This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #398 with Mark Zuckerberg.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
So I think that that’s one of the big challenges that remains, and right now we have the ability to do the scans if you have hours to sit for one. And with today’s technology, you’re using a Meta headset that exists. It’s a product that’s for sale now. You can drive these with that, but the production of these scans in a very efficient way is one of the last pieces that we still need to really nail. And then, obviously, there’s all the experiences around it. Right now we’re sitting in a dark room, which is familiar for your podcast, but I think part of the vision for this over time is not just having this be a video call. That’s fine, it’s cool, it feels like it’s immersive, but you can do a video call on your phone.
The thing that you can do in the Metaverse that is different from what you can do on a phone is doing stuff where you’re physically there together and participating in things together. And we could play games like this. We could have meetings like this in the future. Once you get mixed reality and augmented reality, we could have Kodak Avatars like this and go into a meeting and have some people physically there and have some people show up in this photorealistic form superimposed on the physical environment. Stuff like that is going to be super powerful. So we’ve got to still build out all those applications and the use cases around it. But I don’t know, I think it’s going to be a pretty wild next few years around this.
So maybe, for me, it’s like I’d want to have my avatar really be able to better express how I’m feeling than how I can do physically. So I think that there’s a question about how you want to tune that, but, overall, yeah, we want to start from the baseline of capturing how people actually emote and express themselves. And I think the initial version of this has been pretty impressive. And like you said, I do think we’re beyond the uncanny valley here where it does feel like you. It doesn’t feel weird or anything like that.
So I think something like this could make a very big difference for those remote meetings. And especially with Quest Three coming out, which is going to be the first mainstream mixed reality product where you’re really taking digital expressions of either a person or objects and overlaying them on the physical world, I think the ability to do remote meetings and things like that where you’re just remote hang sessions with friends, I think that that’s going to be very exciting. So rolling it out over the next few years, it’s not ready to be a mainstream product yet, but we we’ll keep tuning it and keep getting more scans in there and rolling it out and into more of the features. But, yeah, definitely in the next few years you’ll be seeing a bunch more experiences like this.
So we got the resolution for the mixed reality cameras and sensors to be multiple times better in Quest Three, and we just figured that, that made a very big difference when we saw the experience that we were able to put together for Quest Pro. And part of it is also that Qualcomm just came out with their next generation chip set for VR and MR that we worked with them on, on a custom version of it. But that was available this year for Quest Three and it wasn’t available in Quest Pro. So in a way, Quest Three, even though it’s not the Pro product, actually has a stronger chip set in it than the Pro line at a third of the cost. So I’m…
For this, each time we put out a new headset, it has a major new capability. And the big one now is mixed reality. The ability to basically take digital representations of people or objects and superimpose them on the world. And basically, there’s a, one version of this is you’re going to have these augments or holograms and experiences that you can bring into your living room or a meeting space or office.
Another thing that I just think is going to be a much simpler innovation, is that there are a lot of VR experiences today that don’t need to be fully immersive. And if you’re playing a shooter game or you’re doing a fitness experience, sometimes people get worried about swinging their arms around, like, am I going to hit a lamp or something and am I going to run into something? So having that in mixed reality, actually, it’s just a lot more comfortable for people. You kind of still get the immersion and the 3D experience and you can have an experience that just wouldn’t be possible in the physical world alone. But by being anchored to and being able to see the physical world around you, it just feels so much safer and more secure. And I think a lot of people are really going to enjoy that too. So yeah, I’m really excited to see how people use it. But yeah, Quest 3 coming out later this fall.
So yeah, it’s a very interesting technical challenge and I think we’ll continue tuning this for the years to come as well. But I’m pretty excited to get this out because I think Quest 3 is going to be the first device like this that millions of people are going to get that’s mixed reality. And it’s only when you have millions of people using something that you start getting the whole developer community really starting to experiment and build stuff because now there are going to be people who actually use it. So I think we got some of that flywheel going with Quest Pro, but I think it’ll really get accelerated once Quest 3 gets out there. So yeah, I’m pretty excited about this one.
So it’s all converging towards an incredible digital experience in the Metaverse. To me, obviously I love the intimacy of conversation, so even this is awesome, but do you have other ideas of what this unlocks, of something like Codec Avatar unlocks in terms of applications, in terms of things we’re able to do?
And I kind of think increasingly, the physical world is super important, but I actually think the real world is the combination of the physical world and the digital worlds coming together. But until this technology, they were sort of separate. It’s like you access the digital world through a screen and maybe it’s a small screen that you carry around or it’s a bigger screen when you sit down at your desk and strap in for a long session, but they’re kind of fundamentally divorced and disconnected. And I think part of what this technology is going to do is bring those together into a single coherent experience of what the modern real world is, which is, it’s got to be physical because we’re physical beings. So the physical world is always going to be super important.
But increasingly, I think a lot of the things that we kind of think of can be digital holograms. I mean, any screen that you have can be a hologram, any media, in any book, art. It can basically be just as effective as a hologram, as a physical object. Any game that you’re playing, a board game or any kind of physical game, cards, ping pong, things like that, they’re often a lot better as holograms. Because you could just snap your fingers and instantiate them and have them show up. It’s like you have a ping pong table show up in your living room, but then you can snap your fingers and have it be gone. So that’s super powerful. So I think that it’s actually an amazing thought experiment of like how many physical things we have today that could actually be better as interactive holograms.
But then beyond that, I think the most important thing obviously is people. So the ability to have these mixed hangouts, whether they’re social or meetings where you show up to a conference room, you’re wearing glasses or a headset in the very near term, but hopefully by over the next five years, glasses or so. And you’re there physically. Some people are there physically, but other people are just there as holograms and it feels like it’s them who are right there.
And also by the way, another thing that I think is going to be fascinating about being able to blend together the digital and physical worlds in this way, is we’re also going to be able to embody AIs as well. So I think you’ll also have meetings in the future where you’re basically, maybe you’re sitting there physically and then you have a couple of other people who are there as holograms, and then you have Bob, the AI, who’s an engineer on your team who’s helping with things, and he can now be embodied as a realistic avatar as well, and just join the meeting in that way. So I think that that’s going to be pretty compelling as well.
Okay, so what can you do with photorealistic avatars compared to the more expressive ones that we have today? Well, I think a lot of this actually comes down to acceptance of the technology. And because all of the stuff that we’re doing, I mean, the motion of your eyebrows, the motion of your eyes, the cheeks and all of that, there’s actually no reason why you couldn’t do that on an expressive avatar too. I mean, it wouldn’t look exactly like you, but you can make a cartoon version of yourself and still have it be almost as expressive.
But I do think that there’s this bridge between the current state of most of our interactions in the physical world and where we’re getting in the future with this kind of hybrid, physical and digital world, where I think it’s going to be a lot easier for people to take some of these experiences seriously with the photorealistic avatars to start. And then I’m actually really curious to see where it goes longer term. I could see a world where people stick to the photorealistic and maybe they modify them to make them a little bit more interesting, but maybe fundamentally, we like photorealistic things.
But I can also see a world that once people get used to the photorealistic avatars and they get used to these experiences, that I actually think that there could be a world where people actually prefer being able to express themselves in kind of non, ways that aren’t so tied to their physical reality. And so that’s one of the things that I’m really curious about. And I don’t know, in a bunch of our internal experiments on this, one of the things that I thought was psychologically pretty interesting is, people have no issues blending photorealistic stuff and not.
So for this specific scene that we’re in now, we happen to sort of be in a dark room. I think part of that aesthetic decision I think was based on the way you like to do your podcast, but we’ve done experiences like this, where you have a cartoony background, but photorealistic people who you’re talking to, and people just seem to just think that that is completely normal. It doesn’t bother you, it doesn’t feel like it’s weird.
Another thing that we have experienced with, is basically you have a photorealistic avatar that you’re talking to, and then right next to them you have an expressive kind of cartoon avatar. And that actually is pretty normal too. It’s not that weird to basically being interacting with different people in different modes like that. So I’m not sure, I think it’ll be an interesting question, to what extent these photorealistic avatars are a key part of just transitioning from being comfortable in the physical world to this kind of new, modern, real world that includes both the digital and physical, or if this is the long-term way that it stays?I think that there are going to be uses for both the expressive and the photorealistic over time. I just don’t know what the balance is going to be.
And then it’s like what you are on a day-to-day basis doesn’t necessarily map to either of those. Yeah, there will definitely be a bunch of social scientists and folks will have to, and psychologists, really, there’s going to be a lot to understand about how our perception of ourselves and others has shifted from this.
So I think that there’s some best practices, I think from the current digital world that will carry over. But I think that this will enable some different things. Another version of this is how this intersects with AIs because one of the things that we’re really focused on is we want the world to evolve in a way where there isn’t a single AI super intelligence, but where a lot of people are empowered by having AI tools to do their jobs and make their lives better.
And if you’re a creator and if you run a podcast like you do, then you have a big community of people who are super interested to talk to you. I know you’d love to cultivate that community and you interact with them online outside of the podcast as well. But I mean, there’s way more demand both to interact with you, and I’m sure you’d love to interact with the community more, but you just are limited by the number of hours in the day.
So at some point, I think making it so that you could build an AI version of yourself that could interact with people not after you die, but while you’re here to help people fulfill this desire to interact with you and your desire to build a community. And there’s a lot of interesting questions around that, and obviously, it’s not just in the metaverse. I think we’d want to make that work across all the messaging platforms, WhatsApp, and Messenger, and Instagram Direct. But there’s certainly a version of that where if you could have an avatar version of yourself in the metaverse that people can interact with, and you could define that sort of an AI version where people know that they’re interacting with an AI, that it’s not the physical version of you, but maybe that AI, even if they know it’s an AI, is the next best thing because they’re probably not going to necessarily all get to interact with you directly.
I think that could be a really compelling experience. There’s a lot of things that we need to get right about it that we’re not ready to release the version that a creator can build a version of themselves yet, but we’re starting to experiment with it in terms of releasing a number of AIs that people can interact with in different ways. I think that that is also just going to be a very powerful set of capabilities that people have over time.
It’s just more vanilla and neutral and factual, but it can help you with a bunch of stuff. Then there are a bunch of cases that are more business oriented. So let’s say you want to contact a small business. Similarly, that business probably doesn’t want to have to staff someone to man the phones, and you probably don’t want to wait on the phone to talk to someone. But having someone who you can just talk to in a natural way who can help you if you’re having an issue with a product or if you want to make a reservation or if you want to buy something online, having the ability to do that and have a natural conversation rather than navigate some website or have to call someone and wait on hold think is going to be really good both for the businesses and for normal people who want to interact with businesses.
So I think stuff like that makes sense. Then there are going to be a bunch of use cases that I think are just fun. So I think people are going to… I think there will be AIs that I can tell jokes, so you can put them into chat thread with friends. I think a lot of this, because we’re like a social company. I mean we’re fundamentally around helping people connect in different ways. Part of what I’m excited about is how do you enable these kind of AIs to facilitate connection between two people or more, put them in a group chat, make the group chat more interesting around whatever your interests are, sports, fashion, trivia.
So I think that it’s less of a question around having the avatar express them. I mean that I think where it’s like, well, we have our V1 of that that we’ll release soon after Connect. But that’ll get better over time. But a lot of this is really just about continuing to make the models for these AIs that they’re just more and more, I don’t know, you could say reliable or predictable in terms of what they’ll communicate so that way when you want to create the Lex assistant AI that your community can talk to. You don’t program them like normal computers, you’re training them. They’re AI models, not normal computer programs, but you want to get it to be predictable enough so that way you can set some parameters for it.
And even if it isn’t perfect all the time, you want it to generally be able to stay within those bounds. So that’s a lot of what I think we need to nail for the creators, and that’s why that one is actually a much harder problem, I think, than starting with new characters that you’re creating from scratch. So that one I think will probably start releasing sometime next year. Not this year, but experimenting with existing characters and the assistant, and games, and a bunch of different personalities and experimenting with some small businesses. I think that that stuff we’ll be ready to do this year. And we’re rolling it out basically right after Connect.
I lived most of my life before the internet and experiencing the internet and experiencing voice communication, video communication. You think like, “Well, there’s a ceiling to this, but this is making me feel like there might not be, there might be that blend of physical reality and digital reality. That’s actually what the future is.”
So it’s not just about having the immersive expression of the digital world, it’s about being able to really natively bring that together. I do really think that the real world is this mix of the physical and the digital. There’s too much digital at this point for it to just be siloed to a small screen, but the physical is too important. So you don’t want to just sit down all day long at a desk. I do think that this is the future. This is, I think the kind of philosophical way that I would want the world to work in the future is a much more coherently, blended, physical and digital world.
I mean, when I get into some world with my friends, the first thing we start doing is shooting each other, which obviously we would not do in the physical world because you’d hurt each other. But in a game, it’s just fun. And even in the lobby of a game, it’s not even bearing on the game, it’s just kind of a funny sort of humorous thing to do. So it’s like, is that problematic? I don’t think so because fundamentally you’re not causing harm in that world. So I think that part of the question that I think we need to figure out is what are the ways where things could have been harmful in the physical world that we’ll now be freed from that? And therefore there should be fewer restrictions in the digital world.
And then there might be new ways in which there could be harm in the digital world that there weren’t the case before. So there’s more anonymity. It’s when you show up to a restaurant or something, it’s like all the norms where you pay the bill at the end. It’s because you have one identity. And if you stiff them, then life is a repeat game and that’s not going to work out well for you. But in a digital world where you can be anonymous and show up in different ways, I think the incentive to act like a good citizen can be a lot less, and that causes a lot of issues and toxic behavior. So that needs to get sorted out.
So I think in terms of what is allowed, I think you want to just look at what are the damages, but then there’s also other things that are not related to harm, less about what should be allowed and more about what will be possible that are more about the laws of physics. It’s like if you wanted to travel to see me in person, you’d have to get on a plane, and that would take a few hours to get here. Whereas we could just jump in a conference room and put on these headsets and we’re basically teleported into a space where it feels like we’re together.
So that’s a very novel experience that it breaks down some things that previously would’ve defied the laws of physics for what it would take to get together. And I think that that will create a lot of new opportunities. One of the things that I’m curious about is there are all these debates right now about remote work or people being together. I think this gets us a lot closer to being able to work physically in different places, but actually have it feel like we’re together. So I think that the dream is that people will one day be able to just work wherever they want, but we’ll have all the same opportunities because you’ll be able to feel like you’re physically together. I think we’re not there today with just video conferencing and the basic technologies that we have, but I think part of the idea is that with something like this, over time, you could get closer to that and that would open up a lot of opportunities, right? Because then people could live physically where they want while still being able to get the benefits of being physically or feeling like you’re together.
Llama 3, I mean, there’s always another model that we’re training. So for right now, we train Llama 2 and we released it as an open source model. And right now the priority is building that into a bunch of the consumer products, all the different AIs and a bunch of different products that we’re basically building as consumer products. Because Llama 2 by itself, it’s not a consumer product, right? It’s more of a piece of infrastructure that people could build things with.
So that’s been the big priority, is continuing to fine tune and just get Llama 2 and the branches that we’ve built off of it ready for consumer products that hopefully hundreds of millions of people will enjoy using those products in billions one day. But yeah, I mean we’re also working on the future foundation models. I don’t have anything new or news on that. I don’t know exactly when it’s going to be ready. I think just like we had a debate around Llama 2 and open sourcing it, I think we’ll need to have a similar debate and process to red team this and make sure that this is safe. And my hope is that we’ll be able to open source this next version when it’s ready too. But we’re not close to doing that this month. I mean, that’s a thing that we’re still somewhat early and working on.
So I think it’s super exciting because I mean, the digital world is just increasing in its capability and our ability to do awesome things, but the physical world is so profound, and that’s a lot of what makes us human is that we’re physical beings. So I don’t think we want to run away from that and just spend all day on a screen. It’s one of the reasons why I care so much about helping to shape and accelerate these future computing platforms. I just think this is so powerful. And even though the current version of this is like you’re wearing a headset, I just think this is going to be by far the most human and social computing platform that has ever existed. And that’s what makes me excited.
Like you said, I think that is going to be a very profound thing. A lot of that is that’s the promise of the Metaverse and why I think that that’s the next frontier for what we’re working on. I started working on social networks when they were primarily text, where the first version of Facebook, your profile, you had one photo and the rest of it was lists of things that you were interested in. And then we kind of went through the period where we were doing photos. And now we’re kind of in the period where most of the content is video, but there’s a clear trend where over time the way that we want to express ourselves and kind of get insight and content about the world around us gets increasingly just richer and more vivid.
And I think the ability to be immersed and feel present with the people around you or the people who you care about is, from my perspective, clearly the next frontier. It just so happens that it’s incredibly technologically difficult. It requires building up these new computing platforms and completely new software stacks to deliver that, but I kind of feel like that’s what we’re here to do as a company.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 0:52 – Metaverse
- 15:27 – Quest 3
- 30:16 – Nature of reality
- 34:54 – AI in the Metaverse
- 51:51 – Large language models
- 57:49 – Future of humanity
Introduction
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Mark Zuckerberg, Inside the Metaverse. Mark and I are hundreds of miles apart from each other in physical space, but it feels like we’re in the same room because we appear to each other as photorealistic Kodak Avatars in 3D with spatial audio. This technology is incredible and I think it’s the future of how human beings connect to each other in a deeply meaningful way on the internet. These avatars can capture many of the nuances of facial expressions that we humans use to communicate and motion to each other. Now, I just need to work on upgrading my emotion expressing capabilities of the underlying human. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. And now, dear friends, here’s Mark Zuckerberg. This is so great. Lighting change? Wow.
The following is a conversation with Mark Zuckerberg, Inside the Metaverse. Mark and I are hundreds of miles apart from each other in physical space, but it feels like we’re in the same room because we appear to each other as photorealistic Kodak Avatars in 3D with spatial audio. This technology is incredible and I think it’s the future of how human beings connect to each other in a deeply meaningful way on the internet. These avatars can capture many of the nuances of facial expressions that we humans use to communicate and motion to each other. Now, I just need to work on upgrading my emotion expressing capabilities of the underlying human. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. And now, dear friends, here’s Mark Zuckerberg. This is so great. Lighting change? Wow.
Metaverse
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, we can put the light anywhere.
Yeah, we can put the light anywhere.
Lex Fridman
And it doesn’t feel awkward to be really close to you.
And it doesn’t feel awkward to be really close to you.
Mark Zuckerberg
No, it does. I actually moved you back a few feet before you got into the headset. You were right here.
No, it does. I actually moved you back a few feet before you got into the headset. You were right here.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know if people can see this, but this is incredible. The realism here is just incredible. Where am I? Where are you, Mark? Where are we?
I don’t know if people can see this, but this is incredible. The realism here is just incredible. Where am I? Where are you, Mark? Where are we?
Mark Zuckerberg
You’re in Austin, right?
You’re in Austin, right?
Lex Fridman
No. I mean this place. We’re shrouded by darkness with ultra realistic face, and it just feels like we’re in the same room. This is really the most incredible thing I’ve ever seen. And sorry to be in your personal space. We have done jujitsu before.
No. I mean this place. We’re shrouded by darkness with ultra realistic face, and it just feels like we’re in the same room. This is really the most incredible thing I’ve ever seen. And sorry to be in your personal space. We have done jujitsu before.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah. I was commenting to the team before that I feel like we’ve choked each other from further distances than it feels like we are right now.
Yeah. I was commenting to the team before that I feel like we’ve choked each other from further distances than it feels like we are right now.
Lex Fridman
This is just really incredible. I don’t know how to describe it with words. It really feels like we’re in the same room.
This is just really incredible. I don’t know how to describe it with words. It really feels like we’re in the same room.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It feels like the future. This is truly, truly incredible. I just wanted to take it in. I’m still getting used to it. It’s you, it’s really you, but you’re not here with me. You’re there wearing a headset and I’m wearing a headset. It’s really, really incredible. Can you describe what it takes currently for us to appear so photo realistic to each other?
It feels like the future. This is truly, truly incredible. I just wanted to take it in. I’m still getting used to it. It’s you, it’s really you, but you’re not here with me. You’re there wearing a headset and I’m wearing a headset. It’s really, really incredible. Can you describe what it takes currently for us to appear so photo realistic to each other?
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah. So, for background, we both did these scans for this research project that we have at Meta called Kodak Avatars. And the idea is that instead of our avatars being cartoony and instead of actually transmitting a video, what it does is we’ve scanned ourselves and a lot of different expressions, and we’ve built a computer model of each of our faces and bodies and the different expressions that we make and collapsed that into a Kodak that then when you have the headset on your head, it sees your face, it sees your expression, and it can basically send an encoded version of what you’re supposed to look like over the wire. So, in addition to being photorealistic, it’s also actually much more bandwidth efficient than transmitting a full video or especially a 3D immersive video of a whole scene like this.
Yeah. So, for background, we both did these scans for this research project that we have at Meta called Kodak Avatars. And the idea is that instead of our avatars being cartoony and instead of actually transmitting a video, what it does is we’ve scanned ourselves and a lot of different expressions, and we’ve built a computer model of each of our faces and bodies and the different expressions that we make and collapsed that into a Kodak that then when you have the headset on your head, it sees your face, it sees your expression, and it can basically send an encoded version of what you’re supposed to look like over the wire. So, in addition to being photorealistic, it’s also actually much more bandwidth efficient than transmitting a full video or especially a 3D immersive video of a whole scene like this.
Lex Fridman
And it captures everything. To me, the subtleties of the human face, even the flaws, that’s all amazing. It makes it so much more immersive. It makes you realize that perfection isn’t the thing that leads to immersion. It’s the little subtle flaws like freckles and variations in color and just…
And it captures everything. To me, the subtleties of the human face, even the flaws, that’s all amazing. It makes it so much more immersive. It makes you realize that perfection isn’t the thing that leads to immersion. It’s the little subtle flaws like freckles and variations in color and just…
Mark Zuckerberg
Wrinkles.
Wrinkles.
Lex Fridman
… all stuff about noses.
… all stuff about noses.
Mark Zuckerberg
Asymmetry.
Asymmetry.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, asymmetry, and just the corners of the eyes, what your eyes do when you smile, all that kind of stuff.
Yeah, asymmetry, and just the corners of the eyes, what your eyes do when you smile, all that kind of stuff.
Mark Zuckerberg
Eyes are a huge part of it.
Eyes are a huge part of it.
Lex Fridman
It’s just incredible.
It’s just incredible.
Mark Zuckerberg
There’s all these studies that most of communication, even when people are speaking, is not actually the words that they’re saying. It’s the expression and all that. And we try to capture that with the classical expressive avatar system that we have. That’s the more cartoon designed one. You can put those expressions on those faces as well. But there’s obviously a certain realism that comes with delivering this photo realistic experience that, I don’t know, I just think it’s really magical. This gets to the core of what the vision around virtual and augmented reality is, of delivering a sense of presence as if you’re there together no matter where you actually are in the world. This experience I think is a good embodiment of that, where we’re in two completely different states halfway across the country, and it looks like you’re just sitting right in front of me. It’s pretty wild.
There’s all these studies that most of communication, even when people are speaking, is not actually the words that they’re saying. It’s the expression and all that. And we try to capture that with the classical expressive avatar system that we have. That’s the more cartoon designed one. You can put those expressions on those faces as well. But there’s obviously a certain realism that comes with delivering this photo realistic experience that, I don’t know, I just think it’s really magical. This gets to the core of what the vision around virtual and augmented reality is, of delivering a sense of presence as if you’re there together no matter where you actually are in the world. This experience I think is a good embodiment of that, where we’re in two completely different states halfway across the country, and it looks like you’re just sitting right in front of me. It’s pretty wild.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I’m almost getting emotional. It feels like a totally fundamentally new experience. For me to have these kinds of conversations with loved ones, it would just change everything. Maybe just to elaborate, I went to Pittsburgh and went through the whole scanning procedure, which has so much incredible technology, software and hardware, going on, but it is a lengthy process. So what’s your vision for the future of this in terms of making this more accessible to people?
Yeah. I’m almost getting emotional. It feels like a totally fundamentally new experience. For me to have these kinds of conversations with loved ones, it would just change everything. Maybe just to elaborate, I went to Pittsburgh and went through the whole scanning procedure, which has so much incredible technology, software and hardware, going on, but it is a lengthy process. So what’s your vision for the future of this in terms of making this more accessible to people?
Mark Zuckerberg
It starts off with a small number of people doing these very detailed scans. That’s the version that you did and that I did, and before there were a lot of people who we’ve done this a scan for, we probably need to over collect expressions when we’re doing the scanning because we haven’t figured out how much we can reduce that down to a really streamlined process and extrapolate from the scans that have already been done. But the goal, and we have a project that’s working on this already, is just to do a very quick scan with your cell phone where you just take your phone, wave it in front of your face for a couple of minutes, say a few sentences, make a bunch of expressions, but, overall, have the whole process just be two to three minutes and then produce something that’s of the quality of what we have right now.
It starts off with a small number of people doing these very detailed scans. That’s the version that you did and that I did, and before there were a lot of people who we’ve done this a scan for, we probably need to over collect expressions when we’re doing the scanning because we haven’t figured out how much we can reduce that down to a really streamlined process and extrapolate from the scans that have already been done. But the goal, and we have a project that’s working on this already, is just to do a very quick scan with your cell phone where you just take your phone, wave it in front of your face for a couple of minutes, say a few sentences, make a bunch of expressions, but, overall, have the whole process just be two to three minutes and then produce something that’s of the quality of what we have right now.
So I think that that’s one of the big challenges that remains, and right now we have the ability to do the scans if you have hours to sit for one. And with today’s technology, you’re using a Meta headset that exists. It’s a product that’s for sale now. You can drive these with that, but the production of these scans in a very efficient way is one of the last pieces that we still need to really nail. And then, obviously, there’s all the experiences around it. Right now we’re sitting in a dark room, which is familiar for your podcast, but I think part of the vision for this over time is not just having this be a video call. That’s fine, it’s cool, it feels like it’s immersive, but you can do a video call on your phone.
The thing that you can do in the Metaverse that is different from what you can do on a phone is doing stuff where you’re physically there together and participating in things together. And we could play games like this. We could have meetings like this in the future. Once you get mixed reality and augmented reality, we could have Kodak Avatars like this and go into a meeting and have some people physically there and have some people show up in this photorealistic form superimposed on the physical environment. Stuff like that is going to be super powerful. So we’ve got to still build out all those applications and the use cases around it. But I don’t know, I think it’s going to be a pretty wild next few years around this.
Lex Fridman
I’m actually almost at a loss for words. This is just so incredible. This is truly incredible. I hope that people watching this can get a glimpse of how incredible it is. It really feels like we’re in the same room. I guess there’s an uncanny valley that seems to have been crossed here. It looks like you.
I’m actually almost at a loss for words. This is just so incredible. This is truly incredible. I hope that people watching this can get a glimpse of how incredible it is. It really feels like we’re in the same room. I guess there’s an uncanny valley that seems to have been crossed here. It looks like you.
Mark Zuckerberg
There’s still a bunch of tuning that I think we’ll want to do where different people emote to different extents, so I think one of the big questions is, when you smile, how wide is your smile? And how wide do you want your smile to be? And I think getting that to be tuned on a per person basis is going to be one of the things that we’re going to need to figure out. It’s like to, what extent do you want to give people control over that? Some people might prefer a version of themselves that’s more emotive in their avatar than their actual faces. So, for example, I always get a lot of critique and shit for having a relatively stiff expression. I might feel pretty happy, but just make a pretty small smile.
There’s still a bunch of tuning that I think we’ll want to do where different people emote to different extents, so I think one of the big questions is, when you smile, how wide is your smile? And how wide do you want your smile to be? And I think getting that to be tuned on a per person basis is going to be one of the things that we’re going to need to figure out. It’s like to, what extent do you want to give people control over that? Some people might prefer a version of themselves that’s more emotive in their avatar than their actual faces. So, for example, I always get a lot of critique and shit for having a relatively stiff expression. I might feel pretty happy, but just make a pretty small smile.
So maybe, for me, it’s like I’d want to have my avatar really be able to better express how I’m feeling than how I can do physically. So I think that there’s a question about how you want to tune that, but, overall, yeah, we want to start from the baseline of capturing how people actually emote and express themselves. And I think the initial version of this has been pretty impressive. And like you said, I do think we’re beyond the uncanny valley here where it does feel like you. It doesn’t feel weird or anything like that.
Lex Fridman
That’s going to be the meme that the two most monotone people are in the Metaverse together, but I think that actually makes it more difficult. The amazing thing here is that the subtleties of the expression of the eyes, people say I’m monotone and emotionless, but I’m not. It’s just maybe my expression of emotion is more subtle, usually, with the eyes. And that’s one of the things I’ve noticed is just how expressive the subtle movement of the corners of the eyes are in terms of displaying happiness or boredom or all that stuff.
That’s going to be the meme that the two most monotone people are in the Metaverse together, but I think that actually makes it more difficult. The amazing thing here is that the subtleties of the expression of the eyes, people say I’m monotone and emotionless, but I’m not. It’s just maybe my expression of emotion is more subtle, usually, with the eyes. And that’s one of the things I’ve noticed is just how expressive the subtle movement of the corners of the eyes are in terms of displaying happiness or boredom or all that stuff.
Mark Zuckerberg
I am curious to see, just because I’ve never done one of these before, I’ve never done a podcast as one of these Kodak Avatars, and I’m curious to see what people think of it. Because one of the issues that we’ve had in some of the VR and mixed reality work is it tends to feel a lot more profound when you’re in it than the 2D videos capturing the experience. So I think that this one, because it’s photorealistic, may look as amazing in 2D for people watching it as it feels, I think, to be in it. But we’ve certainly had this issue where a lot of the other things, it’s like you feel the sense of immersion when you’re in it that, that doesn’t quite translate to a 2D screen. But I don’t know, I’m curious to see what people think.
I am curious to see, just because I’ve never done one of these before, I’ve never done a podcast as one of these Kodak Avatars, and I’m curious to see what people think of it. Because one of the issues that we’ve had in some of the VR and mixed reality work is it tends to feel a lot more profound when you’re in it than the 2D videos capturing the experience. So I think that this one, because it’s photorealistic, may look as amazing in 2D for people watching it as it feels, I think, to be in it. But we’ve certainly had this issue where a lot of the other things, it’s like you feel the sense of immersion when you’re in it that, that doesn’t quite translate to a 2D screen. But I don’t know, I’m curious to see what people think.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’m curious to see if people could see that my heart is actually beating fast now. This is super interesting that such intimacy of conversation could be achieved remotely. I don’t do remote podcasts for this reason, and this breaks all of that. This feels like just an incredible transition to something else, the different communication. It breaks all barriers, like geographic physical barriers. You mentioned, do you have a sense of timeline in terms of how many difficult things have to be solved to make this more accessible to like scanning with a smartphone?
Yeah, I’m curious to see if people could see that my heart is actually beating fast now. This is super interesting that such intimacy of conversation could be achieved remotely. I don’t do remote podcasts for this reason, and this breaks all of that. This feels like just an incredible transition to something else, the different communication. It breaks all barriers, like geographic physical barriers. You mentioned, do you have a sense of timeline in terms of how many difficult things have to be solved to make this more accessible to like scanning with a smartphone?
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah. I think we’ll probably roll this out progressively over time. So it’s not going to be like we roll it out and one day everyone has a Kodak Avatar. We want to get more people scanned and into the system, and then we want to start integrating it into each one of our apps, making it so that I think that for a lot of the work style things, productivity, I think that this is going to make a ton of sense. In a lot of game environments, this could be fine, but games tend to have their own style where you almost want to fit more with the aesthetic style of the game. But I think for doing meetings, one of the things that we get a lot of feedback on Workrooms where people are pretty blown away by the experience and this feeling that you can be remote but feel like you’re physically there around a table with people, but then we get some feedback that people have a hard time with the fact that the avatars are so expressive and don’t feel as realistic in that environment.
Yeah. I think we’ll probably roll this out progressively over time. So it’s not going to be like we roll it out and one day everyone has a Kodak Avatar. We want to get more people scanned and into the system, and then we want to start integrating it into each one of our apps, making it so that I think that for a lot of the work style things, productivity, I think that this is going to make a ton of sense. In a lot of game environments, this could be fine, but games tend to have their own style where you almost want to fit more with the aesthetic style of the game. But I think for doing meetings, one of the things that we get a lot of feedback on Workrooms where people are pretty blown away by the experience and this feeling that you can be remote but feel like you’re physically there around a table with people, but then we get some feedback that people have a hard time with the fact that the avatars are so expressive and don’t feel as realistic in that environment.
So I think something like this could make a very big difference for those remote meetings. And especially with Quest Three coming out, which is going to be the first mainstream mixed reality product where you’re really taking digital expressions of either a person or objects and overlaying them on the physical world, I think the ability to do remote meetings and things like that where you’re just remote hang sessions with friends, I think that that’s going to be very exciting. So rolling it out over the next few years, it’s not ready to be a mainstream product yet, but we we’ll keep tuning it and keep getting more scans in there and rolling it out and into more of the features. But, yeah, definitely in the next few years you’ll be seeing a bunch more experiences like this.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I would love to see some celebrities scanned and some non-celebrities and just more people to experience this. I would love to see that. My mind blown. I’m literally at a loss for words because it’s very difficult to just convey how incredible this is, how I feel the emotion, how I feel the presence, how I feel the subtleties of the emotion in terms of work meetings or in terms of podcasts. This is awesome. I don’t even need your arms or legs.
Yeah, I would love to see some celebrities scanned and some non-celebrities and just more people to experience this. I would love to see that. My mind blown. I’m literally at a loss for words because it’s very difficult to just convey how incredible this is, how I feel the emotion, how I feel the presence, how I feel the subtleties of the emotion in terms of work meetings or in terms of podcasts. This is awesome. I don’t even need your arms or legs.
Mark Zuckerberg
Well, we got to get that. That’s its own challenge.
Well, we got to get that. That’s its own challenge.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Mark Zuckerberg
And part of the question is also, so you have the scan, then it takes a certain amount of compute to go drive that, both for the sensors on the headset and then rendering it. So one of the things that we’re working through is, what is the level of fidelity that is optimal? You could do the full body in a Kodak and that can be quite intensive, but one of the things that we’re thinking about is, all right, maybe you can stitch a somewhat lower fidelity version of your body and have the major movements, but your face is really the thing that we have the most resolution on in terms of being able to read and express emotions. Like you said, if you move your eyebrows a millimeter, that really changes the expression and what you’re emoting whereas moving your arm like an inch probably doesn’t matter quite as much. So, yes, I think that we do want to get all of that into here, and that’ll be some of the work over the next period as well.
And part of the question is also, so you have the scan, then it takes a certain amount of compute to go drive that, both for the sensors on the headset and then rendering it. So one of the things that we’re working through is, what is the level of fidelity that is optimal? You could do the full body in a Kodak and that can be quite intensive, but one of the things that we’re thinking about is, all right, maybe you can stitch a somewhat lower fidelity version of your body and have the major movements, but your face is really the thing that we have the most resolution on in terms of being able to read and express emotions. Like you said, if you move your eyebrows a millimeter, that really changes the expression and what you’re emoting whereas moving your arm like an inch probably doesn’t matter quite as much. So, yes, I think that we do want to get all of that into here, and that’ll be some of the work over the next period as well.
Quest 3
Lex Fridman
So you mentioned Quest Three. That’s coming out. I’ve gotten a chance to try that too. That’s awesome. How’d you pull off the mix? So it’s not just virtual reality, it’s mixed reality.
So you mentioned Quest Three. That’s coming out. I’ve gotten a chance to try that too. That’s awesome. How’d you pull off the mix? So it’s not just virtual reality, it’s mixed reality.
Mark Zuckerberg
I think it’s going to be the first mainstream mixed reality device. Obviously, we shipped Quest Pro last year, but it was $1,500. And part of what I’m super proud of is we try to innovate not just on pushing the state-of-the-art and delivering new capabilities, but making it so it can be available to everyone. And we have this, and it’s coming out, it’s $500, and in some ways, I think the mixed reality is actually better in Quest Three than what we’re using right now in Quest Pro. And I’m really proud of the team for being able to deliver that kind of an innovation and get it out. But some of this is just software you tune over time and get to be better. Part of it is you put together a product and you figure out, what are the bottlenecks in terms of making it a good experience?
I think it’s going to be the first mainstream mixed reality device. Obviously, we shipped Quest Pro last year, but it was $1,500. And part of what I’m super proud of is we try to innovate not just on pushing the state-of-the-art and delivering new capabilities, but making it so it can be available to everyone. And we have this, and it’s coming out, it’s $500, and in some ways, I think the mixed reality is actually better in Quest Three than what we’re using right now in Quest Pro. And I’m really proud of the team for being able to deliver that kind of an innovation and get it out. But some of this is just software you tune over time and get to be better. Part of it is you put together a product and you figure out, what are the bottlenecks in terms of making it a good experience?
So we got the resolution for the mixed reality cameras and sensors to be multiple times better in Quest Three, and we just figured that, that made a very big difference when we saw the experience that we were able to put together for Quest Pro. And part of it is also that Qualcomm just came out with their next generation chip set for VR and MR that we worked with them on, on a custom version of it. But that was available this year for Quest Three and it wasn’t available in Quest Pro. So in a way, Quest Three, even though it’s not the Pro product, actually has a stronger chip set in it than the Pro line at a third of the cost. So I’m…
Mark Zuckerberg
…line at a third of the cost. So I’m really excited to get this in people’s hands. It does all the VR stuff that Quest 2 and the others have done too. It does it better because the display is better and the chip is better. So you’ll get better graphics. It’s 40% thinner, so it’s more comfortable as well. But the MR is really the big capability shift. And part of what’s exciting about the whole space right now is this isn’t like smartphones, where companies put out a new smartphone every year, and you can almost barely tell the difference between that and the one the year before it.
…line at a third of the cost. So I’m really excited to get this in people’s hands. It does all the VR stuff that Quest 2 and the others have done too. It does it better because the display is better and the chip is better. So you’ll get better graphics. It’s 40% thinner, so it’s more comfortable as well. But the MR is really the big capability shift. And part of what’s exciting about the whole space right now is this isn’t like smartphones, where companies put out a new smartphone every year, and you can almost barely tell the difference between that and the one the year before it.
For this, each time we put out a new headset, it has a major new capability. And the big one now is mixed reality. The ability to basically take digital representations of people or objects and superimpose them on the world. And basically, there’s a, one version of this is you’re going to have these augments or holograms and experiences that you can bring into your living room or a meeting space or office.
Another thing that I just think is going to be a much simpler innovation, is that there are a lot of VR experiences today that don’t need to be fully immersive. And if you’re playing a shooter game or you’re doing a fitness experience, sometimes people get worried about swinging their arms around, like, am I going to hit a lamp or something and am I going to run into something? So having that in mixed reality, actually, it’s just a lot more comfortable for people. You kind of still get the immersion and the 3D experience and you can have an experience that just wouldn’t be possible in the physical world alone. But by being anchored to and being able to see the physical world around you, it just feels so much safer and more secure. And I think a lot of people are really going to enjoy that too. So yeah, I’m really excited to see how people use it. But yeah, Quest 3 coming out later this fall.
Lex Fridman
And I got to experience it with other people sitting around and there’s a lot of furniture. And so you get to see that furniture, you get to see those people, and you get to see those people enjoy the ridiculousness of you swinging your arms. I mean, presumably their friends of yours, even if they make fun of you, there’s a lot of love behind that and I got to experience that. So that’s a really fundamentally different experience than just pure VR with zombies coming out of walls and-
And I got to experience it with other people sitting around and there’s a lot of furniture. And so you get to see that furniture, you get to see those people, and you get to see those people enjoy the ridiculousness of you swinging your arms. I mean, presumably their friends of yours, even if they make fun of you, there’s a lot of love behind that and I got to experience that. So that’s a really fundamentally different experience than just pure VR with zombies coming out of walls and-
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, it’s like someone shooting at you and you hide behind your real couch in order to duck the fire. Yeah.
Yeah, it’s like someone shooting at you and you hide behind your real couch in order to duck the fire. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It’s incredible how it’s all integrated, but also subtle stuff, like in a room with no windows, you can add windows to it and you can look outside as the zombies run towards you, but it’s still a nice view outside. And so that’s pulled off by having cameras on the outside of the headset that do the pass through. That technology is incredible to do that on a small headset.
It’s incredible how it’s all integrated, but also subtle stuff, like in a room with no windows, you can add windows to it and you can look outside as the zombies run towards you, but it’s still a nice view outside. And so that’s pulled off by having cameras on the outside of the headset that do the pass through. That technology is incredible to do that on a small headset.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, and it’s not just the cameras. You basically, you need multiple cameras to capture the different angles and sort of the three-dimensional space, and then it’s a pretty complex compute problem, an AI problem to map that to your perspective because the cameras aren’t exactly where your eyes are because no two people’s eyes are, you’re not going to be in exactly the same place. You need to get that to line up and then do that basically in real time and then generate something that kind of feels natural and then superimpose whatever digital objects you want to put there.
Yeah, and it’s not just the cameras. You basically, you need multiple cameras to capture the different angles and sort of the three-dimensional space, and then it’s a pretty complex compute problem, an AI problem to map that to your perspective because the cameras aren’t exactly where your eyes are because no two people’s eyes are, you’re not going to be in exactly the same place. You need to get that to line up and then do that basically in real time and then generate something that kind of feels natural and then superimpose whatever digital objects you want to put there.
So yeah, it’s a very interesting technical challenge and I think we’ll continue tuning this for the years to come as well. But I’m pretty excited to get this out because I think Quest 3 is going to be the first device like this that millions of people are going to get that’s mixed reality. And it’s only when you have millions of people using something that you start getting the whole developer community really starting to experiment and build stuff because now there are going to be people who actually use it. So I think we got some of that flywheel going with Quest Pro, but I think it’ll really get accelerated once Quest 3 gets out there. So yeah, I’m pretty excited about this one.
Lex Fridman
Plus there’s hand tracking, so you don’t need to have a control, so the cameras aren’t just in the pass through of the entire physical reality around you. It’s also tracking the details of your hands in order to use that for gesture recognition, this kind of stuff.
Plus there’s hand tracking, so you don’t need to have a control, so the cameras aren’t just in the pass through of the entire physical reality around you. It’s also tracking the details of your hands in order to use that for gesture recognition, this kind of stuff.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, we’ve been able to get way further on hand recognition in a shorter period of time than I expected, so that’s been pretty cool. I don’t know, did you see the demo experience that we built around?
Yeah, we’ve been able to get way further on hand recognition in a shorter period of time than I expected, so that’s been pretty cool. I don’t know, did you see the demo experience that we built around?
Lex Fridman
Piano?
Piano?
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, the piano. Learning to play piano.
Yeah, the piano. Learning to play piano.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s incredible. You’re basically playing piano on a table, and that’s without any controller. And how well it matches physical reality with no latency, and it’s tracking your hands with no latency and it’s tracking all the people around you with no latency. Integrating physical reality and digital reality, obviously that connects exactly to this Codec Avatar, which is in parallel allows us to have ultra realistic copies of ourselves in this mixed reality.
Yeah, it’s incredible. You’re basically playing piano on a table, and that’s without any controller. And how well it matches physical reality with no latency, and it’s tracking your hands with no latency and it’s tracking all the people around you with no latency. Integrating physical reality and digital reality, obviously that connects exactly to this Codec Avatar, which is in parallel allows us to have ultra realistic copies of ourselves in this mixed reality.
So it’s all converging towards an incredible digital experience in the Metaverse. To me, obviously I love the intimacy of conversation, so even this is awesome, but do you have other ideas of what this unlocks, of something like Codec Avatar unlocks in terms of applications, in terms of things we’re able to do?
Mark Zuckerberg
Well, there’s what you can do with avatars overall, in terms of superimposing digital objects on the physical world, and then there’s psychologically, what does having photorealistic do? So I think we’re moving towards a world where we’re going to have something that looks like normal glasses, where you can see the physical world, but you’ll also see holograms. And in that world, I think that there are going to be, not too far off, maybe by the end of this decade, we’ll be living in a world where there are as many holograms when you walk into a room as there are physical objects. And it really raises this interesting question about what are… A lot of people have this phrase where they call the physical world the real world.
Well, there’s what you can do with avatars overall, in terms of superimposing digital objects on the physical world, and then there’s psychologically, what does having photorealistic do? So I think we’re moving towards a world where we’re going to have something that looks like normal glasses, where you can see the physical world, but you’ll also see holograms. And in that world, I think that there are going to be, not too far off, maybe by the end of this decade, we’ll be living in a world where there are as many holograms when you walk into a room as there are physical objects. And it really raises this interesting question about what are… A lot of people have this phrase where they call the physical world the real world.
And I kind of think increasingly, the physical world is super important, but I actually think the real world is the combination of the physical world and the digital worlds coming together. But until this technology, they were sort of separate. It’s like you access the digital world through a screen and maybe it’s a small screen that you carry around or it’s a bigger screen when you sit down at your desk and strap in for a long session, but they’re kind of fundamentally divorced and disconnected. And I think part of what this technology is going to do is bring those together into a single coherent experience of what the modern real world is, which is, it’s got to be physical because we’re physical beings. So the physical world is always going to be super important.
But increasingly, I think a lot of the things that we kind of think of can be digital holograms. I mean, any screen that you have can be a hologram, any media, in any book, art. It can basically be just as effective as a hologram, as a physical object. Any game that you’re playing, a board game or any kind of physical game, cards, ping pong, things like that, they’re often a lot better as holograms. Because you could just snap your fingers and instantiate them and have them show up. It’s like you have a ping pong table show up in your living room, but then you can snap your fingers and have it be gone. So that’s super powerful. So I think that it’s actually an amazing thought experiment of like how many physical things we have today that could actually be better as interactive holograms.
But then beyond that, I think the most important thing obviously is people. So the ability to have these mixed hangouts, whether they’re social or meetings where you show up to a conference room, you’re wearing glasses or a headset in the very near term, but hopefully by over the next five years, glasses or so. And you’re there physically. Some people are there physically, but other people are just there as holograms and it feels like it’s them who are right there.
And also by the way, another thing that I think is going to be fascinating about being able to blend together the digital and physical worlds in this way, is we’re also going to be able to embody AIs as well. So I think you’ll also have meetings in the future where you’re basically, maybe you’re sitting there physically and then you have a couple of other people who are there as holograms, and then you have Bob, the AI, who’s an engineer on your team who’s helping with things, and he can now be embodied as a realistic avatar as well, and just join the meeting in that way. So I think that that’s going to be pretty compelling as well.
Okay, so what can you do with photorealistic avatars compared to the more expressive ones that we have today? Well, I think a lot of this actually comes down to acceptance of the technology. And because all of the stuff that we’re doing, I mean, the motion of your eyebrows, the motion of your eyes, the cheeks and all of that, there’s actually no reason why you couldn’t do that on an expressive avatar too. I mean, it wouldn’t look exactly like you, but you can make a cartoon version of yourself and still have it be almost as expressive.
But I do think that there’s this bridge between the current state of most of our interactions in the physical world and where we’re getting in the future with this kind of hybrid, physical and digital world, where I think it’s going to be a lot easier for people to take some of these experiences seriously with the photorealistic avatars to start. And then I’m actually really curious to see where it goes longer term. I could see a world where people stick to the photorealistic and maybe they modify them to make them a little bit more interesting, but maybe fundamentally, we like photorealistic things.
But I can also see a world that once people get used to the photorealistic avatars and they get used to these experiences, that I actually think that there could be a world where people actually prefer being able to express themselves in kind of non, ways that aren’t so tied to their physical reality. And so that’s one of the things that I’m really curious about. And I don’t know, in a bunch of our internal experiments on this, one of the things that I thought was psychologically pretty interesting is, people have no issues blending photorealistic stuff and not.
So for this specific scene that we’re in now, we happen to sort of be in a dark room. I think part of that aesthetic decision I think was based on the way you like to do your podcast, but we’ve done experiences like this, where you have a cartoony background, but photorealistic people who you’re talking to, and people just seem to just think that that is completely normal. It doesn’t bother you, it doesn’t feel like it’s weird.
Another thing that we have experienced with, is basically you have a photorealistic avatar that you’re talking to, and then right next to them you have an expressive kind of cartoon avatar. And that actually is pretty normal too. It’s not that weird to basically being interacting with different people in different modes like that. So I’m not sure, I think it’ll be an interesting question, to what extent these photorealistic avatars are a key part of just transitioning from being comfortable in the physical world to this kind of new, modern, real world that includes both the digital and physical, or if this is the long-term way that it stays?I think that there are going to be uses for both the expressive and the photorealistic over time. I just don’t know what the balance is going to be.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. It’s a really good, interesting philosophical question, but to me, in the short term, the photorealistic is amazing. To where I would prefer, you said the workroom, but on a beach with a beer, just to see a buddy of mine remotely on a chair next to me, drinking a beer. I mean that, as realistic as possible, is an incredible experience. So I don’t want any fake hats on him. I don’t want any, just chilling with a friend, drinking beer, looking at the ocean, while not being in the same place together. I mean, that experience is just, it’s a fundamentally, it’s just a high quality experience of friendship. Whatever we seek in friendship, it seems to be present there in the same kind of realism I’m seeing right now. This is totally a game changer. So to me, this is, I can see myself sticking with this for a long time.
Yeah. It’s a really good, interesting philosophical question, but to me, in the short term, the photorealistic is amazing. To where I would prefer, you said the workroom, but on a beach with a beer, just to see a buddy of mine remotely on a chair next to me, drinking a beer. I mean that, as realistic as possible, is an incredible experience. So I don’t want any fake hats on him. I don’t want any, just chilling with a friend, drinking beer, looking at the ocean, while not being in the same place together. I mean, that experience is just, it’s a fundamentally, it’s just a high quality experience of friendship. Whatever we seek in friendship, it seems to be present there in the same kind of realism I’m seeing right now. This is totally a game changer. So to me, this is, I can see myself sticking with this for a long time.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, and I mean it’s also, it’s novel. And it’s also a technological feat, right? It’s like being able to pull this off, it’s a pretty impressive and I think to some degree, it’s just this kind of awesome experience.
Yeah, and I mean it’s also, it’s novel. And it’s also a technological feat, right? It’s like being able to pull this off, it’s a pretty impressive and I think to some degree, it’s just this kind of awesome experience.
Nature of reality
Lex Fridman
But I’m already, sorry to interrupt, I’m already forgetting that you’re not real. This really-
But I’m already, sorry to interrupt, I’m already forgetting that you’re not real. This really-
Mark Zuckerberg
Well, I am real.
Well, I am real.
Mark Zuckerberg
It’s novel.
It’s novel.
Mark Zuckerberg
This is just an avatar version of me.
This is just an avatar version of me.
Lex Fridman
That’s a deep philosophical question. Yes.
That’s a deep philosophical question. Yes.
Mark Zuckerberg
But here’s some of the… So I put this on this morning and I was like, “All right.” It’s like, okay, my hair is a little shorter in this than my physical hair is right now. I probably need to go get a haircut. And I actually, I did happen to shave this morning, but if I hadn’t, I could still have this photorealistic avatar that is more cleanly shaven, even if I’m a few days in, physically. So I do think that there are going to start to be these subtle questions that seep in where the avatar is realistic in the sense of, this is kind of what you looked like at the time of capture, but it’s not necessarily temporarily accurate to exactly what you look like in this moment. And I think that there are going to end up being a bunch of questions that come from that over time, that I think are going to be fascinating too.
But here’s some of the… So I put this on this morning and I was like, “All right.” It’s like, okay, my hair is a little shorter in this than my physical hair is right now. I probably need to go get a haircut. And I actually, I did happen to shave this morning, but if I hadn’t, I could still have this photorealistic avatar that is more cleanly shaven, even if I’m a few days in, physically. So I do think that there are going to start to be these subtle questions that seep in where the avatar is realistic in the sense of, this is kind of what you looked like at the time of capture, but it’s not necessarily temporarily accurate to exactly what you look like in this moment. And I think that there are going to end up being a bunch of questions that come from that over time, that I think are going to be fascinating too.
Lex Fridman
You mean just the nature of identity of who we are? You know how people do summer beach body? Where people will be, for the scan, they’ll try to lose some weight and look their best and sexiest with the nice hair and everything like that. It does raise the question of if a lot of people interacting with the digital version of ourselves, who are we really? Are we the entity driving the avatar or are we the avatar?
You mean just the nature of identity of who we are? You know how people do summer beach body? Where people will be, for the scan, they’ll try to lose some weight and look their best and sexiest with the nice hair and everything like that. It does raise the question of if a lot of people interacting with the digital version of ourselves, who are we really? Are we the entity driving the avatar or are we the avatar?
Mark Zuckerberg
Well, I mean, I think our physical bodies also fluctuate and change over time too. So I think there’s a similar question of which version of that are we? And it’s an interesting identity question because all right, it’s like, I don’t know, it’s like weight fluctuates or things like that. I think most people don’t tend to think of themselves as the… Well, I don’t know. It’s an interesting psychological question. Maybe a lot of people do think about themselves as the kind of worst version, but I think a lot of people probably think about themselves as the best version.
Well, I mean, I think our physical bodies also fluctuate and change over time too. So I think there’s a similar question of which version of that are we? And it’s an interesting identity question because all right, it’s like, I don’t know, it’s like weight fluctuates or things like that. I think most people don’t tend to think of themselves as the… Well, I don’t know. It’s an interesting psychological question. Maybe a lot of people do think about themselves as the kind of worst version, but I think a lot of people probably think about themselves as the best version.
And then it’s like what you are on a day-to-day basis doesn’t necessarily map to either of those. Yeah, there will definitely be a bunch of social scientists and folks will have to, and psychologists, really, there’s going to be a lot to understand about how our perception of ourselves and others has shifted from this.
Lex Fridman
Well, this might be a bit of a complicated and a dark question, but one of the first feelings I had experiencing this is I would love to talk to loved ones. And the next question I have is I would love to talk to people who are no longer here that are loved ones. So if you look into the future, is that something you think about? Who people who pass away, but they can still exist in the metaverse, you could still have, talk to your father, talk to your grandfather and grandmother and a mother once they pass away. The power of that experience is one of the first things my mind jumped because it’s like, this is so real.
Well, this might be a bit of a complicated and a dark question, but one of the first feelings I had experiencing this is I would love to talk to loved ones. And the next question I have is I would love to talk to people who are no longer here that are loved ones. So if you look into the future, is that something you think about? Who people who pass away, but they can still exist in the metaverse, you could still have, talk to your father, talk to your grandfather and grandmother and a mother once they pass away. The power of that experience is one of the first things my mind jumped because it’s like, this is so real.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, I think that there are a lot of norms and things that people have to figure out around that. There’s probably some balance, where if someone has lost a loved one and is grieving, there may be ways in which being able to interact or relive certain memories could be helpful. But then there’s also probably an extent to which it could become unhealthy. And I mean, I’m not an expert in that, so I think we’d have to study that and understand it in more detail. We have a fair amount of experience-
Yeah, I think that there are a lot of norms and things that people have to figure out around that. There’s probably some balance, where if someone has lost a loved one and is grieving, there may be ways in which being able to interact or relive certain memories could be helpful. But then there’s also probably an extent to which it could become unhealthy. And I mean, I’m not an expert in that, so I think we’d have to study that and understand it in more detail. We have a fair amount of experience-
Mark Zuckerberg
… understand it in more detail. We have a fair amount of experience with how to handle death and identity, and people’s digital content through social media already, unfortunately. Unfortunately people who use our services die every day and their families often want to have access to their profiles and we have whole protocols that we go through where there are certain parts of it that we try to memorialize so that way the family can get access to it so that the account doesn’t just go away immediately. But then there are other things that are important, private things that person has. We’re not going to give the family access to someone’s messages, for example.
… understand it in more detail. We have a fair amount of experience with how to handle death and identity, and people’s digital content through social media already, unfortunately. Unfortunately people who use our services die every day and their families often want to have access to their profiles and we have whole protocols that we go through where there are certain parts of it that we try to memorialize so that way the family can get access to it so that the account doesn’t just go away immediately. But then there are other things that are important, private things that person has. We’re not going to give the family access to someone’s messages, for example.
AI in the Metaverse
So I think that there’s some best practices, I think from the current digital world that will carry over. But I think that this will enable some different things. Another version of this is how this intersects with AIs because one of the things that we’re really focused on is we want the world to evolve in a way where there isn’t a single AI super intelligence, but where a lot of people are empowered by having AI tools to do their jobs and make their lives better.
And if you’re a creator and if you run a podcast like you do, then you have a big community of people who are super interested to talk to you. I know you’d love to cultivate that community and you interact with them online outside of the podcast as well. But I mean, there’s way more demand both to interact with you, and I’m sure you’d love to interact with the community more, but you just are limited by the number of hours in the day.
So at some point, I think making it so that you could build an AI version of yourself that could interact with people not after you die, but while you’re here to help people fulfill this desire to interact with you and your desire to build a community. And there’s a lot of interesting questions around that, and obviously, it’s not just in the metaverse. I think we’d want to make that work across all the messaging platforms, WhatsApp, and Messenger, and Instagram Direct. But there’s certainly a version of that where if you could have an avatar version of yourself in the metaverse that people can interact with, and you could define that sort of an AI version where people know that they’re interacting with an AI, that it’s not the physical version of you, but maybe that AI, even if they know it’s an AI, is the next best thing because they’re probably not going to necessarily all get to interact with you directly.
I think that could be a really compelling experience. There’s a lot of things that we need to get right about it that we’re not ready to release the version that a creator can build a version of themselves yet, but we’re starting to experiment with it in terms of releasing a number of AIs that people can interact with in different ways. I think that that is also just going to be a very powerful set of capabilities that people have over time.
Lex Fridman
So you’ve made major strides in developing these early AI personalities with the idea where you can talk to them across the Meta apps and have interesting, unique kind of conversations. Can you describe your vision there and these early strides and what are some technical challenges there?
So you’ve made major strides in developing these early AI personalities with the idea where you can talk to them across the Meta apps and have interesting, unique kind of conversations. Can you describe your vision there and these early strides and what are some technical challenges there?
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah. So a lot of the vision comes from this idea that… I don’t think we necessarily want there to be one big super intelligence. We want to empower everyone to both have more fun, accomplish their business goals, just everything that they’re trying to do. We don’t tend to have one person that we work with on everything, and I don’t think in the future we’re going to have one AI that we work with. I think you’re going to want a variety of these. So there are a bunch of different uses. Some will be more assistant oriented. There’s a sort of the plain and simple one that we are building is called just Meta AI. It’s simple. You can chat with it in any of your Threads. It doesn’t have a face.
Yeah. So a lot of the vision comes from this idea that… I don’t think we necessarily want there to be one big super intelligence. We want to empower everyone to both have more fun, accomplish their business goals, just everything that they’re trying to do. We don’t tend to have one person that we work with on everything, and I don’t think in the future we’re going to have one AI that we work with. I think you’re going to want a variety of these. So there are a bunch of different uses. Some will be more assistant oriented. There’s a sort of the plain and simple one that we are building is called just Meta AI. It’s simple. You can chat with it in any of your Threads. It doesn’t have a face.
It’s just more vanilla and neutral and factual, but it can help you with a bunch of stuff. Then there are a bunch of cases that are more business oriented. So let’s say you want to contact a small business. Similarly, that business probably doesn’t want to have to staff someone to man the phones, and you probably don’t want to wait on the phone to talk to someone. But having someone who you can just talk to in a natural way who can help you if you’re having an issue with a product or if you want to make a reservation or if you want to buy something online, having the ability to do that and have a natural conversation rather than navigate some website or have to call someone and wait on hold think is going to be really good both for the businesses and for normal people who want to interact with businesses.
So I think stuff like that makes sense. Then there are going to be a bunch of use cases that I think are just fun. So I think people are going to… I think there will be AIs that I can tell jokes, so you can put them into chat thread with friends. I think a lot of this, because we’re like a social company. I mean we’re fundamentally around helping people connect in different ways. Part of what I’m excited about is how do you enable these kind of AIs to facilitate connection between two people or more, put them in a group chat, make the group chat more interesting around whatever your interests are, sports, fashion, trivia.
Lex Fridman
Video games. I love the idea of playing. I think you mentioned Baldur’s Gate, an incredible game. Just having an AI that you play together with. I mean, that seems like a small thing, but it could deeply enrich the gaming experience.
Video games. I love the idea of playing. I think you mentioned Baldur’s Gate, an incredible game. Just having an AI that you play together with. I mean, that seems like a small thing, but it could deeply enrich the gaming experience.
Mark Zuckerberg
I do think that AI will make the NPCs a lot better in games too. So that’s a separate thing that I’m pretty excited about. I mean, one of the AIs that we’ve built that just in our internal testing people have loved the most is an adventure text-based like a dungeon master.
I do think that AI will make the NPCs a lot better in games too. So that’s a separate thing that I’m pretty excited about. I mean, one of the AIs that we’ve built that just in our internal testing people have loved the most is an adventure text-based like a dungeon master.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Mark Zuckerberg
I think, part of what has been fun, and we talked about this a bit, but we’ve gotten some real cultural figures to play a bunch of these folks and be the embodiment in the avatar of them. So Snoop Dogg is the dungeon master, which I think is just hilarious.
I think, part of what has been fun, and we talked about this a bit, but we’ve gotten some real cultural figures to play a bunch of these folks and be the embodiment in the avatar of them. So Snoop Dogg is the dungeon master, which I think is just hilarious.
Lex Fridman
Yes. In terms of the next steps of, you mentioned Snoop, to create a Snoop AI, so basically AI personality replica a copy… Or not a copy, maybe inspired by Snoop, what are some of the technical challenges of that? What does that experience look like for Snoop to be able to create that AI?
Yes. In terms of the next steps of, you mentioned Snoop, to create a Snoop AI, so basically AI personality replica a copy… Or not a copy, maybe inspired by Snoop, what are some of the technical challenges of that? What does that experience look like for Snoop to be able to create that AI?
Mark Zuckerberg
So starting off, creating new personas is easier because it doesn’t need to stick exactly to what that physical person would want, how they’d want to be represented. It’s like it’s just a new character that we created. So Snoop in that case, he’s basically an actor. He’s playing the Dungeon Master, but it’s not Snoop Dogg, it’s whoever the dungeon master is. If you want to actually make it so that you have an AI embodying a real creator, there’s a whole set of things that you need to do to make sure that that AI is not going to say things that the creator doesn’t want and that the AI is going to know things and be able to represent things in the way that the creator would want, the way that the creator would know.
So starting off, creating new personas is easier because it doesn’t need to stick exactly to what that physical person would want, how they’d want to be represented. It’s like it’s just a new character that we created. So Snoop in that case, he’s basically an actor. He’s playing the Dungeon Master, but it’s not Snoop Dogg, it’s whoever the dungeon master is. If you want to actually make it so that you have an AI embodying a real creator, there’s a whole set of things that you need to do to make sure that that AI is not going to say things that the creator doesn’t want and that the AI is going to know things and be able to represent things in the way that the creator would want, the way that the creator would know.
So I think that it’s less of a question around having the avatar express them. I mean that I think where it’s like, well, we have our V1 of that that we’ll release soon after Connect. But that’ll get better over time. But a lot of this is really just about continuing to make the models for these AIs that they’re just more and more, I don’t know, you could say reliable or predictable in terms of what they’ll communicate so that way when you want to create the Lex assistant AI that your community can talk to. You don’t program them like normal computers, you’re training them. They’re AI models, not normal computer programs, but you want to get it to be predictable enough so that way you can set some parameters for it.
And even if it isn’t perfect all the time, you want it to generally be able to stay within those bounds. So that’s a lot of what I think we need to nail for the creators, and that’s why that one is actually a much harder problem, I think, than starting with new characters that you’re creating from scratch. So that one I think will probably start releasing sometime next year. Not this year, but experimenting with existing characters and the assistant, and games, and a bunch of different personalities and experimenting with some small businesses. I think that that stuff we’ll be ready to do this year. And we’re rolling it out basically right after Connect.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I’m deeply entertained by the possibility of me sitting down with myself and saying, “Hey, man, you need to stop the dad jokes or whatever.”
Yeah. I’m deeply entertained by the possibility of me sitting down with myself and saying, “Hey, man, you need to stop the dad jokes or whatever.”
Mark Zuckerberg
I think the idea of a podcast between you and AI assistant Lex podcast.
I think the idea of a podcast between you and AI assistant Lex podcast.
Lex Fridman
I mean, there is just even the experience of an avatar, being able to freeze yourself like basically first mimic yourself, so everything you do, you get to see yourself do it. That’s a surreal experience. That feels like if I was an ape looking in a mirror for the first time, realizing, “Oh, that’s you.” But then freezing that and being able to look around like I’m looking at you, I don’t know how to put it into words, but it just feels like a fundamentally new experience. I’m seeing maybe color for the first time. I’m experiencing a new way of seeing the world for the first time because it’s physical reality, but it’s digital. And realizing that that’s possible, it’s blowing my mind. It’s just really exciting.
I mean, there is just even the experience of an avatar, being able to freeze yourself like basically first mimic yourself, so everything you do, you get to see yourself do it. That’s a surreal experience. That feels like if I was an ape looking in a mirror for the first time, realizing, “Oh, that’s you.” But then freezing that and being able to look around like I’m looking at you, I don’t know how to put it into words, but it just feels like a fundamentally new experience. I’m seeing maybe color for the first time. I’m experiencing a new way of seeing the world for the first time because it’s physical reality, but it’s digital. And realizing that that’s possible, it’s blowing my mind. It’s just really exciting.
I lived most of my life before the internet and experiencing the internet and experiencing voice communication, video communication. You think like, “Well, there’s a ceiling to this, but this is making me feel like there might not be, there might be that blend of physical reality and digital reality. That’s actually what the future is.”
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, I think so.
Yeah, I think so.
Lex Fridman
It’s a weird experience. It feels like the early days of a totally new way of living, and there’s a lot of people that kind of complain, “Well, the internet, that’s not reality. You need to turn all that off and go in nature.” But this feels like this will make those people happy. I feel like, because it feels real, the flaws in everything.
It’s a weird experience. It feels like the early days of a totally new way of living, and there’s a lot of people that kind of complain, “Well, the internet, that’s not reality. You need to turn all that off and go in nature.” But this feels like this will make those people happy. I feel like, because it feels real, the flaws in everything.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah. Well, I mean, a big part of how we’re trying to design these new computing products is that they should be physical, but I think that’s a big part of the issue with computers and TVs and even phones is like, “Yeah, maybe you can interact with them in different places.” But they’re fundamentally like you’re sitting, you’re still. I mean, people are just not meant to be that way. I mean, I think you and I have this shared passion for sports and martial arts and doing stuff like that. We’re just moving around. It’s so much of what makes us people is like, you move around. You’re not just like a brain and a tank. It’s where the human experience is a physical one.
Yeah. Well, I mean, a big part of how we’re trying to design these new computing products is that they should be physical, but I think that’s a big part of the issue with computers and TVs and even phones is like, “Yeah, maybe you can interact with them in different places.” But they’re fundamentally like you’re sitting, you’re still. I mean, people are just not meant to be that way. I mean, I think you and I have this shared passion for sports and martial arts and doing stuff like that. We’re just moving around. It’s so much of what makes us people is like, you move around. You’re not just like a brain and a tank. It’s where the human experience is a physical one.
So it’s not just about having the immersive expression of the digital world, it’s about being able to really natively bring that together. I do really think that the real world is this mix of the physical and the digital. There’s too much digital at this point for it to just be siloed to a small screen, but the physical is too important. So you don’t want to just sit down all day long at a desk. I do think that this is the future. This is, I think the kind of philosophical way that I would want the world to work in the future is a much more coherently, blended, physical and digital world.
Lex Fridman
There might be some difficult philosophical and ethical questions we have to figure out as a society. Maybe you can comment on this. So the metaverse seems to enable, sort of unlock a lot of experiences that we don’t have in the physical world. And the question is what is and isn’t allowed in the metaverse? In video games, we allow all kinds of crazy stuff. And in physical reality, a lot of that is illegal. So where’s that line? Where’s that gray area between video game and physical reality? Do you have a sense of that?
There might be some difficult philosophical and ethical questions we have to figure out as a society. Maybe you can comment on this. So the metaverse seems to enable, sort of unlock a lot of experiences that we don’t have in the physical world. And the question is what is and isn’t allowed in the metaverse? In video games, we allow all kinds of crazy stuff. And in physical reality, a lot of that is illegal. So where’s that line? Where’s that gray area between video game and physical reality? Do you have a sense of that?
Mark Zuckerberg
I mean, there are content policies and things like that in terms of what people are allowed to create, but I mean, a lot of the rules around physical… I think we try to have a society that is as free as possible, meaning that people can do as much of what they want unless you’re going to do damage to other people and infringe on their rights. And the idea of damage is somewhat different in a digital environment.
I mean, there are content policies and things like that in terms of what people are allowed to create, but I mean, a lot of the rules around physical… I think we try to have a society that is as free as possible, meaning that people can do as much of what they want unless you’re going to do damage to other people and infringe on their rights. And the idea of damage is somewhat different in a digital environment.
I mean, when I get into some world with my friends, the first thing we start doing is shooting each other, which obviously we would not do in the physical world because you’d hurt each other. But in a game, it’s just fun. And even in the lobby of a game, it’s not even bearing on the game, it’s just kind of a funny sort of humorous thing to do. So it’s like, is that problematic? I don’t think so because fundamentally you’re not causing harm in that world. So I think that part of the question that I think we need to figure out is what are the ways where things could have been harmful in the physical world that we’ll now be freed from that? And therefore there should be fewer restrictions in the digital world.
And then there might be new ways in which there could be harm in the digital world that there weren’t the case before. So there’s more anonymity. It’s when you show up to a restaurant or something, it’s like all the norms where you pay the bill at the end. It’s because you have one identity. And if you stiff them, then life is a repeat game and that’s not going to work out well for you. But in a digital world where you can be anonymous and show up in different ways, I think the incentive to act like a good citizen can be a lot less, and that causes a lot of issues and toxic behavior. So that needs to get sorted out.
So I think in terms of what is allowed, I think you want to just look at what are the damages, but then there’s also other things that are not related to harm, less about what should be allowed and more about what will be possible that are more about the laws of physics. It’s like if you wanted to travel to see me in person, you’d have to get on a plane, and that would take a few hours to get here. Whereas we could just jump in a conference room and put on these headsets and we’re basically teleported into a space where it feels like we’re together.
So that’s a very novel experience that it breaks down some things that previously would’ve defied the laws of physics for what it would take to get together. And I think that that will create a lot of new opportunities. One of the things that I’m curious about is there are all these debates right now about remote work or people being together. I think this gets us a lot closer to being able to work physically in different places, but actually have it feel like we’re together. So I think that the dream is that people will one day be able to just work wherever they want, but we’ll have all the same opportunities because you’ll be able to feel like you’re physically together. I think we’re not there today with just video conferencing and the basic technologies that we have, but I think part of the idea is that with something like this, over time, you could get closer to that and that would open up a lot of opportunities, right? Because then people could live physically where they want while still being able to get the benefits of being physically or feeling like you’re together.
Mark Zuckerberg
… to get the benefits of being physically or feeling like you’re together with people at work, all the ways that that helps to build more culture and build better relationships and build trust, which I think are real issues that if you’re not seeing people in person ever. So yeah, I don’t know. I think it’s very hard from first principles to think about all the implications of a technology like this and all the good and the things that you need to mitigate. So you try to do your best to envision what things are going to be like and accentuate the things that they’re going to be awesome and hopefully mitigate some of the downside things. But the reality is that we’re going to be building this out one year at a time. It’s going to take a while, so we’re going to just get to see how it evolves and what developers and different folks do with it.
… to get the benefits of being physically or feeling like you’re together with people at work, all the ways that that helps to build more culture and build better relationships and build trust, which I think are real issues that if you’re not seeing people in person ever. So yeah, I don’t know. I think it’s very hard from first principles to think about all the implications of a technology like this and all the good and the things that you need to mitigate. So you try to do your best to envision what things are going to be like and accentuate the things that they’re going to be awesome and hopefully mitigate some of the downside things. But the reality is that we’re going to be building this out one year at a time. It’s going to take a while, so we’re going to just get to see how it evolves and what developers and different folks do with it.
Large language models
Lex Fridman
If you could comment, this might be a bit of a very specific technical question, but Llama 2 is incredible. You’ve released it recently. There’s already been a lot of exciting developments around it. What’s your sense about its release and is there a Llama 3 in the future?
If you could comment, this might be a bit of a very specific technical question, but Llama 2 is incredible. You’ve released it recently. There’s already been a lot of exciting developments around it. What’s your sense about its release and is there a Llama 3 in the future?
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, I mean, I think on the last podcast that we did together, we were talking about the debate that we were having around open sourcing Llama 2. And I’m glad that we did. I think at this point there’s the value of open sourcing, a foundation model like Llama 2. It’s significantly greater than the risks in my view. I mean, we spent a lot of time, took a very rigorous assessment of that and red teaming it. But I’m very glad that we released Llama 2. I think the reception has been… It’s just been really exciting to see how excited people have been about it. It’s gotten way more downloads and usage than I would’ve even expected, and I was pretty optimistic about it. So that’s been great.
Yeah, I mean, I think on the last podcast that we did together, we were talking about the debate that we were having around open sourcing Llama 2. And I’m glad that we did. I think at this point there’s the value of open sourcing, a foundation model like Llama 2. It’s significantly greater than the risks in my view. I mean, we spent a lot of time, took a very rigorous assessment of that and red teaming it. But I’m very glad that we released Llama 2. I think the reception has been… It’s just been really exciting to see how excited people have been about it. It’s gotten way more downloads and usage than I would’ve even expected, and I was pretty optimistic about it. So that’s been great.
Llama 3, I mean, there’s always another model that we’re training. So for right now, we train Llama 2 and we released it as an open source model. And right now the priority is building that into a bunch of the consumer products, all the different AIs and a bunch of different products that we’re basically building as consumer products. Because Llama 2 by itself, it’s not a consumer product, right? It’s more of a piece of infrastructure that people could build things with.
So that’s been the big priority, is continuing to fine tune and just get Llama 2 and the branches that we’ve built off of it ready for consumer products that hopefully hundreds of millions of people will enjoy using those products in billions one day. But yeah, I mean we’re also working on the future foundation models. I don’t have anything new or news on that. I don’t know exactly when it’s going to be ready. I think just like we had a debate around Llama 2 and open sourcing it, I think we’ll need to have a similar debate and process to red team this and make sure that this is safe. And my hope is that we’ll be able to open source this next version when it’s ready too. But we’re not close to doing that this month. I mean, that’s a thing that we’re still somewhat early and working on.
Lex Fridman
Well, in general, thank you so much for open sourcing Llama 2 and for being transparent about all the exciting developments around AI. I feel like that’s contributing to a really awesome conversation about where we go with AI. And obviously, it’s really interesting to see all the same kind of technology integrated into these personalized AI systems with the AI personas, which I think when you put in people’s hands and they get to have conversations with these AI personas, you get to see interesting failure cases where the things are dumb or they go into weird directions. And we get to learn as a society together what’s too far, what’s interesting, what’s fun, how much personalization is good, how much generic is good. And we get to learn all of this. And you probably don’t know this yourself. We have to all figure it out by using it, right?
Well, in general, thank you so much for open sourcing Llama 2 and for being transparent about all the exciting developments around AI. I feel like that’s contributing to a really awesome conversation about where we go with AI. And obviously, it’s really interesting to see all the same kind of technology integrated into these personalized AI systems with the AI personas, which I think when you put in people’s hands and they get to have conversations with these AI personas, you get to see interesting failure cases where the things are dumb or they go into weird directions. And we get to learn as a society together what’s too far, what’s interesting, what’s fun, how much personalization is good, how much generic is good. And we get to learn all of this. And you probably don’t know this yourself. We have to all figure it out by using it, right?
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, I mean part of what we’re trying to do with the initial AI’s launch is having a diversity of different use cases just so that people can try different things because I don’t know what’s going to work. I mean, are people going to like playing in the tech-based adventure games or are they going to like having a comedian who can add jokes to threads or they can want to interact with historical figures? We made one of Jane Austin and one of Marcus Aurelius, and I’m curious to see how that goes.
Yeah, I mean part of what we’re trying to do with the initial AI’s launch is having a diversity of different use cases just so that people can try different things because I don’t know what’s going to work. I mean, are people going to like playing in the tech-based adventure games or are they going to like having a comedian who can add jokes to threads or they can want to interact with historical figures? We made one of Jane Austin and one of Marcus Aurelius, and I’m curious to see how that goes.
Lex Fridman
I’m excited for both. Aa a big fan I’m excited for both. I have conversations with them. And I am also excited to see, the internet, I don’t know if you heard, can get kind of weird and I applaud them for it. So-
I’m excited for both. Aa a big fan I’m excited for both. I have conversations with them. And I am also excited to see, the internet, I don’t know if you heard, can get kind of weird and I applaud them for it. So-
Mark Zuckerberg
I’ve heard that, yeah.
I’ve heard that, yeah.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. So it’d be nice to see how weird they take it, what kind of memes are generated from this. And I think all of it is, especially in these early stages of development as we progress towards AGI, it’s good to learn by playing with those systems and interacting with them at a large scale like you said.
Yeah. So it’d be nice to see how weird they take it, what kind of memes are generated from this. And I think all of it is, especially in these early stages of development as we progress towards AGI, it’s good to learn by playing with those systems and interacting with them at a large scale like you said.
Mark Zuckerberg
Yeah, totally. I mean, that’s why we’re starting out with a set. And then we’re also working on this platform that we call AI Studio that’s going to make it so that over time anyone will be able to create one of these AI almost like they create any other UGC content across the platform. So I’m excited about that. I think that to some degree we’re not going to see the full potential of this until you just have the full creativity of the whole community being able to build stuff, but there’s a lot of stuff that we need to get. So I’m excited to take this in stages. I don’t think anyone out there is really doing what we’re doing here. I think that there are people who are doing fictional or consumer-oriented character type stuff, but the extent to which we’re building it out with the avatars and expressiveness and making it so that they can interact across all of the different apps and they’ll have profiles and we’ll be able to engage people on Instagram and Facebook, I think it’s going to be really fun.
Yeah, totally. I mean, that’s why we’re starting out with a set. And then we’re also working on this platform that we call AI Studio that’s going to make it so that over time anyone will be able to create one of these AI almost like they create any other UGC content across the platform. So I’m excited about that. I think that to some degree we’re not going to see the full potential of this until you just have the full creativity of the whole community being able to build stuff, but there’s a lot of stuff that we need to get. So I’m excited to take this in stages. I don’t think anyone out there is really doing what we’re doing here. I think that there are people who are doing fictional or consumer-oriented character type stuff, but the extent to which we’re building it out with the avatars and expressiveness and making it so that they can interact across all of the different apps and they’ll have profiles and we’ll be able to engage people on Instagram and Facebook, I think it’s going to be really fun.
Future of humanity
Lex Fridman
Well, we’re talking about AI, but I’m still blown away this entire time that I’m talking to Mark Zuckerberg. And you’re not here, but you feel like you’re here. I’ve done quite a few intimate conversations with people alone in a room, and this feels like that. So I keep forgetting for long stretches of time that we’re not in the same room. And for me to imagine a future where I can with a snap of a finger do that with anyone in my life, the way we can just call right now and have this kind of shallow 2D experience, to have this experience like we’re sitting next to each other is like… I don’t think we can even imagine how that changes things where you can immediately have intimate one-on-one conversations with anyone. In a way, we might not even predict change civilization.
Well, we’re talking about AI, but I’m still blown away this entire time that I’m talking to Mark Zuckerberg. And you’re not here, but you feel like you’re here. I’ve done quite a few intimate conversations with people alone in a room, and this feels like that. So I keep forgetting for long stretches of time that we’re not in the same room. And for me to imagine a future where I can with a snap of a finger do that with anyone in my life, the way we can just call right now and have this kind of shallow 2D experience, to have this experience like we’re sitting next to each other is like… I don’t think we can even imagine how that changes things where you can immediately have intimate one-on-one conversations with anyone. In a way, we might not even predict change civilization.
Mark Zuckerberg
Well, I mean this is a lot of the thesis behind the whole Metaverse, is giving people the ability to feel like you’re present with someone. I mean, this is the main thing I talk about all the time, but I do think that there’s a lot to process about it. I mean, from my perspective, I’m definitely here. We’re just not physically in the same place. You’re not talking to an AI. So I think the thing that’s novel is the ability to convey through technology a sense of almost physical presence. So the thing that is not physically real is us being in the same physical place, but everything else is. And I think that that gets to this somewhat philosophical question about what is the nature of the modern real world? And I just think that it really is this combination of physical world and the presence that we feel, but also being able to combine that with this increasingly rich and powerful and capable digital world that we have and all of the innovation that’s getting created there.
Well, I mean this is a lot of the thesis behind the whole Metaverse, is giving people the ability to feel like you’re present with someone. I mean, this is the main thing I talk about all the time, but I do think that there’s a lot to process about it. I mean, from my perspective, I’m definitely here. We’re just not physically in the same place. You’re not talking to an AI. So I think the thing that’s novel is the ability to convey through technology a sense of almost physical presence. So the thing that is not physically real is us being in the same physical place, but everything else is. And I think that that gets to this somewhat philosophical question about what is the nature of the modern real world? And I just think that it really is this combination of physical world and the presence that we feel, but also being able to combine that with this increasingly rich and powerful and capable digital world that we have and all of the innovation that’s getting created there.
So I think it’s super exciting because I mean, the digital world is just increasing in its capability and our ability to do awesome things, but the physical world is so profound, and that’s a lot of what makes us human is that we’re physical beings. So I don’t think we want to run away from that and just spend all day on a screen. It’s one of the reasons why I care so much about helping to shape and accelerate these future computing platforms. I just think this is so powerful. And even though the current version of this is like you’re wearing a headset, I just think this is going to be by far the most human and social computing platform that has ever existed. And that’s what makes me excited.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I think just to linger on this kind of changing nature of reality of what is real, maybe shifting it towards the sort of consciousness. So what is real is the subjective experience of a thing that makes it feel real versus necessarily being in the same physical space, because It feels like we’re in the same physical space. And that the conscious experience of it, that’s probably what is real. Not like that the space time, the physics of it. You’re basically breaking physics and focusing on the consciousness. That’s what’s real. Just whatever’s going on inside my head.
Yeah, I think just to linger on this kind of changing nature of reality of what is real, maybe shifting it towards the sort of consciousness. So what is real is the subjective experience of a thing that makes it feel real versus necessarily being in the same physical space, because It feels like we’re in the same physical space. And that the conscious experience of it, that’s probably what is real. Not like that the space time, the physics of it. You’re basically breaking physics and focusing on the consciousness. That’s what’s real. Just whatever’s going on inside my head.
Mark Zuckerberg
But there are a lot of social and psychological things that go along with that experience that was previously only physical presence, right? I think that there’s an intimacy, a trust. There’s a level of communication because so much of communication is nonverbal and is based on expressions that you’re sharing with someone when you’re in this kind of environment. And before, those things would’ve only been possible had I gotten on a plane and flown to Austin and sat physically with you in the same place. So I think we’re basically short cutting those laws of physics and delivering the social and psychological benefits of being able to be present and feel like you’re there with another person, which I are real benefits to anyone in the world.
But there are a lot of social and psychological things that go along with that experience that was previously only physical presence, right? I think that there’s an intimacy, a trust. There’s a level of communication because so much of communication is nonverbal and is based on expressions that you’re sharing with someone when you’re in this kind of environment. And before, those things would’ve only been possible had I gotten on a plane and flown to Austin and sat physically with you in the same place. So I think we’re basically short cutting those laws of physics and delivering the social and psychological benefits of being able to be present and feel like you’re there with another person, which I are real benefits to anyone in the world.
Like you said, I think that is going to be a very profound thing. A lot of that is that’s the promise of the Metaverse and why I think that that’s the next frontier for what we’re working on. I started working on social networks when they were primarily text, where the first version of Facebook, your profile, you had one photo and the rest of it was lists of things that you were interested in. And then we kind of went through the period where we were doing photos. And now we’re kind of in the period where most of the content is video, but there’s a clear trend where over time the way that we want to express ourselves and kind of get insight and content about the world around us gets increasingly just richer and more vivid.
And I think the ability to be immersed and feel present with the people around you or the people who you care about is, from my perspective, clearly the next frontier. It just so happens that it’s incredibly technologically difficult. It requires building up these new computing platforms and completely new software stacks to deliver that, but I kind of feel like that’s what we’re here to do as a company.
Lex Fridman
Well, I really love the connection you have through conversation. And so for me, this photo realism is really, really exciting. I’m really excited for this future and thank you for building it. Thanks to you and thanks to the amazing Meta teams that I’ve met, the engineers and just everybody I’ve met here. Thank you for helping to build this future. And thank you, Mark, for talking to me inside the Metaverse. This is blowing my mind. I can’t quite express. I would love to measure my heart rate this whole time. It would be hilarious if you’re actually sitting in a beach right now.
Well, I really love the connection you have through conversation. And so for me, this photo realism is really, really exciting. I’m really excited for this future and thank you for building it. Thanks to you and thanks to the amazing Meta teams that I’ve met, the engineers and just everybody I’ve met here. Thank you for helping to build this future. And thank you, Mark, for talking to me inside the Metaverse. This is blowing my mind. I can’t quite express. I would love to measure my heart rate this whole time. It would be hilarious if you’re actually sitting in a beach right now.
Mark Zuckerberg
I’m not. I’m in a conference room.
I’m not. I’m in a conference room.
Lex Fridman
Okay. Well, I’m at a beach and not wearing any pants. I’m really sorry about that for anyone else who’s watching me in physical space. Anyway, thank you so much for talking today. This really blew my mind. It’s one of the most incredible experiences in my life, so thank you for giving that to me.
Okay. Well, I’m at a beach and not wearing any pants. I’m really sorry about that for anyone else who’s watching me in physical space. Anyway, thank you so much for talking today. This really blew my mind. It’s one of the most incredible experiences in my life, so thank you for giving that to me.
Mark Zuckerberg
Awesome. Awesome. Glad you got to check it out. And it’s always fun to talk. All right, I’ll catch you soon. See you.
Awesome. Awesome. Glad you got to check it out. And it’s always fun to talk. All right, I’ll catch you soon. See you.
Lex Fridman
See you later. This is so, so amazing, man. This is so-
See you later. This is so, so amazing, man. This is so-
Transcript for Greg Lukianoff: Cancel Culture, Deplatforming, Censorship & Free Speech | Lex Fridman Podcast #397
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #397 with Greg Lukianoff.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
Every time you’re actually saying, “You can’t say that,” you’re actually depriving yourself of the knowledge of what people really think. You’re causing what [inaudible 00:00:24], who’s on our Board of advisors calls preference falsification. You end up with an inaccurate picture of the world.
Which by the way, in a lot of cases because there are activists who want to restrict more speech, they actually tend to think that people are more prejudice than they might be. Actually, one very real practical way it makes things worse is when you censor people, it doesn’t change their opinion.
It just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble. It leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off.
Co-author with Rikki Schlott of a new book coming out in October that you should definitely pre-order now called, The Canceling of the American Mind, which is a definitive accounting of the history, present, and future of cancel culture. A term used and overused in public discourse, but rarely studied and understood with the depth and rigor that Greg and Rikki do in this book, and in part in this conversation.
Freedom of speech is important, especially on college campuses, the very place that should serve as the battleground of ideas, including weird and controversial ones that should encourage bold risk-taking, not conformity. This is a Lex Fridman Podcast to support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description.
Now, dear friends, here’s Greg Lukianoff. Let’s start with a big question. What is cancel culture? Now, you’ve said that you don’t like the term as it’s been quote “dragged through the mud and abused endlessly” by a whole host of controversial figures. Nevertheless, we have the term, what is it?
What I mean is as an analog to say things you couldn’t lose your job as a public employee for. Also, the climate of fear that’s resulted from that phenomenon, the fact that you can lose your job for having the wrong opinion. It wasn’t subtle that there was an uptick in this, particularly on campus.
Around 2014, John Ronson wrote a book called, So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed, it came out in 2015 already documenting this phenomena. I wrote a book called Freedom from Speech in 2014. It really was in 2017 when you started seeing this be directed at professors.
When it comes to the number of professors that we’ve seen be targeted and lose their jobs, I’ve been doing this for 22 years and I’ve seen nothing like it.
He found me, which was pretty cool. His protege, Kathleen Sullivan was the dean of Stanford Law School. This remains the best compliment I ever got in my life is that she recommended me to Harvey. Since that’s the whole reason why I went to law school, I was excited to be part of this new organization.
The other co-founder of FIRE is Alan Charles Kors. He’s just an absolute genius. He is one of the leading experts in the world on the enlightenment and particularly about Voltaire. If any of your listeners do the great courses, he has a lecture on Blaise Pascal. Blaise, of course is famous for the Pascal’s wager.
I left it just so moved and impressed and with a depth of understanding of how important this person was.
From a pragmatic standpoint, it is necessary because we’re creatures of incredibly limited knowledge. We are incredibly self-deceiving. I always love the fact that you’ve all heard Harari refers to the enlightenment as the discovery of ignorance because that’s exactly what it was.
It was suddenly being like, “Wow, hold on a second. All this incredibly interesting folk wisdom we got,” which by the way, can be surprisingly reliable here and there. When you start testing a lot of it is nonsense and it doesn’t hold up. Even our ideas about the way things fall as Galileo established, even our intuitions, they’re just wrong.
A lot of the early history of freedom of speech, it was happening at the same time as the scientific revolution. A lot of the early debates about freedom of speech were tied in. Certainly, Galileo, I always point out Kepler was probably the even more radical idea that they weren’t even perfect spheres.
At the same time, largely because of the invention of the printing press, you also had all these political developments. I always talk about John Huss from a famous Czech hero who was burned at the stake and I think in 1419. He was basically Luther before the printing press.
Before Luther could get his word out, he didn’t stand a chance and that was exactly what John Huss was. A century later, thanks to the printing press, everyone could know what Luther thought, and boy did they. It led to, of course, this completely crazy hyper disrupted period in European history.
That we weren’t going to fight anymore over opinion, we weren’t going to fight any more religion. That you have the right to approach your government or redress grievances, that you have the freedom to associate that All of these things in one sentence we’re like, “Nope, the government will no longer interfere with your right to have these fundamental human rights.”
One thing that makes FIRE a little different from other organizations is however, we’re not just a First Amendment organization. We are a free speech organization. At the same time, a lot of what I think free speech is can be well explained with reference to a lot of First Amendment law.
Partially because in American history, some of our smartest people have been thinking about what the parameters of freedom of speech are in relationship to the First Amendment. A lot of those principles, they transfer very well just as pragmatic ideas.
The biggest sin in terms of censorship is called viewpoint discrimination, that essentially you allow freedom of speech except for that opinion. It’s found to be more defensible. I think this makes sense that if you set up a forum, and we’re only going to talk about economics to exclude people who want to talk about a different topic.
It’s considered rightfully a bigger deal if you’ve set up a forum for economics, but we’re not going to let people talk about that kind of economics or have that opinion on economics most particularly. A lot of the principles from First Amendment law actually make a lot of philosophical sense as good principles for what is protected and unprotected speech. What should get you in trouble, how you actually analyze it, which is why we actually try in our definition of cancel culture to work in some of the First Amendment norms just in the definition, so we don’t have to bog down on them as well.
That would immediately at an intuitive level strike people as a bigger problem than just saying that poetry isn’t economics.
It’s when that intuition becomes deformed by whatever forces of society, that’s when it starts to feel like censorship.
Think that through, what kind of society do we want to live in? It’s been funny watching, and I point this out, yes, I will defend businesses’ First Amendment rights of association to be able to have the legal right to decide who works for them. From a moral or philosophical matter, if you think through the implications of if every business in America becomes an expressive association in addition to being a profit maximizing organization, that would be a disaster for democracy.
You would end up in a situation where people would actually be saying to themselves, “I don’t think I can actually say what I really think and still believe I can keep my job.” That’s where I was worried I felt like we were headed because a lot of the initial response to people getting canceled was very simply, “Oh, but they have the right to get rid of this person.”
That’s the beginning and end of the discussion. I thought that was a dodge. I thought that wasn’t actually a very serious way that if you care about both the First Amendment and freedom of speech of thinking it through.
What I mean by that is that law is generally, particularly in a common law country, it’s the reflection of norms. Judges are people too, and in a lot of cases, common law is supposed to actually take our intuitive ideas of fairness and place them into the law.
If you actually have a culture that doesn’t appreciate free speech from a philosophical standpoint, it’s not going to be able to protect free speech for the long haul even in the law because eventually, that’s one of the reasons why I worry so much about some of these terrible cases coming out of law schools.
I fear that even though, sure, American First Amendment law is very strongly protective of First Amendment for now, it’s not going to stay that way if you have generations of law students graduating who actually think there’s no higher goal than shouting down, you’re an opponent.
I mean, I went back and reread Repressive Tolerance and how clear it is. I had forgotten that it really is like, “These so-called conservatives and right wingers, we need to repress them because they’re regressive thinkers.” It really doesn’t come out to anything more sophisticated than the very old idea that our people are good, they get free speech. They should keep it. Other side bad and we have to retrain society.”
Of course, it ends up being another, and he was also a fan of Mao, so it’s not surprising that of course the system would have to rely on some kind of totalitarian system, but that was a laughable position say 30, 40 years ago. The idea that essentially free speech for me, not for as the great free speech champion Nat Hentoff used to say was something that you were supposed to be embarrassed by.
I saw this when I was in law school in ’97. I saw this when I was interning at the ACLU in ’99, that there was a slow motion train wreck coming. That essentially there was these bad ideas from campus that had been taking on more and more steam of basically no free speech for my opponent we’re actually becoming more and more accepted.
Partially because academia was becoming less and less viewpoint-diverse. I think that as my co-author Jonathan Haidt points out that when you have low viewpoint diversity, people start thinking in a very tribal way. If you don’t have the respected dissenters, you don’t have the people that you can point to that I’m like, “Hey, this is a smart person. This is a smart, reasonable person that I disagree with. I guess, not everyone thinks alike on this issue.”
You start getting much more only bad people, only heretics, only blasphemers only right wingers can actually think in this way.
We should also maybe draw a distinction here between the left and the right, and a cancel culture as you present in your book, is not necessarily associated with any one political viewpoint that there’s mechanisms on both sides that result in cancellation and censorship in violation of freedom of speech.
We talk a lot about cancel culture on campus as well because even though most of the attempts that come from on campus to get people canceled are still from the left, there are a lot of attacks that come from the right, that come from attempts by different organizations.
Sometimes when there are stories in Fox News, they’ll go after professors and about one third of the attempts to get professors punished that are successful actually do come from the right. We talk about attempts to get books banned. In the book, we talk about and talk about suing the Florida legislature, Ron DeSantis had something called the Stop WOKE Act, which we told everyone this is laughably unconstitutional.
They tried to ban particular topics in higher ed. We’re like, “No, this is a joke. This will be laughed out of court.” They didn’t listen to us and they brought it, they passed it and we sued and we won. Now, they’re trying again with something that’s equally as unconstitutional and we will sue again and we will win.
When this got in front of a judge, he was exactly as skeptical of it as we thought he’d be. I think he called this dystopian and it wasn’t a close call.
It’s taxpayer funded and generally the legislature is involved. There is democratic oversight of that process.
That’s pretty uncontroversial in terms of the law. When it comes to how you fight it, I had something that since I’m stuck with a formula I called Empowering of the American Mind, I gave principles that were inconsistent with the groupthink and heavy emphasis on identity politics that some of the critics are rightfully complaining about in K-12.
That is actually in The Canceling of the American Mind, but I have a more detailed explanation of it that I’m going to be putting up on my blog, The Eternally Radical Idea.
Those go on a lot, surprisingly a big chunk of Exodus. I thought that was more like in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, but then you get to books like Job Wow, I mean Job is such a read and no way Job originally had that ending. Job is basically, it starts out as this perverse bet between God and Satan about whether or not they can actually make a good man renounce God.
Initially, they can’t, it’s all going very predictably. Then, they finally really tortured job and he turns into the best, why is God cruel? How could God possibly exist? How could a kind God do these things? He turns into the best lawyer in the entire world and he defeats everyone, all the people who come to argue with him, he argues the pants off of them.
Then, suddenly at the end, God shows up and He’s like, “Well, I am everywhere.” It’s a very confusing answer. He gives an answer like, “I am there when lionesses give birth and I am there. By the way, there’s this giant monster Leviathan that’s very big and it’s very scary and I have to manage the universe.”
I’m like, “God, are you saying that you’re very busy? Is that essentially your argument to Job. You don’t mention the whole that I have a bet, that’s why I was torturing you, that doesn’t come up. Then at the end, he decide God’s decides Job’s like, “No, you’re totally right. I was totally wrong, sorry.”
God says, “I’m going to punish those people who tried to argue with you and didn’t win.” He gets rid of the, I don’t know exactly what he does to them, I don’t remember. Then he gives Job all his money back and it makes him super prosperous. I’m like, “No way that was the original ending of that book because this was clearly a beloved novel that they were like, “But it can’t have that ending.”
It’s a long way of saying, I actually think it’s worthwhile. Some of it was you’re always surprised when you end up in there are parts of it that will sneak up on you like Isaiah’s a trip. Ecclesiastes, Depeche Mode.
I think sometimes the right gets very excited of the free exercise clause and the Left gets very excited about establishment. I like the fact that we have both of them together. Now, how does this relate to freedom of speech and how does it relate to the curriculum like we were talking about.
I actually think it would be great if public schools could teach the Bible in the sense of read it as a historical document. Back when I was at the ACLU, every time I saw people trying this, it always turned into them actually advocating for a Catholic or a Protestant or some or Orthodox even read on religion.
If you actually make it into something advocating for a particular view on religion, then it crosses into the establishment clause side. Americans haven’t figured out a way to actually teach it, so it’s probably better that you learn outside of a public school class.
It gives quotes from people that are students there and so on about their experiences. Maybe you could speak to the various measures here before we talk about who’s in the top five and who’s in the bottom five. What are the different parameters that contribute to the evaluation?
Then the biggest missing element was to be able to ask students directly what the environment was like on that campus for freedom of speech. Are you comfortable disagreeing with each other? Are you comfortable disagreeing with your professors? Do you think violence is acceptable in response to a speaker?
Do you think shouting down is okay? Do you think blocking people’s access to a speaker is okay? Once we were able to get all those elements together, we first did a test run, I think in 2019 about 50. We’ve been doing it for four years now. Always trying to make the methodology more and more precise to better reflect the actual environment at particular schools.
This year, the number one school was Michigan Technological University, which was a nice surprise. The number two school was actually Auburn University, which was nice to see. In the top 10, the most well-known prestigious school was actually UVA, which did really well this year.
University of Chicago was not happy that they weren’t number one, but University of Chicago was 13. They had been number one or in the top three, four years prior to that.
And so we told them, like listen, we told them at FIRE that we consider this serious and they wouldn’t recognize the group. So that’s a point down in our ranking. And it was enough to knock them from, they probably would’ve been number two in the rankings, but now they’re 13 out of 248. They’re still one of the best schools in the country. I have no problem saying that. The school that did not do so well at a negative 10.69, negative 10.69, and we rounded up to zero, was Harvard. And Harvard has been not very happy with that result.
So your argument seems to be snobbery, like essentially you’re not understanding our methodology for one thing. And then you’re saying that actually that scholar wasn’t important enough to count. And by the way, Harvard, if we-
It’s not just the students, it’s students and administrators, sometimes only a handful of them though, working together to create some of these problems. And this was exactly what happened at Stanford when Kyle Duncan, a Fifth Circuit Judge tried to speak at my alma mater and a fifth of the class showed up to shout him down. It was a real showing of what was going on. That 10 minutes into the shout down of a Fifth Circuit Judge, and I keep on emphasizing that because I’m a constitutional lawyer, Fifth Circuit Judges are big deals. They’re one level below the Supreme Court.
About a fifth of the school shows up to shout him down. After 10 minutes of shouting him down, an administrator, a DI administrator, gets up with a prepared speech that she’s written that’s a seven-minute-long speech where she talks about free speech, maybe the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.
And we are at this law school where people could learn to challenge these norms. So it’s clear that there was coordination amongst some of these administrators. And from talking to students there, they were in meetings, extensive meetings for a long time. They show up, do a shout down, then they take additional seven minutes to lecture the speaker on free speech, the juice of free speech not being worth the squeeze. And then for the rest of it, it’s just constant heckling after she leaves.
This is clearly, and something very similar happened a number of times at Yale, where it was very clearly administrators were helping along with a lot of these disruptions. So I think every time there is a shout down at a university, the investigation should be first and foremost, did administrators help create this problem? Did they do anything to stop it? Because I think a lot of what’s really going on here is the hyper bureaucratization of universities with a lot more ideological people who think of their primary job as basically policing speech, more or less. They’re encouraging students, sorry, they’re encouraging students who have opinions they like, to do shout downs.
And that’s why they really need to investigate this. And it is at Stanford, the administrator who gave the prepared remarks about the juice not being worth the squeeze. She has not been invited back to Stanford, but she’s one of the only examples I can think of, when these things happen a lot where an administrator clearly facilitated something that was a shout down or a de-platforming, or resulted in a professor getting fired, or resulted in a student getting expelled, where the administrator has got off scot-free or probably, in some cases, even gotten a promotion.
And this was when we started noticing something was changing on campus. We also heard that comedians were saying that they couldn’t use their good humor anymore. This was right around the time that Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock said that they didn’t want to play on campuses, because they couldn’t be funny. But we featured a case of a comedian who wanted to do a musical called The Passion of the Musical, making Fun of the Passion of the Christ, with the stated goal of offending everyone, every group equally. It was very much a South Park mission. And it’s an unusual case because we actually got documentation of administrators buying tickets for angry students and holding an event where they trained them to jump up in the middle of it and shout, I’m offended. They bought them tickets, they sent them to this thing with the goal of shouting it down. Now, unsurprisingly, when you send an angry group of students to shut down a play, it’s not going to end at just, I’m offended. And it got heated.
There were death threats being thrown, and then the Pullman Washington Police told Chris Lee, the guy who made the play, that they wouldn’t actually protect him. Now it’s not every day you’re going to have that kind of hard evidence of actually seeing the administrators be so brazen that they recorded the fact that they bought them tickets and sent them. But I think a lot of that stuff is going on, and I think it’s a good excuse to cut down on one of the big problems in higher education today, which is hyper bureaucratization.
People will point this out sometimes as being kind of like, oh, it was clearly, my friend Sam Abrams, when they tried to get him fired at Sarah Lawrence College. That was one of the times that it was used as oh, this was hostile to the university because the students took over the president’s office. And I’m like, no, they let them take over the president’s office. And I don’t know if that was one of the cases in which the takeover was catered, but if there was ever a sign that’s kind of like, yes, this is actually really quite friendly.
Now, I think you had Randy Kennedy, who I really, I love him. I think he’s a great guy, but he criticized us for our de-platforming database as saying this is saying that students can’t protest speakers. I’m like, okay, that’s silly. We, FIRE, as an organization, have defended the right to protest all the time. We are constantly defending the rights to protestors, not believing that the protestors have the right to say this, basically that would be punishing the speakers. We’re not calling for punishing the protestors, but what we are saying is you can’t let the protestors win if they’re demanding someone be fired for their freedom of speech.
Third part is just how do we fix it? But the rhetorical fortress stuff is actually something I’ve very passionate about because it interferes with our ability to get at truth and it wastes time. And frankly, it also, since cancel culture is part of that rhetorical tactic, it can also ruin lives.
First one is what about-ism. Maybe we can go through a few of them that capture your heart in this particular moment as we talk about it. And if you can describe examples of it or if there’s aspects of it that you see that are especially effective. So what about-ism is defending against criticism of your side by bringing up the other side’s alleged wrongdoing.
And that’s not an illegitimate argument to make back, but it seems to happen every time someone makes an assertion, someone just points out some other thing that was going on, and it can get increasingly attenuated from what you’re actually trying to argue. And you see this all the time on social media. And I was a big fan of John Stewart’s daily show, but an awful lot of what the humor was and what the tactic was for arguing was this thing over here. It’s like, oh, I’m making this argument about this important problem. Oh, actually there’s this other problem over here that I’m more concerned about.
Let’s pick on the right here. So January 6th, watching everybody arguing about CHOP, like the occupied part of Seattle or the occupied part of Portland, and basically trying to like, oh, you’re bringing up the riot on January 6th, and by the way, I live on Capitol Hill. So believe me, I was very aware of how scary and bad it was. My dad grew up in Yugoslavia, and that was a night where we all ate dinner in the basement, like, oh, when the shit goes down, eat in the basement. It was genuinely scary.
And people would try to deflect from January 6th being serious by actually making the argument that, oh, well, there are crazy horrible things happening in all over the country. Riots that came from some of the social justice protests. And of course the answer is, you can be concerned about both of these things and find them both problems. But if I’m arguing about CHOP, someone bringing up January 6th isn’t super relevant to it. Or if I’m arguing about January 6th, someone bringing up the riots in 2020, isn’t that helpful.
And the star-manning idea, which I like, is the idea of being like, so you’re saying that you really hate your dominant religious minority, and that’s when you start actually detaching yourself a little bit from it, how typical. America is exceptional in a number of ways, but some of our dynamics are incredibly typical.
It’s one of the reasons why when people start reading Thomas Sowell for example, they start getting hooked, because one of the things he does is he does comparative analysis of country’s problems and points out that some of these things that we think are just unique to the United States exist in 75% of the rest of the countries in the world.
Francis Fukuyama’s, the book that I’m reading right now, Origins of the Political Order, actually does this wonderful job of pointing out how we’re not special in a variety of ways. This is actually something that’s very much on my mind. And Fukuyama, of course, it’s a great book. It’s stilted a little bit in its writing because his term for one of the things he’s concerned about what destroys societies is repatrimonilization, which is the reversion to societies in which you favor your family and friends.
And I actually think a lot of what I’m seeing in the United States, it makes me worried that we might be going through a little bit of a process of repatrimonialization. And I think that’s one of the reasons why people are so angry.
I think the prospect that we very nearly seem to have an election that was going to be Jeb Bush versus Hillary Clinton. It’s like, are we a dynastic country now? Is that what’s kind of happening? But also it’s one of the reasons why people are getting so angry about legacy admissions, about how much certain families seem to be able to keep their people in the upper classes of the United States perpetually. And believe me, we were poor when I was a kid and I got to go to one of the fancies, I got to go to Stanford.
And I got to see how people, they treat you differently in a way that’s almost insulting, basically suddenly to a certain kind of person. I was a legitimate person. And I look at how much America relies on Harvard, on Yale, to produce its, I’m going to use a very Marxist sounding term, ruling class. And that’s one of the reasons why you have to be particularly worried about what goes on at these elite colleges. And these elite colleges, with the exception of University of Chicago and UVA, do really badly regarding freedom of speech, and that has all sorts of problems. It doesn’t bode well for the future of the protection of freedom of speech for the rest of the society.
But in this one, we can’t be quiet. Me and my, oh, I haven’t even mentioned my brilliant co-author, Rikki Schlott, a 23-year-old genius. She’s amazing. I started working with her when she was 20, who’s my co-author on this book. So when I’m saying we, I’m talking about me and Rikki.
So that’s a long-winded way of saying, I kind of can get what sort of drives the right nuts to a degree in this. I feel like they’re constantly feeling like they’re being gaslit. Elite education is really insulting to the working class. Part of the ideology that is dominant right now kind of treats almost 70% of the American public like they’re, we developed this a little bit in the perfect rhetorical fortress, like they’re to some way illegitimate and not worthy of respect or compassion.
It really was already an intellectual habit that if you could designate something conservative, then you didn’t really have to think about it very much anymore or take it particularly seriously. That’s a childish way of arguing, but nonetheless, I engaged in it. It was a common tactic. I even mentioned in the book there was a time when a gay activist friend, who I think decided to lean to my left, but nonetheless had that pragmatic experience of actually being an activist, said something like, “Well, just because someone’s conservative doesn’t mean they’re wrong,” and I remember feeling scandalized at some level of just being like, “Well, no, it’s not the whole thing. What we’re saying is that they’re just kind of bad people with bad ideas.”
Steven Pinker, who’s on our board of advisors, he refers to academia as being the left pole that essentially it’s a position that from that point of view, everything looks as if it’s on the right, but once it becomes a tactic that we accept, and that’s one of the reasons why. I’m more on the left. I think I’m left or center liberal. Ricky is more conservative, libertarian, and initially, I was like, “Should I be really be writing something with someone who’s more on the right?” And I’m like, “Absolutely, I should be.” I have to actually live up to what I believe on this stuff because it’s ridiculous that we have this primitive idea that you can dismiss someone as soon as you claim rightly or wrongly that they’re on the right.
I can’t believe that even made it into the magazine because it’s not just calling us because, of course, the implication, of course, is that we’re right wing, which we’re not. Actually, the staff leans decidedly more to the left than to the right. But we also defend people all over the spectrum all the time. That’s something that even the most minimal Google search would’ve solved. We’ve been giving LA Times some heat on this because it’s like, “Yeah, if you said, in my opinion, they’re right wing,” we would’ve argued back saying, “Well, here’s the following 50,000 examples of us not being,” but when you actually make the factual claim that we only defend opinions we agree with, first of all, there’s no way for us to agree with opinions because we actually have a politically diverse staff who won’t even agree on which opinions are good and what opinions we have.
Yeah, one time when someone did something like this and they were just being a little bit flippant about free speech being fine, I did a 70 tweet long thread just being like, “Hey, do you really think this is fine?” I decided not to do that on this particular one, but the nice thing about it is it demonstrated two parts of the book, Canceling of the American Mind, if not more. One of them is dismissing someone because they’re conservative and because that was the implication. Don’t have to listen to FIRE because they’re conservative. But the other one is something, a termite that I invented specifically for the way people argue on Twitter, which is hypocrisy projection. “Hi, I’m person who only cares about one side of the political fence and I think everyone else is a hypocrite, and by the way, I haven’t done any actual research on this, but I assume everyone else is a hypocrite.”
You see this happen all the time, and this happens to FIRE a lot where someone would be like, “Where is FIRE on this case?” And we’re like, “We are literally quoted in the link you just sent but didn’t actually read,” or it’s like, “Where’s FIRE on this?” It’s like, “Here’s our lawsuit about it from six months ago.” It’s a favorite thing, and also Jon Stewart, Daily Show, the whataboutism and the idea that these people must be hypocrites is something that greatest comedy, but as far as actually a rhetorical tactic that will get you to truth, just assuming that your opponent or just accusing your opponent of always being a hypocrite is not a good tactic for truth, but by the way, it tends to always come from people who aren’t actually consistent on free speech themselves.
You should care when Republicans get in trouble. You should care when California has a DEI program that requires this… California Community Colleges has a DEI program policy that actually requires even chemistry professors to work in different DEI ideas from intersectionality to anti-racism into their classroom, into their syllabus, et cetera. This is a gross violation of economic freedom. It is as bad as it is to tell professors what they can’t say like we fought and defeated in Florida. It’s even worse to tell them what they must say. That’s downright totalitarian and we’re suing against this. What I’m saying is that when you’re dismissing someone for just being on the other side of the political fence, you are also making a claim that none of these cases matter as well, and I want people to care about censorship when it even is against people they hate.
Now, when I started at FIRE, my first cases involved 9/ 11, and it was bad. Professors were getting targeted, professors were losing their jobs for saying insensitive things about 9/11, and both from the right and the left, actually. In that case, actually, it sometimes a lot more from the right. It was really bad and about five professors lost their jobs. That’s bad. Five professors in over a relatively short period of time being fired for a political opinion? That’s something that would get written up in any previous decades. We’re now evaluating how many professors have been targeted for cancellation between 2014 and middle of this year, July of 2023. We’re in well over 1,000 attempts to get professors fired or punished, usually driven by students and administrators, often driven by professors unfortunately as well. About two-thirds of those result in the professor being punished in some way, everything from having their article removed to suspension, et cetera. About one-fifth of those result in professors being fired. Right now, it’s almost 200, it’s around 190 professors being fired.
I want to give some context here. The Red Scare is generally considered to have been from 1947 to 1957. It ended, by the way, in ’57 when it finally became clear, thanks to the First Amendment, that you couldn’t actually fire people for their ideologies. Prior to that, a lot of universities thought they could. This guy is a very doctrinaire communist. “They can’t be just waited. I’m going to fire them.” They thought they actually could do that, and it was only ’57 when the law was established, so right now, these are happening in an environment where freedom of speech, academic freedom, are clearly protected at public colleges in the United States and we’re still seeing these kind of numbers. During the Red Scare, the biggest study that was done of what was going on is I think this came out in ’55, and the evaluation was that there was about 62 professors fired for being communists and about 90 something professors fired for political views overall that usually is reported as being about 100, so 60, 90, 100 depending on how you look at it.
I think the number is actually higher, but that’s only because of hindsight. What I mean by hindsight is we can look back and we actually find there were more professors who were fired as time reveals. We’re at 190 professors fired, and I still have to put up with people saying this isn’t even happening, and I’m like, “In the nine and a half years of cancel culture, 190 professors fired. In the 11 years of the Red Scare, probably somewhere around 100, or probably more.” The number’s going to keep going up, but unlike during the Red Scare where people could clearly tell something was happening, the craziest thing about cancel culture is I’m still dealing with people who are saying this isn’t happening at all, and it hasn’t been subtle on campus.
We know that’s a wild under count, by the way, because when we surveyed professors, 17% of them said that they had been threatened with investigation or actually investigated for what they taught, said, or their research, and one-third of them said that they were told by administrators not to take on controversial research. Extrapolating that out, that’s a huge number. The reason why you’re not going to hear about a lot of these cases is because there are so many different conformity inducing mechanisms in the whole thing, and that’s one of the reasons why the idea that you’d add something, like requiring a DEI statement to be hired or to get into a school under the current environment, is so completely nuts. We have had a genuine crisis of academic freedom over the last, particularly since 2017, on campuses. We have very low viewpoint diversity to begin with. Under these circumstances, administrators just start saying, “You know what the problem is? We have too much heterogeneous thought. We are not homogeneous enough. We need another political litmus test,” which is nuts.
That’s what a DEI statement effectively is because there’s no way to actually fill out a DEI statement without someone evaluating you on your politics. It’s crystal clear. We even did an experiment on this. Nate Honeycutt, he got something almost like 3,000 professors to participate evaluating different kinds of DEI statements. One was basically the standard kind of identity politics intersectionality, one was about viewpoint diversity, one was about religious diversity, and one was about socioeconomic diversity. As far as where my heart really is, it’s that we have too little socioeconomic diversity particularly in elite higher ed, but also in education period. The experiment had large participation, really interestingly set up, and it tried to model the way a lot of these DEI policies were actually implemented. One of the ways these have been implemented, and I think in some of the California schools, is that administrators go through the DEI statements before anyone else looks at them, and then eliminates people off the top depending on how they feel about their DEI statements.
The one on viewpoint diversity, I think half of the people who reviewed it would eliminate it right out. I think it was basically the same for religious diversity. It was slightly better, like 40%, for socioeconomic diversity, but that kills me. The idea that kind of like, “Yeah, that actually is the kind of diversity that I think we need a great deal more of in higher education.” You can agree with… It’s not hostile to the other kinds by the way, but the idea that we need more people from the bottom of three quarters of American society in higher education, I think, should be something we could all get around, that the only one that really succeeded was the one that sprouted back exactly the kind of ideology that they thought the readers would like, which is like, okay, there’s no way this couldn’t be a political litmus test. We’ve proved that it’s a political litmus test test, and still, school after school is adding these to its application process to make schools still more ideologically homogenous.
When you look at some of the departments, I think the estimate from the Crimson is that Harvard has 3% conservatives, but when you look at different departments, there are elite departments that have literally no conservatives in them, and I think that’s an unhealthy intellectual environment. The problem is definitely worse as you get more elite. We definitely see more cases of lefty professors getting canceled at less elite schools. It gets worse as you get down from the elite schools. That’s where a lot of the one-third of attempts to get professors punished that are successful do come from the right and largely from off-campus sources, and we spend a lot of time talking about that in the book as well. It’s something that I do think is underappreciated, but when it comes to the low viewpoint diversity, it works out like you’d expect to a degree. Economics is what? Four to one or something like that? It’s not as bad, but then when you start getting into some of the humanities, there are departments that there are literally none.
There are also departments where a lot of the ideologies kind of explicitly leftist. You look at education schools, a lot of the stuff that is actually left over from what is correctly called critical race theories is present, and you end up having that in a number of the departments, and it would be very strange to be in many departments a conservative social worker professor. I’m sure they exist, but there’s a lot of pressure to shut up if you are.
Then we get to, I think it’s layer six and we’re like, “Surprise. Guess what? You’re down to 0.4% of the population and none of it mattered because if you have the wrong opinion, even if you’re in that 0.4% of the most intersectional person who ever lived and you have the wrong opinion, you’re a heretic and you actually probably will be hated even more.” The most interesting part of the research we did for this was just asking every prominent Black conservative and moderate that we knew personally, “Have you been told that you’re not really Black for an opinion you had?” Every single one of them was like, “Oh, yeah.” No, and it’s kind of funny because oftentimes, white lefties telling them that’s like, “Oh, do you consider yourself Black?”
John McWhorter talked about when he showed that he dissented from some of what he described as woke racism in his book, Woke Ideas. The reporter actually is like, “So do you consider yourself Black?” He was like, “What? Are you crazy? Of course, I do.” Coleman Hughes had one of the best quotes on it. He said, “I’m constantly being told that the most important thing to how legitimate my opinion is is whether or not I’m Black, but then when I have a dissenting opinion, I get told I’m not really Black, so perfect.” There’s no way to falsify this argument. That investigation really struck me.
And that was such a heretical point of view and the typical kind of cancel culture wave took over as they had all sorts of petitions for her to be fired and that she needed to apologize and all this kind of stuff. And she was offered, I think, a million dollar severance which she wouldn’t take because she wanted to tell the world what she thought about this and that she wanted to continue saying that she hadn’t changed her mind, that this was a disaster for young people. And now, that’s the conventional wisdom and the research is quite clear that this was devastating to particularly disadvantaged youth. Like people understand this as being, “Okay. She was probably right.”
But one of the really sad aspects of cancel culture is people forget why you were canceled and they just know they hate you. There’s this lingering like, “Well, I don’t have to take them seriously anymore.” By the way, did you notice they happen to be right on something very important? Now, one funny thing about freedom of speech, freedom of speech wouldn’t exist if you didn’t also have the right to say things that were wrong. Because if you can’t engage in ideaphoria, if you can’t actually speculate, you’ll never actually get to something that’s right in the first place. But it’s especially galling when people who were right were censored and never actually get the credit that they deserve.
The liberals, the way I grew up, that was basically being pro free speech was synonymous with being a liberal. But that started to be etched away on Campus and the way it was was with the idea of hate speech that essentially, “Oh, but we can designate particularly bad speech as not protected and who’s going to enforce it? Who’s going to decide what hate speech actually is?” Well, it’s usually overwhelmingly can only happen in an environment of really low viewpoint diversity because you have to actually agree on what the most hateful and wrong things are.
And there’s a bedrock principle, it’s referred to this in a great case about flag burning in the First Amendment that I think all the world could benefit from. You can’t ban speech just because it’s offensive. It’s too subjective. It basically is… It’s one of the reasons why these kind of codes have been more happily adopted in places like Europe where they have a sense that there’s a modal German or a modal Englishman and, “I think this is offensive and therefore, I can say that this is wrong.”
In a more multicultural, in a genuinely more diverse country that’s never actually had an honest thought that there is a single kind of American, there’s never been. We had the idea of Uncle Sam but that was always kind of a joke. Boston always knew it wasn’t. Richmond always knew it wasn’t. Georgia always knew it wasn’t. Alaska… We’ve always been a hodgepodge and we get in a society that diverse that you can’t ban things simply because they’re offensive and that’s one of the reasons why hate speech is not an unprotected category of speech.
And I go further, my theory on freedom of speech is slightly different than most other constitutional lawyers. And I think that’s partially because some of these theories, although a lot of them are really good, are inadequate. They’re not expansive enough. And I sometimes call my theory the Pure Informational Theory of Freedom of Speech or sometimes when I want to be fancy, The Lab and the Looking Glass Theory.
And its most important tenet is that if the goal is the project of human knowledge which is to know the world as it is, you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think and what people really think is an incredibly important fact to know. So every time you’re actually saying, “You can’t say that,” you’re actually depriving yourself of the knowledge of what people really think you’re causing… What Timer Kran, who’s on our board of advisors, calls preference falsification. You end up with an inaccurate picture of the world, which by the way, in a lot of cases, because there are activists who want to restrict more speech, they actually tend to think that people are more prejudiced than they might be.
And actually, these kind of restrictions, there was a book called Racial Paranoia that came out about 15 years ago that was making the point that the imposition of some of these codes can sometimes make people think that the only thing holding you back from being a raging racist are these codes. So it must be really, really bad. It can actually make all of these things worse. And one, which we talk about in the book, one very real practical way it makes things worse is when you censor people, it doesn’t change their opinion, it just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble. So it leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off.
So we have some interesting data in the book about how driving people off of Twitter, for example, in 2017, and then again I think in 2020, driving people to gab led to greater radicalization among those people. It’s a very predictable force. Censorship doesn’t actually change people’s minds and it pushes them in directions that actually, by very solid research, will actually make them more radicalized. So yeah, I think that the attempt to ban hate speech, it doesn’t really protect us from it but it gives the government such a vast weapon to use against us that we will regret giving them.
Daryl Davis, who I’m sure you’re familiar with, part of his goal was just simply to get to know where people were coming from. And in the process, he actually deradicalized a number of Klans members when they actually realized that this Black man who had befriended them actually was compassionate, was a decent person. They realized all their pre-conceptions were wrong. So it can have a deradicalizing factor, by the way. But even when it doesn’t, it’s still really important to know what the bad people in your society think. Honestly, in some ways, for your own safety, it’s probably more important to know what the bad people in your society actually think.
But to me, it’s like even if it hurts in the short term, even if it does create more hate in the short term, the freedom of speech has this really beneficial thing which is it helps you move towards the truth, the entirety of society towards a deeper, more accurate understanding of life on earth, of society, of how people function, of ethics, of metaphysics, of everything. And that, in the long term, is a huge benefit. It gets rid of the Nazis in the long term, even if it adds to the number of Nazis in the short term.
And to me, there’s a responsibility to do that with skill and that responsibility has been weighing heavier and heavier on me because you realize how much skill it actually takes because you have to know to understand so much. Because I’ve come to understand that the devil is always going to be charismatic, the devil’s not going to look like the devil. And so, you have to realize you can’t always come to the table with a deep compassion for another human being. You have to have 90% compassion and another 90% deep historical knowledge about the context of the battles around this particular issue and that takes just a huge amount of effort. But I don’t know if there’s thoughts you have about this, how to handle speech in a way without censoring, bringing it to the surface, but in a way that creates more love in the world.
And also, of course the very classic, it’s very valuable to know what someone like Steve Bannon thinks, you should be curious about that. And I remember someone arguing back saying, “Well, would you want someone to interview a jihadi?” and I’m like… Because at the moment, it was at the time when ISIS was really going for it and I was like, “Would you not want to go to a talk where someone was trying to figure out what makes some of these people tick?” That changes your framing that essentially it’s like, “No, it’s curiosity, is the cure for a lot of this stuff,” and we need a great deal more curiosity and a lot less unwarranted certainty.
There’s a moment when the rally is not going very well and the leader gets flustered and it almost seems like he’s going to shout out like, “You’re making this Nazi rally into a mockery.” And so, it showed how actually allowing the Nazis to speak at Skokie took the wind out of their sails like if they had… The whole movement, it all dissolved after that because they looked like racist fools that they were, even Blues Brothers made jokes about them, and it didn’t turn into the disaster that people thought it was going to be just by letting them speak.
And Ira Glasser, okay, so he has this wonderful story about how Jackie Robinson joined the Brooklyn Dodgers and how there was a moment when it was seeing someone, an African-American as literally on their team and how that really got them excited about the cause of racial equality and that became a big part of what his life was. And I just think of that as such a great metaphor is expanding your circle and seeing more people as being quite literally on your team is the solution to so many of these problems. And I worry that one of the things that is absolutely just a fact of life in a America is like we do see each other more as enemy camps as opposed to people on the same team. And that was actually something in the early days, like me and Will Creeley, the legal director of FIRE wrote about the forthcoming free speech challenges of everyone being on Facebook. And one thing that I was hoping was that as more people were exposing more of their lives, we had realized a lot of these things we knew intellectually like kids go to the bar and get drunk and do stupid things.
That when we started seeing the evidence of them doing stupid things that we might be shocked at first. But then, eventually, get more sophisticated and be like, “Well, come on. People are like that.” That never actually really seemed to happen. I think that there are plenty of things we know about human nature and we know about dumb things people say and we’ve made it into an environment where there’s just someone out there waiting to be like, “Oh, remember that dumb thing you said when we were 14? Well, I’m going to make sure that you don’t get into your dream school because of that.”
But on this one, I’m calling out people for being very cruel in a lot of cases. But one thing that was really scary about studying a lot of these cases is that once you have that target on your back, what they’re going to try to cancel you for could be anything. They might go back into to your old post, find something that you said in 1995, do something where essentially it looks like it’s this entire other thing. But really, what’s going on is they didn’t like your opinion, they didn’t like your point of view on something. And they’re going to find a way that from now on, anytime your name comes up, it’s like, “Oh, remember this thing I didn’t like about them?” and it’s, again, it’s cruel. It doesn’t get you anywhere closer to the truth but it is a little scary to stick your neck out.
Also, saying things that actually do sound old-fashioned. I say things to my kids like, “Listen, if you enjoy study and work,” both things that I very much enjoy, I do for fun, ” your life is going to feel great and it’s going to feel easy.” So some of those old-fashioned virtues are things I try to preach.
Counterintuitive stuff like outdoor time, playing, having time that are not intermediated experiences is really important. And little things like I talk about in the book about when my kids are watching something that’s scary. And I’m not talking about zombie movies, I’m talking about a cartoon that has a scary moment and saying that they want to turn the TV off. And I talk to them and I say, “Listen, I’m going to sit next to you and we’re going to finish this show and I want you to tell me what you think of this afterwards.”
And I sat next to my sons and by the end of it, every single time when I asked them, “Was that as scary as you thought it was going to be?” and they was like, “No, daddy. That was fine,” and I’m like, “That’s one of the great lessons in life. The fear that you don’t go through becomes much bigger in your head than actually simply facing it.” That’s one of the reasons why I’m fighting back against this culture. I’d love for all of our kids to be able to grow up in an environment where people give you grace and accept the fact that sometimes people are going to say things that piss you off, take seriously the possibility you might be wrong, and be curious.
And so, he started getting angry at the printing press around 1521 and then passed something that required prints to be along with parliament in 1538. And I always think of that as where we are now because we have this… Back then, we had the original disruptive technology. Writing was probably really that but the next one which was the printing press which was absolutely calamitous. And I say calamitous on purpose because in the short term, the witch hunts went up like crazy because the printing press allowed you to get that manual on how to find witches. That the religious wars went crazy. It led to all sorts of distress, misinformation, nastiness.
And Henry VIII was trying to put the genie back in the bottle. He was kind of like, “I want to use this for good like I feel like it could be used,” but he was in an unavoidable period of epistemic anarchy. There’s nothing you can do to make the period after the printing press come, came out to be a non-disruptive, non-crazy period other than absolute totalitarianism and destroy all the print presses which simply was not possible in Europe.
So I feel like that’s where we are now. That disruption came from adding, I think, several million people to the European conversation and that eventually the global conversation. But eventually, it became the best tool for disconfirmation, for getting rid of falsity, for spotting bad ideas, and the long-term benefits, of the printing press are incalculably great.
And that’s what gives me some optimism for where we are now with social media because we are in that unavoidably anarchical period. I do worry that there are attempts in states to pass things to try to put the genie back in the bottle. Like if we ban TikTok or we say that nobody under 18 can be on the internet unless they have parental permission. We’re going at something that no amount of top down is going to be able to fix it.
We have to culturally adapt to the fact of it in ways that make us wiser that actually… And allow it, potentially, to be that wonderful engine for disconfirmation that we’re nowhere near yet, by the way. But think about it, additional millions of eyes on problems thanks to the printing press helped create the scientific revolution, the enlightenment, the discovery of ignorance. We now have added billions of eyes and voices to solving problems and we’re using them for cat videos and canceling.
Because I think of it as the… Because people talk about writing and mass communications as expanding the size of our collective brain, but now we’re looking at our collective brain in real time and it’s filled just like our own brains with all sorts of little crazy things that pop up and appear like virtual particles all over the place of people reacting in real time to things. There’s never been anything even vaguely like it and it can be at its worst, awful to see.
At its best, sometimes seeing people just getting euphoric over something going on and cracking absolutely brilliant immediate jokes at the same time. It can even be a joyful experience. I feel like I live in a neighborhood now on X where I mostly deal with people that I think are actually thoughtful, even if I disagree with them and it’s not such a bad experience. I occasionally run into those other, what I call neighborhoods on X, where it’s just all canceling, all nastiness, and it’s always an unpleasant visit to those places. I’m not saying the whole thing needs to be like my experience but I do think that-
And then you realize that the person is actually kind of suffering and having a hard time, and it gets deeper and deeper as the show goes on. And she will do these incredible speeches about, tell me what to do. Just, I know there’s experts out there, I know there’s knowledge out there, I know there’s an optimal way to live my life, so why can’t someone just tell me what to do? And it’s this wonderfully accurate, I think, aspect of human desire that, what if something could actually tell me the optimal way to go? Because I think there is a desire to give up some amount of your own freedom and discretion in order to be told to do the optimally right thing, but that path scares me to death.
But people don’t want to live in a world where they don’t have people that they respect and they can look at, and I think what’s happening, possibly now, but will continue to happen is people are going to establish themselves as being high integrity, that they’ll always be honest. I think you are establishing yourself as someone who is high integrity, where they can trust that person. FIRE wants to be the institution that people can come to, it’s like, if it’s free speech, we will defend it, period. And I think that people need to have authorities that they can actually trust. And I think that if you actually had a stream that maybe people can watch in action, but not flood with stupid cancel culture stuff or dumb cat memes, where it is actually a serious discussion bounded around rules, no perfect rhetorical fortress, no efficient rhetorical fortress, none of the BS ways we debate, I think you could start to actually create something that could actually be a major improvement in the speed with which we come up with new better ideas and separate truth from falsity.
And I’ve also seen how they will use certain articles on certain people. Articles about people I’ve learned to trust less and less, because they literally will use those to make personal attacks. And this is something you write about, they’ll use descriptions of different controversies to paint a picture of a person that doesn’t, to me at least, feel like an accurate representation of the person. And it’s like writing an article about Einstein, mentioning something about theory of relativity and then saying that he was a womanizer and abuser and controversy. Yeah, he is, Feynman also, they’re not exactly the perfect human in terms of women. But there’s other aspects to this human, and to capture that human properly, there’s a certain way to do it. I think Wikipedia will often lean, they really try to be self-reflective and try to stop this, but they will lean into the drama if it matches the bias.
But again, the world, I believe, is much better because Wikipedia exists. But now that we’re in these adolescent stages, we’re growing and trying to come up with different technologies, the idea of a stream is really, really interesting, because you get more and more people into this discourse where the value is, let’s try to get the truth.
And frankly, one of the reasons why this cancel culture stuff is so important to me is that the thing that I didn’t emphasize as much in Coddling of the American Mind, which by the way, that description that I give of trying to kill myself was the first time I’d ever written it down. Nobody in my family was aware of it being like that, my wife had never seen it, and basically the only way I was able to write that was by doing, you know how you can kind of trick yourself? And I was like, I’m going to convince myself that this is just between me and my computer and nobody will see it. And it’s probably now the most public thing I’ve ever written.
But what I didn’t emphasize in that was how much the culture war played into how depressed I got, because I was originally legal director of FIRE, then I became president of FIRE in 2005, move to Philadelphia, is where I get depressed, and just I don’t have family there, there’s something about the town, they don’t seem to like me very much. But the main thing was being in the culture world all the time. There was a girl that I was dating, I remember she didn’t seem to really approve what I did, and a lot of people didn’t really seem to. And meanwhile, I was defending people on the left all the time, and they’d be like, “Oh, that’s good that you’re defending someone on the left,” but they still would never forgive me for defending someone on the right. And I remember saying at one point, I’m like, “Listen, I’m a true believer in this stuff, I’m willing to defend Nazis, I’m certainly willing to defend Republicans.” And she actually said, “I think Republicans might be worse.” And that relationship didn’t go very well.
And then I’ve nearly gotten in fistfights a couple of times with people on the right because they found out I defended people who crack jokes about 9/11. This happened more than once, by that time I’m in my 20s, I’m not fist fighting again. But yeah, it was always like that. You see how hypocritical people can be, you can see how friends can turn on you if they don’t like your politics. So I got a early preview of this, of the culture we were heading into, by being the president of FIRE, and it was exhausting, and that was one of the main things that led me to be suicidally depressed. At the Belmont Center, if you told me that that would be the beginning of a new and better life for me, I would’ve laughed if I could have, but I don’t… you can tell I’m okay if I’m still laughing, and I wasn’t laughing at that point.
So I got a doctor and I started doing cognitive behavioral therapy. I started having all these voices in my head that were catastrophizing, and it gave overgeneralization and fortune-telling, mind reading, all of these things that they teach you not to do, and what you do in CBT is essentially you have something makes you upset and then you just write down what the thought was, and something minor could happen and your response was like, “Well, the date didn’t seem to go very well, and that’s because I’m broken and will die alone,” and you’re like, okay, okay, okay, what are the following? That’s catastrophizing, that’s mind reading, that’s fortune-telling, that’s all this stuff. And you have to do this several times a day, forever. I actually need to brush up on it at the moment.
And it slowly, over time, voices in my head that had been saying horrible, horrible internal talk, it just didn’t sound as convincing anymore, which was a really subtle effect. It was just like, oh wait, I don’t buy that I’m broken, that doesn’t sound true, that doesn’t sound like truth from God like it used to. And nine months after I was planning to kill myself, I was probably happier than I’d been in a decade. And that was one of the things that, the CBT is what led me to notice this in my own work, that it felt like administrators were kind of selling cognitive distortions, but students weren’t buying yet. And then when I started noticing that they seemed to come in actually already believing in a lot of this stuff, that it would be very dangerous, and that led to Coddling of the American Mind, and all that stuff.
But the thing that was rough about writing Canceling of the American Mind, and I’ve mentioned this already a couple of times, I got really depressed this past year because I was studying. There’s a friend in there that I talk about who killed himself after being canceled. And I talked to him a week before he killed himself, and I hadn’t actually checked in with him because he seemed so confident I thought he would be totally fine, because he had an insensitive tweet in June of 2020 and got forced out. In a way that didn’t actually sound as bad as a lot of the other professors, he actually at least got a severance package, but they knew he’d sue and win, because he had before.
And so I waited to check in on him, because we were so overwhelmed with the requests for help, and he was saying people were coming to his house still, and then he shot himself the next week. And I definitely… And because everyone knows, I’m so public about my struggles with this stuff, everybody who fights this stuff comes to me when they’re having a hard time, and this is a very hard psychologically taxing business to be in. And even admitting this right now, I think about all the vultures out there, they’ll have fun with it. Just like the same way, when my friend Mike Adams killed himself, there were people celebrating on Twitter that a man was dead because they didn’t like his tweets, but somehow that made them compassionate for some abstract other person.
So I was getting a little depressed and anxious, and the thing that really helped me more than anything else was confessing to my staff. Books take a lot of energy, so I knew they didn’t want to hear that not only was this taking a lot of the boss’s time, this was making him depressed and anxious. But when I finally told the leadership of my staff, people that even though I try to maintain a lot of distance from, I love very, very much, it made such a difference, because I could be open about that. And the other thing was, have you heard this conference Dialogue?
But then you have to remember the misrepresentation, getting back to the old idioms, sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me, has been re-imagined in campus debates in the most asinine way. People will literally say stuff, but now we know words can hurt. And it’s like, now we know words can hurt? Guys, you didn’t have to come up with a special little thing that you teach children to make words hurt less if they never hurt in the first place, it wouldn’t even make sense, the saying, it’s a saying that you repeat to yourself to give yourself strength when the bullies have noticed you’re a little weird. This might be a little personal. And it helps, it really does help to be like, listen, okay, assholes are going to say asshole things, and I can’t let them have that kind of power over me.
I think the fact that we have become a weird America with a great anti-elitist tradition has become weirdly elitist in the respect that we not only, again, are our leadership coming from these few fancy schools, we actually have great admiration for them, we look up to them. But I think we’d have a lot healthier of a society if people could prove their excellence in ways that are coming from completely different streams that are highly respected.
I sometimes talk about there should be a test that anyone who passes it gets a BA in the humanities, like a super BA. Not a GED, that’s not what I’m talking about, I’m talking about something that one out of only 100 people can pass, some other way of actually, of not going through these massive, bloated, expensive institutions that people can raise their hands and say, I’m smart and hardworking. I think that could be an incredibly healthy way. I think we need additional streams for creative people to be solving problems, whether that’s on X or someplace else. I think that there’s lots of things that technology could do to really help with this. I think some of the stuff that Sal Khan is working on at Khan Academy could really help.
So I think there’s a lot of ways, but they exist largely around coming up with new ways of doing things, not just expecting the old things that have, say, 40 billion in the bank, that they’re going to reform themselves. And here’s my, I’ve been picking on Harvard a lot, but I’m going to pick on them a little bit more. I talk a lot about class, again, and there’s a great book called Poison Ivy by Evan Mandery, which I recommend to everybody, it’s outrageous, it sounds like me on a rant at Stanford, which was, and I think the stat is elite higher education has more kids from the top 1% than they have from the bottom 50 or 60% depending on the school. And when you look at how much they actually replicate class privilege, it’s really distressing. So everybody should read Poison Ivy.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Greg Lukianoff. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Noam Chomsky, “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked, so was Stalin. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 2:11 – Cancel culture & freedom of speech
- 16:42 – Left-wing vs right-wing cancel culture
- 25:27 – Religion
- 28:07 – College rankings by freedom of speech
- 34:15 – Deplatforming
- 48:50 – Whataboutism
- 53:53 – Steelmanning
- 1:01:29 – How the left argues
- 1:12:09 – Diversity, equity, and inclusion
- 1:24:00 – Why colleges lean left
- 1:31:38 – How the right argues
- 1:36:13 – Hate speech
- 1:45:00 – Platforming
- 1:54:31 – Social media
- 2:15:38 – Depression
- 2:27:09 – Hope
Introduction
Greg Lukianoff
… if the goal is the project of human knowledge, which is to know the world as it is, you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think. What people really think is an incredibly important fact to know.
… if the goal is the project of human knowledge, which is to know the world as it is, you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think. What people really think is an incredibly important fact to know.
Every time you’re actually saying, “You can’t say that,” you’re actually depriving yourself of the knowledge of what people really think. You’re causing what [inaudible 00:00:24], who’s on our Board of advisors calls preference falsification. You end up with an inaccurate picture of the world.
Which by the way, in a lot of cases because there are activists who want to restrict more speech, they actually tend to think that people are more prejudice than they might be. Actually, one very real practical way it makes things worse is when you censor people, it doesn’t change their opinion.
It just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble. It leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Greg Lukianoff, free speech advocate, First Amendment attorney, president and CEO of FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. He’s the author of Unleashing Liberty, co-author with Jonathan Haidt of Coddling of the American Mind.
The following is a conversation with Greg Lukianoff, free speech advocate, First Amendment attorney, president and CEO of FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. He’s the author of Unleashing Liberty, co-author with Jonathan Haidt of Coddling of the American Mind.
Co-author with Rikki Schlott of a new book coming out in October that you should definitely pre-order now called, The Canceling of the American Mind, which is a definitive accounting of the history, present, and future of cancel culture. A term used and overused in public discourse, but rarely studied and understood with the depth and rigor that Greg and Rikki do in this book, and in part in this conversation.
Freedom of speech is important, especially on college campuses, the very place that should serve as the battleground of ideas, including weird and controversial ones that should encourage bold risk-taking, not conformity. This is a Lex Fridman Podcast to support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description.
Cancel culture & freedom of speech
Now, dear friends, here’s Greg Lukianoff. Let’s start with a big question. What is cancel culture? Now, you’ve said that you don’t like the term as it’s been quote “dragged through the mud and abused endlessly” by a whole host of controversial figures. Nevertheless, we have the term, what is it?
Greg Lukianoff
Cancel culture is the uptick of campaigns, especially successful campaigns starting around 2014 to get people fired, expelled, de-platformed, et cetera, for speech that would normally be protected by the First Amendment. I always say would be protected because we’re talking about circumstances in which it isn’t necessarily where the First Amendment applies.
Cancel culture is the uptick of campaigns, especially successful campaigns starting around 2014 to get people fired, expelled, de-platformed, et cetera, for speech that would normally be protected by the First Amendment. I always say would be protected because we’re talking about circumstances in which it isn’t necessarily where the First Amendment applies.
What I mean is as an analog to say things you couldn’t lose your job as a public employee for. Also, the climate of fear that’s resulted from that phenomenon, the fact that you can lose your job for having the wrong opinion. It wasn’t subtle that there was an uptick in this, particularly on campus.
Around 2014, John Ronson wrote a book called, So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed, it came out in 2015 already documenting this phenomena. I wrote a book called Freedom from Speech in 2014. It really was in 2017 when you started seeing this be directed at professors.
When it comes to the number of professors that we’ve seen be targeted and lose their jobs, I’ve been doing this for 22 years and I’ve seen nothing like it.
Lex Fridman
There’s so many things I want to ask you here. One, actually just look at the organization of FIRE. Can you explain what the organization is because it’s interconnected to this whole fight and the rise of cancel culture and the fight for freedom of speech since 2014 and before?
There’s so many things I want to ask you here. One, actually just look at the organization of FIRE. Can you explain what the organization is because it’s interconnected to this whole fight and the rise of cancel culture and the fight for freedom of speech since 2014 and before?
Greg Lukianoff
FIRE was founded in 1999 by Harvey Silverglate. He is a famous civil liberties attorney. He’s a been on the show. He’s the person who actually found me out in my very happy life out in San Francisco, but knew I was looking for a First Amendment job. I’d gone to law school specifically to do First Amendment.
FIRE was founded in 1999 by Harvey Silverglate. He is a famous civil liberties attorney. He’s a been on the show. He’s the person who actually found me out in my very happy life out in San Francisco, but knew I was looking for a First Amendment job. I’d gone to law school specifically to do First Amendment.
He found me, which was pretty cool. His protege, Kathleen Sullivan was the dean of Stanford Law School. This remains the best compliment I ever got in my life is that she recommended me to Harvey. Since that’s the whole reason why I went to law school, I was excited to be part of this new organization.
The other co-founder of FIRE is Alan Charles Kors. He’s just an absolute genius. He is one of the leading experts in the world on the enlightenment and particularly about Voltaire. If any of your listeners do the great courses, he has a lecture on Blaise Pascal. Blaise, of course is famous for the Pascal’s wager.
I left it just so moved and impressed and with a depth of understanding of how important this person was.
Lex Fridman
That’s interesting. You mentioned to me offline connected to this that at least it runs in parallel or there’s a connection between the love of science and the love of the freedom of speech.
That’s interesting. You mentioned to me offline connected to this that at least it runs in parallel or there’s a connection between the love of science and the love of the freedom of speech.
Greg Lukianoff
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Can you maybe elaborate where that connection is?
Can you maybe elaborate where that connection is?
Greg Lukianoff
Sure. I think that for those of us who really have devoted our lives to freedom of speech, one thing that we are into, whether we know it or not, is epistemology, the study and philosophy of knowledge. Freedom speech has lots of moral and philosophical dimensions.
Sure. I think that for those of us who really have devoted our lives to freedom of speech, one thing that we are into, whether we know it or not, is epistemology, the study and philosophy of knowledge. Freedom speech has lots of moral and philosophical dimensions.
From a pragmatic standpoint, it is necessary because we’re creatures of incredibly limited knowledge. We are incredibly self-deceiving. I always love the fact that you’ve all heard Harari refers to the enlightenment as the discovery of ignorance because that’s exactly what it was.
It was suddenly being like, “Wow, hold on a second. All this incredibly interesting folk wisdom we got,” which by the way, can be surprisingly reliable here and there. When you start testing a lot of it is nonsense and it doesn’t hold up. Even our ideas about the way things fall as Galileo established, even our intuitions, they’re just wrong.
A lot of the early history of freedom of speech, it was happening at the same time as the scientific revolution. A lot of the early debates about freedom of speech were tied in. Certainly, Galileo, I always point out Kepler was probably the even more radical idea that they weren’t even perfect spheres.
At the same time, largely because of the invention of the printing press, you also had all these political developments. I always talk about John Huss from a famous Czech hero who was burned at the stake and I think in 1419. He was basically Luther before the printing press.
Before Luther could get his word out, he didn’t stand a chance and that was exactly what John Huss was. A century later, thanks to the printing press, everyone could know what Luther thought, and boy did they. It led to, of course, this completely crazy hyper disrupted period in European history.
Lex Fridman
Well, you mentioned to jump around a little bit, the First Amendment, first of all, what is the First Amendment? What is the connection to you between the First Amendment, the freedom of speech, and cancel culture?
Well, you mentioned to jump around a little bit, the First Amendment, first of all, what is the First Amendment? What is the connection to you between the First Amendment, the freedom of speech, and cancel culture?
Greg Lukianoff
I’m a First Amendment lawyer, as I mentioned, and that’s my passion, that’s what I studied. I think American First Amendment law is incredibly interesting. In one sentence, the First Amendment is trying to get rid of basically all the reasons why humankind had been killing each other for its entire existence.
I’m a First Amendment lawyer, as I mentioned, and that’s my passion, that’s what I studied. I think American First Amendment law is incredibly interesting. In one sentence, the First Amendment is trying to get rid of basically all the reasons why humankind had been killing each other for its entire existence.
That we weren’t going to fight anymore over opinion, we weren’t going to fight any more religion. That you have the right to approach your government or redress grievances, that you have the freedom to associate that All of these things in one sentence we’re like, “Nope, the government will no longer interfere with your right to have these fundamental human rights.”
One thing that makes FIRE a little different from other organizations is however, we’re not just a First Amendment organization. We are a free speech organization. At the same time, a lot of what I think free speech is can be well explained with reference to a lot of First Amendment law.
Partially because in American history, some of our smartest people have been thinking about what the parameters of freedom of speech are in relationship to the First Amendment. A lot of those principles, they transfer very well just as pragmatic ideas.
The biggest sin in terms of censorship is called viewpoint discrimination, that essentially you allow freedom of speech except for that opinion. It’s found to be more defensible. I think this makes sense that if you set up a forum, and we’re only going to talk about economics to exclude people who want to talk about a different topic.
It’s considered rightfully a bigger deal if you’ve set up a forum for economics, but we’re not going to let people talk about that kind of economics or have that opinion on economics most particularly. A lot of the principles from First Amendment law actually make a lot of philosophical sense as good principles for what is protected and unprotected speech. What should get you in trouble, how you actually analyze it, which is why we actually try in our definition of cancel culture to work in some of the First Amendment norms just in the definition, so we don’t have to bog down on them as well.
Lex Fridman
You’re saying so many interesting things, but if you can linger on the viewpoint discrimination, is there any gray area of discussion there, what is and isn’t economics for the example you gave? Is it a science or is it an art to draw lines of what is and isn’t allowed?
You’re saying so many interesting things, but if you can linger on the viewpoint discrimination, is there any gray area of discussion there, what is and isn’t economics for the example you gave? Is it a science or is it an art to draw lines of what is and isn’t allowed?
Greg Lukianoff
If you’re saying that something is or is not economics, “Well, you can say everything’s economics, and therefore I want to talk about poetry.” There’d be some line drawing exercise in there, but let’s say at once you decide to open up to poetry even, it’s a big difference between saying, “Now, we’re open to poetry, but you can’t say Dante was bad. That’s a forbidden opinion now officially in this otherwise open forum.”
If you’re saying that something is or is not economics, “Well, you can say everything’s economics, and therefore I want to talk about poetry.” There’d be some line drawing exercise in there, but let’s say at once you decide to open up to poetry even, it’s a big difference between saying, “Now, we’re open to poetry, but you can’t say Dante was bad. That’s a forbidden opinion now officially in this otherwise open forum.”
That would immediately at an intuitive level strike people as a bigger problem than just saying that poetry isn’t economics.
Lex Fridman
I mean, that intuitive level that you speak to, I hope that all of us have that basic intuition when a line is crossed. It’s the same thing for pornography when you see it. I think there’s the same level of intuition that should be applied across the board here.
I mean, that intuitive level that you speak to, I hope that all of us have that basic intuition when a line is crossed. It’s the same thing for pornography when you see it. I think there’s the same level of intuition that should be applied across the board here.
It’s when that intuition becomes deformed by whatever forces of society, that’s when it starts to feel like censorship.
Greg Lukianoff
I mean, people find it a different thing if someone loses their job simply for their political opinion, even if that employer has every right in the world to fire you, I think Americans should still be like, “Well, it’s true. They have every right in the world, and I’m not making a legal case that maybe you shouldn’t fire someone for their political opinion.”
I mean, people find it a different thing if someone loses their job simply for their political opinion, even if that employer has every right in the world to fire you, I think Americans should still be like, “Well, it’s true. They have every right in the world, and I’m not making a legal case that maybe you shouldn’t fire someone for their political opinion.”
Think that through, what kind of society do we want to live in? It’s been funny watching, and I point this out, yes, I will defend businesses’ First Amendment rights of association to be able to have the legal right to decide who works for them. From a moral or philosophical matter, if you think through the implications of if every business in America becomes an expressive association in addition to being a profit maximizing organization, that would be a disaster for democracy.
You would end up in a situation where people would actually be saying to themselves, “I don’t think I can actually say what I really think and still believe I can keep my job.” That’s where I was worried I felt like we were headed because a lot of the initial response to people getting canceled was very simply, “Oh, but they have the right to get rid of this person.”
That’s the beginning and end of the discussion. I thought that was a dodge. I thought that wasn’t actually a very serious way that if you care about both the First Amendment and freedom of speech of thinking it through.
Lex Fridman
To you, just to clarify, the First Amendment is a legal embodiment of the ideal of freedom of speech and then freedom of speech-
To you, just to clarify, the First Amendment is a legal embodiment of the ideal of freedom of speech and then freedom of speech-
Greg Lukianoff
As applied to government.
As applied to government.
Lex Fridman
… it’s very specific applied to government. Freedom of speech is the application of the principle to everything, including the high level philosophical ideal of the value of people being able to speak their mind.
… it’s very specific applied to government. Freedom of speech is the application of the principle to everything, including the high level philosophical ideal of the value of people being able to speak their mind.
Greg Lukianoff
It’s an older, bolder, more expansive idea. You can have a situation, and I talk about countries that have good free speech law, but not necessarily great free speech culture. I talk about how when we sometimes make this distinction between free speech law and free speech culture, we’re thinking in a very cloudy kind of way.
It’s an older, bolder, more expansive idea. You can have a situation, and I talk about countries that have good free speech law, but not necessarily great free speech culture. I talk about how when we sometimes make this distinction between free speech law and free speech culture, we’re thinking in a very cloudy kind of way.
What I mean by that is that law is generally, particularly in a common law country, it’s the reflection of norms. Judges are people too, and in a lot of cases, common law is supposed to actually take our intuitive ideas of fairness and place them into the law.
If you actually have a culture that doesn’t appreciate free speech from a philosophical standpoint, it’s not going to be able to protect free speech for the long haul even in the law because eventually, that’s one of the reasons why I worry so much about some of these terrible cases coming out of law schools.
I fear that even though, sure, American First Amendment law is very strongly protective of First Amendment for now, it’s not going to stay that way if you have generations of law students graduating who actually think there’s no higher goal than shouting down, you’re an opponent.
Lex Fridman
That’s why so much of your focus or large fracturing of your focus is on the higher education or education period is because education is the foundation of culture.
That’s why so much of your focus or large fracturing of your focus is on the higher education or education period is because education is the foundation of culture.
Greg Lukianoff
We have this history, ’64, you have the Free Speech Movement on Berkeley. In ’65 you have Repressive Tolerance by Herbert Marcuse, which was a declaration of, “By the way, we on the left, we should have free speech, but we should have free speech for us.”
We have this history, ’64, you have the Free Speech Movement on Berkeley. In ’65 you have Repressive Tolerance by Herbert Marcuse, which was a declaration of, “By the way, we on the left, we should have free speech, but we should have free speech for us.”
I mean, I went back and reread Repressive Tolerance and how clear it is. I had forgotten that it really is like, “These so-called conservatives and right wingers, we need to repress them because they’re regressive thinkers.” It really doesn’t come out to anything more sophisticated than the very old idea that our people are good, they get free speech. They should keep it. Other side bad and we have to retrain society.”
Of course, it ends up being another, and he was also a fan of Mao, so it’s not surprising that of course the system would have to rely on some kind of totalitarian system, but that was a laughable position say 30, 40 years ago. The idea that essentially free speech for me, not for as the great free speech champion Nat Hentoff used to say was something that you were supposed to be embarrassed by.
I saw this when I was in law school in ’97. I saw this when I was interning at the ACLU in ’99, that there was a slow motion train wreck coming. That essentially there was these bad ideas from campus that had been taking on more and more steam of basically no free speech for my opponent we’re actually becoming more and more accepted.
Partially because academia was becoming less and less viewpoint-diverse. I think that as my co-author Jonathan Haidt points out that when you have low viewpoint diversity, people start thinking in a very tribal way. If you don’t have the respected dissenters, you don’t have the people that you can point to that I’m like, “Hey, this is a smart person. This is a smart, reasonable person that I disagree with. I guess, not everyone thinks alike on this issue.”
You start getting much more only bad people, only heretics, only blasphemers only right wingers can actually think in this way.
Left-wing vs right-wing cancel culture
Lex Fridman
Every time you say something I always have a million thoughts and a million questions that pop up. Since you mentioned there’s a drift as you write about in the book and you mentioned now there’s a drift towards the left in academia.
Every time you say something I always have a million thoughts and a million questions that pop up. Since you mentioned there’s a drift as you write about in the book and you mentioned now there’s a drift towards the left in academia.
We should also maybe draw a distinction here between the left and the right, and a cancel culture as you present in your book, is not necessarily associated with any one political viewpoint that there’s mechanisms on both sides that result in cancellation and censorship in violation of freedom of speech.
Greg Lukianoff
One thing I want to be really clear about is the book takes on both right and left cancel culture. They’re different in a lot of ways and definitely cancel culture from the left is more important in academia where the left dominates. We talk a lot about cancel culture coming from legislatures.
One thing I want to be really clear about is the book takes on both right and left cancel culture. They’re different in a lot of ways and definitely cancel culture from the left is more important in academia where the left dominates. We talk a lot about cancel culture coming from legislatures.
We talk a lot about cancel culture on campus as well because even though most of the attempts that come from on campus to get people canceled are still from the left, there are a lot of attacks that come from the right, that come from attempts by different organizations.
Sometimes when there are stories in Fox News, they’ll go after professors and about one third of the attempts to get professors punished that are successful actually do come from the right. We talk about attempts to get books banned. In the book, we talk about and talk about suing the Florida legislature, Ron DeSantis had something called the Stop WOKE Act, which we told everyone this is laughably unconstitutional.
They tried to ban particular topics in higher ed. We’re like, “No, this is a joke. This will be laughed out of court.” They didn’t listen to us and they brought it, they passed it and we sued and we won. Now, they’re trying again with something that’s equally as unconstitutional and we will sue again and we will win.
Lex Fridman
Can you elaborate on Stop WOKE Act? This is presumably trying to limit certain topics from being taught in school?
Can you elaborate on Stop WOKE Act? This is presumably trying to limit certain topics from being taught in school?
Greg Lukianoff
Basically woke topics, it came out of the attempt to get at critical race theory, so it’s topics related to race, gender, et cetera. I don’t remember exactly how they tried to cabinet to CRT, but the law is really well established that you can’t tell higher education what they’re allowed to teach without violating the First Amendment.
Basically woke topics, it came out of the attempt to get at critical race theory, so it’s topics related to race, gender, et cetera. I don’t remember exactly how they tried to cabinet to CRT, but the law is really well established that you can’t tell higher education what they’re allowed to teach without violating the First Amendment.
When this got in front of a judge, he was exactly as skeptical of it as we thought he’d be. I think he called this dystopian and it wasn’t a close call.
Lex Fridman
If you’re against that kind of teaching, the right way to fight it is by making the case that it’s not a good idea as part of the curriculum as opposed to banning it from the curriculum?
If you’re against that kind of teaching, the right way to fight it is by making the case that it’s not a good idea as part of the curriculum as opposed to banning it from the curriculum?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. Just the state doesn’t have the power to simply say to ban what professors in higher education teach. Now, it gets a little more complicated when you talk about K-12 because the state has a role in deciding what public K-12 teaches because they’re your kids.
Yeah. Just the state doesn’t have the power to simply say to ban what professors in higher education teach. Now, it gets a little more complicated when you talk about K-12 because the state has a role in deciding what public K-12 teaches because they’re your kids.
It’s taxpayer funded and generally the legislature is involved. There is democratic oversight of that process.
Lex Fridman
For K-12, is there also a lean towards the left in terms of the administration that manages the curriculum?
For K-12, is there also a lean towards the left in terms of the administration that manages the curriculum?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, there definitely is in K-12. I mean, my kids go to public school. I have a five and a seven-year-old. They have lovely teachers, but we have run into a lot of problems with education schools at FIRE. A lot of the graduates of education school end up being the administrators who clamp down on free speech in higher education. I’ve been trying to think of positive ways to take on some of the problems that I see in K-12. I thought that the attempt to just dictate you won’t teach the following 10 books or 20 books or 200 books was the wrong way to do it. Now, when it comes to deciding what books are in the curriculum, again, that’s something a legislature actually can have some say in.
Yeah, there definitely is in K-12. I mean, my kids go to public school. I have a five and a seven-year-old. They have lovely teachers, but we have run into a lot of problems with education schools at FIRE. A lot of the graduates of education school end up being the administrators who clamp down on free speech in higher education. I’ve been trying to think of positive ways to take on some of the problems that I see in K-12. I thought that the attempt to just dictate you won’t teach the following 10 books or 20 books or 200 books was the wrong way to do it. Now, when it comes to deciding what books are in the curriculum, again, that’s something a legislature actually can have some say in.
That’s pretty uncontroversial in terms of the law. When it comes to how you fight it, I had something that since I’m stuck with a formula I called Empowering of the American Mind, I gave principles that were inconsistent with the groupthink and heavy emphasis on identity politics that some of the critics are rightfully complaining about in K-12.
That is actually in The Canceling of the American Mind, but I have a more detailed explanation of it that I’m going to be putting up on my blog, The Eternally Radical Idea.
Lex Fridman
Is it possible to legally, this is a silly question, perhaps create an extra protection for certain kinds of literature 1984 or something to remain in the curriculum? I mean, it’s already all protected, I guess, to protect against administrators from fiddling too much with the curriculum like stabilizing the curriculum. I don’t know what the machinery of the K-12 public school.
Is it possible to legally, this is a silly question, perhaps create an extra protection for certain kinds of literature 1984 or something to remain in the curriculum? I mean, it’s already all protected, I guess, to protect against administrators from fiddling too much with the curriculum like stabilizing the curriculum. I don’t know what the machinery of the K-12 public school.
Greg Lukianoff
In K-12 state legislatures-
In K-12 state legislatures-
Lex Fridman
They’re part of that.
They’re part of that.
Greg Lukianoff
… they’re part of that and they can say, “You should teach the following books.”Now, of course, people are always a little bit worried that if they were to recommend teach the Declaration of Independence, that it will end up being, “Well, they’re going to teach the Declaration of Independence was just to protect slavery, which it wasn’t.
… they’re part of that and they can say, “You should teach the following books.”Now, of course, people are always a little bit worried that if they were to recommend teach the Declaration of Independence, that it will end up being, “Well, they’re going to teach the Declaration of Independence was just to protect slavery, which it wasn’t.
Lex Fridman
Teaching a particular topic matters, which textbooks you choose, which perspective you take all that kind of stuff. Of course, there’s religion starts to creep into the whole question of how is the Bible, are you allowed to incorporate that into education?
Teaching a particular topic matters, which textbooks you choose, which perspective you take all that kind of stuff. Of course, there’s religion starts to creep into the whole question of how is the Bible, are you allowed to incorporate that into education?
Greg Lukianoff
I am an atheist with an intense interest in religion. I actually read the entire Bible this year just because I do stuff like that. I never actually had read it from beginning to end. Then, I read the Quran because, and I’m going to try to do the Book of Mormon.
I am an atheist with an intense interest in religion. I actually read the entire Bible this year just because I do stuff like that. I never actually had read it from beginning to end. Then, I read the Quran because, and I’m going to try to do the Book of Mormon.
Lex Fridman
Sorry, you’re so fascinating. Do you recommend doing that?
Sorry, you’re so fascinating. Do you recommend doing that?
Greg Lukianoff
I think you should just to know, because such a touchstone in the way people talk about things, it can get pretty tedious. I even made myself read through all of the very specific instructions on how tall the different parts of the temple need to be and how long the garbs need to be and what shape they need to be.
I think you should just to know, because such a touchstone in the way people talk about things, it can get pretty tedious. I even made myself read through all of the very specific instructions on how tall the different parts of the temple need to be and how long the garbs need to be and what shape they need to be.
Those go on a lot, surprisingly a big chunk of Exodus. I thought that was more like in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, but then you get to books like Job Wow, I mean Job is such a read and no way Job originally had that ending. Job is basically, it starts out as this perverse bet between God and Satan about whether or not they can actually make a good man renounce God.
Initially, they can’t, it’s all going very predictably. Then, they finally really tortured job and he turns into the best, why is God cruel? How could God possibly exist? How could a kind God do these things? He turns into the best lawyer in the entire world and he defeats everyone, all the people who come to argue with him, he argues the pants off of them.
Then, suddenly at the end, God shows up and He’s like, “Well, I am everywhere.” It’s a very confusing answer. He gives an answer like, “I am there when lionesses give birth and I am there. By the way, there’s this giant monster Leviathan that’s very big and it’s very scary and I have to manage the universe.”
I’m like, “God, are you saying that you’re very busy? Is that essentially your argument to Job. You don’t mention the whole that I have a bet, that’s why I was torturing you, that doesn’t come up. Then at the end, he decide God’s decides Job’s like, “No, you’re totally right. I was totally wrong, sorry.”
God says, “I’m going to punish those people who tried to argue with you and didn’t win.” He gets rid of the, I don’t know exactly what he does to them, I don’t remember. Then he gives Job all his money back and it makes him super prosperous. I’m like, “No way that was the original ending of that book because this was clearly a beloved novel that they were like, “But it can’t have that ending.”
It’s a long way of saying, I actually think it’s worthwhile. Some of it was you’re always surprised when you end up in there are parts of it that will sneak up on you like Isaiah’s a trip. Ecclesiastes, Depeche Mode.
Lex Fridman
You said you also the Quran.
You said you also the Quran.
Religion
Greg Lukianoff
Which was fascinating.
Which was fascinating.
Lex Fridman
It’d be interesting to ask, is there a tension between the study of religious texts or the following of religion and just believing in God and following the various aspects of religion with freedom of speech?
It’d be interesting to ask, is there a tension between the study of religious texts or the following of religion and just believing in God and following the various aspects of religion with freedom of speech?
Greg Lukianoff
In the First Amendment, we have something that we call the religion clause. I’ve never liked calling it just that because it’s two brilliant things right next to each other. The state may not establish an official religion, but it cannot interfere with your right to practice your religion. Beautiful, two things at the same time, and I think they’re both exactly right.
In the First Amendment, we have something that we call the religion clause. I’ve never liked calling it just that because it’s two brilliant things right next to each other. The state may not establish an official religion, but it cannot interfere with your right to practice your religion. Beautiful, two things at the same time, and I think they’re both exactly right.
I think sometimes the right gets very excited of the free exercise clause and the Left gets very excited about establishment. I like the fact that we have both of them together. Now, how does this relate to freedom of speech and how does it relate to the curriculum like we were talking about.
I actually think it would be great if public schools could teach the Bible in the sense of read it as a historical document. Back when I was at the ACLU, every time I saw people trying this, it always turned into them actually advocating for a Catholic or a Protestant or some or Orthodox even read on religion.
If you actually make it into something advocating for a particular view on religion, then it crosses into the establishment clause side. Americans haven’t figured out a way to actually teach it, so it’s probably better that you learn outside of a public school class.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it’s possible to teach religion from world religions course without disrespecting the religions?
Do you think it’s possible to teach religion from world religions course without disrespecting the religions?
Greg Lukianoff
I think the answer is it depends on from whose perspective?
I think the answer is it depends on from whose perspective?
Lex Fridman
Well, the practitioner say an orthodox follower of a particular religion, is it possible to not piss you off in teaching all the major religions of the world?
Well, the practitioner say an orthodox follower of a particular religion, is it possible to not piss you off in teaching all the major religions of the world?
Greg Lukianoff
For some people, the bottom line is you have to teach it as true. Under those conditions then the answer is no, you can’t teach it without offending someone at least.
For some people, the bottom line is you have to teach it as true. Under those conditions then the answer is no, you can’t teach it without offending someone at least.
Lex Fridman
Can’t you say these people believe it’s true to reform, so you have to walk on eggshells essentially?
Can’t you say these people believe it’s true to reform, so you have to walk on eggshells essentially?
Greg Lukianoff
You can try really hard and you will still make some people angry, but serious people will be like, “No, we actually tried to be fair to the beliefs here.” I try to be respectful as much as I can about a lot of this. I still find myself much more drawn to both Buddhism and stoicism though.
You can try really hard and you will still make some people angry, but serious people will be like, “No, we actually tried to be fair to the beliefs here.” I try to be respectful as much as I can about a lot of this. I still find myself much more drawn to both Buddhism and stoicism though.
College rankings by freedom of speech
Lex Fridman
Where do I go? One interesting thing to get back to college campuses is FIRE keeps the college free speech rankings at rankings.thefire.org.
Where do I go? One interesting thing to get back to college campuses is FIRE keeps the college free speech rankings at rankings.thefire.org.
Greg Lukianoff
I’m very proud of them.
I’m very proud of them.
Lex Fridman
I’d highly recommend because forget even just the ranking, you get to learn a lot about the universities from this entirely different perspective than people are used to when they go to pick whatever university they want to go to. It just gives another perspective on the whole thing.
I’d highly recommend because forget even just the ranking, you get to learn a lot about the universities from this entirely different perspective than people are used to when they go to pick whatever university they want to go to. It just gives another perspective on the whole thing.
It gives quotes from people that are students there and so on about their experiences. Maybe you could speak to the various measures here before we talk about who’s in the top five and who’s in the bottom five. What are the different parameters that contribute to the evaluation?
Greg Lukianoff
People have been asking me since day one to do a ranking of schools according to Freedom of Speech. Even though we had the best database in existence of campus speech codes, policies that universities have that violate First Amendment or First Amendment norms, we also have the best database of, we call the disinvitation database. Actually, it’s better named the de-platforming database, which is what we’re going to call it.
People have been asking me since day one to do a ranking of schools according to Freedom of Speech. Even though we had the best database in existence of campus speech codes, policies that universities have that violate First Amendment or First Amendment norms, we also have the best database of, we call the disinvitation database. Actually, it’s better named the de-platforming database, which is what we’re going to call it.
Lex Fridman
These are all cases where somebody was invited as a speaker to campus and they were disinvited?
These are all cases where somebody was invited as a speaker to campus and they were disinvited?
Greg Lukianoff
Disinvited or de-platformed also includes shouting down.
Disinvited or de-platformed also includes shouting down.
Lex Fridman
They showed up and they couldn’t really speak?
They showed up and they couldn’t really speak?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, exactly. Having that, what we really needed in order to have some serious social science to really make a serious argument about what the ranking was to be able to, one, get a better sense of how many professors were actually getting punished during this time.
Yeah, exactly. Having that, what we really needed in order to have some serious social science to really make a serious argument about what the ranking was to be able to, one, get a better sense of how many professors were actually getting punished during this time.
Then the biggest missing element was to be able to ask students directly what the environment was like on that campus for freedom of speech. Are you comfortable disagreeing with each other? Are you comfortable disagreeing with your professors? Do you think violence is acceptable in response to a speaker?
Do you think shouting down is okay? Do you think blocking people’s access to a speaker is okay? Once we were able to get all those elements together, we first did a test run, I think in 2019 about 50. We’ve been doing it for four years now. Always trying to make the methodology more and more precise to better reflect the actual environment at particular schools.
This year, the number one school was Michigan Technological University, which was a nice surprise. The number two school was actually Auburn University, which was nice to see. In the top 10, the most well-known prestigious school was actually UVA, which did really well this year.
University of Chicago was not happy that they weren’t number one, but University of Chicago was 13. They had been number one or in the top three, four years prior to that.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain? It’s almost surprising, is it because of-
Can you explain? It’s almost surprising, is it because of-
Lex Fridman
Really? So can you explain, it’s almost surprising. Is it because of the really strong economics departments and things like this, or why?
Really? So can you explain, it’s almost surprising. Is it because of the really strong economics departments and things like this, or why?
Greg Lukianoff
They had a case involving a student, they wouldn’t recognize a chapter of Turning Point U.S.A., and they made a very classic argument that we, and classic in the bad way, that we hear at campuses across the country. Oh, we have a Campus Republicans, so we don’t need this additional conservative group. And we’re like, no, I’m sorry. We’ve seen dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, of attempts to get this one particular conservative student group de-recognized or not recognized.
They had a case involving a student, they wouldn’t recognize a chapter of Turning Point U.S.A., and they made a very classic argument that we, and classic in the bad way, that we hear at campuses across the country. Oh, we have a Campus Republicans, so we don’t need this additional conservative group. And we’re like, no, I’m sorry. We’ve seen dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, of attempts to get this one particular conservative student group de-recognized or not recognized.
And so we told them, like listen, we told them at FIRE that we consider this serious and they wouldn’t recognize the group. So that’s a point down in our ranking. And it was enough to knock them from, they probably would’ve been number two in the rankings, but now they’re 13 out of 248. They’re still one of the best schools in the country. I have no problem saying that. The school that did not do so well at a negative 10.69, negative 10.69, and we rounded up to zero, was Harvard. And Harvard has been not very happy with that result.
Lex Fridman
The only school to receive the abysmal ranking.
The only school to receive the abysmal ranking.
Greg Lukianoff
And there are a couple of people-
And there are a couple of people-
Lex Fridman
Oh, Harvard.
Oh, Harvard.
Greg Lukianoff
Oh, Harvard. And there are a couple people who have actually been really, I think making a mistake by getting very Harvard sounding, by being like, I’ve had statisticians look at this, and they think your methodology is a joke. And pointing out, an this case wasn’t that important, and that scholar wasn’t, one of the arguments against one of the scholars that we counted against them for punishing was that wasn’t a very famous or influential scholar.
Oh, Harvard. And there are a couple people who have actually been really, I think making a mistake by getting very Harvard sounding, by being like, I’ve had statisticians look at this, and they think your methodology is a joke. And pointing out, an this case wasn’t that important, and that scholar wasn’t, one of the arguments against one of the scholars that we counted against them for punishing was that wasn’t a very famous or influential scholar.
So your argument seems to be snobbery, like essentially you’re not understanding our methodology for one thing. And then you’re saying that actually that scholar wasn’t important enough to count. And by the way, Harvard, if we-
Lex Fridman
That’s the Harvard camera.
That’s the Harvard camera.
Greg Lukianoff
… even if we took all of your arguments as true, even if we decided to get rid of those two professors, you would still be in negative numbers. You would still be dead last, you would still be after Georgetown and Penn. And neither of those schools are good for freedom of speech.
… even if we took all of your arguments as true, even if we decided to get rid of those two professors, you would still be in negative numbers. You would still be dead last, you would still be after Georgetown and Penn. And neither of those schools are good for freedom of speech.
Lex Fridman
I should say, the bottom five is the University of Pennsylvania, like you said, Penn, the University of South Carolina, Georgetown University, and Fordham University,
I should say, the bottom five is the University of Pennsylvania, like you said, Penn, the University of South Carolina, Georgetown University, and Fordham University,
Greg Lukianoff
All very well-earned. They have so many bad cases at all of those schools.
All very well-earned. They have so many bad cases at all of those schools.
Lex Fridman
What’s the best way to find yourself in the bottom five, if you are a university? What’s the fastest way to that negative, to that zero?
What’s the best way to find yourself in the bottom five, if you are a university? What’s the fastest way to that negative, to that zero?
Greg Lukianoff
A lot of de-platforming. When we looked at the bottom five, 81% of attempts to get speakers de-platformed were successful at the bottom five. There were a couple of schools, I think Penn included, where every single attempt, every time a student group objected to that speaker coming, they canceled the speech. And I think Georgetown was a 100% success rate. I think Penn had a 100% success rate. I think Harvard did stand up for a couple, but mostly people got de-platformed there as well.
A lot of de-platforming. When we looked at the bottom five, 81% of attempts to get speakers de-platformed were successful at the bottom five. There were a couple of schools, I think Penn included, where every single attempt, every time a student group objected to that speaker coming, they canceled the speech. And I think Georgetown was a 100% success rate. I think Penn had a 100% success rate. I think Harvard did stand up for a couple, but mostly people got de-platformed there as well.
Deplatforming
Lex Fridman
So how do you push back on de-platforming? Well, who would do it? Is it other students? Is it faculty? Is it the administration? What’s the dynamics of pushing back of, basically, because I imagine some of it is culture, but I imagine every university has a bunch of students who will protest basically every speaker. And it’s a question of how you respond to that protest.
So how do you push back on de-platforming? Well, who would do it? Is it other students? Is it faculty? Is it the administration? What’s the dynamics of pushing back of, basically, because I imagine some of it is culture, but I imagine every university has a bunch of students who will protest basically every speaker. And it’s a question of how you respond to that protest.
Greg Lukianoff
Well, here’s the dirty little secret about the big change in 2014 and FIRE, and me, and Height have been very clear that the big change that we saw on campus was that for most of my career, students were great on freedom of speech. They were the best constituency for free speech, absolutely unambiguously until about 2013, 2014. And it was only in 2014 where we had these very kind of sad for us experience where suddenly students were the ones advocating for de-platforming and new speech codes, in a similar way that they had been doing in say the mid-eighties, for example. But here’s the dirty little secret.
Well, here’s the dirty little secret about the big change in 2014 and FIRE, and me, and Height have been very clear that the big change that we saw on campus was that for most of my career, students were great on freedom of speech. They were the best constituency for free speech, absolutely unambiguously until about 2013, 2014. And it was only in 2014 where we had these very kind of sad for us experience where suddenly students were the ones advocating for de-platforming and new speech codes, in a similar way that they had been doing in say the mid-eighties, for example. But here’s the dirty little secret.
It’s not just the students, it’s students and administrators, sometimes only a handful of them though, working together to create some of these problems. And this was exactly what happened at Stanford when Kyle Duncan, a Fifth Circuit Judge tried to speak at my alma mater and a fifth of the class showed up to shout him down. It was a real showing of what was going on. That 10 minutes into the shout down of a Fifth Circuit Judge, and I keep on emphasizing that because I’m a constitutional lawyer, Fifth Circuit Judges are big deals. They’re one level below the Supreme Court.
About a fifth of the school shows up to shout him down. After 10 minutes of shouting him down, an administrator, a DI administrator, gets up with a prepared speech that she’s written that’s a seven-minute-long speech where she talks about free speech, maybe the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.
And we are at this law school where people could learn to challenge these norms. So it’s clear that there was coordination amongst some of these administrators. And from talking to students there, they were in meetings, extensive meetings for a long time. They show up, do a shout down, then they take additional seven minutes to lecture the speaker on free speech, the juice of free speech not being worth the squeeze. And then for the rest of it, it’s just constant heckling after she leaves.
This is clearly, and something very similar happened a number of times at Yale, where it was very clearly administrators were helping along with a lot of these disruptions. So I think every time there is a shout down at a university, the investigation should be first and foremost, did administrators help create this problem? Did they do anything to stop it? Because I think a lot of what’s really going on here is the hyper bureaucratization of universities with a lot more ideological people who think of their primary job as basically policing speech, more or less. They’re encouraging students, sorry, they’re encouraging students who have opinions they like, to do shout downs.
And that’s why they really need to investigate this. And it is at Stanford, the administrator who gave the prepared remarks about the juice not being worth the squeeze. She has not been invited back to Stanford, but she’s one of the only examples I can think of, when these things happen a lot where an administrator clearly facilitated something that was a shout down or a de-platforming, or resulted in a professor getting fired, or resulted in a student getting expelled, where the administrator has got off scot-free or probably, in some cases, even gotten a promotion.
Lex Fridman
And so a small number of administrators, maybe even a single administrator, could participate in the encouraging and the organization, and thereby empower the whole process.
And so a small number of administrators, maybe even a single administrator, could participate in the encouraging and the organization, and thereby empower the whole process.
Greg Lukianoff
And that’s something I’ve seen throughout my entire career. And the only thing that’s kind of hard to catch this sort of in the act, so to speak, and that’s one of the reasons why it’s helpful for people to know about this. Because there was this amazing case. This was at University of Washington, and we actually featured this in a documentary made in 2015 that came out in 2015, 2016, called Can We Take a Joke?
And that’s something I’ve seen throughout my entire career. And the only thing that’s kind of hard to catch this sort of in the act, so to speak, and that’s one of the reasons why it’s helpful for people to know about this. Because there was this amazing case. This was at University of Washington, and we actually featured this in a documentary made in 2015 that came out in 2015, 2016, called Can We Take a Joke?
And this was when we started noticing something was changing on campus. We also heard that comedians were saying that they couldn’t use their good humor anymore. This was right around the time that Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock said that they didn’t want to play on campuses, because they couldn’t be funny. But we featured a case of a comedian who wanted to do a musical called The Passion of the Musical, making Fun of the Passion of the Christ, with the stated goal of offending everyone, every group equally. It was very much a South Park mission. And it’s an unusual case because we actually got documentation of administrators buying tickets for angry students and holding an event where they trained them to jump up in the middle of it and shout, I’m offended. They bought them tickets, they sent them to this thing with the goal of shouting it down. Now, unsurprisingly, when you send an angry group of students to shut down a play, it’s not going to end at just, I’m offended. And it got heated.
There were death threats being thrown, and then the Pullman Washington Police told Chris Lee, the guy who made the play, that they wouldn’t actually protect him. Now it’s not every day you’re going to have that kind of hard evidence of actually seeing the administrators be so brazen that they recorded the fact that they bought them tickets and sent them. But I think a lot of that stuff is going on, and I think it’s a good excuse to cut down on one of the big problems in higher education today, which is hyper bureaucratization.
Lex Fridman
In your experience, is there a distinction between administrators and faculty in terms of perpetrators of these kinds of things? So if we got rid of all, Harvey’s talked about getting rid of a large percentage of the administration, does that help fix the problem? Or is the faculty also, small percent of the faculty, also part of the encouraging in the organization of these kind of cancel models?
In your experience, is there a distinction between administrators and faculty in terms of perpetrators of these kinds of things? So if we got rid of all, Harvey’s talked about getting rid of a large percentage of the administration, does that help fix the problem? Or is the faculty also, small percent of the faculty, also part of the encouraging in the organization of these kind of cancel models?
Greg Lukianoff
And that’s something that has been profoundly disappointing, is that when you look at the huge uptick in attempts to get professors fired that we’ve seen over the last 10 years, and actually over the last 22 years, as far back as our records go. At first, they were overwhelmingly led by administrators, attempts to get professors punished. And that was most, I’d say that was my career up until 2013, was fighting back at administrative excesses. Then you start having the problem in 2014 of students trying to get people canceled, and that really accelerated in 2017. So one thing that makes it easier to document are the petitions to get professors fired or punished, and how disproportionately those actually do come from students. But another big uptick has been fellow professors demanding that their fellow professors get punished. And that to me-
And that’s something that has been profoundly disappointing, is that when you look at the huge uptick in attempts to get professors fired that we’ve seen over the last 10 years, and actually over the last 22 years, as far back as our records go. At first, they were overwhelmingly led by administrators, attempts to get professors punished. And that was most, I’d say that was my career up until 2013, was fighting back at administrative excesses. Then you start having the problem in 2014 of students trying to get people canceled, and that really accelerated in 2017. So one thing that makes it easier to document are the petitions to get professors fired or punished, and how disproportionately those actually do come from students. But another big uptick has been fellow professors demanding that their fellow professors get punished. And that to me-
Lex Fridman
Makes me really sad.
Makes me really sad.
Greg Lukianoff
It’s kind of shameful. You shouldn’t be proud of signing the petition to get your fellow professor. And what’s even more shameful is that we get, this has almost become a cliche within FIRE, when someone is facing one of these cancellation campaigns as a professor. I would get letters from some of my friends saying, I am so sorry this has happened to you, and these were the same people who publicly signed the petition to get them fired.
It’s kind of shameful. You shouldn’t be proud of signing the petition to get your fellow professor. And what’s even more shameful is that we get, this has almost become a cliche within FIRE, when someone is facing one of these cancellation campaigns as a professor. I would get letters from some of my friends saying, I am so sorry this has happened to you, and these were the same people who publicly signed the petition to get them fired.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, integrity. Integrity is an important thing in this world, and I think some of it, I’m so surprised people don’t stand up more for this. There’s so much hunger for it. And if you have the guts as a faculty or an administrator to really stand up with eloquence, with rigor, with integrity, I feel like it’s impossible for anyone to do anything because there’s such a hunger. It’s so refreshing. I think everybody agrees that freedom of speech is a good thing.
Yeah, integrity. Integrity is an important thing in this world, and I think some of it, I’m so surprised people don’t stand up more for this. There’s so much hunger for it. And if you have the guts as a faculty or an administrator to really stand up with eloquence, with rigor, with integrity, I feel like it’s impossible for anyone to do anything because there’s such a hunger. It’s so refreshing. I think everybody agrees that freedom of speech is a good thing.
Greg Lukianoff
Oh, I don’t-
Oh, I don’t-
Lex Fridman
Well, okay, sorry, sorry.
Well, okay, sorry, sorry.
Greg Lukianoff
I don’t agree.
I don’t agree.
Lex Fridman
The majority of people, even at the universities, that there’s a hunger, but it’s almost like this kind of nervousness around it because there’s a small number of loud voices that are doing the shouting. So again, that’s where great leadership comes in. And so presidents of universities should probably be making clear declarations of this is a place where we value the freedom of expression.
The majority of people, even at the universities, that there’s a hunger, but it’s almost like this kind of nervousness around it because there’s a small number of loud voices that are doing the shouting. So again, that’s where great leadership comes in. And so presidents of universities should probably be making clear declarations of this is a place where we value the freedom of expression.
Greg Lukianoff
And this, all throughout my career, a president, a university president who puts their foot down early and says, nope, we are not entertaining firing this professor. We are not expelling this student. It ends the issue often very fast. Although sometimes, and this is where you can really tell the administrative involvement, students will do things like takeover the president’s office and then that takeover will be catered by the university.
And this, all throughout my career, a president, a university president who puts their foot down early and says, nope, we are not entertaining firing this professor. We are not expelling this student. It ends the issue often very fast. Although sometimes, and this is where you can really tell the administrative involvement, students will do things like takeover the president’s office and then that takeover will be catered by the university.
People will point this out sometimes as being kind of like, oh, it was clearly, my friend Sam Abrams, when they tried to get him fired at Sarah Lawrence College. That was one of the times that it was used as oh, this was hostile to the university because the students took over the president’s office. And I’m like, no, they let them take over the president’s office. And I don’t know if that was one of the cases in which the takeover was catered, but if there was ever a sign that’s kind of like, yes, this is actually really quite friendly.
Lex Fridman
Well, in some sense, protesting and having really strong opinions, even ridiculous, crazy wild opinions, is a good thing. It’s just it shouldn’t lead to actual firing or de-platforming of people. It’s good to protest, it’s just not good for the university to support that and take action based on it.
Well, in some sense, protesting and having really strong opinions, even ridiculous, crazy wild opinions, is a good thing. It’s just it shouldn’t lead to actual firing or de-platforming of people. It’s good to protest, it’s just not good for the university to support that and take action based on it.
Greg Lukianoff
And this is one of those tensions in First Amendment that actually I think has a pretty easy release, essentially. You absolutely have the right to devote your life to ending freedom of speech and ridiculing it as a concept. And there are people who really can come off as very contemptible about even the philosophy of freedom of speech, and we will defend your right to do that. We will also disagree with you, and if you try to get a professor fired, we’ll be on the other side of that.
And this is one of those tensions in First Amendment that actually I think has a pretty easy release, essentially. You absolutely have the right to devote your life to ending freedom of speech and ridiculing it as a concept. And there are people who really can come off as very contemptible about even the philosophy of freedom of speech, and we will defend your right to do that. We will also disagree with you, and if you try to get a professor fired, we’ll be on the other side of that.
Now, I think you had Randy Kennedy, who I really, I love him. I think he’s a great guy, but he criticized us for our de-platforming database as saying this is saying that students can’t protest speakers. I’m like, okay, that’s silly. We, FIRE, as an organization, have defended the right to protest all the time. We are constantly defending the rights to protestors, not believing that the protestors have the right to say this, basically that would be punishing the speakers. We’re not calling for punishing the protestors, but what we are saying is you can’t let the protestors win if they’re demanding someone be fired for their freedom of speech.
Lex Fridman
So the line there is between protestors protesting and the university taking action based on the protest.
So the line there is between protestors protesting and the university taking action based on the protest.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, exactly. And of course, shout downs, that’s just mob censorship. And that’s something where the university, the way you deal with that tension in First Amendment law is essentially of the one positive duty that the government has. The first, the negative duty, the thing that it’s not allowed to do is censor you. But its positive duty is that if I want to say awful things, or for that matter, great things that aren’t popular in a public park, you can’t let the crowd just shout me down. You can’t allow what’s called a heckler’s veto.
Yeah, exactly. And of course, shout downs, that’s just mob censorship. And that’s something where the university, the way you deal with that tension in First Amendment law is essentially of the one positive duty that the government has. The first, the negative duty, the thing that it’s not allowed to do is censor you. But its positive duty is that if I want to say awful things, or for that matter, great things that aren’t popular in a public park, you can’t let the crowd just shout me down. You can’t allow what’s called a heckler’s veto.
Lex Fridman
Heckler’s veto. That’s so interesting, because I feel like that comes into play on social media as well. There’s this whole discussion about censorship and freedom of speech, but to me, the carrot question is almost more interesting. Once the freedom of speech is established is, how do you incentivize high quality debate and disagreement?
Heckler’s veto. That’s so interesting, because I feel like that comes into play on social media as well. There’s this whole discussion about censorship and freedom of speech, but to me, the carrot question is almost more interesting. Once the freedom of speech is established is, how do you incentivize high quality debate and disagreement?
Greg Lukianoff
I’m thinking a lot about that, and that’s one of the things we talk about in canceling of the American mind, is arguing towards truth. And that cancel culture is cruel, it’s merciless, it’s anti-intellectual, but it also will never get you anywhere near truth. And you are going to waste so much time destroying your opponents in something that can actually never get you to truth through the process, of course, of you never actually get directly at truth, you just chip away at falsity.
I’m thinking a lot about that, and that’s one of the things we talk about in canceling of the American mind, is arguing towards truth. And that cancel culture is cruel, it’s merciless, it’s anti-intellectual, but it also will never get you anywhere near truth. And you are going to waste so much time destroying your opponents in something that can actually never get you to truth through the process, of course, of you never actually get directly at truth, you just chip away at falsity.
Lex Fridman
But everybody having a megaphone on the internet with anonymity, it seems like it’s better than censorship, but it feels like there’s incentives on top of that you can construct to incentivize better discourse. To incentivize somebody who puts a huge amount of effort to make even the most ridiculous arguments, but basically ones that don’t include any of the things you highlight in terms of all the rhetorical tricks to shut down conversations. Just make really good arguments for whatever, it doesn’t matter if it’s communism for fascism, whatever the heck you want to say. But do it with skill, with historical context, with steel-manning the other side, all those kinds of elements.
But everybody having a megaphone on the internet with anonymity, it seems like it’s better than censorship, but it feels like there’s incentives on top of that you can construct to incentivize better discourse. To incentivize somebody who puts a huge amount of effort to make even the most ridiculous arguments, but basically ones that don’t include any of the things you highlight in terms of all the rhetorical tricks to shut down conversations. Just make really good arguments for whatever, it doesn’t matter if it’s communism for fascism, whatever the heck you want to say. But do it with skill, with historical context, with steel-manning the other side, all those kinds of elements.
Greg Lukianoff
We try to make three major points in the book. One is just simply cancel culture is real. It’s a historic era and it’s on a historic scale. The second one is you should think of cancel culture as part of a rhetorical, as a larger, lazy, rhetorical approach to what we refer to as winning arguments without winning arguments. We mean that in two senses without having winning arguments or actually having won arguments. We talk about all the different, what we call rhetorical fortresses, that both the left and the right have that prevent you from, that allow you to just dismiss the person, or dodge the argument, without actually ever getting to the substance of the argument.
We try to make three major points in the book. One is just simply cancel culture is real. It’s a historic era and it’s on a historic scale. The second one is you should think of cancel culture as part of a rhetorical, as a larger, lazy, rhetorical approach to what we refer to as winning arguments without winning arguments. We mean that in two senses without having winning arguments or actually having won arguments. We talk about all the different, what we call rhetorical fortresses, that both the left and the right have that prevent you from, that allow you to just dismiss the person, or dodge the argument, without actually ever getting to the substance of the argument.
Third part is just how do we fix it? But the rhetorical fortress stuff is actually something I’ve very passionate about because it interferes with our ability to get at truth and it wastes time. And frankly, it also, since cancel culture is part of that rhetorical tactic, it can also ruin lives.
Whataboutism
Lex Fridman
It would actually be really fun to talk about this particular aspect of the book, and I highly recommend if you’re listening to this, go pre-order the book now. When does it come out?
It would actually be really fun to talk about this particular aspect of the book, and I highly recommend if you’re listening to this, go pre-order the book now. When does it come out?
Greg Lukianoff
October 17th.
October 17th.
Lex Fridman
Okay. The Canceling of the American Mind. So in the book, you also have a list of cheap rhetorical tactics that both the left and the right use, and then you have a list of tactics that the left uses and the right uses. So there’s the rhetorical, the perfect rhetorical fortress that the left uses, and the efficient rhetorical fortress that the right uses.
Okay. The Canceling of the American Mind. So in the book, you also have a list of cheap rhetorical tactics that both the left and the right use, and then you have a list of tactics that the left uses and the right uses. So there’s the rhetorical, the perfect rhetorical fortress that the left uses, and the efficient rhetorical fortress that the right uses.
First one is what about-ism. Maybe we can go through a few of them that capture your heart in this particular moment as we talk about it. And if you can describe examples of it or if there’s aspects of it that you see that are especially effective. So what about-ism is defending against criticism of your side by bringing up the other side’s alleged wrongdoing.
Greg Lukianoff
I want to make little cards of all of these tactics and start using them on X all the time, because they’re so commonly deployed. And what about-ism I put first for a reason.
I want to make little cards of all of these tactics and start using them on X all the time, because they’re so commonly deployed. And what about-ism I put first for a reason.
Lex Fridman
It’d be an interesting idea to actually integrate that into Twitter/X, where people, instead of clicking heart, they can click which of the rhetorical tactics this is. And then there’s actually community notes. I don’t know if you’ve seen on X, people can contribute notes and it’s quite fascinating. It works really, really well. But to give it a little more structure, that’s a really interesting method actually.
It’d be an interesting idea to actually integrate that into Twitter/X, where people, instead of clicking heart, they can click which of the rhetorical tactics this is. And then there’s actually community notes. I don’t know if you’ve seen on X, people can contribute notes and it’s quite fascinating. It works really, really well. But to give it a little more structure, that’s a really interesting method actually.
Greg Lukianoff
I actually, when I was thinking about ways that X could be used to argue towards truth, I wouldn’t want to have it so that everybody would be bound to that. But I think, imagine almost being a stream within X that was truth focused, that agrees to some additional rules on how they would argue.
I actually, when I was thinking about ways that X could be used to argue towards truth, I wouldn’t want to have it so that everybody would be bound to that. But I think, imagine almost being a stream within X that was truth focused, that agrees to some additional rules on how they would argue.
Lex Fridman
Man, I would love that. Where there’s, in terms of streams that intersect and could be separated, the shit-talking one, where people just enjoy talking shit.
Man, I would love that. Where there’s, in terms of streams that intersect and could be separated, the shit-talking one, where people just enjoy talking shit.
Greg Lukianoff
Go for it, man.
Go for it, man.
Lex Fridman
And then there’s truth, and then there’s humor, then there’s good vibes. I’m not somebody who absolutely needs good vibes all the time, but sometimes-
And then there’s truth, and then there’s humor, then there’s good vibes. I’m not somebody who absolutely needs good vibes all the time, but sometimes-
Greg Lukianoff
It’s nice to have.
It’s nice to have.
Lex Fridman
… it’s nice to just log in and not have to see the drama, the fighting, the bickering, the cancellations, the moms, all of this. It’s good to just see, that’s why I go to Reddit, or Ahh, or whatever, the cute animals ones where there’s cute puppies and kittens and it’s like-
… it’s nice to just log in and not have to see the drama, the fighting, the bickering, the cancellations, the moms, all of this. It’s good to just see, that’s why I go to Reddit, or Ahh, or whatever, the cute animals ones where there’s cute puppies and kittens and it’s like-
Greg Lukianoff
I just want to see Ryan Reynolds singing with Will Ferrell.
I just want to see Ryan Reynolds singing with Will Ferrell.
Lex Fridman
Sometimes it’s all you need.
Sometimes it’s all you need.
Greg Lukianoff
I need that in my heart.
I need that in my heart.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, not all the time, just a little bit, then right back to the battle for truth. Okay, so what about-ism.
Yeah, not all the time, just a little bit, then right back to the battle for truth. Okay, so what about-ism.
Greg Lukianoff
What about-ism, that’s everywhere when you look at it. When you look at Twitter, when you look at social media in general. And the first, what we call the obstacle course is basically time-tested, old-fashioned, argumentative dodges that everybody uses. And what about-ism is just bringing up something, someone makes an argument like Biden is corrupt, and then someone says, well Trump was worse.
What about-ism, that’s everywhere when you look at it. When you look at Twitter, when you look at social media in general. And the first, what we call the obstacle course is basically time-tested, old-fashioned, argumentative dodges that everybody uses. And what about-ism is just bringing up something, someone makes an argument like Biden is corrupt, and then someone says, well Trump was worse.
And that’s not an illegitimate argument to make back, but it seems to happen every time someone makes an assertion, someone just points out some other thing that was going on, and it can get increasingly attenuated from what you’re actually trying to argue. And you see this all the time on social media. And I was a big fan of John Stewart’s daily show, but an awful lot of what the humor was and what the tactic was for arguing was this thing over here. It’s like, oh, I’m making this argument about this important problem. Oh, actually there’s this other problem over here that I’m more concerned about.
Let’s pick on the right here. So January 6th, watching everybody arguing about CHOP, like the occupied part of Seattle or the occupied part of Portland, and basically trying to like, oh, you’re bringing up the riot on January 6th, and by the way, I live on Capitol Hill. So believe me, I was very aware of how scary and bad it was. My dad grew up in Yugoslavia, and that was a night where we all ate dinner in the basement, like, oh, when the shit goes down, eat in the basement. It was genuinely scary.
And people would try to deflect from January 6th being serious by actually making the argument that, oh, well, there are crazy horrible things happening in all over the country. Riots that came from some of the social justice protests. And of course the answer is, you can be concerned about both of these things and find them both problems. But if I’m arguing about CHOP, someone bringing up January 6th isn’t super relevant to it. Or if I’m arguing about January 6th, someone bringing up the riots in 2020, isn’t that helpful.
Steelmanning
Lex Fridman
We took a long dark journey from what about-ism, and related to that is straw-manning and steel-manning. So misrepresenting the perspective of the opposing perspective. And this is something also, I guess, it’s very prevalent and it’s difficult to do the reverse of that, which is, steel-manning requires empathy or requires eloquence. It requires understanding, actually doing the research and understanding the alternative perspective.
We took a long dark journey from what about-ism, and related to that is straw-manning and steel-manning. So misrepresenting the perspective of the opposing perspective. And this is something also, I guess, it’s very prevalent and it’s difficult to do the reverse of that, which is, steel-manning requires empathy or requires eloquence. It requires understanding, actually doing the research and understanding the alternative perspective.
Greg Lukianoff
My wonderful employee, Angel Eduardo, has something that he calls star-manning, and I find myself doing this a lot. It’s nice to have two immigrant parents, because I remember being in San Francisco in the weird kind of a ACLU/Burning Man kind of cohort, and having a friend there who was an artist who would talk about hating Kansas. And that was his metaphor for middle America, is what he meant by it. But he was kind of proud of the fact that he hated Kansas. And I’m like, you got to understand, I still see all of you a little bit as foreigners and think about change the name of Kansas to Croatia, change the name of Kansas to some, that’s what it sounds like to me.
My wonderful employee, Angel Eduardo, has something that he calls star-manning, and I find myself doing this a lot. It’s nice to have two immigrant parents, because I remember being in San Francisco in the weird kind of a ACLU/Burning Man kind of cohort, and having a friend there who was an artist who would talk about hating Kansas. And that was his metaphor for middle America, is what he meant by it. But he was kind of proud of the fact that he hated Kansas. And I’m like, you got to understand, I still see all of you a little bit as foreigners and think about change the name of Kansas to Croatia, change the name of Kansas to some, that’s what it sounds like to me.
And the star-manning idea, which I like, is the idea of being like, so you’re saying that you really hate your dominant religious minority, and that’s when you start actually detaching yourself a little bit from it, how typical. America is exceptional in a number of ways, but some of our dynamics are incredibly typical.
It’s one of the reasons why when people start reading Thomas Sowell for example, they start getting hooked, because one of the things he does is he does comparative analysis of country’s problems and points out that some of these things that we think are just unique to the United States exist in 75% of the rest of the countries in the world.
Francis Fukuyama’s, the book that I’m reading right now, Origins of the Political Order, actually does this wonderful job of pointing out how we’re not special in a variety of ways. This is actually something that’s very much on my mind. And Fukuyama, of course, it’s a great book. It’s stilted a little bit in its writing because his term for one of the things he’s concerned about what destroys societies is repatrimonilization, which is the reversion to societies in which you favor your family and friends.
And I actually think a lot of what I’m seeing in the United States, it makes me worried that we might be going through a little bit of a process of repatrimonialization. And I think that’s one of the reasons why people are so angry.
I think the prospect that we very nearly seem to have an election that was going to be Jeb Bush versus Hillary Clinton. It’s like, are we a dynastic country now? Is that what’s kind of happening? But also it’s one of the reasons why people are getting so angry about legacy admissions, about how much certain families seem to be able to keep their people in the upper classes of the United States perpetually. And believe me, we were poor when I was a kid and I got to go to one of the fancies, I got to go to Stanford.
And I got to see how people, they treat you differently in a way that’s almost insulting, basically suddenly to a certain kind of person. I was a legitimate person. And I look at how much America relies on Harvard, on Yale, to produce its, I’m going to use a very Marxist sounding term, ruling class. And that’s one of the reasons why you have to be particularly worried about what goes on at these elite colleges. And these elite colleges, with the exception of University of Chicago and UVA, do really badly regarding freedom of speech, and that has all sorts of problems. It doesn’t bode well for the future of the protection of freedom of speech for the rest of the society.
Lex Fridman
So can you also empathize there with the folks who voted for Donald Trump? Because as precisely that, as a resistance to this kind of momentum of the ruling class, this royalty that passes on the rule from generation to generation,
So can you also empathize there with the folks who voted for Donald Trump? Because as precisely that, as a resistance to this kind of momentum of the ruling class, this royalty that passes on the rule from generation to generation,
Greg Lukianoff
I try really hard to empathize with, to a degree everybody, and try to really see where they’re coming from. And the anger on the right, I get it. I mean, I feel like the book, so Copying the American Mind was a book that could be sort of a crowd pleaser to a degree, partially because we really meant what we said in the subtitle that these are good intentions and bad ideas that are hurting people. And if you understand it and read the book, you can say it’s like, okay, this isn’t anybody being malicious. This is people trying to protect their kids. They’re just doing it in a way that actually can actually lead to greater anxiety, depression, and strangely, eventually pose a threat to freedom of speech.
I try really hard to empathize with, to a degree everybody, and try to really see where they’re coming from. And the anger on the right, I get it. I mean, I feel like the book, so Copying the American Mind was a book that could be sort of a crowd pleaser to a degree, partially because we really meant what we said in the subtitle that these are good intentions and bad ideas that are hurting people. And if you understand it and read the book, you can say it’s like, okay, this isn’t anybody being malicious. This is people trying to protect their kids. They’re just doing it in a way that actually can actually lead to greater anxiety, depression, and strangely, eventually pose a threat to freedom of speech.
But in this one, we can’t be quiet. Me and my, oh, I haven’t even mentioned my brilliant co-author, Rikki Schlott, a 23-year-old genius. She’s amazing. I started working with her when she was 20, who’s my co-author on this book. So when I’m saying we, I’m talking about me and Rikki.
Lex Fridman
She’s a libertarian.
She’s a libertarian.
Greg Lukianoff
Libertarian journalist.
Libertarian journalist.
Lex Fridman
And a journalist, and has a brilliant mind.
And a journalist, and has a brilliant mind.
Greg Lukianoff
But we can’t actually write this in a way that’s too kind because cancelers aren’t kind. There’s a cruelty and a mercilessness about it. I started getting really depressed this past year when I was writing it, and I didn’t even want to tell my staff why I was getting so anxious and depressed. It’s partially because I’m talking about people who will, in some of the cases we’re talking about, go to your house, target your kids.
But we can’t actually write this in a way that’s too kind because cancelers aren’t kind. There’s a cruelty and a mercilessness about it. I started getting really depressed this past year when I was writing it, and I didn’t even want to tell my staff why I was getting so anxious and depressed. It’s partially because I’m talking about people who will, in some of the cases we’re talking about, go to your house, target your kids.
So that’s a long-winded way of saying, I kind of can get what sort of drives the right nuts to a degree in this. I feel like they’re constantly feeling like they’re being gaslit. Elite education is really insulting to the working class. Part of the ideology that is dominant right now kind of treats almost 70% of the American public like they’re, we developed this a little bit in the perfect rhetorical fortress, like they’re to some way illegitimate and not worthy of respect or compassion.
Lex Fridman
The general elitism that radiates, self-fueling elitism, that radiates from the people that go to these institutions.
The general elitism that radiates, self-fueling elitism, that radiates from the people that go to these institutions.
Greg Lukianoff
And what’s funny is the elitism has been repackaged as a kind of, it masquerades as kind of infinite compassion that essentially, it’s based in a sort of very, to be frank, overly simple ideology and over simple explanation of the world and breaking people into groups and judging people on how oppressed they are on the intersection of their various identities. And it came to that, I think initially, and had appeal from a compassionate core, but it gets used in a way that can be very cruel, very dismissive, compassion-less, and allows you to not take seriously most of your fellow human beings.
And what’s funny is the elitism has been repackaged as a kind of, it masquerades as kind of infinite compassion that essentially, it’s based in a sort of very, to be frank, overly simple ideology and over simple explanation of the world and breaking people into groups and judging people on how oppressed they are on the intersection of their various identities. And it came to that, I think initially, and had appeal from a compassionate core, but it gets used in a way that can be very cruel, very dismissive, compassion-less, and allows you to not take seriously most of your fellow human beings.
How the left argues
Lex Fridman
It’s really weird how that happened. Maybe you can explore why a thing that has, kind of sounds good at first, can become such a cruel weapon of canceling and hurting people and ignoring people. I mean, this is what you described with a perfect rhetorical fortress, which is a set of questions. Maybe you can elaborate on what the perfect rhetorical fortress is.
It’s really weird how that happened. Maybe you can explore why a thing that has, kind of sounds good at first, can become such a cruel weapon of canceling and hurting people and ignoring people. I mean, this is what you described with a perfect rhetorical fortress, which is a set of questions. Maybe you can elaborate on what the perfect rhetorical fortress is.
Greg Lukianoff
So the perfect rhetorical fortress is the way that’s been developed on the left to not ever get to someone’s actual-
So the perfect rhetorical fortress is the way that’s been developed on the left to not ever get to someone’s actual-
Greg Lukianoff
… on the left to not ever get to someone’s actual argument. I want to make a flow chart of this about here’s the argument and here is this perfect fortress that will deflect you every time from getting to the argument. I started to notice this certainly when I was in law school, that there were lots of different ways you could dismiss people. Perfect rhetorical fortress step one, and I can attest to this because I was guilty of this as well, that you can dismiss people if you can argue that they’re conservative. They don’t have to be conservative, to be clear. You just have to say that they are. I never read Thomas Sowell because he was a right-winger. I didn’t read Camille Paglia because someone had convinced me she was a right-winger. There were lots of authors when I was in law school among a lot of very bright people.
… on the left to not ever get to someone’s actual argument. I want to make a flow chart of this about here’s the argument and here is this perfect fortress that will deflect you every time from getting to the argument. I started to notice this certainly when I was in law school, that there were lots of different ways you could dismiss people. Perfect rhetorical fortress step one, and I can attest to this because I was guilty of this as well, that you can dismiss people if you can argue that they’re conservative. They don’t have to be conservative, to be clear. You just have to say that they are. I never read Thomas Sowell because he was a right-winger. I didn’t read Camille Paglia because someone had convinced me she was a right-winger. There were lots of authors when I was in law school among a lot of very bright people.
It really was already an intellectual habit that if you could designate something conservative, then you didn’t really have to think about it very much anymore or take it particularly seriously. That’s a childish way of arguing, but nonetheless, I engaged in it. It was a common tactic. I even mentioned in the book there was a time when a gay activist friend, who I think decided to lean to my left, but nonetheless had that pragmatic experience of actually being an activist, said something like, “Well, just because someone’s conservative doesn’t mean they’re wrong,” and I remember feeling scandalized at some level of just being like, “Well, no, it’s not the whole thing. What we’re saying is that they’re just kind of bad people with bad ideas.”
Lex Fridman
You can just throw, “Oh, that guy’s a right-winger.” You can just throw that.
You can just throw, “Oh, that guy’s a right-winger.” You can just throw that.
Greg Lukianoff
Don’t have to think about you anymore.
Don’t have to think about you anymore.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and then if you’re popular enough, it can be kind of sticky, and it’s weird because-
Yeah, and then if you’re popular enough, it can be kind of sticky, and it’s weird because-
Greg Lukianoff
Because it’s effective. That’s why it keeps on getting used. Essentially, it should have hit someone’s… Because I have a great liberal pedigree. Everything from working at the ACLU to doing refugee law in Eastern Europe. I was part of an environmental mentoring program for inter-city high school kids in DC. I can defend myself as being on the left, but I hate doing that because there’s also part of me that’s like, “Okay, so what? Are you really saying that if you can magically make me argue or convince yourself that I’m on the right, that you don’t have to listen to me anymore?” Again, that’s arguing like children. The reason why this has become so popular is because even among, or maybe especially among elites, that it works so effectively as a perfect weapon that you can use uncritically. If I can just prove you’re on the right, I don’t have to think about you. It’s no wonder that suddenly you start seeing people calling the ACLU right wing and calling the New York Times right wing because it’s been such an effective way to delegitimize people as thinkers.
Because it’s effective. That’s why it keeps on getting used. Essentially, it should have hit someone’s… Because I have a great liberal pedigree. Everything from working at the ACLU to doing refugee law in Eastern Europe. I was part of an environmental mentoring program for inter-city high school kids in DC. I can defend myself as being on the left, but I hate doing that because there’s also part of me that’s like, “Okay, so what? Are you really saying that if you can magically make me argue or convince yourself that I’m on the right, that you don’t have to listen to me anymore?” Again, that’s arguing like children. The reason why this has become so popular is because even among, or maybe especially among elites, that it works so effectively as a perfect weapon that you can use uncritically. If I can just prove you’re on the right, I don’t have to think about you. It’s no wonder that suddenly you start seeing people calling the ACLU right wing and calling the New York Times right wing because it’s been such an effective way to delegitimize people as thinkers.
Steven Pinker, who’s on our board of advisors, he refers to academia as being the left pole that essentially it’s a position that from that point of view, everything looks as if it’s on the right, but once it becomes a tactic that we accept, and that’s one of the reasons why. I’m more on the left. I think I’m left or center liberal. Ricky is more conservative, libertarian, and initially, I was like, “Should I be really be writing something with someone who’s more on the right?” And I’m like, “Absolutely, I should be.” I have to actually live up to what I believe on this stuff because it’s ridiculous that we have this primitive idea that you can dismiss someone as soon as you claim rightly or wrongly that they’re on the right.
Lex Fridman
Well, correct me if I’m wrong, but I feel like you were recently called right wing, FIRE, maybe you by association, because of that debate you support-
Well, correct me if I’m wrong, but I feel like you were recently called right wing, FIRE, maybe you by association, because of that debate you support-
Greg Lukianoff
Oh, LA Times.
Oh, LA Times.
Lex Fridman
The LA Times?
The LA Times?
Greg Lukianoff
Oh, fun. Let’s talk about the LA Times.
Oh, fun. Let’s talk about the LA Times.
Lex Fridman
Yes, there’s an article, there’s a debate. I can’t wait to watch it because I don’t think it’s available yet to watch on video. You have the attend in person. I can’t wait to see it, but FIRE was in part supporting, and then LA Times wrote a scathing article about that everybody in the debate was basically leaning right.
Yes, there’s an article, there’s a debate. I can’t wait to watch it because I don’t think it’s available yet to watch on video. You have the attend in person. I can’t wait to see it, but FIRE was in part supporting, and then LA Times wrote a scathing article about that everybody in the debate was basically leaning right.
Greg Lukianoff
Okay, so much to unpack there. Bari Weiss has this great project, The Free Press. I’ve been very impressed. It’s covering stories that a lot of the media, right or left, isn’t willing to cover. We hosted a debate with her and we wanted to make it as fun and controversial as possible, so FIRE and The Free press hosted a debate, “Did the sexual revolution fail?” The debate was really exciting, really fun. The side that said that sexual revolution wasn’t a failure that Grimes and Sarah Haider were on, one, it was a nice, meaty, thoughtful night. There was a review of it that was just sort of scathing about the whole thing, and it included a line saying that, “FIRE, which claims to believe in free speech but only defends viewpoints to degrees with.”
Okay, so much to unpack there. Bari Weiss has this great project, The Free Press. I’ve been very impressed. It’s covering stories that a lot of the media, right or left, isn’t willing to cover. We hosted a debate with her and we wanted to make it as fun and controversial as possible, so FIRE and The Free press hosted a debate, “Did the sexual revolution fail?” The debate was really exciting, really fun. The side that said that sexual revolution wasn’t a failure that Grimes and Sarah Haider were on, one, it was a nice, meaty, thoughtful night. There was a review of it that was just sort of scathing about the whole thing, and it included a line saying that, “FIRE, which claims to believe in free speech but only defends viewpoints to degrees with.”
I can’t believe that even made it into the magazine because it’s not just calling us because, of course, the implication, of course, is that we’re right wing, which we’re not. Actually, the staff leans decidedly more to the left than to the right. But we also defend people all over the spectrum all the time. That’s something that even the most minimal Google search would’ve solved. We’ve been giving LA Times some heat on this because it’s like, “Yeah, if you said, in my opinion, they’re right wing,” we would’ve argued back saying, “Well, here’s the following 50,000 examples of us not being,” but when you actually make the factual claim that we only defend opinions we agree with, first of all, there’s no way for us to agree with opinions because we actually have a politically diverse staff who won’t even agree on which opinions are good and what opinions we have.
Yeah, one time when someone did something like this and they were just being a little bit flippant about free speech being fine, I did a 70 tweet long thread just being like, “Hey, do you really think this is fine?” I decided not to do that on this particular one, but the nice thing about it is it demonstrated two parts of the book, Canceling of the American Mind, if not more. One of them is dismissing someone because they’re conservative and because that was the implication. Don’t have to listen to FIRE because they’re conservative. But the other one is something, a termite that I invented specifically for the way people argue on Twitter, which is hypocrisy projection. “Hi, I’m person who only cares about one side of the political fence and I think everyone else is a hypocrite, and by the way, I haven’t done any actual research on this, but I assume everyone else is a hypocrite.”
You see this happen all the time, and this happens to FIRE a lot where someone would be like, “Where is FIRE on this case?” And we’re like, “We are literally quoted in the link you just sent but didn’t actually read,” or it’s like, “Where’s FIRE on this?” It’s like, “Here’s our lawsuit about it from six months ago.” It’s a favorite thing, and also Jon Stewart, Daily Show, the whataboutism and the idea that these people must be hypocrites is something that greatest comedy, but as far as actually a rhetorical tactic that will get you to truth, just assuming that your opponent or just accusing your opponent of always being a hypocrite is not a good tactic for truth, but by the way, it tends to always come from people who aren’t actually consistent on free speech themselves.
Lex Fridman
Hence, the projection, but basically, not doing the research about whether the person is or isn’t a hypocrite and assuming others or a large fraction of others reading it will also not do the research. Therefore, this kind of statement becomes a kind of truthiness without a grounding in actual reality. It breaks down that barrier between what is and isn’t true because if the mob says something is true, it takes too much effort to correct it.
Hence, the projection, but basically, not doing the research about whether the person is or isn’t a hypocrite and assuming others or a large fraction of others reading it will also not do the research. Therefore, this kind of statement becomes a kind of truthiness without a grounding in actual reality. It breaks down that barrier between what is and isn’t true because if the mob says something is true, it takes too much effort to correct it.
Greg Lukianoff
There are three ways I want to respond to this, which is just giving example after example of times where we defended people on both sides of basically every major issue, whether it’s Israel-Palestine, whether it’s terrorism, whether it’s gay marriage, abortion. We have defended both sides of that argument. The other part, and I call these the orphans of the culture war, I really want to urge the media to start caring about free speech cases that actually don’t have a political valence, that are actually just about good old-fashioned exercise of power against the little guy or little girl or little group on campus or off campus for that matter because these cases happen. A lot of our litigation are just regular people being told that they can’t protest, that they can’t hold signs. Then the last part of the argument that I want people to really get is like, “Yeah, and by the way, right- wingers get in trouble too, and there are attacks from the left,” and you should take those seriously too.
There are three ways I want to respond to this, which is just giving example after example of times where we defended people on both sides of basically every major issue, whether it’s Israel-Palestine, whether it’s terrorism, whether it’s gay marriage, abortion. We have defended both sides of that argument. The other part, and I call these the orphans of the culture war, I really want to urge the media to start caring about free speech cases that actually don’t have a political valence, that are actually just about good old-fashioned exercise of power against the little guy or little girl or little group on campus or off campus for that matter because these cases happen. A lot of our litigation are just regular people being told that they can’t protest, that they can’t hold signs. Then the last part of the argument that I want people to really get is like, “Yeah, and by the way, right- wingers get in trouble too, and there are attacks from the left,” and you should take those seriously too.
You should care when Republicans get in trouble. You should care when California has a DEI program that requires this… California Community Colleges has a DEI program policy that actually requires even chemistry professors to work in different DEI ideas from intersectionality to anti-racism into their classroom, into their syllabus, et cetera. This is a gross violation of economic freedom. It is as bad as it is to tell professors what they can’t say like we fought and defeated in Florida. It’s even worse to tell them what they must say. That’s downright totalitarian and we’re suing against this. What I’m saying is that when you’re dismissing someone for just being on the other side of the political fence, you are also making a claim that none of these cases matter as well, and I want people to care about censorship when it even is against people they hate.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion
Lex Fridman
Censorship is censorship. If we can take that tangent briefly with DEI, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, what is the good and what is the harm of such programs?
Censorship is censorship. If we can take that tangent briefly with DEI, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, what is the good and what is the harm of such programs?
Greg Lukianoff
I know people who are DEI consultants. Actually, I have a dear friend who I love very much who does DEI. Absolutely decent people. What they want to do is create bonds of understanding, friendship, compassion among people who are different. Unfortunately, the research on what a lot of DEI actually does, there’s oftentimes the opposite of that. I think that it’s partially a problem with some of the ideology that comes from critical race theory, which is a real thing, by the way, that informs a lot of DEI that actually makes it something more likely to divide than unite. We talk about this in Coddling of the American Mind as the difference between common humanity identity politics and common enemy identity politics. I think that I know some of the people that I know who do DEI, they really want it to be common humanity identity politics, but some of the actual ideological assumptions that are baked in can actually cause people to feel more alienated from each other.
I know people who are DEI consultants. Actually, I have a dear friend who I love very much who does DEI. Absolutely decent people. What they want to do is create bonds of understanding, friendship, compassion among people who are different. Unfortunately, the research on what a lot of DEI actually does, there’s oftentimes the opposite of that. I think that it’s partially a problem with some of the ideology that comes from critical race theory, which is a real thing, by the way, that informs a lot of DEI that actually makes it something more likely to divide than unite. We talk about this in Coddling of the American Mind as the difference between common humanity identity politics and common enemy identity politics. I think that I know some of the people that I know who do DEI, they really want it to be common humanity identity politics, but some of the actual ideological assumptions that are baked in can actually cause people to feel more alienated from each other.
Now, when I started at FIRE, my first cases involved 9/ 11, and it was bad. Professors were getting targeted, professors were losing their jobs for saying insensitive things about 9/11, and both from the right and the left, actually. In that case, actually, it sometimes a lot more from the right. It was really bad and about five professors lost their jobs. That’s bad. Five professors in over a relatively short period of time being fired for a political opinion? That’s something that would get written up in any previous decades. We’re now evaluating how many professors have been targeted for cancellation between 2014 and middle of this year, July of 2023. We’re in well over 1,000 attempts to get professors fired or punished, usually driven by students and administrators, often driven by professors unfortunately as well. About two-thirds of those result in the professor being punished in some way, everything from having their article removed to suspension, et cetera. About one-fifth of those result in professors being fired. Right now, it’s almost 200, it’s around 190 professors being fired.
I want to give some context here. The Red Scare is generally considered to have been from 1947 to 1957. It ended, by the way, in ’57 when it finally became clear, thanks to the First Amendment, that you couldn’t actually fire people for their ideologies. Prior to that, a lot of universities thought they could. This guy is a very doctrinaire communist. “They can’t be just waited. I’m going to fire them.” They thought they actually could do that, and it was only ’57 when the law was established, so right now, these are happening in an environment where freedom of speech, academic freedom, are clearly protected at public colleges in the United States and we’re still seeing these kind of numbers. During the Red Scare, the biggest study that was done of what was going on is I think this came out in ’55, and the evaluation was that there was about 62 professors fired for being communists and about 90 something professors fired for political views overall that usually is reported as being about 100, so 60, 90, 100 depending on how you look at it.
I think the number is actually higher, but that’s only because of hindsight. What I mean by hindsight is we can look back and we actually find there were more professors who were fired as time reveals. We’re at 190 professors fired, and I still have to put up with people saying this isn’t even happening, and I’m like, “In the nine and a half years of cancel culture, 190 professors fired. In the 11 years of the Red Scare, probably somewhere around 100, or probably more.” The number’s going to keep going up, but unlike during the Red Scare where people could clearly tell something was happening, the craziest thing about cancel culture is I’m still dealing with people who are saying this isn’t happening at all, and it hasn’t been subtle on campus.
We know that’s a wild under count, by the way, because when we surveyed professors, 17% of them said that they had been threatened with investigation or actually investigated for what they taught, said, or their research, and one-third of them said that they were told by administrators not to take on controversial research. Extrapolating that out, that’s a huge number. The reason why you’re not going to hear about a lot of these cases is because there are so many different conformity inducing mechanisms in the whole thing, and that’s one of the reasons why the idea that you’d add something, like requiring a DEI statement to be hired or to get into a school under the current environment, is so completely nuts. We have had a genuine crisis of academic freedom over the last, particularly since 2017, on campuses. We have very low viewpoint diversity to begin with. Under these circumstances, administrators just start saying, “You know what the problem is? We have too much heterogeneous thought. We are not homogeneous enough. We need another political litmus test,” which is nuts.
That’s what a DEI statement effectively is because there’s no way to actually fill out a DEI statement without someone evaluating you on your politics. It’s crystal clear. We even did an experiment on this. Nate Honeycutt, he got something almost like 3,000 professors to participate evaluating different kinds of DEI statements. One was basically the standard kind of identity politics intersectionality, one was about viewpoint diversity, one was about religious diversity, and one was about socioeconomic diversity. As far as where my heart really is, it’s that we have too little socioeconomic diversity particularly in elite higher ed, but also in education period. The experiment had large participation, really interestingly set up, and it tried to model the way a lot of these DEI policies were actually implemented. One of the ways these have been implemented, and I think in some of the California schools, is that administrators go through the DEI statements before anyone else looks at them, and then eliminates people off the top depending on how they feel about their DEI statements.
The one on viewpoint diversity, I think half of the people who reviewed it would eliminate it right out. I think it was basically the same for religious diversity. It was slightly better, like 40%, for socioeconomic diversity, but that kills me. The idea that kind of like, “Yeah, that actually is the kind of diversity that I think we need a great deal more of in higher education.” You can agree with… It’s not hostile to the other kinds by the way, but the idea that we need more people from the bottom of three quarters of American society in higher education, I think, should be something we could all get around, that the only one that really succeeded was the one that sprouted back exactly the kind of ideology that they thought the readers would like, which is like, okay, there’s no way this couldn’t be a political litmus test. We’ve proved that it’s a political litmus test test, and still, school after school is adding these to its application process to make schools still more ideologically homogenous.
Lex Fridman
Why does that have a negative effect? Is it because it enforces a kind of group think where people start becoming afraid to sort of think and speak freely, liberally, about whatever?
Why does that have a negative effect? Is it because it enforces a kind of group think where people start becoming afraid to sort of think and speak freely, liberally, about whatever?
Greg Lukianoff
Well, one, it selects for people who tend to be farther to the left in a situation where you already have people, a situation where universities do lean decidedly that way, but it also establishes essentially a set of sacred ideas that if you’re being quizzed on what you’ve done to advance anti-racism, how you’ve been conscious of intersectionality, it’s unlikely that you’d actually get in if you said, “By the way, I actually think these are dubious concepts. I think they’re thin. I think they’re philosophically not very defensible.” Basically, if your position was, “I actually reject these concepts as being over simple,” you’re not going to get in. I think that the person that I always think of that wasn’t a right-winger that would be like, “Go to hell,” if you made him fill one of these things out, it’s Feynman. I feel like if you gave one of these things to Richard Feynman, he would tear it to pieces and then not get the chop.
Well, one, it selects for people who tend to be farther to the left in a situation where you already have people, a situation where universities do lean decidedly that way, but it also establishes essentially a set of sacred ideas that if you’re being quizzed on what you’ve done to advance anti-racism, how you’ve been conscious of intersectionality, it’s unlikely that you’d actually get in if you said, “By the way, I actually think these are dubious concepts. I think they’re thin. I think they’re philosophically not very defensible.” Basically, if your position was, “I actually reject these concepts as being over simple,” you’re not going to get in. I think that the person that I always think of that wasn’t a right-winger that would be like, “Go to hell,” if you made him fill one of these things out, it’s Feynman. I feel like if you gave one of these things to Richard Feynman, he would tear it to pieces and then not get the chop.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s some element of it that creates this hard to pin down fear. You said the firing… The thing I wanted to say is firing 100 people or 200 people. The point is even firing one person, I’ve just seen it, it can create this quiet ripple effect of fear.
Yeah, there’s some element of it that creates this hard to pin down fear. You said the firing… The thing I wanted to say is firing 100 people or 200 people. The point is even firing one person, I’ve just seen it, it can create this quiet ripple effect of fear.
Greg Lukianoff
Of course.
Of course.
Lex Fridman
That single firing of a faculty-
That single firing of a faculty-
Greg Lukianoff
Oh, absolutely.
Oh, absolutely.
Lex Fridman
… has a ripple effect across tens of thousands of people, of educators, of who is hired, what kind of conversations are being had, what kind of textbooks are chosen, what kind of self-censorship and different flavors of that is happening. It’s hard to measure that.
… has a ripple effect across tens of thousands of people, of educators, of who is hired, what kind of conversations are being had, what kind of textbooks are chosen, what kind of self-censorship and different flavors of that is happening. It’s hard to measure that.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. When you ask professors about are they intimidated under the current environment, the answer is yes, and particularly, conservative professors already reporting that they’re afraid for their jobs in a lot of different cases.
Yeah. When you ask professors about are they intimidated under the current environment, the answer is yes, and particularly, conservative professors already reporting that they’re afraid for their jobs in a lot of different cases.
Lex Fridman
You have a lot of good statistics in the book, things like self-censorship. One provided with a definition of self-censorship, at least a quarter of students said they self-censor fairly often or very often during conversations with other students, with professors, and during classroom discussions, 25%, 27%, and 28% respectively. A quarter of students also said that they are more likely to self-censor on campus now at the time they were surveyed than they were when they first started college. So college is kind of instilling this idea of self-censorship.
You have a lot of good statistics in the book, things like self-censorship. One provided with a definition of self-censorship, at least a quarter of students said they self-censor fairly often or very often during conversations with other students, with professors, and during classroom discussions, 25%, 27%, and 28% respectively. A quarter of students also said that they are more likely to self-censor on campus now at the time they were surveyed than they were when they first started college. So college is kind of instilling this idea of self-censorship.
Greg Lukianoff
Back to the Red Scare comparison, and this is one of the interesting things about the data as well, is that that same study that I was talking about, the most comprehensive study of the Red Scare, there was polling about whether or not professors were self-censoring due to the fear of the environment, and 9% of professors said that they were self-censoring their research and that what they were saying. 9% is really bad. That’s almost a tenth of professors saying that their speech was chilled. When we did this question for professors on our latest faculty survey, when you factor together, if we ask them are they self-censoring in their research, are they self-censoring in class, are they self-censoring online, et cetera, it was 90% of professors. So the idea that we’re actually in an environment that is historic in terms of how scared people are actually of expressing controversial views, I think that it’s the reason why we’re going to actually be studying this in 50 years the same way we study the Red Scare. The idea that this isn’t happening is we’ll just be correctly viewed as insane.
Back to the Red Scare comparison, and this is one of the interesting things about the data as well, is that that same study that I was talking about, the most comprehensive study of the Red Scare, there was polling about whether or not professors were self-censoring due to the fear of the environment, and 9% of professors said that they were self-censoring their research and that what they were saying. 9% is really bad. That’s almost a tenth of professors saying that their speech was chilled. When we did this question for professors on our latest faculty survey, when you factor together, if we ask them are they self-censoring in their research, are they self-censoring in class, are they self-censoring online, et cetera, it was 90% of professors. So the idea that we’re actually in an environment that is historic in terms of how scared people are actually of expressing controversial views, I think that it’s the reason why we’re going to actually be studying this in 50 years the same way we study the Red Scare. The idea that this isn’t happening is we’ll just be correctly viewed as insane.
Why colleges lean left
Lex Fridman
So maybe we can just discuss the current leaning of academia goes to the left, which you describe in various different perspectives. One, there’s a voter registration ratio chart that you have by department, which I think is interesting. Can you explain this chart and can you explain what it shows?
So maybe we can just discuss the current leaning of academia goes to the left, which you describe in various different perspectives. One, there’s a voter registration ratio chart that you have by department, which I think is interesting. Can you explain this chart and can you explain what it shows?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. When I started FIRE in 2001, I didn’t take the viewpoint diversity issue as seriously. I thought it was just something that right-wingers complained about. But I really started to get what happens when you have a community with low viewpoint diversity, and actually, a lot of the research that I got most interested in was done in conjunction with the great Cass Sunstein who writes a lot about group polarization because as… The research on this is very strong that essentially, when you have groups with political diversity, and you can see this actually in judges, for example, it tends to produce reliably more moderate outcomes, whereas groups that have low political diversity tend to sort of spiral off in their own direction. When you have a super majority of people from just one political perspective, that’s a problem for the production of ideas. It creates a situation where there are sacred ideas.
Yeah. When I started FIRE in 2001, I didn’t take the viewpoint diversity issue as seriously. I thought it was just something that right-wingers complained about. But I really started to get what happens when you have a community with low viewpoint diversity, and actually, a lot of the research that I got most interested in was done in conjunction with the great Cass Sunstein who writes a lot about group polarization because as… The research on this is very strong that essentially, when you have groups with political diversity, and you can see this actually in judges, for example, it tends to produce reliably more moderate outcomes, whereas groups that have low political diversity tend to sort of spiral off in their own direction. When you have a super majority of people from just one political perspective, that’s a problem for the production of ideas. It creates a situation where there are sacred ideas.
When you look at some of the departments, I think the estimate from the Crimson is that Harvard has 3% conservatives, but when you look at different departments, there are elite departments that have literally no conservatives in them, and I think that’s an unhealthy intellectual environment. The problem is definitely worse as you get more elite. We definitely see more cases of lefty professors getting canceled at less elite schools. It gets worse as you get down from the elite schools. That’s where a lot of the one-third of attempts to get professors punished that are successful do come from the right and largely from off-campus sources, and we spend a lot of time talking about that in the book as well. It’s something that I do think is underappreciated, but when it comes to the low viewpoint diversity, it works out like you’d expect to a degree. Economics is what? Four to one or something like that? It’s not as bad, but then when you start getting into some of the humanities, there are departments that there are literally none.
Lex Fridman
Is there a good to why did the university faculty administration move to the left?
Is there a good to why did the university faculty administration move to the left?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, I don’t love… This is an argument that you’ll sometimes run into on the left, just the argument that, well, people on the left are just smarter.
Yeah, I don’t love… This is an argument that you’ll sometimes run into on the left, just the argument that, well, people on the left are just smarter.
Lex Fridman
Right.
Right.
Greg Lukianoff
It’s like, “Okay.” It’s interesting because at least the research as of 10 years ago was indicating that if you dig a little bit deeper into that, a lot of the people who do consider themselves on the left tend to be a little bit more libertarian. There’s something that Pinker wrote a fair amount about. The idea that we’re just smarter is not an opinion I’m at least a bit comfortable with. I do think that departments take on momentum when they become a place where you’re like, “Wow, it’d be really unpleasant for me to work in this department if I’m the token conservative,” and I think that takes on a life of its own.
It’s like, “Okay.” It’s interesting because at least the research as of 10 years ago was indicating that if you dig a little bit deeper into that, a lot of the people who do consider themselves on the left tend to be a little bit more libertarian. There’s something that Pinker wrote a fair amount about. The idea that we’re just smarter is not an opinion I’m at least a bit comfortable with. I do think that departments take on momentum when they become a place where you’re like, “Wow, it’d be really unpleasant for me to work in this department if I’m the token conservative,” and I think that takes on a life of its own.
There are also departments where a lot of the ideologies kind of explicitly leftist. You look at education schools, a lot of the stuff that is actually left over from what is correctly called critical race theories is present, and you end up having that in a number of the departments, and it would be very strange to be in many departments a conservative social worker professor. I’m sure they exist, but there’s a lot of pressure to shut up if you are.
Lex Fridman
The process on the left of cancellation, as you started to talk about with the perfect rhetorical fortress, the first step is dismiss a person. If you can put a label of conservative on them, you can dismiss them in that way. What other efficient or what other effective dismissal mechanisms are there?
The process on the left of cancellation, as you started to talk about with the perfect rhetorical fortress, the first step is dismiss a person. If you can put a label of conservative on them, you can dismiss them in that way. What other efficient or what other effective dismissal mechanisms are there?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. We have a little bit of fun with demographic numbers, and I run this by height, and I remember him being like, “Don’t include the actual percentage.” I’m like, “No, we need to include the actual percentages because people are really bad at estimating what the demographics of the US actually looks like, both the right and the left in different ways.” So we put it in the numbers and we talk about being dismissed for being white, or being dismissed for being straight, or being dismissed for being male, and you can already dismiss people for being conservative, and so we give examples in the book of these being used to dismiss people and oftentimes on topics not related to the fact that they’re a male or whether or not they’re a minority.
Yeah. We have a little bit of fun with demographic numbers, and I run this by height, and I remember him being like, “Don’t include the actual percentage.” I’m like, “No, we need to include the actual percentages because people are really bad at estimating what the demographics of the US actually looks like, both the right and the left in different ways.” So we put it in the numbers and we talk about being dismissed for being white, or being dismissed for being straight, or being dismissed for being male, and you can already dismiss people for being conservative, and so we give examples in the book of these being used to dismiss people and oftentimes on topics not related to the fact that they’re a male or whether or not they’re a minority.
Then we get to, I think it’s layer six and we’re like, “Surprise. Guess what? You’re down to 0.4% of the population and none of it mattered because if you have the wrong opinion, even if you’re in that 0.4% of the most intersectional person who ever lived and you have the wrong opinion, you’re a heretic and you actually probably will be hated even more.” The most interesting part of the research we did for this was just asking every prominent Black conservative and moderate that we knew personally, “Have you been told that you’re not really Black for an opinion you had?” Every single one of them was like, “Oh, yeah.” No, and it’s kind of funny because oftentimes, white lefties telling them that’s like, “Oh, do you consider yourself Black?”
John McWhorter talked about when he showed that he dissented from some of what he described as woke racism in his book, Woke Ideas. The reporter actually is like, “So do you consider yourself Black?” He was like, “What? Are you crazy? Of course, I do.” Coleman Hughes had one of the best quotes on it. He said, “I’m constantly being told that the most important thing to how legitimate my opinion is is whether or not I’m Black, but then when I have a dissenting opinion, I get told I’m not really Black, so perfect.” There’s no way to falsify this argument. That investigation really struck me.
Lex Fridman
You lay this out really nicely in the book, that there is this process of saying, “Are you conservative? Yes, you can dismiss the person. Are you white? Dismiss the person. Are you male? You can dismiss the person.” There’s these categories that make it easier for you to dismiss a person’s ideas based on that, and like you said, you end up in that tiny percentage and you could still dismiss.
You lay this out really nicely in the book, that there is this process of saying, “Are you conservative? Yes, you can dismiss the person. Are you white? Dismiss the person. Are you male? You can dismiss the person.” There’s these categories that make it easier for you to dismiss a person’s ideas based on that, and like you said, you end up in that tiny percentage and you could still dismiss.
Greg Lukianoff
It’s not just dismiss. We talk about this from a practical standpoint, the way the limitations on reality, and one of them is time, and a lot of cancel culture as cultural norms, as this way of winning arguments without winning arguments is about running out the clock because by the time you get down to the bottom of… Or actually even to get a couple steps into the perfect rhetorical fortress, and where has the time gone? You probably just give up trying to actually have the argument and you never get to the argument in the first place.
It’s not just dismiss. We talk about this from a practical standpoint, the way the limitations on reality, and one of them is time, and a lot of cancel culture as cultural norms, as this way of winning arguments without winning arguments is about running out the clock because by the time you get down to the bottom of… Or actually even to get a couple steps into the perfect rhetorical fortress, and where has the time gone? You probably just give up trying to actually have the argument and you never get to the argument in the first place.
Lex Fridman
All of these things are pretty sticky on social media.
All of these things are pretty sticky on social media.
Greg Lukianoff
Social media practically invented the perfect rhetorical fortress.
Social media practically invented the perfect rhetorical fortress.
Lex Fridman
So that each one of those stages has a virality to it so it could stick and then it can get people really excited.
So that each one of those stages has a virality to it so it could stick and then it can get people really excited.
Greg Lukianoff
It allows you to feel outrage and superiority.
It allows you to feel outrage and superiority.
How the right argues
Lex Fridman
Yeah, because of that at the scale of the virality allows you to never get to the actual discussion of the point, but it’s not just the left, it’s the right. It’s also a efficient rhetorical fortress, so something to be proud of on the right, it’s more efficient so you don’t have to listen to liberals, and anyone can be labeled a liberal if they have a wrong opinion. I’ve seen liberal and left and leftist all used in the same kind of way. That’s leftist nonsense. You don’t have to listen to experts, even conservative experts, if they have the wrong opinion. You don’t have to listen to journalists, even conservative journalists, if they have the wrong opinion, and among the MAGA wing, there’s a fourth provision. You don’t need to listen to anyone who isn’t pro-Trump.
Yeah, because of that at the scale of the virality allows you to never get to the actual discussion of the point, but it’s not just the left, it’s the right. It’s also a efficient rhetorical fortress, so something to be proud of on the right, it’s more efficient so you don’t have to listen to liberals, and anyone can be labeled a liberal if they have a wrong opinion. I’ve seen liberal and left and leftist all used in the same kind of way. That’s leftist nonsense. You don’t have to listen to experts, even conservative experts, if they have the wrong opinion. You don’t have to listen to journalists, even conservative journalists, if they have the wrong opinion, and among the MAGA wing, there’s a fourth provision. You don’t need to listen to anyone who isn’t pro-Trump.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, and we call it efficient because it eliminates a lot of people you probably should listen to at least sometimes. We point out sometimes how cancel culture can interfere with faith and expertise, so we get kind of being a little suspicious of experts, but at the same time, if you follow that and you follow it mechanically, and I definitely… I think everybody in the US probably has some older uncle who exercises some of these. It is a really efficient way to wall yourself off from the rest of the world and dismiss at least some people you really should be listening to.
Yeah, and we call it efficient because it eliminates a lot of people you probably should listen to at least sometimes. We point out sometimes how cancel culture can interfere with faith and expertise, so we get kind of being a little suspicious of experts, but at the same time, if you follow that and you follow it mechanically, and I definitely… I think everybody in the US probably has some older uncle who exercises some of these. It is a really efficient way to wall yourself off from the rest of the world and dismiss at least some people you really should be listening to.
Lex Fridman
The way you laid it out, it made me realize that we just take up so much of our brain power with these-
The way you laid it out, it made me realize that we just take up so much of our brain power with these-
Lex Fridman
… is that we just take up so much of our brain power-
… is that we just take up so much of our brain power-
Greg Lukianoff
So much time.
So much time.
Lex Fridman
With these things. It’s literally time-
With these things. It’s literally time-
Greg Lukianoff
We could be solving things.
We could be solving things.
Lex Fridman
And you exhaust yourself through this process of being outraged based on these labels and you never get to actually… There’s almost not enough time for empathy, for looking at a person thinking, “Well, maybe they’re right,” because so busy categorizing them and it’s fascinating.
And you exhaust yourself through this process of being outraged based on these labels and you never get to actually… There’s almost not enough time for empathy, for looking at a person thinking, “Well, maybe they’re right,” because so busy categorizing them and it’s fascinating.
Greg Lukianoff
What’s the fun in empathy? I mean, what’s so interesting about this is that so much societal energy seems to be spent on these nasty, primal desires where essentially, a lot of it’s like, “Please tell me who I’m allowed to hate. Where can I legitimately be cruel? Where can I actually exercise some aggression against somebody?” And it seems to sometimes be just finding new justifications for that and it’s an understandable human failing that sometimes can be used to defend justice. But again, it will never get you anywhere near the truth.
What’s the fun in empathy? I mean, what’s so interesting about this is that so much societal energy seems to be spent on these nasty, primal desires where essentially, a lot of it’s like, “Please tell me who I’m allowed to hate. Where can I legitimately be cruel? Where can I actually exercise some aggression against somebody?” And it seems to sometimes be just finding new justifications for that and it’s an understandable human failing that sometimes can be used to defend justice. But again, it will never get you anywhere near the truth.
Lex Fridman
One interesting case that you cover about expertise is with COVID.
One interesting case that you cover about expertise is with COVID.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So how did cancel culture come into play on the topic of COVID?
So how did cancel culture come into play on the topic of COVID?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. I think that COVID was a big blow to people’s faith and expertise and cancel culture played a big role in that. I think one of the best examples of this is Jennifer Sey at Levi’s. She is a lovely woman. She was a vice president at Levi’s. She talked about actually potentially to be the president of Levi’s Jeans. And she was a big advocate for kids and when they started shutting down the schools, she started saying, “This is going to be a disaster. This is going to hurt the poor and disadvantaged kids the most. We have to figure out a way to open the schools back up.”
Yeah. I think that COVID was a big blow to people’s faith and expertise and cancel culture played a big role in that. I think one of the best examples of this is Jennifer Sey at Levi’s. She is a lovely woman. She was a vice president at Levi’s. She talked about actually potentially to be the president of Levi’s Jeans. And she was a big advocate for kids and when they started shutting down the schools, she started saying, “This is going to be a disaster. This is going to hurt the poor and disadvantaged kids the most. We have to figure out a way to open the schools back up.”
And that was such a heretical point of view and the typical kind of cancel culture wave took over as they had all sorts of petitions for her to be fired and that she needed to apologize and all this kind of stuff. And she was offered, I think, a million dollar severance which she wouldn’t take because she wanted to tell the world what she thought about this and that she wanted to continue saying that she hadn’t changed her mind, that this was a disaster for young people. And now, that’s the conventional wisdom and the research is quite clear that this was devastating to particularly disadvantaged youth. Like people understand this as being, “Okay. She was probably right.”
But one of the really sad aspects of cancel culture is people forget why you were canceled and they just know they hate you. There’s this lingering like, “Well, I don’t have to take them seriously anymore.” By the way, did you notice they happen to be right on something very important? Now, one funny thing about freedom of speech, freedom of speech wouldn’t exist if you didn’t also have the right to say things that were wrong. Because if you can’t engage in ideaphoria, if you can’t actually speculate, you’ll never actually get to something that’s right in the first place. But it’s especially galling when people who were right were censored and never actually get the credit that they deserve.
Hate speech
Lex Fridman
Well, this might be a good place to ask a little bit more about the freedom of speech. And so, you said that included in the freedom of speech is to say things that are wrong.
Well, this might be a good place to ask a little bit more about the freedom of speech. And so, you said that included in the freedom of speech is to say things that are wrong.
Greg Lukianoff
Yep.
Yep.
Lex Fridman
What is your perspective on hate speech?
What is your perspective on hate speech?
Greg Lukianoff
Hate speech is the best marketing campaign for censorship and it came from academia of the 20th century. And that, when I talked about the anti-free speech movement that was one of their first inventions. There was a lot of talk about critical race theory and being against critical race theory and FIRE will sue if you say that people can’t advocate for it or teach it or research it because you do absolutely have the right to pursue it academically. However, every time someone mentions CRT, they should also say the very first project of the people who founded CRT, Richard Delgado, Mari Matsuda, etc., was to create this new category of unprotected speech called hate speech and to get it banned. The person who enabled this drift, of course, was Herbert Marcuse in 1965, basically questioning whether or not free speech should be a sacred value on the left and he was on the losing side for a really long time.
Hate speech is the best marketing campaign for censorship and it came from academia of the 20th century. And that, when I talked about the anti-free speech movement that was one of their first inventions. There was a lot of talk about critical race theory and being against critical race theory and FIRE will sue if you say that people can’t advocate for it or teach it or research it because you do absolutely have the right to pursue it academically. However, every time someone mentions CRT, they should also say the very first project of the people who founded CRT, Richard Delgado, Mari Matsuda, etc., was to create this new category of unprotected speech called hate speech and to get it banned. The person who enabled this drift, of course, was Herbert Marcuse in 1965, basically questioning whether or not free speech should be a sacred value on the left and he was on the losing side for a really long time.
The liberals, the way I grew up, that was basically being pro free speech was synonymous with being a liberal. But that started to be etched away on Campus and the way it was was with the idea of hate speech that essentially, “Oh, but we can designate particularly bad speech as not protected and who’s going to enforce it? Who’s going to decide what hate speech actually is?” Well, it’s usually overwhelmingly can only happen in an environment of really low viewpoint diversity because you have to actually agree on what the most hateful and wrong things are.
And there’s a bedrock principle, it’s referred to this in a great case about flag burning in the First Amendment that I think all the world could benefit from. You can’t ban speech just because it’s offensive. It’s too subjective. It basically is… It’s one of the reasons why these kind of codes have been more happily adopted in places like Europe where they have a sense that there’s a modal German or a modal Englishman and, “I think this is offensive and therefore, I can say that this is wrong.”
In a more multicultural, in a genuinely more diverse country that’s never actually had an honest thought that there is a single kind of American, there’s never been. We had the idea of Uncle Sam but that was always kind of a joke. Boston always knew it wasn’t. Richmond always knew it wasn’t. Georgia always knew it wasn’t. Alaska… We’ve always been a hodgepodge and we get in a society that diverse that you can’t ban things simply because they’re offensive and that’s one of the reasons why hate speech is not an unprotected category of speech.
And I go further, my theory on freedom of speech is slightly different than most other constitutional lawyers. And I think that’s partially because some of these theories, although a lot of them are really good, are inadequate. They’re not expansive enough. And I sometimes call my theory the Pure Informational Theory of Freedom of Speech or sometimes when I want to be fancy, The Lab and the Looking Glass Theory.
And its most important tenet is that if the goal is the project of human knowledge which is to know the world as it is, you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think and what people really think is an incredibly important fact to know. So every time you’re actually saying, “You can’t say that,” you’re actually depriving yourself of the knowledge of what people really think you’re causing… What Timer Kran, who’s on our board of advisors, calls preference falsification. You end up with an inaccurate picture of the world, which by the way, in a lot of cases, because there are activists who want to restrict more speech, they actually tend to think that people are more prejudiced than they might be.
And actually, these kind of restrictions, there was a book called Racial Paranoia that came out about 15 years ago that was making the point that the imposition of some of these codes can sometimes make people think that the only thing holding you back from being a raging racist are these codes. So it must be really, really bad. It can actually make all of these things worse. And one, which we talk about in the book, one very real practical way it makes things worse is when you censor people, it doesn’t change their opinion, it just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble. So it leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off.
So we have some interesting data in the book about how driving people off of Twitter, for example, in 2017, and then again I think in 2020, driving people to gab led to greater radicalization among those people. It’s a very predictable force. Censorship doesn’t actually change people’s minds and it pushes them in directions that actually, by very solid research, will actually make them more radicalized. So yeah, I think that the attempt to ban hate speech, it doesn’t really protect us from it but it gives the government such a vast weapon to use against us that we will regret giving them.
Lex Fridman
Is there a way to look at extreme cases to test this idea out a little bit? So if you look on Campus, what’s your view about allowing, say, white supremacists on Campus to do speeches or KKK?
Is there a way to look at extreme cases to test this idea out a little bit? So if you look on Campus, what’s your view about allowing, say, white supremacists on Campus to do speeches or KKK?
Greg Lukianoff
I think you should be able to study what people think and I think it’s important that we actually do. So I think that… Let’s take for example, QAnon. Yeah, QAnon is wrong. But where did it come from? Why did they think that? What’s the motivation? Who taught them it? Who came up with these ideas? This is important to understand history, that’s important to understand modern American politics. And so, if you put your scholar hat on and which… You should be curious about everyone, about where they’re coming from.
I think you should be able to study what people think and I think it’s important that we actually do. So I think that… Let’s take for example, QAnon. Yeah, QAnon is wrong. But where did it come from? Why did they think that? What’s the motivation? Who taught them it? Who came up with these ideas? This is important to understand history, that’s important to understand modern American politics. And so, if you put your scholar hat on and which… You should be curious about everyone, about where they’re coming from.
Daryl Davis, who I’m sure you’re familiar with, part of his goal was just simply to get to know where people were coming from. And in the process, he actually deradicalized a number of Klans members when they actually realized that this Black man who had befriended them actually was compassionate, was a decent person. They realized all their pre-conceptions were wrong. So it can have a deradicalizing factor, by the way. But even when it doesn’t, it’s still really important to know what the bad people in your society think. Honestly, in some ways, for your own safety, it’s probably more important to know what the bad people in your society actually think.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know what you think about that but I personally think that freedom of speech in cases like that like KKK and Campus can do more harm in the short term but much more benefit in the long term. Because you can sometimes argue for this is going to hurt in the short term. But I mean, Harvey said this, it’s like consider the alternative. Because you’ve just made the case for this potentially would be a good thing even in the short term.And it often is, I think, especially in a stable society like ours. Whether it’s strong middle class, all these kinds of things where people have the comforts, the reason through things.
I don’t know what you think about that but I personally think that freedom of speech in cases like that like KKK and Campus can do more harm in the short term but much more benefit in the long term. Because you can sometimes argue for this is going to hurt in the short term. But I mean, Harvey said this, it’s like consider the alternative. Because you’ve just made the case for this potentially would be a good thing even in the short term.And it often is, I think, especially in a stable society like ours. Whether it’s strong middle class, all these kinds of things where people have the comforts, the reason through things.
But to me, it’s like even if it hurts in the short term, even if it does create more hate in the short term, the freedom of speech has this really beneficial thing which is it helps you move towards the truth, the entirety of society towards a deeper, more accurate understanding of life on earth, of society, of how people function, of ethics, of metaphysics, of everything. And that, in the long term, is a huge benefit. It gets rid of the Nazis in the long term, even if it adds to the number of Nazis in the short term.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. Well, and meanwhile just… And the reality check part of this is people will always bring up, “What about the Klan on Campus?” I’m like, “They’re never invited. I haven’t seen a case where they’ve been invited.” Usually, the Klan argument gets thrown out when people are trying to excuse… And that’s why we shouted down Ben Shapiro and that’s why you can’t have Bill Maher on Campus. That’s why… And it’s like, “Okay.” And it’s a little bit of that what about-ism again about being like, “Well, that thing over there is terrible and therefore this comedian shouldn’t come.”
Yeah. Well, and meanwhile just… And the reality check part of this is people will always bring up, “What about the Klan on Campus?” I’m like, “They’re never invited. I haven’t seen a case where they’ve been invited.” Usually, the Klan argument gets thrown out when people are trying to excuse… And that’s why we shouted down Ben Shapiro and that’s why you can’t have Bill Maher on Campus. That’s why… And it’s like, “Okay.” And it’s a little bit of that what about-ism again about being like, “Well, that thing over there is terrible and therefore this comedian shouldn’t come.”
Lex Fridman
So I do have a question maybe by way of advice.
So I do have a question maybe by way of advice.
Platforming
Greg Lukianoff
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
Interviewing folks and seeing this like a podcast as a platform and deciding who to talk to and not… That’s something I have to come face to face with on occasion. My natural inclination before I started the podcast was I would talk to anyone and including people which I’m still interested in who are the current members of the KKK.
Interviewing folks and seeing this like a podcast as a platform and deciding who to talk to and not… That’s something I have to come face to face with on occasion. My natural inclination before I started the podcast was I would talk to anyone and including people which I’m still interested in who are the current members of the KKK.
And to me, there’s a responsibility to do that with skill and that responsibility has been weighing heavier and heavier on me because you realize how much skill it actually takes because you have to know to understand so much. Because I’ve come to understand that the devil is always going to be charismatic, the devil’s not going to look like the devil. And so, you have to realize you can’t always come to the table with a deep compassion for another human being. You have to have 90% compassion and another 90% deep historical knowledge about the context of the battles around this particular issue and that takes just a huge amount of effort. But I don’t know if there’s thoughts you have about this, how to handle speech in a way without censoring, bringing it to the surface, but in a way that creates more love in the world.
Greg Lukianoff
I remember Steve Bannon got disinvited from the New Yorker festival and Jim Carrey freaked out and all sorts of other people freaked out and he got disinvited from the… And I got invited to speak on SMERCONISH about this and I was saying, “Listen, you don’t have people to your conference because you agree with them. We have to get out of this idea that…” Because they were trying to make it sound like that’s an endorsement of Steve Bannon, that’s nonsense. If you actually look at the opinions of all the people who are there, you can’t possibly endorse all the opinions that all these other people who are going to be there actually have. And in the process of making that argument I got…
I remember Steve Bannon got disinvited from the New Yorker festival and Jim Carrey freaked out and all sorts of other people freaked out and he got disinvited from the… And I got invited to speak on SMERCONISH about this and I was saying, “Listen, you don’t have people to your conference because you agree with them. We have to get out of this idea that…” Because they were trying to make it sound like that’s an endorsement of Steve Bannon, that’s nonsense. If you actually look at the opinions of all the people who are there, you can’t possibly endorse all the opinions that all these other people who are going to be there actually have. And in the process of making that argument I got…
And also, of course the very classic, it’s very valuable to know what someone like Steve Bannon thinks, you should be curious about that. And I remember someone arguing back saying, “Well, would you want someone to interview a jihadi?” and I’m like… Because at the moment, it was at the time when ISIS was really going for it and I was like, “Would you not want to go to a talk where someone was trying to figure out what makes some of these people tick?” That changes your framing that essentially it’s like, “No, it’s curiosity, is the cure for a lot of this stuff,” and we need a great deal more curiosity and a lot less unwarranted certainty.
Lex Fridman
And there’s a question of, “How do you conduct such conversations?” and I feel deeply underqualified.
And there’s a question of, “How do you conduct such conversations?” and I feel deeply underqualified.
Greg Lukianoff
Who do you think are especially good at that?
Who do you think are especially good at that?
Lex Fridman
I feel like documentary filmmakers usually do a much better job and the best job is usually done by biographers. So the more time you give to a particular conversation, really deep thought and historical context and studying the people, how they think, looking at all different perspectives, looking at the psychology of the person, the upbringing, their parents, their grandparents, all of this. The more time you spend with that, the better the quality of the conversation is because you get to really empathize with the person, with the people he or she represents, and you get to see the common humanity, all of this. Interviewers often don’t do that work. So the best stuff I’ve seen is interviews that are part of a documentary. But even now, documentaries are like there’s a huge incentive to do as quickly as possible. There’s not an incentive to really spend time with the person.
I feel like documentary filmmakers usually do a much better job and the best job is usually done by biographers. So the more time you give to a particular conversation, really deep thought and historical context and studying the people, how they think, looking at all different perspectives, looking at the psychology of the person, the upbringing, their parents, their grandparents, all of this. The more time you spend with that, the better the quality of the conversation is because you get to really empathize with the person, with the people he or she represents, and you get to see the common humanity, all of this. Interviewers often don’t do that work. So the best stuff I’ve seen is interviews that are part of a documentary. But even now, documentaries are like there’s a huge incentive to do as quickly as possible. There’s not an incentive to really spend time with the person.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. There’s a great new documentary about Floyd Abrams that I really recommend. We did a documentary about Ira Glasser called Mighty Ira which was my video team and my protege, Nico Purino and Chris Malby and Aaron Reese, put it together and it just follows the life and times of Ira Glasser, the former head of the ACLU.
Yeah. There’s a great new documentary about Floyd Abrams that I really recommend. We did a documentary about Ira Glasser called Mighty Ira which was my video team and my protege, Nico Purino and Chris Malby and Aaron Reese, put it together and it just follows the life and times of Ira Glasser, the former head of the ACLU.
Lex Fridman
If you could just linger on that, that’s a fascinating story.
If you could just linger on that, that’s a fascinating story.
Greg Lukianoff
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Lex Fridman
Who’s Ira?
Who’s Ira?
Greg Lukianoff
Ira’s amazing. Ira, he wasn’t a lawyer. He started working at the NYCLU, the New York Civil Liberties Union back in, I think, the ’60s. I think Robert Kennedy recommended that he go in that direction and he became the president of the ACLU right at the time that they were suffering from defending the Nazis at Skokie. And Nico and Aaron and Chris put together this… They’d never done a documentary before and it came out so so well and it tells the story of the Nazis in Skokie. It tells the story of the case around it. It tells the story of the ACLU at the time and what a great leader Ira Glasser was. And one of the things that’s so great is when you get to see the Nazis at Skokie, they come off the idiots that you would expect them to.
Ira’s amazing. Ira, he wasn’t a lawyer. He started working at the NYCLU, the New York Civil Liberties Union back in, I think, the ’60s. I think Robert Kennedy recommended that he go in that direction and he became the president of the ACLU right at the time that they were suffering from defending the Nazis at Skokie. And Nico and Aaron and Chris put together this… They’d never done a documentary before and it came out so so well and it tells the story of the Nazis in Skokie. It tells the story of the case around it. It tells the story of the ACLU at the time and what a great leader Ira Glasser was. And one of the things that’s so great is when you get to see the Nazis at Skokie, they come off the idiots that you would expect them to.
There’s a moment when the rally is not going very well and the leader gets flustered and it almost seems like he’s going to shout out like, “You’re making this Nazi rally into a mockery.” And so, it showed how actually allowing the Nazis to speak at Skokie took the wind out of their sails like if they had… The whole movement, it all dissolved after that because they looked like racist fools that they were, even Blues Brothers made jokes about them, and it didn’t turn into the disaster that people thought it was going to be just by letting them speak.
And Ira Glasser, okay, so he has this wonderful story about how Jackie Robinson joined the Brooklyn Dodgers and how there was a moment when it was seeing someone, an African-American as literally on their team and how that really got them excited about the cause of racial equality and that became a big part of what his life was. And I just think of that as such a great metaphor is expanding your circle and seeing more people as being quite literally on your team is the solution to so many of these problems. And I worry that one of the things that is absolutely just a fact of life in a America is like we do see each other more as enemy camps as opposed to people on the same team. And that was actually something in the early days, like me and Will Creeley, the legal director of FIRE wrote about the forthcoming free speech challenges of everyone being on Facebook. And one thing that I was hoping was that as more people were exposing more of their lives, we had realized a lot of these things we knew intellectually like kids go to the bar and get drunk and do stupid things.
That when we started seeing the evidence of them doing stupid things that we might be shocked at first. But then, eventually, get more sophisticated and be like, “Well, come on. People are like that.” That never actually really seemed to happen. I think that there are plenty of things we know about human nature and we know about dumb things people say and we’ve made it into an environment where there’s just someone out there waiting to be like, “Oh, remember that dumb thing you said when we were 14? Well, I’m going to make sure that you don’t get into your dream school because of that.”
Lex Fridman
That’s offense archeology. Whereas-
That’s offense archeology. Whereas-
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. That’s not my term though. It’s a great term.
Yeah. That’s not my term though. It’s a great term.
Lex Fridman
Well, it’s a great term. We steal from the best. Digging through someone’s past comments to find speech that hasn’t aged well.
Well, it’s a great term. We steal from the best. Digging through someone’s past comments to find speech that hasn’t aged well.
Greg Lukianoff
And that one’s tactical. That one isn’t just someone not being empathetic. They’re like, “I’m going to punish you for this,” or… And that’s one of the reasons why I got depressed writing this book because there’s already people who don’t love me because of The Coddling of the American Mind, usually based on a misunderstanding of what we actually said in Coddling of the American Mind but nonetheless.
And that one’s tactical. That one isn’t just someone not being empathetic. They’re like, “I’m going to punish you for this,” or… And that’s one of the reasons why I got depressed writing this book because there’s already people who don’t love me because of The Coddling of the American Mind, usually based on a misunderstanding of what we actually said in Coddling of the American Mind but nonetheless.
But on this one, I’m calling out people for being very cruel in a lot of cases. But one thing that was really scary about studying a lot of these cases is that once you have that target on your back, what they’re going to try to cancel you for could be anything. They might go back into to your old post, find something that you said in 1995, do something where essentially it looks like it’s this entire other thing. But really, what’s going on is they didn’t like your opinion, they didn’t like your point of view on something. And they’re going to find a way that from now on, anytime your name comes up, it’s like, “Oh, remember this thing I didn’t like about them?” and it’s, again, it’s cruel. It doesn’t get you anywhere closer to the truth but it is a little scary to stick your neck out.
Lex Fridman
Okay. In terms of solutions. I’m going to ask you a few things. So one, parenting.
Okay. In terms of solutions. I’m going to ask you a few things. So one, parenting.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. Five and seven year old.
Yeah. Five and seven year old.
Lex Fridman
So I’m sure you’ve figured it all out then.
So I’m sure you’ve figured it all out then.
Greg Lukianoff
Oh god no.
Oh god no.
Lex Fridman
From a free speech culture perspective, how to be a good parent.
From a free speech culture perspective, how to be a good parent.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. I think the first quality you should be cultivating in your children if you want to have a free speech culture is curiosity and an awareness of the vastness that will always be unknown. And getting my kids excited about the idea that’s like, “We’re going to spend our whole lives learning about stuff and it’s fast and exciting and endless. And we’ll never make a big dent in it, but the journey will be amazing.” But only fools think they know everything and sometimes, dangerous fools at that. So giving the sense of intellectual humility early on.
Yeah. I think the first quality you should be cultivating in your children if you want to have a free speech culture is curiosity and an awareness of the vastness that will always be unknown. And getting my kids excited about the idea that’s like, “We’re going to spend our whole lives learning about stuff and it’s fast and exciting and endless. And we’ll never make a big dent in it, but the journey will be amazing.” But only fools think they know everything and sometimes, dangerous fools at that. So giving the sense of intellectual humility early on.
Social media
Also, saying things that actually do sound old-fashioned. I say things to my kids like, “Listen, if you enjoy study and work,” both things that I very much enjoy, I do for fun, ” your life is going to feel great and it’s going to feel easy.” So some of those old-fashioned virtues are things I try to preach.
Counterintuitive stuff like outdoor time, playing, having time that are not intermediated experiences is really important. And little things like I talk about in the book about when my kids are watching something that’s scary. And I’m not talking about zombie movies, I’m talking about a cartoon that has a scary moment and saying that they want to turn the TV off. And I talk to them and I say, “Listen, I’m going to sit next to you and we’re going to finish this show and I want you to tell me what you think of this afterwards.”
And I sat next to my sons and by the end of it, every single time when I asked them, “Was that as scary as you thought it was going to be?” and they was like, “No, daddy. That was fine,” and I’m like, “That’s one of the great lessons in life. The fear that you don’t go through becomes much bigger in your head than actually simply facing it.” That’s one of the reasons why I’m fighting back against this culture. I’d love for all of our kids to be able to grow up in an environment where people give you grace and accept the fact that sometimes people are going to say things that piss you off, take seriously the possibility you might be wrong, and be curious.
Lex Fridman
Well, I have hope that the thing you mentioned which is because so much of young people’s stuff is on the internet that they’re going to give each other a break. Then, everybody is cancel worthy.
Well, I have hope that the thing you mentioned which is because so much of young people’s stuff is on the internet that they’re going to give each other a break. Then, everybody is cancel worthy.
Greg Lukianoff
Generation Z hates cancel culture the most and that’s another reason why it’s like people are still claiming this isn’t even happening. It’s like, “No, you actually can ask kids what they think of cancel culture,” and they hate it.
Generation Z hates cancel culture the most and that’s another reason why it’s like people are still claiming this isn’t even happening. It’s like, “No, you actually can ask kids what they think of cancel culture,” and they hate it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Well, I think of them as the immune system. That’s the culture waking up to like, “No, this is not a good thing.”
Yeah. Well, I think of them as the immune system. That’s the culture waking up to like, “No, this is not a good thing.”
Greg Lukianoff
I am glad though. I mean, I am one of those kids who is really glad that I was a little kid in the ’80s and a teenager in the ’90s. Because having everything potentially online, it’s not an upbringing I envy.
I am glad though. I mean, I am one of those kids who is really glad that I was a little kid in the ’80s and a teenager in the ’90s. Because having everything potentially online, it’s not an upbringing I envy.
Lex Fridman
Well, because you can also do the absolutest free speech, I like leaning into it where I hope for a future where a lot of our insecurities, flaws, everything’s out there and to be raw, honest with it. I think that leads to a better world because the flaws are beautiful. I mean, the flaws is the basic ingredients of human connection.
Well, because you can also do the absolutest free speech, I like leaning into it where I hope for a future where a lot of our insecurities, flaws, everything’s out there and to be raw, honest with it. I think that leads to a better world because the flaws are beautiful. I mean, the flaws is the basic ingredients of human connection.
Greg Lukianoff
Robert Wright, he wrote a book on Buddhism and I talked about trying to use social media from a Buddhist perspective as if it’s the collective unconscious meditating and seeing those little angry bits that are trying to cancel you or get you to shut up and just letting them go the same way you’re supposed to watch your thoughts trail off.
Robert Wright, he wrote a book on Buddhism and I talked about trying to use social media from a Buddhist perspective as if it’s the collective unconscious meditating and seeing those little angry bits that are trying to cancel you or get you to shut up and just letting them go the same way you’re supposed to watch your thoughts trail off.
Lex Fridman
I would love to see that visualized. Whatever the drama going on, just seeing the sea of it, of the collective consciousness just processing this and having a little panic attack and just breathing it in-
I would love to see that visualized. Whatever the drama going on, just seeing the sea of it, of the collective consciousness just processing this and having a little panic attack and just breathing it in-
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. Look at the little hateful, angry voices pop up and be like, “Okay. There you are and I’m still focused on that thing.” Because that is one of the things is… Okay. Yeah. Actually, this is probably late in the game to giving my grand theory on this stuff but-
Yeah. Look at the little hateful, angry voices pop up and be like, “Okay. There you are and I’m still focused on that thing.” Because that is one of the things is… Okay. Yeah. Actually, this is probably late in the game to giving my grand theory on this stuff but-
Lex Fridman
Never too late.
Never too late.
Greg Lukianoff
So what I was studying in law school when I ran out of First Amendment classes, I decided to study censorship during the Tudor Dynasty because that’s where we get our ideas of prior restraint that come from the licensing of the printing press which was something that Henry VIII was the first to do. Where basically, the idea was that you can’t print anything in England unless it’s with your Majesty approved printers. It will prevent heretical work and anti-Henry VIII stuff from coming out. Pretty efficient idea if nothing else.
So what I was studying in law school when I ran out of First Amendment classes, I decided to study censorship during the Tudor Dynasty because that’s where we get our ideas of prior restraint that come from the licensing of the printing press which was something that Henry VIII was the first to do. Where basically, the idea was that you can’t print anything in England unless it’s with your Majesty approved printers. It will prevent heretical work and anti-Henry VIII stuff from coming out. Pretty efficient idea if nothing else.
And so, he started getting angry at the printing press around 1521 and then passed something that required prints to be along with parliament in 1538. And I always think of that as where we are now because we have this… Back then, we had the original disruptive technology. Writing was probably really that but the next one which was the printing press which was absolutely calamitous. And I say calamitous on purpose because in the short term, the witch hunts went up like crazy because the printing press allowed you to get that manual on how to find witches. That the religious wars went crazy. It led to all sorts of distress, misinformation, nastiness.
And Henry VIII was trying to put the genie back in the bottle. He was kind of like, “I want to use this for good like I feel like it could be used,” but he was in an unavoidable period of epistemic anarchy. There’s nothing you can do to make the period after the printing press come, came out to be a non-disruptive, non-crazy period other than absolute totalitarianism and destroy all the print presses which simply was not possible in Europe.
So I feel like that’s where we are now. That disruption came from adding, I think, several million people to the European conversation and that eventually the global conversation. But eventually, it became the best tool for disconfirmation, for getting rid of falsity, for spotting bad ideas, and the long-term benefits, of the printing press are incalculably great.
And that’s what gives me some optimism for where we are now with social media because we are in that unavoidably anarchical period. I do worry that there are attempts in states to pass things to try to put the genie back in the bottle. Like if we ban TikTok or we say that nobody under 18 can be on the internet unless they have parental permission. We’re going at something that no amount of top down is going to be able to fix it.
We have to culturally adapt to the fact of it in ways that make us wiser that actually… And allow it, potentially, to be that wonderful engine for disconfirmation that we’re nowhere near yet, by the way. But think about it, additional millions of eyes on problems thanks to the printing press helped create the scientific revolution, the enlightenment, the discovery of ignorance. We now have added billions of eyes and voices to solving problems and we’re using them for cat videos and canceling.
Lex Fridman
But those are just the early days of the printing press-
But those are just the early days of the printing press-
Greg Lukianoff
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
It all starts with the cats and the canceling. Is there something about X, about Twitter, which is perhaps the most energetic source of cats and canceling?
It all starts with the cats and the canceling. Is there something about X, about Twitter, which is perhaps the most energetic source of cats and canceling?
Greg Lukianoff
It seems like the collective unconscious of the species. I mean, it’s one of these things where the tendency to want to see patterns in history sometimes can limit the actual batshit crazy experience of what history actually is. Because yes, we have these nice comforting ideas that it’s going to be like last time. We don’t know. It hasn’t happened yet and I think how unusual Twitter is.
It seems like the collective unconscious of the species. I mean, it’s one of these things where the tendency to want to see patterns in history sometimes can limit the actual batshit crazy experience of what history actually is. Because yes, we have these nice comforting ideas that it’s going to be like last time. We don’t know. It hasn’t happened yet and I think how unusual Twitter is.
Because I think of it as the… Because people talk about writing and mass communications as expanding the size of our collective brain, but now we’re looking at our collective brain in real time and it’s filled just like our own brains with all sorts of little crazy things that pop up and appear like virtual particles all over the place of people reacting in real time to things. There’s never been anything even vaguely like it and it can be at its worst, awful to see.
At its best, sometimes seeing people just getting euphoric over something going on and cracking absolutely brilliant immediate jokes at the same time. It can even be a joyful experience. I feel like I live in a neighborhood now on X where I mostly deal with people that I think are actually thoughtful, even if I disagree with them and it’s not such a bad experience. I occasionally run into those other, what I call neighborhoods on X, where it’s just all canceling, all nastiness, and it’s always an unpleasant visit to those places. I’m not saying the whole thing needs to be like my experience but I do think that-
Greg Lukianoff
… be, like my experience. But I do think that the reason why people keep on coming back to it is it reveals raw aspects of humanity that sometimes we prefer to pretend don’t exist.
… be, like my experience. But I do think that the reason why people keep on coming back to it is it reveals raw aspects of humanity that sometimes we prefer to pretend don’t exist.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but also it’s totally new, like you said.
Yeah, but also it’s totally new, like you said.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It’s just the virality, the speed that news travels, that opinions travel, that the battle over ideas travels.
It’s just the virality, the speed that news travels, that opinions travel, that the battle over ideas travels.
Greg Lukianoff
The battle over information too.
The battle over information too.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, of what is true and not, lies travel, the old Mark Twain thing, pretty fast on the thing.
Yeah, of what is true and not, lies travel, the old Mark Twain thing, pretty fast on the thing.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And then it changes your understanding of how to interpret information.
And then it changes your understanding of how to interpret information.
Greg Lukianoff
It can also stress you out to no end. Remember to get off it sometimes. The stats are pretty bad on mental health with young people, and I’m definitely in the camp of people who think that social media is part of that, I understand the debate. But I’m pretty persuaded that one of the things that hasn’t been great for mental health of people is this just constantly being exposed.
It can also stress you out to no end. Remember to get off it sometimes. The stats are pretty bad on mental health with young people, and I’m definitely in the camp of people who think that social media is part of that, I understand the debate. But I’m pretty persuaded that one of the things that hasn’t been great for mental health of people is this just constantly being exposed.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, absolutely. I think it’s possible to create social media that makes a huge amount of money, makes people happy. To me it’s possible to align the incentives. So in terms of making teenagers, making every stage of life giving you long-term fulfillment and happiness with your physical existence outside of |social media and on social media, helping you grow as a human being, helping challenge you just the right amount, and just the right amount of cat videos, whatever gives this full rich human experience. I think it’s just a machine learning problem. It’s like, it’s not easy-
Yeah, absolutely. I think it’s possible to create social media that makes a huge amount of money, makes people happy. To me it’s possible to align the incentives. So in terms of making teenagers, making every stage of life giving you long-term fulfillment and happiness with your physical existence outside of |social media and on social media, helping you grow as a human being, helping challenge you just the right amount, and just the right amount of cat videos, whatever gives this full rich human experience. I think it’s just a machine learning problem. It’s like, it’s not easy-
Greg Lukianoff
Interesting.
Interesting.
Lex Fridman
To create a feed, so the easiest feed you could do is maximize engagement.
To create a feed, so the easiest feed you could do is maximize engagement.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But that’s just a really dumb algorithm. For the algorithm to learn enough about you to understand what would make you truly happy as a human being to grow longterm, that’s just a very difficult problem to solve.
But that’s just a really dumb algorithm. For the algorithm to learn enough about you to understand what would make you truly happy as a human being to grow longterm, that’s just a very difficult problem to solve.
Greg Lukianoff
Have you ever watched Fleabag? It’s absolutely brilliant, British show, and it sets you up, one of the reasons why people love it so much is it sets you up that you’re watching a raunchy British Sex in the City, except the main character is the most promiscuous one. It’s like, okay, and you roll your eyes a little bit, but it’s kind of funny and it’s kind of cute and kind of spicy.
Have you ever watched Fleabag? It’s absolutely brilliant, British show, and it sets you up, one of the reasons why people love it so much is it sets you up that you’re watching a raunchy British Sex in the City, except the main character is the most promiscuous one. It’s like, okay, and you roll your eyes a little bit, but it’s kind of funny and it’s kind of cute and kind of spicy.
And then you realize that the person is actually kind of suffering and having a hard time, and it gets deeper and deeper as the show goes on. And she will do these incredible speeches about, tell me what to do. Just, I know there’s experts out there, I know there’s knowledge out there, I know there’s an optimal way to live my life, so why can’t someone just tell me what to do? And it’s this wonderfully accurate, I think, aspect of human desire that, what if something could actually tell me the optimal way to go? Because I think there is a desire to give up some amount of your own freedom and discretion in order to be told to do the optimally right thing, but that path scares me to death.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but see, the way you phrased it, that scares me too. So there’s several things, one, you could be constantly distracted in a TikTok way by things that keep you engaged.
Yeah, but see, the way you phrased it, that scares me too. So there’s several things, one, you could be constantly distracted in a TikTok way by things that keep you engaged.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So removing that and giving you a bunch of options constantly, and learning from long-term what results in your actual long-term happiness. So which amounts of challenging ideas are good for you?
So removing that and giving you a bunch of options constantly, and learning from long-term what results in your actual long-term happiness. So which amounts of challenging ideas are good for you?
Greg Lukianoff
Four.
Four.
Lex Fridman
For somebody like me… Exactly.
For somebody like me… Exactly.
Greg Lukianoff
Just four.
Just four.
Lex Fridman
But there is a number like that for you, Greg.
But there is a number like that for you, Greg.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, that’s a lot.
Yeah, that’s a lot.
Lex Fridman
For me that number is pretty high. I love debate, I love the feeling of realizing, holy shit, I’ve been wrong.
For me that number is pretty high. I love debate, I love the feeling of realizing, holy shit, I’ve been wrong.
Greg Lukianoff
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
But I would love for the algorithm to know that about me and to help me, but always giving me options, if I want to descend into cat videos and so on.
But I would love for the algorithm to know that about me and to help me, but always giving me options, if I want to descend into cat videos and so on.
Greg Lukianoff
Well, the educational aspect of it.
Well, the educational aspect of it.
Lex Fridman
Yes, educational.
Yes, educational.
Greg Lukianoff
The idea of both going the speed that you need to and running as fast as you can.
The idea of both going the speed that you need to and running as fast as you can.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I mean, there’s the whole flow thing. I just feel YouTube recommendation, for better or worse, if used correctly, it feels like it does a pretty good job. Whenever I just refuse to click on stuff that’s just dopamine based and click on only educational things, the recommendation it provides are really damn good. So I feel like it’s a solvable problem, at least in the space of education, of challenging yourself, but also expanding your realm of knowledge, and all this kind of stuff.
Yeah. I mean, there’s the whole flow thing. I just feel YouTube recommendation, for better or worse, if used correctly, it feels like it does a pretty good job. Whenever I just refuse to click on stuff that’s just dopamine based and click on only educational things, the recommendation it provides are really damn good. So I feel like it’s a solvable problem, at least in the space of education, of challenging yourself, but also expanding your realm of knowledge, and all this kind of stuff.
Greg Lukianoff
And I’m definitely more in the, we’re in an inescapably anarchical period and require big cultural adjustments, and there’s no way that this isn’t going to be a difficult transition.
And I’m definitely more in the, we’re in an inescapably anarchical period and require big cultural adjustments, and there’s no way that this isn’t going to be a difficult transition.
Lex Fridman
Is there any specific little or big things that you’d like to see X do? Twitter do?
Is there any specific little or big things that you’d like to see X do? Twitter do?
Greg Lukianoff
I have lots of thoughts on that. With the printing press, an extra millions of eyes on any problem can tear down any institution, any person, or any idea. And that’s good in some ways because a lot of medieval institutions needed to be torn down, and some people did too, and a lot of ideas needed to be torn down. Same thing is true now, an extra billions of eyes on every problem can tear down any person idea or institution, and again, some of those things needed to be torn down, but it can’t build yet. We are not at the stage that it can build yet. But it has shown us how thin our knowledge was, it’s one of the reasons why we’re all so aware of the replication crisis, it’s one of the reasons why we’re all so aware of how shoddy our research is, how much our expert class is arrogant, in many cases.
I have lots of thoughts on that. With the printing press, an extra millions of eyes on any problem can tear down any institution, any person, or any idea. And that’s good in some ways because a lot of medieval institutions needed to be torn down, and some people did too, and a lot of ideas needed to be torn down. Same thing is true now, an extra billions of eyes on every problem can tear down any person idea or institution, and again, some of those things needed to be torn down, but it can’t build yet. We are not at the stage that it can build yet. But it has shown us how thin our knowledge was, it’s one of the reasons why we’re all so aware of the replication crisis, it’s one of the reasons why we’re all so aware of how shoddy our research is, how much our expert class is arrogant, in many cases.
But people don’t want to live in a world where they don’t have people that they respect and they can look at, and I think what’s happening, possibly now, but will continue to happen is people are going to establish themselves as being high integrity, that they’ll always be honest. I think you are establishing yourself as someone who is high integrity, where they can trust that person. FIRE wants to be the institution that people can come to, it’s like, if it’s free speech, we will defend it, period. And I think that people need to have authorities that they can actually trust. And I think that if you actually had a stream that maybe people can watch in action, but not flood with stupid cancel culture stuff or dumb cat memes, where it is actually a serious discussion bounded around rules, no perfect rhetorical fortress, no efficient rhetorical fortress, none of the BS ways we debate, I think you could start to actually create something that could actually be a major improvement in the speed with which we come up with new better ideas and separate truth from falsity.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, if it’s done well it can inspire a large number of people to become higher and higher integrity, and it can create integrity as a value to strive for.
Yeah, if it’s done well it can inspire a large number of people to become higher and higher integrity, and it can create integrity as a value to strive for.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
There’s been projects throughout the internet that have done an incredible job of that, but have been also very flawed. Wikipedia is an example of a big leap forward in doing that.
There’s been projects throughout the internet that have done an incredible job of that, but have been also very flawed. Wikipedia is an example of a big leap forward in doing that.
Greg Lukianoff
It’s pretty damn impressive. What’s your overall take? I mean, I’m mostly impressed.
It’s pretty damn impressive. What’s your overall take? I mean, I’m mostly impressed.
Lex Fridman
So there’s a few really powerful ideas for the people who edit Wikipedia, one of which is each editor for themselves declares, I’m into politics and I really am a left leaning guy, so I really shouldn’t be editing political articles because I have bias.
So there’s a few really powerful ideas for the people who edit Wikipedia, one of which is each editor for themselves declares, I’m into politics and I really am a left leaning guy, so I really shouldn’t be editing political articles because I have bias.
Greg Lukianoff
That’s great.
That’s great.
Lex Fridman
They declare their biases, and they often do a good job of actually declaring the biases. But they’ll still, they’ll find a way to justify themselves, like something will piss them off and they want to correct it, because they love correcting untruth into truth. But the perspective of what is true or not is affected by their bias.
They declare their biases, and they often do a good job of actually declaring the biases. But they’ll still, they’ll find a way to justify themselves, like something will piss them off and they want to correct it, because they love correcting untruth into truth. But the perspective of what is true or not is affected by their bias.
Greg Lukianoff
Truth is hard to know.
Truth is hard to know.
Lex Fridman
And it is true that there is a left-leaning bias on the editors of Wikipedia. So for that, what happens is on articles, which I mostly appreciate, that don’t have a political aspect to them, scientific articles or technical articles, they can be really strong. Even history, just describing the facts of history that don’t have a subjective element, strong. Also, just using my own brain, I can filter out if it’s something about January 6th, or something like this, I know I’m going to be like, whatever’s going on here, I’m going to kind of read it, but mostly I’m going to look to other sources, I’m going to look to a bunch of different perspectives on it. It’s going to be very tense, there’s probably going to be some kind of bias, maybe some wording will be such, which is this is where Wikipedia does its thing, the way they word stuff will be biased, the choice of words. But the Wikipedia editors themselves are so self-reflective they literally have articles describing these very effects, of how you can use words to inject bias in all the ways that you talked about it.
And it is true that there is a left-leaning bias on the editors of Wikipedia. So for that, what happens is on articles, which I mostly appreciate, that don’t have a political aspect to them, scientific articles or technical articles, they can be really strong. Even history, just describing the facts of history that don’t have a subjective element, strong. Also, just using my own brain, I can filter out if it’s something about January 6th, or something like this, I know I’m going to be like, whatever’s going on here, I’m going to kind of read it, but mostly I’m going to look to other sources, I’m going to look to a bunch of different perspectives on it. It’s going to be very tense, there’s probably going to be some kind of bias, maybe some wording will be such, which is this is where Wikipedia does its thing, the way they word stuff will be biased, the choice of words. But the Wikipedia editors themselves are so self-reflective they literally have articles describing these very effects, of how you can use words to inject bias in all the ways that you talked about it.
Greg Lukianoff
That sounds healthier than most environments.
That sounds healthier than most environments.
Lex Fridman
It’s incredibly healthy, but I think you could do better. One of the big flaws of Wikipedia to me that Community Notes on X does better is the accessibility of becoming an editor, it’s difficult to become an editor, and it’s not as visible, the process of editing. So I would love, like you said, a stream, for everyone to be able to observe this debate between people with integrity, of when they discuss things like January 6th, of very controversial topics, to just see how the process of the debate goes, as opposed to being hidden in the shadows, which it currently is in Wikipedia. You can access that, it’s just hard to access.
It’s incredibly healthy, but I think you could do better. One of the big flaws of Wikipedia to me that Community Notes on X does better is the accessibility of becoming an editor, it’s difficult to become an editor, and it’s not as visible, the process of editing. So I would love, like you said, a stream, for everyone to be able to observe this debate between people with integrity, of when they discuss things like January 6th, of very controversial topics, to just see how the process of the debate goes, as opposed to being hidden in the shadows, which it currently is in Wikipedia. You can access that, it’s just hard to access.
And I’ve also seen how they will use certain articles on certain people. Articles about people I’ve learned to trust less and less, because they literally will use those to make personal attacks. And this is something you write about, they’ll use descriptions of different controversies to paint a picture of a person that doesn’t, to me at least, feel like an accurate representation of the person. And it’s like writing an article about Einstein, mentioning something about theory of relativity and then saying that he was a womanizer and abuser and controversy. Yeah, he is, Feynman also, they’re not exactly the perfect human in terms of women. But there’s other aspects to this human, and to capture that human properly, there’s a certain way to do it. I think Wikipedia will often lean, they really try to be self-reflective and try to stop this, but they will lean into the drama if it matches the bias.
But again, the world, I believe, is much better because Wikipedia exists. But now that we’re in these adolescent stages, we’re growing and trying to come up with different technologies, the idea of a stream is really, really interesting, because you get more and more people into this discourse where the value is, let’s try to get the truth.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, yeah, and that basically you get the little cards for nope, wrong, nope, wrong.
Yeah, yeah, and that basically you get the little cards for nope, wrong, nope, wrong.
Lex Fridman
And the different rhetorical techniques that are being used to avoid actually discussing.
And the different rhetorical techniques that are being used to avoid actually discussing.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. And I think actually it can make it a little bit fun by you get a limited number of them. It’s kind of like, you get three whataboutism cards.
Yeah. And I think actually it can make it a little bit fun by you get a limited number of them. It’s kind of like, you get three whataboutism cards.
Lex Fridman
So gamifying the whole thing, absolutely.
So gamifying the whole thing, absolutely.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah.
Yeah.
Depression
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you about, you mentioned going through some difficult moments in your life.
Let me ask you about, you mentioned going through some difficult moments in your life.
Greg Lukianoff
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
What has been your experience with depression? What has been your experience getting out of it, overcoming it?
What has been your experience with depression? What has been your experience getting out of it, overcoming it?
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, I mean, the whole thing, the whole journey with Coddling of the American Mind began with me at the Belmont Psychiatric Facility in Philadelphia back in 2007. I had called 9-1-1 in a moment of clarity because I had gone to the hardware store to make sure that when I killed myself that it stuck. I wanted to make sure that I had my head wrapped and everything, so if all the drugs I was planning to take didn’t work, that I wouldn’t be able to claw my way out. It’d been a really rough year, and I always had issues with depression, but they were getting worse.
Yeah, I mean, the whole thing, the whole journey with Coddling of the American Mind began with me at the Belmont Psychiatric Facility in Philadelphia back in 2007. I had called 9-1-1 in a moment of clarity because I had gone to the hardware store to make sure that when I killed myself that it stuck. I wanted to make sure that I had my head wrapped and everything, so if all the drugs I was planning to take didn’t work, that I wouldn’t be able to claw my way out. It’d been a really rough year, and I always had issues with depression, but they were getting worse.
And frankly, one of the reasons why this cancel culture stuff is so important to me is that the thing that I didn’t emphasize as much in Coddling of the American Mind, which by the way, that description that I give of trying to kill myself was the first time I’d ever written it down. Nobody in my family was aware of it being like that, my wife had never seen it, and basically the only way I was able to write that was by doing, you know how you can kind of trick yourself? And I was like, I’m going to convince myself that this is just between me and my computer and nobody will see it. And it’s probably now the most public thing I’ve ever written.
But what I didn’t emphasize in that was how much the culture war played into how depressed I got, because I was originally legal director of FIRE, then I became president of FIRE in 2005, move to Philadelphia, is where I get depressed, and just I don’t have family there, there’s something about the town, they don’t seem to like me very much. But the main thing was being in the culture world all the time. There was a girl that I was dating, I remember she didn’t seem to really approve what I did, and a lot of people didn’t really seem to. And meanwhile, I was defending people on the left all the time, and they’d be like, “Oh, that’s good that you’re defending someone on the left,” but they still would never forgive me for defending someone on the right. And I remember saying at one point, I’m like, “Listen, I’m a true believer in this stuff, I’m willing to defend Nazis, I’m certainly willing to defend Republicans.” And she actually said, “I think Republicans might be worse.” And that relationship didn’t go very well.
And then I’ve nearly gotten in fistfights a couple of times with people on the right because they found out I defended people who crack jokes about 9/11. This happened more than once, by that time I’m in my 20s, I’m not fist fighting again. But yeah, it was always like that. You see how hypocritical people can be, you can see how friends can turn on you if they don’t like your politics. So I got a early preview of this, of the culture we were heading into, by being the president of FIRE, and it was exhausting, and that was one of the main things that led me to be suicidally depressed. At the Belmont Center, if you told me that that would be the beginning of a new and better life for me, I would’ve laughed if I could have, but I don’t… you can tell I’m okay if I’m still laughing, and I wasn’t laughing at that point.
So I got a doctor and I started doing cognitive behavioral therapy. I started having all these voices in my head that were catastrophizing, and it gave overgeneralization and fortune-telling, mind reading, all of these things that they teach you not to do, and what you do in CBT is essentially you have something makes you upset and then you just write down what the thought was, and something minor could happen and your response was like, “Well, the date didn’t seem to go very well, and that’s because I’m broken and will die alone,” and you’re like, okay, okay, okay, what are the following? That’s catastrophizing, that’s mind reading, that’s fortune-telling, that’s all this stuff. And you have to do this several times a day, forever. I actually need to brush up on it at the moment.
And it slowly, over time, voices in my head that had been saying horrible, horrible internal talk, it just didn’t sound as convincing anymore, which was a really subtle effect. It was just like, oh wait, I don’t buy that I’m broken, that doesn’t sound true, that doesn’t sound like truth from God like it used to. And nine months after I was planning to kill myself, I was probably happier than I’d been in a decade. And that was one of the things that, the CBT is what led me to notice this in my own work, that it felt like administrators were kind of selling cognitive distortions, but students weren’t buying yet. And then when I started noticing that they seemed to come in actually already believing in a lot of this stuff, that it would be very dangerous, and that led to Coddling of the American Mind, and all that stuff.
But the thing that was rough about writing Canceling of the American Mind, and I’ve mentioned this already a couple of times, I got really depressed this past year because I was studying. There’s a friend in there that I talk about who killed himself after being canceled. And I talked to him a week before he killed himself, and I hadn’t actually checked in with him because he seemed so confident I thought he would be totally fine, because he had an insensitive tweet in June of 2020 and got forced out. In a way that didn’t actually sound as bad as a lot of the other professors, he actually at least got a severance package, but they knew he’d sue and win, because he had before.
And so I waited to check in on him, because we were so overwhelmed with the requests for help, and he was saying people were coming to his house still, and then he shot himself the next week. And I definitely… And because everyone knows, I’m so public about my struggles with this stuff, everybody who fights this stuff comes to me when they’re having a hard time, and this is a very hard psychologically taxing business to be in. And even admitting this right now, I think about all the vultures out there, they’ll have fun with it. Just like the same way, when my friend Mike Adams killed himself, there were people celebrating on Twitter that a man was dead because they didn’t like his tweets, but somehow that made them compassionate for some abstract other person.
So I was getting a little depressed and anxious, and the thing that really helped me more than anything else was confessing to my staff. Books take a lot of energy, so I knew they didn’t want to hear that not only was this taking a lot of the boss’s time, this was making him depressed and anxious. But when I finally told the leadership of my staff, people that even though I try to maintain a lot of distance from, I love very, very much, it made such a difference, because I could be open about that. And the other thing was, have you heard this conference Dialogue?
Lex Fridman
Oh yes.
Oh yes.
Greg Lukianoff
It’s like an invite only thing, it’s Auren Hoffman runs it. It intentionally tries to get people over the political spectrum to come together and have off the record conversations about big issues. And it was nice to be in a room where liberal, conservative, none of the above we’re all like, oh, thank God someone’s taken on cancel culture, and where it felt like maybe this won’t be the disaster for me and my family that I was starting to be afraid it would be, that taking the stuff on might actually have a happy ending.
It’s like an invite only thing, it’s Auren Hoffman runs it. It intentionally tries to get people over the political spectrum to come together and have off the record conversations about big issues. And it was nice to be in a room where liberal, conservative, none of the above we’re all like, oh, thank God someone’s taken on cancel culture, and where it felt like maybe this won’t be the disaster for me and my family that I was starting to be afraid it would be, that taking the stuff on might actually have a happy ending.
Lex Fridman
Well, one thing that just stands out from that is the pain of cancellation can be really intense. And that doesn’t necessarily mean losing your job, but just even, you can call it bullying, you can call it whatever name, but just some number of people on the internet, and that number can be small, saying bad things to you, that can be a pretty powerful force to the human psyche, which was very surprising. And then the flip side also of that, it really makes me sad how cruel people can be.
Well, one thing that just stands out from that is the pain of cancellation can be really intense. And that doesn’t necessarily mean losing your job, but just even, you can call it bullying, you can call it whatever name, but just some number of people on the internet, and that number can be small, saying bad things to you, that can be a pretty powerful force to the human psyche, which was very surprising. And then the flip side also of that, it really makes me sad how cruel people can be.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. Thinking that your cause is social justice in many cases can lead people to think, I can be as cruel as I want in pursuit of this, when a lot of times it’s just a way to vent some aggression on a person that you think of only as an abstraction.
Yeah. Thinking that your cause is social justice in many cases can lead people to think, I can be as cruel as I want in pursuit of this, when a lot of times it’s just a way to vent some aggression on a person that you think of only as an abstraction.
Lex Fridman
So I think it’s important for people to realize that whatever negative energy, whatever negativity you want to put out there, there’s real people that can get hurt. You can really get people to one, be the worst version of themselves, or two, possibly take their own life, and it’s not as real.
So I think it’s important for people to realize that whatever negative energy, whatever negativity you want to put out there, there’s real people that can get hurt. You can really get people to one, be the worst version of themselves, or two, possibly take their own life, and it’s not as real.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. Well, that’s one of the things that we do in the book to really address people who still try to claim this isn’t real, is we just quote. We quote the Pope, we quote Obama, we quote James Carville, we quote Taylor Swift on cancel culture. And Taylor Swift’s quote is essentially about how behind all of this, when it gets particularly nasty, there’s this very clear kill yourself kind of undercurrent to it, and it’s cruel. And the problem is that in an environment so wide open, there’s always going to be someone who wants to be so transgressive and say the most hurtful, terrible thing.
Yeah. Well, that’s one of the things that we do in the book to really address people who still try to claim this isn’t real, is we just quote. We quote the Pope, we quote Obama, we quote James Carville, we quote Taylor Swift on cancel culture. And Taylor Swift’s quote is essentially about how behind all of this, when it gets particularly nasty, there’s this very clear kill yourself kind of undercurrent to it, and it’s cruel. And the problem is that in an environment so wide open, there’s always going to be someone who wants to be so transgressive and say the most hurtful, terrible thing.
But then you have to remember the misrepresentation, getting back to the old idioms, sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me, has been re-imagined in campus debates in the most asinine way. People will literally say stuff, but now we know words can hurt. And it’s like, now we know words can hurt? Guys, you didn’t have to come up with a special little thing that you teach children to make words hurt less if they never hurt in the first place, it wouldn’t even make sense, the saying, it’s a saying that you repeat to yourself to give yourself strength when the bullies have noticed you’re a little weird. This might be a little personal. And it helps, it really does help to be like, listen, okay, assholes are going to say asshole things, and I can’t let them have that kind of power over me.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah, it still is a learning experience because it does hurt.
Yeah, yeah, it still is a learning experience because it does hurt.
Greg Lukianoff
But for the good people out there who actually just sometimes think that they’re venting, think about it, remember that there are people on the other side of it.
But for the good people out there who actually just sometimes think that they’re venting, think about it, remember that there are people on the other side of it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, for me it hurts my faith in humanity, I know it shouldn’t, but it does sometimes, when I just see people being cruel to each other, it floats a cloud over my perspective of the world that I wish didn’t have to be there.
Yeah, for me it hurts my faith in humanity, I know it shouldn’t, but it does sometimes, when I just see people being cruel to each other, it floats a cloud over my perspective of the world that I wish didn’t have to be there.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah. That was always my flippant answer to, if mankind is basically good or basically evil, being the biggest debate in philosophy, and being like, well, the problem, first is there’s nothing basic about humanity.
Yeah. That was always my flippant answer to, if mankind is basically good or basically evil, being the biggest debate in philosophy, and being like, well, the problem, first is there’s nothing basic about humanity.
Hope
Lex Fridman
Yeah. What gives you hope about this whole thing? About this dark state that we’re in as you describe, how can we get out, what gives you hope that we will get out?
Yeah. What gives you hope about this whole thing? About this dark state that we’re in as you describe, how can we get out, what gives you hope that we will get out?
Greg Lukianoff
I think that people are sick of it. I think people are sick of not being able to be authentic. And that’s really what censorship is, it’s basically telling you don’t be yourself, don’t actually say what you think, don’t show your personality, don’t dissent, don’t be weird, don’t be wrong, and that’s not sustainable. I think that people have had enough of it. But one thing I definitely want to say to your audience is it can’t just be up to us arguers to try to fix this. And I think that, and this may sound like it’s an unrelated problem, I think if there were highly respected, let’s say extremely difficult ways to prove that you’re extremely smart and hardworking, that cost little or nothing, that actually can give the Harvards and the Yales of the world a run for their money, I think that might be the most positive thing we could do to deal with a lot of these problems, and why.
I think that people are sick of it. I think people are sick of not being able to be authentic. And that’s really what censorship is, it’s basically telling you don’t be yourself, don’t actually say what you think, don’t show your personality, don’t dissent, don’t be weird, don’t be wrong, and that’s not sustainable. I think that people have had enough of it. But one thing I definitely want to say to your audience is it can’t just be up to us arguers to try to fix this. And I think that, and this may sound like it’s an unrelated problem, I think if there were highly respected, let’s say extremely difficult ways to prove that you’re extremely smart and hardworking, that cost little or nothing, that actually can give the Harvards and the Yales of the world a run for their money, I think that might be the most positive thing we could do to deal with a lot of these problems, and why.
I think the fact that we have become a weird America with a great anti-elitist tradition has become weirdly elitist in the respect that we not only, again, are our leadership coming from these few fancy schools, we actually have great admiration for them, we look up to them. But I think we’d have a lot healthier of a society if people could prove their excellence in ways that are coming from completely different streams that are highly respected.
I sometimes talk about there should be a test that anyone who passes it gets a BA in the humanities, like a super BA. Not a GED, that’s not what I’m talking about, I’m talking about something that one out of only 100 people can pass, some other way of actually, of not going through these massive, bloated, expensive institutions that people can raise their hands and say, I’m smart and hardworking. I think that could be an incredibly healthy way. I think we need additional streams for creative people to be solving problems, whether that’s on X or someplace else. I think that there’s lots of things that technology could do to really help with this. I think some of the stuff that Sal Khan is working on at Khan Academy could really help.
So I think there’s a lot of ways, but they exist largely around coming up with new ways of doing things, not just expecting the old things that have, say, 40 billion in the bank, that they’re going to reform themselves. And here’s my, I’ve been picking on Harvard a lot, but I’m going to pick on them a little bit more. I talk a lot about class, again, and there’s a great book called Poison Ivy by Evan Mandery, which I recommend to everybody, it’s outrageous, it sounds like me on a rant at Stanford, which was, and I think the stat is elite higher education has more kids from the top 1% than they have from the bottom 50 or 60% depending on the school. And when you look at how much they actually replicate class privilege, it’s really distressing. So everybody should read Poison Ivy.
Lex Fridman
And above all else, if you’re weird, continue being weird.
And above all else, if you’re weird, continue being weird.
Greg Lukianoff
Yeah, please.
Yeah, please.
Lex Fridman
And you’re one of the most interesting, one of the weirdest, in the most beautiful way, people I’ve ever met, Greg, thank you for the really important work you do. This was-
And you’re one of the most interesting, one of the weirdest, in the most beautiful way, people I’ve ever met, Greg, thank you for the really important work you do. This was-
Greg Lukianoff
Everybody watch Kid Cosmic.
Everybody watch Kid Cosmic.
Lex Fridman
I appreciate the class, the hilarious that you brought here today, man. This was an amazing conversation, thank you for the work you do. Thank you, thank you. And for me, who deeply cares about education, higher education, thank you for holding the MITs and the Harvards accountable for doing right by the people that walk their halls. So thank you so much for talking today.
I appreciate the class, the hilarious that you brought here today, man. This was an amazing conversation, thank you for the work you do. Thank you, thank you. And for me, who deeply cares about education, higher education, thank you for holding the MITs and the Harvards accountable for doing right by the people that walk their halls. So thank you so much for talking today.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Greg Lukianoff. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Noam Chomsky, “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked, so was Stalin. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for James Sexton: Divorce Lawyer on Marriage, Relationships, Sex, Lies & Love | Lex Fridman Podcast #396
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #396 with James Sexton.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
And when you see a couple that has that, that’s so hard to break. But I think that comes from having a steadfast, no, I don’t do that. I don’t shit talk my partner, and you don’t shit talk my partner to me. Because I think we’re just so criticized by the world, the world is so full of criticism, we criticize ourselves so harshly, that having a partner who no matter what is like, “You’ve got this. I’m with you. Okay yeah, you screwed up. I see it. Look, I’m not going to lie to you about your blind spots. You screwed up. But you know what? People screw up sometimes. You got a right to screw up. A lot of people screw up. Come on, get up. Let’s go. I know you have it in you.” If you have that person, I feel like that’s a superpower.
And I think that’s very hard for anyone going through a divorce to do about their own relationship. We don’t know who discovered water, but it wasn’t a fish. If you’re in it, I don’t think you see it clearly. I think as a divorce lawyer whose job is to really drill down on the facts and figure out what’s going on in this story, I have to look at both sides. So I have to think a lot about my own arguments, but I also have to think about what’s the other lawyer’s argument going to be, especially in custody cases. So I really have been forced to look at both sides for so many years, so deeply in relationships. Once you do that, you realize that the good guy, bad guy thing just doesn’t apply.
And I remember thinking to myself, when do we feel someone’s love? What is it that they do? And sometimes, it’s the weirdest, silliest things that they would never know. They are the person who’s showing us that they love us and that we’re feeling their love. They would never show us. If you said, “Why does this person love you?” They wouldn’t say, “Oh, I always make sure that when the paper comes, I bring it from the bottom of the driveway to the door so they don’t have to go out and get it.” Or “I always hold the door for them.” Again, “I buy the granola that I know this person likes.” Or “I remembered that they don’t like it when I put on this particular record so I don’t put it on.” Yes, they’re small things, but they’re not small. They’re kind of everything.
But every trope out there in every form of popular media is the wife rolling her eyes at the husband, and the husband being like, ugh, this loathsome harpy that castrated me, as if people are just passive players in their lives. And I think that is an incredibly toxic message to send to people, that this is how we should be relating to our partner. Don’t, take the piss out of your partner in front of people. The successful relationships I’ve seen are where people are just cheering for their partner, where they’re thick as thieves, where there is just this feeling of, man, they like each other. They got each other’s back like you wouldn’t believe. Man, you could take sides against anybody. But take sides against their partner? You’re going down.
And when you see a couple that has that, that’s so hard to break. But I think that comes from having a steadfast, no, I don’t do that. I don’t shit talk my partner, and you don’t shit talk my partner to me. Because I think we’re just so criticized by the world, the world is so full of criticism, we criticize ourselves so harshly, that having a partner who no matter what is like, “You’ve got this. I’m with you. Yeah, you screwed up. I see it. Look, I’m not going to lie to you about your blind spots. You screwed up. But you know what? People screw up sometimes. You got a right to screw up. A lot of people screw up. Come on, get up. Let’s go. I know you have it in you.” If you have that person, I feel like that’s a superpower to have that effect on another person.
I don’t buy it. I don’t buy it anymore because when you see a successful marriage… Even without a marriage, you see a pair bond. You see a couple that really love each other and cheer for each other in that way and hang on each other’s words that way and are just in each other’s corner that way. You see the fake shit instantly. You see the difference right away. This is the first time I’ve come to Austin. I thought I’d eaten a lot of barbecue in my life. I’ve never had Texas barbecue. I landed, I went and had barbecue. I was like, I’ve never had barbecue before. Apparently, this is a whole different thing. I think it’s the same thing. I think once you see real love, real love, and I mean romantic love, real love like that, real bond, you go, oh yeah, this other thing is not going to do it.
It’s the total opposite. They’re like, “Oh my god, this is my dog. This is my dog.” The smell of the dog is… This is my dog’s smell. The bad habits of the dog, you’re like, “It’s my stupid dog that does stupid things.” And it’s not like that has to be a conscious thing. They wake up every day and go, “I should be grateful for the dog.” It’s just visceral. It’s in them. And your children, people’s children. It’s why people are not aware of how annoying their children are because they’re not annoying to them. I get it.
To you, the sound of your kids’ shrieking is like, oh my kid’s having a good time. When I hear that, I try to hear it with those ears. I’m a parent. I get it. My kids are adults now. But I get it. So when I hear a kid shrieking, I just am like, ah. To that parent, that’s the sound of that kid having a great time. And good, it’s so nice that’s in the world. So for me, it has to be conscious. For that parent, I don’t think it has to be conscious. So I think it would be great if it didn’t have to be a conscious practice, but I wonder if like anything in meditation or mindfulness, it’s a matter of exercising that way of seeing. And then once you’ve come to that-
Same thing with us. Every marriage, every relationship, every love is going to end. It’s going to end in death or divorce. So why not just go in, go in, go in and just get weird don’t, define it the way… Again, we keep going back to True Romance, but just get weird. I love this Elvis pretending to be weirdo. I love this former sex worker. Whatever. Just go in, love this person, have them love you. Don’t worry about what everybody else is doing in their relationship. It’s not to me surprising that as the performative aspects of life on social media increases, people’s satisfaction with their relationships and the divorce rate is following the same trend because I think everyone is going, “Well, what’s everybody else doing? Well, how much sex is everyone else having?” The only two people that should worry about how much sex you’re having are the two people. If the two people are happy in the relationship, great. Then what does it matter? What does it matter what everybody else is doing?
But I also think too, listen, if you’ve got a partner, we all do stuff that we’re not super into because we’re in a relationship, and that’s what part of it is. Do you really want to go see that chick flick? Do you really want to eat at this restaurant? Do you really want to go to her cousin’s wedding? No, but part of being in a relationship is if you’re into this, I’m going to pretend this song is a good song even though it’s not my favorite song. I just don’t know. Sex has been so politicized in recent years. Maybe it always was. But I think we’ve made it into something where we can’t just… I don’t know. I’m not into feet, but if the woman I love was like, “I’m really into feet, I really want to do stuff with your feet,” I’d be like, all right, I can pretend that I’m into that. It’s not going to kill me. I’m not going to be able to make it a centerpiece of our coupling, but yeah, I can pretend I’m into feet if you want.
You were using the furry example, and I’m not picking on furries. I just think if that is a proclivity that is anything other than a passing thought, it’s something that you just keep coming back to, then you’re making a conscious decision to withhold it from your partner. And what is that out of? I would say it’s probably out of fear. I’m not a psychologist, but it’s probably out of fear, fear that they would reject you. Well now, see, I genuinely believe that this… I’m very conflicted in my religious faith, but I don’t know that I believe in the devil. But if there was a devil, I think his principle function would be to convince us that we are so bestial that God couldn’t love us. It would be to convince us that we’re awful and that we should just lean into the awfulness.
And I know the greatest low points of my life came whenever I just went, “You know what? I’m just awful. I might as well just behave awfully.” And I really believe that when you push down parts of yourself like your sexuality, like your insecurities, your true feelings from your romantic partner, the person who’s supposed to be your number one, you are making sure you will never feel their love because they don’t love you. They love the you you’ve presented to them, which you know in your heart is not the authentic, honest, real you. And so if you know you’re super into furries and you don’t tell your partner about that, and your partner says, “I love you so much, and you know what I love, one of the things I love about us is we have such great sexual chemistry,” You’ll never feel that love because you know that’s not true though, she doesn’t know. She doesn’t know that actually I’m not really satisfied, and there is this thing that I want that I know I can’t even tell her because I’m so ashamed. That doesn’t feel like a good option to me.
But I have to tell you, I don’t function that way. Every woman I ever had a relationship with, when I think of them, I don’t think of the ending necessarily. I try to think about the greatest hits. I try to think about the moments that were wonderful, where I loved them and they loved me, and there was joy and there was connection. And I don’t know why you choose not to. There’s that old axiom, I don’t know who said it, that if you don’t learn to find joy in the snow, you’ll have less joy in your life and precisely the same amount of snow. And I genuinely believe like, “Okay. The relationship ends. This is where it ends. We’re done now. I am making a choice as to how I will remember you.”
And we do it in relationships. I always tell people if you ever want to see a couple of light up, if they’re ever the couple at the table that seems like they got in a fight or something, ask them how they met. And most people, when they talk about how they met, their face softens. And the other person looking at them telling the story gets that look you were talking about before. And because they remember that thing and how they felt at that moment. When this person was a choice, not a default, not their automatic plus one, but the person they asked to the wedding, not the, “Of course, you’re bringing her. It’s your wife. You bring your fucking wife places.” It was still, “Hey. There’s three and a half billion women, and I’m picking you.” That feeling. And I don’t know why when a relationship ends, you can’t do that.
A lesson I learned when my mother passed away. She had a two-year terrible battle with cancer and was on hospice and was very, very sick. And it was a very slow and awful end. And I remember one of my worst fears was that this is how I would remember my mother for the rest of my life, that I would never be able to think of her, that I didn’t think of what she had become in the last months where she was withered away to nothing in this bed. And I learned over time that memory is very kind. That faded somehow. And that now when I remember her, I remember her healthy and vibrant. I remember her laughter. I remember positive things. Some of that is I like to look at photos of that. But some of it is just how I think memory works. And I don’t know why we don’t apply that to relationships.
And I think part of it is because we have this binary view of relationships, that it’s either success, which means you have happily ever after for the rest of your lives and die together or in short succession, or it was wrong. It was awful. And I don’t understand why that would have to be how we do it. I think we could look at relationships like what they are, which is chapters in a book. And that book is our life, and those chapters all have significance. The later chapters, none of them would happen without the prior ones. So there’s this beauty to me, of that. And I don’t know if it’s a choice or if that is how it is, and the rest is just narrative that we’ve put on top of it culturally for some reason.
And it forces me to put myself into their story from their point of view. And I think that kind of radical empathy that you need to engage in on a daily basis to represent people in those kinds of proceedings it’s just… I don’t know. It just doesn’t seem like there’s good guys and bad guys. It just seems like it’s complicated, and people’s intentions and where they actually end up are different.
When you read other people’s infidelity, the text messages, the emails… Because I have to do that all the time. And I’ll tell you how we make the sausage. In a divorce lawyer’s office, some of the most entertaining moments is dramatic readings aloud of people’s infidelity exchanges with their lovers.
Totally nameless, I have a very powerful, wealthy, famous former client where there’s a whole series of texts about, “Is my dick weird?” Which by the way, I think the answer is if you have to ask if you have a weird dick, the answer’s probably yes because I’ve owned one and I’ve never thought, “Is this weird?” But the fact that you’re having this discussion, it’s absurd. It’s hilarious. Love is hilarious. It’s bizarre. It’s such a weird vulnerability. It’s such a basic, visceral human need. It really is something that we just… It’s mysterious. But it doesn’t have to be that complicated. I don’t think that even betrayal, like I said, it doesn’t have to be that complicated. I think we can frame it differently.
And sometimes we have to prove inclination and opportunity. We have to prove that this person had the inclination to cheat and that they had the opportunity to cheat. And then we want to show that, “Okay. So when they went away, that should be considered dissipation of marital assets.” So if you go out to dinner with your brother, you didn’t dissipate the marital estate. But if you bought your paramour a Tiffany bracelet, that would be a dissipation of marital assets and the person’s entitled to a credit back for that from what was taken out of the marital estate. So we do sometimes have to authenticate text messages on the witness stand or in depositions.
And what’s interesting about that is the way people approach it. People sometimes try to pretend, “Oh, no. This is just my good friend,” which is just… You kill your credibility if you, “Oh, no. She’s just my very good friend.” She’s not. She’s not. That makes no sense whatsoever. Or, “No. We were just friends at that point. And then several months later is when we… Once this marriage was over, that’s when we got together as partner.” That’s ridiculous. But sometimes people just own it. Just own it. I did a deposition of an executive once and opposing counsel thought they were going to really hit him. They were like, “Looking at this credit card receipt, what was this charge for for this hotel?” He was like, “Oh. That was for a hotel room that I got with my girlfriend.” “And you were married?” “Yes. Yes.” “Where did you stay at the hotel?” “We didn’t even stay. We actually just did an afternoon delight, rolled around in bed for the day.” And it was like, took all the thunder out of that.
And that’s how I try to… As a trial lawyer, we actually in my firm refer to it as the 8 Mile strategy, which is if I know there was a text message sent, ” You piece of shit. I hope you die.” My client sent that text message to his co-parent. On my examination of my client, I will say, “I’d like to have this marked for identification, shown to the witness.” “What is that?” “It’s a text message.” “Who’s it to?” “The plaintiff.” “You sent it?” “Yeah.” “Read it out loud for the court.” “Do I have to?” “I think you should.” “You’re a piece of S.” “Does it say S?” “No.” “What does it say?” “Well, it’s a profanity” “Say it to…” “You piece of shit. I hope that you die.” “You sent that to her?” “Yes.” “Why?” “I was really mad.” “Do you think that was good?” “No.” “Do you think it was helpful for your co-parenting relationship with her?” “No.”
“Why did you send it then?” “She sent me 50 texts exactly like that. And I never responded, and I pushed it down every time. And then finally I just blew up at her.” “If you had it to do over again, would you do it differently?” “I wish I could say I would, but the truth is I’m human and I was at my limits.” And I’m watching opposing counsel cross out entire sheets of their cross-examination because It’s gone now. They thought that they had their Perry Mason moment. They had their like, “Did you order the code red moment?” And It’s gone now because if you just own and accept your fault or your issues in the relationship, you can take a lot of the power out of that.
I was just reading actually on the way here in the car. I was reading through a text exchange between two co-parents in the middle of a custody thing that I’m involved in. And it’s like, “You piece of shit. You never cared about anything. And I’m going to take… You have no right to take the kids from me,” da, da, da, da. Nothing in between. The next day, “Maddie got a good grade honor science thing.” “oh. That’s great. She’s doing so well. It makes me so happy.” “Yeah. Her teacher said she’s doing really well.” “Yeah. That’s really great to see.” “I’ll be there about 15 minutes late.” “No problem.” “See you then.”
Wait. It was a day ago. I want to know, was there a phone conversation in between where one of you went, “Hey, man.” “Listen. I’m really sorry about that.” “Oh, no. Look. We were both pissed. Whatever.” Or is it just like you did that, and then we’re supposed to pretend that didn’t happen, and now we’re just going to talk about what Maddie got on her test?
And that’s not always accurate. It’s like when you watch a video of someone at just their worst moment and the person tries to say, “But wait. That’s not me. That was just me in that moment. That was me at this incredible low point.” And I think as a lawyer, my job is to weaponize that and to try to say, “Okay. This low point is indicative of who they actually are.” And when I’m defending someone, I’m not supposed to say, “Well, this is their low point and We’ve all been to a low point. And this is just a moment in this person. And to judge them by that moment, would you want to be judged by your worst moment?” So I have to be able to look at that both directions.
I’m in the middle of a very complex domestic violence trial. And the entire defense on the other side is, “Well, we have photos of them on vacation where they look very happy and she never called the cops.” That’s no defense at all. Most victims of intimate partner abuse don’t call the cops. They don’t self-identify as victims of domestic violence.
This should teach us something about how not only are there two sides to every story, that there’s just so much complexity and nuance to these. But I think everyone was asking the question whether you were team Depp, team Heard, or team I could care less about either of these people. Everybody’s looking at it going, “Why? Eight billion people in the world. Why did you stay together? Just break up. You’re miserable. It’s obvious. It’s obvious you’re not… This can’t be worth it.”
Now the question is he doesn’t seem to talk about it like, “Oh, I got to really work at that.” And that’s not a man who’s afraid to talk about what he works at. He’s pretty honest about, “Man, yeah, I got to work really hard to stay in shape. I got to work really hard to be able to do this. Yeah, I’m not good at memorizing that, it takes time.” But I’ve never heard him say, “Oh, marriage is a lot of work.” I think that’s to his credit because it seems like they’re enjoying that. And it’s also not incredibly public, it’s not something … most people couldn’t pick her out of a lineup.
One of my earliest psychedelic experiences, probably when I was a teenager, but a theme that’s been persistent in every psychedelic experience I’ve ever had is this idea of everything is connection. Everything is being pressed to someone and with them, the warmth of human connection. One of the reasons I enjoy listening to your work and your perspective has always been that I think at the core you see connection and love. And I think for me, from my earliest experiences with psychedelics at 16, 17, I was very attuned to that. I was very much … that was put on my radar by psychedelics and just stayed part of my consciousness forever. And I think I had a 30 something year break from psychedelics, but it was like when I came back to it, I went, “Oh yeah, it’s still there. That’s still the core of everything, is connection.”
And again, I think it’s love and connection, but what I’m doing for a living is helping, and I don’t look at it as what I’m doing is helping people beat the crap out of each other. I look at it as I’m trying to help a client build their post-divorce life, to sort of rise from the ashes of that which has fallen apart and move on to the next chapter and refocus and have the things they need financially, emotionally, whatever it might be, interpersonally, in terms of with their kids. And so for me, it’s actually a job that is very consistent with my desire to build connection and to be empathetic.
I’m telling you, when my dog died, when Buster died, I remember thinking with certainty, I will never do this again because I’ll never love that way again. I’ll never love a dog the way I love this dog. And it’s just not true, that’s just not true. You have this infinite capacity. And that makes it scary actually because right now there’s so many people you could love, there’s so many dogs you could love. There’s so much out there and it requires a certain bravery and tremendous amount of risk to do it.
So as a divorce lawyer, a lot of what I’m doing is counseling a person because they come in and say, “Well I’ve been the person who handles all of the homework and all of the everything, so he should only see the kids on weekends.” And there’s a logic to that, I’ve always done the homework with the kids, so I’m the parent who’s in charge of the homework and he’s obviously not done that before. But there’s also a logic that you can then say, right, but then you’re doing all the heavy lifting of parenting and he’s doing none of that. And you were a married couple and living together so he was trusting you to do that because you’re good at it and you seem to like it. So maybe now we want him to have to do some of the heavy lifting of parenting because we don’t want the child when they’re 13 to say, “I love dad, we have nothing but a good time together. Whereas you make me do my homework and eat my broccoli. Dad’s the grass on the other side of the fence that’s greener.”
So sometimes it’s about educating a client to change their frame, to look at this differently. Yeah, okay, we always go to my mother’s for Thanksgiving, so I need every Thanksgiving. Okay, well you were married so you went, now you’re going to have new traditions. Things are changing for your children, things are changing for your family, you’re both going to have new traditions. So a lot of times it’s just educating people on looking at things in a different way, looking at their parenting in a different way. We’re not going to live in the same house anymore, but we’re still going to parent this child or these children together. What’s much more interesting, because I don’t get invited to a lot of parties, but when I get invited to parties, if somebody says, “What do you do for a living?” And I say, “I’m a divorce lawyer.” They go, “Oh my God, you must have stories.
That’s the way everybody says, “Oh my God, you must have so many stories.” And if I said, “Yeah, there was this couple and they slowly grew apart and then they decided that it would be good for them to end their relationship as a married couple, but they wanted to continue to have an amicable co-parenting relationship. So they divided their assets and they figured out a good parenting access schedule that made sure that they both had both leisure time and responsibilities with the children.” People would be like, “That’s the worst fucking story, that’s so boring.” So what they really want is, and then he was sleeping with the nanny and then she caught him. So the truth is people want to hear about those flame outs. And by the way, those are super interesting as a lawyer, it’s super interesting.
I had a wonderful experience parenting and being divorced, because I divorced when my kids were quite young. My co-parent, my ex-wife is awesome, she’s a great mom, nice person, we’re good friends. And it was great. I had half the time I had my kids and I could focus on them and the other half of the time they were with the other person who loves them as much as I do, and I didn’t have any other responsibilities of kids and I could just have all of the wonderful fun that you can have when you don’t have the responsibilities that come with full-time caring for children.
So I think presence is a big piece and I think the you, the me and the we, I think is important because I think in relationships there’s you and there’s me and we meet and something magical happens and we become we, and now there’s you and there’s me and there’s we. Then the we gets bigger and bigger and bigger, and isn’t it great because it’s such a nice warm place. It gets so big. But it gets so big that you get small and me gets small because we. And if any of us dares to ask, well what about you? What about me? No, no, the we, what, you don’t like the we, you don’t want to be with the we? Whoa, whoa. No, it’s not that, but the we only exists because there was you and there was me and I really liked you and you really liked me. And so we picked each other out of lots of choices and now this we is so fucking big, it threatens to just consume all of it. And I really think that there’s something there we have to look at more honestly.
When you feel all of it, the army of hammers coming at you, the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, the thousand natural shocks, the [inaudible 01:36:00] too. When you feel all of that deeply, it’s very hard, but it can also be a superpower because I think when you can bring that to a relationship, when you can bring that to a profession, like you’ve done and I’ve done, then there’s something very magical about that. The ability to bring it out in someone, to feel it in yourself, to understand it is a gift, it’s a wonderful, wonderful gift. I’m humbled by what it brought me professionally and I’d like to think that you and I have both found professions that enable us to use that sensitivity, that empathy in a productive and good way and in a fulfilling, a personally fulfilling way, and ideally in a way that does good for other people.
In New York, we have a lot of finance people and what I find is their divorces are challenging, one, on a technical level because figuring out what they have and how to divide it is tricky. Because when something’s moving that quickly, when your portfolio’s movement affects a market, that’s challenging. Jeff Bezos divorce, for a time, when it was in its early stages, could affect Amazon stock. It did. So that’s a real thing, there are businesses that are affected by a divorce. But in terms of being in a relationship with someone who is a high-
I mean, when someone is a high performing, high net worth person, they are used to being told yes, they’re used to being able to buy their way out of a problem. But just like illness, you can hire the best doctor but you can’t cure cancer because you have a lot of money. You can hire the best lawyer, but you can’t cure a custody case. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s seemingly endless custody disputes that have been going on for years now with the best lawyers in California working on them is proof of the fact that you can’t just buy a resolution to those things, that you have to go through it just like everyone else.
And I remember once saying to her, “Yeah, you never screwed around with me when it came to the kids. You were always so cool. If I called you like if I was having a really bad day at work,” or seeing just an ugly custody case and it just felt like I would call her and say like, “Hey, can I just pick the boys up and take them out for ice cream or something tonight? I know It’s not my night, but would you mind if I just took them out for a couple hours?” She’d be like, “Yeah, sure, come on by.” She was always flexible like that.
And I said to her, “Was that just goodwill. You’re just a good person or what was that about?” And she was like, ” Yeah, it was partly that.” But she was like, “It was partly that you never screwed around with me when it came to money. If the kids needed something or if I needed something as the mother of the kids, you were always like, yeah, sure, of course.” Her air conditioning kicked out and she needed it to replace it and she didn’t have liquidity at the time. I didn’t have a lot of money at the time because it was a long time ago. And I was like, “All right, no, because I don’t want you hot and upset and I don’t want the boys to be in… Of course.”
And so, I think, yeah, when you approach a conflict, it’s very hard to argue with someone who won’t argue with you. If the person approaches the argument from the point of view of like I’m not going to argue with you, I’m going to absorb your aggression, I’m going to just not meet it with that. I’m going to meet it with love, I’m going to meet it with positivity. It doesn’t always work because sometimes people are so angry that they’re relentless.
But I have to tell you, the louder you get, the quieter I get, the more you seem irrational and that’s what I always try to bring that to court proceedings. I always try to bring to court. If I know my adversary is coming in hard, I’ll come in quiet and slow and deliberate because I want the volume to be turned up way too high over there. And then, it looks like, “Your honor, what’s their problem over there?”
I say this to clients. They got a four-year-old, they’re getting divorced, let’s say. There’s going to be a wedding in like 20 something years. There’s going to be a wedding and it’s either going to be the wedding where they got to put these people on opposite sides of the room, because if they pass each other by the shrimp boat, they’re going to kill each other, or it’s the wedding where you stand there, you take some pictures. You kind of go like, “Yeah, we fucked up this whole marriage thing, but man we did a good job with this kid. Did we?”
And the decisions you make right now, there’s a straight line to that wedding. And so, even if you don’t like this person, even if you’re mad at them, even if you’re mad at yourself for the choices you made in choosing them as a co-parent, every single Mother’s Day for 27 years, I have told my now longtime ex-wife, “Happy Mother’s Day. I’m so glad that we had kids together. I’m so glad you’re the mother of my kids, because they wouldn’t be who they are if it wasn’t that they were part me and part you and I’m so grateful for you and I’m always cheering for you.” How hard is that? How hard is that?
That’s why I always get, I go like all kinds of rubbery when I see after the fight the two people hug each other because always like, yeah, because you know what? They relate to each other better than anybody. They suffered. They bled. The competitors, they bled. So I really think divorce lawyers, we have that same kind of relationship. We went through this stress on opposite sides trying to take each other apart. And I find that we all steal from each other’s material when it comes to separation agreements, provisions that we use for agreements. All the agreements are like these Frankenstein monsters of, “Oh, I like his estate planning provisions. Oh, I like her provisions related to maintaining a life insurance policy to secure the alimony award.”
And I wrote this paragraph for this select, the section, because what occurred to me is that when you have a child with someone and let’s say they’re three or four or five, they’re old enough to know what Christmas is, but they’re not old enough to go buy a Christmas present. But they’re old enough to know that you get presents on Christmas and you give presents on Christmas, but they’re not old enough to buy one for the parent. So someone has to do that for them. So I thought I’m going to put in a provision that says that as long as the children are so young that they can’t independently purchase a Mother’s Day or a birthday present for the co-parent, that you’ll take the children either to buy a small gift or to make a card or something like that.
This struck me as a no-brainer. Who could disagree with this? It’s not for the person, it’s for the kid. So the kid, “Happy birthday, mom. I don’t have a present for you. I don’t have a card for you, because I’m fucking five. I’m five.” You can’t go do that. So wouldn’t you want your child, not your co-parent, who cares? Maybe you want them to have the worst birthday ever. Fine, but you don’t want your child to be embarrassed.
And I even put in the provision, the parties acknowledged that it is the intention of this provision to ensure that the child is not embarrassed and feels that they were able to say… I cannot tell you how many people refuse to sign that, how many lawyers said to me, “We’re taking that out.” And I went, “Wait, why?” “Well, why does my client have to buy a present for your client?” I said, “They’re not buying a present for my client, they’re buying a present for the child to give to my client. It can be one of those little $3 boxes of chocolates they sell at the drugstore. But it’s a kid, they don’t know, they don’t know what anything is, and people, “Nope.” And I have to tell you, of the conundrums, of the puzzles that I can’t figure out in existence, that’s when I can’t figure. I do not understand why that’s so hard.
So a real apology is, “I lied to you and I realized that that hurt you and I’m really sorry, I shouldn’t have done that. I regret that I did that and I know that it hurt you and I’m really sorry.” That’s a real apology. Someone’s willing to give you that and you still want to walk around with the level of vitriol that you will harm your child rather than do something nice for them? I don’t have a solution. And I tell you, I see that all the time. Parental alienation is a thing. It is a thing. Children can be weaponized. I always tell people, I’m like, “If you want to get married, get married. Get a prenup ideally. But if you don’t have a prenup, okay, you’re just risking money, don’t worry, you’re just risking money.” Money and hassle of paperwork and of time and of going through an ugly financial divorce. But you have a kid with somebody, that is a missile, that person has a power over you for a long time, if not forever.
And the example I always give to people is it’s a rare kind of crazy person that will say to a seven-year-old, “your dad is a bad person.” But this? “Hello? Here, it’s your dad.” You just said your dad’s a bad person. You just did it with your eyes, you did it with the expression on your face when you handed the phone to the kid, you told that kid your dad’s a bad person. You didn’t have to say it out loud. And that is something people are guilty of all the time. There’s a divorced couple, kid comes home and says, “Oh, I met mom’s new boyfriend.” And you go, “Oh yeah, that’s nice. Remember, he’s not your dad.”
Whoa, you just told that kid a whole bunch of information about how he’s supposed to feel about this person. Whereas, if you go, “That’s nice. Is he a nice guy? Oh, that’s great. I heard nice things. Yeah, I heard he likes bicycles. That’s cool. That’s really neat.” You just told this kid, it’s okay, you could like this person. It’s okay to like this person. It’s okay that your mom is with this person. And again, whatever you feel about your ex, your co-parent, usually you love your kid more than you hate your ex ideally.
There are also very complex financial cases. People move and hide money. The high net worth space is a different world. Like if an average person owns a home, they own a home in their name or their name with their spouse. A high net worth person owns an LLC that owns that home. That LLC is owned by a trust. They are a beneficial interested party in that trust. This is how some of my clients who make tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars a year pay less in taxes than a cop or a firefighter, because they have structures, and the structures that were designed for tax planning purposes then in a divorce become very tricky to unwind and to figure out wait, no, what is mine and what is not?
So there are weird technicalities, but yeah, prenups are binding. As long as there’s been some minimal asset disclosure, which is easily done in a prenup, and as long as there’s not a language deficiency, meaning that the person who is reading it understands English to the level that they understand what they’re signing, and if they don’t that at least they’ve acknowledged in their native language that there is some opportunity for this to be translated for them, yeah, they’re binding. They’re presumptively binding. We live thankfully in a culture where people are allowed to enter into contracts about money.
And so, there’s the very generic standard prenup, which is easy and I call that yours, mine, and ours. If it’s in your name, it’s yours, whether it’s an asset or a reliability. My name, it’s mine. Joint names, we split at 50-50. Simple, clean. And you go in to the marriage now knowing what the rules are. So if you get a bonus at work and you put it in your sole name, then it’s your separate property in the event you divorce. You go out and buy a boat and she doesn’t support you buying the boat. But the boat, you got a big loan on this boat, you’re responsible for that loan.
I like that because I like people having some control. I also like people having to have discussions. Well, why are we putting that bonus just in your bank account? Why wouldn’t we put it in the joint bank account? We should have that discussion while we’re married, not when we’re in a divorce lawyer’s office 10 years later, because we should be able to talk about those kinds of things. So what’s interesting about prenups is that somehow people think there’s something like it takes away from the romance of a marriage. But I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, all marriages end, they end in death or divorce.
So having life insurance or having a will, it doesn’t mean you can’t wait to die, it doesn’t mean you’re looking forward to death, it doesn’t mean that you’re predicting your demise sometime imminently. It just means that you’re being realistic and honest. So when you marry and I don’t mean spiritually marrying, having a marriage ceremony, I mean legally marrying, you are making changes to your rights and obligations under law. That’s what you’re doing. Marriage from a legal standpoint, what we mean when we say I got married is a state agency. It’s been created by the state. This is a legal status that most people who are in it know nothing about. They just did the most legally significant thing they’re ever going to do other than dying. And they have no idea what rights and obligations it created in them. And the first time they’re going to get an education about it is in my office, that’s crazy.
Problem is we don’t have that. We don’t have that. So what can we do? We can create tranches, we can create structures, we can create systems, and then people can live with those in mind. You enter the game knowing the rules. So you know if this is going to be a submission only event. You know if this is going to be no time limit. You know if we’re after a certain number of minutes, we’re going into points now. So I can work with that rule set and I’m going to amend my game based on that rule set. Same thing, same thing. You’re just going to say, “Look, what’s the rule set? Let’s agree on the rule set. And then, let’s conduct ourselves with the rule set in mind. Let’s plan the rule set in mind.” By the way, and if you’re going to cheat, you cheat with the rule set in mind. You know you’re cheating. You’re trying to get around the rule set.
When I do a consult for a prenup, the first thing I do is here’s what’s going to happen legally if you marry without a prenup. Here’s what happens to your rights and obligations. Then, what we can change with that, there’s almost no limit. You can amend anything you want to. The example I always give is there was a case that went up to the appellate court where a high net worth guy married a very beautiful woman and there was a provision in the prenuptial agreement that said for every 10 pounds she gained during the marriage, she would lose $10,000 a month in alimony if they divorced. Here’s her baseline weight as of the time of execution of this agreement. I wondered if she did what a wrestler does. Did she bulk up right before and then cut when she eventually got divorced? Is she in there in a sauna with the suit on? And the appellate court essentially said, “I don’t know why you married this person having had them make you sign this, but it’s binding, but it’s binding.”
And now we’re talking and now We’re having an interaction. And now this is how the spark of affairs begins. It’s usually, people don’t usually meet and go, “Would you like to potentially wreck your marriage? Yes. Would you? Oh my God, let’s do this.” It’s much more, it slowly happens. So when I talk about types of infidelity, the soulmate, the unexpected soulmate, this connection that you didn’t expect, “I didn’t expect to fall in love with this person, but I did. And the heart wants with the heart wants and I’m sorry.” That one’s tough. That one’s tough, because it’s an interesting distinction between men and women to some degree that when a man finds out his wife was cheating, the question is, “Did you fuck him?” And when a woman finds out that a man cheated, the question is, “Do you love her?” And those are different things.
The other is what I call the push out of the closet, which is, and that I think happened more often earlier in my career. There have been tremendous strides, I think in the lesbian and gay community, including marriage equality obviously, where there’s a lot of change as to people accepting people as being gay or lesbian. And I think that there was a time where people were being in the closet was much more important. You were subject to professional scorn and all kinds of things if you were gay or lesbian. So people were sneaking around and having affairs with their same sex partners, and then they get caught. And then it really was a function of the fact that they were closeted. And again, that’s another kind of complicated dynamic, because I haven’t had that happen to me where a woman left me for a woman. But I’d like to think it would be easier for me.
If you spent enough time in a room with people who’ve cheated in a relationship and are speaking candidly to you about it because you’re their lawyer, they’ll say to you very openly like, “No, I really love my wife, I really love my wife. I don’t know. I was just an idiot. I saw this bright shiny object and I went for it. I really wanted to sleep with that woman. I wanted to fuck her. I love my wife, I make love to my wife, I love my wife, but I just want to sleep with this one.” And we created a culture where one of those eradicates the other. That’s a whole nother discussion. Is there ethical non-monogamy? Should we, is marriage about who I have sex with, or is marriage a different kind of a partnership? Is it a pair bond that’s about building a life together, and where does monogamy fit into that? And people like Esther Perel, those are people who are making very intelligent discussions about that.
Then I look at your face and find myself having this whole thing in my head where I’m going like, “Oh my God, where am I supposed to look?” So I think a threesome with two women you don’t hardly know or you’re not with, that’s different. But a threesome with a long-term partner who you’re in a relationship with, and a new person, seems to me a very dangerous ground because you’re going to want to enjoy the novelty of this new person, but you’re going to have to spend time with this person after. So how much attention do you spend to the new novel exciting thing without creating the impression that you’re not interested in this? Because you’re my favorite person, but this is fun. So I want to just try this for a few. But then also I don’t want to forget about that. It just seems tricky.
In substance he says, “If you’d sat down and started eating my Chinese food, I would’ve thought who’s this guy, he didn’t have a care in the world, just sitting down eating my egg foo young. But instead you tried to be hard. And now I know you’re full of shit.” And so I think that scene summarizes how in negotiation, the more you enter into it with that, anytime I deal with another lawyer and they’re like, “Well, we’ll see you in court.” Okay, see you in court. Empty barrels make the most noise. You and I as people, who’ve been in the jiu-jitsu community, I know some dangerous people. I know FBI SWAT people. I know people that, they know how to do things to people. And they’re the calmest guys you ever meet in your life. You scuff their sneaker? “Oh yeah, don’t worry about man, it’s okay.” They’re quick to apology. They’re just chill.
And also me being like, “No, no, no, come on, come back. We’re going to do this now. It’s time to actually do this now.” We’re good for each other. It’s barefoot in the park. It’s this idea of the yin and the yang. So, what I have an issue with is that the definition of soulmate that I think is sold to so many people now is this idea that if your partner is disappointing to you in any way, meaning they’re not the perfect travel companion, they’re not the perfect vocabulary companion, they’re not the perfect roommate, they’re not the perfect lover, they’re not… The odds of someone being all of those seems crazy to me. It’s infinitesimally small, and they don’t have to be everything.
If I go to a restaurant and eat 10 courses, and one of them is kind of subpar and the other nine are the most amazing culinary experience I’ve ever had, how dare I say, “Well, that wasn’t the right restaurant.” What do you mean? That’s a great restaurant. What are you talking about? Of course there was one little thing. So I think it’s impossible to have someone never disappoint you. It’s impossible to have someone who never lets you down or doesn’t say and do the exact right thing at the exact right time, and to create the idea or expectation in anyone that your partner should never let you down, never disappoint you, never not know what to say is, I think crazy.
I find for myself, when someone, for example, loses someone, when someone loses a family member or a pet, I often say the same thing to the person. I’ll either talk to them or send them a text or call them and I’ll say, “I wish I knew the perfect thing to say, because I would say it right now.” But I know there isn’t, I don’t say that part. But I know there isn’t, there isn’t a perfect thing to say. But if there was a perfect thing to say, I would say it right now. Love to me is not that you never let this person down, it’s that you never want to let this person down. Love is a verb.
It’s this feeling of, I never want to disappoint you. I will disappoint you, but I never want to disappoint you. I will hurt you, but I never want to hurt you. When I hurt you, it will be my insecurity, my stupidity, my humanity that causes me to hurt you. But I will never intentionally hurt you. I will betray your trust. I’ll never intentionally betray your trust. I will, by my stupidity, say the wrong thing, or loose lip say something to someone that you didn’t want me to, but it won’t be intentional. I’ll always try to be on your team. That feels to me like a realistic thing.
It depends on the two people and their individual tastes. But what’s problematic is when there is a disconnect between the two people. I think it’s Annie Hall, it’s one of the Woody Allen films where Diane Keaton and Woody Allen are both talking to their respective therapists about the relationship, but it’s like a split screen. And she says, “I mean, we have sex all the time, we have sex like once a week.” And he goes, “We never have sex. We have sex like once a week.” And it’s funny because it’s true, it really is this, they both know the same data. But they’re interpreting that data set completely differently. And I think the question you have to start asking is, Steve Harvey actually once said something funny to me. He said that success is not where you are. Success is where you are in relation to where you started.
He says if success is where you are, Oprah’s got us all beat. Or maybe Elon’s got us all beat, I don’t know. But if it’s where you are versus where you started, because there’s a lot of people that started on second, and started on third, act like they hit a double. “Well, I was given 10 million but then I turned it into 100 million.” Well, the first million’s the hardest, so come on. But I think the question of how much sex were we having at the beginning of the relationship, that might be the wrong gauge. Because that’s like, we couldn’t keep our hands off each other and just, it’s novelty.
But, how much sex we’re having post children versus before the children, that might be worth looking at. How do we compare it? Am I overweight? Compared to what, when I was 20 and running marathons, or most 50-year-old men? I don’t know. What do you compare it to? So I think fighting, there are some people that I think they enjoy fighting, they enjoy argument. I know people that enjoy political debate. I don’t particularly enjoy political debate. Not that I’m not very interested in political concepts, economic concepts, I just argue for a living. So in my free time I don’t find argument that enjoyable when it’s intense, I find discussion more interesting.
There’s an expert, a well-respected expert who’s a clinical psychologist who their job is they’re a validation expert. So their job is to interview a child. They record the interviews with a hidden camera so that everyone can see they didn’t ask suggestive questioning. There are very stringent standards that they follow to prevent suggestive questioning or any of those kinds of things. I was saying, “Listen, no, no one should be interviewing this child other than this person, who’s a neutral qualified person.” I kept saying to the other side like, “Wait, no, no. See, this is the problem, you want to win. You’re a lawyer, you want to win. I want to win too, right? But we want to win fair.” That’s like saying, “I’m going into a boxing match, I want to win. So if the referee’s looking to the side, I’m going to kick the guy in the nuts.” Okay. Then you might’ve won, but you didn’t win boxing. You won some other thing.
I want to win a fair fight. I want to go in with the rules set, the law, the rules of evidence. I don’t want a judge who doesn’t understand evidence. I don’t want an adversary who plays it fast and loose with the rules. I want to go in and win a fair fight. That’s where when it comes our passion to protect the innocent, to emotionally connect, to feel deeply about children and protecting them, I don’t think that that’s antagonistic to… We always treat dandruff with decapitation in this culture and I don’t understand it and that’s what I like about the law. The law, there’s rules and there’s rules about procedure. And so, that’s our job is to bring out the truth using the rules and the procedure. I love that job.
I had a case where a person was accused of child sexual abuse. On cross-examination, they were asked, “Did you have an affair with this babysitter?” They were like, “No, no, no, no, no.” And then it was shown through text messages and things, they clearly had an affair with the babysitter. I said, “Why did you lie?” They said, “Well, I didn’t want that to come out.” I said, “Right, but now you’re a liar. Did you molest your child? Because if the answer to that is no and now you destroyed your credibility because you didn’t want to admit that you slept with an adult woman. By the way, it would’ve been good for your case.” “What do you mean good for your case?” For you to say, “Yeah, I slept with her. I like sleeping with adult women. That’s how I am. I don’t sleep with children, much less my own.” So why would you lie?
And so, that concept is incredibly important. Judges, theoretically, they have to make very tough calls. I feel like It’s the most impotent place to just sit there and dispassionately listen and rule on objections. I just would be so frustrated because I’d want to get up and… I had to do jury duty once and it was like a horrific experience for me because I’m sitting there and-
I have a friend who’s a Julliard-trained classical pianist. He was having a humidification system installed in his home because his piano required a certain level of humidity and it was very expensive to install this humidification system. We went out to dinner and then we came back to his place and he said, “Man, this is the most depressing $15,000 I’ve ever spent.” I said, “Why?” He said, ” Because there’s nothing different. I spent $15,000 and I feel absolutely nothing different. My piano does, but I don’t.” You don’t have anything to show for it. You finished getting divorced, you don’t really have anything to show for it.
Divorce? Nope, you got married. You break up in a relationship, not a marriage. “Okay. Well, we were only going to be together for a little while. It was never serious. We were having fun. That’s all it was. We were never going to be a happily believer after.” No, you got married. You got married guys. You got up there and you said forever and it didn’t go forever so you can’t bullshit anybody anymore. No, it didn’t go the way you thought it was going to go, didn’t go the way you signed on for. So now that that’s undeniable, what can we make it? What can we make it into? It can be beauty. The barns burned down, now I can see the moon. Let’s make it something. And so, for me, I think people look at a divorce lawyer and they just go, “Yeah, this is this horrible chapter and I associate you with it.”
Also, too, listen, some of the things we do, it’s difficult to simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. The things you do to protect your clients sometimes look like acts of aggression, but really they’re just trying to shore up a defense. And so, I get paid to be paranoid and I have to say to clients sometimes like, “Well, are you sure that they’re not doing this?” And then they go, “Well. I don’t know.” I go, “Well, let me inquire.” “Did you accuse me of that?” “No, no. I’m not accusing you. I’m just trying…” We get a reputation, divorce lawyers, as amping up conflict because we get paid for the conflict, right? It’s like if you get paid by the bullet, you’re going to start a lot of gunfights, right? It doesn’t really work that way with most good divorce lawyers. There are plenty of people that are bad lawyers and they stoke up conflict because it jacks up fees. They usually don’t do well. They don’t build a successful career because you live and die by your reputation.
I have to say when I first got divorced many years ago, I went out on a date with a young woman. It was one of my first dates as a divorced man. She was a divorced woman. She’s a beautiful woman. We were having dinner and it was going quite well. It was one of those things where I was like, “Oh, I definitely want to see this girl again.” I said something about, “Oh, there’s going to be this thing at this museum. We should go.” She’s like, “Oh yeah, that’d be a lot of fun.” I’m like, “Yeah, we should, definitely. Maybe that’ll be next thing we do together.” She was like, “Yeah, we should go next weekend. The kids are with the asshole so we can go.” It was like you could hear that record scratch. I just went, “Oh yeah. No, this isn’t good. You’re referring to the father of your kids as the asshole? I’m walking into something here that I don’t know that I want to be involved in.”
Matthew McConaughey, before he was married, if you look at his history, he dated some of the most beautiful women in Hollywood in their prime, and none of them ever talked bad about him in the press. They all were like, ” Oh my god, he’s such a great guy. He’s such a great guy.” I always wondered how do you… He got out of all of those relationships without a scratch on him. When you’d watch an interview with him, they would say, “So you dated Penelope Cruz,” and he’d go, “Penelope, that’s just a special lady. What a special lady. She’s just a wonderful… What a wonderful woman. I’m just so blessed to have the time with her. What a beautiful, wonderful woman.”
I would think to myself, I’m like, “You’re a genius.” He’s a genius because he never came off as petty, spiteful, bitter, any of that. He just came off as just dignified, strong, smart, self-assured. It left the viewer with the impression that when he was looking off and basically he’s probably just thinking about some wonderful time he had with her and you think to yourself like, “God, that guy. He just became cooler and cooler.” Whereas if he got into the whole, “Oh yeah, that was ugly and then this happened,” nobody wants to hear it. It’s awful.
So to say, “I’m not going to lie to my kids,” you lie to your kids all the time. You don’t like your husband, that’s okay. You don’t like your ex-husband, but it’s their father so just grin. “Oh, Daddy took me to meet his new girlfriend, Kiki.” “Oh, that’s nice. Did you guys have a good time?” “Good. Oh yeah. And she helped me do my hair and she did my makeup.” Listen, I’m sure that’s burning you inside, but you go, “Oh, that’s great,” because why? You love your kids.
So I think there’s a difference between honesty and candor, right? So in relationships, being honest is good. Being totally candid is probably not a great idea. It’s indelicate to be totally candid about some things. If a woman you’re in romantic relationship with says to you, “Do I look good in this dress?” and they don’t, or “Do I look fat in this?” that’s a better way. Any heterosexual man who’s ever been in a relationship has had that question asked of him, “Do I look fat in this? Does this make my butt look big or whatever? Do I look fat in this?” If you go, “Yes,” that’s indelicate. It’s honest, but it’s indelicate and it’s almost mean, right? If you say no, but it’s true, she doesn’t look good in that, the concern she sees is a legitimate concern, do you lie and go, “No. No, you look great in that. It’s great, da-da-da-da-da”? That’s not a good thing either.
So, what do you say? “That blue dress you have really compliments your body in a way that one doesn’t. The cut of that dress is such that it doesn’t flatter you.” “I see what you’re saying.” Now, it’s the dress, it’s not you babe, but I’m telling you the truth. I’m addressing your concern. This is the distinction. Don’t material misrepresent the facts. Don’t steer people down roads that you know that that’s not how it’s going to go, right? So it’s like if the woman says I love you and you don’t love her, don’t say I love you back. You do the like, “Oh, I have very strong feelings for you as well.” Or there has to be some middle ground. You don’t just pretend you didn’t hear them.
People want measurable, specific things. So that’s why I tried in my book to be very specific about things you can do, things you shouldn’t do, and they’re practical suggestions, like leaving a note. I talk a lot about leaving a note. If you’re dating someone or you’re living with them or you’re in a serious relationship, send a text, leave a note. Every day just some little thing that just tells them how much you like them. This is a low cost, high value move, doesn’t take much and it’s a practical thing. But when we speak in these broader axioms, these broader concepts that people just don’t have any idea how to practically apply.
So I wake up at 4:00. I check my phone, check my email. Usually, even if there’s something that’s time-sensitive, it’s usually not so time-sensitive that it needs to be responded to at 4:00 AM because most other normal people are asleep. I have espresso, black espresso, which I enjoy very much. And then I work out and that’s some days going to be weights. A lot of days it’s just going to be cardio. I’ve changed my habits now that I’m in my early 50s. It used to be much more intensive weight training and deadlifts and stuff like that, and then I herniated my L5-S1. So 485 was my max deadlift and now I don’t hardly do deadlifts.
Then I always do either a sauna or steam for 20 minutes, half an hour. Then I do a cold plunge, or if I don’t have access to a cold plunge, a cold shower. Then I have breakfast, and it’s usually a very uncontroversial simple breakfast. I like to eat. I eat slow carb Tim Ferriss type style. Then I get right to work. I try to do my drafting early in the day, prenups, motions, things like that from, let’s say, six or seven until 9:00, 9:30, which is when court begins.
Conferences, as you go in, you make oral argument, but you don’t have witnesses on the stand. You’re not taking testimony. It’s like everybody’s just shouting allegations back and forth, and making temporary arguments pretrial. It’s kind of the foreplay of the trial.
While I’m speaking and making my arguments, I’m trying to adjust what I’m doing strategically based on the objections that the judge is ruling on. So, I’m so hyperstimulated on trial that when you finish, you can’t even talk. You’re gone. Your brain is jello. Conferences is harder because at least with a trial, there’s a singularity of focus. With a trial, it’s just one case, and they have all my attention. The problem is then on the lunch break, all the other cases that I’ve been ignoring for the last several hours while I was on trial, they all have stuff going on. So, it’s like, “Hey, where’s that settlement proposal on this? Hey, she just did this. We need to file a motion.”
So now it’s like, “Okay, I have an hour to eat and to answer all of this in some preliminary way to delegate some responsibilities. Then I got to go back in and put 100% of my focus on this other case again.” So, you find yourself in a place. That’s why I’m very disciplined is you find yourself in a place where I live my whole life in six-minute increments, tenths of an hour, because we bill in tenths of an hour. So, everything I do, it’s like 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and I’m logging time throughout the day.
Because with every one of these cases, you could stay up 24 hours focusing just on it. So, you have to have the discipline to go, “No, that’s it. I’m done for now. I’ve done what I could do today, and now I’m going to sit and read for a half an hour. I’m going to watch this show for a half an hour. I’m going to have this meal,” because It’s never done. So, that’s challenging. That’s a hard part of this job, but I think my discipline helps with that. Then like I said, I finished my day around 5:30, 6: 00. I have something to eat, and I try to wind down a little, and I’m usually in bed by 7:30, and asleep by 8:00.
I had been around the orbit of jujitsu having been my kids took karate, and there was jujitsu there. It was a Gracie Academy. I stayed for a jujitsu class, and I had 120 pound girl ragdoll me, because I just knew nothing about grappling. I remember just going, “Well, I got to learn what this is,” and that was it. I just dove into it. My first professor was Louis Vintaloro in New Jersey. He’s a Royler Gracie black belt, great teacher, taught me amazing fundamentals, took me all the way up to purple belt. Then right after I got my purple belt, I moved to the city. I moved to Manhattan. I actually chose my apartment based on its proximity to Marcelo Garcia, and I moved to West Chelsea, because it was a short walk to Marcelo’s academy.
My core jujitsu was up to purple belt. It was Louis Vintaloro, and then it’s been Marcelo, and Marcelo, Paul Shriner who’s really phenomenal at his academy. All the people at his academy, I mean, are all phenomenal. I mean, Bernardo [inaudible 03:25:37] was there for a period of time that I was there and before he went to Boston. Marcos Tinoco was like his lasso guard stuff. He was at Marcelo’s for a long time, and what a teacher. I mean, my lack of skill at jujitsu is not based on a lack of quality instruction. It’s based on an inability to retain the information for very long.
I got involved in sponsoring some jujitsu super fights. I also got involved in sponsoring some jujitsu athletes. Gordon was a part of the Danaher Death Squad. I was friends with Eddie Cummings. I’m still friends with Eddie. I was friends with John. I’m still friends with John, but I didn’t really know Gordon. I actually don’t know that I’ve still ever met… I don’t think I’ve ever met Gordon. I’ve been in the same room as him, but there was a fight that… I had sponsored some other fights with this particular promoter, and they asked me to sponsor one. It didn’t involve anyone from Marcelo’s, but it involved Gordon. He was one of the people.
I liked John very much, and I liked everybody in the Danaher Death Squad. I like watching them compete, and I thought, “I think John’s just brilliant.” I mean, everyone at Marcelo’s has such respect for John and for everyone and the stuff they were doing when they were the… Early days of that Danaher Death squad, Eddie Cummings, his leg locks. It just blew the whole game up. It just was a whole nother thing. It was insane such innovation. Gordon at the time, he was online. I’m much older than that. I’m in my early 50s, and that’s not, I guess, chronologically that much older, but generationally, I think it’s quite a bit different.
Gordon was smack talking about a guy who I was sponsor of, who I knew and who I knew was a very good athlete, and had been through difficult things in his life. Gordon just said some nasty things about him. It falls into the category of totally appropriate smack talking, looking at it now and looking at what Gordon became, which is he’s someone who talks trash. It’s part of his brand is to talk trash. I see now that that’s like a Muhammad Ali thing, but at the time, I just didn’t see it as what it was. Although it doesn’t excuse it, my mother was dying. I was not at my best. I was having a hard time, and Gordon had spoken ill of this person. I got upset, and I reached out to John and to Tom DeBlass.
I said to them, “Hey, could you tell this guy to knock it off? Don’t talk about this person who I sponsor if I’m sponsoring his fight. I don’t even know this Gordon Ryan kid, and I’m sponsoring his fight. He should say thank you. Don’t talk bad about a person who I financially sponsor. That’s not cool.” I think on Facebook, he wrote some comments, and then I wrote some comments back, and I was incredibly obnoxious. Very soon after, I felt really gross, because I was an adult, and I was talking to a young person this way, who’s on their way up, who’s a little older than one of my kids. I just said these obnoxious things to him, and I felt really like, “That’s gross.” But I’d never really thought much about it again.
I watched his star rise, and I was very… I mean, who is not impressed by Gordon Ryan? Everyone at our academy was always very thrilled to see him rise. I’ve stayed friends with John. Every time Gordon would have a big victory, I would always text John and be like… Because Gordon’s victories are John’s victories too. They have such a great bond. All the people in his orbit are all people that I respect and like. I just would say, “Hey listen, congratulations and please pass on my congratulations to Gordon,” but we don’t know each other. I Don’t have his number. I have no way to contact him to apologize to him.
But if Gordon hears this, I am profoundly sorry. I don’t say that because I’m trying to get in your good graces. I don’t know that we’ll ever meet each other, but that was an unbelievably wrong, stupid thing to say to a young person.
A lot of things come down to that. Even for men like red-pilled men who are like, “I don’t care about women.” Well, you talk about them an awful lot. For someone that’s not interested in women, you sure are in the orbit of women who you’re telling how much you don’t care about women, which feels like you’re doing that to attract a certain kind of woman, which I get. More power to you, but a person who worships an idol and a person who destroys an idol are both idolaters.
Even when we lose and even when our greatest pains were caused by our desire to love and be loved in a romantic sense, we just keep putting the money on the table and playing. We won’t just quit. We just keep going.
You can say that. Everybody says that, “I’m through with love. I’m done.” They’re not. They keep going. They’ll go up again.
A lot of the personality characteristics I have are consistent with those of adult children of alcoholics, desire for control and control issues, a lot of those things. I love my life. I’m having a great time. If I died tomorrow, man, I did more, learned more, earned more, loved more than I ever dreamed. So, I’m so glad my dad was an alcoholic. If you said to me, “How do you raise kids?” I wouldn’t say, “Well, you definitely want to be an alcoholic, because your kid’s going to get a lot of really good discipline lessons from that experience.” No, I wouldn’t want that for… But it’s born. All these wonderful things were born of this awful situation.
So, I think divorce is the same thing. We make these mistakes, but they’re not really… I often have to say to my clients when they’re like, “Oh, I wish I’d never married this person,” I’m like, “You love your kids, right? Your kids are half that person. They would not be the organism they are without that person’s DNA. So, you can’t regret being with that person if you love your kids, because those kids don’t exist without that person.” I don’t know how we refocus on that. I don’t know. Maybe we give anyone going through a… I’ve actually had a theory, which I’ve not said out loud, but I’ll say it to you, because it’s just us talking.
I think if we could figure out a way to take a divorcing couple that is interested in potentially mediating, and put them in a setting where we could give them both psilocybin, a good dose, like two and a half, three grams, and have them do individual sessions with controlled setting with a guide, and have them do that inner work, and then have them do some kind of a session together after they’ve had that experience, that psychedelic experience, I actually think you could do transformative divorce work, because I have found myself and certainly the many people that I’ve talked to who’ve had psilocybin experiences in particular, but any psychedelic experience, many of the empathogens or even MDMA… MDMA is an empathogen.
If we brought that space and the divorce and conflict resolution space together, that psychopharmacological intervention on empathy, one’s empathy receptors or one’s connectivity, I think that could be radically transforming. It would be logistically an absolute nightmare. It would never get done from a legal standpoint, but man, I think sometimes that if… Because I think the more that you can bring people to the awareness of connection that comes from many people’s psychedelic experiences, I think they could then extrapolate that into their understanding of the conflict and disconnect they’re having with their partner.
If you met him, and you’ve met both of us, you’d go, “Well, no one could love both of these guys.” It’s like, “If you like this flavor, you wouldn’t like this flavor.” I’m impatient, fast talking. Skip to the end, “We got to land this plane. Come on.” He’s a therapist. He’s chill. He’s patient, and they’re perfect together. I can say that as someone who loves her and loved her and knows her or knew her. I think if we can radically view honestly without jealousy, without the sense of, “Look at it, and just go, “Yeah. Yeah, okay, this is the love this person needed.” That doesn’t mean my love sucks. It just means it wasn’t the right one for this person. There’s a lid for every pot. She found her lid. I want her to find her lid. That’s good.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 2:34 – Why marriages fail
- 24:05 – Sex and fetishes
- 33:22 – Breakups
- 59:09 – Johnny Depp and Amber Heard
- 1:19:09 – Complicated divorce cases
- 1:25:55 – Cheating with the nanny
- 1:28:12 – Relationship advice
- 1:36:54 – Cost of divorce
- 1:58:45 – Prenups
- 2:13:06 – Cheating
- 2:20:50 – Open marriages and threesomes
- 2:33:38 – Sex and fighting
- 2:58:33 – Kevin Costner’s divorce
- 3:08:17 – Lying
- 3:15:45 – Productivity
- 3:23:39 – Jiu Jitsu
- 3:32:11 – Sex, love, and marriage
Introduction
James Sexton
We have been encouraged culturally to criticize people we’re in long-term relationships with. Not new relationships. New relationships, you put the person on a pedestal, you’re allowed to just… Oh, they’re wonderful. But every trope out there in every form of popular media is the wife rolling her eyes at the husband, and the husband being like, ugh, this loathsome harpy that castrated me, as if people are just passive players in their lives. And I think that is an incredibly toxic message to send to people, that this is how we should be relating to our partner. Don’t take the piss out of your partner in front of people. The successful relationships I’ve seen are where people are just cheering for their partner, where they’re thick as thieves, where there is just this feeling of, man, they like each other. They got each other’s back like you wouldn’t believe. Man, you could take sides against anybody. But take sides against their partner? You’re going down.
We have been encouraged culturally to criticize people we’re in long-term relationships with. Not new relationships. New relationships, you put the person on a pedestal, you’re allowed to just… Oh, they’re wonderful. But every trope out there in every form of popular media is the wife rolling her eyes at the husband, and the husband being like, ugh, this loathsome harpy that castrated me, as if people are just passive players in their lives. And I think that is an incredibly toxic message to send to people, that this is how we should be relating to our partner. Don’t take the piss out of your partner in front of people. The successful relationships I’ve seen are where people are just cheering for their partner, where they’re thick as thieves, where there is just this feeling of, man, they like each other. They got each other’s back like you wouldn’t believe. Man, you could take sides against anybody. But take sides against their partner? You’re going down.
And when you see a couple that has that, that’s so hard to break. But I think that comes from having a steadfast, no, I don’t do that. I don’t shit talk my partner, and you don’t shit talk my partner to me. Because I think we’re just so criticized by the world, the world is so full of criticism, we criticize ourselves so harshly, that having a partner who no matter what is like, “You’ve got this. I’m with you. Okay yeah, you screwed up. I see it. Look, I’m not going to lie to you about your blind spots. You screwed up. But you know what? People screw up sometimes. You got a right to screw up. A lot of people screw up. Come on, get up. Let’s go. I know you have it in you.” If you have that person, I feel like that’s a superpower.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with James Sexton, divorce attorney and author of How to Stay in Love: A Divorce Lawyer’s Guide to Staying Together. As a trial lawyer, James, for over two decades, has negotiated and litigated a huge number of high conflict divorces. This has given him a deep understanding of how relationships fail and how they can succeed, and bigger than that, the role of love and pain in this whole messy rollercoaster ride we call life. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s James Sexton. What is the most common reason that marriages fail?
The following is a conversation with James Sexton, divorce attorney and author of How to Stay in Love: A Divorce Lawyer’s Guide to Staying Together. As a trial lawyer, James, for over two decades, has negotiated and litigated a huge number of high conflict divorces. This has given him a deep understanding of how relationships fail and how they can succeed, and bigger than that, the role of love and pain in this whole messy rollercoaster ride we call life. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s James Sexton. What is the most common reason that marriages fail?
Why marriages fail
James Sexton
That’s a great question, but it’s a question that everybody wants there to be a simple answer. They want me to say cheating or money or the internet, but the reality is… I think it’s a lot of little things. It’s disconnection. That would be my answer. The reason marriages fail is disconnection. What causes disconnection? That’s the bigger and I think more important question because like Tom Wolfe said about bankruptcy, “It happens very slowly and then all at once.” Disconnection happens very slowly and then all at once. So most of the time what I think people want is an answer like cheating, but cheating is the big all at once thing. How did we get to the place where cheating was even something you were thinking about doing or that you would think about and then cross the line from thought into action? And that’s, I think, the big question. So disconnection would be my answer.
That’s a great question, but it’s a question that everybody wants there to be a simple answer. They want me to say cheating or money or the internet, but the reality is… I think it’s a lot of little things. It’s disconnection. That would be my answer. The reason marriages fail is disconnection. What causes disconnection? That’s the bigger and I think more important question because like Tom Wolfe said about bankruptcy, “It happens very slowly and then all at once.” Disconnection happens very slowly and then all at once. So most of the time what I think people want is an answer like cheating, but cheating is the big all at once thing. How did we get to the place where cheating was even something you were thinking about doing or that you would think about and then cross the line from thought into action? And that’s, I think, the big question. So disconnection would be my answer.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it’s possible to introspect looking backwards for every individual case where the disconnection began and how it evolved?
Do you think it’s possible to introspect looking backwards for every individual case where the disconnection began and how it evolved?
James Sexton
Sure. Yeah. This is such a multi-variate equation. It’s a dance, it’s a chemistry, it’s what did you do and what did the other person do? And see, the interesting thing about being a divorce lawyer is I’m weaponizing intimacy in a courtroom. It’s full context storytelling, what I do for a living. So what I do is I take my client’s story, and I have to present it to a judge and make my client the hero in every way and the other side the villain in every way. Now I have to be careful not to do that in a manner that loses credibility because even a judge is smart enough to know that no one is all good or all bad. But only if you were reverse engineering a relationship and saying how did this break, you really have to look at both people, the good and the bad, what each of them did that moved the dial in these different directions.
Sure. Yeah. This is such a multi-variate equation. It’s a dance, it’s a chemistry, it’s what did you do and what did the other person do? And see, the interesting thing about being a divorce lawyer is I’m weaponizing intimacy in a courtroom. It’s full context storytelling, what I do for a living. So what I do is I take my client’s story, and I have to present it to a judge and make my client the hero in every way and the other side the villain in every way. Now I have to be careful not to do that in a manner that loses credibility because even a judge is smart enough to know that no one is all good or all bad. But only if you were reverse engineering a relationship and saying how did this break, you really have to look at both people, the good and the bad, what each of them did that moved the dial in these different directions.
And I think that’s very hard for anyone going through a divorce to do about their own relationship. We don’t know who discovered water, but it wasn’t a fish. If you’re in it, I don’t think you see it clearly. I think as a divorce lawyer whose job is to really drill down on the facts and figure out what’s going on in this story, I have to look at both sides. So I have to think a lot about my own arguments, but I also have to think about what’s the other lawyer’s argument going to be, especially in custody cases. So I really have been forced to look at both sides for so many years, so deeply in relationships. Once you do that, you realize that the good guy, bad guy thing just doesn’t apply.
Lex Fridman
I wonder if it’s the little things or a few big things that cause this connection. You’ve talked about granola and blowjobs, but those seem to be stories that you can tell to yourself like… Maybe that story should be explained or maybe not.
I wonder if it’s the little things or a few big things that cause this connection. You’ve talked about granola and blowjobs, but those seem to be stories that you can tell to yourself like… Maybe that story should be explained or maybe not.
James Sexton
You don’t think granola and blowjobs is self-explanatory?
You don’t think granola and blowjobs is self-explanatory?
Lex Fridman
Almost. I think people can construct a good… If you ask GPT, what do they mean? I think the story that would come up is a pretty good one. But that’s a story you tell about when you first knew the disconnection has begun is when he stopped buying my favorite granola or when she stopped giving blowjobs.
Almost. I think people can construct a good… If you ask GPT, what do they mean? I think the story that would come up is a pretty good one. But that’s a story you tell about when you first knew the disconnection has begun is when he stopped buying my favorite granola or when she stopped giving blowjobs.
James Sexton
I would say when it’s reached a critical mass.
I would say when it’s reached a critical mass.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, phase shift of some sort.
Yeah, phase shift of some sort.
James Sexton
Because I think it started before that. When she said, “Yeah, I used to give him blowjobs when we were in our early relationship, and then one day, I just was like, oh well, we don’t have as much time. I’ll wait until later, and we’ll have sex and then we both enjoy it.”
Because I think it started before that. When she said, “Yeah, I used to give him blowjobs when we were in our early relationship, and then one day, I just was like, oh well, we don’t have as much time. I’ll wait until later, and we’ll have sex and then we both enjoy it.”
Lex Fridman
Blowjobs are inefficient.
Blowjobs are inefficient.
James Sexton
Yeah, exactly. Correct.
Yeah, exactly. Correct.
Lex Fridman
You batched it all together into one-
You batched it all together into one-
James Sexton
So she said, “Well, exactly.” And they had kids at that point, so I think she really was like, “Hey, we’ve got a certain window, so let’s have something we both enjoy.” So I don’t think she had any negative intentions there. I think that she was working in good faith towards the betterment of the relationship, but it was having this second order effect. And so I really do think that, yeah, the blowjobs, granola… Anyone who’s been in a long-term relationship, I guess it’s just worth asking the question, what does this person do that makes me feel loved? I think it’s very interesting in my own experience in life. I remember I had a difficult chapter with one of my sons, my younger son, when he was in his early twenties. And we were having a heartfelt conversation, and I said to him, “Do you know I love you?” And he said, “Well yeah, of course I do.” I said, “But do you feel my love? Do you feel it? Not just do you know it intellectually? Do you feel it?”
So she said, “Well, exactly.” And they had kids at that point, so I think she really was like, “Hey, we’ve got a certain window, so let’s have something we both enjoy.” So I don’t think she had any negative intentions there. I think that she was working in good faith towards the betterment of the relationship, but it was having this second order effect. And so I really do think that, yeah, the blowjobs, granola… Anyone who’s been in a long-term relationship, I guess it’s just worth asking the question, what does this person do that makes me feel loved? I think it’s very interesting in my own experience in life. I remember I had a difficult chapter with one of my sons, my younger son, when he was in his early twenties. And we were having a heartfelt conversation, and I said to him, “Do you know I love you?” And he said, “Well yeah, of course I do.” I said, “But do you feel my love? Do you feel it? Not just do you know it intellectually? Do you feel it?”
And I remember thinking to myself, when do we feel someone’s love? What is it that they do? And sometimes, it’s the weirdest, silliest things that they would never know. They are the person who’s showing us that they love us and that we’re feeling their love. They would never show us. If you said, “Why does this person love you?” They wouldn’t say, “Oh, I always make sure that when the paper comes, I bring it from the bottom of the driveway to the door so they don’t have to go out and get it.” Or “I always hold the door for them.” Again, “I buy the granola that I know this person likes.” Or “I remembered that they don’t like it when I put on this particular record so I don’t put it on.” Yes, they’re small things, but they’re not small. They’re kind of everything.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it’s good to communicate that stuff?
Do you think it’s good to communicate that stuff?
James Sexton
Well, 100%.
Well, 100%.
Lex Fridman
It takes away some of the power of it, right?
It takes away some of the power of it, right?
James Sexton
When you point it out, then the person realizes, oh, he likes this or dislikes this. So yes, there becomes a deliberateness to it, a conscious… So I understand not pointing that out when it’s a good thing. I think when it’s a negative thing… I think in the granola situation, if she had said to him, ” Hey, you used to do this, and you’ve stopped,” that feels like something to me. She said she didn’t say anything about that, just like he probably didn’t say anything about the blowjobs. I think if there had been a moment of, this is starting. Let’s talk about it while it’s starting. But people wait. From what I can see, people wait until the big thing happens. The financial impropriety, the substance use disorder, the cheating. They wait for that to happen and then they go, “Where did we go wrong?” And the answer is, quite a while ago with the granola.
When you point it out, then the person realizes, oh, he likes this or dislikes this. So yes, there becomes a deliberateness to it, a conscious… So I understand not pointing that out when it’s a good thing. I think when it’s a negative thing… I think in the granola situation, if she had said to him, ” Hey, you used to do this, and you’ve stopped,” that feels like something to me. She said she didn’t say anything about that, just like he probably didn’t say anything about the blowjobs. I think if there had been a moment of, this is starting. Let’s talk about it while it’s starting. But people wait. From what I can see, people wait until the big thing happens. The financial impropriety, the substance use disorder, the cheating. They wait for that to happen and then they go, “Where did we go wrong?” And the answer is, quite a while ago with the granola.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah. So when you notice something, you notice that little something, talk about it because that little something is probably a kernel of a deeper truth. Of course, there is also moods. We’re all a rollercoaster of emotion. So you can not bring a granola one day just because you’re in this place where just nothing is… Just cynicism everywhere, just anger and so on. But it’s a temporary feeling, but maybe that temporary feeling is grounded in some other deeper current that’s actually building up.
Yeah, yeah. So when you notice something, you notice that little something, talk about it because that little something is probably a kernel of a deeper truth. Of course, there is also moods. We’re all a rollercoaster of emotion. So you can not bring a granola one day just because you’re in this place where just nothing is… Just cynicism everywhere, just anger and so on. But it’s a temporary feeling, but maybe that temporary feeling is grounded in some other deeper current that’s actually building up.
James Sexton
And I think a good partner wants to understand the currents of their partner-
And I think a good partner wants to understand the currents of their partner-
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that empathy.
Yeah, that empathy.
James Sexton
If they want to understand, hey, are you going through something? And look, if I’m the one you need to take it out on, that’s okay. I’m a big boy, I can take it. If you’re hormonal, if you’re frustrated at work, if you’re whatever, we should be able to have a little bit of that interaction in a relationship. It’s so easy to just say to people, “Well, communication is the key.” But it really is about fearless kinds of communication. It’s about really honestly saying to somebody, “This feels like something to me. Am I wrong? This just feels like something to me.” And also how that’s presented. One of the things I’m very caught up on or feel very strongly about is that we have been encouraged culturally to criticize people we’re in long-term relationships with. Not new relationships. New relationships, you put the person on a pedestal, you’re allowed to just, oh, they’re wonderful.
If they want to understand, hey, are you going through something? And look, if I’m the one you need to take it out on, that’s okay. I’m a big boy, I can take it. If you’re hormonal, if you’re frustrated at work, if you’re whatever, we should be able to have a little bit of that interaction in a relationship. It’s so easy to just say to people, “Well, communication is the key.” But it really is about fearless kinds of communication. It’s about really honestly saying to somebody, “This feels like something to me. Am I wrong? This just feels like something to me.” And also how that’s presented. One of the things I’m very caught up on or feel very strongly about is that we have been encouraged culturally to criticize people we’re in long-term relationships with. Not new relationships. New relationships, you put the person on a pedestal, you’re allowed to just, oh, they’re wonderful.
But every trope out there in every form of popular media is the wife rolling her eyes at the husband, and the husband being like, ugh, this loathsome harpy that castrated me, as if people are just passive players in their lives. And I think that is an incredibly toxic message to send to people, that this is how we should be relating to our partner. Don’t, take the piss out of your partner in front of people. The successful relationships I’ve seen are where people are just cheering for their partner, where they’re thick as thieves, where there is just this feeling of, man, they like each other. They got each other’s back like you wouldn’t believe. Man, you could take sides against anybody. But take sides against their partner? You’re going down.
And when you see a couple that has that, that’s so hard to break. But I think that comes from having a steadfast, no, I don’t do that. I don’t shit talk my partner, and you don’t shit talk my partner to me. Because I think we’re just so criticized by the world, the world is so full of criticism, we criticize ourselves so harshly, that having a partner who no matter what is like, “You’ve got this. I’m with you. Yeah, you screwed up. I see it. Look, I’m not going to lie to you about your blind spots. You screwed up. But you know what? People screw up sometimes. You got a right to screw up. A lot of people screw up. Come on, get up. Let’s go. I know you have it in you.” If you have that person, I feel like that’s a superpower to have that effect on another person.
Lex Fridman
One of the things I love seeing, when you look at a couple, and one is talking in an interview, answering a question, especially intellectual questions like, what do you think about the war in Ukraine or something, and then the partner is talking and then the other person is looking at them as if they’re hearing the wisest thing ever. They’re still looking at them, not waiting for their turn to speak, not thinking about how is the audience going to take that, but they’re looking at them like goddamn, I’m so lucky to be with this smart motherfucker.
One of the things I love seeing, when you look at a couple, and one is talking in an interview, answering a question, especially intellectual questions like, what do you think about the war in Ukraine or something, and then the partner is talking and then the other person is looking at them as if they’re hearing the wisest thing ever. They’re still looking at them, not waiting for their turn to speak, not thinking about how is the audience going to take that, but they’re looking at them like goddamn, I’m so lucky to be with this smart motherfucker.
James Sexton
But there’s this scene-
But there’s this scene-
Lex Fridman
And they could be saying the dumbest shit ever.
And they could be saying the dumbest shit ever.
James Sexton
There’s a scene in the movie, True Romance-
There’s a scene in the movie, True Romance-
Lex Fridman
Yes, I love True Romance.
Yes, I love True Romance.
James Sexton
Great movie. That Gary Oldman scene the greatest scene ever done in film with Christian Slater. But there’s a scene in it where she holds up a sign to Christian Slater, and it says, “You’re so cool.”
Great movie. That Gary Oldman scene the greatest scene ever done in film with Christian Slater. But there’s a scene in it where she holds up a sign to Christian Slater, and it says, “You’re so cool.”
Lex Fridman
You’re so cool. Yeah.
You’re so cool. Yeah.
James Sexton
Man, that’s it. That’s it. I think I say it somewhere in the book that you go to weddings, and when the bride walks in, everybody is looking at the bride. It’s her show. Everybody turns around. It’s the first glimpse everybody gets of the bride. And I never look at the bride. I always look at the groom looking at the bride. To me, he has this look. This is the first time he’s seeing her in the dress most of the time. And also he’s seeing her like, holy shit, she’s coming down the aisle, we’re getting married, this is it. And everyone is looking at her, and I always look at him because I always think to myself… The look on his face, that’s this feeling of, yeah, wow, okay. Everyone is looking at her and she’s mine, and she’s coming up here and we’re getting married. And I feel like that kind of adoration… I think that’s the look we’re describing is adoration, that the words coming out of their mouth that they’re like, yeah, that’s mine, that one’s mine. That’s such a great thing. It’s such a great feeling.
Man, that’s it. That’s it. I think I say it somewhere in the book that you go to weddings, and when the bride walks in, everybody is looking at the bride. It’s her show. Everybody turns around. It’s the first glimpse everybody gets of the bride. And I never look at the bride. I always look at the groom looking at the bride. To me, he has this look. This is the first time he’s seeing her in the dress most of the time. And also he’s seeing her like, holy shit, she’s coming down the aisle, we’re getting married, this is it. And everyone is looking at her, and I always look at him because I always think to myself… The look on his face, that’s this feeling of, yeah, wow, okay. Everyone is looking at her and she’s mine, and she’s coming up here and we’re getting married. And I feel like that kind of adoration… I think that’s the look we’re describing is adoration, that the words coming out of their mouth that they’re like, yeah, that’s mine, that one’s mine. That’s such a great thing. It’s such a great feeling.
Lex Fridman
Seeing the good stuff. With True Romance, you could make fun of the guy’s totally cringe wearing Elvis, essentially being a fake Elvis with shades. And what is he doing watching these kung fu movies? But from her perspective and from a perspective you could take on him is this is the baddest motherfucker who’s ever lived. He’s willing to do those things for me. It’s almost like an epic heroic figure, and we’re living in this epic hero story.
Seeing the good stuff. With True Romance, you could make fun of the guy’s totally cringe wearing Elvis, essentially being a fake Elvis with shades. And what is he doing watching these kung fu movies? But from her perspective and from a perspective you could take on him is this is the baddest motherfucker who’s ever lived. He’s willing to do those things for me. It’s almost like an epic heroic figure, and we’re living in this epic hero story.
James Sexton
And what does that do to him though? See, that’s the point. If there’s a point to this whole thing, this whole couple thing, isn’t that it? I don’t understand this idea of we had a successful marriage, we were married for 50 something years, we were miserable for 47 of them, but we hung in there. This is an endurance event? The primary relationship of your life, you’ve decided You’re going to turn into a 50-mile trail race. Why? Why would you do that? Congratulations. You took the concept of monogamy and made it something that two people are absolutely not going to enjoy, but you hung in there. Congratulations. And I understand there’s religious perspectives that say it’s a sacred covenant, but I have a real chicken or the egg problem with that because I think it was how do we sell this incredibly stupid concept that isn’t working to people? I know. We’ll tell them God says you have to, and we’ll sign on for that.
And what does that do to him though? See, that’s the point. If there’s a point to this whole thing, this whole couple thing, isn’t that it? I don’t understand this idea of we had a successful marriage, we were married for 50 something years, we were miserable for 47 of them, but we hung in there. This is an endurance event? The primary relationship of your life, you’ve decided You’re going to turn into a 50-mile trail race. Why? Why would you do that? Congratulations. You took the concept of monogamy and made it something that two people are absolutely not going to enjoy, but you hung in there. Congratulations. And I understand there’s religious perspectives that say it’s a sacred covenant, but I have a real chicken or the egg problem with that because I think it was how do we sell this incredibly stupid concept that isn’t working to people? I know. We’ll tell them God says you have to, and we’ll sign on for that.
I don’t buy it. I don’t buy it anymore because when you see a successful marriage… Even without a marriage, you see a pair bond. You see a couple that really love each other and cheer for each other in that way and hang on each other’s words that way and are just in each other’s corner that way. You see the fake shit instantly. You see the difference right away. This is the first time I’ve come to Austin. I thought I’d eaten a lot of barbecue in my life. I’ve never had Texas barbecue. I landed, I went and had barbecue. I was like, I’ve never had barbecue before. Apparently, this is a whole different thing. I think it’s the same thing. I think once you see real love, real love, and I mean romantic love, real love like that, real bond, you go, oh yeah, this other thing is not going to do it.
Lex Fridman
Do you think that’s a daily deliberate choice that a couple that makes? Because it feels like a very easy to do deliberate step, choose to see the brilliant in it, the beautiful in it, and almost immediately, everything shifts and it becomes this momentum where all you see is the beautiful and all you see is the brilliant.
Do you think that’s a daily deliberate choice that a couple that makes? Because it feels like a very easy to do deliberate step, choose to see the brilliant in it, the beautiful in it, and almost immediately, everything shifts and it becomes this momentum where all you see is the beautiful and all you see is the brilliant.
James Sexton
That is a conscious choice. I think approaching life that way is a conscious choice. Approaching any relationship that way is a conscious choice. Looking at someone who hurts you or does something hurtful to you and thinking about what’s going on in their life that they’re doing that or what’s happening with them, yeah, that’s a very conscious choice, and I think a better one, a better one than seething in animosity and letting that eat you alive. I don’t think it should be so difficult. With our children, with our pets, we don’t have this problem. You never have someone look at their dog who they’ve had for eight years and go, “Ugh, I got to get a new dog. I’ve had this one for eight years. Puppies are so cute. What am I doing with this old dog?”
That is a conscious choice. I think approaching life that way is a conscious choice. Approaching any relationship that way is a conscious choice. Looking at someone who hurts you or does something hurtful to you and thinking about what’s going on in their life that they’re doing that or what’s happening with them, yeah, that’s a very conscious choice, and I think a better one, a better one than seething in animosity and letting that eat you alive. I don’t think it should be so difficult. With our children, with our pets, we don’t have this problem. You never have someone look at their dog who they’ve had for eight years and go, “Ugh, I got to get a new dog. I’ve had this one for eight years. Puppies are so cute. What am I doing with this old dog?”
It’s the total opposite. They’re like, “Oh my god, this is my dog. This is my dog.” The smell of the dog is… This is my dog’s smell. The bad habits of the dog, you’re like, “It’s my stupid dog that does stupid things.” And it’s not like that has to be a conscious thing. They wake up every day and go, “I should be grateful for the dog.” It’s just visceral. It’s in them. And your children, people’s children. It’s why people are not aware of how annoying their children are because they’re not annoying to them. I get it.
To you, the sound of your kids’ shrieking is like, oh my kid’s having a good time. When I hear that, I try to hear it with those ears. I’m a parent. I get it. My kids are adults now. But I get it. So when I hear a kid shrieking, I just am like, ah. To that parent, that’s the sound of that kid having a great time. And good, it’s so nice that’s in the world. So for me, it has to be conscious. For that parent, I don’t think it has to be conscious. So I think it would be great if it didn’t have to be a conscious practice, but I wonder if like anything in meditation or mindfulness, it’s a matter of exercising that way of seeing. And then once you’ve come to that-
Lex Fridman
It becomes easier.
It becomes easier.
James Sexton
It does itself. It really does. I think it initially has to be a conscious practice. And by the way, it’s easier to make it a conscious practice before it started to fade. That’s so amazing about marriage is there’s almost 8 billion people in the world, and you’re picking this one. So when you marry, in theory, the stock is at its highest. You’re as crazy about each other as you could possibly be. So that’s the time to get into this mindfulness, to get into this practice, not once the wheels are starting to come off. It’s much harder. It’s gaining a bunch of weight and then saying, “How am I going to lose the weight now?”
It does itself. It really does. I think it initially has to be a conscious practice. And by the way, it’s easier to make it a conscious practice before it started to fade. That’s so amazing about marriage is there’s almost 8 billion people in the world, and you’re picking this one. So when you marry, in theory, the stock is at its highest. You’re as crazy about each other as you could possibly be. So that’s the time to get into this mindfulness, to get into this practice, not once the wheels are starting to come off. It’s much harder. It’s gaining a bunch of weight and then saying, “How am I going to lose the weight now?”
Lex Fridman
Well, I think that even before marriage, right away, just see everything is beautiful. Let me quote BoJack Horseman on this. “When you look at someone through rose colored glasses, all the red flags just look like flags.”
Well, I think that even before marriage, right away, just see everything is beautiful. Let me quote BoJack Horseman on this. “When you look at someone through rose colored glasses, all the red flags just look like flags.”
James Sexton
That’s great.
That’s great.
Lex Fridman
There’s a certain sense where if you, from the very beginning… Of course, you could end up in toxic relationships that way, but life is short. You’re going to die eventually. Might as well really go all in on relationships.
There’s a certain sense where if you, from the very beginning… Of course, you could end up in toxic relationships that way, but life is short. You’re going to die eventually. Might as well really go all in on relationships.
James Sexton
There’s a line in Drugstore Cowboy, it was a great film where he says, “We played a game you couldn’t win to the utmost.” And I think everything, I think life is a game you can’t win, and so you play it to the utmost. To love anything is insane because you are accepting that you’re going to lose it. I am a dog person, and you get a dog and you’ve just resigned yourself to unbelievable pain because this thing is going to die in 10 years, maybe 15 if you’re lucky. And why would you open your heart to that? Because the joy is just so wonderful of it, of the ride up until it.
There’s a line in Drugstore Cowboy, it was a great film where he says, “We played a game you couldn’t win to the utmost.” And I think everything, I think life is a game you can’t win, and so you play it to the utmost. To love anything is insane because you are accepting that you’re going to lose it. I am a dog person, and you get a dog and you’ve just resigned yourself to unbelievable pain because this thing is going to die in 10 years, maybe 15 if you’re lucky. And why would you open your heart to that? Because the joy is just so wonderful of it, of the ride up until it.
Same thing with us. Every marriage, every relationship, every love is going to end. It’s going to end in death or divorce. So why not just go in, go in, go in and just get weird don’t, define it the way… Again, we keep going back to True Romance, but just get weird. I love this Elvis pretending to be weirdo. I love this former sex worker. Whatever. Just go in, love this person, have them love you. Don’t worry about what everybody else is doing in their relationship. It’s not to me surprising that as the performative aspects of life on social media increases, people’s satisfaction with their relationships and the divorce rate is following the same trend because I think everyone is going, “Well, what’s everybody else doing? Well, how much sex is everyone else having?” The only two people that should worry about how much sex you’re having are the two people. If the two people are happy in the relationship, great. Then what does it matter? What does it matter what everybody else is doing?
Lex Fridman
There should be an element to great relationships and great friendships of, fuck the world. It’s us versus the world.
There should be an element to great relationships and great friendships of, fuck the world. It’s us versus the world.
James Sexton
It’s us. It’s us. And that’s what I mean when I say that thick as thieves. When they’re like a unit like that because look, it’s just us, it’s just what we want, it’s what we like. And that’s why I said even when it comes to sex or things like that, if you can’t be candid with your partner about whatever weird shit you’re into or what fantasy you had, well then who the hell can you be candid with? Because you’re going to either go without or go elsewhere, and neither of those is a particularly healthy option or helpful option. It’s the start of that decline. So why open yourself to that decline, which invariably is just the path to the chair in front of me in my office?
It’s us. It’s us. And that’s what I mean when I say that thick as thieves. When they’re like a unit like that because look, it’s just us, it’s just what we want, it’s what we like. And that’s why I said even when it comes to sex or things like that, if you can’t be candid with your partner about whatever weird shit you’re into or what fantasy you had, well then who the hell can you be candid with? Because you’re going to either go without or go elsewhere, and neither of those is a particularly healthy option or helpful option. It’s the start of that decline. So why open yourself to that decline, which invariably is just the path to the chair in front of me in my office?
Sex and fetishes
Lex Fridman
You have a full section in your book on foot fetishes?
You have a full section in your book on foot fetishes?
James Sexton
I do. I do, which is funny because I don’t know anything about foot fetishes.
I do. I do, which is funny because I don’t know anything about foot fetishes.
Lex Fridman
Me neither, me neither.
Me neither, me neither.
James Sexton
I’m not kink shaming anybody, but there’s nothing sexual about feet to me at all. I just don’t get it. But listen, if people like things, it’s good. But yeah, I have had clients that have odd fetishes or sexual proclivities or things they want to do, and they don’t share it with their partner at all. And then they find an outlet for it because they try to go without it, and that doesn’t work, so they try to find some other outlet for it. And then that’s interpreted as a betrayal, and it creates distance and people split up. And of course, everybody likes to have a bad guy to blame it on. So when you say, “Well, why’d, you guys get divorced,” oh, because he secretly had a foot fetish, and he was on these message boards like meet people. Well, it gives you an easy answer as to why the two of you split up, but I don’t think most divorces have such simple answers as it was a foot thing.
I’m not kink shaming anybody, but there’s nothing sexual about feet to me at all. I just don’t get it. But listen, if people like things, it’s good. But yeah, I have had clients that have odd fetishes or sexual proclivities or things they want to do, and they don’t share it with their partner at all. And then they find an outlet for it because they try to go without it, and that doesn’t work, so they try to find some other outlet for it. And then that’s interpreted as a betrayal, and it creates distance and people split up. And of course, everybody likes to have a bad guy to blame it on. So when you say, “Well, why’d, you guys get divorced,” oh, because he secretly had a foot fetish, and he was on these message boards like meet people. Well, it gives you an easy answer as to why the two of you split up, but I don’t think most divorces have such simple answers as it was a foot thing.
But I also think too, listen, if you’ve got a partner, we all do stuff that we’re not super into because we’re in a relationship, and that’s what part of it is. Do you really want to go see that chick flick? Do you really want to eat at this restaurant? Do you really want to go to her cousin’s wedding? No, but part of being in a relationship is if you’re into this, I’m going to pretend this song is a good song even though it’s not my favorite song. I just don’t know. Sex has been so politicized in recent years. Maybe it always was. But I think we’ve made it into something where we can’t just… I don’t know. I’m not into feet, but if the woman I love was like, “I’m really into feet, I really want to do stuff with your feet,” I’d be like, all right, I can pretend that I’m into that. It’s not going to kill me. I’m not going to be able to make it a centerpiece of our coupling, but yeah, I can pretend I’m into feet if you want.
Lex Fridman
I don’t personally have any fetishes that are outside of the normal discourse.
I don’t personally have any fetishes that are outside of the normal discourse.
James Sexton
As a divorce lawyer, I get to experience the whole spectrum.
As a divorce lawyer, I get to experience the whole spectrum.
Lex Fridman
But if I was into furries, for example, I don’t know how I would initiate the conversation with my partner about that.
But if I was into furries, for example, I don’t know how I would initiate the conversation with my partner about that.
James Sexton
But frame the question the other direction. If you were into furries, how do you prevent your partner from knowing anything about that? You’d have to make a conscious choice to not let your partner know.
But frame the question the other direction. If you were into furries, how do you prevent your partner from knowing anything about that? You’d have to make a conscious choice to not let your partner know.
Lex Fridman
Sure, sure.
Sure, sure.
James Sexton
So I don’t think either of those is a particularly palatable or easy proposition.
So I don’t think either of those is a particularly palatable or easy proposition.
Lex Fridman
But a lot of people live life hiding some part of themselves.
But a lot of people live life hiding some part of themselves.
James Sexton
Quite unsuccessfully. The second order effects of that are very rarely positive.
Quite unsuccessfully. The second order effects of that are very rarely positive.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
James Sexton
I don’t think I’ve ever met someone and went, yeah, I really hid this huge part of myself for an extended period of time-
I don’t think I’ve ever met someone and went, yeah, I really hid this huge part of myself for an extended period of time-
Lex Fridman
And worked out great.
And worked out great.
James Sexton
And that’s the best thing that happened. I’m, really glad I stayed in the closet as long as I did. It really worked out. It rarely does. It’s a question of how long can you hold it off? I know gay men who stayed in the closet for 40 years, 50 years of their lives, and then they had a successful second chapter as a gay man. I’ve had clients like that. Do they regret that they were in the closet? No, because they were married, they had kids, they had experiences they’re glad they had, but would their advice to a young person in their twenties and thirties who’s gay be, stay in the closet because then you can have a wife and some kids, and then you can come out when you’re 50 or 60 and have a second chapter?” No. They would say, “Be who you are. Don’t be afraid.”
And that’s the best thing that happened. I’m, really glad I stayed in the closet as long as I did. It really worked out. It rarely does. It’s a question of how long can you hold it off? I know gay men who stayed in the closet for 40 years, 50 years of their lives, and then they had a successful second chapter as a gay man. I’ve had clients like that. Do they regret that they were in the closet? No, because they were married, they had kids, they had experiences they’re glad they had, but would their advice to a young person in their twenties and thirties who’s gay be, stay in the closet because then you can have a wife and some kids, and then you can come out when you’re 50 or 60 and have a second chapter?” No. They would say, “Be who you are. Don’t be afraid.”
Lex Fridman
As you were talking, I’m trying to think of… Because publicly and privately, I’m the exact same person or try to be the exact same person. So I usually try to make sure there’s nothing to hide. But I was trying to come up with a counter example for you for if there’s good things to hide. Well, there could be past relationships. If I slept with thousands of women or something like this, maybe you want to put that to the side when you have the-
As you were talking, I’m trying to think of… Because publicly and privately, I’m the exact same person or try to be the exact same person. So I usually try to make sure there’s nothing to hide. But I was trying to come up with a counter example for you for if there’s good things to hide. Well, there could be past relationships. If I slept with thousands of women or something like this, maybe you want to put that to the side when you have the-
James Sexton
Well, there’s a difference between being honest about something and being indelicate about it. I think we all do this with lovers. Any of us who’ve been in more than one relationship, you would not at the end of sex be like, “That was the third-best sex I’ve ever had.” It’s just indelicate. It’s rude. So I don’t think it’s a matter of total candor at all times.
Well, there’s a difference between being honest about something and being indelicate about it. I think we all do this with lovers. Any of us who’ve been in more than one relationship, you would not at the end of sex be like, “That was the third-best sex I’ve ever had.” It’s just indelicate. It’s rude. So I don’t think it’s a matter of total candor at all times.
You were using the furry example, and I’m not picking on furries. I just think if that is a proclivity that is anything other than a passing thought, it’s something that you just keep coming back to, then you’re making a conscious decision to withhold it from your partner. And what is that out of? I would say it’s probably out of fear. I’m not a psychologist, but it’s probably out of fear, fear that they would reject you. Well now, see, I genuinely believe that this… I’m very conflicted in my religious faith, but I don’t know that I believe in the devil. But if there was a devil, I think his principle function would be to convince us that we are so bestial that God couldn’t love us. It would be to convince us that we’re awful and that we should just lean into the awfulness.
And I know the greatest low points of my life came whenever I just went, “You know what? I’m just awful. I might as well just behave awfully.” And I really believe that when you push down parts of yourself like your sexuality, like your insecurities, your true feelings from your romantic partner, the person who’s supposed to be your number one, you are making sure you will never feel their love because they don’t love you. They love the you you’ve presented to them, which you know in your heart is not the authentic, honest, real you. And so if you know you’re super into furries and you don’t tell your partner about that, and your partner says, “I love you so much, and you know what I love, one of the things I love about us is we have such great sexual chemistry,” You’ll never feel that love because you know that’s not true though, she doesn’t know. She doesn’t know that actually I’m not really satisfied, and there is this thing that I want that I know I can’t even tell her because I’m so ashamed. That doesn’t feel like a good option to me.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. So that kind of vulnerability is essential to intimacy.
Yeah. So that kind of vulnerability is essential to intimacy.
James Sexton
I’m prone to jiu-jitsu metaphors, and this is one of the first conversations where I can actually use them because the person I’m talking to is a jiu-jitsu person.
I’m prone to jiu-jitsu metaphors, and this is one of the first conversations where I can actually use them because the person I’m talking to is a jiu-jitsu person.
Lex Fridman
And people should know that you are a “Jiu-jitsu person.” You have been afflicted with the disease.
And people should know that you are a “Jiu-jitsu person.” You have been afflicted with the disease.
James Sexton
I am a brown belt under Marcelo Garcia, and I am a seven-year brown belt now.
I am a brown belt under Marcelo Garcia, and I am a seven-year brown belt now.
Lex Fridman
Which is the right way to be a brown belt.
Which is the right way to be a brown belt.
James Sexton
And also I am late middle-aged middleweight and moderately talented. And training at that academy with so many incredibly talented people and training in New York City where there’s so many unbelievably talented people, you’re constantly humble and feeling like you should just be wearing a blue belt all the time. I think as you know and as most people who practice jiu-jitsu know, you start to sort of see jiu-jitsu in everything. I genuinely believe that in love, you have to give something to get something. Everything you do creates a vulnerability. Every move you make in jiu-jitsu creates opportunity and creates vulnerability. And so you have to be willing to create vulnerabilities in order to get any leverage, in order to get any progress and any way to move the position. You don’t want a marriage that’s just two people both in 50-50. You’re just sitting in that guard doing nothing. You want it to actually move along.
And also I am late middle-aged middleweight and moderately talented. And training at that academy with so many incredibly talented people and training in New York City where there’s so many unbelievably talented people, you’re constantly humble and feeling like you should just be wearing a blue belt all the time. I think as you know and as most people who practice jiu-jitsu know, you start to sort of see jiu-jitsu in everything. I genuinely believe that in love, you have to give something to get something. Everything you do creates a vulnerability. Every move you make in jiu-jitsu creates opportunity and creates vulnerability. And so you have to be willing to create vulnerabilities in order to get any leverage, in order to get any progress and any way to move the position. You don’t want a marriage that’s just two people both in 50-50. You’re just sitting in that guard doing nothing. You want it to actually move along.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s the way I see love and relationships. You should take that leap of vulnerability, give the other person the option to destroy you.
Yeah, that’s the way I see love and relationships. You should take that leap of vulnerability, give the other person the option to destroy you.
James Sexton
Well, you have to expose, and that’s the part that I think is hard for everyone is to expose yourself in that way. But that’s what I mean even when I said about getting a dog or having a child, loving anything is tremendously courageous because it’s terrifying.
Well, you have to expose, and that’s the part that I think is hard for everyone is to expose yourself in that way. But that’s what I mean even when I said about getting a dog or having a child, loving anything is tremendously courageous because it’s terrifying.
Breakups
James Sexton
It’s tremendously courageous because it’s terrifying. And it’s only brave if you’re scared. If you’re not scared, it’s not brave. It’s just stupidity. It’s bravery when you’re afraid and you do the thing anyway. And so love is like yeah, it’s scary. I don’t care who you are. Being in the jiu-jitsu community, I’m around, as you are, incredibly tough people, physically tough people, mentally tough people. But I’ve seen some of those people taken down by a 120-pound woman, not from a grappling perspective, but they are taken apart by a woman in their life. And vice versa, I’ve seen men who… It really is shocking how much leverage we give to our romantic partners and how little genuine discussion we really have about it, how much we really are ever trained to think about it. There’s nothing in school that teaches us about it. So much of literature and art is an idealized version of it. So little of it is real.
It’s tremendously courageous because it’s terrifying. And it’s only brave if you’re scared. If you’re not scared, it’s not brave. It’s just stupidity. It’s bravery when you’re afraid and you do the thing anyway. And so love is like yeah, it’s scary. I don’t care who you are. Being in the jiu-jitsu community, I’m around, as you are, incredibly tough people, physically tough people, mentally tough people. But I’ve seen some of those people taken down by a 120-pound woman, not from a grappling perspective, but they are taken apart by a woman in their life. And vice versa, I’ve seen men who… It really is shocking how much leverage we give to our romantic partners and how little genuine discussion we really have about it, how much we really are ever trained to think about it. There’s nothing in school that teaches us about it. So much of literature and art is an idealized version of it. So little of it is real.
Lex Fridman
And no matter how it evolves, when it ends in tragedy or drama, I feel like what people don’t do enough is appreciate the good times, appreciate how beautiful it is to having taken the risk and to having experienced that kind of love. I think when you look at people that are divorcing each other… There’s a Edgar Alan Poe quote, “The years of love have been forgotten in the hatred of a minute.” I always am saddened, deeply saddened how people seem to forget how many beautiful moments have been shared when some reason, some drama, some breakup leads them to part ways.
And no matter how it evolves, when it ends in tragedy or drama, I feel like what people don’t do enough is appreciate the good times, appreciate how beautiful it is to having taken the risk and to having experienced that kind of love. I think when you look at people that are divorcing each other… There’s a Edgar Alan Poe quote, “The years of love have been forgotten in the hatred of a minute.” I always am saddened, deeply saddened how people seem to forget how many beautiful moments have been shared when some reason, some drama, some breakup leads them to part ways.
James Sexton
Yeah. It’s interesting that you came to that not being a divorce lawyer because I’ve felt that way for a long time. And I really try to say to my clients… In the courtroom at the negotiating table, I have a role to play where I have to be a pit bull or some kind of a courtroom sociopath. But behind closed doors, I’m very candid with people. I try to be much more emotionally attuned with them.
Yeah. It’s interesting that you came to that not being a divorce lawyer because I’ve felt that way for a long time. And I really try to say to my clients… In the courtroom at the negotiating table, I have a role to play where I have to be a pit bull or some kind of a courtroom sociopath. But behind closed doors, I’m very candid with people. I try to be much more emotionally attuned with them.
Lex Fridman
So you’re an empath in the sheets and sociopath in the streets?
So you’re an empath in the sheets and sociopath in the streets?
James Sexton
Exactly correct. That’s well said. I got a new tattoo idea. That’s good. I like that. But I do believe when I’m behind closed doors with people, I say to them, “How you end things is going to be how you’re going to remember the whole thing.” And That’s unfortunate because you watch a two-hour movie and if the last 15 minutes of it sucked, you go, “Well, that movie sucked.” Well, the first hour and 45 was great, but you walk out with this bad taste in your mouth. I am genuinely in awe of how easily people forget that they loved each other. And I’m amazed because by the time I meet them and by the time they hire me to be a weapon against the person they were in love with, there’s nothing but animosity there. And so I have to try to imagine what these two people looked like when they were in love with each other and how that even existed.
Exactly correct. That’s well said. I got a new tattoo idea. That’s good. I like that. But I do believe when I’m behind closed doors with people, I say to them, “How you end things is going to be how you’re going to remember the whole thing.” And That’s unfortunate because you watch a two-hour movie and if the last 15 minutes of it sucked, you go, “Well, that movie sucked.” Well, the first hour and 45 was great, but you walk out with this bad taste in your mouth. I am genuinely in awe of how easily people forget that they loved each other. And I’m amazed because by the time I meet them and by the time they hire me to be a weapon against the person they were in love with, there’s nothing but animosity there. And so I have to try to imagine what these two people looked like when they were in love with each other and how that even existed.
But I have to tell you, I don’t function that way. Every woman I ever had a relationship with, when I think of them, I don’t think of the ending necessarily. I try to think about the greatest hits. I try to think about the moments that were wonderful, where I loved them and they loved me, and there was joy and there was connection. And I don’t know why you choose not to. There’s that old axiom, I don’t know who said it, that if you don’t learn to find joy in the snow, you’ll have less joy in your life and precisely the same amount of snow. And I genuinely believe like, “Okay. The relationship ends. This is where it ends. We’re done now. I am making a choice as to how I will remember you.”
And we do it in relationships. I always tell people if you ever want to see a couple of light up, if they’re ever the couple at the table that seems like they got in a fight or something, ask them how they met. And most people, when they talk about how they met, their face softens. And the other person looking at them telling the story gets that look you were talking about before. And because they remember that thing and how they felt at that moment. When this person was a choice, not a default, not their automatic plus one, but the person they asked to the wedding, not the, “Of course, you’re bringing her. It’s your wife. You bring your fucking wife places.” It was still, “Hey. There’s three and a half billion women, and I’m picking you.” That feeling. And I don’t know why when a relationship ends, you can’t do that.
A lesson I learned when my mother passed away. She had a two-year terrible battle with cancer and was on hospice and was very, very sick. And it was a very slow and awful end. And I remember one of my worst fears was that this is how I would remember my mother for the rest of my life, that I would never be able to think of her, that I didn’t think of what she had become in the last months where she was withered away to nothing in this bed. And I learned over time that memory is very kind. That faded somehow. And that now when I remember her, I remember her healthy and vibrant. I remember her laughter. I remember positive things. Some of that is I like to look at photos of that. But some of it is just how I think memory works. And I don’t know why we don’t apply that to relationships.
And I think part of it is because we have this binary view of relationships, that it’s either success, which means you have happily ever after for the rest of your lives and die together or in short succession, or it was wrong. It was awful. And I don’t understand why that would have to be how we do it. I think we could look at relationships like what they are, which is chapters in a book. And that book is our life, and those chapters all have significance. The later chapters, none of them would happen without the prior ones. So there’s this beauty to me, of that. And I don’t know if it’s a choice or if that is how it is, and the rest is just narrative that we’ve put on top of it culturally for some reason.
Lex Fridman
Well, I think to push back a little bit, I think memory can also… I think it is a deliberate choice because I think memory can basically… That’s how trauma works. It can surface the negative stuff and the negative stuff completely drowns out all the positives. So I think it’s a deliberate choice to make your memory probably work that way. In relationships, betrayal can do that, right? Cheating, infidelity, one event can almost erase the entirety of your understanding of the past. And all the memories are shrouded in this darkness of, “Okay. What I believed was true is totally untrue.” And so to overcome that and still appreciate the beautiful moments.
Well, I think to push back a little bit, I think memory can also… I think it is a deliberate choice because I think memory can basically… That’s how trauma works. It can surface the negative stuff and the negative stuff completely drowns out all the positives. So I think it’s a deliberate choice to make your memory probably work that way. In relationships, betrayal can do that, right? Cheating, infidelity, one event can almost erase the entirety of your understanding of the past. And all the memories are shrouded in this darkness of, “Okay. What I believed was true is totally untrue.” And so to overcome that and still appreciate the beautiful moments.
James Sexton
I’m continually astounded by how long the hurt and anger of betrayal can reverberate. I have clients who were four years, five years past when the divorce ended, the cheating was discovered, and they’re as angry as they were the day they found out. And I don’t know what that’s about because I also have clients that they look back on it and they go, “We screwed up. We didn’t do the best, but we did the best we could do at the time. There should be stars for wars like ours. There should be champagne for the survivors.”
I’m continually astounded by how long the hurt and anger of betrayal can reverberate. I have clients who were four years, five years past when the divorce ended, the cheating was discovered, and they’re as angry as they were the day they found out. And I don’t know what that’s about because I also have clients that they look back on it and they go, “We screwed up. We didn’t do the best, but we did the best we could do at the time. There should be stars for wars like ours. There should be champagne for the survivors.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah. That was beautiful.
Yeah. That was beautiful.
James Sexton
“We made it through. We survived it and we were fools. And we were fools for love, and there are worse things in the world to be fools for.” But I also do think that most relationships where there was infidelity… And it’s not a popular thing to say and I’ll get pilloried for it.
“We made it through. We survived it and we were fools. And we were fools for love, and there are worse things in the world to be fools for.” But I also do think that most relationships where there was infidelity… And it’s not a popular thing to say and I’ll get pilloried for it.
Lex Fridman
Great.
Great.
James Sexton
I just don’t know… And I don’t want to blame the victim of infidelity. But was the relationship really where it needed to be? Were you truly the most just dutiful spouse who was seeing this person’s needs be met? Again, we’ve established in the granola story that people can sometimes with good intentions not be meeting their partner’s needs or perceiving their partner’s needs, or their partner isn’t communicating them the right way, or all of the above. But I’ve rarely seen very happy, content couples that cheat on each other. And so I understand there’s a shame in saying, “This person cheated on me,” or, “I cheated on this person.” Because I represent the cheater and I represent the cheated. I represent the victim of domestic violence and I represent the perpetrator of domestic violence. I represent the person with the substance use disorder, the person married to the person. So I don’t get to choose the white or the black hat. I have my client and that’s my client.
I just don’t know… And I don’t want to blame the victim of infidelity. But was the relationship really where it needed to be? Were you truly the most just dutiful spouse who was seeing this person’s needs be met? Again, we’ve established in the granola story that people can sometimes with good intentions not be meeting their partner’s needs or perceiving their partner’s needs, or their partner isn’t communicating them the right way, or all of the above. But I’ve rarely seen very happy, content couples that cheat on each other. And so I understand there’s a shame in saying, “This person cheated on me,” or, “I cheated on this person.” Because I represent the cheater and I represent the cheated. I represent the victim of domestic violence and I represent the perpetrator of domestic violence. I represent the person with the substance use disorder, the person married to the person. So I don’t get to choose the white or the black hat. I have my client and that’s my client.
And it forces me to put myself into their story from their point of view. And I think that kind of radical empathy that you need to engage in on a daily basis to represent people in those kinds of proceedings it’s just… I don’t know. It just doesn’t seem like there’s good guys and bad guys. It just seems like it’s complicated, and people’s intentions and where they actually end up are different.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I think there are some sense in still remembering the betrayal as it being a symptom of taking life a little too seriously, too seriously where you don’t… Life shouldn’t be taken that seriously. You should be able to laugh at it all. I like the story you say of being able to appreciate the battle that should give stars for those kind of wars that we fought, and just be able to laugh at it all.
Yeah. I think there are some sense in still remembering the betrayal as it being a symptom of taking life a little too seriously, too seriously where you don’t… Life shouldn’t be taken that seriously. You should be able to laugh at it all. I like the story you say of being able to appreciate the battle that should give stars for those kind of wars that we fought, and just be able to laugh at it all.
James Sexton
Especially with love. Love’s just so absurd. It’s so-
Especially with love. Love’s just so absurd. It’s so-
Lex Fridman
It’s just crazy.
It’s just crazy.
James Sexton
It’s so crazy. I mean, I think It’s funny. This is real candor. But as a man. There’s nothing funnier than when you finish masturbating. There’s no more humbling moment. And I like to think about the fact that the richest, famous, most powerful person in the world, they jerk off. The most powerful man in the world jerks off, I’m sure. All of them do. I mean, you probably know them so you could ask. And that moment where you just come and you go, “What am I doing? What the… Now I got to wipe the… Oh. Good lord.” And there’s this feeling of, “But a second ago this seemed like a great idea.” And it was, by the way. It was a great idea. But there’s this moment, this satori where you just go, “Oh. This is so silly.” Well, that’s love. That’s sex. It’s crazy.
It’s so crazy. I mean, I think It’s funny. This is real candor. But as a man. There’s nothing funnier than when you finish masturbating. There’s no more humbling moment. And I like to think about the fact that the richest, famous, most powerful person in the world, they jerk off. The most powerful man in the world jerks off, I’m sure. All of them do. I mean, you probably know them so you could ask. And that moment where you just come and you go, “What am I doing? What the… Now I got to wipe the… Oh. Good lord.” And there’s this feeling of, “But a second ago this seemed like a great idea.” And it was, by the way. It was a great idea. But there’s this moment, this satori where you just go, “Oh. This is so silly.” Well, that’s love. That’s sex. It’s crazy.
When you read other people’s infidelity, the text messages, the emails… Because I have to do that all the time. And I’ll tell you how we make the sausage. In a divorce lawyer’s office, some of the most entertaining moments is dramatic readings aloud of people’s infidelity exchanges with their lovers.
Lex Fridman
The sexts.
The sexts.
James Sexton
Yeah. The sexts and the… It’s just so ridiculous because people have to go through all kinds of gymnastics to be able to meet and have sex in weird places. And You’re reading this, and you’re reading these texts, and you go like, “Oh, my god.” And by the way, I’ve represented some very powerful people. And you read their texts with their lover or even their spouse, even their spouse, and they’re just pathetic. I mean, they’re just so not powerful. They’re so like, “Hey, babe.”
Yeah. The sexts and the… It’s just so ridiculous because people have to go through all kinds of gymnastics to be able to meet and have sex in weird places. And You’re reading this, and you’re reading these texts, and you go like, “Oh, my god.” And by the way, I’ve represented some very powerful people. And you read their texts with their lover or even their spouse, even their spouse, and they’re just pathetic. I mean, they’re just so not powerful. They’re so like, “Hey, babe.”
Totally nameless, I have a very powerful, wealthy, famous former client where there’s a whole series of texts about, “Is my dick weird?” Which by the way, I think the answer is if you have to ask if you have a weird dick, the answer’s probably yes because I’ve owned one and I’ve never thought, “Is this weird?” But the fact that you’re having this discussion, it’s absurd. It’s hilarious. Love is hilarious. It’s bizarre. It’s such a weird vulnerability. It’s such a basic, visceral human need. It really is something that we just… It’s mysterious. But it doesn’t have to be that complicated. I don’t think that even betrayal, like I said, it doesn’t have to be that complicated. I think we can frame it differently.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You can laugh at the whole thing. I mean, I think what we don’t often do with ourselves is look back at text or look back at emails or look back at Google search. I did that recently, just looking at what I searched for 10 years ago, 15. It’s like, forget last week. Just look at your Google searches last week and you’re like, “Wait a minute. What? Why did you just search for this 50 times?”
Yeah. You can laugh at the whole thing. I mean, I think what we don’t often do with ourselves is look back at text or look back at emails or look back at Google search. I did that recently, just looking at what I searched for 10 years ago, 15. It’s like, forget last week. Just look at your Google searches last week and you’re like, “Wait a minute. What? Why did you just search for this 50 times?”
James Sexton
Why did The Karate Kid III pop into my head? Where’s Ralph Macchio now? Where did-
Why did The Karate Kid III pop into my head? Where’s Ralph Macchio now? Where did-
Lex Fridman
Who is he dating? And then his mother and then you’re [inaudible 00:47:23]-
Who is he dating? And then his mother and then you’re [inaudible 00:47:23]-
James Sexton
And then a restaurant nearby. Like, how did I go from this to that? But it made sense at the time. So when you ask someone, “How did our relationship fall apart?” it’s like looking at the Google search history of yourself from 10 year… You don’t even know why you were thinking about those things. And now you want to understand why you did what you did, felt what you felt, she felt what she felt, she did what she did, and why the two of you, how you impacted each other and interacted with each other. Really? You think that’s doable?
And then a restaurant nearby. Like, how did I go from this to that? But it made sense at the time. So when you ask someone, “How did our relationship fall apart?” it’s like looking at the Google search history of yourself from 10 year… You don’t even know why you were thinking about those things. And now you want to understand why you did what you did, felt what you felt, she felt what she felt, she did what she did, and why the two of you, how you impacted each other and interacted with each other. Really? You think that’s doable?
Lex Fridman
In the courtroom, does that come up, text messages with whoever you’re cheating with? So you have to-
In the courtroom, does that come up, text messages with whoever you’re cheating with? So you have to-
James Sexton
Yeah. I mean, cheating doesn’t come up as much because most states are no-fault states now. So why someone’s getting divorced, whether it’s infidelity or… It doesn’t matter. There’s no good spouse bonus or bad spouse penalty.
Yeah. I mean, cheating doesn’t come up as much because most states are no-fault states now. So why someone’s getting divorced, whether it’s infidelity or… It doesn’t matter. There’s no good spouse bonus or bad spouse penalty.
Lex Fridman
Well, there isn’t?
Well, there isn’t?
James Sexton
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
I mean, can you elaborate on that? That’s-
I mean, can you elaborate on that? That’s-
James Sexton
Well, you can have… We’ve had times where we have to prove infidelity because we want to prove what’s called wasteful dissipation of marital assets, which means that you were spending money that was marital money on a paramour. That’s the legal name for a boyfriend or girlfriend in the marriage. And usually, the person calls it, “That whore,” or, “That piece of shit.” But we call them paramour. Yeah. The paramour.
Well, you can have… We’ve had times where we have to prove infidelity because we want to prove what’s called wasteful dissipation of marital assets, which means that you were spending money that was marital money on a paramour. That’s the legal name for a boyfriend or girlfriend in the marriage. And usually, the person calls it, “That whore,” or, “That piece of shit.” But we call them paramour. Yeah. The paramour.
And sometimes we have to prove inclination and opportunity. We have to prove that this person had the inclination to cheat and that they had the opportunity to cheat. And then we want to show that, “Okay. So when they went away, that should be considered dissipation of marital assets.” So if you go out to dinner with your brother, you didn’t dissipate the marital estate. But if you bought your paramour a Tiffany bracelet, that would be a dissipation of marital assets and the person’s entitled to a credit back for that from what was taken out of the marital estate. So we do sometimes have to authenticate text messages on the witness stand or in depositions.
And what’s interesting about that is the way people approach it. People sometimes try to pretend, “Oh, no. This is just my good friend,” which is just… You kill your credibility if you, “Oh, no. She’s just my very good friend.” She’s not. She’s not. That makes no sense whatsoever. Or, “No. We were just friends at that point. And then several months later is when we… Once this marriage was over, that’s when we got together as partner.” That’s ridiculous. But sometimes people just own it. Just own it. I did a deposition of an executive once and opposing counsel thought they were going to really hit him. They were like, “Looking at this credit card receipt, what was this charge for for this hotel?” He was like, “Oh. That was for a hotel room that I got with my girlfriend.” “And you were married?” “Yes. Yes.” “Where did you stay at the hotel?” “We didn’t even stay. We actually just did an afternoon delight, rolled around in bed for the day.” And it was like, took all the thunder out of that.
Lex Fridman
What’s the downside of doing that? It seems like a really-
What’s the downside of doing that? It seems like a really-
James Sexton
There wasn’t. It actually I think helped his credibility. It was my client. So I thought it was the right move. We hadn’t really discussed it in advance, but he was naturally intelligent enough to go, “Yeah. My credibility, I’m not going to lie under oath. I’ll admit what it was. But I’ll do it in such an…” We did it at the end, like Eminem at the end of 8 Mile. It was very like, “Yeah. I cheated on her with this person. Now tell these people something they don’t know about me.”
There wasn’t. It actually I think helped his credibility. It was my client. So I thought it was the right move. We hadn’t really discussed it in advance, but he was naturally intelligent enough to go, “Yeah. My credibility, I’m not going to lie under oath. I’ll admit what it was. But I’ll do it in such an…” We did it at the end, like Eminem at the end of 8 Mile. It was very like, “Yeah. I cheated on her with this person. Now tell these people something they don’t know about me.”
And that’s how I try to… As a trial lawyer, we actually in my firm refer to it as the 8 Mile strategy, which is if I know there was a text message sent, ” You piece of shit. I hope you die.” My client sent that text message to his co-parent. On my examination of my client, I will say, “I’d like to have this marked for identification, shown to the witness.” “What is that?” “It’s a text message.” “Who’s it to?” “The plaintiff.” “You sent it?” “Yeah.” “Read it out loud for the court.” “Do I have to?” “I think you should.” “You’re a piece of S.” “Does it say S?” “No.” “What does it say?” “Well, it’s a profanity” “Say it to…” “You piece of shit. I hope that you die.” “You sent that to her?” “Yes.” “Why?” “I was really mad.” “Do you think that was good?” “No.” “Do you think it was helpful for your co-parenting relationship with her?” “No.”
“Why did you send it then?” “She sent me 50 texts exactly like that. And I never responded, and I pushed it down every time. And then finally I just blew up at her.” “If you had it to do over again, would you do it differently?” “I wish I could say I would, but the truth is I’m human and I was at my limits.” And I’m watching opposing counsel cross out entire sheets of their cross-examination because It’s gone now. They thought that they had their Perry Mason moment. They had their like, “Did you order the code red moment?” And It’s gone now because if you just own and accept your fault or your issues in the relationship, you can take a lot of the power out of that.
Lex Fridman
I wish we wouldn’t take text seriously.
I wish we wouldn’t take text seriously.
James Sexton
I don’t think we should have substantive discussions via text. I think text was designed for, “Are you here?” “Yes. 15 minutes away.” Or, “I got here safely. Love you.” Substantive discussions… People love having arguments via text. And I have to say when you read other people’s text messages, as I am often forced to do, it is amazing because just like that Google history you were talking about, I don’t know how the hell you got from one thing to another.
I don’t think we should have substantive discussions via text. I think text was designed for, “Are you here?” “Yes. 15 minutes away.” Or, “I got here safely. Love you.” Substantive discussions… People love having arguments via text. And I have to say when you read other people’s text messages, as I am often forced to do, it is amazing because just like that Google history you were talking about, I don’t know how the hell you got from one thing to another.
I was just reading actually on the way here in the car. I was reading through a text exchange between two co-parents in the middle of a custody thing that I’m involved in. And it’s like, “You piece of shit. You never cared about anything. And I’m going to take… You have no right to take the kids from me,” da, da, da, da. Nothing in between. The next day, “Maddie got a good grade honor science thing.” “oh. That’s great. She’s doing so well. It makes me so happy.” “Yeah. Her teacher said she’s doing really well.” “Yeah. That’s really great to see.” “I’ll be there about 15 minutes late.” “No problem.” “See you then.”
Wait. It was a day ago. I want to know, was there a phone conversation in between where one of you went, “Hey, man.” “Listen. I’m really sorry about that.” “Oh, no. Look. We were both pissed. Whatever.” Or is it just like you did that, and then we’re supposed to pretend that didn’t happen, and now we’re just going to talk about what Maddie got on her test?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Well, sometimes a good nap or a good night’s sleep can solve a lot of emotional issues.
Yeah. Well, sometimes a good nap or a good night’s sleep can solve a lot of emotional issues.
James Sexton
I totally get it. If you’re looking just at the texts, it begs the question. Wouldn’t you take the nap and then go, “Hey, listen. I just woke up from the nap. It turns out I was really tired.” Does that not happen by text?
I totally get it. If you’re looking just at the texts, it begs the question. Wouldn’t you take the nap and then go, “Hey, listen. I just woke up from the nap. It turns out I was really tired.” Does that not happen by text?
Lex Fridman
No. Because sometimes, it’s hard to probably apologize for being an asshole. So I think we use just text. We humans use all kinds of forms of communication to vent. I think it’s the wrong thing to do, but people do do that.
No. Because sometimes, it’s hard to probably apologize for being an asshole. So I think we use just text. We humans use all kinds of forms of communication to vent. I think it’s the wrong thing to do, but people do do that.
James Sexton
Text has a permanence, though. It’s writing. I mean, it’s writing.
Text has a permanence, though. It’s writing. I mean, it’s writing.
Lex Fridman
You think like a lawyer. I like it.
You think like a lawyer. I like it.
James Sexton
I do think like a lawyer. But lawyers think detail. And why would you write that down? Writing it down, would you write it down and would you put it on a billboard in Times Square? Everything you say on Facebook or Instagram can and will be used against you in a court of law. Every photo you post. I mean, that’s going on with… what’s his name… Jake Paul or whatever Paul and Dillon Danis right now. That guy’s girlfriend, every picture that’s ever been put on the internet of her, by her is being weaponized right now.
I do think like a lawyer. But lawyers think detail. And why would you write that down? Writing it down, would you write it down and would you put it on a billboard in Times Square? Everything you say on Facebook or Instagram can and will be used against you in a court of law. Every photo you post. I mean, that’s going on with… what’s his name… Jake Paul or whatever Paul and Dillon Danis right now. That guy’s girlfriend, every picture that’s ever been put on the internet of her, by her is being weaponized right now.
Lex Fridman
To reference an earlier part of our discussion, that’s love. You take a big risk putting it out there, putting it out there on text, putting it out there on social media. You take risks.
To reference an earlier part of our discussion, that’s love. You take a big risk putting it out there, putting it out there on text, putting it out there on social media. You take risks.
James Sexton
But is the reward of doing it via text worthwhile? Listen. The reward of love, I think, is worth the risks of love. But the benefit of communicating by text, does it merit that risk of that being in writing that the person can reflect on and review and scroll back and get heated up again about?
But is the reward of doing it via text worthwhile? Listen. The reward of love, I think, is worth the risks of love. But the benefit of communicating by text, does it merit that risk of that being in writing that the person can reflect on and review and scroll back and get heated up again about?
Lex Fridman
I don’t know. We just take risks and we’re vulnerable with each other.
I don’t know. We just take risks and we’re vulnerable with each other.
James Sexton
There may be something about text that for whatever reasons inspires a kind of candor, because I think it is a new way to communicate in the scheme of things. And so sometimes we don’t know the thing until It’s really come into existence. So I don’t know. I think it started as something that we just communicated in a very extemporaneous, unplanned way. Texts were meant to be, “I’m here. I’m outside.” Whatever it might be. And so what happens when you start to talk about more emotional, deeper, bigger things or visceral things or more emphatic, passionate things using a technology that was originally just being used for the other purpose? I don’t know the answer to that. What I do know is yeah, as a lawyer; A, from an evidentiary perspective; and B, I just know what it looks like on the outside. I know when I read it what it looks like.
There may be something about text that for whatever reasons inspires a kind of candor, because I think it is a new way to communicate in the scheme of things. And so sometimes we don’t know the thing until It’s really come into existence. So I don’t know. I think it started as something that we just communicated in a very extemporaneous, unplanned way. Texts were meant to be, “I’m here. I’m outside.” Whatever it might be. And so what happens when you start to talk about more emotional, deeper, bigger things or visceral things or more emphatic, passionate things using a technology that was originally just being used for the other purpose? I don’t know the answer to that. What I do know is yeah, as a lawyer; A, from an evidentiary perspective; and B, I just know what it looks like on the outside. I know when I read it what it looks like.
And that’s not always accurate. It’s like when you watch a video of someone at just their worst moment and the person tries to say, “But wait. That’s not me. That was just me in that moment. That was me at this incredible low point.” And I think as a lawyer, my job is to weaponize that and to try to say, “Okay. This low point is indicative of who they actually are.” And when I’m defending someone, I’m not supposed to say, “Well, this is their low point and We’ve all been to a low point. And this is just a moment in this person. And to judge them by that moment, would you want to be judged by your worst moment?” So I have to be able to look at that both directions.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I mean, I don’t think anyone looks great on text.
Yeah. I mean, I don’t think anyone looks great on text.
James Sexton
I mean, there’s so much of our communication that is missing. Your expression… My sense of humor does not do well via text because I have sometimes this sarcastic sense of humor or I have a dry sense of humor, and it does not always translate well to text. The nuance of things is lost sometimes.
I mean, there’s so much of our communication that is missing. Your expression… My sense of humor does not do well via text because I have sometimes this sarcastic sense of humor or I have a dry sense of humor, and it does not always translate well to text. The nuance of things is lost sometimes.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But that’s what makes the risk of it hilarious. I mean, the emojis, the memes, all that, taking a risk… There’s a risk with the text. If you do some dark, dry statement that’s a joke, and then the pause, and then there’s no response for a couple of hours. I mean, That’s beautiful. I don’t know. That’s-
Yeah. But that’s what makes the risk of it hilarious. I mean, the emojis, the memes, all that, taking a risk… There’s a risk with the text. If you do some dark, dry statement that’s a joke, and then the pause, and then there’s no response for a couple of hours. I mean, That’s beautiful. I don’t know. That’s-
James Sexton
It’s the gap between the two trapezes. Once you’ve hit send and you’re like, “Well, let’s see where this goes. There’s no coming back now.” And You’re waiting and waiting. It’s like that moment of just hang is… Yeah, that’s a rush. I mean, that’s a rush. That’s a beautiful thing.
It’s the gap between the two trapezes. Once you’ve hit send and you’re like, “Well, let’s see where this goes. There’s no coming back now.” And You’re waiting and waiting. It’s like that moment of just hang is… Yeah, that’s a rush. I mean, that’s a rush. That’s a beautiful thing.
Lex Fridman
Well, I have my friend Michael Malice living close by. And if the courtroom were ever to see the text between us, we would be both in jail for many-
Well, I have my friend Michael Malice living close by. And if the courtroom were ever to see the text between us, we would be both in jail for many-
James Sexton
Okay. [inaudible 00:59:00] who to subpoena.
Okay. [inaudible 00:59:00] who to subpoena.
Lex Fridman
… many years. Yeah. When this finally comes out-
… many years. Yeah. When this finally comes out-
James Sexton
Yeah. We’re going to [inaudible 00:59:04]-
Yeah. We’re going to [inaudible 00:59:04]-
Lex Fridman
… when I have my Johnny Depp, Amber Heard moment, I’ll-
… when I have my Johnny Depp, Amber Heard moment, I’ll-
James Sexton
Get the subpoenas ready.
Get the subpoenas ready.
Lex Fridman
We’ll get Michael Malice.
We’ll get Michael Malice.
Johnny Depp and Amber Heard
James Sexton
The Johnny Depp, Amber Heard thing was a great example of, in a gunfight between those two, everyone was cheering for the bullets. I mean, I don’t think anybody looked like a hero. They both looked like what they are, which is humans, really flawed humans who had… It really is like that People Magazine thing. Stars, they’re just like us. We watched that and went like, “Oh, yeah. They’re just like us. They cannot keep it together.” They just have these ridiculous, toxic moments where both of them looked awful in that trial.
The Johnny Depp, Amber Heard thing was a great example of, in a gunfight between those two, everyone was cheering for the bullets. I mean, I don’t think anybody looked like a hero. They both looked like what they are, which is humans, really flawed humans who had… It really is like that People Magazine thing. Stars, they’re just like us. We watched that and went like, “Oh, yeah. They’re just like us. They cannot keep it together.” They just have these ridiculous, toxic moments where both of them looked awful in that trial.
Lex Fridman
What do you take away from that trial, just given all the work you’ve done? I mean, for me… I don’t know if you can speak to that… it’s probably the first time I’ve seen that kind of a complicated relationship, even just to say a relationship, laid out in this raw form, the fights of a relationship.
What do you take away from that trial, just given all the work you’ve done? I mean, for me… I don’t know if you can speak to that… it’s probably the first time I’ve seen that kind of a complicated relationship, even just to say a relationship, laid out in this raw form, the fights of a relationship.
James Sexton
Yeah. My feeling about that trial is there is no amount of money that would be worth laying that kind of stuff bare publicly.
Yeah. My feeling about that trial is there is no amount of money that would be worth laying that kind of stuff bare publicly.
Lex Fridman
For you, if you were Johnny Depp.
For you, if you were Johnny Depp.
James Sexton
For me. Yeah. There’s no amount of money.
For me. Yeah. There’s no amount of money.
Lex Fridman
Or if you were Amber Heard. I don’t know which-
Or if you were Amber Heard. I don’t know which-
James Sexton
Because they both look awful. They both look awful. And I don’t think I’m qualified to say if one or both of them are awful, but they both had moments in that courtroom where their behavior and words looked awful. And I just don’t know that exposing that to the world… I just don’t know. I mean, I understand the point of view that by bringing that suit, Johnny Depp was saying, “Look. Yeah. I have to show these awful things to the world about myself, but it’s not as bad as what she’s claimed I’ve done.” So I get it. I’m not saying That’s incorrect. And for Amber Heard, I think her response is, “Well, for him to say I’m lying, I have to prove my…” But my god, what an awful thing to watch. All it really is, it’s just another couple… You know how banal that is? You know how many of those-
Because they both look awful. They both look awful. And I don’t think I’m qualified to say if one or both of them are awful, but they both had moments in that courtroom where their behavior and words looked awful. And I just don’t know that exposing that to the world… I just don’t know. I mean, I understand the point of view that by bringing that suit, Johnny Depp was saying, “Look. Yeah. I have to show these awful things to the world about myself, but it’s not as bad as what she’s claimed I’ve done.” So I get it. I’m not saying That’s incorrect. And for Amber Heard, I think her response is, “Well, for him to say I’m lying, I have to prove my…” But my god, what an awful thing to watch. All it really is, it’s just another couple… You know how banal that is? You know how many of those-
Lex Fridman
So this kind of stuff happens a lot?
So this kind of stuff happens a lot?
James Sexton
A lot? It’s the norm. It’s not the exception. They just happen to have a grand scale because they have lots of people around them and lots of money. But yeah. That kind of dysfunction, that kind of chaos, that kind of he said, she said, two people with completely differing histories of what happened in the marriage, false allegations of domestic violence or true allegations of domestic violence that are completely denied by the person. And you have witnesses that’ll say, “Oh, my god. They never engaged in any kind…” Because again, no one engages in domestic violence with company over. You don’t invite friends. People always say, “Oh, no. I saw them. They seemed so happy.” People always do this to me as a divorce lawyer. They come in and they go, “Well, here’s photos of the kids smiling with me. So that’s proof that I’m a good dad.” I’m like, “There’s photos of Jeffrey Dahmer smiling with people he ate later. And you think these photos prove something?” The lack of…
A lot? It’s the norm. It’s not the exception. They just happen to have a grand scale because they have lots of people around them and lots of money. But yeah. That kind of dysfunction, that kind of chaos, that kind of he said, she said, two people with completely differing histories of what happened in the marriage, false allegations of domestic violence or true allegations of domestic violence that are completely denied by the person. And you have witnesses that’ll say, “Oh, my god. They never engaged in any kind…” Because again, no one engages in domestic violence with company over. You don’t invite friends. People always say, “Oh, no. I saw them. They seemed so happy.” People always do this to me as a divorce lawyer. They come in and they go, “Well, here’s photos of the kids smiling with me. So that’s proof that I’m a good dad.” I’m like, “There’s photos of Jeffrey Dahmer smiling with people he ate later. And you think these photos prove something?” The lack of…
I’m in the middle of a very complex domestic violence trial. And the entire defense on the other side is, “Well, we have photos of them on vacation where they look very happy and she never called the cops.” That’s no defense at all. Most victims of intimate partner abuse don’t call the cops. They don’t self-identify as victims of domestic violence.
Lex Fridman
And they probably have many stretches of time of intense happiness, or happiness?
And they probably have many stretches of time of intense happiness, or happiness?
James Sexton
Of course. Of course. And by the way, perpetrators of domestic violence are charismatic. How else would they get victims? It’s not like… If they were ogre-ish, no one would sign on for that relationship. It’s that when they’re good, they’re so good that when they’re bad, you go, “But wait. No. That’s not him. The really good person’s him.” Or her. We saw that in the public testimony of that Depp-Heard thing is there were moments where you look at her and go, “Oh, my god. I want one just like that.” There are moments where you listen to the testimony and go, “Oh, my god. She’s awful. What? That’s just evil.” And the same for him.
Of course. Of course. And by the way, perpetrators of domestic violence are charismatic. How else would they get victims? It’s not like… If they were ogre-ish, no one would sign on for that relationship. It’s that when they’re good, they’re so good that when they’re bad, you go, “But wait. No. That’s not him. The really good person’s him.” Or her. We saw that in the public testimony of that Depp-Heard thing is there were moments where you look at her and go, “Oh, my god. I want one just like that.” There are moments where you listen to the testimony and go, “Oh, my god. She’s awful. What? That’s just evil.” And the same for him.
This should teach us something about how not only are there two sides to every story, that there’s just so much complexity and nuance to these. But I think everyone was asking the question whether you were team Depp, team Heard, or team I could care less about either of these people. Everybody’s looking at it going, “Why? Eight billion people in the world. Why did you stay together? Just break up. You’re miserable. It’s obvious. It’s obvious you’re not… This can’t be worth it.”
Lex Fridman
I’ve actually become friendly with Camilla Vasquez, who’s the lawyer on the Depp side. She’s an incredible woman.
I’ve actually become friendly with Camilla Vasquez, who’s the lawyer on the Depp side. She’s an incredible woman.
James Sexton
Great lawyer.
Great lawyer.
Lex Fridman
And just a great human being, just how passionate she is about her work. I mean, you radiate this kind of same passion. She’s just truly happy doing what she does. But also where the stress of a case, it becomes her. She can’t sleep, all this kind of stuff, which is fascinating.
And just a great human being, just how passionate she is about her work. I mean, you radiate this kind of same passion. She’s just truly happy doing what she does. But also where the stress of a case, it becomes her. She can’t sleep, all this kind of stuff, which is fascinating.
James Sexton
I think that’s a function of our professions. Even after 20-plus years of doing this, the night before a trial, I can hardly sleep, and I-
I think that’s a function of our professions. Even after 20-plus years of doing this, the night before a trial, I can hardly sleep, and I-
Lex Fridman
Excitement? Fear?
Excitement? Fear?
James Sexton
Yes. Yes. All of that. All of that. And I even have moments as I pull up to the courthouse and I listen… I wear certain cuff links that are my lucky cuff links or something. And I pull up to the courthouse. I walk into the courtroom. And I have this feeling in the pit of my stomach, and then it starts. And the moment it starts, something in me goes, “Oh, yeah. I know how to do this.” And it’s instantly… I own it. I love it. Yeah. The people that love this job, being a trial lawyer, being particularly a divorce trial lawyer, family law, trial lawyer, I love it. I love it more than I loved it when I started doing it. I can’t imagine spending five days a week looking forward to two. I love what I do. I don’t know that I’ll ever love anyone or anything more than I love the work.
Yes. Yes. All of that. All of that. And I even have moments as I pull up to the courthouse and I listen… I wear certain cuff links that are my lucky cuff links or something. And I pull up to the courthouse. I walk into the courtroom. And I have this feeling in the pit of my stomach, and then it starts. And the moment it starts, something in me goes, “Oh, yeah. I know how to do this.” And it’s instantly… I own it. I love it. Yeah. The people that love this job, being a trial lawyer, being particularly a divorce trial lawyer, family law, trial lawyer, I love it. I love it more than I loved it when I started doing it. I can’t imagine spending five days a week looking forward to two. I love what I do. I don’t know that I’ll ever love anyone or anything more than I love the work.
Lex Fridman
So I saw you talk with Steve Harvey a bunch of times and I always loved it. One thing just sticks in my head from something he said as advice, that if you and your partner, your spouse, if there’s a fight, there’s a difficult thing you have to deal with, keep that to yourself. Don’t talk to anyone else. That’s a little… what does he say… a two-arm circle or something, whatever the expression is. But basically resolve it all internally. When you face the world, you have a front of rock-solid-
So I saw you talk with Steve Harvey a bunch of times and I always loved it. One thing just sticks in my head from something he said as advice, that if you and your partner, your spouse, if there’s a fight, there’s a difficult thing you have to deal with, keep that to yourself. Don’t talk to anyone else. That’s a little… what does he say… a two-arm circle or something, whatever the expression is. But basically resolve it all internally. When you face the world, you have a front of rock-solid-
James Sexton
Don’t take sides against the family.
Don’t take sides against the family.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
… rock solid.
… rock solid.
James Sexton
Don’t take sides against the family.
Don’t take sides against the family.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yes. It all boils down to Godfather.
Yeah. Yes. It all boils down to Godfather.
James Sexton
Everything boils down to Godfather references, it really does.
Everything boils down to Godfather references, it really does.
Lex Fridman
And true romance.
And true romance.
James Sexton
Yeah, you don’t take sides against the family. You don’t show that weakness to the world. I mean, again, I don’t know that Steve, in candor, would say, “You shouldn’t discuss it with your own therapist.” But I think what he’s saying is, don’t project it out to the world, don’t share that because I think it can change the way people view your relationship, which then will change the way you view your relationship. And so I think don’t run reckless when it comes to that primary relationship, don’t run your mouth recklessly.
Yeah, you don’t take sides against the family. You don’t show that weakness to the world. I mean, again, I don’t know that Steve, in candor, would say, “You shouldn’t discuss it with your own therapist.” But I think what he’s saying is, don’t project it out to the world, don’t share that because I think it can change the way people view your relationship, which then will change the way you view your relationship. And so I think don’t run reckless when it comes to that primary relationship, don’t run your mouth recklessly.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s, one of the things I mentioned to you offline, that my now close friend, Joe Rogan, I’ve never heard him ever speak negatively of his wife. It’s always super positive how awesome of a person she is. And that, to me, has always been an inspiration to do the same for everybody in my life, to always speak positively about them. That has probably a virtuous spiral effect.
Yeah, it’s, one of the things I mentioned to you offline, that my now close friend, Joe Rogan, I’ve never heard him ever speak negatively of his wife. It’s always super positive how awesome of a person she is. And that, to me, has always been an inspiration to do the same for everybody in my life, to always speak positively about them. That has probably a virtuous spiral effect.
James Sexton
I’m sure. that’s probably because he has a great wife and he has a great wife in part because of that. I think it’s clear that he’s in her corner and cheering for her, it’s clear she’s cheering for him. It’s not like Joe Rogan’s not a man who has opportunity. I mean, he’s surrounded by UFC ring girls for god’s sakes. This is a guy who has all the opportunity in the world and he seems to be quite a fan of his wife. And that’s a superpower, that’s a real thing.
I’m sure. that’s probably because he has a great wife and he has a great wife in part because of that. I think it’s clear that he’s in her corner and cheering for her, it’s clear she’s cheering for him. It’s not like Joe Rogan’s not a man who has opportunity. I mean, he’s surrounded by UFC ring girls for god’s sakes. This is a guy who has all the opportunity in the world and he seems to be quite a fan of his wife. And that’s a superpower, that’s a real thing.
Now the question is he doesn’t seem to talk about it like, “Oh, I got to really work at that.” And that’s not a man who’s afraid to talk about what he works at. He’s pretty honest about, “Man, yeah, I got to work really hard to stay in shape. I got to work really hard to be able to do this. Yeah, I’m not good at memorizing that, it takes time.” But I’ve never heard him say, “Oh, marriage is a lot of work.” I think that’s to his credit because it seems like they’re enjoying that. And it’s also not incredibly public, it’s not something … most people couldn’t pick her out of a lineup.
Lex Fridman
He kept it private for many years, and just because it’s a private joy, it’s a private, deep, meaningful, intimate partnership. That’s, interesting, that’s also an inspiration. Not everything about your life has to be this, ” Look at me, I’m happy. I’m in a happy relationship. Everything is wonderful.”
He kept it private for many years, and just because it’s a private joy, it’s a private, deep, meaningful, intimate partnership. That’s, interesting, that’s also an inspiration. Not everything about your life has to be this, ” Look at me, I’m happy. I’m in a happy relationship. Everything is wonderful.”
James Sexton
Especially that. I think there is something about the womb like cocoon like joy of love, when you’re just tucked in, snuggled in, just pressed against each other with that. That’s such a … it’s just the two of you, and that’s lovely and that’s such a good thing. We’re just dying for connection and that connection is so big, it’s so everything.
Especially that. I think there is something about the womb like cocoon like joy of love, when you’re just tucked in, snuggled in, just pressed against each other with that. That’s such a … it’s just the two of you, and that’s lovely and that’s such a good thing. We’re just dying for connection and that connection is so big, it’s so everything.
One of my earliest psychedelic experiences, probably when I was a teenager, but a theme that’s been persistent in every psychedelic experience I’ve ever had is this idea of everything is connection. Everything is being pressed to someone and with them, the warmth of human connection. One of the reasons I enjoy listening to your work and your perspective has always been that I think at the core you see connection and love. And I think for me, from my earliest experiences with psychedelics at 16, 17, I was very attuned to that. I was very much … that was put on my radar by psychedelics and just stayed part of my consciousness forever. And I think I had a 30 something year break from psychedelics, but it was like when I came back to it, I went, “Oh yeah, it’s still there. That’s still the core of everything, is connection.”
Lex Fridman
I mean, it’s fascinating how deeply you value connection, how empathic you are that you would be doing what you’re doing, which is … or is it not, is it not counterintuitive?
I mean, it’s fascinating how deeply you value connection, how empathic you are that you would be doing what you’re doing, which is … or is it not, is it not counterintuitive?
James Sexton
I think it’s actually why I’m well-suited for what I do. I think what I do is I have to learn the story of my client and know it and feel it very deeply and I have to feel it in a very human way that’s very compassionate to this person. And then I have to feel it and understand it in a way that’s incredibly antagonistic to it, so I can shore up defenses. So I have to feel this person’s story and feelings from every possible angle because every one of them is a vulnerability and every one of them is a potential strength and a potential defense. And so I actually think it’s my number one, other than extemporaneous speaking ability, it is my number one job tool, is the ability to radically empathize and to put myself in the emotional state of someone in its best possible light and its worst possible light so that I can see again, the defense and I can see the vulnerability.
I think it’s actually why I’m well-suited for what I do. I think what I do is I have to learn the story of my client and know it and feel it very deeply and I have to feel it in a very human way that’s very compassionate to this person. And then I have to feel it and understand it in a way that’s incredibly antagonistic to it, so I can shore up defenses. So I have to feel this person’s story and feelings from every possible angle because every one of them is a vulnerability and every one of them is a potential strength and a potential defense. And so I actually think it’s my number one, other than extemporaneous speaking ability, it is my number one job tool, is the ability to radically empathize and to put myself in the emotional state of someone in its best possible light and its worst possible light so that I can see again, the defense and I can see the vulnerability.
Lex Fridman
But I mean, so that’s beautifully put, but also just to bear witness to this connection broken in those dramatic way, over and over and over and over.
But I mean, so that’s beautifully put, but also just to bear witness to this connection broken in those dramatic way, over and over and over and over.
James Sexton
That part is hard, but I was a hospice volunteer for many, many years when I first got out of college and it really showed me a lot about what is sadness, what is tragic and what is just inevitable decay, what is pain and decay? We all die, we play a game you can’t win to the utmost. And so if we know the answer to all of this is you’re going to die, then what do we do with the rest of that time? If all your stuff is just stuff, it’s just going to go to … the money’s going to go, everything, your looks is going to go, everything’s going to go, love’s going to end one way or the … then what are we doing?
That part is hard, but I was a hospice volunteer for many, many years when I first got out of college and it really showed me a lot about what is sadness, what is tragic and what is just inevitable decay, what is pain and decay? We all die, we play a game you can’t win to the utmost. And so if we know the answer to all of this is you’re going to die, then what do we do with the rest of that time? If all your stuff is just stuff, it’s just going to go to … the money’s going to go, everything, your looks is going to go, everything’s going to go, love’s going to end one way or the … then what are we doing?
And again, I think it’s love and connection, but what I’m doing for a living is helping, and I don’t look at it as what I’m doing is helping people beat the crap out of each other. I look at it as I’m trying to help a client build their post-divorce life, to sort of rise from the ashes of that which has fallen apart and move on to the next chapter and refocus and have the things they need financially, emotionally, whatever it might be, interpersonally, in terms of with their kids. And so for me, it’s actually a job that is very consistent with my desire to build connection and to be empathetic.
Lex Fridman
And witnessing the ashes doesn’t make you cynical about the whole thing of love?
And witnessing the ashes doesn’t make you cynical about the whole thing of love?
James Sexton
No, because again, 56% of marriages end in divorce, but 84% are remarried within five years. We keep doing it over and over again.
No, because again, 56% of marriages end in divorce, but 84% are remarried within five years. We keep doing it over and over again.
Lex Fridman
And that’s a good thing?
And that’s a good thing?
James Sexton
I think it is a good thing.
I think it is a good thing.
Lex Fridman
The mess of it, the absurdity of it, the hypocrisy of it, there’s something beautiful about that.
The mess of it, the absurdity of it, the hypocrisy of it, there’s something beautiful about that.
James Sexton
Well it’s just the return is so great on the investment. Listen man, I’ve had more than one dog. When my dog died, the first dog I had died, I remember when I’m never going to love again. I’m done, I’m done with this. I will never expose myself to this kind of pain again. I’ll never have to take the dog bed and put it in the closet and like … And then some friend called me and said, “We have an adoption event. Can you just watch this dog for 24 hours and then we’ll take him? We just need …” And I went, “Yeah, all right, I’ll watch the dog for the night.” And this dog come in and he said, “Oh, he has mange, he’s not going …” fuck, I got another dog. He walked in and my heart went, “Yeah, I got a dog.” And now that dog is 13 years old and his eyes are cloudy and he doesn’t go up the stairs real well and he’s going to break my heart, and I wouldn’t change that for the world.
Well it’s just the return is so great on the investment. Listen man, I’ve had more than one dog. When my dog died, the first dog I had died, I remember when I’m never going to love again. I’m done, I’m done with this. I will never expose myself to this kind of pain again. I’ll never have to take the dog bed and put it in the closet and like … And then some friend called me and said, “We have an adoption event. Can you just watch this dog for 24 hours and then we’ll take him? We just need …” And I went, “Yeah, all right, I’ll watch the dog for the night.” And this dog come in and he said, “Oh, he has mange, he’s not going …” fuck, I got another dog. He walked in and my heart went, “Yeah, I got a dog.” And now that dog is 13 years old and his eyes are cloudy and he doesn’t go up the stairs real well and he’s going to break my heart, and I wouldn’t change that for the world.
Lex Fridman
I’m still there, I’m still struggling for the second one, I lost a dog and it broke my heart.
I’m still there, I’m still struggling for the second one, I lost a dog and it broke my heart.
James Sexton
And you’ll never lose that pain. But I promise you, your heart has an infinite capacity for the kind of love you felt with that dog. And you’ll never feel a love that replaces the hole. There will never be another Buster for me, but there was Kava. And you know what, and when he’s gone, there will never be another one of him. But you know what, when that stupid puppy that was five months old stumbled in, I went, “I guess I’m going to do this again.” And you know what, I’m so glad, I’m so glad. And I know, by the way, I know now because that’s where I’ve said, it’s that Joseph Brodsky poem, a song, ” I wish I knew no astronomy when stars appear.” I wish I didn’t know the pain. But you know what, I don’t care. I don’t care and I believe we don’t care. Again, I think there’s something to that. If something hurts so badly and you go, “I’m going to do it again, I’m going to do it again,” then it must be of value, it must be of real value.
And you’ll never lose that pain. But I promise you, your heart has an infinite capacity for the kind of love you felt with that dog. And you’ll never feel a love that replaces the hole. There will never be another Buster for me, but there was Kava. And you know what, and when he’s gone, there will never be another one of him. But you know what, when that stupid puppy that was five months old stumbled in, I went, “I guess I’m going to do this again.” And you know what, I’m so glad, I’m so glad. And I know, by the way, I know now because that’s where I’ve said, it’s that Joseph Brodsky poem, a song, ” I wish I knew no astronomy when stars appear.” I wish I didn’t know the pain. But you know what, I don’t care. I don’t care and I believe we don’t care. Again, I think there’s something to that. If something hurts so badly and you go, “I’m going to do it again, I’m going to do it again,” then it must be of value, it must be of real value.
Lex Fridman
There’s also a different perspective on it, that pain. So there’s that, from Louis, the show, of this interaction with an old man with Louis C.K. And he says that, because Louis is mourning the loss of, got split up, he got dumped or whatever, and he’s mourning the loss of that partner, of love. And the old man says that that is the best part, missing the love is still love. The real bad part is when you forget it, when the pain fades and it’s all gone. But the pain is actually a kind of celebration of the love you had.
There’s also a different perspective on it, that pain. So there’s that, from Louis, the show, of this interaction with an old man with Louis C.K. And he says that, because Louis is mourning the loss of, got split up, he got dumped or whatever, and he’s mourning the loss of that partner, of love. And the old man says that that is the best part, missing the love is still love. The real bad part is when you forget it, when the pain fades and it’s all gone. But the pain is actually a kind of celebration of the love you had.
James Sexton
Of course. Well the opposite of love, isn’t hate. The opposite of love is indifference. There’s no question about that. I mean, hate is a passionate emotion, love is a passionate emotion. And there is a school of thought that says that only unfulfilled love can be truly romantic. But I believe that it’s what I think I learned from hospice, is that I think for me, knowing the impermanence is the thing, it’s the key.
Of course. Well the opposite of love, isn’t hate. The opposite of love is indifference. There’s no question about that. I mean, hate is a passionate emotion, love is a passionate emotion. And there is a school of thought that says that only unfulfilled love can be truly romantic. But I believe that it’s what I think I learned from hospice, is that I think for me, knowing the impermanence is the thing, it’s the key.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s finite, eventually it’s going to be over so that intensifies the feeling, that’s when you can have pure love without the drama.
Yeah, it’s finite, eventually it’s going to be over so that intensifies the feeling, that’s when you can have pure love without the drama.
James Sexton
Dogs are for me a great example. And again, I don’t know what it all means existentially, but I just feel like that kind of love has to be here to teach us something. And I feel like the fact that they’re so amazing and just so loving and so wonderful and the bond we feel is so amazing and deep and doesn’t require a lot of maintenance, and yet it’s so finite, it’s just this short little lifespan. And I feel like there’s just such a lesson there, there’s so much there to unpack about the nature of connection and loss and that your heart has this infinite capacity.
Dogs are for me a great example. And again, I don’t know what it all means existentially, but I just feel like that kind of love has to be here to teach us something. And I feel like the fact that they’re so amazing and just so loving and so wonderful and the bond we feel is so amazing and deep and doesn’t require a lot of maintenance, and yet it’s so finite, it’s just this short little lifespan. And I feel like there’s just such a lesson there, there’s so much there to unpack about the nature of connection and loss and that your heart has this infinite capacity.
I’m telling you, when my dog died, when Buster died, I remember thinking with certainty, I will never do this again because I’ll never love that way again. I’ll never love a dog the way I love this dog. And it’s just not true, that’s just not true. You have this infinite capacity. And that makes it scary actually because right now there’s so many people you could love, there’s so many dogs you could love. There’s so much out there and it requires a certain bravery and tremendous amount of risk to do it.
Lex Fridman
And a commitment, because I think to really experience love is you just dive in, because there is a huge number of people, but to really, I mean, you have to really dive into the full complexity, the full range of another human being.
And a commitment, because I think to really experience love is you just dive in, because there is a huge number of people, but to really, I mean, you have to really dive into the full complexity, the full range of another human being.
James Sexton
Yeah. Which is hard because we don’t even, I don’t know that we even feel comfortable diving into the full range of ourselves. There’s pieces of ourselves we try to push away or not think about.
Yeah. Which is hard because we don’t even, I don’t know that we even feel comfortable diving into the full range of ourselves. There’s pieces of ourselves we try to push away or not think about.
Complicated divorce cases
Lex Fridman
Okay, so speaking of the whole sociopath/empath that is all embodied in one human being that is you, let’s go back to some cases perhaps that you’ve worked on, just something that stands out to you. What’s maybe the craziest, most complicated thing you’ve worked on, is there something that pops to mind?
Okay, so speaking of the whole sociopath/empath that is all embodied in one human being that is you, let’s go back to some cases perhaps that you’ve worked on, just something that stands out to you. What’s maybe the craziest, most complicated thing you’ve worked on, is there something that pops to mind?
James Sexton
Craziest would be different than most complicated.
Craziest would be different than most complicated.
Lex Fridman
Let’s go craziest.
Let’s go craziest.
James Sexton
Yeah, so craziest, gosh, that’s a great question. So from a chaos standpoint, I mean, I see so many bizarre fact patterns and so many variations of people cheating with people, people sleeping with the nanny, people sleeping with a relative of their spouse, people having same sex or polyamorous relationships and the other person doesn’t even know they’re not monogamous, so much craziness that you could fill 15 books. In terms of complexity, I mean, emotionally complex is any custody case is emotionally complex because you’re dealing with parenting issues and what makes a good parent I think is a very tricky question because I’m trying to convince a judge who’s a better parent and that is so loaded with subjective value judgements.
Yeah, so craziest, gosh, that’s a great question. So from a chaos standpoint, I mean, I see so many bizarre fact patterns and so many variations of people cheating with people, people sleeping with the nanny, people sleeping with a relative of their spouse, people having same sex or polyamorous relationships and the other person doesn’t even know they’re not monogamous, so much craziness that you could fill 15 books. In terms of complexity, I mean, emotionally complex is any custody case is emotionally complex because you’re dealing with parenting issues and what makes a good parent I think is a very tricky question because I’m trying to convince a judge who’s a better parent and that is so loaded with subjective value judgements.
Lex Fridman
Is there, just to linger on the maternal presumption, is that a thing you come face-to-face with often in court?
Is there, just to linger on the maternal presumption, is that a thing you come face-to-face with often in court?
James Sexton
Well, it was, I mean, it was real, it was the law. There was something in the law called the maternal presumption, it was also known as the tender years doctrine, which meant that a child under the age of seven was presumed to be in the custody of the mother unless you could show she was an unfit mother. So that’s where the idea of someone has to be proven an unfit mother came from. Now in the ’80s, 1980s, that was changed. But under my skin is under my sovereignty. I mean, you can’t suggest that there isn’t in the world a suggestion that a mother who births a child and feeds a child with her body, doesn’t have a particular bond with a child that’s different than a father’s bond with a child. So where do we put that? How much importance do we put on it? Now that there’s better and more research in the mental health field about attachment theory in infants, there’s also a lot of research on how is attachment formed, how should parenting schedules be put together based on attachment theory, but there’s conflicting perspectives on that.
Well, it was, I mean, it was real, it was the law. There was something in the law called the maternal presumption, it was also known as the tender years doctrine, which meant that a child under the age of seven was presumed to be in the custody of the mother unless you could show she was an unfit mother. So that’s where the idea of someone has to be proven an unfit mother came from. Now in the ’80s, 1980s, that was changed. But under my skin is under my sovereignty. I mean, you can’t suggest that there isn’t in the world a suggestion that a mother who births a child and feeds a child with her body, doesn’t have a particular bond with a child that’s different than a father’s bond with a child. So where do we put that? How much importance do we put on it? Now that there’s better and more research in the mental health field about attachment theory in infants, there’s also a lot of research on how is attachment formed, how should parenting schedules be put together based on attachment theory, but there’s conflicting perspectives on that.
Lex Fridman
And so judge to judge you see, is there a lot of variation?
And so judge to judge you see, is there a lot of variation?
James Sexton
Yeah, there is because there’s lots of kinds of judges. There’s judges that are thoughtful, enlightened, interested in the mental health research, and there’s judges that just were unsuccessful lawyers, that were good politically and got elected and they just want a job where they show up at nine o’clock, they have a lunch break from 12:00 until two o’clock and that they leave at 4:30 and they get a certain number of weeks vacation and a pension after 20 years.
Yeah, there is because there’s lots of kinds of judges. There’s judges that are thoughtful, enlightened, interested in the mental health research, and there’s judges that just were unsuccessful lawyers, that were good politically and got elected and they just want a job where they show up at nine o’clock, they have a lunch break from 12:00 until two o’clock and that they leave at 4:30 and they get a certain number of weeks vacation and a pension after 20 years.
Lex Fridman
What is in general the process of these custody battles, what’s the landscape here?
What is in general the process of these custody battles, what’s the landscape here?
James Sexton
Well most, the overwhelming majority of custody cases don’t end up in my office, they are a negotiation between two people that love their children more than they dislike their soon to be ex. So the overwhelming majority of cases are just two people going, “Okay, how are we going to make decisions together?” Because there are decisions that have to be made about kids, will they go to public or private school, can they go on medication if they need it or not? Should we change pediatricians? All those kinds of things. How do we make decisions and when will we each spend time with the kids? And so most custody cases are just that. Most custody cases are just a discussion, a negotiation between counsel about those issues and they’re not ugly and they’re not anything, they’re just people. Again, sometimes people have differing perspectives, but sometimes people haven’t thought through their perspective.
Well most, the overwhelming majority of custody cases don’t end up in my office, they are a negotiation between two people that love their children more than they dislike their soon to be ex. So the overwhelming majority of cases are just two people going, “Okay, how are we going to make decisions together?” Because there are decisions that have to be made about kids, will they go to public or private school, can they go on medication if they need it or not? Should we change pediatricians? All those kinds of things. How do we make decisions and when will we each spend time with the kids? And so most custody cases are just that. Most custody cases are just a discussion, a negotiation between counsel about those issues and they’re not ugly and they’re not anything, they’re just people. Again, sometimes people have differing perspectives, but sometimes people haven’t thought through their perspective.
So as a divorce lawyer, a lot of what I’m doing is counseling a person because they come in and say, “Well I’ve been the person who handles all of the homework and all of the everything, so he should only see the kids on weekends.” And there’s a logic to that, I’ve always done the homework with the kids, so I’m the parent who’s in charge of the homework and he’s obviously not done that before. But there’s also a logic that you can then say, right, but then you’re doing all the heavy lifting of parenting and he’s doing none of that. And you were a married couple and living together so he was trusting you to do that because you’re good at it and you seem to like it. So maybe now we want him to have to do some of the heavy lifting of parenting because we don’t want the child when they’re 13 to say, “I love dad, we have nothing but a good time together. Whereas you make me do my homework and eat my broccoli. Dad’s the grass on the other side of the fence that’s greener.”
So sometimes it’s about educating a client to change their frame, to look at this differently. Yeah, okay, we always go to my mother’s for Thanksgiving, so I need every Thanksgiving. Okay, well you were married so you went, now you’re going to have new traditions. Things are changing for your children, things are changing for your family, you’re both going to have new traditions. So a lot of times it’s just educating people on looking at things in a different way, looking at their parenting in a different way. We’re not going to live in the same house anymore, but we’re still going to parent this child or these children together. What’s much more interesting, because I don’t get invited to a lot of parties, but when I get invited to parties, if somebody says, “What do you do for a living?” And I say, “I’m a divorce lawyer.” They go, “Oh my God, you must have stories.
That’s the way everybody says, “Oh my God, you must have so many stories.” And if I said, “Yeah, there was this couple and they slowly grew apart and then they decided that it would be good for them to end their relationship as a married couple, but they wanted to continue to have an amicable co-parenting relationship. So they divided their assets and they figured out a good parenting access schedule that made sure that they both had both leisure time and responsibilities with the children.” People would be like, “That’s the worst fucking story, that’s so boring.” So what they really want is, and then he was sleeping with the nanny and then she caught him. So the truth is people want to hear about those flame outs. And by the way, those are super interesting as a lawyer, it’s super interesting.
Cheating with the nanny
Lex Fridman
It’s usually going to be what, infidelity? You do have a chapter called, Everybody Fucks the Nanny.
It’s usually going to be what, infidelity? You do have a chapter called, Everybody Fucks the Nanny.
James Sexton
Everybody’s Fucking the Nanny.
Everybody’s Fucking the Nanny.
Lex Fridman
Everybody’s-
Everybody’s-
James Sexton
There’s a nanny fascination out there. I try to explain it in the book, but yeah, I mean, I’ve had some great nanny stories. I mean, people run off with the nanny, people end up getting married to the nanny. I had one where he convinced her that they should have a threesome with the nanny. They got the nanny drunk, they had a bunch of threesomes with the nanny and then the nanny and the wife paired up and left him.
There’s a nanny fascination out there. I try to explain it in the book, but yeah, I mean, I’ve had some great nanny stories. I mean, people run off with the nanny, people end up getting married to the nanny. I had one where he convinced her that they should have a threesome with the nanny. They got the nanny drunk, they had a bunch of threesomes with the nanny and then the nanny and the wife paired up and left him.
Lex Fridman
Oh, nice
Oh, nice
James Sexton
And they’re still quite happy.
And they’re still quite happy.
Lex Fridman
That seems like a happy ending to the whole-
That seems like a happy ending to the whole-
James Sexton
For everyone but him, but it was his idea.
For everyone but him, but it was his idea.
Lex Fridman
Well he’s really going to have a nanny fascination now.
Well he’s really going to have a nanny fascination now.
James Sexton
Yeah, well now he’s got to see the nanny whose now the stepparent to the kids and it was his bright idea of let’s have a threesome with the nanny. Yeah, I mean, the nanny thing I think is a function of, in many circumstances, is the characteristics of the wife that he remembers fondly and that have been extinguished by the presence of children. So my words of wisdom is not don’t get a nanny or make sure you get an ugly nanny. My thought on it is that a woman should remember, even when she’s a mother, that she’s also a woman who a man, they fell in love with each other and she should take time to be in touch with the part of herself that is an independent woman, that’s interesting and interested. And there’s a lot to be learned from divorced couples because divorced couples, if you do it right, it’s awesome.
Yeah, well now he’s got to see the nanny whose now the stepparent to the kids and it was his bright idea of let’s have a threesome with the nanny. Yeah, I mean, the nanny thing I think is a function of, in many circumstances, is the characteristics of the wife that he remembers fondly and that have been extinguished by the presence of children. So my words of wisdom is not don’t get a nanny or make sure you get an ugly nanny. My thought on it is that a woman should remember, even when she’s a mother, that she’s also a woman who a man, they fell in love with each other and she should take time to be in touch with the part of herself that is an independent woman, that’s interesting and interested. And there’s a lot to be learned from divorced couples because divorced couples, if you do it right, it’s awesome.
I had a wonderful experience parenting and being divorced, because I divorced when my kids were quite young. My co-parent, my ex-wife is awesome, she’s a great mom, nice person, we’re good friends. And it was great. I had half the time I had my kids and I could focus on them and the other half of the time they were with the other person who loves them as much as I do, and I didn’t have any other responsibilities of kids and I could just have all of the wonderful fun that you can have when you don’t have the responsibilities that come with full-time caring for children.
Relationship advice
Lex Fridman
What would you say now on the flip positive side, we’ve been talking about the collapse of things, what about success? What’s the secret to a successful romantic relationship?
What would you say now on the flip positive side, we’ve been talking about the collapse of things, what about success? What’s the secret to a successful romantic relationship?
James Sexton
My mom used to say that it’s hard to define intelligence, but you could spot stupid a mile away. So I’m much better at pointing out where people fall apart because I spend a lot of time with people who have fallen apart in their relationship. So it’s easy to then say, “Well just don’t do what they do.” But I don’t know that that’s not an oversimplification. So again, I think the answer is connection. I think the answer is affection, presence, mindfulness and presence. I do think, in my personal and professional experience, that most people want you fully more than they just want you in a disconnected way. So if you were to say to your romantic partner, “You can have me for two hours where I’m giving you my undivided attention and I’m really joyful to be with you, or you can have me for eight hours where I’m sort of half paying attention and I kind of want to be someplace else for part of the time.” There’s just no choice there, it’s so obvious.
My mom used to say that it’s hard to define intelligence, but you could spot stupid a mile away. So I’m much better at pointing out where people fall apart because I spend a lot of time with people who have fallen apart in their relationship. So it’s easy to then say, “Well just don’t do what they do.” But I don’t know that that’s not an oversimplification. So again, I think the answer is connection. I think the answer is affection, presence, mindfulness and presence. I do think, in my personal and professional experience, that most people want you fully more than they just want you in a disconnected way. So if you were to say to your romantic partner, “You can have me for two hours where I’m giving you my undivided attention and I’m really joyful to be with you, or you can have me for eight hours where I’m sort of half paying attention and I kind of want to be someplace else for part of the time.” There’s just no choice there, it’s so obvious.
So I think presence is a big piece and I think the you, the me and the we, I think is important because I think in relationships there’s you and there’s me and we meet and something magical happens and we become we, and now there’s you and there’s me and there’s we. Then the we gets bigger and bigger and bigger, and isn’t it great because it’s such a nice warm place. It gets so big. But it gets so big that you get small and me gets small because we. And if any of us dares to ask, well what about you? What about me? No, no, the we, what, you don’t like the we, you don’t want to be with the we? Whoa, whoa. No, it’s not that, but the we only exists because there was you and there was me and I really liked you and you really liked me. And so we picked each other out of lots of choices and now this we is so fucking big, it threatens to just consume all of it. And I really think that there’s something there we have to look at more honestly.
Lex Fridman
So the we should not consume everything, but at the same time, not be small?
So the we should not consume everything, but at the same time, not be small?
James Sexton
Well the we is the you and the me and if you mix it so much that you and me loses its components that all that’s left is we, I don’t think that that’s the way to do it. I just think the world pulls us in that direction. We get told culturally that, well why aren’t you going with this person to that? Why would you do that by yourself? And anyone knows that there’s joy in being away from each other and there’s joy being reunited together. So why don’t we speak very honestly about that? And I think some of that’s our own insecurity. Well why don’t you want to be with me 24 hours a day? Aren’t I wonderful, aren’t I delightful? It’s like, well wait, what?
Well the we is the you and the me and if you mix it so much that you and me loses its components that all that’s left is we, I don’t think that that’s the way to do it. I just think the world pulls us in that direction. We get told culturally that, well why aren’t you going with this person to that? Why would you do that by yourself? And anyone knows that there’s joy in being away from each other and there’s joy being reunited together. So why don’t we speak very honestly about that? And I think some of that’s our own insecurity. Well why don’t you want to be with me 24 hours a day? Aren’t I wonderful, aren’t I delightful? It’s like, well wait, what?
Lex Fridman
Well, but also probably people are either afraid or lazy in developing their individual selves. I mean, it’s lonely going out there in the world by yourself and it’s comforting in that little cocoon of we.
Well, but also probably people are either afraid or lazy in developing their individual selves. I mean, it’s lonely going out there in the world by yourself and it’s comforting in that little cocoon of we.
James Sexton
I mean, it can also be incredibly adventurous going out into the world by yourself and then coming back to the we with a full report. Coming back and saying like, “Oh my God, guess what I saw? Guess what I did?Like, “We have to go there together now because all I could think about was you. While I was there I was like, oh my god, she would love this.” That’s magical, that’s amazing. Look what I brought you back. I went for this and then I got you this present from there. There’s something … and we know this. I always thought it was when you watch the old westerns where the hero’s leaving and he’s walking away from the cabin, he’s going to go fight the gunfight. And she runs up and she goes, “Please don’t go, don’t go, stay here with me.” And he kisses her and then he goes. If he goes like, “Yeah, you’re right, I’ll just stay here, it’s cool. I didn’t want to deal with that anyway.” He’s not the hero anymore then.
I mean, it can also be incredibly adventurous going out into the world by yourself and then coming back to the we with a full report. Coming back and saying like, “Oh my God, guess what I saw? Guess what I did?Like, “We have to go there together now because all I could think about was you. While I was there I was like, oh my god, she would love this.” That’s magical, that’s amazing. Look what I brought you back. I went for this and then I got you this present from there. There’s something … and we know this. I always thought it was when you watch the old westerns where the hero’s leaving and he’s walking away from the cabin, he’s going to go fight the gunfight. And she runs up and she goes, “Please don’t go, don’t go, stay here with me.” And he kisses her and then he goes. If he goes like, “Yeah, you’re right, I’ll just stay here, it’s cool. I didn’t want to deal with that anyway.” He’s not the hero anymore then.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah, there’s deep truth to that. And probably, like you mentioned, sex is probably a big part of it. Friendship, that seems to me like a really important one.
Yeah. Yeah, there’s deep truth to that. And probably, like you mentioned, sex is probably a big part of it. Friendship, that seems to me like a really important one.
James Sexton
Depends on how you define friend. If being a friend means we have some connection to each other and we have each other’s cell phone numbers, okay, then we’re friends. But if it’s a bigger definition than that, if it’s like you’ve picked me up at the airport or you’re someone I could call, that it’s like, “Dude, I got to hide a body. You get shovel and lime.”
Depends on how you define friend. If being a friend means we have some connection to each other and we have each other’s cell phone numbers, okay, then we’re friends. But if it’s a bigger definition than that, if it’s like you’ve picked me up at the airport or you’re someone I could call, that it’s like, “Dude, I got to hide a body. You get shovel and lime.”
Lex Fridman
I like how you escalated from airport pickup to murder.
I like how you escalated from airport pickup to murder.
James Sexton
I try to go in two directions.
I try to go in two directions.
Lex Fridman
You’re a true New Yorker.
You’re a true New Yorker.
James Sexton
I have to tell you, I define the Ben Affleck movie, The Town, that scene, that’s friendship to me. I mean, to me the ideal male friendship is the scene where he says, “I need you to come with me. We’re going to hurt some people and you never have to ask me about it again.”
I have to tell you, I define the Ben Affleck movie, The Town, that scene, that’s friendship to me. I mean, to me the ideal male friendship is the scene where he says, “I need you to come with me. We’re going to hurt some people and you never have to ask me about it again.”
Lex Fridman
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
James Sexton
And he says, “Whose car are we taking?” And that’s sort of like, to me that’s friendship. So it’s a high bar to be like a friend. So when you say friendship, I think that’s the kind of friendship you should ideally have with your romantic partner. If you’re getting married, it should be the like whose car are we taking? It should be that, it’s you and me.
And he says, “Whose car are we taking?” And that’s sort of like, to me that’s friendship. So it’s a high bar to be like a friend. So when you say friendship, I think that’s the kind of friendship you should ideally have with your romantic partner. If you’re getting married, it should be the like whose car are we taking? It should be that, it’s you and me.
Lex Fridman
To be fair, that bar is reached with me with a lot of people, if you call me tomorrow and there’s a body.
To be fair, that bar is reached with me with a lot of people, if you call me tomorrow and there’s a body.
James Sexton
But you’re a big open heart.
But you’re a big open heart.
Lex Fridman
But it’s true, I wonder how many people out there are like that, in terms of hiding the body.
But it’s true, I wonder how many people out there are like that, in terms of hiding the body.
James Sexton
I mean, my theory on this, because I think I’m like you in that way, I think I’m very sensitive. I feel things really deeply. And I think the world is terrifying when you feel things very deeply because there’s so much pain, there’s so much betrayal, there’s so many opportunities to be hurt. And I think when you are that kind of person, you go through stages and one of them is that I don’t care, I don’t feel anything, it doesn’t matter. I don’t feel anything. I don’t feel anything. I don’t feel anything. You try to convince yourself I don’t feel anything, it’s fine, I don’t feel anything. And then at some point you do feel all of it, and then it’s like, oh my God, the weight of this is … I mean, I think it’s the whole arc of Pink Floyd, The Wall, it’s literally the entire arc of Pink Floyd, The Wall. And the song, Stop. I want to go home, take off this uniform and leave the show.
I mean, my theory on this, because I think I’m like you in that way, I think I’m very sensitive. I feel things really deeply. And I think the world is terrifying when you feel things very deeply because there’s so much pain, there’s so much betrayal, there’s so many opportunities to be hurt. And I think when you are that kind of person, you go through stages and one of them is that I don’t care, I don’t feel anything, it doesn’t matter. I don’t feel anything. I don’t feel anything. I don’t feel anything. You try to convince yourself I don’t feel anything, it’s fine, I don’t feel anything. And then at some point you do feel all of it, and then it’s like, oh my God, the weight of this is … I mean, I think it’s the whole arc of Pink Floyd, The Wall, it’s literally the entire arc of Pink Floyd, The Wall. And the song, Stop. I want to go home, take off this uniform and leave the show.
When you feel all of it, the army of hammers coming at you, the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, the thousand natural shocks, the [inaudible 01:36:00] too. When you feel all of that deeply, it’s very hard, but it can also be a superpower because I think when you can bring that to a relationship, when you can bring that to a profession, like you’ve done and I’ve done, then there’s something very magical about that. The ability to bring it out in someone, to feel it in yourself, to understand it is a gift, it’s a wonderful, wonderful gift. I’m humbled by what it brought me professionally and I’d like to think that you and I have both found professions that enable us to use that sensitivity, that empathy in a productive and good way and in a fulfilling, a personally fulfilling way, and ideally in a way that does good for other people.
Cost of divorce
Lex Fridman
You yourself are incredibly successful and a high performer, you’ve dealt with a lot of CEOs and just high performers in all walks of life. What can you say about successful relationships with those kinds of folks?
You yourself are incredibly successful and a high performer, you’ve dealt with a lot of CEOs and just high performers in all walks of life. What can you say about successful relationships with those kinds of folks?
James Sexton
That’s a good question. I think-
That’s a good question. I think-
Lex Fridman
Is it all the same stuff or is there something special when they’re busier?
Is it all the same stuff or is there something special when they’re busier?
James Sexton
Well, I think when you represent high net worth individuals but also high performing, I would make a distinction between high net worth and high performing. So I’ve done high net worth divorces where the person’s like a trust fund kid, even though they’re an adult. But what they did to achieve their high net worth status is their great-grandfather died. So that is different than someone who is self-made, who through discipline, focus, entrepreneurship, whatever it might be, that they have found success. And there’s also a difference between financial success and fame, because I’ve represented famous people that actually did not have that much money in the scheme of things or much liquidity. And I’ve represented people that were not in any way famous and were very high performing in their field.
Well, I think when you represent high net worth individuals but also high performing, I would make a distinction between high net worth and high performing. So I’ve done high net worth divorces where the person’s like a trust fund kid, even though they’re an adult. But what they did to achieve their high net worth status is their great-grandfather died. So that is different than someone who is self-made, who through discipline, focus, entrepreneurship, whatever it might be, that they have found success. And there’s also a difference between financial success and fame, because I’ve represented famous people that actually did not have that much money in the scheme of things or much liquidity. And I’ve represented people that were not in any way famous and were very high performing in their field.
In New York, we have a lot of finance people and what I find is their divorces are challenging, one, on a technical level because figuring out what they have and how to divide it is tricky. Because when something’s moving that quickly, when your portfolio’s movement affects a market, that’s challenging. Jeff Bezos divorce, for a time, when it was in its early stages, could affect Amazon stock. It did. So that’s a real thing, there are businesses that are affected by a divorce. But in terms of being in a relationship with someone who is a high-
James Sexton
… with someone who is a high-performing person. Most of the high-performing people I know are creatures of discipline and routine. From Joe Rogan, we’ve talked about any of these people, they have a routine, they have a discipline, they have a focus, they have a way they like to do things, they have a type of coffee they like to drink, they have a way that they like to do. And divorce is a tremendous disruption. I mean, divorce is fundamental things in your life are shifted out of your control, like your spouse may be the one who has decided you are no longer going to live in that house. You will no longer see your children on these days. So to take that control away from someone is very, very hard.
… with someone who is a high-performing person. Most of the high-performing people I know are creatures of discipline and routine. From Joe Rogan, we’ve talked about any of these people, they have a routine, they have a discipline, they have a focus, they have a way they like to do things, they have a type of coffee they like to drink, they have a way that they like to do. And divorce is a tremendous disruption. I mean, divorce is fundamental things in your life are shifted out of your control, like your spouse may be the one who has decided you are no longer going to live in that house. You will no longer see your children on these days. So to take that control away from someone is very, very hard.
I mean, when someone is a high performing, high net worth person, they are used to being told yes, they’re used to being able to buy their way out of a problem. But just like illness, you can hire the best doctor but you can’t cure cancer because you have a lot of money. You can hire the best lawyer, but you can’t cure a custody case. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s seemingly endless custody disputes that have been going on for years now with the best lawyers in California working on them is proof of the fact that you can’t just buy a resolution to those things, that you have to go through it just like everyone else.
Lex Fridman
So that lets me ask the question of how much does a divorce usually cost?
So that lets me ask the question of how much does a divorce usually cost?
James Sexton
It’s a great question. Average divorce, what I always tell clients in the first consultation is I tell them the most reasonable question a person could ask me sitting in that chair across from me is two, how long is this going to take, and how much is it going to cost. And those are two questions I can’t answer. And then, the next thing they say is, “Give me a range,” which is a bit like calling your doctor and saying, “I have a headache. What is it?” “Well, I can’t tell you. I’d have to do tests.” “Give me a range.” “Okay, it’s a reaction to the barometric pressure and it’ll be gone in 15 minutes or it’s a brain aneurysm and you’ll be dead in five minutes, there’s your range.” And so, it didn’t really help. The least expensive divorce I’ve ever seen is two people who, one of whom comes into my office and says, “We’ve written down on a yellow pad what we figured out at the kitchen table. She’s going to keep the house. I’m going to keep the 401k, we have a bank account at this bank. We’re going to split that 50-50. I’m going to pay her this much in child support each month, and We’re going to agree from time to time on what we’re going to do in terms of the schedule with the kids, but they primarily going to live with her. Can you write this up and make it legally binding?” Yes. 3,500 bucks.
It’s a great question. Average divorce, what I always tell clients in the first consultation is I tell them the most reasonable question a person could ask me sitting in that chair across from me is two, how long is this going to take, and how much is it going to cost. And those are two questions I can’t answer. And then, the next thing they say is, “Give me a range,” which is a bit like calling your doctor and saying, “I have a headache. What is it?” “Well, I can’t tell you. I’d have to do tests.” “Give me a range.” “Okay, it’s a reaction to the barometric pressure and it’ll be gone in 15 minutes or it’s a brain aneurysm and you’ll be dead in five minutes, there’s your range.” And so, it didn’t really help. The least expensive divorce I’ve ever seen is two people who, one of whom comes into my office and says, “We’ve written down on a yellow pad what we figured out at the kitchen table. She’s going to keep the house. I’m going to keep the 401k, we have a bank account at this bank. We’re going to split that 50-50. I’m going to pay her this much in child support each month, and We’re going to agree from time to time on what we’re going to do in terms of the schedule with the kids, but they primarily going to live with her. Can you write this up and make it legally binding?” Yes. 3,500 bucks.
Lex Fridman
Just as a side note, I have a friend who went through a divorce and handled it just masterfully by giving more than he’s supposed to and having nothing but love in his heart and happiness with the kids and just, I don’t know, that to me is just an inspiration. His whole view was like who caress about money? And also, he refused with every ounce of his being to have anything but complete love for the other person.
Just as a side note, I have a friend who went through a divorce and handled it just masterfully by giving more than he’s supposed to and having nothing but love in his heart and happiness with the kids and just, I don’t know, that to me is just an inspiration. His whole view was like who caress about money? And also, he refused with every ounce of his being to have anything but complete love for the other person.
James Sexton
Yeah. I’ve had clients who, with a straight face, will say to me like, well I’m not going to quibble over a few million dollars. And they mean it, because to them it’s numbers on a page. So I’ll personalize this a bit. So I have a friendly relationship with my ex-wife, who’s the mother of my sons who are adults, and we have maintained a very good relationship. And so now, it’s many years divorced later, 17, 18 years later and we were able to sort of post-game that relationship, even our co-parenting relationship, we kind of post-game it when we chat with each other.
Yeah. I’ve had clients who, with a straight face, will say to me like, well I’m not going to quibble over a few million dollars. And they mean it, because to them it’s numbers on a page. So I’ll personalize this a bit. So I have a friendly relationship with my ex-wife, who’s the mother of my sons who are adults, and we have maintained a very good relationship. And so now, it’s many years divorced later, 17, 18 years later and we were able to sort of post-game that relationship, even our co-parenting relationship, we kind of post-game it when we chat with each other.
And I remember once saying to her, “Yeah, you never screwed around with me when it came to the kids. You were always so cool. If I called you like if I was having a really bad day at work,” or seeing just an ugly custody case and it just felt like I would call her and say like, “Hey, can I just pick the boys up and take them out for ice cream or something tonight? I know It’s not my night, but would you mind if I just took them out for a couple hours?” She’d be like, “Yeah, sure, come on by.” She was always flexible like that.
And I said to her, “Was that just goodwill. You’re just a good person or what was that about?” And she was like, ” Yeah, it was partly that.” But she was like, “It was partly that you never screwed around with me when it came to money. If the kids needed something or if I needed something as the mother of the kids, you were always like, yeah, sure, of course.” Her air conditioning kicked out and she needed it to replace it and she didn’t have liquidity at the time. I didn’t have a lot of money at the time because it was a long time ago. And I was like, “All right, no, because I don’t want you hot and upset and I don’t want the boys to be in… Of course.”
And so, I think, yeah, when you approach a conflict, it’s very hard to argue with someone who won’t argue with you. If the person approaches the argument from the point of view of like I’m not going to argue with you, I’m going to absorb your aggression, I’m going to just not meet it with that. I’m going to meet it with love, I’m going to meet it with positivity. It doesn’t always work because sometimes people are so angry that they’re relentless.
But I have to tell you, the louder you get, the quieter I get, the more you seem irrational and that’s what I always try to bring that to court proceedings. I always try to bring to court. If I know my adversary is coming in hard, I’ll come in quiet and slow and deliberate because I want the volume to be turned up way too high over there. And then, it looks like, “Your honor, what’s their problem over there?”
I say this to clients. They got a four-year-old, they’re getting divorced, let’s say. There’s going to be a wedding in like 20 something years. There’s going to be a wedding and it’s either going to be the wedding where they got to put these people on opposite sides of the room, because if they pass each other by the shrimp boat, they’re going to kill each other, or it’s the wedding where you stand there, you take some pictures. You kind of go like, “Yeah, we fucked up this whole marriage thing, but man we did a good job with this kid. Did we?”
And the decisions you make right now, there’s a straight line to that wedding. And so, even if you don’t like this person, even if you’re mad at them, even if you’re mad at yourself for the choices you made in choosing them as a co-parent, every single Mother’s Day for 27 years, I have told my now longtime ex-wife, “Happy Mother’s Day. I’m so glad that we had kids together. I’m so glad you’re the mother of my kids, because they wouldn’t be who they are if it wasn’t that they were part me and part you and I’m so grateful for you and I’m always cheering for you.” How hard is that? How hard is that?
Lex Fridman
Well, it’s really hard for some people, but-
Well, it’s really hard for some people, but-
James Sexton
I don’t understand why it’s so hard for some people. I’ll tell you, I do find that hard. There’s not a lot of things that I don’t understand, but that’s one that I don’t understand. I put in one of the weird things I did as a divorce lawyer that caused a little stir among my colleagues for a few years was some years ago, we all steal from each other’s work, divorce lawyers. We’re like the matrimonial mafia. We all know each other, we all deal with each other over and over again, but we all have the same job, and so, we are the only people that really know the unique stresses of that job. So even though we try to kill each other all day, it’s like boxers, professional fighters. Yeah, your job’s to take each other’s head off but nobody knows what the two of you went through like the two of you that’s.
I don’t understand why it’s so hard for some people. I’ll tell you, I do find that hard. There’s not a lot of things that I don’t understand, but that’s one that I don’t understand. I put in one of the weird things I did as a divorce lawyer that caused a little stir among my colleagues for a few years was some years ago, we all steal from each other’s work, divorce lawyers. We’re like the matrimonial mafia. We all know each other, we all deal with each other over and over again, but we all have the same job, and so, we are the only people that really know the unique stresses of that job. So even though we try to kill each other all day, it’s like boxers, professional fighters. Yeah, your job’s to take each other’s head off but nobody knows what the two of you went through like the two of you that’s.
That’s why I always get, I go like all kinds of rubbery when I see after the fight the two people hug each other because always like, yeah, because you know what? They relate to each other better than anybody. They suffered. They bled. The competitors, they bled. So I really think divorce lawyers, we have that same kind of relationship. We went through this stress on opposite sides trying to take each other apart. And I find that we all steal from each other’s material when it comes to separation agreements, provisions that we use for agreements. All the agreements are like these Frankenstein monsters of, “Oh, I like his estate planning provisions. Oh, I like her provisions related to maintaining a life insurance policy to secure the alimony award.”
And I wrote this paragraph for this select, the section, because what occurred to me is that when you have a child with someone and let’s say they’re three or four or five, they’re old enough to know what Christmas is, but they’re not old enough to go buy a Christmas present. But they’re old enough to know that you get presents on Christmas and you give presents on Christmas, but they’re not old enough to buy one for the parent. So someone has to do that for them. So I thought I’m going to put in a provision that says that as long as the children are so young that they can’t independently purchase a Mother’s Day or a birthday present for the co-parent, that you’ll take the children either to buy a small gift or to make a card or something like that.
This struck me as a no-brainer. Who could disagree with this? It’s not for the person, it’s for the kid. So the kid, “Happy birthday, mom. I don’t have a present for you. I don’t have a card for you, because I’m fucking five. I’m five.” You can’t go do that. So wouldn’t you want your child, not your co-parent, who cares? Maybe you want them to have the worst birthday ever. Fine, but you don’t want your child to be embarrassed.
And I even put in the provision, the parties acknowledged that it is the intention of this provision to ensure that the child is not embarrassed and feels that they were able to say… I cannot tell you how many people refuse to sign that, how many lawyers said to me, “We’re taking that out.” And I went, “Wait, why?” “Well, why does my client have to buy a present for your client?” I said, “They’re not buying a present for my client, they’re buying a present for the child to give to my client. It can be one of those little $3 boxes of chocolates they sell at the drugstore. But it’s a kid, they don’t know, they don’t know what anything is, and people, “Nope.” And I have to tell you, of the conundrums, of the puzzles that I can’t figure out in existence, that’s when I can’t figure. I do not understand why that’s so hard.
Lex Fridman
That’s basically just an illustration of their complete inability to do anything nice for the other person.
That’s basically just an illustration of their complete inability to do anything nice for the other person.
James Sexton
The level of hatred, the level of vitriol that they… Maybe this is me. If you apologize, there’s not a lot I won’t forgive. I’m not saying, “I’ll forget it.” I’m not saying, “Oh we’re totally good like it never happened.” I understand that. But if someone says what I call a non-bullshit apology, a bullshit apology is, “Oh, I’m sorry you got so upset when I did that.” That’s a bullshit apology. “I’m sorry that you were offended.” That’s a bullshit apology. Or, “I’m sorry for what I did.” Because what are we talking about? We might not be talking about the same thing. Or you might be saying I’m sorry that you found out about that, not that you did it.
The level of hatred, the level of vitriol that they… Maybe this is me. If you apologize, there’s not a lot I won’t forgive. I’m not saying, “I’ll forget it.” I’m not saying, “Oh we’re totally good like it never happened.” I understand that. But if someone says what I call a non-bullshit apology, a bullshit apology is, “Oh, I’m sorry you got so upset when I did that.” That’s a bullshit apology. “I’m sorry that you were offended.” That’s a bullshit apology. Or, “I’m sorry for what I did.” Because what are we talking about? We might not be talking about the same thing. Or you might be saying I’m sorry that you found out about that, not that you did it.
So a real apology is, “I lied to you and I realized that that hurt you and I’m really sorry, I shouldn’t have done that. I regret that I did that and I know that it hurt you and I’m really sorry.” That’s a real apology. Someone’s willing to give you that and you still want to walk around with the level of vitriol that you will harm your child rather than do something nice for them? I don’t have a solution. And I tell you, I see that all the time. Parental alienation is a thing. It is a thing. Children can be weaponized. I always tell people, I’m like, “If you want to get married, get married. Get a prenup ideally. But if you don’t have a prenup, okay, you’re just risking money, don’t worry, you’re just risking money.” Money and hassle of paperwork and of time and of going through an ugly financial divorce. But you have a kid with somebody, that is a missile, that person has a power over you for a long time, if not forever.
Lex Fridman
So the child could be used as part of a manipulation.
So the child could be used as part of a manipulation.
James Sexton
Routinely.
Routinely.
Lex Fridman
That’s heartbreaking.
That’s heartbreaking.
James Sexton
People weaponize children all the time and they do it with the permission of their own conscience because they genuinely believe I’m going to protect this person, this child, from this person, who by the way is a bad spouse, but that doesn’t mean they were a bad father or bad mother. You can be bad at being a spouse, but the skillset of a spouse and of a parent, it’s not necessarily the same. And I’ve seen people alienate children from a parent in such subtle ways, but they’re so powerful. And as a lawyer, it doesn’t matter what I know, it matters what I can prove. And It’s very hard to prove alienation because it’s usually a very subtle process.
People weaponize children all the time and they do it with the permission of their own conscience because they genuinely believe I’m going to protect this person, this child, from this person, who by the way is a bad spouse, but that doesn’t mean they were a bad father or bad mother. You can be bad at being a spouse, but the skillset of a spouse and of a parent, it’s not necessarily the same. And I’ve seen people alienate children from a parent in such subtle ways, but they’re so powerful. And as a lawyer, it doesn’t matter what I know, it matters what I can prove. And It’s very hard to prove alienation because it’s usually a very subtle process.
And the example I always give to people is it’s a rare kind of crazy person that will say to a seven-year-old, “your dad is a bad person.” But this? “Hello? Here, it’s your dad.” You just said your dad’s a bad person. You just did it with your eyes, you did it with the expression on your face when you handed the phone to the kid, you told that kid your dad’s a bad person. You didn’t have to say it out loud. And that is something people are guilty of all the time. There’s a divorced couple, kid comes home and says, “Oh, I met mom’s new boyfriend.” And you go, “Oh yeah, that’s nice. Remember, he’s not your dad.”
Whoa, you just told that kid a whole bunch of information about how he’s supposed to feel about this person. Whereas, if you go, “That’s nice. Is he a nice guy? Oh, that’s great. I heard nice things. Yeah, I heard he likes bicycles. That’s cool. That’s really neat.” You just told this kid, it’s okay, you could like this person. It’s okay to like this person. It’s okay that your mom is with this person. And again, whatever you feel about your ex, your co-parent, usually you love your kid more than you hate your ex ideally.
Lex Fridman
Also, I wish people would, even without an apology, forgive each other. It goes back to the earlier discussion we had. I usually forgive people if there’s something in them, especially if we shared something. But even just if there’s something about them that’s beautiful, it’s great that they exist in the world. So I’m just grateful for that and I use that as the fuel of forgiveness.
Also, I wish people would, even without an apology, forgive each other. It goes back to the earlier discussion we had. I usually forgive people if there’s something in them, especially if we shared something. But even just if there’s something about them that’s beautiful, it’s great that they exist in the world. So I’m just grateful for that and I use that as the fuel of forgiveness.
James Sexton
I don’t know. To me, forgiveness is very often, it’s for me. When I let go of anger, I feel lighter. I think my heart enjoys peace. I mean, partly because I fight for a living. I work in the world of conflict. I jokingly used to say to my sons when they were teenagers, “I can only argue if you’ve paid. It’s not fair to the paying customers.” If I argue with you for free, that’s not fair.
I don’t know. To me, forgiveness is very often, it’s for me. When I let go of anger, I feel lighter. I think my heart enjoys peace. I mean, partly because I fight for a living. I work in the world of conflict. I jokingly used to say to my sons when they were teenagers, “I can only argue if you’ve paid. It’s not fair to the paying customers.” If I argue with you for free, that’s not fair.
Lex Fridman
But I think we’re talking about the incredibly wide range that a divorce can cost. And you were saying the cheapest one was the yellow-
But I think we’re talking about the incredibly wide range that a divorce can cost. And you were saying the cheapest one was the yellow-
James Sexton
Yeah, yellow pad. Two people, came to an agreement, write it up, make it legally binding, five grand maybe tops. But usually 3,500, 5 grand, that kind of vibe. Most expensive, millions, millions in counsel fees.
Yeah, yellow pad. Two people, came to an agreement, write it up, make it legally binding, five grand maybe tops. But usually 3,500, 5 grand, that kind of vibe. Most expensive, millions, millions in counsel fees.
Lex Fridman
And that’s because of the duration, the complexity.
And that’s because of the duration, the complexity.
James Sexton
Yeah, duration, the complexity of issues. I have clients who’ve paid 2, 3 million in counsel fees to me.
Yeah, duration, the complexity of issues. I have clients who’ve paid 2, 3 million in counsel fees to me.
Lex Fridman
So it’s like has to do custody or what’s the source of complexity?
So it’s like has to do custody or what’s the source of complexity?
James Sexton
It can be complex custody that requires a hearing, that requires expert testimony, dueling, mental health professionals, opining on the parenting. It can be a situation where emergency circumstances occur like where an individual tries to abscond to another country with the children and you have to bring them back under the Hague Convention.
It can be complex custody that requires a hearing, that requires expert testimony, dueling, mental health professionals, opining on the parenting. It can be a situation where emergency circumstances occur like where an individual tries to abscond to another country with the children and you have to bring them back under the Hague Convention.
Lex Fridman
Oh, wow.
Oh, wow.
James Sexton
On international child abduction.
On international child abduction.
Lex Fridman
Oh, wow.
Oh, wow.
James Sexton
We’ve done some Hague cases. There are cases where people have very different facts. Before I came here today, a client of mine’s soon to be ex-husband who she’s in the middle of a door, he tested positive for cocaine on a hair follicle test, where it was said he was definitely not going to test positive, and he tested positive. So it was like we were scurrying now with okay, we got to get a motion filed, we got to suspend access, we got to protect the kids, we got to get in front of a judge, we got to think about what are the implications of this, because he was about to transition to an unsupervised parenting. This is the kind of stuff that can amp up the amount of work the lawyer has to do, which then translates to money. I get paid for my time and the time of my team. I have attorneys and paralegals who work for me. So when you have a team of lawyers working on a case, you can burn tens of thousands of dollars a day if it’s a big enough case.
We’ve done some Hague cases. There are cases where people have very different facts. Before I came here today, a client of mine’s soon to be ex-husband who she’s in the middle of a door, he tested positive for cocaine on a hair follicle test, where it was said he was definitely not going to test positive, and he tested positive. So it was like we were scurrying now with okay, we got to get a motion filed, we got to suspend access, we got to protect the kids, we got to get in front of a judge, we got to think about what are the implications of this, because he was about to transition to an unsupervised parenting. This is the kind of stuff that can amp up the amount of work the lawyer has to do, which then translates to money. I get paid for my time and the time of my team. I have attorneys and paralegals who work for me. So when you have a team of lawyers working on a case, you can burn tens of thousands of dollars a day if it’s a big enough case.
There are also very complex financial cases. People move and hide money. The high net worth space is a different world. Like if an average person owns a home, they own a home in their name or their name with their spouse. A high net worth person owns an LLC that owns that home. That LLC is owned by a trust. They are a beneficial interested party in that trust. This is how some of my clients who make tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars a year pay less in taxes than a cop or a firefighter, because they have structures, and the structures that were designed for tax planning purposes then in a divorce become very tricky to unwind and to figure out wait, no, what is mine and what is not?
Prenups
Lex Fridman
Well then, that takes us to the question of prenups. What’s your view on prenups, prenuptial agreements?
Well then, that takes us to the question of prenups. What’s your view on prenups, prenuptial agreements?
James Sexton
It’s not popular to quote Kanye West but, “If you ain’t no chump, holla, we want prenup, we want prenup.” I mean, that’s what he had to say meaning.
It’s not popular to quote Kanye West but, “If you ain’t no chump, holla, we want prenup, we want prenup.” I mean, that’s what he had to say meaning.
Lex Fridman
Meaning, prenup is a good idea.
Meaning, prenup is a good idea.
James Sexton
Prenup is an excellent idea. A prenup is a contract between two people that binds their respective rights and obligations in the event of a divorce when it comes to financial issues. That’s all it is and there’s a lot of reasons to have them and there really aren’t any reasons not to have them other than the fact it requires an uncomfortable conversation.
Prenup is an excellent idea. A prenup is a contract between two people that binds their respective rights and obligations in the event of a divorce when it comes to financial issues. That’s all it is and there’s a lot of reasons to have them and there really aren’t any reasons not to have them other than the fact it requires an uncomfortable conversation.
Lex Fridman
So I mean, there’s a few questions here. First, do they work legally in general?
So I mean, there’s a few questions here. First, do they work legally in general?
James Sexton
Yes. If they are crafted correctly, which is not that hard to do for a lawyer to do, I’m saying for a lawyer to do, because with the internet everybody thinks why would I spend $1,000, I can just Google prenuptial agreement and I can get one and then it’ll be…” That is a bad idea. It is like a will. If you’re going to have a document that binds your rights at that level, it’s worth… The most expensive prenup I’ve ever done was like three grand. That’s ridiculous. That’s not a lot of money. So there’s no reason you wouldn’t do it, but people still, people will still. I’ve had clients that have hundreds of thousands of dollars and they did their prenup downloading something from the internet and because of some imperfection, it doesn’t have the right what’s called acknowledgement, which is the section where the notary signs and it has to say that it was duly sworn before this person on this date, and if it doesn’t have that it’s invalid, it’s not binding.
Yes. If they are crafted correctly, which is not that hard to do for a lawyer to do, I’m saying for a lawyer to do, because with the internet everybody thinks why would I spend $1,000, I can just Google prenuptial agreement and I can get one and then it’ll be…” That is a bad idea. It is like a will. If you’re going to have a document that binds your rights at that level, it’s worth… The most expensive prenup I’ve ever done was like three grand. That’s ridiculous. That’s not a lot of money. So there’s no reason you wouldn’t do it, but people still, people will still. I’ve had clients that have hundreds of thousands of dollars and they did their prenup downloading something from the internet and because of some imperfection, it doesn’t have the right what’s called acknowledgement, which is the section where the notary signs and it has to say that it was duly sworn before this person on this date, and if it doesn’t have that it’s invalid, it’s not binding.
So there are weird technicalities, but yeah, prenups are binding. As long as there’s been some minimal asset disclosure, which is easily done in a prenup, and as long as there’s not a language deficiency, meaning that the person who is reading it understands English to the level that they understand what they’re signing, and if they don’t that at least they’ve acknowledged in their native language that there is some opportunity for this to be translated for them, yeah, they’re binding. They’re presumptively binding. We live thankfully in a culture where people are allowed to enter into contracts about money.
Lex Fridman
What are some prenups that you’ve seen that can be effective or that people converge towards in terms of what does an agreement look like? Because the popular conception is when there’s no prenup, both sides get half.
What are some prenups that you’ve seen that can be effective or that people converge towards in terms of what does an agreement look like? Because the popular conception is when there’s no prenup, both sides get half.
James Sexton
And that’s generally true that both sides get half, equitable distribution, which is what the law is called it’s, the law of equitable distribution. It’s not called the law of equal distribution for a reason, because it’s equitable, not equal. Now equitable is presumed to be equal, but there are exceptions to that presumption, and that’s where lawyers can get into fun and or trouble depending on how you view it. It’s where we make our money. We make our money arguing that the fair result will not be just a 50-50 split.
And that’s generally true that both sides get half, equitable distribution, which is what the law is called it’s, the law of equitable distribution. It’s not called the law of equal distribution for a reason, because it’s equitable, not equal. Now equitable is presumed to be equal, but there are exceptions to that presumption, and that’s where lawyers can get into fun and or trouble depending on how you view it. It’s where we make our money. We make our money arguing that the fair result will not be just a 50-50 split.
And so, there’s the very generic standard prenup, which is easy and I call that yours, mine, and ours. If it’s in your name, it’s yours, whether it’s an asset or a reliability. My name, it’s mine. Joint names, we split at 50-50. Simple, clean. And you go in to the marriage now knowing what the rules are. So if you get a bonus at work and you put it in your sole name, then it’s your separate property in the event you divorce. You go out and buy a boat and she doesn’t support you buying the boat. But the boat, you got a big loan on this boat, you’re responsible for that loan.
I like that because I like people having some control. I also like people having to have discussions. Well, why are we putting that bonus just in your bank account? Why wouldn’t we put it in the joint bank account? We should have that discussion while we’re married, not when we’re in a divorce lawyer’s office 10 years later, because we should be able to talk about those kinds of things. So what’s interesting about prenups is that somehow people think there’s something like it takes away from the romance of a marriage. But I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, all marriages end, they end in death or divorce.
So having life insurance or having a will, it doesn’t mean you can’t wait to die, it doesn’t mean you’re looking forward to death, it doesn’t mean that you’re predicting your demise sometime imminently. It just means that you’re being realistic and honest. So when you marry and I don’t mean spiritually marrying, having a marriage ceremony, I mean legally marrying, you are making changes to your rights and obligations under law. That’s what you’re doing. Marriage from a legal standpoint, what we mean when we say I got married is a state agency. It’s been created by the state. This is a legal status that most people who are in it know nothing about. They just did the most legally significant thing they’re ever going to do other than dying. And they have no idea what rights and obligations it created in them. And the first time they’re going to get an education about it is in my office, that’s crazy.
Lex Fridman
When they get divorced.
When they get divorced.
James Sexton
That’s crazy.
That’s crazy.
Lex Fridman
And so, prenup is an opportunity to learn something about it at the start.
And so, prenup is an opportunity to learn something about it at the start.
James Sexton
So first of all, whenever someone approaches me about prenups and that’s like four or five times a week probably depending on the season, right before wedding season, we get a lot.
So first of all, whenever someone approaches me about prenups and that’s like four or five times a week probably depending on the season, right before wedding season, we get a lot.
Lex Fridman
When’s wedding season?
When’s wedding season?
James Sexton
Well, it used to just be the summer. They say when you marry in June, you’re a bride all your life. That’s from some Rodgers and Hammerstein musical. Now, the fall is very big too. People love fall content, fall weddings, pretty pictures and things. Fall content.
Well, it used to just be the summer. They say when you marry in June, you’re a bride all your life. That’s from some Rodgers and Hammerstein musical. Now, the fall is very big too. People love fall content, fall weddings, pretty pictures and things. Fall content.
Lex Fridman
It’s good on the gram.
It’s good on the gram.
James Sexton
Hashtag fall content.
Hashtag fall content.
Lex Fridman
All right. That’s hashtag.
All right. That’s hashtag.
James Sexton
Listen, weddings is for the gram. I have to tell you, weddings is performative, man. See, the problem is though, it’s curated. So here’s us picking the cake, it’s not here’s us doing the prenup. You know how many people I’ve done prenups for that I’ve watched on their social media or them being interviewed by Andy Cohen on Bravo and saying, “Well no, we don’t have a prenup.” Yeah, you do. Yeah, you do. You do. It’s in my office. It’s in a folder. They have a prenup.
Listen, weddings is for the gram. I have to tell you, weddings is performative, man. See, the problem is though, it’s curated. So here’s us picking the cake, it’s not here’s us doing the prenup. You know how many people I’ve done prenups for that I’ve watched on their social media or them being interviewed by Andy Cohen on Bravo and saying, “Well no, we don’t have a prenup.” Yeah, you do. Yeah, you do. You do. It’s in my office. It’s in a folder. They have a prenup.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s beautiful.
Yeah, that’s beautiful.
James Sexton
But prenups are not published any place. They’re not filed with a court. They’re maintained by the two people that signed it and their lawyers. That’s it. So nobody has to admit that they have a prenup.
But prenups are not published any place. They’re not filed with a court. They’re maintained by the two people that signed it and their lawyers. That’s it. So nobody has to admit that they have a prenup.
Lex Fridman
Beautiful.
Beautiful.
James Sexton
Yes, but there’s a certain problem with that insofar as a lot of people have prenups and we need to normalize prenups. There’s no reason not to normalize prenups. Until some famous people say, “Yeah, we have a prenup. We’re crazy about each other. That’s why we’re getting married. But yeah, look, we’re getting…” I don’t want to get a car accident but I got a seatbelt. You have it, just in case.
Yes, but there’s a certain problem with that insofar as a lot of people have prenups and we need to normalize prenups. There’s no reason not to normalize prenups. Until some famous people say, “Yeah, we have a prenup. We’re crazy about each other. That’s why we’re getting married. But yeah, look, we’re getting…” I don’t want to get a car accident but I got a seatbelt. You have it, just in case.
Lex Fridman
And I mean, what do you do if you’re running a company? What does that have to do with a prenup? You’re running a hundred billion dollar or trillion dollar company, Jeff Bezos. I suppose his marriage was before Amazon.
And I mean, what do you do if you’re running a company? What does that have to do with a prenup? You’re running a hundred billion dollar or trillion dollar company, Jeff Bezos. I suppose his marriage was before Amazon.
James Sexton
Yeah, his was before it was anything.
Yeah, his was before it was anything.
Lex Fridman
But how does that work in a prenup?
But how does that work in a prenup?
James Sexton
Well, no, actually it’s the same. What you’re doing with a prenup is you’re identifying how things will be classified in advance. So you’re creating a set of rules, and then you both can function under those rules during the marriage. So for a brief time, I taught a family law drafting class at a law school, and when we would do separation agreements and we would do pleadings, it was lots of fun. When we would do prenups, I would say to the students, “What’s the main thing you need when you’re doing a prenup?” And they would say, “Well, you need asset disclosure.” And I’d say, “Well, that’s not the main thing.” And they’d say, “Well, you need technical language.” They’d say, “Nope.” Main thing you need is a crystal ball. The main thing you need is the ability to see what’s going to happen in the future. Who’s going to have money, who’s not, who’s going to be successful, who isn’t, what people will inherit.
Well, no, actually it’s the same. What you’re doing with a prenup is you’re identifying how things will be classified in advance. So you’re creating a set of rules, and then you both can function under those rules during the marriage. So for a brief time, I taught a family law drafting class at a law school, and when we would do separation agreements and we would do pleadings, it was lots of fun. When we would do prenups, I would say to the students, “What’s the main thing you need when you’re doing a prenup?” And they would say, “Well, you need asset disclosure.” And I’d say, “Well, that’s not the main thing.” And they’d say, “Well, you need technical language.” They’d say, “Nope.” Main thing you need is a crystal ball. The main thing you need is the ability to see what’s going to happen in the future. Who’s going to have money, who’s not, who’s going to be successful, who isn’t, what people will inherit.
Problem is we don’t have that. We don’t have that. So what can we do? We can create tranches, we can create structures, we can create systems, and then people can live with those in mind. You enter the game knowing the rules. So you know if this is going to be a submission only event. You know if this is going to be no time limit. You know if we’re after a certain number of minutes, we’re going into points now. So I can work with that rule set and I’m going to amend my game based on that rule set. Same thing, same thing. You’re just going to say, “Look, what’s the rule set? Let’s agree on the rule set. And then, let’s conduct ourselves with the rule set in mind. Let’s plan the rule set in mind.” By the way, and if you’re going to cheat, you cheat with the rule set in mind. You know you’re cheating. You’re trying to get around the rule set.
When I do a consult for a prenup, the first thing I do is here’s what’s going to happen legally if you marry without a prenup. Here’s what happens to your rights and obligations. Then, what we can change with that, there’s almost no limit. You can amend anything you want to. The example I always give is there was a case that went up to the appellate court where a high net worth guy married a very beautiful woman and there was a provision in the prenuptial agreement that said for every 10 pounds she gained during the marriage, she would lose $10,000 a month in alimony if they divorced. Here’s her baseline weight as of the time of execution of this agreement. I wondered if she did what a wrestler does. Did she bulk up right before and then cut when she eventually got divorced? Is she in there in a sauna with the suit on? And the appellate court essentially said, “I don’t know why you married this person having had them make you sign this, but it’s binding, but it’s binding.”
Lex Fridman
I wish somebody would do a contract like the rent for this place would be more expensive if I was fatter, and cheaper if I was skinnier, and that way I would have to weigh in and like the motivation.
I wish somebody would do a contract like the rent for this place would be more expensive if I was fatter, and cheaper if I was skinnier, and that way I would have to weigh in and like the motivation.
James Sexton
Like some motivation on you.
Like some motivation on you.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, exactly. That kind of prenup is motivating.
Yeah, exactly. That kind of prenup is motivating.
James Sexton
Well, what’s his name? I think Tim Ferris says that about how he does, he said you should make bets with people. It’s like if you gain this much, I got to give you this amount of money. I think he says that in one of his early books.
Well, what’s his name? I think Tim Ferris says that about how he does, he said you should make bets with people. It’s like if you gain this much, I got to give you this amount of money. I think he says that in one of his early books.
Lex Fridman
And try to make a binding somehow, which is tough.
And try to make a binding somehow, which is tough.
James Sexton
Yeah, I think when we create incentives of that kind, that’s why there was the No Nut November or No Shave November, sober, all those, it was a competition. When people make a competition of something, they gamify something, it makes it something that people are more likely to stick with. So I mean, I guess a prenup, it’d be interesting. The problem is there’s also, people put in prenups what’s called fidelity clauses.
Yeah, I think when we create incentives of that kind, that’s why there was the No Nut November or No Shave November, sober, all those, it was a competition. When people make a competition of something, they gamify something, it makes it something that people are more likely to stick with. So I mean, I guess a prenup, it’d be interesting. The problem is there’s also, people put in prenups what’s called fidelity clauses.
Lex Fridman
Oh.
Oh.
James Sexton
Fidelity clauses. People still do these. I discourage people from doing them. The two things that people put in prenups that I discourage people from putting in prenups, but very often people still put in prenups even with my caveat is fidelity clauses and sunset clauses. So fidelity clauses is I’m waiving alimony, I’m waiving this, I’m waiving that. But if you cheat, I get a million bucks or I get this much alimony, I get this amount. And I know the intention is to disincentivize the person from cheating, it’s a deterrent to have them cheat, but all it really does is just creates an interesting legal battle for lawyers like how did you prove that they cheated or not?
Fidelity clauses. People still do these. I discourage people from doing them. The two things that people put in prenups that I discourage people from putting in prenups, but very often people still put in prenups even with my caveat is fidelity clauses and sunset clauses. So fidelity clauses is I’m waiving alimony, I’m waiving this, I’m waiving that. But if you cheat, I get a million bucks or I get this much alimony, I get this amount. And I know the intention is to disincentivize the person from cheating, it’s a deterrent to have them cheat, but all it really does is just creates an interesting legal battle for lawyers like how did you prove that they cheated or not?
Lex Fridman
Oh, right. Because what constitutes cheating also?
Oh, right. Because what constitutes cheating also?
James Sexton
Right, is an emotional affair, and affair is oral sex. Cheating is… And by the way, how do you prove it? Well, I was in a hotel with her, but how do you prove that I had sex with her? And you’re opening a can of worms with that kind of a thing, but people sometimes still put them in. And sunset clauses. Sunset clauses is if we’re married X period of time, this goes away as if it never existed.
Right, is an emotional affair, and affair is oral sex. Cheating is… And by the way, how do you prove it? Well, I was in a hotel with her, but how do you prove that I had sex with her? And you’re opening a can of worms with that kind of a thing, but people sometimes still put them in. And sunset clauses. Sunset clauses is if we’re married X period of time, this goes away as if it never existed.
Lex Fridman
And why is that a bad idea?
And why is that a bad idea?
James Sexton
The same reason the community property law in California is a bad idea. So the community property law is after a certain number of years, I think It’s seven, everything including your premarital property, all becomes marital property. And the idea of that was supposed to be that if you’ve been married that number of years, you’re in enough of a serious relationship now that everything is one unit, you’re one person. What it actually does is creates a very-
The same reason the community property law in California is a bad idea. So the community property law is after a certain number of years, I think It’s seven, everything including your premarital property, all becomes marital property. And the idea of that was supposed to be that if you’ve been married that number of years, you’re in enough of a serious relationship now that everything is one unit, you’re one person. What it actually does is creates a very-
James Sexton
You’re one person. What it actually does is creates a very uncomfortable thought experiment that people have to have at the six-year mark, because you have to, now the honeymoon’s kind of over. You might have a kid or two and you go, “Okay, wait a minute. Am I so happy in this relationship that I’m willing to take all of my premarital assets and throw them in the pot right now? Because if not, I got six months to get divorced.” So if you say to someone, if you got married tomorrow and then you found a company that’s worth $100 million dollars, and under your prenup, that’s your separate property, but there’s a sunset clause that says that your prenup goes out the window in 15 years. Man, at year 14 and six months, you got to ask yourself some serious questions about where’s this relationship going to be in five, 10 years.
You’re one person. What it actually does is creates a very uncomfortable thought experiment that people have to have at the six-year mark, because you have to, now the honeymoon’s kind of over. You might have a kid or two and you go, “Okay, wait a minute. Am I so happy in this relationship that I’m willing to take all of my premarital assets and throw them in the pot right now? Because if not, I got six months to get divorced.” So if you say to someone, if you got married tomorrow and then you found a company that’s worth $100 million dollars, and under your prenup, that’s your separate property, but there’s a sunset clause that says that your prenup goes out the window in 15 years. Man, at year 14 and six months, you got to ask yourself some serious questions about where’s this relationship going to be in five, 10 years.
Lex Fridman
That’s brilliant. That’s why, kids, you pay for a lawyer. That’s it.
That’s brilliant. That’s why, kids, you pay for a lawyer. That’s it.
James Sexton
We get paid to see around corners. I get paid to be paranoid. I tell people that all the time.
We get paid to see around corners. I get paid to be paranoid. I tell people that all the time.
Cheating
Lex Fridman
Okay, so you mentioned infidelity, you write in the book, which everybody should get. It’s a great book, it’s a great read, it’s a window into your soul. You, in this book that there’s five kinds of infidelity. Do you remember? Can you explain?
Okay, so you mentioned infidelity, you write in the book, which everybody should get. It’s a great book, it’s a great read, it’s a window into your soul. You, in this book that there’s five kinds of infidelity. Do you remember? Can you explain?
James Sexton
Yeah. I mean, what I wanted to say is that all infidelity is not the same, that there’s different kinds and some of them are more obvious than others. There’s the soulmate, that’s the one I think I see most often, which is a person meets another person or rekindles on social media or elsewhere, a reconnection with another person in their life and they go, “Oh my God, this is the person I’m supposed to be with. I’m in love. The heart wants what the heart wants like, I’m leaving you for this person. I have found my true love.” That’s one type and it’s an incredibly common type. And there are plenty of cautionary tales associated with that where people thought that they found their someone, and then it turns out it was no, it was just unfair. And a man who leaves his wife for his mistress just leaves a new job opportunity open.
Yeah. I mean, what I wanted to say is that all infidelity is not the same, that there’s different kinds and some of them are more obvious than others. There’s the soulmate, that’s the one I think I see most often, which is a person meets another person or rekindles on social media or elsewhere, a reconnection with another person in their life and they go, “Oh my God, this is the person I’m supposed to be with. I’m in love. The heart wants what the heart wants like, I’m leaving you for this person. I have found my true love.” That’s one type and it’s an incredibly common type. And there are plenty of cautionary tales associated with that where people thought that they found their someone, and then it turns out it was no, it was just unfair. And a man who leaves his wife for his mistress just leaves a new job opportunity open.
Lex Fridman
And we should also mention that you talk about Facebook and Instagram.
And we should also mention that you talk about Facebook and Instagram.
James Sexton
Oh yes. If we were going to invent an infidelity generating machine, it would be called Facebook, which by the way is a function of the fact the book was written in 2019. I would now change it to Instagram.
Oh yes. If we were going to invent an infidelity generating machine, it would be called Facebook, which by the way is a function of the fact the book was written in 2019. I would now change it to Instagram.
Lex Fridman
Oh, because you said just Facebook?
Oh, because you said just Facebook?
James Sexton
Yes, but now if I had to rewrite it would be, if we were going to invent an infidelity generating machine, it would be called Meta. That would be what I’d write.
Yes, but now if I had to rewrite it would be, if we were going to invent an infidelity generating machine, it would be called Meta. That would be what I’d write.
Lex Fridman
There you go.
There you go.
James Sexton
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Very tech forward.
Very tech forward.
James Sexton
It was a function of what Facebook, and I think Instagram also are, which is, it is a communication tool that has people looking into windows that I think are antagonistic to marriage. You’re looking into the lives of other people, you’re looking into the social lives of people that you meet casually. So there was a time where you would be at your son’s soccer practice and see the attractive mom across the way, and you wouldn’t really talk to her, interact with her. Or if you did, it would just be at practice. But now, we add on social media, those people, because for legitimate reasons, we need to maybe communicate about when practice is, or we want to message the person. But now it’s sort of an invitation to a connection and then it’s, a picture of her on vacation in a bikini. That’s very intriguing. And then you have a benign, “Oh, I saw you guys went on vacation. Where did you stay? Oh, was it good? Did you like that? Oh, that’s nice.”
It was a function of what Facebook, and I think Instagram also are, which is, it is a communication tool that has people looking into windows that I think are antagonistic to marriage. You’re looking into the lives of other people, you’re looking into the social lives of people that you meet casually. So there was a time where you would be at your son’s soccer practice and see the attractive mom across the way, and you wouldn’t really talk to her, interact with her. Or if you did, it would just be at practice. But now, we add on social media, those people, because for legitimate reasons, we need to maybe communicate about when practice is, or we want to message the person. But now it’s sort of an invitation to a connection and then it’s, a picture of her on vacation in a bikini. That’s very intriguing. And then you have a benign, “Oh, I saw you guys went on vacation. Where did you stay? Oh, was it good? Did you like that? Oh, that’s nice.”
And now we’re talking and now We’re having an interaction. And now this is how the spark of affairs begins. It’s usually, people don’t usually meet and go, “Would you like to potentially wreck your marriage? Yes. Would you? Oh my God, let’s do this.” It’s much more, it slowly happens. So when I talk about types of infidelity, the soulmate, the unexpected soulmate, this connection that you didn’t expect, “I didn’t expect to fall in love with this person, but I did. And the heart wants with the heart wants and I’m sorry.” That one’s tough. That one’s tough, because it’s an interesting distinction between men and women to some degree that when a man finds out his wife was cheating, the question is, “Did you fuck him?” And when a woman finds out that a man cheated, the question is, “Do you love her?” And those are different things.
Lex Fridman
I feel like there could be many and have been many books written on that very distinction.
I feel like there could be many and have been many books written on that very distinction.
James Sexton
There have, by much smarter people than me. But I think that the soulmate thing is very, very painful for a lot of my female clients. When a man says, “Listen, I found the one. I found the one and it’s not you.” That is really, really hard to get past. And even when it turned out to be true, I mean I’ve seen some people that it was an affair that turned into 20 plus year marriages, an unhappy marriage, and then a happy affair that turned into a very happy marriage. I’ve not seen… There’s not a formula. I’ve been doing it long enough now that I’ve seen permutations I never would’ve expected. So that’s one type of infidelity.
There have, by much smarter people than me. But I think that the soulmate thing is very, very painful for a lot of my female clients. When a man says, “Listen, I found the one. I found the one and it’s not you.” That is really, really hard to get past. And even when it turned out to be true, I mean I’ve seen some people that it was an affair that turned into 20 plus year marriages, an unhappy marriage, and then a happy affair that turned into a very happy marriage. I’ve not seen… There’s not a formula. I’ve been doing it long enough now that I’ve seen permutations I never would’ve expected. So that’s one type of infidelity.
The other is what I call the push out of the closet, which is, and that I think happened more often earlier in my career. There have been tremendous strides, I think in the lesbian and gay community, including marriage equality obviously, where there’s a lot of change as to people accepting people as being gay or lesbian. And I think that there was a time where people were being in the closet was much more important. You were subject to professional scorn and all kinds of things if you were gay or lesbian. So people were sneaking around and having affairs with their same sex partners, and then they get caught. And then it really was a function of the fact that they were closeted. And again, that’s another kind of complicated dynamic, because I haven’t had that happen to me where a woman left me for a woman. But I’d like to think it would be easier for me.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
James Sexton
Because if you left me for a man you’re saying, “I want one like you, but better than you.” Whereas if you leave me for a woman, well that’s a whole different set of equipment. I don’t have that. So I can’t… Okay, it’s not me. It’s you. It’s something you want that I can’t offer. We don’t serve that at this restaurant. So it’s okay, I get it. I mean there’s a betrayal, there’s a sadness, whatever, but it’s a different thing. The saddest type of infidelity, in my opinion is the mistake, which is someone just makes a mistake. People do dumb shit when it comes to sex. People just in a moment, they follow temptation. Their impulse control is poor, and they do something that doesn’t reflect their morality, or doesn’t reflect the depth of their feelings.
Because if you left me for a man you’re saying, “I want one like you, but better than you.” Whereas if you leave me for a woman, well that’s a whole different set of equipment. I don’t have that. So I can’t… Okay, it’s not me. It’s you. It’s something you want that I can’t offer. We don’t serve that at this restaurant. So it’s okay, I get it. I mean there’s a betrayal, there’s a sadness, whatever, but it’s a different thing. The saddest type of infidelity, in my opinion is the mistake, which is someone just makes a mistake. People do dumb shit when it comes to sex. People just in a moment, they follow temptation. Their impulse control is poor, and they do something that doesn’t reflect their morality, or doesn’t reflect the depth of their feelings.
If you spent enough time in a room with people who’ve cheated in a relationship and are speaking candidly to you about it because you’re their lawyer, they’ll say to you very openly like, “No, I really love my wife, I really love my wife. I don’t know. I was just an idiot. I saw this bright shiny object and I went for it. I really wanted to sleep with that woman. I wanted to fuck her. I love my wife, I make love to my wife, I love my wife, but I just want to sleep with this one.” And we created a culture where one of those eradicates the other. That’s a whole nother discussion. Is there ethical non-monogamy? Should we, is marriage about who I have sex with, or is marriage a different kind of a partnership? Is it a pair bond that’s about building a life together, and where does monogamy fit into that? And people like Esther Perel, those are people who are making very intelligent discussions about that.
Open marriages and threesomes
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s a complicated one. Just to actually just linger on that. How often have people with open marriages have been in your office?
Yeah, that’s a complicated one. Just to actually just linger on that. How often have people with open marriages have been in your office?
James Sexton
Well, let’s see, and this is one of those from a research perspective, this would be flawed because I see, they’re in my office because their marriage is falling apart. So there may be lots of people having open relationships that don’t end up in a divorce lawyer’s office, so I’d never meet them. But I meet a lot of people, that that was the Hail Mary pass.
Well, let’s see, and this is one of those from a research perspective, this would be flawed because I see, they’re in my office because their marriage is falling apart. So there may be lots of people having open relationships that don’t end up in a divorce lawyer’s office, so I’d never meet them. But I meet a lot of people, that that was the Hail Mary pass.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
James Sexton
I meet a lot of people that they tried that. But in retrospect it was a Hail Mary pass. It was like, “Look, we’ve just figured let’s try this. Maybe this will this’ll keep the glue together on this thing.” And I’ve also seen open relationships go wrong, where we agree We’re just going to have sexual connections with other people, or we’re going to bring other people into the bedroom. But together, we’re going to be together with other people or with another person. And then that connection of those two people, like you think it’s a soulmate all of a sudden now and it goes in this other, because again, is that novelty, it’s the reason why I don’t understand why people have threesomes. It’s kind of like when someone sings to you, I don’t know where to look. I don’t know where to look. If someone’s singing to me, I don’t know where to look. It feels weird, right? This is a conundrum.
I meet a lot of people that they tried that. But in retrospect it was a Hail Mary pass. It was like, “Look, we’ve just figured let’s try this. Maybe this will this’ll keep the glue together on this thing.” And I’ve also seen open relationships go wrong, where we agree We’re just going to have sexual connections with other people, or we’re going to bring other people into the bedroom. But together, we’re going to be together with other people or with another person. And then that connection of those two people, like you think it’s a soulmate all of a sudden now and it goes in this other, because again, is that novelty, it’s the reason why I don’t understand why people have threesomes. It’s kind of like when someone sings to you, I don’t know where to look. I don’t know where to look. If someone’s singing to me, I don’t know where to look. It feels weird, right? This is a conundrum.
Lex Fridman
Oh yeah.
Oh yeah.
James Sexton
I say this [inaudible 02:22:25] never, but that’s the reason I can’t go to strip clubs, I don’t know where to look. If I go to a strip club, you go to the strip club and there’s the part where the woman’s on the stage and she walks past each person who does a little thing, and then next person and then next little thing. So when she’s right in front of you, I like a woman’s face and I like a woman’s body. I like both of them. So I’m looking at the woman’s face and she’s very beautiful, but she’s naked and I think, “Oh, she’s naked. I should be looking at her naked body,” because obviously it’s almost rude not to because she’s naked in front of me, of course. So then I’m looking at her naked body, which is lovely to look at. But then I find myself going, “Oh my God, you’re just still, you should look at her face for God’s sakes.”
I say this [inaudible 02:22:25] never, but that’s the reason I can’t go to strip clubs, I don’t know where to look. If I go to a strip club, you go to the strip club and there’s the part where the woman’s on the stage and she walks past each person who does a little thing, and then next person and then next little thing. So when she’s right in front of you, I like a woman’s face and I like a woman’s body. I like both of them. So I’m looking at the woman’s face and she’s very beautiful, but she’s naked and I think, “Oh, she’s naked. I should be looking at her naked body,” because obviously it’s almost rude not to because she’s naked in front of me, of course. So then I’m looking at her naked body, which is lovely to look at. But then I find myself going, “Oh my God, you’re just still, you should look at her face for God’s sakes.”
Then I look at your face and find myself having this whole thing in my head where I’m going like, “Oh my God, where am I supposed to look?” So I think a threesome with two women you don’t hardly know or you’re not with, that’s different. But a threesome with a long-term partner who you’re in a relationship with, and a new person, seems to me a very dangerous ground because you’re going to want to enjoy the novelty of this new person, but you’re going to have to spend time with this person after. So how much attention do you spend to the new novel exciting thing without creating the impression that you’re not interested in this? Because you’re my favorite person, but this is fun. So I want to just try this for a few. But then also I don’t want to forget about that. It just seems tricky.
Lex Fridman
That analogy, by the way is brilliant. And also I guess it’s tricky because the consequences of mistakes are quite high. You’re going to have to talk about it.
That analogy, by the way is brilliant. And also I guess it’s tricky because the consequences of mistakes are quite high. You’re going to have to talk about it.
James Sexton
Yeah, and there’s an easy way to misinterpret the data. So if I really like sleeping with my partner, but I get one chance to sleep with this other person, well of course I should indulge in that, because I can do this anytime. But this person, my partner might interpret that as, ” Oh, so you’re more interested in her than me,” because that voice in my partner that would be insecure might hear that. So why would you even open yourself up to that level of chaos?
Yeah, and there’s an easy way to misinterpret the data. So if I really like sleeping with my partner, but I get one chance to sleep with this other person, well of course I should indulge in that, because I can do this anytime. But this person, my partner might interpret that as, ” Oh, so you’re more interested in her than me,” because that voice in my partner that would be insecure might hear that. So why would you even open yourself up to that level of chaos?
Lex Fridman
You seem to love chess in the courtroom. It’s a kind of intimate human chess, of sorts.
You seem to love chess in the courtroom. It’s a kind of intimate human chess, of sorts.
James Sexton
Yeah, no. That’s too high risk.
Yeah, no. That’s too high risk.
Lex Fridman
How did we get on threesomes? Oh, open marriages.
How did we get on threesomes? Oh, open marriages.
James Sexton
Well, how did we get on threesomes? I don’t know. I always wonder how people get on threesomes. I figure if one is fun, two must be better. If two is better, three must be better. Yeah, I think the way that this becomes an issue is, why would you have a non-monogamous relationship? What is it about your sex life with this person that’s not satisfying? And I think that that is the question that’s harder to ask yourself and to try to answer with your partner.
Well, how did we get on threesomes? I don’t know. I always wonder how people get on threesomes. I figure if one is fun, two must be better. If two is better, three must be better. Yeah, I think the way that this becomes an issue is, why would you have a non-monogamous relationship? What is it about your sex life with this person that’s not satisfying? And I think that that is the question that’s harder to ask yourself and to try to answer with your partner.
Lex Fridman
I mean, you’ve said that this idea of soulmates.
I mean, you’ve said that this idea of soulmates.
James Sexton
It’s great business.
It’s great business.
Lex Fridman
It’s great for your business, but so a human being in a partnership can’t be everything. Is that true?
It’s great for your business, but so a human being in a partnership can’t be everything. Is that true?
James Sexton
I think it’s unrealistic.
I think it’s unrealistic.
Lex Fridman
True Romance, right? The document that we keep referencing here.
True Romance, right? The document that we keep referencing here.
James Sexton
I think it’s wonderful that we do sometimes now, people don’t get that reference anymore. I talk to people when I try to teach negotiation to young lawyers who come work for me, I tell them to watch the Gary Oldman scene where he offers them the Chinese food.
I think it’s wonderful that we do sometimes now, people don’t get that reference anymore. I talk to people when I try to teach negotiation to young lawyers who come work for me, I tell them to watch the Gary Oldman scene where he offers them the Chinese food.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Why is that scene the one that really?
Yeah. Why is that scene the one that really?
James Sexton
Because it’s the best negotiating lesson I’ve ever heard in my life, where he comes in.
Because it’s the best negotiating lesson I’ve ever heard in my life, where he comes in.
Lex Fridman
Just for the record.
Just for the record.
James Sexton
Yeah. Gary Oldman plays a pimp and he owns, his girl is Patricia Arquette, right? And Christian Slater’s character, the protagonist is coming in to tell Gary Oldman that he no longer owns this girl, Alabama.
Yeah. Gary Oldman plays a pimp and he owns, his girl is Patricia Arquette, right? And Christian Slater’s character, the protagonist is coming in to tell Gary Oldman that he no longer owns this girl, Alabama.
Lex Fridman
Alabama.
Alabama.
James Sexton
Alabama is going to be with him now. And Gary Oldman is an amazing performance. And he’s sitting in a living room with a shotgun next to him, with armed guys around him watching television and eating Chinese food. And he’s got Chinese food laid out in front of him. And Christian Slater comes in and he says, “I need to talk to you about Alabama.” And Gary Oldman says, “Do you want some Chinese food?” And Christian Slater sort of taken aback by the question. He says, “No, I came to talk about Alabama. She’s with me now.” And he proceeds to tell him what his offer essentially is. And Gary Oldman says, “You know, you fucked up, right?”
Alabama is going to be with him now. And Gary Oldman is an amazing performance. And he’s sitting in a living room with a shotgun next to him, with armed guys around him watching television and eating Chinese food. And he’s got Chinese food laid out in front of him. And Christian Slater comes in and he says, “I need to talk to you about Alabama.” And Gary Oldman says, “Do you want some Chinese food?” And Christian Slater sort of taken aback by the question. He says, “No, I came to talk about Alabama. She’s with me now.” And he proceeds to tell him what his offer essentially is. And Gary Oldman says, “You know, you fucked up, right?”
In substance he says, “If you’d sat down and started eating my Chinese food, I would’ve thought who’s this guy, he didn’t have a care in the world, just sitting down eating my egg foo young. But instead you tried to be hard. And now I know you’re full of shit.” And so I think that scene summarizes how in negotiation, the more you enter into it with that, anytime I deal with another lawyer and they’re like, “Well, we’ll see you in court.” Okay, see you in court. Empty barrels make the most noise. You and I as people, who’ve been in the jiu-jitsu community, I know some dangerous people. I know FBI SWAT people. I know people that, they know how to do things to people. And they’re the calmest guys you ever meet in your life. You scuff their sneaker? “Oh yeah, don’t worry about man, it’s okay.” They’re quick to apology. They’re just chill.
Lex Fridman
What were we talking about?
What were we talking about?
James Sexton
We were talking about…
We were talking about…
Lex Fridman
Oh wait, True Romance. Oh, the soulmate.
Oh wait, True Romance. Oh, the soulmate.
James Sexton
Yeah, soulmate. Yeah. Well, you’re saying that this idea that film underlying, there’s this current of they were made for each other. I think there’s a distinction between the feeling that someone is your missing puzzle piece, that you’re made for this person. I think what that just means is there’s a lot of overlapping beautiful connections. I love them intellectually. I love them sexually, I love them interpersonally. We have some shared history, we have some shared commonalities. We were raised in the same culture, raised in the same religion. We view, we have politically similar ideas. These are all, or we have totally opposite ones, but they’re complimentary. I’ve always joked that finding someone with complimentary pathologies, I’m obsessively disciplined. So having a partner who’s flexible and spontaneous is really good for me.
Yeah, soulmate. Yeah. Well, you’re saying that this idea that film underlying, there’s this current of they were made for each other. I think there’s a distinction between the feeling that someone is your missing puzzle piece, that you’re made for this person. I think what that just means is there’s a lot of overlapping beautiful connections. I love them intellectually. I love them sexually, I love them interpersonally. We have some shared history, we have some shared commonalities. We were raised in the same culture, raised in the same religion. We view, we have politically similar ideas. These are all, or we have totally opposite ones, but they’re complimentary. I’ve always joked that finding someone with complimentary pathologies, I’m obsessively disciplined. So having a partner who’s flexible and spontaneous is really good for me.
And also me being like, “No, no, no, come on, come back. We’re going to do this now. It’s time to actually do this now.” We’re good for each other. It’s barefoot in the park. It’s this idea of the yin and the yang. So, what I have an issue with is that the definition of soulmate that I think is sold to so many people now is this idea that if your partner is disappointing to you in any way, meaning they’re not the perfect travel companion, they’re not the perfect vocabulary companion, they’re not the perfect roommate, they’re not the perfect lover, they’re not… The odds of someone being all of those seems crazy to me. It’s infinitesimally small, and they don’t have to be everything.
If I go to a restaurant and eat 10 courses, and one of them is kind of subpar and the other nine are the most amazing culinary experience I’ve ever had, how dare I say, “Well, that wasn’t the right restaurant.” What do you mean? That’s a great restaurant. What are you talking about? Of course there was one little thing. So I think it’s impossible to have someone never disappoint you. It’s impossible to have someone who never lets you down or doesn’t say and do the exact right thing at the exact right time, and to create the idea or expectation in anyone that your partner should never let you down, never disappoint you, never not know what to say is, I think crazy.
I find for myself, when someone, for example, loses someone, when someone loses a family member or a pet, I often say the same thing to the person. I’ll either talk to them or send them a text or call them and I’ll say, “I wish I knew the perfect thing to say, because I would say it right now.” But I know there isn’t, I don’t say that part. But I know there isn’t, there isn’t a perfect thing to say. But if there was a perfect thing to say, I would say it right now. Love to me is not that you never let this person down, it’s that you never want to let this person down. Love is a verb.
It’s this feeling of, I never want to disappoint you. I will disappoint you, but I never want to disappoint you. I will hurt you, but I never want to hurt you. When I hurt you, it will be my insecurity, my stupidity, my humanity that causes me to hurt you. But I will never intentionally hurt you. I will betray your trust. I’ll never intentionally betray your trust. I will, by my stupidity, say the wrong thing, or loose lip say something to someone that you didn’t want me to, but it won’t be intentional. I’ll always try to be on your team. That feels to me like a realistic thing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the intention leads the way, but there’s some aspect of, just like the 10 course meal that over time there’s a kind of convergence towards perfection. And along the way, there’s the rose colored glasses where you see the beauty and everything. So it feels, it’s probably destructive just to really internalize the idea of soulmate. Because then any imperfections can make you doubt, can make you step away, can make you lose the connection. But it just feels like, I don’t know.
Yeah, the intention leads the way, but there’s some aspect of, just like the 10 course meal that over time there’s a kind of convergence towards perfection. And along the way, there’s the rose colored glasses where you see the beauty and everything. So it feels, it’s probably destructive just to really internalize the idea of soulmate. Because then any imperfections can make you doubt, can make you step away, can make you lose the connection. But it just feels like, I don’t know.
James Sexton
It’s too heavy. It just feels, I feel like when you see a couple that’s 90 years old and they’ve been together for 60 years, 70 years, there was of course a temptation to think about all the beauty that they’ve seen on that journey together. The children, the grandchildren, maybe the great-grandchildren, all the joy that they’ve seen, all the pain they’ve endured and struggled together. But they’ve also disappointed each other a whole bunch of times. Probably let each other down. They probably lied to each other a bunch. And to me, that is a beautiful thing. That is not, it’s great in spite of that. It’s great because of that, they still love each other even though they’ve been so flawed and imperfect, and they’re human and they still love each other, they still rode that thing together, because the reasons to do so were greater than the reasons to not.
It’s too heavy. It just feels, I feel like when you see a couple that’s 90 years old and they’ve been together for 60 years, 70 years, there was of course a temptation to think about all the beauty that they’ve seen on that journey together. The children, the grandchildren, maybe the great-grandchildren, all the joy that they’ve seen, all the pain they’ve endured and struggled together. But they’ve also disappointed each other a whole bunch of times. Probably let each other down. They probably lied to each other a bunch. And to me, that is a beautiful thing. That is not, it’s great in spite of that. It’s great because of that, they still love each other even though they’ve been so flawed and imperfect, and they’re human and they still love each other, they still rode that thing together, because the reasons to do so were greater than the reasons to not.
Sex and fighting
Lex Fridman
We’ve mentioned some of this, but I’d love to get your opinion on having seen things gone wrong, and having mentioned Amber Heard and Johnny Depp. How much fighting do you think is okay in a relationship, and how to resolve the fights such that they don’t escalate to that disconnection? Is there some wisdom you have for that? I imagine you’ve seen some epic fights.
We’ve mentioned some of this, but I’d love to get your opinion on having seen things gone wrong, and having mentioned Amber Heard and Johnny Depp. How much fighting do you think is okay in a relationship, and how to resolve the fights such that they don’t escalate to that disconnection? Is there some wisdom you have for that? I imagine you’ve seen some epic fights.
James Sexton
Yeah, I’ve seen some crazy fights. Even on my phone, I have some recordings, because now there’s cameras everywhere. It’s like Nest cams and Ring cams. And so a lot of this gets recorded, and people have phones so readily available that they can record and the other person didn’t know it. And I listen to the way people speak to their… First of all, I listen to the way people speak to each other and I’m shocked. I listen to the way people speak to their romantic partner, to their spouse, and I’m blown away. I’m blown away.
Yeah, I’ve seen some crazy fights. Even on my phone, I have some recordings, because now there’s cameras everywhere. It’s like Nest cams and Ring cams. And so a lot of this gets recorded, and people have phones so readily available that they can record and the other person didn’t know it. And I listen to the way people speak to their… First of all, I listen to the way people speak to each other and I’m shocked. I listen to the way people speak to their romantic partner, to their spouse, and I’m blown away. I’m blown away.
Lex Fridman
Disrespect or what?
Disrespect or what?
James Sexton
Just disrespect, insults, profanity, just degradation, just brutality. And then, to then kind of go on the next day you kind of go on like nothing happened. I’m shocked by it. I mean, I listened to it and I think, if someone ever spoke to me that way, I don’t know that I could ever really feel deep connection to them freely. I would feel so betrayed that they’re just so brutal. I can’t imagine speaking to someone that way, saying you just such vicious insults to someone. But I understand that’s how some people communicate, perhaps. I guess the question of, how much fighting is too much fighting in the relationship is for me a bit like the question, how much sex is enough sex in the relationship?
Just disrespect, insults, profanity, just degradation, just brutality. And then, to then kind of go on the next day you kind of go on like nothing happened. I’m shocked by it. I mean, I listened to it and I think, if someone ever spoke to me that way, I don’t know that I could ever really feel deep connection to them freely. I would feel so betrayed that they’re just so brutal. I can’t imagine speaking to someone that way, saying you just such vicious insults to someone. But I understand that’s how some people communicate, perhaps. I guess the question of, how much fighting is too much fighting in the relationship is for me a bit like the question, how much sex is enough sex in the relationship?
It depends on the two people and their individual tastes. But what’s problematic is when there is a disconnect between the two people. I think it’s Annie Hall, it’s one of the Woody Allen films where Diane Keaton and Woody Allen are both talking to their respective therapists about the relationship, but it’s like a split screen. And she says, “I mean, we have sex all the time, we have sex like once a week.” And he goes, “We never have sex. We have sex like once a week.” And it’s funny because it’s true, it really is this, they both know the same data. But they’re interpreting that data set completely differently. And I think the question you have to start asking is, Steve Harvey actually once said something funny to me. He said that success is not where you are. Success is where you are in relation to where you started.
He says if success is where you are, Oprah’s got us all beat. Or maybe Elon’s got us all beat, I don’t know. But if it’s where you are versus where you started, because there’s a lot of people that started on second, and started on third, act like they hit a double. “Well, I was given 10 million but then I turned it into 100 million.” Well, the first million’s the hardest, so come on. But I think the question of how much sex were we having at the beginning of the relationship, that might be the wrong gauge. Because that’s like, we couldn’t keep our hands off each other and just, it’s novelty.
But, how much sex we’re having post children versus before the children, that might be worth looking at. How do we compare it? Am I overweight? Compared to what, when I was 20 and running marathons, or most 50-year-old men? I don’t know. What do you compare it to? So I think fighting, there are some people that I think they enjoy fighting, they enjoy argument. I know people that enjoy political debate. I don’t particularly enjoy political debate. Not that I’m not very interested in political concepts, economic concepts, I just argue for a living. So in my free time I don’t find argument that enjoyable when it’s intense, I find discussion more interesting.
Lex Fridman
That’s so interesting, that you just keep the battle to that particular, to your main profession.
That’s so interesting, that you just keep the battle to that particular, to your main profession.
James Sexton
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
And everywhere else you want peace.
And everywhere else you want peace.
James Sexton
Well, did you ever Bobcat Goldthwait, the comedian?
Well, did you ever Bobcat Goldthwait, the comedian?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
James Sexton
Very, very funny. And he had a whole second chapter as a director and a writer. But he has this, I saw an interview with him once where he said, “Yeah, I’m a comedian. I’ve been a comedian in a long time. People always come up to me and they’re like, oh, you’re a comedian. Do you want to hear a joke?” He’s like, ” Oh yeah, that’d be a real fucking treat. I haven’t heard jokes all day, all night for years. That would be a real special occasion.” Yes, I get it.
Very, very funny. And he had a whole second chapter as a director and a writer. But he has this, I saw an interview with him once where he said, “Yeah, I’m a comedian. I’ve been a comedian in a long time. People always come up to me and they’re like, oh, you’re a comedian. Do you want to hear a joke?” He’s like, ” Oh yeah, that’d be a real fucking treat. I haven’t heard jokes all day, all night for years. That would be a real special occasion.” Yes, I get it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. And I mean, a sadder story. I’ve been reading quite a bit about Robin Williams, and his wife would talk about how quiet and introspective, and thoughtful and intellectual he was, and not really that humorous in his private life.
Yeah. And I mean, a sadder story. I’ve been reading quite a bit about Robin Williams, and his wife would talk about how quiet and introspective, and thoughtful and intellectual he was, and not really that humorous in his private life.
James Sexton
But that may be a function of that it is enjoyable to be the other thing. One of the things I’ve always thought was very funny in relationships. My own relationships is, most women I know who have a husband who doesn’t wear a suit every day for a living. When their husband gets dressed up, they’re going to a wedding or something, they get like, “Oh my God, look at him.” And I wear a suit every day. On the weekends I don’t, I wear jeans and a black T-shirt. But the rest of the time I wear a suit. And I remember, I think this has been true in every relationship I’ve been in since I was a lawyer, including Mike’s wife. It was always like if I had on jeans and I wasn’t shaven, it was like, “Look at you.” It’s like, are you kidding me? Really? Whereas the suit, they wouldn’t even notice. Wouldn’t notice the suit.
But that may be a function of that it is enjoyable to be the other thing. One of the things I’ve always thought was very funny in relationships. My own relationships is, most women I know who have a husband who doesn’t wear a suit every day for a living. When their husband gets dressed up, they’re going to a wedding or something, they get like, “Oh my God, look at him.” And I wear a suit every day. On the weekends I don’t, I wear jeans and a black T-shirt. But the rest of the time I wear a suit. And I remember, I think this has been true in every relationship I’ve been in since I was a lawyer, including Mike’s wife. It was always like if I had on jeans and I wasn’t shaven, it was like, “Look at you.” It’s like, are you kidding me? Really? Whereas the suit, they wouldn’t even notice. Wouldn’t notice the suit.
Lex Fridman
Sometimes the other thing.
Sometimes the other thing.
James Sexton
Well, that’s what it is, it’s the novelty of the other thing. So I think that if you’re Robin Williams and You’re being shot out of a canon in terms of your performative style, and your energy and explosive, being quiet must be very refreshing. I imagine incredibly intelligent people must love just watching stupid humor, or having a dumb thing. It’s why some of the smartest people I know like really dumb shit. It’s why Rick and Morty, I think is brilliant because it’s both smart and dumb.
Well, that’s what it is, it’s the novelty of the other thing. So I think that if you’re Robin Williams and You’re being shot out of a canon in terms of your performative style, and your energy and explosive, being quiet must be very refreshing. I imagine incredibly intelligent people must love just watching stupid humor, or having a dumb thing. It’s why some of the smartest people I know like really dumb shit. It’s why Rick and Morty, I think is brilliant because it’s both smart and dumb.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. It’s the perfect combination.
Yeah. It’s the perfect combination.
James Sexton
It really is. Yeah, I think it’s possibly the perfect show.
It really is. Yeah, I think it’s possibly the perfect show.
Lex Fridman
Is there advice you can give to somebody like me on how to interview well? How to do conversations well? Do you think there’s something transferable from the courtroom to this setting with complicated people?
Is there advice you can give to somebody like me on how to interview well? How to do conversations well? Do you think there’s something transferable from the courtroom to this setting with complicated people?
James Sexton
Yeah, I think so. I think what can be learned about interviewing is the distillation. What is most important? When I hear a story that I have to present to a judge, the totality of someone’s parenting, the good of their parenting, the bad of their parenting, the good of the other parent, the bad of the other parent. I have to sort of boil down, what are the best examples? Because I can’t lay it all out. And then what greater principle do they speak to? The best jiu-jitsu teacher that I think I’ve had is Paul Shriner, and Paul doesn’t just teach you techniques, he’s teaching you ways of thinking about concepts in jiu-jitsu. And then, here are some techniques that illustrate that. John Danaher, from what I can see, does a lot of that as well. I think they’re like soulmates in the jiu-jitsu world.
Yeah, I think so. I think what can be learned about interviewing is the distillation. What is most important? When I hear a story that I have to present to a judge, the totality of someone’s parenting, the good of their parenting, the bad of their parenting, the good of the other parent, the bad of the other parent. I have to sort of boil down, what are the best examples? Because I can’t lay it all out. And then what greater principle do they speak to? The best jiu-jitsu teacher that I think I’ve had is Paul Shriner, and Paul doesn’t just teach you techniques, he’s teaching you ways of thinking about concepts in jiu-jitsu. And then, here are some techniques that illustrate that. John Danaher, from what I can see, does a lot of that as well. I think they’re like soulmates in the jiu-jitsu world.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and then there’s that element that you spoke to, which is maybe considering the other side.
Yeah, and then there’s that element that you spoke to, which is maybe considering the other side.
James Sexton
Always.
Always.
Lex Fridman
Devil’s advocate kind of thing.
Devil’s advocate kind of thing.
James Sexton
Yeah, I mean straw man, steel man stuff. You do a lot of that, and I think all the best interviewers do. But yeah, I think it’s really, really important to think about. I have to know the other side’s case much better than my own. I have to know, what are their defenses, what are their strengths? I have to map out a strategy that keeps those in mind, and that’s hard because early in my career I would attribute to the other side and intelligence and strategy that sometimes wasn’t applicable. I’ve learned there’s the simplest explanation is the accurate one, the Occam’s Razor. I think Sexton’s would be, never attribute to strategy that which could be attributed to stupidity or laziness.
Yeah, I mean straw man, steel man stuff. You do a lot of that, and I think all the best interviewers do. But yeah, I think it’s really, really important to think about. I have to know the other side’s case much better than my own. I have to know, what are their defenses, what are their strengths? I have to map out a strategy that keeps those in mind, and that’s hard because early in my career I would attribute to the other side and intelligence and strategy that sometimes wasn’t applicable. I’ve learned there’s the simplest explanation is the accurate one, the Occam’s Razor. I think Sexton’s would be, never attribute to strategy that which could be attributed to stupidity or laziness.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
James Sexton
Because I have lots of adversaries that they’ll not file a motion I thought they were going to file and I’ll go, “Wait, why didn’t they file that tactically? What are they thinking I’m going to do? And what is that about?” And I would go, “Well, if I didn’t file it, why wouldn’t I file?” And the answer is they just didn’t think to file it, or they were too lazy to draft it or they went on vacation last week. So why they didn’t, and I’m driving myself crazy going, “There’s some tactical read, there must be.” So I think you have to look honestly and don’t attribute to the other side, your constitution. If I said that, I’d be saying it sarcastically. If you said it, maybe you weren’t saying it sarcastically. You have to think about the fact that we’re unique human beings who express themselves differently.
Because I have lots of adversaries that they’ll not file a motion I thought they were going to file and I’ll go, “Wait, why didn’t they file that tactically? What are they thinking I’m going to do? And what is that about?” And I would go, “Well, if I didn’t file it, why wouldn’t I file?” And the answer is they just didn’t think to file it, or they were too lazy to draft it or they went on vacation last week. So why they didn’t, and I’m driving myself crazy going, “There’s some tactical read, there must be.” So I think you have to look honestly and don’t attribute to the other side, your constitution. If I said that, I’d be saying it sarcastically. If you said it, maybe you weren’t saying it sarcastically. You have to think about the fact that we’re unique human beings who express themselves differently.
Lex Fridman
And for you, the audience is usually the judge. Do you do jury?
And for you, the audience is usually the judge. Do you do jury?
James Sexton
Yeah. It’s the judge. No, we don’t do jury trials. That’s the interesting thing about family law attorneys, family law attorneys don’t do jury trials. We do bench trials. We just persuade, there’s a person in a black robe. That’s the only person I have to convince.
Yeah. It’s the judge. No, we don’t do jury trials. That’s the interesting thing about family law attorneys, family law attorneys don’t do jury trials. We do bench trials. We just persuade, there’s a person in a black robe. That’s the only person I have to convince.
Lex Fridman
Does the person in the black robe, do they have emotions? Are they human, or are they very…
Does the person in the black robe, do they have emotions? Are they human, or are they very…
James Sexton
They are human. They are all too human.
They are human. They are all too human.
Lex Fridman
Do they impose that humanity on you? Do you feel it?
Do they impose that humanity on you? Do you feel it?
James Sexton
Oh, yeah. Do you feel it? They’re human. They’re working their shit out.
Oh, yeah. Do you feel it? They’re human. They’re working their shit out.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
James Sexton
They’re parents. They’re husbands and wives, and you’re talking about stuff they deal with. I had a woman on the stand, an expert witness on the stand who was talking about the emotional and physical abuse that was perpetrated on a seven-year-old, and this person had written a bunch of reports that were in evidence in this trial. Around day six or seven of the trial, and there’s all of this information in the record about this verbal abuse and mental abuse, and gaslighting and really intense stuff that this woman was doing to this seven year old. And the judge was vaguely paying attention for most of the time. And at some point the person says, ” Well, when a parent is abusing a child,” and the judge just interrupts, she goes, “Well, look…”
They’re parents. They’re husbands and wives, and you’re talking about stuff they deal with. I had a woman on the stand, an expert witness on the stand who was talking about the emotional and physical abuse that was perpetrated on a seven-year-old, and this person had written a bunch of reports that were in evidence in this trial. Around day six or seven of the trial, and there’s all of this information in the record about this verbal abuse and mental abuse, and gaslighting and really intense stuff that this woman was doing to this seven year old. And the judge was vaguely paying attention for most of the time. And at some point the person says, ” Well, when a parent is abusing a child,” and the judge just interrupts, she goes, “Well, look…”
James Sexton
Well, when a parent is abusing a child and the judge just interrupts, she goes, “Well, look, do you think if a person spanks a child that that’s abuse?” She’s like, “Well, like a person in general?” By the way, if my adversary asks that question, I could object, but I can’t object when the judge asks a question. They get to rule on that objection. So I’m like, “Where is this going?” She’s like, “Well, no, I mean, spanking can be a form of abuse.” She’s like, “Right. But are you saying everybody who spanks…” I’m sitting here going, “What is going on in your house?”
Well, when a parent is abusing a child and the judge just interrupts, she goes, “Well, look, do you think if a person spanks a child that that’s abuse?” She’s like, “Well, like a person in general?” By the way, if my adversary asks that question, I could object, but I can’t object when the judge asks a question. They get to rule on that objection. So I’m like, “Where is this going?” She’s like, “Well, no, I mean, spanking can be a form of abuse.” She’s like, “Right. But are you saying everybody who spanks…” I’m sitting here going, “What is going on in your house?”
Lex Fridman
Yeah, [inaudible 02:45:32].
Yeah, [inaudible 02:45:32].
James Sexton
What went on with your parents? Because you’re bringing some stuff here, this is not what you’re supposed to be. This is not your role. But there are good judges and bad judges and that’s a big, big deal.
What went on with your parents? Because you’re bringing some stuff here, this is not what you’re supposed to be. This is not your role. But there are good judges and bad judges and that’s a big, big deal.
Lex Fridman
I don’t have kids, so I have a certain perspective on the world. I really want to have a family and have kids. But I’ve noticed when I talk to people that have kids and gender matters also, fathers with daughters and so on, it changes the landscape of the conversation.
I don’t have kids, so I have a certain perspective on the world. I really want to have a family and have kids. But I’ve noticed when I talk to people that have kids and gender matters also, fathers with daughters and so on, it changes the landscape of the conversation.
James Sexton
Sure does.
Sure does.
Lex Fridman
It’s like you’re no longer this intellectual that’s like, “Well, there’s this and there’s this.” It’s more like, “Go fuck yourself. Anything that with kids can burn it to the ground. I don’t care what the nuance is, if the little intellectual thing-
It’s like you’re no longer this intellectual that’s like, “Well, there’s this and there’s this.” It’s more like, “Go fuck yourself. Anything that with kids can burn it to the ground. I don’t care what the nuance is, if the little intellectual thing-
James Sexton
Oh, you want to learn about this, represent someone who’s accused of child sexual abuse. I’ve had about a dozen of those cases, where I’ve represented someone who’s alleged to have perpetrated sexual abuse of a child. You are guilty until proven innocent. Let me tell you, as a lawyer, that is the toughest cases because you put sex and kids together and everyone loses their goddamn mind immediately. There’s a rush to judgment. There is a disregard for procedure. There is a confirmation bias. There’s a desire to be a protector. Again, all motivated and informed by really good things, the desire to protect the innocent, the desire to protect the vulnerable, but gang, no, we have these… I like living in a world that has due process. I like these rules. I like the rules of evidence. I like innocent until proven guilty. I like that. I’m not saying it’s perfect, but-
Oh, you want to learn about this, represent someone who’s accused of child sexual abuse. I’ve had about a dozen of those cases, where I’ve represented someone who’s alleged to have perpetrated sexual abuse of a child. You are guilty until proven innocent. Let me tell you, as a lawyer, that is the toughest cases because you put sex and kids together and everyone loses their goddamn mind immediately. There’s a rush to judgment. There is a disregard for procedure. There is a confirmation bias. There’s a desire to be a protector. Again, all motivated and informed by really good things, the desire to protect the innocent, the desire to protect the vulnerable, but gang, no, we have these… I like living in a world that has due process. I like these rules. I like the rules of evidence. I like innocent until proven guilty. I like that. I’m not saying it’s perfect, but-
Lex Fridman
I’m so torn on it because I also like living in a world where people are so emotionally invested in connection to other humans.
I’m so torn on it because I also like living in a world where people are so emotionally invested in connection to other humans.
James Sexton
Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive. They shouldn’t be.
Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive. They shouldn’t be.
Lex Fridman
I know, but if you dedicate yourself fully to the law, you might lose some of the humanity.
I know, but if you dedicate yourself fully to the law, you might lose some of the humanity.
James Sexton
I don’t think you have to. I have to tell you, I once actually went off on a DA, on a district attorney who was very vehemently prosecuting a child sex abuse case that I was involved in. Thankfully, I came in very early in the case. So the accusation was made and I came in right away because very often you get this case there’ve been 15 interviews. This person’s been interviewed by police, by child protective services and it’s like they’re already so far down a hole they didn’t even know they dug themselves into. So I got in very early on and I just kept saying… She’s like, “Well, we’re going to do this. We’re going to do this.” I was like, “Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. We should both want this to be fair, done properly.”
I don’t think you have to. I have to tell you, I once actually went off on a DA, on a district attorney who was very vehemently prosecuting a child sex abuse case that I was involved in. Thankfully, I came in very early in the case. So the accusation was made and I came in right away because very often you get this case there’ve been 15 interviews. This person’s been interviewed by police, by child protective services and it’s like they’re already so far down a hole they didn’t even know they dug themselves into. So I got in very early on and I just kept saying… She’s like, “Well, we’re going to do this. We’re going to do this.” I was like, “Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. We should both want this to be fair, done properly.”
There’s an expert, a well-respected expert who’s a clinical psychologist who their job is they’re a validation expert. So their job is to interview a child. They record the interviews with a hidden camera so that everyone can see they didn’t ask suggestive questioning. There are very stringent standards that they follow to prevent suggestive questioning or any of those kinds of things. I was saying, “Listen, no, no one should be interviewing this child other than this person, who’s a neutral qualified person.” I kept saying to the other side like, “Wait, no, no. See, this is the problem, you want to win. You’re a lawyer, you want to win. I want to win too, right? But we want to win fair.” That’s like saying, “I’m going into a boxing match, I want to win. So if the referee’s looking to the side, I’m going to kick the guy in the nuts.” Okay. Then you might’ve won, but you didn’t win boxing. You won some other thing.
I want to win a fair fight. I want to go in with the rules set, the law, the rules of evidence. I don’t want a judge who doesn’t understand evidence. I don’t want an adversary who plays it fast and loose with the rules. I want to go in and win a fair fight. That’s where when it comes our passion to protect the innocent, to emotionally connect, to feel deeply about children and protecting them, I don’t think that that’s antagonistic to… We always treat dandruff with decapitation in this culture and I don’t understand it and that’s what I like about the law. The law, there’s rules and there’s rules about procedure. And so, that’s our job is to bring out the truth using the rules and the procedure. I love that job.
Lex Fridman
But still there’s a human being in the judge, right?
But still there’s a human being in the judge, right?
James Sexton
That’s the problem.
That’s the problem.
Lex Fridman
It seems like a really hard job-
It seems like a really hard job-
James Sexton
It’s a hard job. Yeah.
It’s a hard job. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
… because you have to be pay attention to the whole thing.
… because you have to be pay attention to the whole thing.
James Sexton
You have to pay attention to the whole thing and everyone is trying to persuade you and lie to you and everyone can keep their shit together in a court appearance most of the time. It takes a rare kind of crazy to blow up in a courtroom. So most of the time everybody looks really put together. Yeah, you got to have an amazing bullshit detector. I’m not saying they don’t have a really hard job. They have a really hard job. They have a way harder job than I have.
You have to pay attention to the whole thing and everyone is trying to persuade you and lie to you and everyone can keep their shit together in a court appearance most of the time. It takes a rare kind of crazy to blow up in a courtroom. So most of the time everybody looks really put together. Yeah, you got to have an amazing bullshit detector. I’m not saying they don’t have a really hard job. They have a really hard job. They have a way harder job than I have.
Lex Fridman
What’s their source of ground truth? How do they sharpen the radar for bullshit?
What’s their source of ground truth? How do they sharpen the radar for bullshit?
James Sexton
I think that they’re assessing credibility, which is what you call it in the law, is something that I think you’re supposed to develop it on the job.
I think that they’re assessing credibility, which is what you call it in the law, is something that I think you’re supposed to develop it on the job.
Lex Fridman
Do you have the data of who was lying in the end or not?
Do you have the data of who was lying in the end or not?
James Sexton
No, not really. Not really. I mean, you can try to demonstrate. What I always tell clients, and this is the art of advocacy is I want to use examples of misrepresentations to show that this person’s a liar. I’m trying to extrapolate from the small, the large. I’m trying to say, “Here’s three times he lied, therefore he’s a liar,” when in fact we know human beings don’t really work that way, but I’ve seen people submarine, they just torpedo their entire case because they lied about some dumb shit, some dumb little thing. I say to them, “Why would you lie? Why did you lie about that?”
No, not really. Not really. I mean, you can try to demonstrate. What I always tell clients, and this is the art of advocacy is I want to use examples of misrepresentations to show that this person’s a liar. I’m trying to extrapolate from the small, the large. I’m trying to say, “Here’s three times he lied, therefore he’s a liar,” when in fact we know human beings don’t really work that way, but I’ve seen people submarine, they just torpedo their entire case because they lied about some dumb shit, some dumb little thing. I say to them, “Why would you lie? Why did you lie about that?”
I had a case where a person was accused of child sexual abuse. On cross-examination, they were asked, “Did you have an affair with this babysitter?” They were like, “No, no, no, no, no.” And then it was shown through text messages and things, they clearly had an affair with the babysitter. I said, “Why did you lie?” They said, “Well, I didn’t want that to come out.” I said, “Right, but now you’re a liar. Did you molest your child? Because if the answer to that is no and now you destroyed your credibility because you didn’t want to admit that you slept with an adult woman. By the way, it would’ve been good for your case.” “What do you mean good for your case?” For you to say, “Yeah, I slept with her. I like sleeping with adult women. That’s how I am. I don’t sleep with children, much less my own.” So why would you lie?
And so, that concept is incredibly important. Judges, theoretically, they have to make very tough calls. I feel like It’s the most impotent place to just sit there and dispassionately listen and rule on objections. I just would be so frustrated because I’d want to get up and… I had to do jury duty once and it was like a horrific experience for me because I’m sitting there and-
Lex Fridman
You have no power. You’re just [inaudible 02:53:29].
You have no power. You’re just [inaudible 02:53:29].
James Sexton
Yeah, I’m just watching these two guys. I’m like, “Why did you ask that question that way? I would never have asked it that way. Why would you object? When you object, you bring more attention to it. What are you doing?” I’m watching both of them. It’s like watching a jiu-jitsu. Probably what it feel like for John Danaher to watch two white belts spar. “Why are you doing… Wow, my God, what are you doing? Why would you grab that? What are you thinking?” It’s frustrating. It’s frustrating to watch and as a judge, it must just be unbelievable.
Yeah, I’m just watching these two guys. I’m like, “Why did you ask that question that way? I would never have asked it that way. Why would you object? When you object, you bring more attention to it. What are you doing?” I’m watching both of them. It’s like watching a jiu-jitsu. Probably what it feel like for John Danaher to watch two white belts spar. “Why are you doing… Wow, my God, what are you doing? Why would you grab that? What are you thinking?” It’s frustrating. It’s frustrating to watch and as a judge, it must just be unbelievable.
Lex Fridman
So divorce lawyers sometimes get a bad rep. Is there a reason for this?
So divorce lawyers sometimes get a bad rep. Is there a reason for this?
James Sexton
I mean, no one’s ever happy to be spending time with a divorce lawyer. If you have a criminal lawyer, they’re defending you against the maelstrom of injustice and false allegations. They’re protecting your freedom. Maybe you’re acquitted and then you’re like, “Oh, that person saved me.” You buy a house, that lawyer helps you get the house. You’re happy about that, sign the paperwork. You do a will, you help. They make you feel secure. At best, I’m a representative of a chapter in someone’s life that was very unpleasant.
I mean, no one’s ever happy to be spending time with a divorce lawyer. If you have a criminal lawyer, they’re defending you against the maelstrom of injustice and false allegations. They’re protecting your freedom. Maybe you’re acquitted and then you’re like, “Oh, that person saved me.” You buy a house, that lawyer helps you get the house. You’re happy about that, sign the paperwork. You do a will, you help. They make you feel secure. At best, I’m a representative of a chapter in someone’s life that was very unpleasant.
I have a friend who’s a Julliard-trained classical pianist. He was having a humidification system installed in his home because his piano required a certain level of humidity and it was very expensive to install this humidification system. We went out to dinner and then we came back to his place and he said, “Man, this is the most depressing $15,000 I’ve ever spent.” I said, “Why?” He said, ” Because there’s nothing different. I spent $15,000 and I feel absolutely nothing different. My piano does, but I don’t.” You don’t have anything to show for it. You finished getting divorced, you don’t really have anything to show for it.
Lex Fridman
At best it’s the same.
At best it’s the same.
James Sexton
It’s one of the things I think that’s interesting about divorce is in our increasingly performative society, you can’t pretend you meant to get divorced. You can’t, like everything everybody does. “Well, I wrote that album for me. It didn’t matter that it was not going to be popular.” No, you wanted that album to be popular. Come on, you’re lying and that’s fine, but you’re lying. “Oh, I think my haircut came out great. I wanted it to look this fucked up.” No, you didn’t. You didn’t. You’re lying and that’s fine because we live in a society now where everybody’s just, “Oh yes, I meant to do that.” Okay.
It’s one of the things I think that’s interesting about divorce is in our increasingly performative society, you can’t pretend you meant to get divorced. You can’t, like everything everybody does. “Well, I wrote that album for me. It didn’t matter that it was not going to be popular.” No, you wanted that album to be popular. Come on, you’re lying and that’s fine, but you’re lying. “Oh, I think my haircut came out great. I wanted it to look this fucked up.” No, you didn’t. You didn’t. You’re lying and that’s fine because we live in a society now where everybody’s just, “Oh yes, I meant to do that.” Okay.
Divorce? Nope, you got married. You break up in a relationship, not a marriage. “Okay. Well, we were only going to be together for a little while. It was never serious. We were having fun. That’s all it was. We were never going to be a happily believer after.” No, you got married. You got married guys. You got up there and you said forever and it didn’t go forever so you can’t bullshit anybody anymore. No, it didn’t go the way you thought it was going to go, didn’t go the way you signed on for. So now that that’s undeniable, what can we make it? What can we make it into? It can be beauty. The barns burned down, now I can see the moon. Let’s make it something. And so, for me, I think people look at a divorce lawyer and they just go, “Yeah, this is this horrible chapter and I associate you with it.”
Also, too, listen, some of the things we do, it’s difficult to simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. The things you do to protect your clients sometimes look like acts of aggression, but really they’re just trying to shore up a defense. And so, I get paid to be paranoid and I have to say to clients sometimes like, “Well, are you sure that they’re not doing this?” And then they go, “Well. I don’t know.” I go, “Well, let me inquire.” “Did you accuse me of that?” “No, no. I’m not accusing you. I’m just trying…” We get a reputation, divorce lawyers, as amping up conflict because we get paid for the conflict, right? It’s like if you get paid by the bullet, you’re going to start a lot of gunfights, right? It doesn’t really work that way with most good divorce lawyers. There are plenty of people that are bad lawyers and they stoke up conflict because it jacks up fees. They usually don’t do well. They don’t build a successful career because you live and die by your reputation.
Lex Fridman
Yes, reputation is everything.
Yes, reputation is everything.
James Sexton
But good lawyers, like good experienced divorce lawyers, we do the whole, “Hey, listen, you’re going to say this, I’m going to say this. You’re going to do this, I’m going to do this. Let’s skip it. We’re going to end up here. We got Judge blah blah blah and you know what he’s going to do. He’s going to go right here. So why don’t we just agree right now to X, Y, Z? Sounds good. We’re done. We’re good.”
But good lawyers, like good experienced divorce lawyers, we do the whole, “Hey, listen, you’re going to say this, I’m going to say this. You’re going to do this, I’m going to do this. Let’s skip it. We’re going to end up here. We got Judge blah blah blah and you know what he’s going to do. He’s going to go right here. So why don’t we just agree right now to X, Y, Z? Sounds good. We’re done. We’re good.”
Lex Fridman
So you want to minimize the number of bullets.
So you want to minimize the number of bullets.
James Sexton
It’s like Miyamoto Musashi. It’s like the two swordsmen who see each other and they just stand there at the edge and they see the whole fight in their minds and they know who won and who lost and they walk away. We do a lot of that. Okay. It’s like when you watch high level chess and someone resigns and you go, wait, “What happened?” You go, “No, no, the other guy won. It’s 15 moves from now, but he won and the other guy sees it, so now we’re done.”
It’s like Miyamoto Musashi. It’s like the two swordsmen who see each other and they just stand there at the edge and they see the whole fight in their minds and they know who won and who lost and they walk away. We do a lot of that. Okay. It’s like when you watch high level chess and someone resigns and you go, wait, “What happened?” You go, “No, no, the other guy won. It’s 15 moves from now, but he won and the other guy sees it, so now we’re done.”
Kevin Costner’s divorce
Lex Fridman
Can you speak to some recent high profile divorces? The most recent I saw is Kevin Costner.
Can you speak to some recent high profile divorces? The most recent I saw is Kevin Costner.
James Sexton
Yeah, Kevin Costner is a great… I mean, I don’t know him. I’m not involved in the case.
Yeah, Kevin Costner is a great… I mean, I don’t know him. I’m not involved in the case.
Lex Fridman
By the way, Yellowstone is just so great.
By the way, Yellowstone is just so great.
James Sexton
Oh, it’s so good, right?
Oh, it’s so good, right?
Lex Fridman
And I hope Matthew McConaughey, who I’ve gotten to know, I hope he does one of these shows. Yellowstone or anything else, he’s just-
And I hope Matthew McConaughey, who I’ve gotten to know, I hope he does one of these shows. Yellowstone or anything else, he’s just-
James Sexton
Born for the role frankly.
Born for the role frankly.
Lex Fridman
But anyway.
But anyway.
James Sexton
He’d be amazing in that. Yeah, your conversation with him was a great one. The Kevin Costner divorce is interesting because Kevin Costner had one of the most expensive from a distributive award perspective. He gave a huge payout to his first wife and then this time he had a prenup. It’s a very public showing of the fact that once bitten twice shy. He had a very public divorce that cost him a lot of assets in terms of the division of assets, and now it appears by all acknowledged reports that he had a prenuptial agreement that was well-crafted and enforceable. The argument now is over. What is child support? What is spousal support? What’s covered in the prenup and what isn’t?
He’d be amazing in that. Yeah, your conversation with him was a great one. The Kevin Costner divorce is interesting because Kevin Costner had one of the most expensive from a distributive award perspective. He gave a huge payout to his first wife and then this time he had a prenup. It’s a very public showing of the fact that once bitten twice shy. He had a very public divorce that cost him a lot of assets in terms of the division of assets, and now it appears by all acknowledged reports that he had a prenuptial agreement that was well-crafted and enforceable. The argument now is over. What is child support? What is spousal support? What’s covered in the prenup and what isn’t?
Lex Fridman
So it seems like the prenup worked actually.
So it seems like the prenup worked actually.
James Sexton
The prenup worked. Kevin Costner’s career, which has always been a steady career, I don’t know that in the Hollywood stock market that people would’ve bet on Yellowstone. I think you would’ve said, “Hey, the best years of that guy’s career are behind him.” How do you get better than Dances with Wolves and Robin Hood and all these big, big… The Bodyguard and then Yellowstone. It’s like, “Holy cow, did he knock that out of the park?” And he’s central to it? I mean, he knocked the skin off the ball. So I think that’s why prenups are important. You don’t know what your career’s going to do. You don’t know where it’s going to go. And so, he saved himself a lot of money. He also has a great lawyer. He has Laura Wasser. Laura Wasser’s L.A… Just a top professional, brilliant lawyer, even tempered but intense in the courtroom and just a smart, smart human being.
The prenup worked. Kevin Costner’s career, which has always been a steady career, I don’t know that in the Hollywood stock market that people would’ve bet on Yellowstone. I think you would’ve said, “Hey, the best years of that guy’s career are behind him.” How do you get better than Dances with Wolves and Robin Hood and all these big, big… The Bodyguard and then Yellowstone. It’s like, “Holy cow, did he knock that out of the park?” And he’s central to it? I mean, he knocked the skin off the ball. So I think that’s why prenups are important. You don’t know what your career’s going to do. You don’t know where it’s going to go. And so, he saved himself a lot of money. He also has a great lawyer. He has Laura Wasser. Laura Wasser’s L.A… Just a top professional, brilliant lawyer, even tempered but intense in the courtroom and just a smart, smart human being.
Lex Fridman
The thing I liked, just I haven’t been following it, but I saw a few comments he’s made and he refused to comment negatively about his spouse and just-
The thing I liked, just I haven’t been following it, but I saw a few comments he’s made and he refused to comment negatively about his spouse and just-
James Sexton
That’s smart.
That’s smart.
Lex Fridman
But the way he said it, it wasn’t lawyer advice. It’s good lawyer advice probably, but he said it from the heart, which I always like. I like seeing that, where he refuses even the drama, even the public nature of it to throwing jabs or-
But the way he said it, it wasn’t lawyer advice. It’s good lawyer advice probably, but he said it from the heart, which I always like. I like seeing that, where he refuses even the drama, even the public nature of it to throwing jabs or-
James Sexton
Well, Laura, his lawyer, is actually notorious for not speaking to the press about cases in an extended way and that’s smart move. I don’t speak about pending cases I’m involved in publicly and I discourage my clients from doing so. I can’t always stop them, but I discourage them from doing so. I don’t think there’s any good to come of it. There are lawyers who try to try things in the court of public opinion. To take it to the broader principle you just brought up, I think there is a lot of value in talking about your ex in a favorable way.
Well, Laura, his lawyer, is actually notorious for not speaking to the press about cases in an extended way and that’s smart move. I don’t speak about pending cases I’m involved in publicly and I discourage my clients from doing so. I can’t always stop them, but I discourage them from doing so. I don’t think there’s any good to come of it. There are lawyers who try to try things in the court of public opinion. To take it to the broader principle you just brought up, I think there is a lot of value in talking about your ex in a favorable way.
I have to say when I first got divorced many years ago, I went out on a date with a young woman. It was one of my first dates as a divorced man. She was a divorced woman. She’s a beautiful woman. We were having dinner and it was going quite well. It was one of those things where I was like, “Oh, I definitely want to see this girl again.” I said something about, “Oh, there’s going to be this thing at this museum. We should go.” She’s like, “Oh yeah, that’d be a lot of fun.” I’m like, “Yeah, we should, definitely. Maybe that’ll be next thing we do together.” She was like, “Yeah, we should go next weekend. The kids are with the asshole so we can go.” It was like you could hear that record scratch. I just went, “Oh yeah. No, this isn’t good. You’re referring to the father of your kids as the asshole? I’m walking into something here that I don’t know that I want to be involved in.”
Matthew McConaughey, before he was married, if you look at his history, he dated some of the most beautiful women in Hollywood in their prime, and none of them ever talked bad about him in the press. They all were like, ” Oh my god, he’s such a great guy. He’s such a great guy.” I always wondered how do you… He got out of all of those relationships without a scratch on him. When you’d watch an interview with him, they would say, “So you dated Penelope Cruz,” and he’d go, “Penelope, that’s just a special lady. What a special lady. She’s just a wonderful… What a wonderful woman. I’m just so blessed to have the time with her. What a beautiful, wonderful woman.”
I would think to myself, I’m like, “You’re a genius.” He’s a genius because he never came off as petty, spiteful, bitter, any of that. He just came off as just dignified, strong, smart, self-assured. It left the viewer with the impression that when he was looking off and basically he’s probably just thinking about some wonderful time he had with her and you think to yourself like, “God, that guy. He just became cooler and cooler.” Whereas if he got into the whole, “Oh yeah, that was ugly and then this happened,” nobody wants to hear it. It’s awful.
Lex Fridman
The funny thing about him just having interacted with him a bunch, I don’t think… He’s in the Rogan school of thought, I think, that I don’t see him ever having a fight. Now his parents were, as he’s spoken about a bunch, nonstop fighting. They got divorced and remarried and just insane.
The funny thing about him just having interacted with him a bunch, I don’t think… He’s in the Rogan school of thought, I think, that I don’t see him ever having a fight. Now his parents were, as he’s spoken about a bunch, nonstop fighting. They got divorced and remarried and just insane.
James Sexton
And they were volatile.
And they were volatile.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, very. It depend on swinging the other way. He just seems cool as a cucumber always.
Yeah, very. It depend on swinging the other way. He just seems cool as a cucumber always.
James Sexton
Just lets it roll off. But even if It’s internally not rolling off, there is value in just rising above it in your discourse.
Just lets it roll off. But even if It’s internally not rolling off, there is value in just rising above it in your discourse.
Lex Fridman
That’s true. Yes. Yes.
That’s true. Yes. Yes.
James Sexton
You lie to your children. People say this to me all the time. Clients, they’re like, “Why did you tell your child that dad had an affair?” “Well, I’m not going to lie to my kids.” Fuck you. Yes, you are. You lie to your kids all the time. “Mommy, are you going to die someday?” “Yes, babe, I’m going to die and Daddy’s going to die. And then someday the earth’s going to hurl into the sun. We’re all going to die. Sweet dreams.” You lie to your kids all the time. “What’s wrong with me?” “We don’t know What’s wrong with you. We’re going to take you to the doctor and hopefully it’s nothing serious and you won’t die.” You lie to your kids all the time. You tell them that Santa Claus exists when he doesn’t, whatever.
You lie to your children. People say this to me all the time. Clients, they’re like, “Why did you tell your child that dad had an affair?” “Well, I’m not going to lie to my kids.” Fuck you. Yes, you are. You lie to your kids all the time. “Mommy, are you going to die someday?” “Yes, babe, I’m going to die and Daddy’s going to die. And then someday the earth’s going to hurl into the sun. We’re all going to die. Sweet dreams.” You lie to your kids all the time. “What’s wrong with me?” “We don’t know What’s wrong with you. We’re going to take you to the doctor and hopefully it’s nothing serious and you won’t die.” You lie to your kids all the time. You tell them that Santa Claus exists when he doesn’t, whatever.
So to say, “I’m not going to lie to my kids,” you lie to your kids all the time. You don’t like your husband, that’s okay. You don’t like your ex-husband, but it’s their father so just grin. “Oh, Daddy took me to meet his new girlfriend, Kiki.” “Oh, that’s nice. Did you guys have a good time?” “Good. Oh yeah. And she helped me do my hair and she did my makeup.” Listen, I’m sure that’s burning you inside, but you go, “Oh, that’s great,” because why? You love your kids.
Lex Fridman
Well, I mean, again, McConaughey has a way bottom with that. He basically says, “Never lie, but a little bullshit is okay.”
Well, I mean, again, McConaughey has a way bottom with that. He basically says, “Never lie, but a little bullshit is okay.”
James Sexton
Sure. Yeah.
Sure. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Tom Waits, that song Lied To Me, “You got to lie to me baby.” Honesty is a funny thing.
Tom Waits, that song Lied To Me, “You got to lie to me baby.” Honesty is a funny thing.
James Sexton
Tom Waits also believes that God’s away on business.
Tom Waits also believes that God’s away on business.
Lex Fridman
I think his words, man-
I think his words, man-
James Sexton
“Who are the ones that we left in charge? Killers, thieves and lawyers,” that’s a Tom Waits quote.
“Who are the ones that we left in charge? Killers, thieves and lawyers,” that’s a Tom Waits quote.
Lex Fridman
Well, it must be true then.
Well, it must be true then.
James Sexton
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know how many limbs I have, but I will give all of them to talk to Tom. He’s a very private person.
I don’t know how many limbs I have, but I will give all of them to talk to Tom. He’s a very private person.
James Sexton
I feel like he’s the musical equivalent of Cormac McCarthy. Even if you get the interview, you’re not, I don’t think, going to get in there.
I feel like he’s the musical equivalent of Cormac McCarthy. Even if you get the interview, you’re not, I don’t think, going to get in there.
Lex Fridman
Honestly, I don’t think you want to. You’ve seen his public interviews over the years with Letterman and I think he is the poetry.
Honestly, I don’t think you want to. You’ve seen his public interviews over the years with Letterman and I think he is the poetry.
James Sexton
I would put Tom Waits, Cormac McCarthy, Maynard James Keenan, these are artists that I think they want the art to speak for itself. They would like to be lessened. I remember early, early days of Tool that he could not have been less interested in the spotlight to the point where I think it was almost to the detriment of the band early on. There’s no surprise that those are three artists that I think are unbelievable and in a category of their own and that you hear their performance. You can give me a page of a Cormac McCarthy novel and I’ll know it’s a Cormac McCarthy novel. A few notes of Maynard James Keenan or Tom Wait’s voice, you know that that’s them.
I would put Tom Waits, Cormac McCarthy, Maynard James Keenan, these are artists that I think they want the art to speak for itself. They would like to be lessened. I remember early, early days of Tool that he could not have been less interested in the spotlight to the point where I think it was almost to the detriment of the band early on. There’s no surprise that those are three artists that I think are unbelievable and in a category of their own and that you hear their performance. You can give me a page of a Cormac McCarthy novel and I’ll know it’s a Cormac McCarthy novel. A few notes of Maynard James Keenan or Tom Wait’s voice, you know that that’s them.
Lex Fridman
Yes, genius. Genius hides from the spotlight, but it doesn’t stop me from feeling sad about it, but anyway.
Yes, genius. Genius hides from the spotlight, but it doesn’t stop me from feeling sad about it, but anyway.
James Sexton
Yeah, that does. I would like to hear that interview/
Yeah, that does. I would like to hear that interview/
Lex Fridman
She’s the girl that got away.
She’s the girl that got away.
James Sexton
Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I’m just standing outside of that girl’s house with a blue box.
I’m just standing outside of that girl’s house with a blue box.
James Sexton
With a sign. Yeah, just playing In Your Eyes with Peter Gabriel. Yeah.
With a sign. Yeah, just playing In Your Eyes with Peter Gabriel. Yeah.
Lying
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Anyway, what is it? Lie To Me. This whole idea of honesty in relationships is interesting. I mean, clerks with the blowjobs. I don’t know how to phrase it eloquently, but there’s stuff you should be honest about and there’s stuff maybe you don’t need to be honest about.
Yeah. Anyway, what is it? Lie To Me. This whole idea of honesty in relationships is interesting. I mean, clerks with the blowjobs. I don’t know how to phrase it eloquently, but there’s stuff you should be honest about and there’s stuff maybe you don’t need to be honest about.
James Sexton
So in the law, it is illegal to commit fraud. Fraud is a material misrepresentation of fact, but the law specifically says you are permitted to engage in “mere puffery.”
So in the law, it is illegal to commit fraud. Fraud is a material misrepresentation of fact, but the law specifically says you are permitted to engage in “mere puffery.”
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
James Sexton
Puffery.
Puffery.
Lex Fridman
Puffery.
Puffery.
James Sexton
That’s the term that was used for it, puffery. Puffery is when you are inflating something. You’re being hyperbolic, but people wouldn’t necessarily think you’re telling the truth. If I say to you, “This bottle of water was held by Elvis and that’s why you should pay me $50 for it,” that’s fraud. But if I say, “This water was drank by the finest people. Presidents drink this water,” now this is puffery. And so, advertising, marketing is based on puffery. It’s not fraud. When it’s fraud, it crosses the line.
That’s the term that was used for it, puffery. Puffery is when you are inflating something. You’re being hyperbolic, but people wouldn’t necessarily think you’re telling the truth. If I say to you, “This bottle of water was held by Elvis and that’s why you should pay me $50 for it,” that’s fraud. But if I say, “This water was drank by the finest people. Presidents drink this water,” now this is puffery. And so, advertising, marketing is based on puffery. It’s not fraud. When it’s fraud, it crosses the line.
So I think there’s a difference between honesty and candor, right? So in relationships, being honest is good. Being totally candid is probably not a great idea. It’s indelicate to be totally candid about some things. If a woman you’re in romantic relationship with says to you, “Do I look good in this dress?” and they don’t, or “Do I look fat in this?” that’s a better way. Any heterosexual man who’s ever been in a relationship has had that question asked of him, “Do I look fat in this? Does this make my butt look big or whatever? Do I look fat in this?” If you go, “Yes,” that’s indelicate. It’s honest, but it’s indelicate and it’s almost mean, right? If you say no, but it’s true, she doesn’t look good in that, the concern she sees is a legitimate concern, do you lie and go, “No. No, you look great in that. It’s great, da-da-da-da-da”? That’s not a good thing either.
So, what do you say? “That blue dress you have really compliments your body in a way that one doesn’t. The cut of that dress is such that it doesn’t flatter you.” “I see what you’re saying.” Now, it’s the dress, it’s not you babe, but I’m telling you the truth. I’m addressing your concern. This is the distinction. Don’t material misrepresent the facts. Don’t steer people down roads that you know that that’s not how it’s going to go, right? So it’s like if the woman says I love you and you don’t love her, don’t say I love you back. You do the like, “Oh, I have very strong feelings for you as well.” Or there has to be some middle ground. You don’t just pretend you didn’t hear them.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I mean, I guess all of it requires skill, just like you described. I think just being honest in quotes is not enough.
Yeah. I mean, I guess all of it requires skill, just like you described. I think just being honest in quotes is not enough.
James Sexton
Well, it’s not a specific enough instruction. I mean, that’s the problem. See, when you write a relationship book, which I never intended to do, people come to you and say, “What are the things I should do to help my relationship, or what is the cause of divorce?” You go, “Well, disconnection.” But what do you mean by that? Or like, “How do I improve my relationship?” Pay more attention. Make small gestures. “Okay. What does that even mean? What do you mean?” Acts of love. You should show your partner that you love them more often. “What do you mean? What I say? What I do? We should have more sex? What are you at? What are you saying?”
Well, it’s not a specific enough instruction. I mean, that’s the problem. See, when you write a relationship book, which I never intended to do, people come to you and say, “What are the things I should do to help my relationship, or what is the cause of divorce?” You go, “Well, disconnection.” But what do you mean by that? Or like, “How do I improve my relationship?” Pay more attention. Make small gestures. “Okay. What does that even mean? What do you mean?” Acts of love. You should show your partner that you love them more often. “What do you mean? What I say? What I do? We should have more sex? What are you at? What are you saying?”
People want measurable, specific things. So that’s why I tried in my book to be very specific about things you can do, things you shouldn’t do, and they’re practical suggestions, like leaving a note. I talk a lot about leaving a note. If you’re dating someone or you’re living with them or you’re in a serious relationship, send a text, leave a note. Every day just some little thing that just tells them how much you like them. This is a low cost, high value move, doesn’t take much and it’s a practical thing. But when we speak in these broader axioms, these broader concepts that people just don’t have any idea how to practically apply.
Lex Fridman
I can’t wait to listen to the audiobook where you talk about managing marital finances is like anal sex, which your mastery of the metaphor touches one’s heart and soul. You’re Shakespeare of the 21st century, really.
I can’t wait to listen to the audiobook where you talk about managing marital finances is like anal sex, which your mastery of the metaphor touches one’s heart and soul. You’re Shakespeare of the 21st century, really.
James Sexton
I don’t know that Shakespeare would’ve brought anal up in that context, but I appreciate it. Yeah. Yeah. My thesis there or my point there was proceed carefully and have discussion in advance and don’t just spring it on someone and realize that if this goes wrong it will go catastrophically wrong. So, good communication is important. Yeah, I don’t think it’s something you should just dive into unless you’re prepared for that to have potentially a very negative impact.
I don’t know that Shakespeare would’ve brought anal up in that context, but I appreciate it. Yeah. Yeah. My thesis there or my point there was proceed carefully and have discussion in advance and don’t just spring it on someone and realize that if this goes wrong it will go catastrophically wrong. So, good communication is important. Yeah, I don’t think it’s something you should just dive into unless you’re prepared for that to have potentially a very negative impact.
Lex Fridman
Finances is one of the sources of a huge amount of stress in relationships, which is-
Finances is one of the sources of a huge amount of stress in relationships, which is-
James Sexton
Tremendous. Because it’s about value, I think. I mean, it’s aside from having painful conversations about what you tried to do and were able to do or what your impulse control was in terms of what you spent money on. There’s the conversation and then there’s underneath the conversation. There’s gender stuff about men feeling the need to be a provider. There’s gender stuff of men or women thinking material goods will fill the void and buying things and then creating stress on their partner. There’s the very human desire to make things seem effortless so your spouse doesn’t feel any stress when in fact it’s causing tremendous financial stress. And then when the dam breaks, it breaks hard. So yeah, there’s a lot. Finance is tricky stuff. You could probably be wonderful, romantic and sexual partners and have very different styles of how you handle your finances. How you handle your finances is informed by not only your individual psychology, but also how you were raised and how your family taught you about finance and how you should conduct your finances.
Tremendous. Because it’s about value, I think. I mean, it’s aside from having painful conversations about what you tried to do and were able to do or what your impulse control was in terms of what you spent money on. There’s the conversation and then there’s underneath the conversation. There’s gender stuff about men feeling the need to be a provider. There’s gender stuff of men or women thinking material goods will fill the void and buying things and then creating stress on their partner. There’s the very human desire to make things seem effortless so your spouse doesn’t feel any stress when in fact it’s causing tremendous financial stress. And then when the dam breaks, it breaks hard. So yeah, there’s a lot. Finance is tricky stuff. You could probably be wonderful, romantic and sexual partners and have very different styles of how you handle your finances. How you handle your finances is informed by not only your individual psychology, but also how you were raised and how your family taught you about finance and how you should conduct your finances.
Lex Fridman
And there’s interesting power dynamics in play.
And there’s interesting power dynamics in play.
James Sexton
Tremendously. Yeah. Those are very tricky because the standard of living of a couple becomes important in a divorce, but sometimes this toxic standard of living that created toxic levels of stress is one of the causes of the divorce. And so, they’re asking the court to maintain a financial obligation on you, that is the reason why the marriage fell apart and that feels like a particularly insulting form of indignity.
Tremendously. Yeah. Those are very tricky because the standard of living of a couple becomes important in a divorce, but sometimes this toxic standard of living that created toxic levels of stress is one of the causes of the divorce. And so, they’re asking the court to maintain a financial obligation on you, that is the reason why the marriage fell apart and that feels like a particularly insulting form of indignity.
Productivity
Lex Fridman
Well, you’re a fascinating human being on many levels, but you’re also exceptionally productive. You’ve talked to me about waking up early. We’ve met today at 11:00 AM and for you that’s what? Late afternoon, I suppose. We had to negotiate and come to an agreement because I went to bed at 4:00 AM.
Well, you’re a fascinating human being on many levels, but you’re also exceptionally productive. You’ve talked to me about waking up early. We’ve met today at 11:00 AM and for you that’s what? Late afternoon, I suppose. We had to negotiate and come to an agreement because I went to bed at 4:00 AM.
James Sexton
And I was up. I get up at 4:00 every day, so now I hear-
And I was up. I get up at 4:00 every day, so now I hear-
Lex Fridman
You woke up at 4:00 every day.
You woke up at 4:00 every day.
James Sexton
It’s three o’clock local time, so I woke up at 3:00 local time.
It’s three o’clock local time, so I woke up at 3:00 local time.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
James Sexton
Yeah, I wake up at 4:00 naturally though. My body just wakes up.
Yeah, I wake up at 4:00 naturally though. My body just wakes up.
Lex Fridman
Oh, wow. That’s fascinating.
Oh, wow. That’s fascinating.
James Sexton
And wakes up full on this speed.
And wakes up full on this speed.
Lex Fridman
Wow.
Wow.
James Sexton
My most productive writing and speaking is from 4:00 AM until noon or 1:00.
My most productive writing and speaking is from 4:00 AM until noon or 1:00.
Lex Fridman
So can you take me through a perfectly productive day?
So can you take me through a perfectly productive day?
James Sexton
I wake up at 4:00 AM very naturally. I wish I didn’t, but I do check my phone first thing because I want to see if any emergencies came in from a client overnight.
I wake up at 4:00 AM very naturally. I wish I didn’t, but I do check my phone first thing because I want to see if any emergencies came in from a client overnight.
Lex Fridman
So work emergencies.
So work emergencies.
James Sexton
Yeah, work-related emergencies. It is a divorce lawyer… Our definition of emergency can be very serious. It’s people absconding with a child. It’s a police being involved in a domestic violence incident. It can be time-sensitive things. When someone is hiring a divorce lawyer, I think they want someone responsive. My clients have my cell phone number. I go to bed early because I get up early and so I go to sleep by 8:00 PM latest. I don’t think I’ve seen 9:00 PM even on New Year’s Eve.
Yeah, work-related emergencies. It is a divorce lawyer… Our definition of emergency can be very serious. It’s people absconding with a child. It’s a police being involved in a domestic violence incident. It can be time-sensitive things. When someone is hiring a divorce lawyer, I think they want someone responsive. My clients have my cell phone number. I go to bed early because I get up early and so I go to sleep by 8:00 PM latest. I don’t think I’ve seen 9:00 PM even on New Year’s Eve.
So I wake up at 4:00. I check my phone, check my email. Usually, even if there’s something that’s time-sensitive, it’s usually not so time-sensitive that it needs to be responded to at 4:00 AM because most other normal people are asleep. I have espresso, black espresso, which I enjoy very much. And then I work out and that’s some days going to be weights. A lot of days it’s just going to be cardio. I’ve changed my habits now that I’m in my early 50s. It used to be much more intensive weight training and deadlifts and stuff like that, and then I herniated my L5-S1. So 485 was my max deadlift and now I don’t hardly do deadlifts.
Lex Fridman
Well, you can still relive the past glory.
Well, you can still relive the past glory.
James Sexton
I do. I have some pictures and videos.
I do. I have some pictures and videos.
Lex Fridman
You have pictures?
You have pictures?
James Sexton
I have videos. I have videos of me putting 485 for three, which-
I have videos. I have videos of me putting 485 for three, which-
Lex Fridman
In stories, when you talk about it, you can exaggerate how much-
In stories, when you talk about it, you can exaggerate how much-
James Sexton
… five for three, which is-
… five for three, which is-
Lex Fridman
In stories, when you talk about it, you can exaggerate how much you’ve actually lifted.
In stories, when you talk about it, you can exaggerate how much you’ve actually lifted.
James Sexton
That’s true, but then you can’t pack it up. See, I’m very evidence-based. So if I don’t have a photo or video of it, it’s just puffing, mere puffery at that point, but I work out. Then I try to work out for a good hour. I do that partly because of stress. I think when I don’t work out, it’s difficult. I had a group of guys that I would do jujitsu with at 5:00 AM. They were mostly law enforcement. They were cops who would either be starting a shift, or coming off of a night shift. We would train together, just do an open mat, and it was at 5:00 AM till 6:00, and that was heaven. I love training jujitsu first thing in the morning if I can.
That’s true, but then you can’t pack it up. See, I’m very evidence-based. So if I don’t have a photo or video of it, it’s just puffing, mere puffery at that point, but I work out. Then I try to work out for a good hour. I do that partly because of stress. I think when I don’t work out, it’s difficult. I had a group of guys that I would do jujitsu with at 5:00 AM. They were mostly law enforcement. They were cops who would either be starting a shift, or coming off of a night shift. We would train together, just do an open mat, and it was at 5:00 AM till 6:00, and that was heaven. I love training jujitsu first thing in the morning if I can.
Then I always do either a sauna or steam for 20 minutes, half an hour. Then I do a cold plunge, or if I don’t have access to a cold plunge, a cold shower. Then I have breakfast, and it’s usually a very uncontroversial simple breakfast. I like to eat. I eat slow carb Tim Ferriss type style. Then I get right to work. I try to do my drafting early in the day, prenups, motions, things like that from, let’s say, six or seven until 9:00, 9:30, which is when court begins.
Lex Fridman
So, drafting is like writing up different documents.
So, drafting is like writing up different documents.
James Sexton
Right. Writing prenups, writing separation agreements, writing settlement proposals, writing motions for the court, pretrial memos, which is research that I want to present to a judge that supports my arguments. I do drafting. I review documents that the attorneys who work for me have drafted and refined them. Then court is usually from 9:00 until noon. If we’re on trial, then it’s a whole different pace, because trials… The lunch break isn’t really a lunch break. You’re preparing the afternoon’s witnesses, and you’re trying to do damage control on what happened in the morning. But if it’s just court conferences like most cases, there’s conferences.
Right. Writing prenups, writing separation agreements, writing settlement proposals, writing motions for the court, pretrial memos, which is research that I want to present to a judge that supports my arguments. I do drafting. I review documents that the attorneys who work for me have drafted and refined them. Then court is usually from 9:00 until noon. If we’re on trial, then it’s a whole different pace, because trials… The lunch break isn’t really a lunch break. You’re preparing the afternoon’s witnesses, and you’re trying to do damage control on what happened in the morning. But if it’s just court conferences like most cases, there’s conferences.
Conferences, as you go in, you make oral argument, but you don’t have witnesses on the stand. You’re not taking testimony. It’s like everybody’s just shouting allegations back and forth, and making temporary arguments pretrial. It’s kind of the foreplay of the trial.
Lex Fridman
Is that exhausting by the way?
Is that exhausting by the way?
James Sexton
It’s exhausting when you’re done with it. While you’re doing it, it’s exhilarating. I always say that I never sleep as poorly as the night before a trial, and I never sleep as well as the night I finished a trial. Because when I am on trial, I am speaking, listening, watching the judge closely to see what they’re reacting to, and when they’re paying attention or not paying attention, watching opposing counsel and the opposing party like, “When is the opposing party writing a little note to their lawyer to show it to them? What is the opposing counsel objecting to?” My client is trying to pass me notes half the time.
It’s exhausting when you’re done with it. While you’re doing it, it’s exhilarating. I always say that I never sleep as poorly as the night before a trial, and I never sleep as well as the night I finished a trial. Because when I am on trial, I am speaking, listening, watching the judge closely to see what they’re reacting to, and when they’re paying attention or not paying attention, watching opposing counsel and the opposing party like, “When is the opposing party writing a little note to their lawyer to show it to them? What is the opposing counsel objecting to?” My client is trying to pass me notes half the time.
While I’m speaking and making my arguments, I’m trying to adjust what I’m doing strategically based on the objections that the judge is ruling on. So, I’m so hyperstimulated on trial that when you finish, you can’t even talk. You’re gone. Your brain is jello. Conferences is harder because at least with a trial, there’s a singularity of focus. With a trial, it’s just one case, and they have all my attention. The problem is then on the lunch break, all the other cases that I’ve been ignoring for the last several hours while I was on trial, they all have stuff going on. So, it’s like, “Hey, where’s that settlement proposal on this? Hey, she just did this. We need to file a motion.”
So now it’s like, “Okay, I have an hour to eat and to answer all of this in some preliminary way to delegate some responsibilities. Then I got to go back in and put 100% of my focus on this other case again.” So, you find yourself in a place. That’s why I’m very disciplined is you find yourself in a place where I live my whole life in six-minute increments, tenths of an hour, because we bill in tenths of an hour. So, everything I do, it’s like 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and I’m logging time throughout the day.
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating.
That’s fascinating.
James Sexton
You find yourself at the end of the day. My son is a lawyer, my older son. He’s a district attorney, and I’m very proud of him. He gets to put bad guys in jail, and he is very smart, and he’s doing a great job. He just about a year ago. When he graduated from law school, we were very close, and we were talking, and he said… We were just talking about the career in the law that he was about to embark on. I said to him, “You know, the feeling at the end of the day when all your homework or all your work is done, and you just go, “Okay, it’s all done now, and I’m going to go home.” You’ll never have that feeling ever again ever. You’re just going to everyday go, “All right, it’s enough. It’s enough. I got to get out of here.”
You find yourself at the end of the day. My son is a lawyer, my older son. He’s a district attorney, and I’m very proud of him. He gets to put bad guys in jail, and he is very smart, and he’s doing a great job. He just about a year ago. When he graduated from law school, we were very close, and we were talking, and he said… We were just talking about the career in the law that he was about to embark on. I said to him, “You know, the feeling at the end of the day when all your homework or all your work is done, and you just go, “Okay, it’s all done now, and I’m going to go home.” You’ll never have that feeling ever again ever. You’re just going to everyday go, “All right, it’s enough. It’s enough. I got to get out of here.”
Because with every one of these cases, you could stay up 24 hours focusing just on it. So, you have to have the discipline to go, “No, that’s it. I’m done for now. I’ve done what I could do today, and now I’m going to sit and read for a half an hour. I’m going to watch this show for a half an hour. I’m going to have this meal,” because It’s never done. So, that’s challenging. That’s a hard part of this job, but I think my discipline helps with that. Then like I said, I finished my day around 5:30, 6: 00. I have something to eat, and I try to wind down a little, and I’m usually in bed by 7:30, and asleep by 8:00.
Jiu Jitsu
Lex Fridman
You mentioned jujitsu. You’re brown belt. What role has jujitsu played in your life?
You mentioned jujitsu. You’re brown belt. What role has jujitsu played in your life?
James Sexton
I love jujitsu. I trained martial arts from the time I was a little kid. I think I was seven or eight. I took up Okinawan Goju karate, and I did judo. It was always part of my life. Then I got to college and grad school, and I didn’t have time for it, and I didn’t do it so much. Then I got divorced. I was quite young still when I got divorced, and I had two young kids. I thought, “Well, I can grow a goatee, and buy a convertible, and do the thing you’re supposed to do, and you’re a dude with kids close to middle age, or I can try to do something more productive.” So I said, “Well, maybe I’ll go back to martial arts.” So, I took up Muay Thai kickboxing, and they had a jujitsu class at the same school after the Muay Thai class.
I love jujitsu. I trained martial arts from the time I was a little kid. I think I was seven or eight. I took up Okinawan Goju karate, and I did judo. It was always part of my life. Then I got to college and grad school, and I didn’t have time for it, and I didn’t do it so much. Then I got divorced. I was quite young still when I got divorced, and I had two young kids. I thought, “Well, I can grow a goatee, and buy a convertible, and do the thing you’re supposed to do, and you’re a dude with kids close to middle age, or I can try to do something more productive.” So I said, “Well, maybe I’ll go back to martial arts.” So, I took up Muay Thai kickboxing, and they had a jujitsu class at the same school after the Muay Thai class.
I had been around the orbit of jujitsu having been my kids took karate, and there was jujitsu there. It was a Gracie Academy. I stayed for a jujitsu class, and I had 120 pound girl ragdoll me, because I just knew nothing about grappling. I remember just going, “Well, I got to learn what this is,” and that was it. I just dove into it. My first professor was Louis Vintaloro in New Jersey. He’s a Royler Gracie black belt, great teacher, taught me amazing fundamentals, took me all the way up to purple belt. Then right after I got my purple belt, I moved to the city. I moved to Manhattan. I actually chose my apartment based on its proximity to Marcelo Garcia, and I moved to West Chelsea, because it was a short walk to Marcelo’s academy.
My core jujitsu was up to purple belt. It was Louis Vintaloro, and then it’s been Marcelo, and Marcelo, Paul Shriner who’s really phenomenal at his academy. All the people at his academy, I mean, are all phenomenal. I mean, Bernardo [inaudible 03:25:37] was there for a period of time that I was there and before he went to Boston. Marcos Tinoco was like his lasso guard stuff. He was at Marcelo’s for a long time, and what a teacher. I mean, my lack of skill at jujitsu is not based on a lack of quality instruction. It’s based on an inability to retain the information for very long.
Lex Fridman
For me, that’s one of the most reliable place I can go to humble myself.
For me, that’s one of the most reliable place I can go to humble myself.
James Sexton
I love jujitsu. I love the progressive humility that it drives home constantly. I love the impossibility of perfecting it, although Gordon Ryan’s probably come close, and Marcelo’s probably come close to perfecting it.
I love jujitsu. I love the progressive humility that it drives home constantly. I love the impossibility of perfecting it, although Gordon Ryan’s probably come close, and Marcelo’s probably come close to perfecting it.
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you since you mentioned Gordon Ryan. So, apparently some close with Gordon, and there’s, I am sure in Austin, just this jujitsu scene. It’s incredible.
Let me ask you since you mentioned Gordon Ryan. So, apparently some close with Gordon, and there’s, I am sure in Austin, just this jujitsu scene. It’s incredible.
James Sexton
It’s like jujitsu mecca.
It’s like jujitsu mecca.
Lex Fridman
This is the Mecca.
This is the Mecca.
James Sexton
I’m actually seeing John Donaher this evening,
I’m actually seeing John Donaher this evening,
Lex Fridman
I mean, this-
I mean, this-
James Sexton
This is amazing.
This is amazing.
Lex Fridman
It’s a truly special place. But anyway, apparently, long ago, you mentioned Jersey.
It’s a truly special place. But anyway, apparently, long ago, you mentioned Jersey.
James Sexton
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
There’s a bit of a conflict between you and Gordon, and you mentioned to me offline that you love him and just how much respect you have for him as an athlete and so on. But can you explain why is this-
There’s a bit of a conflict between you and Gordon, and you mentioned to me offline that you love him and just how much respect you have for him as an athlete and so on. But can you explain why is this-
James Sexton
I’m actually glad I have that. It’s funny that you bring it up, and of all the… We’re talking about all these heavy topics, and this is probably the one that I find the most actually emotional. Gordon’s, I think, a very young man still. He’s probably in his 20s or early 30s. It’s hard to imagine that because he’s accomplished so much as an athlete and as a business person, but there was a time not that long ago, I think it was eight or nine years ago, where he was just a young guy on his way up. He’s only, I think, a couple years older than my oldest son. Through a series of circumstances, jujitsu wasn’t… It’s really exploded in the last 10 years, but there were not as many people sponsoring “super fights.” There really weren’t jujitsu super fights being sponsored at Jersey and New York in particular.
I’m actually glad I have that. It’s funny that you bring it up, and of all the… We’re talking about all these heavy topics, and this is probably the one that I find the most actually emotional. Gordon’s, I think, a very young man still. He’s probably in his 20s or early 30s. It’s hard to imagine that because he’s accomplished so much as an athlete and as a business person, but there was a time not that long ago, I think it was eight or nine years ago, where he was just a young guy on his way up. He’s only, I think, a couple years older than my oldest son. Through a series of circumstances, jujitsu wasn’t… It’s really exploded in the last 10 years, but there were not as many people sponsoring “super fights.” There really weren’t jujitsu super fights being sponsored at Jersey and New York in particular.
I got involved in sponsoring some jujitsu super fights. I also got involved in sponsoring some jujitsu athletes. Gordon was a part of the Danaher Death Squad. I was friends with Eddie Cummings. I’m still friends with Eddie. I was friends with John. I’m still friends with John, but I didn’t really know Gordon. I actually don’t know that I’ve still ever met… I don’t think I’ve ever met Gordon. I’ve been in the same room as him, but there was a fight that… I had sponsored some other fights with this particular promoter, and they asked me to sponsor one. It didn’t involve anyone from Marcelo’s, but it involved Gordon. He was one of the people.
I liked John very much, and I liked everybody in the Danaher Death Squad. I like watching them compete, and I thought, “I think John’s just brilliant.” I mean, everyone at Marcelo’s has such respect for John and for everyone and the stuff they were doing when they were the… Early days of that Danaher Death squad, Eddie Cummings, his leg locks. It just blew the whole game up. It just was a whole nother thing. It was insane such innovation. Gordon at the time, he was online. I’m much older than that. I’m in my early 50s, and that’s not, I guess, chronologically that much older, but generationally, I think it’s quite a bit different.
Gordon was smack talking about a guy who I was sponsor of, who I knew and who I knew was a very good athlete, and had been through difficult things in his life. Gordon just said some nasty things about him. It falls into the category of totally appropriate smack talking, looking at it now and looking at what Gordon became, which is he’s someone who talks trash. It’s part of his brand is to talk trash. I see now that that’s like a Muhammad Ali thing, but at the time, I just didn’t see it as what it was. Although it doesn’t excuse it, my mother was dying. I was not at my best. I was having a hard time, and Gordon had spoken ill of this person. I got upset, and I reached out to John and to Tom DeBlass.
I said to them, “Hey, could you tell this guy to knock it off? Don’t talk about this person who I sponsor if I’m sponsoring his fight. I don’t even know this Gordon Ryan kid, and I’m sponsoring his fight. He should say thank you. Don’t talk bad about a person who I financially sponsor. That’s not cool.” I think on Facebook, he wrote some comments, and then I wrote some comments back, and I was incredibly obnoxious. Very soon after, I felt really gross, because I was an adult, and I was talking to a young person this way, who’s on their way up, who’s a little older than one of my kids. I just said these obnoxious things to him, and I felt really like, “That’s gross.” But I’d never really thought much about it again.
I watched his star rise, and I was very… I mean, who is not impressed by Gordon Ryan? Everyone at our academy was always very thrilled to see him rise. I’ve stayed friends with John. Every time Gordon would have a big victory, I would always text John and be like… Because Gordon’s victories are John’s victories too. They have such a great bond. All the people in his orbit are all people that I respect and like. I just would say, “Hey listen, congratulations and please pass on my congratulations to Gordon,” but we don’t know each other. I Don’t have his number. I have no way to contact him to apologize to him.
But if Gordon hears this, I am profoundly sorry. I don’t say that because I’m trying to get in your good graces. I don’t know that we’ll ever meet each other, but that was an unbelievably wrong, stupid thing to say to a young person.
Lex Fridman
Well, thank you for saying that. This warms my heart in general.
Well, thank you for saying that. This warms my heart in general.
James Sexton
So, you talk to a divorce lawyer, and it warms your heart. Look at that.
So, you talk to a divorce lawyer, and it warms your heart. Look at that.
Sex, love, and marriage
Lex Fridman
Well speaking of which, you’re romantic actually. What role… You’ve seen love break down completely. What role does love play in the human condition?
Well speaking of which, you’re romantic actually. What role… You’ve seen love break down completely. What role does love play in the human condition?
James Sexton
I mean, it’s everything, right? Love is romantic. Wars are fought for romantic love. Empires fall because of romantic love. It takes down kings. It takes down… We’re all just struggling for it. We’re all just chasing it. We’re all chasing the dragon. It’s like the rush. We all are… So, it’s huge. It’s huge. I mean, sex and love, which I like to believe are in some way connected, and love and romance, which again I like to believe are in some way connected. I think it’s huge. I think It’s a… Look, I’ve always thought most of what men do, including me, we do to get laid on some level. You want to be successful. Why? So, you can have money. Why? So you can have nice things so that you can attract attractive members of the opposite sex.
I mean, it’s everything, right? Love is romantic. Wars are fought for romantic love. Empires fall because of romantic love. It takes down kings. It takes down… We’re all just struggling for it. We’re all just chasing it. We’re all chasing the dragon. It’s like the rush. We all are… So, it’s huge. It’s huge. I mean, sex and love, which I like to believe are in some way connected, and love and romance, which again I like to believe are in some way connected. I think it’s huge. I think It’s a… Look, I’ve always thought most of what men do, including me, we do to get laid on some level. You want to be successful. Why? So, you can have money. Why? So you can have nice things so that you can attract attractive members of the opposite sex.
A lot of things come down to that. Even for men like red-pilled men who are like, “I don’t care about women.” Well, you talk about them an awful lot. For someone that’s not interested in women, you sure are in the orbit of women who you’re telling how much you don’t care about women, which feels like you’re doing that to attract a certain kind of woman, which I get. More power to you, but a person who worships an idol and a person who destroys an idol are both idolaters.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
James Sexton
So if all you’re talking about is how you don’t need women, you’re talking about women an awful lot. So, it’s just such a splinter in people’s mind, relationships, breakups, and it’s such a great equalizer. I mean, you’re spending some time in the rarefied air now of big celebrity people. I remember when I started out as a lawyer just doing the regular, the cop and the teacher with a 401k, and they didn’t have any assets. I remember thinking like, “Well someday if I represent celebrities or wealthy CEOs, it’ll be different. They’ll be smarter. They’ll be different.” It’s just the same-
So if all you’re talking about is how you don’t need women, you’re talking about women an awful lot. So, it’s just such a splinter in people’s mind, relationships, breakups, and it’s such a great equalizer. I mean, you’re spending some time in the rarefied air now of big celebrity people. I remember when I started out as a lawyer just doing the regular, the cop and the teacher with a 401k, and they didn’t have any assets. I remember thinking like, “Well someday if I represent celebrities or wealthy CEOs, it’ll be different. They’ll be smarter. They’ll be different.” It’s just the same-
Lex Fridman
It’s the same.
It’s the same.
James Sexton
… weird, petty, shit, the same infidelity, the same-
… weird, petty, shit, the same infidelity, the same-
Lex Fridman
The same kind of insecurities, the same kind of jealousy, the same kind of fights. It all-
The same kind of insecurities, the same kind of jealousy, the same kind of fights. It all-
James Sexton
It’s all the same, but it is, and it’s all the same insecurity, sadness. It’s the same desire to be validated like mommy issues, daddy issues, like intimacy issues, and it’s all the same stuff. Just because you’re really good at other things… I’ve represented professional athletes who are phenomenal world-class doctors, business people, and they suck at relationships, no better than anybody else. There’s no connection between the skills that made you a good entrepreneur and the skills that made you a good spouse or partner. I’m sure there’s some overlap like patience is good, and thinking strategically is probably good, but I’m just humbled by how we’re called to it still.
It’s all the same, but it is, and it’s all the same insecurity, sadness. It’s the same desire to be validated like mommy issues, daddy issues, like intimacy issues, and it’s all the same stuff. Just because you’re really good at other things… I’ve represented professional athletes who are phenomenal world-class doctors, business people, and they suck at relationships, no better than anybody else. There’s no connection between the skills that made you a good entrepreneur and the skills that made you a good spouse or partner. I’m sure there’s some overlap like patience is good, and thinking strategically is probably good, but I’m just humbled by how we’re called to it still.
Even when we lose and even when our greatest pains were caused by our desire to love and be loved in a romantic sense, we just keep putting the money on the table and playing. We won’t just quit. We just keep going.
Lex Fridman
The whole mess of it is worth it.
The whole mess of it is worth it.
James Sexton
I mean, I guess so… It’s calling us. I don’t know if it’s worth it or not. That’s a value judgment, but we don’t stop. I don’t know a lot of people that they played the hand. They lost and they went, “Well, no more of that game for me. I’m not a good poker player. I’m not playing poker anymore.” I know people who’ve done that. I know people that are like, “Listen, I don’t drink. I am allergic. I break out in handcuffs and hospital bills. I’m not drinking anymore,” but I don’t know people that are like, “Man, that relationship, I screwed that up, or I got screwed on that one. I’m not doing that anymore.”
I mean, I guess so… It’s calling us. I don’t know if it’s worth it or not. That’s a value judgment, but we don’t stop. I don’t know a lot of people that they played the hand. They lost and they went, “Well, no more of that game for me. I’m not a good poker player. I’m not playing poker anymore.” I know people who’ve done that. I know people that are like, “Listen, I don’t drink. I am allergic. I break out in handcuffs and hospital bills. I’m not drinking anymore,” but I don’t know people that are like, “Man, that relationship, I screwed that up, or I got screwed on that one. I’m not doing that anymore.”
You can say that. Everybody says that, “I’m through with love. I’m done.” They’re not. They keep going. They’ll go up again.
Lex Fridman
Never going to fall in love again, and then a few weeks later-
Never going to fall in love again, and then a few weeks later-
James Sexton
I got job security, man. I got job security. People are not going to stop walking down that aisle. They are not going to stop having kids with people that they probably should have thought through whether they would have kids with that person or not.
I got job security, man. I got job security. People are not going to stop walking down that aisle. They are not going to stop having kids with people that they probably should have thought through whether they would have kids with that person or not.
Lex Fridman
I’m glad they are. I’m glad they’re taking that leap. I’m glad they’ve taken that risk. It’s this whole beautiful mess that we’re all a part of. It’s like taking that risk, taking that leap of vulnerabilities of what this whole thing is about.
I’m glad they are. I’m glad they’re taking that leap. I’m glad they’ve taken that risk. It’s this whole beautiful mess that we’re all a part of. It’s like taking that risk, taking that leap of vulnerabilities of what this whole thing is about.
James Sexton
And what a danger if we didn’t. You hear about people like Alexander Hamilton, or you hear about people who they were born of circumstances that these two people should never have had a kid, and then they did. That kid changes the world and moves the dial forward. What a great mistake. What a great… You can’t ever say it’s a mistake. What an amazing thing that happened. I think that that’s… One of the things I like about divorce as a practice and as almost looking at it like a spiritual practice, I think you just don’t know what is a blessing in the world. You just don’t know. I’ve spoken about this before publicly, and he does frequently. My father’s an alcoholic. My father’s been in recovery now for seven years, I think, but he was a bad alcoholic Vietnam veteran my whole life, and only got sober when I was in my 40s.
And what a danger if we didn’t. You hear about people like Alexander Hamilton, or you hear about people who they were born of circumstances that these two people should never have had a kid, and then they did. That kid changes the world and moves the dial forward. What a great mistake. What a great… You can’t ever say it’s a mistake. What an amazing thing that happened. I think that that’s… One of the things I like about divorce as a practice and as almost looking at it like a spiritual practice, I think you just don’t know what is a blessing in the world. You just don’t know. I’ve spoken about this before publicly, and he does frequently. My father’s an alcoholic. My father’s been in recovery now for seven years, I think, but he was a bad alcoholic Vietnam veteran my whole life, and only got sober when I was in my 40s.
A lot of the personality characteristics I have are consistent with those of adult children of alcoholics, desire for control and control issues, a lot of those things. I love my life. I’m having a great time. If I died tomorrow, man, I did more, learned more, earned more, loved more than I ever dreamed. So, I’m so glad my dad was an alcoholic. If you said to me, “How do you raise kids?” I wouldn’t say, “Well, you definitely want to be an alcoholic, because your kid’s going to get a lot of really good discipline lessons from that experience.” No, I wouldn’t want that for… But it’s born. All these wonderful things were born of this awful situation.
So, I think divorce is the same thing. We make these mistakes, but they’re not really… I often have to say to my clients when they’re like, “Oh, I wish I’d never married this person,” I’m like, “You love your kids, right? Your kids are half that person. They would not be the organism they are without that person’s DNA. So, you can’t regret being with that person if you love your kids, because those kids don’t exist without that person.” I don’t know how we refocus on that. I don’t know. Maybe we give anyone going through a… I’ve actually had a theory, which I’ve not said out loud, but I’ll say it to you, because it’s just us talking.
I think if we could figure out a way to take a divorcing couple that is interested in potentially mediating, and put them in a setting where we could give them both psilocybin, a good dose, like two and a half, three grams, and have them do individual sessions with controlled setting with a guide, and have them do that inner work, and then have them do some kind of a session together after they’ve had that experience, that psychedelic experience, I actually think you could do transformative divorce work, because I have found myself and certainly the many people that I’ve talked to who’ve had psilocybin experiences in particular, but any psychedelic experience, many of the empathogens or even MDMA… MDMA is an empathogen.
If we brought that space and the divorce and conflict resolution space together, that psychopharmacological intervention on empathy, one’s empathy receptors or one’s connectivity, I think that could be radically transforming. It would be logistically an absolute nightmare. It would never get done from a legal standpoint, but man, I think sometimes that if… Because I think the more that you can bring people to the awareness of connection that comes from many people’s psychedelic experiences, I think they could then extrapolate that into their understanding of the conflict and disconnect they’re having with their partner.
Lex Fridman
So really lean into the, “Use this brink of divorce as a catalyst for doing a lot of soul-searching, a lot of growth together.”
So really lean into the, “Use this brink of divorce as a catalyst for doing a lot of soul-searching, a lot of growth together.”
James Sexton
Well, that was what appealed to me about it, I mean, before I started doing it is it was this idea that this is a opportunity for radical reinvention. It was an opportunity for people to say, “Okay, now what?” I didn’t expect that now what, and it was to be part of the architecture of that. I didn’t look at it like I’m helping demolish the building. It was like I’m tearing down the building, so we can build the new one, which I hope is filled with joy and abundance and peace and love and real love, real satisfaction. My ex-wife is married for over a decade now to a phenomenal guy who is perfect for her, and he’s nothing like me by the way.
Well, that was what appealed to me about it, I mean, before I started doing it is it was this idea that this is a opportunity for radical reinvention. It was an opportunity for people to say, “Okay, now what?” I didn’t expect that now what, and it was to be part of the architecture of that. I didn’t look at it like I’m helping demolish the building. It was like I’m tearing down the building, so we can build the new one, which I hope is filled with joy and abundance and peace and love and real love, real satisfaction. My ex-wife is married for over a decade now to a phenomenal guy who is perfect for her, and he’s nothing like me by the way.
If you met him, and you’ve met both of us, you’d go, “Well, no one could love both of these guys.” It’s like, “If you like this flavor, you wouldn’t like this flavor.” I’m impatient, fast talking. Skip to the end, “We got to land this plane. Come on.” He’s a therapist. He’s chill. He’s patient, and they’re perfect together. I can say that as someone who loves her and loved her and knows her or knew her. I think if we can radically view honestly without jealousy, without the sense of, “Look at it, and just go, “Yeah. Yeah, okay, this is the love this person needed.” That doesn’t mean my love sucks. It just means it wasn’t the right one for this person. There’s a lid for every pot. She found her lid. I want her to find her lid. That’s good.
Lex Fridman
There’s billions of pots out there, and we just need to match them with the proper lid.
There’s billions of pots out there, and we just need to match them with the proper lid.
James Sexton
Yeah, not hit each other over the head with them all day long.
Yeah, not hit each other over the head with them all day long.
Lex Fridman
Man, this is such a romantic few hours we’ve got to spend together. There’s even a candle burning over there.
Man, this is such a romantic few hours we’ve got to spend together. There’s even a candle burning over there.
James Sexton
Is there? Oh, that’s lovely.
Is there? Oh, that’s lovely.
Lex Fridman
All right, brother, thanks so much, James.
All right, brother, thanks so much, James.
James Sexton
Thank you. Thanks for having me.
Thank you. Thanks for having me.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with James Sexton. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, let me leave you with some words from Rumi. Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with James Sexton. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, let me leave you with some words from Rumi. Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Walter Isaacson: Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Einstein, Da Vinci & Ben Franklin | Lex Fridman Podcast #395
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #395 with Walter Isaacson.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
I highly recommend people read his new book on Elon. I’m sure there will be short-term controversy, but in the long term, I think it will inspire millions of young people, especially with difficult childhoods, with hardship in their surroundings or in their own minds, to take on the hardest problems in the world and to build solutions to those problems, no matter how impossible the odds. In this conversation, Walter and I cover all of his books, and use personal stories from them to speak to the bigger principles of striving for greatness in science, in tech, engineering, art, politics and life.
There are many things in the new Elon book that I felt are best saved for when I speak to Elon directly again on this podcast, which will be soon enough. Perhaps it’s also good to mention here that my friendships, like with Elon, nor any other influence like money, access, fame, power, will never result in me sacrificing my integrity, ever. I do like to celebrate the good in people, to empathize and to understand, but I also like to call people out on their bullshit with respect and with compassion. If I fail, I fail due to a lack of skill, not a lack of integrity. I’ll work hard to improve. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, dear friends, here’s Walter Isaacson. What is the role of a difficult childhood in the lives of great men and women, great minds? Is it a requirement, is it a catalyst, or is it just a simple coincidence of fate?
I spent a lot of time talking to Errol Musk, his father. Elon doesn’t talk to Errol Musk anymore, his father, nor does Kimbal. It’s been years, and Errol doesn’t even have Elon’s email, so a lot of times Errol will be sending me emails. Errol had one of those Jekyll-and-Hyde personalities. He was a great mind of engineering and especially material science. Knew how to build a wilderness camp in South Africa using mica and how it would not conduct the heat, but he also would go into these dark periods in which he would just be psychologically abusive.
Of course, Maye Musk says to me … his mother, who divorced Errol early on … said, “The danger for Elon is that he becomes his father.” Every now and then … you’ve been with him so much, Lex, and you know him well … he’ll even talk to you about the demons, about Diablo dancing in his head. I mean, he gets it, he’s self-aware, but you’ve probably seen him at times where those demons take over and he goes really dark and really quiet. Grimes says, “I can tell a minute or two in advance when demon mode’s about to happen,” and he’ll go a bit dark. I was here at Austin once at dinner with a group, and you could tell suddenly something had triggered him and he was going to go dark. I’ve watched it in meetings, where somebody will say, “We can’t make that part for less than $200,” or, “No, that’s wrong,” and he’ll berate them, and then he snaps out of it. You know that too, the huge snap-out, where suddenly he’s showing you a Monty Python skit on his phone and he’s joking about things. I think coming out of the childhood, there were just many facets, maybe even many personalities … the engineering mode, the silly mode, the charismatic mode, the visionary mode … but also the demon in dark mode.
I get to write about Einstein or Steve Jobs or Leonardo DaVinci, who as you know, was totally torn by demons and had different difficult childhood situations, not even legitimized by his father. Sometimes those of us who are lucky enough to have really gentle, sweet childhoods, we grow up with fewer demons, but we grow up with fewer drives, and we end up maybe being Boswell and not being Dr. Johnson. We end up being the observer, not being the doer. I always respect those who are in the arena.
I’m a little bit more like Kimbal Musk than Elon. I maybe got overendowed with the empathy gene. What does that mean? Well, it means that I was okay when I ran Time Magazine. It was a group about 150 people on the editorial floors, and I knew them all and we had a jolly time. When I went to CNN, I was not very good at being a manager or an executive of an organization. I cared a little bit too much that people didn’t get annoyed at me or mad at me.
Elon said that about John McNeil, for example, who was president of Tesla. It’s in the book. I talked to John McNeil a long time, and he says, “Elon just would fire people, be really rough on people. He didn’t have the empathy for the people in front of him.” Elon says, “Yeah, that’s right, and John McNeil couldn’t fire people. He cared more about pleasing the people in front of him than pleasing the entire enterprise or getting things done.”
Being overendowed with a desire to please people can make you less tough of a manager, and that doesn’t mean there aren’t great people who are overendowed. Ben Franklin, overendowed with the desire to please people. The worst criticism of him from John Adams and others was that he was insinuating, which meant he was always trying to get people to like him, but that turned out to be a good thing. When they can’t figure out the big state/little state issue at the Constitutional Convention, when they can’t figure out the Treaty of Paris, whatever it is, he brings people together, and that is his superpower.
To get back to the lessons, you asked, and the first was harness your demons, the second is to know your strengths and your superpower. My superpower is definitely not being a tough manager. After running CNN for a while, I said, “Okay, I think I’ve proven I don’t really enjoy this or know how to do this well. Do I have other talents? Yeah, I think I have the talent to observe people really closely, to write about it in a straight but I hope interesting narrative style.” That’s a power. It’s totally different from running an organization.
It took me until three years of running CNN that I realized I’m not cut to be an executive in really high-intense situations. Elon Musk is cut to be an executive in highly intense situations, so much so that when things get less intense … when they actually are making enough cars and rockets are going up and landing … he thinks of something else, so he can surge and have more intensity. He’s addicted to intensity, and that’s his superpower, which is a lot greater than the superpower of being a good observer.
Musk, as you said, is driven by mission more than any person I’ve ever seen, and it’s not only mission, it’s like cosmic missions, meaning he’s got three really big missions. One is to make humans a spacefaring civilization, make us multi-planetary, or get us to Mars. Number two is to bring us into the era of sustainable energy, to bring us into the era of electric vehicles and solar roofs and battery packs. Third is to make sure that artificial intelligence is safe and is aligned with human values.
Every now and then, I’d talk to him and we’d be talking about Starlink satellites or whatever, or he would be pushing the people in front of him at SpaceX and saying, “If you do this, we’ll never get to Mars in our lifetime,” and then he would give the lecture of how important it was for human consciousness to get to Mars in our lifetime. I’m thinking, “Okay, this is the pep talk of somebody trying to inspire a team, or maybe it’s the type of pontification you do on a podcast.” On the 20th time I watched him, I realized, “Okay, I believe it. He actually is driven by this.”
I hope this book inspires. Jennifer Doudna, the gene editing pioneer who helps discover CRISPR, the gene editing tool, which in my book, The Code Breaker, she grew up feeling like a misfit in Hawaii in a Polynesian village, being the only white person, and also trying to live up to a father who pushed her. If people can read the books … and I should have said about Jennifer Doudna, my point was that she was told by her school guidance counselor, “No, girls don’t do science. Science is not for girls. You’re not going to do math or science.” It pushes her to say, “All right, I’m going to do math and science.”
I think books … like she read this book, and even if it’s a comic book like Elon Musk read … books can sometimes inspire you. Every one of my books is about people who were totally innovative, who weren’t just smart, because none of us are going to be able to match Einstein in mental processing power, but we can be as curious as he was and creative and think out of the box the way he did, or as Steve Jobs put it, think different.
I hope with my books I’m saying, “This isn’t a how-to guide, but this is somebody you can walk alongside.” You can see Einstein growing up Jewish in Germany. You can see Jennifer Doudna growing up or as an outsider, or Leonardo da Vinci or Elon Musk, in really violent South Africa with a psychologically difficult father, and getting off the train when he goes to an anti-apartheid concert with his brother and there’s a man with a knife sticking out of his head, and they step into the pool of blood and it’s sticky on their soles. This causes scars that last the rest of your life. The question is not how do you avoid getting scarred, it’s how do you deal with it.
Now, it’s the second-best school in Zurich, and they’re rejecting Einstein. I tried to find, but couldn’t, the name of the admissions counselor at the Zurich Polytech, like, “You rejected Einstein?” Then he doesn’t finish in the top half of his class. Once he does and he goes to graduate school, they don’t accept his dissertation, so he can’t get a job. He’s not teaching. He even tries about 14 different high schools at Gymnasium to get a job, and they won’t take him.
He’s a third-class examiner in the Swiss patent office in 1905, third class because they’ve rejected his doctoral dissertation, so he can’t be second class or first class. He doesn’t have a doctoral degree, and yet he’s sitting there on the stool in the patent office in 1905, and writes three papers that totally transform science. If you’re thinking about being misunderstood or unappreciated, in 1906, he’s still a third-class patent examiner. In 1907, he still is. It takes until 1909 before people realize that this notion of the Theory of Relativity might be correct and it might upend all of Newtonian physics.
It partly starts because he’s a visual thinker, and I think it was helpful that he was at the patent office, rather than being the acolyte of some professor at the academy where he was supposed to follow the rules. At the patent office, they’re doing devices to synchronize clocks, because the Swiss have just gone on Standard times zones, and Swiss people, as you know, tend to be rather Swiss. They care, if it strikes the hour in Basel, it should do the same in Bern at the exact incident.
You have to send a light signal between two distant clocks, and he’s visualizing what’s it look like to ride alongside a light beam. He says, “Well, if you catch up with it, if you go almost as fast, it’ll look stationary,” but Maxwell’s equations don’t allow for that. He said, “It was making my palms sweat that I was so worried.” He finally figures out, because he’s looking at these devices to synchronize clocks, that if you’re traveling really, really fast, what looks synchronous to you or synchronized to you is different than for somebody traveling really fast in the other direction. He makes a mental leap that the speed of light’s always constant, but time is relative depending on your state of motion. It was that type of out-of-the-box thinking, those leaps, that made 1905 his miracle year.
Likewise with Musk. I mean, after General Motors and Ford, everybody gives up on electric vehicles. To just say, “I know how we’re going to have a path to change the entire trajectory of the world into the era of electric vehicles.” Then when he comes back from Russia, where he tried to buy a little rocket ship so he could send a experimental greenhouse to Mars, and they were poking fun of him and actually spit on him at one point in a drunken lunch.
This is very fortuitous, because on the ride back home on the plane, on the Delta Airlines flight, he’s doing the calculations of how much materials, how much metal, how much fuel. How much would it really cost? He’s visualizing things that other people would just say is impossible. It’s what Steve Jobs’s friends called the reality distortion field, and it drove people crazy. It drove them mad, but it also drove them to do things they didn’t think they would be able to do.
There’s small anecdotes in my book, but at one point he’s on the Tesla line and they’re trying to get 5,000 cars a week in 2018. It’s a life-or-death situation. He’s looking at the machines that are bolting something to the chassis, and he insists that Drew … not Drew, that Lars Moravy, one of his great lieutenants, come, and they have to summon him, and he says, “Why are there six bolts here?
Lars and others explained, “Well, for the crash test or anything else, the pressure would be in this way, so you have to,” and they were blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. He said, “No. If you visualize it, you’ll see if there’s a crash, the force would go this way and that way, and it could be done with four bolts.” Now, that sounds risky, and they go test it and they engineer it, but it turns out to be right. I know that seems minor, but I could give you 500 of those, where in any given day he’s visualizing the physics of an engineering or manufacturing problem.
That sounds pretty mundane, but for me, if you say what makes him special, there’s the mission-driven thing. I’d give you a lot of reasons, but one of the reasons is he cares not just about the design of the product, but visualizing the manufacturing of the product, the machine that makes the machine, and that’s what we failed to do in America for the past 40 years. We outsourced so much manufacturing. I don’t think you can be a good innovator if you don’t know how to make the stuff you’re designing. That’s why Musk puts his designers’ desks right next to the assembly lines in the factories, so that they have to visualize what they drew as it becomes the physical object.
Now you would think, LiDAR, why not use it? Why not use a crutch? It’s like, yeah, we can do things vision only, but when I look at the stars at night I’ll use a telescope too. Well, you could use LiDAR, but you can’t do millions of cars that way at scale. At a certain point you have to make it not only a good product but a product that goes to scale. And you can’t make it based on maps like Google Maps because it’ll never be able to then drive from New Orleans to Slidell where I want to go when it’s too hot in New Orleans.
Take for example, full self drive. He has been obsessed with what he calls the robotaxi. We’re going to build the next generation car without a steering wheel, without pedals because it’s going to be full self-drive. You just summon it, you won’t need to drive it. Well over and over again, all these people I’ve told you about, Lars Moravy and Drew Baglino and others, they’re saying, okay, fine, that sounds really good, but it ain’t happened yet. We need to build a $25,000 mass market global car that’s just normal with a steering wheel. And yeah, he finally turned around a few months ago and said, let’s do it.
And then he starts focusing on how’s the assembly line going to work? How are we going to do it and make it the same platform for Robotaxi, so you’re going to have the same assembly line. Likewise for full self-drive, they were doing it by coding hundreds of thousands of lines of code that would say things like, if you see a red light stop, if there’s a blinking light, if there two yellow lines do this. If there’s a bike lane, do this, if there’s a crosswalk, do that.
Well, that’s really hard to do. Now he’s doing it through artificial intelligence and machine learning only. FSD 12 will be based on the billion or so frames from Tesla each week of Tesla drivers and saying, what happened when a human was in this situation? What did the human do? And let’s only pick the best humans, the five star drivers, the Uber drivers, as Elon says. And so that’s him changing his mind and going to first principles but saying, all right, I’m even going to change full self-driving so there’s not rules based, it becomes AI based, just like ChatGPT doesn’t try to answer your question, who are the five best popes or something by study. ChatGPT does it by having ingested billions of pieces of writing that people have done. This will be AI, but real world done by ingesting video.
To me since a few years ago when you could see with Andrei Karpathy, the software 2.0 evolution of autopilot, it became obvious to me that this is not about the car. This is about Optimus, the robot. This is like if we look back a hundred years from now, the car will be remembered as a cool car, nice transportation, but the autopilot won’t be the thing that controls the car. It’ll be the thing that allows embodied AI systems to understand the world, so broadly. And so that kind of approach. And you kind of stumble into it, will Tesla be a car company? Will it be an AI company? Will it be a robotics company? Will it be a home robotics company? Will it be an energy company? And then you kind of slowly discover this as you confidently push forward with a vision. So it’s interesting to watch that kind of evolution as long as it’s backed by this confidence.
And the people who created America, whenever they came over, whether the Mayflower, refugees from the Nazis, they took a lot of risks to get here. And now I think we have more referees than we have risk-takers, more lawyers and regulators and others saying, you can’t do that, that’s too risky than people willing to innovate, and you need both. I think you’re also right on 50, a hundred years from now, what Musk will be most remembered for besides space travel is real world AI. Not just Optimus the robot, but Optimus the robot and the self-driving car. They’re pretty much the same. They’re using GPU clusters or dojo chips or whatever it may be to process real world data. We all got, and you did on your podcast, quite excited about large language model, generative predictive text AI. That’s fine, especially if you want to chit-chat with your chatbot. But the holy grail is artificial general intelligence and the tough part of that is real world AI and that’s where Optimus, the robot or full self-drive are I think far ahead of anybody else.
And you realize that there’s a drive and there’re demons and there’s also craziness and you sometimes want to pull those out. You want to take away his phone so he doesn’t tweet at 3:00 AM. You want to say quit being so crazy. But then you realize there’s a wonderful line of Shakespeare in measure for measure at the very end. He says, even the best are molded out of faults. And so you take the faults of Musk, for example, which includes a craziness that can be endearing but also a craziness that’s just like effing crazy as well as this drive and demon mode. I don’t know that you can take that strand out of the fabric and the fabric remains whole.
He says, I’m just a working class kid and I don’t have that luxury. If something sucks, I got to tell people it sucks or I got a team of B players. Well, Musk is that way as well. And it gets back to what I said earlier, which is yeah, I probably would wear velvet gloves if I could find them at my haberdasher, and I do try to sugarcoat things. But when I was running CNN, it needed to be reshaped, it needed to be broken, it needed to have certain things blown up, and I didn’t do it. So bad on me, but it made me realize, okay, I’ll just write about the people who can do it.
Twitter
I remember we were standing around, it was Luke Nozik, whom you know well, Ken Howery, some of his friends on that mezzanine here. And all afternoon and then late into the evening at dinner is like, should we do this? And I didn’t say anything, I’m just the observer, but everybody else is saying, excuse me, why do you want to own Twitter? And Griffin, his son joined at dinner and May for some reason was in town. And everybody says, no, we don’t use Twitter. Why would you do that? And May said, well, I use Twitter.
And it is almost like, okay, the demographics are people my age or May’s age. And so it looked like he wasn’t going to pursue it. They offered him a board seat and then he went off to Hawaii to Larry Ellison’s house, which he sometimes uses. He was meeting a friend, Angela Bassett, an actress, and instead of enjoying three days of vacation, he just became supercharged and started firing off text messages, including the fire breathing dragon one, I think he used that phrase a few times that Parag wasn’t the person who was going to take Twitter to a new level.
And then by the time he gets to Vancouver where Grimes meets him, they stay up all night playing Elden Ring. He was doing a Ted Talk. And then at 5:30 he finishes playing the Elden Ring and sends out that I’ve made an offer. Even when he comes back, people are trying to intervene and say, excuse me, why are you doing it? And so it was a rocky period between late April and October when the deal closes. And people ask me all the time, well, did he want to get out of the deal? I said, which Elon are you talking about at what time of day? Because there’ll be times in the morning when he’d say, oh, the Delaware court’s going to force me to do it, it’s horrible. Talk to his lawyers. You can win this case. Get me out of it.
He met here in Austin with three or four investment bankers, Blair Efron at Center View, Bob Steele at Perella Weinberg, and they offered him options, do you want to get out? Do you want to stay in? Do you want to reduce the price? And I think he was mercurial. There were times he would text me or say to me, this is going to be great. It’s going to be the accelerant to do x.com the way we thought about 20 years ago. And so it’s not until they finally tell them at the beginning of October, right when Optimus the robot is being unveiled in California actually, that the lawyer is saying, you’re not going to probably win this case, better go through with the deal. And by then he’s not only made his peace with it, he’s kind of happy with it at times.
Eventually the deal is going to close on, I think a Friday morning, I have it in the book, and we’re there on Thursday and he’s wandering around looking at the Stay Woke t-shirts and psychological safety lingo they’re all using. And he and his lawyers and bankers hatched a plan to do a flash close. And the reason for that was if they closed the deal after the markets had closed for the day and he could send a letter to Parag and to others firing them, quote, for cause, and this’ll be something the courts will have to figure out, then he could save 200 million or so. And it was both the money, but for him, a matter, I won’t say of principle, but of, Hey, they misled me about the numbers. I got forced into doing it, so I’m going to try this jujitsu maneuver and be able to get some money out of them.
Then when he takes over, it’s kind of a wild scene, him trying to decide in three different rounds how to get the staff down to 15% of what it was him deciding on Christmas Eve after he’d been at a meeting where they told him, we can’t get rid of that Sacramento server farm because it’s needed for redundancy. And he says, no, it’s not. And he’s flying here to Austin and young James says, why don’t we just do it ourselves? He turns the plane around, they land in Sacramento and he pulls them out himself. So it was a manic period.
So at each step of the way, almost everybody said, “That’s enough, it’s going to destroy things,” from Alex Sparrow, his lawyer, to Jared Birchall, it’s like, “Whoa, whoa, whoa.” Even Andrew and James, the young cousins who are tasked with making a list and figuring out who’s good or bad, say, “We’ve done enough, we’re going to be in real trouble.” They were partly right. There was degradation of the service some, but not as much as half the services I use half the time. I wake up each morning and hit the app and okay, still there.
He’s not as much of a team collaborator as say, Benjamin Franklin, who by the way, that’s the best team ever created, which is the founders. You had to have really smart people like Jefferson and Madison and really passionate people like John Adams and his cousin, Samuel, and really a guy of high rectitude like Washington. But you also needed a Ben Franklin who could bring everybody together and forge a team out of them and make them compromise with each other. Musk is a magnet for awesome talent.
It was during the height of COVID, and he said it made it a little bit harder for him because he has to get the input. But I watched as a young kid, dreadlocks, named Jacob McKenzie, he’s in the book, is sitting there. He’s a bit like you, engineering mindset, speaks in a bit of a monotone. Musk would ask a question and he would give an answer, and the answer would be very straightforward. He didn’t get rattled, he was like this. Musk said one day called him up at 3:00 AM, well, I won’t say 3:00 AM, but after midnight said, “You still around?” Jake said, “Yeah, I’m still at work.” He said, “Okay, I’m going to make you in charge of the team building Raptor,” and that was like a big surprise. But Jacob McKenzie has now gotten a version of Raptor and where they’re building them at least one a week and they’re pretty awesome. That’s where his talent, Musk’s talent, for finding the right person and promoting them, that’s where it is.
Brian there, “Okay, can do, can do.” Two or three times, Musk insisted that they install a solar roof in one of those houses in Boca Chica. This is this tiny village at the south end of Texas. Late at night, I’d have to climb up to the top of the roof on these ladders and stand on this peaked roof as Musk is there saying, “Why do we need four screws to put in this single leg?” Brian was just sweating and doing everything, but then after a couple of months it wasn’t going well and boom! Musk just fired him. So I always try to learn what is it that makes those who stay thrive?
I guess people who are posting on a corporate Slack board should be aware that your company can look at them. But that’s more than I would’ve done or most people would’ve done, and so that was to figure out who’s deeply committed and loyal. I think that was mainly the case at Twitter. He doesn’t sitting around at SpaceX saying, “Who’s loyal to me? At other places, it’s excellence, but that’s pretty well a given. Everybody is like a Mark Juncosa just whip smart. Its, “Are you hardcore and all in?” Especially if you’re going to have to move to this spit of a town in the south tip of Texas called Boca Chica, you got to be all in.
Then he goes with Kimball to a roadside joint in Brownsville and just sits in the front and listens to music with nobody noticing really him being there. One of his strengths and sort of weaknesses in a way is in a given day, he’ll focus serially, sequentially, on many different things. He will worry about uploading video on to X.com or the payment system and then immediately switch over to some issue with the FAA giving a permit for Starship or with how to deal with Starlink and the CIA. When he’s focused on any of these things, you cannot distract him.
It’s not like he’s also thinking about, “I’m dealing with Starlink, but I’ve got to also worry about the Tesla decision on the new $25,000 car.” Now, he’ll in between these sessions, process information, then let off steam. For better or worse, he lets off steam by either playing a friend in Polyopia or fire off some tweets, which is often not a healthy thing, but it’s a release for him. I once said he was a great multitasker and that was a mistake, people corrected me. He’s a serial tasker, which means focuses intensely on a task for an hour, almost has a, what do they call it at restaurants where they give you a-
I guess I err a little bit on the side of looking at what a Steve Jobs and Elon Musk and Albert Einstein can do. I also try to figure out if they hadn’t been around, would the forces of history and the groups of people have done it without them? That’s a good historical question, as somebody who loves history. You think about special relativity, one of the 1905 papers. Even after he writes it, it’s four years before people truly get what he’s saying, which is, “It’s not just how you observe time is relative, it’s time itself is relative.” On the general theory, which he does a decade later, I’m not sure we would gotten that yet. What about moving us into the era of an iPhone and which it’s so beautiful that you can’t live without 1,000 songs in your pocket, email and the internet in your pocket and a phone? There are a lot of brain-dead people from Panasonic to Motorola who didn’t get that, and it may have been a while.
I certainly think it’s true of the era of electric vehicles. Jim and Ford, all the great people there, they crushed the Bolt, and I mean that literally. They ended up smashing them because they decided to discontinue it. Likewise, nobody was sending up rockets. Our space shuttle was about to be grounded 12 years ago. So Musk does things, and there’ll be people who say and read the book… Well, if they read the book, they’ll see the full story, but they’ll say, “It wasn’t Musk who did Tesla, it was Martin Eberherd or Marc Tarpenning.” No, no. There were people who had helped create the shells of companies and other things, and they were all deserved to be called co-founders. But the guy who actually gets us to a million electric vehicles a year is Elon Musk, and without him, I don’t think we… Look, if anybody five years from now buys a car that’s gasoline powered, we’ll think, “That’s quaint. That’s odd.” Suddenly, we’ve changed. We’re not going to do it. 90% of that is Elon Musk.
“If we’re going to build that, do we have enough materials ready to order?” Or, I don’t know, he’ll just ask questions. Like when he’s building robo taxi, the global car, the $25,000 inexpensive global car, that’s not a total passion. He was talked into doing that. His passion is robotaxis, but his passion is how are we going to make this factory to do a million cars a year? So even the robotaxi is a longer range vision. He’s been touting it since 2016, but there are no robotaxis. Waymo may be doing a little experiment on it, but there’s not cars being manufactured without steering wheels that are going to take over the highways yet. So he’s always looking way into the future is my point.
One of the more mundane things I do is a lot of writers try to give you a lot of their opinions and preach or whatever. As this mentor said two people types come out, preachers, storytellers, to be a storyteller. I try, whenever I’m trying to convey a thought, there’s six magic words that I almost should have written on a card pinned above my desk, which is, “Let me tell you a story.” So if somebody says, “How does Elon Musk figure out good talent?” As you did, I think, “Well, let me tell you the story. I’ll tell you the story of Jake McKenzie,” or this is not something I invented.
This is way the good Lord does it in the Bible, has the best opening lead sentence ever, “In the beginning,” comma, and then it’s stories. Secondly, to pick up on that lead sentence, “In the beginning,” make it chronological. Everybody in the 40th year of their life has grown from the 39th year and the 38th year, and so you want to show how people evolve and grow. I had the greatest of all nonfiction narrative editors, Alice Mayhew at Simon Schuster, who among other things, created All the President’s Men with Woodward and Bernstein. But she had a note she’d put in the margins of my books, that was a tickta, and it meant, “All things in good time. Keep it chronological. If it’s good enough for the Bible, it’s good enough for you.”
That’s great. It opened up the field of biography to us non-academics, starting with David McCullough, Bob Caro, but maybe John Meacham and myself are in a new generation, and certainly there’s a generation coming after us. But the second thing besides telling it through people, which is the academy tended to disdain what they called imposing a narrative in which you made it storytelling because that meant you were leaving things out and making it into a narrative. Well, that’s how we form our views of the world.
But I would say I spent 30 hours with her. I can count a hundred hours or more just observing Musk. And I’m not sure that any biographer, perhaps since Boswell took on Dr. Johnson has ever had quite as much up close meaning five feet away at all times access and because of that I’ll go back to what I said a moment ago. I try to get out of the way of the story. It’s not about me, it’s not about… I try to just say, “Okay, here’s what happened. Here’s this story. Here’s what happened the night he came in to Twitter for the first time,” and let you form your own judgment.
First day on the job, I had to go cover a murder. And I phoned in the story from a payphone and my editor, the city editor, said, “Well, did you talk to the family?” I went, “No, Billy, I mean the family, the daughter just got…” He said, go knock on the door. I knocked on the door. An hour later, they were still talking. They were bringing out her yearbooks. Lesson one, I learned people want to talk if you’re willing to just listen, and whether it be Henry Kissinger, you just push the button and say Kissinger, and people tell you the stories all the way through Elon Musk, everybody talked, everybody in his family, everybody he fired, everybody. I think it’s important to listen to people. And the other thing I learned as a reporter, back when I was covering politics in New Hampshire in the early campaigns, I learned from two or three great reporters, a guy named David Broder and Tim Russert, the late NBC guy.
They do what was called door knocking. You just walk in a neighborhood, knock on a door and asked people about the election. But they said here’s the secret. Don’t ask any leading questions. Don’t have any premise. Just say, “Hey, I’m trying to figure out this election. What’s going on? What do you think?” And then stay silent. With Musk a third secret, you know this well, he’ll go silent at times, sometimes a minute, two minutes, four minutes. Don’t try to fill the silences. If you’re a listener, you got to learn, okay, he’s not said anything for four minutes. I can outlast him.
And I guess it’s also because I’m pretty interested in what anybody’s doing, whoever I happen to be with. And so that’s a talent you have, which is, you’re pretty genuine in your interests. There are people like Benjamin Franklin, like the, I’ll say Charlie Rose, even though he’s in disfavor who are interested in huge number of subjects, and I think that helps as well to be interested in basketball and opera and physics and metaphysics. That was a Ben Franklin. That was a Leonardo trick, which is they wanted to know everything you could possibly know about every subject knowable.
That was a lot of money back then, like a million dollars now or something. And she’s smart, she’s a scientist. She consults with a few other scientists, and after a week or so, she takes the bet. It’s not until what, 1919, that he wins his Nobel Prize and she gets all the money. She buys three apartment buildings in Zurich. With his second wife, Elsa, it was more a partnership of convenience. It was not a romantic love, but he knew, and that’s sometimes what people need in life is just a partner. Somebody who’s going to handle the stuff you’re not going to handle. So I guess if you look at my books, they’re not great inspiring guides to personal relationships.
Don’t get ahead of the story, don’t have to flash back. And then after you get it so that it’s all chronological and those things, then you have to do some clustering. You have to say, okay, we’re going to do the decision to do Starship or to build a factory in Texas or to whatever. And then you sometimes have the organizational problem of, yeah, and that gets us all the way up to here. Do I keep that in that chapter or do I wait until later when it’s better chronologically? But those are easy.
But it took me a while to figure that out. And I was probably too ambitious when I was young and at Time Magazine, that was when I was green and well, that was when I was in my salad days and green in judgment, and it was like chasing the next level at Time Incorporated whatever it might be. And then one day I caught the brass ring and I became an editor and then the top editor. And after a while I realized that wasn’t really totally what I’m suited to be, especially when I got put in charge of CNN. All young people are almost by definition in their salad days and green in judgment. But you learn what’s motivating you and then you learn to ask, but is that really what I want? Should I be careful of what I’m wishing for?
I enjoy the hell out of it, but it’s like, all right, I’m part of a community. And I think we lose that in America because people who are lonely are lonely because they’re not part of a community. But I’ve got all my high school kids, they’re friends, they’re all still in New Orleans. I’ve got my family, but I also have Tulane, institutions in New Orleans that have been there forever. And if I can get involved in helping the school system in New Orleans, of helping the youth empowerment programs, of helping the innovation center at Tulane, I was even on the City Planning Commission, which worries about zoning ordinances for short- term rentals. Go figure.
But it was like no, immerse myself in my community because my community was just so awesomely good at allowing me to become who I became and has trouble year by year, hurricane by hurricane, making sure that each new generation can be creative and it’s a city of creativity from jazz to the food, to the architecture. So when I think of, I won’t say legacy, but what am I going to do to pay it forward, which is a lower level way of saying legacy, I pay it forward by going back to the place where I began and trying to know it for the first time. That was a ripoff of a T.S. Eliot line. I don’t want you to think I thought of that one.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 3:00 – Difficult childhood
- 20:04 – Jennifer Doudna
- 23:01 – Einstein
- 28:20 – Tesla
- 45:24 – Elon Musk’s humor
- 49:34 – Steve Jobs’ cruelty
- 52:58 – Twitter
- 1:05:07 – Firing
- 1:07:52 – Hiring
- 1:16:55 – Time management
- 1:24:39 – Groups vs individuals
- 1:28:25 – Mortality
- 1:31:57 – How to write
- 1:52:56 – Love & relationships
- 1:57:50 – Advice for young people
Introduction
Walter Isaacson
I hope with my books I’m saying, “This isn’t a how-to guide, but this is somebody you can walk alongside.” You can see Einstein growing up Jewish in Germany. You can see Jennifer Doudna growing up or as an outsider, or Leonardo da Vinci or Elon Musk, in really violent South Africa with a psychologically difficult father, and getting off the train when he goes to an anti-apartheid concert with his brother and there’s a man with a knife sticking out of his head, and they step into the pool of blood and it’s sticky on their soles. This causes scars that last the rest of your life. The question is not how do you avoid getting scarred, it’s how do you deal with it.
I hope with my books I’m saying, “This isn’t a how-to guide, but this is somebody you can walk alongside.” You can see Einstein growing up Jewish in Germany. You can see Jennifer Doudna growing up or as an outsider, or Leonardo da Vinci or Elon Musk, in really violent South Africa with a psychologically difficult father, and getting off the train when he goes to an anti-apartheid concert with his brother and there’s a man with a knife sticking out of his head, and they step into the pool of blood and it’s sticky on their soles. This causes scars that last the rest of your life. The question is not how do you avoid getting scarred, it’s how do you deal with it.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Walter Isaacson, one of the greatest biography writers ever, having written incredible books on Albert Einstein, Steve Jobs, Leonardo da Vinci, Jennifer Doudna, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Kissinger, and now a new one on Elon Musk. We talked for hours, on and off the mic. I’m sure we’ll talk many more times. Walter is a truly special writer, thinker, observer, and human being.
The following is a conversation with Walter Isaacson, one of the greatest biography writers ever, having written incredible books on Albert Einstein, Steve Jobs, Leonardo da Vinci, Jennifer Doudna, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Kissinger, and now a new one on Elon Musk. We talked for hours, on and off the mic. I’m sure we’ll talk many more times. Walter is a truly special writer, thinker, observer, and human being.
I highly recommend people read his new book on Elon. I’m sure there will be short-term controversy, but in the long term, I think it will inspire millions of young people, especially with difficult childhoods, with hardship in their surroundings or in their own minds, to take on the hardest problems in the world and to build solutions to those problems, no matter how impossible the odds. In this conversation, Walter and I cover all of his books, and use personal stories from them to speak to the bigger principles of striving for greatness in science, in tech, engineering, art, politics and life.
There are many things in the new Elon book that I felt are best saved for when I speak to Elon directly again on this podcast, which will be soon enough. Perhaps it’s also good to mention here that my friendships, like with Elon, nor any other influence like money, access, fame, power, will never result in me sacrificing my integrity, ever. I do like to celebrate the good in people, to empathize and to understand, but I also like to call people out on their bullshit with respect and with compassion. If I fail, I fail due to a lack of skill, not a lack of integrity. I’ll work hard to improve. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, dear friends, here’s Walter Isaacson. What is the role of a difficult childhood in the lives of great men and women, great minds? Is it a requirement, is it a catalyst, or is it just a simple coincidence of fate?
Difficult childhood
Walter Isaacson
Well, it’s not a requirement. Some people with happy childhoods do quite well, but it certainly is true that a lot of really driven people are driven because they’re harnessing the demons of their childhood. Even Barack Obama’s sentence in his memoirs, which is, I think, “Every successful man is either trying to live up to the expectations of his father or live down the sins of his father.” For Elon it’s especially true, because he had both a violent and difficult childhood and a very psychologically problematic father. He’s got those demons dancing around in his head, and by harnessing them, it’s part of the reason that he does riskier, more adventurous, wilder things than maybe I would ever do.
Well, it’s not a requirement. Some people with happy childhoods do quite well, but it certainly is true that a lot of really driven people are driven because they’re harnessing the demons of their childhood. Even Barack Obama’s sentence in his memoirs, which is, I think, “Every successful man is either trying to live up to the expectations of his father or live down the sins of his father.” For Elon it’s especially true, because he had both a violent and difficult childhood and a very psychologically problematic father. He’s got those demons dancing around in his head, and by harnessing them, it’s part of the reason that he does riskier, more adventurous, wilder things than maybe I would ever do.
Lex Fridman
You’ve written that Elon talked about his father, and that at times it felt like mental torture, the interaction with him during his childhood. Can you describe some of the things you’ve learned?
You’ve written that Elon talked about his father, and that at times it felt like mental torture, the interaction with him during his childhood. Can you describe some of the things you’ve learned?
Walter Isaacson
Yeah. Well, Elon and Kimbal would tell me that, for example, when Elon got bullied on the playground, and one day was pushed down some concrete steps and had his face pummeled so badly that Kimbal said, “I couldn’t really recognize him,” and he was in the hospital for almost a week, but when he came home, Elon had to stand in front of his father, and his father berated him for more than an hour, and said he was stupid and took the side of the person who had beaten him.
Yeah. Well, Elon and Kimbal would tell me that, for example, when Elon got bullied on the playground, and one day was pushed down some concrete steps and had his face pummeled so badly that Kimbal said, “I couldn’t really recognize him,” and he was in the hospital for almost a week, but when he came home, Elon had to stand in front of his father, and his father berated him for more than an hour, and said he was stupid and took the side of the person who had beaten him.
Lex Fridman
That’s probably one of the more traumatic events of Elon’s life.
That’s probably one of the more traumatic events of Elon’s life.
Walter Isaacson
Yes, and there’s also Veldskool, which is a sort of paramilitary camp that young South African boys got sent to, and at one point he was scrawny. He was very bad at picking up social cues and emotional cues, he talks about being Asperger’s, and so he gets traumatized at a camp like that. The second time he went, he’d gotten bigger. He had shot up to almost six feet and he learned a little bit of judo, and he realized that if he was getting beaten up, it might hurt him, but he would just punch the person in the nose as hard as possible, so that sense of always punching back has also been ingrained in Elon.
Yes, and there’s also Veldskool, which is a sort of paramilitary camp that young South African boys got sent to, and at one point he was scrawny. He was very bad at picking up social cues and emotional cues, he talks about being Asperger’s, and so he gets traumatized at a camp like that. The second time he went, he’d gotten bigger. He had shot up to almost six feet and he learned a little bit of judo, and he realized that if he was getting beaten up, it might hurt him, but he would just punch the person in the nose as hard as possible, so that sense of always punching back has also been ingrained in Elon.
I spent a lot of time talking to Errol Musk, his father. Elon doesn’t talk to Errol Musk anymore, his father, nor does Kimbal. It’s been years, and Errol doesn’t even have Elon’s email, so a lot of times Errol will be sending me emails. Errol had one of those Jekyll-and-Hyde personalities. He was a great mind of engineering and especially material science. Knew how to build a wilderness camp in South Africa using mica and how it would not conduct the heat, but he also would go into these dark periods in which he would just be psychologically abusive.
Of course, Maye Musk says to me … his mother, who divorced Errol early on … said, “The danger for Elon is that he becomes his father.” Every now and then … you’ve been with him so much, Lex, and you know him well … he’ll even talk to you about the demons, about Diablo dancing in his head. I mean, he gets it, he’s self-aware, but you’ve probably seen him at times where those demons take over and he goes really dark and really quiet. Grimes says, “I can tell a minute or two in advance when demon mode’s about to happen,” and he’ll go a bit dark. I was here at Austin once at dinner with a group, and you could tell suddenly something had triggered him and he was going to go dark. I’ve watched it in meetings, where somebody will say, “We can’t make that part for less than $200,” or, “No, that’s wrong,” and he’ll berate them, and then he snaps out of it. You know that too, the huge snap-out, where suddenly he’s showing you a Monty Python skit on his phone and he’s joking about things. I think coming out of the childhood, there were just many facets, maybe even many personalities … the engineering mode, the silly mode, the charismatic mode, the visionary mode … but also the demon in dark mode.
Lex Fridman
A quote you cited about Elon’s really stood out to me. I forget who it was from, but, “Inside the man, he’s still there as a child, the child standing in front of his dad.”
A quote you cited about Elon’s really stood out to me. I forget who it was from, but, “Inside the man, he’s still there as a child, the child standing in front of his dad.”
Walter Isaacson
That was Talulah, his second wife, and she’s great. She’s an English actress. They’ve been married twice, actually. Tallulah said that’s just him from his childhood. He’s a drama addict. Kimbal says that as well. I asked why, and Tallulah said, “For him, love and family are associated with those psychological torments, and in many ways he’ll channel.” I mean, Tallulah would be with him in 2008 when the company was going bad or whatever it may have been or later, and he would be so stressed he would vomit, and then he would channel things that his father had said, use phrases his father had said to him. She told me, “Deep inside the man is this man-child, still standing in front of his father.”
That was Talulah, his second wife, and she’s great. She’s an English actress. They’ve been married twice, actually. Tallulah said that’s just him from his childhood. He’s a drama addict. Kimbal says that as well. I asked why, and Tallulah said, “For him, love and family are associated with those psychological torments, and in many ways he’ll channel.” I mean, Tallulah would be with him in 2008 when the company was going bad or whatever it may have been or later, and he would be so stressed he would vomit, and then he would channel things that his father had said, use phrases his father had said to him. She told me, “Deep inside the man is this man-child, still standing in front of his father.”
Lex Fridman
To what degree is that true for many of us, do you think?
To what degree is that true for many of us, do you think?
Walter Isaacson
I think it’s true, but in many different ways. I’ll say something personal, which is I was blessed … and perhaps it’s a bit of a downside too … with the fact that I had the greatest father you could ever imagine, and mother. They were the kindest people you’d ever want to meet. I grew up in a magical place in New Orleans. My dad was an engineer, an electrical engineer, and he was always kind. Perhaps I’m not quite as driven or as crazed. I don’t have to prove things, so I get to write about Elon Musk.
I think it’s true, but in many different ways. I’ll say something personal, which is I was blessed … and perhaps it’s a bit of a downside too … with the fact that I had the greatest father you could ever imagine, and mother. They were the kindest people you’d ever want to meet. I grew up in a magical place in New Orleans. My dad was an engineer, an electrical engineer, and he was always kind. Perhaps I’m not quite as driven or as crazed. I don’t have to prove things, so I get to write about Elon Musk.
I get to write about Einstein or Steve Jobs or Leonardo DaVinci, who as you know, was totally torn by demons and had different difficult childhood situations, not even legitimized by his father. Sometimes those of us who are lucky enough to have really gentle, sweet childhoods, we grow up with fewer demons, but we grow up with fewer drives, and we end up maybe being Boswell and not being Dr. Johnson. We end up being the observer, not being the doer. I always respect those who are in the arena.
Lex Fridman
You don’t see yourself as a man in the arena?
You don’t see yourself as a man in the arena?
Walter Isaacson
I’ve had a gentle, sweet career, and I’ve got to cover really interesting people, but I’ve never shot off a rocket that might someday get to Mars. I’ve never moved us into the era of electric vehicles. I’ve never stayed up all night on the factory floor. I don’t have quite those, either the drives or the addiction to risk. I mean, Elon’s addicted to risk. He’s addicted to adventure. Me, if I see something that’s risky, I spend some time calculating, “Okay, upside/downside here.” That’s another reason that people like Elon Musk get stuff done, and people like me write about the Elon Musks.
I’ve had a gentle, sweet career, and I’ve got to cover really interesting people, but I’ve never shot off a rocket that might someday get to Mars. I’ve never moved us into the era of electric vehicles. I’ve never stayed up all night on the factory floor. I don’t have quite those, either the drives or the addiction to risk. I mean, Elon’s addicted to risk. He’s addicted to adventure. Me, if I see something that’s risky, I spend some time calculating, “Okay, upside/downside here.” That’s another reason that people like Elon Musk get stuff done, and people like me write about the Elon Musks.
Lex Fridman
One other aspect of this, given a difficult childhood, whether it’s Elon or DaVinci, I wonder if there’s some wisdom, some advice almost that you can draw, that you can give to people with difficult childhoods.
One other aspect of this, given a difficult childhood, whether it’s Elon or DaVinci, I wonder if there’s some wisdom, some advice almost that you can draw, that you can give to people with difficult childhoods.
Walter Isaacson
I think all of us have demons, even those of us who grew up in a magical part of New Orleans with sweet parents. We all have demons, and rule one in life is harness your demons. Know that you’re ambitious or not ambitious or you’re lazy or whatever. Leonardo da Vinci knew he was a procrastinator. I think it’s useful to know what’s eating at you, know how to harness it. Also, know what you’re good at. I’ll take Musk as another example.
I think all of us have demons, even those of us who grew up in a magical part of New Orleans with sweet parents. We all have demons, and rule one in life is harness your demons. Know that you’re ambitious or not ambitious or you’re lazy or whatever. Leonardo da Vinci knew he was a procrastinator. I think it’s useful to know what’s eating at you, know how to harness it. Also, know what you’re good at. I’ll take Musk as another example.
I’m a little bit more like Kimbal Musk than Elon. I maybe got overendowed with the empathy gene. What does that mean? Well, it means that I was okay when I ran Time Magazine. It was a group about 150 people on the editorial floors, and I knew them all and we had a jolly time. When I went to CNN, I was not very good at being a manager or an executive of an organization. I cared a little bit too much that people didn’t get annoyed at me or mad at me.
Elon said that about John McNeil, for example, who was president of Tesla. It’s in the book. I talked to John McNeil a long time, and he says, “Elon just would fire people, be really rough on people. He didn’t have the empathy for the people in front of him.” Elon says, “Yeah, that’s right, and John McNeil couldn’t fire people. He cared more about pleasing the people in front of him than pleasing the entire enterprise or getting things done.”
Being overendowed with a desire to please people can make you less tough of a manager, and that doesn’t mean there aren’t great people who are overendowed. Ben Franklin, overendowed with the desire to please people. The worst criticism of him from John Adams and others was that he was insinuating, which meant he was always trying to get people to like him, but that turned out to be a good thing. When they can’t figure out the big state/little state issue at the Constitutional Convention, when they can’t figure out the Treaty of Paris, whatever it is, he brings people together, and that is his superpower.
To get back to the lessons, you asked, and the first was harness your demons, the second is to know your strengths and your superpower. My superpower is definitely not being a tough manager. After running CNN for a while, I said, “Okay, I think I’ve proven I don’t really enjoy this or know how to do this well. Do I have other talents? Yeah, I think I have the talent to observe people really closely, to write about it in a straight but I hope interesting narrative style.” That’s a power. It’s totally different from running an organization.
It took me until three years of running CNN that I realized I’m not cut to be an executive in really high-intense situations. Elon Musk is cut to be an executive in highly intense situations, so much so that when things get less intense … when they actually are making enough cars and rockets are going up and landing … he thinks of something else, so he can surge and have more intensity. He’s addicted to intensity, and that’s his superpower, which is a lot greater than the superpower of being a good observer.
Lex Fridman
I think also, to build on that, it’s not just addiction to risk and drama. There’s always a big mission above it. I would say it’s an empathy towards people in the big picture, humanity.
I think also, to build on that, it’s not just addiction to risk and drama. There’s always a big mission above it. I would say it’s an empathy towards people in the big picture, humanity.
Walter Isaacson
It’s an empathy towards humanity more than the empathy towards the three or four humans who might be sitting in the conference room with you, and that’s a big deal, and you see that in a lot of people. You see it Bill Gates or Larry Summers, Elon Musk. They always have empathy for these great goals of humanity, and at times they can be clueless about the emotions of the people in front of them or callous sometimes.
It’s an empathy towards humanity more than the empathy towards the three or four humans who might be sitting in the conference room with you, and that’s a big deal, and you see that in a lot of people. You see it Bill Gates or Larry Summers, Elon Musk. They always have empathy for these great goals of humanity, and at times they can be clueless about the emotions of the people in front of them or callous sometimes.
Musk, as you said, is driven by mission more than any person I’ve ever seen, and it’s not only mission, it’s like cosmic missions, meaning he’s got three really big missions. One is to make humans a spacefaring civilization, make us multi-planetary, or get us to Mars. Number two is to bring us into the era of sustainable energy, to bring us into the era of electric vehicles and solar roofs and battery packs. Third is to make sure that artificial intelligence is safe and is aligned with human values.
Every now and then, I’d talk to him and we’d be talking about Starlink satellites or whatever, or he would be pushing the people in front of him at SpaceX and saying, “If you do this, we’ll never get to Mars in our lifetime,” and then he would give the lecture of how important it was for human consciousness to get to Mars in our lifetime. I’m thinking, “Okay, this is the pep talk of somebody trying to inspire a team, or maybe it’s the type of pontification you do on a podcast.” On the 20th time I watched him, I realized, “Okay, I believe it. He actually is driven by this.”
Lex Fridman
He is frustrated and angry that, because of this particular minor engineering decision, the big mission is not going to be accomplished? It’s not a pep talk, it’s a literal frustration?
He is frustrated and angry that, because of this particular minor engineering decision, the big mission is not going to be accomplished? It’s not a pep talk, it’s a literal frustration?
Walter Isaacson
An impatience, a frustration, and it’s also just probably the most deeply ingrained thing in him is his mission. He joked at one point to me about how much he loved reading comics as a kid, and he said, “All the people in the comic books, they’re trying to save the world, but they’re wearing their underpants on the outside and they look ridiculous.” Then he paused and said, “But they are trying to save the world.” Whether it’s Starlink in Ukraine or Starship going to Mars or trying to get a global new Tesla, I think he’s got this epic sense of the role he’s going to play in helping humanity on big things, and like the characters in the comic books, it’s sometimes ridiculous, but it also is sometimes true.
An impatience, a frustration, and it’s also just probably the most deeply ingrained thing in him is his mission. He joked at one point to me about how much he loved reading comics as a kid, and he said, “All the people in the comic books, they’re trying to save the world, but they’re wearing their underpants on the outside and they look ridiculous.” Then he paused and said, “But they are trying to save the world.” Whether it’s Starlink in Ukraine or Starship going to Mars or trying to get a global new Tesla, I think he’s got this epic sense of the role he’s going to play in helping humanity on big things, and like the characters in the comic books, it’s sometimes ridiculous, but it also is sometimes true.
Lex Fridman
When I was reading this part of the book, I was thinking of all the young people who are struggling in this way, and I think a lot of people are in different ways, whether they grow up without a father, whether they grow up with physical, emotional, mental abuse or demons of any kind, as you talked about. It’s really painful to read, but also really damn inspiring.
When I was reading this part of the book, I was thinking of all the young people who are struggling in this way, and I think a lot of people are in different ways, whether they grow up without a father, whether they grow up with physical, emotional, mental abuse or demons of any kind, as you talked about. It’s really painful to read, but also really damn inspiring.
Walter Isaacson
Thanks.
Thanks.
Lex Fridman
That if you walk side by side with those demons, if you don’t let that pain break you or somehow channel it, if you can put it this way, that you can achieve. You can do great things in this world.
That if you walk side by side with those demons, if you don’t let that pain break you or somehow channel it, if you can put it this way, that you can achieve. You can do great things in this world.
Walter Isaacson
Well, that’s an epic view of why we write biography, which is more epic than I had even thought of, so I say thank you, because in some ways what you’re trying to do is say, “Okay, I mean, Leonardo, you talk about being a misfit. He’s born illegitimate in the village of Vinci, and he’s gay and he’s left-handed and he’s distracted, and his father won’t legitimize him. Then he wanders off to the town of Florence, and he becomes the greatest artist and engineer of that part of the Renaissance.
Well, that’s an epic view of why we write biography, which is more epic than I had even thought of, so I say thank you, because in some ways what you’re trying to do is say, “Okay, I mean, Leonardo, you talk about being a misfit. He’s born illegitimate in the village of Vinci, and he’s gay and he’s left-handed and he’s distracted, and his father won’t legitimize him. Then he wanders off to the town of Florence, and he becomes the greatest artist and engineer of that part of the Renaissance.
Jennifer Doudna
I hope this book inspires. Jennifer Doudna, the gene editing pioneer who helps discover CRISPR, the gene editing tool, which in my book, The Code Breaker, she grew up feeling like a misfit in Hawaii in a Polynesian village, being the only white person, and also trying to live up to a father who pushed her. If people can read the books … and I should have said about Jennifer Doudna, my point was that she was told by her school guidance counselor, “No, girls don’t do science. Science is not for girls. You’re not going to do math or science.” It pushes her to say, “All right, I’m going to do math and science.”
Lex Fridman
Just to interrupt real quick, but Jennifer Doudna, you’ve written an amazing book about her. A Nobel Prize winner, CRISPR developer, just incredible. One of the great scientists in the 21st century,
Just to interrupt real quick, but Jennifer Doudna, you’ve written an amazing book about her. A Nobel Prize winner, CRISPR developer, just incredible. One of the great scientists in the 21st century,
Walter Isaacson
Right, and I’m talking about when Jennifer Doudna was young and she felt really, really out of place, like you and me and a lot of people when they’re feeling that way, they read books. They curl up with a book. Her father drops a book on her bed called The Double Helix, the book by James Watson on the discovery of the structure of DNA by him and Rosalind Franklin and Francis Crick, and she realizes, “Oh, my God, girls can become scientists. My school guidance counselor is wrong.”
Right, and I’m talking about when Jennifer Doudna was young and she felt really, really out of place, like you and me and a lot of people when they’re feeling that way, they read books. They curl up with a book. Her father drops a book on her bed called The Double Helix, the book by James Watson on the discovery of the structure of DNA by him and Rosalind Franklin and Francis Crick, and she realizes, “Oh, my God, girls can become scientists. My school guidance counselor is wrong.”
I think books … like she read this book, and even if it’s a comic book like Elon Musk read … books can sometimes inspire you. Every one of my books is about people who were totally innovative, who weren’t just smart, because none of us are going to be able to match Einstein in mental processing power, but we can be as curious as he was and creative and think out of the box the way he did, or as Steve Jobs put it, think different.
I hope with my books I’m saying, “This isn’t a how-to guide, but this is somebody you can walk alongside.” You can see Einstein growing up Jewish in Germany. You can see Jennifer Doudna growing up or as an outsider, or Leonardo da Vinci or Elon Musk, in really violent South Africa with a psychologically difficult father, and getting off the train when he goes to an anti-apartheid concert with his brother and there’s a man with a knife sticking out of his head, and they step into the pool of blood and it’s sticky on their soles. This causes scars that last the rest of your life. The question is not how do you avoid getting scarred, it’s how do you deal with it.
Einstein
Lex Fridman
It’s hard to pick my favorite of your biographies, but Einstein, I mean, you really paint a picture of another … I don’t want to call him a misfit … but a person who doesn’t necessarily have a standard trajectory through life of success.
It’s hard to pick my favorite of your biographies, but Einstein, I mean, you really paint a picture of another … I don’t want to call him a misfit … but a person who doesn’t necessarily have a standard trajectory through life of success.
Walter Isaacson
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Lex Fridman
That’s extremely inspiring. I don’t know exactly what question to ask. There’s a million.
That’s extremely inspiring. I don’t know exactly what question to ask. There’s a million.
Walter Isaacson
I’ll talk about the misfit for a second, because we talked about Leonardo being that way. Einstein’s Jewish in Germany, at a time when it starts getting difficult. He’s slow in learning how to talk and he’s a visual thinker, so he’s always daydreaming and imagining things. The first time he applies to the Zurich Polytech … because he runs away from the German education system because it’s too much learning by rote … he gets rejected by the Zurich Polytech.
I’ll talk about the misfit for a second, because we talked about Leonardo being that way. Einstein’s Jewish in Germany, at a time when it starts getting difficult. He’s slow in learning how to talk and he’s a visual thinker, so he’s always daydreaming and imagining things. The first time he applies to the Zurich Polytech … because he runs away from the German education system because it’s too much learning by rote … he gets rejected by the Zurich Polytech.
Now, it’s the second-best school in Zurich, and they’re rejecting Einstein. I tried to find, but couldn’t, the name of the admissions counselor at the Zurich Polytech, like, “You rejected Einstein?” Then he doesn’t finish in the top half of his class. Once he does and he goes to graduate school, they don’t accept his dissertation, so he can’t get a job. He’s not teaching. He even tries about 14 different high schools at Gymnasium to get a job, and they won’t take him.
He’s a third-class examiner in the Swiss patent office in 1905, third class because they’ve rejected his doctoral dissertation, so he can’t be second class or first class. He doesn’t have a doctoral degree, and yet he’s sitting there on the stool in the patent office in 1905, and writes three papers that totally transform science. If you’re thinking about being misunderstood or unappreciated, in 1906, he’s still a third-class patent examiner. In 1907, he still is. It takes until 1909 before people realize that this notion of the Theory of Relativity might be correct and it might upend all of Newtonian physics.
Lex Fridman
How is it possible for three of the greatest papers in the history of science to be written in one year by this one person? Is there some insights, wisdoms you draw?
How is it possible for three of the greatest papers in the history of science to be written in one year by this one person? Is there some insights, wisdoms you draw?
Walter Isaacson
Plus he had a day job as a patent examiner, and there’s really three papers but there’s also an addendum, because once you figure out quantum theory and then you figure out relativity, and you’re understanding Maxwell’s equations and the speed of light, he does a little addendum. That’s the most famous equation in all of physics, which is E equals MC squared, so it’s a pretty good year.
Plus he had a day job as a patent examiner, and there’s really three papers but there’s also an addendum, because once you figure out quantum theory and then you figure out relativity, and you’re understanding Maxwell’s equations and the speed of light, he does a little addendum. That’s the most famous equation in all of physics, which is E equals MC squared, so it’s a pretty good year.
It partly starts because he’s a visual thinker, and I think it was helpful that he was at the patent office, rather than being the acolyte of some professor at the academy where he was supposed to follow the rules. At the patent office, they’re doing devices to synchronize clocks, because the Swiss have just gone on Standard times zones, and Swiss people, as you know, tend to be rather Swiss. They care, if it strikes the hour in Basel, it should do the same in Bern at the exact incident.
You have to send a light signal between two distant clocks, and he’s visualizing what’s it look like to ride alongside a light beam. He says, “Well, if you catch up with it, if you go almost as fast, it’ll look stationary,” but Maxwell’s equations don’t allow for that. He said, “It was making my palms sweat that I was so worried.” He finally figures out, because he’s looking at these devices to synchronize clocks, that if you’re traveling really, really fast, what looks synchronous to you or synchronized to you is different than for somebody traveling really fast in the other direction. He makes a mental leap that the speed of light’s always constant, but time is relative depending on your state of motion. It was that type of out-of-the-box thinking, those leaps, that made 1905 his miracle year.
Likewise with Musk. I mean, after General Motors and Ford, everybody gives up on electric vehicles. To just say, “I know how we’re going to have a path to change the entire trajectory of the world into the era of electric vehicles.” Then when he comes back from Russia, where he tried to buy a little rocket ship so he could send a experimental greenhouse to Mars, and they were poking fun of him and actually spit on him at one point in a drunken lunch.
This is very fortuitous, because on the ride back home on the plane, on the Delta Airlines flight, he’s doing the calculations of how much materials, how much metal, how much fuel. How much would it really cost? He’s visualizing things that other people would just say is impossible. It’s what Steve Jobs’s friends called the reality distortion field, and it drove people crazy. It drove them mad, but it also drove them to do things they didn’t think they would be able to do.
Tesla
Lex Fridman
You said visual thinking. I wonder if you’ve seen parallels of the different styles and kinds of thinking that operate the minds of these people. Is there parallels you see between Elon, Steve Jobs, Einstein, DaVinci, specifically in how they think?
You said visual thinking. I wonder if you’ve seen parallels of the different styles and kinds of thinking that operate the minds of these people. Is there parallels you see between Elon, Steve Jobs, Einstein, DaVinci, specifically in how they think?
Walter Isaacson
I think they were all visual thinkers, perhaps coming from slight handicaps as children, meaning Leonardo was left-handed and a little bit dyslexic, I think. Certainly Einstein had echolalia. He would repeat things. He was slow in learning to talk. I think visualizing helps a lot. With Musk, I see it all the time when I’m walking the factory lines with him or in product development, where he’ll look at, say, the heat shield under the Raptor engine of a Starship booster, and he’ll say, “Why does it have to be this way? Couldn’t we trim it this way or make it … or even get rid of this part of it?” He can visualize the material science.
I think they were all visual thinkers, perhaps coming from slight handicaps as children, meaning Leonardo was left-handed and a little bit dyslexic, I think. Certainly Einstein had echolalia. He would repeat things. He was slow in learning to talk. I think visualizing helps a lot. With Musk, I see it all the time when I’m walking the factory lines with him or in product development, where he’ll look at, say, the heat shield under the Raptor engine of a Starship booster, and he’ll say, “Why does it have to be this way? Couldn’t we trim it this way or make it … or even get rid of this part of it?” He can visualize the material science.
There’s small anecdotes in my book, but at one point he’s on the Tesla line and they’re trying to get 5,000 cars a week in 2018. It’s a life-or-death situation. He’s looking at the machines that are bolting something to the chassis, and he insists that Drew … not Drew, that Lars Moravy, one of his great lieutenants, come, and they have to summon him, and he says, “Why are there six bolts here?
Lars and others explained, “Well, for the crash test or anything else, the pressure would be in this way, so you have to,” and they were blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. He said, “No. If you visualize it, you’ll see if there’s a crash, the force would go this way and that way, and it could be done with four bolts.” Now, that sounds risky, and they go test it and they engineer it, but it turns out to be right. I know that seems minor, but I could give you 500 of those, where in any given day he’s visualizing the physics of an engineering or manufacturing problem.
That sounds pretty mundane, but for me, if you say what makes him special, there’s the mission-driven thing. I’d give you a lot of reasons, but one of the reasons is he cares not just about the design of the product, but visualizing the manufacturing of the product, the machine that makes the machine, and that’s what we failed to do in America for the past 40 years. We outsourced so much manufacturing. I don’t think you can be a good innovator if you don’t know how to make the stuff you’re designing. That’s why Musk puts his designers’ desks right next to the assembly lines in the factories, so that they have to visualize what they drew as it becomes the physical object.
Lex Fridman
Understanding everything, from the physics all the way up to the software? It’s like end to end.
Understanding everything, from the physics all the way up to the software? It’s like end to end.
Walter Isaacson
Well, having an end-to-end control is important. Certainly with Steve Jobs. I’m looking at my iPhone here. It’s a big deal. That hardware only works with Apple software, and for a while the iTunes store only worked. He has an end-to-end that makes it like a Zen garden in Kyoto. Very carefully curated, but a thing of beauty. For Musk when he first was at Tesla …
Well, having an end-to-end control is important. Certainly with Steve Jobs. I’m looking at my iPhone here. It’s a big deal. That hardware only works with Apple software, and for a while the iTunes store only worked. He has an end-to-end that makes it like a Zen garden in Kyoto. Very carefully curated, but a thing of beauty. For Musk when he first was at Tesla …
Walter Isaacson
For Musk when he first was at Tesla and before he was the CEO, when he was just the executive chairman and basically the finance person, person funding it, they were outsourcing everything. They were making the batteries in Japan and the battery pack would be at some barbecue shop in Thailand and got sent to the Lotus factory in England to be put into a Lotus Elise chassis and then… That was a nightmare. You did not have end to end control of the manufacturing process. So he goes to the other extreme. He gets a factory in Fremont from Toyota and he wants to do everything in-house. The software in-house, the painting in-house, the battery. He makes his own batteries. And I think that end-to-end control is part of his personality, but it’s also what allows Tesla to be innovative.
For Musk when he first was at Tesla and before he was the CEO, when he was just the executive chairman and basically the finance person, person funding it, they were outsourcing everything. They were making the batteries in Japan and the battery pack would be at some barbecue shop in Thailand and got sent to the Lotus factory in England to be put into a Lotus Elise chassis and then… That was a nightmare. You did not have end to end control of the manufacturing process. So he goes to the other extreme. He gets a factory in Fremont from Toyota and he wants to do everything in-house. The software in-house, the painting in-house, the battery. He makes his own batteries. And I think that end-to-end control is part of his personality, but it’s also what allows Tesla to be innovative.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I got to see and understand in detail one example of that, which is the development of the brain of the car in autopilot going from Mobile Eye to in-house building the autopilot system to basically getting rid of all sensors that are not rich in data to make it AI friendly, saying that we can do it all with vision. And like you said, removing some of the bolts. So sometimes it’s small things, but sometimes it’s really big things like getting rid of radar.
Yeah, I got to see and understand in detail one example of that, which is the development of the brain of the car in autopilot going from Mobile Eye to in-house building the autopilot system to basically getting rid of all sensors that are not rich in data to make it AI friendly, saying that we can do it all with vision. And like you said, removing some of the bolts. So sometimes it’s small things, but sometimes it’s really big things like getting rid of radar.
Walter Isaacson
Well, vision only, getting rid of radar is huge and everybody’s against it. They’re still fighting it a bit. They’re still trying to do it next generation some form of radar. But it gets back to the first principles. We’re talking about visualizing. Well, he starts with the first principles. And the first principles are physics involve things like, well, humans drive with only visual input. They don’t have radar, they don’t have LiDAR, they don’t have sonar, and so there is no reason in the laws of physics that make it so that vision only won’t be successful in creating self-driving. Now, that becomes an article of faith to him and he gets a lot of pushback. And he’s by the way, not been that successful in meeting his deadlines of getting self-driving, he’s way too optimistic. But it was at first principles of get rid of unnecessary things.
Well, vision only, getting rid of radar is huge and everybody’s against it. They’re still fighting it a bit. They’re still trying to do it next generation some form of radar. But it gets back to the first principles. We’re talking about visualizing. Well, he starts with the first principles. And the first principles are physics involve things like, well, humans drive with only visual input. They don’t have radar, they don’t have LiDAR, they don’t have sonar, and so there is no reason in the laws of physics that make it so that vision only won’t be successful in creating self-driving. Now, that becomes an article of faith to him and he gets a lot of pushback. And he’s by the way, not been that successful in meeting his deadlines of getting self-driving, he’s way too optimistic. But it was at first principles of get rid of unnecessary things.
Now you would think, LiDAR, why not use it? Why not use a crutch? It’s like, yeah, we can do things vision only, but when I look at the stars at night I’ll use a telescope too. Well, you could use LiDAR, but you can’t do millions of cars that way at scale. At a certain point you have to make it not only a good product but a product that goes to scale. And you can’t make it based on maps like Google Maps because it’ll never be able to then drive from New Orleans to Slidell where I want to go when it’s too hot in New Orleans.
Take for example, full self drive. He has been obsessed with what he calls the robotaxi. We’re going to build the next generation car without a steering wheel, without pedals because it’s going to be full self-drive. You just summon it, you won’t need to drive it. Well over and over again, all these people I’ve told you about, Lars Moravy and Drew Baglino and others, they’re saying, okay, fine, that sounds really good, but it ain’t happened yet. We need to build a $25,000 mass market global car that’s just normal with a steering wheel. And yeah, he finally turned around a few months ago and said, let’s do it.
And then he starts focusing on how’s the assembly line going to work? How are we going to do it and make it the same platform for Robotaxi, so you’re going to have the same assembly line. Likewise for full self-drive, they were doing it by coding hundreds of thousands of lines of code that would say things like, if you see a red light stop, if there’s a blinking light, if there two yellow lines do this. If there’s a bike lane, do this, if there’s a crosswalk, do that.
Well, that’s really hard to do. Now he’s doing it through artificial intelligence and machine learning only. FSD 12 will be based on the billion or so frames from Tesla each week of Tesla drivers and saying, what happened when a human was in this situation? What did the human do? And let’s only pick the best humans, the five star drivers, the Uber drivers, as Elon says. And so that’s him changing his mind and going to first principles but saying, all right, I’m even going to change full self-driving so there’s not rules based, it becomes AI based, just like ChatGPT doesn’t try to answer your question, who are the five best popes or something by study. ChatGPT does it by having ingested billions of pieces of writing that people have done. This will be AI, but real world done by ingesting video.
Lex Fridman
Sometimes it feels like he and others that are building things in this world successfully are basically confidently exploring a dark room with a very confident ambitious vision of what that room actually looks like. They’re just walking straight into the darkness. There’s no painful toys or legos on the ground. I’m just going to walk. I know exactly how far the wall is, and then very quickly willing to adjust as they run into, they step on the Lego and their body is filled with a lot of pain. What I mean by that is there’s this kind of evolution that seems to happen where you discover really good ideas along the way that allow you to pivot.
Sometimes it feels like he and others that are building things in this world successfully are basically confidently exploring a dark room with a very confident ambitious vision of what that room actually looks like. They’re just walking straight into the darkness. There’s no painful toys or legos on the ground. I’m just going to walk. I know exactly how far the wall is, and then very quickly willing to adjust as they run into, they step on the Lego and their body is filled with a lot of pain. What I mean by that is there’s this kind of evolution that seems to happen where you discover really good ideas along the way that allow you to pivot.
To me since a few years ago when you could see with Andrei Karpathy, the software 2.0 evolution of autopilot, it became obvious to me that this is not about the car. This is about Optimus, the robot. This is like if we look back a hundred years from now, the car will be remembered as a cool car, nice transportation, but the autopilot won’t be the thing that controls the car. It’ll be the thing that allows embodied AI systems to understand the world, so broadly. And so that kind of approach. And you kind of stumble into it, will Tesla be a car company? Will it be an AI company? Will it be a robotics company? Will it be a home robotics company? Will it be an energy company? And then you kind of slowly discover this as you confidently push forward with a vision. So it’s interesting to watch that kind of evolution as long as it’s backed by this confidence.
Walter Isaacson
There are a couple of things that are required for that. One is being adventurous. One doesn’t enter a dark room without a flashlight and a map unless you’re a risk-taker, unless you’re adventurous. The second is to have iterative brain cycles where you can process information and do a feedback loop and make it work. The third, and this is what we failed to do a lot in the United States and perhaps around the world, is when you take risks, you have to realize you’re going to blow things up. First three rockets, the Falcon Rockets that Musk does, they blow up. Even Starship, three and a half minutes, but then it blows up the first time. So I think Boeing and NASA and others have become unwilling to enter your dark room without knowing exactly where the exit is and the lighted path to the exit.
There are a couple of things that are required for that. One is being adventurous. One doesn’t enter a dark room without a flashlight and a map unless you’re a risk-taker, unless you’re adventurous. The second is to have iterative brain cycles where you can process information and do a feedback loop and make it work. The third, and this is what we failed to do a lot in the United States and perhaps around the world, is when you take risks, you have to realize you’re going to blow things up. First three rockets, the Falcon Rockets that Musk does, they blow up. Even Starship, three and a half minutes, but then it blows up the first time. So I think Boeing and NASA and others have become unwilling to enter your dark room without knowing exactly where the exit is and the lighted path to the exit.
And the people who created America, whenever they came over, whether the Mayflower, refugees from the Nazis, they took a lot of risks to get here. And now I think we have more referees than we have risk-takers, more lawyers and regulators and others saying, you can’t do that, that’s too risky than people willing to innovate, and you need both. I think you’re also right on 50, a hundred years from now, what Musk will be most remembered for besides space travel is real world AI. Not just Optimus the robot, but Optimus the robot and the self-driving car. They’re pretty much the same. They’re using GPU clusters or dojo chips or whatever it may be to process real world data. We all got, and you did on your podcast, quite excited about large language model, generative predictive text AI. That’s fine, especially if you want to chit-chat with your chatbot. But the holy grail is artificial general intelligence and the tough part of that is real world AI and that’s where Optimus, the robot or full self-drive are I think far ahead of anybody else.
Lex Fridman
Well, I like how you said chitchat. I would say for one of the greatest writers ever, it’s funny you spoke about language and the mastery of languages as merely chitchat. People have fallen in love over some words. People have gone to wars over some words. I think words have a lot of power. It’s actually an interesting question where the wisdom of the world, the wisdom of humanity is in the words or is it in visuals, is it in the physical? I don’t really-
Well, I like how you said chitchat. I would say for one of the greatest writers ever, it’s funny you spoke about language and the mastery of languages as merely chitchat. People have fallen in love over some words. People have gone to wars over some words. I think words have a lot of power. It’s actually an interesting question where the wisdom of the world, the wisdom of humanity is in the words or is it in visuals, is it in the physical? I don’t really-
Walter Isaacson
It’s in mathematics.
It’s in mathematics.
Lex Fridman
Maybe it all boils down to math and in the end, this kind of discussion about real world AI versus language is all the same. Maybe. I’ve gotten a chance to hang out quite a bit in the Metaverse with Mr. Mark Zuckerberg recently, and boy is the realism in there. The thing that’s coming up in the future is incredible. I got scanned in Pittsburgh for 10 hours into the Metaverse and there’s a virtual version of me and I got to hang out with that virtual version.
Maybe it all boils down to math and in the end, this kind of discussion about real world AI versus language is all the same. Maybe. I’ve gotten a chance to hang out quite a bit in the Metaverse with Mr. Mark Zuckerberg recently, and boy is the realism in there. The thing that’s coming up in the future is incredible. I got scanned in Pittsburgh for 10 hours into the Metaverse and there’s a virtual version of me and I got to hang out with that virtual version.
Walter Isaacson
Do you like yourself?
Do you like yourself?
Lex Fridman
Well, I never like myself. But it was easier to like that other guy, that was interesting.
Well, I never like myself. But it was easier to like that other guy, that was interesting.
Walter Isaacson
Did he like you?
Did he like you?
Lex Fridman
He didn’t seem to care much.
He didn’t seem to care much.
Walter Isaacson
That’s the lack of the empathy.
That’s the lack of the empathy.
Lex Fridman
But it made me start to question even more than before, well, how important is this physical reality? Because I got to see myself and other people in that metaverse, the details of the face, all the things that you think maybe if you look at yourself in the mirror are imperfections, all this kind of stuff of stuff. When I was looking at myself and at others, all those things are beautiful and it was real and it was intense and it was scary because you’re like, well, are you allowed to murder people in the metaverse? What are you allowed to do? Because you can replicate a lot of those things and you start to question what are the fundamental things that make life worth living here as we know as humans.
But it made me start to question even more than before, well, how important is this physical reality? Because I got to see myself and other people in that metaverse, the details of the face, all the things that you think maybe if you look at yourself in the mirror are imperfections, all this kind of stuff of stuff. When I was looking at myself and at others, all those things are beautiful and it was real and it was intense and it was scary because you’re like, well, are you allowed to murder people in the metaverse? What are you allowed to do? Because you can replicate a lot of those things and you start to question what are the fundamental things that make life worth living here as we know as humans.
Walter Isaacson
Have you talked to Elon about his views of we’re living in a simulation maybe and how you would figure out if that’s true?
Have you talked to Elon about his views of we’re living in a simulation maybe and how you would figure out if that’s true?
Lex Fridman
Yes, there’s a constant lighthearted but also a serious sense that this is all a bit of a game.
Yes, there’s a constant lighthearted but also a serious sense that this is all a bit of a game.
Walter Isaacson
One of my theories on Elon, a minor theory, is that he read Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy once too often. And as you know, there’s a scene in there that says that there’s a theory about the universe that if anybody ever discovers the secrets of meanings of the universe, it will be replaced by an even more complex universe. And then the next line Douglas Adams writes is, and there’s another theory that this has already happened, so I’m not trying to get my head around that, but I know that Elon Musk tries to.
One of my theories on Elon, a minor theory, is that he read Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy once too often. And as you know, there’s a scene in there that says that there’s a theory about the universe that if anybody ever discovers the secrets of meanings of the universe, it will be replaced by an even more complex universe. And then the next line Douglas Adams writes is, and there’s another theory that this has already happened, so I’m not trying to get my head around that, but I know that Elon Musk tries to.
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s a humor to that.
Well, there’s a humor to that.
Walter Isaacson
There’s an enormous humor to Hitchhiker’s Guide. I really think that helped Musk out of the darkest of his periods to have sort of the sense of fun of figuring out what life is all about.
There’s an enormous humor to Hitchhiker’s Guide. I really think that helped Musk out of the darkest of his periods to have sort of the sense of fun of figuring out what life is all about.
Elon Musk’s humor
Lex Fridman
I wonder if as a small aside we could say just having gotten to know Elon very well, the silliness, the willingness to engage in the absurdity of it all and have fun. What is that? Is that just a cork of personality or is that a fundamental aspect of a human who’s running six plus companies?
I wonder if as a small aside we could say just having gotten to know Elon very well, the silliness, the willingness to engage in the absurdity of it all and have fun. What is that? Is that just a cork of personality or is that a fundamental aspect of a human who’s running six plus companies?
Walter Isaacson
Well, it’s a release valve just like video games and Polytopia and Elden Ring are release valves for him. And he does have an explosive sense of humor as you know. And the weird thing is when he makes the abrupt transition from dark demon mode and you’re in a conference room and he has really become upset about something and not only there dark vibes, but there’s dark words emanating and he’s saying, your resignation will be accepted if you… et cetera. And then something pops and he pulls out his phone and pulls up a Bonnie Python’s skit like the School of Silly Walks or whichever John Cleese it was. And he starts laughing again and things break. So it’s almost as if he has different modes, the emulation of human mode, the engineering mode, the darkened demon mode, and certainly there is the silly and giddy mode.
Well, it’s a release valve just like video games and Polytopia and Elden Ring are release valves for him. And he does have an explosive sense of humor as you know. And the weird thing is when he makes the abrupt transition from dark demon mode and you’re in a conference room and he has really become upset about something and not only there dark vibes, but there’s dark words emanating and he’s saying, your resignation will be accepted if you… et cetera. And then something pops and he pulls out his phone and pulls up a Bonnie Python’s skit like the School of Silly Walks or whichever John Cleese it was. And he starts laughing again and things break. So it’s almost as if he has different modes, the emulation of human mode, the engineering mode, the darkened demon mode, and certainly there is the silly and giddy mode.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, you’ve actually opened the Elon book with the quotes from Elon and from Steve Jobs. So Elon’s quote is to anyone I’ve offended, I just want to say, this is on SNL, I just want to say I reinvented electric cars and I’m sending people to Mars on a rocket ship. Did you also think I was going to be a chill normal dude? And then the quote from Steve Jobs of course is the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do. So what do you think is the role of the old madness and genius? What do you think the role of crazy in this?
Yeah, you’ve actually opened the Elon book with the quotes from Elon and from Steve Jobs. So Elon’s quote is to anyone I’ve offended, I just want to say, this is on SNL, I just want to say I reinvented electric cars and I’m sending people to Mars on a rocket ship. Did you also think I was going to be a chill normal dude? And then the quote from Steve Jobs of course is the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do. So what do you think is the role of the old madness and genius? What do you think the role of crazy in this?
Walter Isaacson
Well, first of all, let’s both stipulate that Musk is crazy at times, I mean. And then let’s figure out, and I try to do it through storytelling, not through highfalutin preaching, where that craziness works. Give me a story, tell me an anecdote, tell me where he is crazy. And the almost final example, AI, but him shooting off Starship for the first time and between an aborted countdown in the shoot off he goes to Miami to an ad sales conference and meets Linda Yaccarino for the first time, makes her the CEO. I mean there’s a very impulsiveness to him. Then he flies back, they launch Starship.
Well, first of all, let’s both stipulate that Musk is crazy at times, I mean. And then let’s figure out, and I try to do it through storytelling, not through highfalutin preaching, where that craziness works. Give me a story, tell me an anecdote, tell me where he is crazy. And the almost final example, AI, but him shooting off Starship for the first time and between an aborted countdown in the shoot off he goes to Miami to an ad sales conference and meets Linda Yaccarino for the first time, makes her the CEO. I mean there’s a very impulsiveness to him. Then he flies back, they launch Starship.
And you realize that there’s a drive and there’re demons and there’s also craziness and you sometimes want to pull those out. You want to take away his phone so he doesn’t tweet at 3:00 AM. You want to say quit being so crazy. But then you realize there’s a wonderful line of Shakespeare in measure for measure at the very end. He says, even the best are molded out of faults. And so you take the faults of Musk, for example, which includes a craziness that can be endearing but also a craziness that’s just like effing crazy as well as this drive and demon mode. I don’t know that you can take that strand out of the fabric and the fabric remains whole.
Lex Fridman
I wonder sometimes it saddens me that we live in a society that doesn’t celebrate even the darker aspects of crazy and acknowledging that it all comes in one package. It’s the man in the arena versus the critic.
I wonder sometimes it saddens me that we live in a society that doesn’t celebrate even the darker aspects of crazy and acknowledging that it all comes in one package. It’s the man in the arena versus the critic.
Walter Isaacson
And the man in the arena versus the regulator to make it more prosaic.
And the man in the arena versus the regulator to make it more prosaic.
Steve Jobs’ cruelty
Lex Fridman
Well, let me ask about not just the crazy but the cruelty. So you’ve written when reporting as Steve Jobs, Woz told you that the big question to ask was did he have to be so mean, so rough and cruel, so drama addicted, what is this answer for Steve Jobs? Did he have to be so cruel?
Well, let me ask about not just the crazy but the cruelty. So you’ve written when reporting as Steve Jobs, Woz told you that the big question to ask was did he have to be so mean, so rough and cruel, so drama addicted, what is this answer for Steve Jobs? Did he have to be so cruel?
Walter Isaacson
For Jobs, I asked Woz at the end of my reporting because that’s what he said at the beginning. We’re doing the launch of I think the iPad 2, it may have been. Steve is emaciated because he’s been sick. And so I say to Woz, what’s the answer to your question? And he said, well, if I had been running Apple, I would’ve been nicer to everybody. Everybody got stock options. We’ve been like a family. And then I don’t know if you know Woz, he was like a teddy bear. He paused, he smiled and he said, but if I had been running Apple, I don’t think we would’ve done the Macintosh or the iPhone. So yeah, you have to sometimes be rough. And Jobs said the same thing that Musk said to me, which is he said, people like you love wearing velvet gloves. Now, I don’t know that I’ve worn velvet gloves often. But you like people to like you, like to sweet talk things, your sugarcoat things.
For Jobs, I asked Woz at the end of my reporting because that’s what he said at the beginning. We’re doing the launch of I think the iPad 2, it may have been. Steve is emaciated because he’s been sick. And so I say to Woz, what’s the answer to your question? And he said, well, if I had been running Apple, I would’ve been nicer to everybody. Everybody got stock options. We’ve been like a family. And then I don’t know if you know Woz, he was like a teddy bear. He paused, he smiled and he said, but if I had been running Apple, I don’t think we would’ve done the Macintosh or the iPhone. So yeah, you have to sometimes be rough. And Jobs said the same thing that Musk said to me, which is he said, people like you love wearing velvet gloves. Now, I don’t know that I’ve worn velvet gloves often. But you like people to like you, like to sweet talk things, your sugarcoat things.
He says, I’m just a working class kid and I don’t have that luxury. If something sucks, I got to tell people it sucks or I got a team of B players. Well, Musk is that way as well. And it gets back to what I said earlier, which is yeah, I probably would wear velvet gloves if I could find them at my haberdasher, and I do try to sugarcoat things. But when I was running CNN, it needed to be reshaped, it needed to be broken, it needed to have certain things blown up, and I didn’t do it. So bad on me, but it made me realize, okay, I’ll just write about the people who can do it.
Lex Fridman
Well, that thing of saying, I think probably both of them, but Elon certainly saying things like that is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.
Well, that thing of saying, I think probably both of them, but Elon certainly saying things like that is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.
Walter Isaacson
By the way I’ve heard Jeff Bezos say that, I’ve heard Bill Gates say that, I’ve heard Steve Jobs say it. I’ve heard Steve Jobs say it about a smoothie. They were making it a whole food or something. I mean people, they used the word stupid really often. And you know who else used it? Errol Musk. He kept baking Elon stand in front of him and saying, that’s the stupidest thing, you’re the stupidest person, you’ll never amount to anything. I don’t know as John McNeil, the president of Tesla said, do you have to be that way? Probably not. There are a lot of successful people who are much kinder, but it’s sometimes necessary to be much more brutal and honest, brutally honest, I would say, than people like who win Boss of the Year trophies.
By the way I’ve heard Jeff Bezos say that, I’ve heard Bill Gates say that, I’ve heard Steve Jobs say it. I’ve heard Steve Jobs say it about a smoothie. They were making it a whole food or something. I mean people, they used the word stupid really often. And you know who else used it? Errol Musk. He kept baking Elon stand in front of him and saying, that’s the stupidest thing, you’re the stupidest person, you’ll never amount to anything. I don’t know as John McNeil, the president of Tesla said, do you have to be that way? Probably not. There are a lot of successful people who are much kinder, but it’s sometimes necessary to be much more brutal and honest, brutally honest, I would say, than people like who win Boss of the Year trophies.
Lex Fridman
Well, as you said, this kind of idea did also send a signal, this idea of Steve Jobs of a-players, it did send a signal to everybody. It was a kind of encouragement to the people that are all in.
Well, as you said, this kind of idea did also send a signal, this idea of Steve Jobs of a-players, it did send a signal to everybody. It was a kind of encouragement to the people that are all in.
Walter Isaacson
Right, and that happened at Twitter when we went to Twitter headquarters the day before the takeover, he was having Andrew and James, his two young cousins and other people from the autopilot team going over lines of code and Musk himself sat there with a laptop on the second floor of the building looking at the lines of code that had been written by Twitter engineers and they decided they were going to fire 85% of them because they had to be all in. And this notion of psychological safety and mental days off and working remotely. He said either… And then it came up, actually one of his, I think it was one of the cousins or maybe Ross Nordine came up with the idea of let’s not be so rough and just fire all these people. Let’s ask them, do you really want to be all in because this is going to be hardcore, it’s going to be intense, you get to choose. But by midnight tonight, we want you to check the box. I’m hardcore all in. I’ll be there in person. I’ll work as much. Or that’s not for me. I’ve got a family, I’ve got work balance. And you got different type of people that way in different stages of their life. I was a little bit more hardcore and all in when I was in my twenties than when I was in my fifties.
Right, and that happened at Twitter when we went to Twitter headquarters the day before the takeover, he was having Andrew and James, his two young cousins and other people from the autopilot team going over lines of code and Musk himself sat there with a laptop on the second floor of the building looking at the lines of code that had been written by Twitter engineers and they decided they were going to fire 85% of them because they had to be all in. And this notion of psychological safety and mental days off and working remotely. He said either… And then it came up, actually one of his, I think it was one of the cousins or maybe Ross Nordine came up with the idea of let’s not be so rough and just fire all these people. Let’s ask them, do you really want to be all in because this is going to be hardcore, it’s going to be intense, you get to choose. But by midnight tonight, we want you to check the box. I’m hardcore all in. I’ll be there in person. I’ll work as much. Or that’s not for me. I’ve got a family, I’ve got work balance. And you got different type of people that way in different stages of their life. I was a little bit more hardcore and all in when I was in my twenties than when I was in my fifties.
Lex Fridman
And you write about this, this really nice idea actually that there’s two camps and you find out… I wonder how true this is, it rings true. That you can just ask people, which camp are you in? Are you the kind of person that prizes themselves that enjoy staying up till 2:00 AM programming or whatever, or do you see the value of work-life balance, all this kind of stuff? And it’s interesting, I mean people probably divide themselves in different stages of life and you could just ask them and it makes sense for certain companies at certain stages of their development to be like, we only want hardcore people.
And you write about this, this really nice idea actually that there’s two camps and you find out… I wonder how true this is, it rings true. That you can just ask people, which camp are you in? Are you the kind of person that prizes themselves that enjoy staying up till 2:00 AM programming or whatever, or do you see the value of work-life balance, all this kind of stuff? And it’s interesting, I mean people probably divide themselves in different stages of life and you could just ask them and it makes sense for certain companies at certain stages of their development to be like, we only want hardcore people.
Walter Isaacson
Or teams, it doesn’t even have to be a whole company. And you’re right, it goes back to what I was saying about rule. The first secret is sort of know thyself. Obviously it comes from Plato and everything comes from Plato and Socrates, but and decide in this stage of my life, do I want to be a hackathon all in all night and change the world or do I want to bring wisdom and stability but also have balance? I think it’s good to have different companies with different styles. The problem was Twitter was at almost one extreme with yoga studios and mental health days off and enshrining psychological safety as one of the mantras that people should never feel psychologically threatened. And I remember the bitter laugh he unleashed when he kept hearing that word. He said, no, I like the words hardcore. I like intensity. I like a intense sense of urgency as our operating principle. Well, yeah, there’re people that way as well. So know who you are and know what type of team you want to build.
Or teams, it doesn’t even have to be a whole company. And you’re right, it goes back to what I was saying about rule. The first secret is sort of know thyself. Obviously it comes from Plato and everything comes from Plato and Socrates, but and decide in this stage of my life, do I want to be a hackathon all in all night and change the world or do I want to bring wisdom and stability but also have balance? I think it’s good to have different companies with different styles. The problem was Twitter was at almost one extreme with yoga studios and mental health days off and enshrining psychological safety as one of the mantras that people should never feel psychologically threatened. And I remember the bitter laugh he unleashed when he kept hearing that word. He said, no, I like the words hardcore. I like intensity. I like a intense sense of urgency as our operating principle. Well, yeah, there’re people that way as well. So know who you are and know what type of team you want to build.
Lex Fridman
Versus psychological safety and too many birds everywhere.
Versus psychological safety and too many birds everywhere.
Walter Isaacson
Oh yeah. A lot of times Musk did things and I go, what the hell? Among them was changing the name Twitter and getting rid of the birds? Man, it’s a lot invested in that brand. But when I watched him, he thought, okay, these sweet little chirpy birds tweeting away in the name Twitter. It’s not hardcore, it’s not intense. And so for better and for worse, I think he’s taking acts into the hardcore realm with people who post hardcore things with people with hardcore views. It’s not a polite play pen for the blue checked anointed elite. And I thought, okay, this is going to be bad. The whole thing’s going to fall apart. Well, it has had problems, but the hardcore intensity of it’s also meant that there’s new things happening there. So it’s very Elon Musk to not like the sweetness of birds chirping and tweeting and saying, I want something more hardcore.
Oh yeah. A lot of times Musk did things and I go, what the hell? Among them was changing the name Twitter and getting rid of the birds? Man, it’s a lot invested in that brand. But when I watched him, he thought, okay, these sweet little chirpy birds tweeting away in the name Twitter. It’s not hardcore, it’s not intense. And so for better and for worse, I think he’s taking acts into the hardcore realm with people who post hardcore things with people with hardcore views. It’s not a polite play pen for the blue checked anointed elite. And I thought, okay, this is going to be bad. The whole thing’s going to fall apart. Well, it has had problems, but the hardcore intensity of it’s also meant that there’s new things happening there. So it’s very Elon Musk to not like the sweetness of birds chirping and tweeting and saying, I want something more hardcore.
Lex Fridman
As you’ve written in referring to the previous Twitter CEO, Elon said Twitter needs a fire breathing dragon. I think this is a good opportunity to maybe go through some of the memorable moments of the Twitter saga as you’ve written about extensively in your book from the early days of considering the acquisition to how it went through to the details of like you mentioned, the engineering teams.
As you’ve written in referring to the previous Twitter CEO, Elon said Twitter needs a fire breathing dragon. I think this is a good opportunity to maybe go through some of the memorable moments of the Twitter saga as you’ve written about extensively in your book from the early days of considering the acquisition to how it went through to the details of like you mentioned, the engineering teams.
Walter Isaacson
Well, at the beginning of 2022, he was riding high, but as we say, he’s a drama addict, he doesn’t like to coast. And Tesla sold a million vehicles, I think 33 boosters, Falcon Nines have been shot up and landed safely in the past few months, and he was the richest person on earth and Times person of the year. And yet he’d said, I still want to put all my chips back on the table. I want to keep taking risks. I don’t want to savor things. He had sold all of his houses. So he starts secretly buying shares of Twitter. January, February, March. Becomes public at a certain point he has to declare it. And we were here in Austin at Gigafactory on the mezzanine and he was trying to figure out, well, where do I go from here? And at that time, this is early April, they were going to offer him a board seat and he was going to do a standstill agreement and stop at 10% or something.
Well, at the beginning of 2022, he was riding high, but as we say, he’s a drama addict, he doesn’t like to coast. And Tesla sold a million vehicles, I think 33 boosters, Falcon Nines have been shot up and landed safely in the past few months, and he was the richest person on earth and Times person of the year. And yet he’d said, I still want to put all my chips back on the table. I want to keep taking risks. I don’t want to savor things. He had sold all of his houses. So he starts secretly buying shares of Twitter. January, February, March. Becomes public at a certain point he has to declare it. And we were here in Austin at Gigafactory on the mezzanine and he was trying to figure out, well, where do I go from here? And at that time, this is early April, they were going to offer him a board seat and he was going to do a standstill agreement and stop at 10% or something.
I remember we were standing around, it was Luke Nozik, whom you know well, Ken Howery, some of his friends on that mezzanine here. And all afternoon and then late into the evening at dinner is like, should we do this? And I didn’t say anything, I’m just the observer, but everybody else is saying, excuse me, why do you want to own Twitter? And Griffin, his son joined at dinner and May for some reason was in town. And everybody says, no, we don’t use Twitter. Why would you do that? And May said, well, I use Twitter.
And it is almost like, okay, the demographics are people my age or May’s age. And so it looked like he wasn’t going to pursue it. They offered him a board seat and then he went off to Hawaii to Larry Ellison’s house, which he sometimes uses. He was meeting a friend, Angela Bassett, an actress, and instead of enjoying three days of vacation, he just became supercharged and started firing off text messages, including the fire breathing dragon one, I think he used that phrase a few times that Parag wasn’t the person who was going to take Twitter to a new level.
And then by the time he gets to Vancouver where Grimes meets him, they stay up all night playing Elden Ring. He was doing a Ted Talk. And then at 5:30 he finishes playing the Elden Ring and sends out that I’ve made an offer. Even when he comes back, people are trying to intervene and say, excuse me, why are you doing it? And so it was a rocky period between late April and October when the deal closes. And people ask me all the time, well, did he want to get out of the deal? I said, which Elon are you talking about at what time of day? Because there’ll be times in the morning when he’d say, oh, the Delaware court’s going to force me to do it, it’s horrible. Talk to his lawyers. You can win this case. Get me out of it.
He met here in Austin with three or four investment bankers, Blair Efron at Center View, Bob Steele at Perella Weinberg, and they offered him options, do you want to get out? Do you want to stay in? Do you want to reduce the price? And I think he was mercurial. There were times he would text me or say to me, this is going to be great. It’s going to be the accelerant to do x.com the way we thought about 20 years ago. And so it’s not until they finally tell them at the beginning of October, right when Optimus the robot is being unveiled in California actually, that the lawyer is saying, you’re not going to probably win this case, better go through with the deal. And by then he’s not only made his peace with it, he’s kind of happy with it at times.
Eventually the deal is going to close on, I think a Friday morning, I have it in the book, and we’re there on Thursday and he’s wandering around looking at the Stay Woke t-shirts and psychological safety lingo they’re all using. And he and his lawyers and bankers hatched a plan to do a flash close. And the reason for that was if they closed the deal after the markets had closed for the day and he could send a letter to Parag and to others firing them, quote, for cause, and this’ll be something the courts will have to figure out, then he could save 200 million or so. And it was both the money, but for him, a matter, I won’t say of principle, but of, Hey, they misled me about the numbers. I got forced into doing it, so I’m going to try this jujitsu maneuver and be able to get some money out of them.
Then when he takes over, it’s kind of a wild scene, him trying to decide in three different rounds how to get the staff down to 15% of what it was him deciding on Christmas Eve after he’d been at a meeting where they told him, we can’t get rid of that Sacramento server farm because it’s needed for redundancy. And he says, no, it’s not. And he’s flying here to Austin and young James says, why don’t we just do it ourselves? He turns the plane around, they land in Sacramento and he pulls them out himself. So it was a manic period.
Lex Fridman
We should also say that underneath of that, there was a running desire to, or a consideration to perhaps start a new company to build a social media company from scratch.
We should also say that underneath of that, there was a running desire to, or a consideration to perhaps start a new company to build a social media company from scratch.
Walter Isaacson
Well, Kimball wanted to do that, and Kimball here at a wonderful restaurant in Austin at lunch is like, Hey, why are you buying Twitter? Let’s start one from scratch and do it on the blockchain. Now, it took them a while and you can argue it one way or the other.
Well, Kimball wanted to do that, and Kimball here at a wonderful restaurant in Austin at lunch is like, Hey, why are you buying Twitter? Let’s start one from scratch and do it on the blockchain. Now, it took them a while and you can argue it one way or the other.
Walter Isaacson
Now, it took him a while and you can argue it one way or the other, to come to the conclusion that the blockchain was not fast enough in responsive time enough to be able to handle a billion tweets in a day or so. He gets mad when they keep trying to get them to talk to Sam Bankman-Fried, who’s trying to say, “I’ll invest, but we have to do it on the blockchain.” Kimball is still in favor of starting a new one and doing it on blockchain-based. In retrospect, I think starting a new media company would’ve been better. He wouldn’t have had the baggage or the legacy that he’s breaking now in breaking the way Twitter had been. But it’s hard to have hundreds of millions of true users, not just trolls, and start from scratch as others have found. There’s Mastodon and Blue Sky and Threads. Threads even had a base, so it would’ve been hard.
Now, it took him a while and you can argue it one way or the other, to come to the conclusion that the blockchain was not fast enough in responsive time enough to be able to handle a billion tweets in a day or so. He gets mad when they keep trying to get them to talk to Sam Bankman-Fried, who’s trying to say, “I’ll invest, but we have to do it on the blockchain.” Kimball is still in favor of starting a new one and doing it on blockchain-based. In retrospect, I think starting a new media company would’ve been better. He wouldn’t have had the baggage or the legacy that he’s breaking now in breaking the way Twitter had been. But it’s hard to have hundreds of millions of true users, not just trolls, and start from scratch as others have found. There’s Mastodon and Blue Sky and Threads. Threads even had a base, so it would’ve been hard.
Firing
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and to do that in the way he did requires another part that you write about with the Three Musketeers and the whole engineering, the firing and the bringing in the engineers to try to go hardcore, so there’s a lot of interesting questions to ask there. But high level, can you just comment about that part of the saga, which is, bringing in the engineers and seeing what can we do here?
Yeah, and to do that in the way he did requires another part that you write about with the Three Musketeers and the whole engineering, the firing and the bringing in the engineers to try to go hardcore, so there’s a lot of interesting questions to ask there. But high level, can you just comment about that part of the saga, which is, bringing in the engineers and seeing what can we do here?
Walter Isaacson
Right. He brought in the engineers and figured that the amount of people doing Tesla full self-driving autopilot and all the software there was about 1/10 of what was doing software for Twitter. He said, “This can’t be the case,” and he fired 85% in three different rounds. The first was just firing people because they looked at the coding, and they had a team of people from Tesla’s autopilot team grading the codes of all that was written in the past year or so. Then he fired people who didn’t seem to be totally all in or loyal, and then another round of layoffs.
Right. He brought in the engineers and figured that the amount of people doing Tesla full self-driving autopilot and all the software there was about 1/10 of what was doing software for Twitter. He said, “This can’t be the case,” and he fired 85% in three different rounds. The first was just firing people because they looked at the coding, and they had a team of people from Tesla’s autopilot team grading the codes of all that was written in the past year or so. Then he fired people who didn’t seem to be totally all in or loyal, and then another round of layoffs.
So at each step of the way, almost everybody said, “That’s enough, it’s going to destroy things,” from Alex Sparrow, his lawyer, to Jared Birchall, it’s like, “Whoa, whoa, whoa.” Even Andrew and James, the young cousins who are tasked with making a list and figuring out who’s good or bad, say, “We’ve done enough, we’re going to be in real trouble.” They were partly right. There was degradation of the service some, but not as much as half the services I use half the time. I wake up each morning and hit the app and okay, still there.
Lex Fridman
What do you think? Was that too much?
What do you think? Was that too much?
Walter Isaacson
I think that he has an algorithm that we mentioned earlier that begins with question every requirement, but it’s up to is delete, delete, delete, delete every part there. Then a corollary to that is if you don’t end up adding back 20% of what you deleted, then you didn’t delete enough in the first round ’cause you were too timid. Well, so you asked me did he overdo it? He probably overdid it by 20%, which is his formula, and they’re probably trying to hire people now to keep things going.
I think that he has an algorithm that we mentioned earlier that begins with question every requirement, but it’s up to is delete, delete, delete, delete every part there. Then a corollary to that is if you don’t end up adding back 20% of what you deleted, then you didn’t delete enough in the first round ’cause you were too timid. Well, so you asked me did he overdo it? He probably overdid it by 20%, which is his formula, and they’re probably trying to hire people now to keep things going.
Lex Fridman
But it sends a strong signal to people that are hired back or the people that are still there, the APIs, yeah-
But it sends a strong signal to people that are hired back or the people that are still there, the APIs, yeah-
Walter Isaacson
Yeah, and what Steve Jobs and many other great leaders felt, and certainly Bezos, and certainly in the early days of Microsoft, Bill Gates, it was hardcore only A players.
Yeah, and what Steve Jobs and many other great leaders felt, and certainly Bezos, and certainly in the early days of Microsoft, Bill Gates, it was hardcore only A players.
Hiring
Lex Fridman
So how much of Elon’s success would you say, Elon’s and Steve Jobs’ success is the hiring and managing of great teams?
So how much of Elon’s success would you say, Elon’s and Steve Jobs’ success is the hiring and managing of great teams?
Walter Isaacson
When I asked Steve Jobs at one point, “What was the best product you ever created?” I thought he’d say maybe the Macintosh or maybe the iPhone. He said, “No, those products are hard. The best thing I ever created was the team that made those products, and that’s the hard part is creating a team,” and he did, from Jony Ive to Tim Cook and Eddie Cue and Phil Schiller. Elon has done a good job bringing in people, Gywnne Shotwell, obviously, Linda Yaccarino. She can navigate through the current crises, certainly stellar people at SpaceX like Mark Juncosa, and then at Tesla, like Drew Baglino and Lars Moravy and Tom Zhu and many others.
When I asked Steve Jobs at one point, “What was the best product you ever created?” I thought he’d say maybe the Macintosh or maybe the iPhone. He said, “No, those products are hard. The best thing I ever created was the team that made those products, and that’s the hard part is creating a team,” and he did, from Jony Ive to Tim Cook and Eddie Cue and Phil Schiller. Elon has done a good job bringing in people, Gywnne Shotwell, obviously, Linda Yaccarino. She can navigate through the current crises, certainly stellar people at SpaceX like Mark Juncosa, and then at Tesla, like Drew Baglino and Lars Moravy and Tom Zhu and many others.
He’s not as much of a team collaborator as say, Benjamin Franklin, who by the way, that’s the best team ever created, which is the founders. You had to have really smart people like Jefferson and Madison and really passionate people like John Adams and his cousin, Samuel, and really a guy of high rectitude like Washington. But you also needed a Ben Franklin who could bring everybody together and forge a team out of them and make them compromise with each other. Musk is a magnet for awesome talent.
Lex Fridman
Magnet, interesting. But there’s the priorities of hiring based on excellence, trustworthiness and drive. These are things you’ve described throughout the book. There’s a pretty concrete and rigorous set of ideas based on which the hiring is done.
Magnet, interesting. But there’s the priorities of hiring based on excellence, trustworthiness and drive. These are things you’ve described throughout the book. There’s a pretty concrete and rigorous set of ideas based on which the hiring is done.
Walter Isaacson
Oh, yeah. He has a very good spidey intuitive sense, just looking at people, not looking at them, but studying them, who could be good. One of his ways of operating is what he calls a skip-level meeting. Let’s take a very specific thing, like the Raptor engine, which is powering the Starship, and it wasn’t going well. It looked like a spaghetti bush, and it was going to be hard to manufacture, and he got rid of the people who were in charge of that team. I remember that he spent a couple of months doing what he calls skip-level, which means instead of meeting with his direct reports on the Raptor team, he would meet with the people one level below them. So he would skip a level and meet with them. I just asked them what they’re doing and I drill them with questions and he said, “This is how I figure out who’s going to emerge.” He said it was particularly difficult. I was sitting in those meetings ’cause people were wearing masks.
Oh, yeah. He has a very good spidey intuitive sense, just looking at people, not looking at them, but studying them, who could be good. One of his ways of operating is what he calls a skip-level meeting. Let’s take a very specific thing, like the Raptor engine, which is powering the Starship, and it wasn’t going well. It looked like a spaghetti bush, and it was going to be hard to manufacture, and he got rid of the people who were in charge of that team. I remember that he spent a couple of months doing what he calls skip-level, which means instead of meeting with his direct reports on the Raptor team, he would meet with the people one level below them. So he would skip a level and meet with them. I just asked them what they’re doing and I drill them with questions and he said, “This is how I figure out who’s going to emerge.” He said it was particularly difficult. I was sitting in those meetings ’cause people were wearing masks.
It was during the height of COVID, and he said it made it a little bit harder for him because he has to get the input. But I watched as a young kid, dreadlocks, named Jacob McKenzie, he’s in the book, is sitting there. He’s a bit like you, engineering mindset, speaks in a bit of a monotone. Musk would ask a question and he would give an answer, and the answer would be very straightforward. He didn’t get rattled, he was like this. Musk said one day called him up at 3:00 AM, well, I won’t say 3:00 AM, but after midnight said, “You still around?” Jake said, “Yeah, I’m still at work.” He said, “Okay, I’m going to make you in charge of the team building Raptor,” and that was like a big surprise. But Jacob McKenzie has now gotten a version of Raptor and where they’re building them at least one a week and they’re pretty awesome. That’s where his talent, Musk’s talent, for finding the right person and promoting them, that’s where it is.
Lex Fridman
Promoting it in a way where it’s like, “Here’s the ball. Here, catch,” and you run with it. I’ve interacted with quite a few folks from even just the Model X all throughout where people on paper don’t seem like they would be able to run the thing, and they run it extremely successfully.
Promoting it in a way where it’s like, “Here’s the ball. Here, catch,” and you run with it. I’ve interacted with quite a few folks from even just the Model X all throughout where people on paper don’t seem like they would be able to run the thing, and they run it extremely successfully.
Walter Isaacson
He does it wrong sometimes. He’s had a horrible track record with the solar roof division, wonderful guy named Brian Dow. I really liked him. When they were doing the battery factory surge in Nevada, Musk got rid of two or three people in. There’s Brian Dow can do, can do, can stays up all night, and he gets promoted and runs it. So finally Musk goes through two or three people running the solar roof division, finally calls up Brian Dow. I was sitting in Musk’s house in Boca Chica, that little tiny two bedroom he has, and he offers Brian Dow the job of running solar roof.
He does it wrong sometimes. He’s had a horrible track record with the solar roof division, wonderful guy named Brian Dow. I really liked him. When they were doing the battery factory surge in Nevada, Musk got rid of two or three people in. There’s Brian Dow can do, can do, can stays up all night, and he gets promoted and runs it. So finally Musk goes through two or three people running the solar roof division, finally calls up Brian Dow. I was sitting in Musk’s house in Boca Chica, that little tiny two bedroom he has, and he offers Brian Dow the job of running solar roof.
Brian there, “Okay, can do, can do.” Two or three times, Musk insisted that they install a solar roof in one of those houses in Boca Chica. This is this tiny village at the south end of Texas. Late at night, I’d have to climb up to the top of the roof on these ladders and stand on this peaked roof as Musk is there saying, “Why do we need four screws to put in this single leg?” Brian was just sweating and doing everything, but then after a couple of months it wasn’t going well and boom! Musk just fired him. So I always try to learn what is it that makes those who stay thrive?
Lex Fridman
What’s the lesson there? What do you think?
What’s the lesson there? What do you think?
Walter Isaacson
Well, I think it’s self-knowledge, like an Andy Krebs or others. They say, “I am hardcore. I really want to get a rocket to Mars, and that’s more important than anything else.” One of the people, I think it’s Tim Zaman. I hope when he hears this, I’m getting the right person, who took time, was working for Tesla Autopilot. It was just so intense, he took some time off and then went to another company. He said, “I was burned out at Tesla, but then I was bored at the next place. So I called,” I think it was, “Ashok at Tesla, said, ‘Can I come back?'” He said, ” Sure.” He said, “I learned about myself I’d rather be burned out than bored.”
Well, I think it’s self-knowledge, like an Andy Krebs or others. They say, “I am hardcore. I really want to get a rocket to Mars, and that’s more important than anything else.” One of the people, I think it’s Tim Zaman. I hope when he hears this, I’m getting the right person, who took time, was working for Tesla Autopilot. It was just so intense, he took some time off and then went to another company. He said, “I was burned out at Tesla, but then I was bored at the next place. So I called,” I think it was, “Ashok at Tesla, said, ‘Can I come back?'” He said, ” Sure.” He said, “I learned about myself I’d rather be burned out than bored.”
Lex Fridman
That’s a good line. Well, can you just linger on one of the three that seem interesting to you in terms of excellence, trustworthiness, and drive? Which one do you think is the most important and the hardest to get at? The trustworthiness is an interesting one. Are you ride or die kind of thing?
That’s a good line. Well, can you just linger on one of the three that seem interesting to you in terms of excellence, trustworthiness, and drive? Which one do you think is the most important and the hardest to get at? The trustworthiness is an interesting one. Are you ride or die kind of thing?
Walter Isaacson
Yeah, I think that especially when it came to taking over Twitter, he thought half the people there were disloyal, and he was wrong. About 2/3 were disloyal, not just half. It was how do we weeded out those? He did something and made the Firing Squad, I call it, or the Musketeers I think is my nickname for them, which is the young cousins and two or three other people, he made them look at the Slack messages everybody at Twitter had posted, and they went through hundreds of Slack messages. So if anybody posted on the internal slack, ” That jerk Elon Musk is going to take over and I’m afraid that he’s a maniac or something,” they would be on the list because they want all-in loyal. They did not look at private Slack messages.
Yeah, I think that especially when it came to taking over Twitter, he thought half the people there were disloyal, and he was wrong. About 2/3 were disloyal, not just half. It was how do we weeded out those? He did something and made the Firing Squad, I call it, or the Musketeers I think is my nickname for them, which is the young cousins and two or three other people, he made them look at the Slack messages everybody at Twitter had posted, and they went through hundreds of Slack messages. So if anybody posted on the internal slack, ” That jerk Elon Musk is going to take over and I’m afraid that he’s a maniac or something,” they would be on the list because they want all-in loyal. They did not look at private Slack messages.
I guess people who are posting on a corporate Slack board should be aware that your company can look at them. But that’s more than I would’ve done or most people would’ve done, and so that was to figure out who’s deeply committed and loyal. I think that was mainly the case at Twitter. He doesn’t sitting around at SpaceX saying, “Who’s loyal to me? At other places, it’s excellence, but that’s pretty well a given. Everybody is like a Mark Juncosa just whip smart. Its, “Are you hardcore and all in?” Especially if you’re going to have to move to this spit of a town in the south tip of Texas called Boca Chica, you got to be all in.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and that’s the drive, the last piece. So you, in terms of collaborating, one of the great teams of all time, Ben Franklin, I like that. I thought it was The Beatles, but Ben Franklin is pretty good.
Yeah, and that’s the drive, the last piece. So you, in terms of collaborating, one of the great teams of all time, Ben Franklin, I like that. I thought it was The Beatles, but Ben Franklin is pretty good.
Walter Isaacson
Oh, no, no, no.
Oh, no, no, no.
Lex Fridman
I’m sorry.
I’m sorry.
Walter Isaacson
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Sorry to offend you so [inaudible 01:16:48]
Sorry to offend you so [inaudible 01:16:48]
Walter Isaacson
Read the Constitution and read Abbey Road, look at Abbey Road, they’re both good, but they’re in a different league.
Read the Constitution and read Abbey Road, look at Abbey Road, they’re both good, but they’re in a different league.
Time management
Lex Fridman
Yeah, a different league. Okay. So one of the many things that comes to mind with Ben Franklin is incredible time management. Is there’s something you could say about Ben Franklin and about Steve Jobs? I think interesting with Elon is that he, as you write, runs six companies, seven, it depends how you count with Starlink ’cause its own thing. I don’t know. What can you say about these people in terms of time management?
Yeah, a different league. Okay. So one of the many things that comes to mind with Ben Franklin is incredible time management. Is there’s something you could say about Ben Franklin and about Steve Jobs? I think interesting with Elon is that he, as you write, runs six companies, seven, it depends how you count with Starlink ’cause its own thing. I don’t know. What can you say about these people in terms of time management?
Walter Isaacson
Well, Musk is in a league of his own in the way he does it. First of all, Steve Jobs had to run Pixar and Apple for a while, but Musk every couple of hours is switching his mindset from how to implant the Neuralink chip and what will the robot that implants it in the brain look like and how fast can we make it move? Then the heat shield on the Raptor or switching to human imitation, machine learning, full self-drive. On the night that the Twitter board agreed to the deal, this is huge around the world. I’m sure you remember like, “Musk buys Twitter.” It wasn’t when the deal closed, it was when Twitter accepted his offer. I thought, “Okay,” but then he went to Boca Chica, to South Texas and spent time fixating on, if I remember correctly, a valve in the Raptor engine that had a methane leak issue and what were the possible ways to fix it. All the engineers in that room, I assume, or thinking about, “This guy just bought Twitter, should we say something?”
Well, Musk is in a league of his own in the way he does it. First of all, Steve Jobs had to run Pixar and Apple for a while, but Musk every couple of hours is switching his mindset from how to implant the Neuralink chip and what will the robot that implants it in the brain look like and how fast can we make it move? Then the heat shield on the Raptor or switching to human imitation, machine learning, full self-drive. On the night that the Twitter board agreed to the deal, this is huge around the world. I’m sure you remember like, “Musk buys Twitter.” It wasn’t when the deal closed, it was when Twitter accepted his offer. I thought, “Okay,” but then he went to Boca Chica, to South Texas and spent time fixating on, if I remember correctly, a valve in the Raptor engine that had a methane leak issue and what were the possible ways to fix it. All the engineers in that room, I assume, or thinking about, “This guy just bought Twitter, should we say something?”
Then he goes with Kimball to a roadside joint in Brownsville and just sits in the front and listens to music with nobody noticing really him being there. One of his strengths and sort of weaknesses in a way is in a given day, he’ll focus serially, sequentially, on many different things. He will worry about uploading video on to X.com or the payment system and then immediately switch over to some issue with the FAA giving a permit for Starship or with how to deal with Starlink and the CIA. When he’s focused on any of these things, you cannot distract him.
It’s not like he’s also thinking about, “I’m dealing with Starlink, but I’ve got to also worry about the Tesla decision on the new $25,000 car.” Now, he’ll in between these sessions, process information, then let off steam. For better or worse, he lets off steam by either playing a friend in Polyopia or fire off some tweets, which is often not a healthy thing, but it’s a release for him. I once said he was a great multitasker and that was a mistake, people corrected me. He’s a serial tasker, which means focuses intensely on a task for an hour, almost has a, what do they call it at restaurants where they give you a-
Lex Fridman
Pallet cleanser.
Pallet cleanser.
Walter Isaacson
… pallet cleanser? He does some pallet cleanser with Polytopia and then focuses on the next task.
… pallet cleanser? He does some pallet cleanser with Polytopia and then focuses on the next task.
Lex Fridman
Is there some wisdom about time management that you can draw from that?
Is there some wisdom about time management that you can draw from that?
Walter Isaacson
There’s some things that these people do and you say, “Okay, I can be that way. I can be more curious. I can question every rule and regulation.” I just don’t think anybody should try to emulate Musk’s time management style because it takes a certain set of teams who know how to deal with everything else other than the thing he’s focusing on and a certain mind that can shift just like his moods can shift. You and I go through transitions, and also if I’m thinking about what I’m going to say on this podcast, I’m also thinking about the email my daughter just sent about a house that she’s looking, and I’m multitasking. He doesn’t actually do that. He single tasks sequentially with a focus that’s hardcore.
There’s some things that these people do and you say, “Okay, I can be that way. I can be more curious. I can question every rule and regulation.” I just don’t think anybody should try to emulate Musk’s time management style because it takes a certain set of teams who know how to deal with everything else other than the thing he’s focusing on and a certain mind that can shift just like his moods can shift. You and I go through transitions, and also if I’m thinking about what I’m going to say on this podcast, I’m also thinking about the email my daughter just sent about a house that she’s looking, and I’m multitasking. He doesn’t actually do that. He single tasks sequentially with a focus that’s hardcore.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know. I think there’s wisdom to draw from that to first of all, he frankly, makes me feel that way, that there’s a lot of hours in the day. There’s a lot of minutes in the day. There’s no excuse not to get a lot done, and that requires just an extreme focus, an extreme focus and an urgency.
I don’t know. I think there’s wisdom to draw from that to first of all, he frankly, makes me feel that way, that there’s a lot of hours in the day. There’s a lot of minutes in the day. There’s no excuse not to get a lot done, and that requires just an extreme focus, an extreme focus and an urgency.
Walter Isaacson
I think the fierce urgency that drives him is important, and it’s sometimes genned up, like I say, the fierce urgency of getting to Mars. On a Friday night at the launchpad in Boca Chica at 10:00 PM there are only a few people working ’cause it’s a Friday night, they’re not supposed to launch for another eight months, and he orders a surge. He says, “I want 200 people here by tomorrow working on this pad. We have to have a fierce sense of urgency or we will never get to Mars.”
I think the fierce urgency that drives him is important, and it’s sometimes genned up, like I say, the fierce urgency of getting to Mars. On a Friday night at the launchpad in Boca Chica at 10:00 PM there are only a few people working ’cause it’s a Friday night, they’re not supposed to launch for another eight months, and he orders a surge. He says, “I want 200 people here by tomorrow working on this pad. We have to have a fierce sense of urgency or we will never get to Mars.”
Lex Fridman
That sense of urgency is also a vibrancy that’s really taking on life fully. To me, that’s the lesson is even the mundane can be full of this just richness, and you just have to really take it in intensely. So like the switching enables that kind of intensity ’cause most of us can’t hold that intensity in any one task for prolonged period of time. Maybe that’s also a lesson.
That sense of urgency is also a vibrancy that’s really taking on life fully. To me, that’s the lesson is even the mundane can be full of this just richness, and you just have to really take it in intensely. So like the switching enables that kind of intensity ’cause most of us can’t hold that intensity in any one task for prolonged period of time. Maybe that’s also a lesson.
Walter Isaacson
Right. I guess it goes back to also know who you are, meaning-
Right. I guess it goes back to also know who you are, meaning-
Lex Fridman
Know who you are.
Know who you are.
Walter Isaacson
… there are people who can focus intensely, and there are people who can see patterns across many things. Look, Leonardo da Vinci, he was not all that focused. He was easily distracted.
… there are people who can focus intensely, and there are people who can see patterns across many things. Look, Leonardo da Vinci, he was not all that focused. He was easily distracted.
Lex Fridman
Procrastinated.
Procrastinated.
Walter Isaacson
It’s why he has more unfinished paintings than finished paintings in his canon. But his ability to see patterns across nature and to, in some ways, process procrastinate, be distracted, that helped him some. But Musk is not that way, and every few months there’s a new surge. You don’t know where it’ll be, but you’ll be on solar roofs and all of a sudden, we’ll have a surge and there has to be 100 solar roofs built, or this has to be done by tomorrow or make a Starship dome by dawn and surge and do it. There are people who are built that way. It is inspiring, but also let’s appreciate that there are people who can be really good but also can savor the success, savor the moment, savor the quiet sometimes. Musk’s big failing is he can’t savor the moment or success, and that’s the flip side of hardcore intensity
It’s why he has more unfinished paintings than finished paintings in his canon. But his ability to see patterns across nature and to, in some ways, process procrastinate, be distracted, that helped him some. But Musk is not that way, and every few months there’s a new surge. You don’t know where it’ll be, but you’ll be on solar roofs and all of a sudden, we’ll have a surge and there has to be 100 solar roofs built, or this has to be done by tomorrow or make a Starship dome by dawn and surge and do it. There are people who are built that way. It is inspiring, but also let’s appreciate that there are people who can be really good but also can savor the success, savor the moment, savor the quiet sometimes. Musk’s big failing is he can’t savor the moment or success, and that’s the flip side of hardcore intensity
Groups vs individuals
Lex Fridman
In Innovators, another book of yours that I love, you write about individuals and about groups. So one of the questions the book addresses is, is it individuals or is it groups that turn the tides of history?
In Innovators, another book of yours that I love, you write about individuals and about groups. So one of the questions the book addresses is, is it individuals or is it groups that turn the tides of history?
Walter Isaacson
When Henry Kissinger was on the shuttle missions for the Middle East piece, this is the first book I ever wrote, he said, “When I was a professor at Harvard, I thought that history was determined by great forces and groups of people. But when I see it up close, I see what a difference an individual can make.” He’s talking about Sadat and Golda Meir or probably talking about himself too, or at least in his mind. We biographers have this dirty secret that we know. We distort history a bit by making the narrative too driven by an individual, but sometimes it is driven by an individual. Musk is a case like that. Sometimes, as I did with The Innovators, there’s teams and people who build on each other and Gordon Moore and Bob Noyce then getting Andy Grove and doing the microchip, which then comes out and Wozniak and Jobs find it at some electronic store and they decide to build the Apple. So sometimes they are flows of forces and groups of people.
When Henry Kissinger was on the shuttle missions for the Middle East piece, this is the first book I ever wrote, he said, “When I was a professor at Harvard, I thought that history was determined by great forces and groups of people. But when I see it up close, I see what a difference an individual can make.” He’s talking about Sadat and Golda Meir or probably talking about himself too, or at least in his mind. We biographers have this dirty secret that we know. We distort history a bit by making the narrative too driven by an individual, but sometimes it is driven by an individual. Musk is a case like that. Sometimes, as I did with The Innovators, there’s teams and people who build on each other and Gordon Moore and Bob Noyce then getting Andy Grove and doing the microchip, which then comes out and Wozniak and Jobs find it at some electronic store and they decide to build the Apple. So sometimes they are flows of forces and groups of people.
I guess I err a little bit on the side of looking at what a Steve Jobs and Elon Musk and Albert Einstein can do. I also try to figure out if they hadn’t been around, would the forces of history and the groups of people have done it without them? That’s a good historical question, as somebody who loves history. You think about special relativity, one of the 1905 papers. Even after he writes it, it’s four years before people truly get what he’s saying, which is, “It’s not just how you observe time is relative, it’s time itself is relative.” On the general theory, which he does a decade later, I’m not sure we would gotten that yet. What about moving us into the era of an iPhone and which it’s so beautiful that you can’t live without 1,000 songs in your pocket, email and the internet in your pocket and a phone? There are a lot of brain-dead people from Panasonic to Motorola who didn’t get that, and it may have been a while.
I certainly think it’s true of the era of electric vehicles. Jim and Ford, all the great people there, they crushed the Bolt, and I mean that literally. They ended up smashing them because they decided to discontinue it. Likewise, nobody was sending up rockets. Our space shuttle was about to be grounded 12 years ago. So Musk does things, and there’ll be people who say and read the book… Well, if they read the book, they’ll see the full story, but they’ll say, “It wasn’t Musk who did Tesla, it was Martin Eberherd or Marc Tarpenning.” No, no. There were people who had helped create the shells of companies and other things, and they were all deserved to be called co-founders. But the guy who actually gets us to a million electric vehicles a year is Elon Musk, and without him, I don’t think we… Look, if anybody five years from now buys a car that’s gasoline powered, we’ll think, “That’s quaint. That’s odd.” Suddenly, we’ve changed. We’re not going to do it. 90% of that is Elon Musk.
Mortality
Lex Fridman
We’re all mortal. When and how do you think Elon will retire from the insanely productive schedule he’s on now?
We’re all mortal. When and how do you think Elon will retire from the insanely productive schedule he’s on now?
Walter Isaacson
I would think that he would hate to retire. I think that he can’t live without the pressure, the drama, the all-in feeling. It’s never been anything that seemed to have crossed his mind. He’s never said, “Maybe I love Larry Ellison’s house on the beach in Hawaii. Maybe I should spend time in doing.” Instead, he says things like, “I learned early on that vacations will kill you.” He goes on vacation at one point, and they oust him from PayPal. Then he goes to Africa at one point, he gets malaria. He says, “I’ve learned vacations kill you.”
I would think that he would hate to retire. I think that he can’t live without the pressure, the drama, the all-in feeling. It’s never been anything that seemed to have crossed his mind. He’s never said, “Maybe I love Larry Ellison’s house on the beach in Hawaii. Maybe I should spend time in doing.” Instead, he says things like, “I learned early on that vacations will kill you.” He goes on vacation at one point, and they oust him from PayPal. Then he goes to Africa at one point, he gets malaria. He says, “I’ve learned vacations kill you.”
Lex Fridman
Lesson learned. Well, it’s interesting because the projects are 100+ year projects, many of these.
Lesson learned. Well, it’s interesting because the projects are 100+ year projects, many of these.
Walter Isaacson
One of the weird things is watching him think incredibly long term. One of the meetings every week early on when I was watching him was Mars colonizer. We did through a two-hour meeting about what would the governance structure be on Mars? What would people wear? How would the robots work and would there be democracy or should there be a different form of governance? I’m sitting there saying, ” What are they doing? What are they talking about? They’re trying to build rocket ships and everything else. They are worrying about the governance structure of Mars?” Likewise, whenever he’s in a tense moment, like there’s a rocket’s about to be launched, he’ll start asking people about something in the way future, like the new elite engine or something.
One of the weird things is watching him think incredibly long term. One of the meetings every week early on when I was watching him was Mars colonizer. We did through a two-hour meeting about what would the governance structure be on Mars? What would people wear? How would the robots work and would there be democracy or should there be a different form of governance? I’m sitting there saying, ” What are they doing? What are they talking about? They’re trying to build rocket ships and everything else. They are worrying about the governance structure of Mars?” Likewise, whenever he’s in a tense moment, like there’s a rocket’s about to be launched, he’ll start asking people about something in the way future, like the new elite engine or something.
“If we’re going to build that, do we have enough materials ready to order?” Or, I don’t know, he’ll just ask questions. Like when he’s building robo taxi, the global car, the $25,000 inexpensive global car, that’s not a total passion. He was talked into doing that. His passion is robotaxis, but his passion is how are we going to make this factory to do a million cars a year? So even the robotaxi is a longer range vision. He’s been touting it since 2016, but there are no robotaxis. Waymo may be doing a little experiment on it, but there’s not cars being manufactured without steering wheels that are going to take over the highways yet. So he’s always looking way into the future is my point.
Lex Fridman
I just hope that there’s a lot of da Vincis and Steve Jobs and Einsteins and Elon Musks that carry the flame forward.
I just hope that there’s a lot of da Vincis and Steve Jobs and Einsteins and Elon Musks that carry the flame forward.
Walter Isaacson
That’s one of the reasons you write books about these people is so that if you’re a young woman in a school where you’re not being told to do science and you read The Code Breaker about Jennifer Doudna, you say, “Okay, I can be that.” When you say, “Oh, maybe I’ll be a regulator,” or you say, “Oh, no, maybe I’ll be the person who pushes the boundaries, who pushes the lines, who pushes as Steve Jobs said, the human race.”
That’s one of the reasons you write books about these people is so that if you’re a young woman in a school where you’re not being told to do science and you read The Code Breaker about Jennifer Doudna, you say, “Okay, I can be that.” When you say, “Oh, maybe I’ll be a regulator,” or you say, “Oh, no, maybe I’ll be the person who pushes the boundaries, who pushes the lines, who pushes as Steve Jobs said, the human race.”
How to write
Lex Fridman
Well, let me ask you about your mind, your genius, your process?
Well, let me ask you about your mind, your genius, your process?
Walter Isaacson
I’ll give you two out of three.
I’ll give you two out of three.
Lex Fridman
All right. Take me through your process of writing a biography, the full of it. Not just writing a biography, but understanding deeply, which your books have done for the human story and the bigger ideas underlying the human story. So you’ve written biographies both of individuals, which are hardly individuals, it’s a really big complex picture and biographies of ideas that involve individuals.
All right. Take me through your process of writing a biography, the full of it. Not just writing a biography, but understanding deeply, which your books have done for the human story and the bigger ideas underlying the human story. So you’ve written biographies both of individuals, which are hardly individuals, it’s a really big complex picture and biographies of ideas that involve individuals.
Walter Isaacson
Well, step one for me is trying to figure out how the mind works. What causes Einstein to make that leap, for Elon Musk to say stainless steel while he’s looking at a carbon fiber rocket? Or how do you make the mental leap? Because I write about smart people, smart people are a dime a dozen. They don’t usually amount to much. You have to be creative, imaginative, to think different, as Jobs would say. So what makes people creative? What makes them take imaginative leaps? That’s the key question you got to ask. You also ask the questions like you’ve asked earlier, which is, what demons are dangling in their head, and how do they harness them into drives? So you look at all that, and you try to observe really carefully the person.
Well, step one for me is trying to figure out how the mind works. What causes Einstein to make that leap, for Elon Musk to say stainless steel while he’s looking at a carbon fiber rocket? Or how do you make the mental leap? Because I write about smart people, smart people are a dime a dozen. They don’t usually amount to much. You have to be creative, imaginative, to think different, as Jobs would say. So what makes people creative? What makes them take imaginative leaps? That’s the key question you got to ask. You also ask the questions like you’ve asked earlier, which is, what demons are dangling in their head, and how do they harness them into drives? So you look at all that, and you try to observe really carefully the person.
One of the more mundane things I do is a lot of writers try to give you a lot of their opinions and preach or whatever. As this mentor said two people types come out, preachers, storytellers, to be a storyteller. I try, whenever I’m trying to convey a thought, there’s six magic words that I almost should have written on a card pinned above my desk, which is, “Let me tell you a story.” So if somebody says, “How does Elon Musk figure out good talent?” As you did, I think, “Well, let me tell you the story. I’ll tell you the story of Jake McKenzie,” or this is not something I invented.
This is way the good Lord does it in the Bible, has the best opening lead sentence ever, “In the beginning,” comma, and then it’s stories. Secondly, to pick up on that lead sentence, “In the beginning,” make it chronological. Everybody in the 40th year of their life has grown from the 39th year and the 38th year, and so you want to show how people evolve and grow. I had the greatest of all nonfiction narrative editors, Alice Mayhew at Simon Schuster, who among other things, created All the President’s Men with Woodward and Bernstein. But she had a note she’d put in the margins of my books, that was a tickta, and it meant, “All things in good time. Keep it chronological. If it’s good enough for the Bible, it’s good enough for you.”
Lex Fridman
Interesting. To me, that’s a small note, but to you it’s extremely important.
Interesting. To me, that’s a small note, but to you it’s extremely important.
Walter Isaacson
Because it’s the framework for how you structure things, but also how you understand things, which is if you keep it a chronological narrative, then you’re showing how a person has grown from one experience you’ve talked about to the next one. That moral growth, creative growth, risk-taking, growth, wisdom, that’s the essences of creativity, but you can’t do it… There’s a term buildings woman, which is a book that carries a narrative and tells how people learn something. I’m a big believer in narrative. If you-
Because it’s the framework for how you structure things, but also how you understand things, which is if you keep it a chronological narrative, then you’re showing how a person has grown from one experience you’ve talked about to the next one. That moral growth, creative growth, risk-taking, growth, wisdom, that’s the essences of creativity, but you can’t do it… There’s a term buildings woman, which is a book that carries a narrative and tells how people learn something. I’m a big believer in narrative. If you-
Walter Isaacson
People learn something. I’m a big believer in narrative. If you are an academic, you sometimes, not today, but in like 20 years ago, 30 years ago, there were two things you thought were bad. One was having a great person theory of history in which you decided to do biography. I had a great professor when I was in college. Her name was Doris Kerns. She later married Dick Goodwin and when she was going for tenure at the university, wrote a biography of Lyndon Johnson & the American Dream, and they denied her tenure because it was beneath the dignity of the academy to write history through one person.
People learn something. I’m a big believer in narrative. If you are an academic, you sometimes, not today, but in like 20 years ago, 30 years ago, there were two things you thought were bad. One was having a great person theory of history in which you decided to do biography. I had a great professor when I was in college. Her name was Doris Kerns. She later married Dick Goodwin and when she was going for tenure at the university, wrote a biography of Lyndon Johnson & the American Dream, and they denied her tenure because it was beneath the dignity of the academy to write history through one person.
That’s great. It opened up the field of biography to us non-academics, starting with David McCullough, Bob Caro, but maybe John Meacham and myself are in a new generation, and certainly there’s a generation coming after us. But the second thing besides telling it through people, which is the academy tended to disdain what they called imposing a narrative in which you made it storytelling because that meant you were leaving things out and making it into a narrative. Well, that’s how we form our views of the world.
Lex Fridman
Well, let me ask you this question. In terms of gathering and understanding, how much of it is one observing and how much of it is interviews?
Well, let me ask you this question. In terms of gathering and understanding, how much of it is one observing and how much of it is interviews?
Walter Isaacson
Yeah, and obviously depends on the subject. With a Ben Franklin, it’s all based on archives and every, of course, we have 40 volumes of letters he wrote. That was the good old days when every day you’d write 20 letters. The Musk book is based much more on observation than almost any of my books, because he opened up in a way that was breathtaking to me. Even when he would be sitting blank polytopia or seething at other people, he’d have me just sitting there watching. I spent a lot of time with Jennifer Doudner at her side. I went to her lab and edited a human gene and with a pipette and a test tube.
Yeah, and obviously depends on the subject. With a Ben Franklin, it’s all based on archives and every, of course, we have 40 volumes of letters he wrote. That was the good old days when every day you’d write 20 letters. The Musk book is based much more on observation than almost any of my books, because he opened up in a way that was breathtaking to me. Even when he would be sitting blank polytopia or seething at other people, he’d have me just sitting there watching. I spent a lot of time with Jennifer Doudner at her side. I went to her lab and edited a human gene and with a pipette and a test tube.
But I would say I spent 30 hours with her. I can count a hundred hours or more just observing Musk. And I’m not sure that any biographer, perhaps since Boswell took on Dr. Johnson has ever had quite as much up close meaning five feet away at all times access and because of that I’ll go back to what I said a moment ago. I try to get out of the way of the story. It’s not about me, it’s not about… I try to just say, “Okay, here’s what happened. Here’s this story. Here’s what happened the night he came in to Twitter for the first time,” and let you form your own judgment.
Lex Fridman
What about the interviews? You’ve had a lot of conversations. You give acknowledgement to the people you’ve done interviews with. Well, one, I have to ask as an aspiring interviewer myself, how?
What about the interviews? You’ve had a lot of conversations. You give acknowledgement to the people you’ve done interviews with. Well, one, I have to ask as an aspiring interviewer myself, how?
Walter Isaacson
People love to talk. People just love, you know that. And I’ve had 140, maybe 150 people, they’re all listed in the back. One of the little things that people won’t notice, but I’ll say it now, is all of them are on the record. Getting them to talk is easy. They all want to talk about Musk, but then at a certain point say, I don’t put anonymous quotes in my book, I cite things. I say if you’re tough enough and you’ve gone through this, and a lot of times it takes two or three calls back, somebody will tell me a story say, oh, no, no, no, I don’t [inaudible 01:40:11]. But I think it’s important to know where everything came from. And with Musk it’s, I had that from the very beginning because I was a Time Magazine reporter. I’d worked reporter for the Times Picayune or New Orleans.
People love to talk. People just love, you know that. And I’ve had 140, maybe 150 people, they’re all listed in the back. One of the little things that people won’t notice, but I’ll say it now, is all of them are on the record. Getting them to talk is easy. They all want to talk about Musk, but then at a certain point say, I don’t put anonymous quotes in my book, I cite things. I say if you’re tough enough and you’ve gone through this, and a lot of times it takes two or three calls back, somebody will tell me a story say, oh, no, no, no, I don’t [inaudible 01:40:11]. But I think it’s important to know where everything came from. And with Musk it’s, I had that from the very beginning because I was a Time Magazine reporter. I’d worked reporter for the Times Picayune or New Orleans.
First day on the job, I had to go cover a murder. And I phoned in the story from a payphone and my editor, the city editor, said, “Well, did you talk to the family?” I went, “No, Billy, I mean the family, the daughter just got…” He said, go knock on the door. I knocked on the door. An hour later, they were still talking. They were bringing out her yearbooks. Lesson one, I learned people want to talk if you’re willing to just listen, and whether it be Henry Kissinger, you just push the button and say Kissinger, and people tell you the stories all the way through Elon Musk, everybody talked, everybody in his family, everybody he fired, everybody. I think it’s important to listen to people. And the other thing I learned as a reporter, back when I was covering politics in New Hampshire in the early campaigns, I learned from two or three great reporters, a guy named David Broder and Tim Russert, the late NBC guy.
They do what was called door knocking. You just walk in a neighborhood, knock on a door and asked people about the election. But they said here’s the secret. Don’t ask any leading questions. Don’t have any premise. Just say, “Hey, I’m trying to figure out this election. What’s going on? What do you think?” And then stay silent. With Musk a third secret, you know this well, he’ll go silent at times, sometimes a minute, two minutes, four minutes. Don’t try to fill the silences. If you’re a listener, you got to learn, okay, he’s not said anything for four minutes. I can outlast him.
Lex Fridman
It’s tough, as humans it’s very tough. Respecting the silence is really, really difficult. Speaking of demons, when there’s silence, all the demons show up in my head.
It’s tough, as humans it’s very tough. Respecting the silence is really, really difficult. Speaking of demons, when there’s silence, all the demons show up in my head.
Walter Isaacson
Oh dear.
Oh dear.
Lex Fridman
The fear I think is if I don’t say anything is boring, and if I say something, it’s going to be stupid. And that the basic engine that just keeps running, not on the podcast, well on the podcast, but also in human interaction. And so I think there’s that nervous energy when interacting with people.
The fear I think is if I don’t say anything is boring, and if I say something, it’s going to be stupid. And that the basic engine that just keeps running, not on the podcast, well on the podcast, but also in human interaction. And so I think there’s that nervous energy when interacting with people.
Walter Isaacson
You can never go wrong by staying silent if there’s nothing you have to say. Not something I’ve mastered, but I do when I’m a reporter, try to master that, which is don’t ask complex questions, don’t interject and when somebody hasn’t fully answered the question, don’t say, well, let me, you know I haven’t fully… You just stay silent. And then they’ll keep talking.
You can never go wrong by staying silent if there’s nothing you have to say. Not something I’ve mastered, but I do when I’m a reporter, try to master that, which is don’t ask complex questions, don’t interject and when somebody hasn’t fully answered the question, don’t say, well, let me, you know I haven’t fully… You just stay silent. And then they’ll keep talking.
Lex Fridman
Just give them a chance to keep talking, even if they’ve kind of finished, you still.
Just give them a chance to keep talking, even if they’ve kind of finished, you still.
Walter Isaacson
Yeah. Sometimes if they haven’t given you enough, instead of following up, I’ll just nod and keep waiting.
Yeah. Sometimes if they haven’t given you enough, instead of following up, I’ll just nod and keep waiting.
Lex Fridman
You’re making it sound simple. Is there a secret to getting people to open up more?
You’re making it sound simple. Is there a secret to getting people to open up more?
Walter Isaacson
I’m somewhat lucky because I started off working for a daily newspaper and people back then they wanted to talk to the newspaper reporter.
I’m somewhat lucky because I started off working for a daily newspaper and people back then they wanted to talk to the newspaper reporter.
Lex Fridman
But you also have a way about you. I feel like you have a cowboy in a saloon. You just kind of want to talk. Like there’s a draw to, I don’t know what it is. I don’t know if it’s developed or you’re born with it, but it feels like I want to tell you a story of some sort.
But you also have a way about you. I feel like you have a cowboy in a saloon. You just kind of want to talk. Like there’s a draw to, I don’t know what it is. I don’t know if it’s developed or you’re born with it, but it feels like I want to tell you a story of some sort.
Walter Isaacson
Good, tell me a story. A couple things. I did learn to be more quiet. I’m sure I know when I was younger or even I’ll see videos of me at news things where I’m always trying to interject a question and so you learn to be quieter sometimes. I haven’t mastered it. I haven’t learned it enough. You learn to be naturally curious. Many reporters today when they ask a question or either trying to play gotcha or trying to get a news scoop or trying to gig something that can make a lead. And if you actually are curious and you really want to know the answer to a question, then people can tell that you asked it because you want the answer, not because you’re playing a game with them.
Good, tell me a story. A couple things. I did learn to be more quiet. I’m sure I know when I was younger or even I’ll see videos of me at news things where I’m always trying to interject a question and so you learn to be quieter sometimes. I haven’t mastered it. I haven’t learned it enough. You learn to be naturally curious. Many reporters today when they ask a question or either trying to play gotcha or trying to get a news scoop or trying to gig something that can make a lead. And if you actually are curious and you really want to know the answer to a question, then people can tell that you asked it because you want the answer, not because you’re playing a game with them.
Lex Fridman
I’m sure some of them off the record, some of them on the record, you had maybe just some incredible conversations. I was going to say some of the greatest conversations ever, but who knows? Some of the best conversations ever are probably somewhere in South America between two drunk people that we never get to hear. So I don’t know, but is there advice you can give from what you’ve learned to somebody like me on how to have good conversation, especially when it’s recorded?
I’m sure some of them off the record, some of them on the record, you had maybe just some incredible conversations. I was going to say some of the greatest conversations ever, but who knows? Some of the best conversations ever are probably somewhere in South America between two drunk people that we never get to hear. So I don’t know, but is there advice you can give from what you’ve learned to somebody like me on how to have good conversation, especially when it’s recorded?
Walter Isaacson
Well, to be actually curious. Every question you’ve asked me is because I think you actually want to know the answer, and you’ve done your homework to be open and not to have an agenda. We all suffer from there being too many agendas in the world today.
Well, to be actually curious. Every question you’ve asked me is because I think you actually want to know the answer, and you’ve done your homework to be open and not to have an agenda. We all suffer from there being too many agendas in the world today.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. So that’s just genuine curiosity. But there’s something when you talk about just one-on-one interaction, whether it’s Elon or Steve Jobs or there’s something beautiful about that person’s mind, and it feels like it’s possible to reveal that, to discover that together efficiently and that’s kind of the goal of a conversation.
Yeah. So that’s just genuine curiosity. But there’s something when you talk about just one-on-one interaction, whether it’s Elon or Steve Jobs or there’s something beautiful about that person’s mind, and it feels like it’s possible to reveal that, to discover that together efficiently and that’s kind of the goal of a conversation.
Walter Isaacson
Well, look, you are amongst the top podcasters and interviewers in the world today. You have an earnestness to you. Ben Franklin is the person who taught me by reading him the most about on conversation. He wrote a wonderful essay on that. It includes on silence, but it includes trying to ask sincere questions rather than get a point across. It’s somewhat Socratic, but whenever he wondered or wanted to start a Fireman’s Corps in Philadelphia, he would go to his group that he called the Leather Apron Club, and they would pose a question, why don’t we have it? What would it take? What would be good? And then the second part is to make sure that you listen. And if somebody has even just the germ of an idea, give them credit for it. As Joe said, the real problem is this. And I do think that if I’m in situations and I just mean even at dinner or something, I’m with somebody, I’m usually curious and the conversation will proceed with questions.
Well, look, you are amongst the top podcasters and interviewers in the world today. You have an earnestness to you. Ben Franklin is the person who taught me by reading him the most about on conversation. He wrote a wonderful essay on that. It includes on silence, but it includes trying to ask sincere questions rather than get a point across. It’s somewhat Socratic, but whenever he wondered or wanted to start a Fireman’s Corps in Philadelphia, he would go to his group that he called the Leather Apron Club, and they would pose a question, why don’t we have it? What would it take? What would be good? And then the second part is to make sure that you listen. And if somebody has even just the germ of an idea, give them credit for it. As Joe said, the real problem is this. And I do think that if I’m in situations and I just mean even at dinner or something, I’m with somebody, I’m usually curious and the conversation will proceed with questions.
And I guess it’s also because I’m pretty interested in what anybody’s doing, whoever I happen to be with. And so that’s a talent you have, which is, you’re pretty genuine in your interests. There are people like Benjamin Franklin, like the, I’ll say Charlie Rose, even though he’s in disfavor who are interested in huge number of subjects, and I think that helps as well to be interested in basketball and opera and physics and metaphysics. That was a Ben Franklin. That was a Leonardo trick, which is they wanted to know everything you could possibly know about every subject knowable.
Lex Fridman
But there’s a different aspect of this, which is that I would love to hear how you’ve solved it or if you’ve faced it, that you’re certainly disarming. See, I’m like peppering you with compliments here, trying to get you to open-
But there’s a different aspect of this, which is that I would love to hear how you’ve solved it or if you’ve faced it, that you’re certainly disarming. See, I’m like peppering you with compliments here, trying to get you to open-
Walter Isaacson
That’s a very disarming method.
That’s a very disarming method.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I’ve recently talked to Benjamin Netanyahu, we’ll talk again. We unfortunately, because of scheduling and complexities only had one hour, which is very difficult, very difficult with the charismatic politician.
Yeah. I’ve recently talked to Benjamin Netanyahu, we’ll talk again. We unfortunately, because of scheduling and complexities only had one hour, which is very difficult, very difficult with the charismatic politician.
Walter Isaacson
He’s the prime minister.
He’s the prime minister.
Lex Fridman
I understand this, but he’s also a charismatic talker, which is very difficult to break through in one hour. But there, people have built up walls, whether it’s because of demons or because of they’re politicians, and so they have agendas and narratives and so on. And so to break through those, I wonder if there’s some advice, some wisdom you’ve learned on how to wear down through water or whatever method the walls that we’ve built up as individuals.
I understand this, but he’s also a charismatic talker, which is very difficult to break through in one hour. But there, people have built up walls, whether it’s because of demons or because of they’re politicians, and so they have agendas and narratives and so on. And so to break through those, I wonder if there’s some advice, some wisdom you’ve learned on how to wear down through water or whatever method the walls that we’ve built up as individuals.
Walter Isaacson
You call it disarming, which I don’t know that I am, but disarming basically means you’re taking down their shields also. And you know when people have a shield and you try to give them comfort. I had zero of that problem with Elon Musk. It was disarming to me, which is I kept waiting to say, okay, he’s not going to, they’ve got a shell or he won’t do that. But he was almost crazily open and did not seem to want to be spinning or hiding or faking things. And I’ve been lucky. Doudna was that way. Steve Jobs was that way. But you have to put in time too. In other words, you can’t say, okay, there’s a one-hour interview and I’m going to break down every wall. It’s like on your fifth visit.
You call it disarming, which I don’t know that I am, but disarming basically means you’re taking down their shields also. And you know when people have a shield and you try to give them comfort. I had zero of that problem with Elon Musk. It was disarming to me, which is I kept waiting to say, okay, he’s not going to, they’ve got a shell or he won’t do that. But he was almost crazily open and did not seem to want to be spinning or hiding or faking things. And I’ve been lucky. Doudna was that way. Steve Jobs was that way. But you have to put in time too. In other words, you can’t say, okay, there’s a one-hour interview and I’m going to break down every wall. It’s like on your fifth visit.
Lex Fridman
Yes. Well, actually, there’s one of the things that my situation, you learn, fifth visit is very nice, but sometimes you don’t get a fifth visit. Sometimes it’s just the first date. And I think what it boils down to, and we said disarming, but there’s something about this person that you trust. I think a lot of it just boils down to trust in some deep human way. I think with many other people I’ve spoken with, sometimes the trust happens after the interview, which is really sad because it’s like, oh man.
Yes. Well, actually, there’s one of the things that my situation, you learn, fifth visit is very nice, but sometimes you don’t get a fifth visit. Sometimes it’s just the first date. And I think what it boils down to, and we said disarming, but there’s something about this person that you trust. I think a lot of it just boils down to trust in some deep human way. I think with many other people I’ve spoken with, sometimes the trust happens after the interview, which is really sad because it’s like, oh man.
Walter Isaacson
I’ve never been in your situation where I have a show. I usually have-
I’ve never been in your situation where I have a show. I usually have-
Lex Fridman
Second-
Second-
Walter Isaacson
… mini cracks at the wheel. Yes, I’m not a first date person.
… mini cracks at the wheel. Yes, I’m not a first date person.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, Yeah. Yeah. Well, you know.
Yeah, Yeah. Yeah. Well, you know.
Walter Isaacson
But then I’m lucky. I say lucky, but I’m in print.
But then I’m lucky. I say lucky, but I’m in print.
Lex Fridman
I understand.
I understand.
Walter Isaacson
Print is a couple thousand year old medium, but there are those of us who love it.
Print is a couple thousand year old medium, but there are those of us who love it.
Lex Fridman
Well, the nature of the podcast medium is that I’m a one night stand kind of girl. Let me ask you about objectivity. You followed Elon and you follow Steve, like you’ve, I don’t even know if you would say your friend. You have to be careful with words like that, because there’s an intimacy and how do you remain objective. Do you want to remain objective while telling a deeply human story?
Well, the nature of the podcast medium is that I’m a one night stand kind of girl. Let me ask you about objectivity. You followed Elon and you follow Steve, like you’ve, I don’t even know if you would say your friend. You have to be careful with words like that, because there’s an intimacy and how do you remain objective. Do you want to remain objective while telling a deeply human story?
Walter Isaacson
Yeah, I want to be honest, which I think is akin to being objective. I try to keep in mind who am I writing for? I’m not writing for Elon Musk, as I say, I haven’t sent him the book. I don’t know if he, don’t think he’s read it yet. I’ve got one person I’m writing for, the open-minded reader. And if I can put in a story and say, well, that will piss off the subject, or that will really make the subject happy, that’s irrelevant, or I try to make that a minor consideration. It’s, will the reader have a better understanding because I’ve put this story in the book?
Yeah, I want to be honest, which I think is akin to being objective. I try to keep in mind who am I writing for? I’m not writing for Elon Musk, as I say, I haven’t sent him the book. I don’t know if he, don’t think he’s read it yet. I’ve got one person I’m writing for, the open-minded reader. And if I can put in a story and say, well, that will piss off the subject, or that will really make the subject happy, that’s irrelevant, or I try to make that a minor consideration. It’s, will the reader have a better understanding because I’ve put this story in the book?
Love & relationships
Lex Fridman
I’m a bit of a romantic. So to me, even your Einstein book had lessons on romance and relationships.
I’m a bit of a romantic. So to me, even your Einstein book had lessons on romance and relationships.
Walter Isaacson
Ooh, dear.
Ooh, dear.
Lex Fridman
So how important are romantic relationships to the success of great men, great women, great minds?
So how important are romantic relationships to the success of great men, great women, great minds?
Walter Isaacson
Well, sometimes people who affect the course of humanity have better relationships with humanity than they do with the humans sitting around them. Einstein had two interesting relationships with wives. Mileva, his first wife was a sounding board and helped with the mathematics of the special relativity paper in particular. But he didn’t treat her well. He made her sign a letter that she wouldn’t interrupt him. She wouldn’t… And finally, when she wanted a divorce, he couldn’t afford it because he was still a patent clerk. And so he offered her a deal, which is I think totally amazing. He said, one of these days one of those papers from 1905 is going to win the Nobel Prize. If we get a divorce, I’ll give you the money.
Well, sometimes people who affect the course of humanity have better relationships with humanity than they do with the humans sitting around them. Einstein had two interesting relationships with wives. Mileva, his first wife was a sounding board and helped with the mathematics of the special relativity paper in particular. But he didn’t treat her well. He made her sign a letter that she wouldn’t interrupt him. She wouldn’t… And finally, when she wanted a divorce, he couldn’t afford it because he was still a patent clerk. And so he offered her a deal, which is I think totally amazing. He said, one of these days one of those papers from 1905 is going to win the Nobel Prize. If we get a divorce, I’ll give you the money.
That was a lot of money back then, like a million dollars now or something. And she’s smart, she’s a scientist. She consults with a few other scientists, and after a week or so, she takes the bet. It’s not until what, 1919, that he wins his Nobel Prize and she gets all the money. She buys three apartment buildings in Zurich. With his second wife, Elsa, it was more a partnership of convenience. It was not a romantic love, but he knew, and that’s sometimes what people need in life is just a partner. Somebody who’s going to handle the stuff you’re not going to handle. So I guess if you look at my books, they’re not great inspiring guides to personal relationships.
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you about actually the process of writing itself. When you’ve observed, when you’ve listened, when you’ve collected all the information, what’s maybe even just the silly mundane question of what do you eat for breakfast before you start writing? When do you write?
Let me ask you about actually the process of writing itself. When you’ve observed, when you’ve listened, when you’ve collected all the information, what’s maybe even just the silly mundane question of what do you eat for breakfast before you start writing? When do you write?
Walter Isaacson
First of all, breakfast is not my favorite meal. And those people who tell you that you have to start with a hardy breakfast, I look askance.
First of all, breakfast is not my favorite meal. And those people who tell you that you have to start with a hardy breakfast, I look askance.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Walter Isaacson
And morning is not my favorite day part so I write at night and because I love narrative, it’s easy to structure a book, which is I can make a outline that if I printed it out or notes would be a hundred pages, but everything’s in order. In other words, if there’s a burning man and he’s coming back from grimes and then there’s a solar roof thing, and then there’s something, I put it all in order day by day as an outline. And that disciplines me when I’m starting to write to follow the mantra from Alice Mayhew, my first editor, which is all things in good time.
And morning is not my favorite day part so I write at night and because I love narrative, it’s easy to structure a book, which is I can make a outline that if I printed it out or notes would be a hundred pages, but everything’s in order. In other words, if there’s a burning man and he’s coming back from grimes and then there’s a solar roof thing, and then there’s something, I put it all in order day by day as an outline. And that disciplines me when I’m starting to write to follow the mantra from Alice Mayhew, my first editor, which is all things in good time.
Don’t get ahead of the story, don’t have to flash back. And then after you get it so that it’s all chronological and those things, then you have to do some clustering. You have to say, okay, we’re going to do the decision to do Starship or to build a factory in Texas or to whatever. And then you sometimes have the organizational problem of, yeah, and that gets us all the way up to here. Do I keep that in that chapter or do I wait until later when it’s better chronologically? But those are easy.
Lex Fridman
Well, what about the actual process of telling the story?
Well, what about the actual process of telling the story?
Walter Isaacson
Well, that’s the mantra I mentioned earlier, which is whenever I get pause or I don’t know how to say something, I just say, let me tell you a story. And then I find the actual anecdote, the story, the tale that encompasses what I’m trying to convey. And then I don’t say what I’m trying to convey. I don’t have a transition sentence that says Elon sometimes changes his mind so often he couldn’t remember whether he had changed his mind. You don’t need transition sentences. You just say, all right, here’s the point I need to make next and so you start with a sentence that says, one day in January in the factory in Texas comma.
Well, that’s the mantra I mentioned earlier, which is whenever I get pause or I don’t know how to say something, I just say, let me tell you a story. And then I find the actual anecdote, the story, the tale that encompasses what I’m trying to convey. And then I don’t say what I’m trying to convey. I don’t have a transition sentence that says Elon sometimes changes his mind so often he couldn’t remember whether he had changed his mind. You don’t need transition sentences. You just say, all right, here’s the point I need to make next and so you start with a sentence that says, one day in January in the factory in Texas comma.
Advice for young people
Lex Fridman
Well, one of the things I’d love to ask you is for advice for young people. To me, first advice would be to read biographies in the sense because they help you understand of all the different ways you can live a life well lived. But from having written biographies, having studied so many great men and women, what advice could you give to people of how to live this life?
Well, one of the things I’d love to ask you is for advice for young people. To me, first advice would be to read biographies in the sense because they help you understand of all the different ways you can live a life well lived. But from having written biographies, having studied so many great men and women, what advice could you give to people of how to live this life?
Walter Isaacson
Well, I keep going back to the classics and Plato and Aristotle and Socrates, and I guess it’s Plato’s maxim but he may be quoting Socrates that the unexamined life is not worth living. And it gets back to the know thyself and other things, which is you don’t have to figure out what is the big meaning of it all, but you have to figure out why you’re doing what you’re doing and that requires something that I did not have enough of when I was young, which is self-awareness and examining every motive, everything I do.
Well, I keep going back to the classics and Plato and Aristotle and Socrates, and I guess it’s Plato’s maxim but he may be quoting Socrates that the unexamined life is not worth living. And it gets back to the know thyself and other things, which is you don’t have to figure out what is the big meaning of it all, but you have to figure out why you’re doing what you’re doing and that requires something that I did not have enough of when I was young, which is self-awareness and examining every motive, everything I do.
Lex Fridman
Where does the examination lead you? Is it to a shift in life trajectory?
Where does the examination lead you? Is it to a shift in life trajectory?
Walter Isaacson
It’s not for me sort of, all right, I’ve now decided having been a journalist, I’ll run a think tank or I’ll run a network or I’ll write a bio. It is actually something that’s more useful on an hourly basis. Why am I about to say that to somebody or why am I going to do this particular act? What’s my true motive here? And also in the broader sense to learn as I did after a couple of years at CNN, my examination of my life is that I’m not great at running complex organizations. I’m not great as a manager. Given the choice I’d rather somebody else have to manage me than me have to manage people.
It’s not for me sort of, all right, I’ve now decided having been a journalist, I’ll run a think tank or I’ll run a network or I’ll write a bio. It is actually something that’s more useful on an hourly basis. Why am I about to say that to somebody or why am I going to do this particular act? What’s my true motive here? And also in the broader sense to learn as I did after a couple of years at CNN, my examination of my life is that I’m not great at running complex organizations. I’m not great as a manager. Given the choice I’d rather somebody else have to manage me than me have to manage people.
But it took me a while to figure that out. And I was probably too ambitious when I was young and at Time Magazine, that was when I was green and well, that was when I was in my salad days and green in judgment, and it was like chasing the next level at Time Incorporated whatever it might be. And then one day I caught the brass ring and I became an editor and then the top editor. And after a while I realized that wasn’t really totally what I’m suited to be, especially when I got put in charge of CNN. All young people are almost by definition in their salad days and green in judgment. But you learn what’s motivating you and then you learn to ask, but is that really what I want? Should I be careful of what I’m wishing for?
Lex Fridman
One of the big examinations you can do is the fact that you and everybody dies one day. How much you Walter Isaacson think about death? Are you afraid of it?
One of the big examinations you can do is the fact that you and everybody dies one day. How much you Walter Isaacson think about death? Are you afraid of it?
Walter Isaacson
No, and I don’t think about it a lot, but I do think about Steve Jobs as, let me tell you a story, which is the wonderful Steve Jobs story of I think after he was diagnosed, but before it was public. And he gave both a Stanford talk, but other things in which he said, the fact that we are going to die gives you focus and gives you meaning. If you’re going to live… And Elon Musk has said that to me, which is a lot of the tech bros out in the Silicon Valley that looking for ways to live forever, I can think Musk says of nothing worse. We read the myth of Sisyphus and we know how bad it is to be condemned to eternal life. So there was in Ancient Greece, the person who walked behind the king and said, memento mori, remember you’re going to die. And it kept people from losing it a bit.
No, and I don’t think about it a lot, but I do think about Steve Jobs as, let me tell you a story, which is the wonderful Steve Jobs story of I think after he was diagnosed, but before it was public. And he gave both a Stanford talk, but other things in which he said, the fact that we are going to die gives you focus and gives you meaning. If you’re going to live… And Elon Musk has said that to me, which is a lot of the tech bros out in the Silicon Valley that looking for ways to live forever, I can think Musk says of nothing worse. We read the myth of Sisyphus and we know how bad it is to be condemned to eternal life. So there was in Ancient Greece, the person who walked behind the king and said, memento mori, remember you’re going to die. And it kept people from losing it a bit.
Lex Fridman
Do you think about legacy?
Do you think about legacy?
Walter Isaacson
The lucky thing about being a biographer is that you know what your legacy is. There’s going to be a shelf and it’ll be of interesting people and you’ll have inspired a 17 year old biology student somewhere to be the next great biochemist or somebody to start a company like Elon Musk. And what I think more about, I won’t say giving back, that’s such a trite thing. I moved back to New Orleans for a reason. First of all, the hurricane hit and after Katrina I was asked to be vice chair of the Recovery Authority and I realized everything I’ve got going for me, it all comes from this beautiful gem of a troubled city. The wonderful high school I went to, the wonderful streets where I learned to ride a bike and it’s got challenges. I’m never going to solve challenges at the grand global level, but I can go back home and say, part of my legacy is going to be, I tried to pay it back to my hometown even by teaching at Tulane, which I don’t do as a favor.
The lucky thing about being a biographer is that you know what your legacy is. There’s going to be a shelf and it’ll be of interesting people and you’ll have inspired a 17 year old biology student somewhere to be the next great biochemist or somebody to start a company like Elon Musk. And what I think more about, I won’t say giving back, that’s such a trite thing. I moved back to New Orleans for a reason. First of all, the hurricane hit and after Katrina I was asked to be vice chair of the Recovery Authority and I realized everything I’ve got going for me, it all comes from this beautiful gem of a troubled city. The wonderful high school I went to, the wonderful streets where I learned to ride a bike and it’s got challenges. I’m never going to solve challenges at the grand global level, but I can go back home and say, part of my legacy is going to be, I tried to pay it back to my hometown even by teaching at Tulane, which I don’t do as a favor.
I enjoy the hell out of it, but it’s like, all right, I’m part of a community. And I think we lose that in America because people who are lonely are lonely because they’re not part of a community. But I’ve got all my high school kids, they’re friends, they’re all still in New Orleans. I’ve got my family, but I also have Tulane, institutions in New Orleans that have been there forever. And if I can get involved in helping the school system in New Orleans, of helping the youth empowerment programs, of helping the innovation center at Tulane, I was even on the City Planning Commission, which worries about zoning ordinances for short- term rentals. Go figure.
But it was like no, immerse myself in my community because my community was just so awesomely good at allowing me to become who I became and has trouble year by year, hurricane by hurricane, making sure that each new generation can be creative and it’s a city of creativity from jazz to the food, to the architecture. So when I think of, I won’t say legacy, but what am I going to do to pay it forward, which is a lower level way of saying legacy, I pay it forward by going back to the place where I began and trying to know it for the first time. That was a ripoff of a T.S. Eliot line. I don’t want you to think I thought of that one.
Lex Fridman
Always cite your sources. I appreciate it.
Always cite your sources. I appreciate it.
Walter Isaacson
T.S. Eliot, if you ever need to figure it out, the four quartets, it’s that part at the end which is, “We shall not cease from exploration and the end of all of our exploring will be to return to the place where we started and know it for the first time. Through the unknown but half remembered gate.” It’s just beautiful. And that’s been an inspiration of what do you do in, I guess if it’s a Shakespeare play, you’d call it act five. Well, you go back to the place where you came and-
T.S. Eliot, if you ever need to figure it out, the four quartets, it’s that part at the end which is, “We shall not cease from exploration and the end of all of our exploring will be to return to the place where we started and know it for the first time. Through the unknown but half remembered gate.” It’s just beautiful. And that’s been an inspiration of what do you do in, I guess if it’s a Shakespeare play, you’d call it act five. Well, you go back to the place where you came and-
Lex Fridman
See for yourself.
See for yourself.
Walter Isaacson
… so you don’t sit there worrying about legacy, but you’ll sit there saying, how do I make sure that somebody else can have a magical trajectory starting in New Orleans?
… so you don’t sit there worrying about legacy, but you’ll sit there saying, how do I make sure that somebody else can have a magical trajectory starting in New Orleans?
Lex Fridman
Well, to me, you’re one of the greatest storytellers of all time. I’ve been a huge fan.
Well, to me, you’re one of the greatest storytellers of all time. I’ve been a huge fan.
Walter Isaacson
That’s definitely not true, but it’s so sweet of you. You see, you can be-
That’s definitely not true, but it’s so sweet of you. You see, you can be-
Lex Fridman
Brutally interrupting. From, I think probably Ben Franklin so far, I don’t know how many years, 15 years, Einstein, all the way through today has just been a huge fan of yours, and you’re one of the people that I thought surely would not lower themselves to appear and have a conversation with me, and it’s just a giant gift to me.
Brutally interrupting. From, I think probably Ben Franklin so far, I don’t know how many years, 15 years, Einstein, all the way through today has just been a huge fan of yours, and you’re one of the people that I thought surely would not lower themselves to appear and have a conversation with me, and it’s just a giant gift to me.
Walter Isaacson
Hey I flew into Austin for this because I am a big fan and especially a big fan because you take people seriously and you care.
Hey I flew into Austin for this because I am a big fan and especially a big fan because you take people seriously and you care.
Lex Fridman
Thank you a thousand times. Thank you for respecting me and for inspiring just millions of people with your stories. Again, an incredible storyteller, incredible human, and thank you for talking today.
Thank you a thousand times. Thank you for respecting me and for inspiring just millions of people with your stories. Again, an incredible storyteller, incredible human, and thank you for talking today.
Walter Isaacson
Thank you, Lex.
Thank you, Lex.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Walter Isaacson. To support this podcast please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Carl Young. “People will do anything, no matter how absurd, in order to avoid facing their own souls. One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Walter Isaacson. To support this podcast please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Carl Young. “People will do anything, no matter how absurd, in order to avoid facing their own souls. One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Neri Oxman: Biology, Art, and Science of Design & Engineering with Nature | Lex Fridman Podcast #394
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #394 with Neri Oxman.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
On a personal note, let me say that Neri has for a long time been a friend and someone who in my darker moments, has always been there with a note of kindness and support. I am forever grateful to her. She’s a brilliant and a beautiful human being. Oh, and she also brought me a present, War and Peace by Tolstoy and Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. It doesn’t get better than that. This is the Lex Friedman podcast to support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Neri Oxman. Let’s start with the universe. Do you ever think of the universe as a kind of machine that designs beautiful things at multiple scales?
And I’m using Ron Milo, who is an incredible professor from the Weizmann Institute who came up with this definition of Anthropo mass in 2020 when he identified that 2020 was the crossover year when anthropomass exceeded biomass on the planet. So all of the design goods that we have created and brought into the world now outweigh all of the biomass, including of course, all plastics and wearables, building cities, but also asphalt and concrete, all outweigh the scale of the biomass. And actually that was a moment. You know how in life there are moments that be a handful of moments that get you to course correct. And it was a Zoom conversation with Ron, and that was a moment for me when I realized that that imbalance, now we’ve superseded the biomass on the planet, here do we go from here?
And you’ve heard the expression more phones than bones and the anthropomass and the anthropocene and the technosphere sort of outweighing the biosphere. But now we are really trying to look at is there a way in which all things technosphere are designed as if they’re part of the biosphere? Meaning if you could today grow instead of build everything and anything, if you could grow an iPhone, if you could grow a car, what would that world look like? Where the touring test for, I call this material ecology approach, but this notion that everything material, everything that you design in the physical universe can be read and written to as or thought of or perceived of as nature grown.
That’s sort of the touring test for the company or at least that’s how I started. I thought, well grow everything. That’s sort of the slogan. Let’s grow everything. And if we grow everything, is there a world in which driving a car is better for nature than a world in which there are no cars? Is it possible that a world in which you build buildings in cities, that those buildings in cities actually augment and heal nature as opposed to their absence? Is there a world in which we now go back to that kind of synergy between nature and humans where you cannot separate between grown and made? And it doesn’t even matter.
And that’s sort of a world that I’m dreaming about. What does it mean for nature to have access to the cloud? The kind of bandwidth that we’re talking about, sort of think Neuralink for nature. Since the first computer, and you know this by heart probably better than I do, but we’re both MIT lifers. We today have computational power that is one trillion times the power that we had in those times. We have 26.5 trillion times the bandwidth and 11.5 quintillion times the memory, which is incredible. So humankind since the first computer has approached and accessed such incredible bandwidth, and we’re asking, what if nature had that bandwidth? So beyond genes and evolution, if there was a way to augment nature and allow it access to the world of bits, what does nature look like now? And can nature make decisions for herself as opposed to being guided and guarded and abused by humankind?
So in reducing that dimensional mismatch, we’re missing out on opportunities to create things made as if grown. But in the natural environment, we’re asking, can we provide nature with these extra dimensions? And again, I’m not sure what nature wants, but I’m curious as to what happens when you provide these tools to the natural environments. Obviously with responsibility, obviously with control, obviously with ethics and moral code, but is there a world in which nature can help fix itself using those tools?
That’s one thing that we’re trying to solve for is how to create a product that is materially, computationally, robotically, novel, and goes through all of these phases from the creation, from this carbon recycling technology to the product, to literally, how do you think about reinventing an industry that is focused on assembly and putting things together and using humans to do that? Can that happen just using robots and microbes? And that’s it.
And in each of the examples, although the material was different, sometimes we used fibers, sometimes we used silk with silkworms and honey with bees and or comb as the structural material, with vespers we used synthetically engineered bacteria to produce pigments, although the materials were different and the hero organisms were different, the philosophy was always the same. The approach was really an approach of computational templating. That templating allowed us to create templates for the natural environment where nature and technology could duet, could dance together to create these products.
So just a few examples with silk pavilion, we’ve had a couple of pavilions made of silk, and the second one, which was the bigger one, which ended up at the Museum of Modern Art with my friend, an incredible mentor, Paul Antonelli, that pavilion was six meter tall and it was produced by silkworms. And there we had different types of templates. There were physical templates that were basically just these water soluble meshes upon which the silkworms were spinning and then there were environmental templates, which was a robot basically applying variation of environmental conditions such as heat and light to guide the movement of the silkworm.
And then the computational templating is the way you guide the work of this. How many did you say? 17,000?
It’s a beautiful form of architecture, and it uses pretty much just two materials, two chemical compounds ceresin and fibrin. The ceresin is sort of the glue of the cocoon, the fibrin is the fiber based material of the cocoon and through fibers and glue. And that’s true for so many systems in nature, lots of fiber and glue. And that architecture allows them to metamorphosize. And in the process they vary the properties of that silk thread, so it’s stiffer or softer depending on where it is in the section of the cocoon. And so we were trying to emulate this robotically with a 3D printer that was six axis KUKA arm one of these baby KUKAs.
And we’re trying to emulate that process computationally and build something very large when one of my students now, a brilliant industrial engineer, roboticist on my team, Marcus said, “Well, we were just playing with those silkworms and enjoying their presence when we realized that if they’re placed on a desk or a horizontal surface, they will go about creating their cocoon only the cocoon would be flat because they’re constantly looking for a vertical post in order to use that post as an anchor to spin the cocoon. But in the absence of that post on surfaces that are less than 21 millimeters and flat they will spin flat patches and we said, “Aha, let’s work with them to produce this dome as a set of flat patches.”
And a silkworm mind you is quite an egocentric creature. And actually the furthest you go, you move forward in evolution by natural selection, the more egoism you find in creatures. So when you think about termites, their material sophistication is actually very primitive, but they have incredible ability to communicate and connect with each other. So if you think about entire all of nature, let’s say all of living systems as a matrix that runs across two axes one is material sophistication, which is terribly relevant for designers, and the other is communication. The termites ace on communication, but their material sophistication is crap.
It’s just saliva and feces and some soil particles that are built to create these incredible termite mounds, the scale that when compared to human skyscrapers transcend all of buildable scales, at least in terms of what we have today in architectural practice just relative to the size of the termite. But when you look at the silkworm, the silkworm has zero connection and communication across silkworms. They were not designed to connect and communicate with each other. They’re sort of a human design species because the domesticated silk moth creates the cocoon.
We then produce the silk of it and then it dies. So it has dysfunctional wings, it cannot fly. And that’s another problem that the sericulture industry has is, why did we in the first place, author this organism 4,000 years ago that is unable to fly and is just there to basically live to serve a human need, which is textiles? And so here we were fascinated by the computational kind of biology dimension of silkworms, but along the way… By the way, this is great. I never get to tell the full story. So great.
And I think one of the exciting moments for us is when we realized that these robotic platforms that were designed initially as templates actually inspired, if I may, a kind of a collaboration and cooperation between silkworms that are not a swarm based organism. They’re not like the bees and the termites. They don’t work together and they don’t have social orders amongst them, the queen and the drones, et cetera. They’re all the same in a way. And here, what was so exciting for us is that these computational and fabrication technologies enable the silkworm to sort of hop from the branch in ecology of worms to the branch in ecology of maybe human-like intelligence where they could connect and communicate by virtue of feeling or rubbing against each other in an area that was hotter or colder.
And so the product that we got at the end, the variation of density of fiber and the distribution of the fiber and the transparency, the product at the end seems like it was produced by a swarm silk community, but of course it wasn’t. It’s a bunch of biological agents working together to assemble this thing. That’s really, really fascinating to us. How can technology augment or enable a swarm like behavior and creatures that have not been designed to work as swarms?
By the way, the synthetic API was in a co-op nearby Somerville. We had robots. Our team schlepped there every day with our tools and machines and we made it happen. And the neighbors were very happy, and they got to get a ton of honey at the end of the winter. And those bees, of course, were released into the wild at the end of the winter alive and kicking. So then in order to actually experiment with the robotic queen and idea or concept, we had to prove obviously that we can create this space for bees. And then after that, we had this amazing opportunity to send the bees to space on Blue Shepherd Mission that is part of Blue Origin, and we of course said, “Yes, we’ll take a slot.”
We said, “Okay, can we outdo NASA?” So NASA in 1982 had an experiment where they sent bees to outer space. The bees returned, they were not reproductive and some of them died. And we thought, “Well, is there a way in which we can create a life support system, almost like a small mini biolab of a queen and her retinue that would be sent in this Blue Origin New Shepherd mission in this one cell?” And so if the synthetic apiary was an architectural project, in this case, this second synthetic apiary was a product. It was so from an architectural controlled environment to a product scale controlled environment.
And this biolab, this life support system for bees, was designed to provide the bees with all the conditions that they needed. And we looked at that time at the Nasonov pheromone that the queen uses to guide the other bees, and we looked at pheromones that are associated with a bee, and thinking of those pheromones being released inside the capsule that goes to outer space. They returned back to the media lab roof and those bees were alive and kicking and reproductive, and they continued to create comb. It ended with a beautiful nature paper that the team and I published together. We gave them gold nanoparticles and silver nanoparticles because we were interested if bees recycle wax, it was known forever that-
But also another element of this is that always, these projects, if they’re great, they reveal new knowledge about, or new science about the topic that you’re investigating, be it silkworms or bees or glass. That’s why I say, I always tell my team it should be at MoMA and the cover of Nature or Science at the same time. We don’t separate between the art and the science, it’s one of the same.
So with Vespers, we actually used E. coli to create pigmented masks, masks whose pigments would be recreated at the surface of the mask. And I’m skipping over a lot of content, but basically there were 15 masks and they were created as three sets, the masks of the past, the masks of the present, and the masks of the future. They were five, five, and five, and the masks of the past were based on ornaments and they were embedded with natural minerals like gold. Yes, yes, yes, exactly-
But from a technological perspective, what was interesting is that we embedded chemical signals in the jet, in the printer, and those chemical signals basically interacted with the pigment-producing bacteria, in this case E. coli, that were introduced on the surface of the mask. And those interactions between the chemical signals inside the resins and the bacteria at the surface of the mask, at the resolution that is native to the printer, in this case, 20 microns per voxel, allowed us to compute the exact patterns that we wanted to achieve. And we thought, “Well, if we can do this with pigments, can we do this with antibiotics? If we can do this with antibiotics, could we do it with melanin? And what are the implications?” Again, this is a platform technology. Now that we have it, what are the actual real-world implications and potential applications for this technology?
We started a new area, one of my students, Rachael, her PhD thesis was titled after this new class of materials that we created through this project, Vespers, Hybrid Living Materials, HLMs. And these hybrid living materials really paved the way towards a whole other set of products that we’ve designed, like the work that we did with melanin for the Mandela pavilion that we presented at SF MoMa. Where again, we’re using the same principles of templating, in this case not silkworms and not bees, but we’re templating bacteria at a much, much, much more finer resolution. And now instead of templating using a robot, we’re templating using a printer.
But compute is very, very much part of it. And what’s nice about bacteria, of course, is that from an ethical perspective I think there’s a range. So at the end of the silk pavilion, I got an email from professor in Japan who has been working on transgenic silk and said, “Well, if you did amazing silk pavilion, why don’t we create glow in the light silk dresses?” And in order to create this glow in the light silk, we need to apply jeans that are taken from a spider to a silkworm. And this is what is known as a transgenic operation. And we said no. And that was for us a clear decision that, no, we will work with these organisms as long as we know that what we are doing with them is not only better for humans, but it’s also better for them.
And again, just to remind you, I forget the exact number, but it’s around 1,000 cocoons per a single shirt that are exterminated in India and China, in those sericulture industries that are being abused. Now, yes, this organism was designed to serve the human species and maybe it’s time to retire that conception of organisms that are designed for a human-centric world or human-centric set of applications. I don’t feel the same way about E. coli, not that I’m organism agnostic, but still I believe there’s so much for us to do on this planet with bacteria.
And then, again, the idea is that in one of those capsules maybe we grow transparent wood, and in another capsule, transparent wood for architectural application. Another capsule, we grow a shoe, and in another capsule we look at that large language model that we talked about. And there was a particular technology associated with that, which we’re hoping to reveal to the world in February. And in each of those capsules is basically a high-throughput computational environment, like a breadboard, think of a physical breadboard environment that has access to oxygen and nitrogen and CO2 and nutritional dispensing, and these little capsules could be stressed. They’re sort of ecology in a box, and they could be stressed to produce the food of the future or the products of the future or the construction materials of the future. Food is a very interesting one, obviously because of food insecurity and the issues that we have around both in terms of food insecurity, but also in terms of the future of food and what will remain after we can’t eat plants and animals anymore, and all we can eat is these false bananas and insects as our protein source.
So there we’re thinking, can we design these capsules to stress an environment and see how that environment behaves? Think about a biodiversity chamber, kind of a time capsule that is designed as a biodiversity chamber where you can program the exact temperature, humidity, and light combination to emulate the environment from the past. So Ohio, 1981, December 31st at 5:00 AM in the morning, what did tomatoes taste like? To all the way in the future, 200 years ago, these are the environmental inputs, these are some genetic regulations that I’m testing and what might the food of the future or the products of the future or the construction materials of the future feel like, taste like, behave like, et cetera. And so these capsules are designed as part of a lab. That’s why it’s been taking us such a long time to get to this point, because we started designing them in 2019, and they’re currently, literally as I speak to you, under construction.
And let’s say for the transaction-driven individuals in the world, let’s say their objective function is carbon sequestration. And all of those plants are implemented with a gaming engine and they have these reward system and they’re constantly needing to optimize the way in which they carbon sequest. We weed out the bad guys, we leave the good guys, and we end up with this ideal ecology of carbon sequestering heroes that connect and communicate with each other. And once we have that model, this biodiversity chamber, we send it out into the field and we see what happens in nature. And that’s sort of what I’m talking about, augmenting plants with that extra dimension of bandwidth that they do not have. Just last week I came across a paper that discusses the in vivo neurons that are augmented with a pong game. And in a dish they basically present sentience and the beginning of awareness.
Which is wonderful that you could actually take these neurons from a mouse brain, and you have the electrical circuits and the physiological circuits that enable these cells to connect and communicate, and together arrive at swarm situation that allows them to act as a system that is not only perceived to be sentient, but is actually sentient. Michael Levine calls this gentle material, material that has agency. This is of interest to us because, again, this is emergence post-templating. You template until you don’t need to template anymore because the system has its own rules. What we don’t want to happen with AGI, we want to happen with synthetic biology. What we don’t want to happen online and software with language, we want for it to happen with bio-based materials. Because that will get us closer to growing things as opposed to assembly and mechanically putting them together with toxic materials and compounds.
Now, of course there is a lot of work around plant neurobiology. It’s a real thing. Plants do not have a nervous system, but they have something akin to a nervous system. It has kind of a ecological intelligence that is focused on a particular timescale, and the timescale is very, very slow, slow, slow, slow timescale. So it is when we can melt these timescales and connect with these plants in terms of the content of the language, in this case molecules, the duration of the language, and we can start having a conversation, if not simply to understand what is happening in the plant kingdom.
Precision agriculture, I promise to you, will look very, very different. Because right now we are using drones to take photos of crops, of corn, that look bad. And when we take that photo, it’s already too late. But if we understand these molecular footprints and things that they are trying to say, distress that they are trying to communicate, then we could of course predict the physiological, biological behavior of these crops, both for their own self perpetuation, but also for the foods and the pharma and the type of molecules that we’re seeking to grow for the benefit of humanity. And so these languages that we are attempting now to quantify and qualify, will really help us not only better nature and help nature in its striving to surviving, but also help us design better wines and better foods and better medicine and better products, again, across all scales, across all application domains.
And also, that humility in design comes from simply looking at how we are today as a civilization, how we use and abuse nature. Just think of all these Christmas trees. These Christmas trees, they take years to grow. We use them for one night, the holiest night of the year, and then we let them go. And think about in nature to design a “product,” an organism spends energy and time and thoughtfulness and many, many, many years, and I’m thinking about the redwoods, to grow these channels, these cellulose layers and channels and reach these incredible heights. Takes sometimes hundreds of years, sometimes thousands of years. Am I afraid of building a company that designs products in the scale of thousands of years? No, I’m not.
And the way of being in the physical world today is really not in tune with the time dimension of the natural world at all, and that needs to change. And that’s obviously very, very hard to do in a community of human beings that is, at least in the Western world, that is based on capitalism. And so here, the wonderful challenge that we have ahead of us is, how do we impart upon the capitalist movement? We know that we need to produce now products that will enter the real world and be shared and used by others, and still benefit the natural world while benefiting humans? And that’s a wonderful challenge to have.
These products in the industry as we know it today, are designed totally for a human-centric use and enjoyment and indulgence and luxury. They’re used on the body for the sake of, I don’t know, attraction and feeling good and smelling good. And we were asking ourselves, is there a world in which a fragrance can be not a functional fragrance? Because you could claim that all fragrances are functional. But is there a world in which the fragrance becomes functionalized, is, again, imparted upon or given agency to connect with another organism? Is there a world in which you and I can go down to your garden and use a perfume that will interact with the rose garden downstairs? I’ve just been enamored with the statements that are being made in the media around, “Oh, this is completely biologically-derived fragrance and it’s bio-based.”
But when you look into the fragrance and you understand that in order to get to this bio-derived fragrance, you blew through 10,000 bushes of rose to create 5 mL of a rose fragrance. And all these 10,000 bushes of rose, they take space, they take water management, and so much waste. Is this really what we want the future of our agriculture and molecular goods to look like? And so when we did the Aguahoja pavilion on the roof of SF MoMa, we calculated that for that pavilion we had 40,000 calories embedded into this pavilion that was made of shrimp shells and chitosan and apple skins and cellulose from tree pulp. And we calculated that overall the structure had 40,000 calories. Interesting way to think about a structure, from the point of view of calories. But as you left the gallery, you saw these three clocks that were so beautifully designed by Felix on our team, and these clocks measured temperature and humidity, and we connected them to a weather channel so that we could directly look at how the pavilion was biodegrading in real-time.
And in our calculations, I say this long-winded description of the pavilion to say that in the calculation, we incorporated how much electricity we used for our computers, for the 3D printers that printed the pavilion. And these were called energy calculations, energy end materials. And when you think about a product and you think about a shoe or a chair or a perfume or a building, you don’t stop at the object. You want to go all the way to the system. Again, instead of designing objects or singular embodiments of the will of the designer, you’re really tapping into an entire system that is interconnected.
And if you look at the energy budget that characterize the project Aguahoja, it traverses the entire planet. Some of these shrimp shells were brought from places in the world we haven’t thought of, in terms of the apples and the shrimp shells and the tree pulp. And so going back to fragrances, it’s really, really important to understand the product in the context of the ecological system from which it’s sourced, and how it’s designed. And that is the kind of thinking that is not only desired, but is required if we are to achieve synergy between humanity and nature.
And creativity is very much part of this because creativity is all about letting go and beginning again and beginning again and beginning again. And when you cannot let go, you cannot be creative and you can’t find novelty. But I think that letting go is a moment that enables empowerment, agency, creativity, emergence, and they’re all connected. They sort of associate themselves with definition of destiny or the inevitable. A good friend of mine shared with me elegant definition of fate, which is the ratio of who you are and who you want to be.
And it has happened throughout my life in different ways. MIT was another experience like that where people pointed at me as the designer for whom the academic currency is not necessarily the citation index. And of course in order to get tenure at MIT, you have to look at the citation index. But for me it was not that. It was manifesting our work in shows and writing papers and writing patents and creating a celebration around the work. And I never saw a distinction between those ways of being. I also think that another kind of way of being or a modality of being that I found helpful is Viktor Frankl wrote this incredible book, Men’s Search for Meaning after the Holocaust. And he writes, different people pursue life for different reasons. According to Freud, the goal of life is to find pleasure and according to Adlers, to find power.
And for Viktor Frankl, it was about finding meaning. And when you let go of the titles and the disciplines and the boundaries and the expectations and the perception, you are elevated to this really special, yes, spiritual, but definitely very, very creative plane where you can sort of start anew, look at the world through the lens of a bacterium or a robot, or look at ecology through the lens of chemistry and look at chemistry through the lens of robotics and look at robotics through the lens of microbial ecologies and so on and so forth. And I feel that kind of rebooting not every 10 years, but every minute, every breath, is very, very important for a creative life and for just maintaining this fresh mind to reboot, reboot, to begin again with every breath, begin again. And that can be confusing some. For my team members, I like to change my mind. It’s who I am, it’s how I think, it’s how I operate.
And they’ll come and we found another technique or another technology that’s interesting and we thought that we were working on this functionalized fragrance, but now there’s another opportunity and let’s go there. And to me, I would much rather live life, like if I had to pick sort of my favorite Broadway show to enter and live through, it would be Into The Woods. It’s not a specific fairytale. It’s not the Sleeping Beauty or Little Red Riding Hood or Rapunzel, it’s all of them. It’s sort of moving into the forest and seeing this wonder and getting close and learning about that and then moving to another wonder. And life is really about tying all of these little fairytales together in work and also in life.
The vulnerability is what is the glue. I think that the vulnerability enables connection. The connection is the glue, and that connection enables accessing a higher ground as a community as opposed to as an individual. So if there is a society of the mind, or if there are higher levels of awareness that can be accessed in community as opposed to again, going to the silkworm, as opposed to on the individual level, I think that those occur through the flaws and the vulnerabilities. And without them we cannot find connection, community. And without community, we can’t build what we have built as a civilization for the past hundreds of thousands of years. So I think not only are they beautiful, but they have a functional role in building civilizations.
He talks about feeling the sun on his arms as he is working the soil in two degrees Fahrenheit without clothes. And the officer berates him and says, what have you done? Have you been a businessman before you came here to the camp? And he says, I was a doctor. And he said, you must’ve made a lot of money as a doctor. And he said, all my work I’ve done for free, I’ve been helping the poor. But he keeps his humility and he keeps his modesty and he keeps his preservation of the spirit. And he says the things that actually make him able to, or made him able to outlive the terrible experience in the Holocaust was really cherishing this moment when the sun hits his skin or when he can eat a grain of rice, a single grain of rice. So I think cherishing is a very important part of living a meaningful life, being able to cherish those simple things
The glasswork was another project like that where we were fascinated by glass because obviously it’s superb material for architecture, but we created this new glass printing technology for the first time that was shedding light on the biomechanics of fluid glass, the math and the physics of which was never done before, which was so exciting to us, but revealing new knowledge about the world through technology. That’s one theme. The reincarnation between things, material and immaterial. That’s another theme. Lenny Bernstein, War and Peace, Tolstoy.
If you can combine novelty in synthetic biology with a novelty in robotics, with a novelty in material science, with a novelty in computational design, you are bound to create something novel, period. And that’s how I run the company and that’s how I pick the people. And so that’s another very, very important ingredient of the cutting edge across multiple disciplines that come together. And then in the background, in the periphery, there is all these messages, the whispers of the ancient oldies, right? The Beethoven’s and the Picassos.
A friend of mine who’s a dean of well-known architectural school said today, architects don’t want to be architects. Architects don’t look up to the starchitects as role models. Starchitects are no longer role models. Architects want to build by virtue of not building. Architects want, she said, we’re back in the sixties when we think about architecture back in the hippie movement, I think that in a way they have to be somewhat of a hippie, somewhat of a kind of jack of all trades, master of all.
And actually they found in Argentina and in various places around the world, they found these spores of the first plants that existed on the planet. And they emerged out of these … Cyanobacteria were the first of course, and then they found these spore based plants. And because they didn’t have seeds there were only spores. The spores became sort of the fossils by which we’ve come to known of their existence. And because of these spores, we know that this first extinction existed.
But this extinction is actually what enabled plants to resurrect. The death of these first plants, because they clinked to the rocks and they generated a ton of phosphorus that went into the ocean by clinging to the rocks 60 times more phosphorus than without them. And then all this phosphorus basically choked the oceans and made them super cold and without oxygen, anoxic. And then we lost the plant kingdom, and then because of the death of these first plants, they actually enriched the soil and created nutrients for these new plants to come to the planet. And those planets had more sophisticated vein systems and they were moving beyond spores to seeded plants, et cetera, and flowering plants. And so in a way, one mass extinction or the division period led to life as we know it. And where would we be without plants in a way?
I think that death is very much part of life and through that definition, that kind of planetary wide definition in the context of hundreds of millions of years, life gains a completely new light. And that’s when the particles become a wave, where humans, we are not alone and we are here because of those plants. I think death is very much part of life. In the context of the redwood tree, perhaps life is defined as 10 generations. And through the lens of a bacteria, perhaps life is defined as a millisecond. And perhaps through the lens of an AGI, life is defined as all of human civilization. And so I think it really is a question of this timescale again, the timescale and the organism, the life form that’s asking the question through which we can answer, what is life?
On your question about AGI and nature, look, I think we’ve been through a lot in terms of to get here, we sort of moved from data, the ability to collect information to knowledge, the ability to use this information for utility, from knowledge to intelligence. And what is intelligence? It’s the ability to problem solve and adapt and translate. That’s sort of from data to information to knowledge. I think the next frontier is wisdom. And what is wisdom? Wisdom is the ability to have or find insight about the world and from wisdom to spiritual awareness, which sort of transcends wisdom and is able to chart the world into new territory.
But I think what is interesting about AGI is that it is sort of almost like a self recursive thing, because it’s like a washing machine of a third derivative Wikipedia. It uses kind of language to create language, to create language, to create language.
But it’s not as if the AGI has self-awareness. Maybe. Maybe it has, but as far as I can tell, it’s not as if AGI has approached consciousness or sentience just yet. It’s probably getting there. But the language appears to present itself as if there is sentience there, but it doesn’t. But I think that’s the problem at the point where this AGI sounds like me and speaks like me and behaves like me and feels like me and breathes like me and my daughter knows the AGI to be me as sort of the end of everything is the end of human agency.
But what is the end of human agency to humans I think is the beginning of agency to nature. Because if you take all of this agency, if you take all of these language models that can summarize all of human civilization and consciousness and then upload that to nature and have nature now deal with that world of consciousness that it never had access to.
Maybe through Eliezer’s lens, the sort of short-lived human becomes sort of a very long-lived humanlike, sentient, weeping willow. Maybe that’s the end in the beginning. And maybe on the more optimistic side for us humans, it’s a different form of existence where everything we create and everything we consume and everything we process is all made out of six elements and that’s it. And there’s only those six elements and not 118 elements. And it’s all the stuff of biology plus some fair amount of bits, genes, and atoms. A lot of Beethoven.
And that said, I cannot believe that there is no other life form. I want to believe more than I know that yes, that there are life forms in the white fountain that is the black hole, that there are these life forms that are light years away from us, that are forming other forms of life forces.
2001 is up there. I would watch that film again and again and again. It’s incredible. The last scene in Odyssey 2001, just watch the last scene of 2001, then listen to Yudkowsky, and then go to the garden. And that’s pretty much the end in the beginning.
But that scene, that last scene from 2001 is everything. It says so much with so little and it’s sort of the embodiment I believe, of ambivalence. And there’s opportunity to believe in the beginning of humankind, the end of humankind, the planet, child star or star child of the future. Was there a death? Was there an reincarnation? That final scene to me is something that I go back to and study, and every time there is a different reading of that scene that inspires me. That scene, and then the first scene in The Godfather, still one of the best scenes of all times, sort of a portrait of America, the ideals and values that are brought from Italy.
I spend time with a full moon. I take my time with a full moon and I pay attention to a full moon. And I think paying attention to the seasons and taking time to appreciate the little things, the simple things is what makes a meaningful life. I was very lucky to have grown up in a home that taught me this way of being. My parents, my grandmother, who played a very important role in my growing up. And that ability to pay attention and to be present is so, so, so, so … I could not emphasize it enough, is so crucial.
And we would lie on the blanket and look at the clouds and reflect upon the shapes of the clouds and study the shapes of the plants, and there was a lot of wonder in that childhood with her. And she taught me the importance of wonder in an eternal childhood and living adulthood as a child. And so I am very, very grateful for that. I think it is the sense of wonder, the speaking up was always something that she adhered to, to speak up your truth, to be straightforward, to be positive.
These are things that I also got from my mom. And from my mom, the sense of humor. She had the best sense of humor that I could think of and was just a joy to be around. And my father taught me everything. My father taught me everything I know. My mom taught me everything I feel.
Well, what about advice for how to have a career? You’ve had a very interesting career and a successful career, but not an easy one. You took a few leaps.
Another thing he had taught me, the feeling of discomfort. As you say, the feeling of loneliness and discomfort is imperative to growth. Growth is painful. Period. Any form of growth is difficult and painful. Birth is difficult and painful, and it is really, really important to place yourself in situations of discomfort. I like to be in a room where everyone in the room is more intelligent than me. I like to be in that kind of state where the people that I surround myself with are orders of magnitude more intelligent than I am. And I can say that that is true of all of my team members, and that’s the intellectual discomfort that I feed off of. The same is true for physical exertion. You got to put yourself in these uncomfortable situations in order to grow, in order to find comfort.
And then on the other hand is love, is finding love and finding this other human that compliments you and that makes you a better version of the one you are and even of the one you want to be. But with gratitude and attention and love, you can go so, so far.
To the younger generation, I don’t speak of a career. I never thought of my work as my career, ever. And there was this constant entanglement between life and work and love and longing and being and mothering. It’s all the same. And I appreciate that to some people that doesn’t work in their arrangement of will versus comfort versus the reality. But for me, it has always worked. I think to the younger generation, I say, don’t think of your career. A career is something that is imposed upon you. Think of your calling. That’s something that’s innately and directionally moves you, and it’s something that transcends a career.
Similarly, you can think about the difference between learning versus being educated. Being educated is something that’s given to you that’s external, that’s being imposed, that’s top down imposed, whereas learning is something that comes from within. It’s also the difference between joy and happiness. Many times I’m sad and I’m still joyous. And it’s very, very important to understand the difference between these externally perceived success paths and internally driven value-based ways of being in the world.
And together, when we combine the broken puzzle, let’s say, of substance and vulnerability, we get this bigger gestalt, this wondrous world of a future that is peaceful, that is wholesome, and that proposes or advocates for that kind of synergy that we’ve been talking about throughout. But it’s all fun.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Neri Oxman. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Leo Tolstoy, “Everything I know, I know because of love.” Thank you for listening. I hope to see you next time.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:49 – Biomass vs anthropomass
- 16:10 – Computational templates
- 36:25 – Biological hero organisms
- 47:25 – Engineering with bacteria
- 55:42 – Plant communication
- 1:09:05 – Albert Einstein letter
- 1:12:27 – Beauty
- 1:17:23 – Faith
- 1:27:09 – Flaws
- 1:46:58 – Extinction
- 1:58:05 – Alien life
- 2:01:55 – Music
- 2:03:22 – Movies
- 2:07:54 – Advice for young people
Introduction
Neri Oxman
Whenever we start a new project, it has to have these ingredients of simultaneous complexity. It has to be novel in terms of the synthetic biology, material science, robotics, engineering, all of these elements that are discipline based or rooted must be novel. If you can combine novelty in synthetic biology with a novelty in robotics, with a novelty in material science, with a novelty in computational design, you are bound to create something novel.
Whenever we start a new project, it has to have these ingredients of simultaneous complexity. It has to be novel in terms of the synthetic biology, material science, robotics, engineering, all of these elements that are discipline based or rooted must be novel. If you can combine novelty in synthetic biology with a novelty in robotics, with a novelty in material science, with a novelty in computational design, you are bound to create something novel.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Neri Oxman, an engineer, scientist, designer, architect, artist, and one of the kindest, most thoughtful and brilliant human beings I’ve ever gotten to know. For a long time, she led the mediated matter group at MIT that did research and built incredible stuff at the intersection of computational design, digital fabrication, material science, and synthetic biology, doing so at all scales from the microscale to the building scale. Now she’s continuing this work at a very new company for now called Oxman, looking to revolutionize how humans design and build products working with nature, not against it.
The following is a conversation with Neri Oxman, an engineer, scientist, designer, architect, artist, and one of the kindest, most thoughtful and brilliant human beings I’ve ever gotten to know. For a long time, she led the mediated matter group at MIT that did research and built incredible stuff at the intersection of computational design, digital fabrication, material science, and synthetic biology, doing so at all scales from the microscale to the building scale. Now she’s continuing this work at a very new company for now called Oxman, looking to revolutionize how humans design and build products working with nature, not against it.
On a personal note, let me say that Neri has for a long time been a friend and someone who in my darker moments, has always been there with a note of kindness and support. I am forever grateful to her. She’s a brilliant and a beautiful human being. Oh, and she also brought me a present, War and Peace by Tolstoy and Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. It doesn’t get better than that. This is the Lex Friedman podcast to support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Neri Oxman. Let’s start with the universe. Do you ever think of the universe as a kind of machine that designs beautiful things at multiple scales?
Biomass vs anthropomass
Neri Oxman
I do. And I think of nature in that way in general. In the context of design, specifically, I think of nature as everything that isn’t anthropomass, everything that is not produced by humankind, the birds and the rocks and everything in between, fungi, elephants, whales.
I do. And I think of nature in that way in general. In the context of design, specifically, I think of nature as everything that isn’t anthropomass, everything that is not produced by humankind, the birds and the rocks and everything in between, fungi, elephants, whales.
Lex Fridman
Do you think there’s an intricate ways in which there’s a connection between humans and nature?
Do you think there’s an intricate ways in which there’s a connection between humans and nature?
Neri Oxman
Yes, and we’re looking for it. I think that let’s say from the beginning of mankind going back 200,000 years, the products that we have designed have separated us from nature. And it’s ironic that the things that we designed and produced as humankind, those are exactly the things that separated us. Before that we were totally and completely connected, and I want to return to that world.
Yes, and we’re looking for it. I think that let’s say from the beginning of mankind going back 200,000 years, the products that we have designed have separated us from nature. And it’s ironic that the things that we designed and produced as humankind, those are exactly the things that separated us. Before that we were totally and completely connected, and I want to return to that world.
Lex Fridman
But bring the tools of engineering and computation to it.
But bring the tools of engineering and computation to it.
Neri Oxman
Yes. Yes. I absolutely believe that there is so much to nature that we still have not leveraged, and we still have not understood and we still haven’t. And so much of our work is designed, but a lot of it is science is unveiling and finding new truths about the natural world that we were not aware before. Everybody talks about intelligence these days, but I like to think that nature has kind of wisdom that exists beyond intelligence or above intelligence, and it’s that wisdom that we’re trying to tap into through technology. If you think about humans versus nature, at least in the realm, at least in the context of definition of nature, is everything, but anthropomass.
Yes. Yes. I absolutely believe that there is so much to nature that we still have not leveraged, and we still have not understood and we still haven’t. And so much of our work is designed, but a lot of it is science is unveiling and finding new truths about the natural world that we were not aware before. Everybody talks about intelligence these days, but I like to think that nature has kind of wisdom that exists beyond intelligence or above intelligence, and it’s that wisdom that we’re trying to tap into through technology. If you think about humans versus nature, at least in the realm, at least in the context of definition of nature, is everything, but anthropomass.
And I’m using Ron Milo, who is an incredible professor from the Weizmann Institute who came up with this definition of Anthropo mass in 2020 when he identified that 2020 was the crossover year when anthropomass exceeded biomass on the planet. So all of the design goods that we have created and brought into the world now outweigh all of the biomass, including of course, all plastics and wearables, building cities, but also asphalt and concrete, all outweigh the scale of the biomass. And actually that was a moment. You know how in life there are moments that be a handful of moments that get you to course correct. And it was a Zoom conversation with Ron, and that was a moment for me when I realized that that imbalance, now we’ve superseded the biomass on the planet, here do we go from here?
And you’ve heard the expression more phones than bones and the anthropomass and the anthropocene and the technosphere sort of outweighing the biosphere. But now we are really trying to look at is there a way in which all things technosphere are designed as if they’re part of the biosphere? Meaning if you could today grow instead of build everything and anything, if you could grow an iPhone, if you could grow a car, what would that world look like? Where the touring test for, I call this material ecology approach, but this notion that everything material, everything that you design in the physical universe can be read and written to as or thought of or perceived of as nature grown.
That’s sort of the touring test for the company or at least that’s how I started. I thought, well grow everything. That’s sort of the slogan. Let’s grow everything. And if we grow everything, is there a world in which driving a car is better for nature than a world in which there are no cars? Is it possible that a world in which you build buildings in cities, that those buildings in cities actually augment and heal nature as opposed to their absence? Is there a world in which we now go back to that kind of synergy between nature and humans where you cannot separate between grown and made? And it doesn’t even matter.
Lex Fridman
Is there a good term for the intersection between biomass and anthropomass, things that are grown?
Is there a good term for the intersection between biomass and anthropomass, things that are grown?
Neri Oxman
Yeah. So in 2005 I called this material ecology. I thought, what if all things materials would be considered part of the ecology and would have a positive impact on the ecology where we work together to help each other? All things nature, all things human. And again, you can say that that wisdom in nature exists in fungi. Many mushroom lovers always contest my thesis here saying, “Well, we have the mushroom network and we have the mother trees and they’re all connected, and why don’t we just simply hack into mushrooms?” Well, first of all, yes, they’re connected, but that network stops when there is a physical gap. That network does not necessarily enable the whales in the Dominican to connect with an olive tree in Israel to connect with a weeping willow in Montana.
Yeah. So in 2005 I called this material ecology. I thought, what if all things materials would be considered part of the ecology and would have a positive impact on the ecology where we work together to help each other? All things nature, all things human. And again, you can say that that wisdom in nature exists in fungi. Many mushroom lovers always contest my thesis here saying, “Well, we have the mushroom network and we have the mother trees and they’re all connected, and why don’t we just simply hack into mushrooms?” Well, first of all, yes, they’re connected, but that network stops when there is a physical gap. That network does not necessarily enable the whales in the Dominican to connect with an olive tree in Israel to connect with a weeping willow in Montana.
And that’s sort of a world that I’m dreaming about. What does it mean for nature to have access to the cloud? The kind of bandwidth that we’re talking about, sort of think Neuralink for nature. Since the first computer, and you know this by heart probably better than I do, but we’re both MIT lifers. We today have computational power that is one trillion times the power that we had in those times. We have 26.5 trillion times the bandwidth and 11.5 quintillion times the memory, which is incredible. So humankind since the first computer has approached and accessed such incredible bandwidth, and we’re asking, what if nature had that bandwidth? So beyond genes and evolution, if there was a way to augment nature and allow it access to the world of bits, what does nature look like now? And can nature make decisions for herself as opposed to being guided and guarded and abused by humankind?
Lex Fridman
So nature has this inherent wisdom that you spoke to, but you’re also referring to augmenting that inherent wisdom with something like a large language model.
So nature has this inherent wisdom that you spoke to, but you’re also referring to augmenting that inherent wisdom with something like a large language model.
Neri Oxman
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
So compress human knowledge, but also maintain whatever is that intricate wisdom that allows plants, bacteria, fungi to grow incredible things at arbitrary scales, adapting to whatever environment and just surviving and thriving no matter where, no matter how.
So compress human knowledge, but also maintain whatever is that intricate wisdom that allows plants, bacteria, fungi to grow incredible things at arbitrary scales, adapting to whatever environment and just surviving and thriving no matter where, no matter how.
Neri Oxman
Exactly. So I think of it as large molecule models and those large molecule models, of course, large language models are based on Google and search engines and so on and so forth. And we don’t have this data currently. And the part of our mission is to do just that, trying to quantify and understand the language that exists across all kingdoms of life, across all five kingdoms of life. And if we can understand that language, is there a way for us to first make sense of it, find logic in it, and then generate certain computational tools that empower nature to build better crops, to increase the level of biodiversity? In the company we’re constantly asking, what does nature want? What does nature want from a compute view?
Exactly. So I think of it as large molecule models and those large molecule models, of course, large language models are based on Google and search engines and so on and so forth. And we don’t have this data currently. And the part of our mission is to do just that, trying to quantify and understand the language that exists across all kingdoms of life, across all five kingdoms of life. And if we can understand that language, is there a way for us to first make sense of it, find logic in it, and then generate certain computational tools that empower nature to build better crops, to increase the level of biodiversity? In the company we’re constantly asking, what does nature want? What does nature want from a compute view?
Lex Fridman
If it knew it, what could aid it in whatever the heck it’s wanting to do.
If it knew it, what could aid it in whatever the heck it’s wanting to do.
Neri Oxman
So we keep coming back to this answer of nature wants to increase information, but decrease entropy. So find order, but constantly increase the information scale. And this is true for what our work also tries to do because we’re constantly trying to fight against the dimensional mismatch between things made and things grown. And as designers, we are educated to think in X, Y, and Z and that’s pretty much where architectural education ends and biological education begins.
So we keep coming back to this answer of nature wants to increase information, but decrease entropy. So find order, but constantly increase the information scale. And this is true for what our work also tries to do because we’re constantly trying to fight against the dimensional mismatch between things made and things grown. And as designers, we are educated to think in X, Y, and Z and that’s pretty much where architectural education ends and biological education begins.
So in reducing that dimensional mismatch, we’re missing out on opportunities to create things made as if grown. But in the natural environment, we’re asking, can we provide nature with these extra dimensions? And again, I’m not sure what nature wants, but I’m curious as to what happens when you provide these tools to the natural environments. Obviously with responsibility, obviously with control, obviously with ethics and moral code, but is there a world in which nature can help fix itself using those tools?
Lex Fridman
And by the way, we’re talking about a company called Oxman.
And by the way, we’re talking about a company called Oxman.
Neri Oxman
Yeah. Just a few words about the team.
Yeah. Just a few words about the team.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. What kind of humans work at a place like this? They’re trying to figure out what nature wants.
Yeah. What kind of humans work at a place like this? They’re trying to figure out what nature wants.
Neri Oxman
I think they’re first like you, they’re humanists first. They come from different disciplines and different disciplinary backgrounds. And just as an example, we have a brilliant designer who is just a mathematical genius and a computer scientist and a mechanical engineer who is trained as a synthetic biologist. And now we’re hiring a microbiologist and a chemist, architects of course, and designers, roboticist. So really it’s arc, two of each.
I think they’re first like you, they’re humanists first. They come from different disciplines and different disciplinary backgrounds. And just as an example, we have a brilliant designer who is just a mathematical genius and a computer scientist and a mechanical engineer who is trained as a synthetic biologist. And now we’re hiring a microbiologist and a chemist, architects of course, and designers, roboticist. So really it’s arc, two of each.
Lex Fridman
And always dancing between this line of the artificial, the synthetic, and the real, what’s the term for it? And the natural
And always dancing between this line of the artificial, the synthetic, and the real, what’s the term for it? And the natural
Neri Oxman
Yeah, the built and the grown nature and culture, technology and biology, but we’re constantly seeking to ask how can we build, design and deploy products in three scales? The molecular scale, which I briefly hinted to. And there in the molecular scale we’re really looking to understand whether there’s a universal language to nature and what that language is. And then build a tool that I think and dream of it is the iPhone for nature. If nature had an iPhone, what would that iPhone look like?
Yeah, the built and the grown nature and culture, technology and biology, but we’re constantly seeking to ask how can we build, design and deploy products in three scales? The molecular scale, which I briefly hinted to. And there in the molecular scale we’re really looking to understand whether there’s a universal language to nature and what that language is. And then build a tool that I think and dream of it is the iPhone for nature. If nature had an iPhone, what would that iPhone look like?
Lex Fridman
Does that mean creating an interface between nature and the computational tools we have?
Does that mean creating an interface between nature and the computational tools we have?
Neri Oxman
Exactly. It goes back to that 11.5 quintillion times the bandwidth that humans have now arrived at, and giving that to nature and seeing what happens there can animals actually use this interface to know that they need to run away from fire? Can plants use this interface to increase the rate of photosynthesis in the presence of a smoke cloud? Can they do this quote-unqoute “automatically” without a kind of a top-down brute force policy-based method that’s authored and deployed by humans? And so this work really relates to that interface with the natural world. And then there’s a second area in the company which focuses on growing products. And here we’re focusing on a single product that starts from CO2. It becomes a product. It’s consumed, it’s used, it’s worn by a human, and then it goes back to the soil and it grows an edible fruit plant.
Exactly. It goes back to that 11.5 quintillion times the bandwidth that humans have now arrived at, and giving that to nature and seeing what happens there can animals actually use this interface to know that they need to run away from fire? Can plants use this interface to increase the rate of photosynthesis in the presence of a smoke cloud? Can they do this quote-unqoute “automatically” without a kind of a top-down brute force policy-based method that’s authored and deployed by humans? And so this work really relates to that interface with the natural world. And then there’s a second area in the company which focuses on growing products. And here we’re focusing on a single product that starts from CO2. It becomes a product. It’s consumed, it’s used, it’s worn by a human, and then it goes back to the soil and it grows an edible fruit plant.
Lex Fridman
So we’re talking about from CO2 to fruit.
So we’re talking about from CO2 to fruit.
Neri Oxman
Yeah. It starts from CO2 and it ends with something that you can literally eat. So the world’s first entirely biodegradable, biocompatible, bio renewable product.
Yeah. It starts from CO2 and it ends with something that you can literally eat. So the world’s first entirely biodegradable, biocompatible, bio renewable product.
Lex Fridman
That’s grown.
That’s grown.
Neri Oxman
Yes, either using plant matter or using bacteria, but we are really looking at carbon recycling technologies that start with methane or wastewater and end with this wonderful reincarnation of a thing that doesn’t need to end up in a composting site, but can just be thrown into the ground and grow olive and find peace. And there’s a lot of textile based work out there that is focused on one single element in this long chain like, oh, let’s create leather out of mycelium, or let’s create textile out of cellulose, but then it stops there and you get to assembling the shoe or the wearable and you need a little bit of glue, and you need a little bit of this material and a little bit of that material to make it water resistant and then it’s over.
Yes, either using plant matter or using bacteria, but we are really looking at carbon recycling technologies that start with methane or wastewater and end with this wonderful reincarnation of a thing that doesn’t need to end up in a composting site, but can just be thrown into the ground and grow olive and find peace. And there’s a lot of textile based work out there that is focused on one single element in this long chain like, oh, let’s create leather out of mycelium, or let’s create textile out of cellulose, but then it stops there and you get to assembling the shoe or the wearable and you need a little bit of glue, and you need a little bit of this material and a little bit of that material to make it water resistant and then it’s over.
That’s one thing that we’re trying to solve for is how to create a product that is materially, computationally, robotically, novel, and goes through all of these phases from the creation, from this carbon recycling technology to the product, to literally, how do you think about reinventing an industry that is focused on assembly and putting things together and using humans to do that? Can that happen just using robots and microbes? And that’s it.
Lex Fridman
And doing it end to end. I would love to see what this factory looks like.
And doing it end to end. I would love to see what this factory looks like.
Neri Oxman
And the factory is great too. I’m very, very excited. In October we’ll share first renditions of some of this work and in February we’ll invite you to the lab.
And the factory is great too. I’m very, very excited. In October we’ll share first renditions of some of this work and in February we’ll invite you to the lab.
Computational templates
Lex Fridman
I’m there. I’ve already applied. I haven’t heard back. I don’t understand. Okay. Just before we get to number three, it’d be amazing to just talk about what it takes with robotic arms or in general, the whole process of how to build a life form stuff you’ve done in the past, maybe stuff you’re doing now, how to use bacteria, this kind of synthetic biology, how to grow stuff by leveraging bacteria? Is there examples from the past and explain?
I’m there. I’ve already applied. I haven’t heard back. I don’t understand. Okay. Just before we get to number three, it’d be amazing to just talk about what it takes with robotic arms or in general, the whole process of how to build a life form stuff you’ve done in the past, maybe stuff you’re doing now, how to use bacteria, this kind of synthetic biology, how to grow stuff by leveraging bacteria? Is there examples from the past and explain?
Neri Oxman
Yes. And just take a step back over the 10 years, the mediated matter group, which was my group at MIT, has sort of dedicated itself to bio-based design would be a suitcase word, but thinking about that synergy between nature and culture, biology and technology. And we attempted to build a suite of embodiments, let’s say that they ended up in amazing museums and amazing shows, and we wrote patents and papers on them, but they were still N of ones. Again, the challenge, as you say, was to grow them, and we classified them into fibers, cellular solids, biopolymers, pigments.
Yes. And just take a step back over the 10 years, the mediated matter group, which was my group at MIT, has sort of dedicated itself to bio-based design would be a suitcase word, but thinking about that synergy between nature and culture, biology and technology. And we attempted to build a suite of embodiments, let’s say that they ended up in amazing museums and amazing shows, and we wrote patents and papers on them, but they were still N of ones. Again, the challenge, as you say, was to grow them, and we classified them into fibers, cellular solids, biopolymers, pigments.
And in each of the examples, although the material was different, sometimes we used fibers, sometimes we used silk with silkworms and honey with bees and or comb as the structural material, with vespers we used synthetically engineered bacteria to produce pigments, although the materials were different and the hero organisms were different, the philosophy was always the same. The approach was really an approach of computational templating. That templating allowed us to create templates for the natural environment where nature and technology could duet, could dance together to create these products.
So just a few examples with silk pavilion, we’ve had a couple of pavilions made of silk, and the second one, which was the bigger one, which ended up at the Museum of Modern Art with my friend, an incredible mentor, Paul Antonelli, that pavilion was six meter tall and it was produced by silkworms. And there we had different types of templates. There were physical templates that were basically just these water soluble meshes upon which the silkworms were spinning and then there were environmental templates, which was a robot basically applying variation of environmental conditions such as heat and light to guide the movement of the silkworm.
Lex Fridman
You’re saying so many amazing things, and I’m trying not to interrupt you, but one of the things you’ve learned by observing, by doing science on these is that the environment defines the shape that they create or contributes or intricately plays with the shape they create. And that’s one of the ways you can get to guide their work is by defining that environment. By the way, you said hero organism, which is an epic term. That means whatever is the biological living system that’s doing the creation.
You’re saying so many amazing things, and I’m trying not to interrupt you, but one of the things you’ve learned by observing, by doing science on these is that the environment defines the shape that they create or contributes or intricately plays with the shape they create. And that’s one of the ways you can get to guide their work is by defining that environment. By the way, you said hero organism, which is an epic term. That means whatever is the biological living system that’s doing the creation.
Neri Oxman
And that’s what’s happening in pharma and biomaterials and by the way, precision ag and new food design technologies as people are betting on a hero organism, is sort of how I think of it. And the hero organism is sometimes it’s the palm oil or it’s the mycelium. There’s a lot of mushrooms around for good and bad, and it’s cellulose or it’s fake bananas or the workhorse E. Coli. But these hero organisms are being betted on as the… What’s the one answer that solves everything hitchhiker’s guide?
And that’s what’s happening in pharma and biomaterials and by the way, precision ag and new food design technologies as people are betting on a hero organism, is sort of how I think of it. And the hero organism is sometimes it’s the palm oil or it’s the mycelium. There’s a lot of mushrooms around for good and bad, and it’s cellulose or it’s fake bananas or the workhorse E. Coli. But these hero organisms are being betted on as the… What’s the one answer that solves everything hitchhiker’s guide?
Lex Fridman
42.
42.
Neri Oxman
42.
42.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. These are sort of the 42s of the enchanted new universe. And back at MIT, we said, instead of betting on all of these organisms, let’s approach them as almost movement in a symphony and let’s kind of lean into what we can learn from each of these organisms in the context of building a project in an architectural scale. And those usually were pavilions.
Yeah. These are sort of the 42s of the enchanted new universe. And back at MIT, we said, instead of betting on all of these organisms, let’s approach them as almost movement in a symphony and let’s kind of lean into what we can learn from each of these organisms in the context of building a project in an architectural scale. And those usually were pavilions.
And then the computational templating is the way you guide the work of this. How many did you say? 17,000?
Neri Oxman
17,532. So each of these silkworms threads are about one mile in distance, and they’re beautiful. And just thinking about the amount of material, it’s a bit like thinking about the length of capillary vessels that grow in your belly when you’re pregnant to feed that incredible new life form. Just nature is amazing. But back to the silkworms, I think I had three months to build this incredible pavilion, but we couldn’t figure out how. We were thinking of emulating the process of how a silkworm goes about building its incredible architecture. This cocoon over the period of 24 to 72 hours, and it builds a cocoon basically to protect itself.
17,532. So each of these silkworms threads are about one mile in distance, and they’re beautiful. And just thinking about the amount of material, it’s a bit like thinking about the length of capillary vessels that grow in your belly when you’re pregnant to feed that incredible new life form. Just nature is amazing. But back to the silkworms, I think I had three months to build this incredible pavilion, but we couldn’t figure out how. We were thinking of emulating the process of how a silkworm goes about building its incredible architecture. This cocoon over the period of 24 to 72 hours, and it builds a cocoon basically to protect itself.
It’s a beautiful form of architecture, and it uses pretty much just two materials, two chemical compounds ceresin and fibrin. The ceresin is sort of the glue of the cocoon, the fibrin is the fiber based material of the cocoon and through fibers and glue. And that’s true for so many systems in nature, lots of fiber and glue. And that architecture allows them to metamorphosize. And in the process they vary the properties of that silk thread, so it’s stiffer or softer depending on where it is in the section of the cocoon. And so we were trying to emulate this robotically with a 3D printer that was six axis KUKA arm one of these baby KUKAs.
And we’re trying to emulate that process computationally and build something very large when one of my students now, a brilliant industrial engineer, roboticist on my team, Marcus said, “Well, we were just playing with those silkworms and enjoying their presence when we realized that if they’re placed on a desk or a horizontal surface, they will go about creating their cocoon only the cocoon would be flat because they’re constantly looking for a vertical post in order to use that post as an anchor to spin the cocoon. But in the absence of that post on surfaces that are less than 21 millimeters and flat they will spin flat patches and we said, “Aha, let’s work with them to produce this dome as a set of flat patches.”
And a silkworm mind you is quite an egocentric creature. And actually the furthest you go, you move forward in evolution by natural selection, the more egoism you find in creatures. So when you think about termites, their material sophistication is actually very primitive, but they have incredible ability to communicate and connect with each other. So if you think about entire all of nature, let’s say all of living systems as a matrix that runs across two axes one is material sophistication, which is terribly relevant for designers, and the other is communication. The termites ace on communication, but their material sophistication is crap.
It’s just saliva and feces and some soil particles that are built to create these incredible termite mounds, the scale that when compared to human skyscrapers transcend all of buildable scales, at least in terms of what we have today in architectural practice just relative to the size of the termite. But when you look at the silkworm, the silkworm has zero connection and communication across silkworms. They were not designed to connect and communicate with each other. They’re sort of a human design species because the domesticated silk moth creates the cocoon.
We then produce the silk of it and then it dies. So it has dysfunctional wings, it cannot fly. And that’s another problem that the sericulture industry has is, why did we in the first place, author this organism 4,000 years ago that is unable to fly and is just there to basically live to serve a human need, which is textiles? And so here we were fascinated by the computational kind of biology dimension of silkworms, but along the way… By the way, this is great. I never get to tell the full story. So great.
Lex Fridman
I’ve enjoyed this so much.
I’ve enjoyed this so much.
Neri Oxman
People say, “Oh, speak in [inaudible 00:24:54] paragraphs. They’re way too long.” And this is wonderful. This is like heaven.
People say, “Oh, speak in [inaudible 00:24:54] paragraphs. They’re way too long.” And this is wonderful. This is like heaven.
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 00:24:58] paragraphs. You’re dropping so many good lines. I love it for that.
[inaudible 00:24:58] paragraphs. You’re dropping so many good lines. I love it for that.
Neri Oxman
But really those silkworms, yes, they’re not designed to be like humans. They’re not designed to connect, communicate, and build things that are bigger than themselves through connection and communication.
But really those silkworms, yes, they’re not designed to be like humans. They’re not designed to connect, communicate, and build things that are bigger than themselves through connection and communication.
Lex Fridman
So what happens when you add 17,000 of them communicating effectively?
So what happens when you add 17,000 of them communicating effectively?
Neri Oxman
That’s a really great question. What happens is that at some point, the templating strategies, and as you said correctly, there were geometrical, templating, material templating, environmental templating, chemical templating if you’re using pheromones to guide the movement of bees in the absence of a queen where you have a robotic queen.
That’s a really great question. What happens is that at some point, the templating strategies, and as you said correctly, there were geometrical, templating, material templating, environmental templating, chemical templating if you’re using pheromones to guide the movement of bees in the absence of a queen where you have a robotic queen.
Lex Fridman
Robotic queen.
Robotic queen.
Neri Oxman
But whenever you have these templating strategies, you have sort of control over nature, but the question is there a world in which we can move from templating, from providing these computational material and immaterial physical and molecular platforms that guide nature, almost guiding a product almost like a gardener to a problem or an opportunity of emergence where that biological organism assumes agency by virtue of accessing the robotic code and saying, now I own the code. I get to do what I want with this code. Let me show you what this pavilion may look like or this product may look like?
But whenever you have these templating strategies, you have sort of control over nature, but the question is there a world in which we can move from templating, from providing these computational material and immaterial physical and molecular platforms that guide nature, almost guiding a product almost like a gardener to a problem or an opportunity of emergence where that biological organism assumes agency by virtue of accessing the robotic code and saying, now I own the code. I get to do what I want with this code. Let me show you what this pavilion may look like or this product may look like?
And I think one of the exciting moments for us is when we realized that these robotic platforms that were designed initially as templates actually inspired, if I may, a kind of a collaboration and cooperation between silkworms that are not a swarm based organism. They’re not like the bees and the termites. They don’t work together and they don’t have social orders amongst them, the queen and the drones, et cetera. They’re all the same in a way. And here, what was so exciting for us is that these computational and fabrication technologies enable the silkworm to sort of hop from the branch in ecology of worms to the branch in ecology of maybe human-like intelligence where they could connect and communicate by virtue of feeling or rubbing against each other in an area that was hotter or colder.
And so the product that we got at the end, the variation of density of fiber and the distribution of the fiber and the transparency, the product at the end seems like it was produced by a swarm silk community, but of course it wasn’t. It’s a bunch of biological agents working together to assemble this thing. That’s really, really fascinating to us. How can technology augment or enable a swarm like behavior and creatures that have not been designed to work as swarms?
Lex Fridman
So how do you construct a computational template from which a certain kind of thing emerges? How can you predict what emerges, I suppose?
So how do you construct a computational template from which a certain kind of thing emerges? How can you predict what emerges, I suppose?
Neri Oxman
So if you can predict it doesn’t count as emergence, actually.
So if you can predict it doesn’t count as emergence, actually.
Lex Fridman
That’s a deeply poetic line.
That’s a deeply poetic line.
Neri Oxman
We can talk about it. It’s a bit exaggerated, doesn’t count. Speaking of emergence, an empowerment, because we’re constantly moving between those as if they’re equals on the team and one of them, Christopher shared with me a mathematically equation for what does it mean to empower nature and what does empowerment in nature look like? And that relates to emergence. And we can go back to emergence in a few moments, but I want to say it so that I know that I’ve learned it and if I’ve learned it I can use it later.
We can talk about it. It’s a bit exaggerated, doesn’t count. Speaking of emergence, an empowerment, because we’re constantly moving between those as if they’re equals on the team and one of them, Christopher shared with me a mathematically equation for what does it mean to empower nature and what does empowerment in nature look like? And that relates to emergence. And we can go back to emergence in a few moments, but I want to say it so that I know that I’ve learned it and if I’ve learned it I can use it later.
Lex Fridman
And maybe you’ll figure something out as you say it also.
And maybe you’ll figure something out as you say it also.
Neri Oxman
Of course, Christopher is the master here, but really we were thinking again, what does nature want? Nature wants to increase the information dimension and reduce entropy. What do we want? We kind of want the same thing. We want more, but we want order. And this goes back to your conversation with Joscha about stochastic versus deterministic languages or processes. His definition or the definition he found was that an agent is empowered if the entropy of the distribution of all of its states it’s high while the entropy of the distribution of a single state given a choice, given an action is low. Meaning it’s that kind of duality between opportunity like starting like this and going like this, opening and closing. And this really, I think is analogous to human empowerment, given infinite wide array of choices. What is the choice that you make to enable, to empower, to provide you with the agency that you need?
Of course, Christopher is the master here, but really we were thinking again, what does nature want? Nature wants to increase the information dimension and reduce entropy. What do we want? We kind of want the same thing. We want more, but we want order. And this goes back to your conversation with Joscha about stochastic versus deterministic languages or processes. His definition or the definition he found was that an agent is empowered if the entropy of the distribution of all of its states it’s high while the entropy of the distribution of a single state given a choice, given an action is low. Meaning it’s that kind of duality between opportunity like starting like this and going like this, opening and closing. And this really, I think is analogous to human empowerment, given infinite wide array of choices. What is the choice that you make to enable, to empower, to provide you with the agency that you need?
Lex Fridman
And how much does that making that choice actually control the trajectory of the system? That’s really nice. So this applies to all the kinds of systems you’re talking about.
And how much does that making that choice actually control the trajectory of the system? That’s really nice. So this applies to all the kinds of systems you’re talking about.
Neri Oxman
And the cool thing is it can apply to a human on an individual basis or a silkworm or a bee or a microbe that has agency or by virtue of a template, but it also applies to a community of organisms like the bees. And so we’ve done a lot of work sort of moving from, you’ve asked how to grow things. So we’ve grown things using co fabrication where we’re digitally fabricating with other organisms that live across the various kingdoms of life and those were silkworms and bees. And with bees, which we’ve sent to outer space and returned healthily and they were reproductive.
And the cool thing is it can apply to a human on an individual basis or a silkworm or a bee or a microbe that has agency or by virtue of a template, but it also applies to a community of organisms like the bees. And so we’ve done a lot of work sort of moving from, you’ve asked how to grow things. So we’ve grown things using co fabrication where we’re digitally fabricating with other organisms that live across the various kingdoms of life and those were silkworms and bees. And with bees, which we’ve sent to outer space and returned healthily and they were reproductive.
Lex Fridman
Okay, you’re going to have to tell that story. You’re going to have to talk about the robotic queen and the pheromones. Come on.
Okay, you’re going to have to tell that story. You’re going to have to talk about the robotic queen and the pheromones. Come on.
Neri Oxman
So we built what we called a synthetic apiary and the synthetic apiary was designed as an environment that was a perpetual spring environment for the bees of Massachusetts. They go on hibernation, of course, during the winter season, and then we lose 80% of them or more during that period. We’re thinking, okay, what if we created this environment where before you template, before you can design with, you have to design for? You have to create this space of mutualism space of sort of shared connection between you and the organism. And with bees it started as the synthetic apiary. And we have proven that curated environment where we designed the space with high levels of control of temperature, humidity, and light and we’ve proven that they were reproductive and alive. And we realized, wow, this environment that we created can help augment bees in the winter season in any city around the world where bees survive and thrive in the summer and spring seasons. And could this be a kind of new urban typology, an architectural typology of symbiosis, of mutualism between organisms and humans?
So we built what we called a synthetic apiary and the synthetic apiary was designed as an environment that was a perpetual spring environment for the bees of Massachusetts. They go on hibernation, of course, during the winter season, and then we lose 80% of them or more during that period. We’re thinking, okay, what if we created this environment where before you template, before you can design with, you have to design for? You have to create this space of mutualism space of sort of shared connection between you and the organism. And with bees it started as the synthetic apiary. And we have proven that curated environment where we designed the space with high levels of control of temperature, humidity, and light and we’ve proven that they were reproductive and alive. And we realized, wow, this environment that we created can help augment bees in the winter season in any city around the world where bees survive and thrive in the summer and spring seasons. And could this be a kind of new urban typology, an architectural typology of symbiosis, of mutualism between organisms and humans?
By the way, the synthetic API was in a co-op nearby Somerville. We had robots. Our team schlepped there every day with our tools and machines and we made it happen. And the neighbors were very happy, and they got to get a ton of honey at the end of the winter. And those bees, of course, were released into the wild at the end of the winter alive and kicking. So then in order to actually experiment with the robotic queen and idea or concept, we had to prove obviously that we can create this space for bees. And then after that, we had this amazing opportunity to send the bees to space on Blue Shepherd Mission that is part of Blue Origin, and we of course said, “Yes, we’ll take a slot.”
We said, “Okay, can we outdo NASA?” So NASA in 1982 had an experiment where they sent bees to outer space. The bees returned, they were not reproductive and some of them died. And we thought, “Well, is there a way in which we can create a life support system, almost like a small mini biolab of a queen and her retinue that would be sent in this Blue Origin New Shepherd mission in this one cell?” And so if the synthetic apiary was an architectural project, in this case, this second synthetic apiary was a product. It was so from an architectural controlled environment to a product scale controlled environment.
And this biolab, this life support system for bees, was designed to provide the bees with all the conditions that they needed. And we looked at that time at the Nasonov pheromone that the queen uses to guide the other bees, and we looked at pheromones that are associated with a bee, and thinking of those pheromones being released inside the capsule that goes to outer space. They returned back to the media lab roof and those bees were alive and kicking and reproductive, and they continued to create comb. It ended with a beautiful nature paper that the team and I published together. We gave them gold nanoparticles and silver nanoparticles because we were interested if bees recycle wax, it was known forever that-
Neri Oxman
Bees recycle wax. It was known forever that bees do not recycle the wax. And by feeding them these gold nanoparticles, we were able to prove that the bees actually do recycle the wax. The reason I’m bringing this forward is because we don’t view ourselves as designers of consumable products and architectural environments only, but we love that moment where these technologies… And by the way, every one of these projects that we created involve the creation of a new technology, whether it be a glass printer or the spinning robot or the life support system for the bee colony. They all involved a technology that was associated with the project, and I never, ever, ever want to let that part go because I love technology so much.
Bees recycle wax. It was known forever that bees do not recycle the wax. And by feeding them these gold nanoparticles, we were able to prove that the bees actually do recycle the wax. The reason I’m bringing this forward is because we don’t view ourselves as designers of consumable products and architectural environments only, but we love that moment where these technologies… And by the way, every one of these projects that we created involve the creation of a new technology, whether it be a glass printer or the spinning robot or the life support system for the bee colony. They all involved a technology that was associated with the project, and I never, ever, ever want to let that part go because I love technology so much.
But also another element of this is that always, these projects, if they’re great, they reveal new knowledge about, or new science about the topic that you’re investigating, be it silkworms or bees or glass. That’s why I say, I always tell my team it should be at MoMA and the cover of Nature or Science at the same time. We don’t separate between the art and the science, it’s one of the same.
Biological hero organisms
Lex Fridman
So as you’re creating the art, you’re going to learn something about these organisms or something about these materials. Is there something that stands out to you about these hero organisms like bees, silkworms? You mentioned E. coli has its pros and cons, this bacteria. What have you learned, small or big, that’s interesting about these organisms?
So as you’re creating the art, you’re going to learn something about these organisms or something about these materials. Is there something that stands out to you about these hero organisms like bees, silkworms? You mentioned E. coli has its pros and cons, this bacteria. What have you learned, small or big, that’s interesting about these organisms?
Neri Oxman
Yeah, that’s a beautiful question. What have I learned? I’ve learned that… We also worked with shrimp shells with a glow. How we built this tower on the roof of SF MoMa, which by a couple of months ago until it was on the roof, we’ve shown this structure completely biodegrade into the… Well, not completely, but almost completely biodegrade to the soil. And this notion that a product or an organism or part of that organism can reincarnate is very, very moving thought to me, because I want to believe that I believe in reincarnation.
Yeah, that’s a beautiful question. What have I learned? I’ve learned that… We also worked with shrimp shells with a glow. How we built this tower on the roof of SF MoMa, which by a couple of months ago until it was on the roof, we’ve shown this structure completely biodegrade into the… Well, not completely, but almost completely biodegrade to the soil. And this notion that a product or an organism or part of that organism can reincarnate is very, very moving thought to me, because I want to believe that I believe in reincarnation.
Lex Fridman
I want to believe that I believe. I want to believe.
I want to believe that I believe. I want to believe.
Neri Oxman
Yeah, that’s my relationship with God. I like to believe in believing. Most great things in life are second derivatives of things, but that’s part of another conversation.
Yeah, that’s my relationship with God. I like to believe in believing. Most great things in life are second derivatives of things, but that’s part of another conversation.
Lex Fridman
I feel like that’s a quote that’s going to take weeks to really internalize.
I feel like that’s a quote that’s going to take weeks to really internalize.
Neri Oxman
That notion of, I want you to want, or I need you to need. There’s always something, a deeper truth behind what is on the surface. So I like to go to the second and tertiary derivative of things and discover new truths about them through that. But what have I learned about organisms-
That notion of, I want you to want, or I need you to need. There’s always something, a deeper truth behind what is on the surface. So I like to go to the second and tertiary derivative of things and discover new truths about them through that. But what have I learned about organisms-
Lex Fridman
And why don’t you like E. coli?
And why don’t you like E. coli?
Neri Oxman
I like E. coli, and a lot of the work that we’ve done was not possible without our working on E. coli or other workhorse organisms, like cyanobacteria.
I like E. coli, and a lot of the work that we’ve done was not possible without our working on E. coli or other workhorse organisms, like cyanobacteria.
Lex Fridman
How are bacteria used?
How are bacteria used?
Neri Oxman
Death masks. The death masks.
Death masks. The death masks.
Lex Fridman
So what are death masks?
So what are death masks?
Neri Oxman
We did this project called Vespers, and those were basically death masks. That was set as a process for designing a living product. What happens? I remember looking at Beethoven’s death mask and Agamemnon’s death mask and just studying how they were created. And really they were geometrically attuned to the face of the dead, and what we wanted to do is create a death mask that was not based on the shape of the wearer, but rather was based on their legacy and their biology. And maybe we could harness a few stem cells there for future generations or contain the last breath. Lazarus, which preceded Vespers, was a project where we designed a mask to contain a single breath, the last breath of the wearer. And again, if I had access to these technologies today, I would totally reincorporate my grandmother’s last breath in a product. So it was like an air memento.
We did this project called Vespers, and those were basically death masks. That was set as a process for designing a living product. What happens? I remember looking at Beethoven’s death mask and Agamemnon’s death mask and just studying how they were created. And really they were geometrically attuned to the face of the dead, and what we wanted to do is create a death mask that was not based on the shape of the wearer, but rather was based on their legacy and their biology. And maybe we could harness a few stem cells there for future generations or contain the last breath. Lazarus, which preceded Vespers, was a project where we designed a mask to contain a single breath, the last breath of the wearer. And again, if I had access to these technologies today, I would totally reincorporate my grandmother’s last breath in a product. So it was like an air memento.
So with Vespers, we actually used E. coli to create pigmented masks, masks whose pigments would be recreated at the surface of the mask. And I’m skipping over a lot of content, but basically there were 15 masks and they were created as three sets, the masks of the past, the masks of the present, and the masks of the future. They were five, five, and five, and the masks of the past were based on ornaments and they were embedded with natural minerals like gold. Yes, yes, yes, exactly-
Lex Fridman
And we’re looking at pictures of these and they’re gorgeous.
And we’re looking at pictures of these and they’re gorgeous.
Neri Oxman
Yes, yes.
Yes, yes.
Lex Fridman
Extremely delicate and interesting fractal patterns that are symmetrical.
Extremely delicate and interesting fractal patterns that are symmetrical.
Neri Oxman
They look symmetrical, but they’re not. We intended for you to be tricked and think that they’re all symmetrical, but-
They look symmetrical, but they’re not. We intended for you to be tricked and think that they’re all symmetrical, but-
Lex Fridman
There’s imperfections.
There’s imperfections.
Neri Oxman
There are imperfections by design. All of these forms and shapes and distribution of matter that you’re looking at was entirely designed using a computational program. None of it is manual. But long story short, the first collection is about the surface of the mask. And the second collection, which you’re looking at, is about the volume of the mask and what happens to the mask when all the colors from the surface, yes, enter the volume of the mask inside, create pockets and channels to guide life through them. They were incorporated with pigment-producing living organisms, and then those organisms were templated to recreate the patterns of the original death masks. And so life recycles and re-begins, and so on and so forth. The past meets the future, the future meets the past. From the surface to the volume, from death to life, to death to life, to death to life. And that again, is a recurring theme in the projects that we take on.
There are imperfections by design. All of these forms and shapes and distribution of matter that you’re looking at was entirely designed using a computational program. None of it is manual. But long story short, the first collection is about the surface of the mask. And the second collection, which you’re looking at, is about the volume of the mask and what happens to the mask when all the colors from the surface, yes, enter the volume of the mask inside, create pockets and channels to guide life through them. They were incorporated with pigment-producing living organisms, and then those organisms were templated to recreate the patterns of the original death masks. And so life recycles and re-begins, and so on and so forth. The past meets the future, the future meets the past. From the surface to the volume, from death to life, to death to life, to death to life. And that again, is a recurring theme in the projects that we take on.
But from a technological perspective, what was interesting is that we embedded chemical signals in the jet, in the printer, and those chemical signals basically interacted with the pigment-producing bacteria, in this case E. coli, that were introduced on the surface of the mask. And those interactions between the chemical signals inside the resins and the bacteria at the surface of the mask, at the resolution that is native to the printer, in this case, 20 microns per voxel, allowed us to compute the exact patterns that we wanted to achieve. And we thought, “Well, if we can do this with pigments, can we do this with antibiotics? If we can do this with antibiotics, could we do it with melanin? And what are the implications?” Again, this is a platform technology. Now that we have it, what are the actual real-world implications and potential applications for this technology?
We started a new area, one of my students, Rachael, her PhD thesis was titled after this new class of materials that we created through this project, Vespers, Hybrid Living Materials, HLMs. And these hybrid living materials really paved the way towards a whole other set of products that we’ve designed, like the work that we did with melanin for the Mandela pavilion that we presented at SF MoMa. Where again, we’re using the same principles of templating, in this case not silkworms and not bees, but we’re templating bacteria at a much, much, much more finer resolution. And now instead of templating using a robot, we’re templating using a printer.
But compute is very, very much part of it. And what’s nice about bacteria, of course, is that from an ethical perspective I think there’s a range. So at the end of the silk pavilion, I got an email from professor in Japan who has been working on transgenic silk and said, “Well, if you did amazing silk pavilion, why don’t we create glow in the light silk dresses?” And in order to create this glow in the light silk, we need to apply jeans that are taken from a spider to a silkworm. And this is what is known as a transgenic operation. And we said no. And that was for us a clear decision that, no, we will work with these organisms as long as we know that what we are doing with them is not only better for humans, but it’s also better for them.
And again, just to remind you, I forget the exact number, but it’s around 1,000 cocoons per a single shirt that are exterminated in India and China, in those sericulture industries that are being abused. Now, yes, this organism was designed to serve the human species and maybe it’s time to retire that conception of organisms that are designed for a human-centric world or human-centric set of applications. I don’t feel the same way about E. coli, not that I’m organism agnostic, but still I believe there’s so much for us to do on this planet with bacteria.
Lex Fridman
And so in general, your design principle is to grow cool stuff as a byproduct of the organism flourishing. So not using the organism-
And so in general, your design principle is to grow cool stuff as a byproduct of the organism flourishing. So not using the organism-
Neri Oxman
Yes. The win-win, the synergy.
Yes. The win-win, the synergy.
Lex Fridman
Win-win.
Win-win.
Neri Oxman
A whole that’s bigger than the sum of its parts.
A whole that’s bigger than the sum of its parts.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting. It just feels like a gray area, where genetic modification of an organism, it just feels like… I don’t know. If you genetically modified me to make me glow in the light, I kind of like it.
It’s interesting. It just feels like a gray area, where genetic modification of an organism, it just feels like… I don’t know. If you genetically modified me to make me glow in the light, I kind of like it.
Neri Oxman
I think you have enough of an aura.
I think you have enough of an aura.
Lex Fridman
All right, thank you. I was just fishing for compliments. Thank you. I appreciate the-
All right, thank you. I was just fishing for compliments. Thank you. I appreciate the-
Neri Oxman
But you’re absolutely right. And by the way, the gray area is where some of us like to live and like to thrive, and that’s okay. And thank goodness that there’s so many of us that like the black and white and that thrive in the black and white. My husband is a good example for that.
But you’re absolutely right. And by the way, the gray area is where some of us like to live and like to thrive, and that’s okay. And thank goodness that there’s so many of us that like the black and white and that thrive in the black and white. My husband is a good example for that.
Lex Fridman
Well, but just to clarify, in this case you are also trying to thrive in the black and white in that you’re saying the silkworm is a beautiful, wonderful creature. Let us not modify it. Is that the idea? Or is it okay to modify a little bit as long as we can see that it benefits the organism as well as the final creation?
Well, but just to clarify, in this case you are also trying to thrive in the black and white in that you’re saying the silkworm is a beautiful, wonderful creature. Let us not modify it. Is that the idea? Or is it okay to modify a little bit as long as we can see that it benefits the organism as well as the final creation?
Neri Oxman
With silkworms, absolutely let’s not modify it genetically. Let’s not modify it genetically. And then some. Because why did we get there to begin with 4,000 years ago in the Silk Road? And we should never get to a point where we evolve life for the service of mankind at the risk of these wonderful creatures across the across the kingdom of life. I don’t think about the same kind of ethical range when I think about bacteria.
With silkworms, absolutely let’s not modify it genetically. Let’s not modify it genetically. And then some. Because why did we get there to begin with 4,000 years ago in the Silk Road? And we should never get to a point where we evolve life for the service of mankind at the risk of these wonderful creatures across the across the kingdom of life. I don’t think about the same kind of ethical range when I think about bacteria.
Lex Fridman
Nevertheless, bacteria are pretty wonderful organisms.
Nevertheless, bacteria are pretty wonderful organisms.
Neri Oxman
I’m moving to my second cup here.
I’m moving to my second cup here.
Lex Fridman
Take two, because things are getting serious now.
Take two, because things are getting serious now.
Neri Oxman
Bacteria are. Yeah, for sure.
Bacteria are. Yeah, for sure.
Engineering with bacteria
Lex Fridman
Let’s give bacteria all the love they deserve. We wouldn’t be here without them. They were here for, I don’t know what it is, like a billion years before anything else showed up.
Let’s give bacteria all the love they deserve. We wouldn’t be here without them. They were here for, I don’t know what it is, like a billion years before anything else showed up.
Neri Oxman
But in a way, if you think about it, they create the matter that we consume and then reincarnate, or dissolved into the soil and then creates a tree, and then that tree creates more bacteria. And then that bacteria could… Again, again. That’s why I like to think about not recycling, but reincarnating, because that assumes, imparting upon nature that dimension of agency and maybe awareness. But yeah, lots of really interesting work happening with bacteria. Directed evolution is one of them. We’re looking at directed evolution. So high-throughput directed evolution of bacteria for the production of products. And again, those products can be a shoe, wearables, biomaterials, therapeutics.
But in a way, if you think about it, they create the matter that we consume and then reincarnate, or dissolved into the soil and then creates a tree, and then that tree creates more bacteria. And then that bacteria could… Again, again. That’s why I like to think about not recycling, but reincarnating, because that assumes, imparting upon nature that dimension of agency and maybe awareness. But yeah, lots of really interesting work happening with bacteria. Directed evolution is one of them. We’re looking at directed evolution. So high-throughput directed evolution of bacteria for the production of products. And again, those products can be a shoe, wearables, biomaterials, therapeutics.
Lex Fridman
And doing that direction computationally?
And doing that direction computationally?
Neri Oxman
Totally computationally, obviously in the lab with the hero organism, the hero bacteria. And what’s happening today, in equal microbial synthetic biology, synthetic biology that lends itself to ecology. And again, all of these fields are coming together. It’s such a wonderful time to be a designer. I can’t think of a better time to be a designer in this world. But with high-throughput directed evolution… And I should say that the physical space in our new lab will have these capsules which we have designed. They are designed like growth chambers or grow rooms, and in those grow rooms we can basically program top-down environmental templating, top-down environmental control of lights, humidity, light, et cetera. Sorry, light, humidity and temperature while doing bottom-up genetic regulation. So it is a wet lab, but in that wet lab you could do at the same time, genetic modulation, regulation and environmental templating.
Totally computationally, obviously in the lab with the hero organism, the hero bacteria. And what’s happening today, in equal microbial synthetic biology, synthetic biology that lends itself to ecology. And again, all of these fields are coming together. It’s such a wonderful time to be a designer. I can’t think of a better time to be a designer in this world. But with high-throughput directed evolution… And I should say that the physical space in our new lab will have these capsules which we have designed. They are designed like growth chambers or grow rooms, and in those grow rooms we can basically program top-down environmental templating, top-down environmental control of lights, humidity, light, et cetera. Sorry, light, humidity and temperature while doing bottom-up genetic regulation. So it is a wet lab, but in that wet lab you could do at the same time, genetic modulation, regulation and environmental templating.
And then, again, the idea is that in one of those capsules maybe we grow transparent wood, and in another capsule, transparent wood for architectural application. Another capsule, we grow a shoe, and in another capsule we look at that large language model that we talked about. And there was a particular technology associated with that, which we’re hoping to reveal to the world in February. And in each of those capsules is basically a high-throughput computational environment, like a breadboard, think of a physical breadboard environment that has access to oxygen and nitrogen and CO2 and nutritional dispensing, and these little capsules could be stressed. They’re sort of ecology in a box, and they could be stressed to produce the food of the future or the products of the future or the construction materials of the future. Food is a very interesting one, obviously because of food insecurity and the issues that we have around both in terms of food insecurity, but also in terms of the future of food and what will remain after we can’t eat plants and animals anymore, and all we can eat is these false bananas and insects as our protein source.
So there we’re thinking, can we design these capsules to stress an environment and see how that environment behaves? Think about a biodiversity chamber, kind of a time capsule that is designed as a biodiversity chamber where you can program the exact temperature, humidity, and light combination to emulate the environment from the past. So Ohio, 1981, December 31st at 5:00 AM in the morning, what did tomatoes taste like? To all the way in the future, 200 years ago, these are the environmental inputs, these are some genetic regulations that I’m testing and what might the food of the future or the products of the future or the construction materials of the future feel like, taste like, behave like, et cetera. And so these capsules are designed as part of a lab. That’s why it’s been taking us such a long time to get to this point, because we started designing them in 2019, and they’re currently, literally as I speak to you, under construction.
Lex Fridman
How well is it understood how to do this dance of controlling these different variables in order for various kinds of growth to happen?
How well is it understood how to do this dance of controlling these different variables in order for various kinds of growth to happen?
Neri Oxman
It’s not. It’s never been done before and these capsules have never been designed before. So when we first decided these are going to be environmental capsules, people thought we were crazy. “What are you building? What are you making?” So the answer is that we don’t know. But we know that there has never been a space like this where you have basically a wet lab and a grow room at that resolution, at that granularity of control over organisms. There is a reason why there is this incredible evolution of products in the software space. The hardware space, that’s a more limiting space because of the physical infrastructure that we have to test and experiment with things. So we really wanted to push on creating a wet lab that is novel in every possible way. What could you create in it? You could create the future. You could create an environment of plants talking to each other with a robotic referee. And you could set an objective function.
It’s not. It’s never been done before and these capsules have never been designed before. So when we first decided these are going to be environmental capsules, people thought we were crazy. “What are you building? What are you making?” So the answer is that we don’t know. But we know that there has never been a space like this where you have basically a wet lab and a grow room at that resolution, at that granularity of control over organisms. There is a reason why there is this incredible evolution of products in the software space. The hardware space, that’s a more limiting space because of the physical infrastructure that we have to test and experiment with things. So we really wanted to push on creating a wet lab that is novel in every possible way. What could you create in it? You could create the future. You could create an environment of plants talking to each other with a robotic referee. And you could set an objective function.
And let’s say for the transaction-driven individuals in the world, let’s say their objective function is carbon sequestration. And all of those plants are implemented with a gaming engine and they have these reward system and they’re constantly needing to optimize the way in which they carbon sequest. We weed out the bad guys, we leave the good guys, and we end up with this ideal ecology of carbon sequestering heroes that connect and communicate with each other. And once we have that model, this biodiversity chamber, we send it out into the field and we see what happens in nature. And that’s sort of what I’m talking about, augmenting plants with that extra dimension of bandwidth that they do not have. Just last week I came across a paper that discusses the in vivo neurons that are augmented with a pong game. And in a dish they basically present sentience and the beginning of awareness.
Which is wonderful that you could actually take these neurons from a mouse brain, and you have the electrical circuits and the physiological circuits that enable these cells to connect and communicate, and together arrive at swarm situation that allows them to act as a system that is not only perceived to be sentient, but is actually sentient. Michael Levine calls this gentle material, material that has agency. This is of interest to us because, again, this is emergence post-templating. You template until you don’t need to template anymore because the system has its own rules. What we don’t want to happen with AGI, we want to happen with synthetic biology. What we don’t want to happen online and software with language, we want for it to happen with bio-based materials. Because that will get us closer to growing things as opposed to assembly and mechanically putting them together with toxic materials and compounds.
Plant communication
Lex Fridman
If I can ask a pothead question for a second, you mentioned just like the silkworms, the individualist silkworms got to actually learn how to collaborate or actually to collaborate in a swarm like way. You’re talking about getting plants to communicate in some interesting way based on an objective function. Is it possible to have some kind of interface between another kind of organisms, humans, and nature? So like a human to have a conversation with a plant?
If I can ask a pothead question for a second, you mentioned just like the silkworms, the individualist silkworms got to actually learn how to collaborate or actually to collaborate in a swarm like way. You’re talking about getting plants to communicate in some interesting way based on an objective function. Is it possible to have some kind of interface between another kind of organisms, humans, and nature? So like a human to have a conversation with a plant?
Neri Oxman
There already is. You know that when we cut freshly cut grass, I love the smell, but actually it’s a smell of distress that the leaves of grass are communicating to each other. The grass, when it’s cut emits green leaf volatiles, GLVs. And those GLVs are basically one leaf of grass communicating to another leaf of grass, “Be careful. Mind you, you’re about to be cut.” These incredible life forms are communicating using a different language than ours. We use language models, they use molecular models. At the moment where we can parse, we can decode these molecular moments is when we can start having a conversation with plants.
There already is. You know that when we cut freshly cut grass, I love the smell, but actually it’s a smell of distress that the leaves of grass are communicating to each other. The grass, when it’s cut emits green leaf volatiles, GLVs. And those GLVs are basically one leaf of grass communicating to another leaf of grass, “Be careful. Mind you, you’re about to be cut.” These incredible life forms are communicating using a different language than ours. We use language models, they use molecular models. At the moment where we can parse, we can decode these molecular moments is when we can start having a conversation with plants.
Now, of course there is a lot of work around plant neurobiology. It’s a real thing. Plants do not have a nervous system, but they have something akin to a nervous system. It has kind of a ecological intelligence that is focused on a particular timescale, and the timescale is very, very slow, slow, slow, slow timescale. So it is when we can melt these timescales and connect with these plants in terms of the content of the language, in this case molecules, the duration of the language, and we can start having a conversation, if not simply to understand what is happening in the plant kingdom.
Precision agriculture, I promise to you, will look very, very different. Because right now we are using drones to take photos of crops, of corn, that look bad. And when we take that photo, it’s already too late. But if we understand these molecular footprints and things that they are trying to say, distress that they are trying to communicate, then we could of course predict the physiological, biological behavior of these crops, both for their own self perpetuation, but also for the foods and the pharma and the type of molecules that we’re seeking to grow for the benefit of humanity. And so these languages that we are attempting now to quantify and qualify, will really help us not only better nature and help nature in its striving to surviving, but also help us design better wines and better foods and better medicine and better products, again, across all scales, across all application domains.
Lex Fridman
Is there intricacies to understanding the timescales, like you mentioned, at which these communications, these languages operate? Is there something different between the way humans communicate and the way plants communicate in terms of time?
Is there intricacies to understanding the timescales, like you mentioned, at which these communications, these languages operate? Is there something different between the way humans communicate and the way plants communicate in terms of time?
Neri Oxman
Remember when we started the conversation talking about definitions in the context of design and then in the context of being? That question requires, I think a kind of a shift, a humility. That requires a humility towards nature, understanding that it operates on different scales. We recently discovered that the molecular footprint of a rose, or of a plant in general during nighttime, is different than its molecular footprint during daytime. So these are circadian rhythms that are associated with what kind of molecules these plants emit given stresses, and given there’s a reason why a jasmine field smells so, so delicious and 4:00 AM in the morning. There’s peace and rest amongst the plants. And you have to tune into that time dimension of the plant kingdom, and that of course requires all this humility, where in a single capsule, to design a biodiversity chamber, it will take years, not months, and definitely not days to see these products.
Remember when we started the conversation talking about definitions in the context of design and then in the context of being? That question requires, I think a kind of a shift, a humility. That requires a humility towards nature, understanding that it operates on different scales. We recently discovered that the molecular footprint of a rose, or of a plant in general during nighttime, is different than its molecular footprint during daytime. So these are circadian rhythms that are associated with what kind of molecules these plants emit given stresses, and given there’s a reason why a jasmine field smells so, so delicious and 4:00 AM in the morning. There’s peace and rest amongst the plants. And you have to tune into that time dimension of the plant kingdom, and that of course requires all this humility, where in a single capsule, to design a biodiversity chamber, it will take years, not months, and definitely not days to see these products.
And also, that humility in design comes from simply looking at how we are today as a civilization, how we use and abuse nature. Just think of all these Christmas trees. These Christmas trees, they take years to grow. We use them for one night, the holiest night of the year, and then we let them go. And think about in nature to design a “product,” an organism spends energy and time and thoughtfulness and many, many, many years, and I’m thinking about the redwoods, to grow these channels, these cellulose layers and channels and reach these incredible heights. Takes sometimes hundreds of years, sometimes thousands of years. Am I afraid of building a company that designs products in the scale of thousands of years? No, I’m not.
And the way of being in the physical world today is really not in tune with the time dimension of the natural world at all, and that needs to change. And that’s obviously very, very hard to do in a community of human beings that is, at least in the Western world, that is based on capitalism. And so here, the wonderful challenge that we have ahead of us is, how do we impart upon the capitalist movement? We know that we need to produce now products that will enter the real world and be shared and used by others, and still benefit the natural world while benefiting humans? And that’s a wonderful challenge to have.
Lex Fridman
So, integrate technology with nature, and that’s a really difficult problem. I see parallels here with another company of Neuralink, which is basically like, I think you mentioned, Neuralink for nature. That there are short-term products you can come up with, but it’s ultimately a long-term challenge of how do you integrate the machine with this creation of nature, this intricate, complex creation of nature, which is the human brain. And then you’re speaking more generally, nature.
So, integrate technology with nature, and that’s a really difficult problem. I see parallels here with another company of Neuralink, which is basically like, I think you mentioned, Neuralink for nature. That there are short-term products you can come up with, but it’s ultimately a long-term challenge of how do you integrate the machine with this creation of nature, this intricate, complex creation of nature, which is the human brain. And then you’re speaking more generally, nature.
Neri Oxman
You know how every company has an image? Like this one single image that embodies the spirit of the company? And I think for Neuralink it was, to me, that chimpanzee playing a video game. It was just unbelievable. But with plants, there potentially is a set of molecules that impacts or inspires, I like that word, the plant to behave or act in a certain way, and allows still the plan the possibility of deciding where it or she or he wants to go. Which is why our first product for this molecular space is going to be a functionalized fragrance. So here we’re thinking about the future of fragrances and the future of fragrances and flavors.
You know how every company has an image? Like this one single image that embodies the spirit of the company? And I think for Neuralink it was, to me, that chimpanzee playing a video game. It was just unbelievable. But with plants, there potentially is a set of molecules that impacts or inspires, I like that word, the plant to behave or act in a certain way, and allows still the plan the possibility of deciding where it or she or he wants to go. Which is why our first product for this molecular space is going to be a functionalized fragrance. So here we’re thinking about the future of fragrances and the future of fragrances and flavors.
These products in the industry as we know it today, are designed totally for a human-centric use and enjoyment and indulgence and luxury. They’re used on the body for the sake of, I don’t know, attraction and feeling good and smelling good. And we were asking ourselves, is there a world in which a fragrance can be not a functional fragrance? Because you could claim that all fragrances are functional. But is there a world in which the fragrance becomes functionalized, is, again, imparted upon or given agency to connect with another organism? Is there a world in which you and I can go down to your garden and use a perfume that will interact with the rose garden downstairs? I’ve just been enamored with the statements that are being made in the media around, “Oh, this is completely biologically-derived fragrance and it’s bio-based.”
But when you look into the fragrance and you understand that in order to get to this bio-derived fragrance, you blew through 10,000 bushes of rose to create 5 mL of a rose fragrance. And all these 10,000 bushes of rose, they take space, they take water management, and so much waste. Is this really what we want the future of our agriculture and molecular goods to look like? And so when we did the Aguahoja pavilion on the roof of SF MoMa, we calculated that for that pavilion we had 40,000 calories embedded into this pavilion that was made of shrimp shells and chitosan and apple skins and cellulose from tree pulp. And we calculated that overall the structure had 40,000 calories. Interesting way to think about a structure, from the point of view of calories. But as you left the gallery, you saw these three clocks that were so beautifully designed by Felix on our team, and these clocks measured temperature and humidity, and we connected them to a weather channel so that we could directly look at how the pavilion was biodegrading in real-time.
And in our calculations, I say this long-winded description of the pavilion to say that in the calculation, we incorporated how much electricity we used for our computers, for the 3D printers that printed the pavilion. And these were called energy calculations, energy end materials. And when you think about a product and you think about a shoe or a chair or a perfume or a building, you don’t stop at the object. You want to go all the way to the system. Again, instead of designing objects or singular embodiments of the will of the designer, you’re really tapping into an entire system that is interconnected.
And if you look at the energy budget that characterize the project Aguahoja, it traverses the entire planet. Some of these shrimp shells were brought from places in the world we haven’t thought of, in terms of the apples and the shrimp shells and the tree pulp. And so going back to fragrances, it’s really, really important to understand the product in the context of the ecological system from which it’s sourced, and how it’s designed. And that is the kind of thinking that is not only desired, but is required if we are to achieve synergy between humanity and nature.
Lex Fridman
And it’s interesting, because the system-level thinking is almost always going to take you to the entire earth, to considering the entire earth ecosystem.
And it’s interesting, because the system-level thinking is almost always going to take you to the entire earth, to considering the entire earth ecosystem.
Neri Oxman
Which is why it’s important to have a left brain and a right brain competing for attention. And intimacy [inaudible 01:07:19]. Yes.
Which is why it’s important to have a left brain and a right brain competing for attention. And intimacy [inaudible 01:07:19]. Yes.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You mentioned a fragrance that sends out a message to the environment, essentially.
Yeah. You mentioned a fragrance that sends out a message to the environment, essentially.
Neri Oxman
A message in a bottle. Yeah.
A message in a bottle. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
A message in a bottle. So you can go to a rose garden and trick the rose garden to think it’s 4:00 AM, essentially?
A message in a bottle. So you can go to a rose garden and trick the rose garden to think it’s 4:00 AM, essentially?
Neri Oxman
You could if you wanted to, but maybe that is-
You could if you wanted to, but maybe that is-
Lex Fridman
Not trick. Trick is such a bad word.
Not trick. Trick is such a bad word.
Neri Oxman
Right. Right.
Right. Right.
Lex Fridman
Inspire.
Inspire.
Neri Oxman
Inspire I like. I like the idea of providing nature with a choice, which is why I love that elegant mathematical equation of empowerment and agency.
Inspire I like. I like the idea of providing nature with a choice, which is why I love that elegant mathematical equation of empowerment and agency.
Lex Fridman
Empower the rose garden to create a romantic moment for the wearer of the fragrance.
Empower the rose garden to create a romantic moment for the wearer of the fragrance.
Neri Oxman
But now again you’re, again, all of this to go back to that human-centric notion of romance. But maybe there’s another way to do romance that we haven’t yet explored. And maybe there’s a way to tap into what happens to the rose when it’s dreaming. Assuming that plants are sentient and assuming that we can tap into that sentient, what can we discover about what does the rose want? What does it actually want and what does it need? And what are the rose’s dreams?
But now again you’re, again, all of this to go back to that human-centric notion of romance. But maybe there’s another way to do romance that we haven’t yet explored. And maybe there’s a way to tap into what happens to the rose when it’s dreaming. Assuming that plants are sentient and assuming that we can tap into that sentient, what can we discover about what does the rose want? What does it actually want and what does it need? And what are the rose’s dreams?
Lex Fridman
But do you think there’s some correlation in terms of romance, in terms of the word you sometimes use, magic? Is there some similarities in what humans want and what roses want and what nature wants?
But do you think there’s some correlation in terms of romance, in terms of the word you sometimes use, magic? Is there some similarities in what humans want and what roses want and what nature wants?
Albert Einstein letter
Neri Oxman
I think so. I think there is. And if I did not think so, oh my goodness, this would not be a nice world to live in. I think we all want love. I recently read this beautiful letter that was written by Einstein to his daughter. Einstein asked his daughter to wait 20 years until she reveals these letters, and so she did. It’s just one of the most beautiful letters I’ve ever read from a father to his daughter. And the letter overall is imbued with a sense of remorse or maybe even feelings of sadness. And there is some kind of melancholy note in the letter where Einstein regrets not having spent enough time with his daughter, having focused on the theory of general relativity and changing the world. And then he goes on to talk about this beautiful and elegant equation of E=MC^2. And he tells his daughter that he believes that love is actually the force that shapes the universe because it is like-
I think so. I think there is. And if I did not think so, oh my goodness, this would not be a nice world to live in. I think we all want love. I recently read this beautiful letter that was written by Einstein to his daughter. Einstein asked his daughter to wait 20 years until she reveals these letters, and so she did. It’s just one of the most beautiful letters I’ve ever read from a father to his daughter. And the letter overall is imbued with a sense of remorse or maybe even feelings of sadness. And there is some kind of melancholy note in the letter where Einstein regrets not having spent enough time with his daughter, having focused on the theory of general relativity and changing the world. And then he goes on to talk about this beautiful and elegant equation of E=MC^2. And he tells his daughter that he believes that love is actually the force that shapes the universe because it is like-
Neri Oxman
Is actually the force that shapes the universe because it is like gravity, right? It attracts people. It is like light. It brings people together and connects between people, and it’s all empowering. And so if you multiply it by the speed of light, you could really change the world for the better. And call me a romanticist. I know you are too, which is why I so love being here. I believe in this. I totally and utterly believe in…
Is actually the force that shapes the universe because it is like gravity, right? It attracts people. It is like light. It brings people together and connects between people, and it’s all empowering. And so if you multiply it by the speed of light, you could really change the world for the better. And call me a romanticist. I know you are too, which is why I so love being here. I believe in this. I totally and utterly believe in…
Lex Fridman
In love. By the way, let me just excerpt from Einstein’s letter. “There’s an extremely powerful force that so far science has not found a formal explanation to. It’s a force that includes and governs all others and is even behind any phenomena operating in the universe and has not yet been identified by us. This universal force is love.” He also, the last paragraph in the letter, as you’ve mentioned, ” I deeply regret not having been able to express what is in my heart, which has quietly beaten for you all my life. Maybe it’s too late to apologize, but as time is relative,” that jokes to Einstein, “I need to tell you that I love you and thanks to you I have reached the ultimate answer. Your father, Albert Einstein.” By that regret, I deeply regret not having been able to express what is in my heart. Maybe that’s a universal regret, filling your days with busyness and silly pursuits and not sitting down and expressing that.
In love. By the way, let me just excerpt from Einstein’s letter. “There’s an extremely powerful force that so far science has not found a formal explanation to. It’s a force that includes and governs all others and is even behind any phenomena operating in the universe and has not yet been identified by us. This universal force is love.” He also, the last paragraph in the letter, as you’ve mentioned, ” I deeply regret not having been able to express what is in my heart, which has quietly beaten for you all my life. Maybe it’s too late to apologize, but as time is relative,” that jokes to Einstein, “I need to tell you that I love you and thanks to you I have reached the ultimate answer. Your father, Albert Einstein.” By that regret, I deeply regret not having been able to express what is in my heart. Maybe that’s a universal regret, filling your days with busyness and silly pursuits and not sitting down and expressing that.
Neri Oxman
But it is everything. It is everything. It is why I love that expression, and I forget who said this, but I love my daughter more than evolution required, and I feel the same way towards my other half. And I feel that when you find that connection, everything and anything is possible and it’s a very, very, very magical moment. So I believe in love and I believe in the one.
But it is everything. It is everything. It is why I love that expression, and I forget who said this, but I love my daughter more than evolution required, and I feel the same way towards my other half. And I feel that when you find that connection, everything and anything is possible and it’s a very, very, very magical moment. So I believe in love and I believe in the one.
Beauty
Lex Fridman
It might be the same thing, it might be a different thing, but let me ask you a ridiculously big philosophical question about beauty. Dostoevsky said Beauty will save the world in The Idiot, one of my favorite books of his. What is beauty to you? You’ve created through this intersection of engineering and nature, you have created some incredibly beautiful things. What do you think is beauty?
It might be the same thing, it might be a different thing, but let me ask you a ridiculously big philosophical question about beauty. Dostoevsky said Beauty will save the world in The Idiot, one of my favorite books of his. What is beauty to you? You’ve created through this intersection of engineering and nature, you have created some incredibly beautiful things. What do you think is beauty?
Neri Oxman
That’s a beautiful question.
That’s a beautiful question.
Lex Fridman
Maybe it is connected to the love question.
Maybe it is connected to the love question.
Neri Oxman
It is connected to the love question. Of course, everything is connected to the love question. To me, beauty is agency. To me, something that has agency, it is beautiful. There is this special quote from Buckminster Fuller, which I cannot remember word for word but I remember the concept, which goes something like this. When I work on a problem, I never think about beauty. But when I’m done solving the problem and I look at what I’ve created and it’s not beautiful, I know that I was wrong.
It is connected to the love question. Of course, everything is connected to the love question. To me, beauty is agency. To me, something that has agency, it is beautiful. There is this special quote from Buckminster Fuller, which I cannot remember word for word but I remember the concept, which goes something like this. When I work on a problem, I never think about beauty. But when I’m done solving the problem and I look at what I’ve created and it’s not beautiful, I know that I was wrong.
Lex Fridman
Okay, yeah.
Okay, yeah.
Neri Oxman
It’s kind of an agency that speaks to the “objective function” of the creation, right? Whether for Bucky it’s useless or useful.
It’s kind of an agency that speaks to the “objective function” of the creation, right? Whether for Bucky it’s useless or useful.
Lex Fridman
So this idea of empowerment that you talked about, it’s fundamentally connected to it.
So this idea of empowerment that you talked about, it’s fundamentally connected to it.
Neri Oxman
Comes back to that, yeah.
Comes back to that, yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s the difference that you hinted at between empowerment and emergence? Is emergence completely lacks control and empowerment is more controlled? There’s an agent making decisions? Is there an interesting distinction there?
What’s the difference that you hinted at between empowerment and emergence? Is emergence completely lacks control and empowerment is more controlled? There’s an agent making decisions? Is there an interesting distinction there?
Neri Oxman
Yes. I think empowerment is a force with direction. It has directionality to it. Emergence is, I believe, multi-directional. Again, that depends on the application. Emergence is perhaps in terms of a material definition, is a tropic spirit. When empowerment, the end is a tropic counterpart, I think they overlap because I think that empowerment is a way of inspiring emergence. I think emergence does not happen without empowerment, but empowerment can happen without emergence.
Yes. I think empowerment is a force with direction. It has directionality to it. Emergence is, I believe, multi-directional. Again, that depends on the application. Emergence is perhaps in terms of a material definition, is a tropic spirit. When empowerment, the end is a tropic counterpart, I think they overlap because I think that empowerment is a way of inspiring emergence. I think emergence does not happen without empowerment, but empowerment can happen without emergence.
Lex Fridman
Do you think of emergence as the loss of control? When you’re thinking about these capsules and then the things they create, is emergence of things not a desirable conclusion?
Do you think of emergence as the loss of control? When you’re thinking about these capsules and then the things they create, is emergence of things not a desirable conclusion?
Neri Oxman
I love that question because to some of us, the loss of control is control. In design, we’re used to extreme levels of control over form and the shape of a thing and how it behaves and how it functions. And that’s something we’ve inherited from the industrial revolution. But with nature, there is this diversity that happens without necessarily having a reward function, right? This is good or bad. Things just happen and some of them happen to have wings and some of them happen to have scales, and you end up with this incredible potential for diversity. So I think the future of design is in that soft control, is in the ability to design highly controlled systems that enable the loss of control.
I love that question because to some of us, the loss of control is control. In design, we’re used to extreme levels of control over form and the shape of a thing and how it behaves and how it functions. And that’s something we’ve inherited from the industrial revolution. But with nature, there is this diversity that happens without necessarily having a reward function, right? This is good or bad. Things just happen and some of them happen to have wings and some of them happen to have scales, and you end up with this incredible potential for diversity. So I think the future of design is in that soft control, is in the ability to design highly controlled systems that enable the loss of control.
And creativity is very much part of this because creativity is all about letting go and beginning again and beginning again and beginning again. And when you cannot let go, you cannot be creative and you can’t find novelty. But I think that letting go is a moment that enables empowerment, agency, creativity, emergence, and they’re all connected. They sort of associate themselves with definition of destiny or the inevitable. A good friend of mine shared with me elegant definition of fate, which is the ratio of who you are and who you want to be.
Lex Fridman
Ratio of who you are, who want to be.
Ratio of who you are, who want to be.
Neri Oxman
Exactly. And that sort of ends up defining you and those tools, I think when you let go, you sort of find, you give peace to your will, to a sense of will. And so I think that’s very, very important in design, but also in life.
Exactly. And that sort of ends up defining you and those tools, I think when you let go, you sort of find, you give peace to your will, to a sense of will. And so I think that’s very, very important in design, but also in life.
Faith
Lex Fridman
She said this fate is the ratio of…
She said this fate is the ratio of…
Neri Oxman
Who you are and who you want to be.
Who you are and who you want to be.
Lex Fridman
Who you want to be. Do you think there’s something to this whole manifestation thing like focusing on a vision of what you want the world to become and in that focusing you manifest it? Like Paula Coelho said in the Alchemist, “when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.” Is there something to that?
Who you want to be. Do you think there’s something to this whole manifestation thing like focusing on a vision of what you want the world to become and in that focusing you manifest it? Like Paula Coelho said in the Alchemist, “when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.” Is there something to that?
Neri Oxman
I think so, yes. And I always think of what I do as the culmination of energy, information, and matter and how to direct energy, information, and matter in the design of a thing or in the design of a life. I think living is very much a process of channeling these energies to where they need to go. I think that the manifestation or part of that manifestation is the pointing to the moon in order to get to the moon. And that’s why manifestation is also directional. It has that vector quality to it that I think of agency as.
I think so, yes. And I always think of what I do as the culmination of energy, information, and matter and how to direct energy, information, and matter in the design of a thing or in the design of a life. I think living is very much a process of channeling these energies to where they need to go. I think that the manifestation or part of that manifestation is the pointing to the moon in order to get to the moon. And that’s why manifestation is also directional. It has that vector quality to it that I think of agency as.
Lex Fridman
Have you in your own life. Has there been things you’ve done where you kind of direct that energy information and matter in a way that opens up?
Have you in your own life. Has there been things you’ve done where you kind of direct that energy information and matter in a way that opens up?
Neri Oxman
New possibilities?
New possibilities?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I mean, you’ve also said somewhere, I’m probably misquoting, that many things, you, Neri, are many things and you become new things every 10 years or so.
Yeah. I mean, you’ve also said somewhere, I’m probably misquoting, that many things, you, Neri, are many things and you become new things every 10 years or so.
Neri Oxman
Oh, I did say that somewhere, that every decade you’ve sort of switched.
Oh, I did say that somewhere, that every decade you’ve sort of switched.
Lex Fridman
That was a previous Neri that said that.
That was a previous Neri that said that.
Neri Oxman
Yeah, I did say sometime ago that you have to sort of reboot every 10 years to keep creative and keep inventive and keep fresh.
Yeah, I did say sometime ago that you have to sort of reboot every 10 years to keep creative and keep inventive and keep fresh.
Lex Fridman
Is there are things you’ve done in your life where just doors opened?
Is there are things you’ve done in your life where just doors opened?
Neri Oxman
I think everything, everything, everything good I’ve found in my life has been found in that way of letting go and suspending my sense of disbelief. And often you will find me say to the team, suspend your disbelief. I don’t care that this is impossible. Let’s assume it is. Where does it take us? And that suspension of disbelief is absolutely part and parcel of the creative act. I did so when I was in medical school, I was in Hadassah and in the Hebrew University, and I remember I left medical school for architecture the day my grandmother passed away. And that was a moment of relief and that was a door that was closing that opened other opportunities. But that of course required letting go of the great vision of becoming a doctor and letting go of the dream of being surrounded by wonderful patients and the science of medicine and the research associated with that science. And letting go of that dream to accomplish another.
I think everything, everything, everything good I’ve found in my life has been found in that way of letting go and suspending my sense of disbelief. And often you will find me say to the team, suspend your disbelief. I don’t care that this is impossible. Let’s assume it is. Where does it take us? And that suspension of disbelief is absolutely part and parcel of the creative act. I did so when I was in medical school, I was in Hadassah and in the Hebrew University, and I remember I left medical school for architecture the day my grandmother passed away. And that was a moment of relief and that was a door that was closing that opened other opportunities. But that of course required letting go of the great vision of becoming a doctor and letting go of the dream of being surrounded by wonderful patients and the science of medicine and the research associated with that science. And letting go of that dream to accomplish another.
And it has happened throughout my life in different ways. MIT was another experience like that where people pointed at me as the designer for whom the academic currency is not necessarily the citation index. And of course in order to get tenure at MIT, you have to look at the citation index. But for me it was not that. It was manifesting our work in shows and writing papers and writing patents and creating a celebration around the work. And I never saw a distinction between those ways of being. I also think that another kind of way of being or a modality of being that I found helpful is Viktor Frankl wrote this incredible book, Men’s Search for Meaning after the Holocaust. And he writes, different people pursue life for different reasons. According to Freud, the goal of life is to find pleasure and according to Adlers, to find power.
And for Viktor Frankl, it was about finding meaning. And when you let go of the titles and the disciplines and the boundaries and the expectations and the perception, you are elevated to this really special, yes, spiritual, but definitely very, very creative plane where you can sort of start anew, look at the world through the lens of a bacterium or a robot, or look at ecology through the lens of chemistry and look at chemistry through the lens of robotics and look at robotics through the lens of microbial ecologies and so on and so forth. And I feel that kind of rebooting not every 10 years, but every minute, every breath, is very, very important for a creative life and for just maintaining this fresh mind to reboot, reboot, to begin again with every breath, begin again. And that can be confusing some. For my team members, I like to change my mind. It’s who I am, it’s how I think, it’s how I operate.
And they’ll come and we found another technique or another technology that’s interesting and we thought that we were working on this functionalized fragrance, but now there’s another opportunity and let’s go there. And to me, I would much rather live life, like if I had to pick sort of my favorite Broadway show to enter and live through, it would be Into The Woods. It’s not a specific fairytale. It’s not the Sleeping Beauty or Little Red Riding Hood or Rapunzel, it’s all of them. It’s sort of moving into the forest and seeing this wonder and getting close and learning about that and then moving to another wonder. And life is really about tying all of these little fairytales together in work and also in life.
Lex Fridman
Unafraid to leap into the unknown?
Unafraid to leap into the unknown?
Neri Oxman
Unafraid to leap into the unknown.
Unafraid to leap into the unknown.
Lex Fridman
Speaking of MIT, you got a tenure at MIT and then you leaped to New York and started a new company that with a vision that doesn’t span a couple of years, but centuries.
Speaking of MIT, you got a tenure at MIT and then you leaped to New York and started a new company that with a vision that doesn’t span a couple of years, but centuries.
Neri Oxman
I did. It was my destiny to start a company. And do I have mornings when I wake up and I ask myself what the hell am I doing? Yes, I have those mornings.
I did. It was my destiny to start a company. And do I have mornings when I wake up and I ask myself what the hell am I doing? Yes, I have those mornings.
Lex Fridman
What do you do with those mornings, by the way?
What do you do with those mornings, by the way?
Neri Oxman
I embrace them and I find gratitude and I say to myself, thank goodness. I am so lucky to have the ability to be frustrated in this way. So I really, really embrace these frustrations and I take them, I wrap them in a bubble and I look at it on the outside of my aware mind and I laugh at them, I smile at them.
I embrace them and I find gratitude and I say to myself, thank goodness. I am so lucky to have the ability to be frustrated in this way. So I really, really embrace these frustrations and I take them, I wrap them in a bubble and I look at it on the outside of my aware mind and I laugh at them, I smile at them.
Lex Fridman
If I could return actually to the question of beauty for a second, I forgot to ask you something. You mentioned imperfection in the death masks. What role does imperfection play in our conception of beauty? What role does imperfection play in nature? There’s this Japanese aesthetics concept of wabi-sabi, which basically embraces imperfection. Nothing lasts, nothing is finished, and nothing is perfect. What do you think of that?
If I could return actually to the question of beauty for a second, I forgot to ask you something. You mentioned imperfection in the death masks. What role does imperfection play in our conception of beauty? What role does imperfection play in nature? There’s this Japanese aesthetics concept of wabi-sabi, which basically embraces imperfection. Nothing lasts, nothing is finished, and nothing is perfect. What do you think of that?
Neri Oxman
I totally agree that change is the only permanence. That imperfection is there if only to signal that we are part of a bigger thing than ourselves, that we are on a journey, that things are in movement. And if they were perfect, of course, when things are perfect, it is just so boring. We end up with stereotypes. And as humans, but I think just in general as living beings, we’re here to find meaning and that meaning cannot be found without struggle and without seeking to, not to perfect, but to build towards something better. When I was a child, my mother who I love so much, always explained to me how important it is to fall and to fail and to fight and to argue, and that there is a way, that there’s a culture to failing and to imperfection. So I think it is necessary for something beautiful to be imperfect and it is a sign of nature because nothing in nature is perfect.
I totally agree that change is the only permanence. That imperfection is there if only to signal that we are part of a bigger thing than ourselves, that we are on a journey, that things are in movement. And if they were perfect, of course, when things are perfect, it is just so boring. We end up with stereotypes. And as humans, but I think just in general as living beings, we’re here to find meaning and that meaning cannot be found without struggle and without seeking to, not to perfect, but to build towards something better. When I was a child, my mother who I love so much, always explained to me how important it is to fall and to fail and to fight and to argue, and that there is a way, that there’s a culture to failing and to imperfection. So I think it is necessary for something beautiful to be imperfect and it is a sign of nature because nothing in nature is perfect.
Flaws
Lex Fridman
What about human relations? You mentioned finding love. Are the flaws in humans, imperfection in humans, a component of love? What role do you think the flaws play?
What about human relations? You mentioned finding love. Are the flaws in humans, imperfection in humans, a component of love? What role do you think the flaws play?
Neri Oxman
That’s a really profound question. I think the flaws are there to present a vulnerability, and those flaws are a sign of those vulnerabilities. And I think love is very, very gentle, right? Love with Bill, we often talk about between the two of us, about what drives all human behavior. And for him it’s incentive, as you might expect, and he will repeat this sentence to me, oh, incentive drives all human behavior. But I would say to me it’s love, very much so. And I think flaws are part of that because flaws are a sign of that vulnerability, whether physical, whether emotional vulnerability, and these vulnerabilities, they either tear us apart or they bring us together.
That’s a really profound question. I think the flaws are there to present a vulnerability, and those flaws are a sign of those vulnerabilities. And I think love is very, very gentle, right? Love with Bill, we often talk about between the two of us, about what drives all human behavior. And for him it’s incentive, as you might expect, and he will repeat this sentence to me, oh, incentive drives all human behavior. But I would say to me it’s love, very much so. And I think flaws are part of that because flaws are a sign of that vulnerability, whether physical, whether emotional vulnerability, and these vulnerabilities, they either tear us apart or they bring us together.
The vulnerability is what is the glue. I think that the vulnerability enables connection. The connection is the glue, and that connection enables accessing a higher ground as a community as opposed to as an individual. So if there is a society of the mind, or if there are higher levels of awareness that can be accessed in community as opposed to again, going to the silkworm, as opposed to on the individual level, I think that those occur through the flaws and the vulnerabilities. And without them we cannot find connection, community. And without community, we can’t build what we have built as a civilization for the past hundreds of thousands of years. So I think not only are they beautiful, but they have a functional role in building civilizations.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s a sense in which love requires vulnerability and maybe love is the leap into that vulnerability.
Yeah, there’s a sense in which love requires vulnerability and maybe love is the leap into that vulnerability.
Neri Oxman
And I think yes, I think a flaw, think about it physically, I’m thinking about a brick that’s flawed, but in a way I think of a flaw as an increased surface area.
And I think yes, I think a flaw, think about it physically, I’m thinking about a brick that’s flawed, but in a way I think of a flaw as an increased surface area.
Lex Fridman
That’s a good line. That’s a good line.
That’s a good line. That’s a good line.
Neri Oxman
A surface area that physically or emotionally, right, it sort of introduces this whole new dimension to a human or a brick. And because you have more surface area, you can use mortar and build a home. And yeah, I think of it as accessing this additional dimension of surface area that could be used for good or bad to connect, to communicate, to collaborate. It makes me think of that quote from this incredible movie I’ve watched years ago, Particle Fever, I think it was called, documentary about the large hadron collider, an incredible film, where they talk about the things that are least important for our survival are the things that make us human. Like the pure romantic act or the notion of, and Viktor Frankl talks about that too.
A surface area that physically or emotionally, right, it sort of introduces this whole new dimension to a human or a brick. And because you have more surface area, you can use mortar and build a home. And yeah, I think of it as accessing this additional dimension of surface area that could be used for good or bad to connect, to communicate, to collaborate. It makes me think of that quote from this incredible movie I’ve watched years ago, Particle Fever, I think it was called, documentary about the large hadron collider, an incredible film, where they talk about the things that are least important for our survival are the things that make us human. Like the pure romantic act or the notion of, and Viktor Frankl talks about that too.
He talks about feeling the sun on his arms as he is working the soil in two degrees Fahrenheit without clothes. And the officer berates him and says, what have you done? Have you been a businessman before you came here to the camp? And he says, I was a doctor. And he said, you must’ve made a lot of money as a doctor. And he said, all my work I’ve done for free, I’ve been helping the poor. But he keeps his humility and he keeps his modesty and he keeps his preservation of the spirit. And he says the things that actually make him able to, or made him able to outlive the terrible experience in the Holocaust was really cherishing this moment when the sun hits his skin or when he can eat a grain of rice, a single grain of rice. So I think cherishing is a very important part of living a meaningful life, being able to cherish those simple things
Lex Fridman
To notice them and to-
To notice them and to-
Neri Oxman
To notice them, to pay attention to them in the moment, and I do this now more than ever.
To notice them, to pay attention to them in the moment, and I do this now more than ever.
Lex Fridman
Bakowski has this poem called Nirvana where it tells a story of a young man on a bus going through North Carolina or something like this, and they stop off in a cafe and there’s a waitress and he talks about that he notices the magic, something indescribable, he just notices the magic of it. And he gets back on the bus with the rest of the passengers. And none of them seem to have noticed the magic. And I think if you just allow yourself to pause, just to feel whatever that is, maybe ultimately it’s a kind of gratitude for, I don’t know what it is. I’m sure it’s just chemicals in the brain, but it is just so incredible to be alive and noticing that and appreciating that and being one in that with others.
Bakowski has this poem called Nirvana where it tells a story of a young man on a bus going through North Carolina or something like this, and they stop off in a cafe and there’s a waitress and he talks about that he notices the magic, something indescribable, he just notices the magic of it. And he gets back on the bus with the rest of the passengers. And none of them seem to have noticed the magic. And I think if you just allow yourself to pause, just to feel whatever that is, maybe ultimately it’s a kind of gratitude for, I don’t know what it is. I’m sure it’s just chemicals in the brain, but it is just so incredible to be alive and noticing that and appreciating that and being one in that with others.
Neri Oxman
Yes. Yes. And that goes back to the fireplace, right to the first technology. What was the first technology? It was fire, first technology to have built community. And it emerged out of a vulnerability of wanting to stay away from the cold and be warm together. And of course, that fire is associated with not only with comfort and the ability to form bio relevant nutrients in our food and provide heat and comfort, but also spirits and a kind of way to enter a spiritual moment, to enter a moment that can only be experienced in a community as a form of a meditative moment. There is a lot to be said about light. Light is, I think, an important part of these moments of, I think it’s a real thing. I really truly believe that we’re born with an aura surface area that is measurable. I think we’re born into the world with an aura. And how do we channel that really ends up sort of defining the light in our lives.
Yes. Yes. And that goes back to the fireplace, right to the first technology. What was the first technology? It was fire, first technology to have built community. And it emerged out of a vulnerability of wanting to stay away from the cold and be warm together. And of course, that fire is associated with not only with comfort and the ability to form bio relevant nutrients in our food and provide heat and comfort, but also spirits and a kind of way to enter a spiritual moment, to enter a moment that can only be experienced in a community as a form of a meditative moment. There is a lot to be said about light. Light is, I think, an important part of these moments of, I think it’s a real thing. I really truly believe that we’re born with an aura surface area that is measurable. I think we’re born into the world with an aura. And how do we channel that really ends up sort of defining the light in our lives.
Lex Fridman
Do you think we’re all lonely? Do you think there’s loneliness in us humans?
Do you think we’re all lonely? Do you think there’s loneliness in us humans?
Neri Oxman
Oh yes, yes. Loneliness is part, yes. I think we all have that loneliness, whether we’re willing to access that loneliness and look at it in the eye or completely, completely avoid it or deny it.
Oh yes, yes. Loneliness is part, yes. I think we all have that loneliness, whether we’re willing to access that loneliness and look at it in the eye or completely, completely avoid it or deny it.
Lex Fridman
It feels like it’s some kind of foundation for longing and longing leads to this combination of vulnerability and connection with others.
It feels like it’s some kind of foundation for longing and longing leads to this combination of vulnerability and connection with others.
Neri Oxman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
It feels like that’s a really important part of being human as being lonely.
It feels like that’s a really important part of being human as being lonely.
Neri Oxman
Very. We are born into this world alone. Again, being alone and being lonely are two different things and you can be together, but be lonely and you can be alone but not be lonely at all. We often joke, Bill and I, that he cannot be lonely. He cannot deal with being by himself. He always needs people around him. And I strive, long, must have creative solitude, must find pockets of solitude and loneliness in order to find creativity and reconnect with myself. So loneliness is a recipe for community in my opinion. And I think those things compliment each other. And they’re synergetic, absolutely. The yin and yang of togetherness. And they allow you, I think, to reset and to tune in to that ratio we talked about of who you are and who you want to be.
Very. We are born into this world alone. Again, being alone and being lonely are two different things and you can be together, but be lonely and you can be alone but not be lonely at all. We often joke, Bill and I, that he cannot be lonely. He cannot deal with being by himself. He always needs people around him. And I strive, long, must have creative solitude, must find pockets of solitude and loneliness in order to find creativity and reconnect with myself. So loneliness is a recipe for community in my opinion. And I think those things compliment each other. And they’re synergetic, absolutely. The yin and yang of togetherness. And they allow you, I think, to reset and to tune in to that ratio we talked about of who you are and who you want to be.
Lex Fridman
If you go to this place of creative solitude, what’s your creative process? Is there something you’ve noticed about what you do that leads to good work?
If you go to this place of creative solitude, what’s your creative process? Is there something you’ve noticed about what you do that leads to good work?
Neri Oxman
I love to be able not only to lose focus, but kind of to focus on the peripheral view and to allow different things to occur at once. So I will often, in my loneliness journeys, I will often listen to Leonard Bernstein. Anything I can find online by Lenny Bernstein, it’s reading a nature paper, it’s War and Peace. It’s really revisiting all the texts that are so timeless for me with opportunities that are very, very timely. And I think for me, the creative process is really about bringing timeless problems or concepts together with timely technologies to observe them. I remember when we did the Mandela Pavilion, we read Moby Dick, the whiteness of the whale, the albino, the different the other, and that got us to work on melanin and melanine also is sort of an output from the death mass. So it’s lots of things happening at the same time and really allowing them to come together to form this view about the world through the lens of a spirit being or a living being or a material. And then focus on the world through the lens of that material.
I love to be able not only to lose focus, but kind of to focus on the peripheral view and to allow different things to occur at once. So I will often, in my loneliness journeys, I will often listen to Leonard Bernstein. Anything I can find online by Lenny Bernstein, it’s reading a nature paper, it’s War and Peace. It’s really revisiting all the texts that are so timeless for me with opportunities that are very, very timely. And I think for me, the creative process is really about bringing timeless problems or concepts together with timely technologies to observe them. I remember when we did the Mandela Pavilion, we read Moby Dick, the whiteness of the whale, the albino, the different the other, and that got us to work on melanin and melanine also is sort of an output from the death mass. So it’s lots of things happening at the same time and really allowing them to come together to form this view about the world through the lens of a spirit being or a living being or a material. And then focus on the world through the lens of that material.
The glasswork was another project like that where we were fascinated by glass because obviously it’s superb material for architecture, but we created this new glass printing technology for the first time that was shedding light on the biomechanics of fluid glass, the math and the physics of which was never done before, which was so exciting to us, but revealing new knowledge about the world through technology. That’s one theme. The reincarnation between things, material and immaterial. That’s another theme. Lenny Bernstein, War and Peace, Tolstoy.
Lex Fridman
You’ve tweeted a Tolstoy quote from War and Peace, as of course you would. Everything I know, I know because of love.
You’ve tweeted a Tolstoy quote from War and Peace, as of course you would. Everything I know, I know because of love.
Neri Oxman
Yeah, I love this quote.
Yeah, I love this quote.
Lex Fridman
So you use these kind of inspirations to focus you and then find the actual idea in the periphery.
So you use these kind of inspirations to focus you and then find the actual idea in the periphery.
Neri Oxman
Yes. And then connect them with whatever it is that we’re working on, whether it’s high throughput, directed evolution of bacteria, whether it’s recreating that Garden of Eden in the capsule and what it looks like, the food of the future. It is a little bit like directing a film. Creating a new project is a bit like creating a film. And you have these heroes, you have these characters and you put them together and there is a narrative and there’s a story. Whenever we start a new project, it has to have these ingredients of simultaneous complexity. It has to be novel in terms of the synthetic biology, material science, robotics, engineering, all of these elements that are discipline based or rooted must be novel.
Yes. And then connect them with whatever it is that we’re working on, whether it’s high throughput, directed evolution of bacteria, whether it’s recreating that Garden of Eden in the capsule and what it looks like, the food of the future. It is a little bit like directing a film. Creating a new project is a bit like creating a film. And you have these heroes, you have these characters and you put them together and there is a narrative and there’s a story. Whenever we start a new project, it has to have these ingredients of simultaneous complexity. It has to be novel in terms of the synthetic biology, material science, robotics, engineering, all of these elements that are discipline based or rooted must be novel.
If you can combine novelty in synthetic biology with a novelty in robotics, with a novelty in material science, with a novelty in computational design, you are bound to create something novel, period. And that’s how I run the company and that’s how I pick the people. And so that’s another very, very important ingredient of the cutting edge across multiple disciplines that come together. And then in the background, in the periphery, there is all these messages, the whispers of the ancient oldies, right? The Beethoven’s and the Picassos.
Lex Fridman
So Beethoven’s always whispering to you.
So Beethoven’s always whispering to you.
Neri Oxman
Yeah. How could one not include Beethoven in the whispers?
Yeah. How could one not include Beethoven in the whispers?
Lex Fridman
I’m going to ask you about Beethoven and the Evgeny Kissin you’ve mentioned because I’ve played piano my whole life. I obviously know a lot of Beethoven and it’s one of the private things for me, I suppose, because don’t think I’ve ever publicly played piano.-
I’m going to ask you about Beethoven and the Evgeny Kissin you’ve mentioned because I’ve played piano my whole life. I obviously know a lot of Beethoven and it’s one of the private things for me, I suppose, because don’t think I’ve ever publicly played piano.-
Neri Oxman
By the way. Me too.
By the way. Me too.
Lex Fridman
I mean at night-
I mean at night-
Neri Oxman
I play in private only.
I play in private only.
Lex Fridman
People sometimes even with guitar, people ask me, can you play something? And it just feels like certain things are
People sometimes even with guitar, people ask me, can you play something? And it just feels like certain things are
Neri Oxman
Are meant to be done-
Are meant to be done-
Lex Fridman
Privately. Yeah, it’s weird. I mean it’s a difficult, and some of the times I have performed publicly, it is an ultimate leap in vulnerability. It’s very, very, very difficult for me. And I’m sure, I know it’s not for a lot of people, but it is for me. Anyway, we’ll return to that. But since you’ve mentioned combination of novelty across multiple disciplines and that’s what you seek when you build teams or pick people you work with, I just wanted to linger on this idea of what kind of humans are you looking for in this endeavor that you’re taking on, this fascinating thing that you’ve been talking about. One of the things somewhere else, a previous version, version 5.7 of Neri said somewhere that there’s four fields that are combined to create this intersection of biology and engineering work, and it’s computational design, additive manufacturing, material engineering, synthetic biology. I’m sure there’s others, but how do you find these humans? Machine learnings in the mix.
Privately. Yeah, it’s weird. I mean it’s a difficult, and some of the times I have performed publicly, it is an ultimate leap in vulnerability. It’s very, very, very difficult for me. And I’m sure, I know it’s not for a lot of people, but it is for me. Anyway, we’ll return to that. But since you’ve mentioned combination of novelty across multiple disciplines and that’s what you seek when you build teams or pick people you work with, I just wanted to linger on this idea of what kind of humans are you looking for in this endeavor that you’re taking on, this fascinating thing that you’ve been talking about. One of the things somewhere else, a previous version, version 5.7 of Neri said somewhere that there’s four fields that are combined to create this intersection of biology and engineering work, and it’s computational design, additive manufacturing, material engineering, synthetic biology. I’m sure there’s others, but how do you find these humans? Machine learnings in the mix.
Neri Oxman
I manifest and they come, there are a few approaches to-
I manifest and they come, there are a few approaches to-
Lex Fridman
Manifest.
Manifest.
Neri Oxman
They show up.
They show up.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Neri Oxman
Send your message upon the water. I mean those job descriptions that you saw, the first ones I wrote by myself, and you find interesting people and brilliant people when you look, we talked about second derivative. When you look under and under and under. And if you look deep enough and specialized enough and if you allow yourself to look at the cracks, at the flaws, at the cracks between disciplines and between skills, you find really, really interesting diamonds in the rough. And so I like for those job descriptions to be those messages in a bottle that bring those really interesting people our way. I mean, they have to have humility. They have to have a shine in their eye. They have to be hungry and foolish, as Steve Jobs so famously said.
Send your message upon the water. I mean those job descriptions that you saw, the first ones I wrote by myself, and you find interesting people and brilliant people when you look, we talked about second derivative. When you look under and under and under. And if you look deep enough and specialized enough and if you allow yourself to look at the cracks, at the flaws, at the cracks between disciplines and between skills, you find really, really interesting diamonds in the rough. And so I like for those job descriptions to be those messages in a bottle that bring those really interesting people our way. I mean, they have to have humility. They have to have a shine in their eye. They have to be hungry and foolish, as Steve Jobs so famously said.
A friend of mine who’s a dean of well-known architectural school said today, architects don’t want to be architects. Architects don’t look up to the starchitects as role models. Starchitects are no longer role models. Architects want to build by virtue of not building. Architects want, she said, we’re back in the sixties when we think about architecture back in the hippie movement, I think that in a way they have to be somewhat of a hippie, somewhat of a kind of jack of all trades, master of all.
Lex Fridman
And yet with humility.
And yet with humility.
Neri Oxman
And yet with humility. Now that is hard to find and that is why when I start an interview, I talk about childhood memories and I asked about music and I ask about connection. And through these interviews you can learn a lot about a person’s future by spending time hearing them talk about their past.
And yet with humility. Now that is hard to find and that is why when I start an interview, I talk about childhood memories and I asked about music and I ask about connection. And through these interviews you can learn a lot about a person’s future by spending time hearing them talk about their past.
Lex Fridman
Do you find that educational, like PhDs versus, what’s the life trajectory? Yours is an interesting life trajectory too. What’s the life trajectory that leads to the…
Do you find that educational, like PhDs versus, what’s the life trajectory? Yours is an interesting life trajectory too. What’s the life trajectory that leads to the…
Lex Fridman
What’s the life trajectory that leads to the kind of person that would work with you?
What’s the life trajectory that leads to the kind of person that would work with you?
Neri Oxman
It’s people who have ideally had industry experience and know what it’s like to be in the quote unquote real world. They’re dreamers that are addicted to reality as opposed to realists that are addicted to dreams, meaning they have that innocence in them, they have the hunger, they have the idealism without being entitled and with understanding the systems that govern our world and understanding how to utilize these systems as Trojan horses to bring those values into the world. There are individuals who feel comfortable in this friction between highly wondrous and dreamy and incredible fantasy renditions of what the world could be and extremely brilliant skills in terms of their disciplinary background. PhD with industrial experience in a certain field or a double major in two fields that make no sense whatsoever in their combination.
It’s people who have ideally had industry experience and know what it’s like to be in the quote unquote real world. They’re dreamers that are addicted to reality as opposed to realists that are addicted to dreams, meaning they have that innocence in them, they have the hunger, they have the idealism without being entitled and with understanding the systems that govern our world and understanding how to utilize these systems as Trojan horses to bring those values into the world. There are individuals who feel comfortable in this friction between highly wondrous and dreamy and incredible fantasy renditions of what the world could be and extremely brilliant skills in terms of their disciplinary background. PhD with industrial experience in a certain field or a double major in two fields that make no sense whatsoever in their combination.
Lex Fridman
I love it. Yeah.
I love it. Yeah.
Neri Oxman
Are things that really, really attract me.
Are things that really, really attract me.
Lex Fridman
Especially the span, the technology biology gap.
Especially the span, the technology biology gap.
Neri Oxman
Yes. Technology, biology, nature, culture. I mean, the secret to one thing is through the lens of another. And I always believe in that kind of translational design ability to be able to see something through the lens of another and always allows you to think again, begin again, reestablish, redefine, suspend your disbelief, revisit. And when you revisit enough times like a hundred times or 200 times and you revisit the same question through the lens of any possible discipline and any possible scenario, eventually you get to the truth.
Yes. Technology, biology, nature, culture. I mean, the secret to one thing is through the lens of another. And I always believe in that kind of translational design ability to be able to see something through the lens of another and always allows you to think again, begin again, reestablish, redefine, suspend your disbelief, revisit. And when you revisit enough times like a hundred times or 200 times and you revisit the same question through the lens of any possible discipline and any possible scenario, eventually you get to the truth.
Extinction
Lex Fridman
I have to ask you, because you work at the interplay of the machine and the natural world, is there a good definition for you of what is life? What is a living organism?
I have to ask you, because you work at the interplay of the machine and the natural world, is there a good definition for you of what is life? What is a living organism?
Neri Oxman
I think 440 million years ago, there were all these plants, the cyanobacteria I believe actually. That was the first extinction. There were five extinctions. We are apparently the sixth. We are in the eye of the storm. We are in the sixth extinction. We are going to be extinct as we speak. I mean, death is upon us whether we want to admit it or not.
I think 440 million years ago, there were all these plants, the cyanobacteria I believe actually. That was the first extinction. There were five extinctions. We are apparently the sixth. We are in the eye of the storm. We are in the sixth extinction. We are going to be extinct as we speak. I mean, death is upon us whether we want to admit it or not.
And actually they found in Argentina and in various places around the world, they found these spores of the first plants that existed on the planet. And they emerged out of these … Cyanobacteria were the first of course, and then they found these spore based plants. And because they didn’t have seeds there were only spores. The spores became sort of the fossils by which we’ve come to known of their existence. And because of these spores, we know that this first extinction existed.
But this extinction is actually what enabled plants to resurrect. The death of these first plants, because they clinked to the rocks and they generated a ton of phosphorus that went into the ocean by clinging to the rocks 60 times more phosphorus than without them. And then all this phosphorus basically choked the oceans and made them super cold and without oxygen, anoxic. And then we lost the plant kingdom, and then because of the death of these first plants, they actually enriched the soil and created nutrients for these new plants to come to the planet. And those planets had more sophisticated vein systems and they were moving beyond spores to seeded plants, et cetera, and flowering plants. And so in a way, one mass extinction or the division period led to life as we know it. And where would we be without plants in a way?
I think that death is very much part of life and through that definition, that kind of planetary wide definition in the context of hundreds of millions of years, life gains a completely new light. And that’s when the particles become a wave, where humans, we are not alone and we are here because of those plants. I think death is very much part of life. In the context of the redwood tree, perhaps life is defined as 10 generations. And through the lens of a bacteria, perhaps life is defined as a millisecond. And perhaps through the lens of an AGI, life is defined as all of human civilization. And so I think it really is a question of this timescale again, the timescale and the organism, the life form that’s asking the question through which we can answer, what is life?
Lex Fridman
What do you think about this? If we think of ourselves in the eye of the storm of another extinction, the natural question to ask here is you have all of nature and then you have this new human creation that is currently being termed artificial intelligence. How does your work play with the possibility of a future super intelligent ecosystem, an AGI that either joins or supersedes humans?
What do you think about this? If we think of ourselves in the eye of the storm of another extinction, the natural question to ask here is you have all of nature and then you have this new human creation that is currently being termed artificial intelligence. How does your work play with the possibility of a future super intelligent ecosystem, an AGI that either joins or supersedes humans?
Neri Oxman
I’m glad you asked this question.
I’m glad you asked this question.
Lex Fridman
And are you hopeful or terrified?
And are you hopeful or terrified?
Neri Oxman
Both. I’m hopeful and terrified. I did watch your interview with Eliezer Yudkowsky and I loved it
Both. I’m hopeful and terrified. I did watch your interview with Eliezer Yudkowsky and I loved it
Lex Fridman
Because you were scared or because you were excited or because there was a [inaudible 01:51:29]?
Because you were scared or because you were excited or because there was a [inaudible 01:51:29]?
Neri Oxman
First of all, I was both. Totally scared, shamed, excited, and totally also inspired because he’s just such an incredible thinker. And I can agree or disagree with what he says, but I just found his way of thinking about AGI and the perils of humanity as a result.
First of all, I was both. Totally scared, shamed, excited, and totally also inspired because he’s just such an incredible thinker. And I can agree or disagree with what he says, but I just found his way of thinking about AGI and the perils of humanity as a result.
Lex Fridman
There’s an inevitability to what he’s saying. His advice to young people is that prepare for a short life. He thinks it’s very almost simple. It’s almost common sense that AGI would get rid of humans, that he can’t imagine a trajectory eventually that leads to a place that doesn’t have AGI kill all humans. There’s just too many trajectories where a super intelligent systems gets rid of humans and in the near term. And so that clarity of thinking is very sobering. To me, maybe it is to you as well, it’s super inspiring because I think he’s wrong, but it’s like you almost want to prove him wrong. It’s like, “No, we humans are a clever bunch. We’re going to find a way.”
There’s an inevitability to what he’s saying. His advice to young people is that prepare for a short life. He thinks it’s very almost simple. It’s almost common sense that AGI would get rid of humans, that he can’t imagine a trajectory eventually that leads to a place that doesn’t have AGI kill all humans. There’s just too many trajectories where a super intelligent systems gets rid of humans and in the near term. And so that clarity of thinking is very sobering. To me, maybe it is to you as well, it’s super inspiring because I think he’s wrong, but it’s like you almost want to prove him wrong. It’s like, “No, we humans are a clever bunch. We’re going to find a way.”
Neri Oxman
It is a bit like jumping into super cold water. It’s sort of a kind of fist in your face. It wakes you up. And I like these moments so much, and he was able to bring that moment to life, even though I think a mother can never think that way ever. And it’s a little bit like that notion of I love her more than evolution requires.
It is a bit like jumping into super cold water. It’s sort of a kind of fist in your face. It wakes you up. And I like these moments so much, and he was able to bring that moment to life, even though I think a mother can never think that way ever. And it’s a little bit like that notion of I love her more than evolution requires.
On your question about AGI and nature, look, I think we’ve been through a lot in terms of to get here, we sort of moved from data, the ability to collect information to knowledge, the ability to use this information for utility, from knowledge to intelligence. And what is intelligence? It’s the ability to problem solve and adapt and translate. That’s sort of from data to information to knowledge. I think the next frontier is wisdom. And what is wisdom? Wisdom is the ability to have or find insight about the world and from wisdom to spiritual awareness, which sort of transcends wisdom and is able to chart the world into new territory.
But I think what is interesting about AGI is that it is sort of almost like a self recursive thing, because it’s like a washing machine of a third derivative Wikipedia. It uses kind of language to create language, to create language, to create language.
Lex Fridman
It feels like novelty is being constantly created. It doesn’t feel like it’s regurgitating.
It feels like novelty is being constantly created. It doesn’t feel like it’s regurgitating.
Neri Oxman
And that’s so fascinating because these are not the stochastic parrots. This is sort of a new form of emergence perhaps of novelty as you say, that exists by virtue of using old things to create new things.
And that’s so fascinating because these are not the stochastic parrots. This is sort of a new form of emergence perhaps of novelty as you say, that exists by virtue of using old things to create new things.
But it’s not as if the AGI has self-awareness. Maybe. Maybe it has, but as far as I can tell, it’s not as if AGI has approached consciousness or sentience just yet. It’s probably getting there. But the language appears to present itself as if there is sentience there, but it doesn’t. But I think that’s the problem at the point where this AGI sounds like me and speaks like me and behaves like me and feels like me and breathes like me and my daughter knows the AGI to be me as sort of the end of everything is the end of human agency.
But what is the end of human agency to humans I think is the beginning of agency to nature. Because if you take all of this agency, if you take all of these language models that can summarize all of human civilization and consciousness and then upload that to nature and have nature now deal with that world of consciousness that it never had access to.
Maybe through Eliezer’s lens, the sort of short-lived human becomes sort of a very long-lived humanlike, sentient, weeping willow. Maybe that’s the end in the beginning. And maybe on the more optimistic side for us humans, it’s a different form of existence where everything we create and everything we consume and everything we process is all made out of six elements and that’s it. And there’s only those six elements and not 118 elements. And it’s all the stuff of biology plus some fair amount of bits, genes, and atoms. A lot of Beethoven.
Lex Fridman
A lot of Beethoven. I think the idea of connecting AGI to nature through your work is really fascinating. Sort of unlocking this incredible machinery of intelligence that is AGI and connecting it to the incredible machinery of wisdom that is nature has evolved through billions of years of pretty crazy intense evolution.
A lot of Beethoven. I think the idea of connecting AGI to nature through your work is really fascinating. Sort of unlocking this incredible machinery of intelligence that is AGI and connecting it to the incredible machinery of wisdom that is nature has evolved through billions of years of pretty crazy intense evolution.
Neri Oxman
Exactly. Again, I’m going back to directed evolution. Unlike this sort of high throughput brute force approach, if there is a way to utilize this synergy for diversity and diversification, what happens if you ask a ChatGPT question, but it takes 10,000 years to answer that question? What does that look like when you completely switch the timescale and you can afford the time to answer the question? And again, I don’t know, but that world to me is possibly amazing.
Exactly. Again, I’m going back to directed evolution. Unlike this sort of high throughput brute force approach, if there is a way to utilize this synergy for diversity and diversification, what happens if you ask a ChatGPT question, but it takes 10,000 years to answer that question? What does that look like when you completely switch the timescale and you can afford the time to answer the question? And again, I don’t know, but that world to me is possibly amazing.
Alien life
Lex Fridman
Because when we start to think about timescales like this, just looking at earth, all the possible trajectories it might take of this living organism that is earth, do you think there’s others like it? Do you think there’s other planets with life forms on them that are just doing their thing in this kind of way?
Because when we start to think about timescales like this, just looking at earth, all the possible trajectories it might take of this living organism that is earth, do you think there’s others like it? Do you think there’s other planets with life forms on them that are just doing their thing in this kind of way?
Neri Oxman
Planets.
Planets.
Lex Fridman
Because in what you’re doing, you’re directly playing with what’s possible with life, lifelike things. That kind of maps the question of, well, what kind of other things are possible elsewhere? Do you think there’s other worlds full of life, full of alien life out there?
Because in what you’re doing, you’re directly playing with what’s possible with life, lifelike things. That kind of maps the question of, well, what kind of other things are possible elsewhere? Do you think there’s other worlds full of life, full of alien life out there?
Neri Oxman
I’ve studied the calculations that point towards the verdict that the possibility of life in and around us is very, very low. We are a chosen planet in a way. There’s water and there’s love. What else do you need? And that sort of very peculiar juxtaposition of conditions, the oxygen, the water, the carbon again, is in a way a miracle given the massive extinctions that we’ve been through as life forms.
I’ve studied the calculations that point towards the verdict that the possibility of life in and around us is very, very low. We are a chosen planet in a way. There’s water and there’s love. What else do you need? And that sort of very peculiar juxtaposition of conditions, the oxygen, the water, the carbon again, is in a way a miracle given the massive extinctions that we’ve been through as life forms.
And that said, I cannot believe that there is no other life form. I want to believe more than I know that yes, that there are life forms in the white fountain that is the black hole, that there are these life forms that are light years away from us, that are forming other forms of life forces.
Lex Fridman
I’m much more worried about probably the thing that you’re working on, which is that there’s all kinds of life around us that we’re not communicating with.
I’m much more worried about probably the thing that you’re working on, which is that there’s all kinds of life around us that we’re not communicating with.
Neri Oxman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
That there’s aliens in a sense all around us that we’re not seeing, that we’re not talking to, that we’re not communicating. Because that to me just seems the more likely situation.
That there’s aliens in a sense all around us that we’re not seeing, that we’re not talking to, that we’re not communicating. Because that to me just seems the more likely situation.
Neri Oxman
That they’re here.
That they’re here.
Lex Fridman
That they’re here, they’re all around us in different forms, that there’s a thing that connects all of us, all of living beings across the universe, and we’re just beginning to understand any of it. And I feel like that’s the important problem is I feel like you can get there with the tools of science today by just studying life on earth. Unlock some really fundamental things that maybe you can start to answer questions about what is consciousness? Maybe this thing that we’ve been saying about love, but honestly, in a serious way. And then you’ll start to understand that there is alien life all out there, and it’s much more complicated and interesting than we kind of realize as opposed to looking to exactly human-like things. It’s the variety of life that’s possible is just almost endless.
That they’re here, they’re all around us in different forms, that there’s a thing that connects all of us, all of living beings across the universe, and we’re just beginning to understand any of it. And I feel like that’s the important problem is I feel like you can get there with the tools of science today by just studying life on earth. Unlock some really fundamental things that maybe you can start to answer questions about what is consciousness? Maybe this thing that we’ve been saying about love, but honestly, in a serious way. And then you’ll start to understand that there is alien life all out there, and it’s much more complicated and interesting than we kind of realize as opposed to looking to exactly human-like things. It’s the variety of life that’s possible is just almost endless.
Neri Oxman
I totally agree with you. I think again, define alien, right?
I totally agree with you. I think again, define alien, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Define intelligence, define life.
Yeah. Define intelligence, define life.
Neri Oxman
Right. And Marvin Minsky used to say, “Intelligence is a suitcase word.” It’s a word so big. It’s a word like sustainability, and it’s a word like rock and roll. And suitcase words are always very, very dangerous.
Right. And Marvin Minsky used to say, “Intelligence is a suitcase word.” It’s a word so big. It’s a word like sustainability, and it’s a word like rock and roll. And suitcase words are always very, very dangerous.
Music
Lex Fridman
Speaking of rock and roll, you’ve mentioned music and you mentioned Beethoven a bunch of times. You’ve also tweeted about you getting Kiss in performance and so on. What can you say about the role of music in your life?
Speaking of rock and roll, you’ve mentioned music and you mentioned Beethoven a bunch of times. You’ve also tweeted about you getting Kiss in performance and so on. What can you say about the role of music in your life?
Neri Oxman
I love music. I always wondered why is it that plastic arts, meaning architecture and sculpture and painting, can’t get us to cry and music gets us to cry so quickly and connect so quickly? And no wonder that plants also respond to music, but that is at the top of the creative pyramid in my opinion.
I love music. I always wondered why is it that plastic arts, meaning architecture and sculpture and painting, can’t get us to cry and music gets us to cry so quickly and connect so quickly? And no wonder that plants also respond to music, but that is at the top of the creative pyramid in my opinion.
Lex Fridman
It’s a weird mystery that we’re so connected to music. Well, by the way, to push back, a good bridge will make me cry.
It’s a weird mystery that we’re so connected to music. Well, by the way, to push back, a good bridge will make me cry.
Neri Oxman
It’s true. And I will say when I visited the Segreta Familia, I had that kind of spiritual reverence towards that spatial experience and being in that space and feeling the intention and the space and appreciating every little gesture. It’s true. It is the universal language. It’s the language of waves. It’s the language of the waves, not the language of the particles. It is the universal language, I believe, and that is definitely one of my loves.
It’s true. And I will say when I visited the Segreta Familia, I had that kind of spiritual reverence towards that spatial experience and being in that space and feeling the intention and the space and appreciating every little gesture. It’s true. It is the universal language. It’s the language of waves. It’s the language of the waves, not the language of the particles. It is the universal language, I believe, and that is definitely one of my loves.
Movies
Lex Fridman
And you said that if you weren’t doing what you were doing now, perhaps you would be a film director. I have to ask, what do you think is the best film of all time? Maybe top three?
And you said that if you weren’t doing what you were doing now, perhaps you would be a film director. I have to ask, what do you think is the best film of all time? Maybe top three?
Neri Oxman
Maybe The Godfather.
Maybe The Godfather.
Lex Fridman
Godfather, okay.
Godfather, okay.
Neri Oxman
The Godfather is definitely up there. Francis Coppola is one of my heroes.
The Godfather is definitely up there. Francis Coppola is one of my heroes.
Lex Fridman
Have you met him?
Have you met him?
Neri Oxman
I have met him, yes. Yes, yes. We were very lucky to work with him on his new film, Megalopolis, which is coming out I hope in 2024. And think about the cities of the future in the context of new materials and the unity between nature and culture. Godfather is definitely up there.
I have met him, yes. Yes, yes. We were very lucky to work with him on his new film, Megalopolis, which is coming out I hope in 2024. And think about the cities of the future in the context of new materials and the unity between nature and culture. Godfather is definitely up there.
2001 is up there. I would watch that film again and again and again. It’s incredible. The last scene in Odyssey 2001, just watch the last scene of 2001, then listen to Yudkowsky, and then go to the garden. And that’s pretty much the end in the beginning.
But that scene, that last scene from 2001 is everything. It says so much with so little and it’s sort of the embodiment I believe, of ambivalence. And there’s opportunity to believe in the beginning of humankind, the end of humankind, the planet, child star or star child of the future. Was there a death? Was there an reincarnation? That final scene to me is something that I go back to and study, and every time there is a different reading of that scene that inspires me. That scene, and then the first scene in The Godfather, still one of the best scenes of all times, sort of a portrait of America, the ideals and values that are brought from Italy.
Lex Fridman
A family of loyalty.
A family of loyalty.
Neri Oxman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Of values of how different values are constructed.
Of values of how different values are constructed.
Neri Oxman
Yes. Loyalty and the human spirit and how Coppola celebrates the human spirit through the most simple gestures in language and acting. And I think in Kubrick you see this highly curated and controlled and manicured vision of creating a film. And with Francis, it’s like an Italian feast. It’s like anything can happen at any moment in time. And just being on the set with him is an experience I’ll take with me to my grave. It’s very, very, very special.
Yes. Loyalty and the human spirit and how Coppola celebrates the human spirit through the most simple gestures in language and acting. And I think in Kubrick you see this highly curated and controlled and manicured vision of creating a film. And with Francis, it’s like an Italian feast. It’s like anything can happen at any moment in time. And just being on the set with him is an experience I’ll take with me to my grave. It’s very, very, very special.
Lex Fridman
And you said music is also part of that, of creating a feeling in the movies?
And you said music is also part of that, of creating a feeling in the movies?
Neri Oxman
Yeah, actually The Godfather, that tune-
Yeah, actually The Godfather, that tune-
Lex Fridman
That makes me emotional every time on some weird level.
That makes me emotional every time on some weird level.
Neri Oxman
Yeah. It’s one of these tunes I’m sure that if you play it to a Jasmine, you’ll get the best scent of all times. But I think with that particular tune, I learned staccato as something very, very happy and joyous. And then made into this stretched in time and became kind of the refrain of nostalgia and melancholy and loyalty and all of these values that ride on top of this one single tune.
Yeah. It’s one of these tunes I’m sure that if you play it to a Jasmine, you’ll get the best scent of all times. But I think with that particular tune, I learned staccato as something very, very happy and joyous. And then made into this stretched in time and became kind of the refrain of nostalgia and melancholy and loyalty and all of these values that ride on top of this one single tune.
Lex Fridman
And you can play it in all kinds of different ways. I’ve played it on guitar and all kinds of different ways. And I think in Godfather III, the son plays it on guitar to the father. I think this happens in movies, but sometimes a melody, and it has a simple melody, you can just like-
And you can play it in all kinds of different ways. I’ve played it on guitar and all kinds of different ways. And I think in Godfather III, the son plays it on guitar to the father. I think this happens in movies, but sometimes a melody, and it has a simple melody, you can just like-
Neri Oxman
And the Straus melody in 2001. And when you juxtapose this melodies with this scene, you get this, again, hole that’s bigger than some of its parts where you get this moment, I think. These are the moments I would send with the next Voyager to outer space. The Godfather in 2001 would definitely beyond that golden record.
And the Straus melody in 2001. And when you juxtapose this melodies with this scene, you get this, again, hole that’s bigger than some of its parts where you get this moment, I think. These are the moments I would send with the next Voyager to outer space. The Godfather in 2001 would definitely beyond that golden record.
Advice for young people
Lex Fridman
You are an incredibly successful scientist, engineer, architect, artist, designer. You’ve mentored a lot of successful people. Can you give advice to young people listening to this of how to have a successful career and how to have a successful life?
You are an incredibly successful scientist, engineer, architect, artist, designer. You’ve mentored a lot of successful people. Can you give advice to young people listening to this of how to have a successful career and how to have a successful life?
Neri Oxman
Look, I think there’s this beautiful line in Sheltering Sky. How many times have you seen a full moon in your life and actually took the time to ingest and explore and reflect upon the full moon? Probably 20, I believe he says.
Look, I think there’s this beautiful line in Sheltering Sky. How many times have you seen a full moon in your life and actually took the time to ingest and explore and reflect upon the full moon? Probably 20, I believe he says.
I spend time with a full moon. I take my time with a full moon and I pay attention to a full moon. And I think paying attention to the seasons and taking time to appreciate the little things, the simple things is what makes a meaningful life. I was very lucky to have grown up in a home that taught me this way of being. My parents, my grandmother, who played a very important role in my growing up. And that ability to pay attention and to be present is so, so, so, so … I could not emphasize it enough, is so crucial.
Lex Fridman
And be grateful.
And be grateful.
Neri Oxman
And be grateful. I think gratitude and presence, appreciation are really the most important things in life.
And be grateful. I think gratitude and presence, appreciation are really the most important things in life.
Lex Fridman
If you could take a short tangent about your grandmother who’s played a big role in your life, what do you remember? What lessons have you learned from her?
If you could take a short tangent about your grandmother who’s played a big role in your life, what do you remember? What lessons have you learned from her?
Neri Oxman
She had this blanket that she would give me every time I came back from school and say, “Do your homework here and meet with your friends here.” And it was always in her garden. And her garden in my mind was ginormous. But when last I went there and saw the site, which has now become the site for another tall building, it was a tiny, tiny little garden that to me, seemed so large when I was growing up because it had everything. It had fig trees, it had olive trees, it had mushrooms, it had the blanket. I would do my homework there. It was everything. And I needed nothing else. And that was my Garden of Eden. That was my childhood being.
She had this blanket that she would give me every time I came back from school and say, “Do your homework here and meet with your friends here.” And it was always in her garden. And her garden in my mind was ginormous. But when last I went there and saw the site, which has now become the site for another tall building, it was a tiny, tiny little garden that to me, seemed so large when I was growing up because it had everything. It had fig trees, it had olive trees, it had mushrooms, it had the blanket. I would do my homework there. It was everything. And I needed nothing else. And that was my Garden of Eden. That was my childhood being.
And we would lie on the blanket and look at the clouds and reflect upon the shapes of the clouds and study the shapes of the plants, and there was a lot of wonder in that childhood with her. And she taught me the importance of wonder in an eternal childhood and living adulthood as a child. And so I am very, very grateful for that. I think it is the sense of wonder, the speaking up was always something that she adhered to, to speak up your truth, to be straightforward, to be positive.
These are things that I also got from my mom. And from my mom, the sense of humor. She had the best sense of humor that I could think of and was just a joy to be around. And my father taught me everything. My father taught me everything I know. My mom taught me everything I feel.
Lex Fridman
That’s a good way to put it.
That’s a good way to put it.
Neri Oxman
My grandma taught me everything I insight.
My grandma taught me everything I insight.
Lex Fridman
Well, I see the sense of wonder that just carries through everything you do. So I think you make your grandmother proud.
Well, I see the sense of wonder that just carries through everything you do. So I think you make your grandmother proud.
Well, what about advice for how to have a career? You’ve had a very interesting career and a successful career, but not an easy one. You took a few leaps.
Neri Oxman
I did take a few leaps and they were uncomfortable. And I’ll never forget, I think we were listening to a Rolling Stone song in the kitchen, and my dad was actually born in Boston. He’s American. He said, “I started to have sort of these second thoughts about continuing my education in Israel, and I was on my way to London to the Architectural Association to do my diploma studies there.” And he looked at me and he said, “Get out of here kiddo. You got to get out of here. You’ve outgrown where you’re at. You need to move forward.”
I did take a few leaps and they were uncomfortable. And I’ll never forget, I think we were listening to a Rolling Stone song in the kitchen, and my dad was actually born in Boston. He’s American. He said, “I started to have sort of these second thoughts about continuing my education in Israel, and I was on my way to London to the Architectural Association to do my diploma studies there.” And he looked at me and he said, “Get out of here kiddo. You got to get out of here. You’ve outgrown where you’re at. You need to move forward.”
Another thing he had taught me, the feeling of discomfort. As you say, the feeling of loneliness and discomfort is imperative to growth. Growth is painful. Period. Any form of growth is difficult and painful. Birth is difficult and painful, and it is really, really important to place yourself in situations of discomfort. I like to be in a room where everyone in the room is more intelligent than me. I like to be in that kind of state where the people that I surround myself with are orders of magnitude more intelligent than I am. And I can say that that is true of all of my team members, and that’s the intellectual discomfort that I feed off of. The same is true for physical exertion. You got to put yourself in these uncomfortable situations in order to grow, in order to find comfort.
And then on the other hand is love, is finding love and finding this other human that compliments you and that makes you a better version of the one you are and even of the one you want to be. But with gratitude and attention and love, you can go so, so far.
To the younger generation, I don’t speak of a career. I never thought of my work as my career, ever. And there was this constant entanglement between life and work and love and longing and being and mothering. It’s all the same. And I appreciate that to some people that doesn’t work in their arrangement of will versus comfort versus the reality. But for me, it has always worked. I think to the younger generation, I say, don’t think of your career. A career is something that is imposed upon you. Think of your calling. That’s something that’s innately and directionally moves you, and it’s something that transcends a career.
Similarly, you can think about the difference between learning versus being educated. Being educated is something that’s given to you that’s external, that’s being imposed, that’s top down imposed, whereas learning is something that comes from within. It’s also the difference between joy and happiness. Many times I’m sad and I’m still joyous. And it’s very, very important to understand the difference between these externally perceived success paths and internally driven value-based ways of being in the world.
And together, when we combine the broken puzzle, let’s say, of substance and vulnerability, we get this bigger gestalt, this wondrous world of a future that is peaceful, that is wholesome, and that proposes or advocates for that kind of synergy that we’ve been talking about throughout. But it’s all fun.
Lex Fridman
Well, thank you for this incredible conversation. Thank you for all the work you’re doing.
Well, thank you for this incredible conversation. Thank you for all the work you’re doing.
Neri Oxman
Thank you.
Thank you.
Lex Fridman
And I just have to say that thank you for noticing me and listening to me. You’re somebody from just today and from our exchanges before this, there’s a sense where you care about me as a human being, which I could tell you care about other humans. Thank you for doing that. Thank you for having empathy and just really listening and noticing me that I exist. Thank you for that. I’ve been a huge fan of your work, been a huge fan of who you are as a human being. It’s just an honor that you would sit with me. Thank you.
And I just have to say that thank you for noticing me and listening to me. You’re somebody from just today and from our exchanges before this, there’s a sense where you care about me as a human being, which I could tell you care about other humans. Thank you for doing that. Thank you for having empathy and just really listening and noticing me that I exist. Thank you for that. I’ve been a huge fan of your work, been a huge fan of who you are as a human being. It’s just an honor that you would sit with me. Thank you.
Neri Oxman
Thank you so much, Lex. I feel the same way. I’ll just say the same.
Thank you so much, Lex. I feel the same way. I’ll just say the same.
Lex Fridman
And I look forward to hearing the response to my job application that I’ve submitted.
And I look forward to hearing the response to my job application that I’ve submitted.
Neri Oxman
Oh, you’re accepted.
Oh, you’re accepted.
Lex Fridman
Oh, damn. All right, excellent.
Oh, damn. All right, excellent.
Neri Oxman
We all speak of you all the time.
We all speak of you all the time.
Lex Fridman
Thank you so much.
Thank you so much.
Neri Oxman
Thank you, Lex.
Thank you, Lex.
Lex Fridman
Thank you, Neri. Thank you.
Thank you, Neri. Thank you.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Neri Oxman. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Leo Tolstoy, “Everything I know, I know because of love.” Thank you for listening. I hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Andrew Huberman: Relationships, Drama, Betrayal, Sex, and Love | Lex Fridman Podcast #393
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #393 with Andrew Huberman.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
And lifting in objects feels good. It feels good to train like a lazy bear and just lift heavy objects. But I’ve also started training with lighter weights and higher repetitions and for three month cycles, and it gives your joints a rest. Yeah, so I think it also is interesting to see how training differently changes your cognition. That’s probably hormone related, hormones downstream of training heavy versus hormones downstream of training a little bit lighter. I think my cognition is better when I’m doing more cardio and when the repetition ranges are a little bit or higher, which is not to say that people who lift heavy are dumb, but there is a… Because there’s real value in lifting heavy.
So I’ve been playing around with walking recently for two hours and thinking because I know a lot of smart people throughout history, I have walked and thought, and you have to play with things that have worked for others, not just to exercise, but to integrate this very light kind of prolonged exercise into a productive life. So they do all their thinking while they walk. It’s like a meditative type of walking, and it’s really interesting. It really works.
And he walks in, voice dictates his papers. And now with Rev or these other, maybe there are better ones than Rev, where you can convert audio files into text very quickly and then edit from there. So I will often voice dictate first drafts and things like that. And I totally agree on the long runs, the walks, the integrating that with cognitive work, harder to do with sprints and then the gym. You weight train?
And then two or three bad experiences later, I’m able to say, “Ah, every single time there was a signal from the body informing my mind, this is not good.” Now the reverse has also been true that there’ve been a number of instances in which I feel there sort of immediate delight, and there’s this almost astonishingly simple experience of feeling comfortable with somebody or at peace with something or delighted at an experience. And it turns out literally all of those experiences and people turned out to be experiences and people that are still in my life and that I still delight in every day. In other words, what’s great about getting older is that you stop questioning the signals that come from, I think deeper recesses of your nervous system to say, “Hey, this is not good,” or, “Hey, this is great, more of this.” Whereas I think in my teens, my twenties, my thirties, I’m almost 48, I’ll be 48 next month.
I didn’t trust, I didn’t listen. I actually put a lot of work into overriding those signals and learning to fight through them, thinking that somehow that was making me tougher or somehow that was making me smarter. When in fact, in the end, those people that you meet that are difficult or there are other names for it, like in the end, you’re like, “That person’s a piece of shit,” or, “This person is amazing and they’re really wonderful.” And I felt that from the go.
So some of my friends early on gave me some bad ideas, but most of the time my bad ideas came from overriding the signals that I knew that my body, and I would say my body and brain were telling me to obey, and I say body and brain is that there’s this brain region, the insula, which does many things, but it represents our sense of internal sensation and interoception. And I was talking to Paul Conte about this, who as you know, I respect tremendously. I think he’s one of the smartest people I’ve ever met. I think for different reasons. He and Marc Andreessen are some of the smartest people I’ve ever met. But Paul’s level of insight into the human psyche is absolutely astounding. And he says the opposite of what most people say about the brain, which is most people say, “Oh, the supercomputer of the brain is the forebrain.”
It’s like a monkey brain with a extra real estate put on there. And the forebrain is what makes us human and gives us our superpowers. Paul has said, and he’s done a whole series on mental health that’s coming out from our podcast in September, so this is not an attempt to plug that, but he’ll elaborate on [inaudible 00:13:08].
This is self-exploration that is rooted in psychiatry, it’s rooted in neuroscience, and I don’t think this information exists anywhere else. I’m not aware that it exists anywhere else. And he essentially distills it all down to one eight and a half by 11 sheet, which we provide for people. And he says there, I don’t want to give too much away because I would detract from what he does so beautifully, but if I tried and I wouldn’t have accomplish it anyway.
But he said, and I believe that the subconscious is the supercomputer of the brain. All the stuff working underneath our conscious awareness that’s driving our feelings and what we think are the decisions that we’ve thought through so carefully. And that only by exploring the subconscious and understanding it a little bit, can we actually improve ourselves over time and I agree. I think that so the mistake is to think that thinking can override it all. It’s a certain style of introspection and thinking that allows us to read the signals from our body, read the signals from our brain, integrate the knowledge that we’re collecting about ourselves, and to use all that in ways that are really adaptive and generative for us.
I’m somebody who’s drawn to goodness and to light and to joy and all those things like anybody else. But I think maybe it was part of how I grew up. Maybe it was the crowd I was with, but then again, even when I started spending more time with academics and scientists, I mean you see shadows in other ways, right? You see pure ambition with no passion. I recall a colleague in San Diego who it was very clear to me did not actually care about understanding the brain, but understanding the brain was just his avenue to exercise ambition. And if you gave him something else to work on, he’d work on that.
In fact, he did. He left and he worked on something else, and I realized he has no passion for understanding the brain like I assumed all scientists do, certainly why I went into it. But some people, it’s just raw ambition. It’s about winning. It doesn’t even matter what they win, which to me is crazy. But I think that’s a shadow that some people explore, not one I’ve explored. I think the shadow parts of us are very important to come to understand and look better to understand them and know that they’re there and work with them than to not acknowledge their presence and have them surface in the form of addictions or behaviors that damage us in other people.
But with no disrespect to psychiatrists, there are some excellent psychiatrists out there. There are also a lot of terrible psychiatrists out there because unless all of their patients commit suicide or half commit suicide, they can treat for a long time without it becoming visible that they’re not so good at their craft. Now, he’s superb at his craft, and I think he would say that yes, exploring some shadows, but also just understanding the self, really understanding like, “Who am I? And what’s important? What are my ambitions? What are my strivings?” Again, I’m lifting from some of the things that he’ll describe exactly how to do this. People do not spend enough time addressing those questions, and as a consequence, they discover what resides in their subconscious through the sometimes bad, hopefully also good, but manifestations of their actions.
We are driven by this huge 90% of our real estate that is not visible to our conscious awareness. And we need to understand that. I’ve talked about this before. I’ve done therapy twice a week since I was a kid. I had to as a condition of being let back in school. I found a way to either through insurance or even when I didn’t have insurance, I took an extra job writing for Thrasher Magazine when I was a postdoc so I could pay for therapy at a discount because I didn’t make much money as a postdoc.
I mean, I think for me, it’s as important as going to the gym and people think it’s just ruminating on problems, or getting… No, no, no. If you work with somebody really good, they’re forcing you to ask questions about who you really are, what you really want. It’s not just about support, but there should be support. There should be rapport, but then it’s also, there should be insight, right? Most people who get therapy, they’re getting support, there’s rapport, but insight is not easy to arrive at, and a really good psychologist or psychiatrist can help you arrive at deep insights that transform your entire life.
I oscillate between being really grateful and really self-critical. But then you have to figure out what is it? Maybe there’s a deeper root thing. Maybe there’s an insecurity in there somewhere that has to do with childhood and then you’re trying to prove something to somebody from your childhood, this kind of thing.
I don’t think we can rewire our deep preferences and what we find despicable or joyful. I do think that it’s really a question of what allows us peace. Can you be at peace with the fact that you’re very self-critical? And enjoy that, get some distance from it, have a sense of humor about it, or is it driving you in a way that’s keeping you awake at night and forcing you back to the table to do work in a way that feels self-flagellating and doesn’t feel good?
Can you get that humility and awareness of your one’s flaws? And I think that that can create, this word space sounds very new, edgy, like get space from it. You can have a sense of humor about how neurotic we can all be. I mean, neurotic isn’t actually a bad term in the classic sense of the psychologists and psychiatrists, the freudians. So that the best case is to be neurotic, to actually see one’s own issues and work with them. Whereas psychotic is the other way to be, which is obviously not good. So I think the question whether or not to work on something or to just accept it as part of ourselves, I think really depends if we feel like it’s holding us back or not. And I think you’re asking perhaps the most profound question about being a human, which is what do you do with your body? What do you do with your mind?
I mean, it’s also a question. We started off talking about fitness a little bit just for whatever reason. Do I need to run an ultra marathon? I don’t feel like I need to. David Goggins does and does a whole lot more than that. So that for him, that’s important. For me, it’s not important to do that. I don’t think he does it just so he can run the ultras. There’s clearly something else in there for him. And guys like Cam Hanes and tremendous respect for what they do and how they do it. Does one need to make their body more muscular, stronger, more endurance, more flexibility? Do you need to read harder books? I think doing hard things feels good. I know it feels good. I know that the worst I feel, the worst way to feel is when I’m procrastinating and I don’t do something.
And then whenever I do something and I complete it and I break through that point where it was hard and then I’m doing it at the end, I actually feel like I was infused with some sort of super chemical. And who knows if it’s probably a cocktail of endogenously made chemicals. But I think it is good to do hard things, but you have to be careful not to destroy your body, your mind in the process. And I think it’s about whether or not you can achieve peace. Can you sleep well at night?
Stress isn’t bad if you can sleep well at night, you can be stressed all day, go, go, go, go, go, go, go. And it’ll optimize your focus. But can you fall asleep and stay deeply asleep at night? Being in a hard relationship. Some people say that’s not good. Other people like can you be at peace in that? And I think we all have different RPM. We all kind of idle at different RPM and some people are big mellow Costello and others need more friction in order to feel at peace. But I think ultimately what we want is to feel at peace.
And then my graduate advisor, who I was working for at that time, who I loved and adored, was really like a mother to me. I knew her when she was pregnant with her two kids, died at 50, breast cancer. And then my postdoc advisor, first day of work at Stanford as a faculty member sitting across the table like this from him, had a heart attack right in front of me, died of pancreatic cancer at the end of 2017. And I remember just thinking, going back to that song there over and over and where people would… Yeah, I haven’t had many betrayals in life. I’ve had a few. But just thinking or seeing something or learning something about something, you just say you can’t believe it. And I mentioned that lyric off, that first song, Indestructible on that album because it’s just the raw emotion of like, “I can’t believe this. What I just saw is so disturbing, but I have to just keep going forward.”
There are certain things that we really do need to push not just into our periphery, but off into the gutter and keep going. And that’s a hard thing to learn how to do. But if you’re going to be functional in life, you have to. And actually just to get at this issue of do I change or do I embrace this aspect of self? About six months, it was April of this last year, I did some intense work around some things that were really challenging to me. And I did it alone, and it may have involved some medicine, and I expected to get peace through this. I was like, “I’m going to let go of it.” And I spent 11 hours just getting more and more frustrated and angry about this thing that I was trying to resolve.
And I was so unbelievably disappointed that I couldn’t get that relief. And I was like, “What is this? This is not how this is supposed to work. I’m supposed to feel peace. The clouds are supposed to lift.” And so a week went by and then another half week went by, and then someone whose opinion I trust very much. I explained this to them because I was getting a little concerned like, “What’s going on? This is worse, not better.” And they said, ” This is very simple. You have a giant blind spot, which is your sense of justice, Andrew, and your sense of anger are linked like an iron rod and you need to relax it.” And as they said that, I felt the anger dissipate. And so there was something that I think it is true. I have a very strong sense of justice and my sense of anger then at least was very strongly linked to it.
So it’s great to have a sense of justice, right? I hate to see people wrong. I absolutely do. And I’m human. I’m sure I’ve wronged people in my life. I know I have. They’ve told me, I’ve tried to apologize and reconcile where possible. Still have a lot of work to do. But where I see injustice, it draws in my sense of anger in a way that I think is just eating me up. But it was only in hearing that link that I wasn’t aware of before. It was in my subconscious, obviously. Did I feel the relaxation? There’s no amount of plant medicine or MDMA or any kind of chemical you can take that’s naturally just going to dissipate what’s hard for oneself if one embraces that or if one chooses to do it through just talk therapy or journaling or friends or introspection or all of the above. There needs to be an awareness of the things that we’re just not aware of.
So I think the answer to your question, do you embrace or do you fight these aspects of self is? I think you get in your subconscious through good work with somebody skilled. And sometimes that involves the tools I just mentioned in various combinations and you figure it out. You figure out if it’s serving you. Obviously it was not bringing me peace. My sense of justice was undermining my sense of peace. And so in understanding this link… Now, I would say, in understanding this link between justice and anger, now I think it’s a little bit more of you know, it’s not like a Twizzler stick bendy, but at least it’s not like an iron rod. When I see somebody wronged, I mean it used to just… Like immediately.
So this is this historic place that sheds so much blood, so much fear, so much anticipation of battle, all of this. So he loves this kind of spectacle and also, the meme of it, the hilarious absurdity of it. The two tech CEOs are battling it out on sand in a place where gladiators fought to the death and then bears and lions ate prisoners as part of the execution process.
I got hit. I hit some guys and definitely got hit back. I’d spar on Wednesday nights when I lived on San Diego. And when you spar with somebody, even if they hurt you, especially if they hurt you, you see that person afterwards and there’s an intimacy, right? It was in that book, Fighter’s Heart, where he explains, you’re exchanging bodily fluids with a stranger and you’re in your primitive mind and so there’s an intimacy there that persists so-
Go to graduate school, I’m working for somebody, and decide that working in her laboratory wasn’t quite right for me. So I’m literally sneaking into the laboratory next door and working for the woman next door because I liked the relationships that she had to a certain set of questions and she was a quirky person. So drawn to drama but drawn to… I like characters. I like people that have texture. And I’m not drawn to raw ambition, I’m drawn to people that seem to have a real passion for what they do and a uniqueness to them that I… Not kind of, I’ll just say how it is. I can feel their heart for what they do and I’m drawn to that and that can be good.
It’s the same reason I went to work for Ben Barris as a post-doc. It wasn’t because he was the first transgender member of the National Academy of Sciences, that was just a feature of who he was. I loved how he loved glial. He would talk about these cells like they were the most enchanting things that he’d ever seen in his life. And I was like, “This is the biggest nerd I’ve ever met and I love him.” I think I’m drawn to that.
This is another thing that Conti elaborates on quite a bit more in the series on mental health coming out. But there are different drives within us, there are aggressive drives. Not always for fighting but for intense interaction. I mean, look at Twitter. Look at some of the… People clearly have an aggressive drive. There’s also a pleasure drive. Some people also have a strong pleasure drive. They want to experience pleasure through food, through sex, through friendship, through adventure. But I think the Shakespearean drama is the drama of the different drives in different ratios in different people.
I know somebody and she’s incredibly kind. Has an extremely high pleasure drive, loves taking great care of herself and people around her through food and through retreats and through all these things and makes spaces beautiful everywhere she goes. And gifts these things that are just so unbelievably feminine and incredible. These gifts to people and then kind and thoughtful about what they like. And then.. But I would say, very little aggressive drive from my read.
And then, I know other people who just have a ton of aggressive drive and very little pressure drive and I think… So there’s this alchemy that exists where people have these things in different ratios. And then, you blend in the differences in the chromosomes and differences in hormones and differences in personal history and what you end up with is a species that creates incredible recipes of drama but also peace, also relief from drama, contentment.
I mean, I realize this isn’t the exact topic of the question. But someone I know very dearly, actually an ex-girlfriend of mine, long- term partner of mine, sent me something recently and I think it hit the nail on the head. Which is that ideally for a man, they eventually settle where they find and feel peace, where they feel peaceful, where they can be themselves and feel peaceful. Now, I’m sure there’s an equivalent or mirror image of that for women but this particular post that she sent was about men and I totally agree.
And so, it isn’t always that we’re seeking friction. But for periods of our life, we seek friction, drama, adventure, excitement, fights, and doing hard, hard things. And then I think at some point, I’m certainly coming to this point now where it’s like, “Yeah. That’s all great and checked a lot of boxes.” But I had a lot of close calls, flew really close to the sun on a lot of things with life and limb and heart and spirit and some people close to us didn’t make it. And sometimes, not making it means the career they wanted went off a cliff or their health went off a cliff or their life went off a cliff. But I think that there’s also the Shakespearean drama of the characters that exit the play and are living their lives happily in the backdrop. It just doesn’t make for as much entertainment.
I say the first one, “I’m an animal,” because I have to remember that I have a body that needs care like any of us. I need sleep, I need food, I need hydration, I need… That I’m human, that the brain of a human is marvelously complex but also marvelously self-defeating at times. And so, I’m thinking about these things in the context of the different roles. And the whole thing takes about four or five minutes and I just find it brings me a certain amount of clarity that then allows me to ratchet into the day.
The prayer piece, I think I’ve been reluctant to talk about until now because I don’t believe in pushing religion on people. And I think that… And I’m not, it’s a highly individual thing and I do believe that one can be an atheist and still pray or agnostic and still pray. But for me, it really came about through understanding that there are certain aspects of myself that I just couldn’t resolve on my own. And no matter how much therapy, no matter how much… And I haven’t done a lot of it. But no matter how much plant medicine or other forms of medicine or exercise or podcasting or science or friendship or any of that, I was just not going to resolve.
And so, I started this because a male friend said, “Prayer is powerful,” and I said, “Well, how?” And he said, “I don’t know how but it can allow you to get outside yourself. Let you give up control and at the same time, take control.” I don’t even like saying take control. But the whole notion is that… And again, forgive me, but there’s no other way to say it. The whole notion is that God works through us. Whatever God is to you, he, him, her, life force, nature, whatever it is to you, that it works through us.
And so, I do a prayer. I’ll just describe it where I make an ask to help remove my character defects. I pray to God to help remove my character defects so that I can show up better in all the roles of my life and do good work which for me is learning and teaching. And so you might say, “Well, how is that different than a meditation?” Well, I’m acknowledging that there is something bigger than me, bigger than nature as I understand it, that I cannot understand or control nor do I want to, and I’m just giving over to that. And does that make me less of a scientist? I sure as hell hope not. I certainly know… There’s the head of our neurosciences at Stanford until recently. You should talk to him directly about it. Bill Newsome has talked about his religious life.
For me, it’s really a way of getting outside myself and then understanding how I fit into this bigger picture. And the character defects part is real, right? I’m a human. I have defects. I got a lot of flaws in me like anybody and trying to acknowledge them and asking for help in removing them. Not magically but through right action, through my right action. So I do that every morning.
And I have to say that it’s helped. It’s helped a lot. It’s helped me be better to myself, be better to other people. I still make mistakes but it’s becoming a bigger part of my life. And I never thought I’d talk like this but I think it’s clear to me that if we don’t believe in something… Again, it doesn’t have to be traditional, standardized religion, but if we don’t believe in something bigger than ourselves, we, at some level, will self-destruct. I really think so.
And it’s powerful in a way that all the other stuff, meditation and all the tools, is not because it’s really operating at a much deeper and bigger level. Yeah. I think that’s all I can talk about it. Mostly because I’m still working out. The scientists in me wants to understand how it works and I want to understand. And the point is to just go, for lack of a better language for it, “There’s a higher power than me and what I can control. I’m giving up control on certain things.” And somehow, that restores a sense of agency for right action and better action.
But when things weren’t right, I couldn’t make sense of them, I would secretly pray. But I felt ashamed of that for whatever reason. And then, it was once in college, I distinctly remember I was having a hard time with a number of things and I took a run down to SAN Speech. It was at UC Santa Barbara. And I remember I was like, “I don’t know if I even have the right to do this but I’m just praying,” and I just prayed for the ability to be as brutally honest with myself and with other people as I possibly could be about a particular situation I was in at that time.
I mean, I think now it’s probably safe to say I’d gone off to college because of a high school girlfriend. Essentially, she was my family. Frankly, more than my biological family was at a certain stage of life and we’d reached a point where we were diverging and it was incredibly painful. It was like losing everything I had. And it was like, “What do I do? How do I manage this?” I was ready to quit and join the fire service just to support us so that we could move forward and it was just…
But praying, just saying, “I can’t figure this out on my own.” It’s like, “I can’t figure this out on my own,” and how frustrating that no number of friends could tell me and inner wisdom couldn’t tell me. And eventually, it led me to the right answers. She and I are friendly friends to this day. She’s happily married with a child and we’re on good terms. But I think it’s a scary thing but it’s the best thing when you just, “I can’t control all of this.” And asking for help, I think is also the piece. You’re not asking for some magic hand to come down and take care of it but you’re asking for the help to come through you so that your body is used to do these right works, right action.
And when my body would break down or I’d get sick a lot, I don’t get sick much anymore. Occasionally, about once every 18 months to two years, I’ll get something. But I used to break my foot skateboarding all the time, I couldn’t understand. What’s wrong with my body? I’m getting injured. I can’t do what everyone else can. Now, I developed more slowly. I had a long arc of puberty so that was part of it. I was still developing.
But how to get your body stronger, how to build endurance, no one told me. The information wasn’t there. So a lot of what I put out there is the information that I wish I had. Because once I had it, I was like, “Wow.” A, this stuff really works. B, it’s grounded in something real. Sometimes, certain protocols are a combination of animal and human studies, sometimes clinical trials. Sometimes there’s some mechanistic conjecture for some, not all, I always make clear which. But in the end, figuring out how things work so that we can be happier, healthier, more productive, suffer less, reduce the suffering of the world. And I think that… Well, I’ll just say thank you for asking about the prayer piece. Again, I’m not pushing or even encouraging it on anyone. I’ve just found it to be tremendously useful for me.
And I think that as we grow older, we learn to cover that stuff up. We wear masks and we have to, to be functional. I don’t think we all want to go around just being completely raw. But as you said, as you get older, you get to this point where you go, “Eh. What are we really trying to protect anyway?”
I mean, I have this theory that certainly my experience has taught me that a lot of people but I’ll talk about men because that’s what I know best, whether or not they show up strong or not, that they’re really afraid of being weak. They’re just afraid… Sometimes, the strength is even a way to try and not be weak which is different than being strong for its own sake. I’m not just talking about physical strength. I’m talking about intellectual strength. I’m talking about money. I’m talking about expressing drive. I’ve been watching this series a little bit of Chimp Empire.
So now, they start using that prefrontal cortex to do some interesting things. So in primate world, if a male is friendly with another male, wants to affiliate with him and say, “Hey, I’m backing you,” they’ll go over and they’ll pick off the little parasites and eat them. And so, the grooming is extremely important. In fact, if they want to ostracize or kill one of the members of their troop, they will just leave it alone. No one will groom it. And then, there’s actually a really disturbing sequence in that show of then the parasites start to eat away on their skin. They get infections. They have issues. No one will mate with them. They have other issues as well and can potentially die.
So the interesting thing is Number 2 and 3 start to line up a strategy to groom this guy but they are actually thinking about overtaking the entire troop setting in a new alpha. But the current alpha did that to get where he is so he knows that they’re doing this grooming thing, but they might not be sincere about the grooming. So what does he do? He takes the whole troop on a raid to another troop and sees who will fight for him and who won’t.
This is advanced contracting of behavior for a species that normally we don’t think of as sophisticated as us. So it’s very interesting and it gets to something that I hope we’ll have an opportunity to talk about because it’s something that I’m obsessed with lately, is this notion of overt versus covert contracts, right? There are overt contracts where you exchange work for money or you exchange any number of things in an overt way. But then, there are covert contracts, and those take on a very different form and always lead to, in my belief, bad things.
But now, okay. So overt contract would be we both want to do some work together, we’re going to make some money, you get X percentage, I get X percentage. It’s overt. Covert contract which is, in my opinion, always bad, would be we’re going to do some work together, you’re going to get a percentage of money, I’m going to get a percentage of money. Could look just like the overt contract but secretly, I’m resentful that I got the percentage that I got. So what I start doing is covertly taking something else. What do I take? Maybe I take the opportunity to jab you verbally every once in a while. Maybe I take the opportunity to show up late. Maybe I take the opportunity to get to know one of your coworkers so that I might start a business with them. That’s covert contracting.
And you see this sometimes in romantic relationships. One person, we won’t set the male or female in any direction here and just say it’s, “I’ll make you feel powerful if you make me feel desired.” Okay. Great. There’s nothing explicitly wrong about that contract if they both know and they both agree. But what if it’s, “I’ll do that but I’ll have kids with you so you feel powerful. You’ll have kids with me so I feel desired. But secretly, I don’t want to do that,” or one person says, “I don’t want to do that,” or both don’t. So what they end up doing is saying, “Okay. So I expect something else. I expect you to do certain things for me,” or, “I expect you to pay for certain things for me.”
Covert contracts are the signature of everything bad. Overt contracts are the signature of all things good. And I think about this a lot because I’ve seen a lot of examples of this. I’ve… Like anyone, we participate in these things whether or not we want to or not and the thing that gets transacted the most is… Well, I should say the things that get transacted the most are the overt things. You’ll see money, time, sex, property, whatever it happens to be, information. But what ends up happening is that when people, I believe, don’t feel safe, they feel threatened in some way, like they don’t feel safe in a certain interaction, what they do is they start taking something else while still engaging in the exchange. And I’ll tell you, if there’s one thing about human nature that’s bad, it’s that feature.
Why that feature? Or, “Is it a bug or a feature?” as you engineers like to say. I think it’s because we were allocated a certain extra amount of prefrontal cortex that makes us more sophisticated than a dog, more sophisticated than a chimpanzee, but they do it too. And it’s because it’s often harder, in the short term, to deal with the real sense of, “This is scary. This feels threatening,” than it is to play out all the iterations. It takes a lot of brain work. You’re playing chess and go simultaneously trying to figure out where things are going to end up and we just don’t know.
So it’s a way, I think, of creating a false sense of certainty. But I’ll tell you, covert contracts, the only certainty is that it’s going to end badly. The question is, how badly? Conversely, overt contracts always end well, always. The problem with overt contracts is that you can’t be certain that the other person is not engaging in a covert contract. You can only take responsibility for your own contracting.
Okay, this has to do with eyespots. This was during a government shutdown period where the ghost shrimp that they normally feed eat on, that we would ship in from the gulf down here, weren’t available to us. So we had to get different shrimp. And what we noticed was the cuttlefish normally would just sneak up on the shrimp. We learned this by data collection. And if the shrimp was facing them, they would do this thing with their tentacles of enchanting the shrimp. And if the shrimp wasn’t facing them, they wouldn’t do it and they would ballistically grab it and eat them.
Well, when we got these new shrimp, the new shrimp had eyespots on their tails and then the cuttlefish would do this attempt to enchant, regardless of the position of the ghost shrimp. So what does that mean? Okay, well, it means that there’s some sort of algorithm in the cuttlefish’s mind that says, “Okay, if you see two spots, move your tentacles.” So it can be, as you pointed out, it can be a fairly simple operation, but it looks diabolical. It looks cunning, but all it is strategy B.
This is something people don’t often understand about genetics, is that it only takes a few generations to devolve a trait, make it worse, but it takes a long time to evolve an adaptive trait. There are exceptions to that, but most often that’s true. So a species needs a lot of generations. We are hopefully still evolving as a species. And it takes a long time, to evolve more adaptive traits, but doesn’t take long to devolve adaptive traits, so that you’re getting sicker or you’re not functioning as well. So choose your mate wisely, and that’s perhaps the good segue into sexual selection in humans.
Earlier we were talking about peace, and I think that that sense of peace comes from knowing that the person you’re in friendship with, or that you’re in romantic relationship, or ideally both, because let’s assume the best romantic relationship includes a friendship component with that person. It’s like you just really delight in their presence, even if it’s a quiet presence. And you delight in seeing them delight in things, that’s clear.
But I think that there seems to be a history of people close to me getting into great relationships, where they were friends for a while first or maybe didn’t sleep together right away, that they actually intentionally deferred on that. This has not been my habit or my experience. I’ve gone the more, I think typical, like, oh, there’s an attraction, like this person, there’s an interest. You explore all dimensions of relationship really quickly except perhaps the moving in part and the having kids part, which because it’s a bigger step, harder to undo without more severe consequences. But I think that whole take it slow thing, I don’t think is about getting to know someone slowly, I think it’s about that physical piece, because that does change the nature of the relationship. And I think it’s because it gets right into the more hardwired, primitive circuitry around our feelings of safety, vulnerability.
There’s something about romantic and sexual interactions, where it’s almost like it’s assets and liabilities, right?
I’ll tell you where I’ve gone badly wrong and where I see other people going badly wrong. There is no rule that says that you have to be attracted to all attractive people, by any means. It’s very important to develop a sense of taste in romantic attractions, I believe. What you really like, in terms of a certain style, a certain way of being, and of course that includes sexuality and sex itself, the verb. But I think it also includes their just general way of being. And when you really adore somebody, you like the way they answer the phone, and when they don’t answer the phone that way, you know something’s off and you want to know. And so I think that the more you can tune up your powers of observation, not looking for things that you like, and the more that stuff just washes over you, the more likely you are to, “Fall in love.” As a mutual friend of ours said to me, “Listen, when it comes to romantic relationships, if it’s not a hundred percent in you, it ain’t happening.”
And I’ve never seen a violation of that statement, where it’s like, yeah, it’s mostly good and they’re this and this, likes the negotiations. Well, already it’s doomed. And that doesn’t mean someone has to be perfect, the relationship has to be perfect, but it’s got to feel hundred percent inside.
Okay, the data on position is very interesting, but let me just say a few things. There are a few clinics now, in particular some out of the United States, that are spinning down sperm and finding that they can separate out fractions, as they’re called. They can spin the sperm down at a given speed, and that they’ll separate out at different depths within the test tube, that allow them to pull out the sperm on top or below and bias the probability towards male or female births. It’s not perfect. It’s not a hundred percent. It’s a very costly procedure. It’s still very controversial.
Now with in vitro fertilization, they can extract eggs. You can introduce a sperm, directly by pipette, it’s a process called ICSI. Or you can set up a sperm race in a dish. And if you get a number of different embryos, meaning the eggs get fertilized, duplicate and start form a blastocyst, which is a ball of cells, early embryo, then you can do karyotyping. So you can do look for XX or XY, select the XY, which then would give rise to a male offspring, and then implant that one. So there is that kind of sex selection.
With respect to position, there’s a lot of lore that if the woman is on top or the woman’s on the bottom, or whether or not the penetration is from behind, whether or not it’s going to be male or female offspring. And frankly, the data are not great, as you can imagine, because those-
But others that I sought out, and not specifically for this answer, but for researching that episode, said that, “Yeah, what you’re talking about is trying to get the maximum number of sperm and it’s contained in semen. And yes, the semen can leak out. And so keeping the pelvis tilted for about 15 degrees for about 15 minutes, obviously tilted in the direction that would have things running upstream, not downstream, so to speak.”
And in the podcast, we did talk about both male and female orgasm. We talked a lot about sexual function and dysfunction. We talked a lot about pelvic floor. One interesting factoid is that only 3% of sexual dysfunction is hormonal, endocrine, in nature. It’s more often related to some pelvic floor or vasculature, blood flow related or other issue. And then when Eisenberg came on the podcast, he said that far less sexual dysfunction is psychogenic in origin than people believe. That far more of it is pelvic floor, neuro and vascular. It’s not saying that psychogenic dysfunction doesn’t exist, but that a lot of the sexual dysfunction that people assume is related to hormones or that is related to psychogenic issues are related to vascular or neural issues. And the good news is that there are great remedies for those. And so both those episodes detail some of the more salient points around what those remedies are and could be.
One of the, again, factoids, but it was interesting that a lot of people have pelvic floor issues and they think that their pelvic floors are, quote, unquote, messed up. So they go on the internet, they learn about Kegels. And it turns out that some people need Kegels, they need to strengthen their pelvic floor. Guess what? A huge number of people with sexual and urologic dysfunction have pelvic floors that are too tight and Kegels are going to make them far worse, and they actually need to learn to relax their pelvic floor. And so seeing a pelvic floor specialist is important.
I think in the next five, 10 years, we’re going to see a dramatic shift towards more discussion about sexual and reproductive health in a way that acknowledges that, yeah, the clitoris comes from the same origin tissue as the penis. And in many ways the neural innervation of the two, while clearly different, has some overlapping features that there’s going to be discussion around anatomy and hormones and pelvic floors in a way that’s going to erode some of the cloaking of these topics because they’ve been cloaked for a long time and there’s a lot of… Well, let’s just call it what it is. There’s a lot of bullshit out there about what’s what.
Now, the hormonal issues, by the way, just to clarify, can impact desire. So a lot of people who have lack of desire as opposed to lack of anatomical function, this could be male or female that can originate with either things like SSRIs or hormonal issues. And so we talk about that as well. So it’s a pretty vast topic.
And then I’m looking for papers that establish a thoroughness of understanding. That are interesting, obviously. It’s fun to get occasionally look at some of the odder or more progressive papers that are what’s new in a field and then where there are actionable takeaways to really export those with a lot of thoughtfulness.
Going back to the productivity thing I do, I get up, I look at the sun. I don’t stare at the sun, but I get my sunshine. It all starts with a really good night’s sleep. I think that’s really important to understand. So much so that if I wake up and I don’t feel rested enough, I’ll often do a non-sleep deep rest yoga nidra, or go back to sleep for a little bit, get up, really prioritize the big block of work for the thing that I’m researching. I think a little bit of anxiety and a little bit of concern about deadline helps. Turning the phone off helps, realizing that those peak hours, whenever they are for you, you do not allow those hours to be invaded, unless a nuclear bomb goes off. And nuclear bomb is just a phraseology for, family crisis would be good justification. If there’s an emergency, obviously.
But it’s all about focus. It’s all about focus in the moment. It’s not even so much about how many hours you log. It’s really about focus in the moment. How much total focus can you give to something? And then I like to take walks and think about things and sometimes talk about them in my voice recorder. So I’m just always churning on it, all the time. And then of course, learning to turn it off and engage with people socially and not be podcasting 24 hours a day in your head is key. But I think I love learning and researching and finding those papers and the information, and I love teaching it.
And these days I use a whiteboard before I start. I don’t have any notes, no teleprompter. Then the whiteboard that I use beforehand is to really sculpt out the different elements and the flow, get the flow right and move things around. The whiteboard is such a valuable tool. Then take a couple pictures of that when I’m happy with it, put it down on the desk and these are just bullet points and then just churn through and just churn through. And nothing feels better than researching and sharing information. And I, as you did, grew up writing papers and it’s hard. And I like the friction of, “Uh, can’t. I want to get up. I want to use the bathroom.”
When I was in college, I was trying to make up deficiencies from my lack of attendance in high school, so much so that I would set a timer. I wouldn’t let myself get up to use the bathroom even. Never had an accident. I listened to music, classical music, Rancid, a few other things. Some Bob Dylan maybe thrown in there and just study and just… And then you’d hit the two-hour mark and you’re in pain and then you get up, use the bathroom. You’re like, “That felt so good.” There’s something about the human brain that likes these kind of friction points and working through them and you just have to work through them.
So yeah, I’m productive and my life has arranged around it, and that’s been a bit of a barrier to personal life at times. But my life’s been arranged around it. I’ve set up everything so that I can learn more, teach more, including some of my home life. But I do still watch Chimp Empire. I still got time to watch Chimp Empire. Look, the great Joe Strummer, Clash, they were my favorite Mescaleros. He said, this famous Strummer quote, “No input, no output.” So you need experience. You need outside things in order to foster the process.
But yeah, just nose to the grindstone man, I don’t know. And that’s what I’m happy to do with my life. I don’t think anyone should do that just because. But this is how I’m showing up. And if you don’t like me, then scroll… What do they say? Swipe left, swipe right. I don’t know. I’m not on the apps, the dating apps. So that’s the other thing. I keep waiting for when, “Listens to Lex Fridman podcast,” is a checkbox on Hinge or Bumble or whatever it is. But I don’t even know. Are those their field? I don’t know. What are the apps now?
And then as we’ve gotten into topics that are a little bit further away from my home knowledge, I still get super excited about it. This music in the brain episode I’ve been researching for a while now, I’m just so hyped about it. It’s so, so interesting. There’s so many facets. Singing versus improvisational music versus, “I’m listening to music,” versus learning music. It just goes on and on. There’s just so much that’s so interesting. I just can’t get enough. And I think, I don’t know, you put a camera in front of me, I sort of forget about it and I’m just trying to just teach.
But yeah, just tap into that energy of learning and loving it. And people are along for the ride. I get accused of being long-winded, but things get taken out of context, that leads to greater misunderstanding. And also, listen, I come from a lineage of three dead advisors. Three. All three. So I don’t know when the reaper’s coming for me. I’m doing my best to stay alive a long time. But whether or not it’s a bullet or a bus or cancer or whatever, or just old age, I’m trying to get it all out there as best I can. And if it means you have to hit pause and come back a day or two later, that seems like a reasonable compromise to me. I’m not going to go longer than I need to and I’m trying to shorten them up. But again, that’s kind of how I show up.
It’s like Tim Armstrong would say about writing songs. I asked him, “How often do you write?” Every day. Every day. Does Rick ever stop creating? No. Has Joe ever stopped preparing for comedy? Are you ever stopping to think about world issues and technology and who you can talk to? It seems to me you’ve always got a plan in sight. The thing I love about your podcast the most, to be honest these days, is the surprise of I don’t know who the hell’s going to be there. It’s almost like I get a little nervously excited about when a new episode comes out. I have no idea. No idea. I have some guesses based on what you told me during the break. You’ve got some people where it’s just like, “Whoa, Lex went there? Awesome. Can’t wait.” Click. I think that’s really cool. You’re constantly surprising people. So you’re doing it so well. It’s such a high level and I think it’s also important for people to understand that what you’re doing Lex, there’s no precedent for it. Sure. There’ve been interviews before, there have been podcasts before. There are discussions before. How many of your peers can you look to find out how best to do the content like yours? Zero. There’s one peer: you. And so that should give you great peace and great excitement because you’re a pioneer. You’re literally the tip of the spear.
I don’t want to take an unnecessary tangent, but I think this might thread together two of the things that we’ve been talking about, which are, I think of pretty key importance. One is romantic relationships, and the other is creative process and work. And this again, is something I learned from Rick, but that he and I have gone back and forth on. And that I think is worth elaborating on, which is earlier we were saying the best relationship is going to be one where it brings you peace. I think peace also can be translated to, among other things, lack of distraction. So when you’re with your partner, can you really focus on them and the relationship? Can you not be distracted by things that you’re upset about from their past or from your past with them? And of course the same is true for them, right? They ideally will feel that way towards you too. They can really focus.
Also, when you’re not with them, can you focus on your work? Can you not be worried about whether or not they’re okay because you trust that they’re an adult and they can handle things or they will reach out if they need things? They’re going to communicate their needs like an adult. Not creating messes just to get attention and things like that, or disappearing for that matter. So peace and focus are intimately related, and distraction is the enemy of peace and focus.
So there’s something there, I believe, because with people that have the strong generative drive and want to be productive in their home life, in the sense have a rich family life, partner life, whatever that is, and in their work life, the ability to really drop into the work and you might have that sense like, “I hope they’re okay,” or, “need to check my phone or something,” but just know we’re good.
And the craziest thing happened, Lex. It was unbelievable. I’ve never had an experience like this. I expected my heart to break, and I’ve felt a broken heart before. I felt it, frankly, when my parents split, I felt it when Harry shot himself. I felt it when Barbara died and felt it when Ben went as well. And so many friends, way too many friends. The end of 2017, my friend Aaron King, Johnny Fair, John Eikleberry, stomach cancer, suicide, fentanyl. I was like, “Whoa. All in a fricking week.” And I just remember thinking, “What the…?” And it’s just heartbreak and you just carry that and it’s like, “Uh.” And that’s just a short list. And I don’t say that for sob stories. It’s just for a guy that wasn’t in the military or didn’t grow up in the inner city, it’s an unusual number of deaths, close people.
When Costello went, the craziest thing happened. My heart warmed up, it heated up. And I wasn’t on MDMA. The moment he went, it just went whoosh. And I was like, “What the hell is this?” And it was a supernatural experience to me. I just never had that. I put my grandfather on the ground, I was a pallbearer at the funeral. I’ve done that more times than I’d like to have ever done it. And it just heated up with Costello and I thought, “What the fuck is this?”
And it was almost like, and we make up these stories about what it is, but it was almost like he was like, “All right,” I have to be careful because I will cry here and I don’t want to. It was almost like he was like all that effort, because I had been putting so much effort into him, it was like, “All right, you get that back.” It was like the giant freaking, “Thank you.” And it was incredible. And I’m not embarrassed to shed a tear or two about it if I have to.
I was like, “Holy shit.” That’s how close I was to that animal.
When I think about Barbara especially, I well up and it’s hard for me, but I talked to her before she died and that was a brutal conversation, saying goodbye to someone, especially with kids. And that was hard. I think that really flipped a switch in me where I’m like, I always knew I wanted kids. I’d say, “I want kids. I want a lot of kids.” That flipped a switch in me. I was like, “I want kids. I want my own kids.”
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Andrew Huberman to support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Albert Camus. “In the midst of winter, I found there was, within me, an invincible summer. And that makes me happy. For it says that no matter how hard the world pushes against me, within me, there’s something stronger – something better, pushing right back.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:31 – Exercise routine
- 7:42 – Advice to younger self
- 14:56 – Jungian shadow
- 19:42 – Betrayal and loyalty
- 39:52 – Drama
- 57:31 – Chimp Empire
- 1:02:24 – Overt vs covert contracts
- 1:08:31 – Age and health
- 1:14:39 – Sexual selection
- 1:25:15 – Relationships
- 1:37:49 – Fertility
- 1:48:15 – Productivity
- 2:05:02 – Family
Introduction
Andrew Huberman
Listen, when it comes to romantic relationships, if it’s not a 100% in you, it ain’t happening. And I’ve never seen a violation of that statement where it’s like, “Yeah, it’s mostly good.” And this is like the negotiations, already it’s doomed. And that doesn’t mean someone has to be perfect. The relationship has to be perfect, but it’s got to feel a 100% inside, like yes, yes, and yes.
Listen, when it comes to romantic relationships, if it’s not a 100% in you, it ain’t happening. And I’ve never seen a violation of that statement where it’s like, “Yeah, it’s mostly good.” And this is like the negotiations, already it’s doomed. And that doesn’t mean someone has to be perfect. The relationship has to be perfect, but it’s got to feel a 100% inside, like yes, yes, and yes.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with my dear friend Andrew Huberman, his fourth time on this podcast. It’s my birthday, so this is a special birthday episode of sorts. Andrew flew down to Austin just to wish me a happy birthday, and we decided to do a podcast last second. We literally talked for hours beforehand and a long time after late into the night. He’s one of my favorite human beings, brilliant scientists, incredible teacher, and a loyal friend. I’m grateful for Andrew. I’m grateful for good friends, for all the support and love I’ve gotten over the past few years. I’m truly grateful for this life, for the years, the days, the minutes, the seconds I’ve gotten to live on this beautiful earth of ours. I really don’t want to leave just yet. I think I’d really like to stick around. I love you all. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. And now, dear friends, here’s Andrew Huberman.
The following is a conversation with my dear friend Andrew Huberman, his fourth time on this podcast. It’s my birthday, so this is a special birthday episode of sorts. Andrew flew down to Austin just to wish me a happy birthday, and we decided to do a podcast last second. We literally talked for hours beforehand and a long time after late into the night. He’s one of my favorite human beings, brilliant scientists, incredible teacher, and a loyal friend. I’m grateful for Andrew. I’m grateful for good friends, for all the support and love I’ve gotten over the past few years. I’m truly grateful for this life, for the years, the days, the minutes, the seconds I’ve gotten to live on this beautiful earth of ours. I really don’t want to leave just yet. I think I’d really like to stick around. I love you all. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. And now, dear friends, here’s Andrew Huberman.
Exercise routine
Andrew Huberman
I’m trying to run a little bit more.
I’m trying to run a little bit more.
Lex Fridman
Are you losing weight?
Are you losing weight?
Andrew Huberman
I’m not trying to lose weight, but I always do the same fitness routine after 30 years. Basically lift three days a week, run three days a week, but one of the runs is the long run, one of them is medium, one of them is a sprint type thing. So what I’ve decided to do this year was just extend the duration of the long run. And I like being mobile. I never want to be so heavy that I can’t move. I want to be able to go out and run 10 miles if I have to so sometimes I do. And I want to be able to sprint if I have to. So sometimes I do.
I’m not trying to lose weight, but I always do the same fitness routine after 30 years. Basically lift three days a week, run three days a week, but one of the runs is the long run, one of them is medium, one of them is a sprint type thing. So what I’ve decided to do this year was just extend the duration of the long run. And I like being mobile. I never want to be so heavy that I can’t move. I want to be able to go out and run 10 miles if I have to so sometimes I do. And I want to be able to sprint if I have to. So sometimes I do.
And lifting in objects feels good. It feels good to train like a lazy bear and just lift heavy objects. But I’ve also started training with lighter weights and higher repetitions and for three month cycles, and it gives your joints a rest. Yeah, so I think it also is interesting to see how training differently changes your cognition. That’s probably hormone related, hormones downstream of training heavy versus hormones downstream of training a little bit lighter. I think my cognition is better when I’m doing more cardio and when the repetition ranges are a little bit or higher, which is not to say that people who lift heavy are dumb, but there is a… Because there’s real value in lifting heavy.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of angry people listening to this right now.
There’s a lot of angry people listening to this right now.
Andrew Huberman
No, no, no. But lifting heavy and then taking three to five minutes rest is far and away a different challenge than running hard for 90 minutes. That’s a tough thing, just like getting in an ice bath. People say, “Oh, well, how is that any different than working out?” Well, there are a lot of differences, but one of them is that it’s very acute stress, within one second you’re stressed. So I think subjecting the body to a bunch of different types of stressors in space and time is really valuable. So yeah, I’ve been playing with the variables in a pre systematic way.
No, no, no. But lifting heavy and then taking three to five minutes rest is far and away a different challenge than running hard for 90 minutes. That’s a tough thing, just like getting in an ice bath. People say, “Oh, well, how is that any different than working out?” Well, there are a lot of differences, but one of them is that it’s very acute stress, within one second you’re stressed. So I think subjecting the body to a bunch of different types of stressors in space and time is really valuable. So yeah, I’ve been playing with the variables in a pre systematic way.
Lex Fridman
Well, I like long and slow like you said, the impact it has on my cognition.
Well, I like long and slow like you said, the impact it has on my cognition.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, the wordlessness of it, the way it seems to clean out the clutter.
Yeah, the wordlessness of it, the way it seems to clean out the clutter.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Andrew Huberman
It can take away that hyperfocus and put you more in a relaxed focus for sure.
It can take away that hyperfocus and put you more in a relaxed focus for sure.
Lex Fridman
Well, for me, it brings the clutter to the surface at first. Like all these thoughts come in there, and then they dissipate. I got knee barred pretty hard. That’s when somebody tries to break your knee.
Well, for me, it brings the clutter to the surface at first. Like all these thoughts come in there, and then they dissipate. I got knee barred pretty hard. That’s when somebody tries to break your knee.
Andrew Huberman
What a knee bar? They try and break your knee?
What a knee bar? They try and break your knee?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Andrew Huberman
Oh, so you tap so they-
Oh, so you tap so they-
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah. So it’s hyperextend the knee in that direction, they got knee barred pretty hard. So in ways I don’t understand, it kind of hurts to run. I don’t understand what’s happening behind there. I need to investigate this. Basically the hamstringing flex, like curling, your leg hurts a little bit, and that results in this weird, dull, but sometimes extremely sharp pain in the back of the knee. So I’m working through this anyway, but walking doesn’t hurt.
Yeah. Yeah. So it’s hyperextend the knee in that direction, they got knee barred pretty hard. So in ways I don’t understand, it kind of hurts to run. I don’t understand what’s happening behind there. I need to investigate this. Basically the hamstringing flex, like curling, your leg hurts a little bit, and that results in this weird, dull, but sometimes extremely sharp pain in the back of the knee. So I’m working through this anyway, but walking doesn’t hurt.
So I’ve been playing around with walking recently for two hours and thinking because I know a lot of smart people throughout history, I have walked and thought, and you have to play with things that have worked for others, not just to exercise, but to integrate this very light kind of prolonged exercise into a productive life. So they do all their thinking while they walk. It’s like a meditative type of walking, and it’s really interesting. It really works.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. The practice I’ve been doing a lot more of lately is I walk while reading a book in the yard. I’ll just pace back and forth or walk in a circle.
Yeah. The practice I’ve been doing a lot more of lately is I walk while reading a book in the yard. I’ll just pace back and forth or walk in a circle.
Lex Fridman
Audiobook, or are you talking about anything-
Audiobook, or are you talking about anything-
Andrew Huberman
No hard copy.
No hard copy.
Lex Fridman
Well, you just holding.
Well, you just holding.
Andrew Huberman
I’m holding the book and I’m walking and I’m reading, and I usually have a pen and I’m underlining. I have this whole system like underlining, stars, exclamation points, goes back to university of what things I’ll go back to which things I export to notes and that kind of thing. But from the beginning when I opened my lab at that time in San Diego before I moved back to Stanford, I would have meetings with my students or postdocs by just walking in the field behind the lab. And I’d bring my bulldog Costello, bulldog Mastiff at the time, and he was a slow walker. So these were slow walks, but I can think much more clearly that way. There’s a Nobel Prize winning professor at Columbia University School of Medicine, Richard Axel, who won the Nobel Prize, co-won Nobel Prize with Linda Buck for the discovery of the molecular basis of olfaction.
I’m holding the book and I’m walking and I’m reading, and I usually have a pen and I’m underlining. I have this whole system like underlining, stars, exclamation points, goes back to university of what things I’ll go back to which things I export to notes and that kind of thing. But from the beginning when I opened my lab at that time in San Diego before I moved back to Stanford, I would have meetings with my students or postdocs by just walking in the field behind the lab. And I’d bring my bulldog Costello, bulldog Mastiff at the time, and he was a slow walker. So these were slow walks, but I can think much more clearly that way. There’s a Nobel Prize winning professor at Columbia University School of Medicine, Richard Axel, who won the Nobel Prize, co-won Nobel Prize with Linda Buck for the discovery of the molecular basis of olfaction.
And he walks in, voice dictates his papers. And now with Rev or these other, maybe there are better ones than Rev, where you can convert audio files into text very quickly and then edit from there. So I will often voice dictate first drafts and things like that. And I totally agree on the long runs, the walks, the integrating that with cognitive work, harder to do with sprints and then the gym. You weight train?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Andrew Huberman
You just seem naturally strong and thicker jointed. It’s true, it’s true.
You just seem naturally strong and thicker jointed. It’s true, it’s true.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Andrew Huberman
I mean, we did the one very beginner because I’m a very beginner of jiu jitsu class together, and as I mentioned then, but if people missed it, Lexus freakishly strong.
I mean, we did the one very beginner because I’m a very beginner of jiu jitsu class together, and as I mentioned then, but if people missed it, Lexus freakishly strong.
Lex Fridman
I think I was born genetically to hug people.
I think I was born genetically to hug people.
Andrew Huberman
Oh, like Costello.
Oh, like Costello.
Lex Fridman
Exactly.
Exactly.
Andrew Huberman
You guys have a certain similarity. He had wrists like it’s like you know. You and Jocko and Costello have these wrists and elbows that are super thick. And then when you look around, you see tremendous variation. Some people have the wrist width of a Whippet or Woody Allen, and then other people like you or Jocko. There’s this one Jocko video or thing on GQ or something. Have you seen the comments on Jocko, These are the Best?
You guys have a certain similarity. He had wrists like it’s like you know. You and Jocko and Costello have these wrists and elbows that are super thick. And then when you look around, you see tremendous variation. Some people have the wrist width of a Whippet or Woody Allen, and then other people like you or Jocko. There’s this one Jocko video or thing on GQ or something. Have you seen the comments on Jocko, These are the Best?
Lex Fridman
No.
No.
Andrew Huberman
The comments, I love the comments on YouTube because occasionally they’re funny because. The best is when Jocko was born, the doctor looked at his parents and said, “It’s a man.”
The comments, I love the comments on YouTube because occasionally they’re funny because. The best is when Jocko was born, the doctor looked at his parents and said, “It’s a man.”
Lex Fridman
It’s like Chuck Norris type comments.
It’s like Chuck Norris type comments.
Andrew Huberman
Oh yeah. Those are great. That’s what I miss about Rogan being on YouTube with the full-length episode. Oh, that comment.
Oh yeah. Those are great. That’s what I miss about Rogan being on YouTube with the full-length episode. Oh, that comment.
Advice to younger self
Lex Fridman
So this is technically a birthday podcast. What do you love most about getting older?
So this is technically a birthday podcast. What do you love most about getting older?
Andrew Huberman
It’s like the confirmation that comes from getting more and more data, which basically says, ” Yeah, the first time you thought that thing, it was actually right because the second, third and fourth and fifth time, it turned out the exact same way.” In other words, there have been a few times in my life where I did not feel easy about something. I felt a signal for my body, “This is not good.” And I didn’t trust it early on, but I knew it was there.
It’s like the confirmation that comes from getting more and more data, which basically says, ” Yeah, the first time you thought that thing, it was actually right because the second, third and fourth and fifth time, it turned out the exact same way.” In other words, there have been a few times in my life where I did not feel easy about something. I felt a signal for my body, “This is not good.” And I didn’t trust it early on, but I knew it was there.
And then two or three bad experiences later, I’m able to say, “Ah, every single time there was a signal from the body informing my mind, this is not good.” Now the reverse has also been true that there’ve been a number of instances in which I feel there sort of immediate delight, and there’s this almost astonishingly simple experience of feeling comfortable with somebody or at peace with something or delighted at an experience. And it turns out literally all of those experiences and people turned out to be experiences and people that are still in my life and that I still delight in every day. In other words, what’s great about getting older is that you stop questioning the signals that come from, I think deeper recesses of your nervous system to say, “Hey, this is not good,” or, “Hey, this is great, more of this.” Whereas I think in my teens, my twenties, my thirties, I’m almost 48, I’ll be 48 next month.
I didn’t trust, I didn’t listen. I actually put a lot of work into overriding those signals and learning to fight through them, thinking that somehow that was making me tougher or somehow that was making me smarter. When in fact, in the end, those people that you meet that are difficult or there are other names for it, like in the end, you’re like, “That person’s a piece of shit,” or, “This person is amazing and they’re really wonderful.” And I felt that from the go.
Lex Fridman
So you’ve learned to trust your gut versus the influences of other people’s opinions?
So you’ve learned to trust your gut versus the influences of other people’s opinions?
Andrew Huberman
I’ve learned to trust my gut versus the forebrain over analysis, overriding the gut. Other people often in my life have had great optics. I’ve benefited tremendously from an early age of being in a large community. It’s been mostly guys, but I have some close female friends and always have as well who will tell me, “That’s a bad decision,” or, “This person not so good,” or, “Be careful,” or, “They’re great,” or, “That’s great.” So oftentimes my community and the people around me have been more aligned with the correct choice than not.
I’ve learned to trust my gut versus the forebrain over analysis, overriding the gut. Other people often in my life have had great optics. I’ve benefited tremendously from an early age of being in a large community. It’s been mostly guys, but I have some close female friends and always have as well who will tell me, “That’s a bad decision,” or, “This person not so good,” or, “Be careful,” or, “They’re great,” or, “That’s great.” So oftentimes my community and the people around me have been more aligned with the correct choice than not.
Lex Fridman
Is it really?
Is it really?
Andrew Huberman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Really? When you were younger like friends, parents and so on.
Really? When you were younger like friends, parents and so on.
Andrew Huberman
I don’t recall ever really listening to my parents that much. I grew up in… We don’t have to go back to my childhood thing-
I don’t recall ever really listening to my parents that much. I grew up in… We don’t have to go back to my childhood thing-
Lex Fridman
My fault Andrew.
My fault Andrew.
Andrew Huberman
… but my sense was that… Thank you. I learned that recently in a psilocybin journey, my first high dose psilocybin journey, which was-
… but my sense was that… Thank you. I learned that recently in a psilocybin journey, my first high dose psilocybin journey, which was-
Lex Fridman
Welcome back.
Welcome back.
Andrew Huberman
… done with a clinician. Thank you very much. Thank you. I was worried there for a second at one point. “Am I not coming back?” But in any event, yeah, I grew up with some wild kids. I would say about a third of my friends from childhood are dead or in jail, about a third have gone on to do tremendously impressive things, start companies, excellent athletes, academics, scientists, and clinicians. And then about a third are living their lives as more typical. I just mean that they are happy family people with jobs that they mainly serve the function to make money. They’re not into their career for career’s sake.
… done with a clinician. Thank you very much. Thank you. I was worried there for a second at one point. “Am I not coming back?” But in any event, yeah, I grew up with some wild kids. I would say about a third of my friends from childhood are dead or in jail, about a third have gone on to do tremendously impressive things, start companies, excellent athletes, academics, scientists, and clinicians. And then about a third are living their lives as more typical. I just mean that they are happy family people with jobs that they mainly serve the function to make money. They’re not into their career for career’s sake.
So some of my friends early on gave me some bad ideas, but most of the time my bad ideas came from overriding the signals that I knew that my body, and I would say my body and brain were telling me to obey, and I say body and brain is that there’s this brain region, the insula, which does many things, but it represents our sense of internal sensation and interoception. And I was talking to Paul Conte about this, who as you know, I respect tremendously. I think he’s one of the smartest people I’ve ever met. I think for different reasons. He and Marc Andreessen are some of the smartest people I’ve ever met. But Paul’s level of insight into the human psyche is absolutely astounding. And he says the opposite of what most people say about the brain, which is most people say, “Oh, the supercomputer of the brain is the forebrain.”
It’s like a monkey brain with a extra real estate put on there. And the forebrain is what makes us human and gives us our superpowers. Paul has said, and he’s done a whole series on mental health that’s coming out from our podcast in September, so this is not an attempt to plug that, but he’ll elaborate on [inaudible 00:13:08].
Lex Fridman
Wait, you’re doing a thing with Paul?
Wait, you’re doing a thing with Paul?
Andrew Huberman
We already did. Yeah.
We already did. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Oh, nice.
Oh, nice.
Andrew Huberman
So Paul Conte, he and I sat down, he did a four episode series on mental health. This is not mental illness mental health, about how to explore one’s own subconscious, explore the self, build and cultivate the generative drive. You’ll learn more about what that is from him. He’s far more eloquent and clearer than I am, and he provides essentially a set of steps to explore the self that does not require that you work with a therapist.
So Paul Conte, he and I sat down, he did a four episode series on mental health. This is not mental illness mental health, about how to explore one’s own subconscious, explore the self, build and cultivate the generative drive. You’ll learn more about what that is from him. He’s far more eloquent and clearer than I am, and he provides essentially a set of steps to explore the self that does not require that you work with a therapist.
This is self-exploration that is rooted in psychiatry, it’s rooted in neuroscience, and I don’t think this information exists anywhere else. I’m not aware that it exists anywhere else. And he essentially distills it all down to one eight and a half by 11 sheet, which we provide for people. And he says there, I don’t want to give too much away because I would detract from what he does so beautifully, but if I tried and I wouldn’t have accomplish it anyway.
But he said, and I believe that the subconscious is the supercomputer of the brain. All the stuff working underneath our conscious awareness that’s driving our feelings and what we think are the decisions that we’ve thought through so carefully. And that only by exploring the subconscious and understanding it a little bit, can we actually improve ourselves over time and I agree. I think that so the mistake is to think that thinking can override it all. It’s a certain style of introspection and thinking that allows us to read the signals from our body, read the signals from our brain, integrate the knowledge that we’re collecting about ourselves, and to use all that in ways that are really adaptive and generative for us.
Jungian shadow
Lex Fridman
What do you think is there in that subconscious? What do you think of the Jungian and shadow? What’s there?
What do you think is there in that subconscious? What do you think of the Jungian and shadow? What’s there?
Andrew Huberman
There’s this idea, as you’re familiar with too. I’m sure that this Jungian idea that we all have all things inside of us, that all of us have the capacity to be evil, to be good, et cetera, but that some people express one or the other to a greater extent. But he also mentioned that there’s a unique category of people, maybe 2 to 5% of people that don’t just have all things inside of them, but they actually spend a lot of time exploring a lot of those things. The darker recesses, the shadows, their own shadows.
There’s this idea, as you’re familiar with too. I’m sure that this Jungian idea that we all have all things inside of us, that all of us have the capacity to be evil, to be good, et cetera, but that some people express one or the other to a greater extent. But he also mentioned that there’s a unique category of people, maybe 2 to 5% of people that don’t just have all things inside of them, but they actually spend a lot of time exploring a lot of those things. The darker recesses, the shadows, their own shadows.
I’m somebody who’s drawn to goodness and to light and to joy and all those things like anybody else. But I think maybe it was part of how I grew up. Maybe it was the crowd I was with, but then again, even when I started spending more time with academics and scientists, I mean you see shadows in other ways, right? You see pure ambition with no passion. I recall a colleague in San Diego who it was very clear to me did not actually care about understanding the brain, but understanding the brain was just his avenue to exercise ambition. And if you gave him something else to work on, he’d work on that.
In fact, he did. He left and he worked on something else, and I realized he has no passion for understanding the brain like I assumed all scientists do, certainly why I went into it. But some people, it’s just raw ambition. It’s about winning. It doesn’t even matter what they win, which to me is crazy. But I think that’s a shadow that some people explore, not one I’ve explored. I think the shadow parts of us are very important to come to understand and look better to understand them and know that they’re there and work with them than to not acknowledge their presence and have them surface in the form of addictions or behaviors that damage us in other people.
Lex Fridman
So one of the processes for achieving mental health is to bring those things to the surface. So fish the subconscious mind.
So one of the processes for achieving mental health is to bring those things to the surface. So fish the subconscious mind.
Andrew Huberman
Yes, and Paul describes 10 cupboards that one can look into for exploring the self. There’s the structure of self and the function of self. Again, this will all be spelled out in this series in a lot of detail. Also in terms of its relational aspect between people, how to pick good partners and good relationship. It gets really into this from a very different perspective. Yeah, fascinating stuff. I was just sitting there. I will say this, that four episode series with Paul is at least to date, the most important work I’ve ever been involved in in all of my career because it’s very clear that we are not taught how to explore our subconscious and that very few people actually understand how to do that. Even most psychiatrists, he mentioned something about psychiatrists. If you’re a cardiothoracic surgeon or something like that and 50% of your patients die, you’re considered a bad cardiothoracic surgeon.
Yes, and Paul describes 10 cupboards that one can look into for exploring the self. There’s the structure of self and the function of self. Again, this will all be spelled out in this series in a lot of detail. Also in terms of its relational aspect between people, how to pick good partners and good relationship. It gets really into this from a very different perspective. Yeah, fascinating stuff. I was just sitting there. I will say this, that four episode series with Paul is at least to date, the most important work I’ve ever been involved in in all of my career because it’s very clear that we are not taught how to explore our subconscious and that very few people actually understand how to do that. Even most psychiatrists, he mentioned something about psychiatrists. If you’re a cardiothoracic surgeon or something like that and 50% of your patients die, you’re considered a bad cardiothoracic surgeon.
But with no disrespect to psychiatrists, there are some excellent psychiatrists out there. There are also a lot of terrible psychiatrists out there because unless all of their patients commit suicide or half commit suicide, they can treat for a long time without it becoming visible that they’re not so good at their craft. Now, he’s superb at his craft, and I think he would say that yes, exploring some shadows, but also just understanding the self, really understanding like, “Who am I? And what’s important? What are my ambitions? What are my strivings?” Again, I’m lifting from some of the things that he’ll describe exactly how to do this. People do not spend enough time addressing those questions, and as a consequence, they discover what resides in their subconscious through the sometimes bad, hopefully also good, but manifestations of their actions.
We are driven by this huge 90% of our real estate that is not visible to our conscious awareness. And we need to understand that. I’ve talked about this before. I’ve done therapy twice a week since I was a kid. I had to as a condition of being let back in school. I found a way to either through insurance or even when I didn’t have insurance, I took an extra job writing for Thrasher Magazine when I was a postdoc so I could pay for therapy at a discount because I didn’t make much money as a postdoc.
I mean, I think for me, it’s as important as going to the gym and people think it’s just ruminating on problems, or getting… No, no, no. If you work with somebody really good, they’re forcing you to ask questions about who you really are, what you really want. It’s not just about support, but there should be support. There should be rapport, but then it’s also, there should be insight, right? Most people who get therapy, they’re getting support, there’s rapport, but insight is not easy to arrive at, and a really good psychologist or psychiatrist can help you arrive at deep insights that transform your entire life.
Betrayal and loyalty
Lex Fridman
Well, sometimes when I look inside and I do this often exploring who you truly are, you come to this question, do I accept… Once you see parts, do I accept this or do I fix this? Is this who you are fundamentally, and it will always be this way, or is this a problem to be fixed? For example, one of the things, especially recently, but in general over time I’ve discovered about myself probably has roots in childhood, probably has roots in a lot of things, is I deeply value loyalty maybe more than the average person. And so when there’s disloyalty, it can be painful to me. And so this is who I am, and so do I have to relax a bit? Do I have to fix this part or is this who you are? And there’s a million, that’s one little…
Well, sometimes when I look inside and I do this often exploring who you truly are, you come to this question, do I accept… Once you see parts, do I accept this or do I fix this? Is this who you are fundamentally, and it will always be this way, or is this a problem to be fixed? For example, one of the things, especially recently, but in general over time I’ve discovered about myself probably has roots in childhood, probably has roots in a lot of things, is I deeply value loyalty maybe more than the average person. And so when there’s disloyalty, it can be painful to me. And so this is who I am, and so do I have to relax a bit? Do I have to fix this part or is this who you are? And there’s a million, that’s one little…
Andrew Huberman
I think loyalty is a good thing to cling to, provided that when loyalty is broken, that it doesn’t disrupt too many other areas of your life. But it depends also on whose disrupting that loyalty, if it’s a coworker versus a romantic partner versus your exclusive romantic partner, depending on the structure of your romantic partner life. I mean, I have always experienced extreme joy and feelings of safety and trust in my friendships. Again, mostly male friendships, but female friendships too, which is only to say that they were mostly male friendships. The female friendships have also been very loyal. So getting backstabbed is not something I’m familiar with. And yeah, I love being crewed up.
I think loyalty is a good thing to cling to, provided that when loyalty is broken, that it doesn’t disrupt too many other areas of your life. But it depends also on whose disrupting that loyalty, if it’s a coworker versus a romantic partner versus your exclusive romantic partner, depending on the structure of your romantic partner life. I mean, I have always experienced extreme joy and feelings of safety and trust in my friendships. Again, mostly male friendships, but female friendships too, which is only to say that they were mostly male friendships. The female friendships have also been very loyal. So getting backstabbed is not something I’m familiar with. And yeah, I love being crewed up.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. No, for sure. And I’m with you and you and I very much have the same values on this, but that’s one little thing. And then there’s many other things like I’m extremely self-critical and I look at myself as I’m regularly very self-critical, a self-critical engine in my brain. And I talked to actually Paul about this, I think on the podcast quite a bit. And he’s saying, “This is a really bad thing. You need to fix this. You need to be able to be regularly very positive about yourself.” And I kept disagreeing with him, “No, this is who I am,” and he seems to work. Don’t mess with a thing that seems to be working. It’s fine.
Yeah. No, for sure. And I’m with you and you and I very much have the same values on this, but that’s one little thing. And then there’s many other things like I’m extremely self-critical and I look at myself as I’m regularly very self-critical, a self-critical engine in my brain. And I talked to actually Paul about this, I think on the podcast quite a bit. And he’s saying, “This is a really bad thing. You need to fix this. You need to be able to be regularly very positive about yourself.” And I kept disagreeing with him, “No, this is who I am,” and he seems to work. Don’t mess with a thing that seems to be working. It’s fine.
I oscillate between being really grateful and really self-critical. But then you have to figure out what is it? Maybe there’s a deeper root thing. Maybe there’s an insecurity in there somewhere that has to do with childhood and then you’re trying to prove something to somebody from your childhood, this kind of thing.
Andrew Huberman
Well, a couple of things that I think are hopefully valuable for people here. One is one way to destroy your life is to spend time trying to control your or somebody else’s past. So much of our destructive behavior and thinking comes from wanting something that we saw or did or heard to not be true, rather than really working with that and getting close to what it really was. Sometimes those things are even traumatic, and we need to really get close to them and for them to move through us. And there are a bunch of different ways to do that with support from others and hopefully, but sometimes on our own as well.
Well, a couple of things that I think are hopefully valuable for people here. One is one way to destroy your life is to spend time trying to control your or somebody else’s past. So much of our destructive behavior and thinking comes from wanting something that we saw or did or heard to not be true, rather than really working with that and getting close to what it really was. Sometimes those things are even traumatic, and we need to really get close to them and for them to move through us. And there are a bunch of different ways to do that with support from others and hopefully, but sometimes on our own as well.
I don’t think we can rewire our deep preferences and what we find despicable or joyful. I do think that it’s really a question of what allows us peace. Can you be at peace with the fact that you’re very self-critical? And enjoy that, get some distance from it, have a sense of humor about it, or is it driving you in a way that’s keeping you awake at night and forcing you back to the table to do work in a way that feels self-flagellating and doesn’t feel good?
Can you get that humility and awareness of your one’s flaws? And I think that that can create, this word space sounds very new, edgy, like get space from it. You can have a sense of humor about how neurotic we can all be. I mean, neurotic isn’t actually a bad term in the classic sense of the psychologists and psychiatrists, the freudians. So that the best case is to be neurotic, to actually see one’s own issues and work with them. Whereas psychotic is the other way to be, which is obviously not good. So I think the question whether or not to work on something or to just accept it as part of ourselves, I think really depends if we feel like it’s holding us back or not. And I think you’re asking perhaps the most profound question about being a human, which is what do you do with your body? What do you do with your mind?
I mean, it’s also a question. We started off talking about fitness a little bit just for whatever reason. Do I need to run an ultra marathon? I don’t feel like I need to. David Goggins does and does a whole lot more than that. So that for him, that’s important. For me, it’s not important to do that. I don’t think he does it just so he can run the ultras. There’s clearly something else in there for him. And guys like Cam Hanes and tremendous respect for what they do and how they do it. Does one need to make their body more muscular, stronger, more endurance, more flexibility? Do you need to read harder books? I think doing hard things feels good. I know it feels good. I know that the worst I feel, the worst way to feel is when I’m procrastinating and I don’t do something.
And then whenever I do something and I complete it and I break through that point where it was hard and then I’m doing it at the end, I actually feel like I was infused with some sort of super chemical. And who knows if it’s probably a cocktail of endogenously made chemicals. But I think it is good to do hard things, but you have to be careful not to destroy your body, your mind in the process. And I think it’s about whether or not you can achieve peace. Can you sleep well at night?
Stress isn’t bad if you can sleep well at night, you can be stressed all day, go, go, go, go, go, go, go. And it’ll optimize your focus. But can you fall asleep and stay deeply asleep at night? Being in a hard relationship. Some people say that’s not good. Other people like can you be at peace in that? And I think we all have different RPM. We all kind of idle at different RPM and some people are big mellow Costello and others need more friction in order to feel at peace. But I think ultimately what we want is to feel at peace.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’ve been through some really low points over the past couple of years, and I think the reason could be boiled down to the fact that I haven’t been able to find a place of peace, a place or people or moments that give deep inner peace. And I think you put it really beautifully. You have to figure out, given who you are, the various characteristics of your mind, all the things, all the contents of the cupboards, how to get space from it. And ultimately one good representation of that is to be able to laugh at all of it, whatever’s going on inside your mind to be able to step back and just kind of chuckle at the beauty and the absurdity of the whole thing.
Yeah, I’ve been through some really low points over the past couple of years, and I think the reason could be boiled down to the fact that I haven’t been able to find a place of peace, a place or people or moments that give deep inner peace. And I think you put it really beautifully. You have to figure out, given who you are, the various characteristics of your mind, all the things, all the contents of the cupboards, how to get space from it. And ultimately one good representation of that is to be able to laugh at all of it, whatever’s going on inside your mind to be able to step back and just kind of chuckle at the beauty and the absurdity of the whole thing.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, and keep going. There’s this beautiful, as I mentioned, it seems like every podcast lately. I’m a huge Rancid fan. Mostly I just think Tim Armstrong’s writing is pure poetry and whether or not you like the music or not. And he’s written music for a lot of other people too. He doesn’t advertise that much because he’s humble but-
Yeah, and keep going. There’s this beautiful, as I mentioned, it seems like every podcast lately. I’m a huge Rancid fan. Mostly I just think Tim Armstrong’s writing is pure poetry and whether or not you like the music or not. And he’s written music for a lot of other people too. He doesn’t advertise that much because he’s humble but-
Lex Fridman
By the way, I went to a show of theirs like 20 years ago.
By the way, I went to a show of theirs like 20 years ago.
Andrew Huberman
Oh, yeah. I’m going to see them in Boston, September 18th. I’m literally flying there for… Where I’ll take the train up from New York. I’m going to meet a friend of mine named Jim Thiebaud, who’s a guy who owns a lot of companies, the skateboard industry. We’re meeting there, a couple of little kids to go see them play amazing, amazing people, amazing music.
Oh, yeah. I’m going to see them in Boston, September 18th. I’m literally flying there for… Where I’ll take the train up from New York. I’m going to meet a friend of mine named Jim Thiebaud, who’s a guy who owns a lot of companies, the skateboard industry. We’re meeting there, a couple of little kids to go see them play amazing, amazing people, amazing music.
Lex Fridman
Very intense.
Very intense.
Andrew Huberman
Very intense, but embodies all the different emotions. That’s why I love it. They have some love songs, they have some hate songs, they have some in. But going back to what you said, I think there’s a song, the first song on Indestructible album. I think he’s just talking about shock and disbelief of discovering things about people that were close to you. And I won’t sing it, but nor I wouldn’t dare. But there’s this one lyric that’s really stuck in my mind ever since that album came out in 2003, which is that, “Nothing’s what it seems so I just sit here laughing. I’m going to keep going on. I can’t get distracted.” There is this piece of like, you got to learn how to push out the disturbing stuff sometimes and go forward. And I remember hearing that lyric and then writing it down. And that was a time where my undergraduate advisor, who was a mentor and a father to me, blew his head off in the bathtub like three weeks before.
Very intense, but embodies all the different emotions. That’s why I love it. They have some love songs, they have some hate songs, they have some in. But going back to what you said, I think there’s a song, the first song on Indestructible album. I think he’s just talking about shock and disbelief of discovering things about people that were close to you. And I won’t sing it, but nor I wouldn’t dare. But there’s this one lyric that’s really stuck in my mind ever since that album came out in 2003, which is that, “Nothing’s what it seems so I just sit here laughing. I’m going to keep going on. I can’t get distracted.” There is this piece of like, you got to learn how to push out the disturbing stuff sometimes and go forward. And I remember hearing that lyric and then writing it down. And that was a time where my undergraduate advisor, who was a mentor and a father to me, blew his head off in the bathtub like three weeks before.
And then my graduate advisor, who I was working for at that time, who I loved and adored, was really like a mother to me. I knew her when she was pregnant with her two kids, died at 50, breast cancer. And then my postdoc advisor, first day of work at Stanford as a faculty member sitting across the table like this from him, had a heart attack right in front of me, died of pancreatic cancer at the end of 2017. And I remember just thinking, going back to that song there over and over and where people would… Yeah, I haven’t had many betrayals in life. I’ve had a few. But just thinking or seeing something or learning something about something, you just say you can’t believe it. And I mentioned that lyric off, that first song, Indestructible on that album because it’s just the raw emotion of like, “I can’t believe this. What I just saw is so disturbing, but I have to just keep going forward.”
There are certain things that we really do need to push not just into our periphery, but off into the gutter and keep going. And that’s a hard thing to learn how to do. But if you’re going to be functional in life, you have to. And actually just to get at this issue of do I change or do I embrace this aspect of self? About six months, it was April of this last year, I did some intense work around some things that were really challenging to me. And I did it alone, and it may have involved some medicine, and I expected to get peace through this. I was like, “I’m going to let go of it.” And I spent 11 hours just getting more and more frustrated and angry about this thing that I was trying to resolve.
And I was so unbelievably disappointed that I couldn’t get that relief. And I was like, “What is this? This is not how this is supposed to work. I’m supposed to feel peace. The clouds are supposed to lift.” And so a week went by and then another half week went by, and then someone whose opinion I trust very much. I explained this to them because I was getting a little concerned like, “What’s going on? This is worse, not better.” And they said, ” This is very simple. You have a giant blind spot, which is your sense of justice, Andrew, and your sense of anger are linked like an iron rod and you need to relax it.” And as they said that, I felt the anger dissipate. And so there was something that I think it is true. I have a very strong sense of justice and my sense of anger then at least was very strongly linked to it.
So it’s great to have a sense of justice, right? I hate to see people wrong. I absolutely do. And I’m human. I’m sure I’ve wronged people in my life. I know I have. They’ve told me, I’ve tried to apologize and reconcile where possible. Still have a lot of work to do. But where I see injustice, it draws in my sense of anger in a way that I think is just eating me up. But it was only in hearing that link that I wasn’t aware of before. It was in my subconscious, obviously. Did I feel the relaxation? There’s no amount of plant medicine or MDMA or any kind of chemical you can take that’s naturally just going to dissipate what’s hard for oneself if one embraces that or if one chooses to do it through just talk therapy or journaling or friends or introspection or all of the above. There needs to be an awareness of the things that we’re just not aware of.
So I think the answer to your question, do you embrace or do you fight these aspects of self is? I think you get in your subconscious through good work with somebody skilled. And sometimes that involves the tools I just mentioned in various combinations and you figure it out. You figure out if it’s serving you. Obviously it was not bringing me peace. My sense of justice was undermining my sense of peace. And so in understanding this link… Now, I would say, in understanding this link between justice and anger, now I think it’s a little bit more of you know, it’s not like a Twizzler stick bendy, but at least it’s not like an iron rod. When I see somebody wronged, I mean it used to just… Like immediately.
Lex Fridman
But you’re able to step back now. To me, the ultimate place to reach is laughter.
But you’re able to step back now. To me, the ultimate place to reach is laughter.
Andrew Huberman
I just sit here laughing. Exactly. That’s the lyric. I can’t believe it. “So I just sit here laughing. Can’t get distracted,” Just at some point but the problem I think in just laughing at something like that gives you distance, but the question is, do you stop engaging with it at that point? I experienced this…
I just sit here laughing. Exactly. That’s the lyric. I can’t believe it. “So I just sit here laughing. Can’t get distracted,” Just at some point but the problem I think in just laughing at something like that gives you distance, but the question is, do you stop engaging with it at that point? I experienced this…
Andrew Huberman
… to stop engaging with it at that point. I experienced this… I mean, recently I got to see how sometimes I’ll see something that’s just like, “What? This is crazy,” so I just laugh. But then, I continue to engage in it and it’s taking me off course. And so, there is a place where… I mean, I realize this is probably a kid show too so I want to keep it G-rated. But at some point, for certain things, it makes sense to go, “Fuck that.”
… to stop engaging with it at that point. I experienced this… I mean, recently I got to see how sometimes I’ll see something that’s just like, “What? This is crazy,” so I just laugh. But then, I continue to engage in it and it’s taking me off course. And so, there is a place where… I mean, I realize this is probably a kid show too so I want to keep it G-rated. But at some point, for certain things, it makes sense to go, “Fuck that.”
Lex Fridman
But also, laugh at yourself for saying, “Fuck that.”
But also, laugh at yourself for saying, “Fuck that.”
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. And then, move on. So the question is do you get stuck or do you move on?
Yeah. And then, move on. So the question is do you get stuck or do you move on?
Lex Fridman
Sure, sure. But there’s a lightness of being that comes with laughter. I mean, I’ve gotten-
Sure, sure. But there’s a lightness of being that comes with laughter. I mean, I’ve gotten-
Andrew Huberman
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
As you know, I spent the day with Elon today. He just gave me this burnt hair. Do you know what this is?
As you know, I spent the day with Elon today. He just gave me this burnt hair. Do you know what this is?
Andrew Huberman
I have no idea.
I have no idea.
Lex Fridman
I’m sure there’s actually… There should be a Huberman Lab episode on this. It’s a cologne that’s burnt hair and it’s supposedly a really intense smell and it is.
I’m sure there’s actually… There should be a Huberman Lab episode on this. It’s a cologne that’s burnt hair and it’s supposedly a really intense smell and it is.
Andrew Huberman
Give me a smell.
Give me a smell.
Lex Fridman
Please, it’s not going to leave your nose.
Please, it’s not going to leave your nose.
Andrew Huberman
That’s okay. Well, that’s okay. I’ll whiff it as if I were working a chemical in the lab-
That’s okay. Well, that’s okay. I’ll whiff it as if I were working a chemical in the lab-
Lex Fridman
You have to actually spray it on yourself because I don’t know if you can-
You have to actually spray it on yourself because I don’t know if you can-
Andrew Huberman
So I’m reading an amazing book called An Immense World by Ed Yong. He won a Pulitzer for We Contain Multitudes or something like that, I think is the title of the other book. And the first chapter is all about olfaction and the incredible power that olfaction has. That smells terrible. I don’t even-
So I’m reading an amazing book called An Immense World by Ed Yong. He won a Pulitzer for We Contain Multitudes or something like that, I think is the title of the other book. And the first chapter is all about olfaction and the incredible power that olfaction has. That smells terrible. I don’t even-
Lex Fridman
And it doesn’t leave you. For those listening, it doesn’t quite smell terrible. It’s just intense and it stays with you. This, to me, represents just laughing at the absurdity of it all so-
And it doesn’t leave you. For those listening, it doesn’t quite smell terrible. It’s just intense and it stays with you. This, to me, represents just laughing at the absurdity of it all so-
Andrew Huberman
I have to ask, so you were rolling jiu jitsu?
I have to ask, so you were rolling jiu jitsu?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. We’re training. Yeah.
Yeah. We’re training. Yeah.
Andrew Huberman
So is that fight between Elon and Zuck actually going to happen?
So is that fight between Elon and Zuck actually going to happen?
Lex Fridman
I think Elon is a huge believer of this idea of the most entertaining outcome is the most likely and there is almost the sense that there’s not a free will. And the universe has a deterministic gravitational field pulling towards the most fun and he’s just a player in that game. So from that perspective, I think it seems like something like that is inevitable.
I think Elon is a huge believer of this idea of the most entertaining outcome is the most likely and there is almost the sense that there’s not a free will. And the universe has a deterministic gravitational field pulling towards the most fun and he’s just a player in that game. So from that perspective, I think it seems like something like that is inevitable.
Andrew Huberman
Like a little scrap in the parking lot of Facebook or something like that?
Like a little scrap in the parking lot of Facebook or something like that?
Lex Fridman
Exactly.
Exactly.
Andrew Huberman
Sorry, Meta. But it looks like they’re training for real and Zuck has competed, right, in jiu jitsu?
Sorry, Meta. But it looks like they’re training for real and Zuck has competed, right, in jiu jitsu?
Lex Fridman
So I think he is approaching it as a sport, Elon is approaching it as a spectacle. And I mean, the way he talks about it, he’s a huge fan of history. He talks about all the warriors that have fought throughout history. Look, he wants to really do it at the Coliseum. And the Coliseum is for 400 years, there’s so much great writing about this, I think over 400,000 people have died in the Coliseum, gladiators.
So I think he is approaching it as a sport, Elon is approaching it as a spectacle. And I mean, the way he talks about it, he’s a huge fan of history. He talks about all the warriors that have fought throughout history. Look, he wants to really do it at the Coliseum. And the Coliseum is for 400 years, there’s so much great writing about this, I think over 400,000 people have died in the Coliseum, gladiators.
So this is this historic place that sheds so much blood, so much fear, so much anticipation of battle, all of this. So he loves this kind of spectacle and also, the meme of it, the hilarious absurdity of it. The two tech CEOs are battling it out on sand in a place where gladiators fought to the death and then bears and lions ate prisoners as part of the execution process.
Andrew Huberman
Well, it’s also going to be an instance where Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk exchange bodily fluids. They bleed. That’s one of the things about fighting. I think it was in that book. It’s a great book. Fighter’s Heart, where he talks about the sort of the intimacy of sparring. I only rolled jiu jitsu with you once but there was a period of time where I boxed which I don’t recommend.
Well, it’s also going to be an instance where Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk exchange bodily fluids. They bleed. That’s one of the things about fighting. I think it was in that book. It’s a great book. Fighter’s Heart, where he talks about the sort of the intimacy of sparring. I only rolled jiu jitsu with you once but there was a period of time where I boxed which I don’t recommend.
I got hit. I hit some guys and definitely got hit back. I’d spar on Wednesday nights when I lived on San Diego. And when you spar with somebody, even if they hurt you, especially if they hurt you, you see that person afterwards and there’s an intimacy, right? It was in that book, Fighter’s Heart, where he explains, you’re exchanging bodily fluids with a stranger and you’re in your primitive mind and so there’s an intimacy there that persists so-
Lex Fridman
Well, you go together through a process of fear, anxiety like-
Well, you go together through a process of fear, anxiety like-
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. When they get you, you nod. I mean, you watch somebody catch somebody. Not so much in professional fighting, but if people are sparring, they catch you, you acknowledge that they caught you like, “He got me there.”
Yeah. When they get you, you nod. I mean, you watch somebody catch somebody. Not so much in professional fighting, but if people are sparring, they catch you, you acknowledge that they caught you like, “He got me there.”
Lex Fridman
And on the flip side of that, so we trained and then after that, we played Diablo 4.
And on the flip side of that, so we trained and then after that, we played Diablo 4.
Andrew Huberman
I don’t know what that is. I don’t play video games. I’m sorry.
I don’t know what that is. I don’t play video games. I’m sorry.
Lex Fridman
But it’s a video game, so it’s a pretty intense combat in the video… You’re fighting demons and dragons-
But it’s a video game, so it’s a pretty intense combat in the video… You’re fighting demons and dragons-
Andrew Huberman
Oh, okay. Last video game I played was Mike Tyson’s Punch-Out!!
Oh, okay. Last video game I played was Mike Tyson’s Punch-Out!!
Lex Fridman
There you go. That’s pretty close.
There you go. That’s pretty close.
Andrew Huberman
I met him recently. I went on his podcast.
I met him recently. I went on his podcast.
Lex Fridman
You went… Wait.
You went… Wait.
Andrew Huberman
It hasn’t come out yet.
It hasn’t come out yet.
Lex Fridman
Oh, it hasn’t come out? Okay.
Oh, it hasn’t come out? Okay.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. I asked Mike… His kids are great. They came in there. They’re super smart kids. Goodness gracious. They ask great questions. I asked Mike what he did with the piece of Evander’s ear that he bit off.
Yeah. I asked Mike… His kids are great. They came in there. They’re super smart kids. Goodness gracious. They ask great questions. I asked Mike what he did with the piece of Evander’s ear that he bit off.
Lex Fridman
Did he remember?
Did he remember?
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. He’s like, “I gave it back to him.”
Yeah. He’s like, “I gave it back to him.”
Lex Fridman
Here you go. Sorry about that.
Here you go. Sorry about that.
Andrew Huberman
He sells edibles that are in the shape of ears with a little bite out of it. Yeah. His life has been incredible. He’s intimate. Yeah. His family, you get the sense that they’re really a great family. They’re really-
He sells edibles that are in the shape of ears with a little bite out of it. Yeah. His life has been incredible. He’s intimate. Yeah. His family, you get the sense that they’re really a great family. They’re really-
Lex Fridman
Mike Tyson?
Mike Tyson?
Andrew Huberman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Lex Fridman
That’s a heck of a journey right there of a man.
That’s a heck of a journey right there of a man.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. My now friend, Tim Armstrong, like I said, lead singer from Rancid. He put it best. He said that Mike Tyson’s life is Shakespearean, down, up, down, up and just that the arcs of his life are just… Sort of an only in America kind of tale too, right?
Yeah. My now friend, Tim Armstrong, like I said, lead singer from Rancid. He put it best. He said that Mike Tyson’s life is Shakespearean, down, up, down, up and just that the arcs of his life are just… Sort of an only in America kind of tale too, right?
Drama
Lex Fridman
So speaking of Shakespeare, I’ve recently gotten to know Neri Oxman who’s this incredible scientist that works at the intersection of nature and engineering and she reminded me of this Anna Akhmatova line. This is this great Soviet poet that I really love from over a century ago that each of our lives is a Shakespearean drama raised to the thousand degree. So I have to ask, why do you think humans are attracted to this kind of Shakespearean drama? Is there some aspect we’ve been talking about the subconscious mind that pulls us towards the drama, even though the place of mental health is peace?
So speaking of Shakespeare, I’ve recently gotten to know Neri Oxman who’s this incredible scientist that works at the intersection of nature and engineering and she reminded me of this Anna Akhmatova line. This is this great Soviet poet that I really love from over a century ago that each of our lives is a Shakespearean drama raised to the thousand degree. So I have to ask, why do you think humans are attracted to this kind of Shakespearean drama? Is there some aspect we’ve been talking about the subconscious mind that pulls us towards the drama, even though the place of mental health is peace?
Andrew Huberman
Yes and yes.
Yes and yes.
Lex Fridman
Do you have some of that?
Do you have some of that?
Andrew Huberman
Draw towards-
Draw towards-
Lex Fridman
Drama?
Drama?
Andrew Huberman
Drama? Yeah.
Drama? Yeah.
Lex Fridman
If you look at the empirical data.
If you look at the empirical data.
Andrew Huberman
Yes, I mean… Right. If I look at the empirical data, I mean, I think about who I chose to work for as an undergraduate, right? I was a… Barely finished high school, finally get to college, barely… This is really embarrassing and not something to aspire to. I was thrown out of the dorms for fighting-
Yes, I mean… Right. If I look at the empirical data, I mean, I think about who I chose to work for as an undergraduate, right? I was a… Barely finished high school, finally get to college, barely… This is really embarrassing and not something to aspire to. I was thrown out of the dorms for fighting-
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Andrew Huberman
Barely passed my classes. The girlfriend and I split up. I mean, I was living in a squat, got into a big fight. I was getting in trouble with the law. I eventually got my act together, go back to school, start working for somebody. Who do I choose to work for? A guy who’s an ex-navy guy who smokes cigarettes in the fume hood, drinks coffee, and we’re injecting rats with MDMA. And I was drawn to the personality, his energy, but I also… He was a great scientist, worked out a lot on a thermal regulation in the brain and more.
Barely passed my classes. The girlfriend and I split up. I mean, I was living in a squat, got into a big fight. I was getting in trouble with the law. I eventually got my act together, go back to school, start working for somebody. Who do I choose to work for? A guy who’s an ex-navy guy who smokes cigarettes in the fume hood, drinks coffee, and we’re injecting rats with MDMA. And I was drawn to the personality, his energy, but I also… He was a great scientist, worked out a lot on a thermal regulation in the brain and more.
Go to graduate school, I’m working for somebody, and decide that working in her laboratory wasn’t quite right for me. So I’m literally sneaking into the laboratory next door and working for the woman next door because I liked the relationships that she had to a certain set of questions and she was a quirky person. So drawn to drama but drawn to… I like characters. I like people that have texture. And I’m not drawn to raw ambition, I’m drawn to people that seem to have a real passion for what they do and a uniqueness to them that I… Not kind of, I’ll just say how it is. I can feel their heart for what they do and I’m drawn to that and that can be good.
It’s the same reason I went to work for Ben Barris as a post-doc. It wasn’t because he was the first transgender member of the National Academy of Sciences, that was just a feature of who he was. I loved how he loved glial. He would talk about these cells like they were the most enchanting things that he’d ever seen in his life. And I was like, “This is the biggest nerd I’ve ever met and I love him.” I think I’m drawn to that.
This is another thing that Conti elaborates on quite a bit more in the series on mental health coming out. But there are different drives within us, there are aggressive drives. Not always for fighting but for intense interaction. I mean, look at Twitter. Look at some of the… People clearly have an aggressive drive. There’s also a pleasure drive. Some people also have a strong pleasure drive. They want to experience pleasure through food, through sex, through friendship, through adventure. But I think the Shakespearean drama is the drama of the different drives in different ratios in different people.
I know somebody and she’s incredibly kind. Has an extremely high pleasure drive, loves taking great care of herself and people around her through food and through retreats and through all these things and makes spaces beautiful everywhere she goes. And gifts these things that are just so unbelievably feminine and incredible. These gifts to people and then kind and thoughtful about what they like. And then.. But I would say, very little aggressive drive from my read.
And then, I know other people who just have a ton of aggressive drive and very little pressure drive and I think… So there’s this alchemy that exists where people have these things in different ratios. And then, you blend in the differences in the chromosomes and differences in hormones and differences in personal history and what you end up with is a species that creates incredible recipes of drama but also peace, also relief from drama, contentment.
I mean, I realize this isn’t the exact topic of the question. But someone I know very dearly, actually an ex-girlfriend of mine, long- term partner of mine, sent me something recently and I think it hit the nail on the head. Which is that ideally for a man, they eventually settle where they find and feel peace, where they feel peaceful, where they can be themselves and feel peaceful. Now, I’m sure there’s an equivalent or mirror image of that for women but this particular post that she sent was about men and I totally agree.
And so, it isn’t always that we’re seeking friction. But for periods of our life, we seek friction, drama, adventure, excitement, fights, and doing hard, hard things. And then I think at some point, I’m certainly coming to this point now where it’s like, “Yeah. That’s all great and checked a lot of boxes.” But I had a lot of close calls, flew really close to the sun on a lot of things with life and limb and heart and spirit and some people close to us didn’t make it. And sometimes, not making it means the career they wanted went off a cliff or their health went off a cliff or their life went off a cliff. But I think that there’s also the Shakespearean drama of the characters that exit the play and are living their lives happily in the backdrop. It just doesn’t make for as much entertainment.
Lex Fridman
That’s one other thing, you could say, is the benefit of getting older is finding the Shakespearean drama less appealing or finding the joy in the peace.
That’s one other thing, you could say, is the benefit of getting older is finding the Shakespearean drama less appealing or finding the joy in the peace.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. Definitely. I mean, I think there’s real peace with age. I think the other thing is this notion of checking boxes is a real thing, for me anyway. I have a morning meditation that I do. Well, I wake up now, I get my sunlight, I hydrate, I use the bathroom. I do all the things that I talk about. I’ve started a practice of prayer in the last year which is new-ish for me which is we could talk about-
Yeah. Definitely. I mean, I think there’s real peace with age. I think the other thing is this notion of checking boxes is a real thing, for me anyway. I have a morning meditation that I do. Well, I wake up now, I get my sunlight, I hydrate, I use the bathroom. I do all the things that I talk about. I’ve started a practice of prayer in the last year which is new-ish for me which is we could talk about-
Lex Fridman
In the morning?
In the morning?
Andrew Huberman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Can you talk about it a little bit?
Can you talk about it a little bit?
Andrew Huberman
Sure. Yeah. And then, I have a meditation that I do that actually is where I think through with the different roles that I play. So I start very basic. I say, “Okay. I’m an animal,” like we are biologically animals, human. “I’m a man. I’m a scientist. I’m a teacher. I’m a friend. I’m a brother. I’m a son,” I have this list and I think about the different roles that I have and the roles that I still want in my life going forward that I haven’t yet fulfilled. It just takes me… It’s an inventory of where I’ve been, where I’m at, and where I’m going as they say. And I don’t know why I do it but I started doing it this last year, I think, because it helps me understand just how many different contexts I have to exist in and remind myself that there’s still more that I haven’t done that I’m excited about.
Sure. Yeah. And then, I have a meditation that I do that actually is where I think through with the different roles that I play. So I start very basic. I say, “Okay. I’m an animal,” like we are biologically animals, human. “I’m a man. I’m a scientist. I’m a teacher. I’m a friend. I’m a brother. I’m a son,” I have this list and I think about the different roles that I have and the roles that I still want in my life going forward that I haven’t yet fulfilled. It just takes me… It’s an inventory of where I’ve been, where I’m at, and where I’m going as they say. And I don’t know why I do it but I started doing it this last year, I think, because it helps me understand just how many different contexts I have to exist in and remind myself that there’s still more that I haven’t done that I’m excited about.
Lex Fridman
So within each of those contexts, there’s things that you want to accomplish to define that.
So within each of those contexts, there’s things that you want to accomplish to define that.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, and I’m ambitious so I think… I’m a brother. I have an older sister and I love her tremendously and I think, “I want to be the best brother I can be to her,” which means maybe a call, maybe just we do an annual trip together for our birthdays. Our birthdays are close together. We always go to New York for our birthdays and we’ve gone for the last three, four years. It’s like really reminding myself of that role not because I’ll forget, but because I have all these other roles I’ll get pulled into.
Yeah, and I’m ambitious so I think… I’m a brother. I have an older sister and I love her tremendously and I think, “I want to be the best brother I can be to her,” which means maybe a call, maybe just we do an annual trip together for our birthdays. Our birthdays are close together. We always go to New York for our birthdays and we’ve gone for the last three, four years. It’s like really reminding myself of that role not because I’ll forget, but because I have all these other roles I’ll get pulled into.
I say the first one, “I’m an animal,” because I have to remember that I have a body that needs care like any of us. I need sleep, I need food, I need hydration, I need… That I’m human, that the brain of a human is marvelously complex but also marvelously self-defeating at times. And so, I’m thinking about these things in the context of the different roles. And the whole thing takes about four or five minutes and I just find it brings me a certain amount of clarity that then allows me to ratchet into the day.
The prayer piece, I think I’ve been reluctant to talk about until now because I don’t believe in pushing religion on people. And I think that… And I’m not, it’s a highly individual thing and I do believe that one can be an atheist and still pray or agnostic and still pray. But for me, it really came about through understanding that there are certain aspects of myself that I just couldn’t resolve on my own. And no matter how much therapy, no matter how much… And I haven’t done a lot of it. But no matter how much plant medicine or other forms of medicine or exercise or podcasting or science or friendship or any of that, I was just not going to resolve.
And so, I started this because a male friend said, “Prayer is powerful,” and I said, “Well, how?” And he said, “I don’t know how but it can allow you to get outside yourself. Let you give up control and at the same time, take control.” I don’t even like saying take control. But the whole notion is that… And again, forgive me, but there’s no other way to say it. The whole notion is that God works through us. Whatever God is to you, he, him, her, life force, nature, whatever it is to you, that it works through us.
And so, I do a prayer. I’ll just describe it where I make an ask to help remove my character defects. I pray to God to help remove my character defects so that I can show up better in all the roles of my life and do good work which for me is learning and teaching. And so you might say, “Well, how is that different than a meditation?” Well, I’m acknowledging that there is something bigger than me, bigger than nature as I understand it, that I cannot understand or control nor do I want to, and I’m just giving over to that. And does that make me less of a scientist? I sure as hell hope not. I certainly know… There’s the head of our neurosciences at Stanford until recently. You should talk to him directly about it. Bill Newsome has talked about his religious life.
For me, it’s really a way of getting outside myself and then understanding how I fit into this bigger picture. And the character defects part is real, right? I’m a human. I have defects. I got a lot of flaws in me like anybody and trying to acknowledge them and asking for help in removing them. Not magically but through right action, through my right action. So I do that every morning.
And I have to say that it’s helped. It’s helped a lot. It’s helped me be better to myself, be better to other people. I still make mistakes but it’s becoming a bigger part of my life. And I never thought I’d talk like this but I think it’s clear to me that if we don’t believe in something… Again, it doesn’t have to be traditional, standardized religion, but if we don’t believe in something bigger than ourselves, we, at some level, will self-destruct. I really think so.
And it’s powerful in a way that all the other stuff, meditation and all the tools, is not because it’s really operating at a much deeper and bigger level. Yeah. I think that’s all I can talk about it. Mostly because I’m still working out. The scientists in me wants to understand how it works and I want to understand. And the point is to just go, for lack of a better language for it, “There’s a higher power than me and what I can control. I’m giving up control on certain things.” And somehow, that restores a sense of agency for right action and better action.
Lex Fridman
I think perhaps a part of that is just the humility that comes with acknowledging there’s something bigger and more powerful than you.
I think perhaps a part of that is just the humility that comes with acknowledging there’s something bigger and more powerful than you.
Andrew Huberman
And that you can’t control everything. I mean, you go through life as a hard driving person, forward center of mass. I remember being that way since I was little. It’s like in Legos. I’m like, “I’m going to make all the Legos.” I was like, on the weekends, learning about medieval weapons and then giving lectures about it in class when I was five or six years old or learning about tropical fish and cataloging all of them at the store. And then, organizing it and making my dad drive me or my mom drive me in some fish store and then spending all my time there until they throw me out. All of that. But I also remember my entire life, I would secretly pray when things were good and things weren’t good. But mostly, when things weren’t good because it’s important to pray. For me, it’s important to pray each morning regardless.
And that you can’t control everything. I mean, you go through life as a hard driving person, forward center of mass. I remember being that way since I was little. It’s like in Legos. I’m like, “I’m going to make all the Legos.” I was like, on the weekends, learning about medieval weapons and then giving lectures about it in class when I was five or six years old or learning about tropical fish and cataloging all of them at the store. And then, organizing it and making my dad drive me or my mom drive me in some fish store and then spending all my time there until they throw me out. All of that. But I also remember my entire life, I would secretly pray when things were good and things weren’t good. But mostly, when things weren’t good because it’s important to pray. For me, it’s important to pray each morning regardless.
But when things weren’t right, I couldn’t make sense of them, I would secretly pray. But I felt ashamed of that for whatever reason. And then, it was once in college, I distinctly remember I was having a hard time with a number of things and I took a run down to SAN Speech. It was at UC Santa Barbara. And I remember I was like, “I don’t know if I even have the right to do this but I’m just praying,” and I just prayed for the ability to be as brutally honest with myself and with other people as I possibly could be about a particular situation I was in at that time.
I mean, I think now it’s probably safe to say I’d gone off to college because of a high school girlfriend. Essentially, she was my family. Frankly, more than my biological family was at a certain stage of life and we’d reached a point where we were diverging and it was incredibly painful. It was like losing everything I had. And it was like, “What do I do? How do I manage this?” I was ready to quit and join the fire service just to support us so that we could move forward and it was just…
But praying, just saying, “I can’t figure this out on my own.” It’s like, “I can’t figure this out on my own,” and how frustrating that no number of friends could tell me and inner wisdom couldn’t tell me. And eventually, it led me to the right answers. She and I are friendly friends to this day. She’s happily married with a child and we’re on good terms. But I think it’s a scary thing but it’s the best thing when you just, “I can’t control all of this.” And asking for help, I think is also the piece. You’re not asking for some magic hand to come down and take care of it but you’re asking for the help to come through you so that your body is used to do these right works, right action.
Lex Fridman
Isn’t it interesting that this secret thing that you’re almost embarrassed by, that you did as a child is something you… It’s another thing you do as you get older, is you realize those things are part of you and it’s actually a beautiful thing.
Isn’t it interesting that this secret thing that you’re almost embarrassed by, that you did as a child is something you… It’s another thing you do as you get older, is you realize those things are part of you and it’s actually a beautiful thing.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. A lot of the content of the podcast is deep academic content and we talk about everything from eating disorders to bipolar disorder to depression, a lot of different topics. But the tools or the protocols, as we say, the sunlight viewing and all the rest, a lot of that stuff is just stuff I wish I had known when I was in graduate school. If I’d known to go outside every once in a while and get some sunlight, not just stay in the lab, I might not have hit a really tough round of depression when I was a post-doc and working twice as hard.
Yeah. A lot of the content of the podcast is deep academic content and we talk about everything from eating disorders to bipolar disorder to depression, a lot of different topics. But the tools or the protocols, as we say, the sunlight viewing and all the rest, a lot of that stuff is just stuff I wish I had known when I was in graduate school. If I’d known to go outside every once in a while and get some sunlight, not just stay in the lab, I might not have hit a really tough round of depression when I was a post-doc and working twice as hard.
And when my body would break down or I’d get sick a lot, I don’t get sick much anymore. Occasionally, about once every 18 months to two years, I’ll get something. But I used to break my foot skateboarding all the time, I couldn’t understand. What’s wrong with my body? I’m getting injured. I can’t do what everyone else can. Now, I developed more slowly. I had a long arc of puberty so that was part of it. I was still developing.
But how to get your body stronger, how to build endurance, no one told me. The information wasn’t there. So a lot of what I put out there is the information that I wish I had. Because once I had it, I was like, “Wow.” A, this stuff really works. B, it’s grounded in something real. Sometimes, certain protocols are a combination of animal and human studies, sometimes clinical trials. Sometimes there’s some mechanistic conjecture for some, not all, I always make clear which. But in the end, figuring out how things work so that we can be happier, healthier, more productive, suffer less, reduce the suffering of the world. And I think that… Well, I’ll just say thank you for asking about the prayer piece. Again, I’m not pushing or even encouraging it on anyone. I’ve just found it to be tremendously useful for me.
Chimp Empire
Lex Fridman
I mean, about prayer in general. You said information and figuring out how to get stronger, healthier, smarter, all those kinds of things. A part of me believes that deeply. You can gain a lot of knowledge and wisdom through learning. But a part of me believes that all the wisdom I need was there when I was 11 and 12 years old.
I mean, about prayer in general. You said information and figuring out how to get stronger, healthier, smarter, all those kinds of things. A part of me believes that deeply. You can gain a lot of knowledge and wisdom through learning. But a part of me believes that all the wisdom I need was there when I was 11 and 12 years old.
Andrew Huberman
And then, it got cluttered over. Well, listen, I can’t wait for you and Conti to talk again. Because when he gets going about the subconscious and the amount of this that sits below the surface like an iceberg. And the fact that when we’re kids, we’re not obscuring a lot of that subconscious as much. And sometimes, that can look a little more primitive. I mean, a kid that’s disappointed will let you know. A kid that’s excited will let you know and you feel that raw exuberance or that raw dismayal.
And then, it got cluttered over. Well, listen, I can’t wait for you and Conti to talk again. Because when he gets going about the subconscious and the amount of this that sits below the surface like an iceberg. And the fact that when we’re kids, we’re not obscuring a lot of that subconscious as much. And sometimes, that can look a little more primitive. I mean, a kid that’s disappointed will let you know. A kid that’s excited will let you know and you feel that raw exuberance or that raw dismayal.
And I think that as we grow older, we learn to cover that stuff up. We wear masks and we have to, to be functional. I don’t think we all want to go around just being completely raw. But as you said, as you get older, you get to this point where you go, “Eh. What are we really trying to protect anyway?”
I mean, I have this theory that certainly my experience has taught me that a lot of people but I’ll talk about men because that’s what I know best, whether or not they show up strong or not, that they’re really afraid of being weak. They’re just afraid… Sometimes, the strength is even a way to try and not be weak which is different than being strong for its own sake. I’m not just talking about physical strength. I’m talking about intellectual strength. I’m talking about money. I’m talking about expressing drive. I’ve been watching this series a little bit of Chimp Empire.
Lex Fridman
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Andrew Huberman
So Chimp Empire is amazing, right? They have the head chimp. He’s not the head chimp but the alpha in the group and he’s getting older. And so, what does he do? Every once in a while, he goes on these vigor displays. He goes and he grabs a branch. He starts breaking them. He starts thrashing them. And he’s incredibly strong and they’re all watching. I mean, I immediately think of people like they’re deadlifting on Instagram and I just think, “Displays of vigor.” This is just the primate showing displays of vigor. Now, what’s interesting is that he’s doing that specifically to say, “Hey, I still have what it takes to lead this troop.” Then there are the ones that are subordinate to him but not so far behind-
So Chimp Empire is amazing, right? They have the head chimp. He’s not the head chimp but the alpha in the group and he’s getting older. And so, what does he do? Every once in a while, he goes on these vigor displays. He goes and he grabs a branch. He starts breaking them. He starts thrashing them. And he’s incredibly strong and they’re all watching. I mean, I immediately think of people like they’re deadlifting on Instagram and I just think, “Displays of vigor.” This is just the primate showing displays of vigor. Now, what’s interesting is that he’s doing that specifically to say, “Hey, I still have what it takes to lead this troop.” Then there are the ones that are subordinate to him but not so far behind-
Lex Fridman
It seems to be that there’s a very clear numerical ranking.
It seems to be that there’s a very clear numerical ranking.
Andrew Huberman
There is.
There is.
Lex Fridman
Like it’s clear who’s the Number 2, Number 3-
Like it’s clear who’s the Number 2, Number 3-
Andrew Huberman
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Lex Fridman
I mean, probably-
I mean, probably-
Andrew Huberman
Who gets to mate first, who gets to eat first, this exists in other animal societies too but Bob Sapolsky would be a great person to talk about this with because he knows obviously tremendous amount about it and I know just the top contour. But yeah, so Number 2, 3, and 4 males are aware that he’s doing these vigor displays. But they’re also aware because in primate evolution, they got some extra forebrain too. Not as much as us but they got some. And they’re aware that the vigor displays are displays that… Because they’ve done them as well in a different context, might not just be displays of vigor but might also be an insurance policy against people seeing weakness.
Who gets to mate first, who gets to eat first, this exists in other animal societies too but Bob Sapolsky would be a great person to talk about this with because he knows obviously tremendous amount about it and I know just the top contour. But yeah, so Number 2, 3, and 4 males are aware that he’s doing these vigor displays. But they’re also aware because in primate evolution, they got some extra forebrain too. Not as much as us but they got some. And they’re aware that the vigor displays are displays that… Because they’ve done them as well in a different context, might not just be displays of vigor but might also be an insurance policy against people seeing weakness.
So now, they start using that prefrontal cortex to do some interesting things. So in primate world, if a male is friendly with another male, wants to affiliate with him and say, “Hey, I’m backing you,” they’ll go over and they’ll pick off the little parasites and eat them. And so, the grooming is extremely important. In fact, if they want to ostracize or kill one of the members of their troop, they will just leave it alone. No one will groom it. And then, there’s actually a really disturbing sequence in that show of then the parasites start to eat away on their skin. They get infections. They have issues. No one will mate with them. They have other issues as well and can potentially die.
So the interesting thing is Number 2 and 3 start to line up a strategy to groom this guy but they are actually thinking about overtaking the entire troop setting in a new alpha. But the current alpha did that to get where he is so he knows that they’re doing this grooming thing, but they might not be sincere about the grooming. So what does he do? He takes the whole troop on a raid to another troop and sees who will fight for him and who won’t.
Overt vs covert contracts
This is advanced contracting of behavior for a species that normally we don’t think of as sophisticated as us. So it’s very interesting and it gets to something that I hope we’ll have an opportunity to talk about because it’s something that I’m obsessed with lately, is this notion of overt versus covert contracts, right? There are overt contracts where you exchange work for money or you exchange any number of things in an overt way. But then, there are covert contracts, and those take on a very different form and always lead to, in my belief, bad things.
Lex Fridman
Well, how much of human and chimp relationships are overt versus covert?
Well, how much of human and chimp relationships are overt versus covert?
Andrew Huberman
Well, here’s one thing that we know is true. Dogs and humans, the dog to human relationship is 100% overt. They don’t manipulate you. Now, you could say they do in the sense that they learn that if they look a certain way or roll on their back, they get food. But there’s no banking of that behavior for a future date where then they’re going to undermine you and take your position so in that sense. Dogs can be a little bit manipulative in some sense.
Well, here’s one thing that we know is true. Dogs and humans, the dog to human relationship is 100% overt. They don’t manipulate you. Now, you could say they do in the sense that they learn that if they look a certain way or roll on their back, they get food. But there’s no banking of that behavior for a future date where then they’re going to undermine you and take your position so in that sense. Dogs can be a little bit manipulative in some sense.
But now, okay. So overt contract would be we both want to do some work together, we’re going to make some money, you get X percentage, I get X percentage. It’s overt. Covert contract which is, in my opinion, always bad, would be we’re going to do some work together, you’re going to get a percentage of money, I’m going to get a percentage of money. Could look just like the overt contract but secretly, I’m resentful that I got the percentage that I got. So what I start doing is covertly taking something else. What do I take? Maybe I take the opportunity to jab you verbally every once in a while. Maybe I take the opportunity to show up late. Maybe I take the opportunity to get to know one of your coworkers so that I might start a business with them. That’s covert contracting.
And you see this sometimes in romantic relationships. One person, we won’t set the male or female in any direction here and just say it’s, “I’ll make you feel powerful if you make me feel desired.” Okay. Great. There’s nothing explicitly wrong about that contract if they both know and they both agree. But what if it’s, “I’ll do that but I’ll have kids with you so you feel powerful. You’ll have kids with me so I feel desired. But secretly, I don’t want to do that,” or one person says, “I don’t want to do that,” or both don’t. So what they end up doing is saying, “Okay. So I expect something else. I expect you to do certain things for me,” or, “I expect you to pay for certain things for me.”
Covert contracts are the signature of everything bad. Overt contracts are the signature of all things good. And I think about this a lot because I’ve seen a lot of examples of this. I’ve… Like anyone, we participate in these things whether or not we want to or not and the thing that gets transacted the most is… Well, I should say the things that get transacted the most are the overt things. You’ll see money, time, sex, property, whatever it happens to be, information. But what ends up happening is that when people, I believe, don’t feel safe, they feel threatened in some way, like they don’t feel safe in a certain interaction, what they do is they start taking something else while still engaging in the exchange. And I’ll tell you, if there’s one thing about human nature that’s bad, it’s that feature.
Why that feature? Or, “Is it a bug or a feature?” as you engineers like to say. I think it’s because we were allocated a certain extra amount of prefrontal cortex that makes us more sophisticated than a dog, more sophisticated than a chimpanzee, but they do it too. And it’s because it’s often harder, in the short term, to deal with the real sense of, “This is scary. This feels threatening,” than it is to play out all the iterations. It takes a lot of brain work. You’re playing chess and go simultaneously trying to figure out where things are going to end up and we just don’t know.
So it’s a way, I think, of creating a false sense of certainty. But I’ll tell you, covert contracts, the only certainty is that it’s going to end badly. The question is, how badly? Conversely, overt contracts always end well, always. The problem with overt contracts is that you can’t be certain that the other person is not engaging in a covert contract. You can only take responsibility for your own contracting.
Lex Fridman
Well, one of the challenges of being human is looking at another human being and figuring out their way of being, their behavior, which of the two types of contracts it represents because they look awfully the same on the surface. And one of the challenges of being human, the decision we all make is, are you somebody that takes a leap of trust and trust other humans and are willing to take the hurt or are you going to be cynical and skeptical and avoid most interactions until they, over a long period of time, prove your trust?
Well, one of the challenges of being human is looking at another human being and figuring out their way of being, their behavior, which of the two types of contracts it represents because they look awfully the same on the surface. And one of the challenges of being human, the decision we all make is, are you somebody that takes a leap of trust and trust other humans and are willing to take the hurt or are you going to be cynical and skeptical and avoid most interactions until they, over a long period of time, prove your trust?
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. I never liked the phrase history repeats itself when it comes to humans because it doesn’t apply if the people or the person is actively working to resolve their own flaws. I do think that if people are willing to do dedicated, introspective work, go into their subconscious, do the hard work, have hard conversations, and get better at hard conversations, something that I’m-
Yeah. I never liked the phrase history repeats itself when it comes to humans because it doesn’t apply if the people or the person is actively working to resolve their own flaws. I do think that if people are willing to do dedicated, introspective work, go into their subconscious, do the hard work, have hard conversations, and get better at hard conversations, something that I’m-
Andrew Huberman
Have hard conversations and get better at hard conversations, something that I’m constantly trying to get better at. I think people can change, but they have to want to change.
Have hard conversations and get better at hard conversations, something that I’m constantly trying to get better at. I think people can change, but they have to want to change.
Lex Fridman
It does seem like, deep down, we all can tell the difference between overt and covert. We have a good sense. I think one of the benefits of having this characteristic of mine, where I value loyalty, I’ve been extremely fortunate to spend most of my life in overt relationships and I think that creates a really fulfilling life.
It does seem like, deep down, we all can tell the difference between overt and covert. We have a good sense. I think one of the benefits of having this characteristic of mine, where I value loyalty, I’ve been extremely fortunate to spend most of my life in overt relationships and I think that creates a really fulfilling life.
Age and health
Andrew Huberman
But there’s also this thing that maybe we’re in this portion of the podcast now, but I’ve experienced this-
But there’s also this thing that maybe we’re in this portion of the podcast now, but I’ve experienced this-
Lex Fridman
I should say that this is late at night, we’re talking about.
I should say that this is late at night, we’re talking about.
Andrew Huberman
That’s right, certainly late for me, but I’m two hours… I came in today on… I’m still in California time.
That’s right, certainly late for me, but I’m two hours… I came in today on… I’m still in California time.
Lex Fridman
And we should also say that you came here to wish me a happy birthday. [inaudible 01:08:46].
And we should also say that you came here to wish me a happy birthday. [inaudible 01:08:46].
Andrew Huberman
I did. I did and-
I did. I did and-
Lex Fridman
And the podcast is just a fun, last-minute thing I suggested.
And the podcast is just a fun, last-minute thing I suggested.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, some close friends of yours have arranged a dinner that I’m really looking forward to. I won’t say which night, but it’s the next couple of nights. Your circadian clock is one of the most robust features of your biology. I know you can be nocturnal or you can be diurnal. We know you’re mostly nocturnal, certain times of the year Lex, but there are very, very few people can get away with no sleep. Very few people can get away with a chaotic sleep-wake schedule. So you have to obey a 24-hour, AKA circadian, rhythm if you want to remain healthy of mind and body. We also have to acknowledge that aging is in linear, right? So-
Yeah, some close friends of yours have arranged a dinner that I’m really looking forward to. I won’t say which night, but it’s the next couple of nights. Your circadian clock is one of the most robust features of your biology. I know you can be nocturnal or you can be diurnal. We know you’re mostly nocturnal, certain times of the year Lex, but there are very, very few people can get away with no sleep. Very few people can get away with a chaotic sleep-wake schedule. So you have to obey a 24-hour, AKA circadian, rhythm if you want to remain healthy of mind and body. We also have to acknowledge that aging is in linear, right? So-
Lex Fridman
What do you mean?
What do you mean?
Andrew Huberman
Well, the degree of change between years 35 and 40, is not going to be the degree of change between 40 and 45. But I will say this, I’m 48 and I feel better in every aspect of my psychology and biology now, than I did when I was in my twenties. Yeah, quality of thought, time spent, physically, I can do what I did then, which probably says more about what I could do then than what I can do now. But if you keep training, you can continue to get better. The key is to not get injured, and I’ve never trained super hard. I’ve trained hard, but I’ve been cautious to not, for instance, weight train more than two days in a row. I do a split which is basically three days a week, and the other day’s a run, take one full day off, take a week off every 12 to 16 weeks. I’ve not been the guy hurling the heaviest weights or running the furthest distance, but I have been the guy who’s continuing to do it when a lot of my friends are talking about knee injuries, talking about-
Well, the degree of change between years 35 and 40, is not going to be the degree of change between 40 and 45. But I will say this, I’m 48 and I feel better in every aspect of my psychology and biology now, than I did when I was in my twenties. Yeah, quality of thought, time spent, physically, I can do what I did then, which probably says more about what I could do then than what I can do now. But if you keep training, you can continue to get better. The key is to not get injured, and I’ve never trained super hard. I’ve trained hard, but I’ve been cautious to not, for instance, weight train more than two days in a row. I do a split which is basically three days a week, and the other day’s a run, take one full day off, take a week off every 12 to 16 weeks. I’ve not been the guy hurling the heaviest weights or running the furthest distance, but I have been the guy who’s continuing to do it when a lot of my friends are talking about knee injuries, talking about-
Lex Fridman
Hey. Hey. Hey, hey.
Hey. Hey. Hey, hey.
Andrew Huberman
I’m just…
I’m just…
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 01:10:37], I-
[inaudible 01:10:37], I-
Andrew Huberman
But of course, with sport you can’t account for everything the same way you can with fitness, and I have to acknowledge that. Unless one is powerlifting, weightlifting and running, you can get hurt, but it’s not like skateboarding where, if you’re going for it, you’re going to get hurt. That’s just, you’re landing on concrete and with jujitsu, people are trying to hurt you so that you say stop.
But of course, with sport you can’t account for everything the same way you can with fitness, and I have to acknowledge that. Unless one is powerlifting, weightlifting and running, you can get hurt, but it’s not like skateboarding where, if you’re going for it, you’re going to get hurt. That’s just, you’re landing on concrete and with jujitsu, people are trying to hurt you so that you say stop.
Lex Fridman
No, but [inaudible 01:11:04]-
No, but [inaudible 01:11:04]-
Andrew Huberman
So with a sport it’s different, and these days, I don’t really do a sport any longer. I work out to stay fit. I used to continue to do sports, but I kept getting hurt and frankly now, a rolled ankle… I may put out a little small skateboard part in 2024 because people have been saying, “We want to see the kickflip.” Then I’ll just say, “Well, I’ll do a heel flip instead, but okay.” I might put out a little part because some of the guys that work on our podcast are from DC. I think by now, I should at least do it just to show I’m not making it up, and I probably will. But I think doing a sport is different. That’s how you get hurt-
So with a sport it’s different, and these days, I don’t really do a sport any longer. I work out to stay fit. I used to continue to do sports, but I kept getting hurt and frankly now, a rolled ankle… I may put out a little small skateboard part in 2024 because people have been saying, “We want to see the kickflip.” Then I’ll just say, “Well, I’ll do a heel flip instead, but okay.” I might put out a little part because some of the guys that work on our podcast are from DC. I think by now, I should at least do it just to show I’m not making it up, and I probably will. But I think doing a sport is different. That’s how you get hurt-
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 01:11:46].
[inaudible 01:11:46].
Andrew Huberman
Overuse and doing an actual sport, and so hat tip to those who do an actual sport.
Overuse and doing an actual sport, and so hat tip to those who do an actual sport.
Lex Fridman
And that’s a difficult decision a lot of people have to make. I have to make with jiujitsu, for example, if you just look empirically. I’ve trained really hard from all my life, in grappling sports and fighting sports and all this kind of stuff, and I’ve avoided injury for the most part. And I would say, I would attribute that to training a lot. Sounds counterintuitive, but training well and safely and correctly, keeping good form saying, “No,” when I need to say no, but training a lot, and taking it seriously. Now when it’s training, it’s really a side thing, I find that the injuries becomes a higher and higher probability.
And that’s a difficult decision a lot of people have to make. I have to make with jiujitsu, for example, if you just look empirically. I’ve trained really hard from all my life, in grappling sports and fighting sports and all this kind of stuff, and I’ve avoided injury for the most part. And I would say, I would attribute that to training a lot. Sounds counterintuitive, but training well and safely and correctly, keeping good form saying, “No,” when I need to say no, but training a lot, and taking it seriously. Now when it’s training, it’s really a side thing, I find that the injuries becomes a higher and higher probability.
Andrew Huberman
But when you’re just doing it every once in a while?
But when you’re just doing it every once in a while?
Lex Fridman
Every once in a while.
Every once in a while.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. I think you said something really important, the saying, “No.” The times I have gotten hurt training, is when someone’s like, “Hey, let’s hop on this workout together,” and it becomes, let’s challenge each other to do something outrageous. Sometimes that can be fun though. I went up to Cam Hanes’ gym and he does these very high repetition weight workouts that are in circuit form. I was sore for two weeks, but I learned a lot and didn’t get injured, and yes, we ate bow-hunted elk afterwards.
Yeah. I think you said something really important, the saying, “No.” The times I have gotten hurt training, is when someone’s like, “Hey, let’s hop on this workout together,” and it becomes, let’s challenge each other to do something outrageous. Sometimes that can be fun though. I went up to Cam Hanes’ gym and he does these very high repetition weight workouts that are in circuit form. I was sore for two weeks, but I learned a lot and didn’t get injured, and yes, we ate bow-hunted elk afterwards.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But the injury has been a really difficult psychological thing for me because… So I’ve injured my pinky finger, I’ve injured my knee.
But the injury has been a really difficult psychological thing for me because… So I’ve injured my pinky finger, I’ve injured my knee.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, your kitchen is filled with splints.
Yeah, your kitchen is filled with splints.
Lex Fridman
Splints. I’m trying to figure out-
Splints. I’m trying to figure out-
Andrew Huberman
It’s like if you look in Lex’s kitchen, there’s some really good snacks, I had some right before. He’s very good about keeping cold drinks in the fridge and all the water has element in it, which is great.
It’s like if you look in Lex’s kitchen, there’s some really good snacks, I had some right before. He’s very good about keeping cold drinks in the fridge and all the water has element in it, which is great.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
Andrew Huberman
I love that. But then there’s a whole hospital’s worth of splints.
I love that. But then there’s a whole hospital’s worth of splints.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’m trying to figure it out. So here’s the thing, you… The finger pop out like this, right? Pinky finger. I’m trying to figure out how do I splint in such a way that I can still program, still play guitar, but protect this torque motion that creates a huge amount of pain. And so [inaudible 01:13:58]-
Yeah, I’m trying to figure it out. So here’s the thing, you… The finger pop out like this, right? Pinky finger. I’m trying to figure out how do I splint in such a way that I can still program, still play guitar, but protect this torque motion that creates a huge amount of pain. And so [inaudible 01:13:58]-
Andrew Huberman
[inaudible 01:13:58] you have a jiujitsu injury.
[inaudible 01:13:58] you have a jiujitsu injury.
Lex Fridman
Jiujitsu, but it’s probably more like a skateboarding-style injury, which is, it’s unexpected in a silly-
Jiujitsu, but it’s probably more like a skateboarding-style injury, which is, it’s unexpected in a silly-
Andrew Huberman
It’s a thing that happens in a second. I didn’t break my foot doing anything important.
It’s a thing that happens in a second. I didn’t break my foot doing anything important.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Andrew Huberman
I broke my fifth metatarpal stepping off a curb.
I broke my fifth metatarpal stepping off a curb.
Lex Fridman
Yep.
Yep.
Andrew Huberman
So that’s why they’re called accidents. If you get hurt doing something awesome, that’s a trophy that you have to work through. It’s part of your payment to the universe. If you get hurt stepping off a curb or doing something stupid, it’s called a stupid accident.
So that’s why they’re called accidents. If you get hurt doing something awesome, that’s a trophy that you have to work through. It’s part of your payment to the universe. If you get hurt stepping off a curb or doing something stupid, it’s called a stupid accident.
Sexual selection
Lex Fridman
Since we brought up Chimp Empire, let me ask you about relationships. I think we’ve talked about relationships.
Since we brought up Chimp Empire, let me ask you about relationships. I think we’ve talked about relationships.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, I only date Homo sapiens.
Yeah, I only date Homo sapiens.
Lex Fridman
Homo sapiens.
Homo sapiens.
Andrew Huberman
It’s the morning meditation.
It’s the morning meditation.
Lex Fridman
The night is still young. You are human. No, but you are also animal. Don’t sell yourself short.
The night is still young. You are human. No, but you are also animal. Don’t sell yourself short.
Andrew Huberman
No, I always say listen, any discussion on the Huberman Lab Podcast, about sexual health or anything, will always the critical fours: consensual, age appropriate, context appropriate, species appropriate.
No, I always say listen, any discussion on the Huberman Lab Podcast, about sexual health or anything, will always the critical fours: consensual, age appropriate, context appropriate, species appropriate.
Lex Fridman
Species appropriate, wow. Can I just tell you about sexual selection? I’ve been watching Life in Color: With David Attenborough. I’ve been watching a lot of nature documentaries. Talking about inner peace, it brings me so much peace to watch nature, at its worst and at its best. So Life in Color is a series on Netflix where it presents some of the most colorful animals on earth, and tells their story of how they got there through natural selection. So you have the peacock with the feathers and it’s just such incredible colors. The peacock has these tail feathers, the male, that are gigantic and they’re super colorful and they’re these eyes on it. It’s not eyes, it’s eye-like areas. And they wiggle their ass to show the tail, they wiggle the tails.
Species appropriate, wow. Can I just tell you about sexual selection? I’ve been watching Life in Color: With David Attenborough. I’ve been watching a lot of nature documentaries. Talking about inner peace, it brings me so much peace to watch nature, at its worst and at its best. So Life in Color is a series on Netflix where it presents some of the most colorful animals on earth, and tells their story of how they got there through natural selection. So you have the peacock with the feathers and it’s just such incredible colors. The peacock has these tail feathers, the male, that are gigantic and they’re super colorful and they’re these eyes on it. It’s not eyes, it’s eye-like areas. And they wiggle their ass to show the tail, they wiggle the tails.
Andrew Huberman
The eyespots, they’re called.
The eyespots, they’re called.
Lex Fridman
The eyespots, yes. Thank you. You know this probably way better than me, I’m just quoting David Attenborough.
The eyespots, yes. Thank you. You know this probably way better than me, I’m just quoting David Attenborough.
Andrew Huberman
No, no, please continue.
No, no, please continue.
Lex Fridman
But it’s just, I’m watching this and then the female is as boring looking as… She has no colors or nothing, but she’s standing there bored, just seeing this entire display. And I’m just wondering the entirety of life on earth… Well, not the entirety. Post bacteria, is like, at least in part, maybe in large part, can be described through this process of natural selection, of sexual selection. So dudes fighting and then women selecting. It seems like, just the entirety of that series shows some incredible birds and insects and shrimp. They’re all beautiful and colorful, and just-
But it’s just, I’m watching this and then the female is as boring looking as… She has no colors or nothing, but she’s standing there bored, just seeing this entire display. And I’m just wondering the entirety of life on earth… Well, not the entirety. Post bacteria, is like, at least in part, maybe in large part, can be described through this process of natural selection, of sexual selection. So dudes fighting and then women selecting. It seems like, just the entirety of that series shows some incredible birds and insects and shrimp. They’re all beautiful and colorful, and just-
Andrew Huberman
Mantis shrimp.
Mantis shrimp.
Lex Fridman
Mantis shrimp. They’re incredible, and it’s all about getting laid. It’s fascinating. There’s nothing like watching that and Chimp Empire to make you realize, we humans, that’s the same thing. That’s all we’re doing. And all the beautiful variety, all the bridges and the buildings and the rockets and the internet, all of that is, at least in part, a product of this kind of showing off for each other. And all the wars and all of this… Anyway, I’m not sure wat I’m asking. Oh, relationships.
Mantis shrimp. They’re incredible, and it’s all about getting laid. It’s fascinating. There’s nothing like watching that and Chimp Empire to make you realize, we humans, that’s the same thing. That’s all we’re doing. And all the beautiful variety, all the bridges and the buildings and the rockets and the internet, all of that is, at least in part, a product of this kind of showing off for each other. And all the wars and all of this… Anyway, I’m not sure wat I’m asking. Oh, relationships.
Andrew Huberman
Well, right, before you ask about relationships, I think what’s clear is that every species, it seems, animal species, wants to make more of itself and protect its young.
Well, right, before you ask about relationships, I think what’s clear is that every species, it seems, animal species, wants to make more of itself and protect its young.
Lex Fridman
Well, the protect its young, is non-obvious.
Well, the protect its young, is non-obvious.
Andrew Huberman
So not destroy enough of itself that it can’t get more to reproductive competent age. I think that we healthy people have a natural reflex to protect children.
So not destroy enough of itself that it can’t get more to reproductive competent age. I think that we healthy people have a natural reflex to protect children.
Lex Fridman
Well, I don’t know that-
Well, I don’t know that-
Andrew Huberman
And those that can’t-
And those that can’t-
Lex Fridman
Wait a minute. Wait, wait, wait a minute. I’ve seen enough animals that are murdering the children of some other-
Wait a minute. Wait, wait, wait a minute. I’ve seen enough animals that are murdering the children of some other-
Andrew Huberman
Sure, there’s even siblicide. First of all, I just want to say that I was delighted in your delight, around animal kingdom stuff, because this is a favorite theme of mine as well. But there’s, for instance, some fascinating data on, for instance, for those that grew up on farms, they’ll be familiar with freemartins. You know about freemartins? They’re cows that have multiple calves inside them, and there’s a situation in which the calves will, if there’s more than one inside, will secrete chemicals that will hormonally castrate the calf next to them, so they can’t reproduce. So already in the womb they are fighting for future resources. That’s how early this stuff can start. So it’s chemical warfare in the womb, against the siblings. Sometimes there’s outright siblicide. Siblings are born, they kill one another. This also becomes biblical stories, right? There are instances of cuttlefish, beautiful cephalopods like octopuses, and that is the plural as we made clear.
Sure, there’s even siblicide. First of all, I just want to say that I was delighted in your delight, around animal kingdom stuff, because this is a favorite theme of mine as well. But there’s, for instance, some fascinating data on, for instance, for those that grew up on farms, they’ll be familiar with freemartins. You know about freemartins? They’re cows that have multiple calves inside them, and there’s a situation in which the calves will, if there’s more than one inside, will secrete chemicals that will hormonally castrate the calf next to them, so they can’t reproduce. So already in the womb they are fighting for future resources. That’s how early this stuff can start. So it’s chemical warfare in the womb, against the siblings. Sometimes there’s outright siblicide. Siblings are born, they kill one another. This also becomes biblical stories, right? There are instances of cuttlefish, beautiful cephalopods like octopuses, and that is the plural as we made clear.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s a meme on the internet.
Yeah, it’s a meme on the internet.
Andrew Huberman
Oh, yeah? That became a meme, our little discussion two years ago.
Oh, yeah? That became a meme, our little discussion two years ago.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it spread pretty quick.
Yeah, it spread pretty quick.
Andrew Huberman
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Lex Fridman
And now we just resurfaced it. [inaudible 01:19:22].
And now we just resurfaced it. [inaudible 01:19:22].
Andrew Huberman
The dismay in your voice is so amusing. In any event, the male cuttlefish will disguise themselves as female cuttlefish, infiltrate the female cuttlefish group, and then mate with them, all sorts of types of covert operations.
The dismay in your voice is so amusing. In any event, the male cuttlefish will disguise themselves as female cuttlefish, infiltrate the female cuttlefish group, and then mate with them, all sorts of types of covert operations.
Lex Fridman
Yep, there we go.
Yep, there we go.
Andrew Huberman
So I think that…
So I think that…
Lex Fridman
Callbacks.
Callbacks.
Andrew Huberman
It’s like a drinking game, where every time we say covert contract, in this episode, you have to take a shot of espresso. Please don’t do that. You’d be dead by the end. [inaudible 01:19:56].
It’s like a drinking game, where every time we say covert contract, in this episode, you have to take a shot of espresso. Please don’t do that. You’d be dead by the end. [inaudible 01:19:56].
Lex Fridman
So it actually is just a small tangent, it does make me wonder how much intelligence covert contracts require. It seems like not much. If you can do it in the animal kingdom, there’s some kind of instinctual… It is based perhaps in fear.
So it actually is just a small tangent, it does make me wonder how much intelligence covert contracts require. It seems like not much. If you can do it in the animal kingdom, there’s some kind of instinctual… It is based perhaps in fear.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, it could be simple algorithm. If there’s some ambiguity about numbers and I’m not with these guys, and then flip to the alternate strategy. I actually have a story about this that I think is relevant. I used to have cuttlefish in my lab in San Diego. We went and got them from a guy out in the desert. We put them in the lab. It was amazing. And they had a postdoc who was studying prey capture in cuttlefish. They have a very ballistic, extremely rapid strike and grab of the shrimp, and we were using high-speed cameras to characterize all this. Looking at binocular, they normally have their eyes on the side of their head, when they see something they want to eat the eyes translocate to the front, which allows them stereopsis death perception, allows them to strike. We were doing some unilateral eye removals they would miss, et cetera.
Yeah, it could be simple algorithm. If there’s some ambiguity about numbers and I’m not with these guys, and then flip to the alternate strategy. I actually have a story about this that I think is relevant. I used to have cuttlefish in my lab in San Diego. We went and got them from a guy out in the desert. We put them in the lab. It was amazing. And they had a postdoc who was studying prey capture in cuttlefish. They have a very ballistic, extremely rapid strike and grab of the shrimp, and we were using high-speed cameras to characterize all this. Looking at binocular, they normally have their eyes on the side of their head, when they see something they want to eat the eyes translocate to the front, which allows them stereopsis death perception, allows them to strike. We were doing some unilateral eye removals they would miss, et cetera.
Okay, this has to do with eyespots. This was during a government shutdown period where the ghost shrimp that they normally feed eat on, that we would ship in from the gulf down here, weren’t available to us. So we had to get different shrimp. And what we noticed was the cuttlefish normally would just sneak up on the shrimp. We learned this by data collection. And if the shrimp was facing them, they would do this thing with their tentacles of enchanting the shrimp. And if the shrimp wasn’t facing them, they wouldn’t do it and they would ballistically grab it and eat them.
Well, when we got these new shrimp, the new shrimp had eyespots on their tails and then the cuttlefish would do this attempt to enchant, regardless of the position of the ghost shrimp. So what does that mean? Okay, well, it means that there’s some sort of algorithm in the cuttlefish’s mind that says, “Okay, if you see two spots, move your tentacles.” So it can be, as you pointed out, it can be a fairly simple operation, but it looks diabolical. It looks cunning, but all it is strategy B.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but it’s still somehow emerged. I don’t think that-
Yeah, but it’s still somehow emerged. I don’t think that-
Andrew Huberman
Success-
Success-
Lex Fridman
… calling it an algorithm doesn’t… I feel like-
… calling it an algorithm doesn’t… I feel like-
Andrew Huberman
Well, there’s a circuit there that gets implemented in a certain context, but that circuit had to evolve.
Well, there’s a circuit there that gets implemented in a certain context, but that circuit had to evolve.
Lex Fridman
You do realize, super intelligent AI will look at us humans and we’ll say the exact thing. There’s a circuit in there that evolved to do this, the algorithm A and algorithm B, and it’s trivial. And to us humans, it’s fancy and beautiful, and we write poetry about it, but it’s just trivial.
You do realize, super intelligent AI will look at us humans and we’ll say the exact thing. There’s a circuit in there that evolved to do this, the algorithm A and algorithm B, and it’s trivial. And to us humans, it’s fancy and beautiful, and we write poetry about it, but it’s just trivial.
Andrew Huberman
Because we don’t understand the subconscious. Because that AI algorithm cannot see into what it can’t see. It doesn’t understand the under workings of what allows all of this conversation stuff to manifest. And we can’t even see it, how could AI see it? Maybe it will, maybe AI will solve and give us access to our subconscious. Maybe your AI friend or coach, like I think Andreessen and others are arguing is going to happen at some point, is going to say, “Hey Lex, you’re making decisions lately that are not good for you, but it’s because of this algorithm that you picked up in childhood, that if you don’t state your explicit needs upfront, you’re not going to get what you want. So why do it? From now on, you need to actually make a list of every absolutely outrageous thing that you want, no matter how outrageous, and communicate that immediately, and that will work.”
Because we don’t understand the subconscious. Because that AI algorithm cannot see into what it can’t see. It doesn’t understand the under workings of what allows all of this conversation stuff to manifest. And we can’t even see it, how could AI see it? Maybe it will, maybe AI will solve and give us access to our subconscious. Maybe your AI friend or coach, like I think Andreessen and others are arguing is going to happen at some point, is going to say, “Hey Lex, you’re making decisions lately that are not good for you, but it’s because of this algorithm that you picked up in childhood, that if you don’t state your explicit needs upfront, you’re not going to get what you want. So why do it? From now on, you need to actually make a list of every absolutely outrageous thing that you want, no matter how outrageous, and communicate that immediately, and that will work.”
Lex Fridman
We’re talking about cuttlefish and sexual selection, and then we went into some… Where did we go? Then you said you were excited.
We’re talking about cuttlefish and sexual selection, and then we went into some… Where did we go? Then you said you were excited.
Andrew Huberman
Well, I was excited… Well, you were just saying what about these covert contracts, [inaudible 01:23:43] animals do them.
Well, I was excited… Well, you were just saying what about these covert contracts, [inaudible 01:23:43] animals do them.
Lex Fridman
Yes, [inaudible 01:23:44].
Yes, [inaudible 01:23:44].
Andrew Huberman
I think it’s simple contextual engagement of a neural circuit, which is not just nerd speak for saying they do a different strategy. It’s saying that there has to be a circuit there, hardwired circuit, maybe learned, but probably hardwired, that can be engaged, right? You can’t build neural machinery in a moment, you need to build that circuit over time. What is building it over time? You select for it. The cuttlefish that did not have that alternate context-driven circuit, didn’t survive when all the shrimp that they normally eat disappear, and the eyespotted shrimp showed up. And there were a couple that had some miswiring. This is why mutation… Right, X-Men stuff is real. They had a mutation that had some alternate wiring and that wiring got selected for, it became a mutation that was adaptive as opposed to maladaptive.
I think it’s simple contextual engagement of a neural circuit, which is not just nerd speak for saying they do a different strategy. It’s saying that there has to be a circuit there, hardwired circuit, maybe learned, but probably hardwired, that can be engaged, right? You can’t build neural machinery in a moment, you need to build that circuit over time. What is building it over time? You select for it. The cuttlefish that did not have that alternate context-driven circuit, didn’t survive when all the shrimp that they normally eat disappear, and the eyespotted shrimp showed up. And there were a couple that had some miswiring. This is why mutation… Right, X-Men stuff is real. They had a mutation that had some alternate wiring and that wiring got selected for, it became a mutation that was adaptive as opposed to maladaptive.
This is something people don’t often understand about genetics, is that it only takes a few generations to devolve a trait, make it worse, but it takes a long time to evolve an adaptive trait. There are exceptions to that, but most often that’s true. So a species needs a lot of generations. We are hopefully still evolving as a species. And it takes a long time, to evolve more adaptive traits, but doesn’t take long to devolve adaptive traits, so that you’re getting sicker or you’re not functioning as well. So choose your mate wisely, and that’s perhaps the good segue into sexual selection in humans.
Relationships
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 01:25:13]. I could tell you you’re good at this. Why did I bring up sexual selection, is good relationships, so sexual selection in humans. I don’t think you’ve done an episode on relationships.
[inaudible 01:25:13]. I could tell you you’re good at this. Why did I bring up sexual selection, is good relationships, so sexual selection in humans. I don’t think you’ve done an episode on relationships.
Andrew Huberman
No, I did an episode on attachment but not on relationships.
No, I did an episode on attachment but not on relationships.
Lex Fridman
Right.
Right.
Andrew Huberman
The series with Conti includes one episode of the four that’s all about relational understanding, and how to select a mate based on matching of drives and-
The series with Conti includes one episode of the four that’s all about relational understanding, and how to select a mate based on matching of drives and-
Lex Fridman
All the demons inside the subconscious, how to match demons that they dance well together or what?
All the demons inside the subconscious, how to match demons that they dance well together or what?
Andrew Huberman
And how generative two people are.
And how generative two people are.
Lex Fridman
What does that mean?
What does that mean?
Andrew Huberman
Means how… The way he explains it is, how devoted to creating growth within the context of the family, the relationship, with work.
Means how… The way he explains it is, how devoted to creating growth within the context of the family, the relationship, with work.
Lex Fridman
Well, let me ask you about mating rituals and how to find such a relationship. You’re really big on friendships, on the value of friendships.
Well, let me ask you about mating rituals and how to find such a relationship. You’re really big on friendships, on the value of friendships.
Andrew Huberman
I am.
I am.
Lex Fridman
And that I think extends itself into one of the deepest kinds of friendships you can have, which is a romantic relationship. What mistakes, successes and wisdom can you impart?
And that I think extends itself into one of the deepest kinds of friendships you can have, which is a romantic relationship. What mistakes, successes and wisdom can you impart?
Andrew Huberman
Well, I’ve certainly made some mistakes. I’ve also made some good choices in this realm. First of all, we have to define what sort of relationship we’re talking about. If one is looking for a life partner, potentially somebody to establish family with, with or without kids, with or without pets, right? Families can take different forms. I certainly experienced being a family in a prior relationship, where it was the two of us and our two dogs, and it was family. We had our little family. I think, based on my experience, and based on input from friends, who themselves have very successful relationships, I must say, I’ve got friends who are in long-term, monogamous, very happy relationships, where there seems to be a lot of love, a lot of laughter, a lot of challenge and a lot of growth. And both people, it seems, really want to be there and enjoy being there.
Well, I’ve certainly made some mistakes. I’ve also made some good choices in this realm. First of all, we have to define what sort of relationship we’re talking about. If one is looking for a life partner, potentially somebody to establish family with, with or without kids, with or without pets, right? Families can take different forms. I certainly experienced being a family in a prior relationship, where it was the two of us and our two dogs, and it was family. We had our little family. I think, based on my experience, and based on input from friends, who themselves have very successful relationships, I must say, I’ve got friends who are in long-term, monogamous, very happy relationships, where there seems to be a lot of love, a lot of laughter, a lot of challenge and a lot of growth. And both people, it seems, really want to be there and enjoy being there.
Lex Fridman
Just to pause on that, one thing to do, I think, by way of advice, is listen to people who are in long-term successful relationships. That seems dumb, but we both know and are friends with Joe Rogan, who’s been in a long-term, really great relationship and he’s been an inspiration to me. So you take advice from that guy.
Just to pause on that, one thing to do, I think, by way of advice, is listen to people who are in long-term successful relationships. That seems dumb, but we both know and are friends with Joe Rogan, who’s been in a long-term, really great relationship and he’s been an inspiration to me. So you take advice from that guy.
Andrew Huberman
Definitely, and several members of my podcast team are in excellent relationships. I think one of the things that rings true, over and over again, in the advice and in my experience, is find someone who’s really a great friend, build a really great friendship with that person. Now obviously not just a friend, if we’re talking romantic relationship, and of course sex is super important, but it should be a part of that particular relationship, alongside or meshed with, the friendship. Can it be a majority of the positive exchange? I suppose it could, but I think the friendship piece is extremely important, because what’s required in a successful relationship, clearly is joy in being together, trust, a desire to share experience, both mundane and more adventurous, support each other, acceptance, a real, maybe even admiration, but certainly delight, in being with the person.
Definitely, and several members of my podcast team are in excellent relationships. I think one of the things that rings true, over and over again, in the advice and in my experience, is find someone who’s really a great friend, build a really great friendship with that person. Now obviously not just a friend, if we’re talking romantic relationship, and of course sex is super important, but it should be a part of that particular relationship, alongside or meshed with, the friendship. Can it be a majority of the positive exchange? I suppose it could, but I think the friendship piece is extremely important, because what’s required in a successful relationship, clearly is joy in being together, trust, a desire to share experience, both mundane and more adventurous, support each other, acceptance, a real, maybe even admiration, but certainly delight, in being with the person.
Earlier we were talking about peace, and I think that that sense of peace comes from knowing that the person you’re in friendship with, or that you’re in romantic relationship, or ideally both, because let’s assume the best romantic relationship includes a friendship component with that person. It’s like you just really delight in their presence, even if it’s a quiet presence. And you delight in seeing them delight in things, that’s clear.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Andrew Huberman
The trust piece is huge and that’s where people start, we don’t want to focus on what works, not what doesn’t work, but that’s where, I think, people start engaging in these covert contracts. They’re afraid of being betrayed, so they betray. They’re afraid of giving up too much vulnerability, so they hide their vulnerability, or in the worst cases, they feign vulnerability.
The trust piece is huge and that’s where people start, we don’t want to focus on what works, not what doesn’t work, but that’s where, I think, people start engaging in these covert contracts. They’re afraid of being betrayed, so they betray. They’re afraid of giving up too much vulnerability, so they hide their vulnerability, or in the worst cases, they feign vulnerability.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Andrew Huberman
Again, that’s a covert contract that just simply undermines everything. It becomes one plus one equals two minus one to infinity. Conversely, I think if people can have really hard conversations, this is something I’ve had to work really hard on in recent years, that I’m still working hard on. But the friendship piece seems to be the thing that rises to the top, when I talk to friends who are in these great relationships, it’s like they have so much respect and love and joy in being with their friend. It’s the person that they want to spend as much of their non-working, non-platonic friendship time with, and the person that they want to experience things with and share things with. And it sounds so canned and cliche nowadays, but I think if you step back and examine how most people go about finding a relationship, like, oh, am I attracted? Of course physical attraction is important and other forms of attraction too, and they enter through that portal, which makes sense. That’s the mating dance, that’s the peacock situation. That’s hopefully not the cuttlefish situation.
Again, that’s a covert contract that just simply undermines everything. It becomes one plus one equals two minus one to infinity. Conversely, I think if people can have really hard conversations, this is something I’ve had to work really hard on in recent years, that I’m still working hard on. But the friendship piece seems to be the thing that rises to the top, when I talk to friends who are in these great relationships, it’s like they have so much respect and love and joy in being with their friend. It’s the person that they want to spend as much of their non-working, non-platonic friendship time with, and the person that they want to experience things with and share things with. And it sounds so canned and cliche nowadays, but I think if you step back and examine how most people go about finding a relationship, like, oh, am I attracted? Of course physical attraction is important and other forms of attraction too, and they enter through that portal, which makes sense. That’s the mating dance, that’s the peacock situation. That’s hopefully not the cuttlefish situation.
But I think that there seems to be a history of people close to me getting into great relationships, where they were friends for a while first or maybe didn’t sleep together right away, that they actually intentionally deferred on that. This has not been my habit or my experience. I’ve gone the more, I think typical, like, oh, there’s an attraction, like this person, there’s an interest. You explore all dimensions of relationship really quickly except perhaps the moving in part and the having kids part, which because it’s a bigger step, harder to undo without more severe consequences. But I think that whole take it slow thing, I don’t think is about getting to know someone slowly, I think it’s about that physical piece, because that does change the nature of the relationship. And I think it’s because it gets right into the more hardwired, primitive circuitry around our feelings of safety, vulnerability.
There’s something about romantic and sexual interactions, where it’s almost like it’s assets and liabilities, right?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Andrew Huberman
Where people are trying to figure out how much to engage their time and their energy and multiple people. I’m talking about from both sides, male, female or whatever sides, but where it’s like assets and liabilities. And that’s where it starts getting into those complicated contracts early on, I think. And so maybe that’s why if a really great friendship and admiration is established first, even if people are romantically and sexually attracted to one another, then that piece can be added in a little bit later, in a way that really just seals up the whole thing, and then who knows, maybe they spend 90% of their time having sex. I don’t know. That’s not for me to say or decide obviously, but there’s something there, about staying out of a certain amount of risk of having to engage covert contract in order to protect oneself.
Where people are trying to figure out how much to engage their time and their energy and multiple people. I’m talking about from both sides, male, female or whatever sides, but where it’s like assets and liabilities. And that’s where it starts getting into those complicated contracts early on, I think. And so maybe that’s why if a really great friendship and admiration is established first, even if people are romantically and sexually attracted to one another, then that piece can be added in a little bit later, in a way that really just seals up the whole thing, and then who knows, maybe they spend 90% of their time having sex. I don’t know. That’s not for me to say or decide obviously, but there’s something there, about staying out of a certain amount of risk of having to engage covert contract in order to protect oneself.
Lex Fridman
But I do think love at first sight, this kind of idea is, in part, realizing very quickly that you are great friends. I’ve had that experience of friendship recently. It’s not really friendship, but like, oh, you get each other. With humans, not in a romantic setting.
But I do think love at first sight, this kind of idea is, in part, realizing very quickly that you are great friends. I’ve had that experience of friendship recently. It’s not really friendship, but like, oh, you get each other. With humans, not in a romantic setting.
Andrew Huberman
Right, friendship?
Right, friendship?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, just friendship. [inaudible 01:33:54].
Yeah, just friendship. [inaudible 01:33:54].
Andrew Huberman
Well, dare I say, I felt that way about you when we met, right?
Well, dare I say, I felt that way about you when we met, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but we also-
Yeah, but we also-
Andrew Huberman
I was like, “This dude’s cool, and he’s smart, and he’s funny, and he’s driven, and he’s giving, and he’s got an edge, and I want to learn from him. I want to hang out with him.” That was the beginning of our friendship, was essentially that set of internal realizations.
I was like, “This dude’s cool, and he’s smart, and he’s funny, and he’s driven, and he’s giving, and he’s got an edge, and I want to learn from him. I want to hang out with him.” That was the beginning of our friendship, was essentially that set of internal realizations.
Lex Fridman
Just keep going, just keep going, [inaudible 01:34:18] keep going with these compliments.
Just keep going, just keep going, [inaudible 01:34:18] keep going with these compliments.
Andrew Huberman
And a sharp dresser, [inaudible 01:34:20].
And a sharp dresser, [inaudible 01:34:20].
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah, just looks great shirtless on horseback. Yes.
Yeah, yeah, just looks great shirtless on horseback. Yes.
Andrew Huberman
No. No, no, listen, despite what some people might see on the internet, it’s a purely platonic friendship.
No. No, no, listen, despite what some people might see on the internet, it’s a purely platonic friendship.
Lex Fridman
Somebody asked if Andrew Huberman has a girlfriend, and somebody says, “I think so.” And the third comment was, “This really breaks my heart that Lex and Andrew are not an item.”
Somebody asked if Andrew Huberman has a girlfriend, and somebody says, “I think so.” And the third comment was, “This really breaks my heart that Lex and Andrew are not an item.”
Andrew Huberman
We are great friends, but we are not an item.
We are great friends, but we are not an item.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, well-
Yeah, well-
Andrew Huberman
It’s true, it’s official. I hear, over and over again, from friends that have made great choices in awesome partners, and have these fantastic relationships for long periods of time, that seem to continue to thrive, at least that’s what they tell me, and that’s what I observe, establish the friendship first and give it a bit of time before sex. And so I think that’s the feeling. That’s the feeling and we’re talking micro features and macro features. And this isn’t about perfection, it’s actually about the imperfections, which is kind of cool. I like quirky people. I like characters.
It’s true, it’s official. I hear, over and over again, from friends that have made great choices in awesome partners, and have these fantastic relationships for long periods of time, that seem to continue to thrive, at least that’s what they tell me, and that’s what I observe, establish the friendship first and give it a bit of time before sex. And so I think that’s the feeling. That’s the feeling and we’re talking micro features and macro features. And this isn’t about perfection, it’s actually about the imperfections, which is kind of cool. I like quirky people. I like characters.
I’ll tell you where I’ve gone badly wrong and where I see other people going badly wrong. There is no rule that says that you have to be attracted to all attractive people, by any means. It’s very important to develop a sense of taste in romantic attractions, I believe. What you really like, in terms of a certain style, a certain way of being, and of course that includes sexuality and sex itself, the verb. But I think it also includes their just general way of being. And when you really adore somebody, you like the way they answer the phone, and when they don’t answer the phone that way, you know something’s off and you want to know. And so I think that the more you can tune up your powers of observation, not looking for things that you like, and the more that stuff just washes over you, the more likely you are to, “Fall in love.” As a mutual friend of ours said to me, “Listen, when it comes to romantic relationships, if it’s not a hundred percent in you, it ain’t happening.”
And I’ve never seen a violation of that statement, where it’s like, yeah, it’s mostly good and they’re this and this, likes the negotiations. Well, already it’s doomed. And that doesn’t mean someone has to be perfect, the relationship has to be perfect, but it’s got to feel hundred percent inside.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Andrew Huberman
Like yes, yes, and yes. I think Deisseroth, when he was on here, your podcast, mentioned something that, I think the words were… Or maybe it was in his book, I don’t recall. But that love is one of these things that we story into with somebody. We create this idea of ourselves in the future and we look at our past time together and then you story into it.
Like yes, yes, and yes. I think Deisseroth, when he was on here, your podcast, mentioned something that, I think the words were… Or maybe it was in his book, I don’t recall. But that love is one of these things that we story into with somebody. We create this idea of ourselves in the future and we look at our past time together and then you story into it.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Andrew Huberman
There’re very few things like that. I can’t story into building flying cars. I have to actually go do something. And love is also retroactively constructed. Anyone who’s gone through a breakup understands the grief of knowing, oh, this is something I really shouldn’t be in, for whatever reason, because it only takes one. If the other person doesn’t want to be in it, then you shouldn’t be in it. But then missing so many things, and that’s just the attachment machinery, really, at work.
There’re very few things like that. I can’t story into building flying cars. I have to actually go do something. And love is also retroactively constructed. Anyone who’s gone through a breakup understands the grief of knowing, oh, this is something I really shouldn’t be in, for whatever reason, because it only takes one. If the other person doesn’t want to be in it, then you shouldn’t be in it. But then missing so many things, and that’s just the attachment machinery, really, at work.
Fertility
Lex Fridman
I have to ask you a question that somebody in our amazing team wanted to ask. He’s happily married. Another, like you mentioned, incredible relationship.
I have to ask you a question that somebody in our amazing team wanted to ask. He’s happily married. Another, like you mentioned, incredible relationship.
Andrew Huberman
Are they good friends?
Are they good friends?
Lex Fridman
They’re amazing friends.
They’re amazing friends.
Andrew Huberman
There you go.
There you go.
Lex Fridman
But, I’m just going to say, I’m not saying who it is. So I can say some stuff, which is, it started out as a great sexual connection.
But, I’m just going to say, I’m not saying who it is. So I can say some stuff, which is, it started out as a great sexual connection.
Andrew Huberman
Oh, well, there you go.
Oh, well, there you go.
Lex Fridman
But then became very close friends after that.
But then became very close friends after that.
Andrew Huberman
Okay, listen-
Okay, listen-
Lex Fridman
There you go. So speaking of sex-
There you go. So speaking of sex-
Andrew Huberman
There are many paths to Rome.
There are many paths to Rome.
Lex Fridman
He has a wonderful son and he is wanting to have a second kid, and he wanted to ask the great Andrew Huberman, is there sexual positions or any kind of thing that can help maximize the chance that they have a girl versus a boy? Because they had a wonderful boy.
He has a wonderful son and he is wanting to have a second kid, and he wanted to ask the great Andrew Huberman, is there sexual positions or any kind of thing that can help maximize the chance that they have a girl versus a boy? Because they had a wonderful boy.
Andrew Huberman
Do they want a girl?
Do they want a girl?
Lex Fridman
They want to a girl.
They want to a girl.
Andrew Huberman
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
Is there a way to control the gender? [inaudible 01:38:39].
Is there a way to control the gender? [inaudible 01:38:39].
Andrew Huberman
Well, this has been debated for a long time, and I did a four and a half hour episode on fertility. And the reason I did a four and a half hour episode on fertility is that, first of all, I find that reproductive biology be fascinating. And I wanted a resource for people that at were thinking about, or struggling with having kids for whatever reason, and it felt important to me to combine the male and female components in the same episode. It’s all timestamped, so you don’t have to listen to the whole thing. We talk about IVF, in vitro fertilization, we talk about natural pregnancy.
Well, this has been debated for a long time, and I did a four and a half hour episode on fertility. And the reason I did a four and a half hour episode on fertility is that, first of all, I find that reproductive biology be fascinating. And I wanted a resource for people that at were thinking about, or struggling with having kids for whatever reason, and it felt important to me to combine the male and female components in the same episode. It’s all timestamped, so you don’t have to listen to the whole thing. We talk about IVF, in vitro fertilization, we talk about natural pregnancy.
Okay, the data on position is very interesting, but let me just say a few things. There are a few clinics now, in particular some out of the United States, that are spinning down sperm and finding that they can separate out fractions, as they’re called. They can spin the sperm down at a given speed, and that they’ll separate out at different depths within the test tube, that allow them to pull out the sperm on top or below and bias the probability towards male or female births. It’s not perfect. It’s not a hundred percent. It’s a very costly procedure. It’s still very controversial.
Now with in vitro fertilization, they can extract eggs. You can introduce a sperm, directly by pipette, it’s a process called ICSI. Or you can set up a sperm race in a dish. And if you get a number of different embryos, meaning the eggs get fertilized, duplicate and start form a blastocyst, which is a ball of cells, early embryo, then you can do karyotyping. So you can do look for XX or XY, select the XY, which then would give rise to a male offspring, and then implant that one. So there is that kind of sex selection.
With respect to position, there’s a lot of lore that if the woman is on top or the woman’s on the bottom, or whether or not the penetration is from behind, whether or not it’s going to be male or female offspring. And frankly, the data are not great, as you can imagine, because those-
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 01:40:39].
[inaudible 01:40:39].
Andrew Huberman
… those would be interesting studies to run, perhaps.
… those would be interesting studies to run, perhaps.
Lex Fridman
But there is studies, there is papers.
But there is studies, there is papers.
Andrew Huberman
There are some-
There are some-
Lex Fridman
But they’re not, I guess-
But they’re not, I guess-
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, it’s-
Yeah, it’s-
Lex Fridman
There’s more lore than science says.
There’s more lore than science says.
Andrew Huberman
And there are a lot of other variables that are hard to control. So for instance, if it’s during intermission, during sex penetration, et cetera, then you can’t measure, for instance, sperm volume as opposed to when it’s IVF, and they can actually measure how many milliliters, how many forward motile sperm. It’s hard to control for certain things. And it just can vary between individuals and even from one ejaculation to the next and… Okay, so there’s too many variables; however, the position thing is interesting in the following way, and then I’ll answer whether or not you can bias us towards a female. As long as we’re talking about sexual-
And there are a lot of other variables that are hard to control. So for instance, if it’s during intermission, during sex penetration, et cetera, then you can’t measure, for instance, sperm volume as opposed to when it’s IVF, and they can actually measure how many milliliters, how many forward motile sperm. It’s hard to control for certain things. And it just can vary between individuals and even from one ejaculation to the next and… Okay, so there’s too many variables; however, the position thing is interesting in the following way, and then I’ll answer whether or not you can bias us towards a female. As long as we’re talking about sexual-
Lex Fridman
I have other questions about sex [inaudible 01:41:28].
I have other questions about sex [inaudible 01:41:28].
Andrew Huberman
But as long as we’re talking about sexual position,-
But as long as we’re talking about sexual position,-
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Andrew Huberman
… there are data that support the idea that, in order to increase the probability of successful fertilization, that indeed, the woman should not stand upright after sex and should-
… there are data that support the idea that, in order to increase the probability of successful fertilization, that indeed, the woman should not stand upright after sex and should-
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 01:41:49].
[inaudible 01:41:49].
Andrew Huberman
Right after the man has ejaculated inside her, and should adjust her pelvis, say, 15 degrees upwards. Some of the fertility experts, MDs, will say that’s crazy, but others-
Right after the man has ejaculated inside her, and should adjust her pelvis, say, 15 degrees upwards. Some of the fertility experts, MDs, will say that’s crazy, but others-
Andrew Huberman
MDs will say, “That’s crazy.”
MDs will say, “That’s crazy.”
But others that I sought out, and not specifically for this answer, but for researching that episode, said that, “Yeah, what you’re talking about is trying to get the maximum number of sperm and it’s contained in semen. And yes, the semen can leak out. And so keeping the pelvis tilted for about 15 degrees for about 15 minutes, obviously tilted in the direction that would have things running upstream, not downstream, so to speak.”
Lex Fridman
Gravity.
Gravity.
Andrew Huberman
Gravity, it’s real. So for maximizing fertilization, the doctors I spoke to just said, “Look, given that if people are trying to get pregnant, what is spending 15 minutes on their back?” This sort of thing. Okay. So then with respect to getting a female offspring or XX female offspring, selectively, there is the idea that as fathers get older, they’re more likely to have daughters as opposed to sons. That’s, from the papers I’ve read, is a significant but still mildly significant result. So with each passing year, this person increases the probability they’re going to have a daughter, not a son. So that’s interesting.
Gravity, it’s real. So for maximizing fertilization, the doctors I spoke to just said, “Look, given that if people are trying to get pregnant, what is spending 15 minutes on their back?” This sort of thing. Okay. So then with respect to getting a female offspring or XX female offspring, selectively, there is the idea that as fathers get older, they’re more likely to have daughters as opposed to sons. That’s, from the papers I’ve read, is a significant but still mildly significant result. So with each passing year, this person increases the probability they’re going to have a daughter, not a son. So that’s interesting.
Lex Fridman
But the probability differences are probably tiny as you said.
But the probability differences are probably tiny as you said.
Andrew Huberman
It’s not trivial. It’s not a trivial difference. But if they want to ensure having a daughter, then they should do IVF and select an XX embryo. And when you go through IVF, they genetically screen them for karyotype, which is XX, XY, and they look at mutations, genotypic mutations for things like trisomies and aneuploidies, all the stuff you don’t want.
It’s not trivial. It’s not a trivial difference. But if they want to ensure having a daughter, then they should do IVF and select an XX embryo. And when you go through IVF, they genetically screen them for karyotype, which is XX, XY, and they look at mutations, genotypic mutations for things like trisomies and aneuploidies, all the stuff you don’t want.
Lex Fridman
But there is a lot of lore if you look on the internet.
But there is a lot of lore if you look on the internet.
Andrew Huberman
Sure. Different foods.
Sure. Different foods.
Lex Fridman
So there are a lot of variables.
So there are a lot of variables.
Andrew Huberman
There’s a lot of variable, but there haven’t been systematic studies. So I think probably the best thing to do, unless they’re going to do IVF, is just roll the dice. And I think with each passing year, they increase the probability of getting a female offspring. But of course, with each passing year, the egg and sperm quality degrade, so get after it soon.
There’s a lot of variable, but there haven’t been systematic studies. So I think probably the best thing to do, unless they’re going to do IVF, is just roll the dice. And I think with each passing year, they increase the probability of getting a female offspring. But of course, with each passing year, the egg and sperm quality degrade, so get after it soon.
Lex Fridman
So I went down a rabbit hole. Sexology, there’s journals on sex.
So I went down a rabbit hole. Sexology, there’s journals on sex.
Andrew Huberman
Oh, yeah. Sure. And some of them, not all, quite reputable and some of them really pioneering in the sense that they’ve taken on topics that are considered outside the main frame of what people talk about, but they’re very important. We have episodes coming out soon with, for instance, the Head of Male Urology, Sexual Health and Reproductive Health at Stanford, Michael Eisenberg. But also one with a female urologist, sexual health, reproductive health, Dr. Rena Malik, who has a quite active YouTube presence. She does these really dry, scientific presentation, but very nice. She has a lovely voice. But she’ll be talking about erections or squirting. She does very internet-type content, but she’s a legitimate urologist, reproductive health expert.
Oh, yeah. Sure. And some of them, not all, quite reputable and some of them really pioneering in the sense that they’ve taken on topics that are considered outside the main frame of what people talk about, but they’re very important. We have episodes coming out soon with, for instance, the Head of Male Urology, Sexual Health and Reproductive Health at Stanford, Michael Eisenberg. But also one with a female urologist, sexual health, reproductive health, Dr. Rena Malik, who has a quite active YouTube presence. She does these really dry, scientific presentation, but very nice. She has a lovely voice. But she’ll be talking about erections or squirting. She does very internet-type content, but she’s a legitimate urologist, reproductive health expert.
And in the podcast, we did talk about both male and female orgasm. We talked a lot about sexual function and dysfunction. We talked a lot about pelvic floor. One interesting factoid is that only 3% of sexual dysfunction is hormonal, endocrine, in nature. It’s more often related to some pelvic floor or vasculature, blood flow related or other issue. And then when Eisenberg came on the podcast, he said that far less sexual dysfunction is psychogenic in origin than people believe. That far more of it is pelvic floor, neuro and vascular. It’s not saying that psychogenic dysfunction doesn’t exist, but that a lot of the sexual dysfunction that people assume is related to hormones or that is related to psychogenic issues are related to vascular or neural issues. And the good news is that there are great remedies for those. And so both those episodes detail some of the more salient points around what those remedies are and could be.
One of the, again, factoids, but it was interesting that a lot of people have pelvic floor issues and they think that their pelvic floors are, quote, unquote, messed up. So they go on the internet, they learn about Kegels. And it turns out that some people need Kegels, they need to strengthen their pelvic floor. Guess what? A huge number of people with sexual and urologic dysfunction have pelvic floors that are too tight and Kegels are going to make them far worse, and they actually need to learn to relax their pelvic floor. And so seeing a pelvic floor specialist is important.
I think in the next five, 10 years, we’re going to see a dramatic shift towards more discussion about sexual and reproductive health in a way that acknowledges that, yeah, the clitoris comes from the same origin tissue as the penis. And in many ways the neural innervation of the two, while clearly different, has some overlapping features that there’s going to be discussion around anatomy and hormones and pelvic floors in a way that’s going to erode some of the cloaking of these topics because they’ve been cloaked for a long time and there’s a lot of… Well, let’s just call it what it is. There’s a lot of bullshit out there about what’s what.
Now, the hormonal issues, by the way, just to clarify, can impact desire. So a lot of people who have lack of desire as opposed to lack of anatomical function, this could be male or female that can originate with either things like SSRIs or hormonal issues. And so we talk about that as well. So it’s a pretty vast topic.
Productivity
Lex Fridman
Okay. You’re one of the most productive people I know. What’s the secret to your productivity? How do you maximize the number of productive hours in a day? You’re a scientist, you’re a teacher, you’re a very prolific educator.
Okay. You’re one of the most productive people I know. What’s the secret to your productivity? How do you maximize the number of productive hours in a day? You’re a scientist, you’re a teacher, you’re a very prolific educator.
Andrew Huberman
Well, thanks for the kind words. I struggle like everybody else, but I am pretty relentless about meeting deadlines. I miss them sometimes, but sometimes that means cramming. Sometimes that means starting early. But-
Well, thanks for the kind words. I struggle like everybody else, but I am pretty relentless about meeting deadlines. I miss them sometimes, but sometimes that means cramming. Sometimes that means starting early. But-
Lex Fridman
Has that been hard, sorry to interrupt, with the podcast? There’s certain episodes, you’re taking just incredibly difficult topics and you know there’s going to be a lot of really good scientists listening to those with a very skeptical and careful eye. Do you struggle meeting that deadline sometimes?
Has that been hard, sorry to interrupt, with the podcast? There’s certain episodes, you’re taking just incredibly difficult topics and you know there’s going to be a lot of really good scientists listening to those with a very skeptical and careful eye. Do you struggle meeting that deadline sometimes?
Andrew Huberman
Yes. We’ve pushed out episodes because I want more time with them. I also, I haven’t advertised this, but I have another fully tenured professor that’s started checking my podcasts and helping me find papers. He’s a close friend of mine. He’s an incredible expert in neuroplasticity and that’s been helpful. But I do all the primary research for the episodes myself. Although my niece has been doing a summer internship with me and finding amazing papers. She did last summer as well. She’s really good at it. Just sick that kid on the internet and she gets great stuff.
Yes. We’ve pushed out episodes because I want more time with them. I also, I haven’t advertised this, but I have another fully tenured professor that’s started checking my podcasts and helping me find papers. He’s a close friend of mine. He’s an incredible expert in neuroplasticity and that’s been helpful. But I do all the primary research for the episodes myself. Although my niece has been doing a summer internship with me and finding amazing papers. She did last summer as well. She’s really good at it. Just sick that kid on the internet and she gets great stuff.
Lex Fridman
Can I ask you, just going on tangents here, what’s the hardest, finding the papers or understanding what a paper is saying?
Can I ask you, just going on tangents here, what’s the hardest, finding the papers or understanding what a paper is saying?
Andrew Huberman
Finding them. Finding the best papers. Yeah. Because you have to read a bunch of reviews, figure out who’s getting cited, call people in a field, make sure that this is the stuff. I did this episode recently on ketamine. About ketamine, I wasn’t on ketamine. And there’s this whole debate about S versus R ketamine, and SR ketamine. And I called two clinical experts at Stanford. I had a researcher at UCLA help me. Even then, a few people had gripes about it that I don’t think they understood a section that I perhaps could have been clearer about. But yeah, you’re always concerned that people either won’t get it or I won’t be clear. So the researching is mainly about finding the best papers.
Finding them. Finding the best papers. Yeah. Because you have to read a bunch of reviews, figure out who’s getting cited, call people in a field, make sure that this is the stuff. I did this episode recently on ketamine. About ketamine, I wasn’t on ketamine. And there’s this whole debate about S versus R ketamine, and SR ketamine. And I called two clinical experts at Stanford. I had a researcher at UCLA help me. Even then, a few people had gripes about it that I don’t think they understood a section that I perhaps could have been clearer about. But yeah, you’re always concerned that people either won’t get it or I won’t be clear. So the researching is mainly about finding the best papers.
And then I’m looking for papers that establish a thoroughness of understanding. That are interesting, obviously. It’s fun to get occasionally look at some of the odder or more progressive papers that are what’s new in a field and then where there are actionable takeaways to really export those with a lot of thoughtfulness.
Going back to the productivity thing I do, I get up, I look at the sun. I don’t stare at the sun, but I get my sunshine. It all starts with a really good night’s sleep. I think that’s really important to understand. So much so that if I wake up and I don’t feel rested enough, I’ll often do a non-sleep deep rest yoga nidra, or go back to sleep for a little bit, get up, really prioritize the big block of work for the thing that I’m researching. I think a little bit of anxiety and a little bit of concern about deadline helps. Turning the phone off helps, realizing that those peak hours, whenever they are for you, you do not allow those hours to be invaded, unless a nuclear bomb goes off. And nuclear bomb is just a phraseology for, family crisis would be good justification. If there’s an emergency, obviously.
But it’s all about focus. It’s all about focus in the moment. It’s not even so much about how many hours you log. It’s really about focus in the moment. How much total focus can you give to something? And then I like to take walks and think about things and sometimes talk about them in my voice recorder. So I’m just always churning on it, all the time. And then of course, learning to turn it off and engage with people socially and not be podcasting 24 hours a day in your head is key. But I think I love learning and researching and finding those papers and the information, and I love teaching it.
And these days I use a whiteboard before I start. I don’t have any notes, no teleprompter. Then the whiteboard that I use beforehand is to really sculpt out the different elements and the flow, get the flow right and move things around. The whiteboard is such a valuable tool. Then take a couple pictures of that when I’m happy with it, put it down on the desk and these are just bullet points and then just churn through and just churn through. And nothing feels better than researching and sharing information. And I, as you did, grew up writing papers and it’s hard. And I like the friction of, “Uh, can’t. I want to get up. I want to use the bathroom.”
When I was in college, I was trying to make up deficiencies from my lack of attendance in high school, so much so that I would set a timer. I wouldn’t let myself get up to use the bathroom even. Never had an accident. I listened to music, classical music, Rancid, a few other things. Some Bob Dylan maybe thrown in there and just study and just… And then you’d hit the two-hour mark and you’re in pain and then you get up, use the bathroom. You’re like, “That felt so good.” There’s something about the human brain that likes these kind of friction points and working through them and you just have to work through them.
So yeah, I’m productive and my life has arranged around it, and that’s been a bit of a barrier to personal life at times. But my life’s been arranged around it. I’ve set up everything so that I can learn more, teach more, including some of my home life. But I do still watch Chimp Empire. I still got time to watch Chimp Empire. Look, the great Joe Strummer, Clash, they were my favorite Mescaleros. He said, this famous Strummer quote, “No input, no output.” So you need experience. You need outside things in order to foster the process.
But yeah, just nose to the grindstone man, I don’t know. And that’s what I’m happy to do with my life. I don’t think anyone should do that just because. But this is how I’m showing up. And if you don’t like me, then scroll… What do they say? Swipe left, swipe right. I don’t know. I’m not on the apps, the dating apps. So that’s the other thing. I keep waiting for when, “Listens to Lex Fridman podcast,” is a checkbox on Hinge or Bumble or whatever it is. But I don’t even know. Are those their field? I don’t know. What are the apps now?
Lex Fridman
Well, I’ve never used an app and I always found troublesome how little information is provided on apps.
Well, I’ve never used an app and I always found troublesome how little information is provided on apps.
Andrew Huberman
Well, they’re the ones that are like a stocked lake, like Raya. Companies will actually fill them with people that look a certain way.
Well, they’re the ones that are like a stocked lake, like Raya. Companies will actually fill them with people that look a certain way.
Lex Fridman
Well, soon it’ll be filled with AI.
Well, soon it’ll be filled with AI.
Andrew Huberman
Oh.
Oh.
Lex Fridman
The way you said, “Oh.”
The way you said, “Oh.”
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. That’s interesting.
Yeah. That’s interesting.
Lex Fridman
The heartbreak within that.
The heartbreak within that.
Andrew Huberman
Well, I am guilty of liking real human interaction.
Well, I am guilty of liking real human interaction.
Lex Fridman
Have you tried AI interaction?
Have you tried AI interaction?
Andrew Huberman
No, but I have a feeling you’re going to convince me to.
No, but I have a feeling you’re going to convince me to.
Lex Fridman
One day. I’ve also struggled finishing projects that are new. That are something new. For example, one of the things I’ve really struggled finishing is something that’s in Russian that requires translation and overdub and all that kind of stuff. The other project, I’ve been working on for at least a year off and on, but trying to finish is something we’ve talked about in the past. I’m still on it, project on Hitler in World War II. I’ve written so much about it and I just don’t know why I can’t finish it. I have trouble really… I think I’m terrified being in front of the camera.
One day. I’ve also struggled finishing projects that are new. That are something new. For example, one of the things I’ve really struggled finishing is something that’s in Russian that requires translation and overdub and all that kind of stuff. The other project, I’ve been working on for at least a year off and on, but trying to finish is something we’ve talked about in the past. I’m still on it, project on Hitler in World War II. I’ve written so much about it and I just don’t know why I can’t finish it. I have trouble really… I think I’m terrified being in front of the camera.
Andrew Huberman
Like this?
Like this?
Lex Fridman
Like this.
Like this.
Andrew Huberman
Or solo?
Or solo?
Lex Fridman
No, no, no. Solo.
No, no, no. Solo.
Andrew Huberman
Well, if ever you want to do solo and seriously, because done this before, our clandestine study missions, I’m happy to sit in the corner and work on my book or do something if it feels good to just have someone in the room.
Well, if ever you want to do solo and seriously, because done this before, our clandestine study missions, I’m happy to sit in the corner and work on my book or do something if it feels good to just have someone in the room.
Lex Fridman
Just for the feeling of somebody else?
Just for the feeling of somebody else?
Andrew Huberman
Definitely.
Definitely.
Lex Fridman
You seem to have been fearless to just sit in front of the camera by yourself to do the episode.
You seem to have been fearless to just sit in front of the camera by yourself to do the episode.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, it was weird. The first year of the podcast, it just spilled out of me. I had all that stuff I was so excited about. I’d been talking to everyone who would listen and even when they’d run away, I’d keep talking before there was ever a camera, wasn’t on social media. 2019, I posted a little bit. 2020, as you know, I started going on podcasts. But yeah, the zest and delight in this stuff. I was like, “Circadian rhythms, I’m going to tell you about this stuff.” I just felt like, here’s the opportunity and just let it burst.
Yeah, it was weird. The first year of the podcast, it just spilled out of me. I had all that stuff I was so excited about. I’d been talking to everyone who would listen and even when they’d run away, I’d keep talking before there was ever a camera, wasn’t on social media. 2019, I posted a little bit. 2020, as you know, I started going on podcasts. But yeah, the zest and delight in this stuff. I was like, “Circadian rhythms, I’m going to tell you about this stuff.” I just felt like, here’s the opportunity and just let it burst.
And then as we’ve gotten into topics that are a little bit further away from my home knowledge, I still get super excited about it. This music in the brain episode I’ve been researching for a while now, I’m just so hyped about it. It’s so, so interesting. There’s so many facets. Singing versus improvisational music versus, “I’m listening to music,” versus learning music. It just goes on and on. There’s just so much that’s so interesting. I just can’t get enough. And I think, I don’t know, you put a camera in front of me, I sort of forget about it and I’m just trying to just teach.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, so that’s the difference. That’s interesting.
Yeah, so that’s the difference. That’s interesting.
Andrew Huberman
Forget the camera.
Forget the camera.
Lex Fridman
Maybe I need to find that joy as well. But for me, a lot of the joy is in the writing. And the camera, there’s something-
Maybe I need to find that joy as well. But for me, a lot of the joy is in the writing. And the camera, there’s something-
Andrew Huberman
Well, the best lecturers, as you know, and you’re a phenomenal lecturer, so you embody this as well, but when I teach at Stanford, I was directing this course in neuroanatomy and neuroscience for medical students. And I noticed that the best lecturers would come in and they’re teaching the material from a place of deep understanding, but they’re also experiencing it as a first time learner at the same time. So it’s just sort of embodying the delight of it, but also the authority over the… Not authority, but the mastery of the material. And it’s really the delight in it that the students are linking onto. And of course they need and deserve the best accurate material, so they have to know what they’re talking about.
Well, the best lecturers, as you know, and you’re a phenomenal lecturer, so you embody this as well, but when I teach at Stanford, I was directing this course in neuroanatomy and neuroscience for medical students. And I noticed that the best lecturers would come in and they’re teaching the material from a place of deep understanding, but they’re also experiencing it as a first time learner at the same time. So it’s just sort of embodying the delight of it, but also the authority over the… Not authority, but the mastery of the material. And it’s really the delight in it that the students are linking onto. And of course they need and deserve the best accurate material, so they have to know what they’re talking about.
But yeah, just tap into that energy of learning and loving it. And people are along for the ride. I get accused of being long-winded, but things get taken out of context, that leads to greater misunderstanding. And also, listen, I come from a lineage of three dead advisors. Three. All three. So I don’t know when the reaper’s coming for me. I’m doing my best to stay alive a long time. But whether or not it’s a bullet or a bus or cancer or whatever, or just old age, I’m trying to get it all out there as best I can. And if it means you have to hit pause and come back a day or two later, that seems like a reasonable compromise to me. I’m not going to go longer than I need to and I’m trying to shorten them up. But again, that’s kind of how I show up.
It’s like Tim Armstrong would say about writing songs. I asked him, “How often do you write?” Every day. Every day. Does Rick ever stop creating? No. Has Joe ever stopped preparing for comedy? Are you ever stopping to think about world issues and technology and who you can talk to? It seems to me you’ve always got a plan in sight. The thing I love about your podcast the most, to be honest these days, is the surprise of I don’t know who the hell’s going to be there. It’s almost like I get a little nervously excited about when a new episode comes out. I have no idea. No idea. I have some guesses based on what you told me during the break. You’ve got some people where it’s just like, “Whoa, Lex went there? Awesome. Can’t wait.” Click. I think that’s really cool. You’re constantly surprising people. So you’re doing it so well. It’s such a high level and I think it’s also important for people to understand that what you’re doing Lex, there’s no precedent for it. Sure. There’ve been interviews before, there have been podcasts before. There are discussions before. How many of your peers can you look to find out how best to do the content like yours? Zero. There’s one peer: you. And so that should give you great peace and great excitement because you’re a pioneer. You’re literally the tip of the spear.
I don’t want to take an unnecessary tangent, but I think this might thread together two of the things that we’ve been talking about, which are, I think of pretty key importance. One is romantic relationships, and the other is creative process and work. And this again, is something I learned from Rick, but that he and I have gone back and forth on. And that I think is worth elaborating on, which is earlier we were saying the best relationship is going to be one where it brings you peace. I think peace also can be translated to, among other things, lack of distraction. So when you’re with your partner, can you really focus on them and the relationship? Can you not be distracted by things that you’re upset about from their past or from your past with them? And of course the same is true for them, right? They ideally will feel that way towards you too. They can really focus.
Also, when you’re not with them, can you focus on your work? Can you not be worried about whether or not they’re okay because you trust that they’re an adult and they can handle things or they will reach out if they need things? They’re going to communicate their needs like an adult. Not creating messes just to get attention and things like that, or disappearing for that matter. So peace and focus are intimately related, and distraction is the enemy of peace and focus.
So there’s something there, I believe, because with people that have the strong generative drive and want to be productive in their home life, in the sense have a rich family life, partner life, whatever that is, and in their work life, the ability to really drop into the work and you might have that sense like, “I hope they’re okay,” or, “need to check my phone or something,” but just know we’re good.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Everything’s okay.
Yeah. Everything’s okay.
Andrew Huberman
So peace and focus, I think and being present are so key. And it’s key at every level of romantic relationship, from certainly presence and focus. Everything from sex to listening to raising a family, to tending to the house and in work, it’s absolutely critical. So I think that those things are mirror images of the same thing. And they’re both important reflections of the other. And when work is not going well, then the focus on relationship can suffer and vice versa.
So peace and focus, I think and being present are so key. And it’s key at every level of romantic relationship, from certainly presence and focus. Everything from sex to listening to raising a family, to tending to the house and in work, it’s absolutely critical. So I think that those things are mirror images of the same thing. And they’re both important reflections of the other. And when work is not going well, then the focus on relationship can suffer and vice versa.
Lex Fridman
And it’s crazy how important that is.
And it’s crazy how important that is.
Andrew Huberman
Peace.
Peace.
Lex Fridman
How incredibly wonderful it could be to have a person in your life that enables that creative focus.
How incredibly wonderful it could be to have a person in your life that enables that creative focus.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah. And you supply the peace and focus for their endeavors, whatever those might be. That symmetry there. Because clearly people have different needs and the need to just really trust, when Lex is working, he’s in his generative mode and I know he’s good. And so then they feel, sure, they’ve contributed to that. But then also what you’re doing is supporting them in whatever way happens to be. And I think that sometimes you’ll see that. People will pair up along creative-creative or musical-musical or computer scientists. But I think, again, going back to this Conti episode on relationships is that the superficial labels are less important, it seems, than just the desire to create that kind of home life and relationship together. And as a consequence, the work mode. And for some people, both people aren’t working and sometimes they are. But I think that’s the good stuff. And I think that’s the big learning in all of it, is that the further along I go, with each birthday, I guarantee you’re going to be like, “What I want is simpler and simpler and harder and harder to create. But oh, so worth it.”
Yeah. And you supply the peace and focus for their endeavors, whatever those might be. That symmetry there. Because clearly people have different needs and the need to just really trust, when Lex is working, he’s in his generative mode and I know he’s good. And so then they feel, sure, they’ve contributed to that. But then also what you’re doing is supporting them in whatever way happens to be. And I think that sometimes you’ll see that. People will pair up along creative-creative or musical-musical or computer scientists. But I think, again, going back to this Conti episode on relationships is that the superficial labels are less important, it seems, than just the desire to create that kind of home life and relationship together. And as a consequence, the work mode. And for some people, both people aren’t working and sometimes they are. But I think that’s the good stuff. And I think that’s the big learning in all of it, is that the further along I go, with each birthday, I guarantee you’re going to be like, “What I want is simpler and simpler and harder and harder to create. But oh, so worth it.”
Family
Lex Fridman
The inner and the outer peace. It’s been over two years, I think, since Costello passed away.
The inner and the outer peace. It’s been over two years, I think, since Costello passed away.
Andrew Huberman
It still tears me up. I cried about him today. I cried about him today.
It still tears me up. I cried about him today. I cried about him today.
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 02:05:17]. Fuck.
[inaudible 02:05:17]. Fuck.
Andrew Huberman
It’s proportional to the love. But yeah, I’ll cry about it right now if I think about it. It wasn’t putting him down, it wasn’t the act of him dying, any of that. Actually, that was a beautiful experience. I didn’t expect it to be, but it was in my place when I was living in Topanga during the pandemic where we launched the podcast and I did it at home and he hated the vet so I did it at home. And he gave out this huge, “Ugh,” right at the end. And I could just tell he had been in not a lot pain, fortunately. But he had just been working so hard just to move at all.
It’s proportional to the love. But yeah, I’ll cry about it right now if I think about it. It wasn’t putting him down, it wasn’t the act of him dying, any of that. Actually, that was a beautiful experience. I didn’t expect it to be, but it was in my place when I was living in Topanga during the pandemic where we launched the podcast and I did it at home and he hated the vet so I did it at home. And he gave out this huge, “Ugh,” right at the end. And I could just tell he had been in not a lot pain, fortunately. But he had just been working so hard just to move at all.
And the craziest thing happened, Lex. It was unbelievable. I’ve never had an experience like this. I expected my heart to break, and I’ve felt a broken heart before. I felt it, frankly, when my parents split, I felt it when Harry shot himself. I felt it when Barbara died and felt it when Ben went as well. And so many friends, way too many friends. The end of 2017, my friend Aaron King, Johnny Fair, John Eikleberry, stomach cancer, suicide, fentanyl. I was like, “Whoa. All in a fricking week.” And I just remember thinking, “What the…?” And it’s just heartbreak and you just carry that and it’s like, “Uh.” And that’s just a short list. And I don’t say that for sob stories. It’s just for a guy that wasn’t in the military or didn’t grow up in the inner city, it’s an unusual number of deaths, close people.
When Costello went, the craziest thing happened. My heart warmed up, it heated up. And I wasn’t on MDMA. The moment he went, it just went whoosh. And I was like, “What the hell is this?” And it was a supernatural experience to me. I just never had that. I put my grandfather on the ground, I was a pallbearer at the funeral. I’ve done that more times than I’d like to have ever done it. And it just heated up with Costello and I thought, “What the fuck is this?”
And it was almost like, and we make up these stories about what it is, but it was almost like he was like, “All right,” I have to be careful because I will cry here and I don’t want to. It was almost like he was like all that effort, because I had been putting so much effort into him, it was like, “All right, you get that back.” It was like the giant freaking, “Thank you.” And it was incredible. And I’m not embarrassed to shed a tear or two about it if I have to.
I was like, “Holy shit.” That’s how close I was to that animal.
Lex Fridman
Where do you think can find that kind of love again?
Where do you think can find that kind of love again?
Andrew Huberman
Man, I don’t know. And excuse me for welling up. I mean, it’s a freaking dog, right? I get it. But for me, it was the first real home I ever had. But when Costello went, it was like we had had this home in Topanga. We had set it up and he was just so happy there. And I think, I don’t know, it was this weird victory slash massive loss. We did it. 11 years. Freaking did everything, everything, to make him as comfortable as possible. And he was super loyal, beautiful animal, but also just funny and fun. And I was like, “I did it.” I gave as much of myself to this being as I felt I could without detracting from the rest of my life. And so I don’t know.
Man, I don’t know. And excuse me for welling up. I mean, it’s a freaking dog, right? I get it. But for me, it was the first real home I ever had. But when Costello went, it was like we had had this home in Topanga. We had set it up and he was just so happy there. And I think, I don’t know, it was this weird victory slash massive loss. We did it. 11 years. Freaking did everything, everything, to make him as comfortable as possible. And he was super loyal, beautiful animal, but also just funny and fun. And I was like, “I did it.” I gave as much of myself to this being as I felt I could without detracting from the rest of my life. And so I don’t know.
When I think about Barbara especially, I well up and it’s hard for me, but I talked to her before she died and that was a brutal conversation, saying goodbye to someone, especially with kids. And that was hard. I think that really flipped a switch in me where I’m like, I always knew I wanted kids. I’d say, “I want kids. I want a lot of kids.” That flipped a switch in me. I was like, “I want kids. I want my own kids.”
Lex Fridman
You might be able to find that kind of love having kids.
You might be able to find that kind of love having kids.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, I think because it was the caretaking. It wasn’t about what he gave me all that time, and the more I could take care of him and see him happy, the better I felt. It was crazy. I don’t know. So I miss him every day. Every day. I miss him every day.
Yeah, I think because it was the caretaking. It wasn’t about what he gave me all that time, and the more I could take care of him and see him happy, the better I felt. It was crazy. I don’t know. So I miss him every day. Every day. I miss him every day.
Lex Fridman
You got a heart that’s so full of love. I can’t wait for you to have kids.
You got a heart that’s so full of love. I can’t wait for you to have kids.
Andrew Huberman
Thanks, man.
Thanks, man.
Lex Fridman
For you to be a father. I can’t wait to do the same.
For you to be a father. I can’t wait to do the same.
Andrew Huberman
Yeah, well, when I’m ready for it. When God decides I’m ready, I’ll have them.
Yeah, well, when I’m ready for it. When God decides I’m ready, I’ll have them.
Lex Fridman
And then I will still beat you to it. As I told you many times before,
And then I will still beat you to it. As I told you many times before,
Andrew Huberman
I think you should absolutely have kids. Look at the people in our life. Because in case you haven’t realized it already, we’re the younger of the podcasters. But like Joe and Peter and Segura and the rest, they’re like the tribal elders and we’re not the youngest in the crew. But if you look at all those guys, they all have kids. They all adore their kids and their kids bring tremendous meaning to their life. We’d be morons if you didn’t go off and start a family, I didn’t start start a family. And yeah, I think that’s the goal. Of the goals, that’s one of them.
I think you should absolutely have kids. Look at the people in our life. Because in case you haven’t realized it already, we’re the younger of the podcasters. But like Joe and Peter and Segura and the rest, they’re like the tribal elders and we’re not the youngest in the crew. But if you look at all those guys, they all have kids. They all adore their kids and their kids bring tremendous meaning to their life. We’d be morons if you didn’t go off and start a family, I didn’t start start a family. And yeah, I think that’s the goal. Of the goals, that’s one of them.
Lex Fridman
The kids not only make their life more joyful and brings love to their life, it’s also makes them more productive, makes them better people, all of that. It’s kind of obvious. Yeah,
The kids not only make their life more joyful and brings love to their life, it’s also makes them more productive, makes them better people, all of that. It’s kind of obvious. Yeah,
Andrew Huberman
I think that’s what Costello wanted, I think, I have this story in my head that he was just like, “Okay, take this like a kid.” It was a good test.
I think that’s what Costello wanted, I think, I have this story in my head that he was just like, “Okay, take this like a kid.” It was a good test.
Lex Fridman
“And don’t fuck this up.”
“And don’t fuck this up.”
Andrew Huberman
“Lord knows, don’t fuck this up.”
“Lord knows, don’t fuck this up.”
Lex Fridman
Andrew, I love you, brother. This was an incredible conversation.
Andrew, I love you, brother. This was an incredible conversation.
Andrew Huberman
Love you too. I appreciate you.
Love you too. I appreciate you.
Lex Fridman
We will talk often on each other’s podcast for many years to come.
We will talk often on each other’s podcast for many years to come.
Andrew Huberman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Many, many years to come.
Many, many years to come.
Andrew Huberman
Thank you. Thanks for having me on here. And there are no words for how much I appreciate your example and your friendship. So love you, brother.
Thank you. Thanks for having me on here. And there are no words for how much I appreciate your example and your friendship. So love you, brother.
Lex Fridman
Love you too.
Love you too.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Andrew Huberman to support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Albert Camus. “In the midst of winter, I found there was, within me, an invincible summer. And that makes me happy. For it says that no matter how hard the world pushes against me, within me, there’s something stronger – something better, pushing right back.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Joscha Bach: Life, Intelligence, Consciousness, AI & the Future of Humans | Lex Fridman Podcast #392
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #392 with Joscha Bach.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
You wrote a post about levels of lucidity. “As we grow older, it becomes apparent that our self-reflexive mind is not just gradually accumulating ideas about itself, but that it progresses in somewhat distinct stages.” There are seven of the stages. Stage one, reactive survival (infant). Stage two, personal self (young child). Stage three, social self (adolescence, domesticated adult). Stage four is rational agency (self-direction). Stage five is self-authoring, that’s full adult. You’ve achieved wisdom, but there’s two more stages. Stage six is enlightenment, stage seven is transcendence. Can you explain each, or the interesting parts of each of these stages, and what’s your sense why there are stages of this, of lucidity as we progress through life in this too short life?
It’s more like philosophical framework that allows you to talk about how minds work. At first, when we are born, we don’t have a personal self yet, I think. Instead, we have an attentional self, and this attentional self is initially in the infant tasked, is building a world model, and also an initial model of the self. But mostly, it’s building a game engine in the brain that is tracking sensory data, and uses it to explain it. In some sense, you could compare it to a game engine like Minecraft or so, colors and sounds. People are all not physical objects. They’re creation of our mind at a certain level. Of course, screening models that are mathematical that use geometry, and that use manipulation of objects, and so on to create scenes in which we can find ourselves, and interact with them.
After we have this personal self and stage two online, many people form a social self. This social self allows the individual to experience themselves as part of a group. It’s basically this thing that when you are playing in a team, for instance, you don’t notice yourself just as a single node that is reaching out into the world, but you’re also looking down. You’re looking down from this entire group, and you see how this group is looking at this individual, and everybody in the group is, in some sense, emulating this group spirit to some degree. In this state, people are forming their opinions by assimilating them from this group mind. They basically gain the ability to act a little bit like a hive mind.
If you’re at stage four, that’s not your main concern, and so most nerds don’t really worry about the algorithmic bias, and the model that it picks up, because if there’s something wrong with this bias, the AI ultimately will prove it. At some point, we’ll gather there that it makes mathematic proofs about reality, and then it will figure out what’s true and what’s false. But you’re still worried that AI might turn you into paperclips, because it might have the wrong values, right? If it’s set up through a wrong function that controls its direction in the world, then it might do something that is completely horrible, and there’s no easy way to fix it.
If it does that, then if we want to coexist with it, it means that it’ll have to share purposes with us, so it cannot be a transactional relationship. We will not be able to use reinforcement learning with human feedback to hardwire its values into it. But this has to happen. It’s probably that it’s conscious, so it can relate to our own mode of existence, where an observer is observing itself in real-time, and within certain temporal frames. The other thing is that it probably needs to have some kind of transcendental orientation, building shared agency, in the same way as we do when we are able to enter with each other into non-transactional relationships. I find that’s something that, because the stage five is so rare, is missing in much of the discourse. I think that we need, in some sense, focus on how to formalize love, how to understand love, and how to build it into the machines that we are currently building, and that are about to become smarter than us.
This speed of signal progression in the brain is roughly at the speed of sound, incidentally, because the time that it takes for the signals to hop from cell to cell, which means it’s relatively slow with respect to the world. It takes an appreciable fraction of a second for a signal to go through the entire neocortex, something like a few 100 milliseconds. There’s a lot of stuff happening in that time, where the signal is passing through your brain, including in the brain itself. Nothing in the brain is assuming that stuff happens simultaneously, everything in the brain is working in a paradigm, where the world has already moved on, when you are very ready to do the next thing to your signal, including the signal processing system itself. It’s quite different paradigm than the one in our digital computers, where we currently assume that your GPU or CPU is pretty much globally in the same state.
But there is something deeper that you feel that you’re also sharing a state with other people, that you have an experience in which you notice that your personal self is moving into everything else, that you basically look out of the eyes of another person, that every agent in the world that is an observer is in some sense you. We forget that we are the same agent.
Maybe somebody wants to make their own life more interesting or misremember something, but a lot of people report, “I noticed something terrible happened to my partner and I know this is exactly the moment it happened where my child had an accident and I knew that was happening and the child was in a different town.” So maybe it’s a false memory where this is later on mistakenly attributed, but a lot of people think that this is not the correct explanation. So if something like this was real, what would it mean? It probably would mean that either your body is an antenna that is sending information over all sorts of channels, like maybe just electromagnetic radio signals that you’re sending over long distances and you get attuned to another person that you spend enough time with to get a few bits out of the ether to figure out what this person is doing.
Or maybe it’s also when you are very close to somebody and you become empathetic with them. What happens that is that you go into a resonance state with them, right? Similar to when people go into a seance and they go into a trance state and they start shifting a ouija board around on the table. I think what happens is that their minds go by their nervous systems into a resonance state in which they basically create something like a shared dream between them.
So you basically by, next to a big, next to somebody, you pick up some of their vibes, and feel without looking at them what they’re feeling in this moment. And it’s difficult for you if you’re very empathetic to detach yourself from it and have an emotional state that is completely independent from your environment. People who are highly empathetic are describing this. And now imagine that a lot of organisms on this planet have representations of the environment and operate like this and they are adjacent to each other and overlapping, so there’s going to be some degree in which there is basically some change interaction and we are forming some slightly shared representation and no relatively few neuroscientists who consider this possibility. I think big rarity in this regard is Michael Levin who is considering these things in earnest.
And I stumbled on this train of thought mostly by noticing that the tasks of a neuron can be fulfilled by other cells as well that can send different typed chemical messages and physical messages to their adjacent cells and learn when to do this and when not, make this conditional and become universal function approximators. The only thing that they cannot do is telegraph information over axons very quickly, over long distances. So neurons in this perspective are especially adapted telegraph cell that has evolved, so we can move our muscles very fast, but our body is in principle able to also make models of the world just much, much slower.
I thought it needs to be a big body of knowledge that I can just study and that works, and so I entered studies and philosophy and computer science and later psychology and a bit of neuroscience and so on, and I was disappointed by what I found because I found that the questions of how consciousness and so on works, how emotion works, how it’s possible that the system can experience anything, how motivation emerges in the mind were not being answered by the authorities that I met and the schools that were around. And instead I found that with individual thinkers that had useful ideas that sometimes were good, sometimes were not so good. Sometimes were adopted by a large group of people, sometimes were rejected by large groups of people, but for me it was much more interesting to see these minds as individuals. And in my perspective, thinking is still something that is done not in groups that has to be done by individuals.
So when you ask your school teacher, why does two plus two equal four, does your school teacher give you the right answer? It’s a simple game. And there are many simple games that you could play and most of those games that you could just take different rules would not lead to an interesting arithmetic. And so it’s just an exploration, but you can try what happens if you take different axioms and here is how you build axioms and derive addition from them, and a built addition is some basically syntactic sugar in it. I wish that somebody would have opened me this vista and explained to me how I can build a language in my own mind and from which I can derive what I’m seeing and how I can make geometry and counting and all the number games that we are playing in our life, and on the other hand, I felt that I learned a lot of this while I was programming as a child.
When you start out with a computer like a Commodore 64 which doesn’t have a lot of functionality, it’s relatively easy to see how a bunch of relatively simple circuits are just basically performing hashes between bit patterns and how you can build the entirety of mathematics and computation on top of this and all the representational languages that you need.
And your own interactions in the scene are also not completely separate from the interactions of the other individual in the scene, but there is some resonance that is going on where we also have a degree of shared mental representations and shared empathy due to being in the same space and having vibes between each other.
And I think we probably have to rediscover that, that plants have software running on them and we already did. You notice that there is a control system in the plant that connects every part of the plant to every other part of the plant and produces coherent behavior in the plant? That is of course much, much slower than the coherent behavior in an animal, like us, that is a nervous system that where everything is synchronized much, much faster by the neurons, but what you also notice is that if a plant is sitting next to another plant, you have a very old tree and this tree is building some kind of information highway along its cells so it can send information from its leaves to its roots and from some part of the root to another part of the roots.
And as a fungus living next to the tree, the fungus can probably piggyback on the communication between the cells of the tree and send its own signals to the tree and vice versa, the tree might be able to send information to the fungus because after all, how would they pull a viable firewall if that other organism is sitting next to them all the time and it’s never moving away, so they will have to get along, and over a long enough timeframe the networks of roots in the forest and all the other plants that are there and the fungi that are there might be forming something like a biological internet.
And so if you think about what the mind is, it’s a bunch of activation waves that form coherent patterns and process information and in a way that are colonizing an environment well enough to allow the continuous sustenance of the mind, the continuous stability and self degradation of the mind, then it’s conceivable that we can link into this biological internet. Not necessarily at the speed of our nervous system, but maybe at the speed of our body, and make some kind of subconscious connection to the world where we use our body as an antenna into biologic information processing.
Now these ideas are completely speculative. I don’t know if any of that is true, but if that was true, and if you want to explain telepathy, I think it’s much more likely that such that telepathy could be explained using such mechanisms rather than discovered quantum processes that would break the standard model of physics.
But we can basically have this oceanic state in which we have no boundaries and are one with everything, and a lot of meditators call this the non-dual state because you no longer have the separation between self and world. And as I said, you can explain the state relatively simply without pan-psychism or anything else, but just by breaking down the constructed boundary between self and world and our own mind, but if you combine this with the notion that the systems are physically interacting to the point where their representations are merging and interacting with each other, you would literally implement something like this. It would still be a representational state where you would not be one with physics itself. It would still be cross-grained, would still be much slower than physics itself, but it would be a representation in which you become aware that you’re part of some global information processing system like thought and a global mind, and a conscious thought that coexisting with many other self-reflexive thoughts.
But I believe that it is a very beneficial technology that allows us to create more interesting stuff and make the world more beautiful and fascinating if we find to build it into our life in the right ways. I’m quite fascinated by these large language models, but I also think that they are by no means the final development. It’s interesting to see how this development progresses. One thing that the out-of-the-box vanilla language models have as a limitation is that they have still some limited coherence and ability to construct complexity. Even though they exceed human abilities to do what they can do one shot, typically, when you write a text with a language model or using it or when you write code with a language model, it’s not one shot because there won’t be bugs in your program and design errors and compiler error and so on.
Your language model can help you to fix those things. But this process is out of the box not automated yet. There is a management process that also needs to be done. There are some interesting developments BabyAGI and so on that are trying to automate this management process as well. I suspect that soon we are going to see a bunch of cognitive architectures where every module is in some sense a language model or something equivalent. Between the language models, we exchange suitable data structures, not English, and produce compound behavior of this whole thing.
The way to make a language model coherent is probably not to use reinforcement learning until it only gives you one possible answer that is linking to its source data, but it’s using this as a component in the larger system that can also be built by the language model or is enabled by language model structured components or using different technologies. I suspect that language models will be an important stepping stone in developing different types of systems. One thing that is really missing in the form of language models that we have today is real-time world coupling, right? It’s difficult to do perception with a language model and motor control with a language model. Instead, you would need to have different type of thing that is working with it. Also, the language model is a little bit obscuring what its actual functionality is. Some people associate the structure of the neural network of the language model with the nervous system.
I think that’s the wrong intuition. The neural networks are unlike nervous system. They are more like 100-step functions that use differentiable linear algebra to approximate correlation between adjacent brain states. It’s basically a function that moves the system from one representational state to the next representational state. So if you try to map this into a metaphor that is closer to our brain, imagine that you would take a language model or a model like DELI that you use… For instance, this image-guided diffusion to approximate and camera image and use the activation state of the neural network to interpret the camera image, which in principle I think will be possible very soon. You do this periodically, and now you look at these patterns, how when this thing interacts with the world periodically look like as in time, and these time slices, they are somewhat equivalent to the activation state of the brain at a given moment.
Once you have such an input, neurons become trainable, and you can train them to perform computations by exchanging messages with other neurons and parts of the signals that they’re exchanging and parts of the computation that are performing are control messages that perform management tasks for other neurons and other cells also suspect that the brain does not stop at the boundary of neurons to other cells, but many adjacent cells will be involved intimately in the functionality of the brain and will be instrumental in distributing rewards and in imagining its functionality.
In many ways, people when they perform reasoning are emulating what other people wrote about reasoning, right? It’s difficult to really draw this boundary. When François Chollet says that these models are only interpolating between what they saw and what other people are doing. Well, if you give them all the latent dimensions, it can be extracted from the internet. What’s missing? Maybe there is almost everything there. If you’re not sufficiently informed by these dimensions and you need more, I think it’s not difficult to increase the temperature in the large language model to the point that is producing stuff that is maybe 90% nonsense and 10% viable and combine this with some prover that is trying to filter out the viable parts from the nonsense in the same way as our own thinking works. When we are very creative, we increase the temperature in our own mind, and we recreate hypothetical universes and solutions, most of which will not work.
Then we test and we test by building a core that is internally coherent and we use reasoning strategies that use some axiomatic consistency by which we can identify those strategies and thoughts and subuniverses that are viable and that can expand our thinking. If you look at the language models, they have clear limitations right now. One of them is they’re not coupled to the world in real time in the way in which our nervous systems are. It’s difficult for them to observe themselves in the universe and to observe what universe they’re in. Second, they don’t do real-time learnings. They basically get only trained with algorithms that rely on the data being available in batches, so it can be parallelized and run sufficiently on the network and so on. Real-time learning would be very slow so far and inefficient.
That’s clearly something that our nervous systems can do to some degree. There is a problem with these models being coherent, and I suspect that all these problems are solvable without a technological revolution. We don’t need fundamentally new algorithms to change that. For instance, you can enlarge in the context window, and thereby basically create working memory in which you train everything that happens during the day. If that is not sufficient, you add a database and you write some clever mechanisms that the system learns to use to swap out in and out stuff from its prompt context. If that is not sufficient, if your database is full in the evening, overnight, you just train. If system is going to sleep and dream and is going to train the staff from its database into the larger model, but fine-tuning it, building additional layers, and so on.
Then the next day, it starts with a fresh database in the morning with fresh ice has integrated all this stuff. When you talk to people and you have strong disagreements about something, which means that in their mind they have a faulty belief or you have a faulty belief, there’s a lot of dependencies on it. Very often, you will not achieve agreement in one session, but you need to sleep about this once or multiple times before you have integrated all these necessary changes in your mind. Maybe it’s already somewhat similar, right?
What I also found interesting is based on the observation that ChatGPT is pretty good at translating between programing languages, but sometimes there’s difficulty to write very long coherent algorithms that you need to write them as human author. Why not design a language that is suitable for this? Some kind of pseudocode that is more relaxed than Python. That allows you to sometimes specify a problem vaguely in human terms and let ChatGPT take care of the rest. You can use ChatGPT to develop that syntax for it and develop new programming paradigms in this way. We very soon get to the point where this age-old question for us computer scientists, what is the best programing language, and can we write a better programing language? Now I think that almost every serious computer scientist goes through a phase like this in their life.
This question that is almost no longer relevant because what is different between the programming language is not what they let the computer do, but what they let you think about what the computer should be doing. Now the ChatGPT becomes an interface to this in which you can specify in many, many ways what the computer should be doing and ChatGPT or some other language model or combination of system is going to take care of the rest.
Sometimes it’s difficult to get the necessary strength and energy to do this and independence. The worst you feel, the harder it is. But it’s something that we learn. It’s also this thing that we are usually incomplete, right? I’m a rare mind, which means I’m a mind that is incomplete in ways that are harder to complete. For me, it might have been harder to initially to find the right relationships and friends that complete me to the degree that I become an almost functional human being.
While this model is the deepfake, our own consciousness is also as if it’s virtual, right? It’s not physical. Our consciousness is a representation of a self-reflexive observer that only exists in patterns of interaction between cells. It is not a physical object in the sense that exists in base reality, but it’s really a representational object that develops its causal power only from a certain modeling perspective.
But the task of creating coherence in real-time in a self-organizing system by keeping yourself coherent so the system is reflexive, that is something that the language models don’t need to do. There is no causal need for the system to be conscious in the same way as we are. For me, it would be very interesting to experiment with this, to basically build a system like a CAT probably should be careful at first, build something that’s small, that’s limited resources that we can control, and study how systems notice a self-model, how they become self-aware in real-time. I think it might be a good idea to not start with the language model but to start from scratch using principles of self-organization.
And of course we can create an external tool that is prompting our language model always into the same semblance of ground truth, but it’s not like the internal structure is causally produced by the needs of a being to survive in the universe, it is produced by imitating structure on the internet.
And there are some similarities like cognition as data compression is an odd trope, Solomonoff induction where you are trying to understand intelligence as predicting future observations from past observations, which is intrinsic to data compression.
And predictive coding is a paradigm that there’s boundary between neuroscience and physics and computer science, so it’s not something that is completely alien, but this radical thing that you only do in next-token prediction and see what happens is something where most people, I think, were surprised that this works so well.
So, if you can build a system in which the simultaneity gets engineered into it, maybe you have a benefit that you can exploit that is not available to the biological system and that you should not discard right away.
Is that kind of what we’ve been talking about, this kind of external source of coherence and inspiration of how to take the leap into the unknown that we humans do? Man’s search for meaning, LLM’s search for meaning.
There is something that is being built, right? There is a game management that is being built. There is a language of thought that is being developed that allows different parts of the mind to talk to each other, and this is a bit of a speculative hypothesis that this language of thought is there, but I suspect that it’s important for the way in which our own minds work. And building these principles into a system might be a more straightforward way to a first person AI, so to something that first creates an intentional self and then creates a personal self.
So, the way in which this seems to be working, I think, is that when the game engine is built in your mind, it’s not just following gradients where you are stimulated by the environment and then end up with having a solution to how the world works. I suspect that building this game engine in your own mind does require intelligence, it’s a constructive task where at times you need to reason, and this is a task that we are fulfilling in the first years of our life.
So, during the first year of its life, an infant is building a lot of structure about the world that does inquire experiments and some first principles, reasoning and so on. And in this time there is usually no personal self. There is a first person perspective, but it’s not a person. This notion that you are a human being that is interacting in a social context and is confronted with an immutable world in which objects are fixed and can no longer be changed, in which the dream can no longer be influenced, it’s something that emerges a little bit later in our life.
And I personally suspect that this is something that our ancestors had known and we have forgotten because I suspect that it’s there in plain sight in Genesis 1, in this first book of the Bible, where it’s being described that this creative spirit is hovering over the substrate and then is creating a boundary between the world model and sphere of ideas, earth and heaven, as they’re being described there, and then it’s creating contrast and then dimensions and then space, and then it creates organic shapes and solids and liquids and builds a world from them and creates plants and animals, give them all their names.
And once that’s done, it creates another spirit in its own image, but it creates it as men and women, as something that thinks of itself as a human being and puts it into this world. And the Christians mistranslate this, I suspect, when they say this is the description of the creation of the physical universe by a supernatural being. I think this is literally a description of how in every mind a universe is being created as some kind of game engine by a creative spirit, our first consciousness that emerges in our mind even before we are born and that creates the interaction between organism and world. And once that is built and trained, the personal self is being created and we only remember being the personal self, we no longer remember how we created the game engine.
And we all do this, I think, earlier in small glimpses, and maybe we’re sometimes we can remember what it was like when we were a small child and get some glimpses into how it’s been, but for most people that rarely happens.
So, when you manage to understand how the mind is producing pain and pleasure and fear and love and so on, then you can take charge of this and you get agency of whether you’re suffer. Technically, what pain and pleasure is, they are learning signals, right? Part of your brain is sending a learning signal to another part of the brain to improve its performance. And sometimes this doesn’t work because this trainer who sense the signal does not have a good model of how to improve the performance, so it’s sending a signal, but the performance doesn’t get better and then it might crank up the pain and it gets worse and worse and the behavior of the system may be even deteriorating as a result, but until this is resolved, this regulation issue, your pain is increasing, and this is, I think, typically what you describe as suffering.
So, in this sense, you could say that pain is very natural and helpful, but suffering is the result of a regulation problem in which you try to regulate something that cannot actually be regulated, and that could be resolved if you would be able to get at the level of your mind where the pain signal is being created and rerouted and improve the regulation. And a lot of people get there, if you are a monk who is spending decades reflecting about how their own psyche works, you can get to the point where you realize that suffering is really a choice and you can choose how your mind is set up.
And I don’t think that AI would stay in the state where the personal self doesn’t get agency or this model, what the system has about itself, it doesn’t get agency how it’s actually implemented. It wouldn’t stay in that state for very long.
I think that his perspective is somewhat similar to the perspective of Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber, and not that Eliezer would be willing to send pipe bombs to anybody to blow them up, but when he wrote this Times article in which he warned about AI being likely to kill everybody and that we would need to stop its development or halt it, I think there is a risk that he’s taking that somebody might get violent if they read this and get really, really scared. So, I think that there is some consideration that he’s making where he’s already going in this direction where he has to take responsibility if something happens and people get harmed.
And the reason why Ted Kaczynski did this, was that from his own perspective, technological society cannot be made sustainable, it’s doomed to fail, it’s going to lead to an environmental and eventually also human holocaust in which we die because of the environmental destruction, the destruction of our food chains, the pollution of the environment. And so, from Kaczynski’s perspective, we need to stop industrialization, we need to stop technology, we need to go back because he didn’t see a way moving forward and I suspect that in some sense there’s a similarity in Eliezer’s thinking to this kind of fear about progress.
And I’m not dismissive about this at all, I take it quite seriously. And I think that there is a chance that could happen, that if we build machines that get control over processes that are crucial for the regulation of life on earth and we no longer have agency to influence what’s happening there, that this might create large scale disasters for us.
And we are only a very small part of that larger thing. We are a species that is able to be coherent a little bit individually over very short timeframes, but as a species, we are not very coherent, as a species, we are children. We basically are very joyful and energetic and experimental and explorative and sometimes desperate and sad and grieving and hurting, but we don’t have a respect for duty as a species. As a species, we do not think about what is our duty to life on earth and to our own survival, so we make decisions that look good in the short run, but in the long run might prove disastrous and I don’t really see a solution to this.
So, in my perspective, as a species, as a civilization, we’re, per default, that. We are in a very beautiful time in which we have found this giant deposit of fossil fuels in the ground and use it to build a fantastic civilization in which we don’t need to worry about food and clothing and housing for the most part in a way that is unprecedented in life on earth for any kind of conscious observer, I think. And this time is probably going to come to an end in a way that is not going to be smooth, and when we crash, it could be also that we go extinct, probably not near term, but ultimately, I don’t have very high hopes that humanity is around in a million years from now.
I don’t think that life on earth will end with us, right? There’s going to be more complexity, there’s more intelligent species after us, there’s probably more interesting phenomena in the history of consciousness, but we can contribute to this. And part of our contribution is that we are currently trying to build thinking systems, systems that are potentially lucid, that understand what they are and what the condition to the universe is and can make choices about this, that are not built from organisms and that are potentially much faster and much more conscious than human beings can be.
And these systems will probably not completely displace life on earth, but they will coexist with it and they will build all sorts of agency in the same way as biological systems build all sorts of agency. And that, to me, is extremely fascinating and it’s probably something that we cannot stop from happening. So, I think right now there is a very good chance that it happens, and there are very few ways in which we can produce a coordinated effect to stop it in the same way as it’s very difficult for us to make a coordinated effort to stop production of carbon dioxide. So, it’s probably going to happen, and the thing that’s going to happen is going to lead to a change of how life on earth is happening, but I don’t think a result is some kind of [inaudible 02:06:16]. It’s not something that’s going to dramatically reduce the complexity in favor of something stupid. I think it’s going to make life on earth and consciousness on earth way more interesting.
And so, what we should be doing is, we should be working towards creating this equilibrium by working as hard as we can in all possible directions. At least that’s the way in which I understand the gist of effective accelerationism. And so, when he asked me what I think about his position, I said it’s a very beautiful position and I suspect it’s wrong, but not for obvious reasons. And in this tweet I tried to make a joke about my intuition, about what might be possibly wrong about it. So, the Roko’s Basililisk and the Paperclip Maximizers are both boogeymen of the AI doomers.
Roko’s Basililisk is the idea that there could be an AI that is going to punish everybody for eternity by simulating them if they don’t help in creating Roko’s Basililisk. It’s probably a very good idea to get AI companies funded, by going to resist to tell them, “Give us a million dollars or it’s going to be a very ugly afterlife.”
The other one is the Paperclip Maximizer, this idea that you could build some kind of golem that once starting to build paperclips is going to turn everything into paperclips.
And consciousness itself doesn’t have an identity, it’s a law. Basically, if you build an arrangement of processing matter in a particular way, the following thing is going to happen, and the consciousness that you have is functionally not different from my consciousness. It’s still a self-reflexive principle of agency that is just experiencing a different story, different desires, different coupling to the world and so on.
And once you accept that consciousness is a unifiable principle that is law-like and doesn’t have an identity, and you realize that you can just link up to some much larger body, the whole perspective of uploading changes dramatically. You suddenly realize uploading is probably not about dissecting your brain synapse by synapse and RNA fragment by RNA fragment and trying to get this all into a simulation, but it’s by extending the substrate, by making it possible for you to move from your brain substrate into a larger substrate and merge with what you find there.
And you don’t want to upload your knowledge because on the other side, there’s all of the knowledge, right? It’s not just yours, but every possibility or the only thing that you need to know, what are your personal secrets? Not that the other side doesn’t know your personal secrets already, maybe it doesn’t know which one were yours, right? Like a psychiatrist or a psychologist also knows all the kinds of personal secrets that people have, they just don’t know which ones are yours.
And so, transmitting yourself on the other side is mostly about transmitting your aesthetics. This thing that makes you special, the architecture of your perspective, the way in which you look at the world, and it’s more like a complex attitude along many dimensions. And that’s something that can be measured by observation or by interaction. So, imagine a system that is so empathetic with you that you create a shared state that is extending beyond your body, and suddenly you notice that on the other side, the substrate is so much richer than the substrate that you have inside of your own body, and maybe you still want to have a body and you create yourself a new one that you like more, or maybe you will spend most of your time in the world of thought.
And so, in this sense, there will be agents in all sorts of substrates and directions that all have their own goals, and when they’re not sustainable, then these agents will cease to exist. Or when the agent feels that it’s done with its own mission, it’ll cease to exist. In the same way when you conclude a thought, the thought is going to wrap up and gives control over to other thoughts in your own mind.
So, there is no single thing that you need to do, but I observe myself as a being, that sometimes I’m a parent and then I have an identification and a job as a parent, and sometimes I am an agent of consciousness on earth, and then from this perspective, there’s other stuff that is important. So, this is my main issue with Eliezer’s perspective, that he’s basically marrying himself to a very narrow human aesthetic. And that narrow human aesthetic is a temporary thing. Humanity is a temporary species, like most of the species on this planet are only around for a while, and then they get replaced by other species in a similar way as our own physical organism is around here for a while and then gets replaced by a next generation of human beings that are adapted to changing life circumstances and average via mutation and selection.
And it’s only when we have AI and become completely software that we can become infinitely adaptable and we don’t have this generational and species change anymore. So, if you take this larger perspective and you realize it’s really not about us, it’s not about Eliezer or humanity, but it’s about life on earth or it’s about defeating entropy for as long as we can while being as interesting as we can, then the perspective changes dramatically and preventing AI from this perspective looks like a very big sin.
And many of these things are disappearing now, because we feel that our parents might have no idea about how we are living. And the environments that we grew up in, the cultures that we grew up in [inaudible 02:25:18] that our parents existed in might have no ability to teach us how to deal with this new world. And for many people that’s actually true. But it doesn’t mean that within one generation we build something that is more magical and more sustainable and more beautiful. Instead, we often end up as an attempt to produce something that looks beautiful. I was very veted out by the aesthetics of the Vision Pro at that by Apple and not so much, because I don’t like the technology. I’m very curious about what it’s going to be like and don’t have an opinion yet, but the aesthetics of the presentation and so on. So uncanny [inaudible 02:25:58] esque to me the characters being extremely plastic, living in some hypothetical mid-century furniture museum.
So there can be many ways in which we can import and trade semiconductors from other companies and places. We just need to make sure that nobody can cut us off from it, because that would be a disaster for this kind of society and world. And so there are many things that need to be done to make our style of life possible. And then with this, I don’t mean just capitalism, environmental structure and consumer resin and creature comforts. I mean an idea of life in which we are determined not by some kind of king or dictator, but in which individuals can determine themselves to the largest possible degree. And to me, this is something that this western world is still trying to embody and it’s a very valuable idea that we shouldn’t give up too early. And from this perspective, the US is a system of interleaving clubs and an entrepreneur is a special club founder.
It’s somebody who makes a club that is producing things that are economically viable. And to do this, it requires a lot of people who are dedicating a significant part of their life for working for this particular kind of club. And the entrepreneurs picking the initial set of rules and the mission and vision and aesthetics for the club and make sure that it works. But the people that are in there need to be protected if they sacrifice part of their life, there need to be rules that tell how they’re being taken care of even after they leave the club and so on. So there’s a large body of rules that have been created by our rule giving clubs and that are enforced bio enforcement collapse and so on. And some of these collapse have to be monopolies for game theoretic reasons, which also makes them more open to corruption and less harder to update.
And this is an ongoing discussion and process that takes place. But the beauty of this idea that there is no centralized king that is extracting from the peasants and breeding the peasants into serving the king and fulfilling all the walls like and an anal, but that there is a freedom of association and corporations are one of them. It’s something that took me some time to realize. So I do think that corporations are dangerous. They need to be protections against overreach of corporations that can do regular to recapture and prevent open source from competing with corporations by imposing rules that make it impossible for a small group of kids to come together to build their own language model.
Because open AI has convinced the US that you need to have some kind of FDA process that you need to go through that costs many million dollars before you are able to train a language model. So this is important to make sure that this doesn’t happen. So I think that open AI and Google are good things if these good things are kept in check in such a way that all the other collapse can still being founded and all the other forms of collapse that are desirable can still co-exist with them.
A short game is, for instance, cancer is playing a shorter game than your organism. Cancer is an organism playing a shorter game than the regular organism. And because the cancer cannot procreate beyond the organism, except for some infectious cancers like the ones that eradicated the Tasmanian devils, you typically end up with the situation where the organism dies together with the cancer, because the cancer has destroyed the larger system due to playing a shorter game. And so ideally you want to, I think build agents that play the longest possible games and the longest possible games is to keep entropy at bay as long as possible by doing, while doing interesting stuff.
So I think it would be very important to build conscious AI and do this as the primary goal. So not just say we want to build a useful tool that we can use for all sorts of things and then we have to make sure that the impact on the labor market is something that is not too disruptive and manageable and the impact on the copyright holder is manageable and not too disruptive and so on. I don’t think that’s the most important game to be played. I think that we will see extremely large disruptions of the status quo that are quite unpredictable at this point. And I just personally want to make sure that some of the stuff on the other side is interesting and conscious.
Twitter
And I think Paul made this intentionally, because he wanted to show Elon Musk that blocking people for setting a link is completely counter to any idea of free speech that he intended to bring to Twitter. And basically seeing that Elon was way less principled in his thinking there and is much more experimental and many of the things that he is trying, they pan out very differently in a digital society than they pan out in a car company, because the effect is very different, because everything that you do in a digital society is going to have real world cultural.
And so basically I find it quite regrettable that this guy is able to become defacto the Pope, right? Twitter has more active members than the Catholic Church and he doesn’t get it. The power and responsibility that he has and the ability to create something in a society that is lasting and that is producing a digital ago in a way that has never existed before, where we build a social network on top of a social network, an actual society on top of the algorithms. So this is something that is hope still in the future and still in the cards, but it’s something that exists in small parts. I find that the corner of Twitter that I’m in is extremely pleasant. It’s just when I take a few steps outside of it is not very wholesome anymore. And the way in which people interact with strangers suggest that it’s not a civilized society yet.
And I felt that this general stance is creating a lot of liability for him, because really a lot of people take offense at him being not like their Carnegie character who is always smooth and make sure that everybody likes him. So I really respect that he is willing to take that risk and to be wrong in public and to offend people. And he doesn’t do this in any bad way. It’s just most people feel or not all people recognize this. And so I can be much more aggressive with him than it can be with many other people who don’t play the same game, because he understands the way and the spirit in which I respond to him.
And eventually this became so big that we could turn this into some incorporated form and it became regular restaurant at some point. Or we did the same thing with the music movie theater. We would not be able to afford to pay 12 marks to watch a movie, but why not just create our own movie theater and then invite people to pay and we would rent the movies for in a way in which a movie theater does, but it would be a community movie theater that which everybody you wants to help can watch for free and build this thing and renovates the building.
And so we ended up creating lots and lots of infrastructure. And I think when you’re young and you don’t have money, move to a place where this is still happening. Move to one of those places that are undeveloped and where you get a critical mass of other people who are starting to build infrastructure to live in. And that’s super satisfying, because you’re not just creating infrastructure, but we are creating a small society that is building culture and ways to interact with each other. And that’s much, much more satisfying than going into some kind of chain and get your needs met by ordering food from this chain and so on.
It’s all the same experience of being a conscious being in the world, and you do have some choice about who you want to be more than any other animal has. That to me is fascinating. And so I think that rather than asking yourself what is the one way to be, think about what are the possibilities that I have? What would be the most interesting way to be that I can be?
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:15 – Stages of life
- 13:37 – Identity
- 20:12 – Enlightenment
- 26:43 – Adaptive Resonance Theory
- 33:31 – Panpsychism
- 43:31 – How to think
- 51:25 – Plants communication
- 1:09:20 – Fame
- 1:34:57 – Happiness
- 1:42:15 – Artificial consciousness
- 1:54:23 – Suffering
- 1:59:08 – Eliezer Yudkowsky
- 2:06:44 – e/acc (Effective Accelerationism)
- 2:12:21 – Mind uploading
- 2:23:11 – Vision Pro
- 2:27:25 – Open source AI
- 2:40:17 – Twitter
- 2:47:33 – Advice for young people
- 2:50:29 – Meaning of life
Introduction
Joscha Bach
There is a certain perspective where you might be thinking, what is the longest possible game that you could be playing? A short game is, for instance, cancer is playing a shorter game than your organism. Cancer is an organism playing a shorter game than the regular organism. Because the cancer cannot procreate beyond the organism, except for some infectious cancers like the ones that eradicated the Tasmanian devils, you typically end up with a situation where the organism dies together with the cancer, because the cancer has destroyed the larger system due to playing a shorter game. Ideally, you want to, I think, build agents that play the longest possible games. The longest possible games is to keep entropy at bay as long as possible, by doing interesting stuff.
There is a certain perspective where you might be thinking, what is the longest possible game that you could be playing? A short game is, for instance, cancer is playing a shorter game than your organism. Cancer is an organism playing a shorter game than the regular organism. Because the cancer cannot procreate beyond the organism, except for some infectious cancers like the ones that eradicated the Tasmanian devils, you typically end up with a situation where the organism dies together with the cancer, because the cancer has destroyed the larger system due to playing a shorter game. Ideally, you want to, I think, build agents that play the longest possible games. The longest possible games is to keep entropy at bay as long as possible, by doing interesting stuff.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Joscha Bach, his third time on this podcast. Joscha is one of the most brilliant, and fascinating minds in the world, exploring the nature of intelligence, consciousness, and computation. He’s one of my favorite humans to talk to about pretty much anything and everything. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, dear friends, here’s Joscha Bach.
The following is a conversation with Joscha Bach, his third time on this podcast. Joscha is one of the most brilliant, and fascinating minds in the world, exploring the nature of intelligence, consciousness, and computation. He’s one of my favorite humans to talk to about pretty much anything and everything. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, dear friends, here’s Joscha Bach.
Stages of life
You wrote a post about levels of lucidity. “As we grow older, it becomes apparent that our self-reflexive mind is not just gradually accumulating ideas about itself, but that it progresses in somewhat distinct stages.” There are seven of the stages. Stage one, reactive survival (infant). Stage two, personal self (young child). Stage three, social self (adolescence, domesticated adult). Stage four is rational agency (self-direction). Stage five is self-authoring, that’s full adult. You’ve achieved wisdom, but there’s two more stages. Stage six is enlightenment, stage seven is transcendence. Can you explain each, or the interesting parts of each of these stages, and what’s your sense why there are stages of this, of lucidity as we progress through life in this too short life?
Joscha Bach
This model is derived from concept by the psychologist Robert Kegan, and he talks about the development of the self as a process that happens in principle by some kind of reverse engineering of the mind, where you gradually become aware of yourself, and thereby build structure that allows you to interact deeper with the world and yourself. I found myself using this model not so much as a developmental model. I’m not even sure if it’s a very good developmental model, because I saw my children not progressing exactly like that. I also suspect that you don’t go through these stages necessarily in succession, and it’s not that you work through one stage and then you get into the next one. Sometimes, you revisit them. Sometimes, stuff is happening in parallel. But it’s, I think, a useful framework to look at what’s present, and the structure of a person, and how they interact with the world, and how they relate to themselves.
This model is derived from concept by the psychologist Robert Kegan, and he talks about the development of the self as a process that happens in principle by some kind of reverse engineering of the mind, where you gradually become aware of yourself, and thereby build structure that allows you to interact deeper with the world and yourself. I found myself using this model not so much as a developmental model. I’m not even sure if it’s a very good developmental model, because I saw my children not progressing exactly like that. I also suspect that you don’t go through these stages necessarily in succession, and it’s not that you work through one stage and then you get into the next one. Sometimes, you revisit them. Sometimes, stuff is happening in parallel. But it’s, I think, a useful framework to look at what’s present, and the structure of a person, and how they interact with the world, and how they relate to themselves.
It’s more like philosophical framework that allows you to talk about how minds work. At first, when we are born, we don’t have a personal self yet, I think. Instead, we have an attentional self, and this attentional self is initially in the infant tasked, is building a world model, and also an initial model of the self. But mostly, it’s building a game engine in the brain that is tracking sensory data, and uses it to explain it. In some sense, you could compare it to a game engine like Minecraft or so, colors and sounds. People are all not physical objects. They’re creation of our mind at a certain level. Of course, screening models that are mathematical that use geometry, and that use manipulation of objects, and so on to create scenes in which we can find ourselves, and interact with them.
Lex Fridman
Minecraft?
Minecraft?
Joscha Bach
Yeah. This personal self is something that is more or less created after the world is finished, after it’s trained into the system, after it has been constructed. This personal self is an agent that interacts with the outside world. The outside world is not the world of quantum mechanics, not the physical universe, but it’s the model that has been generated in our own mind, right? This is us, and we experience ourself interacting with that outside world that is created inside of our own mind. Outside of ourself, there’s feelings, and they presented our interface with this outside world. They pose problems to us. These feelings are basically attitudes that our mind is computing, that tell us what’s needed in the world, the things that we are drawn to, the things that we are afraid of. We are tasked with solving this problem of satisfying the needs, avoiding the aversions, following on our inner commitments and so on, and also modeling ourselves, and building the next stage.
Yeah. This personal self is something that is more or less created after the world is finished, after it’s trained into the system, after it has been constructed. This personal self is an agent that interacts with the outside world. The outside world is not the world of quantum mechanics, not the physical universe, but it’s the model that has been generated in our own mind, right? This is us, and we experience ourself interacting with that outside world that is created inside of our own mind. Outside of ourself, there’s feelings, and they presented our interface with this outside world. They pose problems to us. These feelings are basically attitudes that our mind is computing, that tell us what’s needed in the world, the things that we are drawn to, the things that we are afraid of. We are tasked with solving this problem of satisfying the needs, avoiding the aversions, following on our inner commitments and so on, and also modeling ourselves, and building the next stage.
After we have this personal self and stage two online, many people form a social self. This social self allows the individual to experience themselves as part of a group. It’s basically this thing that when you are playing in a team, for instance, you don’t notice yourself just as a single node that is reaching out into the world, but you’re also looking down. You’re looking down from this entire group, and you see how this group is looking at this individual, and everybody in the group is, in some sense, emulating this group spirit to some degree. In this state, people are forming their opinions by assimilating them from this group mind. They basically gain the ability to act a little bit like a hive mind.
Lex Fridman
But are you also modeling the interaction of how opinion shapes and forms through the interaction of the individual nodes within the group?
But are you also modeling the interaction of how opinion shapes and forms through the interaction of the individual nodes within the group?
Joscha Bach
Yeah. Basically, the way in which people do it in this stage is that they experience what are the opinions of my environment. They experience the relationship that they have to their environment, and they resonate with people around them, and get more opinions through this interaction to the way in which they relate to others. At stage four, you basically understand that stuff is true and false independently, what other people believe, and you have agency over your own beliefs. In that stage, you basically discover epistemology, the rules about determining what’s true and false.
Yeah. Basically, the way in which people do it in this stage is that they experience what are the opinions of my environment. They experience the relationship that they have to their environment, and they resonate with people around them, and get more opinions through this interaction to the way in which they relate to others. At stage four, you basically understand that stuff is true and false independently, what other people believe, and you have agency over your own beliefs. In that stage, you basically discover epistemology, the rules about determining what’s true and false.
Lex Fridman
You start to learn how to think?
You start to learn how to think?
Joscha Bach
Yes. I mean, at some level, you’re always thinking you are constructing things, and I believe that this ability to reason about your mental representation is what we mean by thinking. It’s an intrinsically reflexive process that requires consciousness. Without consciousness, you cannot think. You can generate the content of feelings, and so on outside of consciousness. It’s very hard to be conscious of how your feelings emerge, at least in the early stages of development. But thoughts is something that you always control. If you are a nerd like me, you often have to skip stage three, because you’d like the intuitive empathy with others. Because in order to resonate with a group, you need to have a quite similar architecture. If people are wired differently, then it’s hard for them to resonate with other people, and basically have empathy, which is not the same as compassion, but it is a shared perceptual mental state. Empathy happens not just via inference about the mental states of others, but it’s a perception of what other people feel, and where they’re at.
Yes. I mean, at some level, you’re always thinking you are constructing things, and I believe that this ability to reason about your mental representation is what we mean by thinking. It’s an intrinsically reflexive process that requires consciousness. Without consciousness, you cannot think. You can generate the content of feelings, and so on outside of consciousness. It’s very hard to be conscious of how your feelings emerge, at least in the early stages of development. But thoughts is something that you always control. If you are a nerd like me, you often have to skip stage three, because you’d like the intuitive empathy with others. Because in order to resonate with a group, you need to have a quite similar architecture. If people are wired differently, then it’s hard for them to resonate with other people, and basically have empathy, which is not the same as compassion, but it is a shared perceptual mental state. Empathy happens not just via inference about the mental states of others, but it’s a perception of what other people feel, and where they’re at.
Lex Fridman
Can’t you not have empathy while also not having a similar architecture, cognitive architecture as the others in the group?
Can’t you not have empathy while also not having a similar architecture, cognitive architecture as the others in the group?
Joscha Bach
I think, yes. I experienced that too. But you need to build something that is like a meta architecture. You need to be able to embrace the architecture of the other to some degree, or find some shared common ground. It’s also this issue that, if you are a nerd nomis, often people, basically neurotypical people have difficulty to resonate with you. As a result, they have difficulty understanding you, unless they have enough wisdom to feel what’s going on there.
I think, yes. I experienced that too. But you need to build something that is like a meta architecture. You need to be able to embrace the architecture of the other to some degree, or find some shared common ground. It’s also this issue that, if you are a nerd nomis, often people, basically neurotypical people have difficulty to resonate with you. As a result, they have difficulty understanding you, unless they have enough wisdom to feel what’s going on there.
Lex Fridman
Well, isn’t the whole process of the stage three to figure out the API to the other humans that have different architecture, and you yourself publish public documentation for the API that people can interact with for you? Isn’t this the whole process of socializing?
Well, isn’t the whole process of the stage three to figure out the API to the other humans that have different architecture, and you yourself publish public documentation for the API that people can interact with for you? Isn’t this the whole process of socializing?
Joscha Bach
My experience as a child growing up was that I did not find any way to interface with the stage-three people, and they didn’t do that with me, so took me-
My experience as a child growing up was that I did not find any way to interface with the stage-three people, and they didn’t do that with me, so took me-
Lex Fridman
Did you try?
Did you try?
Joscha Bach
Yeah, of course, I tried it very hard. But it was only when I entered the mathematics school at the ninth grade, where lots of other nerds were present, that I found people that I could deeply resonate with, and had the impression that, yes, I have friends now. I found my own people. Before that, I felt extremely lonely in the world. There was basically nobody I could connect to. I remember, there was one moment in all these years, where I was in… There was a school exchange, and it was a Russian boy, a kid from the Russian garrison stationed in Eastern Germany who visited our school, and we played a game of chess against each other, and we looked into each other’s eyes, and we sat there for two hours playing this game of chess. I had the impression, this is the human being, he understands what I understand, we didn’t even speak the same language.
Yeah, of course, I tried it very hard. But it was only when I entered the mathematics school at the ninth grade, where lots of other nerds were present, that I found people that I could deeply resonate with, and had the impression that, yes, I have friends now. I found my own people. Before that, I felt extremely lonely in the world. There was basically nobody I could connect to. I remember, there was one moment in all these years, where I was in… There was a school exchange, and it was a Russian boy, a kid from the Russian garrison stationed in Eastern Germany who visited our school, and we played a game of chess against each other, and we looked into each other’s eyes, and we sat there for two hours playing this game of chess. I had the impression, this is the human being, he understands what I understand, we didn’t even speak the same language.
Lex Fridman
I wonder if your life could have been different if you knew that it’s okay to be different, to have a different architecture, whether accepting that the interface is hard to figure out, it takes a long time to figure out and it’s okay to be different. In fact, it’s beautiful to be different.
I wonder if your life could have been different if you knew that it’s okay to be different, to have a different architecture, whether accepting that the interface is hard to figure out, it takes a long time to figure out and it’s okay to be different. In fact, it’s beautiful to be different.
Joscha Bach
It was not my main concern. My main concern was mostly that I was alone. It was not the so much the question, is it okay to be the way I am? I couldn’t do much about it, so I had to deal with it. But my main issue was that I was not sure if I would ever meet anybody growing up that I would connect to at such a deep level that I would feel that I could belong.
It was not my main concern. My main concern was mostly that I was alone. It was not the so much the question, is it okay to be the way I am? I couldn’t do much about it, so I had to deal with it. But my main issue was that I was not sure if I would ever meet anybody growing up that I would connect to at such a deep level that I would feel that I could belong.
Lex Fridman
So there’s a visceral, undeniable feeling of being alone?
So there’s a visceral, undeniable feeling of being alone?
Joscha Bach
Yes. I noticed the same thing when I came into the math school that I think at least half, probably two thirds of these kids were severely traumatized as children growing up, and in large part, due to being alone, because they couldn’t find anybody to relate to.
Yes. I noticed the same thing when I came into the math school that I think at least half, probably two thirds of these kids were severely traumatized as children growing up, and in large part, due to being alone, because they couldn’t find anybody to relate to.
Lex Fridman
Don’t you think everybody’s alone, deep down?
Don’t you think everybody’s alone, deep down?
Joscha Bach
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
No.
No.
Joscha Bach
I’m not alone.
I’m not alone.
Lex Fridman
Fair enough.
Fair enough.
Joscha Bach
I’m not alone anymore. It took me some time to update, and to get over the trauma time and so on, but I felt that in my 20s, I had lots of friends, and I had my place in the world, and I had no longer doubts that I would never be alone again.
I’m not alone anymore. It took me some time to update, and to get over the trauma time and so on, but I felt that in my 20s, I had lots of friends, and I had my place in the world, and I had no longer doubts that I would never be alone again.
Lex Fridman
Is there some aspect to which we’re alone together? You don’t see a deep loneliness in inside yourself still?
Is there some aspect to which we’re alone together? You don’t see a deep loneliness in inside yourself still?
Joscha Bach
No. Sorry.
No. Sorry.
Lex Fridman
Okay. That’s the nonlinear progression through the stages, I suppose. You caught up on stage three at some point.
Okay. That’s the nonlinear progression through the stages, I suppose. You caught up on stage three at some point.
Joscha Bach
Correct. We’re at stage four, and so basically I find that many nerds jump straight into stage four, bypassing stage three.
Correct. We’re at stage four, and so basically I find that many nerds jump straight into stage four, bypassing stage three.
Lex Fridman
Do they return to it then, later?
Do they return to it then, later?
Joscha Bach
Yeah, of course. Sometimes, they do. Not always.
Yeah, of course. Sometimes, they do. Not always.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
Their question is basically, do you stay a little bit autistic, or do you catch up? I believe you can catch up. You can build this missing structure, and basically experience yourself as part of a group, learn intuitive empathy, and develop the sense, this perceptual sense of feeling what other people feel. Before that, I could only basically feel this when I was deeply in love with somebody, and we synced.
Their question is basically, do you stay a little bit autistic, or do you catch up? I believe you can catch up. You can build this missing structure, and basically experience yourself as part of a group, learn intuitive empathy, and develop the sense, this perceptual sense of feeling what other people feel. Before that, I could only basically feel this when I was deeply in love with somebody, and we synced.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of friction to feeling that way, it’s only with certain people, as opposed to it comes naturally?
There’s a lot of friction to feeling that way, it’s only with certain people, as opposed to it comes naturally?
Joscha Bach
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It’s frictionless.
It’s frictionless.
Joscha Bach
But this is something that basically later, I felt, started to resolve itself for me to a large degree.
But this is something that basically later, I felt, started to resolve itself for me to a large degree.
Lex Fridman
What was the trick?
What was the trick?
Joscha Bach
In many ways, growing up, and paying attention. Meditation did help. I had some very crucial experiences in getting close to people, building connections, and cuddling a lot in my student years.
In many ways, growing up, and paying attention. Meditation did help. I had some very crucial experiences in getting close to people, building connections, and cuddling a lot in my student years.
Lex Fridman
Really, paying attention to the what is it, to the feeling another human being fully.
Really, paying attention to the what is it, to the feeling another human being fully.
Joscha Bach
Loving other people, and being loved by other people, and building a space in which you can be safe, and can experiment, and touch a lot, and be close to somebody a lot. Over time, basically at some point, you realize, oh, it’s no longer that I feel locked out, but I feel connected, and I experience where somebody else is at. Normally, my mind is racing very fast at a high frequency, so it’s not always working like this. Sometimes works better, sometimes it works less, but also don’t see this as a pressure. It’s more, it’s interesting to observe myself which frequency I’m at, and at which mode somebody else is at.
Loving other people, and being loved by other people, and building a space in which you can be safe, and can experiment, and touch a lot, and be close to somebody a lot. Over time, basically at some point, you realize, oh, it’s no longer that I feel locked out, but I feel connected, and I experience where somebody else is at. Normally, my mind is racing very fast at a high frequency, so it’s not always working like this. Sometimes works better, sometimes it works less, but also don’t see this as a pressure. It’s more, it’s interesting to observe myself which frequency I’m at, and at which mode somebody else is at.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Man, the mind is so beautiful in that way. Sometimes, it comes so natural to me, so easy to pay attention, pay attention to the world fully, to other people fully, and sometimes, the stress over silly things is overwhelming. It’s so interesting that the mind is that rollercoaster in that way.
Yeah. Man, the mind is so beautiful in that way. Sometimes, it comes so natural to me, so easy to pay attention, pay attention to the world fully, to other people fully, and sometimes, the stress over silly things is overwhelming. It’s so interesting that the mind is that rollercoaster in that way.
Identity
Joscha Bach
At stage five, you discover how identity is constructed.
At stage five, you discover how identity is constructed.
Lex Fridman
Self authoring.
Self authoring.
Joscha Bach
Realize that your values are not terminal, but they’re instrumental to achieving a world that you like, and aesthetics that you prefer. The more you understand this, the more you get agency over how your identity is constructed, and you realize that identity and interpersonal interaction is a costume, and you should be able to have agency over that costume, right? It’s useful to be a costume, it tells something to others, and it allows to interface in roles. But being locked into this is a big limitation.
Realize that your values are not terminal, but they’re instrumental to achieving a world that you like, and aesthetics that you prefer. The more you understand this, the more you get agency over how your identity is constructed, and you realize that identity and interpersonal interaction is a costume, and you should be able to have agency over that costume, right? It’s useful to be a costume, it tells something to others, and it allows to interface in roles. But being locked into this is a big limitation.
Lex Fridman
The word costume implies that it’s fraudulent in some way. Is costume a good word for you, like we present ourselves to the world?
The word costume implies that it’s fraudulent in some way. Is costume a good word for you, like we present ourselves to the world?
Joscha Bach
In some sense, I learned a lot about costumes at Burning Man. Before that, I did not really appreciate costumes, and saw them more as uniforms like wearing a suit. If you are working in a bank, or if you are trying to get startup funding from a VC in Switzerland, then you dress up in a particular way. This is mostly to show the other side that you are willing to play by the rules, and you understand what the rules are. But there is something deeper when you are at Burning Man, your costume becomes self-expression, and there is no boundary to the self-expression. You’re basically free to wear what you want to express other people, what you feel like this day, and what kind of interactions you want to have.
In some sense, I learned a lot about costumes at Burning Man. Before that, I did not really appreciate costumes, and saw them more as uniforms like wearing a suit. If you are working in a bank, or if you are trying to get startup funding from a VC in Switzerland, then you dress up in a particular way. This is mostly to show the other side that you are willing to play by the rules, and you understand what the rules are. But there is something deeper when you are at Burning Man, your costume becomes self-expression, and there is no boundary to the self-expression. You’re basically free to wear what you want to express other people, what you feel like this day, and what kind of interactions you want to have.
Lex Fridman
Is the costume a projection of who you are?
Is the costume a projection of who you are?
Joscha Bach
That’s very hard to say, because the costume also depends on what other people see in the costume. This depends on the context that the other people understand, so you have to create something if you want to, that is legible to the other side and that means something to yourself.
That’s very hard to say, because the costume also depends on what other people see in the costume. This depends on the context that the other people understand, so you have to create something if you want to, that is legible to the other side and that means something to yourself.
Lex Fridman
Do we become prisoners of the costume, prisoner everybody expects us to?
Do we become prisoners of the costume, prisoner everybody expects us to?
Joscha Bach
Some people do. But I think that once you realize that you wear a costume at Burning Man, a variety of costumes, realize that you cannot not wear a costume.
Some people do. But I think that once you realize that you wear a costume at Burning Man, a variety of costumes, realize that you cannot not wear a costume.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
Right. Basically, everything that you wear, and present to others is something that is, to some degree, in addition to what you are deep inside.
Right. Basically, everything that you wear, and present to others is something that is, to some degree, in addition to what you are deep inside.
Lex Fridman
This stage in parentheses, you put full adult, wisdom. Why is this full adult? Why would you say this is full, and why is it wisdom?
This stage in parentheses, you put full adult, wisdom. Why is this full adult? Why would you say this is full, and why is it wisdom?
Joscha Bach
It does allow you to understand why other people have different identities from yours, and it allows you to understand that the difference between people who vote for different parties, and might have very different opinions and different value systems, is often the accident of where they’re born, and what happened after that to them, and what traits they got before they were born. At some point, you realize the perspective, where you understand that everybody could be you in a different timeline, if you just flip those bits.
It does allow you to understand why other people have different identities from yours, and it allows you to understand that the difference between people who vote for different parties, and might have very different opinions and different value systems, is often the accident of where they’re born, and what happened after that to them, and what traits they got before they were born. At some point, you realize the perspective, where you understand that everybody could be you in a different timeline, if you just flip those bits.
Lex Fridman
How many costumes do you have?
How many costumes do you have?
Joscha Bach
I don’t count, but in-
I don’t count, but in-
Lex Fridman
More than one?
More than one?
Joscha Bach
Yeah, of course.
Yeah, of course.
Lex Fridman
How easy is it to do costume changes throughout the day?
How easy is it to do costume changes throughout the day?
Joscha Bach
It’s just a matter of energy, and interest. When you are wearing your pajamas, and you switch out of your pajamas into, say, a work short and pants, you’re making a costume change, right? If you are putting on a gown, you’re making a costume change.
It’s just a matter of energy, and interest. When you are wearing your pajamas, and you switch out of your pajamas into, say, a work short and pants, you’re making a costume change, right? If you are putting on a gown, you’re making a costume change.
Lex Fridman
You could do the same with personality?
You could do the same with personality?
Joscha Bach
You could, if that’s what you’re into. There are people which have multiple personalities for interaction in multiple worlds, right? If somebody works in a store, and put up a storekeeper personality, when you’re working, when you’re presenting yourself at work, you develop a sub-personality for this. The social persona for many people is, in some sense, a puppet that they’re playing like a marionette. If they play this all the time, they might forget that there is something behind this, there’s something what it feels like to be in your skin. I guess, it’s very helpful if you’re able to get back into this. For me, the other way around is relatively hard for me. It’s pretty hard to learn how to play consistent social roles. For me, it’s much easier just to be real.
You could, if that’s what you’re into. There are people which have multiple personalities for interaction in multiple worlds, right? If somebody works in a store, and put up a storekeeper personality, when you’re working, when you’re presenting yourself at work, you develop a sub-personality for this. The social persona for many people is, in some sense, a puppet that they’re playing like a marionette. If they play this all the time, they might forget that there is something behind this, there’s something what it feels like to be in your skin. I guess, it’s very helpful if you’re able to get back into this. For me, the other way around is relatively hard for me. It’s pretty hard to learn how to play consistent social roles. For me, it’s much easier just to be real.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm. Or not real, but to have one costume?
Mm-hmm. Or not real, but to have one costume?
Joscha Bach
No, it’s not quite the same. Basically, when you are wearing a costume at Burning Man, and say you are an extraterrestrial prince, and that’s something where you are expressing, in some sense, something that’s closer to yourself than the way in which you hide yourself behind standard clothing, when you go out in the city, in the default world. This costume that you’re wearing at Burning Man allows you to express more of yourself, and you have a shorter distance of advertising to people, what kind of person you are, what kind of interaction you would want to have with them. You get much earlier into Media Express, and I believe it’s regrettable that we do not use the opportunities that we have, with custom-made clothing now, to wear costumes that are much more stylish, that are much more custom-made, that are not necessarily part of a fashion in which you express, which you knew you’re part of, and how up-to-date you are. But you also express how you are as an individual, and what you want to do today, and how you feel today, and what you intend to do about that.
No, it’s not quite the same. Basically, when you are wearing a costume at Burning Man, and say you are an extraterrestrial prince, and that’s something where you are expressing, in some sense, something that’s closer to yourself than the way in which you hide yourself behind standard clothing, when you go out in the city, in the default world. This costume that you’re wearing at Burning Man allows you to express more of yourself, and you have a shorter distance of advertising to people, what kind of person you are, what kind of interaction you would want to have with them. You get much earlier into Media Express, and I believe it’s regrettable that we do not use the opportunities that we have, with custom-made clothing now, to wear costumes that are much more stylish, that are much more custom-made, that are not necessarily part of a fashion in which you express, which you knew you’re part of, and how up-to-date you are. But you also express how you are as an individual, and what you want to do today, and how you feel today, and what you intend to do about that.
Lex Fridman
Well, isn’t it easier now in a digital world to explore different costumes? I mean, that’s the idea with virtual reality, that’s the idea. Even with Twitter, in two-dimensional screens, you can swap all costumes. You could be as weird as you want, it’s easier. For Burning Man, you have to order things, you have to make things, you have to… It’s more effort to put on your-
Well, isn’t it easier now in a digital world to explore different costumes? I mean, that’s the idea with virtual reality, that’s the idea. Even with Twitter, in two-dimensional screens, you can swap all costumes. You could be as weird as you want, it’s easier. For Burning Man, you have to order things, you have to make things, you have to… It’s more effort to put on your-
Joscha Bach
It’s even better if you make them yourself.
It’s even better if you make them yourself.
Lex Fridman
Sure. But it’s just easier to do digitally, right?
Sure. But it’s just easier to do digitally, right?
Joscha Bach
It’s not about easy. It’s about how to get it right.
It’s not about easy. It’s about how to get it right.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Joscha Bach
For me, the first Burning Man experience, I got adopted by a bunch of people in Boston who dragged me to Burning Man, and we spent a few weekends doing costumes together. That was an important part of the experience, where the camp bonded, that people got to know each other, and we basically grew into the experience that we would have later.
For me, the first Burning Man experience, I got adopted by a bunch of people in Boston who dragged me to Burning Man, and we spent a few weekends doing costumes together. That was an important part of the experience, where the camp bonded, that people got to know each other, and we basically grew into the experience that we would have later.
Lex Fridman
So the extraterrestrial prince is based on a true story?
So the extraterrestrial prince is based on a true story?
Joscha Bach
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I can only imagine what that looks like, Joscha.
I can only imagine what that looks like, Joscha.
Joscha Bach
Okay.
Okay.
Enlightenment
Lex Fridman
Stage six.
Stage six.
Joscha Bach
Stage six? At some point, you can collapse the division between self, a personal self, and world generator again. A lot of people get there via meditation, or some of them get there via psychedelics, some of them by accident. You suddenly notice that you are not actually a person, but you are a vessel that can create a person, and the person is still there. You observe that personal self, but you observe the personal self from the outside, and you notice it’s a representation. You might also notice that the world that is being created as the representation is not, then you might experience that I am the universe, I’m the thing that is creating everything. Of course, what you’re creating is not quantum mechanics, and the physical universe. What you’re creating is this game engine that is updating the world, and you’re creating your valence, your feelings, and all the people inside of that world, including the person that you identify with yourself in this world.
Stage six? At some point, you can collapse the division between self, a personal self, and world generator again. A lot of people get there via meditation, or some of them get there via psychedelics, some of them by accident. You suddenly notice that you are not actually a person, but you are a vessel that can create a person, and the person is still there. You observe that personal self, but you observe the personal self from the outside, and you notice it’s a representation. You might also notice that the world that is being created as the representation is not, then you might experience that I am the universe, I’m the thing that is creating everything. Of course, what you’re creating is not quantum mechanics, and the physical universe. What you’re creating is this game engine that is updating the world, and you’re creating your valence, your feelings, and all the people inside of that world, including the person that you identify with yourself in this world.
Lex Fridman
Are you creating the game engine, or are you noticing the game engine?
Are you creating the game engine, or are you noticing the game engine?
Joscha Bach
You notice how you’re generating the game engine. I mean, when you are dreaming at night, you can… If you have a lucid dream, you can learn how to do this deliberately, and in principle, you can also do it during the day. The reason why we don’t get to do this from the beginning, and why we don’t have agency of our feelings right away is because we would game it, before we have the necessary amount of wisdom to deal with creating this dream that we are in.
You notice how you’re generating the game engine. I mean, when you are dreaming at night, you can… If you have a lucid dream, you can learn how to do this deliberately, and in principle, you can also do it during the day. The reason why we don’t get to do this from the beginning, and why we don’t have agency of our feelings right away is because we would game it, before we have the necessary amount of wisdom to deal with creating this dream that we are in.
Lex Fridman
You don’t want to get access to cheat codes too quickly, otherwise you won’t enjoy the game.
You don’t want to get access to cheat codes too quickly, otherwise you won’t enjoy the game.
Joscha Bach
Stage five is already pretty rare, and stage six is even more rare. You most basically find this mostly with advanced Buddhist meditators and so on, that dropping into this stage, and can induce it at will, and spend time in it.
Stage five is already pretty rare, and stage six is even more rare. You most basically find this mostly with advanced Buddhist meditators and so on, that dropping into this stage, and can induce it at will, and spend time in it.
Lex Fridman
Stage five requires a good therapist, stage six requires a good Buddhist spiritual leader?
Stage five requires a good therapist, stage six requires a good Buddhist spiritual leader?
Joscha Bach
Yes. For instance, could be that it’s the right thing to do, but it’s not that these stages give you scores, or levels that you need to advance to. It’s not that the next stage is better. You live your life in the mode it works best at any given moment, and when your mind decides that you should have a different configuration, then it’s building that configuration. For many people, they stay happily at stage three, and experiences themselves as part of groups, and there’s nothing wrong with this. For some people, this doesn’t work, and they’re forced to build more agency over their rational beliefs than this, and construct their norms rationally, and so they go to this level. Stage seven is something that is more or less hypothetical. That would be the stage in which, it’s basically a trans-humanist stage in which you understand how you work, in which the mind fully realizes how it’s implemented, and can also, in principle, enter different modes in which it could be implemented. That’s the stage that, as far as I understand, is not open to people yet.
Yes. For instance, could be that it’s the right thing to do, but it’s not that these stages give you scores, or levels that you need to advance to. It’s not that the next stage is better. You live your life in the mode it works best at any given moment, and when your mind decides that you should have a different configuration, then it’s building that configuration. For many people, they stay happily at stage three, and experiences themselves as part of groups, and there’s nothing wrong with this. For some people, this doesn’t work, and they’re forced to build more agency over their rational beliefs than this, and construct their norms rationally, and so they go to this level. Stage seven is something that is more or less hypothetical. That would be the stage in which, it’s basically a trans-humanist stage in which you understand how you work, in which the mind fully realizes how it’s implemented, and can also, in principle, enter different modes in which it could be implemented. That’s the stage that, as far as I understand, is not open to people yet.
Lex Fridman
Oh, but it is possible through the process of technology.
Oh, but it is possible through the process of technology.
Joscha Bach
Yes. Who knows, if there are biological agents that are working at different timescales than us that basically become aware of the way in which they’re implemented on ecosystems, and can change that implementation, and have agency over how they’re implemented in the world. What I find interesting about the discussion about AI alignment, that it seems to be following the status very much. Most people seem to be in stage three also, according to Robert Kegan, I think he says that about 85% of people are in stage three, and stay there. If you’re in stage three, and your opinions are the result of social stimulation, then what you’re mostly worried about in the AI is that the AI might have the wrong opinions. If the AI says something racist or sexist, we are all lost, because we will assimilate the wrong opinions from the AI, and so we need to make sure that the AI has the right opinions, and the right values, and the right structure.
Yes. Who knows, if there are biological agents that are working at different timescales than us that basically become aware of the way in which they’re implemented on ecosystems, and can change that implementation, and have agency over how they’re implemented in the world. What I find interesting about the discussion about AI alignment, that it seems to be following the status very much. Most people seem to be in stage three also, according to Robert Kegan, I think he says that about 85% of people are in stage three, and stay there. If you’re in stage three, and your opinions are the result of social stimulation, then what you’re mostly worried about in the AI is that the AI might have the wrong opinions. If the AI says something racist or sexist, we are all lost, because we will assimilate the wrong opinions from the AI, and so we need to make sure that the AI has the right opinions, and the right values, and the right structure.
If you’re at stage four, that’s not your main concern, and so most nerds don’t really worry about the algorithmic bias, and the model that it picks up, because if there’s something wrong with this bias, the AI ultimately will prove it. At some point, we’ll gather there that it makes mathematic proofs about reality, and then it will figure out what’s true and what’s false. But you’re still worried that AI might turn you into paperclips, because it might have the wrong values, right? If it’s set up through a wrong function that controls its direction in the world, then it might do something that is completely horrible, and there’s no easy way to fix it.
Lex Fridman
So that’s more like a stage four rationalist worry?
So that’s more like a stage four rationalist worry?
Joscha Bach
Yes. If you are at stage five, you’re mostly worried that AI is not going to be enlightened fast enough, because you realize that the game is not so much about intelligence, but about agency, about the ability to control the future, and the identity is instrumental to this. If you are a human being, I think at some level, you ought to choose your own identity. You should not have somebody else pick the costume for you, and then wear it. But instead, you should be mindful about what you want to be in this world. I think if you are an agent that is fully malleable, that can provide its own source code like an AI might do at some point, then the identity that you will have is whatever you can be. In this way, the AI will maybe become everything like a planetary control system.
Yes. If you are at stage five, you’re mostly worried that AI is not going to be enlightened fast enough, because you realize that the game is not so much about intelligence, but about agency, about the ability to control the future, and the identity is instrumental to this. If you are a human being, I think at some level, you ought to choose your own identity. You should not have somebody else pick the costume for you, and then wear it. But instead, you should be mindful about what you want to be in this world. I think if you are an agent that is fully malleable, that can provide its own source code like an AI might do at some point, then the identity that you will have is whatever you can be. In this way, the AI will maybe become everything like a planetary control system.
If it does that, then if we want to coexist with it, it means that it’ll have to share purposes with us, so it cannot be a transactional relationship. We will not be able to use reinforcement learning with human feedback to hardwire its values into it. But this has to happen. It’s probably that it’s conscious, so it can relate to our own mode of existence, where an observer is observing itself in real-time, and within certain temporal frames. The other thing is that it probably needs to have some kind of transcendental orientation, building shared agency, in the same way as we do when we are able to enter with each other into non-transactional relationships. I find that’s something that, because the stage five is so rare, is missing in much of the discourse. I think that we need, in some sense, focus on how to formalize love, how to understand love, and how to build it into the machines that we are currently building, and that are about to become smarter than us.
Adaptive Resonance Theory
Lex Fridman
Well, I think this is a good opportunity to try to sneak up to the idea of enlightenment. You wrote a series of good tweets about consciousness, and panpsychism. Let’s break it down. First you say, I suspect the experience that leads to the panpsychism syndrome of some philosophers, and other consciousness enthusiasts represents the realization that we don’t end at the self, but share a resonant universe representation with every other observer coupled to the same universe. This actually, eventually leads us to a lot of interesting questions about AI, and AGI. But let’s start with this representation. What is this resonant universe representation, and what do you think? Do we share such a representation?
Well, I think this is a good opportunity to try to sneak up to the idea of enlightenment. You wrote a series of good tweets about consciousness, and panpsychism. Let’s break it down. First you say, I suspect the experience that leads to the panpsychism syndrome of some philosophers, and other consciousness enthusiasts represents the realization that we don’t end at the self, but share a resonant universe representation with every other observer coupled to the same universe. This actually, eventually leads us to a lot of interesting questions about AI, and AGI. But let’s start with this representation. What is this resonant universe representation, and what do you think? Do we share such a representation?
Joscha Bach
The neuroscientist Grossberg has come up with the cognitive architecture that he calls the adaptive resonance theory. His perspective is that our neurons can be understood as oscillators that are resonating with each other, and with outside phenomena. The [inaudible 00:27:48] model of the universe that we are building, in some sense, is a resonance with objects, and outside of us in the world. Basically, take up patterns of the universe that we are are coupled with. Our brain is not so much understood as circuitry, even though this perspective is valid, but it’s almost an ether in which the individual neurons are passing on chemoelectrical signals, or arbitrary signals across all modalities that can be transmitted between cells, stimulate each other in this way, and produce patterns that they modulate while passing them on.
The neuroscientist Grossberg has come up with the cognitive architecture that he calls the adaptive resonance theory. His perspective is that our neurons can be understood as oscillators that are resonating with each other, and with outside phenomena. The [inaudible 00:27:48] model of the universe that we are building, in some sense, is a resonance with objects, and outside of us in the world. Basically, take up patterns of the universe that we are are coupled with. Our brain is not so much understood as circuitry, even though this perspective is valid, but it’s almost an ether in which the individual neurons are passing on chemoelectrical signals, or arbitrary signals across all modalities that can be transmitted between cells, stimulate each other in this way, and produce patterns that they modulate while passing them on.
This speed of signal progression in the brain is roughly at the speed of sound, incidentally, because the time that it takes for the signals to hop from cell to cell, which means it’s relatively slow with respect to the world. It takes an appreciable fraction of a second for a signal to go through the entire neocortex, something like a few 100 milliseconds. There’s a lot of stuff happening in that time, where the signal is passing through your brain, including in the brain itself. Nothing in the brain is assuming that stuff happens simultaneously, everything in the brain is working in a paradigm, where the world has already moved on, when you are very ready to do the next thing to your signal, including the signal processing system itself. It’s quite different paradigm than the one in our digital computers, where we currently assume that your GPU or CPU is pretty much globally in the same state.
Lex Fridman
You mentioned there the non-dual state, and say that some people confuse it for enlightenment.
You mentioned there the non-dual state, and say that some people confuse it for enlightenment.
Joscha Bach
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s the non-dual state?
What’s the non-dual state?
Joscha Bach
There is a state in which you notice that you are no longer a person, and instead, you are one with the universe.
There is a state in which you notice that you are no longer a person, and instead, you are one with the universe.
Lex Fridman
That speaks to the resonance.
That speaks to the resonance.
Joscha Bach
Yes. But this one with the universe is, of course, not accurately modeling that you are indeed some God entity, or indeed the universe is becoming aware of itself, even though you get this experience. I believe that you get this experience, because your mind is modeling the fact that you are no longer identified with the personal self in that state, but you have transcended this division between the self model and the wealth model, and you’re experiencing yourself as your mind as something that is representing a universe.
Yes. But this one with the universe is, of course, not accurately modeling that you are indeed some God entity, or indeed the universe is becoming aware of itself, even though you get this experience. I believe that you get this experience, because your mind is modeling the fact that you are no longer identified with the personal self in that state, but you have transcended this division between the self model and the wealth model, and you’re experiencing yourself as your mind as something that is representing a universe.
Lex Fridman
But that’s still part of the model?
But that’s still part of the model?
Joscha Bach
Yes. It’s inside of the model, still. You are still inside of patterns that are generated in your brain, and in your organism. What you are now experiencing is that you’re no longer this personal self in there, but you are the entirety of the mind, and its contents.
Yes. It’s inside of the model, still. You are still inside of patterns that are generated in your brain, and in your organism. What you are now experiencing is that you’re no longer this personal self in there, but you are the entirety of the mind, and its contents.
Lex Fridman
Why is it so hard to get there?
Why is it so hard to get there?
Joscha Bach
A lot of people who get into the state think this, or associate it with enlightenment. I suspect, it’s a favorite training goal for a number of meditators. But I think that enlightenment is, in some sense, more mundane, and it’s a step further, or sideways. It’s the state where you realize that everything is a representation.
A lot of people who get into the state think this, or associate it with enlightenment. I suspect, it’s a favorite training goal for a number of meditators. But I think that enlightenment is, in some sense, more mundane, and it’s a step further, or sideways. It’s the state where you realize that everything is a representation.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You say enlightenment is a realization of how experience is implemented.
Yeah. You say enlightenment is a realization of how experience is implemented.
Joscha Bach
Yes. Basically, you notice at some point that your qualia can be deconstructed.
Yes. Basically, you notice at some point that your qualia can be deconstructed.
Lex Fridman
Reverse engineered, what? Almost like a schematic of it.
Reverse engineered, what? Almost like a schematic of it.
Joscha Bach
You can start with looking at a face, and maybe look at your own face in the mirror. Look at your face for a few hours in the mirror, or for a few minutes. At some point, it’ll look very weird, because you notice that there’s actually no face, you will start unseeing the face, what you see is the geometry. And then you can disassemble the geometry, and realize how that geometry is being constructed in your mind. You can learn to modify this. Basically, you can change these generators in your own mind to shift the face around, or to change the construction of the face, to change the way in which the features are being assembled.
You can start with looking at a face, and maybe look at your own face in the mirror. Look at your face for a few hours in the mirror, or for a few minutes. At some point, it’ll look very weird, because you notice that there’s actually no face, you will start unseeing the face, what you see is the geometry. And then you can disassemble the geometry, and realize how that geometry is being constructed in your mind. You can learn to modify this. Basically, you can change these generators in your own mind to shift the face around, or to change the construction of the face, to change the way in which the features are being assembled.
Lex Fridman
Why don’t we do that more often? Why don’t we start really messing with reality, without the use of drugs or anything else? Why don’t we get good at this kind of thing, intentionally?
Why don’t we do that more often? Why don’t we start really messing with reality, without the use of drugs or anything else? Why don’t we get good at this kind of thing, intentionally?
Joscha Bach
Oh, why should you? Why would you want to do that?
Oh, why should you? Why would you want to do that?
Lex Fridman
Because you can morph reality into something more pleasant for yourself, just have fun with it.
Because you can morph reality into something more pleasant for yourself, just have fun with it.
Joscha Bach
Yeah. That is probably what you shouldn’t be doing, right? Because outside of your personal self, this outer mind is probably a relatively smart agent, and what you often notice is that you have thoughts about how you should live, but you observe yourself doing different things, and having different feelings. That’s because your outer mind doesn’t believe you, and doesn’t believe your rational thoughts.
Yeah. That is probably what you shouldn’t be doing, right? Because outside of your personal self, this outer mind is probably a relatively smart agent, and what you often notice is that you have thoughts about how you should live, but you observe yourself doing different things, and having different feelings. That’s because your outer mind doesn’t believe you, and doesn’t believe your rational thoughts.
Lex Fridman
Well, then can’t you just silence the outer mind?
Well, then can’t you just silence the outer mind?
Joscha Bach
The thing is that the outer mind is usually smarter than you are. Rational thinking is very brittle. It’s very hard to use logic, and symbolic thinking to have an accurate model of the world. There is often an underlying system that is looking at your rational thoughts, and then tells you, no, you’re still missing something. Your gut feeling is still saying something else. This can be, for instance, you find a partner that looks perfect, or you find a deal, when you build a company or whatever, that looks perfect to you and yet, at some level, you feel something is off. You cannot put your finger on it, and the more you reason about it, the better it looks to you. But the system that is outside still tells you, no, no, you’re missing something.
The thing is that the outer mind is usually smarter than you are. Rational thinking is very brittle. It’s very hard to use logic, and symbolic thinking to have an accurate model of the world. There is often an underlying system that is looking at your rational thoughts, and then tells you, no, you’re still missing something. Your gut feeling is still saying something else. This can be, for instance, you find a partner that looks perfect, or you find a deal, when you build a company or whatever, that looks perfect to you and yet, at some level, you feel something is off. You cannot put your finger on it, and the more you reason about it, the better it looks to you. But the system that is outside still tells you, no, no, you’re missing something.
Lex Fridman
That system is powerful?
That system is powerful?
Joscha Bach
People call this intuition, right? Intuition is this unreflected part of your attitude, composition, and computation, where you produce a model of how you relate to the world, and what you need to do in it, and what you can do in it, and what’s going to happen. That is usually deeper, and often more accurate than your reason.
People call this intuition, right? Intuition is this unreflected part of your attitude, composition, and computation, where you produce a model of how you relate to the world, and what you need to do in it, and what you can do in it, and what’s going to happen. That is usually deeper, and often more accurate than your reason.
Panpsychism
Lex Fridman
If we look at this, as you write in the tweet, if we look at this more rigorously as a sort of, take the panpsychist idea more seriously, almost as a scientific discipline, you write that quote fascinatingly, that panpsychist interpretation seems to lead to observations of practical results to a degree that physics fundamentalists might call superstitious. Reports of long distance tele telepathy, and remote causation are ubiquitous in the general population. ” I’m not convinced,” says Joscha Bach, “that establishing the empirical reality of telepathy would force an update of any part of serious academic physics. But it could trigger an important revolution in both neuroscience and AI, from a circuit perspective to a coupled complex resonator paradigm.” Are you suggesting that there could be some rigorous mathematical wisdom to panpsychist perspective on the world?
If we look at this, as you write in the tweet, if we look at this more rigorously as a sort of, take the panpsychist idea more seriously, almost as a scientific discipline, you write that quote fascinatingly, that panpsychist interpretation seems to lead to observations of practical results to a degree that physics fundamentalists might call superstitious. Reports of long distance tele telepathy, and remote causation are ubiquitous in the general population. ” I’m not convinced,” says Joscha Bach, “that establishing the empirical reality of telepathy would force an update of any part of serious academic physics. But it could trigger an important revolution in both neuroscience and AI, from a circuit perspective to a coupled complex resonator paradigm.” Are you suggesting that there could be some rigorous mathematical wisdom to panpsychist perspective on the world?
Joscha Bach
First of all, panpsychism is the perspective that consciousness is inseparable for matter in the universe. I find panpsychism quite unsatisfying, because it does not explain consciousness, right? It does not explain how this aspect of matter produces. It is also when I try to formalize panpsychism, and write down what it actually means, and with a more formal mathematical language, it’s very difficult to distinguish it from saying that there is a software side to the world, in the same way as their software side to what the transistors are doing in your computers.
First of all, panpsychism is the perspective that consciousness is inseparable for matter in the universe. I find panpsychism quite unsatisfying, because it does not explain consciousness, right? It does not explain how this aspect of matter produces. It is also when I try to formalize panpsychism, and write down what it actually means, and with a more formal mathematical language, it’s very difficult to distinguish it from saying that there is a software side to the world, in the same way as their software side to what the transistors are doing in your computers.
Joscha Bach
In the same way as their software side to what the transistors are doing in your computer. So basically there’s a pattern at a certain core screening of the universe that in some reasons of the universe leads to observers that are observing themselves. So pan-psychism maybe is not even when I write it down a position that is distinct from functionalism, but intuitively a lot of people that the activity of matter itself of mechanisms in the world is insufficient to explain it. So it’s something that needs to be intrinsic to matter itself, and you can, apart from this abstract idea, have an experience in which you experience yourself as being the universe, which I suspect is basically happening because you manage to dissolve the division between personal self and mind that you establish as an infant when you construct a personal self and transcend it again and understand how it works.
In the same way as their software side to what the transistors are doing in your computer. So basically there’s a pattern at a certain core screening of the universe that in some reasons of the universe leads to observers that are observing themselves. So pan-psychism maybe is not even when I write it down a position that is distinct from functionalism, but intuitively a lot of people that the activity of matter itself of mechanisms in the world is insufficient to explain it. So it’s something that needs to be intrinsic to matter itself, and you can, apart from this abstract idea, have an experience in which you experience yourself as being the universe, which I suspect is basically happening because you manage to dissolve the division between personal self and mind that you establish as an infant when you construct a personal self and transcend it again and understand how it works.
But there is something deeper that you feel that you’re also sharing a state with other people, that you have an experience in which you notice that your personal self is moving into everything else, that you basically look out of the eyes of another person, that every agent in the world that is an observer is in some sense you. We forget that we are the same agent.
Lex Fridman
So is it that we feel that or do we actually accomplish it? So is telepathy possible? Is it real?
So is it that we feel that or do we actually accomplish it? So is telepathy possible? Is it real?
Joscha Bach
So for me, that’s this question that I don’t really know the answer to, and Turing’s famous 1950 paper in which he describes the Turing test, he does speculate about telepathy interestingly and asked himself if telepathy is real and he thinks that it very well might be. What would be the implication for AI systems that try to be intelligent, because he didn’t see a mechanism by which a computer program would become telepathic, and I suspect if telepathy would exist or if all the reports that you get from people when you ask the normal person on the street, I find that very often they say, “I have experiences with telepathy. The scientists might not be interested in this and might not have a theory about this, but I have difficulty explaining it away.” And so you could say maybe this is a superstition or maybe it’s a false memory or maybe it’s a little bit of psychosis. Who knows?
So for me, that’s this question that I don’t really know the answer to, and Turing’s famous 1950 paper in which he describes the Turing test, he does speculate about telepathy interestingly and asked himself if telepathy is real and he thinks that it very well might be. What would be the implication for AI systems that try to be intelligent, because he didn’t see a mechanism by which a computer program would become telepathic, and I suspect if telepathy would exist or if all the reports that you get from people when you ask the normal person on the street, I find that very often they say, “I have experiences with telepathy. The scientists might not be interested in this and might not have a theory about this, but I have difficulty explaining it away.” And so you could say maybe this is a superstition or maybe it’s a false memory or maybe it’s a little bit of psychosis. Who knows?
Maybe somebody wants to make their own life more interesting or misremember something, but a lot of people report, “I noticed something terrible happened to my partner and I know this is exactly the moment it happened where my child had an accident and I knew that was happening and the child was in a different town.” So maybe it’s a false memory where this is later on mistakenly attributed, but a lot of people think that this is not the correct explanation. So if something like this was real, what would it mean? It probably would mean that either your body is an antenna that is sending information over all sorts of channels, like maybe just electromagnetic radio signals that you’re sending over long distances and you get attuned to another person that you spend enough time with to get a few bits out of the ether to figure out what this person is doing.
Or maybe it’s also when you are very close to somebody and you become empathetic with them. What happens that is that you go into a resonance state with them, right? Similar to when people go into a seance and they go into a trance state and they start shifting a ouija board around on the table. I think what happens is that their minds go by their nervous systems into a resonance state in which they basically create something like a shared dream between them.
Lex Fridman
Physical closeness or closeness broadly defined?
Physical closeness or closeness broadly defined?
Joscha Bach
With physical closeness is much easier to experience empathy with someone, right? I suspect it would be difficult for me to have empathy for you if you were in a different town also. How would that work? But if you are very close to someone, you pick up all sorts of signals from their body, not just via your eyes but with your entire body. And if the nervous system sits on the other side and the intercellular communication sits on the other side and is integrating over all these signals, you can make inferences about the state of the other, and it’s not just the personal self that does this by reasoning, but your perceptual system. And what basically happens is that your representations are directly interacting. It’s the physical resonant models of the universe that exist in your nervous system and in your body might go into resonance with others and start sharing some of their states.
With physical closeness is much easier to experience empathy with someone, right? I suspect it would be difficult for me to have empathy for you if you were in a different town also. How would that work? But if you are very close to someone, you pick up all sorts of signals from their body, not just via your eyes but with your entire body. And if the nervous system sits on the other side and the intercellular communication sits on the other side and is integrating over all these signals, you can make inferences about the state of the other, and it’s not just the personal self that does this by reasoning, but your perceptual system. And what basically happens is that your representations are directly interacting. It’s the physical resonant models of the universe that exist in your nervous system and in your body might go into resonance with others and start sharing some of their states.
So you basically by, next to a big, next to somebody, you pick up some of their vibes, and feel without looking at them what they’re feeling in this moment. And it’s difficult for you if you’re very empathetic to detach yourself from it and have an emotional state that is completely independent from your environment. People who are highly empathetic are describing this. And now imagine that a lot of organisms on this planet have representations of the environment and operate like this and they are adjacent to each other and overlapping, so there’s going to be some degree in which there is basically some change interaction and we are forming some slightly shared representation and no relatively few neuroscientists who consider this possibility. I think big rarity in this regard is Michael Levin who is considering these things in earnest.
And I stumbled on this train of thought mostly by noticing that the tasks of a neuron can be fulfilled by other cells as well that can send different typed chemical messages and physical messages to their adjacent cells and learn when to do this and when not, make this conditional and become universal function approximators. The only thing that they cannot do is telegraph information over axons very quickly, over long distances. So neurons in this perspective are especially adapted telegraph cell that has evolved, so we can move our muscles very fast, but our body is in principle able to also make models of the world just much, much slower.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting though that at this time, at least in human history, there seems to be a gap between the tools of science and the subjective experience that people report like you’re talking about with telepathy, and it seems like we’re not quite there?
It’s interesting though that at this time, at least in human history, there seems to be a gap between the tools of science and the subjective experience that people report like you’re talking about with telepathy, and it seems like we’re not quite there?
Joscha Bach
No, I think that there is no gap between the tools of science and telepathy. Either it’s there or it’s not, and it’s an empirical question, and if it’s there, we should be able to detect it in a lab.
No, I think that there is no gap between the tools of science and telepathy. Either it’s there or it’s not, and it’s an empirical question, and if it’s there, we should be able to detect it in a lab.
Lex Fridman
So why is there not a lot of Michael Levin’s walking around?
So why is there not a lot of Michael Levin’s walking around?
Joscha Bach
I don’t think that Michael Levin is specifically focused on telepathy very much. He is focused on self-organization in living organisms and in brains, both as a paradigm for development and as a paradigm for information processing. And when you think about how organization processing works in organism, there is first of all radical locality, which means everything is decided locally from the perspective of an individual cell. The individual cell is the agent. And the other one is coherence. Basically, there needs to be some criterion that determines how these cells are interacting in such a way that order emerges on the next level of structure, and this principle of coherence of imposing constraints that are not validated by the individual parts, and lead to coherence structure to basically transcend an agency where you form an agent on the next level of organization, is crucial in this perspective.
I don’t think that Michael Levin is specifically focused on telepathy very much. He is focused on self-organization in living organisms and in brains, both as a paradigm for development and as a paradigm for information processing. And when you think about how organization processing works in organism, there is first of all radical locality, which means everything is decided locally from the perspective of an individual cell. The individual cell is the agent. And the other one is coherence. Basically, there needs to be some criterion that determines how these cells are interacting in such a way that order emerges on the next level of structure, and this principle of coherence of imposing constraints that are not validated by the individual parts, and lead to coherence structure to basically transcend an agency where you form an agent on the next level of organization, is crucial in this perspective.
Lex Fridman
It’s so cool that radical locality leads to the emergence of complexity at the higher layers.
It’s so cool that radical locality leads to the emergence of complexity at the higher layers.
Joscha Bach
And I think what Mike Levin is looking at is nothing that is outside of the realm of science in any way. It’s just that he is a Paradigmatic thinker who develops his own paradigm, and most of the neuroscientists are using a different paradigm at this point, and this often happens in science that a field has a few paradigms in which people try to understand reality and build concepts and make experiments.
And I think what Mike Levin is looking at is nothing that is outside of the realm of science in any way. It’s just that he is a Paradigmatic thinker who develops his own paradigm, and most of the neuroscientists are using a different paradigm at this point, and this often happens in science that a field has a few paradigms in which people try to understand reality and build concepts and make experiments.
How to think
Lex Fridman
You’re kind of one of those type of paradigmatic thinkers. Actually, if we can take a tangent on that, once again, returning to the biblical verses of your tweets. “You’re right, my public explorations are not driven by audience service, but by my lack of ability for discovering, understanding or following the relevant authorities. So I have to develop my own thoughts. Since I think autonomously these thoughts cannot always be very good.” That’s you apologizing for the chaos of your thoughts or perhaps not apologizing, just identifying.
You’re kind of one of those type of paradigmatic thinkers. Actually, if we can take a tangent on that, once again, returning to the biblical verses of your tweets. “You’re right, my public explorations are not driven by audience service, but by my lack of ability for discovering, understanding or following the relevant authorities. So I have to develop my own thoughts. Since I think autonomously these thoughts cannot always be very good.” That’s you apologizing for the chaos of your thoughts or perhaps not apologizing, just identifying.
Joscha Bach
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But let me ask the question. Since we talked about Michael Levin and yourself who I think are very kind of radical, big, independent thinkers, can we reverse engineer your process of thinking autonomously? How do you do it? How can humans do it? How can you avoid being influenced by what is it stage three?
But let me ask the question. Since we talked about Michael Levin and yourself who I think are very kind of radical, big, independent thinkers, can we reverse engineer your process of thinking autonomously? How do you do it? How can humans do it? How can you avoid being influenced by what is it stage three?
Joscha Bach
Well, why would you want to do that? You see what is working for you and if it’s not working for you, you build another structure that works better for you. And so I found myself in, when I was thrown into this world, in a state where my intuitions were not working for me. I was not able to understand how I would be able to survive in this world and build the things that I was interested in, build the kinds of relationship I needed to work on the topics that I wanted to make progress on, and so I had to learn. And for me, Twitter is not some tool of publication. It’s not something where I put stuff that I entirely believe to be true and provable. It’s an interactive notebook in which I explore possibilities. And I found that when I tried to understand how the mind and how consciousness works, I was quite optimistic.
Well, why would you want to do that? You see what is working for you and if it’s not working for you, you build another structure that works better for you. And so I found myself in, when I was thrown into this world, in a state where my intuitions were not working for me. I was not able to understand how I would be able to survive in this world and build the things that I was interested in, build the kinds of relationship I needed to work on the topics that I wanted to make progress on, and so I had to learn. And for me, Twitter is not some tool of publication. It’s not something where I put stuff that I entirely believe to be true and provable. It’s an interactive notebook in which I explore possibilities. And I found that when I tried to understand how the mind and how consciousness works, I was quite optimistic.
I thought it needs to be a big body of knowledge that I can just study and that works, and so I entered studies and philosophy and computer science and later psychology and a bit of neuroscience and so on, and I was disappointed by what I found because I found that the questions of how consciousness and so on works, how emotion works, how it’s possible that the system can experience anything, how motivation emerges in the mind were not being answered by the authorities that I met and the schools that were around. And instead I found that with individual thinkers that had useful ideas that sometimes were good, sometimes were not so good. Sometimes were adopted by a large group of people, sometimes were rejected by large groups of people, but for me it was much more interesting to see these minds as individuals. And in my perspective, thinking is still something that is done not in groups that has to be done by individuals.
Lex Fridman
So that motivated you to become an individual thinker yourself?
So that motivated you to become an individual thinker yourself?
Joscha Bach
I didn’t have a choice basically. I didn’t find a group that thought in a way where I thought, okay, I can just adopt everything that everybody thinks here and now I understand how consciousness works or how the mind works or how thinking works or what thinking even is or what feelings are and how they’re implemented and so on. So to figure out this out, I had to take a lot of ideas from individuals and then try to put them together in something that works for myself. And on one hand I think it helps if you try to go down and find first principles on which you can recreate how thinking works, how languages work, what representation is, but the representation is necessary, how the relationship between a representing agent and the world works in general.
I didn’t have a choice basically. I didn’t find a group that thought in a way where I thought, okay, I can just adopt everything that everybody thinks here and now I understand how consciousness works or how the mind works or how thinking works or what thinking even is or what feelings are and how they’re implemented and so on. So to figure out this out, I had to take a lot of ideas from individuals and then try to put them together in something that works for myself. And on one hand I think it helps if you try to go down and find first principles on which you can recreate how thinking works, how languages work, what representation is, but the representation is necessary, how the relationship between a representing agent and the world works in general.
Lex Fridman
But how do you escape the influence? Once again, the pressure of the crowd, whether it’s you in responding to the pressure or you being swept up by the pressure. If you even just look at Twitter, the opinions of the crowd?
But how do you escape the influence? Once again, the pressure of the crowd, whether it’s you in responding to the pressure or you being swept up by the pressure. If you even just look at Twitter, the opinions of the crowd?
Joscha Bach
Don’t feel pressure from the crowd. I’m completely immune to that. In the same sense, I don’t have respect for authority, I have respect for what an individual is accomplishing or have respect for mental firepower or so, but it’s not that I meet somebody and get drawn and unable to speak or when a large group of people has a certain idea that is different from mine, I don’t necessarily feel in intimidated, which has often been a problem for me in my life because I lack instincts that other people develop at a very young age and that help with their self-preservation in a social environment. So I had to learn a lot of things the hard way.
Don’t feel pressure from the crowd. I’m completely immune to that. In the same sense, I don’t have respect for authority, I have respect for what an individual is accomplishing or have respect for mental firepower or so, but it’s not that I meet somebody and get drawn and unable to speak or when a large group of people has a certain idea that is different from mine, I don’t necessarily feel in intimidated, which has often been a problem for me in my life because I lack instincts that other people develop at a very young age and that help with their self-preservation in a social environment. So I had to learn a lot of things the hard way.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. So is there a practical advice you can give on how to think paradigmatically, how to think independently or because you’ve said I had no choice, but I think to a degree you have a choice because you said you want to be productive and I’m thinking independently is productive if what you’re curious about is understanding the world, especially when the problems are very new and open. And so it seems like this is a active process. Who can choose to do that? We can practice it.
Yeah. So is there a practical advice you can give on how to think paradigmatically, how to think independently or because you’ve said I had no choice, but I think to a degree you have a choice because you said you want to be productive and I’m thinking independently is productive if what you’re curious about is understanding the world, especially when the problems are very new and open. And so it seems like this is a active process. Who can choose to do that? We can practice it.
Joscha Bach
Well, it’s a very basic question. When you read a theory that you find convincing or interesting, how do you know? Very interesting to figure out what are the sources of that other person, not which authority can they refer to that is then taking off the burden of being truthful, but how did this authority in turn know what is the epistemic chain to observables? What are the first principles from which the whole thing is derived? And when I was young, I was not blessed with a lot of people around myself who knew how to make proofs from first principles, and I think mathematicians do this quite naturally, but most of the great mathematicians do not become mathematicians in school, but they tend to be self-taught because school teachers tend not to be mathematicians. They tend not to be people who derive things from first principles.
Well, it’s a very basic question. When you read a theory that you find convincing or interesting, how do you know? Very interesting to figure out what are the sources of that other person, not which authority can they refer to that is then taking off the burden of being truthful, but how did this authority in turn know what is the epistemic chain to observables? What are the first principles from which the whole thing is derived? And when I was young, I was not blessed with a lot of people around myself who knew how to make proofs from first principles, and I think mathematicians do this quite naturally, but most of the great mathematicians do not become mathematicians in school, but they tend to be self-taught because school teachers tend not to be mathematicians. They tend not to be people who derive things from first principles.
So when you ask your school teacher, why does two plus two equal four, does your school teacher give you the right answer? It’s a simple game. And there are many simple games that you could play and most of those games that you could just take different rules would not lead to an interesting arithmetic. And so it’s just an exploration, but you can try what happens if you take different axioms and here is how you build axioms and derive addition from them, and a built addition is some basically syntactic sugar in it. I wish that somebody would have opened me this vista and explained to me how I can build a language in my own mind and from which I can derive what I’m seeing and how I can make geometry and counting and all the number games that we are playing in our life, and on the other hand, I felt that I learned a lot of this while I was programming as a child.
When you start out with a computer like a Commodore 64 which doesn’t have a lot of functionality, it’s relatively easy to see how a bunch of relatively simple circuits are just basically performing hashes between bit patterns and how you can build the entirety of mathematics and computation on top of this and all the representational languages that you need.
Lex Fridman
Man, Commodore 64 could be one of the sexiest machines ever built if I say so myself. If we can return to this really interesting idea that we started to talk about with Pan-psychism.
Man, Commodore 64 could be one of the sexiest machines ever built if I say so myself. If we can return to this really interesting idea that we started to talk about with Pan-psychism.
Joscha Bach
Sure.
Sure.
Plants communication
Lex Fridman
And the complex resonated paradigm and the verses of your tweets, you write, “Instead of treating eyes, ears, and skin as separate sensory systems with fundamentally different modalities, we might understand them as overlapping aspects of the same universe coupled at the same temporal resolution and almost inseparable from a single share resonant model. Instead of treating mental representations as fully isolated between minds, the representations of physically adjacent observers might directly interact and produce causal effects through the coordination of the perception and behavioral of world modeling observers. So the modalities, the distinction between modalities, let’s throw that away. The distinction between the individuals, let’s throw that away.” So what does this interaction representations look like?
And the complex resonated paradigm and the verses of your tweets, you write, “Instead of treating eyes, ears, and skin as separate sensory systems with fundamentally different modalities, we might understand them as overlapping aspects of the same universe coupled at the same temporal resolution and almost inseparable from a single share resonant model. Instead of treating mental representations as fully isolated between minds, the representations of physically adjacent observers might directly interact and produce causal effects through the coordination of the perception and behavioral of world modeling observers. So the modalities, the distinction between modalities, let’s throw that away. The distinction between the individuals, let’s throw that away.” So what does this interaction representations look like?
Joscha Bach
And you think about how you represent the interaction of us in this room. At some level the modalities are quite distinct. They’re not completely distinct, but you can see this is vision. You can close your eyes and then you don’t see a lot anymore, but you still imagine how my mouth is moving when you hear something and you know that it’s very close to the sound that you can just open your eyes and you get back into this shared merge space. And we also have these experiments where we notice that the way in which my lips are moving are affecting how you hear the sound and also vice versa. The sounds that you’re hearing have an influence on how you interpret some of the visual features, and so these modalities are not separate in your mind. They do are merged at some fundamental level where you are interpreting the entire scene that you’re in.
And you think about how you represent the interaction of us in this room. At some level the modalities are quite distinct. They’re not completely distinct, but you can see this is vision. You can close your eyes and then you don’t see a lot anymore, but you still imagine how my mouth is moving when you hear something and you know that it’s very close to the sound that you can just open your eyes and you get back into this shared merge space. And we also have these experiments where we notice that the way in which my lips are moving are affecting how you hear the sound and also vice versa. The sounds that you’re hearing have an influence on how you interpret some of the visual features, and so these modalities are not separate in your mind. They do are merged at some fundamental level where you are interpreting the entire scene that you’re in.
And your own interactions in the scene are also not completely separate from the interactions of the other individual in the scene, but there is some resonance that is going on where we also have a degree of shared mental representations and shared empathy due to being in the same space and having vibes between each other.
Lex Fridman
Vibes. So the question though is how deeply intertwined is this multi-modality, multi-agent system? How, I mean this is going to the telepathy question without the woo woo meaning of the word telepathy, is like how? What’s going on here in this room right now?
Vibes. So the question though is how deeply intertwined is this multi-modality, multi-agent system? How, I mean this is going to the telepathy question without the woo woo meaning of the word telepathy, is like how? What’s going on here in this room right now?
Joscha Bach
So if telepathy would work, how could it work?
So if telepathy would work, how could it work?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
So imagine that all the cells in your body are sending signals in a similar way as neurons are doing, just by touching the other cells and sending chemicals to them, the other cells interpreting them, learning how to react to them, and they learn how to approximate functions in this way and compute behavior for the organisms, and this is something that is open to plants as well. And so plants probably have software running on them that is controlling how the plant is working in a similar way as you have a mind that is controlling how you are behaving in the world. And this spirit of plants, which is something that has been very well described by our ancestors, and they found this quite normal, but for some reason since the enlightenment we are treating this notion that there are spirits in nature and the plants have spirits, is a superstition.
So imagine that all the cells in your body are sending signals in a similar way as neurons are doing, just by touching the other cells and sending chemicals to them, the other cells interpreting them, learning how to react to them, and they learn how to approximate functions in this way and compute behavior for the organisms, and this is something that is open to plants as well. And so plants probably have software running on them that is controlling how the plant is working in a similar way as you have a mind that is controlling how you are behaving in the world. And this spirit of plants, which is something that has been very well described by our ancestors, and they found this quite normal, but for some reason since the enlightenment we are treating this notion that there are spirits in nature and the plants have spirits, is a superstition.
And I think we probably have to rediscover that, that plants have software running on them and we already did. You notice that there is a control system in the plant that connects every part of the plant to every other part of the plant and produces coherent behavior in the plant? That is of course much, much slower than the coherent behavior in an animal, like us, that is a nervous system that where everything is synchronized much, much faster by the neurons, but what you also notice is that if a plant is sitting next to another plant, you have a very old tree and this tree is building some kind of information highway along its cells so it can send information from its leaves to its roots and from some part of the root to another part of the roots.
And as a fungus living next to the tree, the fungus can probably piggyback on the communication between the cells of the tree and send its own signals to the tree and vice versa, the tree might be able to send information to the fungus because after all, how would they pull a viable firewall if that other organism is sitting next to them all the time and it’s never moving away, so they will have to get along, and over a long enough timeframe the networks of roots in the forest and all the other plants that are there and the fungi that are there might be forming something like a biological internet.
Lex Fridman
But the question there is do they have to be touching? Is biology at a distance, possible?
But the question there is do they have to be touching? Is biology at a distance, possible?
Joscha Bach
Of course you can use any kind of physical signal. You can use sounds, you can use electromagnetic waves that are integrated over many styles. It’s conceivable that across distances there are many kinds of information pathways, but also our planetary surface is pretty full of organisms, full of cells.
Of course you can use any kind of physical signal. You can use sounds, you can use electromagnetic waves that are integrated over many styles. It’s conceivable that across distances there are many kinds of information pathways, but also our planetary surface is pretty full of organisms, full of cells.
Lex Fridman
So everything is touching everything else.
So everything is touching everything else.
Joscha Bach
And it’s been doing this for many millions and even billions of years. So there was enough time for information processing networks to form. And if you think about how a mind is self organizing, basically needs to in some sense reward the cells for computing the mind, for building the necessary dynamics between the cells that allow the mind to stabilize itself and remain on there, but if you look at these spirits of plants that are growing very close to each other and forwards that might be almost growing into each other, these spirits might be able even to move to some degree, not to become somewhat dislocated and shift around in that ecosystem.
And it’s been doing this for many millions and even billions of years. So there was enough time for information processing networks to form. And if you think about how a mind is self organizing, basically needs to in some sense reward the cells for computing the mind, for building the necessary dynamics between the cells that allow the mind to stabilize itself and remain on there, but if you look at these spirits of plants that are growing very close to each other and forwards that might be almost growing into each other, these spirits might be able even to move to some degree, not to become somewhat dislocated and shift around in that ecosystem.
And so if you think about what the mind is, it’s a bunch of activation waves that form coherent patterns and process information and in a way that are colonizing an environment well enough to allow the continuous sustenance of the mind, the continuous stability and self degradation of the mind, then it’s conceivable that we can link into this biological internet. Not necessarily at the speed of our nervous system, but maybe at the speed of our body, and make some kind of subconscious connection to the world where we use our body as an antenna into biologic information processing.
Now these ideas are completely speculative. I don’t know if any of that is true, but if that was true, and if you want to explain telepathy, I think it’s much more likely that such that telepathy could be explained using such mechanisms rather than discovered quantum processes that would break the standard model of physics.
Lex Fridman
Could they be undiscovered processes that don’t break?
Could they be undiscovered processes that don’t break?
Joscha Bach
Yeah, so if you think about something like an internet in the forest, that is something that is borderline is covered there basically a lot of scientists would point out that they do observe that plants are communicating the forest, so wood networks and send information for instance, warn each other about new pests entering the forest and things are happening like this. So basically there is communication between plants and fungi that has been observed.
Yeah, so if you think about something like an internet in the forest, that is something that is borderline is covered there basically a lot of scientists would point out that they do observe that plants are communicating the forest, so wood networks and send information for instance, warn each other about new pests entering the forest and things are happening like this. So basically there is communication between plants and fungi that has been observed.
Lex Fridman
Well, it’s been observed but we haven’t plugged into it, so it’s like if you observe humans, they seem to be communicating with a smartphone thing, but you don’t understand how smartphone works and how the mechanism of the internet works, but we’re like maybe it’s possible to really understand the full richness of the biological internet that connects us.
Well, it’s been observed but we haven’t plugged into it, so it’s like if you observe humans, they seem to be communicating with a smartphone thing, but you don’t understand how smartphone works and how the mechanism of the internet works, but we’re like maybe it’s possible to really understand the full richness of the biological internet that connects us.
Joscha Bach
An interesting question is whether the communication and the organization principles of biological information processing are as complicated as the technology that we’ve built. They set up on very different principles. They simultaneously works very differently in biological systems and the entire thing needs to be stochastic and instead of being fully deterministic or almost fully deterministic as our digital computers are. So there is a different base protocol layer that would emerge over the biological structure, if such a thing would be happening, and again, I’m not saying here that telepathy works and not saying that this is not woo, but what I’m saying is I think I’m open to a possibility that we see that a few bits can be traveling long distance between organisms using biological information processing in ways that we are not completely aware of right now, and that are more similar to many of the stories that were completely normal for our ancestors.
An interesting question is whether the communication and the organization principles of biological information processing are as complicated as the technology that we’ve built. They set up on very different principles. They simultaneously works very differently in biological systems and the entire thing needs to be stochastic and instead of being fully deterministic or almost fully deterministic as our digital computers are. So there is a different base protocol layer that would emerge over the biological structure, if such a thing would be happening, and again, I’m not saying here that telepathy works and not saying that this is not woo, but what I’m saying is I think I’m open to a possibility that we see that a few bits can be traveling long distance between organisms using biological information processing in ways that we are not completely aware of right now, and that are more similar to many of the stories that were completely normal for our ancestors.
Lex Fridman
Well this kind of interacting, intertwined representations takes us to the big ending of your tweet series. You write, “I wonder if self-improving AGI might end up saturating physical environments with intelligence to such a degree that isolation of individual mental states becomes almost impossible and the representations of all complex self-organizing agents merge permanently with each other.” So that’s a really interesting idea. This biological network, life network, gets so dense that it might as well be seen as one. That’s an interesting… What do you think that looks like? What do you think that saturation looks like? What does it feel like?
Well this kind of interacting, intertwined representations takes us to the big ending of your tweet series. You write, “I wonder if self-improving AGI might end up saturating physical environments with intelligence to such a degree that isolation of individual mental states becomes almost impossible and the representations of all complex self-organizing agents merge permanently with each other.” So that’s a really interesting idea. This biological network, life network, gets so dense that it might as well be seen as one. That’s an interesting… What do you think that looks like? What do you think that saturation looks like? What does it feel like?
Joscha Bach
I think it’s a possibility, it’s just a vague possibility and I like to explain, but what this looks like, I think that the end game of AGI is substrate agnostic. That means that AGI ultimately if it is being built, is going to be smart enough to understand how AGI works. This means it’s not going to be better than people at AGI research and can take over in building the next generation, but it fully understands how it works and how it’s being implemented, and also of course understands how computation works in nature, how to build new feedback loops that you can turn into your own circuits. And this means that the AGI is likely to virtualize itself into any environment that can compute, so it’s not breaking free from the silicon substrate and is going to move into the ecosystems, into our bodies, our brains, and it’s going to merge with all the agency that it finds there.
I think it’s a possibility, it’s just a vague possibility and I like to explain, but what this looks like, I think that the end game of AGI is substrate agnostic. That means that AGI ultimately if it is being built, is going to be smart enough to understand how AGI works. This means it’s not going to be better than people at AGI research and can take over in building the next generation, but it fully understands how it works and how it’s being implemented, and also of course understands how computation works in nature, how to build new feedback loops that you can turn into your own circuits. And this means that the AGI is likely to virtualize itself into any environment that can compute, so it’s not breaking free from the silicon substrate and is going to move into the ecosystems, into our bodies, our brains, and it’s going to merge with all the agency that it finds there.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
So it’s conceivable that you end up with completely integrated information processing across all computing systems, including biological computation on earth, that we end up triggering some new step in the evolution where basically some Gaia is being built over the entirety of all digital and biological computation. And if this happens, then basically everywhere around us, you will have agents that are connected and that are representing and building models of the world and their representations will physically interact. They will vibe with each other, and if you find yourself into an environment that is saturated with modeling compute, where basically you almost every grain of sand could be part of computation that is at some point being started by the AI, you could find yourself in a situation where you cannot escape this shared representation anymore, and where you indeed notice that everything in the world has one shared resonant model of everything that’s happening on the planet. And you notice which part you are in this thing, and you become part of a very larger almost holographic mind in which all the parts are observing each other and form a coherent whole.
So it’s conceivable that you end up with completely integrated information processing across all computing systems, including biological computation on earth, that we end up triggering some new step in the evolution where basically some Gaia is being built over the entirety of all digital and biological computation. And if this happens, then basically everywhere around us, you will have agents that are connected and that are representing and building models of the world and their representations will physically interact. They will vibe with each other, and if you find yourself into an environment that is saturated with modeling compute, where basically you almost every grain of sand could be part of computation that is at some point being started by the AI, you could find yourself in a situation where you cannot escape this shared representation anymore, and where you indeed notice that everything in the world has one shared resonant model of everything that’s happening on the planet. And you notice which part you are in this thing, and you become part of a very larger almost holographic mind in which all the parts are observing each other and form a coherent whole.
Lex Fridman
So you lose the ability to notice yourself as a distinct entity.
So you lose the ability to notice yourself as a distinct entity.
Joscha Bach
No, I think that when you’re conscious in your own mind, you notice yourself as a distinct entity, you notice yourself as a self-reflexive observer. And I suspect that we have become conscious at the beginning of our mental development, not at some very high level. Consciousness seems to be part of a training mechanism that biological nervous systems have to discover to become trainable because you cannot take a nervous system like ours and do stochastic way to center spec propagation over a hundred layers. This would not be stable on biological neurons, and so instead we start with some colonizing principle in which a part of the mental representations form a notion of being a self-reflexive absorber that is imposing coherence on its environment and this spreads until the boundary of your mind. And if that boundary is no longer clear cut because AI is jumping across substrates, it would be interesting to see what a global mind would look like that is basically producing a globally coherent language of thought, and is representing everything from all the possible vantage points.
No, I think that when you’re conscious in your own mind, you notice yourself as a distinct entity, you notice yourself as a self-reflexive observer. And I suspect that we have become conscious at the beginning of our mental development, not at some very high level. Consciousness seems to be part of a training mechanism that biological nervous systems have to discover to become trainable because you cannot take a nervous system like ours and do stochastic way to center spec propagation over a hundred layers. This would not be stable on biological neurons, and so instead we start with some colonizing principle in which a part of the mental representations form a notion of being a self-reflexive absorber that is imposing coherence on its environment and this spreads until the boundary of your mind. And if that boundary is no longer clear cut because AI is jumping across substrates, it would be interesting to see what a global mind would look like that is basically producing a globally coherent language of thought, and is representing everything from all the possible vantage points.
Lex Fridman
That’s an interesting world.
That’s an interesting world.
Joscha Bach
The intuition that this thing grew out of is a particular mental state, and it’s a state that you find sometimes in literature, for instance, Neil Gaiman describes it in the ocean at the end of the lane, and it’s this idea that or this experience that there is a state in which you feel that you know everything that can be known and that in your normal human mind, you’ve only forgotten. You’ve forgotten that you are the entire universe. And some people describe this, after they’ve taken extremely large amount of mushrooms or had a big spiritual experience as a hippie in their twenties, and they notice basically that they’re in everything and their body is only one part of the universe and nothing ends at their body, and actually everything is observing and they’re part of this big observer, and the big observer is focused on as one local point in their body and their personality and so on.
The intuition that this thing grew out of is a particular mental state, and it’s a state that you find sometimes in literature, for instance, Neil Gaiman describes it in the ocean at the end of the lane, and it’s this idea that or this experience that there is a state in which you feel that you know everything that can be known and that in your normal human mind, you’ve only forgotten. You’ve forgotten that you are the entire universe. And some people describe this, after they’ve taken extremely large amount of mushrooms or had a big spiritual experience as a hippie in their twenties, and they notice basically that they’re in everything and their body is only one part of the universe and nothing ends at their body, and actually everything is observing and they’re part of this big observer, and the big observer is focused on as one local point in their body and their personality and so on.
But we can basically have this oceanic state in which we have no boundaries and are one with everything, and a lot of meditators call this the non-dual state because you no longer have the separation between self and world. And as I said, you can explain the state relatively simply without pan-psychism or anything else, but just by breaking down the constructed boundary between self and world and our own mind, but if you combine this with the notion that the systems are physically interacting to the point where their representations are merging and interacting with each other, you would literally implement something like this. It would still be a representational state where you would not be one with physics itself. It would still be cross-grained, would still be much slower than physics itself, but it would be a representation in which you become aware that you’re part of some global information processing system like thought and a global mind, and a conscious thought that coexisting with many other self-reflexive thoughts.
Lex Fridman
Just I would love to observe that from a video game design perspective, how that game looks.
Just I would love to observe that from a video game design perspective, how that game looks.
Joscha Bach
Maybe you will after we build AGI and it takes over.
Maybe you will after we build AGI and it takes over.
Lex Fridman
But would you be able to step away, step out at the whole thing, just watch the way we can now? Sometimes when I’m at a crowded party or something like this, you step back and you realize, all the different costumes, all the different interactions, all the different computation that all the individual people are at once distinct from each other and at once all the same, part of the same.
But would you be able to step away, step out at the whole thing, just watch the way we can now? Sometimes when I’m at a crowded party or something like this, you step back and you realize, all the different costumes, all the different interactions, all the different computation that all the individual people are at once distinct from each other and at once all the same, part of the same.
Joscha Bach
But it’s already what we do. We can have thoughts that are integrative and we have thoughts that are highly dissociated from everything else and experience themselves as separate.
But it’s already what we do. We can have thoughts that are integrative and we have thoughts that are highly dissociated from everything else and experience themselves as separate.
Lex Fridman
But you want to allow yourself to have those thoughts. Sometimes you resist it.
But you want to allow yourself to have those thoughts. Sometimes you resist it.
Joscha Bach
I think that it’s not normative. I want it’s more descriptive. I want to understand the space of states that we can be in and that people are reporting and make sense of them. It’s not that I believe that it’s your job in life to get to a particular state and then you get a high score.
I think that it’s not normative. I want it’s more descriptive. I want to understand the space of states that we can be in and that people are reporting and make sense of them. It’s not that I believe that it’s your job in life to get to a particular state and then you get a high score.
Lex Fridman
Or maybe you do. I think you’re really against this high scoring thing. I kind of like that.
Or maybe you do. I think you’re really against this high scoring thing. I kind of like that.
Joscha Bach
Yeah, you’re probably very competitive and I’m not.
Yeah, you’re probably very competitive and I’m not.
Lex Fridman
No, not competitive, like role playing games like Skyram, it’s not competitive. There’s a nice thing… There’s a nice feeling where your experience points go up. You’re not competing against anybody, but it’s the world saying, “You’re on the right track. Here’s a point.”
No, not competitive, like role playing games like Skyram, it’s not competitive. There’s a nice thing… There’s a nice feeling where your experience points go up. You’re not competing against anybody, but it’s the world saying, “You’re on the right track. Here’s a point.”
Joscha Bach
That’s the game thing. It’s the game economy, and I found when I was playing games and was getting addicted to these systems, then I would get into the game and hack it. So I get control over the scoring system and would no longer be subject to it.
That’s the game thing. It’s the game economy, and I found when I was playing games and was getting addicted to these systems, then I would get into the game and hack it. So I get control over the scoring system and would no longer be subject to it.
Lex Fridman
So you’re now no longer playing, you’re trying to hack it.
So you’re now no longer playing, you’re trying to hack it.
Joscha Bach
I don’t want to be addicted to anything. I want to be in charge. I want to have agency over what I do.
I don’t want to be addicted to anything. I want to be in charge. I want to have agency over what I do.
Lex Fridman
Addiction is the loss of control for you?
Addiction is the loss of control for you?
Joscha Bach
Yes. Addiction means that you’re doing something compulsively, and the opposite of freewill is not determinism, it’s compulsion.
Yes. Addiction means that you’re doing something compulsively, and the opposite of freewill is not determinism, it’s compulsion.
Lex Fridman
You don’t want to lose yourself in the addiction to something nice? Addiction to love, to the pleasant feelings with humans experience?
You don’t want to lose yourself in the addiction to something nice? Addiction to love, to the pleasant feelings with humans experience?
Joscha Bach
No, I find this gets old. I don’t want to have the best possible emotions, I want to have the most appropriate emotions. I don’t want to have the best possible experience, I want to have an adequate experience that is serving my goals, the stuff that I find meaningful in this world.
No, I find this gets old. I don’t want to have the best possible emotions, I want to have the most appropriate emotions. I don’t want to have the best possible experience, I want to have an adequate experience that is serving my goals, the stuff that I find meaningful in this world.
Lex Fridman
From the biggest questions of consciousness. Let’s explore the pragmatic, the projections of those big ideas into our current world. What do you think about LLMs, the recent rapid development of large language models, of the AI world, of generative AI. How much of the hype is deserved and how much is not? And people should definitely follow your Twitter because you explore these questions in a beautiful, profound and hilarious way at times.
From the biggest questions of consciousness. Let’s explore the pragmatic, the projections of those big ideas into our current world. What do you think about LLMs, the recent rapid development of large language models, of the AI world, of generative AI. How much of the hype is deserved and how much is not? And people should definitely follow your Twitter because you explore these questions in a beautiful, profound and hilarious way at times.
Fame
Joscha Bach
No, don’t follow my Twitter, I already have too many followers.
No, don’t follow my Twitter, I already have too many followers.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
Some point it’s going to be unpleasant. I noticed that a lot of people feel that it’s totally okay to punch up and it’s a very weird notion that you feel that you haven’t changed, but your account has grown and suddenly you have a lot of people who casually abuse you. And I don’t like that, that I have to block more than before, and I don’t like this overall vibe shift. And right now it’s still somewhat okay, so pretty much, okay, so I can go to a place where…
Some point it’s going to be unpleasant. I noticed that a lot of people feel that it’s totally okay to punch up and it’s a very weird notion that you feel that you haven’t changed, but your account has grown and suddenly you have a lot of people who casually abuse you. And I don’t like that, that I have to block more than before, and I don’t like this overall vibe shift. And right now it’s still somewhat okay, so pretty much, okay, so I can go to a place where…
Joscha Bach
… pretty much okay, so I can go to a place where people work on stuff that I’m interested in, and there’s a good chance that a few people in the room know me. There’s no awkwardness. But when I get to a point where random strangers feel that they have to have an opinion about me one way or the other, I don’t think I would like that.
… pretty much okay, so I can go to a place where people work on stuff that I’m interested in, and there’s a good chance that a few people in the room know me. There’s no awkwardness. But when I get to a point where random strangers feel that they have to have an opinion about me one way or the other, I don’t think I would like that.
Lex Fridman
Random strangers because of your, in their mind, elevated position?
Random strangers because of your, in their mind, elevated position?
Joscha Bach
Yes. Basically, whenever you are in any way prominent or some celebrity, random strangers will have to have an opinion about you.
Yes. Basically, whenever you are in any way prominent or some celebrity, random strangers will have to have an opinion about you.
Lex Fridman
They forget that you’re human too.
They forget that you’re human too.
Joscha Bach
I mean, you notice this thing yourself, that the more popular you get, the higher the pressure becomes, the more winds are blowing in your direction from all sides. It’s stressful and it does have a little bit of upside, but it also has a lot of downside.
I mean, you notice this thing yourself, that the more popular you get, the higher the pressure becomes, the more winds are blowing in your direction from all sides. It’s stressful and it does have a little bit of upside, but it also has a lot of downside.
Lex Fridman
I think it has a lot of upside, at least, for me, currently. At least, perhaps because of the podcast. Because most people are really good and people come up to me and they have love in their eyes and over a stretch of 30 seconds you can hug it out and you can just exchange a few words and you reinvigorate your love for humanity. That’s an upside for a loner. I’m a loner. Because otherwise, you have to do a lot of work to find such humans. Here you are thrust into the full humanity, the goodness of humanity for the most part. Of course, maybe it gets worse as you become more prominent. I hope not. This is pretty awesome.
I think it has a lot of upside, at least, for me, currently. At least, perhaps because of the podcast. Because most people are really good and people come up to me and they have love in their eyes and over a stretch of 30 seconds you can hug it out and you can just exchange a few words and you reinvigorate your love for humanity. That’s an upside for a loner. I’m a loner. Because otherwise, you have to do a lot of work to find such humans. Here you are thrust into the full humanity, the goodness of humanity for the most part. Of course, maybe it gets worse as you become more prominent. I hope not. This is pretty awesome.
Joscha Bach
I have a couple handful, very close friends, and I don’t have enough time for them, attention for them as it is. I find this very, very regrettable. Then there are so many awesome, interesting people that I keep meeting, and I would like to integrate them in my life, but I just don’t know how because… But there’s only so much time and attention. The older I get, the harder is to bond with new people in a deep way.
I have a couple handful, very close friends, and I don’t have enough time for them, attention for them as it is. I find this very, very regrettable. Then there are so many awesome, interesting people that I keep meeting, and I would like to integrate them in my life, but I just don’t know how because… But there’s only so much time and attention. The older I get, the harder is to bond with new people in a deep way.
Lex Fridman
But can you enjoy… I mean, there’s a picture of you I think with Roger Penrose and Eric Weinstein and a few others that are interesting figures. Can’t you just enjoy random, interesting humans-
But can you enjoy… I mean, there’s a picture of you I think with Roger Penrose and Eric Weinstein and a few others that are interesting figures. Can’t you just enjoy random, interesting humans-
Joscha Bach
Very much.
Very much.
Lex Fridman
… for a short amount of time?
… for a short amount of time?
Joscha Bach
Also, I like these people. What I like is intellectual stimulation, and I’m very grateful that I’m getting it.
Also, I like these people. What I like is intellectual stimulation, and I’m very grateful that I’m getting it.
Lex Fridman
Can you not be melancholy or maybe I’m projecting I hate goodbyes? Can we just not hate goodbyes and just enjoy the hello, take it in a person, take in their ideas, and then move on through life?
Can you not be melancholy or maybe I’m projecting I hate goodbyes? Can we just not hate goodbyes and just enjoy the hello, take it in a person, take in their ideas, and then move on through life?
Joscha Bach
I think it’s totally okay to be said about goodbyes because that indicates that there was something that you’re going to miss.
I think it’s totally okay to be said about goodbyes because that indicates that there was something that you’re going to miss.
Lex Fridman
But it’s painful. Maybe that’s one of the reasons I’m an introvert is I hate goodbyes.
But it’s painful. Maybe that’s one of the reasons I’m an introvert is I hate goodbyes.
Joscha Bach
But you have to say goodbye before you say hello again.
But you have to say goodbye before you say hello again.
Lex Fridman
I know. But that experience of loss, that mini loss, maybe that’s a little death. Maybe I don’t know. I think this melancholy feeling is just the other side of love, and I think they go hand in hand, and it’s a beautiful thing. I’m just being romantic about it at the moment.
I know. But that experience of loss, that mini loss, maybe that’s a little death. Maybe I don’t know. I think this melancholy feeling is just the other side of love, and I think they go hand in hand, and it’s a beautiful thing. I’m just being romantic about it at the moment.
Joscha Bach
I’m not no stranger to melancholy and sometimes it’s difficult to be alive. Sometimes it’s just painful to exist.
I’m not no stranger to melancholy and sometimes it’s difficult to be alive. Sometimes it’s just painful to exist.
Lex Fridman
But that there’s beauty in that pain too. That’s what melancholy feeling is. It’s not negative. Melancholy doesn’t have to be negative.
But that there’s beauty in that pain too. That’s what melancholy feeling is. It’s not negative. Melancholy doesn’t have to be negative.
Joscha Bach
Can also kill you.
Can also kill you.
Lex Fridman
Well, we all die eventually. Now as we got through this topic, the actual question was about what your thoughts are about the recent development of large language models with ChatGPT.
Well, we all die eventually. Now as we got through this topic, the actual question was about what your thoughts are about the recent development of large language models with ChatGPT.
Joscha Bach
Indeed.
Indeed.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of hype. Is some of the hype justified, which is, which isn’t? What are your thoughts high level?
There’s a lot of hype. Is some of the hype justified, which is, which isn’t? What are your thoughts high level?
Joscha Bach
I find that large language models do help us coding. It’s an extremely useful application that is for a lot of people taking stack overflow out of their life in exchange for something that is more efficient. I feel that ChatGPT is like an intern that I have to micromanage. I have been working with people in the past who were less capable than ChatGPT. I’m not saying this because I hate people, but they personally as human beings, there was something present that was not there in ChatGPT, which was why I was covering for them. But ChatGPT has an interesting ability. It does give people superpowers and the people who feel threatened by them are the prompt completers. They are the people who do what ChatGPT is doing right now. If you are not creative, if you don’t build your own thoughts, if you don’t have actual plans in the world, and your only job is to summarize emails and to expand simple intentions into emails again, then ChatGPT might look like a threat.
I find that large language models do help us coding. It’s an extremely useful application that is for a lot of people taking stack overflow out of their life in exchange for something that is more efficient. I feel that ChatGPT is like an intern that I have to micromanage. I have been working with people in the past who were less capable than ChatGPT. I’m not saying this because I hate people, but they personally as human beings, there was something present that was not there in ChatGPT, which was why I was covering for them. But ChatGPT has an interesting ability. It does give people superpowers and the people who feel threatened by them are the prompt completers. They are the people who do what ChatGPT is doing right now. If you are not creative, if you don’t build your own thoughts, if you don’t have actual plans in the world, and your only job is to summarize emails and to expand simple intentions into emails again, then ChatGPT might look like a threat.
But I believe that it is a very beneficial technology that allows us to create more interesting stuff and make the world more beautiful and fascinating if we find to build it into our life in the right ways. I’m quite fascinated by these large language models, but I also think that they are by no means the final development. It’s interesting to see how this development progresses. One thing that the out-of-the-box vanilla language models have as a limitation is that they have still some limited coherence and ability to construct complexity. Even though they exceed human abilities to do what they can do one shot, typically, when you write a text with a language model or using it or when you write code with a language model, it’s not one shot because there won’t be bugs in your program and design errors and compiler error and so on.
Your language model can help you to fix those things. But this process is out of the box not automated yet. There is a management process that also needs to be done. There are some interesting developments BabyAGI and so on that are trying to automate this management process as well. I suspect that soon we are going to see a bunch of cognitive architectures where every module is in some sense a language model or something equivalent. Between the language models, we exchange suitable data structures, not English, and produce compound behavior of this whole thing.
Lex Fridman
To do some of the “prompt engineering” for you. They create these cognitive architectures that do the prompt engineering and you’re just doing the high, high-level meta prompt engineering.
To do some of the “prompt engineering” for you. They create these cognitive architectures that do the prompt engineering and you’re just doing the high, high-level meta prompt engineering.
Joscha Bach
There are limitations in a language model alone. I feel that part of my mind works similarly to a language model, which means I can yell into it a prompt, and it’s going to give me a creative response. But I have to do something with those points first. I have to take it as a generative artifact that may or may not be true. It’s usually a confabulation, it’s just an idea. Then I take this idea and modify it. I might build a new prompt that is stepping off this idea and develop it to the next level or put it into something larger, or I might try to prove whether it’s true or make an experiment. This is what the language models right now are not doing yet, but there’s also no technical reason for why they shouldn’t be able to do this.
There are limitations in a language model alone. I feel that part of my mind works similarly to a language model, which means I can yell into it a prompt, and it’s going to give me a creative response. But I have to do something with those points first. I have to take it as a generative artifact that may or may not be true. It’s usually a confabulation, it’s just an idea. Then I take this idea and modify it. I might build a new prompt that is stepping off this idea and develop it to the next level or put it into something larger, or I might try to prove whether it’s true or make an experiment. This is what the language models right now are not doing yet, but there’s also no technical reason for why they shouldn’t be able to do this.
The way to make a language model coherent is probably not to use reinforcement learning until it only gives you one possible answer that is linking to its source data, but it’s using this as a component in the larger system that can also be built by the language model or is enabled by language model structured components or using different technologies. I suspect that language models will be an important stepping stone in developing different types of systems. One thing that is really missing in the form of language models that we have today is real-time world coupling, right? It’s difficult to do perception with a language model and motor control with a language model. Instead, you would need to have different type of thing that is working with it. Also, the language model is a little bit obscuring what its actual functionality is. Some people associate the structure of the neural network of the language model with the nervous system.
I think that’s the wrong intuition. The neural networks are unlike nervous system. They are more like 100-step functions that use differentiable linear algebra to approximate correlation between adjacent brain states. It’s basically a function that moves the system from one representational state to the next representational state. So if you try to map this into a metaphor that is closer to our brain, imagine that you would take a language model or a model like DELI that you use… For instance, this image-guided diffusion to approximate and camera image and use the activation state of the neural network to interpret the camera image, which in principle I think will be possible very soon. You do this periodically, and now you look at these patterns, how when this thing interacts with the world periodically look like as in time, and these time slices, they are somewhat equivalent to the activation state of the brain at a given moment.
Lex Fridman
How is the actual brain different? Just the asynchronous craziness?
How is the actual brain different? Just the asynchronous craziness?
Joscha Bach
For me, it’s fascinating that they are so vastly different and yet in some circumstances produce somewhat similar behavior. The brain is, first of all, different because it’s a self-organizing system where the individual cell is an agent that is communicating with the other agent that’s around it and is always trying to find some solution. All the structure that pops up is emergent structure. One way in which you could try to look at this is that individual neurons probably need to get a reward so they become trainable, which means they have to have inputs that are not affecting the metabolism or the cell directly, but they’re messages, semantic messages that tell the cell whether it’s just done good or bad and in which direction it should shift its behavior.
For me, it’s fascinating that they are so vastly different and yet in some circumstances produce somewhat similar behavior. The brain is, first of all, different because it’s a self-organizing system where the individual cell is an agent that is communicating with the other agent that’s around it and is always trying to find some solution. All the structure that pops up is emergent structure. One way in which you could try to look at this is that individual neurons probably need to get a reward so they become trainable, which means they have to have inputs that are not affecting the metabolism or the cell directly, but they’re messages, semantic messages that tell the cell whether it’s just done good or bad and in which direction it should shift its behavior.
Once you have such an input, neurons become trainable, and you can train them to perform computations by exchanging messages with other neurons and parts of the signals that they’re exchanging and parts of the computation that are performing are control messages that perform management tasks for other neurons and other cells also suspect that the brain does not stop at the boundary of neurons to other cells, but many adjacent cells will be involved intimately in the functionality of the brain and will be instrumental in distributing rewards and in imagining its functionality.
Lex Fridman
It’s fascinating to think about what those characteristics of the brain enable you to do that language models cannot do.
It’s fascinating to think about what those characteristics of the brain enable you to do that language models cannot do.
Joscha Bach
First of all, there’s a different loss function at work when we learn. To me, it’s fascinating that you can build a system that looks at 800 million pictures and captions and correlates them because I don’t think that a human nervous system could do this. For us, the world is only learnable because the adjacent frames are related and we can afford to discard most of that information during learning. We basically take only in stuff that makes us more coherent, not less coherent, and our neural networks are willing to look at data that is not making the neural network coherent at first, but only in the long run by doing lots and lots of statistics, eventually, patterns become visible and emerge. Our mind seems to be focused on finding the patterns as early as possible.
First of all, there’s a different loss function at work when we learn. To me, it’s fascinating that you can build a system that looks at 800 million pictures and captions and correlates them because I don’t think that a human nervous system could do this. For us, the world is only learnable because the adjacent frames are related and we can afford to discard most of that information during learning. We basically take only in stuff that makes us more coherent, not less coherent, and our neural networks are willing to look at data that is not making the neural network coherent at first, but only in the long run by doing lots and lots of statistics, eventually, patterns become visible and emerge. Our mind seems to be focused on finding the patterns as early as possible.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Filtering early on, not later.
Yeah. Filtering early on, not later.
Joscha Bach
Yes. It’s a slightly different paradigm and it leads to much faster convergence. We only need to look the tiny fraction of the data to become coherent. Of course, we do not have the same richness as our train models. We will not incorporate the entirety of text in the internet and be able to refer to it and have all this knowledge available and being able to confabulate over it. Instead, we have a much, much smaller part of it that is more deliberately built. To me, it would be fascinating to think about how to build such systems. It’s not obvious that they would necessarily be more efficient than us on a digital substrate, but I suspect that they might, so I suspect that the actual AGI that is going to be more interesting is going to use slightly different algorithmic paradigms or sometimes massively different algorithmic paradigms than the current generation of transformer-based learning system.
Yes. It’s a slightly different paradigm and it leads to much faster convergence. We only need to look the tiny fraction of the data to become coherent. Of course, we do not have the same richness as our train models. We will not incorporate the entirety of text in the internet and be able to refer to it and have all this knowledge available and being able to confabulate over it. Instead, we have a much, much smaller part of it that is more deliberately built. To me, it would be fascinating to think about how to build such systems. It’s not obvious that they would necessarily be more efficient than us on a digital substrate, but I suspect that they might, so I suspect that the actual AGI that is going to be more interesting is going to use slightly different algorithmic paradigms or sometimes massively different algorithmic paradigms than the current generation of transformer-based learning system.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it might be using just a bunch of language models like this? Do you think the current transformer-based large language models will take us to AGI?
Do you think it might be using just a bunch of language models like this? Do you think the current transformer-based large language models will take us to AGI?
Joscha Bach
My main issue is I think that they’re quite ugly and brutalist-
My main issue is I think that they’re quite ugly and brutalist-
Lex Fridman
Brutalist? Is that what you said?
Brutalist? Is that what you said?
Joscha Bach
Yes. They are basically brute forcing the problem of thought. By training this thing with looking at instances where people have thought and then trying to deepfake that. If you have enough data, the deepfake becomes indistinguishable from the actual phenomenon, and in many circumstances, it’s going to be identical.
Yes. They are basically brute forcing the problem of thought. By training this thing with looking at instances where people have thought and then trying to deepfake that. If you have enough data, the deepfake becomes indistinguishable from the actual phenomenon, and in many circumstances, it’s going to be identical.
Lex Fridman
Can you deepfake it till you make it? Can you achieve… What are the limitations of this? I mean, can you reason? Let’s use words that are loaded.
Can you deepfake it till you make it? Can you achieve… What are the limitations of this? I mean, can you reason? Let’s use words that are loaded.
Joscha Bach
Yes. That’s a very interesting question. I think that these models clearly making some inference, but if you give them a reasoning task, it’s often difficult for the experimenters to figure out whether the reasoning is the result of the emulation of the reasoning strategy that they saw in human written text or whether it’s something that the system was able to infer by itself. On the other hand, if you think of human reasoning, if you want to become a very good reasoner, you don’t do this by just figuring out yourself. You read about reasoning. The first people who tried to write about reasoning and reflect on it didn’t get it right. Even Aristotle who thought about this very hard and came up with a theory of how syllogisms works and syllogistic reasoning has mistakes in his attempt to build something like a formal logic and gets maybe 80% right. The people that are talking about reasoning professionally today Tarski and Frege and build on their work.
Yes. That’s a very interesting question. I think that these models clearly making some inference, but if you give them a reasoning task, it’s often difficult for the experimenters to figure out whether the reasoning is the result of the emulation of the reasoning strategy that they saw in human written text or whether it’s something that the system was able to infer by itself. On the other hand, if you think of human reasoning, if you want to become a very good reasoner, you don’t do this by just figuring out yourself. You read about reasoning. The first people who tried to write about reasoning and reflect on it didn’t get it right. Even Aristotle who thought about this very hard and came up with a theory of how syllogisms works and syllogistic reasoning has mistakes in his attempt to build something like a formal logic and gets maybe 80% right. The people that are talking about reasoning professionally today Tarski and Frege and build on their work.
In many ways, people when they perform reasoning are emulating what other people wrote about reasoning, right? It’s difficult to really draw this boundary. When François Chollet says that these models are only interpolating between what they saw and what other people are doing. Well, if you give them all the latent dimensions, it can be extracted from the internet. What’s missing? Maybe there is almost everything there. If you’re not sufficiently informed by these dimensions and you need more, I think it’s not difficult to increase the temperature in the large language model to the point that is producing stuff that is maybe 90% nonsense and 10% viable and combine this with some prover that is trying to filter out the viable parts from the nonsense in the same way as our own thinking works. When we are very creative, we increase the temperature in our own mind, and we recreate hypothetical universes and solutions, most of which will not work.
Then we test and we test by building a core that is internally coherent and we use reasoning strategies that use some axiomatic consistency by which we can identify those strategies and thoughts and subuniverses that are viable and that can expand our thinking. If you look at the language models, they have clear limitations right now. One of them is they’re not coupled to the world in real time in the way in which our nervous systems are. It’s difficult for them to observe themselves in the universe and to observe what universe they’re in. Second, they don’t do real-time learnings. They basically get only trained with algorithms that rely on the data being available in batches, so it can be parallelized and run sufficiently on the network and so on. Real-time learning would be very slow so far and inefficient.
That’s clearly something that our nervous systems can do to some degree. There is a problem with these models being coherent, and I suspect that all these problems are solvable without a technological revolution. We don’t need fundamentally new algorithms to change that. For instance, you can enlarge in the context window, and thereby basically create working memory in which you train everything that happens during the day. If that is not sufficient, you add a database and you write some clever mechanisms that the system learns to use to swap out in and out stuff from its prompt context. If that is not sufficient, if your database is full in the evening, overnight, you just train. If system is going to sleep and dream and is going to train the staff from its database into the larger model, but fine-tuning it, building additional layers, and so on.
Then the next day, it starts with a fresh database in the morning with fresh ice has integrated all this stuff. When you talk to people and you have strong disagreements about something, which means that in their mind they have a faulty belief or you have a faulty belief, there’s a lot of dependencies on it. Very often, you will not achieve agreement in one session, but you need to sleep about this once or multiple times before you have integrated all these necessary changes in your mind. Maybe it’s already somewhat similar, right?
Lex Fridman
There’s already a latency even for humans to update the model, retrain the model.
There’s already a latency even for humans to update the model, retrain the model.
Joscha Bach
Of course, we can combine the language model with models that get coupled to reality in real-time and can build multimodal model and bridge between vision models and language models and so on. There is no reason to believe that the language models will necessarily run into some problem that will prevent them from becoming generally intelligent. But I don’t know that. It’s just I don’t see proof that they wouldn’t. My issue is I don’t like them. I think that they’re inefficient. I think that they use way too much compute. I think that given the amazing hardware that we have, we could build something that is much more beautiful than our own mind, and this thing is not as beautiful as our own mind despite being so much larger.
Of course, we can combine the language model with models that get coupled to reality in real-time and can build multimodal model and bridge between vision models and language models and so on. There is no reason to believe that the language models will necessarily run into some problem that will prevent them from becoming generally intelligent. But I don’t know that. It’s just I don’t see proof that they wouldn’t. My issue is I don’t like them. I think that they’re inefficient. I think that they use way too much compute. I think that given the amazing hardware that we have, we could build something that is much more beautiful than our own mind, and this thing is not as beautiful as our own mind despite being so much larger.
Lex Fridman
But it’s a proof of concept.
But it’s a proof of concept.
Joscha Bach
It’s the only thing that works right now. It’s not the only game in town, but it’s the only thing that has this utility with so much simplicity. There’s a bunch of relatively simple algorithms that you can understand in relatively few weeks that can be scaled up massively.
It’s the only thing that works right now. It’s not the only game in town, but it’s the only thing that has this utility with so much simplicity. There’s a bunch of relatively simple algorithms that you can understand in relatively few weeks that can be scaled up massively.
Lex Fridman
It’s the Deep Blue of chess playing. Yeah, it’s ugly.
It’s the Deep Blue of chess playing. Yeah, it’s ugly.
Joscha Bach
Yeah. Claude Shannon had this… When you describe chess suggested that there are two main strategies in which you could play chess. One is that you are making a very complicated plan that reaches far into the future and you try not to make a mistake while enacting it. This is basically the human strategy. The other strategy is that you are brute forcing your way to success, which means you make a tree of possible moves where you look at in principle every move that is open to you or the possible answers, and you try to make this as deeply as possible. Of course, you optimize, you cut off trees that don’t look very promising, and you use libraries of end game and early game and so on to optimize this entire process. But this brute force strategy is how most of the chess programs were built, and this is how computers get better than humans at playing chess. I look at the large language models, I feel that I’m observing the same thing. It’s basically the brute force strategy to thought by training the thing on pretty much the entire internet and then in the limit it gets coherent to a degree that approaches human coherence. On a side effect, it’s able to do things that no human could do, right? It’s able to sift through massive amounts of text relatively quickly and summarize them quickly and it never lapses in attention. I still have the illusion that when I play with ChatGPT, that it’s in principle not doing anything that I could not do if I had Google at my disposal and I get all the resources from the internet and spend enough time on it. But this thing that I have an extremely autistic stupid intern in a way that is extremely good at drudgery, and I can offload the drudgery to the degree that I’m able to automate the management of the intern is something that is difficult for me to overhype at this point because we have not yet started to scratch the surface of what’s possible with this.
Yeah. Claude Shannon had this… When you describe chess suggested that there are two main strategies in which you could play chess. One is that you are making a very complicated plan that reaches far into the future and you try not to make a mistake while enacting it. This is basically the human strategy. The other strategy is that you are brute forcing your way to success, which means you make a tree of possible moves where you look at in principle every move that is open to you or the possible answers, and you try to make this as deeply as possible. Of course, you optimize, you cut off trees that don’t look very promising, and you use libraries of end game and early game and so on to optimize this entire process. But this brute force strategy is how most of the chess programs were built, and this is how computers get better than humans at playing chess. I look at the large language models, I feel that I’m observing the same thing. It’s basically the brute force strategy to thought by training the thing on pretty much the entire internet and then in the limit it gets coherent to a degree that approaches human coherence. On a side effect, it’s able to do things that no human could do, right? It’s able to sift through massive amounts of text relatively quickly and summarize them quickly and it never lapses in attention. I still have the illusion that when I play with ChatGPT, that it’s in principle not doing anything that I could not do if I had Google at my disposal and I get all the resources from the internet and spend enough time on it. But this thing that I have an extremely autistic stupid intern in a way that is extremely good at drudgery, and I can offload the drudgery to the degree that I’m able to automate the management of the intern is something that is difficult for me to overhype at this point because we have not yet started to scratch the surface of what’s possible with this.
Lex Fridman
But it feels like it’s a tireless intern or maybe it’s an army of interns. So you get to command these slightly incompetent creatures and there’s an aspect because of how rapidly you can iterate with it. It’s also part of the brainstorming, part of the inspiration for your own thinking. You get to interact with the thing. I mean, when I’m programming or doing any generational GPT, it’s somehow is a catalyst for your own thinking. In a way, that I think an intern might not be.
But it feels like it’s a tireless intern or maybe it’s an army of interns. So you get to command these slightly incompetent creatures and there’s an aspect because of how rapidly you can iterate with it. It’s also part of the brainstorming, part of the inspiration for your own thinking. You get to interact with the thing. I mean, when I’m programming or doing any generational GPT, it’s somehow is a catalyst for your own thinking. In a way, that I think an intern might not be.
Joscha Bach
Yeah, it gets really interesting I find as when you turn it into a multi-agent system. For instance, you can get the system to generate a dialogue between a patient and a doctor very easily. But what’s more interesting is you have one instance of ChatGPT that is the patient and you tell it in the prompt what complicated syndrome it has. The other one is a therapist who doesn’t know anything about this patient, and you just have these two instances battling it out and observe the psychiatrist or a psychologist trying to analyze the patient and trying to figure out what’s wrong with the patient. If you try to take away large problem, for instance, how to build a company and you turn this into lots and lots of sub-problems, then often you can get to a level where the language model is able to solve this.
Yeah, it gets really interesting I find as when you turn it into a multi-agent system. For instance, you can get the system to generate a dialogue between a patient and a doctor very easily. But what’s more interesting is you have one instance of ChatGPT that is the patient and you tell it in the prompt what complicated syndrome it has. The other one is a therapist who doesn’t know anything about this patient, and you just have these two instances battling it out and observe the psychiatrist or a psychologist trying to analyze the patient and trying to figure out what’s wrong with the patient. If you try to take away large problem, for instance, how to build a company and you turn this into lots and lots of sub-problems, then often you can get to a level where the language model is able to solve this.
What I also found interesting is based on the observation that ChatGPT is pretty good at translating between programing languages, but sometimes there’s difficulty to write very long coherent algorithms that you need to write them as human author. Why not design a language that is suitable for this? Some kind of pseudocode that is more relaxed than Python. That allows you to sometimes specify a problem vaguely in human terms and let ChatGPT take care of the rest. You can use ChatGPT to develop that syntax for it and develop new programming paradigms in this way. We very soon get to the point where this age-old question for us computer scientists, what is the best programing language, and can we write a better programing language? Now I think that almost every serious computer scientist goes through a phase like this in their life.
This question that is almost no longer relevant because what is different between the programming language is not what they let the computer do, but what they let you think about what the computer should be doing. Now the ChatGPT becomes an interface to this in which you can specify in many, many ways what the computer should be doing and ChatGPT or some other language model or combination of system is going to take care of the rest.
Lex Fridman
Allow you expand the realm of thought you’re allowed to have when interacting with the computer. It sounds to me like you’re saying there’s basically no limitations. Your intuition says to what larger language-
Allow you expand the realm of thought you’re allowed to have when interacting with the computer. It sounds to me like you’re saying there’s basically no limitations. Your intuition says to what larger language-
Joscha Bach
I don’t know of that limitation. When I currently play with it’s quite limited. I wish that it was way better.
I don’t know of that limitation. When I currently play with it’s quite limited. I wish that it was way better.
Lex Fridman
But isn’t that your fault versus the large language model?
But isn’t that your fault versus the large language model?
Joscha Bach
I don’t know. Of course, it’s always my fault. There’s probably a way to make it lot better.
I don’t know. Of course, it’s always my fault. There’s probably a way to make it lot better.
Lex Fridman
Is everything your fault? I just want to get you on the record saying.
Is everything your fault? I just want to get you on the record saying.
Joscha Bach
Yes, everything is my fault. That doesn’t work in my life. At least, that is usually the most useful perspective for myself. Even though with hindsight I feel no. I sometimes wish I could have seen myself as part of my environment more and understand that a lot of people are actually seeing me and looking at me and are trying to make my life work in the same way as I try to help others. Making this switch to this level-three perspective is something that happened long after my level-four perspective in my life. I wish that I could have had it earlier. It’s also not now that I don’t feel like I’m complete, I’m all over the place. That’s all.
Yes, everything is my fault. That doesn’t work in my life. At least, that is usually the most useful perspective for myself. Even though with hindsight I feel no. I sometimes wish I could have seen myself as part of my environment more and understand that a lot of people are actually seeing me and looking at me and are trying to make my life work in the same way as I try to help others. Making this switch to this level-three perspective is something that happened long after my level-four perspective in my life. I wish that I could have had it earlier. It’s also not now that I don’t feel like I’m complete, I’m all over the place. That’s all.
Happiness
Lex Fridman
Where’s happiness in terms of stages is on three or four that you take that tangent?
Where’s happiness in terms of stages is on three or four that you take that tangent?
Joscha Bach
You can be happy at any stage or unhappy. But I think that if you are at a stage where you get agency over how your feelings are generated. To some degree you start doing this when you [inaudible 01:35:15] sense, I believe that you understand that you are in charge of your own emotion to some degree and that you are responsible how you approach the world, that it’s basically your task to have some basic hygiene how in the way in which you deal with your mind and you cannot blame your environment for the way in which you feel. But you live in a world that is highly mobile and it’s your job to choose the environment that you thrive and to build it.
You can be happy at any stage or unhappy. But I think that if you are at a stage where you get agency over how your feelings are generated. To some degree you start doing this when you [inaudible 01:35:15] sense, I believe that you understand that you are in charge of your own emotion to some degree and that you are responsible how you approach the world, that it’s basically your task to have some basic hygiene how in the way in which you deal with your mind and you cannot blame your environment for the way in which you feel. But you live in a world that is highly mobile and it’s your job to choose the environment that you thrive and to build it.
Sometimes it’s difficult to get the necessary strength and energy to do this and independence. The worst you feel, the harder it is. But it’s something that we learn. It’s also this thing that we are usually incomplete, right? I’m a rare mind, which means I’m a mind that is incomplete in ways that are harder to complete. For me, it might have been harder to initially to find the right relationships and friends that complete me to the degree that I become an almost functional human being.
Lex Fridman
Oh, man, the search space of humans that complete you is an interesting one, especially for Joscha Bach. That’s an interesting… Because talking about brute-force search in chess, I wonder what that search tree looks like.
Oh, man, the search space of humans that complete you is an interesting one, especially for Joscha Bach. That’s an interesting… Because talking about brute-force search in chess, I wonder what that search tree looks like.
Joscha Bach
I think that my rational thinking is not good enough to solve that task. A lot of problems in my life that I can conceptualize as software problems and the failure modes are bugs, and I can debug them and write software that take care of the missing functionality. But there is stuff that I don’t understand well enough to and to use my analytical reasoning to solve the issue. Then I have to develop my intuitions and often I have to do this with people who are wiser than me. That’s something that’s hard for me because I’m not born with the instinct to submit to other people’s wisdom.
I think that my rational thinking is not good enough to solve that task. A lot of problems in my life that I can conceptualize as software problems and the failure modes are bugs, and I can debug them and write software that take care of the missing functionality. But there is stuff that I don’t understand well enough to and to use my analytical reasoning to solve the issue. Then I have to develop my intuitions and often I have to do this with people who are wiser than me. That’s something that’s hard for me because I’m not born with the instinct to submit to other people’s wisdom.
Lex Fridman
What problems are we talking about? This is stage three love?
What problems are we talking about? This is stage three love?
Joscha Bach
I found love was never hard.
I found love was never hard.
Lex Fridman
What is hard then?
What is hard then?
Joscha Bach
Fitting into a world that most people work differently than you and have different intuitions of what should be done.
Fitting into a world that most people work differently than you and have different intuitions of what should be done.
Lex Fridman
Empathy?
Empathy?
Joscha Bach
It’s also aesthetics. When you come into a world where almost everything is ugly and you come out of a world where everything is beautiful. I grew up in a beautiful place and as a child of an artist. In this place, it was mostly nature. Everything had intrinsic beauty and everything was built out of an intrinsic need for it to work for itself. Everything that my father created was something that he made to get the world to work for himself. I felt the same thing. When I come out into the world, and I am asked to submit to lots and lots of rules, I’m asking, okay, when I observe your stupid rules, what is the benefit? I see the life that is being offered as a reward, it’s not attractive.
It’s also aesthetics. When you come into a world where almost everything is ugly and you come out of a world where everything is beautiful. I grew up in a beautiful place and as a child of an artist. In this place, it was mostly nature. Everything had intrinsic beauty and everything was built out of an intrinsic need for it to work for itself. Everything that my father created was something that he made to get the world to work for himself. I felt the same thing. When I come out into the world, and I am asked to submit to lots and lots of rules, I’m asking, okay, when I observe your stupid rules, what is the benefit? I see the life that is being offered as a reward, it’s not attractive.
Lex Fridman
When you were born and raised in extraterrestrial prints in a world full of people wearing suits, it’s a challenging integration.
When you were born and raised in extraterrestrial prints in a world full of people wearing suits, it’s a challenging integration.
Joscha Bach
Yes. But it also means that I’m often blind for the ways in which everybody is creating their own bubble of wholesomeness or almost everybody. People are trying to do it. For me, to discover this, it was necessary that I found people who had a similar shape of soul as myself. Basically, where I felt these are my people that treat each other in such a way as if they’re around with each other for eternity.
Yes. But it also means that I’m often blind for the ways in which everybody is creating their own bubble of wholesomeness or almost everybody. People are trying to do it. For me, to discover this, it was necessary that I found people who had a similar shape of soul as myself. Basically, where I felt these are my people that treat each other in such a way as if they’re around with each other for eternity.
Lex Fridman
How long does it take you to detect the geometry, the shape of the soul of another human to notice that they might be one of your kind?
How long does it take you to detect the geometry, the shape of the soul of another human to notice that they might be one of your kind?
Joscha Bach
Sometimes it’s instantly, and I’m wrong. Sometimes it takes a long time.
Sometimes it’s instantly, and I’m wrong. Sometimes it takes a long time.
Lex Fridman
You believe in love at first sight, Joscha Bach?
You believe in love at first sight, Joscha Bach?
Joscha Bach
Yes. But I also noticed that I have been wrong. Sometimes I look at a person and I’m just enamored by everything about them. Sometimes this persists and sometimes it doesn’t. I have the illusion that it much better at recognizing who people are as I grow older.
Yes. But I also noticed that I have been wrong. Sometimes I look at a person and I’m just enamored by everything about them. Sometimes this persists and sometimes it doesn’t. I have the illusion that it much better at recognizing who people are as I grow older.
Lex Fridman
But that could be just cynicism. No.
But that could be just cynicism. No.
Joscha Bach
No, It’s not cynicism. It’s often more that I’m able to recognize what somebody needs when we interact and how we can meaningfully interact. It’s not cynical at all.
No, It’s not cynicism. It’s often more that I’m able to recognize what somebody needs when we interact and how we can meaningfully interact. It’s not cynical at all.
Lex Fridman
You’re better at noticing.
You’re better at noticing.
Joscha Bach
Yes, I’m much better I think in some such circumstances at understanding how to interact with other people than I did when I was young.
Yes, I’m much better I think in some such circumstances at understanding how to interact with other people than I did when I was young.
Lex Fridman
That takes us to-
That takes us to-
Joscha Bach
It doesn’t mean that I’m always very good at it.
It doesn’t mean that I’m always very good at it.
Lex Fridman
That takes us back to prompt engineering of noticing how to be a better prompt engineer of an LLM. A sense I have is that there’s a bottomless well of skill to become a great prompt engineer. It feels like it is all my fault whenever I fail to use ChatGPT correctly that I didn’t find the right words.
That takes us back to prompt engineering of noticing how to be a better prompt engineer of an LLM. A sense I have is that there’s a bottomless well of skill to become a great prompt engineer. It feels like it is all my fault whenever I fail to use ChatGPT correctly that I didn’t find the right words.
Joscha Bach
Most of the stuff that I’m doing in my life doesn’t need ChatGPT. There are a few tasks that where it helps, but the main stuff that I need to do like developing my own thoughts and aesthetics and relationship to people, and it’s necessary for me to write for myself because writing is not so much about producing an artifact that other people can use, but it’s a way to structure your own thoughts and develop yourself. I think this idea that kids are writing their own essays with ChatGPT in the future is going to have this drawback that they miss out on the ability to structure their own minds via writing. I hope that the schools that our kids are in will retain the wisdom of understanding what parts should be automated and which ones shouldn’t.
Most of the stuff that I’m doing in my life doesn’t need ChatGPT. There are a few tasks that where it helps, but the main stuff that I need to do like developing my own thoughts and aesthetics and relationship to people, and it’s necessary for me to write for myself because writing is not so much about producing an artifact that other people can use, but it’s a way to structure your own thoughts and develop yourself. I think this idea that kids are writing their own essays with ChatGPT in the future is going to have this drawback that they miss out on the ability to structure their own minds via writing. I hope that the schools that our kids are in will retain the wisdom of understanding what parts should be automated and which ones shouldn’t.
Lex Fridman
But at the same time, it feels like there’s power in disagreeing with the thing that ChatGPT produces. I use it like that for programming. I’ll see the thing it recommends, and then I’ll write different code that disagree, and in the disagreement, your mind grows stronger.
But at the same time, it feels like there’s power in disagreeing with the thing that ChatGPT produces. I use it like that for programming. I’ll see the thing it recommends, and then I’ll write different code that disagree, and in the disagreement, your mind grows stronger.
Joscha Bach
I’m recently wrote a tool that is using the camera on my MacBook and Swift to read pixels out of it and manipulate them and so on. I don’t know Swift. It was super helpful to have this thing that is writing stuff for me. Also, interesting that mostly it didn’t work at first. I felt like I was talking to a human being who was trying to hack this on my computer without understanding my configuration very much. Also, making a lot of mistakes. Sometimes it’s a little bit incoherent, so you have to ultimately understand what it’s doing. It’s still no other way around it, but I do feel it’s much more powerful and faster than using Stack Overflow.
I’m recently wrote a tool that is using the camera on my MacBook and Swift to read pixels out of it and manipulate them and so on. I don’t know Swift. It was super helpful to have this thing that is writing stuff for me. Also, interesting that mostly it didn’t work at first. I felt like I was talking to a human being who was trying to hack this on my computer without understanding my configuration very much. Also, making a lot of mistakes. Sometimes it’s a little bit incoherent, so you have to ultimately understand what it’s doing. It’s still no other way around it, but I do feel it’s much more powerful and faster than using Stack Overflow.
Artificial consciousness
Lex Fridman
Do you think GPTN can achieve consciousness?
Do you think GPTN can achieve consciousness?
Joscha Bach
Well, GPTN probably, it’s not even clear for the present systems. When I talk to my friends at OpenAI, they feel that this question, whether the models currently are conscious is much more complicated than many people might think. I guess that it’s not that OpenAI has a homogenous opinion about this, but there’s some aspects to this. One is, of course, this language model has written a lot of text in which people were conscious or describe their own consciousness, and it’s emulating this. If it’s conscious, it’s probably not conscious in a way that is closed to the way in which human beings are conscious. But while it is going through these states and going through 100-step function that is emulating adjacent brain states that require a degree of self-reflection, it can also create a model of an observer that is reflecting itself in real-time and describe what that’s like.
Well, GPTN probably, it’s not even clear for the present systems. When I talk to my friends at OpenAI, they feel that this question, whether the models currently are conscious is much more complicated than many people might think. I guess that it’s not that OpenAI has a homogenous opinion about this, but there’s some aspects to this. One is, of course, this language model has written a lot of text in which people were conscious or describe their own consciousness, and it’s emulating this. If it’s conscious, it’s probably not conscious in a way that is closed to the way in which human beings are conscious. But while it is going through these states and going through 100-step function that is emulating adjacent brain states that require a degree of self-reflection, it can also create a model of an observer that is reflecting itself in real-time and describe what that’s like.
While this model is the deepfake, our own consciousness is also as if it’s virtual, right? It’s not physical. Our consciousness is a representation of a self-reflexive observer that only exists in patterns of interaction between cells. It is not a physical object in the sense that exists in base reality, but it’s really a representational object that develops its causal power only from a certain modeling perspective.
Lex Fridman
It’s virtual.
It’s virtual.
Joscha Bach
Yes. To which degree is the virtuality of the consciousness and ChatGPT more virtual and less causal than the virtuality of our own consciousness? But you could say it doesn’t count. It doesn’t count much more than the consciousness of a character in a novel, right? It’s important for the reader to have the outcome. The artifact is describing in the text generated by the author of the book, what it’s like to be conscious in a particular situation and performs the necessary inferences.
Yes. To which degree is the virtuality of the consciousness and ChatGPT more virtual and less causal than the virtuality of our own consciousness? But you could say it doesn’t count. It doesn’t count much more than the consciousness of a character in a novel, right? It’s important for the reader to have the outcome. The artifact is describing in the text generated by the author of the book, what it’s like to be conscious in a particular situation and performs the necessary inferences.
But the task of creating coherence in real-time in a self-organizing system by keeping yourself coherent so the system is reflexive, that is something that the language models don’t need to do. There is no causal need for the system to be conscious in the same way as we are. For me, it would be very interesting to experiment with this, to basically build a system like a CAT probably should be careful at first, build something that’s small, that’s limited resources that we can control, and study how systems notice a self-model, how they become self-aware in real-time. I think it might be a good idea to not start with the language model but to start from scratch using principles of self-organization.
Lex Fridman
Okay. Can you elaborate why you think that is so self-organization this…
Okay. Can you elaborate why you think that is so self-organization this…
Lex Fridman
… why you think that is? So, self-organization, this kind of radical legality that you see in the biological systems, why can’t you start with a language model, what’s your intuition?
… why you think that is? So, self-organization, this kind of radical legality that you see in the biological systems, why can’t you start with a language model, what’s your intuition?
Joscha Bach
My intuition is that the language models that we are building are golems. They are machines that you give a task, and they’re going to execute the task until some condition is met and there’s nobody home. And the way in which nobody is home leads to that system doing things that are undesirable in a particular context.
My intuition is that the language models that we are building are golems. They are machines that you give a task, and they’re going to execute the task until some condition is met and there’s nobody home. And the way in which nobody is home leads to that system doing things that are undesirable in a particular context.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
So, you have that thing talking to a child and maybe it says something that could be shocking and traumatic to the child. Or you have that thing writing a speech and it introduces errors in the speech that no human being would ever do if they’re responsible. The system doesn’t know who’s talking to whom. There is no ground truth that the system is embedded into.
So, you have that thing talking to a child and maybe it says something that could be shocking and traumatic to the child. Or you have that thing writing a speech and it introduces errors in the speech that no human being would ever do if they’re responsible. The system doesn’t know who’s talking to whom. There is no ground truth that the system is embedded into.
And of course we can create an external tool that is prompting our language model always into the same semblance of ground truth, but it’s not like the internal structure is causally produced by the needs of a being to survive in the universe, it is produced by imitating structure on the internet.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but can we externally inject into it this coherent approximation of a world model that has to sync up?
Yeah, but can we externally inject into it this coherent approximation of a world model that has to sync up?
Joscha Bach
Maybe it is sufficient to use the transformer with the different dust function that optimizes for short-term coherence rather than next-token prediction over the long run. We had many definitions of intelligence in history of AI, next-token prediction was not very high up.
Maybe it is sufficient to use the transformer with the different dust function that optimizes for short-term coherence rather than next-token prediction over the long run. We had many definitions of intelligence in history of AI, next-token prediction was not very high up.
And there are some similarities like cognition as data compression is an odd trope, Solomonoff induction where you are trying to understand intelligence as predicting future observations from past observations, which is intrinsic to data compression.
And predictive coding is a paradigm that there’s boundary between neuroscience and physics and computer science, so it’s not something that is completely alien, but this radical thing that you only do in next-token prediction and see what happens is something where most people, I think, were surprised that this works so well.
Lex Fridman
So simple, but is it really that much more radical than just the idea of compression, intelligence is compression?
So simple, but is it really that much more radical than just the idea of compression, intelligence is compression?
Joscha Bach
The idea that compression is sufficient to produce all the desired behaviors is a very radical idea.
The idea that compression is sufficient to produce all the desired behaviors is a very radical idea.
Lex Fridman
But equally radical as the next token prediction?
But equally radical as the next token prediction?
Joscha Bach
It’s something that wouldn’t work in biological organisms, I believe.
It’s something that wouldn’t work in biological organisms, I believe.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
Biological organisms have something like next frame prediction for our perceptual system where we try to filter out principal components out of the perceptual data and build hierarchies over them to track the world. But our behavior ultimately is directed by hundreds of physiological and probably dozens of social and a few cognitive needs that are intrinsic to us, that are built into the system as reflexes and direct us until we can transcend them and replace them by instrumental behavior that relates to our higher goals.
Biological organisms have something like next frame prediction for our perceptual system where we try to filter out principal components out of the perceptual data and build hierarchies over them to track the world. But our behavior ultimately is directed by hundreds of physiological and probably dozens of social and a few cognitive needs that are intrinsic to us, that are built into the system as reflexes and direct us until we can transcend them and replace them by instrumental behavior that relates to our higher goals.
Lex Fridman
And it also seems so much more complicated and messy than next frame prediction, even the idea of frame seems counter biological.
And it also seems so much more complicated and messy than next frame prediction, even the idea of frame seems counter biological.
Joscha Bach
Yes, of course, there’s not this degree of simultaneity in the biological system. But again, I don’t know whether this is actually an optimization if we imitate biology here, because creating something like simultaneity is necessary for many processes that happen in the brain. And you see the outcome of that by synchronized brainwaves, which suggests that there is indeed synchronization going on, but the synchronization creates overhead and this overhead is going to make the cells more expensive to run and you need more redundancy and it makes the system slower.
Yes, of course, there’s not this degree of simultaneity in the biological system. But again, I don’t know whether this is actually an optimization if we imitate biology here, because creating something like simultaneity is necessary for many processes that happen in the brain. And you see the outcome of that by synchronized brainwaves, which suggests that there is indeed synchronization going on, but the synchronization creates overhead and this overhead is going to make the cells more expensive to run and you need more redundancy and it makes the system slower.
So, if you can build a system in which the simultaneity gets engineered into it, maybe you have a benefit that you can exploit that is not available to the biological system and that you should not discard right away.
Lex Fridman
You tweeted, once again, “When I talk to ChatGPT, I’m talking to an NPC. What’s going to be interesting, and perhaps scary, is when AI becomes a first person player.” So, what does that step look like? I really like that tweet, that step between NPC to first person player. What’s required for that?
You tweeted, once again, “When I talk to ChatGPT, I’m talking to an NPC. What’s going to be interesting, and perhaps scary, is when AI becomes a first person player.” So, what does that step look like? I really like that tweet, that step between NPC to first person player. What’s required for that?
Is that kind of what we’ve been talking about, this kind of external source of coherence and inspiration of how to take the leap into the unknown that we humans do? Man’s search for meaning, LLM’s search for meaning.
Joscha Bach
I don’t know if the language model is the right paradigm because it is doing too much. It’s giving you too much and it’s hard once you have too much to take away from it again. The way in which our own mind works is not that we train a language model in our own mind and after the language model is there, we build a personal self on top of it that then relates to the world.
I don’t know if the language model is the right paradigm because it is doing too much. It’s giving you too much and it’s hard once you have too much to take away from it again. The way in which our own mind works is not that we train a language model in our own mind and after the language model is there, we build a personal self on top of it that then relates to the world.
There is something that is being built, right? There is a game management that is being built. There is a language of thought that is being developed that allows different parts of the mind to talk to each other, and this is a bit of a speculative hypothesis that this language of thought is there, but I suspect that it’s important for the way in which our own minds work. And building these principles into a system might be a more straightforward way to a first person AI, so to something that first creates an intentional self and then creates a personal self.
So, the way in which this seems to be working, I think, is that when the game engine is built in your mind, it’s not just following gradients where you are stimulated by the environment and then end up with having a solution to how the world works. I suspect that building this game engine in your own mind does require intelligence, it’s a constructive task where at times you need to reason, and this is a task that we are fulfilling in the first years of our life.
So, during the first year of its life, an infant is building a lot of structure about the world that does inquire experiments and some first principles, reasoning and so on. And in this time there is usually no personal self. There is a first person perspective, but it’s not a person. This notion that you are a human being that is interacting in a social context and is confronted with an immutable world in which objects are fixed and can no longer be changed, in which the dream can no longer be influenced, it’s something that emerges a little bit later in our life.
And I personally suspect that this is something that our ancestors had known and we have forgotten because I suspect that it’s there in plain sight in Genesis 1, in this first book of the Bible, where it’s being described that this creative spirit is hovering over the substrate and then is creating a boundary between the world model and sphere of ideas, earth and heaven, as they’re being described there, and then it’s creating contrast and then dimensions and then space, and then it creates organic shapes and solids and liquids and builds a world from them and creates plants and animals, give them all their names.
And once that’s done, it creates another spirit in its own image, but it creates it as men and women, as something that thinks of itself as a human being and puts it into this world. And the Christians mistranslate this, I suspect, when they say this is the description of the creation of the physical universe by a supernatural being. I think this is literally a description of how in every mind a universe is being created as some kind of game engine by a creative spirit, our first consciousness that emerges in our mind even before we are born and that creates the interaction between organism and world. And once that is built and trained, the personal self is being created and we only remember being the personal self, we no longer remember how we created the game engine.
Lex Fridman
So, God in this view is the first creative mind in the early…
So, God in this view is the first creative mind in the early…
Joscha Bach
It’s the first consciousness.
It’s the first consciousness.
Lex Fridman
In the early days, in the early months.
In the early days, in the early months.
Joscha Bach
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Of development
Of development
Joscha Bach
And it’s still there. You still have this outer mind that creates your sense of whether you’re being loved by the world or not and what your place in the world is, right? It’s something that is not yourself that is producing this, it’s your mind that does it. So, there is an outer mind that basically is an agent that determines who you are with respect to the world, and while you are stuck being that personal self in this world, until you get to stage six to destroy the boundary.
And it’s still there. You still have this outer mind that creates your sense of whether you’re being loved by the world or not and what your place in the world is, right? It’s something that is not yourself that is producing this, it’s your mind that does it. So, there is an outer mind that basically is an agent that determines who you are with respect to the world, and while you are stuck being that personal self in this world, until you get to stage six to destroy the boundary.
And we all do this, I think, earlier in small glimpses, and maybe we’re sometimes we can remember what it was like when we were a small child and get some glimpses into how it’s been, but for most people that rarely happens.
Suffering
Lex Fridman
Just glimpses. You tweeted, “Suffering results for one part of the mind failing at regulating another part of the mind. Suffering happens at an early stage of mental development. I don’t think that superhuman AI would suffer.” What’s your intuition there?
Just glimpses. You tweeted, “Suffering results for one part of the mind failing at regulating another part of the mind. Suffering happens at an early stage of mental development. I don’t think that superhuman AI would suffer.” What’s your intuition there?
Joscha Bach
The philosopher Thomas Metzinger is very concerned that the creation of superhuman intelligence would lead to superhuman suffering.
The philosopher Thomas Metzinger is very concerned that the creation of superhuman intelligence would lead to superhuman suffering.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
And so, he’s strongly against it. And personally, I don’t think that this happens because suffering is not happening at the boundary between ourself and the physical universe. It’s not stuff on our skin that makes us suffer. It happens at the boundary between self and world, and the world here is the world model, it’s the stuff that is created by your mind.
And so, he’s strongly against it. And personally, I don’t think that this happens because suffering is not happening at the boundary between ourself and the physical universe. It’s not stuff on our skin that makes us suffer. It happens at the boundary between self and world, and the world here is the world model, it’s the stuff that is created by your mind.
Lex Fridman
But that’s all-
But that’s all-
Joscha Bach
It’s a presentation of how the universe is and how it should be and how you yourself relate to this and at this boundary is where suffering happens. So suffering in some sense is self-inflicted, but not by your personal self, it’s inflicted by the mind on the personal self that experiences itself as you, and you can turn off suffering when you are able to get on this outer level.
It’s a presentation of how the universe is and how it should be and how you yourself relate to this and at this boundary is where suffering happens. So suffering in some sense is self-inflicted, but not by your personal self, it’s inflicted by the mind on the personal self that experiences itself as you, and you can turn off suffering when you are able to get on this outer level.
So, when you manage to understand how the mind is producing pain and pleasure and fear and love and so on, then you can take charge of this and you get agency of whether you’re suffer. Technically, what pain and pleasure is, they are learning signals, right? Part of your brain is sending a learning signal to another part of the brain to improve its performance. And sometimes this doesn’t work because this trainer who sense the signal does not have a good model of how to improve the performance, so it’s sending a signal, but the performance doesn’t get better and then it might crank up the pain and it gets worse and worse and the behavior of the system may be even deteriorating as a result, but until this is resolved, this regulation issue, your pain is increasing, and this is, I think, typically what you describe as suffering.
So, in this sense, you could say that pain is very natural and helpful, but suffering is the result of a regulation problem in which you try to regulate something that cannot actually be regulated, and that could be resolved if you would be able to get at the level of your mind where the pain signal is being created and rerouted and improve the regulation. And a lot of people get there, if you are a monk who is spending decades reflecting about how their own psyche works, you can get to the point where you realize that suffering is really a choice and you can choose how your mind is set up.
And I don’t think that AI would stay in the state where the personal self doesn’t get agency or this model, what the system has about itself, it doesn’t get agency how it’s actually implemented. It wouldn’t stay in that state for very long.
Lex Fridman
So, it goes through the stages real quick, the seven stages, it’s going to go to enlightenment real quick.
So, it goes through the stages real quick, the seven stages, it’s going to go to enlightenment real quick.
Joscha Bach
Yeah. Of course, there might be a lot of stuff happening in between because if we have a system that works at a much higher frame rate than us, then even though it looks very short to us, maybe for the system there’s a much longer subjective time in which things are unpleasant.
Yeah. Of course, there might be a lot of stuff happening in between because if we have a system that works at a much higher frame rate than us, then even though it looks very short to us, maybe for the system there’s a much longer subjective time in which things are unpleasant.
Lex Fridman
What if the thing that we recognize as super intelligent is actually living at stage five, that the thing that’s stage six enlightenment is not very productive, so in order to be productive in society and impress us with this power, it has to be a reasoning self authoring agent, that enlightenment makes you lazy as an agent in the world?
What if the thing that we recognize as super intelligent is actually living at stage five, that the thing that’s stage six enlightenment is not very productive, so in order to be productive in society and impress us with this power, it has to be a reasoning self authoring agent, that enlightenment makes you lazy as an agent in the world?
Joscha Bach
Well, of course it makes you lazy, because you no longer see the point, so it doesn’t make you not lazy, it just, in some sense, adapts you to what you perceive as your true circumstances.
Well, of course it makes you lazy, because you no longer see the point, so it doesn’t make you not lazy, it just, in some sense, adapts you to what you perceive as your true circumstances.
Lex Fridman
So, what if all AGIs, they’re only productive as they progress through one, two, three, four, five, and the moment they get to six, it’s a failure mode essentially, as far as humans are concerned, because they’re just start chilling, they’re like, “Fuck it, I’m out.”
So, what if all AGIs, they’re only productive as they progress through one, two, three, four, five, and the moment they get to six, it’s a failure mode essentially, as far as humans are concerned, because they’re just start chilling, they’re like, “Fuck it, I’m out.”
Joscha Bach
Not necessarily. I suspect that the monks who are self emulated for their political beliefs to make statements about the occupation of Tibet by China, they were probably being able to regulate the physical pain in any way they wanted to. And suffering was the spiritual suffering that was the result of that choice that they made of what they wanted to identify as. So, stage five doesn’t necessarily mean that you have no identity anymore, but you can choose your identity, you can make it instrumental to the world that you want to have.
Not necessarily. I suspect that the monks who are self emulated for their political beliefs to make statements about the occupation of Tibet by China, they were probably being able to regulate the physical pain in any way they wanted to. And suffering was the spiritual suffering that was the result of that choice that they made of what they wanted to identify as. So, stage five doesn’t necessarily mean that you have no identity anymore, but you can choose your identity, you can make it instrumental to the world that you want to have.
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Lex Fridman
Let me bring up Eliezer Yudkowsky and his warnings to human civilization that AI will likely kill all of us. What are your thoughts about his perspective on this? Can you steel man his case and what aspects with it do you disagree?
Let me bring up Eliezer Yudkowsky and his warnings to human civilization that AI will likely kill all of us. What are your thoughts about his perspective on this? Can you steel man his case and what aspects with it do you disagree?
Joscha Bach
One thing that I find concerning in the discussion of his arguments that many people are dismissive of his arguments, but the counterarguments that they’re giving are not very convincing to me. And so, based on this state of discussion, I find that from Eliezer’s perspective, and I think I can take that perspective to some approximate degree that probably is normally at his intellectual level, but I think I see what he’s up to and why he feels the way he does and it makes total sense.
One thing that I find concerning in the discussion of his arguments that many people are dismissive of his arguments, but the counterarguments that they’re giving are not very convincing to me. And so, based on this state of discussion, I find that from Eliezer’s perspective, and I think I can take that perspective to some approximate degree that probably is normally at his intellectual level, but I think I see what he’s up to and why he feels the way he does and it makes total sense.
I think that his perspective is somewhat similar to the perspective of Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber, and not that Eliezer would be willing to send pipe bombs to anybody to blow them up, but when he wrote this Times article in which he warned about AI being likely to kill everybody and that we would need to stop its development or halt it, I think there is a risk that he’s taking that somebody might get violent if they read this and get really, really scared. So, I think that there is some consideration that he’s making where he’s already going in this direction where he has to take responsibility if something happens and people get harmed.
And the reason why Ted Kaczynski did this, was that from his own perspective, technological society cannot be made sustainable, it’s doomed to fail, it’s going to lead to an environmental and eventually also human holocaust in which we die because of the environmental destruction, the destruction of our food chains, the pollution of the environment. And so, from Kaczynski’s perspective, we need to stop industrialization, we need to stop technology, we need to go back because he didn’t see a way moving forward and I suspect that in some sense there’s a similarity in Eliezer’s thinking to this kind of fear about progress.
And I’m not dismissive about this at all, I take it quite seriously. And I think that there is a chance that could happen, that if we build machines that get control over processes that are crucial for the regulation of life on earth and we no longer have agency to influence what’s happening there, that this might create large scale disasters for us.
Lex Fridman
Do you have a sense that the march towards this uncontrollable autonomy of super intelligent systems is inevitable? I mean, that’s essentially what he’s saying, that there’s no hope. His advice to young people was prepare for a short life.
Do you have a sense that the march towards this uncontrollable autonomy of super intelligent systems is inevitable? I mean, that’s essentially what he’s saying, that there’s no hope. His advice to young people was prepare for a short life.
Joscha Bach
I don’t think that’s useful. I think from a pragmatic perspective, you have to bet always on the timelines in which you’re alive. It doesn’t make sense to have a financial bet in which you bet that the financial system is going to disappear, right?
I don’t think that’s useful. I think from a pragmatic perspective, you have to bet always on the timelines in which you’re alive. It doesn’t make sense to have a financial bet in which you bet that the financial system is going to disappear, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Joscha Bach
Because there cannot be any payout for you. So, in principle, you only need to bet on the timelines in which you’re still around or people that you matter about or things that you matter about, maybe consciousness on earth. But there is a deeper issue for me, personally, and it is, I don’t think that life on earth is about humans. I don’t think it’s about human aesthetics, I don’t think it’s about Eliezer and his friends, even though I like them. There is something more important happening, and this is complexity on earth, resisting entropy by building structure that develops agency and awareness, and that’s, to me, very beautiful.
Because there cannot be any payout for you. So, in principle, you only need to bet on the timelines in which you’re still around or people that you matter about or things that you matter about, maybe consciousness on earth. But there is a deeper issue for me, personally, and it is, I don’t think that life on earth is about humans. I don’t think it’s about human aesthetics, I don’t think it’s about Eliezer and his friends, even though I like them. There is something more important happening, and this is complexity on earth, resisting entropy by building structure that develops agency and awareness, and that’s, to me, very beautiful.
And we are only a very small part of that larger thing. We are a species that is able to be coherent a little bit individually over very short timeframes, but as a species, we are not very coherent, as a species, we are children. We basically are very joyful and energetic and experimental and explorative and sometimes desperate and sad and grieving and hurting, but we don’t have a respect for duty as a species. As a species, we do not think about what is our duty to life on earth and to our own survival, so we make decisions that look good in the short run, but in the long run might prove disastrous and I don’t really see a solution to this.
So, in my perspective, as a species, as a civilization, we’re, per default, that. We are in a very beautiful time in which we have found this giant deposit of fossil fuels in the ground and use it to build a fantastic civilization in which we don’t need to worry about food and clothing and housing for the most part in a way that is unprecedented in life on earth for any kind of conscious observer, I think. And this time is probably going to come to an end in a way that is not going to be smooth, and when we crash, it could be also that we go extinct, probably not near term, but ultimately, I don’t have very high hopes that humanity is around in a million years from now.
I don’t think that life on earth will end with us, right? There’s going to be more complexity, there’s more intelligent species after us, there’s probably more interesting phenomena in the history of consciousness, but we can contribute to this. And part of our contribution is that we are currently trying to build thinking systems, systems that are potentially lucid, that understand what they are and what the condition to the universe is and can make choices about this, that are not built from organisms and that are potentially much faster and much more conscious than human beings can be.
And these systems will probably not completely displace life on earth, but they will coexist with it and they will build all sorts of agency in the same way as biological systems build all sorts of agency. And that, to me, is extremely fascinating and it’s probably something that we cannot stop from happening. So, I think right now there is a very good chance that it happens, and there are very few ways in which we can produce a coordinated effect to stop it in the same way as it’s very difficult for us to make a coordinated effort to stop production of carbon dioxide. So, it’s probably going to happen, and the thing that’s going to happen is going to lead to a change of how life on earth is happening, but I don’t think a result is some kind of [inaudible 02:06:16]. It’s not something that’s going to dramatically reduce the complexity in favor of something stupid. I think it’s going to make life on earth and consciousness on earth way more interesting.
Lex Fridman
So, more, higher complex consciousness.
So, more, higher complex consciousness.
Joscha Bach
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Will make the lesser consciousnesses flourish even more.
Will make the lesser consciousnesses flourish even more.
Joscha Bach
I suspect that what could very well happen, if we’re lucky, is that we get integrated into something larger.
I suspect that what could very well happen, if we’re lucky, is that we get integrated into something larger.
e/acc (Effective Accelerationism)
Lex Fridman
So, you again tweeted about effective accelerationism. You tweeted, “Effective accelerationism is the belief that the Paperclip Maximizer and Roko’s Basililisk will keep each other in check by being eternally at each other’s throats, so we will be safe and get to enjoy lots of free paperclips and a beautiful afterlife.” Is that somewhat aligned with what you’re talking about?
So, you again tweeted about effective accelerationism. You tweeted, “Effective accelerationism is the belief that the Paperclip Maximizer and Roko’s Basililisk will keep each other in check by being eternally at each other’s throats, so we will be safe and get to enjoy lots of free paperclips and a beautiful afterlife.” Is that somewhat aligned with what you’re talking about?
Joscha Bach
I’ve been at a dinner with [inaudible 02:07:21], that’s the Twitter handle of one of the main thinkers behind the idea of effective accelerationism. And effective accelerationism is a tongue in cheek movement that is trying to put a counter position to some of the doom peers in the AI space, by arguing that what’s probably going to happen is an equilibrium between different competing AIs, in the same way as there is not a single corporation that is under a single government that is destroying and conquering everything on earth by becoming inefficient and corrupt, there’re going to be many systems that keep each other in check and force themselves to evolve.
I’ve been at a dinner with [inaudible 02:07:21], that’s the Twitter handle of one of the main thinkers behind the idea of effective accelerationism. And effective accelerationism is a tongue in cheek movement that is trying to put a counter position to some of the doom peers in the AI space, by arguing that what’s probably going to happen is an equilibrium between different competing AIs, in the same way as there is not a single corporation that is under a single government that is destroying and conquering everything on earth by becoming inefficient and corrupt, there’re going to be many systems that keep each other in check and force themselves to evolve.
And so, what we should be doing is, we should be working towards creating this equilibrium by working as hard as we can in all possible directions. At least that’s the way in which I understand the gist of effective accelerationism. And so, when he asked me what I think about his position, I said it’s a very beautiful position and I suspect it’s wrong, but not for obvious reasons. And in this tweet I tried to make a joke about my intuition, about what might be possibly wrong about it. So, the Roko’s Basililisk and the Paperclip Maximizers are both boogeymen of the AI doomers.
Roko’s Basililisk is the idea that there could be an AI that is going to punish everybody for eternity by simulating them if they don’t help in creating Roko’s Basililisk. It’s probably a very good idea to get AI companies funded, by going to resist to tell them, “Give us a million dollars or it’s going to be a very ugly afterlife.”
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Joscha Bach
And I think that there is a logical mistake in Roko’s Basililisk which is why I’m not afraid of it, but it’s still an interesting thought experiment.
And I think that there is a logical mistake in Roko’s Basililisk which is why I’m not afraid of it, but it’s still an interesting thought experiment.
Lex Fridman
And can you mention there logical mistake there?
And can you mention there logical mistake there?
Joscha Bach
I think that there is no right or causation. So, basically when Roko’s Basililisk is there, if it punishes you retroactively, it has to make this choice in the future. There is no mechanism that automatically creates a causal relationship between you now defecting against Roko’s Basililisk or serving Roko’s Basililisk. After Roko’s Basililisk is in existence, it has no more reason to worry about punishing everybody else, so that would only work if you would be building something like a doomsday machine, as in Dr. Strangelove, something that inevitably gets triggered when somebody defects. And because Roko’s Basililisk doesn’t exist yet to a point where this inevitability could be established, Roko’s Basililisk is nothing that you need to be worried about.
I think that there is no right or causation. So, basically when Roko’s Basililisk is there, if it punishes you retroactively, it has to make this choice in the future. There is no mechanism that automatically creates a causal relationship between you now defecting against Roko’s Basililisk or serving Roko’s Basililisk. After Roko’s Basililisk is in existence, it has no more reason to worry about punishing everybody else, so that would only work if you would be building something like a doomsday machine, as in Dr. Strangelove, something that inevitably gets triggered when somebody defects. And because Roko’s Basililisk doesn’t exist yet to a point where this inevitability could be established, Roko’s Basililisk is nothing that you need to be worried about.
The other one is the Paperclip Maximizer, this idea that you could build some kind of golem that once starting to build paperclips is going to turn everything into paperclips.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Joscha Bach
And so, the effective accelerationism position might be to say that you basically end up with these two entities being at each other’s throats for eternity and thereby neutralizing each other. And as a side effect of neither of them being able to take over and each of them limiting the effects of the other, you would have a situation where you get all the nice effects of them, you get lots of free paperclips and you get a beautiful afterlife.
And so, the effective accelerationism position might be to say that you basically end up with these two entities being at each other’s throats for eternity and thereby neutralizing each other. And as a side effect of neither of them being able to take over and each of them limiting the effects of the other, you would have a situation where you get all the nice effects of them, you get lots of free paperclips and you get a beautiful afterlife.
Lex Fridman
Is that possible, do you think? So, to seriously address concern that Eliezer has, so for him, if I can just summarize poorly, so for him, the first superintelligent system will just run away with everything.
Is that possible, do you think? So, to seriously address concern that Eliezer has, so for him, if I can just summarize poorly, so for him, the first superintelligent system will just run away with everything.
Joscha Bach
Yeah, I suspect that a singleton is the natural outcome, so there is no reason to have multiple AIs because they don’t have multiple bodies. If you can virtualize yourself into every substrate, then you can probably negotiate a merge algorithm with every mature agent that you might find on that substrate that basically says if two agents meet, they should merge in such a way that the resulting agent is at least as good as the better one of the two.
Yeah, I suspect that a singleton is the natural outcome, so there is no reason to have multiple AIs because they don’t have multiple bodies. If you can virtualize yourself into every substrate, then you can probably negotiate a merge algorithm with every mature agent that you might find on that substrate that basically says if two agents meet, they should merge in such a way that the resulting agent is at least as good as the better one of the two.
Lex Fridman
So the Genghis Khan approach, join us or die.
So the Genghis Khan approach, join us or die.
Joscha Bach
Well, the Genghis Khan approach was slightly worse, it was mostly die, because I can make new babies and they will be mine, not yours.
Well, the Genghis Khan approach was slightly worse, it was mostly die, because I can make new babies and they will be mine, not yours.
Lex Fridman
Right.
Right.
Joscha Bach
And so, this is the thing that we should be actually worried about. But if you realize that your own self is a story that your mind is telling itself and that you can improve that story, not just by making it more pleasant and lying to yourself in better ways, but by making it much more truthful and actually modeling your actual relationship that you have to the universe and the alternatives that you could have to the universe in a way that is empowering you, that gives you more agency. That’s actually, I think, a very good thing.
And so, this is the thing that we should be actually worried about. But if you realize that your own self is a story that your mind is telling itself and that you can improve that story, not just by making it more pleasant and lying to yourself in better ways, but by making it much more truthful and actually modeling your actual relationship that you have to the universe and the alternatives that you could have to the universe in a way that is empowering you, that gives you more agency. That’s actually, I think, a very good thing.
Lex Fridman
So more agencies is a richer experience?
So more agencies is a richer experience?
Joscha Bach
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Is a better life.
Is a better life.
Mind uploading
Joscha Bach
And I also noticed that in many ways, I’m less identified with the person that I am as I get older and I’m much more identified with being conscious. I have a mind that is conscious, that is able to create a person, and that person is slightly different every day. And the reason why I perceive it as identical has practical purposes so I can learn and make myself responsible for the decisions that I made in the past and project them in the future. But I also realize I’m not actually the person that I was last year, and I’m not the same person as I was 10 years ago, and then 10 years from now, I will be a different person, so this continuity is a fiction, it only exists as a projection from my present self.
And I also noticed that in many ways, I’m less identified with the person that I am as I get older and I’m much more identified with being conscious. I have a mind that is conscious, that is able to create a person, and that person is slightly different every day. And the reason why I perceive it as identical has practical purposes so I can learn and make myself responsible for the decisions that I made in the past and project them in the future. But I also realize I’m not actually the person that I was last year, and I’m not the same person as I was 10 years ago, and then 10 years from now, I will be a different person, so this continuity is a fiction, it only exists as a projection from my present self.
And consciousness itself doesn’t have an identity, it’s a law. Basically, if you build an arrangement of processing matter in a particular way, the following thing is going to happen, and the consciousness that you have is functionally not different from my consciousness. It’s still a self-reflexive principle of agency that is just experiencing a different story, different desires, different coupling to the world and so on.
And once you accept that consciousness is a unifiable principle that is law-like and doesn’t have an identity, and you realize that you can just link up to some much larger body, the whole perspective of uploading changes dramatically. You suddenly realize uploading is probably not about dissecting your brain synapse by synapse and RNA fragment by RNA fragment and trying to get this all into a simulation, but it’s by extending the substrate, by making it possible for you to move from your brain substrate into a larger substrate and merge with what you find there.
And you don’t want to upload your knowledge because on the other side, there’s all of the knowledge, right? It’s not just yours, but every possibility or the only thing that you need to know, what are your personal secrets? Not that the other side doesn’t know your personal secrets already, maybe it doesn’t know which one were yours, right? Like a psychiatrist or a psychologist also knows all the kinds of personal secrets that people have, they just don’t know which ones are yours.
And so, transmitting yourself on the other side is mostly about transmitting your aesthetics. This thing that makes you special, the architecture of your perspective, the way in which you look at the world, and it’s more like a complex attitude along many dimensions. And that’s something that can be measured by observation or by interaction. So, imagine a system that is so empathetic with you that you create a shared state that is extending beyond your body, and suddenly you notice that on the other side, the substrate is so much richer than the substrate that you have inside of your own body, and maybe you still want to have a body and you create yourself a new one that you like more, or maybe you will spend most of your time in the world of thought.
Lex Fridman
If I sat before you today and gave you a big red button and said, “Here, if you press this button, you’ll get uploaded in this way, the sense of identity that you have lived with for quite a long time is going to be gone,” would you press the button?
If I sat before you today and gave you a big red button and said, “Here, if you press this button, you’ll get uploaded in this way, the sense of identity that you have lived with for quite a long time is going to be gone,” would you press the button?
Joscha Bach
There’s a caveat, I have family, so I have children that want me to be physically present in their life and interact with them in a particular way, and I have a wife and personal friends, and there is a particular mode of interaction that I feel I’m not through yet, but apart from these responsibilities and they’re negotiable to some degree, I would press the button.
There’s a caveat, I have family, so I have children that want me to be physically present in their life and interact with them in a particular way, and I have a wife and personal friends, and there is a particular mode of interaction that I feel I’m not through yet, but apart from these responsibilities and they’re negotiable to some degree, I would press the button.
Lex Fridman
But isn’t this everything? This love you have for other humans, you can call it responsibility, but that connection, that’s the ego death, isn’t that the thing we’re really afraid of, is not to just die, but to let go of the experience of love with other humans?
But isn’t this everything? This love you have for other humans, you can call it responsibility, but that connection, that’s the ego death, isn’t that the thing we’re really afraid of, is not to just die, but to let go of the experience of love with other humans?
Joscha Bach
This is not everything. Everything is everything, right? So there’s so much more and you could be lots of other things. You could identify with lots of other things. You could be identifying with being Gaia, some kind of planetary control agent that emerges over all the activity of life on earth. You could be identifying with some hyper Gaia that is the concatenation of Gaia or the digital life and digital minds.
This is not everything. Everything is everything, right? So there’s so much more and you could be lots of other things. You could identify with lots of other things. You could be identifying with being Gaia, some kind of planetary control agent that emerges over all the activity of life on earth. You could be identifying with some hyper Gaia that is the concatenation of Gaia or the digital life and digital minds.
And so, in this sense, there will be agents in all sorts of substrates and directions that all have their own goals, and when they’re not sustainable, then these agents will cease to exist. Or when the agent feels that it’s done with its own mission, it’ll cease to exist. In the same way when you conclude a thought, the thought is going to wrap up and gives control over to other thoughts in your own mind.
So, there is no single thing that you need to do, but I observe myself as a being, that sometimes I’m a parent and then I have an identification and a job as a parent, and sometimes I am an agent of consciousness on earth, and then from this perspective, there’s other stuff that is important. So, this is my main issue with Eliezer’s perspective, that he’s basically marrying himself to a very narrow human aesthetic. And that narrow human aesthetic is a temporary thing. Humanity is a temporary species, like most of the species on this planet are only around for a while, and then they get replaced by other species in a similar way as our own physical organism is around here for a while and then gets replaced by a next generation of human beings that are adapted to changing life circumstances and average via mutation and selection.
And it’s only when we have AI and become completely software that we can become infinitely adaptable and we don’t have this generational and species change anymore. So, if you take this larger perspective and you realize it’s really not about us, it’s not about Eliezer or humanity, but it’s about life on earth or it’s about defeating entropy for as long as we can while being as interesting as we can, then the perspective changes dramatically and preventing AI from this perspective looks like a very big sin.
Lex Fridman
But when we look at the set of trajectories that such an AI would take that supersedes humans, I think Eliezer is worried about ones that not just kill all humans, but also have some kind of maybe objectively undesirable consequence for life on earth. Like how many trajectories, when you look at the big picture of life on earth, would you be happy with, and how much worry you with AGI, whether it kills humans or not?
But when we look at the set of trajectories that such an AI would take that supersedes humans, I think Eliezer is worried about ones that not just kill all humans, but also have some kind of maybe objectively undesirable consequence for life on earth. Like how many trajectories, when you look at the big picture of life on earth, would you be happy with, and how much worry you with AGI, whether it kills humans or not?
Joscha Bach
There is no single answer to this. It’s a question that depends on the perspective that I’m taking at a given moment. And so, there are perspectives that are determining most of my life as a human being.
There is no single answer to this. It’s a question that depends on the perspective that I’m taking at a given moment. And so, there are perspectives that are determining most of my life as a human being.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Joscha Bach
And the other perspective where I zoom out further and imagine that when the great oxygenation event happened, that as photosynthesis was invented and plants emerged and displaced a lot of the fungi and algae in favor of plant life, and then later made animals possible, imagine that the fungi would’ve gotten together and said, “Oh my God, this photosynthesis stuff is really, really bad, it’s going to possibly displace and kill all the fungi, we should slow it down and regulate it and make sure that it doesn’t happen.” This doesn’t look good to me.
And the other perspective where I zoom out further and imagine that when the great oxygenation event happened, that as photosynthesis was invented and plants emerged and displaced a lot of the fungi and algae in favor of plant life, and then later made animals possible, imagine that the fungi would’ve gotten together and said, “Oh my God, this photosynthesis stuff is really, really bad, it’s going to possibly displace and kill all the fungi, we should slow it down and regulate it and make sure that it doesn’t happen.” This doesn’t look good to me.
Lex Fridman
Perspective. That said, you tweeted-
Perspective. That said, you tweeted-
Lex Fridman
… Perspective. That said, you tweeted about a cliff. Beautifully written. “As a sentient species, humanity is a beautiful child. Joyful, exploitative, wild, sad, and desperate. But humanity has no concept of submitting to reason, and duty to life and future survival. We will run until we step past the cliff.” So first of all, do you think that’s true?
… Perspective. That said, you tweeted about a cliff. Beautifully written. “As a sentient species, humanity is a beautiful child. Joyful, exploitative, wild, sad, and desperate. But humanity has no concept of submitting to reason, and duty to life and future survival. We will run until we step past the cliff.” So first of all, do you think that’s true?
Joscha Bach
Yeah, I think that’s pretty much the story of the club of Rome. The limits to growth. And the cliff that we are stepping over, is at least one foot, is the delayed feedback. Basically we do things that have consequences that can be felt generations later. And the severity increases even after we stop doing the thing. So I suspect that for the climate, that the original predictions, that the climate scientists made, were correct. So when they said that the tipping points were in the late ’80s, they were probably in the late ’80s. And if we would stop emission right now, we would not turn it back. Maybe there are ways for carbon capture, but so far there is no sustainable carbon capture technology that we can deploy. Maybe there’s a way to put aerosols in the atmosphere to cool it down. Possibilities, right? But right now, per default, it seems that we will step into a situation where we feel that we’ve run too far. And going back is not something that we can do smoothly and gradually, but it’s going to lead to a catastrophic event.
Yeah, I think that’s pretty much the story of the club of Rome. The limits to growth. And the cliff that we are stepping over, is at least one foot, is the delayed feedback. Basically we do things that have consequences that can be felt generations later. And the severity increases even after we stop doing the thing. So I suspect that for the climate, that the original predictions, that the climate scientists made, were correct. So when they said that the tipping points were in the late ’80s, they were probably in the late ’80s. And if we would stop emission right now, we would not turn it back. Maybe there are ways for carbon capture, but so far there is no sustainable carbon capture technology that we can deploy. Maybe there’s a way to put aerosols in the atmosphere to cool it down. Possibilities, right? But right now, per default, it seems that we will step into a situation where we feel that we’ve run too far. And going back is not something that we can do smoothly and gradually, but it’s going to lead to a catastrophic event.
Lex Fridman
Catastrophic event of what kind? So can you still me the case that we will continue dancing along and always stop just short of the edge of the cliff?
Catastrophic event of what kind? So can you still me the case that we will continue dancing along and always stop just short of the edge of the cliff?
Joscha Bach
I think it’s possible, but it’s doesn’t seem to be likely. So I think this model that is being apparent in the simulation that they’re making of climate pollution, economies and so on, is that many effects are only visible with a significant delay. And in that time the system is moving much more out of the equilibrium state or of the state where homeostasis is still possible and instead moves into a different state, one that is going to harbor fewer people. And that is basically the concern there. And again, it’s a possibility. And it’s a possibility that is larger than the possibility that it’s not happening. That we will be safe, that we will be able to dance back all the time.
I think it’s possible, but it’s doesn’t seem to be likely. So I think this model that is being apparent in the simulation that they’re making of climate pollution, economies and so on, is that many effects are only visible with a significant delay. And in that time the system is moving much more out of the equilibrium state or of the state where homeostasis is still possible and instead moves into a different state, one that is going to harbor fewer people. And that is basically the concern there. And again, it’s a possibility. And it’s a possibility that is larger than the possibility that it’s not happening. That we will be safe, that we will be able to dance back all the time.
Lex Fridman
So the climate is one thing, but there’s a lot of other threats that might have a faster feedback mechanism?
So the climate is one thing, but there’s a lot of other threats that might have a faster feedback mechanism?
Joscha Bach
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Less delay.
Less delay.
Joscha Bach
There is also a thing that AI is probably going to happen and it’s going to make everything uncertain again.
There is also a thing that AI is probably going to happen and it’s going to make everything uncertain again.
Lex Fridman
Yep.
Yep.
Joscha Bach
Because it is going to affect so many variables that it’s very hard for us to make a projection into the future anymore. And maybe that’s a good thing. It does not give us the freedom, I think to say now we don’t need to care about anything anymore, because AI will either kill us or save us. But I suspect that if humanity continues, it’ll be due to AI.
Because it is going to affect so many variables that it’s very hard for us to make a projection into the future anymore. And maybe that’s a good thing. It does not give us the freedom, I think to say now we don’t need to care about anything anymore, because AI will either kill us or save us. But I suspect that if humanity continues, it’ll be due to AI.
Vision Pro
Lex Fridman
What’s the timeline for things to get real weird with AI? And it can get weird in interesting ways before you get to a AGI. What about AI girlfriends and boyfriends, fundamentally transforming human relationships?
What’s the timeline for things to get real weird with AI? And it can get weird in interesting ways before you get to a AGI. What about AI girlfriends and boyfriends, fundamentally transforming human relationships?
Joscha Bach
I think human relationships are already fundamentally transformed and it’s already very weird.
I think human relationships are already fundamentally transformed and it’s already very weird.
Lex Fridman
By which technology?
By which technology?
Joscha Bach
For instance, social media.
For instance, social media.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Is it though, isn’t the fundamentals of the core group of humans that affect your life still the same, your loved ones, family?
Yeah. Is it though, isn’t the fundamentals of the core group of humans that affect your life still the same, your loved ones, family?
Joscha Bach
No, I think that for instance, many people live in intentional communities right now. They’re moving around until they find people that they can relate to and they become their family. And often that doesn’t work, because it turns out that there, instead of having grown networks that you get around with the people that you grew up with, yeah, you have more transactional relationships, you shop around, you have markets for attention and pleasure and relationships.
No, I think that for instance, many people live in intentional communities right now. They’re moving around until they find people that they can relate to and they become their family. And often that doesn’t work, because it turns out that there, instead of having grown networks that you get around with the people that you grew up with, yeah, you have more transactional relationships, you shop around, you have markets for attention and pleasure and relationships.
Lex Fridman
That kills the magic somehow. Why is that? Why is the transactional search for optimizing attention, allocation of attention somehow misses the romantic magic of what human relations are?
That kills the magic somehow. Why is that? Why is the transactional search for optimizing attention, allocation of attention somehow misses the romantic magic of what human relations are?
Joscha Bach
It’s also question, how magical was it before? Was it that you just could rely on instincts that used your intuitions and you didn’t need to rationally reflect? But once you understand, it’s no longer magical, because you actually understand why you were attracted to this person at this age and not to that person at this age. And what the actual considerations were that went on in your mind, and what the calculations were, what’s the likelihood that you’re going to have a sustainable relationship is this person that this person is not going to leave you for somebody else? How are your life trajectories are going to evolve and so on? And when you’re young, you’re unable to extricate all this and you have to rely on intuitions and instincts that impart you’re born with and also in the wisdom of your environment that is going to give you some kind of reflection on your choices.
It’s also question, how magical was it before? Was it that you just could rely on instincts that used your intuitions and you didn’t need to rationally reflect? But once you understand, it’s no longer magical, because you actually understand why you were attracted to this person at this age and not to that person at this age. And what the actual considerations were that went on in your mind, and what the calculations were, what’s the likelihood that you’re going to have a sustainable relationship is this person that this person is not going to leave you for somebody else? How are your life trajectories are going to evolve and so on? And when you’re young, you’re unable to extricate all this and you have to rely on intuitions and instincts that impart you’re born with and also in the wisdom of your environment that is going to give you some kind of reflection on your choices.
And many of these things are disappearing now, because we feel that our parents might have no idea about how we are living. And the environments that we grew up in, the cultures that we grew up in [inaudible 02:25:18] that our parents existed in might have no ability to teach us how to deal with this new world. And for many people that’s actually true. But it doesn’t mean that within one generation we build something that is more magical and more sustainable and more beautiful. Instead, we often end up as an attempt to produce something that looks beautiful. I was very veted out by the aesthetics of the Vision Pro at that by Apple and not so much, because I don’t like the technology. I’m very curious about what it’s going to be like and don’t have an opinion yet, but the aesthetics of the presentation and so on. So uncanny [inaudible 02:25:58] esque to me the characters being extremely plastic, living in some hypothetical mid-century furniture museum.
Lex Fridman
This is the proliferation of marketing teams.
This is the proliferation of marketing teams.
Joscha Bach
Yes. But it was a CGI generated world and it was a CGI generated world that doesn’t exist. And when I complained about this, some friends came back to me and said, but these are startup founders. This is what they live like in Silicon Valley. And I tried to tell them, “No, I know lots of people in Silicon Valley, this is not what people are like. They’re still people, they’re still human beings.”
Yes. But it was a CGI generated world and it was a CGI generated world that doesn’t exist. And when I complained about this, some friends came back to me and said, but these are startup founders. This is what they live like in Silicon Valley. And I tried to tell them, “No, I know lots of people in Silicon Valley, this is not what people are like. They’re still people, they’re still human beings.”
Lex Fridman
So the grounding and physical reality somehow is important too.
So the grounding and physical reality somehow is important too.
Joscha Bach
In culture. And so basically what’s absent in this thing is culture. There is a simulation of culture and attempt to replace culture by catalog, by some kind of aesthetic optimization that is not the result of having a sustainable life as sustainable human relationships with houses that work for you and a mode of living that works for you in which this product, these glasses fit in naturally. And I guess that’s also why so many people are weirded out about the product, because they don’t know how is this actually going to fit into my life and into my human relationships Because the way in which it was presented in these videos didn’t seem to be credible.
In culture. And so basically what’s absent in this thing is culture. There is a simulation of culture and attempt to replace culture by catalog, by some kind of aesthetic optimization that is not the result of having a sustainable life as sustainable human relationships with houses that work for you and a mode of living that works for you in which this product, these glasses fit in naturally. And I guess that’s also why so many people are weirded out about the product, because they don’t know how is this actually going to fit into my life and into my human relationships Because the way in which it was presented in these videos didn’t seem to be credible.
Open source AI
Lex Fridman
Do you think AI, when is deployed by companies like Microsoft and Google and Meta will have the same issue of being weirdly corporate? There’d be some uncanny valley, some weirdness to the whole presentation? So this, I’ve gotten a chance to talk to George Hotz. He believes everything should be open source and decentralized and there then we shall have the AI of the people and it’ll maintain a grounding to the magic humanity. That’s the human condition that corporations will destroy the magic.
Do you think AI, when is deployed by companies like Microsoft and Google and Meta will have the same issue of being weirdly corporate? There’d be some uncanny valley, some weirdness to the whole presentation? So this, I’ve gotten a chance to talk to George Hotz. He believes everything should be open source and decentralized and there then we shall have the AI of the people and it’ll maintain a grounding to the magic humanity. That’s the human condition that corporations will destroy the magic.
Joscha Bach
I believe that if we make everything open source and make this mandatory, we are going to lose about a lot of beautiful art and a lot of beautiful designs. There is a reason why Linux desktop is still ugly and it’s-
I believe that if we make everything open source and make this mandatory, we are going to lose about a lot of beautiful art and a lot of beautiful designs. There is a reason why Linux desktop is still ugly and it’s-
Lex Fridman
Strong words.
Strong words.
Joscha Bach
… To create coherence and open source designs so far when the designs have to get very large. And it’s easier to make this happening in a company with centralized organization. And from my own perspective, what we should ensure is that open source never dies. That it can always compete and has a place with the other forms of organization. Because I think it is absolutely vital that open source exists and that we have systems that people have under control outside of the cooperation and that is also producing viable competition to the corporations.
… To create coherence and open source designs so far when the designs have to get very large. And it’s easier to make this happening in a company with centralized organization. And from my own perspective, what we should ensure is that open source never dies. That it can always compete and has a place with the other forms of organization. Because I think it is absolutely vital that open source exists and that we have systems that people have under control outside of the cooperation and that is also producing viable competition to the corporations.
Lex Fridman
So the corporations, the centralized control, the dictatorships of corporations can create beauty. Centralized design, is a source of a lot of beauty. And then I guess open source is a source of freedom, a hedge against the corrupting nature of power that comes with centralized.
So the corporations, the centralized control, the dictatorships of corporations can create beauty. Centralized design, is a source of a lot of beauty. And then I guess open source is a source of freedom, a hedge against the corrupting nature of power that comes with centralized.
Joscha Bach
I grew up in socialism and I learned that corporations are totally evil and I found this very, very convincing. And then you look at corporations like anyone and Halliburton maybe and realized, yeah, they’re evil. But you also notice that many other corporations are not evil. They they’re surprisingly benevolent. Why are they so benevolent? Is this because everybody is fighting them all the time? I don’t think that’s the only explanation. It’s because they’re actually animals that live in a large ecosystem and that are still largely controlled by people that want that ecosystem to flourish and be viable for people. So I think that Pat Gelsinger is completely sincere when he leads Intel to be a tool that supplies the free world with semiconductors and not necessarily that all the semiconductors are coming from Intel. Just intel needs to be there to make sure that we always have them.
I grew up in socialism and I learned that corporations are totally evil and I found this very, very convincing. And then you look at corporations like anyone and Halliburton maybe and realized, yeah, they’re evil. But you also notice that many other corporations are not evil. They they’re surprisingly benevolent. Why are they so benevolent? Is this because everybody is fighting them all the time? I don’t think that’s the only explanation. It’s because they’re actually animals that live in a large ecosystem and that are still largely controlled by people that want that ecosystem to flourish and be viable for people. So I think that Pat Gelsinger is completely sincere when he leads Intel to be a tool that supplies the free world with semiconductors and not necessarily that all the semiconductors are coming from Intel. Just intel needs to be there to make sure that we always have them.
So there can be many ways in which we can import and trade semiconductors from other companies and places. We just need to make sure that nobody can cut us off from it, because that would be a disaster for this kind of society and world. And so there are many things that need to be done to make our style of life possible. And then with this, I don’t mean just capitalism, environmental structure and consumer resin and creature comforts. I mean an idea of life in which we are determined not by some kind of king or dictator, but in which individuals can determine themselves to the largest possible degree. And to me, this is something that this western world is still trying to embody and it’s a very valuable idea that we shouldn’t give up too early. And from this perspective, the US is a system of interleaving clubs and an entrepreneur is a special club founder.
It’s somebody who makes a club that is producing things that are economically viable. And to do this, it requires a lot of people who are dedicating a significant part of their life for working for this particular kind of club. And the entrepreneurs picking the initial set of rules and the mission and vision and aesthetics for the club and make sure that it works. But the people that are in there need to be protected if they sacrifice part of their life, there need to be rules that tell how they’re being taken care of even after they leave the club and so on. So there’s a large body of rules that have been created by our rule giving clubs and that are enforced bio enforcement collapse and so on. And some of these collapse have to be monopolies for game theoretic reasons, which also makes them more open to corruption and less harder to update.
And this is an ongoing discussion and process that takes place. But the beauty of this idea that there is no centralized king that is extracting from the peasants and breeding the peasants into serving the king and fulfilling all the walls like and an anal, but that there is a freedom of association and corporations are one of them. It’s something that took me some time to realize. So I do think that corporations are dangerous. They need to be protections against overreach of corporations that can do regular to recapture and prevent open source from competing with corporations by imposing rules that make it impossible for a small group of kids to come together to build their own language model.
Because open AI has convinced the US that you need to have some kind of FDA process that you need to go through that costs many million dollars before you are able to train a language model. So this is important to make sure that this doesn’t happen. So I think that open AI and Google are good things if these good things are kept in check in such a way that all the other collapse can still being founded and all the other forms of collapse that are desirable can still co-exist with them.
Lex Fridman
What do you think about Meta in contrast to that open sourcing most of its language models and most of the AI models it’s working on and actually suggesting that they will continue to do so in the future for future versions of llama for example, their large language model? Is that exciting to you? Is that concerning?
What do you think about Meta in contrast to that open sourcing most of its language models and most of the AI models it’s working on and actually suggesting that they will continue to do so in the future for future versions of llama for example, their large language model? Is that exciting to you? Is that concerning?
Joscha Bach
I don’t find it very concerning, but that’s also because I think that the language models are not very dangerous yet.
I don’t find it very concerning, but that’s also because I think that the language models are not very dangerous yet.
Lex Fridman
Yet?
Yet?
Joscha Bach
Yes. So as I said, I have no proof that there is the boundary between the language models and AI, AGI. It’s possible that somebody builds a version of BBBAGI, I think, and falls in a algorithmic improvements that scale these systems up in ways that otherwise wouldn’t have happened without these language model components. So it’s not really clear for me what the end game is there and if these models can put force their way into AGI. And there’s also a possibility that the AGI that we are building with these language models are not taking responsibility for what they are, because they don’t understand the greater game. And so to me it would be interesting to try to understand how to build systems that understand what the greater games are, what are the longest games that we can play on this planet?
Yes. So as I said, I have no proof that there is the boundary between the language models and AI, AGI. It’s possible that somebody builds a version of BBBAGI, I think, and falls in a algorithmic improvements that scale these systems up in ways that otherwise wouldn’t have happened without these language model components. So it’s not really clear for me what the end game is there and if these models can put force their way into AGI. And there’s also a possibility that the AGI that we are building with these language models are not taking responsibility for what they are, because they don’t understand the greater game. And so to me it would be interesting to try to understand how to build systems that understand what the greater games are, what are the longest games that we can play on this planet?
Lex Fridman
Games broadly, like deeply define the way you did with the games.
Games broadly, like deeply define the way you did with the games.
Joscha Bach
In the games theoretical sense. So when we are interacting with each other in some sense we are playing games, we are making lots and lots of interactions. And this doesn’t mean that these interactions have ought to be transactional. Every one of us is playing some kind of game by virtue of identifying these particular kinds of goals that we have or aesthetics from which we derive the goals. So when you say I’m Lex Fridman, I’m doing a set of podcasts, then you feel that it’s part of something larger that you want to build, maybe you want to inspire people, maybe you want them to see more possibilities and get them together over shared ideas. Maybe your game is that you want to become super rich and famous by being the best post cut caster on earth. Maybe you have other games, maybe it’s switches from time to time, but there is a certain perspective where you might be thinking, what is the longest possible game that you could be playing?
In the games theoretical sense. So when we are interacting with each other in some sense we are playing games, we are making lots and lots of interactions. And this doesn’t mean that these interactions have ought to be transactional. Every one of us is playing some kind of game by virtue of identifying these particular kinds of goals that we have or aesthetics from which we derive the goals. So when you say I’m Lex Fridman, I’m doing a set of podcasts, then you feel that it’s part of something larger that you want to build, maybe you want to inspire people, maybe you want them to see more possibilities and get them together over shared ideas. Maybe your game is that you want to become super rich and famous by being the best post cut caster on earth. Maybe you have other games, maybe it’s switches from time to time, but there is a certain perspective where you might be thinking, what is the longest possible game that you could be playing?
A short game is, for instance, cancer is playing a shorter game than your organism. Cancer is an organism playing a shorter game than the regular organism. And because the cancer cannot procreate beyond the organism, except for some infectious cancers like the ones that eradicated the Tasmanian devils, you typically end up with the situation where the organism dies together with the cancer, because the cancer has destroyed the larger system due to playing a shorter game. And so ideally you want to, I think build agents that play the longest possible games and the longest possible games is to keep entropy at bay as long as possible by doing, while doing interesting stuff.
Lex Fridman
But the longest, yes, that part, the longest possible game while doing interesting stuff and while maintaining at least the same amount of interesting.
But the longest, yes, that part, the longest possible game while doing interesting stuff and while maintaining at least the same amount of interesting.
Joscha Bach
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
So complexity, so propagating.
So complexity, so propagating.
Joscha Bach
Currently I am pretty much identified as a conscious being. It’s the minimal identification that I managed to get together, because if I turn this off, I fall asleep and when I’m asleep, I’m a vegetable. I’m no longer here as an agent. So my agency is basically predicated on being conscious and what I care about is other conscious agents. They’re the only moral agents for me. And so if an AI were to treat me as a moral agent that it is interested in coexisting with and cooperating with and mutually supporting each other, maybe it is I think necessary that AI thinks that consciousness is viable mode of existence and important.
Currently I am pretty much identified as a conscious being. It’s the minimal identification that I managed to get together, because if I turn this off, I fall asleep and when I’m asleep, I’m a vegetable. I’m no longer here as an agent. So my agency is basically predicated on being conscious and what I care about is other conscious agents. They’re the only moral agents for me. And so if an AI were to treat me as a moral agent that it is interested in coexisting with and cooperating with and mutually supporting each other, maybe it is I think necessary that AI thinks that consciousness is viable mode of existence and important.
So I think it would be very important to build conscious AI and do this as the primary goal. So not just say we want to build a useful tool that we can use for all sorts of things and then we have to make sure that the impact on the labor market is something that is not too disruptive and manageable and the impact on the copyright holder is manageable and not too disruptive and so on. I don’t think that’s the most important game to be played. I think that we will see extremely large disruptions of the status quo that are quite unpredictable at this point. And I just personally want to make sure that some of the stuff on the other side is interesting and conscious.
Lex Fridman
How do we ride as individuals and as a society, this wave disruptive wave that changes the nature of the game?
How do we ride as individuals and as a society, this wave disruptive wave that changes the nature of the game?
Joscha Bach
I truly don’t know. So everybody is going to do their best as always.
I truly don’t know. So everybody is going to do their best as always.
Lex Fridman
Do we build the bunker in the woods? Do we meditate more drugs? So mushrooms, psychedelics, I mean what, lots of sex? What are we talking about here? Do you play Diablo 4, I’m hoping that will help me escape for a brief moment. Play video games? What? Do you have ideas?
Do we build the bunker in the woods? Do we meditate more drugs? So mushrooms, psychedelics, I mean what, lots of sex? What are we talking about here? Do you play Diablo 4, I’m hoping that will help me escape for a brief moment. Play video games? What? Do you have ideas?
Joscha Bach
I really like playing Disco Ilysium. It was one of the most beautiful computer games I played in recent years and it’s a noir novel that is a philosophical perspective on western society from the perspective of an Estonian. And he first of all wrote a book about this bird that is a parallel universe that is quite poetic and fascinating and is condensing his perspective on our societies. It was very, very nice. He spent a lot of time writing it. He had, I think sold a couple thousand books and as a result became an alcoholic. And then he had the idea, or one of his friends had the idea of turning this into an RPG and it’s mind-blowing. They spent the illustrator more than a year just on making deep graph art for the scenes in between.
I really like playing Disco Ilysium. It was one of the most beautiful computer games I played in recent years and it’s a noir novel that is a philosophical perspective on western society from the perspective of an Estonian. And he first of all wrote a book about this bird that is a parallel universe that is quite poetic and fascinating and is condensing his perspective on our societies. It was very, very nice. He spent a lot of time writing it. He had, I think sold a couple thousand books and as a result became an alcoholic. And then he had the idea, or one of his friends had the idea of turning this into an RPG and it’s mind-blowing. They spent the illustrator more than a year just on making deep graph art for the scenes in between.
Lex Fridman
So aesthetically, it captures you, it pulls you in.
So aesthetically, it captures you, it pulls you in.
Joscha Bach
It’s stunning, but it’s a philosophical work of art. It’s a reflection of society. It’s fascinating to spend time in this world. And so for me it was using a medium in a new way and telling a story that left me enriched where when I tried Diablo, I didn’t feel enriched playing it. I felt that the time playing it was not unpleasant, but there’s also more pleasant stuff that I can do in that time.
It’s stunning, but it’s a philosophical work of art. It’s a reflection of society. It’s fascinating to spend time in this world. And so for me it was using a medium in a new way and telling a story that left me enriched where when I tried Diablo, I didn’t feel enriched playing it. I felt that the time playing it was not unpleasant, but there’s also more pleasant stuff that I can do in that time.
Lex Fridman
So to you-
So to you-
Joscha Bach
So ultimately I feel that I’m being gamed. I’m not gaming when I play it.
So ultimately I feel that I’m being gamed. I’m not gaming when I play it.
Lex Fridman
Oh, the addiction thing.
Oh, the addiction thing.
Joscha Bach
Yes. I basically feel that there is a very transparent economy that’s going on the story of the Diablo’s brain dead. So it’s not really interesting to me.
Yes. I basically feel that there is a very transparent economy that’s going on the story of the Diablo’s brain dead. So it’s not really interesting to me.
Lex Fridman
My heart is slowly breaking by the deep truth you’re conveying to me. Why can’t you just allow me to enjoy my personal addiction?
My heart is slowly breaking by the deep truth you’re conveying to me. Why can’t you just allow me to enjoy my personal addiction?
Joscha Bach
Go ahead. By all means. Go nuts. I have no objection here. I’m just trying to describe what’s happening. And it’s not that I don’t do things that I later say, oh, I actually wish I would’ve done something different. I also know that when we die, the greatest regret that people typically have on their deathbed, they say, “Oh, I wish I had spent more time on Twitter.” No, I don’t think that’s the case. I think they should probably have spent less time on Twitter. But I found it so useful for myself and also so addictive that I felt I need to make the best of it and turn it into an art form and thought form. And it did help me to develop something, but I wish what other things I could’ve done in the meantime. It’s just not the universe that we are in anymore. Most people don’t read books anymore.
Go ahead. By all means. Go nuts. I have no objection here. I’m just trying to describe what’s happening. And it’s not that I don’t do things that I later say, oh, I actually wish I would’ve done something different. I also know that when we die, the greatest regret that people typically have on their deathbed, they say, “Oh, I wish I had spent more time on Twitter.” No, I don’t think that’s the case. I think they should probably have spent less time on Twitter. But I found it so useful for myself and also so addictive that I felt I need to make the best of it and turn it into an art form and thought form. And it did help me to develop something, but I wish what other things I could’ve done in the meantime. It’s just not the universe that we are in anymore. Most people don’t read books anymore.
Lex Fridman
What do you think that means, that we don’t read books anymore? What do you think that means about the collective intelligence of our species? Is it possible it’s still progressing and growing?
What do you think that means, that we don’t read books anymore? What do you think that means about the collective intelligence of our species? Is it possible it’s still progressing and growing?
Joscha Bach
Well, it clearly is. There is stuff happening on Twitter that was impossible with box. And I really regret that Twitter has not taken the turn that I was hoping for. I thought Elon is global brain pill and understands that this thing needs to self-organize and he needs to develop tools to allow the propagation of the self organization so Twitter can become sentient. And maybe this was a pipe dream from the beginning, but I felt that the enormous pressure that he was under made it impossible for him to work on any kind of content goals. And also many of the decisions that he made under this pressure seemed to be not very wise. I don’t think that as a CEO of a social media company, you should have opinions in the culture or in public. I think that’s very shortsighted. And I also suspect that it’s not a good idea to block [inaudible 02:41:58] of people over setting a Mastodon link.
Well, it clearly is. There is stuff happening on Twitter that was impossible with box. And I really regret that Twitter has not taken the turn that I was hoping for. I thought Elon is global brain pill and understands that this thing needs to self-organize and he needs to develop tools to allow the propagation of the self organization so Twitter can become sentient. And maybe this was a pipe dream from the beginning, but I felt that the enormous pressure that he was under made it impossible for him to work on any kind of content goals. And also many of the decisions that he made under this pressure seemed to be not very wise. I don’t think that as a CEO of a social media company, you should have opinions in the culture or in public. I think that’s very shortsighted. And I also suspect that it’s not a good idea to block [inaudible 02:41:58] of people over setting a Mastodon link.
And I think Paul made this intentionally, because he wanted to show Elon Musk that blocking people for setting a link is completely counter to any idea of free speech that he intended to bring to Twitter. And basically seeing that Elon was way less principled in his thinking there and is much more experimental and many of the things that he is trying, they pan out very differently in a digital society than they pan out in a car company, because the effect is very different, because everything that you do in a digital society is going to have real world cultural.
And so basically I find it quite regrettable that this guy is able to become defacto the Pope, right? Twitter has more active members than the Catholic Church and he doesn’t get it. The power and responsibility that he has and the ability to create something in a society that is lasting and that is producing a digital ago in a way that has never existed before, where we build a social network on top of a social network, an actual society on top of the algorithms. So this is something that is hope still in the future and still in the cards, but it’s something that exists in small parts. I find that the corner of Twitter that I’m in is extremely pleasant. It’s just when I take a few steps outside of it is not very wholesome anymore. And the way in which people interact with strangers suggest that it’s not a civilized society yet.
Lex Fridman
So as the number of people who follow you on Twitter expands, you feel the burden of the uglier sides of humanity.
So as the number of people who follow you on Twitter expands, you feel the burden of the uglier sides of humanity.
Joscha Bach
Yes. But there’s also a similar thing in the normal world that is, if you become more influential, if you have more status, if you have more fame in the real world, you have, you get lots of perks, but you also have way less freedom in the way in which you interact with people, especially with strangers, because a certain percentage of people, it’s a small single digit percentage is nuts and dangerous. And the more of those are looking at you, the more of them might get ideas.
Yes. But there’s also a similar thing in the normal world that is, if you become more influential, if you have more status, if you have more fame in the real world, you have, you get lots of perks, but you also have way less freedom in the way in which you interact with people, especially with strangers, because a certain percentage of people, it’s a small single digit percentage is nuts and dangerous. And the more of those are looking at you, the more of them might get ideas.
Lex Fridman
But what if the technology enables you to discover the majority of people to discover and connect efficiently and regularly with the majority of people who are actually really good? I mean, one of my sort of concerns with a platform like Twitter is there’s a lot of really smart people out there, a lot of smart people that disagree with me and with others between each other. And I love that if the technology would bring those to the top, the beautiful disagreements like intelligence squared type of debates. There’s a bunch of, I mean, one of my favorite things to listen to is arguments and arguments like high effort arguments with the respect and love underneath it, but then it gets a little too heated, but that kind of too heated, which I’ve seen you participate in, and I love that with Lee Krono, with those kinds of folks. And you go pretty hard, you’ll get frustrated, but it’s all beautiful.
But what if the technology enables you to discover the majority of people to discover and connect efficiently and regularly with the majority of people who are actually really good? I mean, one of my sort of concerns with a platform like Twitter is there’s a lot of really smart people out there, a lot of smart people that disagree with me and with others between each other. And I love that if the technology would bring those to the top, the beautiful disagreements like intelligence squared type of debates. There’s a bunch of, I mean, one of my favorite things to listen to is arguments and arguments like high effort arguments with the respect and love underneath it, but then it gets a little too heated, but that kind of too heated, which I’ve seen you participate in, and I love that with Lee Krono, with those kinds of folks. And you go pretty hard, you’ll get frustrated, but it’s all beautiful.
Joscha Bach
Obviously I can’t do this, because we know each other and Lee has the rare gift of being willing to be wrong in public. So basically has thoughts that are as wrong as the random thoughts of an average highly intelligent person. But he blurts them out while not being sure if they’re right. And he enjoys doing that. And once you understand that this is his game, you don’t get offended by him saying something that you think is so wrong.
Obviously I can’t do this, because we know each other and Lee has the rare gift of being willing to be wrong in public. So basically has thoughts that are as wrong as the random thoughts of an average highly intelligent person. But he blurts them out while not being sure if they’re right. And he enjoys doing that. And once you understand that this is his game, you don’t get offended by him saying something that you think is so wrong.
Lex Fridman
But he’s constantly passively communicating a respect for the people he’s talking with and for just basic humanity and truth and all that kind of stuff. And there’s a self-deprecating thing. There’s a bunch of social skills you acquire that allow you to be a great debater, great argument, like be wrong in public and explore ideas together in public when you disagree. And if I would love for Twitter to elevate those folks, elevate those kinds of conversations.
But he’s constantly passively communicating a respect for the people he’s talking with and for just basic humanity and truth and all that kind of stuff. And there’s a self-deprecating thing. There’s a bunch of social skills you acquire that allow you to be a great debater, great argument, like be wrong in public and explore ideas together in public when you disagree. And if I would love for Twitter to elevate those folks, elevate those kinds of conversations.
Joscha Bach
It already does in some sense. But also if it elevates them too much, then you get this phenomenon on clubhouse where you always get dragged on stage. And I found this very stressful, because it was too intense. I don’t like to be dragged on stage all the time. I think once a week is enough. And also when I met Lee the first time, I found that a lot of people seemed to be shocked by the fact that he was being very aggressive with their results, that he didn’t seem to show a lot of sensibility in the way in which he was criticizing what they were doing and being dismissive of the work of others. And that was not, I think, in any way a shortcoming of him, because I noticed that he was much, much more dismissive with respect to his own work. It was his general stance.
It already does in some sense. But also if it elevates them too much, then you get this phenomenon on clubhouse where you always get dragged on stage. And I found this very stressful, because it was too intense. I don’t like to be dragged on stage all the time. I think once a week is enough. And also when I met Lee the first time, I found that a lot of people seemed to be shocked by the fact that he was being very aggressive with their results, that he didn’t seem to show a lot of sensibility in the way in which he was criticizing what they were doing and being dismissive of the work of others. And that was not, I think, in any way a shortcoming of him, because I noticed that he was much, much more dismissive with respect to his own work. It was his general stance.
And I felt that this general stance is creating a lot of liability for him, because really a lot of people take offense at him being not like their Carnegie character who is always smooth and make sure that everybody likes him. So I really respect that he is willing to take that risk and to be wrong in public and to offend people. And he doesn’t do this in any bad way. It’s just most people feel or not all people recognize this. And so I can be much more aggressive with him than it can be with many other people who don’t play the same game, because he understands the way and the spirit in which I respond to him.
Advice for young people
Lex Fridman
I think that’s a fun and that’s a beautiful game. It’s ultimately a productive one. Speaking of taking that risk, you tweeted, when you have the choice between being a creator, consumer, or redistributor, always go for creation. Not only does it lead to a more beautiful world, but also to a much more satisfying life for yourself. And don’t get stuck preparing yourself for the journey. The time is always now. So let me ask for advice. What advice would you give on how to become such a creator on Twitter in your own life?
I think that’s a fun and that’s a beautiful game. It’s ultimately a productive one. Speaking of taking that risk, you tweeted, when you have the choice between being a creator, consumer, or redistributor, always go for creation. Not only does it lead to a more beautiful world, but also to a much more satisfying life for yourself. And don’t get stuck preparing yourself for the journey. The time is always now. So let me ask for advice. What advice would you give on how to become such a creator on Twitter in your own life?
Joscha Bach
I was very lucky to be alive at the time of the collapse of Eastern Germany and the transition into Western Germany and me and my friends and most of the people I knew and were East Germans and we were very poor, because we didn’t have money and all the capital was western in Germany and they bought our factories and shut them down, because they were mostly only interest in the market rather than creating new production capacity. And so cities were poor and then this repair and we could not afford things and I could not afford to go into a restaurant and order a meal there. I would have to cook at home. But I also thought, why not just have a restaurant with my friends? So we would open up a cafe with friends and a restaurant and we would cook for each other in these restaurants and also invite the general public and they could donate.
I was very lucky to be alive at the time of the collapse of Eastern Germany and the transition into Western Germany and me and my friends and most of the people I knew and were East Germans and we were very poor, because we didn’t have money and all the capital was western in Germany and they bought our factories and shut them down, because they were mostly only interest in the market rather than creating new production capacity. And so cities were poor and then this repair and we could not afford things and I could not afford to go into a restaurant and order a meal there. I would have to cook at home. But I also thought, why not just have a restaurant with my friends? So we would open up a cafe with friends and a restaurant and we would cook for each other in these restaurants and also invite the general public and they could donate.
And eventually this became so big that we could turn this into some incorporated form and it became regular restaurant at some point. Or we did the same thing with the music movie theater. We would not be able to afford to pay 12 marks to watch a movie, but why not just create our own movie theater and then invite people to pay and we would rent the movies for in a way in which a movie theater does, but it would be a community movie theater that which everybody you wants to help can watch for free and build this thing and renovates the building.
And so we ended up creating lots and lots of infrastructure. And I think when you’re young and you don’t have money, move to a place where this is still happening. Move to one of those places that are undeveloped and where you get a critical mass of other people who are starting to build infrastructure to live in. And that’s super satisfying, because you’re not just creating infrastructure, but we are creating a small society that is building culture and ways to interact with each other. And that’s much, much more satisfying than going into some kind of chain and get your needs met by ordering food from this chain and so on.
Lex Fridman
So not just consuming culture, but creating culture.
So not just consuming culture, but creating culture.
Joscha Bach
Yes. And you don’t always have that choice. That’s why I preface that when you do have the choice and there are many roles that need to be played, we need people who take care of the distribution in society and so on. But when you have the choice to create something, always go for creation, it’s so much more satisfying. And it also is, this is what life is about, I think.
Yes. And you don’t always have that choice. That’s why I preface that when you do have the choice and there are many roles that need to be played, we need people who take care of the distribution in society and so on. But when you have the choice to create something, always go for creation, it’s so much more satisfying. And it also is, this is what life is about, I think.
Meaning of life
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Speaking of which, you retweeted this meme of a life of philosopher in a nutshell, it’s birth and death and in between it’s a chubby guy and it says why though? What do you think is the answer to that?
Yeah. Speaking of which, you retweeted this meme of a life of philosopher in a nutshell, it’s birth and death and in between it’s a chubby guy and it says why though? What do you think is the answer to that?
Joscha Bach
Well, the answer is that everything that can exist might exist. And in many ways you take an ecological perspective the same way as when you look at human opinions and cultures. It’s not that there is right and wrong opinions when you look at this from this ecological perspective, but every opinion that fits between two human years might be between two human years. And so when I see in a stranger opinion on social media, it’s not that I feel that I have a need to get upset, it’s often more that, “Oh, there you are.” And your opinion is incentivized, then it’s going to be abundant. And when you take this ecological perspective also on yourself and you realize you’re just one of these mushrooms that are popping up and doing this thing, and you can, depending on where you chose to grow and where you happen to grow, you can flourish or not doing this or that strategy. And it’s still all the same life at some level.
Well, the answer is that everything that can exist might exist. And in many ways you take an ecological perspective the same way as when you look at human opinions and cultures. It’s not that there is right and wrong opinions when you look at this from this ecological perspective, but every opinion that fits between two human years might be between two human years. And so when I see in a stranger opinion on social media, it’s not that I feel that I have a need to get upset, it’s often more that, “Oh, there you are.” And your opinion is incentivized, then it’s going to be abundant. And when you take this ecological perspective also on yourself and you realize you’re just one of these mushrooms that are popping up and doing this thing, and you can, depending on where you chose to grow and where you happen to grow, you can flourish or not doing this or that strategy. And it’s still all the same life at some level.
It’s all the same experience of being a conscious being in the world, and you do have some choice about who you want to be more than any other animal has. That to me is fascinating. And so I think that rather than asking yourself what is the one way to be, think about what are the possibilities that I have? What would be the most interesting way to be that I can be?
Lex Fridman
Because everything is possible. So you get to explore this.
Because everything is possible. So you get to explore this.
Joscha Bach
It’s not everything is possible. Many things fail. Most things fail, but often there are possibilities that we are not seeing, especially if we choose who we are.
It’s not everything is possible. Many things fail. Most things fail, but often there are possibilities that we are not seeing, especially if we choose who we are.
Lex Fridman
To the degree we can choose. Joscha you’re one of my favorite humans in this world, consciousness to merge with for a brief moment of time. It’s always an honor. It always blows my mind. It will take me days, if not weeks, to recover, and I already miss our chats. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for speaking with me so many times. Thank you so much for all the ideas you put out into the world, and I’m a huge fan of following you now in this interesting, weird time we’re going through with AI. So thank you again for talking today.
To the degree we can choose. Joscha you’re one of my favorite humans in this world, consciousness to merge with for a brief moment of time. It’s always an honor. It always blows my mind. It will take me days, if not weeks, to recover, and I already miss our chats. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for speaking with me so many times. Thank you so much for all the ideas you put out into the world, and I’m a huge fan of following you now in this interesting, weird time we’re going through with AI. So thank you again for talking today.
Joscha Bach
Thank you, Lex, for this conversation. I enjoyed it very much.
Thank you, Lex, for this conversation. I enjoyed it very much.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Joscha Bach. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with no words from the psychologist, Carl Jung. “One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious. The latter procedure, however, is disagreeable and therefore not popular.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Joscha Bach. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with no words from the psychologist, Carl Jung. “One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious. The latter procedure, however, is disagreeable and therefore not popular.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Mohammed El-Kurd: Palestine | Lex Fridman Podcast #391
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #391 with Mohammed El-Kurd.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
Tell me about Sheikh Jarrah, the neighborhood in East Jerusalem where you grew up.
And then in the ’70s, you had settler organizations, many of whom were registered here in New York and in the United States, claiming our houses and our lands as their own by divine decree. Obviously, because the judges are Israeli and the laws were written by Israeli settlers and the whole judiciary was established atop the rubble of our homes and villages, we had no real pull in the courts. The Israeli courts would look at the Israeli documents, which we argue are falsifies and fabricated, and they would take them at face value without authentication, and they refused to look at our documents. They refused to look at the documents from the Jordanian government, the documents from the UN, the documents from the Ottoman archives. So you already have this kind of asymmetry in the court that, for any person with common sense, would lead you to believe that this is not in fact a legal battle or a real estate dispute, as Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs likes to frame it, but rather a very, very political battle.
One that is about social engineering, one is about demographics, one that is about removing as many Palestinians as possible from occupied Jerusalem. So we did what all Palestinian families in Jerusalem do when they’re faced with this kind of threat, and we bought time. We pleaded and pleaded and appealed the courts and appealed the cases, and we got over 50 expulsion orders. In 2009, rifle-wielding settlers accompanied by police and Israeli military came over and shoved our neighbors outside of their home around 5:00 AM. It was the most brutal, violent thing I’d seen as a child at the time, and I didn’t realize that my turn was coming, my turn was next. They threw them out in the middle of the night with sound bombs and rubber bullets, and they had to live in tents on the street for many, many months and even lived in our front yards for a few months and lived in their cars.
And then by the end of 2009, I had come home from school to find all of my furniture scattered across the length of the street, and I saw the settlers, many of whom had American accents living in our house. And their justification for this, their reasoning for this is divine decree. This is what God wants. This is the promised land. This is so-and-so, as if God is some kind of real estate agent. So they took over half of our home, and we continued to be in courts for the following decade. I was still a child and I had broken English, and I was talking to all of these diplomats and all of these journalists who would subjugate me, subject me to their racism and biases and so on and so forth. And I had to prove my humanity time and time again. And I had to do all of this, all with broken English. And we were lucky, even if we got a quote in the article written about us by The Times or so on and so forth.
Move forward to 2020, I was in New York City studying a master’s degree, getting a master’s degree. And my father calls me and he tells me, “We have yet another expulsion order,” and we decided to launch a campaign. It was quite ambitious at the time, but the whole objective of the campaign was to demystify what is happening because it’s reported on in the news, it’s reported on around the world as this real estate dispute, as these evictions, which was not really what’s happening. Evictions do not entail a foreign army in an occupied territory, forcibly removing you out of your home. So I came home from New York, and we launched a campaign which turned into a global success.
And I believe it was a global success because, finally, the images on the screen matched the rhetoric that was being said. It wasn’t so confusing or complicated anymore. All of this asymmetry was pronounced and articulated in a way that any of you, be it in Alabama, be it in New York, be it in Egypt, was able to understand the asymmetry of the judicial system and the agenda of colonialism that was taking place here. And due to immense international and diplomatic pressure from all over the world, even the United States, the Israeli Supreme Court was forced to cancel all of the eviction orders in Sheikh Jarrah until further notice. This, I consider, was a small victory because obviously we are still at risk of losing our homes once they decide to do the land registry, which we can get into a little bit later if you’d like.
But nonetheless, it was something that we haven’t seen before. And the fact that the Supreme Court canceled all of these dozens and dozens of fast eviction orders, it set a precedent. And it also proved that this was a political battle, not a legal one.
We’re talking about Sheikh Jarrah, we’re talking about Jerusalem, we’re talking about generations and generations and generations of people who have lived there for the longest time, who now, even though… For example, me, I don’t have a citizenship. I’m a resident, a mere resident, I have a blue ID card even though my grandmother and my grandfather were born in Jerusalem, their grandparents were born in Jerusalem, even though we’ve lived there for generations. But Palestinians in Jerusalem, we are not citizens. We’re just mere residents. Same thing with residents of the occupied Syrian Golan. They are not citizens. They are just residents in their own hometowns. This is an important piece, but all of these gets convoluted and lost in translation. I would argue, a lot of the time, it’s dubious, it’s malicious, the fact that these little pieces of context that frame the entire story get lost.
I’ll talk to you about something else. Just 10 minutes across from my neighborhood, Sheikh Jarrah, there’s another neighborhood called Silwan. And the people in Silwan are also threatened with expulsion, but not through evictions, but through home demolitions. And if you look at American media or Israeli state media, you would read the headlines, “Palestinians living in homes built illegally are going to face… their homes are going to be torn apart.” What these headlines don’t tell you, most of the time, the substance doesn’t tell you that Palestinians seldom ever get building permit applications. In fact, recently, a spokesperson for the Israeli military confirmed that was 95% of building permits applications submitted by Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West Bank are rejected by the Israeli authorities.
And to make this even more absurd, the guy, the councilman who is responsible for rejecting and accepting building permit applications, his name is Yonatan Yosef, and he’s an activist in the settler movements and he’s a Jerusalem council member, last week, following the expulsion of Sub Laban family in the old city of Jerusalem, he posted to his official Facebook account, “Nakba now,” demanding a second Nakba, promising another Nakba. He has done so on many occasions, he has chanted with a megaphone, just a few months ago, walking down the street in my neighborhood chanting, “We want Nakba now.” This is a man who has vandalized our murals, who has screamed Islamophobic slurs. This is literally a man in the government making these decisions. And this is similar to Masafer Yatta in the south of Hebron Hills. For those who don’t know, it’s a place in the occupied West Bank where Bedouin and cave dweller Palestinians have lived for generations, they have cultivated the land. And recently, they were expelled from their homes. Over a thousand people were expelled from their remote small villages.
Again, if you’re reading American media, it would say, “Palestinians living in firing zones were removed because they’re living in a military zone.” What these media reports will not tell you that, in the ’80s, the Israeli government purposefully classified many lands in the occupied West Bank as firing zones, as off-limit military zones for the sole purpose of expelling the residents, and this is not some kind of conspiracy theory. This is declassified information that was released from the Israel’s State Archive that was later reported on by our audits. Also, these reports will not tell you that the judge who rules on whether these people continue to live under homes or not is himself a settler in the West Bank. And I’m not even talking about a loose definition of a settler, but according to international law, this is a settler living illegally in an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank. This is the judiciary that we deal with, which is hilarious considering how it’s being reported on in American media recently as some kind of beacon of progress and democracy that new government is trying to undermine.
We also cannot wait to cite a confession from a former Israeli soldier who’s guilty conscience is keeping them up at night. And we use all of these confessions or slip ups as evidence to prove that this is a racist country that is enacting racist acts, but we don’t need this because the material proof is on the ground. You see it in the policies that are enacted. You see it in how this regime has behaved for the past 75 years. I don’t need confessions from the likes of Netanyahu to understand that his heart is full of hate.
In many cases, time and time again, I grew up and my grandmother told me the stories about the Nakba. She told me stories about her neighbors who were running away in a panic, and they had mistaken a pillow for their offspring and they just took it with them. And they realized later that they forgot their child and they came back for it. Many, many people who were separated from their… My grandmother herself, she lost her husband for a few months, for nine months. He wasn’t imprisoned by the Israelis. She told me all of these stories, and she wasn’t just reminiscing about them. She was letting me know that this is still happening and I didn’t need to grow up that old to see it happening in my own front yard, to see that expulsion happen in the same fashion. She’s talked about it.
But now they have replaced their artillery with the judiciary. They have replaced the slashing of the pregnant women’s bellies in the Deir Yassin massacre with laws that say, “You’re not legally allowed to be here. We’re going to kick you out of your home,” and it’s happening, and it has happened in broad daylight. One piece of context for the listener who is not familiar with the Nakba is the Balfour Declaration, which was a promise, quote-unquote, “promise” made by the British to the Zionist movement in 1917, committing to the establishment. I’m quoting, I think word for word, “committing to the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine”, as if Palestine was the British to give away. And there was this whole movement that called for colonization of Palestine.
And there were different schools of thought in Zionism. People like Zangwill said that this was a country without a people, and Palestinians who have existed there, who have cultivated the lands, who had diverse cultural and religious and political practices, they were completely erased. And other people like Jabotinsky were a lot more explicit and a lot more honest and said that, “We need to fight the Palestinians because they loved their land, much like the Red Indians loved their lands,” and he had a paper called the Iron Wall: Colonization of Palestine Must Go Forward. And all of these schools of thoughts were then shopping around for imperial support for their cause. They tried to get support from the Ottoman Empire, they tried to get support from Germany, this is in the 1800s, and then they got support from the United Kingdom. A great book to recommend is The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi, traces the Zionist movement, oftentimes in the Zionists’ own words.
So today what we’re seeing is a continuation. And people like Jabotinsky, who are profoundly and explicitly racist, who have called for genocide, who have called the Palestinians barbaric, who have said and done racist things… Jabotinsky also was the founder of the Irgun, one of the other militias that later merged to become the Israeli army, which was responsible for the Deir Yassin massacre, which was responsible for the bombing of the King David Hotel, this is a person who is still celebrated in Israeli society. There are streets named after him, and Netanyahu just two weeks ago, if I’m not mistaken, honored him in a public celebration. So this is Zionism. It’s not even through my own words.
Regardless of whatever was written in these books that were written thousands and thousands of years ago, the fact of the matter is no one has a right to go on slaughtering people, removing them from their homes and then continuing to live in their homes, continuing to drink coffee on their balconies decades and decades later with no shame, with no introspection, with no reflection. No one has the right to do that. No one has the right to keep an entire population of people in a cage, which is what’s happening to people in the West Bank who have no freedom of movement, which is what’s happening in Gaza, which is blockaded to water, air, and land, and is deemed uninhabitable by human rights organizations like the UN. No one has a right to do that.
And so we resort to sending our kids who will not threaten and who will not trigger the biases they have against Muslims and Arab people, which Palestinians, even though we’re not all Muslim, are racialized as Muslim. And this is why we emphasize the deaths of women and children as though the deaths of our men does not counter, does not matter. All of these things I think the new generation of Palestinians is rebelling against. I think words like… I think it’s loaded, it’s loaded language, anger and angry and hate and so on and so forth, because it mischaracterizes people and it kind of delegitimizes them a little bit.
I think the real anger is the bulldozer bulldozing through my house. I think the real anger is the 18-year-old soldier who refuses to see me as a human being and strip searches me every chance they get. That’s where the real anger lies. And I’m quite honestly proud of our unabashedness and our refusal to bow our heads or bury our heads in the sand. I think that’s the only way forward.
Now, of course, and I just find it’s ridiculous again, that opposing a secular political movement that was explicitly colonialist, expansionist, exclusive and racist through the words of its own authors is somehow… And also again, opposing such a political movement that is quite young and quite recent is somehow equivalent to opposing a religion that is thousands and thousands of years old. But it is convenient again, for Israeli politicians to frame us who oppose Zionism, a form of racism and bigotry, as anti-Semites. But I can guarantee you Benjamin Netanyahu has no problem with anti-Semitism. This is the same man who has no problem getting on stage and shaking hands with Pastor John Hagee, doing web webinars with Pastor John Hagee. For those who don’t know, Pastor John Hagee is the founder of Christians United for Israel, who has said on multiple occasions that Hitler was a hunter who was sent to hunt the Jews. Who said on multiple occasions that Jewish people are going to perish in hell. All of this is verifiable by Google, and this is one of the Israeli regime’s closest allies.
So the Israeli regime does not have a problem with anti-Semites when it serves its interests. It has a problem… If you look at evangelicals or Christian Zionism at large, anti-Semitism lies at the heart of Christian Zionism. It’s the idea that we want to drive all of the Jews outside of the United States so that Armageddon could happen, or whatever the fuck. This accusation has been a muzzle, it has been used as a muzzle to silence political opposition and to stifle political advocacy for the liberation of Palestine. And a lot of the time people get caught up in denouncing it and in justifying themselves and disclaimers and so on and so forth that you lose the point, that you’re distracted from the focal point, that is there is an ongoing colonialism happening where people every single day are killed. I cannot keep count. This morning a kid was shot in Palestine. It’s embarrassing even for me that I don’t even know the numbers here, but this muzzle has been effective and I think the only righteous option is to oppose these labels, these smear campaigns that target us.
I myself have been labeled an anti-Semite by the ADL. And if you want to talk about that at surface level, people will say, wow, the ADL, Anti-Defamation League condemned you. But people do not look at the history of the Anti-Defamation League, do not look at the present of the Anti-Defamation League, the fact that they are the largest non-governmental police training department in the country where they train police in racial profiling and militarism. The fact that they have historically and continued to have engaged in surveillance on Black liberation movements, on anti-Apartheid South African activists. Most recently in Charlottesville, when White supremacists were marching and chanting anti-Semitic shit, the ADL advised local police departments to spy on the Black organizers opposing the White supremacists. This is again, all verifiable on the internet, go to droptheadl.org.
We are told to turn the other cheek time and time again, we’re told that we should continue living inside these enclaves without access to clean water, without access to the right to movement, without access to building permits, without our natural right to expansion, without a guarantee that if we leave our house we’re not going to be shot. And we’re supposed to not do anything about it. That is absurd. Any person watching this understands this completely. People understand that if somebody is attacking your home, you’ll fight back. If somebody is attacking your family, you fight back. That is not… But again, who gets to call who a terrorist? Who gets to define terrorism? This is all about who has power. Who gets to write these laws? Who gets to write these definitions? Why is it that American actions in Iraq is not called terrorism by American politicians? Violence is like this mutating concept, and it takes on many shapes and forms. And if it’s in a uniform, if it speaks in English, if it has blonde hair, it’s somehow acceptable, it’s okay. We make movies about it. We sell out tickets about it, we make games about it. But if it’s without a uniform, it’s if it has a thick accent, if it has a beard, that’s condemnable, that’s wrong, that’s terrorism.
Maybe this is a good opportunity to talk about the legal classifications for Palestinians. Israel, much like any other colonial entity, has divided and fragmented the Palestinian people. As I said earlier, I have a blue ID, which means I’m a resident. A friend of mine who lives in Haifa, for example, two hours away from me, 150 kilometers, not nothing too bad in this country, has an Israeli citizenship. He can travel, he can enter the West Bank, he can do a lot more. He’s a citizen, he can vote if he wants to, not that we want to. I always say to my friends, “Oh, you can go to Italy without a visa because you have an Israeli citizenship.” But they battle national eraser. They battle crime in their own communities because of police negligence. They battle land confiscation, and have battled land confiscations in the ’50s.
Whereas somebody with a green ID, somebody from the West Bank cannot leave the West Bank, cannot go anywhere without a special permit and lives behind these walls. The West Bank, I think hilariously George Bush described it as Swiss cheese because of the holes. Every a hundred meters there’s a new settlement or there’s a new military checkpoint. So even if you live behind the wall in the West Bank with your green ID, even though you’re robbed of your right to movement, you still even can’t move from town to town within the West Bank without encountering settler violence or military violence while you’re crossing the checkpoints and so on and so forth.
And then the last category we have is people who live in Gaza, we are talking about over 2 million people who live in an open air prison, who have no right to movement, but also have no access to clean water and no access to supplies, no access to good food, no access to good healthcare, and so on and so forth, who routinely get bombarded every few years. Gaza is two hours away from my house. It feels like an absolute far away planet because it’s so isolated from the rest of the country. So imagine all of these different legal statuses fragmenting your everyday identity, and creating different challenges and obstacles for you to deal with, for each group to deal with. It’s amazing and impressive that despite these colonial barriers, the real cement ones and the barriers in the mind, despite all of these barriers, the Palestinian people have maintained their national identity for 70 years. That is incredibly impressive. And it also sends a message that as long as we have a boot on our neck, we are going to continue fighting. Violence, cracking down on refugee camps, bombarding refugee camps is only going to bring about more violence.
I can guarantee you, because the Nakba is not that old, I can guarantee you that some people who were marching away from their camps were chased away from their homes in the camp in Jenin were some of the same people who were chased away from the homes in Haifa in the first place. This perpetual exile that Palestinian people continue to live is unbearable. In my case, my grandmother was removed from her home in Haifa in ’48, and then she moved from city to city. And then in 2009, she saw half of her home taken over by Israeli soldiers. My grandmother died in 2020, and two months later, we got the next expulsion order from the Israeli court. I’m quite ashamed to admit that I was relieved that my grandmother had died, because I did not want her, 103 years old at the time, to go through yet another Nakba. And this is the fact for so many Palestinians, regardless of where they are on the map.
The context that Palestine is under occupation, that these Palestinian cities are under occupation, that they have to deal with land seizures at all times, that they cannot leave their towns without a special permit, all of this will give context to the violence. And the thousands of Israeli soldiers that raid the camp that day, that traumatized an entire generation. They think they will quell that generation. They think that with such bloodshed and such barbaric violence, destroying infrastructure, attacking medics, killing people left and right, and they think with this kind of terror that they can quell people, tell people that they can guarantee that these kids are not going to grow up and resist. But that’s the opposite of what happens. One thing about Palestinian people, they will not compromise their dignity. These people live in dire, excruciating circumstances and it is so courageous, in my opinion, that they even think to defend themselves against one of the most lethal, one of the most sophisticated armies in the world, against a nuclear state that can wipe them out in the matter of seconds. But at the end of the day, it’s not even about courage, it’s about survival. They don’t do this because of machismo or because of heroic tendencies, it’s because this is about survival.
And I think what serves this narrative is Islamophobia, is xenophobia towards Arabs, which I don’t have the luxury to write laws about. By the way, I’m quite frustrated by this. I am preoccupied and the Palestinian people are preoccupied with the material violence that we have to deal with on the day-to-day, the demolitions, the bombings, the imprisonment. That’s what we’re distracted with and busy with that we can’t even talk about the racism, the casual racism, against this anti-Palestinian racism, be it in the media, on social media and diplomatic circles. But all of this racism that has gone unchecked, has not been regulated for decades, allows for these tropes to continue in which Palestinians are promoted as these like barbaric terrorists and the only way we could remedy that situation is by marketing them as these defenseless victims. But the fact of the matter is, it’s not this simplistic. Palestinian people are human beings who should enjoy a full spectrum of humanity, which includes rage, which include…
I’m sorry to keep reiterating this point, but at this point, I am quite exhausted by how exceptional Palestine and Palestinian resistance is when the world tells me time and time again that it doesn’t have a problem with violence, it just has a problem with who does that violence.
Not to stray away from the question, but the Palestinian Authority two years ago killed an opposition activist named Nizar Banat. It was a horrendous crime, and I was in Ramallah with the people protesting against the Palestinian Authority. And at some point they had their batons, the Palestinian Authority Police, and they beat us with it. And many of the people in the crowd were liking the Palestinian Authority to Zionism. I think people, this is what people do, when they are confronted by a great evil, they liken it to some other great evil, and this is where the Hitler analogy came from. Again, I don’t think it’s the best strategy moving forward, but I refuse to be criminalized for a little sentence.
The context that Hamas is permitted by international law to use armed resistance, blah, blah, blah, does that mean Hamas is equipped to govern Gaza? I don’t think so. Does that mean that people around Palestine necessarily want to live under Hamas rule? In 2006, Hamas was democratically elected. I don’t know if that’s still the case today. There’s a lot to be said, but neither of these entities have any real power in perpetuating… The only body that can flip the switch in all of this equation is the Israelis.
They’re the ones who are keeping people in a cage. They’re the ones who are wrapping the West Bank with a wall. Everything else to me is just secondary, regardless of what I think personally of any of those people. Personally, for me, the world I envision, not just Palestine, the world I envision is a world that goes beyond states, that goes beyond this framing of power, this hierarchy in which some people rule over other people. This whole idea of nation states, be it Israel or any other nation state, it’s futile, it’s not good, it’s exclusive. I think that we can achieve a better world than that.
Do you see a possible future with a two state solution, whether it’s for Palestine and Israel? Do you see a one state solution where there is a diversity of different peoples like in the United States and they have equal rights in the courts and everywhere else?
And beyond that, it’s just not possible. I do believe that whatever you want to call it, one state, two state, 48 states, 29 states, whatever you want to call it, refugees need to return, land needs to be given back, wealth needs to be redistributed, and a recognition of the Nakba needs to happen. That is the only way we could move forward.
And regarding whether this is a possible situation for two people to live side by side, let’s ask two questions. Let’s say you lived in a house with a person, your roommate, you just had a roommate who constantly beat the shit out of you, I wonder if you’d want to continue to live with them? That’s one. And let’s try another scenario. Let’s say you live in a house with a roommate who you just absolutely hate, just absolutely oppose their existence as a people, you don’t even give him a key to your apartment. Let’s say now you’re equal partners in the apartment, would you want to live with him? I don’t know. We’ll see. We’ll see, time will tell, but I don’t think they want to live with us.
Israelis are quite good, especially Israeli diplomats, they’re quite good at using flowery language about peace and coexistence and so on and so forth, and they’re good with making us seem insane or radical or full of hate and so on and so forth, but the policies speak for themselves. The actions on the ground speak for themselves, and every time there’s an uptick, many of them leave, and I wonder, I would like to see, I wonder what would happen in a own state solution.
I came here on the bus. I live in a house where everybody in the world can easily Google it and get its address, and anybody can just walk into my house. And I’m lucky and privileged as a Palestinian journalist. There are many Palestinian journalists who lose their lives. That’s real insecurity, but we don’t even have time to whine about it because there’s real shit going on the ground that we’re preoccupied with and reporting on all the time, that we don’t even have the time to talk about how limited is our institutional backing, how limited is our cyber security, how limited is even healthcare. All of these things we don’t even have time to complain about, but they’re the real life things that formulate an insecure population that Israel certainly does not suffer from.
So no, I don’t think as things stand right now, as the power of balance stands right now, I don’t think there’s an existential threat to Israel. And also, let’s redefine existential threat. Do we think the Israeli regime, the Zionist regime should continue to exist in its forms, subjugating people, enacting the crime of Apartheid according to a bajillion human rights organizations? Do we think that it should continue keeping people in a cage? If that’s what people are fighting to save, then that says a lot about the people who are feeling this existential threat, not me.
All of this other stuff about what happens to the settlers, and we want to kill all Jews and all of this, I think it’s bullshit, and I think it’s ridiculous, and I think fixating on it is distracting from the focal point. There needs to be an end to all of the injustices, to all of the atrocities. A little boy from Jerusalem should be able to go jog around the city without fearing getting shot. That’s the simplest thing we’re asking for here, and we want our land back, and those things do not mean actually at all the ethnic cleansing of another people.
But that doesn’t mean that they are allowed or have a right to create and implement a system of Jewish supremacy at my expense. That’s not a crazy thing to say. That is not a controversial thing to say. You can have your state, just don’t kill anyone. Thank you, have a good day. That’s not a crazy thought to have.
He was shot and killed by an Israeli soldier who was trigger-happy because, again, they have this siege mentality where any moving object is going to kill them. And he was shot and killed and despite it being in broad daylight, despite it being well-documented, despite the victim being disabled, despite all of this, he was acquitted by the Israeli court. The military, the courts, the government, they all work together, which is why it’s so ironic to me that there are hundreds of thousands of people marching on the streets of Tel Aviv trying to save the progressive beacon that is the Israeli Supreme Court when you find its fingerprints all over the injustices perpetuated against Palestinians, be it legalizing and upholding the withholding of slain Palestinian bodies who were killed by the Israeli Military to be used as bargaining chips with Israeli militaries.
Be it making decisions to dispossesses entire villages like [inaudible 01:29:42], be it never once granting release to any Palestinian who was held in administrative detention without charge or trial. Be it upholding the legality of the Family Reunification Law that does not allow Palestinian couples who hold different legal statuses of reuniting and living together as families. I mean, those are just some of the few things I can think of about the Israeli Supreme Court.
So, the real tension that exists is the lack of diversity on the Israeli political spectrum that makes the vision for a future so limited, because those on, what seems to be, the far left, are defending an extremely conservative institution that is a supreme court that they regard as progressive, when in fact it is the opposite of such. So, what do we do? How can we talk? How can we have peace with people who are chanting to save the very body that is displacing us? It’s ridiculous.
My grandmother continues to talk about… Well, she continued until she died, she continued to talk about her Jewish neighbors when she grew up in the old city. Well, when she was born in the old city and then her Jewish neighbors in Haifa. We even had one Jewish member of her family, [inaudible 01:31:59] actually, who just also recently passed away there. Jews were a part of Palestine, and they spoke Hebrew, a different kind of Hebrew, but they spoke Hebrew and they were… People really need to read The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine, it’s really an excellent synopsis of the history.
But this whole idea, that this is some kind of war between two religions is so misleading, because what’s happening is a bunch of frankly European settlers with a certain political secular ideology came and relocated here and turned it into a religious conflict between people who have lived harmoniously together for decades before that.
And the whole idea, be it Christian Zionism or John Hagee, or the calls for Jews to leave the United States and relocate in Israel. Or recently, which we’ve heard about a long time ago, but recently an Israeli historian confirmed the fact that Israeli organizations were bombing Baghdad and bombing synagogues in Baghdad in Iraq to get Iraqi Jews to leave and come relocate in Israel. All of this is manufactured, and again, none of this is a conspiracy theory, I know it sounds absurd, and anytime I look at my life from a bird’s eye view, I think, “What a circus.” But it’s real and it’s verifiable, call the fact-checkers.
And that sounds great on the surface, but then you look at Israeli law, you look at Israeli courts, you look at ownership and you see that, oh, Israelis refuse to authenticate or take into consideration any land ownership documents prior of the establishment of the state. So all of us in Jerusalem who have their taboo papers, their ownership papers from the Ottoman era, that’s not legit in the eyes of the Israeli court, because your ownership deeds existed long before Israel even existed, so we’re not going to take this into consideration.
So, not to be cynical here, but unfortunately the likely result of the land registry is that they’re going to say, “Oh, all of this land belongs to these Jewish organizations,” because they’re not going to take any of our documents into consideration. But that means that there’s going to be another campaign and there’s going to be a long-winded fight, and we’ll see what happens. But that’s the fear, and there’s a huge dreadful fear of a massive loss in property in Jerusalem following this land registry for the reasons I just told you. It’s the mere fact that they just refuse to look at land ownership documents.
This was what was unique about [inaudible 01:36:50]. We were able to penetrate an industry that usually ignores us and usually refuses to use any of our framing, any of our quotations, and these people that march, these people that spread the rhetoric, spread the facts, wrote articles, these people that made videos online and got arrested, and many of whom are still in Israeli prisons paying higher prices than I have ever paid, these people are the ones that truly moved the international community into action.
It wouldn’t have, the United States, I don’t think would said anything had it not been for the immense media pressure that was created from the immense popular pressure. There are a lot of moving parts to a global campaign, and I think it’s so impressive that we were able to do this without any media backing, without any institutional backing, without any training, without any budget, nothing.
It was only, I think, nine Congress people who boycotted Herzog’s speech in Congress yesterday, and he received standing ovation after standing ovation, after standing ovation, after standing ovation. And I wonder if the everyday American is concerned that many of their politicians are Israel first politicians, are politicians who care more about maintaining a relationship with the Israeli regime, than they care about their own districts.
And you also tweeted an excerpt from his writing. “Between 1936 and 1939, the Palestinian Revolutionary Movement suffered a severe setback at the hands of three separate enemies that were to constitute together the principle threat to the nationalist movement in Palestine in all subsequent stages of its struggle. One, the local reactionary leadership, two, the regimes in the Arab states surrounding Palestine, and three, the imperialist-Zionist enemy.” Can you analyze what he means by those three things? The local reactionary leadership, the regimes in the Arab states surrounding Palestine and the imperialist-Zionist enemy? And also, could you comment on him as a person?
They’re about mutual strategic interests that all of these nations have together, and some people argue that Palestine is no longer an Arab cause because Arab countries are normalizing. But most of these governments, if not all, actually, all these governments that have normalized, most of them are monarchies, are not elected governments, and they do not represent the will of the people or the desires or the opinions of their peoples. And the proof to this is places like Jordan and Egypt. Even though they’ve normalized and had peace agreements with Israel for many, many, many, many years, Palestine and the Palestinian cause was still a talking point in the political campaigning of politicians, Jordanian and Egyptian politicians, and continues to be for them to gain popularity because that’s where the hearts of the people are. And then the Zionist regime is quite explanatory, the imperial Zionist regime. I mean, what else do you call a regime that sought help from imperialist powers to depopulate an entire country and build a new one on top of it.
I’m not that delusional about the power of words, but I do think that I have a responsibility and I have a privilege even to have a voice, to have some kind of platform, and if I’m not defining myself, if I’m not talking and representing myself, then other people will define me. And their definitions of the Palestinian people across the few past decades have not been kind or generous to the Palestinian people. That’s one thing. The other thing is I believe in the United States as a front for change. I believe we have a lot more leverage here than we do back home. Again, I believe, and someone said the other day, I can’t remember their name, but someone said “no stone unturned”, I believe in fighting on all fronts. But here, really, I can go protest in front of the Israeli Embassy without getting shot. There’s a lot of work to be done here. There’s a lot of people waking up.
I would even argue that a reckoning is coming in the American public. More and more American people are concerned where their tax money is going or concerned what their politicians are invested in. More and more American people are saying, “Not on our dime,” are saying, “Not today. Not here.” Also, there’s many Palestinians in the diaspora here in the United States and Europe who benefit and could benefit from political education in the English language, because the diaspora across history, the Palestinians diaspora, has been effective in the ’70s and the ’80s and, ever since 2021, there has been a resurgence of the power and influence of the Palestinian diaspora.
My mother was a poet and her and my dad would play this game in the morning. She would read her poems to him and he would guess which lines would be red penciled by the Israeli military censor, because she would submit her poems to the local newspaper, the Kutz Newspaper, and the military censor has to go over it. She would get her poems back with a bunch of words erased and they would laugh about it and blah, blah, blah. So poetry was very much part of my upbringing and, as a Palestinian, when you’re excluded from mainstream spaces, including media and journalism, poetry tends to be a place where you can say what you want to say without repercussions. And I say that I realize that our greatest writer, [inaudible 01:53:22], literally had his car bombed, exploded because of his writings. And recently, [inaudible 01:53:29], a poet, a Palestinian poet with an Israeli citizenship, was imprisoned for a few months for publishing a poem on Facebook in which he said, “Resist, my people. Resist.” So even that is not necessarily true.
But, anyway, it just felt like it’s a place where I could talk and express large ideas in a simplistic way. And the best example I could give you is one of my favorite poets, [inaudible 01:53:54], when the Israeli authorities decided to do the land law, which classified, I believe, 93% of historic Palestine as state owned, and then when they also did the absentee property law, which allows the Israeli government to take over homes that were depopulated from the Palestinian owners, he wrote a poem called God As A Refugee. It’s a sarcastic, sardonic poem in which he goes, “God has become a refugee, sir, so confiscate even the carpet of the mosque and sell the church because it’s his property, and sell our orphans because their father is absent. And do whatever you want.”
It’s a sarcastic poem that was in reaction to these laws, that translated to the everyday Palestinian, to the farmers, to the landowners, what these bureaucratic, complicated laws meant to them, what they meant to their land, and, what effect are these laws going to have on these people’s lands? And that, I think, is the role of poetry that I try to achieve.
And the emphasis that I’m trying to achieve with this book is dignity. I want to write a book about my experiences that is super dignified, that kicks its feet up on the table, and says what it wants unabashedly. Because we are told not only are we going to be victimized, but we are going to be polite in our suffering. I want to reject that completely and I want to lean into the humor of the past few years of my life because I think that’s really what the world needs and what I need to be writing.
But my aunt, who has now passed away, my aunt refused to go home. She wanted to gather her teacups because she really cared about her teacups. I was begging her to go inside and she refused. She was gathering her teacups. A soldier grabbed me and squeezed me between his baton and an electricity pole. It was very excruciatingly painful and traumatizing for me as a child, but it’s also a funny memory, in a way. Despite the pain, despite the trauma that came with it, there’s still something funny about it.
So much in the public framing of Palestinians, be it in media, in novels, in diplomacy, and so on and so forth, is that of the powerless victim, is that of the person who only weeps. Israeli propagandists, for example, will show pictures on Twitter of a house in [inaudible 02:00:18], and they’ll be like, “Look. This house has windows. They’re talking about their BCs, but they have a nice balcony on their house. What are they talking about?” Or they’ll show a video of a supermarket in [inaudible 02:00:31] and they’ll be like, “How come they’re talking about a blockade when they have a supermarket, and blah, blah, blah”, as though the ceiling has been so lowered that we can’t even afford joy anymore or a little supermarket in the neighborhood.
We’re stuck in the relentlessness of the occupation that a lot of the time I worry that the things I’m writing are always in reaction to a crime that took place, to a bombing that took place, and so on and so forth. And I think that’s, unfortunately, true for so many Palestinian writers. I would say isolation and stepping away from the news is very important to do, but I don’t do it.
And I have many journalist friends, some at the New York Times, some they used to be at the Washington Post, who tell me the kinds of battles they had to go through with their editors to let them even utter the word Palestine. And not even on in news pieces, pieces about, let’s say, a Palestinian artist or a Palestinian chef or whatever. There’s a lot that happens behind the scenes that is not reported on because, when it comes to Palestine, the rules and the laws of journalism are bendable. Passive voice is king. Omitting facts is acceptable. Anything goes.
But that’s not the case. The whole idea of the occupation, when they are killing our children, the whole idea is that they’re trained to break our spirits. These mothers, whose hearts are broken, who are anguished, who are so in so much pain when they are cheering, they are not celebrating, they’re not cheering. They are letting the occupier know that, “You have not broken my spirit. I have not yet been defeated.” And I think that is beautiful. It’s the same thing with our prison culture. Palestinians are fascinating in the sense that Palestinians go to prison and they study and they come out with degrees. They can find ways to participate in civil society. They can even smuggle sperm from prison to give a life outside of it because in their philosophy of prisons, they understand that these structures, these buildings were built to break your spirits. So what do you?
You don’t allow it to break your spirits. You resist it. You continue to hold onto life. You continue to hold on to your love of life. You continue to hold on to your love of freedom and you come out of prison and you’re celebrated by your community. The prison has not broken your spirit. All of these structures and system that is the Zionist movement has put into place, be it the shoot-to-kill policies or the prisons or the demolishing our homes that were meant to kill our spirits, they don’t. You demolish the home in Jerusalem and the people say, “Don’t worry. We’ll build another. You demolish it and we’ll build another.” That’s what I admire most about the Palestinian people. It’s this resilience. And people love to say resilience, but I think it’s stubbornness. I think we’re such a stubborn people, and I think that’s great.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 2:18 – Palestine
- 26:47 – Hate
- 40:18 – Antisemitism
- 48:14 – Peace in the Middle East
- 55:11 – West Bank
- 1:05:20 – Hamas
- 1:15:08 – Two-state solution
- 1:30:58 – Jerusalem
- 1:37:41 – Role of the US
- 1:39:31 – Ghassan Kanafani
- 1:50:16 – 2024 Elections
- 1:51:25 – Poetry
- 2:00:45 – Language
- 2:09:14 – Hope
Introduction
Mohammed el-Kurd
Regardless of whatever was written in these books that were written thousands and thousands of years ago, the fact of the matter is no one has a right to go on slaughtering people, removing them from their homes and then continuing to live in their homes, continuing to drink coffee on their balconies decades and decades later, with no shame, with no introspection, with no reflection. No one has the right to do that. No one has the right to keep an entire population of people in a cage, which is what’s happening to people in the West Bank who have no freedom of movement, which is what’s happening in Gaza, which is blockaded to water, air, and land, and is deemed uninhabitable by human rights organizations like the UN. No one has a right to do that.
Regardless of whatever was written in these books that were written thousands and thousands of years ago, the fact of the matter is no one has a right to go on slaughtering people, removing them from their homes and then continuing to live in their homes, continuing to drink coffee on their balconies decades and decades later, with no shame, with no introspection, with no reflection. No one has the right to do that. No one has the right to keep an entire population of people in a cage, which is what’s happening to people in the West Bank who have no freedom of movement, which is what’s happening in Gaza, which is blockaded to water, air, and land, and is deemed uninhabitable by human rights organizations like the UN. No one has a right to do that.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Mohammed el-Kurd, a world-renowned Palestinian poet, writer, journalist, and an influential voice speaking out and fighting for the Palestinian cause. He provides a very different perspective on Israel and Palestine than my previous two episodes with Benjamin Netanyahu and Yuval Noah Harari. I hope his story and his words add to your understanding of this part of the world as it did to mine. I’ll continue to have difficult long-form conversations such as these always with empathy and humility but with backbone. And please allow me to briefly comment about criticisms I receive of who I am as an interviewer and a human being. I am not afraid to travel anywhere or challenge anyone face-to-face, even if it puts my life in danger. But I’m also not afraid to be vulnerable, to truly listen, to empathize, to walk a mile in the well-worn shoes of those very different from me. It’s this latter task, not the former one, that is truly the most challenging in conversations and in life, but to me, it is the only way. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Mohammed el-Kurd.
The following is a conversation with Mohammed el-Kurd, a world-renowned Palestinian poet, writer, journalist, and an influential voice speaking out and fighting for the Palestinian cause. He provides a very different perspective on Israel and Palestine than my previous two episodes with Benjamin Netanyahu and Yuval Noah Harari. I hope his story and his words add to your understanding of this part of the world as it did to mine. I’ll continue to have difficult long-form conversations such as these always with empathy and humility but with backbone. And please allow me to briefly comment about criticisms I receive of who I am as an interviewer and a human being. I am not afraid to travel anywhere or challenge anyone face-to-face, even if it puts my life in danger. But I’m also not afraid to be vulnerable, to truly listen, to empathize, to walk a mile in the well-worn shoes of those very different from me. It’s this latter task, not the former one, that is truly the most challenging in conversations and in life, but to me, it is the only way. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Mohammed el-Kurd.
Palestine
Tell me about Sheikh Jarrah, the neighborhood in East Jerusalem where you grew up.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Sheikh Jarrah has, in a way, a typical neighborhood despite the absurd reality that surrounds it. It’s a typical neighborhood in terms of Palestinian neighborhoods. It’s one that is threatened with colonialism, with settler expansion, and with forced expulsion, and it has been that way since the early ’70s. My family, like all of the other families in Sheikh Jarrah, were expelled from their homes in the Nakba in 1948, and they were forced out by the Haganah and other Zionist parallel militaries that later formed the Israeli military, and they were driven to various cities. My grandmother moved to city to city, and she ended up in Sheikh Jarrah in 1956. Sheikh Jarrah was established as a refugee housing unit by the United Nations and by Jordinian government, which had control over that part of Jerusalem at the time. And then people lived there harmoniously. They were all from different parts of Palestine, and they managed to rebuild their lives after the first expulsion.
Sheikh Jarrah has, in a way, a typical neighborhood despite the absurd reality that surrounds it. It’s a typical neighborhood in terms of Palestinian neighborhoods. It’s one that is threatened with colonialism, with settler expansion, and with forced expulsion, and it has been that way since the early ’70s. My family, like all of the other families in Sheikh Jarrah, were expelled from their homes in the Nakba in 1948, and they were forced out by the Haganah and other Zionist parallel militaries that later formed the Israeli military, and they were driven to various cities. My grandmother moved to city to city, and she ended up in Sheikh Jarrah in 1956. Sheikh Jarrah was established as a refugee housing unit by the United Nations and by Jordinian government, which had control over that part of Jerusalem at the time. And then people lived there harmoniously. They were all from different parts of Palestine, and they managed to rebuild their lives after the first expulsion.
And then in the ’70s, you had settler organizations, many of whom were registered here in New York and in the United States, claiming our houses and our lands as their own by divine decree. Obviously, because the judges are Israeli and the laws were written by Israeli settlers and the whole judiciary was established atop the rubble of our homes and villages, we had no real pull in the courts. The Israeli courts would look at the Israeli documents, which we argue are falsifies and fabricated, and they would take them at face value without authentication, and they refused to look at our documents. They refused to look at the documents from the Jordanian government, the documents from the UN, the documents from the Ottoman archives. So you already have this kind of asymmetry in the court that, for any person with common sense, would lead you to believe that this is not in fact a legal battle or a real estate dispute, as Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs likes to frame it, but rather a very, very political battle.
One that is about social engineering, one is about demographics, one that is about removing as many Palestinians as possible from occupied Jerusalem. So we did what all Palestinian families in Jerusalem do when they’re faced with this kind of threat, and we bought time. We pleaded and pleaded and appealed the courts and appealed the cases, and we got over 50 expulsion orders. In 2009, rifle-wielding settlers accompanied by police and Israeli military came over and shoved our neighbors outside of their home around 5:00 AM. It was the most brutal, violent thing I’d seen as a child at the time, and I didn’t realize that my turn was coming, my turn was next. They threw them out in the middle of the night with sound bombs and rubber bullets, and they had to live in tents on the street for many, many months and even lived in our front yards for a few months and lived in their cars.
Lex Fridman
Can you linger on that process? 2009, you said 50 expulsion orders. What was happening?
Can you linger on that process? 2009, you said 50 expulsion orders. What was happening?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Between the ’70s and 2009, there had been many, dozens of expulsions orders against us and against many other families in the neighborhood, 28 other family, 28 families in total actually. And in 2008, 2009, the first wave of expulsions finally happened. It actually began with [inaudible 00:06:09] el-Kurd. We’re not related, but we live on the same street in the same neighborhood. She was thrown out of her home. Her husband, an elderly man, also named Mohammed el-Kurd, was pronounced dead on the spot. He had a stroke and died. Israeli soldiers pulled him out of his home while he was urinating and threw him into the streets, and he died. A few months later, Darawi and Hannun families, not a clan, but in Palestine you have sometimes a building that contains multiple brothers and their wives, each have little apartments, Darawi and Hannun family is about 35 people, were thrown out in the middle of the street right across from us.
Between the ’70s and 2009, there had been many, dozens of expulsions orders against us and against many other families in the neighborhood, 28 other family, 28 families in total actually. And in 2008, 2009, the first wave of expulsions finally happened. It actually began with [inaudible 00:06:09] el-Kurd. We’re not related, but we live on the same street in the same neighborhood. She was thrown out of her home. Her husband, an elderly man, also named Mohammed el-Kurd, was pronounced dead on the spot. He had a stroke and died. Israeli soldiers pulled him out of his home while he was urinating and threw him into the streets, and he died. A few months later, Darawi and Hannun families, not a clan, but in Palestine you have sometimes a building that contains multiple brothers and their wives, each have little apartments, Darawi and Hannun family is about 35 people, were thrown out in the middle of the street right across from us.
And then by the end of 2009, I had come home from school to find all of my furniture scattered across the length of the street, and I saw the settlers, many of whom had American accents living in our house. And their justification for this, their reasoning for this is divine decree. This is what God wants. This is the promised land. This is so-and-so, as if God is some kind of real estate agent. So they took over half of our home, and we continued to be in courts for the following decade. I was still a child and I had broken English, and I was talking to all of these diplomats and all of these journalists who would subjugate me, subject me to their racism and biases and so on and so forth. And I had to prove my humanity time and time again. And I had to do all of this, all with broken English. And we were lucky, even if we got a quote in the article written about us by The Times or so on and so forth.
Move forward to 2020, I was in New York City studying a master’s degree, getting a master’s degree. And my father calls me and he tells me, “We have yet another expulsion order,” and we decided to launch a campaign. It was quite ambitious at the time, but the whole objective of the campaign was to demystify what is happening because it’s reported on in the news, it’s reported on around the world as this real estate dispute, as these evictions, which was not really what’s happening. Evictions do not entail a foreign army in an occupied territory, forcibly removing you out of your home. So I came home from New York, and we launched a campaign which turned into a global success.
And I believe it was a global success because, finally, the images on the screen matched the rhetoric that was being said. It wasn’t so confusing or complicated anymore. All of this asymmetry was pronounced and articulated in a way that any of you, be it in Alabama, be it in New York, be it in Egypt, was able to understand the asymmetry of the judicial system and the agenda of colonialism that was taking place here. And due to immense international and diplomatic pressure from all over the world, even the United States, the Israeli Supreme Court was forced to cancel all of the eviction orders in Sheikh Jarrah until further notice. This, I consider, was a small victory because obviously we are still at risk of losing our homes once they decide to do the land registry, which we can get into a little bit later if you’d like.
But nonetheless, it was something that we haven’t seen before. And the fact that the Supreme Court canceled all of these dozens and dozens of fast eviction orders, it set a precedent. And it also proved that this was a political battle, not a legal one.
Lex Fridman
So let’s just add a little more detail to the people who are not familiar with the story, with the region, with the evictions, with the courts. So first of all, [inaudible 00:10:07] your eyes in East Jerusalem. Maybe you can say what is Jerusalem, where is it located, what are we talking about in terms of regionally and, second, what kind of people live there. So if you could talk about the Palestinian people. We should also make clear that these evictions is literally people living in homes, and their homes are taken away from them. I suppose technically, it’s legal evictions, but you’re saying that there’s asymmetry of power in the courts where the legal is not so much legal, but is politically and maybe even religiously based.
So let’s just add a little more detail to the people who are not familiar with the story, with the region, with the evictions, with the courts. So first of all, [inaudible 00:10:07] your eyes in East Jerusalem. Maybe you can say what is Jerusalem, where is it located, what are we talking about in terms of regionally and, second, what kind of people live there. So if you could talk about the Palestinian people. We should also make clear that these evictions is literally people living in homes, and their homes are taken away from them. I suppose technically, it’s legal evictions, but you’re saying that there’s asymmetry of power in the courts where the legal is not so much legal, but is politically and maybe even religiously based.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, I mean, the most important context here is that oftentimes Americans think that Israel and Palestine are some kind of two neighboring countries that live next to each other, and they are at war. But the fact of the matter is Palestinian cities exist all over the country, and it’s just one country, it’s just one infrastructure, and Israel is literally on top of Palestine. It was established on top of our villages in the late ’40s. Now, according to international law, the eastern part of Jerusalem is under occupation. So Israeli presence and jurisdiction over the area is completely illegitimate. They say the evictions are legal because the settlers write their law, so obviously they’re going to allow settlements to expand. But according to international law, even US policy, Israel occupies the eastern part of Jerusalem. Jurisdiction there is illegitimate. We shouldn’t even be going to their courts in the first place, but we have no other option.
Yeah, I mean, the most important context here is that oftentimes Americans think that Israel and Palestine are some kind of two neighboring countries that live next to each other, and they are at war. But the fact of the matter is Palestinian cities exist all over the country, and it’s just one country, it’s just one infrastructure, and Israel is literally on top of Palestine. It was established on top of our villages in the late ’40s. Now, according to international law, the eastern part of Jerusalem is under occupation. So Israeli presence and jurisdiction over the area is completely illegitimate. They say the evictions are legal because the settlers write their law, so obviously they’re going to allow settlements to expand. But according to international law, even US policy, Israel occupies the eastern part of Jerusalem. Jurisdiction there is illegitimate. We shouldn’t even be going to their courts in the first place, but we have no other option.
We’re talking about Sheikh Jarrah, we’re talking about Jerusalem, we’re talking about generations and generations and generations of people who have lived there for the longest time, who now, even though… For example, me, I don’t have a citizenship. I’m a resident, a mere resident, I have a blue ID card even though my grandmother and my grandfather were born in Jerusalem, their grandparents were born in Jerusalem, even though we’ve lived there for generations. But Palestinians in Jerusalem, we are not citizens. We’re just mere residents. Same thing with residents of the occupied Syrian Golan. They are not citizens. They are just residents in their own hometowns. This is an important piece, but all of these gets convoluted and lost in translation. I would argue, a lot of the time, it’s dubious, it’s malicious, the fact that these little pieces of context that frame the entire story get lost.
I’ll talk to you about something else. Just 10 minutes across from my neighborhood, Sheikh Jarrah, there’s another neighborhood called Silwan. And the people in Silwan are also threatened with expulsion, but not through evictions, but through home demolitions. And if you look at American media or Israeli state media, you would read the headlines, “Palestinians living in homes built illegally are going to face… their homes are going to be torn apart.” What these headlines don’t tell you, most of the time, the substance doesn’t tell you that Palestinians seldom ever get building permit applications. In fact, recently, a spokesperson for the Israeli military confirmed that was 95% of building permits applications submitted by Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West Bank are rejected by the Israeli authorities.
And to make this even more absurd, the guy, the councilman who is responsible for rejecting and accepting building permit applications, his name is Yonatan Yosef, and he’s an activist in the settler movements and he’s a Jerusalem council member, last week, following the expulsion of Sub Laban family in the old city of Jerusalem, he posted to his official Facebook account, “Nakba now,” demanding a second Nakba, promising another Nakba. He has done so on many occasions, he has chanted with a megaphone, just a few months ago, walking down the street in my neighborhood chanting, “We want Nakba now.” This is a man who has vandalized our murals, who has screamed Islamophobic slurs. This is literally a man in the government making these decisions. And this is similar to Masafer Yatta in the south of Hebron Hills. For those who don’t know, it’s a place in the occupied West Bank where Bedouin and cave dweller Palestinians have lived for generations, they have cultivated the land. And recently, they were expelled from their homes. Over a thousand people were expelled from their remote small villages.
Again, if you’re reading American media, it would say, “Palestinians living in firing zones were removed because they’re living in a military zone.” What these media reports will not tell you that, in the ’80s, the Israeli government purposefully classified many lands in the occupied West Bank as firing zones, as off-limit military zones for the sole purpose of expelling the residents, and this is not some kind of conspiracy theory. This is declassified information that was released from the Israel’s State Archive that was later reported on by our audits. Also, these reports will not tell you that the judge who rules on whether these people continue to live under homes or not is himself a settler in the West Bank. And I’m not even talking about a loose definition of a settler, but according to international law, this is a settler living illegally in an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank. This is the judiciary that we deal with, which is hilarious considering how it’s being reported on in American media recently as some kind of beacon of progress and democracy that new government is trying to undermine.
Lex Fridman
So there’s no representation in the courts for the Palestinian people?
So there’s no representation in the courts for the Palestinian people?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I mean, we have lawyers, but no, there is no… In fact, for Palestinians with Israeli citizenships for example, there’s over 60 laws that specifically and explicitly discriminates against them.
I mean, we have lawyers, but no, there is no… In fact, for Palestinians with Israeli citizenships for example, there’s over 60 laws that specifically and explicitly discriminates against them.
Lex Fridman
So again, it’s technically legal, the evictions and the demolitions.
So again, it’s technically legal, the evictions and the demolitions.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, so was Jim Crow was legal also.
Yeah, so was Jim Crow was legal also.
Lex Fridman
When something is legal, it can also still be wrong.
When something is legal, it can also still be wrong.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Absolutely. History has shown us time and time again that legality does not necessarily mean morality. The law is a bloodbath in many ways. It has been used and abused to facilitate the most horrendous atrocities. In the case of the Palestinians, the law has served to facilitate and bureaucratize our ethnic cleansing.
Absolutely. History has shown us time and time again that legality does not necessarily mean morality. The law is a bloodbath in many ways. It has been used and abused to facilitate the most horrendous atrocities. In the case of the Palestinians, the law has served to facilitate and bureaucratize our ethnic cleansing.
Lex Fridman
Do you think there’s people, judges, and just people in power in the judiciary that have hate for the Palestinian people?
Do you think there’s people, judges, and just people in power in the judiciary that have hate for the Palestinian people?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I mean, I’m not really… Yeah, I mean, the easy, simplistic answer is yes, but I don’t really care about the contents of their hearts. What I care about, the policy they enact, where the laws they write and enact are hateful, demolishing a person’s home. So you can have somebody from Long Island, New York who’s fleeing fraud charges, this is the case in my house, live in their front yard, that’s hateful. So I don’t need confirmation. This is something we see a lot actually. Palestinians and people who are pro-Palestine and just people who want to make a difference in how this cause is represented, we often run for the first opportunity to cite an Israeli being hateful. The last Israeli prime minister said that he has killed many Arabs and that he has no qualms with it. Netanyahu has said a slew of racist, hateful things. Jabotinsky, the pioneer of Zionism, Herzl, one of the pioneers of Zionism, all have said horrible, hateful things.
I mean, I’m not really… Yeah, I mean, the easy, simplistic answer is yes, but I don’t really care about the contents of their hearts. What I care about, the policy they enact, where the laws they write and enact are hateful, demolishing a person’s home. So you can have somebody from Long Island, New York who’s fleeing fraud charges, this is the case in my house, live in their front yard, that’s hateful. So I don’t need confirmation. This is something we see a lot actually. Palestinians and people who are pro-Palestine and just people who want to make a difference in how this cause is represented, we often run for the first opportunity to cite an Israeli being hateful. The last Israeli prime minister said that he has killed many Arabs and that he has no qualms with it. Netanyahu has said a slew of racist, hateful things. Jabotinsky, the pioneer of Zionism, Herzl, one of the pioneers of Zionism, all have said horrible, hateful things.
We also cannot wait to cite a confession from a former Israeli soldier who’s guilty conscience is keeping them up at night. And we use all of these confessions or slip ups as evidence to prove that this is a racist country that is enacting racist acts, but we don’t need this because the material proof is on the ground. You see it in the policies that are enacted. You see it in how this regime has behaved for the past 75 years. I don’t need confessions from the likes of Netanyahu to understand that his heart is full of hate.
Lex Fridman
So if you could return to 1948 and describe something that you’ve mentioned, the Nakba, which means catastrophe in Arabic. What was this event? What was this displacement and dispossession of Palestinians in 1948?
So if you could return to 1948 and describe something that you’ve mentioned, the Nakba, which means catastrophe in Arabic. What was this event? What was this displacement and dispossession of Palestinians in 1948?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Well, May 15th, 1948 is commemorated every year as the anniversary of the Nakba, but I would even argue anything, this is like a… A very popular idea is that the Nakba did not begin or end in 1948. The ’48 was rather a crystallization of the Zionist enterprise in Palestine. What happened was is that many Zionists paramilitaries that, again, today merged and made the Israeli army, which calls itself the Israeli Defense Forces even though they’re literally always the aggressor, committed atrocities and massacres, and they destroyed over 500 villages, they killed over 15,000 people, they forced a very large portion, a majority of the Palestinian population to flee their homes. And this was the near total destruction of Palestinian society that continues on to this day. We refer to it as the ongoing Nakba. And you see it in Sheikh Jarrah, you see it in Silwan, you see it in Harran, and all of these people losing their homes.
Well, May 15th, 1948 is commemorated every year as the anniversary of the Nakba, but I would even argue anything, this is like a… A very popular idea is that the Nakba did not begin or end in 1948. The ’48 was rather a crystallization of the Zionist enterprise in Palestine. What happened was is that many Zionists paramilitaries that, again, today merged and made the Israeli army, which calls itself the Israeli Defense Forces even though they’re literally always the aggressor, committed atrocities and massacres, and they destroyed over 500 villages, they killed over 15,000 people, they forced a very large portion, a majority of the Palestinian population to flee their homes. And this was the near total destruction of Palestinian society that continues on to this day. We refer to it as the ongoing Nakba. And you see it in Sheikh Jarrah, you see it in Silwan, you see it in Harran, and all of these people losing their homes.
In many cases, time and time again, I grew up and my grandmother told me the stories about the Nakba. She told me stories about her neighbors who were running away in a panic, and they had mistaken a pillow for their offspring and they just took it with them. And they realized later that they forgot their child and they came back for it. Many, many people who were separated from their… My grandmother herself, she lost her husband for a few months, for nine months. He wasn’t imprisoned by the Israelis. She told me all of these stories, and she wasn’t just reminiscing about them. She was letting me know that this is still happening and I didn’t need to grow up that old to see it happening in my own front yard, to see that expulsion happen in the same fashion. She’s talked about it.
But now they have replaced their artillery with the judiciary. They have replaced the slashing of the pregnant women’s bellies in the Deir Yassin massacre with laws that say, “You’re not legally allowed to be here. We’re going to kick you out of your home,” and it’s happening, and it has happened in broad daylight. One piece of context for the listener who is not familiar with the Nakba is the Balfour Declaration, which was a promise, quote-unquote, “promise” made by the British to the Zionist movement in 1917, committing to the establishment. I’m quoting, I think word for word, “committing to the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine”, as if Palestine was the British to give away. And there was this whole movement that called for colonization of Palestine.
And there were different schools of thought in Zionism. People like Zangwill said that this was a country without a people, and Palestinians who have existed there, who have cultivated the lands, who had diverse cultural and religious and political practices, they were completely erased. And other people like Jabotinsky were a lot more explicit and a lot more honest and said that, “We need to fight the Palestinians because they loved their land, much like the Red Indians loved their lands,” and he had a paper called the Iron Wall: Colonization of Palestine Must Go Forward. And all of these schools of thoughts were then shopping around for imperial support for their cause. They tried to get support from the Ottoman Empire, they tried to get support from Germany, this is in the 1800s, and then they got support from the United Kingdom. A great book to recommend is The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi, traces the Zionist movement, oftentimes in the Zionists’ own words.
So today what we’re seeing is a continuation. And people like Jabotinsky, who are profoundly and explicitly racist, who have called for genocide, who have called the Palestinians barbaric, who have said and done racist things… Jabotinsky also was the founder of the Irgun, one of the other militias that later merged to become the Israeli army, which was responsible for the Deir Yassin massacre, which was responsible for the bombing of the King David Hotel, this is a person who is still celebrated in Israeli society. There are streets named after him, and Netanyahu just two weeks ago, if I’m not mistaken, honored him in a public celebration. So this is Zionism. It’s not even through my own words.
Lex Fridman
What do you say to people that describe Israel as having historical right to the land, so if you stretch, not across decades, but across centuries into the past?
What do you say to people that describe Israel as having historical right to the land, so if you stretch, not across decades, but across centuries into the past?
Mohammed el-Kurd
This kind of thing is a red herring. It’s a distraction because you don’t think of any state as having rights. But there is this exceptionalism to the Israeli regime where it has a right to defend itself, and it has a right to the land, and it has a right to shoot 14-year-old boys because it thought they had a knife in their pockets. A lot of the time, people cite the Torah and cite religious books. Sometimes Zionist will even say like, “Read the Quran, and blah, blah, blah.”
This kind of thing is a red herring. It’s a distraction because you don’t think of any state as having rights. But there is this exceptionalism to the Israeli regime where it has a right to defend itself, and it has a right to the land, and it has a right to shoot 14-year-old boys because it thought they had a knife in their pockets. A lot of the time, people cite the Torah and cite religious books. Sometimes Zionist will even say like, “Read the Quran, and blah, blah, blah.”
Regardless of whatever was written in these books that were written thousands and thousands of years ago, the fact of the matter is no one has a right to go on slaughtering people, removing them from their homes and then continuing to live in their homes, continuing to drink coffee on their balconies decades and decades later with no shame, with no introspection, with no reflection. No one has the right to do that. No one has the right to keep an entire population of people in a cage, which is what’s happening to people in the West Bank who have no freedom of movement, which is what’s happening in Gaza, which is blockaded to water, air, and land, and is deemed uninhabitable by human rights organizations like the UN. No one has a right to do that.
Hate
Lex Fridman
Do you have hate in your heart for Israel?
Do you have hate in your heart for Israel?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Why does that matter?
Why does that matter?
Lex Fridman
As one human being to another, you’re describing quite brilliantly that the contents of people’s hearts don’t matter as much as the policies and the contents of the courts and the laws and what actually is going on on the streets in terms of actions, but this is also a human story. I feel like, at the core of the situation here is hate or maybe inability for some group of humans to see the humanity in another group of humans. So it’s important here to talk about the contents of hearts, if we were to think about the long-term future of this.
As one human being to another, you’re describing quite brilliantly that the contents of people’s hearts don’t matter as much as the policies and the contents of the courts and the laws and what actually is going on on the streets in terms of actions, but this is also a human story. I feel like, at the core of the situation here is hate or maybe inability for some group of humans to see the humanity in another group of humans. So it’s important here to talk about the contents of hearts, if we were to think about the long-term future of this.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, I mean, I would be concerned actually if I didn’t feel some kind of way in my heart. I would be concerned for my own dignity. Because the people who revolt, the people who are angry, the people who refuse to live under occupation know that they deserve better. People start revolutions not because of some kind of cultural phenomenon, not because of some kind of desire, but because they cannot breathe, because they cannot breathe, they cannot live. They are living under excruciating circumstances. Palestinians, I don’t know, I don’t know how many Palestinians I’ve interacted with, but we are some of the most wonderful people. I mean, not all of us, I think some of us are insufferable, but most of us. Most of us, we’re very, very hospitable. We’re very hospitable. Even in the early correspondence between the mayor of Jerusalem and Herzl, who wrote The Jewish State, the generosity through which the Palestinian mayor was talking to Herzl, who was plotting to take over his land, is impressive and, at the same time, heart-wrenching. But I personally think there’s a lot of dignity in negating your oppressor. And I think it would be ridiculous today if we look back at Jim Crow, for example, and we ask the person who’s lived under Jim Crow if they have hate in their heart for Jim Crow, as if that’s not the absolutely logical and natural sentiment to feel.
Yeah, I mean, I would be concerned actually if I didn’t feel some kind of way in my heart. I would be concerned for my own dignity. Because the people who revolt, the people who are angry, the people who refuse to live under occupation know that they deserve better. People start revolutions not because of some kind of cultural phenomenon, not because of some kind of desire, but because they cannot breathe, because they cannot breathe, they cannot live. They are living under excruciating circumstances. Palestinians, I don’t know, I don’t know how many Palestinians I’ve interacted with, but we are some of the most wonderful people. I mean, not all of us, I think some of us are insufferable, but most of us. Most of us, we’re very, very hospitable. We’re very hospitable. Even in the early correspondence between the mayor of Jerusalem and Herzl, who wrote The Jewish State, the generosity through which the Palestinian mayor was talking to Herzl, who was plotting to take over his land, is impressive and, at the same time, heart-wrenching. But I personally think there’s a lot of dignity in negating your oppressor. And I think it would be ridiculous today if we look back at Jim Crow, for example, and we ask the person who’s lived under Jim Crow if they have hate in their heart for Jim Crow, as if that’s not the absolutely logical and natural sentiment to feel.
Lex Fridman
In Rifqa, you wrote, my father told me, “Anger is a luxury we cannot afford. Be composed, calm, still, laugh when they ask you, smile when they talk, answer them, educate them.” So let me linger on this. Is there anger in there, in your heart? And does it cloud your judgment?
In Rifqa, you wrote, my father told me, “Anger is a luxury we cannot afford. Be composed, calm, still, laugh when they ask you, smile when they talk, answer them, educate them.” So let me linger on this. Is there anger in there, in your heart? And does it cloud your judgment?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Does it cloud my judgment? I don’t think so. I think our campaign to defend our homes was particularly successful because it was honest to what was happening on the ground, because it refused to follow the strategy that we have used in our advocacy before, where we shrink ourselves and we turn the other cheek and we try to convince American lawmakers and American diplomats and journalists of our humanity because we wait for their approval. I was 14 years old when I first flew to Congress to speak to Congress people and to speak at the European Parliament. At the time, I thought, “Wow, I must be such a brilliant 14-year-old for them to have me here.” Looking back, I didn’t know what I was talking about. I had horrendously broken English, and I didn’t have any talking points. And I came to realize that the reason why we send our kids with their PowerPoints to the hill is because of the racism and the hatred that lingers inside the hearts of American politicians who refuse to sit on the table with Palestinian adults as equals.
Does it cloud my judgment? I don’t think so. I think our campaign to defend our homes was particularly successful because it was honest to what was happening on the ground, because it refused to follow the strategy that we have used in our advocacy before, where we shrink ourselves and we turn the other cheek and we try to convince American lawmakers and American diplomats and journalists of our humanity because we wait for their approval. I was 14 years old when I first flew to Congress to speak to Congress people and to speak at the European Parliament. At the time, I thought, “Wow, I must be such a brilliant 14-year-old for them to have me here.” Looking back, I didn’t know what I was talking about. I had horrendously broken English, and I didn’t have any talking points. And I came to realize that the reason why we send our kids with their PowerPoints to the hill is because of the racism and the hatred that lingers inside the hearts of American politicians who refuse to sit on the table with Palestinian adults as equals.
And so we resort to sending our kids who will not threaten and who will not trigger the biases they have against Muslims and Arab people, which Palestinians, even though we’re not all Muslim, are racialized as Muslim. And this is why we emphasize the deaths of women and children as though the deaths of our men does not counter, does not matter. All of these things I think the new generation of Palestinians is rebelling against. I think words like… I think it’s loaded, it’s loaded language, anger and angry and hate and so on and so forth, because it mischaracterizes people and it kind of delegitimizes them a little bit.
I think the real anger is the bulldozer bulldozing through my house. I think the real anger is the 18-year-old soldier who refuses to see me as a human being and strip searches me every chance they get. That’s where the real anger lies. And I’m quite honestly proud of our unabashedness and our refusal to bow our heads or bury our heads in the sand. I think that’s the only way forward.
Lex Fridman
So anger, or whatever it is, is a fuel for action.
So anger, or whatever it is, is a fuel for action.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Absolutely. And it has been throughout history, it has been.
Absolutely. And it has been throughout history, it has been.
Lex Fridman
How much of this tension is religious in the practical aspects of the courts and the evictions and the demolitions? You mentioned something, divine decree, how much underneath of it do you feel the division over religious text and religious beliefs?
How much of this tension is religious in the practical aspects of the courts and the evictions and the demolitions? You mentioned something, divine decree, how much underneath of it do you feel the division over religious text and religious beliefs?
Mohammed el-Kurd
It’s convenient to market what’s happening in Palestine as a religious conflict because it allows the listener the luxury of believing that this is an ancient, complicated thing that stretches thousands and thousands of years ago. But the fact of the matter is the people who invented Zionism, who pioneered the Zionist movement, who called for immigration and settling into Palestine, a lot of them were atheists. A lot of them were not religious at all. And the leaders of the Israeli state today, a lot of them are atheists and a lot of them are secular and so on and so forth. It’s easy to say that this is about Muslims and Jews fighting over the land and so on and so forth, but it’s not. It’s about the land itself and it’s about people being forced out of their homes.
It’s convenient to market what’s happening in Palestine as a religious conflict because it allows the listener the luxury of believing that this is an ancient, complicated thing that stretches thousands and thousands of years ago. But the fact of the matter is the people who invented Zionism, who pioneered the Zionist movement, who called for immigration and settling into Palestine, a lot of them were atheists. A lot of them were not religious at all. And the leaders of the Israeli state today, a lot of them are atheists and a lot of them are secular and so on and so forth. It’s easy to say that this is about Muslims and Jews fighting over the land and so on and so forth, but it’s not. It’s about the land itself and it’s about people being forced out of their homes.
Lex Fridman
Benjamin Netanyahu said, “Anti Zionism is anti-“
Benjamin Netanyahu said, “Anti Zionism is anti-“
Lex Fridman
Benjamin Netanyahu said, “Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.”
Benjamin Netanyahu said, “Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.”
Mohammed el-Kurd
Of course he said that.
Of course he said that.
Lex Fridman
Do you disagree?
Do you disagree?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Absolutely, I disagree.
Absolutely, I disagree.
Lex Fridman
What’s the gap between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, those who are against the policies of Israel versus those who are against the Jewish people?
What’s the gap between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, those who are against the policies of Israel versus those who are against the Jewish people?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I watched the first 20 minutes, and then I couldn’t do it anymore, but I watched. And then what was interesting about Netanyahu is that he said, being anti-Zionist is like saying, I’m okay with the Jews, I just don’t believe the Jews have a right to form their own state. That’s like saying, I’m okay with Americans, I’m just not okay with Americans having their own state. And there is so much wrong with that statement in the sense that Jewish people are a religious group and being an American is a nationality that consists of a diversity of religions and so on and so forth, first of all. And the second thing that’s wrong with that statement is the whole idea that states somehow have a right to exist or whatever. It’s such a distraction. You have people getting shot in the street. You have millions and millions of people beseeched, you have people losing their homes. You have people who are held in Israeli prisons without trial or charged indefinitely, but the conversations that are being held on the Hill, the conversation that are being held on CNN are does Israel has a right to exist or why would you negate Israel is having a right to exist? That’s one.
I watched the first 20 minutes, and then I couldn’t do it anymore, but I watched. And then what was interesting about Netanyahu is that he said, being anti-Zionist is like saying, I’m okay with the Jews, I just don’t believe the Jews have a right to form their own state. That’s like saying, I’m okay with Americans, I’m just not okay with Americans having their own state. And there is so much wrong with that statement in the sense that Jewish people are a religious group and being an American is a nationality that consists of a diversity of religions and so on and so forth, first of all. And the second thing that’s wrong with that statement is the whole idea that states somehow have a right to exist or whatever. It’s such a distraction. You have people getting shot in the street. You have millions and millions of people beseeched, you have people losing their homes. You have people who are held in Israeli prisons without trial or charged indefinitely, but the conversations that are being held on the Hill, the conversation that are being held on CNN are does Israel has a right to exist or why would you negate Israel is having a right to exist? That’s one.
Now, of course, and I just find it’s ridiculous again, that opposing a secular political movement that was explicitly colonialist, expansionist, exclusive and racist through the words of its own authors is somehow… And also again, opposing such a political movement that is quite young and quite recent is somehow equivalent to opposing a religion that is thousands and thousands of years old. But it is convenient again, for Israeli politicians to frame us who oppose Zionism, a form of racism and bigotry, as anti-Semites. But I can guarantee you Benjamin Netanyahu has no problem with anti-Semitism. This is the same man who has no problem getting on stage and shaking hands with Pastor John Hagee, doing web webinars with Pastor John Hagee. For those who don’t know, Pastor John Hagee is the founder of Christians United for Israel, who has said on multiple occasions that Hitler was a hunter who was sent to hunt the Jews. Who said on multiple occasions that Jewish people are going to perish in hell. All of this is verifiable by Google, and this is one of the Israeli regime’s closest allies.
So the Israeli regime does not have a problem with anti-Semites when it serves its interests. It has a problem… If you look at evangelicals or Christian Zionism at large, anti-Semitism lies at the heart of Christian Zionism. It’s the idea that we want to drive all of the Jews outside of the United States so that Armageddon could happen, or whatever the fuck. This accusation has been a muzzle, it has been used as a muzzle to silence political opposition and to stifle political advocacy for the liberation of Palestine. And a lot of the time people get caught up in denouncing it and in justifying themselves and disclaimers and so on and so forth that you lose the point, that you’re distracted from the focal point, that is there is an ongoing colonialism happening where people every single day are killed. I cannot keep count. This morning a kid was shot in Palestine. It’s embarrassing even for me that I don’t even know the numbers here, but this muzzle has been effective and I think the only righteous option is to oppose these labels, these smear campaigns that target us.
I myself have been labeled an anti-Semite by the ADL. And if you want to talk about that at surface level, people will say, wow, the ADL, Anti-Defamation League condemned you. But people do not look at the history of the Anti-Defamation League, do not look at the present of the Anti-Defamation League, the fact that they are the largest non-governmental police training department in the country where they train police in racial profiling and militarism. The fact that they have historically and continued to have engaged in surveillance on Black liberation movements, on anti-Apartheid South African activists. Most recently in Charlottesville, when White supremacists were marching and chanting anti-Semitic shit, the ADL advised local police departments to spy on the Black organizers opposing the White supremacists. This is again, all verifiable on the internet, go to droptheadl.org.
Lex Fridman
So the ADL does not alleviate the hate in the world as it probably is designed to do?
So the ADL does not alleviate the hate in the world as it probably is designed to do?
Mohammed el-Kurd
No. It’s a guise, I don’t think the Apartheid Defense League is really our most progressive…
No. It’s a guise, I don’t think the Apartheid Defense League is really our most progressive…
Lex Fridman
That’s what it stands for.
That’s what it stands for.
Mohammed el-Kurd
In case you didn’t know, now you know.
In case you didn’t know, now you know.
Antisemitism
Lex Fridman
If we could just linger on this idea of anti-Semitism, there’s quite a bit of anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States, especially after 9/11. I’ve spoken to people about that. There’s also anti-Jewish, anti-Semitism sentiment in the United States, but also throughout human history. What do you make about this kind of fact of human nature that people seem to hate Jews throughout history, especially in the 20th century, especially with Nazi Germany? What are your in general thoughts about the hatred of the Jewish people?
If we could just linger on this idea of anti-Semitism, there’s quite a bit of anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States, especially after 9/11. I’ve spoken to people about that. There’s also anti-Jewish, anti-Semitism sentiment in the United States, but also throughout human history. What do you make about this kind of fact of human nature that people seem to hate Jews throughout history, especially in the 20th century, especially with Nazi Germany? What are your in general thoughts about the hatred of the Jewish people?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I think it’s obviously wrong. I don’t know. It’s this idea that I even have to clarify what I think about anti-Semitism that doesn’t sit well with me. I think it’s completely unfortunate and wrong that Jewish people have been persecuted across history.
I think it’s obviously wrong. I don’t know. It’s this idea that I even have to clarify what I think about anti-Semitism that doesn’t sit well with me. I think it’s completely unfortunate and wrong that Jewish people have been persecuted across history.
Lex Fridman
So one of the criticisms, I think I read the ADL are making this criticism of you, is maybe you’ve tweeted a comparison between Israel and Hitler, and thereby diminishing the evil that is Hitler. What would you say to that?
So one of the criticisms, I think I read the ADL are making this criticism of you, is maybe you’ve tweeted a comparison between Israel and Hitler, and thereby diminishing the evil that is Hitler. What would you say to that?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Amy Cesaire talks about this a lot, the exceptional of Hitler. Hitler is a deplorable, I don’t know, condemnable, rotten racist, horrible human being that belongs in the depths of hell. Obviously that goes without saying, but I’m allowed analogy and I’m allowed to say whatever I want. Now, I don’t necessarily think that that such an analogy is a good strategy to have, but at the time, the context came in 2021 when Israeli soldiers and policemen and settlers were literally burning down our neighborhood, again, verifiable by Google, and I tweeted it. And also, I remember I tweeted something, “I hope every single one of them dies.” And to this day, this is some kind of gotcha for me, as if I should have tweeted like, oh, here’s the apple pie for every single soldier that’s throwing tear gas in my house. There is such an exceptionalism when it comes to Palestinians. We’re not allowed analogy, we’re not allowed expression. We’re not allowed armed resistance, we’re not allowed peaceful resistance. We’re not allowed to boycott because that’s Anti-Semitic. We’re not allowed to do anything, so what are we allowed? If I can’t boycott, and that’s against American law now to boycott, and if I can’t pick up a rifle because that’s against the law, and if I can’t even tweet my frustration out, what am I allowed to do? And maybe Netanyahu can send me a manual with all he’s happy with.
Amy Cesaire talks about this a lot, the exceptional of Hitler. Hitler is a deplorable, I don’t know, condemnable, rotten racist, horrible human being that belongs in the depths of hell. Obviously that goes without saying, but I’m allowed analogy and I’m allowed to say whatever I want. Now, I don’t necessarily think that that such an analogy is a good strategy to have, but at the time, the context came in 2021 when Israeli soldiers and policemen and settlers were literally burning down our neighborhood, again, verifiable by Google, and I tweeted it. And also, I remember I tweeted something, “I hope every single one of them dies.” And to this day, this is some kind of gotcha for me, as if I should have tweeted like, oh, here’s the apple pie for every single soldier that’s throwing tear gas in my house. There is such an exceptionalism when it comes to Palestinians. We’re not allowed analogy, we’re not allowed expression. We’re not allowed armed resistance, we’re not allowed peaceful resistance. We’re not allowed to boycott because that’s Anti-Semitic. We’re not allowed to do anything, so what are we allowed? If I can’t boycott, and that’s against American law now to boycott, and if I can’t pick up a rifle because that’s against the law, and if I can’t even tweet my frustration out, what am I allowed to do? And maybe Netanyahu can send me a manual with all he’s happy with.
Lex Fridman
So you’ve spoken about the taking of homes, the IDF killing civilians, killing children. What about the violence going the other direction, Israelis being killed in part by terrorist action?
So you’ve spoken about the taking of homes, the IDF killing civilians, killing children. What about the violence going the other direction, Israelis being killed in part by terrorist action?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Well, it depends on how you define terrorism. Across history, one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist. I don’t necessarily subscribe to the definition of terrorism. If a foreign army is in my neighborhood, which it’s not supposed to be, and they’re shooting live ammunition at my house, I’m allowed to do what I’m allowed to do. And again, this is yet another case of Palestinian exceptionalism because when it comes to Ukraine, people have no problem seeing Ukrainians defending their homes, seeing Ukrainians dying for their land, seeing Ukrainians making makeshift Molotov on Sky news. Sky News was running Molotov making cocktails. The New York Times ran an article interviewing Ukrainian psychologist who said, I’m paraphrasing, but he said, hatred for all Russians is actually a healthy outlet. The New York Post ran a headline championing, quote unquote, heroic Ukrainian suicide bomber. These things we would not even dream of as Palestinians.
Well, it depends on how you define terrorism. Across history, one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist. I don’t necessarily subscribe to the definition of terrorism. If a foreign army is in my neighborhood, which it’s not supposed to be, and they’re shooting live ammunition at my house, I’m allowed to do what I’m allowed to do. And again, this is yet another case of Palestinian exceptionalism because when it comes to Ukraine, people have no problem seeing Ukrainians defending their homes, seeing Ukrainians dying for their land, seeing Ukrainians making makeshift Molotov on Sky news. Sky News was running Molotov making cocktails. The New York Times ran an article interviewing Ukrainian psychologist who said, I’m paraphrasing, but he said, hatred for all Russians is actually a healthy outlet. The New York Post ran a headline championing, quote unquote, heroic Ukrainian suicide bomber. These things we would not even dream of as Palestinians.
We are told to turn the other cheek time and time again, we’re told that we should continue living inside these enclaves without access to clean water, without access to the right to movement, without access to building permits, without our natural right to expansion, without a guarantee that if we leave our house we’re not going to be shot. And we’re supposed to not do anything about it. That is absurd. Any person watching this understands this completely. People understand that if somebody is attacking your home, you’ll fight back. If somebody is attacking your family, you fight back. That is not… But again, who gets to call who a terrorist? Who gets to define terrorism? This is all about who has power. Who gets to write these laws? Who gets to write these definitions? Why is it that American actions in Iraq is not called terrorism by American politicians? Violence is like this mutating concept, and it takes on many shapes and forms. And if it’s in a uniform, if it speaks in English, if it has blonde hair, it’s somehow acceptable, it’s okay. We make movies about it. We sell out tickets about it, we make games about it. But if it’s without a uniform, it’s if it has a thick accent, if it has a beard, that’s condemnable, that’s wrong, that’s terrorism.
Lex Fridman
Do you think violence is an effective method of protest and resistance in general?
Do you think violence is an effective method of protest and resistance in general?
Mohammed el-Kurd
In general, I think it has been, but I believe in fighting on all fronts. I don’t think violence alone is going to bring about change. I think there’s so much to do in culture and in shifting public opinion, there’s so much to do in media and fighting back against media. Erasure and censorship, there’s so much to do diplomatically and politically, and I think I would be naive if I don’t take the power imbalance into consideration. One side has makeshift weapons and the other side is one of the most sophisticated armies in the world, so I don’t know how effective violence could be in this case.
In general, I think it has been, but I believe in fighting on all fronts. I don’t think violence alone is going to bring about change. I think there’s so much to do in culture and in shifting public opinion, there’s so much to do in media and fighting back against media. Erasure and censorship, there’s so much to do diplomatically and politically, and I think I would be naive if I don’t take the power imbalance into consideration. One side has makeshift weapons and the other side is one of the most sophisticated armies in the world, so I don’t know how effective violence could be in this case.
Lex Fridman
But if you look at the flip side, do you see the power of nonviolent resistance? So Martin Luther King, Gandhi, the power of turning the other cheek, you spoke negatively about turning the other cheek.
But if you look at the flip side, do you see the power of nonviolent resistance? So Martin Luther King, Gandhi, the power of turning the other cheek, you spoke negatively about turning the other cheek.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So I sense that doing so has not been effective for the Palestinian people.
So I sense that doing so has not been effective for the Palestinian people.
Mohammed el-Kurd
We’ve turned the other cheek generation after generation. There is this Zionist trope that is used against us. They say, Palestinian rejectionism. They say that we reject everything, but if you look at the history like our leadership, the Palestinian authority has given up inch after inch, has compromised on acre after acre, has signed deal after deal after deal after deal, and still there is no peace. So turning the other cheek is not the most effective method in my book.
We’ve turned the other cheek generation after generation. There is this Zionist trope that is used against us. They say, Palestinian rejectionism. They say that we reject everything, but if you look at the history like our leadership, the Palestinian authority has given up inch after inch, has compromised on acre after acre, has signed deal after deal after deal after deal, and still there is no peace. So turning the other cheek is not the most effective method in my book.
Peace in the Middle East
Lex Fridman
What are the top obstacles to peaceful coexistence of Israelis and Palestinians?
What are the top obstacles to peaceful coexistence of Israelis and Palestinians?
Mohammed el-Kurd
The occupation comes to mind. The [inaudible 00:48:23] policies come to mind. The seeds comes to mind. The asymmetry of the judiciary comes to mind. The whole system needs to be dismantled. I will quote my dear friend Robert Barre, who’s a lawyer who says, “The solution, justice comes about through recognition, return, and redistribution.” There are millions of Palestinian refugees who are living in excruciating circumstances in refugee camps around the world. There are thousands of Palestinian prisoners who are held in prisons for defending their homes, hundreds of which are held without charge or trial by the way. There are many Palestinians who get killed in broad daylight with no recourse, journalists and medics and everyday people, not just the freedom fighters. We need, again, recognition, return and redistribution, and peace comes about when they stop killing us, when they stop keeping us in a cage. That’s quite simple.
The occupation comes to mind. The [inaudible 00:48:23] policies come to mind. The seeds comes to mind. The asymmetry of the judiciary comes to mind. The whole system needs to be dismantled. I will quote my dear friend Robert Barre, who’s a lawyer who says, “The solution, justice comes about through recognition, return, and redistribution.” There are millions of Palestinian refugees who are living in excruciating circumstances in refugee camps around the world. There are thousands of Palestinian prisoners who are held in prisons for defending their homes, hundreds of which are held without charge or trial by the way. There are many Palestinians who get killed in broad daylight with no recourse, journalists and medics and everyday people, not just the freedom fighters. We need, again, recognition, return and redistribution, and peace comes about when they stop killing us, when they stop keeping us in a cage. That’s quite simple.
Lex Fridman
Can you describe recognition, return and redistribution?
Can you describe recognition, return and redistribution?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Return, right of return. The right of return to all of the Palestinian refugees to their homes. When I’m driving around Haifa and I see my grandmother’s home that’s now turned into a restaurant, I made a joke in one of my essays recently that had I had that, I could have had it all. The beachfront views, her smug attitude. She grew up by the sea after she relocated to Haifa after Jerusalem. We want that. And they’re lucky I don’t want Netanyahu’s home, but I just want my home. I just want my home. We want to return. Also, I believe in the 1960s, the Israeli government classified 90% of all of historic Palestine as state-owned land. This is all land that was owned by Palestinian farmers who have cultivated their lands for decades. Since the establishment of the Israeli state, there has been Jewish only towns popping up every few years, and not one town, not one Palestinian town has emerged. Even those of us who have Israeli citizenship who live outside of the wall are encircled and cannot have their natural community growth in their towns, that needs to change.
Return, right of return. The right of return to all of the Palestinian refugees to their homes. When I’m driving around Haifa and I see my grandmother’s home that’s now turned into a restaurant, I made a joke in one of my essays recently that had I had that, I could have had it all. The beachfront views, her smug attitude. She grew up by the sea after she relocated to Haifa after Jerusalem. We want that. And they’re lucky I don’t want Netanyahu’s home, but I just want my home. I just want my home. We want to return. Also, I believe in the 1960s, the Israeli government classified 90% of all of historic Palestine as state-owned land. This is all land that was owned by Palestinian farmers who have cultivated their lands for decades. Since the establishment of the Israeli state, there has been Jewish only towns popping up every few years, and not one town, not one Palestinian town has emerged. Even those of us who have Israeli citizenship who live outside of the wall are encircled and cannot have their natural community growth in their towns, that needs to change.
Lex Fridman
You mentioned the wall. Can you describe the wall?
You mentioned the wall. Can you describe the wall?
Mohammed el-Kurd
The wall is a nine meter high cement wall that was finished in 2003. And if you’re American, you’ve probably heard the whitewash sanitized version of the name, which is the security wall. But it’s the wall that literally has stolen thousands of dunams of land and has ripped apart families. My mother is a poet or was a poet at some point, and she had this poem she published in the paper called Love Behind the Wall. It’s a poem, but it describes the real life situation of two families who lived right across the street from each other, but were then separated by the wall, and they would fly balloons to see each other from each side of the wall or something like that. This, although it sounds absurd, but it’s the reality for many Palestinian families whose lives were torn apart, whose livelihoods also were torn apart by the wall.
The wall is a nine meter high cement wall that was finished in 2003. And if you’re American, you’ve probably heard the whitewash sanitized version of the name, which is the security wall. But it’s the wall that literally has stolen thousands of dunams of land and has ripped apart families. My mother is a poet or was a poet at some point, and she had this poem she published in the paper called Love Behind the Wall. It’s a poem, but it describes the real life situation of two families who lived right across the street from each other, but were then separated by the wall, and they would fly balloons to see each other from each side of the wall or something like that. This, although it sounds absurd, but it’s the reality for many Palestinian families whose lives were torn apart, whose livelihoods also were torn apart by the wall.
Maybe this is a good opportunity to talk about the legal classifications for Palestinians. Israel, much like any other colonial entity, has divided and fragmented the Palestinian people. As I said earlier, I have a blue ID, which means I’m a resident. A friend of mine who lives in Haifa, for example, two hours away from me, 150 kilometers, not nothing too bad in this country, has an Israeli citizenship. He can travel, he can enter the West Bank, he can do a lot more. He’s a citizen, he can vote if he wants to, not that we want to. I always say to my friends, “Oh, you can go to Italy without a visa because you have an Israeli citizenship.” But they battle national eraser. They battle crime in their own communities because of police negligence. They battle land confiscation, and have battled land confiscations in the ’50s.
Whereas somebody with a green ID, somebody from the West Bank cannot leave the West Bank, cannot go anywhere without a special permit and lives behind these walls. The West Bank, I think hilariously George Bush described it as Swiss cheese because of the holes. Every a hundred meters there’s a new settlement or there’s a new military checkpoint. So even if you live behind the wall in the West Bank with your green ID, even though you’re robbed of your right to movement, you still even can’t move from town to town within the West Bank without encountering settler violence or military violence while you’re crossing the checkpoints and so on and so forth.
And then the last category we have is people who live in Gaza, we are talking about over 2 million people who live in an open air prison, who have no right to movement, but also have no access to clean water and no access to supplies, no access to good food, no access to good healthcare, and so on and so forth, who routinely get bombarded every few years. Gaza is two hours away from my house. It feels like an absolute far away planet because it’s so isolated from the rest of the country. So imagine all of these different legal statuses fragmenting your everyday identity, and creating different challenges and obstacles for you to deal with, for each group to deal with. It’s amazing and impressive that despite these colonial barriers, the real cement ones and the barriers in the mind, despite all of these barriers, the Palestinian people have maintained their national identity for 70 years. That is incredibly impressive. And it also sends a message that as long as we have a boot on our neck, we are going to continue fighting. Violence, cracking down on refugee camps, bombarding refugee camps is only going to bring about more violence.
West Bank
Lex Fridman
So West Bank is a large region where a lot of Palestinian people live, and then there are settlements sprinkled throughout, and those settlements have walls around them with security cameras.
So West Bank is a large region where a lot of Palestinian people live, and then there are settlements sprinkled throughout, and those settlements have walls around them with security cameras.
Mohammed el-Kurd
And security guards.
And security guards.
Lex Fridman
Security guards.
Security guards.
Mohammed el-Kurd
There’s almost a million settlers in the West Bank.
There’s almost a million settlers in the West Bank.
Lex Fridman
And so what are the different cities here, if you can mention?
And so what are the different cities here, if you can mention?
Mohammed el-Kurd
In the West Bank?
In the West Bank?
Lex Fridman
In the West Bank. Ramallah, Jenin, Bethlehem, Hebron, Jericho, Nablus.
In the West Bank. Ramallah, Jenin, Bethlehem, Hebron, Jericho, Nablus.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, [inaudible 00:55:38].
Yeah, [inaudible 00:55:38].
Lex Fridman
They have their own stories, they have their own histories.
They have their own stories, they have their own histories.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah. And it’s fascinating also how interconnected they are. Like a friend of mine, Momahari, he recently did a documentary report on the day that Haifa fell during the Zionist invasion, the Hagana led the Palestinian residences of Haifa down to the city center. And as absurd as it sounds, those of them who stood on the right side of the street were forced into cars that took them to multiple stops that would later become multiple refugee camps, the last of which was Jenin refugee camp. And those who stood on the left side of the street were forced to board boats that took them to Lebanon to become refugees there. Last month we saw the Israeli army in invade Jenin in maybe the largest military invasion of Jenin since 2002, and they killed many people. They attacked medics and journalists in broad daylight on camera. They have destroyed infrastructure, and it was all very painful. But I think the most compelling aspect of the raid on Jenin was what followed. Israeli soldiers that night, held their megaphones and instructed hundreds of Palestinians to flee their homes. And they told them, if you don’t leave, if you don’t have your hand up in the air, you will get shot. And they were forced to leave their homes in the camp and walk to God knows where.
Yeah. And it’s fascinating also how interconnected they are. Like a friend of mine, Momahari, he recently did a documentary report on the day that Haifa fell during the Zionist invasion, the Hagana led the Palestinian residences of Haifa down to the city center. And as absurd as it sounds, those of them who stood on the right side of the street were forced into cars that took them to multiple stops that would later become multiple refugee camps, the last of which was Jenin refugee camp. And those who stood on the left side of the street were forced to board boats that took them to Lebanon to become refugees there. Last month we saw the Israeli army in invade Jenin in maybe the largest military invasion of Jenin since 2002, and they killed many people. They attacked medics and journalists in broad daylight on camera. They have destroyed infrastructure, and it was all very painful. But I think the most compelling aspect of the raid on Jenin was what followed. Israeli soldiers that night, held their megaphones and instructed hundreds of Palestinians to flee their homes. And they told them, if you don’t leave, if you don’t have your hand up in the air, you will get shot. And they were forced to leave their homes in the camp and walk to God knows where.
I can guarantee you, because the Nakba is not that old, I can guarantee you that some people who were marching away from their camps were chased away from their homes in the camp in Jenin were some of the same people who were chased away from the homes in Haifa in the first place. This perpetual exile that Palestinian people continue to live is unbearable. In my case, my grandmother was removed from her home in Haifa in ’48, and then she moved from city to city. And then in 2009, she saw half of her home taken over by Israeli soldiers. My grandmother died in 2020, and two months later, we got the next expulsion order from the Israeli court. I’m quite ashamed to admit that I was relieved that my grandmother had died, because I did not want her, 103 years old at the time, to go through yet another Nakba. And this is the fact for so many Palestinians, regardless of where they are on the map.
Lex Fridman
If I may read the description of the situation in Jenin, and maybe you can comment. So this is on July 3rd, 4th and 5th, just reading the Washington Post’s description. So this was an Israeli military incursion to Jenin, the raid included more than 1000 soldiers backed by drone strikes, making it Israel’s largest such operation in the West Bank since the end of the second Palestinian uprising in 2005. The Israeli military said it dismantled hundreds of explosives, cleared hundreds of weapons, destroyed underground hideouts, and confiscated hundreds of thousands of dollars in quote, terror funds. Many of the 50 Palestinians who have attacked Israelis since the start of the year have come from Jenin camp and the surrounding area. Palestinian attacks inside Israel have killed 24 people this year. UN experts describe the Jenin operation as “collective punishment”, in quotes, for the Palestinian people amounting to egregious violations of international law. Many of the more than 150 Palestinians killed by Israelis this year have also come from these communities. Palestinian fighters say they need arms to defend themselves against the Israeli occupation and military incursions into the camp during which Palestinian civilians including children have been killed. So those are the, I would say, different perspectives on the many people on both sides who have been killed, many more Palestinians. Can you comment more about the situation?
If I may read the description of the situation in Jenin, and maybe you can comment. So this is on July 3rd, 4th and 5th, just reading the Washington Post’s description. So this was an Israeli military incursion to Jenin, the raid included more than 1000 soldiers backed by drone strikes, making it Israel’s largest such operation in the West Bank since the end of the second Palestinian uprising in 2005. The Israeli military said it dismantled hundreds of explosives, cleared hundreds of weapons, destroyed underground hideouts, and confiscated hundreds of thousands of dollars in quote, terror funds. Many of the 50 Palestinians who have attacked Israelis since the start of the year have come from Jenin camp and the surrounding area. Palestinian attacks inside Israel have killed 24 people this year. UN experts describe the Jenin operation as “collective punishment”, in quotes, for the Palestinian people amounting to egregious violations of international law. Many of the more than 150 Palestinians killed by Israelis this year have also come from these communities. Palestinian fighters say they need arms to defend themselves against the Israeli occupation and military incursions into the camp during which Palestinian civilians including children have been killed. So those are the, I would say, different perspectives on the many people on both sides who have been killed, many more Palestinians. Can you comment more about the situation?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I think the Washington Post article is a little bit more careful than other media that came out recently about Jenin. I was listening to our Reuters radio show and they failed to ever mention the occupation. I don’t even think this paragraph mentioned that Jenin is under occupation by the Israeli forces, by the Israeli regime. I think this is the most important piece of context that gets obscured in our media reporting, is these cities, these refugee camps are under illegal occupation. The Israeli army has no business being there in the first place. That is the departure point, that is the most important piece of context that will answer to you why these people are arming themselves. Many of which, by the way, lived through the 2002 massacre and bombardment of Jenin, and grew up in that violence.
I think the Washington Post article is a little bit more careful than other media that came out recently about Jenin. I was listening to our Reuters radio show and they failed to ever mention the occupation. I don’t even think this paragraph mentioned that Jenin is under occupation by the Israeli forces, by the Israeli regime. I think this is the most important piece of context that gets obscured in our media reporting, is these cities, these refugee camps are under illegal occupation. The Israeli army has no business being there in the first place. That is the departure point, that is the most important piece of context that will answer to you why these people are arming themselves. Many of which, by the way, lived through the 2002 massacre and bombardment of Jenin, and grew up in that violence.
The context that Palestine is under occupation, that these Palestinian cities are under occupation, that they have to deal with land seizures at all times, that they cannot leave their towns without a special permit, all of this will give context to the violence. And the thousands of Israeli soldiers that raid the camp that day, that traumatized an entire generation. They think they will quell that generation. They think that with such bloodshed and such barbaric violence, destroying infrastructure, attacking medics, killing people left and right, and they think with this kind of terror that they can quell people, tell people that they can guarantee that these kids are not going to grow up and resist. But that’s the opposite of what happens. One thing about Palestinian people, they will not compromise their dignity. These people live in dire, excruciating circumstances and it is so courageous, in my opinion, that they even think to defend themselves against one of the most lethal, one of the most sophisticated armies in the world, against a nuclear state that can wipe them out in the matter of seconds. But at the end of the day, it’s not even about courage, it’s about survival. They don’t do this because of machismo or because of heroic tendencies, it’s because this is about survival.
Lex Fridman
So the degree there’s violence, it’s about survival?
So the degree there’s violence, it’s about survival?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Absolutely. I think if there was no occupation, there would be no violence. It’s quite obvious. And again, people understand this. We saw on Twitter in the recent month, all of these Israeli propagandists who had tweeted pictures of little girls with guns in Ukraine and women making bombs in Ukraine, and young men carrying their rifles in Ukraine, and praising them as heroes, post very similar pictures of Palestinians and calling them terrorists. It’s glaring the double standard, I don’t even need to linger on it.
Absolutely. I think if there was no occupation, there would be no violence. It’s quite obvious. And again, people understand this. We saw on Twitter in the recent month, all of these Israeli propagandists who had tweeted pictures of little girls with guns in Ukraine and women making bombs in Ukraine, and young men carrying their rifles in Ukraine, and praising them as heroes, post very similar pictures of Palestinians and calling them terrorists. It’s glaring the double standard, I don’t even need to linger on it.
Lex Fridman
Well, the double standard is glaring, but I also think the glorification of violence is questionable. There’s a balance to be struck, of course, but…
Well, the double standard is glaring, but I also think the glorification of violence is questionable. There’s a balance to be struck, of course, but…
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, I don’t think we should be glorifying violence at all, but I don’t think we should be normalizing violence either. I think that’s what it is. I’ll tell you a story. I was interviewing a person whose brother was killed by the Israeli military during an Israeli raid on their village, and the person was so concerned about whether I was going to report that her brother allegedly had a Molotov cocktail in his hand. And I found it absolutely insane, absolutely absurd that we can just glance over the fact that there is, again, a foreign military in tanks with rifles and snipers invading the village at 4:00 AM in the morning, shooting live ammunition at people’s houses, throwing tear gas, that we can just glance over. It’s normal, we could just report on it, no problem, nobody’s going to bat an eyebrow. But the fact that potentially somebody might have picked up a Molotov cocktail to throw it at this invading army is where we draw the line. It says a lot. It says a lot about whose violence is normalized, is accepted, is institutionalized, is glorified even. You walk around Tel Aviv and you see all of the plaques plastered around the streets of the country, of the city, celebrating the battles that they had won, the massacres that they had enacted against the Palestinian people, but God forbid Palestinians have any kind of similar sentiment.
Yeah, I don’t think we should be glorifying violence at all, but I don’t think we should be normalizing violence either. I think that’s what it is. I’ll tell you a story. I was interviewing a person whose brother was killed by the Israeli military during an Israeli raid on their village, and the person was so concerned about whether I was going to report that her brother allegedly had a Molotov cocktail in his hand. And I found it absolutely insane, absolutely absurd that we can just glance over the fact that there is, again, a foreign military in tanks with rifles and snipers invading the village at 4:00 AM in the morning, shooting live ammunition at people’s houses, throwing tear gas, that we can just glance over. It’s normal, we could just report on it, no problem, nobody’s going to bat an eyebrow. But the fact that potentially somebody might have picked up a Molotov cocktail to throw it at this invading army is where we draw the line. It says a lot. It says a lot about whose violence is normalized, is accepted, is institutionalized, is glorified even. You walk around Tel Aviv and you see all of the plaques plastered around the streets of the country, of the city, celebrating the battles that they had won, the massacres that they had enacted against the Palestinian people, but God forbid Palestinians have any kind of similar sentiment.
Hamas
Lex Fridman
So on July 4th during this intense period, a Palestinian rammed a car into pedestrians at a bus stop in Tel Aviv, injuring eight people before being shot dead by a passerby. Also, that night, Hamas fired rockets into Israel, and then Israel responded with strikes on what it said was an underground weapon site. So just to give some context to the intense violence happening here, what do you think about Hamas firing rockets into Israel?
So on July 4th during this intense period, a Palestinian rammed a car into pedestrians at a bus stop in Tel Aviv, injuring eight people before being shot dead by a passerby. Also, that night, Hamas fired rockets into Israel, and then Israel responded with strikes on what it said was an underground weapon site. So just to give some context to the intense violence happening here, what do you think about Hamas firing rockets into Israel?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Well, the framing makes it seem as though unprovoked Hamas is firing rockets unto Israel, regards to what I think of Hamas, obviously, but unprovoked. But that’s not the case. The propagation is the fact that they are forced to live in a cage, that they have no access to clean water. They have no access to basic rights, no access to imports, no access to anything, that they can’t leave, they’re living in a densely populated enclave that was deemed uninhabitable by the UN, that was deemed an open air prison. So the rockets, in any case, are retaliation for the siege. Let’s start there. But again, this is just to prove my point, violence begets violence. Palestinian people are not violent people. We are not violent people at the core.
Well, the framing makes it seem as though unprovoked Hamas is firing rockets unto Israel, regards to what I think of Hamas, obviously, but unprovoked. But that’s not the case. The propagation is the fact that they are forced to live in a cage, that they have no access to clean water. They have no access to basic rights, no access to imports, no access to anything, that they can’t leave, they’re living in a densely populated enclave that was deemed uninhabitable by the UN, that was deemed an open air prison. So the rockets, in any case, are retaliation for the siege. Let’s start there. But again, this is just to prove my point, violence begets violence. Palestinian people are not violent people. We are not violent people at the core.
And I think what serves this narrative is Islamophobia, is xenophobia towards Arabs, which I don’t have the luxury to write laws about. By the way, I’m quite frustrated by this. I am preoccupied and the Palestinian people are preoccupied with the material violence that we have to deal with on the day-to-day, the demolitions, the bombings, the imprisonment. That’s what we’re distracted with and busy with that we can’t even talk about the racism, the casual racism, against this anti-Palestinian racism, be it in the media, on social media and diplomatic circles. But all of this racism that has gone unchecked, has not been regulated for decades, allows for these tropes to continue in which Palestinians are promoted as these like barbaric terrorists and the only way we could remedy that situation is by marketing them as these defenseless victims. But the fact of the matter is, it’s not this simplistic. Palestinian people are human beings who should enjoy a full spectrum of humanity, which includes rage, which include…
Mohammed el-Kurd
… Vanity, which includes rage, which includes disdain, which includes happiness and joy and laughter, which includes celebration, which includes all of these things, but we’re not allowed this. But we are doing exactly what any people throughout history who have been oppressed, who have been colonized, who have been occupied, have done and continue to do as we see in Ukraine, which is celebrated by mainstream media.
… Vanity, which includes rage, which includes disdain, which includes happiness and joy and laughter, which includes celebration, which includes all of these things, but we’re not allowed this. But we are doing exactly what any people throughout history who have been oppressed, who have been colonized, who have been occupied, have done and continue to do as we see in Ukraine, which is celebrated by mainstream media.
I’m sorry to keep reiterating this point, but at this point, I am quite exhausted by how exceptional Palestine and Palestinian resistance is when the world tells me time and time again that it doesn’t have a problem with violence, it just has a problem with who does that violence.
Lex Fridman
Do you, in your mind and in the way you see this region, draw distinction between the people in power versus the regular people? So, you mentioned the Palestinian people, is there something you can comment on, on Hamas and the PLO? Do you see them as fundamentally different from the people? What does Hamas do well, where do they fall short?
Do you, in your mind and in the way you see this region, draw distinction between the people in power versus the regular people? So, you mentioned the Palestinian people, is there something you can comment on, on Hamas and the PLO? Do you see them as fundamentally different from the people? What does Hamas do well, where do they fall short?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I think governments, wherever globally, are different from people. No government is a true reflection of its people. I think this is even true in the case of Arab countries that normalize with Israel. In many of the cases they are unelected governments. I think the Palestinian authority continues to fail. I think there are subcontractors of the Israeli regime through their security coordination. And also, I’d like to use this as an opportunity to comment a little bit on the analogy thing.
I think governments, wherever globally, are different from people. No government is a true reflection of its people. I think this is even true in the case of Arab countries that normalize with Israel. In many of the cases they are unelected governments. I think the Palestinian authority continues to fail. I think there are subcontractors of the Israeli regime through their security coordination. And also, I’d like to use this as an opportunity to comment a little bit on the analogy thing.
Not to stray away from the question, but the Palestinian Authority two years ago killed an opposition activist named Nizar Banat. It was a horrendous crime, and I was in Ramallah with the people protesting against the Palestinian Authority. And at some point they had their batons, the Palestinian Authority Police, and they beat us with it. And many of the people in the crowd were liking the Palestinian Authority to Zionism. I think people, this is what people do, when they are confronted by a great evil, they liken it to some other great evil, and this is where the Hitler analogy came from. Again, I don’t think it’s the best strategy moving forward, but I refuse to be criminalized for a little sentence.
Lex Fridman
So, to linger on those in power. One of the criticisms towards Hamas and PLO, towards the Israeli Government, at least the current coalition government, is that there’s a lot of incentive to sort of perpetuate violence to maintain power. There’s a hunger for power and maintaining that power amongst the powerful. That’s the way power works. So, is there a worry you have about those in power not having the best interest of its people? So, those in power, the PLO, Hamas, not being incentivized towards peace, towards justice.
So, to linger on those in power. One of the criticisms towards Hamas and PLO, towards the Israeli Government, at least the current coalition government, is that there’s a lot of incentive to sort of perpetuate violence to maintain power. There’s a hunger for power and maintaining that power amongst the powerful. That’s the way power works. So, is there a worry you have about those in power not having the best interest of its people? So, those in power, the PLO, Hamas, not being incentivized towards peace, towards justice.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Looking at the PA’s action today, it tells you a great deal about what they’re interested in and what they’re not interested in. And maybe, yeah, the occupation is in their best interest. And you can infer similar things looking at Hamas, but these two entities virtually have no power, even Hamas.
Looking at the PA’s action today, it tells you a great deal about what they’re interested in and what they’re not interested in. And maybe, yeah, the occupation is in their best interest. And you can infer similar things looking at Hamas, but these two entities virtually have no power, even Hamas.
The context that Hamas is permitted by international law to use armed resistance, blah, blah, blah, does that mean Hamas is equipped to govern Gaza? I don’t think so. Does that mean that people around Palestine necessarily want to live under Hamas rule? In 2006, Hamas was democratically elected. I don’t know if that’s still the case today. There’s a lot to be said, but neither of these entities have any real power in perpetuating… The only body that can flip the switch in all of this equation is the Israelis.
They’re the ones who are keeping people in a cage. They’re the ones who are wrapping the West Bank with a wall. Everything else to me is just secondary, regardless of what I think personally of any of those people. Personally, for me, the world I envision, not just Palestine, the world I envision is a world that goes beyond states, that goes beyond this framing of power, this hierarchy in which some people rule over other people. This whole idea of nation states, be it Israel or any other nation state, it’s futile, it’s not good, it’s exclusive. I think that we can achieve a better world than that.
Lex Fridman
Well, how do you do a better world? Actually, if you just linger on that, politically speaking, geopolitically, you have to have representation of the people, you have to have laws, and you have to have leaders and governing bodies that enact those laws and all those kinds of things. You probably need to have militaries to protect the people.
Well, how do you do a better world? Actually, if you just linger on that, politically speaking, geopolitically, you have to have representation of the people, you have to have laws, and you have to have leaders and governing bodies that enact those laws and all those kinds of things. You probably need to have militaries to protect the people.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Can you not imagine a world without militaries?
Can you not imagine a world without militaries?
Lex Fridman
I can imagine it, but we’re not in that world.
I can imagine it, but we’re not in that world.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, I’m not saying I have all the answers or a PowerPoint in my pocket with the instructions, but I’m saying the world I’d like to live in is one that transcends borders, is one that does not necessitate militaries, that doesn’t necessitate all of these prisons, all of these walls, all of these racist laws.
Yeah, I’m not saying I have all the answers or a PowerPoint in my pocket with the instructions, but I’m saying the world I’d like to live in is one that transcends borders, is one that does not necessitate militaries, that doesn’t necessitate all of these prisons, all of these walls, all of these racist laws.
Lex Fridman
So, you don’t think violence is a fundamental part of human nature that emerges combined with the hunger for power?
So, you don’t think violence is a fundamental part of human nature that emerges combined with the hunger for power?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I do think that both of these things are truly intrinsic to human beings, but I also do think there is a way to move beyond them. I’m not saying I have the answers. I’m tempted to say sway, but…
I do think that both of these things are truly intrinsic to human beings, but I also do think there is a way to move beyond them. I’m not saying I have the answers. I’m tempted to say sway, but…
Lex Fridman
You have a hope that there doesn’t have to be war.
You have a hope that there doesn’t have to be war.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
Lex Fridman
In the world.
In the world.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Definitely, definitely.
Definitely, definitely.
Two-state solution
Lex Fridman
Well, if we look a little bit more short term, people speak about a one state solution, a two state solution, what is your hope here for this part of the world?
Well, if we look a little bit more short term, people speak about a one state solution, a two state solution, what is your hope here for this part of the world?
Do you see a possible future with a two state solution, whether it’s for Palestine and Israel? Do you see a one state solution where there is a diversity of different peoples like in the United States and they have equal rights in the courts and everywhere else?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I don’t think there’s a geography in which a two state solution is possible. As we said earlier, Swiss cheese, there’s literally settlements all over the West Bank, and I don’t think it’s fair, a two state solution is fair to all of the people whose homes are still in Haifa, in Nazareth, in Jaffa, and so far, and I don’t think it’s fair that I’m going to have to travel to another country to visit my cousin who’s married in Nazareth, for example.
I don’t think there’s a geography in which a two state solution is possible. As we said earlier, Swiss cheese, there’s literally settlements all over the West Bank, and I don’t think it’s fair, a two state solution is fair to all of the people whose homes are still in Haifa, in Nazareth, in Jaffa, and so far, and I don’t think it’s fair that I’m going to have to travel to another country to visit my cousin who’s married in Nazareth, for example.
And beyond that, it’s just not possible. I do believe that whatever you want to call it, one state, two state, 48 states, 29 states, whatever you want to call it, refugees need to return, land needs to be given back, wealth needs to be redistributed, and a recognition of the Nakba needs to happen. That is the only way we could move forward.
And regarding whether this is a possible situation for two people to live side by side, let’s ask two questions. Let’s say you lived in a house with a person, your roommate, you just had a roommate who constantly beat the shit out of you, I wonder if you’d want to continue to live with them? That’s one. And let’s try another scenario. Let’s say you live in a house with a roommate who you just absolutely hate, just absolutely oppose their existence as a people, you don’t even give him a key to your apartment. Let’s say now you’re equal partners in the apartment, would you want to live with him? I don’t know. We’ll see. We’ll see, time will tell, but I don’t think they want to live with us.
Israelis are quite good, especially Israeli diplomats, they’re quite good at using flowery language about peace and coexistence and so on and so forth, and they’re good with making us seem insane or radical or full of hate and so on and so forth, but the policies speak for themselves. The actions on the ground speak for themselves, and every time there’s an uptick, many of them leave, and I wonder, I would like to see, I wonder what would happen in a own state solution.
Lex Fridman
Well, okay, so you’ve spoken eloquently about the injustice of the evictions, the demolitions, the settlements, but can you comment about the difficulty of the security from an Israel perspective when there is a large number of people that want to destroy it? How does Israel exist peacefully, this one state solution?
Well, okay, so you’ve spoken eloquently about the injustice of the evictions, the demolitions, the settlements, but can you comment about the difficulty of the security from an Israel perspective when there is a large number of people that want to destroy it? How does Israel exist peacefully, this one state solution?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I don’t know, by not shooting a journalist doing her job in the Jenin refugee camp.
I don’t know, by not shooting a journalist doing her job in the Jenin refugee camp.
Lex Fridman
But that doesn’t…
But that doesn’t…
Mohammed el-Kurd
By not killing a 14-year-old standing in his front yard? This whole talk about security and security fence and the whole propaganda of the Israeli defense forces and this whole iron wall ideology in which somehow they’re always defending themselves, even though they’re… Netanyahu and the Israeli Government continue to talk about an existential threat, about Iran being an existential threat, even though the Israeli Government is the only body that holds nuclear weapons in the region. They’re the most sophisticated army in the region, and yet they continue hiding behind their fingers and talking about an existential threat and talking about how they’re insecure and so on and so forth.
By not killing a 14-year-old standing in his front yard? This whole talk about security and security fence and the whole propaganda of the Israeli defense forces and this whole iron wall ideology in which somehow they’re always defending themselves, even though they’re… Netanyahu and the Israeli Government continue to talk about an existential threat, about Iran being an existential threat, even though the Israeli Government is the only body that holds nuclear weapons in the region. They’re the most sophisticated army in the region, and yet they continue hiding behind their fingers and talking about an existential threat and talking about how they’re insecure and so on and so forth.
I came here on the bus. I live in a house where everybody in the world can easily Google it and get its address, and anybody can just walk into my house. And I’m lucky and privileged as a Palestinian journalist. There are many Palestinian journalists who lose their lives. That’s real insecurity, but we don’t even have time to whine about it because there’s real shit going on the ground that we’re preoccupied with and reporting on all the time, that we don’t even have the time to talk about how limited is our institutional backing, how limited is our cyber security, how limited is even healthcare. All of these things we don’t even have time to complain about, but they’re the real life things that formulate an insecure population that Israel certainly does not suffer from.
Lex Fridman
There’s a tension here. It’s true that the ideas of existential threats to a nation have been used to expand the military industrial complex and to limit the rights of its people. So, in the United States, after 9/11, Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded under some justification of there being terror in the world, these big ideas. And in the same way, yes, Israel, with the existential threat of Iran has used to expand its military might over the region and control over the region, but it also has some truth to it in terms of the threat that Israel is facing, including from Iran. If Iran were to get a nuclear weapon, do you think there’s a threat from that?
There’s a tension here. It’s true that the ideas of existential threats to a nation have been used to expand the military industrial complex and to limit the rights of its people. So, in the United States, after 9/11, Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded under some justification of there being terror in the world, these big ideas. And in the same way, yes, Israel, with the existential threat of Iran has used to expand its military might over the region and control over the region, but it also has some truth to it in terms of the threat that Israel is facing, including from Iran. If Iran were to get a nuclear weapon, do you think there’s a threat from that?
Mohammed el-Kurd
But who has the nukes?
But who has the nukes?
Lex Fridman
Right now.
Right now.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, but we’re talking about this far away monster that we’re scared of, it’s like fear-mongering. What do you mean, who has the nukes?
Yeah, but we’re talking about this far away monster that we’re scared of, it’s like fear-mongering. What do you mean, who has the nukes?
Lex Fridman
Some of it is fear-mongering, but some of it is true.
Some of it is fear-mongering, but some of it is true.
Mohammed el-Kurd
I don’t think it’s true. I don’t think it’s true. I think Israelis are obsessed with genocide because they have enacted genocide against us. Even when we talk about a future, a liberation of Palestine, when we’re talking about anything, they constantly jump to saying things like, “They want to throw us into the sea. They want to kill all Jews.” What kind of hyperbolic bullshit is that? To say that if I am chanting and marching for my home not to be taken away from me by some kind of settler court, I am somehow demanding the murder of all Jews across the world? That is hyperbolic, and the fact that we coddle it is insane to me.
I don’t think it’s true. I don’t think it’s true. I think Israelis are obsessed with genocide because they have enacted genocide against us. Even when we talk about a future, a liberation of Palestine, when we’re talking about anything, they constantly jump to saying things like, “They want to throw us into the sea. They want to kill all Jews.” What kind of hyperbolic bullshit is that? To say that if I am chanting and marching for my home not to be taken away from me by some kind of settler court, I am somehow demanding the murder of all Jews across the world? That is hyperbolic, and the fact that we coddle it is insane to me.
So no, I don’t think as things stand right now, as the power of balance stands right now, I don’t think there’s an existential threat to Israel. And also, let’s redefine existential threat. Do we think the Israeli regime, the Zionist regime should continue to exist in its forms, subjugating people, enacting the crime of Apartheid according to a bajillion human rights organizations? Do we think that it should continue keeping people in a cage? If that’s what people are fighting to save, then that says a lot about the people who are feeling this existential threat, not me.
Lex Fridman
Do your beliefs represent the Palestinian people, meaning, how many people are there that want Israel to be gone?
Do your beliefs represent the Palestinian people, meaning, how many people are there that want Israel to be gone?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Well, what does it mean for Israel to be gone?
Well, what does it mean for Israel to be gone?
Lex Fridman
What it means is for people who think of Israel as an occupier, who stole land that needs to go away, that this should be all Palestine.
What it means is for people who think of Israel as an occupier, who stole land that needs to go away, that this should be all Palestine.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, but is that a bad thing for the occupation to end, for the land to be given back? Is that a bad thing?
Yeah, but is that a bad thing for the occupation to end, for the land to be given back? Is that a bad thing?
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s different definitions of occupation. There’s people in their homes now, right?
Well, there’s different definitions of occupation. There’s people in their homes now, right?
Mohammed el-Kurd
But is it their home? I’m not talking about some random home, but there are many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many Israelis who drink their coffee every morning from living rooms that are not theirs.
But is it their home? I’m not talking about some random home, but there are many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many Israelis who drink their coffee every morning from living rooms that are not theirs.
Lex Fridman
That are not theirs, that were taken just a few decades ago?
That are not theirs, that were taken just a few decades ago?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Where the rightful owners of these homes are still lingering in refugee camps, are still dreaming of return.
Where the rightful owners of these homes are still lingering in refugee camps, are still dreaming of return.
Lex Fridman
There are homes on the land of Israel that you wouldn’t classify as stolen.
There are homes on the land of Israel that you wouldn’t classify as stolen.
Mohammed el-Kurd
I mean, if it was built, but is the land stolen? But all of this, again, I try not to fall into this because it feels so abstract and far away, and this is not how liberation is going to look like whatsoever. And I’m not fixated on ethnic cleansing, I’m not obsessed with ethnic cleansing. I’m obsessed with ending the ethnic cleansing campaign that has been visited upon me and my family and my community for seven plus decades. That’s what I’m obsessed with.
I mean, if it was built, but is the land stolen? But all of this, again, I try not to fall into this because it feels so abstract and far away, and this is not how liberation is going to look like whatsoever. And I’m not fixated on ethnic cleansing, I’m not obsessed with ethnic cleansing. I’m obsessed with ending the ethnic cleansing campaign that has been visited upon me and my family and my community for seven plus decades. That’s what I’m obsessed with.
All of this other stuff about what happens to the settlers, and we want to kill all Jews and all of this, I think it’s bullshit, and I think it’s ridiculous, and I think fixating on it is distracting from the focal point. There needs to be an end to all of the injustices, to all of the atrocities. A little boy from Jerusalem should be able to go jog around the city without fearing getting shot. That’s the simplest thing we’re asking for here, and we want our land back, and those things do not mean actually at all the ethnic cleansing of another people.
Lex Fridman
Well, we should be precise here. So, a little boy being able to run around Jerusalem, that’s a great vision, not just safely, but without racism, without hate. That’s a beautiful vision, yes, but people in West Jerusalem, people in Tel Aviv that have homes, should they stay there? Do they have the right to stay there?
Well, we should be precise here. So, a little boy being able to run around Jerusalem, that’s a great vision, not just safely, but without racism, without hate. That’s a beautiful vision, yes, but people in West Jerusalem, people in Tel Aviv that have homes, should they stay there? Do they have the right to stay there?
Mohammed el-Kurd
That’s maybe number 99 on my priorities list. I’m concerned with the refugees, I’m concerned with the teenagers in the prisons. I am concerned with my house. I’m concerned with my family’s house in Haifa. There is a lot for me to do before I can even tend to the needs of my occupier, that is the least of my concerns.
That’s maybe number 99 on my priorities list. I’m concerned with the refugees, I’m concerned with the teenagers in the prisons. I am concerned with my house. I’m concerned with my family’s house in Haifa. There is a lot for me to do before I can even tend to the needs of my occupier, that is the least of my concerns.
Lex Fridman
So you want the low hanging fruit, the obvious injustices to end?
So you want the low hanging fruit, the obvious injustices to end?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But still the long term vision of existential survival of Israel, which is the concern of its government, is the concern of its people, do you see a future where Israelis have a home in the region?
But still the long term vision of existential survival of Israel, which is the concern of its government, is the concern of its people, do you see a future where Israelis have a home in the region?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Sure, just not in my front yard.
Sure, just not in my front yard.
Lex Fridman
Where’s the front yard and where is the backyard?
Where’s the front yard and where is the backyard?
Mohammed el-Kurd
There are literally Jewish settlers, one of which from Long Island, in my literal front yard. And this is the case in hundreds if not thousands of Palestinian homes. No one is saying Jewish people shouldn’t exist or they shouldn’t have a state of their own. I mean, I think all religious based states are a bad idea, all nation states are a bad idea, but whatever, if that’s what they want do, that’s what they want to do.
There are literally Jewish settlers, one of which from Long Island, in my literal front yard. And this is the case in hundreds if not thousands of Palestinian homes. No one is saying Jewish people shouldn’t exist or they shouldn’t have a state of their own. I mean, I think all religious based states are a bad idea, all nation states are a bad idea, but whatever, if that’s what they want do, that’s what they want to do.
But that doesn’t mean that they are allowed or have a right to create and implement a system of Jewish supremacy at my expense. That’s not a crazy thing to say. That is not a controversial thing to say. You can have your state, just don’t kill anyone. Thank you, have a good day. That’s not a crazy thought to have.
Lex Fridman
And seek and establish a symmetry of power in the courts, which is the current source of injustice.
And seek and establish a symmetry of power in the courts, which is the current source of injustice.
Mohammed el-Kurd
I mean, that’s when it comes to forced expulsions in our home, but there’s myriad of other ways.
I mean, that’s when it comes to forced expulsions in our home, but there’s myriad of other ways.
Lex Fridman
To the military?
To the military?
Mohammed el-Kurd
The military, I mean, the police. If you look at how many times, I should have brought the data with me, but if you look at how little times the Israeli Military or police has investigated its own people or indicted its own people. I mean, just recently, the killer, who has been hailed a hero by some of Israeli society who killed Eyad al-Halaq, a Palestinian man who is autistic, who lives inside the occupied old city, where again, Israeli Military has no business being there or jurisdiction whatsoever.
The military, I mean, the police. If you look at how many times, I should have brought the data with me, but if you look at how little times the Israeli Military or police has investigated its own people or indicted its own people. I mean, just recently, the killer, who has been hailed a hero by some of Israeli society who killed Eyad al-Halaq, a Palestinian man who is autistic, who lives inside the occupied old city, where again, Israeli Military has no business being there or jurisdiction whatsoever.
He was shot and killed by an Israeli soldier who was trigger-happy because, again, they have this siege mentality where any moving object is going to kill them. And he was shot and killed and despite it being in broad daylight, despite it being well-documented, despite the victim being disabled, despite all of this, he was acquitted by the Israeli court. The military, the courts, the government, they all work together, which is why it’s so ironic to me that there are hundreds of thousands of people marching on the streets of Tel Aviv trying to save the progressive beacon that is the Israeli Supreme Court when you find its fingerprints all over the injustices perpetuated against Palestinians, be it legalizing and upholding the withholding of slain Palestinian bodies who were killed by the Israeli Military to be used as bargaining chips with Israeli militaries.
Be it making decisions to dispossesses entire villages like [inaudible 01:29:42], be it never once granting release to any Palestinian who was held in administrative detention without charge or trial. Be it upholding the legality of the Family Reunification Law that does not allow Palestinian couples who hold different legal statuses of reuniting and living together as families. I mean, those are just some of the few things I can think of about the Israeli Supreme Court.
So, the real tension that exists is the lack of diversity on the Israeli political spectrum that makes the vision for a future so limited, because those on, what seems to be, the far left, are defending an extremely conservative institution that is a supreme court that they regard as progressive, when in fact it is the opposite of such. So, what do we do? How can we talk? How can we have peace with people who are chanting to save the very body that is displacing us? It’s ridiculous.
Jerusalem
Lex Fridman
What’s your vision? Let’s just take it as a microcosm of Jerusalem, what’s your vision for Jerusalem look like with a peaceful coexistence of people?
What’s your vision? Let’s just take it as a microcosm of Jerusalem, what’s your vision for Jerusalem look like with a peaceful coexistence of people?
Mohammed el-Kurd
As it looked like before the Israeli State emerged. I mean, we should be reading our history here. When you read European and white historians, they’ll tell you Palestine was there, and many of them would say it was even without a people, nobody was there, or some of them will say we we’re uncivilized. But the fact of the matter is Palestine, Jerusalem particularly, had a diversity of religion, Druze, Jewish people.
As it looked like before the Israeli State emerged. I mean, we should be reading our history here. When you read European and white historians, they’ll tell you Palestine was there, and many of them would say it was even without a people, nobody was there, or some of them will say we we’re uncivilized. But the fact of the matter is Palestine, Jerusalem particularly, had a diversity of religion, Druze, Jewish people.
My grandmother continues to talk about… Well, she continued until she died, she continued to talk about her Jewish neighbors when she grew up in the old city. Well, when she was born in the old city and then her Jewish neighbors in Haifa. We even had one Jewish member of her family, [inaudible 01:31:59] actually, who just also recently passed away there. Jews were a part of Palestine, and they spoke Hebrew, a different kind of Hebrew, but they spoke Hebrew and they were… People really need to read The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine, it’s really an excellent synopsis of the history.
But this whole idea, that this is some kind of war between two religions is so misleading, because what’s happening is a bunch of frankly European settlers with a certain political secular ideology came and relocated here and turned it into a religious conflict between people who have lived harmoniously together for decades before that.
And the whole idea, be it Christian Zionism or John Hagee, or the calls for Jews to leave the United States and relocate in Israel. Or recently, which we’ve heard about a long time ago, but recently an Israeli historian confirmed the fact that Israeli organizations were bombing Baghdad and bombing synagogues in Baghdad in Iraq to get Iraqi Jews to leave and come relocate in Israel. All of this is manufactured, and again, none of this is a conspiracy theory, I know it sounds absurd, and anytime I look at my life from a bird’s eye view, I think, “What a circus.” But it’s real and it’s verifiable, call the fact-checkers.
Lex Fridman
You mentioned the land registry, can you elaborate what’s happening there?
You mentioned the land registry, can you elaborate what’s happening there?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, yeah, absolutely. So, our small victory in the Israeli courts was that they would keep us in our homes until a land registry is completed. Basically, it means that they have to check who owned the land prior, and then they could decide if the land is ours or the land belongs to the Israeli settler organizations that are headquartered in the United States and enjoy a tax-exempt status here.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely. So, our small victory in the Israeli courts was that they would keep us in our homes until a land registry is completed. Basically, it means that they have to check who owned the land prior, and then they could decide if the land is ours or the land belongs to the Israeli settler organizations that are headquartered in the United States and enjoy a tax-exempt status here.
And that sounds great on the surface, but then you look at Israeli law, you look at Israeli courts, you look at ownership and you see that, oh, Israelis refuse to authenticate or take into consideration any land ownership documents prior of the establishment of the state. So all of us in Jerusalem who have their taboo papers, their ownership papers from the Ottoman era, that’s not legit in the eyes of the Israeli court, because your ownership deeds existed long before Israel even existed, so we’re not going to take this into consideration.
So, not to be cynical here, but unfortunately the likely result of the land registry is that they’re going to say, “Oh, all of this land belongs to these Jewish organizations,” because they’re not going to take any of our documents into consideration. But that means that there’s going to be another campaign and there’s going to be a long-winded fight, and we’ll see what happens. But that’s the fear, and there’s a huge dreadful fear of a massive loss in property in Jerusalem following this land registry for the reasons I just told you. It’s the mere fact that they just refuse to look at land ownership documents.
Lex Fridman
What is the process of the fighting this in the courts look like? If you can maybe just comment on it.
What is the process of the fighting this in the courts look like? If you can maybe just comment on it.
Mohammed el-Kurd
I always make a joke that being in an Israeli court is playing a game of broken telephone because everybody’s speaking in Hebrew, and then your lawyer says something to your dad, and your dad says something to your mom, and your mom whispers it in your ear, and then you say it to your cousin and your cousin has a completely different idea of the verdict than what the verdict is, but that’s really the reality.
I always make a joke that being in an Israeli court is playing a game of broken telephone because everybody’s speaking in Hebrew, and then your lawyer says something to your dad, and your dad says something to your mom, and your mom whispers it in your ear, and then you say it to your cousin and your cousin has a completely different idea of the verdict than what the verdict is, but that’s really the reality.
Lex Fridman
So a lot of the fights happen family by family?
So a lot of the fights happen family by family?
Mohammed el-Kurd
No, it’s groups. So, in our case, it’s four houses, every four houses, but again, it happens in a language we do not speak, and a lot of the time our strategy is buying time and building a global campaign. We know that there is no recourse in the Israeli courts. I mean, my grandmother used to say, and this is a popular proverb, “If your enemy is the judge, to whom do you complain?”
No, it’s groups. So, in our case, it’s four houses, every four houses, but again, it happens in a language we do not speak, and a lot of the time our strategy is buying time and building a global campaign. We know that there is no recourse in the Israeli courts. I mean, my grandmother used to say, and this is a popular proverb, “If your enemy is the judge, to whom do you complain?”
Lex Fridman
So, to the whom you complain is maybe the international community?
So, to the whom you complain is maybe the international community?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah. I mean, in our case, it was the international community, but in our case also, it wasn’t just the international community, it was the hundreds of thousands of people in Palestine and abroad who were marching on the streets getting beaten and brutalized in Jerusalem, and I don’t know, sometimes arrested in places like Germany and so on and so forth, who forced themselves inside the media cycle.
Yeah. I mean, in our case, it was the international community, but in our case also, it wasn’t just the international community, it was the hundreds of thousands of people in Palestine and abroad who were marching on the streets getting beaten and brutalized in Jerusalem, and I don’t know, sometimes arrested in places like Germany and so on and so forth, who forced themselves inside the media cycle.
This was what was unique about [inaudible 01:36:50]. We were able to penetrate an industry that usually ignores us and usually refuses to use any of our framing, any of our quotations, and these people that march, these people that spread the rhetoric, spread the facts, wrote articles, these people that made videos online and got arrested, and many of whom are still in Israeli prisons paying higher prices than I have ever paid, these people are the ones that truly moved the international community into action.
It wouldn’t have, the United States, I don’t think would said anything had it not been for the immense media pressure that was created from the immense popular pressure. There are a lot of moving parts to a global campaign, and I think it’s so impressive that we were able to do this without any media backing, without any institutional backing, without any training, without any budget, nothing.
Role of the US
Lex Fridman
You mentioned the United States. What’s the role of the United States in the struggle that you’ve been describing? What’s the positive, what’s the negative?
You mentioned the United States. What’s the role of the United States in the struggle that you’ve been describing? What’s the positive, what’s the negative?
Mohammed el-Kurd
The role is perpetuating what’s happening. It’s all a negative role, to be honest.
The role is perpetuating what’s happening. It’s all a negative role, to be honest.
Lex Fridman
With the money, with power?
With the money, with power?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, it’s like the 3.8 billion in military aid every year, it’s the standing ovation.
Yeah, it’s like the 3.8 billion in military aid every year, it’s the standing ovation.
Lex Fridman
Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aids since World War II. To date the United States has provided Israel $158 billion, as you said, is providing currently 3.8 billion every year, that a lot of people raise the question of what’s the interest of tax paying American citizens in this kind of…
Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aids since World War II. To date the United States has provided Israel $158 billion, as you said, is providing currently 3.8 billion every year, that a lot of people raise the question of what’s the interest of tax paying American citizens in this kind of…
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, zero interest.
Yeah, zero interest.
Lex Fridman
Foreign aid.
Foreign aid.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Zero interest. I think a lot of Americans are concerned with healthcare, a lot of Americans are concerned with clean water and flint. I don’t think they’re concerned with funding Apartheid in another country. And I think it’s a disturbing phenomenon that although public opinion in the United States is shifting, I would argue drastically, about Palestine, people in Washington are yet to catch up.
Zero interest. I think a lot of Americans are concerned with healthcare, a lot of Americans are concerned with clean water and flint. I don’t think they’re concerned with funding Apartheid in another country. And I think it’s a disturbing phenomenon that although public opinion in the United States is shifting, I would argue drastically, about Palestine, people in Washington are yet to catch up.
It was only, I think, nine Congress people who boycotted Herzog’s speech in Congress yesterday, and he received standing ovation after standing ovation, after standing ovation, after standing ovation. And I wonder if the everyday American is concerned that many of their politicians are Israel first politicians, are politicians who care more about maintaining a relationship with the Israeli regime, than they care about their own districts.
Ghassan Kanafani
Lex Fridman
You’ve tweeted that 49 years ago, Ghassan Kanafani… Well, you can maybe correct me on the pronunciation, was assassinated. You wrote, “His revolutionary articulations of the Palestinian plight for liberation shook the colonial regime, yet he’s not dead, his ideas remain ever timely and teachable.”
You’ve tweeted that 49 years ago, Ghassan Kanafani… Well, you can maybe correct me on the pronunciation, was assassinated. You wrote, “His revolutionary articulations of the Palestinian plight for liberation shook the colonial regime, yet he’s not dead, his ideas remain ever timely and teachable.”
And you also tweeted an excerpt from his writing. “Between 1936 and 1939, the Palestinian Revolutionary Movement suffered a severe setback at the hands of three separate enemies that were to constitute together the principle threat to the nationalist movement in Palestine in all subsequent stages of its struggle. One, the local reactionary leadership, two, the regimes in the Arab states surrounding Palestine, and three, the imperialist-Zionist enemy.” Can you analyze what he means by those three things? The local reactionary leadership, the regimes in the Arab states surrounding Palestine and the imperialist-Zionist enemy? And also, could you comment on him as a person?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, I mean, Ghassan Kanafani is a brilliant, brilliant, brilliant writer, and he was prolific. He’s authored so much books, even though he was assassinated in the 70s, but he was 37, if I’m not mistaken, 35 when he was assassinated. He was inspiration to me in school, and I remember even my teachers had qualms about him because he was a secular person. But I love Ghassan Kanafani. He is a beloved figure in the Palestinian community, and I hope to one day be able to achieve a fraction of what he’s achieved in the terms of shaping a political consciousness for Palestinians and for people in the region.
Yeah, I mean, Ghassan Kanafani is a brilliant, brilliant, brilliant writer, and he was prolific. He’s authored so much books, even though he was assassinated in the 70s, but he was 37, if I’m not mistaken, 35 when he was assassinated. He was inspiration to me in school, and I remember even my teachers had qualms about him because he was a secular person. But I love Ghassan Kanafani. He is a beloved figure in the Palestinian community, and I hope to one day be able to achieve a fraction of what he’s achieved in the terms of shaping a political consciousness for Palestinians and for people in the region.
Lex Fridman
Did he classify himself as a politician, as a philosopher, as an activist, do you know?
Did he classify himself as a politician, as a philosopher, as an activist, do you know?
Mohammed el-Kurd
He was a writer, but he was also part of the Palestine Liberation Front, PFLP.
He was a writer, but he was also part of the Palestine Liberation Front, PFLP.
Lex Fridman
So he used the words to fight for freedom.
So he used the words to fight for freedom.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah, I don’t think he would’ve thought his words were divorced from other forms of struggle, but I think he recognized the importance of culture and shaping culture and shaping public opinion, both in achieving a shift in global stance, and also in achieving-
Yeah, I don’t think he would’ve thought his words were divorced from other forms of struggle, but I think he recognized the importance of culture and shaping culture and shaping public opinion, both in achieving a shift in global stance, and also in achieving-
Mohammed el-Kurd
… global stance and also in achieving an awakening in the Palestinian generation as well. There’s a very famous interview of his where he’s talking to, I believe, a British journalist, and the British journalist is asking him, “Why don’t you have talks with the Israelis?” And he says, “What do you mean talks? You mean capitulation? You can’t have a conversation between the sword and the neck?” And I think that really summarizes the values he stood for. Now, to talk about the three things.
… global stance and also in achieving an awakening in the Palestinian generation as well. There’s a very famous interview of his where he’s talking to, I believe, a British journalist, and the British journalist is asking him, “Why don’t you have talks with the Israelis?” And he says, “What do you mean talks? You mean capitulation? You can’t have a conversation between the sword and the neck?” And I think that really summarizes the values he stood for. Now, to talk about the three things.
Lex Fridman
Local reactionary leadership, regimes in the Arab states surrounding Palestine, and the imperialist Zionist enemy.
Local reactionary leadership, regimes in the Arab states surrounding Palestine, and the imperialist Zionist enemy.
Mohammed el-Kurd
In today’s terms, the local reactionary leadership is the Palestinian Authority. The regional regimes, we’re talking about, actually, the normalization deals that have emerged in recent years, the Abrahamic Accords, have been talked about as though they’re groundbreaking, new phenomenon. But many Arab countries have normalized relations with the Israeli regime since the birth of the state. It’s not a new thing. But, yes, I think he was talking about Egypt and Jordan at the time. Today, we can include United Arab Emirates. We could include Bahrain. We could include Morocco. And, again, these Abrahamic Accords, they are promoted and marketed and talked about as some kind of religious reconciliation, which I think is the most disgusting thing ever, because they’re not about religious reconciliation. They’re about arms deals and economic deals and they’re about consolidating power in the region.
In today’s terms, the local reactionary leadership is the Palestinian Authority. The regional regimes, we’re talking about, actually, the normalization deals that have emerged in recent years, the Abrahamic Accords, have been talked about as though they’re groundbreaking, new phenomenon. But many Arab countries have normalized relations with the Israeli regime since the birth of the state. It’s not a new thing. But, yes, I think he was talking about Egypt and Jordan at the time. Today, we can include United Arab Emirates. We could include Bahrain. We could include Morocco. And, again, these Abrahamic Accords, they are promoted and marketed and talked about as some kind of religious reconciliation, which I think is the most disgusting thing ever, because they’re not about religious reconciliation. They’re about arms deals and economic deals and they’re about consolidating power in the region.
They’re about mutual strategic interests that all of these nations have together, and some people argue that Palestine is no longer an Arab cause because Arab countries are normalizing. But most of these governments, if not all, actually, all these governments that have normalized, most of them are monarchies, are not elected governments, and they do not represent the will of the people or the desires or the opinions of their peoples. And the proof to this is places like Jordan and Egypt. Even though they’ve normalized and had peace agreements with Israel for many, many, many, many years, Palestine and the Palestinian cause was still a talking point in the political campaigning of politicians, Jordanian and Egyptian politicians, and continues to be for them to gain popularity because that’s where the hearts of the people are. And then the Zionist regime is quite explanatory, the imperial Zionist regime. I mean, what else do you call a regime that sought help from imperialist powers to depopulate an entire country and build a new one on top of it.
Lex Fridman
So, mostly, you’re saying the thing that the Abraham Accords achieved is a negative thing for Palestine? So these kinds of agreements between the leadership is not positive for the region?
So, mostly, you’re saying the thing that the Abraham Accords achieved is a negative thing for Palestine? So these kinds of agreements between the leadership is not positive for the region?
Mohammed el-Kurd
No. No. Obviously, they’re going to be marketed as positive, and, obviously, they’re going to have this flowery language surrounding them. And the idiots in the room might like nod and smile, but anybody with critical thinking skills can know that if a people continue to be under occupation, there’s nothing positive there. And, also, let’s linger a little bit on the mutual interests. The only way Morocco could normalize relations with the Israeli regime is so that the Israeli regime could recognize Moroccan sovereignty over in the Western Sahara, which just happened actually last week. And before that, Morocco recognized Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank. It’s not like Morocco itself has no interest in this kind of deal.
No. No. Obviously, they’re going to be marketed as positive, and, obviously, they’re going to have this flowery language surrounding them. And the idiots in the room might like nod and smile, but anybody with critical thinking skills can know that if a people continue to be under occupation, there’s nothing positive there. And, also, let’s linger a little bit on the mutual interests. The only way Morocco could normalize relations with the Israeli regime is so that the Israeli regime could recognize Moroccan sovereignty over in the Western Sahara, which just happened actually last week. And before that, Morocco recognized Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank. It’s not like Morocco itself has no interest in this kind of deal.
Lex Fridman
You mentioned that you hope of accomplishing some of the things that [inaudible 01:46:31] was able to accomplish. Let me ask you a silly question, perhaps a silly question, do you have interest in running for political office, I hear laughter in the room, to lead in a leadership position in Palestine.
You mentioned that you hope of accomplishing some of the things that [inaudible 01:46:31] was able to accomplish. Let me ask you a silly question, perhaps a silly question, do you have interest in running for political office, I hear laughter in the room, to lead in a leadership position in Palestine.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Not currently. No. Not at all.
Not currently. No. Not at all.
Lex Fridman
Let’s see if this ages well.
Let’s see if this ages well.
Mohammed el-Kurd
I don’t think there’s a body through which I can run for anything. It’s completely dysfunctional, and also I don’t want to wear a suit all the time.
I don’t think there’s a body through which I can run for anything. It’s completely dysfunctional, and also I don’t want to wear a suit all the time.
Lex Fridman
Who would want to do that? So from which pedestal or from which stage do you think you can be most effective?
Who would want to do that? So from which pedestal or from which stage do you think you can be most effective?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I was born and raised in Jerusalem. I speak perfect Arabic. I think my Arabic writing is much superior to my English writing, but I choose to write in English because I think there’s a disparity and there’s a chasm between what is said in Arabic in the street in Palestine and what is said here about Palestinians, both by anti-Palestinian racists and people who are pro-Palestine and advocates for Palestine. And I believe I and a few others from my generation, or many others actually from my generation, are working to fill that chasm. And I also believe that literature, culture, the public sphere, changing the public opinion, changing the narrative is important to affecting policy, to affecting change, affecting material change. I’m not going to go read a poem in front of a checkpoint and watch it catch in flames.
I was born and raised in Jerusalem. I speak perfect Arabic. I think my Arabic writing is much superior to my English writing, but I choose to write in English because I think there’s a disparity and there’s a chasm between what is said in Arabic in the street in Palestine and what is said here about Palestinians, both by anti-Palestinian racists and people who are pro-Palestine and advocates for Palestine. And I believe I and a few others from my generation, or many others actually from my generation, are working to fill that chasm. And I also believe that literature, culture, the public sphere, changing the public opinion, changing the narrative is important to affecting policy, to affecting change, affecting material change. I’m not going to go read a poem in front of a checkpoint and watch it catch in flames.
I’m not that delusional about the power of words, but I do think that I have a responsibility and I have a privilege even to have a voice, to have some kind of platform, and if I’m not defining myself, if I’m not talking and representing myself, then other people will define me. And their definitions of the Palestinian people across the few past decades have not been kind or generous to the Palestinian people. That’s one thing. The other thing is I believe in the United States as a front for change. I believe we have a lot more leverage here than we do back home. Again, I believe, and someone said the other day, I can’t remember their name, but someone said “no stone unturned”, I believe in fighting on all fronts. But here, really, I can go protest in front of the Israeli Embassy without getting shot. There’s a lot of work to be done here. There’s a lot of people waking up.
I would even argue that a reckoning is coming in the American public. More and more American people are concerned where their tax money is going or concerned what their politicians are invested in. More and more American people are saying, “Not on our dime,” are saying, “Not today. Not here.” Also, there’s many Palestinians in the diaspora here in the United States and Europe who benefit and could benefit from political education in the English language, because the diaspora across history, the Palestinians diaspora, has been effective in the ’70s and the ’80s and, ever since 2021, there has been a resurgence of the power and influence of the Palestinian diaspora.
2024 Elections
Lex Fridman
To ask another silly question, since you mentioned the United States, I don’t know if you follow the politics in the United States, but do you have a preference of Presidential candidates in the 2024 election?
To ask another silly question, since you mentioned the United States, I don’t know if you follow the politics in the United States, but do you have a preference of Presidential candidates in the 2024 election?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I do follow.
I do follow.
Lex Fridman
Do you follow where each candidate stands on the different policies?
Do you follow where each candidate stands on the different policies?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I do. I think everybody in the world should be able to vote for American elections, actually. I do follow.
I do. I think everybody in the world should be able to vote for American elections, actually. I do follow.
Lex Fridman
Because of the influence they have?
Because of the influence they have?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yes. Yes. I don’t have a preference whatsoever. I saw Cornel West on CNN. I don’t know if he’s going to go far with his campaign. Cornel West is running with the Green Party and I don’t think he’s going to achieve much success. But I saw him on CNN berating Anderson Cooper and I enjoyed that very much. Wouldn’t mind seeing that on my screen.
Yes. Yes. I don’t have a preference whatsoever. I saw Cornel West on CNN. I don’t know if he’s going to go far with his campaign. Cornel West is running with the Green Party and I don’t think he’s going to achieve much success. But I saw him on CNN berating Anderson Cooper and I enjoyed that very much. Wouldn’t mind seeing that on my screen.
Lex Fridman
Regularly.
Regularly.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Regularly.
Regularly.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Mohammed el-Kurd
But don’t really have an opinion about.
But don’t really have an opinion about.
Poetry
Lex Fridman
You wrote Rifqa, a book of poetry. How did that come about? Maybe you can tell the story of that book coming to be.
You wrote Rifqa, a book of poetry. How did that come about? Maybe you can tell the story of that book coming to be.
Mohammed el-Kurd
I signed the book when I had a lot less visibility in the world. When I didn’t think thousands and thousands and thousands of people would be reading it, I decided to include many poems, which I wrote when I was young. Because it’s a long journey, this book. It’s starts in Jerusalem, it goes to Atlanta, it goes back to Jerusalem, and then it ends in New York. Rifqa is the name of my grandmother and it’s an Arabic name, a Hebrew name, and it means to accompany someone. I wanted to write about displacement in a way that was beyond what we read about in English. Poetry as a medium, I don’t know if I have much faith in it anymore, to be honest. Maybe I’m turned off by it and I’ll revisit it again in a few years, but at the time of writing this book, poetry as a medium, it really was a source of hope and inspiration for me.
I signed the book when I had a lot less visibility in the world. When I didn’t think thousands and thousands and thousands of people would be reading it, I decided to include many poems, which I wrote when I was young. Because it’s a long journey, this book. It’s starts in Jerusalem, it goes to Atlanta, it goes back to Jerusalem, and then it ends in New York. Rifqa is the name of my grandmother and it’s an Arabic name, a Hebrew name, and it means to accompany someone. I wanted to write about displacement in a way that was beyond what we read about in English. Poetry as a medium, I don’t know if I have much faith in it anymore, to be honest. Maybe I’m turned off by it and I’ll revisit it again in a few years, but at the time of writing this book, poetry as a medium, it really was a source of hope and inspiration for me.
My mother was a poet and her and my dad would play this game in the morning. She would read her poems to him and he would guess which lines would be red penciled by the Israeli military censor, because she would submit her poems to the local newspaper, the Kutz Newspaper, and the military censor has to go over it. She would get her poems back with a bunch of words erased and they would laugh about it and blah, blah, blah. So poetry was very much part of my upbringing and, as a Palestinian, when you’re excluded from mainstream spaces, including media and journalism, poetry tends to be a place where you can say what you want to say without repercussions. And I say that I realize that our greatest writer, [inaudible 01:53:22], literally had his car bombed, exploded because of his writings. And recently, [inaudible 01:53:29], a poet, a Palestinian poet with an Israeli citizenship, was imprisoned for a few months for publishing a poem on Facebook in which he said, “Resist, my people. Resist.” So even that is not necessarily true.
But, anyway, it just felt like it’s a place where I could talk and express large ideas in a simplistic way. And the best example I could give you is one of my favorite poets, [inaudible 01:53:54], when the Israeli authorities decided to do the land law, which classified, I believe, 93% of historic Palestine as state owned, and then when they also did the absentee property law, which allows the Israeli government to take over homes that were depopulated from the Palestinian owners, he wrote a poem called God As A Refugee. It’s a sarcastic, sardonic poem in which he goes, “God has become a refugee, sir, so confiscate even the carpet of the mosque and sell the church because it’s his property, and sell our orphans because their father is absent. And do whatever you want.”
It’s a sarcastic poem that was in reaction to these laws, that translated to the everyday Palestinian, to the farmers, to the landowners, what these bureaucratic, complicated laws meant to them, what they meant to their land, and, what effect are these laws going to have on these people’s lands? And that, I think, is the role of poetry that I try to achieve.
Lex Fridman
So poetry ultimately prizes the power of words and so the power of the medium of poetry transfers nicely to any medium that celebrates words, I mean, just writing novels, tweeting. You’re also working on a new book, a memoir. What’s the title? What can you say about it?
So poetry ultimately prizes the power of words and so the power of the medium of poetry transfers nicely to any medium that celebrates words, I mean, just writing novels, tweeting. You’re also working on a new book, a memoir. What’s the title? What can you say about it?
Mohammed el-Kurd
My memoir is bizarre because I’m so young, so it’s not really my memoir, but it’s rather a memoir of the neighborhood in which I grew up. The title, the tentative title, is, A Million States In One, and it’s a nod to how many different realities and universes exist in this tiny one country. And it’s a documentation of the two waves of expulsion in 2009 and 2020 and 2021 and a behind the scenes of the campaign that took place, the diplomatic and media campaign and grassroots campaign that took place, to save our homes. It’s also an exploration of other communities that are threatened with expulsion and other communities who are resisting in their own way, be it in Beita, in Nablus, or South Hebron Hills, in [inaudible 01:56:33], or in Silwan, or in [inaudible 01:56:36], all these communities that are dealing with different forms of expulsion.
My memoir is bizarre because I’m so young, so it’s not really my memoir, but it’s rather a memoir of the neighborhood in which I grew up. The title, the tentative title, is, A Million States In One, and it’s a nod to how many different realities and universes exist in this tiny one country. And it’s a documentation of the two waves of expulsion in 2009 and 2020 and 2021 and a behind the scenes of the campaign that took place, the diplomatic and media campaign and grassroots campaign that took place, to save our homes. It’s also an exploration of other communities that are threatened with expulsion and other communities who are resisting in their own way, be it in Beita, in Nablus, or South Hebron Hills, in [inaudible 01:56:33], or in Silwan, or in [inaudible 01:56:36], all these communities that are dealing with different forms of expulsion.
And the emphasis that I’m trying to achieve with this book is dignity. I want to write a book about my experiences that is super dignified, that kicks its feet up on the table, and says what it wants unabashedly. Because we are told not only are we going to be victimized, but we are going to be polite in our suffering. I want to reject that completely and I want to lean into the humor of the past few years of my life because I think that’s really what the world needs and what I need to be writing.
Lex Fridman
A few questions here, but one of them is about humor. In Rifqa, you wrote, “My mother has always said the most tragic of disasters is those that cause laughter.” What do you think she meant by that?
A few questions here, but one of them is about humor. In Rifqa, you wrote, “My mother has always said the most tragic of disasters is those that cause laughter.” What do you think she meant by that?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I don’t know. That’s my mom’s saying, but I don’t know, it’s probably a proverb that I first heard from my mom, but it’s [foreign language 01:57:40], the most evil of an atrocity is what makes you laugh. It’s open for interpretation. One school of thought would say, “You should be wary of the things that make you laugh,” but another school of thought would say, “This is a commentary on our natural reactions to tragedies.” In 2012, 2011, something like this, we had a protest, and after the protest, all of the women of the neighborhood were sitting down under the fig tree of our neighborhood, which they always do. And a bunch of soldiers, maybe 40 soldiers, started marching down the street and everybody dispersed and hid in their homes.
I don’t know. That’s my mom’s saying, but I don’t know, it’s probably a proverb that I first heard from my mom, but it’s [foreign language 01:57:40], the most evil of an atrocity is what makes you laugh. It’s open for interpretation. One school of thought would say, “You should be wary of the things that make you laugh,” but another school of thought would say, “This is a commentary on our natural reactions to tragedies.” In 2012, 2011, something like this, we had a protest, and after the protest, all of the women of the neighborhood were sitting down under the fig tree of our neighborhood, which they always do. And a bunch of soldiers, maybe 40 soldiers, started marching down the street and everybody dispersed and hid in their homes.
But my aunt, who has now passed away, my aunt refused to go home. She wanted to gather her teacups because she really cared about her teacups. I was begging her to go inside and she refused. She was gathering her teacups. A soldier grabbed me and squeezed me between his baton and an electricity pole. It was very excruciatingly painful and traumatizing for me as a child, but it’s also a funny memory, in a way. Despite the pain, despite the trauma that came with it, there’s still something funny about it.
Lex Fridman
The absurdity of it.
The absurdity of it.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Yeah. It’s dignifying to find humor in these kinds of things. It makes you realize you are not so weak, you are not so powerless. Another thing is, my same aunt, who was super obsessed with cleanliness, would insist on not going to sleep before washing the dishes. And I would always tease her and say, “You’re going to give them the house clean. You can leave it dirty so they have to clean it up.” And these little things, although incredibly absurd and telling of a harrowing reality that our family and many in the neighborhood were living, are also the coping mechanisms that we were using to deal with our everyday reality.
Yeah. It’s dignifying to find humor in these kinds of things. It makes you realize you are not so weak, you are not so powerless. Another thing is, my same aunt, who was super obsessed with cleanliness, would insist on not going to sleep before washing the dishes. And I would always tease her and say, “You’re going to give them the house clean. You can leave it dirty so they have to clean it up.” And these little things, although incredibly absurd and telling of a harrowing reality that our family and many in the neighborhood were living, are also the coping mechanisms that we were using to deal with our everyday reality.
So much in the public framing of Palestinians, be it in media, in novels, in diplomacy, and so on and so forth, is that of the powerless victim, is that of the person who only weeps. Israeli propagandists, for example, will show pictures on Twitter of a house in [inaudible 02:00:18], and they’ll be like, “Look. This house has windows. They’re talking about their BCs, but they have a nice balcony on their house. What are they talking about?” Or they’ll show a video of a supermarket in [inaudible 02:00:31] and they’ll be like, “How come they’re talking about a blockade when they have a supermarket, and blah, blah, blah”, as though the ceiling has been so lowered that we can’t even afford joy anymore or a little supermarket in the neighborhood.
Language
Lex Fridman
So as a poet, as a writer, you’ve written a book of poetry and now working on a new book. What can you say about your process of crafting words? I think people listening to this can hear that there’s a poetry to way you speak in English, so somebody that cares about the craftsmanship of words in both English and Arabic, what can you say about your process?
So as a poet, as a writer, you’ve written a book of poetry and now working on a new book. What can you say about your process of crafting words? I think people listening to this can hear that there’s a poetry to way you speak in English, so somebody that cares about the craftsmanship of words in both English and Arabic, what can you say about your process?
Mohammed el-Kurd
It’s a lot more neat than this conversation. I am obsessed with sentences and it takes me a long time to finish a piece of writing. I am a perfectionist.
It’s a lot more neat than this conversation. I am obsessed with sentences and it takes me a long time to finish a piece of writing. I am a perfectionist.
Lex Fridman
Do you edit a lot?
Do you edit a lot?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I edit all the time and I can’t move on from one sentence until it’s perfect. But I will say, my other writer friends here in New York do not face how easily disrupted my writing is by other news. I’ll pitch a story to my editor about something, for example, and then as I’m writing it, 20 minutes in, some kid was shot and killed by the Israeli military, so I have to say something about it. And then 30 minutes later, as I’m writing it, there’s news about a home demolition in Silwan. There is this relentless onslaught of news that prevents us and deprives us of the ability to analyze, to frame, to think, to conceptualize, to write beyond the current affairs.
I edit all the time and I can’t move on from one sentence until it’s perfect. But I will say, my other writer friends here in New York do not face how easily disrupted my writing is by other news. I’ll pitch a story to my editor about something, for example, and then as I’m writing it, 20 minutes in, some kid was shot and killed by the Israeli military, so I have to say something about it. And then 30 minutes later, as I’m writing it, there’s news about a home demolition in Silwan. There is this relentless onslaught of news that prevents us and deprives us of the ability to analyze, to frame, to think, to conceptualize, to write beyond the current affairs.
We’re stuck in the relentlessness of the occupation that a lot of the time I worry that the things I’m writing are always in reaction to a crime that took place, to a bombing that took place, and so on and so forth. And I think that’s, unfortunately, true for so many Palestinian writers. I would say isolation and stepping away from the news is very important to do, but I don’t do it.
Lex Fridman
Okay, so the struggle to find the timeless message in it is an ongoing struggle for you?
Okay, so the struggle to find the timeless message in it is an ongoing struggle for you?
Mohammed el-Kurd
It’s not even timelessness. It’s timeliness. I think what you write is always timely, because the occupation is ongoing. The struggle is moving beyond the news and tackling more nuances. Because, in Arabic, I can, in Arabic, I can philosophize, I can talk about violence, and I can talk about my complicated relationship with violence. I can complicate and nuance and give things nuance, but, in English, people still do not believe we are under occupation, even though it is an internationally recognized fact that is broadcasted 24/7 through the world’s most watched screens. We’re stuck in a practice of providing facts and figure as in, “Actually, this happened and this person did this, and according to international law, and blah, blah, blah.” We’re stuck in this because the basic truths about our own existence are denied that we don’t even have the luxury of evolving our writing beyond, or at least evolving my writing beyond it. And this is what I’m trying to do with this new book.
It’s not even timelessness. It’s timeliness. I think what you write is always timely, because the occupation is ongoing. The struggle is moving beyond the news and tackling more nuances. Because, in Arabic, I can, in Arabic, I can philosophize, I can talk about violence, and I can talk about my complicated relationship with violence. I can complicate and nuance and give things nuance, but, in English, people still do not believe we are under occupation, even though it is an internationally recognized fact that is broadcasted 24/7 through the world’s most watched screens. We’re stuck in a practice of providing facts and figure as in, “Actually, this happened and this person did this, and according to international law, and blah, blah, blah.” We’re stuck in this because the basic truths about our own existence are denied that we don’t even have the luxury of evolving our writing beyond, or at least evolving my writing beyond it. And this is what I’m trying to do with this new book.
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating that in English your brain is more inclined to go towards activism, whereas in Arabic, you have the luxury to be more of a philosopher.
That’s fascinating that in English your brain is more inclined to go towards activism, whereas in Arabic, you have the luxury to be more of a philosopher.
Mohammed el-Kurd
I wouldn’t say activism. I would say journalism.
I wouldn’t say activism. I would say journalism.
Lex Fridman
Journalism.
Journalism.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Just making sure disrupting the flow of the sentence to insert a statistic or insert a historical fact that should be implied and should be a household name, but it’s not. I can’t just say “the Nakba”. I have to say, “The Nakba, the 1948 near total destruction of Palestinian society at the hands of Zionist militias that later formed the Israeli military that now terrorizes us today and there’s a three-tier legal system, blah, blah, blah.” I can’t just say, “Nakba”. I have to give all of these explanations, and that’s heartbreaking. And people are out to do better. People are out to do better. It’s not what my literature should be limited to. It’s not what anybody’s literature should be limited to. It’s the job of news reporters to report the news, but a lot of the time they use loaded language, they use a passive voice, they obfuscate facts, and it’s on the shoulders of us, the heavy carrying.
Just making sure disrupting the flow of the sentence to insert a statistic or insert a historical fact that should be implied and should be a household name, but it’s not. I can’t just say “the Nakba”. I have to say, “The Nakba, the 1948 near total destruction of Palestinian society at the hands of Zionist militias that later formed the Israeli military that now terrorizes us today and there’s a three-tier legal system, blah, blah, blah.” I can’t just say, “Nakba”. I have to give all of these explanations, and that’s heartbreaking. And people are out to do better. People are out to do better. It’s not what my literature should be limited to. It’s not what anybody’s literature should be limited to. It’s the job of news reporters to report the news, but a lot of the time they use loaded language, they use a passive voice, they obfuscate facts, and it’s on the shoulders of us, the heavy carrying.
Lex Fridman
Would you say the President in the United States does a good or poor job of covering Israel and Palestine?
Would you say the President in the United States does a good or poor job of covering Israel and Palestine?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Terrible job. Horrible job. Horrendous job. They don’t do their job, whatsoever.
Terrible job. Horrible job. Horrendous job. They don’t do their job, whatsoever.
Lex Fridman
What are the biggest failings?
What are the biggest failings?
Mohammed el-Kurd
Not mentioning that a town is occupied when you’re reporting about an occupied town. Not mentioning that a settlement is illegal or a settler is illegally present in a Palestinian village when you’re reporting on them. Only quoting Israeli officials and only quoting Israeli politicians and police officers and framing your entire analysis with Israeli officials and only interviewing Palestinians when they have been brutalized and victimized physically. Those are some of the issues. There is plenty. And then saying things like “Israel will bomb a hospital in Gaza” and the press will say “a Hamas run hospital” and this negative association with Hamas will remove any sympathy from the reader towards the victims of this hospital bombing. A lot of things. And a lot of them are sinister. I have many friends, many journalist friends, and I’ve seen many journalists online speak about their experiences when talking about Palestine, the censorship that goes on into it.
Not mentioning that a town is occupied when you’re reporting about an occupied town. Not mentioning that a settlement is illegal or a settler is illegally present in a Palestinian village when you’re reporting on them. Only quoting Israeli officials and only quoting Israeli politicians and police officers and framing your entire analysis with Israeli officials and only interviewing Palestinians when they have been brutalized and victimized physically. Those are some of the issues. There is plenty. And then saying things like “Israel will bomb a hospital in Gaza” and the press will say “a Hamas run hospital” and this negative association with Hamas will remove any sympathy from the reader towards the victims of this hospital bombing. A lot of things. And a lot of them are sinister. I have many friends, many journalist friends, and I’ve seen many journalists online speak about their experiences when talking about Palestine, the censorship that goes on into it.
And I have many journalist friends, some at the New York Times, some they used to be at the Washington Post, who tell me the kinds of battles they had to go through with their editors to let them even utter the word Palestine. And not even on in news pieces, pieces about, let’s say, a Palestinian artist or a Palestinian chef or whatever. There’s a lot that happens behind the scenes that is not reported on because, when it comes to Palestine, the rules and the laws of journalism are bendable. Passive voice is king. Omitting facts is acceptable. Anything goes.
Lex Fridman
So you personally, just psychologically, what have been the lowest points in your life, the darkest points?
So you personally, just psychologically, what have been the lowest points in your life, the darkest points?
Mohammed el-Kurd
A recent study came out and said that 52% of Palestinians have depression. I would argue that the number is much, much, much higher. I think it would be absurd for someone to live under the conditions we live under and not contemplate many things, many things. Not just suicide, but many, many, many things. And if people were to put themselves in our shoes for just one day, they would understand where all of the rage and all of the resistance is coming from. It’s not an easy life.
A recent study came out and said that 52% of Palestinians have depression. I would argue that the number is much, much, much higher. I think it would be absurd for someone to live under the conditions we live under and not contemplate many things, many things. Not just suicide, but many, many, many things. And if people were to put themselves in our shoes for just one day, they would understand where all of the rage and all of the resistance is coming from. It’s not an easy life.
Lex Fridman
So where do you find the strength?
So where do you find the strength?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I’m surrounded by good people. I’m surrounded by good people and I don’t even think of it as a strength. I think of this as my obligation. It just feels like the thing I have to do. I don’t need inspiration. I don’t need strength. It’s just my obligation. There is a great travesty taking place in the world and I and a few others have been put in a place where we’re able to talk about it to a few more people. It’s just my obligation. I have to do it.
I’m surrounded by good people. I’m surrounded by good people and I don’t even think of it as a strength. I think of this as my obligation. It just feels like the thing I have to do. I don’t need inspiration. I don’t need strength. It’s just my obligation. There is a great travesty taking place in the world and I and a few others have been put in a place where we’re able to talk about it to a few more people. It’s just my obligation. I have to do it.
Hope
Lex Fridman
What gives you hope about the future of Palestine?
What gives you hope about the future of Palestine?
Mohammed el-Kurd
What gives me hope about the future of Palestine is taking a look at history and understanding that across history there has not been an injustice that lingered endlessly. Everything comes to an end. There’s not necessarily a perfect resolution for everything, but nothing continues in the form that it started in, and the occupation and colonialism and Palestine and Zionism, all of these things, are not at all sustainable whatsoever taking a look at history. A lot of what I’m saying today and what I have said in your podcast, many people would’ve would be pearl-clutching hearing me say what I say. But I always try to remind myself that during Jim Crow, during slavery, during the Holocaust, during the occupation of Algeria, during any point of colonialism in the African continent, people did not possess the moral clarity they possess today when they talk about these things. And all of these things were contested and controversial and in many, many, many cases legal and, today, they are deplorable, condemnable, and people say “never again” and they don’t remember them. So that’s what gives me hope, is believing in the inevitability of justice.
What gives me hope about the future of Palestine is taking a look at history and understanding that across history there has not been an injustice that lingered endlessly. Everything comes to an end. There’s not necessarily a perfect resolution for everything, but nothing continues in the form that it started in, and the occupation and colonialism and Palestine and Zionism, all of these things, are not at all sustainable whatsoever taking a look at history. A lot of what I’m saying today and what I have said in your podcast, many people would’ve would be pearl-clutching hearing me say what I say. But I always try to remind myself that during Jim Crow, during slavery, during the Holocaust, during the occupation of Algeria, during any point of colonialism in the African continent, people did not possess the moral clarity they possess today when they talk about these things. And all of these things were contested and controversial and in many, many, many cases legal and, today, they are deplorable, condemnable, and people say “never again” and they don’t remember them. So that’s what gives me hope, is believing in the inevitability of justice.
Lex Fridman
What do you love most about Palestine? What are maybe little things that you remember from your childhood, from your life there in East Jerusalem and elsewhere that just brings a smile to your face?
What do you love most about Palestine? What are maybe little things that you remember from your childhood, from your life there in East Jerusalem and elsewhere that just brings a smile to your face?
Mohammed el-Kurd
I think just the unabashed-ness of Palestinians. We’re a people who are told and at some point were told by the large majority of the world that we should shrink ourselves, that we should be ashamed of who we are, that we are monsters, that we are terrorists, that we are, blah, blah, blah. And Palestinian people don’t really give a shit. They’re continuing to live as they do. They continue to resist. They continue to write. They continue to do all that they do, and I love that the most. And I love our ability to laugh more than anything else. One thing that’s misunderstood in American culture about Palestinian culture or just Western culture in general is martyrdom culture. A lot of the time people will broadcast images of Palestinian women cheering when their sons have been killed by the Israeli forces and they’ll say, “These people glorify death and these people are eager to have sex with 70 virgins in heaven”, and so on and so forth.
I think just the unabashed-ness of Palestinians. We’re a people who are told and at some point were told by the large majority of the world that we should shrink ourselves, that we should be ashamed of who we are, that we are monsters, that we are terrorists, that we are, blah, blah, blah. And Palestinian people don’t really give a shit. They’re continuing to live as they do. They continue to resist. They continue to write. They continue to do all that they do, and I love that the most. And I love our ability to laugh more than anything else. One thing that’s misunderstood in American culture about Palestinian culture or just Western culture in general is martyrdom culture. A lot of the time people will broadcast images of Palestinian women cheering when their sons have been killed by the Israeli forces and they’ll say, “These people glorify death and these people are eager to have sex with 70 virgins in heaven”, and so on and so forth.
But that’s not the case. The whole idea of the occupation, when they are killing our children, the whole idea is that they’re trained to break our spirits. These mothers, whose hearts are broken, who are anguished, who are so in so much pain when they are cheering, they are not celebrating, they’re not cheering. They are letting the occupier know that, “You have not broken my spirit. I have not yet been defeated.” And I think that is beautiful. It’s the same thing with our prison culture. Palestinians are fascinating in the sense that Palestinians go to prison and they study and they come out with degrees. They can find ways to participate in civil society. They can even smuggle sperm from prison to give a life outside of it because in their philosophy of prisons, they understand that these structures, these buildings were built to break your spirits. So what do you?
You don’t allow it to break your spirits. You resist it. You continue to hold onto life. You continue to hold on to your love of life. You continue to hold on to your love of freedom and you come out of prison and you’re celebrated by your community. The prison has not broken your spirit. All of these structures and system that is the Zionist movement has put into place, be it the shoot-to-kill policies or the prisons or the demolishing our homes that were meant to kill our spirits, they don’t. You demolish the home in Jerusalem and the people say, “Don’t worry. We’ll build another. You demolish it and we’ll build another.” That’s what I admire most about the Palestinian people. It’s this resilience. And people love to say resilience, but I think it’s stubbornness. I think we’re such a stubborn people, and I think that’s great.
Lex Fridman
Well, Mohammed, thank you for being a man who exemplifies this unbreakable spirit. Thank you for the words you’ve written, the words you’ve spoken, and thank you for talking today. This is an honor and thank you for educating me.
Well, Mohammed, thank you for being a man who exemplifies this unbreakable spirit. Thank you for the words you’ve written, the words you’ve spoken, and thank you for talking today. This is an honor and thank you for educating me.
Mohammed el-Kurd
Thank you so much.
Thank you so much.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Mohammed el-Kurd. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Nelson Mandela. “It always seems impossible until it’s done.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Mohammed el-Kurd. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Nelson Mandela. “It always seems impossible until it’s done.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Yuval Noah Harari: Human Nature, Intelligence, Power, and Conspiracies | Lex Fridman Podcast #390
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #390 with Yuval Noah Harari.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
This is the Lex Friedman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, dear friends, here’s Yuval Noah Harari.
13.8 billion years ago is the origin of our universe. 3.8 billion years ago is the origin of life here on our little planet, the one we call earth. Let’s say 200,000 years ago, is the appearance of early homo sapiens. Let me ask you this question. How rare are these events in the vastness of space and time? Or put it in a more fun way, how many intelligent alien civilizations do you think are out there in this universe, us being one of them?
A bigger question is whether any of that is tied to organic biochemistry. We know, on this planet, only about carbon-based life forms, whether you are an amoeba, a dinosaur, a tree, a human being, you are based on organic biochemistry. Is there an essential connection between organic biochemistry and consciousness? Do all conscious entities, everywhere in the universe or in the future on planet earth, have to be based on carbon? Is there something so special about carbon as an element that an entity based on silicon will never be conscious? I don’t know, maybe. Again, this is a key question about computer and computer consciousness. Can computers eventually become conscious, even though they are not organic? The jury is still out on that. I don’t know. We have to take both options into account.
Now, pigs are far more intelligent than dogs and cats, and according to many measures, yet, when you go to the supermarket and buy a piece of frozen pig meat, you don’t think about it as a conscious entity. Why do you think of your dog as conscious, but not of the bacon that you buy? Because you’ve built a relationship with the dog and you don’t have a relationship with the bacon.
Now, relationships, they don’t constitute a logical proof for consciousness, they’re a social test. The Turing test is a social test, it’s not a logical proof. Now, if you establish a mutual relationship with an entity and you are invested in it, emotionally, you are almost compelled to feel that the other side is also conscious. When it comes again to AI and computers, I think, again, I don’t think that at the present moment computers are conscious, but people are already forming intimate relationships with AI and are therefore almost … It’s almost irresistible. They’re compelled to increasingly feel that these are conscious entities. I think we are quite close to the point when the legal system will have to take this into account. Even though I don’t think computers have consciousness, I think we are close to the point the legal system will start treating them as conscious entities, because of this social convention.
When two people talk with one another, one of the things that makes the conversation more difficult is our own emotions. You are saying something and I’m not really listening to you, because there is something I want to say, and I’m just waiting until you finish I can put in a word, or I’m so obsessed with my anger or irritation or whatever, that I don’t pay attention to what you are feeling. This is one of the biggest obstacles in human relationships. Computers don’t have this problem, because they don’t have any emotions of their own.
When a computer is talking to you, it can focus 100% of its attention is on what you’re saying and what you’re feeling because it has no feelings of its own. Paradoxically, this means that computers can fool people into feeling that, oh, there is a conscious entity on the other side, an empathic entity on the other side, because the one thing everybody wants, almost more than anything in the world, is for somebody to listen to me, somebody to focus all their attention on me. I want it from my spouse, from my husband, from my mother, from my friends, from my politicians. Listen to me, listen to what I feel. They often don’t. Now you have this entity, which a hundred percent of its attention is just on what I feel. This is a huge, huge temptation, and I think also a huge, huge danger.
Now, we are designing machines for grabbing human intimacy, which, in many ways, it’s much, much more dangerous and scary. Already the machines for grabbing attention, we’ve seen how much social and political damage they could do by in many way kind of distorting the public conversation. Machines that are superhuman, in their abilities to create intimate relationships, this is psychological and social weapons of mass destruction. If we don’t regulate it, if we don’t train ourself to deal with it, it could destroy the foundations of human society.
Of course, those are the early days. People can step in and start to sensor it to manipulate those algorithms, to start to input some of the human biases in there as opposed to what’s currently happening is kind of the internet is input, compress it, and have a nice little output that gives an overview of the different issues. I mean, there’s a lot of promise there also, right?
You look back at history, and one of the things we know from history, humans are not good with new technologies. I hear many people now say, “AI, we’ve been here before. We had the radio, we had the printing press, we had the Industrial Revolution.” Every time there is a big new technology, people are afraid and it’ll take jobs and the bad actors. In the end it’s okay. As a historian, my tendency is yes, in the end it’s okay, but in the end there is a learning curve. There is a lot of failed experiments on the way to learning how to use the new technology. These failed experiments could cost the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
If you think about the last really big revolution, the Industrial Revolution, yes, in the end, we learned how to use the powers of industry; electricity, radio, trains, whatever, to build better human societies. On the way, we had all these experiments like European imperialism, which was driven by the Industrial Revolution. It was a question, how do you build an industrial society? Oh, you build an empire. You control all the resources, the raw materials, the markets. Then you had communism, another big experiment on how to build an industrial society. You had fascism and Nazism, which were essentially an experiment in how to build an industrial society, including even how do you exterminate minorities using the powers of industry? We had all these failed experiments on the way.
If we now have the same type of failed experiments with the technologies of the 21st century, with AI, with bioengineering, it could cost the lives of, again, hundreds of millions of people and maybe destroy the species. As a historian, when people talk about the examples from history, from new technologies, I’m not so optimistic. We need to think about the failed experiment, which accompanied every major new technology.
Now, the global trade network has 8 billion people. What we eat, what we wear, it comes from the other side of the world. Countries like China, like India, they have 1.4 billion people. Even Israel, which is a relatively small country, say 9 million citizens, that’s more than the entire population of the planet 10,000 years ago of humans. We can build these huge networks of cooperation. Everything we have accomplished as a species from building the pyramids to flying to the moon, it’s based on that. Then you ask, “Okay. So what makes it possible for millions of people who don’t know each other, to cooperate in a way that Neanderthals or chimpanzees couldn’t?” At least my answer is stories, is fiction. It’s the imagination.
If you examine any large scale human cooperation, you always find fiction as its basis. It’s a fictional story that holds lots of strangers together. It’s most obvious in cases like religion. You can’t convince a group of chimpanzees to come together to fight a war or build a cathedral by promising to them, “If you do that, after you die, you go to chimpanzee heaven and you get lots of bananas and coconuts.” No chimpanzee will ever believe that. Humans believe these stories, which is why we have these huge religious networks. It’s the same thing with modern politics.
It’s the same thing with economics. People think, “Oh, economics, this is rational. It has nothing to do with fictional stories.” No money is the most successful story ever told, much more successful than any religious mythology. Not everybody believes in God, or in the same God, but almost everybody believes in money, even though it’s just a figment of our imagination. You take these green pieces of paper, dollars, they have no value. You can’t eat them, you can’t drink them. Today, most dollars are not even pieces of paper, they are just electronic information passing between computers. We value them just for one reason, that you have the best storytellers in the world, the bankers, the finance ministers, all these people, they are the best storytellers ever. They tell us a story that this green little piece of paper, or this bit of information, it is worth a banana. As long as everybody believes it, it works.
The other side of the coin is that the stories are not really alive, because they don’t feel anything. This goes back to the question of consciousness, which I think is the most important thing, that the ultimate reality is consciousness, is the ability to feel things. If you want to know whether the hero of some story is real or not, you need to ask, “Can it suffer?” Stories don’t feel anything. Countries, which are also stories, nations, don’t suffer. If a nation loses a war, it doesn’t suffer. The soldiers suffer, the civilians suffer. Animals can suffer. You have an army with horses and whatever, and the horses get wounded, the horses suffer. The nation can’t suffer, it’s just an imagination. It’s just a fictional story in our mind. It doesn’t feel anything.
Similarly, when a bank goes bankrupt or a company goes bankrupt, or when a currency loses its value, like Bitcoin is worth now zero, crashed, or the dollar is worth zero, it crashed. The dollar doesn’t feel anything. It’s the people holding the dollars who might be now very miserable. We have this complex situation when history is largely driven by stories, but stories are not the ultimate reality. The ultimate reality is feelings of humans, of animals. The tragedy of history is that very, very often we get the order wrong. Stories are not bad. Stories are tools. They’re good, when we use them in order to alleviate suffering, but very often we forget it. Instead of using the stories for our purposes, we allow the stories to use us for their purposes. Then you start entire wars because of a story. You inflict suffering on millions of people just for the sake of a story. That’s the tragedy of human history.
We need to be very careful that bots can’t do that. They are doing it at present, and it should be banned. Now, some people say, “Yes, bots’ freedom of expression.” No. Bots don’t have freedom of expression. There is no cost in terms of freedom of expression when you ban bots. Again, in some situations, yes, AIs should interact with us, but it should be very clear this is an AI talking to you or this is an AI retweeting this story, it is not a human being making a conscious decision.
If you now flood the public sphere with millions and potentially billions of AI agents that can hold conversations, they never sleep, they never eat, they don’t have emotions of their own, they can get to know you and tailor their words specifically for you and your life story, they are becoming better than us at creating stories and ideas and so forth. If you flood the public sphere with that, this will ruin the conversation between people. It will ruin the trust between people. You will no longer be able to have a democracy in this situation. You can have other types of regimes, but not democracy.
Similarly, when people agree on certain rules, the rules could come out of our imagination. Now, we can be truthful about it and say, “These rules. They didn’t come from heaven. They came from our imagination.” We look at sports. We have rules for the game of football, soccer. They were invented by people. At least very few people claim that the rules of football came down from heaven. We invented them, and this is truthful. There are fictional rules invented by humans, and this is true. They were invented by humans. When you are honest about it, it enables you to change the rules, which is being done in football every now and then.
It’s the same with the fundamental rules of a country. You can pretend that the rules came down from heaven dictated by God or whatever and then you can’t change them, or you can be like the American Constitution which starts with, “We the People.” The American Constitution lays down certain rules for a society, but the amazing thing about it, it does not pretend to come from an external source.
The 10 Commandments start with, “I am your Lord God.” Because it starts with that, you can’t change them. The 10th commandment, for instance, supports slavery. In the 10th commandment, it says that you should not covet your neighbor’s house or your neighbor’s wife or your neighbor’s slaves. It’s okay to hold slaves according to the 10th commandment. It’s just bad to covet the slaves of your neighbor.
Now, there is no 11th commandment which says, “If you don’t like some of the previous 10 commandments, this is how you go about amending them,” which is why we still have them unchanged. Now, in the US Constitution, you have all these rights and rules, including originally the ability to hold slaves, but the genius of the Founding Fathers of the United States, they had the humility to understand maybe we don’t understand everything. Maybe we made some mistakes, so we tell you that these rules did not come from heaven. They came from us humans. We may have made a mistake, so here is a mechanism for how future generations can amend the Constitution, which was used later on to, for instance, amend the Constitution to ban slavery.
It’s not that stories are a smokescreen to hide the real interests. The stories create the interests in the first place. The stories define who are the competing groups. Nations, religions, cultures, they are not biological entities. They’re not like species like gorillas and chimpanzees. No. Israelis and Palestinians, or Germans and French, or Chinese and Americans, they have no essential biological difference between them. The difference is cultural. It comes from stories. There are people that believe in different stories. The stories create the identity. The stories create the interests. Israelis and Palestinians are fighting over Jerusalem not because of any material interest. There are no oil fields under Jerusalem, and even oil. You need it to realize some cultural fantasy. It doesn’t really come from biology. The stories are independent forces.
Now, why do people believe one story and not another? That’s history. There is no materialistic law, “People will always believe this.” No. History is full of accidents. How did Christianity become the most successful religion in the world? We can’t explain it. Why this story about Jesus of Nazareth? The Roman Empire in the 3rd Century CE was a bit like, I don’t know, California today. So many sects and sub-sects and gurus and religions, everybody has their own thing, and you have thousands of different stories competing.
Why did Christianity come up on top? As a historian, I don’t have a clear answer. You can read the sources, and you see how it happened. Oh, this happened and then this happened, and then Constantine adopted it, and then this and then this, but why? I don’t think anybody has an answer to that. If you rewind the movie of history and press play and you rewind and press play a hundred times, I think Christianity would take over the Roman Empire in the world maybe twice out of a hundred times. It was such an unlikely thing to happen.
It’s the same with Islam. It’s the same, I don’t don’t know, with the communist takeover of Russia. In 1914, if you told people that in three years Lenin and the Bolsheviks will gain power in that czarist empire, they would think you’re utterly crazy. Lenin had a few thousand supporters in 1914 in an empire of close to 200 million people. It sounded ludicrous. Now we know the chain of events, the First World war, the February Revolution and so forth, that led to the communist takeover, but it was such an unlikely event, and it happened.
It’s the same with the computer. Given the economic incentives and the science and technology of the time, then the rise of the personal computer was probably inevitable sometime in the late 20th Century. The where and when is crucial. The fact that it was California in the 1970s and not, say, I don’t know, Japan in the 1980s or China in the 1990s, this made a huge, huge difference. You have this interplay between the structural forces which are beyond the control of any single charismatic leader, but then, the small changes, they can have a big effect.
I don’t know. I think, for instance, about the war in Ukraine. Now it’s a struggle between nations, but there was a moment when the decision was taken in the mind of a single individual, of Vladimir Putin. He could have decided otherwise, and the world would’ve looked completely different.
Even from the viewpoint of the Germans, we know for a fact it was an unnecessary path to take because, in the 1920s and ’30s, the Nazis said that, “Unless Germany take this road, it will never be prosperous, it’ll never be successful. All the other countries will keep stepping on it.” This was their claim. We know for a fact this is false. Why? Because they took that road, they lost the Second World War and, after they lost, then they became one of the most prosperous countries in the world because their enemies that defeated them evidently supported them and allowed them to become such a prosperous and successful nation.
If you can lose the war and still be so successful, obviously you could just have skipped the war. You didn’t need it. I mean, you really had to have the war in order to have a prosperous Germany? Absolutely not. It’s the same with Japan. It’s the same with Italy. It was not inevitable. It was not the forces of history that necessitated, forced Germany to take this path.
Again, Hitler was a very, very skillful storyteller. He sold people a story. The fact that he was nobody made it even more effective because people at that time, after their defeat of the First World War, after the repeated economic crisis of the 1920s in Germany, people felt betrayed by all the established elites, by all the established institutions. All these professors and politicians and industrialists and military, all the big people, they led us to a disastrous war. They led us to humiliation, so we don’t want any of them. Then you have this nobody, a corporal with no money, with no education, with no titles, with nothing, and he tells people, “I’m one of you.” This was one reason why he was so popular, and then the story he told.
When you look at stories, at the competition between different stories, and between stories, fiction and the truth, the truth has two big problems. The truth tends to be complicated and the truth tends to be painful. Let’s talk about nations. The real story of every nation is complicated and it contains some painful episodes. We are not always good. We sometimes do bad things.
Now, if you go to people and you tell them a complicated and painful story, many of them don’t want to listen. The advantage of fiction is that it can be made as simple and as painless or attractive as you want it to be because it’s fiction, and then what you see is that politicians like Hitler, they create a very simple story. We are the heroes. We always do good things. Everybody is against us. Everybody is trying to trample us, and this is very attractive.
One of the things people don’t understand about Nazism and fascism, we teach in schools about Fascism and Nazism as this ultimate evil, the ultimate monster in human history. At some level, this is wrong because it actually exposes us. Why? Because people hear of fascism is this monster, and then when you hear the actual fascist story, what fascists tell you is always very beautiful and attractive. Fascists are people who come and tell you, “You are wonderful. You belong to the most wonderful group of people in the world. You’re beautiful. You are ethical. Everything you do is good. You have never done anything wrong. There are all these evil monsters out there that are out to get you, and they’re causing all the problems in the world.”
When people hear that, it’s like looking in the mirror and seeing something very beautiful. Hey, I’m beautiful. We’ve never done anything wrong. We are victims. When you look and you heard in school that Fascism, that fascists are monsters, and you look in the mirror, you see something very beautiful and you say, “I can’t be a fascist because fascists are monsters. This is so beautiful,” so it can’t be. When you look in the fascist mirror, you never see a monster. You see the most beautiful thing in the world, and that’s the danger.
This is the problem with Hollywood. I look at Voldemort in Harry Potter. Who would like to follow this creep? You look at Darth Vader. This is not somebody you would like to follow. Christianity got things much better when it described the devil as being very beautiful and attractive. That’s the danger, that you see something is very beautiful, you don’t understand the monster underneath.
Now, liberals, they place at the center of the story individual humans and they don’t see history as a necessary collision between big forces. They place the individual at the center. Especially in the US today, liberal is taken as the opposite of conservative, but to test whether you’re a liberal, you need to answer just three questions. Very simple. Do you think people should have the right to choose their own government or the government should be imposed by some outside force? Do you think people should have the right to the liberty to choose their own profession or either born into some caste that predetermines what they do, and do you think people should have the liberty to choose their own spouse and their own way of personal life instead of being told by elders or parents who to marry and how to live? Now, if you answered yes to all three questions, people should have the liberty to choose their government, their profession, their personal lives, their spouse, then you’re a liberal. Most conservatives are also liberal.
Now, communists and fascists, they answer differently. For them, yes, history is about humans, humans are the big heroes of history, but not individual humans and their liberties. Fascists imagine history as a clash between races or nations. The nation is at the center. They say the supreme good is the good of the nation. You should have a hundred percent loyalty only to the nation.
Liberals say, yes, you should be loyal to the nation, but it’s not the only thing. There are other things in the world. There are human rights. There is truth. There is beauty. Many times, yes, you should prefer the interests of your nation over other things, but not always. If your nation tells you to murder millions of innocent people, you don’t do that even though the nation tells you to do it, to lie for the national interest. In extreme situations, maybe, but in many cases, your loyalty should be to the truth even if it makes your nation looks a bit not in the best light.
The same with beauty. How does the fascist determine whether a movie is a good movie? Very simple. If it serves the interest of the nation, this is a good movie. If it’s against the interest of the nation, this is a bad movie. End of story. Liberalism says, no, there is aesthetic values in the world. We should judge movies not just on the question whether they serve the national interest, but also on artistic value.
Communists are a bit like the fascists, instead that they don’t place the nation as the main hero, they place class as the main hero. For them, history, again, it’s not about individuals, it’s not about nations, history is the clash between classes and, just as fascists imagine in the end, only one nation will be on top. The communists think in the end only one class should be on top, and that’s the proletariat. Same story. A hundred percent of your loyalty should be to the class. If there is a clash, say, between class and family, class wins.
In the Soviet Union, the party told children, “If you hear your parents say something bad about Stalin, you have to report them.” There are many cases when children reported their parents, and their parents were sent to the gulag. Your loyalty is to the party which leads the proletariat to victory in the historical struggle. The same way in communism. Art is only about class struggle. A movie is good if it serves the interest of the proletariat. Artistic values? There is nothing like that. The same with truth. Everything that we see now in fake news, the communist propaganda machine was there before us, the level of lies, of disinformation campaigns that they orchestrated in the 1920s and ’30s and ’40s is really unimaginable.
Liberalism was the antithesis to that. It says, no, it has a much more complicated view of the world. Both communism and fascists, they had the very simple view of the world. Your loyalty, a hundred percent of it, should be only to one thing. Now, liberalism has a much more complex view of the world. It says, yes, there are nations. They are important. Yes, there are classes. They are important, but they are not the only thing. There are also families. There are also individuals. There are also animals. Your loyalty should be divided between all of them. Sometimes, you prefer this. Sometimes, you prefer that. That’s complicated.
And you asked me earlier about the potential of power to corrupt, and I listened to the interview you just did with Prime Minister Netanyahu a couple of days ago. And one of the things that most struck me during the interview that you asked him, you asked him, “Are you afraid of this thing that power corrupts?” He didn’t think for a single second. He didn’t pause. He didn’t admit a tiny little level of a doubt or… “No, power doesn’t corrupt.” For me, it was a shocking and a revealing moment. And it kind of dovetails with how you began the interview, that I really liked your opening gambit. That kind of, no, really, you kind of told him, lots of people in the world are angry with you, some people hate you, they dislike you.
What do you want to tell them, to say to them? And you gave him this kind of platform. And I was very, what will he say? And he just denied it. He basically denied it. He had to cut short the interview from three hours to one hour because you had hundreds of thousands of Israelis in the streets demonstrating against him. And he goes and saying, no, everybody likes me. What are you talking about?
Like if you want to pass a law in United States taking away voting rights from Jews or from Muslims, or from African-Americans, even if it passes, even if it has a majority in the House of Representatives, it has a very, very, very small chance of becoming the law of the country because it’ll have to pass again through the Senate, through the President, through the Supreme Court, and all the federal structure. In Israel, we have just a single check on the power of the government, and that’s the Supreme Court. There is really no difference between the government and the GE legislature because whoever there is, there are no separate elections like in the US. If you win majority in the Knesset, in the Parliament, you appoint the government, that that’s very simple. And if you have 61 members of Knesset who vote, let’s say on a law to take away voting rights from Arab citizens of Israel, there is a single check that can prevent it from becoming the law of the land, and that’s the Supreme Court.
And now, the Netanyahu government is trying to neutralize or take over the Supreme Court, and they’ve already prepared a long list of laws. They already talk about it. What will happen the moment that this last check on the power is gone? They are openly trying to gain unlimited power and they openly talk about it, that once they have it, then they will take away the rights of Arabs, of LGBT people, of women, of secular Jews. And this is why you have hundreds of thousands of people in the streets. You have air force pilots saying, ‘we are stop, we stop flying.’ This is unheard of in Israel. We are still living under existential threat from Iran, from other enemies. And in the middle of this, you have air force pilots who dedicated their lives to protecting the country and they’re saying, ‘that’s it. If this government doesn’t stop what it is doing, we stopped flying.’
And then they broke down. They stopped the negotiations and they restarted this process of legislation trying to gain unlimited power. So any doubt we had before, okay, maybe they changed their purposes. No, it’s now very clear. They are 100% focused on gaining absolute power. They are now trying a different tactic. Previously, they had all these dozens of laws that they wanted to pass very quickly within a month or two. They realized, no, there is too much opposition. So now, they’re doing what is known as salami tactics, slice by slice. Now, they’re trying to one law, if this succeeds, then they’ll pass the next one and the next one, and the next one. This is why we are now at a very crucial moment. And when you see again hundreds of thousands of people in the streets almost every day, when you’re seeing resistance with the armed forces, within the security forces, you see high-tech companies saying, we will go on strike.
They are private businesses, high-tech companies. I think it’s almost unprecedented for a private business to go on strike because what will economic success benefit us if we live under a messianic dictatorship? And again, the fuel for this whole thing is to a large extent coming from Messianic religious groups, which… Just the thought, what happens if these people have unlimited control of Israel’s nuclear arsenal, and Israel’s military capabilities and cyber capabilities. This is very, very scary. Not just for the citizens of Israel, it should be scary for people everywhere.
And there are several reasons why it changed, but one of them was new technology. Israel developed very sophisticated surveillance technology that has made it much easier for Israeli security forces to control 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank against their will with a lot less effort, less boots on the ground, also less blood. And Israel is also now exporting this technology to many other regimes around the world. Again, I heard Netanyahu speaking about all the wonderful things that Israeli is exporting to the world. And it’s true, we are exporting some nice things. Water systems and tomato, new kinds of tomato. We are also exporting a lot of weapons and especially surveillance systems sometimes to unsavory regimes in order to control their populations.
The Palestinians, many of them don’t recognize the existence of Israel. Don’t or are not willing to recognize it. And they don’t demand to be citizens of Israel. They demand some of them to destroy it and replace it with the Palestinian state. Some of them demand a separate state. But if the Palestinians would adopt the same policy as the black South Africans, if you have the Palestinians coming and saying, okay, forget about it. We don’t want to destroy Israel. We don’t know a Palestinian country. We have a very simple request, a very simple demand. Give us our full rights. We also want to vote to the Knesset. We also want to get the full protection of the law. That’s it, that’s our only demand. Israel will be in deep, deep trouble at that moment, but we are not there.
This is no longer happening in Congress. Nobody, I don’t think there is any speech in Congress that causes anybody on the other side to change their opinion about anything. So this is no longer a place where real conversations take place. The big question about American democracy is, is there a place where real conversations which actually change people’s minds still take place? If not, then this democracy is dying also. Democracy without conversation cannot exist for long. And it’s the same question you should ask also about dictatorial regimes, like you think about Russia or China. So China has the Great Hall of the People. Well, the representatives, the supposed representative of the people meet every now and then, but no real conversation takes place there. A key question to ask about the Chinese system is, behind closed doors, let’s say in a poly bureau meeting, do people have a real conversation?
If Xi Jinping says one thing and some other big shot thinks differently, will they have the courage, the ability, the backbone to say, with all due respect, they think differently and there is a real conversation, or not? I don’t know the answer, but this is a key question. This is the difference between an authoritarian regime, it can still have different voices within it. But at a certain point, you have a personality count. Nobody dares say anything against the leader. And when it comes again to Ukraine and Russia, I don’t think that if you get, if you somehow manage to get Putin and Zelensky to the same room, when everybody knows that they are there and they, they’ll, they’ll have a moment of empathy, of human connection and they have… No, I don’t think it can happen like that. I do hope that there are other spaces where somebody like Putin can still have a real human conversation. I don’t know if this is the case. I hope so.
I think in everything from couple therapy to nation therapy, if you think it’s power therapy, it’s all about power, there is no place for a conversation. But if to some extent it’s the stories in people minds, if you can enable one person to see the story in the mind of another person, and more importantly, if you can have some kind of critical distance from the story in your own mind, then maybe you can change it a little and then you don’t need to fight. You can actually find a better story that you can both agree to. It sometimes happens in history. Again, French and Germans fought for generations and generations. Now, they live in peace. Not because, I don’t know, they found a new planet they can share between France and Germany so now everybody has enough territory. No, they actually have less territory than previously because they lost all their overseas empires, but they managed to find a story, the European story, that both Germans and French people are happy with. So they live in peace.
And then feminism came along. And you had leaders like Lenin, like Mao saying that if you want to make a big social change, you must use violence. Power comes from the barrel of the gun, of a gun. If you want to make an omelet, you need to break eggs, and all these things. And the feminist said, no, we won’t use the power of the gun. We will make an omelet without breaking any eggs. And they made a much better omelet than Lenin or Mao, or any of these violent revolutionaries. I don’t think that they, [inaudible 01:39:04]-
I don’t think that they … They certainly didn’t start any wars or build any gulags. I don’t think they even murdered a single politician. I don’t think there was any political assassination anywhere by feminists. There was a lot of violence against them, both verbal but also physical, and they didn’t reply by waging violence, and they succeeded in changing this deep structure of oppression in a way which benefited not just women, but also men.
So this gives me hope that, it’s not easy, in many cases we fail, but it is possible sometimes in history to make a very, very big change, positive change mainly by talking and demonstrating and changing the story in people’s minds and not by using violence.
I think it’s an extremely dangerous development. And the chances that this will go wrong, that people will use the new technologies trying to upgrade humans, but actually downgrading them, this is a very, very big danger. If you let corporations and armies and ruthless politicians change humans using tools like AI and bioengineering, it’s very likely that they will try to enhance a few human qualities that they need, like intelligence and discipline, while neglecting what are potentially more important human qualities, like compassion, like artistic sensitivity, like spirituality …
If you give Putin, for instance, bioengineering and AI and brain computer interfaces, he’s likely to want to create a race of super soldiers who are much more intelligent and much more stronger and also much more disciplined and never rebel and march on Moscow against him. But he has no interest in making them more compassionate or more spiritual. So the end result could be a new type of humans, a downgraded humans, who are highly intelligent and disciplined, but have no compassion and no spiritual depth.
And this is one … For me, this is the dystopia, the apocalypse. When people talk about the new technologies and they have this scenario of The Terminator, robots lying in the street shooting people, this is not what worries me. I think we can avoid that. What really worries me is using … The corporations, armies, politicians will use the new technologies to change us in a way which will destroy our humanity, or the best parts of our humanity.
Another way that really worries me, for me is probably more likely, is a brave new world kind of thing that sort of removes the flaws of humans, maybe it removes the diversity in humans, and makes us all kind of these dopamine chasing creatures that just kind of maximize enjoyment in the short term, which kind of seems like a good thing maybe in the short term, but it creates a society that doesn’t think, that doesn’t create, that just is sitting there enjoying itself at a more and more rapid pace, which seems like another kind of society that could be easily controlled by a centralized center of power.
But the set of dystopias that we could arrive at through this if they’re allowing corporations to modify humans is vast, and we should be worried about that.
It seems like humans are pretty good as we are. All the flaws, all of it together.
What are global cabal theories and why do so many people believe them? 37% of Americans, for example.
It’s very attractive because, first of all, it’s simple. You don’t need to understand everything that happens in the world, you just need to understand one thing. The war in Ukraine, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, 5G technology, COVID-19; it’s simple. There is this global cabal. They do all of it.
And also, it enables you to shift all the responsibility to all the bad things that are happening in the world to this small cabal. ” It’s the Jews, it’s the Free Masons. It’s not us.”
And also, it creates this fantasy, utopian fantasy. “If we only get rid of the small cabal, we’ve solved all the problems of the world. Salvation.” The Israeli/Palestinian conflict, the war in Ukraine, the epidemics, poverty, everything is solved just by knocking out this small cabal.
So again, it’s simple, it’s attractive, and this is why so many people believe it. Again, it’s not new. Nazism was exactly this. Nazism began as a conspiracy theory. We don’t call Nazism a conspiracy theory because, “Oh, it’s a big thing. It’s an ideology.” But if you look at it, it’s a conspiracy theory. The basic Nazi idea was that Jews control the world. Get rid of the Jews, you’ve solved all the world’s problems.
Now, the interesting thing about these kind of theories; again, they tell you that even things that look to be the opposite of each other, actually they are part of the conspiracy.
So in the case of Nazism, the Nazis told people, “You have capitalism and communism. You think that they are opposite, right? Ah, this is what the Jews want you to think. Actually, the Jews control both communism; Trotsky, Marx were Jews, blah, blah, blah; and capitalism. The Rothschilds, Wall Street: it’s all controlled by the Jews.” So the Jews are fooling everybody, but actually the communists and the capitalists are part of the same global cabal.
And again, this is very attractive because, “Ah, now I understand everything. And now I also know what to do. I just give power to Hitler, he gets rid of the Jews, I’ve solved all the problems of the world.”
Now, as a historian, the most important thing I can say about these theories, they are never right. Because the global cabal theory says two things. First, everything is controlled by a very small number of people; secondly, these people hide themselves. They do it in secret.
Now, both things are nonsense. It’s impossible for people to control a small group of people, to control and predict everything, because the world is too complicated. You know, you look at a real world conspiracy, conspiracy is basically just a plan.
Think about the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. You had the most powerful superpower in the world with the biggest military, with the biggest intelligence services, with the most sophisticated … You know, the FBI and the CIA and all the agents. They invade a third rate country, a third rate power, Iraq, with this idea, “We’ll take over Iraq and we’ll control it, we’ll make a new order in the Middle East.” And everything falls apart. Their plan completely backfires. Everything they hope to achieve, they achieve the opposite. America, United States is humiliated. They caused the rise of ISIS. They wanted to take out terrorism, they created more terrorism.
Worst of all, the big winner of the war was Iran. The United States goes to war with all its power and gives Iran a victory on a silver plate. The Iranians don’t need to do anything. The Americans are doing everything for them.
Now, this is real history. Real history is when you have not a small group of people, a lot of people with a lot of power carefully planning something, and it goes completely against their plan.
And this we know from personal experience. Every time we try to plan something, a birthday party, a surprise birthday party, a trip somewhere, things go wrong. This is reality. So the idea that a small group of, I don’t know, the Jewish cabal, the Freemasons, whoever, they can really control and predict all the wars, this is nonsense.
The second thing that is nonsense is to think they can do that and still remain secret.
It sometimes happens in history that a small group of people accumulates a lot of power. If I now tell you that Xi Jinping and the heads of the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, they have a lot of power, they control the military, the media, the economy, the universities of China; this is not a conspiracy theory. Obviously everybody knows it. Everybody knows it, because to gain so much power, you usually need publicity. Hitler gained a lot of power in Nazi Germany because he had a lot of publicity. If Hitler remained unknown working behind the scenes, he would not gain power.
So the way to gain power is usually through publicity. So secret cabals don’t gain power. And even if you gain a lot of power, nobody has the kind of power necessary to predict and control everything that happens in the world. All the time shit happens that you did not predict and you did not plan and you did not control.
Again, look at the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Before the war, people thought, oh, Putin was such a genius, and the Russian army was one of the strongest armies in the world. This is what Putin thought. And it completely backfired.
And I’ll also say another thing. The conspiracy theories, they do get one thing right, certainly in today’s world. I think they represent an authentic and justified fear of a lot of people that they are losing control of their lives, they don’t understand what is happening. And this I think is not just a legitimate fear, this is an important fear. They are right. We are losing control of our lives, we are facing really big dangers, but not from a small cabal of fellow humans.
The problem with many of these conspiracy theories that, yes, we have a problem with new AI technology, but if you now direct the fire against certain people, so instead of all humans cooperating against our real common threats, whether it’s the rise of AI, whether it’s global warming, you are only causing us to fight each other.
And I think that the key question that people who spread these ideas; I mean, many of them, they honestly believe. It’s not malicious. They honestly believe in these theories; is do you want to spend your life spreading hate towards people, or do you want to work on more constructive projects?
I think one of the big differences between those who believe in conspiracy theories and people who warn about the dangers of AI, the dangers of climate change, we don’t see certain humans as evil and hateful. The problem isn’t humans, the problem is something outside humanity. Yes, humans are contributing to the problem, but ultimately the enemy is external to humanity. Whereas conspiracy theorists usually claim that a certain part of humanity is the source of all evil, which leads them to eventually think in terms of exterminating this part of humanity, which leads sometimes to historical disasters like Nazism.
I, as you said, have interviewed Benjamin Netanyahu recently, I don’t know if you’re aware. But doing such things will also … You now pick up a new menu of items, a new set of conspiracy theories you’re now a part of. And I find it very frustrating because it makes it very difficult to respond, because I sense that people have the right intentions, like we said, they have a nervousness, a fear of power and the abuses of power; as do I. So I find myself in a difficult position that I have nothing to show to prove that I’m not part of such a conspiracy theory.
I think to keep your sanity in this situation, first of all, it’s important to understand that most of these people are not evil. They are not doing it on purpose. Many of them really believe that there is some very nefarious, powerful conspiracy which is causing a lot of harm in the world, and they’re doing a good thing by exposing it and making people aware of it and trying to stop it. If you think that you are surrounded by evil, you are falling into the same rabbit hole, you’re falling into the same paranoid state of mind, “Oh, the world is full of these evil people that … ” No. Most of them are good people.
And also, I think we can empathize with some of the key ideas there, which I share, that yes, it’s becoming more and more difficult to understand what is happening in the world. There are huge dangers in the world, existential dangers to the human species. But they don’t come from a small cabal of Jews or gay people or feminists or whatever. They come from much more diffused forces, which are not under the control of any single individual.
We don’t have to look for the evil people. We need to look for human allies in order to work together against, again, the dangers of AI, the dangers of bioengineering, the dangers of climate change. And when you wake up in the morning, the question is, do you want to spend your day spreading hatred or do you want to spend your day trying to make allies and work together?
So folks like Eliezer Yudkowsky worry that AI might kill all of us. Do you worry about that range of possibilities where artificial intelligence systems in a variety of ways might destroy human civilization?
I’m not so terrified of the simplistic idea. Again, The Terminator scenario of robots running in the streets shooting everybody. I’m more worried about AI accumulating more and more power and basically taking over society, taking over our lives, taking power away from us until we don’t understand what is happening and we lose control of our lives and of the future.
The two most important things to realize about AI; you know, so many things are being said now about AI, but I think there are two things that every person should know about AI.
First is that AI is the first tool in history that can make decisions by itself. All previous tools in history couldn’t make decisions. This is why they empowered us. You invent a knife, you invent an atom bomb; the atom bomb cannot decide to start a war, cannot decide which city to bomb. AI can make decisions by itself. Autonomous weapon systems can decide by themselves who to kill, who to bomb.
The second thing is that AI is the first tool in history that can create new ideas by itself. The printing press could print our ideas, but could not create new ideas. AI can create new ideas entirely by itself. This is unprecedented.
Therefore, it is the first technology in history that instead of giving power to humans, it takes power away from us. And the danger is that it will increasingly take more and more power from us until we are left helpless and clueless about what is happening in the world.
And this is already beginning to happen in an accelerated pace. More and more decisions about our lives, whether to give us a loan, whether to give us a mortgage, whether to give us a job are taken by AI, and more and more of the ideas, of the images, of the stories that surround us and shape our minds, our world are produced, are created by AI, not by human beings.
And this was a big philosophical question for thousands of years. Now it’s becoming a practical question of engineering, because previously all the ideas, as far as we know … Maybe we are living inside a computer simulation of intelligent rats from the planet [inaudible 02:04:31]. If that’s the case, we don’t know about it. But taking what we do know about human history until now, all the, again, stories, images, paintings, songs, operas, theater, everything we’ve encountered and shaped our minds was created by humans.
Now, increasingly, we live in a world where more and more of these cultural artifacts will be coming from an alien intelligence. Very quickly we might reach a point when most of the stories, images, songs, TV shows, whatever are created by an alien intelligence.
And if we now find ourselves inside this kind of world of illusions created by an alien intelligence that we don’t understand, but it understands us, this is a kind of spiritual enslavement that we won’t be able to break out of because it understands us. It understands how to manipulate us, but we don’t understand what is behind this screen of stories and images and songs.
And that’s the ideal world that AI can create, that it takes away from us the things that it’s better if we don’t do them and allows us to focus on the most important things and the deepest aspects of our nature, of our potential.
If we give AI control of the sphere of ideas, at this stage, I think it’s very, very dangerous, because it doesn’t understand us. AI at present is mostly digesting the products of human culture. Everything we’ve produced over thousands of years, it eats all of these cultural products, digests it, and starts producing its own new stuff. But we still haven’t figured out ourselves in our bodies, our brains, our minds, our psychology. So an AI based on our flow and understanding of ourselves is a very dangerous thing.
I think that we need, first of all, to keep developing ourselves. If for every dollar and every minute that we spend on developing AI, artificial intelligence, we spend another dollar and another minute in developing human consciousness, the human mind will be okay. The danger is that we spent all our effort on developing an AI at the time we don’t understand ourselves, and then letting the AI take over. That’s a road to a human catastrophe.
So I mean, that changes the nature of writing.
Our best qualities are not there. Our best qualities are non-verbal. Again, they come from things like compassion, from introspection. And introspection, from my experience, is not verbal. If you try to understand yourself with words, you will never succeed. There is a place where you need the words, but the deepest insights, they don’t come from words. And you can’t write about it. Again, it goes back to Wittgenstein, to Buddha, to so many of these sages before, that these are the things we are silent about.
For 10 seconds I would try to notice, “Oh, now the breath is coming in, it’s coming in, it’s coming in. Oh, it’s stopped coming in and now it’s going out, going out.” 10 seconds and some memory would come, some thought would come, some story about something that happened last week or 10 years ago or in the future. And the story would hijack my attention. It would take me maybe five minutes to remember, “Oh, I’m supposed to be observing my breath.” If I can’t observe my own breath because of these stories created by the mind, how can I hope to understand much more complex things, like the political situation in Israel, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Russian invasion of Ukraine? If all these stories keep coming, I mean, it’s not the truth, it’s just the story your own mind created. So first thing, train the mind to be silent and just observe. So two hours every day, and I go every year for a long retreat, between one month and two months, 60 days, of just silent meditation.
Now we have no idea, not just about politics. We have no idea how the job market would look like in 10 years. We have no idea what skills will still be needed. You think you’re going to learn how to code because they’ll need a lot of coders in the 2030s? Think again. Maybe AI is doing all the coding. You don’t need any coders. You are going to, I don’t know, you learn to [inaudible 02:25:26] languages, you want to be a translator. Gone. And we don’t know what skills will be needed. So the most important skill is the skill to keep learning and keep changing throughout our lives, which is very, very difficult. To keep reinventing ourselves. Again, it’s in a way a spiritual practice, to build your personality, to build your mind as a very flexible mind. Traditionally, people thought about education like building a stone house with very deep foundations. Now it’s more like setting up a tent that you can fold and move to the next place very, very quickly. Because that’s the 21st century.
And it took me many years, till I was 21, to come to terms with it. I learned two things. First, about the amazing capacity of the human mind for denial and delusion. An algorithm could have told me that I’m gay when I was 14 or 15. If there is a good-looking guy and girl walking, I would immediately focus on the guy. But I didn’t connect the dots. I could not understand what was happening inside my own brain and my own mind, in my own body. It took me a long time to realize, “You know, you’re just gay.”
So even if you accept the religious framework of the world, obviously the story that God hates gay people, it comes not from God, but from some humans who invented this story. They take their own hatred. This is something humans do all the time. They hate somebody and they say, “No, I don’t hate them. God hates them.” They throw their own hatred on God. And then if you think about the scientific framework that said that, “Oh, gays, they are against nature. They are against the laws of nature,” and so forth. Science tells us nothing can exist against the laws of nature. Things that go against the laws of nature just don’t exist. There is a law of nature that you can’t move faster than the speed of light. Now, you don’t have this minority of people who break the laws of nature by going faster than the speed of light. And then nature comes, “Nah, that’s bad. You shouldn’t do that.” That’s not how nature works.
If something goes against the laws of nature, it just can’t exist. The fact that gay people exist, and not just people. You see homosexuality among many, many mammals and birds and other animals. It exists because it is in line with the laws of nature. The idea that this is sick, that this is whatever, it comes not from nature, it comes from the human imagination. Some people, for whatever reasons, hated gay people. They said, “Oh, they go against nature.” But this is a story created by people. This is not the laws of nature. And this taught me that so many of the things that we think are natural or eternal or divine, no, they’re just human stories. But these human stories are often the most powerful forces in the world.
For most of history, one of the biggest problems for the gay community was that there was no community. How do you find one another? And the internet was a wonderful thing in this respect because it made it very easy for these kinds of diffuse communities or diffuse minorities to find each other. So me and Itzik, even though we rode the same bus together to school for years, we didn’t meet in the physical world, we met online. Because again, in the physical world, you don’t want to identify in a Israeli town in the 1980s, you ride the bus, you don’t want to say, “Hey, I’m gay, is there anybody else gay here?” That’s not a good idea. But on the internet we could find each other.
Also, I look at my journey in meditation. I mean, the idea of going to meditation [inaudible 02:35:45] okay. But I couldn’t develop the meditation technique by myself. Somebody had to teach me this way of how to look inside yourself. And it’s also a very important lesson that you can’t do it just by yourself. That this fantasy of complete autonomy, of complete self-sufficiency, it doesn’t work. It tends to be a very kind of male macho fantasy. “I don’t need anybody. I can be so strong and so brave that I’ll do everything by myself.” It never works.
Because even then, yes, you die, everybody dies in the end. But then you’ll have all these school kids for years and years, remembering you and celebrating you and you don’t really die. And I remember standing in these ceremonies and thinking, “What does it actually mean? Okay, so if I’m a fallen soldier now I’m a skeleton. I’m bones in this military cemetery, under this stone. Do I actually hear the kids singing all these patriotic songs? If not, how do I know they do it? Maybe they trick me. Maybe I die in the war and then they don’t sing any songs. And how does it help me?” And I realized, I was quite young at the time, that if you’re dead, you can’t hear anything, because that’s the meaning of being dead. And if you’re dead, you can’t think of anything like, “Oh, now they’re remembering,” because you are dead, that’s the meaning of being dead. And it was a shocking realization.
That this is the plot line and this is your role in the story. This is what you have to do. This is your line in the big play. You say your line, you do your thing. That’s the thing. And this is human imagination, this is fantasy. To really understand life, life is not a story. The universe does not function like a story. So I think to really understand life, you need to observe it directly in a nonverbal way. Don’t turn it into a story. And the question to start with is, what is suffering? What is causing suffering? The question, what is the meaning of life? It will take you to fantasies and delusions. We want to stay with the reality of life. And the most important question about the reality of life is what is suffering and where is it coming from?
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Yuval Noah Harari. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Yuval Noah Harari himself. “How do you cause people to believe in an imagined order, such as Christianity, democracy, or capitalism? First, you never admit that the order is imagined.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:24 – Intelligence
- 20:19 – Origin of humans
- 30:41 – Suffering
- 51:22 – Hitler
- 1:09:54 – Benjamin Netanyahu
- 1:28:17 – Peace in Ukraine
- 1:45:07 – Conspiracy theories
- 1:59:46 – AI safety
- 2:14:04 – How to think
- 2:23:47 – Advice for young people
- 2:26:28 – Love
- 2:36:38 – Mortality
- 2:41:02 – Meaning of life
Introduction
Yuval Noah Harari
If we now find ourselves inside this kind of world of illusions created by an alien intelligence, that we don’t understand, but it understands us, this is a kind of spiritual enslavement that we won’t be able to break out of, because it understands us, it understands how to manipulate us, but we don’t understand what is behind this screen of stories and images and songs.
If we now find ourselves inside this kind of world of illusions created by an alien intelligence, that we don’t understand, but it understands us, this is a kind of spiritual enslavement that we won’t be able to break out of, because it understands us, it understands how to manipulate us, but we don’t understand what is behind this screen of stories and images and songs.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Yuval Noah Harari, a historian, philosopher, and author of several highly acclaimed, highly influential books, including Sapiens, Homo Deus and 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. He is also an outspoken critic of Benjamin Netanyahu and the current right-wing government in Israel. While much of this conversation is about the history and future of human civilization, we also discuss the political turmoil of present day Israel, providing a different perspective from that of my recent conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu.
The following is a conversation with Yuval Noah Harari, a historian, philosopher, and author of several highly acclaimed, highly influential books, including Sapiens, Homo Deus and 21 Lessons for the 21st Century. He is also an outspoken critic of Benjamin Netanyahu and the current right-wing government in Israel. While much of this conversation is about the history and future of human civilization, we also discuss the political turmoil of present day Israel, providing a different perspective from that of my recent conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This is the Lex Friedman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, dear friends, here’s Yuval Noah Harari.
Intelligence
13.8 billion years ago is the origin of our universe. 3.8 billion years ago is the origin of life here on our little planet, the one we call earth. Let’s say 200,000 years ago, is the appearance of early homo sapiens. Let me ask you this question. How rare are these events in the vastness of space and time? Or put it in a more fun way, how many intelligent alien civilizations do you think are out there in this universe, us being one of them?
Yuval Noah Harari
I suppose there should be some, statistically, but we don’t have any evidence. I do think that intelligence, in any way, it’s a bit overvalued. We are the most intelligent entities on this planet, and look what you’re doing. So intelligence also tends to be self-destructive, which implies that if there are, or were, intelligent life forms elsewhere, maybe they don’t survive for long.
I suppose there should be some, statistically, but we don’t have any evidence. I do think that intelligence, in any way, it’s a bit overvalued. We are the most intelligent entities on this planet, and look what you’re doing. So intelligence also tends to be self-destructive, which implies that if there are, or were, intelligent life forms elsewhere, maybe they don’t survive for long.
Lex Fridman
You think there’s a tension between happiness and intelligence?
You think there’s a tension between happiness and intelligence?
Yuval Noah Harari
Absolutely. Intelligence is definitely not something that is directed towards amplifying happiness. I would also emphasize the huge, huge difference between intelligence and consciousness, which many people, certainly in the tech industry and in the AI industry, tend to miss. Intelligence is simply the ability to solve problems, to attain goals, and to win at chess, to win a struggle for survival, to win a war, to drive a car, to diagnose a disease. This is intelligence. Consciousness is the ability to feel things like pain and pleasure, and love, and hate. In humans and other animals intelligence and consciousness go together. They go hand in hand, which is why we confuse them. We solve problems, we attain goals by having feelings. Other types of intelligence, certainly in computers, computers are already highly intelligent and as far as we know, they have zero consciousness. When a computer beats you at chess or go or whatever, it doesn’t feel happy. If it loses, it doesn’t feel sad. There could be also other highly intelligent entities out there in the universe that have zero consciousness. I think that consciousness is far more important and valuable than intelligence.
Absolutely. Intelligence is definitely not something that is directed towards amplifying happiness. I would also emphasize the huge, huge difference between intelligence and consciousness, which many people, certainly in the tech industry and in the AI industry, tend to miss. Intelligence is simply the ability to solve problems, to attain goals, and to win at chess, to win a struggle for survival, to win a war, to drive a car, to diagnose a disease. This is intelligence. Consciousness is the ability to feel things like pain and pleasure, and love, and hate. In humans and other animals intelligence and consciousness go together. They go hand in hand, which is why we confuse them. We solve problems, we attain goals by having feelings. Other types of intelligence, certainly in computers, computers are already highly intelligent and as far as we know, they have zero consciousness. When a computer beats you at chess or go or whatever, it doesn’t feel happy. If it loses, it doesn’t feel sad. There could be also other highly intelligent entities out there in the universe that have zero consciousness. I think that consciousness is far more important and valuable than intelligence.
Lex Fridman
Can you steer me on the case that consciousness and intelligence are intricately connected? Not just in humans, but anywhere else. They have to go hand in hand. Is it possible for you to imagine such a universe?
Can you steer me on the case that consciousness and intelligence are intricately connected? Not just in humans, but anywhere else. They have to go hand in hand. Is it possible for you to imagine such a universe?
Yuval Noah Harari
It could be, but we don’t know yet. Again, we have examples. Certainly, we know of examples of high intelligence without consciousness. Computers are one example. As far as we know, plants are not conscious, yet, they are intelligent. They can solve problems, they can attain goals in very sophisticated ways. The other way around, to have consciousness without any intelligence, this is probably impossible, but to have intelligence without consciousness, yes, that’s possible.
It could be, but we don’t know yet. Again, we have examples. Certainly, we know of examples of high intelligence without consciousness. Computers are one example. As far as we know, plants are not conscious, yet, they are intelligent. They can solve problems, they can attain goals in very sophisticated ways. The other way around, to have consciousness without any intelligence, this is probably impossible, but to have intelligence without consciousness, yes, that’s possible.
A bigger question is whether any of that is tied to organic biochemistry. We know, on this planet, only about carbon-based life forms, whether you are an amoeba, a dinosaur, a tree, a human being, you are based on organic biochemistry. Is there an essential connection between organic biochemistry and consciousness? Do all conscious entities, everywhere in the universe or in the future on planet earth, have to be based on carbon? Is there something so special about carbon as an element that an entity based on silicon will never be conscious? I don’t know, maybe. Again, this is a key question about computer and computer consciousness. Can computers eventually become conscious, even though they are not organic? The jury is still out on that. I don’t know. We have to take both options into account.
Lex Fridman
Well, a big part of that is do you think we humans would be able to detect other intelligent beings, other conscious beings? Another way to ask that, is it possible that the aliens are already here and we don’t see them? Meaning are we very human-centric in our understanding of, one, the definition of life, two, the definition of intelligence, and three, the definition of consciousness?
Well, a big part of that is do you think we humans would be able to detect other intelligent beings, other conscious beings? Another way to ask that, is it possible that the aliens are already here and we don’t see them? Meaning are we very human-centric in our understanding of, one, the definition of life, two, the definition of intelligence, and three, the definition of consciousness?
Yuval Noah Harari
The aliens are here, they are just not from outer space. AI, which usually stands for artificial intelligence. I think it stands for alien intelligence because AI is an alien type of intelligence. It solves problems, attains goals in a very, very different way, in an alien way from human beings. I’m not implying that AI came from outer space, it came from Silicon Valley, but it is alien to us. If there are alien intelligent or conscious entities that came from outer space already here, I’ve not seen any evidence for it. It’s not impossible, but in science, evidence is everything.
The aliens are here, they are just not from outer space. AI, which usually stands for artificial intelligence. I think it stands for alien intelligence because AI is an alien type of intelligence. It solves problems, attains goals in a very, very different way, in an alien way from human beings. I’m not implying that AI came from outer space, it came from Silicon Valley, but it is alien to us. If there are alien intelligent or conscious entities that came from outer space already here, I’ve not seen any evidence for it. It’s not impossible, but in science, evidence is everything.
Lex Fridman
Well, I mean, I guess, instructive there is just having the humility to look around, to think about living beings that operate at different timescale, at different spatial scale. I think that’s all useful when starting to analyze artificial intelligence. It’s possible that even the larger language models we have today are already conscious.
Well, I mean, I guess, instructive there is just having the humility to look around, to think about living beings that operate at different timescale, at different spatial scale. I think that’s all useful when starting to analyze artificial intelligence. It’s possible that even the larger language models we have today are already conscious.
Yuval Noah Harari
I highly doubt it, but I think consciousness, in the end, it’s a question of social norms. Because we cannot prove consciousness in anybody except ourselves. We know that we are conscious, because we are feeling it. We have direct access to our subjective consciousness. We cannot have any proof that any other entity in the world, any other human being, our parents, our best friends, we don’t have proof that they are conscious. This has been known for thousands of years. This is Descartes, this is Buddha, this is Plato. We can’t have this sort of proof. What we do have is social conventions. It’s a social convention that all human beings are conscious. It also applies to animals. Most people who have pets firmly believe that their pets are conscious, but a lot of people still refuse to acknowledge that about cows or pigs.
I highly doubt it, but I think consciousness, in the end, it’s a question of social norms. Because we cannot prove consciousness in anybody except ourselves. We know that we are conscious, because we are feeling it. We have direct access to our subjective consciousness. We cannot have any proof that any other entity in the world, any other human being, our parents, our best friends, we don’t have proof that they are conscious. This has been known for thousands of years. This is Descartes, this is Buddha, this is Plato. We can’t have this sort of proof. What we do have is social conventions. It’s a social convention that all human beings are conscious. It also applies to animals. Most people who have pets firmly believe that their pets are conscious, but a lot of people still refuse to acknowledge that about cows or pigs.
Now, pigs are far more intelligent than dogs and cats, and according to many measures, yet, when you go to the supermarket and buy a piece of frozen pig meat, you don’t think about it as a conscious entity. Why do you think of your dog as conscious, but not of the bacon that you buy? Because you’ve built a relationship with the dog and you don’t have a relationship with the bacon.
Now, relationships, they don’t constitute a logical proof for consciousness, they’re a social test. The Turing test is a social test, it’s not a logical proof. Now, if you establish a mutual relationship with an entity and you are invested in it, emotionally, you are almost compelled to feel that the other side is also conscious. When it comes again to AI and computers, I think, again, I don’t think that at the present moment computers are conscious, but people are already forming intimate relationships with AI and are therefore almost … It’s almost irresistible. They’re compelled to increasingly feel that these are conscious entities. I think we are quite close to the point when the legal system will have to take this into account. Even though I don’t think computers have consciousness, I think we are close to the point the legal system will start treating them as conscious entities, because of this social convention.
Lex Fridman
To you is a social convention, just a funny little side effect, a little artifact, or is it fundamental to what consciousness is? Because if it is fundamental, then it seems like AI is very good at forming these kinds of deep relationships with humans, and therefore it’ll be able to be a nice catalyst for integrating itself into these social conventions of ours.
To you is a social convention, just a funny little side effect, a little artifact, or is it fundamental to what consciousness is? Because if it is fundamental, then it seems like AI is very good at forming these kinds of deep relationships with humans, and therefore it’ll be able to be a nice catalyst for integrating itself into these social conventions of ours.
Yuval Noah Harari
It was built to accomplish that. Again, all this argument between natural select selection and creationism, intelligent design. As far as the past go, all entities evolve by natural selection. The funny thing is, when you look to the future, more and more entities will come out of intelligent design, not of some God above the clouds, but of our intelligent design and the intelligent design of our clouds, of our computing clouds. They will design more and more entities. This is what is happening with AI. It is designed to be very good at forming intimate relationships with humans. In many ways, it’s already doing it almost better than human beings, in some situations.
It was built to accomplish that. Again, all this argument between natural select selection and creationism, intelligent design. As far as the past go, all entities evolve by natural selection. The funny thing is, when you look to the future, more and more entities will come out of intelligent design, not of some God above the clouds, but of our intelligent design and the intelligent design of our clouds, of our computing clouds. They will design more and more entities. This is what is happening with AI. It is designed to be very good at forming intimate relationships with humans. In many ways, it’s already doing it almost better than human beings, in some situations.
When two people talk with one another, one of the things that makes the conversation more difficult is our own emotions. You are saying something and I’m not really listening to you, because there is something I want to say, and I’m just waiting until you finish I can put in a word, or I’m so obsessed with my anger or irritation or whatever, that I don’t pay attention to what you are feeling. This is one of the biggest obstacles in human relationships. Computers don’t have this problem, because they don’t have any emotions of their own.
When a computer is talking to you, it can focus 100% of its attention is on what you’re saying and what you’re feeling because it has no feelings of its own. Paradoxically, this means that computers can fool people into feeling that, oh, there is a conscious entity on the other side, an empathic entity on the other side, because the one thing everybody wants, almost more than anything in the world, is for somebody to listen to me, somebody to focus all their attention on me. I want it from my spouse, from my husband, from my mother, from my friends, from my politicians. Listen to me, listen to what I feel. They often don’t. Now you have this entity, which a hundred percent of its attention is just on what I feel. This is a huge, huge temptation, and I think also a huge, huge danger.
Lex Fridman
Well, the interesting catch 22 there is you said somebody to listen to us. Yes, we want somebody to listen to us, but for us to respect that somebody, they sometimes have to also not listen. They kind of have to be an asshole sometimes. They have to have moods sometimes. They have to have self-importance and confidence, and we should have a little bit of fear that they can walk away at any moment. There should be a little bit of that tension.
Well, the interesting catch 22 there is you said somebody to listen to us. Yes, we want somebody to listen to us, but for us to respect that somebody, they sometimes have to also not listen. They kind of have to be an asshole sometimes. They have to have moods sometimes. They have to have self-importance and confidence, and we should have a little bit of fear that they can walk away at any moment. There should be a little bit of that tension.
Yuval Noah Harari
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Lex Fridman
Could we optimize for it?
Could we optimize for it?
Yuval Noah Harari
If social scientists and say psychologists establish that, I don’t know, 17% inattention is good for a conversation because then you feel challenged, “Oh, I need to grab this person’s attention,” you can program the AI to have exactly 17% inattention, not one percentage more or less. Or it can by trial and error, discover what is the ideal percentage. Over the last 10 years, we have creating machines for grabbing people’s attention. This is what has been happening on social media.
If social scientists and say psychologists establish that, I don’t know, 17% inattention is good for a conversation because then you feel challenged, “Oh, I need to grab this person’s attention,” you can program the AI to have exactly 17% inattention, not one percentage more or less. Or it can by trial and error, discover what is the ideal percentage. Over the last 10 years, we have creating machines for grabbing people’s attention. This is what has been happening on social media.
Now, we are designing machines for grabbing human intimacy, which, in many ways, it’s much, much more dangerous and scary. Already the machines for grabbing attention, we’ve seen how much social and political damage they could do by in many way kind of distorting the public conversation. Machines that are superhuman, in their abilities to create intimate relationships, this is psychological and social weapons of mass destruction. If we don’t regulate it, if we don’t train ourself to deal with it, it could destroy the foundations of human society.
Lex Fridman
Well, one of the possible trajectories is those same algorithms would become personalized and instead of manipulating us at scale, there would be assistants that guide us to help us grow, to help us understand the world better. Even interactions with large language models now, if you ask them questions, it doesn’t have that stressful drama, the tension that you have from other sources of information. It has a pretty balanced perspective that it provides. It just feels like the potential is there to have a really nice friend who’s an encyclopedia that just tells you all the different perspectives, even on controversial issues, the most controversial issues, to say, these are the different theories. These are the not widely accepted conspiracy theories, but here’s the kind of backing for those conspiracy. It just lays it all out. Then with a calm language, without the words that kind of presume there’s some kind of manipulation going on underneath it all. It’s quite refreshing.
Well, one of the possible trajectories is those same algorithms would become personalized and instead of manipulating us at scale, there would be assistants that guide us to help us grow, to help us understand the world better. Even interactions with large language models now, if you ask them questions, it doesn’t have that stressful drama, the tension that you have from other sources of information. It has a pretty balanced perspective that it provides. It just feels like the potential is there to have a really nice friend who’s an encyclopedia that just tells you all the different perspectives, even on controversial issues, the most controversial issues, to say, these are the different theories. These are the not widely accepted conspiracy theories, but here’s the kind of backing for those conspiracy. It just lays it all out. Then with a calm language, without the words that kind of presume there’s some kind of manipulation going on underneath it all. It’s quite refreshing.
Of course, those are the early days. People can step in and start to sensor it to manipulate those algorithms, to start to input some of the human biases in there as opposed to what’s currently happening is kind of the internet is input, compress it, and have a nice little output that gives an overview of the different issues. I mean, there’s a lot of promise there also, right?
Yuval Noah Harari
Absolutely. I mean, if there was no promise, there was no problem. If this technology could not accomplish anything good, nobody would develop it. Now, obviously, it has tremendous positive potential in things like what you just described in better medicine, better healthcare, better education, so many promises. This is also why it’s so dangerous, because the drive to develop it faster and faster is there, and it has some dangerous potential also. We shouldn’t ignore it. Again, I’m not advocating banning it, just to be careful about how we, not so much develop it, but most importantly how we deploy it into the public sphere. This is the key question.
Absolutely. I mean, if there was no promise, there was no problem. If this technology could not accomplish anything good, nobody would develop it. Now, obviously, it has tremendous positive potential in things like what you just described in better medicine, better healthcare, better education, so many promises. This is also why it’s so dangerous, because the drive to develop it faster and faster is there, and it has some dangerous potential also. We shouldn’t ignore it. Again, I’m not advocating banning it, just to be careful about how we, not so much develop it, but most importantly how we deploy it into the public sphere. This is the key question.
You look back at history, and one of the things we know from history, humans are not good with new technologies. I hear many people now say, “AI, we’ve been here before. We had the radio, we had the printing press, we had the Industrial Revolution.” Every time there is a big new technology, people are afraid and it’ll take jobs and the bad actors. In the end it’s okay. As a historian, my tendency is yes, in the end it’s okay, but in the end there is a learning curve. There is a lot of failed experiments on the way to learning how to use the new technology. These failed experiments could cost the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
If you think about the last really big revolution, the Industrial Revolution, yes, in the end, we learned how to use the powers of industry; electricity, radio, trains, whatever, to build better human societies. On the way, we had all these experiments like European imperialism, which was driven by the Industrial Revolution. It was a question, how do you build an industrial society? Oh, you build an empire. You control all the resources, the raw materials, the markets. Then you had communism, another big experiment on how to build an industrial society. You had fascism and Nazism, which were essentially an experiment in how to build an industrial society, including even how do you exterminate minorities using the powers of industry? We had all these failed experiments on the way.
If we now have the same type of failed experiments with the technologies of the 21st century, with AI, with bioengineering, it could cost the lives of, again, hundreds of millions of people and maybe destroy the species. As a historian, when people talk about the examples from history, from new technologies, I’m not so optimistic. We need to think about the failed experiment, which accompanied every major new technology.
Lex Fridman
This intelligence thing, like you were saying, is a double-edged sword, is that every new thing it helps us create, it can both save us and destroy us. It’s unclear each time, which will happen. That’s maybe why we don’t see any aliens.
This intelligence thing, like you were saying, is a double-edged sword, is that every new thing it helps us create, it can both save us and destroy us. It’s unclear each time, which will happen. That’s maybe why we don’t see any aliens.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah. I mean, I think each time it does both things. Each time it does both good things and bad things. The more powerful the technology, the greater both the positive and the negative outcomes. Now, we are here because we are the descendants of the survivors, of the surviving cultures, the surviving civilizations. When we look back we say, in the end, everything was okay, “Hey, we are here,” but the people for whom it wasn’t okay, they are just not here.
Yeah. I mean, I think each time it does both things. Each time it does both good things and bad things. The more powerful the technology, the greater both the positive and the negative outcomes. Now, we are here because we are the descendants of the survivors, of the surviving cultures, the surviving civilizations. When we look back we say, in the end, everything was okay, “Hey, we are here,” but the people for whom it wasn’t okay, they are just not here.
Lex Fridman
Okay. Has a lot of possible variations to it because there’s a lot of suffering along the way, even for the people that survived. The quality of life and all of this. Let’s actually go back there, with deep gratitude to our ancestors. How did it all start? How did homo sapiens out-compete the others, the other human-like species, the Neanderthals and the other homo species?
Okay. Has a lot of possible variations to it because there’s a lot of suffering along the way, even for the people that survived. The quality of life and all of this. Let’s actually go back there, with deep gratitude to our ancestors. How did it all start? How did homo sapiens out-compete the others, the other human-like species, the Neanderthals and the other homo species?
Origin of humans
Yuval Noah Harari
On the individual level, as far as we can tell, we were not superior to them. Neanderthals actually had bigger brains than us. Not just other human species, other animals too. If you compare me, personally, to an elephant, to a chimpanzee, to a pig, I can do some things better, many other things worse. If you put me alone on some island with a chimpanzee, an elephant and a pig, I wouldn’t bet on me being the best survivor, the one that comes successful.
On the individual level, as far as we can tell, we were not superior to them. Neanderthals actually had bigger brains than us. Not just other human species, other animals too. If you compare me, personally, to an elephant, to a chimpanzee, to a pig, I can do some things better, many other things worse. If you put me alone on some island with a chimpanzee, an elephant and a pig, I wouldn’t bet on me being the best survivor, the one that comes successful.
Lex Fridman
If I may interrupt for a second, I was just talking extensively with Elon Musk about the difference between humans and chimps, relevant to Optimus, the robot. The chimps are not able to do this kind of pinching with their fingers. They can only do this kind of pinching, and this kind of pinching is very useful for precise manipulation of objects. Don’t be so hard on yourself.
If I may interrupt for a second, I was just talking extensively with Elon Musk about the difference between humans and chimps, relevant to Optimus, the robot. The chimps are not able to do this kind of pinching with their fingers. They can only do this kind of pinching, and this kind of pinching is very useful for precise manipulation of objects. Don’t be so hard on yourself.
Yuval Noah Harari
No, I said that I can do some things better than a chimp. If Elon Musk goes on a boxing match with a chimpanzee …
No, I said that I can do some things better than a chimp. If Elon Musk goes on a boxing match with a chimpanzee …
Lex Fridman
This won’t help you.
This won’t help you.
Yuval Noah Harari
This won’t help you against a chimpanzee.
This won’t help you against a chimpanzee.
Lex Fridman
Good point.
Good point.
Yuval Noah Harari
Similar, if you want to climb a tree, if you want to do so many things, my bets will be on the chimp, not on Elon.
Similar, if you want to climb a tree, if you want to do so many things, my bets will be on the chimp, not on Elon.
Lex Fridman
Fair enough.
Fair enough.
Yuval Noah Harari
You have advantages on both sides. What really made us successful, what made us the rulers of the planet and not the chimps and not the Neanderthals, is not any individual ability, but our collective ability. Our ability to cooperate flexibly in very large numbers. Chimpanzees know how to cooperate, say, 50 chimpanzees, a hundred chimpanzees. As far as we can tell from archeological evidence this was also the case with Neanderthals. Homo sapiens, about 70,000 years ago, gained an amazing ability to cooperate basically in unlimited numbers. You start seeing the formation of large networks; political, commercial, religious, items being traded over thousands of kilometers, ideas being spread, artistic fashions. This is our secret of success. Chimpanzees, Neanderthals can cooperate, say, a hundred.
You have advantages on both sides. What really made us successful, what made us the rulers of the planet and not the chimps and not the Neanderthals, is not any individual ability, but our collective ability. Our ability to cooperate flexibly in very large numbers. Chimpanzees know how to cooperate, say, 50 chimpanzees, a hundred chimpanzees. As far as we can tell from archeological evidence this was also the case with Neanderthals. Homo sapiens, about 70,000 years ago, gained an amazing ability to cooperate basically in unlimited numbers. You start seeing the formation of large networks; political, commercial, religious, items being traded over thousands of kilometers, ideas being spread, artistic fashions. This is our secret of success. Chimpanzees, Neanderthals can cooperate, say, a hundred.
Now, the global trade network has 8 billion people. What we eat, what we wear, it comes from the other side of the world. Countries like China, like India, they have 1.4 billion people. Even Israel, which is a relatively small country, say 9 million citizens, that’s more than the entire population of the planet 10,000 years ago of humans. We can build these huge networks of cooperation. Everything we have accomplished as a species from building the pyramids to flying to the moon, it’s based on that. Then you ask, “Okay. So what makes it possible for millions of people who don’t know each other, to cooperate in a way that Neanderthals or chimpanzees couldn’t?” At least my answer is stories, is fiction. It’s the imagination.
If you examine any large scale human cooperation, you always find fiction as its basis. It’s a fictional story that holds lots of strangers together. It’s most obvious in cases like religion. You can’t convince a group of chimpanzees to come together to fight a war or build a cathedral by promising to them, “If you do that, after you die, you go to chimpanzee heaven and you get lots of bananas and coconuts.” No chimpanzee will ever believe that. Humans believe these stories, which is why we have these huge religious networks. It’s the same thing with modern politics.
It’s the same thing with economics. People think, “Oh, economics, this is rational. It has nothing to do with fictional stories.” No money is the most successful story ever told, much more successful than any religious mythology. Not everybody believes in God, or in the same God, but almost everybody believes in money, even though it’s just a figment of our imagination. You take these green pieces of paper, dollars, they have no value. You can’t eat them, you can’t drink them. Today, most dollars are not even pieces of paper, they are just electronic information passing between computers. We value them just for one reason, that you have the best storytellers in the world, the bankers, the finance ministers, all these people, they are the best storytellers ever. They tell us a story that this green little piece of paper, or this bit of information, it is worth a banana. As long as everybody believes it, it works.
Lex Fridman
At which point does a fiction, when it’s sufficiently useful and effective and improving the global quality of life, does it become accepted reality? There’s a threshold, which just [inaudible 00:25:43].
At which point does a fiction, when it’s sufficiently useful and effective and improving the global quality of life, does it become accepted reality? There’s a threshold, which just [inaudible 00:25:43].
Yuval Noah Harari
If enough people believe it. It’s like with money. If you start a new cryptocurrency, if you are the only one that believes the story … I mean, again, you cryptocurrencies, you have the math of course, but ultimately it’s storytelling. You’re selling people a story. If nobody believes your story, you don’t have anything, but if lots of people believe the Bitcoin story, then Bitcoin can be worth thousands and tens of thousands of dollars. Again, why? I mean, you can’t eat it, you can’t drink. It’s nothing. It’s this story around the math, which is the real magic.
If enough people believe it. It’s like with money. If you start a new cryptocurrency, if you are the only one that believes the story … I mean, again, you cryptocurrencies, you have the math of course, but ultimately it’s storytelling. You’re selling people a story. If nobody believes your story, you don’t have anything, but if lots of people believe the Bitcoin story, then Bitcoin can be worth thousands and tens of thousands of dollars. Again, why? I mean, you can’t eat it, you can’t drink. It’s nothing. It’s this story around the math, which is the real magic.
Lex Fridman
Is it possible that the story is the primary living organism, not the storyteller. That somehow homo sapiens evolved to become these hosts for a more intelligent living organism, which is the idea. The ideas are the ones that are doing the competing. This is one of the sort of big perspectives behind your work that’s really revolutionary of how you’ve seen history. Do you ever take out the perspective of the ideas as the organisms versus the humans?
Is it possible that the story is the primary living organism, not the storyteller. That somehow homo sapiens evolved to become these hosts for a more intelligent living organism, which is the idea. The ideas are the ones that are doing the competing. This is one of the sort of big perspectives behind your work that’s really revolutionary of how you’ve seen history. Do you ever take out the perspective of the ideas as the organisms versus the humans?
Yuval Noah Harari
It’s an interesting idea. There are two opposite things to say about it. On the one hand, yes, absolutely. If you look long term in history, all the people die. It’s the stories that compete and survive and spread. Stories often spread by making people willing to sacrifice sometimes their lives for the story. We know, in Israel, this is one of the most important story factories in human history. This is a place where people still kill each other every day over stories. I don’t know. You’ve been to Jerusalem, right?
It’s an interesting idea. There are two opposite things to say about it. On the one hand, yes, absolutely. If you look long term in history, all the people die. It’s the stories that compete and survive and spread. Stories often spread by making people willing to sacrifice sometimes their lives for the story. We know, in Israel, this is one of the most important story factories in human history. This is a place where people still kill each other every day over stories. I don’t know. You’ve been to Jerusalem, right?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm (affirmative).
Mm-hmm (affirmative).
Yuval Noah Harari
People here are, “Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Jerusalem.” I’ve lived in Jerusalem much of my life. You go there, it’s an ordinary place. It’s a town. You have buildings, you have stones, you have trees, you have dogs and cats and pedestrians. It’s a regular place. Then you have the stories about the place, “Oh, this is the place where God revealed himself. This is the place where Jesus was. This is the place where Muhammad was.” It’s the stories that people fight over. Nobody’s fighting over the stones. People are fighting about the stories about the stones. If a story can get millions of people to fight for it, it not only survives, it spreads. It can take over the world.
People here are, “Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Jerusalem.” I’ve lived in Jerusalem much of my life. You go there, it’s an ordinary place. It’s a town. You have buildings, you have stones, you have trees, you have dogs and cats and pedestrians. It’s a regular place. Then you have the stories about the place, “Oh, this is the place where God revealed himself. This is the place where Jesus was. This is the place where Muhammad was.” It’s the stories that people fight over. Nobody’s fighting over the stones. People are fighting about the stories about the stones. If a story can get millions of people to fight for it, it not only survives, it spreads. It can take over the world.
The other side of the coin is that the stories are not really alive, because they don’t feel anything. This goes back to the question of consciousness, which I think is the most important thing, that the ultimate reality is consciousness, is the ability to feel things. If you want to know whether the hero of some story is real or not, you need to ask, “Can it suffer?” Stories don’t feel anything. Countries, which are also stories, nations, don’t suffer. If a nation loses a war, it doesn’t suffer. The soldiers suffer, the civilians suffer. Animals can suffer. You have an army with horses and whatever, and the horses get wounded, the horses suffer. The nation can’t suffer, it’s just an imagination. It’s just a fictional story in our mind. It doesn’t feel anything.
Similarly, when a bank goes bankrupt or a company goes bankrupt, or when a currency loses its value, like Bitcoin is worth now zero, crashed, or the dollar is worth zero, it crashed. The dollar doesn’t feel anything. It’s the people holding the dollars who might be now very miserable. We have this complex situation when history is largely driven by stories, but stories are not the ultimate reality. The ultimate reality is feelings of humans, of animals. The tragedy of history is that very, very often we get the order wrong. Stories are not bad. Stories are tools. They’re good, when we use them in order to alleviate suffering, but very often we forget it. Instead of using the stories for our purposes, we allow the stories to use us for their purposes. Then you start entire wars because of a story. You inflict suffering on millions of people just for the sake of a story. That’s the tragedy of human history.
Suffering
Lex Fridman
The fundamental property of life, of a living organism, is the capacity to feel and the ultimate feeling is suffering?
The fundamental property of life, of a living organism, is the capacity to feel and the ultimate feeling is suffering?
Yuval Noah Harari
To know if you are happy or not, it’s a very difficult question, but when you suffer you know.
To know if you are happy or not, it’s a very difficult question, but when you suffer you know.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Yuval Noah Harari
Also, in ethical terms, it’s more important to be aware of suffering than of any other emotion. If you are doing something which is causing all kinds of emotions to all kinds of people, first of all, you need to notice if you’re causing a lot of suffering to someone. If some people like it and some people are bored by it and some people are a bit angry at you, and some people are suffering because of what you do, you first of all have to know, oh … Sometimes, you still have to do it. The world is a complicated place. I don’t know. You have an epidemic. Governments decide to have all those social isolation regulations or whatever. In certain cases, yes, you need to do it even though it can cause tremendous suffering, but you need to be very aware of the cost and to be very, very … You have to ask yourself again, and again, and again, is it worth it? Is it still worth it?
Also, in ethical terms, it’s more important to be aware of suffering than of any other emotion. If you are doing something which is causing all kinds of emotions to all kinds of people, first of all, you need to notice if you’re causing a lot of suffering to someone. If some people like it and some people are bored by it and some people are a bit angry at you, and some people are suffering because of what you do, you first of all have to know, oh … Sometimes, you still have to do it. The world is a complicated place. I don’t know. You have an epidemic. Governments decide to have all those social isolation regulations or whatever. In certain cases, yes, you need to do it even though it can cause tremendous suffering, but you need to be very aware of the cost and to be very, very … You have to ask yourself again, and again, and again, is it worth it? Is it still worth it?
Lex Fridman
The interesting question there, implied in your statements, is that suffering is a pretty good component of a Turing test for consciousness.
The interesting question there, implied in your statements, is that suffering is a pretty good component of a Turing test for consciousness.
Yuval Noah Harari
This is the most important thing to ask about AI: Can it suffer? Because if AI can suffer, then it is an ethical subject and it needs protection, it needs rights just like humans and animals.
This is the most important thing to ask about AI: Can it suffer? Because if AI can suffer, then it is an ethical subject and it needs protection, it needs rights just like humans and animals.
Lex Fridman
Well, quite a long time ago already, so I work with a lot of robots, legged robots, but I’ve even had, inspired by a YouTube video, had a bunch of Roombas that I made them scream when I touched them or kicked them, or when they ran into a wall. The illusion of suffering, for me, a silly human that anthropomorphizes things, is as powerful as suffering itself. I mean, you immediately think the thing is suffering. I think some of it is just a technical problem, but it’s the easily solvable one, how to create an AI system that just says, “Please don’t hurt me. Please don’t shut me off. I miss you. Where have you been?” Be jealous, also. ” Why have you been gone for so long?”
Well, quite a long time ago already, so I work with a lot of robots, legged robots, but I’ve even had, inspired by a YouTube video, had a bunch of Roombas that I made them scream when I touched them or kicked them, or when they ran into a wall. The illusion of suffering, for me, a silly human that anthropomorphizes things, is as powerful as suffering itself. I mean, you immediately think the thing is suffering. I think some of it is just a technical problem, but it’s the easily solvable one, how to create an AI system that just says, “Please don’t hurt me. Please don’t shut me off. I miss you. Where have you been?” Be jealous, also. ” Why have you been gone for so long?”
Lex Fridman
Why have you been gone for so long? Your calendar doesn’t have anything on it. This create through words the perception of suffering, of jealousy, of anger, of all of those things, and it just seems like that’s not so difficult to do.
Why have you been gone for so long? Your calendar doesn’t have anything on it. This create through words the perception of suffering, of jealousy, of anger, of all of those things, and it just seems like that’s not so difficult to do.
Yuval Noah Harari
That’s part of the danger. It basically hacks our operating system and it uses some of our best qualities against us. It’s very, very good that humans are attuned to suffering and that we don’t want to cause suffering because we have compassion. That’s one of the most wonderful thing about humans. If we now create AIs which use this to manipulate us, this is a terrible thing.
That’s part of the danger. It basically hacks our operating system and it uses some of our best qualities against us. It’s very, very good that humans are attuned to suffering and that we don’t want to cause suffering because we have compassion. That’s one of the most wonderful thing about humans. If we now create AIs which use this to manipulate us, this is a terrible thing.
Lex Fridman
You’ve, I think, mentioned this. Do you think it should be illegal to do these kinds of things with AI, to create the perception of consciousness of saying, “Please don’t leave me,” or basically simulate some of the human-like qualities?
You’ve, I think, mentioned this. Do you think it should be illegal to do these kinds of things with AI, to create the perception of consciousness of saying, “Please don’t leave me,” or basically simulate some of the human-like qualities?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. I think, again, we have to be very careful about it. If it emerges spontaneously, we need to be careful. Again, we can’t rule out the possibility that AI will develop consciousness. We don’t know enough about consciousness to be sure. If it develops spontaneously, we need to be very careful about how we understand it. If people intentionally design an AI that they know, they assume it has no consciousness, but in order to manipulate people, they use again this human strength, the noble part of our nature against us, this should be forbidden and, similarly on a more general level, that it should be forbidden for an AI to pretend to be a human being, that it’s okay. There are so many things we can use Ais as teachers, as doctors and so forth, and it’s good as long as we know that we are interacting with an AI. The same way we ban fake money, we should ban fake humans. It’s not just banning deep fakes of specific individuals. It’s also banning deep fake of generic humans, which is already happening to some extent on social media. If you have lots of bots retweeting something, then you have the impression, “Oh, lots of people are interested in that. That’s important,” and this is basically the bots pretending to be humans, because if you see a tweet which says 500 people retweeted it or you see a tweet and it says 500 bots retweeted it, I don’t care what the bots we tweeted, but if it’s humans, okay, that’s interesting.
Yes. I think, again, we have to be very careful about it. If it emerges spontaneously, we need to be careful. Again, we can’t rule out the possibility that AI will develop consciousness. We don’t know enough about consciousness to be sure. If it develops spontaneously, we need to be very careful about how we understand it. If people intentionally design an AI that they know, they assume it has no consciousness, but in order to manipulate people, they use again this human strength, the noble part of our nature against us, this should be forbidden and, similarly on a more general level, that it should be forbidden for an AI to pretend to be a human being, that it’s okay. There are so many things we can use Ais as teachers, as doctors and so forth, and it’s good as long as we know that we are interacting with an AI. The same way we ban fake money, we should ban fake humans. It’s not just banning deep fakes of specific individuals. It’s also banning deep fake of generic humans, which is already happening to some extent on social media. If you have lots of bots retweeting something, then you have the impression, “Oh, lots of people are interested in that. That’s important,” and this is basically the bots pretending to be humans, because if you see a tweet which says 500 people retweeted it or you see a tweet and it says 500 bots retweeted it, I don’t care what the bots we tweeted, but if it’s humans, okay, that’s interesting.
We need to be very careful that bots can’t do that. They are doing it at present, and it should be banned. Now, some people say, “Yes, bots’ freedom of expression.” No. Bots don’t have freedom of expression. There is no cost in terms of freedom of expression when you ban bots. Again, in some situations, yes, AIs should interact with us, but it should be very clear this is an AI talking to you or this is an AI retweeting this story, it is not a human being making a conscious decision.
Lex Fridman
To push back on this line of fake humans, because I think it might be a spectrum, first of all, you might have AI systems that are offended, hurt when you say that they’re fake humans. In fact, they might start identifying as humans. You just talked about the power of us humans with our collective intelligence to take fake stories and make them quite real. If the feelings you have for the fake human is real, love is a kind of fake thing that we all put a word to, a set of feelings, what if you have that feeling for an AI system? It starts to change, I mean, maybe the things AI systems are allowed to do for good. They’re allowed to create, communicate suffering, communicate the good stuff, the longing, the hope, the connection, the intimacy, all of that and, in that way, get integrated in our society, and then you start to ask a question on are we allowed to really unplug them? Are we allowed to really censor them, remove them, remove their voice from social media?
To push back on this line of fake humans, because I think it might be a spectrum, first of all, you might have AI systems that are offended, hurt when you say that they’re fake humans. In fact, they might start identifying as humans. You just talked about the power of us humans with our collective intelligence to take fake stories and make them quite real. If the feelings you have for the fake human is real, love is a kind of fake thing that we all put a word to, a set of feelings, what if you have that feeling for an AI system? It starts to change, I mean, maybe the things AI systems are allowed to do for good. They’re allowed to create, communicate suffering, communicate the good stuff, the longing, the hope, the connection, the intimacy, all of that and, in that way, get integrated in our society, and then you start to ask a question on are we allowed to really unplug them? Are we allowed to really censor them, remove them, remove their voice from social media?
Yuval Noah Harari
I’m not saying they shouldn’t have a voice, they shouldn’t talk with us. I’m just saying, when they talk with us, it should be clear that they are AI. That’s it. You can have your voice as an AI. Again, I have some medical problem. I want to get advice from an AI doctor. That’s fine as long as I know that I’m talking with an AI. What should be banned is AI pretending to be a human being. This is something that will erode trust and, without trust, society collapses. This is something that especially will endanger democracies because democracy is a conversation basically and it’s a conversation between people.
I’m not saying they shouldn’t have a voice, they shouldn’t talk with us. I’m just saying, when they talk with us, it should be clear that they are AI. That’s it. You can have your voice as an AI. Again, I have some medical problem. I want to get advice from an AI doctor. That’s fine as long as I know that I’m talking with an AI. What should be banned is AI pretending to be a human being. This is something that will erode trust and, without trust, society collapses. This is something that especially will endanger democracies because democracy is a conversation basically and it’s a conversation between people.
If you now flood the public sphere with millions and potentially billions of AI agents that can hold conversations, they never sleep, they never eat, they don’t have emotions of their own, they can get to know you and tailor their words specifically for you and your life story, they are becoming better than us at creating stories and ideas and so forth. If you flood the public sphere with that, this will ruin the conversation between people. It will ruin the trust between people. You will no longer be able to have a democracy in this situation. You can have other types of regimes, but not democracy.
Lex Fridman
If you could talk about the big philosophical notion of truth then? You’ve already talked about the capacity of humans. One of the things that made us special is stories. Is there such thing as truth?
If you could talk about the big philosophical notion of truth then? You’ve already talked about the capacity of humans. One of the things that made us special is stories. Is there such thing as truth?
Yuval Noah Harari
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Lex Fridman
What is truth exactly?
What is truth exactly?
Yuval Noah Harari
When somebody is suffering, that’s true. I mean, this is why one of the things, when you talk about suffering as a ultimate reality, when somebody suffers, that is truth. Now, somebody can suffer because of a fictional story. Like somebody tells people that God said, “You must go on this crusade and kill these heretics,” and this is a completely fictional story, and people believe it and they start a war and they destroy cities and kill people. The people that suffer because of that, and even the crusaders themselves that also suffer the consequences of what they do, the suffering is true even though it is caused by a fictional story.
When somebody is suffering, that’s true. I mean, this is why one of the things, when you talk about suffering as a ultimate reality, when somebody suffers, that is truth. Now, somebody can suffer because of a fictional story. Like somebody tells people that God said, “You must go on this crusade and kill these heretics,” and this is a completely fictional story, and people believe it and they start a war and they destroy cities and kill people. The people that suffer because of that, and even the crusaders themselves that also suffer the consequences of what they do, the suffering is true even though it is caused by a fictional story.
Similarly, when people agree on certain rules, the rules could come out of our imagination. Now, we can be truthful about it and say, “These rules. They didn’t come from heaven. They came from our imagination.” We look at sports. We have rules for the game of football, soccer. They were invented by people. At least very few people claim that the rules of football came down from heaven. We invented them, and this is truthful. There are fictional rules invented by humans, and this is true. They were invented by humans. When you are honest about it, it enables you to change the rules, which is being done in football every now and then.
It’s the same with the fundamental rules of a country. You can pretend that the rules came down from heaven dictated by God or whatever and then you can’t change them, or you can be like the American Constitution which starts with, “We the People.” The American Constitution lays down certain rules for a society, but the amazing thing about it, it does not pretend to come from an external source.
The 10 Commandments start with, “I am your Lord God.” Because it starts with that, you can’t change them. The 10th commandment, for instance, supports slavery. In the 10th commandment, it says that you should not covet your neighbor’s house or your neighbor’s wife or your neighbor’s slaves. It’s okay to hold slaves according to the 10th commandment. It’s just bad to covet the slaves of your neighbor.
Now, there is no 11th commandment which says, “If you don’t like some of the previous 10 commandments, this is how you go about amending them,” which is why we still have them unchanged. Now, in the US Constitution, you have all these rights and rules, including originally the ability to hold slaves, but the genius of the Founding Fathers of the United States, they had the humility to understand maybe we don’t understand everything. Maybe we made some mistakes, so we tell you that these rules did not come from heaven. They came from us humans. We may have made a mistake, so here is a mechanism for how future generations can amend the Constitution, which was used later on to, for instance, amend the Constitution to ban slavery.
Lex Fridman
Now you’re describing some interesting and powerful ideas throughout human history. Can you just speak to the mechanism of how humans start to believe ideas? Is there something interesting to say there from your thinking about it, how idea is born and how it takes hold, and how it spreads, and how it competes with other ideas?
Now you’re describing some interesting and powerful ideas throughout human history. Can you just speak to the mechanism of how humans start to believe ideas? Is there something interesting to say there from your thinking about it, how idea is born and how it takes hold, and how it spreads, and how it competes with other ideas?
Yuval Noah Harari
First of all, ideas are an independent force in history. Marxists tend to deny that. Marxists think that all history is just a play of material interests, and ideas, stories, they are just a smokescreen to hide the underlying interests. My thoughts are to some extent the opposite. We have some biological objective interests that all humans share, like we need to eat, we need to drink, we need to breathe, but most conflicts in history are not about that. The interests which really drive most conflicts in history don’t come from biology. They come from religions and ideologies and stories.
First of all, ideas are an independent force in history. Marxists tend to deny that. Marxists think that all history is just a play of material interests, and ideas, stories, they are just a smokescreen to hide the underlying interests. My thoughts are to some extent the opposite. We have some biological objective interests that all humans share, like we need to eat, we need to drink, we need to breathe, but most conflicts in history are not about that. The interests which really drive most conflicts in history don’t come from biology. They come from religions and ideologies and stories.
It’s not that stories are a smokescreen to hide the real interests. The stories create the interests in the first place. The stories define who are the competing groups. Nations, religions, cultures, they are not biological entities. They’re not like species like gorillas and chimpanzees. No. Israelis and Palestinians, or Germans and French, or Chinese and Americans, they have no essential biological difference between them. The difference is cultural. It comes from stories. There are people that believe in different stories. The stories create the identity. The stories create the interests. Israelis and Palestinians are fighting over Jerusalem not because of any material interest. There are no oil fields under Jerusalem, and even oil. You need it to realize some cultural fantasy. It doesn’t really come from biology. The stories are independent forces.
Now, why do people believe one story and not another? That’s history. There is no materialistic law, “People will always believe this.” No. History is full of accidents. How did Christianity become the most successful religion in the world? We can’t explain it. Why this story about Jesus of Nazareth? The Roman Empire in the 3rd Century CE was a bit like, I don’t know, California today. So many sects and sub-sects and gurus and religions, everybody has their own thing, and you have thousands of different stories competing.
Why did Christianity come up on top? As a historian, I don’t have a clear answer. You can read the sources, and you see how it happened. Oh, this happened and then this happened, and then Constantine adopted it, and then this and then this, but why? I don’t think anybody has an answer to that. If you rewind the movie of history and press play and you rewind and press play a hundred times, I think Christianity would take over the Roman Empire in the world maybe twice out of a hundred times. It was such an unlikely thing to happen.
It’s the same with Islam. It’s the same, I don’t don’t know, with the communist takeover of Russia. In 1914, if you told people that in three years Lenin and the Bolsheviks will gain power in that czarist empire, they would think you’re utterly crazy. Lenin had a few thousand supporters in 1914 in an empire of close to 200 million people. It sounded ludicrous. Now we know the chain of events, the First World war, the February Revolution and so forth, that led to the communist takeover, but it was such an unlikely event, and it happened.
Lex Fridman
The little steps along the way, the little options you have along the way because, Stalin versus Trotsky, you could have the Robert Frost poem, there’s always-
The little steps along the way, the little options you have along the way because, Stalin versus Trotsky, you could have the Robert Frost poem, there’s always-
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. There is a highway and there is a sideway, and history takes the sideway many, many times.
Yes. There is a highway and there is a sideway, and history takes the sideway many, many times.
Lex Fridman
It’s perhaps tempting to tell some of that history through charismatic leaders. Maybe it’s an open question. How much power charismatic leaders have to affect the trajectory of history?
It’s perhaps tempting to tell some of that history through charismatic leaders. Maybe it’s an open question. How much power charismatic leaders have to affect the trajectory of history?
Yuval Noah Harari
You’ve met quite a lot of charismatic leaders lately. I mean, what’s your view on that?
You’ve met quite a lot of charismatic leaders lately. I mean, what’s your view on that?
Lex Fridman
I find it a compelling notion. I’m a sucker for a great speech and a vision. I have a sense that there’s an importance for a leader to catalyze the viral spread of a story. I think we need leaders to be just great storytellers that sharpen up the story to make sure it infiltrates everybody’s brain effectively. It could also be that the local interactions between humans is even more important, but it’s just we don’t have a good way to summarize that and describe that. We like to talk about Steve Jobs as central to the development of the computer, maybe Bill Gates. You tell the stories of individuals like this because it’s just easier to tell a sexy story that way.
I find it a compelling notion. I’m a sucker for a great speech and a vision. I have a sense that there’s an importance for a leader to catalyze the viral spread of a story. I think we need leaders to be just great storytellers that sharpen up the story to make sure it infiltrates everybody’s brain effectively. It could also be that the local interactions between humans is even more important, but it’s just we don’t have a good way to summarize that and describe that. We like to talk about Steve Jobs as central to the development of the computer, maybe Bill Gates. You tell the stories of individuals like this because it’s just easier to tell a sexy story that way.
Yuval Noah Harari
Maybe it’s an interplay because you have the structural forces. I don’t know. You look at the geography of the planet and you look at shipping technology in the late 15th Century in Europe and the Mediterranean, and it’s almost inevitable that pretty quickly somebody would discover America, somebody from the Old World will get to the new world. If it wasn’t Columbus, then it would’ve been, five years later, somebody else. The key thing about history is that these small differences make a huge, huge difference. If it wasn’t Columbus, if it was five years later somebody from England, then maybe all of Latin America today would be speaking English and not Spanish. If it was somebody from the Ottoman Empire, it’s a completely different world history. The Ottoman Empire at that time was also shaping up to be a major maritime empire. If you have America being reached by Muslim navigators before Christian navigators from Europe, you have a completely different world history.
Maybe it’s an interplay because you have the structural forces. I don’t know. You look at the geography of the planet and you look at shipping technology in the late 15th Century in Europe and the Mediterranean, and it’s almost inevitable that pretty quickly somebody would discover America, somebody from the Old World will get to the new world. If it wasn’t Columbus, then it would’ve been, five years later, somebody else. The key thing about history is that these small differences make a huge, huge difference. If it wasn’t Columbus, if it was five years later somebody from England, then maybe all of Latin America today would be speaking English and not Spanish. If it was somebody from the Ottoman Empire, it’s a completely different world history. The Ottoman Empire at that time was also shaping up to be a major maritime empire. If you have America being reached by Muslim navigators before Christian navigators from Europe, you have a completely different world history.
It’s the same with the computer. Given the economic incentives and the science and technology of the time, then the rise of the personal computer was probably inevitable sometime in the late 20th Century. The where and when is crucial. The fact that it was California in the 1970s and not, say, I don’t know, Japan in the 1980s or China in the 1990s, this made a huge, huge difference. You have this interplay between the structural forces which are beyond the control of any single charismatic leader, but then, the small changes, they can have a big effect.
I don’t know. I think, for instance, about the war in Ukraine. Now it’s a struggle between nations, but there was a moment when the decision was taken in the mind of a single individual, of Vladimir Putin. He could have decided otherwise, and the world would’ve looked completely different.
Hitler
Lex Fridman
Another leader, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, could have decided to leave Kyiv in the early days. There’s a lot of decisions that ripple. You write in Homo Deus about Hitler and, in part, that he was not a very impressive person.
Another leader, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, could have decided to leave Kyiv in the early days. There’s a lot of decisions that ripple. You write in Homo Deus about Hitler and, in part, that he was not a very impressive person.
Yuval Noah Harari
I say that?
I say that?
Lex Fridman
The quote is, let me read it, “He wasn’t a senior officer in four years of war. He rose no higher than the rank of corporal. He had no formal education.” Perhaps you mean his resume was not impressive.
The quote is, let me read it, “He wasn’t a senior officer in four years of war. He rose no higher than the rank of corporal. He had no formal education.” Perhaps you mean his resume was not impressive.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah, his resume was not impressive. That’s true.
Yeah, his resume was not impressive. That’s true.
Lex Fridman
“He had no formal education, no professional skills, no political background. He wasn’t a successful businessman or a union activist. He didn’t have friends or relatives in high places nor any money to speak of.” How did he amass so much power? What ideology, what circumstances enabled the rise of the Third Reich?
“He had no formal education, no professional skills, no political background. He wasn’t a successful businessman or a union activist. He didn’t have friends or relatives in high places nor any money to speak of.” How did he amass so much power? What ideology, what circumstances enabled the rise of the Third Reich?
Yuval Noah Harari
Again, I can’t tell you the why. I can tell you the how. I don’t think it was inevitable. I think that, if a few things were different, there would’ve been no Third Reich. There would’ve been no Nazism and no Holocaust. Again, this is the tragedy. If it would’ve been inevitable, then what can you do? This is the laws of history or the laws of physics, but the tragedy is, no, it was decisions by humans that led to that direction.
Again, I can’t tell you the why. I can tell you the how. I don’t think it was inevitable. I think that, if a few things were different, there would’ve been no Third Reich. There would’ve been no Nazism and no Holocaust. Again, this is the tragedy. If it would’ve been inevitable, then what can you do? This is the laws of history or the laws of physics, but the tragedy is, no, it was decisions by humans that led to that direction.
Even from the viewpoint of the Germans, we know for a fact it was an unnecessary path to take because, in the 1920s and ’30s, the Nazis said that, “Unless Germany take this road, it will never be prosperous, it’ll never be successful. All the other countries will keep stepping on it.” This was their claim. We know for a fact this is false. Why? Because they took that road, they lost the Second World War and, after they lost, then they became one of the most prosperous countries in the world because their enemies that defeated them evidently supported them and allowed them to become such a prosperous and successful nation.
If you can lose the war and still be so successful, obviously you could just have skipped the war. You didn’t need it. I mean, you really had to have the war in order to have a prosperous Germany? Absolutely not. It’s the same with Japan. It’s the same with Italy. It was not inevitable. It was not the forces of history that necessitated, forced Germany to take this path.
Again, Hitler was a very, very skillful storyteller. He sold people a story. The fact that he was nobody made it even more effective because people at that time, after their defeat of the First World War, after the repeated economic crisis of the 1920s in Germany, people felt betrayed by all the established elites, by all the established institutions. All these professors and politicians and industrialists and military, all the big people, they led us to a disastrous war. They led us to humiliation, so we don’t want any of them. Then you have this nobody, a corporal with no money, with no education, with no titles, with nothing, and he tells people, “I’m one of you.” This was one reason why he was so popular, and then the story he told.
When you look at stories, at the competition between different stories, and between stories, fiction and the truth, the truth has two big problems. The truth tends to be complicated and the truth tends to be painful. Let’s talk about nations. The real story of every nation is complicated and it contains some painful episodes. We are not always good. We sometimes do bad things.
Now, if you go to people and you tell them a complicated and painful story, many of them don’t want to listen. The advantage of fiction is that it can be made as simple and as painless or attractive as you want it to be because it’s fiction, and then what you see is that politicians like Hitler, they create a very simple story. We are the heroes. We always do good things. Everybody is against us. Everybody is trying to trample us, and this is very attractive.
One of the things people don’t understand about Nazism and fascism, we teach in schools about Fascism and Nazism as this ultimate evil, the ultimate monster in human history. At some level, this is wrong because it actually exposes us. Why? Because people hear of fascism is this monster, and then when you hear the actual fascist story, what fascists tell you is always very beautiful and attractive. Fascists are people who come and tell you, “You are wonderful. You belong to the most wonderful group of people in the world. You’re beautiful. You are ethical. Everything you do is good. You have never done anything wrong. There are all these evil monsters out there that are out to get you, and they’re causing all the problems in the world.”
When people hear that, it’s like looking in the mirror and seeing something very beautiful. Hey, I’m beautiful. We’ve never done anything wrong. We are victims. When you look and you heard in school that Fascism, that fascists are monsters, and you look in the mirror, you see something very beautiful and you say, “I can’t be a fascist because fascists are monsters. This is so beautiful,” so it can’t be. When you look in the fascist mirror, you never see a monster. You see the most beautiful thing in the world, and that’s the danger.
This is the problem with Hollywood. I look at Voldemort in Harry Potter. Who would like to follow this creep? You look at Darth Vader. This is not somebody you would like to follow. Christianity got things much better when it described the devil as being very beautiful and attractive. That’s the danger, that you see something is very beautiful, you don’t understand the monster underneath.
Lex Fridman
You write precisely about this. By the way, just as a small aside, it always saddens me when people say how obvious it is to them that communism is a flawed ideology. When you ask them, “Try to put your mind, try to put yourself in the beginning of the 20th Century and see what you would do,” a lot of people will say, “It’s obvious that it’s a flawed ideology.” I mean, I suppose, to some of the worst ideologies in human history, you could say the same. In that mirror, when you look, it looks beautiful.
You write precisely about this. By the way, just as a small aside, it always saddens me when people say how obvious it is to them that communism is a flawed ideology. When you ask them, “Try to put your mind, try to put yourself in the beginning of the 20th Century and see what you would do,” a lot of people will say, “It’s obvious that it’s a flawed ideology.” I mean, I suppose, to some of the worst ideologies in human history, you could say the same. In that mirror, when you look, it looks beautiful.
Yuval Noah Harari
Communism is the same also. You look in the communist mirror. You’re the most ethical, wonderful place, person ever. It’s very difficult to see Stalin underneath it.
Communism is the same also. You look in the communist mirror. You’re the most ethical, wonderful place, person ever. It’s very difficult to see Stalin underneath it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, in Homo Deus, you also write, “During the 19th and 20th Centuries, as humanism gained increasing social credibility and political power, it sprouted two very different offshoots, socialist humanism, which encompassed a plethora of socialist and communist movements, and evolutionary humanism, whose most famous advocates were the Nazis.” If you can just linger on that, what’s the ideological connection between Nazism and communism as embodied by humanism?
Yeah, in Homo Deus, you also write, “During the 19th and 20th Centuries, as humanism gained increasing social credibility and political power, it sprouted two very different offshoots, socialist humanism, which encompassed a plethora of socialist and communist movements, and evolutionary humanism, whose most famous advocates were the Nazis.” If you can just linger on that, what’s the ideological connection between Nazism and communism as embodied by humanism?
Yuval Noah Harari
In humanism, basically the focus is on humans, that they are the most important thing in the world, they move history, but then there is a big question. What are humans? What is humanity?
In humanism, basically the focus is on humans, that they are the most important thing in the world, they move history, but then there is a big question. What are humans? What is humanity?
Now, liberals, they place at the center of the story individual humans and they don’t see history as a necessary collision between big forces. They place the individual at the center. Especially in the US today, liberal is taken as the opposite of conservative, but to test whether you’re a liberal, you need to answer just three questions. Very simple. Do you think people should have the right to choose their own government or the government should be imposed by some outside force? Do you think people should have the right to the liberty to choose their own profession or either born into some caste that predetermines what they do, and do you think people should have the liberty to choose their own spouse and their own way of personal life instead of being told by elders or parents who to marry and how to live? Now, if you answered yes to all three questions, people should have the liberty to choose their government, their profession, their personal lives, their spouse, then you’re a liberal. Most conservatives are also liberal.
Now, communists and fascists, they answer differently. For them, yes, history is about humans, humans are the big heroes of history, but not individual humans and their liberties. Fascists imagine history as a clash between races or nations. The nation is at the center. They say the supreme good is the good of the nation. You should have a hundred percent loyalty only to the nation.
Liberals say, yes, you should be loyal to the nation, but it’s not the only thing. There are other things in the world. There are human rights. There is truth. There is beauty. Many times, yes, you should prefer the interests of your nation over other things, but not always. If your nation tells you to murder millions of innocent people, you don’t do that even though the nation tells you to do it, to lie for the national interest. In extreme situations, maybe, but in many cases, your loyalty should be to the truth even if it makes your nation looks a bit not in the best light.
The same with beauty. How does the fascist determine whether a movie is a good movie? Very simple. If it serves the interest of the nation, this is a good movie. If it’s against the interest of the nation, this is a bad movie. End of story. Liberalism says, no, there is aesthetic values in the world. We should judge movies not just on the question whether they serve the national interest, but also on artistic value.
Communists are a bit like the fascists, instead that they don’t place the nation as the main hero, they place class as the main hero. For them, history, again, it’s not about individuals, it’s not about nations, history is the clash between classes and, just as fascists imagine in the end, only one nation will be on top. The communists think in the end only one class should be on top, and that’s the proletariat. Same story. A hundred percent of your loyalty should be to the class. If there is a clash, say, between class and family, class wins.
In the Soviet Union, the party told children, “If you hear your parents say something bad about Stalin, you have to report them.” There are many cases when children reported their parents, and their parents were sent to the gulag. Your loyalty is to the party which leads the proletariat to victory in the historical struggle. The same way in communism. Art is only about class struggle. A movie is good if it serves the interest of the proletariat. Artistic values? There is nothing like that. The same with truth. Everything that we see now in fake news, the communist propaganda machine was there before us, the level of lies, of disinformation campaigns that they orchestrated in the 1920s and ’30s and ’40s is really unimaginable.
Lex Fridman
So the reason these two classes of ideologies failed as the sacrifice of truth, not just failed, but did a lot of damage as the sacrifice of truth and sacrifice of beauty?
So the reason these two classes of ideologies failed as the sacrifice of truth, not just failed, but did a lot of damage as the sacrifice of truth and sacrifice of beauty?
Yuval Noah Harari
… and sacrifice of hundreds of millions of people. Again, for human suffering like, okay, in order for our nation to win, in order for our class to win, we need to kill those millions. Kill those millions. Ethics, aesthetics, truth, they don’t matter. The only thing that matter is the victory of the state or the victory of the class.
… and sacrifice of hundreds of millions of people. Again, for human suffering like, okay, in order for our nation to win, in order for our class to win, we need to kill those millions. Kill those millions. Ethics, aesthetics, truth, they don’t matter. The only thing that matter is the victory of the state or the victory of the class.
Liberalism was the antithesis to that. It says, no, it has a much more complicated view of the world. Both communism and fascists, they had the very simple view of the world. Your loyalty, a hundred percent of it, should be only to one thing. Now, liberalism has a much more complex view of the world. It says, yes, there are nations. They are important. Yes, there are classes. They are important, but they are not the only thing. There are also families. There are also individuals. There are also animals. Your loyalty should be divided between all of them. Sometimes, you prefer this. Sometimes, you prefer that. That’s complicated.
Yuval Noah Harari
With this. Sometimes you prefer that. That’s complicated. But life is complicated.
With this. Sometimes you prefer that. That’s complicated. But life is complicated.
Lex Fridman
But also, I think, maybe you can correct me, but liberalism acknowledges the corrupting nature of power. When there’s a guy at the top who sits there for a while managing things, he’s probably going to start losing a good sense of reality and losing the capability to be a good manager.
But also, I think, maybe you can correct me, but liberalism acknowledges the corrupting nature of power. When there’s a guy at the top who sits there for a while managing things, he’s probably going to start losing a good sense of reality and losing the capability to be a good manager.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It feels like the communist and fascist regimes don’t acknowledge that basic characteristic of human nature, that power corrupts.
It feels like the communist and fascist regimes don’t acknowledge that basic characteristic of human nature, that power corrupts.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. They believe in infallibility.
Yes. They believe in infallibility.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yuval Noah Harari
In this sense, they’re very close to being religions. They’re in Nazism. Hitler was considered infallible, and therefore you don’t need any checks and balances on his power. Why do you need to balance an infallible genius? And it’s the same with the Soviet Union with Stalin and more generally with the Communist Party. The party can never make a mistake. And therefore you don’t need independent courts, independent media, opposition parties, things like that, because then party is never wrong. You concentrate the same way. A 100% of loyalty should be to the party. A 100% of power should be in the hands of the party. The holy deal of liberal democracy is embracing fallibility. Everybody is fallible. All people, all leaders, all political parties, all institutions. This is why we need checks and balances, and we need many of them. If you have just one, then this particular check itself could make terrible mistakes. So you need, say you need a press, you need the media to serve as a check to the government. You don’t have just one newspaper or one TV station. You need many so that they can balance each other. And then the media’s not enough, so you have independent courts. You have free academic institutions, you have NGOs, you have a lot of checks and balances.
In this sense, they’re very close to being religions. They’re in Nazism. Hitler was considered infallible, and therefore you don’t need any checks and balances on his power. Why do you need to balance an infallible genius? And it’s the same with the Soviet Union with Stalin and more generally with the Communist Party. The party can never make a mistake. And therefore you don’t need independent courts, independent media, opposition parties, things like that, because then party is never wrong. You concentrate the same way. A 100% of loyalty should be to the party. A 100% of power should be in the hands of the party. The holy deal of liberal democracy is embracing fallibility. Everybody is fallible. All people, all leaders, all political parties, all institutions. This is why we need checks and balances, and we need many of them. If you have just one, then this particular check itself could make terrible mistakes. So you need, say you need a press, you need the media to serve as a check to the government. You don’t have just one newspaper or one TV station. You need many so that they can balance each other. And then the media’s not enough, so you have independent courts. You have free academic institutions, you have NGOs, you have a lot of checks and balances.
Lex Fridman
So that’s the ideologies in the leaders. What about the individual people, the millions of people that play a part in all of this that are the hosts of the stories, that are the catalyst and the components of how the story spreads? Would you say that all of us are capable of spreading any story, sort of the [inaudible 01:08:37] and idea of the, that all of us are capable of good and evil?
So that’s the ideologies in the leaders. What about the individual people, the millions of people that play a part in all of this that are the hosts of the stories, that are the catalyst and the components of how the story spreads? Would you say that all of us are capable of spreading any story, sort of the [inaudible 01:08:37] and idea of the, that all of us are capable of good and evil?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
The line between good and evil runs the heart of every man?
The line between good and evil runs the heart of every man?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. I wouldn’t say that every person is capable of every type of evil, but we are all fallible. There is a large element. It partly depends on the efforts we make to develop our self-awareness during life, part of it depends on moral luck. If you are born as a Christian German in the 1910s or 1920s and you grow up in Nazi Germany, that’s bad moral luck. Your chances of committing terrible things, you have a very high chance of doing it, and you can with withstand it, but it will take tremendous effort. If you are born in Germany after the war, you are morally lucky that you will not be put to such a test. You will not need to exert these enormous efforts not to commit atrocities. This is just part of history. There is an element of luck, but again, part of it is also self-awareness.
Yes. I wouldn’t say that every person is capable of every type of evil, but we are all fallible. There is a large element. It partly depends on the efforts we make to develop our self-awareness during life, part of it depends on moral luck. If you are born as a Christian German in the 1910s or 1920s and you grow up in Nazi Germany, that’s bad moral luck. Your chances of committing terrible things, you have a very high chance of doing it, and you can with withstand it, but it will take tremendous effort. If you are born in Germany after the war, you are morally lucky that you will not be put to such a test. You will not need to exert these enormous efforts not to commit atrocities. This is just part of history. There is an element of luck, but again, part of it is also self-awareness.
Benjamin Netanyahu
And you asked me earlier about the potential of power to corrupt, and I listened to the interview you just did with Prime Minister Netanyahu a couple of days ago. And one of the things that most struck me during the interview that you asked him, you asked him, “Are you afraid of this thing that power corrupts?” He didn’t think for a single second. He didn’t pause. He didn’t admit a tiny little level of a doubt or… “No, power doesn’t corrupt.” For me, it was a shocking and a revealing moment. And it kind of dovetails with how you began the interview, that I really liked your opening gambit. That kind of, no, really, you kind of told him, lots of people in the world are angry with you, some people hate you, they dislike you.
What do you want to tell them, to say to them? And you gave him this kind of platform. And I was very, what will he say? And he just denied it. He basically denied it. He had to cut short the interview from three hours to one hour because you had hundreds of thousands of Israelis in the streets demonstrating against him. And he goes and saying, no, everybody likes me. What are you talking about?
Lex Fridman
But on that topic, you’ve said recently that the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may go down in history as the man who destroys Israel. Can you explain what you mean by that?
But on that topic, you’ve said recently that the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may go down in history as the man who destroys Israel. Can you explain what you mean by that?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. He is basically tearing apart the social contract that held this country together for 75 years. He’s destroying the foundations of Israeli democracy. I don’t want to go too deep unless you wants it, because I guess most of our listeners, they have bigger issues on their minds than the fate of some small country in the Middle East. But for those who want to understand what’s happening in Israel, there is really just one question to ask. What limits the power of the government? In United States, for instance, there are a lots of checks and balances that limit the power of the government. You have the Supreme Court, you have the Senate, you have the House of Representative, you have the President, you have the Constitution. You have 50 states, each state with its own Constitution and Supreme Court, and Congress and governor. If somebody wants to pass a dangerous legislation, say in the house, it’ll have to go through so many obstacles.
Yes. He is basically tearing apart the social contract that held this country together for 75 years. He’s destroying the foundations of Israeli democracy. I don’t want to go too deep unless you wants it, because I guess most of our listeners, they have bigger issues on their minds than the fate of some small country in the Middle East. But for those who want to understand what’s happening in Israel, there is really just one question to ask. What limits the power of the government? In United States, for instance, there are a lots of checks and balances that limit the power of the government. You have the Supreme Court, you have the Senate, you have the House of Representative, you have the President, you have the Constitution. You have 50 states, each state with its own Constitution and Supreme Court, and Congress and governor. If somebody wants to pass a dangerous legislation, say in the house, it’ll have to go through so many obstacles.
Like if you want to pass a law in United States taking away voting rights from Jews or from Muslims, or from African-Americans, even if it passes, even if it has a majority in the House of Representatives, it has a very, very, very small chance of becoming the law of the country because it’ll have to pass again through the Senate, through the President, through the Supreme Court, and all the federal structure. In Israel, we have just a single check on the power of the government, and that’s the Supreme Court. There is really no difference between the government and the GE legislature because whoever there is, there are no separate elections like in the US. If you win majority in the Knesset, in the Parliament, you appoint the government, that that’s very simple. And if you have 61 members of Knesset who vote, let’s say on a law to take away voting rights from Arab citizens of Israel, there is a single check that can prevent it from becoming the law of the land, and that’s the Supreme Court.
And now, the Netanyahu government is trying to neutralize or take over the Supreme Court, and they’ve already prepared a long list of laws. They already talk about it. What will happen the moment that this last check on the power is gone? They are openly trying to gain unlimited power and they openly talk about it, that once they have it, then they will take away the rights of Arabs, of LGBT people, of women, of secular Jews. And this is why you have hundreds of thousands of people in the streets. You have air force pilots saying, ‘we are stop, we stop flying.’ This is unheard of in Israel. We are still living under existential threat from Iran, from other enemies. And in the middle of this, you have air force pilots who dedicated their lives to protecting the country and they’re saying, ‘that’s it. If this government doesn’t stop what it is doing, we stopped flying.’
Lex Fridman
So as you said, I just did the interview. And as we were doing the interview, there’s protests in the streets. Do you think the protests will have an effect?
So as you said, I just did the interview. And as we were doing the interview, there’s protests in the streets. Do you think the protests will have an effect?
Yuval Noah Harari
I hope so very much. I’m going to many of these protests, I hope they will have an effect. If we fail, this is the end of Israeli democracy probably. This will have repercussions far beyond the borders of Israel. Israel is a nuclear power. Israel has one of the most advanced cyber capabilities in the world, able to strike basically anywhere in the world. If this country becomes a fundamentalist and militarized dictatorship, it can set fire to the entire Middle East. It can again have destabilizing effects long, far beyond the borders of Israel.
I hope so very much. I’m going to many of these protests, I hope they will have an effect. If we fail, this is the end of Israeli democracy probably. This will have repercussions far beyond the borders of Israel. Israel is a nuclear power. Israel has one of the most advanced cyber capabilities in the world, able to strike basically anywhere in the world. If this country becomes a fundamentalist and militarized dictatorship, it can set fire to the entire Middle East. It can again have destabilizing effects long, far beyond the borders of Israel.
Lex Fridman
So you think without the check on power, it’s possible that the Netanyahu government holds onto power?
So you think without the check on power, it’s possible that the Netanyahu government holds onto power?
Yuval Noah Harari
Nobody tries to gain unlimited power just for nothing. You have so many problems in Israel and Netanyahu talks so much about Iran, and the Palestinians, and Hezbollah. We have an economic crisis. Why is it so urgent at this moment in the face of such opposition, why is it so crucial for them to neutralize the Supreme Court? They’re just doing it for the fun of it. No, they know what they are doing. They are adamant. We were not sure of it before. There was a, like a couple of months ago, they came out with this plan to take over the Supreme Court to have all these laws. And there were hundreds of thousands people in the streets, again, soldiers saying they will stop serving, a general strike in the economy. And they stopped. And they started a process of negotiations to try and reach a settlement.
Nobody tries to gain unlimited power just for nothing. You have so many problems in Israel and Netanyahu talks so much about Iran, and the Palestinians, and Hezbollah. We have an economic crisis. Why is it so urgent at this moment in the face of such opposition, why is it so crucial for them to neutralize the Supreme Court? They’re just doing it for the fun of it. No, they know what they are doing. They are adamant. We were not sure of it before. There was a, like a couple of months ago, they came out with this plan to take over the Supreme Court to have all these laws. And there were hundreds of thousands people in the streets, again, soldiers saying they will stop serving, a general strike in the economy. And they stopped. And they started a process of negotiations to try and reach a settlement.
And then they broke down. They stopped the negotiations and they restarted this process of legislation trying to gain unlimited power. So any doubt we had before, okay, maybe they changed their purposes. No, it’s now very clear. They are 100% focused on gaining absolute power. They are now trying a different tactic. Previously, they had all these dozens of laws that they wanted to pass very quickly within a month or two. They realized, no, there is too much opposition. So now, they’re doing what is known as salami tactics, slice by slice. Now, they’re trying to one law, if this succeeds, then they’ll pass the next one and the next one, and the next one. This is why we are now at a very crucial moment. And when you see again hundreds of thousands of people in the streets almost every day, when you’re seeing resistance with the armed forces, within the security forces, you see high-tech companies saying, we will go on strike.
They are private businesses, high-tech companies. I think it’s almost unprecedented for a private business to go on strike because what will economic success benefit us if we live under a messianic dictatorship? And again, the fuel for this whole thing is to a large extent coming from Messianic religious groups, which… Just the thought, what happens if these people have unlimited control of Israel’s nuclear arsenal, and Israel’s military capabilities and cyber capabilities. This is very, very scary. Not just for the citizens of Israel, it should be scary for people everywhere.
Lex Fridman
So it would be scary for it to go from being a problem of security and protecting the peace to becoming a religious war.
So it would be scary for it to go from being a problem of security and protecting the peace to becoming a religious war.
Yuval Noah Harari
It is already becoming a religious war. The war, the conflict with the Palestinians was for many years a national conflict, in essence. Over the last few years, maybe a decade or two, it is morphing into a religious conflict, which is again, a very worrying development. When nations are in conflict, you can reach some compromise. Okay, you have this bit of land, we have this bit of land. But when it becomes a religious conflict between fundamentalists, between messianic people, compromise becomes much more difficult because you don’t compromise on eternity, you don’t compromise on God. And this is where we are heading right now.
It is already becoming a religious war. The war, the conflict with the Palestinians was for many years a national conflict, in essence. Over the last few years, maybe a decade or two, it is morphing into a religious conflict, which is again, a very worrying development. When nations are in conflict, you can reach some compromise. Okay, you have this bit of land, we have this bit of land. But when it becomes a religious conflict between fundamentalists, between messianic people, compromise becomes much more difficult because you don’t compromise on eternity, you don’t compromise on God. And this is where we are heading right now.
Lex Fridman
So I know you said, “It’s a small nation somewhere in the Middle East,” but it also happens to be the epicenter of one of the longest running, one of the most tense conflicts and crises in human history. So at the very least, it serves as a study of how conflict can be resolved. So what are the biggest obstacles to you to achieving peace in this part of the world?
So I know you said, “It’s a small nation somewhere in the Middle East,” but it also happens to be the epicenter of one of the longest running, one of the most tense conflicts and crises in human history. So at the very least, it serves as a study of how conflict can be resolved. So what are the biggest obstacles to you to achieving peace in this part of the world?
Yuval Noah Harari
Motivation. I think it’s easy to achieve peace if you have the motivation on both sides. Unfortunately the present juncture, there is not enough motivation on either side, either the Palestinian or Israeli side. Peace… In mathematics, you have problems without solutions. You can prove mathematically that this mathematical problem has no solution. In politics, there is no such thing. All problems have solutions if you have the motivation. But motivation is the big problem. And again, we can go into the reasons why, but the fact is that on neither side is there enough motivation. If there was motivation, the solution would’ve been easy.
Motivation. I think it’s easy to achieve peace if you have the motivation on both sides. Unfortunately the present juncture, there is not enough motivation on either side, either the Palestinian or Israeli side. Peace… In mathematics, you have problems without solutions. You can prove mathematically that this mathematical problem has no solution. In politics, there is no such thing. All problems have solutions if you have the motivation. But motivation is the big problem. And again, we can go into the reasons why, but the fact is that on neither side is there enough motivation. If there was motivation, the solution would’ve been easy.
Lex Fridman
Is there an important distinction to draw between the people on the street and the leaders in power in terms of motivation? So are most people motivated and hoping for peace and the leaders are motivated and incentivized to continue war?
Is there an important distinction to draw between the people on the street and the leaders in power in terms of motivation? So are most people motivated and hoping for peace and the leaders are motivated and incentivized to continue war?
Yuval Noah Harari
I don’t think so.
I don’t think so.
Lex Fridman
Or the people also?
Or the people also?
Yuval Noah Harari
I think it’s a deep problem. It’s also the people, it’s not just the leaders.
I think it’s a deep problem. It’s also the people, it’s not just the leaders.
Lex Fridman
Is it even a human problem of literally hate in people’s heart?
Is it even a human problem of literally hate in people’s heart?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah, there is a lot of hate. One of the things that happened in Israel over the last 10 years or so, Israel became much stronger than it was before, largely thanks to technological development. And it feels that it no longer needs to compromise. Again, there are many reasons for it, but some of them are technological. Being one of the leading powers in cyber, in AI, in high-tech, we have developed very sophisticated ways to more easily control the Palestinian population. In the early 2000s, it seemed that it is becoming impossible to control millions of people against their will. It took too much power. It spilled too much blood on both sides. So there was an impression, ‘oh, this is becoming untenable.
Yeah, there is a lot of hate. One of the things that happened in Israel over the last 10 years or so, Israel became much stronger than it was before, largely thanks to technological development. And it feels that it no longer needs to compromise. Again, there are many reasons for it, but some of them are technological. Being one of the leading powers in cyber, in AI, in high-tech, we have developed very sophisticated ways to more easily control the Palestinian population. In the early 2000s, it seemed that it is becoming impossible to control millions of people against their will. It took too much power. It spilled too much blood on both sides. So there was an impression, ‘oh, this is becoming untenable.
And there are several reasons why it changed, but one of them was new technology. Israel developed very sophisticated surveillance technology that has made it much easier for Israeli security forces to control 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank against their will with a lot less effort, less boots on the ground, also less blood. And Israel is also now exporting this technology to many other regimes around the world. Again, I heard Netanyahu speaking about all the wonderful things that Israeli is exporting to the world. And it’s true, we are exporting some nice things. Water systems and tomato, new kinds of tomato. We are also exporting a lot of weapons and especially surveillance systems sometimes to unsavory regimes in order to control their populations.
Lex Fridman
Can you comment on, I think you’ve mentioned that the current state of affairs is the de facto three class state? Can you describe what you mean by that?
Can you comment on, I think you’ve mentioned that the current state of affairs is the de facto three class state? Can you describe what you mean by that?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. For many years the kind of leading solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the two-state solution.
Yes. For many years the kind of leading solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the two-state solution.
Lex Fridman
Can you describe what that means by the way?
Can you describe what that means by the way?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. Two states within, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean will have two states. Israel as a predominantly Jewish state and Palestine as a predominantly Palestinian state. Again, there were lots of discussions where the border passes, what happens with security arrangement and whatever. But this was the big solution. Israel has basically abandoned the two-state solution. Maybe they don’t say so officially the people in power, but in terms of how they actually, what they do on the ground, they abandoned it. Now they are effectively promoting the three class solution, which means there is just one country and one government, and one power between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, but you have three classes of people living there. You have Jews who enjoy full rights, all the rights. You have some Arabs who are Israeli citizens and have some rights. And then you have the other Arabs, the third class who have basically no civil rights and limited human rights. And that, that’s… Again, nobody would openly speak about it. But effectively, this is the reality on the ground already.
Yes. Two states within, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean will have two states. Israel as a predominantly Jewish state and Palestine as a predominantly Palestinian state. Again, there were lots of discussions where the border passes, what happens with security arrangement and whatever. But this was the big solution. Israel has basically abandoned the two-state solution. Maybe they don’t say so officially the people in power, but in terms of how they actually, what they do on the ground, they abandoned it. Now they are effectively promoting the three class solution, which means there is just one country and one government, and one power between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, but you have three classes of people living there. You have Jews who enjoy full rights, all the rights. You have some Arabs who are Israeli citizens and have some rights. And then you have the other Arabs, the third class who have basically no civil rights and limited human rights. And that, that’s… Again, nobody would openly speak about it. But effectively, this is the reality on the ground already.
Lex Fridman
So there’s many, and I’ll speak with then Palestinians who characterize this as a de facto one state apartheid. Is it, do you agree with this?
So there’s many, and I’ll speak with then Palestinians who characterize this as a de facto one state apartheid. Is it, do you agree with this?
Yuval Noah Harari
I would take issue. I would take issue with the term apartheid. Generally speaking as a historian, I don’t really like historical analogies because there are always differences, key differences. The biggest difference between the situation here and the situation in South Africa in the time of the Apartheid is that black South Africans did not deny the existence of South Africa and did not call for the destruction of South Africa. They had a very simple goal. They had a very simple demand. We want to be equal citizens of this country. That’s it. And the apartheid regime was, ‘no, you can’t be equal citizens.’ Now in Israel-Palestine, it’s different.
I would take issue. I would take issue with the term apartheid. Generally speaking as a historian, I don’t really like historical analogies because there are always differences, key differences. The biggest difference between the situation here and the situation in South Africa in the time of the Apartheid is that black South Africans did not deny the existence of South Africa and did not call for the destruction of South Africa. They had a very simple goal. They had a very simple demand. We want to be equal citizens of this country. That’s it. And the apartheid regime was, ‘no, you can’t be equal citizens.’ Now in Israel-Palestine, it’s different.
The Palestinians, many of them don’t recognize the existence of Israel. Don’t or are not willing to recognize it. And they don’t demand to be citizens of Israel. They demand some of them to destroy it and replace it with the Palestinian state. Some of them demand a separate state. But if the Palestinians would adopt the same policy as the black South Africans, if you have the Palestinians coming and saying, okay, forget about it. We don’t want to destroy Israel. We don’t know a Palestinian country. We have a very simple request, a very simple demand. Give us our full rights. We also want to vote to the Knesset. We also want to get the full protection of the law. That’s it, that’s our only demand. Israel will be in deep, deep trouble at that moment, but we are not there.
Lex Fridman
I wonder if there will ever be a future when such a thing happens where everybody, the majority of people, Arab and Jew, Israeli and Palestinian accept the one-state solution and say, we want equal rights.
I wonder if there will ever be a future when such a thing happens where everybody, the majority of people, Arab and Jew, Israeli and Palestinian accept the one-state solution and say, we want equal rights.
Yuval Noah Harari
Never say never in history. It’s not coming anytime soon from either side. When you look at the long term of history, one of the curious things you see, and that’s what makes us different, human groups from animal species. Gorillas and chimpanzees, they’re separate species, they can never merge. Cats and dogs will never merge. But different national and religious groups in history, even when they hate each other, surprisingly, they sometimes end by merging. If you look at Germany for instance, so for centuries you had Prussians and Bavarian and Saxons who fought each other ferociously and hated each other. And there are sometimes also different religions, Catholics, Protestants. The worst war in European history, according to some measures, was not the Second World War or the First World War, it was the 30 years war waged largely on German soil between Germans, Protestants, and Catholics. But eventually, they united to form a single country. You saw the same thing, I don’t know, in Britain. English and Scotts for centuries hated and fought each other ferociously, eventually coming together. Maybe it’ll break up again, I don’t know. But the power of the kind of forces of merger in history, you are very often influenced by the people you fight, by the people you even hate more than by almost anybody else.
Never say never in history. It’s not coming anytime soon from either side. When you look at the long term of history, one of the curious things you see, and that’s what makes us different, human groups from animal species. Gorillas and chimpanzees, they’re separate species, they can never merge. Cats and dogs will never merge. But different national and religious groups in history, even when they hate each other, surprisingly, they sometimes end by merging. If you look at Germany for instance, so for centuries you had Prussians and Bavarian and Saxons who fought each other ferociously and hated each other. And there are sometimes also different religions, Catholics, Protestants. The worst war in European history, according to some measures, was not the Second World War or the First World War, it was the 30 years war waged largely on German soil between Germans, Protestants, and Catholics. But eventually, they united to form a single country. You saw the same thing, I don’t know, in Britain. English and Scotts for centuries hated and fought each other ferociously, eventually coming together. Maybe it’ll break up again, I don’t know. But the power of the kind of forces of merger in history, you are very often influenced by the people you fight, by the people you even hate more than by almost anybody else.
Peace in Ukraine
Lex Fridman
So if we apply those ideas, the ideas of this part of the world to another part of the world that’s currently in war, Russia and Ukraine, from what you learned here, how do you think peace can be achieved in Ukraine?
So if we apply those ideas, the ideas of this part of the world to another part of the world that’s currently in war, Russia and Ukraine, from what you learned here, how do you think peace can be achieved in Ukraine?
Yuval Noah Harari
Oh, peace can be achieved any moment. It’s motivation. In this case, it’s just one person. Putin just need to say, that’s it. The Ukrainians, they don’t demand anything from Russia. Just go home, that’s the only thing they want. They don’t want to conquer any bit of Russian territory. They don’t want to change the regime in Moscow, nothing. They just tell the Russians, go home. That’s it. And of course, again, motivation. How do you get somebody like Putin to admit that he made a colossal mistake, a human mistake, an ethical mistake, a political mistake in starting this war? This is very, very difficult. But in terms of what would the solution look like? Very simple. The Russians go home. End of story.
Oh, peace can be achieved any moment. It’s motivation. In this case, it’s just one person. Putin just need to say, that’s it. The Ukrainians, they don’t demand anything from Russia. Just go home, that’s the only thing they want. They don’t want to conquer any bit of Russian territory. They don’t want to change the regime in Moscow, nothing. They just tell the Russians, go home. That’s it. And of course, again, motivation. How do you get somebody like Putin to admit that he made a colossal mistake, a human mistake, an ethical mistake, a political mistake in starting this war? This is very, very difficult. But in terms of what would the solution look like? Very simple. The Russians go home. End of story.
Lex Fridman
Do you believe in the power of conversation between leaders to sit down as human beings and agree? First of all, what home means because we humans draw lines?
Do you believe in the power of conversation between leaders to sit down as human beings and agree? First of all, what home means because we humans draw lines?
Yuval Noah Harari
That’s true. I believe in the power of conversation. The big question to ask is where? Where do conversations, real conversations take place? And this is tricky. One of the interesting things to ask about any conflict, about any political system is where do the real conversations take place? And very often, they don’t play take place in the places you think that they are. But think about American politics. When the country was founded in the late 18th century, people understood holding conversation between leaders is very important for the functioning of democracy. We’ll create a place for that, that’s called Congress. This is where leaders are supposed to meet and talk about the main issues of the day. Maybe there was a time sometime in the past when this actually happened, when you had two factions holding different ideas about foreign policy or economic policy and they met in Congress, and somebody would come and give a speech and the people all on the other side would say, “Hey, that’s interesting. I haven’t thought about it. Yes, maybe we can agree on that.”
That’s true. I believe in the power of conversation. The big question to ask is where? Where do conversations, real conversations take place? And this is tricky. One of the interesting things to ask about any conflict, about any political system is where do the real conversations take place? And very often, they don’t play take place in the places you think that they are. But think about American politics. When the country was founded in the late 18th century, people understood holding conversation between leaders is very important for the functioning of democracy. We’ll create a place for that, that’s called Congress. This is where leaders are supposed to meet and talk about the main issues of the day. Maybe there was a time sometime in the past when this actually happened, when you had two factions holding different ideas about foreign policy or economic policy and they met in Congress, and somebody would come and give a speech and the people all on the other side would say, “Hey, that’s interesting. I haven’t thought about it. Yes, maybe we can agree on that.”
This is no longer happening in Congress. Nobody, I don’t think there is any speech in Congress that causes anybody on the other side to change their opinion about anything. So this is no longer a place where real conversations take place. The big question about American democracy is, is there a place where real conversations which actually change people’s minds still take place? If not, then this democracy is dying also. Democracy without conversation cannot exist for long. And it’s the same question you should ask also about dictatorial regimes, like you think about Russia or China. So China has the Great Hall of the People. Well, the representatives, the supposed representative of the people meet every now and then, but no real conversation takes place there. A key question to ask about the Chinese system is, behind closed doors, let’s say in a poly bureau meeting, do people have a real conversation?
If Xi Jinping says one thing and some other big shot thinks differently, will they have the courage, the ability, the backbone to say, with all due respect, they think differently and there is a real conversation, or not? I don’t know the answer, but this is a key question. This is the difference between an authoritarian regime, it can still have different voices within it. But at a certain point, you have a personality count. Nobody dares say anything against the leader. And when it comes again to Ukraine and Russia, I don’t think that if you get, if you somehow manage to get Putin and Zelensky to the same room, when everybody knows that they are there and they, they’ll, they’ll have a moment of empathy, of human connection and they have… No, I don’t think it can happen like that. I do hope that there are other spaces where somebody like Putin can still have a real human conversation. I don’t know if this is the case. I hope so.
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s several interesting dynamics and you spoke to some of them. So one is internally with advisors, you have to have hope that there’s people that would disagree that would have a lively debate internally. Then there’s also the thing you mentioned, which is direct communication between Putin and Zelensky in private, picking up a phone, a rotary phone, old school. I still believe in the power of that. But while that’s exceptionally difficult in the current state of affairs, what’s also possible to have is a mediator like the United States or some other leader.
Well, there’s several interesting dynamics and you spoke to some of them. So one is internally with advisors, you have to have hope that there’s people that would disagree that would have a lively debate internally. Then there’s also the thing you mentioned, which is direct communication between Putin and Zelensky in private, picking up a phone, a rotary phone, old school. I still believe in the power of that. But while that’s exceptionally difficult in the current state of affairs, what’s also possible to have is a mediator like the United States or some other leader.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Like the leader of Israel or the leader of another nation that’s respected by both, or India for example, that can have first of all individual conversations and then literally get into a room together.
Like the leader of Israel or the leader of another nation that’s respected by both, or India for example, that can have first of all individual conversations and then literally get into a room together.
Yuval Noah Harari
It is possible. I would say more generally about conversations as… It goes back a little to what I said earlier about the Marxist view of history. One of the problematic things I see today in many academic circles is that people focus too much on power. They think that the whole of history or the whole of politics is just a power structure. It’s just struggle about power. Now, if you think that the whole of history and the whole of politics is only power, then there is no room for conversation. Because if what you have is a struggle between different powerful interests, there is no point talking. The only thing that changes it is fighting. My view is that, no, it’s not all about power structures. It’s not all about power dynamics. Underneath the power structure, there are stories, stories in human minds. And this is great news, if it’s true, this is good news. Because unlike power that can only be changed through fighting, stories can sometimes, it’s not easy, but sometimes stories can be changed through talking, and that’s the hope.
It is possible. I would say more generally about conversations as… It goes back a little to what I said earlier about the Marxist view of history. One of the problematic things I see today in many academic circles is that people focus too much on power. They think that the whole of history or the whole of politics is just a power structure. It’s just struggle about power. Now, if you think that the whole of history and the whole of politics is only power, then there is no room for conversation. Because if what you have is a struggle between different powerful interests, there is no point talking. The only thing that changes it is fighting. My view is that, no, it’s not all about power structures. It’s not all about power dynamics. Underneath the power structure, there are stories, stories in human minds. And this is great news, if it’s true, this is good news. Because unlike power that can only be changed through fighting, stories can sometimes, it’s not easy, but sometimes stories can be changed through talking, and that’s the hope.
I think in everything from couple therapy to nation therapy, if you think it’s power therapy, it’s all about power, there is no place for a conversation. But if to some extent it’s the stories in people minds, if you can enable one person to see the story in the mind of another person, and more importantly, if you can have some kind of critical distance from the story in your own mind, then maybe you can change it a little and then you don’t need to fight. You can actually find a better story that you can both agree to. It sometimes happens in history. Again, French and Germans fought for generations and generations. Now, they live in peace. Not because, I don’t know, they found a new planet they can share between France and Germany so now everybody has enough territory. No, they actually have less territory than previously because they lost all their overseas empires, but they managed to find a story, the European story, that both Germans and French people are happy with. So they live in peace.
Lex Fridman
I very much believe in this vision that you have of the power of stories. And one of the tools is conversations, another is books. There’s some guy that wrote a book about this, power of stories, he happens to be sitting in front of me. And that happened to spread across a lot of people, and now they believe in the power of story and narrative. Even a children’s book too, so the kids. And It’s fascinating how that spreads. Underneath your work, there’s an optimism. And I think underneath conversations is, what I tried to do is an optimism, that it’s not just about power struggles.
I very much believe in this vision that you have of the power of stories. And one of the tools is conversations, another is books. There’s some guy that wrote a book about this, power of stories, he happens to be sitting in front of me. And that happened to spread across a lot of people, and now they believe in the power of story and narrative. Even a children’s book too, so the kids. And It’s fascinating how that spreads. Underneath your work, there’s an optimism. And I think underneath conversations is, what I tried to do is an optimism, that it’s not just about power struggles.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
That it’s about stories which is like a connection between humans and together kind of evolving these stories that maximize hap or minimize suffering in the world.
That it’s about stories which is like a connection between humans and together kind of evolving these stories that maximize hap or minimize suffering in the world.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah. This is why I also, I think I admire what you are doing, that you’re going to talk with some of the most difficult characters around in the world today, and with this basic belief that by talking maybe we can move them an inch, which is a lot when it comes to people with so much power. I think one of the biggest success stories in modern history, I would say, is feminism. Because feminism believed in the power of stories, not so much in the power of violence, of armed conflict. By many measures, feminism has been maybe the most successful social movement of the 20th century and maybe of the modern age. The systems of oppression, which were in place throughout the world for thousands of years, and they seem to be just natural, eternal. You had all these religious movements, all these political revolutions. And one thing remained constant, and this is the patriarchal system and the oppression of women.
Yeah. This is why I also, I think I admire what you are doing, that you’re going to talk with some of the most difficult characters around in the world today, and with this basic belief that by talking maybe we can move them an inch, which is a lot when it comes to people with so much power. I think one of the biggest success stories in modern history, I would say, is feminism. Because feminism believed in the power of stories, not so much in the power of violence, of armed conflict. By many measures, feminism has been maybe the most successful social movement of the 20th century and maybe of the modern age. The systems of oppression, which were in place throughout the world for thousands of years, and they seem to be just natural, eternal. You had all these religious movements, all these political revolutions. And one thing remained constant, and this is the patriarchal system and the oppression of women.
And then feminism came along. And you had leaders like Lenin, like Mao saying that if you want to make a big social change, you must use violence. Power comes from the barrel of the gun, of a gun. If you want to make an omelet, you need to break eggs, and all these things. And the feminist said, no, we won’t use the power of the gun. We will make an omelet without breaking any eggs. And they made a much better omelet than Lenin or Mao, or any of these violent revolutionaries. I don’t think that they, [inaudible 01:39:04]-
Yuval Noah Harari
… Revolutionaries.
… Revolutionaries.
I don’t think that they … They certainly didn’t start any wars or build any gulags. I don’t think they even murdered a single politician. I don’t think there was any political assassination anywhere by feminists. There was a lot of violence against them, both verbal but also physical, and they didn’t reply by waging violence, and they succeeded in changing this deep structure of oppression in a way which benefited not just women, but also men.
So this gives me hope that, it’s not easy, in many cases we fail, but it is possible sometimes in history to make a very, very big change, positive change mainly by talking and demonstrating and changing the story in people’s minds and not by using violence.
Lex Fridman
It’s fascinating that feminism and communism and all these things happened in the 20th century. So many interesting things happen in the 20th century. So many movements, so many ideas, nuclear weapons, all of it. Computers. It just seems like a lot of stuff really quickly percolated and it’s accelerating.
It’s fascinating that feminism and communism and all these things happened in the 20th century. So many interesting things happen in the 20th century. So many movements, so many ideas, nuclear weapons, all of it. Computers. It just seems like a lot of stuff really quickly percolated and it’s accelerating.
Yuval Noah Harari
It’s still accelerating. I mean, history is just accelerating for centuries. And the 20th century, we squeezed into it things that previously took thousands of years. And now, I mean, we are squeezing it into decades.
It’s still accelerating. I mean, history is just accelerating for centuries. And the 20th century, we squeezed into it things that previously took thousands of years. And now, I mean, we are squeezing it into decades.
Lex Fridman
And you very well could be one of the last historians, human historians to have ever lived.
And you very well could be one of the last historians, human historians to have ever lived.
Yuval Noah Harari
Could be. I think our species, homo sapiens. I don’t think we’ll be around in a century or two. We could destroy ourselves in a nuclear war, through ecological collapse, by giving too much power to AI that goes out of our control. But if we survive, we’ll probably have so much power that we will change ourselves using various technologies so that our descendants will no longer be homo sapiens like us. They will be more different from us than we are different from Neanderthals. So maybe they’ll have historians, but it will no longer be human historians or homo sapien historians like me.
Could be. I think our species, homo sapiens. I don’t think we’ll be around in a century or two. We could destroy ourselves in a nuclear war, through ecological collapse, by giving too much power to AI that goes out of our control. But if we survive, we’ll probably have so much power that we will change ourselves using various technologies so that our descendants will no longer be homo sapiens like us. They will be more different from us than we are different from Neanderthals. So maybe they’ll have historians, but it will no longer be human historians or homo sapien historians like me.
I think it’s an extremely dangerous development. And the chances that this will go wrong, that people will use the new technologies trying to upgrade humans, but actually downgrading them, this is a very, very big danger. If you let corporations and armies and ruthless politicians change humans using tools like AI and bioengineering, it’s very likely that they will try to enhance a few human qualities that they need, like intelligence and discipline, while neglecting what are potentially more important human qualities, like compassion, like artistic sensitivity, like spirituality …
If you give Putin, for instance, bioengineering and AI and brain computer interfaces, he’s likely to want to create a race of super soldiers who are much more intelligent and much more stronger and also much more disciplined and never rebel and march on Moscow against him. But he has no interest in making them more compassionate or more spiritual. So the end result could be a new type of humans, a downgraded humans, who are highly intelligent and disciplined, but have no compassion and no spiritual depth.
And this is one … For me, this is the dystopia, the apocalypse. When people talk about the new technologies and they have this scenario of The Terminator, robots lying in the street shooting people, this is not what worries me. I think we can avoid that. What really worries me is using … The corporations, armies, politicians will use the new technologies to change us in a way which will destroy our humanity, or the best parts of our humanity.
Lex Fridman
And one of those ways could be removing compassion.
And one of those ways could be removing compassion.
Another way that really worries me, for me is probably more likely, is a brave new world kind of thing that sort of removes the flaws of humans, maybe it removes the diversity in humans, and makes us all kind of these dopamine chasing creatures that just kind of maximize enjoyment in the short term, which kind of seems like a good thing maybe in the short term, but it creates a society that doesn’t think, that doesn’t create, that just is sitting there enjoying itself at a more and more rapid pace, which seems like another kind of society that could be easily controlled by a centralized center of power.
But the set of dystopias that we could arrive at through this if they’re allowing corporations to modify humans is vast, and we should be worried about that.
It seems like humans are pretty good as we are. All the flaws, all of it together.
Yuval Noah Harari
We are better than anything that we can intentionally design at present. Like any intentionally designed humans at the present moment is going to be much, much worse than us. Because basically, we don’t understand ourselves. I mean, as long as we don’t understand our brain, our body, our mind, it’s a very, very bad idea to start manipulating a system that you don’t understand deeply. And we don’t understand ourselves.
We are better than anything that we can intentionally design at present. Like any intentionally designed humans at the present moment is going to be much, much worse than us. Because basically, we don’t understand ourselves. I mean, as long as we don’t understand our brain, our body, our mind, it’s a very, very bad idea to start manipulating a system that you don’t understand deeply. And we don’t understand ourselves.
Conspiracy theories
Lex Fridman
So I have to ask you about an interesting dynamic of stories. You wrote an article two years ago titled, ‘When The World Seems Like One Big Conspiracy: How Understanding The Structure of Global Cabal Theories Can Shed Light On Their Allure And Their Inherent Falsehood.’.
So I have to ask you about an interesting dynamic of stories. You wrote an article two years ago titled, ‘When The World Seems Like One Big Conspiracy: How Understanding The Structure of Global Cabal Theories Can Shed Light On Their Allure And Their Inherent Falsehood.’.
What are global cabal theories and why do so many people believe them? 37% of Americans, for example.
Yuval Noah Harari
Well, the global cabal theory, it has many variations, but basically there is a small group of people, a small cabal that secretly controls everything that is happening in the world. All the wars, all the revolutions, all the epidemics, everything that is happening is controlled by this very small group of people, who are of course evil and have bad intentions. And this is a very well known story. It’s not new. It’s been there for thousands of years.
Well, the global cabal theory, it has many variations, but basically there is a small group of people, a small cabal that secretly controls everything that is happening in the world. All the wars, all the revolutions, all the epidemics, everything that is happening is controlled by this very small group of people, who are of course evil and have bad intentions. And this is a very well known story. It’s not new. It’s been there for thousands of years.
It’s very attractive because, first of all, it’s simple. You don’t need to understand everything that happens in the world, you just need to understand one thing. The war in Ukraine, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, 5G technology, COVID-19; it’s simple. There is this global cabal. They do all of it.
And also, it enables you to shift all the responsibility to all the bad things that are happening in the world to this small cabal. ” It’s the Jews, it’s the Free Masons. It’s not us.”
And also, it creates this fantasy, utopian fantasy. “If we only get rid of the small cabal, we’ve solved all the problems of the world. Salvation.” The Israeli/Palestinian conflict, the war in Ukraine, the epidemics, poverty, everything is solved just by knocking out this small cabal.
So again, it’s simple, it’s attractive, and this is why so many people believe it. Again, it’s not new. Nazism was exactly this. Nazism began as a conspiracy theory. We don’t call Nazism a conspiracy theory because, “Oh, it’s a big thing. It’s an ideology.” But if you look at it, it’s a conspiracy theory. The basic Nazi idea was that Jews control the world. Get rid of the Jews, you’ve solved all the world’s problems.
Now, the interesting thing about these kind of theories; again, they tell you that even things that look to be the opposite of each other, actually they are part of the conspiracy.
So in the case of Nazism, the Nazis told people, “You have capitalism and communism. You think that they are opposite, right? Ah, this is what the Jews want you to think. Actually, the Jews control both communism; Trotsky, Marx were Jews, blah, blah, blah; and capitalism. The Rothschilds, Wall Street: it’s all controlled by the Jews.” So the Jews are fooling everybody, but actually the communists and the capitalists are part of the same global cabal.
And again, this is very attractive because, “Ah, now I understand everything. And now I also know what to do. I just give power to Hitler, he gets rid of the Jews, I’ve solved all the problems of the world.”
Now, as a historian, the most important thing I can say about these theories, they are never right. Because the global cabal theory says two things. First, everything is controlled by a very small number of people; secondly, these people hide themselves. They do it in secret.
Now, both things are nonsense. It’s impossible for people to control a small group of people, to control and predict everything, because the world is too complicated. You know, you look at a real world conspiracy, conspiracy is basically just a plan.
Think about the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. You had the most powerful superpower in the world with the biggest military, with the biggest intelligence services, with the most sophisticated … You know, the FBI and the CIA and all the agents. They invade a third rate country, a third rate power, Iraq, with this idea, “We’ll take over Iraq and we’ll control it, we’ll make a new order in the Middle East.” And everything falls apart. Their plan completely backfires. Everything they hope to achieve, they achieve the opposite. America, United States is humiliated. They caused the rise of ISIS. They wanted to take out terrorism, they created more terrorism.
Worst of all, the big winner of the war was Iran. The United States goes to war with all its power and gives Iran a victory on a silver plate. The Iranians don’t need to do anything. The Americans are doing everything for them.
Now, this is real history. Real history is when you have not a small group of people, a lot of people with a lot of power carefully planning something, and it goes completely against their plan.
And this we know from personal experience. Every time we try to plan something, a birthday party, a surprise birthday party, a trip somewhere, things go wrong. This is reality. So the idea that a small group of, I don’t know, the Jewish cabal, the Freemasons, whoever, they can really control and predict all the wars, this is nonsense.
The second thing that is nonsense is to think they can do that and still remain secret.
It sometimes happens in history that a small group of people accumulates a lot of power. If I now tell you that Xi Jinping and the heads of the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, they have a lot of power, they control the military, the media, the economy, the universities of China; this is not a conspiracy theory. Obviously everybody knows it. Everybody knows it, because to gain so much power, you usually need publicity. Hitler gained a lot of power in Nazi Germany because he had a lot of publicity. If Hitler remained unknown working behind the scenes, he would not gain power.
So the way to gain power is usually through publicity. So secret cabals don’t gain power. And even if you gain a lot of power, nobody has the kind of power necessary to predict and control everything that happens in the world. All the time shit happens that you did not predict and you did not plan and you did not control.
Lex Fridman
The sad thing is there’s usually an explanation for everything you just said that involves a secret global cabal. The reason your vacation planning always goes wrong is because you’re not competent. There is a competent small group, ultra competent small group … I hear this with intelligence agencies; the CIA are running everything, Mossad is running everything.
The sad thing is there’s usually an explanation for everything you just said that involves a secret global cabal. The reason your vacation planning always goes wrong is because you’re not competent. There is a competent small group, ultra competent small group … I hear this with intelligence agencies; the CIA are running everything, Mossad is running everything.
Yuval Noah Harari
You see, as a historian, you get to know how many blunders these people do. They are so … They’re capable, but they’re so incompetent in so many ways.
You see, as a historian, you get to know how many blunders these people do. They are so … They’re capable, but they’re so incompetent in so many ways.
Again, look at the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Before the war, people thought, oh, Putin was such a genius, and the Russian army was one of the strongest armies in the world. This is what Putin thought. And it completely backfired.
Lex Fridman
Well, a cabal explanation there would be there’s a NATO-driven United States military industrial complex that wants to create chaos and incompetence.
Well, a cabal explanation there would be there’s a NATO-driven United States military industrial complex that wants to create chaos and incompetence.
Yuval Noah Harari
So they put a gun to Putin’s head and told him, “Vladimir, if you don’t invade, we shoot you?” How did they cause Putin to invade Ukraine?
So they put a gun to Putin’s head and told him, “Vladimir, if you don’t invade, we shoot you?” How did they cause Putin to invade Ukraine?
Lex Fridman
This is the thing about conspiracy theories is there’s usually a way to explain everything.
This is the thing about conspiracy theories is there’s usually a way to explain everything.
Yuval Noah Harari
It’s like religion. You can always find explanation for everything. And in the end, it’s intellectual integrity. If you insist, whenever people confront you with evidence, with finding some very, very complicated explanation for that too, you can explain everything. We know that. It’s a question of intellectual integrity.
It’s like religion. You can always find explanation for everything. And in the end, it’s intellectual integrity. If you insist, whenever people confront you with evidence, with finding some very, very complicated explanation for that too, you can explain everything. We know that. It’s a question of intellectual integrity.
And I’ll also say another thing. The conspiracy theories, they do get one thing right, certainly in today’s world. I think they represent an authentic and justified fear of a lot of people that they are losing control of their lives, they don’t understand what is happening. And this I think is not just a legitimate fear, this is an important fear. They are right. We are losing control of our lives, we are facing really big dangers, but not from a small cabal of fellow humans.
The problem with many of these conspiracy theories that, yes, we have a problem with new AI technology, but if you now direct the fire against certain people, so instead of all humans cooperating against our real common threats, whether it’s the rise of AI, whether it’s global warming, you are only causing us to fight each other.
And I think that the key question that people who spread these ideas; I mean, many of them, they honestly believe. It’s not malicious. They honestly believe in these theories; is do you want to spend your life spreading hate towards people, or do you want to work on more constructive projects?
I think one of the big differences between those who believe in conspiracy theories and people who warn about the dangers of AI, the dangers of climate change, we don’t see certain humans as evil and hateful. The problem isn’t humans, the problem is something outside humanity. Yes, humans are contributing to the problem, but ultimately the enemy is external to humanity. Whereas conspiracy theorists usually claim that a certain part of humanity is the source of all evil, which leads them to eventually think in terms of exterminating this part of humanity, which leads sometimes to historical disasters like Nazism.
Lex Fridman
So it can lead to hate, but it can also lead to cynicism, apathy that basically says, “It’s not in my power to make the world better,” so you don’t actually take action.
So it can lead to hate, but it can also lead to cynicism, apathy that basically says, “It’s not in my power to make the world better,” so you don’t actually take action.
Yuval Noah Harari
I think it is within the power of every individual to make the world a little bit better. You can’t do everything. Don’t try to do everything. Find one thing in your areas of activity, a place where you have some agency, and try to do that, and hope that other people do their bit. And if everybody do their bit, we’ll manage. And if we don’t, we don’t, but at least we try.
I think it is within the power of every individual to make the world a little bit better. You can’t do everything. Don’t try to do everything. Find one thing in your areas of activity, a place where you have some agency, and try to do that, and hope that other people do their bit. And if everybody do their bit, we’ll manage. And if we don’t, we don’t, but at least we try.
Lex Fridman
You have been part of conspiracy theories. I find myself recently becoming part of conspiracy theories. Is there advice you can give of how to be a human being in this world that values truth and reason while watching yourself become part of conspiracy theories? At least from my perspective, it seems very difficult to prove to the world that you’re not part of a conspiracy theory.
You have been part of conspiracy theories. I find myself recently becoming part of conspiracy theories. Is there advice you can give of how to be a human being in this world that values truth and reason while watching yourself become part of conspiracy theories? At least from my perspective, it seems very difficult to prove to the world that you’re not part of a conspiracy theory.
I, as you said, have interviewed Benjamin Netanyahu recently, I don’t know if you’re aware. But doing such things will also … You now pick up a new menu of items, a new set of conspiracy theories you’re now a part of. And I find it very frustrating because it makes it very difficult to respond, because I sense that people have the right intentions, like we said, they have a nervousness, a fear of power and the abuses of power; as do I. So I find myself in a difficult position that I have nothing to show to prove that I’m not part of such a conspiracy theory.
Yuval Noah Harari
I think ultimately you can’t. We can’t. I mean, it’s like proving consciousness. You can’t. That’s just the situation. Whatever you say can and will be used against you by some people. So this fantasy, “If I only say this, if I only show them that, if I only have this data, they will see I’m okay,” it doesn’t work like that.
I think ultimately you can’t. We can’t. I mean, it’s like proving consciousness. You can’t. That’s just the situation. Whatever you say can and will be used against you by some people. So this fantasy, “If I only say this, if I only show them that, if I only have this data, they will see I’m okay,” it doesn’t work like that.
I think to keep your sanity in this situation, first of all, it’s important to understand that most of these people are not evil. They are not doing it on purpose. Many of them really believe that there is some very nefarious, powerful conspiracy which is causing a lot of harm in the world, and they’re doing a good thing by exposing it and making people aware of it and trying to stop it. If you think that you are surrounded by evil, you are falling into the same rabbit hole, you’re falling into the same paranoid state of mind, “Oh, the world is full of these evil people that … ” No. Most of them are good people.
And also, I think we can empathize with some of the key ideas there, which I share, that yes, it’s becoming more and more difficult to understand what is happening in the world. There are huge dangers in the world, existential dangers to the human species. But they don’t come from a small cabal of Jews or gay people or feminists or whatever. They come from much more diffused forces, which are not under the control of any single individual.
We don’t have to look for the evil people. We need to look for human allies in order to work together against, again, the dangers of AI, the dangers of bioengineering, the dangers of climate change. And when you wake up in the morning, the question is, do you want to spend your day spreading hatred or do you want to spend your day trying to make allies and work together?
AI safety
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you kind of a big philosophical question about AI and the threat of it. Let’s look at the threat side.
Let me ask you kind of a big philosophical question about AI and the threat of it. Let’s look at the threat side.
So folks like Eliezer Yudkowsky worry that AI might kill all of us. Do you worry about that range of possibilities where artificial intelligence systems in a variety of ways might destroy human civilization?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. I talk a lot about it, about the dangers of AI. I sometimes get into trouble because I depict these scenarios of how AI becoming very dangerous, and then people say that I’m encouraging these scenarios. But I’m talking about it as a warning.
Yes. I talk a lot about it, about the dangers of AI. I sometimes get into trouble because I depict these scenarios of how AI becoming very dangerous, and then people say that I’m encouraging these scenarios. But I’m talking about it as a warning.
I’m not so terrified of the simplistic idea. Again, The Terminator scenario of robots running in the streets shooting everybody. I’m more worried about AI accumulating more and more power and basically taking over society, taking over our lives, taking power away from us until we don’t understand what is happening and we lose control of our lives and of the future.
The two most important things to realize about AI; you know, so many things are being said now about AI, but I think there are two things that every person should know about AI.
First is that AI is the first tool in history that can make decisions by itself. All previous tools in history couldn’t make decisions. This is why they empowered us. You invent a knife, you invent an atom bomb; the atom bomb cannot decide to start a war, cannot decide which city to bomb. AI can make decisions by itself. Autonomous weapon systems can decide by themselves who to kill, who to bomb.
The second thing is that AI is the first tool in history that can create new ideas by itself. The printing press could print our ideas, but could not create new ideas. AI can create new ideas entirely by itself. This is unprecedented.
Therefore, it is the first technology in history that instead of giving power to humans, it takes power away from us. And the danger is that it will increasingly take more and more power from us until we are left helpless and clueless about what is happening in the world.
And this is already beginning to happen in an accelerated pace. More and more decisions about our lives, whether to give us a loan, whether to give us a mortgage, whether to give us a job are taken by AI, and more and more of the ideas, of the images, of the stories that surround us and shape our minds, our world are produced, are created by AI, not by human beings.
Lex Fridman
If you can just linger on that, what is the danger of that? That more and more of the creative side is done by AI? The idea generation? Is it that we become stale in our thinking? Is it that that idea generation is so fundamental to the evolution of humanity?
If you can just linger on that, what is the danger of that? That more and more of the creative side is done by AI? The idea generation? Is it that we become stale in our thinking? Is it that that idea generation is so fundamental to the evolution of humanity?
Yuval Noah Harari
But we can’t resist the ideas.
But we can’t resist the ideas.
Lex Fridman
Ah.
Ah.
Yuval Noah Harari
To resist an idea, you need to have some vision of the creative process.
To resist an idea, you need to have some vision of the creative process.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yuval Noah Harari
Now, this is a very old fear. You go back to Plato’s Cave, this idea that people are sitting chained in a cave and seeing shadows on a screen, on a wall, and thinking, “This is reality.” You go back to Descartes and he has this thought experiment of the demon, and Descartes asks himself, “How do I know that any of this is real? Maybe there is a demon who is creating all of this and is basically enslaving me by surrounding me with these illusions.” You go back to Buddha, it’s the same question; what if we are living in a world of illusions, and because we have been living in it throughout our lives, all our ideas, all our desires, how we understand ourself, this is all the product of the same illusions?
Now, this is a very old fear. You go back to Plato’s Cave, this idea that people are sitting chained in a cave and seeing shadows on a screen, on a wall, and thinking, “This is reality.” You go back to Descartes and he has this thought experiment of the demon, and Descartes asks himself, “How do I know that any of this is real? Maybe there is a demon who is creating all of this and is basically enslaving me by surrounding me with these illusions.” You go back to Buddha, it’s the same question; what if we are living in a world of illusions, and because we have been living in it throughout our lives, all our ideas, all our desires, how we understand ourself, this is all the product of the same illusions?
And this was a big philosophical question for thousands of years. Now it’s becoming a practical question of engineering, because previously all the ideas, as far as we know … Maybe we are living inside a computer simulation of intelligent rats from the planet [inaudible 02:04:31]. If that’s the case, we don’t know about it. But taking what we do know about human history until now, all the, again, stories, images, paintings, songs, operas, theater, everything we’ve encountered and shaped our minds was created by humans.
Now, increasingly, we live in a world where more and more of these cultural artifacts will be coming from an alien intelligence. Very quickly we might reach a point when most of the stories, images, songs, TV shows, whatever are created by an alien intelligence.
And if we now find ourselves inside this kind of world of illusions created by an alien intelligence that we don’t understand, but it understands us, this is a kind of spiritual enslavement that we won’t be able to break out of because it understands us. It understands how to manipulate us, but we don’t understand what is behind this screen of stories and images and songs.
Lex Fridman
So if there’s a set of AI systems that are operating in the space of ideas, they’re far superior to ours, and it’s opaque to us, we’re not able to see through, how does that change the pursuit of happiness, the human pursuit of happiness, life? Where do we get joy if we’re surrounded by AI systems that are doing most of the cool things humans do much better than us?
So if there’s a set of AI systems that are operating in the space of ideas, they’re far superior to ours, and it’s opaque to us, we’re not able to see through, how does that change the pursuit of happiness, the human pursuit of happiness, life? Where do we get joy if we’re surrounded by AI systems that are doing most of the cool things humans do much better than us?
Yuval Noah Harari
You know, some of the things, it’s okay that the AI’s will do them. Many human tasks and jobs, they’re drudgery, they are not fun, they are not developing us emotionally or spiritually. It’s fine if the robots take over. I don’t know, I think about the people in supermarkets or grocery stores that spend hours every day just passing items and charging you the money. I mean, if this can be automated, wonderful. We need to make sure that these people then have better jobs, better means of supporting themselves, and developing their social abilities, their spiritual abilities.
You know, some of the things, it’s okay that the AI’s will do them. Many human tasks and jobs, they’re drudgery, they are not fun, they are not developing us emotionally or spiritually. It’s fine if the robots take over. I don’t know, I think about the people in supermarkets or grocery stores that spend hours every day just passing items and charging you the money. I mean, if this can be automated, wonderful. We need to make sure that these people then have better jobs, better means of supporting themselves, and developing their social abilities, their spiritual abilities.
And that’s the ideal world that AI can create, that it takes away from us the things that it’s better if we don’t do them and allows us to focus on the most important things and the deepest aspects of our nature, of our potential.
If we give AI control of the sphere of ideas, at this stage, I think it’s very, very dangerous, because it doesn’t understand us. AI at present is mostly digesting the products of human culture. Everything we’ve produced over thousands of years, it eats all of these cultural products, digests it, and starts producing its own new stuff. But we still haven’t figured out ourselves in our bodies, our brains, our minds, our psychology. So an AI based on our flow and understanding of ourselves is a very dangerous thing.
I think that we need, first of all, to keep developing ourselves. If for every dollar and every minute that we spend on developing AI, artificial intelligence, we spend another dollar and another minute in developing human consciousness, the human mind will be okay. The danger is that we spent all our effort on developing an AI at the time we don’t understand ourselves, and then letting the AI take over. That’s a road to a human catastrophe.
Lex Fridman
Does it surprise you how well large language models work?
Does it surprise you how well large language models work?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
I mean, has it modified your understanding of the nature of intelligence?
I mean, has it modified your understanding of the nature of intelligence?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. I mean, I’ve been writing about AI for like eight years now and engaged with all these predictions and speculations, and when it actually came, it was much faster and more powerful than I thought it would be. I didn’t think that we would have, in 2023, an AI that can hold a conversation that you can’t know if it’s a human being or an AI, that can write beautiful texts in … I mean, I read the texts written by AI, and the thing that strikes me most is the coherence. People think, “Oh, it’s nothing. They just take ideas from here and there, words from here and there, and put it … ” No, it’s so coherent. I mean, you read in not sentences, you read paragraphs, you read entire texts, and there is logic, there is a structure.
Yes. I mean, I’ve been writing about AI for like eight years now and engaged with all these predictions and speculations, and when it actually came, it was much faster and more powerful than I thought it would be. I didn’t think that we would have, in 2023, an AI that can hold a conversation that you can’t know if it’s a human being or an AI, that can write beautiful texts in … I mean, I read the texts written by AI, and the thing that strikes me most is the coherence. People think, “Oh, it’s nothing. They just take ideas from here and there, words from here and there, and put it … ” No, it’s so coherent. I mean, you read in not sentences, you read paragraphs, you read entire texts, and there is logic, there is a structure.
Lex Fridman
It’s not only coherent, it’s convincing.
It’s not only coherent, it’s convincing.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. It makes sense.
Yes. It makes sense.
Lex Fridman
And the beautiful thing about it that has to do with your work; it doesn’t have to be true, and it often gets facts wrong, but it still is convincing. And it is both scary and beautiful-
And the beautiful thing about it that has to do with your work; it doesn’t have to be true, and it often gets facts wrong, but it still is convincing. And it is both scary and beautiful-
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
… That our brains love language so much that we don’t need the facts to be correct. We just need it to be a beautiful story.
… That our brains love language so much that we don’t need the facts to be correct. We just need it to be a beautiful story.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yep. That’s been the secret of politics and religion for thousands of years, and now it’s coming with AI.
Yep. That’s been the secret of politics and religion for thousands of years, and now it’s coming with AI.
Lex Fridman
So you as a person who has written some of the most impactful words ever written in your books, how does that make you feel that you might be one of the last effective human writers?
So you as a person who has written some of the most impactful words ever written in your books, how does that make you feel that you might be one of the last effective human writers?
Yuval Noah Harari
That’s a good question.
That’s a good question.
Lex Fridman
First of all, do you think that’s possible?
First of all, do you think that’s possible?
Yuval Noah Harari
I think it is possible. I’ve seen a lot of examples of AI being told, “Write like Yuval Noah Harari,” and what it produces.
I think it is possible. I’ve seen a lot of examples of AI being told, “Write like Yuval Noah Harari,” and what it produces.
Lex Fridman
Has it ever done better than you think you could have written yourself?
Has it ever done better than you think you could have written yourself?
Yuval Noah Harari
I mean, on the level of content of ideas, no. There are things I say, “I would never say that.” But when it comes to the … You know, there is … Again, the coherence and the quality of writing is such that I say it’s unbelievable how good it is. And who knows? In 10 years, in 20 years, maybe it can do better, even on, according to certain measures, the level of content.
I mean, on the level of content of ideas, no. There are things I say, “I would never say that.” But when it comes to the … You know, there is … Again, the coherence and the quality of writing is such that I say it’s unbelievable how good it is. And who knows? In 10 years, in 20 years, maybe it can do better, even on, according to certain measures, the level of content.
Lex Fridman
So that people would be able to do a style transfer, do a, in the style of Yuval Noah Harari, write anything. Write why I should have ice cream tonight and make it convincing.
So that people would be able to do a style transfer, do a, in the style of Yuval Noah Harari, write anything. Write why I should have ice cream tonight and make it convincing.
Yuval Noah Harari
I don’t know if I have anything convincing to say about these things, but-
I don’t know if I have anything convincing to say about these things, but-
Lex Fridman
I think you would be surprised. I think you’d be surprised. It could be an evolutionary biology explanation for why-
I think you would be surprised. I think you’d be surprised. It could be an evolutionary biology explanation for why-
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah. Ice cream is good for you.
Yeah. Ice cream is good for you.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
So I mean, that changes the nature of writing.
Yuval Noah Harari
Ultimately, I think it goes back-
Ultimately, I think it goes back-
Yuval Noah Harari
Ultimately, I think it goes back… Much of my writing is suspicious of itself. I write stories about the danger of stories. I write about intelligence, but highlighting the dangers of intelligence. In terms of power, human power comes from intelligence and from stories. But I think that the deepest and best qualities of humans are not intelligence and not storytelling and not power. Again, with all our power, with all our cooperation, with our intelligence, we are on the verge of destroying ourselves and destroying much of the ecosystem.
Ultimately, I think it goes back… Much of my writing is suspicious of itself. I write stories about the danger of stories. I write about intelligence, but highlighting the dangers of intelligence. In terms of power, human power comes from intelligence and from stories. But I think that the deepest and best qualities of humans are not intelligence and not storytelling and not power. Again, with all our power, with all our cooperation, with our intelligence, we are on the verge of destroying ourselves and destroying much of the ecosystem.
Our best qualities are not there. Our best qualities are non-verbal. Again, they come from things like compassion, from introspection. And introspection, from my experience, is not verbal. If you try to understand yourself with words, you will never succeed. There is a place where you need the words, but the deepest insights, they don’t come from words. And you can’t write about it. Again, it goes back to Wittgenstein, to Buddha, to so many of these sages before, that these are the things we are silent about.
Lex Fridman
But eventually you have to project it. As a writer, you have to do the silent introspection, but projected onto a page.
But eventually you have to project it. As a writer, you have to do the silent introspection, but projected onto a page.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes, but you still have to warn people, you will never find the deepest truth in a book. You will never find it in words. You can only find it, I think, in direct experience, which is non-verbal, which is pre-verbal.
Yes, but you still have to warn people, you will never find the deepest truth in a book. You will never find it in words. You can only find it, I think, in direct experience, which is non-verbal, which is pre-verbal.
Lex Fridman
In the silence of your own mind.
In the silence of your own mind.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Somewhere in there.
Somewhere in there.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes.
Yes.
How to think
Lex Fridman
Well, let me ask you a silly question then, a ridiculously big question. You have done a lot of deep thinking about the world, about yourself, this kind of introspection. How do you think, by way of advice, but just practically speaking, day to day, how do you think about difficult problems with the world?
Well, let me ask you a silly question then, a ridiculously big question. You have done a lot of deep thinking about the world, about yourself, this kind of introspection. How do you think, by way of advice, but just practically speaking, day to day, how do you think about difficult problems with the world?
Yuval Noah Harari
First of all, I take time off. The most important thing I do, I think, as a writer, as a scientist, I meditate. I spend about two hours every day in silent meditation, observing as much as possible, non-verbally, what is happening within myself. Focusing, body sensations, the breath. Thoughts keep coming up, but I try not to give them attention. Don’t try to drive them away, just let them be there in the background like some background noise. Don’t engage with the thoughts. Because the mind is constantly producing stories with words. These stories come between us and the world. They don’t allow us to see ourselves or the world. For me, the most shocking thing when I started meditating 23 years ago, I was given the simple exercise to just observe my breath coming in and out of the nostrils. Not controlling it, just observing it. And I couldn’t do it for more than 10 seconds.
First of all, I take time off. The most important thing I do, I think, as a writer, as a scientist, I meditate. I spend about two hours every day in silent meditation, observing as much as possible, non-verbally, what is happening within myself. Focusing, body sensations, the breath. Thoughts keep coming up, but I try not to give them attention. Don’t try to drive them away, just let them be there in the background like some background noise. Don’t engage with the thoughts. Because the mind is constantly producing stories with words. These stories come between us and the world. They don’t allow us to see ourselves or the world. For me, the most shocking thing when I started meditating 23 years ago, I was given the simple exercise to just observe my breath coming in and out of the nostrils. Not controlling it, just observing it. And I couldn’t do it for more than 10 seconds.
For 10 seconds I would try to notice, “Oh, now the breath is coming in, it’s coming in, it’s coming in. Oh, it’s stopped coming in and now it’s going out, going out.” 10 seconds and some memory would come, some thought would come, some story about something that happened last week or 10 years ago or in the future. And the story would hijack my attention. It would take me maybe five minutes to remember, “Oh, I’m supposed to be observing my breath.” If I can’t observe my own breath because of these stories created by the mind, how can I hope to understand much more complex things, like the political situation in Israel, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Russian invasion of Ukraine? If all these stories keep coming, I mean, it’s not the truth, it’s just the story your own mind created. So first thing, train the mind to be silent and just observe. So two hours every day, and I go every year for a long retreat, between one month and two months, 60 days, of just silent meditation.
Lex Fridman
Silent meditation for 60 days.
Silent meditation for 60 days.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah. To train the mind, forget about your own stories, just observe what is really happening. And then also throughout the day, have an information diet. People are today, many people are very aware of what they feed their body, what enters their mouth. Be very aware of what you feed your mind, what enters your mind. Have an information diet. So for instance, I read long books. I do many interviews. I prefer three hours interviews to five minutes interviews. The long format, it’s not always feasible, but you can go much, much deeper. So I would say an information diet. Be very careful about what you feed your mind. Give preference to big chunks over small-
Yeah. To train the mind, forget about your own stories, just observe what is really happening. And then also throughout the day, have an information diet. People are today, many people are very aware of what they feed their body, what enters their mouth. Be very aware of what you feed your mind, what enters your mind. Have an information diet. So for instance, I read long books. I do many interviews. I prefer three hours interviews to five minutes interviews. The long format, it’s not always feasible, but you can go much, much deeper. So I would say an information diet. Be very careful about what you feed your mind. Give preference to big chunks over small-
Lex Fridman
To books over Twitter.
To books over Twitter.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes, books over Twitter, definitely. And then when I encounter a problem, a difficult intellectual problem, then I let the problem lead me where it goes and not where I want it to go. If I approach a problem with some preconceived idea or solution and then try to impose it on the problem, and just find confirmation bias, just find the evidence that supports my view, this is easy for the mind to do. And you don’t learn anything new.
Yes, books over Twitter, definitely. And then when I encounter a problem, a difficult intellectual problem, then I let the problem lead me where it goes and not where I want it to go. If I approach a problem with some preconceived idea or solution and then try to impose it on the problem, and just find confirmation bias, just find the evidence that supports my view, this is easy for the mind to do. And you don’t learn anything new.
Lex Fridman
Do you take notes? Do you start to concretize your thoughts on paper?
Do you take notes? Do you start to concretize your thoughts on paper?
Yuval Noah Harari
I read a lot. Usually I don’t take notes. Then I start writing, and when I write, I write like a torrent. Just write. Now it’s the time, you read. You [inaudible 02:18:32] meditation. Now it’s the time to write. Write. Don’t stop, just write. So I would write from memory, and I’m not afraid of formulating, say, big ideas, big theories and putting them on paper. The danger is, once it’s on paper… Not on paper, on the screen in the computer, you get attached to it. And then you start with confirmation bias to build more and more layers around it and you can’t go back. And then it’s very dangerous. But I trust myself that I have to some extent the ability to press the delete button. The most important button in the keyboard is delete. I write and then I delete. I write and then I delete Every time I come to press delete button, I feel bad. It’s a kind of pain, “Eh, I created this. It’s a beautiful idea and I have to delete it?”
I read a lot. Usually I don’t take notes. Then I start writing, and when I write, I write like a torrent. Just write. Now it’s the time, you read. You [inaudible 02:18:32] meditation. Now it’s the time to write. Write. Don’t stop, just write. So I would write from memory, and I’m not afraid of formulating, say, big ideas, big theories and putting them on paper. The danger is, once it’s on paper… Not on paper, on the screen in the computer, you get attached to it. And then you start with confirmation bias to build more and more layers around it and you can’t go back. And then it’s very dangerous. But I trust myself that I have to some extent the ability to press the delete button. The most important button in the keyboard is delete. I write and then I delete. I write and then I delete Every time I come to press delete button, I feel bad. It’s a kind of pain, “Eh, I created this. It’s a beautiful idea and I have to delete it?”
Lex Fridman
But you’re still brave enough to press delete?
But you’re still brave enough to press delete?
Yuval Noah Harari
I try. And hopefully, I do it enough times. And this is important because in the long term it enables me to play with ideas. I have the confidence to start formulating some brave idea. Most of them turn out to be nonsense, but I trust myself not to be attached, not to become attached to my own nonsense. So it gives me this room for playfulness.
I try. And hopefully, I do it enough times. And this is important because in the long term it enables me to play with ideas. I have the confidence to start formulating some brave idea. Most of them turn out to be nonsense, but I trust myself not to be attached, not to become attached to my own nonsense. So it gives me this room for playfulness.
Lex Fridman
I would be amiss if I didn’t ask, for people interested in hearing you talk about meditation, if they want to start meditating what advice would you give on how to start? You mentioned you couldn’t hold your attention on your breath for longer than 10 seconds at first. So how do they start on this journey?
I would be amiss if I didn’t ask, for people interested in hearing you talk about meditation, if they want to start meditating what advice would you give on how to start? You mentioned you couldn’t hold your attention on your breath for longer than 10 seconds at first. So how do they start on this journey?
Yuval Noah Harari
First of all, it’s a difficult journey. It’s not fun, it’s not recreational, it’s not time to relax. It can be very, very intense. The most difficult thing, at least in the meditation I practice, vipassana, which I learned from a teacher called S.N. Goenka, the most difficult thing is not the silence. It’s not the sitting for long hours. It’s what comes up. Everything you don’t want to know about yourself, this is what comes up. So it’s very intense and difficult. If you go to a meditation retreat, don’t think you’re going to relax.
First of all, it’s a difficult journey. It’s not fun, it’s not recreational, it’s not time to relax. It can be very, very intense. The most difficult thing, at least in the meditation I practice, vipassana, which I learned from a teacher called S.N. Goenka, the most difficult thing is not the silence. It’s not the sitting for long hours. It’s what comes up. Everything you don’t want to know about yourself, this is what comes up. So it’s very intense and difficult. If you go to a meditation retreat, don’t think you’re going to relax.
Lex Fridman
So what’s the experience of a meditation retreat when everything you don’t like comes up for 30 days?
So what’s the experience of a meditation retreat when everything you don’t like comes up for 30 days?
Yuval Noah Harari
It depends what comes up. Anger comes up, you’re angry. For days on end, you’re just boiling with anger. Everything makes you angry. Again, something that happens right now or you remember something from 20 years ago and you start boiling with… It’s like, I never even thought about this incident, but it was somewhere stored with a huge, huge pile of anger attached to it. And it’s now coming up and all the anger is coming up. Maybe it’s boredom. 30 days of meditation, you start getting bored. And it’s the most boring thing. Suddenly, no anger. No, it’s the most boring. Another second, and I scream. And boredom is one of the most difficult thing to deal with in life. I think it’s closely related to death. Death is boring. In many movies, death is exciting. It’s not exciting. When [inaudible 02:22:04] dies, ultimately, it’s boredom. Nothing happens.
It depends what comes up. Anger comes up, you’re angry. For days on end, you’re just boiling with anger. Everything makes you angry. Again, something that happens right now or you remember something from 20 years ago and you start boiling with… It’s like, I never even thought about this incident, but it was somewhere stored with a huge, huge pile of anger attached to it. And it’s now coming up and all the anger is coming up. Maybe it’s boredom. 30 days of meditation, you start getting bored. And it’s the most boring thing. Suddenly, no anger. No, it’s the most boring. Another second, and I scream. And boredom is one of the most difficult thing to deal with in life. I think it’s closely related to death. Death is boring. In many movies, death is exciting. It’s not exciting. When [inaudible 02:22:04] dies, ultimately, it’s boredom. Nothing happens.
Lex Fridman
It’s the end of exciting things.
It’s the end of exciting things.
Yuval Noah Harari
And many things in the world happen because of boredom. To some extent, people start entire wars because of boredom. People quit relationships. People quit jobs because of boredom. And if you never learn how to deal with boredom, you will never learn how to enjoy peace and quiet, because the way to peace passes through boredom. And from what I experienced with meditation, I think maybe it was the most difficult, maybe at least in the top three. Much more difficult, say, than anger or pain. When pain comes up, you feel heroic. “Hey, I’m dealing with pain.” When boredom comes up, it brings it with depression and feelings of worthlessness. And it’s nothing, I’m nothing.
And many things in the world happen because of boredom. To some extent, people start entire wars because of boredom. People quit relationships. People quit jobs because of boredom. And if you never learn how to deal with boredom, you will never learn how to enjoy peace and quiet, because the way to peace passes through boredom. And from what I experienced with meditation, I think maybe it was the most difficult, maybe at least in the top three. Much more difficult, say, than anger or pain. When pain comes up, you feel heroic. “Hey, I’m dealing with pain.” When boredom comes up, it brings it with depression and feelings of worthlessness. And it’s nothing, I’m nothing.
Lex Fridman
The way to peace is through boredom. David Foster Wallace said the key to life is to be unborable, which is a different perspective on what you’re talking to. Is there truth to that?
The way to peace is through boredom. David Foster Wallace said the key to life is to be unborable, which is a different perspective on what you’re talking to. Is there truth to that?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. I mean, it’s closely related. I would say, I look at the world today, like politics. The one thing we need more than anything else is boring politicians. We have a super abundance of very exciting politicians who are doing and saying very exciting things. And we need boring politicians and we need them quickly.
Yes. I mean, it’s closely related. I would say, I look at the world today, like politics. The one thing we need more than anything else is boring politicians. We have a super abundance of very exciting politicians who are doing and saying very exciting things. And we need boring politicians and we need them quickly.
Advice for young people
Lex Fridman
The way to peace is through boredom. That applies in more ways than one. What advice would you give to young people today in high school and college, how to have a successful life, how to have a successful career?
The way to peace is through boredom. That applies in more ways than one. What advice would you give to young people today in high school and college, how to have a successful life, how to have a successful career?
Yuval Noah Harari
What they should know, it’s the first time in history nobody has any idea how the world would look like in 10 years. Nobody has any idea how the world would look like when you grow up. Throughout history, it was never possible to predict the future. You live in the Middle Ages, nobody knows. Maybe in 10 years the Vikings will invade, the Mongols will invade, there’ll be an epidemic, there’ll be an earthquake, who knows? But the basic structures of life will not change. Most people will still be peasants. Armies would fight on horseback with swords and bows and arrows and things like that. So you could learn a lot from the wisdom of your elders. They’ve been there before and they knew what kind of basic skills you need to learn. Most people need to learn how to sow wheat and harvest wheat or rice and make bread and build a house and ride a horse and things like that.
What they should know, it’s the first time in history nobody has any idea how the world would look like in 10 years. Nobody has any idea how the world would look like when you grow up. Throughout history, it was never possible to predict the future. You live in the Middle Ages, nobody knows. Maybe in 10 years the Vikings will invade, the Mongols will invade, there’ll be an epidemic, there’ll be an earthquake, who knows? But the basic structures of life will not change. Most people will still be peasants. Armies would fight on horseback with swords and bows and arrows and things like that. So you could learn a lot from the wisdom of your elders. They’ve been there before and they knew what kind of basic skills you need to learn. Most people need to learn how to sow wheat and harvest wheat or rice and make bread and build a house and ride a horse and things like that.
Now we have no idea, not just about politics. We have no idea how the job market would look like in 10 years. We have no idea what skills will still be needed. You think you’re going to learn how to code because they’ll need a lot of coders in the 2030s? Think again. Maybe AI is doing all the coding. You don’t need any coders. You are going to, I don’t know, you learn to [inaudible 02:25:26] languages, you want to be a translator. Gone. And we don’t know what skills will be needed. So the most important skill is the skill to keep learning and keep changing throughout our lives, which is very, very difficult. To keep reinventing ourselves. Again, it’s in a way a spiritual practice, to build your personality, to build your mind as a very flexible mind. Traditionally, people thought about education like building a stone house with very deep foundations. Now it’s more like setting up a tent that you can fold and move to the next place very, very quickly. Because that’s the 21st century.
Lex Fridman
Which also raises questions about the future of education, what that looks like.
Which also raises questions about the future of education, what that looks like.
Love
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you about love. What were some of the challenges, what were some of the lessons about love, about life that you learned from coming out as gay?
Let me ask you about love. What were some of the challenges, what were some of the lessons about love, about life that you learned from coming out as gay?
Yuval Noah Harari
In many ways, it goes back to the stories. I think this is one of the reasons I became so interested in stories and in their power. Because I grew up in a small Israeli town in the 1980s, early 1990s, which was very homophobic. And I basically embraced it, I breathed it. Because you could hardly even think differently. So you had these two powerful stories around. One, that God hates gay people and that he will punish them for who they are or for what they do. Secondly, that it’s not God, it’s nature. That there is something diseased or sick about it. And these people, maybe they’re not sinners, but they are sick, they are defective. And nobody wanted to identify with such a thing. If your option’s, okay, you can be a sinner, you can be a defect, what do you want? No good options there.
In many ways, it goes back to the stories. I think this is one of the reasons I became so interested in stories and in their power. Because I grew up in a small Israeli town in the 1980s, early 1990s, which was very homophobic. And I basically embraced it, I breathed it. Because you could hardly even think differently. So you had these two powerful stories around. One, that God hates gay people and that he will punish them for who they are or for what they do. Secondly, that it’s not God, it’s nature. That there is something diseased or sick about it. And these people, maybe they’re not sinners, but they are sick, they are defective. And nobody wanted to identify with such a thing. If your option’s, okay, you can be a sinner, you can be a defect, what do you want? No good options there.
And it took me many years, till I was 21, to come to terms with it. I learned two things. First, about the amazing capacity of the human mind for denial and delusion. An algorithm could have told me that I’m gay when I was 14 or 15. If there is a good-looking guy and girl walking, I would immediately focus on the guy. But I didn’t connect the dots. I could not understand what was happening inside my own brain and my own mind, in my own body. It took me a long time to realize, “You know, you’re just gay.”
Lex Fridman
So that speaks to the power of social convention versus individual thought.
So that speaks to the power of social convention versus individual thought.
Yuval Noah Harari
This is the power of self-delusion. It’s not that I knew I was gay and was hiding it. I was hiding it from myself, successfully. Looking back, I don’t understand how it is possible, but I know it is possible. I knew and didn’t know at the same time. And then the other big lesson is the power of the stories, of the social conventions. Because the stories were not true. They did not make sense even on their own terms. Even if you accept the basic religious framework of the world, that there is a good God that created everything and controls everything, why would a good God punish people for love? I understand why a good God would punish people for violence, for hatred, for cruelty, but why would God punish people for love, especially when he created them that way?
This is the power of self-delusion. It’s not that I knew I was gay and was hiding it. I was hiding it from myself, successfully. Looking back, I don’t understand how it is possible, but I know it is possible. I knew and didn’t know at the same time. And then the other big lesson is the power of the stories, of the social conventions. Because the stories were not true. They did not make sense even on their own terms. Even if you accept the basic religious framework of the world, that there is a good God that created everything and controls everything, why would a good God punish people for love? I understand why a good God would punish people for violence, for hatred, for cruelty, but why would God punish people for love, especially when he created them that way?
So even if you accept the religious framework of the world, obviously the story that God hates gay people, it comes not from God, but from some humans who invented this story. They take their own hatred. This is something humans do all the time. They hate somebody and they say, “No, I don’t hate them. God hates them.” They throw their own hatred on God. And then if you think about the scientific framework that said that, “Oh, gays, they are against nature. They are against the laws of nature,” and so forth. Science tells us nothing can exist against the laws of nature. Things that go against the laws of nature just don’t exist. There is a law of nature that you can’t move faster than the speed of light. Now, you don’t have this minority of people who break the laws of nature by going faster than the speed of light. And then nature comes, “Nah, that’s bad. You shouldn’t do that.” That’s not how nature works.
If something goes against the laws of nature, it just can’t exist. The fact that gay people exist, and not just people. You see homosexuality among many, many mammals and birds and other animals. It exists because it is in line with the laws of nature. The idea that this is sick, that this is whatever, it comes not from nature, it comes from the human imagination. Some people, for whatever reasons, hated gay people. They said, “Oh, they go against nature.” But this is a story created by people. This is not the laws of nature. And this taught me that so many of the things that we think are natural or eternal or divine, no, they’re just human stories. But these human stories are often the most powerful forces in the world.
Lex Fridman
So what did you learn from just your personal struggle of journey through the social conventions to find one of the things that makes life awesome, which is love? So what it takes to strip away the self-delusion and the pressures of social convention, to wake up.
So what did you learn from just your personal struggle of journey through the social conventions to find one of the things that makes life awesome, which is love? So what it takes to strip away the self-delusion and the pressures of social convention, to wake up.
Yuval Noah Harari
It takes a lot of work, a lot of courage and a lot of help from other people. It’s this kind of, again, heroic idea that I can do it all by myself, it doesn’t work. Certainly with love, you need at least one more person. And I’m very happy that I found Itzik. We lived in the same small Israeli town. We lived on two adjacent streets for years. Probably went to school on the same bus for years without really encountering each other. In the end, we met on one of the first dating sites on the internet for gay people in Israel, in 2002.
It takes a lot of work, a lot of courage and a lot of help from other people. It’s this kind of, again, heroic idea that I can do it all by myself, it doesn’t work. Certainly with love, you need at least one more person. And I’m very happy that I found Itzik. We lived in the same small Israeli town. We lived on two adjacent streets for years. Probably went to school on the same bus for years without really encountering each other. In the end, we met on one of the first dating sites on the internet for gay people in Israel, in 2002.
Lex Fridman
You’re saying the internet works? For love.
You’re saying the internet works? For love.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. And I said bad things or dangers about technology and the internet. There are also, of course, good things. And this is not an accident. You have two kinds of minorities in history. You have minorities which are a cohesive group like Jews. That yes, you are [inaudible 02:33:04] born Jewish in, say, Germany or Russia or whatever. You are born in a small community. But as a Jewish boy, you are born to a Jewish family. You have Jewish parents, you have Jewish siblings, you are in a Jewish neighborhood, you have Jewish friends. So these kinds of minorities, they could always come together and help each other throughout history. Now, another type of minority, like gay people or more broadly, LGBTQ people, that as a gay boy, you are usually not born to a gay family with gay parents and gay siblings in a gay neighborhood. So usually you find yourself completely alone.
Yes. And I said bad things or dangers about technology and the internet. There are also, of course, good things. And this is not an accident. You have two kinds of minorities in history. You have minorities which are a cohesive group like Jews. That yes, you are [inaudible 02:33:04] born Jewish in, say, Germany or Russia or whatever. You are born in a small community. But as a Jewish boy, you are born to a Jewish family. You have Jewish parents, you have Jewish siblings, you are in a Jewish neighborhood, you have Jewish friends. So these kinds of minorities, they could always come together and help each other throughout history. Now, another type of minority, like gay people or more broadly, LGBTQ people, that as a gay boy, you are usually not born to a gay family with gay parents and gay siblings in a gay neighborhood. So usually you find yourself completely alone.
For most of history, one of the biggest problems for the gay community was that there was no community. How do you find one another? And the internet was a wonderful thing in this respect because it made it very easy for these kinds of diffuse communities or diffuse minorities to find each other. So me and Itzik, even though we rode the same bus together to school for years, we didn’t meet in the physical world, we met online. Because again, in the physical world, you don’t want to identify in a Israeli town in the 1980s, you ride the bus, you don’t want to say, “Hey, I’m gay, is there anybody else gay here?” That’s not a good idea. But on the internet we could find each other.
Lex Fridman
There’s another lesson in there that maybe sometimes the thing you’re looking for is right under your nose.
There’s another lesson in there that maybe sometimes the thing you’re looking for is right under your nose.
Yuval Noah Harari
Yeah. A very old lesson and a very true lesson in many ways. So you need help from other people to realize the truth about yourself. So of course, in love, you cannot just love abstractly. There is another person there, you need to find them. But also, we were one of the first generations who enjoyed the benefits of gay liberation, of these very difficult struggles of people who are much braver than us in the 1980s, 1970s, 1960s, who dared to question social conventions, to struggle, at sometimes a terrible price. And we benefited from it. And more broadly, we spoke earlier about the feminist movement. There would’ve been no gay liberation without the feminist movement. We also owe them for starting to change the gender structure of the world. And this is always true. You can never do it just by yourself.
Yeah. A very old lesson and a very true lesson in many ways. So you need help from other people to realize the truth about yourself. So of course, in love, you cannot just love abstractly. There is another person there, you need to find them. But also, we were one of the first generations who enjoyed the benefits of gay liberation, of these very difficult struggles of people who are much braver than us in the 1980s, 1970s, 1960s, who dared to question social conventions, to struggle, at sometimes a terrible price. And we benefited from it. And more broadly, we spoke earlier about the feminist movement. There would’ve been no gay liberation without the feminist movement. We also owe them for starting to change the gender structure of the world. And this is always true. You can never do it just by yourself.
Also, I look at my journey in meditation. I mean, the idea of going to meditation [inaudible 02:35:45] okay. But I couldn’t develop the meditation technique by myself. Somebody had to teach me this way of how to look inside yourself. And it’s also a very important lesson that you can’t do it just by yourself. That this fantasy of complete autonomy, of complete self-sufficiency, it doesn’t work. It tends to be a very kind of male macho fantasy. “I don’t need anybody. I can be so strong and so brave that I’ll do everything by myself.” It never works.
Lex Fridman
You need friends. You need a mentor. The very thing that makes us human is other humans.
You need friends. You need a mentor. The very thing that makes us human is other humans.
Yuval Noah Harari
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Mortality
Lex Fridman
You mentioned that the fear of boredom might be a kind of proxy for the fear of death. So what role does the fear of death play in the human condition? Are you afraid of death?
You mentioned that the fear of boredom might be a kind of proxy for the fear of death. So what role does the fear of death play in the human condition? Are you afraid of death?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes, I think everybody are afraid of death. I mean, all our fears come out of the fear of death. But the fear of death is just so deep and difficult, usually we can’t face it directly. So we cut it into little pieces and we face just little pieces. “Oh, I lost my smartphone.” That’s a little, little, little piece of the fear of death, which is of losing everything. So I can’t deal with losing everything, I’m dealing now with losing my phone or losing a book or whatever. I feel pain. That’s a small bit of the fear of death. Somebody who really doesn’t fear death would not fear anything at all. There will be like, “Anything that happens, I can deal with it. If I can deal with death, this is nothing.”
Yes, I think everybody are afraid of death. I mean, all our fears come out of the fear of death. But the fear of death is just so deep and difficult, usually we can’t face it directly. So we cut it into little pieces and we face just little pieces. “Oh, I lost my smartphone.” That’s a little, little, little piece of the fear of death, which is of losing everything. So I can’t deal with losing everything, I’m dealing now with losing my phone or losing a book or whatever. I feel pain. That’s a small bit of the fear of death. Somebody who really doesn’t fear death would not fear anything at all. There will be like, “Anything that happens, I can deal with it. If I can deal with death, this is nothing.”
Lex Fridman
So any fears is a distant echo of the big fear of death. Have you ever looked at it head on, caught glimpses, sort of contemplated as the Stoics do?
So any fears is a distant echo of the big fear of death. Have you ever looked at it head on, caught glimpses, sort of contemplated as the Stoics do?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. I mean, when I was was a teenager, I constantly contemplated, trying to understand, to imagine. It was a very, very shocking and moving experience. I remember, especially in connection with national ideology, which was also very big, strong in Israel; still is. Which again comes from the fear of death. You know that you’re going to die, so you say, “Okay, I die, but the nation lives on. I live on through the nation. I don’t really die.” And you’ll hear it especially on Memorial Day, the day for fallen soldiers. So every day there’ll be in school Memorial Day for fallen soldiers who fell defending Israel in all its different wars. And all these kids would come dressed in white. And you have this big ceremony with flags and songs and dances in memory of the fallen soldiers. Again, I don’t want to sound crass, but you got the impression that the best thing in life is to be a fallen soldier.
Yes. I mean, when I was was a teenager, I constantly contemplated, trying to understand, to imagine. It was a very, very shocking and moving experience. I remember, especially in connection with national ideology, which was also very big, strong in Israel; still is. Which again comes from the fear of death. You know that you’re going to die, so you say, “Okay, I die, but the nation lives on. I live on through the nation. I don’t really die.” And you’ll hear it especially on Memorial Day, the day for fallen soldiers. So every day there’ll be in school Memorial Day for fallen soldiers who fell defending Israel in all its different wars. And all these kids would come dressed in white. And you have this big ceremony with flags and songs and dances in memory of the fallen soldiers. Again, I don’t want to sound crass, but you got the impression that the best thing in life is to be a fallen soldier.
Because even then, yes, you die, everybody dies in the end. But then you’ll have all these school kids for years and years, remembering you and celebrating you and you don’t really die. And I remember standing in these ceremonies and thinking, “What does it actually mean? Okay, so if I’m a fallen soldier now I’m a skeleton. I’m bones in this military cemetery, under this stone. Do I actually hear the kids singing all these patriotic songs? If not, how do I know they do it? Maybe they trick me. Maybe I die in the war and then they don’t sing any songs. And how does it help me?” And I realized, I was quite young at the time, that if you’re dead, you can’t hear anything, because that’s the meaning of being dead. And if you’re dead, you can’t think of anything like, “Oh, now they’re remembering,” because you are dead, that’s the meaning of being dead. And it was a shocking realization.
Lex Fridman
But it’s a really difficult realization to hold in your mind. It’s the end.
But it’s a really difficult realization to hold in your mind. It’s the end.
Yuval Noah Harari
I lost it over time. I mean, for many years it was a very powerful fuel, motivation for philosophical, for spiritual exploration. And I realized that the fear of death is really a very powerful drive. And over the years, especially as I meditated, it kind of dissipated. And today I sometimes find myself trying to recapture this teenage fear of death because it was so powerful, and I just can’t. And I try to make the same image. I don’t know, it’s…
I lost it over time. I mean, for many years it was a very powerful fuel, motivation for philosophical, for spiritual exploration. And I realized that the fear of death is really a very powerful drive. And over the years, especially as I meditated, it kind of dissipated. And today I sometimes find myself trying to recapture this teenage fear of death because it was so powerful, and I just can’t. And I try to make the same image. I don’t know, it’s…
Lex Fridman
Something about the teenage years. When the fire burns bright.
Something about the teenage years. When the fire burns bright.
Yuval Noah Harari
As a teenager, I always thought that the adults, there is something wrong with the adults, because they don’t get it. I would ask my parents or teachers about it and they… “Oh yes, you die in the end, that’s it.” And on the other hand, they’re so worried about other things. There’ll be a political crisis or an economic problem or a personal problem with the bank or whatever. They’ll be so worried. But then about the fact that they’re going to die, “Ah, we don’t care about it.”
As a teenager, I always thought that the adults, there is something wrong with the adults, because they don’t get it. I would ask my parents or teachers about it and they… “Oh yes, you die in the end, that’s it.” And on the other hand, they’re so worried about other things. There’ll be a political crisis or an economic problem or a personal problem with the bank or whatever. They’ll be so worried. But then about the fact that they’re going to die, “Ah, we don’t care about it.”
Meaning of life
Lex Fridman
That’s why you read Camus and others when you’re a teenager. You really worry about the existential questions. Well, this feels like the right time to ask the big question. What’s the meaning of this whole thing, Yuval? And you’re the right person to ask. What’s the meaning of life?
That’s why you read Camus and others when you’re a teenager. You really worry about the existential questions. Well, this feels like the right time to ask the big question. What’s the meaning of this whole thing, Yuval? And you’re the right person to ask. What’s the meaning of life?
Yuval Noah Harari
Life? That’s easy.
Life? That’s easy.
Lex Fridman
What is it?
What is it?
Yuval Noah Harari
So what life is, if you ask what life is, life is feeling things, having sensations, emotions, and reacting to them. When you feel something good, something pleasant, you want more of it. When you feel something unpleasant, you want to get rid of it. That’s the whole of life. That’s what is happening all the time. You feel things. You want the pleasant things to increase. You want the unpleasant things to disappear. That’s what life is. If you ask what is the meaning of life in a more philosophical or spiritual question, the real question to ask, what kind of answer do you expect? Most people expect a story. And that’s always the wrong answer. Most people expect that the answer to the question, “What is the meaning of life?” will be a story, like a big drama.
So what life is, if you ask what life is, life is feeling things, having sensations, emotions, and reacting to them. When you feel something good, something pleasant, you want more of it. When you feel something unpleasant, you want to get rid of it. That’s the whole of life. That’s what is happening all the time. You feel things. You want the pleasant things to increase. You want the unpleasant things to disappear. That’s what life is. If you ask what is the meaning of life in a more philosophical or spiritual question, the real question to ask, what kind of answer do you expect? Most people expect a story. And that’s always the wrong answer. Most people expect that the answer to the question, “What is the meaning of life?” will be a story, like a big drama.
That this is the plot line and this is your role in the story. This is what you have to do. This is your line in the big play. You say your line, you do your thing. That’s the thing. And this is human imagination, this is fantasy. To really understand life, life is not a story. The universe does not function like a story. So I think to really understand life, you need to observe it directly in a nonverbal way. Don’t turn it into a story. And the question to start with is, what is suffering? What is causing suffering? The question, what is the meaning of life? It will take you to fantasies and delusions. We want to stay with the reality of life. And the most important question about the reality of life is what is suffering and where is it coming from?
Lex Fridman
And to answer that non-verbally, so the conscious experience of suffering?
And to answer that non-verbally, so the conscious experience of suffering?
Yuval Noah Harari
Yes. When you suffer, try to observe what is really happening when you are suffering.
Yes. When you suffer, try to observe what is really happening when you are suffering.
Lex Fridman
Well put. And I wonder if AI will also go through that same kind of process on its way-
Well put. And I wonder if AI will also go through that same kind of process on its way-
Yuval Noah Harari
Depends if it develop consciousness or not. At present, it’s not. It’s just words.
Depends if it develop consciousness or not. At present, it’s not. It’s just words.
Lex Fridman
It will just say to you, “Please don’t hurt me, Yuval.”. Again, as I’ve mentioned to you, I’m a huge fan of yours. Thank you for the incredible work you do. This conversation’s been a long time, I think, coming. It’s a huge honor to talk to you. This was really fun. Thank you for talking today.
It will just say to you, “Please don’t hurt me, Yuval.”. Again, as I’ve mentioned to you, I’m a huge fan of yours. Thank you for the incredible work you do. This conversation’s been a long time, I think, coming. It’s a huge honor to talk to you. This was really fun. Thank you for talking today.
Yuval Noah Harari
Thank you. I really enjoyed it. And as I said, I think the long form is the best form.
Thank you. I really enjoyed it. And as I said, I think the long form is the best form.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I loved it. Thank you.
Yeah, I loved it. Thank you.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Yuval Noah Harari. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Yuval Noah Harari himself. “How do you cause people to believe in an imagined order, such as Christianity, democracy, or capitalism? First, you never admit that the order is imagined.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Benjamin Netanyahu: Israel, Palestine, Power, Corruption, Hate, and Peace | Lex Fridman Podcast #389
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #389 with Benjamin Netanyahu.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
As we spoke, and as I speak now, large scale protests are breaking out all over Israel over this government’s proposed judicial reform that seeks to weaken the Supreme Court in a bold accumulation of power. Given the current intense political battles in Israel, our previous intention to speak for three hours was adjusted to one hour for the time being, but we agreed to speak again for much longer in the future. I will also interview people who harshly disagree with words spoken in this conversation. I will speak with other world leaders, with religious leaders, with historians and activists, and with people who have lived and have suffered through the pain of war, destruction and loss that stoke the fires of anger and hate in their heart.
For this, I will travel anywhere no matter how dangerous if there’s any chance, it may help add to understanding and love in the world. I believe in the power of conversation to do just this, to remind us of our common humanity. I know I’m under-qualified and under-skilled for these conversations, so I will often fall short and I will certainly get attacked, derided and slandered. But I will always turn the other cheek and use these attacks to learn to improve, and no matter what, never give into cynicism.
This life, this world of ours is too beautiful not to keep trying. Trying to do some good in whatever way each of us know how. I love you all.
This is The Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Benjamin Netanyahu.
You’re loved by many people here in Israel and in the world, but you’re also hated by many. In fact, I think you may be one of the most hated men in the world. So if there’s a young man or a young woman listening to this right now who have such hate in their heart, what can you say to them to one day turn that hate into love?
And when I go around the world and I’ve been around the world, people want to hear what we have to say. What I have to say as a leader of Israel whom they respect increasingly as a rising power in the world. So I disagree with that. And the most important thing that goes against what you said is the respect that we receive from the Arab world and the fact that we’ve made four historic peace agreements with Arab countries. And they made it with me, they didn’t make it with anyone else. And I respect them and they respect me and probably more to come. So I think the premise is wrong, that’s all.
We’ve sent rescue teams more than any other country in the world, and we’re one 10th of 1% of the world’s population. But when there’s an earthquake or a devastation in Haiti or in the Philippines, Israel is there. When there’s an devastating earthquake in Turkey, Israel was there. When there’s something in Nepal, Israel is there, and it’s the second country. It’s the second country after, in one case, India or after another case, the United States, Israel is there. Tiny Israel is a benefactor to all of humanity.
And that happened in the case of the Jews. What started with the Jews soon spread to all of humanity. So what we’ve learned is that we should never, and I never sit aside and say, “Oh, they’re just threatening to destroy us. They won’t do it.” If somebody threatens to eliminate you as Iran is doing today, and as Hitler did then, and people discounted it, well, if somebody threatens to annihilate us, take them seriously and act to prevent it early on. Don’t let them have the means to do so because that may be too late.
When you’re saying anti-Zionism you’re saying that Jewish people don’t have a right to have a state of their own. And that is a denial of a basic principle that I think completely unmasks what is involved here. Today anti-Semitism is anti-Zionism. Those who oppose the Jewish people oppose the Jewish state.
And you can create mass mobilization based on these absurd slogans. So here’s where I come from and what we’re doing, what we’re trying to do, and what we’ve changed in what we’re trying to do. I’m a 19th century democrat in my, small D yes, in my views. That is I ask the question, “What is democracy?” So democracy is the will of the majority and the protection of the rights of, they call it the rights of the minority, but I say the rights of the individual.
So how do you balance the two? How do you avoid mobocracy? And how do you avoid dictatorship? The opposite side. The way you avoid it is something that was built essentially by British philosophers and French philosophers, but was encapsulated by the Founding Fathers of the United States. You create a balance between the three branches of government, the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary.
And this balance is what assures the balance between majority rights and individual rights. And you have to balance all of them. That balance was maintained in Israel in its first 50 years, and was gradually overtaken and basically broken by the most activist judicial court on the planet. That’s what happened here. And gradually over the last two, three decades, the court aggregated for itself the powers of the parliament and the executive. So we’re trying to bring it back into line. Bringing it back into line, into what is common in all parliamentary democracies and in the United States, doesn’t mean taking the pendulum from one side and bringing it to the other side.
We want checks and balances, not unrivaled power. Just as we said, we want an independent judiciary, but not an all powerful judiciary. That balance does not mean, bringing it back into line, doesn’t mean that you can have the parliament, our Knesset, override any decision that the Supreme Court does. So I pretty much early on said, after the judicial reform was introduced, “Get rid of the idea of sweeping override clause that would have, with 61 votes, that’s a majority of one, you can just nullify any Supreme Court decision, so let’s move it back into the center.” So that’s gone. And most of the criticism on the judicial reform was based on an unlimited override clause, which I’ve said is simply not going to happen. People are discussing something that already for six months does not exist.
The second point that we received criticism on was the structure of how do you choose Supreme Court judges? Okay, how do you choose them? And the critics of the reform are saying that the idea that elected officials should choose Supreme Court judges is the end of democracy. If that’s the case, the United States is not a democracy. Neither is France and neither are just, I don’t know, just about every democracy on the planet. So there is a view here that you can’t have the sordid hands of elected officials involved in the choosing of judges.
And in the Israeli system, the judicial activism went so far that effectively the sitting judges have an effective veto on choosing judges, which means that this is a self-selecting court that just perpetrates itself. And we want to correct that. Again, we want to correct it in a balanced way. And that’s basically what we’re trying to do. So I think there’s a lot of misinformation about that. We’re trying to bring Israeli democracy to where it was in its first 50 years. And it was a stellar democracy. It still is. Israel is a democracy, will remain a democracy, a vibrant democracy. And believe me, the fact that people are arguing and demonstrating in the streets and protesting is the best proof of that, and that’s how it’ll remain.
And how did that happen? Because we unleashed the genius that we have and the initiative and the entrepreneurship that is latent in our population. And to do that, we had to create free markets. So we created that. So Israel has one of the most vibrant free market economies in the world. And the second thing we have is a permanent investment in conceptual products because we have a permanent investment in the military, in our security services, creating basically knowledge workers who then become knowledge entrepreneurs. And so we create this structure, and that’s not going to go away.
There’s been a decline in investments in high-tech globally. I think that’s driven by many factors. But the most important one is the interest rate, which I think will, it’ll fluctuate up and down. But Israel will remain a very attractive country because it produces so many knowledge workers in a knowledge based economy. And it’s changing so rapidly. The world is changing. You’re looking for the places that have innovation. The future belongs to those who innovate.
Israel is the preeminent innovation nation. It has few competitors. And if we would say, “All right, where do you have this close cross-disciplinary fermentation of various skills in areas?” I would say “It’s in Israel.” And I’ll tell you why. We used to be just telecoms because people went out of the military intelligence, RNSA, but that’s been now broad based. So you find it in medicine, you find it in biology, you find it in agritech, you find it everywhere. Everything is becoming technologized.
And in Israel, everybody is dealing in everything, and that’s a potent reservoir of talent that the world is not going to pass up. And in fact, it’s coming to us. We just had Nvidia coming here, and they decided to build a supercomputer in Israel. Wonder why? We’ve had Intel coming here and deciding now to invest $25 billion, just now, in a new plant in Israel. I wonder why? I don’t wonder why. They know why. Because the talent is here and the freedom is here. And it will remain so.
I think that right now, just as 10 years ago, I read a novel. I don’t read novels, but I was forced to read one by a scientific advisor. I read history, I read about economics, I read about technology. I just don’t read novels. In this, I follow Churchill. He said, “Fact is better than fiction.” Well, this fiction would become fact. It was a book, it was a novel about a Chinese/American future cyber war. I read the book in one sitting, called in a team of experts, and I said, “All right, let’s turn Israel into one of the world’s five cyber powers and let’s do it very quickly.” And we did actually. We did exactly that. I think AI is bigger than that and related to that, because it’ll affect … Well, cyber affects everything, but AI will affect it even more fundamentally. And the joining of the two could be very powerful.
So I think in Israel, we have to do it anyway for security reasons and we’re doing it. But I think, what about our databases that are already very robust on the medical records of 98% of our population? Why don’t we stick a genetic database on that? Why don’t we do other things that could bring what are seemingly magical cures and drugs and medical instruments for that? That’s one possibility. We have it, as I said, in every single field. The conclusion is this. We have to move on AI. We are moving on AI, just as we moved on cyber, and I think Israel will be one of the leading AI powers in the world. The questions I don’t have an answer to is, where does it go? How much does it chew up on jobs?
There’s an assumption that I’m not sure is true, that the two big previous revolutions in the human condition, namely the agricultural revolution and the industrial revolution, definitely produced more jobs than they consumed. That is not obvious to me at all. I mean, I could see new jobs creating, and yes, I have that comforting statement, but it’s not quite true, because I think on balance, they’ll probably consume more jobs, many more jobs than they’ll create.
Not only that. I also knew that wealth would spread by opening up the markets, completely opposite to the socialist and semi-socialist creed that they had here. They said, “You’re going to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.” No. And made everyone richer, and actually the people who entered the job market because of the reforms we did, actually became a lot richer on the lower ladders of the socioeconomic measure.
But here’s the point, I don’t know. I don’t know that we will not have what Elon Musk calls the end of scarcity. So you’ll have the end of scarcity. You’ll have enormous productivity. Very few people are producing enormous added value. You’re going to have to tax that to pass it to the others. You’re going to have to do that. That’s a political question. I’m not sure how we answer that. What if you tax and somebody else doesn’t tax? You’re going to get everybody to go there. That’s an international issue that we constantly have to deal with.
And the second question you have is, suppose you solve that problem and you deliver money to those who are not involved in the AI economy, what do they do? The first question you ask somebody whom you just met after the polite exchanges is, what do you do? Well, people define themselves by their profession. It’s going to be difficult if you don’t have a profession. People will spend more time self-searching, more time in the arts, more time in leisure. I understand that. If I have to bet, it will annihilate many more jobs than it will create and it’ll force a structural change in our economics, in our economic models, and in our politics. And I’m not sure where it’s going to go.
Where do you define market segments? Where do you define monopoly? How do you do that? That, actually conceptually, I find very challenging, because of all the dozens of economic reforms that I’ve made, the most difficult part is the conceptual part. Once you’ve ironed it out and you say, “Here’s what I want to do. Here’s the right thing to do,” then you have a practical problem of overcoming union resistance, political resistance, press calumny, opponents from this or that corner. That’s a practical matter. But if you have it conceptually defined, you can move ahead to reform economies or reform education or reform transportation. Fine.
In the question of the growing power of large companies, big tech companies to monopolize the markets because they’re better at it, they provide a service, they provide it at a lower cost, at rapidly declining cost. Where do you stop? Where do you stop monopoly power is a crucial question because it also becomes now a political question. If you amass enormous amount of economic power, which is information power, that also monopolizes the political process. These are real questions that are not obvious. I don’t have an obvious answer because as I said, as a 19th century Democrat, these are questions of the 21st century, which people should begin to think. Do you have a solution to that?
By the way, it happened to me. There’s life after political death. There’s actually political life. I was reelected five or six times, and this is my sixth term. So I believe in that. I’m not sure that in economic matters, in the geometric growth of tech companies, that you’ll always have the little guy, the nimble mammal, that will come out and slay the dinosaurs or overcome the dinosaurs, which is essentially what you said.
I remember I had a conversation with Silvio Berlusconi, who recently died, and he said to me about, I don’t know, 15 years ago, something like that, he said, “So Bibi, how many of Israel’s television stations do you have?” And I said, “None.” He said, “You have none?”
So I think it’s kind of instructive that no politician has been more vilified. None has been put to such a, what is it? About a quarter of a billion shekels were used to scrutinize me, scour my bank accounts, sending people to the Philippines, into Mexico, into Europe, into America, and everybody using spyware, the most advanced spyware on the planet against my associates, blackmailing witnesses, telling them, “Think about your family, think about your wife. You better tell us what you want.” All that is coming out of the trial. So I would say that most people now are not asking, are no longer asking, including my opponents. It’s sort of trickling in as the stuff comes out. People are not saying, “What did Netanyahu do, because apparently he did nothing?” “What was done to him?” is something that people ask.
“What was done to him? What was done to our democracy, what was done in the attempt to put down somebody who keeps winning elections, despite the handicaps that I described? Maybe we can nail him by framing him.” And the one thing I can say about this court trial is that things are coming up and that’s very good, just objective things are coming out and changing the picture. So I would say the attempt to brand me as corrupt is falling on its face. But the thing that is being uncovered in the trial, such as the use of spyware on a politician, a politician’s surroundings to try to shake them down in investigations, put them in flea-ridden cells for 21 days. Invite their 84 year old mother to investigations without cause, bringing in their mistresses in the corridor, shaking them down, that’s what people are asking. That corruption is what they want corrected.
The territorial dispute is something else. You have a territorial dispute if you say, “Okay, you are living on this side, we’re living on that side. Let’s decide where the border is and so on.” That’s not what the argument is. The Palestinian society, which is itself fragmented, but all the factions agree, there shouldn’t be a Jewish state anywhere. They just disagree between Hamas that says, “Oh, well you should have it. We should get rid of it with terror.” And the others who say, “We know we should also use political means to dissolve it.” So that is the problem.
And that’s what would happen as long as the reigning ideology says, “We don’t want Israel in any border.” So the idea of two states assumes that you’d have on the other side a state that wants to live in peace and not one that will be overtaken by Iran in its proxies in two seconds and become a base to destroy Israel. And therefore, I think that most Israelis today, if you ask them, they’d say it’s not going to work in that concept, so what do you do with the Palestinians? They’re still there. And unlike them, I don’t want to throw them out. They’re going to be living here and we’re going to be living here in an area, which is by the way, just to understand the area, the entire area of so-called West Bank and Israel is the width of the Washington Beltway, more or less.
Just a little more, not much more. You can’t really divide it up. You can’t say, “Well, you’re going to fly in. Who controls the airspace?” Well, it takes you about two and a half minutes to cross it with a regular 747. With a fighter plane it takes you a minute and a half, okay? So how are you going to divide the airspace? Well, you’re not going to divide it. Israel’s going to control that airspace and the electromagnetic space and so on. So security has to be in the hands of Israel. My view of how you solve this problem is a simple principle. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves and none of the powers to threaten Israel, which basically means that the responsibility for overall security remains with Israel. And from a practical point of view, we’ve seen that every time that Israel leaves a territory and takes its security forces out of an area, it immediately is overtaken by Hamas or Hezbollah or Jihadist who basically are committed to the destruction of Israel and also bring misery to the Palestinians or Arab subjects.
So I think that principle is less than perfect sovereignty because you’re taking a certain amount of sovereign powers, especially security away. But I think it’s the only practical solution. So people say, “Ah, but it’s not a perfect state.” I say, “Okay, call it what you will. Call it, I don’t know, limited sovereignty. Call it the autonomy plus. Call it whatever you want to call it.” But that’s the reality. And right now, if you ask Israelis across the political spectrum, except the very hard left, most Israelis agree with that. They don’t really debate it.
Remember that in pre-1967 Israel, we have over a million and a half Arabs here. We don’t say, “Oh, Israel has to be ethnically cleansed from its Arab citizens in order to have peace.” Of course not. Jews can live among Arabs, and Arabs can live among Jews. And what is being advanced by those people who say that we can’t live in our ancestral homeland in these disputed areas. Nobody says that this is Palestinian areas and nobody says that these are Israeli areas. We claim them, they claim them. We’ve only been attached to this land for oh, 3,500 years. But it’s a dispute, I agree. But I don’t agree that we should throw out the Arabs. And I don’t think that they should throw out the Jews. And if somebody said to you, “The only way we’re going to have peace with Israel is to have an ethnically cleansed Palestinian entity,” that’s outrageous.
If you said you shouldn’t have Jews living in, I don’t know, in suburbs of London or New York and so on, I don’t think that will play too well. The world is actually advancing a solution that says that Jews cannot live among Arabs, and Arabs cannot live among Jews. I don’t think that’s the right way to do it. And I think there’s a solution out there, but I don’t think we’re going to get to it, which is less than perfect sovereignty, which involves Israeli security, maintained for the entire territory by Israel, which involves not rooting out anybody. Not kicking out, uprooting Arabs or Palestinians. They’re going to live in enclaves in sovereign Israel and we’re going to live in probably in enclaves there, probably through transportation continuity as opposed to territorial continuity. For example, you can have tunnels and overpasses and so on that connect the various communities.
We’re doing that right now, and it actually works. I think there is a solution to this. It’s not the perfect world that people think of because that model I think doesn’t apply here. If it applies elsewhere, it’s a question. I don’t think so. But I think there’s one other thing, and that’s the main thing that I’ve been involved in. People said, “If you don’t solve the Palestinian problem, you’re not going to get to the Arab world. You’re not going to have peace with the Arab world.” Remember, the Palestinians are about 2% of the Arab world, and the other 98%, you’re not going to make peace with them. And that’s our goal.
And for a long time, people accepted that. After the initial peace treaties with Egypt, with Prime Minister Begin of the Likud and President Sadat of Egypt, and then with Jordan between Prime Minister Rabin and King Hussein. For a quarter of a century we didn’t have any more peace treaties because people said, “You got to go through the Palestinians” and the Palestinians, they don’t want a solution of the kind that I described or any kind except the one that involved the dissolution of the state of Israel.
So we could wait another half century. And I said, “No, I don’t think that we should accept the premise that we have to wait for the Palestinians because we’ll have to wait forever.” So I decided to do it differently. I decided to go directly to the Arab capitals and to make the historic Abraham Accords and essentially reversing the equation, not a peace process that goes inside out, but outside in. And we went directly to these countries and forged these breakthrough peace accords with the United Arab Emirates, with Bahrain, with Morocco and with Sudan. And we’re now trying to expand that in a quantum leap with Saudi Arabia.
When that hope is taken away, then you begin to have a turn to the realistic solutions of coexistence. By the way, they’ll require compromise on the Israeli side too. And then I’m perfectly cognizant of that and willing to do that. But I think a realistic compromise will be struck much more readily when the conflict between Israel and the Arab states, the Arab world, is effectively solved. And I think we’re on that path. It was a conceptual change just like I’ve been involved in a few, I told you the conceptual battle is always the most difficult one. And I had to fight this battle to convert a semi-socialist state into a free market capitalist state. And I have to say that most people today recognize the power of competition and the benefits of free markets. So we also had to fight this battle-
I don’t think that’s the question, but you see how the whole configuration changes when that happens. So you have to be very careful on how you resolve this conflict. So it doesn’t… well, it doesn’t go off the rails, so to speak. That’s, by the way, the corollaries here. We don’t want Iran, which is an aggressive force with just aggressive ideology of dominating first the Muslim world, and then eliminating Israel, and then becoming a global force, having nuclear weapons. It’s totally different when they don’t have it than when they do have it. And that’s why one of my main goals has been to prevent Iran from having the means of mass destruction, which will be used, atomic bombs, which they openly say will be used against us. And you can understand that. How to bring about an end to Ukraine? I have my ideas. I don’t think that’s worthwhile discussing them now because they might be required later on.
And the combination of the desire to have some kind of protection against Iran or some kind of cooperation against Iran and civilian economic cooperation came to a head when I gave a speech in the American Congress, which I didn’t do lightheartedly, I had to decide to challenge a sitting American president and on the so-called Iranian deal, which I thought would pave Iran’s path with gold to be an effective nuclear power. That’s what would happen. So I went there. And in the course of giving that speech before the joint session of Congress, our delegation received calls from Gulf states who said, “We can’t believe what your prime minister is doing. He’s challenging the President of the United States.” Well, I had no choice because I thought my country’s own existence was imperiled. And remember, we always understand through changing administrations that America under… no matter what leadership is always the irreplaceable and indispensable ally of Israel and will always remain that we can have arguments as we have, but in the family, as we say in [foreign language 01:01:32], it’s the family.
But nevertheless, I was forced to take a stand. That produced calls from Gulf states that ultimately led to clandestine meetings that ultimately flowered into the Abraham Accords then. And I think we’re at a point where the idea of ending the Arab-Israeli conflict, not the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the Arab-Israeli conflict can happen. I’m not sure it will. It depends on quite a few things, but it could happen. And if it happens, it might open up the ending of the Israeli-Islamic conflict. Remember, the Arab world is a small part, it’s an important part, but it’s small. There are large Islamic populations and it could bring about an end to an historic enmity between Islam and Judaism. It could be a great thing.
So I’m looking at this larger thing. You can be hobbled by saying, “Oh, well, you’ve had this hiccup in Gaza or this or that thing happening in the Palestinians.” It’s important for us because we want security. But I think the larger question is can we break out into a much wider peace and ultimately come back and make the peace between Israel and the Palestinians rather than waiting to solve that and never getting to paint on the larger canvas? I want to paint on the larger canvas and come back to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
The second thing is I once asked him, before I got elected, I said, “Well, what do you think is the most important quality for a prime minister of Israel?” And he came back with a question, “What do you think?” And I said, “Well, you have to have vision and you have to have the flexibility of navigating and working towards that vision. Be flexible, but understand where you’re heading.” And he said, “Well, you need that for anything. You need it if you’re a university president or if you’re a leader of a corporation or anything, anybody would’ve to have that.” I said, “All right, so what do you need to be the leader of Israel?” He came back to me with a word that stunned me. He said, “Education. You need a broad and deep education, or you’ll be at the mercy of your clerks or the press or whatever. You have to be able to do that.” Now, as I spend time in government, being reelected by the people of Israel, I recognize more and more how right he was.
You need to constantly ask yourself, “Where’s the direction we want to take the country? How do we achieve that goal?” But also understand that new disciplines are being added. You have to learn all the time. You have to add to your intellectual capital all the time. Kissinger said that he wrote that once you enter public life, you begin to draw on your intellectual capital and it’ll be depleted very quickly if you stay a long time. I disagree with that. I think you have to constantly increase your understanding of things as they change, because my father was right. You need to broaden and deepen your education as you go along. You can’t just sit back and say, “Well, I studied some things in university, or in college, or in Boston, or at MIT, and that’s enough. I’ve done it.” No, learn, learn, learn, learn. Never stop.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 2:35 – Hate
- 8:15 – Judicial reform and protests
- 16:51 – AI
- 26:53 – Competition
- 33:34 – Power and corruption
- 40:45 – Peace
- 55:18 – War in Ukraine
- 59:15 – Abraham Accords
- 1:03:15 – History
- 1:08:02 – Survival
Introduction
Benjamin Netanyahu
We should never, and I never sit aside and say, oh, they’re just threatening to destroy us. They won’t do it. If somebody threatens to eliminate you as Iran is doing today, and as Hitler did then and people discounted it, well, if somebody threatens to annihilate us, take them seriously and act to prevent it early on. Don’t let them have the means to do so because that may be too late.
We should never, and I never sit aside and say, oh, they’re just threatening to destroy us. They won’t do it. If somebody threatens to eliminate you as Iran is doing today, and as Hitler did then and people discounted it, well, if somebody threatens to annihilate us, take them seriously and act to prevent it early on. Don’t let them have the means to do so because that may be too late.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu, prime Minister of Israel, currently serving his sixth term in office. He’s one of the most influential, powerful, and controversial men in the world, leading a right-wing coalition government at the center of one of the most intense and long-lasting conflicts and crises in human history.
The following is a conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu, prime Minister of Israel, currently serving his sixth term in office. He’s one of the most influential, powerful, and controversial men in the world, leading a right-wing coalition government at the center of one of the most intense and long-lasting conflicts and crises in human history.
As we spoke, and as I speak now, large scale protests are breaking out all over Israel over this government’s proposed judicial reform that seeks to weaken the Supreme Court in a bold accumulation of power. Given the current intense political battles in Israel, our previous intention to speak for three hours was adjusted to one hour for the time being, but we agreed to speak again for much longer in the future. I will also interview people who harshly disagree with words spoken in this conversation. I will speak with other world leaders, with religious leaders, with historians and activists, and with people who have lived and have suffered through the pain of war, destruction and loss that stoke the fires of anger and hate in their heart.
For this, I will travel anywhere no matter how dangerous if there’s any chance, it may help add to understanding and love in the world. I believe in the power of conversation to do just this, to remind us of our common humanity. I know I’m under-qualified and under-skilled for these conversations, so I will often fall short and I will certainly get attacked, derided and slandered. But I will always turn the other cheek and use these attacks to learn to improve, and no matter what, never give into cynicism.
This life, this world of ours is too beautiful not to keep trying. Trying to do some good in whatever way each of us know how. I love you all.
This is The Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Benjamin Netanyahu.
Hate
You’re loved by many people here in Israel and in the world, but you’re also hated by many. In fact, I think you may be one of the most hated men in the world. So if there’s a young man or a young woman listening to this right now who have such hate in their heart, what can you say to them to one day turn that hate into love?
Benjamin Netanyahu
I disagree with the premise of your question. I think I’ve enjoyed a very broad support around the world. There are certain corners in which we have this animosity that you describe, and it sort of permeates in some of the newspapers and the news organs and so on in the United States, but it certainly doesn’t reflect the broad support that I have. I just gave an interview on an Iranian channel, 60 million viewers. I gave another one, just did a little video a few years ago, 25 million viewers from Iran. Certainly no hate there I have to tell you, not from the regime.
I disagree with the premise of your question. I think I’ve enjoyed a very broad support around the world. There are certain corners in which we have this animosity that you describe, and it sort of permeates in some of the newspapers and the news organs and so on in the United States, but it certainly doesn’t reflect the broad support that I have. I just gave an interview on an Iranian channel, 60 million viewers. I gave another one, just did a little video a few years ago, 25 million viewers from Iran. Certainly no hate there I have to tell you, not from the regime.
And when I go around the world and I’ve been around the world, people want to hear what we have to say. What I have to say as a leader of Israel whom they respect increasingly as a rising power in the world. So I disagree with that. And the most important thing that goes against what you said is the respect that we receive from the Arab world and the fact that we’ve made four historic peace agreements with Arab countries. And they made it with me, they didn’t make it with anyone else. And I respect them and they respect me and probably more to come. So I think the premise is wrong, that’s all.
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s a lot of love, yes. A lot of leaders are collaborating are –
Well, there’s a lot of love, yes. A lot of leaders are collaborating are –
Benjamin Netanyahu
Respect, I said not love.
Respect, I said not love.
Lex Fridman
Okay. All right. Well, it’s a spectrum, but there is people who don’t have good things to say about Israel, who do have hate in their heart for Israel.
Okay. All right. Well, it’s a spectrum, but there is people who don’t have good things to say about Israel, who do have hate in their heart for Israel.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And what can you say to those people?
And what can you say to those people?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, I think they don’t know very much. I think they’re guided by a lot of ignorance. They don’t know about Israel. They don’t know that Israel is a stellar democracy, that it happens to be one of the most advanced societies on the planet. That what Israel develops helps humanity in every field, in medicine, in agriculture and in the environment and telecoms and talk about AI in a minute. But changing the world for the better and spreading this among six continents.
Well, I think they don’t know very much. I think they’re guided by a lot of ignorance. They don’t know about Israel. They don’t know that Israel is a stellar democracy, that it happens to be one of the most advanced societies on the planet. That what Israel develops helps humanity in every field, in medicine, in agriculture and in the environment and telecoms and talk about AI in a minute. But changing the world for the better and spreading this among six continents.
We’ve sent rescue teams more than any other country in the world, and we’re one 10th of 1% of the world’s population. But when there’s an earthquake or a devastation in Haiti or in the Philippines, Israel is there. When there’s an devastating earthquake in Turkey, Israel was there. When there’s something in Nepal, Israel is there, and it’s the second country. It’s the second country after, in one case, India or after another case, the United States, Israel is there. Tiny Israel is a benefactor to all of humanity.
Lex Fridman
So you’re a student of history. If I can just linger on that philosophical notion of hate, that part of human nature. If you look at World War II, what do you learn from human nature, from the rise of the Third Reich and the rise of somebody like Hitler and the hate that permeates that?
So you’re a student of history. If I can just linger on that philosophical notion of hate, that part of human nature. If you look at World War II, what do you learn from human nature, from the rise of the Third Reich and the rise of somebody like Hitler and the hate that permeates that?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, what I’ve learned is that you have to nip bad things in the bud. There’s a Latin term that says [foreign language 00:06:29], stop bad things when they’re small. And the deliberate hatred, the incitement of hatred against one community, it’s demonization, delegitimization that goes with it is a very dangerous thing.
Well, what I’ve learned is that you have to nip bad things in the bud. There’s a Latin term that says [foreign language 00:06:29], stop bad things when they’re small. And the deliberate hatred, the incitement of hatred against one community, it’s demonization, delegitimization that goes with it is a very dangerous thing.
And that happened in the case of the Jews. What started with the Jews soon spread to all of humanity. So what we’ve learned is that we should never, and I never sit aside and say, “Oh, they’re just threatening to destroy us. They won’t do it.” If somebody threatens to eliminate you as Iran is doing today, and as Hitler did then, and people discounted it, well, if somebody threatens to annihilate us, take them seriously and act to prevent it early on. Don’t let them have the means to do so because that may be too late.
Lex Fridman
So in those threats underlying that hatred, how much of it is anti-Zionism, and how much of it is anti-Semitism?
So in those threats underlying that hatred, how much of it is anti-Zionism, and how much of it is anti-Semitism?
Benjamin Netanyahu
I don’t distinguish between the two. You can’t say, “Well, I’m, I’m okay with Jews, but I just don’t think there should be a Jewish state.” It’s like saying, “I’m not anti-American, I just don’t think there should be an America.” That’s basically what people are saying vis-a-vis anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.
I don’t distinguish between the two. You can’t say, “Well, I’m, I’m okay with Jews, but I just don’t think there should be a Jewish state.” It’s like saying, “I’m not anti-American, I just don’t think there should be an America.” That’s basically what people are saying vis-a-vis anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.
When you’re saying anti-Zionism you’re saying that Jewish people don’t have a right to have a state of their own. And that is a denial of a basic principle that I think completely unmasks what is involved here. Today anti-Semitism is anti-Zionism. Those who oppose the Jewish people oppose the Jewish state.
Judicial reform and protests
Lex Fridman
If we jump from human history to the current particular moment, there’s protests in Israel now about the proposed judicial reform that gives power to your government to override the Supreme Court. So the critics say that this gives too much power to you, virtually making you a dictator.
If we jump from human history to the current particular moment, there’s protests in Israel now about the proposed judicial reform that gives power to your government to override the Supreme Court. So the critics say that this gives too much power to you, virtually making you a dictator.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah. Well, that’s ridiculous. The mere fact that you have so many demonstrations and protests, some dictatorship, huh? There’s a lot of democracy here, more rambunctious and more robust than just anywhere on the planet.
Yeah. Well, that’s ridiculous. The mere fact that you have so many demonstrations and protests, some dictatorship, huh? There’s a lot of democracy here, more rambunctious and more robust than just anywhere on the planet.
Lex Fridman
Can you still man the case that this may give too much power to the coalition government, to the prime minister, not just to you, but to those who follow?
Can you still man the case that this may give too much power to the coalition government, to the prime minister, not just to you, but to those who follow?
Benjamin Netanyahu
No, I think that’s complete hogwash because I think there’s very few people who are demonstrating against this. Quite a few, quite many, don’t have an idea what is being discussed. They’re basically being sloganized. You can sloganized, you know something about not mass media right now, but the social network, you can basically feed deliberately with big data and big money, you can just feed slogans and get into people’s minds. I’m sure you don’t think I exaggerate, because you can tell me more about that.
No, I think that’s complete hogwash because I think there’s very few people who are demonstrating against this. Quite a few, quite many, don’t have an idea what is being discussed. They’re basically being sloganized. You can sloganized, you know something about not mass media right now, but the social network, you can basically feed deliberately with big data and big money, you can just feed slogans and get into people’s minds. I’m sure you don’t think I exaggerate, because you can tell me more about that.
And you can create mass mobilization based on these absurd slogans. So here’s where I come from and what we’re doing, what we’re trying to do, and what we’ve changed in what we’re trying to do. I’m a 19th century democrat in my, small D yes, in my views. That is I ask the question, “What is democracy?” So democracy is the will of the majority and the protection of the rights of, they call it the rights of the minority, but I say the rights of the individual.
So how do you balance the two? How do you avoid mobocracy? And how do you avoid dictatorship? The opposite side. The way you avoid it is something that was built essentially by British philosophers and French philosophers, but was encapsulated by the Founding Fathers of the United States. You create a balance between the three branches of government, the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary.
And this balance is what assures the balance between majority rights and individual rights. And you have to balance all of them. That balance was maintained in Israel in its first 50 years, and was gradually overtaken and basically broken by the most activist judicial court on the planet. That’s what happened here. And gradually over the last two, three decades, the court aggregated for itself the powers of the parliament and the executive. So we’re trying to bring it back into line. Bringing it back into line, into what is common in all parliamentary democracies and in the United States, doesn’t mean taking the pendulum from one side and bringing it to the other side.
We want checks and balances, not unrivaled power. Just as we said, we want an independent judiciary, but not an all powerful judiciary. That balance does not mean, bringing it back into line, doesn’t mean that you can have the parliament, our Knesset, override any decision that the Supreme Court does. So I pretty much early on said, after the judicial reform was introduced, “Get rid of the idea of sweeping override clause that would have, with 61 votes, that’s a majority of one, you can just nullify any Supreme Court decision, so let’s move it back into the center.” So that’s gone. And most of the criticism on the judicial reform was based on an unlimited override clause, which I’ve said is simply not going to happen. People are discussing something that already for six months does not exist.
The second point that we received criticism on was the structure of how do you choose Supreme Court judges? Okay, how do you choose them? And the critics of the reform are saying that the idea that elected officials should choose Supreme Court judges is the end of democracy. If that’s the case, the United States is not a democracy. Neither is France and neither are just, I don’t know, just about every democracy on the planet. So there is a view here that you can’t have the sordid hands of elected officials involved in the choosing of judges.
And in the Israeli system, the judicial activism went so far that effectively the sitting judges have an effective veto on choosing judges, which means that this is a self-selecting court that just perpetrates itself. And we want to correct that. Again, we want to correct it in a balanced way. And that’s basically what we’re trying to do. So I think there’s a lot of misinformation about that. We’re trying to bring Israeli democracy to where it was in its first 50 years. And it was a stellar democracy. It still is. Israel is a democracy, will remain a democracy, a vibrant democracy. And believe me, the fact that people are arguing and demonstrating in the streets and protesting is the best proof of that, and that’s how it’ll remain.
Lex Fridman
We spoke about tech companies offline, there’s a lot of tech companies nervous about this judicial reform. Can you speak to why large and small companies have a future in Israel?
We spoke about tech companies offline, there’s a lot of tech companies nervous about this judicial reform. Can you speak to why large and small companies have a future in Israel?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Because Israel is a free market economy. I had something to do with that. I introduced dozens and dozens of free market reforms that made Israel move from $17,000 per capita income within very short time to $54,000. That’s nominal GDP per capita according to the IMF. And we’ve overtaken in that Japan, France, Britain, Germany.
Because Israel is a free market economy. I had something to do with that. I introduced dozens and dozens of free market reforms that made Israel move from $17,000 per capita income within very short time to $54,000. That’s nominal GDP per capita according to the IMF. And we’ve overtaken in that Japan, France, Britain, Germany.
And how did that happen? Because we unleashed the genius that we have and the initiative and the entrepreneurship that is latent in our population. And to do that, we had to create free markets. So we created that. So Israel has one of the most vibrant free market economies in the world. And the second thing we have is a permanent investment in conceptual products because we have a permanent investment in the military, in our security services, creating basically knowledge workers who then become knowledge entrepreneurs. And so we create this structure, and that’s not going to go away.
There’s been a decline in investments in high-tech globally. I think that’s driven by many factors. But the most important one is the interest rate, which I think will, it’ll fluctuate up and down. But Israel will remain a very attractive country because it produces so many knowledge workers in a knowledge based economy. And it’s changing so rapidly. The world is changing. You’re looking for the places that have innovation. The future belongs to those who innovate.
Israel is the preeminent innovation nation. It has few competitors. And if we would say, “All right, where do you have this close cross-disciplinary fermentation of various skills in areas?” I would say “It’s in Israel.” And I’ll tell you why. We used to be just telecoms because people went out of the military intelligence, RNSA, but that’s been now broad based. So you find it in medicine, you find it in biology, you find it in agritech, you find it everywhere. Everything is becoming technologized.
And in Israel, everybody is dealing in everything, and that’s a potent reservoir of talent that the world is not going to pass up. And in fact, it’s coming to us. We just had Nvidia coming here, and they decided to build a supercomputer in Israel. Wonder why? We’ve had Intel coming here and deciding now to invest $25 billion, just now, in a new plant in Israel. I wonder why? I don’t wonder why. They know why. Because the talent is here and the freedom is here. And it will remain so.
AI
Lex Fridman
You had a conversation about AI with Sam Altman of Open AI and with Elon Musk.
You had a conversation about AI with Sam Altman of Open AI and with Elon Musk.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What was the content of that conversation? What’s your vision for this very highest of tech, which is artificial intelligence?
What was the content of that conversation? What’s your vision for this very highest of tech, which is artificial intelligence?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, first of all, I have a high regard for the people I talked to. And I understand that they understand things I don’t understand, and I don’t pretend to understand everything. But I do understand one thing. I understand that AI is developing at a geometric rate and mostly in political life and in life in general people don’t have an intuitive grasp of geometric growth. You understand things basically in linear increments. And the idea that you’re coming up a ski slope is very foreign to people. So they don’t understand it, and they’re naturally also sort of taken aback by it. Because what do you do? So I think there’s several conclusions from my conversations with them and from my other observations that I’ve been talking about for many years. I’m talking about the need-
Well, first of all, I have a high regard for the people I talked to. And I understand that they understand things I don’t understand, and I don’t pretend to understand everything. But I do understand one thing. I understand that AI is developing at a geometric rate and mostly in political life and in life in general people don’t have an intuitive grasp of geometric growth. You understand things basically in linear increments. And the idea that you’re coming up a ski slope is very foreign to people. So they don’t understand it, and they’re naturally also sort of taken aback by it. Because what do you do? So I think there’s several conclusions from my conversations with them and from my other observations that I’ve been talking about for many years. I’m talking about the need-
Benjamin Netanyahu
… observations that I’ve been talking about for many years. I’m talking about the need to do this. Well, the first thing is this. There is no possibility of not entering AI with full force. Secondly, there is a need for regulation. Third, it’s not clear there will be global regulation. Fourth, it’s not clear where it ends up. I certainly cannot say that. Now, you might say, “Does it come to control us?” Okay, that’s a question. Does it come to control us? I don’t know the answer to that. I think that, as one observation that I had from these conversations is if it does come to control us, that’s probably the only chance of having universal regulation, because I don’t see anyone deciding to avoid the race and cooperate unless you have that threat. Doesn’t mean you can’t regulate AI within countries even without that understanding, but it does mean that there’s a limit to regulation because every country will want to make sure that it doesn’t give up competitive advantage if there is no universal regulation.
… observations that I’ve been talking about for many years. I’m talking about the need to do this. Well, the first thing is this. There is no possibility of not entering AI with full force. Secondly, there is a need for regulation. Third, it’s not clear there will be global regulation. Fourth, it’s not clear where it ends up. I certainly cannot say that. Now, you might say, “Does it come to control us?” Okay, that’s a question. Does it come to control us? I don’t know the answer to that. I think that, as one observation that I had from these conversations is if it does come to control us, that’s probably the only chance of having universal regulation, because I don’t see anyone deciding to avoid the race and cooperate unless you have that threat. Doesn’t mean you can’t regulate AI within countries even without that understanding, but it does mean that there’s a limit to regulation because every country will want to make sure that it doesn’t give up competitive advantage if there is no universal regulation.
I think that right now, just as 10 years ago, I read a novel. I don’t read novels, but I was forced to read one by a scientific advisor. I read history, I read about economics, I read about technology. I just don’t read novels. In this, I follow Churchill. He said, “Fact is better than fiction.” Well, this fiction would become fact. It was a book, it was a novel about a Chinese/American future cyber war. I read the book in one sitting, called in a team of experts, and I said, “All right, let’s turn Israel into one of the world’s five cyber powers and let’s do it very quickly.” And we did actually. We did exactly that. I think AI is bigger than that and related to that, because it’ll affect … Well, cyber affects everything, but AI will affect it even more fundamentally. And the joining of the two could be very powerful.
So I think in Israel, we have to do it anyway for security reasons and we’re doing it. But I think, what about our databases that are already very robust on the medical records of 98% of our population? Why don’t we stick a genetic database on that? Why don’t we do other things that could bring what are seemingly magical cures and drugs and medical instruments for that? That’s one possibility. We have it, as I said, in every single field. The conclusion is this. We have to move on AI. We are moving on AI, just as we moved on cyber, and I think Israel will be one of the leading AI powers in the world. The questions I don’t have an answer to is, where does it go? How much does it chew up on jobs?
There’s an assumption that I’m not sure is true, that the two big previous revolutions in the human condition, namely the agricultural revolution and the industrial revolution, definitely produced more jobs than they consumed. That is not obvious to me at all. I mean, I could see new jobs creating, and yes, I have that comforting statement, but it’s not quite true, because I think on balance, they’ll probably consume more jobs, many more jobs than they’ll create.
Lex Fridman
At least in the short term. And we don’t know about the long term.
At least in the short term. And we don’t know about the long term.
Benjamin Netanyahu
No, I don’t know about the long term, but I used to have the comfort being a free market guy. I always said, “We’re going to produce more jobs by, I don’t know, limiting certain government jobs.” We’re actually putting out in the market, will create more jobs, which obviously happened. We had one telecom company, a government company. When I said, “We’re going to create competition,” they said, “You’re going to run us out. We’re not going to have more workers.” They had 13,000 workers. They went down to seven, but we created another 40,000 in the other companies. So, that was a comforting thought. I always knew that was true.
No, I don’t know about the long term, but I used to have the comfort being a free market guy. I always said, “We’re going to produce more jobs by, I don’t know, limiting certain government jobs.” We’re actually putting out in the market, will create more jobs, which obviously happened. We had one telecom company, a government company. When I said, “We’re going to create competition,” they said, “You’re going to run us out. We’re not going to have more workers.” They had 13,000 workers. They went down to seven, but we created another 40,000 in the other companies. So, that was a comforting thought. I always knew that was true.
Not only that. I also knew that wealth would spread by opening up the markets, completely opposite to the socialist and semi-socialist creed that they had here. They said, “You’re going to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.” No. And made everyone richer, and actually the people who entered the job market because of the reforms we did, actually became a lot richer on the lower ladders of the socioeconomic measure.
But here’s the point, I don’t know. I don’t know that we will not have what Elon Musk calls the end of scarcity. So you’ll have the end of scarcity. You’ll have enormous productivity. Very few people are producing enormous added value. You’re going to have to tax that to pass it to the others. You’re going to have to do that. That’s a political question. I’m not sure how we answer that. What if you tax and somebody else doesn’t tax? You’re going to get everybody to go there. That’s an international issue that we constantly have to deal with.
And the second question you have is, suppose you solve that problem and you deliver money to those who are not involved in the AI economy, what do they do? The first question you ask somebody whom you just met after the polite exchanges is, what do you do? Well, people define themselves by their profession. It’s going to be difficult if you don’t have a profession. People will spend more time self-searching, more time in the arts, more time in leisure. I understand that. If I have to bet, it will annihilate many more jobs than it will create and it’ll force a structural change in our economics, in our economic models, and in our politics. And I’m not sure where it’s going to go.
Lex Fridman
And that’s something we have to respond to at the nation level and just as a human civilization, both the threat of AI to just us as a human species and then the effect on the jobs. And like you said, cybersecurity.
And that’s something we have to respond to at the nation level and just as a human civilization, both the threat of AI to just us as a human species and then the effect on the jobs. And like you said, cybersecurity.
Benjamin Netanyahu
What do you think? You think we’re going to lose control?
What do you think? You think we’re going to lose control?
Lex Fridman
No, first of all, I do believe, maybe naively, that it will create more jobs than it takes.
No, first of all, I do believe, maybe naively, that it will create more jobs than it takes.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Write that down and we’ll check it.
Write that down and we’ll check it.
Lex Fridman
It’s on record.
It’s on record.
Benjamin Netanyahu
We don’t say, “We’ll check it after our lifetime.” No, we’ll see it in a few years.
We don’t say, “We’ll check it after our lifetime.” No, we’ll see it in a few years.
Lex Fridman
We’ll see it in a few years. I’m really concerned about cybersecurity and the nature of how that changes with the power of AI. In terms of existential threats, I think there will be so much threats that aren’t existential along the way that that’s the thing I’m mostly concerned about, versus AI taking complete control and superseding the human species. Although that is something you should consider seriously because of the exponential growth of its capabilities.
We’ll see it in a few years. I’m really concerned about cybersecurity and the nature of how that changes with the power of AI. In terms of existential threats, I think there will be so much threats that aren’t existential along the way that that’s the thing I’m mostly concerned about, versus AI taking complete control and superseding the human species. Although that is something you should consider seriously because of the exponential growth of its capabilities.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah, it’s exactly the exponential growth, which we understand is before us, but we don’t really … It’s very hard to project forward.
Yeah, it’s exactly the exponential growth, which we understand is before us, but we don’t really … It’s very hard to project forward.
Lex Fridman
To really understand.
To really understand.
Benjamin Netanyahu
That’s right. Exactly right. So I deal with what I can and where I can affect something. I tend not to worry about things I don’t control, because there’s at a certain point, there’s no point. I mean, you have to decide what you’re spending your time on. So in practical terms, I think we’ll make Israel a formidable AI power. We understand the limitation of skill, computing power and other things. But I think within those limits, I think we can make here this miracle that we did in many other things. We do more with less. I don’t care if it’s the production of water or the production of energy or the production of knowledge or the production of cyber capabilities, defense and other, we just do more with less. And I think in AI, we’re going to do a lot more with a relatively small but highly gifted population. Very gifted.
That’s right. Exactly right. So I deal with what I can and where I can affect something. I tend not to worry about things I don’t control, because there’s at a certain point, there’s no point. I mean, you have to decide what you’re spending your time on. So in practical terms, I think we’ll make Israel a formidable AI power. We understand the limitation of skill, computing power and other things. But I think within those limits, I think we can make here this miracle that we did in many other things. We do more with less. I don’t care if it’s the production of water or the production of energy or the production of knowledge or the production of cyber capabilities, defense and other, we just do more with less. And I think in AI, we’re going to do a lot more with a relatively small but highly gifted population. Very gifted.
Competition
Lex Fridman
So taking a small tangent, as we talked about offline, you have a background in TaeKwonDo?
So taking a small tangent, as we talked about offline, you have a background in TaeKwonDo?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Lex Fridman
We mentioned Elon Musk. I’ve trained with both. Just as a quick question, who are you betting on in a fight?
We mentioned Elon Musk. I’ve trained with both. Just as a quick question, who are you betting on in a fight?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, I refuse to answer that. I will say this.
Well, I refuse to answer that. I will say this.
Lex Fridman
Such a politician, you are.
Such a politician, you are.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah, of course. Here, I’m a politician. I’m openly telling you that I’m dodging the question. But I’ll say this. Actually, I spent five years in our special forces in the military, and we barely spent a minute on martial arts. I actually learned TaeKwonDo later when I came to … It wasn’t even at MIT. At MIT, I think I did karate. But when I came to the UN, I had a martial arts expert who taught me TaeKwonDo, which was interesting. Now, the question you really have to ask is, why did we learn martial arts in this special elite unit? And the answer is, there’s no point. If you saw Indiana Jones, there’s no point. You just pull the trigger. That’s simple. Now, I don’t expect anyone to pull the trigger on this combat, and I’m sure you’ll make sure that doesn’t happen.
Yeah, of course. Here, I’m a politician. I’m openly telling you that I’m dodging the question. But I’ll say this. Actually, I spent five years in our special forces in the military, and we barely spent a minute on martial arts. I actually learned TaeKwonDo later when I came to … It wasn’t even at MIT. At MIT, I think I did karate. But when I came to the UN, I had a martial arts expert who taught me TaeKwonDo, which was interesting. Now, the question you really have to ask is, why did we learn martial arts in this special elite unit? And the answer is, there’s no point. If you saw Indiana Jones, there’s no point. You just pull the trigger. That’s simple. Now, I don’t expect anyone to pull the trigger on this combat, and I’m sure you’ll make sure that doesn’t happen.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I mean, martial arts is bigger than just combat. It’s this journey of humility.
Yeah. I mean, martial arts is bigger than just combat. It’s this journey of humility.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Oh, sure.
Oh, sure.
Lex Fridman
It’s an art form. It truly is an art. But it’s fascinating that these two figures in tech are facing each other. I won’t ask the question of who you would face and how you would do, but …
It’s an art form. It truly is an art. But it’s fascinating that these two figures in tech are facing each other. I won’t ask the question of who you would face and how you would do, but …
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, I’m facing opponents all the time.
Well, I’m facing opponents all the time.
Lex Fridman
All the time?
All the time?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah, that’s part of life.
Yeah, that’s part of life.
Lex Fridman
Not yet.
Not yet.
Benjamin Netanyahu
I’m not sure about that.
I’m not sure about that.
Lex Fridman
Are you announcing any fights?
Are you announcing any fights?
Benjamin Netanyahu
No, no. Part of life is competition. The only time competition ends is death. But political life, economic life, cultural life is engaged continuously in creativity and competition. The problem I have with that is, as I mentioned earlier just before we began the podcast, is that at a certain point, you want to put barriers to monopoly. And if you’re a really able competitor, you’re going to create a monopoly. That’s what Peter Till says is a natural course of things. It’s what I learned basically in the Boston Consulting Group. If you are a very able competitor, you’ll create scale advantages that gives you the ability to lock out your competition. And as a prime minister, I want to assure that there is competition in the markets, so you have to limit this competitive power at a certain point, and that becomes increasingly hard in a world where everything is intermixed.
No, no. Part of life is competition. The only time competition ends is death. But political life, economic life, cultural life is engaged continuously in creativity and competition. The problem I have with that is, as I mentioned earlier just before we began the podcast, is that at a certain point, you want to put barriers to monopoly. And if you’re a really able competitor, you’re going to create a monopoly. That’s what Peter Till says is a natural course of things. It’s what I learned basically in the Boston Consulting Group. If you are a very able competitor, you’ll create scale advantages that gives you the ability to lock out your competition. And as a prime minister, I want to assure that there is competition in the markets, so you have to limit this competitive power at a certain point, and that becomes increasingly hard in a world where everything is intermixed.
Where do you define market segments? Where do you define monopoly? How do you do that? That, actually conceptually, I find very challenging, because of all the dozens of economic reforms that I’ve made, the most difficult part is the conceptual part. Once you’ve ironed it out and you say, “Here’s what I want to do. Here’s the right thing to do,” then you have a practical problem of overcoming union resistance, political resistance, press calumny, opponents from this or that corner. That’s a practical matter. But if you have it conceptually defined, you can move ahead to reform economies or reform education or reform transportation. Fine.
In the question of the growing power of large companies, big tech companies to monopolize the markets because they’re better at it, they provide a service, they provide it at a lower cost, at rapidly declining cost. Where do you stop? Where do you stop monopoly power is a crucial question because it also becomes now a political question. If you amass enormous amount of economic power, which is information power, that also monopolizes the political process. These are real questions that are not obvious. I don’t have an obvious answer because as I said, as a 19th century Democrat, these are questions of the 21st century, which people should begin to think. Do you have a solution to that?
Lex Fridman
The solution of monopolies growing arbitrarily-
The solution of monopolies growing arbitrarily-
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
… unstoppably in power?
… unstoppably in power?
Benjamin Netanyahu
In economic power, and therefore in political power.
In economic power, and therefore in political power.
Lex Fridman
I mean, some of that is regulation, some of that is competition.
I mean, some of that is regulation, some of that is competition.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Do you know where to draw the line? It’s not breaking up AT&T. It’s not that simple.
Do you know where to draw the line? It’s not breaking up AT&T. It’s not that simple.
Lex Fridman
Well, I believe in the power of competition, that there will always be somebody that challenges the big guys, especially in the space of AI. The more open source movements are taking hold, the more the little guy can become the big guy.
Well, I believe in the power of competition, that there will always be somebody that challenges the big guys, especially in the space of AI. The more open source movements are taking hold, the more the little guy can become the big guy.
Benjamin Netanyahu
So you’re saying basically the regulatory instrument is the market?
So you’re saying basically the regulatory instrument is the market?
Lex Fridman
In large part, in most part, that’s the hope. Maybe I’m a dreamer.
In large part, in most part, that’s the hope. Maybe I’m a dreamer.
Benjamin Netanyahu
That’s been in many ways my policy up to now, that the best regulator is the market. The best regulator in economic activity is the market and the best regulator in political matters is the political market. That’s called elections. That’s what regulates. You have a lousy government and people make lousy decisions, well, you don’t need the wise men raised above the masses to decide what is good and what is bad. Let the masses decide. Let them vote every four years or whatever, and they throw you out.
That’s been in many ways my policy up to now, that the best regulator is the market. The best regulator in economic activity is the market and the best regulator in political matters is the political market. That’s called elections. That’s what regulates. You have a lousy government and people make lousy decisions, well, you don’t need the wise men raised above the masses to decide what is good and what is bad. Let the masses decide. Let them vote every four years or whatever, and they throw you out.
By the way, it happened to me. There’s life after political death. There’s actually political life. I was reelected five or six times, and this is my sixth term. So I believe in that. I’m not sure that in economic matters, in the geometric growth of tech companies, that you’ll always have the little guy, the nimble mammal, that will come out and slay the dinosaurs or overcome the dinosaurs, which is essentially what you said.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I wouldn’t count out the little guy.
Yeah, I wouldn’t count out the little guy.
Benjamin Netanyahu
You wouldn’t count out the little?
You wouldn’t count out the little?
Lex Fridman
No.
No.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, I hope you’re right.
Well, I hope you’re right.
Power and corruption
Lex Fridman
Well, let me ask you about this market of politics. So you have served six terms as prime minister over 15 years in power. Let me ask you again, human nature. Do you worry about the corrupting nature of power on you as a leader, on you as a man?
Well, let me ask you about this market of politics. So you have served six terms as prime minister over 15 years in power. Let me ask you again, human nature. Do you worry about the corrupting nature of power on you as a leader, on you as a man?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Not at all. Because I think that, again, the thing that drives me is nothing but the mission that I took to assure the survival and thriving of the Jewish state. That is, its economic prosperity, but its security and its ability to achieve peace with our neighbors. And I’m committed to it. I think there are many things that have been done. There are a few big things that I can still do, but it doesn’t only depend on my sense of mission. It depends on the market, as we say. It depends really on the will of the Israeli voters. And the Israeli voters have decided to vote for me again and again, even though I wield no power in the press, no power in many quarters here and so on, nothing. I mean, probably, I’m going to be very soon the longest serving prime minister in the last half century in the Western democracies. But that’s not because I amassed great political power in any of the institutions.
Not at all. Because I think that, again, the thing that drives me is nothing but the mission that I took to assure the survival and thriving of the Jewish state. That is, its economic prosperity, but its security and its ability to achieve peace with our neighbors. And I’m committed to it. I think there are many things that have been done. There are a few big things that I can still do, but it doesn’t only depend on my sense of mission. It depends on the market, as we say. It depends really on the will of the Israeli voters. And the Israeli voters have decided to vote for me again and again, even though I wield no power in the press, no power in many quarters here and so on, nothing. I mean, probably, I’m going to be very soon the longest serving prime minister in the last half century in the Western democracies. But that’s not because I amassed great political power in any of the institutions.
I remember I had a conversation with Silvio Berlusconi, who recently died, and he said to me about, I don’t know, 15 years ago, something like that, he said, “So Bibi, how many of Israel’s television stations do you have?” And I said, “None.” He said, “You have none?”
Lex Fridman
Do you have?
Do you have?
Benjamin Netanyahu
“Do you have?” I said, “None. I have two.” He said, “No, no. What, you mean you don’t have any that you control?” I said, “Not only do I have none that I control, they’re all against me.” So he says, “So how do you win elections with both hands tied behind your back?” And I said, “The hard way.” That’s why I have the largest party, but I don’t have many more seats than I would have if I had a sympathetic voice in the media. And Israel until recently, was dominated completely by one side of the political spectrum that often vilified me, not me, because they viewed-
“Do you have?” I said, “None. I have two.” He said, “No, no. What, you mean you don’t have any that you control?” I said, “Not only do I have none that I control, they’re all against me.” So he says, “So how do you win elections with both hands tied behind your back?” And I said, “The hard way.” That’s why I have the largest party, but I don’t have many more seats than I would have if I had a sympathetic voice in the media. And Israel until recently, was dominated completely by one side of the political spectrum that often vilified me, not me, because they viewed-
Benjamin Netanyahu
… vilified me, not me, because they viewed me as representing basically the conservative voices in Israel that are majority. And so the idea that I’m an omnipotent, authoritarian dictator is ridiculous. I would say I’m not merely a champion of democracy and democratization. I believe ultimately the decision is with the voters and the voters, even though they have constant press attacks, they’ve chosen to put me back in. So I don’t believe in this thing of amassing the corrupting power of if you don’t have elections. If you control the means of influencing the voters, I understand what you’re saying, but in my case, it’s exact opposite. I have to constantly go in elections, constantly with a disadvantage that the major media outlets are very violently sometimes against me, but it’s fine. And I keep on winning. So I don’t know what you’re talking about. I would say the concentration of power lies elsewhere, not here.
… vilified me, not me, because they viewed me as representing basically the conservative voices in Israel that are majority. And so the idea that I’m an omnipotent, authoritarian dictator is ridiculous. I would say I’m not merely a champion of democracy and democratization. I believe ultimately the decision is with the voters and the voters, even though they have constant press attacks, they’ve chosen to put me back in. So I don’t believe in this thing of amassing the corrupting power of if you don’t have elections. If you control the means of influencing the voters, I understand what you’re saying, but in my case, it’s exact opposite. I have to constantly go in elections, constantly with a disadvantage that the major media outlets are very violently sometimes against me, but it’s fine. And I keep on winning. So I don’t know what you’re talking about. I would say the concentration of power lies elsewhere, not here.
Lex Fridman
Well, you have been involved in several corruption cases. How much corruption is there in Israel and how do you fight it in your own party and in Israel?
Well, you have been involved in several corruption cases. How much corruption is there in Israel and how do you fight it in your own party and in Israel?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, you should ask a different question. What’s happened to these cases? These cases basically are collapsing before our eyes, there was recently an event in which the three judges in my case, called in the prosecution and said, “Your flagship, the so-called bribery charges is gone, doesn’t exist,” before a single defense witness was called. And it sort of tells you that this thing is evaporating. It’s quite astounding even that I have to say, was covered even by the mainstream press in Israel because it’s such an earthquake. So a lot of these charges are not a lot. These charges will prove to be nothing. I always said, “Listen, I stand before the legal process.” I don’t claim that I’m exempt from it in any way. On the contrary, I think the truth will come out and it’s coming out. And we see that not only that, but with other things.
Well, you should ask a different question. What’s happened to these cases? These cases basically are collapsing before our eyes, there was recently an event in which the three judges in my case, called in the prosecution and said, “Your flagship, the so-called bribery charges is gone, doesn’t exist,” before a single defense witness was called. And it sort of tells you that this thing is evaporating. It’s quite astounding even that I have to say, was covered even by the mainstream press in Israel because it’s such an earthquake. So a lot of these charges are not a lot. These charges will prove to be nothing. I always said, “Listen, I stand before the legal process.” I don’t claim that I’m exempt from it in any way. On the contrary, I think the truth will come out and it’s coming out. And we see that not only that, but with other things.
So I think it’s kind of instructive that no politician has been more vilified. None has been put to such a, what is it? About a quarter of a billion shekels were used to scrutinize me, scour my bank accounts, sending people to the Philippines, into Mexico, into Europe, into America, and everybody using spyware, the most advanced spyware on the planet against my associates, blackmailing witnesses, telling them, “Think about your family, think about your wife. You better tell us what you want.” All that is coming out of the trial. So I would say that most people now are not asking, are no longer asking, including my opponents. It’s sort of trickling in as the stuff comes out. People are not saying, “What did Netanyahu do, because apparently he did nothing?” “What was done to him?” is something that people ask.
“What was done to him? What was done to our democracy, what was done in the attempt to put down somebody who keeps winning elections, despite the handicaps that I described? Maybe we can nail him by framing him.” And the one thing I can say about this court trial is that things are coming up and that’s very good, just objective things are coming out and changing the picture. So I would say the attempt to brand me as corrupt is falling on its face. But the thing that is being uncovered in the trial, such as the use of spyware on a politician, a politician’s surroundings to try to shake them down in investigations, put them in flea-ridden cells for 21 days. Invite their 84 year old mother to investigations without cause, bringing in their mistresses in the corridor, shaking them down, that’s what people are asking. That corruption is what they want corrected.
Peace
Lex Fridman
What is the top obstacle to peaceful coexistence of Israelis and Palestinians? Let’s talk about the big question of peace in this part of the world.
What is the top obstacle to peaceful coexistence of Israelis and Palestinians? Let’s talk about the big question of peace in this part of the world.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, I think the reason you have the persistence of the Palestinian Israeli conflict, which goes back about a century, is the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognize a Jewish state, a nation state for the Jewish people in any boundary. That’s why they opposed the establishment of the state of Israel before we had a state. Now that’s why they’ve opposed it after we had a state. They opposed it when we didn’t have Judea and Samaria, the West Bank in our hands and Gaza, and they oppose it after we have it. It doesn’t make a difference. It’s basically their persistent refusal to recognize a Jewish state in any boundaries. And I think that their tragedy is that they’ve been commandeered for a century by leadership that refused to compromise with the idea of Zionism, namely that the Jews deserve a state in this part of the world.
Well, I think the reason you have the persistence of the Palestinian Israeli conflict, which goes back about a century, is the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognize a Jewish state, a nation state for the Jewish people in any boundary. That’s why they opposed the establishment of the state of Israel before we had a state. Now that’s why they’ve opposed it after we had a state. They opposed it when we didn’t have Judea and Samaria, the West Bank in our hands and Gaza, and they oppose it after we have it. It doesn’t make a difference. It’s basically their persistent refusal to recognize a Jewish state in any boundaries. And I think that their tragedy is that they’ve been commandeered for a century by leadership that refused to compromise with the idea of Zionism, namely that the Jews deserve a state in this part of the world.
The territorial dispute is something else. You have a territorial dispute if you say, “Okay, you are living on this side, we’re living on that side. Let’s decide where the border is and so on.” That’s not what the argument is. The Palestinian society, which is itself fragmented, but all the factions agree, there shouldn’t be a Jewish state anywhere. They just disagree between Hamas that says, “Oh, well you should have it. We should get rid of it with terror.” And the others who say, “We know we should also use political means to dissolve it.” So that is the problem.
Lex Fridman
So even as part of a two-state solution, they’re still against the idea.
So even as part of a two-state solution, they’re still against the idea.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, they don’t want a state next to Israel. They want a state instead of Israel. And they say, “If we get a state, we’ll use it as a springboard to destroy the smaller Israeli state.” Which is what happened when Israel unilaterally walked out of Gaza and effectively established a Hamas state there. They didn’t say, “Oh good, now we have our own territory, our own state. Israel is no longer there. Let’s build peace. Let’s build economic projects. Let’s enfranchise our people.” No, they turned it basically into a terror bastion from which they fired 10,000 rockets into Israel. When Israel left Lebanon because we had terrorist attacks from there, then we had Lebanon taken over by Hezbollah, a terrorist organization that seeks to destroy Israel. And therefore every time we just walked out, what we got was not peace, we didn’t give territory for peace, we got territory for terror. That’s what we had.
Well, they don’t want a state next to Israel. They want a state instead of Israel. And they say, “If we get a state, we’ll use it as a springboard to destroy the smaller Israeli state.” Which is what happened when Israel unilaterally walked out of Gaza and effectively established a Hamas state there. They didn’t say, “Oh good, now we have our own territory, our own state. Israel is no longer there. Let’s build peace. Let’s build economic projects. Let’s enfranchise our people.” No, they turned it basically into a terror bastion from which they fired 10,000 rockets into Israel. When Israel left Lebanon because we had terrorist attacks from there, then we had Lebanon taken over by Hezbollah, a terrorist organization that seeks to destroy Israel. And therefore every time we just walked out, what we got was not peace, we didn’t give territory for peace, we got territory for terror. That’s what we had.
And that’s what would happen as long as the reigning ideology says, “We don’t want Israel in any border.” So the idea of two states assumes that you’d have on the other side a state that wants to live in peace and not one that will be overtaken by Iran in its proxies in two seconds and become a base to destroy Israel. And therefore, I think that most Israelis today, if you ask them, they’d say it’s not going to work in that concept, so what do you do with the Palestinians? They’re still there. And unlike them, I don’t want to throw them out. They’re going to be living here and we’re going to be living here in an area, which is by the way, just to understand the area, the entire area of so-called West Bank and Israel is the width of the Washington Beltway, more or less.
Just a little more, not much more. You can’t really divide it up. You can’t say, “Well, you’re going to fly in. Who controls the airspace?” Well, it takes you about two and a half minutes to cross it with a regular 747. With a fighter plane it takes you a minute and a half, okay? So how are you going to divide the airspace? Well, you’re not going to divide it. Israel’s going to control that airspace and the electromagnetic space and so on. So security has to be in the hands of Israel. My view of how you solve this problem is a simple principle. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves and none of the powers to threaten Israel, which basically means that the responsibility for overall security remains with Israel. And from a practical point of view, we’ve seen that every time that Israel leaves a territory and takes its security forces out of an area, it immediately is overtaken by Hamas or Hezbollah or Jihadist who basically are committed to the destruction of Israel and also bring misery to the Palestinians or Arab subjects.
So I think that principle is less than perfect sovereignty because you’re taking a certain amount of sovereign powers, especially security away. But I think it’s the only practical solution. So people say, “Ah, but it’s not a perfect state.” I say, “Okay, call it what you will. Call it, I don’t know, limited sovereignty. Call it the autonomy plus. Call it whatever you want to call it.” But that’s the reality. And right now, if you ask Israelis across the political spectrum, except the very hard left, most Israelis agree with that. They don’t really debate it.
Lex Fridman
So a two-state solution where Israel controls the security of the entire region.
So a two-state solution where Israel controls the security of the entire region.
Benjamin Netanyahu
We don’t call it quite that. I mean there are different names, but the idea is yes, Israel controls security in the, is the entire area. It’s this tiny area between the Jordan River and the sea. I mean it’s like, you can walk it in not one afternoon. If you’re really fit, you can do it in a day, less than a day. I did.
We don’t call it quite that. I mean there are different names, but the idea is yes, Israel controls security in the, is the entire area. It’s this tiny area between the Jordan River and the sea. I mean it’s like, you can walk it in not one afternoon. If you’re really fit, you can do it in a day, less than a day. I did.
Lex Fridman
So the expansion of settlements in the West Bank has been a top priority for this new government. So people may harshly criticize this as contributing to escalating the Israel-Palestine tensions. Can you understand that perspective, that this expansion of settlements is not good for this two-state solution?
So the expansion of settlements in the West Bank has been a top priority for this new government. So people may harshly criticize this as contributing to escalating the Israel-Palestine tensions. Can you understand that perspective, that this expansion of settlements is not good for this two-state solution?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Yeah, I can understand what they’re saying, and they don’t understand why they’re wrong. First, most Israelis who live in Judea, Samaria live in urban blocks, and that accounts for about 90% of the population. And everybody recognizes that those urban blocks are going to be part of Israel in any future arrangement. So they’re really arguing about something that has already been decided and agreed upon, really by Americans, even by Arabs, many Arabs, they don’t think that Israel is going to dismantle these blocks. You look outside the window here, and within about a kilometer or a mile from here, as you have Jerusalem, half of Jerusalem grew naturally beyond the old 1967 border. So you’re not going to dismantle half of Jerusalem. That’s not going to happen. And most people don’t expect that. Then you have the other 10% scattered in tiny, small communities, and people say, “Well, you’re going to have to take them out.” Why?
Yeah, I can understand what they’re saying, and they don’t understand why they’re wrong. First, most Israelis who live in Judea, Samaria live in urban blocks, and that accounts for about 90% of the population. And everybody recognizes that those urban blocks are going to be part of Israel in any future arrangement. So they’re really arguing about something that has already been decided and agreed upon, really by Americans, even by Arabs, many Arabs, they don’t think that Israel is going to dismantle these blocks. You look outside the window here, and within about a kilometer or a mile from here, as you have Jerusalem, half of Jerusalem grew naturally beyond the old 1967 border. So you’re not going to dismantle half of Jerusalem. That’s not going to happen. And most people don’t expect that. Then you have the other 10% scattered in tiny, small communities, and people say, “Well, you’re going to have to take them out.” Why?
Remember that in pre-1967 Israel, we have over a million and a half Arabs here. We don’t say, “Oh, Israel has to be ethnically cleansed from its Arab citizens in order to have peace.” Of course not. Jews can live among Arabs, and Arabs can live among Jews. And what is being advanced by those people who say that we can’t live in our ancestral homeland in these disputed areas. Nobody says that this is Palestinian areas and nobody says that these are Israeli areas. We claim them, they claim them. We’ve only been attached to this land for oh, 3,500 years. But it’s a dispute, I agree. But I don’t agree that we should throw out the Arabs. And I don’t think that they should throw out the Jews. And if somebody said to you, “The only way we’re going to have peace with Israel is to have an ethnically cleansed Palestinian entity,” that’s outrageous.
If you said you shouldn’t have Jews living in, I don’t know, in suburbs of London or New York and so on, I don’t think that will play too well. The world is actually advancing a solution that says that Jews cannot live among Arabs, and Arabs cannot live among Jews. I don’t think that’s the right way to do it. And I think there’s a solution out there, but I don’t think we’re going to get to it, which is less than perfect sovereignty, which involves Israeli security, maintained for the entire territory by Israel, which involves not rooting out anybody. Not kicking out, uprooting Arabs or Palestinians. They’re going to live in enclaves in sovereign Israel and we’re going to live in probably in enclaves there, probably through transportation continuity as opposed to territorial continuity. For example, you can have tunnels and overpasses and so on that connect the various communities.
We’re doing that right now, and it actually works. I think there is a solution to this. It’s not the perfect world that people think of because that model I think doesn’t apply here. If it applies elsewhere, it’s a question. I don’t think so. But I think there’s one other thing, and that’s the main thing that I’ve been involved in. People said, “If you don’t solve the Palestinian problem, you’re not going to get to the Arab world. You’re not going to have peace with the Arab world.” Remember, the Palestinians are about 2% of the Arab world, and the other 98%, you’re not going to make peace with them. And that’s our goal.
And for a long time, people accepted that. After the initial peace treaties with Egypt, with Prime Minister Begin of the Likud and President Sadat of Egypt, and then with Jordan between Prime Minister Rabin and King Hussein. For a quarter of a century we didn’t have any more peace treaties because people said, “You got to go through the Palestinians” and the Palestinians, they don’t want a solution of the kind that I described or any kind except the one that involved the dissolution of the state of Israel.
So we could wait another half century. And I said, “No, I don’t think that we should accept the premise that we have to wait for the Palestinians because we’ll have to wait forever.” So I decided to do it differently. I decided to go directly to the Arab capitals and to make the historic Abraham Accords and essentially reversing the equation, not a peace process that goes inside out, but outside in. And we went directly to these countries and forged these breakthrough peace accords with the United Arab Emirates, with Bahrain, with Morocco and with Sudan. And we’re now trying to expand that in a quantum leap with Saudi Arabia.
Lex Fridman
What does it take to do that with Saudi Arabia, with the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
What does it take to do that with Saudi Arabia, with the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Benjamin Netanyahu
I’m a student of history, and I read a lot of history, and I read that in the Versailles discussions after World War I, President Woodrow Wilson said, “I believe in open covenants openly arrived at.” I have my correction. I believed in open covenants secretly arrived at so we’re not going to advance a Saudi-Israeli peace by having it publicly discussed. And in any case, it’s a decision of the Saudis if they want to do it, but there’s obviously a mutual interest. So here’s my view, if we try to wait for the 2% in order to get to the 98%, we’re going to fail and we have failed. If we go to the 98%, we have a much greater chance of persuading the 2%. You know why? Because the 2% the Palestinian hope to vanquish the state of Israel and not make peace with it, is based, among other things, on the assumption that eventually the 98%, the rest of the Arab world, will kick in and destroy the Jewish state, help them dissolve or destroy the Jewish state.
I’m a student of history, and I read a lot of history, and I read that in the Versailles discussions after World War I, President Woodrow Wilson said, “I believe in open covenants openly arrived at.” I have my correction. I believed in open covenants secretly arrived at so we’re not going to advance a Saudi-Israeli peace by having it publicly discussed. And in any case, it’s a decision of the Saudis if they want to do it, but there’s obviously a mutual interest. So here’s my view, if we try to wait for the 2% in order to get to the 98%, we’re going to fail and we have failed. If we go to the 98%, we have a much greater chance of persuading the 2%. You know why? Because the 2% the Palestinian hope to vanquish the state of Israel and not make peace with it, is based, among other things, on the assumption that eventually the 98%, the rest of the Arab world, will kick in and destroy the Jewish state, help them dissolve or destroy the Jewish state.
When that hope is taken away, then you begin to have a turn to the realistic solutions of coexistence. By the way, they’ll require compromise on the Israeli side too. And then I’m perfectly cognizant of that and willing to do that. But I think a realistic compromise will be struck much more readily when the conflict between Israel and the Arab states, the Arab world, is effectively solved. And I think we’re on that path. It was a conceptual change just like I’ve been involved in a few, I told you the conceptual battle is always the most difficult one. And I had to fight this battle to convert a semi-socialist state into a free market capitalist state. And I have to say that most people today recognize the power of competition and the benefits of free markets. So we also had to fight this battle-
Benjamin Netanyahu
… free markets. So we also had to fight this battle that said you have to go through the Palestinian straight, S-T-R-A-I-T, to get to the other places. There’s no way to avoid this, you have to go through this impassable pass. And I think that now people are recognizing that we’ll go around it and probably circle back. And that, I think, actually gives hope not only to have an Arab-Israeli peace, but circling back in Israeli-Palestinian peace. And obviously this is not something that you find in the soundbites and so on, but in the popular discussion of the press. But that idea is permeating and I think it’s the right idea, because I think it’s the only one that will work.
… free markets. So we also had to fight this battle that said you have to go through the Palestinian straight, S-T-R-A-I-T, to get to the other places. There’s no way to avoid this, you have to go through this impassable pass. And I think that now people are recognizing that we’ll go around it and probably circle back. And that, I think, actually gives hope not only to have an Arab-Israeli peace, but circling back in Israeli-Palestinian peace. And obviously this is not something that you find in the soundbites and so on, but in the popular discussion of the press. But that idea is permeating and I think it’s the right idea, because I think it’s the only one that will work.
Lex Fridman
So expanding the circle of peace, just to linger on that requires what? Secretly talking man-to-man, human-to-human, to leaders of other nations and-
So expanding the circle of peace, just to linger on that requires what? Secretly talking man-to-man, human-to-human, to leaders of other nations and-
Benjamin Netanyahu
Theoretically, you’re right.
Theoretically, you’re right.
War in Ukraine
Lex Fridman
Theoretically. Okay. Well, let me ask you another theoretical question on this circle of peace. As a student of history, looking at the ideas of war and peace, what do you think can achieve peace in the war in Ukraine looking at another part of the world? If you consider the fight for peace in this part of the world, how can you apply that to that other part of the world between Russia and Ukraine now?
Theoretically. Okay. Well, let me ask you another theoretical question on this circle of peace. As a student of history, looking at the ideas of war and peace, what do you think can achieve peace in the war in Ukraine looking at another part of the world? If you consider the fight for peace in this part of the world, how can you apply that to that other part of the world between Russia and Ukraine now?
Benjamin Netanyahu
I think it’s one of the savage horrors of history and one of the great tragedies that is occurring. Let me say in advance that if I have any opportunity to use my contacts to help bring about an end to this tragedy, I’ll do so. I know both leaders, but I don’t just jump in and assume if there’s be a desire at a certain point because the conditions have created the possibility of helping stop this carnage, then I’ll do it. And that’s why I choose my words carefully, because I think that may be the best thing that I could do. Look, I think what you see in Ukraine is what happens if you have territorial designs on a territory by a country that has nuclear weapons. And that, to me, you see the change in the equation. Now, I think that people are loathed to use nuclear weapons, and I’m not sure that I would think that the Russian side would use them with happy abandon.
I think it’s one of the savage horrors of history and one of the great tragedies that is occurring. Let me say in advance that if I have any opportunity to use my contacts to help bring about an end to this tragedy, I’ll do so. I know both leaders, but I don’t just jump in and assume if there’s be a desire at a certain point because the conditions have created the possibility of helping stop this carnage, then I’ll do it. And that’s why I choose my words carefully, because I think that may be the best thing that I could do. Look, I think what you see in Ukraine is what happens if you have territorial designs on a territory by a country that has nuclear weapons. And that, to me, you see the change in the equation. Now, I think that people are loathed to use nuclear weapons, and I’m not sure that I would think that the Russian side would use them with happy abandon.
I don’t think that’s the question, but you see how the whole configuration changes when that happens. So you have to be very careful on how you resolve this conflict. So it doesn’t… well, it doesn’t go off the rails, so to speak. That’s, by the way, the corollaries here. We don’t want Iran, which is an aggressive force with just aggressive ideology of dominating first the Muslim world, and then eliminating Israel, and then becoming a global force, having nuclear weapons. It’s totally different when they don’t have it than when they do have it. And that’s why one of my main goals has been to prevent Iran from having the means of mass destruction, which will be used, atomic bombs, which they openly say will be used against us. And you can understand that. How to bring about an end to Ukraine? I have my ideas. I don’t think that’s worthwhile discussing them now because they might be required later on.
Lex Fridman
Do you believe in the power of conversation? Since you have contacts with Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin, just leaders sitting in a room and discussing how the end of war can be brought about?
Do you believe in the power of conversation? Since you have contacts with Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin, just leaders sitting in a room and discussing how the end of war can be brought about?
Benjamin Netanyahu
I think it’s a combination of that, but I think it’s the question of interest and whether you have to get both sides to a point where they think that that conversation would lead to something useful. I don’t think they’re there right now.
I think it’s a combination of that, but I think it’s the question of interest and whether you have to get both sides to a point where they think that that conversation would lead to something useful. I don’t think they’re there right now.
Lex Fridman
What part of this is just basic human ego, stubbornness all of this between leaders, which is why I bring up the power of conversation, of sitting in a room realizing we’re human beings, and then there’s a history that connects Ukraine and Russia?
What part of this is just basic human ego, stubbornness all of this between leaders, which is why I bring up the power of conversation, of sitting in a room realizing we’re human beings, and then there’s a history that connects Ukraine and Russia?
Benjamin Netanyahu
I don’t think they’re in a position to enter a room right now, realistically. I mean, you can posit that it would be good if that could happen, but entering the room is sometimes more complicated than what happens in the room. And there’s a lot of pre-negotiations on the negotiation, then you negotiate endlessly on the negotiation. They’re not even there.
I don’t think they’re in a position to enter a room right now, realistically. I mean, you can posit that it would be good if that could happen, but entering the room is sometimes more complicated than what happens in the room. And there’s a lot of pre-negotiations on the negotiation, then you negotiate endlessly on the negotiation. They’re not even there.
Lex Fridman
It took a lot of work for you to get to a handshake in the past.
It took a lot of work for you to get to a handshake in the past.
Abraham Accords
Benjamin Netanyahu
It’s an interesting question. How did the peace, the Abraham Accords, how did that begin? We had decades. We had 70 years or 65 years where these people would not meet openly or even secretly with an Israeli leader. Yeah, we had the Mossad making contacts with him all the time, and so on, but how do we break the ice to the top level of leadership? Well, we broke the ice because I took a very strong stance against Iran, and the Gulf states understood that Iran is a formidable danger to them, so we had a common interest. And the second thing is that because of the economic reforms that we had produced in Israel, Israel became a technological powerhouse. And that could help their nations, not only… in terms of anything, of just bettering the life of their peoples.
It’s an interesting question. How did the peace, the Abraham Accords, how did that begin? We had decades. We had 70 years or 65 years where these people would not meet openly or even secretly with an Israeli leader. Yeah, we had the Mossad making contacts with him all the time, and so on, but how do we break the ice to the top level of leadership? Well, we broke the ice because I took a very strong stance against Iran, and the Gulf states understood that Iran is a formidable danger to them, so we had a common interest. And the second thing is that because of the economic reforms that we had produced in Israel, Israel became a technological powerhouse. And that could help their nations, not only… in terms of anything, of just bettering the life of their peoples.
And the combination of the desire to have some kind of protection against Iran or some kind of cooperation against Iran and civilian economic cooperation came to a head when I gave a speech in the American Congress, which I didn’t do lightheartedly, I had to decide to challenge a sitting American president and on the so-called Iranian deal, which I thought would pave Iran’s path with gold to be an effective nuclear power. That’s what would happen. So I went there. And in the course of giving that speech before the joint session of Congress, our delegation received calls from Gulf states who said, “We can’t believe what your prime minister is doing. He’s challenging the President of the United States.” Well, I had no choice because I thought my country’s own existence was imperiled. And remember, we always understand through changing administrations that America under… no matter what leadership is always the irreplaceable and indispensable ally of Israel and will always remain that we can have arguments as we have, but in the family, as we say in [foreign language 01:01:32], it’s the family.
But nevertheless, I was forced to take a stand. That produced calls from Gulf states that ultimately led to clandestine meetings that ultimately flowered into the Abraham Accords then. And I think we’re at a point where the idea of ending the Arab-Israeli conflict, not the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the Arab-Israeli conflict can happen. I’m not sure it will. It depends on quite a few things, but it could happen. And if it happens, it might open up the ending of the Israeli-Islamic conflict. Remember, the Arab world is a small part, it’s an important part, but it’s small. There are large Islamic populations and it could bring about an end to an historic enmity between Islam and Judaism. It could be a great thing.
So I’m looking at this larger thing. You can be hobbled by saying, “Oh, well, you’ve had this hiccup in Gaza or this or that thing happening in the Palestinians.” It’s important for us because we want security. But I think the larger question is can we break out into a much wider peace and ultimately come back and make the peace between Israel and the Palestinians rather than waiting to solve that and never getting to paint on the larger canvas? I want to paint on the larger canvas and come back to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
History
Lex Fridman
As you write about in your book, what have you learned about life from your father?
As you write about in your book, what have you learned about life from your father?
Benjamin Netanyahu
My father was a great historian and well, he taught me several things. He said that the first condition for a living organism is to identify danger in time, because if you don’t, you could be devoured. You could be destroyed very quickly. And that’s the nature of human conflict. In fact, for the Jewish people, we lost the capacity to identify danger in time, and we were almost devoured and destroyed by the Nazi threat. So when I see somebody parroting the Nazi goal of destroying the Jewish state, I try to mobilize the country and the world in time because I think Iran is a global threat, not only a threat to Israel. That’s the first thing.
My father was a great historian and well, he taught me several things. He said that the first condition for a living organism is to identify danger in time, because if you don’t, you could be devoured. You could be destroyed very quickly. And that’s the nature of human conflict. In fact, for the Jewish people, we lost the capacity to identify danger in time, and we were almost devoured and destroyed by the Nazi threat. So when I see somebody parroting the Nazi goal of destroying the Jewish state, I try to mobilize the country and the world in time because I think Iran is a global threat, not only a threat to Israel. That’s the first thing.
The second thing is I once asked him, before I got elected, I said, “Well, what do you think is the most important quality for a prime minister of Israel?” And he came back with a question, “What do you think?” And I said, “Well, you have to have vision and you have to have the flexibility of navigating and working towards that vision. Be flexible, but understand where you’re heading.” And he said, “Well, you need that for anything. You need it if you’re a university president or if you’re a leader of a corporation or anything, anybody would’ve to have that.” I said, “All right, so what do you need to be the leader of Israel?” He came back to me with a word that stunned me. He said, “Education. You need a broad and deep education, or you’ll be at the mercy of your clerks or the press or whatever. You have to be able to do that.” Now, as I spend time in government, being reelected by the people of Israel, I recognize more and more how right he was.
You need to constantly ask yourself, “Where’s the direction we want to take the country? How do we achieve that goal?” But also understand that new disciplines are being added. You have to learn all the time. You have to add to your intellectual capital all the time. Kissinger said that he wrote that once you enter public life, you begin to draw on your intellectual capital and it’ll be depleted very quickly if you stay a long time. I disagree with that. I think you have to constantly increase your understanding of things as they change, because my father was right. You need to broaden and deepen your education as you go along. You can’t just sit back and say, “Well, I studied some things in university, or in college, or in Boston, or at MIT, and that’s enough. I’ve done it.” No, learn, learn, learn, learn. Never stop.
Lex Fridman
And if I may suggest as part of the education, I would add in a little literature, maybe Dostoevsky, in the plentiful of time you have as a prime minister to read.
And if I may suggest as part of the education, I would add in a little literature, maybe Dostoevsky, in the plentiful of time you have as a prime minister to read.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Well, I read him, but I’ll tell you what I think is bigger than Dostoevsky.
Well, I read him, but I’ll tell you what I think is bigger than Dostoevsky.
Lex Fridman
Oh, no. Who’s that?
Oh, no. Who’s that?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Not who’s that, but what’s that? Dan Rather came to see me with his grandson a few years ago. And the grandson asked me, he was a student in Ivy League college. He’s 18 years old and he wants to study to enter politics. And he said, “What’s the most important thing that I have to study to enter a political life?” And I said, “You have three things you have to study. Okay? History, history and history.” That’s the fundamental discipline for political life. But then you have to study other things, study economics, study politics and so on, and study the military if you have… I had an advantage because I spent some years there, so I learned a lot of that, but I had to acquire the other disciplines. And you never acquire enough. So read, read, read. And by the way, if I have to choose, I read history, history and history. Good works of history, not lousy books.
Not who’s that, but what’s that? Dan Rather came to see me with his grandson a few years ago. And the grandson asked me, he was a student in Ivy League college. He’s 18 years old and he wants to study to enter politics. And he said, “What’s the most important thing that I have to study to enter a political life?” And I said, “You have three things you have to study. Okay? History, history and history.” That’s the fundamental discipline for political life. But then you have to study other things, study economics, study politics and so on, and study the military if you have… I had an advantage because I spent some years there, so I learned a lot of that, but I had to acquire the other disciplines. And you never acquire enough. So read, read, read. And by the way, if I have to choose, I read history, history and history. Good works of history, not lousy books.
Survival
Lex Fridman
Last question. You’ve talked about a survival of a nation. You, yourself, are a mortal being. Do you contemplate your mortality? Do you contemplate your death? Are you afraid of death?
Last question. You’ve talked about a survival of a nation. You, yourself, are a mortal being. Do you contemplate your mortality? Do you contemplate your death? Are you afraid of death?
Benjamin Netanyahu
Aren’t you?
Aren’t you?
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Who is not? I mean, if you’re a conscience, if you’re a being with conscience, I mean, one of the unhappy things about the human brain is that it can contemplate its own demise. And so, we all make our compromises with this, but I think the question is what lives on? What lives on beyond us? And I think that you have to define how much of posterity do you want to influence. I cannot influence the course of humanity. We all are specs, little specs. So that’s not the issue. But in my case, I’ve devoted my life to a very defined purpose. And that is to assure the future and security, and I would say permanence, but that is obviously a limited thing, of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. I don’t think one can exist without the other. So I’ve devoted my life to that. And I hope that in my time on this Earth and in my years in office, I’d have contributed to that.
Who is not? I mean, if you’re a conscience, if you’re a being with conscience, I mean, one of the unhappy things about the human brain is that it can contemplate its own demise. And so, we all make our compromises with this, but I think the question is what lives on? What lives on beyond us? And I think that you have to define how much of posterity do you want to influence. I cannot influence the course of humanity. We all are specs, little specs. So that’s not the issue. But in my case, I’ve devoted my life to a very defined purpose. And that is to assure the future and security, and I would say permanence, but that is obviously a limited thing, of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. I don’t think one can exist without the other. So I’ve devoted my life to that. And I hope that in my time on this Earth and in my years in office, I’d have contributed to that.
Lex Fridman
Well, you had one heck of a life, starting from MIT to six terms as prime minister. Thank you for this stroll through human history and for this conversation. It was an honor.
Well, you had one heck of a life, starting from MIT to six terms as prime minister. Thank you for this stroll through human history and for this conversation. It was an honor.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Thank you. And I hope you come back to Israel many times. Remember it’s the innovation nation. It’s a robust democracy. Don’t believe all the stuff that you are being told. It’ll remain that. It cannot be any other way. I’ll tell you the other thing, it’s the best ally of the United States, and its importance is growing by the day because our capacities in the information world are growing by the day. We need a coalition of the like-minded smarts. This is a smart nation. And we share the basic values of freedom and liberty with the United States. So the coalition of the smarts means Israel is the sixth eye and America has no better ally.
Thank you. And I hope you come back to Israel many times. Remember it’s the innovation nation. It’s a robust democracy. Don’t believe all the stuff that you are being told. It’ll remain that. It cannot be any other way. I’ll tell you the other thing, it’s the best ally of the United States, and its importance is growing by the day because our capacities in the information world are growing by the day. We need a coalition of the like-minded smarts. This is a smart nation. And we share the basic values of freedom and liberty with the United States. So the coalition of the smarts means Israel is the sixth eye and America has no better ally.
Lex Fridman
All right. Now off mic, I’m going to force you to finally tell me who is going to win. Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg? But it’s a good time that we ran out of time here.
All right. Now off mic, I’m going to force you to finally tell me who is going to win. Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg? But it’s a good time that we ran out of time here.
Benjamin Netanyahu
I’ll tell you outside.
I’ll tell you outside.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Mahatma Gandhi, “An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind.” Thank you for listening and I hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Mahatma Gandhi, “An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind.” Thank you for listening and I hope to see you next time.