321. A Conversation So Intense It Might Transcend Time and Space | John Vervaeke | The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast Transcripts

The hello. Everyone watching and listened on youtube and socio I'd forms. I'm here, today in person? So that's nice, doktor John vaguely he's professor at the university of toronto, like I am, or was depending on how you look at it and has run in parallel for a long time, probably twenty years may be longer than that, and we have students at the university of toronto in common and we had a lot of discussions on youtube. John and I are both interested in this issue. the issue of relevance, realisation, which is a very struck way of pointing to something extremely fundamental, which is the fact that certain

announced themselves to your perception as primary things. Attract your attention and attract your focus and that's a great mystery. It's an immense mystery. It might be the immense mystery in some real sense and so John is made a tremendous amount of progress on that front using sources different than the ones that I have relied on, and so that's made our conversations for me extremely interesting, because we're trying to us dress the same problem, which is, the problem of meaning whatever meaning is, but he draws on literatures that are from those that I have drawn on and so conversations are reproductive because of that I am from, a brief violence of joy, and his work and then we're gonna jump right into the topics at hand, because there's lots to talk about on this front. So john verve aiki is an associate professor in cognitive psychology and cognitive signs at the university of toronto. His work as I alluded to construct a bridge between science and speed

twenty, which will walkabout. In order to understand the experience of meaningfulness and the cultivation of wisdom so as to have or an awakening from the meaning crisis. The meaning crisis is a phrase that jones popularized and that many of you may be familiar with so well good to see you gonna person? Would you look great? Thank you, sir. It's my twitter suit, so I wanted to start. I'm gonna jump right into the sleeves there's, some very clear. located an essential issues that I want to talk to you. But I talked with Carl frist and, while back and for those you watching pristine is one of the world's premier neuroscientist and he's very interested in categorization any eye, and he said something to me that was extra really illuminating think. Thinking related to your notion of through line and also oneness, because one of the core

since Jones interested in by the way is what is it that allows us to presume that any given thing is one thing just when it's made out of parts and what does it mean for two things to be similar or identical, given that there are seven is all of this is lurking in the background is problems that need to be solved. is very interested in the use of condoms, categories to constrain entropy, so entropy is proclivity of things to move in multiple directions, I say, and I've always construed entropy. Ah, what regulation and constrained as

straight of negative emotion. But he pointed out to me that its importantly associated with positive emotion, so it makes sense to me there's a huge neural psychological literature that indicates that you experience positive emotion when you see yourself moving towards a valued go. That's what the dopamine ergic tracked regional ones, and he pointed out. That's also entropy reduction because entropy which is disorder, in some sense, into some I've figured out a while ago, but had an associated with positive emotion and he is something like path links to it, donation If you see the path, links, paddling shrink which means you're getting clear destination: you're reducing engine, yes, but that really which is an advance right of pragmatic advances, actually signal by the positive emotion system for the negative emotions system signals an explosion of entropy which might be part of common,

the explosion at the heart of what what's the what's the weather the fact that things can be perceived in the multi frame problem areas as he has an altitude of ways, so that counts for negative emotion, but it's cool positive emotion- as a response to a decrease in entropy. That's associated with voluntary action struck me as well a form of unification right brings both emotional channels under the. Break of entropy reduction in so that relates them as well to a very fundamental physical reality. In so far as entropy is. In reality yeah I mean that I mean. First of all, I haven't met coffers. Then I've worked with a lot of his students and I have met and talked with Andy Clarke and but For me, just before we get to the content, what were coffers it is doing represents the big sure, cognitive science that I think we need the attempt to give

get a synoptic integration like he thinks of it as a unifying framework across many different sub disciplines. As I see one of the jobs of of cognitive sciences overcome fragmentation within psychology and then overcoming the fragmentation between the various minded disciplines, psychology, I neuro idea and his work is doing that, and that is the kind of work I aspire to doing as well, I'm first are, I think, that's brilliant I would argue it's not the sole cause, but I would think I will you're. A contributing factor to the replication crisis is the fact that we are privilege over privileges, innovation, as opposed to integration and psychology. So what we're getting is we're getting these very narrow, very almost effect specialised fee ever theory about this effect of a theory, it isn't like and there and and so they they leave the controlled

medical framework. You need in order to make sure that these the constructs are plausible, their clear that you bigger, intelligible their intelligible, you don't haven't. You know the jingle jangle problem in psychology get rid of all of that kind of thing, and so I think that That kind of work is exemplary. I think he's also, I think, is also the good work, I think its careful, it's mathematically, rigorous. You know I work wait, he has a student. mark miller, who also one of my former students and I work a lot with mark You got a huge sir grant come to toronto. We're gonna work together on a lot of this stuff and more has been one of the people, in fact just to bring it back around who has been really trying to integrate the predicted processing framework with a bright right right, right, yeah. Well, there's the air, while its very so that, because It isn't obvious that the models, for example, experience anything that you might consider akin to emotion

you can relate negative emotion to an explosion of potential pathway. I think- and positive motion to a reduction, then starting to make a very tight connection between information, processing and emotional experience. I'd, say or or at least the meaning of emotional experience right where his work in my work starts to integrate because way of translating that reduction of entropy. I do want to get back to the theme of you know. Shared grammar between cognition reality up, but first you know a psychological way of understanding that the the fact is around the notion of basically surprise reduction. So the right right, rightly ideas, the brain is trying to yet. I would argue we are better tremors anticipation that we can come back to the brain. Is and predict the world because the more can predict the world the more adaptive. Actually it has to be found

it's very easy, it's much better to avoid the tiger than to confront the tiger right the thing about that it is you note: when will you like when I first say this to my students. I start. Oh, so you, the brain, is this massively recursive system for reducing surprise, a lot of them will say, but I like surprises and you go yeah, that's right and that is so then you ve got to get this question about what you want to reduce. You want to reduce surprise right. It's not sort of absolute reduction, who were like the rate, and then you playing the rate, different, different longitudinal scales? So I might like the short term surprise for my birthday party, because it is a long term predictor of stable relationships, so my long term right. The ability to protect the environment goes up. All of these people have done all of this. Intricate went to surprise me at the party, so I just

make it clear, because it people easily get this confused with he's just proposing some simplistic just You know just make just reduce surprise up across the board. So then you Various accidental surprise, in some sense in an unknown oil. That's not a complete solution, the problem either cause some accidental surprises are positive, but yet we were much happier about surprise if we encounter involuntarily and then there's a writ, there's a right problem there that's proportionate to something like death. and that's associated with the phenomena of meaning as well. Yes, so so let me take frisk argument apart. A bit more. Does I asked him a very specific question so I asked him if he thought the basic perceptual categories, where my crow narratives, right so because one of one of the place. That your work and I and my dovetail is in

observation that the very categories of perception that make themselves manifest to us, aren't simple objects right. That's where you bring in the neo platonic, yet teleology agent arena released right right, and so what we seem to see in the world are passed. and that have functional utility, functional utility is construed in relationship to a goal and, of course, than that brings up there what should the goal be, and is there such a thing as an integrated goal, and so there's a pragmatism like empiricists and the rational. But let's say the appears is to begin with, seem to presume that what we see in the world are objects and then we derive meaning we pose a meaning on top of that, and that is and how it works. Is that the very these things we see as objects are tools, that we use in relationship to goals and Some of those can be described objectively, but that isn't

The essence of perception Itself- and I agree- and if you get so you look at, even the history, the psychology of categories there there is there's a sort of tooth funding. Talk presuppositions that I've been were run through at that point, exactly what you're talking about that really sort of kick started to come into question mid eighties, early eighties and gathered steamed, well neural networks in another to the fore. But there was the idea that concepts are just lists of features. Yeah right lists of features. and that the primary function of a concept is to label the world and discredit, and that's that both of those which I sort of often

interesting because when you ask people what they think concepts are that's what they tell you that there's features. There's two things are identical and share the same list of the answers yet yeah, it's axiomatic and that's what they think yeah, but that's not how they actually do the categories, because that won't give you categories. and so the Kristen's work points to a fundamental and it belongs to much broader framework about no, no. What concepts are is there generative model state, their structural, functional organization of features there Allow us to predict and explain how things are going to behave. especially with relationship to us. Alright, so and then what you and that's the pragmatism element right in a functional elements exactly, and so you get different, much different notion of similarity. So, instead of thinking of here's, these

featureless, and then you get goodman's problem of what goes on the features and ladys right right right now, that's a fact which has an idea, let's say I have these two generative models and could I how many steps go back where I can trace them back to it, common shared degenerative model is like an evolutionary low if two things are similar if they have an ancestor, generative model that is close to them. and their dissimilar. If you have to go through a lot of transformations to get them back to a shared generative model, we're judging. I thought of that. Actually variant of that as a way of determining

whether something was real you know well, can you imagine two met measurement methods that are similar different? You might say what what makes them you want to measure the same thing in as many different ways as you can to calibrate its reality. Then you run into the thorny problem of what makes two measurement systems different and one of the answers to that on the can actual left, at least, is Since evolution airily, there might be a domain of measurement that emerged in in physics and a domain of measurement that emerged in psychology, and so they don't share a lot underlying axiomatic presuppositions that- and if you bring both of them to bear on the problem- and they report the same pattern, then you can be reasonably sure that that pattern, just independent of your projection of more in this kind of what your senses due to right, because you five senses and there really qualitatively different

A vision and audition are extremely different, an audition and vision and touch her extremely different, and we use it's not triangulation. I guess it's quintana violation. A two zero in on patterns to see if there are breakable across all the sensory domains and announced saw a form of What would you call analysis by by option? We different measurement systems, ok and then that is a way In that context, the research and work I do that can help, supply the missing normative. Eighty four pragmatism, the prom with which of them, as they had this very nebulous concept of utility, which was very hard to do to get any swamp you know normative guidance, but what you do describe this goes towards a lot of literature, I'm sort of putting your this converging on the net. the possibility now there's two cents. The possibility. One is just a senate

for highly probable. But another is it when we invoke things like say that makes good sense that yams teresa yeah right, oh yeah, yeah yeah. I get that those kinds of judgments and when it still turning out is what you get Applause ability is present, Haven't plausibility? Is that You said when you have convergence for many difference and they can the same source and in the region. What would that gives you? What national call for russia cause trustworthiness yankees the chance. So I have just one information channel MIKE Mike the chest I conclusion is being affected by bias in the system is significant right, but if I have multiple converging ones, yeah the chance of them sharing all of those biases is very low, very low, and it probably decreases exponentially as the number of measurements that you use to to to to to, says the reality of a given phenomenon increases but you had a lot of diminishing returns right, one right right at some point in the

well, a friend of mine says you know for human beings. One is I'll, think about it, two or maybe three, while three or four, it's high yeah yeah sort of over the working memory, capacity kind of thing right sought, not all you want for plausibility. You also want the thing here to have that structure functional organization. You wanted to not just be a featureless. You wanted to be a general model, things that can predict counterfactual, because but you want that contract. Also to do is you wanted to be able to cook to go in to many different domains and find and formulate promised well. So it has to have this elegance so has convergence, so that would be multi multi. Agnes right, right so yeah, so that would be utility across a broad range of potential applications. The threat that makes a nice tool right is that you can use it for more than one thing. So here you know of forces. pastimes acceleration. You can use it for talking about whales floating other water use it for talking about. You know planet.

Circling assign you can use to talk about rights like across situational, generalised generality right, so him and and then the third thing you want. You want balance right, and so, if I give you tremendous amount of convergence to something that has very little elegance. Let's trivial right It brings fault. You say it's right right. Swollen, that's and that's actually the fate of most fact- and this is put related to this problem in psychology- so always struck me in relationship to the social sciences, is that our acid of movement forward is income in fact gathering the problem without is that there is an infinite number of fact, yes and most of them are irrelevant, and so without these unifying theory zack, then you can't you can't integrate across the facts in any coherent manner, and you just get you just get the endless generation of while valid in some sense, but point this fact right in that

that goes to the point we were talking about with with christians work he about regenerating those frameworks that bring all the things together and you're, getting a generative model rather than just a feature list of fat right, frank and then, but you also, like you say you you get triviality, you also get the reverse. If I very little trustworthiness, but the promise of a lot of elegance. That's when we think of something as far fetched If you just believe that the british monarchy are lizard peoples from space, look at all the things I can explain, and so you get You can get far fetched, that's right! if you actually pay attention- and this is of the conspiracy theories- something make themselves manifest- that's exactly wreck when their true right and then you get you can also equivocate. You can do Martin bailey and a lot of things. Where are you? Are you you? you seem to be doing this, but you're actually equivocating, like a deepening, then you know, love is a further work. Ok on the grass

side that is highly convergent, but it's absolutely trivial parents who, but then you think that their there are not talking about the graph feel like you think, they're talking about the concept of love so equivocate and youth and the? U think something important has been said about this phenomena that ramifying your whole life, so you ve got. It's too triviality that then equivocate to something. That's profound that would promise, but there's, nothing being said when you say love is a poor who, like how could we have that sort of proving that love is an inconsequential? Cannot, of course, not sounds so you can at all times. It is, I'm trying to show the way the plausibility machinery just gets. Miss used and misled pervasively cultural, so you want that balance.

the current administration's new year's goals are to tax, spend and turn a blind eye to inflation. If this is at odds with your goals, if you're tired of the government playing games with your savings and your retirement plans, then you need to get in touch with the experts at birch gold. Today, for over five thousand years, gold has withstood inflation, geopolitical turmoil and stock market crashes. With help from the experts at vertical you can own gold in a tax, sheltered retirement account, birch gold makes it easy to convert an ira or four o one k into an ira in precious metals, just texts- Jordan's nine, eight. Ninety nine eight to claim your free info on gold and then talk to one of their precious metals specialists. Birch gold will hold your hand through the entire process: texts: jordan's, nine, eight, nine, eight, nine, eight and protect yourself with gold. Today, with an a plus rating with the better business bureau, thousands of happy customers and countless five star reviews, you can trust burch gold to help protect your savings texts, Jordan's, nine, eight. Ninety nine eight today.

that's another form of of triangulation in some. Yes, yes, I wanted to explain to everybody who is listening a little bit more about this idea of entropy just so that it can be made more understandable. So imagine that you're you driving to work and you're in your car and your car isn't, but bothering you you're not in your car. Apart from the fact that you have to drive it and the reason that you're not attending to your car is because its performing its proper function as a car in relationship to your goal, which means that it is moving you down the road reliably? now imagine what happens in your imagination when your car stops let's say it stops on a busy highway. now what's happened is the past linked dear destination and too also, other multiple potential destinations has now become in determinately large. So and then imagine that the search space opens up its so like now you're to the side of the road with your car, while you're

set of problems is your whole day is now messed up. How are you going to get to work right, so have to compute a whole variety of potential pathways in the world just in ship to your day and then While you have the broader problem of the fact that your car is now no longer a car. It's a useless chunk of metal that your trapped in in a dangerous situation, and you have no idea how to fix it, and maybe you have no idea where did take it, and so the color. Apps of the simplicity of your car as an affordable in relationship to approximate goal has exposed you two entropy and then b is the multiplication of the problems that now be set. You and category collapse. Does that, and so. To understand this, if you, if you understand that your perception of car is depend on the maiden of its maintenance of its function in relationship to go. You start stand, something very fundamental about categories themselves, because

Can you see in the world? Has this nature its it's a unity of form which is, I think that the empiricists can concentrate on, but it's a unity of form in relationship to a goal and that's built right into the perception of the so called object itself, and so your object perception is straining entropy by organizing the world in categories that are functionally relevant to goals that you that you, spain, either explicitly or even more importantly, implicitly category collapse produces this increase in entropy now feel positive emotion when you see yourself moving towards a value goal and you feel negative emotion win some. uncertainty with relationship to that goal is manifested itself or when you encounter say determined and obstacle that you have to walk around, and so That's part of the way that to go back

an earlier section of this discussion that you can relate emotion to both cognition and categorization, so this issue of entropy reduction is crucially important, because it's why the basis of categories asian itself. Now The reason I asked frist it about. Categories as micro narratives is because I very curious. Curious and and this probably more relevant to your work on spirituality, so One of the things you point out, the recent lecture you did for ralston college is that even the perception of a given object is dependent on some sense of oneness, yes and so period, is very interested in. This is like wise. One thing is right because it's not there. You know now There are two things: don't have to be physically contiguous to be one right right, so that Question is what constant

the wonders of the thing given that its fractional in an infinite number of weights and so and then The question that emerges out of that is what makes to cell phones. In the same category? Ok, so Let me run a hypothesis by me what you think about that, and I think that These are one First of all there one if you can use them for a specific purpose, with specific sequence of actions in relationship to a given goal. But there is spur symbol, so there are the same. If you can, place them functionally in the same pattern of operations with no, transformation of the path is all so there there there the same, because their functionally equivalent in relationship to go, not because they say they share a set of features. So anything that swap above all, is the saint yet but that is dependent on a teleology.

Necessarily dependent on a teleology yeah. Yet I mean this is this. Is this is not a criticism? there's a bicycle notion of multiple realise ability, you can have the same programme itself. And I can run at many different machines, so actual physical instantiated, can be different as law right as I'm getting the reliable same generative models. I as long as I at the same formal system running. That's why you that in fact I think that there was one potter one programme here: program there think about it. We think about this abstract entity a computer program or even a file. If you move it yeah as you move like what what what space are you moving it through, like the language, has come so readily to attempt you're doing this thing where you're moving it from one computer to another because of exactly that because you say

the general model here and here there is no- and this is an important qualification- there's no relevant difference. Yes, I did like, for example, this one might run a little bit slower on this computer than here, but it did not the impact on how you can use it, then that it then Dennis then it's it's the same enough. Yes, I wanted I wanted to introduce, and this will help get us into a little bit more recently public. paper with bread, anderson and mark miller. Ah, integrating the relevance, realisation framework and the predicted processing framework youtube you entered production, but if you, if you look at network there, you you and the way you explained in terms of pass reduction- is really So there's three basic kinds of networks. Networks are just ways in which things are connected like sequences. when an airline is connected with the way the internet is connected or the way, neurons are connected. Functional connectivity,

So there's a regular network which is nodes, are just things that are connected. You have all the all. The connections are just one step away, node to node right and then there's it's called a random network- is where you can have long distance connections. Very long does right. So I dont have to fly. you know from savannah to atlanta to blow identified directly from savannah to toronto. Something like that. So. The regular network is highly enough. should the way you measure efficiency is called mean path, distance, all the distance from all possible combination how many steps to act. From this point to that point, and then take all of them and you average them together. You get the mean path, distance, the average path distance between any two points. In a regular network is very, very, very, very high

I have to go through a lot of steps and a regular network is one where they're all connected to a local connection is when you look at it. It looks beautiful, it's highly ordered and all the lines are the same length and everything its highly inefficient, the the the random network is highly efficient cause. You have a lot of these long distance connections, the collapse, your path, you mean palaces but you don't, the brain doesn't go for either. One of those who because there's a trade off relationship as I make the network more random, to make it more efficient, which sounds like a contradiction in terms. But it's not. I lose, I lose. I lose robustness and the system so think about when when, when you, when you have a lot of these little connections, there, often with there's lots of redundant grain yeah, and so I can lose a lot of stuff- and I get

four degradation. I only get a small reduction in the average man I have. This ran with network, I can take up one lake and entire nodes can become isolated from each other. So that's the danger of efficiency versus redundancy we have. What you want, what what the brain does is. What's called small world yeah small world network is mostly regular and then one or two long distance connection yeah. So I pointed this out before him and he's that associated with. The manner in which the cortical columns organise themselves because there's there's a lot of micro connections within cortical columns that are very fast and efficient and run actively. Sparse connections began, cortical, call of yeah yeah, that's a car tax. By the way the cortex is made up of these cortical columns, which are rare, allocated units of about thickets hundred thousand neurons each with ten thousand connections so neuron, something like that and then have structures replicated that makes up the cortical sheet, so

everything we're timer right now is it is it is one such controversial. There's lots, I'm not saying anything that doesn't have a lot of good empirical evidence for. in a world relying on technologies that are still like Furthermore, I and density g that don't give us the kind of procedure like so, I want to say that I am not saying anything ridiculous here. I would not want to claim, like we ve, been subject to revision, yeah yeah yeah right, but it looks like this is organised at multiple levels of analysis, not only top down but back front and in out in smaller network formation and here's some really interesting things If give somebody proper fall, you take them into unconscious. The brain will go from being a global small world network into it'll break up small local, regular networks and then you bring them back in the consciousness it'll go from those local, regular networks back into account.

hence a small, so car heard harris talks about criticality in consciousness, and so how do you understand totally totally? So? How do you understand the relationship between? So car hard harris and other people? I talked about this and maps raising weight on the edge of propaganda and it's on the border between chaos in order that a little technical? Ok. So how is that relate of how you can stand the relationship between connectivity, it's great, ok and then, and then I want to bring it to a phenomenon of insight, because insight has a combination of I was surprised and then long term game, yeah yeah. Talk about. Is it long term irreparable game It depends I mean you can have you can you can have I mean you can have a systematic insight. You can have the kind of insight that piazza talks about which is not an insight into this problem. It's an insight into a system of all. You can have just an insight into this problem, like the nine that problem and it's just in the future. You'll know the end of the first insight would be a deeper insight than the second. Yes, that's it not like a technical definition of deep yes,

yes, which is a fun thing to add. Some we just talk about too, is what it means technically for something to be deep: okay, so back to consciousness and and work, organizing right, ok! So we talked about small world network and so brain seems to be doing. Is the especially the work have been recently with bread and mark its just redundancy. The brain is training between, and this is because it's not to ease between efficiency and if all mobility in the technical sense that's coming out of biology, which is the term is degeneracy, but I don't like to use the term degeneracy because immunity degenerate away from it because when, when average and here's that yeah degeneracy. What the, how long time, man a bad name. It now evolve ability is you, you are enough for done see an overlap in your system. To be resilient right felt just quit. Just very quick. You have Robustness problem in biology, which is you want a lot of variation in the species, but You don't want to be the individual that has the variation right,

because you're that changes are you're going to get killed right so What you do is you you, and this is the work of andreas Wagner. You you at the at the at the level of the geno type. You have quite a bit of this degenerate. The overlap and involve a video in right. In the end, the genome. it doesn't show up. In feed a typical differences, so there's not significant behave, but soon as there is a change in the environment the genome is ready to shift who produced a new new field. Typical behaviour so did Don't you know the older, the the older, the the the gene structure that codes- morphology, the less likely it is to avoid correction if its mutated. Yes, yes, that's a relatively new finding it. So it looks like even added at the mutation level that, Biology will

play with fringes but leave the centre intact? So mutations are basically random and they can occur anywhere in the genome. But if it's a fundamental element of the genome, the air correction systems replace it back to exactly what it was. Yes, so I think that's analogous to this issue we're getting out in terms of optimized learning with the start of the new year upon us? What better time, the now to start building a habit of prayer just like physical exercise, daily spiritual exercise, is critical to your well being, especially in a world where attacks on faith and religion are happening all around us every day, hallowed the number one christian per up in the? U s and the number one catholic gap in the world helps you maintain a daily prayer, routine, its film, studies meditations and reflections, including the number one christian podcast, the bible and a year, download the free and hallow dot com? Slash Jordan,

you can set prayer reminders invite others to pray with you and track your progress along the way, make. This year your year for spiritual growth and peace, get an exclusive three month free trial at Hallo. Dotcom such jordan. That's hallowed dot, com, slash, Jordan,. Yeah! You want you want your system. in the eighties, when they did the downsizing corporations to make them very fast, the problem out right, the problem is, you does they became brittle? They did. I couldn't if ever there was a sudden change in the marked, because everybody's working at the max bob, can you this is well know. I'm sorry, I'm working right! There's, there's! There's no evolve ability in this system, and so there's there's a lot of work coming out now that natural doesn't just select for traits it selects for the mandatory of availability, because If, if, if you and I are basically equal,

and we have more evolve, labelling is long as environments stable, nothing's, going to write. With a differentiated yeah. But if there's a sudden change in the environment, I'll get what's called I'll, get the innovator advantage, yeah I know I will evolve faster and then I will go into the new niece and I went on me optimally fitted for that niece right. I will propagate and feel that the use or what It's got a general cognitive ability. Yes, yes, yes, ok, so right! So what you doing not now back to self organizing, better, so what you doing is- and this is of course, to paper published with LEO far away back in two thousand and thirteen we actually talk to, Does it want? What use of the meadow psychology group who move the publications of like that? I'd, like a good good so again, subject to review but what looks like happening with the brain is oscillating between two different states: theirs the neurons firing synchrony and that

to do something like data compression and data compression is like when you draw the line at best, fit on a scatter plot who year basically lapierre throwing out a lot of variants. So they get clean, interrelation, extrapolation, so great general I'd suggest in some say: yes, you judge, but just allows you to generalise. The algae regret. Yes allows you to general ok right now, but then the brain, like avalanches, all the neurons for firing, a synchrony, and what that does is that mutual predictability goes down Entropy is going up with the brain do because I want it does that that opens up an opportunity for it the volume knew that psychedelic. So doing yes, yes, and so what the brain is doing is its constantly right. It's it, it self organizes, and then it goes critical breaks up not too much supper now, who so that it can now reconfigure in something different, and it

and so what you are doing is you're not just getting a one shot gently. Your are actually exploring different generalizations that are possible within the tape state space that make who soup if you can get the brain on that edge right words, com still doing this and there's been some taste. So now that also well, that takes us very interesting lisa and people should attend to this, because I think its crucial is that we have debate in our society. Probably since the enlightenment, whether the phenomenon, of meaning is real in any real sense, and it tends to downplay by empiricists, because it's not objective but it's to me highly probable that the sense of meaning, most fundamentally, is signal of the operation The optimization of this process is that right is that, we want to put ourselves on the edge where things are.

predictable enough, so that we get what we need and want, but so that at the same time we are expanding our adaptive confidence in a variety of domain. Simultaneous verily, I think meaning so so here is a way of thinking about this existential. So imagine you're pursuing a given goal whatever it is. Maybe you want to get married. You want to children and then you think well who the hell terrorism two hundred thousand years, what differences are going to make any ways, and then all your motivational energies drained out by that sort of nihilistic thought now why thing you can think in relationship to that as well. nihilistic thought is accurate because that's a subordinate timeframe and if you had any sense, that's the timeframe across which you would evaluate things, and you just have to pay them. Of the non of the meaninglessness of your life, or you could say, wait a second. if I'm pursuing a goal- and I use a frame of interpretation that renders it a motivational one

stability. Is that I'm using counterproductive frame of reference and that's actually what my nervous system is signalling to me. So one of the discussions we could have is like is, reasonable, epistemological and even onto logically, to use your sense of deep meaning as a guide to optimum functioning in the world. I think it's the instinct that is literally that guide. So I think How does the you want to say? That's really powerful. First thing I think thomas nagel is rate nihilism. Is, is not generally be by argument, because the arguments are actually technically not valid. So if someone says well a hundred thousand years from now will matter who it symmetrical what's happening a hundred thousand years from now. The matter to you,

has no normative right. Why's that wrote. Why is that a relevant fat exact? Yes? Yes, because you making an implicit presumption, exact that the wider time four eggs that yeah yes exactly exactly! That's the first point right in and so for him, and I We wish him it's not a matter of a propositional argument. It's a matter. You haven't learned how to properly integrate you're different perspective you're right you're right, remember some perspective. The cosmic there and you know, there's a wealthy things like you know He called in science and neo platonists m are about How do we properly cultivate diverge use for managing and proving the relationship between our press. Our perspective, yes, which that's the Jenkins ladder- probably yes, it gets so that second thing is when this goes too. Let's do something you and I both talked in common, and I you know we haven't come. We talk a lot about now. Privilege to work with John Kennedy. Is the note? and of you know, real relationship. Gibsons notion of affording one right here

none are now: let's go, do you know I ology and adaptability is adaptive any in the organism. Of course, not that doesn't make any sense is the great white charted adaptive one out of you put it in iridescent lies- I guess the activity and the environment, but that doesn't make any a real relationship between it's the way there really coupled and there are real couplings that make a real difference right, enzo we have to get away from like that, We have to get away from that cartesian, exhausted the problem of the cartesian exhaustive divide, as it gives you nothing that relate to the subject of the objective gray, which means truth, is and is not possible in writing. About also means that meaning evaporates in some areas hands because its reduced to this objective and then reduced to the arbitrary and then not just disintegrates, and that doesn't work because, while I dont think biologically either because. Meaning does appear to me to be something akin to a profound instinct and

even from an objective perspective you have to make. Supposition that actual biological instinct is real, and so the The idea of the object eats itself in that regard, in some fundamental sense, this kind of argument that always tried to have with SAM Harris it's like there. if the contradiction between the darwinian notion of reality and the newtonian or cartesian idea of reality, because there's a reality that has something to do with this notion of fit yet right of of of of relationship between the subjective and the objective, right and, and and and the newtonian and cartesian are formal systems. Darwin, the theory of evolution- is the first significant and important dynamical systems. Theory within science, in which. the self organization of the system and its coupling to the world are constitutive of the kind of entity. Right where, including as category as again as entities of categorization, yes option, yes, now, let's go,

to the adaptability and end ended and the self organized. So the self organizing criticality think about what it is doing. and how it is darwinian right, so you get you get the avalanche, that introduces variation and then you can put that selects from Europe and then a new variation and annual What the brain is doing at mike is its implementing the same grammar by what Biological ibm prostheses are feeding them to the environment. You right, doing this self, organizing criticality, that is constantly evolving your adaptive, cognitive adaptive to the invoking. So that's also, why just point out everyone. That's actually also why zero sum economic models are false. Is because the zero sum economic model presumes, fixed reality in relationship to affordances, and there is no fixed reality and the way that we've we've. Superseded the limb.

The growth in and perhaps not an absolute sense, but in some very important sense is that we do have this capacity, you think it was Alfred. North whitehead said that we can let her ideas and concepts die instead of us right, and so we we can You might say, wants a zero sum game economically speed there's only so much that you and I can share, but the there's an this is part of an argument which is well given the manner in which we structured our relationships and the environment. That might be, But then it's an open question how much restructuring of those a priori axioms can we do, and the answer is binding I that amount right unbelievably good at that, and we can do more with less all the time just I agree with that and and and and and in the end- and that I mean because we can take it up into levels of of symbolic abstract when you know that you get you get you put personally and I'll give you five dollars. Will you take it? Of course, Naples this situation I'll give you five dollars, and I give you ten dollars, but you only get to keep your

I've you let him keep his ten. It was you, I don't want it even We could get the five dollars they don't want to belong to the system. That is right I rarely move up a level of abstract. I don't want to participate in what they see as perceived unfairness. Well, and that's, I think, because they're playing a metagame exact situation right and what I was going to say is like the the the into which we got abstract the method games where they like. I don't know of any formal argument that says it stops at this level. Do you have to go towards your point? One more thing around so brain is evolving it I think this has a lot. This is what basically, what is going on irrelevance realisation? You can see it in your attention, you, you know default mode and test centres The fault is making your mind wander and you introduce variation and then task selects and then you very you kill it off most of the variations, but some of them come in because your mind wandered enough. You can do this and Stephanie Dixon.

People a problem like an insight problem in their imposing. They can't solve it and you just in just a little bit of entropy into the system, like you put some static on the computer, or you shake it and then the heavy insight, because it puts in enough critic right, so they stop this unit. Dimensional task focused attention ran. It allows the spread of activation right and then and then they re select and they evolve a new way of framing the problem. You get there, what's. That would mean in some sense. Okay, so imagine that you, snap out of gold, focused attention israel We have the psychoanalytic ideas, so freud would put his place into a state of free association right and so freud's tat was so you're in the garage workin on your car and you need the vows you bought last week the cabinets and on the shelves, but the parts are never in the right place ebay motors has the car parts you need over a hundred and twenty two million of them all in one place and all the right prices. Fine parts for

everything from your classic coop to your brand new truck and ebay motors dot com. Let's ride. try just to say whatever comes into your mind or describe your fantasies and just let yourself talk right, no self, censorship, and so really what he meant by that was a band any info and goal focused attention for the moment and let your mind wander you'll get a lot of this to guess. You get a lot of purposeful fantasize right you just let it that's a contradiction in terms he let his mind wander, he would have discussions with the characters of his imagination, for example, so very hallucinogenic in some real sense, but you can imagine that. imagine, there's a hierarchy of rules and you move from a unity at the top of the hierarchy, to a plurality. Guess at any given moment when you're focusing your attention you're using the, center focus of your attention as the main source of unity, and

reducing everything to an a priori set of perceptions and principles. But then you let that goal have these diverse networks in your brain. That can they all have a slightly different way of looking at the same situation that- and you can let them have an internal dialogue- is here and some of those one of the things that psychoanalysts pointed out. Some of those can be in like imagine, for example, that you're angry at someone and so you allow yourself to notice fantasies that you're, generating as a consequence of the anger right and you'll see. Maybe you have a very violent fantasy and something that's highly aggressive, while you're being informed that part of Category system has that vengeful, never say as a goal and that so we might be relic. In some sense, if you can figure out how to integrate that it related goal to a higher set of principles for I don't want to produce. bloody ma am because that doesnt iterate well across instances, but that doesn't mean you should ignore the.

part of these subsidiary systems. Exactly. I bet that so you introduce the the very so when you variation differentiation right and then but differentiation that has the potential to weaken, merge, that's right, and so you a system simultaneously differentiating and integrating it becomes what Kelso another of medicine but the system is complex, a fine it can you a greater variety of things, while remaining integrated as an agent. It does the right right right, right, ain't right, and so what you want That's what happens by the way in the short cathedral, when you wonder the maze the symbolic representation there right. So the idea is you go into the maize in one section, and then you all four corners of the world right, so you have to cover all the territory and that where you get to the centre, and so the idea there is maximum differentiation as a consequence of voluntary experience that pushes too

further towards a unity exactly and so what what? What you get is a system that is complex, a fine and if it's done right, it's it because of this real adaptive fitted. its complex. Suffocation is increasingly conforming to the complexity of the world. Yet riots right, that's the scientific enterprise. Young sense right. That's that's that calibration again. If it real world pattered lid, synoptic integration and not just for information over innovation for your career. Yes, Yes, yes, yes, yes, there is bad who so that software that is included Now, here's the thing subordinate when a system is Let's all use the halves firing, wiring distinction when it fires in self organizing critically attends to create a small world network wiring cause it's mostly. Its organised right when its organise their orders it, but when it breaks apart, that opens up the possible

one of these long does yeah yeah. Now, if a system starts to wire, as a small world network It's mostly regular connections, keeping you do in the norm, but it has a few long distance connections that can certainly snap you out, like that. Was between conservatism and liberalism there it. It is men, so smile of fires. small world at fires and self organizing credit kelley intends to wire as a small world network and of wires is a small world network at tends to fire his self organizing criticality. So these two things can actually mutually inform. the other, and so, if you can get it right, you can be right can be organizing your brain so that you make it more capable of this evolving of framing and is better at doing at that will tend to reinforce you, organizing array, so there's real possibility here for people to do that to get that that that that sort of reciprocal opening of a virtuous cycle

It is interesting that we have to do. We have that self, organizing criticality theory of insight, so inside is you ve used you you? You have to break out of an inappropriate frame the criticality and it reorganizes into the better for you. evolution, but showing and better would be something like this. efficient and capable of performing a broader range of action that is, like a p, a jedi in description of what constituted a better theory a bit. Theory allows you to do everything. The previous theory allowed you to do plus something more hopefully, gain of efficiency right and that's a definition of better, but you you, you want to keep to a good theory right. A good theory is a fish in that sense, but a good fear is also generative, so you're always optimize between efficiency and evolve, ability that yeah right and so, like you said you you, don't you don't just do compression that's apple. If your brain just fires in a completely synchronous thing, that's epilepsy re, because you just

this system down. It has no capacity to adaptively refit itself. To do so, the brain is constantly I think this actually is mapping on two key we should have a simulation of comedy yep, yeah assimilation is compression, making everything integrated accommodate and then he calibration is this dynamical constantly trade between them is that you will come, any kind of stable thing. You can't evolved and theory. You find the final theory, you constantly moving to a theory that robs more differences and yet brings them into an active integration? and then the theory have won't pay. One appears use points and enhanced his writing enemies. Had this explicitly was that the task of genetic epistemological was to specify the process by which the balance between assimilation of accommodation occur exactly that has something to do with. Okay, so two questions, so we ve already

put forward the hypothesis that the instinct for meaning is something like a marker for the proper spanish in an organization of of, category system of the brain itself, or maybe even related to health. But then There's another interesting thing that that car, hard harrison and people like him have been concentrating on, which is that the phenomenon of consciousness itself, which is being itself in some real sense in so far as you have to be conscious of things for them to be, is like still don't understand how this gives us out of this so called zombie problem, it's like. Why is it, consciousness itself. In this sense of being is associated with operation on this meaningful educate and they re question to ask right because I have already said their relationships between small world network formation and how conscious you are and there's also relationships between self organizing criticality. So you can get you

At present, people to visual stimuli that are put individual systems of the brain is constantly flipping between them like a regular square and what you can have you can see is self organizing criticality moving between areas as the brain. slipping in consciousness between the triangle and the square. Rights are two different patterns: tat perception that associate yes or independent consciousness. Ok, so here's alluding to that. I think a lot of this stuff is how we're implementing I can put one more piece on this: I can get to your consciousness. Okay, let's go back, that's worth a than willing to wait around for that so You try to do it, to try to do. You know, predict the processing and, as you know, and they pick up on it, insight and enforced. A hazard to the brain doesn't trying predict the world. It tries to predict itself in its interaction with world, which is, as you have really really profound idea right and in the the prediction is, why say, better terms is not just predicting is attempting to complete so like it find a predictable and also something by the waves,

problem. I've always had with the prediction. Models is there's a cold cognitive element to it, because we really wanted. We really wanted to have happen in the world. What we desire- let's say so: it's not just cold prediction, and this is as a slogan. I've been footing Relevance realisation is not called calculation ok, ok, I didn't know you had formulate a gas, yes, so as to the prom so predict the processing you're doing all this stuff, but the question- and we will give bumped into it already is- were what do I put it right and you can't do it do initially to illogical answers because they pursue presume right that you ve got capacity to represent the environment? So you you have to these along our argument. I'll just for dick wait. Wait you have to do is you have to have the system has to have an internal way of deciding which, which errors?

knows engendered models. It's gonna prioritize hoovering, yes, yes, certainly means that. Yet so that's called precision waited within predictive and their theory of waiting, is explicitly that that is what selective attention in this matter onto the models of have a like watson and others that others intention is. Is it this really nested dynamical prioritization thing in its content. It gives you this flowing salience landscape right, that's what attention is doing, ok, so that the end where the two, where in the paper that the rat and market I published, is you got, the data processing comes down to the central committee of this precision waiting and then you get clark in two thousand and seventeen saying. Well task relevance and then who they were back to the rather by what's happening, is virgins has relevance. Realisation says you know: no, what you're actually doing you doing things like this,

evolution and what evolution that that cognitive evolution is doing is its finding these important trade off relationship between efficiency and evolve, ability, between exploiting the here now and exploring the there that, between being at the level of the features zoo, zooming in and being at the level of the gestalt you have when looking out into the world and stepping back and looking and so there's. Oh, so you can think about each one of these as a domain of opponent, processing, yeah, right, like like in your in in your autonomic nervous system, between the participant and then you more and where, in their end, there's mehta appoint a processing. All of the important processes are also pulling in, and so you get this multi dimensional stay space than into here, says like a hierarchy of dialogues? Yes, yes, yes and they're, all intersecting and low. The idea was that that is primary, what's coming out in the predicted, like that's how So you know what precision have waiting is working. It's basically doing this, Three dimensional opponent processing this

p, dimensional complex of, is multi them. National evolution of your doktor fit and then the two models come together and they fit together and is like it's The marriage between darwinian natural action and then deleon genetics. The theories jobs tail dovetail, come together and they converge on a solution to the frame problem. Carry so so then ability used at to bottom of ok, ok! Well, I wanted to do is make a saying we hear that might find interesting. I think all modeled, extremely well, particularly by symphonic music, because what you have, if you listen to two two simple Make music? What you see as there's dialogues at the level of the instrument might still be a proposition and then a counter response, and then all those dialogues are structured, hierarchically in relationship to a higher order structure and that's the melodic integrity of the entire piece, but will align themselves without right. And so you can see this multi dimensional processing occurring in a musical peace. That speaks to

the core issue of reality, which is actually the harmony in the beauty of the peace itself so and now means that that deep, meaning that you're describing is pointing to something like the optimized balance between multiple levels of processing Simultaneously- and some of that is also temporal, right, balancing the here and now, as you said, with a what did you call them they're there that there and then right right and so the reality is. The emergent balance between all those different viewpoints right than any given viewpoint, it flows right so think that this is perfect. because you know music is basically playing with our salience landscaping for the sake of play computer. For me, it's in the being motors, not the having more when it will not trying to do anything. We're we're impure development. Because we're doing pure play, we play hasn't airplane herblay. You basically is the closest what it Rex murphy said. All music art aspires to. The condition of

he's right and notice of music is not in your its yes between its fundamental the residence. The between this the connected this, the fits in getting dancing and then routes in john rooted in bearing as to epiphany, and I got to talk to John reason. He he said- and this is so- and he admits it because he's deeply influenced by plato. This is such a platonic thing to think. How intelligibility is basically there's a musicality telling right delicately right. So there are rhythms who right away, there's melodies everything has its through line, which is like a melody and then the melodies and the rhythm go together with an overarching harmony and you getting all of this salient slant and right and so music All pointing to something like an ultimate unity in so fundamental to in neo platonists right right, then I want to talk. two boat, that one idea do so we will get into that little bit later, but to return to consciousness, yes of it so important. This is

firstly associated with with, of course, with attention with working memory and with fluid fluid and tell Yes, he right angles, and and of course there is the others there's quite high levels of correlation between working memory and standard measures of g? they might be the same thing even make, maybe maybe or a very close their posts. Yes, so here's the idea, we're going to do up the plausibility argument. So if you take a look at many of so there's two different theirs, while there's three question I did I did this, then there'll be there's three questions about consciousness. Okay, one is, what's the nature, consciousness. How does this weird nonphysical a thing exist in the physical universe? That's the right, there's the but there's the function, but what does consciousness since you can do so much behaviour as an intelligence. right when I, why not all of it went on yeah, ok and then, as you do well, you're

Thus, cerebellum is a good example of that kind of thing is more neurons in the cerebral anymore cortex, and it's not conscious by any by any normal measures, so it's like obviously com, This isn't a mirror concept and some neural activity, no, no, so much of that is unconscious, and then it does beg the question. If so much of it is unconscious, why not all of it right and then? The third question is a meta question: what's the relationship between the nature of the function question and here's what I actually agree with descartes? I disagree with a lot of current philosophy. Descartes tries to argue and answer those two questions in an integrated fashion. The nature question: The function. Question should be answered together at what we have to do in modern academic philosophy and science, as we tend to separate them. We, which we talk about just the function problem or just the heart problem, which is the nature problem, and that, if you just think about it for a minute, that's very problematic. Trying to talk about function without talking about nature is very, very problematic and by

first at trying to talk about the nature of something without talking about without functions, with respect to other things very, very problematic. there's a longer argument that just giving you the jest you wanna, so what You take a look right if you take a look at of the leading theories. Let's take the global workspace theory, for example: what's the what's what's the fund, of consciousness in the global web. So the idea is, your conscience is something like a computer does taught in your unconscious. Has all the files and what consciousnesses is I can bring anything onto the desktop, and I can manipulate it and then I can broadcast it back to what a rainy ring and you can and where you update your unconscious. Doing that to write became part of what consciousness does seem to do is to assess faulty unconscious, actions recalibrate them and reject them, so consciousness this thing that moves up and down the hierarchy of unconscious and regulates it right, here's here's the thing- and this, of course is the frame problem. You can check

all of the gatt right around. I can't you give me a morocco or so in this is. I am not imposing this on shanahan bars bright with the they public they and bars is personally argued shanahan and has gone up and chanting insubordination and is literally person who, like your rights, Stanford encyclopedia article on the frame problem rang, and so they argue that one of the functions of consciousness is to help solve the issue of relevance, realisation the proper irrelevant. Now. I don't think their solution works, but that that's that's not the issue there saying what the fuck of consciousness is to do enhanced relevance realisation. Then you look at the a boar and south, and they say well, what's the function of conscience, the function of consciousness is like and think about, the relationship to working memory, It's too we organise and restructure like chunky, so we can yeah right right. I put that, then. Is why, when we need that what we needed in situations compare

and you can drive a car like a zombie and when you can't drive it is only right when, when I need consciousness- women, something axiomatic has moved well, yet, yes in it cashes out in this way, the problem I'm facing is now ill defined, rather than a well defined yeah. For me, the problem is messy. There's also there's fun that's a puzzling you'll get yes, yes, yes and right. There's novelty There is now stuff that I was previously able to discard as irrelevant error that I can't discard, the relevant error, and so do I, and that would be associated with the fact that you'd have an automaton solution to whatever set of problems was making themselves manifests. That's right! You don't have to tend to it because you ve got taken it into account. Even your perceptions is taken into account and allow a lot of little regular networks to run it. Yes. right now I get into this situation and I need to go into right,

small world network, I need to have the system I need to evolve and enhance my relevance. That's where you get a fly consciousness. When you have insight, you actually get there and so that or when something goes wrong. Yes, rights, like all yes consciousness. Yes, once that, but ok so there's a longer argument here, but you can take a look. You know pyramids radical plasticity, hypothesis, Tony's, integrated and for me basically converge on what consciousness is due. Doing is its higher order, relevance realisation, which of course is what working memory is doing like what would that stuff, our colleague, glyn hash, her we're talking about a work, it's not just miller's holding space because I don't really count white chunky and so more no, no, it's it's it's functional, it's it's! It is sort of the last ditch serving of how good, as my relevance realisation before I commit the action in the world

I think salience is actually just relevance to your working memory in that fashion, so the functionality. Ok, so let's say that the growing convergence member plausibility from many different people onto the function of consciousness higher order, recursive relevance! Realisation, if you the conscience has done some preliminary relevance. Realization, and then you do that. Yes, but this is a demanding and you you you ratchet up. The relevance realize is that is that as well ok now, you give me that right, I can start to talk. What about the phenomenon ology of consciousness beyond the functionality that'll get? I need to make a distinction I need to make an important distinction that has not been why I would argue, hasn't been may very well and therefore there is a deep equivocation and confident you need to make it. Thinking between adjectives, quality are the felt experience things you need to make it Thanks for between the adjective equality and the ad verbal kuala, adjective appalling,

Our greenness blueness balloon is that of the ones the philosophers love to talk about, I've read your call. You are our things like hearing this. Now this togetherness and you say why would I ever need that? Ok, so where are those at verbal because their modifications of how you are connected to the world? They are not specific proper. Ok, so do they didn't do that does not correspond to a now That's a noun verb distinction in some rights so towards what things are versus they give would you say how do we of their function, how they could kill emerge in being and in your consciousness. So let's go to pieces, empirical evidence that support what I'm saying much is drawing this speculation. One is I've been in this state it is widely reported. Many different people cross. Me different variables. Culturally history, you can get it what's. Foreman calls the pure consciousness of it

so you're, not conscious of anything it. I've been conscious of consciousness, you're, just purely conscious its memory, we talked about? You? Can step back and yeah even stepped back until you? You can't stay back any further, because you be trying to step back in consciousness into unconsciousness right and when the pure, conscious of it there there are. There is no greenness. There is no blueness. There is no black now there are no objects around of things, but you don't blackout. What there is is, there is a sense of hearing this when your hearing turning and at present should say, and now this is that that that sense of eternity at an and then there's everything is one unity, togetherness, here it is in the now descended, togetherness, don't go, even though the adjective appalling, do, which tells you the acceptable kuala are not necessary for consciousness.

Verbal one showed you think of. That is an experience of something akin to the ground of being yes, because here, when you, when, like you're doing that. What is that? The name of that is that of god that was announced moses the same idea, because, while the name is I am that I am. I wasn't that I am. I want to try to answer that and I want to try it, and so I was that I went to work with. I went to the respond retreat in vermont and giving my talk and relevance, realisation that I was getting great questions from monks, actually interacting with other theorists and I came to What I think is an important insight, so your system is doing relevance. Realization, is giving you the complex invocation of the world is giving you the world of things, but as you organised like in like so it's giving you this

but you can come to that in one of the things relevance realisation is interested in is relevant, realise that's what I've been cited the lies all my way, realizing which relevant was actually wrong, the restructuring, so it's intrinsically, because its intrinsically evolving and self correcting is entrance the interested in itself. Ok, I can do relevance, realisation on the world and that's too that that is the realisation of beings, parliament's role nation has to realise its own irrelevance with respect to be who it has the like. You have to stop trying to think of it Your experience ass, a movement up Jacobs. Ok, ok, so you have such a story happens with moses? Is that he's walking the desert, so he's confused in some sands and so thing attracts his attention. Yes, the burning bush and it doesn't like announce itself. in some magnificent way it glimmer.

In the shadows of his perception, but then here two gates. So imagine, imagine that something glimmers to attract your attention. That's me. carried by the way. Yes, here he's the wing message: germany, jaws hermes, yeah, trying to attract your attention. So now, pursue that, and now you who are deeply and the deeper you pursue at the farther you get away from the particulars of the phenomenon itself, closer you get to something like general. being, and that seems to me the idea of its implicit in the story of the burning bush and the announcement of the name of god. Yes, but so what happened this is. This is from gregory of agnes and his work on those is going up right at them and all the nicholas of coups right. The burning bushes inherently paradoxical right, ass regulates it's something that is destroying itself, but his maintain right right right, and so it's under me generation and destruction,

underneath all of the mechanisms by which being is particularised. It is trying to point I am that I am, or actually I will be, what I right right right, and so it is trying to point to the round of being as opposed to the world, and what? What? What did Moses trying comment? It's a paradox, as you said so interesting, it is a paradox, is pointing the way to that sort of you. I think in your lectured roston about the idea that the parables in the new testament are basically then codes re. Their paradox is that are designed to produce a state of insight and that's the grip of imagination by relevance, realization and a pointer to something that's beyond at exactly exactly you get ripped by the paradox in the animals is the comprehend it. No. He takes off his shoes and he goes into reverence right right right right. He that's. Why takes off issue yet because he now he knows you standing on wholly ground as they have to name is

and even that doesn't mean you stop naming ridiculous yeah. Well that without would be the abandonment of of sanity right some real lance. There is theirs meant when the relevance realisation at right can point its own irrelevance. When you are trying to not grip anything yeah you're trying to be opened to the ground of everything right right right. That's how I would answer and then the utility okay. So now the utility of being open to the ground of everything let let me lay this out, you tell me what you think about it: She might say. Well do does everything have to converge on one. That's the monotheistic quest to get some real sense. While, let's say forget that question from let's look at the alternative things converge- yes, okay, so what's this psychological state associated with non convergence, while others, too if I have a multitude of goals and if

multitude. That means they conflict is if they didn't conflict, conflicting, be a unity, is live a multitude of goals, so that's an entropy problem and I'm going to chaotic, confused and anxious as a consequence, so there one consequence and the second consequences- positive emotion is associated with movement towards the goal, but I have more, pull fractured gold, then the intensity of my positive emotion, that's my enthusiasm and that's possession by god by then my enthusiasm is diminished. So the alternative to the vision of a monotheistic unity is a chaotic. Plurality, that's associated with the detriment in motivation and enthusiasts? Yes, how that doesn't answer that of what that all unity might be right, but it doesn't least point out the consequences of not assuming that such a thing exists. It's basically the uk,

all the cycle, pathology of polytheism, something like that an end when that's manifested socially. This is also something interesting. If you and It cannot agree on a unity of vision now in and were we're both spluttering- and we agree on that, so we can sit here without conflict. If we cannot agree on a unity of vision, then we are in conflict. Yes, those are the only options. So now we have this problem, there has to be a unity or else these are the consequences and then them three as well. What constitutes that unity? yeah? I totally agree. I mean you see, arguments from citizens because it basically doing that that move, which is where I think I mean there are some things you can say about the unity. It can't be at any level below ultimate reality right right. It has to be to become a vessel, the definition of ultimate rio. Yes, that was exactly an end, and then you get it's so I could.

To the psychological, the upper stomach right to understand something and to grasp it? Its reality is: is an act of integration is in its an you know, yeah, and so they were what science does. Here's all these desperate phenomena and I have a unifying understanding and then here's different theory: here's darwinian natural selection, whose mandolin genetics and I get it. I get model abolition, airy theory, that the grand synthesis and why, what and wire scientist trying to find the guy knows are profound synthesis and their profound, because they point to a deep underline unity. Exactly exactly- and this is the NEO platonic argument and then- and then you add in the argument I did at length and ralston reality isn't or if that fundamental grammar of intelligibility doesn't conform to a fundamental grammar. as ranked right down your deal. Are we're doing a radical solar system, a rat? So it's not you can't you, I would argue,

I would ask people to look at the longer argument ralston, but you can't take that in position that, yes, that is the grammar of intelligibility but reality is somehow fundamentally different because caught like just clerks argument, different cork same apart like What presupposes the existence of other minds within a pistol ology? That gives him no way of acknowledging the since of other minds, wisely, writing the bam critic. Can, he doesn't think wise, you upset when he doesn't get the recent because he believes that there are other minds right that they and their rights and their real and they're out there, and he somehow has access to them, and they alternative frame a great, so his implicit presupposition, even a very pleasant presuppositions. Don't now he's into performative contradiction, we have said so. If you- and so the newport tonic argument- is not the particulars but the great or of intelligibility and grammar reality have to automatically out. Although this is actually really why I wanted to talk to you for raising this issue here, so I did a lecture for

then, as well as the emphasis on the greek idea of the logos. Yes, yes, so ok, so I want to I want to. I want to ask some questions about this, and I suppose this has something to do possibly with neo, platonists, em and buddhism and christianity. Sure, ok, so. That's what will will open with the question about what might constitute this ultimate unity think about it as a phenomenon: logical unity in some sense and and put it in the objective space. But what I want make a different case. So I think ultimate. Unity is better conceptualize as something that you might term a spirit. And we can get into your desire, Jonathan, aurelio, ok, ok, so soap spirit is an animated principle or a set of animated produce. A universal spirit would be the same set of animated principles, estimating a lot of people similar yes, I so it's like a meme in in the in the dark and sense right. It's like a hyper me, and so the question is

well. Why should you conceptualize? That is the spirit, so let me offer a pro, vision about what's happening in the biblical corpus? it's. So there's some attempt to spare defy the implicit unity, and the way the biblical corpus does, that is by laying out a sequence of narratives and the new motives stress again front yes ultimate unity right for example, in the story of noah, here's the unity that is being pointed to. So you have no characterize to someone who's, a wise man for his time and place, which is all any all of us anything or any of us can hope for Now, no one has a intuition tat. This we are coming and he has failed. In the intuition and act on it and then god is characterized as the source of the intuition and faith was cases characterized as the willingness to abide by that intuition? That's the story against.

and then all the people that are criticising and against all other things that might occupy his attention. Prioritizes that yes, yes, okay, so he meant that and that's how he manifests faith in that. Okay. So now story bombs up against that and the stories the tower of babel and the very different narrative, and so what you have here is this in this: actually related to this problem of criticality. But we won't go into that. You have this point position that human beings can build these towers of abstraction that can become totalitarian s, yes, rice and they go in punishes that yeah he dystrophy yeah and in fragments and fragments it makes people confused. Okay! So now that's a very different picture of god, the Noah god, okay, but they're contiguous. They call that metonymy. So there's an quotation by juxtaposition that there's an identity between those two different but are very diverse. Ok, so that due to more these, then you have distorted abraham

our abraham is a slow start right. So he's very wealthy. His parents are wealthy. He lives a very privileged in sheltered life, but a spirit makes itself manifest to him and the spirit the call to adventure- and so god in the abraham story, is the spirit that calls even the comfortable out to the cutout, catastrophic adventure of their life and that's juxtaposed against these other two spirits. Then you have I'd, say moses, now you have a different characterisation of that ultimate unity and the ultimate unity in the story of Moses is the unity that announces itself in the burning bush, but also the spirit that punishes the tyrant and that where's the slaves out of slavery, and so now the open future to meaning The gods of egypt are gods of location and function, the god of moses and even what but even so. This is a development of the god of Abraham, the god of Moses travels with people through space and time into an open future

right right right. Ok, that's that's! A reference is far I can tell back to the opening lines of genesis, because god characterizes himself at the beginning of the book of genesis. I think, that are very much akin to the terms we ve been using to describe consciousness itself, because god is the thing that confronts the plural potential chaos really, if you look at what what is it? What's the word taylor total va, who that's really what it means. It means plural potential chaos is something like that. He confronts that blurry potential chaos and rates habitable or the habitable order? That is good out of it and that the image of god is in man those rights if I did the same thing- and this is so crucial because it also implies so one of the core since my students used always ask me, is how do you know that what you're teaching us isn't just another ideology is, I was trying to teach.

counter radiology and that's a really good question. It's the question. Right, isn't it is the question, but it is in You could have a story that concentrates The process by which functional stuff are generated. But this is what I wanted to say to you. I think what you getting I mean a spirit is something like a multiple realisable like you know, generative What I mean by that is You try to find the through line each one of the things that Why did the multi dimensional upon a processing each one of these narrative is an opponent processing that's fine versus able and there's this and but there's also writers, egypt for the problem here. They're gap, egypt, conflict, but but but Egypt is explicitly here now or explore the there. Then Then we talked about the core relevant member. They talk about. The flesh parts of Egypt is like they did this if we stay here, are the sole We could just explain

but you're right. Well, that's what the israelites get get. What would nostalgic about when you're in the desert? That's right! Their immediate needs are no longer being gratified and that causes them to become faithless and and and fractious, what I'm suggesting to you is like I'll, just use the that the exit, a story, though it as one of but all of them. I would I what myth is always doing We're after doing it, and let me stress, had sort of a sense of this was structural ism. But what is it's doing, is waning you to appoint a processing, then you can think about a here's. This myth with disappointed, processing, here's this myth with this important process, what's the through life- and they want to do as I try to find like like you're doing what I would like in earlier years, trying to find the multi dimensional like nexus the fruit the matter of the monastery line, yeah of all the appointed processing you trying to do say: ok, all the relevance realisation if I, if I could do all the tradeoffs. This is nicholas of Cuba, with his open sense of infinity in vienna

in the ancient greek wielded, the infinity is a bad thing. It's chaos, but with kusa. It opens up into. And then the whole neoplatonic tradition into a positive thing is, I don't know if I could all of the. Of all of the opposite. I would see the infinity they all coincide, the coincidence of it is right and that would be the culmination not in in any entity that would be sort of the summation of what our cognitive it is about it would be sort of. I would have found the source of intelligibility, because I would have moved to the deepest grammar of cognition, which would go me and that's the resolution of all posing conflict sums. Ok, so here is an interesting question. So I've been thinking about this recently so talking with partial, so there as idea in the end? the story of adam and eve. That's

offering doesn't descend upon the world until the sin of adam and eve, and I've been trying to take that apart with Matthew patio most particularly. The casual believes that if you believe that the sin of even and Adam was something like pride and eve hearken to the voice of the serpent and serve in some sense is that which is poisonous in and and the fruit it offers is inevitable in its essence and pride is that can even speak for the poisonous inedible and added. pride is that he'll hearken to the voice of eve and so oh, and I like that idea. I like the idea that pride comes before a fall and that we can bite off more than we can chew and then men's pride. What would you say motivates them to attend to appear bigger than they are in the eyes of women and that women's pride motivates them to incorporate under the guise of compassion more than they can eat. Let's say now, there's christian idea and a jewish ideas. Well that sir

for doesn't descend upon the world until this sin takes place elsewhere. Imagine imagine that you follow through line of meaning assiduously anywhere well to bring the opposites into coincidence, and you'd have to do that with proper epistemic humility of great and openness to possibility the question would be in some senses too What degree do your moral errors actually constitute the suffering to begin with, and then to what degree do you think the suffering itself can be ameliorated? and I mean maybe eliminated. In favour of something like the spirit of play. If you follow the through line of meaning religiously right. That's because I have this sympathy to the idea of it that

Unbearable suffering in some sense is built into the structure. Reality itself right cause we're finite and mortal creature. That makes you were a buddhist. We have right right, although there you see the same emphasis and judaism right with the tragic sense of history and, of course, the fact that the central bank christianity is crucified in some sense. Thanks to the same thing, but then there is an open question there right, which is well yes, Suffering is built into finitude, but it's clearly the case. we exaggerate multiply it by failing to. the mark you know I'm sir, I think we can ameliorated. I happen to think that the very processes irrelevance, realisation that make us adaptive, make us perennially system. the ball to self deception. That's my interpretation of the first novel truth buddhism. The very processes like whittling, just look at Does your rustic a biased literature to its double named for good reason? I can do, I can actually calculate formal probability of events, its common, a toilet.

So I have to use the representative heuristic and the availability heuristic right, but anders and work of could pick up talking about this, course of grants, and others is in many situations that outperform emit in real world messy ill defined situations where there is real and certainly not risk. If confused or sitting at risk, as you can assign a probability right right words, but real uncertainty, these heuristic actually do really really well, but they do make you prone to mistake you take your loved one to the airport. And you say: don't you say all these euphemism for don't die tax me when you there safe trip, because and easily imagine a plain crashing and would apply crashes: it's not a crash into disaster, it's a tragedy! So the availability and their representatives yardsticks are getting triggered like mad, and then you get back in your car, the north,

american death missionary, though giving it a second thought and that's an act of self deception, who write that significant, so you're not properly calibrating your level of affecting arousal to the risks your face, it that's that's what I mean when I think the very things that I can't get rid of the heuristics. I would face common at twelve explosion by trying to the probability calculations, but that in this, the no free lunch there it's well. That's that's the complicating factor of how much of so you might say well how much of suffering is due to the intrinsic nature of finite fan. Two, that's gonna do how much is due to ignorance and inevitable blindness and then how much is due to the failure to hit the mark and wisdom is about being able to differentiate those improperly calibrate your efforts to that differentiation. Elaborate on that, so so plato, jus highland finite, transcendent,

platos whole argument is. We are finally transcend. We are being out capable of transcending herself, but if we only pay attention to that, we fall prey to hubris right: if we, if we only pay attention to affinity, we fall prey to tyranny and servitude right keep the two in ongoing opponent processing in that what we want. What we truck keep trying to do is resolved into one of these or the other, and we can going back and forth and plato is about. You know can't resolve that you have to always hold those two into yeah, that's right! All right, and that means you have to you have to properly realise like so there's no salute. There's knows this solution is participation in the process that continues to generate a solution. So let me give you a strong analogy: when we ve been a vote, is there a final form of life in evolution? That makes no sense understandable, Lucian there isn't there the culminating life form? That's not that's, not the that's, not

no, no reality, the evolution of just speaking that way right. There's, there's no there's no project now now the organism that will never suffering the possibility of extinction, that's impossible. Who can't do that? I think that if relevance, realisation the meaning is a kind of now: ongoing rapid cognitive evolution. There is no final form This is one of the areas where criticized the platonic framework plato's and of of the sacred as completion static perfection that I find is very problematic because I don't think it actually sits well with his we should have with it then soccer I like to think of music in that regard. Don't you think about what bach does in particular, I really love the brandenburg concertos, because what barack does, as he brings a phrase, to a magnificent conclusion, and then out of that emerges another set of possibilities that he brings to allow their magnificent conclusion, and it seems to me That's, a nice, more

for the unfolding of being right. It's yours to attain a goal and then to pull out of that goal. A new goal that transcends the previous school and to do that in their financially that's a self regulation and and and then maybe you do have as a final solution in some sense too- that the acquiescence to that process I'm? Ok, so that let me honestly that the toy that the ultimate version of you met again. Yes, yes, definitely ok, so let let live them. The real of this in christianity especial eastern orthodoxy. You see gregory of nyssa, nyssa and use in maximus n it is this notion of practices that we come to rest in god right what god is? God is the the matter of florence, so that we continually self transcend yeah yeah. We never without the jacobs, zeiner vision, yes to write. to ascend, continually towards

destination, its infinite receding, that's right right on that grows hasn't receive. But but this is the thing the infinity is not inaccessible to write it The infinity is not just receding from you, it's also reaching towards you, and then this is reality. Reality is constantly shining into your frame with intelligibility and constantly resounding out into the mystery, And- and I think the announced that that's the parallel of the greek idea of the logos, I think, with the judeo christian idea of the logos, I think so too I mean there's lots of people who won't like that, but I think the notion of the logos that especially as you see it, coming through the newport art, a product, then, taken up into deal logos and to die out that yeah. I think I think that deeply converges. I mean I mean the christian model is ultimately a model of that and and this is not going to try and do anything, but that the paradox of of of the unity to a trinity is an attempt

summers. How say, there's something inherently dial logical. I would argue about how we are we come into relationship with ultimate reality: bright, red, that's right and is an attempt to solve the problem of unity and multiplicity as well. I've been looking at the transformation of the image god in the biblical corpus? We know the biblical corpus is at assembled library right and we don't exactly understand the process by which the stories came follow one another and how they weren't acted with each other exact exact. So it's a mystery, but it's a mystery of collective intuition at something like that. Had just risen, cognition get out we're, yes, yes, and, and and and it's something like distributed insight, because What happens is theirs different forms of juxtaposition and some of them catch on people go. Oh, yes that works, but they don't know why, which is very interesting

You have the old testament corpus in christianity, followed by the new testament corpus and there's a new proposition here. I want you to tell me what you think about this, so The things that psychotherapists have learned across disciplines in the last hundred years is that if you get people to voluntarily confront what there, of avoiding disgusted by inclined to be wilfully blind about they get braver. it isn't. Situation. It's not the substitution of relaxation for anxiety. You can do without relaxation training it see to be contingent on the willingness to do the voluntary confrontation. But that means I think, that really means a willingness to break down to a degree to like toot. There has to be told The willingness can't be mere assertion. It can't be

It has to be not it's not it's not propositional yet, and it has to do it yet you have to do it and there has. There has to be a vulnerability. There has to be a real willingness to learn get hats, humility, yes, humanity, epistemic, end world humidity gap, and so I think, might might what is it? you're doing as you you're, actually making use of dialogue, or perhaps even the logos yeah in order afford the complex invocation of the persons competence which is actually what they are. Ultimately, yes, yes, yes, while you do that in part by demonstrating to them that they can find the zone of proxy, will develop exact, voluntary confrontation right. So, if you're exposing to some one to an elevator that they're afraid of they might get in the elevator, but they will stay forty feet away and look out it right. I am thirty nine felicity sensitized yet which is not a good turn, because what it is, in fact, is it

progressive, generalised, able adaptation exactly right. That's what I very different thing. Yes, that's! What I was going to argue is going. Are you it's actually progressive, complex suffocation of their cognitive capacity? they can manage more and more of the variables without being overwhelmed by the potential There are presenting well, and they also have a chance to observe themselves acting out opposition that they are those creatures because one of the medical missions that goes along with four make avoidance. Is I can't handle this and so then you put the person in the situation challenge there. You show well, yes, under certain circumstances, not only can you handle this, but you find it optimally challenging and it's really good for your development and so on. equally, what you do is you put someone you're using exposure therapy, you put them into the zone. That everyone occupies when their learning optimally exactly the

I am thinking of it, but the zone is exactly that place between assimilation and accommodation that we write. But earlier right you do you're trying to get you trying to get them to see If you will allow me some of my language that it's not the problem, isn't just subjectively in them. I can't get in the elevator nano there's a real relationship that you that you are capable of evolving between, like you have again, and you get and you can evolve your cognition so that you can get into the elevator. So that you can confront what you're afraid of I had one client, the doors finally opened the elevator. She said, that's a tomb and I thought well, we're simultaneously, exposing you in this friday and symbolic manner not only to the elevator but to the idea of your own fin attitude and yes, how many and I was there- definitely happening at the same time. Ok, so there's so imagine that the better corpus is is assessed.

And there's multiple pictures of the spirit of god that characterize the old testament, then there's a culmination, at least from the christian perspective in the new testament, but here's the idea of the culmination The idea is that the same spirit that called noah to prepare for catastrophe in the same spirit that called Abraham out of his comfort to the adventure of his life is the spirit that is. Motivating people to voluntarily confront the catastrophic suffering of their life it's the same idea and then that idea gets transformed even one more one more in one, profound manner, which is not only is that the same spirit now humanised right, because that's something you can actually act out, but if you do acted out that that inverts the tragedy- and so the hypothesis that there's a there's a paradigm circle balance between the degree to which you are willing to voluntarily take on the suffering of your life and your ability to simultaneously transcend the suffering and then a final analysis:

the more you're willing to bear the burden of being voluntarily the less suffering is actually associated with that? The more play right, the more more progression up jacobs ladder, and so ok too What do you think about the proposition that seems to emerge there that that's the same spirit and that its reasonably construed as a spirit? And what do you think about that? As a proposition mean you tend to take to come in from a more buddhist perspective. So I'm poor, neoplatonic right right so for for me and a great stub that I mean that process that process of being able to find this through lines of the deeper? For me when you time spirit, you're talking about like a dynamical sir, Organizing system, that's generative in the way we ve been talking about, and it doesn't generate being it generates, the intelligibility of being so, right and that's logos. Yes right.

and so for for me, trying to find right through line right this has a logos, and this has the lowest, but what's the logos of all of the writing right right and it right in its this nested in that absolutely everything we ve been talking about about cognition intelligence and consciousness. There were the relevant realisation that predict the processing back for me Those two things saying if the eu, the argument about the gram of reality happened, asked are called it has to be deeply conformable to that, then, for me, that's that's something to me. The plainest are taught, and that was what the neo platonists are doing right. Is there they're taking plato and are finding that spirit who rightly Plato's the spirit that takes you out of the cave. I said the recipient of the biological spirit. We are like to come back to them and then you get there.

Two trillion spirit, which is that the idea of knowing as conforming and this interior project of trying to get an organised, systematic understanding. you have the stoic system of no no this is. How do I best into great my agency so that I can be most virtuous disposed to the world so I am not overwhelmed by the tragedy, but I'll be right, back then ended so neat neo platonists is like that grand unified. You feel of of the whole of philosophical spiritual tradition, of socrates. Does what I'm doing it? My series hunter Socrates is tracing that out right. just tell everybody now about that, so so that everybody listening knows, I'm so, which just contagious sure. So I january night then we're losing my new series socrates, it'll, be free on youtube and be released twice. week, mondays and thursdays and

I'm really trying to play with the format and and bring to light this, this whole through line that runs from socrates to people like nick. Of coups and regina right and in what what is this? There is a continuing lectures series that build a continuous argument like I did an awakening for the meaning crisis, but I also have a section on points to ponder so and this is to encourage people to reflect and to discuss with each other, and then I also teach a practice out of the provisional and there's a petticoat the programmer practices. That is also unfolding in parallel to the lectures, and then I also move out of the bottle loggers I'm trying to be socratic random, and so I have up. Episodes where I'll be with other people, and the four of us will demonstrate a whole ecology of practices and then I'm also trying to put the whole socratic right. Away into dialogue with, like with with with christianity

That's what happened in the west right rivalry, and so like there's does it areas within the series Christopher bastard Pietro and I we meet and we go into dialogue because we're doing crook a guard confrontation with socrates and protocols wrestling love. This I was his opponent processing these costs so he's a follower of christ, but socrates is teacher, and is constantly toddling between them. You can see the breyer report godson upon a process that work and western symbolise exactly exactly an exit Chris and I are bringing that and so what I m trying to do is trying to try. People can get access to this on your you do just exactly. Even just look up John for vacant find as you do, jack will put the links in the description of the value it. So What I'm trying to do is it's called after socrates, because I'm I I'm after socrates and that are trying to understand him right, I'm trying to what because there's up he's a deeply enigmatic figure,

Importantly, so I am because one of the great things- about the socratic dialogues, is socrates? Never, socrates is always, that zone. Approximate development is all his arm, he shining in enough to intelligibility, and then he brought he puts it, a party of that state. We are perplexed Hundred says he wants to also open you up to the mysteries constantly it. So I will. I'm after Socrates, in that sense, and I'm out socrates, in that try and reverse engineer this practice of dialectic into dialogue, not hungarian dialectic, platonic dialectic, all this new work on it so dialectics is a this anti, although gas process yeah you get it Dialogue is the practice of psychotherapy. I think so indeed it is it's the redemptive practice of psychotherapy right, the mutual exploration of the truth that redeems so Socrates is. You know it is about This is easy to say, and it is hard to realise and both senses of the word of understanding, to make real.

to be able to follow the logos wherever it goes and an end to do that comprehensively profoundly percolating through different layers of the psyche permeating many different means of your life. Getting that ultimate profundity that ultimate kind of plausibility and that ultimate unity. Yes, yes, and so on and intensity of purpose, because when things become unified in relationship to the purpose, it makes you in some sense comparatively unstoppable. Well, there's is a good thing, you to be unstoppable in life, because there's plenty of things that conspire to attempt to stop you, yes, and here that's why he actually he dies right well that well, that's very, very relevant to our discussion of transcendent meaning because one of the that emerges in the socratic apollonia is the sense that Socrates has lived a life so deep and meaningful that he's able to his two

abide by his set of moral principles, even in the face of death in frightened and part of the reason for that appears to be that he lived his life fully and and and so he satisfied with some fundamental sense right he's not clinging to it this is the interesting thing about it. I mean socrates knows that he does not know, and that eventually becomes the learned. Ignorance of nicholas of Cusa and the ability to wrestle with the paradoxes and the considerable see that, but but he, but he does know, thinks he knows erotica. He knows what to care about point, and he also knows that the unexamined life is not worth living life in which you have not tried to his son was unconscious. It's unconscious, and it's also going to be your agency is going to break down you're, making a lot more pray that self deception or tyrannical you're going to exactly all of this, try to trace out, but not just trace out the ideas because socrates is ultimately about. This is third was called third way, platonist

the new scholarship. Socrates is Similarly about trying to get should shift people into the non propositional because that ultimately, we are virtually ultimate you and I both know you can get these university professors who are highly trade and moral argument, and that is in no way predictive of how virtuously they live their lives. Propositional management is that most and the necessary condition for virtue but it is in no way sufficient and you can see sock and socrates is always challenging two things. challenging just intuitive pronouncement as to what something is where what is courage that your idle urges rubber by these a challenging sort of third person right, technical mission, while I learned this definition luckily says, but do you Do you really enacted? Yes, right now, he's costly, challenging the first person perspective of just spontaneous subjective authority. Here

constantly challenging the third person imposing technical authority because he's trying to constant get us into the second person perspective where we actually enter into the dialogue, reigns as virtue, so he you'll get like equally when he's, with the two generals about courage. They, like represents this intuitive, the other percent. I he learned all these definitions from the surface and their very sophist a great right right and socrates undermine both of those, and he doesn't come to a conclusion. But here's the thing The generals were coming to socrates, because they're asking. Why should we take her sons for education because we want them to be courageous? there's no conclusion that out, but the generals, both both emotional say we would like your son, our sons to come and learn from right right, socrates, exemplifies the courage. in the dialogue. That usually you see something similar happening in the brothers karamazov because you have even is a very, is very able to put forward

finally compelling propositional atheists arguments right in a kind of a nietzsche and scared, real sense right and our ocean who's. The monastic novitiate is no match for Ivan on the propositional front, but he's a way better person, yes and dostoevsky also explores that in the idiot, because that's prince me in writing. El the Christ analogue for oil in europe. This is right but dostoevsky because he uses narrative rather than philosophy is able to produce an embodied figure who exemplifies virtue, even though the propositional grounds for his moral pronouncements are relatively and what undeveloped, and I think this is a profound thing and try to bring that out and then say so. What are they practices that you well so so you want to bring it as socratic socks. Socrates was famous for Able to stand in a meditative state transfix for Twenty four to forty eight hours totally, who write so there

found capacity for mindfulness in this he famously never got drunk, he could drink quite a bit. Better mindfulness was like if he could stay wonder how much of that hallucinogenic greek wine he was consuming. While doing all of this, I I that I don't know, but he he he has this tremendous. So I start with teaching people a him basic meditate. Practices, that's taking off your mental framing and looking at seeing what we might be distorting the house, No, if you ve distorted, we have to put your glasses on and see. You now see more clearly. We because those are contemplating practices and and taken. I take people too a contemplate a practice take them into a kind of teach them lex. Yoda vena how to read the platonic tax, not just for information about how to get into that residents with its own will bring about. Transformation is likes, you demeanor was way of reading and then philosophical fellowship where people for a joint kind of lex yoda vena, with each other

philosophical text and you're not trying you- is this text right or wrong. I'm not saying you should never do their aid. The point of this practice is no no. I want to present the perspective from which this text with generated so that I can her into a got scared relation right without perspective, because it will challenge me into a zone of proper All right, then I can practice being in the zone of proximate development as a consequence of engaging in dialogue. Well, that's you know. I think one of the things that be distinguished me to some degree for my from my peers, see my academic periods is that almost Every time I read something. My goal was to see what I can learn from reading it to dispense with the like too, and I think The same position of reverence that you described in relation to Moses and taking off his shoes. It's like you. find out. What's in this, I did that with freud, and I did that was young, and I did do that with the biblical corpus not to do so with it or to argue with out of existence. Even though testing ideas is important but too, but to be

open to whatever my for me, as a consequence, is really for gadgets title to the adverse right. Ok, much so like I've heard this many times, but what one really profound for me- was spinoza spinoza heart Spinoza, like reading euclid elements, because its pattern on Euclid's elements, your axioms proofs and there is the most logically, the rigorous thing in your are, and you try to remember all the predicate theirs in it and then what happens, though? Is you get when he talks about you? You go from repressive, red, discursive reasoning. into what he calls scantier into a tv you see, you get. This realization will you see, all of the whole in each premise, in each premise and all of the hall, and then you see all of reality like that, So you see you see, it's been a distinctly you take

spinoza perspective rather than remarried lingering operators right right. That's what I mean about being well, that's that's something like that's, not something like ancestor worship, that's something, and having the spirit of the divine ancestry, because what you are trying to do what I love about university was that it enabled me to select my peers from among the great men of history. Now I'm not saying I was able to manage that, but at least have that opportunity. Aid in each of those people was animated, but I would say by a central, in some sense, by a central, exploratory and benevolent spirit in so far as they were manifestations of logos, so that this is so you get I'm doing this. this is with people there are, you know, nuns and, oh, yes, secular and buckled they will. That was like a spirit that was like a secular seance rise. I felt expert knows I was present right right. What happens if you get you get that we aim to see you get that you get, that you get the the spirit of the disease.

did cognition. That is not reducible to a mere aggregation of individual consciousnesses. You get you have you get you get that emergent dynamic like a rock concert. Yes, exactly exactly what you're doing it with intelligibility rather than just salient sound right, and so that isn't it, but that also is weak. We can state pretty forthrightly that that is an experience. profoundly unifying spirit, because people wouldn't be able to inhabit the same conceptual. Perceptual space simultaneously. You take people through this progression. You get them into that, and then you take them into dialectic into deal logos where you actually get them to get that collective. state around the examination of a virtue and bright The group acts like as a as people are shifting wars. The group acts like soccer to the individual and everybody is switching around and what happens people. Get this collective spirit. Logos shows up the fire of her apparent colonels and people

People are suddenly dropped and then what happens if they go from all their propositions? About virtue to saying they they experience, reverence about the virtue and they and right, and then they also say that the report did so the progression of intimacies to say I discovered a kind of intimacy with people that I didn't know existed, but I always wanted right, not on ship. It's not sexuality. I used the christian term fellowship fellowship now and then, and then they do this needs in the gulf of you, and I are experiencing this kind of into two we all are experiencing intimacy with the logo here and then they can also go to you and I. Intimacy with each other with the logos, and all of that is becoming more intimate with being itself talk about feeling more connected to that's dialectic into deal. Oh okay. Well, so, if all of you are inclined to be interested, sort of thing you can go over to johns youtube channel and for

histories of lectures its can launch when genuine iphone, and just so you all know too, Some of you may know that I've started this academy with my daughter petersen academy, which is an attempt to bring humanities and liberal arts education to people on low. Scale, and we have a lot of professors lined up to help us without about thirty, so far top rate top rate people. as far as I'm concerned and John is so going down to miami this week to record series of lectures that will about eight hours on the sorts of topics that we discuss today exactly It's ok, so everyone we have to stop, unfortunately, because we can continue pretty much forever and hopefully will I'd like to thank all of you for attending watching in listening today and to encourage you to check out john vagaries. You too, general, and follow his lectures, I'm There is no doubt that if you participate that it in that with some degree of intent that the consequences be transformative, John was and is what

the most popular lectures at the university of Toronto ever produced and his students we're constantly raving to me when I was still there about. The romanians. They had encountered both intellectually and I would say personally as a consequence of taking joint courses, This is a good deal, so go go on going check that out, and I'm going turn over to the daily, where plus platform now and talk to John more on the biographical level for a while. I want to try the development of his through lines. His life, which is what I intend to use the extra half an hour for, and so probably watching in listening, happy new year and thank you very much for your time and attention and don't hesitate to check out we're making his youtube gentle child thanks. John thanks great. As always,.

Hello, everyone. I would encourage you to continue listening to my conversation with my guest on daily wire plus dot com.