perpetual Mover, that is to say, a
collection of more ghosts that no one has ever encountered from the monads of lait
to the absolute spirit of Hegel or the dasin of Heidegger or the pure substance of Espinosa or
Orwell's big brother. In short, he is the last of the relatives of all that genealogy
of ghosts that philosophy has built. Now when philosophy builds one of these
myths, naturally, there are a lot of people who They cling to it to survive as they cling
to the idea of God or as they cling to the idea of solidarity or climate change or whatever, that is
, they are ideas that are true or false, it does not matter if they are true or false.
What matters is that they work, that is, it does not matter whether God exists or does not exist, what matters is
that the idea of God or the feeling of belief in God mobilizes huge masses of human beings.
It does not matter whether the absolute spirit exists or not. nor does it matter that the dasin or monads exist or
not, what matters is that it works, that is, it does not matter whether climate change exists or not, what
matters is that it works so that certain people defend it in one direction and others
condemn it in another direction, but from the moment from the moment we create a ghost. It does not
matter whether that ghost is real or fictitious, what matters is that this ghost causes
consequences that, even though the ghost is fictitious, the consequences are real. We now start from
Romanticism and you pose a question to your readers. he tells him he asks If they are
victims of their feelings, letting themselves be carried away by them or if they are capable of dominating them, what
can a person expect from life in general when they let themselves be carried away by feelings and not
by reason? Well, anything can happen and reason can be understood. in many ways There are
many ways of reasoning there are systematic ways of reasoning and systematic ways of reasoning
there are idealistic rationalisms and materialistic rationalisms that is, idealistic rationalism
is, for example, that of a furious Orlando, that is, idealistic rationalism It is that of a
Catholic or Christian theology that designs a totally ideal idea of God because materially it does not
exist, that is to say, there are many ways of reasoning, now there are also many ways of thinking, and
there are also many ways of feeling, but the question is, you organize your life according to What ways of
reasoning realistic or idealistic ways of reasoning utopian or dystopian ways
of reasoning systematic or systematic ways of reasoning critical or uncritical of course
There are uncritical reasonings that are totally say those who do not discuss the very foundations
of their own argument but rather critically discuss the arguments of the
opposite reasoning. For example, ideologies have critical reasoning against other ideologies
but critical ACs against their own and of course we can also ask what type
of emotions develops in his life because of course the emotions in the time in which we live are
Untouchable, you cannot discuss anyone's emotions but you can discuss
someone's reasoning, that is, it is considered that emotions are above my reasons. feelings
are Untouchable my reasons are debatable That is the motto of our time well it is
a very old motto because it is the motto of all of Nietzsche's philosophy Nietzsche considers
that human emotions are above any articulation or any
rational explanation What I feel, says Nietzsche, does not have to be explained rationally from
any criterion because the rights of my feelings, says Nietzsche, are above
any rational explanation that anyone demands of me. I do not have to rationally explain
to anyone the basis of my feelings, that is. Nietzsche, which Freud would later develop, especially
basing it on another great phantasm, which is the unconscious, because the unconscious
has no more presence than Hegel's absolute spirit, Heidegger's Dasin, or
Hobes's leviathan. than Plato's de miur or all those ghosts that philosophy has
always constructed then our time and of this we must be aware our time considers that
feelings are above all rights the rights of feelings are
the supreme rights and They are above the rights of reason, that is to say that reason has
lost rights. Regarding the rights that feelings have gained, all these people who
declare themselves Defenders of the Enlightenment and of enlightened rationalism basically do not defend
the rights of reason. defend the rights of feelings that put before the rights of
rationalism, in fact, enlightened rationalism is romantic rationalism, that is, the right that
I have to impose my feelings on the feelings of others. This is basically
the foundation because when today we talk about someone's rights What we are talking about is
the rights of someone's feelings. And we are not going to deny feelings. Because life without
feelings is impossible, but what we cannot do is reduce life exclusively to feelings.
I still teach a subject called se titled thinking about literature in the future, this
subject is I am absolutely convinced of this, but
thinking about commercial law is not the same as feeling commercial law. Thinking
about liver oncology is not the same as feeling about ecology. Of course, it is not the same as feeling about liver oncology. Thinking about ecology is the same
as feeling ecology. They are completely different things.
We cannot live suppressing feelings, but we cannot live suppressing
reason either. That is to say, we have to reason about feelings and we have to feel any type
of things. That we are going to execute rationally that cannot be settled undoubtedly now, of course,
the piano is not played with feeling, eh, the piano is played with hours and years of learning and
literature is not interpreted with feeling, literature is interpreted by analyzing metrics.
theory of poetic rhetoric literature and many other issues is to say that except for that case of the
famous painter who painted with the unconscious. Well, the rest of the rest of the people who do
valuable things have to make an effort to learn them, feeling is not enough to live because neither
animals reduce life by feeling, animals are very rational, extraordinarily
rational, sometimes more rational than human beings in many aspects, but
non-human animal rationalism is given on a different scale from human rationalism
and sometimes in many aspects it is exemplary, not in vain does literature convert From a very
early age, animals became protagonists of one of the most representative literary genres
, such as Aesopian fables and parenetic literature, so there is something about the animal when
literature has blessed it from the first moment very well in the chapter. 9 you
talk to us about state and nation policy about the Power of global trade where you consider
that these concepts are heading in the 20th century Well, it is the great debate of our time
That is why we have an Inevitable appointment with him not the great debate of our time is precisely this
one about Where are we going from the point of view of globalization of the state and the economy and
money and all these aspects, man. I have always said that the rich have no ideology, the
rich have money, ideology is the emotion of the poor and naturally, well, the poor argue
about ideology, especially when they lack political power, ideology is what
people talk about people who lack political power who speaks who has political power does not waste
time with ideologies manages pacts pacts that they naturally have behind them The power of
money the 21st century in my opinion from a political, economic and global point of view is characterized
by the destruction of the modern State, that is, the modern State was established in the Renaissance
as a political configuration that surpasses medieval feudalism and that tries to
dominate both the church. On the one hand, although it may not seem like it, but the relations between the
church and state have always been conflictive, the church was the great power of the Middle Ages and is
enormously limited and delimited by The power of the State since the Renaissance but
right now a power has emerged that was always present, which was economic power,
financial power, financial power, you already see today it is more than The power of the state in such a way that
it perfectly dares to give impetus to the state and to propose an
international world configuration where the state is simply A bureaucratic institution that transmits retransmit
reconfigures the mandates of the great international global political power, of course this many sometimes
they ask me but This is good or bad This is not that it is good or bad, it is that this is like this This
is how in the Middle Ages there had not been but there were feudal lords and there was a
commercial activity completely attacked and completely oppressed by the church On the one hand and
by the feudal lords on the other, in this 21st century, mercantile power has developed in such
a way that I am absolutely sure and this is what I have explained in different interventions, especially
in the eh. In the video seminar I did on the book by Romano prodi sorry about Paulo
prodi no Romano who is his brother the theft in the history of Commerce in the West And the fact is that
the 21st century will undoubtedly replace civil law with commercial law and in
commercial law the rights of the citizen They are the consumer rights that fit on
a complaint sheet, meaning that the loss of the state as a political structure
will mean in many aspects the loss of democratic values that have been achieved
historically after much work and of many historical efforts and it will also involve
the transformation of our freedoms into a very broad limitation of those freedoms,
there will be other freedoms but we will still see what these alleged new freedoms give rise to. We
delve into chapter 10 and reach this point, you have it. Of course, those who do not work do not
mature, why well, why not, those who do not work do not mature, that is clear, those who do not work do not
mature because work is a full relationship with reality, that is, work is a
direct confrontation with reality, that is, work puts us against Having a job
solves many problems because when you don't have a job you are not integrated into the world
as fully as when you have a job, but the fact of having a job means having co
-workers having colleagues. It is no longer said that the university professor He also lived well
to annoy life. What did God invent or create the colleague? Well, the same thing that happens in
the university happens in all places. Coworkers also have bosses.
They also have clients in such a way that of course the work demands to the human being a relationship within
which everything changes and everything It changes every day in such a way that you learn more by working than
by studying. This is an absolutely vital imperative. Clearly, that is, the study.
The hours of study The years of study are designed more to provide work for teachers
than to train students. That is a fact that is clear and people
forget that the university exists because there are students, not because there are teachers. But
I insist the study is designed more to provide work for teachers than to provide
scientific training to students, eh And that is something that should change for a long time but
it does not change but it does not change why Because the power is held by those who want giving work to
teachers and not training students in such a way that when these students
become teachers they perpetuate the status quo, that is, they perpetuate the system. However,
those who do not work do not mature. It is absolutely impossible to mature without working because work
is a brutal confrontation with reality and, furthermore, at work there is no palliatives at
work there is cynicism at work there are stabbings at work there are traps at work there is what
there is in life but in a condensed way and specifically to complicate your existence
eh And so that you have to overcome many obstacles that is to say everything that in work It is
presented as something that facilitates your work, it is usually the opposite, openly And those who work know that,
of course, living without working is a great fortune Apparently Apparently because when
the devil takes the bill anyway You claim that literature does not teach you examines how
suggesting that readers of literature books must become taught lived
educated What is the reason well the reason is that literature does not reveal any secrets eh
literature is simply an intelligence test And it is one of the most complicated intelligence test
that there really is To write literature you must have lived before. Because if
one has not lived a decisive experience, an experience that marks a before and after, one cannot
say anything original or anything useful in literature, that is, one cannot write a
book about a war. literary work about a war without having gone to war or without having
suffered the consequences of a war, that is, in the same way as at the airport. You have to arrive
crying for a farewell. Well, to literature, you have to arrive alive. Of course, there are people who
ask me. Sometimes good and and love How is love because San Juan de la cruz talks about love
in this poem and veer talks about love in these other poems yelin talks about love here and kirar talks about
love there and I don't know what and how love is I say Hey look, fall in love with yourself and leave literature, let
's see The thing is that here reality is replaced by a virtuality,
reality is replaced by idealism, of course, if you try to fall in love by reading literature, you are going
down the wrong path to literature. You have to arrive already lived in love, I'm not saying divorced. No.
I'm speaking in these terms, no, I'm not saying that you have to arrive at literature with failures, but
you have to arrive at literature knowing what literature speaks clearly and someone says it's not that
literature teaches many things, it teaches many things, well, what does literature teach? The first thing
literature does is require you to know how to read and write, that's where to start, of course, it's like they say
. Music teaches many things. Music teaches many things. First, it requires you to know how
to read music, then know how to read a musical score with the ability to play instrumentally. then
of course music teaches many things to those who already You have learned them previously, of course, the law
teaches many things. Yes, after having studied them, of course, or you are born Knowing
commercial law, no
. see how your colleague, the lawyer who defends the
opposite cause, gets you into trouble on more than one occasion in a dispute, not obviously, then of
course literature is that literature does not teach you anything, literature only
demands a capacity for knowledge. that you have to mobilize to be able to interpret a
sonnet by Quevedo, it is clear that it gives the impression that reading The Divine Comedy by Cervantes
we know Dante's Forgiveness The Divine Comedy we know the geology of hell or that by reading
Don Quixote by Cervantes we know the geography of La Mancha when in Don Quixote by Cervantes
there is not a single geographical description of La Mancha and evidently in
Dante's divine media There is not a single visible description of what hell is because no one
has been there unless they have previously gone through a concentration camp that has nothing
to do with Dan, for example, then of course in this type of situation and this type
In fact, it is necessary to categorically affirm that literature is a demand for intelligence, it is
a challenge to human intelligence, that is, a sonnet by Quevedo, eh. No one can read it
without stumbling because they are not capable, and even less capable of interpreting it, except for this man. who
translates Don Quixote for us because it is assumed that he is the only one who understands it, that is very well, the
Pied Piper of Hamelin and the mice are a German legend from the 11th century and in the book you
connect it a little to the reality of the social networks of the 21st century explain to us This is
good, it's curious, funny and obvious, that's not to say the story of the piper of the de,
it's the one that everyone knows, that's not to say. There is a city ravaged by mice And then you call or
hire or arrive unexpectedly a flutist to melin and to the sound of the flutist's music all
the mice follow them and he takes them to a river and they drown there no This is one of the versions of
the story well he is a mass leader he is someone who seduces, that is to say, Ulysses is seduced with the
song of the sirens, but tied to the mast of his ship or to the mast of his ship, well,
he can say, no, not take the bait of the song of the sirens, not of the deceptive worlds, but
Evidently the flutist D'Amelin seduces a massive amount of rats. The storyteller says "little mice"
but they could be rats or they could be, anyway, it's not the same, the little mouse Pérez doesn't know. presents him as
Ratoncito Pérez, we don't talk about the rat Pérez, no, of course. It depends on what we want to say,
and then these little mice are automatically removed from circulation because they bother, no
. Of course, this story today can hurt many sensitivities, depending on how you look at it, obviously. e
social networks What are social networks? They are the massive organization of collective emotion.
In short, that is to say, like ideologies, ideology is a way of organizing a way of
emotionally organizing collective ignorance if the mice knew they were leaving. to drowning in the
river they would not follow the melody of the Pied Piper if the consumers of social networks knew
where they were going, they would not spend so much time on social networks either, but the world of the
31st century is organized in this way and in many others and precisely We constantly talk about these and other aspects
in the book. In other words, this book is a manual of
intellectual self-defense. In short, of course, what to do on social networks, the solution is not
to delete social networks, the solution is to know how to navigate social networks and No argue with
political Bot farms In short, the solution is not to eliminate screens in
educational centers, the solution is to teach people to deal with screens, of course,
it is as if we eliminated clay tablets in Mesopotamia or papyri in the Egyptian world
In short, they are instruments that human beings have to use to improve their
living conditions, not to follow the path of the Pied Piper's mice, but that
depends on each human being following that line. the television gatherings and debates on YouTube
why you prefer to stay on the sidelines would you not like to confront your ideas your work on
occasion why no no no because we are going to see that is very di that is the circus that is being part of
a circus show eh Why? So that's a way to entertain people, right? And I'm not
saying that people aren't entertained by listening to me, but that's people's problem, not mine. eh,
they called Cervantes at one point and he presents it in the in the in the persiles in and in
the attached to the parnassus also refers to this eh say well it is that you are a it is a
comic writer is a humorist writer they say to Cervantes and Cervantes says Look, I'm not I will be
a comedian I will be a humorist because you say so but that is not my intention I say things much
more serious than all that So there are people who can stay with the humorous aspect can
stay with the meme or it can stay with the doctoral thesis that there is everything there is naturally everything
as Cervantes himself said my work Well, the children touch it, the young people comment on it and the
old people reflect on it This is not to say that everyone will do what they want with those things, but
debates are wasted time, and debates are usually narcissistic exercises where
people expose themselves simply to try to be above others and in reality
they are not even above them. nor are they below but simply because it is a circus show that
does not interest me if I have been asked a few times and I explain this in that statement of
treatment which is that that that video to which the buyers of this book will have access in the
pre-sale period I do talk about it They have called me like they call so many people
in the media, they have even called me to participate in television contests, eh,
eh, obviously many of those messages are not answered, of course, so that I can be part
of social gatherings, some have even called me from time to time. very circus program to
naturally be part of shows. And obviously I have never been to any of those programs and it is going
to be very difficult for my life to be part of that type of thing. You cannot say that about this
water, I will not drink from this. I should not drink water because nothing is excluded from the future but there are some
things that are really incompatible with my present situation. I don't know if in the future I will get
to star in some barbarity of this type but I haven't seen it in the script. I don't think so. Furthermore
, not in human communication, that is, in human interaction. Better said, hey, I communicate
but I don't usually have a lot of dialogue and And if someone insists on denying me the reason, let them keep it all,
I mean, I don't have any problems. There are no times when sometimes some people They say
we can discuss or debate this topic no no I don't debate anything You are absolutely right,
stick with it when someone tells me I am a friend of Plato But I am more of a friend of the
truth, so enjoy the truth, stay with the truth. truth and with Plato with the two of us you
leave me in peace and so comfortable it is better this way for the three of us as some song for
Plato usually says for the truth for you and for me as simple as that, that is, if you want the reason keep
everything come on but Absolutely because I don't need you or the reason put in the
mouth of someone like you, so enjoy Plato's reason. And whatever you want,
social networks are a fool's paradise, not because they are happy we return to social networks
eh I would like to know then eh what attractive aspects networks have for
fools and also for those who aspire not to be fools what they can take advantage of well
social networks are the paradise of fools and smart people also and of the fools and of the smart ones
The problem is that the social network induces the smart ones to adopt behavior that is typical
of fools, that is, frequently on social networks intelligent people stop being so
, that is, a person who is very intelligent in their normal life When he enters the social network, let's not
say that he loses his faculties, but that he uses the ones he has to act foolishly, which are
very different things, and he acts foolishly in a much more virtuous way than the ways that the
fool uses to act foolishly when It lacks that intellectual potential. Then it is a paradise, yes
it is a paradise. at a certain moment at a certain point to a certain extent But it is also torture
because there are people who suffer a lot on social networks, that is, there are people who, seduced by
the melody of the social network, end up shipwrecked in the sea in the river in the ocean like the amelin 's mice
then of course the social network we return again to aragne and Narciso we return
again to the spider that weaves the web the piper of amelin and Narciso the one who feels pleasure in
a kind of personal self-satisfaction, people enter the social network for many
reasons but basically because of the anxiety of acquiring a certain prominence because of the
anxiety of multiplying their emotions and feeling them confirmed or reverberated by the emotions of
other people with whom they interact. can identify and that gives him satisfaction. But
even the psychologists know this, I mean that everyone knows it, the
teachers don't know it, the victims know it, and the perpetrators know it, and above all, the perpetrators know it
. know those who set up all that very Anglo-Saxon engineering. By the way, the Anglo-Saxon world
has been the inventor of modern psychology, which it already knew, it was known since Hippocrates, and what
it has done has been to massively sophisticate the eh. In other words, we can make a
caged bird become feel happy feel free because happiness is a matter of feelings it
is not a matter of reasons If we lose reason and reduce everything to resentment Well
the mystics already said it that the mystics and the mystics were happy ascetics who were happy Eh well living in a
lonely hut drinking river water with their hands and things like that Well then nothing. Keep
preaching happiness in those terms that the friends of commerce will make sure
that you don't have a job no have a home, don't have a car and don't have more than 15
minutes to go out around your house or even in confinement you will be happy without leaving
home so continue preaching asceticism that you will soon live like a hermit in the chapter
15 you warn us against the dangers of idealism can an idealistic society
an idealistic individual avoid failure impossible it is impossible because idealism
always leads to failure and idealism leads to failure because idealism is a deviation from
reality idealism is fear To reality, idealism is literal between the fear of reality and
feeling guilty for facing reality and living in the lie that reality is
wrong. That is to say, for the idealist, reality is poorly done, so it is clear what is well done.
is Its clear ideal model, idealism, is the great construction of the European Enlightenment. In fact, the
great founder of idealism is Kant. Kant considers that reality is poorly made and that what is
well made is my idea of reality, my ideal of reality. There is the categorical imperative,
hence Nazi Germany, which arises after there is a reality that is poorly made and we
are going to make it better. We already saw how they made it better. They invent an Aryan race. They invent a race of
people that must be exterminated. what are all abcd all except them In short then of course
idealism In short it is a fear of reality as it is that reality is not a fear as
reality is set up and it is a way of saying the reality that I imagine that I design is much
better than the other and if the other continues to exist it is worse for her because between the Oasis and the
Mirage I live in the Mirage well but living in the Mirage means ignoring many things and
reality there is something that reality never forgives you or allows you and that is that you are not compatible
with her Of course, what is the solution to this? The solution to this is in the thinking of the Baroque.
The authors of the Baroque Quevedo Cervantes López de Vega Góngora all these authors taught
the human being to become compatible with reality, especially from the Greco-Latin tradition
. To say that you cannot live with your back to reality, the Anglo-Saxon world and especially the
world of German idealism chose, on the contrary, to live with your back to reality and to say if
something fails, reality is to blame. I have it, if something fails, it is the fault of
others, I do not have it because I, who live my particular idealism in my particular reality,
am like the infallible dad, so the fault for everything lies with others, like the generation of
'98, the fault for failure is The others have it, I don't And so this is a very idealistic resource
and very typical of the European Enlightenment, of course, as Quevedo says in that sonnet, not in the
world you were born not to amend but to live clito and suffer, of course, that is to say Well, let's see or be not
try to change reality Because reality will change you, undoubtedly try to make yourself
compatible with reality Because there you can introduce some change for your survival
in the 21st century now. If Cervantes gave us a lesson, it is that idealists
always lead to the failure and in fact it is curious that Don Quixote is a work greatly admired by
idealists because they have not understood anything. Of course, when people say Don Quixote is the work that
makes our dreams come true Don Quixote is the work of our dreams it is that Don Quixote is the triumph
of idealism, I tell you, look, read Don Quixote again to see if you learn
something on the second reading, but of course, however you read the translation of the Great Idealist, then you no longer
read Cervantes because it clogs the The ability of someone to believe that they are a replacement for Cervantes in
the 20th or 21st century has more morals than the man from Alcoy. Well, in chapter 16 we talked about feminism and
I would like to ask you why you consider that the current press treats it in an absurd way. to the
man to the male figure and where they are waxing is women's rights Well
let's see the machismo and feminism are today very fashionable topics are today very fashionable topics
and obviously if machismo is the fear of women's freedoms because it is the fear that
women will acquire power and freedoms that are incompatible with the sexist mentality. As
a reaction, feminism arises, which is the fear that men will continue to perpetuate those freedoms to
the detriment of the woman, then of course there are two truly irreconcilable positions,
both one and the other disqualify the relationship and coexistence because one cannot live
in fear of the freedoms of one's neighbor. Because if that exists, it is because that neighbor, more than freedom,
is what What it does is oppression and evidently feminism is the result of the oppression that
for many years and for many centuries was exercised against women, limiting their right
to marriage, limiting their right to work, limiting lots of rights that is unappealable
undoubtedly now well today It seems that however things have changed radically
and have changed so radically that The pendulum has swung excessively in another direction even
within current feminism there are very conflicting tendencies and very incompatible with each other with the
problem of of the of the sport where certain eh people can win prizes for other
people eh For issues of gender of sex in which I honestly am already lost
I am already completely lost now well if we go to literature what literature
raises of feminism This is something enormously important because Cervantes Cervantes in the
15th century writes works like La gitanilla, the exemplary novel, writes works like Galatea
and writes works like El jealouso extremeño, not to mention a lot of passages from Don Quixote where
a woman is vindicated. series of rights that In those times in no corner of the world were
in any way recognized the right to choose a partner the right to choose a
fair marriage as given above all in in the novel by de La gypsy girl where in a totally patriarchal context
they say Well, I'll give you this little girl so you can marry her and she says
Well, let's see, you guys bring me and take me from hand to hand Eh, from one man to
another but there is one, there is one very very important thing that must be taken into account above all,
you can decide with me with with with let's go with my freedom whatever you want, but to the extent that I
allow it, that is to say, it is an aunt who takes up the case of Pastor Marcela is another, although she
is already a
extraordinary idealistic
case
Throughout history by men who have identified them,
there have always been men in history who have identified these rights of women and
there have always been systems that have oppressed them. The case of the orca. The case of the orca is also very similar.
to that of Cervantes but in a very opposite sense because in reality what really
matters to the orca is the man is the man. We must take into account that the orca writes literary works in
which women kill themselves for sleeping with a man. Of course, that right of the woman
to choose the man, the Alpha man, and not even the Sigma man, but the Alpha man,
the most sexually powerful man, is a right that is oriented more than civil matters,
to the right of thought. guides the right of feeling That is to say that the orca is above all interested
in the woman insofar as the woman enhances the male, he enhances the figure of the macho man of
the virile male compared to the Oedipal male, that is, Lorca does not exalt the woman as long as he recognizes
or demands for her a series of rights but exalts the woman insofar as the woman is the most
important and powerful sounding board of the male of Pepe el Romano does not want Don Perlin Plin with
Belisa in his garden wants an authentic male, not a man Oedipal does not want Yerma's husband
Juan, the impotent, the sterile, wants a real male, a stallion. That is the model of woman
towards which Lorca directs his work, all his literary work and his theatrical work. In short, it is it is
the woman who It demands maximum power from man in all virile aspects. It is the
supreme idealization of man as a male. It is a tremendous thing. The orca at that point
is much more judicious, much less sentimental, much more rational and much more effective. that is to say
Cervantes is indeed a man who put women's rights on the paper of literature
as in no other historical moment at the height of his time could have been conceived. Cervantes is
a buf reference that is far above But light years from of all authors and it was already before
the current mediums tried to translate it into universal Spanish, you ask a
question in chapter 17 to your readers, I quote verbatim, do you prefer money or freedom
, now I ask you We work to be free to be slaves or to survive. Hey, that's
what the contract that each of us has signed at work says. The truth is
that that's what each of us has signed. That's the answer given to the contract, but let's go. Let's
answer what is asked not beyond the contract, that is, we work
for money, every human being who works works for money, in my opinion, that is, work is what
is done for money, from prostitution to university teaching. prostitution and
university teaching have in mind common that they are jobs like all jobs that are done for
money if I don't know if there wasn't money it wouldn't be done otherwise if there wasn't money you wouldn't work you work
for money another issue is that people disguise this with whatever ideals they want and say
well that I like my job What remedy is left What remedy is left to you eh naturally it may
be more pleasant for me to give a class on Cervantes than to chop coal in the mine Like my
grandmother did for example undoubtedly undoubtedly among other things that I would not know I would finish
buried in a mine Because I wouldn't be able to do it, I would have to start, well, like
my grandfather, from the age of 12 or 13, he started to crush coal in the mine, to work in a mine well,
but times at that point have changed for my family or for my context or for the world
in which I lived, but work is what is done for money, not for no reason. For happiness, that is,
whoever tries to find happiness at work neither knows what work is nor knows what
life is. happiness eh They are completely different issues Another issue is that work
provides us with different moments of pleasure or satisfaction, that is, there are moments in which
one is satisfied with the work because one has achieved certain objectives or
because one has a concept of satisfaction that is compatible with the work one does. Since I don't know
how prostitution works, I don't know what kind of pleasure there can be in someone who does
that job. I don't really know. I don't know and I don't want to know personally. I don't want to know.
Now, work provides satisfaction and also provides many things. dissatisfactions
because not everything that is part of the job is Equally rewarding at work you have to be
very cynical, sometimes you can allow yourself a certain sincerity You have to always be very cautious and
always be very practical etcetera etcetera But do you prefer work or life? freedom
work It is a way to buy freedom It is that freedom is bought with money it is bought
with power one way to buy freedom is by working of course there are people who, as Jorge
Manrique would say, well, they live with jobs that are not due with jobs that are not due. who live by their hands
in the rich and others who with jobs that are not due, it remains clear that those of us who have to live by
our work and The rich also have to live by their work but on another scale because
we know what we are talking about but freedom is something that is bought with money that is bought with
work In short no and and that must also be maintained with one's own work That is why I say that
those who do not work do not mature either freedom and work usually go together
intellectuals usually travel together the world of culture the press you present them as false critics
of power What would be the vision that the book gives us about yes, that is that vision, but
they already demonstrate that better than I do. I mean, intellectuals are people who today say one
thing and tomorrow the opposite, and intellectuals have no problem. They are people
who basically serve an ideology today and tomorrow the opposite has no problem
doing that, their work basically consists of that. Intellectuals are not critical of power.
Intellectuals are collaborators of power. That is, when an intellectual criticizes a power,
it is because he does it in the name of another power that Furthermore, intellectuals always
speak to satisfy the narcissistic public that listens to them And that keeps them clear yy
andy They can say the same thing they say well And you do the same I treat my audience well I am a
nettle with my audience I really don't In that In this sense, I am a person who does not make any effort at
all to be kind to anyone. Not really, and I have to admit that it is like that, so
anyone who loves me just the way I am is fine with me, and anyone who doesn't love me just the way I am feels fine to me. It seems just as
good because I don't I'm never going to try it. I'm not delighted to know myself,
I'm delighted to not know anyone. In short, it's the best way to be without
knowing anyone, no, but intellectuals, not intellectuals, seek the support of the people
say things that people like to hear they attract mice no Why leave them lying around
at any moment I don't deceive anyone I don't betray anyone I have never betrayed anyone
I have never deceived anyone absolutely eh yes What do I say likes some or displeasing others
is their problem. I do not speak to please or to displease. I do not speak or to make enemies. Nor
to make friends. I do not speak nor to satisfy an ideology, a religion, a sophistry or a
philosophy. I speak in the name of the knowledge of others. that I have, not in the name of any ideology,
intellectuals frequently, not to mention that they always speak in the name of an ideology of a
power that they pretend to criticize in the name of another power, which is why I find it very funny when they
say that literature is Rebellion Rebellion against what against What is Rebellion?
Literature wants to explain to me that you write for the system that publishes the
system's publishers and that says everything that the system wants to hear. What are you rebelling against? You rebel
against reason, not against the system. which is totally idealistic and irrational Not clear
then you tell me that we reveal ourselves How many forbidden words do you use
in your novels that is to say against against What system do you reveal yourself are you perhaps a reproducer
of Orwell or an opponent of Orwell do you defend democracy either the enemies of Democracy
, of course, that is what Those are the questions that must be asked of intellectuals. We delve
into the penultimate chapter of his book 19 and I invite you now to think about
anyone who may be unaware of the work of Cervantes and from Shakespeare how he would argue
So the first is worth more than the second, well Cervantes is worth more than Shakespeare since
Cervantes writes novels and Shakespeare did not write any Cervantes is
the master of narration and Shakespeare did not narrate anything Cervantes writes more poetry than
Cervantes is one of the Authors who write the most poetry from the Golden Age are one of the authors
who write the most theater from the Golden Age despite everything Despite everything and who writes theater
that is much more original outside the Golden Age than it was inside of the golden century and
of course Cervantes is an author who writes some novels that, well, in the case of Shakespeare,
it is neither clear nor expected to propose a relationship of equivalence of that or valence
between Cervantes and Shakespeare. It is simply not knowing what we are talking about, it is not knowing about what is spoken
Shakespeare is an Anglo-Saxon myth constructed by English imperialism to put it like a limpet in
I will not say that it starts from Cervantes and that in this way when we talk about Cervantes
that endiadis truth is formed That That couple of Cervantes and Shakespeare when in reality it has nothing
to do with it, it's as if they're talking to me about Well, I don't know, well, I don't waffle Cher Cervantes or I don't know or Cervantes
and Sánchez Ferlosio, for example, it's fine, but they can't put the two at the same
height At the same level because they don't have it But what happens when that becomes a
cliche in a kit Well, everyone repeats that phrase and it becomes a common place, it becomes a
cliché and it becomes much easier identify popularly known ideas that be original posing
ideas that people don't know because if an original idea is posed that people don't know, people
are not going to follow it, that is, the mice are only going to follow a loud melody, but if you give them a
melody that is, for example, one of the movements of Gustav's eighth symphony,
since that doesn't sound familiar to them, they keep going, that is, they follow the reggaeton. To put it simply, no, of
course, if an original idea is proposed, that idea will not have followers, it will not even have
interpreters because of course We must distinguish between followers of tractors and interpreters, they are three
completely different genres. You can be a follower of Cervantes. They say, well,
you are a follower of Cervantes. I am not a follower of Cervantes. I am an interpreter of Don Quixote. They are
two different things. A follower of Cervantes. They will be others. I don't know. whether the Cervantistas or not I don't know
, they have their own mouths to say it but of course you shouldn't confuse a follower
with a detractor with an interpreter. So when people mention Cervantes and Shakespeare they do it
as The mice do not follow Amelin's music, but it is another thing to be an interpreter of Cervantes
, of course, and I return again to these people who declare themselves no longer an interpreter but simply
Cervantes' medium. In other words, I am the only one who knows what you sing. wanted to say in Don
Quixote and I offer a translation of Don Quixote well I offer a translation of Don Quixote to say that
to tell us the same thing Borges already did that in a story and it was much funnier not
infinitely So no there is no need confuse things Cervantes eh is also an author who
writes literature for the modern world and shpe is an author who writes literature for
the ancient world there is not a single Shakespearean character nor a single Shakespearean character
that survives the ancien regime the the mentality of a Richard the third the mentality of a fsta the
mentality of a Hamlet the mentality of a king lea does not exceed the limits of the 10th century
they are incapable of living in a democratic world they live in the mentality of the Old Regime
say a Richard the third I insist a falstaff a hamlet any good Lady macbeth the worst of
Shakespeare's tragedies mcbeth are characters who live anchored in a medieval and mythical world
they are incompatible with modernity that is, when Harold Bloom talks about Shakespeare
as the inventor of the human I have a fit of laughter That lasts me for years, I mean I really have
to do exercises to contain my laughter later when I talk about this in public. I mean,
if he is the inventor of the human being, that's a completely impressive song, that is to say.
No Shakespearean character can survive the mentality of the Old Regime and yet
all of Cervantes's characters are galloping modernity. Tell me. Someone tell me
which female Shakespearean character defends the rights of women. Lady Macbeth, who ends up
moron and crazy, doesn't. women, all the women who appear in Ricardo are such mourners
that no Lorca heroine would even stop to look at her. Compare Bernarda Alba with
any female character in Shakespeare, completely ridiculous. What rights does
Shakespeare defend in literature before the state and before the church none What rights does Cervantes defend,
even the right to atheism, each one makes his fortune, here, let's say destiny, has nothing
to say because each one, I insist, makes his own destiny, he has no fortune here somewhere,
they say the numancia literally in verses c 56 57 of the first day then of course
talk about the superiority of Shakespeare with respect to that of Cervantes give me and What is the concept of
superiority medieval superiority then of course that is what is explained here in this
This is a book written against self-help books against many of the intellectuals
who today live anchored in a blind enlightenment And of course with respect to a
series of codes that we have in our literature in universal literature and particularly in
Spanish literature to make us compatible with the 21st century and survive it. In short,
it is a survival book, it is an intellectual instruction manual for intellectual self-defense
very well and in the last chapter of this book you make us almost like an epilogue, not
a little, you tell us the future of that as already I say first, nothing is excluded. What
final reflection could we say to the younger generations about what lies ahead of them?
Obviously, nothing is excluded from the future. We don't know what will appear when a door opens.
No, we don't know. We really don't know. We can intuit it, we can assume it, we can
imagine it, but what is clear is that we do not know it, we do not know what the future will be like.
Although we can imagine it, presume it, fantasize, no. By chance, Spanish literature is not a
literature of utopias in literature. Spanish there are no utopias In Spanish literature,
time is not wasted fantasizing about the future. That is what philosophers do, who idealize and design a
world in their own way by playing the Apocalypse. Geopoliticians do it, inventing
an outcome every day, always apocalyptic because at least it is necessary to at least enjoy of
one apocalypse a day, not throughout human life. The more Apocalypses there are, the better because
we can always count them. It is assumed that one will always survive the Apocalypse, but the
future does not. We now know well that if we tried to analyze the present by looking at the trajectory of
events, I would dare to say that H democracy does not survive
the 20th century, the state as a political configuration does not survive the 21st century and the freedoms that
will come in the second half. of the 21st century there will be freedoms determined by friends of
commerce more than by other types of friendships. I don't know if this is good or bad. This is simply
something different, something different from what we have been educated for, that is, today
people are educated. people to survive in a world that no longer It will exist when these people are adults, therefore
education is always a failure, that is, the education that succeeds is one that is based
on self-education and personal training, not on self-help because that is going directly
to failure but simply on disappointment. which is the opposite of self-help, therefore, if
someone wants to survive the 21st century, they should go to work where they can and however they can. And why
there is no work because one of the fundamental ways to make people fail
is to prevent them from accessing the market. work if you do not work you do not mature if you do not mature you do not have
the strength to buy your freedom if you are not free you are at the mercy of the rules that
the other sets because your freedom ends where your power to impose the rules ends when others
impose the rules on you. You have no freedom, you practice obedience because you follow the rules.
It is not exercising freedom, it is obeying. That is why I have always said that literature, like history,
has always been at the Service of the Triumph of an illegality. Who can make
an illegality triumph in the second half of the 20th century? That will be the one who writes the next page
of the story Thank you very much professor for your time Well nothing Thank you very much Now We confirm
that from today you can purchase this book in pre-sale on the Amazon page in the link that
has been appearing throughout this video at the bottom and now on a personal basis
the eh courtesy of this gathering or this interview with two people who have been one
of them in particular, uh, which is the case of Andrea, no, no, I don't know if we have introduced ourselves
yet, Andrea and Gabriel, uh, former students of the academic institution in which I have carried out my
teaching activity for the last 30 years and in the case of Andrea she was a student of mine approximately 20 years
ago approximately 20 years ago and now I am going to dare to ask a question
that was not in the script after 20 years What's left, what's left of my classes in your training
, well, a lot. I always like yours, I always saw that your classes were different from the others. I
never missed them. I could make mistakes in another subject. I could sneak out to catch the bus earlier
because I had another one. better plan but really when you had your subjects I remember going to your office
and asking you if you had already taken all of them or there was a possibility of taking another one and you had
told me that you had already taken all your subjects I wouldn't miss them and good time more afternoon eh
I'm very happy that your YouTube channel can spread your knowledge, we
both enjoy it and we are delighted to have spent this time talking about your book
Well, eh I don't know, I stay very much in that little heart that I sometimes have Eh well, I am
grateful for this situation so my most sincere thanks for the attention to
Gabriel and Andrea And well then there is health to continue of course nothing now that you can enjoy
a book if you can enjoy a book like this that will be seen Many thank you
Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video
Share:
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
Transcript Extraction Form
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.
