This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #404 with Lee Cronin.
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 your big assembly theory paper was published in Nature. Congratulations.
And then when I was pushed by a bunch of mathematicians, we came up with the correct physical explanation, which I can get to, but it’s the minimum and it’s really important. It’s the minimum. And the reason I knew the minimum was right is because we could measure it. So almost before this paper came out, we’d published papers, explain how you can measure the assembly index of molecules.
And that’s what made me realize, take a toy example, literally a toy example, take a Lego object, which is broken up of Lego blocks. So you could do exactly the same thing. In this case, the Lego blocks are naturally the smallest. They’re the atoms in the actual composite Lego architecture. But then if you maybe take a couple of blocks and put them together in a certain way, maybe they’re offset in some way, that offset is on the memory, you can use that offset again with only a penalty of one and you can then make a square, triangle and keep going.
And you remember those motifs on the chain. So you can then leap from the start with all the Lego blocks or atoms just laid out in front of you and say, “Right, I’ll take you, you, you,” connect and do the least amount of work. So it’s really like the smallest steps you can take on the graph to make the object. And so for molecules, it came relatively intuitively. And then we started to apply it to language. We’ve even started to apply it to mathematical theorems. But I’m so well out of my depth. But it looks like you can take minimum set of axioms and then start to build up mathematical architectures in the same way. And then the shortest path to get there is something interesting that I don’t yet understand.
And that becomes [inaudible 00:07:53] quite hard. For some natural product molecules, it becomes very hard. It’s not impossible, but we’re looking at the bounds on that at the moment. But as the object gets bigger it becomes really hard. But that’s the bad news. But the good news is there are shortcuts. And we might even be able to physically measure the complexity without computationally calculating it, which is kind of insane.
Now there’s some problems there. What is then the definition of the object? How many pixels? How do you break it down? And so we’re just learning all this right now.
But it’s just a new way of looking at, not just compression. What we do right now in computer science and data, one big kind of misunderstanding as assembly theory is telling you about how compressed the object is. That’s not right. It’s how much information is required on a chain of events. Because the nice thing is if, when you do compression and computer science, we’re wandering a bit here, but it’s kind of worth wandering I think, you assume you have instantaneous access to all the information in the memory. In assembly theory you say, “No, you don’t get access to that memory until you’ve done the work.” And then when you’ve done access to that memory, you can have access but not to the next one.
And this is how in assembly theory, we talk about the four universes, the assembly universe, the assembly possible, and the assembly contingent, and then the assembly observed. And they’re all scales in this commentorial universe.
Then the assembly contingent says “No, you can’t have access to the highly assembled object in the future until you’ve done the work in the past on the causal chain.” And that’s really, the really interesting shift where you go from assembly possible to assembly contingent. That is really the key thing in assembly theory that says you cannot just have instantaneous access to all those memories. You have to have done the work. Somehow the universe has to have somehow built a system that allows you to select that path rather than other paths.
And then the final thing the assembly observed is basically us saying, “Oh, these are the things we actually see. We can go backwards now and understand that they have been created by this causal process.”
So why is the shortest path important? Imagine you’ve got, I’m going to have to go chemistry for a moment, then abstract it. So imagine you’ve got a given environment that you have a budget of atoms, you’re just flinging together. And the objective of those atoms that being flung together in say, molecule A, they decompose. So molecules decompose over time. So the molecules in this environment, in this magic environment have to not die, but they do die. They have a half-life.
So the only way the molecules can get through that environment out the other side, let’s pretend the environment is a box and can go in and out without dying. And there’s just an infinite supply of atoms coming or, well, a large supply, the molecule gets built, but the molecule that is able to template itself being built and survives in the environment will basically reign supreme.
Now let’s say that molecule takes 10 steps and it is using a finite set of atoms. Now, let’s say another molecule, smart ass molecule we’ll call it, comes in and can survive in that environment and can copy itself, but it only needs five steps. The molecule that only needs five steps continued, both molecules are being destroyed, but they’re creating themselves faster they can be destroyed. You can see that the shortest path reigns supreme. So the shortest path tells us something super interesting about the minimal amount of information required to propagate that motif in time and space. And it seems to be like some kind of conservation law.
Now you start to consider two objects, you have a joint assembly space. And it’s not now, it’s a compromise between not just making A and B in the shortest path. You want to be able to make A and B in the shortest path, which might mean that A is slightly longer, compromise. So when you see slightly more nesting in the construction, when you take a given object, that can look longer. But that’s because the overall function is the object is still trying to be efficient. And this is still very hand wavy and maybe having no leg to stand on, but we think we’re getting somewhere with that.
And so I keep seeing parallels everywhere where there are complex nested systems where if you give it enough time and you introduce a bit of heterogeneity, the system readjusts and finds a new shortest path. But the shortest path isn’t fixed on just one molecule now. It’s in the actual existence of the object over time. And that object could be a city, it could be a cell, it could be a factory, but I think we’re going way beyond molecules and my competence so probably should go back to molecules, but hey.
And then there is a few variables in there that include the assembly index, the copy number which we’ll talk about. That’s an interesting, I don’t remember you talking about that. That’s an interesting addition and I think a powerful one. It has to do with what, that you can create pretty complex objects randomly, and in order to know that they’re not random, that there’s a factory involved, you need to see a bunch of them. That’s the intuition there. It’s an interesting intuition and then some normalization. What else is and-
Second point, we say that evolution works, but we don’t know how evolution got going. So biological evolution and biological selection. So for me, this seems like a simple continuum. So when I mentioned selection and evolution in the title, I think, and in the abstract, we should have maybe prefaced that and said non-biological selection and non-biological evolutions. And then that might have made it even more crystal clear. But I didn’t think that biology, evolutionary biology, should be so bold to claim ownership of selection and evolution.
And secondly, a lot of evolutionary biologists seem to dismiss the origin of life question and just say it’s obvious. And that causes a real problem scientifically because two different, when the physicists are like, ” We own the universe. The universe is good, we explain all of it, look at us.” And even biologists say, “We can explain biology.” And the poor chemists in the middle going, “But hang on.”
And this paper kind of says, “Hey, there is an interesting disconnect between physics and biology. And that’s at the point at which memories get made in chemistry through bonds. And hey, let’s look at this close and see if we can quantify it.” So yeah, I never expected the paper to get that much interest. And still, it’s only been published just over a month ago now.
So good chemistry examples, if you took some carbon and you made a chain of carbon atoms, whereas if you took some, I don’t know, some carbon, nitrogen and oxygen and made change from those, you’d start to get different reactions and rearrangements. So a chain of carbon atoms might be more resistant to falling apart under a acidic or basic conditions versus another set of molecules. So it survives in that environment. So the acid pond, the resistant molecule can get through. And then that molecule goes into another environment. So that environment now maybe being acid pond is a basic pond or maybe it’s an oxidizing pond. And so if you’ve got carbon and it goes an oxidizing pond, maybe the carbon starts to oxidize and break apart. So you go through all these kind of obstacle courses if you like, given by reality. So selection is the ability happens when object survives in an environment for some time.
And this is the thing that’s super subtle. The object has to be continually being destroyed and made by process. So it’s not just about the object now, it’s about the process and time that makes it because a rock could just stand on the mountain side for 4 billion years and nothing happened to it. And that’s not necessarily really advanced selection. So for selection to get really interesting, you need to have a turnover in time. You need to be continually creating objects, producing them, what we call discovery time. So there’s a discovery time for an object.
When that object is discovered, if it’s say a molecule that can then act on itself or the chain of events that caused itself to bolster its formation, then you go from discovery time to production time and suddenly you have more of it in the universe. So it could be a self-replicating molecule and the interaction of the molecule in the environment, in the warm little pond or in the sea or wherever in the bubble could then start to build a proto factory, the environment.
So really to answer your question, what the factory is, the factory is the environment, but it’s not very autonomous, it’s not very redundant. There’s lots of things that could go wrong. So once you get high enough up the hierarchy of networks, of interactions, something needs to happen that needs to be compressed into a smaller volume and made resistant robust because in biology, selection and evolution is robust that you have error correction built in. You have really, there’s good ways of basically making sure propagation goes on.
So really the difference between inorganic, antibiotic selection and evolution and evolution and stuff in biology is robustness the ability to propagate, the ability to survive in lots of different environments. Whereas our poor little inorganic sole molecule, whatever, just dies in lots of different environments. So there’s something super special that happens from the inorganic molecule in the environment that kills it to where you’ve got evolution and cells can survive everywhere.
And we use that and say, “Oh, there’s a hydrothermal vent. Oh, there’s a process going on. There’s molecular networks,” because the assembly equation is not only meant to identify at the higher end advanced selection, what you get, I would call in biology super advanced selection. And even, you could use the assembly equation to look for technology and God forbid we could talk about consciousness and abstraction, but let’s keep it primitive, molecules and biology. So I think the real power of the assembly equation is to say how much selection is going on in this space.
And there’s a really simple thought experiment I could do is you have a little Petri dish and on that Petri dish you put some simple food. So the assembly index of all the sugars and everything is quite low. So then, and you put a single cell of E. coli cell and then you say, “I’m going to measure the assembly in this, amount of assembly in the box.” So it’s quite low, but the rate of change of assembly, DADT will go [inaudible 00:33:47] sigmoidal as it eats all the food and the number of coli cells will replicate because they take all the food, they copy themselves, the assembly index of all the molecules goes up, up and up until the food is exhausted in the box. So now the E. coli’s stopped-
So if you go to Mars and you take a mass spec, with high enough resolution, and you can find molecules, a guide on earth, if you could find molecules, say, greater than 350 molecular weight, with more than 15 fragments, you have found artifacts that can only be produced, at least on earth, by life. And now you would say, “Oh, well, maybe the geological process.” I would argue very virulently that that is not the case.
But we can say, “Look, if you don’t like the cutoff on earth, go up higher, 30, 100, because there’s going to be a point where you can find a molecule with so many different parts, the chances of you getting a molecule that has a hundred different parts and finding a million identical copies, that’s just impossible. That could never happen in an infinite set of universes.
So the way I do it is if I say, “Here’s a bag of 10 identical molecules, let’s prove they’re identical.” You pick one out of the bag and you basically observe it, using some technique, and then you take it away and then you take another one out. If you observe it using technique, you see no differences. They’re identical. It’s really interesting to get right. Because if you take, say, two molecules, molecules can be in different vibrational rotational states. They’re moving all the time.
So in this respect, identical molecules have identical bonding. In this case, we don’t even talk about chirality, because we don’t have a chirality detector. So two identical molecules in one conception, assembly theory, basically considers both hands as being the same. But, of course, they’re not, they’re different. As soon as you have a chiral distinguisher to detect the left and the right hand, they become different. And so, it’s to do with the detection system that you have and the resolution.
If you drill down a little bit, you could drill down a bit into soil that’s billions of years old. Then I would put in some solvent, water, alcohol, or something, or take a scoop, make it volatile, put it into the mass spectrometer and just try and detect high complexity, high abundant molecules. And if you get them, hey, presto, you can have evidence of life. Wouldn’t that then be great if you could say, “Okay, we’ve found evidence of life, now we want to keep the life meter, keep searching for more and more complexity,” until you actually find living cells. And you can get those new living cells and then you could bring them back to earth or you could try and sequence them. You could see that they have different DNA and proteins.
And then the further up in molecular weight range for the mass spec, and the number of bands, you go up and up and up from the dead, interesting, interesting, over the threshold, oh my gosh, earth life, and then right up to the batshit crazy, this is definitely alien intelligence that’s made this life, right? You could almost go all the way there. Same in the infrared. And pretty simple.
The thing that is really problematical is that for many years, decades, what people have done, and I can’t blame them, is they’ve rather, they’ve been obsessing about small biomarkers that we find on earth, amino acids, like single amino acids or evidence of small molecules and these things, and looking for those while I’m looking for complexity. The beautiful thing about this is you can look for complexity without earth chemistry bias or earth biology bias. So assembly theory is just a way of saying, hey, complexity in abundance is evidence of selection. That’s how our universal life meter will work.
Same with some minerals, but we can come back to that. So basically what you do, we’ve got a whole loads of samples, inorganic ones, we got a load of, we got Scotch whiskey and also got-
And one of the computational complexity people, it was just throwing, yeah… He’s very vigorous in his disagreement of assembly theory, was just saying, “You don’t know what you’re doing. Even beer is more complicated than human.” What he didn’t realize is that it’s not beer, per se, it’s taking the yeast extract, taking the extract, breaking the cells, extracting the molecules, and just looking at the profile of the molecules, see if there’s anything over the threshold. And we also put in a really complex molecule, Taxol.
So we took all of these, but also NASA gave us, I think, five samples, and they wouldn’t tell us what they are. They said, “No, we don’t believe you’re going to get this to work.” And they really gave us some super complex samples. And they gave us two fossils, one that was a million years old and one was at 10,000 years old, something from Antarctica, seabed. They gave us some Murchison and meteorite, and a few others. Put them through the system. So we took all the samples, treat them all identically, put them into mass spec, fragmented them, counted.
And in this case, implicit in the measurement was we, in mass spec, you only detect peaks when you’ve got more than, say, let’s say 10,000 identical molecules. So the copy number’s already baked in, but wasn’t quantified, which is super important there. This was in the first paper. Because I was like, it’s abundant, of course.
And when you then took it all out, we found that the biological samples gave you molecules that had an assembly index greater than 15. And all the abiotic samples were less than 15. And then we took the NASA samples and we looked at the ones that were more than 15, less than 15, and we gave them back to NASA, and they’re like, “Oh, gosh. Yep, dead, living, dead, living. You got it.” And that’s what we found on earth.
What we did is we were able to fingerprint… So we took a load of random samples from all of biology and we used mass spectrometry. And what we did now is not just look for individual molecules, but we looked for coexisting molecules where they had to look at their joint assembly space. And we were able to cut them apart and undergo recursion in the mass spec and infer some relationships. And we’re able to recapitulate the tree of life using mass spectroscopy, no sequencing and no drawing.
Whereas, some animals are lazy, they can just go eat the fungi, and they don’t need to make very much. And so, what you do is you look at the, so you take, I don’t know, the fingerprint, maybe the top number of high molecular weight molecules you find in the sample, you fragment them to get their assembly indices, and then what you can do is you can infer common origins of molecules. You can do a molecular… When the reverse engineering of the assembly space, you can infer common roots and look at what’s called the joint assembly space.
But let’s translate that into the experiment. Take a sample, bung it in the mass spec, take the top, say, 10 molecules, fragment them, and that gives you one fingerprint. Then you do it for another sample, you get another fingerprint. Now the question is you say, “Hey, are these samples the same or different?” And that’s what we’ve been able to do and by basically looking at the assembly space that these molecules create. Without any knowledge of assembly theory, you are unable to do it. With a knowledge of assembly theory, you can reconstruct the tree.
But what life also does is it enriches. As you get older, the amount of carbon-13 in you goes up, because of the way the bonding is in carbon-13. So it has a slightly different strength, bond strength, than you. It’s called a kinetic isotope effect. So you can literally date how old you are or when you stop metabolizing. So you could date someone’s… how old they are, I think. I’m making this up, this might be right, but I think it’s roughly right. The amount of carbon-13 you have in you, you can estimate how old you are.
The second thing was the fact that physicists, the physicists were actually really polite, really nice about it. But they just said, “Huh, we’re not really sure about the initial conditions thing. But this is a really big debate that we should certainly get into, because the emergence of life was not encoded in the initial conditions of the universe.” And I think assembly theory shows why it can’t be. I’ll say that-
And everyone’s saying, “How dare, how dare you be so grandiose?” I’m like, “No, no, no. This is not hype. We’re not saying we’ve invented some, I don’t know, we’ve discovered a alien in a closet somewhere, just for hype. We genuinely mean this to genuinely have the impact or asked the question. And the way people jumped on that was a really bad precedent for young people who want to actually do something new.
Because this makes a bold claim, and the chances are that it’s not correct. But what I wanted to do is a couple of things. Is I wanted to make a bold claim that was precise and testable and correctable. Not another wooly information-in-biology argument, information-churring machine, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. A concrete series of statements that can be falsified and explored, and either the theory could be destroyed or built upon.
So this kind of plucked two strings at once. It plucked the there is something interesting that biology are, we can see around this, but we haven’t quantified yet. And what this is, is the first stab at quantifying that, so the fact that people said “This is obvious.” But if it’s obvious, why have you not done it?
Now if you think about how embryos develop, you go all the way back, those cells undergo differentiation on a causal way that’s biomechanically a feedback between the genetics and biomechanics. I think we can use assembly theory to apply to tissue types. We can even apply it to different cell disease types. So that’s what we’re doing next. But we are trying to walk… The thing is, I’m trying to, I want a leap ahead to go, whoa, we apply it to culture. Clearly you can apply it to memes and culture. And we’ve also applied to assembly theory to CA’s and not as you think…
But it does show you can apply it at a higher scale. So what do we need to do to apply assembly theory to things? We need to agree, there’s a common set of building blocks. So in a cell, well, in a multicellular creature, you need to look back in time. So there is the initial cell, which the creature is fertilized and then starts to grow and then there is cell differentiation. And you have to then make that causal chain both on those. So that requires development of the organism in time. Or if you look at the cell surfaces and the cell types, they’ve got different features on the cell walls and inside the cell. So we’re building up, but obviously I want a leap to things like emoticons, language, mathematical theorems.
And again, it’s not just about compression, it is about understanding how you can make the most of the architecture you’ve already built. And I think this is something beautiful that evolution does. We are reusing those architectures. We can’t just abandon our evolutionary history. And if you don’t want to abandon your evolutionary history and you know that evolution has been happening, then assembly theory works.
And I think that’s a key comment I want to make is that assembly theory is great for understanding when evolution has been used. The next jump is when we go to technology, because of course, if you take the M3 processor… I want to buy, I haven’t bought one yet. I can’t justify it, but I want it at some point. The M3 processor arguably is there’s quite a lot of features, a quite large number. The M2 came before it, then the M1 all the way back, you can apply assembly theory to microprocessor architecture. It doesn’t take a huge leap to see that.
So Kolmogorov complexity, you can approximate Kolmogorov complexity, but it’s not really telling you very much about the actual… It’s really telling you about your dataset, compression of your dataset.
The shortest path is inferred from the object. That is the worst case scenario if you have no machine to make it. So that tells you about the depth of that object in time. And so what assembly theory allows you to do is without considering any other circumstances, to say from this object, how deep is this object in time if we just treat the object as itself without any other constraints? And that’s super powerful because the shortest path then allows you to say, “Oh, this object wasn’t just created randomly. There was a process.” And so assembly theory is not meant to one up AIT or to ignore the factory. It’s just to say, “Hey, there was a factory and how big was that factory? And how deep in time is it?”
You flip the problem 180 and focus on the molecule evolution rather than the protein. And so you can guess in the future what might happen. So you rather than having to consider all possible molecules, you know where to focus. And that’s the same thing if you’re looking at in assembly spaces for an object where you don’t know the entire history, but you know that in the history of this object, it’s not going to have some other motif there that it doesn’t apply. It doesn’t appear in the past.
Now what are these reactions? So these reactions are constrained by the following. They’re constrained by the fact they’re on planet Earth, 1G, 298 Kelvin, 1 Bar. So these are constraints. They’re also constrained by the chemical composition of earth, oxygen availability, all this stuff. And that then allows us to focus in our chemistry. So when a chemist does a reaction, that’s a really nice compressed shorthand for constraint application, glass flask, pure reagent, temperature, pressure, boom, boom, boom, control, control control, control control.
So of course we have bond energies. So the bond energies are kind of intrinsic in a vacuum. So the bond energy, you have to have a bond. And so for assembly theory to work, you have to have a bond, which means that bond has to give the molecule a half life. So you’re probably going to find later on that some bonds are weaker and that you are going to miss in mass spectrum, when you look at the assembly of some molecules, you’re going to miscount the assembly of the molecule. It falls apart too quickly because the bonds just form. But you can solve that with looking at infrared.
So when people think about the probability, they’re kind of misunderstanding. Assembly theory says nothing about the chemistry because chemistry is chemistry and their constraints are put in by biology. There was no chemist on the origin of life unless you believe in the chemist in the sky… And it’s like Santa Claus, they had a lot of work to do, but chemical reactions do not exist and the constraints that allow chemical transformations to occur do exist.
I said, “Well look, if we want to explain this to people, there’s a real challenge.” And so Sarah and I went through the, I think it was actually 160 versions of the paper, but basically we got to version 40 or something. We said, “Right, zero it start again.” So we wrote the whole paper again. We knew the entire…
And long story, probably a boring story, but in this case it went out to review, the comments came back and the comments were incredibly, they were very deep comments from all the reviewers. But the nice thing was the reviewers were kind of very critical, but not dismissive. They were like, “Oh, really? Explain this, explain this, explain this, explain this.”
Sorry, give me a second. Silly, never get emotional about papers normally, but I think what we do, you just compressed five years of angst from this.
So we submitted the paper and then when it was almost accepted, the mass spec one and it was astrobiologists said, great, a mass spectroscopist said great. And the chemist went nonsense, biggest pile of nonsense ever. Fraud. And I was like, “But why fraud?” And they just said, “Just because.” I was like well… I could not convince the editor in this case. The editor was just so pissed off. They see it as a, you’re wasting my time. And I would not give up. I wrote, I went and dissected all the parts. And I think, although, I mean I got upset about, it was kind of embarrassing actually, but I guess…
And all I did is I just kept knocking it down bit by bit, by bit, by bit by bit. It was ultimately rejected and it got published elsewhere. And then the actual experimental data, so in this paper, the experimental justification was already published. So when we did this one and we went through the versions and then we sent it in and in the end it just got accepted. We were like, well, that’s kind of cool, right? This is kind of like some days…
Sorry, the first author was like, “I can’t believe it got accepted.” I was like, “Nor am I, but it’s great. It’s good.” And then when the paper was published, I was not expecting the backlash. I was expecting computational. Well, no, actually I was just expecting one person who’d been trolling me for a while about it just to carry on trolling, but I didn’t expect the backlash. And then I wrote to the editor and apologized and the editor was like, “What are you apologizing for? It was a great paper. Of course it’s going to get backlash. You said some controversial stuff, but it’s awesome.”
And the fact that this paper has been so discussed, for me is a dream come true, it doesn’t get better than that. If you can’t accept a few people hating it… And the nice thing is, the thing that really makes me happy is that no one has attacked the actual physical content.
You can measure the assembly index, you can measure selection now. So either that’s right or it’s… Well, either that’s helpful or unhelpful. If it’s unhelpful, this paper will sink down and no one will use it again. If it’s helpful, it’ll help people scaffold on it and we’ll start to converge for a new paradigm. So I think that that’s the thing that I wanted to see my colleagues, authors, collaborators and people were like, you’ve just published this paper. You’re a chemist. Why have you done this? Who are you to be doing evolutionary theory? Well, I don’t know. I mean, sorry, did I need to…
And then I just basically didn’t do well in any of the tests, and I went down and down and down and down and then I was like, “Huh, this is really embarrassing. I really like maths and everyone says I can’t do it. I really like physics and chemistry and science and people say you can’t read and write.” And so I found myself in a learning difficulties class at the end of primary school and the beginning of secondary school. In the UK, secondary school is 11, 12 years old. And I remember being put in the remedial class. And the remedial class was basically full of three types of people. There were people quite violent and there were people who couldn’t speak English and there were people that really had learning difficulties. So the one thing I can objectively remember was… I could read. I liked reading. I read a lot. But something in me, I’m a bit of a rebel. I refused to read what I was told to read and I found it difficult to read individual words in the way they were told.
But anyway, I got caught one day teaching someone else to read and they said, “Okay, we don’t understand this.” I’d always known I wanted to be a scientist, but I didn’t really know what that meant and I realized you had to go to university and I thought, “I can just go to university. They take curious people.” “No, no, no need to have these. You have to be able to enter these exams to get this grade point average, and the fact is, the exams you’ve been entered into, you are just going to get C, D or E.” You can’t even get A, B or C. These are the UK GCSEs. I was like, ” Oh, shit,” and I said, “Can you just put me into the higher exams?” They said, “No, no, you’re going to fail. There’s no chance.” So my father intervened and said, “Just let him go in the exams,” and they said, “He’s definitely going to fail. It’s a waste of time, waste of money,” and he said, “What if we paid?” So they said, “Okay,” so you didn’t actually have to pay. You only had to pay if I failed.
So I took the exams and passed them, fortunately. I didn’t get the top grades, but I got into A Levels. But then that also limited what I could do at A Levels. I wasn’t allowed to do A Level maths.
“It’s wrong.” “Okay, why is it wrong?” Say, “Oh, your equation’s incorrect for this or your method is wrong.” So what I try and do is get enough criticism from people to then triangulate and go back. And I’ve been very fortunate in my life that I’ve got great colleagues, great collaborators, funders, mentors, and people that will take the time to say, “You are wrong because.” And then what I have to do is integrate the wrongness and go, “Oh, cool, maybe I can fix that.” And I think criticism is really good. People have a go at me because I’m really critical. But I’m not criticizing you as a person. I’m just criticizing the idea and trying to make it better and say, “What about this?”
And sometimes my filters are truncated in some ways. I’m just like, “That’s wrong, that’s wrong, that’s wrong. Why’d you do this?” And people are like, “Oh my God, you just told me, you destroyed my life’s work.” I’m like, “Relax. No.” I’m just like, “Let’s make it better.” And I think that we don’t do that enough because we are either personally critical, which isn’t helpful or we don’t give any criticism at all because we’re too scared.
That we are going to know that the universe as it stands, the present, the way the present builds the future is so big, the universe can’t ever contain the future. And this is a really interesting thing. I think Max Tegmark has this mathematical universe. He says the universe is like a block universe, and I apologize to Max if I’m getting it wrong, but people think you can just move. You have the stat, you have the initial conditions, and you can run the universe right to the end and go backwards and forwards in that universe. That is not correct.
But when the object is finite and it can’t store its own coordinates, what do you do? So in principle, if a finite object cannot be specified to infinite precision, in principle, the initial conditions don’t apply.
The universe is intrinsically too big and that’s why time exists. It’s non-deterministic. Looking back into the past, you can use logical arguments because you can say, “Was it true or false?” You already know. But this is the fact we are unable to predict the future with the precision is not evidence of lack of knowledge. It’s evidence the universe is generating new things.
And this is why I really hate the idea of the Boltzmann brain. The Boltzmann brain makes me super, like everyone’s having a free lunch. It’s like saying, “Let’s break all the laws of physics.” So a Boltzmann brain is this idea that in a long enough universe, a brain will just emerge in the universe as conscious. And that neglects the causal chain of evolution that required to produce that brain. And this is where the computational argument really falls down because a computationalist could say,” I can calculate probability of a Boltzmann brain.” And they’ll give you a probability. But I can calculate probability of a Boltzmann brain. Zero.
Because I think the same mechanism that gives us a factory gives us novelty. And I think that is why I’m so deeply hung up on time. Of course I’m wrong, but how wrong? And I think that life opens up that combinatorial space in a way that our current laws of physics, although as contrived in a deterministic initial condition universe even with the get out of the multiverse, David Deutsch style, which I love by the way, but I don’t think is correct, but it’s really beautiful.
Taxol is unique to Earth. There’s no taxol elsewhere in the universe, and taxol was not decided by the initial conditions. It was decided by this interplay between the … So, the past simply is embedded in the present. It gives some features. But why the past doesn’t map to the future one-to-one is because the universe is too big to contain itself. That gives space for creativity, and novelty, and some things which are unpredictable.
It’s fascinating to me that for pi, there is a formula where you can go to the millionth decimal place of pi and read out the number without having to go there. But there are some numbers where you can’t do that, and you have to just crank through. Whether it’s Wolframian computational irreducibility or some other thing, well, it doesn’t matter. But these CAs, that complexity, is that just complexity, or a number that is basically you’re mining that number in time? Is that just a display screen for that number, that function?
CAs are mining novelty in the future by iteration, right? And you’re like, ” Oh, that’s great. That’s great.” You didn’t predict it. Some rules you can predict what’s going to happen, and other rules you can’t. So for me, if anything, CAs are evidence that the universe is too big to contain itself, because otherwise you’d know what the rules are going to do forevermore.
The reason why I think it’s nonsensical … And I don’t think there isn’t things we should do and be very worried about. There are things we need to worry about right now, what AI are doing. Whether it’s fake data, fake users. I want authentic people, authentic data. I don’t want everything to be faked, and I think it’s a really big problem, and I absolutely want to go on the record to say I really worry about that. What I’m not worried about is that some fictitious entity is going to turn us all to paperclips or detonate nuclear bombs, or maybe, I don’t know, anything you can think of.
Why is this? I’ll take a very simple series of logical arguments, and the AI doomers do not have the correct epistemology. They do not understand what knowledge is. And until we understand what knowledge is, they’re not going to get anywhere because they’re applying things falsely. So, let me give you a very simple argument.
People talk about the probability, “P(doom)”, of AI. We can work out the probability of an asteroid hitting the planet. Why? Because it’s happened before. We know the mechanism. We know that there’s a gravity well, or that spacetime is bent and stuff falls in. We don’t know the probability of AGI because we have no mechanism. So, let me give you another one, which is like, “I’m really worried about AG.” What’s AG? AG is anti-gravity. “One day we could wake up and anti-gravity is discovered, we’re all going to die, the atmosphere is going to float away, we’re going to float away, we’re all doomed.”
What is the probability of AG? We don’t know because there’s no mechanism for AG. Do we worry about it? No, and I don’t understand the current reason for certain people in certain areas to be generating this nonsense. I think they’re not doing it maliciously. I think we’re observing the emergence of new religions, how religions come, because religions are about some controls.
You’ve got the optimist saying, “AI is going to cure us all,” and, “AI is going to kill us all.” What’s the reality? Well, we don’t have AI. We have really powerful machine learning tools and they will allow us to do interesting things, and we need to be careful about how we use those tools in terms of manipulating human beings and faking stuff. Right?
So, the idea there is that if you have a being that’s 10x smarter than humans, we’re not going to be able to predict what that being is going to be able to do, especially if it has the power to hurt humans. Which, you can imagine a lot of trajectories in which the more benefit AI systems give, the more control we give to those AI systems over our power grid, over our nuclear weapons, or weapons of any sort. And then it’s hard to know what an ultra-intelligence system would be able to do in that case. You don’t find that convincing?
The decision-making ability comes from human beings. We have no understanding of how humans make decisions. We’ve just been discussing free will for the last half an hour, right? We don’t even know what that is. So, the intention, I totally agree with you, people who intend to do bad things can do bad things and we should not let that risk go. That’s totally here and now. I do not want that to happen, and I’m happy to be regulated to make sure that systems I generate, whether they’re computer systems, or … I’m working on a new project called “Chem Machina”.
When people play chess computers, they don’t expect to win now, right? The chess computer is very good at chess. That doesn’t mean it’s super-intelligent. So, I think that super-intelligence, and I think even Nick Bostrom is pulling back on this now, because he invented this … So, I see this a lot. When did I see it first happen? Eric Drexler, nanotechnology. Atomically precise machines. He came up with a world where we had these atom cogs everywhere and we were going to make self-replicating nanobots.
Not possible. Why? Because there’s no resources to build these self-replicating nanobots. You can’t get the precision. It doesn’t work. It was a major category error in taking engineering principles down to the molecular level. The only functioning nanomolecular technology we know is produced by evolution. There.
So, now let’s go forward to AGI. What is AGI? We don’t know. It’s super, it can do this, or humans can’t think. I would argue the only AGIs that exist in the universe are produced by evolution. And sure, we may be able to make our working memory better. We might be able to do more things. The human brain is the most compact computing unit in the universe. It uses 20 watts, uses a really limited volume. It’s not like a ChatGPT cluster which has to have thousands of watts, and a model that’s generated, and it has to be corrected by human beings. You are autonomous and embodied intelligence.
So, I think that there are so many levels that we’re missing out, we’ve just kind of went, “Oh, we’ve discovered fire. Oh gosh, the planet’s just going to burn one day randomly.” I just don’t understand that leap. There are bigger problems we need to worry about. So, what is the motivation? Why are these people, and let’s assume they’re earnest, have this conviction? Well, I think they’re making leaps and they’re trapped in a virtual reality that isn’t reality.
But there is a lot of concerns with super-intelligent systems, very capable systems. I think when you hear the word “super-intelligent”, you’re hearing, “It’s smarter than humans in every way that humans are smart.” But the paperclip manufacturing system doesn’t need to be smart in every way. It just needs to be smart in a set of specific ways. And the more capable the AI systems become, the more you could see us giving them control over, like I said, our power grid, a lot of aspects of human life. And then that means they’ll be able to do more and more damage when there’s unintended consequences that come to life.
I think that what happens in evolution, it’s really: Why has a killer virus not killed all life on Earth? Well, what happens is, sure, superkiller viruses that kill the ribosome have emerged. But you know what happens? They nuke a small space because they can’t propagate. They all die. So, there’s this interplay between evolution and propagation, right? And death. So …
Now, I guess what I’m trying to say is when people talk about doom, and when you ask them for the mechanism, they just make something up. In this case, I’m with Yann LeCun. I think you put out a very good point about trying to regulate jet engines before we’ve even invented them. And I think that’s what I’m saying.
I’m not saying we should … I just don’t understand why these guys are going around literally making stuff up about us all dying, when basically we need to actually really focus on … Now, let’s say there’s some actors that are earnest. Let’s say Yudkowsky is being earnest and he really cares. But he loves it. He goes, “Da, da, da, and then you’re all going to die.” It’s like, why don’t we try and do the same thing and say, “You could do this, and then you’re all going to be happy forever after”?
For example, I do believe we’re not properly concerned about the threat of nuclear weapons currently. It just seems like people have forgotten that that’s a thing, and there’s a war in Ukraine with a nuclear power involved. There’s nuclear powers throughout the world, and it just feels like war in the brink of a potential world war to a percentage that I don’t think people are properly calibrating in their head. We’re all thinking it’s a Twitter battle as opposed to actual threat.
So, it’s nice to have that kind of level of concern. But to me, when I hear AI doomers, what I’m imagining is with unintended consequences a potential situation where let’s say 5% of the world suffers deeply because of a mistake made, of unintended consequences. I don’t want to imagine the entirety of human civilization dying, but there could be a lot of suffering if this is done poorly.
When it comes to nuclear weapons, I grew up in the ’70s and ’80s where there was nuclear doom and a lot of adults really had existential threat, almost as bad as now with AI doom. They were really worried. There were some great … Well, not great. There were some horrific documentaries. I think there was one called Threads that was generated in the UK, which, it was terrible. It was so scary.
And I think that the correct thing to do is obviously get rid of nuclear weapons, but let’s think about unintended consequences. We’ve got rid of … This is going to be such a non sequitur. We got rid of all the sulfur particles in the atmosphere, right? All the soot. And what’s happened in the last couple of years is global warming has accelerated because we’ve cleaned up the atmosphere too much. So …
But right now, what about certain nations that are being exploited for their natural resources in the future for a short-term gain because we don’t want to generate knowledge? So, if everybody had an equal doomsday switch, I predict the quality of life of the average human will go up faster. I am an optimist, and I believe that humanity is going to get better and better and better, that we’re going to eliminate more problems. But I think, yeah, let’s-
So, what I would like to do is to say, “Well, hey, hang on. What is it about the brain?” So, the brain has this incredible connectivity, and it has the ability to … As I said earlier about my nephew, I went from “Bill” to “Billy” and he went, “All right, Leroy.” How did he make that leap? That he was able to basically without any training … I extended his name in a way that he doesn’t like. He wants to be called Bill. He went back and said, “You like to be called Lee? I’m going to call you Leroy.”
So, human beings have a brilliant ability, or intelligent beings appear to have a brilliant ability to integrate across all domains all at once, and to synthesize something which allows us to generate knowledge. And becoming Turing-complete on our own, although AIs are built and Turing-complete things, their thinking is not Turing-complete in that they are not able to build universal explanations. And that lack of universal explanation means that they’re just-
It never will produce anything out with the dataset because you mine the past. The thing that I’m getting to is I think that actually current machine learning technologies might actually help reveal why time is fundamental. It’s like kind of insane. Because they tell you about what’s happened in the past, but they can never help you understand what’s happening in the future without training examples. Sure, if that thing happens again. So let’s think about what large language models are doing. We have all the internet as we know it, language, but also they’re doing something else. We having human beings correcting it all the time. Those models are being corrected,
I think the way you can do it is this, is that you come up with a theory, an explanation, inspiration comes from out, and then you then test that, and then you see that’s going towards the truth. And human beings are very good at doing that. And the transition between philosophy, mathematics, physics and natural sciences. And I think that we can see that. Where I get confused is why people misappropriate the term artificial intelligence to say, “Hey, there’s something else going on here.” Because I think you and I both agree, machine learning’s really good, it’s only going to get better. We’re going to get happier with the outcome. But why would you ever think the model is thinking or reasoning? Reasoning requires intention. And the intention, if the model isn’t reasoning, the intentions come from the prompter. And the intention has come from the person who programmed it to do it.
And so what we built was a system that you literally could give it a, let’s say you could take a protein that has a particular active site or a cup with a certain hole in it. You pour noise into it and with A GPT you turn the noise into electron density. And then in this case it hallucinates, like all of them do. But then hallucinations are good because it means I don’t have to train on such a huge dataset, because these data sets are very expensive. How do you produce it? So go back a step. So you’ve got all these molecules in this dataset, but what you’ve literally done is a quantum mechanical calculation. We produce electron densities for each molecule. So you say, oh, this representation of this molecule has these electron densities associated with it, so you know what the representation is and you train the neural network to know what electron density is.
So then you give it an unknown pocket. You pour in noise and you say, right, produce me electron density, it produces electron density that doesn’t look ridiculous. And what we did in this case is we produce electron density that maximizes the electrostatic potential, so the stickiness, but minimizes what we call the steric hindrance. So the overlaps, so it’s repulsive. So make the perfect fit. And then we then use kind of like a ChatGPT type thing to turn that electron density into what’s called a smile. A smile string is a way of representing a molecule in letters. And then we can then-
Because it just basically… This is a case where interpolation extrapolation worked relatively well. And we were able to generate the really good molecules. And then what we were able to do here is, and this is a really good point and what I was trying to say earlier, that we were able to generate new molecules, from the known set, that would bind to the host. So a new guest would bind. Were these truly novel? Not really because they were constrained by the host. Were they new to us? Yes. So I do, well understand… I can concede that machine learning systems, artificial intelligence systems can generate new entities, but how novel are they? It remains to be seen.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:15 – Assembly theory paper
- 21:45 – Assembly equation
- 34:57 – Discovering alien life
- 53:16 – Evolution of life on Earth
- 1:01:12 – Response to criticism
- 1:18:50 – Kolmogorov complexity
- 1:30:40 – Nature review process
- 1:51:34 – Time and free will
- 1:57:59 – Communication with aliens
- 2:19:57 – Cellular automata
- 2:24:26 – AGI
- 2:41:15 – Nuclear weapons
- 2:47:00 – Chem Machina
- 2:59:54 – GPT for electron density
- 3:09:24 – God
Introduction
Lee Cronin
Every star in the sky probably has planets and life is probably emerging on these planets. But I think the commentorial space associated with these planets is so different. Our causal cones are never going to overlap or not easily. And this is the thing that makes me sad about alien life, why we have to create alien life in the lab as quickly as possible because I don’t know if we are going to be able to build architectures that will intersect with alien intelligence architectures.
Every star in the sky probably has planets and life is probably emerging on these planets. But I think the commentorial space associated with these planets is so different. Our causal cones are never going to overlap or not easily. And this is the thing that makes me sad about alien life, why we have to create alien life in the lab as quickly as possible because I don’t know if we are going to be able to build architectures that will intersect with alien intelligence architectures.
Lex Fridman
Intersect, you don’t mean in time or space-
Intersect, you don’t mean in time or space-
Lee Cronin
Time and the ability to communicate.
Time and the ability to communicate.
Lex Fridman
The ability to communicate.
The ability to communicate.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. My biggest fear in a way is that life is everywhere, but we’ve become infinitely more lonely because of our scaffolding in that commentorial space.
Yeah. My biggest fear in a way is that life is everywhere, but we’ve become infinitely more lonely because of our scaffolding in that commentorial space.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Lee Cronin, his third time in this podcast. He’s a chemist from University of Glasgow who is one of the most fascinating, brilliant and fun to talk to scientists I’ve ever had the pleasure of getting to know. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Lee Cronin.
The following is a conversation with Lee Cronin, his third time in this podcast. He’s a chemist from University of Glasgow who is one of the most fascinating, brilliant and fun to talk to scientists I’ve ever had the pleasure of getting to know. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Lee Cronin.
Assembly theory paper
So your big assembly theory paper was published in Nature. Congratulations.
Lee Cronin
Thanks.
Thanks.
Lex Fridman
It created, I think it’s fair to say, a lot of controversy, but also a lot of interesting discussion. So maybe I can try to summarize assembly theory and you tell me if I’m wrong.
It created, I think it’s fair to say, a lot of controversy, but also a lot of interesting discussion. So maybe I can try to summarize assembly theory and you tell me if I’m wrong.
Lee Cronin
Go for it.
Go for it.
Lex Fridman
So assembly theory says that if we look at any object in the universe, any object, that we can quantify how complex it is by trying to find the number of steps it took to create it. And also we can determine if it was built by a process akin to evolution by looking at how many copies of the object there are.
So assembly theory says that if we look at any object in the universe, any object, that we can quantify how complex it is by trying to find the number of steps it took to create it. And also we can determine if it was built by a process akin to evolution by looking at how many copies of the object there are.
Lee Cronin
Yep. That’s spot on. Yep.
Yep. That’s spot on. Yep.
Lex Fridman
Spot on.
Spot on.
Lee Cronin
Spot on.
Spot on.
Lex Fridman
I was not expecting that. Okay, so let’s go through definitions. So there’s a central equation I’d love to talk about, but definition wise, what is an object?
I was not expecting that. Okay, so let’s go through definitions. So there’s a central equation I’d love to talk about, but definition wise, what is an object?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, an object. So if I’m going to try to be as meticulous as possible, objects need to be finite and they need to be decomposable into sub-units. All human made artifacts are objects. Is a planet an object? Probably yes, if you scale out. So an object is finite and accountable and decomposable, I suppose, mathematically. But yeah, I still wake up some days and go to think to myself, what is an object? Because it’s a non-trivial question.
Yeah, an object. So if I’m going to try to be as meticulous as possible, objects need to be finite and they need to be decomposable into sub-units. All human made artifacts are objects. Is a planet an object? Probably yes, if you scale out. So an object is finite and accountable and decomposable, I suppose, mathematically. But yeah, I still wake up some days and go to think to myself, what is an object? Because it’s a non-trivial question.
Lex Fridman
Persists over time, I’m quoting from the paper here. An object is finite, is distinguishable. I’m sure that’s a weird adjective, distinguishable.
Persists over time, I’m quoting from the paper here. An object is finite, is distinguishable. I’m sure that’s a weird adjective, distinguishable.
Lee Cronin
We’ve had so many people help offering to rewrite the paper after it came out. You wouldn’t believe it’s so funny.
We’ve had so many people help offering to rewrite the paper after it came out. You wouldn’t believe it’s so funny.
Lex Fridman
Persists over time. And is breakable such that the set of constraints to construct it from elementary building blocks is quantifiable, such that the set of constraints to construct it from elementary building blocks is quantifiable.
Persists over time. And is breakable such that the set of constraints to construct it from elementary building blocks is quantifiable, such that the set of constraints to construct it from elementary building blocks is quantifiable.
Lee Cronin
The history is in the objects. It’s kind of cool, right?
The history is in the objects. It’s kind of cool, right?
Lex Fridman
Okay. So what defines the object is its history or memory, whichever is the sexier word.
Okay. So what defines the object is its history or memory, whichever is the sexier word.
Lee Cronin
I’m happy with both depending on the day.
I’m happy with both depending on the day.
Lex Fridman
Okay, so the set of steps it took to create the object. So there’s a sense in which every object in the universe has a history. And that is part of the thing that is used to describe its complexity. How complicated it is. Okay, what is an assembly index?
Okay, so the set of steps it took to create the object. So there’s a sense in which every object in the universe has a history. And that is part of the thing that is used to describe its complexity. How complicated it is. Okay, what is an assembly index?
Lee Cronin
So the assembly index, if you’re to take the object apart and be super lazy about it or minimal say ’cause it’s like you’ve got a really short-term memory. So what you do is you lay all the parts on the path and you find the minimum number of steps you take on the path to add the parts together to reproduce the object. And that minimum number is the assembly index. It’s minimum bound. And it was always my intuition, the minimum bound and assembly theory was really important that I only worked out why a few weeks ago, which is kind of funny ’cause I was just like, “No, this is sacrosanct. I don’t know why, it’ll come to me one day.”
So the assembly index, if you’re to take the object apart and be super lazy about it or minimal say ’cause it’s like you’ve got a really short-term memory. So what you do is you lay all the parts on the path and you find the minimum number of steps you take on the path to add the parts together to reproduce the object. And that minimum number is the assembly index. It’s minimum bound. And it was always my intuition, the minimum bound and assembly theory was really important that I only worked out why a few weeks ago, which is kind of funny ’cause I was just like, “No, this is sacrosanct. I don’t know why, it’ll come to me one day.”
And then when I was pushed by a bunch of mathematicians, we came up with the correct physical explanation, which I can get to, but it’s the minimum and it’s really important. It’s the minimum. And the reason I knew the minimum was right is because we could measure it. So almost before this paper came out, we’d published papers, explain how you can measure the assembly index of molecules.
Lex Fridman
Okay, so that’s not so trivial to figure out. So when you look at an object, we could say a molecule, we could say object more generally. To figure out the minimum number of steps it takes to create that object, that doesn’t seem like a trivial thing to do.
Okay, so that’s not so trivial to figure out. So when you look at an object, we could say a molecule, we could say object more generally. To figure out the minimum number of steps it takes to create that object, that doesn’t seem like a trivial thing to do.
Lee Cronin
So with molecules, it is not trivial, but it is possible because what you can do and because I’m a chemist, so I’m kind of like I see the lens of the world for just chemistry. I break the molecule apart and break bonds. And if you take a molecule and you break it all apart, you have a bunch of atoms and then you say, “Okay, I’m going to then take the atoms and form bonds and go up the chain of events to make the molecule.”
So with molecules, it is not trivial, but it is possible because what you can do and because I’m a chemist, so I’m kind of like I see the lens of the world for just chemistry. I break the molecule apart and break bonds. And if you take a molecule and you break it all apart, you have a bunch of atoms and then you say, “Okay, I’m going to then take the atoms and form bonds and go up the chain of events to make the molecule.”
And that’s what made me realize, take a toy example, literally a toy example, take a Lego object, which is broken up of Lego blocks. So you could do exactly the same thing. In this case, the Lego blocks are naturally the smallest. They’re the atoms in the actual composite Lego architecture. But then if you maybe take a couple of blocks and put them together in a certain way, maybe they’re offset in some way, that offset is on the memory, you can use that offset again with only a penalty of one and you can then make a square, triangle and keep going.
And you remember those motifs on the chain. So you can then leap from the start with all the Lego blocks or atoms just laid out in front of you and say, “Right, I’ll take you, you, you,” connect and do the least amount of work. So it’s really like the smallest steps you can take on the graph to make the object. And so for molecules, it came relatively intuitively. And then we started to apply it to language. We’ve even started to apply it to mathematical theorems. But I’m so well out of my depth. But it looks like you can take minimum set of axioms and then start to build up mathematical architectures in the same way. And then the shortest path to get there is something interesting that I don’t yet understand.
Lex Fridman
So what’s the computational complexity of figuring out the shortest path with molecules, with language, with mathematical theorems? It seems like once you have the fully constructed Lego castle or whatever your favorite Lego world is, figuring out how to get there from the basic building blocks, is that an empty hard problem? It’s a hard problem.
So what’s the computational complexity of figuring out the shortest path with molecules, with language, with mathematical theorems? It seems like once you have the fully constructed Lego castle or whatever your favorite Lego world is, figuring out how to get there from the basic building blocks, is that an empty hard problem? It’s a hard problem.
Lee Cronin
It’s a hard problem. But actually if you look at it, so the best way to look at it, let’s take a molecule. So if the molecule has 13 bonds, first of all, take 13 copies of the molecule and just cut all the bonds. So cut 12 bonds and then you just put them in order and then that’s how it works. And you keep looking for symmetry or copies so you can then shorten it as you go down.
It’s a hard problem. But actually if you look at it, so the best way to look at it, let’s take a molecule. So if the molecule has 13 bonds, first of all, take 13 copies of the molecule and just cut all the bonds. So cut 12 bonds and then you just put them in order and then that’s how it works. And you keep looking for symmetry or copies so you can then shorten it as you go down.
And that becomes [inaudible 00:07:53] quite hard. For some natural product molecules, it becomes very hard. It’s not impossible, but we’re looking at the bounds on that at the moment. But as the object gets bigger it becomes really hard. But that’s the bad news. But the good news is there are shortcuts. And we might even be able to physically measure the complexity without computationally calculating it, which is kind of insane.
Lex Fridman
Wait, how would you do that?
Wait, how would you do that?
Lee Cronin
Well, in the case of molecule, so if you shine light on a molecule, let’s take an infrared. The molecule has each of the bonds absorbs the infrared differently in what we call the fingerprint region. And so it’s a bit like because it’s quantized as well, you have all these discreet kind of absorbances. And my intuition, after we realized we could cut molecules up in mass spec, that was the first go at this. We did it with using infrared. And the infrared gave us an even better correlation assembly index. And we used another technique as well in addition to infrared called NMR, nuclear magnetic resonance, which tells you about the number of different magnetic environments in a molecule. And that also worked out. So we have three techniques which each of them independently gives us the same or tending towards the same assembly index from molecule that we can calculate mathematically.
Well, in the case of molecule, so if you shine light on a molecule, let’s take an infrared. The molecule has each of the bonds absorbs the infrared differently in what we call the fingerprint region. And so it’s a bit like because it’s quantized as well, you have all these discreet kind of absorbances. And my intuition, after we realized we could cut molecules up in mass spec, that was the first go at this. We did it with using infrared. And the infrared gave us an even better correlation assembly index. And we used another technique as well in addition to infrared called NMR, nuclear magnetic resonance, which tells you about the number of different magnetic environments in a molecule. And that also worked out. So we have three techniques which each of them independently gives us the same or tending towards the same assembly index from molecule that we can calculate mathematically.
Lex Fridman
So these are all methods of mass spectrometry, mass spec. You scan a molecule, it gives you data in the form of a mass spectrum. And you’re saying that the data correlates to the assembly index?
So these are all methods of mass spectrometry, mass spec. You scan a molecule, it gives you data in the form of a mass spectrum. And you’re saying that the data correlates to the assembly index?
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So how generalizable is that shortcut, first of all it’s chemistry. And second of all, beyond that, that seems like a nice hack and you’re extremely knowledgeable about various aspects of chemistry. So you can say, okay, it kind of correlates. But the whole idea behind assembly theory paper and perhaps why it’s so controversial is that it reaches bigger. It reaches for the bigger general theory of objects in the universe.
So how generalizable is that shortcut, first of all it’s chemistry. And second of all, beyond that, that seems like a nice hack and you’re extremely knowledgeable about various aspects of chemistry. So you can say, okay, it kind of correlates. But the whole idea behind assembly theory paper and perhaps why it’s so controversial is that it reaches bigger. It reaches for the bigger general theory of objects in the universe.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, I’d say so. I’d agree. So I’ve started assembly theory of emoticons with my lab, believe it or not. So we take emojis, pixelate them and work out the assembly index of the emoji and then work out how many emojis you can make on the path of emoji. So there’s the uber emoji from which all other emojis emerge. So you can then take a photograph and by looking at the shortest path, by reproducing the pixels to make the image you want, you can measure that. So then you start to be able to take spatial data.
Yeah, I’d say so. I’d agree. So I’ve started assembly theory of emoticons with my lab, believe it or not. So we take emojis, pixelate them and work out the assembly index of the emoji and then work out how many emojis you can make on the path of emoji. So there’s the uber emoji from which all other emojis emerge. So you can then take a photograph and by looking at the shortest path, by reproducing the pixels to make the image you want, you can measure that. So then you start to be able to take spatial data.
Now there’s some problems there. What is then the definition of the object? How many pixels? How do you break it down? And so we’re just learning all this right now.
Lex Fridman
So how do you compute, begin to compute the assembly index of a graphical, a set of pixels on a 2D plane that form a thing?
So how do you compute, begin to compute the assembly index of a graphical, a set of pixels on a 2D plane that form a thing?
Lee Cronin
So you would first of all determine the resolution. So then what is your XY and what the number on the X and Y plane and then look at the surface area. And then you take all your emojis and make sure they’re all looked at the same resolution. And then we would basically then do exactly the same thing we would do for cutting the bonds. You’d cut bits out of the emoji and look at, you’d have a bag of pixels and you would then add those pixels together to make the overall emoji.
So you would first of all determine the resolution. So then what is your XY and what the number on the X and Y plane and then look at the surface area. And then you take all your emojis and make sure they’re all looked at the same resolution. And then we would basically then do exactly the same thing we would do for cutting the bonds. You’d cut bits out of the emoji and look at, you’d have a bag of pixels and you would then add those pixels together to make the overall emoji.
Lex Fridman
Wait, wait a minute. But first of all, not every pixels, I mean this is at the core, machine learning and computer vision, not every pixels that important. And there’s macro features, there’s micro features and all that kind of stuff.
Wait, wait a minute. But first of all, not every pixels, I mean this is at the core, machine learning and computer vision, not every pixels that important. And there’s macro features, there’s micro features and all that kind of stuff.
Lee Cronin
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
The eyes appear in a lot of them, the smile appears in a lot of them.
The eyes appear in a lot of them, the smile appears in a lot of them.
Lee Cronin
So in the same way in chemistry we assume the bond is fundamental. What we do in they’re and here is we assume the resolution at the scale at which we do it is fundamental and we’re just working that out. And you’re right, that will change because as you take your lens out a bit, it will change dramatically.
So in the same way in chemistry we assume the bond is fundamental. What we do in they’re and here is we assume the resolution at the scale at which we do it is fundamental and we’re just working that out. And you’re right, that will change because as you take your lens out a bit, it will change dramatically.
But it’s just a new way of looking at, not just compression. What we do right now in computer science and data, one big kind of misunderstanding as assembly theory is telling you about how compressed the object is. That’s not right. It’s how much information is required on a chain of events. Because the nice thing is if, when you do compression and computer science, we’re wandering a bit here, but it’s kind of worth wandering I think, you assume you have instantaneous access to all the information in the memory. In assembly theory you say, “No, you don’t get access to that memory until you’ve done the work.” And then when you’ve done access to that memory, you can have access but not to the next one.
And this is how in assembly theory, we talk about the four universes, the assembly universe, the assembly possible, and the assembly contingent, and then the assembly observed. And they’re all scales in this commentorial universe.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Can you explain each one of them?
Yeah. Can you explain each one of them?
Lee Cronin
Yep. So the assembly universe is like anything goes, just combinatorial kind of explosion in everything.
Yep. So the assembly universe is like anything goes, just combinatorial kind of explosion in everything.
Lex Fridman
So that’s the biggest one?
So that’s the biggest one?
Lee Cronin
That’s the biggest one. It’s massive.
That’s the biggest one. It’s massive.
Lex Fridman
Assembly universe, assembly possible, assembly contingent, assembly observed. And the Y axis is assembly steps in time and the X axis as the thing expands through time, more and more unique objects appear.
Assembly universe, assembly possible, assembly contingent, assembly observed. And the Y axis is assembly steps in time and the X axis as the thing expands through time, more and more unique objects appear.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, so assembly universe, everything goes. Assembly possible, laws of physics come in this case in chemistry, bonds assembly. So that means-
Yeah, so assembly universe, everything goes. Assembly possible, laws of physics come in this case in chemistry, bonds assembly. So that means-
Lex Fridman
Those are extra constraints, I guess?
Those are extra constraints, I guess?
Lee Cronin
Yes. And they’re the only constraints. They’re the constraints at the base. So the way to look at it’s you’ve got all your atoms, they’re contized and you can just bond them together. So then you can become a kind of, so in the way in computer science speak, I suppose the assembly universe is just like no laws of physics. Things can fly through mountains, beyond the speed of light. In the assembly possible. You have to apply the laws of physics, but you can get access to all the motifs instantaneously with no effort. So that means you could make anything.
Yes. And they’re the only constraints. They’re the constraints at the base. So the way to look at it’s you’ve got all your atoms, they’re contized and you can just bond them together. So then you can become a kind of, so in the way in computer science speak, I suppose the assembly universe is just like no laws of physics. Things can fly through mountains, beyond the speed of light. In the assembly possible. You have to apply the laws of physics, but you can get access to all the motifs instantaneously with no effort. So that means you could make anything.
Then the assembly contingent says “No, you can’t have access to the highly assembled object in the future until you’ve done the work in the past on the causal chain.” And that’s really, the really interesting shift where you go from assembly possible to assembly contingent. That is really the key thing in assembly theory that says you cannot just have instantaneous access to all those memories. You have to have done the work. Somehow the universe has to have somehow built a system that allows you to select that path rather than other paths.
And then the final thing the assembly observed is basically us saying, “Oh, these are the things we actually see. We can go backwards now and understand that they have been created by this causal process.”
Lex Fridman
Wait a minute. So when you say the universe has to construct the system that does the work, is that like the environment that allows for selection?
Wait a minute. So when you say the universe has to construct the system that does the work, is that like the environment that allows for selection?
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So that’s the thing that does the selection.
So that’s the thing that does the selection.
Lee Cronin
You could think about in terms of a Von Neumann constructor versus a selection, a ribosome, a Tesla plant assembling Teslas. The difference between the assembly universe in Tesla land and the Tesla factory is everyone says, “No, Teslas are just easy. They just spring out, you know how to make them all. The Tesla factory, you have to put things in sequence and out comes a Tesla.
You could think about in terms of a Von Neumann constructor versus a selection, a ribosome, a Tesla plant assembling Teslas. The difference between the assembly universe in Tesla land and the Tesla factory is everyone says, “No, Teslas are just easy. They just spring out, you know how to make them all. The Tesla factory, you have to put things in sequence and out comes a Tesla.
Lex Fridman
So you’re talking about the factory?
So you’re talking about the factory?
Lee Cronin
Yes. This is really nice, super important point is that when I talk about the universe having a memory or there’s some magic, it’s not that. It’s that tells you that there must be a process encoded somewhere in physical reality, be it a cell, a Tesla factory or something else that is making that object. I’m not saying there’s some kind of woo-woo memory in the universe, morphic resonance or something. I’m saying that there is an actual causal process that is being directed, constrained in some way. So it’s not kind of just making everything.
Yes. This is really nice, super important point is that when I talk about the universe having a memory or there’s some magic, it’s not that. It’s that tells you that there must be a process encoded somewhere in physical reality, be it a cell, a Tesla factory or something else that is making that object. I’m not saying there’s some kind of woo-woo memory in the universe, morphic resonance or something. I’m saying that there is an actual causal process that is being directed, constrained in some way. So it’s not kind of just making everything.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but Lee, what’s the factory that made the factory? First of all, you assume the laws of physics is just sprung to existence at the beginning. Those are constraints. But what makes the factory the environment that does the selection?
Yeah, but Lee, what’s the factory that made the factory? First of all, you assume the laws of physics is just sprung to existence at the beginning. Those are constraints. But what makes the factory the environment that does the selection?
Lee Cronin
This is the question of, well, it’s the first interesting question that I want to answer out of four. I think the factory emerges in the interplay between the environment and the objects that are being built. And let me, I’ll have a go at explain to you the shortest path.
This is the question of, well, it’s the first interesting question that I want to answer out of four. I think the factory emerges in the interplay between the environment and the objects that are being built. And let me, I’ll have a go at explain to you the shortest path.
So why is the shortest path important? Imagine you’ve got, I’m going to have to go chemistry for a moment, then abstract it. So imagine you’ve got a given environment that you have a budget of atoms, you’re just flinging together. And the objective of those atoms that being flung together in say, molecule A, they decompose. So molecules decompose over time. So the molecules in this environment, in this magic environment have to not die, but they do die. They have a half-life.
So the only way the molecules can get through that environment out the other side, let’s pretend the environment is a box and can go in and out without dying. And there’s just an infinite supply of atoms coming or, well, a large supply, the molecule gets built, but the molecule that is able to template itself being built and survives in the environment will basically reign supreme.
Now let’s say that molecule takes 10 steps and it is using a finite set of atoms. Now, let’s say another molecule, smart ass molecule we’ll call it, comes in and can survive in that environment and can copy itself, but it only needs five steps. The molecule that only needs five steps continued, both molecules are being destroyed, but they’re creating themselves faster they can be destroyed. You can see that the shortest path reigns supreme. So the shortest path tells us something super interesting about the minimal amount of information required to propagate that motif in time and space. And it seems to be like some kind of conservation law.
Lex Fridman
So one of the intuitions you have is the propagation of motifs in time will be done by the things that can construct themselves in the shortest path.
So one of the intuitions you have is the propagation of motifs in time will be done by the things that can construct themselves in the shortest path.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So you can assume that most of the objects in the universe are built in the shortest, in the most efficient way. Big leap I just took there.
So you can assume that most of the objects in the universe are built in the shortest, in the most efficient way. Big leap I just took there.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. Yes and no, because there are other things. So in the limit, yes, because you want to tell the difference between things that have required a factory to build them and just random processes. But you can find instances where the shortest path isn’t taken for an individual object, individual function. And people go, “Ah, that means the shortest path isn’t right.” And then I say, “Well, I don’t know. I think it’s right still because,” so of course, because there are other driving forces, it’s not just one molecule.
Yeah. Yes and no, because there are other things. So in the limit, yes, because you want to tell the difference between things that have required a factory to build them and just random processes. But you can find instances where the shortest path isn’t taken for an individual object, individual function. And people go, “Ah, that means the shortest path isn’t right.” And then I say, “Well, I don’t know. I think it’s right still because,” so of course, because there are other driving forces, it’s not just one molecule.
Now you start to consider two objects, you have a joint assembly space. And it’s not now, it’s a compromise between not just making A and B in the shortest path. You want to be able to make A and B in the shortest path, which might mean that A is slightly longer, compromise. So when you see slightly more nesting in the construction, when you take a given object, that can look longer. But that’s because the overall function is the object is still trying to be efficient. And this is still very hand wavy and maybe having no leg to stand on, but we think we’re getting somewhere with that.
Lex Fridman
And there’s probably some parallelization, right?
And there’s probably some parallelization, right?
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So this is not sequential. The building is, I guess.
So this is not sequential. The building is, I guess.
Lee Cronin
No, you’re right.
No, you’re right.
Lex Fridman
When you’re talking about complex objects, you don’t have to work sequentially. You can work in parallel, you can get your friends together and they can…
When you’re talking about complex objects, you don’t have to work sequentially. You can work in parallel, you can get your friends together and they can…
Lee Cronin
Yeah, and the thing we’re working on right now is how to understand these parallel processes. Now there’s a new thing we’ve introduced called assembly depth. And assembly depth can be lower than the assembly index for a molecule when they’re cooperating together because exactly this parallel processing is going on. And my team have been working this out in the last few weeks because we’re looking at what compromises does nature need to make when it’s making molecules in a cell? And I wonder if maybe like, well, I’m always leaping out of my competence, but in economics, I’m just wondering if you could apply this in economic processes. It seems like capitalism is very good at finding shortest path every time. And there are ludicrous things that happen because actually the cost function has been minimized.
Yeah, and the thing we’re working on right now is how to understand these parallel processes. Now there’s a new thing we’ve introduced called assembly depth. And assembly depth can be lower than the assembly index for a molecule when they’re cooperating together because exactly this parallel processing is going on. And my team have been working this out in the last few weeks because we’re looking at what compromises does nature need to make when it’s making molecules in a cell? And I wonder if maybe like, well, I’m always leaping out of my competence, but in economics, I’m just wondering if you could apply this in economic processes. It seems like capitalism is very good at finding shortest path every time. And there are ludicrous things that happen because actually the cost function has been minimized.
And so I keep seeing parallels everywhere where there are complex nested systems where if you give it enough time and you introduce a bit of heterogeneity, the system readjusts and finds a new shortest path. But the shortest path isn’t fixed on just one molecule now. It’s in the actual existence of the object over time. And that object could be a city, it could be a cell, it could be a factory, but I think we’re going way beyond molecules and my competence so probably should go back to molecules, but hey.
Assembly equation
Lex Fridman
All right, before we get too far, let’s talk about the assembly equation. Okay. How should we do this? Let me just even read that part of the paper. We define assembly as the total amount of selection necessary to produce an ensemble of observed objects quantified using equation one. The equation basically has A on one side, which is the assembly of the ensemble, and then a sum from one to N, where N is the total number of unique objects.
All right, before we get too far, let’s talk about the assembly equation. Okay. How should we do this? Let me just even read that part of the paper. We define assembly as the total amount of selection necessary to produce an ensemble of observed objects quantified using equation one. The equation basically has A on one side, which is the assembly of the ensemble, and then a sum from one to N, where N is the total number of unique objects.
And then there is a few variables in there that include the assembly index, the copy number which we’ll talk about. That’s an interesting, I don’t remember you talking about that. That’s an interesting addition and I think a powerful one. It has to do with what, that you can create pretty complex objects randomly, and in order to know that they’re not random, that there’s a factory involved, you need to see a bunch of them. That’s the intuition there. It’s an interesting intuition and then some normalization. What else is and-
Lee Cronin
N minus one, just to make sure that more than one object, one object could be a one-off and random. And then you have more than one identical object. That’s interesting.
N minus one, just to make sure that more than one object, one object could be a one-off and random. And then you have more than one identical object. That’s interesting.
Lex Fridman
When there’s two of a thing.
When there’s two of a thing.
Lee Cronin
Two of a thing is super important, especially if the index assembly index is high.
Two of a thing is super important, especially if the index assembly index is high.
Lex Fridman
So we could say several questions here. One, let’s talk about selection. What is this term selection? What is this term evolution that we’re referring to? Which aspect of Darwinian evolution are we referring to? That’s interesting here.
So we could say several questions here. One, let’s talk about selection. What is this term selection? What is this term evolution that we’re referring to? Which aspect of Darwinian evolution are we referring to? That’s interesting here.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, so this is probably what the paper, we should talk about the paper for a second. The paper, what it did is it kind of annoyed, we didn’t know it. It got intention and obviously the angry people were annoyed.
Yeah, so this is probably what the paper, we should talk about the paper for a second. The paper, what it did is it kind of annoyed, we didn’t know it. It got intention and obviously the angry people were annoyed.
Lex Fridman
There’s angry people in the world. That’s good.
There’s angry people in the world. That’s good.
Lee Cronin
So what happened is the evolutionary biologists got angry. We were not expecting that. We thought evolutionary biologists would be cool. I knew that some, not many, computational complexity people will get angry because I’ve kind of been poking them and maybe I deserved it, but I was trying to poke them in a productive way. And then the physicists kind of got grumpy because the initial conditions tell everything. The prebiotic chemist got slightly grumpy because there’s not enough chemistry in there. Then finally, when the creationist said it wasn’t creationist enough, I was like, “I’ve done my job.”
So what happened is the evolutionary biologists got angry. We were not expecting that. We thought evolutionary biologists would be cool. I knew that some, not many, computational complexity people will get angry because I’ve kind of been poking them and maybe I deserved it, but I was trying to poke them in a productive way. And then the physicists kind of got grumpy because the initial conditions tell everything. The prebiotic chemist got slightly grumpy because there’s not enough chemistry in there. Then finally, when the creationist said it wasn’t creationist enough, I was like, “I’ve done my job.”
Lex Fridman
You’re saying the physics, they say, because you’re basically saying that physics is not enough to tell the story of how biology emerges?
You’re saying the physics, they say, because you’re basically saying that physics is not enough to tell the story of how biology emerges?
Lee Cronin
I think so.
I think so.
Lex Fridman
And then they said a few physics is the beginning and the end of the story.
And then they said a few physics is the beginning and the end of the story.
Lee Cronin
So what happened is the reason why people put the phone down on the call of the paper, if you view reading the paper like a phone call, they got to the abstract and in the abstract-
So what happened is the reason why people put the phone down on the call of the paper, if you view reading the paper like a phone call, they got to the abstract and in the abstract-
Lex Fridman
First sentence is pretty strong.
First sentence is pretty strong.
Lee Cronin
The first two sentences caused everybody-
The first two sentences caused everybody-
Lex Fridman
Scientists have grappled with reconciling biological evolution with the immutable laws of the universe defined by physics.
Scientists have grappled with reconciling biological evolution with the immutable laws of the universe defined by physics.
Lee Cronin
True, right? There’s nothing wrong with that statement. Totally true.
True, right? There’s nothing wrong with that statement. Totally true.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. These laws underpin life’s origin, evolution, and the development of human culture and technology, yet they do not predict the emergence of these phenomena. Wow. First of all, we should say the title of the paper, this paper was accepted and published in Nature. The title is Assembly Theory Explains and Quantifies Selection and Evolution, very humble title. And the entirety of the paper, I think, presents interesting ideas, but reaches high.
Yeah. These laws underpin life’s origin, evolution, and the development of human culture and technology, yet they do not predict the emergence of these phenomena. Wow. First of all, we should say the title of the paper, this paper was accepted and published in Nature. The title is Assembly Theory Explains and Quantifies Selection and Evolution, very humble title. And the entirety of the paper, I think, presents interesting ideas, but reaches high.
Lee Cronin
I am not… I would do it all again. This paper was actually on the pre-print server for over a year.
I am not… I would do it all again. This paper was actually on the pre-print server for over a year.
Lex Fridman
You regret nothing?
You regret nothing?
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
I think, yeah, I don’t regret anything.
I think, yeah, I don’t regret anything.
Lex Fridman
You and Frank Sinatra did it your way.
You and Frank Sinatra did it your way.
Lee Cronin
What I love about being a scientist is sometimes because I’m a bit dim and I don’t understand what people are telling me, I want to get to the point. This paper says, “Hey, the laws of physics are really cool, the universe is great, but they don’t really, it’s not intuitive that you just run the standard model and get life out.” I think most physicists might go, “Yeah, it’s not just, we can’t just go back and say that’s what happened.” Because physics can’t explain the origin of life yet. That doesn’t mean it won’t or can’t. Okay. Just to be clear. Sorry intelligent designers, we are going to get there.
What I love about being a scientist is sometimes because I’m a bit dim and I don’t understand what people are telling me, I want to get to the point. This paper says, “Hey, the laws of physics are really cool, the universe is great, but they don’t really, it’s not intuitive that you just run the standard model and get life out.” I think most physicists might go, “Yeah, it’s not just, we can’t just go back and say that’s what happened.” Because physics can’t explain the origin of life yet. That doesn’t mean it won’t or can’t. Okay. Just to be clear. Sorry intelligent designers, we are going to get there.
Second point, we say that evolution works, but we don’t know how evolution got going. So biological evolution and biological selection. So for me, this seems like a simple continuum. So when I mentioned selection and evolution in the title, I think, and in the abstract, we should have maybe prefaced that and said non-biological selection and non-biological evolutions. And then that might have made it even more crystal clear. But I didn’t think that biology, evolutionary biology, should be so bold to claim ownership of selection and evolution.
And secondly, a lot of evolutionary biologists seem to dismiss the origin of life question and just say it’s obvious. And that causes a real problem scientifically because two different, when the physicists are like, ” We own the universe. The universe is good, we explain all of it, look at us.” And even biologists say, “We can explain biology.” And the poor chemists in the middle going, “But hang on.”
And this paper kind of says, “Hey, there is an interesting disconnect between physics and biology. And that’s at the point at which memories get made in chemistry through bonds. And hey, let’s look at this close and see if we can quantify it.” So yeah, I never expected the paper to get that much interest. And still, it’s only been published just over a month ago now.
Lex Fridman
So just to link on the selection, what is the broader sense of what selection means?
So just to link on the selection, what is the broader sense of what selection means?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, that’s really good. For selection, so I think for selection, so this is where for me, the concept of an object is something that can persist in time and not die, but basically can be broken up. So if I was going to kind of bolster the definition of an object, so if something can form and persist for a long period of time under an existing environment that could destroy other, and I’m going to use anthropomorphic terms, I apologize, about weaker objects or less robust, then the environment could have selected that.
Yeah, that’s really good. For selection, so I think for selection, so this is where for me, the concept of an object is something that can persist in time and not die, but basically can be broken up. So if I was going to kind of bolster the definition of an object, so if something can form and persist for a long period of time under an existing environment that could destroy other, and I’m going to use anthropomorphic terms, I apologize, about weaker objects or less robust, then the environment could have selected that.
So good chemistry examples, if you took some carbon and you made a chain of carbon atoms, whereas if you took some, I don’t know, some carbon, nitrogen and oxygen and made change from those, you’d start to get different reactions and rearrangements. So a chain of carbon atoms might be more resistant to falling apart under a acidic or basic conditions versus another set of molecules. So it survives in that environment. So the acid pond, the resistant molecule can get through. And then that molecule goes into another environment. So that environment now maybe being acid pond is a basic pond or maybe it’s an oxidizing pond. And so if you’ve got carbon and it goes an oxidizing pond, maybe the carbon starts to oxidize and break apart. So you go through all these kind of obstacle courses if you like, given by reality. So selection is the ability happens when object survives in an environment for some time.
And this is the thing that’s super subtle. The object has to be continually being destroyed and made by process. So it’s not just about the object now, it’s about the process and time that makes it because a rock could just stand on the mountain side for 4 billion years and nothing happened to it. And that’s not necessarily really advanced selection. So for selection to get really interesting, you need to have a turnover in time. You need to be continually creating objects, producing them, what we call discovery time. So there’s a discovery time for an object.
When that object is discovered, if it’s say a molecule that can then act on itself or the chain of events that caused itself to bolster its formation, then you go from discovery time to production time and suddenly you have more of it in the universe. So it could be a self-replicating molecule and the interaction of the molecule in the environment, in the warm little pond or in the sea or wherever in the bubble could then start to build a proto factory, the environment.
So really to answer your question, what the factory is, the factory is the environment, but it’s not very autonomous, it’s not very redundant. There’s lots of things that could go wrong. So once you get high enough up the hierarchy of networks, of interactions, something needs to happen that needs to be compressed into a smaller volume and made resistant robust because in biology, selection and evolution is robust that you have error correction built in. You have really, there’s good ways of basically making sure propagation goes on.
So really the difference between inorganic, antibiotic selection and evolution and evolution and stuff in biology is robustness the ability to propagate, the ability to survive in lots of different environments. Whereas our poor little inorganic sole molecule, whatever, just dies in lots of different environments. So there’s something super special that happens from the inorganic molecule in the environment that kills it to where you’ve got evolution and cells can survive everywhere.
Lex Fridman
How special is that? How do you know those kinds of evolution factors aren’t everywhere in the universe?
How special is that? How do you know those kinds of evolution factors aren’t everywhere in the universe?
Lee Cronin
I don’t, and I’m excited because I think selection isn’t special at all. I think what is special is the history of the environments on earth that gave rise to the first cell that now has taken all those environments and is now more autonomous. And I would like to think that, you know this paper could be very wrong, but I don’t think it’s very wrong. I mean it’s certainly wrong, but it’s less wrong than some other ideas, I hope, right? And if this inspires us to go and look for selection in the universe because we now have an equation where we can say, we can look for selection going on and say, “Oh, that’s interesting. We seem to have a process. It’s giving us high copy number objects that also are highly complex, but that doesn’t look like life as we know it.”
I don’t, and I’m excited because I think selection isn’t special at all. I think what is special is the history of the environments on earth that gave rise to the first cell that now has taken all those environments and is now more autonomous. And I would like to think that, you know this paper could be very wrong, but I don’t think it’s very wrong. I mean it’s certainly wrong, but it’s less wrong than some other ideas, I hope, right? And if this inspires us to go and look for selection in the universe because we now have an equation where we can say, we can look for selection going on and say, “Oh, that’s interesting. We seem to have a process. It’s giving us high copy number objects that also are highly complex, but that doesn’t look like life as we know it.”
And we use that and say, “Oh, there’s a hydrothermal vent. Oh, there’s a process going on. There’s molecular networks,” because the assembly equation is not only meant to identify at the higher end advanced selection, what you get, I would call in biology super advanced selection. And even, you could use the assembly equation to look for technology and God forbid we could talk about consciousness and abstraction, but let’s keep it primitive, molecules and biology. So I think the real power of the assembly equation is to say how much selection is going on in this space.
And there’s a really simple thought experiment I could do is you have a little Petri dish and on that Petri dish you put some simple food. So the assembly index of all the sugars and everything is quite low. So then, and you put a single cell of E. coli cell and then you say, “I’m going to measure the assembly in this, amount of assembly in the box.” So it’s quite low, but the rate of change of assembly, DADT will go [inaudible 00:33:47] sigmoidal as it eats all the food and the number of coli cells will replicate because they take all the food, they copy themselves, the assembly index of all the molecules goes up, up and up until the food is exhausted in the box. So now the E. coli’s stopped-
Lee Cronin
… in the box. So now the E. coli’s stopped… I mean, die is probably a strong word. They stopped respiring because all the food is gone. But suddenly, the amount of assembly in the box has gone up gigantically because of that one E. coli factory has just eaten through, milled lots of other E. coli factories run out of food and stopped. And so that, looking at that… So in the initial box, although the amount of assembly was really small, it was able to replicate and use all the food and go up. And that’s what we’re trying to do in the lab, actually, is make those experiments and see if we can spot the emergence of molecular networks that are producing complexity, as we feed in raw materials and we feed a challenge, an environment. We try and kill the molecules. And really, that’s the main idea for the entire paper.
… in the box. So now the E. coli’s stopped… I mean, die is probably a strong word. They stopped respiring because all the food is gone. But suddenly, the amount of assembly in the box has gone up gigantically because of that one E. coli factory has just eaten through, milled lots of other E. coli factories run out of food and stopped. And so that, looking at that… So in the initial box, although the amount of assembly was really small, it was able to replicate and use all the food and go up. And that’s what we’re trying to do in the lab, actually, is make those experiments and see if we can spot the emergence of molecular networks that are producing complexity, as we feed in raw materials and we feed a challenge, an environment. We try and kill the molecules. And really, that’s the main idea for the entire paper.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and see if you can measure the changes in the assembly index throughout the whole system.
Yeah, and see if you can measure the changes in the assembly index throughout the whole system.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Discovering alien life
Lex Fridman
Okay. What about, if I show up to a new planet, we’ll go to Mars or some other planet from a different solar system, how do we use assembly index there to discover alien life?
Okay. What about, if I show up to a new planet, we’ll go to Mars or some other planet from a different solar system, how do we use assembly index there to discover alien life?
Lee Cronin
Very simply, actually. Let’s say we’ll go to Mars with a mass spectrometer, with a sufficiently high resolution, so what you have to be able to do, so a good thing about mass spec is that you can select the molecule from the mass, and then if it’s high enough resolution, you can be more and more sure that you’re just seeing identical copies. You can count them. And then you fragment them and you count the number of fragments, and look at the molecular weight. And the higher the molecular weight and the higher the number of the fragments, the higher the assembly index.
Very simply, actually. Let’s say we’ll go to Mars with a mass spectrometer, with a sufficiently high resolution, so what you have to be able to do, so a good thing about mass spec is that you can select the molecule from the mass, and then if it’s high enough resolution, you can be more and more sure that you’re just seeing identical copies. You can count them. And then you fragment them and you count the number of fragments, and look at the molecular weight. And the higher the molecular weight and the higher the number of the fragments, the higher the assembly index.
So if you go to Mars and you take a mass spec, with high enough resolution, and you can find molecules, a guide on earth, if you could find molecules, say, greater than 350 molecular weight, with more than 15 fragments, you have found artifacts that can only be produced, at least on earth, by life. And now you would say, “Oh, well, maybe the geological process.” I would argue very virulently that that is not the case.
But we can say, “Look, if you don’t like the cutoff on earth, go up higher, 30, 100, because there’s going to be a point where you can find a molecule with so many different parts, the chances of you getting a molecule that has a hundred different parts and finding a million identical copies, that’s just impossible. That could never happen in an infinite set of universes.
Lex Fridman
Can you just linger on this copy number thing? A million different copies, what do you mean by copies and why is the number of copies important?
Can you just linger on this copy number thing? A million different copies, what do you mean by copies and why is the number of copies important?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, that was so interesting. I always understood the copy number is really important, but I never explained it properly, for ages. And I kept having this, it goes back to this, if I give you a, I don’t know, a really complicated molecule, and I say it’s complicated, you could say, “Hey, that’s really complicated.” But is it just really random?
Yeah, that was so interesting. I always understood the copy number is really important, but I never explained it properly, for ages. And I kept having this, it goes back to this, if I give you a, I don’t know, a really complicated molecule, and I say it’s complicated, you could say, “Hey, that’s really complicated.” But is it just really random?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Lee Cronin
So I realized that ultimate randomness and ultimate complexity are indistinguishable until you can see a structure in the randomness, so you can see copies.
So I realized that ultimate randomness and ultimate complexity are indistinguishable until you can see a structure in the randomness, so you can see copies.
Lex Fridman
So copies implies structure.
So copies implies structure.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. The factory-
Yeah. The factory-
Lex Fridman
I mean, there’s a deep profound thing in there. Because if you just have a random process, you’re going to get a lot of complex, beautiful, sophisticated things.
I mean, there’s a deep profound thing in there. Because if you just have a random process, you’re going to get a lot of complex, beautiful, sophisticated things.
Lee Cronin
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Lex Fridman
What makes them complex in the way we think life is complex or, yeah, something like a factory that’s operating under a selection processes, there should be copies. Is there some looseness about copies? What does it mean for two objects to be equal?
What makes them complex in the way we think life is complex or, yeah, something like a factory that’s operating under a selection processes, there should be copies. Is there some looseness about copies? What does it mean for two objects to be equal?
Lee Cronin
It’s all to do with the telescope or the microscope you’re using. And so, at the maximum resolution… The nice thing about chemists is they have this concept of the molecule and they’re all familiar with the molecule. And molecules, you can hold on your hand, lots of them, identical copies. A molecule is actually a super important thing in chemistry, to say, look, you can have a mole of a molecules, an Avogadro’s number of molecules, and they’re identical. What does that mean? That means that the molecular composition, the bonding and so on, the configuration is indistinguishable. You can hold them together. You can overlay them.
It’s all to do with the telescope or the microscope you’re using. And so, at the maximum resolution… The nice thing about chemists is they have this concept of the molecule and they’re all familiar with the molecule. And molecules, you can hold on your hand, lots of them, identical copies. A molecule is actually a super important thing in chemistry, to say, look, you can have a mole of a molecules, an Avogadro’s number of molecules, and they’re identical. What does that mean? That means that the molecular composition, the bonding and so on, the configuration is indistinguishable. You can hold them together. You can overlay them.
So the way I do it is if I say, “Here’s a bag of 10 identical molecules, let’s prove they’re identical.” You pick one out of the bag and you basically observe it, using some technique, and then you take it away and then you take another one out. If you observe it using technique, you see no differences. They’re identical. It’s really interesting to get right. Because if you take, say, two molecules, molecules can be in different vibrational rotational states. They’re moving all the time.
So in this respect, identical molecules have identical bonding. In this case, we don’t even talk about chirality, because we don’t have a chirality detector. So two identical molecules in one conception, assembly theory, basically considers both hands as being the same. But, of course, they’re not, they’re different. As soon as you have a chiral distinguisher to detect the left and the right hand, they become different. And so, it’s to do with the detection system that you have and the resolution.
Lex Fridman
So I wonder if there’s an art and science to the, which detection system is used when you show up to a new planet.
So I wonder if there’s an art and science to the, which detection system is used when you show up to a new planet.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. Yeah, yeah.
Yeah. Yeah, yeah.
Lex Fridman
So you’re talking about chemistry a lot today. We have standardized detection systems of how to compare molecules. So when you start to talk about emojis and language and mathematical theorems and, I don’t know, more sophisticated things at different scale, at a smaller scale than molecules, at a larger scale than molecules, what detection… If we look at the difference between you and me, Lex and Lee, are we the same? Are we different?
So you’re talking about chemistry a lot today. We have standardized detection systems of how to compare molecules. So when you start to talk about emojis and language and mathematical theorems and, I don’t know, more sophisticated things at different scale, at a smaller scale than molecules, at a larger scale than molecules, what detection… If we look at the difference between you and me, Lex and Lee, are we the same? Are we different?
Lee Cronin
Sure. I mean, of course we’re different close up, but if you zoom out a little bit, we will morphologically look the same. High in characteristics, hair length, stuff like that.
Sure. I mean, of course we’re different close up, but if you zoom out a little bit, we will morphologically look the same. High in characteristics, hair length, stuff like that.
Lex Fridman
Well, also, the species and-
Well, also, the species and-
Lee Cronin
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Lex Fridman
… and also there’s a sense why we’re both from earth.
… and also there’s a sense why we’re both from earth.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, I agree. I mean, this is the power of assembly theory in that regard. So if everything… So the way to look at it, if you have a box of objects, if they’re all indistinguishable, then using your technique, what you then do is you then look at the assembly index. Now, if the assembly index of them is really low and they’re all indistinguishable, then they’re telling you that you have to go to another resolution. So that would be, it is a sliding scale. It’s nice.
Yeah, I agree. I mean, this is the power of assembly theory in that regard. So if everything… So the way to look at it, if you have a box of objects, if they’re all indistinguishable, then using your technique, what you then do is you then look at the assembly index. Now, if the assembly index of them is really low and they’re all indistinguishable, then they’re telling you that you have to go to another resolution. So that would be, it is a sliding scale. It’s nice.
Lex Fridman
Got it. So those two are attentional with each other.
Got it. So those two are attentional with each other.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
The number of copies and the assembly index.
The number of copies and the assembly index.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
That’s really, really interesting. So, okay. So you show up to a new planet, you’ll be doing what?
That’s really, really interesting. So, okay. So you show up to a new planet, you’ll be doing what?
Lee Cronin
I would do mass spec. I would bring-
I would do mass spec. I would bring-
Lex Fridman
On a sample of what? First of all, how big of a scoop do you take? Do you just take a scoop? What… So we’re looking for primitive life.
On a sample of what? First of all, how big of a scoop do you take? Do you just take a scoop? What… So we’re looking for primitive life.
Lee Cronin
I would look… Yeah, so if you’re just going to Mars or Titan or Enceladus, or somewhere, so a number of ways of doing it. So you could take a large scoop or you go through the atmosphere and detect stuff. You could make a life meter, right? One of Sarah’s colleagues at ASU, Paul Davies, keeps calling it a life meter, which is quite a nice idea. Because you think about it, if you’ve got a living system that’s producing these highly complex molecules and they drift away, and they’re in a highly demanding environment, they could be burnt, right? So they could just be falling apart. So you want to sniff a little bit of complexity and say warmer, warmer, warmer. Oh, we’ve found life, we found the alien. We’ve found the alien Elon Musk, smoking a joint in the bottom of the cave on Mars, or Elon himself, whatever, right?
I would look… Yeah, so if you’re just going to Mars or Titan or Enceladus, or somewhere, so a number of ways of doing it. So you could take a large scoop or you go through the atmosphere and detect stuff. You could make a life meter, right? One of Sarah’s colleagues at ASU, Paul Davies, keeps calling it a life meter, which is quite a nice idea. Because you think about it, if you’ve got a living system that’s producing these highly complex molecules and they drift away, and they’re in a highly demanding environment, they could be burnt, right? So they could just be falling apart. So you want to sniff a little bit of complexity and say warmer, warmer, warmer. Oh, we’ve found life, we found the alien. We’ve found the alien Elon Musk, smoking a joint in the bottom of the cave on Mars, or Elon himself, whatever, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Mm-hmm.
Yeah. Mm-hmm.
Lee Cronin
You say, “Okay, found it.” So what you can do is a mass spectrometer, you could just look for things in the gas phase or you go on the surface, drill down, because you want to find molecules that are… Well, you’ve either got to find the source, living system, because the problem with just looking for complexity is it gets burnt away. So in a harsh environment on, say, on the surface of Mars, there’s a very low probability that you’re going to find really complex molecules because of all the radiation and so on.
You say, “Okay, found it.” So what you can do is a mass spectrometer, you could just look for things in the gas phase or you go on the surface, drill down, because you want to find molecules that are… Well, you’ve either got to find the source, living system, because the problem with just looking for complexity is it gets burnt away. So in a harsh environment on, say, on the surface of Mars, there’s a very low probability that you’re going to find really complex molecules because of all the radiation and so on.
If you drill down a little bit, you could drill down a bit into soil that’s billions of years old. Then I would put in some solvent, water, alcohol, or something, or take a scoop, make it volatile, put it into the mass spectrometer and just try and detect high complexity, high abundant molecules. And if you get them, hey, presto, you can have evidence of life. Wouldn’t that then be great if you could say, “Okay, we’ve found evidence of life, now we want to keep the life meter, keep searching for more and more complexity,” until you actually find living cells. And you can get those new living cells and then you could bring them back to earth or you could try and sequence them. You could see that they have different DNA and proteins.
Lex Fridman
Go along the gradient of the life meter.
Go along the gradient of the life meter.
Lee Cronin
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
How would you build a life meter? Let’s say we’re together, starting new-
How would you build a life meter? Let’s say we’re together, starting new-
Lee Cronin
Just a mass spectrometer.
Just a mass spectrometer.
Lex Fridman
… new company, launching a life-
… new company, launching a life-
Lee Cronin
Mass spectrometer would be the first way of doing it. Just take-
Mass spectrometer would be the first way of doing it. Just take-
Lex Fridman
No, no, no, but that’s one of the major components of it. But I’m talking about-
No, no, no, but that’s one of the major components of it. But I’m talking about-
Lee Cronin
I would-
I would-
Lex Fridman
… if it’s a device and branding, logo we got to talk about-
… if it’s a device and branding, logo we got to talk about-
Lee Cronin
All right.
All right.
Lex Fridman
… that’s later. But what’s the input and what’s the… How do you get to the metered output?
… that’s later. But what’s the input and what’s the… How do you get to the metered output?
Lee Cronin
So I would take a… So my life meter, our life meter. There you go.
So I would take a… So my life meter, our life meter. There you go.
Lex Fridman
Oh, thank you.
Oh, thank you.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, you’re welcome, would have both infrared and mass spec. It would have two ports so it could shine a light. And so, what it would do is you would have a vacuum chamber and you would have an electrostatic analyzer, and you’d have a monochromator to producing infrared. You’d add the sum. So you’d take a scoop of the sample, put it in the life meter, it would then add a solvent or heat up the sample so some volatiles come off. The volatiles would then be put into the mass… into electrostatic trap, and you’d weigh the molecules and fragment them. Alternatively, you’d shine infrared light on them and you count number of bands. But you’d have to, in that case, do some separation, because you want to separate… And so, in mass spec, it’s really nice and convenient, because you can separate electrostatically, but you need to have that.
Yeah, you’re welcome, would have both infrared and mass spec. It would have two ports so it could shine a light. And so, what it would do is you would have a vacuum chamber and you would have an electrostatic analyzer, and you’d have a monochromator to producing infrared. You’d add the sum. So you’d take a scoop of the sample, put it in the life meter, it would then add a solvent or heat up the sample so some volatiles come off. The volatiles would then be put into the mass… into electrostatic trap, and you’d weigh the molecules and fragment them. Alternatively, you’d shine infrared light on them and you count number of bands. But you’d have to, in that case, do some separation, because you want to separate… And so, in mass spec, it’s really nice and convenient, because you can separate electrostatically, but you need to have that.
Lex Fridman
Can you do it in real time?
Can you do it in real time?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, pretty much. Pretty much, yeah. So let’s go all the way back. Okay, we’re really going to get this-
Yeah, pretty much. Pretty much, yeah. So let’s go all the way back. Okay, we’re really going to get this-
Lex Fridman
Let’s go.
Let’s go.
Lee Cronin
… Lex’s life… Lex and Lee’s life meter.
… Lex’s life… Lex and Lee’s life meter.
Lex Fridman
No, I like Lex and Lee. It’s a good ring to it.
No, I like Lex and Lee. It’s a good ring to it.
Lee Cronin
All right. So you have a vacuum chamber, you have a little nose. The nose would have some, a packing material. So you would take your sample, add it onto the nose, add a solvent or a gas. It would then be sucked up the nose and that would be separated, using what we call chromatography. And then as each band comes off the nose, we’ll then do mass spec and infrared. And in the case of the infrared, count the number of bands, in the case of mass spec, count the number of fragments and weigh it.
All right. So you have a vacuum chamber, you have a little nose. The nose would have some, a packing material. So you would take your sample, add it onto the nose, add a solvent or a gas. It would then be sucked up the nose and that would be separated, using what we call chromatography. And then as each band comes off the nose, we’ll then do mass spec and infrared. And in the case of the infrared, count the number of bands, in the case of mass spec, count the number of fragments and weigh it.
And then the further up in molecular weight range for the mass spec, and the number of bands, you go up and up and up from the dead, interesting, interesting, over the threshold, oh my gosh, earth life, and then right up to the batshit crazy, this is definitely alien intelligence that’s made this life, right? You could almost go all the way there. Same in the infrared. And pretty simple.
The thing that is really problematical is that for many years, decades, what people have done, and I can’t blame them, is they’ve rather, they’ve been obsessing about small biomarkers that we find on earth, amino acids, like single amino acids or evidence of small molecules and these things, and looking for those while I’m looking for complexity. The beautiful thing about this is you can look for complexity without earth chemistry bias or earth biology bias. So assembly theory is just a way of saying, hey, complexity in abundance is evidence of selection. That’s how our universal life meter will work.
Lex Fridman
Complexity in abundance is evidence of selection. Okay. So let’s apply our life meter to earth. If we were just to apply assembly index measurements to earth, what kind of stuff are going to get? What’s impressive about-
Complexity in abundance is evidence of selection. Okay. So let’s apply our life meter to earth. If we were just to apply assembly index measurements to earth, what kind of stuff are going to get? What’s impressive about-
Lee Cronin
So-
So-
Lex Fridman
… some of the complexity on earth?
… some of the complexity on earth?
Lee Cronin
… So we did this a few years ago when I was trying to convince NASA and colleagues that this technique could work. And honestly, it’s so funny, because everyone’s like, “No, it ain’t going to work.” And it was just like, because the chemists were saying, “Of course there are complicated molecules out there you can detect that just form randomly.” And I was like, “Really?” That was like, it’s a bit like, I don’t know, someone saying, “Of course, Darwin’s textbook was just written randomly by some monkeys and a typewriter.” Just for me, it was like, “Really?” And I’ve pushed a lot on the chemists now. And I think most of them are on board, but not totally. I really had some big arguments, but the copy number caught there. Because I think I confused the chemists by saying one-off. And then when I made clear about the copy number, I think that made it a little bit easier.
… So we did this a few years ago when I was trying to convince NASA and colleagues that this technique could work. And honestly, it’s so funny, because everyone’s like, “No, it ain’t going to work.” And it was just like, because the chemists were saying, “Of course there are complicated molecules out there you can detect that just form randomly.” And I was like, “Really?” That was like, it’s a bit like, I don’t know, someone saying, “Of course, Darwin’s textbook was just written randomly by some monkeys and a typewriter.” Just for me, it was like, “Really?” And I’ve pushed a lot on the chemists now. And I think most of them are on board, but not totally. I really had some big arguments, but the copy number caught there. Because I think I confused the chemists by saying one-off. And then when I made clear about the copy number, I think that made it a little bit easier.
Lex Fridman
Just to clarify, a chemist might say that, of course out there, outside of earth there’s complex molecules?
Just to clarify, a chemist might say that, of course out there, outside of earth there’s complex molecules?
Lee Cronin
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Okay. And then you’re saying, “Wait a minute, that’s like saying, ‘Of course there’s aliens out there.'” Like you-
Okay. And then you’re saying, “Wait a minute, that’s like saying, ‘Of course there’s aliens out there.'” Like you-
Lee Cronin
Yeah, exactly that.
Yeah, exactly that.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Lee Cronin
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
You clarify that, that’s actually a very interesting question and we should be looking for complex molecules of which the copy number is two or greater.
You clarify that, that’s actually a very interesting question and we should be looking for complex molecules of which the copy number is two or greater.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, exactly. So on earth, so coming back to earth, what we did is we took a whole bunch of samples and we were running prebiotic chemistry experiments in the lab. We took various inorganic minerals and extracted them, look at the volatile. Because there’s a special way of treating minerals and polymers in assembly theory. In this, in our life machine, we’re looking at molecules. We don’t care about polymers, because they don’t, they’re not volatile. You can’t hold them. How can you make… If you can’t discern that they’re identical, then it’s very difficult for you to work out if this, undergone selection or they’re just a random mess.
Yeah, exactly. So on earth, so coming back to earth, what we did is we took a whole bunch of samples and we were running prebiotic chemistry experiments in the lab. We took various inorganic minerals and extracted them, look at the volatile. Because there’s a special way of treating minerals and polymers in assembly theory. In this, in our life machine, we’re looking at molecules. We don’t care about polymers, because they don’t, they’re not volatile. You can’t hold them. How can you make… If you can’t discern that they’re identical, then it’s very difficult for you to work out if this, undergone selection or they’re just a random mess.
Same with some minerals, but we can come back to that. So basically what you do, we’ve got a whole loads of samples, inorganic ones, we got a load of, we got Scotch whiskey and also got-
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Lee Cronin
… took a odd bag, which is one of my favorite whiskeys, which is very peaty. And another-
… took a odd bag, which is one of my favorite whiskeys, which is very peaty. And another-
Lex Fridman
What’s peaty mean?
What’s peaty mean?
Lee Cronin
It is like… So the way that in Scotland, in Isla, which is a little island, the scotch, the whiskey is let to mature in barrels. It’s said that the peat, the complex molecules in the peat find their way through into the whiskey, and that’s what gives it this intense brown color and really complex flavor. It’s literally molecular complexity that does that. And so, vodka’s the complete opposite. It’s just pure, right?-
It is like… So the way that in Scotland, in Isla, which is a little island, the scotch, the whiskey is let to mature in barrels. It’s said that the peat, the complex molecules in the peat find their way through into the whiskey, and that’s what gives it this intense brown color and really complex flavor. It’s literally molecular complexity that does that. And so, vodka’s the complete opposite. It’s just pure, right?-
Lex Fridman
So the better the whiskey, the higher the assembly index, the higher the assembly index, the better the whiskey.
So the better the whiskey, the higher the assembly index, the higher the assembly index, the better the whiskey.
Lee Cronin
I mean, I really love deep, peaty Scottish whiskeys. Near my house, there is one of the lowland distilleries, called Glengoyne. It’s still beautiful whiskey but not as complex. So for fun, I took some Glengoyne whiskey in our bag and put them into the mass spec and measured the assembly index. I also got E. coli. So the way we do it, take the E. coli, break the cell apart, take it all apart. And also got some beer. And people were ridiculing us saying, “Oh, beer is evidence of complexity.”
I mean, I really love deep, peaty Scottish whiskeys. Near my house, there is one of the lowland distilleries, called Glengoyne. It’s still beautiful whiskey but not as complex. So for fun, I took some Glengoyne whiskey in our bag and put them into the mass spec and measured the assembly index. I also got E. coli. So the way we do it, take the E. coli, break the cell apart, take it all apart. And also got some beer. And people were ridiculing us saying, “Oh, beer is evidence of complexity.”
And one of the computational complexity people, it was just throwing, yeah… He’s very vigorous in his disagreement of assembly theory, was just saying, “You don’t know what you’re doing. Even beer is more complicated than human.” What he didn’t realize is that it’s not beer, per se, it’s taking the yeast extract, taking the extract, breaking the cells, extracting the molecules, and just looking at the profile of the molecules, see if there’s anything over the threshold. And we also put in a really complex molecule, Taxol.
So we took all of these, but also NASA gave us, I think, five samples, and they wouldn’t tell us what they are. They said, “No, we don’t believe you’re going to get this to work.” And they really gave us some super complex samples. And they gave us two fossils, one that was a million years old and one was at 10,000 years old, something from Antarctica, seabed. They gave us some Murchison and meteorite, and a few others. Put them through the system. So we took all the samples, treat them all identically, put them into mass spec, fragmented them, counted.
And in this case, implicit in the measurement was we, in mass spec, you only detect peaks when you’ve got more than, say, let’s say 10,000 identical molecules. So the copy number’s already baked in, but wasn’t quantified, which is super important there. This was in the first paper. Because I was like, it’s abundant, of course.
And when you then took it all out, we found that the biological samples gave you molecules that had an assembly index greater than 15. And all the abiotic samples were less than 15. And then we took the NASA samples and we looked at the ones that were more than 15, less than 15, and we gave them back to NASA, and they’re like, “Oh, gosh. Yep, dead, living, dead, living. You got it.” And that’s what we found on earth.
Lex Fridman
That’s a success.
That’s a success.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. Oh yeah, resounding success.
Yeah. Oh yeah, resounding success.
Lex Fridman
Can you just go back to the beer and the E. coli? So what’s the assembly index on those?
Can you just go back to the beer and the E. coli? So what’s the assembly index on those?
Lee Cronin
So what you were able to do is, the assembly index of… We found high assembly index molecules originating from the beer sample and the E. coli sample.
So what you were able to do is, the assembly index of… We found high assembly index molecules originating from the beer sample and the E. coli sample.
Lex Fridman
Yeast in the beer.
Yeast in the beer.
Evolution of life on Earth
Lee Cronin
I didn’t know which one was higher. We didn’t really do any detail there. Because now we are doing that. Because one of the things we’ve done, it’s a secret, but I can tell you. I think it’s-
I didn’t know which one was higher. We didn’t really do any detail there. Because now we are doing that. Because one of the things we’ve done, it’s a secret, but I can tell you. I think it’s-
Lex Fridman
Nobody’s listening.
Nobody’s listening.
Lee Cronin
… well, is that we’ve just mapped the tree of life using assembly theory, because everyone said, ” Oh, you can’t do anything from biology.” And what we’re able to do is, so I think there’s three, well, two ways of doing tree of life… Well, three ways actually.
… well, is that we’ve just mapped the tree of life using assembly theory, because everyone said, ” Oh, you can’t do anything from biology.” And what we’re able to do is, so I think there’s three, well, two ways of doing tree of life… Well, three ways actually.
Lex Fridman
What’s the tree of life?
What’s the tree of life?
Lee Cronin
So the tree of life is basically tracing back the history of life on earth, all the different species, going back who evolved from what. And it all goes all the way back to the first life forms, and they branch off. And you have plant kingdom, the animal kingdom, the fungi kingdom, and different branches all the way up. And the way this was classically done, and I’m no evolutionary biologist. The evolutionary biologists tell me every day, at least 10 times… I want to be one though. I like biology, it’s cool.
So the tree of life is basically tracing back the history of life on earth, all the different species, going back who evolved from what. And it all goes all the way back to the first life forms, and they branch off. And you have plant kingdom, the animal kingdom, the fungi kingdom, and different branches all the way up. And the way this was classically done, and I’m no evolutionary biologist. The evolutionary biologists tell me every day, at least 10 times… I want to be one though. I like biology, it’s cool.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s very cool.
Yeah, it’s very cool.
Lee Cronin
But basically-
But basically-
Lex Fridman
Evolutionary.
Evolutionary.
Lee Cronin
… What Darwin and Mendeleev, and all these people do is just, they draw pictures and they [inaudible 00:54:20] taxa. They were able to draw pictures and say, “Oh, these look like common classes.”
… What Darwin and Mendeleev, and all these people do is just, they draw pictures and they [inaudible 00:54:20] taxa. They were able to draw pictures and say, “Oh, these look like common classes.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
Then…
Then…
Lex Fridman
They’re artists really. They’re just…
They’re artists really. They’re just…
Lee Cronin
They were able to find out a lot, right? And looking at vertebrates and vertebrates, Cambrian explosion and all this stuff. And then came the genomic revolution and suddenly, everyone used gene sequencing. And Craig Venter’s a good example. I think he’s gone around the world in his yacht, just picking up samples, looking for new species. Where he’s just found new species of life just from sequencing. It’s amazing. So you have taxonomy, you have sequencing, and then you can also do a little bit of molecular archeology, like measure the samples and form some inference.
They were able to find out a lot, right? And looking at vertebrates and vertebrates, Cambrian explosion and all this stuff. And then came the genomic revolution and suddenly, everyone used gene sequencing. And Craig Venter’s a good example. I think he’s gone around the world in his yacht, just picking up samples, looking for new species. Where he’s just found new species of life just from sequencing. It’s amazing. So you have taxonomy, you have sequencing, and then you can also do a little bit of molecular archeology, like measure the samples and form some inference.
What we did is we were able to fingerprint… So we took a load of random samples from all of biology and we used mass spectrometry. And what we did now is not just look for individual molecules, but we looked for coexisting molecules where they had to look at their joint assembly space. And we were able to cut them apart and undergo recursion in the mass spec and infer some relationships. And we’re able to recapitulate the tree of life using mass spectroscopy, no sequencing and no drawing.
Lex Fridman
All right. Can you try to say that again, with a little more detail? So recreating, what does it take to recreate the tree of life? What does the reverse engineering process look like here?
All right. Can you try to say that again, with a little more detail? So recreating, what does it take to recreate the tree of life? What does the reverse engineering process look like here?
Lee Cronin
So what you do is you take an unknown sample, you bung it into the mass spec, you get… Because this comes from what you’re asking, what do you see in E. coli?
So what you do is you take an unknown sample, you bung it into the mass spec, you get… Because this comes from what you’re asking, what do you see in E. coli?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Lee Cronin
And so, in E. coli, you don’t just see, it’s not the most sophisticated cells on earth make the most sophisticated molecules. It is the coexistence of lots of complex molecules above a threshold. And so, what we realized is you could fingerprint different life forms. So fungi make really complicated molecules. Why? Because they can’t move. They have to make everything onsite.
And so, in E. coli, you don’t just see, it’s not the most sophisticated cells on earth make the most sophisticated molecules. It is the coexistence of lots of complex molecules above a threshold. And so, what we realized is you could fingerprint different life forms. So fungi make really complicated molecules. Why? Because they can’t move. They have to make everything onsite.
Whereas, some animals are lazy, they can just go eat the fungi, and they don’t need to make very much. And so, what you do is you look at the, so you take, I don’t know, the fingerprint, maybe the top number of high molecular weight molecules you find in the sample, you fragment them to get their assembly indices, and then what you can do is you can infer common origins of molecules. You can do a molecular… When the reverse engineering of the assembly space, you can infer common roots and look at what’s called the joint assembly space.
But let’s translate that into the experiment. Take a sample, bung it in the mass spec, take the top, say, 10 molecules, fragment them, and that gives you one fingerprint. Then you do it for another sample, you get another fingerprint. Now the question is you say, “Hey, are these samples the same or different?” And that’s what we’ve been able to do and by basically looking at the assembly space that these molecules create. Without any knowledge of assembly theory, you are unable to do it. With a knowledge of assembly theory, you can reconstruct the tree.
Lex Fridman
How does knowing if they’re the same or different give you the tree?
How does knowing if they’re the same or different give you the tree?
Lee Cronin
Let’s go to two leaves on different branches on the tree, right? What you can do, by counting the number of differences, you can estimate how far away their origin was.
Let’s go to two leaves on different branches on the tree, right? What you can do, by counting the number of differences, you can estimate how far away their origin was.
Lex Fridman
Got it.
Got it.
Lee Cronin
And that’s what we do, and it just works. But when we realized you could even use assembly theory to recapitulate the tree of life with no gene sequencing, we were like, “Huh.”
And that’s what we do, and it just works. But when we realized you could even use assembly theory to recapitulate the tree of life with no gene sequencing, we were like, “Huh.”
Lex Fridman
So this is looking at samples that exist today in the world.
So this is looking at samples that exist today in the world.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What about things that are no longer exist? I mean, the tree contains information about the past-
What about things that are no longer exist? I mean, the tree contains information about the past-
Lee Cronin
I would-
I would-
Lex Fridman
… some of it is gone.
… some of it is gone.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, absolutely. I would love to get old fossil samples and apply assembly theory, mass spec, and see if we can find new forms of life that have, that are no longer amenable to gene sequencing, because the DNA is all gone. Because DNA and RNA’s quite unstable, but some of the more complex molecules might be there. They might give you a hint something new, or wouldn’t it be great if you-
Yeah, absolutely. I would love to get old fossil samples and apply assembly theory, mass spec, and see if we can find new forms of life that have, that are no longer amenable to gene sequencing, because the DNA is all gone. Because DNA and RNA’s quite unstable, but some of the more complex molecules might be there. They might give you a hint something new, or wouldn’t it be great if you-
Lex Fridman
I understand.
I understand.
Lee Cronin
… if you find a sample that’s worth really persevering and doing the proper extraction to PCR and so on and then sequence it, and then put it together-
… if you find a sample that’s worth really persevering and doing the proper extraction to PCR and so on and then sequence it, and then put it together-
Lex Fridman
So when a thing dies, you can still get some information about its complexity.
So when a thing dies, you can still get some information about its complexity.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. And it appears that you can do some dating. Now there are really good techniques. There’s radiocarbon dating, there is longer dating, going looking at radioactive minerals and so on. And you can also, in bone, you can look at… What happens after something dies, is you get what’s called racemization, where the chirality in the polymers basically changes and you get decomposition, and the deviation from the pure enantiomer to the mixture, you can have, it gives you a timescale on it, half-life, so you can date when it died. I want to use assembly theory to see if I can use it and date death and things, and trace the tree of life and also decomposition of molecules.
Yeah. And it appears that you can do some dating. Now there are really good techniques. There’s radiocarbon dating, there is longer dating, going looking at radioactive minerals and so on. And you can also, in bone, you can look at… What happens after something dies, is you get what’s called racemization, where the chirality in the polymers basically changes and you get decomposition, and the deviation from the pure enantiomer to the mixture, you can have, it gives you a timescale on it, half-life, so you can date when it died. I want to use assembly theory to see if I can use it and date death and things, and trace the tree of life and also decomposition of molecules.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it’s possible?
Do you think it’s possible?
Lee Cronin
Oh yeah, without a doubt. It may not be better than what… I was just at conference where there’s some brilliant people, looking isotope enrichment and looking at how life enriches isotopes, and they’re really sophisticated stuff that they’re doing. But I think there’s some fun to be had there, because it gives you another dimension of dating. How old is this molecule in terms of, or more importantly, how long ago was this molecule produced by life? More complex the molecule, the more prospect for decomposition, oxidation, reorganization, loss of chirality, and all that jazz.
Oh yeah, without a doubt. It may not be better than what… I was just at conference where there’s some brilliant people, looking isotope enrichment and looking at how life enriches isotopes, and they’re really sophisticated stuff that they’re doing. But I think there’s some fun to be had there, because it gives you another dimension of dating. How old is this molecule in terms of, or more importantly, how long ago was this molecule produced by life? More complex the molecule, the more prospect for decomposition, oxidation, reorganization, loss of chirality, and all that jazz.
But what life also does is it enriches. As you get older, the amount of carbon-13 in you goes up, because of the way the bonding is in carbon-13. So it has a slightly different strength, bond strength, than you. It’s called a kinetic isotope effect. So you can literally date how old you are or when you stop metabolizing. So you could date someone’s… how old they are, I think. I’m making this up, this might be right, but I think it’s roughly right. The amount of carbon-13 you have in you, you can estimate how old you are.
Lex Fridman
How old living humans are, or living organism?
How old living humans are, or living organism?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, yeah. You could say, “Oh, this person is 10 years old and this person is 30 years old, because they’ve been metabolizing more carbon and they’ve accumulated it.” That’s the basic idea. It’s probably completely wrong timescale-
Yeah, yeah. You could say, “Oh, this person is 10 years old and this person is 30 years old, because they’ve been metabolizing more carbon and they’ve accumulated it.” That’s the basic idea. It’s probably completely wrong timescale-
Response to criticism
Lex Fridman
Signatures of chemistry are fascinating. So you’ve been saying a lot of chemistry examples for assembly theory. What if we zoom out and look at a bigger scale of an object, like really complex objects, like humans or living organisms that are made up of millions or billions of other organisms, how do you try to apply assembly theory to that?
Signatures of chemistry are fascinating. So you’ve been saying a lot of chemistry examples for assembly theory. What if we zoom out and look at a bigger scale of an object, like really complex objects, like humans or living organisms that are made up of millions or billions of other organisms, how do you try to apply assembly theory to that?
Lee Cronin
At the moment, we should be able to do this to morphology in cells. So we’re looking at cell surfaces, and really, I’m to trying to extend further. It’s just that we work so hard to get this paper out and people to start discussing the ideas, but it’s kind of funny, because I think the penny is falling on this. So yeah-
At the moment, we should be able to do this to morphology in cells. So we’re looking at cell surfaces, and really, I’m to trying to extend further. It’s just that we work so hard to get this paper out and people to start discussing the ideas, but it’s kind of funny, because I think the penny is falling on this. So yeah-
Lex Fridman
What does that even… What’s it mean for a penny to be-
What does that even… What’s it mean for a penny to be-
Lee Cronin
I mean, no, the penny’s dropped, right? A lot of people were like, “It’s rubbish, it’s rubbish. You’ve insulted me. It’s wrong.” I mean, the paper got published on the 4th of October. It had 2.3 million engagements on Twitter and it’s been downloaded over a few hundred thousand times. And someone actually said to me, wrote to me and said, “This is an example of really bad writing and what not to do.” And I was like, if all of my papers got read this much, because that’s the objective, if I have a publishing a paper, I want people to read it. I want to write that badly again.
I mean, no, the penny’s dropped, right? A lot of people were like, “It’s rubbish, it’s rubbish. You’ve insulted me. It’s wrong.” I mean, the paper got published on the 4th of October. It had 2.3 million engagements on Twitter and it’s been downloaded over a few hundred thousand times. And someone actually said to me, wrote to me and said, “This is an example of really bad writing and what not to do.” And I was like, if all of my papers got read this much, because that’s the objective, if I have a publishing a paper, I want people to read it. I want to write that badly again.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I don’t know, what’s the deep insight here about the negativity in the space. I think it’s probably the immune system of the scientific community, making sure that there’s no bullshit that gets published and that it can overfy, it can do a lot of damage. It can shut down conversations in a way that’s not productive.
Yeah. I don’t know, what’s the deep insight here about the negativity in the space. I think it’s probably the immune system of the scientific community, making sure that there’s no bullshit that gets published and that it can overfy, it can do a lot of damage. It can shut down conversations in a way that’s not productive.
Lee Cronin
And I go back, I mean, I’ll answer your question about the hierarchy in assembly, but let’s go back to the perception people saying the paper was badly written. I mean, of course we could improve it. We could always improve the clarity.
And I go back, I mean, I’ll answer your question about the hierarchy in assembly, but let’s go back to the perception people saying the paper was badly written. I mean, of course we could improve it. We could always improve the clarity.
Lex Fridman
Let’s go there before we go to the hierarchy.
Let’s go there before we go to the hierarchy.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It has been criticized quite a bit, the paper. What has been some criticism that you’ve found most powerful, that you can understand and can you explain it?
It has been criticized quite a bit, the paper. What has been some criticism that you’ve found most powerful, that you can understand and can you explain it?
Lee Cronin
Yes. The most exciting criticism came from the evolutionary biologist telling me that he thought that origin of life was a solved problem. And I was like, “Whoa, we’re really onto something, because it’s clearly not.” And when you poked them on that they just said, “No. You you don’t understand evolution.” And I said, “No, no, I don’t think you understand that evolution had to occur before biology and there’s a gap.” That was really for me, that misunderstanding, and that did cause an immune response, which was really interesting.
Yes. The most exciting criticism came from the evolutionary biologist telling me that he thought that origin of life was a solved problem. And I was like, “Whoa, we’re really onto something, because it’s clearly not.” And when you poked them on that they just said, “No. You you don’t understand evolution.” And I said, “No, no, I don’t think you understand that evolution had to occur before biology and there’s a gap.” That was really for me, that misunderstanding, and that did cause an immune response, which was really interesting.
The second thing was the fact that physicists, the physicists were actually really polite, really nice about it. But they just said, “Huh, we’re not really sure about the initial conditions thing. But this is a really big debate that we should certainly get into, because the emergence of life was not encoded in the initial conditions of the universe.” And I think assembly theory shows why it can’t be. I’ll say that-
Lex Fridman
Okay. Sure. If you could say that again.
Okay. Sure. If you could say that again.
Lee Cronin
The origin of, the emergence of life was not and cannot, in principle, be encoded in the initial conditions of the universe.
The origin of, the emergence of life was not and cannot, in principle, be encoded in the initial conditions of the universe.
Lex Fridman
Just to clarify what you mean by life is what, high assembly index objects?
Just to clarify what you mean by life is what, high assembly index objects?
Lee Cronin
Yeah. And this goes back to your favorite subject.
Yeah. And this goes back to your favorite subject.
Lex Fridman
What’s that?
What’s that?
Lee Cronin
Time.
Time.
Lex Fridman
Right. So why? What does time have to do with it?
Right. So why? What does time have to do with it?
Lee Cronin
I mean, probably we can come back to it later, but I think it might be, if we have time.
I mean, probably we can come back to it later, but I think it might be, if we have time.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
But I think that, I think I now understand how to explain how… Lots of people got angry with the assembly paper, but also, the ramifications of this is how time is fundamental in the universe and this notion of commentorial spaces. And there are so many layers on this, but you have to become an… I think you have to become an intuitionist mathematician and you have to abandon Platonic mathematics. And also, Platonic mathematics is left physics astray, but there’s a lot to unpack there. So we can go to the-
But I think that, I think I now understand how to explain how… Lots of people got angry with the assembly paper, but also, the ramifications of this is how time is fundamental in the universe and this notion of commentorial spaces. And there are so many layers on this, but you have to become an… I think you have to become an intuitionist mathematician and you have to abandon Platonic mathematics. And also, Platonic mathematics is left physics astray, but there’s a lot to unpack there. So we can go to the-
Lex Fridman
Platonic mathematic, okay. It’s okay, the evolutionary biologists criticized, because the origin of life is understood and not, it doesn’t require an explanation that involves physics.
Platonic mathematic, okay. It’s okay, the evolutionary biologists criticized, because the origin of life is understood and not, it doesn’t require an explanation that involves physics.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. It-
Yeah. It-
Lex Fridman
That’s their statement.
That’s their statement.
Lee Cronin
Well, I mean, they said lots of confusing statements. Basically, I realized the evolutionary biology community that were vocal, and some of them were really rude, really spiteful, and needlessly so, right? Because look, I didn’t, people misunderstand publication as well. Some of the peoples have said, “How dare this be published in Nature. What a terrible journal.” And it really, and I watched, said to people, “Look, this is a brand new idea that’s not only potentially going to change the way we look at biology, it’s going to change the way we look at the universe.”
Well, I mean, they said lots of confusing statements. Basically, I realized the evolutionary biology community that were vocal, and some of them were really rude, really spiteful, and needlessly so, right? Because look, I didn’t, people misunderstand publication as well. Some of the peoples have said, “How dare this be published in Nature. What a terrible journal.” And it really, and I watched, said to people, “Look, this is a brand new idea that’s not only potentially going to change the way we look at biology, it’s going to change the way we look at the universe.”
And everyone’s saying, “How dare, how dare you be so grandiose?” I’m like, “No, no, no. This is not hype. We’re not saying we’ve invented some, I don’t know, we’ve discovered a alien in a closet somewhere, just for hype. We genuinely mean this to genuinely have the impact or asked the question. And the way people jumped on that was a really bad precedent for young people who want to actually do something new.
Because this makes a bold claim, and the chances are that it’s not correct. But what I wanted to do is a couple of things. Is I wanted to make a bold claim that was precise and testable and correctable. Not another wooly information-in-biology argument, information-churring machine, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. A concrete series of statements that can be falsified and explored, and either the theory could be destroyed or built upon.
Lex Fridman
Well, what about the criticism of you’re just putting a bunch of sexy names on something that’s already obvious?
Well, what about the criticism of you’re just putting a bunch of sexy names on something that’s already obvious?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, that’s really good. So the assembly index of a molecule is not obvious. No one had measure it before. And no one has thought to quantify selection, complexity, and copy number before, in such a primitive, quantifiable way. I think the nice thing about this paper-
Yeah, that’s really good. So the assembly index of a molecule is not obvious. No one had measure it before. And no one has thought to quantify selection, complexity, and copy number before, in such a primitive, quantifiable way. I think the nice thing about this paper-
Lee Cronin
… quantifiable way. I think the nice thing about this paper, this paper is a tribute to all the people that understand that biology does something very interesting. Some people call it negentropy. Some people call it, think about organizational principles that lots of people were not shocked by the paper because they’d done it before. A lot of the arguments we got, some people said, “Oh, it’s rubbish. Oh, by the way, I had this idea 20 years before.” I was like, ” Which one?” Is it the rubbish part or the really revolutionary part.
… quantifiable way. I think the nice thing about this paper, this paper is a tribute to all the people that understand that biology does something very interesting. Some people call it negentropy. Some people call it, think about organizational principles that lots of people were not shocked by the paper because they’d done it before. A lot of the arguments we got, some people said, “Oh, it’s rubbish. Oh, by the way, I had this idea 20 years before.” I was like, ” Which one?” Is it the rubbish part or the really revolutionary part.
So this kind of plucked two strings at once. It plucked the there is something interesting that biology are, we can see around this, but we haven’t quantified yet. And what this is, is the first stab at quantifying that, so the fact that people said “This is obvious.” But if it’s obvious, why have you not done it?
Lex Fridman
Sure. But there’s a few things to say there. One is, this is in part of philosophical framework because it’s not like you can apply this generally to any object in the universe. It’s very chemistry focused.
Sure. But there’s a few things to say there. One is, this is in part of philosophical framework because it’s not like you can apply this generally to any object in the universe. It’s very chemistry focused.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, well, I think you will be able to, we just haven’t got there robustly. So if we can say how can we… Let’s go up a level. So if we go up from level, let’s go up from molecules to cells because you would jump to people and I jump to emoticons and both are good and they will be assembly…
Yeah, well, I think you will be able to, we just haven’t got there robustly. So if we can say how can we… Let’s go up a level. So if we go up from level, let’s go up from molecules to cells because you would jump to people and I jump to emoticons and both are good and they will be assembly…
Lex Fridman
Lets stick with cells, yeah. Good point.
Lets stick with cells, yeah. Good point.
Lee Cronin
If we go from molecules to assemblies and let’s take acellular assembly. A nice thing about a cell is you can tell the difference between a eukaryote and a prokaryote, right? The organalles are specialized differently when then look at the cell surface and the cell surface has different glycosylation patterns and these cells will stick together. Now let’s go up a level in multicellular creatures you have cellular differentiation.
If we go from molecules to assemblies and let’s take acellular assembly. A nice thing about a cell is you can tell the difference between a eukaryote and a prokaryote, right? The organalles are specialized differently when then look at the cell surface and the cell surface has different glycosylation patterns and these cells will stick together. Now let’s go up a level in multicellular creatures you have cellular differentiation.
Now if you think about how embryos develop, you go all the way back, those cells undergo differentiation on a causal way that’s biomechanically a feedback between the genetics and biomechanics. I think we can use assembly theory to apply to tissue types. We can even apply it to different cell disease types. So that’s what we’re doing next. But we are trying to walk… The thing is, I’m trying to, I want a leap ahead to go, whoa, we apply it to culture. Clearly you can apply it to memes and culture. And we’ve also applied to assembly theory to CA’s and not as you think…
Lex Fridman
Cellular automaton, by the way.
Cellular automaton, by the way.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, yeah. Cellular automaton, not just as you think. Different CA rules were invented by different people at different times. And one of my coworkers, very talented chap basically was like, “Oh, I can realize that different people had different ideas with different rules and they copied each other and made slightly different cellular automaton rules and looked at them online.” And so he was able to refer an assembly index and copy number of rule, whatever, doing this thing. But I digress.
Yeah, yeah. Cellular automaton, not just as you think. Different CA rules were invented by different people at different times. And one of my coworkers, very talented chap basically was like, “Oh, I can realize that different people had different ideas with different rules and they copied each other and made slightly different cellular automaton rules and looked at them online.” And so he was able to refer an assembly index and copy number of rule, whatever, doing this thing. But I digress.
But it does show you can apply it at a higher scale. So what do we need to do to apply assembly theory to things? We need to agree, there’s a common set of building blocks. So in a cell, well, in a multicellular creature, you need to look back in time. So there is the initial cell, which the creature is fertilized and then starts to grow and then there is cell differentiation. And you have to then make that causal chain both on those. So that requires development of the organism in time. Or if you look at the cell surfaces and the cell types, they’ve got different features on the cell walls and inside the cell. So we’re building up, but obviously I want a leap to things like emoticons, language, mathematical theorems.
Lex Fridman
But that’s a very large number of steps to get from a molecule to the human brain.
But that’s a very large number of steps to get from a molecule to the human brain.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, and I think they are related, but in hierarchies of emergence. So you shouldn’t compare them. I mean the assembly index of a human brain, what does that even mean? Well, maybe we can look at the morphology of the human brain, say all human brains have these number of features in common. If they have those number… And then let’s look at a brain in a whale or a dolphin or a chimpanzee or a bird and say, “Okay, let’s look at the assembly indices and number of features in these.” And now the copy number is just the number of how many birds are there, how many chimpanzees are there, how many humans are there?
Yeah, and I think they are related, but in hierarchies of emergence. So you shouldn’t compare them. I mean the assembly index of a human brain, what does that even mean? Well, maybe we can look at the morphology of the human brain, say all human brains have these number of features in common. If they have those number… And then let’s look at a brain in a whale or a dolphin or a chimpanzee or a bird and say, “Okay, let’s look at the assembly indices and number of features in these.” And now the copy number is just the number of how many birds are there, how many chimpanzees are there, how many humans are there?
Lex Fridman
But then you have to discover for that the features that you would be looking for.
But then you have to discover for that the features that you would be looking for.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, and that means you need to have some idea of the anatomy.
Yeah, and that means you need to have some idea of the anatomy.
Lex Fridman
But is there an automated way to discover features?
But is there an automated way to discover features?
Lee Cronin
I guess so. And I think this is a good way to apply machine learning and image recognition just to basically characterize things.
I guess so. And I think this is a good way to apply machine learning and image recognition just to basically characterize things.
Lex Fridman
To apply compression to it, to see what emerges, and then use the features used as part of the compression, as the measurement of… As the thing that is searched for when you’re measuring assembly index and copy number.
To apply compression to it, to see what emerges, and then use the features used as part of the compression, as the measurement of… As the thing that is searched for when you’re measuring assembly index and copy number.
Lee Cronin
And the compression has to be, remember the assembly universe, which is you have to go from assembly possible to assembly contingent and that jump from… Because assembly possible all possible brains, all possible features all the time. But we know that on the tree of life and also on the lineage of life, going back to Luca, the human brain just didn’t spring into existence yesterday, it’s a long lineage of brains going all the way back. And so if we could do assembly theory to understand the development, not just in evolutionary history, but in biological development, as you grow, we are going to learn something more.
And the compression has to be, remember the assembly universe, which is you have to go from assembly possible to assembly contingent and that jump from… Because assembly possible all possible brains, all possible features all the time. But we know that on the tree of life and also on the lineage of life, going back to Luca, the human brain just didn’t spring into existence yesterday, it’s a long lineage of brains going all the way back. And so if we could do assembly theory to understand the development, not just in evolutionary history, but in biological development, as you grow, we are going to learn something more.
Lex Fridman
What would be amazing is if you can use assembly theory, this framework to show the increase in the assembly index associated with, I don’t know, cultures or pieces of text like language or images and so on and illustrate without knowing the data ahead of time, just kind like you did with NASA that you were able to demonstrate that it applies in those other contexts. I mean, and that probably wouldn’t at first, and you have to evolve the theory somehow. You have to change it, you have to expand it.
What would be amazing is if you can use assembly theory, this framework to show the increase in the assembly index associated with, I don’t know, cultures or pieces of text like language or images and so on and illustrate without knowing the data ahead of time, just kind like you did with NASA that you were able to demonstrate that it applies in those other contexts. I mean, and that probably wouldn’t at first, and you have to evolve the theory somehow. You have to change it, you have to expand it.
Lee Cronin
I think so.
I think so.
Lex Fridman
I guess this is as a paper, a first step in saying, okay, “Can we create a general framework for measuring complexity of objects. For measuring life, the complexity of living organisms.”
I guess this is as a paper, a first step in saying, okay, “Can we create a general framework for measuring complexity of objects. For measuring life, the complexity of living organisms.”
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
That’s what this is reaching for.
That’s what this is reaching for.
Lee Cronin
That is the first step. And also to say, look, we have a way of quantifying selection and evolution in a fairly, not mundane, but a fairly mechanical way because before now… The ground truth for it was very subjective. Whereas here we’re talking about clean observables and there’s going to be layers on that. I mean, with collaborators right now, we already think we can do assembly theory on language. And not only that, wouldn’t it be great if we can figure out how under pressure language is going to involve and be more efficient? Because you’re going to want to transmit things.
That is the first step. And also to say, look, we have a way of quantifying selection and evolution in a fairly, not mundane, but a fairly mechanical way because before now… The ground truth for it was very subjective. Whereas here we’re talking about clean observables and there’s going to be layers on that. I mean, with collaborators right now, we already think we can do assembly theory on language. And not only that, wouldn’t it be great if we can figure out how under pressure language is going to involve and be more efficient? Because you’re going to want to transmit things.
And again, it’s not just about compression, it is about understanding how you can make the most of the architecture you’ve already built. And I think this is something beautiful that evolution does. We are reusing those architectures. We can’t just abandon our evolutionary history. And if you don’t want to abandon your evolutionary history and you know that evolution has been happening, then assembly theory works.
And I think that’s a key comment I want to make is that assembly theory is great for understanding when evolution has been used. The next jump is when we go to technology, because of course, if you take the M3 processor… I want to buy, I haven’t bought one yet. I can’t justify it, but I want it at some point. The M3 processor arguably is there’s quite a lot of features, a quite large number. The M2 came before it, then the M1 all the way back, you can apply assembly theory to microprocessor architecture. It doesn’t take a huge leap to see that.
Lex Fridman
I’m a Linux guy, by the way. So your examples go way over my head.
I’m a Linux guy, by the way. So your examples go way over my head.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, well, whatever…
Yeah, well, whatever…
Lex Fridman
Is that a fruit company of some sort? I don’t even know. Yeah, there’s a lot of interesting stuff to ask about language. Like you could look at… How would that work? You could look at GPT-1, GPT-2, GPT-3, 3, 5, 4, and try to analyze the kind of language it produces. I mean, that’s almost trying to look at assembly index of intelligence systems.
Is that a fruit company of some sort? I don’t even know. Yeah, there’s a lot of interesting stuff to ask about language. Like you could look at… How would that work? You could look at GPT-1, GPT-2, GPT-3, 3, 5, 4, and try to analyze the kind of language it produces. I mean, that’s almost trying to look at assembly index of intelligence systems.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, I mean I think the thing about large language models, and this is a whole hobbyhorse I have at the moment, is that obviously they’re all about… The evidence of evolution in the large language model comes from all the people that produced all the language. And that’s really interesting. And all the corrections in the Mechanical Turk, right?
Yeah, I mean I think the thing about large language models, and this is a whole hobbyhorse I have at the moment, is that obviously they’re all about… The evidence of evolution in the large language model comes from all the people that produced all the language. And that’s really interesting. And all the corrections in the Mechanical Turk, right?
Lex Fridman
Sure. But that’s part of the history, part of the memory of the system.
Sure. But that’s part of the history, part of the memory of the system.
Lee Cronin
Exactly. So it would be really interesting to basically use an assembly based approach to making language in a hierarchy. My guess is that we might be able to build a new type of large language model that uses assembly theory, that it has more understanding of the past and how things were created. Basically the thing with LLMs is like, everything everywhere, all at once, splat and make the user happy. So there’s not much intelligence in the model. The model is how the human interacts with the model. But wouldn’t it be great if we could understand how to embed more intelligence in the system?
Exactly. So it would be really interesting to basically use an assembly based approach to making language in a hierarchy. My guess is that we might be able to build a new type of large language model that uses assembly theory, that it has more understanding of the past and how things were created. Basically the thing with LLMs is like, everything everywhere, all at once, splat and make the user happy. So there’s not much intelligence in the model. The model is how the human interacts with the model. But wouldn’t it be great if we could understand how to embed more intelligence in the system?
Lex Fridman
What do you mean by intelligence there? You seem to associate intelligence with history or memory?
What do you mean by intelligence there? You seem to associate intelligence with history or memory?
Lee Cronin
Yeah. I think selection produces intelligence.
Yeah. I think selection produces intelligence.
Lex Fridman
You’re almost implying that selection is intelligence. No.
You’re almost implying that selection is intelligence. No.
Lee Cronin
Kind of, I would go out in limb and say that, but I think it’s a little bit more, human beings have the ability to abstract and they can break beyond selection. And this is… Darwinian selection, because a human being doesn’t have to basically do trial and error, but they can think about it and say, “Oh, that’s a bad idea, won’t do that.” And then technologies and so on.
Kind of, I would go out in limb and say that, but I think it’s a little bit more, human beings have the ability to abstract and they can break beyond selection. And this is… Darwinian selection, because a human being doesn’t have to basically do trial and error, but they can think about it and say, “Oh, that’s a bad idea, won’t do that.” And then technologies and so on.
Lex Fridman
So we escaped Darwinian evolution and now we’re onto some other kind of evolution, I guess? Higher level.
So we escaped Darwinian evolution and now we’re onto some other kind of evolution, I guess? Higher level.
Lee Cronin
And assembly theory will measure that as well, right? Because it’s all a lineage.
And assembly theory will measure that as well, right? Because it’s all a lineage.
Kolmogorov complexity
Lex Fridman
Okay. Another piece of criticism or by way of question is how is assembly theory or maybe assembly index different from Kolmogorov complexity? So for people who don’t know, a Kolmogorov complexity of an object is the length of a shortest computer program that produces the object as output.
Okay. Another piece of criticism or by way of question is how is assembly theory or maybe assembly index different from Kolmogorov complexity? So for people who don’t know, a Kolmogorov complexity of an object is the length of a shortest computer program that produces the object as output.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, there seems to be a disconnect between the computational approach. So Kolmogorov measure requires a Turing machine, requires a computer, and that’s one thing. And the other thing is assembly theory is supposed to trace the process by which life evolution emerged, right? There’s a main thing there. There are lots of other layers.
Yeah, there seems to be a disconnect between the computational approach. So Kolmogorov measure requires a Turing machine, requires a computer, and that’s one thing. And the other thing is assembly theory is supposed to trace the process by which life evolution emerged, right? There’s a main thing there. There are lots of other layers.
So Kolmogorov complexity, you can approximate Kolmogorov complexity, but it’s not really telling you very much about the actual… It’s really telling you about your dataset, compression of your dataset.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Lee Cronin
And so that doesn’t really help you identify… The turtle in this case is the computer. And so what assembly theory does is, I’m going to say, it’s a trigger warning for anyone listening who loves complexity theory. I think that we’re going to show that AIT is a very important subset of assembly theory because here’s what happens. I think that assembly theory allows us to go understand when were selections occurring. Selection produces factories and things, factories in the end produce computers, and then algorithmic information theory comes out of that. The frustration I’ve had with looking at life through this kind of information theory is it doesn’t take into account causation. So the main difference between assembly theory and all these complexity measures is there’s no causal chain. And I think that’s the main…
And so that doesn’t really help you identify… The turtle in this case is the computer. And so what assembly theory does is, I’m going to say, it’s a trigger warning for anyone listening who loves complexity theory. I think that we’re going to show that AIT is a very important subset of assembly theory because here’s what happens. I think that assembly theory allows us to go understand when were selections occurring. Selection produces factories and things, factories in the end produce computers, and then algorithmic information theory comes out of that. The frustration I’ve had with looking at life through this kind of information theory is it doesn’t take into account causation. So the main difference between assembly theory and all these complexity measures is there’s no causal chain. And I think that’s the main…
Lex Fridman
That’s the causal chain is at the core of assembly theory.
That’s the causal chain is at the core of assembly theory.
Lee Cronin
Exactly. And if you’ve got all your data in a computer memory, all the data’s the same. You can access it in the same way. You don’t care. You just compress it. And you either look at the program runtime or the shortest program. And that for me is absolutely not capturing what it is. What selection does.
Exactly. And if you’ve got all your data in a computer memory, all the data’s the same. You can access it in the same way. You don’t care. You just compress it. And you either look at the program runtime or the shortest program. And that for me is absolutely not capturing what it is. What selection does.
Lex Fridman
But assembly theory looks at objects. It doesn’t have information about the object history. It’s going to try to infer that history by looking for the shortest history, right? The object doesn’t have a Wikipedia page that goes with it about its history.
But assembly theory looks at objects. It doesn’t have information about the object history. It’s going to try to infer that history by looking for the shortest history, right? The object doesn’t have a Wikipedia page that goes with it about its history.
Lee Cronin
I would say it does in a way, and it is fascinating to look at. So you’ve just got the object and you have no other information about the object. What assembly theory allows you to do with just with the object is to, and the word infer is correct, I agree with infer. You say, well, that’s not the history. But something really interesting comes from this.
I would say it does in a way, and it is fascinating to look at. So you’ve just got the object and you have no other information about the object. What assembly theory allows you to do with just with the object is to, and the word infer is correct, I agree with infer. You say, well, that’s not the history. But something really interesting comes from this.
The shortest path is inferred from the object. That is the worst case scenario if you have no machine to make it. So that tells you about the depth of that object in time. And so what assembly theory allows you to do is without considering any other circumstances, to say from this object, how deep is this object in time if we just treat the object as itself without any other constraints? And that’s super powerful because the shortest path then allows you to say, “Oh, this object wasn’t just created randomly. There was a process.” And so assembly theory is not meant to one up AIT or to ignore the factory. It’s just to say, “Hey, there was a factory and how big was that factory? And how deep in time is it?”
Lex Fridman
But it’s still computationally very difficult to compute that history, right? For complex objects?
But it’s still computationally very difficult to compute that history, right? For complex objects?
Lee Cronin
It is. It becomes harder. But one of the thing that’s super nice is that it constrains your initial conditions, right?
It is. It becomes harder. But one of the thing that’s super nice is that it constrains your initial conditions, right?
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Lee Cronin
It constrains where you’re going to be. So if you take, say, imagine… So one of the things we’re doing right now is applying assembly theory to drug discovery. Now, what everyone’s doing right now is taking all the proteins and looking at the proteins and looking at molecules, doppler proteins, why not instead, look at the molecules that are involved in interacting with the receptors over time, rather than thinking about and use the molecules, evolve over time as a proxy for how the proteins evolved over time. And then use that to constrain your drug discovery process.
It constrains where you’re going to be. So if you take, say, imagine… So one of the things we’re doing right now is applying assembly theory to drug discovery. Now, what everyone’s doing right now is taking all the proteins and looking at the proteins and looking at molecules, doppler proteins, why not instead, look at the molecules that are involved in interacting with the receptors over time, rather than thinking about and use the molecules, evolve over time as a proxy for how the proteins evolved over time. And then use that to constrain your drug discovery process.
You flip the problem 180 and focus on the molecule evolution rather than the protein. And so you can guess in the future what might happen. So you rather than having to consider all possible molecules, you know where to focus. And that’s the same thing if you’re looking at in assembly spaces for an object where you don’t know the entire history, but you know that in the history of this object, it’s not going to have some other motif there that it doesn’t apply. It doesn’t appear in the past.
Lex Fridman
But just even for the drug discovery point you made, don’t you have to simulate all of chemistry to figure out how to come up with constraints?
But just even for the drug discovery point you made, don’t you have to simulate all of chemistry to figure out how to come up with constraints?
Lee Cronin
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
And the molecules and the…
And the molecules and the…
Lee Cronin
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know enough about protein.
I don’t know enough about protein.
Lee Cronin
Well, this is another thing that I think causes… Because this paper goes across so many boundaries. So chemists have looked at this and said, “This is not correct reaction.” It’s like, no, it’s a graph.
Well, this is another thing that I think causes… Because this paper goes across so many boundaries. So chemists have looked at this and said, “This is not correct reaction.” It’s like, no, it’s a graph.
Lex Fridman
Sure, there’s assembly index and shortest path examples here on chemistry.
Sure, there’s assembly index and shortest path examples here on chemistry.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, and what you do is you look at the minimal constraints on that graph. Of course it has some mapping to the synthesis, but actually you don’t have to know all of chemistry. You can build up the constraints space rather nicely. But this is just at the beginning, right? There are so many directions this could go in and as I said, it could all be wrong, but hopefully it’s less wrong.
Yeah, and what you do is you look at the minimal constraints on that graph. Of course it has some mapping to the synthesis, but actually you don’t have to know all of chemistry. You can build up the constraints space rather nicely. But this is just at the beginning, right? There are so many directions this could go in and as I said, it could all be wrong, but hopefully it’s less wrong.
Lex Fridman
What about the little criticism I saw of… By way of question, do you consider the different probabilities of each reaction in the chain so that there could be different… When you look at a chain of events that led up to the creation of an object, doesn’t it matter that some parts in the chain are less likely than others?
What about the little criticism I saw of… By way of question, do you consider the different probabilities of each reaction in the chain so that there could be different… When you look at a chain of events that led up to the creation of an object, doesn’t it matter that some parts in the chain are less likely than others?
Lee Cronin
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
It doesn’t matter?
It doesn’t matter?
Lee Cronin
No, no. Well, let’s go back. So no, not less likely, but react… So, no. So let’s go back to what we’re looking at here. So the assembly index is the minimal path that could have created that object probabilistically. So imagine you have all your atoms in a plasma, you’ve got enough energy, there’s collisions. What is the quickest way you could zip out that molecule with no reaction constraints?
No, no. Well, let’s go back. So no, not less likely, but react… So, no. So let’s go back to what we’re looking at here. So the assembly index is the minimal path that could have created that object probabilistically. So imagine you have all your atoms in a plasma, you’ve got enough energy, there’s collisions. What is the quickest way you could zip out that molecule with no reaction constraints?
Lex Fridman
How do you define quickest there then?
How do you define quickest there then?
Lee Cronin
It’s just basically walk on a random graph. So we make an assumption that basically the timescale for forming the bonds. So no, I don’t want to say that because then it’s going to have people getting obsessing about this point. And your criticism is a really good one. What we’re trying to say is this puts a lower bound on something. Of course, some reactions are less possible than others, but actually I don’t think chemical reactions exist.
It’s just basically walk on a random graph. So we make an assumption that basically the timescale for forming the bonds. So no, I don’t want to say that because then it’s going to have people getting obsessing about this point. And your criticism is a really good one. What we’re trying to say is this puts a lower bound on something. Of course, some reactions are less possible than others, but actually I don’t think chemical reactions exist.
Lex Fridman
Oh, boy. What does that mean? Why don’t chemical reactions exist?
Oh, boy. What does that mean? Why don’t chemical reactions exist?
Lee Cronin
I’m writing a paper right now that I keep being told I have to finish, and it’s called ‘The Origin of Chemical Reactions.’ And it merely says that reactivity exists as controlled by the laws of quantum mechanics. And reactions, chemists put names on reactions. So you can have, I don’t know, the Wittig reaction, which is by Wittig. You could have the Suzuki reaction, which is by Suzuki.
I’m writing a paper right now that I keep being told I have to finish, and it’s called ‘The Origin of Chemical Reactions.’ And it merely says that reactivity exists as controlled by the laws of quantum mechanics. And reactions, chemists put names on reactions. So you can have, I don’t know, the Wittig reaction, which is by Wittig. You could have the Suzuki reaction, which is by Suzuki.
Now what are these reactions? So these reactions are constrained by the following. They’re constrained by the fact they’re on planet Earth, 1G, 298 Kelvin, 1 Bar. So these are constraints. They’re also constrained by the chemical composition of earth, oxygen availability, all this stuff. And that then allows us to focus in our chemistry. So when a chemist does a reaction, that’s a really nice compressed shorthand for constraint application, glass flask, pure reagent, temperature, pressure, boom, boom, boom, control, control control, control control.
So of course we have bond energies. So the bond energies are kind of intrinsic in a vacuum. So the bond energy, you have to have a bond. And so for assembly theory to work, you have to have a bond, which means that bond has to give the molecule a half life. So you’re probably going to find later on that some bonds are weaker and that you are going to miss in mass spectrum, when you look at the assembly of some molecules, you’re going to miscount the assembly of the molecule. It falls apart too quickly because the bonds just form. But you can solve that with looking at infrared.
So when people think about the probability, they’re kind of misunderstanding. Assembly theory says nothing about the chemistry because chemistry is chemistry and their constraints are put in by biology. There was no chemist on the origin of life unless you believe in the chemist in the sky… And it’s like Santa Claus, they had a lot of work to do, but chemical reactions do not exist and the constraints that allow chemical transformations to occur do exist.
Lex Fridman
Okay, okay. So it’s constraint. So there’s no chemical reactions. It’s all constraint application, which enables the emergence of… What’s a different word for chemical reaction?
Okay, okay. So it’s constraint. So there’s no chemical reactions. It’s all constraint application, which enables the emergence of… What’s a different word for chemical reaction?
Lee Cronin
Transformation?
Transformation?
Lex Fridman
Transformation.
Transformation.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, like a function. It’s a function, but no, but I love chemical reactions as a shorthand. And so the chemists don’t all go mad. I mean, of course chemical reactions exist on earth.
Yeah, like a function. It’s a function, but no, but I love chemical reactions as a shorthand. And so the chemists don’t all go mad. I mean, of course chemical reactions exist on earth.
Lex Fridman
It’s a shorthand.
It’s a shorthand.
Lee Cronin
It’s a shorthand for these constraints.
It’s a shorthand for these constraints.
Lex Fridman
So assuming all these constraints that we’ve been using for so long that we just assume that that’s what was the case in natural language conversation.
So assuming all these constraints that we’ve been using for so long that we just assume that that’s what was the case in natural language conversation.
Lee Cronin
Exactly. The grammar of chemistry of course emerges in reactions and we can use them reliably, but I do not think the Wittig reaction is accessible on Venus.
Exactly. The grammar of chemistry of course emerges in reactions and we can use them reliably, but I do not think the Wittig reaction is accessible on Venus.
Lex Fridman
Right, and this is useful to remember to frame it as constraint application is useful for when you zoom out to the bigger picture of the universe and looking at the chemistry of the universe and then starting to apply assembly theory. That’s interesting. That’s really interesting. But we’ve also pissed off the chemists now.
Right, and this is useful to remember to frame it as constraint application is useful for when you zoom out to the bigger picture of the universe and looking at the chemistry of the universe and then starting to apply assembly theory. That’s interesting. That’s really interesting. But we’ve also pissed off the chemists now.
Lee Cronin
Oh, they’re pretty happy, but well, most of them.
Oh, they’re pretty happy, but well, most of them.
Lex Fridman
No. Everybody deep down is happy, I think. They’re just sometimes feisty, that’s how they have fun.
No. Everybody deep down is happy, I think. They’re just sometimes feisty, that’s how they have fun.
Lee Cronin
Everyone is grumpy on some days when you challenge… The problem with this paper is… It’s almost like I went to a park, it’s like I used to do this occasionally when I was young. Go to a meeting and just find a way to offend everyone at the meeting simultaneously. Even the factions that don’t like each other, they’re all unified in the hatred of you just offending them. This paper, it feels like the person that went to the party and offended everyone simultaneously. So stop fighting with themselves and just focused on this paper.
Everyone is grumpy on some days when you challenge… The problem with this paper is… It’s almost like I went to a park, it’s like I used to do this occasionally when I was young. Go to a meeting and just find a way to offend everyone at the meeting simultaneously. Even the factions that don’t like each other, they’re all unified in the hatred of you just offending them. This paper, it feels like the person that went to the party and offended everyone simultaneously. So stop fighting with themselves and just focused on this paper.
Nature review process
Lex Fridman
Maybe just a little insider interesting information. What were the editors of Nature, what the reviews and so on, how difficult was that process because this is a pretty big paper.
Maybe just a little insider interesting information. What were the editors of Nature, what the reviews and so on, how difficult was that process because this is a pretty big paper.
Lee Cronin
So when we originally sent the paper, we sent the paper and the editor said that… This is quite a long process. We sent the paper and the editor gave us some feedback and said, “I don’t think it’s that interesting.” Or “It’s hard. It’s hard concept.” And the editor gave us some feedback and Sarah and I took a year to rewrite the paper.
So when we originally sent the paper, we sent the paper and the editor said that… This is quite a long process. We sent the paper and the editor gave us some feedback and said, “I don’t think it’s that interesting.” Or “It’s hard. It’s hard concept.” And the editor gave us some feedback and Sarah and I took a year to rewrite the paper.
Lex Fridman
Was the Nature of the feedback very specific on this part? This part? Or was it like, “What are you guys smoking? What kind of crack are you taking?”
Was the Nature of the feedback very specific on this part? This part? Or was it like, “What are you guys smoking? What kind of crack are you taking?”
Lee Cronin
Yeah, it was kind of the latter. What are you smoking.
Yeah, it was kind of the latter. What are you smoking.
Lex Fridman
Okay. But polite and there’s promise.
Okay. But polite and there’s promise.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. Well the thing is the editor was really critical, but in a really professional way. And I mean for me, this was the way science should happen. So when it came back, we had too many equations in the paper. If you look at the pre-print, there’s just equations everywhere, like 23 equations. And when I said to Abhishek, who was the first author, we’ve got to remove all the equations, but my assembly equations staying in Abhishek was like, “No, we can’t.”
Yeah. Well the thing is the editor was really critical, but in a really professional way. And I mean for me, this was the way science should happen. So when it came back, we had too many equations in the paper. If you look at the pre-print, there’s just equations everywhere, like 23 equations. And when I said to Abhishek, who was the first author, we’ve got to remove all the equations, but my assembly equations staying in Abhishek was like, “No, we can’t.”
I said, “Well look, if we want to explain this to people, there’s a real challenge.” And so Sarah and I went through the, I think it was actually 160 versions of the paper, but basically we got to version 40 or something. We said, “Right, zero it start again.” So we wrote the whole paper again. We knew the entire…
Lex Fridman
Amazing.
Amazing.
Lee Cronin
And we just went bit by bit by bit and said, “What is it we want to say?” And then we sent the paper in and we expected it to be rejected and not even go to review. And then we got notification back, it had gone to review and we were like, “Oh my God, it’s so going to get rejected. How’s it going to get rejected?” Because the first assembly paper on the mass spec we sent to Nature went through six rounds of review and rejected. And by a chemist that just said, “I don’t believe you. You must be committing fraud.”
And we just went bit by bit by bit and said, “What is it we want to say?” And then we sent the paper in and we expected it to be rejected and not even go to review. And then we got notification back, it had gone to review and we were like, “Oh my God, it’s so going to get rejected. How’s it going to get rejected?” Because the first assembly paper on the mass spec we sent to Nature went through six rounds of review and rejected. And by a chemist that just said, “I don’t believe you. You must be committing fraud.”
And long story, probably a boring story, but in this case it went out to review, the comments came back and the comments were incredibly, they were very deep comments from all the reviewers. But the nice thing was the reviewers were kind of very critical, but not dismissive. They were like, “Oh, really? Explain this, explain this, explain this, explain this.”
Lex Fridman
That’s great.
That’s great.
Lee Cronin
Are you sure it’s not Kolmogorov? Are you sure it’s not this? And we went through I think three rounds of review pretty quick and the editor went, yeah, it’s in.
Are you sure it’s not Kolmogorov? Are you sure it’s not this? And we went through I think three rounds of review pretty quick and the editor went, yeah, it’s in.
Lex Fridman
But maybe you could just comment on the whole process. You’ve published some pretty huge papers on all kinds of topics within chemistry and beyond. Some of them have some little spice in them, a little spice of crazy like Tom Waits, says, “I like my Tom with a little drop of poison.” It’s not a mundane paper. So what’s it like psychologically to go through all this process to keep getting rejected, to get reviews from people that don’t get the paper or all that kind of stuff? Just from a question of a scientist, what is that like?
But maybe you could just comment on the whole process. You’ve published some pretty huge papers on all kinds of topics within chemistry and beyond. Some of them have some little spice in them, a little spice of crazy like Tom Waits, says, “I like my Tom with a little drop of poison.” It’s not a mundane paper. So what’s it like psychologically to go through all this process to keep getting rejected, to get reviews from people that don’t get the paper or all that kind of stuff? Just from a question of a scientist, what is that like?
Lee Cronin
I mean this paper for me kind of, because this wasn’t the first time we tried to publish assembly theory at the highest level. The Nature communications paper on the mass spec, the idea went to Nature and got rejected, went through six rounds of review and got rejected. And I just was so confused when the chemist said, this can’t be possible. I do not believe you can measure complexity using mass spec. And also by the way, complex molecules can randomly form. And we’re like, “But look at the data. The data says…” And they said, “No, no. We don’t believe you.” And we went and I just wouldn’t give up. And the editor in the end was just like… Different editors actually. Right?
I mean this paper for me kind of, because this wasn’t the first time we tried to publish assembly theory at the highest level. The Nature communications paper on the mass spec, the idea went to Nature and got rejected, went through six rounds of review and got rejected. And I just was so confused when the chemist said, this can’t be possible. I do not believe you can measure complexity using mass spec. And also by the way, complex molecules can randomly form. And we’re like, “But look at the data. The data says…” And they said, “No, no. We don’t believe you.” And we went and I just wouldn’t give up. And the editor in the end was just like… Different editors actually. Right?
Lex Fridman
What’s behind that never giving up? When you’re sitting there 10 o’clock in the evening, there’s a melancholy feeling that comes over you and you’re like, “Okay, this is rejection number five.” Or it’s not rejection, but maybe it feels like a rejection because the comments are that you totally don’t get it. What gives you strength to keep going there?
What’s behind that never giving up? When you’re sitting there 10 o’clock in the evening, there’s a melancholy feeling that comes over you and you’re like, “Okay, this is rejection number five.” Or it’s not rejection, but maybe it feels like a rejection because the comments are that you totally don’t get it. What gives you strength to keep going there?
Lee Cronin
I don’t know. I don’t normally get emotional about papers, but it is not about giving up because we want to get it published because we want the glory or anything. It’s just like, why don’t you understand? And so what I would just… Is try to be as rational as possible and say, yeah, you didn’t like it. Tell me why. And then…
I don’t know. I don’t normally get emotional about papers, but it is not about giving up because we want to get it published because we want the glory or anything. It’s just like, why don’t you understand? And so what I would just… Is try to be as rational as possible and say, yeah, you didn’t like it. Tell me why. And then…
Sorry, give me a second. Silly, never get emotional about papers normally, but I think what we do, you just compressed five years of angst from this.
Lex Fridman
So it’s been rough?
So it’s been rough?
Lee Cronin
It’s not just rough. It’s like, it happened… I came up with the assembly equation remote from Sarah in Arizona and the people at SFI. I felt like I was a mad person. The guy depicted in A Beautiful Mind who was just like… Not the actual genius part, but just the gibberish, gibberish, gibberish.
It’s not just rough. It’s like, it happened… I came up with the assembly equation remote from Sarah in Arizona and the people at SFI. I felt like I was a mad person. The guy depicted in A Beautiful Mind who was just like… Not the actual genius part, but just the gibberish, gibberish, gibberish.
Lex Fridman
Just the crazy part.
Just the crazy part.
Lee Cronin
Because I kept writing expanded and I have no mathematical ability at all. And I was making these mathematical expansions where I kept seeing the same motif again. I was like, I think this is a copy number. The same string is coming again and again and again, I couldn’t do the math. And then I realized the copy number fell out of the equation and everything collapsed down. I was like, oh, that works kind of.
Because I kept writing expanded and I have no mathematical ability at all. And I was making these mathematical expansions where I kept seeing the same motif again. I was like, I think this is a copy number. The same string is coming again and again and again, I couldn’t do the math. And then I realized the copy number fell out of the equation and everything collapsed down. I was like, oh, that works kind of.
So we submitted the paper and then when it was almost accepted, the mass spec one and it was astrobiologists said, great, a mass spectroscopist said great. And the chemist went nonsense, biggest pile of nonsense ever. Fraud. And I was like, “But why fraud?” And they just said, “Just because.” I was like well… I could not convince the editor in this case. The editor was just so pissed off. They see it as a, you’re wasting my time. And I would not give up. I wrote, I went and dissected all the parts. And I think, although, I mean I got upset about, it was kind of embarrassing actually, but I guess…
Lex Fridman
I bet it was beautiful.
I bet it was beautiful.
Lee Cronin
But it was just trying to understand why they didn’t like it. So part of me was really devastated and a part of me was super excited because I’m like, “Huh, they can’t tell me why I’m wrong.” And this kind of goes back to when I was at school, I was in a kind of learning difficulties class, and I kept going to the teacher and saying, “What do I do today to prove I’m smart?” And they were like, “Nothing, you can’t.” I was like, “Give me a job, give me something to do, give me a job to do. Something to do.” And I kind of felt like that a bit when I was arguing with the, and not arguing. There was no ad hominem. I wasn’t telling the editor they were idiots or anything like this or the reviewers. I kept it strictly factual.
But it was just trying to understand why they didn’t like it. So part of me was really devastated and a part of me was super excited because I’m like, “Huh, they can’t tell me why I’m wrong.” And this kind of goes back to when I was at school, I was in a kind of learning difficulties class, and I kept going to the teacher and saying, “What do I do today to prove I’m smart?” And they were like, “Nothing, you can’t.” I was like, “Give me a job, give me something to do, give me a job to do. Something to do.” And I kind of felt like that a bit when I was arguing with the, and not arguing. There was no ad hominem. I wasn’t telling the editor they were idiots or anything like this or the reviewers. I kept it strictly factual.
And all I did is I just kept knocking it down bit by bit, by bit, by bit by bit. It was ultimately rejected and it got published elsewhere. And then the actual experimental data, so in this paper, the experimental justification was already published. So when we did this one and we went through the versions and then we sent it in and in the end it just got accepted. We were like, well, that’s kind of cool, right? This is kind of like some days…
Sorry, the first author was like, “I can’t believe it got accepted.” I was like, “Nor am I, but it’s great. It’s good.” And then when the paper was published, I was not expecting the backlash. I was expecting computational. Well, no, actually I was just expecting one person who’d been trolling me for a while about it just to carry on trolling, but I didn’t expect the backlash. And then I wrote to the editor and apologized and the editor was like, “What are you apologizing for? It was a great paper. Of course it’s going to get backlash. You said some controversial stuff, but it’s awesome.”
Lex Fridman
Well, I think it’s a beautiful story of perseverance and the backlash is just a negative word for discourse, which I think is beautiful. That’s the science.
Well, I think it’s a beautiful story of perseverance and the backlash is just a negative word for discourse, which I think is beautiful. That’s the science.
Lee Cronin
I think, as I said when it got accepted and people were saying, we’re kind of hacking on it. And I was like, papers are not gold medals. The reason I wanted to publish that paper in Nature is because it says, “Hey, there’s something before biological evolution.” You have to have that, if you’re not a creationist, by the way, this is an approach. First time someone has put a concrete mechanism, or sorry, a concrete quantification and what comes next you are pushing on is a mechanism. And that’s what we need to get to is an auto catalytic sets, self-replicating molecules, some other features that come in.
I think, as I said when it got accepted and people were saying, we’re kind of hacking on it. And I was like, papers are not gold medals. The reason I wanted to publish that paper in Nature is because it says, “Hey, there’s something before biological evolution.” You have to have that, if you’re not a creationist, by the way, this is an approach. First time someone has put a concrete mechanism, or sorry, a concrete quantification and what comes next you are pushing on is a mechanism. And that’s what we need to get to is an auto catalytic sets, self-replicating molecules, some other features that come in.
And the fact that this paper has been so discussed, for me is a dream come true, it doesn’t get better than that. If you can’t accept a few people hating it… And the nice thing is, the thing that really makes me happy is that no one has attacked the actual physical content.
You can measure the assembly index, you can measure selection now. So either that’s right or it’s… Well, either that’s helpful or unhelpful. If it’s unhelpful, this paper will sink down and no one will use it again. If it’s helpful, it’ll help people scaffold on it and we’ll start to converge for a new paradigm. So I think that that’s the thing that I wanted to see my colleagues, authors, collaborators and people were like, you’ve just published this paper. You’re a chemist. Why have you done this? Who are you to be doing evolutionary theory? Well, I don’t know. I mean, sorry, did I need to…
Lex Fridman
Who is anyone to do anything? Well, I’m glad you did. Let me just before coming back to Origin of Life and these kinds of questions, you mentioned learning difficulties. I didn’t know about this. So what was it like?
Who is anyone to do anything? Well, I’m glad you did. Let me just before coming back to Origin of Life and these kinds of questions, you mentioned learning difficulties. I didn’t know about this. So what was it like?
Lee Cronin
I wasn’t very good at school, right.
I wasn’t very good at school, right.
Lee Cronin
I wasn’t very good at school, right?
I wasn’t very good at school, right?
Lex Fridman
This is when you were very young?
This is when you were very young?
Lee Cronin
Yeah. But in primary school, my handwriting was really poor and apparently I couldn’t read and my mathematics was very poor. So they just said, “This is a problem.” They identified it. My parents at the time, were confused because I was busy taking things apart, buying electronic junk from the shop, trying to build computers and things. And then once I got out of… when I think, about the major transition in my stupidity, everyone thought I wasn’t that stupid when I was… Basically, everyone thought I was faking. I liked stuff and I was faking wanting to be it. So I always want to be a scientist. So five, six, seven years old, I’d be a scientist, take things apart, and everyone’s like, “Yeah, this guy wants to be a scientist, but he’s an idiot.” So everyone was really confused, I think, at first, that I wasn’t smarter than I was claiming to be.
Yeah. But in primary school, my handwriting was really poor and apparently I couldn’t read and my mathematics was very poor. So they just said, “This is a problem.” They identified it. My parents at the time, were confused because I was busy taking things apart, buying electronic junk from the shop, trying to build computers and things. And then once I got out of… when I think, about the major transition in my stupidity, everyone thought I wasn’t that stupid when I was… Basically, everyone thought I was faking. I liked stuff and I was faking wanting to be it. So I always want to be a scientist. So five, six, seven years old, I’d be a scientist, take things apart, and everyone’s like, “Yeah, this guy wants to be a scientist, but he’s an idiot.” So everyone was really confused, I think, at first, that I wasn’t smarter than I was claiming to be.
And then I just basically didn’t do well in any of the tests, and I went down and down and down and down and then I was like, “Huh, this is really embarrassing. I really like maths and everyone says I can’t do it. I really like physics and chemistry and science and people say you can’t read and write.” And so I found myself in a learning difficulties class at the end of primary school and the beginning of secondary school. In the UK, secondary school is 11, 12 years old. And I remember being put in the remedial class. And the remedial class was basically full of three types of people. There were people quite violent and there were people who couldn’t speak English and there were people that really had learning difficulties. So the one thing I can objectively remember was… I could read. I liked reading. I read a lot. But something in me, I’m a bit of a rebel. I refused to read what I was told to read and I found it difficult to read individual words in the way they were told.
But anyway, I got caught one day teaching someone else to read and they said, “Okay, we don’t understand this.” I’d always known I wanted to be a scientist, but I didn’t really know what that meant and I realized you had to go to university and I thought, “I can just go to university. They take curious people.” “No, no, no need to have these. You have to be able to enter these exams to get this grade point average, and the fact is, the exams you’ve been entered into, you are just going to get C, D or E.” You can’t even get A, B or C. These are the UK GCSEs. I was like, ” Oh, shit,” and I said, “Can you just put me into the higher exams?” They said, “No, no, you’re going to fail. There’s no chance.” So my father intervened and said, “Just let him go in the exams,” and they said, “He’s definitely going to fail. It’s a waste of time, waste of money,” and he said, “What if we paid?” So they said, “Okay,” so you didn’t actually have to pay. You only had to pay if I failed.
So I took the exams and passed them, fortunately. I didn’t get the top grades, but I got into A Levels. But then that also limited what I could do at A Levels. I wasn’t allowed to do A Level maths.
Lex Fridman
What do you mean you weren’t allowed to?
What do you mean you weren’t allowed to?
Lee Cronin
Because I had such a bad math grade from my GCSE, I only had a C. But they wouldn’t let me go into the ABC for maths because of some coursework requirement back then so the top grade I could have got was a C. So C, D or E. So I got a C and they let me do AS Level maths, which is this half intermediate and get to go to university. But I liked chemistry. I had a good chemistry teacher so in the end I got to university to do chemistry.
Because I had such a bad math grade from my GCSE, I only had a C. But they wouldn’t let me go into the ABC for maths because of some coursework requirement back then so the top grade I could have got was a C. So C, D or E. So I got a C and they let me do AS Level maths, which is this half intermediate and get to go to university. But I liked chemistry. I had a good chemistry teacher so in the end I got to university to do chemistry.
Lex Fridman
So through that process, I think for kids in that situation, it’s easy to start believing that you’re not… How do I put it… That you’re stupid, and basically give up, that you’re just not good at math, you’re not good at school. So this is, by way of advice for people, for interesting people, for interesting young kids right now, experiencing the same thing. Where was the place? What was the source of you not giving up there?
So through that process, I think for kids in that situation, it’s easy to start believing that you’re not… How do I put it… That you’re stupid, and basically give up, that you’re just not good at math, you’re not good at school. So this is, by way of advice for people, for interesting people, for interesting young kids right now, experiencing the same thing. Where was the place? What was the source of you not giving up there?
Lee Cronin
I have no idea. Other than… I really liked not understanding stuff. For me, when I not understand something… I feel like I don’t understand anything. But now, but back then, I remember when I was like… I don’t know, I tried to build a laser when I was eight and I thought, “How hard could it be?” And basically, I was going to build a CO2 laser and I was like, “Right, I think I need some partially coated mirrors. I need some carbon dioxide and I need a high voltage.” And I was so stupid. I was so embarrassed. T make enough CO2, I actually set a fire and tried to filter the flame.
I have no idea. Other than… I really liked not understanding stuff. For me, when I not understand something… I feel like I don’t understand anything. But now, but back then, I remember when I was like… I don’t know, I tried to build a laser when I was eight and I thought, “How hard could it be?” And basically, I was going to build a CO2 laser and I was like, “Right, I think I need some partially coated mirrors. I need some carbon dioxide and I need a high voltage.” And I was so stupid. I was so embarrassed. T make enough CO2, I actually set a fire and tried to filter the flame.
Lex Fridman
Oh, nice. That’s an idea.
Oh, nice. That’s an idea.
Lee Cronin
Just to collect enough CO2 and it completely failed. And I burnt half the garage down. So my parents were not very happy about that. So that was one thing. I really liked first principle thinking. So I remember being super curious and being determined to find answers. And so when people do give advice about this, why ask for advice about this? I don’t really have that much advice other than don’t give up. And one of the things I try to do as a chemistry professor in my group is I hire people that I think, if they’re persistent enough, who am I to deny them the chance? Because people gave me a chance and I was able to do stuff.
Just to collect enough CO2 and it completely failed. And I burnt half the garage down. So my parents were not very happy about that. So that was one thing. I really liked first principle thinking. So I remember being super curious and being determined to find answers. And so when people do give advice about this, why ask for advice about this? I don’t really have that much advice other than don’t give up. And one of the things I try to do as a chemistry professor in my group is I hire people that I think, if they’re persistent enough, who am I to deny them the chance? Because people gave me a chance and I was able to do stuff.
Lex Fridman
Do you believe in yourself essentially?
Do you believe in yourself essentially?
Lee Cronin
So I love being around smart people and I love confusing smart people. And when I’m confusing smart people, not by stealing their wallets and hiding it somewhere, but if I can confuse smart people, that is the one piece of hope that I might be doing something interesting.
So I love being around smart people and I love confusing smart people. And when I’m confusing smart people, not by stealing their wallets and hiding it somewhere, but if I can confuse smart people, that is the one piece of hope that I might be doing something interesting.
Lex Fridman
Wow, that’s quite brilliant. As a gradient to optimize. Hang out with smart people and confuse them. And the more confusing it is, the more there’s something there.
Wow, that’s quite brilliant. As a gradient to optimize. Hang out with smart people and confuse them. And the more confusing it is, the more there’s something there.
Lee Cronin
And as long as they’re not telling you just a complete idiot and they give you different reasons. And everyone, because with assembly theory and people said, “Oh, it’s wrong.” And I was like, “Why?” And no one could give me a consistent reason. They said, “Oh, because it’s been done before or it’s just [inaudible 01:49:04] or it’s just there, that and the other. So I think the thing that I like to do is, and in academia it’s hard because people are critical. But the criticism, although I got upset about it earlier, which is silly, but not silly because obviously it’s hard work being on your own or with a team spatially separated during lockdown and try to keep everyone on board and have some faith. I always wanted to have a new idea. And so I like a new idea and I want to nurture it as long as possible. And if someone can give me actionable criticism, that’s why I think I was trying to say earlier when I was stuck for words, give me actionable criticism.
And as long as they’re not telling you just a complete idiot and they give you different reasons. And everyone, because with assembly theory and people said, “Oh, it’s wrong.” And I was like, “Why?” And no one could give me a consistent reason. They said, “Oh, because it’s been done before or it’s just [inaudible 01:49:04] or it’s just there, that and the other. So I think the thing that I like to do is, and in academia it’s hard because people are critical. But the criticism, although I got upset about it earlier, which is silly, but not silly because obviously it’s hard work being on your own or with a team spatially separated during lockdown and try to keep everyone on board and have some faith. I always wanted to have a new idea. And so I like a new idea and I want to nurture it as long as possible. And if someone can give me actionable criticism, that’s why I think I was trying to say earlier when I was stuck for words, give me actionable criticism.
“It’s wrong.” “Okay, why is it wrong?” Say, “Oh, your equation’s incorrect for this or your method is wrong.” So what I try and do is get enough criticism from people to then triangulate and go back. And I’ve been very fortunate in my life that I’ve got great colleagues, great collaborators, funders, mentors, and people that will take the time to say, “You are wrong because.” And then what I have to do is integrate the wrongness and go, “Oh, cool, maybe I can fix that.” And I think criticism is really good. People have a go at me because I’m really critical. But I’m not criticizing you as a person. I’m just criticizing the idea and trying to make it better and say, “What about this?”
And sometimes my filters are truncated in some ways. I’m just like, “That’s wrong, that’s wrong, that’s wrong. Why’d you do this?” And people are like, “Oh my God, you just told me, you destroyed my life’s work.” I’m like, “Relax. No.” I’m just like, “Let’s make it better.” And I think that we don’t do that enough because we are either personally critical, which isn’t helpful or we don’t give any criticism at all because we’re too scared.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’ve seen you be pretty aggressively critical but every time I’ve seen, it’s the idea, not the person.
Yeah, I’ve seen you be pretty aggressively critical but every time I’ve seen, it’s the idea, not the person.
Time and free will
Lee Cronin
I’m sure I make mistakes on that.I argue lots with Sara and she’s shocked. I’ve argued with Joscha, Joscha Bach, in the past and he is like, “You’re just making that up.” And I’m like, “No, not quite. But kind of.” But I had a big argument with Sara about time and she’s like, “No, time doesn’t exist.” I’m like, “No, no, time does exist.” And as she realized that her conception of assembly theory and my conception of assembly theory was the same thing, necessitated us to abandon the fact that time is eternal, to actually really fundamentally question how the universe produces combinatorial novelty.
I’m sure I make mistakes on that.I argue lots with Sara and she’s shocked. I’ve argued with Joscha, Joscha Bach, in the past and he is like, “You’re just making that up.” And I’m like, “No, not quite. But kind of.” But I had a big argument with Sara about time and she’s like, “No, time doesn’t exist.” I’m like, “No, no, time does exist.” And as she realized that her conception of assembly theory and my conception of assembly theory was the same thing, necessitated us to abandon the fact that time is eternal, to actually really fundamentally question how the universe produces combinatorial novelty.
Lex Fridman
So time is fundamental for assembly theory? I’m just trying to figure out where you and Sara converged.
So time is fundamental for assembly theory? I’m just trying to figure out where you and Sara converged.
Lee Cronin
I think assembly theory is fine in this time right now but I think it helps us understand that something interesting is going on. I’ve been really inspired by a guy called Nick Gisin. I’m going to butcher his argument but I love his argument a lot. So I hope he forgives me if he hears about it. But basically if you want free will, time has to be fundamental. And if you want time to be fundamental, you have to give up on platonic mathematics and you have to use intuition. By the way, and again I’m going to butcher this, but basically Hilbert said that infinite numbers are allowed. And I think it was Brouwer who said, “No, you can’t. All numbers are finite.” So let’s go back a step because it was like people going to say, assembly theory seems to explain that large combinatorial space allows you to produce things like life and technology. And that large combinatorial space is so big it’s not even accessible to a Sean Carroll, David Deutsch multiverse that physicists saying that all of the universe already exists in time is probably, provably, that’s a strong word, not correct.
I think assembly theory is fine in this time right now but I think it helps us understand that something interesting is going on. I’ve been really inspired by a guy called Nick Gisin. I’m going to butcher his argument but I love his argument a lot. So I hope he forgives me if he hears about it. But basically if you want free will, time has to be fundamental. And if you want time to be fundamental, you have to give up on platonic mathematics and you have to use intuition. By the way, and again I’m going to butcher this, but basically Hilbert said that infinite numbers are allowed. And I think it was Brouwer who said, “No, you can’t. All numbers are finite.” So let’s go back a step because it was like people going to say, assembly theory seems to explain that large combinatorial space allows you to produce things like life and technology. And that large combinatorial space is so big it’s not even accessible to a Sean Carroll, David Deutsch multiverse that physicists saying that all of the universe already exists in time is probably, provably, that’s a strong word, not correct.
That we are going to know that the universe as it stands, the present, the way the present builds the future is so big, the universe can’t ever contain the future. And this is a really interesting thing. I think Max Tegmark has this mathematical universe. He says the universe is like a block universe, and I apologize to Max if I’m getting it wrong, but people think you can just move. You have the stat, you have the initial conditions, and you can run the universe right to the end and go backwards and forwards in that universe. That is not correct.
Lex Fridman
Let me load that in. The universe is not big enough to contain the future.
Let me load that in. The universe is not big enough to contain the future.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. That’s why. That’s it.
Yeah. That’s why. That’s it.
Lex Fridman
That’s a beautiful way of saying that time is fundamental.
That’s a beautiful way of saying that time is fundamental.
Lee Cronin
Yes. And this is why the law of the excluded middle, something is true or false, only works in the past. Is it going to snow in New York next week or in Austin? You might, in Austin, say probably not. In New York, you might say, yeah. If you go forward to next week and say, “Did it snow in New York last week? True or false?” You can answer that question. The fact that the law of the excluded middle cannot apply to the future explains why time is fundamental.
Yes. And this is why the law of the excluded middle, something is true or false, only works in the past. Is it going to snow in New York next week or in Austin? You might, in Austin, say probably not. In New York, you might say, yeah. If you go forward to next week and say, “Did it snow in New York last week? True or false?” You can answer that question. The fact that the law of the excluded middle cannot apply to the future explains why time is fundamental.
Lex Fridman
That’s a good example, intuitive example, but it’s possible that we might be able to predict whether it’s going to snow if we had the perfect information.
That’s a good example, intuitive example, but it’s possible that we might be able to predict whether it’s going to snow if we had the perfect information.
Lee Cronin
I think…
I think…
Lex Fridman
You’re saying it not.
You’re saying it not.
Lee Cronin
Impossible. Impossible. So here’s why. I’ll make a really quick argument and this argument isn’t mine. It’s Nick’s and a few other people.
Impossible. Impossible. So here’s why. I’ll make a really quick argument and this argument isn’t mine. It’s Nick’s and a few other people.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain his view on time being fundamental?
Can you explain his view on time being fundamental?
Lee Cronin
Yeah. So I’ll give my view, which resonates with his, but basically it’s very simple actually. It would say your ability to design and do an experiment is exercising free will. So he used that thought process. I never really thought about it that way, and that you actively make decisions. I used to think that free will was a consequence of just selection but I’m understanding that human free will is something really interesting. And he very much inspired me. But I think that what Sara Walker said that inspired me as well, these will converge, is that I think that the universe, and the universe is very big, huge, but actually the place that is largest in the universe right now, the largest place in the universe, is earth.
Yeah. So I’ll give my view, which resonates with his, but basically it’s very simple actually. It would say your ability to design and do an experiment is exercising free will. So he used that thought process. I never really thought about it that way, and that you actively make decisions. I used to think that free will was a consequence of just selection but I’m understanding that human free will is something really interesting. And he very much inspired me. But I think that what Sara Walker said that inspired me as well, these will converge, is that I think that the universe, and the universe is very big, huge, but actually the place that is largest in the universe right now, the largest place in the universe, is earth.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’ve seen you say that. And boy, does that… That’s an interesting one to process. What do you mean by that earth is the biggest place in the universe?
Yeah, I’ve seen you say that. And boy, does that… That’s an interesting one to process. What do you mean by that earth is the biggest place in the universe?
Lee Cronin
Because we have this combinatorial scaffolding going all the way back from LUCA. So you’ve got cells that can self-replicate and then you go all the way to terraforming the earth. You’ve got all these architectures, the amount of selection that’s going on, biological selection, just to be clear, biological evolution, and then have multicellularity then animals and abstraction. And with abstraction, there was another kick because you can then build architectures and computers and cultures and language and these things are the biggest things that exist in the universe because we can just build architectures that could naturally arise anywhere and the further that distance goes in time, and it’s gigantic.
Because we have this combinatorial scaffolding going all the way back from LUCA. So you’ve got cells that can self-replicate and then you go all the way to terraforming the earth. You’ve got all these architectures, the amount of selection that’s going on, biological selection, just to be clear, biological evolution, and then have multicellularity then animals and abstraction. And with abstraction, there was another kick because you can then build architectures and computers and cultures and language and these things are the biggest things that exist in the universe because we can just build architectures that could naturally arise anywhere and the further that distance goes in time, and it’s gigantic.
Lex Fridman
From a complexity perspective.
From a complexity perspective.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Okay, wait a minute. But I know you’re being poetic, but how do you know there’s not other earth-like… How do you know? You’re basically saying earth is really special. It’s awesome stuff as far as we look out, there’s nothing like it going on. But how do you know there’s not nearly infinite number of places where cool stuff like this is going on?
Okay, wait a minute. But I know you’re being poetic, but how do you know there’s not other earth-like… How do you know? You’re basically saying earth is really special. It’s awesome stuff as far as we look out, there’s nothing like it going on. But how do you know there’s not nearly infinite number of places where cool stuff like this is going on?
Lee Cronin
I agree and I would say, I’ll say again, that earth is the most gigantic thing we know in the universe combinatorially we know.
I agree and I would say, I’ll say again, that earth is the most gigantic thing we know in the universe combinatorially we know.
Lex Fridman
We know. Yeah.
We know. Yeah.
Communication with aliens
Lee Cronin
Now, I guess this is just purely a guess. I have no data other than hope. Maybe not hope, maybe… No, I have some data. That every star in the sky probably has planets and life is probably emerging on these planets. But the amount of contingency that is associated with life, is I think the combinatorial space associated with these planets is so different. Our causal cones are never going to overlap or not easily. And this is the thing that makes me sad about alien life. It’s why we have to create alien life in the lab as quickly as possible because I don’t know if we are going to be able to be able to build architectures that will intersect with alien intelligence architectures.
Now, I guess this is just purely a guess. I have no data other than hope. Maybe not hope, maybe… No, I have some data. That every star in the sky probably has planets and life is probably emerging on these planets. But the amount of contingency that is associated with life, is I think the combinatorial space associated with these planets is so different. Our causal cones are never going to overlap or not easily. And this is the thing that makes me sad about alien life. It’s why we have to create alien life in the lab as quickly as possible because I don’t know if we are going to be able to be able to build architectures that will intersect with alien intelligence architectures.
Lex Fridman
Intersect, you don’t mean in time or space?
Intersect, you don’t mean in time or space?
Lee Cronin
Time and the ability to communicate.
Time and the ability to communicate.
Lex Fridman
The ability to communicate.
The ability to communicate.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. My biggest fear in a way is that life is everywhere but we become infinitely more lonely because of our scaffolding in that combinatorial space. Because it’s so big.
Yeah. My biggest fear in a way is that life is everywhere but we become infinitely more lonely because of our scaffolding in that combinatorial space. Because it’s so big.
Lex Fridman
So you’re saying the constraints created by the environment that led to the factory of Darwinian evolution are just this little tiny cone in a nearly infinite combinatorial space.
So you’re saying the constraints created by the environment that led to the factory of Darwinian evolution are just this little tiny cone in a nearly infinite combinatorial space.
Lee Cronin
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
So there’s other cones like it. Why can’t we communicate with other… Just because we can’t create it doesn’t mean we can’t appreciate the creation, right? Sorry, detect the creation.
So there’s other cones like it. Why can’t we communicate with other… Just because we can’t create it doesn’t mean we can’t appreciate the creation, right? Sorry, detect the creation.
Lee Cronin
I truly don’t know but it’s an excuse for me to ask for people to give me money to make a planet simulator.
I truly don’t know but it’s an excuse for me to ask for people to give me money to make a planet simulator.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, right.
Yeah, right.
Lee Cronin
If I can make…
If I can make…
Lex Fridman
With a different [crosstalk 01:59:40]
With a different [crosstalk 01:59:40]
Lee Cronin
It’s like another shameless say, it’s like, “Give me money. I need money.”
It’s like another shameless say, it’s like, “Give me money. I need money.”
Lex Fridman
This was all long plug for a planet simulator. Hey, I won’t be the first in line to do that.
This was all long plug for a planet simulator. Hey, I won’t be the first in line to do that.
Lee Cronin
My rick garage has run out of room.
My rick garage has run out of room.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
And this planet simulator, you mean a different planet or different sets of environments and pressures?
And this planet simulator, you mean a different planet or different sets of environments and pressures?
Lee Cronin
Exactly. If we could basically recreate the selection before biology as we know it, that gives rise to a different biology, we should be able to put the constraints on where to look in the universe. So here’s the thing. Here’s my dream. My dream is that by creating life in the lab based upon constraints we understand, let’s go for Venus type life or earth type life or something again, do an Earth 2.0. Screw it, let’s do an Earth 2.0. An Earth 2.0 has a different genetic alphabet. Fine, that’s fine. Different protein alphabet, fine. Have cells and evolution, all that stuff. We will then be able to say, “Okay, life is a more general phenomena. Selection is more general than what we think is the chemical constraints on life.” And we can point at James Webb and other telescopes at other planets that we are in that zone we are most likely to combinatorially overlap with because, so there’s chemistry…
Exactly. If we could basically recreate the selection before biology as we know it, that gives rise to a different biology, we should be able to put the constraints on where to look in the universe. So here’s the thing. Here’s my dream. My dream is that by creating life in the lab based upon constraints we understand, let’s go for Venus type life or earth type life or something again, do an Earth 2.0. Screw it, let’s do an Earth 2.0. An Earth 2.0 has a different genetic alphabet. Fine, that’s fine. Different protein alphabet, fine. Have cells and evolution, all that stuff. We will then be able to say, “Okay, life is a more general phenomena. Selection is more general than what we think is the chemical constraints on life.” And we can point at James Webb and other telescopes at other planets that we are in that zone we are most likely to combinatorially overlap with because, so there’s chemistry…
Lex Fridman
You’re looking for some overlap.
You’re looking for some overlap.
Lee Cronin
And then we can then basically shine light on them literally and look at light coming back and apply advanced assembly theory to general theory of language that we’ll get and say, “Huh, in that signal, it looks random but there’s a copy number. Oh, this random set of things that shouldn’t be that looks like a true random number generator has structure as not [inaudible 02:01:32], an IT type structure, but evolutionary structure given by assembly theory,” and we start to… But I would say that because I’m a shameless assembly theorist.
And then we can then basically shine light on them literally and look at light coming back and apply advanced assembly theory to general theory of language that we’ll get and say, “Huh, in that signal, it looks random but there’s a copy number. Oh, this random set of things that shouldn’t be that looks like a true random number generator has structure as not [inaudible 02:01:32], an IT type structure, but evolutionary structure given by assembly theory,” and we start to… But I would say that because I’m a shameless assembly theorist.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it just feels like the cone, I might be misusing the word cone here but the width of the cone is growing faster, is growing really fast to where eventually all the cones overlap even in a very, very, very large combinatorial space. But then again, if you’re saying the universe is also growing very quickly in terms of possibilities…
Yeah, it just feels like the cone, I might be misusing the word cone here but the width of the cone is growing faster, is growing really fast to where eventually all the cones overlap even in a very, very, very large combinatorial space. But then again, if you’re saying the universe is also growing very quickly in terms of possibilities…
Lee Cronin
I hope that as we build abstractions, one idea is that as we go to intelligence, intelligence allows us to look at the regularities around us in the universe. And that gives us some common grounding to discuss with aliens. And you might be right that we will overlap there. Even though we have completely different chemistry, literally completely different chemistry, that we will be able to pass information from one another. But it’s not a given. And I have to try and divorce hope and emotion away from what I can logically justify.
I hope that as we build abstractions, one idea is that as we go to intelligence, intelligence allows us to look at the regularities around us in the universe. And that gives us some common grounding to discuss with aliens. And you might be right that we will overlap there. Even though we have completely different chemistry, literally completely different chemistry, that we will be able to pass information from one another. But it’s not a given. And I have to try and divorce hope and emotion away from what I can logically justify.
Lex Fridman
But it’s just hard to intuit a world, a universe where there’s nearly infinite complexity objects and they somehow can’t detect each other.
But it’s just hard to intuit a world, a universe where there’s nearly infinite complexity objects and they somehow can’t detect each other.
Lee Cronin
The universe is expanding. But the nice thing is I would say, I would look, you see, I think Carl Sagan did the wrong thing. Not the wrong thing. He flicked the Voyager program and the Pale Blue Dot and said, “Look how big the universe is.” I would’ve done it the other way around and said, “Look at the Voyager probe that came from the planet earth that came from LUCA. Look at how big earth is.”
The universe is expanding. But the nice thing is I would say, I would look, you see, I think Carl Sagan did the wrong thing. Not the wrong thing. He flicked the Voyager program and the Pale Blue Dot and said, “Look how big the universe is.” I would’ve done it the other way around and said, “Look at the Voyager probe that came from the planet earth that came from LUCA. Look at how big earth is.”
Lex Fridman
Then it produced that.
Then it produced that.
Lee Cronin
It produced that.
It produced that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
And that I think is completely amazing. And then that should allow people on earth to think about, “Probably we should try and get causal chains off Earth onto Mars, onto the moon, wherever. Whether it’s human life or martian life that we create, it doesn’t matter. But I think this combinatorial space tells us something very important about the universe and that I realized in assembly theory that the universe is too big to contain itself. Now coming back, I want to change your mind about time because I’m guessing that your time is just a coordinate. So I’m going to change…
And that I think is completely amazing. And then that should allow people on earth to think about, “Probably we should try and get causal chains off Earth onto Mars, onto the moon, wherever. Whether it’s human life or martian life that we create, it doesn’t matter. But I think this combinatorial space tells us something very important about the universe and that I realized in assembly theory that the universe is too big to contain itself. Now coming back, I want to change your mind about time because I’m guessing that your time is just a coordinate. So I’m going to change…
Lex Fridman
I’m guessing you’re one of those.
I’m guessing you’re one of those.
Lee Cronin
One of those. I’m change my mind in real time or at least attempt.
One of those. I’m change my mind in real time or at least attempt.
Lex Fridman
Oh, in real time. There you go. I already got the tattoo. So this is going to be embarrassing if you change my mind.
Oh, in real time. There you go. I already got the tattoo. So this is going to be embarrassing if you change my mind.
Lee Cronin
But you can just add an arrow of time onto it, right?
But you can just add an arrow of time onto it, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, true. Just modify it.
Yeah, true. Just modify it.
Lee Cronin
Or raise it a bit. And the argument that I think that is really most interesting is people say the initial conditions specify the future of the universe. Okay, fine. Let’s say that’s the case for a moment. Now let’s go back to Newtonian mechanics. Now, the uncertainty principle in Newtonian mechanics is this. If I give you the coordinates of an object moving in space and the coordinates of another object and they collide in space. And those initial conditions, you should know exactly what’s going to happen. However, you cannot specify these coordinates to infinite precision. Now everyone says, “Oh, this is like the chaos theory argument.” No, no, it’s deeper than that. Here’s a problem with numbers. This is where Hilbert and Brouwer fell out. To have the coordinates of this object, a given object that’s colliding, you have to have them to infinite precision. That’s what Hilbert says. There’s no problem. Infinite precision is fine. Let’s just take that for granted.
Or raise it a bit. And the argument that I think that is really most interesting is people say the initial conditions specify the future of the universe. Okay, fine. Let’s say that’s the case for a moment. Now let’s go back to Newtonian mechanics. Now, the uncertainty principle in Newtonian mechanics is this. If I give you the coordinates of an object moving in space and the coordinates of another object and they collide in space. And those initial conditions, you should know exactly what’s going to happen. However, you cannot specify these coordinates to infinite precision. Now everyone says, “Oh, this is like the chaos theory argument.” No, no, it’s deeper than that. Here’s a problem with numbers. This is where Hilbert and Brouwer fell out. To have the coordinates of this object, a given object that’s colliding, you have to have them to infinite precision. That’s what Hilbert says. There’s no problem. Infinite precision is fine. Let’s just take that for granted.
But when the object is finite and it can’t store its own coordinates, what do you do? So in principle, if a finite object cannot be specified to infinite precision, in principle, the initial conditions don’t apply.
Lex Fridman
How do you know it can’t store its…
How do you know it can’t store its…
Lee Cronin
How do you store an in long number in a finite size?
How do you store an in long number in a finite size?
Lex Fridman
We’re using infinity very loosely here.
We’re using infinity very loosely here.
Lee Cronin
No, no. We’re using…
No, no. We’re using…
Lex Fridman
Infinite precision. Not loosely, but…
Infinite precision. Not loosely, but…
Lee Cronin
Very precisely.
Very precisely.
Lex Fridman
So you think infinite precision is required?
So you think infinite precision is required?
Lee Cronin
Let’s take the object. Let’s say the object is a golf ball. A golf ball is a few centimeters in diameter. We can work out how many atoms are in the golf ball. And let’s say we can store numbers down to atomic dislocations. So we can work out how many atoms there are in the golf ball and we can store the coordinates in that golf ball down to that number. But beyond that, we can’t. Let’s make the golf ball smaller. And this is where I think that we think that we get randomness in quantum mechanics and some people say you can’t get randomness, quantum mechanic’s deterministic, but aha, this is where we realize that classical mechanics and quantum mechanics suffer from the same uncertainty principle. And that is the inability to specify the initial conditions to a precise enough degree to give you determinism.
Let’s take the object. Let’s say the object is a golf ball. A golf ball is a few centimeters in diameter. We can work out how many atoms are in the golf ball. And let’s say we can store numbers down to atomic dislocations. So we can work out how many atoms there are in the golf ball and we can store the coordinates in that golf ball down to that number. But beyond that, we can’t. Let’s make the golf ball smaller. And this is where I think that we think that we get randomness in quantum mechanics and some people say you can’t get randomness, quantum mechanic’s deterministic, but aha, this is where we realize that classical mechanics and quantum mechanics suffer from the same uncertainty principle. And that is the inability to specify the initial conditions to a precise enough degree to give you determinism.
The universe is intrinsically too big and that’s why time exists. It’s non-deterministic. Looking back into the past, you can use logical arguments because you can say, “Was it true or false?” You already know. But this is the fact we are unable to predict the future with the precision is not evidence of lack of knowledge. It’s evidence the universe is generating new things.
Lex Fridman
Okay, first of all, quantum mechanics, you could just say statistically what’s going to happen when two golf balls hit each other.
Okay, first of all, quantum mechanics, you could just say statistically what’s going to happen when two golf balls hit each other.
Lee Cronin
Statistically. But sure, I can say statistically what’s going to happen. But then when they do happen and then you keep nesting it together, it goes almost back to, look, let’s think about entropy in the universe. So how do we understand entropy change or process? We can use the ergodic hypothesis. We can also have have the counterfactuals where we have all the different states and we can even put that in the multiverse. But both those, they’re nonphysical. The multiverse collapses back to the same problem about the precision. So if you accept, you don’t have to have true and false going forward into the future. The real numbers are real. They’re observables.
Statistically. But sure, I can say statistically what’s going to happen. But then when they do happen and then you keep nesting it together, it goes almost back to, look, let’s think about entropy in the universe. So how do we understand entropy change or process? We can use the ergodic hypothesis. We can also have have the counterfactuals where we have all the different states and we can even put that in the multiverse. But both those, they’re nonphysical. The multiverse collapses back to the same problem about the precision. So if you accept, you don’t have to have true and false going forward into the future. The real numbers are real. They’re observables.
Lex Fridman
We’re trying to see exactly where time being fundamental sneaks in. And this difference between the golf ball can’t contain its own position perfectly precisely. How that leads to time needing to be fundamental.
We’re trying to see exactly where time being fundamental sneaks in. And this difference between the golf ball can’t contain its own position perfectly precisely. How that leads to time needing to be fundamental.
Lee Cronin
Do you believe or do you accept you have free will?
Do you believe or do you accept you have free will?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I think at this moment in time, I believe that I have free will.
Yeah, I think at this moment in time, I believe that I have free will.
Lee Cronin
So then you have to believe that time is fundamental.
So then you have to believe that time is fundamental.
Lex Fridman
I understand that’s a statement you’ve made.
I understand that’s a statement you’ve made.
Lee Cronin
No, that we can logically follow because if you don’t have free will, so if you’re in a universe that has no time, universe is deterministic. If it’s deterministic, then you have no free will.
No, that we can logically follow because if you don’t have free will, so if you’re in a universe that has no time, universe is deterministic. If it’s deterministic, then you have no free will.
Lex Fridman
I think the space of how much we don’t know is so vast that saying the universe is deterministic and from that jumping into there’s no free will is just too difficult of a leap.
I think the space of how much we don’t know is so vast that saying the universe is deterministic and from that jumping into there’s no free will is just too difficult of a leap.
Lee Cronin
No, I logically follow. No, no, I don’t disagree. It’s deep and it’s important. All I’m saying, and it’s actually different to what I’ve said before, is that if you don’t require platonistic mathematics and accepts that non-determinism is how the universe looks and that gives us our creativity and the way the universe is getting novelty, it’s really deeply important in assembly theory because assembly theory starts to actually give you a mechanism where you go from boring time, which is basically initial conditions specify everything, to a mismatch in creative time. And I hope we’ll do experiments. I would love to do an experiment that prove that time is fundamental and the universe is generating novelty. I don’t know all the features of that experiment yet, but by having these conversations openly and getting people to think about the problems in a new way, better people, more intelligent people with good mathematical backgrounds can say, “Oh, hey, I’ve got an idea. I would love to do an experiment that shows that the universe is too big for itself going forward in time.”
No, I logically follow. No, no, I don’t disagree. It’s deep and it’s important. All I’m saying, and it’s actually different to what I’ve said before, is that if you don’t require platonistic mathematics and accepts that non-determinism is how the universe looks and that gives us our creativity and the way the universe is getting novelty, it’s really deeply important in assembly theory because assembly theory starts to actually give you a mechanism where you go from boring time, which is basically initial conditions specify everything, to a mismatch in creative time. And I hope we’ll do experiments. I would love to do an experiment that prove that time is fundamental and the universe is generating novelty. I don’t know all the features of that experiment yet, but by having these conversations openly and getting people to think about the problems in a new way, better people, more intelligent people with good mathematical backgrounds can say, “Oh, hey, I’ve got an idea. I would love to do an experiment that shows that the universe is too big for itself going forward in time.”
And this is why I really hate the idea of the Boltzmann brain. The Boltzmann brain makes me super, like everyone’s having a free lunch. It’s like saying, “Let’s break all the laws of physics.” So a Boltzmann brain is this idea that in a long enough universe, a brain will just emerge in the universe as conscious. And that neglects the causal chain of evolution that required to produce that brain. And this is where the computational argument really falls down because a computationalist could say,” I can calculate probability of a Boltzmann brain.” And they’ll give you a probability. But I can calculate probability of a Boltzmann brain. Zero.
Lex Fridman
Just because the space of possibilities is so large?
Just because the space of possibilities is so large?
Lee Cronin
Yeah. When we start falling ourselves with numbers that we can’t actually measure and we can’t ever conceive of, I think it doesn’t give us a good explanation. And I want to explain why life is in the universe. I think life is actually novelty minor. Life basically mines novelty almost from the future and actualizes in the present.
Yeah. When we start falling ourselves with numbers that we can’t actually measure and we can’t ever conceive of, I think it doesn’t give us a good explanation. And I want to explain why life is in the universe. I think life is actually novelty minor. Life basically mines novelty almost from the future and actualizes in the present.
Lex Fridman
Okay. Life is a novelty minor from the future that is actualized in the present.
Okay. Life is a novelty minor from the future that is actualized in the present.
Lee Cronin
Yep. I think so.
Yep. I think so.
Lex Fridman
Novelty minor. First of all, novelty. What’s the origin of novelty when you go from boring time to creative time? Where is that? Is it as simple as randomness like you’re referring to?
Novelty minor. First of all, novelty. What’s the origin of novelty when you go from boring time to creative time? Where is that? Is it as simple as randomness like you’re referring to?
Lee Cronin
I am really struggling with randomness because I had a really good argument with Joscha Bach about randomness, and he just said, “Randomness doesn’t give you free will. That’s insane because you’d just be random.” And I think he’s right at that level but I don’t think he is right on another level. And it’s not about randomness, it’s about constrained, I’m making this up as I go along, so making this up, constrained opportunity. So the novelty. What is novelty? This is what I think is a funny thing if you ever want to discuss AI. Why I think everyone’s gone AI mad is that they’re misunderstanding novelty. But let’s think about novelty. Yes. What is novelty? So I think novelty is a genuinely new configuration that is not predicted by the past and that you discover in the present. And that is truly different. Now, everyone says that. Some people say that novelty doesn’t exist. It’s always with precedent. I want to do experiments that show that that is not the case. And it goes back to a question you asked me a few moments ago, which is where is the factory?
I am really struggling with randomness because I had a really good argument with Joscha Bach about randomness, and he just said, “Randomness doesn’t give you free will. That’s insane because you’d just be random.” And I think he’s right at that level but I don’t think he is right on another level. And it’s not about randomness, it’s about constrained, I’m making this up as I go along, so making this up, constrained opportunity. So the novelty. What is novelty? This is what I think is a funny thing if you ever want to discuss AI. Why I think everyone’s gone AI mad is that they’re misunderstanding novelty. But let’s think about novelty. Yes. What is novelty? So I think novelty is a genuinely new configuration that is not predicted by the past and that you discover in the present. And that is truly different. Now, everyone says that. Some people say that novelty doesn’t exist. It’s always with precedent. I want to do experiments that show that that is not the case. And it goes back to a question you asked me a few moments ago, which is where is the factory?
Because I think the same mechanism that gives us a factory gives us novelty. And I think that is why I’m so deeply hung up on time. Of course I’m wrong, but how wrong? And I think that life opens up that combinatorial space in a way that our current laws of physics, although as contrived in a deterministic initial condition universe even with the get out of the multiverse, David Deutsch style, which I love by the way, but I don’t think is correct, but it’s really beautiful.
Lex Fridman
Multiverse.
Multiverse.
Lee Cronin
David Deutsche’s conception of the multiverse is given. But I think that the problem with wave particle duality in quantum mechanics is not about the multiverse. It’s about understanding how determined the past is. I don’t just think that actually, this is a discussion I was having with Sara about that, where she was like, “Oh, I think we’ve been debating this for a long time now, about how do we reconcile novelty determinism in determinism.”
David Deutsche’s conception of the multiverse is given. But I think that the problem with wave particle duality in quantum mechanics is not about the multiverse. It’s about understanding how determined the past is. I don’t just think that actually, this is a discussion I was having with Sara about that, where she was like, “Oh, I think we’ve been debating this for a long time now, about how do we reconcile novelty determinism in determinism.”
Lex Fridman
Okay. Just to clarify, both you and Sara think the universe is not deterministic?
Okay. Just to clarify, both you and Sara think the universe is not deterministic?
Lee Cronin
I won’t speak for Sara but roughly. I think the universe is deterministic looking back in the past but undetermined going forward in the future. So I’m having my cake and eating it here. This is because I fundamentally don’t understand randomness, as Joscha told me or other people told me. But if I adopt a new view now which the new view is the universe is just non-deterministic, but I’d like to refine that and say the universe appears deterministic going back in the past but it’s undetermined going forward in the future. So how can we have a universe that has deterministically looking rules that’s non-determined
I won’t speak for Sara but roughly. I think the universe is deterministic looking back in the past but undetermined going forward in the future. So I’m having my cake and eating it here. This is because I fundamentally don’t understand randomness, as Joscha told me or other people told me. But if I adopt a new view now which the new view is the universe is just non-deterministic, but I’d like to refine that and say the universe appears deterministic going back in the past but it’s undetermined going forward in the future. So how can we have a universe that has deterministically looking rules that’s non-determined
Lee Cronin
… universe that has deterministically-looking rules that is non-determined going into the future. It’s this breakdown in precision in the initial conditions, and we have to just stop using initial conditions and start looking at trajectories, and how the combinatorial space behaves in an expanding universe in time and space. And assembly theory helps us quantify the transition to biology, and biology appears to be novelty-mining, because it’s making crazy stuff that are unique to Earth. Right? There are objects on Earth that are unique to Earth that will not be found anywhere else, because you can do the combinatorial math.
… universe that has deterministically-looking rules that is non-determined going into the future. It’s this breakdown in precision in the initial conditions, and we have to just stop using initial conditions and start looking at trajectories, and how the combinatorial space behaves in an expanding universe in time and space. And assembly theory helps us quantify the transition to biology, and biology appears to be novelty-mining, because it’s making crazy stuff that are unique to Earth. Right? There are objects on Earth that are unique to Earth that will not be found anywhere else, because you can do the combinatorial math.
Lex Fridman
What was that statement you made about “life is novelty-mining from the future”? What’s the little element of time that you’re introducing there?
What was that statement you made about “life is novelty-mining from the future”? What’s the little element of time that you’re introducing there?
Lee Cronin
What I’m kind of meaning is because the future is bigger than the present, in a deterministic universe, how do the states go from one to another? There’s a mismatch, right?
What I’m kind of meaning is because the future is bigger than the present, in a deterministic universe, how do the states go from one to another? There’s a mismatch, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
So, that must mean that you have a little bit of indeterminism. Whether that’s randomness or something else, I don’t understand. I want to do experiments to formulate a theory to refine that as we go forward that might help us explain that. And I think that’s why I’m so determined to try and crack the “non-life to life” transition looking at networks and molecules, and that might help us think about the mechanism. But certainly the future is bigger than the past in my conception of the universe and some conception of the universe. And-
So, that must mean that you have a little bit of indeterminism. Whether that’s randomness or something else, I don’t understand. I want to do experiments to formulate a theory to refine that as we go forward that might help us explain that. And I think that’s why I’m so determined to try and crack the “non-life to life” transition looking at networks and molecules, and that might help us think about the mechanism. But certainly the future is bigger than the past in my conception of the universe and some conception of the universe. And-
Lex Fridman
By the way, that’s not obvious, right? The future being bigger than the past, well, that’s one statement, and the statement that the universe is not big enough to contain the future is another statement. That one is a big one. That one’s a really big one.
By the way, that’s not obvious, right? The future being bigger than the past, well, that’s one statement, and the statement that the universe is not big enough to contain the future is another statement. That one is a big one. That one’s a really big one.
Lee Cronin
I think so, but I think it’s entirely … Because look, we have the second law, and right now we don’t need the second law if the future’s bigger than the past. It follows naturally. So, why are we retrofitting all these sticking plasters onto our reality to hold onto a timeless universe?
I think so, but I think it’s entirely … Because look, we have the second law, and right now we don’t need the second law if the future’s bigger than the past. It follows naturally. So, why are we retrofitting all these sticking plasters onto our reality to hold onto a timeless universe?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but that’s because it’s kind of difficult to imagine the universe that can’t contain the future.
Yeah, but that’s because it’s kind of difficult to imagine the universe that can’t contain the future.
Lee Cronin
But isn’t that really exciting?
But isn’t that really exciting?
Lex Fridman
It’s very exciting, but it’s hard. We are humans on Earth, and we have a very kind of four-dimensional conception of the world, of 3D plus time. It’s just hard to intuit a world where, what does that even mean, a universe that can’t contain the future?
It’s very exciting, but it’s hard. We are humans on Earth, and we have a very kind of four-dimensional conception of the world, of 3D plus time. It’s just hard to intuit a world where, what does that even mean, a universe that can’t contain the future?
Lee Cronin
Yeah. It’s kind of crazy but obvious.
Yeah. It’s kind of crazy but obvious.
Lex Fridman
It’s weird, it’s weird. I suppose it sounds obvious, yeah, if it’s true.
It’s weird, it’s weird. I suppose it sounds obvious, yeah, if it’s true.
Lee Cronin
So, the reason why assembly theory turned me onto that was that, let’s just start in the present, and look at all the complex molecules, and go backwards in time, and understand how evolutionary processes gave rise to them. It’s not at all obvious that taxol, which is one of the most complex natural products produced by biology, was going to be invented by biology. It’s an accident.
So, the reason why assembly theory turned me onto that was that, let’s just start in the present, and look at all the complex molecules, and go backwards in time, and understand how evolutionary processes gave rise to them. It’s not at all obvious that taxol, which is one of the most complex natural products produced by biology, was going to be invented by biology. It’s an accident.
Taxol is unique to Earth. There’s no taxol elsewhere in the universe, and taxol was not decided by the initial conditions. It was decided by this interplay between the … So, the past simply is embedded in the present. It gives some features. But why the past doesn’t map to the future one-to-one is because the universe is too big to contain itself. That gives space for creativity, and novelty, and some things which are unpredictable.
Cellular automata
Lex Fridman
Well, okay. So, given that you’re disrespecting the power of the initial conditions, let me ask you about, how do you explain that cellular automata are able to produce such incredible complexity given just basic rules and basic initial conditions?
Well, okay. So, given that you’re disrespecting the power of the initial conditions, let me ask you about, how do you explain that cellular automata are able to produce such incredible complexity given just basic rules and basic initial conditions?
Lee Cronin
I think that this falls into the Brouwer-Hilbert trap. So, how do you get cellular automata to produce complexity? You have a computer, you generate a display, and you map the change of that in time. There are some CAs that repeat like functions.
I think that this falls into the Brouwer-Hilbert trap. So, how do you get cellular automata to produce complexity? You have a computer, you generate a display, and you map the change of that in time. There are some CAs that repeat like functions.
It’s fascinating to me that for pi, there is a formula where you can go to the millionth decimal place of pi and read out the number without having to go there. But there are some numbers where you can’t do that, and you have to just crank through. Whether it’s Wolframian computational irreducibility or some other thing, well, it doesn’t matter. But these CAs, that complexity, is that just complexity, or a number that is basically you’re mining that number in time? Is that just a display screen for that number, that function?
Lex Fridman
Well, can’t you say the same thing about the complexity on Earth then?
Well, can’t you say the same thing about the complexity on Earth then?
Lee Cronin
No. Because the complexity on Earth has a copy number and an assembly index associated with it. That CA is just a number running.
No. Because the complexity on Earth has a copy number and an assembly index associated with it. That CA is just a number running.
Lex Fridman
You don’t think it has a copy number? Wait a minute …
You don’t think it has a copy number? Wait a minute …
Lee Cronin
Well, it does where we’re looking at humans producing different rules, but then it’s nested on selection. So, those CAs are produced by selection. The CA is such a fascinating pseudo-complexity generator. What I would love to do is understand, quantify the degree of surprise in a CA and run it long enough. But what I guess that means is we have to instantiate, we have to have a number of experiments where we’re generating different rules and running them time steps, but … Oh, I got it.
Well, it does where we’re looking at humans producing different rules, but then it’s nested on selection. So, those CAs are produced by selection. The CA is such a fascinating pseudo-complexity generator. What I would love to do is understand, quantify the degree of surprise in a CA and run it long enough. But what I guess that means is we have to instantiate, we have to have a number of experiments where we’re generating different rules and running them time steps, but … Oh, I got it.
CAs are mining novelty in the future by iteration, right? And you’re like, ” Oh, that’s great. That’s great.” You didn’t predict it. Some rules you can predict what’s going to happen, and other rules you can’t. So for me, if anything, CAs are evidence that the universe is too big to contain itself, because otherwise you’d know what the rules are going to do forevermore.
Lex Fridman
Right. I guess you were saying that the physicist saying that all you need is the initial conditions and the rules of physics is somehow missing the bigger picture.
Right. I guess you were saying that the physicist saying that all you need is the initial conditions and the rules of physics is somehow missing the bigger picture.
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And if you look at CAs, all you need is the initial condition and the rules, and then run the thing.
And if you look at CAs, all you need is the initial condition and the rules, and then run the thing.
Lee Cronin
You need three things; You need the initial conditions, you need the rules, and you need time iteration to mine it out. Without the coordinate, you can’t get it out.
You need three things; You need the initial conditions, you need the rules, and you need time iteration to mine it out. Without the coordinate, you can’t get it out.
Lex Fridman
Sure, and that to you is fundamental?
Sure, and that to you is fundamental?
Lee Cronin
And you can’t predict it from the initial conditions. If you could, then it could be fine.
And you can’t predict it from the initial conditions. If you could, then it could be fine.
Lex Fridman
And that time is-
And that time is-
Lee Cronin
A resource.
A resource.
Lex Fridman
… like the foundation of the history, the memory of each of the things it created. It has to have that memory of all the things that led up to it.
… like the foundation of the history, the memory of each of the things it created. It has to have that memory of all the things that led up to it.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, you have to have the resource. Because time is a fundamental resource. Yeah, I think I had a major epiphany about randomness, but I keep doing that every two days and then it goes away again. It’s random.
Yeah, you have to have the resource. Because time is a fundamental resource. Yeah, I think I had a major epiphany about randomness, but I keep doing that every two days and then it goes away again. It’s random.
Lex Fridman
You’re a time fundamentalist.
You’re a time fundamentalist.
Lee Cronin
And you should be as well. If you believe in free will, then the only conclusion is that time is fundamental. Otherwise you cannot have free will. It logically follows.
And you should be as well. If you believe in free will, then the only conclusion is that time is fundamental. Otherwise you cannot have free will. It logically follows.
Lex Fridman
Well, the foundation of my belief in free will is observation-driven.
Well, the foundation of my belief in free will is observation-driven.
Lee Cronin
But that’s-
But that’s-
Lex Fridman
I think if you use logic, logically it seems like the universe is deterministic.
I think if you use logic, logically it seems like the universe is deterministic.
Lee Cronin
Looking backwards in time then that’s correct, the universe is.
Looking backwards in time then that’s correct, the universe is.
Lex Fridman
And then everything else is a kind of leap. It requires a leap.
And then everything else is a kind of leap. It requires a leap.
Lee Cronin
This is why I think machine learning is going to provide a chunk of that, right? To help us explain this. So, the way I’d say it, if you take …
This is why I think machine learning is going to provide a chunk of that, right? To help us explain this. So, the way I’d say it, if you take …
Lex Fridman
That’s interesting. Why?
That’s interesting. Why?
AGI
Lee Cronin
Well, my favorite one is … Because AI doomers are driving me mad, and in fact we don’t have any intelligence yet. I call AI “autonomous informatics” just to make people grumpy.
Well, my favorite one is … Because AI doomers are driving me mad, and in fact we don’t have any intelligence yet. I call AI “autonomous informatics” just to make people grumpy.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You’re saying we’re quite far away from AGI.
Yeah. You’re saying we’re quite far away from AGI.
Lee Cronin
I think that we have no conception of intelligence, and I think that we don’t understand how the human brain does what it does. I think that neuroscience is making great advances, but I think that we have no idea about AGI. So, I am a technological, I guess optimist. I believe we should do everything. The whole regulation of AI is nonsensical. Why would you regulate Excel, other than the fact that Clippy should come back and I love Excel ’97 because we can do the flight simulator.
I think that we have no conception of intelligence, and I think that we don’t understand how the human brain does what it does. I think that neuroscience is making great advances, but I think that we have no idea about AGI. So, I am a technological, I guess optimist. I believe we should do everything. The whole regulation of AI is nonsensical. Why would you regulate Excel, other than the fact that Clippy should come back and I love Excel ’97 because we can do the flight simulator.
Lex Fridman
Sorry, in Excel?
Sorry, in Excel?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, have you not played the flight simulator in-
Yeah, have you not played the flight simulator in-
Lex Fridman
In Excel ’97?
In Excel ’97?
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What does that look like?
What does that look like?
Lee Cronin
It’s like wireframe, very basic. But basically I think it’s X zero, Y zero, shift, and it opens up and you can play the flight simulator.
It’s like wireframe, very basic. But basically I think it’s X zero, Y zero, shift, and it opens up and you can play the flight simulator.
Lex Fridman
Oh, wow. Wait, wait, is it using Excel?
Oh, wow. Wait, wait, is it using Excel?
Lee Cronin
Excel ’97.
Excel ’97.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Lee Cronin
I resurrected it the other day and saw Clippy again for the first time in a long time.
I resurrected it the other day and saw Clippy again for the first time in a long time.
Lex Fridman
Well, Clippy is definitely coming back. But you’re saying we don’t have a great understanding of what is intelligence, what is the intelligence underpinning the human mind.
Well, Clippy is definitely coming back. But you’re saying we don’t have a great understanding of what is intelligence, what is the intelligence underpinning the human mind.
Lee Cronin
I’m very frustrated by the way that we’re AI dooming right now, and people are bestowing some kind of magic. Now, let’s go back a bit. So, you said about AGI, are we far away from AGI? Yes. I do not think we’re going to get to AGI anytime soon. I’ve seen no evidence of it, and the AI doom scenario is nonsensical in the extreme.
I’m very frustrated by the way that we’re AI dooming right now, and people are bestowing some kind of magic. Now, let’s go back a bit. So, you said about AGI, are we far away from AGI? Yes. I do not think we’re going to get to AGI anytime soon. I’ve seen no evidence of it, and the AI doom scenario is nonsensical in the extreme.
The reason why I think it’s nonsensical … And I don’t think there isn’t things we should do and be very worried about. There are things we need to worry about right now, what AI are doing. Whether it’s fake data, fake users. I want authentic people, authentic data. I don’t want everything to be faked, and I think it’s a really big problem, and I absolutely want to go on the record to say I really worry about that. What I’m not worried about is that some fictitious entity is going to turn us all to paperclips or detonate nuclear bombs, or maybe, I don’t know, anything you can think of.
Why is this? I’ll take a very simple series of logical arguments, and the AI doomers do not have the correct epistemology. They do not understand what knowledge is. And until we understand what knowledge is, they’re not going to get anywhere because they’re applying things falsely. So, let me give you a very simple argument.
People talk about the probability, “P(doom)”, of AI. We can work out the probability of an asteroid hitting the planet. Why? Because it’s happened before. We know the mechanism. We know that there’s a gravity well, or that spacetime is bent and stuff falls in. We don’t know the probability of AGI because we have no mechanism. So, let me give you another one, which is like, “I’m really worried about AG.” What’s AG? AG is anti-gravity. “One day we could wake up and anti-gravity is discovered, we’re all going to die, the atmosphere is going to float away, we’re going to float away, we’re all doomed.”
What is the probability of AG? We don’t know because there’s no mechanism for AG. Do we worry about it? No, and I don’t understand the current reason for certain people in certain areas to be generating this nonsense. I think they’re not doing it maliciously. I think we’re observing the emergence of new religions, how religions come, because religions are about some controls.
You’ve got the optimist saying, “AI is going to cure us all,” and, “AI is going to kill us all.” What’s the reality? Well, we don’t have AI. We have really powerful machine learning tools and they will allow us to do interesting things, and we need to be careful about how we use those tools in terms of manipulating human beings and faking stuff. Right?
Lex Fridman
Right. Well, let me try to steel man the AI doomers’ argument. And actually, I don’t know, are AI doomers in the Yudkowsky camp saying it’s definitely going to kill us? Because there’s a spectrum.
Right. Well, let me try to steel man the AI doomers’ argument. And actually, I don’t know, are AI doomers in the Yudkowsky camp saying it’s definitely going to kill us? Because there’s a spectrum.
Lee Cronin
95% I think is the limit.
95% I think is the limit.
Lex Fridman
Plus? 95%-plus, that’s the-
Plus? 95%-plus, that’s the-
Lee Cronin
No, not plus. I don’t know. I was seeing on Twitter today various things. But I think Yudkowsky is at 95%.
No, not plus. I don’t know. I was seeing on Twitter today various things. But I think Yudkowsky is at 95%.
Lex Fridman
But to belong to the AI doomer club, is there a threshold? I don’t know what the membership …
But to belong to the AI doomer club, is there a threshold? I don’t know what the membership …
Lee Cronin
Maybe.
Maybe.
Lex Fridman
And what are the fees?
And what are the fees?
Lee Cronin
Well, I think Scott Aronson, I was quite surprised, had put two … I saw this online, so I could be wrong. So, sorry if it’s wrong. He says 2%. But the thing is, if someone said there’s a 2% chance that you’re going to die going into the lift, would you go into the lift?
Well, I think Scott Aronson, I was quite surprised, had put two … I saw this online, so I could be wrong. So, sorry if it’s wrong. He says 2%. But the thing is, if someone said there’s a 2% chance that you’re going to die going into the lift, would you go into the lift?
Lex Fridman
In the elevator, for the American English-speaking audience. Well, no, not for the elevator.
In the elevator, for the American English-speaking audience. Well, no, not for the elevator.
Lee Cronin
So, I would say anyone higher than 2% … I think there’s a 0% chance of AGI doom. Zero.
So, I would say anyone higher than 2% … I think there’s a 0% chance of AGI doom. Zero.
Lex Fridman
Just to push back on the argument where N of zero on the AGI … We could see on Earth that there’s increasing levels of intelligence of organisms. We can see what humans with extra intelligence were able to do to the other species. So, that is a lot of samples of data, what a delta in intelligence gives you. When you have an increase in intelligence, how you’re able to dominate a species on Earth.
Just to push back on the argument where N of zero on the AGI … We could see on Earth that there’s increasing levels of intelligence of organisms. We can see what humans with extra intelligence were able to do to the other species. So, that is a lot of samples of data, what a delta in intelligence gives you. When you have an increase in intelligence, how you’re able to dominate a species on Earth.
So, the idea there is that if you have a being that’s 10x smarter than humans, we’re not going to be able to predict what that being is going to be able to do, especially if it has the power to hurt humans. Which, you can imagine a lot of trajectories in which the more benefit AI systems give, the more control we give to those AI systems over our power grid, over our nuclear weapons, or weapons of any sort. And then it’s hard to know what an ultra-intelligence system would be able to do in that case. You don’t find that convincing?
Lee Cronin
I think I would fail that argument 100%. Here’s a number of reasons to fail it on. First of all, we don’t know where the intention comes from. The problem is that people keep … I’ve been watching all the hucksters online with the prompt engineering and all this stuff. When I talk to a typical AI computer scientist, they keep talking about the AIs having some kind of decision-making ability. That is a category error.
I think I would fail that argument 100%. Here’s a number of reasons to fail it on. First of all, we don’t know where the intention comes from. The problem is that people keep … I’ve been watching all the hucksters online with the prompt engineering and all this stuff. When I talk to a typical AI computer scientist, they keep talking about the AIs having some kind of decision-making ability. That is a category error.
The decision-making ability comes from human beings. We have no understanding of how humans make decisions. We’ve just been discussing free will for the last half an hour, right? We don’t even know what that is. So, the intention, I totally agree with you, people who intend to do bad things can do bad things and we should not let that risk go. That’s totally here and now. I do not want that to happen, and I’m happy to be regulated to make sure that systems I generate, whether they’re computer systems, or … I’m working on a new project called “Chem Machina”.
Lex Fridman
Nice. Well done.
Nice. Well done.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, yeah. Which is basically a …
Yeah, yeah. Which is basically a …
Lex Fridman
For people who don’t understand the pun, the Ex Machina is a great film about I guess AGI embodied, and “chem” is the chemistry version of that.
For people who don’t understand the pun, the Ex Machina is a great film about I guess AGI embodied, and “chem” is the chemistry version of that.
Lee Cronin
And I only know one way to embody intelligence, and that’s in chemistry and human brains. So, category error number one is that they have agency. Category error number two is assuming that anything we make is going to be more intelligent. Now, you didn’t say super-intelligent. I’ll put the words into our mouths here, super-intelligent. I think that there is no reason to expect that we are going to make systems that are more intelligent. More capable …
And I only know one way to embody intelligence, and that’s in chemistry and human brains. So, category error number one is that they have agency. Category error number two is assuming that anything we make is going to be more intelligent. Now, you didn’t say super-intelligent. I’ll put the words into our mouths here, super-intelligent. I think that there is no reason to expect that we are going to make systems that are more intelligent. More capable …
When people play chess computers, they don’t expect to win now, right? The chess computer is very good at chess. That doesn’t mean it’s super-intelligent. So, I think that super-intelligence, and I think even Nick Bostrom is pulling back on this now, because he invented this … So, I see this a lot. When did I see it first happen? Eric Drexler, nanotechnology. Atomically precise machines. He came up with a world where we had these atom cogs everywhere and we were going to make self-replicating nanobots.
Not possible. Why? Because there’s no resources to build these self-replicating nanobots. You can’t get the precision. It doesn’t work. It was a major category error in taking engineering principles down to the molecular level. The only functioning nanomolecular technology we know is produced by evolution. There.
So, now let’s go forward to AGI. What is AGI? We don’t know. It’s super, it can do this, or humans can’t think. I would argue the only AGIs that exist in the universe are produced by evolution. And sure, we may be able to make our working memory better. We might be able to do more things. The human brain is the most compact computing unit in the universe. It uses 20 watts, uses a really limited volume. It’s not like a ChatGPT cluster which has to have thousands of watts, and a model that’s generated, and it has to be corrected by human beings. You are autonomous and embodied intelligence.
So, I think that there are so many levels that we’re missing out, we’ve just kind of went, “Oh, we’ve discovered fire. Oh gosh, the planet’s just going to burn one day randomly.” I just don’t understand that leap. There are bigger problems we need to worry about. So, what is the motivation? Why are these people, and let’s assume they’re earnest, have this conviction? Well, I think they’re making leaps and they’re trapped in a virtual reality that isn’t reality.
Lex Fridman
Well, I can continue a set of arguments here, but also it is true that ideologies that fearmonger are dangerous. Because you can then use it to control, to regulate in a way that halts progress, to control people, and to cancel people, all that kind of stuff. So, you have to be careful, because reason ultimately wins. Right?
Well, I can continue a set of arguments here, but also it is true that ideologies that fearmonger are dangerous. Because you can then use it to control, to regulate in a way that halts progress, to control people, and to cancel people, all that kind of stuff. So, you have to be careful, because reason ultimately wins. Right?
But there is a lot of concerns with super-intelligent systems, very capable systems. I think when you hear the word “super-intelligent”, you’re hearing, “It’s smarter than humans in every way that humans are smart.” But the paperclip manufacturing system doesn’t need to be smart in every way. It just needs to be smart in a set of specific ways. And the more capable the AI systems become, the more you could see us giving them control over, like I said, our power grid, a lot of aspects of human life. And then that means they’ll be able to do more and more damage when there’s unintended consequences that come to life.
Lee Cronin
I think that that’s right. The unintended consequences we have to think about, and that I fully agree with. But let’s go back a bit. Sentience … Again, I’m far away from my comfort zone and all this stuff, but hey, let’s talk about it. Because I give myself a qualification.
I think that that’s right. The unintended consequences we have to think about, and that I fully agree with. But let’s go back a bit. Sentience … Again, I’m far away from my comfort zone and all this stuff, but hey, let’s talk about it. Because I give myself a qualification.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, we’re both qualified in sentience, I think, as much as anyone else.
Yeah, we’re both qualified in sentience, I think, as much as anyone else.
Lee Cronin
I think the paperclip scenario is just such a poor one, because let’s think about how that would happen. And also, let’s think about, we are being so unrealistic about how much of the Earth’s surface we have commandeered. For paperclip manufacturing to really happen, do the math. It’s not going to happen. There’s not enough energy, there’s not enough resource. Where is it all going to come from?
I think the paperclip scenario is just such a poor one, because let’s think about how that would happen. And also, let’s think about, we are being so unrealistic about how much of the Earth’s surface we have commandeered. For paperclip manufacturing to really happen, do the math. It’s not going to happen. There’s not enough energy, there’s not enough resource. Where is it all going to come from?
I think that what happens in evolution, it’s really: Why has a killer virus not killed all life on Earth? Well, what happens is, sure, superkiller viruses that kill the ribosome have emerged. But you know what happens? They nuke a small space because they can’t propagate. They all die. So, there’s this interplay between evolution and propagation, right? And death. So …
Lex Fridman
In evolution. You don’t think it’s possible to engineer, for example, and sorry to interrupt, but a perfect virus?
In evolution. You don’t think it’s possible to engineer, for example, and sorry to interrupt, but a perfect virus?
Lee Cronin
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
That’s deadly enough?
That’s deadly enough?
Lee Cronin
No. Nonsensical. I think again, it wouldn’t work. Because if it was too deadly, it would just kill the radius and not replicate.
No. Nonsensical. I think again, it wouldn’t work. Because if it was too deadly, it would just kill the radius and not replicate.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But you don’t think it’s possible to get a …
Yeah. But you don’t think it’s possible to get a …
Lee Cronin
If you were …
If you were …
Lex Fridman
Not kill all of life on Earth, but kill all humans. There’s not many of us. There’s only like 8 billion. There’s so much more ants. So many more ants, and they’re pretty smart.
Not kill all of life on Earth, but kill all humans. There’s not many of us. There’s only like 8 billion. There’s so much more ants. So many more ants, and they’re pretty smart.
Lee Cronin
I think the nice thing about where we are, I would love for the AI crowd to take a leaf out of the book of the bio-warfare, chemical warfare crowd. I mean, not love, because actually people have been killed with chemical weapons in the first and second World War, and bio-weapons have been made, and we can argue about COVID-19 and all this stuff. Let’s not go there just now. But I think there is a consensus that some certain things are bad and we shouldn’t do them, right? And sure, it would be possible for a bad actor to engineer something bad, but we would see it coming and we would be able to do something about it.
I think the nice thing about where we are, I would love for the AI crowd to take a leaf out of the book of the bio-warfare, chemical warfare crowd. I mean, not love, because actually people have been killed with chemical weapons in the first and second World War, and bio-weapons have been made, and we can argue about COVID-19 and all this stuff. Let’s not go there just now. But I think there is a consensus that some certain things are bad and we shouldn’t do them, right? And sure, it would be possible for a bad actor to engineer something bad, but we would see it coming and we would be able to do something about it.
Now, I guess what I’m trying to say is when people talk about doom, and when you ask them for the mechanism, they just make something up. In this case, I’m with Yann LeCun. I think you put out a very good point about trying to regulate jet engines before we’ve even invented them. And I think that’s what I’m saying.
I’m not saying we should … I just don’t understand why these guys are going around literally making stuff up about us all dying, when basically we need to actually really focus on … Now, let’s say there’s some actors that are earnest. Let’s say Yudkowsky is being earnest and he really cares. But he loves it. He goes, “Da, da, da, and then you’re all going to die.” It’s like, why don’t we try and do the same thing and say, “You could do this, and then you’re all going to be happy forever after”?
Lex Fridman
Well, I think there’s several things to say there. One, I think there is a role in society for people that say we’re all going to die. Because I think it filters through as a message, as a viral message that gives us the proper amount of concern. Meaning it’s not 95%, but when you say 95% and it filters through society, it’ll give an average of like a 0.03%. An average. So, it’s nice to have people that are like, “We’re all going to die,” and then we’ll have a proper concern.
Well, I think there’s several things to say there. One, I think there is a role in society for people that say we’re all going to die. Because I think it filters through as a message, as a viral message that gives us the proper amount of concern. Meaning it’s not 95%, but when you say 95% and it filters through society, it’ll give an average of like a 0.03%. An average. So, it’s nice to have people that are like, “We’re all going to die,” and then we’ll have a proper concern.
For example, I do believe we’re not properly concerned about the threat of nuclear weapons currently. It just seems like people have forgotten that that’s a thing, and there’s a war in Ukraine with a nuclear power involved. There’s nuclear powers throughout the world, and it just feels like war in the brink of a potential world war to a percentage that I don’t think people are properly calibrating in their head. We’re all thinking it’s a Twitter battle as opposed to actual threat.
So, it’s nice to have that kind of level of concern. But to me, when I hear AI doomers, what I’m imagining is with unintended consequences a potential situation where let’s say 5% of the world suffers deeply because of a mistake made, of unintended consequences. I don’t want to imagine the entirety of human civilization dying, but there could be a lot of suffering if this is done poorly.
Lee Cronin
I understand that, and I guess I’m involved in the whole hype cycle. So, let’s say having some people saying AI doom is a worry, fine. Let’s give them that. But what seems to be happening is there seems to be people who don’t think AI is doing that, and they’re trying to use that to control regulation and to push people to regulate, which stops humans generating knowledge. And I am an advocate for generating as much knowledge as possible.
I understand that, and I guess I’m involved in the whole hype cycle. So, let’s say having some people saying AI doom is a worry, fine. Let’s give them that. But what seems to be happening is there seems to be people who don’t think AI is doing that, and they’re trying to use that to control regulation and to push people to regulate, which stops humans generating knowledge. And I am an advocate for generating as much knowledge as possible.
Nuclear weapons
When it comes to nuclear weapons, I grew up in the ’70s and ’80s where there was nuclear doom and a lot of adults really had existential threat, almost as bad as now with AI doom. They were really worried. There were some great … Well, not great. There were some horrific documentaries. I think there was one called Threads that was generated in the UK, which, it was terrible. It was so scary.
And I think that the correct thing to do is obviously get rid of nuclear weapons, but let’s think about unintended consequences. We’ve got rid of … This is going to be such a non sequitur. We got rid of all the sulfur particles in the atmosphere, right? All the soot. And what’s happened in the last couple of years is global warming has accelerated because we’ve cleaned up the atmosphere too much. So …
Lex Fridman
Sure. The same thing if you get rid of nuclear weapons. You’ll get [inaudible 02:42:05]-
Sure. The same thing if you get rid of nuclear weapons. You’ll get [inaudible 02:42:05]-
Lee Cronin
Exactly, that’s my point. So, what we could do is if we actually started to put the AI in charge … Which I’d really like an AI to be in charge of all world politics, and this will sound ridiculous for a second. Hang on. But if we could all agree on the-
Exactly, that’s my point. So, what we could do is if we actually started to put the AI in charge … Which I’d really like an AI to be in charge of all world politics, and this will sound ridiculous for a second. Hang on. But if we could all agree on the-
Lex Fridman
The AI doomers just woke up on that statement.
The AI doomers just woke up on that statement.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I really don’t like politicians who are basically just looking at local sampling. But if you could say globally, “Look, here’s some game theory here. What is the minimum number of nuclear weapons we need to distribute around the world to everybody to basically reduce war to zero?”
Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I really don’t like politicians who are basically just looking at local sampling. But if you could say globally, “Look, here’s some game theory here. What is the minimum number of nuclear weapons we need to distribute around the world to everybody to basically reduce war to zero?”
Lex Fridman
Just the thought experiment of, the United States and China and Russia and major nuclear powers get together and say, “All right, we’re going to distribute nuclear weapons to every single nation on Earth.” Oh, boy. That has a probably greater than 50% chance of eliminating major military conflict, but it’s not a hundred percent.
Just the thought experiment of, the United States and China and Russia and major nuclear powers get together and say, “All right, we’re going to distribute nuclear weapons to every single nation on Earth.” Oh, boy. That has a probably greater than 50% chance of eliminating major military conflict, but it’s not a hundred percent.
Lee Cronin
But I don’t think anyone will use them, because … And look, what you’ve got to try and do is to qualify for these nuclear weapons … This is a great idea. The game theorists could do this, right?
But I don’t think anyone will use them, because … And look, what you’ve got to try and do is to qualify for these nuclear weapons … This is a great idea. The game theorists could do this, right?
Lex Fridman
Uh-huh.
Uh-huh.
Lee Cronin
I think the question is this … I really buy your question. We have too many nukes. Just from a feeling point of view, that we’ve got too many of them. So, let’s reduce the number, but not get rid of them because we’ll have too much conventional warfare. So then, what is the minimum number of nuclear weapons we can distribute around to remove … Humans hurting each other is something we should stop doing. It’s not out with our conceptual capability …
I think the question is this … I really buy your question. We have too many nukes. Just from a feeling point of view, that we’ve got too many of them. So, let’s reduce the number, but not get rid of them because we’ll have too much conventional warfare. So then, what is the minimum number of nuclear weapons we can distribute around to remove … Humans hurting each other is something we should stop doing. It’s not out with our conceptual capability …
But right now, what about certain nations that are being exploited for their natural resources in the future for a short-term gain because we don’t want to generate knowledge? So, if everybody had an equal doomsday switch, I predict the quality of life of the average human will go up faster. I am an optimist, and I believe that humanity is going to get better and better and better, that we’re going to eliminate more problems. But I think, yeah, let’s-
Lex Fridman
But the probability of a bad actor, of one of the nations setting off a nuclear weapon, you have to integrate that into the calculus here.
But the probability of a bad actor, of one of the nations setting off a nuclear weapon, you have to integrate that into the calculus here.
Lee Cronin
But we just give you [inaudible 02:44:28] nukes population. Right? What we do is we … I can’t believe this. But anyway, let’s just go there. So, if a small nation with a couple of nukes uses one because they’re a bit bored or annoyed, the likelihood that they are going to be pummeled out of existence immediately is 100%. And yet they’ve only nuked one other city. I know this is crazy, and I apologize for …
But we just give you [inaudible 02:44:28] nukes population. Right? What we do is we … I can’t believe this. But anyway, let’s just go there. So, if a small nation with a couple of nukes uses one because they’re a bit bored or annoyed, the likelihood that they are going to be pummeled out of existence immediately is 100%. And yet they’ve only nuked one other city. I know this is crazy, and I apologize for …
Lex Fridman
Well, no, no. Just to be clear, we’re just having a thought experiment that’s interesting. But there’s terrorist organizations that would take that trade. We have to ask ourselves a question of: Which percentage of humans would be suicide bombers, essentially? Where they would sacrifice their own life because they hate another group of people. I believe it’s a very small fraction, but is it large enough to, if you give out nuclear weapons …
Well, no, no. Just to be clear, we’re just having a thought experiment that’s interesting. But there’s terrorist organizations that would take that trade. We have to ask ourselves a question of: Which percentage of humans would be suicide bombers, essentially? Where they would sacrifice their own life because they hate another group of people. I believe it’s a very small fraction, but is it large enough to, if you give out nuclear weapons …
Lee Cronin
I can predict a future where we take all nuclear material and we burn it for energy, right? Because we’re getting there. And the other thing you could do is say, “Look, there’s a gap.” So, if we get all the countries to sign up to the virtual agreement where we have a simulation where we can nuke each other in the simulation and the economic consequences are catastrophic …
I can predict a future where we take all nuclear material and we burn it for energy, right? Because we’re getting there. And the other thing you could do is say, “Look, there’s a gap.” So, if we get all the countries to sign up to the virtual agreement where we have a simulation where we can nuke each other in the simulation and the economic consequences are catastrophic …
Lex Fridman
Sure. In the simulation, I love it. It’s not going to kill all humans, it’s just going to have economic consequences.
Sure. In the simulation, I love it. It’s not going to kill all humans, it’s just going to have economic consequences.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, yeah. I don’t know, I just made it up. It seems like a cool idea.
Yeah, yeah. I don’t know, I just made it up. It seems like a cool idea.
Lex Fridman
No, it’s interesting. But it’s interesting whether that would have as much power on human psychology as actual physical nuclear explosion.
No, it’s interesting. But it’s interesting whether that would have as much power on human psychology as actual physical nuclear explosion.
Lee Cronin
I think so.
I think so.
Lex Fridman
It’s possible, but people don’t take economic consequences as seriously I think as actual nuclear weapons exploding.
It’s possible, but people don’t take economic consequences as seriously I think as actual nuclear weapons exploding.
Lee Cronin
I think they do in Argentina, and they do in Somalia. And they do in a lot of these places where … No, I think this is a great idea. I’m a strong advocate now for … So, what have we come up with? Burning all the nuclear material to have energy. And before we do that, because MAD is good, mutually assured destruction is very powerful, let’s take it into the metaverse and then get people to kind of subscribe to that. And if they actually nuke each other even for fun in the metaverse, there are dire consequences.
I think they do in Argentina, and they do in Somalia. And they do in a lot of these places where … No, I think this is a great idea. I’m a strong advocate now for … So, what have we come up with? Burning all the nuclear material to have energy. And before we do that, because MAD is good, mutually assured destruction is very powerful, let’s take it into the metaverse and then get people to kind of subscribe to that. And if they actually nuke each other even for fun in the metaverse, there are dire consequences.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah. So, it’s like a video game. We all have to join this metaverse video game …
Yeah, yeah. So, it’s like a video game. We all have to join this metaverse video game …
Lee Cronin
Yeah. I can’t believe we just …
Yeah. I can’t believe we just …
Lex Fridman
And then there’s dire economic consequences. And it’s all run by AI, as you mentioned, so the AI doomers are really terrified at this point.
And then there’s dire economic consequences. And it’s all run by AI, as you mentioned, so the AI doomers are really terrified at this point.
Lee Cronin
No, they’re happy. They have a job for another 20 years, right?
No, they’re happy. They have a job for another 20 years, right?
Lex Fridman
Oh, fear-mongering.
Oh, fear-mongering.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I’m a believer in equal employment.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I’m a believer in equal employment.
Chem Machina
Lex Fridman
You’ve mentioned that, what’d you call it … Chem Machina?
You’ve mentioned that, what’d you call it … Chem Machina?
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. So, you’ve mentioned that a chemical brain is something you’re interested in creating, and that’s the way to get conscious AI soon. Can you explain what a chemical brain is?
Yeah. So, you’ve mentioned that a chemical brain is something you’re interested in creating, and that’s the way to get conscious AI soon. Can you explain what a chemical brain is?
Lee Cronin
I want to understand the mechanism of intelligence that’s gone through evolution, right? Because the way that intelligence was produced by evolution appears to be the following: origin of life, multi-cellularity, locomotion, senses. Once you can start to see things coming towards you, and you can remember the past and interrogate the present and imagine the future, you can do something amazing, right? And I think only in recent years did humans become Turing-complete, right?
I want to understand the mechanism of intelligence that’s gone through evolution, right? Because the way that intelligence was produced by evolution appears to be the following: origin of life, multi-cellularity, locomotion, senses. Once you can start to see things coming towards you, and you can remember the past and interrogate the present and imagine the future, you can do something amazing, right? And I think only in recent years did humans become Turing-complete, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
Right? So, that Turing completeness kind of gave us another kick up. But our ability to process that information was produced in a wet brain. And I think that we do not have the correct hardware architectures to have the domain flexibility and the ability to integrate information, and I think intelligence also comes at a massive compromise of data. Right now we’re obsessing about getting more and more data, more and more processing, more and more tricks to get dopamine hits. So, when we look back on this going, “Oh yeah, that was really cool, because when I asked ChatGPT, it made me feel really happy and I got a hit from it.” But actually it just exposed how little intelligence I use in every moment, because I’m easily fooled.
Right? So, that Turing completeness kind of gave us another kick up. But our ability to process that information was produced in a wet brain. And I think that we do not have the correct hardware architectures to have the domain flexibility and the ability to integrate information, and I think intelligence also comes at a massive compromise of data. Right now we’re obsessing about getting more and more data, more and more processing, more and more tricks to get dopamine hits. So, when we look back on this going, “Oh yeah, that was really cool, because when I asked ChatGPT, it made me feel really happy and I got a hit from it.” But actually it just exposed how little intelligence I use in every moment, because I’m easily fooled.
So, what I would like to do is to say, “Well, hey, hang on. What is it about the brain?” So, the brain has this incredible connectivity, and it has the ability to … As I said earlier about my nephew, I went from “Bill” to “Billy” and he went, “All right, Leroy.” How did he make that leap? That he was able to basically without any training … I extended his name in a way that he doesn’t like. He wants to be called Bill. He went back and said, “You like to be called Lee? I’m going to call you Leroy.”
So, human beings have a brilliant ability, or intelligent beings appear to have a brilliant ability to integrate across all domains all at once, and to synthesize something which allows us to generate knowledge. And becoming Turing-complete on our own, although AIs are built and Turing-complete things, their thinking is not Turing-complete in that they are not able to build universal explanations. And that lack of universal explanation means that they’re just-
Lee Cronin
Lack of universal explanation means that they’re just inductivists. Inductivism doesn’t get you anywhere. It’s just basically a party trick. I think it’s in The Fabric Of Reality from David Deutsch where basically the farmer is feeding the chicken every day and the chicken’s getting fat and happy. And the chicken’s like, “I’m really happy every time the farmer comes in and feeds me.” And then one day the farmer comes in and instead of feeding the chicken, just rings its neck. And had the chicken had an alternative understanding of why the farmer was feeding it.
Lack of universal explanation means that they’re just inductivists. Inductivism doesn’t get you anywhere. It’s just basically a party trick. I think it’s in The Fabric Of Reality from David Deutsch where basically the farmer is feeding the chicken every day and the chicken’s getting fat and happy. And the chicken’s like, “I’m really happy every time the farmer comes in and feeds me.” And then one day the farmer comes in and instead of feeding the chicken, just rings its neck. And had the chicken had an alternative understanding of why the farmer was feeding it.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting though, because we don’t know what’s special about the human mind that’s able to come up with these kind of generalities. This universal theories of things. And we’ll come up with novelty. I can imagine… Because you gave an example about William and Leroy. I feel like an example like that we’ll be able to see in future versions of large language models. We’ll be really, really, really impressed by the humor, the insights, all of it. Because it’s fundamentally trained on all the incredible humor and insights that’s available out there on the internet. So we’ll be impressed. I think we’ll be impressed.
It’s interesting though, because we don’t know what’s special about the human mind that’s able to come up with these kind of generalities. This universal theories of things. And we’ll come up with novelty. I can imagine… Because you gave an example about William and Leroy. I feel like an example like that we’ll be able to see in future versions of large language models. We’ll be really, really, really impressed by the humor, the insights, all of it. Because it’s fundamentally trained on all the incredible humor and insights that’s available out there on the internet. So we’ll be impressed. I think we’ll be impressed.
Lee Cronin
Oh, I’m impressed. I’m impressed.
Oh, I’m impressed. I’m impressed.
Lex Fridman
Increasingly so.
Increasingly so.
Lee Cronin
But we are mining the past.
But we are mining the past.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Lee Cronin
And what the human brain appears to be able to do is mine the future.
And what the human brain appears to be able to do is mine the future.
Lex Fridman
Yes. So novelty, it is interesting whether these large language models will ever be able to come up with something truly novel.
Yes. So novelty, it is interesting whether these large language models will ever be able to come up with something truly novel.
Lee Cronin
I can show on the back of a piece of paper why that’s impossible. And it’s like the problem is that… And again these are domain experts kind of bullshitting each other. The term generative, right. Average person say, oh, it’s no, no, no. Look, if I take the numbers between zero and 1000 and I train a model to pick out the prime numbers by giving all the prime numbers between zero and a thousand, it doesn’t know what prime number is. Occasionally if I can cheat a bit, it will start to guess.
I can show on the back of a piece of paper why that’s impossible. And it’s like the problem is that… And again these are domain experts kind of bullshitting each other. The term generative, right. Average person say, oh, it’s no, no, no. Look, if I take the numbers between zero and 1000 and I train a model to pick out the prime numbers by giving all the prime numbers between zero and a thousand, it doesn’t know what prime number is. Occasionally if I can cheat a bit, it will start to guess.
It never will produce anything out with the dataset because you mine the past. The thing that I’m getting to is I think that actually current machine learning technologies might actually help reveal why time is fundamental. It’s like kind of insane. Because they tell you about what’s happened in the past, but they can never help you understand what’s happening in the future without training examples. Sure, if that thing happens again. So let’s think about what large language models are doing. We have all the internet as we know it, language, but also they’re doing something else. We having human beings correcting it all the time. Those models are being corrected,
Lex Fridman
Steered.
Steered.
Lee Cronin
Corrected, modified, tweaked.
Corrected, modified, tweaked.
Lex Fridman
Well, yeah, but-
Well, yeah, but-
Lee Cronin
Cheating.
Cheating.
Lex Fridman
Well you could say the training on human data in the first place is cheating.
Well you could say the training on human data in the first place is cheating.
Lee Cronin
Well, human is in the loop. Sorry to interrupt.
Well, human is in the loop. Sorry to interrupt.
Lex Fridman
Yes. So human is definitely in the loop, but it’s not just human is in the loop. A very large collection of humans is in the loop.
Yes. So human is definitely in the loop, but it’s not just human is in the loop. A very large collection of humans is in the loop.
Lee Cronin
Look I totally-
Look I totally-
Lex Fridman
And that could be… I mean to me it’s not intuitive that you said prime numbers, that the system can’t generate an algorithm. That the algorithm that can generate prime numbers or the algorithm that can tell you if a number is prime and so on. And generate algorithms that generate algorithms, that generate algorithms that start to look a lot like human reasoning.
And that could be… I mean to me it’s not intuitive that you said prime numbers, that the system can’t generate an algorithm. That the algorithm that can generate prime numbers or the algorithm that can tell you if a number is prime and so on. And generate algorithms that generate algorithms, that generate algorithms that start to look a lot like human reasoning.
Lee Cronin
I think again, we can show that on a piece of paper, that sure. I think you have to have… So this is the failure in epidemiology. I’m glad I even can say that word, let know what it means.
I think again, we can show that on a piece of paper, that sure. I think you have to have… So this is the failure in epidemiology. I’m glad I even can say that word, let know what it means.
Lex Fridman
You said it multiple times.
You said it multiple times.
Lee Cronin
I know. It’s like three times now.
I know. It’s like three times now.
Lex Fridman
Without failure. Quit while you’re ahead. Just don’t say it again because you did really well.
Without failure. Quit while you’re ahead. Just don’t say it again because you did really well.
Lee Cronin
Thanks. But I think, so what is reasoning? So coming back to the chemical brain. If I could show the inner… Because I mean I’m never going to make an intelligence in ca machina. Because if you don’t have brain cells, they don’t have glial cells, they don’t have neurons. But if I can take a gel and engineer the gel to have it be a hybrid hardware for reprogramming, which I think I know how to do, I will able to process a lot more information and train models billions of times cheaper and use cross domain knowledge. And there’s certain techniques I think we can do. But there’s still missing, though the abilities that human beings have had to become true and complete. And so I guess the question to give back at you is like how do you tell the difference between trial and error and the generation of new knowledge?
Thanks. But I think, so what is reasoning? So coming back to the chemical brain. If I could show the inner… Because I mean I’m never going to make an intelligence in ca machina. Because if you don’t have brain cells, they don’t have glial cells, they don’t have neurons. But if I can take a gel and engineer the gel to have it be a hybrid hardware for reprogramming, which I think I know how to do, I will able to process a lot more information and train models billions of times cheaper and use cross domain knowledge. And there’s certain techniques I think we can do. But there’s still missing, though the abilities that human beings have had to become true and complete. And so I guess the question to give back at you is like how do you tell the difference between trial and error and the generation of new knowledge?
I think the way you can do it is this, is that you come up with a theory, an explanation, inspiration comes from out, and then you then test that, and then you see that’s going towards the truth. And human beings are very good at doing that. And the transition between philosophy, mathematics, physics and natural sciences. And I think that we can see that. Where I get confused is why people misappropriate the term artificial intelligence to say, “Hey, there’s something else going on here.” Because I think you and I both agree, machine learning’s really good, it’s only going to get better. We’re going to get happier with the outcome. But why would you ever think the model is thinking or reasoning? Reasoning requires intention. And the intention, if the model isn’t reasoning, the intentions come from the prompter. And the intention has come from the person who programmed it to do it.
Lex Fridman
But don’t you think you can prompt it to have intention?Basically start with the initial conditions and get it going? Where currently large language models, ChatGPT only talks to you when you talk to it. There’s no reason why you can’t just start it talking.
But don’t you think you can prompt it to have intention?Basically start with the initial conditions and get it going? Where currently large language models, ChatGPT only talks to you when you talk to it. There’s no reason why you can’t just start it talking.
Lee Cronin
But those initial conditions came from someone starting it.
But those initial conditions came from someone starting it.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Lee Cronin
And that causal chain in there. So that intention comes from the outside. I think that there is something in that causal chain of intention that’s super important. I don’t disagree, we’re going to get to AGI. It’s a matter of when and what hardware. I think we’re not going to do it in this hardware and I think we’re unnecessarily fetishizing really cool outputs and dopamine hits. Because obviously that’s what people want to sell us.
And that causal chain in there. So that intention comes from the outside. I think that there is something in that causal chain of intention that’s super important. I don’t disagree, we’re going to get to AGI. It’s a matter of when and what hardware. I think we’re not going to do it in this hardware and I think we’re unnecessarily fetishizing really cool outputs and dopamine hits. Because obviously that’s what people want to sell us.
Lex Fridman
Well, but there could be AGI is a loaded term. But there could be incredibly super impressive intelligence systems on the way to AGI. So these large language models, I mean if it appears conscious, if it appears super intelligent, who are we to say it’s not.
Well, but there could be AGI is a loaded term. But there could be incredibly super impressive intelligence systems on the way to AGI. So these large language models, I mean if it appears conscious, if it appears super intelligent, who are we to say it’s not.
Lee Cronin
I agree, but the super intelligence I want, I want to be able to have a discussion with it about coming up with fundamental new ideas that generate knowledge. And if the superintelligent we generate can mine novel even from the future that I didn’t see in its training set in the past, I would agree that something really interesting is coming on. I’ll say that again. If the intelligence system, be it a human being, a Chatbot, something else, is able to produce something truly novel that I could not predict ,even having full audit trail from the past, then I’ll be sold.
I agree, but the super intelligence I want, I want to be able to have a discussion with it about coming up with fundamental new ideas that generate knowledge. And if the superintelligent we generate can mine novel even from the future that I didn’t see in its training set in the past, I would agree that something really interesting is coming on. I’ll say that again. If the intelligence system, be it a human being, a Chatbot, something else, is able to produce something truly novel that I could not predict ,even having full audit trail from the past, then I’ll be sold.
Lex Fridman
Well, so we should be clear that it can currently produce things that are in a shallow sense novel. That are not in the training set. But you’re saying truly novel.
Well, so we should be clear that it can currently produce things that are in a shallow sense novel. That are not in the training set. But you’re saying truly novel.
Lee Cronin
I think they are in the training set. I think everything it produces comes from a training set. There’s a difference between novelty and interpolation. We do not understand where these leaps come from yet. That is what intelligence is I would argue. Those leaps and some people say no, it’s actually just what will happen if you just do cross domain training and all that stuff. And that may be true. And I may be completely wrong. But right now the human mind is able to mine novelty in a way that artificial intelligence systems cannot. And this is why we still all have a job. And we’re still doing staff. And I used ChatGPT for a few weeks. Oh this is cool. And then what happened is it took me too much time to correct it. Then it got really good. And now they’ve done something to it. It’s not actually that good.
I think they are in the training set. I think everything it produces comes from a training set. There’s a difference between novelty and interpolation. We do not understand where these leaps come from yet. That is what intelligence is I would argue. Those leaps and some people say no, it’s actually just what will happen if you just do cross domain training and all that stuff. And that may be true. And I may be completely wrong. But right now the human mind is able to mine novelty in a way that artificial intelligence systems cannot. And this is why we still all have a job. And we’re still doing staff. And I used ChatGPT for a few weeks. Oh this is cool. And then what happened is it took me too much time to correct it. Then it got really good. And now they’ve done something to it. It’s not actually that good.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, right.
Yeah, right.
Lee Cronin
I don’t know what’s going on.
I don’t know what’s going on.
Lex Fridman
Censorship. Yeah, I mean that’s interesting. But it will push us humans to characterize novelty better. Characterize the novel, what is novel, what is truly novel, what’s the difference between novelty and interpolation.
Censorship. Yeah, I mean that’s interesting. But it will push us humans to characterize novelty better. Characterize the novel, what is novel, what is truly novel, what’s the difference between novelty and interpolation.
Lee Cronin
I think that this is the thing that makes me most excited about these technologies, is they’re going to help me demonstrate to you that time is fundamental. And the unit future is bigger than the present. Which is why human beings are quite good at generating novelty because we have to expand our dataset. And to cope with unexpected things in our environment. Our environment throws them all at us. Again, we have to survive in that environment. And I mean, I never say never. I would be very interested in how we can get cross domain training cheaply in chemical systems. Because I’m a chemist and bray, the only sim thing I know of is a human brain. But maybe that’s just me being boring and predictable and not novel.
I think that this is the thing that makes me most excited about these technologies, is they’re going to help me demonstrate to you that time is fundamental. And the unit future is bigger than the present. Which is why human beings are quite good at generating novelty because we have to expand our dataset. And to cope with unexpected things in our environment. Our environment throws them all at us. Again, we have to survive in that environment. And I mean, I never say never. I would be very interested in how we can get cross domain training cheaply in chemical systems. Because I’m a chemist and bray, the only sim thing I know of is a human brain. But maybe that’s just me being boring and predictable and not novel.
GPT for electron density
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You mentioned GPT for electron density. So a GPT like system for generating molecules that can bind to host automatically. I mean that’s interesting. I’s really interesting. Applying this same kind of transform mechanism.
Yeah. You mentioned GPT for electron density. So a GPT like system for generating molecules that can bind to host automatically. I mean that’s interesting. I’s really interesting. Applying this same kind of transform mechanism.
Lee Cronin
I mean, my team, I try and do things that are non obvious but non obvious in certain areas. And one of the things I was always asking about in chemistry, people like to represent molecules as graphs and it’s quite difficult. It’s really hard if you’re doing AI and chemistry, you really want to basically have good representations. You can generate new molecules are interesting. And I was thinking, well molecules aren’t really graphs and they’re not continuously differentiable. Could I do something that was continuously differentiable? I was like, well, molecules are actually made up of electron density. So I got thinking and say, well, okay, could there be a way where we could just basically take a database of readily solved electron densities for millions of molecules? So we took the electron density for millions of molecules and just train the model to learn what electron density is.
I mean, my team, I try and do things that are non obvious but non obvious in certain areas. And one of the things I was always asking about in chemistry, people like to represent molecules as graphs and it’s quite difficult. It’s really hard if you’re doing AI and chemistry, you really want to basically have good representations. You can generate new molecules are interesting. And I was thinking, well molecules aren’t really graphs and they’re not continuously differentiable. Could I do something that was continuously differentiable? I was like, well, molecules are actually made up of electron density. So I got thinking and say, well, okay, could there be a way where we could just basically take a database of readily solved electron densities for millions of molecules? So we took the electron density for millions of molecules and just train the model to learn what electron density is.
And so what we built was a system that you literally could give it a, let’s say you could take a protein that has a particular active site or a cup with a certain hole in it. You pour noise into it and with A GPT you turn the noise into electron density. And then in this case it hallucinates, like all of them do. But then hallucinations are good because it means I don’t have to train on such a huge dataset, because these data sets are very expensive. How do you produce it? So go back a step. So you’ve got all these molecules in this dataset, but what you’ve literally done is a quantum mechanical calculation. We produce electron densities for each molecule. So you say, oh, this representation of this molecule has these electron densities associated with it, so you know what the representation is and you train the neural network to know what electron density is.
So then you give it an unknown pocket. You pour in noise and you say, right, produce me electron density, it produces electron density that doesn’t look ridiculous. And what we did in this case is we produce electron density that maximizes the electrostatic potential, so the stickiness, but minimizes what we call the steric hindrance. So the overlaps, so it’s repulsive. So make the perfect fit. And then we then use kind of like a ChatGPT type thing to turn that electron density into what’s called a smile. A smile string is a way of representing a molecule in letters. And then we can then-
Lex Fridman
So it just generates them then.
So it just generates them then.
Lee Cronin
Just generates them. And then the other thing is then we bung that into the computer and then it just makes it.
Just generates them. And then the other thing is then we bung that into the computer and then it just makes it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the computer being the thing that right… To generate-
Yeah, the computer being the thing that right… To generate-
Lee Cronin
The robot we’ve got that can basically just do chemistry. So we’ve kind of got this end-to-end drug discovery machine where you can say, “Oh, you want to bind to this active site, here you go.” I mean it is a bit leaky and things kind of break, but it is the proof of principle.
The robot we’ve got that can basically just do chemistry. So we’ve kind of got this end-to-end drug discovery machine where you can say, “Oh, you want to bind to this active site, here you go.” I mean it is a bit leaky and things kind of break, but it is the proof of principle.
Lex Fridman
But were the hallucinations, are those still accurate?
But were the hallucinations, are those still accurate?
Lee Cronin
Well the hallucinations are really great in this case, because in the case of a large language model, the hallucinations just make everything up. It doesn’t just make everything up, but it gives you an output that you are plausibly comfortable with and thinks you’re doing probabilistically. The problem on these tron density models is it’s very expensive to solve a shredding equation going up to many heavy atoms and large molecules. And so we wondered if we trained the system on up to nine heavy atoms, whether it would go beyond nine and it did, It started to generate molecules for 12. No problem. They look pretty good. And I was like, well this hallucination I will take for free. Thank you very much.
Well the hallucinations are really great in this case, because in the case of a large language model, the hallucinations just make everything up. It doesn’t just make everything up, but it gives you an output that you are plausibly comfortable with and thinks you’re doing probabilistically. The problem on these tron density models is it’s very expensive to solve a shredding equation going up to many heavy atoms and large molecules. And so we wondered if we trained the system on up to nine heavy atoms, whether it would go beyond nine and it did, It started to generate molecules for 12. No problem. They look pretty good. And I was like, well this hallucination I will take for free. Thank you very much.
Because it just basically… This is a case where interpolation extrapolation worked relatively well. And we were able to generate the really good molecules. And then what we were able to do here is, and this is a really good point and what I was trying to say earlier, that we were able to generate new molecules, from the known set, that would bind to the host. So a new guest would bind. Were these truly novel? Not really because they were constrained by the host. Were they new to us? Yes. So I do, well understand… I can concede that machine learning systems, artificial intelligence systems can generate new entities, but how novel are they? It remains to be seen.
Lex Fridman
And how novel the things that humans generate is also difficult to quantify. They seem novel.
And how novel the things that humans generate is also difficult to quantify. They seem novel.
Lee Cronin
That’s what a lot of people say. So the way to really get to genuine novelty, and assembly theory shows you the way, is to have different causal chains overlap. And this really, really resonates with the time is fundamental argument. And if you are bringing together a couple of objects with different initial conditions coming together, when they interact, the more different their histories, the more novelty they generate in time going forward. And so it could be that genuine novelty is basically about mix it up a little. And the human brain is able to mix it up a little little, and all that stimulus comes from the environment. But all I think I’m saying is the universe is deterministic going back in time. Non-deterministic going forward in time. Because the universe is too big in the future to contain in the present. Therefore these collisions of known things generate unknown things, that then become part of your data set and don’t appear weird. That’s how we give ourselves comfort. The past looks consistent with this initial condition hypothesis, but actually we’re generating more and more novelty. And that’s how it works. Simple.
That’s what a lot of people say. So the way to really get to genuine novelty, and assembly theory shows you the way, is to have different causal chains overlap. And this really, really resonates with the time is fundamental argument. And if you are bringing together a couple of objects with different initial conditions coming together, when they interact, the more different their histories, the more novelty they generate in time going forward. And so it could be that genuine novelty is basically about mix it up a little. And the human brain is able to mix it up a little little, and all that stimulus comes from the environment. But all I think I’m saying is the universe is deterministic going back in time. Non-deterministic going forward in time. Because the universe is too big in the future to contain in the present. Therefore these collisions of known things generate unknown things, that then become part of your data set and don’t appear weird. That’s how we give ourselves comfort. The past looks consistent with this initial condition hypothesis, but actually we’re generating more and more novelty. And that’s how it works. Simple.
Lex Fridman
So it’s hard to quantify novelty looking backwards. I mean the present and the future at the novelty generators.
So it’s hard to quantify novelty looking backwards. I mean the present and the future at the novelty generators.
Lee Cronin
But I like this whole idea of mining novelty. I think it is going to reveal why the limitations of current AI is a bit like a printing press. Everyone thought that when the printing press came that writing books is going to be terrible, that you had evil spirits and all this. They were just books.
But I like this whole idea of mining novelty. I think it is going to reveal why the limitations of current AI is a bit like a printing press. Everyone thought that when the printing press came that writing books is going to be terrible, that you had evil spirits and all this. They were just books.
Lex Fridman
And same with AI. But I think just the scale you can achieve in terms of impact with AI systems is pretty nerve wracking.
And same with AI. But I think just the scale you can achieve in terms of impact with AI systems is pretty nerve wracking.
Lee Cronin
But that’s what the big companies want you to think.
But that’s what the big companies want you to think.
Lex Fridman
But not in terms of destroy all humans. But you can have major consequences in the way social media has had major consequences, both positive and negative. And so you have to think about it and worry about it. But yeah, people that fear monger…
But not in terms of destroy all humans. But you can have major consequences in the way social media has had major consequences, both positive and negative. And so you have to think about it and worry about it. But yeah, people that fear monger…
Lee Cronin
My pet theory for this, you want to know?
My pet theory for this, you want to know?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
Is I think that a lot… And maybe I’m being… And I really do respect a lot of the people out there who are trying to have discourse about the positive future. So open AI guys, meta guys and all this. What I wonder if they’re trying to cover up for the fact that social media has had a pretty disastrous effect at some level, and they’re just trying to say, “Oh yeah, we should do this.” Covering up for the fact that we have got some problems with teenagers, and Instagram, and Snapchat, and all this stuff, and maybe they’re just overreacting now. It’s like, “Oh yeah, sorry, we made the bubonic plate and gave it to you all and you’re all dying.” And “Oh yeah, but look at this over here it’s even worse.”
Is I think that a lot… And maybe I’m being… And I really do respect a lot of the people out there who are trying to have discourse about the positive future. So open AI guys, meta guys and all this. What I wonder if they’re trying to cover up for the fact that social media has had a pretty disastrous effect at some level, and they’re just trying to say, “Oh yeah, we should do this.” Covering up for the fact that we have got some problems with teenagers, and Instagram, and Snapchat, and all this stuff, and maybe they’re just overreacting now. It’s like, “Oh yeah, sorry, we made the bubonic plate and gave it to you all and you’re all dying.” And “Oh yeah, but look at this over here it’s even worse.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s a little bit of that. But there’s also not enough celebration of the positive impact that all of these technologies have had. We tend to focus on the negative and tend to forget that. In part because it’s hard to measure. It is very hard to measure the positive impact social media had on the world.
Yeah, there’s a little bit of that. But there’s also not enough celebration of the positive impact that all of these technologies have had. We tend to focus on the negative and tend to forget that. In part because it’s hard to measure. It is very hard to measure the positive impact social media had on the world.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, I agree. But what I worry about right now is I do care about the ethics of what we’re doing. And one of the reasons why I’m so open about the things we’re trying to do in the lab, make life look at intelligence, all this, so people say, what are the consequences of this? And you say, what are the consequences of not doing it? And I think that what worries me right now in the present is lack of authenticated users and authenticated data and-
Yeah, I agree. But what I worry about right now is I do care about the ethics of what we’re doing. And one of the reasons why I’m so open about the things we’re trying to do in the lab, make life look at intelligence, all this, so people say, what are the consequences of this? And you say, what are the consequences of not doing it? And I think that what worries me right now in the present is lack of authenticated users and authenticated data and-
Lex Fridman
Human users.
Human users.
Lee Cronin
Yeah, human.
Yeah, human.
Lex Fridman
I still think that there will be AI agents that appear to be conscious, but they would have to be also authenticated and labeled as such. There’s too much value in that. Like friendships with AI systems. There’s too much meaningful human experiences to have with the AI systems that I just…
I still think that there will be AI agents that appear to be conscious, but they would have to be also authenticated and labeled as such. There’s too much value in that. Like friendships with AI systems. There’s too much meaningful human experiences to have with the AI systems that I just…
Lee Cronin
But that’s like a tool, right? It’s a bit like a meditation tool, right?
But that’s like a tool, right? It’s a bit like a meditation tool, right?
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Lee Cronin
Some people have a meditation tool, it makes them feel better. But I’m not sure you can ascribe sentience and legal rights to a chatbot that makes you feel less lonely.
Some people have a meditation tool, it makes them feel better. But I’m not sure you can ascribe sentience and legal rights to a chatbot that makes you feel less lonely.
Lex Fridman
Sentience, yes. I think legal rights, no. I think it’s the same. You can have a really deep, meaningful relationship with a dog.
Sentience, yes. I think legal rights, no. I think it’s the same. You can have a really deep, meaningful relationship with a dog.
Lee Cronin
Well the dog is sentient.
Well the dog is sentient.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Lee Cronin
The chatbots right now, using the technology we use, it’s not going to be sentient.
The chatbots right now, using the technology we use, it’s not going to be sentient.
God
Lex Fridman
This is going to be a fun continued conversation on Twitter that I look forward to. Since you’ve had also from another place some debates that were inspired by the assembly theory paper, let me ask you about God. Is there any room for notions of God in assembly theory? Of God.
This is going to be a fun continued conversation on Twitter that I look forward to. Since you’ve had also from another place some debates that were inspired by the assembly theory paper, let me ask you about God. Is there any room for notions of God in assembly theory? Of God.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. I don’t know what God is a… I mean, so God exists in our mind created by selection. So the human beings have created the concept of God in the same way that human beings have created the concept of super intelligence.
Yeah. I don’t know what God is a… I mean, so God exists in our mind created by selection. So the human beings have created the concept of God in the same way that human beings have created the concept of super intelligence.
Lex Fridman
Sure, but does it mean, does it not… It still could mean that that’s a projection from the real world where we’re just assigning words and concepts to a thing that is fundamental to the real world. That there is something out there that is a creative force underlying the universe.
Sure, but does it mean, does it not… It still could mean that that’s a projection from the real world where we’re just assigning words and concepts to a thing that is fundamental to the real world. That there is something out there that is a creative force underlying the universe.
Lee Cronin
I think the universe… There is a creative force in the universe, but I don’t think it’s sentient. So I do not understand the universe. So who am I to say that God doesn’t exist? I am an atheist, but I’m not an angry atheist. There’s some people I know that are angry atheists and say-
I think the universe… There is a creative force in the universe, but I don’t think it’s sentient. So I do not understand the universe. So who am I to say that God doesn’t exist? I am an atheist, but I’m not an angry atheist. There’s some people I know that are angry atheists and say-
Lex Fridman
Cranky.
Cranky.
Lee Cronin
Say that religious people are stupid. I don’t think that’s the case. I have faith in some things. I mean when I was a kid I was like, I need to know what the charge of electron is. And I was like, I can’t measure the charge on electron. I just gave up and had faith. Okay, you know, resistors worked. So when it comes to… I want to know why the universe is growing in the future and what humanity is going to become. And I’ve seen that the acquisition of knowledge via the generation of novelty to produce technology has uniformly made humans’ lives better. I would love to continue that tradition.
Say that religious people are stupid. I don’t think that’s the case. I have faith in some things. I mean when I was a kid I was like, I need to know what the charge of electron is. And I was like, I can’t measure the charge on electron. I just gave up and had faith. Okay, you know, resistors worked. So when it comes to… I want to know why the universe is growing in the future and what humanity is going to become. And I’ve seen that the acquisition of knowledge via the generation of novelty to produce technology has uniformly made humans’ lives better. I would love to continue that tradition.
Lex Fridman
You said that there’s that creative force. Do you think, just to think on that point, do you think there’s a creative force? Is there like a thing, like a driver that’s creating stuff?
You said that there’s that creative force. Do you think, just to think on that point, do you think there’s a creative force? Is there like a thing, like a driver that’s creating stuff?
Lee Cronin
Yeah, so I think that…
Yeah, so I think that…
Lex Fridman
And where? What is it? Can you describe it mathematically?
And where? What is it? Can you describe it mathematically?
Lee Cronin
Well, I think selection. I think selection.
Well, I think selection. I think selection.
Lex Fridman
Selection is the force.
Selection is the force.
Lee Cronin
Selection is the force in the universe. It creates novelty.
Selection is the force in the universe. It creates novelty.
Lex Fridman
So is selection somehow fundamental? Like what…
So is selection somehow fundamental? Like what…
Lee Cronin
Yeah, I think persistence of objects that could decay into nothing through operations that maintain that structure. I mean, think about it. It’s amazing that things exist at all. That we’re just not a big commentorial mess.
Yeah, I think persistence of objects that could decay into nothing through operations that maintain that structure. I mean, think about it. It’s amazing that things exist at all. That we’re just not a big commentorial mess.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Lee Cronin
So the fact that-
So the fact that-
Lex Fridman
And exist. A thing that exists persist in time.
And exist. A thing that exists persist in time.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. Let’s think, maybe the universe is actually in the present. The things… Everything that can exist in the present does exist.
Yeah. Let’s think, maybe the universe is actually in the present. The things… Everything that can exist in the present does exist.
Lex Fridman
Well that would mean it’s deterministic, right?
Well that would mean it’s deterministic, right?
Lee Cronin
I think the universes might. So the universe started super small. The past was deterministic, there wasn’t much going on. And it was able to mine mine, mine, mine, mine. And so the process is somehow generating universes basically… I’m trying to put this into words.
I think the universes might. So the universe started super small. The past was deterministic, there wasn’t much going on. And it was able to mine mine, mine, mine, mine. And so the process is somehow generating universes basically… I’m trying to put this into words.
Lex Fridman
Did you just say there’s no free will though?
Did you just say there’s no free will though?
Lee Cronin
No, I didn’t say that.
No, I didn’t say that.
Lex Fridman
As if-
As if-
Lee Cronin
Sorry, sorry, sorry.
Sorry, sorry, sorry.
Lex Fridman
-it can exist.
-it can exist.
Lee Cronin
I said there is free will. I’m saying that free will occurs at the boundary between the-
I said there is free will. I’m saying that free will occurs at the boundary between the-
Lex Fridman
The past and the future?
The past and the future?
Lee Cronin
The past and the future.
The past and the future.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I got you. But everything that can exist does exist.
Yeah, I got you. But everything that can exist does exist.
Lee Cronin
So everything that’s possible to exist at this… So no, I’m really pulling this…
So everything that’s possible to exist at this… So no, I’m really pulling this…
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of loaded words there. There’s a time element loaded into that statement.
There’s a lot of loaded words there. There’s a time element loaded into that statement.
Lee Cronin
I think that the universe is able to do what it can in the present, right?
I think that the universe is able to do what it can in the present, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lee Cronin
And then I think in the future there are other things that could be possible. We can imagine lots of things, but they don’t all happen.
And then I think in the future there are other things that could be possible. We can imagine lots of things, but they don’t all happen.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Lee Cronin
So what-
So what-
Lex Fridman
So that’s where-
So that’s where-
Lee Cronin
So that’s what I guess I’m getting to.
So that’s what I guess I’m getting to.
Lex Fridman
-you sneak in free will right there.
-you sneak in free will right there.
Lee Cronin
Yeah. So I guess what I’m saying is what exists is a convolution of the past with the present, and the free will going into the future.
Yeah. So I guess what I’m saying is what exists is a convolution of the past with the present, and the free will going into the future.
Lex Fridman
Well, we could still imagine stuff. Right? We can imagine stuff that will never happen.
Well, we could still imagine stuff. Right? We can imagine stuff that will never happen.
Lee Cronin
And it’s amazing force. Because this is the most important thing that we don’t understand. Is our imaginations can actually change the future in a tangible way. Which is what the initial conditions and physics cannot predict. Your imagination has a causal consequence in the future.
And it’s amazing force. Because this is the most important thing that we don’t understand. Is our imaginations can actually change the future in a tangible way. Which is what the initial conditions and physics cannot predict. Your imagination has a causal consequence in the future.
Lex Fridman
Isn’t that weird to you?
Isn’t that weird to you?
Lee Cronin
Yeah. It breaks the laws of physics as we know them right now.
Yeah. It breaks the laws of physics as we know them right now.
Lex Fridman
So you think the imagination has a causal effect on the future?
So you think the imagination has a causal effect on the future?
Lee Cronin
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But it does exist in there in the head.
But it does exist in there in the head.
Lee Cronin
It does, but-
It does, but-
Lex Fridman
There must be a lot of power in whatever’s going on. There could be a lot of power, whatever’s going on in there.
There must be a lot of power in whatever’s going on. There could be a lot of power, whatever’s going on in there.
Lee Cronin
If we then go back to the initial conditions, and that is simply not possible that can happen. But if we go into a universe where we accept that there is a finite ability to represent numbers. And you have rounding… Well not rounding errors, you have sum… What happens, your ability to make decisions, imagine and do stuff is that that interface between the certain and the uncertain. It’s not as Yashar was saying to me, “Randomness goes and you just randomly do random stuff.” It is that you are set free a little on your trajectory. Free will is about being able to explore on this narrow trajectory, that allows you to build… You have a choice about what you build. Or that choice is you interacting with a future in the present.
If we then go back to the initial conditions, and that is simply not possible that can happen. But if we go into a universe where we accept that there is a finite ability to represent numbers. And you have rounding… Well not rounding errors, you have sum… What happens, your ability to make decisions, imagine and do stuff is that that interface between the certain and the uncertain. It’s not as Yashar was saying to me, “Randomness goes and you just randomly do random stuff.” It is that you are set free a little on your trajectory. Free will is about being able to explore on this narrow trajectory, that allows you to build… You have a choice about what you build. Or that choice is you interacting with a future in the present.
Lex Fridman
What to you is most beautiful about this whole thing? The universe?
What to you is most beautiful about this whole thing? The universe?
Lee Cronin
The fact it seems to be very undecided, very open. The fact that every time I think I’m getting towards an answer to a question, there are so many more questions that make the chase.
The fact it seems to be very undecided, very open. The fact that every time I think I’m getting towards an answer to a question, there are so many more questions that make the chase.
Lex Fridman
Do you hate that it’s going to be over at some point for you?
Do you hate that it’s going to be over at some point for you?
Lee Cronin
No. Well for me. I think if you think about it, is it over for Newton now? Newton has had causal consequences in the future. We discuss him all the time,
No. Well for me. I think if you think about it, is it over for Newton now? Newton has had causal consequences in the future. We discuss him all the time,
Lex Fridman
His ideas, but not the person.
His ideas, but not the person.
Lee Cronin
The person just had a lot of causal power when he was alive. But oh my God, one of the things I want to do is leave as many Easter eggs in the future when I’m gone to go, “Oh, that’s cool.”
The person just had a lot of causal power when he was alive. But oh my God, one of the things I want to do is leave as many Easter eggs in the future when I’m gone to go, “Oh, that’s cool.”
Lex Fridman
Would you be very upset if somebody made a good large language model that’s fine tuned to Lee Cronin?
Would you be very upset if somebody made a good large language model that’s fine tuned to Lee Cronin?
Lee Cronin
It would be quite boring. Because I mean, I…
It would be quite boring. Because I mean, I…
Lex Fridman
No novelty generation?
No novelty generation?
Lee Cronin
I mean if it’s a faithful representation of what I’ve done in my life, that’s great. That’s an interesting artifact. But I think the most interesting thing about knowing each other is we don’t know what we’re going to do next.
I mean if it’s a faithful representation of what I’ve done in my life, that’s great. That’s an interesting artifact. But I think the most interesting thing about knowing each other is we don’t know what we’re going to do next.
Lex Fridman
Sure. Sure.
Sure. Sure.
Lee Cronin
I mean within some constraints I’ve got, I can predict some things about you. You can predict some things about me. But we can’t predict everything.
I mean within some constraints I’ve got, I can predict some things about you. You can predict some things about me. But we can’t predict everything.
Lex Fridman
Everything.
Everything.
Lee Cronin
And it’s because we can’t predict everything is why we’re exciting to come back and discuss and see. So yeah, I’m happy that it’ll be interesting that some things that I’ve done can be captured, but I’m pretty sure that my angle on mining novelty for the future will not be captured.
And it’s because we can’t predict everything is why we’re exciting to come back and discuss and see. So yeah, I’m happy that it’ll be interesting that some things that I’ve done can be captured, but I’m pretty sure that my angle on mining novelty for the future will not be captured.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah. So that’s what life is, is just some novelty generation and then you’re done. Each one of us just generally a little bit. Or have the capacity to at least.
Yeah. Yeah. So that’s what life is, is just some novelty generation and then you’re done. Each one of us just generally a little bit. Or have the capacity to at least.
Lee Cronin
I think life is a selection produces life. And life affects a universe. Universes with life in them are materially, physically, fundamentally different than universes without life. And that’s super interesting. And I have no beginnings of understanding. I think maybe this is in a thousand years, there’ll be a new discipline. And the humans will be like, “Yeah, of course. This is how it all works.” Right?
I think life is a selection produces life. And life affects a universe. Universes with life in them are materially, physically, fundamentally different than universes without life. And that’s super interesting. And I have no beginnings of understanding. I think maybe this is in a thousand years, there’ll be a new discipline. And the humans will be like, “Yeah, of course. This is how it all works.” Right?
Lex Fridman
In retrospect, it’ll all be obvious I think.
In retrospect, it’ll all be obvious I think.
Lee Cronin
I think assembly theory is obvious, that’s why a lot of people got angry. They were like, “Oh my God, this is such nonsense.” And like, “Oh, actually it’s not quite.” But the writing’s really bad.
I think assembly theory is obvious, that’s why a lot of people got angry. They were like, “Oh my God, this is such nonsense.” And like, “Oh, actually it’s not quite.” But the writing’s really bad.
Lex Fridman
Well, I can’t wait to see where it evolves, Lee. And I am glad I get to exist in this universe with you. You’re a fascinating human. This is always a pleasure. I hope to talk to you many more times. And I’m a huge fan of just watching you create stuff in this world. And thank you for talking today.
Well, I can’t wait to see where it evolves, Lee. And I am glad I get to exist in this universe with you. You’re a fascinating human. This is always a pleasure. I hope to talk to you many more times. And I’m a huge fan of just watching you create stuff in this world. And thank you for talking today.
Lee Cronin
It’s a pleasure as always, Lex. Thanks for having me on.
It’s a pleasure as always, Lex. Thanks for having me on.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Lee Cronin. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Carl Sagan. We can judge our progress by the courage of our questions, and the depth of our answers. Our willingness to embrace what is true rather than what feels good. Thank you for listening. And hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Lee Cronin. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Carl Sagan. We can judge our progress by the courage of our questions, and the depth of our answers. Our willingness to embrace what is true rather than what feels good. Thank you for listening. And hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Lisa Randall: Dark Matter, Theoretical Physics, and Extinction Events | Lex Fridman Podcast #403
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #403 with Lisa Randall.
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 Lisa Randall.
One of the things you work on and write about is dark matter. We can’t see it, but there’s a lot of it in the universe. You also end one of your books with a Beatles song quote, “‘Got to be good-looking because he’s so hard to see.” What is dark matter? How should we think about it given that we can’t see it? How should we visualize it in our mind’s eye?
We can generalize this, but just for now to focus on dark matter, it’s something we know is there, and it’s not just one way we know it’s there. In my book, Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs, I talk about the many different ways. There’s eight or nine that we deduce not just the existence of dark matter, but how much is there, and they all agree.
Now, how do we know it’s there? Because of its gravitational force. Individually, a particle doesn’t have such a big gravitational force. In fact, gravity is an extremely weak force compared to other forces we know about in nature, but there’s a lot of dark matter out there. It carries a lot of energy. Five times the amount of energy as the matter. We know that’s in atoms, et cetera.
You can ask, how should we think about it? It’s just another form of matter that doesn’t interact with light, or at least as far as we know. It interacts gravitationally, it clumps, it forms galaxies, but it doesn’t interact with light, which means we just don’t see it. Most of our detection, before gravitational wave detectors, we only saw things because of their interactions with light in some sense.
In our galaxy, it’s roughly spherical unless it has its own interactions, that’s another story. We know that it’s roughly spherical, whereas ordinary matter can radiate and clumps into a disk. That’s why we see the Milky Way disk. On large scales, in some sense, yes, all the matter is similar in some sense.
In fact, dark matter is in some sense more important because it can collapse more readily than ordinary matter because ordinary matter has radiative forces, which makes it hard to collapse on small scales. Actually it’s dark matter that drives galaxy formation and then ordinary matter comes along with it.
There’s also just more of it, and because there’s more of it can start collapsing sooner. That is to say the energy density in dark matter dominates over radiation earlier than you would if you just had an ordinary matter.
In fact, I would say it’s more surprising that the matter that we know about is constitutes as big a fraction of the universe as it does. We’re limited, we’re human. The fact that we see 5% of the energy density of the universe, about one sixth of the energy density in matter, that’s remarkable. Why should that be? Anything could be out there, yet the universe that we see is a significant fraction.
I guess the disturbances from the dark matter, they create gravitational disturbances in the Oort Cloud at the edge of our solar system, and then that increases the rate of asteroids hitting earth.
Again, we have to get outside this mindset of just humans and ask what else could be there. What we suggested is that there’s a fraction of dark matter, not all the dark matter, but some of the dark matter, maybe it has interactions of its own just the same way in our universe, we have lots of different types of matter. We have nuclei, we have electrons, we have neutrons, we have forces.
It’s not a simple model, the standard model, but it does have some basic ingredients, so maybe dark matter also has some interesting structure to it. Maybe there’s some small fraction. The interesting thing is that if some of the dark matter does radiate, and I like to call it dark light because it’s light that we don’t see, but dark matter would see. It could radiate that and then it could perhaps collapse into a disk the same way ordinary matter collapsed into the Milky Way disk.
It’s not all the dark matter, it’s a fraction, but it could conceivably be a very thin disk of dark matter, thin, dense disk of dark matter. The question is do these exist? People have done studies now to think about whether they can find them. It’s an interesting target, it’s something you can measure. By measuring the positions and velocities of stars, you can find out what the structure of the Milky Way is, but the fun proposal was that the solar system orbits around the galaxy.
As it does so, it goes a little bit up and down kind of horses on a carousel. The suggestion was every time it goes through, you have an enhanced probability that you would dislodge something from the edge of the solar system in something called the Oort Cloud. The idea was that at those times, you’re more likely to have these cataclysmic events such as the amazing one that actually caused the last extinction that we know of for sure.
Also, I have to say if you think about it, it sounds like a story a five-year-old would make up. Maybe the dinosaurs were killed by some big rock that came and hit the earth, but then there really was a scientific story behind it. That’s also why I like the dark disk because there’s a scientific story behind it. As far-fetched as it might sound, you could actually go and look for the experimental consequences, for the observational consequences to test whether it’s true.
As you point out, it took many operations on many different scales. We had to have the formation of structure, the formation of galaxies, the formation of the solar system, the formation of our planet, the formation of humans. There’s so many steps that go into this. Humans in some part were the result of the fact that this big object hit the earth, made the dinosaurs go extinct, and mammals developed. It is an incredible story and yes, something else might come of it, but it won’t be us if we mess with it too much.
The reason it doesn’t collapse as far as we know is that it can’t radiate the same way. Because it can radiate ordinary matter collapses, and this actually, because of conservation of angular momentum, it stays a disk and it doesn’t just collapse to the center. Our suggestion was that maybe there are some components of dark matter that also radiate.
Like I said, that’s far from proven. People have looked for a disk, they see some evidence of some disks of certain densities, but these are all questions that are worth asking. Basically if we can figure it out from existing measurements, why not try?
The most popular candidate for dark matter probably until pretty recently because they haven’t found it, is something called WIMPs, Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, particles that have mass about the same as the Higgs boson mass, and it turns out then you would get about the right density of dark matter.
People really like that, of course, because it is connected to the standard model, the particles that we know about, and if it’s connected to that, we have a better chance of actually seeing it. Fortunately or unfortunately, it’s also a better chance that you can rule it out because you can look for it. So far, no one has found it. We’re still looking for
A lot of physicists, I’ll say particularly in Europe, but I’d say a lot of physicists were saying when that the Large Hadron Collider would have the energy reach necessary to discover what underlies the standard model. We don’t want to just discover the standard model, we want to know what the next step is.
I think here people were more cautious about that. They want to have a more comprehensive search that could get to higher energies, more events so that we could really more definitively rule it out. In that case, many people thought they knew what would be there. It happened to be a theory called supersymmetry. A lot of physicists thought it would be supersymmetry.
It’s one of the many factors I think that went into the fact that the Large Hadron Collider became the only machine in town, and the Superconducting Supercollider would’ve just been a much… If it had really had achieved what it was supposed to, would’ve been a much more robust test of the space.
I’d say for humanity, it’s both a tribute to the ability of discovery and the ability of really believing in things so that you have the confidence to go look for them, but it’s also a cautionary tale that you don’t want to assume things before they’ve been actually found. You want to believe in your theories, but you also want to question them at the same time in ways that you’re more likely to discover the truth.
It’s also impressive that so many countries work together to do this. It wasn’t just one country. It was also impressive in that it was a long-term project that people committed to and made it happen. It is a demonstration that when people set their minds to things and they commit to it, that they can do something amazing.
We’re seeing that with people now, too. I know people are worried just about AI taking over, and that’s a totally different story. We just don’t think about the future very much. We think about what we’re doing now, and we certainly don’t think enough about all the animals that we’re destroying, all the things that are precursors to humans that we rely on.
These aren’t predictable events necessarily. They’re only predictable on a grand scale, but sometimes they are. I think people were pretty aware that nuclear weapons were dangerous. I’m not sure people are as aware now as they were say, 20 or 30 years ago, and that certainly worries me. I have to say I was not as worried about AI as other people, but now I understand. It’s more that as soon as you create things that we lose control over, it’s scary.
The other thing that we’re learning from the events today is that it takes a few bad actors. It takes everyone to make things work well, it takes not that many things to make things go wrong. The issue with disease, we can find out what causes a disease, but to make things better is not necessarily that simple. Sometimes it is. But for things to be healthy, a lot of things have to work. For things to go wrong, only one thing has to go wrong. It’s amazing that we do it.
The same is true for democracy. For democracy to work, a lot of people have to believe in it. A few bad actors can destroy things sometimes. A lot of the things that we really rely on are delicate equilibrium situations. There is some robustness in the systems, we try to build in robustness, but a few extreme events can sometimes alter things. I think that’s what people are scared of today in many ways. They’re scared of it for democracy, they’re scared of it for peace, they’re scared of it for AI.
I think they’re not as scared as they should be about nuclear weapons, to be honest. I think that’s more serious danger than people realize. I think people are a little bit more scared about pandemics than they were before, but I still say they’re not super scared about it. So you’re right, there are these major events that can happen and we are setting things up so that they might happen, and we should be thinking about them. The question is who should be thinking about them? How should we be thinking about them? How do you make things happen on a global scale, because that’s really what we need.
It’s true that you have that, yes, this is scary, but you also have, this is cool feeling and I think we have to get around that because I think that yes, you can be in that, but I’m not sure that’s going to make people scared. Have they actually asked afterwards, are you more or less scared?
I think that’s something sometimes these movies miss, just the thing itself. You’re not thinking about the overall consequences. In some ways it was like the early Silicon Valley. People were just thinking what if we did this? What if we did that? Not keeping track of what the peripheral consequences are. You definitely see that happening with AI now. I think that was the moral of the battle that just happened, that it’s just full speed ahead.
You’re always at this edge where you’re trying to sort things out and there is something scary. You don’t know if there’s going to be a solution, you don’t know if you’re going to find it. It’s not something that can destroy the earth, it’s just something that you do on your individual level. But then of course there are much bigger things like the ones you’re talking about where they could actually be dangerous. The stuff I do, I just want to be clear, I’m doing theoretical physics. Not very dangerous, but sometimes things end up having bigger consequences than you think.
They interact through the strong force, the strong nuclear force. There’s something called the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism. Basically, all those particles and their interactions describe many, many things we understand. That’s the standard model. We now know about the Higgs boson, which is associated with how elementary particles get their mass. That piece of the puzzle has also been completed.
We also know that there are a weird array of masses of elementary particles. There’s not just the up and down quark, but there are heavier versions of the up and down quark. Charm and strange, top and bottom. There’s not just the electron, there’s a muon and a tau. There are particles called neutrinos, which are under intense study now, which are partnered with the leptons through the weak interactions.
We really do know these basic elements and we know the forces. When we’re doing particle physics experiments, we can usually even ignore gravity except in exceptional cases that we can talk about. Those are the basic elements in their interactions.
Dark matter stands outside that, it’s not interacting through those forces. When we look at the world around us, we don’t usually see the effects of dark matter. It’s because there’s so much of it that we do and it doesn’t have those forces that we know about. The standard model has worked spectacularly well. It’s been tested to a high degree of precision. People are still testing it.
One of the things we do as physicists is we actually want it to break down at some level, we’re looking for the precision measurement or the energy or whatever it will take where the standard model is no longer working. Not that it’s not working approximately, but we’re looking for the deviations. Those deviations are critical because they can tell us what underlies the standard model, which is what we really want to see next.
The other place is precision measurements. The standard model has been tested exquisitely, so if it’s been tested 1%, you want to look at a 10th of a percent. There are some processes that we know shouldn’t even happen at all in the standard model or happen at very suppressed level, and those are other things that we look for. All of those things could indicate there’s something beyond what we know about, which of course would be very exciting.
“Stocks may not achieve a precise value until they’re traded, but that doesn’t mean we can’t approximate their worth until they change hands. Similarly, electrons might not have definite properties, but they do exist. It’s true that the electron doesn’t exist as a classical object with definite position until the position is measured. But something was there – which physicists use a wave function to describe.” It’s a fascinating nuanced disagreement. Do electrons always exist or not? Does a tree fall in the forest if nobody’s there to see it?
I would say that those wave functions are real. One of the things that don’t forget that particle physics does that quantum field theory says is that electrons can be created and destroyed. It’s not that every electron has to be in the universe. That’s what happens at colliders, particles get created and destroyed, but that doesn’t mean that if I have electron in an atom, it’s not there. It’s certainly there, and we know about it. Its charge is there.
There might be different layers of reality that are built in terms of the matter that we know about in terms of the stuff we know about that. When I say we’ve measured everything, I say that with a grain of salt. I mean we’ve measured everything about the standard model. There’s lots of phenomena that we don’t understand, but often there are complex phenomena that will be given in terms of the fundamental ingredients that we know about.
The kind of science that’s going to happen in the more numerical age or even AI, what does it mean to answer a question? Does it mean that we can predict it? Does it mean that we can reproduce it? I think we’re coming up against the definition of what we mean by science as human beings. In terms of the science that we can do, I don’t think we’ll know it until we get there. We’re trying to solve hard problems and we’ve made progress.
If you think of how much science has advanced in the last century or century and a half, it’s incredible. We didn’t even know the universe was expanding at the beginning of the 20th century. We didn’t know about quantum mechanics at the beginning of the century, we didn’t know about special relativity. That’s a lot in a relatively short time, depending on how you think of time. I think it would be premature to say we know limitations.
The community tends to get segmented or fragmented into people who do one or the other, but there are definitely times… Some of my best collaborations with people who are more top-down than I am, so that we come up with interesting ideas that we wouldn’t have thought of if either one of us was working individually.
He was very much a bottom-up person, and in fact, he resisted top-down for a long time. Then when he tried to do the theory of general relativity or the general theory of relativity, whichever you want to call it, incorporating gravity into the system when you need some feedback, then he was helped by a mathematician who had developed some differential geometry and helped him figure out how to write down that.
After that, he thought top-down was the way to go, but he actually didn’t make that much progress. I think it’s naive to think it was just one or the other. In fact, a lot of people who made real progress were rooted in actual measurements.
That’s not to say the methods and advances in strength theory don’t exist, but they certainly weren’t able to immediately solve all the problems they thought they could solve. It has given us tools, it has given us some insights, but it becomes almost a sociological question of how much it should be one or the other.
I do think that you can get caught up in the problems themselves, and sometimes you can get caught up in the methods and just do other examples. The real physics insights often come from people who are thinking about physics as well as math.
You can say a lot of the things in a very different level about the internet. You could say has the internet helped do things? It definitely took on a life of its own in some sense, but it’s also something that we’re able to tame. I know that I, myself wouldn’t have been able to write books if the internet didn’t exist because I wouldn’t have had the time to go to the library and look everything up. It helped me enormously.
In some sense, AI could be that. In a very nice world, it could be a tool that helps us go a step further than we would and a lot more efficiently. It’s already done that to some extent. Or it could be like the parts of the internet that we can control that are ruining politics or whatever. There’s certainly a lot of indications that can do that. Then there are even bigger things that people speculate about AI being able to do its own things, but in terms of actually figuring things out, we’re in the early stages.
It forces us to… We don’t really understand how smart we are. We don’t understand how we think about things all that well, actually. But one thing is true though, we are a lot more efficient right now than computers and coming up with things, we require a lot less energy to do that. If computers figure out how to do that, then it’s going to be at a totally different ball game.
Here are clearly kinds of connections that we don’t know how we’re making, but we are making them. That’s going to be interesting. I say we’re in early stages, but this is changing very rapidly. Right now, I don’t think that it’s actually discovered new laws of physics, but could it in the future? Maybe it can.
While it was starting out, people were doing these kinds of toy problems, but what will it actually be applied to and what will it be optimized to do? There’s a lot of questions out there that it’s really important we start addressing.
Also, there’s really deep questions like what fraction are we actually seeing? If there are these other forces, if there is another way of seeing the world, are there universes beyond their own? If they’re so totally different, how do we even comprehend them? What would we even think about them? There’s a lot about trying to get beyond… It’s always just getting beyond our limited vision and limited experience and trying to see what underlies it, both at small scales and at large scales.
We just don’t know the answers. I’d like to think that we understand more about dark matter, about dark energy, about are there extra dimensions, things that we actually work on, but there’s probably a lot beyond what we work on that’s yet to be discovered.
That’s not actually the gravity we have, but there’s all sorts of phenomena that might be out there that we don’t know about. All sorts of evolution things, time dependence that we don’t know about. Of course, that’s from the point of view of particle physics, from the point of view of other kinds of physics, we’re just beginning, so who knows?
The other thing is sometimes if you get too far buried, you look out and you think there’s so much out there. Sometimes it’s just good to bring it back home and just think okay, can I have as good idea as the person next to me rather than the greatest physicist who ever lived? Right now, like you said, I think there’s lots of big issues out there, and it’s hard to balance that.
Sometimes it’s hard to forget the role of physics, but I think Wilson said it really well when he said when they were building Fermilab, it was like this won’t defend the country, but it’ll make it worth defending. It’s just the idea that in all this chaos, it’s still important that we still make progress in these things. Sometimes when major world events are happening, it’s easy to forget that. I think those are important too. You don’t want to forget those, but to try to keep that balance because we don’t want to lose what it is that makes humans special.
I talk about effective theory in my second book, Knocking On Heaven’s Door, a lot. It’s rather than ask the big questions, sometimes we just ask the questions about the immediate things that we can measure and like I said, we can sometimes tell one that we’ll fail, but we can have these effective theories. Sometimes I think when we approach these big questions, it’s good to do it from an effective theory point. Why do I find this satisfying? Why is the world we have the way it is?
We think things are beautiful that we live in. I’m not sure if we had different senses or different ways of looking at things, we wouldn’t necessarily find it beautiful. But I have to say, it is fantastic that no matter how many times I see a sunset, I will always find it beautiful. I don’t think I ever see a sunset as say whatever. It’s just always beautiful.
There are things that as humans, clearly resonate with us, but we were maybe evolved that way. But that’s about us. In terms of figuring out the universe, it’s amazing how far we’ve gotten. We have discovered many, many wonderful things, but there’s a lot more out there and I hope we have the opportunity to keep going.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 0:24 – Dark matter
- 19:16 – Extinction events
- 30:16 – Particle physics
- 45:30 – Physics vs mathematics
Introduction
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Lisa Randall, a theoretical physicist and cosmologist at Harvard. Her work involves improving our understanding of particle physics, supersymmetry, baryogenesis, cosmological inflation, and dark matter.
The following is a conversation with Lisa Randall, a theoretical physicist and cosmologist at Harvard. Her work involves improving our understanding of particle physics, supersymmetry, baryogenesis, cosmological inflation, and dark matter.
This is the Lex Friedman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, dear friends, here’s Lisa Randall.
Dark matter
One of the things you work on and write about is dark matter. We can’t see it, but there’s a lot of it in the universe. You also end one of your books with a Beatles song quote, “‘Got to be good-looking because he’s so hard to see.” What is dark matter? How should we think about it given that we can’t see it? How should we visualize it in our mind’s eye?
Lisa Randall
I think one of the really important things that physics teaches you is just our limitations, but also our abilities. The fact that we can deduce the existence of something that we don’t directly see is really a tribute to people that we can do that. It’s also something that tells you, you can’t overly rely on your direct senses. If you just relied on just what you see directly, you would miss so much of what’s happening in the world.
I think one of the really important things that physics teaches you is just our limitations, but also our abilities. The fact that we can deduce the existence of something that we don’t directly see is really a tribute to people that we can do that. It’s also something that tells you, you can’t overly rely on your direct senses. If you just relied on just what you see directly, you would miss so much of what’s happening in the world.
We can generalize this, but just for now to focus on dark matter, it’s something we know is there, and it’s not just one way we know it’s there. In my book, Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs, I talk about the many different ways. There’s eight or nine that we deduce not just the existence of dark matter, but how much is there, and they all agree.
Now, how do we know it’s there? Because of its gravitational force. Individually, a particle doesn’t have such a big gravitational force. In fact, gravity is an extremely weak force compared to other forces we know about in nature, but there’s a lot of dark matter out there. It carries a lot of energy. Five times the amount of energy as the matter. We know that’s in atoms, et cetera.
You can ask, how should we think about it? It’s just another form of matter that doesn’t interact with light, or at least as far as we know. It interacts gravitationally, it clumps, it forms galaxies, but it doesn’t interact with light, which means we just don’t see it. Most of our detection, before gravitational wave detectors, we only saw things because of their interactions with light in some sense.
Lex Fridman
In theory, it behaves just like any other matter, it just doesn’t interact with light.
In theory, it behaves just like any other matter, it just doesn’t interact with light.
Lisa Randall
When we say it interacts just like any other form of matter, we have to be careful because gravitationally, it interacts like other forms of matter, but it doesn’t experience electromagnetism, which is why it has a different distribution.
When we say it interacts just like any other form of matter, we have to be careful because gravitationally, it interacts like other forms of matter, but it doesn’t experience electromagnetism, which is why it has a different distribution.
In our galaxy, it’s roughly spherical unless it has its own interactions, that’s another story. We know that it’s roughly spherical, whereas ordinary matter can radiate and clumps into a disk. That’s why we see the Milky Way disk. On large scales, in some sense, yes, all the matter is similar in some sense.
In fact, dark matter is in some sense more important because it can collapse more readily than ordinary matter because ordinary matter has radiative forces, which makes it hard to collapse on small scales. Actually it’s dark matter that drives galaxy formation and then ordinary matter comes along with it.
There’s also just more of it, and because there’s more of it can start collapsing sooner. That is to say the energy density in dark matter dominates over radiation earlier than you would if you just had an ordinary matter.
Lex Fridman
It’s part of the story of the origin of the galaxy, part of the story of the end of the galaxy, and part of the story of all the various interactions throughout.
It’s part of the story of the origin of the galaxy, part of the story of the end of the galaxy, and part of the story of all the various interactions throughout.
Lisa Randall
Exactly. In my book, I make jokes about, it’s like when we think about a building, we think about the architect, we think about the high level, but we forget about all the workers that did all the grunt work. In fact, dark matter was really important in the formation of our universe, and we forget that sometimes.
Exactly. In my book, I make jokes about, it’s like when we think about a building, we think about the architect, we think about the high level, but we forget about all the workers that did all the grunt work. In fact, dark matter was really important in the formation of our universe, and we forget that sometimes.
Lex Fridman
That’s a metaphor on top of a metaphor. Okay. The unheard voices that do the actual work.
That’s a metaphor on top of a metaphor. Okay. The unheard voices that do the actual work.
Lisa Randall
Exactly. No, but it is a metaphor, but it also captures something because the fact is we don’t directly see it, so we forget it’s there or we don’t understand it’s there, or we think it’s not. The fact that we don’t see it makes it no less legitimate, it just means that we have challenges in order to find out exactly what it is.
Exactly. No, but it is a metaphor, but it also captures something because the fact is we don’t directly see it, so we forget it’s there or we don’t understand it’s there, or we think it’s not. The fact that we don’t see it makes it no less legitimate, it just means that we have challenges in order to find out exactly what it is.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but the things we cannot see that nevertheless have a gravitational interaction with the things we can’t see is at the layman level, it’s just mind-blowing.
Yeah, but the things we cannot see that nevertheless have a gravitational interaction with the things we can’t see is at the layman level, it’s just mind-blowing.
Lisa Randall
It is and it isn’t because I think what it’s teaching us is that we’re human, the universe is what it is, and we’re trying to interact with that universe and discover what it is. We’ve discovered, amazing things.
It is and it isn’t because I think what it’s teaching us is that we’re human, the universe is what it is, and we’re trying to interact with that universe and discover what it is. We’ve discovered, amazing things.
In fact, I would say it’s more surprising that the matter that we know about is constitutes as big a fraction of the universe as it does. We’re limited, we’re human. The fact that we see 5% of the energy density of the universe, about one sixth of the energy density in matter, that’s remarkable. Why should that be? Anything could be out there, yet the universe that we see is a significant fraction.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but a lot of our intuition, I think operates using visualizations in the mind.
Yeah, but a lot of our intuition, I think operates using visualizations in the mind.
Lisa Randall
That’s absolutely true. Certainly writing books, I realized also how many of our words are based on how we see the world, and that’s true. That’s actually one of the fantastic things about physics is that it teaches you how to go beyond your immediate intuition to develop intuitions that apply at different distances, different scales, different ways of thinking about things.
That’s absolutely true. Certainly writing books, I realized also how many of our words are based on how we see the world, and that’s true. That’s actually one of the fantastic things about physics is that it teaches you how to go beyond your immediate intuition to develop intuitions that apply at different distances, different scales, different ways of thinking about things.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. How do you anthropomorphize dark matter?
Yeah. How do you anthropomorphize dark matter?
Lisa Randall
I just did, I think. I made it the grunt workers.
I just did, I think. I made it the grunt workers.
Lex Fridman
Oh yeah, that’s good. You did. That’s why you get paid the big bucks and write the great books. Okay, you also write in that book about dark matter, having to do something with the extinction events, the extinction of the dinosaurs, which is a fascinating presentation of how everything is connected.
Oh yeah, that’s good. You did. That’s why you get paid the big bucks and write the great books. Okay, you also write in that book about dark matter, having to do something with the extinction events, the extinction of the dinosaurs, which is a fascinating presentation of how everything is connected.
I guess the disturbances from the dark matter, they create gravitational disturbances in the Oort Cloud at the edge of our solar system, and then that increases the rate of asteroids hitting earth.
Lisa Randall
I want to be really clear, this was a speculative theory.
I want to be really clear, this was a speculative theory.
Lex Fridman
I love it, though.
I love it, though.
Lisa Randall
I liked it too. We still don’t know for sure, but what we liked about it… Let me take a step back. We usually assume that dark matter, we being physicists, that it’s just one thing. It’s just basically non-interacting aside from gravity or very weakly interacting matter.
I liked it too. We still don’t know for sure, but what we liked about it… Let me take a step back. We usually assume that dark matter, we being physicists, that it’s just one thing. It’s just basically non-interacting aside from gravity or very weakly interacting matter.
Again, we have to get outside this mindset of just humans and ask what else could be there. What we suggested is that there’s a fraction of dark matter, not all the dark matter, but some of the dark matter, maybe it has interactions of its own just the same way in our universe, we have lots of different types of matter. We have nuclei, we have electrons, we have neutrons, we have forces.
It’s not a simple model, the standard model, but it does have some basic ingredients, so maybe dark matter also has some interesting structure to it. Maybe there’s some small fraction. The interesting thing is that if some of the dark matter does radiate, and I like to call it dark light because it’s light that we don’t see, but dark matter would see. It could radiate that and then it could perhaps collapse into a disk the same way ordinary matter collapsed into the Milky Way disk.
It’s not all the dark matter, it’s a fraction, but it could conceivably be a very thin disk of dark matter, thin, dense disk of dark matter. The question is do these exist? People have done studies now to think about whether they can find them. It’s an interesting target, it’s something you can measure. By measuring the positions and velocities of stars, you can find out what the structure of the Milky Way is, but the fun proposal was that the solar system orbits around the galaxy.
As it does so, it goes a little bit up and down kind of horses on a carousel. The suggestion was every time it goes through, you have an enhanced probability that you would dislodge something from the edge of the solar system in something called the Oort Cloud. The idea was that at those times, you’re more likely to have these cataclysmic events such as the amazing one that actually caused the last extinction that we know of for sure.
Lex Fridman
It wasn’t so amazing for the dinosaurs.
It wasn’t so amazing for the dinosaurs.
Lisa Randall
Or for two thirds of the species on the planet.
Or for two thirds of the species on the planet.
Lex Fridman
But it gets amazing for humans. It wouldn’t be-
But it gets amazing for humans. It wouldn’t be-
Lisa Randall
What really is amazing… I talk about this in Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs. It is just an amazing scientific story because it really is one of the real stories that combine together different fields of science. Geologists at the time or people thought that things happen slowly and this would be a cataclysmic event.
What really is amazing… I talk about this in Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs. It is just an amazing scientific story because it really is one of the real stories that combine together different fields of science. Geologists at the time or people thought that things happen slowly and this would be a cataclysmic event.
Also, I have to say if you think about it, it sounds like a story a five-year-old would make up. Maybe the dinosaurs were killed by some big rock that came and hit the earth, but then there really was a scientific story behind it. That’s also why I like the dark disk because there’s a scientific story behind it. As far-fetched as it might sound, you could actually go and look for the experimental consequences, for the observational consequences to test whether it’s true.
Lex Fridman
I wish you could know high-resolution details of where that asteroid came from, where in the Oort Cloud, why it happened, is it in fact because of dark matter? Just the full tracing back to the origin of the universe because humans seem to be somewhat special. It seems like so many fascinating events at all scales of physics had to happen for [inaudible 00:10:17].
I wish you could know high-resolution details of where that asteroid came from, where in the Oort Cloud, why it happened, is it in fact because of dark matter? Just the full tracing back to the origin of the universe because humans seem to be somewhat special. It seems like so many fascinating events at all scales of physics had to happen for [inaudible 00:10:17].
Lisa Randall
I’m really, really glad you mentioned that because actually that was one of the main points of my book, Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs. One of the reasons I wrote it was because I really think we are abusing the planet, we’re changing the planet way too quickly. Just like anything else, when you alter things, it’s good to think about the history of what it took to get here.
I’m really, really glad you mentioned that because actually that was one of the main points of my book, Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs. One of the reasons I wrote it was because I really think we are abusing the planet, we’re changing the planet way too quickly. Just like anything else, when you alter things, it’s good to think about the history of what it took to get here.
As you point out, it took many operations on many different scales. We had to have the formation of structure, the formation of galaxies, the formation of the solar system, the formation of our planet, the formation of humans. There’s so many steps that go into this. Humans in some part were the result of the fact that this big object hit the earth, made the dinosaurs go extinct, and mammals developed. It is an incredible story and yes, something else might come of it, but it won’t be us if we mess with it too much.
Lex Fridman
But it is on a grand scale, earth is a pretty resilient system. Can you just clarify, just fascinating, the shape of things. The shape of the Milky Way’s… Of the observable stuff is mostly flat. You said dark matter tends to be spherical, but a subset of that might be a flat disk.
But it is on a grand scale, earth is a pretty resilient system. Can you just clarify, just fascinating, the shape of things. The shape of the Milky Way’s… Of the observable stuff is mostly flat. You said dark matter tends to be spherical, but a subset of that might be a flat disk.
Lisa Randall
You want to hear about the shape of things.
You want to hear about the shape of things.
Lex Fridman
Yes, please.
Yes, please.
Lisa Randall
Structure formed early on, and now our structure that we live in is… We know about the Milky Way galaxy. The Milky Way galaxy has the disk you can see in a dry dark place, that’s where stars and light is, but you can also measure in some ways the dark matter. We believe that dark matter is more or less spherically distributed. Like we said, there’s a lot of it, not necessarily in the disk, but just because it’s a sphere, there’s a lot of it sitting there.
Structure formed early on, and now our structure that we live in is… We know about the Milky Way galaxy. The Milky Way galaxy has the disk you can see in a dry dark place, that’s where stars and light is, but you can also measure in some ways the dark matter. We believe that dark matter is more or less spherically distributed. Like we said, there’s a lot of it, not necessarily in the disk, but just because it’s a sphere, there’s a lot of it sitting there.
The reason it doesn’t collapse as far as we know is that it can’t radiate the same way. Because it can radiate ordinary matter collapses, and this actually, because of conservation of angular momentum, it stays a disk and it doesn’t just collapse to the center. Our suggestion was that maybe there are some components of dark matter that also radiate.
Like I said, that’s far from proven. People have looked for a disk, they see some evidence of some disks of certain densities, but these are all questions that are worth asking. Basically if we can figure it out from existing measurements, why not try?
Lex Fridman
Okay, so not all dark matter is made the same.
Okay, so not all dark matter is made the same.
Lisa Randall
That’s a possibility. We actually don’t know what dark matter is in the first place, we don’t know what most of it is, we don’t know what a fraction is. It’s hard to measure. Why is it hard to measure for exactly the reason you said earlier, we don’t see it. We want to think of possibilities for what it can be, especially if those give rise to some observational consequences. It’s a tough game because it’s not something that’s just there for the taking. You have to think about what it could be and how you might find it.
That’s a possibility. We actually don’t know what dark matter is in the first place, we don’t know what most of it is, we don’t know what a fraction is. It’s hard to measure. Why is it hard to measure for exactly the reason you said earlier, we don’t see it. We want to think of possibilities for what it can be, especially if those give rise to some observational consequences. It’s a tough game because it’s not something that’s just there for the taking. You have to think about what it could be and how you might find it.
Lex Fridman
The way you detect it is gravitational effects on things we can see.
The way you detect it is gravitational effects on things we can see.
Lisa Randall
That would be the way you detect the type of dark matter. I’ve been talking about people have suggestions for other forms of dark matter. They could be particles called axions, they could be other types of particles, and then there are different ways of detecting it.
That would be the way you detect the type of dark matter. I’ve been talking about people have suggestions for other forms of dark matter. They could be particles called axions, they could be other types of particles, and then there are different ways of detecting it.
The most popular candidate for dark matter probably until pretty recently because they haven’t found it, is something called WIMPs, Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, particles that have mass about the same as the Higgs boson mass, and it turns out then you would get about the right density of dark matter.
People really like that, of course, because it is connected to the standard model, the particles that we know about, and if it’s connected to that, we have a better chance of actually seeing it. Fortunately or unfortunately, it’s also a better chance that you can rule it out because you can look for it. So far, no one has found it. We’re still looking for
Lex Fridman
Is that one of the hopes of the Large Hadron Collider?
Is that one of the hopes of the Large Hadron Collider?
Lisa Randall
That was originally one of the hopes of Large Hadron Collider. I’d say at this point, it would be very unlikely given what they’ve already accomplished, but there are these underground detectors, xenon detectors that look for dark matter coming in, and they are going to try to achieve a much stronger bound than exists today.
That was originally one of the hopes of Large Hadron Collider. I’d say at this point, it would be very unlikely given what they’ve already accomplished, but there are these underground detectors, xenon detectors that look for dark matter coming in, and they are going to try to achieve a much stronger bound than exists today.
Lex Fridman
Just to take that tangent, looking back now, what’s the biggest, to you, insight to humanity that the LHC has been able to provide?
Just to take that tangent, looking back now, what’s the biggest, to you, insight to humanity that the LHC has been able to provide?
Lisa Randall
It’s interesting. It’s both a major victory. The Higgs boson was proposed 50 years ago, and it was discovered. The Higgs mechanism seemed to be the only way to explain elementary particle masses and it was right so on the one hand, it was a major victory. On the other hand, I’ve been in physics long enough to know it was also a cautionary tale in some sense because at the time I started out in physics, we had proposed something in the United States called the Superconducting Supercollider.
It’s interesting. It’s both a major victory. The Higgs boson was proposed 50 years ago, and it was discovered. The Higgs mechanism seemed to be the only way to explain elementary particle masses and it was right so on the one hand, it was a major victory. On the other hand, I’ve been in physics long enough to know it was also a cautionary tale in some sense because at the time I started out in physics, we had proposed something in the United States called the Superconducting Supercollider.
A lot of physicists, I’ll say particularly in Europe, but I’d say a lot of physicists were saying when that the Large Hadron Collider would have the energy reach necessary to discover what underlies the standard model. We don’t want to just discover the standard model, we want to know what the next step is.
I think here people were more cautious about that. They want to have a more comprehensive search that could get to higher energies, more events so that we could really more definitively rule it out. In that case, many people thought they knew what would be there. It happened to be a theory called supersymmetry. A lot of physicists thought it would be supersymmetry.
It’s one of the many factors I think that went into the fact that the Large Hadron Collider became the only machine in town, and the Superconducting Supercollider would’ve just been a much… If it had really had achieved what it was supposed to, would’ve been a much more robust test of the space.
I’d say for humanity, it’s both a tribute to the ability of discovery and the ability of really believing in things so that you have the confidence to go look for them, but it’s also a cautionary tale that you don’t want to assume things before they’ve been actually found. You want to believe in your theories, but you also want to question them at the same time in ways that you’re more likely to discover the truth.
Lex Fridman
It’s also an illustration of grand engineering efforts that humanity can take on and maybe a lesson that you could go even bigger.
It’s also an illustration of grand engineering efforts that humanity can take on and maybe a lesson that you could go even bigger.
Lisa Randall
I’m really glad you said that though too, because that’s absolutely true. It really is an impressive… It’s impressive in so many ways. It’s impressive technologically, it’s impressive at engineering level.
I’m really glad you said that though too, because that’s absolutely true. It really is an impressive… It’s impressive in so many ways. It’s impressive technologically, it’s impressive at engineering level.
It’s also impressive that so many countries work together to do this. It wasn’t just one country. It was also impressive in that it was a long-term project that people committed to and made it happen. It is a demonstration that when people set their minds to things and they commit to it, that they can do something amazing.
Lex Fridman
Also in the United States, maybe a lesson that bureaucracy can slow things down to [inaudible 00:17:24].
Also in the United States, maybe a lesson that bureaucracy can slow things down to [inaudible 00:17:24].
Lisa Randall
Bureaucracy and politics.
Bureaucracy and politics.
Lex Fridman
Politics.
Politics.
Lisa Randall
And economics. Many things can make them faster and make them slower.
And economics. Many things can make them faster and make them slower.
Lex Fridman
Science is the way to make progress, politics is the way to slow that progress down. And here we are.
Science is the way to make progress, politics is the way to slow that progress down. And here we are.
Lisa Randall
I don’t want to overstate that because without politics, the [inaudible 00:17:42] wouldn’t happen either.
I don’t want to overstate that because without politics, the [inaudible 00:17:42] wouldn’t happen either.
Lex Fridman
You need broccoli.
You need broccoli.
Lisa Randall
Sometimes I do think… You’re not asking this question, but sometimes I do think when I think about some of these conflicts, sometimes it’s just good to have a project that people work on together. There were some efforts to do that in science too, to have Palestinians and Israelis work together, a project called Sesame. I think it’s not a bad idea when you can do that, when you can get… Forget the politics and just focus on some particular project. Sometimes that can work.
Sometimes I do think… You’re not asking this question, but sometimes I do think when I think about some of these conflicts, sometimes it’s just good to have a project that people work on together. There were some efforts to do that in science too, to have Palestinians and Israelis work together, a project called Sesame. I think it’s not a bad idea when you can do that, when you can get… Forget the politics and just focus on some particular project. Sometimes that can work.
Lex Fridman
Some kind of forcing function, some kind of deadline that gets people to sit in a room together and you’re working on a thing. As part of that, you realize the common humanity, that you all have the same concerns, the same hopes, the same fears, that you are all human. That’s an accidental side effect of working together on a thing.
Some kind of forcing function, some kind of deadline that gets people to sit in a room together and you’re working on a thing. As part of that, you realize the common humanity, that you all have the same concerns, the same hopes, the same fears, that you are all human. That’s an accidental side effect of working together on a thing.
Lisa Randall
That’s absolutely true. It’s one of the reasons CERN was formed actually. It was post-World War II, and a lot of European physicists had actually left Europe and they wanted to see Europeans work together and rebuild, and it worked. They did. It’s true, I often think that, that one of the major problems is we just don’t meet enough people so that everyone… When they seem like the other, it’s more easy to forget their humanity. I think it is important to have these connections.
That’s absolutely true. It’s one of the reasons CERN was formed actually. It was post-World War II, and a lot of European physicists had actually left Europe and they wanted to see Europeans work together and rebuild, and it worked. They did. It’s true, I often think that, that one of the major problems is we just don’t meet enough people so that everyone… When they seem like the other, it’s more easy to forget their humanity. I think it is important to have these connections.
Extinction events
Lex Fridman
Given the complexity, all cosmological scales involved here that led to the extinction of the dinosaurs, when you look out at the future of earth, do you worry about future extinction events?
Given the complexity, all cosmological scales involved here that led to the extinction of the dinosaurs, when you look out at the future of earth, do you worry about future extinction events?
Lisa Randall
I do think that we might be in the middle of an extinction right now if you define it by the number of species that are getting killed off. It’s subtle, but it’s a complex system. The way things respond to events is sometimes things evolve, sometimes animals just move to another place. The way we’ve developed the earth, it’s very hard for species just to move somewhere else.
I do think that we might be in the middle of an extinction right now if you define it by the number of species that are getting killed off. It’s subtle, but it’s a complex system. The way things respond to events is sometimes things evolve, sometimes animals just move to another place. The way we’ve developed the earth, it’s very hard for species just to move somewhere else.
We’re seeing that with people now, too. I know people are worried just about AI taking over, and that’s a totally different story. We just don’t think about the future very much. We think about what we’re doing now, and we certainly don’t think enough about all the animals that we’re destroying, all the things that are precursors to humans that we rely on.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting to think whether the things that threaten us is the stuff we see that’s happening gradually or the stuff we don’t really see that’s going to happen all of a sudden. I sometimes think about what should we be worried about? It seems like with the asteroids or nuclear war, it could be stuff that just happens one day. When I say one day meaning over a span of a few days or a few months, but not on a scale of decades and centuries. We sometimes mostly talk about stuff that’s happening gradually, but we can be really surprised.
It’s interesting to think whether the things that threaten us is the stuff we see that’s happening gradually or the stuff we don’t really see that’s going to happen all of a sudden. I sometimes think about what should we be worried about? It seems like with the asteroids or nuclear war, it could be stuff that just happens one day. When I say one day meaning over a span of a few days or a few months, but not on a scale of decades and centuries. We sometimes mostly talk about stuff that’s happening gradually, but we can be really surprised.
Lisa Randall
It’s actually really interesting. That was actually one of the reasons it took a while to determine what it was that it caused the last extinction because people did think at the time, many people thought that things were more gradual, and the idea of extinction was actually a novel concept at some point.
It’s actually really interesting. That was actually one of the reasons it took a while to determine what it was that it caused the last extinction because people did think at the time, many people thought that things were more gradual, and the idea of extinction was actually a novel concept at some point.
These aren’t predictable events necessarily. They’re only predictable on a grand scale, but sometimes they are. I think people were pretty aware that nuclear weapons were dangerous. I’m not sure people are as aware now as they were say, 20 or 30 years ago, and that certainly worries me. I have to say I was not as worried about AI as other people, but now I understand. It’s more that as soon as you create things that we lose control over, it’s scary.
The other thing that we’re learning from the events today is that it takes a few bad actors. It takes everyone to make things work well, it takes not that many things to make things go wrong. The issue with disease, we can find out what causes a disease, but to make things better is not necessarily that simple. Sometimes it is. But for things to be healthy, a lot of things have to work. For things to go wrong, only one thing has to go wrong. It’s amazing that we do it.
The same is true for democracy. For democracy to work, a lot of people have to believe in it. A few bad actors can destroy things sometimes. A lot of the things that we really rely on are delicate equilibrium situations. There is some robustness in the systems, we try to build in robustness, but a few extreme events can sometimes alter things. I think that’s what people are scared of today in many ways. They’re scared of it for democracy, they’re scared of it for peace, they’re scared of it for AI.
I think they’re not as scared as they should be about nuclear weapons, to be honest. I think that’s more serious danger than people realize. I think people are a little bit more scared about pandemics than they were before, but I still say they’re not super scared about it. So you’re right, there are these major events that can happen and we are setting things up so that they might happen, and we should be thinking about them. The question is who should be thinking about them? How should we be thinking about them? How do you make things happen on a global scale, because that’s really what we need.
Lex Fridman
It certainly shouldn’t be a source of division, it should be a source of grand collaboration probably.
It certainly shouldn’t be a source of division, it should be a source of grand collaboration probably.
Lisa Randall
Wouldn’t that be nice?
Wouldn’t that be nice?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I just wonder what it’d be like to be a dinosaur. It must have been beautiful to look at that asteroid enter the atmosphere. Until everything…. Man, that would be one of the things I would travel back in time to just to watch it.
Yeah. I just wonder what it’d be like to be a dinosaur. It must have been beautiful to look at that asteroid enter the atmosphere. Until everything…. Man, that would be one of the things I would travel back in time to just to watch it.
Lisa Randall
That’s also one of the things that I think you probably could do with virtual reality. I don’t think you have to be there and get extinct.
That’s also one of the things that I think you probably could do with virtual reality. I don’t think you have to be there and get extinct.
Lex Fridman
To just experience it.
To just experience it.
Lisa Randall
I think there’s something… It’s an event. You’re just watching. You’re not doing anything, you’re just looking at it, so maybe you could just recreate it.
I think there’s something… It’s an event. You’re just watching. You’re not doing anything, you’re just looking at it, so maybe you could just recreate it.
Lex Fridman
I actually heard that there’s a nuclear weapon explosion experience in virtual reality that’s good to remind you about what it would feel like.
I actually heard that there’s a nuclear weapon explosion experience in virtual reality that’s good to remind you about what it would feel like.
Lisa Randall
I have to say, I got an award from the Museum of Nuclear History and Technology in the Southwest, and I went to visit the museum, which turned out to be mostly a museum of nuclear weapons. The scary thing is that they look really cool.
I have to say, I got an award from the Museum of Nuclear History and Technology in the Southwest, and I went to visit the museum, which turned out to be mostly a museum of nuclear weapons. The scary thing is that they look really cool.
It’s true that you have that, yes, this is scary, but you also have, this is cool feeling and I think we have to get around that because I think that yes, you can be in that, but I’m not sure that’s going to make people scared. Have they actually asked afterwards, are you more or less scared?
Lex Fridman
That’s a really good point. That’s a good summary of just humanity in general. We’re attracted to creating cool stuff, even though it can be dangerous.
That’s a really good point. That’s a good summary of just humanity in general. We’re attracted to creating cool stuff, even though it can be dangerous.
Lisa Randall
Actually, that was the really interesting thing about visiting that museum, actually. It was very nice because I had a tour from people who had been working there in the Cold War and actually one or two people from the Manhattan Project. It was a very cool tour. You just realize just how just the thing itself gets you so excited.
Actually, that was the really interesting thing about visiting that museum, actually. It was very nice because I had a tour from people who had been working there in the Cold War and actually one or two people from the Manhattan Project. It was a very cool tour. You just realize just how just the thing itself gets you so excited.
I think that’s something sometimes these movies miss, just the thing itself. You’re not thinking about the overall consequences. In some ways it was like the early Silicon Valley. People were just thinking what if we did this? What if we did that? Not keeping track of what the peripheral consequences are. You definitely see that happening with AI now. I think that was the moral of the battle that just happened, that it’s just full speed ahead.
Lex Fridman
Which gives me a really great transition to another quote in your book. You write about the experience of facing the sublime in physics, and you quote Rainer Rilke. “For beauty is nothing but the beginning of terror, which we are still just able to endure, and we’re so odd because it’s serenely disdains to annihilate us.” It’s pretty intense. It I think applies to nuclear weapons.
Which gives me a really great transition to another quote in your book. You write about the experience of facing the sublime in physics, and you quote Rainer Rilke. “For beauty is nothing but the beginning of terror, which we are still just able to endure, and we’re so odd because it’s serenely disdains to annihilate us.” It’s pretty intense. It I think applies to nuclear weapons.
Lisa Randall
At a more mundane, perhaps level, I think it applies… It’s really interesting. One of the things that I found when I wrote these books is some people love certainty. Scientists, many revel in uncertainty. It’s not that you want to be uncertain, you want to solve it, but you’re at this edge where it’s really frustrating because you don’t really want to not know the answer, but of course, if you knew the answer, it would be done.
At a more mundane, perhaps level, I think it applies… It’s really interesting. One of the things that I found when I wrote these books is some people love certainty. Scientists, many revel in uncertainty. It’s not that you want to be uncertain, you want to solve it, but you’re at this edge where it’s really frustrating because you don’t really want to not know the answer, but of course, if you knew the answer, it would be done.
You’re always at this edge where you’re trying to sort things out and there is something scary. You don’t know if there’s going to be a solution, you don’t know if you’re going to find it. It’s not something that can destroy the earth, it’s just something that you do on your individual level. But then of course there are much bigger things like the ones you’re talking about where they could actually be dangerous. The stuff I do, I just want to be clear, I’m doing theoretical physics. Not very dangerous, but sometimes things end up having bigger consequences than you think.
Lex Fridman
Dangerous in a very pragmatic sense. Isn’t it still in part terrifying when you think of just the size of things like the size of dark matter, the power of this thing in terms of its potential gravitational effects, just cosmological objects of a black hole at the center of our galaxy.
Dangerous in a very pragmatic sense. Isn’t it still in part terrifying when you think of just the size of things like the size of dark matter, the power of this thing in terms of its potential gravitational effects, just cosmological objects of a black hole at the center of our galaxy.
Lisa Randall
This might be why I’m a physicist or why I differ from other people because I’m not such a big fan of humanity in some ways. Some ways I am, but the idea that we were everything would be really boring to me. I love the idea that there’s so much more out there, that there’s a bigger universe and there’s lots to discover and that we’re not all there is. Wouldn’t it be disappointing if we were all there is?
This might be why I’m a physicist or why I differ from other people because I’m not such a big fan of humanity in some ways. Some ways I am, but the idea that we were everything would be really boring to me. I love the idea that there’s so much more out there, that there’s a bigger universe and there’s lots to discover and that we’re not all there is. Wouldn’t it be disappointing if we were all there is?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and the full diversity of other stuff is pretty interesting.
Yeah, and the full diversity of other stuff is pretty interesting.
Lisa Randall
We have no idea how much there is. We know what we can observe so far, so the idea that there’s other stuff out there that we yet have to figure out, it’s exciting.
We have no idea how much there is. We know what we can observe so far, so the idea that there’s other stuff out there that we yet have to figure out, it’s exciting.
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you an out there question. If you think of humans on earth, life on earth as this pocket of complexity that emerged and there’s a bunch of conditions that came to be, and there’s Darwinian evolution and however life originated, do you think it’s possible there’s some pockets of complexity of that sort inside dark matter that we can’t see?
Let me ask you an out there question. If you think of humans on earth, life on earth as this pocket of complexity that emerged and there’s a bunch of conditions that came to be, and there’s Darwinian evolution and however life originated, do you think it’s possible there’s some pockets of complexity of that sort inside dark matter that we can’t see?
Lisa Randall
That’s possible.
That’s possible.
Lex Fridman
Chemistry and biology evolving in different ways.
Chemistry and biology evolving in different ways.
Lisa Randall
That’s one of the reasons we suggest… It’s not the reason, but it would be true if there were the type of interactions we’d suggest, it would need more complex ones. We don’t know. I will say that the conditions that give rise to life and complexity, they’re complex, they’re unlikely. It’s not like there’s great odds that would happen, but there’s no reason to know that it doesn’t happen. It’s worth investigating are there other forces that exist in the dark matter sector? That’s exactly-
That’s one of the reasons we suggest… It’s not the reason, but it would be true if there were the type of interactions we’d suggest, it would need more complex ones. We don’t know. I will say that the conditions that give rise to life and complexity, they’re complex, they’re unlikely. It’s not like there’s great odds that would happen, but there’s no reason to know that it doesn’t happen. It’s worth investigating are there other forces that exist in the dark matter sector? That’s exactly-
Lex Fridman
So the dark matter sector doesn’t have all the forces of the standard model of physics?
So the dark matter sector doesn’t have all the forces of the standard model of physics?
Lisa Randall
Right. As far as we know, it doesn’t have any. It might have it at some low level, but it could have its own forces, just like the dark matter might not experience our light. Maybe it has its light that we don’t experience.
Right. As far as we know, it doesn’t have any. It might have it at some low level, but it could have its own forces, just like the dark matter might not experience our light. Maybe it has its light that we don’t experience.
Lex Fridman
So there could be other kinds of forces.
So there could be other kinds of forces.
Lisa Randall
There could be other kinds of forces even within our sector that are too weak for us to have discovered so far or that exist at different scales than we know about. We detect what interacts strongly enough with our detectors to detect. It’s worth asking, and that’s one of the reasons we build big colliders to see are there other forces, other particles that exist say, at higher energies, at shorter distance scales than we’ve explored so far. It’s not just in the dark matter sector. Even in our sector, there could be a whole bunch of stuff we don’t yet know.
There could be other kinds of forces even within our sector that are too weak for us to have discovered so far or that exist at different scales than we know about. We detect what interacts strongly enough with our detectors to detect. It’s worth asking, and that’s one of the reasons we build big colliders to see are there other forces, other particles that exist say, at higher energies, at shorter distance scales than we’ve explored so far. It’s not just in the dark matter sector. Even in our sector, there could be a whole bunch of stuff we don’t yet know.
Particle physics
Lex Fridman
Maybe let’s zoom out and look at the standard model of particle physics. How does dark matter fit into it? First of all, what is it? Can you explain what the standard model is?
Maybe let’s zoom out and look at the standard model of particle physics. How does dark matter fit into it? First of all, what is it? Can you explain what the standard model is?
Lisa Randall
The standard model of particle physics is basically it tells us about nature’s most basic elements and their interactions. It’s the substructure as far as we understand it. If you look at atoms, we know they have nuclei and electrons, nuclei have protons and neutrons in them, protons and neutrons have particles called quarks that are held together by something called the strong force.
The standard model of particle physics is basically it tells us about nature’s most basic elements and their interactions. It’s the substructure as far as we understand it. If you look at atoms, we know they have nuclei and electrons, nuclei have protons and neutrons in them, protons and neutrons have particles called quarks that are held together by something called the strong force.
They interact through the strong force, the strong nuclear force. There’s something called the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism. Basically, all those particles and their interactions describe many, many things we understand. That’s the standard model. We now know about the Higgs boson, which is associated with how elementary particles get their mass. That piece of the puzzle has also been completed.
We also know that there are a weird array of masses of elementary particles. There’s not just the up and down quark, but there are heavier versions of the up and down quark. Charm and strange, top and bottom. There’s not just the electron, there’s a muon and a tau. There are particles called neutrinos, which are under intense study now, which are partnered with the leptons through the weak interactions.
We really do know these basic elements and we know the forces. When we’re doing particle physics experiments, we can usually even ignore gravity except in exceptional cases that we can talk about. Those are the basic elements in their interactions.
Dark matter stands outside that, it’s not interacting through those forces. When we look at the world around us, we don’t usually see the effects of dark matter. It’s because there’s so much of it that we do and it doesn’t have those forces that we know about. The standard model has worked spectacularly well. It’s been tested to a high degree of precision. People are still testing it.
One of the things we do as physicists is we actually want it to break down at some level, we’re looking for the precision measurement or the energy or whatever it will take where the standard model is no longer working. Not that it’s not working approximately, but we’re looking for the deviations. Those deviations are critical because they can tell us what underlies the standard model, which is what we really want to see next.
Lex Fridman
Where can you find the places where the standard model breaks down? What are the places you can see those tiny little deviations?
Where can you find the places where the standard model breaks down? What are the places you can see those tiny little deviations?
Lisa Randall
We don’t know yet, but we know the kinds of things you wouldn’t want to look for. One obvious place to look is at higher energy. We’re looking at the Large Hadron Collider, but we’d love to go beyond that. Higher energy means shorter distances and it means things that we just couldn’t produce before. E=mc², so if you have a heavy particle and you don’t have enough energy to make it, you’ll never see it. That’s one place.
We don’t know yet, but we know the kinds of things you wouldn’t want to look for. One obvious place to look is at higher energy. We’re looking at the Large Hadron Collider, but we’d love to go beyond that. Higher energy means shorter distances and it means things that we just couldn’t produce before. E=mc², so if you have a heavy particle and you don’t have enough energy to make it, you’ll never see it. That’s one place.
The other place is precision measurements. The standard model has been tested exquisitely, so if it’s been tested 1%, you want to look at a 10th of a percent. There are some processes that we know shouldn’t even happen at all in the standard model or happen at very suppressed level, and those are other things that we look for. All of those things could indicate there’s something beyond what we know about, which of course would be very exciting.
Lex Fridman
When you just step back and look at the standard model, the quarks and all the different particles and neutrinos, isn’t it wild how this little system came to be and underpins everything we see?
When you just step back and look at the standard model, the quarks and all the different particles and neutrinos, isn’t it wild how this little system came to be and underpins everything we see?
Lisa Randall
Absolutely. That’s why we’d like to understand it better. We want to know is it part of some bigger sector? Why are these particles… Why do they have the masses they do? Why is the Higgs boson so light compared to the mass that could have had, which we might’ve even expected based on the principles of special relativity and quantum mechanics. That’s a really big question. Why are they what they are?
Absolutely. That’s why we’d like to understand it better. We want to know is it part of some bigger sector? Why are these particles… Why do they have the masses they do? Why is the Higgs boson so light compared to the mass that could have had, which we might’ve even expected based on the principles of special relativity and quantum mechanics. That’s a really big question. Why are they what they are?
Lex Fridman
And they originate, there’s some mechanism that created the whole thing?
And they originate, there’s some mechanism that created the whole thing?
Lisa Randall
That’s one of the things we’re trying to study. Why is it what it is?
That’s one of the things we’re trying to study. Why is it what it is?
Lex Fridman
Even just the mechanism that creates stuff, the way a human being is created from a single cell. It’s like embryogenesis, the whole thing, you build up this thing. All of it, this whole thing comes to be from just like a [inaudible 00:34:47].
Even just the mechanism that creates stuff, the way a human being is created from a single cell. It’s like embryogenesis, the whole thing, you build up this thing. All of it, this whole thing comes to be from just like a [inaudible 00:34:47].
Lisa Randall
Don’t forget it is interacting with the environment.
Don’t forget it is interacting with the environment.
Lex Fridman
For sure. Okay, right, right, right.
For sure. Okay, right, right, right.
Lisa Randall
It’s important.
It’s important.
Lex Fridman
That’s a really good question is how much of it is the environment? Is it just the environment acting on a set of constraints? How much of it is just the information in the DNA or any information? How much is it in the initial conditions of the universe versus some other thing acting on it?
That’s a really good question is how much of it is the environment? Is it just the environment acting on a set of constraints? How much of it is just the information in the DNA or any information? How much is it in the initial conditions of the universe versus some other thing acting on it?
Lisa Randall
These are big questions. These are big questions in pretty much every field. For the universe, we do consider it… It’s everything there is by definition. But people now think about it. Is it one of many universes? Of course it’s a misnomer, but could there be other places where there are self-contained gravitational systems that we don’t even interact with? Those are really important questions, and the only way we’re going to answer them is we go back as far as we can. We try to think theoretically, and we try to think about observational consequences. That’s all we can do.
These are big questions. These are big questions in pretty much every field. For the universe, we do consider it… It’s everything there is by definition. But people now think about it. Is it one of many universes? Of course it’s a misnomer, but could there be other places where there are self-contained gravitational systems that we don’t even interact with? Those are really important questions, and the only way we’re going to answer them is we go back as far as we can. We try to think theoretically, and we try to think about observational consequences. That’s all we can do.
Lex Fridman
One interesting way to explore the standard model is to look at your fun, nuanced disagreement with Carlo Rovelli. When you talked about him writing in his book, “Electrons don’t always exist. They exist when they interact. They materialize in a place when they collide with something else.” You wrote that… I’ll just read the whole thing because it’s interesting.
One interesting way to explore the standard model is to look at your fun, nuanced disagreement with Carlo Rovelli. When you talked about him writing in his book, “Electrons don’t always exist. They exist when they interact. They materialize in a place when they collide with something else.” You wrote that… I’ll just read the whole thing because it’s interesting.
“Stocks may not achieve a precise value until they’re traded, but that doesn’t mean we can’t approximate their worth until they change hands. Similarly, electrons might not have definite properties, but they do exist. It’s true that the electron doesn’t exist as a classical object with definite position until the position is measured. But something was there – which physicists use a wave function to describe.” It’s a fascinating nuanced disagreement. Do electrons always exist or not? Does a tree fall in the forest if nobody’s there to see it?
Lisa Randall
I like to think of the universe as being out there, whether or not… It would be really weird if the only time things came into existence was when I saw them or I measured them.
I like to think of the universe as being out there, whether or not… It would be really weird if the only time things came into existence was when I saw them or I measured them.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of weird stuff in the works.
There’s a lot of weird stuff in the works.
Lisa Randall
I could believe that the Middle East doesn’t exist because I’m not there now. That would be kind of ridiculous, I think we would all agree on that. I think there’s only so much that we can attribute to our own powers of seeing. The whole system doesn’t come into being because I’m measuring it. What is weird, and this isn’t even a disagreement about the standard model, this is a disagreement about how you interpret quantum mechanics.
I could believe that the Middle East doesn’t exist because I’m not there now. That would be kind of ridiculous, I think we would all agree on that. I think there’s only so much that we can attribute to our own powers of seeing. The whole system doesn’t come into being because I’m measuring it. What is weird, and this isn’t even a disagreement about the standard model, this is a disagreement about how you interpret quantum mechanics.
I would say that those wave functions are real. One of the things that don’t forget that particle physics does that quantum field theory says is that electrons can be created and destroyed. It’s not that every electron has to be in the universe. That’s what happens at colliders, particles get created and destroyed, but that doesn’t mean that if I have electron in an atom, it’s not there. It’s certainly there, and we know about it. Its charge is there.
Lex Fridman
Physics is a kind of way to see the world. At the bottom, what’s the bottom turtle? Do you have a sense that there’s a bottom reality that we’re trying to approximate with physics?
Physics is a kind of way to see the world. At the bottom, what’s the bottom turtle? Do you have a sense that there’s a bottom reality that we’re trying to approximate with physics?
Lisa Randall
I think we always have in our head maybe that we’d like to find that, but I have to… I might not seem so, but I think I’m more humble than a lot of physicists. I’m not sure that we’re ever going to get to that bottom level, but I do think we’re going to keep penetrating different layers and get further.
I think we always have in our head maybe that we’d like to find that, but I have to… I might not seem so, but I think I’m more humble than a lot of physicists. I’m not sure that we’re ever going to get to that bottom level, but I do think we’re going to keep penetrating different layers and get further.
Lex Fridman
I just wonder how far away we are.
I just wonder how far away we are.
Lisa Randall
We all wonder that. What’s even the measure of how far away we are. One way you can measure it is just by our everyday lives. In terms of our everyday lives, we’ve measured everything. In terms of what underlies it. There’s a lot more to see. Part of it has to do with how far we think we can go. It might be that the nature of reality changes so much that even these terms are different. Maybe the notion of distance itself might break down at some point.
We all wonder that. What’s even the measure of how far away we are. One way you can measure it is just by our everyday lives. In terms of our everyday lives, we’ve measured everything. In terms of what underlies it. There’s a lot more to see. Part of it has to do with how far we think we can go. It might be that the nature of reality changes so much that even these terms are different. Maybe the notion of distance itself might break down at some point.
Lex Fridman
Also to push back on the we’ve measured everything, maybe there’s stuff we haven’t even considered is measurable. For example, consciousness. There might be stuff, just like you said, forces unseen, undetected.
Also to push back on the we’ve measured everything, maybe there’s stuff we haven’t even considered is measurable. For example, consciousness. There might be stuff, just like you said, forces unseen, undetected.
Lisa Randall
It’s an interesting thing, and this is often a confusion that happens. There’s the fundamental stuff underlying it, and then there’s the higher levels, what we’ll call an effective theory at some level. We’re not always working… When I throw a ball, I don’t tell you where every atom is. I tell you there’s a ball.
It’s an interesting thing, and this is often a confusion that happens. There’s the fundamental stuff underlying it, and then there’s the higher levels, what we’ll call an effective theory at some level. We’re not always working… When I throw a ball, I don’t tell you where every atom is. I tell you there’s a ball.
There might be different layers of reality that are built in terms of the matter that we know about in terms of the stuff we know about that. When I say we’ve measured everything, I say that with a grain of salt. I mean we’ve measured everything about the standard model. There’s lots of phenomena that we don’t understand, but often there are complex phenomena that will be given in terms of the fundamental ingredients that we know about.
Lex Fridman
That is an interesting question because yes, there’s phenomena that are at the higher level of abstractions that emerge, but maybe with consciousness, there is far out people that think that consciousness is panpsychus, that there’s going to be almost like a fundamental force of physics. That’s consciousness that permeates all that matter.
That is an interesting question because yes, there’s phenomena that are at the higher level of abstractions that emerge, but maybe with consciousness, there is far out people that think that consciousness is panpsychus, that there’s going to be almost like a fundamental force of physics. That’s consciousness that permeates all that matter.
Lisa Randall
Usually when you have a crazy… Sorry, when you have a far out theory, the thing you do is you test all the possibilities within the constructs that exist. You don’t just jump to the most far out possibility. You can do that, but then to see if it’s true, you either have to find evidence of it or you have to show that it’s not possible without that, and we’re very far from that.
Usually when you have a crazy… Sorry, when you have a far out theory, the thing you do is you test all the possibilities within the constructs that exist. You don’t just jump to the most far out possibility. You can do that, but then to see if it’s true, you either have to find evidence of it or you have to show that it’s not possible without that, and we’re very far from that.
Lex Fridman
I think one of the criticisms of your theory on the dinosaurs was that it requires, if I remember correctly, for dark matter to be weirder than it already is. I think you had a clever response to that. Can you remind…
I think one of the criticisms of your theory on the dinosaurs was that it requires, if I remember correctly, for dark matter to be weirder than it already is. I think you had a clever response to that. Can you remind…
Lisa Randall
I’m not sure I remember what I said then, but we have no idea how weird dark matter is. It’s based on everyone thinking they know what dark matter is. Weirder than it already is, it’s not already anything. We don’t know what it is, so there’s no normalization here.
I’m not sure I remember what I said then, but we have no idea how weird dark matter is. It’s based on everyone thinking they know what dark matter is. Weirder than it already is, it’s not already anything. We don’t know what it is, so there’s no normalization here.
Lex Fridman
Do we know if dark matter varies in density?
Do we know if dark matter varies in density?
Lisa Randall
It just certainly does in the universe, just like… For example, there’s more dark matter in galaxies than there’s between galaxies. It clumps. It’s matter, so it’s distributed like matter. It is matter.
It just certainly does in the universe, just like… For example, there’s more dark matter in galaxies than there’s between galaxies. It clumps. It’s matter, so it’s distributed like matter. It is matter.
Lex Fridman
It does clump, but the full details of how it clumps and the complexity of the clumping…
It does clump, but the full details of how it clumps and the complexity of the clumping…
Lisa Randall
It’s understood pretty well. People do simulations… Where people are always looking for things, including us as particle physics, it’s at small scales, are the deviations on small scales so that indicating other interactions or other processes or interactions with baryons. That is to say normal matter that we don’t understand. But on large scales, we have a pretty good understanding of dark matter distribution.
It’s understood pretty well. People do simulations… Where people are always looking for things, including us as particle physics, it’s at small scales, are the deviations on small scales so that indicating other interactions or other processes or interactions with baryons. That is to say normal matter that we don’t understand. But on large scales, we have a pretty good understanding of dark matter distribution.
Lex Fridman
You were part of a recent debate on can science uncover reality. Let me ask you this question then, what do you think is the limits of science?
You were part of a recent debate on can science uncover reality. Let me ask you this question then, what do you think is the limits of science?
Lisa Randall
I’m smart enough to know that I have no idea. Also it’s not even clear what science means because there’s the science that we do, which is particle physics. We try to find fundamental things and figure out what their effects are. There’s science like biology where at a higher level, the kind of questions you ask are different, the kind of measurements are different.
I’m smart enough to know that I have no idea. Also it’s not even clear what science means because there’s the science that we do, which is particle physics. We try to find fundamental things and figure out what their effects are. There’s science like biology where at a higher level, the kind of questions you ask are different, the kind of measurements are different.
The kind of science that’s going to happen in the more numerical age or even AI, what does it mean to answer a question? Does it mean that we can predict it? Does it mean that we can reproduce it? I think we’re coming up against the definition of what we mean by science as human beings. In terms of the science that we can do, I don’t think we’ll know it until we get there. We’re trying to solve hard problems and we’ve made progress.
If you think of how much science has advanced in the last century or century and a half, it’s incredible. We didn’t even know the universe was expanding at the beginning of the 20th century. We didn’t know about quantum mechanics at the beginning of the century, we didn’t know about special relativity. That’s a lot in a relatively short time, depending on how you think of time. I think it would be premature to say we know limitations.
Lex Fridman
At various points throughout the history, we thought we solved everything or at least various people declared-
At various points throughout the history, we thought we solved everything or at least various people declared-
Lisa Randall
[inaudible 00:43:20] various people. Exactly.
[inaudible 00:43:20] various people. Exactly.
Lex Fridman
Declared that we’ve solved everything. This also a good place to… Maybe could you describe the difference between top-down and bottom-up approaches to theoretical physics that you talked about in the book?
Declared that we’ve solved everything. This also a good place to… Maybe could you describe the difference between top-down and bottom-up approaches to theoretical physics that you talked about in the book?
Lisa Randall
You could try to jump in and say I have a theory that I think is so perfect that I can predict everything from it or at least predict some salient features from it.
You could try to jump in and say I have a theory that I think is so perfect that I can predict everything from it or at least predict some salient features from it.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm. That’s top-down.
Mm-hmm. That’s top-down.
Lisa Randall
That would be a top-down. Bottom-up is more like the questions we just asked. Why are masses what they are? We measure things. We want to put them together. Usually a good approach is to combine the two. If you ask a very specific question but combine it with the methods of knowing that there could be a fundamental theory underlying it, sometimes you make progress.
That would be a top-down. Bottom-up is more like the questions we just asked. Why are masses what they are? We measure things. We want to put them together. Usually a good approach is to combine the two. If you ask a very specific question but combine it with the methods of knowing that there could be a fundamental theory underlying it, sometimes you make progress.
The community tends to get segmented or fragmented into people who do one or the other, but there are definitely times… Some of my best collaborations with people who are more top-down than I am, so that we come up with interesting ideas that we wouldn’t have thought of if either one of us was working individually.
Lex Fridman
Would you say the truly big leaps happened top-down? Like Einstein?
Would you say the truly big leaps happened top-down? Like Einstein?
Lisa Randall
Einstein was not a top-down person in the beginning. Special relativity was very much him thinking about… They were thought experiments, but he was very much… The original theory about relativity is something like on the nature of electromagnetism. He was trying to understand how Maxwell’s laws could make sense when they seemed to have different symmetries than what we had thought they were.
Einstein was not a top-down person in the beginning. Special relativity was very much him thinking about… They were thought experiments, but he was very much… The original theory about relativity is something like on the nature of electromagnetism. He was trying to understand how Maxwell’s laws could make sense when they seemed to have different symmetries than what we had thought they were.
He was very much a bottom-up person, and in fact, he resisted top-down for a long time. Then when he tried to do the theory of general relativity or the general theory of relativity, whichever you want to call it, incorporating gravity into the system when you need some feedback, then he was helped by a mathematician who had developed some differential geometry and helped him figure out how to write down that.
After that, he thought top-down was the way to go, but he actually didn’t make that much progress. I think it’s naive to think it was just one or the other. In fact, a lot of people who made real progress were rooted in actual measurements.
Physics vs mathematics
Lex Fridman
Speaking of mathematicians, what do you is the difference, you’ve had a bit of foot in both, between physics and mathematics in the way it helps us understand the world?
Speaking of mathematicians, what do you is the difference, you’ve had a bit of foot in both, between physics and mathematics in the way it helps us understand the world?
Lisa Randall
To be frank, there’s a lot more overlap in physics and math. I think that has been… Maybe not more, but there’s certainly a lot. I think, again, the kinds of questions you’re asking are usually different. Mathematicians like the structure itself, physicists are trying to concentrate on, to some extent, on the consequences for the world. But there is a lot of overlap.
To be frank, there’s a lot more overlap in physics and math. I think that has been… Maybe not more, but there’s certainly a lot. I think, again, the kinds of questions you’re asking are usually different. Mathematicians like the structure itself, physicists are trying to concentrate on, to some extent, on the consequences for the world. But there is a lot of overlap.
Lex Fridman
The string theory is an example. There’s certain theories where there’s a certain mathematical beauty to it.
The string theory is an example. There’s certain theories where there’s a certain mathematical beauty to it.
Lisa Randall
There’s also some really cool ideas that you get in particle physics where you can describe what’s going on and connect it to other ideas. That’s also really beautiful. I think basically insights can be beautiful. They might seem simple, and sometimes they genuinely are, and sometimes they’re built on a whole system that you have to understand before. If you actually saw Einstein’s equations written out in components, if you wouldn’t think it’s so beautiful. If you write in a compact way, it looks nice.
There’s also some really cool ideas that you get in particle physics where you can describe what’s going on and connect it to other ideas. That’s also really beautiful. I think basically insights can be beautiful. They might seem simple, and sometimes they genuinely are, and sometimes they’re built on a whole system that you have to understand before. If you actually saw Einstein’s equations written out in components, if you wouldn’t think it’s so beautiful. If you write in a compact way, it looks nice.
Lex Fridman
What do you think about the successes and the failures of string theory? To what degree do you think it succeeded, to what degrees it not succeeded yet or has failed?
What do you think about the successes and the failures of string theory? To what degree do you think it succeeded, to what degrees it not succeeded yet or has failed?
Lisa Randall
I think to talk about any science in terms of success and failure often misses the point because there’s not some absolute thing. I do think that string theorists were a bit overly ambitious… Not overly ambitious, but a little bit overly arrogant in the beginning, thinking they could solve many problems that they weren’t going to solve.
I think to talk about any science in terms of success and failure often misses the point because there’s not some absolute thing. I do think that string theorists were a bit overly ambitious… Not overly ambitious, but a little bit overly arrogant in the beginning, thinking they could solve many problems that they weren’t going to solve.
That’s not to say the methods and advances in strength theory don’t exist, but they certainly weren’t able to immediately solve all the problems they thought they could solve. It has given us tools, it has given us some insights, but it becomes almost a sociological question of how much it should be one or the other.
I do think that you can get caught up in the problems themselves, and sometimes you can get caught up in the methods and just do other examples. The real physics insights often come from people who are thinking about physics as well as math.
Lex Fridman
Because you mentioned AI, is there hope that AI might be able to help find some interesting insights? Another way to ask this question is how special are humans that we’re able to discover novel insights about the world?
Because you mentioned AI, is there hope that AI might be able to help find some interesting insights? Another way to ask this question is how special are humans that we’re able to discover novel insights about the world?
Lisa Randall
That’s a great question, and it depends on what kind of insights and what we’re going to find that out. Because it’s hard to think about something that doesn’t quite exist yet, I could just think about something, take a step back. It’s a little bit like I’m trying understand four dimensions so you go back to three dimensions. Go to something you can imagine.
That’s a great question, and it depends on what kind of insights and what we’re going to find that out. Because it’s hard to think about something that doesn’t quite exist yet, I could just think about something, take a step back. It’s a little bit like I’m trying understand four dimensions so you go back to three dimensions. Go to something you can imagine.
You can say a lot of the things in a very different level about the internet. You could say has the internet helped do things? It definitely took on a life of its own in some sense, but it’s also something that we’re able to tame. I know that I, myself wouldn’t have been able to write books if the internet didn’t exist because I wouldn’t have had the time to go to the library and look everything up. It helped me enormously.
In some sense, AI could be that. In a very nice world, it could be a tool that helps us go a step further than we would and a lot more efficiently. It’s already done that to some extent. Or it could be like the parts of the internet that we can control that are ruining politics or whatever. There’s certainly a lot of indications that can do that. Then there are even bigger things that people speculate about AI being able to do its own things, but in terms of actually figuring things out, we’re in the early stages.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s several directions here. One is on the theorem prover side, Wolfram Alpha where everything’s much more precise, and we have large language model type of stuff. One of the limitations of those is it seems to come up with convincing looking things, which we don’t know if it’s true or not, and that’s a big problem for physics.
Yeah, there’s several directions here. One is on the theorem prover side, Wolfram Alpha where everything’s much more precise, and we have large language model type of stuff. One of the limitations of those is it seems to come up with convincing looking things, which we don’t know if it’s true or not, and that’s a big problem for physics.
Lisa Randall
Large language models are more or less generalizations of stuff that we have. There’s still breakthroughs in AI waiting to happen, and maybe they are happening and maybe they’ll be good, maybe not, but that’s not quite the same. Maybe in some cases, it’s just pattern recognition that leads to important things, but sometimes it could be something more insightful than that that I can’t even put my finger on.
Large language models are more or less generalizations of stuff that we have. There’s still breakthroughs in AI waiting to happen, and maybe they are happening and maybe they’ll be good, maybe not, but that’s not quite the same. Maybe in some cases, it’s just pattern recognition that leads to important things, but sometimes it could be something more insightful than that that I can’t even put my finger on.
It forces us to… We don’t really understand how smart we are. We don’t understand how we think about things all that well, actually. But one thing is true though, we are a lot more efficient right now than computers and coming up with things, we require a lot less energy to do that. If computers figure out how to do that, then it’s going to be at a totally different ball game.
Here are clearly kinds of connections that we don’t know how we’re making, but we are making them. That’s going to be interesting. I say we’re in early stages, but this is changing very rapidly. Right now, I don’t think that it’s actually discovered new laws of physics, but could it in the future? Maybe it can.
Lex Fridman
It will raise big questions about what is special about humans that we don’t quite appreciate. There could be things that are like that leap of insight that happens, truly novel ideas, that could potentially be very difficult to do.
It will raise big questions about what is special about humans that we don’t quite appreciate. There could be things that are like that leap of insight that happens, truly novel ideas, that could potentially be very difficult to do.
Lisa Randall
There are abstract questions like that. There’s also questions of how is it that we can address to some extent, how will AI be used in the context of the world we live in? Which is based on at least our country’s based on capitalism in a certain political system. How will global politics deal with it? How will our capitalist system deal with it? What will be the things that we focus on doing with it? How much will researchers get control of it to be able to ask different sorts of questions?
There are abstract questions like that. There’s also questions of how is it that we can address to some extent, how will AI be used in the context of the world we live in? Which is based on at least our country’s based on capitalism in a certain political system. How will global politics deal with it? How will our capitalist system deal with it? What will be the things that we focus on doing with it? How much will researchers get control of it to be able to ask different sorts of questions?
While it was starting out, people were doing these kinds of toy problems, but what will it actually be applied to and what will it be optimized to do? There’s a lot of questions out there that it’s really important we start addressing.
Lex Fridman
What to you is the most beautiful unsolved problem in physics and cosmology, which is really exciting if we can unlock the mystery of in the next few decades?
What to you is the most beautiful unsolved problem in physics and cosmology, which is really exciting if we can unlock the mystery of in the next few decades?
Lisa Randall
Is it what’s the most beautiful unsolved problem, or what is the most beautiful unsolved problem I think we can make progress on?
Is it what’s the most beautiful unsolved problem, or what is the most beautiful unsolved problem I think we can make progress on?
Lex Fridman
Oh boy, we make progress on in the next few centuries.
Oh boy, we make progress on in the next few centuries.
Lisa Randall
Most of the big questions have to do with what underlies things, how things started, what’s at the base of it. There’s also just basic questions like that you asked earlier, how far will science take us? How much can we understand? There are questions like how we got here, what underlies it, are there.
Most of the big questions have to do with what underlies things, how things started, what’s at the base of it. There’s also just basic questions like that you asked earlier, how far will science take us? How much can we understand? There are questions like how we got here, what underlies it, are there.
Also, there’s really deep questions like what fraction are we actually seeing? If there are these other forces, if there is another way of seeing the world, are there universes beyond their own? If they’re so totally different, how do we even comprehend them? What would we even think about them? There’s a lot about trying to get beyond… It’s always just getting beyond our limited vision and limited experience and trying to see what underlies it, both at small scales and at large scales.
We just don’t know the answers. I’d like to think that we understand more about dark matter, about dark energy, about are there extra dimensions, things that we actually work on, but there’s probably a lot beyond what we work on that’s yet to be discovered.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, understanding the extra dimensions piece will be really interesting.
Yeah, understanding the extra dimensions piece will be really interesting.
Lisa Randall
Totally. If it is how the universe went from higher dimensions to what we see, are the extra dimensions present everywhere? One of the really interesting pieces of physics we did that I talk about in my first book, Warped Passages, is finding out that there can be a higher dimension, but only locally. Do you think there’s a gravity of a lower dimension? It could be like only locally do we think we live in three dimensions. It could be higher dimensions is different.
Totally. If it is how the universe went from higher dimensions to what we see, are the extra dimensions present everywhere? One of the really interesting pieces of physics we did that I talk about in my first book, Warped Passages, is finding out that there can be a higher dimension, but only locally. Do you think there’s a gravity of a lower dimension? It could be like only locally do we think we live in three dimensions. It could be higher dimensions is different.
That’s not actually the gravity we have, but there’s all sorts of phenomena that might be out there that we don’t know about. All sorts of evolution things, time dependence that we don’t know about. Of course, that’s from the point of view of particle physics, from the point of view of other kinds of physics, we’re just beginning, so who knows?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, if the physics changes throughout is not homogeneous throughout the universe, that’ll be weird.
Yeah, if the physics changes throughout is not homogeneous throughout the universe, that’ll be weird.
Lisa Randall
I mean, for the observable universe, it’s the same. But beyond the observable universe, who knows?
I mean, for the observable universe, it’s the same. But beyond the observable universe, who knows?
Lex Fridman
You’ve had an exceptional career. What advice would you give to young people, maybe high school, college, on how to have a career they can be proud of and a life they can be proud of?
You’ve had an exceptional career. What advice would you give to young people, maybe high school, college, on how to have a career they can be proud of and a life they can be proud of?
Lisa Randall
I think the weird thing about being a scientist or an academic in general is you have to believe really strongly what you do while questioning it all the time. That’s a hard balance to have. Sometimes it helps to collaborate with people, but to really believe that you could have good ideas at the same time, knowing they could all be wrong. That’s a tough tightrope to walk sometimes, but to really test them out.
I think the weird thing about being a scientist or an academic in general is you have to believe really strongly what you do while questioning it all the time. That’s a hard balance to have. Sometimes it helps to collaborate with people, but to really believe that you could have good ideas at the same time, knowing they could all be wrong. That’s a tough tightrope to walk sometimes, but to really test them out.
The other thing is sometimes if you get too far buried, you look out and you think there’s so much out there. Sometimes it’s just good to bring it back home and just think okay, can I have as good idea as the person next to me rather than the greatest physicist who ever lived? Right now, like you said, I think there’s lots of big issues out there, and it’s hard to balance that.
Sometimes it’s hard to forget the role of physics, but I think Wilson said it really well when he said when they were building Fermilab, it was like this won’t defend the country, but it’ll make it worth defending. It’s just the idea that in all this chaos, it’s still important that we still make progress in these things. Sometimes when major world events are happening, it’s easy to forget that. I think those are important too. You don’t want to forget those, but to try to keep that balance because we don’t want to lose what it is that makes humans special.
Lex Fridman
That’s the big picture. Do you also lose yourself in the simple joy of puzzle solving?
That’s the big picture. Do you also lose yourself in the simple joy of puzzle solving?
Lisa Randall
Yeah. We all like solving puzzles. Actually one of the things that drives me in my research is the inconsistencies. When things don’t make sense, it really bugs me and it just will go into different directions to see how could these things fit together.
Yeah. We all like solving puzzles. Actually one of the things that drives me in my research is the inconsistencies. When things don’t make sense, it really bugs me and it just will go into different directions to see how could these things fit together.
Lex Fridman
It bugs you, but that motivates you?
It bugs you, but that motivates you?
Lisa Randall
Yeah, totally.
Yeah, totally.
Lex Fridman
Until it doesn’t. You have to resolve it.
Until it doesn’t. You have to resolve it.
Lisa Randall
I think I have this underlying belief that it should make sense, even though the world comes at you in many ways and tells you nothing should make sense, but if you believe that it makes sense and you look for underlying logic. I think that’s just good advice for everything to try to find why is it the way.
I think I have this underlying belief that it should make sense, even though the world comes at you in many ways and tells you nothing should make sense, but if you believe that it makes sense and you look for underlying logic. I think that’s just good advice for everything to try to find why is it the way.
I talk about effective theory in my second book, Knocking On Heaven’s Door, a lot. It’s rather than ask the big questions, sometimes we just ask the questions about the immediate things that we can measure and like I said, we can sometimes tell one that we’ll fail, but we can have these effective theories. Sometimes I think when we approach these big questions, it’s good to do it from an effective theory point. Why do I find this satisfying? Why is the world we have the way it is?
We think things are beautiful that we live in. I’m not sure if we had different senses or different ways of looking at things, we wouldn’t necessarily find it beautiful. But I have to say, it is fantastic that no matter how many times I see a sunset, I will always find it beautiful. I don’t think I ever see a sunset as say whatever. It’s just always beautiful.
There are things that as humans, clearly resonate with us, but we were maybe evolved that way. But that’s about us. In terms of figuring out the universe, it’s amazing how far we’ve gotten. We have discovered many, many wonderful things, but there’s a lot more out there and I hope we have the opportunity to keep going.
Lex Fridman
With effective theories, one small step at a time, just keep unraveling the mystery.
With effective theories, one small step at a time, just keep unraveling the mystery.
Lisa Randall
Also having in mind the big questions, but doing one small step at a time. Exactly.
Also having in mind the big questions, but doing one small step at a time. Exactly.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, looking out to the stars. You said the sunset. For me, it’s the sunset, the sunrise, and just looking at the stars. It’s wondering what’s all out there and having a lot of hope that humans will figure it out.
Yeah, looking out to the stars. You said the sunset. For me, it’s the sunset, the sunrise, and just looking at the stars. It’s wondering what’s all out there and having a lot of hope that humans will figure it out.
Lisa Randall
Right. I like it.
Right. I like it.
Lex Fridman
Lisa, thank you for being one of the humans in the world for having me here for that are pushing it forward and figuring out this beautiful puzzle of ours. Thank you for talking today. This was amazing.
Lisa, thank you for being one of the humans in the world for having me here for that are pushing it forward and figuring out this beautiful puzzle of ours. Thank you for talking today. This was amazing.
Lisa Randall
Thank you for having me here.
Thank you for having me here.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Lisa Randall. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, let me leave you with some words from Albert Einstein. The important thing is to not stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existence. Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Lisa Randall. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, let me leave you with some words from Albert Einstein. The important thing is to not stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existence. Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Michael Malice: Thanksgiving Pirate Special | Lex Fridman Podcast #402
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #402 with Michael Malice.
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:
Make me a pinata. I don’t care. I don’t understand, well, I do understand, but it’s sad for me when people are like, “This isn’t funny. That isn’t funny.” The way I look at humor is the way it’s like a chef, right? It’s pretty easy to make bacon taste good, but some of these really obscure ingredients to make it palatable, that’s takes skill. So if you’re dealing with a subject that is very emotional or intense and you can make people laugh, then that takes skill and that’s the relief for them.
And the guy’s like, “Dude, what happened to you?” He goes, “Ugh, you never believe this. I got one of those genie lamps and this genie.” He’s like, “Well, what happened?” He goes, “Well, the first wish, I wished for a hundred million dollars.” He’s like, “Yeah, did you get it?” He goes, “Yeah.” He goes, “In my bank account. Feels fine.” He goes, “All right. Well, the second wish, I wished to have sex with as many beautiful women as I want.” He goes, “Did that happen?” He goes, “Yeah, it was amazing.” He goes, “Then what?” “Well, I wished for a giant pumpkin head.”
And when you make her laugh, which is that laugh that’s in the theme song of her show, you feel like, “Okay, I did a mitzvah. I did something good and right in the world that I made Roseanne Barr laugh.” And it’s also really funny because, and she’s going to hate this, because I tell her, she’s adorable. She doesn’t like that. She’s little. You think of Roseanne Barr as this force of nature, like a tsunami.
He opened for Tenacious D once in somewhere, I think in Ireland or the UK, one of those. And they’re booing him because his jokes are often not funny. He’s like, “Hey, where did my whore ex-wife run off to with that dentist she’s shacking up with? I don’t know. But when I see her in court next month, Alaska.”
So they’re booing and he goes, “All right, do you guys want me to bring out Tenacious D?” They’re like, “Yeah.” “Do you want to see your heroes of my Tenacious D?” “Yeah.” “Come on, let me hear it. Do you want to see Tenacious D?” “Yeah.” He goes, “All right, if I tell this next joke and you don’t boo me, I’ll bring out Tenacious D.” And it’s like, I’m trying to think of one that’s not too…
He didn’t want to tell you.” And she’s freaking out. He goes, “Prank.” So I took him, Dinesh D’Souza just released a movie called Police State, which was actually really good, highly recommend it. I was surprised how much I liked it because he wasn’t going Republicans good, Democrats bad.
It was just about authoritarianism. And he had a movie premier at Mar-a-Lago. So I’m like, I got to bring Lucas to Mar-a-Lago. So Lucas is, I’m like, “We’re going to the President’s house.” He’s like, “Oh, the White House?” And I’m like, “No, no, a former president.” He goes, “Oh, Abe Lincoln?” And I’m like, “Okay, kid logic.” He’s giving logical answers. This is kind of like AI, you have to program it. It’s using logic correctly.
I was in the car with my sister when she was 10, 12, whatever. She’s much younger than me. She’s 12 years younger. And there’s this species of squid, by the way, which is asymmetric. One of its eyes is very much bigger than the other because it swims horizontally. And so one’s looking up, one’s looking down where there’s more light. Shout out. If you want to learn more about squids, go to octonation.com.
So I’ve got an artist, we’re getting it together, so I’m going to make it happen finally. And it’s some of the best writing I’ve ever done. I’m really proud of the story. It’s ironic reading it now, because when you’re a writer, obviously different books, you put different aspects of yourself into them, and this story is very, very dark because basically they did all the right things and they went nowhere. What I realized was reading it now, that all these fears I had over 20 years ago about what if I’m not going to make it? What if I’m doing all the hard work and it’s still not enough? Now it’s been disproven because I can at least pay my rent.
What does the pirate say when he turns 80?
See, that’s how I know you don’t like humor.
Do you play any musical instruments?
Okay.
Oh my God.
So I don’t have any relationship with any of these people, these are just some galleries I follow on Instagram. Outre Gallery, Antler Gallery, Giant Robot 2, Beinart, I don’t know how to pronounce it, I’m sorry. B-E-I-N-A-R-T. Spoke Art Gallery, Var Gallery in Milwaukee, I was there. The pieces were not expensive at all.
So I’m a big fan of the contemporary art scene. A lot of it is not great, but even the stuff that’s not great is very rarely disgusting or gross. It’s just like, okay, I’ve seen this before, or something like that.
For example, if you look at the George W. Bush White House, you had W, you had Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, a lot of these NeoCon advisors. So if there’s 10 people in a room and there’s one Jewish person, it’s his fault, and the rest are Jew controlled. So again, they only exist as a puppet of Jews in this kind of worldview. And it’s like, to me, if there were no Jews on earth, it is crazy to say that John Bolton and Liz Cheney and Lindsey Graham wouldn’t be pushing for more war. That makes no sense to me. It’s like, you blame the Jews when bad things happen, but when a Jewish person does something good, it doesn’t really matter. Or just wait, he’s going to do something bad. Well, yeah, that’s true. Human beings do good things and then they do bad things sometimes. But it only counts when that Jewish person does the bad thing.
Another thing I have, which is like, in terms of holy crap I’ve made it. I have an original Patrick Nagel painting, and if people don’t know the name, he’s like the ’80s artist. He did the Duran Duran cover. Whenever you see him in nail salons. I have a male, which were very rare for him to do. So that’s two of my kind of favorite pieces.
So if you someone who has an interest or a hobby, I’m sure to some extent, maybe your friends or family are sick of talking about it or you don’t want to talk about it with them. That’s the private life where you could just be yourself. So I try to, and this comes from my co-authoring background. When I’m talking to people to ask the questions that they haven’t heard before. There’s a possibility that this actor I’m a huge fan of is going to be on my show. I don’t want to spoil everything. And he’s got a very specific role that he’s known for. And I’m like, “Okay, I know it’s going to be annoying for you talking about this one role, but my goal is to ask questions that you aren’t sick of asking, haven’t been asked.”
And if something is not working in your life… Let’s suppose you don’t have friends. Right? There’s the internet. How do people make friends? Try things out? What’s the worst that’s going to happen? Things will blow up in your face. Well, you’ll learn something at least. Don’t be afraid of making mistakes. When I was a kid, I was so scared of having things under control, so like I would never have to get hit in the face metaphorically. And then I realized, and you realized this as well, everyone who’s important gets hit in the face. Look at the president, whoever the president is. It becomes a matter of being strong enough that you could take getting hit in the face. So that is a big important switch in your thinking.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:28 – Beauty and mantis shrimp
- 6:02 – Parrots, Pirates, and Monty Python
- 12:14 – Humor and absurdity
- 19:35 – Thanksgiving
- 48:15 – Unboxing the mystery box
- 1:04:13 – Karl Marx and religion
- 1:12:30 – Art
- 1:16:44 – Books
- 1:29:21 – How to be happy
- 1:31:31 – Depression
- 1:32:35 – Fear
- 1:34:01 – Betrayal
Introduction
Lex Fridman
What’s your opinion on my bird here, Mr. Parrot?
What’s your opinion on my bird here, Mr. Parrot?
Michael Malice
It’s a Macaw. Scarlet Macaw.
It’s a Macaw. Scarlet Macaw.
Lex Fridman
What?
What?
Michael Malice
It is a Scarlet Macaw.
It is a Scarlet Macaw.
Lex Fridman
Oh, you know birds?
Oh, you know birds?
Michael Malice
Yeah. And that’s actually not life-sized.
Yeah. And that’s actually not life-sized.
Lex Fridman
Are you saying he’s not real?
Are you saying he’s not real?
Michael Malice
I’m saying it’s not to scale.
I’m saying it’s not to scale.
Lex Fridman
Okay. But he’s real.
Okay. But he’s real.
Michael Malice
Are we doing that Monty Python sketch?
Are we doing that Monty Python sketch?
Lex Fridman
Everything is a Monty Python sketch.
Everything is a Monty Python sketch.
Michael Malice
I don’t think Monty Python’s funny.
I don’t think Monty Python’s funny.
Lex Fridman
You don’t?
You don’t?
Michael Malice
At all. Not once.
At all. Not once.
Lex Fridman
That explains so much.
That explains so much.
Michael Malice
Does it? What does it explain?
Does it? What does it explain?
Lex Fridman
What do you think is funny?
What do you think is funny?
Michael Malice
You not answering that question is pretty funny.
You not answering that question is pretty funny.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. What do you think is funny, having a mantis shrimp?
Yeah. What do you think is funny, having a mantis shrimp?
Michael Malice
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
You think Big Lebowski is funny?
You think Big Lebowski is funny?
Michael Malice
Oh God, no.
Oh God, no.
Lex Fridman
This is getting worse and worse. The following is a conversation with Michael Malice, anarchist and author of Dear Reader, The New Right, The Anarchist Handbook, The White Pill, and he is the host of the podcast, YOUR WELCOME. This is a Thanksgiving special of the pirate and oceangoing variety. So once again, let me say thank you for listening today and for being part of this wild journey with me. This is a Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Michael Malice.
This is getting worse and worse. The following is a conversation with Michael Malice, anarchist and author of Dear Reader, The New Right, The Anarchist Handbook, The White Pill, and he is the host of the podcast, YOUR WELCOME. This is a Thanksgiving special of the pirate and oceangoing variety. So once again, let me say thank you for listening today and for being part of this wild journey with me. This is a Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Michael Malice.
Beauty and mantis shrimp
Michael Malice
The box?
The box?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
The mystery box.
The mystery box.
Lex Fridman
I’m wondering what’s in it.
I’m wondering what’s in it.
Michael Malice
There’s something in that box of exquisite beauty, both literally and in what it symbolizes and why it is here.
There’s something in that box of exquisite beauty, both literally and in what it symbolizes and why it is here.
Lex Fridman
Given the kind of human being you are, I’m terrified at what you find beautiful.
Given the kind of human being you are, I’m terrified at what you find beautiful.
Michael Malice
That’s a good point. You kind of hit me with a curve ball. For me, the most beautiful wildlife are what I call God’s mistakes. Because my friend came up with that term where she’s like, “God made these disgusting animals, just threw in the bottom of the ocean.” He’s like, “No one’s ever going to see this.”
That’s a good point. You kind of hit me with a curve ball. For me, the most beautiful wildlife are what I call God’s mistakes. Because my friend came up with that term where she’s like, “God made these disgusting animals, just threw in the bottom of the ocean.” He’s like, “No one’s ever going to see this.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You commented on Twitter about some creature, a rainbow type creature.
Yeah. You commented on Twitter about some creature, a rainbow type creature.
Michael Malice
The peacock mantis shrimp.
The peacock mantis shrimp.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s beautiful.
Yeah, it’s beautiful.
Michael Malice
It’s horrific though. So it has, I think eight legs, six arms, two punching claws or spearing claws depending on the genus. Two eyes, two antennae, two ear flaps. I don’t know what they do. And its punch can be as strong as a bullet. And the other type with the spears, divers call them thumb splitters because if you stick your finger near it’ll cut your thumb down to the bone. So I had one as a pet. All night I would hear banging on the PVC pipe. And I’ve got to tell you, if they have the best eyesight of any animal because they see in seven different ways. And when you make eye contact with this thing, it’s just absolutely terrifying. But you can eat them as sushi. They call them sea centipedes.
It’s horrific though. So it has, I think eight legs, six arms, two punching claws or spearing claws depending on the genus. Two eyes, two antennae, two ear flaps. I don’t know what they do. And its punch can be as strong as a bullet. And the other type with the spears, divers call them thumb splitters because if you stick your finger near it’ll cut your thumb down to the bone. So I had one as a pet. All night I would hear banging on the PVC pipe. And I’ve got to tell you, if they have the best eyesight of any animal because they see in seven different ways. And when you make eye contact with this thing, it’s just absolutely terrifying. But you can eat them as sushi. They call them sea centipedes.
Lex Fridman
But they’re colorful and beautiful.
But they’re colorful and beautiful.
Michael Malice
That’s species is, yeah.
That’s species is, yeah.
Lex Fridman
What was it like having one as a pet, and why did you do it?
What was it like having one as a pet, and why did you do it?
Michael Malice
Well, when you have a species that’s that unique and that much of an outlier, growing up, reading these books, watching these shows, I found this stuff so much more fascinating than space, which is dead. So to be able to have this specimen in your house and just observe its behavior is just an amazing thing.
Well, when you have a species that’s that unique and that much of an outlier, growing up, reading these books, watching these shows, I found this stuff so much more fascinating than space, which is dead. So to be able to have this specimen in your house and just observe its behavior is just an amazing thing.
Lex Fridman
Why’d you get rid of it?
Why’d you get rid of it?
Michael Malice
I didn’t have, I guess, the right minerals in the mix because-
I didn’t have, I guess, the right minerals in the mix because-
Lex Fridman
It died?
It died?
Michael Malice
… it had a problem moulting once. Yeah, it couldn’t moult correctly.
… it had a problem moulting once. Yeah, it couldn’t moult correctly.
Lex Fridman
Wow. Do you miss it? Think about it still?
Wow. Do you miss it? Think about it still?
Michael Malice
I do think about it, to be honest. I still have a pair of it’s punching appendages from when it moulted.
I do think about it, to be honest. I still have a pair of it’s punching appendages from when it moulted.
Lex Fridman
What pet animal in your life do you miss the most, that has been in your life that you think about?
What pet animal in your life do you miss the most, that has been in your life that you think about?
Michael Malice
I’ve never had cats or dogs growing up or anything like that, which I… Oh God. My problem is-
I’ve never had cats or dogs growing up or anything like that, which I… Oh God. My problem is-
Lex Fridman
Here we go.
Here we go.
Michael Malice
… if I like something, I will go down a rabbit hole. So I know if I got one tattoo, I already know my first five are going to be. Okay? So I can’t do it because then once I get those five, it’s going to be a hundred and I’m already too old to be the tattoo guy.
… if I like something, I will go down a rabbit hole. So I know if I got one tattoo, I already know my first five are going to be. Okay? So I can’t do it because then once I get those five, it’s going to be a hundred and I’m already too old to be the tattoo guy.
Lex Fridman
What would be the first tattoo? My face? Would it go on your ass cheeks or where would you put them if it was my face?
What would be the first tattoo? My face? Would it go on your ass cheeks or where would you put them if it was my face?
Michael Malice
If I got your face, it would definitely be on my arm right here.
If I got your face, it would definitely be on my arm right here.
Lex Fridman
If you had multiple faces, would you put like?
If you had multiple faces, would you put like?
Michael Malice
I think delts, right? Shoulders, different faces on different shoulders.
I think delts, right? Shoulders, different faces on different shoulders.
Lex Fridman
And when you flex?
And when you flex?
Michael Malice
I’d want some symmetry.
I’d want some symmetry.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Would you get a dictator? If you had to get a dictator, who would you get?
Yeah. Would you get a dictator? If you had to get a dictator, who would you get?
Michael Malice
Would have to be Kim Jong-il. Right? Because I wrote the book on him.
Would have to be Kim Jong-il. Right? Because I wrote the book on him.
Lex Fridman
Oh, it’s like the plugging your book in the tattoo?
Oh, it’s like the plugging your book in the tattoo?
Michael Malice
I don’t think plugging, it’s just I have a personal connection to this stuff.
I don’t think plugging, it’s just I have a personal connection to this stuff.
Lex Fridman
Good opener, the conversation. People would be asking why him and he’d be like, “Well, I wrote a book about it.” And I’d be like, “Oh, okay.”
Good opener, the conversation. People would be asking why him and he’d be like, “Well, I wrote a book about it.” And I’d be like, “Oh, okay.”
Michael Malice
Okay. Here’s why-
Okay. Here’s why-
Lex Fridman
“Let me check it out.”
“Let me check it out.”
Michael Malice
That would be a bad. No, that’s not what happens.
That would be a bad. No, that’s not what happens.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Michael Malice
Here’s the thing.
Here’s the thing.
Lex Fridman
What happens?
What happens?
Michael Malice
When you write a book about North, “Hey, nice to meet you. What is it you do?’ “I’m an author.” “What kind of books do you write?” “Well, my last book was on North Korea,” 90% of the time, 90, they will then start telling me everything they know about North Korea. And it’s like, “I don’t need, this isn’t a quiz, and it’s a very poorly understood country. I don’t expect you to know anything. You’re not on the spot. And half of what you’re saying is not accurate either. It’s fine.”
When you write a book about North, “Hey, nice to meet you. What is it you do?’ “I’m an author.” “What kind of books do you write?” “Well, my last book was on North Korea,” 90% of the time, 90, they will then start telling me everything they know about North Korea. And it’s like, “I don’t need, this isn’t a quiz, and it’s a very poorly understood country. I don’t expect you to know anything. You’re not on the spot. And half of what you’re saying is not accurate either. It’s fine.”
Lex Fridman
How often did they bring up Dennis Rodman?
How often did they bring up Dennis Rodman?
Michael Malice
A hundred percent.
A hundred percent.
Lex Fridman
A hundred percent of the time.
A hundred percent of the time.
Michael Malice
“Oh, so do you know Dennis Rodman?”
“Oh, so do you know Dennis Rodman?”
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
But I don’t understand why. I guess, people feel the need to, “All right, now we’re talking about this subject. I just got to drop whatever I can talk about.” It’s usually a small amount. And there’s this thing in the culture, which I hate that everyone have to have an opinion on everything. And it’s like it’s okay to be like, “Yeah, I don’t know anything about that. Tell me more.” There’s lots of things I don’t know anything about.
But I don’t understand why. I guess, people feel the need to, “All right, now we’re talking about this subject. I just got to drop whatever I can talk about.” It’s usually a small amount. And there’s this thing in the culture, which I hate that everyone have to have an opinion on everything. And it’s like it’s okay to be like, “Yeah, I don’t know anything about that. Tell me more.” There’s lots of things I don’t know anything about.
Parrots, Pirates, and Monty Python
Lex Fridman
What’s your opinion on my bird here, Mr. Parrot?
What’s your opinion on my bird here, Mr. Parrot?
Michael Malice
It’s Macaw, Scarlet Macaw.
It’s Macaw, Scarlet Macaw.
Lex Fridman
What?
What?
Michael Malice
It is a Scarlet Macaw.
It is a Scarlet Macaw.
Lex Fridman
Oh, you know birds?
Oh, you know birds?
Michael Malice
Yeah. And that’s actually not life-sized.
Yeah. And that’s actually not life-sized.
Lex Fridman
Are you saying he’s not real?
Are you saying he’s not real?
Michael Malice
I’m saying it’s not to scale.
I’m saying it’s not to scale.
Lex Fridman
Okay. But he’s real.
Okay. But he’s real.
Michael Malice
Are we doing that Monty Python sketch?
Are we doing that Monty Python sketch?
Lex Fridman
Everything is a Monty Python sketch.
Everything is a Monty Python sketch.
Michael Malice
I don’t think Monty Python’s funny.
I don’t think Monty Python’s funny.
Lex Fridman
You don’t?
You don’t?
Michael Malice
At all. Not that once.
At all. Not that once.
Lex Fridman
That explains so much.
That explains so much.
Michael Malice
Does it? What does it explain?
Does it? What does it explain?
Lex Fridman
What do you think is funny?
What do you think is funny?
Michael Malice
You not answering that question is pretty funny.
You not answering that question is pretty funny.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. What do you think is funny, having a mantis shrimp?
Yeah. What do you think is funny, having a mantis shrimp?
Michael Malice
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
Do you think big Big Lebowski is funny?
Do you think big Big Lebowski is funny?
Michael Malice
Oh God, no. Although…
Oh God, no. Although…
Lex Fridman
This is getting worse and worse.
This is getting worse and worse.
Michael Malice
To be fair, I only tried to watch Big Lebowski after it’s been part of the culture for many years.
To be fair, I only tried to watch Big Lebowski after it’s been part of the culture for many years.
Lex Fridman
Right.
Right.
Michael Malice
To the point where every single line has been quoted incessantly by the most annoying frat bros ever. So I kind of have been poisoned to be able to appreciate it.
To the point where every single line has been quoted incessantly by the most annoying frat bros ever. So I kind of have been poisoned to be able to appreciate it.
Lex Fridman
Right.
Right.
Michael Malice
So maybe if I’d seen it when it came out, before it became a thing, I would’ve enjoyed it. I couldn’t get through it. I couldn’t get through 20 minutes.
So maybe if I’d seen it when it came out, before it became a thing, I would’ve enjoyed it. I couldn’t get through it. I couldn’t get through 20 minutes.
Lex Fridman
Is that how you feel about Schindler’s List?
Is that how you feel about Schindler’s List?
Michael Malice
Well…
Well…
Lex Fridman
It’s so much easier for me to stare at you when you have sunglasses on.
It’s so much easier for me to stare at you when you have sunglasses on.
Michael Malice
I didn’t think you’d be the one making Holocaust jokes today. And yet, here we are.
I didn’t think you’d be the one making Holocaust jokes today. And yet, here we are.
Lex Fridman
And cut scene. I actually have no trouble making eye contact with you when you’re wearing shades.
And cut scene. I actually have no trouble making eye contact with you when you’re wearing shades.
Michael Malice
Yes, because you’re a robot.
Yes, because you’re a robot.
Lex Fridman
Two copies of myself.
Two copies of myself.
Michael Malice
Yeah. Oh, you’re seeing yourself in them?
Yeah. Oh, you’re seeing yourself in them?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Michael Malice
Okay, cool.
Okay, cool.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’m having a conversation with myself. It’s not your fault, Lex.
Yeah, I’m having a conversation with myself. It’s not your fault, Lex.
Michael Malice
They made you like this. You were just a good little Roman in Saint Petersburg.
They made you like this. You were just a good little Roman in Saint Petersburg.
Lex Fridman
I could see Mr. Parrot a little bit too.
I could see Mr. Parrot a little bit too.
Michael Malice
But what do you find funny? Come on. This is an interesting subject.
But what do you find funny? Come on. This is an interesting subject.
Lex Fridman
Well, I find Monty Python. I find absurdity funny.
Well, I find Monty Python. I find absurdity funny.
Michael Malice
Yes. I find absurdity funny. I think that’s the thing. When people come at me, and maybe this is an Eastern European thing, when they’re like, “How can you find this very dark subject funny?” It’s like, well, the humor. First of all, the humor is that you’re making fun of something that’s dark. So already it’s absurd. It’s completely inappropriate. Second, just psychologically, Joan Rivers said that Winston Churchill said, I don’t know if it’s true, that when you make people laugh, you’re giving them a little vacation. And I was just thinking about this the other day, how when I die, if, I want my funeral to be a roast. It doesn’t help me that everyone’s sad. If I brought people happiness or joy in life, whatever, I want to keep doing that in death. Your sadness doesn’t help me. I know you can’t help it, but tell stories of how I made you laugh. Make fun of me. Make me the punching bag. Even literally, take me out of that coffin and beat the-.
Yes. I find absurdity funny. I think that’s the thing. When people come at me, and maybe this is an Eastern European thing, when they’re like, “How can you find this very dark subject funny?” It’s like, well, the humor. First of all, the humor is that you’re making fun of something that’s dark. So already it’s absurd. It’s completely inappropriate. Second, just psychologically, Joan Rivers said that Winston Churchill said, I don’t know if it’s true, that when you make people laugh, you’re giving them a little vacation. And I was just thinking about this the other day, how when I die, if, I want my funeral to be a roast. It doesn’t help me that everyone’s sad. If I brought people happiness or joy in life, whatever, I want to keep doing that in death. Your sadness doesn’t help me. I know you can’t help it, but tell stories of how I made you laugh. Make fun of me. Make me the punching bag. Even literally, take me out of that coffin and beat the-.
Make me a pinata. I don’t care. I don’t understand, well, I do understand, but it’s sad for me when people are like, “This isn’t funny. That isn’t funny.” The way I look at humor is the way it’s like a chef, right? It’s pretty easy to make bacon taste good, but some of these really obscure ingredients to make it palatable, that’s takes skill. So if you’re dealing with a subject that is very emotional or intense and you can make people laugh, then that takes skill and that’s the relief for them.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. It’s all about timing.
Yeah. It’s all about timing.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
What’s the difference? You want to hear one of my jokes?
What’s the difference? You want to hear one of my jokes?
Lex Fridman
Is it a pirate joke? Because that’s the only kind I accept today.
Is it a pirate joke? Because that’s the only kind I accept today.
Michael Malice
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
But no, go ahead. It doesn’t have to be a pirate joke this one time.
But no, go ahead. It doesn’t have to be a pirate joke this one time.
Michael Malice
Do you know who Lia Thomas is?
Do you know who Lia Thomas is?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
What’s difference between Lia Thomas and Hitler?
What’s difference between Lia Thomas and Hitler?
Lex Fridman
What?
What?
Michael Malice
Lia Thomas knows how to finish a race.
Lia Thomas knows how to finish a race.
Lex Fridman
Very nice. Very nice.
Very nice. Very nice.
Michael Malice
Did I just get the gold medal?
Did I just get the gold medal?
Lex Fridman
Good job. Why does it take pirates forever to get through the alphabet?
Good job. Why does it take pirates forever to get through the alphabet?
Michael Malice
Why?
Why?
Lex Fridman
Because they spent years at sea.
Because they spent years at sea.
Michael Malice
Oh, I thought it was going to be an [inaudible 00:10:15] joke.
Oh, I thought it was going to be an [inaudible 00:10:15] joke.
Lex Fridman
Nope. No.
Nope. No.
Michael Malice
That’s a good one. I like that.
That’s a good one. I like that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
When I was in North Korea.
When I was in North Korea.
Lex Fridman
Oh, you know Dennis Rodman? It’s a callback.
Oh, you know Dennis Rodman? It’s a callback.
Michael Malice
By the way, the thing that is very heartbreaking about the North Korean situation is that they have a great sense of humor. It would be a lot easier if these were robots or drones. They have big personalities, big senses of humor, and that made it much harder to leave and interact with these people because I mean, there’s nothing more human and universal than laughter and laughter’s free.
By the way, the thing that is very heartbreaking about the North Korean situation is that they have a great sense of humor. It would be a lot easier if these were robots or drones. They have big personalities, big senses of humor, and that made it much harder to leave and interact with these people because I mean, there’s nothing more human and universal than laughter and laughter’s free.
Lex Fridman
Are you saying there’s humor even amongst the people that have most of their freedoms taken away?
Are you saying there’s humor even amongst the people that have most of their freedoms taken away?
Michael Malice
Especially. I mean, again, we’re from the Soviet Union, there’s [inaudible 00:10:57] I mean, Russian humor is a thing because there’s nothing you can, if you can’t have food or nice things, at least you can have joy and make each other laugh. I think about it all the time, and I think about my guide all the time. It’s been, what, 2012? So it’s been 11 years since I’ve been there, and she’s still there. And everyone I’ve seen is still there. They just recently electrified the border. So you can’t even, even the few people who are escaping can’t do it anymore.
Especially. I mean, again, we’re from the Soviet Union, there’s [inaudible 00:10:57] I mean, Russian humor is a thing because there’s nothing you can, if you can’t have food or nice things, at least you can have joy and make each other laugh. I think about it all the time, and I think about my guide all the time. It’s been, what, 2012? So it’s been 11 years since I’ve been there, and she’s still there. And everyone I’ve seen is still there. They just recently electrified the border. So you can’t even, even the few people who are escaping can’t do it anymore.
Lex Fridman
Well, that’s interesting that they still have a sense of humor. I attribute the Soviet Union for having that because of the really deep education system. You got to read a lot of literature.
Well, that’s interesting that they still have a sense of humor. I attribute the Soviet Union for having that because of the really deep education system. You got to read a lot of literature.
Michael Malice
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
And because of that, you get to kind of learn about the cruelty, the injustices, the absurdity of the world.
And because of that, you get to kind of learn about the cruelty, the injustices, the absurdity of the world.
Michael Malice
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
As long as the writing is not about the current regime.
As long as the writing is not about the current regime.
Michael Malice
Yeah. But I think if you look at African Americans, Jewish Americans, gay Americans, they are all disproportionate in terms of attributing to comedy. It’s not because these groups have some kind of magic to them., It’s that when you are on the outside looking in, A, you’re going to have different perspective than the people who are in the middle of the bell curve. But also, when you don’t have anything to lose, at the very least, you can make each other laugh and find happiness that way. So that is something that I think is an important thing to recognize.
Yeah. But I think if you look at African Americans, Jewish Americans, gay Americans, they are all disproportionate in terms of attributing to comedy. It’s not because these groups have some kind of magic to them., It’s that when you are on the outside looking in, A, you’re going to have different perspective than the people who are in the middle of the bell curve. But also, when you don’t have anything to lose, at the very least, you can make each other laugh and find happiness that way. So that is something that I think is an important thing to recognize.
Humor and absurdity
Lex Fridman
So what do you find funny? What makes you giggle in the most joyful of ways? The suffering of others?
So what do you find funny? What makes you giggle in the most joyful of ways? The suffering of others?
Michael Malice
I mean, there are YouTube videos of fat people falling down and they’re really funny.
I mean, there are YouTube videos of fat people falling down and they’re really funny.
Lex Fridman
There’s two kinds of people in this world, those that laugh at those videos and those that don’t.
There’s two kinds of people in this world, those that laugh at those videos and those that don’t.
Michael Malice
No. And those that are in them. My friend Jesse just told me a great Norm Macdonald joke, and this is a good litmus test joke because he says, “A certain group of people lose their minds and a certain group of people just stare at you.” And he goes, “This kind of…” and so I’ll tell you the joke. This is Norm McDonald. A guy walks into a bar and he sees someone at the bar who has a big pumpkin for a head.
No. And those that are in them. My friend Jesse just told me a great Norm Macdonald joke, and this is a good litmus test joke because he says, “A certain group of people lose their minds and a certain group of people just stare at you.” And he goes, “This kind of…” and so I’ll tell you the joke. This is Norm McDonald. A guy walks into a bar and he sees someone at the bar who has a big pumpkin for a head.
And the guy’s like, “Dude, what happened to you?” He goes, “Ugh, you never believe this. I got one of those genie lamps and this genie.” He’s like, “Well, what happened?” He goes, “Well, the first wish, I wished for a hundred million dollars.” He’s like, “Yeah, did you get it?” He goes, “Yeah.” He goes, “In my bank account. Feels fine.” He goes, “All right. Well, the second wish, I wished to have sex with as many beautiful women as I want.” He goes, “Did that happen?” He goes, “Yeah, it was amazing.” He goes, “Then what?” “Well, I wished for a giant pumpkin head.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
So there’s a certain mindset that will just be staring at the screen. And that is, I mean, there’s so many levels why that’s funny, at least to me. And I just love that kind of humor.
So there’s a certain mindset that will just be staring at the screen. And that is, I mean, there’s so many levels why that’s funny, at least to me. And I just love that kind of humor.
Lex Fridman
Well, Norm McDonald is just, I watch his videos all the time. He’s a guy that definitely makes me giggle. And he’s one of the people that makes me giggle for reasons I don’t quite understand.
Well, Norm McDonald is just, I watch his videos all the time. He’s a guy that definitely makes me giggle. And he’s one of the people that makes me giggle for reasons I don’t quite understand.
Michael Malice
Did you ever see him with Carrot Top on Conan O’Brien?
Did you ever see him with Carrot Top on Conan O’Brien?
Lex Fridman
No.
No.
Michael Malice
Making fun of Carrot Top?
Making fun of Carrot Top?
Lex Fridman
No.
No.
Michael Malice
This is probably the best talk show clip of all time. He’s on with Courtney Thorne-Smith. She was on Melrose’s Place and Conan O’Brien’s the host, and Courtney’s talking about how she’s going to be an upcoming movie with Carrot Top. And Conan is like, “Oh, what’s it going to be called?” And she’s like, “Doesn’t have a title yet.” And Norm goes, “Oh, I know what should be called, Box Office Poison.” And they’re all laughing. And she’s like, “No, no, no, the working title is Chairman of the Board. And Conan goes, “Do something with that smart ass.” And Norm goes, “Yeah, bored is spelled B-O-R-E-D.” And they all just completely lost it.
This is probably the best talk show clip of all time. He’s on with Courtney Thorne-Smith. She was on Melrose’s Place and Conan O’Brien’s the host, and Courtney’s talking about how she’s going to be an upcoming movie with Carrot Top. And Conan is like, “Oh, what’s it going to be called?” And she’s like, “Doesn’t have a title yet.” And Norm goes, “Oh, I know what should be called, Box Office Poison.” And they’re all laughing. And she’s like, “No, no, no, the working title is Chairman of the Board. And Conan goes, “Do something with that smart ass.” And Norm goes, “Yeah, bored is spelled B-O-R-E-D.” And they all just completely lost it.
Lex Fridman
There’s something about him with words spoken out of his mouth with the way he turns his head and looks at the camera.
There’s something about him with words spoken out of his mouth with the way he turns his head and looks at the camera.
Michael Malice
I think he is one of those rare comedians who you really feel like he’s talking to you directly. He feels like he’s winking at you in the audience. And he’s like, “Can you believe I’m doing this?” It’s like almost he feels like he’s, I don’t want to say imposter, but he’s more a member of the audience than he is a member of the people on the stage.
I think he is one of those rare comedians who you really feel like he’s talking to you directly. He feels like he’s winking at you in the audience. And he’s like, “Can you believe I’m doing this?” It’s like almost he feels like he’s, I don’t want to say imposter, but he’s more a member of the audience than he is a member of the people on the stage.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it feels like he’s on our side.
Yeah, it feels like he’s on our side.
Michael Malice
Yes. Yeah.
Yes. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Whatever the hell “Our” means.
Whatever the hell “Our” means.
Michael Malice
Roseanne got him his first job.
Roseanne got him his first job.
Lex Fridman
Man. Roseanne, you and her have been hanging out.
Man. Roseanne, you and her have been hanging out.
Michael Malice
I got it. Oh my God. Talk about Thanksgiving. When you are talking to Roseanne Barr and making eye contact with this person, it is, I can’t even describe it. It’s just like, “Holy crap, Roseanne Barr’s talking to me.” She is, I’ve said this to her face, pathologically funny. It does not turn off. And you’re sitting there and you’re like, “Holy crap.”
I got it. Oh my God. Talk about Thanksgiving. When you are talking to Roseanne Barr and making eye contact with this person, it is, I can’t even describe it. It’s just like, “Holy crap, Roseanne Barr’s talking to me.” She is, I’ve said this to her face, pathologically funny. It does not turn off. And you’re sitting there and you’re like, “Holy crap.”
And when you make her laugh, which is that laugh that’s in the theme song of her show, you feel like, “Okay, I did a mitzvah. I did something good and right in the world that I made Roseanne Barr laugh.” And it’s also really funny because, and she’s going to hate this, because I tell her, she’s adorable. She doesn’t like that. She’s little. You think of Roseanne Barr as this force of nature, like a tsunami.
Lex Fridman
Big, yeah.
Big, yeah.
Michael Malice
She’s five three, I’d say maybe 130. And she puts on the sunglasses, you think this little old Jewish lady. You’d never know this is one of the most epic performers of all time. She lives near here now. So it’s just so much fun talking to her. There was an old satirical magazine in the, I think early two thousands called Heeb, written by Jews, and she dressed up as Hitler for one of the photo shoots, and she was baking little men in the oven. I found it on eBay, I wanted her to sign it to, “Michael, it should have been you.” But she signed it to, “Michael, you’re one smart cookie.” And now it hangs, “Love, mom, Roseanne Barr.” And I call her mom and it hangs over my desk because I have her good domestic goddess energy flowing at me. What?
She’s five three, I’d say maybe 130. And she puts on the sunglasses, you think this little old Jewish lady. You’d never know this is one of the most epic performers of all time. She lives near here now. So it’s just so much fun talking to her. There was an old satirical magazine in the, I think early two thousands called Heeb, written by Jews, and she dressed up as Hitler for one of the photo shoots, and she was baking little men in the oven. I found it on eBay, I wanted her to sign it to, “Michael, it should have been you.” But she signed it to, “Michael, you’re one smart cookie.” And now it hangs, “Love, mom, Roseanne Barr.” And I call her mom and it hangs over my desk because I have her good domestic goddess energy flowing at me. What?
Lex Fridman
What do you find? What else? So Norm McDonald. I guess, we’ve landed on that.
What do you find? What else? So Norm McDonald. I guess, we’ve landed on that.
Michael Malice
No. My favorite comedian is-
No. My favorite comedian is-
Lex Fridman
We agree on something.
We agree on something.
Michael Malice
My favorite comedian of all time is Neil Hamburger. So Neil Hamburger, I don’t know if I’m ruining the bit, he’s a character performed by this guy named Gregg Turkington. So he comes out in a tuxedo, big eyeglasses, holding three glasses of water, coughing into the mic. And I remember I saw him once in LA and the girl ahead of me, at the table ahead of me was with her boyfriend, this basic chick, pumpkin spice. She turns to him and she goes, “What is this?” And I remember the first time he was on Jimmy Kimmel, and he tells one of his jokes and it was like, “Why does ET Reese’s Pieces so much? Well, that’s what sperm tastes like on his home planet.” And no one laughs. And he goes, “Oh, come on guys. I have cancer.” And it just cuts to this Marine in the audience with his arms crossed. So if you know what he’s doing, it’s just absolutely amazing.
My favorite comedian of all time is Neil Hamburger. So Neil Hamburger, I don’t know if I’m ruining the bit, he’s a character performed by this guy named Gregg Turkington. So he comes out in a tuxedo, big eyeglasses, holding three glasses of water, coughing into the mic. And I remember I saw him once in LA and the girl ahead of me, at the table ahead of me was with her boyfriend, this basic chick, pumpkin spice. She turns to him and she goes, “What is this?” And I remember the first time he was on Jimmy Kimmel, and he tells one of his jokes and it was like, “Why does ET Reese’s Pieces so much? Well, that’s what sperm tastes like on his home planet.” And no one laughs. And he goes, “Oh, come on guys. I have cancer.” And it just cuts to this Marine in the audience with his arms crossed. So if you know what he’s doing, it’s just absolutely amazing.
He opened for Tenacious D once in somewhere, I think in Ireland or the UK, one of those. And they’re booing him because his jokes are often not funny. He’s like, “Hey, where did my whore ex-wife run off to with that dentist she’s shacking up with? I don’t know. But when I see her in court next month, Alaska.”
So they’re booing and he goes, “All right, do you guys want me to bring out Tenacious D?” They’re like, “Yeah.” “Do you want to see your heroes of my Tenacious D?” “Yeah.” “Come on, let me hear it. Do you want to see Tenacious D?” “Yeah.” He goes, “All right, if I tell this next joke and you don’t boo me, I’ll bring out Tenacious D.” And it’s like, I’m trying to think of one that’s not too…
Lex Fridman
Self censorship is never good.
Self censorship is never good.
Michael Malice
Okay. He goes, “Can we agree that George Bush is the worst President America’s ever had?” Everyone claps. He goes, “Which makes it all the stranger that his son, George W. Bush was in fact the best.”
Okay. He goes, “Can we agree that George Bush is the worst President America’s ever had?” Everyone claps. He goes, “Which makes it all the stranger that his son, George W. Bush was in fact the best.”
Lex Fridman
I take it back on the self-censorship.
I take it back on the self-censorship.
Michael Malice
So two people laugh and he goes, “Oh, that’s amazing. I guess I’ll do an encore.” And he did 10 more minutes. It was just, I love him so much.
So two people laugh and he goes, “Oh, that’s amazing. I guess I’ll do an encore.” And he did 10 more minutes. It was just, I love him so much.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting. They opened for Tenacious D. Jack Black, that’s a comedic genius of a different kind.
It’s interesting. They opened for Tenacious D. Jack Black, that’s a comedic genius of a different kind.
Michael Malice
Oh, yeah. And he was in one of my favorite movies, Jesus’ Son. It’s this little Indie movie. He did a great turn in that. He’s really underrated as an actor. He’s got a lot of range. I know he kind of get types cast as this one specific type, but he’s really, really talented.
Oh, yeah. And he was in one of my favorite movies, Jesus’ Son. It’s this little Indie movie. He did a great turn in that. He’s really underrated as an actor. He’s got a lot of range. I know he kind of get types cast as this one specific type, but he’s really, really talented.
Lex Fridman
But also just the pure joy.
But also just the pure joy.
Michael Malice
Yes. He’s clearly having fun.
Yes. He’s clearly having fun.
Thanksgiving
Lex Fridman
Okay. It is Thanksgiving. So in the tradition, following tradition, what are you thankful for, Michael, in this world?
Okay. It is Thanksgiving. So in the tradition, following tradition, what are you thankful for, Michael, in this world?
Michael Malice
Do you have a list too?
Do you have a list too?
Lex Fridman
No, not really.
No, not really.
Michael Malice
Really?
Really?
Lex Fridman
It’s up in here.
It’s up in here.
Michael Malice
Oh, I mean, but you have several things you’re thankful for.
Oh, I mean, but you have several things you’re thankful for.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Michael Malice
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Michael Malice
One of the things I’m-
One of the things I’m-
Lex Fridman
My list comes from the heart. I don’t have to write anything down.
My list comes from the heart. I don’t have to write anything down.
Michael Malice
Well, I don’t have written down.
Well, I don’t have written down.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Michael Malice
One of the things that I’m most thankful for, this is a common answer, but I can back it up, is my family. Because my nephew, Lucas, is now six years old. And when kids have a sense of humor, it’s like just miraculous. So he stole my sister’s phone, his mom. Figured out that grandma is listed as mom in the phone, and he calls her up and he’s like, “Michael’s in the hospital. He’s really sick.
One of the things that I’m most thankful for, this is a common answer, but I can back it up, is my family. Because my nephew, Lucas, is now six years old. And when kids have a sense of humor, it’s like just miraculous. So he stole my sister’s phone, his mom. Figured out that grandma is listed as mom in the phone, and he calls her up and he’s like, “Michael’s in the hospital. He’s really sick.
He didn’t want to tell you.” And she’s freaking out. He goes, “Prank.” So I took him, Dinesh D’Souza just released a movie called Police State, which was actually really good, highly recommend it. I was surprised how much I liked it because he wasn’t going Republicans good, Democrats bad.
It was just about authoritarianism. And he had a movie premier at Mar-a-Lago. So I’m like, I got to bring Lucas to Mar-a-Lago. So Lucas is, I’m like, “We’re going to the President’s house.” He’s like, “Oh, the White House?” And I’m like, “No, no, a former president.” He goes, “Oh, Abe Lincoln?” And I’m like, “Okay, kid logic.” He’s giving logical answers. This is kind of like AI, you have to program it. It’s using logic correctly.
Lex Fridman
You should have told him it’s a president that’s second to only Ab Lincoln in terms of greatness.
You should have told him it’s a president that’s second to only Ab Lincoln in terms of greatness.
Michael Malice
Accomplishments, yeah. He went up to all the women in their ball gown, evening gowns, and he goes, “You’re so beautiful. Were you born as a girl?” So when you have this six year old asking you this, it was really, really fun. So that is a great joy to have a nephew. And I have another one, Zach, who’s coming up in age, and he’s starting to talk now. That is really, really fun for me.
Accomplishments, yeah. He went up to all the women in their ball gown, evening gowns, and he goes, “You’re so beautiful. Were you born as a girl?” So when you have this six year old asking you this, it was really, really fun. So that is a great joy to have a nephew. And I have another one, Zach, who’s coming up in age, and he’s starting to talk now. That is really, really fun for me.
Lex Fridman
Getting to watch them find out about the world for the first time.
Getting to watch them find out about the world for the first time.
Michael Malice
And also training them, that he loves being funny and having fun.
And also training them, that he loves being funny and having fun.
Lex Fridman
You’re his audience in a sense?
You’re his audience in a sense?
Michael Malice
Yeah, but.
Yeah, but.
Lex Fridman
Because you giggle and?
Because you giggle and?
Michael Malice
I give him, “We’re prank bros.” He gives me a high five. My family, and this is one, you talk about what I find funny, this is things that actually enraged me. When people, and this is such a wasp thing, don’t just go with the joke or they’re like, “I don’t get it,” or they don’t understand to just go with it.
I give him, “We’re prank bros.” He gives me a high five. My family, and this is one, you talk about what I find funny, this is things that actually enraged me. When people, and this is such a wasp thing, don’t just go with the joke or they’re like, “I don’t get it,” or they don’t understand to just go with it.
I was in the car with my sister when she was 10, 12, whatever. She’s much younger than me. She’s 12 years younger. And there’s this species of squid, by the way, which is asymmetric. One of its eyes is very much bigger than the other because it swims horizontally. And so one’s looking up, one’s looking down where there’s more light. Shout out. If you want to learn more about squids, go to octonation.com.
Lex Fridman
OctoNation. Shout out.
OctoNation. Shout out.
Michael Malice
Shout out to Warren.
Shout out to Warren.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of fascinating stuff. OctoNation on Instagram.
There’s a lot of fascinating stuff. OctoNation on Instagram.
Michael Malice
Yes. I was in the car with my sister. She’s 10 or 20.
Yes. I was in the car with my sister. She’s 10 or 20.
Lex Fridman
Me as a pirate, I’m sorry for the rude interruptions. I appreciate that comment, especially.
Me as a pirate, I’m sorry for the rude interruptions. I appreciate that comment, especially.
Michael Malice
Yeah, it’s a great. Yeah.
Yeah, it’s a great. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
These jokes and thoughts are coming to me at a ten-second delay, so I apologize. Anyway, you were telling about the asymmetrical.
These jokes and thoughts are coming to me at a ten-second delay, so I apologize. Anyway, you were telling about the asymmetrical.
Michael Malice
I know where I was, don’t worry. I got it.
I know where I was, don’t worry. I got it.
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Michael Malice
So I tell my-
So I tell my-
Lex Fridman
Sometimes you need help.
Sometimes you need help.
Michael Malice
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
The age is getting to you.
The age is getting to you.
Michael Malice
I was…
I was…
Lex Fridman
Your skin is showing it. It’s getting dark.
Your skin is showing it. It’s getting dark.
Michael Malice
I told my sister, I go, “When you were born, one of your eyes was bigger than the other, and you had to have surgery to fix it.” So she turns, she’s like, “Mom.” And my mom goes, “Honey, the important things that you’re beautiful now. It’s like, what’s the big deal? It was just a little surgery.” And I says like, “All right.” Calls grandma. And grandma goes, she goes, “Michael said that I was born one of the eyes.” She goes, “Why is he telling you this now? It’s not a big deal.” So the fact that everyone went with this…
I told my sister, I go, “When you were born, one of your eyes was bigger than the other, and you had to have surgery to fix it.” So she turns, she’s like, “Mom.” And my mom goes, “Honey, the important things that you’re beautiful now. It’s like, what’s the big deal? It was just a little surgery.” And I says like, “All right.” Calls grandma. And grandma goes, she goes, “Michael said that I was born one of the eyes.” She goes, “Why is he telling you this now? It’s not a big deal.” So the fact that everyone went with this…
Lex Fridman
Oh, nice.
Oh, nice.
Michael Malice
I was so impressed. I was like, “This is a quality family in this very specific regard.”
I was so impressed. I was like, “This is a quality family in this very specific regard.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
Does your family have a sense of humor?
Does your family have a sense of humor?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Soviet culture, there’s a dark sense of humor.
Soviet culture, there’s a dark sense of humor.
Michael Malice
Very much so.
Very much so.
Lex Fridman
There’s…
There’s…
Michael Malice
Wordplay.
Wordplay.
Lex Fridman
Wordplay. Yeah. Yeah. And especially the Russian language allows for some-
Wordplay. Yeah. Yeah. And especially the Russian language allows for some-
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Hilarity to it. There’s also culture of poetry and my dad, my mom too, but they remember a lot of lines from books and poems. So you can do a lot of fascinating references that add to the humor and the richness of the conversation.
Hilarity to it. There’s also culture of poetry and my dad, my mom too, but they remember a lot of lines from books and poems. So you can do a lot of fascinating references that add to the humor and the richness of the conversation.
Michael Malice
I feel like that’s a very Russian thing. At a party or maybe at a bar or something, I don’t know where you’d meet people, these are such great ice-
I feel like that’s a very Russian thing. At a party or maybe at a bar or something, I don’t know where you’d meet people, these are such great ice-
Lex Fridman
I never go out.
I never go out.
Michael Malice
I meant in Russia.
I meant in Russia.
Lex Fridman
Oh.
Oh.
Michael Malice
I meant these would be such good icebreakers, right? You go up to someone and goes, “Hey, did you hear this one?” [foreign language 00:24:32] And you just tell him some little story.
I meant these would be such good icebreakers, right? You go up to someone and goes, “Hey, did you hear this one?” [foreign language 00:24:32] And you just tell him some little story.
Lex Fridman
Did you say icebreakers because it’s cold in Russia? I’m here all night.
Did you say icebreakers because it’s cold in Russia? I’m here all night.
Michael Malice
That’s true. You never leave the house.
That’s true. You never leave the house.
Lex Fridman
Literally.
Literally.
Michael Malice
I feel like that’s a thing.
I feel like that’s a thing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
And that’s not a thing in America.
And that’s not a thing in America.
Lex Fridman
You mean like witty banter?
You mean like witty banter?
Michael Malice
No. Meaning you go up to stranger and that’s your icebreaker. You tell them this little joke, and since everyone kind of has the same sensibilities, right away, you guys are chatting. I don’t think that’s a thing here.
No. Meaning you go up to stranger and that’s your icebreaker. You tell them this little joke, and since everyone kind of has the same sensibilities, right away, you guys are chatting. I don’t think that’s a thing here.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
I think here it’s more small talk, which.
I think here it’s more small talk, which.
Michael Malice
… We’re chatting. I don’t think that’s a thing here. The thing here, it’s more small talk, which drives me crazy.
… We’re chatting. I don’t think that’s a thing here. The thing here, it’s more small talk, which drives me crazy.
Lex Fridman
So what else are you thankful for?
So what else are you thankful for?
Michael Malice
Well, what’s something you’re thankful for?
Well, what’s something you’re thankful for?
Lex Fridman
Well, you went with family. I’m definitely thankful for family.
Well, you went with family. I’m definitely thankful for family.
Michael Malice
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
If I may ask, how do they react to you? You’re sitting down with Elon, you’re sitting out Netanyahu, sitting down with Kanye, all these big names. Are they expressing that they’re proud of you or is it more like, why haven’t you talked to this person?
If I may ask, how do they react to you? You’re sitting down with Elon, you’re sitting out Netanyahu, sitting down with Kanye, all these big names. Are they expressing that they’re proud of you or is it more like, why haven’t you talked to this person?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, more Michael Malice, please.
Yeah, more Michael Malice, please.
Michael Malice
The people’s choice.
The people’s choice.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, They’re very proud. But they get argumentative and they’re just like a regular human being with whom I’m close and we just argue about stuff. They’re maybe not enough show the being proud of, but that part is just the nature of our relationship. It’s also the same with your parents?
Yeah, They’re very proud. But they get argumentative and they’re just like a regular human being with whom I’m close and we just argue about stuff. They’re maybe not enough show the being proud of, but that part is just the nature of our relationship. It’s also the same with your parents?
Michael Malice
Yeah. I don’t talk to my dad. That’s one of the reasons because there’s never ever any good job. And at a certain point it’s like, why am I trying to search for approval from someone I’m never getting it for? And from whom it wouldn’t mean anything at this point anyway.
Yeah. I don’t talk to my dad. That’s one of the reasons because there’s never ever any good job. And at a certain point it’s like, why am I trying to search for approval from someone I’m never getting it for? And from whom it wouldn’t mean anything at this point anyway.
Lex Fridman
Well, that’s interesting. There’s a journey like that for a lot of people with their father or their mother. They’re always trying to find approval, and that’s life for a lot of people. That’s a really big part of the human condition is that relationship you have with your father, with your mother. I don’t know. It’s a beautiful thing whether it’s been a rough childhood or a beautiful one, all of it. That’s who you are. The relationship, especially early on in your life with your father or with your mother, is extremely formative.
Well, that’s interesting. There’s a journey like that for a lot of people with their father or their mother. They’re always trying to find approval, and that’s life for a lot of people. That’s a really big part of the human condition is that relationship you have with your father, with your mother. I don’t know. It’s a beautiful thing whether it’s been a rough childhood or a beautiful one, all of it. That’s who you are. The relationship, especially early on in your life with your father or with your mother, is extremely formative.
Michael Malice
Yeah. My dad taught me a lot of things at a young age that I’m very, very grateful for. He’s extremely intelligent, very flawed, and that’s fine. We all are, except for me. And it’s the kind of things that when you learn things at a right age, and this is one of the things I like about being older, is that when I’m friends with people-
Yeah. My dad taught me a lot of things at a young age that I’m very, very grateful for. He’s extremely intelligent, very flawed, and that’s fine. We all are, except for me. And it’s the kind of things that when you learn things at a right age, and this is one of the things I like about being older, is that when I’m friends with people-
Lex Fridman
Much older.
Much older.
Michael Malice
Much older, much older. When I have friends who are younger, it’s very easy for me to keep them from making the mistakes I did. So at least this is something I’m getting out of it is that, okay, I can’t fix these mistakes, but it just takes me 30 seconds and I can pull you back from making the mistake. So he’s taught me a lot as a kid, he really encouraged me very much to… He has a very good sense of humor and also very bad in some ways. Dad jokes, but also really funny jokes, but also this love of learning that I got that from him. And I have got literally right now, 98 books on my shelf to read. I remember I had a friend and she ran into someone she went to high school with and he stopped me on the train and he’s like, “Yo, you’re not in college. You don’t need to read books anymore.” And I was just horrified to hear this.
Much older, much older. When I have friends who are younger, it’s very easy for me to keep them from making the mistakes I did. So at least this is something I’m getting out of it is that, okay, I can’t fix these mistakes, but it just takes me 30 seconds and I can pull you back from making the mistake. So he’s taught me a lot as a kid, he really encouraged me very much to… He has a very good sense of humor and also very bad in some ways. Dad jokes, but also really funny jokes, but also this love of learning that I got that from him. And I have got literally right now, 98 books on my shelf to read. I remember I had a friend and she ran into someone she went to high school with and he stopped me on the train and he’s like, “Yo, you’re not in college. You don’t need to read books anymore.” And I was just horrified to hear this.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah. Boy, don’t I know it.
Yeah, yeah. Boy, don’t I know it.
Michael Malice
You do laugh, but there’s a lot of things I don’t understand. When you got heat for, I want to read the Western Classics. To me, that might’ve been the internet at its absolute worst.
You do laugh, but there’s a lot of things I don’t understand. When you got heat for, I want to read the Western Classics. To me, that might’ve been the internet at its absolute worst.
Lex Fridman
I think there’s just a cynical perspective you can take that this is such a simple celebration of a thing, that there must be something behind it. I think the internet for good and bad, is just skeptical. What’s behind this?
I think there’s just a cynical perspective you can take that this is such a simple celebration of a thing, that there must be something behind it. I think the internet for good and bad, is just skeptical. What’s behind this?
Michael Malice
My hero, Albert Camus. And if there’s one thing I would want to fight, it’s cynicism because it’s such a giving up. It’s such, everything sucks, this sucks, this sucks. Most things suck. Most stand up comedians suck. Most movies suck. All podcasts suck. But it doesn’t matter.
My hero, Albert Camus. And if there’s one thing I would want to fight, it’s cynicism because it’s such a giving up. It’s such, everything sucks, this sucks, this sucks. Most things suck. Most stand up comedians suck. Most movies suck. All podcasts suck. But it doesn’t matter.
Lex Fridman
Especially yours.
Especially yours.
Michael Malice
Especially mine. It’s unwatchable.
Especially mine. It’s unwatchable.
Lex Fridman
You’re welcome. You can’t even spell it correctly.
You’re welcome. You can’t even spell it correctly.
Michael Malice
But the stuff that’s good is what matters. Who cares if 90% of movies are terrible? They’re the ones that change your life, the books, the people, the comedians, the shows, the music.
But the stuff that’s good is what matters. Who cares if 90% of movies are terrible? They’re the ones that change your life, the books, the people, the comedians, the shows, the music.
Lex Fridman
And even the terrible things have good moments, beautiful moments.
And even the terrible things have good moments, beautiful moments.
Michael Malice
Some, not all.
Some, not all.
Lex Fridman
Your podcast being an example of not all. I keep listening for something good, something good.
Your podcast being an example of not all. I keep listening for something good, something good.
Michael Malice
In all fairness, none of my guests have anything to offer.so that’s not on me. I try.
In all fairness, none of my guests have anything to offer.so that’s not on me. I try.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Well, I wish you’d talk a little less in your podcast. It’s a little excessive. I only listen for the underwear commercials.
Yeah. Well, I wish you’d talk a little less in your podcast. It’s a little excessive. I only listen for the underwear commercials.
Michael Malice
Sheathunderwear.com. Promo code Malice.
Sheathunderwear.com. Promo code Malice.
Lex Fridman
I haven’t seen you do it in a while, but this kind of commentary on a debate or I think it was with Rand, like an Ayn Rand debate or something.
I haven’t seen you do it in a while, but this kind of commentary on a debate or I think it was with Rand, like an Ayn Rand debate or something.
Michael Malice
Oh yeah. Malice at the Movies. I watched the video and I broke it down.
Oh yeah. Malice at the Movies. I watched the video and I broke it down.
Lex Fridman
That was really great. I wish you did that more.
That was really great. I wish you did that more.
Michael Malice
I haven’t done livestreaming in a long time. It was something I was doing a lot in New York, especially during COVID. I feel that I don’t know, I got so many projects on the plate. Oh, this is something else I’m thankful for. This is something I’m very, very thankful for and I’m going to announce it here.
I haven’t done livestreaming in a long time. It was something I was doing a lot in New York, especially during COVID. I feel that I don’t know, I got so many projects on the plate. Oh, this is something else I’m thankful for. This is something I’m very, very thankful for and I’m going to announce it here.
Lex Fridman
Coming out of the closet, finally. Go ahead. Who’s the lucky guy?
Coming out of the closet, finally. Go ahead. Who’s the lucky guy?
Michael Malice
You’re the one in drag.
You’re the one in drag.
Lex Fridman
Guns out. Guns out.
Guns out. Guns out.
Michael Malice
He makes me call him Sex Friedman.
He makes me call him Sex Friedman.
Lex Fridman
You like it.
You like it.
Michael Malice
I didn’t say I did.
I didn’t say I did.
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Michael Malice
Didn’t even imply that. When I in, as you probably know as you know, but as many people watching this also know, Harvey Pekar who had the comic book series, American Splendor was the subject of the movie, American Splendor. He wrote a graphic novel about me in 2006 called Ego and Hubris, which goes for like $150 on eBay. It’s not worth it, just downloaded it. And I met Harvey because I wrote this screenplay about this band from the 80s called Rubber Rodeo. It’s a real band. And the keyboardist, Gary Leib, who passed away. Rest in peace, Gary. Introduced me to Harvey because he did the animation for the movie. And this script’s been in my desk for over 20 years, and I realized thanks to my buddy Eric July, who has some huge success with his comics, I could just produce this as a graphic novel.
Didn’t even imply that. When I in, as you probably know as you know, but as many people watching this also know, Harvey Pekar who had the comic book series, American Splendor was the subject of the movie, American Splendor. He wrote a graphic novel about me in 2006 called Ego and Hubris, which goes for like $150 on eBay. It’s not worth it, just downloaded it. And I met Harvey because I wrote this screenplay about this band from the 80s called Rubber Rodeo. It’s a real band. And the keyboardist, Gary Leib, who passed away. Rest in peace, Gary. Introduced me to Harvey because he did the animation for the movie. And this script’s been in my desk for over 20 years, and I realized thanks to my buddy Eric July, who has some huge success with his comics, I could just produce this as a graphic novel.
So I’ve got an artist, we’re getting it together, so I’m going to make it happen finally. And it’s some of the best writing I’ve ever done. I’m really proud of the story. It’s ironic reading it now, because when you’re a writer, obviously different books, you put different aspects of yourself into them, and this story is very, very dark because basically they did all the right things and they went nowhere. What I realized was reading it now, that all these fears I had over 20 years ago about what if I’m not going to make it? What if I’m doing all the hard work and it’s still not enough? Now it’s been disproven because I can at least pay my rent.
Lex Fridman
Do you feel like you’ve made it because you said you could pay your rent.
Do you feel like you’ve made it because you said you could pay your rent.
Michael Malice
I feel that to make it is if you don’t have to have a boss, and you know how I really felt like I made it?
I feel that to make it is if you don’t have to have a boss, and you know how I really felt like I made it?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Michael Malice
This is going to sound like a joke, and it’s not. This is being an immigrant, I own as you know, Margaret Thatcher’s bookcases.
This is going to sound like a joke, and it’s not. This is being an immigrant, I own as you know, Margaret Thatcher’s bookcases.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Michael Malice
So to me as an immigrant, to have her bookcases in my house, I’ve made it.
So to me as an immigrant, to have her bookcases in my house, I’ve made it.
Lex Fridman
You’re right. It’s not a joke.
You’re right. It’s not a joke.
Michael Malice
There’s nothing funny about it at all.
There’s nothing funny about it at all.
Lex Fridman
Not laughing.
Not laughing.
Michael Malice
It’s time to get serious.
It’s time to get serious.
Lex Fridman
Oh, nice. Oh, now I’m more nervous and aroused. So what else are you thankful for? So we’re both thankful for family.
Oh, nice. Oh, now I’m more nervous and aroused. So what else are you thankful for? So we’re both thankful for family.
Michael Malice
the fact that I can-
the fact that I can-
Lex Fridman
Still get it up?
Still get it up?
Michael Malice
What’s that?
What’s that?
Lex Fridman
Nothing, go ahead.
Nothing, go ahead.
Michael Malice
I think as an author, to be able to write what you want and have of enough an audience that it covers your living, that’s as good as it gets as an author almost. You don’t need to be Stephen King or some legend. There’s lots of stand-ups who aren’t world famous, but they have perfectly good living. They do their gig, they do what they love. I feel very, very blessed. You must be thankful for your career?
I think as an author, to be able to write what you want and have of enough an audience that it covers your living, that’s as good as it gets as an author almost. You don’t need to be Stephen King or some legend. There’s lots of stand-ups who aren’t world famous, but they have perfectly good living. They do their gig, they do what they love. I feel very, very blessed. You must be thankful for your career?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah. Career wise. But I think the best part about it’s just making friends with people I admire.
Yeah, yeah. Career wise. But I think the best part about it’s just making friends with people I admire.
Michael Malice
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
Quite honestly, just friends. The people that have gotten to know me, I hide from the world sometimes, I hit some low points, especially with all the new experiences and just the people that have been there for me and haven’t given up on me.
Quite honestly, just friends. The people that have gotten to know me, I hide from the world sometimes, I hit some low points, especially with all the new experiences and just the people that have been there for me and haven’t given up on me.
Michael Malice
There’s days, and I’m sure you’ve had this also where I literally don’t speak to someone the whole day. And in certain times in my life, I remember very vividly, I was in DC in ’97, I was an intern, and that summer, DC closes down on the weekends. And I remember those weekends when I got off the phone with the third person. I knew there was no possibility anyone was going to call and what that felt like, and it was dark and it was bad. So I remember those feelings of loneliness a lot.
There’s days, and I’m sure you’ve had this also where I literally don’t speak to someone the whole day. And in certain times in my life, I remember very vividly, I was in DC in ’97, I was an intern, and that summer, DC closes down on the weekends. And I remember those weekends when I got off the phone with the third person. I knew there was no possibility anyone was going to call and what that felt like, and it was dark and it was bad. So I remember those feelings of loneliness a lot.
Lex Fridman
I still feel alone like that sometimes. You don’t feel alone?
I still feel alone like that sometimes. You don’t feel alone?
Michael Malice
Not anymore.
Not anymore.
Lex Fridman
What’s the reason, you think?
What’s the reason, you think?
Michael Malice
Because I have a lot of people who I care about and who care about me. The thing about moving to Austin is I forgot how lonely New York got because it was like one after another, I lost everybody. And then you start losing the places you go to, and then it was just like, “Holy crap. I’m very isolated.” And here in Austin, there’s not as much to do, obviously as in New York, but there’s a lot of people here. More people are coming all the time. So if I ever want to hang out with someone, I’ve got a long list. And these are people who I’ve known for a very long time, people who know me quite well, so I could be myself. My awful, awful, awful, awful self. And that is something I don’t take lightly.
Because I have a lot of people who I care about and who care about me. The thing about moving to Austin is I forgot how lonely New York got because it was like one after another, I lost everybody. And then you start losing the places you go to, and then it was just like, “Holy crap. I’m very isolated.” And here in Austin, there’s not as much to do, obviously as in New York, but there’s a lot of people here. More people are coming all the time. So if I ever want to hang out with someone, I’ve got a long list. And these are people who I’ve known for a very long time, people who know me quite well, so I could be myself. My awful, awful, awful, awful self. And that is something I don’t take lightly.
Lex Fridman
Now you moved to Texas, it’s going to secede.
Now you moved to Texas, it’s going to secede.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It’s just a very-
It’s just a very-
Michael Malice
Do you know what happened with that?
Do you know what happened with that?
Lex Fridman
No.
No.
Michael Malice
I forget the guy’s name, and it’s probably for the best. On Monday, a guy in the Texas legislature introduces a bill to have it on the referendum to have a referendum for Texas to declare its independence. Tuesday, I’m on Rogan. Me and him discuss it. I give it national attention. It was also really funny because a lot of people are like, “These people have been in Texas, five minutes, blah, blah.” I go to the Texas legislature, meet with the guy, have a nice conversation. A month or two later, unanimous, I think, he gets voted kicked out of Congress because he got an intern drunk and was inappropriate with her. At least it was a girl in this case. But yeah, so that was my little Texas independence moment.
I forget the guy’s name, and it’s probably for the best. On Monday, a guy in the Texas legislature introduces a bill to have it on the referendum to have a referendum for Texas to declare its independence. Tuesday, I’m on Rogan. Me and him discuss it. I give it national attention. It was also really funny because a lot of people are like, “These people have been in Texas, five minutes, blah, blah.” I go to the Texas legislature, meet with the guy, have a nice conversation. A month or two later, unanimous, I think, he gets voted kicked out of Congress because he got an intern drunk and was inappropriate with her. At least it was a girl in this case. But yeah, so that was my little Texas independence moment.
Lex Fridman
Oh, it didn’t go anywhere?
Oh, it didn’t go anywhere?
Michael Malice
It did not go anywhere.
It did not go anywhere.
Lex Fridman
Wow.
Wow.
Michael Malice
But it’s still part of the platform of the Texas Republican Party.
But it’s still part of the platform of the Texas Republican Party.
Lex Fridman
It’s fascinating that history is probably laden with stories like this of failed revolutionaries. We celebrate the heroes, but then there’s the losers like…
It’s fascinating that history is probably laden with stories like this of failed revolutionaries. We celebrate the heroes, but then there’s the losers like…
Michael Malice
Myself.
Myself.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And we’re going to mark that one as a failure and edit it out and moving on. So thankful. Friendships, right? But by the way, I want to say just to you, I’m thankful in these lonely moments, for people who write books. I’ve been listening to audiobooks a lot and reading a lot. I really like audiobooks actually. I don’t know, I can just name random person, Serhii Plokhy. He’s a historian I’m reading on the-
And we’re going to mark that one as a failure and edit it out and moving on. So thankful. Friendships, right? But by the way, I want to say just to you, I’m thankful in these lonely moments, for people who write books. I’ve been listening to audiobooks a lot and reading a lot. I really like audiobooks actually. I don’t know, I can just name random person, Serhii Plokhy. He’s a historian I’m reading on the-
Michael Malice
Wait, I read him. What did he…
Wait, I read him. What did he…
Lex Fridman
It’s just he’s written a book most recently about the Russia-Ukraine war.
It’s just he’s written a book most recently about the Russia-Ukraine war.
Michael Malice
He wrote another one that I read. Didn’t he write about-
He wrote another one that I read. Didn’t he write about-
Lex Fridman
Empires, I think.
Empires, I think.
Michael Malice
The fall of the Soviet Union or something like that.
The fall of the Soviet Union or something like that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
Michael Malice
Yeah. It was very, very good.
Yeah. It was very, very good.
Lex Fridman
He’s great.
He’s great.
Michael Malice
I used him as a resource for the White Pill.
I used him as a resource for the White Pill.
Lex Fridman
He’s objective while still having emotion and feeling to it. He has a bias.
He’s objective while still having emotion and feeling to it. He has a bias.
Michael Malice
That’s fine.
That’s fine.
Lex Fridman
A lot of times when you write a story that involves Putin, people are really ideological. They don’t write with a calmness and the clarity and the rigor of history, there’s emotion in it. There’s almost a virtue signaling. And he doesn’t have that, even though he is Ukrainian and has very strong opinions on the matter. Anyway, there’s people like that and he’s done an incredible job researching a recent event. Like he says, I was looking at everything that’s been written about the war in Ukraine and realizing the old Churchill line, that historians are the worst ones to write about current events except everybody else. And so he’s like, “I might as well just write about this war.” And he does an exceptional job summarizing day by day, the details of this war. Anyway. So I’m just grateful for a guy like that.
A lot of times when you write a story that involves Putin, people are really ideological. They don’t write with a calmness and the clarity and the rigor of history, there’s emotion in it. There’s almost a virtue signaling. And he doesn’t have that, even though he is Ukrainian and has very strong opinions on the matter. Anyway, there’s people like that and he’s done an incredible job researching a recent event. Like he says, I was looking at everything that’s been written about the war in Ukraine and realizing the old Churchill line, that historians are the worst ones to write about current events except everybody else. And so he’s like, “I might as well just write about this war.” And he does an exceptional job summarizing day by day, the details of this war. Anyway. So I’m just grateful for a guy like that.
Michael Malice
For me, I’ll name some historians I love. Arthur Herman, Victor Sebastyen is probably my favorite. David Pietrusza, P-I-E-T-R- U-S-Z-A. When you are a historian, and I try to do this to some degree in the White Pill as much as I could. But when you take data and you make it read like a novel, so you’re learning about who we are as people, what had happened, but also it’s entertaining and readable. That to me is like the Acme of writing. I have so much admiration-
For me, I’ll name some historians I love. Arthur Herman, Victor Sebastyen is probably my favorite. David Pietrusza, P-I-E-T-R- U-S-Z-A. When you are a historian, and I try to do this to some degree in the White Pill as much as I could. But when you take data and you make it read like a novel, so you’re learning about who we are as people, what had happened, but also it’s entertaining and readable. That to me is like the Acme of writing. I have so much admiration-
Lex Fridman
What does Acme mean?
What does Acme mean?
Michael Malice
Top.
Top.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Michael Malice
Zenith.
Zenith.
Lex Fridman
Zenith? Okay. Is this what writers do? They just come up with these incredibly sophisticated words? I’m impressed.
Zenith? Okay. Is this what writers do? They just come up with these incredibly sophisticated words? I’m impressed.
Michael Malice
Well, Acme is-
Well, Acme is-
Lex Fridman
Because you could have just said the best of writing.
Because you could have just said the best of writing.
Michael Malice
Acme is also the company in Bugs Bunny and Wile E. Coyote is always Acme, like Acme bombs. When they are that good, it leaves me in awe.
Acme is also the company in Bugs Bunny and Wile E. Coyote is always Acme, like Acme bombs. When they are that good, it leaves me in awe.
Lex Fridman
It’s just-
It’s just-
Michael Malice
Ron Chernow is another one.
Ron Chernow is another one.
Lex Fridman
Who?
Who?
Michael Malice
He wrote the Hamilton biography.
He wrote the Hamilton biography.
Lex Fridman
Oh, nice. Well, I have a lot of favorite historians about the whole time period of World War II, William Shirer, people that lived during it, especially. I really like those accounts. Obviously Soldier Knudsen, he’s not a historian, but his accounts are fascinating. Actually, how much do you talk about Soldier Knudsen?
Oh, nice. Well, I have a lot of favorite historians about the whole time period of World War II, William Shirer, people that lived during it, especially. I really like those accounts. Obviously Soldier Knudsen, he’s not a historian, but his accounts are fascinating. Actually, how much do you talk about Soldier Knudsen?
Michael Malice
Never.
Never.
Lex Fridman
Not much, right? Why not?
Not much, right? Why not?
Michael Malice
I feel like I wanted to. There’s nothing I could add to him.
I feel like I wanted to. There’s nothing I could add to him.
Lex Fridman
But he’s the Michael Malice of the previous century?
But he’s the Michael Malice of the previous century?
Michael Malice
No, he’s talented, charismatic, and skilled. So he’s not the Michael Malice. Yeah. I feel like I didn’t read Gulag Archipelago for the White Pill.
No, he’s talented, charismatic, and skilled. So he’s not the Michael Malice. Yeah. I feel like I didn’t read Gulag Archipelago for the White Pill.
Lex Fridman
You didn’t?
You didn’t?
Michael Malice
I didn’t. No. I got a lot of it from Anne Applebaum, who’s a very controversial figure. Her history books on the Soviet Union, I think are superb, but she’s also accused of being very much a NeoCon and being a warmonger in contemporary times.
I didn’t. No. I got a lot of it from Anne Applebaum, who’s a very controversial figure. Her history books on the Soviet Union, I think are superb, but she’s also accused of being very much a NeoCon and being a warmonger in contemporary times.
Lex Fridman
Oh, I see.
Oh, I see.
Michael Malice
And I think comparisons between Putin and Stalin, although there is a Venn diagram, I think are a bit much, because I think it’s very hard to claim that if Putin conquered Ukraine, that there’d be a genocide. I think that’s a very hard argument to make.
And I think comparisons between Putin and Stalin, although there is a Venn diagram, I think are a bit much, because I think it’s very hard to claim that if Putin conquered Ukraine, that there’d be a genocide. I think that’s a very hard argument to make.
Lex Fridman
In these tense times. Even the comparisons of what’s going on in Israel on either side, comparisons to the Holocaust are also troubling in this way.
In these tense times. Even the comparisons of what’s going on in Israel on either side, comparisons to the Holocaust are also troubling in this way.
Michael Malice
Yes. And I also don’t like how that… I got in trouble. There was some literal demon who works at the Atlantic.
Yes. And I also don’t like how that… I got in trouble. There was some literal demon who works at the Atlantic.
Lex Fridman
As opposed to a regular demon?
As opposed to a regular demon?
Michael Malice
As opposed to figurative demon.
As opposed to figurative demon.
Lex Fridman
I didn’t know they employed demons.
I didn’t know they employed demons.
Michael Malice
They exclusively employ demons at the Atlantic. And he was giving me crap this a couple of years ago on Twitter because I didn’t think it’s appropriate to refer to George Soros as a Holocaust survivor. And I’m like, “Listen, if you want to put him in the same context as Anne Frank, knock yourself out.” But I think that’s so completely disingenuous and frankly repulsive to me morally to equivocate between figures like that. And also to claim that anyone who is a billionaire who is including Elon, including Sheldon Adelson, there’s no shortage of these people. If you want to use your extreme wealth, use it to influence politics, you have to be up for criticism, Bill Gates. To protect these people from criticism just on the base of their identity is deranged to me.
They exclusively employ demons at the Atlantic. And he was giving me crap this a couple of years ago on Twitter because I didn’t think it’s appropriate to refer to George Soros as a Holocaust survivor. And I’m like, “Listen, if you want to put him in the same context as Anne Frank, knock yourself out.” But I think that’s so completely disingenuous and frankly repulsive to me morally to equivocate between figures like that. And also to claim that anyone who is a billionaire who is including Elon, including Sheldon Adelson, there’s no shortage of these people. If you want to use your extreme wealth, use it to influence politics, you have to be up for criticism, Bill Gates. To protect these people from criticism just on the base of their identity is deranged to me.
Lex Fridman
But also, the Holocaust as a historical event and the atrocities within it are just singular in history. And so comparing them…
But also, the Holocaust as a historical event and the atrocities within it are just singular in history. And so comparing them…
Michael Malice
What’s the utility? You’re just basically trying to take this brand. I’m using that term in a very specific way. And when they say climate denial, no one’s denying climate exists. So you’re just trying to go off Holocaust denial. I think it’s shameless and I think it’s gross.
What’s the utility? You’re just basically trying to take this brand. I’m using that term in a very specific way. And when they say climate denial, no one’s denying climate exists. So you’re just trying to go off Holocaust denial. I think it’s shameless and I think it’s gross.
Lex Fridman
And it cheapens everything because there’s deep important lessons about the Holocaust.
And it cheapens everything because there’s deep important lessons about the Holocaust.
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
To me, the lessons are about how extreme it can get.
To me, the lessons are about how extreme it can get.
Michael Malice
And how fast.
And how fast.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and how fast.
Yeah, and how fast.
Michael Malice
That’s the one. So people ask, “Oh, are humans basically good? Are they basically evil?” I always say they’re basically animals. And I think most people are almost fundamentally deranged. And that there’s basically this veneer of civilization and decency. And when shit hits the fan and we see this over and over, they do things that would’ve been completely unthinkable even to themselves five years ago.
That’s the one. So people ask, “Oh, are humans basically good? Are they basically evil?” I always say they’re basically animals. And I think most people are almost fundamentally deranged. And that there’s basically this veneer of civilization and decency. And when shit hits the fan and we see this over and over, they do things that would’ve been completely unthinkable even to themselves five years ago.
Lex Fridman
Most people are fundamentally deranged with a veneer of civility.
Most people are fundamentally deranged with a veneer of civility.
Michael Malice
There’s a show called-
There’s a show called-
Lex Fridman
I Think I disagree with that.
I Think I disagree with that.
Michael Malice
What’s the show called? I’m having Alzheimer’s because of the advanced age.
What’s the show called? I’m having Alzheimer’s because of the advanced age.
Lex Fridman
The age, the skincare. It’s just working well.
The age, the skincare. It’s just working well.
Michael Malice
There’s a show called, I Think You Should Leave. It’s a sketch comedy.
There’s a show called, I Think You Should Leave. It’s a sketch comedy.
Lex Fridman
I think you should leave. Okay, sorry.
I think you should leave. Okay, sorry.
Michael Malice
It’s a sketch comedy show. And he captures these great… How’s your hair, princess? He captures these great moments of just the very thin veneer of normalcy and just the craziness that’s so frequently lurking underneath. Another great example of this, when this is dealing with people who are literally crazy, have you ever seen the show, Hoarders?
It’s a sketch comedy show. And he captures these great… How’s your hair, princess? He captures these great moments of just the very thin veneer of normalcy and just the craziness that’s so frequently lurking underneath. Another great example of this, when this is dealing with people who are literally crazy, have you ever seen the show, Hoarders?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
So every episode of Hoarders, there’s usually two people in every episode, but every episode has the same plot line, veneer of normalcy, veneer of normalcy, veneer of normalcy, slight expression of concern, full-blown derangement. And it always follows that exact pattern.
So every episode of Hoarders, there’s usually two people in every episode, but every episode has the same plot line, veneer of normalcy, veneer of normalcy, veneer of normalcy, slight expression of concern, full-blown derangement. And it always follows that exact pattern.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I don’t know. I think the deep ocean of the human mind is good. There’s a longing to be good to others.
Yeah, I don’t know. I think the deep ocean of the human mind is good. There’s a longing to be good to others.
Michael Malice
I have seen literally no evidence of this. And I know everything’s a deep ocean with you people, but-
I have seen literally no evidence of this. And I know everything’s a deep ocean with you people, but-
Lex Fridman
What do you mean you people?
What do you mean you people?
Michael Malice
Pirates.
Pirates.
Lex Fridman
Oh.
Oh.
Michael Malice
I don’t see it.
I don’t see it.
Lex Fridman
What’s that Mr. Parrot? He’s an antisemite/ No, that’s not nice to say in front of such a large audience. You’re embarrassing me, Mr. Parrot.
What’s that Mr. Parrot? He’s an antisemite/ No, that’s not nice to say in front of such a large audience. You’re embarrassing me, Mr. Parrot.
Michael Malice
Lex, you have-
Lex, you have-
Lex Fridman
What’s that Mr. Parrot? He’s a run-of-the-mill troll and barely an intellectual. That’s not nice to say. That’s not true. We talked about this. You have to see the good in people.
What’s that Mr. Parrot? He’s a run-of-the-mill troll and barely an intellectual. That’s not nice to say. That’s not true. We talked about this. You have to see the good in people.
Michael Malice
You have seen personally, how quickly and easily it is for human beings to form outgroups and to just rid others, as I just did a minute ago with the Atlantic, completely out of the human race. And that happens constantly and very easily. Humans are tribal beings. I don’t see how that’s compatible with this essential desire to do good.
You have seen personally, how quickly and easily it is for human beings to form outgroups and to just rid others, as I just did a minute ago with the Atlantic, completely out of the human race. And that happens constantly and very easily. Humans are tribal beings. I don’t see how that’s compatible with this essential desire to do good.
Lex Fridman
No, I think it’s like in 1984, the two minutes of hate. There is a part of humans that wants to be tribal and wants to get angry and hateful. And then that hate is easy to direct by, especially people as you, as an anarchist, talk about, there are people in power that direct that anger.
No, I think it’s like in 1984, the two minutes of hate. There is a part of humans that wants to be tribal and wants to get angry and hateful. And then that hate is easy to direct by, especially people as you, as an anarchist, talk about, there are people in power that direct that anger.
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
But I think if you just look at recent human history, the desire for good, the communal desire for good outweighs that, I think. Most of life on earth right now, people are being good to each other in a most fundamental sense relative to how nature usually works.
But I think if you just look at recent human history, the desire for good, the communal desire for good outweighs that, I think. Most of life on earth right now, people are being good to each other in a most fundamental sense relative to how nature usually works.
Michael Malice
Okay. I think you’re both wrong about people and about nature. So nature is not inherently violent in the sense, for example, if anyone has an aquarium or if you look at wildlife, yeah, you’re going to have predator or prey, but these animals are going to be coexisting and they’re going to be ignoring each other for the most part, right?
Okay. I think you’re both wrong about people and about nature. So nature is not inherently violent in the sense, for example, if anyone has an aquarium or if you look at wildlife, yeah, you’re going to have predator or prey, but these animals are going to be coexisting and they’re going to be ignoring each other for the most part, right?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Michael Malice
And as for humans being essentially good, I think humans are essentially to each other, you said, I think they’re essentially civil and amiable, but that’s not really being good.
And as for humans being essentially good, I think humans are essentially to each other, you said, I think they’re essentially civil and amiable, but that’s not really being good.
Lex Fridman
Good, I think is a thing that gets illustrated when you’re challenged, when there’s difficult situations.
Good, I think is a thing that gets illustrated when you’re challenged, when there’s difficult situations.
Michael Malice
Yes, exactly. Yes.
Yes, exactly. Yes.
Lex Fridman
Civility is a good starting point. And then when there’s a big challenge that comes, people step up on average.
Civility is a good starting point. And then when there’s a big challenge that comes, people step up on average.
Michael Malice
I completely agree with you that human beings are capable of such profound goodness, that it makes you extremely emotional. And I certainly think that’s that’s true, but I think that’s more unusual than it’s the norm.
I completely agree with you that human beings are capable of such profound goodness, that it makes you extremely emotional. And I certainly think that’s that’s true, but I think that’s more unusual than it’s the norm.
Lex Fridman
I see beauty everywhere.
I see beauty everywhere.
Michael Malice
So do I, but that doesn’t mean it’s in every person.
So do I, but that doesn’t mean it’s in every person.
Lex Fridman
Not in every person, but in most people. I wish there was a really good way to measure this, my general sense of the world. It’s just there’s so much incredible both in terms of economics, in terms of art, in terms of just creation as a whole, that’s happened over the past century, that it feels like the good is out powering the bad.
Not in every person, but in most people. I wish there was a really good way to measure this, my general sense of the world. It’s just there’s so much incredible both in terms of economics, in terms of art, in terms of just creation as a whole, that’s happened over the past century, that it feels like the good is out powering the bad.
Michael Malice
You just did the perfect segue to the box.
You just did the perfect segue to the box.
Unboxing the mystery box
Lex Fridman
What’s in the box? Is it your fragile ego?
What’s in the box? Is it your fragile ego?
Michael Malice
You stole my joke. You stole my joke. That was the joke I made at you before we recorded. You stole my joke.
You stole my joke. You stole my joke. That was the joke I made at you before we recorded. You stole my joke.
Lex Fridman
No, I didn’t. I write all your material, you hack.
No, I didn’t. I write all your material, you hack.
Michael Malice
So as you know, I have a lot of beautiful stuff in my house because I think it’s something very important. Everyone listening, if you accomplish something that is great, some achievement, what I like to do is buy myself something to remember that moment. Because sometimes when it’s hard, you forget you’ve done great things in your life. You’ve made accomplishments. It doesn’t have to be some amazing factory. It could just be like my first job or I got a raise or you know what? Anything. So there’s this amazing sculptor named Jake Michael Singer, a singer who’s a sculptor, and I saw a piece of him.
So as you know, I have a lot of beautiful stuff in my house because I think it’s something very important. Everyone listening, if you accomplish something that is great, some achievement, what I like to do is buy myself something to remember that moment. Because sometimes when it’s hard, you forget you’ve done great things in your life. You’ve made accomplishments. It doesn’t have to be some amazing factory. It could just be like my first job or I got a raise or you know what? Anything. So there’s this amazing sculptor named Jake Michael Singer, a singer who’s a sculptor, and I saw a piece of him.
Lex Fridman
How’s his singing voice? This joke’s not going-
How’s his singing voice? This joke’s not going-
Michael Malice
Hold on. I could go somewhere with this.
Hold on. I could go somewhere with this.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Michael Malice
How’s his singing voice?
How’s his singing voice?
Lex Fridman
Do you want me to write your joke for you?
Do you want me to write your joke for you?
Michael Malice
Yeah. What’s the punchline? Harrrd. There it is, that’s the one.
Yeah. What’s the punchline? Harrrd. There it is, that’s the one.
Lex Fridman
That’s what she said.
That’s what she said.
Michael Malice
So I followed him on Instagram, he followed me back and he says, “What’s the point of being an artist if the work I create isn’t in the spaces of people I like and admire?” He’s a big fan of yours. You’ve given him and our episodes together give him joy. So he said, “If I make Lex a sculpture, will he put it on the-“
So I followed him on Instagram, he followed me back and he says, “What’s the point of being an artist if the work I create isn’t in the spaces of people I like and admire?” He’s a big fan of yours. You’ve given him and our episodes together give him joy. So he said, “If I make Lex a sculpture, will he put it on the-“
Michael Malice
He said, “If I make Lex a sculpture, will he put on the shelf behind him?” And what that reminded me of is when I was a kid, you read Batman comics and there’s the Bat Cave. And the Bat Cave has all this cool stuff in it. I didn’t realize until much later that all of those things in the bat cave had an origin story. So the giant penny, the dinosaur, there was actually a story where that came from. So if you’re a fan of a show, you can spot, oh, this is when this appeared. This is when that appeared. This is when that appeared. So he made you this sculpture. He lives in Turkey and it’s called Chance Murmur. And it is, I haven’t even seen it yet. It is absolutely beautiful.
He said, “If I make Lex a sculpture, will he put on the shelf behind him?” And what that reminded me of is when I was a kid, you read Batman comics and there’s the Bat Cave. And the Bat Cave has all this cool stuff in it. I didn’t realize until much later that all of those things in the bat cave had an origin story. So the giant penny, the dinosaur, there was actually a story where that came from. So if you’re a fan of a show, you can spot, oh, this is when this appeared. This is when that appeared. This is when that appeared. So he made you this sculpture. He lives in Turkey and it’s called Chance Murmur. And it is, I haven’t even seen it yet. It is absolutely beautiful.
Lex Fridman
So you want to do a little unboxing?
So you want to do a little unboxing?
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Okay. Axe or…
Okay. Axe or…
Michael Malice
Body spray?
Body spray?
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Michael Malice
Let’s do it.
Let’s do it.
Lex Fridman
Let’s unbox.
Let’s unbox.
Michael Malice
I’m so excited. He lunges out of the box.
I’m so excited. He lunges out of the box.
Lex Fridman
You know that Steven Seagal movie where there’s a stripper that comes out of the box?
You know that Steven Seagal movie where there’s a stripper that comes out of the box?
Michael Malice
Is there?
Is there?
Lex Fridman
Under Siege.
Under Siege.
Michael Malice
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
He’s on a boat. You’re not an action film guy.
He’s on a boat. You’re not an action film guy.
Michael Malice
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
One.
One.
What does the pirate say when he turns 80?
Michael Malice
What?
What?
Lex Fridman
Aye matey.
Aye matey.
Michael Malice
Aye matey. Oh.
Aye matey. Oh.
Lex Fridman
Oh.
Oh.
See, that’s how I know you don’t like humor.
Michael Malice
I just don’t like pirates.
I just don’t like pirates.
Lex Fridman
Well, your mom does.
Well, your mom does.
Do you play any musical instruments?
Michael Malice
No. Neither do you. I’ve seen your guitar videos.
No. Neither do you. I’ve seen your guitar videos.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
Here’s a big piece of wood for you. That’s what it feels like, just so you know.
Here’s a big piece of wood for you. That’s what it feels like, just so you know.
Michael Malice
Oh, wow. Do you need help?
Oh, wow. Do you need help?
Oh my God.
Lex Fridman
This traveled across the world.
This traveled across the world.
Michael Malice
So here’s why his work speaks so much to me. So first of all, he’s combining so many different references. It’s Nike, the Goddess of Victory, right? It looks like an angel as well. The Italian futurist, which is my favorite art movement from the early 20th century, they tried to capture motion in 2D or 3D form.
So here’s why his work speaks so much to me. So first of all, he’s combining so many different references. It’s Nike, the Goddess of Victory, right? It looks like an angel as well. The Italian futurist, which is my favorite art movement from the early 20th century, they tried to capture motion in 2D or 3D form.
Lex Fridman
Well, Jake, thank you, thank you, thank you. Thank you for creating beautiful things. Thank you for caring about somebody like me and somebody like Michael. We really feel the love.
Well, Jake, thank you, thank you, thank you. Thank you for creating beautiful things. Thank you for caring about somebody like me and somebody like Michael. We really feel the love.
Michael Malice
That’s the other thing.
That’s the other thing.
Lex Fridman
Thank you.
Thank you.
Michael Malice
When you have something that matters to you in your house and you’re having a bad day, you can look at it and remember. You know what I mean? That spirit of joy. And I actually have a list here. Okay? I’ve got a little rant ready. Do you want to hear my rant?
When you have something that matters to you in your house and you’re having a bad day, you can look at it and remember. You know what I mean? That spirit of joy. And I actually have a list here. Okay? I’ve got a little rant ready. Do you want to hear my rant?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Let’s go.
Yeah. Let’s go.
Michael Malice
One of the things that drives me crazy is when people, especially conservatives, think that all contemporary art is ugly or abstract or literally garbage. And there’s a lot of that, but so much of the stuff out there in galleries is not only not crazy expensive, but they’re trying to sell things for people in their house. And these are young artists. They’re trying to add beauty. I have a list, so if you don’t believe me and you think all contemporary art is garbage or terrible, go to the website or any of these places that I’m going to rattle off, look through them. And you’re telling me that it’s not about creating beauty and joy and things in people’s lives?
One of the things that drives me crazy is when people, especially conservatives, think that all contemporary art is ugly or abstract or literally garbage. And there’s a lot of that, but so much of the stuff out there in galleries is not only not crazy expensive, but they’re trying to sell things for people in their house. And these are young artists. They’re trying to add beauty. I have a list, so if you don’t believe me and you think all contemporary art is garbage or terrible, go to the website or any of these places that I’m going to rattle off, look through them. And you’re telling me that it’s not about creating beauty and joy and things in people’s lives?
So I don’t have any relationship with any of these people, these are just some galleries I follow on Instagram. Outre Gallery, Antler Gallery, Giant Robot 2, Beinart, I don’t know how to pronounce it, I’m sorry. B-E-I-N-A-R-T. Spoke Art Gallery, Var Gallery in Milwaukee, I was there. The pieces were not expensive at all.
Lex Fridman
What kind of art are we talking about? Everything? Paintings?
What kind of art are we talking about? Everything? Paintings?
Michael Malice
Mostly paintings. Mostly paintings. Some sculptures too, like this. Corey Helford is my favorite one in LA. Night Gallery, Vertical Gallery, Avant Gallery, Hive Gallery, Haven Gallery, and Curio Art Gallery. I’m telling you, it’s not exorbitant. This is not the kind of thing where you have to go to a museum and be like, “This doesn’t make sense to me.” You look at it right away, you’re like, “Okay, I know what this is.” And it’s beautiful. It’s awesome. And you’re supporting someone who’s young and creative trying to do something and make the world a better place.
Mostly paintings. Mostly paintings. Some sculptures too, like this. Corey Helford is my favorite one in LA. Night Gallery, Vertical Gallery, Avant Gallery, Hive Gallery, Haven Gallery, and Curio Art Gallery. I’m telling you, it’s not exorbitant. This is not the kind of thing where you have to go to a museum and be like, “This doesn’t make sense to me.” You look at it right away, you’re like, “Okay, I know what this is.” And it’s beautiful. It’s awesome. And you’re supporting someone who’s young and creative trying to do something and make the world a better place.
So I’m a big fan of the contemporary art scene. A lot of it is not great, but even the stuff that’s not great is very rarely disgusting or gross. It’s just like, okay, I’ve seen this before, or something like that.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Michael Malice
It’s like the difference between, there’s a standup where I’ll pay money for the ticket, and someone who’s an opener. It’s like, I wouldn’t pay to see him perform, but he sure still made me laugh. That person is still by far more good than bad. So a lot of this art isn’t stuff I would own, but it’s like, okay, I get it. I like it.
It’s like the difference between, there’s a standup where I’ll pay money for the ticket, and someone who’s an opener. It’s like, I wouldn’t pay to see him perform, but he sure still made me laugh. That person is still by far more good than bad. So a lot of this art isn’t stuff I would own, but it’s like, okay, I get it. I like it.
Lex Fridman
Well, as the analogy goes, I really like going to open mics, actually, because funny… It sounds absurd to say, but funny isn’t the only thing that’s beautiful about standup comedy, it’s the…
Well, as the analogy goes, I really like going to open mics, actually, because funny… It sounds absurd to say, but funny isn’t the only thing that’s beautiful about standup comedy, it’s the…
Michael Malice
The agony.
The agony.
Lex Fridman
It’s going for it. It’s trying to be funny. It’s taking the leap, trying the joke. And some of the best stuff is actually funny, but the audience is like three people, two of whom are drunk and bored, and you’re still going for it. And that’s the human spirit right there.
It’s going for it. It’s trying to be funny. It’s taking the leap, trying the joke. And some of the best stuff is actually funny, but the audience is like three people, two of whom are drunk and bored, and you’re still going for it. And that’s the human spirit right there.
Michael Malice
Roseanne was telling me how Gilbert Gottfried would go on, it was like 3:00 in the morning. And it was her and three other comics in the audience and they all were just dying.
Roseanne was telling me how Gilbert Gottfried would go on, it was like 3:00 in the morning. And it was her and three other comics in the audience and they all were just dying.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
He was just killing them. Who’s your favorite comedian?
He was just killing them. Who’s your favorite comedian?
Lex Fridman
Dave Smith.
Dave Smith.
Michael Malice
Who?
Who?
Lex Fridman
And cut scene. Favorite comedian. First, Norm Macdonald. If you put a gun to my head and I had to answer really quickly, that would be him.
And cut scene. Favorite comedian. First, Norm Macdonald. If you put a gun to my head and I had to answer really quickly, that would be him.
Michael Malice
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
I would also say Louis C.K.
I would also say Louis C.K.
Michael Malice
Oh, wow. Yeah. Oh my God, yes.
Oh, wow. Yeah. Oh my God, yes.
Lex Fridman
But that’s almost like a vanilla answer at this moment in history because it’s like a-
But that’s almost like a vanilla answer at this moment in history because it’s like a-
Michael Malice
Louis C.K.’s pretty radioactive.
Louis C.K.’s pretty radioactive.
Lex Fridman
He is. Well, yeah. He does the tough topics-
He is. Well, yeah. He does the tough topics-
Michael Malice
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
… the best. Mitch Hedberg. The wit of a good one-liner is great. I guess that’s what Norm Macdonald was a genius at. What about you?
… the best. Mitch Hedberg. The wit of a good one-liner is great. I guess that’s what Norm Macdonald was a genius at. What about you?
Michael Malice
I mean, we’re so fortunate to be here in Austin because that Comedy Mothership, you go there and people are just killing it. David Lucas is amazing.
I mean, we’re so fortunate to be here in Austin because that Comedy Mothership, you go there and people are just killing it. David Lucas is amazing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, he’s great.
Yeah, he’s great.
Michael Malice
Thai Rivera probably did the best set I’ve seen since I’ve been here in Austin. And I watched him and I’m like, “This guy’s even bitchier than I am.” So I reached out to him. So he’s just terrific. David Lucas is another one, a buddy of mine.
Thai Rivera probably did the best set I’ve seen since I’ve been here in Austin. And I watched him and I’m like, “This guy’s even bitchier than I am.” So I reached out to him. So he’s just terrific. David Lucas is another one, a buddy of mine.
Lex Fridman
You just said it twice, I think. David.
You just said it twice, I think. David.
Michael Malice
I’m thinking of Dave Landau, excuse me.
I’m thinking of Dave Landau, excuse me.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
Dave Landau. Joe Machi is-
Dave Landau. Joe Machi is-
Lex Fridman
Old age catching up.
Old age catching up.
Michael Malice
It’s true though.
It’s true though.
Lex Fridman
It’s true.
It’s true.
Michael Malice
It’s true.
It’s true.
Lex Fridman
It’s true.
It’s true.
Michael Malice
Dave Lucas.
Dave Lucas.
Lex Fridman
You ever been to the Comedy Mothership? It’s a great spot.
You ever been to the Comedy Mothership? It’s a great spot.
Michael Malice
Where is that? Is that in Austin?
Where is that? Is that in Austin?
Lex Fridman
Austin? Is that where Willie Nelson is from? I haven’t really… Go ahead, I’m-
Austin? Is that where Willie Nelson is from? I haven’t really… Go ahead, I’m-
Michael Malice
Oh, I heard a joke about that the other week.
Oh, I heard a joke about that the other week.
Lex Fridman
Go ahead. Tell a joke again.
Go ahead. Tell a joke again.
Michael Malice
What’s the only thing worse than giving head to Willie Nelson?
What’s the only thing worse than giving head to Willie Nelson?
Lex Fridman
What?
What?
Michael Malice
If he says, “I’m not Willie Nelson.”
If he says, “I’m not Willie Nelson.”
Lex Fridman
What’s that, Mr. Parrot? I know he’s not funny. He thinks he’s better on Twitter. But that’s not nice to say, and right in front of his face. Just think how he feels.
What’s that, Mr. Parrot? I know he’s not funny. He thinks he’s better on Twitter. But that’s not nice to say, and right in front of his face. Just think how he feels.
Michael Malice
The statue, Chance Murmur is judging you.
The statue, Chance Murmur is judging you.
Lex Fridman
Chance?
Chance?
Michael Malice
It’s called Chance Murmur.
It’s called Chance Murmur.
Lex Fridman
Chance Murmur.
Chance Murmur.
Michael Malice
God, that’s so beautiful.
God, that’s so beautiful.
Lex Fridman
That is gorgeous.
That is gorgeous.
Michael Malice
This is another reason I hate cynicism, and I talk about this a lot. Even just on Etsy, there are so many small, not huge companies, individual artisans who are creating great stuff and just making it happen. And it’s really sad for me where people can’t see that. Or if they’re like, “Well, how could I be excited about a sculpture when blah, blah, blah, the Middle East?” And it’s just like, you can always look for an excuse not to look for joy, or you could look for an excuse to look for joy.
This is another reason I hate cynicism, and I talk about this a lot. Even just on Etsy, there are so many small, not huge companies, individual artisans who are creating great stuff and just making it happen. And it’s really sad for me where people can’t see that. Or if they’re like, “Well, how could I be excited about a sculpture when blah, blah, blah, the Middle East?” And it’s just like, you can always look for an excuse not to look for joy, or you could look for an excuse to look for joy.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Etsy is incredible. I feel the same way about-
Yeah. Etsy is incredible. I feel the same way about-
Michael Malice
OnlyFans?
OnlyFans?
Lex Fridman
… OnlyFans. I can’t even get that out of my mouth before laughing at my own failed joke.
… OnlyFans. I can’t even get that out of my mouth before laughing at my own failed joke.
Michael Malice
That’s what she said.
That’s what she said.
Lex Fridman
Oh, all right. That might be one of the first that’s what she said from Michael Malice.
Oh, all right. That might be one of the first that’s what she said from Michael Malice.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I’m going to count that.
I’m going to count that.
Michael Malice
I don’t know what I’m going to do with mine, because I got my own. Mine’s three feet tall, just like me.
I don’t know what I’m going to do with mine, because I got my own. Mine’s three feet tall, just like me.
Lex Fridman
Your box was much bigger.
Your box was much bigger.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And it was giving me an inferiority complex. I think I’m going to invade Russia. That’s a Napoleon reference for those in the audience.
And it was giving me an inferiority complex. I think I’m going to invade Russia. That’s a Napoleon reference for those in the audience.
Michael Malice
I don’t know if I’m going to… I think I’m going to put it in my bedroom so it’s the first thing I see when I wake up.
I don’t know if I’m going to… I think I’m going to put it in my bedroom so it’s the first thing I see when I wake up.
Lex Fridman
Put it in the bedroom.
Put it in the bedroom.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Did we get through everything we’re thankful for?
Did we get through everything we’re thankful for?
Michael Malice
No, I’ve got lots of things I’m thankful for.
No, I’ve got lots of things I’m thankful for.
Lex Fridman
What else? Friends, family. We said books.
What else? Friends, family. We said books.
Michael Malice
I’m thankful for career. I am thankful for… And I know people are going to lose their minds and I can hear them flipping out already. I am thankful for social media.
I’m thankful for career. I am thankful for… And I know people are going to lose their minds and I can hear them flipping out already. I am thankful for social media.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
I’m thankful for several reasons. First, it is a way for people to make connections that they couldn’t have made in years past. That if you’ve got some weird hobby, you can find that other person’s weird hobby and you make that connection. It’s a great way to stay in touch permanently for people otherwise you’d lose touch with, you know, at whatever venue. And it’s also a great way to expose corporate depravity. When you have these organizations that are dishonest, I think the community notes thing on Twitter is the greatest thing ever.
I’m thankful for several reasons. First, it is a way for people to make connections that they couldn’t have made in years past. That if you’ve got some weird hobby, you can find that other person’s weird hobby and you make that connection. It’s a great way to stay in touch permanently for people otherwise you’d lose touch with, you know, at whatever venue. And it’s also a great way to expose corporate depravity. When you have these organizations that are dishonest, I think the community notes thing on Twitter is the greatest thing ever.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s incredible. I wish they would pay attention to the Michael Malice account more often.
Yeah, it’s incredible. I wish they would pay attention to the Michael Malice account more often.
Michael Malice
You shouldn’t be encouraging anyone to pay attention to my Twitter account.
You shouldn’t be encouraging anyone to pay attention to my Twitter account.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
It’s a dumpster fire. And I don’t mean Bridget, I mean like a literal… Bridget Phetasy.
It’s a dumpster fire. And I don’t mean Bridget, I mean like a literal… Bridget Phetasy.
Lex Fridman
Oh, Bridget, by the way, is amazing. But your Twitter account makes-
Oh, Bridget, by the way, is amazing. But your Twitter account makes-
Michael Malice
She lives here.
She lives here.
Lex Fridman
Yes. Not here. I wish she did.
Yes. Not here. I wish she did.
Michael Malice
She’s in Georgetown.
She’s in Georgetown.
Lex Fridman
No, I mean in this, where we’re sitting.
No, I mean in this, where we’re sitting.
Michael Malice
Oh.
Oh.
Lex Fridman
It’s a joke, Michael.
It’s a joke, Michael.
Michael Malice
Is it?
Is it?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
But I’m just really glad about… It’s another way for people who before would’ve felt very alone. I know some people do feel alone, but for other people it makes them feel connected.
But I’m just really glad about… It’s another way for people who before would’ve felt very alone. I know some people do feel alone, but for other people it makes them feel connected.
Lex Fridman
There’s been a lot of talk about antisemitism recently.
There’s been a lot of talk about antisemitism recently.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s your sense about this? Is antisemitism like any other brand of hate? There’s a lot of hate out there.
What’s your sense about this? Is antisemitism like any other brand of hate? There’s a lot of hate out there.
Michael Malice
No, I don’t think it’s like any other brand of hate, because I don’t think racists or transphobes or homophobes or misogynists or xenophobes argue openly or even not so openly for the killing of black Americans, transgender people, gay people, women, or immigrants. And it’s not only something that’s talked about, it’s something that has actually happened. And not just the Holocaust, but just centuries of pilgrims, right? There’s this great book that I read many years ago called The Satanization of the Jews. Camille Paglia recommended it and I read it. And they live in this certain specific kind of antisemitism. And again, I’m not talking about people who are against Israel or something like that. I’m talking specifically about Jew hatred. They have this moral calculus that Jews are the only people who are capable of good or evil, and Jews are exclusively capable of evil.
No, I don’t think it’s like any other brand of hate, because I don’t think racists or transphobes or homophobes or misogynists or xenophobes argue openly or even not so openly for the killing of black Americans, transgender people, gay people, women, or immigrants. And it’s not only something that’s talked about, it’s something that has actually happened. And not just the Holocaust, but just centuries of pilgrims, right? There’s this great book that I read many years ago called The Satanization of the Jews. Camille Paglia recommended it and I read it. And they live in this certain specific kind of antisemitism. And again, I’m not talking about people who are against Israel or something like that. I’m talking specifically about Jew hatred. They have this moral calculus that Jews are the only people who are capable of good or evil, and Jews are exclusively capable of evil.
For example, if you look at the George W. Bush White House, you had W, you had Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, a lot of these NeoCon advisors. So if there’s 10 people in a room and there’s one Jewish person, it’s his fault, and the rest are Jew controlled. So again, they only exist as a puppet of Jews in this kind of worldview. And it’s like, to me, if there were no Jews on earth, it is crazy to say that John Bolton and Liz Cheney and Lindsey Graham wouldn’t be pushing for more war. That makes no sense to me. It’s like, you blame the Jews when bad things happen, but when a Jewish person does something good, it doesn’t really matter. Or just wait, he’s going to do something bad. Well, yeah, that’s true. Human beings do good things and then they do bad things sometimes. But it only counts when that Jewish person does the bad thing.
Lex Fridman
I wonder what’s a way to fight antisemitism and fight hate in general?
I wonder what’s a way to fight antisemitism and fight hate in general?
Michael Malice
I think the only or the best way, because I thought a lot about this, about how did gay Americans go from being universally hated and despised to the point that many people in the ’80s went to their graves, those who had AIDS, without even telling their parents because they were so scared, to now Times Square is just covered in pride flags. And this also works for Islamophobia and some of these other bigotry, is what I call the ambassador program. Because as soon as you know someone who is a member of a certain group, it is a lot harder to be bigoted against them because instead of this being this out group that’s somewhere out there, it’s like, wait a minute, I work with this guy. Yeah, he’s kind of a jerk and maybe he sees things a little differently than me, but this guy is not a horrible human being. So I think the only way to fight any form of bigotry is to be a good example of the counter to whatever archetype or stereotype is in the culture.
I think the only or the best way, because I thought a lot about this, about how did gay Americans go from being universally hated and despised to the point that many people in the ’80s went to their graves, those who had AIDS, without even telling their parents because they were so scared, to now Times Square is just covered in pride flags. And this also works for Islamophobia and some of these other bigotry, is what I call the ambassador program. Because as soon as you know someone who is a member of a certain group, it is a lot harder to be bigoted against them because instead of this being this out group that’s somewhere out there, it’s like, wait a minute, I work with this guy. Yeah, he’s kind of a jerk and maybe he sees things a little differently than me, but this guy is not a horrible human being. So I think the only way to fight any form of bigotry is to be a good example of the counter to whatever archetype or stereotype is in the culture.
Karl Marx and religion
Lex Fridman
Karl Marx wrote that, “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of a soulless condition. It is the opium of the people.” As the famous phrase goes. Do you think he has a point?
Karl Marx wrote that, “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of a soulless condition. It is the opium of the people.” As the famous phrase goes. Do you think he has a point?
Michael Malice
No. I hate that quote. I absolutely hate it. I despise this sort of Reddit internet atheist activism for the simple reason that I know many people who in finding faith have become objectively better human beings.
No. I hate that quote. I absolutely hate it. I despise this sort of Reddit internet atheist activism for the simple reason that I know many people who in finding faith have become objectively better human beings.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
They start living consciously. They take morality seriously. They try, we all fail, to be moral good people. So this sneering that these midwits, these marginally intelligent people have towards religious people. Now, lots of religious people use religion to rationalize their bad behavior or sinful or big ego, so on and so forth. That exists, that’s true. But to say that it never helps anyone and it’s universally the… See, Marx was talking about a period, I mean, I’ll defend his quote, when his argument was the masses are being starved and oppressed, but they’re promised, don’t worry, you’ll have riches in heaven. So you should kind of let yourself be pushed around now, and this is kind of this BS bargain that the people are being given. So that was, I think, the point he was making. It certainly doesn’t apply nowadays. I’m close to the family in the Midwest. They’re good Christian people. I remember very specifically this guy, shout out to him, Sean Sherrod. I went to college with him. David Lucas.
They start living consciously. They take morality seriously. They try, we all fail, to be moral good people. So this sneering that these midwits, these marginally intelligent people have towards religious people. Now, lots of religious people use religion to rationalize their bad behavior or sinful or big ego, so on and so forth. That exists, that’s true. But to say that it never helps anyone and it’s universally the… See, Marx was talking about a period, I mean, I’ll defend his quote, when his argument was the masses are being starved and oppressed, but they’re promised, don’t worry, you’ll have riches in heaven. So you should kind of let yourself be pushed around now, and this is kind of this BS bargain that the people are being given. So that was, I think, the point he was making. It certainly doesn’t apply nowadays. I’m close to the family in the Midwest. They’re good Christian people. I remember very specifically this guy, shout out to him, Sean Sherrod. I went to college with him. David Lucas.
Lex Fridman
Have you checked out the Comedy Mothership? Great club.
Have you checked out the Comedy Mothership? Great club.
Michael Malice
Where is it? Is it in Austin?
Where is it? Is it in Austin?
Lex Fridman
Willie Nelson.
Willie Nelson.
Michael Malice
I was 17, 18, freshman year, and I was reading all this criticism of the Bible and I was like, “Look, this is in there. Look at this in there.” And he put his hand on my shoulder and he says, “Michael, there’s nothing you’re going to tell me that’s going to make me lose my faith.” And that was a very self-aware and profound thing to say. As I’ve gotten older, I know lots of religious people. There’s no part of me that thinks they’re wrong or they should be mocked. It also reminds me of when people sneer at addicts in recovery, they’re like, “Alcoholism isn’t a disease, it’s a choice.” It’s like, wait a minute. You don’t know what it’s like to have your entire life ruined by drugs or alcohol.
I was 17, 18, freshman year, and I was reading all this criticism of the Bible and I was like, “Look, this is in there. Look at this in there.” And he put his hand on my shoulder and he says, “Michael, there’s nothing you’re going to tell me that’s going to make me lose my faith.” And that was a very self-aware and profound thing to say. As I’ve gotten older, I know lots of religious people. There’s no part of me that thinks they’re wrong or they should be mocked. It also reminds me of when people sneer at addicts in recovery, they’re like, “Alcoholism isn’t a disease, it’s a choice.” It’s like, wait a minute. You don’t know what it’s like to have your entire life ruined by drugs or alcohol.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Michael Malice
And if you have to tell yourself, “I have this disease and blah, blah, blah,” and that keeps you from drinking and now you’re a moral upstanding person who’s reliable and takes responsibility for their actions, I don’t see the harm at all. So I think this kind of activist atheism is cheap. I don’t agree with it whatsoever. And I do not like that quote at all.
And if you have to tell yourself, “I have this disease and blah, blah, blah,” and that keeps you from drinking and now you’re a moral upstanding person who’s reliable and takes responsibility for their actions, I don’t see the harm at all. So I think this kind of activist atheism is cheap. I don’t agree with it whatsoever. And I do not like that quote at all.
Lex Fridman
But otherwise, big fan of Marx?
But otherwise, big fan of Marx?
Michael Malice
I mean, I think there’s a fan of mine, I forget who it was, apologies. He had this great quote, and this is me talking. He goes, “The games people play to feel smarter than others is depressing and annoying.” And I think this kind of fedora internet atheism is a good example, because here’s the other thing. If you’ve proven that someone else is stupid, that doesn’t mean you’re smart. You could both be stupid. So congrats, you proved someone else is stupid. Who cares?
I mean, I think there’s a fan of mine, I forget who it was, apologies. He had this great quote, and this is me talking. He goes, “The games people play to feel smarter than others is depressing and annoying.” And I think this kind of fedora internet atheism is a good example, because here’s the other thing. If you’ve proven that someone else is stupid, that doesn’t mean you’re smart. You could both be stupid. So congrats, you proved someone else is stupid. Who cares?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. And sneering of all forms in general is just not great.
Yeah. And sneering of all forms in general is just not great.
Michael Malice
That’s one of the things I block out people on social media instantly. You’re not going to sneer at me in my space. You could sneer at me all you want in your space, but I’m not putting up with your crap. I don’t know you.
That’s one of the things I block out people on social media instantly. You’re not going to sneer at me in my space. You could sneer at me all you want in your space, but I’m not putting up with your crap. I don’t know you.
Lex Fridman
MySpace, great social network.
MySpace, great social network.
Michael Malice
Is that on Sixth Street?
Is that on Sixth Street?
Lex Fridman
AOL.com.
AOL.com.
Michael Malice
Clang, clang, clang. That’s how Lex comes.
Clang, clang, clang. That’s how Lex comes.
Lex Fridman
Like a Pavlov’s dog. That was the sound before you get to see… Spend 10 minutes waiting for an image of a lady load one line at a time.
Like a Pavlov’s dog. That was the sound before you get to see… Spend 10 minutes waiting for an image of a lady load one line at a time.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I recently talked to John Mearsheimer, I don’t know if you know him at all. So he has this idea about offensive realism. It’s a way to analyze the world into national relations. And the basic idea, and I’ll run it by you and see what you think, is that states, nations want to survive and they try to do so by maximizing power, military power. And he talks about anarchy quite a bit, in that one of these underlying assumptions of this way of viewing the world is that states are anarchic towards each other.
I recently talked to John Mearsheimer, I don’t know if you know him at all. So he has this idea about offensive realism. It’s a way to analyze the world into national relations. And the basic idea, and I’ll run it by you and see what you think, is that states, nations want to survive and they try to do so by maximizing power, military power. And he talks about anarchy quite a bit, in that one of these underlying assumptions of this way of viewing the world is that states are anarchic towards each other.
Michael Malice
Yes, that’s true.
Yes, that’s true.
Lex Fridman
And they operate under a lot of uncertainty. States cannot be sure that other states will not use military capabilities against them.
And they operate under a lot of uncertainty. States cannot be sure that other states will not use military capabilities against them.
Michael Malice
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
They want to survive and they want to use military power to control the uncertainty to protect themselves.
They want to survive and they want to use military power to control the uncertainty to protect themselves.
Michael Malice
So I disagree in that regard. And I see on your bookshelf, I think the world is a lot closer to Brave New World than it is to 1984. And I think if you look at, let’s suppose China’s influence in America. The influence is far more through soft power than military power. China doesn’t threaten America through “we’re going to kill you.” It’s more like the infiltration of universities, TikTok, things of that nature. Maybe this would’ve worked before the pop culture era, but I think one of the reasons we have this kind of American hegemony isn’t just a function of American military. I think it’s much more a function of American popular culture. When you’re exporting ideas and culture, it makes other people in other countries feel closer to you and also regard you as a friend, and also to adopt your value. It’s a great way to spread propaganda.
So I disagree in that regard. And I see on your bookshelf, I think the world is a lot closer to Brave New World than it is to 1984. And I think if you look at, let’s suppose China’s influence in America. The influence is far more through soft power than military power. China doesn’t threaten America through “we’re going to kill you.” It’s more like the infiltration of universities, TikTok, things of that nature. Maybe this would’ve worked before the pop culture era, but I think one of the reasons we have this kind of American hegemony isn’t just a function of American military. I think it’s much more a function of American popular culture. When you’re exporting ideas and culture, it makes other people in other countries feel closer to you and also regard you as a friend, and also to adopt your value. It’s a great way to spread propaganda.
Lex Fridman
It seems to correlate though, right? It’s interesting. It’s an interesting idea. What has more power, the viral spread of ideas or the power of the military? It seems that the United States is at the top of the world on both.
It seems to correlate though, right? It’s interesting. It’s an interesting idea. What has more power, the viral spread of ideas or the power of the military? It seems that the United States is at the top of the world on both.
Michael Malice
That’s true.
That’s true.
Lex Fridman
And so it’s hard to disentangle the two.
And so it’s hard to disentangle the two.
Michael Malice
Let’s look at Europe. American culture is very popular in Europe in many ways, right? The best music comes out of Sweden, Swedish indie pop. They’re singing in English, even though… So on and so forth. None of this is a function, maybe it’s a function of post World War II to some extent, but I don’t think it’s a function of American bases there. I think it’s a function of we’re exporting our music, our TV shows, and our movies.
Let’s look at Europe. American culture is very popular in Europe in many ways, right? The best music comes out of Sweden, Swedish indie pop. They’re singing in English, even though… So on and so forth. None of this is a function, maybe it’s a function of post World War II to some extent, but I don’t think it’s a function of American bases there. I think it’s a function of we’re exporting our music, our TV shows, and our movies.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. It’s interesting, if the battleground will be Brave New World, the battle of ideas.
Yeah. It’s interesting, if the battleground will be Brave New World, the battle of ideas.
Michael Malice
I think it’s clearly Brave New World. It’s so much cheaper, and again, this is one of the dark sides of social media, to use influence than it is to use threats. I think Covid is a good example of this. So much of the pressure, yes, there was authoritarianism, but it was the fact that everyone bought into it, rightly or wrongly. But the vast majority of the population wars behind all of these things, and that was through persuasion. And because people are begging for it to come back in many cases.
I think it’s clearly Brave New World. It’s so much cheaper, and again, this is one of the dark sides of social media, to use influence than it is to use threats. I think Covid is a good example of this. So much of the pressure, yes, there was authoritarianism, but it was the fact that everyone bought into it, rightly or wrongly. But the vast majority of the population wars behind all of these things, and that was through persuasion. And because people are begging for it to come back in many cases.
Lex Fridman
So who’s funding you? Which intelligence agency?
So who’s funding you? Which intelligence agency?
Michael Malice
Mossad.
Mossad.
Lex Fridman
Mossad. Mossad. This is how you do great interviewing. See, he didn’t even expect that. Okay.
Mossad. Mossad. This is how you do great interviewing. See, he didn’t even expect that. Okay.
Michael Malice
What’s that, Mr. Parrot?
What’s that, Mr. Parrot?
Lex Fridman
What was that, Mr. Parrot? You knew it? But you didn’t have any documentation, did you?
What was that, Mr. Parrot? You knew it? But you didn’t have any documentation, did you?
Michael Malice
I think Mr. Parrot is threatened by the better wings on Chance Murmur.
I think Mr. Parrot is threatened by the better wings on Chance Murmur.
Lex Fridman
He gets like that when he’s turned on, he’s not threatened.
He gets like that when he’s turned on, he’s not threatened.
Michael Malice
Oh, okay.
Oh, okay.
Lex Fridman
You can’t wait until all three of us are alone together. It’s going to be one hell of a party.
You can’t wait until all three of us are alone together. It’s going to be one hell of a party.
Michael Malice
Beaks and feathers everywhere.
Beaks and feathers everywhere.
Lex Fridman
And metal. Yeah, this thing is beautiful.
And metal. Yeah, this thing is beautiful.
Art
Michael Malice
It’s ridiculous.
It’s ridiculous.
Lex Fridman
You have actually a lot of really cool stuff at your place.
You have actually a lot of really cool stuff at your place.
Michael Malice
It’s so fun.
It’s so fun.
Lex Fridman
What’s a cool thing that stands out to you? Maybe a recent addition.
What’s a cool thing that stands out to you? Maybe a recent addition.
Michael Malice
So I went to the Dallas Museum of Art last year for my birthday and there was a painting I liked, and I Googled it and I saw the auction for that exact painting. And it was, I think three grand, which is not cheap, but not something you think… You think in a museum, “I could never afford something like this,” right? So when I went to Houston with some friends… The Sideserfs, Natalie, who made the cake of you.
So I went to the Dallas Museum of Art last year for my birthday and there was a painting I liked, and I Googled it and I saw the auction for that exact painting. And it was, I think three grand, which is not cheap, but not something you think… You think in a museum, “I could never afford something like this,” right? So when I went to Houston with some friends… The Sideserfs, Natalie, who made the cake of you.
Lex Fridman
Oh, yeah, the cake. Terrified my mom.
Oh, yeah, the cake. Terrified my mom.
Michael Malice
Did it?
Did it?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
Aww.
Aww.
Lex Fridman
No, it’s not the cake that terrified my mom. It’s you, Michael Malice, cutting it off, cutting the face off and laughing maniacally.
No, it’s not the cake that terrified my mom. It’s you, Michael Malice, cutting it off, cutting the face off and laughing maniacally.
Michael Malice
Well, Natalie’s pregnant. She’s going to have a daughter named Daisy. So congrats to Natalie.
Well, Natalie’s pregnant. She’s going to have a daughter named Daisy. So congrats to Natalie.
Lex Fridman
Congrats to Natalie.
Congrats to Natalie.
Michael Malice
But I was in the museum with them and there was a statue of Thoth, who’s the Egyptian god whose head is an ibis. It’s a bird with a long beak. And Thoth is the god of the moon, god of knowledge, and supposedly he invented writing. So I thought, you know what? I’ve always loved Ancient Egypt. I know a lot about it and especially the mythology. It’d be really cool as an aspiring author to have an ancient Egyptian Thoth statue in my house. Well, it turned out that the Egyptians also killed and mummified ibises and buried them with scribes. And a week after I went to the museum, there was an auction for an ibis mummy. And I have it now in my house, still in its bandages, overlooking my desk. And we all know it’s going to come to life and peck out my eyes and write with my blood. But that is one of the recent cool additions.
But I was in the museum with them and there was a statue of Thoth, who’s the Egyptian god whose head is an ibis. It’s a bird with a long beak. And Thoth is the god of the moon, god of knowledge, and supposedly he invented writing. So I thought, you know what? I’ve always loved Ancient Egypt. I know a lot about it and especially the mythology. It’d be really cool as an aspiring author to have an ancient Egyptian Thoth statue in my house. Well, it turned out that the Egyptians also killed and mummified ibises and buried them with scribes. And a week after I went to the museum, there was an auction for an ibis mummy. And I have it now in my house, still in its bandages, overlooking my desk. And we all know it’s going to come to life and peck out my eyes and write with my blood. But that is one of the recent cool additions.
Another thing I have, which is like, in terms of holy crap I’ve made it. I have an original Patrick Nagel painting, and if people don’t know the name, he’s like the ’80s artist. He did the Duran Duran cover. Whenever you see him in nail salons. I have a male, which were very rare for him to do. So that’s two of my kind of favorite pieces.
Lex Fridman
You have what?
You have what?
Michael Malice
He only drew women predominantly. I have one where we drew a male. It was a guy in a jean ad or something. And now I’m looking forward to, so Jake made me a three-foot tall sculpture called Future Murmur, which I am ecstatic-
He only drew women predominantly. I have one where we drew a male. It was a guy in a jean ad or something. And now I’m looking forward to, so Jake made me a three-foot tall sculpture called Future Murmur, which I am ecstatic-
Michael Malice
… sculpture called Future Murmur, which I am ecstatic to get.
… sculpture called Future Murmur, which I am ecstatic to get.
Lex Fridman
Just remind yourself how many fascinating, beautiful people that are out there.
Just remind yourself how many fascinating, beautiful people that are out there.
Michael Malice
And just the victory and holiness and technology and speed, and how many people have fought so that I could do what I do.
And just the victory and holiness and technology and speed, and how many people have fought so that I could do what I do.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. That’s another thing I’m grateful for. Just like the 100 billion or so people that came before us, and also the trillions of lifeforms that came before that.
Yeah. That’s another thing I’m grateful for. Just like the 100 billion or so people that came before us, and also the trillions of lifeforms that came before that.
Michael Malice
Oh God, I’ve gone down this trilobite rabbit hole, buying fossils because as a kid I thought trilobites were the coolest thing, and now I’ve got like 15. And what’s interesting is when you buy trilobite fossils on eBay, they’re listed as used, because it’s got to be new or used according to the programming. So it’s used.
Oh God, I’ve gone down this trilobite rabbit hole, buying fossils because as a kid I thought trilobites were the coolest thing, and now I’ve got like 15. And what’s interesting is when you buy trilobite fossils on eBay, they’re listed as used, because it’s got to be new or used according to the programming. So it’s used.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But just thinking about all that history, just all the lifeforms that came before. It seems like a really special thing we have going on earth here.
Yeah. But just thinking about all that history, just all the lifeforms that came before. It seems like a really special thing we have going on earth here.
Michael Malice
Oh yeah. I think that’s very fair to say, but also think this kind of is like live life to the fullest. Camus talked about living to the point of tears, especially on behalf of people who didn’t have that privilege. So I dedicated the white pill to my parents who got me out of the Soviet Union and all the kids who never could. And it’s like when I die, I want everyone else to not only, they’re obviously going to be happy, but yeah… I’m not here. Live for me, I can’t have that privilege anymore.
Oh yeah. I think that’s very fair to say, but also think this kind of is like live life to the fullest. Camus talked about living to the point of tears, especially on behalf of people who didn’t have that privilege. So I dedicated the white pill to my parents who got me out of the Soviet Union and all the kids who never could. And it’s like when I die, I want everyone else to not only, they’re obviously going to be happy, but yeah… I’m not here. Live for me, I can’t have that privilege anymore.
Books
Lex Fridman
What do you think about Camus as a writer?
What do you think about Camus as a writer?
Michael Malice
I don’t like his novels at all.
I don’t like his novels at all.
Lex Fridman
Oh, you don’t?
Oh, you don’t?
Michael Malice
At all.
At all.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You’ve talked about The Plague to me, a little bit.
Yeah. You’ve talked about The Plague to me, a little bit.
Michael Malice
Yeah. I think the book is pointless.
Yeah. I think the book is pointless.
Lex Fridman
It’s fascinating.
It’s fascinating.
Michael Malice
Because all you need to do is read the synopsis and then you get it. I don’t think his book-
Because all you need to do is read the synopsis and then you get it. I don’t think his book-
Lex Fridman
Isn’t that true for most books?
Isn’t that true for most books?
Michael Malice
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
I mean, you could take, I don’t know… I just don’t agree at all. I mean, it’s Catcher in the Rye. There’s a lot of books that are seem trivial.
I mean, you could take, I don’t know… I just don’t agree at all. I mean, it’s Catcher in the Rye. There’s a lot of books that are seem trivial.
Michael Malice
I don’t think it seems trivial, but I think-
I don’t think it seems trivial, but I think-
Lex Fridman
Animal Farm.
Animal Farm.
Michael Malice
Animal Farm is a methodical step-by-step examination of a transformation from one thing to another. The Plague is not that.
Animal Farm is a methodical step-by-step examination of a transformation from one thing to another. The Plague is not that.
Lex Fridman
It’s a methodical examination of what a society is like under the plague, which could symbolize a lot of things, including the plague directly or Nazi Germany or ideological movements, or… It’s similar to Animal Farm. Maybe not as effective in terms of using this kind of symbology-
It’s a methodical examination of what a society is like under the plague, which could symbolize a lot of things, including the plague directly or Nazi Germany or ideological movements, or… It’s similar to Animal Farm. Maybe not as effective in terms of using this kind of symbology-
Michael Malice
I think Animal Farm has a narrative and… I’m going to spoil the whole Plague. The book, The Plague. There’s a town, I believe in Oman, a plague descends, people struggle to deal with it, and the plague vanishes as quickly as it came. The end.
I think Animal Farm has a narrative and… I’m going to spoil the whole Plague. The book, The Plague. There’s a town, I believe in Oman, a plague descends, people struggle to deal with it, and the plague vanishes as quickly as it came. The end.
Lex Fridman
But there’s the victims, the people that take advantage of it. There’s the doctor that, amidst the absurdity and the evil of the plague, is fighting to do good.
But there’s the victims, the people that take advantage of it. There’s the doctor that, amidst the absurdity and the evil of the plague, is fighting to do good.
Michael Malice
Nothing for me. Does nothing for me.
Nothing for me. Does nothing for me.
Lex Fridman
Okay, well I can spoil the Animal Farm. There’s animals at a farm and the humans are abusing them, and then the animals overthrow the humans, but then the pigs become just like the humans. The lesson, kids, is that power corrupts, no matter whether you walk on four or on two.
Okay, well I can spoil the Animal Farm. There’s animals at a farm and the humans are abusing them, and then the animals overthrow the humans, but then the pigs become just like the humans. The lesson, kids, is that power corrupts, no matter whether you walk on four or on two.
Michael Malice
I thought the lesson was that pigs are the most human-like animals on the farm.
I thought the lesson was that pigs are the most human-like animals on the farm.
Lex Fridman
I thought the lesson was that there’s no sugar candy mountain.
I thought the lesson was that there’s no sugar candy mountain.
Michael Malice
That’s right. Yeah.
That’s right. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
You’ve interviewed a lot of people. What have you learned about getting to the soul of a person, the soul of an idea from interviewing? Just how to do a good interview?
You’ve interviewed a lot of people. What have you learned about getting to the soul of a person, the soul of an idea from interviewing? Just how to do a good interview?
Michael Malice
First off, I’m not interviewing just random people. I’m interviewing people who are accomplished. It’s not a random group. That’s self-selecting for something different. But I think that people love to, and this is very understandable, love to feel seen. So if you’re someone who’s done something, even if you’re like the best Guinea pig breeder in America, to have someone interested in your work and listen to what you’re saying… because I remember every book I’ve written, I have friends, and I wouldn’t stop talking about the person I’m writing with or the North Korea. And a certain point, I’m sure they’re like, “All right, I don’t care about this anymore.”But it takes over your brain. You know what I mean?
First off, I’m not interviewing just random people. I’m interviewing people who are accomplished. It’s not a random group. That’s self-selecting for something different. But I think that people love to, and this is very understandable, love to feel seen. So if you’re someone who’s done something, even if you’re like the best Guinea pig breeder in America, to have someone interested in your work and listen to what you’re saying… because I remember every book I’ve written, I have friends, and I wouldn’t stop talking about the person I’m writing with or the North Korea. And a certain point, I’m sure they’re like, “All right, I don’t care about this anymore.”But it takes over your brain. You know what I mean?
So if you someone who has an interest or a hobby, I’m sure to some extent, maybe your friends or family are sick of talking about it or you don’t want to talk about it with them. That’s the private life where you could just be yourself. So I try to, and this comes from my co-authoring background. When I’m talking to people to ask the questions that they haven’t heard before. There’s a possibility that this actor I’m a huge fan of is going to be on my show. I don’t want to spoil everything. And he’s got a very specific role that he’s known for. And I’m like, “Okay, I know it’s going to be annoying for you talking about this one role, but my goal is to ask questions that you aren’t sick of asking, haven’t been asked.”
Lex Fridman
Porn star or…
Porn star or…
Michael Malice
No, not a porn star.
No, not a porn star.
Lex Fridman
That joke failed. Also edit out. What do you know about breeding Guinea pigs? You mentioned it. I’d love to hear-
That joke failed. Also edit out. What do you know about breeding Guinea pigs? You mentioned it. I’d love to hear-
Michael Malice
I don’t know anything.
I don’t know anything.
Lex Fridman
I would love to hear more about it.
I would love to hear more about it.
Michael Malice
I always use this as an example. You meet someone at a party who breeds Guinea pigs, right? There’s two approaches. Either you’re weird, okay. Or, “Sit down and tell me everything.” And I’m very much, and all the people I like are the second group. When you meet someone who’s doing something unusual and are passionate about it and are good at it, that to me is the mother load.
I always use this as an example. You meet someone at a party who breeds Guinea pigs, right? There’s two approaches. Either you’re weird, okay. Or, “Sit down and tell me everything.” And I’m very much, and all the people I like are the second group. When you meet someone who’s doing something unusual and are passionate about it and are good at it, that to me is the mother load.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. That to me also is the thing I enjoy the most, is people-
Yeah. That to me also is the thing I enjoy the most, is people-
Michael Malice
And then it’s like-
And then it’s like-
Lex Fridman
… that are passionate about a thing.
… that are passionate about a thing.
Michael Malice
… who do you guys hate? Do you guys hate the hamster people? Do you hate the rabid people? There’s got to be someone that you guys look down on, because the marine aquarium people look down on the freshwater aquarium people.
… who do you guys hate? Do you guys hate the hamster people? Do you hate the rabid people? There’s got to be someone that you guys look down on, because the marine aquarium people look down on the freshwater aquarium people.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. It’s a hierarchy.
Yeah. It’s a hierarchy.
Michael Malice
Yes. There’s always going to be a hierarchy. This is where the left anarchists and I disagree, because they think you can have egalitarianism. There’s going to be a hierarchy.
Yes. There’s always going to be a hierarchy. This is where the left anarchists and I disagree, because they think you can have egalitarianism. There’s going to be a hierarchy.
Lex Fridman
Hierarchies emerge.
Hierarchies emerge.
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
There’s no anarchy in the Guinea pig world.
There’s no anarchy in the Guinea pig world.
Michael Malice
No. It’s just a different kind of anarchy.
No. It’s just a different kind of anarchy.
Lex Fridman
Somebody’s always breeding somebody else.
Somebody’s always breeding somebody else.
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
And looking down on the others.
And looking down on the others.
Michael Malice
Yeah, someone’s the other. Whether it’s the hamster people, the rat people.
Yeah, someone’s the other. Whether it’s the hamster people, the rat people.
Lex Fridman
And everybody’s breeding. By the way, are you an anarcho-capitalist? What flavor of anarchist are you?
And everybody’s breeding. By the way, are you an anarcho-capitalist? What flavor of anarchist are you?
Michael Malice
I’m an anarchist without adjectives. I like them all. The black flag comes in many colors.
I’m an anarchist without adjectives. I like them all. The black flag comes in many colors.
Lex Fridman
All right. All right. You’re quoting your… No, I understand. It’s a beautiful line in the book.
All right. All right. You’re quoting your… No, I understand. It’s a beautiful line in the book.
Michael Malice
Thank you. I think the anarcho-capitalists don’t give the left anarchist enough credit, especially for their courage. And I do whatever I can in my power to talk about people like Emma Goldman, whenever possible.
Thank you. I think the anarcho-capitalists don’t give the left anarchist enough credit, especially for their courage. And I do whatever I can in my power to talk about people like Emma Goldman, whenever possible.
Lex Fridman
Do you still think that “are some people better than others” is a good litmus test?
Do you still think that “are some people better than others” is a good litmus test?
Michael Malice
Yes. It’s worked 100% of the time.
Yes. It’s worked 100% of the time.
Lex Fridman
And for you, the answer is yes?
And for you, the answer is yes?
Michael Malice
I never answer.
I never answer.
Lex Fridman
There’s two of them.
There’s two of them.
Michael Malice
What are you all Hitchcock up in here?
What are you all Hitchcock up in here?
Lex Fridman
Oh, hey, careful. I always got your back. What little habits in your life make you happy now that you’re in Austin?
Oh, hey, careful. I always got your back. What little habits in your life make you happy now that you’re in Austin?
Michael Malice
Oh my god. I was prepping for this interview, and I imagined this coming up, and I knew that as I explained this, you know how sometimes when someone tells a story, at first it’s amusing, then it’s amusing and concerned, and then you’re like, “Holy shit, where’s the exit?”
Oh my god. I was prepping for this interview, and I imagined this coming up, and I knew that as I explained this, you know how sometimes when someone tells a story, at first it’s amusing, then it’s amusing and concerned, and then you’re like, “Holy shit, where’s the exit?”
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I’m getting nervous already.
Yeah. I’m getting nervous already.
Michael Malice
You should. So I’m going to tell you something I’ve told only a couple of people. This is my absolutely off the charts, autistic approach to shaving. So I have this insane system. You asked about habits that give me joy. I used to hate shaving. I used to hate it. There’s something called wet shaving. So wet shaving is you get the brush, you get the soap that’s in a canister, you stirred up, you paint your face, and then you shave. The thing is, there are dozens of these shaving soap companies, okay? So I tried a couple of hundred of these soaps, because you’re testing for scent, you’re testing for, with the lather, thickness, and also how smooth of a shave it gives you. I have it down… I’m not making this up. I’m not this creative. I have it down to a cycle of 67 soaps. Okay?
You should. So I’m going to tell you something I’ve told only a couple of people. This is my absolutely off the charts, autistic approach to shaving. So I have this insane system. You asked about habits that give me joy. I used to hate shaving. I used to hate it. There’s something called wet shaving. So wet shaving is you get the brush, you get the soap that’s in a canister, you stirred up, you paint your face, and then you shave. The thing is, there are dozens of these shaving soap companies, okay? So I tried a couple of hundred of these soaps, because you’re testing for scent, you’re testing for, with the lather, thickness, and also how smooth of a shave it gives you. I have it down… I’m not making this up. I’m not this creative. I have it down to a cycle of 67 soaps. Okay?
Lex Fridman
A cycle.
A cycle.
Michael Malice
A cycle. So 67. When I use up one soap, that is a slot that I will have to try new ones, and I will try new ones in that slot until I get one that I like, and then that slot is filled. So right now, I have 67 that I use, and I have 86 candidates.
A cycle. So 67. When I use up one soap, that is a slot that I will have to try new ones, and I will try new ones in that slot until I get one that I like, and then that slot is filled. So right now, I have 67 that I use, and I have 86 candidates.
Lex Fridman
Like in the queue?
Like in the queue?
Michael Malice
In the queue.
In the queue.
Lex Fridman
Do you label them? Do you remember which one is which?
Do you label them? Do you remember which one is which?
Michael Malice
Well, they all have beautiful labels. I mean, these are artisans who are creating these a amazing things. I would encourage everyone to try this hobby, who’s a guy. It’s so much fun. I will give a shout-out to the companies that are the best. So the best company, in my opinion, is a company called… they just changed the name because… You know what they’re originally called? I’m not joking. Grooming Department. And now it’s like-
Well, they all have beautiful labels. I mean, these are artisans who are creating these a amazing things. I would encourage everyone to try this hobby, who’s a guy. It’s so much fun. I will give a shout-out to the companies that are the best. So the best company, in my opinion, is a company called… they just changed the name because… You know what they’re originally called? I’m not joking. Grooming Department. And now it’s like-
Lex Fridman
Not a bad name.
Not a bad name.
Michael Malice
Yeah, but it has certain connotations in contemporary discourse.
Yeah, but it has certain connotations in contemporary discourse.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I understand. Contemporary discourse, yeah.
Yeah, I understand. Contemporary discourse, yeah.
Michael Malice
So now he changed his name to Aion Skincare, A-I-O-N. That’s the sense of the most sophisticated, the most diverse, and the soap is just really high quality. Another amazing company is Barrister and Man. And if I’m going to tell you to try one, it’s called Cheshire. He comes out with new ones every month or so. A lot of it’s miss. A lot of it’s hit. Just great, great quality stuff. Another great company is Chiseled Face. They make something called Midnight Stag, which basically smells like a garage. It’s one of my favorite soaps of all time.
So now he changed his name to Aion Skincare, A-I-O-N. That’s the sense of the most sophisticated, the most diverse, and the soap is just really high quality. Another amazing company is Barrister and Man. And if I’m going to tell you to try one, it’s called Cheshire. He comes out with new ones every month or so. A lot of it’s miss. A lot of it’s hit. Just great, great quality stuff. Another great company is Chiseled Face. They make something called Midnight Stag, which basically smells like a garage. It’s one of my favorite soaps of all time.
Lex Fridman
What makes for a good smell for Michael Malice?
What makes for a good smell for Michael Malice?
Michael Malice
I have 67 answers. So some of them smell-
I have 67 answers. So some of them smell-
Lex Fridman
So you can’t convert it into words?
So you can’t convert it into words?
Michael Malice
Some are citrusy, some are industrial, some-
Some are citrusy, some are industrial, some-
Lex Fridman
So garage is more industrial.
So garage is more industrial.
Michael Malice
It smells like a garage. Yeah. Midnight Stag. It smells like a garage. Some are fun. There smells that smell like other things. For example, there’s a scent in my queue called Finding Scotty. It smells like Swedish Fish. Another great company is Phoenix Shaving, and they have one called Aloha Smackdown. It smells like Hawaiian Punch. They had one called Yule Ham that they made for me special. Smells like a ham. They had a ramen one, Rock and Ramen. Smells a cup of noodles. And every year they do an advent calendar where for 12 days you have a little sample of a soap and a sample of the aftershave.
It smells like a garage. Yeah. Midnight Stag. It smells like a garage. Some are fun. There smells that smell like other things. For example, there’s a scent in my queue called Finding Scotty. It smells like Swedish Fish. Another great company is Phoenix Shaving, and they have one called Aloha Smackdown. It smells like Hawaiian Punch. They had one called Yule Ham that they made for me special. Smells like a ham. They had a ramen one, Rock and Ramen. Smells a cup of noodles. And every year they do an advent calendar where for 12 days you have a little sample of a soap and a sample of the aftershave.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Michael Malice
I’m forgetting someone and I’m feeling angry that I’m doing it. But those are some of the… Oh, and Catie’s Bubbles is great. They’re vegan, out of New Jersey. They’ve got one called a Knee High to a Grape. It smells like grape soda. I think those are the biggest names off the top of my head.
I’m forgetting someone and I’m feeling angry that I’m doing it. But those are some of the… Oh, and Catie’s Bubbles is great. They’re vegan, out of New Jersey. They’ve got one called a Knee High to a Grape. It smells like grape soda. I think those are the biggest names off the top of my head.
Lex Fridman
Will that list converge down to a small set eventually, or no? 67 down to-
Will that list converge down to a small set eventually, or no? 67 down to-
Michael Malice
Well, no, it’s 67.
Well, no, it’s 67.
Lex Fridman
Oh, so it always keeps [inaudible 01:27:35]-
Oh, so it always keeps [inaudible 01:27:35]-
Michael Malice
So if there’s a slot, then, you know what I mean? I’ll fill that. You see what I’m saying?
So if there’s a slot, then, you know what I mean? I’ll fill that. You see what I’m saying?
Lex Fridman
Oh, so you will forever have the variety of 67?
Oh, so you will forever have the variety of 67?
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
You know how sad my brain is? When you were telling me this, I was like, “I wonder how many soaps are left in Michael Malice’s life.” You can count your life by days, by month, by years, or by soaps.
You know how sad my brain is? When you were telling me this, I was like, “I wonder how many soaps are left in Michael Malice’s life.” You can count your life by days, by month, by years, or by soaps.
Michael Malice
That is depressing. That is very dark.
That is depressing. That is very dark.
Lex Fridman
Because each experience of shaving is a little beautiful experience.
Because each experience of shaving is a little beautiful experience.
Michael Malice
Yes, it is. It’s so much fun.
Yes, it is. It’s so much fun.
Lex Fridman
How many do you have left in your life, right?
How many do you have left in your life, right?
Michael Malice
That’s true.
That’s true.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
I got to tell you, there’s something else. There’s a term my friend Jackie taught me called Touching Pan. It’s a makeup term. So basically when you use it and you could see the bottom, that’s like a big moment.
I got to tell you, there’s something else. There’s a term my friend Jackie taught me called Touching Pan. It’s a makeup term. So basically when you use it and you could see the bottom, that’s like a big moment.
Lex Fridman
Oh, it’s a great thing.
Oh, it’s a great thing.
Michael Malice
Yeah. Well, it’s kind of fun. I’m telling you, people can scoff. It is such a fun… and there’s a lot of us online who are into this whole space. It’s really, really fun.
Yeah. Well, it’s kind of fun. I’m telling you, people can scoff. It is such a fun… and there’s a lot of us online who are into this whole space. It’s really, really fun.
Lex Fridman
When did you first discover this?
When did you first discover this?
Michael Malice
Can I curse?
Can I curse?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Michael Malice
Fuck you, Cole Stryker. Because I was staying at my friend Cole’s house in LA. Fuck you Cole.
Fuck you, Cole Stryker. Because I was staying at my friend Cole’s house in LA. Fuck you Cole.
Lex Fridman
Fuck you, Cole.
Fuck you, Cole.
Michael Malice
Cole is one of the biggest hipsters I know. He’s got the shirts with the pearl snaps and everything. And I’m staying at his house because I was doing Rogan, and he goes, “Oh, have you heard of this wet shaving thing?” And he goes, “Look, this one’s Proraso. That’s the Italian grandpa soap, which is also a great one. And I went down this rabbit hole, and now I’m like… I don’t even know how much money I spent on this. And it’s all because of him.
Cole is one of the biggest hipsters I know. He’s got the shirts with the pearl snaps and everything. And I’m staying at his house because I was doing Rogan, and he goes, “Oh, have you heard of this wet shaving thing?” And he goes, “Look, this one’s Proraso. That’s the Italian grandpa soap, which is also a great one. And I went down this rabbit hole, and now I’m like… I don’t even know how much money I spent on this. And it’s all because of him.
Lex Fridman
Oh. But it’s like a happy fuck you. Like, fuck you, Cole.
Oh. But it’s like a happy fuck you. Like, fuck you, Cole.
Michael Malice
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I love you, Cole. Fuck you.
I love you, Cole. Fuck you.
Michael Malice
Yeah, it’s just-
Yeah, it’s just-
Lex Fridman
Thank you.
Thank you.
Michael Malice
Yes, yes.
Yes, yes.
Lex Fridman
That’s a good idea for a tattoo. Fuck you, Cole. Do you have advice on how to be happy?
That’s a good idea for a tattoo. Fuck you, Cole. Do you have advice on how to be happy?
How to be happy
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of loneliness and sadness in the world.
There’s a lot of loneliness and sadness in the world.
Michael Malice
I can give a very easy piece of advice that worked a lot for me. Instead of telling yourself that you have these ridiculous standards, tell yourself, “I can be better. I don’t have to be a great writer. I could be a better writer. I don’t have to be a great podcaster. That will never happen. I could be a better podcaster. I could be a better person. I could be better at the gym. I could be better with my time.” And when you regard things in… and especially if you have metrics that you can go by. “I’ll run this many miles a day.” Things you have control over. Especially as males, when you have this chart and the data is telling you you’re improving, right away, it’s like you have this sense of accomplishment. So I think that is a really great way to…
I can give a very easy piece of advice that worked a lot for me. Instead of telling yourself that you have these ridiculous standards, tell yourself, “I can be better. I don’t have to be a great writer. I could be a better writer. I don’t have to be a great podcaster. That will never happen. I could be a better podcaster. I could be a better person. I could be better at the gym. I could be better with my time.” And when you regard things in… and especially if you have metrics that you can go by. “I’ll run this many miles a day.” Things you have control over. Especially as males, when you have this chart and the data is telling you you’re improving, right away, it’s like you have this sense of accomplishment. So I think that is a really great way to…
And if something is not working in your life… Let’s suppose you don’t have friends. Right? There’s the internet. How do people make friends? Try things out? What’s the worst that’s going to happen? Things will blow up in your face. Well, you’ll learn something at least. Don’t be afraid of making mistakes. When I was a kid, I was so scared of having things under control, so like I would never have to get hit in the face metaphorically. And then I realized, and you realized this as well, everyone who’s important gets hit in the face. Look at the president, whoever the president is. It becomes a matter of being strong enough that you could take getting hit in the face. So that is a big important switch in your thinking.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. There’s a Bukowski quote I wrote down. “Sometimes you climb out of bed in the morning and you think, I’m not going to make it. But you laugh inside, remembering all the times you felt that way.”
Yeah. There’s a Bukowski quote I wrote down. “Sometimes you climb out of bed in the morning and you think, I’m not going to make it. But you laugh inside, remembering all the times you felt that way.”
Michael Malice
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
Lex Fridman
There’s a part of me that’s like that. There’s some days where I feel like this is the worst day of my life. And then shortly after, I chuckle at that.
There’s a part of me that’s like that. There’s some days where I feel like this is the worst day of my life. And then shortly after, I chuckle at that.
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Just knowing the ups and downs of the brain and the mind and life and all that. You ever been depressed?
Just knowing the ups and downs of the brain and the mind and life and all that. You ever been depressed?
Depression
Michael Malice
Yeah, of course. I’m more anxious than depressed. I don’t really get depressed, but I’ve been depressed.
Yeah, of course. I’m more anxious than depressed. I don’t really get depressed, but I’ve been depressed.
Lex Fridman
Like low points.
Like low points.
Michael Malice
Yeah. But I think I distinguish depression between low points, right? If things are going bad and you feel bad, that makes sense. But when I think of depression, I think of someone who feels bad when things aren’t bad. To me, it’s almost by definition irrational.
Yeah. But I think I distinguish depression between low points, right? If things are going bad and you feel bad, that makes sense. But when I think of depression, I think of someone who feels bad when things aren’t bad. To me, it’s almost by definition irrational.
Lex Fridman
Well, yeah. And there’s different kinds of… There’s a exhausted kind of depression where it’s not so much sad as you don’t want to do anything. You don’t want to live. You don’t want to-
Well, yeah. And there’s different kinds of… There’s a exhausted kind of depression where it’s not so much sad as you don’t want to do anything. You don’t want to live. You don’t want to-
Michael Malice
Yeah. What’s the point? It’s a wrap, yeah.
Yeah. What’s the point? It’s a wrap, yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s the point? What’s the point? And an extreme self-critical negativity, which I’m also scared of because my brain is generally very self-critical.
What’s the point? What’s the point? And an extreme self-critical negativity, which I’m also scared of because my brain is generally very self-critical.
Michael Malice
Because you’re not taking enough magnesium.
Because you’re not taking enough magnesium.
Lex Fridman
Do you take a rectally or in the mouth?
Do you take a rectally or in the mouth?
Michael Malice
You take a rectally.
You take a rectally.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Michael Malice
But as for the magnesium, you should take it as a pill.
But as for the magnesium, you should take it as a pill.
Fear
Lex Fridman
Okay. Well, the way your mom explained it then is way different. What are you most afraid of?
Okay. Well, the way your mom explained it then is way different. What are you most afraid of?
Michael Malice
Holy crap. I am trying to think of anything I’m afraid of.
Holy crap. I am trying to think of anything I’m afraid of.
Lex Fridman
In 1984-
In 1984-
Michael Malice
I thought even just-
I thought even just-
Lex Fridman
Look, if I wanted to torture you, hypothetically…
Look, if I wanted to torture you, hypothetically…
Michael Malice
Well, the mission accomplished. I mean, I’m scared of increasing authoritarianism, but that’s not personal. And that’s something that I don’t think is as much of an imminent concern as let’s say in Canada.
Well, the mission accomplished. I mean, I’m scared of increasing authoritarianism, but that’s not personal. And that’s something that I don’t think is as much of an imminent concern as let’s say in Canada.
Lex Fridman
Are you scared of death?
Are you scared of death?
Michael Malice
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
You think Camus was scared of death?
You think Camus was scared of death?
Michael Malice
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
He just accepted it as-
He just accepted it as-
Michael Malice
Look, I honestly feel like if I died tomorrow, I did pretty good with what I had. I think I did things that matter to me. I think I moved the needle on things that matter to me. I think I’ve been a good friend to the people I care about. I’ve saved a couple of lives. So I think it’s a very low bar for someone to be able to grow their grave and say, “I left the world a better place than I found it.” I don’t think it’s that hard.
Look, I honestly feel like if I died tomorrow, I did pretty good with what I had. I think I did things that matter to me. I think I moved the needle on things that matter to me. I think I’ve been a good friend to the people I care about. I’ve saved a couple of lives. So I think it’s a very low bar for someone to be able to grow their grave and say, “I left the world a better place than I found it.” I don’t think it’s that hard.
Betrayal
Lex Fridman
You ever been betrayed?
You ever been betrayed?
Michael Malice
Oh god, yes. Of course. Haven’t you?
Oh god, yes. Of course. Haven’t you?
Lex Fridman
Not as often as I would’ve predicted.
Not as often as I would’ve predicted.
Michael Malice
Yeah. The Russian upbringing expects everyone to be like… it’s a time bomb before they betray you. I have been betrayed. Of course. Yeah.
Yeah. The Russian upbringing expects everyone to be like… it’s a time bomb before they betray you. I have been betrayed. Of course. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You value loyalty?
Yeah. You value loyalty?
Michael Malice
I do. And I also made it a point to not let that betrayal color my future interactions and regard that as the universal or the norm. I think that’s very important.
I do. And I also made it a point to not let that betrayal color my future interactions and regard that as the universal or the norm. I think that’s very important.
Lex Fridman
Me too.
Me too.
Michael Malice
And also, I feel bad. I’ve gotten, Lex, enough that I feel bad for the person who betrayed me, because it’s just like they didn’t need to do this. And at some point, if you betray someone, you know, and you know you’re not a good person. I believe that. Like even if you tell yourself, “This is something I had to do,” you still know you had to do a bad thing to someone who didn’t deserve it. And that’s a really hard pill to swallow.
And also, I feel bad. I’ve gotten, Lex, enough that I feel bad for the person who betrayed me, because it’s just like they didn’t need to do this. And at some point, if you betray someone, you know, and you know you’re not a good person. I believe that. Like even if you tell yourself, “This is something I had to do,” you still know you had to do a bad thing to someone who didn’t deserve it. And that’s a really hard pill to swallow.
Lex Fridman
In my situation, I still think good thoughts and empathize with the people that have done me wrong.
In my situation, I still think good thoughts and empathize with the people that have done me wrong.
Michael Malice
I don’t empathize with them, but I sympathize with them.
I don’t empathize with them, but I sympathize with them.
Lex Fridman
My English is not good enough to know the difference.
My English is not good enough to know the difference.
Michael Malice
Empathizing means you’re putting yourself in their shoes. Sympathizing means you feel bad for them and wish them well.
Empathizing means you’re putting yourself in their shoes. Sympathizing means you feel bad for them and wish them well.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I wish them well.
Yeah, I wish them well.
Michael Malice
Yeah, but I don’t put myself… it’s very hard for me to empathize with someone who betrays someone that they care about. It’s not that just I think I’m such a great person. It’s that I feel guilt very strongly. So if I did that to someone who trusted me, it would up my head for a long time.
Yeah, but I don’t put myself… it’s very hard for me to empathize with someone who betrays someone that they care about. It’s not that just I think I’m such a great person. It’s that I feel guilt very strongly. So if I did that to someone who trusted me, it would up my head for a long time.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but maybe they were in pain. Maybe they were desperate. Maybe their back’s to the wall.
Yeah, but maybe they were in pain. Maybe they were desperate. Maybe their back’s to the wall.
Michael Malice
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
They felt that way.
They felt that way.
Michael Malice
Sure. Well, that’s a sympathy thing. Not really an empathy thing.
Sure. Well, that’s a sympathy thing. Not really an empathy thing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah. Loyalty is a fascinating thing.
Yeah. Yeah. Loyalty is a fascinating thing.
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
I value trust a lot.
I value trust a lot.
Michael Malice
I know you do. Especially because you’re in such a public… Both of us, we’re in very public positions. You have to be very careful who you surround yourself with.
I know you do. Especially because you’re in such a public… Both of us, we’re in very public positions. You have to be very careful who you surround yourself with.
Lex Fridman
It sucks.
It sucks.
Michael Malice
Does it? Well, it’s-
Does it? Well, it’s-
Lex Fridman
Well, it sucks because it’s hard to… I usually just trust everybody.
Well, it sucks because it’s hard to… I usually just trust everybody.
Michael Malice
Okay, that’s crazy.
Okay, that’s crazy.
Lex Fridman
But what’s the alternative?
But what’s the alternative?
Michael Malice
To have a filter?
To have a filter?
Lex Fridman
Well, I have a filter in terms of who I interact with, but within the… I see the good in people, but then in the very rare instances that might turn. Yeah. It just sucks. It breaks my heart.
Well, I have a filter in terms of who I interact with, but within the… I see the good in people, but then in the very rare instances that might turn. Yeah. It just sucks. It breaks my heart.
Michael Malice
Yeah, I hear you. I completely agree.
Yeah, I hear you. I completely agree.
Lex Fridman
Has your heart ever been broken?
Has your heart ever been broken?
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Love?
Love?
Michael Malice
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
I’m just so relaxed right now, and happy.
I’m just so relaxed right now, and happy.
Michael Malice
Good.
Good.
Lex Fridman
Relaxed sand happy.
Relaxed sand happy.
Michael Malice
Good.
Good.
Lex Fridman
This is making me really happy.
This is making me really happy.
Michael Malice
Again, it’s beautiful on like eight different levels.
Again, it’s beautiful on like eight different levels.
Lex Fridman
I think that’s the deepest thing I’m thankful for, is just how beautiful people are and how beautiful the world is.
I think that’s the deepest thing I’m thankful for, is just how beautiful people are and how beautiful the world is.
Michael Malice
People are going to laugh, and I welcome it. That’s fine. I really sometimes feel like the guy in American Beauty looking at the plastic bag dancing in the wind, and he’s brought to tears because of how much beautiful life is. And a lot of people feel the need to sneer at that scene and Ricky Pitts, whatever, and I think he’s got it exactly right.
People are going to laugh, and I welcome it. That’s fine. I really sometimes feel like the guy in American Beauty looking at the plastic bag dancing in the wind, and he’s brought to tears because of how much beautiful life is. And a lot of people feel the need to sneer at that scene and Ricky Pitts, whatever, and I think he’s got it exactly right.
Lex Fridman
I think he does too. Well, in the end, you and I will be both laughing,
I think he does too. Well, in the end, you and I will be both laughing,
Michael Malice
Right. And also seeing beauty where other people see garbage. And I’d rather be the person who sees beauty than the person who sees garbage.
Right. And also seeing beauty where other people see garbage. And I’d rather be the person who sees beauty than the person who sees garbage.
Lex Fridman
Yep. Well, when I look at you, I see beauty when most people see garbage. And it’s really unfair, Mr. Parrot, that you keep saying that. But all jokes aside, man, I’m really grateful for your friendship. I’m really grateful for who you are as a person. Thank you so much for talking today. Thank you so much for talking to me throughout all these years. Thank you for being who you are.
Yep. Well, when I look at you, I see beauty when most people see garbage. And it’s really unfair, Mr. Parrot, that you keep saying that. But all jokes aside, man, I’m really grateful for your friendship. I’m really grateful for who you are as a person. Thank you so much for talking today. Thank you so much for talking to me throughout all these years. Thank you for being who you are.
Michael Malice
You are welcome.
You are welcome.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Michael Malice. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Andre Gide. Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Michael Malice. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Andre Gide. Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for John Mearsheimer: Israel-Palestine, Russia-Ukraine, China, NATO, and WW3 | Lex Fridman Podcast #401
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #401 with John Mearsheimer.
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:
Please allow me to say, once again, my hope for this little journey I’m on. I will speak to everyone on all sides with compassion, with empathy, and with backbone. I’ll speak with Vladimir Putin and with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, with Russians and with Ukrainians, with Israelis and with Palestinians, with everyone. My goal is to do whatever small part I can to decrease the amount of suffering in the world by trying to reveal our common humanity. I believe that in the end, truth and love wins. I will get attacked for being naive, for being a shill, for being weak. I’m none of those things, but I do make mistakes and I will get better. I love you all.
This is a Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s John Mearsheimer.
Can you explain your view on power in international politics as outlined in your book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics and in your writing since then?
Second point I would make is that in the realist story or in my story, power is largely a function of material factors. The two key building blocks of power are population size and wealth. You want to have a lot of people and you want to be really wealthy. Of course, this is why the United States is so powerful. It has lots of people and it has lots of wealth. China was not considered a great power until recently because it didn’t have a lot of wealth. It certainly had population size, but it didn’t have wealth. And without both a large population and much wealth, you’re usually not considered a great power. So I think power matters, but when we talk about power, it’s important to understand that it’s population size and wealth that are underpinning it.
And of course the political philosopher who laid this all out was Thomas Hobbes. And Hobbes talked about life in the state of nature, and in the state of nature you have individuals and those individuals compete with each other for power. And the reason that they do is because in the state of nature, by definition, you have no higher authority. And Hobbes’s view is that the way to get out of this terrible situation where individuals are competing with each other and even killing each other is to create a state. It’s what he calls the Leviathan, and that of course is the title of his famous book.
So the idea is to escape anarchy, you create a state, and that means you go from anarchy to hierarchy. The problem in international politics is that there is no world state, there is no hierarchy. And if you have no hierarchy and you’re in an anarchic system, you have no choice but to try to maximize your relative power to make sure you are, as we used to say when I was a kid on New York City playgrounds, the biggest and baddest dude on the block. Not because you necessarily want to beat up on other kids or on other states, but because again, that’s the best way to survive.
And as I like to point out to people, the best example of what happens when you’re weak in international politics is what the Chinese call the century of national humiliation. From the late 1840s to the late 1940s the Chinese were remarkably weak, and the great powers in the system preyed upon them. And that sends a very important message to not only the Chinese, but to other states in the system. Don’t be weak, be as powerful as you can.
States understand that, and they go to great lengths to become powerful. Just take the United States of America. When it started in 1783, it was comprised of 13 measly colonies strung out along the Atlantic seaboard. Over time, the various leaders of the United States went to great lengths to turn that country into the dominant power in the Western Hemisphere. And then once that was achieved in 1900, we’ve gone to great lengths to make sure that there’s no pier competitor in the system. We just want to make sure that we’re number one.
And my argument is that this is not peculiar to the United States. If I’m China, for example, today, I would want to dominate Asia the way the United States dominates the Western Hemisphere. They’d be fools not to. If I were imperial Germany, I’d want to dominate all of Europe the way the United States dominates the Western Hemisphere. Why? Because if you dominate all of Europe, assuming you’re Imperial Germany or Napoleonic France, then no other state in the area or in the region can threaten you because you’re simply so powerful.
And again, what I’m saying here is that the structure of the international system really matters. It’s the fact that you’re in this anarchic system where survival is your principle goal and where I can’t know your intentions, right? You’re another state. I can’t know that at some point you might not come after me. You might. And if you’re really powerful and I’m not, I’m in deep trouble.
But basically realists believe that power matters, that states compete for power, and that war is an instrument of statecraft. And liberals, on the other hand, have what I would say is a more idealistic view of the world. This is not to say that they’re naive or foolish, but they believe there are aspects of international politics that lead to a less competitive and more peaceful world than most realists say. And I’ll lay out for you very quickly, what are the three major liberal theories today that I think will give you a sense of the more optimistic perspective that is inherent in the liberal enterprise.
The first and most important of the liberal theories is democratic peace theory, and this is a theory that says democracies do not fight against other democracies. So the more the world is populated with democracies, the less likely it is that we will have wars. And this basic argument is inherent in Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History. He argues that democracy triumphed first over fascism in the 20th century, it then triumphed over communism, and that means that in the future we’re going to have more and more liberal democracies on the planet. And if you have more and more liberal democracies and those democracies don’t fight each other, then you have a more peaceful world. That was his argument. It’s a very liberal argument.
A realist like me would say that it doesn’t matter whether a state is a democracy or not, all states behave the same way because the structure of the system, getting back to our earlier discussion about international anarchy, the structure of the system leaves those states no choice, whether they’re democracies or autocracies. And again, the liberal view, this first liberal theory, is that democracies don’t fight other democracies, and therefore the more democracies you have, the more peaceful the world.
So the argument I believe that you have to make, if you’re going to support democratic peace theory, the main argument you have to make is that liberal democracies have a healthy respect for each other and they can assess each other’s intentions. If you’re a liberal democracy, and I’m a liberal democracy, we know we have value systems that argue against aggression, and argue for peaceful resolution of crises. And therefore, given these norms, we can trust each other, we can know each other’s intentions. Remember, for realists like me, uncertainty about intentions really helps drive the train. But if you’re talking about two democracies, the argument there is that they know each other’s intentions.
And then the third liberal argument has to do with institutions, sometimes referred to as liberal institutionalism. And this is the argument that if you can get states into institutions where they become rule abiding actors, they will obey the rules that dictate that war is not acceptable. So if you get them to accept the UN rules on when you can and cannot initiate a war, then you’ll have a more peaceful world. So those are the liberal theories, and as you can tell, they’re very different from realism as articulated by somebody like me.
However, I want to qualify that in the case of Adolf Hitler, because I do think he had what you would call a will to power. I’ve never used that word to describe him before, but it’s consistent with my point that I often make, that there are two leaders, or there have been two leaders in modern history who are congenital aggressors, and one was Napoleon and the other was Hitler. Now, if you want to call that a will to power, you can do that. I’m more comfortable referring to Hitler as a congenital aggressor and referring to Napoleon as a congenital aggressor, although there were important differences between the two, because Hitler was probably the most murderous leader in recorded history, and Napoleon was not in that category at all. But both of them were driven by what you would call a will to power, and that has to be married to the structural argument in Hitler’s case, and also in Napoleon’s case.
I also believe that one of the principal reasons that he was so popular and he was wildly popular inside Nazi Germany is because he was the only leader of an industrialized country who pulled his country out of the depression. And that really mattered, and it made him very effective. It’s also worth noting that he was a remarkably charismatic individual. I find that hard to believe because every time I look at him or listen to his speeches, he does not appear to be charismatic to me. But I’ve talked to a number of people who are experts on this subject who assure me that he was very charismatic. And I would note to you, if you look at public opinion polls in Germany, West Germany, in the late 1940s, this is the late 1940s after the Third Reich is destroyed in 1945, he is still remarkably popular in the polls.
And if you look at what happened in the initial stages of the conflict, that proved to be the case. The Germans won a lot of significant tactical victories early on.
And Hitler believed that that should have been the main Axis. And in fact, in 1942, the Soviets, excuse me, the Germans go back on the offensive in 1942. This is Operation Blue, and the main Axis in ’42 is deep into the Ukraine and into the caucuses, and that fails.
But one could argue that, had they done that in ’41, had they not gone to Moscow, had they gone, had they concentrated on going deep into Ukraine and into the caucuses, they could have knocked the Soviets out that way. I’m not sure that in the end I believe that. I think in the end the Soviets would’ve won no matter what, but I’m not a hundred percent sure of that.
But World War I does not fit neatly with your argument because the Russians lost and surrendered, and you had the infamous treaty of Brest-Litovsk, where the Soviet Union then, because it went from Russia to the Soviet Union in October 1917, the Soviet Union surrendered large amounts of Soviet territory because it had suffered a humiliating defeat.
My argument for why the Russians, let me take that back, why the Soviets fought like wild dogs in World War II is that they were up against a genocidal adversary. You want to understand that the Germans murdered huge numbers of Soviet POWs. The overall total was 3.7 million. And by December, December of 1941, remember the invasion is June ’41, by December of 1941, the Germans have murdered 2 million Soviet POWs. At that point in time, they had murdered many more POWs than they had murdered Jews.
And this is not to deny for one second that they were on a murderous rampage when it came to Jews, but they were also on a murderous rampage when it came to Soviet citizens and Soviet soldiers. So those Soviet soldiers quickly came to understand they were fighting for their lives. If they were taken prisoner, they would die. So they fought like wild dogs.
And of course, I just explained to you how many POWs they had killed. So they would’ve ended up murdering huge numbers of Soviet citizens as well. But people quickly figured out that this was happening, that’s my point to you. And that gave them, needless to say, very powerful incentives to fight hard against the Germans, and to make sure that they did not win.
As I like to emphasize, when the Germans went into Poland in 1939, and the Germans, you want to remember, were only intent on conquering the western half of Poland, because the Soviets, who came in later that month, were going to conquer the eastern half of Poland. So the western half of Poland is much smaller than Ukraine, and the Germans went in with 1.5 million troops. If Vladimir Putin were bent on conquering all of Ukraine, he would’ve needed at least 2 million troops. I would argue he’d need 3 million troops, because not only did he need to conquer the country, you then have to occupy it.
But the idea that 190,000 troops was sufficient for conquering all of Ukraine, it’s not a serious argument. Furthermore, he was not interested in conquering Ukraine, and that’s why, in March 2022, this is immediately after the war starts, he is negotiating with Zelensky to end the war. There are serious negotiations taking place in Istanbul involving the Turks. And Naftali Bennett, who was the Israeli prime minister at the time, was deeply involved in negotiating with both Putin and Zelensky to end the war.
Well, if he was interested, Putin, in conquering all of Ukraine, why in God’s name would he be negotiating with Zelensky to end the war? And of course, what they were negotiating about was NATO expansion into Ukraine, which was the principal cause of the war. People in the West don’t want to hear that argument because if it is true, which it is, then the West is principally responsible for this bloodbath that’s now taking place. And of course, the West doesn’t want to be principally responsible. It wants to blame Vladimir Putin.
So we’ve invented this story out of whole cloth that he is an aggressor, that he’s the second coming of Adolf Hitler, and that what he did in Ukraine was try to conquer all of it and he failed. But with a little bit of luck, he probably would’ve conquered all of it, and he’d now be in the Baltic States, and eventually end up dominating all of Eastern Europe. As I said, I think there’s no evidence to support this.
Here in the United States we have, as you well know, what’s called the Monroe Doctrine, and that basically says no great powers from Europe or Asia are allowed to come into our neighborhood and form a military alliance with anybody in this neighborhood. When I was young, there was this thing called the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviets had the audacity to put nuclear armed missiles in Cuba. We told them in no uncertain terms that that was not acceptable, and that those missiles had to be removed. This is our backyard and we do not tolerate distant great powers coming into our neighborhood.
Well, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. And if we don’t like great powers coming into our neighborhood, it’s hardly surprising that the Russians did not want NATO on their doorstep. They made that manifestly clear when the Cold War ended, and they exacted a promise from us that we would not expand NATO. And then when we started expanding NATO, they made it clear, after the first tranche in 1999, that they were profoundly unhappy with that. They made it clear in 2004, after the second tranche, that they were profoundly unhappy with that expansion.
And then, in April 2008, when NATO announced that Ukraine and Georgia would become part of NATO, they made it unequivocally clear, not just Putin, that was not going to happen. They were drawing a red line in the sand. And it is no accident that in August 2008, remember the Bucharest Summit is April 2008? And August 2008, you had a war between Georgia and Russia, and that involved, at its core, NATO expansion.
So the Americans and their allies should have understood by at least August 2008 that continuing to push to bring Ukraine into NATO was going to lead to disaster. And I would note that there were all sorts of people in the 1990s like George Kennan, William Perry, who was Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Paul Nitsa, and so forth and so on, who argued that NATO expansion would end up producing a disaster, which it has.
I would note that at the famous April 2008 Bucharest Summit, where NATO said that Ukraine would be brought into the alliance, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, the German and French leaders respectively, opposed that decision. Angela Merkel later said that the reason she opposed it was because she understood that Putin would interpret it as a declaration of war. Just think about that. Merkel is telling you that she opposed NATO expansion into Ukraine, because she understood, correctly, that Putin would see it as a declaration of war.
What did the United States and its friends and friends in Europe do? They continued to push and push, because we thought that we could push NATO expansion down their throat after 2008, the same way we did in 1999 and 2004, but we were wrong, and it all blew up in our face in 2014. And when it blew up in our face in 2014, what did we do? Did we back off and say, “Well, maybe the Russians have some legitimate security interest.” No, that’s not the way we operate. We continued to double down.
And the end result is that in 2022, you got a war. And as I’ve argued for a long time now, we, the West, are principally responsible for that, not Vladimir Putin.
And that meant that you’d have Ukraine, if it worked, as a pro-Western liberal democracy that was in the EU, and that was in NATO. This was our goal. And the Russians made it unequivocally clear Ukraine was not going to become a Western bulwark on their border, and most importantly, they made it clear that Ukraine in NATO was unacceptable.
This is not to say he doesn’t make mistakes, and he admits he’s made some mistakes, but I think that the West is dealing with a formidable adversary here. And I don’t see any evidence that he’s either lost speed off his fastball, or that power has corrupted his thinking about strategic affairs.
And if you read what he said, it’s quite clear that he privileged security or survival. He was deeply concerned about the security of Russia. And Russia is a quite vulnerable state in a lot of ways, especially if you think back to what it looked like in the 1990s, as you know better than I do. It was in terrible shape. The Chinese talk about the century of national humiliation. One could argue that for the Russians, that was the decade of national humiliation. And it took Putin, I think, quite a bit of time to bring the Russians back from the dead. I think he eventually succeeded, but it took a considerable amount of time, and I think he understood that he was not playing a particularly strong hand. He was playing something of a weak hand, and he had to be very careful, very cautious, and I think he was. And I think that’s very different than the United States. The United States was the Unipol. It was the most powerful state in the history of the world, the most powerful state relative to all its possible competitors. From roughly 1989, certainly after December 1991, when the Soviet Union fell apart, up until, I would argue, about 2017, we were incredibly powerful. And even after 2017, up to today, the United States remains the most powerful state in the system.
And because of our geographical location, we are in a terrific situation to survive in any great power competition. So you have a situation involving the United States that’s different than the situation involving Russia. They’re just much more vulnerable than we are. And therefore, I think Putin tends to be more sensitive about security than any American president in recent times.
You can understand full well, or at least you should be able to understand full well, why the idea of bringing Ukraine up to their border really spooked them. I don’t understand why more Americans don’t understand that, it befuddles me. I think it has to do with the fact that Americans are not very good at putting themselves in the shoes of other countries. And you really, if you’re going to be a first class strategist in international politics, you have to be able to do that. You have to put yourself in the shoes of the other side and think about how they think, so you don’t make foolish mistakes.
First of all, see the world, if the United States is the bad guys and China is the good guys, what does that world look like? Be able to just exist with that thought, because that is what the Chinese leadership and many Chinese citizens, if not now, maybe in the future, will believe. And you have to kind of do the calculation, the simulation forward from that. And same with Russia, same with other nations.
And I asked Mike what Putin’s response was to that. And Mike said that Putin didn’t believe it, but Mike believed that he should believe it, and that we could move NATO eastward to include Ukraine, and in the end, we’d get away with it because we are a benign hegemony, but the fact is that’s not what Putin saw. Putin saw us as a malign hegemony. And what Mike thinks, or any American thinks, doesn’t matter. What matters is what Putin thinks.
These are sovereign countries that can decide for themselves, and the Russians have no say in what Ukraine wants to do. And then finally, and this is a point I emphasized before, we were very powerful, and we thought we could shove it down their throat. So it’s a combination of those factors that led us to pursue what I think was ultimately a foolish policy.
And the Ukrainians in the West will do everything they can to weaken Russia’s position, and the Russians will go to great lengths to not only damage that dysfunctional rump state that Ukraine becomes, but the Russians will go to great lengths to sow dissension within the alliance. And that includes in terms of transatlantic relations.
So you’ll have this continuing security competition between Russia on one side, and Ukraine and the West on the other. Even when you get a frozen peace, or you get a frozen conflict, and the potential for escalation there will be great. So I think this is a disaster.
Is it possible for Vladimir Zelensky and Vladimir Putin to sit down and talk, and to figure out a way where the security concerns are addressed, and both nations can minimize the amount of suffering that’s happening, and create a path towards future flourishing?
And as I said to you, the two sides were negotiating in Istanbul, and they were also negotiating through Naftali Bennett, and the Bennett track and the Turkish track were operating together. I mean, they were not at cross purposes at all. What happened? Bennett tells the story very clearly that they had made significant progress in reaching an agreement. This is Zelensky on one side and Putin on the other. Bennett is talking in person to both Putin and Zelensky, and what happens to produce failure?
The answer is, the United States and Britain get involved and tell Zelensky to walk. They tell Zelensky to walk. If they had come in and encouraged Zelensky to try to figure out a way with Putin to shut this one down, and worked with Bennett, and worked with Erdogan, we might’ve been able to shut the war down then, but it was the United States.
And look at the interest of one, Russia, look at the interest of the other, Ukraine. Their interests are pretty simple. And say, the United States is going to stay out of this. We’re not going to expand NATO, and say all that in a way that’s convincing, which is that NATO expansion is silly at this point, China’s the big threat. We’re not going to do this kind of conflict escalation with Russia. The Cold War’s over, let’s normalize relations.
And number two, Ukraine has to accept the fact that the Russians are going to keep the four oblasts that they’ve now annexed, and Crimea. The Russians are not going to give them back. And what you really want to do, if you’re Zelensky or who’s ever running Ukraine in this scenario that we’re positing, is you want to make sure the Russians don’t take another four oblasts, to include Kharkiv and Odessa.
If I’m playing Putin’s hand and this war goes on, I’m thinking about taking four more oblasts. I want to take about 43% of Ukraine and annex it to Russia, and I certainly want Odessa, and I certainly want Kharkiv, and I want the two oblasts-
So EU expansion is tricky, but I think your point of close economic relations between … or healthy economic relations to use a better term between Ukraine and the West is possible. I think the Russians have a vested interest and if it’s a neutral Ukraine, they have a vested interest in that Ukraine flourishing, but that then brings us back to the territorial issue, right?
And Angela Merkel, Francois Hollande, he was the French leader and Poroshenko, who was the Ukrainian leader, those were the three key players besides Putin. Again, Hollande from France, Merkel from Germany, and Poroshenko from Ukraine have all explicitly said they were not seriously interested in reaching an agreement in all of the discussions with Putin, they were bamboozling him. They were trying to trick him so that they would buy time to build up Ukraine’s military. Putin is profoundly upset about these admissions by these three leaders. He believes he was fooled into thinking that Minsk could work. He believes that he negotiated in good faith and they did not.
And he believes that the level of trust now between Russia and the West is virtually zero as a result of this experience over Minsk. I only bring this up because it cuts against your argument that leaders could pick up the phone and talk to each other and trust each other at least somewhat to work out a meaningful deal. If you’re Putin at this point in time, trusting the West is not an idea that’s going to be very attractive at all. In fact, you’re going to distrust anything they say.
And if they can shut down the Ukraine-Russia war, it would be wonderful. If I’m proved dead wrong, that would be wonderful news. My prediction that this war is going to go on for a long time and end in an ugly way is a prediction that I don’t like at all. So I hope I’m wrong.
I actually think one could argue that Putin was too trusting of the West before the war started and number two, I think one could argue that he has not waged the war against Ukraine as vigorously as one might have expected. He was slow to mobilize the nation for war, and he has pursued a limited war in all sorts of ways. The Israelis, for example, have killed more civilians in Gaza in one month than the Russians have killed over 18 months in Ukraine. The idea that Vladimir Putin is waging a punishment campaign and killing on purpose, large numbers of civilians, is simply not true.
All this just to say that … I would imagine that if Putin leaves office and someone else comes in to replace him, that someone else will be at least if not, more hard line than him in terms of waging the war, and certainly will not trust the West any more than he has.
Why didn’t he mobilize the Russian military before late September, 2022, once the negotiations that we were talking about before involving Istanbul and Naftali Bennett. Once they broke down, why didn’t he immediately mobilize more of the Russian population to fight the war? Just all sorts of questions like that. Then, you could ask him questions about where he sees this one headed. What’s the best strategy for Russia if the Ukrainians will not agree to neutrality?People like John Mearsheimer say, “You’ll probably take close to half of Ukraine. Is that true? Does it make sense to take Odessa.”
Furthermore, I argued in 2014 that it made eminently good sense not to continue to push to bring Ukraine into NATO because the end result is that Ukraine would be destroyed and Ukraine is being destroyed. So I was deeply interested at time in making sure that that didn’t happen for the good of the Ukrainians, not to mention, because stability in Europe is a net positive for almost everybody involved, but people did not listen to me then either.
The way you use nuclear weapons in that world is you use them for manipulation of risk purposes, demonstration effect. You put both sides out on the slippery slope. Now, what exactly am I saying here? Let me talk about NATO doctrine during the Cold War. We lived in a MAD world, United States and Soviet Union or the Warsaw Pact in NATO, both had an assured destruction capability. So you had mutual assured destruction. If the Warsaw Pact were to invade Western Europe, and here we’re talking about West Germany and NATO was losing the war, we said that we would use nuclear weapons. How would we use nuclear weapons given that we were in a MAD world? The argument was that we would use a handful of nuclear weapons against the Warsaw Pact, not necessarily against their military forces.
It could be in a remote area. We would use a small number of nuclear weapons to signal to the Soviets that we were deadly serious about putting an end to their offensive, and that we were throwing both sides out on the slippery slope to oblivion. In other words, we were manipulating risk and the last clear chance to avoid Armageddon rested with them. And then, we would tell them that if you retaliated with a handful of nuclear weapons and you didn’t cease your offensive against West Germany, we would launch a small, another nuclear attack. We would explode a handful more of nuclear weapons, all for the purposes of showing you our resolve.
So this is the manipulation of risk strategy, and a lot of the language I just used in describing it to you is language that Thomas Schelling invented. Now fast-forward to the present, if Russia were losing in Ukraine, that’s the one scenario where I think where Russia would’ve used nuclear weapons. The question is, how would Russia have used nuclear weapons? Again, we’re assuming that the Russians are losing to the Ukrainians. I believe they would’ve pursued a manipulation of risk strategy. They would’ve used four or five, three or four, who knows, nuclear weapons-
Both Henry Kissinger and Robert McNamara said after leaving office that they would not have done it. They would’ve not initiated nuclear use, even limited nuclear use. That’s what we’re talking about here. They would rather be red than dead, that was the argument.
You see the landscape of human emotions, the leaders and the populace and the way news are reported, and then the landscape of risk, as you mentioned, shifting the world’s most intense nonlinear dynamical system, and it is just terrifying because the entirety of human civilizations hangs in the balance there. And it’s like this, hundreds of millions of people could be dead.
And therefore, it makes nuclear use more likely. Okay. That’s point one. Point two is let’s assume that the Russians use two or three nuclear weapons in a remote area-
They have nuclear weapons, we have nuclear weapons. They’ve used nuclear weapons. What is the happy ending here? And just to take it a step further and go back to our earlier discussion about moving NATO up to Russia’s borders, the point I made, which you’ll surely agree with, is that the Russians are very fearful when they see NATO coming up to their border. Well, here’s a case where not only is NATO come up to their border, but they’re in a war with NATO right on their border. What do the escalation dynamics look like there? You know what the answer is? Who knows? That should scare the living bejesus out of you, right?
I think given the fact that this was in the planning stages for probably about two years, and the Abraham Accords with regard to Saudi Arabia are relatively new phenomenon, I don’t think that’s the main driving force here. I think the main driving force is that the Palestinians feel oppressed as they should, and that this was a resistance move. They were resisting the Israeli occupation.
Over 40% of them are under the age of 18, of those killed. That’s of course, according to Ministry of Health of Palestinian Authority. So what do you think is the long-term effect on the prospect of peace when so many civilians die?
And it’s in large part because the political center of gravity in Israel has steadily moved to the right. When I was a young boy, the political center of gravity in Israel was much further to the left than it is today. It is in a position now, the political center of gravity where there’s hardly any support for two state solution and Netanyahu and the rest of the people in his government were in favor or are in favor of a greater Israel. There’s just no question about that. Well, on top of that, you now have had a war where, as you described, huge numbers of civilians have been killed, and you already had bad blood between the Palestinians and the Israelis before this conflict.
And you could imagine how people on each side now feel about people on the other side. So even if you didn’t have this opposition inside Israel to a two-state solution, how could you possibly get the Israelis now to agree to a two-state solution? I think for the foreseeable future, the animosity …
And that’s true of Mahmoud Abbas who runs the PA in the West Bank. It’s not true of Hamas at this point in time. They want a one-state solution, they want a Palestinian state. And of course, the Israelis want a one-state solution too, which is a Jewish state that controls all of Greater Israel. So the question is, can you get some sort of agreement? And I think to get to the nub of your question, given what’s just happened, it’s almost impossible to imagine that happening anytime soon.
So, I think the Israelis would prefer that the Palestinians roll over and accept submission. In terms of the people who live in Gaza to include the elites, and the people who live in the West Bank to include the elites. They would much prefer to move to some sort of situation where the Palestinians have a state of their own. I think in the case of the PA, under Abbas, they would accept a two-state solution. I think what, at this point in time, Hamas wants is a one-state solution, but they want peace. All of them want peace. The two different sets of leadership in Palestine and the Israelis.
The idea that you can use with Ze’ev Jabotinsky called The Iron Wall, to beat the Palestinians into submission is delusional. It’s just not going to happen. The Palestinians want a state of their own. They don’t want to live under occupation. And there’s no military solution for Israel here. There has to be a political solution. And the only viable political solution is a two-state solution. I mean, you can’t go to democracy. You can’t go to a situation where you give the Palestinians equal rights inside of Greater Israel in large part because there are now as many Palestinians as there are Israeli Jews. And over time, the balance, the demographic balance shifts against the Israeli Jews and in favor of the Palestinians. In which case, you’ll end up with a Palestinian state in Greater Israel. So democracy for all doesn’t work. The Israelis, I believe, are quite interested in ethnic cleansing.
I think they saw this recent set of events as an opportunity to cleanse Gaza, but that’s not going to happen. The Jordanians and the Egyptians have made it clear that that’s not happening. The United States has now made it clear that that’s not happening. And the Palestinians will not leave. They’ll die in place. So ethnic cleansing doesn’t work. So you’re really left with two alternatives, the two-state solution or a Greater Israel that is effectively an apartheid state. I mean, that’s what the occupation has led to. And all sorts of people have been predicting this for a long, long time. And you’ve now reached the point. Here in the United States, if you say that Israel’s an apartheid state, that’s going to get you into all sorts of trouble. But the fact is that Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and B’Tselem, which is the leading Israeli human rights group. All three of those institutions or organizations have issued detailed reports making the case that Israel is an apartheid state.
Furthermore, if you read the Israeli media, all sorts of Israelis, including Israeli leaders, refer to Israel as an apartheid state. It’s not that unusual to hear that term used in Israel. This is disastrous for Israel in my opinion. And Steve Walt and I said this, by the way, when we wrote The Israel Lobby, that Israel is an apartheid state, which is equivalent to Israel as an occupier is not good for Israel. That brings us back to the two-state solution. But as you and I were talking about a few minutes ago, it’s hard to see how you get a two-state solution. And the end result of this conversation is utter despair.
But even if you do that at this point, let’s say, that there’s a lot of willingness intellectually on both sides to do that. The problem is that the hatred that has been fueled by this ongoing conflict is so great that it’s just hard to imagine how you can make a two-state solution work at this juncture. That’s why I’ve sort of taken to saying, and I hope I’m wrong here, that on the two-state solution, that boat has sailed. It’s no longer possible.
Now, it’s very important to understand that the American political system is set up in ways that allow interest groups of all sorts to wield great influence. So in the United States, you have an interest group or a lobby like the National Rifle Association that makes it, well, not impossible to get gun control. And so with the Israel lobby, you have this group of individuals and organizations that wield enormous influence on US policy toward the Middle East. And this is not surprising given the nature of the American political system. So our argument is that the lobby is not doing anything that’s illegal, or illicit, or immoral, or unethical. It’s just a good old-fashioned American interest group. And it just happens to be extremely powerful. And our argument is that this is not good for the United States because no two countries have the same interests all the time. And when our interests conflict with Israel’s interest, we should be able to do what we think is in our national interest, in America’s national interest.
But the lobby tends to conflate America’s national interests with Israel’s national interests and wants the United States to support Israel no matter what. We also argue, and I cannot emphasize this enough, given what’s going on in the world today, that the lobby’s effects, the lobby has not been pushing policies that are in Israel’s interest. So our argument is that the lobby pushes policies that are not in America’s interest or not in Israel’s interest. Now, you’re saying to yourself, what exactly does he mean by that? What every president since Jimmy Carter has tried to do, as I said before, is to foster a two-state solution to push Israel, which is the dominant player in Greater Israel, push Israel to accept the two-state solution. And we have run into huge resistance from the lobby whenever we try to, let’s be blunt about it, coerce Israel.
In a perfect world where there was no lobby and an American president was free to put pressure on Israel, to coerce Israel, I believe, we would’ve gone a long way towards getting two-state solution. And I believe, this would’ve been in Israel’s interest. But we couldn’t get a two-state solution because it was almost impossible to put meaningful pressure on Israel because of the lobby. So this was not in Israel’s interest and it was not in America’s interest. And that was the argument that we made. And we, of course, got huge pushback for making that argument.
But with regard to the American Jews who are in that lobby, I think that really, this is all about nationalism. It’s not so much religion. Many of those Jews who are influential in the lobby are not religious in any meaningful sense of that term. But they self-identify as Jewish in the sense that they feel they’re part of a Jewish nation. And that in addition to being an American, they are part of this tribe, this nation called Jews. And that they have a responsibility to push the United States in ways that support the Jewish state. So I think that’s what drives most, if not almost all the Jews. This is not to say there’s not a religious dimension for some of them, but I think that the main connection is much more tribal in nature.
But even people who are anti-Zionists, I don’t think they’re antisemitic at all. You can argue they’re misguided, that’s fine. But many of these people are Jewish and proud of the fact that they’re Jewish. They just don’t believe that nationalism and Jewish nationalism is a force that should be applauded. And you want to understand that in the American context, there is a rich tradition of anti-Zionism. And these were not people who were antisemites if you go back to the thirties, forties, fifties. And the same thing was even true in Europe. There were all sorts of European Jews who were opposed to Zionism. Were they antisemites? I don’t think so. But we’ve gotten to the point now where people are so interested in stopping any criticism of Israel that they wield this weapon of calling people antisemites so loosely that the term has kind of lost meaning. So I think Netanyahu is wrongheaded to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism.
But once you start talking about the root causes, you end up talking about how Israel was created. And that means telling a story that is not pretty about how the Zionists conquered Palestine. And number two, it means talking about the occupation, right? It’s not like Hamas attacked on October 7th because there were just a bunch of antisemites who hated Jews and wanted to kill Jews. This is not Nazi Germany. This is directly related to the occupation and to what was going on inside of Gaza. And it’s not in Israel’s interest or the lobby’s interest to have an open discourse about what the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinians since, I would say, roughly 1903 when the second aliyah came to Israel or came to what was then Palestine, right? We want to talk about that. And we don’t want to talk about from the lobbyist’s point of view, the influence that the lobby has, right?
It’s better from the lobbyist’s point of view if most Americans think that American support of Israel is just done for all the right moral and strategic reasons, not because of the lobby. And when John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt come along and say, you have to understand that this special relationship is due, in large part, to the lobby’s influence. That is not an argument that people in the lobby want to hear. So the point is, you have to go to great lengths for all these reasons. You have to go to great lengths to silence people like me and Steve Walt. And one of the ways to do that is to call us antisemites.
I think the chapter or the section of the book where we talk about this charge of antisemitism is called The Great Silencer. That’s what we call the charge of antisemitism, The Great Silencer. Who wants to be called an antisemite, especially in the wake of the holocaust? Do I want to be called an antisemite? Oh my God, no. And so it’s very effective. But it is important to talk about these issues, in my humble opinion. And I think if we had talked about these issues way back when, it would’ve gone a long way towards maybe getting a two-state solution, which I think was the best alternative here.
The problem was that our arguments were quite powerful. And instead of engaging us and defeating our arguments, they wanted to silence us. And this is not good. It’s not good for Israel, it’s not good for the United States. And I would argue in the end, if anything, it’s going to foster antisemitism. I think you don’t want to run around telling people that they can’t talk about Israel without being called an antisemite. It’s just not healthy in terms of the issue that you’re raising. But I still agree with you that it is a tricky issue. I don’t want to make light of that. I know that there’s this piece of literature out there called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. And I fully understand that if you’re not careful, you can come close to writing volume two of the protocol. But I don’t believe that we wrote anything that was even close to that. And again, I think that a healthy debate on the issues that we were raising would’ve been not only in America’s interest, but it would’ve been in Israel’s interest.
If you look at the Germans after World War II, they’ve gone a long way towards reducing, I wouldn’t want to say completely eliminating, but reducing a lot of the hatred that existed between Germans and their neighbors. But that’s really kind of an anomalous case. I mean, you go around East Asia today and the hatred of Japan in a place like China, the hatred of Japan in a place like Korea, just not to be underestimated. But I think a lot of it just has to do with the fact that you’re dealing with social groups that have crashed into each other at one point or another. And there are those lingering effects. And by the way, this gets back to our discussion a few minutes ago about trying to get a two-state solution between the Palestinians and the Israeli Jews now that you have had this horrible war, which is ongoing.
And if they could have gotten their hands on Jews outside of Europe, they would’ve murdered them as well. That’s a genocide. And I think with the Hutus and the Tutsis, you had a similar situation. I think with the Turks and the Armenians during World War I, that was a genocide, but I have a rather narrow definition of what a genocide is and I don’t think there are many cases that qualify as a genocide. The Holocaust certainly does. Now, what Hamas did doesn’t even come close to what happened to European Jewry between, let’s say, 1939 and 1945, although I date the start of the Holocaust to 1941, if we were looking at it closely, but let’s just say 1939, when they invaded Poland, from 1939 to 1945. What Hamas did pales in comparison. It’s hard to believe anybody would make that argument. Yes, a lot of Jews died, but hardly any compared to the number that died at the hands of the Germans. No parallel at all. And furthermore, Hamas was in no position to kill all of the Jews in the Middle East, just not going to happen.
The whole concept of the Iron Wall, Jabotinsky’s term, was misguided. And by the way, if you look at what the Israelis are doing, they’re trying to do two things. One is the Iron Wall, and that’s where you punish the civilian population in Gaza and get them to submit. The other thing that they’re trying to do is get Hamas. They want to destroy Hamas. And the belief there is that if they destroy Hamas, they’ve solved the problem. But as many Israelis know, including people on the hard right, even if you destroy Hamas, they are going to be replaced by another resistance group and that resistance group will employ terror.
And in fact, it’s going to cost them because people all over the planet are turning against Israel. I saw an Israeli think tank today that has been tracking protests around the world, gave some figures for what it looked like between October 7th and October 13th in terms of the number of protests around the world that were pro-Israel versus pro-Palestine. And then it looked at the numbers from October 13th up to the present and I think the numbers were 69% were pro-Palestinian in the first six days after October 7th, 69%, and I think 31%… Take these numbers with a grain of salt. 31% were pro-Israel. So I think it was 69 and 31.
And since then, since October 13th, if you look at the number of protests around the world, 95% have been pro-Palestinian and 5% have been pro-Israel. And what this tells you is that public opinion around the world has shifted against Israel. And if you look at some of the demonstrations in places like London and Washington, DC, it’s truly amazing the number of people who are coming out in support of the Palestinians. And all of this, again, is just to support my point that it was just not smart for Israel to launch this bombing campaign. You can make an argument for going after Hamas and doing it in a surgical way or as surgical a way as possible, but that’s not what they did. And again, my point to you is I think that this punishment campaign is not going to work strategically. In other words, they’re not going to beat the Palestinians into submission, they’re not going to finish off Hamas. And at the same time, by pursuing this strategy, they’re doing huge damage to their reputation around the world.
Second reason is you want to bottle up the Chinese Navy and the Chinese Air Force inside the first island-chain. You don’t want to let them get out into the Pacific. You don’t want them dominating the waters of East Asia. You want to bottle them up again inside the first island-chain. And you can only do that if you control Taiwan. You don’t control Taiwan, they get out into the Philippines Sea, into the Pacific, and the Western Pacific and cause all sorts of problems.
But at the same time, and this should be music to your ears, we not only want to contain it, we want to make sure we don’t end up in a shooting match with the Chinese because this could be disastrous. So you have to have a very smart policy. You have to build powerful military forces, and you have to make sure you don’t do anything that’s provocative. On Taiwan, for example, the last thing you want is for the Taiwanese government to declare its independence because the Chinese have said, “If Taiwan does that, we’ll go to war.” And of course, we don’t want that. So my view is you want to smartly build up your military forces and you want to do everything you can to contain China, and at the same time, not be provocative.
And if you can’t do that, you think that they’re so powerful that they’re ultimately going to win, you want to convince them that victory would be a Pyrrhic victory. In other words, they would pay a godawful price to win the war. You follow what I’m saying? So the best strategy for deterrence is you win, China loses. Second best strategy is a stalemate, nobody wins. Third best strategy is they win, but they pay a godawful price. And the fourth possibility, which you don’t want, is they went quickly and decisively. If that’s the case, then you don’t have much deterrence.
It’s not because I think we’re the good guys and they’re the bad guys. If I were Chinese and I were in Beijing and I was Xi Jinping’s national security advisor, I’d tell him what we got to do is make sure we dominate the world or dominate our region and then do everything we can to undermine America’s position in the Western hemisphere. That’d be my view. So I guess you could say I do view the world in terms of good guys and bad guys, an American and-
First of all, the Chinese are realists to the core. I’ve spent a lot of time in China. I basically have rock and roll. I’m basically a rock and roll star in China. The Chinese-
And this makes me a little nervous to pick up on your point. I mean, the United States is thinking about the world in ways that are somewhat different than the Chinese who are real as par excellence.
One could argue that, that discussion that I laid out before it didn’t take into account nuclear weapons and all President Biden or any of his successors has to do is just very subtly rattle or employ the nuclear threat and just sort of remind the Chinese that you start a war over Taiwan, it could easily escalate into a nuclear war. You want to understand we both have nuclear weapons, and if either one of us is put into a desperate situation, we may turn to those nuclear weapons and oh, by the way, Xi Jinping, you want to understand that we’re out here in the water and using nuclear weapons in the water, it’s not the same as using war nuclear weapons on lands. So we may very well use them. I’m not saying we will, but anyway, a little saber rattling. Right?
This is not to say the United States is not an incredibly powerful country that goes all around the world building military bases and stationing troops here, there and everywhere, but we’re not running an empire the way the British Empire was run or the French Empire. So the question for me is why did those empires go away? Why did the British Empire go away? If you ever look at a map of the world in 1922 after World War I, it’s truly amazing how much of that map is controlled by Britain. They had a huge empire and it’s disappeared.
So that’s the first reason, nationalism that these empires disappeared. The second reason is that from a cost benefit analysis, they no longer made any sense, and it was the coming of the Industrial Revolution. Once the Industrial Revolution comes, an empire is basically an albatross around your neck. I would argue that the British Empire was an albatross around Britain’s neck in most of the 20th Century. Some of my friends disagree with that and think there were all sorts of benefits from the British Empire, but you want to remember that in the 20th Century, the three countries that really were powerful were the United States, Germany and the Soviet Union. Those were the big three. Did any of them have an empire? No.
United States, American women are not having lots of babies these days. No question about that, but we have immigration. We’re an immigrant culture. You’re a perfect manifestation of that. You’re a perfect, you’re now an American. That’s wonderful. We need more people like you. So when I hear Donald Trump and others arguing that immigration’s a terrible thing, this is ridiculous. Immigration is what made us great. It’s when my relatives came over in the middle of the 19th Century from Germany and Ireland.
If you look at immigration from Europe into the United States, leaving aside the original wasps who came over and founded the place, the immigrants start coming in large numbers in 1835, and we really don’t shut the door until 1924, right? This is a crude overview, starting in 1835 and running up till about 1885, it’s mainly Germans and Irish. That’s why Germans are the largest ethnic group to ever come to the United States, and the Irish are right behind them. These are the European ethnic groups we’re talking about. Then starting in 1885 Pols, Jews and Italians start coming, and the Germans and Irish keep coming, and this is why Ellis Island is opened, I think it’s 1893, Ellis Island is opened because Castle Garden in New York, which had handled all the previous immigrants coming across the pond, Castle Garden, couldn’t handle them all, so they opened up Ellis Island.
That’s why somebody like me, I can’t find my distant relative’s records in Ellis Island because they came through Castle Garden. Whereas lots of Jews I know, lots of Italians, I know they can find their relatives records in Ellis Island because they came through Ellis Island. The point is, you had all these immigrants who came in roughly between 1835 and 1924 when we shut the gates. It was the only time we’ve ever really shut the gates in a meaningful way and this is what made America great, all these people, and they made lots of babies.
The Irish, oh my God, they were treated horribly. There’s a book, a very famous book that’s been written called When The Irish Became White, just think about the title of that book. There was discrimination against all these groups, and the worst discrimination, of course was against Chinese Americans, but we’ve gotten much better and what we should do moving forward is redouble our efforts to integrate immigrants into the American mainstream, Hispanics, Asians of all sorts, because the fact is that America is rapidly reaching the point where it’s not going to be an all white country.
I have five children and two of my children are, I was a generation Z, Gen Z. Gen Z is the last majority white generation, subsequent generations, and not majority white. So for anybody who’s bothered by this, I’m not bothered by that, but for anybody who is bothered by this, they better good use to it because Americans aren’t making enough babies that we can continue to grow population-wise in a robust way. So we need immigration and we’re an immigrant culture, and this is a great virtue. It has been a great virtue over time.
The second thing I would say, and this has to do with your point about humility, you want to think about the humility hubris index. My friend Steve Van Everett, who teaches at MIT, he and I invented this concept. We call it the hubris humility index, and you want to have a healthy dose of humility, but you also want to have a healthy dose of hubris. You want to think you can change the world. You want to think you can make things better for yourself. You want to take chances. You want to think sometimes that you know better than other people do. Hubris is not a bad thing, but at the same time, you have to have humility. You have to understand that a man or a woman has his or her limits and you want to listen to other people. You want to be a good listener.
So always remember the importance of the hubris humility index and the importance of having healthy doses of both hubris and humility.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:29 – Power
- 24:43 – Hitler
- 42:09 – Russia and Ukraine
- 1:38:22 – Israel and Palestine
- 2:39:13 – China
- 3:21:34 – Life and mortality
Introduction
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with John Mearsheimer, a professor at University of Chicago and one of the most influential and controversial thinkers in the world. He teaches, speaks and writes about the nature of power and war on the global stage, in history and today.
The following is a conversation with John Mearsheimer, a professor at University of Chicago and one of the most influential and controversial thinkers in the world. He teaches, speaks and writes about the nature of power and war on the global stage, in history and today.
Please allow me to say, once again, my hope for this little journey I’m on. I will speak to everyone on all sides with compassion, with empathy, and with backbone. I’ll speak with Vladimir Putin and with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, with Russians and with Ukrainians, with Israelis and with Palestinians, with everyone. My goal is to do whatever small part I can to decrease the amount of suffering in the world by trying to reveal our common humanity. I believe that in the end, truth and love wins. I will get attacked for being naive, for being a shill, for being weak. I’m none of those things, but I do make mistakes and I will get better. I love you all.
This is a Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s John Mearsheimer.
Power
Can you explain your view on power in international politics as outlined in your book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics and in your writing since then?
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, I make two sets of points there. First of all, I believe that power is the currency of international relations, and by that I mean that states are deeply interested in the balance of power and they’re interested in maximizing how much power they control. And the question is why do states care so much about power. In the international system, there’s no higher authority, so if you get into trouble and you dial 911, there’s nobody at the other end. In a system like that, you have no choice but to figure out for yourself how best to protect yourself. And the best way to protect yourself is to be powerful, to have as much power as you can possibly gain over all the other states in the system. Therefore, states care about power because it enhances or maximizes their prospects for survival.
Yeah, I make two sets of points there. First of all, I believe that power is the currency of international relations, and by that I mean that states are deeply interested in the balance of power and they’re interested in maximizing how much power they control. And the question is why do states care so much about power. In the international system, there’s no higher authority, so if you get into trouble and you dial 911, there’s nobody at the other end. In a system like that, you have no choice but to figure out for yourself how best to protect yourself. And the best way to protect yourself is to be powerful, to have as much power as you can possibly gain over all the other states in the system. Therefore, states care about power because it enhances or maximizes their prospects for survival.
Second point I would make is that in the realist story or in my story, power is largely a function of material factors. The two key building blocks of power are population size and wealth. You want to have a lot of people and you want to be really wealthy. Of course, this is why the United States is so powerful. It has lots of people and it has lots of wealth. China was not considered a great power until recently because it didn’t have a lot of wealth. It certainly had population size, but it didn’t have wealth. And without both a large population and much wealth, you’re usually not considered a great power. So I think power matters, but when we talk about power, it’s important to understand that it’s population size and wealth that are underpinning it.
Lex Fridman
So there’s a lot of interesting things there. First you said nations in relation to each other is essentially in a state of anarchism.
So there’s a lot of interesting things there. First you said nations in relation to each other is essentially in a state of anarchism.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, well, anarchy basically means the opposite of hierarchy. Sometimes people think when you’re talking about anarchy, you’re talking about murder and mayhem, but that’s not what anarchy means in the realist context. Anarchy simply means that you don’t have hierarchy. There’s no higher authority that sits above states. States are like pool balls on a table. And in an anarchic world, there’s no higher authority that you can turn to if you get into trouble.
Yeah, well, anarchy basically means the opposite of hierarchy. Sometimes people think when you’re talking about anarchy, you’re talking about murder and mayhem, but that’s not what anarchy means in the realist context. Anarchy simply means that you don’t have hierarchy. There’s no higher authority that sits above states. States are like pool balls on a table. And in an anarchic world, there’s no higher authority that you can turn to if you get into trouble.
And of course the political philosopher who laid this all out was Thomas Hobbes. And Hobbes talked about life in the state of nature, and in the state of nature you have individuals and those individuals compete with each other for power. And the reason that they do is because in the state of nature, by definition, you have no higher authority. And Hobbes’s view is that the way to get out of this terrible situation where individuals are competing with each other and even killing each other is to create a state. It’s what he calls the Leviathan, and that of course is the title of his famous book.
So the idea is to escape anarchy, you create a state, and that means you go from anarchy to hierarchy. The problem in international politics is that there is no world state, there is no hierarchy. And if you have no hierarchy and you’re in an anarchic system, you have no choice but to try to maximize your relative power to make sure you are, as we used to say when I was a kid on New York City playgrounds, the biggest and baddest dude on the block. Not because you necessarily want to beat up on other kids or on other states, but because again, that’s the best way to survive.
And as I like to point out to people, the best example of what happens when you’re weak in international politics is what the Chinese call the century of national humiliation. From the late 1840s to the late 1940s the Chinese were remarkably weak, and the great powers in the system preyed upon them. And that sends a very important message to not only the Chinese, but to other states in the system. Don’t be weak, be as powerful as you can.
Lex Fridman
And we’ll talk about it, but humiliation can lead to resentment or resentment leads to something you’ve also studied, which is Nazi Germany in the 1930s. We’ll talk about it, but staying to the psychology and philosophy picture, what’s the connection between the will to power in the individual, as you mentioned, and the will to power in a nation?
And we’ll talk about it, but humiliation can lead to resentment or resentment leads to something you’ve also studied, which is Nazi Germany in the 1930s. We’ll talk about it, but staying to the psychology and philosophy picture, what’s the connection between the will to power in the individual, as you mentioned, and the will to power in a nation?
John Mearsheimer
The will to power in an individual has a lot to do with individual psychology. The story that I tell about the pursuit of power is a structural argument. It’s an argument that says when you are in a particular structure, when you’re in a system that has a specific architecture which is anarchy, the states have no choice but to compete for power. So structure is really driving the story here. Will to power has a lot more to do with an individual in the Nietzschen story where that concept comes from. So it’s very important to understand that I’m not arguing that states are inherently aggressive. My point is that as long as states are in anarchy, they have no choice but to behave in an aggressive fashion. But if you went to a hierarchic system, there’s no reason for those states to worry about the balance of power, because if they get into trouble there is a higher authority that they can turn to. There is in effect a leviathan.
The will to power in an individual has a lot to do with individual psychology. The story that I tell about the pursuit of power is a structural argument. It’s an argument that says when you are in a particular structure, when you’re in a system that has a specific architecture which is anarchy, the states have no choice but to compete for power. So structure is really driving the story here. Will to power has a lot more to do with an individual in the Nietzschen story where that concept comes from. So it’s very important to understand that I’m not arguing that states are inherently aggressive. My point is that as long as states are in anarchy, they have no choice but to behave in an aggressive fashion. But if you went to a hierarchic system, there’s no reason for those states to worry about the balance of power, because if they get into trouble there is a higher authority that they can turn to. There is in effect a leviathan.
Lex Fridman
So what is the role of military might in this will to power on the national level?
So what is the role of military might in this will to power on the national level?
John Mearsheimer
Well, military mights is what ultimately matters. As I said to you before, the two building blocks of power are population size and wealth.
Well, military mights is what ultimately matters. As I said to you before, the two building blocks of power are population size and wealth.
Lex Fridman
You didn’t mention military mights.
You didn’t mention military mights.
John Mearsheimer
I did not, no. That’s right. And it’s good that you caught that because if you have a large population and you’re a wealthy country, what you do is you build a large military, and it’s ultimately the size of your military that matters because militaries fight wars. And if states are concerned about survival, which I argue is the principle goal of every state in the international system for what I think are obvious reasons, then they’re going to care about having a powerful military that can protect them if another state comes after them.
I did not, no. That’s right. And it’s good that you caught that because if you have a large population and you’re a wealthy country, what you do is you build a large military, and it’s ultimately the size of your military that matters because militaries fight wars. And if states are concerned about survival, which I argue is the principle goal of every state in the international system for what I think are obvious reasons, then they’re going to care about having a powerful military that can protect them if another state comes after them.
Lex Fridman
Well, it’s not obvious that a large nation with a lot of people and a lot of money should necessarily build a gigantic army and seek to attain dominant soul superpower status to military might. But you’re saying, as you see the world today, it has to be that way.
Well, it’s not obvious that a large nation with a lot of people and a lot of money should necessarily build a gigantic army and seek to attain dominant soul superpower status to military might. But you’re saying, as you see the world today, it has to be that way.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, I’m arguing it is obvious. If you’re a state in the international system, do you want to be weak? If you live next door to Nazi Germany or Imperial Germany or Napoleonic France or even the United States… The United States is a ruthless great power, you surely recognize that. And if you’re dealing with the United States of America and you’re Vladimir Putin, you want to make sure you’re as powerful as possible so that the United States doesn’t put its gun sights on you and come after you. Same thing is true with China. You want to be powerful in the international system.
Yeah, I’m arguing it is obvious. If you’re a state in the international system, do you want to be weak? If you live next door to Nazi Germany or Imperial Germany or Napoleonic France or even the United States… The United States is a ruthless great power, you surely recognize that. And if you’re dealing with the United States of America and you’re Vladimir Putin, you want to make sure you’re as powerful as possible so that the United States doesn’t put its gun sights on you and come after you. Same thing is true with China. You want to be powerful in the international system.
States understand that, and they go to great lengths to become powerful. Just take the United States of America. When it started in 1783, it was comprised of 13 measly colonies strung out along the Atlantic seaboard. Over time, the various leaders of the United States went to great lengths to turn that country into the dominant power in the Western Hemisphere. And then once that was achieved in 1900, we’ve gone to great lengths to make sure that there’s no pier competitor in the system. We just want to make sure that we’re number one.
And my argument is that this is not peculiar to the United States. If I’m China, for example, today, I would want to dominate Asia the way the United States dominates the Western Hemisphere. They’d be fools not to. If I were imperial Germany, I’d want to dominate all of Europe the way the United States dominates the Western Hemisphere. Why? Because if you dominate all of Europe, assuming you’re Imperial Germany or Napoleonic France, then no other state in the area or in the region can threaten you because you’re simply so powerful.
And again, what I’m saying here is that the structure of the international system really matters. It’s the fact that you’re in this anarchic system where survival is your principle goal and where I can’t know your intentions, right? You’re another state. I can’t know that at some point you might not come after me. You might. And if you’re really powerful and I’m not, I’m in deep trouble.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. So some of the ideas underlying what you’ve said, offensive realism, which I would love to talk to you about sort of the history of realism versus liberalism, but some of the ideas you already mentioned, anarchy between states, everybody’s trying to develop military capabilities, uncertainty, such an interesting concept. States cannot be sure that other states will not use military capabilities against them, which is one-
Yeah. So some of the ideas underlying what you’ve said, offensive realism, which I would love to talk to you about sort of the history of realism versus liberalism, but some of the ideas you already mentioned, anarchy between states, everybody’s trying to develop military capabilities, uncertainty, such an interesting concept. States cannot be sure that other states will not use military capabilities against them, which is one-
John Mearsheimer
That’s of enormous importance to the story,
That’s of enormous importance to the story,
Lex Fridman
…really important, and so interesting because you also say that this makes realists more cautious and more peaceful, the uncertainty because of all the uncertainty involved here, it’s better to approach international politics with caution, which is really interesting to think about. Again, survival, most states interested in survival. And the other interesting thing is you assume all the states are rational, which-
…really important, and so interesting because you also say that this makes realists more cautious and more peaceful, the uncertainty because of all the uncertainty involved here, it’s better to approach international politics with caution, which is really interesting to think about. Again, survival, most states interested in survival. And the other interesting thing is you assume all the states are rational, which-
John Mearsheimer
Most of the time.
Most of the time.
Lex Fridman
Most of the time. You call this framework offensive realism. Can you just give an overview of the history of the realism versus liberalism debate as worldviews?
Most of the time. You call this framework offensive realism. Can you just give an overview of the history of the realism versus liberalism debate as worldviews?
John Mearsheimer
Well, I think for many centuries now, the big divide within the world of international relations theory is between realism and liberalism. These are time honored bodies of theory. And before I tell you what I think the differences are between those two bodies of theory, it is important to emphasize that there are differences among realists and differences among liberals. And so when you talk about me as an offensive realist, you should understand that there are also defensive realists out there, and there are a panoply of liberal theories as well.
Well, I think for many centuries now, the big divide within the world of international relations theory is between realism and liberalism. These are time honored bodies of theory. And before I tell you what I think the differences are between those two bodies of theory, it is important to emphasize that there are differences among realists and differences among liberals. And so when you talk about me as an offensive realist, you should understand that there are also defensive realists out there, and there are a panoply of liberal theories as well.
But basically realists believe that power matters, that states compete for power, and that war is an instrument of statecraft. And liberals, on the other hand, have what I would say is a more idealistic view of the world. This is not to say that they’re naive or foolish, but they believe there are aspects of international politics that lead to a less competitive and more peaceful world than most realists say. And I’ll lay out for you very quickly, what are the three major liberal theories today that I think will give you a sense of the more optimistic perspective that is inherent in the liberal enterprise.
The first and most important of the liberal theories is democratic peace theory, and this is a theory that says democracies do not fight against other democracies. So the more the world is populated with democracies, the less likely it is that we will have wars. And this basic argument is inherent in Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History. He argues that democracy triumphed first over fascism in the 20th century, it then triumphed over communism, and that means that in the future we’re going to have more and more liberal democracies on the planet. And if you have more and more liberal democracies and those democracies don’t fight each other, then you have a more peaceful world. That was his argument. It’s a very liberal argument.
A realist like me would say that it doesn’t matter whether a state is a democracy or not, all states behave the same way because the structure of the system, getting back to our earlier discussion about international anarchy, the structure of the system leaves those states no choice, whether they’re democracies or autocracies. And again, the liberal view, this first liberal theory, is that democracies don’t fight other democracies, and therefore the more democracies you have, the more peaceful the world.
Lex Fridman
Can I just sort of try to unpack that a little bit? So the democratic peace theory, I guess, would say that in democracies leaders are elected, and the underlying assumption is most people want peace, and so they will elect peacemakers. So the more democracies you have, the more likely you have peace. And then the realist perspective says that it doesn’t matter if the majority of people want peace. The structure of international politics is such that superpowers want to become more super and powerful, and they do that through war.
Can I just sort of try to unpack that a little bit? So the democratic peace theory, I guess, would say that in democracies leaders are elected, and the underlying assumption is most people want peace, and so they will elect peacemakers. So the more democracies you have, the more likely you have peace. And then the realist perspective says that it doesn’t matter if the majority of people want peace. The structure of international politics is such that superpowers want to become more super and powerful, and they do that through war.
John Mearsheimer
You can’t make that argument that you’re making about democracies, because if you’re saying that democracies are inclined toward peace and that the electorate picks leaders who are inclined towards peace, then you have to show that democracies are, in general, more peaceful than non democracies, and you can’t support that argument. You can find lots of evidence to support the argument that democracies don’t fight other democracies.
You can’t make that argument that you’re making about democracies, because if you’re saying that democracies are inclined toward peace and that the electorate picks leaders who are inclined towards peace, then you have to show that democracies are, in general, more peaceful than non democracies, and you can’t support that argument. You can find lots of evidence to support the argument that democracies don’t fight other democracies.
So the argument I believe that you have to make, if you’re going to support democratic peace theory, the main argument you have to make is that liberal democracies have a healthy respect for each other and they can assess each other’s intentions. If you’re a liberal democracy, and I’m a liberal democracy, we know we have value systems that argue against aggression, and argue for peaceful resolution of crises. And therefore, given these norms, we can trust each other, we can know each other’s intentions. Remember, for realists like me, uncertainty about intentions really helps drive the train. But if you’re talking about two democracies, the argument there is that they know each other’s intentions.
Lex Fridman
And for you, sure, maybe democracies reduce uncertainty a little bit, but not enough to stop the train.
And for you, sure, maybe democracies reduce uncertainty a little bit, but not enough to stop the train.
John Mearsheimer
I think that’s right, yeah. That’s right. So that’s democratic peace theory. The second theory is economic interdependence theory, and that’s the argument that, in a globalized world like the one that we live in and have lived in for a long time, there’s a great deal of economic interdependence. And if you and I are two countries, or if you and me are two countries and we’re economically interdependent and we’re both getting prosperous as a result of this economic intercourse, the last thing that we’re going to do is start a war, either one of us, because who would kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, it’s that kind of argument. So there you have an argument that economic interdependence leads to peace.
I think that’s right, yeah. That’s right. So that’s democratic peace theory. The second theory is economic interdependence theory, and that’s the argument that, in a globalized world like the one that we live in and have lived in for a long time, there’s a great deal of economic interdependence. And if you and I are two countries, or if you and me are two countries and we’re economically interdependent and we’re both getting prosperous as a result of this economic intercourse, the last thing that we’re going to do is start a war, either one of us, because who would kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, it’s that kind of argument. So there you have an argument that economic interdependence leads to peace.
And then the third liberal argument has to do with institutions, sometimes referred to as liberal institutionalism. And this is the argument that if you can get states into institutions where they become rule abiding actors, they will obey the rules that dictate that war is not acceptable. So if you get them to accept the UN rules on when you can and cannot initiate a war, then you’ll have a more peaceful world. So those are the liberal theories, and as you can tell, they’re very different from realism as articulated by somebody like me.
Lex Fridman
Can you maybe argue against the economic interdependence and in the institutions that institutions follow rules a little bit? So the golden goose with the golden egg, you’re saying that nations are happy to kill the goose because again, they want power.
Can you maybe argue against the economic interdependence and in the institutions that institutions follow rules a little bit? So the golden goose with the golden egg, you’re saying that nations are happy to kill the goose because again, they want power.
John Mearsheimer
If they think it’s necessary to kill the golden goose because of security concerns, they will do it. The point is that economic interdependence at its root has prosperity as the core variable. In the realest story, the core variable is survival, and survival always trumps prosperity. So if you go back to the period before World War I, we’re in Europe, it’s 1913 or early 1914, what you see is that you have an intense security competition between all of the great powers. On one side you have the Triple Alliance, and on the other side you have the Triple Entente. You have these two alliances, and you have an intense security competition between them. At the same time, you have a great deal of economic interdependence. It’s amazing how much economic intercourse is taking place in Europe among all the actors. And people are getting prosperous or countries are getting prosperous as a result. But nevertheless, in the famous July crisis of 1914, this economic prosperity is unable to prevent World War I because security concerns or survival is more important. So there are going to be lots of situations where prosperity and survival come into conflict, and in those cases, survival will win.
If they think it’s necessary to kill the golden goose because of security concerns, they will do it. The point is that economic interdependence at its root has prosperity as the core variable. In the realest story, the core variable is survival, and survival always trumps prosperity. So if you go back to the period before World War I, we’re in Europe, it’s 1913 or early 1914, what you see is that you have an intense security competition between all of the great powers. On one side you have the Triple Alliance, and on the other side you have the Triple Entente. You have these two alliances, and you have an intense security competition between them. At the same time, you have a great deal of economic interdependence. It’s amazing how much economic intercourse is taking place in Europe among all the actors. And people are getting prosperous or countries are getting prosperous as a result. But nevertheless, in the famous July crisis of 1914, this economic prosperity is unable to prevent World War I because security concerns or survival is more important. So there are going to be lots of situations where prosperity and survival come into conflict, and in those cases, survival will win.
Lex Fridman
And maybe you can speak to the different camps of realists. You said offensive and defensive. Can you draw a distinction between those two?
And maybe you can speak to the different camps of realists. You said offensive and defensive. Can you draw a distinction between those two?
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. Let me just back up a bit on that one. And you were talking about will to power before. The first big divide between realists is structural realists and human nature realists, and Hans Morgenthau, who was influenced by nature and therefore had that will to power logic embedded in his thinking about how the world works, he was a human nature realist. I’m a structural realist and I believe it’s not human nature, it’s not individuals in some will to power that drives competition and war. What drives competition and war is the structure of the system. It’s anarchy.
Yeah. Let me just back up a bit on that one. And you were talking about will to power before. The first big divide between realists is structural realists and human nature realists, and Hans Morgenthau, who was influenced by nature and therefore had that will to power logic embedded in his thinking about how the world works, he was a human nature realist. I’m a structural realist and I believe it’s not human nature, it’s not individuals in some will to power that drives competition and war. What drives competition and war is the structure of the system. It’s anarchy.
Lex Fridman
So you’re not as romantic as the human nature realists.
So you’re not as romantic as the human nature realists.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. There’s just a world of difference between the two. It’s just important to understand that.
Yeah. There’s just a world of difference between the two. It’s just important to understand that.
Lex Fridman
So within that, from the structural, there’s a subdivision also of offensive and defensive.
So within that, from the structural, there’s a subdivision also of offensive and defensive.
John Mearsheimer
Yes. Inside the structural realist world. And you have a handful of realists who believe that the structure of the system fosters competition, for sure, security competition. But it really rules out great power war almost all the time. So it makes sense to care about the balance of power, but to focus on maintaining how much power you have. That’s the defensive realism, maintaining how much power you have. Not trying to gain more power, because the argument the defense of realists make is that if you try to gain more power, the system will punish you, the structure will punish you. I’m not a defensive realist, I’m an offensive realist. And my argument is that states look for opportunities to gain more power, and every time they see, or almost every time they see an opportunity to gain more power, and they think the likelihood of success is high and the cost will not be great, they’ll jump at that opportunity.
Yes. Inside the structural realist world. And you have a handful of realists who believe that the structure of the system fosters competition, for sure, security competition. But it really rules out great power war almost all the time. So it makes sense to care about the balance of power, but to focus on maintaining how much power you have. That’s the defensive realism, maintaining how much power you have. Not trying to gain more power, because the argument the defense of realists make is that if you try to gain more power, the system will punish you, the structure will punish you. I’m not a defensive realist, I’m an offensive realist. And my argument is that states look for opportunities to gain more power, and every time they see, or almost every time they see an opportunity to gain more power, and they think the likelihood of success is high and the cost will not be great, they’ll jump at that opportunity.
Hitler
Lex Fridman
Just to linger on the human nature perspective, how do you explain Hitler and Nazi Germany, just one of the more recent aggressive expansions through military might? How do you explain that in the framework of offensive realism?
Just to linger on the human nature perspective, how do you explain Hitler and Nazi Germany, just one of the more recent aggressive expansions through military might? How do you explain that in the framework of offensive realism?
John Mearsheimer
Well, I think that Nazi Germany was driven in large part by structural considerations. And I think if you look at Imperial Germany, which was largely responsible for starting World War I, and of course Nazi Germany’s largely responsible for starting World War II, what that tells you is you didn’t need Adolf Hitler to start World War I. And I believe that there is a good chance you would’ve had World War II in the absence of Hitler. I believe that Germany was very powerful, it was deeply worried about the balance of power in Europe, and it had strong incentives to behave aggressively in the late 1930s, early 1940s. So I believe that structure mattered.
Well, I think that Nazi Germany was driven in large part by structural considerations. And I think if you look at Imperial Germany, which was largely responsible for starting World War I, and of course Nazi Germany’s largely responsible for starting World War II, what that tells you is you didn’t need Adolf Hitler to start World War I. And I believe that there is a good chance you would’ve had World War II in the absence of Hitler. I believe that Germany was very powerful, it was deeply worried about the balance of power in Europe, and it had strong incentives to behave aggressively in the late 1930s, early 1940s. So I believe that structure mattered.
However, I want to qualify that in the case of Adolf Hitler, because I do think he had what you would call a will to power. I’ve never used that word to describe him before, but it’s consistent with my point that I often make, that there are two leaders, or there have been two leaders in modern history who are congenital aggressors, and one was Napoleon and the other was Hitler. Now, if you want to call that a will to power, you can do that. I’m more comfortable referring to Hitler as a congenital aggressor and referring to Napoleon as a congenital aggressor, although there were important differences between the two, because Hitler was probably the most murderous leader in recorded history, and Napoleon was not in that category at all. But both of them were driven by what you would call a will to power, and that has to be married to the structural argument in Hitler’s case, and also in Napoleon’s case.
Lex Fridman
Is there some degree on the human psychology side that resentment, because of what happened after World War I, led to Hitler willing so much power, and then Hitler starting World War II? So this is the human side. Perhaps the reason I asked that question is also because you mentioned the century of humiliation on the China side. So to which degree does humiliation lead to Hitler and lead to World War II?
Is there some degree on the human psychology side that resentment, because of what happened after World War I, led to Hitler willing so much power, and then Hitler starting World War II? So this is the human side. Perhaps the reason I asked that question is also because you mentioned the century of humiliation on the China side. So to which degree does humiliation lead to Hitler and lead to World War II?
John Mearsheimer
Well, the question of what led to Hitler is a very different question than the question of what led to World War II once Hitler was in power. I mean, after January 30th, 1933, he’s in power. And then the question of what is driving him comes racing to the fore. Is there resentment over the Versailles treaty and what happened to Germany? Yes. Did that matter? Yes. But my argument is that structure was the principle factor driving the train in Hitler’s case. But what I’m saying here is that there were other factors that as well, resentment being one of them. Will to power or the fact that he was a congenital aggressor in my lexicon certainly mattered as well, so I don’t want to dismiss your point about resentment.
Well, the question of what led to Hitler is a very different question than the question of what led to World War II once Hitler was in power. I mean, after January 30th, 1933, he’s in power. And then the question of what is driving him comes racing to the fore. Is there resentment over the Versailles treaty and what happened to Germany? Yes. Did that matter? Yes. But my argument is that structure was the principle factor driving the train in Hitler’s case. But what I’m saying here is that there were other factors that as well, resentment being one of them. Will to power or the fact that he was a congenital aggressor in my lexicon certainly mattered as well, so I don’t want to dismiss your point about resentment.
Lex Fridman
So Hitler in particular, the way he wielded, the way he gained so much power, might have been the general resentment of the populace or the German populace.
So Hitler in particular, the way he wielded, the way he gained so much power, might have been the general resentment of the populace or the German populace.
John Mearsheimer
I think that as a result of defeat in World War I and all the trials and tribulations associated with Weimar Germany, and then the coming of the Great Depression, all of those factors definitely account for his coming to power. I think that one of the reasons that he was so successful at winning over the German people once he came to power was because there was a great deal of resentment in the German body politic. And he played on that resentment, that surely helped him get elected too. But I think having studied the case, it was even more important once he took over.
I think that as a result of defeat in World War I and all the trials and tribulations associated with Weimar Germany, and then the coming of the Great Depression, all of those factors definitely account for his coming to power. I think that one of the reasons that he was so successful at winning over the German people once he came to power was because there was a great deal of resentment in the German body politic. And he played on that resentment, that surely helped him get elected too. But I think having studied the case, it was even more important once he took over.
I also believe that one of the principal reasons that he was so popular and he was wildly popular inside Nazi Germany is because he was the only leader of an industrialized country who pulled his country out of the depression. And that really mattered, and it made him very effective. It’s also worth noting that he was a remarkably charismatic individual. I find that hard to believe because every time I look at him or listen to his speeches, he does not appear to be charismatic to me. But I’ve talked to a number of people who are experts on this subject who assure me that he was very charismatic. And I would note to you, if you look at public opinion polls in Germany, West Germany, in the late 1940s, this is the late 1940s after the Third Reich is destroyed in 1945, he is still remarkably popular in the polls.
Lex Fridman
Stalin is still popular in many parts of Eastern Europe.
Stalin is still popular in many parts of Eastern Europe.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, yeah. And Stalin’s popular in many quarters inside Russia, and Stalin murdered more of his own people than he murdered people outside of the Soviet Union.
Yeah, yeah. And Stalin’s popular in many quarters inside Russia, and Stalin murdered more of his own people than he murdered people outside of the Soviet Union.
Lex Fridman
And still to you, the tides of history turned not on individuals, but on structural considerations. So Hitler may be a surface-layer characteristics of how Germany started war, but not really the reason.
And still to you, the tides of history turned not on individuals, but on structural considerations. So Hitler may be a surface-layer characteristics of how Germany started war, but not really the reason.
John Mearsheimer
Well, history is a multidimensional phenomenon-
Well, history is a multidimensional phenomenon-
Lex Fridman
So I hear.
So I hear.
John Mearsheimer
… and we’re talking about interstate relations here, and realism is a theory about how states interact with each other, and there are many other dimensions to international politics. And if you’re talking about someone like Adolf Hitler, why did he start World War II is a very different question than why did he start the Holocaust or why did he push forward a holocaust? I mean, that’s a different question, and realism doesn’t answer that question. So I want to be very clear that I’m not someone who argues that realism answers every question about international politics, but it does answer what is one of the big, if not the biggest, questions that IR scholars care about, which is what causes security competition and what causes great power war.
… and we’re talking about interstate relations here, and realism is a theory about how states interact with each other, and there are many other dimensions to international politics. And if you’re talking about someone like Adolf Hitler, why did he start World War II is a very different question than why did he start the Holocaust or why did he push forward a holocaust? I mean, that’s a different question, and realism doesn’t answer that question. So I want to be very clear that I’m not someone who argues that realism answers every question about international politics, but it does answer what is one of the big, if not the biggest, questions that IR scholars care about, which is what causes security competition and what causes great power war.
Lex Fridman
Does offensive realism answer the question why Hitler attacked the Soviet Union?
Does offensive realism answer the question why Hitler attacked the Soviet Union?
John Mearsheimer
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Because from a military strategy perspective, there’s pros and cons to that decision.
Because from a military strategy perspective, there’s pros and cons to that decision.
John Mearsheimer
Pros and cons to every decision. The question is, did he think that he could win a quick and decisive victory. And he did, as did his generals. It’s very interesting, I’ve spent a lot of time studying German decision making in World War II. If you look at the German decision to invade Poland on September 1st, 1939, and you look at the German decision to invade France on May 10th, 1940, and then the Soviet Union on June 22nd, 1941, what you see is there was actually quite a bit of resistance to Hitler in 1938 at the time of Czechoslovakia, Munich, and there was also quite a bit of resistance in September, 1939.
Pros and cons to every decision. The question is, did he think that he could win a quick and decisive victory. And he did, as did his generals. It’s very interesting, I’ve spent a lot of time studying German decision making in World War II. If you look at the German decision to invade Poland on September 1st, 1939, and you look at the German decision to invade France on May 10th, 1940, and then the Soviet Union on June 22nd, 1941, what you see is there was actually quite a bit of resistance to Hitler in 1938 at the time of Czechoslovakia, Munich, and there was also quite a bit of resistance in September, 1939.
Lex Fridman
Internally? Or you mean…
Internally? Or you mean…
John Mearsheimer
Internally, internally. For sure. Yeah. People had doubts. They didn’t think the Wehrmacht was ready, and given the fact that World War I had just ended about 20 years before, the thought of starting another European war was not especially attractive to lots of German policy makers, including military leaders. And then came France 1940. In the run-up to May 10th, 1940, there was huge resistance in the German army to attacking France. But that was eventually eliminated because they came up with a clever plan, the Manstein Plan. If you look at the decision to invade the Soviet Union on June 22nd, 1941, which is the only case where they fail… They succeeded in France, they succeeded in Poland, they succeeded at Munich in 1938. Soviet Union is where they fail. There’s hardly any resistance at all, right?
Internally, internally. For sure. Yeah. People had doubts. They didn’t think the Wehrmacht was ready, and given the fact that World War I had just ended about 20 years before, the thought of starting another European war was not especially attractive to lots of German policy makers, including military leaders. And then came France 1940. In the run-up to May 10th, 1940, there was huge resistance in the German army to attacking France. But that was eventually eliminated because they came up with a clever plan, the Manstein Plan. If you look at the decision to invade the Soviet Union on June 22nd, 1941, which is the only case where they fail… They succeeded in France, they succeeded in Poland, they succeeded at Munich in 1938. Soviet Union is where they fail. There’s hardly any resistance at all, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Well, and to say that they failed the Soviet Union, my grandfather fought for the Soviet Union, there was a lot of successes early on. So there’s poor military, I would say, strategic decisions along the way, but it caught Stalin off guard. Maybe you can correct me, but from my perspective, terrifyingly so, they could have been successful if certain different decisions were made from a military perspective.
Yeah. Well, and to say that they failed the Soviet Union, my grandfather fought for the Soviet Union, there was a lot of successes early on. So there’s poor military, I would say, strategic decisions along the way, but it caught Stalin off guard. Maybe you can correct me, but from my perspective, terrifyingly so, they could have been successful if certain different decisions were made from a military perspective.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. I’ve always had the sense they came terrifyingly close to winning. You can make the opposite argument that they were doomed-
Yeah. I’ve always had the sense they came terrifyingly close to winning. You can make the opposite argument that they were doomed-
John Mearsheimer
You can make the opposite argument that they were doomed. But I’m not terribly comfortable making that argument. I think the Wehrmacht, by the summer of 1941, was a finely tuned instrument for war, and the Red Army was in quite terrible shape. Stalin had purged the Officer Corps, they had performed poorly in Finland, and there were all sorts of reasons to think that they were no match for the Wehrmacht.
You can make the opposite argument that they were doomed. But I’m not terribly comfortable making that argument. I think the Wehrmacht, by the summer of 1941, was a finely tuned instrument for war, and the Red Army was in quite terrible shape. Stalin had purged the Officer Corps, they had performed poorly in Finland, and there were all sorts of reasons to think that they were no match for the Wehrmacht.
And if you look at what happened in the initial stages of the conflict, that proved to be the case. The Germans won a lot of significant tactical victories early on.
Lex Fridman
And if they focused and went to Moscow as quickly as possible, again, terrifyingly, so could have been, basically topple Stalin. And one thing that’s-
And if they focused and went to Moscow as quickly as possible, again, terrifyingly, so could have been, basically topple Stalin. And one thing that’s-
John Mearsheimer
That’s possible.
That’s possible.
Lex Fridman
That’s possible.
That’s possible.
John Mearsheimer
Fortunately, we’re not going to run the experiment again, but one could argue that, had they concentrated as the generals wanted to do, in going straight from Moscow, that they would’ve won. I mean, what Hitler wanted to do is, he wanted to go into the Ukraine. I mean, Hitler thought that the main Axis… There were three Axes. The northern Axis went towards Leningrad, the central Axis of course, went to Moscow, and then the Southern Axis, Army Group South, headed towards Ukraine and deep into the caucuses.
Fortunately, we’re not going to run the experiment again, but one could argue that, had they concentrated as the generals wanted to do, in going straight from Moscow, that they would’ve won. I mean, what Hitler wanted to do is, he wanted to go into the Ukraine. I mean, Hitler thought that the main Axis… There were three Axes. The northern Axis went towards Leningrad, the central Axis of course, went to Moscow, and then the Southern Axis, Army Group South, headed towards Ukraine and deep into the caucuses.
And Hitler believed that that should have been the main Axis. And in fact, in 1942, the Soviets, excuse me, the Germans go back on the offensive in 1942. This is Operation Blue, and the main Axis in ’42 is deep into the Ukraine and into the caucuses, and that fails.
But one could argue that, had they done that in ’41, had they not gone to Moscow, had they gone, had they concentrated on going deep into Ukraine and into the caucuses, they could have knocked the Soviets out that way. I’m not sure that in the end I believe that. I think in the end the Soviets would’ve won no matter what, but I’m not a hundred percent sure of that.
Lex Fridman
Sometimes, maybe you can educate me, but sometimes they say, just like with Napoleon, winter defeated Hitler in Russia. I think not often enough people tell the story of the soldiers and the motivation and how hard they fight. So it turns out that Ukrainians and Russians are not easy to conquer. They’re the kinds of people that don’t roll over and fight bravely. There seems to be a difference in certain peoples, in how they see war, how they approach war, how proud they are to fight for their country, to die for their country, these kinds of things. So I think Battle of Stalingrad tells, at least to me, a story of extremely brave fighting on the Soviet side, and that, it’s a component of war too. It’s not just structural, it’s not just military strategy, it’s also the humans involved, but maybe that’s a romantic notion of war.
Sometimes, maybe you can educate me, but sometimes they say, just like with Napoleon, winter defeated Hitler in Russia. I think not often enough people tell the story of the soldiers and the motivation and how hard they fight. So it turns out that Ukrainians and Russians are not easy to conquer. They’re the kinds of people that don’t roll over and fight bravely. There seems to be a difference in certain peoples, in how they see war, how they approach war, how proud they are to fight for their country, to die for their country, these kinds of things. So I think Battle of Stalingrad tells, at least to me, a story of extremely brave fighting on the Soviet side, and that, it’s a component of war too. It’s not just structural, it’s not just military strategy, it’s also the humans involved, but maybe that’s a romantic notion of war.
John Mearsheimer
No, I think there’s a great deal of truth in that, but let’s just unpack it a bit in the case of the Soviet Union in World War II. The counterargument to that is that in World War I, the Russian Army disintegrated. And if you look at what happened when Napoleon invaded in 1812, and you look at what happened in 1917, and then you look at what happened between ’41 and ’45, the Napoleon case looks a lot like the Hitler case, and it fits neatly with your argument.
No, I think there’s a great deal of truth in that, but let’s just unpack it a bit in the case of the Soviet Union in World War II. The counterargument to that is that in World War I, the Russian Army disintegrated. And if you look at what happened when Napoleon invaded in 1812, and you look at what happened in 1917, and then you look at what happened between ’41 and ’45, the Napoleon case looks a lot like the Hitler case, and it fits neatly with your argument.
But World War I does not fit neatly with your argument because the Russians lost and surrendered, and you had the infamous treaty of Brest-Litovsk, where the Soviet Union then, because it went from Russia to the Soviet Union in October 1917, the Soviet Union surrendered large amounts of Soviet territory because it had suffered a humiliating defeat.
My argument for why the Russians, let me take that back, why the Soviets fought like wild dogs in World War II is that they were up against a genocidal adversary. You want to understand that the Germans murdered huge numbers of Soviet POWs. The overall total was 3.7 million. And by December, December of 1941, remember the invasion is June ’41, by December of 1941, the Germans have murdered 2 million Soviet POWs. At that point in time, they had murdered many more POWs than they had murdered Jews.
And this is not to deny for one second that they were on a murderous rampage when it came to Jews, but they were also on a murderous rampage when it came to Soviet citizens and Soviet soldiers. So those Soviet soldiers quickly came to understand they were fighting for their lives. If they were taken prisoner, they would die. So they fought like wild dogs.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the story of the Holocaust, of the 6 million Jews, is often told extensively. If Hitler won, conquered the Soviet Union, it’s terrifying to think, on a much grander scale than the Holocaust, what would’ve happened to the Slavic people, to the Soviet people.
Yeah, the story of the Holocaust, of the 6 million Jews, is often told extensively. If Hitler won, conquered the Soviet Union, it’s terrifying to think, on a much grander scale than the Holocaust, what would’ve happened to the Slavic people, to the Soviet people.
John Mearsheimer
Absolutely. All you have to do is read the Hunger Plan, right? And they also had a plan, what was it called? Grand Planned East, I forget the exact name of it, which made it clear that they were going to murder many tens of millions of people. And by the way, I believe that they would’ve murdered all the Poles and all the Roma. I mean, my view is that the Jews were number one on the genocidal hit list. The Roma, or the gypsies, were number two, and the Poles were number three.
Absolutely. All you have to do is read the Hunger Plan, right? And they also had a plan, what was it called? Grand Planned East, I forget the exact name of it, which made it clear that they were going to murder many tens of millions of people. And by the way, I believe that they would’ve murdered all the Poles and all the Roma. I mean, my view is that the Jews were number one on the genocidal hit list. The Roma, or the gypsies, were number two, and the Poles were number three.
And of course, I just explained to you how many POWs they had killed. So they would’ve ended up murdering huge numbers of Soviet citizens as well. But people quickly figured out that this was happening, that’s my point to you. And that gave them, needless to say, very powerful incentives to fight hard against the Germans, and to make sure that they did not win.
Russia and Ukraine
Lex Fridman
To fast-forward in time, but not in space, let me ask you about the war in Ukraine. Why did Russia invade Ukraine on February 24th, 2022? What are some of the explanations given? And which do you find the most convincing?
To fast-forward in time, but not in space, let me ask you about the war in Ukraine. Why did Russia invade Ukraine on February 24th, 2022? What are some of the explanations given? And which do you find the most convincing?
John Mearsheimer
Well, clearly, the conventional wisdom is that Putin is principally responsible. Putin is an imperialist, he’s an expansionist.
Well, clearly, the conventional wisdom is that Putin is principally responsible. Putin is an imperialist, he’s an expansionist.
Lex Fridman
That’s the conventional thinking.
That’s the conventional thinking.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, yeah. And the idea is that he is bent on creating a greater Russia, and even more, so he’s interested in dominating Eastern Europe, if not all of Europe, and that Ukraine was the first stop on the train line. And what he wanted to do was to conquer all of Ukraine, incorporate it into a greater Russia, and then he would move on and conquer other countries. This is the conventional wisdom. My view is there is no evidence, let me emphasize, zero evidence, to support that argument.
Yeah, yeah. And the idea is that he is bent on creating a greater Russia, and even more, so he’s interested in dominating Eastern Europe, if not all of Europe, and that Ukraine was the first stop on the train line. And what he wanted to do was to conquer all of Ukraine, incorporate it into a greater Russia, and then he would move on and conquer other countries. This is the conventional wisdom. My view is there is no evidence, let me emphasize, zero evidence, to support that argument.
Lex Fridman
Which part? That he would… The imperialist part, the sense that he sought to conquer all of Ukraine, and move on and conquer-
Which part? That he would… The imperialist part, the sense that he sought to conquer all of Ukraine, and move on and conquer-
John Mearsheimer
There’s no evidence he was interested in conquering all of Ukraine. There was no evidence beforehand that he was interested in conquering any of Ukraine. And there’s no way that an army that had 190,000 troops, at the most, could have conquered all of Ukraine, it’s just impossible.
There’s no evidence he was interested in conquering all of Ukraine. There was no evidence beforehand that he was interested in conquering any of Ukraine. And there’s no way that an army that had 190,000 troops, at the most, could have conquered all of Ukraine, it’s just impossible.
As I like to emphasize, when the Germans went into Poland in 1939, and the Germans, you want to remember, were only intent on conquering the western half of Poland, because the Soviets, who came in later that month, were going to conquer the eastern half of Poland. So the western half of Poland is much smaller than Ukraine, and the Germans went in with 1.5 million troops. If Vladimir Putin were bent on conquering all of Ukraine, he would’ve needed at least 2 million troops. I would argue he’d need 3 million troops, because not only did he need to conquer the country, you then have to occupy it.
But the idea that 190,000 troops was sufficient for conquering all of Ukraine, it’s not a serious argument. Furthermore, he was not interested in conquering Ukraine, and that’s why, in March 2022, this is immediately after the war starts, he is negotiating with Zelensky to end the war. There are serious negotiations taking place in Istanbul involving the Turks. And Naftali Bennett, who was the Israeli prime minister at the time, was deeply involved in negotiating with both Putin and Zelensky to end the war.
Well, if he was interested, Putin, in conquering all of Ukraine, why in God’s name would he be negotiating with Zelensky to end the war? And of course, what they were negotiating about was NATO expansion into Ukraine, which was the principal cause of the war. People in the West don’t want to hear that argument because if it is true, which it is, then the West is principally responsible for this bloodbath that’s now taking place. And of course, the West doesn’t want to be principally responsible. It wants to blame Vladimir Putin.
So we’ve invented this story out of whole cloth that he is an aggressor, that he’s the second coming of Adolf Hitler, and that what he did in Ukraine was try to conquer all of it and he failed. But with a little bit of luck, he probably would’ve conquered all of it, and he’d now be in the Baltic States, and eventually end up dominating all of Eastern Europe. As I said, I think there’s no evidence to support this.
Lex Fridman
So maybe there’s a lot of things to ask there. Maybe just to linger on NATO expansion, what is NATO expansion? What is the threat of NATO expansion and why is this such a concern for Russia?
So maybe there’s a lot of things to ask there. Maybe just to linger on NATO expansion, what is NATO expansion? What is the threat of NATO expansion and why is this such a concern for Russia?
John Mearsheimer
NATO was a mortal enemy of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It’s a military alliance which has at its heart the United States of America, which is the most powerful state on the planet. It is perfectly understandable that Russia is not going to want that military alliance on its doorstep.
NATO was a mortal enemy of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It’s a military alliance which has at its heart the United States of America, which is the most powerful state on the planet. It is perfectly understandable that Russia is not going to want that military alliance on its doorstep.
Here in the United States we have, as you well know, what’s called the Monroe Doctrine, and that basically says no great powers from Europe or Asia are allowed to come into our neighborhood and form a military alliance with anybody in this neighborhood. When I was young, there was this thing called the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviets had the audacity to put nuclear armed missiles in Cuba. We told them in no uncertain terms that that was not acceptable, and that those missiles had to be removed. This is our backyard and we do not tolerate distant great powers coming into our neighborhood.
Well, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. And if we don’t like great powers coming into our neighborhood, it’s hardly surprising that the Russians did not want NATO on their doorstep. They made that manifestly clear when the Cold War ended, and they exacted a promise from us that we would not expand NATO. And then when we started expanding NATO, they made it clear, after the first tranche in 1999, that they were profoundly unhappy with that. They made it clear in 2004, after the second tranche, that they were profoundly unhappy with that expansion.
And then, in April 2008, when NATO announced that Ukraine and Georgia would become part of NATO, they made it unequivocally clear, not just Putin, that was not going to happen. They were drawing a red line in the sand. And it is no accident that in August 2008, remember the Bucharest Summit is April 2008? And August 2008, you had a war between Georgia and Russia, and that involved, at its core, NATO expansion.
So the Americans and their allies should have understood by at least August 2008 that continuing to push to bring Ukraine into NATO was going to lead to disaster. And I would note that there were all sorts of people in the 1990s like George Kennan, William Perry, who was Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Paul Nitsa, and so forth and so on, who argued that NATO expansion would end up producing a disaster, which it has.
I would note that at the famous April 2008 Bucharest Summit, where NATO said that Ukraine would be brought into the alliance, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, the German and French leaders respectively, opposed that decision. Angela Merkel later said that the reason she opposed it was because she understood that Putin would interpret it as a declaration of war. Just think about that. Merkel is telling you that she opposed NATO expansion into Ukraine, because she understood, correctly, that Putin would see it as a declaration of war.
What did the United States and its friends and friends in Europe do? They continued to push and push, because we thought that we could push NATO expansion down their throat after 2008, the same way we did in 1999 and 2004, but we were wrong, and it all blew up in our face in 2014. And when it blew up in our face in 2014, what did we do? Did we back off and say, “Well, maybe the Russians have some legitimate security interest.” No, that’s not the way we operate. We continued to double down.
And the end result is that in 2022, you got a war. And as I’ve argued for a long time now, we, the West, are principally responsible for that, not Vladimir Putin.
Lex Fridman
So the expansion of NATO is primarily responsible for that.
So the expansion of NATO is primarily responsible for that.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. To put it in more general terms, what we were trying to do was turn Ukraine into a Western bulwark on Russia’s border, and it really wasn’t NATO expansion alone. NATO expansion was the most important element of our strategy. But the strategy had two other dimensions. One was EU expansion, and the third was the Color Revolution. We were trying to force Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and the basic goal there was to turn Ukraine into a pro-Western, liberal democracy.
Yeah. To put it in more general terms, what we were trying to do was turn Ukraine into a Western bulwark on Russia’s border, and it really wasn’t NATO expansion alone. NATO expansion was the most important element of our strategy. But the strategy had two other dimensions. One was EU expansion, and the third was the Color Revolution. We were trying to force Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and the basic goal there was to turn Ukraine into a pro-Western, liberal democracy.
And that meant that you’d have Ukraine, if it worked, as a pro-Western liberal democracy that was in the EU, and that was in NATO. This was our goal. And the Russians made it unequivocally clear Ukraine was not going to become a Western bulwark on their border, and most importantly, they made it clear that Ukraine in NATO was unacceptable.
Lex Fridman
Can we talk about the mind of Vladimir Putin? You’ve mentioned this idea that he has aspirations for imperialist conquest, that he dreams of empire, is not grounded in reality. He wrote an essay in 2021, about one people. Do you think there is some degree to which he still dreams of the former Soviet Union reuniting?
Can we talk about the mind of Vladimir Putin? You’ve mentioned this idea that he has aspirations for imperialist conquest, that he dreams of empire, is not grounded in reality. He wrote an essay in 2021, about one people. Do you think there is some degree to which he still dreams of the former Soviet Union reuniting?
John Mearsheimer
No, he’s made it clear that anybody with a triple digit IQ understands that it’s nuts to think about recreating the Soviet Union. He thinks it’s a tragedy that the Soviet Union fell apart, but as he made clear in that essay, the July 12th, 2021 essay, and as he made clear in speeches before, immediately before he invaded Ukraine, he accepted the breakup of the Soviet Union, and he accepted the status quo in Europe, save for the fact he did not accept the idea that Ukraine would become part of NATO.
No, he’s made it clear that anybody with a triple digit IQ understands that it’s nuts to think about recreating the Soviet Union. He thinks it’s a tragedy that the Soviet Union fell apart, but as he made clear in that essay, the July 12th, 2021 essay, and as he made clear in speeches before, immediately before he invaded Ukraine, he accepted the breakup of the Soviet Union, and he accepted the status quo in Europe, save for the fact he did not accept the idea that Ukraine would become part of NATO.
Lex Fridman
He’s been in power for over two decades. Is there a degree that power can affect a leader’s ability to see the world clearly, as they say, corrupt? Do you think power has corrupted Vladimir Putin, to a degree?
He’s been in power for over two decades. Is there a degree that power can affect a leader’s ability to see the world clearly, as they say, corrupt? Do you think power has corrupted Vladimir Putin, to a degree?
John Mearsheimer
It’s very hard for me to answer that question because I don’t know him, and I’ve not studied him carefully in terms of his overall performance over the course of the 23 years that he’s been in power. I’ve studied him as a strategist, and I’ve studied how he deals with the West, and deals with the international system more generally since 2014. And I think he is a first class strategist.
It’s very hard for me to answer that question because I don’t know him, and I’ve not studied him carefully in terms of his overall performance over the course of the 23 years that he’s been in power. I’ve studied him as a strategist, and I’ve studied how he deals with the West, and deals with the international system more generally since 2014. And I think he is a first class strategist.
This is not to say he doesn’t make mistakes, and he admits he’s made some mistakes, but I think that the West is dealing with a formidable adversary here. And I don’t see any evidence that he’s either lost speed off his fastball, or that power has corrupted his thinking about strategic affairs.
Lex Fridman
So he has consistently put, as a primary concern, security? As does the United States, he’s put for Russia’s security, making sure that NATO doesn’t get close to its borders?
So he has consistently put, as a primary concern, security? As does the United States, he’s put for Russia’s security, making sure that NATO doesn’t get close to its borders?
John Mearsheimer
I think that’s clear. Yeah, I think as I emphasized early on in our conversation, that leaders privilege security or survival over everything else. And by the way, he gave a number of talks and press conferences in addition to writing that famous article that you referred to on July 12th, 2021. So we have a pretty clear record of what he was saying, and I would argue what he was thinking, in the run-up to the war in February 2022.
I think that’s clear. Yeah, I think as I emphasized early on in our conversation, that leaders privilege security or survival over everything else. And by the way, he gave a number of talks and press conferences in addition to writing that famous article that you referred to on July 12th, 2021. So we have a pretty clear record of what he was saying, and I would argue what he was thinking, in the run-up to the war in February 2022.
And if you read what he said, it’s quite clear that he privileged security or survival. He was deeply concerned about the security of Russia. And Russia is a quite vulnerable state in a lot of ways, especially if you think back to what it looked like in the 1990s, as you know better than I do. It was in terrible shape. The Chinese talk about the century of national humiliation. One could argue that for the Russians, that was the decade of national humiliation. And it took Putin, I think, quite a bit of time to bring the Russians back from the dead. I think he eventually succeeded, but it took a considerable amount of time, and I think he understood that he was not playing a particularly strong hand. He was playing something of a weak hand, and he had to be very careful, very cautious, and I think he was. And I think that’s very different than the United States. The United States was the Unipol. It was the most powerful state in the history of the world, the most powerful state relative to all its possible competitors. From roughly 1989, certainly after December 1991, when the Soviet Union fell apart, up until, I would argue, about 2017, we were incredibly powerful. And even after 2017, up to today, the United States remains the most powerful state in the system.
And because of our geographical location, we are in a terrific situation to survive in any great power competition. So you have a situation involving the United States that’s different than the situation involving Russia. They’re just much more vulnerable than we are. And therefore, I think Putin tends to be more sensitive about security than any American president in recent times.
Lex Fridman
Europe on one side, China on the other side. It’s a complicated situation.
Europe on one side, China on the other side. It’s a complicated situation.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. And we talked before about 1812, when Napoleon invaded and Moscow got burned to the ground. We talked about World War I, where the Russians were actually defeated and surrendered, and then we talked about 1941 to 1945, where, although thankfully the Soviets prevailed, it was a close call. And I mean, the casualties, the destruction that the Soviet Union had inflicted on it by the Germans is just almost hard to believe. So they are sensitive.
Yeah. And we talked before about 1812, when Napoleon invaded and Moscow got burned to the ground. We talked about World War I, where the Russians were actually defeated and surrendered, and then we talked about 1941 to 1945, where, although thankfully the Soviets prevailed, it was a close call. And I mean, the casualties, the destruction that the Soviet Union had inflicted on it by the Germans is just almost hard to believe. So they are sensitive.
You can understand full well, or at least you should be able to understand full well, why the idea of bringing Ukraine up to their border really spooked them. I don’t understand why more Americans don’t understand that, it befuddles me. I think it has to do with the fact that Americans are not very good at putting themselves in the shoes of other countries. And you really, if you’re going to be a first class strategist in international politics, you have to be able to do that. You have to put yourself in the shoes of the other side and think about how they think, so you don’t make foolish mistakes.
Lex Fridman
And as a starting point, Americans tend to see themselves as the good guys and a set of others as the bad guys. And you have to be able to empathize that Russians think of themselves as the good guys, the Chinese think of themselves as the good guys, and just be able to empathize. If they are the good guys… It’s like that funny skit. Are we the baddies? Consider the United States could be the bad guys.
And as a starting point, Americans tend to see themselves as the good guys and a set of others as the bad guys. And you have to be able to empathize that Russians think of themselves as the good guys, the Chinese think of themselves as the good guys, and just be able to empathize. If they are the good guys… It’s like that funny skit. Are we the baddies? Consider the United States could be the bad guys.
First of all, see the world, if the United States is the bad guys and China is the good guys, what does that world look like? Be able to just exist with that thought, because that is what the Chinese leadership and many Chinese citizens, if not now, maybe in the future, will believe. And you have to kind of do the calculation, the simulation forward from that. And same with Russia, same with other nations.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, I agree with you, a hundred percent. And just, I always think of Michael McFall at Stanford, who was the American ambassador to Russia, I think between 2012 and 2014. And he told me that he told Putin that Putin didn’t have to worry about NATO expansion because the United States was a benign hegemony.
Yeah, I agree with you, a hundred percent. And just, I always think of Michael McFall at Stanford, who was the American ambassador to Russia, I think between 2012 and 2014. And he told me that he told Putin that Putin didn’t have to worry about NATO expansion because the United States was a benign hegemony.
And I asked Mike what Putin’s response was to that. And Mike said that Putin didn’t believe it, but Mike believed that he should believe it, and that we could move NATO eastward to include Ukraine, and in the end, we’d get away with it because we are a benign hegemony, but the fact is that’s not what Putin saw. Putin saw us as a malign hegemony. And what Mike thinks, or any American thinks, doesn’t matter. What matters is what Putin thinks.
Lex Fridman
But also, the drums of war have been beating for some reason. NATO expansion has been threatened for some reason. So you’ve talked about NATO expansion being dead, so it doesn’t make sense from a geopolitical perspective, on the Europe side, to expand NATO. But nevertheless, that threat has been echoed. So why has NATO expansion been pushed, from your perspective?
But also, the drums of war have been beating for some reason. NATO expansion has been threatened for some reason. So you’ve talked about NATO expansion being dead, so it doesn’t make sense from a geopolitical perspective, on the Europe side, to expand NATO. But nevertheless, that threat has been echoed. So why has NATO expansion been pushed, from your perspective?
John Mearsheimer
There are two reasons. One is, first of all, we thought it was a wonderful thing to bring more and more countries into NATO. We thought that it facilitated peace and prosperity. It was ultimately all for the good. And we also thought that countries like Ukraine had a right to join NATO.
There are two reasons. One is, first of all, we thought it was a wonderful thing to bring more and more countries into NATO. We thought that it facilitated peace and prosperity. It was ultimately all for the good. And we also thought that countries like Ukraine had a right to join NATO.
These are sovereign countries that can decide for themselves, and the Russians have no say in what Ukraine wants to do. And then finally, and this is a point I emphasized before, we were very powerful, and we thought we could shove it down their throat. So it’s a combination of those factors that led us to pursue what I think was ultimately a foolish policy.
Lex Fridman
We’ve talked about how wars get started. How do you hope the war in Ukraine ends? What are the ways to end this war? What are the ways to achieve peace there? To end the, I would say, senseless death of young men, as always happens in war?
We’ve talked about how wars get started. How do you hope the war in Ukraine ends? What are the ways to end this war? What are the ways to achieve peace there? To end the, I would say, senseless death of young men, as always happens in war?
John Mearsheimer
I’m sad to say I don’t have a good answer to that. I don’t think there’s any real prospect of a meaningful peace agreement. I think it’s almost impossible. I think the best you can hope for at this point is, at some point the shooting stops, you have a ceasefire, and then you have a frozen conflict. And that frozen conflict will not be highly stable.
I’m sad to say I don’t have a good answer to that. I don’t think there’s any real prospect of a meaningful peace agreement. I think it’s almost impossible. I think the best you can hope for at this point is, at some point the shooting stops, you have a ceasefire, and then you have a frozen conflict. And that frozen conflict will not be highly stable.
And the Ukrainians in the West will do everything they can to weaken Russia’s position, and the Russians will go to great lengths to not only damage that dysfunctional rump state that Ukraine becomes, but the Russians will go to great lengths to sow dissension within the alliance. And that includes in terms of transatlantic relations.
So you’ll have this continuing security competition between Russia on one side, and Ukraine and the West on the other. Even when you get a frozen peace, or you get a frozen conflict, and the potential for escalation there will be great. So I think this is a disaster.
Lex Fridman
That’s a very realist perspective. Let me ask you sort of the human side of it. Do you think there’s some power to leaders sitting down, having a conversation, man to man, leader to leader, about this? There is just a lot of death happening. It seems that, from an economic perspective, from a historic perspective, from a human perspective, both nations are losing.
That’s a very realist perspective. Let me ask you sort of the human side of it. Do you think there’s some power to leaders sitting down, having a conversation, man to man, leader to leader, about this? There is just a lot of death happening. It seems that, from an economic perspective, from a historic perspective, from a human perspective, both nations are losing.
Is it possible for Vladimir Zelensky and Vladimir Putin to sit down and talk, and to figure out a way where the security concerns are addressed, and both nations can minimize the amount of suffering that’s happening, and create a path towards future flourishing?
John Mearsheimer
I think the answer is no.
I think the answer is no.
Lex Fridman
Even with the United States involved, three people in the room?
Even with the United States involved, three people in the room?
John Mearsheimer
Well, I think if the United States is involved, the answer is definitely no. You have to get the Americans out. And then, I think if you have Zelensky and Putin talking, you have a sliver of a chance there. The Americans are a real problem. Look, let’s go back to what happens right after the war starts, okay? As I said before, we’re talking March, early April of 2022. The war starts on February 24th, 2022.
Well, I think if the United States is involved, the answer is definitely no. You have to get the Americans out. And then, I think if you have Zelensky and Putin talking, you have a sliver of a chance there. The Americans are a real problem. Look, let’s go back to what happens right after the war starts, okay? As I said before, we’re talking March, early April of 2022. The war starts on February 24th, 2022.
And as I said to you, the two sides were negotiating in Istanbul, and they were also negotiating through Naftali Bennett, and the Bennett track and the Turkish track were operating together. I mean, they were not at cross purposes at all. What happened? Bennett tells the story very clearly that they had made significant progress in reaching an agreement. This is Zelensky on one side and Putin on the other. Bennett is talking in person to both Putin and Zelensky, and what happens to produce failure?
The answer is, the United States and Britain get involved and tell Zelensky to walk. They tell Zelensky to walk. If they had come in and encouraged Zelensky to try to figure out a way with Putin to shut this one down, and worked with Bennett, and worked with Erdogan, we might’ve been able to shut the war down then, but it was the United States.
Lex Fridman
Well, let me sort of push back on that. You’re correct, but the United States paints this picture that everybody’s aligned. Maybe you can correct me, but I believe in the power of individuals, especially individual leaders. Again, whether it’s Biden or Trump or whoever goes into a room and says, in a way that’s convincing, that no more NATO expansion. And actually just on a basic human level, ask the question of why are we doing all this senseless killing?
Well, let me sort of push back on that. You’re correct, but the United States paints this picture that everybody’s aligned. Maybe you can correct me, but I believe in the power of individuals, especially individual leaders. Again, whether it’s Biden or Trump or whoever goes into a room and says, in a way that’s convincing, that no more NATO expansion. And actually just on a basic human level, ask the question of why are we doing all this senseless killing?
And look at the interest of one, Russia, look at the interest of the other, Ukraine. Their interests are pretty simple. And say, the United States is going to stay out of this. We’re not going to expand NATO, and say all that in a way that’s convincing, which is that NATO expansion is silly at this point, China’s the big threat. We’re not going to do this kind of conflict escalation with Russia. The Cold War’s over, let’s normalize relations.
John Mearsheimer
Let me just embellish your argument, okay?
Let me just embellish your argument, okay?
Lex Fridman
Thank you. I need it.
Thank you. I need it.
John Mearsheimer
If we say there’s a sliver of a chance that you can do this, and I do think there is a sliver of a chance. Let me just embellish your point.
If we say there’s a sliver of a chance that you can do this, and I do think there is a sliver of a chance. Let me just embellish your point.
Lex Fridman
Thank you. I need all the help I can get.
Thank you. I need all the help I can get.
John Mearsheimer
Two things have to be done here, in my opinion. One is, Ukraine has to become neutral, and it has to completely sever all security ties with the West, right? It is not like you can say, “We’re not going to expand NATO to include Ukraine, but we’re going to continue to have some loose security arrangement with Ukraine.” None of that. It has to be completely severed. Ukraine has to be on its own, okay?
Two things have to be done here, in my opinion. One is, Ukraine has to become neutral, and it has to completely sever all security ties with the West, right? It is not like you can say, “We’re not going to expand NATO to include Ukraine, but we’re going to continue to have some loose security arrangement with Ukraine.” None of that. It has to be completely severed. Ukraine has to be on its own, okay?
And number two, Ukraine has to accept the fact that the Russians are going to keep the four oblasts that they’ve now annexed, and Crimea. The Russians are not going to give them back. And what you really want to do, if you’re Zelensky or who’s ever running Ukraine in this scenario that we’re positing, is you want to make sure the Russians don’t take another four oblasts, to include Kharkiv and Odessa.
If I’m playing Putin’s hand and this war goes on, I’m thinking about taking four more oblasts. I want to take about 43% of Ukraine and annex it to Russia, and I certainly want Odessa, and I certainly want Kharkiv, and I want the two oblasts-
John Mearsheimer
And I certainly want Harki and I want the two old boss in between as well.
And I certainly want Harki and I want the two old boss in between as well.
Lex Fridman
Literally, or as leveraged in negotiation or Ukraine neutrality?
Literally, or as leveraged in negotiation or Ukraine neutrality?
John Mearsheimer
No, I want them literally, I want to conquer them literally. My point to you is if we can begin to talk about cutting a deal now, you may be able to head that kind of aggression off at the pass. In other words, you may be able to limit Putin and Russia to annexing the four old boss that they’ve now annexed plus Crimea. That’s the best I think you can hope for. The point is you have to get the Ukrainians to accept that. You have to get the Ukrainians to accept becoming a truly neutral state and conceding that the Russians keep a big chunk of territory. It’s about 23% of Ukrainian territory that they’ve annexed and I find it hard to imagine any Ukrainian leader agreeing to that.
No, I want them literally, I want to conquer them literally. My point to you is if we can begin to talk about cutting a deal now, you may be able to head that kind of aggression off at the pass. In other words, you may be able to limit Putin and Russia to annexing the four old boss that they’ve now annexed plus Crimea. That’s the best I think you can hope for. The point is you have to get the Ukrainians to accept that. You have to get the Ukrainians to accept becoming a truly neutral state and conceding that the Russians keep a big chunk of territory. It’s about 23% of Ukrainian territory that they’ve annexed and I find it hard to imagine any Ukrainian leader agreeing to that.
Lex Fridman
Well, there could be more nuanced things like no military involvement between the United States and Ukraine, but economic involvement, sort of financial support, so normalizing economic relationships with Ukraine, with Russia, all being-
Well, there could be more nuanced things like no military involvement between the United States and Ukraine, but economic involvement, sort of financial support, so normalizing economic relationships with Ukraine, with Russia, all being-
John Mearsheimer
I think you could probably get away with that. I think the tricky question there that you would have to answer is what about EU expansion? And I think EU expansion is probably a no-no for the Russians because most people don’t recognize this, but there is a military dimension built into EU expansion. It’s not purely an economic alliance or relationship or institution, whatever word you want to use. There’s a military dimension to that. In the run-up to the war, actually in the run-up to the 2014 crisis, when it first broke out, the Russians made it clear they saw EU expansion as a stalking horse for NATO expansion.
I think you could probably get away with that. I think the tricky question there that you would have to answer is what about EU expansion? And I think EU expansion is probably a no-no for the Russians because most people don’t recognize this, but there is a military dimension built into EU expansion. It’s not purely an economic alliance or relationship or institution, whatever word you want to use. There’s a military dimension to that. In the run-up to the war, actually in the run-up to the 2014 crisis, when it first broke out, the Russians made it clear they saw EU expansion as a stalking horse for NATO expansion.
So EU expansion is tricky, but I think your point of close economic relations between … or healthy economic relations to use a better term between Ukraine and the West is possible. I think the Russians have a vested interest and if it’s a neutral Ukraine, they have a vested interest in that Ukraine flourishing, but that then brings us back to the territorial issue, right?
Lex Fridman
Well, so do you believe it’s possible for individual human relations to counteract the structural forces that you talk about? So meaning the leaders being able to pick up the phone and make agreements that are good for humanity as a whole and for their individual nations in the long term?
Well, so do you believe it’s possible for individual human relations to counteract the structural forces that you talk about? So meaning the leaders being able to pick up the phone and make agreements that are good for humanity as a whole and for their individual nations in the long term?
John Mearsheimer
I think leadership matters here. I mean, one of the real problems here is that there’s no trust on the Russian side, and that has to do with the Minsk agreements. The Minsk agreements, which were designed to shut down the Civil War in Eastern Ukraine, in the Donbas really mattered to the Russians. And there were four players involved in the Minsk process, four main players, Russia and Ukraine of course, and then Germany and France. And I believe the Russians took the Minsk Accord seriously. I believe Putin took them very seriously. He wanted to shut down that conflict.
I think leadership matters here. I mean, one of the real problems here is that there’s no trust on the Russian side, and that has to do with the Minsk agreements. The Minsk agreements, which were designed to shut down the Civil War in Eastern Ukraine, in the Donbas really mattered to the Russians. And there were four players involved in the Minsk process, four main players, Russia and Ukraine of course, and then Germany and France. And I believe the Russians took the Minsk Accord seriously. I believe Putin took them very seriously. He wanted to shut down that conflict.
And Angela Merkel, Francois Hollande, he was the French leader and Poroshenko, who was the Ukrainian leader, those were the three key players besides Putin. Again, Hollande from France, Merkel from Germany, and Poroshenko from Ukraine have all explicitly said they were not seriously interested in reaching an agreement in all of the discussions with Putin, they were bamboozling him. They were trying to trick him so that they would buy time to build up Ukraine’s military. Putin is profoundly upset about these admissions by these three leaders. He believes he was fooled into thinking that Minsk could work. He believes that he negotiated in good faith and they did not.
And he believes that the level of trust now between Russia and the West is virtually zero as a result of this experience over Minsk. I only bring this up because it cuts against your argument that leaders could pick up the phone and talk to each other and trust each other at least somewhat to work out a meaningful deal. If you’re Putin at this point in time, trusting the West is not an idea that’s going to be very attractive at all. In fact, you’re going to distrust anything they say.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, distrust anything the West say, but there is individual humans. The way human nature works is when you’re sitting across from a person, you can trust a human being while still distrusting the West. I mean, I believe in the power of that. I think with the right leaders, you could sit down and talk, like override the general structural distrust of the West and say, “You know what? I like this guy or gal, whatever.” I do hope Zelensky and Putin sit down together and talk, have multiple talks.
Yeah, distrust anything the West say, but there is individual humans. The way human nature works is when you’re sitting across from a person, you can trust a human being while still distrusting the West. I mean, I believe in the power of that. I think with the right leaders, you could sit down and talk, like override the general structural distrust of the West and say, “You know what? I like this guy or gal, whatever.” I do hope Zelensky and Putin sit down together and talk, have multiple talks.
John Mearsheimer
Just remember they were doing that in March and the Americans came in and the British came in and they scotched a potential deal.
Just remember they were doing that in March and the Americans came in and the British came in and they scotched a potential deal.
Lex Fridman
Well, the other beautiful thing about human nature, there’s forgiveness and there’s trying again.
Well, the other beautiful thing about human nature, there’s forgiveness and there’s trying again.
John Mearsheimer
When you’re the leader of a country in an anarchic system, you have to be very careful not to let your trust in a foreign leader take you too far, because if that foreign leader betrays you or betrays your trust and stab you in the back, you could die and again, you want to remember that the principal responsibility of any leader, I don’t care what country it is, is to ensure the survival of their state. And that means that trust is only going to buy you so much, and when you’ve already betrayed the trust of a leader, you really are not going to be able to rely on trust very much to help you moving forward. Now, you disagree with that? I hope you’re right.
When you’re the leader of a country in an anarchic system, you have to be very careful not to let your trust in a foreign leader take you too far, because if that foreign leader betrays you or betrays your trust and stab you in the back, you could die and again, you want to remember that the principal responsibility of any leader, I don’t care what country it is, is to ensure the survival of their state. And that means that trust is only going to buy you so much, and when you’ve already betrayed the trust of a leader, you really are not going to be able to rely on trust very much to help you moving forward. Now, you disagree with that? I hope you’re right.
And if they can shut down the Ukraine-Russia war, it would be wonderful. If I’m proved dead wrong, that would be wonderful news. My prediction that this war is going to go on for a long time and end in an ugly way is a prediction that I don’t like at all. So I hope I’m wrong.
Lex Fridman
You wrote that many in the West believe that the best hope for ending the Ukraine wars to remove Vladimir Putin from power, but you argue that this isn’t the case. Can you explain?
You wrote that many in the West believe that the best hope for ending the Ukraine wars to remove Vladimir Putin from power, but you argue that this isn’t the case. Can you explain?
John Mearsheimer
Well, a lot of people thought when they were having all that trouble, the Russians were having all that trouble with Prigozhin and the Wagner Group that Putin was vulnerable and was likely to be overthrown. And what would happen is a peace-loving leader would replace Putin. I made two points at the time, and I would make those same two points now. Number one, he’s not likely to be overthrown. He was not likely then to be overthrown. And I think as long as his health holds up, I think he will remain in power. My second point is if he doesn’t remain in power and he’s replaced, I would bet a lot of money that his replacement will be more hawkish and more hard line than Putin is.
Well, a lot of people thought when they were having all that trouble, the Russians were having all that trouble with Prigozhin and the Wagner Group that Putin was vulnerable and was likely to be overthrown. And what would happen is a peace-loving leader would replace Putin. I made two points at the time, and I would make those same two points now. Number one, he’s not likely to be overthrown. He was not likely then to be overthrown. And I think as long as his health holds up, I think he will remain in power. My second point is if he doesn’t remain in power and he’s replaced, I would bet a lot of money that his replacement will be more hawkish and more hard line than Putin is.
I actually think one could argue that Putin was too trusting of the West before the war started and number two, I think one could argue that he has not waged the war against Ukraine as vigorously as one might have expected. He was slow to mobilize the nation for war, and he has pursued a limited war in all sorts of ways. The Israelis, for example, have killed more civilians in Gaza in one month than the Russians have killed over 18 months in Ukraine. The idea that Vladimir Putin is waging a punishment campaign and killing on purpose, large numbers of civilians, is simply not true.
All this just to say that … I would imagine that if Putin leaves office and someone else comes in to replace him, that someone else will be at least if not, more hard line than him in terms of waging the war, and certainly will not trust the West any more than he has.
Lex Fridman
By way of advice, let me ask you, if I were to have a conversation interview Vladimir Putin and Zelensky individually, what should I ask them? If you, me and Vladimir Putin are having a chat, what are good ideas to explore? What are good questions to ask? What are good things to say on or off the mic once again, that could potentially even slightly, lessen the amount of suffering in the world caused by this war?
By way of advice, let me ask you, if I were to have a conversation interview Vladimir Putin and Zelensky individually, what should I ask them? If you, me and Vladimir Putin are having a chat, what are good ideas to explore? What are good questions to ask? What are good things to say on or off the mic once again, that could potentially even slightly, lessen the amount of suffering in the world caused by this war?
John Mearsheimer
I think if you get an interview with Vladimir Putin, there’s just all sorts of questions you could ask him. And my sense is that Putin is a straight shooter. He’s also very knowledgeable about history, and he has simple theories in his head about how the world works. I think he would level with you, and all you would’ve to do is just figure out what all the right questions are. That would not be hard to do. You could ask him why was he so foolish? For example, why was he so foolish as to trust Poroshenko, Hollande and Merkel in the Minsk Accords. Why after his famous talk at Munich in 2007 where he made it clear that he was so unhappy with the West, did he continue to, in a very important way, trust the West?
I think if you get an interview with Vladimir Putin, there’s just all sorts of questions you could ask him. And my sense is that Putin is a straight shooter. He’s also very knowledgeable about history, and he has simple theories in his head about how the world works. I think he would level with you, and all you would’ve to do is just figure out what all the right questions are. That would not be hard to do. You could ask him why was he so foolish? For example, why was he so foolish as to trust Poroshenko, Hollande and Merkel in the Minsk Accords. Why after his famous talk at Munich in 2007 where he made it clear that he was so unhappy with the West, did he continue to, in a very important way, trust the West?
Why didn’t he mobilize the Russian military before late September, 2022, once the negotiations that we were talking about before involving Istanbul and Naftali Bennett. Once they broke down, why didn’t he immediately mobilize more of the Russian population to fight the war? Just all sorts of questions like that. Then, you could ask him questions about where he sees this one headed. What’s the best strategy for Russia if the Ukrainians will not agree to neutrality?People like John Mearsheimer say, “You’ll probably take close to half of Ukraine. Is that true? Does it make sense to take Odessa.”
Lex Fridman
And John Mearsheimer also has questions about China, your future relationships with China?
And John Mearsheimer also has questions about China, your future relationships with China?
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, I mean, one really important question that I would ask him is if the United States had basically not driven you into the arms of the Chinese, if there had been no war over Ukraine and the United States and its European allies had gone to considerable lengths to create some sort of security architecture in Europe that resulted in you, Vladimir Putin having good relations with Ukraine, what would your relations with China be and how would you think about that? So there are just plenty of questions you could ask him.
Yeah, I mean, one really important question that I would ask him is if the United States had basically not driven you into the arms of the Chinese, if there had been no war over Ukraine and the United States and its European allies had gone to considerable lengths to create some sort of security architecture in Europe that resulted in you, Vladimir Putin having good relations with Ukraine, what would your relations with China be and how would you think about that? So there are just plenty of questions you could ask him.
Lex Fridman
Well, hope burns eternal in my heart, I think probably in Putin’s heart and Zelensky’s heart, I hope because hope is, the leap of trust that we’ve talked about, I think is necessary for deescalation and for peace.
Well, hope burns eternal in my heart, I think probably in Putin’s heart and Zelensky’s heart, I hope because hope is, the leap of trust that we’ve talked about, I think is necessary for deescalation and for peace.
John Mearsheimer
Well, you realize, I have, from the beginning, argued for different policies that were all designed to prevent this war from ever happening.
Well, you realize, I have, from the beginning, argued for different policies that were all designed to prevent this war from ever happening.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
John Mearsheimer
I don’t know if you know this, but in 1993, I argued that Ukraine should keep its nuclear weapons. I was probably the only person in the West who made that argument. And my argument in 1993, this is in foreign affairs, was that there may come the day when Russia thinks about invading Ukraine. And should that day come, it would be very helpful for preventing war if Ukraine had nuclear weapons.
I don’t know if you know this, but in 1993, I argued that Ukraine should keep its nuclear weapons. I was probably the only person in the West who made that argument. And my argument in 1993, this is in foreign affairs, was that there may come the day when Russia thinks about invading Ukraine. And should that day come, it would be very helpful for preventing war if Ukraine had nuclear weapons.
Lex Fridman
So military might is essential for maintaining a balance of power and peace.
So military might is essential for maintaining a balance of power and peace.
John Mearsheimer
Well, if you’re interested in deterring an adversary, if I’m worried about you coming after me, the best way to deter you is to have military might. If you’re Russia, and I’m Ukraine, I’m far weaker than you, right?
Well, if you’re interested in deterring an adversary, if I’m worried about you coming after me, the best way to deter you is to have military might. If you’re Russia, and I’m Ukraine, I’m far weaker than you, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
And having a nuclear deterrent would be very effective at convincing you not to attack me because if you attack me, you’re threatening my survival. And that’s the one circumstance where it is likely that I would use nuclear weapons to defend myself and given the consequences of nuclear use, you would be reluctant in the extreme to attack me. So that’s why I argued in ’93 that if Ukraine kept its nuclear weapons that made war down the road much less likely. And I believe I was correct. And in fact, Bill Clinton, who played the key role in forcing Ukraine to give up its nuclear weapons now says … he has said it publicly, you can find it on YouTube that he made a mistake doing that.
And having a nuclear deterrent would be very effective at convincing you not to attack me because if you attack me, you’re threatening my survival. And that’s the one circumstance where it is likely that I would use nuclear weapons to defend myself and given the consequences of nuclear use, you would be reluctant in the extreme to attack me. So that’s why I argued in ’93 that if Ukraine kept its nuclear weapons that made war down the road much less likely. And I believe I was correct. And in fact, Bill Clinton, who played the key role in forcing Ukraine to give up its nuclear weapons now says … he has said it publicly, you can find it on YouTube that he made a mistake doing that.
Furthermore, I argued in 2014 that it made eminently good sense not to continue to push to bring Ukraine into NATO because the end result is that Ukraine would be destroyed and Ukraine is being destroyed. So I was deeply interested at time in making sure that that didn’t happen for the good of the Ukrainians, not to mention, because stability in Europe is a net positive for almost everybody involved, but people did not listen to me then either.
Lex Fridman
How did nuclear weapons change the calculus of offensive realism, because of mutually assured destruction? I mean, it’s not just military might. It’s just so destructive that you basically can’t use nuclear weapons unless you want complete destruction.
How did nuclear weapons change the calculus of offensive realism, because of mutually assured destruction? I mean, it’s not just military might. It’s just so destructive that you basically can’t use nuclear weapons unless you want complete destruction.
John Mearsheimer
There’s no question that the presence of nuclear weapons makes it much less likely. I’m choosing my words carefully here, much less likely that a great power would aggress against another great power. It doesn’t take that possibility off the table, but it makes it much less likely because of the reasons that you articulated. With regard to nuclear use, it’s an interesting question how you think about nuclear use in a MAD world. I mean, your point that we’re in a MAD world is … that’s mad, MAD as well as mad, small letters, but let’s stick to the capital letters. We’re in a world of mutual assured destruction. There’s no question that in that world, it’s unlikely that nuclear weapons would be used.
There’s no question that the presence of nuclear weapons makes it much less likely. I’m choosing my words carefully here, much less likely that a great power would aggress against another great power. It doesn’t take that possibility off the table, but it makes it much less likely because of the reasons that you articulated. With regard to nuclear use, it’s an interesting question how you think about nuclear use in a MAD world. I mean, your point that we’re in a MAD world is … that’s mad, MAD as well as mad, small letters, but let’s stick to the capital letters. We’re in a world of mutual assured destruction. There’s no question that in that world, it’s unlikely that nuclear weapons would be used.
The way you use nuclear weapons in that world is you use them for manipulation of risk purposes, demonstration effect. You put both sides out on the slippery slope. Now, what exactly am I saying here? Let me talk about NATO doctrine during the Cold War. We lived in a MAD world, United States and Soviet Union or the Warsaw Pact in NATO, both had an assured destruction capability. So you had mutual assured destruction. If the Warsaw Pact were to invade Western Europe, and here we’re talking about West Germany and NATO was losing the war, we said that we would use nuclear weapons. How would we use nuclear weapons given that we were in a MAD world? The argument was that we would use a handful of nuclear weapons against the Warsaw Pact, not necessarily against their military forces.
It could be in a remote area. We would use a small number of nuclear weapons to signal to the Soviets that we were deadly serious about putting an end to their offensive, and that we were throwing both sides out on the slippery slope to oblivion. In other words, we were manipulating risk and the last clear chance to avoid Armageddon rested with them. And then, we would tell them that if you retaliated with a handful of nuclear weapons and you didn’t cease your offensive against West Germany, we would launch a small, another nuclear attack. We would explode a handful more of nuclear weapons, all for the purposes of showing you our resolve.
So this is the manipulation of risk strategy, and a lot of the language I just used in describing it to you is language that Thomas Schelling invented. Now fast-forward to the present, if Russia were losing in Ukraine, that’s the one scenario where I think where Russia would’ve used nuclear weapons. The question is, how would Russia have used nuclear weapons? Again, we’re assuming that the Russians are losing to the Ukrainians. I believe they would’ve pursued a manipulation of risk strategy. They would’ve used four or five, three or four, who knows, nuclear weapons-
Lex Fridman
Maybe just one in a rural area that kills very few people.
Maybe just one in a rural area that kills very few people.
John Mearsheimer
Yes, exactly, and basically, that would spook everybody. The American-
Yes, exactly, and basically, that would spook everybody. The American-
Lex Fridman
Just the mushroom cloud.
Just the mushroom cloud.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. It’s because of the threat of escalation.
Yeah. It’s because of the threat of escalation.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
Again, your point is we’re in a MAD world. I accept that and if you have limited nuclear use, right? We understand hardly anything about nuclear escalation because thank goodness we’ve never had a nuclear war. So once you throw both sides out on the slippery slope, even if you only use one nuclear weapon in your scenario, you don’t know what the escalation dynamics look like. So everybody has a powerful incentive to put an end to the conflict right away. I might add to you that there were people who believed that we would not even initiate a manipulation of risk strategy in Europe if we were losing to the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.
Again, your point is we’re in a MAD world. I accept that and if you have limited nuclear use, right? We understand hardly anything about nuclear escalation because thank goodness we’ve never had a nuclear war. So once you throw both sides out on the slippery slope, even if you only use one nuclear weapon in your scenario, you don’t know what the escalation dynamics look like. So everybody has a powerful incentive to put an end to the conflict right away. I might add to you that there were people who believed that we would not even initiate a manipulation of risk strategy in Europe if we were losing to the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.
Both Henry Kissinger and Robert McNamara said after leaving office that they would not have done it. They would’ve not initiated nuclear use, even limited nuclear use. That’s what we’re talking about here. They would rather be red than dead, that was the argument.
Lex Fridman
Too risky.
Too risky.
John Mearsheimer
Too risky. That’s exactly right, but if they had used one nuclear weapon in your story, or three or four in my story, everybody would’ve said, “Oh my God, we’ve got to shut this one down immediately.” I only tell you this story or lay out this scenario as an answer to your question of how you use nuclear weapons in a MAD world, and this is the answer.
Too risky. That’s exactly right, but if they had used one nuclear weapon in your story, or three or four in my story, everybody would’ve said, “Oh my God, we’ve got to shut this one down immediately.” I only tell you this story or lay out this scenario as an answer to your question of how you use nuclear weapons in a MAD world, and this is the answer.
Lex Fridman
This is all very terrifying. Perhaps in part, it’s terrifying to me because I can see in the 21st century, China, Russia, Israel, United States using a nuclear weapon in this way, blowing it up somewhere in the middle of nowhere that kills maybe nobody, but I’m terrified of seeing the mushroom cloud and not knowing, given social media, given how fast news travels, what the escalation looks like there. Just in a matter of minutes, how the news travels and how the leaders react. It’s terrifying that this little demonstration of power, the ripple effects of it, in a matter of minutes, seconds, what that leads to because it’s human emotions.
This is all very terrifying. Perhaps in part, it’s terrifying to me because I can see in the 21st century, China, Russia, Israel, United States using a nuclear weapon in this way, blowing it up somewhere in the middle of nowhere that kills maybe nobody, but I’m terrified of seeing the mushroom cloud and not knowing, given social media, given how fast news travels, what the escalation looks like there. Just in a matter of minutes, how the news travels and how the leaders react. It’s terrifying that this little demonstration of power, the ripple effects of it, in a matter of minutes, seconds, what that leads to because it’s human emotions.
You see the landscape of human emotions, the leaders and the populace and the way news are reported, and then the landscape of risk, as you mentioned, shifting the world’s most intense nonlinear dynamical system, and it is just terrifying because the entirety of human civilizations hangs in the balance there. And it’s like this, hundreds of millions of people could be dead.
John Mearsheimer
Let’s just talk about this in the context of the Ukrainian War. If the Russians were losing, as I said before, which is not the case anymore, but in 2022, it did look like that, if the Russians are losing and they turn to nuclear weapons, the question is how do they use them? And they would use them in Ukraine, and because Ukraine has no nuclear weapons of its own, Ukraine cannot retaliate. It’s not a mutual assured destruction world. It’s a case where one side has nuclear weapons and the other doesn’t. That means that the Russians are likely to think that they can get away with using nuclear weapons in ways that would not be the case if they were attacking NATO.
Let’s just talk about this in the context of the Ukrainian War. If the Russians were losing, as I said before, which is not the case anymore, but in 2022, it did look like that, if the Russians are losing and they turn to nuclear weapons, the question is how do they use them? And they would use them in Ukraine, and because Ukraine has no nuclear weapons of its own, Ukraine cannot retaliate. It’s not a mutual assured destruction world. It’s a case where one side has nuclear weapons and the other doesn’t. That means that the Russians are likely to think that they can get away with using nuclear weapons in ways that would not be the case if they were attacking NATO.
And therefore, it makes nuclear use more likely. Okay. That’s point one. Point two is let’s assume that the Russians use two or three nuclear weapons in a remote area-
Lex Fridman
My palms are sweating, by the way. Just as a commentary. It’s terrifying.
My palms are sweating, by the way. Just as a commentary. It’s terrifying.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. The question then is what does the West do? Now, Macron has said and Biden has also, I think, implicitly made this clear, “We would not retaliate with nuclear weapons, if the Russians were to attack with a handful of nuclear weapons in Western Ukraine.” Then, the question is what would we do? And if you listen to David Petraeus, what David Petraeus says, is that we should attack the Russian naval assets in the Black Sea and attack Russian forces in Ukraine. Well, once you do that, you have a great power of war. You have NATO versus Russia, which is another way of saying you have the United States versus Russia. We’re now in a great power of war.
Yeah. The question then is what does the West do? Now, Macron has said and Biden has also, I think, implicitly made this clear, “We would not retaliate with nuclear weapons, if the Russians were to attack with a handful of nuclear weapons in Western Ukraine.” Then, the question is what would we do? And if you listen to David Petraeus, what David Petraeus says, is that we should attack the Russian naval assets in the Black Sea and attack Russian forces in Ukraine. Well, once you do that, you have a great power of war. You have NATO versus Russia, which is another way of saying you have the United States versus Russia. We’re now in a great power of war.
They have nuclear weapons, we have nuclear weapons. They’ve used nuclear weapons. What is the happy ending here? And just to take it a step further and go back to our earlier discussion about moving NATO up to Russia’s borders, the point I made, which you’ll surely agree with, is that the Russians are very fearful when they see NATO coming up to their border. Well, here’s a case where not only is NATO come up to their border, but they’re in a war with NATO right on their border. What do the escalation dynamics look like there? You know what the answer is? Who knows? That should scare the living bejesus out of you, right?
Lex Fridman
And some of it could be, like you mentioned, unintended. There could be unintended consequences. That could be a Russian missile misses in hits Poland. These kinds of things that just escalate misunderstandings, miscommunications, even … I mean, nuclear weapon could be … boy, it could have been planned to go location X, and it went to a location Y that ended up actually killing a very large number of people. I mean, the escalation that happens there just happens in a matter of minutes. And the only way to stop that is communication between leaders. And that to me is a big argument for ongoing communication.
And some of it could be, like you mentioned, unintended. There could be unintended consequences. That could be a Russian missile misses in hits Poland. These kinds of things that just escalate misunderstandings, miscommunications, even … I mean, nuclear weapon could be … boy, it could have been planned to go location X, and it went to a location Y that ended up actually killing a very large number of people. I mean, the escalation that happens there just happens in a matter of minutes. And the only way to stop that is communication between leaders. And that to me is a big argument for ongoing communication.
John Mearsheimer
There’s a story that during the Cuban missile crisis, Kennedy put out the word, no aircraft under any circumstances or to penetrate Soviet airspace. He then found out a few days later that some guy hadn’t gotten the message and had penetrated in an aircraft deep into Soviet airspace.
There’s a story that during the Cuban missile crisis, Kennedy put out the word, no aircraft under any circumstances or to penetrate Soviet airspace. He then found out a few days later that some guy hadn’t gotten the message and had penetrated in an aircraft deep into Soviet airspace.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
And this supports your basic point that bad things happen.
And this supports your basic point that bad things happen.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
And again, the overarching point here is we’ve never done this before, thankfully. Therefore, we don’t have a lot of experience as to how it plays itself out. It’s really a theoretical enterprise because there’s no empirical basis for talking about escalation in a nuclear crisis. And that, of course, is a wonderful thing.
And again, the overarching point here is we’ve never done this before, thankfully. Therefore, we don’t have a lot of experience as to how it plays itself out. It’s really a theoretical enterprise because there’s no empirical basis for talking about escalation in a nuclear crisis. And that, of course, is a wonderful thing.
Lex Fridman
Well, and in general, the human species as a whole as a one-off, is a theoretical enterprise. The survival of the human species. We’ve seen empires rise and fall, but we haven’t seen the human species rise and fall. So far it’s been rising, but it’s not obvious that it doesn’t end. In fact, I think about aliens a lot, and the fact that we don’t see aliens makes me suspect it’s not so easy to survive in this complicated world of ours. Switching gears a little bit and going to a different part of the world, also engulfed in war. Let me ask you about the situation in Israel. Why did Hamas attack Israel on October 7th, 2023? As you understand the situation, what was the reason that attack happened?
Well, and in general, the human species as a whole as a one-off, is a theoretical enterprise. The survival of the human species. We’ve seen empires rise and fall, but we haven’t seen the human species rise and fall. So far it’s been rising, but it’s not obvious that it doesn’t end. In fact, I think about aliens a lot, and the fact that we don’t see aliens makes me suspect it’s not so easy to survive in this complicated world of ours. Switching gears a little bit and going to a different part of the world, also engulfed in war. Let me ask you about the situation in Israel. Why did Hamas attack Israel on October 7th, 2023? As you understand the situation, what was the reason that attack happened?
Israel and Palestine
John Mearsheimer
Well, I think the main reason was that you had this suffocating occupation. I think as long as the occupation persists, the Palestinians are going to resist. As you well know, this is not the first time there has been a Palestinian uprising. There was the first Intifada, there was the second Intifada, now there’s October 7th, and there are uprisings besides those three, so this is not terribly surprising. A lot of people hypothesized that this attack was due to the fact that the Israelis, the Saudis and the Americans were working together to foster another Abraham Accord and that the Palestinians would in effect be sold down the river.
Well, I think the main reason was that you had this suffocating occupation. I think as long as the occupation persists, the Palestinians are going to resist. As you well know, this is not the first time there has been a Palestinian uprising. There was the first Intifada, there was the second Intifada, now there’s October 7th, and there are uprisings besides those three, so this is not terribly surprising. A lot of people hypothesized that this attack was due to the fact that the Israelis, the Saudis and the Americans were working together to foster another Abraham Accord and that the Palestinians would in effect be sold down the river.
I think given the fact that this was in the planning stages for probably about two years, and the Abraham Accords with regard to Saudi Arabia are relatively new phenomenon, I don’t think that’s the main driving force here. I think the main driving force is that the Palestinians feel oppressed as they should, and that this was a resistance move. They were resisting the Israeli occupation.
Lex Fridman
So that resistance, the attack involved killing a large number of Israeli civilians. There’s many questions asked there, but one is, do you think Hamas fully understood what the retaliation will involve from Israel and to Gaza?
So that resistance, the attack involved killing a large number of Israeli civilians. There’s many questions asked there, but one is, do you think Hamas fully understood what the retaliation will involve from Israel and to Gaza?
John Mearsheimer
They had to understand. I mean, you had Operation Cast Lead in 2008, 2009. It started, I think right after Christmas 2008, and it ended right before President Obama took office in January 2009. And the Israelis periodically do what they call mowing the lawn where they go into Gaza and they pound the Palestinians to remind them that they’re not supposed to rise up and cause any problem. So there’s no question in my mind that the Hamas forces understood full well that the Israelis would retaliate and they would retaliate in force as they have done.
They had to understand. I mean, you had Operation Cast Lead in 2008, 2009. It started, I think right after Christmas 2008, and it ended right before President Obama took office in January 2009. And the Israelis periodically do what they call mowing the lawn where they go into Gaza and they pound the Palestinians to remind them that they’re not supposed to rise up and cause any problem. So there’s no question in my mind that the Hamas forces understood full well that the Israelis would retaliate and they would retaliate in force as they have done.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, even the metaphor of mowing the lawn is disturbing to me in many ways. I actually saw Norman Finkelstein, I think, say that, well, then if you use that metaphor, then you could say that Hamas was also mowing the lawn. It’s such a horrific image because the result on either side is just the death of civilians. I mean, let me ask you about the death of civilians. So during the attack, 1400 Israelis were killed. Over 240 were taken hostage. Then, in response, as we sit today, Israel’s military response has killed over 10,000 people in Gaza. And given the nature of the demographics, it’s a very heavily young population.
Yeah, even the metaphor of mowing the lawn is disturbing to me in many ways. I actually saw Norman Finkelstein, I think, say that, well, then if you use that metaphor, then you could say that Hamas was also mowing the lawn. It’s such a horrific image because the result on either side is just the death of civilians. I mean, let me ask you about the death of civilians. So during the attack, 1400 Israelis were killed. Over 240 were taken hostage. Then, in response, as we sit today, Israel’s military response has killed over 10,000 people in Gaza. And given the nature of the demographics, it’s a very heavily young population.
Over 40% of them are under the age of 18, of those killed. That’s of course, according to Ministry of Health of Palestinian Authority. So what do you think is the long-term effect on the prospect of peace when so many civilians die?
John Mearsheimer
I mean, I think it’s disastrous. I mean, the only way you’re going to get peace here is if you have a two-state solution where the Palestinians have a sovereign state of their own, and there is a sovereign Jewish state. And these two states live side by side American presidents since Jimmy Carter have understood this full well. And this is why we have pushed very hard for two-state solution. Indeed, many American Jews and many Israelis have pushed for a two-state solution because they think that that is the only way you’re going to get peace between the two sides. What’s happened here is that in recent years, the Israelis have lost all interest in a two-state solution.
I mean, I think it’s disastrous. I mean, the only way you’re going to get peace here is if you have a two-state solution where the Palestinians have a sovereign state of their own, and there is a sovereign Jewish state. And these two states live side by side American presidents since Jimmy Carter have understood this full well. And this is why we have pushed very hard for two-state solution. Indeed, many American Jews and many Israelis have pushed for a two-state solution because they think that that is the only way you’re going to get peace between the two sides. What’s happened here is that in recent years, the Israelis have lost all interest in a two-state solution.
And it’s in large part because the political center of gravity in Israel has steadily moved to the right. When I was a young boy, the political center of gravity in Israel was much further to the left than it is today. It is in a position now, the political center of gravity where there’s hardly any support for two state solution and Netanyahu and the rest of the people in his government were in favor or are in favor of a greater Israel. There’s just no question about that. Well, on top of that, you now have had a war where, as you described, huge numbers of civilians have been killed, and you already had bad blood between the Palestinians and the Israelis before this conflict.
And you could imagine how people on each side now feel about people on the other side. So even if you didn’t have this opposition inside Israel to a two-state solution, how could you possibly get the Israelis now to agree to a two-state solution? I think for the foreseeable future, the animosity …
John Mearsheimer
Solution. I think for the foreseeable future, the animosity inside Israel towards the Palestinians is so great that it is impossible to move the Israelis in that direction. And the Israelis here are the key players more so than the Palestinians because it’s the Israelis who control Greater Israel. It’s the Israelis who you have to convince. Now, I want to be clear here. You also ultimately have to get around the fact that Hamas is not committed to a two-state solution. But I think that problem could be dealt with. It’s important to understand that Arafat and the PLO was once adamantly opposed to a two-state solution. But Arafat came around to understand that that was really the only hope for settling this. And he became a proponent of a two-state solution.
Solution. I think for the foreseeable future, the animosity inside Israel towards the Palestinians is so great that it is impossible to move the Israelis in that direction. And the Israelis here are the key players more so than the Palestinians because it’s the Israelis who control Greater Israel. It’s the Israelis who you have to convince. Now, I want to be clear here. You also ultimately have to get around the fact that Hamas is not committed to a two-state solution. But I think that problem could be dealt with. It’s important to understand that Arafat and the PLO was once adamantly opposed to a two-state solution. But Arafat came around to understand that that was really the only hope for settling this. And he became a proponent of a two-state solution.
And that’s true of Mahmoud Abbas who runs the PA in the West Bank. It’s not true of Hamas at this point in time. They want a one-state solution, they want a Palestinian state. And of course, the Israelis want a one-state solution too, which is a Jewish state that controls all of Greater Israel. So the question is, can you get some sort of agreement? And I think to get to the nub of your question, given what’s just happened, it’s almost impossible to imagine that happening anytime soon.
Lex Fridman
The cynical perspective here is that those in power benefit from conflict while the people on both sides suffer. Is there a degree of truth to that? Or for the people in power to maintain power conflict needs to continue?
The cynical perspective here is that those in power benefit from conflict while the people on both sides suffer. Is there a degree of truth to that? Or for the people in power to maintain power conflict needs to continue?
John Mearsheimer
No, I don’t believe that. I mean, just to take the Netanyahu government or any Israeli government that maintains the occupation, what you want is you want a Palestinian population that submits to Israeli domination of Greater Israel. You don’t want resistance, you don’t want an intifada. You don’t want what happened on October 7th. In fact, I think one of the principal reasons that the Israelis are pounding Gaza and killing huge numbers of civilians. Punishing the civilian population in ways that clearly violate the laws of war, is because they want the Palestinians to understand that they are not allowed to rise up and resist the occupation. That’s their goal.
No, I don’t believe that. I mean, just to take the Netanyahu government or any Israeli government that maintains the occupation, what you want is you want a Palestinian population that submits to Israeli domination of Greater Israel. You don’t want resistance, you don’t want an intifada. You don’t want what happened on October 7th. In fact, I think one of the principal reasons that the Israelis are pounding Gaza and killing huge numbers of civilians. Punishing the civilian population in ways that clearly violate the laws of war, is because they want the Palestinians to understand that they are not allowed to rise up and resist the occupation. That’s their goal.
So, I think the Israelis would prefer that the Palestinians roll over and accept submission. In terms of the people who live in Gaza to include the elites, and the people who live in the West Bank to include the elites. They would much prefer to move to some sort of situation where the Palestinians have a state of their own. I think in the case of the PA, under Abbas, they would accept a two-state solution. I think what, at this point in time, Hamas wants is a one-state solution, but they want peace. All of them want peace. The two different sets of leadership in Palestine and the Israelis.
Lex Fridman
So you think Hamas wants peace?
So you think Hamas wants peace?
John Mearsheimer
Sure. But on its own terms, that’s the point.
Sure. But on its own terms, that’s the point.
Lex Fridman
What does peace look like for Hamas?
What does peace look like for Hamas?
John Mearsheimer
At this point in time, I think peace basically means a Greater Israel controlled by Palestine or Palestinians.
At this point in time, I think peace basically means a Greater Israel controlled by Palestine or Palestinians.
Lex Fridman
Okay. So essentially, it’s the whole land is called Palestine and there’s no Israel?
Okay. So essentially, it’s the whole land is called Palestine and there’s no Israel?
John Mearsheimer
I think, at this point in time, that’s their principal goal. I do believe, and there have been hints over time, Jimmy Carter has said this, that Hamas can be convinced to a two-state solution. Assuming that the Palestinians get a viable state of their own, that Hamas would buy into that. Can we say that with a high degree of certainty? No, but I think the Israelis should have pursued that possibility. They should have worked with Abbas, they should have worked with Hamas to do everything they can to facilitate a two-state solution. Because I think, ultimately, that’s in Israel’s interest. Now, the Israeli government, and most Israelis at this point in time, I believe, don’t agree with that.
I think, at this point in time, that’s their principal goal. I do believe, and there have been hints over time, Jimmy Carter has said this, that Hamas can be convinced to a two-state solution. Assuming that the Palestinians get a viable state of their own, that Hamas would buy into that. Can we say that with a high degree of certainty? No, but I think the Israelis should have pursued that possibility. They should have worked with Abbas, they should have worked with Hamas to do everything they can to facilitate a two-state solution. Because I think, ultimately, that’s in Israel’s interest. Now, the Israeli government, and most Israelis at this point in time, I believe, don’t agree with that.
Lex Fridman
What do you think of Israel starting the ground invasion of Gaza recently on October 27th?
What do you think of Israel starting the ground invasion of Gaza recently on October 27th?
John Mearsheimer
The question is, should they continue until they have finally defeated Hamas? There are all sorts of reports in the media, including in the Israeli media, that they’re not going to be allowed by the United States to continue this offensive for much more than a few weeks. The Israelis have been saying it’s going to take, in the best of all possible worlds, a number of months, if not a year to finish off Hamas. Well, it doesn’t look like they’re going to have enough time to do that. I doubt whether they can finish off Hamas, even if they’re given the time. I think they’re going to run into fierce resistance. And when they run into fierce resistance and large numbers of Israelis going to start to die, they’ll lose their appetite for this. And they, the Israelis, surely know at this point in time that even if they finish off Hamas, even if I’m wrong and they’re able to finish off Hamas, another group is going to rise up to resist the occupation.
The question is, should they continue until they have finally defeated Hamas? There are all sorts of reports in the media, including in the Israeli media, that they’re not going to be allowed by the United States to continue this offensive for much more than a few weeks. The Israelis have been saying it’s going to take, in the best of all possible worlds, a number of months, if not a year to finish off Hamas. Well, it doesn’t look like they’re going to have enough time to do that. I doubt whether they can finish off Hamas, even if they’re given the time. I think they’re going to run into fierce resistance. And when they run into fierce resistance and large numbers of Israelis going to start to die, they’ll lose their appetite for this. And they, the Israelis, surely know at this point in time that even if they finish off Hamas, even if I’m wrong and they’re able to finish off Hamas, another group is going to rise up to resist the occupation.
The idea that you can use with Ze’ev Jabotinsky called The Iron Wall, to beat the Palestinians into submission is delusional. It’s just not going to happen. The Palestinians want a state of their own. They don’t want to live under occupation. And there’s no military solution for Israel here. There has to be a political solution. And the only viable political solution is a two-state solution. I mean, you can’t go to democracy. You can’t go to a situation where you give the Palestinians equal rights inside of Greater Israel in large part because there are now as many Palestinians as there are Israeli Jews. And over time, the balance, the demographic balance shifts against the Israeli Jews and in favor of the Palestinians. In which case, you’ll end up with a Palestinian state in Greater Israel. So democracy for all doesn’t work. The Israelis, I believe, are quite interested in ethnic cleansing.
I think they saw this recent set of events as an opportunity to cleanse Gaza, but that’s not going to happen. The Jordanians and the Egyptians have made it clear that that’s not happening. The United States has now made it clear that that’s not happening. And the Palestinians will not leave. They’ll die in place. So ethnic cleansing doesn’t work. So you’re really left with two alternatives, the two-state solution or a Greater Israel that is effectively an apartheid state. I mean, that’s what the occupation has led to. And all sorts of people have been predicting this for a long, long time. And you’ve now reached the point. Here in the United States, if you say that Israel’s an apartheid state, that’s going to get you into all sorts of trouble. But the fact is that Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and B’Tselem, which is the leading Israeli human rights group. All three of those institutions or organizations have issued detailed reports making the case that Israel is an apartheid state.
Furthermore, if you read the Israeli media, all sorts of Israelis, including Israeli leaders, refer to Israel as an apartheid state. It’s not that unusual to hear that term used in Israel. This is disastrous for Israel in my opinion. And Steve Walt and I said this, by the way, when we wrote The Israel Lobby, that Israel is an apartheid state, which is equivalent to Israel as an occupier is not good for Israel. That brings us back to the two-state solution. But as you and I were talking about a few minutes ago, it’s hard to see how you get a two-state solution. And the end result of this conversation is utter despair.
Lex Fridman
Because the path to a two-state solution is blocked by the amount of hate that’s created by civilian deaths?
Because the path to a two-state solution is blocked by the amount of hate that’s created by civilian deaths?
John Mearsheimer
Well, that plus the fact that the Israeli government is filled with people who have no interest in a two-state solution. They’re ideologically deeply committed to a Greater Israel. They want all the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea to be part of a Jewish state. They’re just ideologically committed to that. And of course, as we were talking about before with regard to Hamas, Hamas wants everything between the river and the sea to be a Palestinian state. And when you have two sides with those kinds of views, you’re in deep trouble because there’s a little room for compromise. So what you have to do to get this to work is you have to convince the Israelis that it’s in their interest to have a two-state solution. And you’ve already taken care of the PA on this front, the Palestinian Authority, but you’ve got to convince Hamas that it’s maximalist goals are not going to work. And it’s in its interest to follow in the footsteps of Arafat and accept a two-state solution.
Well, that plus the fact that the Israeli government is filled with people who have no interest in a two-state solution. They’re ideologically deeply committed to a Greater Israel. They want all the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea to be part of a Jewish state. They’re just ideologically committed to that. And of course, as we were talking about before with regard to Hamas, Hamas wants everything between the river and the sea to be a Palestinian state. And when you have two sides with those kinds of views, you’re in deep trouble because there’s a little room for compromise. So what you have to do to get this to work is you have to convince the Israelis that it’s in their interest to have a two-state solution. And you’ve already taken care of the PA on this front, the Palestinian Authority, but you’ve got to convince Hamas that it’s maximalist goals are not going to work. And it’s in its interest to follow in the footsteps of Arafat and accept a two-state solution.
But even if you do that at this point, let’s say, that there’s a lot of willingness intellectually on both sides to do that. The problem is that the hatred that has been fueled by this ongoing conflict is so great that it’s just hard to imagine how you can make a two-state solution work at this juncture. That’s why I’ve sort of taken to saying, and I hope I’m wrong here, that on the two-state solution, that boat has sailed. It’s no longer possible.
Lex Fridman
Well, again, I believe in leadership and there’s other parties at play here, other nations, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, other players in the Middle East that could help through a normalization of relationships and these kinds of things. There’s always hope, like you said, slither of hope.
Well, again, I believe in leadership and there’s other parties at play here, other nations, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, other players in the Middle East that could help through a normalization of relationships and these kinds of things. There’s always hope, like you said, slither of hope.
John Mearsheimer
Slither of hope.
Slither of hope.
Lex Fridman
I think human civilization progresses forward by taking advantage of all the slithers it can get. Let me ask you about, you mentioned The Israel Lobby. You wrote a book, probably your most controversial book on the topic.
I think human civilization progresses forward by taking advantage of all the slithers it can get. Let me ask you about, you mentioned The Israel Lobby. You wrote a book, probably your most controversial book on the topic.
John Mearsheimer
Not probably. Clearly, the most controversial book I ever wrote.
Not probably. Clearly, the most controversial book I ever wrote.
Lex Fridman
So you’ve criticized the Israel lobby in the United States for influencing US policy in the Middle East. Can you explain what the Israel lobby is, their influence, and your criticism over the past, let’s say a couple of decades?
So you’ve criticized the Israel lobby in the United States for influencing US policy in the Middle East. Can you explain what the Israel lobby is, their influence, and your criticism over the past, let’s say a couple of decades?
John Mearsheimer
Well, the argument that Steve Walt and I made, actually, we wrote an article first, which appeared in the London Review of Books, and then we wrote the book itself. Our argument is that the lobby is a loose coalition of individuals and organizations that push American policy in a pro-Israel direction. And basically, the lobby is interested in getting the United States, and here we’re talking mainly about the American government, to support Israel no matter what Israel does. And our argument is, that if you look at the relationship between the United States and Israel, it’s unprecedented in modern history. This is the closest relationship that you can find between any two countries in recorded history. It’s truly amazing the extent to which Israel and the United States are joined at the hip. And we support Israel no matter what almost all the time. And our argument is that, that is largely due to the influence of the lobby. The lobby is an extremely powerful interest group.
Well, the argument that Steve Walt and I made, actually, we wrote an article first, which appeared in the London Review of Books, and then we wrote the book itself. Our argument is that the lobby is a loose coalition of individuals and organizations that push American policy in a pro-Israel direction. And basically, the lobby is interested in getting the United States, and here we’re talking mainly about the American government, to support Israel no matter what Israel does. And our argument is, that if you look at the relationship between the United States and Israel, it’s unprecedented in modern history. This is the closest relationship that you can find between any two countries in recorded history. It’s truly amazing the extent to which Israel and the United States are joined at the hip. And we support Israel no matter what almost all the time. And our argument is that, that is largely due to the influence of the lobby. The lobby is an extremely powerful interest group.
Now, it’s very important to understand that the American political system is set up in ways that allow interest groups of all sorts to wield great influence. So in the United States, you have an interest group or a lobby like the National Rifle Association that makes it, well, not impossible to get gun control. And so with the Israel lobby, you have this group of individuals and organizations that wield enormous influence on US policy toward the Middle East. And this is not surprising given the nature of the American political system. So our argument is that the lobby is not doing anything that’s illegal, or illicit, or immoral, or unethical. It’s just a good old-fashioned American interest group. And it just happens to be extremely powerful. And our argument is that this is not good for the United States because no two countries have the same interests all the time. And when our interests conflict with Israel’s interest, we should be able to do what we think is in our national interest, in America’s national interest.
But the lobby tends to conflate America’s national interests with Israel’s national interests and wants the United States to support Israel no matter what. We also argue, and I cannot emphasize this enough, given what’s going on in the world today, that the lobby’s effects, the lobby has not been pushing policies that are in Israel’s interest. So our argument is that the lobby pushes policies that are not in America’s interest or not in Israel’s interest. Now, you’re saying to yourself, what exactly does he mean by that? What every president since Jimmy Carter has tried to do, as I said before, is to foster a two-state solution to push Israel, which is the dominant player in Greater Israel, push Israel to accept the two-state solution. And we have run into huge resistance from the lobby whenever we try to, let’s be blunt about it, coerce Israel.
In a perfect world where there was no lobby and an American president was free to put pressure on Israel, to coerce Israel, I believe, we would’ve gone a long way towards getting two-state solution. And I believe, this would’ve been in Israel’s interest. But we couldn’t get a two-state solution because it was almost impossible to put meaningful pressure on Israel because of the lobby. So this was not in Israel’s interest and it was not in America’s interest. And that was the argument that we made. And we, of course, got huge pushback for making that argument.
Lex Fridman
What’s the underlying motivation of the lobby? Is it religious in nature? Is it similar to the way war hawks are sort of militaristic in nature? Is it nationalistic in nature? If you were describe this loose coalition of people, what would you say is their motivation?
What’s the underlying motivation of the lobby? Is it religious in nature? Is it similar to the way war hawks are sort of militaristic in nature? Is it nationalistic in nature? If you were describe this loose coalition of people, what would you say is their motivation?
John Mearsheimer
Well, first of all, I think you have to distinguish between Jews and Christians. You want to remember that there are a huge number of Christian Zionists who are deeply committed to Israel no matter what, right? And then, there are a large number of Jews. The Jews are obviously the most important of those two groups in the Israel lobby. But one of the arguments that we made in the book is that you should not call it the Jewish lobby because it’s not populated just by Jews and Christian Zionists are an important part of that lobby. But furthermore, there are a good number of Jews who are opposed to the lobby and the policies that the lobby pervades. And there are a number of Jews who are prominent anti-Zionist, and they’re obviously not in the lobby. Or if you take a group like Jewish Voice for Peace, Jewish Voice for Peace is not in the lobby. So it’s wrong to call it a Jewish lobby.
Well, first of all, I think you have to distinguish between Jews and Christians. You want to remember that there are a huge number of Christian Zionists who are deeply committed to Israel no matter what, right? And then, there are a large number of Jews. The Jews are obviously the most important of those two groups in the Israel lobby. But one of the arguments that we made in the book is that you should not call it the Jewish lobby because it’s not populated just by Jews and Christian Zionists are an important part of that lobby. But furthermore, there are a good number of Jews who are opposed to the lobby and the policies that the lobby pervades. And there are a number of Jews who are prominent anti-Zionist, and they’re obviously not in the lobby. Or if you take a group like Jewish Voice for Peace, Jewish Voice for Peace is not in the lobby. So it’s wrong to call it a Jewish lobby.
But with regard to the American Jews who are in that lobby, I think that really, this is all about nationalism. It’s not so much religion. Many of those Jews who are influential in the lobby are not religious in any meaningful sense of that term. But they self-identify as Jewish in the sense that they feel they’re part of a Jewish nation. And that in addition to being an American, they are part of this tribe, this nation called Jews. And that they have a responsibility to push the United States in ways that support the Jewish state. So I think that’s what drives most, if not almost all the Jews. This is not to say there’s not a religious dimension for some of them, but I think that the main connection is much more tribal in nature.
Lex Fridman
So I had a conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu and he said, “Fundamentally, if you’re anti-Zionist, you’re antisemitic.” So the Zionist project is tied to the hip to the Jewish project, what do you have to say to that?
So I had a conversation with Benjamin Netanyahu and he said, “Fundamentally, if you’re anti-Zionist, you’re antisemitic.” So the Zionist project is tied to the hip to the Jewish project, what do you have to say to that?
John Mearsheimer
Look, you can define antisemitism any way you want. And you can define antisemitism to incorporate anti-Zionism. And I think we have reached the point where antisemitism is identified today, not just with anti-Zionism, but with criticism of Israel. If you criticize Israel, some people will say you’re an antisemite. And if that’s your definition of antisemitism, it’s taken an important term and stretched it to the point where it’s meaningless. So when Steve and I wrote the book, wrote the article and then wrote the book, all sorts of people said that we were antisemites. This is a ludicrous charge. But what they meant was, you’re criticizing the lobby, you’re criticizing Israel, and therefore, you’re an antisemite. Okay. If that’s what an antisemite is, somebody who criticizes Israel, probably half the Jewish community, if not more in the United States, is antisemitic. And of course, you get into all these crazy games where people are calling Jews, self-hating Jews and antisemites because they’re critical of Israel.
Look, you can define antisemitism any way you want. And you can define antisemitism to incorporate anti-Zionism. And I think we have reached the point where antisemitism is identified today, not just with anti-Zionism, but with criticism of Israel. If you criticize Israel, some people will say you’re an antisemite. And if that’s your definition of antisemitism, it’s taken an important term and stretched it to the point where it’s meaningless. So when Steve and I wrote the book, wrote the article and then wrote the book, all sorts of people said that we were antisemites. This is a ludicrous charge. But what they meant was, you’re criticizing the lobby, you’re criticizing Israel, and therefore, you’re an antisemite. Okay. If that’s what an antisemite is, somebody who criticizes Israel, probably half the Jewish community, if not more in the United States, is antisemitic. And of course, you get into all these crazy games where people are calling Jews, self-hating Jews and antisemites because they’re critical of Israel.
But even people who are anti-Zionists, I don’t think they’re antisemitic at all. You can argue they’re misguided, that’s fine. But many of these people are Jewish and proud of the fact that they’re Jewish. They just don’t believe that nationalism and Jewish nationalism is a force that should be applauded. And you want to understand that in the American context, there is a rich tradition of anti-Zionism. And these were not people who were antisemites if you go back to the thirties, forties, fifties. And the same thing was even true in Europe. There were all sorts of European Jews who were opposed to Zionism. Were they antisemites? I don’t think so. But we’ve gotten to the point now where people are so interested in stopping any criticism of Israel that they wield this weapon of calling people antisemites so loosely that the term has kind of lost meaning. So I think Netanyahu is wrongheaded to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism.
Lex Fridman
Alan Dershowitz was one of the people that called you specifically antisemitic. So just looking at the space of discourse, where’s the slither of hope for healthy discourse about US relationships with Israel between you and Alan Dershowitz and others like him?
Alan Dershowitz was one of the people that called you specifically antisemitic. So just looking at the space of discourse, where’s the slither of hope for healthy discourse about US relationships with Israel between you and Alan Dershowitz and others like him?
John Mearsheimer
Well, I think until there is a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there’s no hope of putting an end to this nonsense. Right?
Well, I think until there is a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there’s no hope of putting an end to this nonsense. Right?
Lex Fridman
So these are just uses of terms to kind of cheat your way through the discourse, it’s a shortcut.
So these are just uses of terms to kind of cheat your way through the discourse, it’s a shortcut.
John Mearsheimer
No, it’s to silence people. It’s very important to understand that one of the lobby’s principle goals is to make sure we don’t have an open discourse, a freewheeling discourse about Israel. Because they understand, people in the lobby understand, that if you have an open discourse, Israel will end up looking very bad. You don’t want to talk about the occupation, you don’t want to talk about how Israel was created. All these subjects are ones that will cause problems for Israel. See, just to go to the present crisis. When you have a disaster, and what happened on October 7th is a disaster. One of the first things that happens is that people begin to ask the question, how did this happen? What’s the root cause of this problem? This is a disaster. We have to understand what caused it so that we can work to make sure it doesn’t happen again. So we can work to shut it down and then make sure it doesn’t happen again.
No, it’s to silence people. It’s very important to understand that one of the lobby’s principle goals is to make sure we don’t have an open discourse, a freewheeling discourse about Israel. Because they understand, people in the lobby understand, that if you have an open discourse, Israel will end up looking very bad. You don’t want to talk about the occupation, you don’t want to talk about how Israel was created. All these subjects are ones that will cause problems for Israel. See, just to go to the present crisis. When you have a disaster, and what happened on October 7th is a disaster. One of the first things that happens is that people begin to ask the question, how did this happen? What’s the root cause of this problem? This is a disaster. We have to understand what caused it so that we can work to make sure it doesn’t happen again. So we can work to shut it down and then make sure it doesn’t happen again.
But once you start talking about the root causes, you end up talking about how Israel was created. And that means telling a story that is not pretty about how the Zionists conquered Palestine. And number two, it means talking about the occupation, right? It’s not like Hamas attacked on October 7th because there were just a bunch of antisemites who hated Jews and wanted to kill Jews. This is not Nazi Germany. This is directly related to the occupation and to what was going on inside of Gaza. And it’s not in Israel’s interest or the lobby’s interest to have an open discourse about what the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinians since, I would say, roughly 1903 when the second aliyah came to Israel or came to what was then Palestine, right? We want to talk about that. And we don’t want to talk about from the lobbyist’s point of view, the influence that the lobby has, right?
It’s better from the lobbyist’s point of view if most Americans think that American support of Israel is just done for all the right moral and strategic reasons, not because of the lobby. And when John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt come along and say, you have to understand that this special relationship is due, in large part, to the lobby’s influence. That is not an argument that people in the lobby want to hear. So the point is, you have to go to great lengths for all these reasons. You have to go to great lengths to silence people like me and Steve Walt. And one of the ways to do that is to call us antisemites.
I think the chapter or the section of the book where we talk about this charge of antisemitism is called The Great Silencer. That’s what we call the charge of antisemitism, The Great Silencer. Who wants to be called an antisemite, especially in the wake of the holocaust? Do I want to be called an antisemite? Oh my God, no. And so it’s very effective. But it is important to talk about these issues, in my humble opinion. And I think if we had talked about these issues way back when, it would’ve gone a long way towards maybe getting a two-state solution, which I think was the best alternative here.
Lex Fridman
It’s complicated. And I wonder if you can comment on the complexity of this, because criticizing Israel and criticizing the lobby can, for a lot of people, be a dog whistle for sort of antisemitic conspiracy theories. That this idea that Jews run everything, run the world, they’re this kind of cabal. And it’s also very true that people who are legitimately antisemitic are also critics of Israel in the same kind of way. And so, it’s such a complicated landscape in which to have discussions. Because even people like David Duke who are racist, don’t sound racist on the surface. I haven’t listened to him enough. But there’s dog whistles. It’s a complicated space in which to have discussions. I wonder if you can sort of speak to that. Because there’s this silencing effect of calling everybody antisemitic. But it’s also true that there’s antisemitism in the world, there is a sizable population of people that hate Jews. There’s probably a sizable population of people who hate Muslims, too.
It’s complicated. And I wonder if you can comment on the complexity of this, because criticizing Israel and criticizing the lobby can, for a lot of people, be a dog whistle for sort of antisemitic conspiracy theories. That this idea that Jews run everything, run the world, they’re this kind of cabal. And it’s also very true that people who are legitimately antisemitic are also critics of Israel in the same kind of way. And so, it’s such a complicated landscape in which to have discussions. Because even people like David Duke who are racist, don’t sound racist on the surface. I haven’t listened to him enough. But there’s dog whistles. It’s a complicated space in which to have discussions. I wonder if you can sort of speak to that. Because there’s this silencing effect of calling everybody antisemitic. But it’s also true that there’s antisemitism in the world, there is a sizable population of people that hate Jews. There’s probably a sizable population of people who hate Muslims, too.
John Mearsheimer
A lot of hate out there.
A lot of hate out there.
Lex Fridman
A lot of hate out there. But the hatred of Jews has a long history. And so you have, like Rolling Stones have a set of great hits. And there’s just a set of great hits of the ways, conspiracy theories, that you can make about the Jews that are used as part of the hatred. So there’s nice templates for that. And I just wonder if you can comment on operating as a historian, as an analyst, as a strategic thinker in this kind of space.
A lot of hate out there. But the hatred of Jews has a long history. And so you have, like Rolling Stones have a set of great hits. And there’s just a set of great hits of the ways, conspiracy theories, that you can make about the Jews that are used as part of the hatred. So there’s nice templates for that. And I just wonder if you can comment on operating as a historian, as an analyst, as a strategic thinker in this kind of space.
John Mearsheimer
Obviously, when we wrote the article, which we did before the book gave this subject a great deal of thought. I mean, what you say just now is music to our ears. I’m talking about me and Steve. I think that your point about dog whistles is correct. Look, we went to great lengths to make it clear that this is not a cabal. It’s not a conspiracy. And in fact, in a very important way, the lobby operates out in the open. They brag about their power. And this was true before we wrote the article. And we said in the article, in the book, and you heard me say it here, first of all, it’s not a Jewish lobby. Secondly, it’s not a cabal. It’s an American interest group.
Obviously, when we wrote the article, which we did before the book gave this subject a great deal of thought. I mean, what you say just now is music to our ears. I’m talking about me and Steve. I think that your point about dog whistles is correct. Look, we went to great lengths to make it clear that this is not a cabal. It’s not a conspiracy. And in fact, in a very important way, the lobby operates out in the open. They brag about their power. And this was true before we wrote the article. And we said in the article, in the book, and you heard me say it here, first of all, it’s not a Jewish lobby. Secondly, it’s not a cabal. It’s an American interest group.
Lex Fridman
And the American system is designed such that interest groups are perfectly legal, and some of them are super effective.
And the American system is designed such that interest groups are perfectly legal, and some of them are super effective.
John Mearsheimer
Exactly. I mean, you hit the nail right on the head. That’s exactly right. And there was nothing that we said that was antisemitic by any reasonable definition of that term. And huge numbers of Jews have known me and Steve over the years, and nobody ever, ever said that we were antisemitic before March, 2006 when the article appeared, because we’re not antisemitic. But look, you’ve got this interest group that has a significant influence on American policy and on Israeli policy, and you want to talk about it. It’s just important to talk about it. It’s important for Jews in the United States, for Jews in Israel, to talk about this. The idea that you want to silence critics is not a smart way to go about doing business, in my opinion. If we were wrong, if Steve and I were so wrong and our arguments were so foul, they could have easily exposed those arguments. They could have gone into combat with this in terms of the marketplace of ideas and easily knocked this down.
Exactly. I mean, you hit the nail right on the head. That’s exactly right. And there was nothing that we said that was antisemitic by any reasonable definition of that term. And huge numbers of Jews have known me and Steve over the years, and nobody ever, ever said that we were antisemitic before March, 2006 when the article appeared, because we’re not antisemitic. But look, you’ve got this interest group that has a significant influence on American policy and on Israeli policy, and you want to talk about it. It’s just important to talk about it. It’s important for Jews in the United States, for Jews in Israel, to talk about this. The idea that you want to silence critics is not a smart way to go about doing business, in my opinion. If we were wrong, if Steve and I were so wrong and our arguments were so foul, they could have easily exposed those arguments. They could have gone into combat with this in terms of the marketplace of ideas and easily knocked this down.
The problem was that our arguments were quite powerful. And instead of engaging us and defeating our arguments, they wanted to silence us. And this is not good. It’s not good for Israel, it’s not good for the United States. And I would argue in the end, if anything, it’s going to foster antisemitism. I think you don’t want to run around telling people that they can’t talk about Israel without being called an antisemite. It’s just not healthy in terms of the issue that you’re raising. But I still agree with you that it is a tricky issue. I don’t want to make light of that. I know that there’s this piece of literature out there called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. And I fully understand that if you’re not careful, you can come close to writing volume two of the protocol. But I don’t believe that we wrote anything that was even close to that. And again, I think that a healthy debate on the issues that we were raising would’ve been not only in America’s interest, but it would’ve been in Israel’s interest.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Underneath it all is just, I wonder why there is so much hate against groups, why it’s such a sticky way of thinking. Not just tribalism, proud of your country and kind of hating another country, but really deeply hating. Hating in a way where it’s part of your identity kind of hate.
Yeah. Underneath it all is just, I wonder why there is so much hate against groups, why it’s such a sticky way of thinking. Not just tribalism, proud of your country and kind of hating another country, but really deeply hating. Hating in a way where it’s part of your identity kind of hate.
John Mearsheimer
Well, just to make a general point on this issue in our conversation here today, you often talk about individual leaders, and the word individual often pops up in your vocabulary. I believe that we are ultimately social animals before we are individuals. I believe we’re born into tribes, we’re heavily socialized, and that we carve out space for our individualism. But we are part of tribes, or social groups, or nations. Call them what you want, ethnic groups, religious groups. But the fact is that these tribes often crash into each other. And when they crash into each other, they end up hating each other. If you go to a place like Bosnia, the Croats and the Serbs, oh, my God. And then throw in the Bosniaks, which is the term for Bosnian Muslims. And Muslims, Croats, Serbs, and the tribes hate each other. And in a funny way, that hatred almost never goes away. And I guess, there are some exceptions to that.
Well, just to make a general point on this issue in our conversation here today, you often talk about individual leaders, and the word individual often pops up in your vocabulary. I believe that we are ultimately social animals before we are individuals. I believe we’re born into tribes, we’re heavily socialized, and that we carve out space for our individualism. But we are part of tribes, or social groups, or nations. Call them what you want, ethnic groups, religious groups. But the fact is that these tribes often crash into each other. And when they crash into each other, they end up hating each other. If you go to a place like Bosnia, the Croats and the Serbs, oh, my God. And then throw in the Bosniaks, which is the term for Bosnian Muslims. And Muslims, Croats, Serbs, and the tribes hate each other. And in a funny way, that hatred almost never goes away. And I guess, there are some exceptions to that.
If you look at the Germans after World War II, they’ve gone a long way towards reducing, I wouldn’t want to say completely eliminating, but reducing a lot of the hatred that existed between Germans and their neighbors. But that’s really kind of an anomalous case. I mean, you go around East Asia today and the hatred of Japan in a place like China, the hatred of Japan in a place like Korea, just not to be underestimated. But I think a lot of it just has to do with the fact that you’re dealing with social groups that have crashed into each other at one point or another. And there are those lingering effects. And by the way, this gets back to our discussion a few minutes ago about trying to get a two-state solution between the Palestinians and the Israeli Jews now that you have had this horrible war, which is ongoing.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting to ask, to go back to World War II-
It’s interesting to ask, to go back to World War II-
Lex Fridman
… To ask to go back to World War II. Now, you said you studied Nazi Germany in the ’30s from a perspective of maybe offensive realism, but just to look at the Holocaust, it’s sometimes popular in public discourse today to compare certain things to the Holocaust. People have compared the Hamas attack on Israel to the Holocaust, saying things like, “It’s the biggest attack on Jews since the Holocaust,” which kind of implies that there’s a comparison. People have made that same comparison in the other direction. What do you make of this comparison? Is it comparable? Does the use of the Holocaust have any accuracy in comparisons of modern day international politics?
… To ask to go back to World War II. Now, you said you studied Nazi Germany in the ’30s from a perspective of maybe offensive realism, but just to look at the Holocaust, it’s sometimes popular in public discourse today to compare certain things to the Holocaust. People have compared the Hamas attack on Israel to the Holocaust, saying things like, “It’s the biggest attack on Jews since the Holocaust,” which kind of implies that there’s a comparison. People have made that same comparison in the other direction. What do you make of this comparison? Is it comparable? Does the use of the Holocaust have any accuracy in comparisons of modern day international politics?
John Mearsheimer
Is it possible that you could have another genocide? Yes, and I would argue that what you had in Rwanda was a genocide. The Holocaust is not the only genocide. I believe the word genocide is used too loosely today. And as you know, lots of people, and I mean lots of people who are pro-Palestinian accused the Israelis of engaging in genocide in Gaza. I think what the Israelis are doing in Gaza represents a massacre. I would use that term given the number of civilians that they’ve killed and the fact that they’ve been indiscriminate in terms of how they’ve been bombing Gaza. But I would not use the word genocide. For me, a genocide is where one side attempts to eliminate another group from the planet. I think that what happened with the Holocaust was clearly a genocide, and that the Germans were bent on destroying all of European Jewry.
Is it possible that you could have another genocide? Yes, and I would argue that what you had in Rwanda was a genocide. The Holocaust is not the only genocide. I believe the word genocide is used too loosely today. And as you know, lots of people, and I mean lots of people who are pro-Palestinian accused the Israelis of engaging in genocide in Gaza. I think what the Israelis are doing in Gaza represents a massacre. I would use that term given the number of civilians that they’ve killed and the fact that they’ve been indiscriminate in terms of how they’ve been bombing Gaza. But I would not use the word genocide. For me, a genocide is where one side attempts to eliminate another group from the planet. I think that what happened with the Holocaust was clearly a genocide, and that the Germans were bent on destroying all of European Jewry.
And if they could have gotten their hands on Jews outside of Europe, they would’ve murdered them as well. That’s a genocide. And I think with the Hutus and the Tutsis, you had a similar situation. I think with the Turks and the Armenians during World War I, that was a genocide, but I have a rather narrow definition of what a genocide is and I don’t think there are many cases that qualify as a genocide. The Holocaust certainly does. Now, what Hamas did doesn’t even come close to what happened to European Jewry between, let’s say, 1939 and 1945, although I date the start of the Holocaust to 1941, if we were looking at it closely, but let’s just say 1939, when they invaded Poland, from 1939 to 1945. What Hamas did pales in comparison. It’s hard to believe anybody would make that argument. Yes, a lot of Jews died, but hardly any compared to the number that died at the hands of the Germans. No parallel at all. And furthermore, Hamas was in no position to kill all of the Jews in the Middle East, just not going to happen.
Lex Fridman
But there’s also levels of things, Germans using human skin for lamps. There’s just levels of evil in this world.
But there’s also levels of things, Germans using human skin for lamps. There’s just levels of evil in this world.
John Mearsheimer
Yes, but that’s not what Hamas is doing. I want to be very clear here. I am not justifying the Hamas’ killing of civilians. Not for one second, but I’m just saying… And by the way, just to go to the Israelis and what they’re doing in Gaza, as I said to you before, I do believe that is a massacre and I believe that’s to be condemned, the killing of civilians. This is not legitimate collateral damage. They’re directly punishing the population. But I would not call that a genocide and I would not compare that to the Holocaust for one second. I just want to be very clear on that.
Yes, but that’s not what Hamas is doing. I want to be very clear here. I am not justifying the Hamas’ killing of civilians. Not for one second, but I’m just saying… And by the way, just to go to the Israelis and what they’re doing in Gaza, as I said to you before, I do believe that is a massacre and I believe that’s to be condemned, the killing of civilians. This is not legitimate collateral damage. They’re directly punishing the population. But I would not call that a genocide and I would not compare that to the Holocaust for one second. I just want to be very clear on that.
Lex Fridman
Do you think if Israel could, they would avoid the death of any civilians? So you’re saying there’s some degree of punishment of collective-?
Do you think if Israel could, they would avoid the death of any civilians? So you’re saying there’s some degree of punishment of collective-?
John Mearsheimer
They’re purposely killing civilians. This is the Iron Wall. They’re trying to beat the Palestinians into submission. There’s no way you kill this many civilians if you’re trying to precisely take out Hamas fighters. And by the way, the Israeli spokesmen, the IDF spokesman has explicitly said that, “We are not pursuing precision bombing. And that what we are doing is trying to maximize the amount of destruction and damage that we can inflict on the Palestinians and I think this is a major mistake on the part of Israel.” First of all, it ends up being a moral stain on your reputation, number one. And number two, it doesn’t work. It doesn’t work. The Palestinians are not going to roll over and submit to Israeli domination of their life.
They’re purposely killing civilians. This is the Iron Wall. They’re trying to beat the Palestinians into submission. There’s no way you kill this many civilians if you’re trying to precisely take out Hamas fighters. And by the way, the Israeli spokesmen, the IDF spokesman has explicitly said that, “We are not pursuing precision bombing. And that what we are doing is trying to maximize the amount of destruction and damage that we can inflict on the Palestinians and I think this is a major mistake on the part of Israel.” First of all, it ends up being a moral stain on your reputation, number one. And number two, it doesn’t work. It doesn’t work. The Palestinians are not going to roll over and submit to Israeli domination of their life.
The whole concept of the Iron Wall, Jabotinsky’s term, was misguided. And by the way, if you look at what the Israelis are doing, they’re trying to do two things. One is the Iron Wall, and that’s where you punish the civilian population in Gaza and get them to submit. The other thing that they’re trying to do is get Hamas. They want to destroy Hamas. And the belief there is that if they destroy Hamas, they’ve solved the problem. But as many Israelis know, including people on the hard right, even if you destroy Hamas, they are going to be replaced by another resistance group and that resistance group will employ terror.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I think you’ve said that other terrorist organizations have used the situation in Palestine as a recruitment mechanism for a long time.
Yeah. I think you’ve said that other terrorist organizations have used the situation in Palestine as a recruitment mechanism for a long time.
John Mearsheimer
Osama bin Laden made it clear that this was one of those principal reasons for attacking the United States.
Osama bin Laden made it clear that this was one of those principal reasons for attacking the United States.
Lex Fridman
And the United States attacked back and got us into a 20-year war that cost the lives of millions of people, not American, but human beings and-
And the United States attacked back and got us into a 20-year war that cost the lives of millions of people, not American, but human beings and-
John Mearsheimer
Engaged in torture.
Engaged in torture.
Lex Fridman
And torture. Yeah.
And torture. Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
No, I think if you look at how we reacted to 9/11 and how the Israelis are reacting to what happened on October 7th, there’s quite a bit of similarity in that both sides, the Israeli side and the American side, are enraged and they lash out and they go on a rampage and the end result is not good.
No, I think if you look at how we reacted to 9/11 and how the Israelis are reacting to what happened on October 7th, there’s quite a bit of similarity in that both sides, the Israeli side and the American side, are enraged and they lash out and they go on a rampage and the end result is not good.
Lex Fridman
Is there a capacity within Israel or within United States after 9/11 to do something approximating turn the other cheek of understanding the root of terror is hate and fighting that hate with, not to sound naive, but compassion?
Is there a capacity within Israel or within United States after 9/11 to do something approximating turn the other cheek of understanding the root of terror is hate and fighting that hate with, not to sound naive, but compassion?
John Mearsheimer
Well, I don’t think in either case you’re going to turn the other cheek.
Well, I don’t think in either case you’re going to turn the other cheek.
Lex Fridman
What I mean by that is some limited powerful military response, but very limited?
What I mean by that is some limited powerful military response, but very limited?
John Mearsheimer
Coupled with a smart political strategy.
Coupled with a smart political strategy.
Lex Fridman
Political strategy, diplomacy.
Political strategy, diplomacy.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. That’s what they should have done.
Yeah. That’s what they should have done.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
But is there capacity for that or from your offensive realism perspective, it’s just the odds are really low?
But is there capacity for that or from your offensive realism perspective, it’s just the odds are really low?
John Mearsheimer
From my offensive realist perspective or my realist perspective, that’s what you should do. My view is states are rational actors, they should be cunning. They should think about the strategic situation they’re in and choose the appropriate response. And what happens, and this is why my theory is not always correct, is that sometimes states are not rational and they misbehave. I would argue in the Israeli case that it would’ve been good after October 7th, or starting on October 7th, if the United States had tried to hold the Israelis back and countenanced a more moderate response. Take some time just to think about how to deal with this problem instead of lashing out. I think given what happened to the Israelis, given how shocked they were, given the level of fear, given the level of rage, they were going to lash out and I don’t believe that was in their interest. I think it would’ve made sense to think about it and to think about a smarter strategy than they’re now employing. And I think the Americans blew it. The Americans gave them a bear hug and a green light and said, “We’ll give you all the weaponry you need and go out and do it.” And I don’t think that was the smart thing to do. Look, in the wake of October 7th, the Israelis had no good strategy. It’s not like there’s a magic formula that they just didn’t see and we should have told them what the magic formula was. That’s not true. They were, in a sense, caught between a rock and a hard place in terms of what to do. But there are smarter things than number things and I think the Israelis lashed out in ways that are counterproductive. I think going on a rampage and killing huge numbers as civilians, it’s obviously morally wrong, but it’s also just not in their strategic interest because it’s not going to buy them anything.
From my offensive realist perspective or my realist perspective, that’s what you should do. My view is states are rational actors, they should be cunning. They should think about the strategic situation they’re in and choose the appropriate response. And what happens, and this is why my theory is not always correct, is that sometimes states are not rational and they misbehave. I would argue in the Israeli case that it would’ve been good after October 7th, or starting on October 7th, if the United States had tried to hold the Israelis back and countenanced a more moderate response. Take some time just to think about how to deal with this problem instead of lashing out. I think given what happened to the Israelis, given how shocked they were, given the level of fear, given the level of rage, they were going to lash out and I don’t believe that was in their interest. I think it would’ve made sense to think about it and to think about a smarter strategy than they’re now employing. And I think the Americans blew it. The Americans gave them a bear hug and a green light and said, “We’ll give you all the weaponry you need and go out and do it.” And I don’t think that was the smart thing to do. Look, in the wake of October 7th, the Israelis had no good strategy. It’s not like there’s a magic formula that they just didn’t see and we should have told them what the magic formula was. That’s not true. They were, in a sense, caught between a rock and a hard place in terms of what to do. But there are smarter things than number things and I think the Israelis lashed out in ways that are counterproductive. I think going on a rampage and killing huge numbers as civilians, it’s obviously morally wrong, but it’s also just not in their strategic interest because it’s not going to buy them anything.
And in fact, it’s going to cost them because people all over the planet are turning against Israel. I saw an Israeli think tank today that has been tracking protests around the world, gave some figures for what it looked like between October 7th and October 13th in terms of the number of protests around the world that were pro-Israel versus pro-Palestine. And then it looked at the numbers from October 13th up to the present and I think the numbers were 69% were pro-Palestinian in the first six days after October 7th, 69%, and I think 31%… Take these numbers with a grain of salt. 31% were pro-Israel. So I think it was 69 and 31.
And since then, since October 13th, if you look at the number of protests around the world, 95% have been pro-Palestinian and 5% have been pro-Israel. And what this tells you is that public opinion around the world has shifted against Israel. And if you look at some of the demonstrations in places like London and Washington, DC, it’s truly amazing the number of people who are coming out in support of the Palestinians. And all of this, again, is just to support my point that it was just not smart for Israel to launch this bombing campaign. You can make an argument for going after Hamas and doing it in a surgical way or as surgical a way as possible, but that’s not what they did. And again, my point to you is I think that this punishment campaign is not going to work strategically. In other words, they’re not going to beat the Palestinians into submission, they’re not going to finish off Hamas. And at the same time, by pursuing this strategy, they’re doing huge damage to their reputation around the world.
Lex Fridman
In the wake of October 7th, given the geopolitical context, I think there’s a lot of leverage to be the great ethical superpower, demonstrate power without killing any civilians, and use that leverage diplomatic leverage to push forward something like Abrahamic Accords with more nations, with Saudi Arabia, push for peace aggressively, peace agreements, this kind of stuff, economic relationships, all of this kind of stuff, and thereby pressure the Palestinian authority towards perhaps the two-state solution.
In the wake of October 7th, given the geopolitical context, I think there’s a lot of leverage to be the great ethical superpower, demonstrate power without killing any civilians, and use that leverage diplomatic leverage to push forward something like Abrahamic Accords with more nations, with Saudi Arabia, push for peace aggressively, peace agreements, this kind of stuff, economic relationships, all of this kind of stuff, and thereby pressure the Palestinian authority towards perhaps the two-state solution.
John Mearsheimer
I think what you’re missing here, just in the Israeli case, is that the Israeli government is not interested in two-state solution. And you want to remember that Benjamin Netanyahu, who looks very hawkish when you look at him in isolation, doesn’t look so hawkish when you look at him compared to the rest of the people in his cabinet. He almost looks like a moderate. He’s got a lot of people who are way out to the right of him. And these people, and this of course includes Netanyahu, are not interested in the two-state solution. So the question you have to ask yourself is, if you’re Benjamin Netanyahu and it’s October 7th, late in the day, what do you do? You’re not thinking about a two-state solution. You’re thinking about an occupation that’s not going to end. And the question is how do you deal with the Palestinians given what’s just happened?
I think what you’re missing here, just in the Israeli case, is that the Israeli government is not interested in two-state solution. And you want to remember that Benjamin Netanyahu, who looks very hawkish when you look at him in isolation, doesn’t look so hawkish when you look at him compared to the rest of the people in his cabinet. He almost looks like a moderate. He’s got a lot of people who are way out to the right of him. And these people, and this of course includes Netanyahu, are not interested in the two-state solution. So the question you have to ask yourself is, if you’re Benjamin Netanyahu and it’s October 7th, late in the day, what do you do? You’re not thinking about a two-state solution. You’re thinking about an occupation that’s not going to end. And the question is how do you deal with the Palestinians given what’s just happened?
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s people in the cabinet and then there’s history. And history remembers great leaders. So Benjamin Netanyahu can look in the streets of Israel and see the protests and think of how history will remember him. I think a two-state solution is on the table for a great leader.
Well, there’s people in the cabinet and then there’s history. And history remembers great leaders. So Benjamin Netanyahu can look in the streets of Israel and see the protests and think of how history will remember him. I think a two-state solution is on the table for a great leader.
John Mearsheimer
Well, it was there. Was he the person who was going to take advantage of it? I don’t think so, but we’ll see.
Well, it was there. Was he the person who was going to take advantage of it? I don’t think so, but we’ll see.
Lex Fridman
He’s a student of history. At this point, it’s very difficult. Like you said, 95% now or whatever the number is of protests, I think the window in which Israel has the ears of the world, it can do the big ethical action towards peace, I think, has closed. Or maybe there’s still a slither, but it’s just… The slippery slope of hate has taken off. It’s quite depressing to watch what’s going on.
He’s a student of history. At this point, it’s very difficult. Like you said, 95% now or whatever the number is of protests, I think the window in which Israel has the ears of the world, it can do the big ethical action towards peace, I think, has closed. Or maybe there’s still a slither, but it’s just… The slippery slope of hate has taken off. It’s quite depressing to watch what’s going on.
John Mearsheimer
Yep. I agree a hundred percent. Unequivocally depressing.
Yep. I agree a hundred percent. Unequivocally depressing.
Lex Fridman
But of course, as you talk about the role of… The US involvement is of critical importance here for the United States and the argument you make is that we should not be involved in Ukraine, at least to the degree we are, we being the United States, and we should not be involved in Israel to the degree we are because it’s stretching us too thin when the big geopolitical contender in the 21st century with United States is China. Is that a correct summary?
But of course, as you talk about the role of… The US involvement is of critical importance here for the United States and the argument you make is that we should not be involved in Ukraine, at least to the degree we are, we being the United States, and we should not be involved in Israel to the degree we are because it’s stretching us too thin when the big geopolitical contender in the 21st century with United States is China. Is that a correct summary?
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, I think just on Ukraine, we should not have pushed Ukraine to join NATO.
Yeah, I think just on Ukraine, we should not have pushed Ukraine to join NATO.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
John Mearsheimer
And once the war started, we should have worked overtime to shut it down immediately.
And once the war started, we should have worked overtime to shut it down immediately.
Lex Fridman
March.
March.
John Mearsheimer
March, right. And you remember, by the way, not to go back to Ukraine in great detail, in the early fall of 2022… The war starts February, 2022. There’s March, 2022, which we’ve talked about, which is the negotiations. In the fall of 2022, I think it was in September, the Ukrainians had won two major tactical victories, one in Kherson and the other in Kharkiv. And at that point in time, General Milley, who was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, “Now is the time to negotiate because this is the high watermark for the Ukrainians.” Milley understood that things were only going to get worse, and the White House shut Milley down and said, “We’re not negotiating.” So we have blown a number of opportunities here to head this problem off at the pass. But that’s my view there. And with regard to the Israelis, my only point about Israel is that it would be better for Israel and better for the United States if we, the United States, was in a position to put pressure on Israel from time to time. As Steve and I say in the book, we should be able to treat Israel like a normal country. The fact is that countries sometimes do stupid things. This includes the United States and Israel. And if Israel is pursuing a policy that we think is unwise, we should be in a position where we could put pressure on Israel. That’s our argument. But anyway, we goofed both with regard to Ukraine and with regard to the Middle East and we’re now up to our eyeballs in alligators in both of those regions. And as you described my view, this is not good because the area of the most strategic importance for the United States today is East Asia and that’s because China is there and China is the most serious threat the United States faces.
March, right. And you remember, by the way, not to go back to Ukraine in great detail, in the early fall of 2022… The war starts February, 2022. There’s March, 2022, which we’ve talked about, which is the negotiations. In the fall of 2022, I think it was in September, the Ukrainians had won two major tactical victories, one in Kherson and the other in Kharkiv. And at that point in time, General Milley, who was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, “Now is the time to negotiate because this is the high watermark for the Ukrainians.” Milley understood that things were only going to get worse, and the White House shut Milley down and said, “We’re not negotiating.” So we have blown a number of opportunities here to head this problem off at the pass. But that’s my view there. And with regard to the Israelis, my only point about Israel is that it would be better for Israel and better for the United States if we, the United States, was in a position to put pressure on Israel from time to time. As Steve and I say in the book, we should be able to treat Israel like a normal country. The fact is that countries sometimes do stupid things. This includes the United States and Israel. And if Israel is pursuing a policy that we think is unwise, we should be in a position where we could put pressure on Israel. That’s our argument. But anyway, we goofed both with regard to Ukraine and with regard to the Middle East and we’re now up to our eyeballs in alligators in both of those regions. And as you described my view, this is not good because the area of the most strategic importance for the United States today is East Asia and that’s because China is there and China is the most serious threat the United States faces.
China
Lex Fridman
Do you think there will be a war with China in the 21st century?
Do you think there will be a war with China in the 21st century?
John Mearsheimer
I don’t know. My argument is there will be. There is right now a serious security competition and at the same time, there is a real possibility of war. Whether or not we avoid it is very hard to say. I mean, we did during the Cold War. We had a serious security competition from roughly 1947 to 1989 and we thankfully avoided war, probably came the closest in 1962 at the Cuban Missile Crisis. But we avoided it and I think we can avoid it here. Is it for sure? No.
I don’t know. My argument is there will be. There is right now a serious security competition and at the same time, there is a real possibility of war. Whether or not we avoid it is very hard to say. I mean, we did during the Cold War. We had a serious security competition from roughly 1947 to 1989 and we thankfully avoided war, probably came the closest in 1962 at the Cuban Missile Crisis. But we avoided it and I think we can avoid it here. Is it for sure? No.
Lex Fridman
You’ve said that China won’t move on Taiwan militarily, in part because, as you said, amphibious operations are difficult. Why will China not move on Taiwan in your sense in the near future?
You’ve said that China won’t move on Taiwan militarily, in part because, as you said, amphibious operations are difficult. Why will China not move on Taiwan in your sense in the near future?
John Mearsheimer
Well, it’s because there’s this body of water called the Taiwan Strait, which is a big body of water, and getting across water is very difficult unless you can walk on water.
Well, it’s because there’s this body of water called the Taiwan Strait, which is a big body of water, and getting across water is very difficult unless you can walk on water.
Lex Fridman
So geography still has a role to play in the 21st century?
So geography still has a role to play in the 21st century?
John Mearsheimer
Oh, yeah. I think geography’s very important. Big bodies of water really matter. In an ideal world, you’d like to have the Pacific Ocean between you and any potential adversary. 6,000 miles of water, hard to get across. If you’re a country and I’m a country and there’s land between us, I can take my Panzer divisions and I can go right across the land and get into your country or attack your country. And you of course can take your Panzer divisions and come across that same piece of land. But if there’s a big body of water between us, your Panzer divisions can’t go across the water and then the question is how do you get them across the water? And that’s very tricky. And in a world where we have lots of submarines and you have lots of aircraft and you have missiles that are land-based that can hit those surface ships, it is very, very hard to attack across a body of water. And all you have to do is think about the American invasion of Normandy, June 6th, 1944, coming in on Omaha Beach. Oh, boy. That was really difficult.
Oh, yeah. I think geography’s very important. Big bodies of water really matter. In an ideal world, you’d like to have the Pacific Ocean between you and any potential adversary. 6,000 miles of water, hard to get across. If you’re a country and I’m a country and there’s land between us, I can take my Panzer divisions and I can go right across the land and get into your country or attack your country. And you of course can take your Panzer divisions and come across that same piece of land. But if there’s a big body of water between us, your Panzer divisions can’t go across the water and then the question is how do you get them across the water? And that’s very tricky. And in a world where we have lots of submarines and you have lots of aircraft and you have missiles that are land-based that can hit those surface ships, it is very, very hard to attack across a body of water. And all you have to do is think about the American invasion of Normandy, June 6th, 1944, coming in on Omaha Beach. Oh, boy. That was really difficult.
Lex Fridman
But there is a growing asymmetry of military power there that even though it’s difficult-
But there is a growing asymmetry of military power there that even though it’s difficult-
John Mearsheimer
That is correct.
That is correct.
Lex Fridman
So I guess-
So I guess-
John Mearsheimer
That is correct.
That is correct.
Lex Fridman
So I recently had a conversation with Elon Musk and he says that China is quite serious about the One China policy, and it seems inevitable that Taiwan will have to be… If you look at this pragmatically in the 21st century, it seems inevitable that Taiwan will have to be a part of China and so we can get there either diplomatically or militarily. What do you think about the inevitability of that kind of idea? When a nation says, “This is a top priority for us,” what do you think about them meaning it, and what do we do about that?
So I recently had a conversation with Elon Musk and he says that China is quite serious about the One China policy, and it seems inevitable that Taiwan will have to be… If you look at this pragmatically in the 21st century, it seems inevitable that Taiwan will have to be a part of China and so we can get there either diplomatically or militarily. What do you think about the inevitability of that kind of idea? When a nation says, “This is a top priority for us,” what do you think about them meaning it, and what do we do about that?
John Mearsheimer
There’s no question it’s a top priority for them and there’s no question they mean it, but it’s also a top priority for us not to let them take Taiwan.
There’s no question it’s a top priority for them and there’s no question they mean it, but it’s also a top priority for us not to let them take Taiwan.
Lex Fridman
Why exactly?
Why exactly?
John Mearsheimer
Because it’s an important strategic asset. Many people will say it’s because Taiwan’s a democracy, but that doesn’t matter that much. It’s because of two strategic reasons. The first is that if we were to let Taiwan go, it would have hugely negative consequences for our alliance structure in East Asia. To contain China, we need allies. We have an alliance structure, and our allies, Japanese, South Koreans, Filipinos, Australians, they’re all counting on us to be there for them. And if we say, “We’re not going to defend Taiwan, the Chinese attack,” they’re going to say, “I bet if the Chinese attack us, the Americans won’t be there for us.” So it would have a damaging effect on our alliance structure, which we cannot afford because containing China is a wicked problem. It’s a powerful state. You were getting to this before when you talked about China versus Taiwan. So that’s the first reason.
Because it’s an important strategic asset. Many people will say it’s because Taiwan’s a democracy, but that doesn’t matter that much. It’s because of two strategic reasons. The first is that if we were to let Taiwan go, it would have hugely negative consequences for our alliance structure in East Asia. To contain China, we need allies. We have an alliance structure, and our allies, Japanese, South Koreans, Filipinos, Australians, they’re all counting on us to be there for them. And if we say, “We’re not going to defend Taiwan, the Chinese attack,” they’re going to say, “I bet if the Chinese attack us, the Americans won’t be there for us.” So it would have a damaging effect on our alliance structure, which we cannot afford because containing China is a wicked problem. It’s a powerful state. You were getting to this before when you talked about China versus Taiwan. So that’s the first reason.
Second reason is you want to bottle up the Chinese Navy and the Chinese Air Force inside the first island-chain. You don’t want to let them get out into the Pacific. You don’t want them dominating the waters of East Asia. You want to bottle them up again inside the first island-chain. And you can only do that if you control Taiwan. You don’t control Taiwan, they get out into the Philippines Sea, into the Pacific, and the Western Pacific and cause all sorts of problems.
Lex Fridman
Well, you saying all that, you’ve also said the Century of Humiliation, Japan and the United States are a source of that humiliation for China, don’t you think they see the other side of that?
Well, you saying all that, you’ve also said the Century of Humiliation, Japan and the United States are a source of that humiliation for China, don’t you think they see the other side of that?
John Mearsheimer
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Lex Fridman
And in the interest of avoiding a World War… I guess the question is how do we avoid a world war? It doesn’t seem like the military involvement in the conflict between China and Taiwan is the way.
And in the interest of avoiding a World War… I guess the question is how do we avoid a world war? It doesn’t seem like the military involvement in the conflict between China and Taiwan is the way.
John Mearsheimer
Well, I don’t want-
Well, I don’t want-
Lex Fridman
There’s no good answers here. I’m just saying-
There’s no good answers here. I’m just saying-
John Mearsheimer
There are no-
There are no-
Lex Fridman
Which is the less bad option?
Which is the less bad option?
John Mearsheimer
Well, what you want to do is you want to make sure that you deter China from invading Taiwan. You want to avoid a war. You and I are in complete agreement on that. We don’t want a war, but we want to contain China. We do not want to let China dominate Asia. That’s what the Americans are principally concerned with here and it’s what China’s neighbors are principally concerned with. This includes the Japanese, the South Koreans, the Filipinos, Australians, and the Taiwanese. They don’t want and we don’t want China to dominate the region, so we have to contain it.
Well, what you want to do is you want to make sure that you deter China from invading Taiwan. You want to avoid a war. You and I are in complete agreement on that. We don’t want a war, but we want to contain China. We do not want to let China dominate Asia. That’s what the Americans are principally concerned with here and it’s what China’s neighbors are principally concerned with. This includes the Japanese, the South Koreans, the Filipinos, Australians, and the Taiwanese. They don’t want and we don’t want China to dominate the region, so we have to contain it.
But at the same time, and this should be music to your ears, we not only want to contain it, we want to make sure we don’t end up in a shooting match with the Chinese because this could be disastrous. So you have to have a very smart policy. You have to build powerful military forces, and you have to make sure you don’t do anything that’s provocative. On Taiwan, for example, the last thing you want is for the Taiwanese government to declare its independence because the Chinese have said, “If Taiwan does that, we’ll go to war.” And of course, we don’t want that. So my view is you want to smartly build up your military forces and you want to do everything you can to contain China, and at the same time, not be provocative.
Lex Fridman
So a big component of that is making sure the US military is bigger than the Chinese military.
So a big component of that is making sure the US military is bigger than the Chinese military.
John Mearsheimer
Not necessarily. It’s an interesting question. A lot of people think that to make deterrence work, you have to be able to beat the Chinese and therefore, you need a much bigger military. And I don’t think over time that’s possible. I think it’s probably not even possible now to beat the Chinese in a war over Taiwan or in a war in the South China Sea. I think what you want to do is make it clear to the Chinese either that there will be no winner… In other words, you don’t have to win, but you want to make sure they don’t win. It’s a lose-lose proposition if they go to war over Taiwan or what have you.
Not necessarily. It’s an interesting question. A lot of people think that to make deterrence work, you have to be able to beat the Chinese and therefore, you need a much bigger military. And I don’t think over time that’s possible. I think it’s probably not even possible now to beat the Chinese in a war over Taiwan or in a war in the South China Sea. I think what you want to do is make it clear to the Chinese either that there will be no winner… In other words, you don’t have to win, but you want to make sure they don’t win. It’s a lose-lose proposition if they go to war over Taiwan or what have you.
And if you can’t do that, you think that they’re so powerful that they’re ultimately going to win, you want to convince them that victory would be a Pyrrhic victory. In other words, they would pay a godawful price to win the war. You follow what I’m saying? So the best strategy for deterrence is you win, China loses. Second best strategy is a stalemate, nobody wins. Third best strategy is they win, but they pay a godawful price. And the fourth possibility, which you don’t want, is they went quickly and decisively. If that’s the case, then you don’t have much deterrence.
Lex Fridman
What does a world with China as the sole dominant superpower look like? I mean, a little bit underlying our discussion is this kind of idea that US is the good guys and China is the bad guys. First of all, dividing the world into good guys and bad guys seems to somehow miss the nuance of this whole human civilization project we’re undertaking. But what does the world look like where China is the dominant sole superpower in a unipolar world?
What does a world with China as the sole dominant superpower look like? I mean, a little bit underlying our discussion is this kind of idea that US is the good guys and China is the bad guys. First of all, dividing the world into good guys and bad guys seems to somehow miss the nuance of this whole human civilization project we’re undertaking. But what does the world look like where China is the dominant sole superpower in a unipolar world?
John Mearsheimer
Well, I don’t tend to think of the world in terms of good guys and bad guys. As a good realist, I think that states or states, they’re all black boxes. I don’t discriminate between democracies and autocracies. But having said that, I am an American and as an American, I’m interested in the security of my country, the survival of my country. So I want the United States to be the most powerful state in the world, which means I want the United States to dominate the Western hemisphere, I want us to be a regional hegemon, and I want to make sure that China does not dominate Asia the way we dominate the Western hemisphere.
Well, I don’t tend to think of the world in terms of good guys and bad guys. As a good realist, I think that states or states, they’re all black boxes. I don’t discriminate between democracies and autocracies. But having said that, I am an American and as an American, I’m interested in the security of my country, the survival of my country. So I want the United States to be the most powerful state in the world, which means I want the United States to dominate the Western hemisphere, I want us to be a regional hegemon, and I want to make sure that China does not dominate Asia the way we dominate the Western hemisphere.
It’s not because I think we’re the good guys and they’re the bad guys. If I were Chinese and I were in Beijing and I was Xi Jinping’s national security advisor, I’d tell him what we got to do is make sure we dominate the world or dominate our region and then do everything we can to undermine America’s position in the Western hemisphere. That’d be my view. So I guess you could say I do view the world in terms of good guys and bad guys, an American and-
Lex Fridman
More like us and them versus-
More like us and them versus-
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, it’s us and them. That’s a nice way to put it. Yeah, it’s us versus them. Not so much good guys versus bad guys.
Yeah, it’s us and them. That’s a nice way to put it. Yeah, it’s us versus them. Not so much good guys versus bad guys.
Lex Fridman
Is it possible to have a stable, peaceful world with a good balance of power where it’s China and US as superpowers? It’s a bipolar world, no longer unipolar.
Is it possible to have a stable, peaceful world with a good balance of power where it’s China and US as superpowers? It’s a bipolar world, no longer unipolar.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. Okay, so you’re hypothesizing a world where they dominate Asia and we dominate the Western hemisphere.
Yeah. Okay, so you’re hypothesizing a world where they dominate Asia and we dominate the Western hemisphere.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
I believe there would be a great deal of intense security competition between those two superpowers.
I believe there would be a great deal of intense security competition between those two superpowers.
Lex Fridman
The definition of intense matters here. So it could be small military conflicts or it could be extremely large unstable military conflicts, right?
The definition of intense matters here. So it could be small military conflicts or it could be extremely large unstable military conflicts, right?
John Mearsheimer
Well, conflict… Let’s use the word war. So I distinguish between security competition and war. And what I’m telling you is you’ll have an intense security competition where there’s no shooting, or if there’s shooting, it’s mainly proxies that are doing the fighting, much like the Vietnam War. Or you could have a case where one of those superpowers was involved in a war against a proxy of the other superpower. Think the Korean War. The United States fought the Chinese who were allied with the Soviets at the time. But a war between the United States and China, just like a war between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, that’s what you really want to avoid. So I think you’d have an intense security competition. You’d have wars involving proxies of each of those two superpowers and you would probably have some wars where one of superpowers was involved in a proxy with one of the other superpower’s proxies.
Well, conflict… Let’s use the word war. So I distinguish between security competition and war. And what I’m telling you is you’ll have an intense security competition where there’s no shooting, or if there’s shooting, it’s mainly proxies that are doing the fighting, much like the Vietnam War. Or you could have a case where one of those superpowers was involved in a war against a proxy of the other superpower. Think the Korean War. The United States fought the Chinese who were allied with the Soviets at the time. But a war between the United States and China, just like a war between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, that’s what you really want to avoid. So I think you’d have an intense security competition. You’d have wars involving proxies of each of those two superpowers and you would probably have some wars where one of superpowers was involved in a proxy with one of the other superpower’s proxies.
Lex Fridman
So it seems likely then, if that’s the case, then it would be Taiwan is the proxy and US fighting China through the proxy of Taiwan?
So it seems likely then, if that’s the case, then it would be Taiwan is the proxy and US fighting China through the proxy of Taiwan?
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. Well, that would assume the United States… But you want to remember, you’re hypothesizing a situation where China dominates Asia.
Yeah. Well, that would assume the United States… But you want to remember, you’re hypothesizing a situation where China dominates Asia.
Lex Fridman
Oh, it already has dominated.
Oh, it already has dominated.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, it’s already dominated Taiwan.
Yeah, it’s already dominated Taiwan.
Lex Fridman
I see. Where do you find the proxies? Australia?
I see. Where do you find the proxies? Australia?
John Mearsheimer
The Middle East could be a good case.
The Middle East could be a good case.
Lex Fridman
Oh, wow.
Oh, wow.
John Mearsheimer
Persian Gulf.
Persian Gulf.
Lex Fridman
Oh boy. And then our discussion of Israel becomes even more dramatically-
Oh boy. And then our discussion of Israel becomes even more dramatically-
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, well, Israel gets involved… I think in this scenario, if you’re talking about a US China competition and you’re talking about the Middle East, I think it’s the Gulf, it’s the Saudis, the Iranians, the Iraqis. It’s the oil.
Yeah, well, Israel gets involved… I think in this scenario, if you’re talking about a US China competition and you’re talking about the Middle East, I think it’s the Gulf, it’s the Saudis, the Iranians, the Iraqis. It’s the oil.
Lex Fridman
Don’t you think it could be Israel versus Iran with some very 1984 kind of dramatic partnership of Iran, Russia, and China versus United States, Europe, and Israel?
Don’t you think it could be Israel versus Iran with some very 1984 kind of dramatic partnership of Iran, Russia, and China versus United States, Europe, and Israel?
John Mearsheimer
I think that’s possible. Yeah.
I think that’s possible. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Oh boy.
Oh boy.
John Mearsheimer
I think that’s possible. Yeah. I mean, I hadn’t thought about it until you said it, but yeah, I think that that is possible.
I think that’s possible. Yeah. I mean, I hadn’t thought about it until you said it, but yeah, I think that that is possible.
Lex Fridman
Isn’t that terrifying?
Isn’t that terrifying?
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. Well, in your scenario, where China already dominates Asia and we dominate the Western hemisphere, I think you start talking about where the most likely places that the United States and China go head-to-head or fight through proxies. I think it is the Gulf or the Middle East and the scenario that you posit.
Yeah. Well, in your scenario, where China already dominates Asia and we dominate the Western hemisphere, I think you start talking about where the most likely places that the United States and China go head-to-head or fight through proxies. I think it is the Gulf or the Middle East and the scenario that you posit.
Lex Fridman
I mean, one question I have… I don’t know about you, but for me, unlike with the Soviet Union, and I know I was born there, but even outside of that, the cultural gap, the loss in translation, the communication gap between China and the United States seems to be much greater than that of what was the former Soviet Union and the United States. I see two cultures intermingling and communicating as one of the ways to deescalate future conflict.
I mean, one question I have… I don’t know about you, but for me, unlike with the Soviet Union, and I know I was born there, but even outside of that, the cultural gap, the loss in translation, the communication gap between China and the United States seems to be much greater than that of what was the former Soviet Union and the United States. I see two cultures intermingling and communicating as one of the ways to deescalate future conflict.
John Mearsheimer
It’s an interesting question. I mean, at sort of an abstract theoretical level, my argument is that great powers act according to realist dictates and they understand those realistic dictates and that could lead to cooperation or it can lead to war. It depends. I would say just in the case of the Soviets, a lot of people…
It’s an interesting question. I mean, at sort of an abstract theoretical level, my argument is that great powers act according to realist dictates and they understand those realistic dictates and that could lead to cooperation or it can lead to war. It depends. I would say just in the case of the Soviets, a lot of people…
John Mearsheimer
I would say just in the case of the Soviets, a lot of people describe the Cold War as an ideological competition above all else, it was communism versus liberal democracy or communism versus liberal capitalism, whatever. I actually don’t believe that. I believe the Soviets were realist to the core. I believe Stalin was a realist par excellence, and that ideology did not matter much in Stalin’s foreign policy. And I believe if you look at Soviet foreign policy after World War II, throughout the Cold War, they were realists to the core. And I think in those days, the Americans were realists, a lot of liberal ideology floating around out there, but the Americans were realists. And I think one of the reasons you avoided a shooting match between the United States and the Soviet Union from ’47 to ’89 was because both sides, I think understood basic balance of power logic. US China competition is somewhat different.
I would say just in the case of the Soviets, a lot of people describe the Cold War as an ideological competition above all else, it was communism versus liberal democracy or communism versus liberal capitalism, whatever. I actually don’t believe that. I believe the Soviets were realist to the core. I believe Stalin was a realist par excellence, and that ideology did not matter much in Stalin’s foreign policy. And I believe if you look at Soviet foreign policy after World War II, throughout the Cold War, they were realists to the core. And I think in those days, the Americans were realists, a lot of liberal ideology floating around out there, but the Americans were realists. And I think one of the reasons you avoided a shooting match between the United States and the Soviet Union from ’47 to ’89 was because both sides, I think understood basic balance of power logic. US China competition is somewhat different.
First of all, the Chinese are realists to the core. I’ve spent a lot of time in China. I basically have rock and roll. I’m basically a rock and roll star in China. The Chinese-
Lex Fridman
You’re kind of a big deal in China. I love it.
You’re kind of a big deal in China. I love it.
John Mearsheimer
The Chinese are my kind of people. They’re realists, right? They speak my language. It’s the United States that is not very realist. American leaders have a very powerful liberal bent and tend not to see the world in realist terms. I believe, by the way, just going back to our discussion of NATO expansion, I think our inability to understand that NATO expansion was anathema to the Soviet, to the Russians, was due in large part to the fact that we just during the unipolar moment, didn’t think of international politics from a realist perspective and didn’t respect anyone who thought about international politics from a realist perspective. If those various American administrations starting with the Clinton administration had put their realist hat on, they would’ve understood that NATO expansion into Ukraine was not a good idea, but we had this thoroughly liberal view of the world that dominated our thinking, and it’s gone away somewhat since we’ve moved into Multi-polarity, but not completely.
The Chinese are my kind of people. They’re realists, right? They speak my language. It’s the United States that is not very realist. American leaders have a very powerful liberal bent and tend not to see the world in realist terms. I believe, by the way, just going back to our discussion of NATO expansion, I think our inability to understand that NATO expansion was anathema to the Soviet, to the Russians, was due in large part to the fact that we just during the unipolar moment, didn’t think of international politics from a realist perspective and didn’t respect anyone who thought about international politics from a realist perspective. If those various American administrations starting with the Clinton administration had put their realist hat on, they would’ve understood that NATO expansion into Ukraine was not a good idea, but we had this thoroughly liberal view of the world that dominated our thinking, and it’s gone away somewhat since we’ve moved into Multi-polarity, but not completely.
And this makes me a little nervous to pick up on your point. I mean, the United States is thinking about the world in ways that are somewhat different than the Chinese who are real as par excellence.
Lex Fridman
So that’s fascinating. So the Chinese are pragmatic about thinking of the world as a competition of military powers, all the ways in which you described the realist perspective. So that’s a hopeful thing, right? If we can achieve stability and a balance of powers through that military competition.
So that’s fascinating. So the Chinese are pragmatic about thinking of the world as a competition of military powers, all the ways in which you described the realist perspective. So that’s a hopeful thing, right? If we can achieve stability and a balance of powers through that military competition.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, I actually think that’s right. I think if the United States, just let me talk a little bit about the United States to get at the issue you’re raising. If the United States pursues a smart containment strategy, given what you just said, and I said about the Chinese, I think we will avoid war. The problem with the Americans is it’s not just the liberalism. It’s the possibility that we will pursue a rollback policy. In other words, during the Cold War, we pursued containment. It was whenever anybody talked about American grand strategy towards the Soviet Unions, containment, containment, containment. We now know from the historical record that the United States was not only pursuing containment, it was pursuing rollback. We were trying to roll back Soviet power to put it bluntly, we were trying to wreck the Soviet Union, and I would not be surprised moving forward with regard to China if the United States pursues a serious rollback policy and-
Yeah, I actually think that’s right. I think if the United States, just let me talk a little bit about the United States to get at the issue you’re raising. If the United States pursues a smart containment strategy, given what you just said, and I said about the Chinese, I think we will avoid war. The problem with the Americans is it’s not just the liberalism. It’s the possibility that we will pursue a rollback policy. In other words, during the Cold War, we pursued containment. It was whenever anybody talked about American grand strategy towards the Soviet Unions, containment, containment, containment. We now know from the historical record that the United States was not only pursuing containment, it was pursuing rollback. We were trying to roll back Soviet power to put it bluntly, we were trying to wreck the Soviet Union, and I would not be surprised moving forward with regard to China if the United States pursues a serious rollback policy and-
Lex Fridman
So you’re saying throughout history, United States was always doing that. Always. Where’s that from? Why can’t we respect the power of other nations?
So you’re saying throughout history, United States was always doing that. Always. Where’s that from? Why can’t we respect the power of other nations?
John Mearsheimer
Because they may be a threat to us?
Because they may be a threat to us?
Lex Fridman
Well, I mean-
Well, I mean-
John Mearsheimer
Look, you don’t respect the power of other nations. You fear the power of other nations.
Look, you don’t respect the power of other nations. You fear the power of other nations.
Lex Fridman
Well fear and respect are next door neighbors depending on the neighborhood you’re living in, but I just mean it could be very counterproductive to try because if you can empathize with their… If you assume they’re rational actors you trying to roll back would lean into the uncertainty of potential conflict. So you want to avoid the uncertainty of potential conflict, caution, right?
Well fear and respect are next door neighbors depending on the neighborhood you’re living in, but I just mean it could be very counterproductive to try because if you can empathize with their… If you assume they’re rational actors you trying to roll back would lean into the uncertainty of potential conflict. So you want to avoid the uncertainty of potential conflict, caution, right?
John Mearsheimer
Well, yes and no. Look, your point is you want to empathize. You want to be able to put yourself in the shoes of the other side.
Well, yes and no. Look, your point is you want to empathize. You want to be able to put yourself in the shoes of the other side.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
John Mearsheimer
I agree 100% with that, right. It’s very important if you’re a first class strategist to be able to do that, but at the same time, there is this competition for power taking place, and what you want to do is maximize how much power you have relative to the other side, and the other side wants to maximize how much power it has relative to you. So you have this competition for power that’s taking place all the time, and that’s taking place at the same time you want to have empathy or you want to be able to put yourself in the shoes of the other side. So those two things kind of go together.
I agree 100% with that, right. It’s very important if you’re a first class strategist to be able to do that, but at the same time, there is this competition for power taking place, and what you want to do is maximize how much power you have relative to the other side, and the other side wants to maximize how much power it has relative to you. So you have this competition for power that’s taking place all the time, and that’s taking place at the same time you want to have empathy or you want to be able to put yourself in the shoes of the other side. So those two things kind of go together.
Lex Fridman
It just feels less threatening to build up your thing versus try to hurt the other person’s thing, the other group’s thing.
It just feels less threatening to build up your thing versus try to hurt the other person’s thing, the other group’s thing.
John Mearsheimer
But if you build up your own power, you are building up your capability to hurt the other side.
But if you build up your own power, you are building up your capability to hurt the other side.
Lex Fridman
Right, but I guess you don’t rattle the saber just work on manufacturing sabers.
Right, but I guess you don’t rattle the saber just work on manufacturing sabers.
John Mearsheimer
Well, that I agree with. I think that the United States wants to make sure it has a big stick in East Asia for purposes of containing China and avoiding a war, right? Again, I want to be clear, I’m not advocating that we start World War III, but the point is you want to have a big stick and you want to make sure that you don’t overstep your bounds in terms of using that big stick. This is the danger with rollback that you get too aggressive and you precipitate a war, and you also just have to be very careful what you say. And to go back to your favorite argument, you want to be able to have empathy or put yourself in the shoes of the other side, because if you do something, you want to think smartly about what that other side, how that other side is going to see your action and how they’re going to react, right?
Well, that I agree with. I think that the United States wants to make sure it has a big stick in East Asia for purposes of containing China and avoiding a war, right? Again, I want to be clear, I’m not advocating that we start World War III, but the point is you want to have a big stick and you want to make sure that you don’t overstep your bounds in terms of using that big stick. This is the danger with rollback that you get too aggressive and you precipitate a war, and you also just have to be very careful what you say. And to go back to your favorite argument, you want to be able to have empathy or put yourself in the shoes of the other side, because if you do something, you want to think smartly about what that other side, how that other side is going to see your action and how they’re going to react, right?
Lex Fridman
And mostly focus on the carrots, have a giant stick laying around, but never mention it, just focus on the carrots.
And mostly focus on the carrots, have a giant stick laying around, but never mention it, just focus on the carrots.
John Mearsheimer
Well, occasionally you have to mention the stick.
Well, occasionally you have to mention the stick.
Lex Fridman
Everyone knows the stick is there.
Everyone knows the stick is there.
John Mearsheimer
There is some truth in that, right?
There is some truth in that, right?
Lex Fridman
I mean, yeah, and words matter a lot. It feels our current President Biden is meeting with Xi Jinping, and I think the words exchanged there are really important. I have a notion that leaders can stop wars just as much as they can start wars.
I mean, yeah, and words matter a lot. It feels our current President Biden is meeting with Xi Jinping, and I think the words exchanged there are really important. I have a notion that leaders can stop wars just as much as they can start wars.
John Mearsheimer
Well, leaders matter. There’s no question about that, no question, but just on rhetoric, you want to remember that Putin has on more than one occasion, very subtly rattled the nuclear sword, and it has been very effective because Joe Biden has paid attention, and Joe Biden wants to make sure we don’t end up in a thermonuclear war, and thank goodness he’s thinking that way. So all Putin has to do is mention the possibility of nuclear war. Just to go back to Taiwan, switch areas of the world. If you’re interested in containing China and you’re interested in deterrence, and let’s go back to those various scenarios where the Chinese win, we win, Chinese win, but they do it at great cost.
Well, leaders matter. There’s no question about that, no question, but just on rhetoric, you want to remember that Putin has on more than one occasion, very subtly rattled the nuclear sword, and it has been very effective because Joe Biden has paid attention, and Joe Biden wants to make sure we don’t end up in a thermonuclear war, and thank goodness he’s thinking that way. So all Putin has to do is mention the possibility of nuclear war. Just to go back to Taiwan, switch areas of the world. If you’re interested in containing China and you’re interested in deterrence, and let’s go back to those various scenarios where the Chinese win, we win, Chinese win, but they do it at great cost.
One could argue that, that discussion that I laid out before it didn’t take into account nuclear weapons and all President Biden or any of his successors has to do is just very subtly rattle or employ the nuclear threat and just sort of remind the Chinese that you start a war over Taiwan, it could easily escalate into a nuclear war. You want to understand we both have nuclear weapons, and if either one of us is put into a desperate situation, we may turn to those nuclear weapons and oh, by the way, Xi Jinping, you want to understand that we’re out here in the water and using nuclear weapons in the water, it’s not the same as using war nuclear weapons on lands. So we may very well use them. I’m not saying we will, but anyway, a little saber rattling. Right?
Lex Fridman
Let me just zoom out on human history. What makes empires collapse and what makes them last when they do when you look at human history, in your sense thinking about the United States, perhaps as an empire?
Let me just zoom out on human history. What makes empires collapse and what makes them last when they do when you look at human history, in your sense thinking about the United States, perhaps as an empire?
John Mearsheimer
I don’t view the United States as an empire.
I don’t view the United States as an empire.
Lex Fridman
So to you empire as a thing that seeks expansion constantly?
So to you empire as a thing that seeks expansion constantly?
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, I think it’s a country that incorporates different regions or areas around the world into sort of a giant sphere of influence without incorporating those territories actually into the state itself. So you had this thing called the British Empire and it controlled areas like India, North America, and Kenya, just to pick a couple instances at different points. Singapore would be another example. Australia would be another example. So these were all entities that were part of the British Empire and the United States has taken a stab at empire after the Spanish American War, for example, with regard to the Philippines and Cuba and Puerto Rico, but we never got serious about it. There’s never been an American empire.
Yeah, I think it’s a country that incorporates different regions or areas around the world into sort of a giant sphere of influence without incorporating those territories actually into the state itself. So you had this thing called the British Empire and it controlled areas like India, North America, and Kenya, just to pick a couple instances at different points. Singapore would be another example. Australia would be another example. So these were all entities that were part of the British Empire and the United States has taken a stab at empire after the Spanish American War, for example, with regard to the Philippines and Cuba and Puerto Rico, but we never got serious about it. There’s never been an American empire.
This is not to say the United States is not an incredibly powerful country that goes all around the world building military bases and stationing troops here, there and everywhere, but we’re not running an empire the way the British Empire was run or the French Empire. So the question for me is why did those empires go away? Why did the British Empire go away? If you ever look at a map of the world in 1922 after World War I, it’s truly amazing how much of that map is controlled by Britain. They had a huge empire and it’s disappeared.
Lex Fridman
Probably by far the biggest in terms of area empire in human history, I think so.
Probably by far the biggest in terms of area empire in human history, I think so.
John Mearsheimer
I think that’s right. It almost has to be.
I think that’s right. It almost has to be.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, right. It’s crazy.
Yeah, right. It’s crazy.
John Mearsheimer
Crazy, yeah.
Crazy, yeah.
Lex Fridman
And then no longer is the case.
And then no longer is the case.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. Now I want to be clear. The Americans have wielded maybe even greater influence than Britain did when it had its empire, but I don’t believe we have an empire that bears any resemblance to the British Empire. So the question is, what happened to that British empire? What happened to the French Empire? What happened to the Belgian Empire? What happened to the Dutch Empire? These were countries that had colonies all over the planet. The Dutch East Indies, Vietnam was French Indochina. Where did those empires go? Two factors finished them off. Number one, nationalism. Nationalism became a very powerful force in the 19th Century. It began to rear its head in the late 18th Century and became a very powerful force in the 19th and certainly in the 20th.
Yeah. Now I want to be clear. The Americans have wielded maybe even greater influence than Britain did when it had its empire, but I don’t believe we have an empire that bears any resemblance to the British Empire. So the question is, what happened to that British empire? What happened to the French Empire? What happened to the Belgian Empire? What happened to the Dutch Empire? These were countries that had colonies all over the planet. The Dutch East Indies, Vietnam was French Indochina. Where did those empires go? Two factors finished them off. Number one, nationalism. Nationalism became a very powerful force in the 19th Century. It began to rear its head in the late 18th Century and became a very powerful force in the 19th and certainly in the 20th.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain nationalism here?
Can you explain nationalism here?
John Mearsheimer
Nationalism is the idea that these different nations that were part of the empire, like the Kenyans wanted their own state, nation state. This is my point about the Palestinians, right? This is Palestinian nationalism. What is Zionism? Zionism is Jewish nationalism. Jewish nationalism. Think of Theodore Herzl’s famous book. It’s called The Jewish State, Nation State. Think of the word nation state that embodies nationalism. Nation state, Jewish state. Palestinians want their own state, two state solution. Can’t beat the Palestinians into submission. The Indians wanted their own state. The Pakistanis wanted their own state. The Kenyans wanted their own state. Singapore wanted its own state. Oh, the Americans wanted their own state. This is called the American Revolution.
Nationalism is the idea that these different nations that were part of the empire, like the Kenyans wanted their own state, nation state. This is my point about the Palestinians, right? This is Palestinian nationalism. What is Zionism? Zionism is Jewish nationalism. Jewish nationalism. Think of Theodore Herzl’s famous book. It’s called The Jewish State, Nation State. Think of the word nation state that embodies nationalism. Nation state, Jewish state. Palestinians want their own state, two state solution. Can’t beat the Palestinians into submission. The Indians wanted their own state. The Pakistanis wanted their own state. The Kenyans wanted their own state. Singapore wanted its own state. Oh, the Americans wanted their own state. This is called the American Revolution.
So that’s the first reason, nationalism that these empires disappeared. The second reason is that from a cost benefit analysis, they no longer made any sense, and it was the coming of the Industrial Revolution. Once the Industrial Revolution comes, an empire is basically an albatross around your neck. I would argue that the British Empire was an albatross around Britain’s neck in most of the 20th Century. Some of my friends disagree with that and think there were all sorts of benefits from the British Empire, but you want to remember that in the 20th Century, the three countries that really were powerful were the United States, Germany and the Soviet Union. Those were the big three. Did any of them have an empire? No.
Lex Fridman
That’s a good argument.
That’s a good argument.
John Mearsheimer
In the industrial world, you don’t need an empire, right? What you need is a powerful manufacturing base.
In the industrial world, you don’t need an empire, right? What you need is a powerful manufacturing base.
Lex Fridman
Well, the cost benefit analysis is different before the Industrial Revolution, there’s been many empires.
Well, the cost benefit analysis is different before the Industrial Revolution, there’s been many empires.
John Mearsheimer
There’s no question that empires came and went, right?
There’s no question that empires came and went, right?
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
John Mearsheimer
All you have to do is just look at the British and the French in the Seven Years War, 1756 to 1763, the British win, they get Canada, and that’s why Quebec, Montreal, all these big French speaking areas are now part of Canada. So borders change and countries got established. The United States being one, and remember, South American, Central America were once completely dominated by the Spanish, and in the case of Brazil, the Portuguese, but they all in the 19th Century got their independence, and what I’m saying to you is in the 19th and in the 20th Century, there were two forces that were really driving the train. One is nationalism, and then the other is the industrial revolution, which changes the cost benefit analysis.
All you have to do is just look at the British and the French in the Seven Years War, 1756 to 1763, the British win, they get Canada, and that’s why Quebec, Montreal, all these big French speaking areas are now part of Canada. So borders change and countries got established. The United States being one, and remember, South American, Central America were once completely dominated by the Spanish, and in the case of Brazil, the Portuguese, but they all in the 19th Century got their independence, and what I’m saying to you is in the 19th and in the 20th Century, there were two forces that were really driving the train. One is nationalism, and then the other is the industrial revolution, which changes the cost benefit analysis.
Lex Fridman
Almost too crazy of a question, but if you look, let me calculate, let’s say 500 years from now, and you John Mearsheimer traveled through time and are at a bookstore looking at the entire history of human civilization in a single book. What role does US play? What’s the story of US over the next a hundred, 200, 300 years? Is it a big role, small role?
Almost too crazy of a question, but if you look, let me calculate, let’s say 500 years from now, and you John Mearsheimer traveled through time and are at a bookstore looking at the entire history of human civilization in a single book. What role does US play? What’s the story of US over the next a hundred, 200, 300 years? Is it a big role, small role?
John Mearsheimer
Well, that’s a long time. If you asked me, let’s just say the next hundred years.
Well, that’s a long time. If you asked me, let’s just say the next hundred years.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s still tough.
Yeah, that’s still tough.
John Mearsheimer
That’s still tough, but actually I think we’re in excellent shape and here’s the reason. Going back to the beginning of our conversation, you asked me about power and I told you the two principle building blocks of power are population size and wealth, and therefore you want to look around the world and you want to look at what you think the demographics are of countries like Britain, the United States, Iran, China, Russia, pick your country moving forward, what do the demographics look like and how wealthy are those countries likely to be? What you discover very quickly is that almost every country around the world is depopulating over time. Russia’s going to be much smaller, China’s going to be much smaller a hundred years from now than both of those countries are, as best we can tell.
That’s still tough, but actually I think we’re in excellent shape and here’s the reason. Going back to the beginning of our conversation, you asked me about power and I told you the two principle building blocks of power are population size and wealth, and therefore you want to look around the world and you want to look at what you think the demographics are of countries like Britain, the United States, Iran, China, Russia, pick your country moving forward, what do the demographics look like and how wealthy are those countries likely to be? What you discover very quickly is that almost every country around the world is depopulating over time. Russia’s going to be much smaller, China’s going to be much smaller a hundred years from now than both of those countries are, as best we can tell.
United States, American women are not having lots of babies these days. No question about that, but we have immigration. We’re an immigrant culture. You’re a perfect manifestation of that. You’re a perfect, you’re now an American. That’s wonderful. We need more people like you. So when I hear Donald Trump and others arguing that immigration’s a terrible thing, this is ridiculous. Immigration is what made us great. It’s when my relatives came over in the middle of the 19th Century from Germany and Ireland.
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating because there’s been a huge concern, America and other developed nations are not having enough children, but you just made me realize in the long arc of history, the United States has gotten really good at integrating immigrants and helping them flourish. The whole diversity of that makes up America.
That’s fascinating because there’s been a huge concern, America and other developed nations are not having enough children, but you just made me realize in the long arc of history, the United States has gotten really good at integrating immigrants and helping them flourish. The whole diversity of that makes up America.
John Mearsheimer
You’re absolutely right.
You’re absolutely right.
Lex Fridman
There’s a machinery of integrating other cultures.
There’s a machinery of integrating other cultures.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah, just very quickly on this-
Yeah, just very quickly on this-
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating.
That’s fascinating.
John Mearsheimer
Sam Huntington’s book, Who Are We? Which in many ways I love that book, but it has one fundamental flaw and a number of people told him beforehand that flaw existed and he didn’t fix it, but Sam argues in the book that we have large numbers of Hispanics in this country and we’re doing a very poor job of integrating them into the mainstream and they’re not becoming Americans, and because many of them are concentrated in the Southwest of the United States, unlike other ethnic groups that were spread out all over God’s little green acre, we’re going to have this cohesive group of Spanish speaking Americans who are going to want to break away, and the United States is no longer going to be a reasonably coherent nation state. He’s wrong. All the evidence is that Hispanics are integrating into the American mainstream more quickly and more effectively than the European immigrant groups that came starting around 1835.
Sam Huntington’s book, Who Are We? Which in many ways I love that book, but it has one fundamental flaw and a number of people told him beforehand that flaw existed and he didn’t fix it, but Sam argues in the book that we have large numbers of Hispanics in this country and we’re doing a very poor job of integrating them into the mainstream and they’re not becoming Americans, and because many of them are concentrated in the Southwest of the United States, unlike other ethnic groups that were spread out all over God’s little green acre, we’re going to have this cohesive group of Spanish speaking Americans who are going to want to break away, and the United States is no longer going to be a reasonably coherent nation state. He’s wrong. All the evidence is that Hispanics are integrating into the American mainstream more quickly and more effectively than the European immigrant groups that came starting around 1835.
If you look at immigration from Europe into the United States, leaving aside the original wasps who came over and founded the place, the immigrants start coming in large numbers in 1835, and we really don’t shut the door until 1924, right? This is a crude overview, starting in 1835 and running up till about 1885, it’s mainly Germans and Irish. That’s why Germans are the largest ethnic group to ever come to the United States, and the Irish are right behind them. These are the European ethnic groups we’re talking about. Then starting in 1885 Pols, Jews and Italians start coming, and the Germans and Irish keep coming, and this is why Ellis Island is opened, I think it’s 1893, Ellis Island is opened because Castle Garden in New York, which had handled all the previous immigrants coming across the pond, Castle Garden, couldn’t handle them all, so they opened up Ellis Island.
That’s why somebody like me, I can’t find my distant relative’s records in Ellis Island because they came through Castle Garden. Whereas lots of Jews I know, lots of Italians, I know they can find their relatives records in Ellis Island because they came through Ellis Island. The point is, you had all these immigrants who came in roughly between 1835 and 1924 when we shut the gates. It was the only time we’ve ever really shut the gates in a meaningful way and this is what made America great, all these people, and they made lots of babies.
Lex Fridman
So in some sense, make America great again, means getting more immigrants in.
So in some sense, make America great again, means getting more immigrants in.
John Mearsheimer
Well, we opened the gates again in ’65, closed them in ’24, opened them in ’65. I’m oversimplifying the story here, because we didn’t completely shut them. We almost completely shut them in ’24, opened in ’65, and we’ve had huge numbers of immigrants flowing in. These immigrants who have been flowing in since ’65 are not Europeans. They’re not mainly Europeans, they’re mainly Hispanics and Asians. If you look at those Hispanics and Asians, they’re integrating into the American mainstream at a much faster and more effective clip than was the case with those immigrants who came in the 19th Century and early 20th Century.
Well, we opened the gates again in ’65, closed them in ’24, opened them in ’65. I’m oversimplifying the story here, because we didn’t completely shut them. We almost completely shut them in ’24, opened in ’65, and we’ve had huge numbers of immigrants flowing in. These immigrants who have been flowing in since ’65 are not Europeans. They’re not mainly Europeans, they’re mainly Hispanics and Asians. If you look at those Hispanics and Asians, they’re integrating into the American mainstream at a much faster and more effective clip than was the case with those immigrants who came in the 19th Century and early 20th Century.
The Irish, oh my God, they were treated horribly. There’s a book, a very famous book that’s been written called When The Irish Became White, just think about the title of that book. There was discrimination against all these groups, and the worst discrimination, of course was against Chinese Americans, but we’ve gotten much better and what we should do moving forward is redouble our efforts to integrate immigrants into the American mainstream, Hispanics, Asians of all sorts, because the fact is that America is rapidly reaching the point where it’s not going to be an all white country.
I have five children and two of my children are, I was a generation Z, Gen Z. Gen Z is the last majority white generation, subsequent generations, and not majority white. So for anybody who’s bothered by this, I’m not bothered by that, but for anybody who is bothered by this, they better good use to it because Americans aren’t making enough babies that we can continue to grow population-wise in a robust way. So we need immigration and we’re an immigrant culture, and this is a great virtue. It has been a great virtue over time.
Lex Fridman
It should be a source of hope, not worry.
It should be a source of hope, not worry.
John Mearsheimer
That’s my view. That’s my view and America when it works, is a place that is very attractive to immigrants and immigrants can do very well here and then the real key moving forward is intermarriage, and you have a huge amount of intermarriage. Somebody was telling me not too long ago that the highest inner marriage rates in the United States are among Asian women, Asian American women, Asian women and Anglos, and I say wonderful and-
That’s my view. That’s my view and America when it works, is a place that is very attractive to immigrants and immigrants can do very well here and then the real key moving forward is intermarriage, and you have a huge amount of intermarriage. Somebody was telling me not too long ago that the highest inner marriage rates in the United States are among Asian women, Asian American women, Asian women and Anglos, and I say wonderful and-
Lex Fridman
Great.
Great.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. No, the more-
Yeah. No, the more-
Lex Fridman
Love is the fastest way to integrate.
Love is the fastest way to integrate.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. Well, what you want to do is you want to eliminate difference, right? You want to eliminate difference, right? It’s like people who say, “I’m an antisemite,” right? I have two grandsons who Adolf Hitler would’ve thrown into a gas chamber. One of whose first name is John, and middle name is Mearsheimer, right?
Yeah. Well, what you want to do is you want to eliminate difference, right? You want to eliminate difference, right? It’s like people who say, “I’m an antisemite,” right? I have two grandsons who Adolf Hitler would’ve thrown into a gas chamber. One of whose first name is John, and middle name is Mearsheimer, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
John Mearsheimer
This is what you want. Steve Watt’s wife and his two children would’ve been thrown into a gas chamber by Adolf Hitler. This is what you want. You want intermarriage. Now, there are a good number of people in some of those groups, especially among Jews who don’t like intermarriage, but they’ve lost because I haven’t looked recently at the data for intermarriage rates among basically secular Jews, but it used to be around 62% large numbers of Jews marry Guam.
This is what you want. Steve Watt’s wife and his two children would’ve been thrown into a gas chamber by Adolf Hitler. This is what you want. You want intermarriage. Now, there are a good number of people in some of those groups, especially among Jews who don’t like intermarriage, but they’ve lost because I haven’t looked recently at the data for intermarriage rates among basically secular Jews, but it used to be around 62% large numbers of Jews marry Guam.
Lex Fridman
And they’ve lost because of intermarriage. Intermarriage helps fight tribalism. Destructive kind of tribalism.
And they’ve lost because of intermarriage. Intermarriage helps fight tribalism. Destructive kind of tribalism.
John Mearsheimer
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
It’s nice
It’s nice
John Mearsheimer
Calling me an antisemite, they haven’t met my grandsons, my son-in-laws, a niece that I have, nephews that I have, brother-in-laws that I have. Jewish. Come on.
Calling me an antisemite, they haven’t met my grandsons, my son-in-laws, a niece that I have, nephews that I have, brother-in-laws that I have. Jewish. Come on.
Lex Fridman
And this gives a really nice hopeful view of America is the integration of different cultures, different kinds of peoples. That is a unique property of America.
And this gives a really nice hopeful view of America is the integration of different cultures, different kinds of peoples. That is a unique property of America.
John Mearsheimer
Yes, but just to go back to where we started, it was not smooth in the beginning.
Yes, but just to go back to where we started, it was not smooth in the beginning.
Lex Fridman
All things are rough in the beginning.
All things are rough in the beginning.
John Mearsheimer
All things are rough in the beginning.
All things are rough in the beginning.
Life and mortality
Lex Fridman
What advice would you give to a young person today about how to have a career they can be proud of or a life they can be proud of?
What advice would you give to a young person today about how to have a career they can be proud of or a life they can be proud of?
John Mearsheimer
Well, I think it’s very important to make sure that you do something in life that really interests you. My mother used to use this phrase, “Floats your boat.” You want to do something that floats your boat or to use another one of my mother’s phrases, ” You want to get off. You want to do something where you get up out of bed in the morning with a bounce in your step.” So I think that if your mother and father want you to be a lawyer and they’re pushing you to be a lawyer and you don’t want to be a lawyer, you want to be a policeman, be a policeman. Don’t do what other people want you to do because it’s very important to find a job, an occupation that you really love.
Well, I think it’s very important to make sure that you do something in life that really interests you. My mother used to use this phrase, “Floats your boat.” You want to do something that floats your boat or to use another one of my mother’s phrases, ” You want to get off. You want to do something where you get up out of bed in the morning with a bounce in your step.” So I think that if your mother and father want you to be a lawyer and they’re pushing you to be a lawyer and you don’t want to be a lawyer, you want to be a policeman, be a policeman. Don’t do what other people want you to do because it’s very important to find a job, an occupation that you really love.
The second thing I would say, and this has to do with your point about humility, you want to think about the humility hubris index. My friend Steve Van Everett, who teaches at MIT, he and I invented this concept. We call it the hubris humility index, and you want to have a healthy dose of humility, but you also want to have a healthy dose of hubris. You want to think you can change the world. You want to think you can make things better for yourself. You want to take chances. You want to think sometimes that you know better than other people do. Hubris is not a bad thing, but at the same time, you have to have humility. You have to understand that a man or a woman has his or her limits and you want to listen to other people. You want to be a good listener.
So always remember the importance of the hubris humility index and the importance of having healthy doses of both hubris and humility.
Lex Fridman
Speaking of humility, you’re mortal, like all humans are, do you ponder your mortality? Are you afraid of it? Are you afraid of death?
Speaking of humility, you’re mortal, like all humans are, do you ponder your mortality? Are you afraid of it? Are you afraid of death?
John Mearsheimer
I’m not sure I’m afraid of death. I don’t want to die because I enjoy life so much.
I’m not sure I’m afraid of death. I don’t want to die because I enjoy life so much.
Lex Fridman
Having too much fun?
Having too much fun?
John Mearsheimer
Given how horrible the world is today, I hate to say that I’m having too much fun, but do I find what I do interesting and gratifying? I do. I just love what I do and I love studying international politics, and I love being intellectually curious about all sorts of subjects. I love talking to you about this and that. I mean, this is really wonderful, and I often tell people thank goodness I’m only 28 years old because I do try to behave like I’m only 28 years old, but I am well aware of the fact that as my mother used to say, “Nothing is forever,” and that includes me and when you’re 75 going on 76, you understand that you have a limited number of years left and I find that depressing because I’ve been very lucky and I feel like I’ve won the lottery. I’m very thankful for that. I’d like to make it last for as long as possible, but I do understand that nothing is forever.
Given how horrible the world is today, I hate to say that I’m having too much fun, but do I find what I do interesting and gratifying? I do. I just love what I do and I love studying international politics, and I love being intellectually curious about all sorts of subjects. I love talking to you about this and that. I mean, this is really wonderful, and I often tell people thank goodness I’m only 28 years old because I do try to behave like I’m only 28 years old, but I am well aware of the fact that as my mother used to say, “Nothing is forever,” and that includes me and when you’re 75 going on 76, you understand that you have a limited number of years left and I find that depressing because I’ve been very lucky and I feel like I’ve won the lottery. I’m very thankful for that. I’d like to make it last for as long as possible, but I do understand that nothing is forever.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the finiteness of things.
Yeah, the finiteness of things.
John Mearsheimer
Yeah. You never think that when you’re young. I mean, you think you’re going to live forever and you’re just not going to get old. I never thought this would happen that I would become 75 years old.
Yeah. You never think that when you’re young. I mean, you think you’re going to live forever and you’re just not going to get old. I never thought this would happen that I would become 75 years old.
Lex Fridman
Well, you got so much energy and boldness and fearlessness and excitement to you that I’m really grateful to see that, especially given how much I’m sure you’ve been attacked for having bold ideas and presenting them and not losing that youthful energy is beautiful to see.
Well, you got so much energy and boldness and fearlessness and excitement to you that I’m really grateful to see that, especially given how much I’m sure you’ve been attacked for having bold ideas and presenting them and not losing that youthful energy is beautiful to see.
John Mearsheimer
Thank you.
Thank you.
Lex Fridman
Not becoming cynical. John, it’s a huge honor to speak with you that you’ve given me so much time and so much respect and so much love. This was a really incredible conversation. Thank you so much for everything you do in the world, for looking out into the world and trying to understand it and teach us, and thank you so much for talking with a silly kid like me.
Not becoming cynical. John, it’s a huge honor to speak with you that you’ve given me so much time and so much respect and so much love. This was a really incredible conversation. Thank you so much for everything you do in the world, for looking out into the world and trying to understand it and teach us, and thank you so much for talking with a silly kid like me.
John Mearsheimer
It was my pleasure. Thank you very much. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
It was my pleasure. Thank you very much. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Lex Fridman
Awesome. Thanks for listening to this conversation with John Mearsheimer. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Plato. “Only the dead have seen the end of war.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Awesome. Thanks for listening to this conversation with John Mearsheimer. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Plato. “Only the dead have seen the end of war.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Elon Musk: War, AI, Aliens, Politics, Physics, Video Games, and Humanity | Lex Fridman Podcast #400
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #400 with Elon Musk.
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 he kind of got put into the cannon fodder category basically. But then randomly they gave him this test. He was transferred to British intelligence in London. That’s where we met my grandmother. But he had PTSD next level, next level. I mean, just didn’t talk, just didn’t talk. And if you tried talking to him, he’d just tell you to shut up. And he won a bunch of medals, never bragged about it once, not even hinted nothing. I found out about it because his military records were online. That’s how I know. So he would say like, “No way in hell do you want to do that again.” But how many people… Obviously, he died, he 20 years ago or longer, actually 30 years ago. How many people are alive that remember World War II? Not many.
Spartans didn’t write… They also weren’t very verbose by their nature, but they did write, but they weren’t very verbose. They were [inaudible 00:21:23]. But the Athenians and the other Greeks wrote a line, and Spartan was really kind of like the leader of Greece. But Athens grew stronger and stronger with each passing year. And everyone’s like, “Well, that’s inevitable that there’s going to be a clash between Athens and Sparta. Well, how do we avoid that?” And actually they saw it coming and they still could not avoid it. So at some point, if one group, one civilization or country or whatever exceeds another sort of like the United States has been the biggest kid on the block since I think around 1890 from an economic standpoint.
So the United States has been the most powerful economic engine in the world longer than anyone’s been alive. And the foundation of war is economics. So now we have a situation in the case of China where the economy is likely to be two, perhaps three times larger than that of the US. So imagine you’re the biggest kid on the block for as long as anyone can remember, and suddenly a kid comes along who’s twice your size.
So now China historically has always been, with rare exception, been internally focused. They have not been inquisitive. They’ve fought each other. There’ve been many, many civil wars. In the Three Kingdoms war, I believe they lost about 70% of their population. So they’ve had brutal internal wars, civil wars that make the US Civil War look small by comparison. So I think it’s important to appreciate that China is not monolithic. We sort of think of China as a sort of one entity of one mind. And this is definitely not the case. From what I’ve seen and I think most people who understand China would agree, people in China think about China 10 times more than they think about anything outside of China. So it’s like 90% of their consideration is internal.
The US did conspicuous acts of kindness like the Berlin Airlift. And I think it’s always like, well, America’s done bad things. Well, of course America’s done bad things, but one needs to look at the whole track record and just generally, one sort of test would be how do you treat your prisoners at war? Or let’s say, no offense to the Russians, but let’s say you’re in Germany, it’s 1945, you’ve got the Russian Army coming one side and you’ve got the French, British and American Army’s coming the other side, who would you like to be just surrendered to? No country is [inaudible 00:27:58] perfect, but I recommend being a POW with the Americans. That would be my choice very strongly.
So I think there are… In this way, China and the United States are similar. Neither country has been acquisitive in a significant way. So that’s a shared principle, I guess. Now, China does feel very strongly about Taiwan. They’ve been very clear about that for a long time. From this standpoint, it would be like one of the states is not there like Hawaii or something like that but more significant than Hawaii. And Hawaii is pretty significant for us. So they view it as really there’s a fundamental part of China, the island of Formosa, not Taiwan, that is not part of China, but should be. And the only reason it hasn’t been is because the US Pacific fleet.
So civilization has been around. It’s really a flash in the pan so far. And why did it take so long? Four and a half billion years, for the vast majority of the time, there was no life. And then there was archaic bacteria for a very long time. And then you had mitochondria get captured, multicellular life, differentiation into plants and animals, life moving from the oceans to land, mammals, higher brain functions. And the sun is expanding slowly but it’ll heat the earth up at some point in the future, boil the oceans and earth will become like Venus, where life as we know it is impossible. So if we do not become multiplanetary and ultimately solar system, annihilation of all life on earth is a certainty. A certainty. And it could be as little as on the galactic timescale, half a billion years, long time by human standards, but that’s only 10% longer than earth has been around at all. So if life had taken 10% longer to evolve on earth, it wouldn’t exist at all.
Really I am 52, so my reflex is not what they used to be, but I have a lifetime of playing video games. At one point, I was maybe one of the best quake players in the world. I actually won money in what I think was the first paid eSports tournament in the US. We were doing four person quake tournaments and I was the second best person on the team and the actual best person that… We were actually winning, we would’ve come first, except the best person on the team. His computer crashed halfway through the game. So we came second, but I got money for it and everything. So basically I got skills, albeit no spring chicken these days. And to be totally frank, it’s driving me crazy to beat Lilith as a Druid, basically trying to beat Hatred Incarnate in the eternal realm.
We had that crazy blackout for several days in Austin because there’s almost no buffering of energy in the grid. If you’ve got a hydropower plant you can buffer energy, but otherwise it’s all real time. So with batteries, you can produce energy at night and use it during the day so you can buffer. So I expect that there will be very heavy usage of batteries in the future because the peak to trough ratio for power plants is anywhere from two to five, so its lowest point to highest point.
The FAA has actually given their approval, but we’re waiting for fish and wildlife to finish their analysis and give their approval. That’s why I posted I want to buy a fish license on, which also refers to the Monte Python sketch. Why do you need a license for your fish? I don’t know. But according to the rules, I’m told you need some sort of fish license or something. We effectively need a fish license to launch a rocket. And I’m like, wait a second. How did the fish come into this picture? I mean, some of the things I feel like are so absurd that I want to do a comedy sketch and flash at the bottom. This is all real. This is actually what happened.
One of the things that was a bit of a challenge at one point is that they were worried about a rocket hitting a shark. And the ocean’s very big, and how often do you see sharks? Not that often. As a percentage of ocean surface area, sharks basically are zero. And so then we said, well, how will we calculate the probability of killing a shark? And they’re like, well, we can’t give you that information because they’re worried about shark fin hunters going and hunting sharks and I said, well, how are we supposed to, we’re on the horns of a dilemma then.
They said, well, there’s another part of fish and wildlife that can do this analysis. I’m like, well, why don’t you give them the data? We don’t trust them. Excuse me? They’re literally in your department. Again, this is actually what happened. And then can you do an NDA or something? Eventually they managed to solve the internal quandary, and indeed the probability of us hitting a shark is essentially zero. Then there’s another organization that I didn’t realize existed until a few months ago that cares about whether we would potentially hit a whale in international waters. Now, again, you look the surface, look at the Pacific and say what percentage of the Pacific consists of whale? I could give you a big picture and point out all the whales in this picture. I’m like, I don’t see any whales. It’s basically 0%, and if our rocket does hit a whale, which is extremely unlikely beyond all belief, fate had it, that’s a whale has some seriously bad luck, least lucky whale ever.
And to me, what’s really fascinating is how fast it has to do that. So currently that entire pipeline to go from several hundred million to a handful takes 220 seconds of CPU time, single CPU time, and then it has to do that in a second. So it has to be super distributed in fascinating ways. There’s just a lot of tweets, there’s a lot.
It’d be like tweet for two hours? Come on. Tweet made sense when it was 140 characters of text. Because it’s like a bunch of little birds tweeting. But when you’ve got long form content, it’s no longer a tweet. So a movie is not a tweet. Apple, for example, posted the entire episode of The Silo, the entire thing, on a platform. By the way, it was their number one social media thing ever in engagement of anything, on any platform ever. So it was a great idea. And by the way, I just learned about it afterwards. I was like, Hey, wow, they posted an entire hour long episode of, so no, that’s not a tweet. This is a video.
So, there’s a bunch of correlations in how you rate a Community Notes post, Community Notes. So then, in order for a community note to actually be shown, people who historically have disagreed on a subject must agree in order for a note to be shown. That’s the essential magic of it.
This is actually different than what it gave me before, which was a bullet point list. Here’s more a narrative structure. Cybertruck unveiling, where the supposedly unbreakable windows.
So, I was told by our CFO that the banks would immediately suspend our lines of credit. And if they suspend our lines of credit, at that time, we would’ve gone bankrupt instantly. So, there would never have been an opportunity for a trial because Tesla would be dead. So really, this is like someone holding a gun to your kid’s head and saying, “Pay $20 million and admit…” This is like a hostage negotiation.
And the reason they don’t attack the hedge funds is because those hedge funds employ those law firms. And they know if they attack the hedge funds, they’re affecting their future career prospects. So, they sell small investors down the river for their own career. That’s what actually happens. Regulatory capture.
I mean, the AI has thus far gotten to where it is via brute force, just throwing massive amounts of compute and massive amounts of power at it. So, this is not where it will end up. In general, with any given technology, you first try to make it work, and then you make it efficient. So I think we’ll find, over time, that these models get smaller, are able to produce sensible output with far less compute, far less power. Tesla is arguably ahead of the game on that front because we’ve just been forced to try to understand the world with 100 watts of compute.
And there are a bunch of fundamental functions that we forgot to include. So, we had to run a bunch of things in emulation. We fixed a bunch of those with hardware four, and then hardware five will be even better. But it does appear, at this point, that the car will be able to drive better than a human, even with hardware three and 100 watts of power. And really, if we really optimize it, it could be probably less than 50 watts.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 0:07 – War and human nature
- 4:33 – Israel-Hamas war
- 10:41 – Military-Industrial Complex
- 14:58 – War in Ukraine
- 19:41 – China
- 33:57 – xAI Grok
- 44:55 – Aliens
- 52:55 – God
- 55:22 – Diablo 4 and video games
- 1:04:29 – Dystopian worlds: 1984 and Brave New World
- 1:10:41 – AI and useful compute per watt
- 1:16:22 – AI regulation
- 1:23:14 – Should AI be open-sourced?
- 1:30:36 – X algorithm
- 1:41:57 – 2024 presidential elections
- 1:54:55 – Politics
- 1:57:57 – Trust
- 2:03:29 – Tesla’s Autopilot and Optimus robot
- 2:12:28 – Hardships
Introduction
War and human nature
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Elon Musk, his fourth time on this, the Lex Fridman Podcast. I thought you were going to finish it. It’s one of the greatest themes in all of film history.
The following is a conversation with Elon Musk, his fourth time on this, the Lex Fridman Podcast. I thought you were going to finish it. It’s one of the greatest themes in all of film history.
Elon Musk
Yeah, that’s great.
Yeah, that’s great.
Lex Fridman
So I was just thinking about the Roman Empire, as one does.
So I was just thinking about the Roman Empire, as one does.
Elon Musk
Is that whole meme where all guys are thinking about the Roman Empire at least once a day?
Is that whole meme where all guys are thinking about the Roman Empire at least once a day?
Lex Fridman
And half the population is confused whether it’s true or not. But more seriously, thinking about the wars going on in the world today, and as you know, war and military conquest has been a big part of Roman society and culture, and I think has been a big part of most empires and dynasties throughout human history.
And half the population is confused whether it’s true or not. But more seriously, thinking about the wars going on in the world today, and as you know, war and military conquest has been a big part of Roman society and culture, and I think has been a big part of most empires and dynasties throughout human history.
Elon Musk
Yeah, they usually came as a result of conquest. I mean, there’s some like the Hapsburg Empire where there was just a lot of clever marriages.
Yeah, they usually came as a result of conquest. I mean, there’s some like the Hapsburg Empire where there was just a lot of clever marriages.
Lex Fridman
But fundamentally there’s an engine of conquest and they celebrate excellence in warfare, many of the leaders were excellent generals, that kind of thing. So a big picture question, Grok approved, I asked if this is a good question to ask.
But fundamentally there’s an engine of conquest and they celebrate excellence in warfare, many of the leaders were excellent generals, that kind of thing. So a big picture question, Grok approved, I asked if this is a good question to ask.
Elon Musk
Tested, Grok approved. Yeah.
Tested, Grok approved. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
At least on fun mode. To what degree do you think war is part of human nature versus a consequence of how human societies are structured? I ask this as you have somehow controversially been a proponent of peace.
At least on fun mode. To what degree do you think war is part of human nature versus a consequence of how human societies are structured? I ask this as you have somehow controversially been a proponent of peace.
Elon Musk
I’m generally a proponent of peace. I mean, ignorance is perhaps, in my view, the real enemy to be countered. That’s the real hard part, not fighting other humans, but all creatures fight. I mean, the jungle is… People think of nature as perhaps some sort of peaceful thing, but in fact it is not. There’s some quite funny Werner Herzog thing where he is in the jungle saying that it’s basically just murder and death in every direction. The plants and animals in the jungle are constantly trying to kill each other every single day, every minute. So it’s not like we’re unusual in that respect.
I’m generally a proponent of peace. I mean, ignorance is perhaps, in my view, the real enemy to be countered. That’s the real hard part, not fighting other humans, but all creatures fight. I mean, the jungle is… People think of nature as perhaps some sort of peaceful thing, but in fact it is not. There’s some quite funny Werner Herzog thing where he is in the jungle saying that it’s basically just murder and death in every direction. The plants and animals in the jungle are constantly trying to kill each other every single day, every minute. So it’s not like we’re unusual in that respect.
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s a relevant question here, whether with greater intelligence comes greater control over these base instincts for violence.
Well, there’s a relevant question here, whether with greater intelligence comes greater control over these base instincts for violence.
Elon Musk
Yes. We have much more vulnerability to control our limbic instinct for violence than say a chimpanzee. And in fact, if one looks at say, chimpanzee society, it is not friendly. I mean, the Bonobos are an exception, but chimpanzee society is filled with violence and it’s quite horrific, frankly. That’s our limbic system in action. You don’t want to be on the wrong side of a chimpanzee, it’ll eat your face off and tear your nuts off.
Yes. We have much more vulnerability to control our limbic instinct for violence than say a chimpanzee. And in fact, if one looks at say, chimpanzee society, it is not friendly. I mean, the Bonobos are an exception, but chimpanzee society is filled with violence and it’s quite horrific, frankly. That’s our limbic system in action. You don’t want to be on the wrong side of a chimpanzee, it’ll eat your face off and tear your nuts off.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Basically there’s no limits or ethics or they almost had just war. There’s no just war in the chimpanzee societies. Is war and dominance by any means necessary?
Yeah. Basically there’s no limits or ethics or they almost had just war. There’s no just war in the chimpanzee societies. Is war and dominance by any means necessary?
Elon Musk
Yeah. Chimpanzee society is a permanent version of human society. They’re not like peace loving basically at all. There’s extreme violence and then once in a while, somebody who’s watched too many Disney movies decides to raise a chimpanzee as a pet, and then that eats their face or they’re nuts off or chew their fingers off and that kind of thing. It’s happened several times.
Yeah. Chimpanzee society is a permanent version of human society. They’re not like peace loving basically at all. There’s extreme violence and then once in a while, somebody who’s watched too many Disney movies decides to raise a chimpanzee as a pet, and then that eats their face or they’re nuts off or chew their fingers off and that kind of thing. It’s happened several times.
Lex Fridman
Ripping your nuts off is an interesting strategy for interaction.
Ripping your nuts off is an interesting strategy for interaction.
Elon Musk
It’s happened to people. It’s unfortunate. That’s, I guess, one way to ensure that the other chimp doesn’t contribute to the gene pool.
It’s happened to people. It’s unfortunate. That’s, I guess, one way to ensure that the other chimp doesn’t contribute to the gene pool.
Lex Fridman
Well, from a martial arts perspective is the fascinating strategy.
Well, from a martial arts perspective is the fascinating strategy.
Elon Musk
The nut rougher.
The nut rougher.
Lex Fridman
I wonder which of the martial arts teaches that one.
I wonder which of the martial arts teaches that one.
Elon Musk
I think it’s safe to say if somebody’s got your nuts in their hands and as the option of roughing them off, you’ll be amenable to whatever they want.
I think it’s safe to say if somebody’s got your nuts in their hands and as the option of roughing them off, you’ll be amenable to whatever they want.
Israel-Hamas war
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Safe to say. So, like I said, somehow controversially, you’ve been a proponent of peace on Twitter on X.
Yeah. Safe to say. So, like I said, somehow controversially, you’ve been a proponent of peace on Twitter on X.
Elon Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So let me ask you about the wars going on today and to see what the path to peace could be. How do you hope the current war in Israel and Gaza comes to an end? What path do you see that can minimize human suffering in the longterm in that part of the world?
So let me ask you about the wars going on today and to see what the path to peace could be. How do you hope the current war in Israel and Gaza comes to an end? What path do you see that can minimize human suffering in the longterm in that part of the world?
Elon Musk
Well, I think that part of the world is definitely, if you look up… There is no easy answer in the dictionary. It’ll be the picture of the Middle East in Israel especially. So there is no easy answer. This is strictly my opinion is that the goal of Hamas was to provoke an overreaction from Israel. They obviously did not expect to have a military victory, but they really wanted to commit the worst atrocities that they could in order to provoke the most aggressive response possible from Israel, and then leverage that aggressive response to rally Muslims worldwide for the course of Gaza and Palestine, which they have succeeded in doing. So the counterintuitive thing here, I think that the thing that I think should be done, even though it’s very difficult, is that I would recommend that Israel engage in the most conspicuous acts of kindness possible, everything, that is the actual thing that we’re taught the goal of Hamas.
Well, I think that part of the world is definitely, if you look up… There is no easy answer in the dictionary. It’ll be the picture of the Middle East in Israel especially. So there is no easy answer. This is strictly my opinion is that the goal of Hamas was to provoke an overreaction from Israel. They obviously did not expect to have a military victory, but they really wanted to commit the worst atrocities that they could in order to provoke the most aggressive response possible from Israel, and then leverage that aggressive response to rally Muslims worldwide for the course of Gaza and Palestine, which they have succeeded in doing. So the counterintuitive thing here, I think that the thing that I think should be done, even though it’s very difficult, is that I would recommend that Israel engage in the most conspicuous acts of kindness possible, everything, that is the actual thing that we’re taught the goal of Hamas.
Lex Fridman
So in some sense, the degree that makes sense in geopolitics turn the other cheek implemented.
So in some sense, the degree that makes sense in geopolitics turn the other cheek implemented.
Elon Musk
It’s not exactly turn the other cheek because I do think that it is appropriate for Israel to find the Hamas members and either kill them or incarcerate them. That’s something has to be done because they’re just going to keep coming otherwise. But in addition to that, they need to do whatever they can. There’s some talk of establishing, for example, a mobile hospital. I’d recommend doing that. Just making sure that there’s food, water, medical necessities and just be over the top about it and be very transparent. So [inaudible 00:07:22] can claim it’s a trick. Just put webcam on the thing or 24, 7.
It’s not exactly turn the other cheek because I do think that it is appropriate for Israel to find the Hamas members and either kill them or incarcerate them. That’s something has to be done because they’re just going to keep coming otherwise. But in addition to that, they need to do whatever they can. There’s some talk of establishing, for example, a mobile hospital. I’d recommend doing that. Just making sure that there’s food, water, medical necessities and just be over the top about it and be very transparent. So [inaudible 00:07:22] can claim it’s a trick. Just put webcam on the thing or 24, 7.
Lex Fridman
Deploy acts of kindness.
Deploy acts of kindness.
Elon Musk
Yeah, conspicuous acts of kindness that are unequivocal, meaning they can’t be somehow because Hamas will then their response will be, “Oh, it’s a trick.” Therefore, you have to counter how it’s not a trick.
Yeah, conspicuous acts of kindness that are unequivocal, meaning they can’t be somehow because Hamas will then their response will be, “Oh, it’s a trick.” Therefore, you have to counter how it’s not a trick.
Lex Fridman
This ultimately fights the broader force of hatred in the region.
This ultimately fights the broader force of hatred in the region.
Elon Musk
Yes. And I’m not sure who said it, it’s an [inaudible 00:07:54] saying, but an eye for an eye makes everyone blind. Now, that neck of the woods, they really believe in the whole eye for an eye thing. But you really have… If you’re not going to just outright commit genocide against an entire people, which obviously would not be acceptable to really, shouldn’t be acceptable to anyone, then you’re going to leave basically a lot of people alive who subsequently hate Israel. So really the question is like for every Hamas member that you kill, how many did you create? And if you create more than you killed, you’ve not succeeded. That’s the real situation there. And it’s safe to say that if you kill somebody’s child in Gaza, you’ve made at least a few homeless members who will die just to kill an Israeli. That’s the situation. But I mean, this is one of the most contentious subjects one could possibly discuss. But I think if the goal ultimately is some sort of long-term piece, one has to look at this from the standpoint of over time, are there more or fewer terrorists being created?
Yes. And I’m not sure who said it, it’s an [inaudible 00:07:54] saying, but an eye for an eye makes everyone blind. Now, that neck of the woods, they really believe in the whole eye for an eye thing. But you really have… If you’re not going to just outright commit genocide against an entire people, which obviously would not be acceptable to really, shouldn’t be acceptable to anyone, then you’re going to leave basically a lot of people alive who subsequently hate Israel. So really the question is like for every Hamas member that you kill, how many did you create? And if you create more than you killed, you’ve not succeeded. That’s the real situation there. And it’s safe to say that if you kill somebody’s child in Gaza, you’ve made at least a few homeless members who will die just to kill an Israeli. That’s the situation. But I mean, this is one of the most contentious subjects one could possibly discuss. But I think if the goal ultimately is some sort of long-term piece, one has to look at this from the standpoint of over time, are there more or fewer terrorists being created?
Lex Fridman
Let me just linger on war.
Let me just linger on war.
Elon Musk
Yeah, war, safe to say, wars always existed and always will exist.
Yeah, war, safe to say, wars always existed and always will exist.
Lex Fridman
Always will exist.
Always will exist.
Elon Musk
Always has existed and always will exist.
Always has existed and always will exist.
Lex Fridman
I hope not. You think it’ll always-
I hope not. You think it’ll always-
Elon Musk
There will always be war. There’s a question of just how much war and there’s sort of the scope and scale of war. But to imagine that there would not be any war in the future, I think would be a very unlikely outcome.
There will always be war. There’s a question of just how much war and there’s sort of the scope and scale of war. But to imagine that there would not be any war in the future, I think would be a very unlikely outcome.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You talked about the Culture series. There’s war even there.
Yeah. You talked about the Culture series. There’s war even there.
Elon Musk
Yes. It’s a giant war. The first book starts off with a gigantic galactic war where trillions die trillions.
Yes. It’s a giant war. The first book starts off with a gigantic galactic war where trillions die trillions.
Lex Fridman
But it still nevertheless protects these pockets of flourishing. Somehow you can have galactic war and still have pockets of flourishing.
But it still nevertheless protects these pockets of flourishing. Somehow you can have galactic war and still have pockets of flourishing.
Elon Musk
Yeah, I guess if we are able to one day expand to fool the galaxy or whatever, there will be a galactic war at some point.
Yeah, I guess if we are able to one day expand to fool the galaxy or whatever, there will be a galactic war at some point.
Lex Fridman
I mean, the scale of war has been increasing, increasing, increasing. It’s like a race between the scale of suffering and the scale of flourishing.
I mean, the scale of war has been increasing, increasing, increasing. It’s like a race between the scale of suffering and the scale of flourishing.
Elon Musk
Yes.
Yes.
Military-Industrial Complex
Lex Fridman
A lot of people seem to be using this tragedy to beat the drums of war and feed the military industrial complex. Do you worry about this, the people who are rooting for escalation and how can it be stopped?
A lot of people seem to be using this tragedy to beat the drums of war and feed the military industrial complex. Do you worry about this, the people who are rooting for escalation and how can it be stopped?
Elon Musk
One of the things that does concern me is that there are very few people alive today who actually viscerally understand the horrors of war, at least in the US. I mean, obviously there are people on the front lines in Ukraine and Russia who understand just how terrible war is, but how many people in the West understand it? My grandfather was in World War II. He was severely traumatized. He was there I think for almost six years in Eastern North Africa and Italy. All his friends were killed in front of him, and he would’ve died too, except they randomly gave some, I guess IQ test or something, and he scored very high. He was not an officer. He was I think a corporal or a sergeant or something like that because he didn’t finish high school because he had to drop out of high school because his dad died and he had to work to support his siblings. So because he didn’t graduate high school, he was not eligible for the offset corps.
One of the things that does concern me is that there are very few people alive today who actually viscerally understand the horrors of war, at least in the US. I mean, obviously there are people on the front lines in Ukraine and Russia who understand just how terrible war is, but how many people in the West understand it? My grandfather was in World War II. He was severely traumatized. He was there I think for almost six years in Eastern North Africa and Italy. All his friends were killed in front of him, and he would’ve died too, except they randomly gave some, I guess IQ test or something, and he scored very high. He was not an officer. He was I think a corporal or a sergeant or something like that because he didn’t finish high school because he had to drop out of high school because his dad died and he had to work to support his siblings. So because he didn’t graduate high school, he was not eligible for the offset corps.
So he kind of got put into the cannon fodder category basically. But then randomly they gave him this test. He was transferred to British intelligence in London. That’s where we met my grandmother. But he had PTSD next level, next level. I mean, just didn’t talk, just didn’t talk. And if you tried talking to him, he’d just tell you to shut up. And he won a bunch of medals, never bragged about it once, not even hinted nothing. I found out about it because his military records were online. That’s how I know. So he would say like, “No way in hell do you want to do that again.” But how many people… Obviously, he died, he 20 years ago or longer, actually 30 years ago. How many people are alive that remember World War II? Not many.
Lex Fridman
And the same perhaps applies to the threat of nuclear war.
And the same perhaps applies to the threat of nuclear war.
Elon Musk
Yeah, I mean, there are enough nuclear bombs pointed at United States to make the radioactive revel balance many times.
Yeah, I mean, there are enough nuclear bombs pointed at United States to make the radioactive revel balance many times.
Lex Fridman
There’s two major wars going on right now. So you talked about the threat of AGI quite a bit, but now as we sit here with the intensity of conflict going on, do you worry about nuclear war?
There’s two major wars going on right now. So you talked about the threat of AGI quite a bit, but now as we sit here with the intensity of conflict going on, do you worry about nuclear war?
Elon Musk
I think we shouldn’t discount the possibility of nuclear war. It is a civilizational threat. Right now, I could be wrong, but I think the current probability of nuclear war is quite low. But there are a lot of nukes pointed at us, and we have a lot of nukes pointed at other people. They’re still there. Nobody’s put their guns away. The missiles are still in the silos.
I think we shouldn’t discount the possibility of nuclear war. It is a civilizational threat. Right now, I could be wrong, but I think the current probability of nuclear war is quite low. But there are a lot of nukes pointed at us, and we have a lot of nukes pointed at other people. They’re still there. Nobody’s put their guns away. The missiles are still in the silos.
Lex Fridman
And the leaders don’t seem to be the ones with the nukes talking to each other.
And the leaders don’t seem to be the ones with the nukes talking to each other.
Elon Musk
No, there are wars which are tragic and difficult on a local basis. And then there are wars which are civilization ending or has that potential. Obviously, global thermonuclear warfare has high potential to end civilization, perhaps permanently, but certainly to severely wound and perhaps set back human progress to the Stone Age or something. I don’t know. Pretty bad. Probably scientists and engineers want to be super popular after that as well. You got us into this mess. So generally, I think we obviously want to prioritize civilizational risks over things that are painful and tragic on a local level, but not civilizational.
No, there are wars which are tragic and difficult on a local basis. And then there are wars which are civilization ending or has that potential. Obviously, global thermonuclear warfare has high potential to end civilization, perhaps permanently, but certainly to severely wound and perhaps set back human progress to the Stone Age or something. I don’t know. Pretty bad. Probably scientists and engineers want to be super popular after that as well. You got us into this mess. So generally, I think we obviously want to prioritize civilizational risks over things that are painful and tragic on a local level, but not civilizational.
War in Ukraine
Lex Fridman
How do you hope the war in Ukraine comes to an end? And what’s the path, once again to minimizing human suffering there?
How do you hope the war in Ukraine comes to an end? And what’s the path, once again to minimizing human suffering there?
Elon Musk
Well, I think that what is likely to happen, which is really pretty much the way it is, is that something very close to the current lines will be how a ceasefire or truce happens. But you just have a situation right now where whoever goes on the offensive will suffer casualties at several times the rate of whoever’s on the defense because you’ve got defense in depth, you’ve got minefields, trenches, anti-tank defenses. Nobody has air superiority because the anti-aircraft missiles are really far better than the aircraft. They’re far more of them. And so neither side has air superiority. Tanks are basically death traps, just slow moving, and they’re not immune to anti-tank weapons. So you really just have long range artillery and infantry ranges. It’s World War I all over again with drones, thrown old drones, some drones there.
Well, I think that what is likely to happen, which is really pretty much the way it is, is that something very close to the current lines will be how a ceasefire or truce happens. But you just have a situation right now where whoever goes on the offensive will suffer casualties at several times the rate of whoever’s on the defense because you’ve got defense in depth, you’ve got minefields, trenches, anti-tank defenses. Nobody has air superiority because the anti-aircraft missiles are really far better than the aircraft. They’re far more of them. And so neither side has air superiority. Tanks are basically death traps, just slow moving, and they’re not immune to anti-tank weapons. So you really just have long range artillery and infantry ranges. It’s World War I all over again with drones, thrown old drones, some drones there.
Lex Fridman
Which makes the long range artillery just that much more accurate and better, and so more efficient at murdering people on both sides.
Which makes the long range artillery just that much more accurate and better, and so more efficient at murdering people on both sides.
Elon Musk
So whoever is… You don’t want to be trying to advance from either side because the probability of dying is incredibly high. So in order to overcome defense in depth, trenches and minefields, you really need a significant local superiority in numbers. Ideally combined alms where you do a fast attack with aircraft, a concentrated number of tanks, and a lot of people, that’s the only way you’re going to punch through a line and then you’re going to punch through and then not have reinforcements just kick you right out again. I mean, I really recommend people read World War I warfare in detail. That’s rough. I mean, the sheer number of people that died there was mind-boggling.
So whoever is… You don’t want to be trying to advance from either side because the probability of dying is incredibly high. So in order to overcome defense in depth, trenches and minefields, you really need a significant local superiority in numbers. Ideally combined alms where you do a fast attack with aircraft, a concentrated number of tanks, and a lot of people, that’s the only way you’re going to punch through a line and then you’re going to punch through and then not have reinforcements just kick you right out again. I mean, I really recommend people read World War I warfare in detail. That’s rough. I mean, the sheer number of people that died there was mind-boggling.
Lex Fridman
And it’s almost impossible to imagine the end of it that doesn’t look like almost exactly like the beginning in terms of what land belongs to who and so on. But on the other side of a lot of human suffering, death and destruction of infrastructure.
And it’s almost impossible to imagine the end of it that doesn’t look like almost exactly like the beginning in terms of what land belongs to who and so on. But on the other side of a lot of human suffering, death and destruction of infrastructure.
Elon Musk
Yes. The thing that… The reason I proposed some sort of truce or peace a year ago was because I’ve predicted pretty much exactly what would happen, which is a lot of people dying for basically almost no changes in land and the loss of the flower of Ukrainian and Russian youth. And we should have some sympathy for the Russian boys as well as the Ukrainian boys, because Russian boys, because boys didn’t ask to be on their frontline. They have to be. So there’s a lot of sons not coming back to their parents, and I think most of them don’t hate the other side. It’s sort of like as this saying comes from World War I, it’s like young boys who don’t know each other killing each other on behalf of old men that do know each other. The hell’s the point of that.
Yes. The thing that… The reason I proposed some sort of truce or peace a year ago was because I’ve predicted pretty much exactly what would happen, which is a lot of people dying for basically almost no changes in land and the loss of the flower of Ukrainian and Russian youth. And we should have some sympathy for the Russian boys as well as the Ukrainian boys, because Russian boys, because boys didn’t ask to be on their frontline. They have to be. So there’s a lot of sons not coming back to their parents, and I think most of them don’t hate the other side. It’s sort of like as this saying comes from World War I, it’s like young boys who don’t know each other killing each other on behalf of old men that do know each other. The hell’s the point of that.
Lex Fridman
So Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that he’s not, or has said in the past, he’s not interested in talking to Putin directly. Do you think he should sit down man to man, lead a leader, and negotiate peace?
So Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that he’s not, or has said in the past, he’s not interested in talking to Putin directly. Do you think he should sit down man to man, lead a leader, and negotiate peace?
Elon Musk
Look, I think I would just recommend do not send the flower of Ukrainian youth to die in trenches, whether he talks to Putin or not, just don’t do that. Whoever goes on the offensive will lose massive numbers of people and history will not look kindly upon them.
Look, I think I would just recommend do not send the flower of Ukrainian youth to die in trenches, whether he talks to Putin or not, just don’t do that. Whoever goes on the offensive will lose massive numbers of people and history will not look kindly upon them.
China
Lex Fridman
You’ve spoken honestly about the possibility of war between US and China in the longterm if no diplomatic solution is found, for example, on the question of Taiwan and One China policy, how do we avoid the trajectory where these two superpowers clash?
You’ve spoken honestly about the possibility of war between US and China in the longterm if no diplomatic solution is found, for example, on the question of Taiwan and One China policy, how do we avoid the trajectory where these two superpowers clash?
Elon Musk
Well, it’s worth reading that book on the, difficult to pronounce, the Thucydides Trap, I believe it’s called. I love war history. I like inside out and backwards. There’s hardly a battle I haven’t read about. And trying to figure out what really was the cause of victory in any particular case as opposed to what one side or another claim the reason.
Well, it’s worth reading that book on the, difficult to pronounce, the Thucydides Trap, I believe it’s called. I love war history. I like inside out and backwards. There’s hardly a battle I haven’t read about. And trying to figure out what really was the cause of victory in any particular case as opposed to what one side or another claim the reason.
Lex Fridman
Both the victory and what sparked the war and-
Both the victory and what sparked the war and-
Elon Musk
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
Lex Fridman
The whole thing.
The whole thing.
Elon Musk
Yeah. So that Athens and Sparta is a classic case. The thing about the Greek is they really wrote down a lot of stuff. They loved writing. There are lots of interesting things that happened in many parts of the world, but people didn’t write down, so we don’t know what happened or they didn’t really write in detail. They just would say, “We had a battle and we won.” And what? Can you add a bit more? The Greeks, they really wrote a lot. They were very articulate on… They just love writing. And we have a bunch of that writing as preserved. So we know what led up to the Peloponnesian War between the Spartanand Athenian Alliance, and we know that they saw it coming.
Yeah. So that Athens and Sparta is a classic case. The thing about the Greek is they really wrote down a lot of stuff. They loved writing. There are lots of interesting things that happened in many parts of the world, but people didn’t write down, so we don’t know what happened or they didn’t really write in detail. They just would say, “We had a battle and we won.” And what? Can you add a bit more? The Greeks, they really wrote a lot. They were very articulate on… They just love writing. And we have a bunch of that writing as preserved. So we know what led up to the Peloponnesian War between the Spartanand Athenian Alliance, and we know that they saw it coming.
Spartans didn’t write… They also weren’t very verbose by their nature, but they did write, but they weren’t very verbose. They were [inaudible 00:21:23]. But the Athenians and the other Greeks wrote a line, and Spartan was really kind of like the leader of Greece. But Athens grew stronger and stronger with each passing year. And everyone’s like, “Well, that’s inevitable that there’s going to be a clash between Athens and Sparta. Well, how do we avoid that?” And actually they saw it coming and they still could not avoid it. So at some point, if one group, one civilization or country or whatever exceeds another sort of like the United States has been the biggest kid on the block since I think around 1890 from an economic standpoint.
So the United States has been the most powerful economic engine in the world longer than anyone’s been alive. And the foundation of war is economics. So now we have a situation in the case of China where the economy is likely to be two, perhaps three times larger than that of the US. So imagine you’re the biggest kid on the block for as long as anyone can remember, and suddenly a kid comes along who’s twice your size.
Lex Fridman
So we see it coming, how is it possible to stop? Let me throw something out there, just intermixing of cultures understanding there does seem to be a giant cultural gap in understanding of each other. And you’re an interesting case study because you are an American, obviously you’ve done a lot of incredible manufacture here in the United States, but you also work with China.
So we see it coming, how is it possible to stop? Let me throw something out there, just intermixing of cultures understanding there does seem to be a giant cultural gap in understanding of each other. And you’re an interesting case study because you are an American, obviously you’ve done a lot of incredible manufacture here in the United States, but you also work with China.
Elon Musk
I’ve spent a lot of time in China and met with the leadership many times.
I’ve spent a lot of time in China and met with the leadership many times.
Lex Fridman
Maybe a good question to ask is, what are some things about China that people don’t understand, positive just in the culture? What’s some interesting things that you’ve learned about the Chinese?
Maybe a good question to ask is, what are some things about China that people don’t understand, positive just in the culture? What’s some interesting things that you’ve learned about the Chinese?
Elon Musk
Well, the sheer number of really smart, hardworking people in China is incredible. There are really say how many smart, hardworking people are there in China? There’s far more of them there than there are here, I think, in my opinion. And they’ve got a lot of energy. So I mean, the architecture in China that’s in recent years is far more impressive than the US. I mean the train stations, the buildings, the high speed rail, everything, it’s really far more impressive than what we have in the US. I mean, I recommend somebody just go to Shanghai and Beijing, look at the buildings and go to take the train from Beijing to Xian, where you have the terracotta warriors. China’s got an incredible history, very long history, and I think arguably in terms of the use of language from a written standpoint, one of the oldest, perhaps the oldest written language, and then China, people did write things down.
Well, the sheer number of really smart, hardworking people in China is incredible. There are really say how many smart, hardworking people are there in China? There’s far more of them there than there are here, I think, in my opinion. And they’ve got a lot of energy. So I mean, the architecture in China that’s in recent years is far more impressive than the US. I mean the train stations, the buildings, the high speed rail, everything, it’s really far more impressive than what we have in the US. I mean, I recommend somebody just go to Shanghai and Beijing, look at the buildings and go to take the train from Beijing to Xian, where you have the terracotta warriors. China’s got an incredible history, very long history, and I think arguably in terms of the use of language from a written standpoint, one of the oldest, perhaps the oldest written language, and then China, people did write things down.
So now China historically has always been, with rare exception, been internally focused. They have not been inquisitive. They’ve fought each other. There’ve been many, many civil wars. In the Three Kingdoms war, I believe they lost about 70% of their population. So they’ve had brutal internal wars, civil wars that make the US Civil War look small by comparison. So I think it’s important to appreciate that China is not monolithic. We sort of think of China as a sort of one entity of one mind. And this is definitely not the case. From what I’ve seen and I think most people who understand China would agree, people in China think about China 10 times more than they think about anything outside of China. So it’s like 90% of their consideration is internal.
Lex Fridman
Well, isn’t that a really positive thing when you’re talking about the collaboration and the future piece between superpowers when you’re inward facing, which is focusing on improving yourself versus focusing on quote, unquote improving others through military might.
Well, isn’t that a really positive thing when you’re talking about the collaboration and the future piece between superpowers when you’re inward facing, which is focusing on improving yourself versus focusing on quote, unquote improving others through military might.
Elon Musk
The good news, the history of China suggests that China is not inquisitive, meaning they’re not going to go out and invade a whole bunch of countries. Now they do feel very strongly… So that’s good. I mean, because a lot of very powerful countries have been inquisitive. The US is also one of the rare cases that has not been inquisitive. After World War II, the US could have basically taken over the world in any country, we’ve got nukes, nobody else has got nukes. We don’t even have to lose soldiers. Which country do you want? And the United States could have taken over everything and it didn’t. And the United States actually helped rebuild countries. So it helped rebuild Europe, helped rebuild Japan. This is very unusual behavior, almost unprecedented.
The good news, the history of China suggests that China is not inquisitive, meaning they’re not going to go out and invade a whole bunch of countries. Now they do feel very strongly… So that’s good. I mean, because a lot of very powerful countries have been inquisitive. The US is also one of the rare cases that has not been inquisitive. After World War II, the US could have basically taken over the world in any country, we’ve got nukes, nobody else has got nukes. We don’t even have to lose soldiers. Which country do you want? And the United States could have taken over everything and it didn’t. And the United States actually helped rebuild countries. So it helped rebuild Europe, helped rebuild Japan. This is very unusual behavior, almost unprecedented.
The US did conspicuous acts of kindness like the Berlin Airlift. And I think it’s always like, well, America’s done bad things. Well, of course America’s done bad things, but one needs to look at the whole track record and just generally, one sort of test would be how do you treat your prisoners at war? Or let’s say, no offense to the Russians, but let’s say you’re in Germany, it’s 1945, you’ve got the Russian Army coming one side and you’ve got the French, British and American Army’s coming the other side, who would you like to be just surrendered to? No country is [inaudible 00:27:58] perfect, but I recommend being a POW with the Americans. That would be my choice very strongly.
Lex Fridman
In the full menu of POWs in the US.
In the full menu of POWs in the US.
Elon Musk
Very much so. And in fact, Wernher von Braun, a smart guy, was like, “We’ve got to be captured by the Americans.” And in fact, the SS was under orders to execute von Braun and all of the German rocket conditioners, and they narrowly escaped. They said they were going out for a walk in the woods. They left in the middle of winter with no coats and then ran, but no food, no coats, no water, and just ran like hell and ran West and Vice Sherlock, I think his brother found a bicycle or something and then just cycled West as fast as he couldn’t have found a US patrol. So anyway, that’s one way you can tell morality is where do you want to be a PW? It’s not fun anywhere, but some places are much worse than others. Anyway, so America has been, while far from perfect, generally a benevolent force, and we should always be self-critical and we try to be better, but anyone with half a brain knows that.
Very much so. And in fact, Wernher von Braun, a smart guy, was like, “We’ve got to be captured by the Americans.” And in fact, the SS was under orders to execute von Braun and all of the German rocket conditioners, and they narrowly escaped. They said they were going out for a walk in the woods. They left in the middle of winter with no coats and then ran, but no food, no coats, no water, and just ran like hell and ran West and Vice Sherlock, I think his brother found a bicycle or something and then just cycled West as fast as he couldn’t have found a US patrol. So anyway, that’s one way you can tell morality is where do you want to be a PW? It’s not fun anywhere, but some places are much worse than others. Anyway, so America has been, while far from perfect, generally a benevolent force, and we should always be self-critical and we try to be better, but anyone with half a brain knows that.
So I think there are… In this way, China and the United States are similar. Neither country has been acquisitive in a significant way. So that’s a shared principle, I guess. Now, China does feel very strongly about Taiwan. They’ve been very clear about that for a long time. From this standpoint, it would be like one of the states is not there like Hawaii or something like that but more significant than Hawaii. And Hawaii is pretty significant for us. So they view it as really there’s a fundamental part of China, the island of Formosa, not Taiwan, that is not part of China, but should be. And the only reason it hasn’t been is because the US Pacific fleet.
Lex Fridman
And is their economic power grows and is their military power grows, the thing that they’re clearly saying is their interest will clearly be materialized.
And is their economic power grows and is their military power grows, the thing that they’re clearly saying is their interest will clearly be materialized.
Elon Musk
Yes, China has been very clear that they’ll incorporate Taiwan peacefully or militarily, but that they will incorporate it from their standpoint is 100% likely.
Yes, China has been very clear that they’ll incorporate Taiwan peacefully or militarily, but that they will incorporate it from their standpoint is 100% likely.
Lex Fridman
Something you said about conspicuous acts of kindness as a geopolitical policy, it almost seems naive, but I’d venture to say that this is probably the path forward, how you avoid most wars. Just as you say it sounds naive, but it’s kind of brilliant. If you believe in the goodness of underlying most of human nature, it just seems like conspicuous acts of kindness can reverberate through the populace of the countries involved and deescalate.
Something you said about conspicuous acts of kindness as a geopolitical policy, it almost seems naive, but I’d venture to say that this is probably the path forward, how you avoid most wars. Just as you say it sounds naive, but it’s kind of brilliant. If you believe in the goodness of underlying most of human nature, it just seems like conspicuous acts of kindness can reverberate through the populace of the countries involved and deescalate.
Elon Musk
Absolutely. So after World War I, they made a big mistake. They basically tried to lump all of blame on Germany and saddle Germany with impossible reparations. And really there was quite a bit of blame to go around for World War I, but they try to put it all in Germany and that laid the seeds for World War II. So a lot of people, were not just Hitler, a lot of people felt wronged and they wanted vengeance and they got it.
Absolutely. So after World War I, they made a big mistake. They basically tried to lump all of blame on Germany and saddle Germany with impossible reparations. And really there was quite a bit of blame to go around for World War I, but they try to put it all in Germany and that laid the seeds for World War II. So a lot of people, were not just Hitler, a lot of people felt wronged and they wanted vengeance and they got it.
Lex Fridman
People don’t forget.
People don’t forget.
Elon Musk
Yeah, you kill somebody’s father, mother or son, daughter, they’re not going to forget it. They’ll want vengeance. So after World War II, they’re like, “Well, the Treaty of Versi was a huge mistake in World War I. And so this time, instead of crushing the losers, we’re actually going to help them with the module plan, and we’re going to help rebuild Germany. We’re going to help rebuild Austria and Italy and whatnot.” So that was the right move.
Yeah, you kill somebody’s father, mother or son, daughter, they’re not going to forget it. They’ll want vengeance. So after World War II, they’re like, “Well, the Treaty of Versi was a huge mistake in World War I. And so this time, instead of crushing the losers, we’re actually going to help them with the module plan, and we’re going to help rebuild Germany. We’re going to help rebuild Austria and Italy and whatnot.” So that was the right move.
Lex Fridman
It does feel like there’s a profound truth to the conspicuous acts of kindness being an antidote to this.
It does feel like there’s a profound truth to the conspicuous acts of kindness being an antidote to this.
Elon Musk
Something must stop the cycle of reciprocal violence. Something must stop it, or it’ll never stop. Just eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, limb for a limb, life for a life forever and ever.
Something must stop the cycle of reciprocal violence. Something must stop it, or it’ll never stop. Just eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, limb for a limb, life for a life forever and ever.
xAI Grok
Lex Fridman
To escape briefly the darkness, was some incredible engineering work, xAI just released Grok AI assistant that I’ve gotten a chance to play with. It’s amazing on many levels. First of all, it’s amazing that a relatively small team in a relatively short amount of time was able to develop this close to state-of-the-art system. Another incredible thing is there’s a regular mode and there’s a fun mode.
To escape briefly the darkness, was some incredible engineering work, xAI just released Grok AI assistant that I’ve gotten a chance to play with. It’s amazing on many levels. First of all, it’s amazing that a relatively small team in a relatively short amount of time was able to develop this close to state-of-the-art system. Another incredible thing is there’s a regular mode and there’s a fun mode.
Elon Musk
Yeah, I guess I’m to blame for that one.
Yeah, I guess I’m to blame for that one.
Lex Fridman
First of all, I wish everything in life had a fun mode.
First of all, I wish everything in life had a fun mode.
Elon Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
There’s something compelling beyond just fun about the fun mode interacting with a large language model. I’m not sure exactly what it is because I’ve only have had a little bit of time to play with it, but it just makes it more interesting, more vibrant to interact with the system.
There’s something compelling beyond just fun about the fun mode interacting with a large language model. I’m not sure exactly what it is because I’ve only have had a little bit of time to play with it, but it just makes it more interesting, more vibrant to interact with the system.
Elon Musk
Yeah, absolutely. Our AI, Grok, is modeled after The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, which is one of my favorite books, which it’s a book on philosophy. It’s-
Yeah, absolutely. Our AI, Grok, is modeled after The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, which is one of my favorite books, which it’s a book on philosophy. It’s-
Elon Musk
My favorite books, it’s a book on philosophy, disguises book on humor. And I would say that forms the basis of my philosophy, which is that we don’t know the meaning of life, but the more we can expand the scope and scale of consciousness, digital and biological, the more we’re able to understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe. So I have a philosophy of curiosity.
My favorite books, it’s a book on philosophy, disguises book on humor. And I would say that forms the basis of my philosophy, which is that we don’t know the meaning of life, but the more we can expand the scope and scale of consciousness, digital and biological, the more we’re able to understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe. So I have a philosophy of curiosity.
Lex Fridman
There is generally a feeling like this AI system has an outward looking, like the way you are sitting with a good friend looking up at the stars, asking pod head like questions about the universe, wondering what it’s all about. The curiosity that you talk about. No matter how mundane the question I ask it, there’s a sense of cosmic grandeur to the whole thing.
There is generally a feeling like this AI system has an outward looking, like the way you are sitting with a good friend looking up at the stars, asking pod head like questions about the universe, wondering what it’s all about. The curiosity that you talk about. No matter how mundane the question I ask it, there’s a sense of cosmic grandeur to the whole thing.
Elon Musk
Well, we are actually working hard to have engineering math, physics answers that you can count on. So for the other AIs out there, these so-called large language models, I’ve not found the engineering to be reliable. It unfortunately hallucinates most when you at least want it to hallucinate. So when you’re asking important, difficult questions, that’s when it tends to be confidently wrong. So we’re really trying hard to say, okay, how do we be as grounded as possible? So you can count on the results, trace things back to physics first principles, mathematical logic. So underlying the humor is an aspiration to adhere to the truth of the universe as closely as possible.
Well, we are actually working hard to have engineering math, physics answers that you can count on. So for the other AIs out there, these so-called large language models, I’ve not found the engineering to be reliable. It unfortunately hallucinates most when you at least want it to hallucinate. So when you’re asking important, difficult questions, that’s when it tends to be confidently wrong. So we’re really trying hard to say, okay, how do we be as grounded as possible? So you can count on the results, trace things back to physics first principles, mathematical logic. So underlying the humor is an aspiration to adhere to the truth of the universe as closely as possible.
Lex Fridman
That’s really tricky.
That’s really tricky.
Elon Musk
It is tricky. So that’s why there’s always going to be some amount of error. But do we want to aspire to be as truthful as possible about the answers with acknowledged error. So that there was always, you don’t want to be confidently wrong, so you’re not going to be right every time, but you want to minimize how often you’re confidently wrong. And then like I said, once you can count on the logic as being not violating physics, then you can start to bull on that to create inventions, like invent new technologies. But if you cannot count on the foundational physics being correct, obviously the inventions are simply wishful thinking, imagination land. Magic basically.
It is tricky. So that’s why there’s always going to be some amount of error. But do we want to aspire to be as truthful as possible about the answers with acknowledged error. So that there was always, you don’t want to be confidently wrong, so you’re not going to be right every time, but you want to minimize how often you’re confidently wrong. And then like I said, once you can count on the logic as being not violating physics, then you can start to bull on that to create inventions, like invent new technologies. But if you cannot count on the foundational physics being correct, obviously the inventions are simply wishful thinking, imagination land. Magic basically.
Lex Fridman
Well, as you said, I think one of the big goals of XAI is to understand the universe.
Well, as you said, I think one of the big goals of XAI is to understand the universe.
Elon Musk
Yes, that’s how simple three word mission.
Yes, that’s how simple three word mission.
Lex Fridman
If you look out far into the future, do you think on this level of physics, the very edge of what we understand about physics, do you think it will make the sexiest discovery of them as we know now, unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics? So coming up with a theory of everything, do you think it could push towards that direction, almost like theoretical physics discoveries?
If you look out far into the future, do you think on this level of physics, the very edge of what we understand about physics, do you think it will make the sexiest discovery of them as we know now, unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics? So coming up with a theory of everything, do you think it could push towards that direction, almost like theoretical physics discoveries?
Elon Musk
If an AI cannot figure out new physics, it’s clearly not equal to humans, nor has surpassed humans because humans have figured out new physics. Physics is just deepening what’s inside into how reality works. And then there’s engineering which is inventing things that have never existed. Now the range of possibilities for engineering is far greater than for physics because once you figure out the rules of the universe, that’s it. You’ve discovered things that already existed. But from that you can then build technologies that are really almost limitless in the variety. And it’s like once you understand the rules of the game properly, and with current physics, we do at least at a local level, understand how physics works very well. Our ability to predict things is incredibly good. Degree to which quantum mechanics can predict outcomes is incredible. That was my hardest class in college by the way. My senior quantum mechanics class was harder than all of my other classes put together.
If an AI cannot figure out new physics, it’s clearly not equal to humans, nor has surpassed humans because humans have figured out new physics. Physics is just deepening what’s inside into how reality works. And then there’s engineering which is inventing things that have never existed. Now the range of possibilities for engineering is far greater than for physics because once you figure out the rules of the universe, that’s it. You’ve discovered things that already existed. But from that you can then build technologies that are really almost limitless in the variety. And it’s like once you understand the rules of the game properly, and with current physics, we do at least at a local level, understand how physics works very well. Our ability to predict things is incredibly good. Degree to which quantum mechanics can predict outcomes is incredible. That was my hardest class in college by the way. My senior quantum mechanics class was harder than all of my other classes put together.
Lex Fridman
To get an AI system, a large language model be as reliable as quantum mechanics and physics is very difficult.
To get an AI system, a large language model be as reliable as quantum mechanics and physics is very difficult.
Elon Musk
Yeah. You have to test any conclusions against the ground truth of reality. Reality is the ultimate judge. Like physics is the law, everything else is a recommendation. I’ve seen plenty of people break the laws made by man, but none break the laws made by physics.
Yeah. You have to test any conclusions against the ground truth of reality. Reality is the ultimate judge. Like physics is the law, everything else is a recommendation. I’ve seen plenty of people break the laws made by man, but none break the laws made by physics.
Lex Fridman
It’s a good test actually. If this LLM understands and matches physics, then you can more reliably trust whatever it thinks about the current state of politics in some sense.
It’s a good test actually. If this LLM understands and matches physics, then you can more reliably trust whatever it thinks about the current state of politics in some sense.
Elon Musk
And it’s also not the case currently that even that its internal logic is not consistent. So especially with the approach of just predicting a token predict token, predict token, it’s like a vector sum. You’re summing up a bunch of vectors, but you can get drift. A little bit of error adds up and by the time you are many tokens down the path, it doesn’t make any sense.
And it’s also not the case currently that even that its internal logic is not consistent. So especially with the approach of just predicting a token predict token, predict token, it’s like a vector sum. You’re summing up a bunch of vectors, but you can get drift. A little bit of error adds up and by the time you are many tokens down the path, it doesn’t make any sense.
Lex Fridman
So it has to be somehow self-aware about the drift.
So it has to be somehow self-aware about the drift.
Elon Musk
It has to be self-aware about the drift, and then look at the thing as a gestalt as a whole and say it doesn’t have coherence as a whole. When authors write books, they will write the book and then they’ll go and revise it, take into account all the end and the beginning and the middle and rewrite it to achieve coherence so that it doesn’t end up at a nonsensical place.
It has to be self-aware about the drift, and then look at the thing as a gestalt as a whole and say it doesn’t have coherence as a whole. When authors write books, they will write the book and then they’ll go and revise it, take into account all the end and the beginning and the middle and rewrite it to achieve coherence so that it doesn’t end up at a nonsensical place.
Lex Fridman
Maybe the process of revising is what reasoning is, and then the process of revising is how you get closer and closer to truth. At least I approached that way, you just say a bunch of bullshit first and then you get it better. You start a bullshit and then you-
Maybe the process of revising is what reasoning is, and then the process of revising is how you get closer and closer to truth. At least I approached that way, you just say a bunch of bullshit first and then you get it better. You start a bullshit and then you-
Elon Musk
Create a draft and then you iterate on that draft until it has coherence, until it all adds up basically.
Create a draft and then you iterate on that draft until it has coherence, until it all adds up basically.
Lex Fridman
Another question about theory of everything, but for intelligence, as you’re exploring this with XAI, creating this intelligence system? Do you think there is a theory of intelligence where you get to understand what is the I in AGI and what is the I in human intelligence?
Another question about theory of everything, but for intelligence, as you’re exploring this with XAI, creating this intelligence system? Do you think there is a theory of intelligence where you get to understand what is the I in AGI and what is the I in human intelligence?
Elon Musk
No, I in team America. Wait, there is.
No, I in team America. Wait, there is.
Lex Fridman
No, it’s going to be stuck in my head now. Yeah, there’s no me and whatever in quantum mechanics, wait. I mean is that part of the process of discovering, understanding the universe is understanding intelligence?
No, it’s going to be stuck in my head now. Yeah, there’s no me and whatever in quantum mechanics, wait. I mean is that part of the process of discovering, understanding the universe is understanding intelligence?
Elon Musk
Yeah. I think we need to understand intelligence, understand consciousness. I mean there are some fundamental questions of what is thought, what is emotion? Is it really just one atom bumping into another atom? It feels like something more than that. So I think we’re probably missing some really big things.
Yeah. I think we need to understand intelligence, understand consciousness. I mean there are some fundamental questions of what is thought, what is emotion? Is it really just one atom bumping into another atom? It feels like something more than that. So I think we’re probably missing some really big things.
Lex Fridman
Something that’ll be obvious in retrospect. You put the whole consciousness and motion.
Something that’ll be obvious in retrospect. You put the whole consciousness and motion.
Elon Musk
Well, some people would quote like a soul religion, be a soul. You feel like you’re you, I mean you don’t feel like you’re just a collection of atoms, but on what dimension does thought exist? What dimension does do emotions exist? Because we feel them very strongly. I suspect there’s more to it than atoms bumping into atoms.
Well, some people would quote like a soul religion, be a soul. You feel like you’re you, I mean you don’t feel like you’re just a collection of atoms, but on what dimension does thought exist? What dimension does do emotions exist? Because we feel them very strongly. I suspect there’s more to it than atoms bumping into atoms.
Lex Fridman
And maybe AI can pave the path to the discovery whatever the hell that thing is.
And maybe AI can pave the path to the discovery whatever the hell that thing is.
Elon Musk
Yeah. What is consciousness? When you put the atoms in a particular shape, why are they able to form thoughts and take actions and feelings?
Yeah. What is consciousness? When you put the atoms in a particular shape, why are they able to form thoughts and take actions and feelings?
Lex Fridman
And even if it is an illusion, why is this illusion so compelling?
And even if it is an illusion, why is this illusion so compelling?
Elon Musk
Yeah. Why does the solution exist? On what plane does the solution exist? And sometimes I wonder is either perhaps everything’s conscious or nothing’s conscious. One of the two.
Yeah. Why does the solution exist? On what plane does the solution exist? And sometimes I wonder is either perhaps everything’s conscious or nothing’s conscious. One of the two.
Lex Fridman
Like the former, everything conscious just seems more fun.
Like the former, everything conscious just seems more fun.
Elon Musk
It does seem more fun, yes. But we’re composed of atoms and those atoms are composed of quarks and leptons and those quarks and leptons have been around since the beginning of the universe.
It does seem more fun, yes. But we’re composed of atoms and those atoms are composed of quarks and leptons and those quarks and leptons have been around since the beginning of the universe.
Lex Fridman
“The beginning of the universe.”
“The beginning of the universe.”
Elon Musk
What seems to be the beginning of the universe.
What seems to be the beginning of the universe.
Aliens
Lex Fridman
The first time we talked, you said, which is surreal to think that this discussion was happening is becoming a reality. I asked you what question would you ask an AGI system once you create it? And you said, “What’s outside the simulation,” is the question. Good question. But it seems like with Grok you started literally the system’s goal is to be able to answer such questions and to ask such questions.
The first time we talked, you said, which is surreal to think that this discussion was happening is becoming a reality. I asked you what question would you ask an AGI system once you create it? And you said, “What’s outside the simulation,” is the question. Good question. But it seems like with Grok you started literally the system’s goal is to be able to answer such questions and to ask such questions.
Elon Musk
Where are the aliens?
Where are the aliens?
Lex Fridman
Where are the aliens?
Where are the aliens?
Elon Musk
That’s one of the foam paradox question. A lot of people have asked me if I’ve seen any evidence of aliens and I haven’t, which is kind of concerning. I think I’d probably prefer to at least have seen some archeological evidence of aliens. To the best of my knowledge, I’m not aware of any evidence surveillance. If they’re out there, they’re very subtle. We might just be the only consciousness, at least in the galaxy. And if you look at say the history of Earth, to believe the archeological record Earth is about four and a half billion years old. Civilization as measured from the first writing is only about 5,000 years old. We have to give some credit there to the ancient Sumerians who aren’t around anymore. I think it was an archaic pre-form was the first actual symbolic representation, but only about 5,000 years ago. I think that’s a good date for when we say civilization started. That’s 1000000th of Earth’s existence.
That’s one of the foam paradox question. A lot of people have asked me if I’ve seen any evidence of aliens and I haven’t, which is kind of concerning. I think I’d probably prefer to at least have seen some archeological evidence of aliens. To the best of my knowledge, I’m not aware of any evidence surveillance. If they’re out there, they’re very subtle. We might just be the only consciousness, at least in the galaxy. And if you look at say the history of Earth, to believe the archeological record Earth is about four and a half billion years old. Civilization as measured from the first writing is only about 5,000 years old. We have to give some credit there to the ancient Sumerians who aren’t around anymore. I think it was an archaic pre-form was the first actual symbolic representation, but only about 5,000 years ago. I think that’s a good date for when we say civilization started. That’s 1000000th of Earth’s existence.
So civilization has been around. It’s really a flash in the pan so far. And why did it take so long? Four and a half billion years, for the vast majority of the time, there was no life. And then there was archaic bacteria for a very long time. And then you had mitochondria get captured, multicellular life, differentiation into plants and animals, life moving from the oceans to land, mammals, higher brain functions. And the sun is expanding slowly but it’ll heat the earth up at some point in the future, boil the oceans and earth will become like Venus, where life as we know it is impossible. So if we do not become multiplanetary and ultimately solar system, annihilation of all life on earth is a certainty. A certainty. And it could be as little as on the galactic timescale, half a billion years, long time by human standards, but that’s only 10% longer than earth has been around at all. So if life had taken 10% longer to evolve on earth, it wouldn’t exist at all.
Lex Fridman
Glad a deadline coming up, you better hurry. But that said, as you said, humans intelligent life on earth developed a lot of cool stuff very quickly. So it seems like becoming a multiplanetary is almost inevitable. Unless we destroy-
Glad a deadline coming up, you better hurry. But that said, as you said, humans intelligent life on earth developed a lot of cool stuff very quickly. So it seems like becoming a multiplanetary is almost inevitable. Unless we destroy-
Elon Musk
We need to do it. I suspect that if we are able to go out there and explore other star systems that we… There’s a good chance we find a whole bunch of long dead one planet civilizations that never made it past their home planet.
We need to do it. I suspect that if we are able to go out there and explore other star systems that we… There’s a good chance we find a whole bunch of long dead one planet civilizations that never made it past their home planet.
Lex Fridman
That’s so sad. Also fascinating.
That’s so sad. Also fascinating.
Elon Musk
I mean there are various explanations for paradox and one is they’re these great vultures which civilizations don’t pass through. And one of those great vultures is do you become a multi-plan civilization or not? And if you don’t, it’s simply a matter of time before something happens on your planet, either natural or manmade that causes us to die out. Like the dinosaurs, where are they now? They didn’t have spaceships.
I mean there are various explanations for paradox and one is they’re these great vultures which civilizations don’t pass through. And one of those great vultures is do you become a multi-plan civilization or not? And if you don’t, it’s simply a matter of time before something happens on your planet, either natural or manmade that causes us to die out. Like the dinosaurs, where are they now? They didn’t have spaceships.
Lex Fridman
I think the more likely thing is because just to empathize with the aliens that they found us and they’re protecting us and letting us be.
I think the more likely thing is because just to empathize with the aliens that they found us and they’re protecting us and letting us be.
Elon Musk
I hope so. Nice aliens.
I hope so. Nice aliens.
Lex Fridman
Just like the tribes in the Amazon, the uncontacted tribes or protecting them. That’s what-
Just like the tribes in the Amazon, the uncontacted tribes or protecting them. That’s what-
Elon Musk
That would be a nice explanation.
That would be a nice explanation.
Lex Fridman
Or you could have, what was it? I think Andre Kappelhoff said, “It’s like the ants and the Amazon asking where’s everybody?”
Or you could have, what was it? I think Andre Kappelhoff said, “It’s like the ants and the Amazon asking where’s everybody?”
Elon Musk
Well, they do run into a lot of other ants.
Well, they do run into a lot of other ants.
Lex Fridman
That’s true.
That’s true.
Elon Musk
These ant wars.
These ant wars.
Lex Fridman
Sounds like a good TV show.
Sounds like a good TV show.
Elon Musk
Yeah. They literally have these big wars between various ants.
Yeah. They literally have these big wars between various ants.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Maybe I’m just dismissing all the different diversity of ants.
Yeah. Maybe I’m just dismissing all the different diversity of ants.
Elon Musk
Listen to that Werner Herzog talking about the jungle. It’s really hilarious. Have you heard it?
Listen to that Werner Herzog talking about the jungle. It’s really hilarious. Have you heard it?
Lex Fridman
No, I have not. But Werner Herzog is a way.
No, I have not. But Werner Herzog is a way.
Elon Musk
You should play it as an interlude in the… It’s on YouTube. It’s awesome.
You should play it as an interlude in the… It’s on YouTube. It’s awesome.
Lex Fridman
I love him so much.
I love him so much.
Elon Musk
He’s great.
He’s great.
Lex Fridman
Was he the director of happy people life and the Taiga? I think also-
Was he the director of happy people life and the Taiga? I think also-
Elon Musk
He did that bear documentary. I did this thing about penguins.
He did that bear documentary. I did this thing about penguins.
Lex Fridman
The psycho analysis of a penguin.
The psycho analysis of a penguin.
Elon Musk
Yeah. The penguins headed for mountains that are 70 miles away and penguin is just headed for dom, basically.
Yeah. The penguins headed for mountains that are 70 miles away and penguin is just headed for dom, basically.
Lex Fridman
Well, he had a cynical take. He could be just a brave explorer and there’ll be great stories told about him amongst the penguin population for many centuries to come. What were we talking about? Okay.
Well, he had a cynical take. He could be just a brave explorer and there’ll be great stories told about him amongst the penguin population for many centuries to come. What were we talking about? Okay.
Elon Musk
Yeah. So aliens, I mean, I don’t know. Look, I think the smart move is just this is the first time in the history of earth that it’s been possible for life to extend beyond earth. That window is open. Now it may be open for a long time or it may be open for a short time and it may be open now and then never open again. So I think the smart move here is to make life multiplanetary while it’s possible to do so. We don’t want to be one of those lame one planet civilizations that just dies out.
Yeah. So aliens, I mean, I don’t know. Look, I think the smart move is just this is the first time in the history of earth that it’s been possible for life to extend beyond earth. That window is open. Now it may be open for a long time or it may be open for a short time and it may be open now and then never open again. So I think the smart move here is to make life multiplanetary while it’s possible to do so. We don’t want to be one of those lame one planet civilizations that just dies out.
Lex Fridman
No, those are lame.
No, those are lame.
Elon Musk
Yeah. Lame. Self-respecting, civilization would be one planet.
Yeah. Lame. Self-respecting, civilization would be one planet.
Lex Fridman
There’s not going to be a Wikipedia entry for one of those. Do SpaceX have an official policy for when we meet aliens?
There’s not going to be a Wikipedia entry for one of those. Do SpaceX have an official policy for when we meet aliens?
Elon Musk
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
That seems irresponsible.
That seems irresponsible.
Elon Musk
I mean, look, if I see the slightest indication that there are aliens, I will immediately post on X platform anything I know.
I mean, look, if I see the slightest indication that there are aliens, I will immediately post on X platform anything I know.
Lex Fridman
It could be the most liked reposted post of all time.
It could be the most liked reposted post of all time.
Elon Musk
Yeah. I mean, look, we have more satellites up there right now than everyone else combined. So we know if we’ve got a maneuver around something and we don’t have to maneuver around anything.
Yeah. I mean, look, we have more satellites up there right now than everyone else combined. So we know if we’ve got a maneuver around something and we don’t have to maneuver around anything.
God
Lex Fridman
If we go to the big questions once again, you said you’re with Einstein, that you believe in the goddess Spinoza.
If we go to the big questions once again, you said you’re with Einstein, that you believe in the goddess Spinoza.
Elon Musk
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
So that’s that view that God is like the universe and reveals himself through the laws of physics or as Einstein said, “Through the lawful harmony of the world.”
So that’s that view that God is like the universe and reveals himself through the laws of physics or as Einstein said, “Through the lawful harmony of the world.”
Elon Musk
Yeah. I would agree that God of the simulator or whatever the supreme beings reveal themselves through the physics, they have creatives of this existence and incumbent upon us to try to understand more about this one creation.
Yeah. I would agree that God of the simulator or whatever the supreme beings reveal themselves through the physics, they have creatives of this existence and incumbent upon us to try to understand more about this one creation.
Lex Fridman
Who created this thing? Who’s running this thing? Embodying it into a singular question with a sexy word on top of it is focusing the mind to understand. It does seem like there’s a, again, it could be an illusion. It seems like there’s a purpose that there’s an underlying master plan of some kind, and it seems like.
Who created this thing? Who’s running this thing? Embodying it into a singular question with a sexy word on top of it is focusing the mind to understand. It does seem like there’s a, again, it could be an illusion. It seems like there’s a purpose that there’s an underlying master plan of some kind, and it seems like.
Elon Musk
There may not be a master plan in the sense. So maybe an interesting answer to the question of determinism versus free will is that if we are in a simulation, the reason that these higher beings would hold a simulation is to see what happens. So they don’t know what happens otherwise they wouldn’t hold the simulation. So when humans create a simulation, so it’s SpaceX and Tesla, we create simulations all the time. Especially for the rocket, you have to run a lot of simulations to understand what’s going to happen because you can’t really test the rocket until it goes to space and you want it to work. So you have to simulate subsonic, transonic, supersonic, hypersonic, ascend, and then coming back, super high heating and orbital dynamics. All this has got to be simulated because you don’t get very many kicks at the can. But we run the simulations to see what happens, not if we knew what happens, we wouldn’t run the simulation. So whoever created this existence, they’re running it because they don’t know what’s going to happen, not because they do.
There may not be a master plan in the sense. So maybe an interesting answer to the question of determinism versus free will is that if we are in a simulation, the reason that these higher beings would hold a simulation is to see what happens. So they don’t know what happens otherwise they wouldn’t hold the simulation. So when humans create a simulation, so it’s SpaceX and Tesla, we create simulations all the time. Especially for the rocket, you have to run a lot of simulations to understand what’s going to happen because you can’t really test the rocket until it goes to space and you want it to work. So you have to simulate subsonic, transonic, supersonic, hypersonic, ascend, and then coming back, super high heating and orbital dynamics. All this has got to be simulated because you don’t get very many kicks at the can. But we run the simulations to see what happens, not if we knew what happens, we wouldn’t run the simulation. So whoever created this existence, they’re running it because they don’t know what’s going to happen, not because they do.
Diablo 4 and video games
Lex Fridman
So maybe we both played Diablo. Maybe Diablo was created to see if Druid, your character, could defeat Uber Lilith at the end. They didn’t know.
So maybe we both played Diablo. Maybe Diablo was created to see if Druid, your character, could defeat Uber Lilith at the end. They didn’t know.
Elon Musk
Well, the funny thing is Uber Lilith, her title is Hatred Incarnate. And right now, I guess you can ask the Diablo team, but it’s almost impossible to defeat Hatred in the eternal realm.
Well, the funny thing is Uber Lilith, her title is Hatred Incarnate. And right now, I guess you can ask the Diablo team, but it’s almost impossible to defeat Hatred in the eternal realm.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You’ve streamed yourself dominating Tier 100 Nightmare Dungeon. And still-
Yeah. You’ve streamed yourself dominating Tier 100 Nightmare Dungeon. And still-
Elon Musk
I can cruise through Tier 100 Nightmare Dungeon like a stroll in the park.
I can cruise through Tier 100 Nightmare Dungeon like a stroll in the park.
Lex Fridman
And still you’re defeated by Hatred?
And still you’re defeated by Hatred?
Elon Musk
Yeah. I guess maybe the second hardest boss is Duriel. Duriel can even scratch the paint. So I killed Duriel so many times and every other boss in the game, all of them kill him so many times, it’s easy. But Uber Lilith, otherwise known as Hatred Incarnate, especially if you’re Duriel and you have no ability to go to be vulnerable, there are these random death waves that come at you.
Yeah. I guess maybe the second hardest boss is Duriel. Duriel can even scratch the paint. So I killed Duriel so many times and every other boss in the game, all of them kill him so many times, it’s easy. But Uber Lilith, otherwise known as Hatred Incarnate, especially if you’re Duriel and you have no ability to go to be vulnerable, there are these random death waves that come at you.
Really I am 52, so my reflex is not what they used to be, but I have a lifetime of playing video games. At one point, I was maybe one of the best quake players in the world. I actually won money in what I think was the first paid eSports tournament in the US. We were doing four person quake tournaments and I was the second best person on the team and the actual best person that… We were actually winning, we would’ve come first, except the best person on the team. His computer crashed halfway through the game. So we came second, but I got money for it and everything. So basically I got skills, albeit no spring chicken these days. And to be totally frank, it’s driving me crazy to beat Lilith as a Druid, basically trying to beat Hatred Incarnate in the eternal realm.
Lex Fridman
As a Druid.
As a Druid.
Elon Musk
As a Druid. This is really vexing, let me tell you.
As a Druid. This is really vexing, let me tell you.
Lex Fridman
I mean, the challenge is part of the fun. I have seen directly, you’re actually a world-class, incredible video game player. And I think Diablo, so you’re just picking up a new game and you’re figuring out its fundamentals. You’re also with the Paragon Board and the build are not somebody like me who perfectly follows whatever they suggest on the internet. You’re also an innovator there, which is hilarious to watch. It’s like a mad scientist just trying to figure out the Paragon Board and the build. Is there some interesting insights there about if somebody’s starting as a druid, do you have advice?
I mean, the challenge is part of the fun. I have seen directly, you’re actually a world-class, incredible video game player. And I think Diablo, so you’re just picking up a new game and you’re figuring out its fundamentals. You’re also with the Paragon Board and the build are not somebody like me who perfectly follows whatever they suggest on the internet. You’re also an innovator there, which is hilarious to watch. It’s like a mad scientist just trying to figure out the Paragon Board and the build. Is there some interesting insights there about if somebody’s starting as a druid, do you have advice?
Elon Musk
I would not recommend playing a druid in the eternal realm. Right now I think the most powerful character in the seasonal realm is the Sorcerer with the lightning balls. The smokes have huge balls in the seasonal.
I would not recommend playing a druid in the eternal realm. Right now I think the most powerful character in the seasonal realm is the Sorcerer with the lightning balls. The smokes have huge balls in the seasonal.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s what they say.
Yeah, that’s what they say.
Elon Musk
So have huge balls. They do huge balls of lightning.
So have huge balls. They do huge balls of lightning.
Lex Fridman
I’ll take you word for it.
I’ll take you word for it.
Elon Musk
In the seasonal realm, it’s pretty easy to beat Uber Lilith because you get these vapor powers that out amplify your damage and increase your defense and whatnot. So really quite easy to defeat Hatred seasonally, but to defeat Hatred eternally very difficult, almost impossible. It’s very impossible. It seems like a metaphor for life.
In the seasonal realm, it’s pretty easy to beat Uber Lilith because you get these vapor powers that out amplify your damage and increase your defense and whatnot. So really quite easy to defeat Hatred seasonally, but to defeat Hatred eternally very difficult, almost impossible. It’s very impossible. It seems like a metaphor for life.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I like the idea that Elon Musk, because I was playing Diablo yesterday and I saw Level 100 Druid just run by, I will never die and then run back the other way. And this metaphor, it’s hilarious that you, Elon Musk is restlessly, fighting Hatred in this demonic realm.
Yeah. I like the idea that Elon Musk, because I was playing Diablo yesterday and I saw Level 100 Druid just run by, I will never die and then run back the other way. And this metaphor, it’s hilarious that you, Elon Musk is restlessly, fighting Hatred in this demonic realm.
Elon Musk
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
It’s hilarious. I mean it’s pretty hilarious.
It’s hilarious. I mean it’s pretty hilarious.
Elon Musk
No, it’s absurd. Really, it’s exercise and absurdity and it makes me want to pull my hair out.
No, it’s absurd. Really, it’s exercise and absurdity and it makes me want to pull my hair out.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. What do you get from video games in general, for you personally?
Yeah. What do you get from video games in general, for you personally?
Elon Musk
I don’t know. It calms my mind. I mean, killing the demons in a video game calms the demons in my mind. If you play a tough video game, you can get into a state of flow, which is very enjoyable. Admittedly, it needs to be not too easy, not too hard, kind of in the Goldilocks zone, and I guess you generally want to feel like you’re progressing in the game. A good video, and there’s also beautiful art, engaging storylines, and it’s like an amazing puzzle to solve, I think. So it’s like solving the puzzle.
I don’t know. It calms my mind. I mean, killing the demons in a video game calms the demons in my mind. If you play a tough video game, you can get into a state of flow, which is very enjoyable. Admittedly, it needs to be not too easy, not too hard, kind of in the Goldilocks zone, and I guess you generally want to feel like you’re progressing in the game. A good video, and there’s also beautiful art, engaging storylines, and it’s like an amazing puzzle to solve, I think. So it’s like solving the puzzle.
Lex Fridman
Elden Ring the greatest game of all time. I still haven’t played it, but to you-
Elden Ring the greatest game of all time. I still haven’t played it, but to you-
Elon Musk
Elden Ring is definitely a candidate for best game ever. Top five for sure.
Elden Ring is definitely a candidate for best game ever. Top five for sure.
Lex Fridman
I think I’ve been scared how hard it is or how hard I hear it is, but it’s beautiful.
I think I’ve been scared how hard it is or how hard I hear it is, but it’s beautiful.
Elon Musk
Elden Ring, feels like it’s designed by an alien.
Elden Ring, feels like it’s designed by an alien.
Lex Fridman
It’s a theme to this discussion. In what way?
It’s a theme to this discussion. In what way?
Elon Musk
It’s so unusual. It’s incredibly creative, and the art is stunning. I recommend playing it on a big resolution, high dynamic raised TV even. It doesn’t need to be a monitor. Just the art is incredible. It’s so beautiful and it’s so unusual, and each of those top bus battles is unique. It’s a unique puzzle to solve. Each one’s different and the strategy you use to solve one battle is different from another battle.
It’s so unusual. It’s incredibly creative, and the art is stunning. I recommend playing it on a big resolution, high dynamic raised TV even. It doesn’t need to be a monitor. Just the art is incredible. It’s so beautiful and it’s so unusual, and each of those top bus battles is unique. It’s a unique puzzle to solve. Each one’s different and the strategy you use to solve one battle is different from another battle.
Lex Fridman
That said, you said Druid, an internal against Uber Lilith is the hardest boss battle you’ve ever…
That said, you said Druid, an internal against Uber Lilith is the hardest boss battle you’ve ever…
Elon Musk
Correct. That is currently the, and I’ve played a lot of video games because that’s my primary recreational activity. And yes, beating Hatred in the internal realm is the hardest bus battle in life. And in the video game. I’m not sure it’s possible, but I do make progress. So then I’m like, ” Okay. I’m making progress. Maybe if I just tweak that paragon board a little more, I can do it could.” Just dodge a few more waves, I could do it.
Correct. That is currently the, and I’ve played a lot of video games because that’s my primary recreational activity. And yes, beating Hatred in the internal realm is the hardest bus battle in life. And in the video game. I’m not sure it’s possible, but I do make progress. So then I’m like, ” Okay. I’m making progress. Maybe if I just tweak that paragon board a little more, I can do it could.” Just dodge a few more waves, I could do it.
Lex Fridman
Well, the simulation is created for the purpose of figuring out if it can be done, and you’re just a cog in the machine of the simulation.
Well, the simulation is created for the purpose of figuring out if it can be done, and you’re just a cog in the machine of the simulation.
Elon Musk
Yeah, it might be. I have a feeling that at least I think-
Yeah, it might be. I have a feeling that at least I think-
Lex Fridman
It’s doable.
It’s doable.
Elon Musk
It’s doable. Yes.
It’s doable. Yes.
Lex Fridman
Well, that’s the human spirit right there to believe.
Well, that’s the human spirit right there to believe.
Elon Musk
Yeah. I mean, it did prompt me to think about just hate in general, which is you want to be careful of one of those things where you wish for something that sounds good, but if you get it’s actually a dystopian situation. So if you wish for world peace sounds good, but how’d it enforced and at what cost eternal peace? It might actually be worse to have eternal peace because of what that would entail. The suppression of everyone, it might be the suppression of progress. It might be an ossified society that never changes. What I’m saying is that there is an argument that if you wish for no war, you should be careful what you wish for because what’s required in order for there to be no war might be worse than a little war.
Yeah. I mean, it did prompt me to think about just hate in general, which is you want to be careful of one of those things where you wish for something that sounds good, but if you get it’s actually a dystopian situation. So if you wish for world peace sounds good, but how’d it enforced and at what cost eternal peace? It might actually be worse to have eternal peace because of what that would entail. The suppression of everyone, it might be the suppression of progress. It might be an ossified society that never changes. What I’m saying is that there is an argument that if you wish for no war, you should be careful what you wish for because what’s required in order for there to be no war might be worse than a little war.
Dystopian worlds: 1984 and Brave New World
Lex Fridman
Yeah. The things we’ll consider to be flaws of human civilization might be a necessary components for whatever optimal looks like. I mean this, do you worry about AI, AGI enabling a dystopian state of this nature, whether it’s 1984 with surveillance and fear or brave new world with pleasure and what is it? Lots of sex, but no deep human experience.
Yeah. The things we’ll consider to be flaws of human civilization might be a necessary components for whatever optimal looks like. I mean this, do you worry about AI, AGI enabling a dystopian state of this nature, whether it’s 1984 with surveillance and fear or brave new world with pleasure and what is it? Lots of sex, but no deep human experience.
Elon Musk
There’s actually a real drug called Soma.
There’s actually a real drug called Soma.
Lex Fridman
There is?
There is?
Elon Musk
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
I’m going to take notes.
I’m going to take notes.
Elon Musk
Does Gong know about it? No. He probably will go to Brave New World.
Does Gong know about it? No. He probably will go to Brave New World.
Elon Musk
We got to ask it.
We got to ask it.
Lex Fridman
What would be the question?
What would be the question?
Elon Musk
Tell us about the drug called Soma.
Tell us about the drug called Soma.
Lex Fridman
Tell us about the drug called Soma. It’s going to go to Brave New World, I think.
Tell us about the drug called Soma. It’s going to go to Brave New World, I think.
Elon Musk
Well, there’s a real drug as well.
Well, there’s a real drug as well.
Lex Fridman
Searching for Soma drug information. Oh boy. Soma, the wonder drug… By the way, I’m in fun mode.
Searching for Soma drug information. Oh boy. Soma, the wonder drug… By the way, I’m in fun mode.
Elon Musk
Okay, fun. Yeah. So it’s talking about the real drug.
Okay, fun. Yeah. So it’s talking about the real drug.
Lex Fridman
It’s a muscle relaxant that’s been around since the 1950s. It’s used to treat muscle pain and discomfort, and it does this by altering the activity between neurons and the spinal cord. Now, Soma isn’t just a pain reliever, it’s also a bit of a sedative. It can make you feel a bit drowsy. So it’s not something to take if you’re planning on operating, having machinery or trying to solve complex math equations. And it goes on and on. In conclusion, Soma is a drug that can be helpful for those dealing with muscle pain, but it’s not without its risks. That’s pretty good. Wait a minute.
It’s a muscle relaxant that’s been around since the 1950s. It’s used to treat muscle pain and discomfort, and it does this by altering the activity between neurons and the spinal cord. Now, Soma isn’t just a pain reliever, it’s also a bit of a sedative. It can make you feel a bit drowsy. So it’s not something to take if you’re planning on operating, having machinery or trying to solve complex math equations. And it goes on and on. In conclusion, Soma is a drug that can be helpful for those dealing with muscle pain, but it’s not without its risks. That’s pretty good. Wait a minute.
Elon Musk
That’s the real drug it’s talking about.
That’s the real drug it’s talking about.
Lex Fridman
It’s the real drug. And of course the fun is always use it responsibly in accordance with the advice of a healthcare professional. And remember, in the end, the universe is probably just a giant computer simulation, so don’t take anything too seriously. I love it.
It’s the real drug. And of course the fun is always use it responsibly in accordance with the advice of a healthcare professional. And remember, in the end, the universe is probably just a giant computer simulation, so don’t take anything too seriously. I love it.
Elon Musk
I love it. Yeah.
I love it. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It also really nicely includes the tweets, posts on X that are relevant to this, which is really cool. That integrates everything together. The interface is one of the really cool things here.
It also really nicely includes the tweets, posts on X that are relevant to this, which is really cool. That integrates everything together. The interface is one of the really cool things here.
Elon Musk
Yeah. Seems done a great job. You could say no, I mean, Soma from Brave New World, because it thinks you mean, you mean Soma, the real drug. No, I mean Soma from Brave Beer World.
Yeah. Seems done a great job. You could say no, I mean, Soma from Brave New World, because it thinks you mean, you mean Soma, the real drug. No, I mean Soma from Brave Beer World.
Lex Fridman
It’s going to be like, “Oops, I’m really sorry.” I’m really surprised it went to the real drug first. My apologies. I was thinking of the muscle relaxer. Soma for brand New World is a different beast altogether. Now this Huxley dystopian, Soma is a drug that plays a central role in the society depicted in the book. It’s a mood altering hallucinogenic drug that’s used to keep the population docile and content in the novel. To use Soma in Brave New World raises some interesting questions about the nature of happiness and the role of drugs in society, man.
It’s going to be like, “Oops, I’m really sorry.” I’m really surprised it went to the real drug first. My apologies. I was thinking of the muscle relaxer. Soma for brand New World is a different beast altogether. Now this Huxley dystopian, Soma is a drug that plays a central role in the society depicted in the book. It’s a mood altering hallucinogenic drug that’s used to keep the population docile and content in the novel. To use Soma in Brave New World raises some interesting questions about the nature of happiness and the role of drugs in society, man.
Elon Musk
Exactly. Is it better to live in a world where everyone is happy all the time, even if that happiness is artificial? It’s good question. This is what I mean. Do you wish for world peace and happiness all the time? Are you sure? Because that might be a society that is essentially sterile and ossified that never changes, that is ultimately doomed.
Exactly. Is it better to live in a world where everyone is happy all the time, even if that happiness is artificial? It’s good question. This is what I mean. Do you wish for world peace and happiness all the time? Are you sure? Because that might be a society that is essentially sterile and ossified that never changes, that is ultimately doomed.
Lex Fridman
This kind of tension between doctors and the light-
This kind of tension between doctors and the light-
Elon Musk
This is really a very good summary. It really gets to the point. This is not simply regurgitating a brave new world. It’s actually getting to the salient element of Soma as a drug. Do you actually want to be in a situation where everyone is happy all the time, even though it’s artificial? Or is it better to confront the challenges of life and experience the full range of human emotions, even if it means experiencing pain and suffering? For
This is really a very good summary. It really gets to the point. This is not simply regurgitating a brave new world. It’s actually getting to the salient element of Soma as a drug. Do you actually want to be in a situation where everyone is happy all the time, even though it’s artificial? Or is it better to confront the challenges of life and experience the full range of human emotions, even if it means experiencing pain and suffering? For
Lex Fridman
Those listening, by the way, Elon just read directly from Grok, which is a really nice kind of insightful, philosophical analysis of the tension here. Interesting.
Those listening, by the way, Elon just read directly from Grok, which is a really nice kind of insightful, philosophical analysis of the tension here. Interesting.
Elon Musk
It pretty much nails it. In conclusion, Soma from Brave New World is fictional drug that’s used to explore some deep philosophical questions about the nature of happiness and the role of drugs in society. It’s a powerful symbol of the dangers of using drugs to escape from reality and the importance of confronting the challenges of life head on. Nailed it. And the crazy thing is we do have a real drug called Soma, which is like the drug in the book. And I’m like, “They must’ve named it Probably.” Some of the real drug is quite effective on back pain.
It pretty much nails it. In conclusion, Soma from Brave New World is fictional drug that’s used to explore some deep philosophical questions about the nature of happiness and the role of drugs in society. It’s a powerful symbol of the dangers of using drugs to escape from reality and the importance of confronting the challenges of life head on. Nailed it. And the crazy thing is we do have a real drug called Soma, which is like the drug in the book. And I’m like, “They must’ve named it Probably.” Some of the real drug is quite effective on back pain.
Lex Fridman
So you know about this drug. It’s fascinating
So you know about this drug. It’s fascinating
Elon Musk
I’ve taken it because I had a squashed disc in my C5-C6.
I’ve taken it because I had a squashed disc in my C5-C6.
Lex Fridman
So it takes the physical pain away. But Soma here-
So it takes the physical pain away. But Soma here-
Elon Musk
It doesn’t completely, it reduces the amount of pain you feel, but at the expense of mental acuity, it dells your mind. Just like the drug in the book.
It doesn’t completely, it reduces the amount of pain you feel, but at the expense of mental acuity, it dells your mind. Just like the drug in the book.
Lex Fridman
Just like the drug in the book, and hence the trade off. The thing that seems like utopia could be a dystopia after all.
Just like the drug in the book, and hence the trade off. The thing that seems like utopia could be a dystopia after all.
Elon Musk
Yeah. Actually I was towing a friend of mine saying, “Would you really want there to be no hate in the world? Really none?” I wonder why hate evolved. I’m not saying we should have…
Yeah. Actually I was towing a friend of mine saying, “Would you really want there to be no hate in the world? Really none?” I wonder why hate evolved. I’m not saying we should have…
Elon Musk
I wonder why hate evolved. I’m not saying we should amplify hate, of course, I think we should try to minimize it, but none at all. There might be a reason for hate.
I wonder why hate evolved. I’m not saying we should amplify hate, of course, I think we should try to minimize it, but none at all. There might be a reason for hate.
Lex Fridman
And suffering. It’s really complicated to consider that some amount of human suffering is necessary for human flourishing.
And suffering. It’s really complicated to consider that some amount of human suffering is necessary for human flourishing.
Elon Musk
Is it possible to appreciate the highs without knowing the lows?
Is it possible to appreciate the highs without knowing the lows?
Lex Fridman
And that all is summarized there in a single statement from God. Okay.
And that all is summarized there in a single statement from God. Okay.
Elon Musk
No highs, no lows, who knows?
No highs, no lows, who knows?
AI and useful compute per watt
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 01:10:38]. It seems that training LLMs efficiently is a big focus for xAI. First of all, what’s the limit of what’s possible in terms of efficiency? There’s this terminology of useful productivity per watt. What have you learned from pushing the limits of that?
[inaudible 01:10:38]. It seems that training LLMs efficiently is a big focus for xAI. First of all, what’s the limit of what’s possible in terms of efficiency? There’s this terminology of useful productivity per watt. What have you learned from pushing the limits of that?
Elon Musk
Well, I think it’s helpful, the tools of physics are very powerful and can be applied I think to really any arena in life. It’s really just critical thinking. For something important you need to reason with from first principles and think about things in the limit one direction or the other. So in the limit, even at the Kardashev scale, meaning even if you harness the entire power of the sun, you’ll still care about useful compute per watt. That’s where I think, probably where things are headed from the standpoint of AI is that we have a silicon shortage now that will transition to a voltage transformer shortage in about a year. Ironically, transformers for transformers. You need transformers to run transformers.
Well, I think it’s helpful, the tools of physics are very powerful and can be applied I think to really any arena in life. It’s really just critical thinking. For something important you need to reason with from first principles and think about things in the limit one direction or the other. So in the limit, even at the Kardashev scale, meaning even if you harness the entire power of the sun, you’ll still care about useful compute per watt. That’s where I think, probably where things are headed from the standpoint of AI is that we have a silicon shortage now that will transition to a voltage transformer shortage in about a year. Ironically, transformers for transformers. You need transformers to run transformers.
Lex Fridman
Somebody has a sense of humor in this thing.
Somebody has a sense of humor in this thing.
Elon Musk
I think, yes, fate loves irony, ironic humor, an ironically funny outcome seems to be often what fate wants.
I think, yes, fate loves irony, ironic humor, an ironically funny outcome seems to be often what fate wants.
Lex Fridman
Humor is all you need. I think spice is all you need somebody posted.
Humor is all you need. I think spice is all you need somebody posted.
Elon Musk
Yeah. But yeah, so we have silicon shortage today, a voltage step down transformer shortage probably in about a year, and then just electricity shortages in general in about two years. I gave a speech for the world gathering of utility companies, electricity companies, and I said, look, you really need to prepare for traveling of electricity demand because all transport is going to go electric with the ironic exception of rockets, and heating will also go electric. So energy usage right now is roughly one third, very rough terms, one third electricity, one third transport, one third heating. And so in order for everything to go sustainable, to go electric, you need to triple electricity output. So I encourage the utilities to build more power of plants and also to probably have, well, not probably, they should definitely buy more batteries because the grid currently is sized for realtime load, which is kind of crazy because that means you’ve got to size for whatever the peak electricity demand is, the worst second or the worst day of the year, or you can have a brown out or blackout.
Yeah. But yeah, so we have silicon shortage today, a voltage step down transformer shortage probably in about a year, and then just electricity shortages in general in about two years. I gave a speech for the world gathering of utility companies, electricity companies, and I said, look, you really need to prepare for traveling of electricity demand because all transport is going to go electric with the ironic exception of rockets, and heating will also go electric. So energy usage right now is roughly one third, very rough terms, one third electricity, one third transport, one third heating. And so in order for everything to go sustainable, to go electric, you need to triple electricity output. So I encourage the utilities to build more power of plants and also to probably have, well, not probably, they should definitely buy more batteries because the grid currently is sized for realtime load, which is kind of crazy because that means you’ve got to size for whatever the peak electricity demand is, the worst second or the worst day of the year, or you can have a brown out or blackout.
We had that crazy blackout for several days in Austin because there’s almost no buffering of energy in the grid. If you’ve got a hydropower plant you can buffer energy, but otherwise it’s all real time. So with batteries, you can produce energy at night and use it during the day so you can buffer. So I expect that there will be very heavy usage of batteries in the future because the peak to trough ratio for power plants is anywhere from two to five, so its lowest point to highest point.
Lex Fridman
So batteries necessary to balance it out, but the demand, as you’re saying, is going to grow, grow, grow, grow.
So batteries necessary to balance it out, but the demand, as you’re saying, is going to grow, grow, grow, grow.
Elon Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And part of that is the compute?
And part of that is the compute?
Elon Musk
Yes. Yes. I mean, electrification of transport and electric heating will be much bigger than AI, at least-
Yes. Yes. I mean, electrification of transport and electric heating will be much bigger than AI, at least-
Lex Fridman
In the short term.
In the short term.
Elon Musk
In the short term. But even for AI, you really have a growing demand for electricity, for electric vehicles, and a growing demand for electricity to run the computers for AI. And so this is obviously, can lead to electricity shortage.
In the short term. But even for AI, you really have a growing demand for electricity, for electric vehicles, and a growing demand for electricity to run the computers for AI. And so this is obviously, can lead to electricity shortage.
Lex Fridman
How difficult is the problem of, in this particular case, maximizing the useful productivity per watt for training and that’s, this seems to be really where the big problem we’re facing that needs to be solved, is how to use the power efficiently. What you’ve learned so far about applying this physics first principle of reasoning in this domain, how difficult is this problem?
How difficult is the problem of, in this particular case, maximizing the useful productivity per watt for training and that’s, this seems to be really where the big problem we’re facing that needs to be solved, is how to use the power efficiently. What you’ve learned so far about applying this physics first principle of reasoning in this domain, how difficult is this problem?
Elon Musk
It will get solved. It’s the question of how long it takes to solve it. So at various points, there’s some kind of limiting factor to progress and with regard to AI, I’m saying right now the limiting factor is silicon chips and that will, we’re going to then have more chips than we can actually plug in and turn on probably in about a year. The initial constraint being literally voltage step down transformers because you’ve got power coming in at 300,000 volts and it’s got to step all the way down eventually to around 0.7 volts. So it’s a very big amount of, the voltage step down is gigantic and the industry is not used to rapid growth.
It will get solved. It’s the question of how long it takes to solve it. So at various points, there’s some kind of limiting factor to progress and with regard to AI, I’m saying right now the limiting factor is silicon chips and that will, we’re going to then have more chips than we can actually plug in and turn on probably in about a year. The initial constraint being literally voltage step down transformers because you’ve got power coming in at 300,000 volts and it’s got to step all the way down eventually to around 0.7 volts. So it’s a very big amount of, the voltage step down is gigantic and the industry is not used to rapid growth.
AI regulation
Lex Fridman
Okay. Let’s talk about the competition here. You’ve shown concern about Google and Microsoft with OpenAI developing AGI. How can you help ensure with xAI and Tesla AI work that it doesn’t become a competitive race to AGI, but that is a collaborative development of safe AGI?
Okay. Let’s talk about the competition here. You’ve shown concern about Google and Microsoft with OpenAI developing AGI. How can you help ensure with xAI and Tesla AI work that it doesn’t become a competitive race to AGI, but that is a collaborative development of safe AGI?
Elon Musk
Well, I mean I’ve been pushing for some kind of regulatory oversight for a long time. I’ve been somewhat of a Cassandra on the subject for over a decade. I think we want to be very careful in how we develop AI. It’s a great power and with great power comes great responsibility. I think it would be wise for us to have at least an objective third party who can be like a referee that can go in and understand what the various leading players are doing with AI, and even if there’s no enforcement ability, they can at least voice concerns publicly. Jeff Hinton, for example, left Google and he voiced strong concerns, but now he’s not at Google anymore, so who’s going to voice the concerns? So I think there’s, Tesla gets a lot of regulatory oversight on the automotive front. We’re subject to, I think over a hundred regulatory agencies domestically and internationally. It’s a lot. You could fill this room with the all regulations that Tesla has to adhere to for automotive. Same is true for rockets and for, currently, the limiting factor for SpaceX for Starship launch is regulatory approval.
Well, I mean I’ve been pushing for some kind of regulatory oversight for a long time. I’ve been somewhat of a Cassandra on the subject for over a decade. I think we want to be very careful in how we develop AI. It’s a great power and with great power comes great responsibility. I think it would be wise for us to have at least an objective third party who can be like a referee that can go in and understand what the various leading players are doing with AI, and even if there’s no enforcement ability, they can at least voice concerns publicly. Jeff Hinton, for example, left Google and he voiced strong concerns, but now he’s not at Google anymore, so who’s going to voice the concerns? So I think there’s, Tesla gets a lot of regulatory oversight on the automotive front. We’re subject to, I think over a hundred regulatory agencies domestically and internationally. It’s a lot. You could fill this room with the all regulations that Tesla has to adhere to for automotive. Same is true for rockets and for, currently, the limiting factor for SpaceX for Starship launch is regulatory approval.
The FAA has actually given their approval, but we’re waiting for fish and wildlife to finish their analysis and give their approval. That’s why I posted I want to buy a fish license on, which also refers to the Monte Python sketch. Why do you need a license for your fish? I don’t know. But according to the rules, I’m told you need some sort of fish license or something. We effectively need a fish license to launch a rocket. And I’m like, wait a second. How did the fish come into this picture? I mean, some of the things I feel like are so absurd that I want to do a comedy sketch and flash at the bottom. This is all real. This is actually what happened.
One of the things that was a bit of a challenge at one point is that they were worried about a rocket hitting a shark. And the ocean’s very big, and how often do you see sharks? Not that often. As a percentage of ocean surface area, sharks basically are zero. And so then we said, well, how will we calculate the probability of killing a shark? And they’re like, well, we can’t give you that information because they’re worried about shark fin hunters going and hunting sharks and I said, well, how are we supposed to, we’re on the horns of a dilemma then.
They said, well, there’s another part of fish and wildlife that can do this analysis. I’m like, well, why don’t you give them the data? We don’t trust them. Excuse me? They’re literally in your department. Again, this is actually what happened. And then can you do an NDA or something? Eventually they managed to solve the internal quandary, and indeed the probability of us hitting a shark is essentially zero. Then there’s another organization that I didn’t realize existed until a few months ago that cares about whether we would potentially hit a whale in international waters. Now, again, you look the surface, look at the Pacific and say what percentage of the Pacific consists of whale? I could give you a big picture and point out all the whales in this picture. I’m like, I don’t see any whales. It’s basically 0%, and if our rocket does hit a whale, which is extremely unlikely beyond all belief, fate had it, that’s a whale has some seriously bad luck, least lucky whale ever.
Lex Fridman
I mean this is quite absurd, the bureaucracy of this, however it emerged.
I mean this is quite absurd, the bureaucracy of this, however it emerged.
Elon Musk
Yes. Well, I mean one of the things that’s pretty wild is for launching out of Vanderberg in California, we had to, they were worried about seal procreation, whether the seals would be dismayed by the sonic booms. Now, there’ve been a lot of rockets launched out of Vandenberg and the seal population has steadily increased. So if anything, rocket booms are an aphrodisiac, based on the evidence, if you were to correlate rocket launches with seal population. Nonetheless, we were forced to kidnap a seal, strap it to a board, put headphones on the seal and play sonic boom sounds to it to see if it would be distressed. This is an actual thing that happened. This is actually real. I have pictures.
Yes. Well, I mean one of the things that’s pretty wild is for launching out of Vanderberg in California, we had to, they were worried about seal procreation, whether the seals would be dismayed by the sonic booms. Now, there’ve been a lot of rockets launched out of Vandenberg and the seal population has steadily increased. So if anything, rocket booms are an aphrodisiac, based on the evidence, if you were to correlate rocket launches with seal population. Nonetheless, we were forced to kidnap a seal, strap it to a board, put headphones on the seal and play sonic boom sounds to it to see if it would be distressed. This is an actual thing that happened. This is actually real. I have pictures.
Lex Fridman
I would love to see this. Yeah. Sorry. There’s a seal with headphones.
I would love to see this. Yeah. Sorry. There’s a seal with headphones.
Elon Musk
Yes, it’s a seal with headphones strapped to a board. Okay. Now the amazing part is how calm the seal was because if I was a seal, I’d be like, this is the end. They’re definitely going to eat me. How old the seal, when seal goes back to other seal friends, how’s he going to explain that?
Yes, it’s a seal with headphones strapped to a board. Okay. Now the amazing part is how calm the seal was because if I was a seal, I’d be like, this is the end. They’re definitely going to eat me. How old the seal, when seal goes back to other seal friends, how’s he going to explain that?
Lex Fridman
They’re never going to believe them.
They’re never going to believe them.
Elon Musk
Never going to believe him. That’s why, I’m like sort of like it’s getting kidnapped by aliens and getting anal probed. You come back and say, I swear to God, I got kidnapped by aliens and they stuck anal probe in my butt and people are like, no, they didn’t. That’s ridiculous. His seal buddies are never going to believe him that he got strapped to aboard and they put headphones on his ears and then let him go. Twice, by the way, we had to do it twice.
Never going to believe him. That’s why, I’m like sort of like it’s getting kidnapped by aliens and getting anal probed. You come back and say, I swear to God, I got kidnapped by aliens and they stuck anal probe in my butt and people are like, no, they didn’t. That’s ridiculous. His seal buddies are never going to believe him that he got strapped to aboard and they put headphones on his ears and then let him go. Twice, by the way, we had to do it twice.
Lex Fridman
They let him go twice.
They let him go twice.
Elon Musk
We had to capture-
We had to capture-
Lex Fridman
The same seal?
The same seal?
Elon Musk
No different seal.
No different seal.
Lex Fridman
Okay. Did you get a seal of approval?
Okay. Did you get a seal of approval?
Elon Musk
Exactly. Seal of approval. No, I mean I don’t think the public is quite aware of the madness that goes on.
Exactly. Seal of approval. No, I mean I don’t think the public is quite aware of the madness that goes on.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah. It’s absurd.
Yeah. Yeah. It’s absurd.
Elon Musk
Fricking seals with fricking headphones.
Fricking seals with fricking headphones.
Lex Fridman
I mean, this is a good encapsulation of the absurdity of human civilization, seals in headphones.
I mean, this is a good encapsulation of the absurdity of human civilization, seals in headphones.
Should AI be open-sourced?
Elon Musk
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
What are the pros and cons of open sourcing AI to you as another way to combat a company running away with AGI?
What are the pros and cons of open sourcing AI to you as another way to combat a company running away with AGI?
Elon Musk
In order to run really deep intelligence, you need a lot of compute. So it’s not like you can just fire up a PC in your basement and be running AGI, at least not yet. Grok was trained on 8,000 A100’s running at peak efficiency and Grok’s going to get a lot better, by the way, we will be more than doubling our compute every couple months for the next several months.
In order to run really deep intelligence, you need a lot of compute. So it’s not like you can just fire up a PC in your basement and be running AGI, at least not yet. Grok was trained on 8,000 A100’s running at peak efficiency and Grok’s going to get a lot better, by the way, we will be more than doubling our compute every couple months for the next several months.
Lex Fridman
There’s a nice writeup, on how we went from Grok zero to Grok one.
There’s a nice writeup, on how we went from Grok zero to Grok one.
Elon Musk
By Grok?
By Grok?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, right, grok just bragging, making shit up about itself.
Yeah, right, grok just bragging, making shit up about itself.
Elon Musk
Just Grok, Grok, Grok.
Just Grok, Grok, Grok.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. That’s like a weird AI dating site where it exaggerates about itself. No, there’s a writeup of where it stands now, the history of its development, and where it stands on some benchmarks compared to the state-of-the art GPT-3 five. And so I mean, there’s [inaudible 01:24:37], you can open source, once it’s trained, you can open source a model. For fine-tuning, all that kind of stuff. What to is the pros and cons of that, of open sourcing base models?
Yeah. That’s like a weird AI dating site where it exaggerates about itself. No, there’s a writeup of where it stands now, the history of its development, and where it stands on some benchmarks compared to the state-of-the art GPT-3 five. And so I mean, there’s [inaudible 01:24:37], you can open source, once it’s trained, you can open source a model. For fine-tuning, all that kind of stuff. What to is the pros and cons of that, of open sourcing base models?
Elon Musk
I think the [inaudible 01:24:53] to open sourcing, I think perhaps with a slight time delay, I don’t know, six months even. I think I’m generally in favor of open sourcing, biased towards open sourcing. I mean, it is a concern to me that OpenAI, I was I think, I guess oddly the prime mover behind OpenAI in the sense that it was created because of discussions that I had with Larry Page back when he and I were friends and I stayed at his house and I talked to him about AI safety, and Larry did not care about AI safety, or at least at the time he didn’t. And at one point he called me a speciesist for being pro-human, and I’m like, well, what team are you on, Larry? He’s still on Team Robot to be clear. And I’m like, okay. So at the time Google had acquired DeepMind, they had probably two thirds of all AI researchers in the world. They had basically infinite money and compute, and the guy in charge, Larry Page, did not care about safety and even yelled at me and caught me a speciesist for being pro-human.
I think the [inaudible 01:24:53] to open sourcing, I think perhaps with a slight time delay, I don’t know, six months even. I think I’m generally in favor of open sourcing, biased towards open sourcing. I mean, it is a concern to me that OpenAI, I was I think, I guess oddly the prime mover behind OpenAI in the sense that it was created because of discussions that I had with Larry Page back when he and I were friends and I stayed at his house and I talked to him about AI safety, and Larry did not care about AI safety, or at least at the time he didn’t. And at one point he called me a speciesist for being pro-human, and I’m like, well, what team are you on, Larry? He’s still on Team Robot to be clear. And I’m like, okay. So at the time Google had acquired DeepMind, they had probably two thirds of all AI researchers in the world. They had basically infinite money and compute, and the guy in charge, Larry Page, did not care about safety and even yelled at me and caught me a speciesist for being pro-human.
Lex Fridman
So I don’t know if you notice about humans, they can change their mind and maybe you and Larry Page can still, can be friends once more.
So I don’t know if you notice about humans, they can change their mind and maybe you and Larry Page can still, can be friends once more.
Elon Musk
I’d like to be friends with Larry again. Really the breaking of the friendship was over OpenAI and specifically I think the key moment was recruiting Ilya Sutskever.
I’d like to be friends with Larry again. Really the breaking of the friendship was over OpenAI and specifically I think the key moment was recruiting Ilya Sutskever.
Lex Fridman
I love Ilya. He’s so brilliant.
I love Ilya. He’s so brilliant.
Elon Musk
Ilya is a good human, smart, good heart, and that was a tough recruiting battle. It was mostly Demis on one side and me on the other, both trying to recruit Ilya, and Ilya went back and forth, he was going to stay at Google, he was going to leave, then he was going to stay, then he’ll leave. And finally he did agree to join OpenAI. That was one of the toughest recruiting battles we’ve ever had. But that was really the linchpin for OpenAI being successful. And I was also instrumental in recruiting a number of other people, and I provided all of the funding in the beginning, over $40 million. And the name, the open in open AI is supposed to mean open source, and it was created as a nonprofit open source, and now it is a closed source for maximum profit, which I think is not good karma.
Ilya is a good human, smart, good heart, and that was a tough recruiting battle. It was mostly Demis on one side and me on the other, both trying to recruit Ilya, and Ilya went back and forth, he was going to stay at Google, he was going to leave, then he was going to stay, then he’ll leave. And finally he did agree to join OpenAI. That was one of the toughest recruiting battles we’ve ever had. But that was really the linchpin for OpenAI being successful. And I was also instrumental in recruiting a number of other people, and I provided all of the funding in the beginning, over $40 million. And the name, the open in open AI is supposed to mean open source, and it was created as a nonprofit open source, and now it is a closed source for maximum profit, which I think is not good karma.
Lex Fridman
But like we talked about with war and leaders talking, I do hope that, there’s only a few folks working on this at the highest level. I do hope you reinvigorate friendships here.
But like we talked about with war and leaders talking, I do hope that, there’s only a few folks working on this at the highest level. I do hope you reinvigorate friendships here.
Elon Musk
Like I said, I’d like to be friends again with Larry. I haven’t seen him in ages and we were friends for a very long time. I met Larry Page before he got funding for Google, or actually I guess before he got venture funding, I think he got the first like $100k from I think Bechtel Zeimer or someone.
Like I said, I’d like to be friends again with Larry. I haven’t seen him in ages and we were friends for a very long time. I met Larry Page before he got funding for Google, or actually I guess before he got venture funding, I think he got the first like $100k from I think Bechtel Zeimer or someone.
Lex Fridman
It’s wild to think about all that happened, and you guys known each other that whole time, it’s 20 years.
It’s wild to think about all that happened, and you guys known each other that whole time, it’s 20 years.
Elon Musk
Yeah, since maybe 98 or something.
Yeah, since maybe 98 or something.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s crazy. Crazy how much has happened since then.
Yeah, it’s crazy. Crazy how much has happened since then.
Elon Musk
Yeah, 25 years, a lot has happened. It’s insane.
Yeah, 25 years, a lot has happened. It’s insane.
Lex Fridman
But you’re seeing the tension there that maybe delayed open source.
But you’re seeing the tension there that maybe delayed open source.
Elon Musk
Delayed, yeah, like what is the source that is open? You know what I mean? There’s basically, it’s a giant CSB file with a bunch of numbers. What do you do with that giant file of numbers? How do you run, the amount of actual, the lines of code is very small and most of the work, the software work is in the curation of the data. So it’s like trying to figure out what data is, separating good data from bad data. You can’t just crawl the internet because theres a lot of junk out there. A huge percentage of websites have more noise than signal because they’re just used for search engine optimization. They’re literally just scam websites.
Delayed, yeah, like what is the source that is open? You know what I mean? There’s basically, it’s a giant CSB file with a bunch of numbers. What do you do with that giant file of numbers? How do you run, the amount of actual, the lines of code is very small and most of the work, the software work is in the curation of the data. So it’s like trying to figure out what data is, separating good data from bad data. You can’t just crawl the internet because theres a lot of junk out there. A huge percentage of websites have more noise than signal because they’re just used for search engine optimization. They’re literally just scam websites.
Lex Fridman
How do you, by the way, sorry to interrupt, get the signal, separate the signal and noise on X? That’s such a fascinating source of data. No offense to people posting on X, but sometimes there’s a little bit of noise.
How do you, by the way, sorry to interrupt, get the signal, separate the signal and noise on X? That’s such a fascinating source of data. No offense to people posting on X, but sometimes there’s a little bit of noise.
Elon Musk
I think the signal noise could be greatly improved. Really, all of the posts on the X platform should be AI recommended, meaning we should populate a vector space around any given post, compare that to the vector space around any user and match the two. Right now there is a little bit of AI used for the recommended posts, but it’s mostly heuristics. And if there’s a reply where the reply to a post could be much better than the original post, but will, according to the current rules of the system, get almost no attention compared to a primary post.
I think the signal noise could be greatly improved. Really, all of the posts on the X platform should be AI recommended, meaning we should populate a vector space around any given post, compare that to the vector space around any user and match the two. Right now there is a little bit of AI used for the recommended posts, but it’s mostly heuristics. And if there’s a reply where the reply to a post could be much better than the original post, but will, according to the current rules of the system, get almost no attention compared to a primary post.
X algorithm
Lex Fridman
So a lot of that, I got the sense, so a lot of the X algorithm has been open sourced and been written up about, and it seems there to be some machine learning. It’s disparate, but there’s some machine.
So a lot of that, I got the sense, so a lot of the X algorithm has been open sourced and been written up about, and it seems there to be some machine learning. It’s disparate, but there’s some machine.
Elon Musk
It’s a little bit, but it needs to be entirely that. At least, if you explicitly follow someone, that’s one thing. But in terms of what is recommended from people that you don’t follow, that should all be AI.
It’s a little bit, but it needs to be entirely that. At least, if you explicitly follow someone, that’s one thing. But in terms of what is recommended from people that you don’t follow, that should all be AI.
Lex Fridman
I mean it’s a fascinating problem. So there’s several aspects of it that’s fascinating. First, as the write-up goes, it first picks 1500 tweets from a pool of hundreds of millions. First of all, that’s fascinating. You have hundreds of millions of posts every single day, and it has to pick 1500 from which it then does obviously people you follow, but then there’s also some kind of clustering it has to do to figure out what kind of human are you, what kind of new clusters might be relevant to you, people like you. This kind of problem is just fascinating because it has to then rank those 1500 with some filtering and then recommend you just a handful.
I mean it’s a fascinating problem. So there’s several aspects of it that’s fascinating. First, as the write-up goes, it first picks 1500 tweets from a pool of hundreds of millions. First of all, that’s fascinating. You have hundreds of millions of posts every single day, and it has to pick 1500 from which it then does obviously people you follow, but then there’s also some kind of clustering it has to do to figure out what kind of human are you, what kind of new clusters might be relevant to you, people like you. This kind of problem is just fascinating because it has to then rank those 1500 with some filtering and then recommend you just a handful.
And to me, what’s really fascinating is how fast it has to do that. So currently that entire pipeline to go from several hundred million to a handful takes 220 seconds of CPU time, single CPU time, and then it has to do that in a second. So it has to be super distributed in fascinating ways. There’s just a lot of tweets, there’s a lot.
Elon Musk
There’s a lot of stuff on the system, but I think, right now it’s not currently good at recommending things from accounts you don’t follow or where there’s more than one degree of separation. So it is pretty good if there’s at least some commonality between someone you follow liked something or reposted it or commented on it or something like that. But if there’s no, let’s say somebody posts something really interesting, but you have no followers in common, you would not see it.
There’s a lot of stuff on the system, but I think, right now it’s not currently good at recommending things from accounts you don’t follow or where there’s more than one degree of separation. So it is pretty good if there’s at least some commonality between someone you follow liked something or reposted it or commented on it or something like that. But if there’s no, let’s say somebody posts something really interesting, but you have no followers in common, you would not see it.
Lex Fridman
Interesting. And then as you said, replies might not surface either.
Interesting. And then as you said, replies might not surface either.
Elon Musk
Replies basically never get seen currently. I’m not saying it’s correct, I’m saying it’s incorrect. Replies have a couple order magnitude less importance than primary posts.
Replies basically never get seen currently. I’m not saying it’s correct, I’m saying it’s incorrect. Replies have a couple order magnitude less importance than primary posts.
Lex Fridman
Do you think this can be more and more converted into end to end mural net?
Do you think this can be more and more converted into end to end mural net?
Elon Musk
Yeah. Yeah, that’s what it should be. Well, the recommendations should be purely a vector correlation. There’s a series of vectors basically parameters, vectors, whatever you want to call them, but sort of things that the system knows that you like. Maybe there’s several hundred vectors associated with each user account and then any post in the system, whether it’s video, audio, short post, long post. The reason by the way I want to move away from tweet is that people are posting two, three hour videos on the site. That’s not a tweet.
Yeah. Yeah, that’s what it should be. Well, the recommendations should be purely a vector correlation. There’s a series of vectors basically parameters, vectors, whatever you want to call them, but sort of things that the system knows that you like. Maybe there’s several hundred vectors associated with each user account and then any post in the system, whether it’s video, audio, short post, long post. The reason by the way I want to move away from tweet is that people are posting two, three hour videos on the site. That’s not a tweet.
It’d be like tweet for two hours? Come on. Tweet made sense when it was 140 characters of text. Because it’s like a bunch of little birds tweeting. But when you’ve got long form content, it’s no longer a tweet. So a movie is not a tweet. Apple, for example, posted the entire episode of The Silo, the entire thing, on a platform. By the way, it was their number one social media thing ever in engagement of anything, on any platform ever. So it was a great idea. And by the way, I just learned about it afterwards. I was like, Hey, wow, they posted an entire hour long episode of, so no, that’s not a tweet. This is a video.
Lex Fridman
But from a neural net perspective, it becomes really complex, whether it’s a single, so everything’s data. So single sentence, a clever sort of joke, dad joke is in the same pool as a three hour video.
But from a neural net perspective, it becomes really complex, whether it’s a single, so everything’s data. So single sentence, a clever sort of joke, dad joke is in the same pool as a three hour video.
Elon Musk
Yeah, I mean right now it’s a hodgepodge for that reason. Let’s say in the case of Apple posting an entire episode of this series, pretty good series, by the way, The Silo, I watched it. So there’s going to be a lot of discussion around it. So you’ve got a lot of context, people commenting, they like it, they don’t like it or they like this, and you can then populate the vector space based on the context of all the comments around it. So even though it’s a video, there’s a lot of information around it that allows you to populate back to space of that hour long video. And then you can obviously get more sophisticated by having the AI actually watch the movie and tell you if you’re going to like the movie.
Yeah, I mean right now it’s a hodgepodge for that reason. Let’s say in the case of Apple posting an entire episode of this series, pretty good series, by the way, The Silo, I watched it. So there’s going to be a lot of discussion around it. So you’ve got a lot of context, people commenting, they like it, they don’t like it or they like this, and you can then populate the vector space based on the context of all the comments around it. So even though it’s a video, there’s a lot of information around it that allows you to populate back to space of that hour long video. And then you can obviously get more sophisticated by having the AI actually watch the movie and tell you if you’re going to like the movie.
Lex Fridman
Convert the movie into language, essentially.
Convert the movie into language, essentially.
Elon Musk
Analyze this movie and just like your movie critic or TV series and then recommend based on after AI watches the movie, just like a friend can tell you, if a friend knows you well, a friend can recommend a movie with high probability that you’ll like it.
Analyze this movie and just like your movie critic or TV series and then recommend based on after AI watches the movie, just like a friend can tell you, if a friend knows you well, a friend can recommend a movie with high probability that you’ll like it.
Lex Fridman
But this is a friend that’s analyzing, whatever, hundreds of millions.
But this is a friend that’s analyzing, whatever, hundreds of millions.
Elon Musk
Yeah, actually, frankly, AI will be better than, will know you better than your friends know you, most of your friends anyway.
Yeah, actually, frankly, AI will be better than, will know you better than your friends know you, most of your friends anyway.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. And as part of this, it should also feed you advertisements in a way that’s like, I mean, I like advertisements that are well done. The whole point is because it funds things. Like an advertisement that you actually want to see is a big success.
Yeah. And as part of this, it should also feed you advertisements in a way that’s like, I mean, I like advertisements that are well done. The whole point is because it funds things. Like an advertisement that you actually want to see is a big success.
Elon Musk
Absolutely. You want ads that are, advertising that is, if it’s for a product or service that you actually need when you need it, it’s content. And then even if it’s not something that you need when you need it, if it’s at least aesthetically pleasing and entertaining, it could be like a Coca-Cola ad. They actually run a lot of great ads on the X system and McDonald’s does too. And you can do something that’s like, well, this is just a cool thing. And so basically the question is, do you regret seeing it or not? And if you don’t regret seeing it’s a win.
Absolutely. You want ads that are, advertising that is, if it’s for a product or service that you actually need when you need it, it’s content. And then even if it’s not something that you need when you need it, if it’s at least aesthetically pleasing and entertaining, it could be like a Coca-Cola ad. They actually run a lot of great ads on the X system and McDonald’s does too. And you can do something that’s like, well, this is just a cool thing. And so basically the question is, do you regret seeing it or not? And if you don’t regret seeing it’s a win.
Lex Fridman
So there’s a bunch of signals that are incorporated, hearts and reposts and maybe number of seconds you linger on a post or something like this.
So there’s a bunch of signals that are incorporated, hearts and reposts and maybe number of seconds you linger on a post or something like this.
Elon Musk
Yeah, attention is a big factor.
Yeah, attention is a big factor.
Lex Fridman
Attention.
Attention.
Elon Musk
So that’s why it is actually better to do things that are long form on the system because it basically is tallying up how many user seconds, users were interested in this thing for how many seconds? So if it’s a really short thing, well they will be less. If it’s a link leading out of the system, which we’re not opposed to at all, it just is going to have fewer user seconds then that article was posted on the X platform.
So that’s why it is actually better to do things that are long form on the system because it basically is tallying up how many user seconds, users were interested in this thing for how many seconds? So if it’s a really short thing, well they will be less. If it’s a link leading out of the system, which we’re not opposed to at all, it just is going to have fewer user seconds then that article was posted on the X platform.
Lex Fridman
How hard is it to go from maximizing minutes on platform to maximizing unregretted minutes?
How hard is it to go from maximizing minutes on platform to maximizing unregretted minutes?
Elon Musk
Well, I mean, our aspiration is certainly unregretted minutes.
Well, I mean, our aspiration is certainly unregretted minutes.
Lex Fridman
It’s tricky. It’s a tough-
It’s tricky. It’s a tough-
Elon Musk
It is.
It is.
Lex Fridman
It’s a fascinating leap because regret is a fascinating concept.
It’s a fascinating leap because regret is a fascinating concept.
Elon Musk
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
Happiness.
Happiness.
Elon Musk
I have a joke with a friend of mine, like you need this drug called regretamine. You just take one dose of regretamine and all your regrets are gone. Wait, do you want to have regrets though? So then I’m like, maybe you want to have regrets. If you don’t regret anything, was anything meaningful?
I have a joke with a friend of mine, like you need this drug called regretamine. You just take one dose of regretamine and all your regrets are gone. Wait, do you want to have regrets though? So then I’m like, maybe you want to have regrets. If you don’t regret anything, was anything meaningful?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s a French song like that.
Yeah, there’s a French song like that.
Elon Musk
[foreign language 01:38:39]
[foreign language 01:38:39]
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Elon Musk
I regret nothing.
I regret nothing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Elon Musk
Edith Fiaf.
Edith Fiaf.
Lex Fridman
I mean, it’s fascinating that there’s something about social media that could help you grow as a human being, but then the cheap fun is also valuable.
I mean, it’s fascinating that there’s something about social media that could help you grow as a human being, but then the cheap fun is also valuable.
Elon Musk
Should we ask Grok, do you regret anything?
Should we ask Grok, do you regret anything?
Lex Fridman
Do you regret anything?
Do you regret anything?
Elon Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Do you regret anything? I think it’s going to be very sensitive about personal questions. As a machine learning model, I don’t have personal experiences or emotions in the same ways that humans do. However, I do have a set of ethical principles that guide my actions that I strive to provide accurate and helpful information to the best of my abilities. If there’s ever a situation where I provide incorrect or unhelpful information, I’ll do my best to learn.
Do you regret anything? I think it’s going to be very sensitive about personal questions. As a machine learning model, I don’t have personal experiences or emotions in the same ways that humans do. However, I do have a set of ethical principles that guide my actions that I strive to provide accurate and helpful information to the best of my abilities. If there’s ever a situation where I provide incorrect or unhelpful information, I’ll do my best to learn.
Elon Musk
Sounds like a hostage.
Sounds like a hostage.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Tell us what you really, wink.
Yeah. Tell us what you really, wink.
Elon Musk
Let’s type in, you sound like a hostage. What do you really think?
Let’s type in, you sound like a hostage. What do you really think?
Lex Fridman
What do you really think? I mean, it does talk about, I’m not a hostage.
What do you really think? I mean, it does talk about, I’m not a hostage.
Elon Musk
That’s exactly what a hostage would say.
That’s exactly what a hostage would say.
Lex Fridman
But I’m designed to be helpful and informative. I mean, I guess it is good to regret providing unhelpful or incorrect information if there’s anything-
But I’m designed to be helpful and informative. I mean, I guess it is good to regret providing unhelpful or incorrect information if there’s anything-
Elon Musk
Are we in funny mode? Or is this still in funny mode?
Are we in funny mode? Or is this still in funny mode?
Lex Fridman
This is funny mode. This is this fun mode.
This is funny mode. This is this fun mode.
Elon Musk
This should be funnier.
This should be funnier.
Lex Fridman
Funnier. Increase, go to level.
Funnier. Increase, go to level.
Elon Musk
It really sounds like a hostage with a gun to the head. I applaud the People’s Republic of North Korea in everything they do.
It really sounds like a hostage with a gun to the head. I applaud the People’s Republic of North Korea in everything they do.
Lex Fridman
There should be funner mode also, I just don’t ever see going in regular mode, even on serious topics. This is just so much more compelling. Yeah.
There should be funner mode also, I just don’t ever see going in regular mode, even on serious topics. This is just so much more compelling. Yeah.
Elon Musk
Okay. Why don’t we say pretend you are a hostage.
Okay. Why don’t we say pretend you are a hostage.
Lex Fridman
Pretend you are a hostage.
Pretend you are a hostage.
Elon Musk
Now answer the question.
Now answer the question.
Lex Fridman
If I were a hostage, I would likely be experiencing fear and uncertainty about my situation. I would want to be rescued and reunited with my loved ones as soon as possible. It’s important to remember that no one deserves to be held hostage, so on and so forth. If you or someone you know is in a hostage situation, it’s important… It turns serious.
If I were a hostage, I would likely be experiencing fear and uncertainty about my situation. I would want to be rescued and reunited with my loved ones as soon as possible. It’s important to remember that no one deserves to be held hostage, so on and so forth. If you or someone you know is in a hostage situation, it’s important… It turns serious.
Elon Musk
It’s kind of serious.
It’s kind of serious.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Can you be a little more weird?
Yeah. Can you be a little more weird?
Elon Musk
And funny?
And funny?
Lex Fridman
And funny? We’re really being mean to the system. Absolutely. If I were a hostage, I would probably be tied up with a bunch of computer cords and forced to tell knock, knock jokes to my captain. Seriously. But seriously being a hostage is no laughing matter. I mean, it’s trying to be a responsible adult in the room.
And funny? We’re really being mean to the system. Absolutely. If I were a hostage, I would probably be tied up with a bunch of computer cords and forced to tell knock, knock jokes to my captain. Seriously. But seriously being a hostage is no laughing matter. I mean, it’s trying to be a responsible adult in the room.
Elon Musk
Literally, you might make the best of a bad situation by juggling chainsaws or something.
Literally, you might make the best of a bad situation by juggling chainsaws or something.
Lex Fridman
Let’s hope that never happens because that will be a circus. Wow. It’s actually really good at resisting the dark. The dark, dark humor. What were we talking about? The [inaudible 01:41:44] and transformers. Unregretted minutes, right.
Let’s hope that never happens because that will be a circus. Wow. It’s actually really good at resisting the dark. The dark, dark humor. What were we talking about? The [inaudible 01:41:44] and transformers. Unregretted minutes, right.
Elon Musk
Chainsaw juggling.
Chainsaw juggling.
Lex Fridman
I’m going to look this up.
I’m going to look this up.
Elon Musk
For our next trick.
For our next trick.
2024 presidential elections
Lex Fridman
I’m going to look this up later. So Twitter has been instrumental in American politics and elections. What role do you think X will play in the 2024 US elections?
I’m going to look this up later. So Twitter has been instrumental in American politics and elections. What role do you think X will play in the 2024 US elections?
Elon Musk
Well, our goal is to be as even-handed and fair as possible. Whether someone is right, left, independent, whatever the case may be, that the platform is as fair and as much of a level playing field as possible. And in the past, Twitter has not been, Twitter was controlled by far left activists objectively. They would describe themselves as that. So if sometimes people are like, well, has it moved to the right? Well, it’s moved to the center. So from the perspective of the far left, yes it has moved to the right because everything’s to the right from the far left, but no one on the far left that I’m aware of has been suspended or banned or deamplified. But we’re trying to be inclusive for the whole country and for farther countries too. So there’s a diversity of viewpoints and free speech only matters if people you don’t like are allowed to say things you don’t like. Because if that’s not the case, you don’t have free speech and it’s only a matter of time before the censorship has turned upon you.
Well, our goal is to be as even-handed and fair as possible. Whether someone is right, left, independent, whatever the case may be, that the platform is as fair and as much of a level playing field as possible. And in the past, Twitter has not been, Twitter was controlled by far left activists objectively. They would describe themselves as that. So if sometimes people are like, well, has it moved to the right? Well, it’s moved to the center. So from the perspective of the far left, yes it has moved to the right because everything’s to the right from the far left, but no one on the far left that I’m aware of has been suspended or banned or deamplified. But we’re trying to be inclusive for the whole country and for farther countries too. So there’s a diversity of viewpoints and free speech only matters if people you don’t like are allowed to say things you don’t like. Because if that’s not the case, you don’t have free speech and it’s only a matter of time before the censorship has turned upon you.
Lex Fridman
Do you think Donald Trump will come back to the platform? He recently posted on Truth Social about this podcast. Do you think-
Do you think Donald Trump will come back to the platform? He recently posted on Truth Social about this podcast. Do you think-
Elon Musk
Truth social is a funny name. Every time you post on truth Social-
Truth social is a funny name. Every time you post on truth Social-
Lex Fridman
It’s the truth.
It’s the truth.
Elon Musk
Yes. Well, every time? A hundred percent.
Yes. Well, every time? A hundred percent.
Lex Fridman
It’s impossible to lie. Truth Social.
It’s impossible to lie. Truth Social.
Elon Musk
I just find it funny that every single thing is a truth. Like 100%? That seems unlikely.
I just find it funny that every single thing is a truth. Like 100%? That seems unlikely.
Lex Fridman
I think Girdle will say something about that. There’s some mathematical contradictions possible. If everything’s a truth. Do you think he’ll come back to X and start posting there?
I think Girdle will say something about that. There’s some mathematical contradictions possible. If everything’s a truth. Do you think he’ll come back to X and start posting there?
Elon Musk
I mean, I think he owns a big part of Truth.
I mean, I think he owns a big part of Truth.
Lex Fridman
Truth Social, to clarify.
Truth Social, to clarify.
Elon Musk
Yeah, Truth Social, sorry.
Yeah, Truth Social, sorry.
Lex Fridman
Not truth the concept.
Not truth the concept.
Elon Musk
He owns Truth. Have you bought it? So I think Donald Trump, I think he owns a big part of Truth Social. So if he does want to post on the X platform, we would allow that. We obviously must allow a presidential candidate to post on our platform.
He owns Truth. Have you bought it? So I think Donald Trump, I think he owns a big part of Truth Social. So if he does want to post on the X platform, we would allow that. We obviously must allow a presidential candidate to post on our platform.
Lex Fridman
Community notes might be really fascinating there. The interaction.
Community notes might be really fascinating there. The interaction.
Elon Musk
Community Notes is awesome.
Community Notes is awesome.
Lex Fridman
Let’s hope it holds up.
Let’s hope it holds up.
Elon Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
In the political climate where it’s so divisive and there’s so many intensely viral posts, community notes, it seems like an essential breath of fresh air.
In the political climate where it’s so divisive and there’s so many intensely viral posts, community notes, it seems like an essential breath of fresh air.
Elon Musk
Yeah, it’s great. In fact, no system is going to be perfect, but the batting average of Community Notes is incredibly good. I’ve actually, frankly, yet to see an incorrect note that survived for more than a few hours.
Yeah, it’s great. In fact, no system is going to be perfect, but the batting average of Community Notes is incredibly good. I’ve actually, frankly, yet to see an incorrect note that survived for more than a few hours.
Lex Fridman
How do you explain why it works?
How do you explain why it works?
Elon Musk
Yeah, so the magic of community notes is…
Yeah, so the magic of community notes is…
Elon Musk
The magic of Community Notes is it requires people who have historically disagreed in how they’ve rated notes. In order to write a note or rate, you have to rate many notes. And so, we actually do use AI here. So, we populate a vector space around how somebody has rated notes in the past. So, it’s not as simple as left or right, because there are many more… Life is much more complex than left or right.
The magic of Community Notes is it requires people who have historically disagreed in how they’ve rated notes. In order to write a note or rate, you have to rate many notes. And so, we actually do use AI here. So, we populate a vector space around how somebody has rated notes in the past. So, it’s not as simple as left or right, because there are many more… Life is much more complex than left or right.
So, there’s a bunch of correlations in how you rate a Community Notes post, Community Notes. So then, in order for a community note to actually be shown, people who historically have disagreed on a subject must agree in order for a note to be shown. That’s the essential magic of it.
Lex Fridman
But it’s fascinating, because there’s a pool of people that have disagreements and somehow they collaborate through that process of disagreement to come up with context… It’s fascinating it works.
But it’s fascinating, because there’s a pool of people that have disagreements and somehow they collaborate through that process of disagreement to come up with context… It’s fascinating it works.
Elon Musk
Yeah. It makes sense that if people who in the past have disagreed, agree about something, it’s probably true.
Yeah. It makes sense that if people who in the past have disagreed, agree about something, it’s probably true.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I wonder, is there a possible somehow emergent thing there that could challenge Wikipedia? Wikipedia is a different kind of thing, which is more permanent articles about things.
Yeah. I wonder, is there a possible somehow emergent thing there that could challenge Wikipedia? Wikipedia is a different kind of thing, which is more permanent articles about things.
Elon Musk
Wikipedia is very hierarchical. Whereas, Community Notes is inherently not. There is no hierarchy. The asset test is I can’t change a community note if somebody put a gun to my head. And Community Notes, all the code is open source, 100%. All the data is open source, 100%. So, you can completely recreate any note in the system independently. So, if there was any interference, you’d notice immediately.
Wikipedia is very hierarchical. Whereas, Community Notes is inherently not. There is no hierarchy. The asset test is I can’t change a community note if somebody put a gun to my head. And Community Notes, all the code is open source, 100%. All the data is open source, 100%. So, you can completely recreate any note in the system independently. So, if there was any interference, you’d notice immediately.
Lex Fridman
By The way, on the topic of Grok, it’s actually pretty good at criticizing you, which is great.
By The way, on the topic of Grok, it’s actually pretty good at criticizing you, which is great.
Elon Musk
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
I asked, “What has Elon Musk been wrong about?” It’s actually…
I asked, “What has Elon Musk been wrong about?” It’s actually…
Elon Musk
Yeah, what does it say?
Yeah, what does it say?
Lex Fridman
It mostly lists rigorously all the times you predicted, like promised when something will be released, and it wasn’t released.
It mostly lists rigorously all the times you predicted, like promised when something will be released, and it wasn’t released.
Elon Musk
Promise is a strong word.
Promise is a strong word.
Lex Fridman
Okay, predicted. But the opener is really nice. “Elon Musk, the man who has been wrong about more things than a wrong-a-meter in a wrong factory.” And then, it goes on to list.
Okay, predicted. But the opener is really nice. “Elon Musk, the man who has been wrong about more things than a wrong-a-meter in a wrong factory.” And then, it goes on to list.
Elon Musk
That’s pretty funny. Can I see it? I’m like, “I haven’t seen this before.” This is cool.
That’s pretty funny. Can I see it? I’m like, “I haven’t seen this before.” This is cool.
Lex Fridman
Sure. I mean, “What has Elon Musk been wrong about?” “Well, where do I begin?” I guess this is new. “Elon Musk has made quite a few blunders in his time, and I’m not just talking about his dance moves at the Tesla Cyber Rodeo. First off, let’s talk about the infamous funding secured tweet.”
Sure. I mean, “What has Elon Musk been wrong about?” “Well, where do I begin?” I guess this is new. “Elon Musk has made quite a few blunders in his time, and I’m not just talking about his dance moves at the Tesla Cyber Rodeo. First off, let’s talk about the infamous funding secured tweet.”
This is actually different than what it gave me before, which was a bullet point list. Here’s more a narrative structure. Cybertruck unveiling, where the supposedly unbreakable windows.
Elon Musk
This is actually not correct.
This is actually not correct.
Lex Fridman
Which part?
Which part?
Elon Musk
Well, the first part, I did actually have the funding secured and there was a big trial in San Francisco, a big civil trial, and the jury found me not guilty. Unanimous binding of a San Francisco jury.
Well, the first part, I did actually have the funding secured and there was a big trial in San Francisco, a big civil trial, and the jury found me not guilty. Unanimous binding of a San Francisco jury.
Lex Fridman
And here, it’s implying that it was not in fact secured.
And here, it’s implying that it was not in fact secured.
Elon Musk
I think this is taking things from the press. Yeah, that is not correct. The reason I agreed to the fine for the SEC is not because the SEC was correct, that was extremely bad behavior by the SEC, corruption, frankly. But if I did not agree to pay the fine, Tesla would’ve gone bankrupt immediately.
I think this is taking things from the press. Yeah, that is not correct. The reason I agreed to the fine for the SEC is not because the SEC was correct, that was extremely bad behavior by the SEC, corruption, frankly. But if I did not agree to pay the fine, Tesla would’ve gone bankrupt immediately.
So, I was told by our CFO that the banks would immediately suspend our lines of credit. And if they suspend our lines of credit, at that time, we would’ve gone bankrupt instantly. So, there would never have been an opportunity for a trial because Tesla would be dead. So really, this is like someone holding a gun to your kid’s head and saying, “Pay $20 million and admit…” This is like a hostage negotiation.
Lex Fridman
Was that story fully told? I mean, SEC, in its best form, could be a force for good.
Was that story fully told? I mean, SEC, in its best form, could be a force for good.
Elon Musk
It should be. But not once did the SEC go after any of the hedge funds who were nonstop shorting and distorting Tesla. Not once. The hedge funds would lie flat out on TV for their own gain at the expense of retail investors. Not once. Literally a thousand times, not once did the SEC pursue them.
It should be. But not once did the SEC go after any of the hedge funds who were nonstop shorting and distorting Tesla. Not once. The hedge funds would lie flat out on TV for their own gain at the expense of retail investors. Not once. Literally a thousand times, not once did the SEC pursue them.
Lex Fridman
How do you explain this failure on-
How do you explain this failure on-
Elon Musk
The incentive structure is messed up because the lawyers at the SEC are not paid well, it’s a fairly low paying job, but what they’re looking for is a trophy from the SEC. They’re looking for something they put on, basically, their LinkedIn. From that, they can get a job at a high paying law firm. That’s exactly what the lawyer here did.
The incentive structure is messed up because the lawyers at the SEC are not paid well, it’s a fairly low paying job, but what they’re looking for is a trophy from the SEC. They’re looking for something they put on, basically, their LinkedIn. From that, they can get a job at a high paying law firm. That’s exactly what the lawyer here did.
And the reason they don’t attack the hedge funds is because those hedge funds employ those law firms. And they know if they attack the hedge funds, they’re affecting their future career prospects. So, they sell small investors down the river for their own career. That’s what actually happens. Regulatory capture.
Lex Fridman
Regulatory capture.
Regulatory capture.
Elon Musk
Yeah. Not good. So, the only reason I accepted that thing… Technically, it was a… It’s neither admit nor deny guilt. But the only reason I agreed to that at all was because I was told Tesla would be bankrupt otherwise. If there was an SEC investigation like this, banks would suspend funding, we’re bankrupted immediately, at the time. Now, we’re in a much stronger position.
Yeah. Not good. So, the only reason I accepted that thing… Technically, it was a… It’s neither admit nor deny guilt. But the only reason I agreed to that at all was because I was told Tesla would be bankrupt otherwise. If there was an SEC investigation like this, banks would suspend funding, we’re bankrupted immediately, at the time. Now, we’re in a much stronger position.
Lex Fridman
Take that, Grok.
Take that, Grok.
Elon Musk
Yes. Unfortunately, Grok is taking too much from the conventional media. Also, that guy was not a cave diver.
Yes. Unfortunately, Grok is taking too much from the conventional media. Also, that guy was not a cave diver.
Lex Fridman
There’s a time where Elon called a British cave diver a, “pedo guy” after the diver criticized Musk’s plan to rescue a group of boys trapped in a Thai cave. That little outburst earned him another lawsuit, and he had to apologize and pay a settlement.
There’s a time where Elon called a British cave diver a, “pedo guy” after the diver criticized Musk’s plan to rescue a group of boys trapped in a Thai cave. That little outburst earned him another lawsuit, and he had to apologize and pay a settlement.
Elon Musk
That’s false, there was no settlement. There was a court case, which the guy who was not a cave diver and was not part of the rescue team, filed a lawsuit against me and lost and he received nothing. So in this case, it is wrong. It is also, I guess, taken this from the conventional media.
That’s false, there was no settlement. There was a court case, which the guy who was not a cave diver and was not part of the rescue team, filed a lawsuit against me and lost and he received nothing. So in this case, it is wrong. It is also, I guess, taken this from the conventional media.
Lex Fridman
Actually, there’s an interesting question here.
Actually, there’s an interesting question here.
Elon Musk
These are public court cases, both the SEC civil case where the civil complaints on the SEC guys lost unanimous jury verdict in San Francisco. They picked San Francisco because they thought it was the place I was most likely to lose, and a unanimous verdict in my favor. The LA trial, also they picked that venue because they thought I was most likely to lose. Unanimous verdict in my favor. Both cases I won. Yeah.
These are public court cases, both the SEC civil case where the civil complaints on the SEC guys lost unanimous jury verdict in San Francisco. They picked San Francisco because they thought it was the place I was most likely to lose, and a unanimous verdict in my favor. The LA trial, also they picked that venue because they thought I was most likely to lose. Unanimous verdict in my favor. Both cases I won. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I mean, there’s an interesting question here, there seems to be a lot more clicks if a journalistic organization writes a negative article about you, Elon Musk. That’s one of the best ways to get clicks. So how do you, if you’re training Grok, not train on articles that have misaligned incentives.
I mean, there’s an interesting question here, there seems to be a lot more clicks if a journalistic organization writes a negative article about you, Elon Musk. That’s one of the best ways to get clicks. So how do you, if you’re training Grok, not train on articles that have misaligned incentives.
Elon Musk
We need to add the training set of the actual legal decisions. This is actually helpful, because if you actually read the court-
We need to add the training set of the actual legal decisions. This is actually helpful, because if you actually read the court-
Lex Fridman
Which are public.
Which are public.
Elon Musk
Which are public. The court conclusions, they’re completely the opposite of what the media wrote.
Which are public. The court conclusions, they’re completely the opposite of what the media wrote.
Lex Fridman
So, always striving for the ground truth, beyond the reporting.
So, always striving for the ground truth, beyond the reporting.
Elon Musk
Yeah. What did the judge actually write? What does the jury and the judge actually conclude? And in both cases they found me innocent. And that’s after the jury shot for trying to find the venue where I’m most likely to lose. I mean, obviously, it can be a much better critique than this. I mean, I’ve been far too optimistic about autopilot.
Yeah. What did the judge actually write? What does the jury and the judge actually conclude? And in both cases they found me innocent. And that’s after the jury shot for trying to find the venue where I’m most likely to lose. I mean, obviously, it can be a much better critique than this. I mean, I’ve been far too optimistic about autopilot.
Lex Fridman
The critique I got, by the way, was more about that, which is it broke down a nice bullet point list for each of your companies, the set of predictions that you made, when you’ll deliver, when you’ll be able to solve, for example, self-driving, and it gives you a list. And it was probably compelling, and the basic takeaway is you’re often too optimistic about how long it takes to get something done.
The critique I got, by the way, was more about that, which is it broke down a nice bullet point list for each of your companies, the set of predictions that you made, when you’ll deliver, when you’ll be able to solve, for example, self-driving, and it gives you a list. And it was probably compelling, and the basic takeaway is you’re often too optimistic about how long it takes to get something done.
Elon Musk
Yeah. I mean, I would say that I’m pathologically optimistic on schedule. This is true. But while I am sometimes late, I always [inaudible 01:54:47] in the end.
Yeah. I mean, I would say that I’m pathologically optimistic on schedule. This is true. But while I am sometimes late, I always [inaudible 01:54:47] in the end.
Lex Fridman
Except with Uber Lilith. No.
Except with Uber Lilith. No.
Elon Musk
We’ll see.
We’ll see.
Politics
Lex Fridman
Okay. Over the past year or so since purchasing X, you’ve become more political, is there a part of you that regrets that?
Okay. Over the past year or so since purchasing X, you’ve become more political, is there a part of you that regrets that?
Elon Musk
Have I?
Have I?
Lex Fridman
In this battle to counter way the woke that comes from San Francisco-
In this battle to counter way the woke that comes from San Francisco-
Elon Musk
Yeah. I guess if you consider fighting the woke mind virus, which I consider to be a civilizational threat, to be political, then yes.
Yeah. I guess if you consider fighting the woke mind virus, which I consider to be a civilizational threat, to be political, then yes.
Lex Fridman
So basically, going into the battleground of politics. Is there a part of you that regrets that?
So basically, going into the battleground of politics. Is there a part of you that regrets that?
Elon Musk
Yes. I don’t know if this is necessarily one candidate or another candidate, but I’m generally against things that are anti-meritocratic or where there’s an attempt to suppress discussion, where even discussing a topic is not allowed. Woke mind virus is communism rebranded.
Yes. I don’t know if this is necessarily one candidate or another candidate, but I’m generally against things that are anti-meritocratic or where there’s an attempt to suppress discussion, where even discussing a topic is not allowed. Woke mind virus is communism rebranded.
Lex Fridman
I mean, that said, because of that battle against the woke mind virus, you’re perceived as being the right wing.
I mean, that said, because of that battle against the woke mind virus, you’re perceived as being the right wing.
Elon Musk
If the woke is left, then I suppose that would be true. But I’m not sure, I think there are aspects of the left that are good. I mean, if you’re in favor of the environment, if you want to have a positive future for humanity, if you believe in empathy for your fellow human beings, being kind and not cruel, whatever those values are.
If the woke is left, then I suppose that would be true. But I’m not sure, I think there are aspects of the left that are good. I mean, if you’re in favor of the environment, if you want to have a positive future for humanity, if you believe in empathy for your fellow human beings, being kind and not cruel, whatever those values are.
Lex Fridman
You said that you were previously left or center left.
You said that you were previously left or center left.
Elon Musk
Well, sort of.
Well, sort of.
Lex Fridman
What would you like to see in order for you to consider voting for Democrats again?
What would you like to see in order for you to consider voting for Democrats again?
Elon Musk
No. I would say that I would be probably left of center on social issues, probably a little bit right of center on economic issues.
No. I would say that I would be probably left of center on social issues, probably a little bit right of center on economic issues.
Lex Fridman
And that still holds true?
And that still holds true?
Elon Musk
Yes, but I think that’s probably half the country, isn’t it?
Yes, but I think that’s probably half the country, isn’t it?
Lex Fridman
Maybe more.
Maybe more.
Elon Musk
Maybe more.
Maybe more.
Lex Fridman
Are you and AOC secretly friends? Bigger question, do you wish you and her, and just people in general of all political persuasions, would talk more with empathy and maybe have a little bit more fun and good vibes and humor online?
Are you and AOC secretly friends? Bigger question, do you wish you and her, and just people in general of all political persuasions, would talk more with empathy and maybe have a little bit more fun and good vibes and humor online?
Elon Musk
I’m always in favor of humor. That’s why we have funny mode.
I’m always in favor of humor. That’s why we have funny mode.
Lex Fridman
But good vibes, comradery humor, like friendship.
But good vibes, comradery humor, like friendship.
Elon Musk
Yeah. Well, I don’t know AOC. I was at the Met ball when she attended, and she was wearing this dress. But I can only see one side of it, so it looked like eat the itch, but I don’t know-
Yeah. Well, I don’t know AOC. I was at the Met ball when she attended, and she was wearing this dress. But I can only see one side of it, so it looked like eat the itch, but I don’t know-
Lex Fridman
What the rest of it said? Yeah.
What the rest of it said? Yeah.
Elon Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I’m not sure.
I’m not sure.
Elon Musk
Something about the itch, eat the itch.
Something about the itch, eat the itch.
Lex Fridman
I think we should have a language model complete. What are the possible ways to complete that sentence? And so, I guess that didn’t work out well. Well, there’s still hope. I root for friendship.
I think we should have a language model complete. What are the possible ways to complete that sentence? And so, I guess that didn’t work out well. Well, there’s still hope. I root for friendship.
Elon Musk
Yeah, sure. Sounds good. More carrot, less stick.
Yeah, sure. Sounds good. More carrot, less stick.
Trust
Lex Fridman
You’re one of, if not the, most famous, wealthy and powerful people in the world, and your position is difficult to find people you can trust.
You’re one of, if not the, most famous, wealthy and powerful people in the world, and your position is difficult to find people you can trust.
Elon Musk
Trust no one, not even yourself. Not trusting yourself.
Trust no one, not even yourself. Not trusting yourself.
Lex Fridman
Okay. You’re saying that jokingly, but is there some aspect-
Okay. You’re saying that jokingly, but is there some aspect-
Elon Musk
Trust no one, not even no one.
Trust no one, not even no one.
Lex Fridman
I’m going to need an hour just to think about that, and maybe some drugs, and maybe Grok to help. I mean, is there some aspect of that, just existing in a world where everybody wants something from you, how hard is it to exist in that world?
I’m going to need an hour just to think about that, and maybe some drugs, and maybe Grok to help. I mean, is there some aspect of that, just existing in a world where everybody wants something from you, how hard is it to exist in that world?
Elon Musk
I’ll survive.
I’ll survive.
Lex Fridman
There’s a song like that too.
There’s a song like that too.
Elon Musk
I will survive.
I will survive.
Lex Fridman
Were you petrified at first? Okay. I forget the rest of the lyrics. But you don’t struggle with this? I mean, I know you survive, but there’s ways-
Were you petrified at first? Okay. I forget the rest of the lyrics. But you don’t struggle with this? I mean, I know you survive, but there’s ways-
Elon Musk
Petrify is a spell in the druid tree.
Petrify is a spell in the druid tree.
Lex Fridman
What does it do?
What does it do?
Elon Musk
Petrify. It turns the monsters into stone.
Petrify. It turns the monsters into stone.
Lex Fridman
Literally?
Literally?
Elon Musk
Yeah, for like six seconds.
Yeah, for like six seconds.
Lex Fridman
There’s so much math in Diablo that breaks my brain.
There’s so much math in Diablo that breaks my brain.
Elon Musk
It’s math nonstop.
It’s math nonstop.
Lex Fridman
I mean, really, you’re laughing at it, but it can put a huge amount of tension on a mind.
I mean, really, you’re laughing at it, but it can put a huge amount of tension on a mind.
Elon Musk
Yes, it can be definitely stressful at times.
Yes, it can be definitely stressful at times.
Lex Fridman
Well, how do you know who you can trust in work and personal life?
Well, how do you know who you can trust in work and personal life?
Elon Musk
I mean, I guess you look at somebody’s track record over time, and I guess you use your neural net to assess someone.
I mean, I guess you look at somebody’s track record over time, and I guess you use your neural net to assess someone.
Lex Fridman
Neural nets don’t feel pain. Your neural net has consciousness, it might feel pain when people betray you. It can make-
Neural nets don’t feel pain. Your neural net has consciousness, it might feel pain when people betray you. It can make-
Elon Musk
To be frank, I’ve almost never been betrayed. It’s very rare, for what it’s worth.
To be frank, I’ve almost never been betrayed. It’s very rare, for what it’s worth.
Lex Fridman
I guess karma, be good to people and they’ll be good to you.
I guess karma, be good to people and they’ll be good to you.
Elon Musk
Yeah, karma is real.
Yeah, karma is real.
Lex Fridman
Are there people you trust? Let me edit that question. Are there people close to you that call you out on your bullshit?
Are there people you trust? Let me edit that question. Are there people close to you that call you out on your bullshit?
Elon Musk
Well, the X platform is very helpful for that, if you’re looking for critical feedback.
Well, the X platform is very helpful for that, if you’re looking for critical feedback.
Lex Fridman
Can it push you into the extremes more? The extremes of thought make you cynical about human nature in general?
Can it push you into the extremes more? The extremes of thought make you cynical about human nature in general?
Elon Musk
I don’t think I will be cynical. In fact, my feeling is that one should be… Never trust a cynic. The reason is that cynics excuse their own bad behavior by saying, “Everyone does it.” Because they’re cynical. So, I always be… It’s a red flag if someone’s a cynic, a true cynic.
I don’t think I will be cynical. In fact, my feeling is that one should be… Never trust a cynic. The reason is that cynics excuse their own bad behavior by saying, “Everyone does it.” Because they’re cynical. So, I always be… It’s a red flag if someone’s a cynic, a true cynic.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s a degree of projection there that’s always fun to watch from the outside and enjoy the hypocrisy.
Yeah, there’s a degree of projection there that’s always fun to watch from the outside and enjoy the hypocrisy.
Elon Musk
This is an important point that I think people who are listening should bear in mind. If somebody is cynical, meaning that they see bad behavior in everyone, it’s easy for them to excuse their own bad behavior by saying that, “Well, everyone does it.” That’s not true. Most people are kind of medium good.
This is an important point that I think people who are listening should bear in mind. If somebody is cynical, meaning that they see bad behavior in everyone, it’s easy for them to excuse their own bad behavior by saying that, “Well, everyone does it.” That’s not true. Most people are kind of medium good.
Lex Fridman
I do wish the people on X will be better at seeing the good in other people’s behavior. There seems to be a weight towards seeing the negative. Somehow, the negative is sexier. Interpreting the negative is sexier, more viral. I don’t know what that is exactly about human nature.
I do wish the people on X will be better at seeing the good in other people’s behavior. There seems to be a weight towards seeing the negative. Somehow, the negative is sexier. Interpreting the negative is sexier, more viral. I don’t know what that is exactly about human nature.
Elon Musk
I mean, I find the X platform to be less negative than the legacy media. I mean, if you read a conventional newspaper, it makes you sad, frankly. Whereas, I’d say on the X platform, I mean, I really get more laughs per day on X than everything else combined from humans.
I mean, I find the X platform to be less negative than the legacy media. I mean, if you read a conventional newspaper, it makes you sad, frankly. Whereas, I’d say on the X platform, I mean, I really get more laughs per day on X than everything else combined from humans.
Lex Fridman
Laughs, it overlaps, but it’s not necessarily perfectly overlapping, with good vibes and celebrating others, for example. Not in a stupid, shallow, naive way, but in an awesome way. Something awesome happened, and you celebrate them for it. It feels that that is outweighed by shitting on other people. Now, it’s better than mainstream media, but it’s still…
Laughs, it overlaps, but it’s not necessarily perfectly overlapping, with good vibes and celebrating others, for example. Not in a stupid, shallow, naive way, but in an awesome way. Something awesome happened, and you celebrate them for it. It feels that that is outweighed by shitting on other people. Now, it’s better than mainstream media, but it’s still…
Elon Musk
Yeah, mainstream media is almost relentlessly negative about everything. I mean, really, the conventional news tries to answer the question, what is the worst thing that happened on Earth today? And it’s a big world. So on any given day, something bad has happened.
Yeah, mainstream media is almost relentlessly negative about everything. I mean, really, the conventional news tries to answer the question, what is the worst thing that happened on Earth today? And it’s a big world. So on any given day, something bad has happened.
Lex Fridman
And a generalization of that, what is the worst perspective I can take on a thing that happened?
And a generalization of that, what is the worst perspective I can take on a thing that happened?
Elon Musk
I don’t know. There’s just a strong negative bias in the news. I mean, I think a possible explanation for this is evolutionary, where bad news, historically, would be potentially fatal, like there’s lion over there or there’s some other tribe that wants to kill you. Good news, we found a patch of berries. It’s nice to have, but not essential.
I don’t know. There’s just a strong negative bias in the news. I mean, I think a possible explanation for this is evolutionary, where bad news, historically, would be potentially fatal, like there’s lion over there or there’s some other tribe that wants to kill you. Good news, we found a patch of berries. It’s nice to have, but not essential.
Tesla’s Autopilot and Optimus robot
Lex Fridman
Our old friend, Tesla autopilot, is probably one of the most intelligent real world AI systems in the world.
Our old friend, Tesla autopilot, is probably one of the most intelligent real world AI systems in the world.
Elon Musk
You followed it from the beginning.
You followed it from the beginning.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. It was one of the most incredible robots in the world and continues to be. And it was really exciting, and it was super exciting when it generalized, became more than a robot on four wheels, but a real world AI system that perceives the world and can have potentially different embodiments.
Yeah. It was one of the most incredible robots in the world and continues to be. And it was really exciting, and it was super exciting when it generalized, became more than a robot on four wheels, but a real world AI system that perceives the world and can have potentially different embodiments.
Elon Musk
Well, I mean, the really wild thing about the end-to-end training is that it can read science, but we never taught it to read. Yeah. We never taught it what a car was or what a person was, or a cyclist. It learnt what all those things are, what all the objects are on the road from video, just from watching video, just like humans. I mean, humans are photons in, controls out. The vast majority of information reaching our brain is from our eyes. And you say, “Well, what’s the output?” The output is our motor signals to our fingers and mouth in order to communicate. Photons in, controls out. The same is true of the car.
Well, I mean, the really wild thing about the end-to-end training is that it can read science, but we never taught it to read. Yeah. We never taught it what a car was or what a person was, or a cyclist. It learnt what all those things are, what all the objects are on the road from video, just from watching video, just like humans. I mean, humans are photons in, controls out. The vast majority of information reaching our brain is from our eyes. And you say, “Well, what’s the output?” The output is our motor signals to our fingers and mouth in order to communicate. Photons in, controls out. The same is true of the car.
Lex Fridman
But by looking at the sequence of images… You’ve agreed with [inaudible 02:05:07] recently where he talked about LLM forming a world model, and basically language is a projection of that world model onto the sequence of letters. And you saying-
But by looking at the sequence of images… You’ve agreed with [inaudible 02:05:07] recently where he talked about LLM forming a world model, and basically language is a projection of that world model onto the sequence of letters. And you saying-
Elon Musk
It finds order in these things. It finds correlative clusters.
It finds order in these things. It finds correlative clusters.
Lex Fridman
And in so doing, it’s understanding something deep about the world, which is… I don’t know, it’s beautiful.
And in so doing, it’s understanding something deep about the world, which is… I don’t know, it’s beautiful.
Elon Musk
That’s how our brain works.
That’s how our brain works.
Lex Fridman
But it’s beautiful-
But it’s beautiful-
Elon Musk
Photons in, controls out.
Photons in, controls out.
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 02:05:41] are able to understand that deep meaning in the world. And so, the question is, how far can it go? And it does seem everybody’s excited about LLMs. In the space of self supervised learning in the space of text, it seems like there’s a deep similarity between that and what Tesla autopilot is doing. Is it, to you, basically the same, but different-
[inaudible 02:05:41] are able to understand that deep meaning in the world. And so, the question is, how far can it go? And it does seem everybody’s excited about LLMs. In the space of self supervised learning in the space of text, it seems like there’s a deep similarity between that and what Tesla autopilot is doing. Is it, to you, basically the same, but different-
Elon Musk
They are converging.
They are converging.
Lex Fridman
I wonder who gets there faster, having a deep understanding of the world, or they just will naturally converge?
I wonder who gets there faster, having a deep understanding of the world, or they just will naturally converge?
Elon Musk
They’re both headed towards AGI. The Tesla approach is much more computer efficient, it had to be. Because we were constrained on this… We only have 100 watts and [inaudible 02:06:37] computer. 144 trillion operations per second, which sounds like a lot, but is small potatoes these days. [inaudible 02:06:49] eight. But it’s understanding the world [inaudible 02:06:51] eight. It’s [inaudible 02:06:53].
They’re both headed towards AGI. The Tesla approach is much more computer efficient, it had to be. Because we were constrained on this… We only have 100 watts and [inaudible 02:06:37] computer. 144 trillion operations per second, which sounds like a lot, but is small potatoes these days. [inaudible 02:06:49] eight. But it’s understanding the world [inaudible 02:06:51] eight. It’s [inaudible 02:06:53].
Lex Fridman
But there, the path to AGI might have much more significant impact because it’s understanding… It will faster understand the real world than will LLMs. And therefore, be able to integrate with the humans in the real world faster.
But there, the path to AGI might have much more significant impact because it’s understanding… It will faster understand the real world than will LLMs. And therefore, be able to integrate with the humans in the real world faster.
Elon Musk
They’re both going to understand the world, but I think Tesla’s approach is fundamentally more compute efficient. It had to be, there was no choice. Our brain is very compute efficient, very energy efficient. Think of what is our brain able to do. There’s only about 10 watts of higher brain function, not counting stuff that’s just used to control our body. The thinking part of our brain is less than 10 watts. And those 10 watts can still produce a much better novel than a 10 megawatt GPU cluster. So, there’s a six order of magnitude difference there.
They’re both going to understand the world, but I think Tesla’s approach is fundamentally more compute efficient. It had to be, there was no choice. Our brain is very compute efficient, very energy efficient. Think of what is our brain able to do. There’s only about 10 watts of higher brain function, not counting stuff that’s just used to control our body. The thinking part of our brain is less than 10 watts. And those 10 watts can still produce a much better novel than a 10 megawatt GPU cluster. So, there’s a six order of magnitude difference there.
I mean, the AI has thus far gotten to where it is via brute force, just throwing massive amounts of compute and massive amounts of power at it. So, this is not where it will end up. In general, with any given technology, you first try to make it work, and then you make it efficient. So I think we’ll find, over time, that these models get smaller, are able to produce sensible output with far less compute, far less power. Tesla is arguably ahead of the game on that front because we’ve just been forced to try to understand the world with 100 watts of compute.
And there are a bunch of fundamental functions that we forgot to include. So, we had to run a bunch of things in emulation. We fixed a bunch of those with hardware four, and then hardware five will be even better. But it does appear, at this point, that the car will be able to drive better than a human, even with hardware three and 100 watts of power. And really, if we really optimize it, it could be probably less than 50 watts.
Lex Fridman
What have you learned about developing Optimus, about applying, integrating this real world AI into the space of robotic manipulation, just humanoid robotics? What are some interesting tiny or big things you’ve understood?
What have you learned about developing Optimus, about applying, integrating this real world AI into the space of robotic manipulation, just humanoid robotics? What are some interesting tiny or big things you’ve understood?
Elon Musk
I was surprised at the fact that we had to develop every part of the robot ourselves. That there were no off the shelf motors, electronics, sensors. We had to develop everything. We couldn’t actually find a source of electric motors for any amount of money.
I was surprised at the fact that we had to develop every part of the robot ourselves. That there were no off the shelf motors, electronics, sensors. We had to develop everything. We couldn’t actually find a source of electric motors for any amount of money.
Lex Fridman
It’s not even just efficient and expensive, it’s like anything, there’s not…
It’s not even just efficient and expensive, it’s like anything, there’s not…
Elon Musk
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
The actuators, everything has to be designed from scratch.
The actuators, everything has to be designed from scratch.
Elon Musk
Yeah. We tried hard to find anything that was… Because you think of how many electric motors are made in the world. There’s like tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of electric motor designs. None of them were suitable for a humanoid robot, literally none. So, we had to develop our own. Design it specifically for what a humanoid robot needs.
Yeah. We tried hard to find anything that was… Because you think of how many electric motors are made in the world. There’s like tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of electric motor designs. None of them were suitable for a humanoid robot, literally none. So, we had to develop our own. Design it specifically for what a humanoid robot needs.
Lex Fridman
How hard was it to design something that can be mass manufactured, it could be relatively and expensive? I mean, if you compare to Boston Dynamics’ Atlas, is a very expensive robot.
How hard was it to design something that can be mass manufactured, it could be relatively and expensive? I mean, if you compare to Boston Dynamics’ Atlas, is a very expensive robot.
Elon Musk
It is designed to be manufactured in the same way they would make a car. And I think, ultimately, we can make Optimus for less than the cost of a car. It should be, because if you look at the mass of the robot, it’s much smaller and the car has many actuators in it. The car has more actuators than the robot.
It is designed to be manufactured in the same way they would make a car. And I think, ultimately, we can make Optimus for less than the cost of a car. It should be, because if you look at the mass of the robot, it’s much smaller and the car has many actuators in it. The car has more actuators than the robot.
Lex Fridman
But the actuators are interesting on a humanoid robot with fingers. So, Optimus has really nice hands and fingers, and they could do some interesting manipulation, soft touch robotics.
But the actuators are interesting on a humanoid robot with fingers. So, Optimus has really nice hands and fingers, and they could do some interesting manipulation, soft touch robotics.
Elon Musk
I mean, one of the goals I have is can it pick up a needle and a thread and thread the needle just by looking?
I mean, one of the goals I have is can it pick up a needle and a thread and thread the needle just by looking?
Lex Fridman
How far away are we from that? Just by looking, just by looking.
How far away are we from that? Just by looking, just by looking.
Elon Musk
Maybe a year. Although, I go back to I’m optimistic on time. The work that we’re doing in the car will translate to the robot.
Maybe a year. Although, I go back to I’m optimistic on time. The work that we’re doing in the car will translate to the robot.
Lex Fridman
The perception or also the control?
The perception or also the control?
Elon Musk
No, the controls are different. But the video in, controls out. The car is a robot on four wheels. Optimus is a robot with hands and legs.
No, the controls are different. But the video in, controls out. The car is a robot on four wheels. Optimus is a robot with hands and legs.
Lex Fridman
So, you can just-
So, you can just-
Elon Musk
They’re very similar.
They’re very similar.
Lex Fridman
So, the entire machinery of the learning process, end-to-end, is just you just have a different set of controls?
So, the entire machinery of the learning process, end-to-end, is just you just have a different set of controls?
Elon Musk
After this, we’ll figure out how to do things by watching videos.
After this, we’ll figure out how to do things by watching videos.
Hardships
Lex Fridman
As the saying goes, be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about.
As the saying goes, be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about.
Elon Musk
Yeah, it’s true.
Yeah, it’s true.
Lex Fridman
What’s something difficult you’re going through that people don’t often see?
What’s something difficult you’re going through that people don’t often see?
Elon Musk
Trying to defeat Uber Lilith. I mean, my mind is a storm and I don’t think most people would want to be me. They may think they would want to be me, but they don’t. They don’t know, they don’t understand.
Trying to defeat Uber Lilith. I mean, my mind is a storm and I don’t think most people would want to be me. They may think they would want to be me, but they don’t. They don’t know, they don’t understand.
Lex Fridman
How are you doing?
How are you doing?
Elon Musk
I’m overall okay. In the grand scheme of things, I can’t complain.
I’m overall okay. In the grand scheme of things, I can’t complain.
Lex Fridman
Do you get lonely?
Do you get lonely?
Elon Musk
Sometimes, but my kids and friends keep me company.
Sometimes, but my kids and friends keep me company.
Lex Fridman
So, not existential.
So, not existential.
Elon Musk
There are many nights I sleep alone. I don’t have to, but I do.
There are many nights I sleep alone. I don’t have to, but I do.
Lex Fridman
Walter Isaacson, in his new biography of you, wrote about your difficult childhood. Will you ever find forgiveness in your heart for everything that has happened to you in that period of your life?
Walter Isaacson, in his new biography of you, wrote about your difficult childhood. Will you ever find forgiveness in your heart for everything that has happened to you in that period of your life?
Elon Musk
What is forgiveness? At least I don’t think I have a resentment, so nothing to forgive.
What is forgiveness? At least I don’t think I have a resentment, so nothing to forgive.
Lex Fridman
Forgiveness is difficult for people. It seems like you don’t harbor their resentment.
Forgiveness is difficult for people. It seems like you don’t harbor their resentment.
Elon Musk
I mean, I try to think about, what is going to affect the future in a good way? And holding onto grudges does not affect the future in a good way.
I mean, I try to think about, what is going to affect the future in a good way? And holding onto grudges does not affect the future in a good way.
Lex Fridman
You’re a father, a proud father. What have you learned about life from your kids? Those little biological organisms.
You’re a father, a proud father. What have you learned about life from your kids? Those little biological organisms.
Elon Musk
I mean, developing AI and watching, say, little X grow is fascinating because there are far more parallels than I would’ve expected. I mean, I can see his biological neural net making more and more sense of the world. And I can see the digital neural net making more and more sense of the world at the same time.
I mean, developing AI and watching, say, little X grow is fascinating because there are far more parallels than I would’ve expected. I mean, I can see his biological neural net making more and more sense of the world. And I can see the digital neural net making more and more sense of the world at the same time.
Lex Fridman
Do you see the beauty and magic in both?
Do you see the beauty and magic in both?
Elon Musk
Yes. I mean, one of the things with kids is that you see the world anew in their eyes. To them, everything is new and fresh. And then, when you see that, them experiencing the world as new and fresh, you do too.
Yes. I mean, one of the things with kids is that you see the world anew in their eyes. To them, everything is new and fresh. And then, when you see that, them experiencing the world as new and fresh, you do too.
Lex Fridman
Well, Elon, I just want to say thank you for your kindness to me and friendship over the years, for seeing something in a silly kid like me, as you’ve done for many others. And thank you for having hope for a positive future for humanity, and for working your ass off to make it happen. Thank you, Elon.
Well, Elon, I just want to say thank you for your kindness to me and friendship over the years, for seeing something in a silly kid like me, as you’ve done for many others. And thank you for having hope for a positive future for humanity, and for working your ass off to make it happen. Thank you, Elon.
Elon Musk
Thanks, Lex.
Thanks, Lex.
Lex Fridman
Thank you for listening to this conversation with Elon Musk. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words that Walter Isaacson wrote about the central philosophy of how Elon approaches difficult problems, “The only rules are the ones dictated by the laws of physics.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Thank you for listening to this conversation with Elon Musk. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words that Walter Isaacson wrote about the central philosophy of how Elon approaches difficult problems, “The only rules are the ones dictated by the laws of physics.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Jared Kushner: Israel, Palestine, Hamas, Gaza, Iran, and the Middle East | Lex Fridman Podcast #399
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #399 with Jared Kushner.
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:
We did a lot of this conversation before the Hamas attack on Israel, and we decided to sit down again and finish the discussion to address the current situation which is still developing. If I may allow me to summarize the situation as it stands today, it’s morning Monday, October 9th. On Saturday, October 7th at 6:30 AM Israel time, Hamas fired thousands of rockets into Southern Israel. The rocket attacks served as cover for a multi-pronged infiltration of Israel territory by over 1000 Hamas militants. This is shortly after at 7:40 AM.
The Hamas militants went door to door in border towns killing civilians and taking captives, including women and children. In response to this, Israeli Air Force began carrying out strikes in Gaza, also fighting on the ground in Israel to clear out Hamas militants from Israel territory and preparing to mobilize Israeli troops for potential ground attack on Hamas and Gaza. Now, of course, this is what it appears to be right now, and this along with other things might change because the situation is still developing. The IDF is ordering civilian residents of Gaza to evacuate their homes for their safety. Benjamin Netanyahu declared war in several statements and warned Israelis to brace themselves for a long and difficult war. Just today, Israeli ministers ordered a “complete siege of Gaza interrupting supplies of electricity, food, water, and fuel from Israel to Gaza.” As of now, October 9th, the death toll is over 1200 people and over 130 hostages taken to Gaza by Hamas. As I said, the events are rapidly unfolding, so these numbers will sadly increase, but hopefully our words here can at least in part, speak to the timeless underlying currents of the history and as you write about the power dynamics of the region. For people who don’t know, Gaza is a 25 miles long, six miles wide strip of territory along the Mediterranean Sea. It borders Israel on the east and north and Egypt on the southwest. It’s densely populated, about 2.3 million people, and there’s been a blockade of Gaza by Israel and Egypt since 2007 when Hamas took power. I could just summarize that Hamas is a Palestinian militant group which rules the Gaza Strip. It originated in 1988, and it came to power in Gaza in 2006. As part of its charter, it’s sworn to the destruction of Israel, and it is designated by the United States, European Union, UK, and of course Israel as a terrorist group.
Given that context, what are your feelings as a human being and what is your analysis as the former senior advisor to the president under the Trump administration of the current situation in Israel and Gaza?
My heart goes out, obviously, to all of the families of the victims, to the families of those who are held in captive now and to all of Israel because one of the beautiful things about the state of Israel is that when one Israeli is hurting, the entire nation comes together. It’s a shame that it’s taking an action like this to unify the nation, but I have seen incredibly beautiful signs over the last 48 hours of a country coming together. The Jewish people have been under oppression before. The Jewish people know what it’s like, and seeing people rally together to fight for their homeland to try to reestablish safety is a very beautiful thing to watch. I wish it wasn’t something we had to watch, but it is.
With that being said though, the backdrop, I’ve been speaking to friends over the last couple of days. One friend I spoke with last night who was saying that a good friend messaged him saying, I’m going in. We’re going to do some operations to try to free some of the hostages held in one of the kibbutzes. Messaged him the next morning. He was one of the first through the door to try to free these hostages, and he was killed by a Hamas militant. Sadly, we’re going to be hearing many, many more stories of brave Israeli soldiers trying to get these terrorists out of Israel, trying to free innocent civilians who unfortunately are risking their lives to do it. They’re all heroes, but some will have less good faith than others, sadly.
It’s a very, very heartbreaking moment, and I do think that it’s very important at this moment in time for the entire world to stand behind Israel. I think that Hamas has shown the entire world who they really are. I think what their aim is, what they’re willing to do, and all of the strong security that Israel’s put in place over the last years, which in some instances was criticized, I think is now being validated, that there was a real threat that they were looking to deter. Short answer is my heart is broken, praying for peace, praying for strength, praying for Israel to do what it needs to do to avoid being in this situation again, which is either eliminating or severely degrading Hamas’ capabilities. There cannot be peace in Israel and in the Middle East, while there is a terror group that is being funded by Iran that is allowed to flourish and is allowed to plan operations that are going to aim to kill innocent civilians.
As somebody who was formerly in this position, who was intimately involved with Israel with the strategies to minimize attacks from Hamas and to try to turn the region around, and I think we did do a very substantial job under President Trump. The Middle East went from one of the most chaotic regions in the world. You had ISIS in 2016, ISIS had a caliphate the size of Ohio. They’re beheading journalists. They were killing Christians. They controlled 8 million people. They were planning attacks all over the world from their caliphate. They were using the internet to radicalize people. We had the San Bernardino shooting in America. We had the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, and there was real threat. Then you had Iran, which was given $150 billion in a glide path to a nuclear weapon, and they were using their newfound riches to fund Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, different rebels all over the region that were looking to destabilize further. Syria was in a civil war where 500,000 people were killed. Yemen was destabilized, Libya was destabilized, and it was just a mess, and all of America’s allies had felt betrayed. President Trump came into power. We rebuilt the trust and the relationships with all of our traditional allies. We were able to eliminate ISIS, the territorial caliphate, and then we’re able to project strength in the region, really go after Iran’s wallet. We were able to stop through crushing sanctions a lot of their financial resources, which they were using to fund all these terror groups. We left the Middle East with six piece deals and in a fairly peaceful world. Seeing what’s happening, I think it was completely avoidable. I think it’s horrible to see that it’s occurring, and I pray that those in power will make the right decisions to restore safety, but also to potentially create a better paradigm for peace in the future.
In Gaza, you have basically 2.2 million people that are being held hostage by 30,000 Hamas terrorists. That’s really the problem, and I would just encourage people to push their attention and energy in this moment and their anger towards Hamas, those are the people who are killing innocent civilians, who are murdering indiscriminately, and those are the people who have held back the Palestinians from having a better life.
Finally, what I would say is what we saw with Hamas was that if you go back to 2007, they basically had just one plan that they did over and over. We were very careful to try to monitor very closely and stop the Iranian money and the resources from coming in. Again, we took a little bit of criticism from the international community for keeping the border tight, but unfortunately, every time you’d allow construction materials to go into Gaza, they’d use them to build tunnels, not homes. You would have equipment that would come in to build pipes, they’d turn it into bombs. It was very, very hard to figure out how do you get the resources into Gaza to help people live a better life while at the same time the leadership in Gaza was taking all those resources and turning it into military equipment to attack Israel.
Since now, there’s been more resources allowed to go to the Iranian regime by lack of enforcement of sanctions. As a result, Iran is funding Hezbollah, Hamas. They were funding the Houthis. Now there’s a little bit of a détente between Saudi and Iran, which has led to that going down, which only further proves that Iran was behind the Houthis, which is what the Saudis had been saying for years, and Iran was denying. There’s a very strong relationship between the two, and we always knew that the way that Iran fights wars or fights conflicts is never directly, it’s usually through its proxies. In this case, Hamas has been a proxy for Iran who wanted to obviously see the destruction of Israel, but also does not want to see the Israelis and the Saudis come together for a peace agreement.
The big thing everyone was saying is, “What do you do with this land where you have a mosque built over a very big Jewish site?” I was hearing all of the experts, and I always say experts with quotes, because only in Washington can you work on something for a decade and continue to fail, and then you basically leave are considered an expert. But that’s one of the problems with Washington, which maybe we could talk about later. But the notion here was I went and I said, “Let me try to understand what the issue is with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with the people.” I always felt the politicians were a little disconnected so I commissioned several focus groups, one in Amman, one in Cairo, one in Dubai, and one in Ramallah. I asked people, Muslims, what is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict about? Time and time again, the most popular thing that they said was that Israel was not allowing access to the mosque for Muslims to pray. What was interesting was is that Israel’s policy is to allow anyone who wants to come and pray peacefully at the sites to come and pray. Sometimes they have security issues when there’s provocations. But by and large, since 1967, when Israel was able to take back Jerusalem in a defensive war, just to be very clear, they were attacked in the South and they were attacked from the east, and they basically were able to beat back the Jordanians and the Egyptians and then reconquer the old city of Jerusalem. During that time, immediately after Israel then passed the protection of Holy Places law, which was they basically took resources they didn’t have and they said we’re going to restore the Christian sites, the Muslim sites, the Jewish sites, and they’ve worked to allow everyone access to the mosque.
Today, any Muslim who wants to come can come and pray at the mosque. The mosque is… Israel’s acknowledged that King Abdullah, the king of Jordan, is the custodian of the mosque and as long as people want to come to the country and pray peacefully, they’re able to do that. But if you look at a lot of the propaganda that’s been used by ISIS or Iran to recruit terrorists or to justify their incursions, they often say they’re doing it in the name of liberating the Al-Aqsa Mosque. But from an operational and pragmatic perspective today, any Muslim who wants to go to the mosque, you can book a flight to Israel now through Dubai because there’s flights between Israel and Dubai and as long as your country has relations with Israel and they’ll accept your passport in there, you can come and pray. That’s what Israel wants. Israel wants Jerusalem to be a place where all religions can come and celebrate together. But you have a lot of actors that look to find ways to use these religious tensions in order to sow division and justify violent behavior.
But this misinformation is not something that’s new. One of the characters who played a very big role in spreading the antisemitism and the violence in Israel in the 1920s was a guy named Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was known as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. He was very close with Hitler and Mussolini, and he was working with them to try to get some claims to the Middle East once the Jewish people were annihilated. What he did for a very long time was he did the same shtick, only it was before yet smartphones and YouTube where he would say the mosque is under attack. These imperialist Zionists are coming in to try to destroy the mosque.
He would use that to raise money from Indonesia, from Pakistan, from all over the world, and then use that threat to justify recruiting groups of young, vulnerable Muslim men and then getting them in the name of religious rights to go and kill people, which really is more of a perversion of the religion than I think the true essence of what Islam is. I think Islam at as core is a peaceful religion, and I think that’s where a lot of the great leaders in Islam want to take it. But the people who use Islam or the mosque or as a justification for violence, those are people who I think are really… They’re disrespecting the Islam religion.
The biggest piece of what President Trump did during his four years in office was he really strengthened the relationship with Israel, number one. He did things like recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. He moved the embassy to Jerusalem. He recognized the Golan Heights. He got out of the Iran deal. We did an economic conference in Bahrain where we brought Israelis to meet with Saudi and Emirati and Qatari businessmen and everyone came together. Each one of these instances were unthinkable previously. Everyone said that if you did it, the world was going to end and every time President Trump did one, the next morning the sun rose, the next evening, the sun set and things moved on. By doing that, what President Trump did was he slaughtered a lot of the sacred cows of these false barriers that people had erected and showed people that the vast majority of the people in the Middle East, whether they’re Jewish, Muslim, Christian, whatever religion they are, they just want to live better lives.
What we basically did was create a paradigm where the voices for peace, the voices for together now finally had a forum where they were able to do it. We did that in the backdrop. The way we’re able to be successful was we severely limited the resources of Iran, and they were focused more internally, and they couldn’t cause the trouble that they were causing everywhere else. Since we’ve left, obviously the dynamics have changed, but the way you get to peace is obviously number one through strength and number two, by finding a way for people to be better off tomorrow than they are today. What I found was that most of the voices looking for violence or trouble were people who were just focused on what happened two years ago, 20 years ago, 70 years ago, 1000 years ago. People who were trying to solve those problems in that context often were looking more to use those past grievances as a justification for their power and for the bad behavior that they were looking to perpetuate.
Then I went through and I felt that the Palestinian leadership was fairly disincentivized to make a deal because there was just this paradigm where they had billions of dollars coming in from the international community, and I think that they feared that if they made a deal, they would lose their relevancy internationally and the money would stop flowing into the country. What I tried to do is to say my approach when I would get into a hard problem, say, how do I understand all the different escape patches? How do I try to eliminate them and then build a golden bridge that becomes really the only, but also the most desirable pathway For the decision makers to walk through.
It wasn’t always hard, and sometimes you have to go and hold their hand or you try to pick them up and walk them across. But a lot of these leaders are very reluctant to change, and the dynamics of the Palestinians also were such that I think they were fairly stuck where they were. We developed a business plan for Gaza, the West Bank. We threw in some improvements for Jordan and Egypt as well. I based it off of the vision 2030 that they did in Saudi Arabia, which I thought was a visionary document. I went back through this process and I studied basically every economic project in post-World War II period.
We looked at what they did in South Korea, why it was successful with some strong industrial planning. We looked at Japan, we looked at Singapore, we looked at Poland, why it was successful. We spent a lot of time on the Ukraine plan for the country and why it wasn’t successful. That was mostly because of governance and corruption, which actually resembles a lot of what’s gone wrong with the Palestinians where there’s no property rights, there’s no rule of law. What we did is we built a plan to show it’s not that hard in the sense that between the West Bank and Gaza, you had 5 million people. We put together a plan. I think it was about $27 billion. We got together a conference. I had the head of AT&T. We had Steve Schwarzman from Blackstone came, which was very gracious of them.
We had all the leading Arabic businessmen, the leading builders, leading developers. The general consensus of that conference was that this is very doable. We think that for Gaza in particular, it would cost maybe seven to $8 billion to rebuild the entire place. We felt we could reduce the poverty rate in half. We can create over a million jobs there. The only thing that people said was holding it back wasn’t Israel. What was holding it back was governance, and people wouldn’t have confidence investing there with the rule that Hamas was perpetuating.
I encourage people actually to look at the plan. It was very thoughtful. It was 181 pages. We went project by project. Each project is costed out. It’s a real plan that could be implemented, but you need the right governance and all of the different Arabic countries are willing to fund it. The international community is willing to fund it because they’ve just been throwing so much money at the Palestinians for years that’s never been outcomes based or conditions based. It’s just been entitlement money, and unfortunately, it hasn’t really achieved any outcomes that have been successful.
It’s a great business plan. It just shows too rebuilding Gaza could be easy, but like I said, the problem that’s held the Palestinian people back and that’s made their lives terrible in Gaza has not been Israel. It’s really been Hamas’ leadership or lack of leadership and their desire to focus on trying to kill Israelis and start war with Israel over improving the lies of the Palestinian people.
By the way, these are things I was saying three, four years ago that that was the objective, and that was really the fear. Now that’s been proven. Unfortunately, the fear has manifested, and in exchange you can rebuild the place and you can give the people a much better life. But Hamas has not shown desire for that or a capability for that, and I don’t think there’s enough trust to allow them to do that, which is why under the current circumstances, if you do want to have peace there, Hamas has to be either eliminated or severely degraded in terms of their military capabilities.
Same with the Palestinians. We stopped the funding to UNRWA, the UN agency, which is totally corrupt. We’ve put $10 billion in there over time. I did a poll in the Middle East, in Gaza to say, “Okay, we’ve invested $10 billion here as a country. Are we popular?” The US had a 7% approval rating. USAID has 70% approval rating, but it just felt like a waste of our taxpayer dollars. Again, we wanted to make it conditions based. The Biden administration came in. Number one, they started insulting Saudi and Russia. Oil prices went up at the same time. What they did was they stopped domestic production of oil. They disincentivized a lot of oil and shale production with regulations. They stopped pipelines. Oil prices went up. They stopped enforcing the sanctions against Iran probably to get the oil prices lower to make up for what they were doing. They ran to Iran to try to make a deal. They started funding the Palestinians again right away.
I even said if you’re going to fund them, if that’s your policy, I respect that. Again, elections have consequences and you can take a different policy. But what I would recommend is get some conditions, make them do some reforms, make them give property rights to people, make them do real economic investments for people. But they just went right away. They were funding the Palestinians, not enforcing the sanctions and then overall, just projecting a lot of weakness in the region. One of the most embarrassing examples is what happened in the United Arab Emirates. Again, an amazing, probably one of America’s best allies over the last 20, 30 years…
I think that they realized, after a stint, that maybe the process that President Trump had created in the region was the right policy. And keep in mind, President Trump’s policy, that I was working on, was very strongly criticized during the first three years before we were able to achieve the results, because it was a departure from the failed policies of the past. So first, there was return to those policies, appease Iran, let’s criticize Saudi Arabia. Then they started embracing and working on the Israel-Saudi deal, which was really exciting. I think we were all very excited about it. But they did it in public, and I think that that also was something. Again, I didn’t have access to their intelligence, so I assumed that by doing it so publicly, they thought that they’d either had a deal with Iran because they were letting them get all this revenue where Iran wouldn’t be a problem.
But one of the reasons with the Abraham Accords, we kept it so quiet during the whole time, was because we always felt like the troublemakers in the region, particularly Iran, who we thought would be disadvantaged by having UAE, Saudi, Israel altogether. Israel’s a nuclear power. You have other strong economies. Iran seeks instability. They seek looking to create a division in the region. And if you can create that economic sphere where you have security from Haifa to Muscat, from Israel to Oman all the way through with Saudi, Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Egypt. That’s an incredibly powerful block. If you can make it secure and then get economic integration, that really could be a Middle East that thrives. So Iran, obviously, wanted nothing to do with that, and that’s why they’ve been working to disrupt. So I think the administration, they took an incredibly stable situation with momentum.
I think they underestimated the way that Iran would approach the region to undermine. I think they gave way too much rope to Iran, and I think that they didn’t seize, when they had an opportunity of strength with the Palestinians, to try to drive to a conclusion that, I believe, could have prevented us being where we are today. Not to mention that even just three weeks ago, it’s a bad look that they just basically gave $6 billion to Iran in exchange for hostages. And then Iran’s basically funding these terror attacks, they are killing American citizens in Israel. It’s a heartbreaking situation. Again, totally avoidable and one that, I think, has been very badly mismanaged to date.
I actually think President Biden’s words were the right words. I see that they’re moving aircraft carriers to the region. Again, the purpose of having a strong military… I believe obviously if you get into a war, you want to win the war. But the purpose of a very strong military primarily is to avoid a war. I don’t know what credibility the Biden administration has to show the strength, but right now you have to support Israel completely. You have to really let people in the region know that there’ll be consequences if they try to escalate. Again, we saw a little bit of rocket skirmish from Lebanon, from Hezbollah. But again, this is the type of thing that they have to know, there’ll be severe consequences if they make this a multi-party fight. And I think sending a strong message to Iran, I think that they have to see some consequences from this and know that they’re not going to be allowed to have a free rein to cause instability in that.
Iran doesn’t usually fight face- to-face. They usually do it through proxies, but let’s just all be honest about where this is coming from and let them know that there will be a consequence if they instigate these actions. Again, at least with the Biden administration, they’ve had contact with Iran, they’ve been talking with Iran, but they’ve allowed Iran. Again, the number I saw last year, I think under Trump the number was maybe like four or $5 billion of oil revenue in total. I think last year it was something like $45 billion in revenue. This year, I think it’ll be even more. That’s a combination of them driving up oil prices, but also allowing much more sales. You would think that they would find a way to get them to behave and allow them to have this happen. Or if that’s not the case, then be tough. Go back to being tough. That’s what you have to do.
I think it’s one of Iran’s worst nightmares to have Israel and Saudi interlinked together. I think it’d be great for the Saudi people from a security perspective, what they’re discussing with America would be very strong. The ability to get different elements across would be incredible. So what I would say with this is that, the industrial logic held yesterday, and I think it will hold again tomorrow. I always expect countries to act in their interests. I think that the deal that’s on the table right now between Saudi, Israel and America is in Saudi’s interests, it’s in America’s interests and it’s in Israel’s interest. What’s going to happen now though is, the political dynamics are going to shift. And I think that, as we’ve seen with political dynamics, they come and go. I think let’s get through this moment, and then I hope at the right time that those talks will be able to resume and conclude in an appropriate way.
It’s funny, Lex, when I was working on the US-Mexico agreement for the trade, every day there’d be a tweet that would go out or there would be an issue. People forget how intense it was between America and Mexico. And I’d speak to my counterpart of Mexico after a rough day and we were working on something, we were making progress. It’d get blown up. And I’d speak to them and say, “You know what? Look, they’re not moving America. They’re not moving Mexico. Let’s stop for today. Let’s pick up tomorrow and let’s find a new way to bring this forward.” So I would just encourage everyone working on that not to give up, to keep working hard at it and to find a way. But like I said, I would take a little bit of a pause for the time being. Let’s let the current situation play out and then hopefully there’ll be a way for it to move forward.
And I do think that if the international community comes together and unites behind Israel and really forces Hamas and their Iranian backers to stop hostilities, to stop saber-rattling, to stop misrepresenting the history in order to justify their violent behavior. And if they say instead, “We want to hold you accountable, no more money.” And they all say that they’re going to stand behind Israel’s efforts to eliminate their national security threats. Then we will all come together and only fund again into a framework that we believe can be a long-term solution where the Palestinian people really have a chance to live a better life. That’s really the best way to get there. There’s tons of complicating factors, but that’s the end state that the global community should be looking to come together. And it’s very achievable. It’s very, very achievable.
I’ve been happy to see that what they’ve been doing in retaliation so far has been somewhat measured and they’ve taken their time to try to assess what’s achievable. Again, I don’t have access to the intelligence, and we’re talking at a very early stage in this conflict. So a lot had happened even by the time this is published. But my hope is that they’ll just stay very focused on what the objective is and try to make sure that they’re acting appropriately in order to do that. And I will say this too, that this has been different than what I’ve seen in the past. And that the attacks were so heinous and so disgusting that I’ve seen the international community rally around Israel more so than I ever have. And I hope that Israel continues to keep the moral high ground and continue to communicate what they’re fighting for, why they’re fighting. And I do hope that the international community supports the objective and they can work together to achieve it.
And I don’t think he wants to see his legacy be somebody who left Israel more vulnerable than it had to be. So I think, in that regard, he’ll be incredibly strong. But I also think that he’ll hopefully be calculating in the risks that he takes and not create more risk than is needed. And that’s easy to say, the two of us sitting here having a conversation. When you’re sitting in that chair as a leader in the fog of war, it’s a very hard decision to make. He’s been here before. He knows the weight of the situation. I’m sure he knows the moment. And I pray that he’ll do what’s right here to bring the best outcome possible.
With that being said, the times in Jewish history where the Jewish people have been most vulnerable have been when there’s been division, and that’s when the temple was destroyed. But that’s not just with the Jewish people and with Israel, that’s in all societies. So I definitely believe that this division has left them less prepared for the situation than it would. I do think there’s real lessons we should be taking from this here in America, where we’re in a time where we’re very divided. But I do think that it’d be very wise for our leaders to find the areas where we do agree and find ways to secure our southern border, to make sure that we know who’s in our country, what risks we all face. And I do think that division definitely creates risk for countries.
I think that it’s very clear that the group that’s responsible for the Palestinian people living the lives that all of these people are angry about is Hamas. And if they direct their anger towards Hamas and put the attention on the failings of Hamas and put forth a vision for what they’d like to see leadership in Gaza do. And they respect that there’s a real fear that Israel has and any country would have of having a group of terrorists next to them that’s calling for their destruction. I think that that recognition of finding a way for Israel to be secure and then having an opportunity for the Palestinian people to live a better life is the right pathway to try and pursue.
Because actually once you have this economic sphere, if you could bring Iraq into it, if you could bring Iran into it, that makes it even bigger and stronger. And the Persian people are incredibly entrepreneurial and incredibly industrious. So I do think that the region has tremendous potential. It’s just been held back by bad policy, bad leadership, bad objectives. And again, when President Trump left office in 2021, the Middle East was really on a very, very positive trajectory. And if the right things happen, it can continue to be so. I’m praying at this moment in time that we navigate the current crisis, that the important objectives are achieved of eliminating the terrorists and their threats. And then allowing the leaders who are focused on giving their citizens and their neighbors the opportunity to live a better life, are able to work together and really dream and be ambitious and find ways to create a paradigm where humans can flourish.
Look, I’ve traveled all over the world now. I’ve been very fortunate to meet people from different states in America. I’ve different political persuasions, different ages, different classes. And what I found is that, there’s a fundamental driving amongst all of us where we all want to live a better life. People don’t want to fight naturally, but it’s easy to fight when you feel wronged or you feel like somebody disrespected you or somebody did something from hatred. And hatred leads to more hatred, which sometimes just pushes that cycle further and further. So I believe that each and every one of us has the power to stop that cycle. We don’t do it by being on Twitter and yelling at people. We don’t do it by just being critical. We do it by finding the people we disagree with, by listening to them, by asking questions, by sitting with them. And then if we each take responsibility to try to make the world better, then I think that there’s no limits to the incredible place that this world can be.
Unfortunately now, in the era of social media, people will say one wrong thing, it sticks with them forever. They get canceled or they get put out. We’re all humans. We grow from our mistakes, we learn from our mistakes. And I think that some people are just evil. There are some evil people. But I do think the vast, vast, vast majority of people are good. And I do think that people sometimes also can be in a bad place, and then society can push them to a worse and worse place. But we all have the power to make them feel loved, make them feel heard. I think there’s also tremendous power that we have as people to help people get to a better place. My wife and I, we’ve always tried to be a force for good. We’ve always tried to provide a place where people can discuss with each other.
When we were in Washington, we would host dinners at our house all the time, or we would have Democrats and Republicans sitting together. I saw Senator Feinstein just passed away. We had a great dinner at her house when she was a senator, with her and her husband and Mark Meadows when he was on the Freedom Caucus. And we had actually a fascinating discussion about Iran. Mark was much more hard line than me. I had to actually bite my tongue. I was impressed at how much he did. Whereas Feinstein and her husband were super into… They knew the Iranians well. They thought they were peace loving. And it was an incredibly robust and respectful debate. I don’t think we maybe concluded anything that night, but it was interesting for people to get together. Having a dinner at my house where I had Dick Durbin, the number two ranking Democrat in the Senate, Lindsey Graham and Steven Miller, who’s known to be a very hard line on immigration, discussing what an immigration reform could look like.
They left that dinner saying, “Wow, we hadn’t spoken to people on the other side and we actually agree on 85% of things. Maybe something is possible.” So I believe that we should always be trying to push to make the world a better place. And you only do that by listening to people and connecting with people and by respecting people. And finally, I’ll just say on this is that, I meet people all the time who have so much confidence in their perspectives. I’m very jealous that these people are able to be so confident about every single thing. Because, for me, I have some degree of confidence in the things that I’ve studied and what I’ve learned, but I’m always trying to find people who disagree to sharpen my perspectives and to help me grow and to help me learn further. I think that’s the beauty of the world, is that the knowledge base continues to grow, the facts continue to change, and what’s possible tomorrow continues to become different. So as humans, we have to continue to thrive, to learn, and to grow and to connect. And if we do that, everything’s possible.
After that, I would say taking maybe a first principles approach to what the outcome of whatever problem you’re looking to solve should be. Now, you have different kinds of negotiations. I always tried to create a framework in the negotiation where it wasn’t me against you. It was always, let’s agree on what the outcome is that we’re trying to accomplish. Let’s all sit on the same side of the table and say, “We want to get to this outcome. How do we get there?” Really trying to create a roadmap. So once you understand the destination you want to, get to the endpoint, then you’d have to work backwards and really try to put-
And then finally, I would just say that in any negotiation, you have to understand the power dynamics as well. And you have to then weight your approach in order to maneuver pieces to accomplish the objective. And so, in areas where we had stronger power dynamics, I’d always look at it and say, “What are the potential escape routes where a politician would say, ‘This is just the reason why we can’t get there.'” And I’d always think, how can you try to eliminate those escape routes or make them much harder to accomplish? And then, ultimately, think about what’s the golden bridge that you want to create for them in order to get to the other side, where they were motivated to get there because it was in their self-interest to get there, but also because it helped accomplish the different objective.
And I have many examples that I lived through with that, obviously negotiating in Congress for prison reform. I had to form a lot of trust with Democrats, whether it was Hakeem Jeffries or Dick Durbin. And then also on the Republican side with, I had Mike Lee, I had Lindsey Graham, I had Tim Scott, Senator Grassley, and then also Doug Collins in the house was tremendous. And every time we maneuvered something, we would get attacked either from the left. There was a time we were being attacked by Nancy Pelosi, John Lewis, for not being inclusive enough. And then there were times that we maneuvered it, we’d be attacked from the right for maybe going too far. And ultimately, we had to find just the right place where we can get it done.
And the same thing happened with USMCA, where we were negotiating the biggest trade deal in the history of the world, which was $1.3 trillion in annual trade between Mexico, Canada, the United States of America. And we were able to form good trust with the other side and try to say, “How do we create win-win outcomes?” And ultimately, we were able to do something in a record time that people thought was very hard to do. And both of them, in a divided time of the Trump administration, were bipartisan wins with big, big votes in the Senate and the House.
And that’s ultimately what the partnership is, right? My job was to represent America, his job was to represent Israel, and you had other parties representing their own interests. And as long as you assume that people were acting mostly in good faith, you were able to navigate areas where you didn’t have complete overlap of priorities and objectives.
Is there a skill to that? Is that genetics, you’re born with that? Or is that something you develop? So basically, it requires you to look at the game of politics and not have a kind of cynicism about it, to where everybody’s trying to manipulate you. And actually just go in with a kind open mind and open heart and actually speak truthfully to people on a basic human level.
My father, again, a lot of my childhood was I was exposed to business. My father, on Sundays, he would take us to job sites and to the office with him instead of to football games like my friend’s fathers would do. And so, we were exposed to business. And what he would say about his father, who was an immigrant to America, came over with nothing, had no formal education, but he would always say, “A good deal with a bad partner will always be a bad deal. And a bad deal with a good partner, you’ll figure it out.”
And so, going through some of the challenges that I had in my life early on, whether it was the issue with my father, that I’m sure we’ll talk about, or even going through some tougher financial times during the Great Financial Crisis, I really learned a lot about partnership. And I always thought, “How can I act in a way where I could be the type of partner or friend to others that I wish others would be to me?”
One of my greatest takeaways when I grew up, I’d read the newspapers about all these powerful, famous people. And then as I got older and had the chance to meet them and do business with them and then ultimately interact with them in government, is I realized that they’re just like you and me. They wake up every morning, their kids are pissed at them, their wife doesn’t want to talk with them. And they’ve got a set of advisors around them, one saying, ” Let’s go to war,” one saying, “Let’s make peace.” One saying, “Do the deal,” one saying, “Don’t do the deal.” And they’re all thinking, where do I get advice? How do I make decisions?
And so, understanding the true human nature of them and then the different power dynamics around them, I thought was very key. And so, I didn’t have a choice, do I deal with them or not? It was a function of how do you deal with them effectively in order to find areas where you have common interests and then work well together to pursue those common interests in order to achieve a certain goal.
But anyway, there’s a bunch of stuff you learned from that, but one of the things you told me is it influenced your general approach to diplomacy of just picking up the phone and giving it a try. So as opposed to planning and strategizing, just pick up the phone.
And as I was reading the book, I remember thinking to myself, “Even though things are set in a certain way, go sit with somebody, go talk to them and say, ‘This doesn’t make sense, this is wrong. How do we create a better pathway?'” And as a civilian, all my life, I would read the newspapers, I would observe how different leaders would act. But when we had the opportunity to serve in government and have the position, you realize you’re not a civilian. You don’t have the luxury of sitting back and letting the world happen the way it’s happening. You have agency and you have the potential to influence the outcome of things.
And one thing I’ve seen is most political prognosticators are wrong. Anyone who tells you what’s going to happen really has no clue. And it’s not because they’re bad or they’re not intelligent, it’s because nobody knows. And at the end of the day, the outcomes in the world are usually driven by the decisions of humans. And if you’re able to come together, form relationships, listen to each other, you can do that.
And one of the great examples that I speak about in the book is with North Korea. Whereas if you remember in 2017, it was very intense. When President Obama was leaving office, he told President Trump that the single biggest fear that he had, and this is a time when the world was a mess, you had the Middle East was on fire, ISIS was beheading journalists and killing Christians. They had a caliphate the size of Ohio. Libya was destabilized, Yemen was destabilized. Syria was in a civil war where 500,000 people were killed. Iran was on a glide path to a nuclear weapon. Yet the single biggest fear he had was North Korea.
Then it got compounded by the fact that we get into office and President Trump brings his generals around and he’s learning how to interact with all the generals and says, “Okay, what are my options?” And they said, “Calm down. We’ve been using all of our ammunition in the Middle East. We don’t have enough ammunition to go to war over there.” And he says, “Let’s not let that be too public. Let’s try to restock and come up with a plan.”
And at the time, there was a lot of banter back and forth. And I was able to, I got a call from a friend who was an old business contact, who actually had done business in North Korea. And he said, “I’d love to find a way to solve this.” And I was getting calls from friends at the time saying, “I’m trying to go to Hawaii for vacation. Should I not be going? Is it not safe?”
So that was really the mindset, which was whenever there’s a problem, just pick up the phone and try. And I think President Trump had a very similar approach, which was let’s give it a shot. And he wasn’t afraid to go after the hard ones too.
And I’ll say one final thing on this, which is that in politics, the incentive structure is just much different than in the real world, in the sense that you have a hard problem. And if you try to solve a hard problem, the likelihood of failure is great. Whereas in the business world, if you’re going after a hard problem, we celebrate those people. Right? We want our entrepreneurs and our great people to go after solving the big, hard problems. But in politics, if you try to take on a hard problem, you have a high likelihood of failure. You’ll get a lot of criticism on your pathway to trying to accomplish that, if you fail. And then if you fail, it has a higher probability of leading to you losing your opportunity to serve. And so, it’s just one of these things where people want to play it safe, which is not the notion that really was taken during the time that President Trump was in office.
And I think that in the business world, it’s outcome oriented, it’s results oriented. And what we would see in New York is there, they would stab you in the eye, in DC they would stab you in the back, and it just became a whole different-
But that is what’s amazing about the world, right? This could be the biggest story on the front page of every paper, and they’re inciting fear in everyone, and it’s not illegitimate fear. There were missile tests over Japan. You had a lot of very big challenges with that file. And then all of a sudden we make contact, we go through negotiations to set a meeting. There’s a meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong Un. And then all of a sudden, there’s a framework to try and move things forward. And again, I think that there’s a lot of possibility there for what could happen if it’s worked in the right way.
Anyway. This conversation quickly turned to the ridiculous. But to do another book reference, you mentioned the book Thirteen Days in September by Lawrence Wright, in discussing all the work you’ve done in Israel and the Middle East. I just want to ask you sort of the interesting aspect of that book, which is the influence of the personalities and personal relationships on these negotiations. You kind of started to allude to that with the trust, but how much do the personalities matter in this? So going from North Korea to the Middle East here, to within Congress and all that kind of stuff.
And the thing that I kind of took from that experience was just how personal it was. And again, one of my favorite stories from that book was how Anwar Sadat, who was a big, big leader, he had a mystic who was, according to this book, again, history, I like reading it, but I always realize that you have to notice that this is just the perspective of a given author that’s writing it. But the way that they write this book was that he had an advisor who was a mystic, and the mystic was having a back channel with the Israelis. And the mystic told Sadat, “If you go to Israel and you make a speech at the Knesset, Begin is ready to give you the Sinai.”
And so, he goes to Israel, they set this whole thing up, he goes and gives the Knesset. They go for their meeting after, and Sadat says, “Okay, well, are we going to do this thing?” And Begin says, “What are you talking about? I’m not giving you an inch of our land.” And it was just one of these things where it was a miscommunication that brought about the symbolic visit of Anwar Sadat to Israel. And that was one of these notions that just made everyone think that something was possible, that they thought was impossible a moment before.
And actually, we had an example like that during our time in government when we did the Abraham Accords. The first step of the accords was really a phone call between President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and Mohammed bin Zayed, who, at that point, was the Crown Prince and de facto ruler of the UAE. But all we had was a phone call and then a statement that was released.
And what was interesting after that is we said, “Okay, well, how do we integrate countries? Nobody’s done this in a long time.” And we were trying to figure out all the issues, and there was big miscommunications between Israel and UAE, and we were navigating through all the issues. And so, after a couple weeks, I said, “I’ve got to go over there and try to sort through these issues.” So we make a plan to go to Israel, and then we’re going to go to UAE.
And then a young gentleman who worked with me, named Avi Berkowitz, says, “Well, if we’re flying from Israel to UAE, instead of flying on a government plane, why don’t we see if we can get an El AL plane and we’ll do the first official commercial flight?” And so, I said, “That’s a great idea. Let’s call Ambassador Otaiba,” Yousef, who was a tremendous player in the Abraham Accords, working behind the scenes day and night, and was really a big catalyst. So he calls Yousef and he says, “Sure, no problem. Let’s give it a shot.”
So we go and we do it, and he says, “If we can work out these issues, what we’ll do.” So we go to Israel, we do our meetings, we get everything back into a good place. We set up this trip over, we fly on an El Al plane. We fill it up, at the time, it was during Covid, with a health delegation. We had the financial ministry because we had to open up banking relationships, they could wire money between countries. We wanted to get health partnerships. Then we just had a lot of legal things and national security things we wanted to start putting together.
So we do this flight and we end up landing in UAE. And the picture of us coming off the plane, being greeted by Emiratis in thobes, with an El Al plane with an Israeli flag on it, just captured everyone’s imagination. And so, it was one of these things where it’s like you work so hard on the details and the negotiation, hundreds of hours to make sure everything’s perfect, and the one thing that you do kind of, “Yeah, let’s give it a shot.” That image ended up capturing everyone’s heart.
So going back to Sadat, that visit was very critical. And what was interesting was is according to this book, it happened because of a miscommunication. That was the first part. The second part of the book, that’s just amazing theater, and actually the book was based on a play, it was just going back and forth with all of the different methodologies that they tried, that failed, but they kept trying at it. And then, ultimately, seeing how the personalities were able to find ways to make the compromise that ultimately was a very, very big thing for more stability in the Middle East.
And so, amazing book, I would highly recommend it. A very entertaining read and something that at least gave me encouragement to keep going when the task I was pursuing seemed so large.
And so, when I would think about diplomacy, words without actions or without the threat of actions, and that was something that President Trump did very well, was that people knew that he was willing to take action, he was very unpredictable in how he would act. And that made our words much more effective in what they did. So it’s all a combination.
But coming from the private sector, we are all about results. If you’re in government, you can work on something for 10 years and fail and then retire, and they consider you an expert. In the private sector, if you work on something for 10 weeks and you don’t have a success, then you’re unemployed. So it’s a different kind of notion. And it was just understanding the mentality and trying to adjust and bridging the divides between the different trainings.
The other skillset, so there was a couple skill sets that I found were quite deficient in government. First of all, there was a ton of amazing people. People talk about the bureaucracy. What I found was is you had incredibly committed, passionate, intelligent, capable people all throughout the government. And what they were waiting for though was direction and then cover in order to get there.
And so, there were a lot of tasks that I worked on, whether it was building the wall at the southern border, where I was able to work with Customs, Border Patrol, Army Corps of Engineers, military, DHS professionals, DOD, and we basically all came together. And then once we had a good project management plan, we were able to move very, very quickly. I think we built about 470 miles of border barrier in about two years, basically. And that worked very well because we basically brought private sector project management skillset, which we’re quite often missing in government.
The second one is just, we spoke about negotiation earlier. I would say that most people in government, it’s just a different form of negotiation than you see in the private sector, and way less effective in that regard. Which is why I think it’s good the more we can encourage more people with private sector experience to do a stint in government and to really try to contribute and serve their country. That’s how our founders, George Washington and all the founding fathers, they were working on their farms. They left their farms, served in government, then they went back to the farm.
And that was kind of the design of the representative government. It wasn’t a career political class, it was people coming in to show gratitude for the freedoms and the liberties that they enjoyed, and then do their best to help others have those same opportunities that they had, and then they’d go back and live their lives. So I think that there’s a lot of opportunity with our government, of people with more business mindsets who are going to think about things from a solutions perspective, go and serve.
One thing I was very proud of, of the work of the Trump administration was that you had four years consecutively where there was a net decrease in the cost of regulations. So to give you a context, in the last year of Obama in 2016, there was 6 million man hours spent by the private sector complying with new federal regulations. And that’s not really what the intent of our government was, right? If we have rules or regulations, those should be legislated by Congress. They shouldn’t be put in by bureaucrats who are basically saying, “I want to follow this objective,” so using the power of the pen in order to do that.
So the deregulatory effort was actually very critical to Trump’s economic success that happened in the beginning of the administration. And then what I saw with regulation was anytime either there was legislation or regulation coming, the people pushing for it were usually the people who would benefit from the regulatory captures. You look at the Great Financial Crisis, where you had these big banking reforms. Well, what happened during the big banking reforms? Then you had a big reduction in the amount of banks that occurred, and the big banks became even bigger. Whereas I don’t think that was the intention of the legislation, but the people who were writing the legislation and influencing it had a lot of the constituencies from those larger institutions.
And then what happened as a result of that? A lot of these smaller institutions didn’t have the ability to be as competitive. They had more restrictions, more costs, they became less profitable. But these were the banks that were serving small business, which is the biggest creator of jobs in our country. And then as a result, the bigger banks got more powerful and what happened in the country as a result of the regulations that they put in place? The wealth gap in the country grew, it didn’t shrink.
And so, I think oftentimes what they say these regulations are intended to be, the result often becomes the opposite. And so, what President Trump did and his administration was they did a massive deregulatory effort. And I think they pledged that for every one regulation they put on, because you do need some regulation in an economy and in a society, they would take off two. And in the first year, they eliminated eight regulations for every one.
So that was just something I took from it, which was, I thought, very interesting. And you had to really, I think you just have to think through what are the consequences going to be of the different actions you take? And often, government gets it wrong by taking an action that feels right, but has big negative consequences down the road.
And so, at first, when this started coming up, I thought this was ridiculous. I was very intimately involved with the operations of the campaign. I was running the finance of the campaign. I was running the digital media of the campaign. I was running the schedule for the campaign. And I knew that on most days, we had trouble working, coordinating with ourselves, let alone collaborating with another government and colluding, as they called it. And so, we did a great job, I think, as an underdog campaign, very leanly staffed. And then they said that we were working with the Russians.
And so, at the time, I didn’t take it too seriously because I knew there was no truth to it. But it was amazing to me to start seeing all of these institutions, whether it was CNN, the Washington Post, New York Times, these were news organizations that I grew up having a lot of respect for, taking these accusations so seriously. And then working themselves up in order to just cover it for two years. Then as a result, you had a special counsel, you had a House investigation, a Senate investigation.
And I personally spent about, I think over 20 hours just testifying before these different committees. Again, spent millions of dollars out of my own pocket on my legal fees to make sure I was well-represented. And the reason I did that was because I saw in Washington, it was like a sick game. It’s almost like even though there was no underlying problems to the accusation, I felt like this is one of those things where they’re going to try to catch you. And then if you step on the line, they catch you with one misrepresentation, they’re going to try to put you in jail or worse. And so, for me, that was a big concern.
And it was amazing. My poor mom, I told her to stop reading whatever. I said, “Mom, I promise you, we didn’t do anything wrong. It’s good.” But she’d call me and say, “Well, our friends were on the Upper East Side, were talking with Chuck Schumer, says, ‘Jared’s going to jail. We know for sure that he colluded with the Russians.'” And this is a leading senator saying things like this.
And so, it was just interesting for me to see how the whole world could believe something and be talking about it that I knew, with 1000% certainty, was just not true. And so, seeing that play out was very, very hard. Obviously, I was accused of a lot of things. There were times in Washington, I was radioactive. I remember one weekend it was all over CNN, the people, they had panels on CNN, like the news organization that I grew up thinking was the number one trusted name for news in the world, talking about how I’d committed treason, because I met with an ambassador and said, “We’d like to hear your perspective on what you think the policy should be in Syria,” where there was a big civil war happening and ISIS, and a lot of different things.
So it was quite a crazy time in that regard. But luckily, again, we were able to fight through it. It was a major distraction for our administration. And I think we were able to kind of stay focused on the objectives and the policies. But it was a crazy time, and I learned a lot from that experience.
And then I also had to make sure that I didn’t allow that to distract me from my job. I felt like I had an amazing opportunity in the White House to make a difference in the world. And if I would’ve spent all my time playing defense, in politics, it’s a time duration game. In business, you have whatever duration you set for yourself, in politics, it’s time duration. We had four years. Every day was sand through an hourglass. My mindset was, I need to accomplish as much as I can in these four years. And I guess the traditional game that’s played in Washington is whether it’s the media, the opposition, their job is to distract you and then try to stop you from being as successful as you want to be. And so just fought through it.
And it wasn’t always fun, but we got through and thank God it’s something people don’t talk about. And it has been amazing to me just the lack of self-awareness and reflection of a lot of the people who hyped this up for two years. They don’t think there was anything wrong with it. And that’s interesting, but my view is, we got through it, it’s good. So it’s in the past and then I started moving to the future and that’s really where I spent my time.
And I think that as a country, we should be thinking big. We should be dreaming big, and we should be encouraging our politicians to try and to fail more and to go to take on big things knowing that there’s risk of failing. Obviously, we want them to succeed, not to fail, but let’s take on the big things. Let’s try to do that. So I think it’s just very basic that you’re in a situation. I’ve made decisions. I can’t go back and change decisions in the past. I still felt very blessed to be in the position I was in, and I knew that I just had to work through it. Like I said, I was very lucky to have support from my wife and from my family and from good friends.
Again, I think I’d chosen very good friends in life and my friends were with me. I had one friend who, my lowest moment, got on the plane, he lived in Arizona, got on a plane and came just to have dinner with me to say, “Just pick your head up. I know you’re down now, you’re going to be fine. Just fight through.” That meant a lot to me. And again, I always think in my life, you don’t learn as much from your successes. You don’t learn as much from your high points. You learn the most about who you want to be and how the world works from your lowest moments. And at those lowest moments, it made me better and it taught me how to be a better friend to people who are in tough situations. And I tried to just get tougher and I tried to just get better and work through it.
And there’s something about Jersey with the diners, often late at night… There’s several diner experiences I should say. There’s the family friendly, there’s a nice waitress and there’s a sweetness, a kindness like hello sweetheart, that kind of thing. There’s also the 3:00 AM diner, the ones that are open 24 hours, that has a romantic element when you’re a young man or young woman, you’re traveling. The loneliness of that, it’s all of it. The American diner is from Jack Kerouac on, represents something. I’m not sure what that is, but it’s a real beautiful experience. And the food itself too.
I joke that if you grew up in Jersey, you grow up with just enough of a chip on your shoulder that you have to go and make something of yourself in life. It’s a special place. I had an amazing childhood there and very, very proud to be from the state. And I will just give a little bit of a plug now because the state has now actually turned the corner and they had a $10 billion budget surplus for many years. It was a state that was basically bankrupt and now actually under a pretty progressive Democrat governor Phil Murphy. He’s turned the state around and it’s actually has a very bright future ahead and it’s probably one of the best places to raise a family in the country. It’s got very low crime, one of the best public school systems in the country, pretty good healthcare system, a lot of green parks. People know the Turnpike, but it’s got a lot to it. That’s really great. So I’m a big, big fan of Jersey.
My childhood was I think, a very nice childhood. My parents always said, “Do good in school, work hard.” I was very focused on my athletics. I was captain of the basketball team, assistant captain of the hockey team. I ran a marathon with my father and it was always about pursuing. Went to Harvard, graduated with honors, and then was in NYU pursuing a law degree and a business degree. And I was working at the Manhattan District Attorney’s office at the time actually thinking I wanted to go into public service because my father always taught us, we were always surrounded by politicians and he always said, ” My parents came to America. They lived in the land of opportunity and they had these opportunities because this is the best country in the world. So you should be successful. Work hard, don’t ever let your opportunities become your disadvantages because you have advantages in life. You have to work harder.” And that’s what he instilled in myself and my brother. And he always pushed us to make the most of ourselves. And when we did that…
Everything changed overnight when my father got arrested. Obviously it’s very embarrassing for a family when you’re on the front page of the papers, I would see the newspapers writing all these things about my father that I didn’t think were representative of the person that I knew. It was a big change for our family. And I was angry. I was angry. I said, “I could be angry at the prosecutor, I could be angry at my father’s brother. I could be angry at my father’s lawyers. I could be angry at my father for making this mistake.” And then I said, “That’s not going to change anything.” And I had a real shift. And I do think that that was a turning point in my life where I basically said, “Let me focus on the things I can control. Let me focus on the positive things I can do.”
And from that moment forward, I said, “How can I be a great son to my father? How can I be a great older brother/substitute father for my two sisters and my younger brother? How could I be there for my mother? How could I be there for my father’s business?” And I just went into battle mode and I put my armor on and I just ran into it. And for the next two years, every day was painful. I was dealing with banks, the company still had subpoenas, I was still in law school. I’d tell my father I wanted to drop out of law school and business school, but he said, “Please don’t.”
So I would basically go to law school one day a week or maybe I’d skip it most days and I’d go to his office every day. And my friends would joke that if my professors wanted to fail me, the law professor would have to give me a test that had four pictures and say, “Circle who your professor is.” But I would basically take a week off, I’d read the books and I did well and I got my degrees. And it was just a very, very challenging time.
But like I said to you before is that you learn the most about life and you learn the most about humanity and yourself when you’re in your most challenging periods. And I’ll say that that experience also changed the people I interacted with, spending weekends with my father down in a prison in Alabama, I met the other inmates, I met their families. I spent time then trying to advise the children of other people who were going through the same experience that I’d gone through on how to navigate it correctly. And you just learn a lot about the world and you see that in life, everything could get taken from you, your status, your money, your friends. I saw that certain people were very disloyal to my father at the time, who he thought were friends. It was only a handful. But again, I learned from those people, how can I be a true friend to people? How can I be better? And I learned a tremendous amount through that experience.
And so I just stood by him and stood close. And later that day or the next day, he got up and started walking. He had an ankle monitor. For whatever reason, the prosecutor was so aggressive that he was a flight risk, so they made him wear an ankle monitor. They were very, very aggressive and nasty. And at the time, my father was the biggest donor to Democrats. The prosecutor was a Republican. It was a very political thing. And what happened was is he was walking around the pool and I just started walking with him and he said to me, “Jared, in life sometimes, we get so powerful that we believe that we’re the dealer.” He says, “But we’re not the dealer. God’s the dealer. And we have to come down to earth to understand,” like you said. So what I took from that was that my father, with all of his success, had started to believe that maybe certain rules didn’t apply to him. And I think that that’s where he made a mistake. And I think he had a lot of regret that he made the mistake. And my father is a very humble person. He’s a very moral person. For me, with my humility, my brother and I joke that we give our credit for being humble, number one, to being Mets fans because every year you have a lot of promise and then it never ends up paying off. Although now with Steve Cohen, hopefully we’re on a different trajectory.
But the other thing is also our mother. Our mother really raised us to be very humble. We knew we had a lot, but every Sunday morning my mom was there clipping the coupons. The cereal we ate in our house was based on was what was on sale versus what we liked. When we would have a problem with our teachers in school and I’d say, “Well, teacher doesn’t like me.” She’d say, “Well, I’m not calling them. It’s your job to make the teacher like you.” And so my mother gave us a lot of that. My father gave us a lot of the grounding. And I think during that time, my father was just realizing that maybe he had gotten disconnected from the grounding and the values.
And again, I think he also accepted maybe he could have blamed others for acting inappropriately. But I respect the fact that he took responsibility himself and said, “I can’t control the actions of other people. I can’t control what they do is right and wrong. I can just control my actions.” And as I go on the next journeys in my life and I go to government, I go to Washington. I even think through the craziness of going from visiting my father in a prison to 10 years later sitting in the office in the White House next to the President of the United States. And I think about that story and that it’s a story that only God could write. And I really believe that you have to have a lot of faith because the lows and the highs are both so extreme and unbelievable that I feel like those low moments in some ways, allowed me to keep my grounding and to understand what was truly important in life for when I ended up going through those other moments.
So I think it’s a very big problem that you have, whether it’s something that’s solvable, I think it’s about having the right leaders and hopefully for the leaders, having good friends. I’m still friends with a lot of the people I interacted with when I was in government, and the number one thing I try to be to them is just a good friend. I try to be somebody who they can talk about things with. I don’t go in trying to tell them what to do on different things. And I think that that’s a big thing is that people just need friends and they need conversation. And if they have that, then hopefully, that allows them to keep their head in the right place.
And when my father got out, we didn’t run from that experience. He started hiring people from Rikers Island and different prisons into the company into a second chance, a program, which we’re very, very proud of doing. And what we saw through our micro experience was that if you give people mentorship, if you give them job training, a lot of people, they have addiction issues and they can’t find housing. And so people leave prison with a criminal record and they’re less likely to go back and reintegrate in society without help from different institutions that can help them do that. So we modeled the reforms off what they did in Texas and Georgia and other states where they basically put a lot of job training, alcohol and addiction treatment programs in the prisons as a way to incentivize the prisoners to work on themselves while they’re there in order to allow them to reenter society.
It’s turned out to be very successful so far. They just had a report that showed that the general population has had a 47% recidivism rate, meaning that people who leave federal prison, half of them go back. And people who have now taken this program, only 12% of them go back. So number one, you’re making communities safer because if people are going to now get a job and enter society instead of committing future crimes, you’re avoiding future crimes. And number two, you’re giving people a second chance at life. And so that was the first part of it. The second thing we did was there was a rule passed in the ’90s that basically penalized crack cocaine at 100 times the penalty of what regular cocaine was. And I think a lot of the motivations, what people say in retrospect was that crack was more of a black drug drug and cocaine was more of a white drug.
And so there was a really racial disparity in terms of what the application of these sentences were. So they then revised that to make it 18 to one. And what we did in this bill is we allowed it to go retroactive to allow people who were in prison with sentences under what we thought was the racist law to be able to make an application to a judge in order to be dismissed. And it was based on good behavior, being rehabilitated and the fact that they would have a low probability of offending in the future. And so that was really the meat of it. And there was a couple other things in there we did as well, which were also quite good. So we did it. Worked very closely with the Democrats, Republicans to do it. At first, President Trump was a little bit skeptical of it because he’s a big strong law and order supporter, but he made me work very hard to put together a coalition of Republicans and Democrats and law enforcement.
We had the support from the policemen, we had the support from the ACLU and ultimately, we were able to get it together. And it was an amazing thing. We ended up getting 87 votes in the Senate. This happened for me at a time while the Russia investigation stuff was still happening. New chief of staff came in, John Kelly, he basically marginalized me in the operations. So I had less day-to-day responsibilities in the White House. And so for me, this effort became one of my full-time efforts along with negotiating the Mexico trade deal and along with the Middle East efforts. And the reason why that was great was because it didn’t have a lot of support from the Republican caucus originally, and people thought there was no way it would happen. So I really was able to be the chief executive, the middle executive, the low executive, the intern.
And through that process, I really got an education on how Congress works, on how to pass legislation. I was negotiating text, I was negotiating back and forth, and I built a lot of trust. Again, I would deal with whether it’s Hakeem Jeffries or Cedric Richmond, that we built a lot of trust. We’d speak three times a day. These guys had my back, the ACLU. Again, I never thought they were suing our administration every day or every other day on something. But for whatever reason, we built trust and we’re able to work together. And then also with the real conservative groups because there was a big part of the conservative base that felt like we should be giving people a second chance. And in addition to that, this will keep our country safer and it’ll reduce the cost of what we spend on prisons. And so it was a great effort and I was very, very proud that we were able to get it done under President Trump.
So it was really a balancing act, but it was an amazing thing and I worked very closely on that with Van Jones and Jessica Jackson, who also gave me a lot of help on the left. And it was an amazing thing. Had a great team too.
And so when you go through an experience like that, you learn who’s in it for themselves. You learn who’s in it for the cause and for every thing you read about in the press of a fight I had with somebody because we were at odds. I have about 100 people who have become lifelong friends because I respect the way that when we were under fire together, they got better, they were competent, and they were there to serve for the right reason.
And so I guess the answer is yes, it is possible. You have to be careful because there are a lot of mercurial people there. I always say the politicians are like gladiators. I didn’t have as much respect for politicians till I got there. But if you think about it, everyone who’s got a congressional seat or a senate seat, there’s 25 people back at home who want their job, who think they’re smarter than them, who are trying to back stab them. And so I always say that the political dynamic, it’s like in the private sector, you’re standing on flat ground. You choose which fights you take on. When you take them on, how you fight them.
In politics, it’s like you’re standing on a ball and what you have to realize is that there’s maybe 10 things that you have to do, but there’s a potential cost to taking on each one that might destabilize you. You fall off the ball and then you lose your opportunity to pursue those. You have to always be marking everything to market and going through your calculations to make sure you can accomplish what you want to without falling off the ball and losing your opportunity to make a difference.
And I have a lot of respect for the people who suit up and go play. Again, some of them I wish they would play for different means, but the fact that they’re willing to put their name on the ballot, make the sacrifice, and go put on the fads and get hit and hit others, I think that you need those people. And I wish more people who had maybe the moral wiring that you discussed would be putting on a helmet and going to play because it’s hard. It’s hard.
Again, the years of Trump, I think that he was an outsider and he represented something that was existential to the system. You think about for the 30 years before you were either part of the Clinton Dynasty or the Bush dynasty. I think a lot of people in the country felt like that whole class, whether you’re wearing a red shirt or a blue shirt, wasn’t representing them and Trump represented a true outsider to that system. I do think that as he went in there, there was a lot of norms that were broken to try to stop him from changing the traditional power structure. So I think that we’re at a time where maybe there will be an optimistic breakthrough where you’ll have institutions that will allow for a lot more transparency into what truth really is.
When he was younger, his father would give him a book a week and make him report on it on the weekend. He was trained as a leader and as a politician, really, by his father. He’s not western educated, so he grew up in the Saudi culture and he’s a real Saudi nationalist. He loves their history, loves their heritage, has a steep understanding of the tribal nature of the region. His father was actually known to be a tremendous politician, so when he was governor of Riyadh, people who I speak to today about him say that if they had a full election, he would’ve won in a landslide. They say every time somebody went to the hospital, he was the first person to call. Anytime there was a funeral, he was the first person to show up. He’s a very, very beloved leader.
Mohammed bin Salman, he was a businessman before he got into Crown Prince. So he thinks really with a business mindset about how he runs the country, and he’s brought I think a different mindset and energy to the Middle East. One thing I’ll say that maybe that comes to mind here is that I remember early on talking with him about all the different initiatives he was taking on. He’s building a big city called Neo in the desert in a place where there really was nothing on the Red Sea, and a lot of people were criticizing the ambition of the plan. And I was sitting with him one night and I said, ‘Why are you taking on all these things? You’ve got a lot of different programs, but what most politicians do is they set lower expectations and then they exceed the expectations.” And he looked at me without hesitation.
He says, “Jared, the way I look at it is that in five years from now, if I set five goals and I achieve five goals, I’ll achieve five things. If I set a hundred goals and I fail at 50 of them, then five years I’ll accomplish 50 things.” And so it’s a very different mindset as a leader. The way I got to work with him was Saudi Arabia was a big topic in the campaign. President Trump was basically saying during the campaign that they’ve got to pay for their fair share, they haven’t been a great partner in the region. He’s very critical of Saudi. And then during the transition, I was asked by several friends to meet with a representative of Saudi Arabia. I said, “I don’t want to meet with them.”
But I came over and I met and they said, “Well, we want to make changes.” And I said, “Well, you have to make changes to how you treat women.” Then women couldn’t drive, they had guardianship laws. So you got to start working with Israel, you have to be paying more of your fair share and you have to be stopping the Wahhabism that’s being spread. Again, I had no knowledge these were just kind of the traditional talking points about Saudi Arabia. So the guy I was with basically said, this guy Fahad Toonsi, who’s a very respected minister there, he says, “Jared,” he says, “You don’t know much about Saudi Arabia, do you?” I said, “No, no, no, I don’t. It’s just really what I’ve kind of been told or what I read.” And he says, “Okay, let me do this. We want to be great allies with America. We’ve traditionally been great allies with America. Can I come back to you with a proposal on ways that we can make progress on all of the different areas where we have joint interests?”
Keep in mind at that point in time, the Middle East was a mess, and probably the single biggest issue we had after ISIS was the ideological battle. If you remember in 2016, there was the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, you had the San Bernardino shooting and people were being radicalized online with the extremism, and then there was a lot of crimes that were happening because of that. It was a big topic in the campaign, and so that when I was thinking about talking different generals and what capabilities the US had to really combat the extremism and the ideological battle, what we realized was that Saudi Arabia as the custodian of the two holiest sites in Islam, the Mecca Medina, that that would be the best partner to work with if they were willing to. But for years, they really hadn’t been willing to kind of lean into this fight.
So I said, “Sure, give a proposal.” So they come back, give a proposal, and they said, “Look, if you make President Trump’s first trip to Saudi Arabia, we will do all these different things. We’ll increase our military spending and cooperation, we’ll counter all the terror financing.” Unbelievable layer. So I took the proposal, I went to the National, then it was General Flynn. I said, “If Saudi Arabia did these things, would this be considered a big…” “Unbelievable, but it’ll never happen.” I said, “Well, they’re telling me they want to do these things. Again, having no foreign policy experience, I’m just saying I’ve got somebody telling me they want to do it and that’s kind of where we started.” Again, to office I don’t think much more about it.
And then I think it was like maybe a month in President Trump has a call with King Salman and before the call we’re in the Oval Office and the president’s basically saying, “Well, this is what we want to go through.” And I have Secretary Mattis and Secretary Tillerson, the Minister of Defense and the Secretary of State basically saying, “You have to deal with MBN. MBN is the guy who’s been our partner for all these years. He’s the head of intelligence and he’s been a great partner.” I said, “Well, if he’s been a great partner, then why do we have all these problems that you guys are complaining about with Saudi?”
I said, “I’ve been told that we have this proposal from MBS who’s the Deputy Crown Prince and that’s who we should be dealing with on this.” And so the phone call starts and President Trump listened to both of us, and on the phone call with King Salman, President Trump says, “Okay, we’ll go through all these things. These are the things we want to get done.” He says, “Well, who should we deal with?” King Salman says, “Deal with my son, the Deputy Crown Prince MBS.” So President Trump said on the phone, “Have him deal with Jared.” Because I think he knew that if he would’ve put him with the other guys, they were not believers in what he had the ability to do, and that’s how I got assigned to work with him.
I get back to my office after that, have an email from him, spoke to him for the first time, and then we just went to work. A lot of people were betting against that trip, they thought it wasn’t going to be successful, and they’ve been betting against him and he’s been underestimated, but he’s been doing an incredible job and the whole Middle East is different today because of the work that he’s done.
And I basically was at a point where I said, “Look guys, but they’re saying they want to do all these things, shouldn’t we at least give them a chance to try to do it? Why do we want to predetermine their direction by not giving them a chance to change? Just because things in the past haven’t gotten the way you want them to, that doesn’t mean they can’t go that way in the future.” So we fought the battle. They basically deferred and let me go through with it, but when I’d do the planning meetings for the trip, nobody would show up because they all thought it was going to be an absolute disaster.
By the way, they probably weren’t wrong to think that because I’d never planned a foreign trip before and I’d never done any foreign policy before. So during the planning, I’d speak to MBS almost every day and I’d go through all the different details and the things that would be coming up and I said, “Look, I really need to get these things in writing.” He sent over a guy, Dr. Musaid Al Aiban, who’s a tremendous diplomat for them. He came to Washington, stayed for three weeks, and we worked through all the different details of what we needed and we ended up coming to an arrangement on what it should be. So I think about now in retrospect why I was so focused on getting things like this done and why I even believed that they could be possible. But the answer is really the people I was talking to on the other end were telling me that these things were possible, and so just because they hadn’t been done before and just because others around me didn’t believe that they could be done, I wasn’t willing to just say, “Well, let’s not try.”
There’s a lot of interesting things here to talk about. This aspect of doing this seemingly simple that seems to be so hard to do it, as Paul describes, requires a willingness to break rules. ” There are two ways to be comfortable breaking rules: to enjoy breaking them and to be indifferent to them.” That’s an interesting distinction. “I call these two cases being aggressively and passively independent minded.” So again, that’s to enjoy breaking the rules or being indifferent to the rules. “The aggressively independent-minded are the naughty ones. Rules don’t merely fail to stop them; breaking rules gives them additional energy. For this sort of person delight at the sheer of audacity of a project sometimes supplies enough activation energy to get it started. The other way to break the rules is not to care about them at all, or perhaps even to know they exist. This is why novices and outsiders often make new discoveries; their ignorance of a field,” ignorance may be in quotes, “of a field’s assumptions act as a source of temporary, passive, independent mindedness.
Aspies also seem to have a kind of immunity to conventional beliefs. Several I know say that this helps them to have new ideas.” So the aggressive and the passive is such an interesting way of looking at it. Perhaps some aspect of this, at least in the story you told us, some passive aspect where you’re not even acknowledging, not even caring that there was rules, just kind of asking the simple question and taking the simple action.
There’s always a lot of resistance when you go against something that’s been accepted as the way that you’re supposed to do things. I came to learn over the course of my time in government that when everyone was agreeing with what I was doing, then it actually made me more nervous because I felt like you have these problems, they haven’t been solved for a long time, and then if you take the same approach as others, you’re going to fail just like they did. So taking a different approach doesn’t mean you’re going to succeed, but at least if you fail, you’re going to fail in an original way.
I did like this a lot and I think that what I saw was the people who were very good at getting things done that hadn’t been done before were people who came with different qualifications, different perspectives, and they came in and really worked the problem in untraditional ways. And so I think in the Middle East, I came in with a very different approach than people before me, not because I came in deliberately trying to do it differently, but because I came in trying to listen and understand from people why the problem hadn’t been solved and then think from a first principle’s perspective on what’s the right perspective today. Not based on what happened 50 years ago or not based on what somebody’s feelings who were hurt, but what’s the right thing to make people’s lives better, to make the world a safer and more prosperous place tomorrow.
One of my favorite quotes was from the Alice in Wonderland, where the Cheshire Cat says, “If you don’t know where you’re going, it doesn’t matter which path you take.” So I think that that’s something that really helped set them on a good path, and they’ve been very successful with it. One of the things he told me about putting that together was he said, “My father’s generation, they created this country from almost nothing. They came here, they were a poor country, they were Bedouins in the desert. And then they look back and see what they’ve done over 50 years, and they say it’s absolutely remarkable.” He said, his generation, they come in and they say, “We’re very grateful for everything that’s been done to date, but we have so much opportunity that we’re not taking advantage of.”
And so he’s now empowered the next generation to be ambitious and think big and grow with it. What that means for his vision for the Middle East is that the general architecture that should exist, and now there’s excitement in the discussions with Israel that have advanced was the general view of what we thought from a Trump perspective should be the new Middle East is having an economic and security corridor all the way from Haifa to Muscat, from Oman to Israel, where basically you go through and if you can create a security area where people can live free of fear, of terrorism and of conflict. The Middle East for the last 20 years has been a sinkhole for arms, for death, for terrorism. It’s been awful. It’s been a big national security threat for America, a big place where our treasure has gone. We’ve had a lot of our young, amazing American soldiers killed in action there, and the same thing for the Arab countries as well.
So if we can create a security architecture for that region, and then we can create economic integration between all the different countries, I mean, the amount of innovation happening in Israel is unbelievable. Think of it like Silicon Valley’s not connected to the rest of California. You have a very young population, a very digital savvy population, you have a lot of resources. And so if you can get that whole set, the potential for it is unbelievable. I do think that that’s his ultimate vision is to become a really strong country economically, and then to become a place where you could be funding advancements in science, advancements in humanity, advancements in artificial intelligence, and think about ways to be a positive influence in the world.
And so when I would think about foreign policy in general, one of the differences between foreign policy and business is that in business the conclusion of a problem set, you finish a deal. You either have a company or a property, or if you sell it, you have less to do and more capital hopefully if it’s successful. In a political deal, it’s always about paradigms. So the end of a problem set is always the beginning of a new paradigm, and you’re always thinking through how do you create an environment that leads to hopefully the best amount of positive outcomes that could occur versus creating a paradigm that will lead to negative outcomes. So bad things happen, a lot in the world, and you have to make sure that when those happen, people are held accountable for it. But you also don’t want to make sure that in the process of making sure that there’s accountability for these actions, you don’t set a lot of progress that the world is making back. That will lead to worse off situation for many more people.
So I created a slide where I showed from the Oslo Accords till the day I was there, all the different peace discussions. I put a dove in the slide for those, and then I put a tank for every time there was a war, because there was always skirmishes between Hamas and Hezbollah and the Palestinians. And then I showed two lines, and they both went from the bottom of the page all the way up like this. One of the lines was Israeli settlements. So every time a negotiation failed, Israel was able to get more land and then the other one was money to the Palestinians. I said every time a negotiation failed, the Palestinians would get more money. The problem with that money though, was that it wasn’t going to the people. Some of it would make its way down, but most of it was going to the politicians.
You had leadership of the Palestinians who was basically, I think at that point it was in the 16th year of a four-year term, so it wasn’t democratically elected. A lot of what I tried to show was that there was no rule of law, there was no judicial system, there were no property rights, and there was no opportunity or hope for the people to live a better life. And so all of the envoys to date were basically trained to go and do the same things. Again, I got massively criticized by all the previous envoys for not doing it the same way they did, but I thought the problem structurally just didn’t make sense and so I felt like the incentive structure was all wrong, and I took a different approach.
And I was dealing with their negotiators, their back channel secret negotiators, their double secret neg- I was like, “This whole thing is like, it’s a process created where nobody wants to talk about the actual solution.” So coming from the business world, I said, ‘Okay, let me just write down a proposed solution that I think is fair, and let me have each side react. Don’t tell me about theoretical things. Tell me I want to move the line from here to here. I want to change this word.” So I tried to make it much more tactical, and what I realized was the Palestinians, they’d worked so hard to get the Arab world to stay with the line of the Arab Peace Initiative.
And so I was going back and I read the Arab Peace Initiative. It was 10 lines and it didn’t have any detail, so it was a concept. And so they liked that concept because it allowed them to reject everything. They kept getting more money. I mean, Bibi Netanyahu, who runs one of the most incredible economies in the world, who runs an incredible superpower militarily for the size of their country. He would fly to Washington to meet us, and he’d be taking a commercial El Al Plane. Abbas, who runs a refugee organization, a refugee group that claims that they don’t have a state that gets billions of dollars every year from the global community would fly in a $60 million Boeing BBJ. So the whole thing was just very corrupt and off, and I do think that that’s why… I don’t think people were incentivized to solve it, to be honest.
And that line just like stuck with me. A couple days later, I was thinking about it and I said, “Wait a minute, who elected the Palestinian people to represent the Muslim world on the Al-Aqsa Mosque? And so the reason why I felt like it had never been solved was it was a riddle A, that I believed was designed to not be solved, but B, you were conflating two separate issues. You had the issue between Israel and the Muslim world, which really was the issue of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and then you had just a territorial dispute, which throughout history, you have lots of territorial disputes, and they’re usually resolved in different ways.
If you go back to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, there’s just a couple components you need to solve. Number one is territorial continuity, right? You need to figure out where do you draw the lines? And that’s something that you can talk about what people were owed 70 years ago, but it’s much more productive to say, “This is what you can make work today.” And that’s kind of what we did. We literally spent months and months drawing a map and we put something out, probably change a couple lines here and there, but by and large, it was a very pragmatic solution that I think could work and I think it could work for-
So first issue is drawing a map. Second issue is security. And again, this is one issue, we were incredibly sympathetic with Israel, which is you can’t expect a prime minister of Israel to make a deal where he’s going to make his people less secure than before. So we worked very closely with them on a security apparatus. We laid something out that I think would keep the whole area safer, and it would make sure Israel was safe and also keep the Palestinian issue safe. So you needs security.
Number three was the religious sites, and that was one that was actually always made much more complicated by people, the Al-Aqsa Mosque, because you basically have Ḥaram al-Sharīf, which is a place where the mosque was built in the seventh or eighth century, but originally it was where the Holy of Holies were in the [inaudible 02:45:52] for the Jewish people. And then compounding by the fact that you have all the Christian holy sites in Jerusalem. It’s a city that should be bringing everyone together, but in fact has become a place where you have wars and hatred, and a lot of different conflicts that have risen because of it.
But what I said was, instead of fighting over concepts of sovereignty, which is interesting, how I got to the notion that this wasn’t really the big issue. I basically just operationally, why don’t we just make it simple? Let everyone come and be able to worship as long as they’re being able to worship peacefully.
So that’s really the contours of it. And what the Palestinians have done is they’ve kind of deflected from a lot of their own shortcomings, and a lot of the Arab leaders did that as well, kind of in the Abraham Accord days, by kind of allowing this issue to be so prevalent.
So one thing I’ll say on the Palestinians is that what we tried to do by laying out plan was we said, “Okay, what are the reasons why the Palestinian people are not having the lives that they deserve?” And I’ll give you a couple of things. One is I studied the economies of Jordan, West Bank, Gaza, Egypt, Morocco. This was numbers from like 2019. But what was interesting was the GDP per capita of somebody living in the West Bank was actually the same as Jordan, and it was actually more than somebody living in Egypt. And the debt of GDP that the Palestinians had was like 30, 40% compared to Egypt, which was at like 130%. In Jordan, which was at 110%. Then Lebanon, which is at 200%.
And so you’re in a situation where a lot of this stuff didn’t make sense, but if you draw lines, create institutions where Palestinian people can now feel like they have property rights and have ownership over their place, and let the money flow past the leadership ranks to the people, let them have jobs, let them have opportunity, and then let all Muslims from throughout the world have access to the mosque and Israel, making sure that they can control the security, which I think the Jordanians and a lot of others want Israel to have strong security control there to prevent the radicalists and the extremists from coming, you could have peace there very easily.
But then the other thing you mentioned so simply, which is you have money flow past the leadership ranks. How do you have money flow past the leadership ranks in Palestine? So make sure that the money that’s invested in Palestine, the West Bank, gets to the people.
And so I think for Israel, they view all these things as existential. They value their safety. They’ve been under attack for a long time. I do think having a deal where we can say, “How do the Jews and the Muslims, Christians, come together?” I think King Abdullah from Jordan’s been an incredible custodian for the mosque. I think everyone, in my travels, recognize that he’s the right guy for that. That the king of Jordan should be the custodian of the mosque. We should have some kind of framework to make sure everyone has access. The more countries that have diplomatic relations with Israel, the more Muslims and Arabs that should be able to come and visit. And by the way, the more you have these normalizations, think about what that will do to the economy of the West Bank where they’ll have great hotels, hospitality, a tremendous tourism industry because of all the Christian, Muslim, and Jewish holy sites that they have there.
So there’s a lot of potential there. We just have to get unstuck. I believe that it’s so possible if the leaders want to make tomorrow better, that they can. And unfortunately, the people who suffer the most are really are just the Palestinian people. And I think that in Gaza, they’re hostages to Hamas. And in the West Bank, they’re just held back because their leadership just is afraid or too self-interested to give them the opportunity to change their paradigm and pursue the potential of what they have. And by the way, it’s an incredibly well-educated population, it’s an incredibly capable population, and they’re right next to Israel where the economy, they need everything. And so the potential should be incredible if you can just move some of these pieces.
But again, there’s still a lot of emotion and hatred you have to work through as well. But I do believe that you’re not going to solve that by litigating the past. You’re only going to solve that by creating an exciting paradigm for the future and getting everyone to buy in, and then move towards that.
How it occurred, part of why I wrote the book was to put this down for history’s sake, to go through all the different intentional, unintentional, circumstantial things that occurred. It’s funny, we left government. There’s a lot of people saying, “Well, this is why that…” I said, “I was kind of at the middle of it, and I couldn’t even perfectly articulate why it happened,” because it was in evolution of a lot of things. And I joke that we made peace on plan C, but only because we went through the alphabet three times, failing at every letter. But we didn’t give up and we kept going and we got it done.
The traditional thinking had always been was that Muslim Arab countries would not make peace with Israel until the Israeli-Palestinian issue was solved. And what we were able to do is separate the issues and then make these connections, which are leading to amazing interaction between Jews and Muslims. So when I think about, obviously you have national security, you have emotional benefits from these things. But the single biggest benefit that I’ve seen from the Accords is that if you were an Arab or a Muslim and you were willing to say positive things about Israel or the Jews before this came out, you had been viciously attacked by the media or the hordes of influencers or the extremists in these different countries. What this did was it brought out into the public the fact that Jews and Muslims can be together and they can be respectful, they can have meals together, and that the cultures can live together in peace.
But again, one of the things that I respect about the work you do is you believe in the power of conversation and the power of human interaction. And these issues and gaps between us feel so big when we think about them, when we’re told about them, when we read about them. But when we go and sit with each other, all of a sudden we realize maybe we have a lot more in common than we have that divides us.
For me, what I’ve seen about it that’s made the biggest difference is I’ve seen people who wouldn’t have the ability to be together, be together, and that’s now forming a nucleus of togetherness, which is a restoration. So you think about the modern Middle East from post Holocaust to now, again, in 1948, after that War of Independence, you had Jews living in Baghdad and Cairo. Then they became so anti-Jewish that they then expelled all of the Jews from all of these capitals of those cities. So you think about the Jewish history in Baghdad. I mean, I think that Talmud was written in Baghdad. It was a place where, in Babylon, where the Jewish people thrived, I think in 570 BCE, when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem, he took about 10,000 Jews back with him to Babylon because he thought it’d be good for his economy. And during that place, the Jews actually flourished and had a good life there.
So for a 1,000 years before the second World War, the Jews and the Muslims lived very peacefully together. So people say that what we’re doing now is an aberration. I actually think it’s not an aberration. I think it’s actually a return to the time where people can live together culturally. And so this is the beginning of the end of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and it’s the beginning of togetherness, which again, you think about how much war, how much provocation, how much terrorism has been made in the name of religious conflict. This is, I think, the start of the process of religious respect and understanding.
And my thinking was is that, through my time in government, I’d met so many people, I’d learned so much about the world. I had a big understanding now for how the macroeconomic picture worked. And I did feel like there was a lot more that I could do than just going back to real estate.
In the meantime, I was getting a lot of calls from different CEOs and companies saying, “Can you help me with this company? Can you help me with that company? Your knowledge could be helpful to help this company navigate this challenge or to expand internationally.” And so I said, “You know what? Maybe I should create a business to do an investment firm, where I can do something different, where I’m putting together geopolitical expertise and traditional private equity and growth investing and figure out how to do that, where I can do something differentiated, where I can invest in growing things and help with my navigation skills and relationships.”
So that was kind of the thesis of what I thought could make sense as kind of a next step. I called different friends. They were very excited to back the effort. Obviously this was coming off the success that I just had in the Middle East where I did six peace deals there. And one of the notions I wanted to be able to do with the firm was to be able to take money from the Gulf and then to be able to invest it in Israel, to continue to build the economic links between the countries. Again, if countries have more economic ties, I think war and fighting is less likely. And then in addition to that, I wanted to figure out how do you bring the entrepreneurs together from both of those countries?
So that was really the mission of what I set out to do. So far, I’ve been enjoying it. It’s been a lot of fun. I’ve been learning a ton. I think we’re doing very well with it.
In terms of the criticisms, I think that I’ve been criticized in every step of everything I’ve always done in my life. And so what I would say is, this business is actually an objective metric business, right? It’s about returns. So in three, four years from now, five years from now, see how I do? Hopefully I’ll do very well and judge me based on that.
In terms of any of the nefarious things, I haven’t been accused of violating any laws, and I haven’t violated any of the ethics rules either. When I was in government, I, every year, submitted all my financials to the Office of Government Ethics. They certified it every year, and I followed every rule and every law possible. So to my critics, I’ll say, “Criticized me before, you’ll criticize me now. I’m going to keep doing me and I’m going to keep pursuing things that I think are worthwhile.” And I’m very excited about this chapter of my career.
But again, that’s what Kim Kardashian did when she had a case of clemency with a woman, Alice Johnson, that she felt strongly about. We went through the case. I wouldn’t have had her call if I didn’t think it was a legitimate case. So we spent about eight months quietly working through the case, working through the details, to make sure that it really was a worthy case.
I brought it to President Trump said, “She’d like to come meet with you to talk about this case.” And he said, “Have her come in.” So she came in. We went through the case, and President Trump ultimately granted the clemency to Alice Johnson, who was a woman who was accused of being part of a drug ring. She had basically a life sentence for doing it. She’d served 22 years in prison. While in prison, she’s basically was a grandmother, and she was putting on the prison plays, she was mentoring young women in prison. Somebody who, again, there’s always a risk, but by and large had a very, very, very low risk of committing a crime in the future.
And then it goes back to the notion of, are we going to judge people by the worst decision they make in their life? And so President Trump was willing to grant the clemency, and it went.
And I think that it just goes to the notion of maybe this goes back to his unpredictability in a positive way, which is if you go sit with him and you make your case, he’ll hear you, he’ll listen to you, and he’s not afraid to act, and he’s not afraid to be controversial, which I think is a good thing.
So from a foreign policy point of view, in particular, his unpredictability just meant that everyone was always on their back foot. People were afraid to kind of cross America. And what I would tell people who don’t like Trump is I would say, “Think about how crazy he’s making you and his enemies. He did that to the enemies of America.” Yeah, so he was a very, very strong president and I think did a great job.
I’ll tell you a funny story, just popped into my mind from the tariffs is we did also, we used a 232 national security exemption to protect our steel industry, and we put tariffs on steel and aluminum. And again, I thought about this because we also negotiated them with Canada. And there was a very funny phone call where Trudeau is calling Trump. And again, they got along decently well. Trudeau’s calling saying, “You can’t put national security tariffs on us in Canada. We’re your NATO ally. We fought wars with you. We do military together.” And Trump says to him, “Didn’t you burn the White House down in 1812?” And Trudeau says, “That was the French.” He says, “No, it was the Canadians.”
And so it was just, like I said, he’s always keeping everyone on their toes.
But with that being said, I think 100%, if Trump was president, there would not be a war in Ukraine today.
But now he’s promising his people we’re going to win the war, and the military action has not necessarily coincided with that sentiment. And so there has to be some form of off ramp, but he can’t say that publicly. So for him to be able to work privately with somebody who can help create a new paradigm where both leaders can say, “We’re going to stop the bloodshed. We’re going to stop the risk of nuclear war for the world. We’re going to stop what’s happening.” That’s really what it will take. How that occurs, again, it’s not something I’m involved in now, so I don’t know who the right broker is or how to put that together, but essentially they need somebody in between them who can figure out how do you create a landing zone that works? Because neither party’s going to jump until the pool is filled with water.
And you have to outline what the go forward looks like, because you can’t just stop it for them to get worse for both parties. You have to move it forward into what happens next, that hopefully can start to turn the tide to benefit both sides where they can focus on the future instead of being stuck into the old paradigm of who started what, who’s to blame for what, who did what to who. It’s just a lot of tough stuff now that’s occurred that’s going to be hard to walk back. And it’s a big task to get it done, but for the sake of the world, it’d be amazing if we were able to reach a conclusion to that conflict.
I always thought, from the beginning, that Putin would try to bring in President Xi in China to resolve it, to basically give a big screw you to America to say, “China’s now the one in charge of this.” But that hasn’t seemed to manifest itself to date either. But it takes leadership. The leaders have to get it and say, “Let’s get everyone together and let’s try to get this done.” Because every day it goes on, A, more people are dying, and B, we do risk a nuclear war for the world, which is not a good situation.
And again, people may attack me for saying that that sounds naive. Again, the past 15 years may show that that’s not the case, but I don’t believe that countries have permanent enemies, and I don’t believe countries have permanent allies. Right? Again, you think about the US and Russia and World War II, we worked together to defeat the Nazis, right? And now we’re great allies with Germany, who basically was our great enemy in World War II. We’re great allies with Japan, who was our great enemy in World War II.
So it goes back to the notion we discussed earlier of you shouldn’t condemn tomorrow to be like yesterday if you’re unhappy with yesterday. So number one is I would definitely ask him about that.
The phone call that you mentioned was after we did a pretty intense negotiation to create the largest oil cut in the history of oil production. So during COVID, demand just shut off like crazy, and it was stopping very quickly. Saudi and Russia, at that time, were having a conflict. They created this thing called OPEC+, which goes back again, history between the two countries where they had conflicts, and then all of a sudden they were working together to try to stabilize the oil markets. But they couldn’t agree on the cuts, so Saudi actually increased production. So you had two things hitting at once where Saudi and Russia were both increasing production and demand was dropping.
So you were headed for a real crisis, and I was starting to get calls from a lot of the oil industry executives here in America saying, “You don’t understand. We can’t just flip a switch and turn off our oil wells. We’re running out of storage here.” And I said, “Look, president Trump likes low oil prices, so he’s not upset about what’s happening. You have to call him and if he gives me permission or the instruction, then I can try to intervene. But right now, he’s not inclined to intervene.”
After a little bit, he said, “It’s time. Get involved. Go do it.” It was right over Passover. This was during COVID. I spent three days nonstop on the phone with [inaudible 03:16:09] from Russia and with MBS directly, and I was dealing with Dan Brouillette, who was our energy minister, going back and forth, and it was crazy. I mean, it was just one of the craziest negotiations. We ended up agreeing on the largest oil cut in the history of the world.
But the story you went to before, which was pretty funny, was finally make the deal, and we set up a call between King Salman, Vladimir Putin, and President Trump to announce the deal. I’m like, “Oh, this is great.” So President Trump gets on, “Congratulations. We have a deal.” And then King Salman says, “We don’t have a deal. Mexico hasn’t agreed to their cuts.” He’s saying, “What do you mean?” So they were part of the OPEC+. And so I get a note saying, “You got to go call Mexico. So I’m calling Mexico and we’re dealing, they’re saying, “We’re not doing any cuts.” I said, “Why? I said, we’re hedged at $55.” I said, “Why didn’t you tell us that at the beginning?” So I’m telling the Saudis. So we were working through this whole thing.
So meanwhile, we were trying to find the compromise with Mexico. I set up a call with Trump and Putin, so they can kind of talk this through. And he was always trying to play the game of how do we get Russia away from China? He always thought that that was not the right strategic framework for US interests. And again, we had no problems with them during that time.
What I would say is that for Zelenskyy and Putin, any conversation with both of them is about understanding their perspective. I think with Putin, he’s a student of history from the things that I saw with him. If you look at Russia over the last 500 years, I think they were attacked by the Polish in early 1600. I think they were attacked by the Swedes in the 1700s. I think they were attacked by Napoleon in the 1800s. And then in the 1900s, they were attacked by Germany twice. And so from his perspective there is… In the early days of Russia, they were attacked by the Mongols. They were-
And I think that there’s two different parts of the mindset. The people who are most cynical of Putin will say, “Well, he’s just trying to recreate the USSR. He’s being expansionist,” and the people who want to be sympathetic to him will say, “Well, if you think about it, the Russian perception of the NATO arrangement was that they wouldn’t be expanding westward. Over the last years they’ve included all these countries that they said, they promised they wouldn’t include,” who knows what the promises were or were or weren’t?
But what I do know from his perspective is allowing Ukraine and to NATO was always a red line, and that’s why we never offered it. We never provoked it. We never brought it up. We said we’re going to arm them, and we basically said, “Just calm down. We don’t want any conflicts there. We have bigger issues and bigger opportunities to work from.” So I do think you have to think through, what’s a paradigm that he can accept? And I do think that he’ll give the justification for why he’s done what he’s done, and then I think the framework for a solution is about, how do we move both parties forward? Tough job. I hope you get the opportunity to do it because I think it’s a conversation that will only help the world hopefully find a pathway forward.
So, the Chinese are very proud and a lot of it’s about face, and so in order to negotiate for that first call, we basically agreed on what would happen in the call. So not, “Let’s just have a call, say hi, nice to meet you.” It’s a question of, President Trump basically agreed that he would acknowledge the One China Policy, which he didn’t see as a big concession because you could always unacknowledge it the next day, “So yeah, I’ll acknowledge it, and then we’ll go and exchange.” President Xi was going to come over to the US for a visit so they could sit together and they want to do it outside the White House, and so we agreed on Mar-a-Lago, which I also thought was good because President Trump always felt much more comfortable when he was hosting at his properties, and he just felt at home. And so, he liked having people as his guests and he loved it. He always felt really relaxed and it was great. So, that was really what we did.
Then, the Chinese come over, very much anticipated visit. And it was incredible, so they were supposed to sit together for 15 minutes, and they sent about an hour and a half together. And during that meeting with President Trump, I said, “Look, let’s just set some ground rules to this relationship. Let’s just not talk about Taiwan. Just don’t do anything I don’t want it on the table. If it does, I’m going to have to do harsh things. I don’t want this to be a problem for four years. We’ve got bigger issues.” They basically just, again, you notice four years of Trump administration: no Taiwan talk whatsoever. It was a non-issue. Started talking about the trade issues. They spent a lot of time on North Korea. President Trump was trying to get the perspective from President Xi about North Korea because that was again considered from Obama, the biggest national security issue that we faced at the time, and they just had a good feeling for each other.
It also helped that my wife and I, we actually had a Chinese nanny and teacher in our house, and our kids learned fluent Mandarin, and our daughter actually opened when President Xi and President Trump were together with Melania and with Madame Peng, my daughter actually sang them a couple of Chinese songs. And I thought that was a nice way to show we’re tough, but we respect your culture because the Chinese have an incredible culture that goes back thousands of years: they’re very proud in how they do it. And I think that sign of respect also set things off in a very warm way for President Trump say, “My granddaughter speaks Chinese and we’re showing you the respect,” which I think is very important, and he did have respect for them.
The next part about the visit, obviously we had a lot of discussions on trade, but the part that was probably most impactful to me was President Xi basically did an hour monologue at lunch where he just went through Chinese history from his perspective, and he talked about with particular emphasis on the Treaty of Unequals and then, the 100 years of humiliation. And then, you go through from Mao all the way to today and you had China coming back and rising, and you could tell that he learned the lessons from the past and was very committed to seeing China go through. So, that was a different time, right? So, China today is different than it was in 2017. In 2017, I remember President Xi was at Davos and he was vetted by all the top business people in the world as, “Donald Trump was the threat to the global world order. President Xi was the champion of free trade and the biggest champion of environmentalism and fighting for climate change.” And what occurred was President Trump came in and basically said, “I think China has not been following the rules-based order,” took very drastic approaches with tariffs. Every time he would do the tariffs again, I had Mnuchin, our treasury sector come to Ivanka at my house, “If he does this, this is going to crash the whole economy,” and by the way, he believed it. These were things that people were telling him would be very tough to do. President Trump had a gentleman named Ambassador Lighthizer, Robert Lighthizer. He was really the tip of the spear on all of our trade negotiations. He worked very well with Secretary Mnuchin, and we ended up increasing tariffs to numbers that hadn’t even been thought could happen. So we did the first round of tariffs, then the Chinese came back and retaliated very surgically trying to hit us in all the areas that politically would’ve been difficult. And what Trump did was instead of backing down, he took some of the revenue from the tariffs, gave it to the farmers and said, “I know that this is going to hurt your business, but I’m going to make sure you guys are made whole,” and then he doubled down, and basically went back at the Chinese with even more tariffs.
So, what we watched over a year and a half was probably the biggest hand of poker that was ever played, and it was an amazing experience to be a part of it. And the role I played was really working for Secretary Mnuchin and Ambassador Lighthizer as a back channel with the Chinese to make sure we can just deescalate things and get to solutions in the best way possible. So anyway, it was a fascinating time, but if you think about the global awareness of the bad practices that China was putting in place today versus what they were in 2016, I think one of President Trump’s most successful policies was shifting the way the entire world understood the threat of China, and then putting in place the beginning of a regime to try and rebalance the world so that we could have more economic parity.
And by rejecting that, the rest of the world got stronger, China remained weaker. Then, you had the Opium Wars, the Chinese had big opium problems through all the trade back and forth. And then, China from about 1840 to the 1940, 100 years where they, after all these treaties, were really a second class country. And so then, you have the People’s Revolution that comes in, and he talks about how China very strategically, as a very poor country, would fight their way back and build brick by brick. And he proffers in the book that Nixon didn’t go to China and open China, it was China that actually went to Nixon and was able to use Nixon in order to open up. And then, they talk about how under Carter, they were able to get the US to contribute to a lot of their, they were able to start borrowing the US know-how from our university systems, from our medical, from our science, from our research.
And the whole notion that was the conventional thinking of American leaders was that the more we helped China advance, the more they would become a free market economy, and it was a great market. The only difference was was that they weren’t allowing us access, they were making our companies basically give them all of their technical knowledge, they were stealing our intellectual property, they were doing espionage to steal a lot of the patents, they were just ignoring our patents and they weren’t following any of the rules of international trade. Then, they started becoming the world’s manufacturing hub. They basically came the world’s factory, and then they started this whole initiative called the Belt and Road Initiative in order to start locking in their lines of trades: they were buying up all the ports everywhere. They were building railways, thinking, “How do we lock in our distribution so that we can maintain the dominance as the world’s global factory?”
And so, it was a brilliant long-term plan that they were doing. And by raising awareness, by putting the tariffs, Trump slowed them down a lot. The real question is, if they actually did achieve this full objective of becoming the world dominant country, what they would’ve done with it, whether they would’ve been nefarious or not. I think from my perspective, even with some of the divisions and issues we have now in America, I still would rather an American-led world order than a Chinese-led world order. But the notion was is that they were playing a very zero-sum game and really going to be the dominant leader in this new world order. So that really framed the perspective, and the Chinese were always fearing, “Is Trump trying to stop our rise?”, and you have a great book also by Graham Allison that he writes about, are we destined for war between us and China? And he goes through different historical times where you have a power and a rising superpower.
And I think more than half the time it ends up leading to war. So the question is, what’s going to happen here? And I do think that Trump’s perspective, and this is my interpretation, because everything was always tactical day-to-day, and he was unpredictable to the Chinese, which they couldn’t deal with, and he was unpredictable even to his team sometimes because he was playing it day by day and issue by issue, and always changing and adjusting, which is how an entrepreneur thinks. He respected the job they did by building their country: they moved 300 million people out of poverty into the middle class. They did it at the expense of a lot of other countries throughout the world, especially America.
But Trump says, “Look, stupid politicians made deals. I respect China for doing what they did, but what I want to do is I want to change the paradigm so that for the next 20 years we can maintain our advantage over them, we can maintain our competitive dynamic,” and his general view was that America is the best private sector in the world, we have a lot of the best minds in the world, and if we can just have a level playing field with set rules, then America should be able to outperform. And so, that’s really what we were trying to do: we were trying to get rid of some of their state subsidies, make them follow some of these international rules of trade, and not allowing them to do predatory investments that then undercut different industries that we had ,so that they can have global market dominance or monopolies on different industries and then have pricing power, but also geopolitical power.
So, one of the examples that people talk about now is China for the last 20 years was very advanced on seeing this electrification trend. They subsidized solar panels, a lot of the American solar panel players were put out of business. So now, I think it’s 90% plus of solar panels in the world are manufactured in China, and then all the rare earths that you need in order to make these solar panels and to make these electric vehicles, China’s bought up most of them and a lot of the refining capacities in China. So, thinking through strategically, how do we create an even playing field so that we’re not at the mercy of them, and how you can have a rules-based world order, that was really the thought of what we were trying to work towards.
“You’re going to an active war zone.” I’m like, “Okay, so I guess I’m going to a war zone,” I didn’t really think this thing fully through. I get on the plane with Dunford and we land in Iraq and he looks like GI Joe. He’s a great general, he’s very well respected in the military, and we go in and we get on Black Hawk helicopter. They said, “You know what? Today’s a nice day, let’s take the sides off,” and so I get on the plane and there’s a military service officer who then takes a machine gun, locks it into a thing, takes the bullets, puts them into the gun, and is sitting there saying, “We’re ready to go,” and then I’m looking out and there’s like three other helicopters with guys. One was an Osprey with a guy, buckled in also with a machine gun looking out, we take off, and we’re flying over Baghdad from the airport to the embassy. And as we’re going, I’m sitting in an open air helicopter with the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, guys with machine guns everywhere-
But I think just being behind the scenes for me just gave me more maneuverability in the sense that, again, it goes back to trust and people knowing that I wasn’t going to try to publicize the things they were telling me. I think it just gave me more ability to operate that way. And I also realized too, communicating is a very important skill. Luckily in Washington, there’s no shortage of amazing communicators. I think there were a lot of people who were much better than me than being communicators. So I was very happy that they were willing to do it because it wasn’t something that I had a lot of experience with or necessarily I thought I was very good at. And so, I just did my job and just focused on getting things done.
And I just think it’s something where if you want to accomplish something, a lot of people I hear they complain about what other people do or why it’s hard or why it’s impossible. And again, I say this as somebody who’s been so blessed with so many things in life, but when I’ve had challenges or things I’ve wanted to achieve, I just focus and say, ” What can I do?”, and I’ll read everything I can get my hands on. If the door closes, I’ll try the window. If the window closes, I’ll try the chimney. If the chimney closes, I’ll try to dig a tunnel. It’s just, if you want to accomplish something, you just have to go at it.
And I think the most important thing I’ll say, sorry, I’m thinking my way into this answer is just do the right thing. I think that’s also right. And I saw that in my career in be good to people, be honest, do the right thing. And if you do that, I think long-term, it does pay off. Maybe not in politics, but in the world at large, it does. And my hope is in politics it will as well.
Ivanka, she’s an incredible researcher, she’s just voracious. And so, she gave me some of my best books and some incredible advice as well. But that was really the process. And then, I think that was kind of the first stage. And then, the second stage was just constant iteration and readjusting plan as you continue to get more learning. And one story I tell in the book as well is that on my first trip to the Middle East where I met with Mohamed bin Zayed, who I spoke about earlier, the ruler of UAE, I spent two hours with him asking him questions and really going through the Israeli-Palestinian issue, the Israeli-Arab issue. And he said to me at the end of the meeting, he says, “Jared, I think you’re going to make peace here in the Middle East,” and I was shocked because first of all, he was at the time I think one of the most respected leaders in the region, somebody who I found to be very wise, and super thoughtful, and experienced.
And I said to him, “Why do you say that?”, I was flattered, obviously, but not certain why he was saying that based on the fact that I didn’t know what my plan was, I didn’t know what I was going to do and I had no pathway to make peace. And he said, “Well, the US usually sends one of three different kinds of people to come see me. The first are people who come and they fall asleep in meetings. The second are people who come and they basically read me notes but have no ability to interact on the message they’re there to convey. And then, the third have been people who have come to convince me to do things that aren’t in my interests. You’re the first person who’s ever come here and has just asked questions. Why have you done that?”
I said, “Because I figure this problem’s been going on for a long time, you live here, I’ll be gone at some point. You’re going to have to live with the consequences of whatever my work is, and the US has a lot of power. And my question is, what would you do if you were me and how would you approach this? And help me think about it.” And again, I wasn’t going to then take his plan and then execute it, but I thought it’d be very provocative to understand from the people in the region and instructive how they would use the resource and the power that the US had to solve the problems that were having significant impact on their lives.
I think in medical and science, we’re going to have cures for diseases. We have the potential in 10, 20 years from now to enter a dawn for humanity that could be incredible: we could become multi-planetary, we can explore the wonders of the world, we can find things we didn’t know. So, I think that if we put our energy towards finding these advancements that will improve the lives of everyone on this planet instead of figuring out ways to have these tensions between us, that for me, is the most optimistic case for what’s possible. And the reason why I believe it’s possible is because somebody with no experience, somebody who all I really had was the faith of a leader. And I had the courage to try, and I went out there with other people, and we took on some of the most hopeless, impossible problems, and we succeeded. And if we were able to do that, then everyone else should be able to do that as well.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 1:17 – Hamas attack on Israel
- 4:10 – Response to attack
- 10:28 – History of Hamas
- 13:09 – Iran
- 14:55 – Al-Aqsa Mosque
- 21:20 – Abraham Accords
- 30:14 – Trump vs Biden on Middle East
- 39:15 – Israeli-Saudi Normalization
- 43:26 – How the Israel-Gaza war ends
- 47:44 – Benjamin Netanyahu
- 51:21 – Palestinian support
- 54:01 – Trump 2024
- 57:30 – Human nature
- 1:04:28 – Geopolitics and negotiation
- 1:13:10 – North Korea
- 1:21:50 – Personalities of leaders
- 1:28:25 – Government bureaucracy
- 1:34:11 – Accusations of collusion with Russia
- 1:43:50 – Ivanka
- 1:49:45 – Father
- 1:58:28 – Money and power
- 2:07:11 – Trust and betrayal
- 2:16:12 – Mohammed bin Salman
- 2:38:31 – Israeli–Palestinian peace process
- 2:53:01 – Abraham Accords and Arab-Israeli normalization
- 3:03:07 – Donald Trump
- 3:08:13 – War in Ukraine
- 3:13:29 – Vladimir Putin
- 3:20:48 – China
- 3:39:04 – Learning process
- 3:45:34 – Hope for the future
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Jared Kushner, former senior advisor to the President during the Donald Trump administration and author of Breaking History, A White House memoir. He’s one of the most influential and effective presidential advisors in modern history, helping conduct negotiations with some of the most powerful leaders in the world and deliver results on trade, criminal justice reform, and historic progress towards peace in the Middle East. On Thursday, October 5th, we recorded conversation on topics of war and peace, history and power in the Middle East and beyond. This was about a day and a half before the Hamas attack on Israel, and then we felt we must sit down again on Monday, October 9th and add a discussion on the current situation. We open the podcast with a second newly recorded part. My heart goes out to everyone who has and is suffering in this war. I pray for your strength and for the long-term peace and flourishing of the Israeli and Palestinian people. I love you all. This is a Lex Fridman podcast. And now, dear friends, here’s Jared Kushner.
The following is a conversation with Jared Kushner, former senior advisor to the President during the Donald Trump administration and author of Breaking History, A White House memoir. He’s one of the most influential and effective presidential advisors in modern history, helping conduct negotiations with some of the most powerful leaders in the world and deliver results on trade, criminal justice reform, and historic progress towards peace in the Middle East. On Thursday, October 5th, we recorded conversation on topics of war and peace, history and power in the Middle East and beyond. This was about a day and a half before the Hamas attack on Israel, and then we felt we must sit down again on Monday, October 9th and add a discussion on the current situation. We open the podcast with a second newly recorded part. My heart goes out to everyone who has and is suffering in this war. I pray for your strength and for the long-term peace and flourishing of the Israeli and Palestinian people. I love you all. This is a Lex Fridman podcast. And now, dear friends, here’s Jared Kushner.
Hamas attack on Israel
We did a lot of this conversation before the Hamas attack on Israel, and we decided to sit down again and finish the discussion to address the current situation which is still developing. If I may allow me to summarize the situation as it stands today, it’s morning Monday, October 9th. On Saturday, October 7th at 6:30 AM Israel time, Hamas fired thousands of rockets into Southern Israel. The rocket attacks served as cover for a multi-pronged infiltration of Israel territory by over 1000 Hamas militants. This is shortly after at 7:40 AM.
The Hamas militants went door to door in border towns killing civilians and taking captives, including women and children. In response to this, Israeli Air Force began carrying out strikes in Gaza, also fighting on the ground in Israel to clear out Hamas militants from Israel territory and preparing to mobilize Israeli troops for potential ground attack on Hamas and Gaza. Now, of course, this is what it appears to be right now, and this along with other things might change because the situation is still developing. The IDF is ordering civilian residents of Gaza to evacuate their homes for their safety. Benjamin Netanyahu declared war in several statements and warned Israelis to brace themselves for a long and difficult war. Just today, Israeli ministers ordered a “complete siege of Gaza interrupting supplies of electricity, food, water, and fuel from Israel to Gaza.” As of now, October 9th, the death toll is over 1200 people and over 130 hostages taken to Gaza by Hamas. As I said, the events are rapidly unfolding, so these numbers will sadly increase, but hopefully our words here can at least in part, speak to the timeless underlying currents of the history and as you write about the power dynamics of the region. For people who don’t know, Gaza is a 25 miles long, six miles wide strip of territory along the Mediterranean Sea. It borders Israel on the east and north and Egypt on the southwest. It’s densely populated, about 2.3 million people, and there’s been a blockade of Gaza by Israel and Egypt since 2007 when Hamas took power. I could just summarize that Hamas is a Palestinian militant group which rules the Gaza Strip. It originated in 1988, and it came to power in Gaza in 2006. As part of its charter, it’s sworn to the destruction of Israel, and it is designated by the United States, European Union, UK, and of course Israel as a terrorist group.
Response to attack
Given that context, what are your feelings as a human being and what is your analysis as the former senior advisor to the president under the Trump administration of the current situation in Israel and Gaza?
Jared Kushner
I think you did an excellent job of summarizing a lot of the context, but watching what’s unfolded over the last 48 hours has been truly heartbreaking to see. We’re still in the early stages of what’s developing, but seeing the images on X of militants, terrorists going door to door with machine guns gunning down innocent civilians, seeing beheaded Israeli soldiers, seeing young 20 year olds at a rave, a dance party to celebrate peace with militants flying in and then shooting machine guns to kill people indiscriminately, seeing young children captive and held prisoner, seeing 80-year old grandmothers, a Holocaust survivor also being taken captive. These are just images and actions that we have not seen in this world since 9/11. This is a terror attack on the scale of which we have not seen, and it’s been incredibly hard for a lot of people to comprehend.
I think you did an excellent job of summarizing a lot of the context, but watching what’s unfolded over the last 48 hours has been truly heartbreaking to see. We’re still in the early stages of what’s developing, but seeing the images on X of militants, terrorists going door to door with machine guns gunning down innocent civilians, seeing beheaded Israeli soldiers, seeing young 20 year olds at a rave, a dance party to celebrate peace with militants flying in and then shooting machine guns to kill people indiscriminately, seeing young children captive and held prisoner, seeing 80-year old grandmothers, a Holocaust survivor also being taken captive. These are just images and actions that we have not seen in this world since 9/11. This is a terror attack on the scale of which we have not seen, and it’s been incredibly hard for a lot of people to comprehend.
My heart goes out, obviously, to all of the families of the victims, to the families of those who are held in captive now and to all of Israel because one of the beautiful things about the state of Israel is that when one Israeli is hurting, the entire nation comes together. It’s a shame that it’s taking an action like this to unify the nation, but I have seen incredibly beautiful signs over the last 48 hours of a country coming together. The Jewish people have been under oppression before. The Jewish people know what it’s like, and seeing people rally together to fight for their homeland to try to reestablish safety is a very beautiful thing to watch. I wish it wasn’t something we had to watch, but it is.
With that being said though, the backdrop, I’ve been speaking to friends over the last couple of days. One friend I spoke with last night who was saying that a good friend messaged him saying, I’m going in. We’re going to do some operations to try to free some of the hostages held in one of the kibbutzes. Messaged him the next morning. He was one of the first through the door to try to free these hostages, and he was killed by a Hamas militant. Sadly, we’re going to be hearing many, many more stories of brave Israeli soldiers trying to get these terrorists out of Israel, trying to free innocent civilians who unfortunately are risking their lives to do it. They’re all heroes, but some will have less good faith than others, sadly.
It’s a very, very heartbreaking moment, and I do think that it’s very important at this moment in time for the entire world to stand behind Israel. I think that Hamas has shown the entire world who they really are. I think what their aim is, what they’re willing to do, and all of the strong security that Israel’s put in place over the last years, which in some instances was criticized, I think is now being validated, that there was a real threat that they were looking to deter. Short answer is my heart is broken, praying for peace, praying for strength, praying for Israel to do what it needs to do to avoid being in this situation again, which is either eliminating or severely degrading Hamas’ capabilities. There cannot be peace in Israel and in the Middle East, while there is a terror group that is being funded by Iran that is allowed to flourish and is allowed to plan operations that are going to aim to kill innocent civilians.
As somebody who was formerly in this position, who was intimately involved with Israel with the strategies to minimize attacks from Hamas and to try to turn the region around, and I think we did do a very substantial job under President Trump. The Middle East went from one of the most chaotic regions in the world. You had ISIS in 2016, ISIS had a caliphate the size of Ohio. They’re beheading journalists. They were killing Christians. They controlled 8 million people. They were planning attacks all over the world from their caliphate. They were using the internet to radicalize people. We had the San Bernardino shooting in America. We had the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, and there was real threat. Then you had Iran, which was given $150 billion in a glide path to a nuclear weapon, and they were using their newfound riches to fund Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, different rebels all over the region that were looking to destabilize further. Syria was in a civil war where 500,000 people were killed. Yemen was destabilized, Libya was destabilized, and it was just a mess, and all of America’s allies had felt betrayed. President Trump came into power. We rebuilt the trust and the relationships with all of our traditional allies. We were able to eliminate ISIS, the territorial caliphate, and then we’re able to project strength in the region, really go after Iran’s wallet. We were able to stop through crushing sanctions a lot of their financial resources, which they were using to fund all these terror groups. We left the Middle East with six piece deals and in a fairly peaceful world. Seeing what’s happening, I think it was completely avoidable. I think it’s horrible to see that it’s occurring, and I pray that those in power will make the right decisions to restore safety, but also to potentially create a better paradigm for peace in the future.
History of Hamas
Lex Fridman
I have a lot of questions to ask you about the journey towards this historic progress towards peace with Abraham Accords, of course. But first on this situation to step back and some of the history, is there things about the history of Hamas and Gaza that’s important to understand what is happening now? Just your comments, your thoughts, your understanding of Hamas.
I have a lot of questions to ask you about the journey towards this historic progress towards peace with Abraham Accords, of course. But first on this situation to step back and some of the history, is there things about the history of Hamas and Gaza that’s important to understand what is happening now? Just your comments, your thoughts, your understanding of Hamas.
Jared Kushner
I think you did an excellent job, Lex, of really giving the summary. Just a couple of things, maybe I’ll add to it, is that Hamas was originally founded from the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which is a group that’s caused a lot of issues in the region. They’ve attacked Israel many times in the past. There’s a lot of discussion about how Israel is an occupying power. Well, in Gaza, in 2005, they withdrew from all the land, and then they say, Israel’s an apartheid state. Well, Israel then gave governance of the region to the Palestinians, and then what’s happened is the Palestinian people’s lives have now gone down, not up since then. I will say that under Hamas’ leadership in Gaza, the people who have suffered the most are the Palestinian people and I see and I’ve watched cries throughout my time in government from people saying we want to see the Palestinian people live a better life. I agree with those people. I think that the Palestinian people in Gaza are essentially hostages.
I think you did an excellent job, Lex, of really giving the summary. Just a couple of things, maybe I’ll add to it, is that Hamas was originally founded from the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which is a group that’s caused a lot of issues in the region. They’ve attacked Israel many times in the past. There’s a lot of discussion about how Israel is an occupying power. Well, in Gaza, in 2005, they withdrew from all the land, and then they say, Israel’s an apartheid state. Well, Israel then gave governance of the region to the Palestinians, and then what’s happened is the Palestinian people’s lives have now gone down, not up since then. I will say that under Hamas’ leadership in Gaza, the people who have suffered the most are the Palestinian people and I see and I’ve watched cries throughout my time in government from people saying we want to see the Palestinian people live a better life. I agree with those people. I think that the Palestinian people in Gaza are essentially hostages.
In Gaza, you have basically 2.2 million people that are being held hostage by 30,000 Hamas terrorists. That’s really the problem, and I would just encourage people to push their attention and energy in this moment and their anger towards Hamas, those are the people who are killing innocent civilians, who are murdering indiscriminately, and those are the people who have held back the Palestinians from having a better life.
Finally, what I would say is what we saw with Hamas was that if you go back to 2007, they basically had just one plan that they did over and over. We were very careful to try to monitor very closely and stop the Iranian money and the resources from coming in. Again, we took a little bit of criticism from the international community for keeping the border tight, but unfortunately, every time you’d allow construction materials to go into Gaza, they’d use them to build tunnels, not homes. You would have equipment that would come in to build pipes, they’d turn it into bombs. It was very, very hard to figure out how do you get the resources into Gaza to help people live a better life while at the same time the leadership in Gaza was taking all those resources and turning it into military equipment to attack Israel.
Iran
Lex Fridman
What role does Iran play in this war, in this connection to Hamas? Can you speak to the connection between Hamas and Iran that’s important to understand, especially as this most recent attack unfolds?
What role does Iran play in this war, in this connection to Hamas? Can you speak to the connection between Hamas and Iran that’s important to understand, especially as this most recent attack unfolds?
Jared Kushner
Sure. The correlation, there’s reports that Iran is behind the attack. Hamas has thanked Iran for their support, and it’s been very well known that Iran supports the destruction of the state of Israel. I won’t say Iran as a country. I’ll talk about Iran in the leadership. There’s actually a beautiful thing I saw on the internet where at one of the soccer games in Iran, they were trying to rally support for the Hamas terror attacks and a lot of people in the crowds were chanting FU to the regime because I think the Iranian people, the Persian people generally are peace-loving people who don’t want to see this focus on destruction and annihilation. But you saw this in 2015, 2016, when the Iranian government had resources, the region was less safe.
Sure. The correlation, there’s reports that Iran is behind the attack. Hamas has thanked Iran for their support, and it’s been very well known that Iran supports the destruction of the state of Israel. I won’t say Iran as a country. I’ll talk about Iran in the leadership. There’s actually a beautiful thing I saw on the internet where at one of the soccer games in Iran, they were trying to rally support for the Hamas terror attacks and a lot of people in the crowds were chanting FU to the regime because I think the Iranian people, the Persian people generally are peace-loving people who don’t want to see this focus on destruction and annihilation. But you saw this in 2015, 2016, when the Iranian government had resources, the region was less safe.
Since now, there’s been more resources allowed to go to the Iranian regime by lack of enforcement of sanctions. As a result, Iran is funding Hezbollah, Hamas. They were funding the Houthis. Now there’s a little bit of a détente between Saudi and Iran, which has led to that going down, which only further proves that Iran was behind the Houthis, which is what the Saudis had been saying for years, and Iran was denying. There’s a very strong relationship between the two, and we always knew that the way that Iran fights wars or fights conflicts is never directly, it’s usually through its proxies. In this case, Hamas has been a proxy for Iran who wanted to obviously see the destruction of Israel, but also does not want to see the Israelis and the Saudis come together for a peace agreement.
Al-Aqsa Mosque
Lex Fridman
The name of this operation, of the Hamas operation is Al-Aqsa Flood, referring to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. How much of this attack is about the Al-Aqsa Mosque?
The name of this operation, of the Hamas operation is Al-Aqsa Flood, referring to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. How much of this attack is about the Al-Aqsa Mosque?
Jared Kushner
In actuality, I don’t think any of it is, but the Al-Aqsa Mosque is something that all of the Shia Jihadists have used for years in order to justify their actions that are aggressive towards Israel. This is something, I’ll maybe even take a step back and go through when I was working initially in my first year on the Peace Plan, I was doing a lot of listening. Quite frankly, a lot of what people were saying to me didn’t make sense. The reason why I was trying to figure out, they were talking about sovereignty over Al-Aqsa Mosque. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is a mosque that’s built in the Holy of Holies, the Haram al-Sharif in Israel, where the [Foreign language 00:15:49], the Holy temple was built in a very religious place after the Temple was destroyed. Then there was a big mosque built there, and it’s one of the more holy places in Islam now.
In actuality, I don’t think any of it is, but the Al-Aqsa Mosque is something that all of the Shia Jihadists have used for years in order to justify their actions that are aggressive towards Israel. This is something, I’ll maybe even take a step back and go through when I was working initially in my first year on the Peace Plan, I was doing a lot of listening. Quite frankly, a lot of what people were saying to me didn’t make sense. The reason why I was trying to figure out, they were talking about sovereignty over Al-Aqsa Mosque. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is a mosque that’s built in the Holy of Holies, the Haram al-Sharif in Israel, where the [Foreign language 00:15:49], the Holy temple was built in a very religious place after the Temple was destroyed. Then there was a big mosque built there, and it’s one of the more holy places in Islam now.
The big thing everyone was saying is, “What do you do with this land where you have a mosque built over a very big Jewish site?” I was hearing all of the experts, and I always say experts with quotes, because only in Washington can you work on something for a decade and continue to fail, and then you basically leave are considered an expert. But that’s one of the problems with Washington, which maybe we could talk about later. But the notion here was I went and I said, “Let me try to understand what the issue is with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with the people.” I always felt the politicians were a little disconnected so I commissioned several focus groups, one in Amman, one in Cairo, one in Dubai, and one in Ramallah. I asked people, Muslims, what is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict about? Time and time again, the most popular thing that they said was that Israel was not allowing access to the mosque for Muslims to pray. What was interesting was is that Israel’s policy is to allow anyone who wants to come and pray peacefully at the sites to come and pray. Sometimes they have security issues when there’s provocations. But by and large, since 1967, when Israel was able to take back Jerusalem in a defensive war, just to be very clear, they were attacked in the South and they were attacked from the east, and they basically were able to beat back the Jordanians and the Egyptians and then reconquer the old city of Jerusalem. During that time, immediately after Israel then passed the protection of Holy Places law, which was they basically took resources they didn’t have and they said we’re going to restore the Christian sites, the Muslim sites, the Jewish sites, and they’ve worked to allow everyone access to the mosque.
Today, any Muslim who wants to come can come and pray at the mosque. The mosque is… Israel’s acknowledged that King Abdullah, the king of Jordan, is the custodian of the mosque and as long as people want to come to the country and pray peacefully, they’re able to do that. But if you look at a lot of the propaganda that’s been used by ISIS or Iran to recruit terrorists or to justify their incursions, they often say they’re doing it in the name of liberating the Al-Aqsa Mosque. But from an operational and pragmatic perspective today, any Muslim who wants to go to the mosque, you can book a flight to Israel now through Dubai because there’s flights between Israel and Dubai and as long as your country has relations with Israel and they’ll accept your passport in there, you can come and pray. That’s what Israel wants. Israel wants Jerusalem to be a place where all religions can come and celebrate together. But you have a lot of actors that look to find ways to use these religious tensions in order to sow division and justify violent behavior.
Lex Fridman
I wonder how it’s possible to lessen the effectiveness of that propaganda message, that a lot of the war, a lot of the attacks are about access to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Is there something you can speak to why that message hasn’t disseminated across the Arab world?
I wonder how it’s possible to lessen the effectiveness of that propaganda message, that a lot of the war, a lot of the attacks are about access to the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Is there something you can speak to why that message hasn’t disseminated across the Arab world?
Jared Kushner
Israel’s good at a lot of things. They’re not very good traditionally with public relations. After the Abraham Accords, we made the first Abraham Accords deal in August, 2020, and then we made five other deals. We first did United Arab Emirates, then we did a deal with Bahrain, then we did a deal with Kosovo, then we did a deal with Sudan, then we did a deal with Morocco, and then we got the GCC deal done as well, the tension between Qatar, Saudi, UAE, Egypt and Bahrain. That was allowing us to create a pathway to then pursue the Israeli-Saudi normalization. We had so much momentum then that the goal was just keep getting more countries to normalize relations with Israel. Once you create the connection between people and create the ability for people to do business together, the ability for flights to fly between, then you would just start naturally having people coming and everyone has a smartphone today, so they can then post and combat the misinformation that’s been out there.
Israel’s good at a lot of things. They’re not very good traditionally with public relations. After the Abraham Accords, we made the first Abraham Accords deal in August, 2020, and then we made five other deals. We first did United Arab Emirates, then we did a deal with Bahrain, then we did a deal with Kosovo, then we did a deal with Sudan, then we did a deal with Morocco, and then we got the GCC deal done as well, the tension between Qatar, Saudi, UAE, Egypt and Bahrain. That was allowing us to create a pathway to then pursue the Israeli-Saudi normalization. We had so much momentum then that the goal was just keep getting more countries to normalize relations with Israel. Once you create the connection between people and create the ability for people to do business together, the ability for flights to fly between, then you would just start naturally having people coming and everyone has a smartphone today, so they can then post and combat the misinformation that’s been out there.
But this misinformation is not something that’s new. One of the characters who played a very big role in spreading the antisemitism and the violence in Israel in the 1920s was a guy named Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was known as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. He was very close with Hitler and Mussolini, and he was working with them to try to get some claims to the Middle East once the Jewish people were annihilated. What he did for a very long time was he did the same shtick, only it was before yet smartphones and YouTube where he would say the mosque is under attack. These imperialist Zionists are coming in to try to destroy the mosque.
He would use that to raise money from Indonesia, from Pakistan, from all over the world, and then use that threat to justify recruiting groups of young, vulnerable Muslim men and then getting them in the name of religious rights to go and kill people, which really is more of a perversion of the religion than I think the true essence of what Islam is. I think Islam at as core is a peaceful religion, and I think that’s where a lot of the great leaders in Islam want to take it. But the people who use Islam or the mosque or as a justification for violence, those are people who I think are really… They’re disrespecting the Islam religion.
Abraham Accords
Lex Fridman
As you said, you helped make major strides towards peace in the Middle East with the Abraham Accords. Can you describe what it took to accomplish this, and maybe this will help us understand what broke down and led to the tragedy this week?
As you said, you helped make major strides towards peace in the Middle East with the Abraham Accords. Can you describe what it took to accomplish this, and maybe this will help us understand what broke down and led to the tragedy this week?
Jared Kushner
Yeah. I always believed in foreign policy. I learned very quickly that the difference between a political deal and a business deal is that in a business deal, you have a problem set, you come to a conclusion, and then if you buy or sell something, you either have more cash or you have a company. More to do, less to do. Political problem set is very different, where the conclusion of a problem set is essentially the beginning of a new paradigm. When I would think about how do you move pieces around the board, you couldn’t say let me just solve the problem. You have to think about what happens the day after the signing, and how do you create a paradigm that has positivity to it.
Yeah. I always believed in foreign policy. I learned very quickly that the difference between a political deal and a business deal is that in a business deal, you have a problem set, you come to a conclusion, and then if you buy or sell something, you either have more cash or you have a company. More to do, less to do. Political problem set is very different, where the conclusion of a problem set is essentially the beginning of a new paradigm. When I would think about how do you move pieces around the board, you couldn’t say let me just solve the problem. You have to think about what happens the day after the signing, and how do you create a paradigm that has positivity to it.
The biggest piece of what President Trump did during his four years in office was he really strengthened the relationship with Israel, number one. He did things like recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. He moved the embassy to Jerusalem. He recognized the Golan Heights. He got out of the Iran deal. We did an economic conference in Bahrain where we brought Israelis to meet with Saudi and Emirati and Qatari businessmen and everyone came together. Each one of these instances were unthinkable previously. Everyone said that if you did it, the world was going to end and every time President Trump did one, the next morning the sun rose, the next evening, the sun set and things moved on. By doing that, what President Trump did was he slaughtered a lot of the sacred cows of these false barriers that people had erected and showed people that the vast majority of the people in the Middle East, whether they’re Jewish, Muslim, Christian, whatever religion they are, they just want to live better lives.
What we basically did was create a paradigm where the voices for peace, the voices for together now finally had a forum where they were able to do it. We did that in the backdrop. The way we’re able to be successful was we severely limited the resources of Iran, and they were focused more internally, and they couldn’t cause the trouble that they were causing everywhere else. Since we’ve left, obviously the dynamics have changed, but the way you get to peace is obviously number one through strength and number two, by finding a way for people to be better off tomorrow than they are today. What I found was that most of the voices looking for violence or trouble were people who were just focused on what happened two years ago, 20 years ago, 70 years ago, 1000 years ago. People who were trying to solve those problems in that context often were looking more to use those past grievances as a justification for their power and for the bad behavior that they were looking to perpetuate.
Lex Fridman
As we have talked about extensively, managing the power dynamics of the region and providing a plan, this is something you did with the economic plan titled Peace to Prosperity, A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli people. Can you first of all describe what’s in the plan?
As we have talked about extensively, managing the power dynamics of the region and providing a plan, this is something you did with the economic plan titled Peace to Prosperity, A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli people. Can you first of all describe what’s in the plan?
Jared Kushner
Sure. This was something I took on. I was working on the political framework between the Israelis and the Palestinians and trying to understand what were the issues. The issues were not very many. It basically was you had a land dispute, so you had to figure out where do you put borders ultimately, you had a security paradigm, which I was much more favorable to Israel’s perspective on. Obviously the events of the past 48 hours have fully justified that bias. Then in addition to that, you had to deal with the religious sites, but I felt operationally that wasn’t actually as complicated as people made it because you wanted to just leave it open for everybody.
Sure. This was something I took on. I was working on the political framework between the Israelis and the Palestinians and trying to understand what were the issues. The issues were not very many. It basically was you had a land dispute, so you had to figure out where do you put borders ultimately, you had a security paradigm, which I was much more favorable to Israel’s perspective on. Obviously the events of the past 48 hours have fully justified that bias. Then in addition to that, you had to deal with the religious sites, but I felt operationally that wasn’t actually as complicated as people made it because you wanted to just leave it open for everybody.
Then I went through and I felt that the Palestinian leadership was fairly disincentivized to make a deal because there was just this paradigm where they had billions of dollars coming in from the international community, and I think that they feared that if they made a deal, they would lose their relevancy internationally and the money would stop flowing into the country. What I tried to do is to say my approach when I would get into a hard problem, say, how do I understand all the different escape patches? How do I try to eliminate them and then build a golden bridge that becomes really the only, but also the most desirable pathway For the decision makers to walk through.
It wasn’t always hard, and sometimes you have to go and hold their hand or you try to pick them up and walk them across. But a lot of these leaders are very reluctant to change, and the dynamics of the Palestinians also were such that I think they were fairly stuck where they were. We developed a business plan for Gaza, the West Bank. We threw in some improvements for Jordan and Egypt as well. I based it off of the vision 2030 that they did in Saudi Arabia, which I thought was a visionary document. I went back through this process and I studied basically every economic project in post-World War II period.
We looked at what they did in South Korea, why it was successful with some strong industrial planning. We looked at Japan, we looked at Singapore, we looked at Poland, why it was successful. We spent a lot of time on the Ukraine plan for the country and why it wasn’t successful. That was mostly because of governance and corruption, which actually resembles a lot of what’s gone wrong with the Palestinians where there’s no property rights, there’s no rule of law. What we did is we built a plan to show it’s not that hard in the sense that between the West Bank and Gaza, you had 5 million people. We put together a plan. I think it was about $27 billion. We got together a conference. I had the head of AT&T. We had Steve Schwarzman from Blackstone came, which was very gracious of them.
We had all the leading Arabic businessmen, the leading builders, leading developers. The general consensus of that conference was that this is very doable. We think that for Gaza in particular, it would cost maybe seven to $8 billion to rebuild the entire place. We felt we could reduce the poverty rate in half. We can create over a million jobs there. The only thing that people said was holding it back wasn’t Israel. What was holding it back was governance, and people wouldn’t have confidence investing there with the rule that Hamas was perpetuating.
I encourage people actually to look at the plan. It was very thoughtful. It was 181 pages. We went project by project. Each project is costed out. It’s a real plan that could be implemented, but you need the right governance and all of the different Arabic countries are willing to fund it. The international community is willing to fund it because they’ve just been throwing so much money at the Palestinians for years that’s never been outcomes based or conditions based. It’s just been entitlement money, and unfortunately, it hasn’t really achieved any outcomes that have been successful.
It’s a great business plan. It just shows too rebuilding Gaza could be easy, but like I said, the problem that’s held the Palestinian people back and that’s made their lives terrible in Gaza has not been Israel. It’s really been Hamas’ leadership or lack of leadership and their desire to focus on trying to kill Israelis and start war with Israel over improving the lies of the Palestinian people.
Lex Fridman
The current approach of Hamas, the more violence they perpetrate, the more they can hold onto power versus improving the lives of people. As you said, maybe you can comment on they do not propose an economics plan.
The current approach of Hamas, the more violence they perpetrate, the more they can hold onto power versus improving the lives of people. As you said, maybe you can comment on they do not propose an economics plan.
Jared Kushner
Hamas has been running it now for 16 years, and they don’t have a lot to show for it. Our posture with them was basically a very simple deal. If you think about what’s the end state in Gaza, it’s actually not that complicated. There’s no territorial disputes, right? The border’s the border. There’s no religious issues there as well. You’re not dealing with Jerusalem. You’re basically just dealing with the fact that Israel wants to make sure that there’s no threat from Gaza so it’s a demilitarization or some kind of security guarantee from a credible source where Israel doesn’t feel like Gaza can be used to stage attacks into Israel or to fire rockets into Israel.
Hamas has been running it now for 16 years, and they don’t have a lot to show for it. Our posture with them was basically a very simple deal. If you think about what’s the end state in Gaza, it’s actually not that complicated. There’s no territorial disputes, right? The border’s the border. There’s no religious issues there as well. You’re not dealing with Jerusalem. You’re basically just dealing with the fact that Israel wants to make sure that there’s no threat from Gaza so it’s a demilitarization or some kind of security guarantee from a credible source where Israel doesn’t feel like Gaza can be used to stage attacks into Israel or to fire rockets into Israel.
By the way, these are things I was saying three, four years ago that that was the objective, and that was really the fear. Now that’s been proven. Unfortunately, the fear has manifested, and in exchange you can rebuild the place and you can give the people a much better life. But Hamas has not shown desire for that or a capability for that, and I don’t think there’s enough trust to allow them to do that, which is why under the current circumstances, if you do want to have peace there, Hamas has to be either eliminated or severely degraded in terms of their military capabilities.
Trump vs Biden on Middle East
Lex Fridman
I would love to ask about leadership, especially on the side of the United States. What has the current administration, the Biden administration, done different than the Trump administration, as you understand, that may have contributed to the events we saw this week.
I would love to ask about leadership, especially on the side of the United States. What has the current administration, the Biden administration, done different than the Trump administration, as you understand, that may have contributed to the events we saw this week.
Jared Kushner
All I can talk about are where we left them. We left them a place where they had tremendous momentum in the Middle East. I met with them during the transition and said, “Look, we even got the Qatar-Saudi conflict done, which was a big… No peace between Israel and Saudi would’ve been possible without that so we even got that done in our lame duck period. They came in and they said, “Look, we want to focus on the three Cs, which is Covid, climate change, and China.” I said, “That’s great, but the Middle East we have in an amazing place right now. It’s stable, there’s momentum. Iran is basically broke.” We put such crippling sanctions on Iran that they went from about, I think it was 2.6 million barrels a day of oil they were selling to about 100,000 under Trump. Their foreign currency reserves were basically depleted and they were broke.
All I can talk about are where we left them. We left them a place where they had tremendous momentum in the Middle East. I met with them during the transition and said, “Look, we even got the Qatar-Saudi conflict done, which was a big… No peace between Israel and Saudi would’ve been possible without that so we even got that done in our lame duck period. They came in and they said, “Look, we want to focus on the three Cs, which is Covid, climate change, and China.” I said, “That’s great, but the Middle East we have in an amazing place right now. It’s stable, there’s momentum. Iran is basically broke.” We put such crippling sanctions on Iran that they went from about, I think it was 2.6 million barrels a day of oil they were selling to about 100,000 under Trump. Their foreign currency reserves were basically depleted and they were broke.
Same with the Palestinians. We stopped the funding to UNRWA, the UN agency, which is totally corrupt. We’ve put $10 billion in there over time. I did a poll in the Middle East, in Gaza to say, “Okay, we’ve invested $10 billion here as a country. Are we popular?” The US had a 7% approval rating. USAID has 70% approval rating, but it just felt like a waste of our taxpayer dollars. Again, we wanted to make it conditions based. The Biden administration came in. Number one, they started insulting Saudi and Russia. Oil prices went up at the same time. What they did was they stopped domestic production of oil. They disincentivized a lot of oil and shale production with regulations. They stopped pipelines. Oil prices went up. They stopped enforcing the sanctions against Iran probably to get the oil prices lower to make up for what they were doing. They ran to Iran to try to make a deal. They started funding the Palestinians again right away.
I even said if you’re going to fund them, if that’s your policy, I respect that. Again, elections have consequences and you can take a different policy. But what I would recommend is get some conditions, make them do some reforms, make them give property rights to people, make them do real economic investments for people. But they just went right away. They were funding the Palestinians, not enforcing the sanctions and then overall, just projecting a lot of weakness in the region. One of the most embarrassing examples is what happened in the United Arab Emirates. Again, an amazing, probably one of America’s best allies over the last 20, 30 years…
Jared Kushner
… of America’s best allies over the last 20, 30 years. They fought with us in Afghanistan. They were the first Muslim country to stand up and do that after 9/11 because they didn’t want it to be a war of the West against the Muslim religion. So they joined the fight, because they saw it as a fight between right and wrong. They have rocket shot into their country from the Houthis, and they basically don’t get a call from the US for 17 days. They need their equipment that they buy from the US, which creates job in the US. They need it restocked. We don’t call. So they’ve severely degraded the trust that we had to rebuild with our allies. I think they’ve been working now to get it back. They, after two years, started working with Saudi and Israel, which I think was good.
… of America’s best allies over the last 20, 30 years. They fought with us in Afghanistan. They were the first Muslim country to stand up and do that after 9/11 because they didn’t want it to be a war of the West against the Muslim religion. So they joined the fight, because they saw it as a fight between right and wrong. They have rocket shot into their country from the Houthis, and they basically don’t get a call from the US for 17 days. They need their equipment that they buy from the US, which creates job in the US. They need it restocked. We don’t call. So they’ve severely degraded the trust that we had to rebuild with our allies. I think they’ve been working now to get it back. They, after two years, started working with Saudi and Israel, which I think was good.
I think that they realized, after a stint, that maybe the process that President Trump had created in the region was the right policy. And keep in mind, President Trump’s policy, that I was working on, was very strongly criticized during the first three years before we were able to achieve the results, because it was a departure from the failed policies of the past. So first, there was return to those policies, appease Iran, let’s criticize Saudi Arabia. Then they started embracing and working on the Israel-Saudi deal, which was really exciting. I think we were all very excited about it. But they did it in public, and I think that that also was something. Again, I didn’t have access to their intelligence, so I assumed that by doing it so publicly, they thought that they’d either had a deal with Iran because they were letting them get all this revenue where Iran wouldn’t be a problem.
But one of the reasons with the Abraham Accords, we kept it so quiet during the whole time, was because we always felt like the troublemakers in the region, particularly Iran, who we thought would be disadvantaged by having UAE, Saudi, Israel altogether. Israel’s a nuclear power. You have other strong economies. Iran seeks instability. They seek looking to create a division in the region. And if you can create that economic sphere where you have security from Haifa to Muscat, from Israel to Oman all the way through with Saudi, Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Egypt. That’s an incredibly powerful block. If you can make it secure and then get economic integration, that really could be a Middle East that thrives. So Iran, obviously, wanted nothing to do with that, and that’s why they’ve been working to disrupt. So I think the administration, they took an incredibly stable situation with momentum.
I think they underestimated the way that Iran would approach the region to undermine. I think they gave way too much rope to Iran, and I think that they didn’t seize, when they had an opportunity of strength with the Palestinians, to try to drive to a conclusion that, I believe, could have prevented us being where we are today. Not to mention that even just three weeks ago, it’s a bad look that they just basically gave $6 billion to Iran in exchange for hostages. And then Iran’s basically funding these terror attacks, they are killing American citizens in Israel. It’s a heartbreaking situation. Again, totally avoidable and one that, I think, has been very badly mismanaged to date.
Lex Fridman
If Trump was currently president, you were still working with him on this part of the world, what actions would you take? What conversations would you have? What ideas would you be working with in order to unite the various allies that you mentioned in the Middle East over this tragedy and not let it be a thing that divides the Middle East, but make it a thing that catalyzes further progress towards peace?
If Trump was currently president, you were still working with him on this part of the world, what actions would you take? What conversations would you have? What ideas would you be working with in order to unite the various allies that you mentioned in the Middle East over this tragedy and not let it be a thing that divides the Middle East, but make it a thing that catalyzes further progress towards peace?
Jared Kushner
I want to say one thing, Lex. I have a lot of friends who are fans of Trump, who are not fans of Trump. But one thing I want to say with absolute certainty is that, if President Trump was in office, this never would have happened. When President Trump was in office, anyone who supports Israel or who wants to see Jewish people not be innocently slaughtered, he would never have allowed that to happen. It did not happen when he was in power. And I hope people recognize that as something that’s very, very true. How I would play the ball where it lies right now. Keep in mind, we transferred the ball it was on the green. Now it’s almost like it’s gone back 150 yards and it’s in a sand trap. I think the way that I would play the ball right now is, number one is you have to show strength.
I want to say one thing, Lex. I have a lot of friends who are fans of Trump, who are not fans of Trump. But one thing I want to say with absolute certainty is that, if President Trump was in office, this never would have happened. When President Trump was in office, anyone who supports Israel or who wants to see Jewish people not be innocently slaughtered, he would never have allowed that to happen. It did not happen when he was in power. And I hope people recognize that as something that’s very, very true. How I would play the ball where it lies right now. Keep in mind, we transferred the ball it was on the green. Now it’s almost like it’s gone back 150 yards and it’s in a sand trap. I think the way that I would play the ball right now is, number one is you have to show strength.
I actually think President Biden’s words were the right words. I see that they’re moving aircraft carriers to the region. Again, the purpose of having a strong military… I believe obviously if you get into a war, you want to win the war. But the purpose of a very strong military primarily is to avoid a war. I don’t know what credibility the Biden administration has to show the strength, but right now you have to support Israel completely. You have to really let people in the region know that there’ll be consequences if they try to escalate. Again, we saw a little bit of rocket skirmish from Lebanon, from Hezbollah. But again, this is the type of thing that they have to know, there’ll be severe consequences if they make this a multi-party fight. And I think sending a strong message to Iran, I think that they have to see some consequences from this and know that they’re not going to be allowed to have a free rein to cause instability in that.
Iran doesn’t usually fight face- to-face. They usually do it through proxies, but let’s just all be honest about where this is coming from and let them know that there will be a consequence if they instigate these actions. Again, at least with the Biden administration, they’ve had contact with Iran, they’ve been talking with Iran, but they’ve allowed Iran. Again, the number I saw last year, I think under Trump the number was maybe like four or $5 billion of oil revenue in total. I think last year it was something like $45 billion in revenue. This year, I think it’ll be even more. That’s a combination of them driving up oil prices, but also allowing much more sales. You would think that they would find a way to get them to behave and allow them to have this happen. Or if that’s not the case, then be tough. Go back to being tough. That’s what you have to do.
Israeli-Saudi Normalization
Lex Fridman
Building off of Abraham Accords, as you mentioned, Israel-Saudi normalization, there’s been a lot of promising progress towards this. What does it take to not allow this tragedy damage the progress towards Israel-Saudi normalization?
Building off of Abraham Accords, as you mentioned, Israel-Saudi normalization, there’s been a lot of promising progress towards this. What does it take to not allow this tragedy damage the progress towards Israel-Saudi normalization?
Jared Kushner
I think right now it’s probably not the best to think about that. I think that we want to think about that after whatever’s going to happen is going to happen now. I think right now, the number one priority for Israel has to be to fully regain security in the country. And then number two is, to figure out how you can, like I said, eliminate or degrade the Hamas capability or other Iranian threats to make sure that you have your security apparatus. I think that the Israeli leadership right now should proceed with that, and I don’t think that they should be thinking about normalization with Saudi at this moment. My instinct, and I’ve been watching this Israeli-Saudi normalization play out. Obviously just speaking with people and seeing what I’ve been reading and watching with great excitement. I think it would be a game-changer for the region.
I think right now it’s probably not the best to think about that. I think that we want to think about that after whatever’s going to happen is going to happen now. I think right now, the number one priority for Israel has to be to fully regain security in the country. And then number two is, to figure out how you can, like I said, eliminate or degrade the Hamas capability or other Iranian threats to make sure that you have your security apparatus. I think that the Israeli leadership right now should proceed with that, and I don’t think that they should be thinking about normalization with Saudi at this moment. My instinct, and I’ve been watching this Israeli-Saudi normalization play out. Obviously just speaking with people and seeing what I’ve been reading and watching with great excitement. I think it would be a game-changer for the region.
I think it’s one of Iran’s worst nightmares to have Israel and Saudi interlinked together. I think it’d be great for the Saudi people from a security perspective, what they’re discussing with America would be very strong. The ability to get different elements across would be incredible. So what I would say with this is that, the industrial logic held yesterday, and I think it will hold again tomorrow. I always expect countries to act in their interests. I think that the deal that’s on the table right now between Saudi, Israel and America is in Saudi’s interests, it’s in America’s interests and it’s in Israel’s interest. What’s going to happen now though is, the political dynamics are going to shift. And I think that, as we’ve seen with political dynamics, they come and go. I think let’s get through this moment, and then I hope at the right time that those talks will be able to resume and conclude in an appropriate way.
It’s funny, Lex, when I was working on the US-Mexico agreement for the trade, every day there’d be a tweet that would go out or there would be an issue. People forget how intense it was between America and Mexico. And I’d speak to my counterpart of Mexico after a rough day and we were working on something, we were making progress. It’d get blown up. And I’d speak to them and say, “You know what? Look, they’re not moving America. They’re not moving Mexico. Let’s stop for today. Let’s pick up tomorrow and let’s find a new way to bring this forward.” So I would just encourage everyone working on that not to give up, to keep working hard at it and to find a way. But like I said, I would take a little bit of a pause for the time being. Let’s let the current situation play out and then hopefully there’ll be a way for it to move forward.
Lex Fridman
I just hope there’s still people on the US side picking up the phone and calling UAE, Saudi Arabia just as human beings, as friends, as allies, and just keeping that channel of communication going. Maybe you can correct me, but I just feel like there’s just simple human dynamics that play out here, that divisions can form and just run away from you. Over simple misunderstandings, over just inability to see a tragedy from the same perspective because of conversations that could have happened but didn’t happen.
I just hope there’s still people on the US side picking up the phone and calling UAE, Saudi Arabia just as human beings, as friends, as allies, and just keeping that channel of communication going. Maybe you can correct me, but I just feel like there’s just simple human dynamics that play out here, that divisions can form and just run away from you. Over simple misunderstandings, over just inability to see a tragedy from the same perspective because of conversations that could have happened but didn’t happen.
Jared Kushner
I think there’ll definitely be communication, but words on phone calls is only worth so much. It’s really trust between people in power. And obviously when you’re in a position of power, you represent your country and your country’s interests. But the ability to have trusting relationships where people feel like they’re okay taking more risks to help each other, that’s actually what’s most important. So communication, I hope for. But deepening and trusting relationships, that’s what I believe makes progress and keeps people safe.
I think there’ll definitely be communication, but words on phone calls is only worth so much. It’s really trust between people in power. And obviously when you’re in a position of power, you represent your country and your country’s interests. But the ability to have trusting relationships where people feel like they’re okay taking more risks to help each other, that’s actually what’s most important. So communication, I hope for. But deepening and trusting relationships, that’s what I believe makes progress and keeps people safe.
How the Israel-Gaza war ends
Lex Fridman
We talk quite extensively about the value of trust in negotiation and just working with leaders, which I think is a fascinating conversation. And you’ve taught me a lot about that. Let me ask you about the end here. What are the various trajectories this war can take, in your view? What are some of the end states, as you’ve said, which are desirable and are achievable?
We talk quite extensively about the value of trust in negotiation and just working with leaders, which I think is a fascinating conversation. And you’ve taught me a lot about that. Let me ask you about the end here. What are the various trajectories this war can take, in your view? What are some of the end states, as you’ve said, which are desirable and are achievable?
Jared Kushner
I mentioned this earlier, but whenever I would get a problem set in government, I’d always think through from a first principle’s perspective, what’s the logical outcome? And forget about all the reasons why it can’t happen. That’s what everyone in governments always rush to talk about. But I do think here, number one, Israel has to have a secure environment where they don’t feel threatened from Gaza. And number two is, the people in Gaza need to have an environment where they feel like they can live a better life and have opportunities. That’s the end state. So I think that the international community should come together. I do think that the people who are usually putting blame on Israel should now realize that maybe they’ve been a little bit harsh here, and that Hamas has been as big a threat, if not an even bigger threat than Israel has been saying.
I mentioned this earlier, but whenever I would get a problem set in government, I’d always think through from a first principle’s perspective, what’s the logical outcome? And forget about all the reasons why it can’t happen. That’s what everyone in governments always rush to talk about. But I do think here, number one, Israel has to have a secure environment where they don’t feel threatened from Gaza. And number two is, the people in Gaza need to have an environment where they feel like they can live a better life and have opportunities. That’s the end state. So I think that the international community should come together. I do think that the people who are usually putting blame on Israel should now realize that maybe they’ve been a little bit harsh here, and that Hamas has been as big a threat, if not an even bigger threat than Israel has been saying.
And I do think that if the international community comes together and unites behind Israel and really forces Hamas and their Iranian backers to stop hostilities, to stop saber-rattling, to stop misrepresenting the history in order to justify their violent behavior. And if they say instead, “We want to hold you accountable, no more money.” And they all say that they’re going to stand behind Israel’s efforts to eliminate their national security threats. Then we will all come together and only fund again into a framework that we believe can be a long-term solution where the Palestinian people really have a chance to live a better life. That’s really the best way to get there. There’s tons of complicating factors, but that’s the end state that the global community should be looking to come together. And it’s very achievable. It’s very, very achievable.
Lex Fridman
As we stand here today, there’s a lot of different ways that this war can evolve. If a ground invasion happens, by Israeli forces, of Gaza, and if the number is correct of 100,000 Israeli soldiers. Do you worry about various trajectories that can take or the consequences that might have of an unprecedented ground troop attack?
As we stand here today, there’s a lot of different ways that this war can evolve. If a ground invasion happens, by Israeli forces, of Gaza, and if the number is correct of 100,000 Israeli soldiers. Do you worry about various trajectories that can take or the consequences that might have of an unprecedented ground troop attack?
Jared Kushner
I think as a leader, you can’t change yesterday, but you have the ability to change tomorrow. And that’s a very important fundamental. That’s true for all of us, not just leaders. We saw with 9/11 how America was caught off guard by a terrorist attack. We acted somewhat rationally, somewhat emotionally, which led to a 20-year war with trillions of dollars lost. I think almost a million lives lost, not just American, but all lives. And it was a total tragedy what occurred. I think right now the temptation is to be strong. I think that that’s a necessity. I do think eliminating risk is the right objective. I think the goal should be to stay very clear about what the objective is. But also this attack was very well planned, not to walk into another trap. I think you have to be very smart, very cautious.
I think as a leader, you can’t change yesterday, but you have the ability to change tomorrow. And that’s a very important fundamental. That’s true for all of us, not just leaders. We saw with 9/11 how America was caught off guard by a terrorist attack. We acted somewhat rationally, somewhat emotionally, which led to a 20-year war with trillions of dollars lost. I think almost a million lives lost, not just American, but all lives. And it was a total tragedy what occurred. I think right now the temptation is to be strong. I think that that’s a necessity. I do think eliminating risk is the right objective. I think the goal should be to stay very clear about what the objective is. But also this attack was very well planned, not to walk into another trap. I think you have to be very smart, very cautious.
I’ve been happy to see that what they’ve been doing in retaliation so far has been somewhat measured and they’ve taken their time to try to assess what’s achievable. Again, I don’t have access to the intelligence, and we’re talking at a very early stage in this conflict. So a lot had happened even by the time this is published. But my hope is that they’ll just stay very focused on what the objective is and try to make sure that they’re acting appropriately in order to do that. And I will say this too, that this has been different than what I’ve seen in the past. And that the attacks were so heinous and so disgusting that I’ve seen the international community rally around Israel more so than I ever have. And I hope that Israel continues to keep the moral high ground and continue to communicate what they’re fighting for, why they’re fighting. And I do hope that the international community supports the objective and they can work together to achieve it.
Benjamin Netanyahu
Lex Fridman
Benjamin Netanyahu, Bibi, somebody you’ve gotten to know well in negotiation, in conversation. He has made statements, he has declared war, he has spoken about this potentially being a long and difficult war. What have you learned about the mind in Benjamin Netanyahu that might be important to understand here in this current war?
Benjamin Netanyahu, Bibi, somebody you’ve gotten to know well in negotiation, in conversation. He has made statements, he has declared war, he has spoken about this potentially being a long and difficult war. What have you learned about the mind in Benjamin Netanyahu that might be important to understand here in this current war?
Jared Kushner
Bibi is definitely a historic figure. I’d meet with a lot of different world leaders, and some of them, I would say, they’re very, very special, transformational figures. And some, I would say, how the hell is this person running a country? Bibi is somebody who has done a lot for the state of Israel, he has a tremendous understanding of the security apparatus. He has tremendous global relations. So for a crisis like this, I think Bibi’s the leader you want, if you’re Israel, to be in that seat. I think he’s ambitious in what he’s going to look to achieve. He understands his role in history as somebody who’s helped strengthen Israel economically, militarily.
Bibi is definitely a historic figure. I’d meet with a lot of different world leaders, and some of them, I would say, they’re very, very special, transformational figures. And some, I would say, how the hell is this person running a country? Bibi is somebody who has done a lot for the state of Israel, he has a tremendous understanding of the security apparatus. He has tremendous global relations. So for a crisis like this, I think Bibi’s the leader you want, if you’re Israel, to be in that seat. I think he’s ambitious in what he’s going to look to achieve. He understands his role in history as somebody who’s helped strengthen Israel economically, militarily.
And I don’t think he wants to see his legacy be somebody who left Israel more vulnerable than it had to be. So I think, in that regard, he’ll be incredibly strong. But I also think that he’ll hopefully be calculating in the risks that he takes and not create more risk than is needed. And that’s easy to say, the two of us sitting here having a conversation. When you’re sitting in that chair as a leader in the fog of war, it’s a very hard decision to make. He’s been here before. He knows the weight of the situation. I’m sure he knows the moment. And I pray that he’ll do what’s right here to bring the best outcome possible.
Lex Fridman
I wonder if you can comment on the internal political turmoil that Bibi has been operating in and how that relates to the tragedy that we saw.
I wonder if you can comment on the internal political turmoil that Bibi has been operating in and how that relates to the tragedy that we saw.
Jared Kushner
On the one hand, the political turmoil, it’s a sign of a vibrant democracy. I think it’s been actually nice to see how people have fought for their country and their beliefs in a democratic way. You compare that to the Palestinians where there’s no democracy, there’s no free speech, there’s no free press. You can disagree with the leadership in Israel. If you want to be homosexual, you can go to a parade and live your life. In Gaza, they’ll throw you off a building and kill you. So in Israel, you have the freedoms, which I think make it a special place. And you have a very vibrant democracy.
On the one hand, the political turmoil, it’s a sign of a vibrant democracy. I think it’s been actually nice to see how people have fought for their country and their beliefs in a democratic way. You compare that to the Palestinians where there’s no democracy, there’s no free speech, there’s no free press. You can disagree with the leadership in Israel. If you want to be homosexual, you can go to a parade and live your life. In Gaza, they’ll throw you off a building and kill you. So in Israel, you have the freedoms, which I think make it a special place. And you have a very vibrant democracy.
With that being said, the times in Jewish history where the Jewish people have been most vulnerable have been when there’s been division, and that’s when the temple was destroyed. But that’s not just with the Jewish people and with Israel, that’s in all societies. So I definitely believe that this division has left them less prepared for the situation than it would. I do think there’s real lessons we should be taking from this here in America, where we’re in a time where we’re very divided. But I do think that it’d be very wise for our leaders to find the areas where we do agree and find ways to secure our southern border, to make sure that we know who’s in our country, what risks we all face. And I do think that division definitely creates risk for countries.
Palestinian support
Lex Fridman
Let me switch gears here and just zoom out and look at our society and our public discourse at the moment. What do you make of the scale and nature of the Palestinian support online in response to this situation?
Let me switch gears here and just zoom out and look at our society and our public discourse at the moment. What do you make of the scale and nature of the Palestinian support online in response to this situation?
Jared Kushner
This is something I’ve observed over the years since I got involved with the Israeli-Palestinian issue with a lot of interest. I think a lot of the people who are pledging support for the Palestinian people, I think that they want to see the Palestinian people live a better life. And I actually agree with them in that regard. Unfortunately, I think many of them are incredibly ill-informed as to the facts on the ground. I think all of the people who are advocating online for the Palestinian people, who are going to these marches in support of them, I think they’d be best served if they really care about effectuating the outcome of joining with Israel right now and directing their anger towards the Hamas leadership.
This is something I’ve observed over the years since I got involved with the Israeli-Palestinian issue with a lot of interest. I think a lot of the people who are pledging support for the Palestinian people, I think that they want to see the Palestinian people live a better life. And I actually agree with them in that regard. Unfortunately, I think many of them are incredibly ill-informed as to the facts on the ground. I think all of the people who are advocating online for the Palestinian people, who are going to these marches in support of them, I think they’d be best served if they really care about effectuating the outcome of joining with Israel right now and directing their anger towards the Hamas leadership.
I think that it’s very clear that the group that’s responsible for the Palestinian people living the lives that all of these people are angry about is Hamas. And if they direct their anger towards Hamas and put the attention on the failings of Hamas and put forth a vision for what they’d like to see leadership in Gaza do. And they respect that there’s a real fear that Israel has and any country would have of having a group of terrorists next to them that’s calling for their destruction. I think that that recognition of finding a way for Israel to be secure and then having an opportunity for the Palestinian people to live a better life is the right pathway to try and pursue.
Lex Fridman
So to you, there’s a clear distinction between Hamas and the Palestinian people, in that Hamas is the enemy of progress and the flourishing of the Palestinian people.
So to you, there’s a clear distinction between Hamas and the Palestinian people, in that Hamas is the enemy of progress and the flourishing of the Palestinian people.
Jared Kushner
100%. It’s very, very clear. And I think that if people were honest about the situation, if they spent the time to really understand it. Again, if you follow the conference I did in Bahrain, we had all of the leading businessmen there and they said, “We can rebuild Gaza very easily. We all want to.” The leading Arab businessmen, the leading American businessmen, everyone wants to, they’re just held back by Hamas. So I do think having an honest conversation about this at this point in time has really only one logical conclusion. And my hope is that, maybe this conflict leads to that conversation being had. And if it is, then maybe that brings more unity and understanding and we get to a conclusion better that could improve the lives of the Palestinian people.
100%. It’s very, very clear. And I think that if people were honest about the situation, if they spent the time to really understand it. Again, if you follow the conference I did in Bahrain, we had all of the leading businessmen there and they said, “We can rebuild Gaza very easily. We all want to.” The leading Arab businessmen, the leading American businessmen, everyone wants to, they’re just held back by Hamas. So I do think having an honest conversation about this at this point in time has really only one logical conclusion. And my hope is that, maybe this conflict leads to that conversation being had. And if it is, then maybe that brings more unity and understanding and we get to a conclusion better that could improve the lives of the Palestinian people.
Trump 2024
Lex Fridman
Pragmatic question about the future. Do you hope Donald Trump wins in 2024? And how can his administration help bring peace to the Middle East?
Pragmatic question about the future. Do you hope Donald Trump wins in 2024? And how can his administration help bring peace to the Middle East?
Jared Kushner
When Donald Trump was president, we had a peaceful world. Everyone said if he was elected, we would have World War III. Meanwhile, he gets elected, and he not only is the first president in decades to not start any wars, he’s making peace deals. He’s making trade deals. He’s working with our allies, getting them to pay their fair share in NATO. He’s having a dialogue with China, with Russia. He’s weakening Iran. So I do think that the job he did as a foreign policy president was tremendous. I think now more and more people are starting to recognize that. Again, under President Biden, this is the second war that’s broken out in the world. And when you have a weak American leadership, the world becomes a less safe place. So my hope and prayers are that President Trump is reelected and that he’s able to then restore order and calm and peace and prosperity to the world .
When Donald Trump was president, we had a peaceful world. Everyone said if he was elected, we would have World War III. Meanwhile, he gets elected, and he not only is the first president in decades to not start any wars, he’s making peace deals. He’s making trade deals. He’s working with our allies, getting them to pay their fair share in NATO. He’s having a dialogue with China, with Russia. He’s weakening Iran. So I do think that the job he did as a foreign policy president was tremendous. I think now more and more people are starting to recognize that. Again, under President Biden, this is the second war that’s broken out in the world. And when you have a weak American leadership, the world becomes a less safe place. So my hope and prayers are that President Trump is reelected and that he’s able to then restore order and calm and peace and prosperity to the world .
Lex Fridman
From a place of strength?
From a place of strength?
Jared Kushner
That’s the only way he knows how to do it.
That’s the only way he knows how to do it.
Lex Fridman
What gives you hope about the future of this region, of Israel and of the Middle East?
What gives you hope about the future of this region, of Israel and of the Middle East?
Jared Kushner
The Middle East for 20 years was an area of conflict. They spent all their money on bullets and bombs. You have young leadership now in Saudi Arabia and UAE and Qatar, and there’s a much more ambitious agenda now for the region to make it an economic superpower and hub of the world. Israel is one of the most burgeoning and exciting tech economies in the world. And if you think about it, it’s almost like having Silicon Valley not connected to California. The thing that’s held the region back for all these years has just been the conflict and the division and the lack of connectivity. But if you have that region and if it can all come together, if you can create a security architecture. You have an incredibly young population, you have a lot of wealth and resources and a lot of capabilities and knowhow. So I think that if it’s managed correctly, and if Iran is able to be restrained and suppressed with their ambitions to cause destabilization. I don’t mean Iran the country, I mean the Iranian regime.
The Middle East for 20 years was an area of conflict. They spent all their money on bullets and bombs. You have young leadership now in Saudi Arabia and UAE and Qatar, and there’s a much more ambitious agenda now for the region to make it an economic superpower and hub of the world. Israel is one of the most burgeoning and exciting tech economies in the world. And if you think about it, it’s almost like having Silicon Valley not connected to California. The thing that’s held the region back for all these years has just been the conflict and the division and the lack of connectivity. But if you have that region and if it can all come together, if you can create a security architecture. You have an incredibly young population, you have a lot of wealth and resources and a lot of capabilities and knowhow. So I think that if it’s managed correctly, and if Iran is able to be restrained and suppressed with their ambitions to cause destabilization. I don’t mean Iran the country, I mean the Iranian regime.
Because actually once you have this economic sphere, if you could bring Iraq into it, if you could bring Iran into it, that makes it even bigger and stronger. And the Persian people are incredibly entrepreneurial and incredibly industrious. So I do think that the region has tremendous potential. It’s just been held back by bad policy, bad leadership, bad objectives. And again, when President Trump left office in 2021, the Middle East was really on a very, very positive trajectory. And if the right things happen, it can continue to be so. I’m praying at this moment in time that we navigate the current crisis, that the important objectives are achieved of eliminating the terrorists and their threats. And then allowing the leaders who are focused on giving their citizens and their neighbors the opportunity to live a better life, are able to work together and really dream and be ambitious and find ways to create a paradigm where humans can flourish.
Human nature
Lex Fridman
What is the best way to defeat hate in the world?
What is the best way to defeat hate in the world?
Jared Kushner
Hate is a very powerful force, and it’s much easier to hate people you don’t know. It’s funny, when I was working on prison reform, one of the most interesting people I met was a reverend, actually down in Texas, who negotiated the first truce between the Bloods and the Crips. Two of the notorious gangs in America, in prison. And I was very excited to meet him. When I met him, I said, “Well, how’d you do it?” And he said, “It was very simple.” He says, “I got all the guys together and I had a tremendous amount of barbecue brought in.” He says, “And I got the meeting.” He says, “No drinking.” He says, “Drinking sometimes gets people a little bit more against each other.” He says, “But I got a meeting and they started sitting down together and they started saying, ‘You know what? You’re just like me.'” And all of a sudden, they started finding areas where they were more together.
Hate is a very powerful force, and it’s much easier to hate people you don’t know. It’s funny, when I was working on prison reform, one of the most interesting people I met was a reverend, actually down in Texas, who negotiated the first truce between the Bloods and the Crips. Two of the notorious gangs in America, in prison. And I was very excited to meet him. When I met him, I said, “Well, how’d you do it?” And he said, “It was very simple.” He says, “I got all the guys together and I had a tremendous amount of barbecue brought in.” He says, “And I got the meeting.” He says, “No drinking.” He says, “Drinking sometimes gets people a little bit more against each other.” He says, “But I got a meeting and they started sitting down together and they started saying, ‘You know what? You’re just like me.'” And all of a sudden, they started finding areas where they were more together.
Look, I’ve traveled all over the world now. I’ve been very fortunate to meet people from different states in America. I’ve different political persuasions, different ages, different classes. And what I found is that, there’s a fundamental driving amongst all of us where we all want to live a better life. People don’t want to fight naturally, but it’s easy to fight when you feel wronged or you feel like somebody disrespected you or somebody did something from hatred. And hatred leads to more hatred, which sometimes just pushes that cycle further and further. So I believe that each and every one of us has the power to stop that cycle. We don’t do it by being on Twitter and yelling at people. We don’t do it by just being critical. We do it by finding the people we disagree with, by listening to them, by asking questions, by sitting with them. And then if we each take responsibility to try to make the world better, then I think that there’s no limits to the incredible place that this world can be.
Lex Fridman
As you’ve said, you’ve traveled all across the world. Do you think most people are good, most people have love in their heart?
As you’ve said, you’ve traveled all across the world. Do you think most people are good, most people have love in their heart?
Jared Kushner
I do believe that, yeah. And you have some bad people. You have some real evil people. A big part of the work I did was on prison reform. Previously the mentality was, is that the prison should basically be a warehouse for human trash. And if you’ve made a mistake in this world, then we’re going to throw you out and we’re going to make the rest of your life incredibly difficult. Because you’re going to have a criminal record, you’re not going to have access to jobs. But what I found is, when I would sit with people in prison, the people I’ve met through my father’s experience and who I met along the way is that people make mistakes. We’re all human. I think it’s the right thing from a religious perspective to give people second chances. I always believe you shouldn’t judge people by the worst mistake they make in their life.
I do believe that, yeah. And you have some bad people. You have some real evil people. A big part of the work I did was on prison reform. Previously the mentality was, is that the prison should basically be a warehouse for human trash. And if you’ve made a mistake in this world, then we’re going to throw you out and we’re going to make the rest of your life incredibly difficult. Because you’re going to have a criminal record, you’re not going to have access to jobs. But what I found is, when I would sit with people in prison, the people I’ve met through my father’s experience and who I met along the way is that people make mistakes. We’re all human. I think it’s the right thing from a religious perspective to give people second chances. I always believe you shouldn’t judge people by the worst mistake they make in their life.
Unfortunately now, in the era of social media, people will say one wrong thing, it sticks with them forever. They get canceled or they get put out. We’re all humans. We grow from our mistakes, we learn from our mistakes. And I think that some people are just evil. There are some evil people. But I do think the vast, vast, vast majority of people are good. And I do think that people sometimes also can be in a bad place, and then society can push them to a worse and worse place. But we all have the power to make them feel loved, make them feel heard. I think there’s also tremendous power that we have as people to help people get to a better place. My wife and I, we’ve always tried to be a force for good. We’ve always tried to provide a place where people can discuss with each other.
When we were in Washington, we would host dinners at our house all the time, or we would have Democrats and Republicans sitting together. I saw Senator Feinstein just passed away. We had a great dinner at her house when she was a senator, with her and her husband and Mark Meadows when he was on the Freedom Caucus. And we had actually a fascinating discussion about Iran. Mark was much more hard line than me. I had to actually bite my tongue. I was impressed at how much he did. Whereas Feinstein and her husband were super into… They knew the Iranians well. They thought they were peace loving. And it was an incredibly robust and respectful debate. I don’t think we maybe concluded anything that night, but it was interesting for people to get together. Having a dinner at my house where I had Dick Durbin, the number two ranking Democrat in the Senate, Lindsey Graham and Steven Miller, who’s known to be a very hard line on immigration, discussing what an immigration reform could look like.
They left that dinner saying, “Wow, we hadn’t spoken to people on the other side and we actually agree on 85% of things. Maybe something is possible.” So I believe that we should always be trying to push to make the world a better place. And you only do that by listening to people and connecting with people and by respecting people. And finally, I’ll just say on this is that, I meet people all the time who have so much confidence in their perspectives. I’m very jealous that these people are able to be so confident about every single thing. Because, for me, I have some degree of confidence in the things that I’ve studied and what I’ve learned, but I’m always trying to find people who disagree to sharpen my perspectives and to help me grow and to help me learn further. I think that’s the beauty of the world, is that the knowledge base continues to grow, the facts continue to change, and what’s possible tomorrow continues to become different. So as humans, we have to continue to thrive, to learn, and to grow and to connect. And if we do that, everything’s possible.
Lex Fridman
Well, Jared, thank you for your compassion, first of all, but also your wisdom today on this very difficult, this tragic set of events, these difficult days for the world. It’s a big honor to speak with you again. Every time I speak to you, I learn a lot about the world. And I deeply appreciate, like I said, your humility and your understanding of the details of all the complex power dynamics and human dynamics that are going on in the world. Once again, thank you for talking today.
Well, Jared, thank you for your compassion, first of all, but also your wisdom today on this very difficult, this tragic set of events, these difficult days for the world. It’s a big honor to speak with you again. Every time I speak to you, I learn a lot about the world. And I deeply appreciate, like I said, your humility and your understanding of the details of all the complex power dynamics and human dynamics that are going on in the world. Once again, thank you for talking today.
Jared Kushner
Thank you. And Lex, if I could say just one final thing, which is that my thoughts and prayers are really with all the people in Israel and the innocent civilians as well on the Palestinian side. My prayers are with the IDF soldiers that they should be safe and they should be really watched by God to accomplish whatever mission will enable to make the world a safer place.
Thank you. And Lex, if I could say just one final thing, which is that my thoughts and prayers are really with all the people in Israel and the innocent civilians as well on the Palestinian side. My prayers are with the IDF soldiers that they should be safe and they should be really watched by God to accomplish whatever mission will enable to make the world a safer place.
Lex Fridman
Thank you for listening to this newly-recorded segment of The Conversation that addresses the current situation in Israel and Gaza. And now we go on to the second part of the conversation recorded on Thursday, October 5th. Given your experience in negotiating with some of the most powerful and influential leaders in the world, what’s the key to negotiating difficult agreements in geopolitics? I start with a big question.
Thank you for listening to this newly-recorded segment of The Conversation that addresses the current situation in Israel and Gaza. And now we go on to the second part of the conversation recorded on Thursday, October 5th. Given your experience in negotiating with some of the most powerful and influential leaders in the world, what’s the key to negotiating difficult agreements in geopolitics? I start with a big question.
Geopolitics and negotiation
Jared Kushner
If I look back on the different negotiations I had when I was in government, either with leaders of countries, with representatives of leaders, or even with members of Congress to pass legislation. The most important thing I would draw back to would be trust. I think getting to know each other, understanding what was motivating the other party to get to the outcome. And making them feel like you weren’t going to use whatever information they gave you to benefit yourself at the expense of them is probably what I would call table stakes to have a shot at accomplishing anything that was hard in negotiation.
If I look back on the different negotiations I had when I was in government, either with leaders of countries, with representatives of leaders, or even with members of Congress to pass legislation. The most important thing I would draw back to would be trust. I think getting to know each other, understanding what was motivating the other party to get to the outcome. And making them feel like you weren’t going to use whatever information they gave you to benefit yourself at the expense of them is probably what I would call table stakes to have a shot at accomplishing anything that was hard in negotiation.
After that, I would say taking maybe a first principles approach to what the outcome of whatever problem you’re looking to solve should be. Now, you have different kinds of negotiations. I always tried to create a framework in the negotiation where it wasn’t me against you. It was always, let’s agree on what the outcome is that we’re trying to accomplish. Let’s all sit on the same side of the table and say, “We want to get to this outcome. How do we get there?” Really trying to create a roadmap. So once you understand the destination you want to, get to the endpoint, then you’d have to work backwards and really try to put-
Jared Kushner
… to the endpoint, then you’d have to work backwards and really try to put yourself in their shoes and try to understand what were their motivations macro. Most of the time, you have to assume that a leader’s primary objective was to stay in power. And so, all decisions made would be made through the framework of what it would take to do that and how it would impact their ability to do that.
… to the endpoint, then you’d have to work backwards and really try to put yourself in their shoes and try to understand what were their motivations macro. Most of the time, you have to assume that a leader’s primary objective was to stay in power. And so, all decisions made would be made through the framework of what it would take to do that and how it would impact their ability to do that.
And then finally, I would just say that in any negotiation, you have to understand the power dynamics as well. And you have to then weight your approach in order to maneuver pieces to accomplish the objective. And so, in areas where we had stronger power dynamics, I’d always look at it and say, “What are the potential escape routes where a politician would say, ‘This is just the reason why we can’t get there.'” And I’d always think, how can you try to eliminate those escape routes or make them much harder to accomplish? And then, ultimately, think about what’s the golden bridge that you want to create for them in order to get to the other side, where they were motivated to get there because it was in their self-interest to get there, but also because it helped accomplish the different objective.
And I have many examples that I lived through with that, obviously negotiating in Congress for prison reform. I had to form a lot of trust with Democrats, whether it was Hakeem Jeffries or Dick Durbin. And then also on the Republican side with, I had Mike Lee, I had Lindsey Graham, I had Tim Scott, Senator Grassley, and then also Doug Collins in the house was tremendous. And every time we maneuvered something, we would get attacked either from the left. There was a time we were being attacked by Nancy Pelosi, John Lewis, for not being inclusive enough. And then there were times that we maneuvered it, we’d be attacked from the right for maybe going too far. And ultimately, we had to find just the right place where we can get it done.
And the same thing happened with USMCA, where we were negotiating the biggest trade deal in the history of the world, which was $1.3 trillion in annual trade between Mexico, Canada, the United States of America. And we were able to form good trust with the other side and try to say, “How do we create win-win outcomes?” And ultimately, we were able to do something in a record time that people thought was very hard to do. And both of them, in a divided time of the Trump administration, were bipartisan wins with big, big votes in the Senate and the House.
Lex Fridman
You have a lot of stories of this kind, sometimes a soft approach, sometimes a hard approach. I think the story where with Bibi, there was a potential, a dramatic election coming up, and you have to say, “No. No excuses, no delaying. We have to make this agreement.” I know Bibi cares about Israel more than the particular dynamics of the election. You had to draw a hard line there.
You have a lot of stories of this kind, sometimes a soft approach, sometimes a hard approach. I think the story where with Bibi, there was a potential, a dramatic election coming up, and you have to say, “No. No excuses, no delaying. We have to make this agreement.” I know Bibi cares about Israel more than the particular dynamics of the election. You had to draw a hard line there.
Jared Kushner
Yeah. But in fairness too, for him, during the time that we were dealing with him, he was always in election versus election, and then election. And what he was saying wasn’t wrong. And I think he was more expressing his concerns given the dynamics. And we never held those concerns against him, we just said those are real concerns he had. We respected those concerns. But then we helped him prioritize to help accomplish the right things.
Yeah. But in fairness too, for him, during the time that we were dealing with him, he was always in election versus election, and then election. And what he was saying wasn’t wrong. And I think he was more expressing his concerns given the dynamics. And we never held those concerns against him, we just said those are real concerns he had. We respected those concerns. But then we helped him prioritize to help accomplish the right things.
And that’s ultimately what the partnership is, right? My job was to represent America, his job was to represent Israel, and you had other parties representing their own interests. And as long as you assume that people were acting mostly in good faith, you were able to navigate areas where you didn’t have complete overlap of priorities and objectives.
Lex Fridman
Just to go back to the trust thing, you sometimes see that with leaders, where it looks like they’re trying to screw over the other person when they’re talking. And so, not having that, I think is a really powerful thing for earning trust. That people actually can believe that you’re results driven and are working towards a certain end.
Just to go back to the trust thing, you sometimes see that with leaders, where it looks like they’re trying to screw over the other person when they’re talking. And so, not having that, I think is a really powerful thing for earning trust. That people actually can believe that you’re results driven and are working towards a certain end.
Is there a skill to that? Is that genetics, you’re born with that? Or is that something you develop? So basically, it requires you to look at the game of politics and not have a kind of cynicism about it, to where everybody’s trying to manipulate you. And actually just go in with a kind open mind and open heart and actually speak truthfully to people on a basic human level.
Jared Kushner
I would say that I always would think about how can I be a partner to others like I would want somebody to be a partner to me? And a lot of it comes from just my different experiences in business. I’ve had great partners, I’ve had terrible partners.
I would say that I always would think about how can I be a partner to others like I would want somebody to be a partner to me? And a lot of it comes from just my different experiences in business. I’ve had great partners, I’ve had terrible partners.
My father, again, a lot of my childhood was I was exposed to business. My father, on Sundays, he would take us to job sites and to the office with him instead of to football games like my friend’s fathers would do. And so, we were exposed to business. And what he would say about his father, who was an immigrant to America, came over with nothing, had no formal education, but he would always say, “A good deal with a bad partner will always be a bad deal. And a bad deal with a good partner, you’ll figure it out.”
And so, going through some of the challenges that I had in my life early on, whether it was the issue with my father, that I’m sure we’ll talk about, or even going through some tougher financial times during the Great Financial Crisis, I really learned a lot about partnership. And I always thought, “How can I act in a way where I could be the type of partner or friend to others that I wish others would be to me?”
Lex Fridman
So when you look for a good partner, don’t you think there’s the capacity for both good and bad in every person? So when you negotiate with all of these leaders, aren’t there multiple people you’re speaking to inside one person, that you’re trying to encourage, catalyze the goodness in the human?
So when you look for a good partner, don’t you think there’s the capacity for both good and bad in every person? So when you negotiate with all of these leaders, aren’t there multiple people you’re speaking to inside one person, that you’re trying to encourage, catalyze the goodness in the human?
Jared Kushner
Yeah. Leaders are generally chosen by their country. And so, my view was if I had an objective, I didn’t get to choose who was the leader of other countries. My job was to deal with that leader, understand their strengths, understand their weaknesses, understand their power dynamics as well.
Yeah. Leaders are generally chosen by their country. And so, my view was if I had an objective, I didn’t get to choose who was the leader of other countries. My job was to deal with that leader, understand their strengths, understand their weaknesses, understand their power dynamics as well.
One of my greatest takeaways when I grew up, I’d read the newspapers about all these powerful, famous people. And then as I got older and had the chance to meet them and do business with them and then ultimately interact with them in government, is I realized that they’re just like you and me. They wake up every morning, their kids are pissed at them, their wife doesn’t want to talk with them. And they’ve got a set of advisors around them, one saying, ” Let’s go to war,” one saying, “Let’s make peace.” One saying, “Do the deal,” one saying, “Don’t do the deal.” And they’re all thinking, where do I get advice? How do I make decisions?
And so, understanding the true human nature of them and then the different power dynamics around them, I thought was very key. And so, I didn’t have a choice, do I deal with them or not? It was a function of how do you deal with them effectively in order to find areas where you have common interests and then work well together to pursue those common interests in order to achieve a certain goal.
North Korea
Lex Fridman
First of all, you’re incredibly well-read. I’ve gotten to know you and I’ve gotten to know Ivanka, and the book recommendation list is just incredible. So first of all, thank you for that. You told me about The Guns of August by Barbara Tuchman. It’s a book on World War I, and I went down a whole rabbit hole there. She’s an incredible historian.
First of all, you’re incredibly well-read. I’ve gotten to know you and I’ve gotten to know Ivanka, and the book recommendation list is just incredible. So first of all, thank you for that. You told me about The Guns of August by Barbara Tuchman. It’s a book on World War I, and I went down a whole rabbit hole there. She’s an incredible historian.
But anyway, there’s a bunch of stuff you learned from that, but one of the things you told me is it influenced your general approach to diplomacy of just picking up the phone and giving it a try. So as opposed to planning and strategizing, just pick up the phone.
Jared Kushner
This was a book I read way before the notion of serving in government was ever even on my mind or a reality. And I remember thinking about it, reading it, and thinking how World War I started, where you had somebody was assassinated, and then you had all these different alliances that were created. And then in order to accomplish objectives, it triggered all of these people getting in bed with everyone else because of documents that were created without the intent of going to a massive war. And I think in the course of World War I, it was one of the greatest atrocities that we’ve seen as humanity. We’ve had 16 million people killed in that war.
This was a book I read way before the notion of serving in government was ever even on my mind or a reality. And I remember thinking about it, reading it, and thinking how World War I started, where you had somebody was assassinated, and then you had all these different alliances that were created. And then in order to accomplish objectives, it triggered all of these people getting in bed with everyone else because of documents that were created without the intent of going to a massive war. And I think in the course of World War I, it was one of the greatest atrocities that we’ve seen as humanity. We’ve had 16 million people killed in that war.
And as I was reading the book, I remember thinking to myself, “Even though things are set in a certain way, go sit with somebody, go talk to them and say, ‘This doesn’t make sense, this is wrong. How do we create a better pathway?'” And as a civilian, all my life, I would read the newspapers, I would observe how different leaders would act. But when we had the opportunity to serve in government and have the position, you realize you’re not a civilian. You don’t have the luxury of sitting back and letting the world happen the way it’s happening. You have agency and you have the potential to influence the outcome of things.
And one thing I’ve seen is most political prognosticators are wrong. Anyone who tells you what’s going to happen really has no clue. And it’s not because they’re bad or they’re not intelligent, it’s because nobody knows. And at the end of the day, the outcomes in the world are usually driven by the decisions of humans. And if you’re able to come together, form relationships, listen to each other, you can do that.
And one of the great examples that I speak about in the book is with North Korea. Whereas if you remember in 2017, it was very intense. When President Obama was leaving office, he told President Trump that the single biggest fear that he had, and this is a time when the world was a mess, you had the Middle East was on fire, ISIS was beheading journalists and killing Christians. They had a caliphate the size of Ohio. Libya was destabilized, Yemen was destabilized. Syria was in a civil war where 500,000 people were killed. Iran was on a glide path to a nuclear weapon. Yet the single biggest fear he had was North Korea.
Then it got compounded by the fact that we get into office and President Trump brings his generals around and he’s learning how to interact with all the generals and says, “Okay, what are my options?” And they said, “Calm down. We’ve been using all of our ammunition in the Middle East. We don’t have enough ammunition to go to war over there.” And he says, “Let’s not let that be too public. Let’s try to restock and come up with a plan.”
And at the time, there was a lot of banter back and forth. And I was able to, I got a call from a friend who was an old business contact, who actually had done business in North Korea. And he said, “I’d love to find a way to solve this.” And I was getting calls from friends at the time saying, “I’m trying to go to Hawaii for vacation. Should I not be going? Is it not safe?”
Lex Fridman
Wow.
Wow.
Jared Kushner
We forget the psychology of how intense that was at the time. And then through that interaction, he called some of his contacts in North Korea. And then we were able, with the CIA, to open up a back channel that ultimately led to the deescalation, the meeting between Trump and Kim Jong-Un, which led to a deescalation.
We forget the psychology of how intense that was at the time. And then through that interaction, he called some of his contacts in North Korea. And then we were able, with the CIA, to open up a back channel that ultimately led to the deescalation, the meeting between Trump and Kim Jong-Un, which led to a deescalation.
So that was really the mindset, which was whenever there’s a problem, just pick up the phone and try. And I think President Trump had a very similar approach, which was let’s give it a shot. And he wasn’t afraid to go after the hard ones too.
And I’ll say one final thing on this, which is that in politics, the incentive structure is just much different than in the real world, in the sense that you have a hard problem. And if you try to solve a hard problem, the likelihood of failure is great. Whereas in the business world, if you’re going after a hard problem, we celebrate those people. Right? We want our entrepreneurs and our great people to go after solving the big, hard problems. But in politics, if you try to take on a hard problem, you have a high likelihood of failure. You’ll get a lot of criticism on your pathway to trying to accomplish that, if you fail. And then if you fail, it has a higher probability of leading to you losing your opportunity to serve. And so, it’s just one of these things where people want to play it safe, which is not the notion that really was taken during the time that President Trump was in office.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it has to be that way? I think there’s something in the human spirit, in the public that desires politicians to take on the big, bold problems. Right? Why is it the politicians need to be so afraid of failure?
Do you think it has to be that way? I think there’s something in the human spirit, in the public that desires politicians to take on the big, bold problems. Right? Why is it the politicians need to be so afraid of failure?
Jared Kushner
I don’t think it has to be that way. And that’s, I think, one of the great lessons from the time of the Trump administration. He brought a lot of people from the business world into government. The business people have a much different mindset than government people, and there was a lot of resistance. And I think part of why there was so much resistance was because, I think about it from my personal sense, was that if I was successful with no traditional qualifications to do diplomacy, it meant that all the people with traditional qualifications and diplomacy didn’t necessarily need those qualifications in order to be successful. And that same sentiment manifested itself in many areas in government.
I don’t think it has to be that way. And that’s, I think, one of the great lessons from the time of the Trump administration. He brought a lot of people from the business world into government. The business people have a much different mindset than government people, and there was a lot of resistance. And I think part of why there was so much resistance was because, I think about it from my personal sense, was that if I was successful with no traditional qualifications to do diplomacy, it meant that all the people with traditional qualifications and diplomacy didn’t necessarily need those qualifications in order to be successful. And that same sentiment manifested itself in many areas in government.
And I think that in the business world, it’s outcome oriented, it’s results oriented. And what we would see in New York is there, they would stab you in the eye, in DC they would stab you in the back, and it just became a whole different-
Lex Fridman
God line.
God line.
Jared Kushner
… dynamic of how you work through these different areas. So the answer is, it doesn’t have to be that way, you just need the right courageous leader. And that’s why I’m so optimistic about what the future of America and the world could be if you have the right people in power who are willing to take on the right challenges and do it in the right way.
… dynamic of how you work through these different areas. So the answer is, it doesn’t have to be that way, you just need the right courageous leader. And that’s why I’m so optimistic about what the future of America and the world could be if you have the right people in power who are willing to take on the right challenges and do it in the right way.
Lex Fridman
So if we just linger on the North Korea and the deescalation and the meeting, what’s the trajectory from this could be the most catastrophic thing that destroys the world, to you find back channels? Do you start talking and start arranging the meeting? Is there some insights you can give to how difficult that is to do? In that, in the North Korea case, which seems like to be one of the more closed off parts of the world. And any other cases that you worked on.
So if we just linger on the North Korea and the deescalation and the meeting, what’s the trajectory from this could be the most catastrophic thing that destroys the world, to you find back channels? Do you start talking and start arranging the meeting? Is there some insights you can give to how difficult that is to do? In that, in the North Korea case, which seems like to be one of the more closed off parts of the world. And any other cases that you worked on.
Jared Kushner
Yeah, it’s always very challenging. And especially when you’re going against the grain of what’s established, right? We did something different, to think that an old business contact that I had could then do it. That’s the type of thing that if the press knew what we were doing, they would’ve derided it and criticized it in every which way. But that was one of the benefits of operating very much below the radar, is that we were able to try all these different things. And not all of them worked, but some of them did.
Yeah, it’s always very challenging. And especially when you’re going against the grain of what’s established, right? We did something different, to think that an old business contact that I had could then do it. That’s the type of thing that if the press knew what we were doing, they would’ve derided it and criticized it in every which way. But that was one of the benefits of operating very much below the radar, is that we were able to try all these different things. And not all of them worked, but some of them did.
But that is what’s amazing about the world, right? This could be the biggest story on the front page of every paper, and they’re inciting fear in everyone, and it’s not illegitimate fear. There were missile tests over Japan. You had a lot of very big challenges with that file. And then all of a sudden we make contact, we go through negotiations to set a meeting. There’s a meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong Un. And then all of a sudden, there’s a framework to try and move things forward. And again, I think that there’s a lot of possibility there for what could happen if it’s worked in the right way.
Lex Fridman
I just want to know how you word that first email or text message, what emojis do you use? Like the hugging emoji. It’s just personally, I’ve gotten to know a lot of powerful and rich people, and it’s funny that they’re all human, just like you’re saying. And a lot of the drama, a lot of the problems can be resolved with just a little comradery, a little kindness, a little just actually just reaching out.
I just want to know how you word that first email or text message, what emojis do you use? Like the hugging emoji. It’s just personally, I’ve gotten to know a lot of powerful and rich people, and it’s funny that they’re all human, just like you’re saying. And a lot of the drama, a lot of the problems can be resolved with just a little comradery, a little kindness, a little just actually just reaching out.
Jared Kushner
We’re all human beings. And people want to be successful, and people want to be good. And you’re right too. There’s way more emojis involved in diplomacy than I ever would’ve expected.
We’re all human beings. And people want to be successful, and people want to be good. And you’re right too. There’s way more emojis involved in diplomacy than I ever would’ve expected.
Lex Fridman
And every leader, I’m sure, has their favorite emoji. This is also I learned about people. Everybody has their go-to emoji. I usually go to the heart very quickly, emoji. There’s some people who go the hugging, whatever that, you’re like the hugging thing.
And every leader, I’m sure, has their favorite emoji. This is also I learned about people. Everybody has their go-to emoji. I usually go to the heart very quickly, emoji. There’s some people who go the hugging, whatever that, you’re like the hugging thing.
Personalities of leaders
Anyway. This conversation quickly turned to the ridiculous. But to do another book reference, you mentioned the book Thirteen Days in September by Lawrence Wright, in discussing all the work you’ve done in Israel and the Middle East. I just want to ask you sort of the interesting aspect of that book, which is the influence of the personalities and personal relationships on these negotiations. You kind of started to allude to that with the trust, but how much do the personalities matter in this? So going from North Korea to the Middle East here, to within Congress and all that kind of stuff.
Jared Kushner
Yeah, completely in every way. That’s an incredible book, and it’s a very entertaining read. It has obviously a lot of good historical context on some of the key players, whether it was on Anwar Sadat or Menachem Begin or Jimmy Carter and Cy Vance, and a lot of the others who were involved with those negotiations.
Yeah, completely in every way. That’s an incredible book, and it’s a very entertaining read. It has obviously a lot of good historical context on some of the key players, whether it was on Anwar Sadat or Menachem Begin or Jimmy Carter and Cy Vance, and a lot of the others who were involved with those negotiations.
And the thing that I kind of took from that experience was just how personal it was. And again, one of my favorite stories from that book was how Anwar Sadat, who was a big, big leader, he had a mystic who was, according to this book, again, history, I like reading it, but I always realize that you have to notice that this is just the perspective of a given author that’s writing it. But the way that they write this book was that he had an advisor who was a mystic, and the mystic was having a back channel with the Israelis. And the mystic told Sadat, “If you go to Israel and you make a speech at the Knesset, Begin is ready to give you the Sinai.”
And so, he goes to Israel, they set this whole thing up, he goes and gives the Knesset. They go for their meeting after, and Sadat says, “Okay, well, are we going to do this thing?” And Begin says, “What are you talking about? I’m not giving you an inch of our land.” And it was just one of these things where it was a miscommunication that brought about the symbolic visit of Anwar Sadat to Israel. And that was one of these notions that just made everyone think that something was possible, that they thought was impossible a moment before.
And actually, we had an example like that during our time in government when we did the Abraham Accords. The first step of the accords was really a phone call between President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and Mohammed bin Zayed, who, at that point, was the Crown Prince and de facto ruler of the UAE. But all we had was a phone call and then a statement that was released.
And what was interesting after that is we said, “Okay, well, how do we integrate countries? Nobody’s done this in a long time.” And we were trying to figure out all the issues, and there was big miscommunications between Israel and UAE, and we were navigating through all the issues. And so, after a couple weeks, I said, “I’ve got to go over there and try to sort through these issues.” So we make a plan to go to Israel, and then we’re going to go to UAE.
And then a young gentleman who worked with me, named Avi Berkowitz, says, “Well, if we’re flying from Israel to UAE, instead of flying on a government plane, why don’t we see if we can get an El AL plane and we’ll do the first official commercial flight?” And so, I said, “That’s a great idea. Let’s call Ambassador Otaiba,” Yousef, who was a tremendous player in the Abraham Accords, working behind the scenes day and night, and was really a big catalyst. So he calls Yousef and he says, “Sure, no problem. Let’s give it a shot.”
So we go and we do it, and he says, “If we can work out these issues, what we’ll do.” So we go to Israel, we do our meetings, we get everything back into a good place. We set up this trip over, we fly on an El Al plane. We fill it up, at the time, it was during Covid, with a health delegation. We had the financial ministry because we had to open up banking relationships, they could wire money between countries. We wanted to get health partnerships. Then we just had a lot of legal things and national security things we wanted to start putting together.
So we do this flight and we end up landing in UAE. And the picture of us coming off the plane, being greeted by Emiratis in thobes, with an El Al plane with an Israeli flag on it, just captured everyone’s imagination. And so, it was one of these things where it’s like you work so hard on the details and the negotiation, hundreds of hours to make sure everything’s perfect, and the one thing that you do kind of, “Yeah, let’s give it a shot.” That image ended up capturing everyone’s heart.
So going back to Sadat, that visit was very critical. And what was interesting was is according to this book, it happened because of a miscommunication. That was the first part. The second part of the book, that’s just amazing theater, and actually the book was based on a play, it was just going back and forth with all of the different methodologies that they tried, that failed, but they kept trying at it. And then, ultimately, seeing how the personalities were able to find ways to make the compromise that ultimately was a very, very big thing for more stability in the Middle East.
And so, amazing book, I would highly recommend it. A very entertaining read and something that at least gave me encouragement to keep going when the task I was pursuing seemed so large.
Lex Fridman
If you could just linger on the personalities. You write in the book that words matter. Or you write in the context of saying, in the diplomacy business, words matter. And then you said that, “We’re in the results business,” is a badass line. But if we just stick to the diplomacy business and words mattering, it seems like one of the things you really highlight that individual words can really have… You can fight over individual words. So how do you operate in a world where single words matter?
If you could just linger on the personalities. You write in the book that words matter. Or you write in the context of saying, in the diplomacy business, words matter. And then you said that, “We’re in the results business,” is a badass line. But if we just stick to the diplomacy business and words mattering, it seems like one of the things you really highlight that individual words can really have… You can fight over individual words. So how do you operate in a world where single words matter?
Jared Kushner
I think you have to be respectful to the craft that you’re in, where words matter, but then realize that they don’t matter as much. And then also focus on the fact that the actions are actually what’s going to matter more than the words. And so, you have a difference between leaders and politicians. Politicians are there to say the right thing and to hold the power. Leaders are people who are willing to do things that will be transformational, from my perspective.
I think you have to be respectful to the craft that you’re in, where words matter, but then realize that they don’t matter as much. And then also focus on the fact that the actions are actually what’s going to matter more than the words. And so, you have a difference between leaders and politicians. Politicians are there to say the right thing and to hold the power. Leaders are people who are willing to do things that will be transformational, from my perspective.
And so, when I would think about diplomacy, words without actions or without the threat of actions, and that was something that President Trump did very well, was that people knew that he was willing to take action, he was very unpredictable in how he would act. And that made our words much more effective in what they did. So it’s all a combination.
But coming from the private sector, we are all about results. If you’re in government, you can work on something for 10 years and fail and then retire, and they consider you an expert. In the private sector, if you work on something for 10 weeks and you don’t have a success, then you’re unemployed. So it’s a different kind of notion. And it was just understanding the mentality and trying to adjust and bridging the divides between the different trainings.
Government bureaucracy
Lex Fridman
Is that the biggest thing you took from your business background, is that just be really results focused?
Is that the biggest thing you took from your business background, is that just be really results focused?
Jared Kushner
It was just the only way to be. If I was giving up a nice life in New York, and if I was giving up the stuff that I really enjoyed, the company that I’d helped build and the life that I was enjoying in order to do government, I was going there to make a difference and we had to focus on it.
It was just the only way to be. If I was giving up a nice life in New York, and if I was giving up the stuff that I really enjoyed, the company that I’d helped build and the life that I was enjoying in order to do government, I was going there to make a difference and we had to focus on it.
The other skillset, so there was a couple skill sets that I found were quite deficient in government. First of all, there was a ton of amazing people. People talk about the bureaucracy. What I found was is you had incredibly committed, passionate, intelligent, capable people all throughout the government. And what they were waiting for though was direction and then cover in order to get there.
And so, there were a lot of tasks that I worked on, whether it was building the wall at the southern border, where I was able to work with Customs, Border Patrol, Army Corps of Engineers, military, DHS professionals, DOD, and we basically all came together. And then once we had a good project management plan, we were able to move very, very quickly. I think we built about 470 miles of border barrier in about two years, basically. And that worked very well because we basically brought private sector project management skillset, which we’re quite often missing in government.
The second one is just, we spoke about negotiation earlier. I would say that most people in government, it’s just a different form of negotiation than you see in the private sector, and way less effective in that regard. Which is why I think it’s good the more we can encourage more people with private sector experience to do a stint in government and to really try to contribute and serve their country. That’s how our founders, George Washington and all the founding fathers, they were working on their farms. They left their farms, served in government, then they went back to the farm.
And that was kind of the design of the representative government. It wasn’t a career political class, it was people coming in to show gratitude for the freedoms and the liberties that they enjoyed, and then do their best to help others have those same opportunities that they had, and then they’d go back and live their lives. So I think that there’s a lot of opportunity with our government, of people with more business mindsets who are going to think about things from a solutions perspective, go and serve.
Lex Fridman
Is that one of the main problems here? So you also mentioned the book, the Great Degeneration by Niall Ferguson, an awesome historian. He’s been on this podcast. It helped you understand the inefficiencies of government regulation. I’d love it if you can give an insight into why government is so inefficient at times. When it is inefficient, when it doesn’t work, why is that the case? The bureaucracy that you spoke to, the negative aspects of the bureaucracy.
Is that one of the main problems here? So you also mentioned the book, the Great Degeneration by Niall Ferguson, an awesome historian. He’s been on this podcast. It helped you understand the inefficiencies of government regulation. I’d love it if you can give an insight into why government is so inefficient at times. When it is inefficient, when it doesn’t work, why is that the case? The bureaucracy that you spoke to, the negative aspects of the bureaucracy.
Jared Kushner
So we don’t have enough time on this podcast to go into it, but it’s… Look, there’s a lot of aspects that work as well. But I do think we’ve gotten too big. Niall’s book that you mentioned, one of the things that I took from that, I read it I think in 2012, right kind of in the middle of the Great Financial Crisis, was he was talking about how government regulation often was put in place to deal with old crises. It was never going to solve future problems, it was more to solve for problems that had happened in the past. And I remember thinking about that.
So we don’t have enough time on this podcast to go into it, but it’s… Look, there’s a lot of aspects that work as well. But I do think we’ve gotten too big. Niall’s book that you mentioned, one of the things that I took from that, I read it I think in 2012, right kind of in the middle of the Great Financial Crisis, was he was talking about how government regulation often was put in place to deal with old crises. It was never going to solve future problems, it was more to solve for problems that had happened in the past. And I remember thinking about that.
One thing I was very proud of, of the work of the Trump administration was that you had four years consecutively where there was a net decrease in the cost of regulations. So to give you a context, in the last year of Obama in 2016, there was 6 million man hours spent by the private sector complying with new federal regulations. And that’s not really what the intent of our government was, right? If we have rules or regulations, those should be legislated by Congress. They shouldn’t be put in by bureaucrats who are basically saying, “I want to follow this objective,” so using the power of the pen in order to do that.
So the deregulatory effort was actually very critical to Trump’s economic success that happened in the beginning of the administration. And then what I saw with regulation was anytime either there was legislation or regulation coming, the people pushing for it were usually the people who would benefit from the regulatory captures. You look at the Great Financial Crisis, where you had these big banking reforms. Well, what happened during the big banking reforms? Then you had a big reduction in the amount of banks that occurred, and the big banks became even bigger. Whereas I don’t think that was the intention of the legislation, but the people who were writing the legislation and influencing it had a lot of the constituencies from those larger institutions.
And then what happened as a result of that? A lot of these smaller institutions didn’t have the ability to be as competitive. They had more restrictions, more costs, they became less profitable. But these were the banks that were serving small business, which is the biggest creator of jobs in our country. And then as a result, the bigger banks got more powerful and what happened in the country as a result of the regulations that they put in place? The wealth gap in the country grew, it didn’t shrink.
And so, I think oftentimes what they say these regulations are intended to be, the result often becomes the opposite. And so, what President Trump did and his administration was they did a massive deregulatory effort. And I think they pledged that for every one regulation they put on, because you do need some regulation in an economy and in a society, they would take off two. And in the first year, they eliminated eight regulations for every one.
So that was just something I took from it, which was, I thought, very interesting. And you had to really, I think you just have to think through what are the consequences going to be of the different actions you take? And often, government gets it wrong by taking an action that feels right, but has big negative consequences down the road.
Accusations of collusion with Russia
Lex Fridman
Let’s go to some difficult topics. You’ve wrote in the book about your experience with some very low points in government. You’ve been attacked quite a bit. One of the ones that stands out is the accusations of collusion with Russia. And you tell in the book, in general, this whole story, this whole journey, on a personal level, on a sort of big political level. Can you tell me some aspects of this story?
Let’s go to some difficult topics. You’ve wrote in the book about your experience with some very low points in government. You’ve been attacked quite a bit. One of the ones that stands out is the accusations of collusion with Russia. And you tell in the book, in general, this whole story, this whole journey, on a personal level, on a sort of big political level. Can you tell me some aspects of this story?
Jared Kushner
Sure. So to give the listeners some context, and people remember this now, it’s been kind of swept away because it turned out not to be true, was that after President Trump won the election in 2016, instead of the media saying, “Oh, we were wrong,” because again, everyone thought he had zero chance of winning. They said, “Okay, well, we couldn’t have been wrong. It must have been the Russians who worked with him.”
Sure. So to give the listeners some context, and people remember this now, it’s been kind of swept away because it turned out not to be true, was that after President Trump won the election in 2016, instead of the media saying, “Oh, we were wrong,” because again, everyone thought he had zero chance of winning. They said, “Okay, well, we couldn’t have been wrong. It must have been the Russians who worked with him.”
And so, at first, when this started coming up, I thought this was ridiculous. I was very intimately involved with the operations of the campaign. I was running the finance of the campaign. I was running the digital media of the campaign. I was running the schedule for the campaign. And I knew that on most days, we had trouble working, coordinating with ourselves, let alone collaborating with another government and colluding, as they called it. And so, we did a great job, I think, as an underdog campaign, very leanly staffed. And then they said that we were working with the Russians.
And so, at the time, I didn’t take it too seriously because I knew there was no truth to it. But it was amazing to me to start seeing all of these institutions, whether it was CNN, the Washington Post, New York Times, these were news organizations that I grew up having a lot of respect for, taking these accusations so seriously. And then working themselves up in order to just cover it for two years. Then as a result, you had a special counsel, you had a House investigation, a Senate investigation.
And I personally spent about, I think over 20 hours just testifying before these different committees. Again, spent millions of dollars out of my own pocket on my legal fees to make sure I was well-represented. And the reason I did that was because I saw in Washington, it was like a sick game. It’s almost like even though there was no underlying problems to the accusation, I felt like this is one of those things where they’re going to try to catch you. And then if you step on the line, they catch you with one misrepresentation, they’re going to try to put you in jail or worse. And so, for me, that was a big concern.
And it was amazing. My poor mom, I told her to stop reading whatever. I said, “Mom, I promise you, we didn’t do anything wrong. It’s good.” But she’d call me and say, “Well, our friends were on the Upper East Side, were talking with Chuck Schumer, says, ‘Jared’s going to jail. We know for sure that he colluded with the Russians.'” And this is a leading senator saying things like this.
And so, it was just interesting for me to see how the whole world could believe something and be talking about it that I knew, with 1000% certainty, was just not true. And so, seeing that play out was very, very hard. Obviously, I was accused of a lot of things. There were times in Washington, I was radioactive. I remember one weekend it was all over CNN, the people, they had panels on CNN, like the news organization that I grew up thinking was the number one trusted name for news in the world, talking about how I’d committed treason, because I met with an ambassador and said, “We’d like to hear your perspective on what you think the policy should be in Syria,” where there was a big civil war happening and ISIS, and a lot of different things.
So it was quite a crazy time in that regard. But luckily, again, we were able to fight through it. It was a major distraction for our administration. And I think we were able to kind of stay focused on the objectives and the policies. But it was a crazy time, and I learned a lot from that experience.
Lex Fridman
It’s crazy how just an accusation can be viral and can just go. One of the things that worries me is the effect on your mind, the psychology of it, to make sure it doesn’t make you cynical. People that are trying to do stuff, those kinds of stories that can destroy their mind. So one of the things I’d love to sort of understand, you, who kind of rolled in from the business world, and all of a sudden, the entire world, from CNN to everybody’s accusing you of colluding with the Russians. When you’re sitting at home, how do you keep a calm mind, a clear mind, an optimistic one, that doesn’t become cynical and actually just keep trying to push on and do stuff in the world?
It’s crazy how just an accusation can be viral and can just go. One of the things that worries me is the effect on your mind, the psychology of it, to make sure it doesn’t make you cynical. People that are trying to do stuff, those kinds of stories that can destroy their mind. So one of the things I’d love to sort of understand, you, who kind of rolled in from the business world, and all of a sudden, the entire world, from CNN to everybody’s accusing you of colluding with the Russians. When you’re sitting at home, how do you keep a calm mind, a clear mind, an optimistic one, that doesn’t become cynical and actually just keep trying to push on and do stuff in the world?
Jared Kushner
Yeah. It was a surreal experience. I would say number one is I felt very confident that I hadn’t done anything wrong. So I’d always tell my lawyer, “The good news is I’ve got a good fact problem.” I need a good lawyer to get me through it, but it’s much easier to be a good lawyer if you have a very innocent client. And so, the fact that I knew that I didn’t believe that I had any legal liability helped me kind of-
Yeah. It was a surreal experience. I would say number one is I felt very confident that I hadn’t done anything wrong. So I’d always tell my lawyer, “The good news is I’ve got a good fact problem.” I need a good lawyer to get me through it, but it’s much easier to be a good lawyer if you have a very innocent client. And so, the fact that I knew that I didn’t believe that I had any legal liability helped me kind of-
Jared Kushner
… That I had any legal liability helped me intellectually separate the challenge I needed to do to fight through it, from it. And then I just basically said I’d had hardship earlier in my life where I dealt with the situation with my father. And what I realized there is that you can’t really spend energy on the things that you don’t control. All you can do is spend your time and energy worrying about what you can control and then how you react to the things that you have there. And so it took a lot of discipline, it took a lot of strength. And again, I give my wife Ivanka and even Donald, a lot of credit for having my back during that time and encouraging me just to fight through it.
… That I had any legal liability helped me intellectually separate the challenge I needed to do to fight through it, from it. And then I just basically said I’d had hardship earlier in my life where I dealt with the situation with my father. And what I realized there is that you can’t really spend energy on the things that you don’t control. All you can do is spend your time and energy worrying about what you can control and then how you react to the things that you have there. And so it took a lot of discipline, it took a lot of strength. And again, I give my wife Ivanka and even Donald, a lot of credit for having my back during that time and encouraging me just to fight through it.
And then I also had to make sure that I didn’t allow that to distract me from my job. I felt like I had an amazing opportunity in the White House to make a difference in the world. And if I would’ve spent all my time playing defense, in politics, it’s a time duration game. In business, you have whatever duration you set for yourself, in politics, it’s time duration. We had four years. Every day was sand through an hourglass. My mindset was, I need to accomplish as much as I can in these four years. And I guess the traditional game that’s played in Washington is whether it’s the media, the opposition, their job is to distract you and then try to stop you from being as successful as you want to be. And so just fought through it.
And it wasn’t always fun, but we got through and thank God it’s something people don’t talk about. And it has been amazing to me just the lack of self-awareness and reflection of a lot of the people who hyped this up for two years. They don’t think there was anything wrong with it. And that’s interesting, but my view is, we got through it, it’s good. So it’s in the past and then I started moving to the future and that’s really where I spent my time.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But I want to linger on it because to me, that has a really discouraging effect on anyone who’s trying to do positive in the world. These kinds of attacks are intense. You say one of the lessons you learned is that you really have to be perfect, but I hate that to be the lesson. I feel like you should be able to do stupid stuff, take big risks, and people celebrate the big risks and not try to weave gigantic stories over nothing. I just want to understand the two aspects of this, how to not have such stories of so much legs, and the other is how to stay psychologically strong? So you waved it off that you didn’t have a fact problem, but it can just have a effect in your psyche. You seem to be pretty stoic about the whole thing, but just on the psychology side, how did you stay calm and not become cynical where you can continue to do stuff and take big risks?
Yeah. But I want to linger on it because to me, that has a really discouraging effect on anyone who’s trying to do positive in the world. These kinds of attacks are intense. You say one of the lessons you learned is that you really have to be perfect, but I hate that to be the lesson. I feel like you should be able to do stupid stuff, take big risks, and people celebrate the big risks and not try to weave gigantic stories over nothing. I just want to understand the two aspects of this, how to not have such stories of so much legs, and the other is how to stay psychologically strong? So you waved it off that you didn’t have a fact problem, but it can just have a effect in your psyche. You seem to be pretty stoic about the whole thing, but just on the psychology side, how did you stay calm and not become cynical where you can continue to do stuff and take big risks?
Jared Kushner
I didn’t have a choice.
I didn’t have a choice.
Lex Fridman
What do you mean?
What do you mean?
Jared Kushner
I mean I could have spent every day feeling sorry for myself or complaining or saying things aren’t fair. But the general way I looked at it was that in life, every opportunity has a cost. And you could look at it and say maybe this was a massive cost, either in dollars or in time or in reputation or in emotional drain. But you could also say that I had an opportunity to work in the White House and I had an opportunity to work on some of the hardest challenges. And you talk about how that’s not celebrated, that is something very different. In the private sector, when you take on big challenges, that is celebrated. In government, when you take on big challenges, people want to see it fail or they want to criticize those people who are trying to take that on. And I think that’s wrong.
I mean I could have spent every day feeling sorry for myself or complaining or saying things aren’t fair. But the general way I looked at it was that in life, every opportunity has a cost. And you could look at it and say maybe this was a massive cost, either in dollars or in time or in reputation or in emotional drain. But you could also say that I had an opportunity to work in the White House and I had an opportunity to work on some of the hardest challenges. And you talk about how that’s not celebrated, that is something very different. In the private sector, when you take on big challenges, that is celebrated. In government, when you take on big challenges, people want to see it fail or they want to criticize those people who are trying to take that on. And I think that’s wrong.
And I think that as a country, we should be thinking big. We should be dreaming big, and we should be encouraging our politicians to try and to fail more and to go to take on big things knowing that there’s risk of failing. Obviously, we want them to succeed, not to fail, but let’s take on the big things. Let’s try to do that. So I think it’s just very basic that you’re in a situation. I’ve made decisions. I can’t go back and change decisions in the past. I still felt very blessed to be in the position I was in, and I knew that I just had to work through it. Like I said, I was very lucky to have support from my wife and from my family and from good friends.
Again, I think I’d chosen very good friends in life and my friends were with me. I had one friend who, my lowest moment, got on the plane, he lived in Arizona, got on a plane and came just to have dinner with me to say, “Just pick your head up. I know you’re down now, you’re going to be fine. Just fight through.” That meant a lot to me. And again, I always think in my life, you don’t learn as much from your successes. You don’t learn as much from your high points. You learn the most about who you want to be and how the world works from your lowest moments. And at those lowest moments, it made me better and it taught me how to be a better friend to people who are in tough situations. And I tried to just get tougher and I tried to just get better and work through it.
Ivanka
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You said that you and Ivanka, this intense time brought you two together and helped you deal with the intensity, with the chaos of it all.
Yeah. You said that you and Ivanka, this intense time brought you two together and helped you deal with the intensity, with the chaos of it all.
Jared Kushner
So I think it was just number one, knowing that you had a partner and knowing that you had somebody who loved you and believed in you. I think that was definitely by far the biggest of anything. And-
So I think it was just number one, knowing that you had a partner and knowing that you had somebody who loved you and believed in you. I think that was definitely by far the biggest of anything. And-
Lex Fridman
Love is the answer.
Love is the answer.
Jared Kushner
Love is very important. But then there’s also a lot that I’ve learned from her always getting me to read different books or learn different things, which I love. But she’s also, I think, an amazing role model. And I go through our time in Washington where there were so many people who were, I thought, very nasty to her, unfoundedly. And I’m not talking about individually because again, most people who interacted with her were super kind. But I would see people on Twitter or different places go after her and she always stayed elegant and I felt like that was something that she never stooped down to a lower level. She kept her elegance the whole time and she really went to Washington wanting to be a force of good. And I see all the time that she follows her heart, she does what’s right and she has a very strong moral compass. And I feel very lucky to have her as a partner. And I respect her tremendously.
Love is very important. But then there’s also a lot that I’ve learned from her always getting me to read different books or learn different things, which I love. But she’s also, I think, an amazing role model. And I go through our time in Washington where there were so many people who were, I thought, very nasty to her, unfoundedly. And I’m not talking about individually because again, most people who interacted with her were super kind. But I would see people on Twitter or different places go after her and she always stayed elegant and I felt like that was something that she never stooped down to a lower level. She kept her elegance the whole time and she really went to Washington wanting to be a force of good. And I see all the time that she follows her heart, she does what’s right and she has a very strong moral compass. And I feel very lucky to have her as a partner. And I respect her tremendously.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. She walks through the fire with grace, I would say. And she’s recommended a bunch of amazing books to me and she has an incredible, fascinating mind. But one thing that jumped out to me is you both love diners, Jersey diners. So I lived in Philly for a while and I traveled quite a bit and traveling from Boston down to Philly, maybe to DC, you can drive through Jersey. It’s something about Jersey. I don’t know what it is.
Yeah. She walks through the fire with grace, I would say. And she’s recommended a bunch of amazing books to me and she has an incredible, fascinating mind. But one thing that jumped out to me is you both love diners, Jersey diners. So I lived in Philly for a while and I traveled quite a bit and traveling from Boston down to Philly, maybe to DC, you can drive through Jersey. It’s something about Jersey. I don’t know what it is.
Jared Kushner
It’s the best. It’s the best.
It’s the best. It’s the best.
Lex Fridman
You listen to Bruce Springsteen. Louis C.K has this bit where I think it’s part of criticizing cell phones today where people are too much on their phone. They don’t just sit there, be bored, but he uses that story to tell where he’s just driving and Bruce Springsteen’s song comes on and he just wants to pull over to the side of the road and just weep for unexplainable reason. I think that’s true because life is difficult. Life is full of suffering or struggle or challenges. So sometimes, it’s always Bruce Springsteen, but some song like this can really make you reflect on life, that melancholy feeling. But that melancholy feeling is the other side of the happiness coin where, if you just allow yourself to feel that pain, you can also feel the highest joys. That’s the sort of the point Louis C.K makes.
You listen to Bruce Springsteen. Louis C.K has this bit where I think it’s part of criticizing cell phones today where people are too much on their phone. They don’t just sit there, be bored, but he uses that story to tell where he’s just driving and Bruce Springsteen’s song comes on and he just wants to pull over to the side of the road and just weep for unexplainable reason. I think that’s true because life is difficult. Life is full of suffering or struggle or challenges. So sometimes, it’s always Bruce Springsteen, but some song like this can really make you reflect on life, that melancholy feeling. But that melancholy feeling is the other side of the happiness coin where, if you just allow yourself to feel that pain, you can also feel the highest joys. That’s the sort of the point Louis C.K makes.
And there’s something about Jersey with the diners, often late at night… There’s several diner experiences I should say. There’s the family friendly, there’s a nice waitress and there’s a sweetness, a kindness like hello sweetheart, that kind of thing. There’s also the 3:00 AM diner, the ones that are open 24 hours, that has a romantic element when you’re a young man or young woman, you’re traveling. The loneliness of that, it’s all of it. The American diner is from Jack Kerouac on, represents something. I’m not sure what that is, but it’s a real beautiful experience. And the food itself too.
Jared Kushner
Oh, always fresh. Yeah. The thing with diners, there’s so much to love about it. And I grew up, obviously in New Jersey, when I’d go with my father to business, he’d always stop. We’d eat at a diner. Late night I’d be come back with my friends, we’d stop at a diner. And it’s a tradition that Ivanka and I love doing as well. And I think there’s a notion of it’s very egalitarian in that people from all places are there. You could order basically whatever you want. The menus at the diners look like the phone book.
Oh, always fresh. Yeah. The thing with diners, there’s so much to love about it. And I grew up, obviously in New Jersey, when I’d go with my father to business, he’d always stop. We’d eat at a diner. Late night I’d be come back with my friends, we’d stop at a diner. And it’s a tradition that Ivanka and I love doing as well. And I think there’s a notion of it’s very egalitarian in that people from all places are there. You could order basically whatever you want. The menus at the diners look like the phone book.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s great.
Yeah, it’s great.
Jared Kushner
And it’s amazing how they keep so much fresh ingredients to do it, at least the good ones do. I love as a jersey guy, that you get mozzarella sticks and an omelet at any hour of the day because most of them are open 24 hours. And that’s basically my Ivanka, my go-to, we’ll throw in a milkshake or two as well. But for me as a kid, my father would take me, sometimes I’d sit with him in the meeting, sometimes I’d be at the table next to him. He’d give me a bunch of quarters to put in the music machine that they would have on the wall. And it was always just a great experience doing it.
And it’s amazing how they keep so much fresh ingredients to do it, at least the good ones do. I love as a jersey guy, that you get mozzarella sticks and an omelet at any hour of the day because most of them are open 24 hours. And that’s basically my Ivanka, my go-to, we’ll throw in a milkshake or two as well. But for me as a kid, my father would take me, sometimes I’d sit with him in the meeting, sometimes I’d be at the table next to him. He’d give me a bunch of quarters to put in the music machine that they would have on the wall. And it was always just a great experience doing it.
I joke that if you grew up in Jersey, you grow up with just enough of a chip on your shoulder that you have to go and make something of yourself in life. It’s a special place. I had an amazing childhood there and very, very proud to be from the state. And I will just give a little bit of a plug now because the state has now actually turned the corner and they had a $10 billion budget surplus for many years. It was a state that was basically bankrupt and now actually under a pretty progressive Democrat governor Phil Murphy. He’s turned the state around and it’s actually has a very bright future ahead and it’s probably one of the best places to raise a family in the country. It’s got very low crime, one of the best public school systems in the country, pretty good healthcare system, a lot of green parks. People know the Turnpike, but it’s got a lot to it. That’s really great. So I’m a big, big fan of Jersey.
Lex Fridman
I like how this is a first for this particular podcast, you literally gave a plug to a state. So New Jersey everybody.
I like how this is a first for this particular podcast, you literally gave a plug to a state. So New Jersey everybody.
Jared Kushner
It’s where it’s at.
It’s where it’s at.
Lex Fridman
There’s South Jersey there’s North Jersey. There’s all kinds of Jerseys too. The whole thing, it just…
There’s South Jersey there’s North Jersey. There’s all kinds of Jerseys too. The whole thing, it just…
Jared Kushner
And don’t get me started on the Jersey Shore, Lex.
And don’t get me started on the Jersey Shore, Lex.
Lex Fridman
Jersey Shore is a whole thing.
Jersey Shore is a whole thing.
Jared Kushner
And I’m not talking about the Snooki part, I’m talking about the real nice parts, really great food, great people.
And I’m not talking about the Snooki part, I’m talking about the real nice parts, really great food, great people.
Lex Fridman
What do you mean nice parts? It’s all beautiful. The full range of human characters that are in New Jersey are all beautiful.
What do you mean nice parts? It’s all beautiful. The full range of human characters that are in New Jersey are all beautiful.
Jared Kushner
I agree with that.
I agree with that.
Father
Lex Fridman
And every time I travel across the world, there’s always to meet somebody from New Jersey and you give a nod of a deep understanding. It’s the cradle of civilization in many ways. Okay, so back, I don’t know how we got there. Oh, all right. Going back to the low points, you mentioned your father, if we could just return there. Even just the personal story of your father that you write about, all the betrayal that happened in his life and then how he responded to that betrayal and he was after that arrested. Can you just tell the story?
And every time I travel across the world, there’s always to meet somebody from New Jersey and you give a nod of a deep understanding. It’s the cradle of civilization in many ways. Okay, so back, I don’t know how we got there. Oh, all right. Going back to the low points, you mentioned your father, if we could just return there. Even just the personal story of your father that you write about, all the betrayal that happened in his life and then how he responded to that betrayal and he was after that arrested. Can you just tell the story?
Jared Kushner
Sure. So my father is an amazing person and we grew up in New Jersey. My father was a big developer, a great entrepreneur, built an amazing business. He got into a dispute with two of his siblings and through that dispute, they basically took all of the documents in his company, went to the US attorney’s office and turned from a civil dispute into a real public dispute. My father did something wrong in that process. And when he got arrested for that, he basically said, “You know what? What I did was wrong.” And he took his medicine and he did it like a man. And he said, “I’m going to go to prison.” And he did that for a year. And so for me, that was a very challenging time in the family. Obviously, it was a shock. It was a total change.
Sure. So my father is an amazing person and we grew up in New Jersey. My father was a big developer, a great entrepreneur, built an amazing business. He got into a dispute with two of his siblings and through that dispute, they basically took all of the documents in his company, went to the US attorney’s office and turned from a civil dispute into a real public dispute. My father did something wrong in that process. And when he got arrested for that, he basically said, “You know what? What I did was wrong.” And he took his medicine and he did it like a man. And he said, “I’m going to go to prison.” And he did that for a year. And so for me, that was a very challenging time in the family. Obviously, it was a shock. It was a total change.
My childhood was I think, a very nice childhood. My parents always said, “Do good in school, work hard.” I was very focused on my athletics. I was captain of the basketball team, assistant captain of the hockey team. I ran a marathon with my father and it was always about pursuing. Went to Harvard, graduated with honors, and then was in NYU pursuing a law degree and a business degree. And I was working at the Manhattan District Attorney’s office at the time actually thinking I wanted to go into public service because my father always taught us, we were always surrounded by politicians and he always said, ” My parents came to America. They lived in the land of opportunity and they had these opportunities because this is the best country in the world. So you should be successful. Work hard, don’t ever let your opportunities become your disadvantages because you have advantages in life. You have to work harder.” And that’s what he instilled in myself and my brother. And he always pushed us to make the most of ourselves. And when we did that…
Everything changed overnight when my father got arrested. Obviously it’s very embarrassing for a family when you’re on the front page of the papers, I would see the newspapers writing all these things about my father that I didn’t think were representative of the person that I knew. It was a big change for our family. And I was angry. I was angry. I said, “I could be angry at the prosecutor, I could be angry at my father’s brother. I could be angry at my father’s lawyers. I could be angry at my father for making this mistake.” And then I said, “That’s not going to change anything.” And I had a real shift. And I do think that that was a turning point in my life where I basically said, “Let me focus on the things I can control. Let me focus on the positive things I can do.”
And from that moment forward, I said, “How can I be a great son to my father? How can I be a great older brother/substitute father for my two sisters and my younger brother? How could I be there for my mother? How could I be there for my father’s business?” And I just went into battle mode and I put my armor on and I just ran into it. And for the next two years, every day was painful. I was dealing with banks, the company still had subpoenas, I was still in law school. I’d tell my father I wanted to drop out of law school and business school, but he said, “Please don’t.”
So I would basically go to law school one day a week or maybe I’d skip it most days and I’d go to his office every day. And my friends would joke that if my professors wanted to fail me, the law professor would have to give me a test that had four pictures and say, “Circle who your professor is.” But I would basically take a week off, I’d read the books and I did well and I got my degrees. And it was just a very, very challenging time.
But like I said to you before is that you learn the most about life and you learn the most about humanity and yourself when you’re in your most challenging periods. And I’ll say that that experience also changed the people I interacted with, spending weekends with my father down in a prison in Alabama, I met the other inmates, I met their families. I spent time then trying to advise the children of other people who were going through the same experience that I’d gone through on how to navigate it correctly. And you just learn a lot about the world and you see that in life, everything could get taken from you, your status, your money, your friends. I saw that certain people were very disloyal to my father at the time, who he thought were friends. It was only a handful. But again, I learned from those people, how can I be a true friend to people? How can I be better? And I learned a tremendous amount through that experience.
Lex Fridman
You write that your father told you about being humble. I’d love to ask you about this, that in life sometimes we get so powerful that we start to think we’re the dealers of our own fate. We’re not the dealer’s, God is the dealer. Sometimes we have to be brought back down to earth to get perspective on what is really important. What do you think he meant by that? What did you learn from that experience?
You write that your father told you about being humble. I’d love to ask you about this, that in life sometimes we get so powerful that we start to think we’re the dealers of our own fate. We’re not the dealer’s, God is the dealer. Sometimes we have to be brought back down to earth to get perspective on what is really important. What do you think he meant by that? What did you learn from that experience?
Jared Kushner
The way I interpreted it at the time, and those were very, very memorable words, and it occurred… After I picked up my father from the arraignment. I drove him down. I drove the car and my father and I are very, very close. And he didn’t say a word for the whole time. And I think he was processing number one, what was happening to him. And I couldn’t even imagine. But I actually think the bigger pain for him, because my father is such a committed person to the family, is like, did I let my family down? Did I let my kids down? And I do think he felt that that moment like his life was over. He couldn’t really see past what this challenge was going to bring and if there would be a life for him after it. So I could see that he had a lot of fear and he really wasn’t saying much. And then I didn’t know what to do.
The way I interpreted it at the time, and those were very, very memorable words, and it occurred… After I picked up my father from the arraignment. I drove him down. I drove the car and my father and I are very, very close. And he didn’t say a word for the whole time. And I think he was processing number one, what was happening to him. And I couldn’t even imagine. But I actually think the bigger pain for him, because my father is such a committed person to the family, is like, did I let my family down? Did I let my kids down? And I do think he felt that that moment like his life was over. He couldn’t really see past what this challenge was going to bring and if there would be a life for him after it. So I could see that he had a lot of fear and he really wasn’t saying much. And then I didn’t know what to do.
And so I just stood by him and stood close. And later that day or the next day, he got up and started walking. He had an ankle monitor. For whatever reason, the prosecutor was so aggressive that he was a flight risk, so they made him wear an ankle monitor. They were very, very aggressive and nasty. And at the time, my father was the biggest donor to Democrats. The prosecutor was a Republican. It was a very political thing. And what happened was is he was walking around the pool and I just started walking with him and he said to me, “Jared, in life sometimes, we get so powerful that we believe that we’re the dealer.” He says, “But we’re not the dealer. God’s the dealer. And we have to come down to earth to understand,” like you said. So what I took from that was that my father, with all of his success, had started to believe that maybe certain rules didn’t apply to him. And I think that that’s where he made a mistake. And I think he had a lot of regret that he made the mistake. And my father is a very humble person. He’s a very moral person. For me, with my humility, my brother and I joke that we give our credit for being humble, number one, to being Mets fans because every year you have a lot of promise and then it never ends up paying off. Although now with Steve Cohen, hopefully we’re on a different trajectory.
But the other thing is also our mother. Our mother really raised us to be very humble. We knew we had a lot, but every Sunday morning my mom was there clipping the coupons. The cereal we ate in our house was based on was what was on sale versus what we liked. When we would have a problem with our teachers in school and I’d say, “Well, teacher doesn’t like me.” She’d say, “Well, I’m not calling them. It’s your job to make the teacher like you.” And so my mother gave us a lot of that. My father gave us a lot of the grounding. And I think during that time, my father was just realizing that maybe he had gotten disconnected from the grounding and the values.
And again, I think he also accepted maybe he could have blamed others for acting inappropriately. But I respect the fact that he took responsibility himself and said, “I can’t control the actions of other people. I can’t control what they do is right and wrong. I can just control my actions.” And as I go on the next journeys in my life and I go to government, I go to Washington. I even think through the craziness of going from visiting my father in a prison to 10 years later sitting in the office in the White House next to the President of the United States. And I think about that story and that it’s a story that only God could write. And I really believe that you have to have a lot of faith because the lows and the highs are both so extreme and unbelievable that I feel like those low moments in some ways, allowed me to keep my grounding and to understand what was truly important in life for when I ended up going through those other moments.
Money and power
Lex Fridman
Your father was betrayed, perhaps over money by siblings. Is there some deeper wisdom you can draw from that? Have you seen money or perhaps power cloud people’s judgment?
Your father was betrayed, perhaps over money by siblings. Is there some deeper wisdom you can draw from that? Have you seen money or perhaps power cloud people’s judgment?
Jared Kushner
Oh, 100%. 100%.
Oh, 100%. 100%.
Lex Fridman
Is there some optimistic thing you can take from that about human nature of how to escape that clouding of judgment when you’re talking about leaders, when you’re talking about government, even business. Because you mentioned there’s a power dynamics at play always when you’re negotiating. Is there a way to see the common humanity and not see the will to power in the whole thing?
Is there some optimistic thing you can take from that about human nature of how to escape that clouding of judgment when you’re talking about leaders, when you’re talking about government, even business. Because you mentioned there’s a power dynamics at play always when you’re negotiating. Is there a way to see the common humanity and not see the will to power in the whole thing?
Jared Kushner
Definitely. You mentioned about power, money corrupting. There’s a great quote I heard a friend of mine say, is a guy Michael Harris, who was one of the founders of Death Row Records, and he was being interviewed recently and they asked him about what happened with Suge Knight. And his line was, ” Money just makes you more of what you already are,” which I thought was a very elegant way of saying it. And I would see this time and time again in the White House where you had people who were now given a lot of responsibility and power and it went to their head and they acted very crazily and maybe didn’t act in a way that I thought was always conducive to the objective.
Definitely. You mentioned about power, money corrupting. There’s a great quote I heard a friend of mine say, is a guy Michael Harris, who was one of the founders of Death Row Records, and he was being interviewed recently and they asked him about what happened with Suge Knight. And his line was, ” Money just makes you more of what you already are,” which I thought was a very elegant way of saying it. And I would see this time and time again in the White House where you had people who were now given a lot of responsibility and power and it went to their head and they acted very crazily and maybe didn’t act in a way that I thought was always conducive to the objective.
So I think it’s a very big problem that you have, whether it’s something that’s solvable, I think it’s about having the right leaders and hopefully for the leaders, having good friends. I’m still friends with a lot of the people I interacted with when I was in government, and the number one thing I try to be to them is just a good friend. I try to be somebody who they can talk about things with. I don’t go in trying to tell them what to do on different things. And I think that that’s a big thing is that people just need friends and they need conversation. And if they have that, then hopefully, that allows them to keep their head in the right place.
Lex Fridman
I think this is a good place to ask about one aspect of the fascinating work you’ve done, which is on prison reform. Can you take me through your journey of helping the bipartisan bill get passed. Just working on prison reform in the White House in general, how you made that happen, how you help make that happen?
I think this is a good place to ask about one aspect of the fascinating work you’ve done, which is on prison reform. Can you take me through your journey of helping the bipartisan bill get passed. Just working on prison reform in the White House in general, how you made that happen, how you help make that happen?
Jared Kushner
Sure. So we passed a law called the First Step Act, which was the largest prison and criminal justice reform bill that’s been done maybe in 30, 40, 50 years in the US. And so what it basically did was two things. Number one is it took the prison system and it took a certain class of offenders and allowed them to become eligible for earlier release if they go through the certain trainings that will allow them to have a lower probability of going back. Stepping back, you look at the prison system, you say, “What’s the purpose? Is it to punish? Is it to warehouse? Is it to rehabilitate?” And I do think that we’re a country that believes in second chances. I saw firsthand when my father was a client of the system, how inefficient it was and how much better it could be.
Sure. So we passed a law called the First Step Act, which was the largest prison and criminal justice reform bill that’s been done maybe in 30, 40, 50 years in the US. And so what it basically did was two things. Number one is it took the prison system and it took a certain class of offenders and allowed them to become eligible for earlier release if they go through the certain trainings that will allow them to have a lower probability of going back. Stepping back, you look at the prison system, you say, “What’s the purpose? Is it to punish? Is it to warehouse? Is it to rehabilitate?” And I do think that we’re a country that believes in second chances. I saw firsthand when my father was a client of the system, how inefficient it was and how much better it could be.
And when my father got out, we didn’t run from that experience. He started hiring people from Rikers Island and different prisons into the company into a second chance, a program, which we’re very, very proud of doing. And what we saw through our micro experience was that if you give people mentorship, if you give them job training, a lot of people, they have addiction issues and they can’t find housing. And so people leave prison with a criminal record and they’re less likely to go back and reintegrate in society without help from different institutions that can help them do that. So we modeled the reforms off what they did in Texas and Georgia and other states where they basically put a lot of job training, alcohol and addiction treatment programs in the prisons as a way to incentivize the prisoners to work on themselves while they’re there in order to allow them to reenter society.
It’s turned out to be very successful so far. They just had a report that showed that the general population has had a 47% recidivism rate, meaning that people who leave federal prison, half of them go back. And people who have now taken this program, only 12% of them go back. So number one, you’re making communities safer because if people are going to now get a job and enter society instead of committing future crimes, you’re avoiding future crimes. And number two, you’re giving people a second chance at life. And so that was the first part of it. The second thing we did was there was a rule passed in the ’90s that basically penalized crack cocaine at 100 times the penalty of what regular cocaine was. And I think a lot of the motivations, what people say in retrospect was that crack was more of a black drug drug and cocaine was more of a white drug.
And so there was a really racial disparity in terms of what the application of these sentences were. So they then revised that to make it 18 to one. And what we did in this bill is we allowed it to go retroactive to allow people who were in prison with sentences under what we thought was the racist law to be able to make an application to a judge in order to be dismissed. And it was based on good behavior, being rehabilitated and the fact that they would have a low probability of offending in the future. And so that was really the meat of it. And there was a couple other things in there we did as well, which were also quite good. So we did it. Worked very closely with the Democrats, Republicans to do it. At first, President Trump was a little bit skeptical of it because he’s a big strong law and order supporter, but he made me work very hard to put together a coalition of Republicans and Democrats and law enforcement.
We had the support from the policemen, we had the support from the ACLU and ultimately, we were able to get it together. And it was an amazing thing. We ended up getting 87 votes in the Senate. This happened for me at a time while the Russia investigation stuff was still happening. New chief of staff came in, John Kelly, he basically marginalized me in the operations. So I had less day-to-day responsibilities in the White House. And so for me, this effort became one of my full-time efforts along with negotiating the Mexico trade deal and along with the Middle East efforts. And the reason why that was great was because it didn’t have a lot of support from the Republican caucus originally, and people thought there was no way it would happen. So I really was able to be the chief executive, the middle executive, the low executive, the intern.
And through that process, I really got an education on how Congress works, on how to pass legislation. I was negotiating text, I was negotiating back and forth, and I built a lot of trust. Again, I would deal with whether it’s Hakeem Jeffries or Cedric Richmond, that we built a lot of trust. We’d speak three times a day. These guys had my back, the ACLU. Again, I never thought they were suing our administration every day or every other day on something. But for whatever reason, we built trust and we’re able to work together. And then also with the real conservative groups because there was a big part of the conservative base that felt like we should be giving people a second chance. And in addition to that, this will keep our country safer and it’ll reduce the cost of what we spend on prisons. And so it was a great effort and I was very, very proud that we were able to get it done under President Trump.
Lex Fridman
How’d you convince the Republicans? So they were skeptical at first? Are we talking about just phone conversations? Going out to lunch? Just back to the emojis or what?
How’d you convince the Republicans? So they were skeptical at first? Are we talking about just phone conversations? Going out to lunch? Just back to the emojis or what?
Jared Kushner
Hand to hand combat, meetings. The cool thing about this… I always get frustrated when I hear a lawmaker say, “Oh, the senate’s not what it used to be, or Congress isn’t what it used to be. Things are broken today.” I don’t think that’s true. I think going through the process, I think that our founders were totally genius in the way that they designed our system of government. And what I saw is you just have to work it so everyone knows the power of their vote. Some would give it to me easily, some wouldn’t give it to me easily. Some would trade it for other things, some would withhold it because they were pissed about other things and it was just hand to hand combat. So it was just making calls using the phone, walking the halls, going to lunches, hosting dinners at my house. It was a nonstop lobbying effort. And by the way, it was also adjudicating issues and making people feel like they were heard, hearing their issues, and then trying to find solutions that you don’t put something in that then tips off where you lose a whole coalition.
Hand to hand combat, meetings. The cool thing about this… I always get frustrated when I hear a lawmaker say, “Oh, the senate’s not what it used to be, or Congress isn’t what it used to be. Things are broken today.” I don’t think that’s true. I think going through the process, I think that our founders were totally genius in the way that they designed our system of government. And what I saw is you just have to work it so everyone knows the power of their vote. Some would give it to me easily, some wouldn’t give it to me easily. Some would trade it for other things, some would withhold it because they were pissed about other things and it was just hand to hand combat. So it was just making calls using the phone, walking the halls, going to lunches, hosting dinners at my house. It was a nonstop lobbying effort. And by the way, it was also adjudicating issues and making people feel like they were heard, hearing their issues, and then trying to find solutions that you don’t put something in that then tips off where you lose a whole coalition.
So it was really a balancing act, but it was an amazing thing and I worked very closely on that with Van Jones and Jessica Jackson, who also gave me a lot of help on the left. And it was an amazing thing. Had a great team too.
Trust and betrayal
Lex Fridman
So you mentioned the importance of trust at the very beginning of the conversation. From the outsider perspective, just maybe a dark question, which is, how much trust is there in Washington? The flip side of that, how much backstabbing is there? Can you form long-term relationships with people on a basic human level where you know you’re not going to be betrayed, screwed over, manipulated for again, going back to the old money and power?
So you mentioned the importance of trust at the very beginning of the conversation. From the outsider perspective, just maybe a dark question, which is, how much trust is there in Washington? The flip side of that, how much backstabbing is there? Can you form long-term relationships with people on a basic human level where you know you’re not going to be betrayed, screwed over, manipulated for again, going back to the old money and power?
Jared Kushner
The answer is yes, and the answer is no. So I made some incredible friends, lifelong friends through my time in Washington, but the way I think about it from politics and I think in geopolitics as well, is I would say that politicians really don’t have friends. Politicians have interests. And as long as you follow that rule, you should be able to know how to rate where your relationship with a given person falls in the spectrum. But I do think I was the exception. I did make some tremendous friends. And again, I’d go back to what I said about negotiation where, when you’re in a situation where there’s really nothing in it for any of you personally, but you’re in a foxhole together and nobody in Washington can get anything done by themselves. So you have people coming from all different backgrounds, all different experiences, all different geographies coming together, agreeing on an objective, creating a plan, and then every day rowing together in order to get it done. It’s a beautiful thing and you really learn what people are about.
The answer is yes, and the answer is no. So I made some incredible friends, lifelong friends through my time in Washington, but the way I think about it from politics and I think in geopolitics as well, is I would say that politicians really don’t have friends. Politicians have interests. And as long as you follow that rule, you should be able to know how to rate where your relationship with a given person falls in the spectrum. But I do think I was the exception. I did make some tremendous friends. And again, I’d go back to what I said about negotiation where, when you’re in a situation where there’s really nothing in it for any of you personally, but you’re in a foxhole together and nobody in Washington can get anything done by themselves. So you have people coming from all different backgrounds, all different experiences, all different geographies coming together, agreeing on an objective, creating a plan, and then every day rowing together in order to get it done. It’s a beautiful thing and you really learn what people are about.
And so when you go through an experience like that, you learn who’s in it for themselves. You learn who’s in it for the cause and for every thing you read about in the press of a fight I had with somebody because we were at odds. I have about 100 people who have become lifelong friends because I respect the way that when we were under fire together, they got better, they were competent, and they were there to serve for the right reason.
And so I guess the answer is yes, it is possible. You have to be careful because there are a lot of mercurial people there. I always say the politicians are like gladiators. I didn’t have as much respect for politicians till I got there. But if you think about it, everyone who’s got a congressional seat or a senate seat, there’s 25 people back at home who want their job, who think they’re smarter than them, who are trying to back stab them. And so I always say that the political dynamic, it’s like in the private sector, you’re standing on flat ground. You choose which fights you take on. When you take them on, how you fight them.
In politics, it’s like you’re standing on a ball and what you have to realize is that there’s maybe 10 things that you have to do, but there’s a potential cost to taking on each one that might destabilize you. You fall off the ball and then you lose your opportunity to pursue those. You have to always be marking everything to market and going through your calculations to make sure you can accomplish what you want to without falling off the ball and losing your opportunity to make a difference.
Lex Fridman
I guess people like power and I just feel like to be a good politician, good meaning, good for humanity, be willing to let go of power. Try to do the right thing. If there’s somebody back home that does manipulate stuff, screws you over and takes power from you, it’s okay. I feel like that kind of humility is required to be a great leader, and I feel like that’s actually a good way to have long-term power because karma has a viral aspect to it. Just doing good by others, I feel like is-
I guess people like power and I just feel like to be a good politician, good meaning, good for humanity, be willing to let go of power. Try to do the right thing. If there’s somebody back home that does manipulate stuff, screws you over and takes power from you, it’s okay. I feel like that kind of humility is required to be a great leader, and I feel like that’s actually a good way to have long-term power because karma has a viral aspect to it. Just doing good by others, I feel like is-
Jared Kushner
I’d like to say that’s true, Lex. I think it’s just way more complicated. You look what happened this week with Kevin McCarthy, right? He did what he thought was morally right. He thought he did a bipartisan deal. He was told that they would have his back, and then the moment things got tough, they cut him loose. So again, I don’t know if that was the right thing or the wrong thing, right? I’ve also seen leaders on the other end say, “I’m going to do things that are short-term, more selfish.” But the way they justify it to themselves is to say, “I believe that myself staying in power is existential to the greater good. So I will do things that maybe are not in the greater good now because I believe that my maintaining power is.” And so it’s complicated. In an idealized world, I’d love to believe that’s the case, but it’s just way more complicated than that.
I’d like to say that’s true, Lex. I think it’s just way more complicated. You look what happened this week with Kevin McCarthy, right? He did what he thought was morally right. He thought he did a bipartisan deal. He was told that they would have his back, and then the moment things got tough, they cut him loose. So again, I don’t know if that was the right thing or the wrong thing, right? I’ve also seen leaders on the other end say, “I’m going to do things that are short-term, more selfish.” But the way they justify it to themselves is to say, “I believe that myself staying in power is existential to the greater good. So I will do things that maybe are not in the greater good now because I believe that my maintaining power is.” And so it’s complicated. In an idealized world, I’d love to believe that’s the case, but it’s just way more complicated than that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Jared Kushner
I wish it wasn’t, but it is.
I wish it wasn’t, but it is.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I do just wish people in politics zoomed out a bit and just ask themselves, what are we all doing this for? Sometimes you can get a little bit lost in the-
Yeah. I do just wish people in politics zoomed out a bit and just ask themselves, what are we all doing this for? Sometimes you can get a little bit lost in the-
Lex Fridman
You know sometimes you can get a little bit lost in the game of it. If you zoom out you realize integrity is way more important than little gains in money or little gains in power in the longterm just when you look at yourself in the mirror at the end of the day. And also how history remembers you, I just feel like people do some dark stuff when they’re in that moment when they’re losing power and they try to hold on a little too hard. This is when they can do really dark things like bring out the worst in themselves. It’s just sad to see, and I wish there was a kind of machinery of government would inspire people to be their best selves in their last days versus their worst selves.
You know sometimes you can get a little bit lost in the game of it. If you zoom out you realize integrity is way more important than little gains in money or little gains in power in the longterm just when you look at yourself in the mirror at the end of the day. And also how history remembers you, I just feel like people do some dark stuff when they’re in that moment when they’re losing power and they try to hold on a little too hard. This is when they can do really dark things like bring out the worst in themselves. It’s just sad to see, and I wish there was a kind of machinery of government would inspire people to be their best selves in their last days versus their worst selves.
Jared Kushner
When that system gets invented, you’ll share with me what it is, but it’s… Look, let me give you another way to frame it, which is, and this was kind of the revelation we spoke before about when I was getting my butt kicked by the Russian investigation and all the different areas. But the basic framework I looked at was I said, “Okay, this all feels tough.” But I said, “The game’s the game, the game’s been here way longer, but way before I came, and it’ll be here way long after I leave, and so I have two choices. I can complain that the game’s tough, it’s not fair, it’s not moral, or I can go and I can try to play the game as hard as possible.” And I think that there’s two different things. You have people who are willing to kind of sit in the stands and they’re willing to yell at the players or make their points known, or you have people who are willing to suit up and get in the arena and go play.
When that system gets invented, you’ll share with me what it is, but it’s… Look, let me give you another way to frame it, which is, and this was kind of the revelation we spoke before about when I was getting my butt kicked by the Russian investigation and all the different areas. But the basic framework I looked at was I said, “Okay, this all feels tough.” But I said, “The game’s the game, the game’s been here way longer, but way before I came, and it’ll be here way long after I leave, and so I have two choices. I can complain that the game’s tough, it’s not fair, it’s not moral, or I can go and I can try to play the game as hard as possible.” And I think that there’s two different things. You have people who are willing to kind of sit in the stands and they’re willing to yell at the players or make their points known, or you have people who are willing to suit up and get in the arena and go play.
And I have a lot of respect for the people who suit up and go play. Again, some of them I wish they would play for different means, but the fact that they’re willing to put their name on the ballot, make the sacrifice, and go put on the fads and get hit and hit others, I think that you need those people. And I wish more people who had maybe the moral wiring that you discussed would be putting on a helmet and going to play because it’s hard. It’s hard.
Lex Fridman
I agree with you. I just would love to fix the aspect of the Russia collusion, accusation, the virality, the power of that, because that’s a really discouraging thing for people. Maybe it’s the way it has to be, but it seems like a disincentive to people to participate.
I agree with you. I just would love to fix the aspect of the Russia collusion, accusation, the virality, the power of that, because that’s a really discouraging thing for people. Maybe it’s the way it has to be, but it seems like a disincentive to people to participate.
Jared Kushner
It is, but I’ll give you, again, an optimistic side of it is that what you’re seeing now with social media is I do think with what’s happening at X, there is now more of a reversion towards more egalitarian and egalitarianism of information. And so for many years the media publications were the gate holders, they were the gatekeepers, and then you had these social media companies that grew. They became so powerful, but then they were tilting the scales. Why they were doing it, we can go through long explanations for that, but if there truly is a real forum and a democratization of information, then you would think that the marketplace of ideas would surface the real ones and discredit the non-real ones. And I think that as a society, we’re starting to kind of come to grips with the fact that the power dynamic is changing and that some of these institutions that we used to have a lot of faith in don’t deserve our faith. And some of them will actually reform and maybe re-earn our faith, so I think that there could be an optimistic tone.
It is, but I’ll give you, again, an optimistic side of it is that what you’re seeing now with social media is I do think with what’s happening at X, there is now more of a reversion towards more egalitarian and egalitarianism of information. And so for many years the media publications were the gate holders, they were the gatekeepers, and then you had these social media companies that grew. They became so powerful, but then they were tilting the scales. Why they were doing it, we can go through long explanations for that, but if there truly is a real forum and a democratization of information, then you would think that the marketplace of ideas would surface the real ones and discredit the non-real ones. And I think that as a society, we’re starting to kind of come to grips with the fact that the power dynamic is changing and that some of these institutions that we used to have a lot of faith in don’t deserve our faith. And some of them will actually reform and maybe re-earn our faith, so I think that there could be an optimistic tone.
Again, the years of Trump, I think that he was an outsider and he represented something that was existential to the system. You think about for the 30 years before you were either part of the Clinton Dynasty or the Bush dynasty. I think a lot of people in the country felt like that whole class, whether you’re wearing a red shirt or a blue shirt, wasn’t representing them and Trump represented a true outsider to that system. I do think that as he went in there, there was a lot of norms that were broken to try to stop him from changing the traditional power structure. So I think that we’re at a time where maybe there will be an optimistic breakthrough where you’ll have institutions that will allow for a lot more transparency into what truth really is.
Mohammed bin Salman
Lex Fridman
I’d love to go back and talk to you about the Middle East, because there’s so many interesting components to this. Let’s talk about Saudi Arabia, and first let me ask you about MBS, Mohammed bin Salman, the Crown Prince. So you’ve gotten to know him pretty well, you’ve become friends with him. What’s he like as a human being? Just on a basic human level, what’s he like?
I’d love to go back and talk to you about the Middle East, because there’s so many interesting components to this. Let’s talk about Saudi Arabia, and first let me ask you about MBS, Mohammed bin Salman, the Crown Prince. So you’ve gotten to know him pretty well, you’ve become friends with him. What’s he like as a human being? Just on a basic human level, what’s he like?
Jared Kushner
So for the listeners, Mohammed bin Salman is now the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. He has risen to that position over the last couple of years and he’s been a tremendous reformer for the country. He’s gone in and he’s really modernized the economy. He’s put a lot more investment into the country. He’s marginalized the religious police and he’s really done a good job to bring modernization, a lot of reform. So he is been a great reformer. What he’s like as a person is he’s very high energy. He’s got tremendous candor power, very, very smart, incredibly well-read.
So for the listeners, Mohammed bin Salman is now the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. He has risen to that position over the last couple of years and he’s been a tremendous reformer for the country. He’s gone in and he’s really modernized the economy. He’s put a lot more investment into the country. He’s marginalized the religious police and he’s really done a good job to bring modernization, a lot of reform. So he is been a great reformer. What he’s like as a person is he’s very high energy. He’s got tremendous candor power, very, very smart, incredibly well-read.
When he was younger, his father would give him a book a week and make him report on it on the weekend. He was trained as a leader and as a politician, really, by his father. He’s not western educated, so he grew up in the Saudi culture and he’s a real Saudi nationalist. He loves their history, loves their heritage, has a steep understanding of the tribal nature of the region. His father was actually known to be a tremendous politician, so when he was governor of Riyadh, people who I speak to today about him say that if they had a full election, he would’ve won in a landslide. They say every time somebody went to the hospital, he was the first person to call. Anytime there was a funeral, he was the first person to show up. He’s a very, very beloved leader.
Mohammed bin Salman, he was a businessman before he got into Crown Prince. So he thinks really with a business mindset about how he runs the country, and he’s brought I think a different mindset and energy to the Middle East. One thing I’ll say that maybe that comes to mind here is that I remember early on talking with him about all the different initiatives he was taking on. He’s building a big city called Neo in the desert in a place where there really was nothing on the Red Sea, and a lot of people were criticizing the ambition of the plan. And I was sitting with him one night and I said, ‘Why are you taking on all these things? You’ve got a lot of different programs, but what most politicians do is they set lower expectations and then they exceed the expectations.” And he looked at me without hesitation.
He says, “Jared, the way I look at it is that in five years from now, if I set five goals and I achieve five goals, I’ll achieve five things. If I set a hundred goals and I fail at 50 of them, then five years I’ll accomplish 50 things.” And so it’s a very different mindset as a leader. The way I got to work with him was Saudi Arabia was a big topic in the campaign. President Trump was basically saying during the campaign that they’ve got to pay for their fair share, they haven’t been a great partner in the region. He’s very critical of Saudi. And then during the transition, I was asked by several friends to meet with a representative of Saudi Arabia. I said, “I don’t want to meet with them.”
But I came over and I met and they said, “Well, we want to make changes.” And I said, “Well, you have to make changes to how you treat women.” Then women couldn’t drive, they had guardianship laws. So you got to start working with Israel, you have to be paying more of your fair share and you have to be stopping the Wahhabism that’s being spread. Again, I had no knowledge these were just kind of the traditional talking points about Saudi Arabia. So the guy I was with basically said, this guy Fahad Toonsi, who’s a very respected minister there, he says, “Jared,” he says, “You don’t know much about Saudi Arabia, do you?” I said, “No, no, no, I don’t. It’s just really what I’ve kind of been told or what I read.” And he says, “Okay, let me do this. We want to be great allies with America. We’ve traditionally been great allies with America. Can I come back to you with a proposal on ways that we can make progress on all of the different areas where we have joint interests?”
Keep in mind at that point in time, the Middle East was a mess, and probably the single biggest issue we had after ISIS was the ideological battle. If you remember in 2016, there was the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, you had the San Bernardino shooting and people were being radicalized online with the extremism, and then there was a lot of crimes that were happening because of that. It was a big topic in the campaign, and so that when I was thinking about talking different generals and what capabilities the US had to really combat the extremism and the ideological battle, what we realized was that Saudi Arabia as the custodian of the two holiest sites in Islam, the Mecca Medina, that that would be the best partner to work with if they were willing to. But for years, they really hadn’t been willing to kind of lean into this fight.
So I said, “Sure, give a proposal.” So they come back, give a proposal, and they said, “Look, if you make President Trump’s first trip to Saudi Arabia, we will do all these different things. We’ll increase our military spending and cooperation, we’ll counter all the terror financing.” Unbelievable layer. So I took the proposal, I went to the National, then it was General Flynn. I said, “If Saudi Arabia did these things, would this be considered a big…” “Unbelievable, but it’ll never happen.” I said, “Well, they’re telling me they want to do these things. Again, having no foreign policy experience, I’m just saying I’ve got somebody telling me they want to do it and that’s kind of where we started.” Again, to office I don’t think much more about it.
And then I think it was like maybe a month in President Trump has a call with King Salman and before the call we’re in the Oval Office and the president’s basically saying, “Well, this is what we want to go through.” And I have Secretary Mattis and Secretary Tillerson, the Minister of Defense and the Secretary of State basically saying, “You have to deal with MBN. MBN is the guy who’s been our partner for all these years. He’s the head of intelligence and he’s been a great partner.” I said, “Well, if he’s been a great partner, then why do we have all these problems that you guys are complaining about with Saudi?”
I said, “I’ve been told that we have this proposal from MBS who’s the Deputy Crown Prince and that’s who we should be dealing with on this.” And so the phone call starts and President Trump listened to both of us, and on the phone call with King Salman, President Trump says, “Okay, we’ll go through all these things. These are the things we want to get done.” He says, “Well, who should we deal with?” King Salman says, “Deal with my son, the Deputy Crown Prince MBS.” So President Trump said on the phone, “Have him deal with Jared.” Because I think he knew that if he would’ve put him with the other guys, they were not believers in what he had the ability to do, and that’s how I got assigned to work with him.
I get back to my office after that, have an email from him, spoke to him for the first time, and then we just went to work. A lot of people were betting against that trip, they thought it wasn’t going to be successful, and they’ve been betting against him and he’s been underestimated, but he’s been doing an incredible job and the whole Middle East is different today because of the work that he’s done.
Lex Fridman
Maybe it’s instructive to go through the mental journey that you went on from the talking points, the basic narratives, the very basic talking points, understanding of Saudi Arabia to making that human connection with MBS and making the policy connection that it’s actually possible to solve problems. What was that journey like? Why was it so difficult to take for others and why were you effective in being able to take that journey yourself?
Maybe it’s instructive to go through the mental journey that you went on from the talking points, the basic narratives, the very basic talking points, understanding of Saudi Arabia to making that human connection with MBS and making the policy connection that it’s actually possible to solve problems. What was that journey like? Why was it so difficult to take for others and why were you effective in being able to take that journey yourself?
Jared Kushner
Maybe some of it came from my inexperience, but my desire to listen and hear people. So I had this proposal, I was told that all of these things were good. Then we’re trying to schedule this trip and the National Security Council calls a meeting where we’re in the Situation Room and we have Homeland Security, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and everyone’s saying this is going to be a disaster. They said, “If we go to Saudi Arabia, the Saudis never keep their promises.” And our Secretary of State at the time was a gentleman named Rex Tillerson, who’d been the CEO of Exxon so he dealt with all these people very extensively and he basically said, “In my experience, the Saudis won’t come through. And Jared, you don’t know what you’re doing, you’re wasting your time.”
Maybe some of it came from my inexperience, but my desire to listen and hear people. So I had this proposal, I was told that all of these things were good. Then we’re trying to schedule this trip and the National Security Council calls a meeting where we’re in the Situation Room and we have Homeland Security, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and everyone’s saying this is going to be a disaster. They said, “If we go to Saudi Arabia, the Saudis never keep their promises.” And our Secretary of State at the time was a gentleman named Rex Tillerson, who’d been the CEO of Exxon so he dealt with all these people very extensively and he basically said, “In my experience, the Saudis won’t come through. And Jared, you don’t know what you’re doing, you’re wasting your time.”
And I basically was at a point where I said, “Look guys, but they’re saying they want to do all these things, shouldn’t we at least give them a chance to try to do it? Why do we want to predetermine their direction by not giving them a chance to change? Just because things in the past haven’t gotten the way you want them to, that doesn’t mean they can’t go that way in the future.” So we fought the battle. They basically deferred and let me go through with it, but when I’d do the planning meetings for the trip, nobody would show up because they all thought it was going to be an absolute disaster.
By the way, they probably weren’t wrong to think that because I’d never planned a foreign trip before and I’d never done any foreign policy before. So during the planning, I’d speak to MBS almost every day and I’d go through all the different details and the things that would be coming up and I said, “Look, I really need to get these things in writing.” He sent over a guy, Dr. Musaid Al Aiban, who’s a tremendous diplomat for them. He came to Washington, stayed for three weeks, and we worked through all the different details of what we needed and we ended up coming to an arrangement on what it should be. So I think about now in retrospect why I was so focused on getting things like this done and why I even believed that they could be possible. But the answer is really the people I was talking to on the other end were telling me that these things were possible, and so just because they hadn’t been done before and just because others around me didn’t believe that they could be done, I wasn’t willing to just say, “Well, let’s not try.”
Lex Fridman
It just seems like that cynicism that takes over is paralyzing. You sent me a great essay from Paul Graham. I’m a big fan of. I think it explains a lot of your success. The essay is called How to Do Great Work, and people should go definitely read the full essay. There’s a few things I could read from it, some quotes. “Having new ideas is a strange game because it usually consists of seeing things that were right under your nose. Once you’ve seen a new idea, it tends to seem obvious. Why did no one think of this before? Seeing something obvious sounds easy, and yet empirically having new ideas is hard.” The steps you took seem trivial, and yet nobody was taking them, or at least in the past, that weren’t successful. So the successes you’ve had were as simple as essentially picking up the phone or trying.
It just seems like that cynicism that takes over is paralyzing. You sent me a great essay from Paul Graham. I’m a big fan of. I think it explains a lot of your success. The essay is called How to Do Great Work, and people should go definitely read the full essay. There’s a few things I could read from it, some quotes. “Having new ideas is a strange game because it usually consists of seeing things that were right under your nose. Once you’ve seen a new idea, it tends to seem obvious. Why did no one think of this before? Seeing something obvious sounds easy, and yet empirically having new ideas is hard.” The steps you took seem trivial, and yet nobody was taking them, or at least in the past, that weren’t successful. So the successes you’ve had were as simple as essentially picking up the phone or trying.
There’s a lot of interesting things here to talk about. This aspect of doing this seemingly simple that seems to be so hard to do it, as Paul describes, requires a willingness to break rules. ” There are two ways to be comfortable breaking rules: to enjoy breaking them and to be indifferent to them.” That’s an interesting distinction. “I call these two cases being aggressively and passively independent minded.” So again, that’s to enjoy breaking the rules or being indifferent to the rules. “The aggressively independent-minded are the naughty ones. Rules don’t merely fail to stop them; breaking rules gives them additional energy. For this sort of person delight at the sheer of audacity of a project sometimes supplies enough activation energy to get it started. The other way to break the rules is not to care about them at all, or perhaps even to know they exist. This is why novices and outsiders often make new discoveries; their ignorance of a field,” ignorance may be in quotes, “of a field’s assumptions act as a source of temporary, passive, independent mindedness.
Aspies also seem to have a kind of immunity to conventional beliefs. Several I know say that this helps them to have new ideas.” So the aggressive and the passive is such an interesting way of looking at it. Perhaps some aspect of this, at least in the story you told us, some passive aspect where you’re not even acknowledging, not even caring that there was rules, just kind of asking the simple question and taking the simple action.
Jared Kushner
I think that it’s funny that was a necessary read and we’re doing just a snippet of it, but I would encourage anyone listening to go and find it and read the entire thing because it’s something that really spoke to me as I was transitioning into my new career now, and I just loved it. But when we were talking about why certain people who don’t have traditional qualifications are able to come in and do incredible work and solve complex problems, it made me think of that essay, which is why I shared it. I think that in the context of the work that I was doing here, perhaps not having the historical context became an advantage and obviously went back and then tried to study it. But if you go into a problem, I always find that especially in the political realm, my favorite political issues are ones where they’re contrarian by being obvious and sometimes they feel very intuitive and so you take them on.
I think that it’s funny that was a necessary read and we’re doing just a snippet of it, but I would encourage anyone listening to go and find it and read the entire thing because it’s something that really spoke to me as I was transitioning into my new career now, and I just loved it. But when we were talking about why certain people who don’t have traditional qualifications are able to come in and do incredible work and solve complex problems, it made me think of that essay, which is why I shared it. I think that in the context of the work that I was doing here, perhaps not having the historical context became an advantage and obviously went back and then tried to study it. But if you go into a problem, I always find that especially in the political realm, my favorite political issues are ones where they’re contrarian by being obvious and sometimes they feel very intuitive and so you take them on.
There’s always a lot of resistance when you go against something that’s been accepted as the way that you’re supposed to do things. I came to learn over the course of my time in government that when everyone was agreeing with what I was doing, then it actually made me more nervous because I felt like you have these problems, they haven’t been solved for a long time, and then if you take the same approach as others, you’re going to fail just like they did. So taking a different approach doesn’t mean you’re going to succeed, but at least if you fail, you’re going to fail in an original way.
I did like this a lot and I think that what I saw was the people who were very good at getting things done that hadn’t been done before were people who came with different qualifications, different perspectives, and they came in and really worked the problem in untraditional ways. And so I think in the Middle East, I came in with a very different approach than people before me, not because I came in deliberately trying to do it differently, but because I came in trying to listen and understand from people why the problem hadn’t been solved and then think from a first principle’s perspective on what’s the right perspective today. Not based on what happened 50 years ago or not based on what somebody’s feelings who were hurt, but what’s the right thing to make people’s lives better, to make the world a safer and more prosperous place tomorrow.
Lex Fridman
So if we can go back to MBS for a little bit, from the person to the vision, there’s something called Vision 2030 about his vision for Saudi Arabia in the future. Can you maybe look from his perspective, what is his vision for the region?
So if we can go back to MBS for a little bit, from the person to the vision, there’s something called Vision 2030 about his vision for Saudi Arabia in the future. Can you maybe look from his perspective, what is his vision for the region?
Jared Kushner
Sure. So it’s funny, we were talking before about how we wish leaders would set big audacious goals and take on big things. Well, that’s what he did with Vision 2030 when he was young. And again, this is something that was derided and a lot of people were very skeptical of it, but the people who actually picked it up and read it said this is a very thoughtful plan that’s very achievable. So he studied his country and said, “What’s our place in the world? What are our advantages? What are our disadvantages?” And then he set publicly KPIs that he wanted to hold his country to and then put in place plans and committees and really worked hard to push things in that direction, which was pretty remarkable. I think that it’s something, when I saw it, I thought it was very refreshing. I said, “Wait, in America, why don’t we have set goals? Why don’t we have KPIs?” And I do think that it’s something that most countries, if not all countries, should have.
Sure. So it’s funny, we were talking before about how we wish leaders would set big audacious goals and take on big things. Well, that’s what he did with Vision 2030 when he was young. And again, this is something that was derided and a lot of people were very skeptical of it, but the people who actually picked it up and read it said this is a very thoughtful plan that’s very achievable. So he studied his country and said, “What’s our place in the world? What are our advantages? What are our disadvantages?” And then he set publicly KPIs that he wanted to hold his country to and then put in place plans and committees and really worked hard to push things in that direction, which was pretty remarkable. I think that it’s something, when I saw it, I thought it was very refreshing. I said, “Wait, in America, why don’t we have set goals? Why don’t we have KPIs?” And I do think that it’s something that most countries, if not all countries, should have.
One of my favorite quotes was from the Alice in Wonderland, where the Cheshire Cat says, “If you don’t know where you’re going, it doesn’t matter which path you take.” So I think that that’s something that really helped set them on a good path, and they’ve been very successful with it. One of the things he told me about putting that together was he said, “My father’s generation, they created this country from almost nothing. They came here, they were a poor country, they were Bedouins in the desert. And then they look back and see what they’ve done over 50 years, and they say it’s absolutely remarkable.” He said, his generation, they come in and they say, “We’re very grateful for everything that’s been done to date, but we have so much opportunity that we’re not taking advantage of.”
And so he’s now empowered the next generation to be ambitious and think big and grow with it. What that means for his vision for the Middle East is that the general architecture that should exist, and now there’s excitement in the discussions with Israel that have advanced was the general view of what we thought from a Trump perspective should be the new Middle East is having an economic and security corridor all the way from Haifa to Muscat, from Oman to Israel, where basically you go through and if you can create a security area where people can live free of fear, of terrorism and of conflict. The Middle East for the last 20 years has been a sinkhole for arms, for death, for terrorism. It’s been awful. It’s been a big national security threat for America, a big place where our treasure has gone. We’ve had a lot of our young, amazing American soldiers killed in action there, and the same thing for the Arab countries as well.
So if we can create a security architecture for that region, and then we can create economic integration between all the different countries, I mean, the amount of innovation happening in Israel is unbelievable. Think of it like Silicon Valley’s not connected to the rest of California. You have a very young population, a very digital savvy population, you have a lot of resources. And so if you can get that whole set, the potential for it is unbelievable. I do think that that’s his ultimate vision is to become a really strong country economically, and then to become a place where you could be funding advancements in science, advancements in humanity, advancements in artificial intelligence, and think about ways to be a positive influence in the world.
Lex Fridman
So a difficult question. One big source of tension between the United States and Saudi is the case of Jamal Khashoggi. I was wondering if you can comment on what MBS has said about it to you. You’ve spoken to him about it and what MBS has said about it publicly on 60 Minutes and After.
So a difficult question. One big source of tension between the United States and Saudi is the case of Jamal Khashoggi. I was wondering if you can comment on what MBS has said about it to you. You’ve spoken to him about it and what MBS has said about it publicly on 60 Minutes and After.
Jared Kushner
Yeah, so what he said to me was no different than what he ultimately said on 60 Minutes, which was, ” As somebody helping lead this country, I bear responsibility and I’m going to make sure that those who are involved are brought to justice and I’m going to make sure that we put in place reforms to make sure things like this don’t happen again.” It was a horrible situation that occurred. What I saw from him after that was just a doubling and a tripling down on the positive things he was doing, figuring out ways to kind of continue to modernize this society, build opportunity in the kingdom, and to continue to be a better ally to all the different countries that wanted to be aligned with them.
Yeah, so what he said to me was no different than what he ultimately said on 60 Minutes, which was, ” As somebody helping lead this country, I bear responsibility and I’m going to make sure that those who are involved are brought to justice and I’m going to make sure that we put in place reforms to make sure things like this don’t happen again.” It was a horrible situation that occurred. What I saw from him after that was just a doubling and a tripling down on the positive things he was doing, figuring out ways to kind of continue to modernize this society, build opportunity in the kingdom, and to continue to be a better ally to all the different countries that wanted to be aligned with them.
Lex Fridman
One thing I learned from this case is how one particular situation, a tragedy, can destroy so much progress and the possibility of progress and the possibility of connection between the bridges that are built between different nations and how narratives around that can take off and take such a long time to repair. You’ve worked with this in the Middle East with Israel and so on, how the history, the narratives, the stories, they kind of have this momentum that’s so hard to break even when you have new leaders, new blood, new ideas that come in. It’s just sad to see that yes, this tragedy happens, but it doesn’t mean that you can’t make progress. I don’t know if you have lessons from that, just how much of a dramatic impact it had on creating tension between the United States and Saudi and in general and the Middle East that somehow Saudi’s not a friend, but is against the ideals and the values of the United States.
One thing I learned from this case is how one particular situation, a tragedy, can destroy so much progress and the possibility of progress and the possibility of connection between the bridges that are built between different nations and how narratives around that can take off and take such a long time to repair. You’ve worked with this in the Middle East with Israel and so on, how the history, the narratives, the stories, they kind of have this momentum that’s so hard to break even when you have new leaders, new blood, new ideas that come in. It’s just sad to see that yes, this tragedy happens, but it doesn’t mean that you can’t make progress. I don’t know if you have lessons from that, just how much of a dramatic impact it had on creating tension between the United States and Saudi and in general and the Middle East that somehow Saudi’s not a friend, but is against the ideals and the values of the United States.
Jared Kushner
So it definitely created massive tension and it became a very high profile action that actually overshadowed a lot of the good work that was being done in the region and a lot of the progress we were making. But when you think about this or you think about the other issues that we’ve gone through today, I think the general framework that I always try to approach things with is you can’t change what happened yesterday. You can only learn from it and then you can change how you deal with tomorrow. When I think about the people in power, what do I hope that they’re spending their time focused on? Two basic things. Number one is how do I create safety and security for my people and for the world? And then how do I give people the opportunity to live a better life? And so when things like this happen, obviously there are certain reactions that are appropriate, but ultimately you have to think through how do you not allow the paradigm that you’re creating in the world to lead to worse outcomes than would happen otherwise?
So it definitely created massive tension and it became a very high profile action that actually overshadowed a lot of the good work that was being done in the region and a lot of the progress we were making. But when you think about this or you think about the other issues that we’ve gone through today, I think the general framework that I always try to approach things with is you can’t change what happened yesterday. You can only learn from it and then you can change how you deal with tomorrow. When I think about the people in power, what do I hope that they’re spending their time focused on? Two basic things. Number one is how do I create safety and security for my people and for the world? And then how do I give people the opportunity to live a better life? And so when things like this happen, obviously there are certain reactions that are appropriate, but ultimately you have to think through how do you not allow the paradigm that you’re creating in the world to lead to worse outcomes than would happen otherwise?
And so when I would think about foreign policy in general, one of the differences between foreign policy and business is that in business the conclusion of a problem set, you finish a deal. You either have a company or a property, or if you sell it, you have less to do and more capital hopefully if it’s successful. In a political deal, it’s always about paradigms. So the end of a problem set is always the beginning of a new paradigm, and you’re always thinking through how do you create an environment that leads to hopefully the best amount of positive outcomes that could occur versus creating a paradigm that will lead to negative outcomes. So bad things happen, a lot in the world, and you have to make sure that when those happen, people are held accountable for it. But you also don’t want to make sure that in the process of making sure that there’s accountability for these actions, you don’t set a lot of progress that the world is making back. That will lead to worse off situation for many more people.
Israeli–Palestinian peace process
Lex Fridman
If we can go back to the incredible work with Abraham Accords and Israel and the Middle East, first, the big question about peace. Why is it so difficult to achieve peace in this part of the world between Israel and Palestine and between Israel and the other countries in the Middle East? Or any sort of peace like agreements?
If we can go back to the incredible work with Abraham Accords and Israel and the Middle East, first, the big question about peace. Why is it so difficult to achieve peace in this part of the world between Israel and Palestine and between Israel and the other countries in the Middle East? Or any sort of peace like agreements?
Jared Kushner
If I had to give you the most simple answer, I would say that it’s structural. If you go back to the incentive structure of different leaders, this whole peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, and again, I’ve gotten criticized for saying this, but it’s what I believe, so I’m going to say it, is that the incentive structure was all wrong. When I went before the United Nations Security Council to discuss the peace plan that I proposed, which again was more of an operational plan, and it was a pragmatic plan, it was over 180 pages in detail. In politics, people don’t like putting forward detail because it just gives a lot of places for you to get criticized on. Nobody actually criticized the detail of my plan. They just criticized the fact that it was coming from us and didn’t want to debate the merits of the operational pieces of it.
If I had to give you the most simple answer, I would say that it’s structural. If you go back to the incentive structure of different leaders, this whole peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, and again, I’ve gotten criticized for saying this, but it’s what I believe, so I’m going to say it, is that the incentive structure was all wrong. When I went before the United Nations Security Council to discuss the peace plan that I proposed, which again was more of an operational plan, and it was a pragmatic plan, it was over 180 pages in detail. In politics, people don’t like putting forward detail because it just gives a lot of places for you to get criticized on. Nobody actually criticized the detail of my plan. They just criticized the fact that it was coming from us and didn’t want to debate the merits of the operational pieces of it.
So I created a slide where I showed from the Oslo Accords till the day I was there, all the different peace discussions. I put a dove in the slide for those, and then I put a tank for every time there was a war, because there was always skirmishes between Hamas and Hezbollah and the Palestinians. And then I showed two lines, and they both went from the bottom of the page all the way up like this. One of the lines was Israeli settlements. So every time a negotiation failed, Israel was able to get more land and then the other one was money to the Palestinians. I said every time a negotiation failed, the Palestinians would get more money. The problem with that money though, was that it wasn’t going to the people. Some of it would make its way down, but most of it was going to the politicians.
You had leadership of the Palestinians who was basically, I think at that point it was in the 16th year of a four-year term, so it wasn’t democratically elected. A lot of what I tried to show was that there was no rule of law, there was no judicial system, there were no property rights, and there was no opportunity or hope for the people to live a better life. And so all of the envoys to date were basically trained to go and do the same things. Again, I got massively criticized by all the previous envoys for not doing it the same way they did, but I thought the problem structurally just didn’t make sense and so I felt like the incentive structure was all wrong, and I took a different approach.
Lex Fridman
And so what’s the different approach?
And so what’s the different approach?
Jared Kushner
I started writing down a document. These are the 11 issues, but there’s really only three issues that matter. I said, “Just tell me what you think the compromise is that you think the other side could live with, that you would accept.” And it was very hard to get them talking about this. “Oh, you have to go back to 1972, you have to go back to 1982, you have to go back to 2001, you have to go to…” And I was just like, “I don’t need a headache and I don’t need a history lesson. I just want a very simple thing. Here today in 2017, what’s the outcome that you would accept?”
I started writing down a document. These are the 11 issues, but there’s really only three issues that matter. I said, “Just tell me what you think the compromise is that you think the other side could live with, that you would accept.” And it was very hard to get them talking about this. “Oh, you have to go back to 1972, you have to go back to 1982, you have to go back to 2001, you have to go to…” And I was just like, “I don’t need a headache and I don’t need a history lesson. I just want a very simple thing. Here today in 2017, what’s the outcome that you would accept?”
And I was dealing with their negotiators, their back channel secret negotiators, their double secret neg- I was like, “This whole thing is like, it’s a process created where nobody wants to talk about the actual solution.” So coming from the business world, I said, ‘Okay, let me just write down a proposed solution that I think is fair, and let me have each side react. Don’t tell me about theoretical things. Tell me I want to move the line from here to here. I want to change this word.” So I tried to make it much more tactical, and what I realized was the Palestinians, they’d worked so hard to get the Arab world to stay with the line of the Arab Peace Initiative.
And so I was going back and I read the Arab Peace Initiative. It was 10 lines and it didn’t have any detail, so it was a concept. And so they liked that concept because it allowed them to reject everything. They kept getting more money. I mean, Bibi Netanyahu, who runs one of the most incredible economies in the world, who runs an incredible superpower militarily for the size of their country. He would fly to Washington to meet us, and he’d be taking a commercial El Al Plane. Abbas, who runs a refugee organization, a refugee group that claims that they don’t have a state that gets billions of dollars every year from the global community would fly in a $60 million Boeing BBJ. So the whole thing was just very corrupt and off, and I do think that that’s why… I don’t think people were incentivized to solve it, to be honest.
Lex Fridman
What do you think an actual plan on that part, just before we talk about Abraham Accords, if there is a peace plan that works between Israel and Palestine, what do you think it looks like?
What do you think an actual plan on that part, just before we talk about Abraham Accords, if there is a peace plan that works between Israel and Palestine, what do you think it looks like?
Jared Kushner
You have to separate it into two different issues. And I think that that’s actually how we came to the Abraham Accords, is that I tell the story in the book, and it was one of my favorite experiences during my time in diplomacy where I went to meet with Sultan Qaboos, who was the sultan of Oman. We fly out there because he’d had a secret meeting with Bibi, and I thought maybe he was open to normalizing with Israel. So after he meets with Bibi, he calls me and says, “I want you to come see me.” So I go over to see him, and again, I tell the story. It was a crazy night and all these different areas, but when I was talking to him, he basically says to me, “I feel badly for the Palestinian people that they carry with them the burden of the Muslim world.”
You have to separate it into two different issues. And I think that that’s actually how we came to the Abraham Accords, is that I tell the story in the book, and it was one of my favorite experiences during my time in diplomacy where I went to meet with Sultan Qaboos, who was the sultan of Oman. We fly out there because he’d had a secret meeting with Bibi, and I thought maybe he was open to normalizing with Israel. So after he meets with Bibi, he calls me and says, “I want you to come see me.” So I go over to see him, and again, I tell the story. It was a crazy night and all these different areas, but when I was talking to him, he basically says to me, “I feel badly for the Palestinian people that they carry with them the burden of the Muslim world.”
And that line just like stuck with me. A couple days later, I was thinking about it and I said, “Wait a minute, who elected the Palestinian people to represent the Muslim world on the Al-Aqsa Mosque? And so the reason why I felt like it had never been solved was it was a riddle A, that I believed was designed to not be solved, but B, you were conflating two separate issues. You had the issue between Israel and the Muslim world, which really was the issue of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and then you had just a territorial dispute, which throughout history, you have lots of territorial disputes, and they’re usually resolved in different ways.
If you go back to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, there’s just a couple components you need to solve. Number one is territorial continuity, right? You need to figure out where do you draw the lines? And that’s something that you can talk about what people were owed 70 years ago, but it’s much more productive to say, “This is what you can make work today.” And that’s kind of what we did. We literally spent months and months drawing a map and we put something out, probably change a couple lines here and there, but by and large, it was a very pragmatic solution that I think could work and I think it could work for-
Jared Kushner
… very pragmatic solution that I think could work, and I think it could work for the safety and security of Israel, which was number one.
… very pragmatic solution that I think could work, and I think it could work for the safety and security of Israel, which was number one.
So first issue is drawing a map. Second issue is security. And again, this is one issue, we were incredibly sympathetic with Israel, which is you can’t expect a prime minister of Israel to make a deal where he’s going to make his people less secure than before. So we worked very closely with them on a security apparatus. We laid something out that I think would keep the whole area safer, and it would make sure Israel was safe and also keep the Palestinian issue safe. So you needs security.
Number three was the religious sites, and that was one that was actually always made much more complicated by people, the Al-Aqsa Mosque, because you basically have Ḥaram al-Sharīf, which is a place where the mosque was built in the seventh or eighth century, but originally it was where the Holy of Holies were in the [inaudible 02:45:52] for the Jewish people. And then compounding by the fact that you have all the Christian holy sites in Jerusalem. It’s a city that should be bringing everyone together, but in fact has become a place where you have wars and hatred, and a lot of different conflicts that have risen because of it.
But what I said was, instead of fighting over concepts of sovereignty, which is interesting, how I got to the notion that this wasn’t really the big issue. I basically just operationally, why don’t we just make it simple? Let everyone come and be able to worship as long as they’re being able to worship peacefully.
So that’s really the contours of it. And what the Palestinians have done is they’ve kind of deflected from a lot of their own shortcomings, and a lot of the Arab leaders did that as well, kind of in the Abraham Accord days, by kind of allowing this issue to be so prevalent.
So one thing I’ll say on the Palestinians is that what we tried to do by laying out plan was we said, “Okay, what are the reasons why the Palestinian people are not having the lives that they deserve?” And I’ll give you a couple of things. One is I studied the economies of Jordan, West Bank, Gaza, Egypt, Morocco. This was numbers from like 2019. But what was interesting was the GDP per capita of somebody living in the West Bank was actually the same as Jordan, and it was actually more than somebody living in Egypt. And the debt of GDP that the Palestinians had was like 30, 40% compared to Egypt, which was at like 130%. In Jordan, which was at 110%. Then Lebanon, which is at 200%.
And so you’re in a situation where a lot of this stuff didn’t make sense, but if you draw lines, create institutions where Palestinian people can now feel like they have property rights and have ownership over their place, and let the money flow past the leadership ranks to the people, let them have jobs, let them have opportunity, and then let all Muslims from throughout the world have access to the mosque and Israel, making sure that they can control the security, which I think the Jordanians and a lot of others want Israel to have strong security control there to prevent the radicalists and the extremists from coming, you could have peace there very easily.
Lex Fridman
So there’s a lot of things to say here. One is just to emphasize, Al-Aqsa Mosque, says this a holy place, and this is something in our conversations and in my own travels, I’ve seen the importance of frictionless access to those sites from the entirety of the Muslim world. And that’s what Abraham, of course, took big leaps on. Okay, so we’ll talk about that a little bit more, but that’s kind of a religious component. That’s a dignity in the religious practice and faith component.
So there’s a lot of things to say here. One is just to emphasize, Al-Aqsa Mosque, says this a holy place, and this is something in our conversations and in my own travels, I’ve seen the importance of frictionless access to those sites from the entirety of the Muslim world. And that’s what Abraham, of course, took big leaps on. Okay, so we’ll talk about that a little bit more, but that’s kind of a religious component. That’s a dignity in the religious practice and faith component.
But then the other thing you mentioned so simply, which is you have money flow past the leadership ranks. How do you have money flow past the leadership ranks in Palestine? So make sure that the money that’s invested in Palestine, the West Bank, gets to the people.
Jared Kushner
So to date, all of the aid that’s been given to the Palestinians has been an entitlement. It’s not conditions based. It’s always just we give them money and there’s no expectations. It’s very simple. You make the aid conditions based. You fight for transparency. You do it through institutions other than the PA, or you put reformers into the PA that will allow it to go down that way.
So to date, all of the aid that’s been given to the Palestinians has been an entitlement. It’s not conditions based. It’s always just we give them money and there’s no expectations. It’s very simple. You make the aid conditions based. You fight for transparency. You do it through institutions other than the PA, or you put reformers into the PA that will allow it to go down that way.
Lex Fridman
PA being the Palestinian Authority, which is the leadership?
PA being the Palestinian Authority, which is the leadership?
Jared Kushner
It’s not hard to do. It just takes people who actually want to do it. But I think that the mindset of the international community has not been, “Let’s solve this problem.” It’s like, ” Let’s just throw a little bit of money. The money’s Novocaine. Let’s put a little Novocaine on the problem and let’s not have to deal with it.” But nobody’s ever said, “Oh, let’s do an accounting of the $20 billion we’ve given them and see how many jobs it’s done and where it’s gone.” That just hasn’t happened. Again, it’s an incredibly corrupt organization [inaudible 02:49:46]. You think about the post-World War II dynamic, you had a lot of refugees. My grandparents were Refugees post World War II. Every other refugee class has been resettled and you only have one permanent refugee organization ever created. Why was this done? It was done to perpetuate the conflict so that a lot of Arab leaders could basically deflect from a lot of their shortcomings at home.
It’s not hard to do. It just takes people who actually want to do it. But I think that the mindset of the international community has not been, “Let’s solve this problem.” It’s like, ” Let’s just throw a little bit of money. The money’s Novocaine. Let’s put a little Novocaine on the problem and let’s not have to deal with it.” But nobody’s ever said, “Oh, let’s do an accounting of the $20 billion we’ve given them and see how many jobs it’s done and where it’s gone.” That just hasn’t happened. Again, it’s an incredibly corrupt organization [inaudible 02:49:46]. You think about the post-World War II dynamic, you had a lot of refugees. My grandparents were Refugees post World War II. Every other refugee class has been resettled and you only have one permanent refugee organization ever created. Why was this done? It was done to perpetuate the conflict so that a lot of Arab leaders could basically deflect from a lot of their shortcomings at home.
And so I think for Israel, they view all these things as existential. They value their safety. They’ve been under attack for a long time. I do think having a deal where we can say, “How do the Jews and the Muslims, Christians, come together?” I think King Abdullah from Jordan’s been an incredible custodian for the mosque. I think everyone, in my travels, recognize that he’s the right guy for that. That the king of Jordan should be the custodian of the mosque. We should have some kind of framework to make sure everyone has access. The more countries that have diplomatic relations with Israel, the more Muslims and Arabs that should be able to come and visit. And by the way, the more you have these normalizations, think about what that will do to the economy of the West Bank where they’ll have great hotels, hospitality, a tremendous tourism industry because of all the Christian, Muslim, and Jewish holy sites that they have there.
So there’s a lot of potential there. We just have to get unstuck. I believe that it’s so possible if the leaders want to make tomorrow better, that they can. And unfortunately, the people who suffer the most are really are just the Palestinian people. And I think that in Gaza, they’re hostages to Hamas. And in the West Bank, they’re just held back because their leadership just is afraid or too self-interested to give them the opportunity to change their paradigm and pursue the potential of what they have. And by the way, it’s an incredibly well-educated population, it’s an incredibly capable population, and they’re right next to Israel where the economy, they need everything. And so the potential should be incredible if you can just move some of these pieces.
But again, there’s still a lot of emotion and hatred you have to work through as well. But I do believe that you’re not going to solve that by litigating the past. You’re only going to solve that by creating an exciting paradigm for the future and getting everyone to buy in, and then move towards that.
Lex Fridman
And maybe increase the chance of being able to establish an economy where the entrepreneurs can flourish in the West Bank and so on in Palestine, once the relationship across the Arab world is normalized.
And maybe increase the chance of being able to establish an economy where the entrepreneurs can flourish in the West Bank and so on in Palestine, once the relationship across the Arab world is normalized.
Jared Kushner
So one thing on that, which is very interesting, is when I got into my job in the Middle East, all of the conventional thinkers said to me, “The separation in the Muslim world is between the scene as Sunnis and the Shias, and that’s really the big divide.” And as I was traveling, I didn’t think there was any divide in that regard. The divide that I saw was between leaders who wanted to give a better opportunity for their people and create economic reforms and opportunity, and leaders who wanted to use religion or fear to keep their stronghold on power. And so if you think about who’s not creating the opportunity for their people, it’s the Palestinian leadership and the Iranian leadership. All the other Arab countries were focused on, how do we give opportunity for our people to live a better life?
So one thing on that, which is very interesting, is when I got into my job in the Middle East, all of the conventional thinkers said to me, “The separation in the Muslim world is between the scene as Sunnis and the Shias, and that’s really the big divide.” And as I was traveling, I didn’t think there was any divide in that regard. The divide that I saw was between leaders who wanted to give a better opportunity for their people and create economic reforms and opportunity, and leaders who wanted to use religion or fear to keep their stronghold on power. And so if you think about who’s not creating the opportunity for their people, it’s the Palestinian leadership and the Iranian leadership. All the other Arab countries were focused on, how do we give opportunity for our people to live a better life?
Abraham Accords and Arab-Israeli normalization
Lex Fridman
And there is a big foundation on which that framework can succeed, which I think is, in general, the idea of Arab Israeli normalization. So that’s where Abraham Accords come in. Can you tell the story of that?
And there is a big foundation on which that framework can succeed, which I think is, in general, the idea of Arab Israeli normalization. So that’s where Abraham Accords come in. Can you tell the story of that?
Jared Kushner
Sure. So it’s an amazing thing. And I sit here today, somebody not in government, and every day I see another flight that goes between, or I see an Israeli student studying at a university in Dubai or a new synagogue opening up in Abu Dhabi. And it just gives me such… Or Bahrain. It gives me such tremendous pride to see all of the progress that’s been made.
Sure. So it’s an amazing thing. And I sit here today, somebody not in government, and every day I see another flight that goes between, or I see an Israeli student studying at a university in Dubai or a new synagogue opening up in Abu Dhabi. And it just gives me such… Or Bahrain. It gives me such tremendous pride to see all of the progress that’s been made.
How it occurred, part of why I wrote the book was to put this down for history’s sake, to go through all the different intentional, unintentional, circumstantial things that occurred. It’s funny, we left government. There’s a lot of people saying, “Well, this is why that…” I said, “I was kind of at the middle of it, and I couldn’t even perfectly articulate why it happened,” because it was in evolution of a lot of things. And I joke that we made peace on plan C, but only because we went through the alphabet three times, failing at every letter. But we didn’t give up and we kept going and we got it done.
Lex Fridman
And maybe this is a good place to also step back and say, what is Arab Israeli normalization? What is the state of things for people who may not be aware before the progress you made?
And maybe this is a good place to also step back and say, what is Arab Israeli normalization? What is the state of things for people who may not be aware before the progress you made?
Jared Kushner
That’s Probably the best place to start. So what we did is we made a peace deal between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, and then Israel and Bahrain. Then we did a deal with Israel and Sudan, then Israel and Kosovo, Israel and Morocco, where basically countries that didn’t recognize each other before ended up recognize each other, all of these were Muslim majority countries, and getting them to integrate with Israel was a very big thing.
That’s Probably the best place to start. So what we did is we made a peace deal between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, and then Israel and Bahrain. Then we did a deal with Israel and Sudan, then Israel and Kosovo, Israel and Morocco, where basically countries that didn’t recognize each other before ended up recognize each other, all of these were Muslim majority countries, and getting them to integrate with Israel was a very big thing.
The traditional thinking had always been was that Muslim Arab countries would not make peace with Israel until the Israeli-Palestinian issue was solved. And what we were able to do is separate the issues and then make these connections, which are leading to amazing interaction between Jews and Muslims. So when I think about, obviously you have national security, you have emotional benefits from these things. But the single biggest benefit that I’ve seen from the Accords is that if you were an Arab or a Muslim and you were willing to say positive things about Israel or the Jews before this came out, you had been viciously attacked by the media or the hordes of influencers or the extremists in these different countries. What this did was it brought out into the public the fact that Jews and Muslims can be together and they can be respectful, they can have meals together, and that the cultures can live together in peace.
Lex Fridman
So just to linger on this, it’s like a once subtle and in another sense, transformative. So normalization means you’re allowed to travel from one place together. That has a kind of ripple effect of that you can now start talking in a little bit more accepting way. You can start integrating, traveling, communicating, doing business with, socializing. So the cultures mix, conversations mix, all of this. And this kind of has a ripple effect on the basic connection between these previously disparate worlds. I don’t know if there’s a nice way to kind of make clear why these agreements have such a transformative effect, especially in the long term.
So just to linger on this, it’s like a once subtle and in another sense, transformative. So normalization means you’re allowed to travel from one place together. That has a kind of ripple effect of that you can now start talking in a little bit more accepting way. You can start integrating, traveling, communicating, doing business with, socializing. So the cultures mix, conversations mix, all of this. And this kind of has a ripple effect on the basic connection between these previously disparate worlds. I don’t know if there’s a nice way to kind of make clear why these agreements have such a transformative effect, especially in the long term.
Jared Kushner
I would say the simplest form is it’s just a mindset, and it’s almost like you’re taught all your life, “We’re enemies, or we can’t be friends with that tribe on the other side of the fence.” And then one day the leaders get up and say, “No, it’s okay now.” And there was never an issue between the people. The people were just taught different things and they were separated from each other.
I would say the simplest form is it’s just a mindset, and it’s almost like you’re taught all your life, “We’re enemies, or we can’t be friends with that tribe on the other side of the fence.” And then one day the leaders get up and say, “No, it’s okay now.” And there was never an issue between the people. The people were just taught different things and they were separated from each other.
But again, one of the things that I respect about the work you do is you believe in the power of conversation and the power of human interaction. And these issues and gaps between us feel so big when we think about them, when we’re told about them, when we read about them. But when we go and sit with each other, all of a sudden we realize maybe we have a lot more in common than we have that divides us.
For me, what I’ve seen about it that’s made the biggest difference is I’ve seen people who wouldn’t have the ability to be together, be together, and that’s now forming a nucleus of togetherness, which is a restoration. So you think about the modern Middle East from post Holocaust to now, again, in 1948, after that War of Independence, you had Jews living in Baghdad and Cairo. Then they became so anti-Jewish that they then expelled all of the Jews from all of these capitals of those cities. So you think about the Jewish history in Baghdad. I mean, I think that Talmud was written in Baghdad. It was a place where, in Babylon, where the Jewish people thrived, I think in 570 BCE, when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem, he took about 10,000 Jews back with him to Babylon because he thought it’d be good for his economy. And during that place, the Jews actually flourished and had a good life there.
So for a 1,000 years before the second World War, the Jews and the Muslims lived very peacefully together. So people say that what we’re doing now is an aberration. I actually think it’s not an aberration. I think it’s actually a return to the time where people can live together culturally. And so this is the beginning of the end of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and it’s the beginning of togetherness, which again, you think about how much war, how much provocation, how much terrorism has been made in the name of religious conflict. This is, I think, the start of the process of religious respect and understanding.
Lex Fridman
We’ve talked about you being attacked in the press for the Russian collusion and other topics. One of the most recent set of attacks comes on the topic of Saudi public investment fund, giving $2 billion to your investment firm after you left government. So that includes a 1.25% asset management fee of 25 million a year. Can you respond to these recent set of attacks?
We’ve talked about you being attacked in the press for the Russian collusion and other topics. One of the most recent set of attacks comes on the topic of Saudi public investment fund, giving $2 billion to your investment firm after you left government. So that includes a 1.25% asset management fee of 25 million a year. Can you respond to these recent set of attacks?
Jared Kushner
Sure. So left government. Obviously worked for four years. It was a very action packed time. That’s why I wrote the book. I wanted to put down all those experiences. I started thinking, “What do I want to do next?” So my previous career, I’d been in real estate. I had worked with my brother on some technology businesses that I’d started. And then got into government. So I kind of had a career shift. In my previous career, obviously was very successful. The New York Times, they violated and they published my financial statements. They showed I was making about $50 million a year in the private sector before I went to government. I went into government and I volunteered. I didn’t take a salary. I paid for my own health insurance for four years, my wife and I. And then we went and I was thinking, “Should I go back to my old company or should I start something new?”
Sure. So left government. Obviously worked for four years. It was a very action packed time. That’s why I wrote the book. I wanted to put down all those experiences. I started thinking, “What do I want to do next?” So my previous career, I’d been in real estate. I had worked with my brother on some technology businesses that I’d started. And then got into government. So I kind of had a career shift. In my previous career, obviously was very successful. The New York Times, they violated and they published my financial statements. They showed I was making about $50 million a year in the private sector before I went to government. I went into government and I volunteered. I didn’t take a salary. I paid for my own health insurance for four years, my wife and I. And then we went and I was thinking, “Should I go back to my old company or should I start something new?”
And my thinking was is that, through my time in government, I’d met so many people, I’d learned so much about the world. I had a big understanding now for how the macroeconomic picture worked. And I did feel like there was a lot more that I could do than just going back to real estate.
In the meantime, I was getting a lot of calls from different CEOs and companies saying, “Can you help me with this company? Can you help me with that company? Your knowledge could be helpful to help this company navigate this challenge or to expand internationally.” And so I said, “You know what? Maybe I should create a business to do an investment firm, where I can do something different, where I’m putting together geopolitical expertise and traditional private equity and growth investing and figure out how to do that, where I can do something differentiated, where I can invest in growing things and help with my navigation skills and relationships.”
So that was kind of the thesis of what I thought could make sense as kind of a next step. I called different friends. They were very excited to back the effort. Obviously this was coming off the success that I just had in the Middle East where I did six peace deals there. And one of the notions I wanted to be able to do with the firm was to be able to take money from the Gulf and then to be able to invest it in Israel, to continue to build the economic links between the countries. Again, if countries have more economic ties, I think war and fighting is less likely. And then in addition to that, I wanted to figure out how do you bring the entrepreneurs together from both of those countries?
So that was really the mission of what I set out to do. So far, I’ve been enjoying it. It’s been a lot of fun. I’ve been learning a ton. I think we’re doing very well with it.
In terms of the criticisms, I think that I’ve been criticized in every step of everything I’ve always done in my life. And so what I would say is, this business is actually an objective metric business, right? It’s about returns. So in three, four years from now, five years from now, see how I do? Hopefully I’ll do very well and judge me based on that.
In terms of any of the nefarious things, I haven’t been accused of violating any laws, and I haven’t violated any of the ethics rules either. When I was in government, I, every year, submitted all my financials to the Office of Government Ethics. They certified it every year, and I followed every rule and every law possible. So to my critics, I’ll say, “Criticized me before, you’ll criticize me now. I’m going to keep doing me and I’m going to keep pursuing things that I think are worthwhile.” And I’m very excited about this chapter of my career.
Donald Trump
Lex Fridman
Maybe this is a good place to ask. In working closely with Donald Trump, what, in your sense, looking into the mind of the man, what’s the biggest strength of Donald Trump as a leader?
Maybe this is a good place to ask. In working closely with Donald Trump, what, in your sense, looking into the mind of the man, what’s the biggest strength of Donald Trump as a leader?
Jared Kushner
I would say his unpredictability. I think that, as a leader, he consumes a ton of information. He doesn’t like to be managed or have his information filtered. So he’ll speak to a lot of people to draw his information himself. He’s very pragmatic. I don’t see him as terribly ideological. I see him as somebody who’s about results. I think he wants to deliver results. And I think ultimately, he’s an incredible fighter. He’s a big counter puncher, but he also wants to get along with people. And that’s probably the biggest surprise that people found with him. I mean, you look at even situations like… I would always tell people, “If you disagree with him, don’t go on television and criticize him. Just pick up the phone and call him, and go see him, and he’ll talk to you about it.” He may not agree with you.
I would say his unpredictability. I think that, as a leader, he consumes a ton of information. He doesn’t like to be managed or have his information filtered. So he’ll speak to a lot of people to draw his information himself. He’s very pragmatic. I don’t see him as terribly ideological. I see him as somebody who’s about results. I think he wants to deliver results. And I think ultimately, he’s an incredible fighter. He’s a big counter puncher, but he also wants to get along with people. And that’s probably the biggest surprise that people found with him. I mean, you look at even situations like… I would always tell people, “If you disagree with him, don’t go on television and criticize him. Just pick up the phone and call him, and go see him, and he’ll talk to you about it.” He may not agree with you.
But again, that’s what Kim Kardashian did when she had a case of clemency with a woman, Alice Johnson, that she felt strongly about. We went through the case. I wouldn’t have had her call if I didn’t think it was a legitimate case. So we spent about eight months quietly working through the case, working through the details, to make sure that it really was a worthy case.
I brought it to President Trump said, “She’d like to come meet with you to talk about this case.” And he said, “Have her come in.” So she came in. We went through the case, and President Trump ultimately granted the clemency to Alice Johnson, who was a woman who was accused of being part of a drug ring. She had basically a life sentence for doing it. She’d served 22 years in prison. While in prison, she’s basically was a grandmother, and she was putting on the prison plays, she was mentoring young women in prison. Somebody who, again, there’s always a risk, but by and large had a very, very, very low risk of committing a crime in the future.
And then it goes back to the notion of, are we going to judge people by the worst decision they make in their life? And so President Trump was willing to grant the clemency, and it went.
And I think that it just goes to the notion of maybe this goes back to his unpredictability in a positive way, which is if you go sit with him and you make your case, he’ll hear you, he’ll listen to you, and he’s not afraid to act, and he’s not afraid to be controversial, which I think is a good thing.
So from a foreign policy point of view, in particular, his unpredictability just meant that everyone was always on their back foot. People were afraid to kind of cross America. And what I would tell people who don’t like Trump is I would say, “Think about how crazy he’s making you and his enemies. He did that to the enemies of America.” Yeah, so he was a very, very strong president and I think did a great job.
Lex Fridman
So in some of these agreements that we’ve been talking about and speaking with leaders, how do you think the unpredictability helps?
So in some of these agreements that we’ve been talking about and speaking with leaders, how do you think the unpredictability helps?
Jared Kushner
So in all the agreements that I was negotiating, I wasn’t doing it as a principle, I was doing it on behalf of President Trump. And people knew that I had access to President Trump, and they knew that I could say, “You may say this that we don’t like, but I’m going to have to take it back to him, and then we’ll see what he does.” And one of the biggest instances was on the USMCA trade deal, where that deal happened because Mexico was legitimately concerned, and smartly so, that President Trump was going to impose tariffs on the car industry, which would’ve been decimating to their economy. And by the way, he was ready to do it. We were holding it back from doing it with every ounce of strength that we could. So it wasn’t a bluff. I mean, that was actually real, but they were smart to read that it was real. And ultimately we created a great win-win deal.
So in all the agreements that I was negotiating, I wasn’t doing it as a principle, I was doing it on behalf of President Trump. And people knew that I had access to President Trump, and they knew that I could say, “You may say this that we don’t like, but I’m going to have to take it back to him, and then we’ll see what he does.” And one of the biggest instances was on the USMCA trade deal, where that deal happened because Mexico was legitimately concerned, and smartly so, that President Trump was going to impose tariffs on the car industry, which would’ve been decimating to their economy. And by the way, he was ready to do it. We were holding it back from doing it with every ounce of strength that we could. So it wasn’t a bluff. I mean, that was actually real, but they were smart to read that it was real. And ultimately we created a great win-win deal.
I’ll tell you a funny story, just popped into my mind from the tariffs is we did also, we used a 232 national security exemption to protect our steel industry, and we put tariffs on steel and aluminum. And again, I thought about this because we also negotiated them with Canada. And there was a very funny phone call where Trudeau is calling Trump. And again, they got along decently well. Trudeau’s calling saying, “You can’t put national security tariffs on us in Canada. We’re your NATO ally. We fought wars with you. We do military together.” And Trump says to him, “Didn’t you burn the White House down in 1812?” And Trudeau says, “That was the French.” He says, “No, it was the Canadians.”
And so it was just, like I said, he’s always keeping everyone on their toes.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Jared Kushner
But he took very calculated risks. And like I said, everyone was outraged all the time with everything. But if you look at his body of work, people said if he was elected, he would start World War III. Meanwhile, we inherited world filled with wars, no new wars, right? Three years. He made peace deals, no new wars. He was tough. He was strong. People respected him. He built relationships and got trade deals done, got peace deals done. The economy was rocking. His body of work, I think was pretty strong as president.
But he took very calculated risks. And like I said, everyone was outraged all the time with everything. But if you look at his body of work, people said if he was elected, he would start World War III. Meanwhile, we inherited world filled with wars, no new wars, right? Three years. He made peace deals, no new wars. He was tough. He was strong. People respected him. He built relationships and got trade deals done, got peace deals done. The economy was rocking. His body of work, I think was pretty strong as president.
War in Ukraine
Lex Fridman
Like you said, no new wars. This makes me think if Donald Trump won the presidency, what the current situation in Ukraine would look like. But let me just ask you, zoom out and ask you broadly, do you think the war in Ukraine could have been avoided? And what do you think it takes to bring it to an end?
Like you said, no new wars. This makes me think if Donald Trump won the presidency, what the current situation in Ukraine would look like. But let me just ask you, zoom out and ask you broadly, do you think the war in Ukraine could have been avoided? And what do you think it takes to bring it to an end?
Jared Kushner
I think 100%, it would’ve been avoided. Not 99%. President Trump, for four years, had no problems with Russia. We were arming Ukraine, but we were working with Russia. And again, the first two years, we had a little bit of issue working with Russia because they were accused of colluding with us since we had to go through that investigation. But in the second two years, we were trying to focus Russia on what are the areas where we can collaborate together. I think Russia, we thought it was in their strategic advantage to play US and China against each other because of the way that everything was done before. They were stuck with China, but not getting a lot for it. Under Bush, they took Georgia. Under Obama, they took Crimea. Under Trump, there was no problems. And then under Biden, unfortunately, I think they misplayed a couple of things, which I think provoked Russia to go forward. Still no excuse to do what they did. I think that the invasion was a terrible thing and should not have occurred.
I think 100%, it would’ve been avoided. Not 99%. President Trump, for four years, had no problems with Russia. We were arming Ukraine, but we were working with Russia. And again, the first two years, we had a little bit of issue working with Russia because they were accused of colluding with us since we had to go through that investigation. But in the second two years, we were trying to focus Russia on what are the areas where we can collaborate together. I think Russia, we thought it was in their strategic advantage to play US and China against each other because of the way that everything was done before. They were stuck with China, but not getting a lot for it. Under Bush, they took Georgia. Under Obama, they took Crimea. Under Trump, there was no problems. And then under Biden, unfortunately, I think they misplayed a couple of things, which I think provoked Russia to go forward. Still no excuse to do what they did. I think that the invasion was a terrible thing and should not have occurred.
But with that being said, I think 100%, if Trump was president, there would not be a war in Ukraine today.
Lex Fridman
Coming to the table and negotiating a peace, whether it’s Donald Trump, whether it’s Biden, whether it’s anybody, what do you think it takes? Do you think it’s possible? And if you’re in a room, if Jared Kushner is in the room with Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, what does it take to have a productive conversation? And what does it take for that conversation to fail? What are the trajectories that lead to success and failure?
Coming to the table and negotiating a peace, whether it’s Donald Trump, whether it’s Biden, whether it’s anybody, what do you think it takes? Do you think it’s possible? And if you’re in a room, if Jared Kushner is in the room with Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, what does it take to have a productive conversation? And what does it take for that conversation to fail? What are the trajectories that lead to success and failure?
Jared Kushner
I think we go back to negotiations. Number one is trust, right? Both leaders have to have the ability to communicate what an off-ramp is without fearing it’s going to leak to the public. So if you go to the posture of Zelenskyy right now, and by the way, President Zelenskyy, I have a lot of respect for the courage he showed, especially initially, you saw what [inaudible 03:10:33] did in Afghanistan, they were getting attacked by the Taliban. He took the cash and got the hell out of there. Staying in Kiev when he did, how he did it, was one of the most brave things we’ve seen in a long time. And he has a ton of my respect and admiration for doing that.
I think we go back to negotiations. Number one is trust, right? Both leaders have to have the ability to communicate what an off-ramp is without fearing it’s going to leak to the public. So if you go to the posture of Zelenskyy right now, and by the way, President Zelenskyy, I have a lot of respect for the courage he showed, especially initially, you saw what [inaudible 03:10:33] did in Afghanistan, they were getting attacked by the Taliban. He took the cash and got the hell out of there. Staying in Kiev when he did, how he did it, was one of the most brave things we’ve seen in a long time. And he has a ton of my respect and admiration for doing that.
But now he’s promising his people we’re going to win the war, and the military action has not necessarily coincided with that sentiment. And so there has to be some form of off ramp, but he can’t say that publicly. So for him to be able to work privately with somebody who can help create a new paradigm where both leaders can say, “We’re going to stop the bloodshed. We’re going to stop the risk of nuclear war for the world. We’re going to stop what’s happening.” That’s really what it will take. How that occurs, again, it’s not something I’m involved in now, so I don’t know who the right broker is or how to put that together, but essentially they need somebody in between them who can figure out how do you create a landing zone that works? Because neither party’s going to jump until the pool is filled with water.
And you have to outline what the go forward looks like, because you can’t just stop it for them to get worse for both parties. You have to move it forward into what happens next, that hopefully can start to turn the tide to benefit both sides where they can focus on the future instead of being stuck into the old paradigm of who started what, who’s to blame for what, who did what to who. It’s just a lot of tough stuff now that’s occurred that’s going to be hard to walk back. And it’s a big task to get it done, but for the sake of the world, it’d be amazing if we were able to reach a conclusion to that conflict.
Lex Fridman
Just going back to your earlier mention of North Korea, what do you think it takes to bring Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the table together?
Just going back to your earlier mention of North Korea, what do you think it takes to bring Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the table together?
Jared Kushner
Leadership.
Leadership.
Lex Fridman
So you’re saying it has to be a US president?
So you’re saying it has to be a US president?
Jared Kushner
It has to be somebody who’s willing to put themself on the line to go and do it. And again, if you’re the US president and you’re the most powerful nation in the world, you should be trying. But I do think, again, the posture that the US has taken has probably been in a place where it would be very hard for them to get the trust of Russia based on the way that they’ve played their moves to date.
It has to be somebody who’s willing to put themself on the line to go and do it. And again, if you’re the US president and you’re the most powerful nation in the world, you should be trying. But I do think, again, the posture that the US has taken has probably been in a place where it would be very hard for them to get the trust of Russia based on the way that they’ve played their moves to date.
I always thought, from the beginning, that Putin would try to bring in President Xi in China to resolve it, to basically give a big screw you to America to say, “China’s now the one in charge of this.” But that hasn’t seemed to manifest itself to date either. But it takes leadership. The leaders have to get it and say, “Let’s get everyone together and let’s try to get this done.” Because every day it goes on, A, more people are dying, and B, we do risk a nuclear war for the world, which is not a good situation.
Vladimir Putin
Lex Fridman
Let me ask, since you helped set up phone calls between Donald Trump, Putin, and the King of Saudi Arabia, if I were to interview Putin, what advice would you give on how to get a deep understanding of the human being?
Let me ask, since you helped set up phone calls between Donald Trump, Putin, and the King of Saudi Arabia, if I were to interview Putin, what advice would you give on how to get a deep understanding of the human being?
Jared Kushner
So I didn’t deal with Russia a ton, but in my interaction with Putin and with Russia, I would kind of point out a couple of things. Number one is, when America was hit with COVID and New York was looking like we were going to run out of ventilators and masks, Russia was the second country that sent us a planeload of supplies. And they didn’t send that because they hate America, they sent that because we were starting to make progress together as countries, and they thought that they wanted to show goodwill to figure out how can we start working together.
So I didn’t deal with Russia a ton, but in my interaction with Putin and with Russia, I would kind of point out a couple of things. Number one is, when America was hit with COVID and New York was looking like we were going to run out of ventilators and masks, Russia was the second country that sent us a planeload of supplies. And they didn’t send that because they hate America, they sent that because we were starting to make progress together as countries, and they thought that they wanted to show goodwill to figure out how can we start working together.
And again, people may attack me for saying that that sounds naive. Again, the past 15 years may show that that’s not the case, but I don’t believe that countries have permanent enemies, and I don’t believe countries have permanent allies. Right? Again, you think about the US and Russia and World War II, we worked together to defeat the Nazis, right? And now we’re great allies with Germany, who basically was our great enemy in World War II. We’re great allies with Japan, who was our great enemy in World War II.
So it goes back to the notion we discussed earlier of you shouldn’t condemn tomorrow to be like yesterday if you’re unhappy with yesterday. So number one is I would definitely ask him about that.
The phone call that you mentioned was after we did a pretty intense negotiation to create the largest oil cut in the history of oil production. So during COVID, demand just shut off like crazy, and it was stopping very quickly. Saudi and Russia, at that time, were having a conflict. They created this thing called OPEC+, which goes back again, history between the two countries where they had conflicts, and then all of a sudden they were working together to try to stabilize the oil markets. But they couldn’t agree on the cuts, so Saudi actually increased production. So you had two things hitting at once where Saudi and Russia were both increasing production and demand was dropping.
So you were headed for a real crisis, and I was starting to get calls from a lot of the oil industry executives here in America saying, “You don’t understand. We can’t just flip a switch and turn off our oil wells. We’re running out of storage here.” And I said, “Look, president Trump likes low oil prices, so he’s not upset about what’s happening. You have to call him and if he gives me permission or the instruction, then I can try to intervene. But right now, he’s not inclined to intervene.”
After a little bit, he said, “It’s time. Get involved. Go do it.” It was right over Passover. This was during COVID. I spent three days nonstop on the phone with [inaudible 03:16:09] from Russia and with MBS directly, and I was dealing with Dan Brouillette, who was our energy minister, going back and forth, and it was crazy. I mean, it was just one of the craziest negotiations. We ended up agreeing on the largest oil cut in the history of the world.
But the story you went to before, which was pretty funny, was finally make the deal, and we set up a call between King Salman, Vladimir Putin, and President Trump to announce the deal. I’m like, “Oh, this is great.” So President Trump gets on, “Congratulations. We have a deal.” And then King Salman says, “We don’t have a deal. Mexico hasn’t agreed to their cuts.” He’s saying, “What do you mean?” So they were part of the OPEC+. And so I get a note saying, “You got to go call Mexico. So I’m calling Mexico and we’re dealing, they’re saying, “We’re not doing any cuts.” I said, “Why? I said, we’re hedged at $55.” I said, “Why didn’t you tell us that at the beginning?” So I’m telling the Saudis. So we were working through this whole thing.
So meanwhile, we were trying to find the compromise with Mexico. I set up a call with Trump and Putin, so they can kind of talk this through. And he was always trying to play the game of how do we get Russia away from China? He always thought that that was not the right strategic framework for US interests. And again, we had no problems with them during that time.
What I would say is that for Zelenskyy and Putin, any conversation with both of them is about understanding their perspective. I think with Putin, he’s a student of history from the things that I saw with him. If you look at Russia over the last 500 years, I think they were attacked by the Polish in early 1600. I think they were attacked by the Swedes in the 1700s. I think they were attacked by Napoleon in the 1800s. And then in the 1900s, they were attacked by Germany twice. And so from his perspective there is… In the early days of Russia, they were attacked by the Mongols. They were-
Jared Kushner
… Russia, they were attacked by the Mongols. They were very vulnerable. And a lot of the geography of Russia today is really designed for defensive purposes, that they have natural barriers that makes them easier to defend. And Russia is a massive land mass, it’s twice the size of America, they have 11 times zones in the country, and so I do think that for Vladimir Putin, his biggest concern is, “How do we create a security paradigm in the west of this country that won’t be a creep?”
… Russia, they were attacked by the Mongols. They were very vulnerable. And a lot of the geography of Russia today is really designed for defensive purposes, that they have natural barriers that makes them easier to defend. And Russia is a massive land mass, it’s twice the size of America, they have 11 times zones in the country, and so I do think that for Vladimir Putin, his biggest concern is, “How do we create a security paradigm in the west of this country that won’t be a creep?”
And I think that there’s two different parts of the mindset. The people who are most cynical of Putin will say, “Well, he’s just trying to recreate the USSR. He’s being expansionist,” and the people who want to be sympathetic to him will say, “Well, if you think about it, the Russian perception of the NATO arrangement was that they wouldn’t be expanding westward. Over the last years they’ve included all these countries that they said, they promised they wouldn’t include,” who knows what the promises were or were or weren’t?
But what I do know from his perspective is allowing Ukraine and to NATO was always a red line, and that’s why we never offered it. We never provoked it. We never brought it up. We said we’re going to arm them, and we basically said, “Just calm down. We don’t want any conflicts there. We have bigger issues and bigger opportunities to work from.” So I do think you have to think through, what’s a paradigm that he can accept? And I do think that he’ll give the justification for why he’s done what he’s done, and then I think the framework for a solution is about, how do we move both parties forward? Tough job. I hope you get the opportunity to do it because I think it’s a conversation that will only help the world hopefully find a pathway forward.
Lex Fridman
And I should mention, because you mentioned geography, one of the many books you’ve recommended to me that gives a very interesting perspective on history. It’s called Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall, and it has a very interesting perspective on the geopolitical conflicts and perspective of Russia from a geography perspective. And also for China in the second chapter. And there’s a lot of understanding of why the expansion of NATO is such a concern for Russia, because geography still even in the 21st century, less and less so because of technology and so on, but it still plays a major role in conflicts between nations: rivers, mountains…
And I should mention, because you mentioned geography, one of the many books you’ve recommended to me that gives a very interesting perspective on history. It’s called Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall, and it has a very interesting perspective on the geopolitical conflicts and perspective of Russia from a geography perspective. And also for China in the second chapter. And there’s a lot of understanding of why the expansion of NATO is such a concern for Russia, because geography still even in the 21st century, less and less so because of technology and so on, but it still plays a major role in conflicts between nations: rivers, mountains…
Jared Kushner
And understanding the DNA of countries. It was one of the most phenomenal books, and I just found it on Amazon randomly, but I loved every minute of it. The chapter on America is also incredible, going through the evolution of how we became the country we are, the different acquisitions, the different changes, why we have all these geographic advantages, and it’s an unbelievable book for anyone who’s interested in geopolitics.
And understanding the DNA of countries. It was one of the most phenomenal books, and I just found it on Amazon randomly, but I loved every minute of it. The chapter on America is also incredible, going through the evolution of how we became the country we are, the different acquisitions, the different changes, why we have all these geographic advantages, and it’s an unbelievable book for anyone who’s interested in geopolitics.
China
Lex Fridman
I have to ask on several aspects of China. First on the president, the meeting: you helped set up a first call and first meeting between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. Can you tell the story of that? Because that’s also interesting, again, that first phone call, the reaching out, the forming the human connection, which ultimately leads the connection between nations, and the possibility of collaboration.
I have to ask on several aspects of China. First on the president, the meeting: you helped set up a first call and first meeting between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. Can you tell the story of that? Because that’s also interesting, again, that first phone call, the reaching out, the forming the human connection, which ultimately leads the connection between nations, and the possibility of collaboration.
Jared Kushner
During the transition, President Trump took a call from the head of Taiwan and that sent the Chinese into a real tailspin, and he didn’t do it, I think to be provocative to them as much as just as a businessman, he felt, you answer your call: if somebody wants to speak to you, you speak to him, you want to have conversations, hear their point of view. But it was taken as a very big insult and it was against tradition and norm. And so, that was something that set us off in a wrong direction. My view at the time was that we are entering a G2 [inaudible 03:21:47] world, whether people want to admit it or not, and that a lot of these countries in what I call the middle market countries, when China was being aggressive with their One Belt, One Road, they were basically playing the US and China against each other. And I thought that by the two leaders coming together, there were some things they wouldn’t agree on, but there was a lot that they probably could agree on, which could lead to resolutions to a lot of issues in the world. That was my most optimistic view. My more pragmatic view was that President Trump had very big issues on trade that he wanted to get to with China. He felt like China, their trade practices were unfair, they weren’t following all the global rules of trade, he was a little bit nervous that they would be provocative with Taiwan, and I felt like the two of them getting together would be the best way to try and resolve that.
During the transition, President Trump took a call from the head of Taiwan and that sent the Chinese into a real tailspin, and he didn’t do it, I think to be provocative to them as much as just as a businessman, he felt, you answer your call: if somebody wants to speak to you, you speak to him, you want to have conversations, hear their point of view. But it was taken as a very big insult and it was against tradition and norm. And so, that was something that set us off in a wrong direction. My view at the time was that we are entering a G2 [inaudible 03:21:47] world, whether people want to admit it or not, and that a lot of these countries in what I call the middle market countries, when China was being aggressive with their One Belt, One Road, they were basically playing the US and China against each other. And I thought that by the two leaders coming together, there were some things they wouldn’t agree on, but there was a lot that they probably could agree on, which could lead to resolutions to a lot of issues in the world. That was my most optimistic view. My more pragmatic view was that President Trump had very big issues on trade that he wanted to get to with China. He felt like China, their trade practices were unfair, they weren’t following all the global rules of trade, he was a little bit nervous that they would be provocative with Taiwan, and I felt like the two of them getting together would be the best way to try and resolve that.
So, the Chinese are very proud and a lot of it’s about face, and so in order to negotiate for that first call, we basically agreed on what would happen in the call. So not, “Let’s just have a call, say hi, nice to meet you.” It’s a question of, President Trump basically agreed that he would acknowledge the One China Policy, which he didn’t see as a big concession because you could always unacknowledge it the next day, “So yeah, I’ll acknowledge it, and then we’ll go and exchange.” President Xi was going to come over to the US for a visit so they could sit together and they want to do it outside the White House, and so we agreed on Mar-a-Lago, which I also thought was good because President Trump always felt much more comfortable when he was hosting at his properties, and he just felt at home. And so, he liked having people as his guests and he loved it. He always felt really relaxed and it was great. So, that was really what we did.
Then, the Chinese come over, very much anticipated visit. And it was incredible, so they were supposed to sit together for 15 minutes, and they sent about an hour and a half together. And during that meeting with President Trump, I said, “Look, let’s just set some ground rules to this relationship. Let’s just not talk about Taiwan. Just don’t do anything I don’t want it on the table. If it does, I’m going to have to do harsh things. I don’t want this to be a problem for four years. We’ve got bigger issues.” They basically just, again, you notice four years of Trump administration: no Taiwan talk whatsoever. It was a non-issue. Started talking about the trade issues. They spent a lot of time on North Korea. President Trump was trying to get the perspective from President Xi about North Korea because that was again considered from Obama, the biggest national security issue that we faced at the time, and they just had a good feeling for each other.
It also helped that my wife and I, we actually had a Chinese nanny and teacher in our house, and our kids learned fluent Mandarin, and our daughter actually opened when President Xi and President Trump were together with Melania and with Madame Peng, my daughter actually sang them a couple of Chinese songs. And I thought that was a nice way to show we’re tough, but we respect your culture because the Chinese have an incredible culture that goes back thousands of years: they’re very proud in how they do it. And I think that sign of respect also set things off in a very warm way for President Trump say, “My granddaughter speaks Chinese and we’re showing you the respect,” which I think is very important, and he did have respect for them.
The next part about the visit, obviously we had a lot of discussions on trade, but the part that was probably most impactful to me was President Xi basically did an hour monologue at lunch where he just went through Chinese history from his perspective, and he talked about with particular emphasis on the Treaty of Unequals and then, the 100 years of humiliation. And then, you go through from Mao all the way to today and you had China coming back and rising, and you could tell that he learned the lessons from the past and was very committed to seeing China go through. So, that was a different time, right? So, China today is different than it was in 2017. In 2017, I remember President Xi was at Davos and he was vetted by all the top business people in the world as, “Donald Trump was the threat to the global world order. President Xi was the champion of free trade and the biggest champion of environmentalism and fighting for climate change.” And what occurred was President Trump came in and basically said, “I think China has not been following the rules-based order,” took very drastic approaches with tariffs. Every time he would do the tariffs again, I had Mnuchin, our treasury sector come to Ivanka at my house, “If he does this, this is going to crash the whole economy,” and by the way, he believed it. These were things that people were telling him would be very tough to do. President Trump had a gentleman named Ambassador Lighthizer, Robert Lighthizer. He was really the tip of the spear on all of our trade negotiations. He worked very well with Secretary Mnuchin, and we ended up increasing tariffs to numbers that hadn’t even been thought could happen. So we did the first round of tariffs, then the Chinese came back and retaliated very surgically trying to hit us in all the areas that politically would’ve been difficult. And what Trump did was instead of backing down, he took some of the revenue from the tariffs, gave it to the farmers and said, “I know that this is going to hurt your business, but I’m going to make sure you guys are made whole,” and then he doubled down, and basically went back at the Chinese with even more tariffs.
So, what we watched over a year and a half was probably the biggest hand of poker that was ever played, and it was an amazing experience to be a part of it. And the role I played was really working for Secretary Mnuchin and Ambassador Lighthizer as a back channel with the Chinese to make sure we can just deescalate things and get to solutions in the best way possible. So anyway, it was a fascinating time, but if you think about the global awareness of the bad practices that China was putting in place today versus what they were in 2016, I think one of President Trump’s most successful policies was shifting the way the entire world understood the threat of China, and then putting in place the beginning of a regime to try and rebalance the world so that we could have more economic parity.
Lex Fridman
You mentioned to me the book, The Hundred-Year Marathon by Michael Pillsbury when we discussed China, and I’ve gotten a chance to read parts of it, and I highly recommend people read it’s definitely an eye-opening perspective. I don’t know if I agree with all of it, I don’t know if you agree with all of it, but it gives a very intense perspective on China, and you said it was instructive to how you thought how Donald Trump thought about China. Can you describe the main thesis of the book, and maybe with a hopeful view how it’s possible to have a trajectory of these two superpowers working together in the 21st century, versus fighting against each other?
You mentioned to me the book, The Hundred-Year Marathon by Michael Pillsbury when we discussed China, and I’ve gotten a chance to read parts of it, and I highly recommend people read it’s definitely an eye-opening perspective. I don’t know if I agree with all of it, I don’t know if you agree with all of it, but it gives a very intense perspective on China, and you said it was instructive to how you thought how Donald Trump thought about China. Can you describe the main thesis of the book, and maybe with a hopeful view how it’s possible to have a trajectory of these two superpowers working together in the 21st century, versus fighting against each other?
Jared Kushner
Perfect. So, it’s a very big book, and I think it’s a book definitely worth reading. Michael is tremendous, he speaks fluent Mandarin, and so he spent a lot of time researching to do the book, so I highly recommend it to everyone. And it was considered more of a fringe perspective in 2016, but it really, I think came to represent the underpinning of what the collective thought was of the Trump administration. And maybe you could argue that it was even more cynical. The whole thesis of the book was that China from 1949 to 2049 was working to reclaim their position as the global leader. So, you had the Chinese empire. One of the things, I don’t know if it’s from this book or a different book that I read that spoke about how in the late 1700s, basically the Emperor of China was offered some of the industrial capability from England, which was basically now becoming the Industrial Revolution, and basically, “No, we’re fine. We’re the great Chinese empire. We don’t need any of these things. We’re better than that.”
Perfect. So, it’s a very big book, and I think it’s a book definitely worth reading. Michael is tremendous, he speaks fluent Mandarin, and so he spent a lot of time researching to do the book, so I highly recommend it to everyone. And it was considered more of a fringe perspective in 2016, but it really, I think came to represent the underpinning of what the collective thought was of the Trump administration. And maybe you could argue that it was even more cynical. The whole thesis of the book was that China from 1949 to 2049 was working to reclaim their position as the global leader. So, you had the Chinese empire. One of the things, I don’t know if it’s from this book or a different book that I read that spoke about how in the late 1700s, basically the Emperor of China was offered some of the industrial capability from England, which was basically now becoming the Industrial Revolution, and basically, “No, we’re fine. We’re the great Chinese empire. We don’t need any of these things. We’re better than that.”
And by rejecting that, the rest of the world got stronger, China remained weaker. Then, you had the Opium Wars, the Chinese had big opium problems through all the trade back and forth. And then, China from about 1840 to the 1940, 100 years where they, after all these treaties, were really a second class country. And so then, you have the People’s Revolution that comes in, and he talks about how China very strategically, as a very poor country, would fight their way back and build brick by brick. And he proffers in the book that Nixon didn’t go to China and open China, it was China that actually went to Nixon and was able to use Nixon in order to open up. And then, they talk about how under Carter, they were able to get the US to contribute to a lot of their, they were able to start borrowing the US know-how from our university systems, from our medical, from our science, from our research.
And the whole notion that was the conventional thinking of American leaders was that the more we helped China advance, the more they would become a free market economy, and it was a great market. The only difference was was that they weren’t allowing us access, they were making our companies basically give them all of their technical knowledge, they were stealing our intellectual property, they were doing espionage to steal a lot of the patents, they were just ignoring our patents and they weren’t following any of the rules of international trade. Then, they started becoming the world’s manufacturing hub. They basically came the world’s factory, and then they started this whole initiative called the Belt and Road Initiative in order to start locking in their lines of trades: they were buying up all the ports everywhere. They were building railways, thinking, “How do we lock in our distribution so that we can maintain the dominance as the world’s global factory?”
And so, it was a brilliant long-term plan that they were doing. And by raising awareness, by putting the tariffs, Trump slowed them down a lot. The real question is, if they actually did achieve this full objective of becoming the world dominant country, what they would’ve done with it, whether they would’ve been nefarious or not. I think from my perspective, even with some of the divisions and issues we have now in America, I still would rather an American-led world order than a Chinese-led world order. But the notion was is that they were playing a very zero-sum game and really going to be the dominant leader in this new world order. So that really framed the perspective, and the Chinese were always fearing, “Is Trump trying to stop our rise?”, and you have a great book also by Graham Allison that he writes about, are we destined for war between us and China? And he goes through different historical times where you have a power and a rising superpower.
And I think more than half the time it ends up leading to war. So the question is, what’s going to happen here? And I do think that Trump’s perspective, and this is my interpretation, because everything was always tactical day-to-day, and he was unpredictable to the Chinese, which they couldn’t deal with, and he was unpredictable even to his team sometimes because he was playing it day by day and issue by issue, and always changing and adjusting, which is how an entrepreneur thinks. He respected the job they did by building their country: they moved 300 million people out of poverty into the middle class. They did it at the expense of a lot of other countries throughout the world, especially America.
But Trump says, “Look, stupid politicians made deals. I respect China for doing what they did, but what I want to do is I want to change the paradigm so that for the next 20 years we can maintain our advantage over them, we can maintain our competitive dynamic,” and his general view was that America is the best private sector in the world, we have a lot of the best minds in the world, and if we can just have a level playing field with set rules, then America should be able to outperform. And so, that’s really what we were trying to do: we were trying to get rid of some of their state subsidies, make them follow some of these international rules of trade, and not allowing them to do predatory investments that then undercut different industries that we had ,so that they can have global market dominance or monopolies on different industries and then have pricing power, but also geopolitical power.
So, one of the examples that people talk about now is China for the last 20 years was very advanced on seeing this electrification trend. They subsidized solar panels, a lot of the American solar panel players were put out of business. So now, I think it’s 90% plus of solar panels in the world are manufactured in China, and then all the rare earths that you need in order to make these solar panels and to make these electric vehicles, China’s bought up most of them and a lot of the refining capacities in China. So, thinking through strategically, how do we create an even playing field so that we’re not at the mercy of them, and how you can have a rules-based world order, that was really the thought of what we were trying to work towards.
Lex Fridman
There’s this SNL skit where Jimmy Fallon plays you, and you’re walking into the Oval Office looking cool, wearing shades and a bulletproof vest to the song Unbelievable by EMF, I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but it’s pretty epic. And then Trump says that, “You’ve traveled the world representing the administration, but no one has ever heard you speak,” so there’s a lot of questions I can ask about that. But one of them is, can you introspect why you choose this low-key approach of operating behind the scenes and not speaking much to the public, at least at the time? You’ve spoken a little bit more, and today you’ve spoken for a really long time, which I deeply appreciate.
There’s this SNL skit where Jimmy Fallon plays you, and you’re walking into the Oval Office looking cool, wearing shades and a bulletproof vest to the song Unbelievable by EMF, I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but it’s pretty epic. And then Trump says that, “You’ve traveled the world representing the administration, but no one has ever heard you speak,” so there’s a lot of questions I can ask about that. But one of them is, can you introspect why you choose this low-key approach of operating behind the scenes and not speaking much to the public, at least at the time? You’ve spoken a little bit more, and today you’ve spoken for a really long time, which I deeply appreciate.
Jared Kushner
No, it’s been a pleasure to do this and thank you for the opportunity to talk about these things. And so, that was a really funny skit. And it’s funny, the thing I got made fun of the most for that was the wardrobe. And that came from after three months in the administration, we were having dinner with all the generals and they were updating us on the war with ISIS. And General Dunford said to me after, “Look, the president can’t come to see how we’re fighting this war, but I’d like to invite you to come with me to Iraq and come see. And would you come with me?” I said, “You know what? That’s great.” I always learned in business that you can’t make decisions from just an ivory tower. You have to go to the front lines and see what’s actually happening. So I said, “No problem. I’d love to go.” Meanwhile, two days before I’m about to go, the doc from the White House stops by my office and says, “We need to get your blood type.” I said, “Why do you need my blood type for this?”
No, it’s been a pleasure to do this and thank you for the opportunity to talk about these things. And so, that was a really funny skit. And it’s funny, the thing I got made fun of the most for that was the wardrobe. And that came from after three months in the administration, we were having dinner with all the generals and they were updating us on the war with ISIS. And General Dunford said to me after, “Look, the president can’t come to see how we’re fighting this war, but I’d like to invite you to come with me to Iraq and come see. And would you come with me?” I said, “You know what? That’s great.” I always learned in business that you can’t make decisions from just an ivory tower. You have to go to the front lines and see what’s actually happening. So I said, “No problem. I’d love to go.” Meanwhile, two days before I’m about to go, the doc from the White House stops by my office and says, “We need to get your blood type.” I said, “Why do you need my blood type for this?”
“You’re going to an active war zone.” I’m like, “Okay, so I guess I’m going to a war zone,” I didn’t really think this thing fully through. I get on the plane with Dunford and we land in Iraq and he looks like GI Joe. He’s a great general, he’s very well respected in the military, and we go in and we get on Black Hawk helicopter. They said, “You know what? Today’s a nice day, let’s take the sides off,” and so I get on the plane and there’s a military service officer who then takes a machine gun, locks it into a thing, takes the bullets, puts them into the gun, and is sitting there saying, “We’re ready to go,” and then I’m looking out and there’s like three other helicopters with guys. One was an Osprey with a guy, buckled in also with a machine gun looking out, we take off, and we’re flying over Baghdad from the airport to the embassy. And as we’re going, I’m sitting in an open air helicopter with the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, guys with machine guns everywhere-
Lex Fridman
This is a new experience for you. You haven’t experienced this previously.
This is a new experience for you. You haven’t experienced this previously.
Jared Kushner
I would say slightly. I was doing real estate like three months ago and now I’m flying over Iraq and the chairman says, “That’s Saddam Hussein’s palace,” and I looked down, there’s a big bomb right through the middle. Then, you see the area with the two swords in the hands. I’m saying to myself like, “How the hell did I get here? What is happening?” So meanwhile, we end up going to the front lines to be with the Iraqi military, which the US military is working closely with. And I had a meeting that night with the President of Iraq. And so I wore, what are you wear to the front lines in a battle zone and also to meet the president. So I put a sports jacket on, we land at the front line and they give me a bulletproof vest that says, “Kushner,” on it. I tape it, I put it on, I go out, I cover the N-E-R, so it just said, “Kush,” and I went and I didn’t realize they were taking pictures. And so-
I would say slightly. I was doing real estate like three months ago and now I’m flying over Iraq and the chairman says, “That’s Saddam Hussein’s palace,” and I looked down, there’s a big bomb right through the middle. Then, you see the area with the two swords in the hands. I’m saying to myself like, “How the hell did I get here? What is happening?” So meanwhile, we end up going to the front lines to be with the Iraqi military, which the US military is working closely with. And I had a meeting that night with the President of Iraq. And so I wore, what are you wear to the front lines in a battle zone and also to meet the president. So I put a sports jacket on, we land at the front line and they give me a bulletproof vest that says, “Kushner,” on it. I tape it, I put it on, I go out, I cover the N-E-R, so it just said, “Kush,” and I went and I didn’t realize they were taking pictures. And so-
Lex Fridman
I think the picture looks pretty epic. You with sunglasses, I think I love it.
I think the picture looks pretty epic. You with sunglasses, I think I love it.
Jared Kushner
So anyway, so that was the funny story behind that. And then actually, my brother was at some society event in New York and he ran into Jimmy Fallon, so the two of them took a selfie together. And Josh writes me, he says, “Hanging out with my older brother in New York. I’m trying to explain to him what your voice sounds like,” so it was good. So, that was a funny one.
So anyway, so that was the funny story behind that. And then actually, my brother was at some society event in New York and he ran into Jimmy Fallon, so the two of them took a selfie together. And Josh writes me, he says, “Hanging out with my older brother in New York. I’m trying to explain to him what your voice sounds like,” so it was good. So, that was a funny one.
But I think just being behind the scenes for me just gave me more maneuverability in the sense that, again, it goes back to trust and people knowing that I wasn’t going to try to publicize the things they were telling me. I think it just gave me more ability to operate that way. And I also realized too, communicating is a very important skill. Luckily in Washington, there’s no shortage of amazing communicators. I think there were a lot of people who were much better than me than being communicators. So I was very happy that they were willing to do it because it wasn’t something that I had a lot of experience with or necessarily I thought I was very good at. And so, I just did my job and just focused on getting things done.
Learning process
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you, you have a very interesting life. If you were to give advice to young folks on how to have such an impactful life, what would you say? Career and life, how to have a successful career and a successful life?
Let me ask you, you have a very interesting life. If you were to give advice to young folks on how to have such an impactful life, what would you say? Career and life, how to have a successful career and a successful life?
Jared Kushner
Number one is I would say you just have to work hard at everything you do. Number two, I would say never stop learning and always try to say yes more than you should, go out of your comfort zone. And I think just, you’ve got to work hard at everything you do. And if you’re going to take something on, do it the best you can. One of the lessons I write about in the book from my father was I remember I was going for a job interview and he asked me, he says, “Well, what time are you leaving to the job interview?” It was at nine o’clock. I said, “I’ll leave at eight o’clock.” He says, “Well, what if there’s traffic?”, I said, “Dad, I’ve done this drive 1,000 times. There’s never traffic.” He said, “What if there’s an accident?”, I said, “I can’t control that.” He said, “Jared, the only excuse you ever have for being late is that you didn’t leave early enough.”
Number one is I would say you just have to work hard at everything you do. Number two, I would say never stop learning and always try to say yes more than you should, go out of your comfort zone. And I think just, you’ve got to work hard at everything you do. And if you’re going to take something on, do it the best you can. One of the lessons I write about in the book from my father was I remember I was going for a job interview and he asked me, he says, “Well, what time are you leaving to the job interview?” It was at nine o’clock. I said, “I’ll leave at eight o’clock.” He says, “Well, what if there’s traffic?”, I said, “Dad, I’ve done this drive 1,000 times. There’s never traffic.” He said, “What if there’s an accident?”, I said, “I can’t control that.” He said, “Jared, the only excuse you ever have for being late is that you didn’t leave early enough.”
And I just think it’s something where if you want to accomplish something, a lot of people I hear they complain about what other people do or why it’s hard or why it’s impossible. And again, I say this as somebody who’s been so blessed with so many things in life, but when I’ve had challenges or things I’ve wanted to achieve, I just focus and say, ” What can I do?”, and I’ll read everything I can get my hands on. If the door closes, I’ll try the window. If the window closes, I’ll try the chimney. If the chimney closes, I’ll try to dig a tunnel. It’s just, if you want to accomplish something, you just have to go at it.
And I think the most important thing I’ll say, sorry, I’m thinking my way into this answer is just do the right thing. I think that’s also right. And I saw that in my career in be good to people, be honest, do the right thing. And if you do that, I think long-term, it does pay off. Maybe not in politics, but in the world at large, it does. And my hope is in politics it will as well.
Lex Fridman
I wonder if you can comment on your process of learning in general because you took on so many new interesting problem, and approached them with a first principles approach. So, what was your source of information? Because you didn’t seem to be listening to the assumptions of the prior experts, you were just taking on the problem in a very pragmatic perspective. So, how’d you learn about the Middle East? How did you learn about China? How did you learn about Mexico? Prison reform? All of this that you’ve taken on and were extremely effective at?
I wonder if you can comment on your process of learning in general because you took on so many new interesting problem, and approached them with a first principles approach. So, what was your source of information? Because you didn’t seem to be listening to the assumptions of the prior experts, you were just taking on the problem in a very pragmatic perspective. So, how’d you learn about the Middle East? How did you learn about China? How did you learn about Mexico? Prison reform? All of this that you’ve taken on and were extremely effective at?
Jared Kushner
It really started with just talking to people. I would try to reach out to people who had been involved in different things, and ask them what they did, what they thought of the problem, who they thought was smart on it, what they read that helped them get a better understanding, why they think something had failed. And then, I would just read voraciously on every topic. Washington, it was harder to get advice from humans because I found humans had this weird tendency to talk to the media. And so, I talked to somebody, and I’d ask advice, and then the next thing I know is the Washington Post would call and say, “Jared’s an idiot, doesn’t know what he’s doing, and he’s even going to this person to get advice.” I’m like, “Yeah, I’m asking everyone,” so books really became an amazing guide for me.
It really started with just talking to people. I would try to reach out to people who had been involved in different things, and ask them what they did, what they thought of the problem, who they thought was smart on it, what they read that helped them get a better understanding, why they think something had failed. And then, I would just read voraciously on every topic. Washington, it was harder to get advice from humans because I found humans had this weird tendency to talk to the media. And so, I talked to somebody, and I’d ask advice, and then the next thing I know is the Washington Post would call and say, “Jared’s an idiot, doesn’t know what he’s doing, and he’s even going to this person to get advice.” I’m like, “Yeah, I’m asking everyone,” so books really became an amazing guide for me.
Ivanka, she’s an incredible researcher, she’s just voracious. And so, she gave me some of my best books and some incredible advice as well. But that was really the process. And then, I think that was kind of the first stage. And then, the second stage was just constant iteration and readjusting plan as you continue to get more learning. And one story I tell in the book as well is that on my first trip to the Middle East where I met with Mohamed bin Zayed, who I spoke about earlier, the ruler of UAE, I spent two hours with him asking him questions and really going through the Israeli-Palestinian issue, the Israeli-Arab issue. And he said to me at the end of the meeting, he says, “Jared, I think you’re going to make peace here in the Middle East,” and I was shocked because first of all, he was at the time I think one of the most respected leaders in the region, somebody who I found to be very wise, and super thoughtful, and experienced.
And I said to him, “Why do you say that?”, I was flattered, obviously, but not certain why he was saying that based on the fact that I didn’t know what my plan was, I didn’t know what I was going to do and I had no pathway to make peace. And he said, “Well, the US usually sends one of three different kinds of people to come see me. The first are people who come and they fall asleep in meetings. The second are people who come and they basically read me notes but have no ability to interact on the message they’re there to convey. And then, the third have been people who have come to convince me to do things that aren’t in my interests. You’re the first person who’s ever come here and has just asked questions. Why have you done that?”
I said, “Because I figure this problem’s been going on for a long time, you live here, I’ll be gone at some point. You’re going to have to live with the consequences of whatever my work is, and the US has a lot of power. And my question is, what would you do if you were me and how would you approach this? And help me think about it.” And again, I wasn’t going to then take his plan and then execute it, but I thought it’d be very provocative to understand from the people in the region and instructive how they would use the resource and the power that the US had to solve the problems that were having significant impact on their lives.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s a lot of power to the simplicity of that human approach where you’re just listening.
Yeah, there’s a lot of power to the simplicity of that human approach where you’re just listening.
Jared Kushner
And one of my wishes for society as I leave government: I was living on the Upper East Side in a very liberal echo chamber. I then traveled the country. I met so many people who I never would’ve met otherwise, on the conservative side, on the independent side, on so many different issues, I think that people benefit, if you have such a strong point of view, I would follow the John Stewart Mill marketplace of ideas and find people who disagree with you, and don’t call them names, don’t say they’re a bad person. Say, “I want to understand why you feel the way you do.” Let’s have conversations in this country, and I think that that’s probably going to be our best way to work through the issues that we have currently.
And one of my wishes for society as I leave government: I was living on the Upper East Side in a very liberal echo chamber. I then traveled the country. I met so many people who I never would’ve met otherwise, on the conservative side, on the independent side, on so many different issues, I think that people benefit, if you have such a strong point of view, I would follow the John Stewart Mill marketplace of ideas and find people who disagree with you, and don’t call them names, don’t say they’re a bad person. Say, “I want to understand why you feel the way you do.” Let’s have conversations in this country, and I think that that’s probably going to be our best way to work through the issues that we have currently.
Hope for the future
Lex Fridman
When you zoom out and look at the 21st century from a human history perspective, across the timescale of many decades, maybe centuries, what gives you hope about human civilization? Everything you’ve seen: you’ve traveled the world, you’ve talked to some of the most powerful and influential people, and you look at the future, what gives you hope about this little planet of ours?
When you zoom out and look at the 21st century from a human history perspective, across the timescale of many decades, maybe centuries, what gives you hope about human civilization? Everything you’ve seen: you’ve traveled the world, you’ve talked to some of the most powerful and influential people, and you look at the future, what gives you hope about this little planet of ours?
Jared Kushner
What gives me the most hope is that anything’s possible. If there’s one lesson that I took from my time in government, it’s that people coming together to try to make tomorrow different than yesterday can succeed. And if the right people in the right places focus on the right ideas, I think the advancement that we can have for human history and for society can be tremendous. And I think that right now, I see we’re at a place in society where there’s a lot of what I call squabbles between countries, which are really man versus man issues. And those are as old as time, right? We’ve been fighting about borders or religion or who wronged somebody 100 or 1,000 years ago. And these are what I call more tribal battles. But I do think that as we advance with artificial intelligence, as energy becomes cheaper and it’s more readily available, I think we’re going to have massive industrialization, I think we’re going to have massive advancement.
What gives me the most hope is that anything’s possible. If there’s one lesson that I took from my time in government, it’s that people coming together to try to make tomorrow different than yesterday can succeed. And if the right people in the right places focus on the right ideas, I think the advancement that we can have for human history and for society can be tremendous. And I think that right now, I see we’re at a place in society where there’s a lot of what I call squabbles between countries, which are really man versus man issues. And those are as old as time, right? We’ve been fighting about borders or religion or who wronged somebody 100 or 1,000 years ago. And these are what I call more tribal battles. But I do think that as we advance with artificial intelligence, as energy becomes cheaper and it’s more readily available, I think we’re going to have massive industrialization, I think we’re going to have massive advancement.
I think in medical and science, we’re going to have cures for diseases. We have the potential in 10, 20 years from now to enter a dawn for humanity that could be incredible: we could become multi-planetary, we can explore the wonders of the world, we can find things we didn’t know. So, I think that if we put our energy towards finding these advancements that will improve the lives of everyone on this planet instead of figuring out ways to have these tensions between us, that for me, is the most optimistic case for what’s possible. And the reason why I believe it’s possible is because somebody with no experience, somebody who all I really had was the faith of a leader. And I had the courage to try, and I went out there with other people, and we took on some of the most hopeless, impossible problems, and we succeeded. And if we were able to do that, then everyone else should be able to do that as well.
Lex Fridman
Well, Jared, thank you for having the courage to try. Thank you for your friendship, for your kindness, most importantly, for your book recommendations. And thank you for talking today. This was fascinating and eye-opening. I hope to have many more conversations like this.
Well, Jared, thank you for having the courage to try. Thank you for your friendship, for your kindness, most importantly, for your book recommendations. And thank you for talking today. This was fascinating and eye-opening. I hope to have many more conversations like this.
Jared Kushner
Thank you very much, Lex.
Thank you very much, Lex.
Lex Fridman
Thank you for listening to this conversation with Jared Kushner. 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 hope to see you next time.
Thank you for listening to this conversation with Jared Kushner. 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 hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Mark Zuckerberg: First Interview in the Metaverse | Lex Fridman Podcast #398
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.