The Joe Rogan Experience - #2263 - Gad Saad

Episode Date: January 28, 2025

Gad Saad is Visiting Professor and Global Ambassador at Northwood University, and an expert in the application of evolutionary psychology in marketing and consumer behavior. He is the host of "The Saad Truth with Dr. Saad" podcast, and the author of several books, including "The Saad Truth about Happiness: 8 Secrets for Leading the Good Life."  www.gadsaad.com Take ownership of your health with AG1 and get a FREE bottle of Vitamin D3+K2 AND 5 free Travel Packs with your first subscription. Go to drinkag1.com/joerogan This episode is brought to you by ZipRecruiter — 4 out of 5 employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. Try ZipRecruiter FOR FREE at ziprecruiter.com/rogan Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Joe Rogan Experience. Jo Rogan, you're gorgeous. You are too, you beautiful bastard. Come on. Can I read you something? Oh, okay. You want to read me something? This is from my son, just before I came on the show.

Hi, daddy. read me something? This is from my son just before I came on the show. Hi daddy, I was wondering if the show will be live anywhere and tell Joe that I say hello and I love his show. Oh, you just made his life. How old is he? Well, last week was his bar mitzvah. Oh, so he's 13. He's 13. Okay. And it was that's about the age you shouldn't be listening to my show yet. You used to disturb me when I would meet my youngest daughter's friends when they were before high school. Yeah.

And they would say they love my podcast. I was like, geez, this is really not for you. Like so many subjects. Not for you. But the kids today, they're not 12 year olds when I was a 12 year old. These kids have a far more advanced understanding of the world for good or for bad. I mean I don't know if it's good or bad, because I think our childhood,

we were more exposed to things than our parents were. I don't necessarily think that's bad. So why would I think it's bad for kids today? I think the explosion though Yeah, you could go on and see porn that you and I don't even know they exist. Yeah, it is an issue Yeah, that that most certainly is a problem, but I don't know If it's worse or better. Yeah, you know I'm saying like I would rather have the loss of innocence that I had as a

14 year old then the loss of innocence my parents had as a 14 year old than the loss of innocence my parents had. I think they just lived in a more ignorant time and with knowledge you're also going to get all the bad stuff. Like I see a lot of assassination videos. Okay. You know it's funny you say the age of innocence because I've always said that the two things that protect me in life were my Belgian shepherds whom I love. I saw by the way that you were talking recently about Belgian malinois. My kids have grown up with... By the way, the Belgian malinois is one of four types of Belgian shepherds.

The only difference across the four types is that the Belgian malinois has short hair, whereas the ones that we had have long hair. They even look more wolfish, more intimidating. Scary dogs. And so anyways, so I always said that the two things that protect me when I sort of entered the sanctity of my home was the love of my family, my Belgian shepherds, and the innocence of my children. Because you know, the world out there is ugly and then you go back home and so once that becomes polluted because they just know more I feel like I'm losing part of them. That's interesting. I don't think you should think that way. I think they're human beings and you should want them to know

things. It's just that we enjoy the position of being the person that has all the deep, dark knowledge of the world and dealing with this innocent child that wants to watch Dora the Explorer. You know? D-d-d-dora. Pepper Pig. Yeah. Pepper Pig. All those kind of shows. And there's something beautiful in watching a little person learn stuff about the world and and Shocking when they find out about like murders and danger and scary things and you know, and then their their Realm of knowledge expands to you know, what amazes me is seeing my children get a political awakening

So my son who's really? Precautions, he's 13, my daughter's 16, she wasn't as into it, but during the last US elections, maybe because of the TikTok stuff and so on, she sort of woke up to it, and she would come to me and say, you know, why do we like Trump? Why don't we like, and so I saw an awakening in her that my son already had.

I mean, he literally will sit with me, watch, I mean, Tucker's no longer on, but he would watch Tucker with me and have conversations with me when he was 11, 12. My daughter came a bit later into the game, but it's so rewarding to see them wake up to these things and have meaningful conversations with me on these topics. It's beautiful.

God, I didn't know anything about politics blissfully, blissfully unaware when I was 13. Is that right? Right. But I did worry about Russia. When I was in high school, everybody was terrified before the fall of the Soviet Union. We were terrified that we were going to go to war with Russia. It was like a thing that was hovering over our head every day. Yeah.

That was kind of all I knew about politics, like Russia bad, United States good, Russia bad wants to kill United States. Like that's what we were basically told. All the movies like Red Dawn, you know, Russia invades America. Can I incorporate some professorial elements to what you just said? So one of my intellectual heroes is John von Neumann, who was a Hungarian Jewish polymath, he was a mathematician, he was a game theorist and one of the things that he did, he was one of the pioneers of using game theory. Do you know what game theory is?

Yes. In economics? Yes. Do you want me to explain it for you? Yeah, please. So a classic example of a game theory context would be the prisoner's dilemma, right? You capture two prisoners, you take them apart as the cops do, each of them can either squeal, confess or not,

and depending on whether, so there are four possibilities, both can confess, one confess, the other one, so it's a two by two matrix, and there are different payoffs in each of these matrices, and then the question is what is the optimal behavior? So that's called game theory because you use game theoretic framework to model what should be some optimal behavior. Well, in the context of the Cold War, that's when game theory was first being applied, that the Russians or the Soviets can nuke us or not, we can nuke them or not. And so there were all these models that were developed. So for example, mutually assured destruction is a out shoot of understanding game theory. And so for the ones who are watching the show, John von Neumann is the definition of how

I think an intellectual should be very broad thinker. He can both discuss mathematics or economics or game theory. He died, I think, too young, but he got his PhD at the age of 23. Check him out, John von Neumann. Wow, 23. 23 years old, from Hungary. Incredible guy. People like that just make you feel like such a dummy.

I mean, I was impressed with myself because I got my PhD in my in my late 20s That's still pretty good. Well, he beat me by many many years So I'm a little and compared to him It's bizarre when you see like young teenagers that are in college already because they've gone through their entire high school course Yeah, by the time they're 14 15 years old. Yeah now 16. They're in college. Yeah, so strange They'll of course as you know, the danger of that is that you're not At the right social developmental phase. So yes, you can solve calculus really easily

But you can't speak with people who are four years older than you so you end up being crazy Yeah, so it's it's so I'm not I'm not sure if I support this kind of fast-tracking Because there's right there's an element of just being with the right people at the right age that is true But also when you have an extraordinary mind you you want to give that extraordinary mind fuel You you have someone who caught lightning in a bottle, you know, and you you want to help that Yeah, I mean, maybe there's a way to do it or the parents come with the kid to school or something like that But isn't it strange though that you and I at our age, the idea of talking to someone four years older than us is like, so what?

Like what's the big deal? Isn't it weird? Like the accelerated learning that you have as a child is so rapid and so profound that a four year age gap is nuts. Well, speaking of accelerated learning, my biggest regret, I may have discussed this with you before or not,

but my parental regret is that we never taught our children all of the languages that we speak at home. So, so I speak, my mother tongue is Arabic and I also learned French because from Lebanon and then moving to Montreal, then I learned English and I also speak Hebrew. And then my wife, because she's Lebanese-Armenian, she speaks Armenian. So between the two of us, we speak five languages. But here's the rub. If I speak to them in Arabic or Hebrew, my wife won't understand. If she speaks to them in Armenian, I won't understand. So we just settled on French and English. So rather than them now being these super exotic, you know Five language speaking kids. They only speak the very vanilla French and English. Yeah, but it's still two

Well 99% of America's I agree. They don't even master one language barely know English Very they have separate versions of English, you know, actually I was slangs and dialects I was I I posted on ans. I was, I posted on X that, well, I was coming to Texas. I'm also soon going to South Carolina, to Georgia, to Florida, to Mississippi. And so I said, if I'm going to fit in in the South, since I'm doing this big, what are some absolute must expressions that I must have?

So the ones I came up with, and you'll add to that, I'm fixing to leave. Bless your heart. Bless your heart. Y'all. Y'all. All y'all. All y'all. That's all I got. Yeah, don't use any of those.

No? No. Why? No, because. Too cliche? They're gonna know you're faking it. They're gonna know I'm faking it because I'm not tall enough to be a Texan. Oh, there's some short Texans. Fitness isn't just about what you do in Texan. There's some short Texans.

Fitness isn't just about what you do in the gym, it's also about your nutrition, but even with the best diet, some nutrients can be hard to get and AG1 can help fill those gaps. AG1 delivers optimal amounts of nutrients in forms that help your body perform. AG1 makes foundational nutrition easy because there aren't a million different pills and capsules you have to keep track of. It's just one scoop mixed in water. It and capsules you have to keep track of. It's just one scoop mixed in water. It's such an easy routine to keep in the mornings. Ingredients in AG1 are selected for absorption, nutrient density, and potency,

and are intentionally picked to work in sync with the whole formula for optimal impact. They are seriously committed to quality. AG1 has tested for hundreds of contaminants and impurities, and they're constantly reformulating their recipe to dial it in. This is all part of why I've partnered with AG1 for years. So get started with AG1 this holiday season and get a free bottle of vitamin D3, K2, and five free AG1 travel packs with your first purchase at drinkag1.com slash Joe Rogan. That's a $76 value gift for free. If you go to drinkag1.com slash Joe Rogan, seriously get on this.

But the thing is like saying it like that. You can't with, if you don't have a Southern accent and you're throwing y'alls around, people are like, get out of here with that. It's just a weird one. And not that the accent here is so dense. Like the Texas accent is probably much stronger in the rural areas or in small cities and stuff like that. Austin is pretty mixed with a bunch of people

from all over the place. So I think even the general Texas accent here is fairly muted. Do you agree with that, Jamie? Does that make sense? I mean, there's definitely y'alls are thrown around, but that's about it. Right, but it's not a Texas accent.

Like you hear in other parts of the state, there's other parts of the state you talk to people, like that's a motherfucking Texas accent. You know what I'm saying? Like there's a very specific way that they talk that's pretty cool. But it's very accent, you know what I'm saying? Like there's a very specific way that they talk that's pretty cool. But it's very distinct, you know, it makes you know where you're at.

Like New Yorkers, like if you're in New York and you go to an Italian deli, and you're talking to this fucking guy and he's making you a sandwich, you know, like my friend Giovanni, like it's fun. It's like they're talking the way they talk. It's like it's a very specific way of talking It's cool

I was gonna say that you're gonna get me in trouble because I think I mentioned to you last time that the biggest trouble I ever faced was two shows ago when I was here and I made a joke about the French-Canadian accent Yes, you did. So I am hereby stating that in nature the most beautiful Auditory orgasm is to listen to the French community But now they think you're lying because now you know, I just learned your flip-flopper Flip-flopper is a weird one to me because it's like wait a minute. What do you do when you encounter new information? That's right. Don't you change your mind like this idea that someone who's running for office, especially right? It's always like presidential candidates and Senate candidates.

You should never, you should always be consistent. Which is so crazy. Like shouldn't you learn from new information? So in behavioral decision making and psychology decision making, there's a whole field that studies what are the types of cognitive traps that people succumb to precisely to not alter their original position. And Leon Festinger, I don't know if you know, he's the pioneer who developed the theory of cognitive dissonance.

And so he has an amazing quote, which I use in one of my earlier books, in The Parasitic Mind, where he basically says, the types of mental machinations that the average human being will engage in to make sure that there is cognitive consistency in his mind. Because incoming information that contradicts my anchored position makes me feel icky. So what are the kinds of mental gymnastics I'm going to go through to make sure that everything stays consistent in my mind?

Which, as you might imagine imagine is a big obstacle for me because I'm in the business of administering mind vaccines to people, right? Getting them to think properly. But if the reality is that the architecture of the human mind is not built to change their positions, then I'm up shits creek. Well, if you pay attention to X,

you will see you are up shits creek. Yes. Especially liberal people on X, like super hyper liberal people that are unwilling to look at any positive aspects of any sort of Republican ideas or policies or... It's like that's what they're doing. They're doing that 100%. Albeit, there are a few people that have come around, let's say to Trump you know, don't you think oh, yeah Yeah, yeah a lot of people have but it's like they had to see You know four years of an awful administration to go. Oh, okay. Wait a minute

I think I think these people are bullshitting me. I think these people are fully incompetent I don't think that guy's really the president I think there's like a bunch of financial institutions and deep state operatives that are involved in this whole thing. Like, and that's when did you see that interview with Mike Johnson, when he was talking about conversations that he had with Biden about liquid natural gas? I don't think so. And that Biden had signed an executive order and it limited liquid natural.

Oh, and then he said, I didn't do that. He said, I didn't do it. That's right. And so he couldn't get a meeting with Biden. They wouldn't let him have a meeting. It took a year before he got a meeting and there was a bunch of people in the room in that meeting. And he wanted to be alone with Biden,

but Biden kicked everybody out. And so they had to listen. So when Biden kicked everybody out, then he was talking to him. And then he found out that Biden didn't even read these executive orders. He was gone gone man. We knew he was gone I said he was gone in 2020. Yeah, the presidency ages you faster than radiation Whatever the fuck happens when you're in that when you have all that information and all that pressure and like the whole world's watching you

And then there's fucking chaos everywhere and a probably a bunch of terrifying shit that most people don't have information on but you do and all sudden you have this Crazy position like you age like crazy. So he was already gone four years ago So four years of getting cooked by being the president like that poor guy So I'll tell you a background story because we're talking about Trump. And of course he came on your show I was speaking to one of his senior advisors prior to him agreeing to come on your show and I was saying you know hey I would love to have President Trump for a chat and so on he goes oh that's that's fantastic what would you like to talk about what what angle would you like to do to pursue and I said well you

know I think that a lot of people have this wrong impression of President Trump if if he was given a long format Setting where we can just chat people would see that he's funny and he's not this ogre and of course he came on your show There's no point coming on my show what he's been on your show And I think you did exactly that with him so that a lot of people several people that I know Who hated Trump after they sort of watch someone show you they like it's kind of cool And so I that was exactly what I was hoping to do had I had the privilege of having him chat with me And of course you pulled it off Yeah, that's the only way to talk to people and I wanted to do that with Harris, too

I wanted to be able to talk to her as a human just have a conversation with the I know there's a human in there I know this does the whole systems fucked but I've talked about this before but there's this one interview that she does where she talks about meeting her mother and father-in-law for the first time and it's so funny and she talks about her mother-in-law grabbing her face it goes oh look at you yes and she's laughing but she's laughing genuine it's not that weird performative laugh that she does sometimes it's really funny as I'm like there's a human in there. Like, that would be fun to just talk to a person.

Do you, I mean, obviously you've spoken to thousands of people for three hour chunks. Do you think, had you had the opportunity, you would have been able to pull out three hours of worthwhile conversation with her? I don't know. You don't know until you do it. You don't know also based on people's conversations with other people, because people are different. Some people, they go into conversations like it's an interview, right?

And so they can't establish a flow, right? Conversation like what you and I are having is a dance. Exactly. We're both moving. We're moving. We have to like, actually call it a tango, like literally. It is a dance. Exactly. We're both moving. We're moving. We have to like, actually call it a tango, like literally. It is a tango. It's a tango.

It's a dance. And you have to know that. And some people literally are having these things and don't know it's a tango. They think that it's an opportunity for them to expose people's flaws or catch people in viral moments or an opportunity to flex your intellect. There's a bunch of things. So it fucks with the flow because as a person listening, I want to feel a genuine conversation.

That's what I want. Right? And you can get that out of almost anybody if they're willing to do it. But that you have to be skillful in how you negotiate it and how you do it. You have to think about it like it's like a dance. So I'm going to maybe be a bit more on less charitable than you. I don't think she's capable of doing it because it takes a couple of things to be able to do what you just said. Number one, it takes vulnerability in that you're laying yourself out there. Right now I'm speaking straight without any script and I might say something stupid that's going to be caught by millions of people,

but I'm willing to take that chance for the joy of sitting and chatting with you. But if you're tight and you can't let yourself go, if you don't have the self-assuredness to be able to be vulnerable, then you can't. That's why she could only speak in those little chunks. Perhaps, but this episode is brought to you by Squarespace. When it came time to make a website, there was no question that we would power it with Squarespace from the intuitive design intelligence that helps to create a bespoke digital identity to the seamless payment options that can help give your customers more ways

to pay, or the fact that you can measure your end-to-end online performance with powerful website and seller analytics. The reasons to power your website with Squarespace are endless. So if you're looking to build or even upgrade your current website, check out squarespace.com for a free trial, or go to squarespace.com slash Rogan to save 10% off your first website or domain purchase. It's also perhaps who is she talking to? Do they have the ability to, do they have the personality?

Do they have whatever it is that allows people to be comfortable and have a conversation? Because all these conversations is just like the way I talk about these rambling speeches that she does, when she kind of rambles on. It's because she's, I know what it's like. She's trying to dismount. She doesn't know how to dismount. So it's pressure, right? But how is she verbally when there's no pressure?

I bet she's a lot better, everybody is. So that's the goal. The goal is to talk to her like a human, like there was a few things they didn't want to talk about I said I don't care we could talk about fucking groceries I don't give a shit we talk about flowers I don't don't give a fuck I just want to talk like let's talk you don't want to talk anybody who doesn't want to talk about something I don't need to talk to them about that right you know if you don't if you've had a UFO experience you don't

want to talk about it like okay let's talk about ghosts What do you think about big fuck? I'll find out what you're about We did you and I talked about Bigfoot last time when you explained to me how you got off the Bigfoot train Yeah, I want to believe that's the problem. The problem with Bigfoot is the same. Oh, here we go I have with no, I don't believe but it's the same problem that I have with UFOs Yeah, the problem is I am very biased. Look, there's a fucking UFO right behind me. Very, very biased. There's a UFO on the desk.

Look, that's the sport model from Bob Lazar, what he found in the area S4, area 51. I am... I'm a romantic in that way. I want to believe in stupid shit. Right. I do. So I want to believe in stupid shit I do I so I have to be careful I have to be careful in what do I actually believe versus what do I want to believe? Like what is the data show me and the data shows me especially what I know now

from being a hunter for 12 years and spending a lot of time in the woods and for 12 years and spending a lot of time in the woods and knowing how many people are out there and how many people have phones and cameras and how many trail cameras there are and how many do we have like real accurate there's only two Jaguars that we know of that are in North America and they know exactly where they are like you tell me just tell me this fucking giant ape is wandering around Seattle It's just not likely Also, there's a bunch of all reasonable explanations. First of all, have you ever been the Pacific Northwest? You've been I've been to Seattle The woods up there are fascinating because it's essentially a rainforest So there's so much rain that the forest is dense like these fingers.

It's like a box of Q-tips. That's what I always describe it as. There's no spaces. It's just trees everywhere. There's no big open spaces where you, if you go to Montana, you go to the woods, there's mountains and there's trees, but there's space in between the trees.

It's expansive. There's no fucking space up there. It's a rainforest, it's like this. You don't see shit. And bears are known commonly to walk on two legs. They do it all the time. I've seen bears, personally with my own eyes, I've seen bears in the woods walk on two legs.

They do it all the time. So if you're looking in between all these trees and something 100 yards away is looking in between all these trees and something a hundred yards away is Going in between trees and standing up tall you just saw a bigfoot right meanwhile you saw a black bear Yeah, exactly normal everyday average black bear Stand on its back legs. They do it all the time and they could easily be seven feet tall So, you know earlier we were talking about how would you change your opinion once you have a position that's anchored? Yeah. So and now you're saying you know I'd love to believe in this stuff but then incoming information

comes in and then I kind of have to accept the fact that I can't believe this stuff. Well that in a sense was the exact topic of my doctoral dissertation. I actually celebrated 30 years in 2024. What examples did you use? So I brought in subjects into the lab. So let me tell you what the topic was and then I'll tell you how I ran it. So the idea was to study what are called stopping strategies, which means when is it that a person has acquired enough information to stop and make a choice?

Now why is that important? Because classical economic theory argues that if you're going to maximize your utility when you're making a decision, you should look at all of the available information. You can't choose the car that maximizes your utility if you leave some information unturned. So that's called the normative theory, meaning that's how you ought to behave normatively if you want to be a perfect decision maker, rational decision maker. But objectively speaking, that's not what we do, right? Like you and I, every decision that we make every day, we don't sample all of the relevant

and available information before we make a choice. We sample until we have sufficiently differentiated between the choices that you say, there's no point in sampling more information. I now have enough information to vote for Trump. I have enough information to marry this girl, to choose this employee. So that's called the stopping strategy. So I was studying the cognitive strategies that people use when they's called the stopping strategy. So I was studying the cognitive strategies that people use when they're making the stopping decision.

And so what I did, so to answer your question of how I went about doing it, I brought in people into the lab and I made them make sequential binary choices. Binary choices means it's a choice between two alternatives. Sequential means that they acquire one piece of information at a time on these two alternatives.

This was done on a computer. And it's called the process tracing algorithm, meaning that it keeps track of every single behavior that the decision maker is making. It does that in the background. And so what I was looking at, they could acquire up to 25 attributes, let's say choosing between apartments.

And I was tracking the cognitive processes that they were using and deciding when to stop and choose apartment A or choose apartment B. And then later, I applied that to other types of decisions, for example, mate choice, right? So you could apply for anything. You could apply choosing between fitness instructors, choosing between political candidates to vote for for anything, right? The reason why it's binary, it's because it only operates once you're down to two final alternatives.

You might have used another process to go from 10 alternatives. Like let's say the primaries in the US system, we first go through Republican primary, then we choose one final one, and then we go through a Democratic primary, we choose one, and then the final two go head to head. That's when my model comes in.

And so my model really explains how we make decisions across a bewildering number of cases, specifically how we stop and say, I'm marrying her, I'm hiring him, I'm voting for him. So it was a big deal. So a tipping point of information, like when you have enough information to make a rational quality decision. Exactly. So what you do actually is you set, I mean, if I could show it to you on a curve, it would really be cool. It's you set a what's called a differentiation threshold, which basically says that I have now sufficiently teased apart

the Mazda and the Toyota, that I've hit that threshold, that I'm sufficiently convinced that that decision would never be overturned, even if I sampled all of the remaining information. That's a good example, a good example, because when people are looking at cars, and they're trying to figure it out, like you start going over, especially today, you start going over all the details and different things they do. And then you get online, like what's more reliable? You know, yeah.

And some people use what's called the core attributes heuristic, which basically is there's only, there might be 60 attributes that I might look at in a car, but I really care only about four attributes. I sample those four whichever car is ahead after those four I'll buy that car and so I studied all of those decision rule strategies about emotions though Doesn't that play in there great question? So later once I had gotten my PhD I started incorporating Various types of emotional states to see where people shift those stopping thresholds.

So one thing I did, it never got published and we can talk about that. So I wanted to look at what happens to those stopping thresholds for dysphorics. Do you know what dysphorics mean? Like gender dysphoria? No, not gender dysphoria, emotion. So dysphoria is like a mild state of a clinical depression.

It's not I'm going to kill myself, but my wife left me, my dog died, life sucks. So that's called dysphoria. It's the opposite of euphoria. So there is a psychometric scale that you could administer to people to measure their dysphoria scores. And so I wanted to see whether non-dysphorics, people who don't suffer from dysphoria, would make their stopping decisions in a different way than dysphorics. And I didn't have any a priori hypotheses. Why? Because the literature was very confused. Some theory said that

dysphorics, by virtue of them being helpless and apathetic, life sucks, will actually acquire less information before they commit to a choice. Then there was another school of thought that thought, no, dysphorics are so helpless that one of the ways that they can gain control over their lives is to look at more information. So because I couldn't come up with any a priori hypotheses and being an honest scientist I said I'm not gonna posit any hypotheses. I'm just gonna run it and see what I get So I think I had 18 different measures that were comparing the this Maybe maybe 17 measures that were comparing the dysphoric to the non dysphoric on of which on

16 out of the 17 I got no effects, right? of which on 16 out of the 17, I got no effects, right? Now that to me was worthy of publishing, meaning that in this particular task, dysphoria doesn't seem to moderate the behavior. I send it to this top journal, actually called Cognition and Emotion, you're asking about emotion. The editor writes back to me,

God, gorgeous study, beautiful design, beautiful. Unfortunately, given the number of null effects you got, I can't publish it. Now this is literally called in science the null effects bias or the drawer, which means what? You only end up publishing findings that give you an effect and you Put into the disappearance bin all of the findings that didn't get any effects So when you then run a meta analysis, you know what a meta analysis when you run a meta analysis It's not an actual accurate depiction of the totality of findings because all of those null effect studies were never published And so I tried to tell the the psychologist in question, who by the way several years later he was at USC and

was hounding me because he's a super wokester. I couldn't believe how much he fell in my esteem. But anyways that's a separate I won't even mention his name although he's worthy of being shamed on the Joe Rogan show. And I wrote him I said but I really think that you know you're succumbing to the null effects bias because I really, it's worthy to publish this. This was, I think, in 1998. It's information. It's information that is worthy of the,

certainly the scientific community should know about it. Well, I probably, one of the first times I've ever discussed it was on the show, so hopefully at least it gets that attention, but it's not on the record. What a shame. That is a shame. This episode is brought to you by ZipRecruiter. It's that time again when we all look ahead and plan out what we want to accomplish in

the new year. There's the usual resolutions like wanting to travel more, get a promotion or get healthier, which I think is a good thing to do any time of the year. If your goal is to hire more talented people for your business though, you've got it pretty easy because you can use ZipRecruiter. You can even try it for free at ziprecruiter.com slash rogan. When it comes to hiring, ZipRecruiter does a lot of the work for you.

It's powerful, matching technology works fast to find candidates for your role. There's also a feature that lets you invite top candidates to apply for your job. That's a smart way to encourage people to apply sooner. Here's to a new year of hiring made easier with ZipRecruiter. Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. See for yourself. Go to this exclusive web address to try ZipRecruiter for free. Go to ziprecruiter.com slash rogan. Again, that's ziprecruiter.com slash rogan. ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire. It's interesting that one of our biggest hurdles is the human ego does not want us to ever be wrong. Right.

It's a giant hurdle. And human beings, for whatever reason, I guess it's part of the motivation of acquiring information and of advancing your ideas. We attach ourselves to ideas. And one of the things I always tell young people, like if you wanna do better in life and not get tricked by your own bullshit,

don't be married to your ideas. Ideas are just ideas. You are not your ideas. Ideas are some things that you fuck around with in your head and you explore and you talk about with friends, but you have to always be honest about them, and never be attached to them. The problem with ideas is that ideas

are just like everything else. Human beings grab them, and they're stingy, and they're like, mine, and I want my idea to win. And you'll lie so your idea wins, and it'll advance your career if your idea wins. And if you can wins and if you can even if you can unfairly dismiss or you you can be you can be unethical and how you're ignoring certain aspects of data for your opposing ideas like people do that and succeed because of that because

academia rewards them the media rewards them, the media rewards them, especially if they can publish in the New York Times or something like that, if they can make a story, you'll get rewarded for lying. So I can tell you, at Millie, I mean, this is my 31st year as a professor, I can read a paper and I can, just by looking at how clean their presentation of the data is, tell you

that they cheated. Because the structure of the reality of data is never as clean as how it is presented in many of these journals. And then by the way, not to sort of tap myself on the shoulder, but some of the top people that I know who ended up getting caught for fabrication of data, I was in private circles saying, I bet you 80% of this guy's research is bullshit, and then it comes out to be the case.

Because, I'll give you an example. So I did a study, and speaking about being wedded to your idea, so I had a graduate student that worked with me on a really, really cool project which we ended up publishing in 2009. Gorgeous paper on testosterone and so on. Really beautiful paper. I noticed that as we were getting ready to run these studies, there was always a delay

where he wasn't yet ready to kind of cast the die. And so one day we had gone for coffee. I said, you know what I think? I think that maybe you're afraid that if right now in the rarefied world of us having just posited the hypotheses but not run the study, we live in a world where it hasn't been falsified yet. So you're wedded to the idea. But I think you're scared that if we run the studies and the data doesn't come out in support, then the...

But guess what? It doesn't matter because we're going to reap some benefit from that. Well, true. And he looked at me and he was like, actually, you're exactly right, Professor. I'm afraid to find out whether we're correct or not. I said, just let's do it. It was actually a study on, so there was two parts of the study, and I'm not sure if I've ever discussed it with you. So I wanted to look at what happens to men's testosterone levels when they engage in acts of conspicuous consumption,

and what happens to men's testosterone when they see other men engaging in acts of conspicuous consumption and what happens to men's testosterone when they see other men engaging in acts of conspicuous consumption. And the general story, as you might imagine, is when I engage in an act of conspicuous consumption, my testosterone goes up because I had a social win. And when I see you, who's a competitor to me, getting into your fancy Maserati, then my tail goes between my legs. So you feel bad.

So my testosterone goes down. So we designed two gorgeous studies. We ran them. It was gorgeous. It was beautiful. By the way, I always joke that for study one, we actually had people drive a Porsche that we rented and a beaten up old sedan.

And after each driving condition, we took salivary assays so that we could measure the testosterone. And I always joke, try to get from a granting agency research funds so that you could rent a Porsche. Now only when you can do that, you're a good scientist. Anyways, and so we ran the studies and several of the hypotheses that we posited

turned out to be vertical, but several were falsified. But to the credit of the editor, unlike the other guy, he found value in even the findings that were contrary to what we had expected because we had an ex post hoc explanation for why it didn't work out. And so lesson to everybody who is an aspiring scientist, always be honest, don't fudge the data, don't go back and pretend that you have hypothesized

the stuff after you see what the data results are. Oh, is that what they do? Oh, tons, tons. As a matter of fact, I- Human ego. Human ego, that's, I told this whole story to your point, exactly. Yeah, it's awful.

It's awful because we rely on experts. And a lot of times experts are just like everybody else. They're competing with these other experts and they're trying to get ahead and they're willing to bullshit. And also there's financial reward and bullshit. There's people that would like them to bullshit a little bit of make it a lot easier for us to pass this thing that we're trying to do, do a little bullshitting. Exactly. I'll add something else.

Actually, I'm going to, I'm giving a talk at one of the universities here in Austin as part of this trip, and I'm going to talk about the, so I'm old enough at this point, although I'd like to think that I still have many years left, but that I can sort of look back at, you know, what are some of the great things that I've faced as a professor? What are some of the things that I'm disappointed in? Probably the number one thing that most disappoints me in my fellow academics,

and I don't mean that as a haughty thing, is how non-intellectual most of them are. Most of them are just playing a game. I mean, obviously they're intelligent. They're in the sense that they've gotten a PhD, they've gotten a professorship, they are stay-in-your-lane professors, they know their little methodology, but you can't sit with them at a party and talk about things that is not within their areas of specialty. They're not these big polymaths.

They're not Leonardo da Vinci. And so that has disappointed me because sort of my fantasy of becoming an academic was that every Friday for Shabbat dinner, I'd be inviting all of these intellectual colleagues of mine and my children would be growing up hearing the art historian and the mathematician and the...and my children and I are immersed in an endless orgy of ideas all day. Whereas most professors are just sort of mundane, publish or perish, get tenure, game the system.

And so that left me with a very... And that's why I do my thing, because I don't play those games. And so that's been disappointing. Well, that competition, it creeps into medical science as well. And the really scary thing, I was reading about this case where this doctor was treating people for cancer that didn't have cancer. He was giving chemotherapy to all these people

that didn't have cancer. And when they confronted him, one of the things that he said is, you have to eat what you kill in this business. So it was essentially he was saying in order to thrive as a cancer doctor, he had to diagnose more people with cancer than actually had cancer. And he was in some way, if not justifying, explaining the thought process that led him to do this,

which is so crazy to think that. But that's the reality of being a person. It's like your ego and your mind and the justifications that you can make for doing certain things. I mean, this is why we have war, right? This is what war is, the ultimate expression of that justification of the most horrific things, because you believe it's the right thing to do.

Exactly. Or because it benefits you, or because if you don it's the right thing to do. Exactly. Or because it benefits you, or because if you don't, something's going to happen. Yeah. You know, and... Well, I always say, and you might have seen me post it often on X, I always say the most dangerous force in nature are parasitized minds. Yeah. Right?

It's, I mean, the tsunami is devastating, but it's a one bleep. Well, what's interesting about you and your work is you predicted essentially the entire COVID reaction and the freak out and the woke mob, the whole left freak out way before it was going on. You caught like the first sounds of the drums in the far distance. You're like, guys, we gotta get the first sounds of the drums in the far distance you're like guys we got to get the fuck out of here and everyone's like

relax I don't hear any drums and you're like dude I heard drums I mean that's Viking drums that is literally my autobiography yeah well that's what you did you really did do that you you you were way ahead of it and you were widely criticized by a bunch of those people turned out to be these woke dipshits. They eventually fell into the trance and they all put their fucking bios on their gender bios on their Twitter. Trance T-R-A-N-C-E. Yeah, the trance.

But they fell into the trance of trance T-R-A-N-S. Well, trance was just the ultimate expression of this preposterous idea. This inclusion, this idea that the more suppressed you are, the more maligned you are, the more social credit we have to give you. This is in the name of equity. We bump a biological male who thinks he's a woman ahead of actual biological women to the point where it's literally victimizing these women and we ignore it. We try to pretend it doesn't happen, whether it's in schools or it's like in the workplace and that's the ultimate expression of this ability to completely ignore reality because it

doesn't align with your ideology. Well, so I have some good news, not phenomenal news, but in the same way that there is now this cataclysmic change that's happening because of Trump and so on, DEI is out and so on, I'm definitely seeing a, well, certainly a growing number of institutions that are reaching out to me who are suddenly very interested and keen on speaking with me. Well, that's good.

Yeah, so that's wonderful. And not in a gleeful sense of, hey, I was right, but in the sense that- Well, hey, you were right. Thank you. First of all, hey, you were right. No, but we're redirecting the ship. People are waking up.

So it's not just about me. And so like this year, I'm a visiting professor and global ambassador at Northwood University. I took a leave from my home university because I couldn't stand the Hamas crazies and so on. And you know, if you go to that school, you'll be heart blessed to see one parasitic idea. That's great.

You know, University of Austin here is trying to do big things. There are several other schools. How's that going? It's coming along. I mean, it had hit a bit of a couple of obstacles, but I think things are moving on track now. Now, is the idea behind the University of Austin,

I only peripherally know what's going on. I know they brought in a lot of very interesting people that are going to be a part of it, and Barry Weiss is a big part of it. Yeah, she's on the board of trustees. So what are they trying to do? Are they trying to have a real university like every other university we get accredited? Completely real universities. Actually, they're now I think

they just admitted their first class of 2028 fully accredited. And the idea is to return to broad classical liberal, not in liberal in the political sense, but like you read the ancient Greek stories, you read Homer, you read Socrates and Aristotle, like real basic education without any of the parasitic stuff. But it's not just an anti-woke school. It's a return to that broad education. I mean, you know, I was reading some of the stuff that the founding fathers write. And not, no disrespect to Kamala Harris or Joe Biden. When you read stuff that Thomas Jefferson

and George Washington and James Madison wrote, those were men of letters, right? I mean, they can quote Cicero and so on. Well, I think what University of Austin, I haven't gone to visit yet, but from my understanding is they're trying to create students who are really well-read, well, you know, have critical thinking abilities. So it's not just a correction to the woke stuff, but let's return to meaningful, well-grounded, all-encompassing education.

And if they pull it off, what a great thing. Yeah, education is not supposed to be just indoctrination. It's supposed to be giving you a broad perspective on a bunch of different ways that people look at the world and what we know about the world that's a fact. And you're supposed to be able to form your own conclusions. The way you're supposed to be able to do that, you're supposed to see people of different ideologies debate and have conversations about things. You're not supposed to pull fire alarms and shut people off because you don't like what

they're saying. You're supposed to have someone from your side who can calmly and reasonably and in a way that's encouraging to other people to think the way they're thinking. Yeah. Like you have to be persuasive. There's has to be something about what they're saying that go wow that guy's making some really good points or wow she just shut all that down now I'm thinking about it differently. Like you don't that's like a beautiful part of education is that you might have some like how many people that look wasn't Ronald Reagan at one point in time I think Ronald Reagan was like he was it was so left-wing that he was investigated by the government see if

that's true I think I think I've read this that Ronald Reagan at one point in time was like a hardcore lefty well he certainly was lefty I don't know how hardcore but yeah I think he was a hardcore lefty. Well, he certainly was lefty. I don't know how hardcore, but yeah. I think he was a hardcore lefty. And I think he was, I think during the McCarthy era, I think somewhere around then, I think he was even investigated. Yeah, okay. I think that's true.

I'm not sure if it was during the McCarthy era, but he was a really hardcore left wing. He changed his mind. People, and how do you change your mind? You change your mind by evidence by interacting with people that have different opinions that you didn't consider before now you do and you have to Be honest about your ideas and mull them over in your head and figure out why do I think this way now? So when one thing about Sort of this broad education. I was mentioning earlier John von Neumann who's this kind of polymath?

He's an expert in so many things. He's a generalist. You know, Joe, many of the biggest scientific innovations have happened at the intersection of interdisciplinarity because many of the biggest scientific problems necessitate expertise in many different domains. So the mapping of the human genome could not come from only one discipline. It took biostatisticians and biologists and geneticists and bioengineering, all kinds of different expertise to put it all together, right? And so one of the things that I've been trying, I mean certainly in my own research, I published in medicine and in marketing and in psychology and in behavioral science and evolution.

I've lived my life as an interdisciplinary, but we don't train our students to be this way. You are an accounting major. You are my... Stay in your lane. Stay in your lane. You stay in your silo. As a matter of fact, our universities are architecturally designed so that we never speak to people who are. If you were in the psychology department, you never talk to someone from the finance department. But what if we were to speak to each other to study the psychology of personal finance? And now we've just created a synergy that we never thought of before, right? So one of the things that I'm hoping to do with some of the universities that are now

interested in making me an offer is to build something that I've long dreamt of, which I call the Consilience Institute. Consilience, have we ever talked about consilience on this show? I don't know. So even if we have, let me repeat it. So consilience is a term that was sort of reintroduced into the vernacular by E.O. Wilson,

who's a, he recently passed away, a Harvard entomologist. He studied social ants. In the late 90s, Joe, he wrote a book called Consilience, Colon, Unity of Knowledge. So, consilience refers to, are you able to create links between different disciplines? Can you create an organized tree of knowledge? So, he was arguing, as I believe as well,

that evolutionary theory is the meta-conciliant framework that can link many different disciplines. So for example, you could study literature using evolutionary theory. And this field is called Darwinian literary criticism. And can you guess what that might mean? Or do you want me to just jump into this? Yeah, just jump in. Okay, so Darwinian literary criticism. And can you guess what that might mean? Or do you want me to just jump in? Yeah, just jump in.

Okay, so Darwinian literary criticism means when you study certain literature narratives that have stood the test of time, the reason why they tickle our fancy is because at their base, they have certain universal themes that map onto key evolutionary, right? Paternity, uncertainty, sibling rivalry, romantic jealousy.

So in other words, there are six, seven, eight key evolutionary templates that drive much of the great literature, whether it be Arabic literature, whether it be ancient Greek literature, whether it be Japanese literature, there's always that same template and that's why they cater to our scent. That's why I could understand what an ancient Greek poet had wrote 2,500 years ago and I get what how he's feeling jealousy because you and I are running on the same software as that that guy did. And so that would be called Darwinian literary criticism. You could apply evolutionary theory to architecture. Okay, so I'm trying to give examples that you wouldn't

have thought of. So architects usually are trained in how to design buildings to minimize cost and maximize the speed with which you can build a thing. They're not trained to design buildings that are consistent with our biophilic nature. Biophilic means love of nature. So there are certain architectural designs that actually make us be more productive. Here's a simple example. Just having more windows increases productivity. As a matter of fact, there's a great study that was published in maybe Nature or Science, one of those two journals in 1984, I think, where the researcher did only the following experimental experimental manipulation. Half the people who had just done a surgery

were placed in a room with a window and the other half were placed in a room without a window. Everything else is controlled. It's the same surgery, everything else was controlled. The one that was in a room with a window had many better outcomes, different metrics, just that one manipulation being able to see the light, right? So, by the way, there's a field called biophilic architecture, which tries to incorporate our innate love of nature in the design of architectural buildings or interior spaces and so on. So that would be another example of using evolutionary theory in a completely different field. You can use evolutionary theory in medicine.

You could use evolutionary theory in consumer behavior. And so I argue that we can build an institute called the Consilience Institute where filmmakers from Hollywood can come to this institute and do a six-month stage studying about how to develop cool scripts that adhere to evolutionary principles. And evolutionary computer scientists can also come in. What's unifying all of us is an understanding of the importance of evolutionary theory in these very disparate disciplines. That's fascinating. Pretty cool stuff huh? It's very very cool stuff because it's always so interesting to think of what are

the motivations of human thinking and where do we trip on ourself? Where do we trip on our own, just our own programming, essentially, when we were essentially operating with a system that was in place back when we were hunter and gatherers, we have the same system. And that's by the way called in evolutionary medicine, the exact words you just said, it's called the mismatch hypothesis.

The argument is that many of, and I know you're very interested in health, so I think you'd like this. This is not my research. This is from other evolutionary medical guys. I think the top nine killers in health are related to the mismatch hypothesis, which means that something that could have been perfectly adaptive a hundred years ago in the modern world becomes maladaptive. So for example, and hence the mismatch.

So whether it be colon cancer or diabetes or heart disease or so on, what ends up happening with each of these diseases is that misalignment between what was evolutionarily adaptive back then and evolutionary maladaptive now creates that health condition. Let me give you a concrete example. We've evolved the taste buds, the gustatory preferences to prefer fatty foods because of caloric uncertainty, caloric scarcity. That makes perfect evolutionary sense when as a hunter-gatherer, I have to spend 30,000 calories to go out and hunt and I may not return with game.

But then when I do get the game, then I gorge on that meat because I don't know when I'm gonna eat next, right? In today's environment of plentitude, I don't face caloric uncertainty and caloric scarcitycity I become fat I overeat because that mechanism of gorging on fatty foods Still isn't me. So we still have that mechanism, but it becomes maladaptive. And so incorporating an evolutionary lens into medicine

Often ends up with completely different medical interventions medicine often ends up with completely different medical interventions than that which the typical physician who's not trained in evolutionary medicine would have come up with. That makes sense. Well, unfortunately, so many doctors don't even take into account so many factors in health. Yeah. And this thing that you're talking about this desire for fatty foods is that's a great example and

You know one of the best ways that people have found to sort of mitigate the effects of that is to only eat protein When you go on one of those carnivore diets one of things that's so interesting about it is you naturally limit the amount you eat Yeah, your body achieves sort of a homeostasis with your food because you're not consuming, like, I can sit down and eat a steak, a steak alone, and I'll be fine, but if there's mashed potatoes sitting right there with gravy, or there's some pasta, or there's a piece of bread with some butter,

like, I'll go in, I'll go in, but if I'm only eating steak, I don't feel the need to eat anything else. I'm fully satisfied, I'm not starving. I'm not like, oh my God, I need more food. It's like I've had plenty of food, but ooh, that looks good. And that is just the trick, that's the trick.

But if you can get past that trick and just be disciplined with your diet and eat as much as you want of eggs and fish and meat. You will lose weight, like in a shocking way, and you'll feel a lot better. And it's kind of disturbing. So are you on an all protein diet right now? I'm like 90 plus percent only meat, 90 plus percent.

Every now and then I'll eat a cookie. Like I'm not ridiculous, like I'll have tacos. I love tacos, good solid Mexican taco. But it's like, I know the reality of what food is. Dessert is just fun. It's just mouth fun. It's just mouth pleasure. So it's like, oh, this is so good.

It's tiramisu, it's delicious. I love it. But that's just because I enjoy life. I like going to a restaurant and a great chef cooks you a great meal. I don't think, oh my God, there's gluten in it. I'm going to a restaurant and a great chef cooks you a great meal. I don't think, oh my God, there's gluten in it. I'm not doing that for nutrition. I'm doing that for enjoyment.

This is for passion and love and a glass of wine and good conversation with friends and eating delicious food. You're just enjoying, you're taking part in a pleasurable experience that's essentially art that was created by a chef, right? So that's different to me But when it comes to food, like what do I use to fuel my body? It's mostly meat mostly wild game meat and and ribeye steaks. Yeah, that's what I eat I had a ribeye yesterday at my hotel. I need fat I need a lot of protein and then I'm good

And if I just eat that, my brain operates better, my body feels better, less inflammation. The brain fogs, the craziest one. When I went back to the carnivore diet, I took a lot of time off and then I went back to it. I was telling Jamie, I was like, dude, I feel like I have like a whole nother gear, like intellectually.

Like I'm not, I don't search for thoughts as much when I'm eating only like that. It's palpable, you feel that. Palpable, yeah, but for me, it's because I have so many conversations with people. I know when I'm off. I know when I'm like, oh, I'm slow. Like if I just flew in from fucking Italy

or something like that and I'm tired, and I'm jet-lagged, it's a little harder to get the gears turning. I don't feel like I'm at my best. And I always notice the difference when I'm eating well always. Right. What are your thoughts on and I know very little about this so I'm really asking you because I don't know anything about it all that ozembic stuff are you are you forward are you against

it? I think if you're morbidly obese it's probably a good idea to do something that helps you get going. Because even if the side effects are bad it's better than you're gonna die again. Bro, you're dying. If you're 500 pounds, you're fucking dying. You have all the comorbidities. You probably have diabetes. You probably have all sorts of shit wrong with you.

You can't be that big. And if you just don't know what to do and you don't know where to turn and your habits are so deeply ingrained in your psyche that you can't pass up ring dings and you can't stop eating sugary cereal or whatever the fuck it is that's your thing. Ozempic is probably a good way to get going. I wish people would just get going with discipline and they would just get going with food choices.

I would like that, but goddamn that's hard, especially if you're so far down the road because it takes a long time. You know, when someone says like, how do you stay in shape? I'm like, because I stay in shape. So that's the thing, right? I'm 57 years old, but I worked out like this when I was 17. So like, I don't do anything different.

I keep this thing going. I keep the party rolling. And I never let it get fat, because I've gotten fat before, but never out of shape. I just got fat because I ate too much food. I've never gotten to the point where I wasn't fit. I wasn't exercising. I don't think you should ever let yourself get there

because it's too fucking hard to get back. Now if you've gone 39 years of your life doing nothing and just eating potato chips and drinking Mountain Dew and now you're 500 pounds, you don't know what to do, you're looking at a long journey. You're looking at a long journey to getting healthy again. It's a long road and it's hard to do a long journey because you're not gonna see it every day.

You're not gonna see any results. You're gonna look in the mirror, you're gonna still see all this extra meat and fat, you're gonna feel disgusted with yourself. You wanna look like the guys at the gym, it's gonna take forever. Well, I wonder, I mean, I guess we can calculate that, but for every amount of weight that you put on or lose,

what's the ratio of the speed? Meaning, it only takes me three weeks to put on 10 pounds if I eat badly. That's supposed that that number were three weeks. What's the number, the temporal number, the time number of how long it would take me to lose 10 pounds? It's probably three, four, five times that. So that there's all.

Well, it depends on what you're doing, okay? So it depends on how you're losing the weight and it depends on, are you doing, do you have multiple things going on simultaneously? Like have you started exercising? Have you stopped drinking sugary sodas? Have you changed your diet completely? Are you stopped drinking sugary sodas? Have you changed your diet completely?

Are you getting enough sleep? All those things factor in. Getting enough sleep is a giant factor. One of the times that people make the worst food choices is when they're tired. I know that for a fact. If I come home from the comedy club and it's like one o'clock in the morning and I'm hungry,

I fucking eat everything that's there. I eat everything. I'll eat cookies, I'll eat whatever the fuck I want. Because I'm like, I wanna eat what I wanna eat right now. I'm good most of the time. Tonight we're having spaghetti. I'll cook a pot of spaghetti. But tired is one, but it's like,

what are you doing to mitigate this and have you change your mindset? And if you haven't, if you're kind of dabbling and losing the weight, how long is it gonna take? It might take a long ass time. You might not ever lose it. You have to like get into calorie deficit. Calorie deficit is hard.

So here's the thing though. You can't starve yourself. Because some people do it the wrong way. They go too extreme and they fucking starve themselves. Which is fucking dangerous. It's dangerous. It's dangerous for your heart, it's dangerous for your mind, it's dangerous for your mind. It's dangerous for your body.

Your body starts to eat itself. You know, there's a process. What is it called? Autosis? What is it called? I forget what the process is called. Where your body starts eating its own tissue to stay alive. And that's what people are doing

when they're on Ozempic, unfortunately. And this is the thing where people that are just a little Overweight that get on it disturb the shit out of me right like you lazy fuck just go to the goddamn gym Yeah, you lazy fuck you're ten pounds overweight, and you're gonna get on ozempic. That's so crazy Autophagy that's what I thought I thought you were talking about yeah wait go go back to that again Body breaks down its its own tissue survives. It's called a locton. I never heard that word before.

Maramoose? Maras? Marasmus? Marasmus, or muscle atrophy. It can happen when your body's deprived of nutrients or oxygen or when cells are damaged. So here, so remember earlier I was saying how you can incorporate evolutionary thinking

into all kinds of areas. So there's these great studies that were done looking at how the human mind can be tricked because of its desire for variety seeking. And then I, of course, I offer an evolutionary explanation for it. But let me tell you the two studies that I have in mind, I think, because when you mentioned spaghetti, it triggered that in my head. So in one set of studies, they took, I think it was M&Ms. And you know, M&Ms can, you could make, you could create a bowl with only one

color M&Ms, or you can create a bowl with many colored M&Ms. That colorant, objectively speaking, doesn't alter the taste, it doesn't alter the smell. So it is only perceptually it affects it in that your eyes see a different color, but it doesn't alter the gustatory experience. And it turns out that when you offer people the multicolored bowl. They eat more. They eat more.

I wonder if people that are colorblind make better food choices. You just, there's your research project. It's kind of interesting, right? That's kind of cool. But some things that are colorblind make better food choices. You just there there's your there's your research project It's kind of interesting. That's kind of cool. That's but some things that are brightly colored are really good for you You know like peppers. Yeah, yeah, like bell peppers, you know, it's pretty bright red and they're pretty Yeah apples sure oranges, although there are some cases where I want to talk about another variety study in a second But there are some cases where colors and nature are called This was actually my first book in 2007. I talked about aposematic

Coloring, you know what that means? Sure this to warn you from exactly So then you you and then I use it to explain the the hair coloring of all the wokesters I say that that's a form of aposematic hair color so so check this out. So the Amazonian frog that lives in a very dangerous neighborhood, you'd think that it would evolve camouflaging. And yet you could see it from a satellite that's so brightly yellow or red

because it's saying, hey, idiot, if you could see me, you wanna sort of stay wide of me. I'm not even trying to hide, that's how dangerous I am. Here's the beauty of nature. Another species will co-opt that coloring scheme, and it will evolve it, but it's completely harmless. But the predator doesn't know which is which. Do you get it?

Yes, right. So I use that mechanism when I'm talking about deceptive signaling, and I use it in the context of deceptive branding, where people, Canal Street in New York City is all about you going and buying a Prada bag that should be $5,000, but hopefully if they faked it well, I can buy it for $50. And so that's how I take all of these biological examples and try to apply them in economic

or consumer decision making. But let me go back to variety seeking. Please do. So you mentioned earlier spaghetti. So they did another study where they took the exact same pasta and they either gave it to you in a plate of one shape pasta or in a plate of multi shape, but it's plate of multi-shape but it's the same

pasta so it doesn't change anything but I can give it to you whatever it's called Fussela or this and I guess you can guess what they're more they ate more when it's the multi-form pasta even though it's not cool you know what's interesting too you just brought up brands like brands are interesting it's really fascinating how brands have status attached to them and people are so attached to acquiring these brands that they'll have fake ones. Of course. And the fake bag thing to me is the nuttiest one

because it's just a bag, it's not a fake Ferrari. Like if you buy a fake Ferrari, you're gonna notice the moment you start, oh this thing's a piece of shit, right? It's not gonna handle well. It's gonna sound terrible won't be fast a real for It's like the reason what you're buying you're paying for the Engineering of this magnificent piece of technology well most most people are buying to show off so doing that too. Yeah, but Rich people aren't stupid all right the reason why Ferraris are so expensive and they sell so many of them is because you buy them, you go, holy shit.

It's worth it. The reason why it developed this brand status is because they win races. That's why. Lewis Hamilton drives for Ferrari. That's why they sell Ferraris. Because Ferraris are the shit. But also, I wouldn't recommend a long trip in one.

Do you know that the upper uppers usually, and you've met many of them, don't drive super ostentatious cars. They downplay it. They get like a regular Porsche 911, not even the turbo, not even that maybe. And do you know, do you know why? Do you know, do you know why from an evolutionary? Cause they have to hide. They're hiding a little bit. Not even that maybe. Maybe not even that. Do you know why? Maybe a Lexus. Do you know why from an evolutionary? Because they have to hide. They're hiding a little bit.

They're camo. They're like the frog that pretends to look like the leaf. Perhaps. But it's because when I'm nouveau riche, I just entered that thing. I want to demonstrate to everybody that I'm the real deal.

And for many other people who are in my circle, they may not be able to afford the ostentatious $350,000 Ferrari. But when I am an upper upper in the billionaire class, then me driving a $350,000 car is not a costly signal, in a biological sense, of my worth, because every single member of my billionaire friends group could match that signal.

Therefore, the way I can then compete with my billionaire friends is if I can spend my money in a lavish, wasteful way such that I buy an art piece that a monkey could have come up with, and I pay $180 million of it. That makes me big dog. Because you don't have enough money, Joe, to be able to buy what a monkey.

And I paid $180 million. Both of us can buy the Maserati. And so that's where I use the principle of costly signaling from biology to explain ostentatious behaviors and consumer behavior. God, that's the dumbest flex, isn't it? Especially the modern art flex. I can't stand that shit.

I used to go to LACMA, the LA Modern Art Museum, and I would get angry. Angry, like I just... I've done the same thing. Just like, just furious. Because you're feeling that they're cheating you from the experience of seeing real art. This is not art There's that one of them is literally a plexiglass box that's sitting on the ground. I'm like you dumb motherfuckers You dumb motherfuckers the meanwhile if you go on Instagram you find amazing art There's so many artists out there, like legitimate, incredible artists.

Like what you're doing is bullshit. Like one of them was a video of people playing catch. That was their art. Like fuck you. That's postmodernism. Yeah. Right. Fuck you. There are no objective aesthetic standards. Yeah. So anything goes. So in the parasitic mind, I have a section where I talk about, so like you, it, so you mentioned, where was it? It was an LA museum. Okay. So I had gone to visit, I think it was in 1996, couple years after my PhD, one of my fellow PhDs from my school had gotten a job as a professor in Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh.

So I went to visit him, and so he was busy teaching or something, so I said, oh, you know, I'll go to the Carnegie Museum and hang out and see stuff. So exactly like the experience you had, there was an empty canvas. So I went, looked for someone who was working there. I said, can I see the curator, please? Well, how can we help you? I said, well, I'd like to discuss the this this art piece.

So then this other woman comes to me, says, how can I help you, sir? Super, you know, I said, well, you know, what is this bullshit? So she goes, help you, sir? Super, you know. I said, what is this bullshit? So she goes. Did you say bullshit? Well, maybe not bullshit, but like, what is this? Can you explain this to me? I paid an entrance fee to see this. Right.

And what do you think she said? I don't know. Well, look, it triggered a reaction in you. Isn't that what art is all about? I'm like, okay. I went to see Yoko Ono's exhibit once. Of course you did. She had an exhibit in Boston, when I was living in Boston.

And one of the pieces was a block of wood with a box of nails and a hammer. And she encouraged people to take a nail and knock it into the piece of wood. She encouraged people to participate. Yeah, that's right. They're creating the art with her. It's a collaborative process. This was the art, was nails on a piece of wood. Do you think that when she does that, she believes it or she knows in the deep recesses

of her mind that she's a charlatan? I would have to talk to her. I don't know. So forget about her. Just in general. Well, the way she separated John Lennon from the Beatles, the way, you know, like everybody, like if you're in a band and one of the band members has a girlfriend, the girlfriend now gets involved in the band

and starts talking about like, you know, you need to treat him better. That's Yoko Ono. Everybody calls her Yoko Ono. Like that's like a standard thing that people do because they think that Yoko Ono was Everybody calls her Yoko Ono. Like that's like a standard thing that people do because they think that Yoko Ono was a wedge that drove. So a person who can do that with an intelligent guy like John Lennon. John Lennon was very smart, very smart guy. So a person who could like serve and he wanted to spend all of his time with her, that's probably a master persuader. That's probably someone who's like really good at playing you, really good at pulling your strings.

How about playing herself? Because remember, the best way to tell a lie is to first believe it yourself. Did you ever see when she appeared with John Lennon and they played on television with Chuck Berry? No. And she starts singing into the microphone and Chuck Berry freaks out. Because she sucks. She's screaming.

She just starts screaming into the microphone while they're playing. So they're playing Johnny B. Goode. Oh my god. You never saw it? No. The best version of it is Bill Burr, because Bill Burr talks over it.

He like explains what's happening in his inimitable Bill Burr way. He's just getting angry watching Yoko Ono Just scream like a banshee and you see the look on Yeah on their faces when they're looking, you know It's just it's one of those things where if you see you can't believe it's real You know that my friend of mine recently told me he was actually a former student of mine who's a good friend now He told me that that that famous sit-in that they had happened

in Montreal did you know that I did not know yeah I did not know that it was like 1969 at the I think Queen Elizabeth maybe Jamie will pull it off a lot of crazy things happen in Montreal Sugar Ray Leonard versus Roberto Duran that is true that's right how I guess I would expect you to know that yeah yeah that was like 81? 80s, somewhere in the 80s, right? Because he won a gold medal in the 76 Olympics, and by then he was a world champion. Yeah.

Somewhere in the 80s. Yeah, yeah. So have you met all these guys? I have never really met Sugar Ray. I saw him at a UFC. I did meet Roberto Duran, though. It was amazing. What did you think?

I mean, that's what I love about our conversation. It just goes anywhere. What did you think about the Mike Tyson thing that just, with the Jack Paul and so on? Jake Paul? I'm happy they made money. I'll leave it at that. And that's what I think.

Yeah, okay. I think it looked like sparring to me. Yeah. It looked like sparring. It didn't look like anybody was trying to hurt Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I think it looked like sparring to me. Yeah, it looked like sparring It didn't look like anybody was trying to hurt anybody really. Okay. Yeah, which is good. And you know, whatever Draw your own conclusions. I have no facts. You've met you met I paid for it. Yes. I love Tyson Yeah, I've met Jake Paul too. He's a cool guy. I'm happy they made money I paid for it. I don't care. Right.

Yeah. I was hoping it was going to be a real fight, but I was like, okay, I see what's going on. Right. Like if you and I sparred, we could put on the gloves and we could go back into the gym and we could spar and it would look almost like we're really fighting. No, because you'd punch me once and I'd be dead. I wouldn't. I would do it like at your speed.

I would do it at your speed and just bring myself to your speed and just move around with you That's that's kind of what I tell somebody I would actually be interested in doing that. Okay, we could do it It's fun, but I'm gonna know you so bad I won't talk the thing about doing that with someone who's gonna be nice to you Is that you can actually learn how to do it because you don't worry about getting hit so like the best sparring that I ever got ever was when I learned to spar with people who had the same intentions as me just getting better and not we're not trying to kill each other. So my early days of sparring when I was a young man I

trained at a very hard gym and we in kickboxing we tried to kill each other and so there was wars in the gym essentially every day. You were fighting. Whenever you sparred, you were essentially fighting. You weren't pulling punches. You were hitting each other as hard as you could. It's a really dumb way to do it, but that's how you make a tough guy, right? Like, that was the idea back then.

Now I think people are much more concerned with CTE, brain damage, the longevity of a fighter's career, that they would have people fight smart And so the thing is like training partners Especially in jujitsu you learn to really value your training partners Could you training partners help you get better and you have to trust them like if somebody gets me any heel hook? I have to trust them that they're not just gonna rip my knee apart and they're gonna let me tap They got me. Give me a second. Let me tap. Well, I know I can't get out. Let me tap Don't rip it apart.

And then let go as soon as the person taps. This is like a, if you don't do that in jujitsu, you won't have people to train with you, and you'll get kicked out of schools. And people have been kicked out of schools because they don't let go of taps. They don't let go of submissions. So like you develop this understanding

that you both could get hurt really easily. I trust you, I know you're gonna go hard, and I'm gonna go hard, but I know that we're gonna be safe with each other. We're not gonna do anything to each other that we know is get hurt really easily. I trust you. I know you're gonna go hard, and I'm gonna go hard, but I know that we're gonna be safe with each other. We're not gonna do anything to each other that we know is gonna hurt each other. So this is what you do in kickboxing too, but you have to trust that the person is gonna do this. They're not gonna hit you hard.

Like, a body's gonna hit me in the body, he's gonna hit me in the body like this. Where we're both okay. We know he could've really hurt me, but he just touched me. So he's getting his timing, he's getting his movement, and we're both moving fast, but we're both really good so we have the ability to control.

So instead of blasting through someone and punching them, you punch them like that. You literally punch them like that. You're withholding. He's touching, yeah, 100%. You're not even going 50%. You're just touching. You're going fast, and occasionally, unfortunately, sometimes you hit someone harder

than you mean to because they move into something, or you both hit each other at the same time. It's occasionally, but you mitigate a whole lot of impact, and then you also develop your timing better because you're not worried about getting hit. So the best way to learn boxing is, first of all, before you do any kind of sparring, is learn technique.

Technique is everything. It's everything. Mechanics are everything. Learning getting it ingrained in your body's system where you know that if you're going to throw a punch, you're going to lean your body into it. You're going to keep your hand up. When you throw a right hand, you're going to do this. When you throw the left hook, you're going to your hand up, when you throw a right hand, you're gonna do this, when you throw the left hook, you're gonna cover up

with your right hand, you learn these things so they're ingrained in your movement patterns. And then you do them on pads, and the pad holder will throw things at you so that you cover up, and you learn distance, and you learn how to pull away, and counter, and you learn all these things. And then slowly you start incorporating moving targets. You start incorporating a person, and the best way to do that is not get two people

try to kill each other, because that's what we used to do. You don't learn anything. The best way to do it is have someone gently move around with you, and they're like hands up, hands up, and you move around, and you go through a whole round where you're not even allowed to punch. Just do defense. And I suspect- I just want you covering.

I just want you moving good. I want head movement I just want you covering I just want you moving good I want head movement I want you to be an elusive target and when punches come at you I want you to be able to move away because I was gonna say that when I was a soccer player that the type of trainings would do because you have to do a lot of sprints is very different than the type of fitness that I do now which is usually I just get on the treadmill and I do a bit of interval training, but I just kind of either run or fast walk uphill without these kinds of anaerobic, right? And so I'm kind of looking at,

although I just turned 60, by the way, in October. Congratulations. Thank you. So I'm looking to do something that raises my heart level in a way that is akin to what I suppose would happen if you got into a ring, how your heart rate would kind of go up in ways that I'm probably not testing my heart currently because I just get on the treadmill and I just jog. Yeah.

I mean, there's a whole bunch of workouts you could just do online. You could find online on YouTube, there's hundreds of different people that put out free workouts and you could do them with two 10 pound dumbbells. Yeah, that's true. And you know, they'll take you through all this different stuff like pistol squats, do this, do that, you know, overhead press, do this, do that. And then they'll work you through the reps and all you have to do is follow along. Have you ever seen the training regimen of Alvin Kamara?

No, who's that? Alvin Kamara is, I mean, recently he's kind of had a couple of off years, but he's sort of the feature back, running back of the New Orleans Saints. He's an all purpose bag, meaning that he both runs, but he also catches the ball a lot, right? So he's really, he does, he's a generalist, he's a polymath. And I've always loved the way he moves. He moves very, very elegantly, almost like a,

so he's both power, but also, if you remember how Barry Sanders was in the late 90s, do you remember who that was? He was in Detroit Lions running back. And so I thought, this guy runs unique, in a unique way that's different from all the other players. And I, oh, I know who I was thinking. I had Dean Cain on my show.

Do you know who Dean Cain is? Sure, Superman. Superman, who used to be a football player. Right. And so we were discussing our favorite football players and I was telling him, oh, this was about three, four years ago, I said, oh, my favorite player is Alvin Kamara.

So then he tells me, go on YouTube and watch the types of trainings he does to develop those movements. And as a big fitness guy, just go watch it. There's a lot of plyometrics. A lot of plyometrics, a lot of stuff where, you know, they throw a ball and he's standing on a balancing ball, what is that called, a platform?

And he's trying to catch balls that they're throwing. I mean, I would have a hard time just staying on that damn thing There you go. Oh, yeah That's crazy It what that's exactly his trainer. You have to see what this guy makes him do. It's unbelievable. He's like a ballerina Well, that makes sense that he would be so agile and mobile because it's doing this body You can't just like do squats

agile and mobile because he's doing all these different things. Look at his body. You can't just like do squats. You know if you want to be an amazing athlete you have to do a bunch of different things. Oh, this is cool. Oh a lot of explosions left and right. Oh, he's unbelievable. Look at this. Wow. That's crazy. Hopping back and forth on ball to ball with balance on one leg. Isn't that unbelievable? Yeah, it is. I'm so glad you brought it. Thank you, Jamie. It does make sense though that you need to develop all this stuff. If you wanna, look at that, he's got a bunch of cords. That's it, look at his stuff. Look at his stuff.

Crazy. He's got a stick with the right ball standing on one foot. I bet he has insane balance. Look at those legs. That balance is insane. That thing is so hard to stand on anyway, especially with one leg. It's exciting that I shared something with you

Who's like this huge fitness expert that you didn't know cool? Yeah, I've seen people do similar types of workouts But that's very impressive. Yeah, yeah that that kind of I mean it just makes sense that if you want to separate yourself from everybody else Yeah, what do you need to do to separate yourself like elite balance elite? There's this guy Armand Sarukhin who was supposed to be fighting Islam Makachev for the world lightweight UFC title, but he hurt his back literally like the day before the weigh-ins. It's probably because of the severe weight cut. He cuts a lot of weight. He's very muscular. But one of the things that this guy does that's really extraordinary, they put out his workout.

He does these incredible mobility exercises. Like he's insanely flexible. He's like jacked, like super muscular, but like ridiculously mobile and pliable. And he's doing, see if you can find his workout routine. He does all these crazy exercises where they're like twisting them in weird positions. And it's very unusual for a guy that's that strong to be that agile and mobile. Are you, do you have a lot of flexibility? Yeah, but that's just because I started

when I was a really young kid. I started in martial arts and I was stretching from the time I was developing. I genuinely believe that my muscles are made of glass. No, that's all horse shit. See if you can find this is yeah this he does a lot of this stuff like look at these twisting motions he does a lot of like weird mobility stuff like hip mobility like

look at all this. Wow. It's all very so he's pulling on a cable machine and like look how flexible he is. Wow. It's nuts And this is like a core part of his training that is very different than a lot of other people's training. Oh my goodness. His ability to stand on his head like that and move his whole body around in a circle. What the hell? Incredibly agile. So this is not something that every person-

No, this is super unusual. I mean, there's some wrestlers that do this kind of stuff is pretty common I do these but he's like got it. It's a core part of his training is His physicality his physicality is very this is him with Hamsa Chmaev Who's one of the top middleweight contenders one of the absolute best fighters in the world and you know He's giving him a run for it. Wow, they're really good I mean watching him roll like comes out rolls through everybody and he's having a hard time controlling this guy. And this guy fights two weight classes below him.

That's how good he is. The blue guy is the smaller guy. The blue guy is much smaller. So Hamzat is, he's a 185 pound guy. And at one point he fought at 170, but he was cutting a shitload of weight. But even at 185, he's next in line for the title. And this kid, this kid's fighting at 155. So he's quite a bit smaller and still giving him,

he's not allowing Hamzah to run him over, which is very impressive. So what's the trajectory of MMA next? Is it all turn it into an Olympic sport? What are the- I hope so. I hope MMA becomes an Olympic sport. It should- Is that on the agenda? I mean, I hope MMA becomes an Olympic sport. It should. Is that on the agenda? I don't, I mean I know they've pushed for it. Okay. It should be. You know, I know there's combat sports obviously in the Olympics, boxing and judo in particular,

in taekwondo now as well. And you've got the Australian break dancer too. That one was amazing. Do you think that was a troll or was real? I think that was hubris. I think that was a person who didn't think they were going to get scrutinized, who used their position of influence to acquire a PhD in this stuff she has. But also there's like legit break dancers in Australia. Google Australian break dancers. There's people that are legit. I love break dancing. I love watching it. It's so impressive. Like the locking and all that stuff No, the physical moves all the when they do a flip and land on one leg and then flip all the other way

There's a couple of guys Richie and Gio Martinez that are black belts under 10th planet jiu-jitsu and they started out their career as breakdancing and they were so hard to hold on to and they were so mobile and so agile that Eddie started incorporating like break dancing into his training, like learning break dance techniques because it's just basically kind of gymnastics, you know, and a lot of these guys, they can stand on one arm and spin around in a circle with their feet in like a lotus position. Like it's bananas. Isn't there a Brazilian self-defense or an Israeli self-defense?

Capoeira. Yeah? Capoeira? Yeah, capoeira. That's right. Yeah, capoeira. But capoeira was like a dance that the slaves had created that they were disguising a martial art in a dance. Allegedly. I'm not an expert in capoeira, but a lot of the capoeira moves, they dance, but they're

dancing into wheel kicks. They're dancing into like tornado kicks. These are weapons, right? Like they're techniques, but you could pretend that it's just a dance, right? But it's kind of oh that's so the origin is a slavery thing. I might be wrong about that I don't think I am I think that's one of the things that they did was they hid it They hid their martial art and dance One of these left left turns we take through our connections of conversation,

I recently had a guest on my show who's an expert on Frederick Douglass. Do you know who that is? Sure. Regrettably, not enough Americans, not enough of anybody knows who he is, and of course he was in the era of, you know, when slavery was being abolished.

And have you ever seen his face? Yes. Doesn't he look as though he's like a Nubian king, the way, how regal he looks? Let's see a photo of Frederick Douglass. And I told that to the scholar, and he goes, you're exactly right. Look at that, look at that.

Imagine that guy teaching classes. Oh my God. I'm getting warm and I'm a heterosexual male. And also imagine to be intellectual and a black man in that day and age. And he didn't know how to read and learned it later. And if you read his stuff, it's unbelievable. Like the eloquence that he had, it's not as though learned how to read the way and a typical child learns at three four five That that happened later in his life and then you see the production of quality. It's unbelievable

So I really recommend everybody certainly Americans as part of your history read about Rick Ferrick Douglas He's unbelievable. How old was he when he learned how to read? So I don't want to misspeak, I'm not sure, but let's go, probably Jamie can pull it off, but probably 12, 13. Connection literacy and freedom, not allowed to attend school, taught himself to read and write in the streets of Baltimore. At 12, he bought a book. There you go, that's exactly what I said. So in his young life.

12, 13. Do you know who Rick Ross is? No. Not the rapper, but freeway Ricky Ross Rick Ross was a cocaine dealer in the 1980s that didn't know at the time But he was a part of the whole Oliver North thing where they were selling cocaine in the LA Streets and they were using the money to Oliver the conscious. All over North the Colonel. Uh huh.

Okay. You know the United States, this is like pretty established. They sold cocaine in the LA ghettos to fund the conscious versus the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. And this guy was the guy who was funneling all the cocaine through. He was making millions of dollars, couldn't read, goes to jail, goes to jail for selling cocaine for the government. In jail, learns how to read and then becomes a lawyer and then retries his own case and gets out because they tried him on the three strikes rule. This is how they convicted him on three strikes. But it was three strikes from one incident. It's supposed to be three strikes.

Separate things. Exactly. Okay. And so he got out. So he's out now. Wow. Yeah. He's been on my podcast a few times.

Oh, so I'll check it out. Brilliant guy. So he learned how to read while in jail. Learned to read in jail. Yeah. Amazing. Could not read. Amazing.

Yeah. So one of the biggest stressors I face when I travel, speaking about reading, is I've got a very, very big personal library of books, many of which I've yet to read. And I wake up every day worried that am I going to run out of time in life and not read these books? So whenever I travel and I'm going to bring a book to read on that trip, I sit there, the guy who studies psychology of decision-making, I have complete decision paralysis because usually my wife will tell me, you're leaving in 24 hours, why don't you now go and anguish, get in anguish for the next six hours as my hair is pulling.

And pick a book. Yeah. So I'm like, oh, this one. No, this one. And I'm literally sitting there. Interesting. Yeah, interesting. I think you listen to books.

You don't read them, right? I do read occasionally, but like 90% of them I listen to yeah, I need that tactile thing. I can't do the tactile thing is great But for me, it's a time thing. Okay, I can get listening in when I'm in my car and when I'm in the sauna So those are two side and you feel you you pretty much retain as much or or not as it's hard to say because it's kind Of the only way I'm accessing information these days. But I retain a lot of it. OK.

It depends on what it did. It always depends on whether or not I'm excited about the information. Always. If I'm very excited about it, I retain most of it. If I'm just forcing myself to pay attention, and then my mind drifts off into something else, then comes back, and that's a little bit of a problem.

Like if things become like, lately, I have been listening to a lot of UFO stuff, a lot of UFO abduction stories, a lot of UFO, I've gone going through Jacques Vallee's stuff because he's coming on the podcast again. And so I've been going through all of his books, he's got several books, and he's got a very nuanced perspective on this whole UFO thing That is I didn't know and I wish I knew the first time I had him on because the first time I had him on I knew that he was the guy who was He inspired the French scientist in the Steven Spielberg movie closing counters of the third kind, okay

Did you see that movie? I did see it remember I was like 12. Do you remember the French scientist? This is 1977, right? Yes. So there's a French scientist in that film that is coordinating all these people that are trying to contact this UFO, and they're working this out, like how to do it. It's based on Jacques Valle.

And Jacques Valle has been involved in the research of these experiences that people had had or allegedly had with being abducted, with sightings, with crash sites and all these different things. He's been involved with it for a long time. Where are you on the zero, I absolutely don't believe any of this, 100, I fully believe in this?

What's your score? I, the more time goes on, the more I think it's way weirder than we think. I don't dismiss the idea that something from another planet can come here and visit us. I have a feeling it's weirder. I have a feeling there may be that and then also other things. I have a feeling it's way more complicated. I have a feeling it's like life. Like if you told me that if you go to earth, you can find life. Okay, well what kind of life are you talking about?

You're talking about like fish? Are you talking about raptors? Are you talking about dogs? Like what kind of life? There's so much life. There's so much different life. I have a feeling that alien contact, intelligent beings from somewhere other than here is like that.

I think it's probably more complex than we can imagine and probably there's an interdimensional aspect to it. There's probably a non-physical aspect to it that seems physical too. There's probably an area of this phenomenon that plays on human consciousness and dreams and our interactions with the unknown. Because I think there's more to life than we can perceive. I think there's more to the existence, this conscious existence in this moment in the universe. There's more to it than we're picking up

on. I think we have limited senses and I think that this is what things like the telepathy tapes and all these different people that are studying paranormal phenomenon. I think that's what this stuff is all about. I think it's part of an emerging aspect of human consciousness that we're developing stronger and stronger senses in regards to things that aren't they're not something that you just put on a scale. They're not something that you could take a ruler to there's not something that you can quantify but they probably exist. And if you've I don't know if you've listened to the telepathy tapes. I haven't but I just started watching I think three days ago a Netflix series. So you'll know this better because I don't know what it's called it's supposedly a New York case in the late 1980s that's the most famous

UFO abduction case is this ringing a bell? I don't know about the 1980s the most famous cases like Betty and Barney Hill and they were in the 1950s that's and then the other one is Travis Walton he's this guy right here Oh They made a movie out of it called fire in the sky But maybe I don't know if Jamie can pull it's it's a Netflix series that just it's a documentary series That just start that I think came out this year this past year. There is kind of a guy I don't think he's a professor's only but he's a guy who's like the investigator who? collates What's it called? That's the one a reduction. That's the one. Thank you. Thank you, Jamie.

Oh, you don't know this one? No, because they sold it as the most famous, most documented case of UFO abductions. It might be. Okay. I mean, I don't know what to think of those things. I've read John Mack's book. John Mack was a psychiatrist at Harvard, or a psychologist. I forget which one. He wrote a book called Abduction that was all about hypnotic regression therapy that he did with all these different people that had these abduction experiences, and they're all really similar, like eerily similar. And there's no way that they could have they didn't they weren't communicating with each other They didn't know about it. They were these they were ashamed of these stories. They didn't want to tell other people They were telling them to their shrink, but they weren't telling to other people It's a it's a weird thing man

I and but here's the thing they all come back like no one gets abducted and gets kidnapped like what's going on Are you really leaving or is this in your mind in your mind? Did you leave like what happened to your body? If I had a camera in your room, were you in that bed the whole time? Is this experience all happening inside your mind? And is it still real? Like just because some things,

I think there's dimensions that we don't have access to that exist around us. And these guys that pretend to understand quantum theory and all that stuff, when they start talking to you about it, and talking about multiple dimensions, it leaves room for the possibility of these things. I actually had, so I've had a lot of amazing guests on my show, you know, top professors of all kinds.

Arguably the best conversation I've had, which is saying a lot with a guest on my show, is one of the pioneers of quantum computing and and Not to serve as this publicist, but I think you know, he'd be a great guy for you to have I love to talk to him What's his name? His name is David Deutsch He's a physicist by training. He wrote two best-selling books, I think one of them is called the edge of infinity and We try to discuss, you know, what is quantum physics, what is, how do you apply that principle to quantum computing,

and remember earlier I said that there are too many professors who are not intellectuals? Yes. Well, he's exactly an intellectual, because we could sit down and have a conversation where at the end of it, you were so hedonistically tickled in your brain that it's as if you just had sex. But with you get excited, you get excited. And so we had two conversations. I'd urge you to listen to our conversations. It was not too long ago, maybe three, four months ago. Amazing guy. Okay. I'll try to have them on. Yeah, that'd be great. I'm fascinated by quantum computing. Mark Andreessen was explaining the experiments that they've done where they did a calculation that if you turn the entire

universe into a computer, every molecule, every atom of the universe was a computer, it would take so much time to solve this equation that the universe would die of heat death first. But you do it in quantum computing and does it in four seconds. Yeah, quickly. Is that amazing? A couple minutes. Is that amazing? Yeah, it's bananas. Like what is happening? And he said it's proof of the multiverse because somehow or another this computer is contacting other quantum computers in an infinite number of universes. So I know the computing power and solving it instantaneously. Forgive me for being eager to jump on what you're saying.

I think, if I'm not mistaken, David Deutsch is one of the pioneers of the multiverse theory. Well, it kind of is the only theory, at least as it's been explained to me. That could work with quantum computing. Exactly. They're all like, they don't know what's happening. It's like these guys are making magic. Do you remember the famous quote? Do you know who Richard Feynman is? Yes. Exactly. They're all like, they don't know what's happening. Yeah. It's like these guys are making magic.

Do you remember the famous quote? Do you know who Richard Feynman is? Yes. Yeah, so there's a quote, I might get it off. The quantum computer, yeah. Yeah, where he says, if you think you understand quantum physics, you don't understand quantum physics.

Yeah. And that's pretty much how I feel when I try to understand. I'm like, what is this shit? I don't understand any of this. It's so bizarre. Just what's measurable about it is so bizarre. Like articles in superposition so they're they're moving

and they're still at the same time what the quantumly entangled photons what are you talking what yeah what does this even mean like where is this stuff what is this I first was exposed because you were just saying about the computational power that would be required that you could reduce for content computing when I was first exposed to AI, so my undergrad was in mathematics, computer science, and so I had taken an AI course before AI was the shit, right?

This was 1985, and the professor who taught me was, his name is, I can't believe I remember his name, Monte Newborn, he was part of the deep blue team that was developed, do you remember that stuff? Sure, that's the computer that beat Gary Kasparov at chess. Exactly, exactly, and so actually, for one of our assignments in that course, we had to develop on a game, it didn't have to be chess,

but it could be some other game, what's called alpha beta pruning, which is if you blow out the decision tree of a typical game, let's say like chess, you would need 10 to the 100 nodes, if I'm not mistaken, which is more nodes than there are particles in the universe. I think in the universe there's 10 to the 80. So there are more nodes in a chess game than there are particles or atoms in the universe. So it would take you infinite. So what alpha beta pruning does,

so you're pruning, so what it's basically doing is it starts testing going down the tree and if it seems like no good outcome can come here, you prune that tree. So what you're doing is you're reducing the computational complexity of the tree so that you can arrive to a final solution much quicker. And so that was the original time

that I was exposed to AI, and at the time I thought, wow, AI is gonna take over the world, and then AI went through a winter Where it kind of died out and it's only in the last three four or five years that really it has exploded But I want to tell you a few Assignments that I had back then and I would challenge Someone to solve them on your show and post the answers. I still remember them. Okay. I was an a plus student

So here's one if you take a string of ones and zeros, right? Any string. So it could be 1110001010 or it could be 1 million long, it could be set, okay? You and I will play a game. We start. Let's say I start. I have to either take out the end digit from this side or the end digit from that side then when it's your turn you take out the end digit from this side or that side we keep going until we get to one digit remaining whomever is left with that digit if it's a one they win if it's a zero they they win. If it's a zero, they lose. Do you follow the game so far? Yes.

So what Professor Newborn had asked us to do as an assignment, 1985, 40 years ago, is can you tell us, this is called the deterministic game, meaning that there is a way to a priori know who would win the game before we even play, just by looking at some characteristic of any string. So you understand what I'm saying? Yeah, yeah. So then my question to your, and don't cheat and go check it on Google or even I have it on my YouTube channel somewhere. So the thing is, what are the characteristics of any string that would allow us to deterministically know

before we begin playing whether Gad or Joe will win? So that's game one. Okay. And let's see if anybody's gonna post it on you. I know you don't read the comments, but whatever. What would be a characteristic that you would take into consideration? So this is not a correct one, but it's too bad that I'm saying it because you can go down that

path for five hours before you realize it's not correct. So I'm saving a lot of people alpha beta. Is it a ratio of how many ones and zeros that any string has? So for example, is it if it's two to one ratio and I start, then I will win? Or is it, yeah, someone, okay. Right, got it. It could, so I could look at a string that's four million digits long or five digits long

and I will know ahead of time. Jesus. It's unbelievable, so that's one. I can't even possibly guess. Okay, I could give you the answer or not. No. Okay, don't give it. Number two.

Let people simmer in it. You know what I would love? I would love for Professor Newborn, if he's still alive, to watch this show and say, my God, I must have trained the student well, that he can pull this out of his butt 40 years later. Yeah. Right?

Yeah. So anyway, so game two, or problem two, and imagine now you have to go off, it's due next Tuesday, and now try to solve this damn thing. That's why I always tell people, just study math and computer science. Whatever you end up becoming, it doesn't matter.

You're never gonna get as good a training as being a math and computer science undergrad. Anyways, second game, you have 12 coins. This one I think is a bit easier. You have 12 coins of which one is counterfeit. It's counterfeit in that it's either heavier or lighter. You don't know. Okay.

What is the minimal sequence of weighings that if I had a scale that I can place these on so that I can unequivocally identify which is the faulty, the counterfeit coin and whether it's too heavy or too light. Is this based on odds? So because you have 12 coins? Yeah.

So I could say 12 because you might fuck it up until the end. Right, no, but then I asked you for the minimal number of rings. Well, you get lucky on the first two and the second one could be heavier and then you do the third one, the third one's lighter and you go, okay, so it's the heavier one. Okay, but then that depends on what the outcome of the weighing was. Right. Is there, what is the minimal number of sequence of weighings that will invariably converge to the right counterfeit coin irrespective of what happens in the weighing?

Okay. And tells me whether it's too heavy or too light. It's mind blowing shit. Tell me what it is. So I don't remember the sequence, but if I'm not mistaken, I hope I'm not wrong, I'm sure Jamie could pull it off. I believe that there is a sequence of three steps that could invariably identify which coin is counterfeit and if it's too light or too heavy. So it's not as simple as just weighing them. It is as simple as weighing them, but which ones? Is it you weigh, is it you take any

two, and you, so let's say I take four. Right. And I put two and two, and the balance weighs, then I know that those four could not have been the counterfeit. Right. Because it didn't tip one way or the other. Right. Because they're the same weight. So in that case, by taking any random four, putting them on, I've only eliminated those four. Right, but you could do that three times, you have 12. Just try it.

Yeah, but if you do that three times, you'd be able to figure it out really quickly. So if now you got rid of those four, so I don't remember what the sequence is, so we could try to work it out now, but I don't think it's as simple as just us doing it. If I take another four and I put them out and that comes out as even, I get rid of those four.

I've now done two weighings. Now I still have four. If I take two and two, now if it does do one or the other, I won't know which one it is yet, and I won't know if it's too light or too heavy, correct? So that means your strategy of I just take four three times will not converge me to the optimal solution of three.

So you have to do it in three steps So you have to do it in three steps. You have to do it in three steps. But by the way, he doesn't tell you at the assignment what is the number of steps. Wouldn't you just do six and six then? No, because then you wouldn't have any to base it on. No, if you get six and six, you're sure you're going to get this unbalanced and you don't know anything. Right, you don't know which side.

So that weighing gave you nothing. It just confirmed that there's a counterfactual one. I mean a counterfeit one. So you do four and four. If you got lucky, you could catch it on the second one. No. But you wouldn't know then because you wouldn't know if it was heavier or lighter. But if you did what you just said, that means it's dependent on the outcome of that singular time that you did it.

Right. You need three. What I'm saying is irrespective of what you do, here is the strategy that will always get you. So I don't remember what the thing. God damn it, you're gonna leave me in suspense? No, but I didn't tell you the other one. I didn't tell you the digit one. Right, well the digit one I don't want you to tell people.

It'll blow your, I could give a singular hint that would almost make everybody get it. But I don't wanna give it because, no, I'll tell you why. Because it is almost a mystical process. I mean, we're sitting there, we're all, you know. Just give, just tell us what it is. You want me to?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay, so before I do so, let me give you the hint to see if you'll get it. Okay. You don't think I'm putting it on the spot, right? No, no, no. Okay. What does, this is so cool. What does any string, whether it's a million strings or 20 strings always

have architecturally speaking, do you understand what I'm asking? Yes. A number, a finite number? No. It always has a... it starts with M. Jamie? What are you saying? It has a middle. A middle. Okay. If you have a... do you see where I'm going with this? Okay. So meaning if both you and I know the deterministic rule, right, it doesn't matter how big the string is, right? If I look at the middle of the string, I mean I'm getting goosebumps saying it. Okay. If you look at the middle of this, like look, if this, if the middle is 1 1 1, one, just bear with me. Okay. If the

middle is one, one, one, this, the string is an odd number. Okay. Cause whether it's odd number or even, right. It is matter. Got it. If it's an odd number and I start and the middle is 1-1-1, I know that I'm going to win. Why? The middle has to be a 1. 1 or 0. Yeah. Well, no, because if the middle is 1-1-1, so when we're left with 1-1-1, I take a 1

from this side. You take any other 1 and I'll be left with one and I win. Therefore, if we both know the deterministic rule of the game, I will always make sure so when you take out from this side, I will counterbalance by taking out from this side and then you take out from this side, I'll counterbalance with this side to make sure that we converge to the middle 111, which I know because it's an odd string and I started the game, I'm always gonna get to it. Got it.

Do you get it? Yeah. And so the entire algorithm is based on is the string odd or even? That will determine if it's the middle three or middle four. And do I start or do you start? Knowing that information, the string could be 73 billion digits long, or it could be six digits long.

It's a deterministic game. I know who will win. As long as we both know that rule. If we both, if I know it and you don't, then there's asymmetry, then I could always make sure to win. But if we both know it, you don't, then there's asymmetry, then I could always make sure to win. But if we both know it, we don't have to play the game. I just look at the middle and I go,

you're starting or you win. We don't need to play. Isn't that cool? It is cool. But I wish we hadn't done it because I would have loved to see people's attempts because you learn from how people are thinking. How, do you understand this quantum computing,

this multiverse explanation? I mean, I don't want to say nothing, but certainly not enough to offer any insights in this conversation. It seems so strange, and there's no real applications for it yet, which is even stranger, is that they have this computing power, but they're not using it to do things. Well, but here's where it does. So I guess maybe I was being too humble and when I said I don't I don't know anything about it. So here's a mind-blowing thing.

So you know what prime numbers are? Yes. Okay. It's an incredibly easy property to define. We know how the number line operates, yet you know that one of the open problems in pure mathematics, pure mathematics is basically number theory. It's the purest, most theoretical form of math, which is saying a lot. Pure mathematicians don't have a formula that allows them to generate what is the next prime, right? So usually right now what you do is you have these incredible supercomputers and through

brute force someone comes out with we now found the largest prime number ever, but it was done through algorithmic, brutish force. So I can see how a quantum computing approach will allow us to, through brute force, calculate much further prime numbers that today we don't have the computational power to do. So I don't know what the application would be, but that would be an example of using the raw computational power of quantum computing to solve these problems. What I was

getting at was we don't have an application for it where it's being used and it's eventually going to be. What I was getting at is that we're looking at this astounding computational ability that's baffling, and what happens when that gets applied to something? This is what my point was. My point is always what happens when that gets applied to sentient AI, when it gets applied to some large language model that's untethered. That's where it's really crazy because the computing power, one of the big problems with

artificial intelligence is the incredible need for power, right? This is why these, like Google's doing this AI thing where they want to develop three nuclear power plants to power their AI. Yeah, crazy. This is nuts. So what happens when this insane thing that we have developed,

called artificial intelligence, meets this other insane thing that we have developed called artificial intelligence meets this other insane thing that we have developed called quantum computing? So I don't know about that, but what I can say is that any type of problem that requires massive computational power because of the burdensome search, you can use that for. Right. Right, so imagine, although I don't think you need quantum computing for this,

but say in medical diagnostics, where you use an AI system, why isn't it that we don't, why do we even go to a physician and provide him or her with our symptoms when it should be so trivially easy to put that into an AI medical diagnostic system and it can look up rare cases in 1827 in Zambia that exactly map onto exactly the symptoms, the unique symptoms that I'm facing because I went on a safari in Zambia. No physician, even if he's trained in infectious diseases,

has probably seen that case from 1827 in Zambia. So I would expect that in problems that require huge computational power to search through huge engines, is where quantum, but I don't know anything else. Yeah, well, it's gonna have applications is the point. And it's right now, it's this insane technology that is so above and beyond anything that's even imaginable. If you just said that to someone 20 years ago, you're going to have a computer that if you took the whole universe and turned

it into a computer, it would die of heat death before this thing could figure it out and this thing could do it in a couple of minutes. You would go, what are you even saying? You go, what does the world look like when this thing becomes real? The world looks like we're in some sort of Terminator movie. We're in some sort of space movie, Star Trek type deal. It's not gonna be like a normal world, but it is a normal world, and this technology exists. My wife just before I came on the show,

she called me up and she goes, oh, did you see this deep AI stuff with the Chinese? I said, sweetie, I'm about to head off to speak to Joe. Well, why are you having a deep conversation with me now? She goes, Oh, because maybe Joe's going to bring up something about AI and you might want it all. So anyway, so let me give her a clue. Do you know anything about this? I do. I do. There's a lot going on. And what's bizarre is that China is dumping insane amounts of money. I think the estimation in the American dollar is a quarter of a trillion dollars into their

AI program. Their AI program is also allegedly involves a little bit of espionage. So it involves a little bit of stealing some of the data from OpenAI and some of these other places. And one of the things that does happen of course with these sort of enormous technology breakthroughs is that you're gonna have certain foreign governments that are trying to infiltrate these research centers. They're trying to get access to this information and the speculation is that they have done that and that they are more advanced because of it than we're even aware of and that they're

dumping untold amounts of resources, sort of unchecked. The response to this is probably what the government just recently announced, what the Trump administration- Oh, the 500 billion thing, right? Yeah, this is probably in response to that. Okay that there's an AI arms race That's going on right now and whoever gets to the front of the line first is gonna be in an insane position of power And in a sense, it's similar to the space race But this one is probably more consequential

Probably more consequential because essentially when you're dealing with quantum computing and AI And you put the two of those together, which they haven't done yet, but once they do what are it? What is that that sounds like a God? Yeah, it does it sounds like something that can do things It doesn't even make sense It's gonna have the kind of understanding of the universe that we would only dream of right now Right and it's probably a week away that we would only dream of right now. And it's probably a week away, or a month away, or a year away, or whatever it is.

It's gonna happen quick. In a much less grand context, yesterday I had, this morning I was telling you, I was having breakfast with a colleague from UT Austin. I actually also met him yesterday, he came over to the hotel, we went out, he has a Tesla. And he said that over the past month or so I don't remember the exact time the AI abilities of the self-driving part of his Tesla he's noticed a huge improvement

like a really discrete jump and so we were driving we were going to a coffee shop and he wasn't he wasn't looking at the road and he wasn't using his hands and the car was driving oh yeah I have one but okay so for you it doesn't seem perceptually and I was looking no it's bananas when you use bananas the auto driving features not the stops at red lights it turns left and right, it changes lanes. The whole thing. Oh yeah. And so this was the first time I was fully immersed in a self-driving car, and I was telling him,

hey Richard, are you sure that this is okay? And he's like, oh yeah, no, it's fine. My children come in, and it was like mind-blowing experience. It's mind-blowing, yeah. And what is that compared to what it's going to be? Yeah, exactly. There was a, I bought my first one I guess seven years ago something like that and I made a video of me driving on Sunset Boulevard without my hands

I was I had my hands over the steering wheel. I led Zeppelin's plan Like this is so crazy. It was driving down the street and have you how much have you noticed? It's much better Okay. Oh, you're much much much much much 500% noticed? It's much better. Oh yeah, much much much much much better. Five hundred percent better. It's way better. Yeah, it's like I said, now. What specifically? It makes better decisions?

Now it changes lanes to avoid obstructions. It puts its blinker on, it makes turns, it stops at red lights and stop signs. It just does everything. It drives like a person. I mean it still feels weird. I don't like to let it drive. I like to drive. I like person. I mean, it still feels weird. I don't like to let it drive. I like to drive. I like driving.

It's fun. It's a fun car to drive because it's so preposterous. It's like it moves like a time machine. It just goes places. It doesn't make any noise. It's real weird. So I like driving, but the auto driving feature that exists now is just the beginning.

It's going to get to the point where it's going to be stupid to let people drive. You know, it's funny because linking it back to my area research in psychology decision making, there was a psychologist who has now passed away, a very famous psychologist named Paul Meehl, M-E-E-H-L, who in the 1950s was already doing studies looking at what's called actuarial versus clinical judgments. What does that mean? Let's suppose I were to tell you that when it comes to making decisions for your admissions to university, using an actuarial model, meaning putting in all of your admissions data and allowing a model

to decide yes or no, is a much better mechanism than to allow humans to make that choice, because humans can be hungry at 1145 and they're pissed off because their blood sugar is low. And if they're, depending on whether the blood sugar is low or not, they may make a different decision on the exact same file. So that he tried to argue that actuarial decisions for certain structured decisions will end up having much better, fairer outcomes for university applicants, and people were still reticent to allow the machine to make decisions.

They wanted it to be in the hands of humans. And so I think, the reason why I thought of this example is because when you said, I don't like the machine to be driving, I wanna be in control. What that to me suggests is that no matter how much actuarial evidence you might provide to people telling them, on average average you're much less likely to get into an accident if the self-driving car drives.

Most people are going to have the bias of saying, no, I can't relinquish control. Do you agree with that? Yeah, I think that's definitely a factor. Also you wonder if the car is paying attention to things that you can see but it can't see, right? So what I like to look at when I'm driving, one of the reasons why I like driving my truck, I have a Raptor and it's above the rest of the traffic. So I could see people doing stupid things way up ahead.

So I could see someone slamming on their brakes and I know all these other people are going to have to slam on their brakes too because somebody just cut in front of that guy and stop dead. I can change lanes. Right. The car gonna know that it's not gonna see that It's not gonna be paying attention. It's not high enough, right? Well, it's not paying attention to anything other than the car in front of it or the car to the right and to the left It's not looking at cars like way down the road. I'm looking at things like Hundreds of yards ahead of me, but couldn't a couple of cold lines fix what you just said might not be able to see it

Okay, it doesn't it's not gonna see it like I see it It would have to have like sensors up where my eyeballs are okay, right? And especially I'll move to the left lane a little bit to see what's going on over there, and I'll move back You know I'll move slightly to the left so that I could see past this line when you're Taking into account other people's stupidity the thing is once we get to a point where? Automated cars are ubiquitous then the argument for self-driving or driving yourself rather is going to be kind of shitty Because it's going to be so much better than driving like you're it's so much safer

You're not going to worry about ever being distracted by your phone You're not going to ever worry about you about dropping your drink in your lap and changing lanes and colliding with someone. You're not going to think about all those things because the car is going to be doing everything. And as good as it is now, it's way better than it used to be and it's going to be way better in a few years from now. It's like I do love driving though.

I love the pleasure of driving a car. It's not that I want to be in control. I enjoy it. It's like a ride. When I was a little kid, I remember thinking, boy, one day I'm going to be able to drive a car. That's like going to Disneyland every day. Because Disneyland, you're on a ride. There's some of these little race car rides in Disneyland.

They're silly in compared to a car. So you're on a ride. Well, I remember in 1983, I had gone to help my brother move. He had moved to Toronto for a year, and then he ended up moving to Southern California. And I was going with him to help him move, and he took a U-Haul truck, and I took his then, I think it was called an RX-7 Mazda.

Yeah. Do you remember those? Oh, yeah. OK. And it had the cruise control on it. Oh yeah. Which was the earliest manifestation. So I did it a bit on the highway

because we have to drive from Montreal to Toronto. Yeah, you just lay back. But I didn't, I wanted to be in control of, I didn't like being constrained by, it's on 110 kilometers. Right. I want to be able to adjust. Right. And so I played with

it for about 50 kilometers and then I turned it off and I never use it again. Well, now they have ones that judge the speed based on the distance between the car in front of you and you can change it. So it's like radar laser, I think it uses laser. So the laser determines how far ahead of you the car is and slows down So that you have an appropriate amount of stopping distance, right? They're pretty incredible now. Do you do you foresee? Have you heard of those? kind of flying Taxis that is this kind of Jefferson stuff or I think once we get really good at automating

Cars, why wouldn't you have automated flying vehicles? The real concern with flying vehicles is people getting in accidents in the sky and falling onto people's houses Which would happen. I mean think about how street takeovers where people drive like assholes on the street Imagine that happening in the sky walking your dog and you're dead. Yeah, you're walking dog and boom Car falls on you. That could happen. So is that an intractable problem that ends the project right there, or can you foresee?

No, automation. Automation changes all that. So with automation, you have a 3D perspective of everything around it. Everything around it has a 3D perspective of everything around it. And they're all moving in sync. So they all share information.

You're going to know where one is at every time, but you're not gonna be in control. You can't just dive bomb onto your ex-girlfriend's house. Right. You know, fuck you bitch, I wanna die. You can't, you know, it's like the worry about humans is human error or, you know, doing it on purpose, which is an error.

But you know, as someone who used to code in my computer science days, sometimes you forget the semicolon and the syntax of the programming language. You do, but it's gonna be coded by AI. It won't be coded by people. That's true. There's already, like people that are coding right now will tell you, don't go to school for coding.

Because it's a great thing to learn. So learn to code is now obsolete. Yeah, isn't that funny? Like learn to code. What was the learn to code thing would get you in trouble? Because someone had said it in regards to people losing menial jobs.

It was like, I think, in the coal industry. Yes. It was that. Yeah. You don't have to learn to code, which is a crazy thing to say. But it became a thing where it would get you kicked off of Twitter.

That's how suppressive. People don't understand how suppressive Twitter was. You get in trouble for writing learn to code. Like you couldn't mock people by saying that ridiculous thing that someone had said about coal miners. So can I take credit for having reintroduced the word into the lexicon? Did you? I think you are looking at the one who made the use of the word retard. Listen. No. No, I'm not. at the one who made the use of the word retard. Fool again.

Let me. Listen. No. No, I'm not gonna get credit. I never let it go. I never let it go. Cause I got banned from Twitter. Yeah, but everybody did.

Retards in quiet circles has always existed. It's like a smoldering ember that reunited to a flame. No, because now there's a skit that I do. Whenever I see somebody posting something Yeah, there are two levels. I retweet it and then I go are you retarded or if I'm really pissed Are you fucking retarded? And so now people are creating like memes t-shirts with me and retarded Some people have said my next book after my current one suicidal Suicidal Empathy, will be Are You Retarded?

So I feel as though, give me a bit of credit. I don't give you any credit. It's been going around. It's never died in comedian circles. We've kept it alive forever. It's just too good of a word. And also, it doesn't have anything to do with Down syndrome.

It has to do with a specific way of thinking. And just because some people, you know, oh, you're an ableist, that's not what it's about. I would never use that term if I was talking about someone who had Down syndrome. That's not how you use it. You use it when you're talking about someone who thinks the world is flat.

Right, you're an extreme idiot. That was like from my last comedy special, yeah. Instead of saying extreme idiot, yeah. There's a time and a place for certain words. That's why they exist. You don't eliminate words that make the world a better place. Are there any words that you've never used?

And I've got one. Go. No, that you've never used? Like I've never, I mean, obviously there's a million words in the lexicon that I haven't used just because, I mean, words that we know that we find too objectionable to use. Can you guess what mine would be?

What is it? It's the C word. Really? I've never used it. I don't like you mean I see you hang out in England more. I know that's not Your it's yeah, and yeah in my Australia he's a good cunt exactly. I don't like it. I get it Do you do you feel it? Do you see my reflex? There's a lot of power in that word, but the less you use it the more power it has. It's like the old Lenny Bruce bit.

Yeah, I think that is going to be a thing of the past too. I think technology is going to bring us to a point where we're going to be able to telepathically exchange ideas and it's going to be thought based. It's not going to be based on language and the problem with language, of course, you have objectable words, words that are used out of context, words that you see in print, you're lacking the sarcastic tone that the person set it in so you read it, you could reinterpret it as being a serious statement.

There's a lot of weird stuff with language because what we're really trying to do is communicate. It's a crude form of communication that only exists because telepathy is not good. You feel that we're going to one day be able to just, our conversation will just be we're looking at each other in the eyes. Yeah, yeah. I think so. What would be the material means by which that gets instantiated? How would we do that? Well, I think initially it would be technology. But what I think is it's an emerging aspect of human consciousness anyway.

I think we're getting better at it. I think ironically the thing that keeps us from it is technology, because what is the worst way to communicate with someone where you're not exactly sure what they're saying is text. Right. Like people misinterpret things in text messages all the time. One person is joking and the other person takes them seriously or one person doesn't understand that this person doesn't know about something else and they wrote something.

So there is, and I may have mentioned this before on the show, I can't remember, there is something to what you're saying, not quite telepathically, but so you know brain imaging. FMRI. FMRI, right? Yeah. So in FMRI, I put you through the machine and I'm able to look at which areas of your brain are getting more activated, either through blood flow

or oxygenation or whatever, right? So if I'm studying the psychology of fear-based appeals or advertising, well, I expect your amygdala to light up more because that's an emotional center where you expect fear to be processed, right? So there is some researchers, I think, out of UCLA, that took, I can't remember if it's like a sentence. So let's say eight different sentences.

I'm getting the methodology wrong, but the general idea is valid. And based on the activation pattern that they see, they're able to tell you which sentence would have been said by looking at the brain image. You understand what I'm saying? Yeah. Because each of those enunciated sentences

or things that I thought about will necessitate a different invoking of a particular region in my brain, right? And therefore, so I can't be to the point where I'm able to read your mind in the way that if you and I were having a telepathic conversation would happen, but at least I'm able to know if you just thought about something fearful or you thought about a house or and so now they're already doing that. So I think the analogy would be like this is the first grunts that ancient man developed to recognize particular things and to

point out things before they developed a written language that was eloquent like Thomas Jefferson. Right and yes. Like as it advances. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. So I've written two papers, I mean academic papers on the brain imaging paradigm. And I used a term that I first learned of from my doctoral professor. I did one of my minors in my PG was cognitive studies, studies of the brain. And his name is Frank Kyle. He's now a professor at Yale University. He called it the illusion of explanatory profundity. He was applying it to something else, but I apply it to brain imaging. Let me explain what I mean by that. There are studies that show that if you take the exact same paper and in one version you actually put an image of a brain imaging thing and

in the other version of the paper you don't do that and you ask people to judge what it's the exact same paper right but you put the one with the image people go oh this one is more scientific right of course the packaging matters because it just, showing the brain, which looks cool and science-y with all kinds of activation pattern, is science-y. This other paper, which is exactly the same paper, doesn't have it. It's not a science-y. So, hence, illusion of explanatory profundity. You're thinking that you're explaining something very profound, but it really is you don't

know what the hell you're talking about. So I think brain imaging so far has been very powerful as a diagnostic tool, because you could see things in vivo. You could actually see certain things that before you had to do an invasive surgery to see. But to be able to fully, like now there are neuro-marketing firms that tell you, that sell you, based on the activation patterns of your consumers, we can help you design better marketing campaigns. Bullshit.

Right. So they're over exaggerating the capabilities. This is a problem when Luddites sort of interpret what science is capable of and then try it based on that. Exactly. Do you know the story of and then try it based on that. Do you know the story of, I think it was in India, there was a woman who was convicted of murder because through fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imagery, she had a functional memory of the crime somehow or another. And the problem with, I talked to neuroscientists about that and they said the problem is like

she could have had that memory based on the evidence that was given to her when she was being tried. You would imagine that that would have a profound effect. If someone told you that you're being tried for murder and they showed you photos of the crime scene, you might develop a functional memory of this crime scene. We're trying to think like who the fuck did this? Why am I being blamed? We don't really have the capability of it. Another one is there was these Italian scientists that were actually tried and convicted because

they were liable of not telling people about an earthquake that took place. Because the people that were trying them did not understand that the science involved in predicting earthquakes is not exact. It's not like I know an earthquake is gonna happen Tuesday at noon or I know an earthquake is definitely even gonna happen. You don't know. It's just and because the fact that these people who didn't understand the science were trying them they wanted to pretend that these people were responsible for not alerting all these. I think they tried them for manslaughter and they were convicted and I think they won on

appeal. Wow. Yeah, see if you can find that story. That's interesting. It's a crazy story because actual people who are geologists are like, what the fuck are you doing? Yeah, seven year legal saga ends as Italian officials cleared of manslaughter and earthquake trial. Verdict files conviction of deputy for advice given ahead of La Quila earthquake.

Wow. Yeah. Crazy. Incredible. Crazy because you have a bunch of assholes that say you should have known we're going to take you to court. And like hey you fucking idiot you don't even know how this technology works and they don't have to know. Well, even on a much more basic level,

eyewitness testimony has been shown to be unbelievably unreliable. Unbelievably unreliable, yeah. The pioneer of that research, I give so many shout outs to people who become famous after hearing about me on the show. Elizabeth Loftus, who's a venerable psychologist at University of California Irvine, where I was for a few years, Elizabeth Loftus, who's a venerable psychologist

at University of California Irvine, where I was for a few years, she is the pioneer of having studied the inaccuracy of eyewitness testimony. And once you see her research, you shudder to think how many people have gone to the gas chamber, you know, because someone said, of course, I absolutely saw him. It was him. Oh, well, yeah. I mean, I've worked with Josh Dubin multiple times on the show to help people

get out of jail. This is Innocence Project? He was with the Innocence Project, and now he does this thing with Ike Perlmutter, and he's very involved in helping these people that have and there's a lot of them that are in jail either through eyewitness testimony or corrupt prosecutors or you know evidence was withheld or you know there's there's a ton of those cases. Are you a consumer of all the crime shows? No. Not at all? No. Why? Because there's bad vibes. I don't need that in my life. I'm aware of it enough. I mean I've paid

attention to enough of them. I've read enough books. I've read enough books on serial killers. I get it. You know what, as a psychologist, what interests me is, and you see it almost in every show. I like I don't know if you know the show it's called interrogation raw where the the whole our series is There's a case and now they bring in the guy and they're actually filming Interrogation that's happening and invariably in almost every case that I've watched It's the same dynamic. The guy who eventually is convicted

always thinks that he's smarter than these hick hillbilly cops that don't know anything. And seeing how the cops play them, how they really are amazing psychologists themselves to know how they're- Good cop, bad cop. The whole thing. And so I love watching that interaction

because the guy comes in and does his whole song and dance and he truly, because he's gotten away with it for much of his life. And then, you know, I'm just aw shucks, a stupid country boy who doesn't know what I'm talking about. We talked about this the other day too, that I think there's something going on as well,

that people that lie all the time, they don't recognize that people can tell that they're lying because they're not good at reading lying because they lie all the time. So they're not good at reading people because they live in this bullshit world of blinders where they're just trying to be charismatic and push forth some fake story. Like I can't like I watch this one where this woman hired an undercover police officer to kill her husband. I know this case. Yeah. And she goes into histrionics. Yes. And they all know that she did it. They're all aware. Ma'am, your husband was, oh, I can't believe it. She hugs the officer. It's like, wow, this is crazy to watch. How, how rewarding must it be to be that cop?

Oh my god, it's probably hilarious. You're like this crazy bitch. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Especially, fortunately, if you're dealing with a murder that didn't actually take place. So here's an incredible story about serendipity that relates to serial killers. So in 1989, I'm then with a girlfriend.

We're going to the Charlevoix region, which is in northern Quebec. It's about five, six hours north of Montreal by car, where it's very famous because the Beluga whales come there to mate, the white St. Lawrence whales. I don't know if you know them, but these beautiful, very rare whales, they're all white. And so we had gone up there and we end up at this inn

in the middle of Quebec countryside. And I walk in there, there's this tall American greeting me. I'm surprised. They speak English? He's speaking English to me. And so I put a book. That's crazy enough up there, right? Absolutely.

And so I have a book with me that I'm reading. At the time, I was thinking maybe I'll go into maybe forensic psychiatry, which would mean I would go to med school or I'd go into forensic psychology because I was very interested in criminology. But then I decided, I think rightly so, that it's too dark for me also as a career. And so I was reading a book titled Alone with the Devil,

which you could probably pull it up, which is a book that was written by a forensic psychiatrist out of LA County system, where he was the forensic psychiatrist who would interview many of the most famous serial killers that were running through LA County back then. The Angelo Bueno, the Hillstride Stranglers, the Night Stalker, all those insane ones

in Southern California. And so hence, along with the devil, meaning him sitting with the, okay. And as I put the book down, as this is the guy who's checking me into this kind of bed and breakfast place, he looks at it and he goes, oh, I know the author. And I'm thinking, how does this American guy who's in northern Quebec know this author who's a forensic psychiatrist in LA?

He goes, oh, I used to be a public defender in the LA County system. Then he met a woman who was a Quebecer and then they moved there together. And I used to work with this psychiatrist. And as we started talking, he goes, all I could tell you, so this is 1989, so I'm like a 23, 24 year old guy with long hair. And he goes, all I can, and I was telling him that I have a brother who was in Southern California so I always go see him and he goes all I can tell you is don't ever ever do something that gets you to go to LA County jail for even a night because if you piss off the cops they'll throw you in there and they just scream fresh fish out of water and then the guys will have their way with you.

And so I made sure to never drink and drive in LA County because I don't think I would have lasted 14 seconds. So anyways, let's hold on. Let me finish. Fast forward to 2013. I am in Lubbock, Texas. I've been invited to speak at the Life Sciences and Politics Conference. I'm the plenary speaker, and the political scientist who invited me there takes me out for a Texan barbecue. And as we're chatting, he goes, you know, I know you're from Quebec. You know, my father lives in Quebec. I said, your father, you're okay. Can I just take a guess who your father might

be? And I said, was your dad a public defender in the LA County system? He looks at me as though I'm like an oracle. He goes, yes, that's my dad. So imagine I meet a guy in 1989 Based on this book and he knows that guy fast forward many many years later I meet his son who just tells me oh my dad lives in Quebec I take a shot at throwing and it was that guy that I met in 1989. How is that for the metaphysics of life? That's nuts. It's a small world. That's weird. That's weird. There's certain things that are like, okay, what are we dealing with here? Like is this a simulation? Like what is this? Right. Have you seen the thing about the book from 1953 that talks about Elon wanting to go to Mars? Like a Warner von Braun? No. Have you seen this? Where's my phone? Yeah, Elon

tweeted it. You can find it. See, look, there's certain things where you go, come on. Just even the name Elon and Elon is going to take us to Mars. Sorry, you mean in 1953? There's a character. So here it is. This is in a Warner von Braun book. So Elon is the elected leader of the Martian government serving serving a five-year term. Elon and their cabinet administrator have laws enacted by two houses of parliament. Elon in Project Mars, a technical tale, is the name of the Martian leader and the connection between the character and Elon Musk led to speculation about Werner von Braun's influence on Musk's space exploration.

Okay, now. So this is a book from, I think it's 1953. Okay, you ready? Right, is that when he wrote it, Jamie? Hold on. It says 48, 49. See if you can find the tweet, that Elon's tweet, because Elon's tweet is hilarious.

Because like, how is this possible? Because he's like, this doesn't even make sense. This is so crazy. So I do have one non-sexy explanation that can explain this. Okay. One of his parents was a huge fan of that author, read that book, and in honor of that character,

actually called Elon Musk, Elon. Sure, that's great. But what are the odds that guy's gonna develop rockets? That's true. What are the odds that your little baby boy, who you're naming when he was one day old, is gonna develop? Yeah, that part. Like, a 1953 book, Mars Project, by Werner von Braun, says the leader of Mars shall be

called Elon. Someone pulled the original German manuscript out of the archives and debunked this myth only to confirm that von Braun did indeed predict he'd be called Elon. And Elon writes, how can this be real? It's kind of crazy. It's kind of crazy because the guy's literally obsessed with Mars and has created rockets that you can catch. Rockets that... Have you seen when Trump explains that? Yeah, it's hilarious. It's amazing what he can do with these rockets. It's nuts man. We're living in a very very strange time

What is this? This is Elon's dad? Elon's father named him after reading the book. It's common knowledge. Amazing Oh, okay. So that okay, so I'm a site side, but also part still worthy still still what are the odds? There's eight What are the odds? There's eight billion people on this fucking planet What are the odds that your kid who you named Elon because you read a book becomes the guy and Elon didn't even know about it? Wow, yeah thing with baron trump. Have you heard that? Oh, yeah Find that one that one's nuts too. That one's completely bizarre baron the young kid. Yeah, what is it? Well, he'll pull it up I don't want to fuck it up, but there's there's a few of those that make you wonder like

Is this a simulation is this real? I feel like there's aspects of it that are real trying to find the year There's a series of books from like I think it's the late 1800s or something. Yeah about yes It's 1900 here, but it's like a person named baron trump goes on these adventures Gets a Like a guy from Manhattan to be his like guide It's it's very strange. Wow very similar to like what see we can find what the synopsis Like what connects it to baron trump. It seems real weird. It's almost like Like the telepathy thing like someone in the past says I think something's gonna happen one day. I just get this feeling

This is Elon motherfuckers, you know what I mean? Like there's some I think there's some weird things about the potential futures and that might be also what we're seeing with this alien stuff I think this alien stuff might be the future. Have you how many times have you had you long on the show? Oh bunch of what was called book was called The Last President. Oh, ad blocker. The Last President. That's kind of crazy because if shit hits the fan in the aliens land, he is the last president.

In 1889 novel called Baron Trump's Marvelous Underground Journey was written by Inglesol Lockwood. He would go on to write another book called The Last President in 1900. This mystery which involves a Trump family, Nikola Tesla, time travel and dark forces. Wow. Dun dun dun. Castle called Castle Trump. So he's a falls the adventures of a young aristocrat aristocrat named Baron Trump living in a castle named Castle Trump, which is fucking crazy. The characters describe as intelligent, curious, and somewhat arrogant guided by his mentor Don. His mentor Don. Baron embarks on a

fantastical journeys including one to discover a magical portal in Russia. Oh oh, Putin connections confirmed. Jesus Christ. It's like, is this bullshit? Is life bullshit? Is life real? Wow. I think life's mostly real. But you know, this is the problem with the whole idea of simulation theory is that if

it's true, if there is a simulation and the simulation, if we develop technology where the simulation becomes indiscernible from reality itself Right, how will we know maybe we'll know from goofy clues like that like silly coding Easter eggs that God leaves behind I would love to know What was the mechanism by which for each of those stories that you came up with who came up with like right? Is it was it just a fan of one of those books who said wait a minute and right well the weird one is why is Werner von Braun writing fiction when he's a fucking Nazi why is it what in Nazi running NASA and before that he was writing fiction like what how's he have

time how's he have time to write fiction when this guy's the middle of developing rockets for the Germans yeah wow yeah amazing yeah sorry so what. So what are some of the things that you take away when you interact with Elon? Because I've gotten, I've been fortunate enough to get to know him a bit better now and so on, and I'm just amazed by what an amazing guy he is. What are some of your views? Well, he's just a fascinating human being.

Like if we didn't live in a time of Elon Musk and you were studying him in history, you'd be like, Jesus Christ, what was that guy like? That guy must have been insane. This guy's running five different companies simultaneously, trying to develop a Department of Government Efficiency at the same time. And like, he's a very unique human being that exists once every, who knows how many generations, if ever. and to think that there are so like when this Nazi salute thing came out. Mm-hmm. And of course, you know, I I debunked it and there's some way to it Because I happen to be Jewish and I know him

But do you really need me to come out with my imprimatur to say no, no, no People don't really believe he made a Nazi salute They want to believe so they say they believe because you can get him on that and he's on the defensive. It's an attack vector. Okay, so you don't think anybody who left. He thinks he's a fucking Nazi. He literally wears a thing around his neck

that says bring them all home about the hostages. Or did you see when he said, I think, I don't know if it was after Ben Shapiro when he went with him to, I think it was Auschwitz or something, and he said, I am Jew-ish. Yes. Yeah.

He's a fascinating human being, and all fascinating human beings, especially all people that are in incredible positions of power and wealth, which is what he is. You're going to get attacked. Yeah. And you get attacked by a lot of bad faith arguments. And this is one of them. Well, the last time I was in, in Austin, you know, we, we had, we had met up in person and but it was delayed our meeting because he ended up having to go to all sorts of depositions. And so he would be texting me and saying, Oh, I'm in this, I'm in this hellish deposition.

And then later when we met, he kind of told me a bit about it. I mean, I won't share some of the stuff, but I'm thinking, you know, if at my level, I get people coming after me, it's unimaginable to even think at what level, right? For me, it's a troll coming after me or an annoying academic or an Islamist who sends me a death threat. Okay for me. It's a troll coming after me or an annoying academic or an islamist who sends me a death threat

Okay, fine, but I mean he's getting governments attacking him. He's getting so it's but yet. He just keeps trucking along It's unbelievable. Well, I mean it really helps have 400 billion dollars That helps a lot, but you know if he didn't buy Twitter I think the world would be a far more fucked up place right now I think we would be far more confused far less free to express ourselves and the narrative the cultural narrative shifted because of People's ability to freely express themselves now on social media in front of everybody where you just didn't have that before well I I mean literally

Within few days of it being maybe even the same day of it being announced that he was buying it, I had put out a clip on my channel where I said, of all things that Elon Musk has ever done or will ever do, none will ever count as much as him having bought Twitter. If it didn't happen, you would have a complete cult-like takeover of all public discourse. All public discourse would be controlled by this ridiculous ideology, this woke ideology, this what you call a mind virus. And that mind virus would have been used by corporations

And it has been and used by government and it has been used in order to enact more control over its citizens under the guise of protecting marginalized people and protecting ideas It seems like they're doing the right thing and it seems like opposing that is doing the wrong thing But it's just a wolf in sheep's clothing. That's all it is. It's just control. It's just the government was...

They don't give a fuck about DEI. All they give a fuck about is votes and power and control. And if they can use DEI to get their way, and if they can use whatever green energy bullshit they're pushing, whatever they're doing. They're not doing it because they're trying to save you. That's nonsense. If you look at it from the perspective of this is to gain more power, more influence and make more money, then you'll see things more clearly.

So I've been asked in many different contexts, do you think that this is it? This is the end of all the parasitic stuff? And I keep imploring people to not be complacent. And not be complacent. Exactly, because sure, Donald Trump is a huge doorstop to all the insanity, but here's the analogy I like to draw. So you know how there's the evolution

of the super bug that comes about because of the misapplication of the antibiotic regimen. So what happens basically? I mean, it literally is a natural selection, right? So yeah, so because I'm supposed to take the antibiotics for five days, but I only take it for two days and I immediately feel a lot better. I stopped taking it. But what that has created is that the weak bacteria have died off, whereas the ones that have survived until that point have only become stronger. And through the misapplication of the prescription for antibiotics, I then contribute analogizing now with the woke mind virus. If you don't completely do the antibiotic regimen fully, which in this case means eradicating all those parasitic ideas everywhere, right?

Because it took 50 to 100 years for those bad ideas to originally be spawned and flourish in the university ecosystem. So you're not going to get rid of them in a four-year term with Donald Trump and we never see them again. So it has to be a continuous cultural war to eradicate those. Now you'd like to think that it won't take 50 to 100 years to eradicate them, but it's not going to start and end with Trump.

I'm thinking you agree with that. No, I definitely do agree with that. And I think that it's also you have to take into consideration, although Trump won and Trump is controlling the cabinet and all these different people are going to be able to do his agenda, you still have almost half the country that didn't vote for him. And people are always tribal.

And so they're going to be opposed to everything, even the good things that he's doing. They're going to find fault in it. Did you see the CBS interview with JD Vance? Just one clip. Fucking amazing. Oh, so I should watch the whole thing? Oh my God, it's a master class.

He just, he is impressive. He is so good. He is really good. He's so good. Has he been on your show? Yes, yeah, he's great. Thank God for that guy. He's so good at dismantling those dopey people

and just breaking down, like she was like, this is a country built on immigrants. He's like good at dismantling those dopey people and just breaking down, like she was like, this is a country built on immigrants. He's like, yes, that doesn't mean that 240 years later we have to have the dumbest immigration policy possible. Well, and so actually in my forthcoming book that I'm trying to wrap up now, Suicidal Empathy, I have a section where I talk about these kinds of immigration arguments

and I use something from cognitive psychology. It's called categorization theory How do you categorize something so when people say you're such a hypocrite God? You're an immigrant. Why are you railing against immigrants your buddy? Elon Musk is an immigrant and so then I usually give them the following analogy satirical analogy, but a valid one I say analogy, satirical analogy, but a valid one. I say, phyro the house cat is a feline, so is the male lion in the African jungle. They're both called feline, therefore I'm just as likely to want to snuggle when I go on a safari in Namibia next to the feline called the male lion.

No, I recognize that even though they're both called feline, there is a distinction between the two. I don't categorize them as an exemplar of the same identity. Whereas what these people play is, you're an immigrant, why do you rail against immigrants? So isn't it astonishing that you could have such shoddy thinking that you're unable to recognize what I just said?

It is, but it's again, it goes back to this tribal thing is that people don't want to admit that having an open border is going to let in terrorists. Because the previous administration, which was democratic, had essentially an open border policy. And it was based on this concept of empathy and you have sanctuary cities like New York and then as soon as the mayor opposes it well guess what he gets indicted like it's also transparent it's so crazy it's right in front of your face and so I don't understand what they're doing and you know there's a lot of arguments they're doing it for cheap labor they're doing it to get votes they're doing it

whatever they're doing you're making things less safe. And to oppose getting rid of cartel members and gang members and criminals and pedophiles and serial killers, to oppose getting rid of them and deporting them is just nuts. Well the perfect example of this kind of parasitic idea and suicidal empathy is that bishop that just spoke that kind of lecture. Oh yeah, yeah. Right? They're your dishwashers there.

But nobody's questioning that there might be lovely people. That doesn't take away from the fact that you shouldn't have an open border policy. Yeah. But she's so committed to empathy that she views any position contrary to complete capitulation of your border as non-empathetic. Right. And that is the perspective of the extreme leftists. Yeah.

And that's a cult-like perspective. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It doesn't make sense. What? It's not empathetic. It's certainly not empathetic to the people that are victims to those people. Right. Exactly.

Well, it's not empathetic to the, I think, 900 biological women who lost medals. Did you see that study? Yeah. No. Right? But what you're doing- And everyone's like, it's just a small amount. It's a small number?

No, it's not. Well, is 900 small? What would be a big number? Also, here's the big thing. There was not 900 10 years ago. Right. Okay? So what happened in 10 years and what happens 10 years from now?

Are we willing to have all female sports dominated by men? Who believe that they're women? That's crazy. That doesn't make any sense. Well in Canada, there was a 50 year old man who identified as a teenage girl. So he's competing in swimming events. I believe he was a professor as well. I satirize this in the parasitic mind

where I said that through trans gravity I Identify as much smaller weight than I really am and through trans ageism. I am an eight-year-old boy So I'm competing in the under eight judo competition Isn't it nuts and then that actually turned out to be true where people that's ridiculous I remember watched Dennis Prager on Bill Maher show a long time ago And he was talking about how men can menstruate. Next thing you're gonna be saying, men can menstruate, and the whole place goes nuts and screams and cheers,

like, what are you saying? Because this was quite a while ago. And now it's commonplace. It's commonplace. Commonplace to say men can menstruate. In fact, tampon Tim, Tim Walsh, the guy was trying, he was putting tampons in the men's room.

So at Concordia, which is my home university, right? I'm now at Northwood, but my home university, had last May a one-day symposium on menstrual equity, because menstruation is a human right. What the fuck does that mean? What does that mean, menstrual equity? How can you get men to menstruate? I'll send you privately, like literally.

It's a human right. It's a human right. It's a human right. Like, until that symposium, women had been stopped from menstruating in Canada. What does that mean? What does it mean? It's so crazy. Well, unfortunately for us in Canada, unlike you guys have the savior Trump, yes, Trudeau has resigned officially or won't be running the country for much longer, but we're much further down the woke abyss than you guys are.

Yeah. It's a cautionary tale. Yeah, exactly. So I think, yes, Pierre Poilier will be an obvious massive improvement over Trudeau. Is that how you say it? I mean, if you say it with a proper French accent, yeah, it's Poilier. Other people say it differently. What's the wrong that I say it. I mean if you say it with a proper French. I think that's what yeah Well, how other people say it differently. What's the wrong way to say it? Every other way that an American or English Canadian would say it. I've even heard people say like Paul Yvette. No, no, it's

Pauly yeah Paul Pauly. Yeah, yeah, Pierre Paul. Yeah. He's a very logical guy He was one of the things that was interesting Reporter questioned him on whether or not he aligns with Donald Trump in that there are two genders. And he said, well, if there's other genders, I'd like you to tell me what they are. That's beautiful. I'm open to, tell me what they are. That one was great. But of course, the classic one is the apple. The apple. Yeah. When he was eating an apple.

He's great. That was like straight out of a spaghetti western. Well, it seems like that's what your country needs and I hope it happens. I hope he wins. I hope there's some sort of a recognition that if America changes course and course corrects and America starts to thrive and do better, which I think it will, and gets the violent crime down and a lot of the issues down and prices down, and if all that stuff happens, I hope Canada comes to its senses and wakes up from this woke trance. I mean, I think it will, but it will be a longer auto correction. Yeah, unless you become the 51st state. Come on, join up. By the way, do you know that I posted a post on Twitter on X where I tagged Trump and I said, dear Donald Trump, look, can you invade Canada? It won't take more than four to six committed marines

or something like that, like really, to show how wimpy we are. And if you saw the tagging of Concordia that I got on X, because people were saying, you have a Canadian professor who is being treasonous and get How could a human being be so lacking in humor? This same thing is the Hitler thing with with Elon. It's like you're pretty so they don't really believe it No, it's an attack vector

They're just looking at is like I can go after him now and this is what this is one of the major problems with social media I said, it's like it's really good for that. It's really good for people to be shitty. And what we talked about, it's like it's the least connected form of discourse between human beings. It's so much shittier than verbal communication and what is eventually going to be telepathic communication is gonna far exceed that to the point where

you're not gonna have to wonder what a person thinks. You're gonna know what they think. You almost, I don't think I've seen you in many years ever engage anyone on X, right? No, I mean, occasionally I wanted to get Peter Hotez to debate with Bobby Kennedy because he was calling me a neo-fascist, it's a neo-fascist leanings. Like, I was like, this is so ridiculous. Like, I'll give a bunch of money to the charity of your choosing. charity of your oh yes, I remember I said I'll donate $100,000 You pick a charity debate him here explain what's going on if you're so smart and you're so correct come debate him and Nobody you know he didn't want to do it

It's just the whole thing is just like I don't like to do that because I don't like it's gonna sound very hippie I don't like negativity. I don't want to argue with anybody I don't even want to argue with people that I disagree with if I disagree with someone I'd like to have a discussion with them. I'd like to have a calm civil discussion with you I don't think things should be I think you should avoid personal attacks and all that stuff whenever possible I think it's bad for you. Is this something that you adhere to? Even in your personal relationships. Okay. Yeah, I don't argue be I'm not interested I don't I don't like bad vibes. I can disagree with someone and I that's I'll have people on the podcast

I disagree with I'm never mean to them. I never call them names and I don't I don't think it's good for you I don't think it's good. Even if I'm look I's good even if I'm look I'm good at it okay I'm a professional shit talker I could talk a lot of shit if I'd want to make fun of someone I can make fun of someone pretty easily I don't want to I don't want to not interested I mean I make fun in jokes I do stand up I make fun on podcasts we fuck around and joke around but in real life or in an communication with another person, I don't want it. I don't think it's necessary for you to have a full rich life.

I think it's junk food. I think it's essential, like you don't need to eat chips. Don't eat chips. Chips are killing you and Mountain Dew's killing you. Don't eat Mountain Dew. I think negativity is bad for everyone. I think it's bad for the person who pushes it out. It's bad for the person that receives it.

It's the reason why people don't like it being canceled. All these people are dumping on you. It's all this negativity and like, oh, and you feel terrible and they know you feel terrible. So they keep piling on. I think it's bad for them. I think it's bad for your soul. I think it's bad for your self-respect,

for how you view yourself as an evolved human being. Like that you want to do that to a person and go after them like that. I mean, the only exceptions are if someone's a criminal, someone's doing something like, you know, if you're the head of a pharmaceutical drug company that's pushing stuff on people, it's killing people and you know what it is and you're hiding it. If you're a person who's involved in the trafficking of, you know, underage sex workers or whatever. Whatever it is, it's evil.

You want to go after pure evil in the world? Okay, I get it. But most of what people do when they're really shitty to each other is like political disagreements or ideological disagreements. And it just, it shows your weakness as a person. Well, so I think it was Henry Kissinger who said this. He said, to your point, he said, never are the battles so fierce

as when the stakes are so low. So I think it speaks to your point, right? So people get all animated. I think it's also a lot of people that don't understand real conflict, right? I think people have a certain amount of anticipation, just being a human being, again, with this old operating system that we have. There's a certain amount of anticipation of an enemy

and of a threat and of a thing that you have to defeat. I think it's just a naturally built, it's naturally built into us, to the point where people become illogical, especially when they get super tribal. They're on a team. We're on a team, so we have to defeat the people on the other team. So you say horrible things about people on the other team on Twitter, and then people

retweet it and post it to you, and you feed off of it. I think it's a stupid way to communicate. I think it's a stupid way for human beings to think and behave, and I think it goes back to what I said before about ideas, that you not your ideas You cannot be your ideas if you want to talk about ideas just talk about what the ideas and what you think things should be and what this is what you think is going on and have and have respectful conversations with people to disagree and That's that's the best way to communicate. So that's just too hard to find. So I had one That's just too hard to find. So I had one negative interaction

that sat very badly with me after the fact, and I think we've now cleared it. So to your point about not going after someone, I mean, usually I'm a very affable guy and warm and the whole thing, but sometimes if somebody pisses me off, I just kind of- Call them a fucking retard.

Call them a fucking retard, but usually not someone that I know. It's just it's an egg. But even if it's a person that you don't know, there's a person on the other end of that. That's true. But usually if I call you a retard, it's because you've been kind of doing stuff. Right. Endlessly after me.

Right. So you don't punch a guy if he just slaps you one time, but if he slaps you 18 times, you're probably going to. Now you should punch him if he slaps you once. There you go. Because slaps usually lead to something else. There you go. Can't let a guy get away with a slap.

So I, you know, I, we're in Austin, so, there was a point where Lex Friedman was doing all the love will conquer everything stuff. And it was pissing me off because it was, in the context of let's say the Middle East, where I come from, where I know that love doesn't conquer all. And so that shtick was getting me angry. And so I kind of went after him,

not like in a mean way calling him names, but I said, you know, it's kind of infantile to think that love conquers everywhere or something. And then he got upset and then had blocked me. And that never sat well with me, not because he had blocked me, but because I don't like to have can you know

Maintaining a bad vibe with someone right right they kind of maintain it if you're still blocked if I'm still blocked and we still Blocked now. I don't know if I'm still blocked But you're still blocked. I don't maybe I don't think you unblocked you can't block people now Well, you can block people still you just can't see unblock people. I thought you can't block people now. Well, you can block people still. You just can still see those guys. Exactly. But to his credit, and I think mine,

we kind of kissed and made up. And he said, oh, if you ever come to Austin, I'm always happy to talk to you, and I'd love to, and I'm a fan of your work. And we haven't been able to connect. I'll connect you. Thank you. I'll connect you. So to your I'll connect you. But that makes, so to your point,

that made me feel better because there was like this negativity, even though I'd never met him and I don't know him, I don't like that there's a guy that exists that is in any way upset at something that I said about him. Right, right. He's not a Nazi, he's not a Islamist terrorist. I don't want that.

And so I take your point and I'm glad we patched, we cleared up. Haven't cleared it up yet with our mutual buddy. Oh yeah, that guy? The Malibu Meditator? Well, you know, he's on his own journey. But even, I've really toyed with just sending him an email, and it doesn't matter, like it's not like he's

in my close personal circle of friends, but I don't like having, so I wanna say, hey buddy, there's no hard feelings between, you think I should do it? Yeah, why not? Yeah, exactly. Yeah, it's not gonna hurt. I've had a conversation with him on the phone.

I think, you know, life is short. Life is short. It goes by very quickly, and like I said I think that stuff engaging in that stuff is just like eating junk food I don't think you should do it yeah don't think it's smart but less enjoyable than junk food of all the wonderful conversations we've had one of the pieces of advice that always rings in my head from Joe Rogan is, you read your effing comments? Are you insane?

Or something like that you had said to me. Because one time we were chatting and you said, I'm never. And I was upset. And so every time I almost feel like I'm falling into that trap where I'm starting to scroll, I go Joe Rogan and then I slide it. There's also a thing too where if someone writes something,

for some reason it seems more real than if they just say it to their friend. Yes. You know people talk shit all the time they say things and then they say I shouldn't have said that you know. Yeah. But when it's written down it's out there forever on the internet. Right. Which is really weird. Yeah. You know which is it's another aspect of it that's very strange. Earlier you were talking about stand-up comics. I can't remember exactly what you're saying, but I thought I'll have to tell him this guy. The funniest bit I've ever seen, of course you will know it, the bit with Bobby Lee and Brian Callan and another guy, I don't know

what his name is, where he's telling them that he was molested by a down single guy. Yes Brendan shop Yeah, so I've probably watched that ten times and there hasn't been a tedium in my laughter Like usually if you see a joke the fourth time is less funny So every time I go back to it and I watch it I laugh as much as the previous time. It's very ridiculous Yeah, but that's the beauty of podcasts is like you could never have something that ridiculous on like Saturday night live or on the Jimmy Kimmel show or any late night talk show It's like the only place that's no holds barred like that is podcast. Oh, that guy's really funny. Bobby's very funny He's very fun. It's I kind of got I first learned of him I saw him on

curb your enthusiasm where he was do you know do you know that he was on that? I didn't know he was on that. Yeah he's like a Korean bookie to Larry David or something and whatever some funny and he's speaking with a Korean accent so on and I thought oh who's this guy and then I discovered him and so I watched some of his stand-ups I mean some some of it is a bit harsh, but but he is he is funny. He's he's a good dude, too. And I saw him in with Bill Maher recently. And I'm sorry, no disrespect for Bill Maher, but I think Bobby Lee is a lot funnier than Bill Maher. But well, what do I know? I'm not a professional comedian. They're purely he's purely funny, whereas Bill Maher is very political

and opinionated. And he has that sort of antagonistic personal style of politics. And it's never just about ideas. It's a complete mockery of everything. It's a comedic bent on everything. Which everybody likes different things. Some people like that.

You've had him on the show? Yeah. Yeah, I've had him on. Yeah. A. You know, people like that. You've had them on the show. Yeah. Yeah, I've had them on. Yeah. A couple of times. I like them. It's just like I don't talk to people like that, though. And this is like as I've gotten older and wiser and had more experiences in life and thought about things more and more and more.

I've decided to engage in as little of that shit as possible. So it's interesting because you're interested in a sport that's all about combat and fighting, and yet you live by the motto of the exact opposite of that, which I wonder if many fighters might have that because they realize that their physicality is actually quite ominous. I want to live exactly the opposite of that in my personal engagements with people. They also realize like all that is extra energy. It's all just energy that you're giving out

to conversations online, arguing with people online, just bad energy. It's not a good use of energy, I should say. It's an improper use of energy. It's a waste. This is what I describe to people, and I'm sorry if you've heard this before. I say think of your mind as your mind has units of thought.

You have a hundred units that you can use and you're using 30 of them on social media arguing about stupid shit. Now you've deprived yourself of your music or your poetry or your art, whatever you do that you really like to do. You've deprived yourself of your access to your units of thought that can focus on this positive thing because you're spending time arguing about whatever the fuck it is,

whatever it is online, whatever it is, whatever. You're just, why? Why? So let's say, forgive me for asking an intrusive question, are you able to stick true to that motto as a fight is brewing with your wife?

Yeah, I don't argue with like that. I don't ever like I don't get mean ever never I don't I don't we don't even yell We'll talk about stuff. We'll disagree on stuff, but it never gets shitty. I don't think you should talk to people like that That are your friends. I don't think you should talk to your loved ones like that Yeah, I mean sometimes you have to tell your friend, hey, dude, you're being a fucking idiot. Like, you got to stop doing that. You're going to ruin your life. You're doing it for their benefit.

And sometimes you have to speak in harsh language just to let them know how you actually feel about what's happening. But for the most part, I don't think it's, I don't think it's good in any way, shape, or form. And if you're in one of those relationships where you yell at each other and throw things at each other and call each other the worst things possible and then make up Like well December 5th. I just celebrated 25 years congratulations. Thank you sir. How long have you?

Well, how long 15 15? Yeah, look, it's it's beautiful to be happy It's beautiful to be in a good relationship But like all things, like online communication, like interpersonal communication, it takes work. And you have to have a thought, like this is what I don't want out of my life. I don't want conflict. I don't want bullshit.

And I don't wanna be the cause of conflict. So you have to have your own shit together too. Some people, they don't want conflict, but they create it all the time by stupid decisions and bad behavior. and you gotta learn that too. So how do you are you able to completely do this when people are coming after you? People come after me all the time. I don't mean troll. I mean like people I know come after me all the time I ignore it. Right. I don't engage. Okay. Good luck. You can have

your opinions about me. Good luck. It's okay. Have fun. Enjoy your life. I I self assess all the time. I self audit my own behavior I'm my own worst critic right so things that other people that are saying about me whether Especially if they're inaccurate, it doesn't work. It doesn't affect me. I don't care right. I'm happy It doesn't affect me. I don't care right. I'm happy You are a model to live by sir. Well, I try but it's hard work It's not like this is an it's an easy thing to like to try to stay at peace all the time Do you ever work at it? Do you ever foresee? deciding

I've spoken to all the interesting people like it's yeah, there could be a point in time I don't want to do this anymore. But I think it would be more related to not wanting to be public anymore, not interested in having your thoughts out there in the world. It might come a point in time where I want to enter a different phase in my life

where I don't think about expressing myself publicly anymore. That could be, I could see that, where I'm thinking about just living my life, doing the things that I'm interested in, because I'm interested in a lot of things and I don't want to limit the amount of things that I'm exposed to that I'm interested in. What are some of the things that you're taking, you know, the ceramics course that you've always, you know, whatever, you know, what are some of the things that are? Oh, between like, I'm full of stuff. Between martial arts and comedy and archery

and playing pool and all the different things that I enjoy doing. When people tell me they're bored, I just don't understand. I don't understand how you can be bored. The world is so interesting. There's so many different things to learn. But by the way, what you just said is exactly why your podcast has been so successful because you exude, in French you say joie de vivre, right, a joy for living, and that

curiosity, that insatiable love of life that makes you open to all these other people who sit in this seat that you say, give it to me. And if you didn't have that quality, you could have had all the other qualities. If you didn't have that quality, I don't think your show would have been successful. You're probably right. So you're, no, but it's true. Yeah, no, I'm sure. Because I mean, a lot of people will tell, you know, they'll ask me, oh, you know, you

know, Joe, what, what's his secret? I said, there's no secret. He's a cool guy who wants to have cool conversations. I mean really. I think the secret is numbers too. It's putting in the numbers. I do a lot more podcasts than most people. So five days a week right? Four, mostly four, sometimes three, sometimes five. Okay. More threes than fives, but a bunch of fives. But the most important thing is just for 15 16 years It's like I just I've done it forever

And so in doing it for that long over the course of that immense amount of time talking to people You just get better at talking to people. It's like everything else you get better at it The more you do it and then you understand what sucks about what you're doing what percentage? I'm not asking you to give names or anything. What percentage of guests that come on your show the first time you've come to the realization that they're not good enough conversationalists to ever invite again? Well, it happens.

Yeah, it happens. I don't want to give a number, but it definitely happens happens It's like you don't know until you talk to someone and some people You could tell some people are bullshitting you and some people are pushing an agenda and some people just aren't that good at talking And they're not compelling and you can't drag anything out of them, you know, well, this would be a one-time conversation, right? Yeah, it happens. But thankfully, you know what you and I what is this? This art number 11 11 Wow I was gonna say 10 Wow, and I, what is this? Number 11. 11. Wow, I was gonna say 10. Wow. And I'll just say this.

I think my first time was 2014. Wow. We're 2025. 11 years, my friend. So that means we are on one show a year. Well, we just banged out. For many more years. Thank you, sir.

Thank you, sir. It's always a pleasure. You are such a joy. Always a pleasure. Appreciate you very much. Thanks. All right. Bye, everybody.