The Tim Ferriss Show - #796: L.A. Paul — On Becoming a Vampire, Whether or Not to Have Kids, Getting Incredible Mentorship for $250, Transformative Experiences, and More

Episode Date: February 20, 2025

L.A. Paul is the Millstone Family Professor of Philosophy and Professor of Cognitive Science at Yale University. She is also the author of Transformative Experience. Her work on transformative experience has been covered by The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, NPR, and the BBC, among others. And in 2024, she was profiled by The New Yorker. Sponsors:MUD\WTR energy-boosting coffee alternative—without the jitters: https://MUDWTR.com/Tim (between 15% and 43% off)Eight Sleep’s Pod 4 Ultra sleeping solution for dynamic cooling and heating: https://eightsleep.com/tim (save $350 on the Pod 4 Ultra)LinkedIn Ads, the go-to tool for B2B marketers and advertisers who want to drive brand awareness and generate leads: LinkedIn.com/TFS ($100 LinkedIn ad credit)Timestamps:00:00 Introduction 05:56 L. A. Paul's Journey into Philosophy09:55 Challenges in Studying Philosophy25:29 The Role of Philosophy in Modern Times27:50 Vampire Thought Experiment32:07 The Transformative Experience of Parenthood36:55 The Concept of Act-State Independence39:33 Philosophical Insights on Parenthood52:29 Personal Reflections on Choosing Parenthood56:37 From Chemistry to Philosophy: A Personal Journey01:01:14 Philosophical Literature Recommendations01:07:44 Exploring the Value of Analytic Philosophy01:08:29 Philosophical Insights from Movies01:08:46 Primer and La Jetée: A Deep Dive01:09:45 The Joy of Problem Solving01:10:37 Getting Started with Analytic Philosophy01:12:09 Philosophy Resources and Recommendations01:13:23 Addressing Nihilism and Finding Intellectual Companionship01:17:29 Philosophical Misrepresentations in Media01:20:18 Continental vs. Analytic Philosophy01:21:57 Philosophy's Role in Broader Applications01:26:31 Philosophy and Psychedelics01:32:55 Facing Cognitive Decline with Philosophy01:35:57 Final Thoughts and Upcoming Projects*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim’s email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim’s books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Well, hello, boys and girls, ladies and germs. This is Tim Ferriss. Welcome to another episode of the Tim Ferriss Show, where it is my job to deconstruct and investigate world-class performers in many different disciplines. My guest today is L.A. Paul. L.A. Paul is the Millstone Family Professor of Philosophy and Professor of Cognitive Science at Yale University,

where she leads the Self and Society Initiative for the Wu Tsai Institute. Her research explores questions about the nature of the self and decision-making in the metaphysics and cognitive science of time, cause and experience. Now that's a mouthful, but we also get into vampire thought experiments, how to decide or how to think about deciding whether or not to have a kid, that is children, and many other things you can apply to your own lives. Ellie Paul is also the recipient of fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation, the National

Humanities Center, and the Australian National University. She is the author of Transformative Experience, that's how I was introduced to her work, and co-author of Causation, a User's Guide, which was awarded the American Philosophical Association's Sanders Book Prize. Her work on transformative experience has been covered by the New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, NPR, and the BBC, among others. And in 2024, she was profiled by The New Yorker, which is also an amazing read that I recommend. She's currently working on a book about self-construction, transformative experience, humility, and fear of mental corruption. Fundamentally, this conversation focuses on how you can make decisions or think about making decisions where the person you are

now is not the same person you are afterwards. And the most resonant example of that is deciding whether or not to have children. So please enjoy a very wide ranging conversation with none other than LA Paul. But first, just a few quick words from our fine podcast sponsors and only maybe 15%, 20% at most of the people who want to be sponsors for the show become sponsors because I personally test and vet everything.

So with that said, please enjoy. Coffee, coffee, coffee, man, do I love a great cup of coffee. Sometimes too much, then I'll have two, three, four, five cups of coffee. I do not love the jitters that come from that or how even one really strong cup of coffee can impact my sleep, which I measure in all sorts of ways, which HRV and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But more recently, I have downshifted to something that feels good. I have been enjoying a more serene morning brew from this episode's sponsor, Mudwater. With only a fraction of the caffeine found in a cup of coffee, Mudwater gives me all the energy I need without the crash, without the fidgety crawling out of my skin kind of feeling. And it's delicious.

It tastes as if cacao and chai had a beautiful love child. I drink it in the morning and sometimes right now I'm exercising in the mountains and running around. Sometimes I'll also add some milk and ice for a 2pm. Maybe 1pm if I'm behaving. Iced latte pick me up type of thing. Mudwaters original blend contains four different types of mushrooms. Lion's mane for focus. Cordyceps to promote energy, I used to use that when I was competing in all

sorts of sports, and both Chaga and Reishi to support a healthy immune system. I also love that they make and have for a long time donations to support psychedelic therapeutics and research, including organizations like the Heroic Hearts Project, which I encourage people to check out, and the UC Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics. You, my dear listeners, can now try Mudwater with 15% off, plus a free rechargeable frother and free shipping by going to mudwater.com slash Tim. Now listen to the spelling, this is important.

That's M-U-D-W-T-R dot com slash Tim. So one more time, M-U-D slash tim for a free frother 15% off and a better morning routine. This episode is brought to you by 8 Sleep. Temperature is one of the main causes of poor sleep, and heat is my personal nemesis. I've suffered for decades, tossing and turning, throwing blankets off, pulling the back on, putting one leg on top, and repeating all of that ad nauseum. But now I am falling asleep in record time.

Why? Because I'm using a device that was recommended to me by friends called the PodCover by 8 Sleep. The PodCover fits on any mattress and allows you to adjust the temperature of your sleeping environment, providing the optimal temperature that gets you the best night's sleep. With the PodCover's dual zone temperature control, you and your partner can set your sides of the bed to as cool as 55 degrees or as hot as 110 degrees.

I think generally in my experience, my partners prefer the high side and I like to sleep very, very cool. So stop fighting, this helps. Based on your biometrics, environment, and sleep stages, the PodCover makes temperature adjustments throughout the night that limit wakeups and increase your percentage of deep sleep.

In addition to its best-in-class temperature regulation, the PodCover sensors also track your health and sleep metrics without the need to use a wearable. Conquer this winter season with the best in sleep tech and sleep at your perfect temperature. Many of my listeners in colder areas, sometimes that's me, enjoy warming up their bed after a freezing day. And if you have a partner, great, you can split the zones and you can sleep at your own ideal temperatures. It's easy. So get your best night's sleep.

Head to 8sleep.com slash Tim and use code TIM to get $350 off of the Pod 4 Ultra. They currently ship to the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Europe and Australia. Optimal minimal. At this altitude I can run flat out for a half mile before my hands start shaking. Can I answer your personal question? No, what is the appropriate time? What if I get the opposite? I'm a cybernetic organism living this year over a metal endoskeleton. So I am very interested in someone by the name of Quentin Smith and the role that he

played in your life. How did that connection happen and what was the result of that connection? So, I was at Antioch College. I had gotten my undergraduate degree, I think, or I was close to finishing. I can't quite remember exactly when I met him, but I was already thinking I wanted to study philosophy, but wasn't sure how to go about it because I don't have an undergraduate degree in philosophy. In fact, I tried twice to take philosophy classes and each time it was a huge disaster. I realized about three or four weeks into the class, it just wasn't

working for me. So I dropped out. I never managed to take a single philosophy class when I was in college. And yet don't ask me to explain this. I have no idea. I was convinced that philosophy was probably the thing that would be most meaningful ask me to explain this. I have no idea. I was convinced that philosophy was probably the thing that would be most meaningful for me to study and explore. I don't know what to tell you about that, other than I can be a reasonably stubborn individual in various ways, as my husband won't be happy to elaborate on.

So I thought I really want to study philosophy. I don't know how to do this or what the best way is. And there are lots of different kinds of philosophy I'll just add. So, you know, you can do kind of Western philosophy, Eastern philosophy. These are rough categories, you know, where so like Eastern might be nice to be Buddhism or related sorts of kind of faith-based philosophical views. And then within Western style philosophy, there are like sort of continental philosophy and analytic style philosophy, which is what I do anyway. So I didn't

even have a grasp of these distinctions, but I was committed. Okay. So I was needed to earn some money because, you know, I graduated and I was just sort of living, hanging out with friends of trying to figure out what my next step would be. So I worked for the college driving back and forth to the airport to pick up invited speakers. And Quentin Smith was an invited speaker. So I drive to the airport and I pick him up. I don't think I knew anything about him. Wasn't like I thought, oh, a philosopher, I wanna meet this person. It's just some random invitation.

He gets in the car. Yeah, some random pickup. Right, I picked him up. And he gets in the car and we started talking. And it's a long drive. I think it was like, I don't remember. I think he came into like Cincinnati. So we had like an hour and a half

and he asked me about myself and I asked him about him. and I discovered he's a philosopher. And then we start talking and say, Oh, I really would love philosophy and I really want to do it. But I don't really know how. And I don't know if the things I'm interested in are really philosophical. And he said, Well, tell me about it. And I said, Well, I really care about like how to understand who we are in the world. And I think a lot about time. And I'm trying to kind of make sense of what it's like to have kind of a point of view. And so I started just blabbing, you know, basically as I'm, I don't know how old I was, like 22 or something. And he said, as we're driving, he's like, you should study philosophy. You're exactly the

kind of person who would be interested in doing philosophy. And I said, well, what should I say? He said, well, you should read Martin Heidegger's Being in Time to start because that's all about the nature of the self and time. And I said, okay. And then we kept going, we kept talking. And I said, okay, I'm going to read this book. And then he said, well, I think you should read the book. And then he said, and I think you also should study with me. It was after like an hour, like an hour, because I told him, like, I had studied chemistry and I really loved problem solving. So I loved organic chemistry. And that's what I was really into when I was in college. And I was good at it, like, you know, I mean,

it was my thing, I could have become a chemist. I also drove him back from his talk, but I thought, okay, wow, so he goes off to have his visit, and I immediately go to the library, dig out being in time and start reading it, and I was like, this is fantastic, confusing, but really interesting. So then I drive him back, I tell him what I've gotten out

of like the first, I don't know, of like 10 pages I had written. It's very dense. It's like, you know, it took me forever to read it, but I managed to get through 10 pages. And he said, you should study with me. Here are my details. Let's figure this out. And so that was how it started. I didn't know anything about him, but he was so great to talk to and so responsive. And he understood, he understood the intellectual problems that I wanted to explore because he explores those intellectual problems. And I had never met anybody who had any understanding of this weird orientation that I had. I can tell you more, but that's how it happened. It was like

completely random. I'm going to come back to Quentin Smith, but I want to call back to something that you said a few minutes ago, which was you took some philosophy classes and paraphrasing here and they were Disasters why were those classes disasters? What didn't work? Nothing worked. I mean, okay So there were a combination of things and some of it was me and some of it was certainly the teachers So and also some of it was analytic philosophy can be extremely inaccessible Okay, it's a beautiful way of thinking, and it involves a very rigorous conceptual,

sort of concepts-oriented approach to thinking about almost anything that you wanna pick out in the world around us or how we think and how we make sense of the world. But it's not very accessible in the sense that it doesn't feel very natural. And so the first thing was I was both immature, very impressed with myself in the sense of like,

well, I'll just do this, you know. You know, I do mathematics, I do chemistry, I do physics. Of course I can do this. And I think I underestimated things. But also the teaching wasn't very good. I put myself through college and I started at a big state school and the class was huge and the professor wasn't really into the teaching and I had some TA. And so, you know, she would stand down there,

it was this huge, like there must have been 300 students in the lecture hall and she would stand down on this blackboard and scribble things on the blackboard and I could barely see it. And I didn't understand really what she was doing. I would do the readings and work really hard to understand the readings. The TA wasn't especially into his job either.

And then there was the first assignment. I worked incredibly hard on it, incredibly hard. And I had taken other classes, like writing classes and stuff like that. And the there was the first assignment. I worked incredibly hard on it, incredibly hard. And I had taken other classes, like writing classes and stuff like that. And the TA hated it. And I was so angry that I just dropped the class. I was like, I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. So I dropped the class. That was the first time. And part of it was like the class wasn't really designed. It was like designed, oh, these are the things you should know if you are going to think about philosophy is like a 101. And she started out with some history, but it just wasn't, it would, no one seemed to really care about like, how to take these abstract ideas and connect them to things that were meaningful in a certain way.

Like I care very much about the nature of how we live our lives, the kinds of struggles that individual people have. I'm fascinated by the fact that all of us have these internal worlds. And then there's some way in which we all have these internal worlds. And then these internal worlds have to kind of coexist with the external world. And we have to try to make sense of everything and, and try to understand other people. These are like deep puzzles for me. And it's not that analytic philosophy doesn't address this, but it doesn't address it in a straightforward way.

It was actually, it was Descartes that really like she started with. And that Descartes talks about the mind-body problem, but she didn't like make any connection to like these sorts of questions. It was just like, oh, the mind is different from the body and here are these questions and here's an analysis of what Descartes was saying and what the problem was. And so it wasn't a good experience. And then the second time I took a more applied class and this was a philosophy of law class and I tried this and this also didn't

go well. There's another thing which is that I may have mentioned I was a stubborn person. Well, I have views and I was committed to trying to kind of argue something that was kind of creative also with the first paper actually. I wanted to kind of give my own perspective. And I'm sure that it was raw and not especially good in various ways, but it wasn't stupid. Do you know what I mean?

And I got treated as though I was making a mistake by trying to kind of really engage in a very kind of open and creative way, as opposed to just kind of vomit back what I was being told. Okay. Now I'm not going to mention the schools I was at, they weren't, I mean, I put myself through school. I had to kind of apply, you know, so it was a mix of things that made it go badly and blame can be spread all around.

Anyway, that's what happened. All right. Thank you for answering that. Part of the reason I wanted to ask this is that many people listening will not know how philosophy applies to their lives or they have had similar experiences. They take a philosophy class and it's an hour and a half of trying to define what is, is and they're like, I don't know how this is relevant to my life. I'm out. And I would like to think of myself as a curious person, but I've had these experiences where it's like, okay, I'm interested in like the limits of our language, the limits of our world.

Let me get into Wittgenstein. I'm like, wow, cool family, but I cannot decipher this guy any which way from Sunday. And then I've had a few experiences that have brought things home. I won't make this into a soliloquy, but I remember taking a freshman class when I was undergrad at Princeton with Gideon Rosen. And I believe it was Introduction to Epistemology, something like that, which ended up itself as a course title none of us knew how to make any sense of. But he was so good at weaving stories together with the concepts that it was very compelling and very, very memorable to the extent that here I am, whatever it is,

25 plus years later, and I still remember the impact of that class. And I just wanna give credit where credit is due to a lovely Austrian woman who's now at HBS, Harvard Business School, who gave me a copy of your book, Transformative Experience, and that was my personal experience of reading some of the examples in that, which we'll get to, whether it be the cochlear implants

or some of the other thought experiments that we will certainly get into. I was like, okay, I can connect this to some real or hypothetical lived experience that I've had or might have. And that made at least all the difference for me. So I wanted to learn about the early failures because a lot of people listening are going to go, Oh God, conversation with a philosopher. This is going to turn into a bunch of intellectual masturbation. I'm not going to know what to do with it. Anyway. No, completely legit. Yes. You'll discover that the sentence snow is white is true if and only if snow is white. I mean, you know, come on. I mean, that's actually very important, but as a matter of,

I'm just going to give you a better background. Like, so I went to Princeton for my PhD. Amazingly, they let me in. I was this crazy person, okay, and then we could talk about that, but they let me in. And I was a TA teaching fellow for Gideon for that class. Oh, no kidding. Wow. Small world. I know exactly what you're talking about. Gideon is that class. Oh, no kidding. Wow. Small world. I know exactly what you're talking about.

Gideon is an amazing teacher. He's actually like one of the best people to talk to to get a sense of an idea and get it framed. And you can see immediately like what the main idea is, why it's important and what the problems are as well. Unbelievable teacher. I mean, the lectures were unreal. Yeah.

Totally fantastic. And so I think the teaching does really matter. And very few people are lucky enough to be introduced to philosophy by Gideon. But I think it's also the case independently of teaching ability or teaching focus that analytic philosophy is there's a sense in which, well, it's not unfair to call it a kind of intellectual masturbation in certain contexts, or it can seem like that or it can descend into that. I'm not gonna deny it at all. And I'm not gonna deny that I might also

kind of fall into that in various kinds of contexts when I'm hanging out with the right sorts of people. But I think it's also really important, you might have to cut that if I say I'm doing intellectual. Masturbation is always a bad thing. Exactly, it can be very rewarding, okay. So you don't have to cut it. Okay. I do think that because in a quest for kind of clarity and precision, sometimes if that's the

priority and I respect that as a priority, it can be easy to leave other things aside. But my approach is different. I mean, I do technical work on causation. I do collaborative work with computational cognitive scientists. Like there's plenty of stuff that's maybe a little bit less accessible than the transformative experience work. But there, because with that book and with the work I've been doing subsequently, I was returning to my roots. I was there wanting to do, I wanted to approach the topics that made me go into philosophy and that I find deeply meaningful. And I thought to do, I wanted to approach the topics that made me go into philosophy and that I find deeply meaningful. And I thought, well, I have to pair the search for rigor with accessibility. And maybe some of it comes from my father, because my father,

see, you're getting personal stuff now. I can't believe I'm telling you about my father. It's like you're my philosophy therapist. So- That's my side hustle. It's like you're my philosophy therapist. So. That's my side hustle. You know, whatever it takes. So my dad always felt that, like he liked to read pop science and he always felt like it was really important

that people learned about the kinds of intellectual education, like the kinds of intellectual activities that people did. He was fascinated by astronomy in particular and the nature of the universe and physics generally. And so there was a part of me that thought, well, I have to pair a search for precision with a way of developing the ideas that would capture the content in an intuitive way.

And partly it's because when you're trying to do something new and I am trying to do something new and I was trying to do something new, you have to be guided by a kind of gut instinct and understanding that it's right. Because I think if you haven't got that gut instinct, it's really easy to lose track. So the thought is, well, if I'm going to do this, approach this topic, I have to approach it in a way that kind of follows, like that I deeply intuitively grasp. And then I, especially when I'm confused, I can kind of reach back to that I deeply intuitively grasp. And then I, especially when I'm confused, I can kind of reach back to that.

And if it's really right, I should be able to explain it to somebody without a technical apparatus. But then I should also be able to embed it in that technical apparatus and use that to draw the consequences in an especially precise and interesting and rewarding way, and then take it back to the intuition.

And that is what I have tried to do. I'm happy with my results. I'm not going to promote myself, but I think that's been my goal. That is my goal. It's incredibly hard. Well, that's true. I guess that's what people do. No, it's incredibly hard to do that, try to capture these ideas. So that's the take. And I think I've been so happy because people seem to get it. It seems to be. It resonates. And I looked at some of my, yeah, it resonates. And I looked at some been so happy because people seem to get it. Like it seems to be. It resonates. And I looked at some of my, yeah, it resonates. And I looked at some of my philosophical heroes, which would be Thomas Nagel, Saul Kripke, because these are people in the field who have really managed to develop things.

And also, nevermind my early failure to appreciate Descartes later on, like Descartes and Hume, all of these philosophers, there's a way to understand their work using very simple examples that brings out the heart of it. Actually, Gideon was really good at that, like teaching Hume, for example. He just really could bring that out. So I was like, okay, this is what I can do. This is what I'm going to do, or at least I'm going to try. So I promised I would come back to Quentin, and I feel like this is a decent enough place as any to try to figure out how you have landed where you are and also how you think about different decisions.

So I'm going to read something from the New Yorker profile and then I want to unpack a little bit. So this won't take too, too long. It's just a few lines. Smith suggested that Paul read widely and reach out to philosophers whose work intrigued her. Perhaps he said they would agree to correspond with her for a modest sum. A letter writing campaign resulted in a sort of pedagogical supervision by mail with three of them. Paul

offered each a $250 personal check and asked if they would reply to letters about her work, as well as comment on a paper of her own. They agreed to correspond with her. She now suspects, quote, not quite knowing what they were signing up for, end quote. Every two weeks for many months, Paul mailed at least 20 typewritten pages to each philosopher attempting to dissect their arguments one by one they responded to all of your letters and By the end of the experiment you felt more sure yourself. Obviously I'm paraphrasing the last few lines There's so much here in this paragraph I'll throw these out and then you can answer them in any particular order you like

There's so much here in this paragraph. I'll throw these out and then you can answer them in any particular order you'd like. One is, did they actually take your check or did you make the offer and then they not take the check but correspond with you? The second is, how did you choose the people you reached out to? Like what drove the selection?

I offered to pay them and they all said yes. And then at the end, I said, okay, I'm going to send you the check and only one person took it. And I don't want to out that person because that person was also very supportive to me in my later career and they earned their $250. Yeah, it's also a deal is a deal. Like there's nothing wrong with taking it. I had no problem with it. I was surprised that the other two didn't.

Like their per hour labor on that one was probably pretty low. I know, exactly. Exactly. I mean, and I took out student loans to do all this and I had earmarked that money. It was all fine. I didn't object. I paid Antioch College much more or Antioch University at the time, much more than that amount. That degree was like, I just basically, I paid them money so that it was official, but the people who really did the work didn't make anything. So. How did you choose those particular people to write to? And how many did you write to to get the three to actually bite? Oh, everybody said yes.

Everybody said yes. I have a science background. I was very interested in the nature of time. And I had been working with Quentin on the philosophy of time. So Quentin was a very unusual philosopher in terms of his training and his intellectual discipline and what he worked on a variety of things. He didn't fit into the mainstream philosophy. And that was actually great for me because I didn't fit in either. And he was open to that and he helped me. So I talked to Quentin. He said, well, I needed some kind of degree in philosophy and some kind of paper to apply to PhD programs. So the thought was I'm gonna,

Antioch College had this basically a degree by mail where you could get an individualized master of arts. You pay the university some enormous amount, it wasn't that much, but seemed like a lot to me. And then you had to kind of do your own thing. And as long as you did your own thing, you would get this master's degree. Pretty sweet business model.

So I was like, okay, sign me up. Yeah, exactly. I mean, there were a few other things. You had to have some, like a professor had to sign off or whatever, but Quentin signed off on everything. So he said, well, okay, you want to do some course equivalence. Why don't you do something philosophy of time? I have this friend, he does philosophy of time.

He'd work with you. He'd be great. And I said, great. So that was straightforward. And then he said, well, how about, I wanna choose some female philosophers because there's hardly any. I'd like to work with some women. And so I went to the bookstore

and looked at the philosophy section and I found two books, recent books by female philosophers, one in philosophy of mind and one in philosophy of science. And I said, what about these two? And he said, okay, great, write to them. And I wrote to another person as well who did logic and I was gonna work with her as well, but I did not have the background.

It became clear because I didn't have, like logic requires, she's a very sophisticated logician and she would want me to do something at the graduate level for this. And I'd never even taken basic logic. So that was like kind of a no-go, but it didn't matter. But the other two immediately said yes. And the plan was for me, and all of them had recent books. So I just worked through their books

chapter by chapter and like just worked like crazy. It just strikes me as a very deliberately or accidentally smart way to approach things by going through someone's book, right? I mean, on one hand, you're kind of flattering them by going through it so seriously. And then secondly, benefiting from getting their clarification, stress testing your own interpretations and maybe criticisms. Oh yeah. I would read a chapter and I'd be like,

but what about this? And this seems wrong to me and I can't understand this. I don't know why you did that. And I don't have any of that material anymore. I'm sure some of it was the kind of like was raw, you know, like kind of dumb question material. But I think some of it was not kind of like was raw, you know, like kind of dumb question material, but I think some of it was not bad. Like I did think it through really, really carefully

and I'm, you know, reasonably intelligent. And so I think I was able to come up with an interesting kind of challenging 20 page discussion of their chapter. So they would write back to me these long, and their letters back to me were always very long, like at least 10 pages sometimes more. It's incredible.

What is the role of philosophy in our modern times? I'm just gonna use this moment to give a shout out to Agnes Callard who you should absolutely interview. Who has a book on this. Oh, I have questions about her as well. Yeah. And I mean, I think there are lots of roles for philosophy and And there's the question is like, what is it in general? And then what part of it am I interested in, in particular in my career? And I mean, I think philosophy plays a lot

of different roles in particular, like its most basic role is really to teach you how to think about things. And that involves, this goes back to analytics philosophy's weirdness. You can't think about something unless you have some kind of conceptual framework for it. You know, you've got to be able to like provide some structure to your thoughts in order to, you know, something like, okay, what are you going to take as fundamental? What do you take the framework to be here? What does

this apply to? What do my terms mean? And even just doing that can teach you an awful lot about something. So I wanted to think about like the nature of time and how the mind embeds itself in the world and how we understand ourselves as selves in time. And to do that in a productive way, I absolutely had to like learn a bunch of stuff about what does identity through time mean? Like what even is time? What do you mean by a point of view? Like what's so important about the way that we experience ourselves in time?

Lots of stuff. And so the primary goal, I think, of philosophy is to kind of teach you how to think about these things. But there are lots of other important things. Like I teach a class here at Yale that I think of as sort of like philosophy of mind for computer scientists, cognitive scientists, neuroscientists, as well as philosophy majors, because it's all about showing how really interesting kinds of philosophical concepts are coming up all the time now with like artificial intelligence and all the questions about like, what it means for a machine, you know, could a machine be intelligent? Do LLMs have any kind of knowledge?

What is chain of thought reasoning? Why is this helpful? All kinds of things that really actually, if it's framed the right way, people see are super relevant to the work that they're doing. Even engineers who don't tend to be especially philosophically inclined as a group. No shade on engineers. It's just like, you know, people have their preferences. I mean, I think that's the most basic thing. I also think the role of philosophy is to kind of uncover or discover some of the most fundamental truths about both human beings and about the

nature of the world. And that's a beautiful thing to be able to study. Like it's so incredible to be able to spend my time thinking about these things. Pete Slauson Vampires. How do vampires fit into your life and why do they fit in to your writing? Julie Peltz Oh, vampires. I love vampires. So many ways they fit in. So, my favorite thought experiment involves vampires because I like to use it to illustrate the concept of transformative experience. Maybe just because I like to use it to illustrate the concept of transformative experience. Maybe just because I like vampires so much,

I think it's an especially good way to kind of illustrate the concept. And also because it's not a real life, I don't think vampires are real. And the beautiful thing about a thought experiment is you can design it the way that you want to kind of illustrate the structure of a concept, but then I also think that the structure of that concept

then fits to real life cases. So my example, I'm just going to tell you. So the way that I think about this is I imagine, or you imagine, I ask you to imagine, traveling through some part of, you know, on your summer vacations, traveling through some part of Europe and you decide to explore a castle, you're in Romania, let's say, and you go down to the dungeons and Dracula comes to you and he says, I want to make you one of my own. I'm going to give you a one-time only chance. You could become one of my followers.

It'll be painless. You'll enjoy it, in fact, but this is a one-time only chance and it's irreversible. And then he says, go back to your Airbnb and think about it until midnight. And if you choose to accept my offer, leave your window open. And if you choose to decline it, leave your window shut and leave and never come back. So I see this as a really interesting possibility because, you know, vampires are sexy, they look great in black. They have amazing powers.

They probably have different kinds of sense perception. Yeah. Virtually. I mean, as long as they stay away from virtually, virtually, they have some things, they have to check off. Yeah, exactly. Like there are certain, certain, certain obstacles, but in general, yeah, for all, for all intents and purposes, immortal. And so this seems pretty cool, but they're not human.

You'd have to exit the human race. You have to sleep in a coffin. You can't enjoy the sunshine anymore, you have to sleep in a coffin, you can't enjoy the sunshine anymore, and you have to drink blood. And I try to separate out some of the ethical questions. So let's say it's artificial blood or the blood of humanely raised farm animals or something like that. Still, right now, as a human, I think there's something-

Coffin's pretty cozy. It's got some memory for a minute. Yeah, coffins reasonable. I mean, reasonably. I don't know. I mean, I don't know. I'm not, okay, it's lined with satin, but it still might be a bit hard for my mattress preferences. But the idea is that these things, while they seem interesting, they also seem kind of alien,

right? And I think in particular, not only will you have to drink blood, but you will love the taste of it. Like you will thirst for it, right? And even ethical vampires have to kind of keep themselves from like sucking the blood of their human compatriots. So that's quite alien. And I wanted to kind of bring out how the possibility of becoming another kind of individual can seem incredibly alien. Because obviously I take it that most

of us don't enjoy or thirst after the taste of blood or think about the different varietals like it'd be some kind of fancy wine. But if you became a vampire, you would. Okay. So the way that I think about it then is I continue the story and it's like, okay, so you rush back to your Airbnb and you start calling people or texting them, telling them about what happened to you. And you find out that a bunch of your friends have already become vampires. So then you immediately want to find out, well, wait, tell me about what it's like. Like, what's it like to be a vampire? Do you like it? Should I do it? And they tell you that they love it and it's fabulous and it's totally incredible. But they also tell you, you can't

possibly understand what it's like to be a vampire as a mere human. They say life has meaning, it has a kind of purpose that, you know, is exquisite, but until you become a vampire, you can't possibly understand it and you lack the capacity. So you're like, okay, thanks. So what do I do? Because if you can't possibly understand what it's like to be a vampire, then you either have to do it just because all of your friends do it

and they say it's great and they tell you they think it would be great for you, but there's no way you can actually kind of conceive of what it would be like to do that. And it, I'm sure it hasn't escaped your thought. It certainly didn't escape my imaginings that, well, maybe there's something about being a vampire that makes you really happy to be a vampire.

So maybe like when you become this other species, there's some kind of biological evolutionary thing that makes you really glad that you're a vampire. Right. So it's not even clear what their testimony applies. Okay. So that's my example.

And my favorite application is to becoming a parent because speaking as someone who wasn't quite clear about whether they wanted to have children. I have two children and I love them very much and I'm very happy, but there's something about becoming a parent that makes you like producing the child that you actually produce that makes you very, I mean, I love my children. I wouldn't exchange them for anything else in the world. You know, if I'd gotten pregnant a month later, I would have loved that child too. But there's no way that I would exchange my current child for the child I could have had.

You just get incredibly attached to these children in a completely legitimate way. And you know, you would never change what you've done. And that's awfully like the testimony that you get from vampires. Okay, so I think, also you don't get, you stay up a lot at night, right? There are many similarities. Vampires kind of illustrate the possibility of undergoing a transformative experience,

like a life-changing, something that's life-changing, but also where you change the kind of mind you have in a certain way, or what you care about most in a certain way, that means that you would make yourself into a kind of alien version of yourself, like someone who's alien to you now and who you might not even wanna be now, even if once you become that person

or that version of yourself, you're super happy. If I had some kind of modal scope and I could look at my future self, I could have looked at my future self before I decided I wanted to have kids. I got up at 4 a.m. every day for years to write before my children woke up. I mean, no one ever told me that that was something I would want to do and if they had told me I would have denied it strenuously because I could barely get up before noon when I was a graduate student. And I did it willingly. Something happened. I was clearly a victim of some kind of Stockholm syndrome. So the thought is that when you face a certain

kind of transformative experience, and I don't think it's just having a child, I think, like deciding to go to war or maybe moving to an entirely different country, maybe getting some kind of, if you're diagnosed with some kind of disease and getting some kind of like radically experimental treatment, there are lots of things that can count as transformative. But if you don't know what it's gonna be like on the other side of that experience, and you know it's gonna make you into a version of yourself that right now you find alien,

I don't know how we're supposed to make that decision if it's up to us. We can't use the ordinary models that we use for rational decision making because those assume that you can see through the options to assign them value and model them for yourself and choose in a way that's going to, as you say it, we say it in a technical way, maximize your expected value.

And if you can't assign value and you can't really understand what it's like to be this kind of a self, then that procedure just doesn't work. Tell me if I'm off base here, but also fundamentally, even if you were trying to calculate or maximize your expected value and assign these different values, you're doing it from the perspective of your current version of yourself and your current preferences. And after you become a vampire or after you have a kid, you may be a different person

with different preferences. So do you make the decision based on the preferences of your current self or the preferences of your expected future self? There's a way of capturing the puzzle, as you said. So given the fact that these are new kinds of experiences, so a kind of experience you've never had before, and I compare this to like Mary growing up

in a black and white room and seeing color for the first time, or Thomas Nagel talking about like, you can't understand like for a bat what it's like for a bat to be a bat. Yeah, exactly. So there are these like new kinds of experiences that are just very different from any kind of experience we've had before. And so that means there's just a sense in which we can't kind of from the inside kind of imagine what they're like, even if someone can describe, try to describe to me like what it's like to see red and you see the

problem right away. We just don't like language just kind of gives out if I haven't seen red before. I have no color vision. Okay, so there's a sense in which we kind of can't see through a certain kind of veil and across that veil, the self that we're going to be the kind of person that you're going to realize is just like really different. So you can't just assume you're going to be, the kind of person that you're going to realize is just like really different. So you can't just assume you're going to be basically the same. This puts us into the situation where you're making a choice for your future self and that future self might have preferences that are super different from your current self. And by definition, and this breaks, so now here's a little technical bit.

So we talked about the intuitive idea. I find it easy to understand when I think about someone who doesn't, maybe doesn't want to have a child or really is unsure. And they know that if they choose to have a child, they're going to be super happy with that result, but they don't trust the fact that in virtue of like becoming a parent, it's going to kind of rewire them

and their preferences in a certain way, right? Sure, I'll be really happy, but I don't know if I want to be that self right now, given who I am now. And I can't understand in a really deep way what it's going to be like to have that child. So I have to kind of, you know, leap over the abyss or leap into the abyss, I guess, if I want to do it. So if you find yourself in that situation, what you're confronting involves what I describe as a violation of act-state independence, okay? So here's the technical part comes. You've got the intuitive idea. Act-state independence involves very roughly

a distinction between the act that you're performing and the state that you're in, or that's how I'm gonna interpret it here. There are different ways to interpret it, but this is the way to do it here. And so normally when you're confronted with, oh, do I want to do something? Do I want to try this kind of ice cream or do I want to have this cup of coffee? You don't change in the process of trying it.

So after you do it, you can kind of assess, oh, I liked it. Oh, it was good. That's meaningful to you beforehand because you know that you're going to stay constant through the change in your circumstances, like tasting the new kind of ice cream. But in this case, having the experience, let's say tasting the new kind of ice cream, was going to rework your flavor profile so that you would just like a whole bunch of different things after that. Well, that changes the state that you're in at the same time. And so your act and your state are not independent. And if you break that, that's an axiom for rational choice theory. That has to be a foundational element of the model to make straightforward inferences.

There are all kinds of fancy things you have to do if that breaks. And these cases of transformative experience and decision-making are precisely cases in which that breaks. Just a quick thanks to one of our sponsors and we'll be right back to the show. As many of you know out there, I shave my head once every week, every 10 days, and yet, I am constantly being served ads for hair products. This is one of many examples of mis-targeting. This is proof that one of the hardest parts about marketing is reaching the right audience. And if you don't, it's wasted effort planning, not to mention dollars. So if you want to reach the right audience for your B2B campaigns,

try LinkedIn ads, this episode's sponsor. LinkedIn has grown to a network of more than 1 billion professionals, and it stands apart from other ad buys in a number of ways. You can really fine tune and target your buyers by job title, industry, company role, seniority, skills, and company revenue.

It's easy to find all of the professionals you need to reach in one place, one platform. So stop wasting budget on the wrong audiences and start targeting the right ones on LinkedIn ads. LinkedIn will even give you a $100 credit on your next campaign so you can try it for yourself. Just go to LinkedIn.com slash TFS. That's linkedin.com slash TFS terms and conditions apply I want to Make a few references and read something here. The first is I have to say if this philosophy thing doesn't work out for you

you should be a copywriter for Madison Avenue because He transformative experience grew out of, as I understand it, a working paper titled, What You Can't Expect When You're Expecting. That's pretty clever. I have to give you that. That is very, very clever. And I want to read just a paragraph from Alice Gregory.

This is again from the New Yorker piece, which I think underscores a lot of angst that sort of modern and well-educated folks have, particularly women, I would think. And here we go. All right. This is from the piece. When I approached Paul about the possibility of a profile, I was in the spirit of self-help. I was 31 and obsessed with whether or not I should have a child. The question felt huge and opaque, like one that neither data nor anecdote could solve. I thought about it all the time, though, quote unquote, thinking is probably too precise a verb. It was more like a constant buzz scoring the background of daily life in a tone that registered somewhere between urgency and tedium. She's a very good writer. The bad parts were easy to picture, less time,

less sleep, less money. The awesome parts, expelling a new person out of my own body, say were quite literally inconceivable. The dilemma felt impossible, as if I were attempting to convert dollars into the currency of a country that didn't yet exist." So I think that really does a brilliant job of putting into words what a lot of people feel. So if you can't, as one of my friends, I don't want to name him, but a very, very successful chess competitor said, you can't always calculate to mate, meaning that you can't make a plan

from move one to the end of the game. And then in your opponent's third move, they do something unexpected. This whole calculate to mate doesn't work. Now there are some situations perhaps in which you can do that. You can reverse engineer and plot out step by step how you might achieve something and kind of execute to plan. But then you have these transformative experiences. And I suppose I'm wondering and God, you must get sick of people asking this, but what do you do given the difficulty and the different nature of these types of decisions? How do you approach it? Because in some of the reading I've done, because I don't have kids, I would like to have kids, I would like

to hit some prereqs first before I do that. But there are some things, say moving to a different country, which in most instances are going to be reversible. So yes, it could be transformative, but you could move back to your country of origin. Having a kid, less so, right? And I'm curious what advice you give to people when they come to you wringing their hands and say, well, how do I do it then? Because you could make the argument that you can ascribe a value to the learning and transformation itself of leaping into the abyss with a transformative experience. But then it strikes me that you would always, you'd be at the risk of always being biased towards action, right?

Doing the thing that could potentially be transformative and then what do you do? Oh yeah. Well, things are not always good when you're like transformation does not entail. There's a kind of popular conception of transformative experience involving a kind of epiphany and that kind of thing. And that can happen for sure. But the way I'm talking about transformative experience, it's not always like that. Remember that whole thing about like you suffer.

I mean, you kind of don't mind it, but you certainly suffer. This is an aside, but I specialize in asides, please. I live part of my time in New York and part of my time in New Haven. And in New York, the neighborhood I live in is kind of a funky neighborhood. And I've toyed with the possibility of like on Sundays, hanging out my shingle and being like, I specialize in transformative experiences, big life choices, you know, you could book time with me to discuss your philosophical life choice if you'd like. So I feel like you need a desk in Prospect Park. Exactly. I mean, in the neighborhood I live in, this

would not be an unusual type of thing, Brooklyn, you know. And that's by way of saying, and I thought about it and I thought, well, I'm not going to be able to give people any answers. I'll just be able to sort of talk to them about like the conceptual framework for that choice. And if that's of interest, not clear to me that would be of interest, then maybe I have a possible side gig. I really what I'm saying is that, all right, I'm much better at raising questions than answering them. I do have a view.

I don't think very many people like my view, but I'm gonna tell you my view. I still like my view. Well, I don't like my view. I just think it's like, I haven't come across anything better, which isn't exactly the space you wanna be in. So what I really think is that

it's a special class of experiences. It's not like every experience is transformative. I really don't think we could talk about the reason why that's the case. I think there's a fairly well-defined class of certain kinds of life experiences that can count as transformative, not for everyone, but for many people that undergo them. And I think what's really important is to recognize how problematic they are, that they don't fit the ordinary framework. Because people, like Alice talks about, she agonized, I agonized. And for me, I was really

annoyed because I agonized and I didn't get anywhere. And then I had a baby and I was like, oh, none of the things I was reading, which is why what you can't expect when you're expecting, is so satisfying because I hated what you could expect when you're expecting. It was the worst book ever. It answered no questions for me whatsoever. None of it addressed what I wanted to know. And so it was like an insult on top of everything else, right? Okay, I'm sorry. I apologize preemptively to everyone who found that book,

a wonderful book. It wasn't for me. Alice talked about in the article how there was this moment when I was like starting to go into labor and it was like, oh my God, this enormous thing has to come out of me. How's that going to happen? Like I knew theoretically that that was going to happen, but it's presented to you in a very personal way, in a very intimate way when you go into labor. And I just discovered the reality of

it in a special way. What I'm trying to say is that I want my work to sort of help people realize that this kind of agonizing is actually completely reasonable because there isn't any easy answer and we don't have a framework. And when there's something kind of almost inconceivable that's happening, then it's a bit like, as I said earlier, like you step off the ledge into the deep and flailing might be the only response. And I also think this is just part of what it is to live a life and to be human. And you can, it's perfectly legitimate

to pass on transformative experiences, but part of living a life and being open to possibilities involves choosing some of them, but for most people. And also things happen to us that are like this, that we don't choose, like terrible accidents, for example. There's a philosopher named Paul Sagar who's been writing a sub stack on, he was a climber and he had a catastrophic accident. And his writing is beautiful. And he talks about, he's paraplegic now, no, he's quadriplegic. And the life change that that involves is clearly transformative and clearly horrible. And he wouldn't have chosen it. And that makes sense. But he has to now discover this new way of being an agent,

basically, because he lacks so much agency in so many fun ways. Okay, so I want people to articulate in the conceptual framework that's involved and diagnosing why there's a kind of incoherence in having to try to make this choice where you're supposed to know what you're doing is part of the solution.

Maybe it's just something that we have to accept. Now in my book, here's my unpopular solution. My unpopular solution is to say, well, maybe we can reframe the choice so that when we're making a choice, so this presumes that we have enough information to know that there's at least a very high chance that it's going to be at least pretty good as opposed to a very high chance it's going to be terrible or bad or whatever. We use evidence in all kinds of reasonable ways to know that kind of thing. But when we're confronted with something like, do I want to go to war? Do I want to emigrate to another country?

Or do I want to have a child? Or pick your favorite case. Do I want my child to have a cochlear implant? You alluded to that earlier. You're not going to be able to know what it's like and you are going to change who you are. And so then the question is, do you want to discover that new way of living? And if you do, with all the pluses and minuses, all the suffering, because I think transformative experiences almost always involve suffering of some sort, then you go for it. And if you don't, which I think is also perfectly reasonable,

then you don't. And because I don't think it's a matter of rationality, so I think just because some people have children and they're super happy that they did, it doesn't mean that that's just true for everyone, even if it would be the case that for almost everyone, they would reform themselves so that they would be happy with their choice.

There's no inference to the best explanation there. Just because many vampires testified to being happy that they've become vampires does not mean that everyone should become a vampire, especially somebody who just finds that way of being alien. In the case of having kids specifically, I remember a friend of mine, he has three kids now and he's kind of ambivalent, I guess. His wife really wanted kids and he was in the fortunate position of being able to provide and they wouldn't have struggles on that level. But he said, well, look, he said, at some point when you

get old enough to have meaning, you have to either find God or have kids. And he's like, having kids is easier. So he had kids and he said it in jest, but I've thought about the comment because like to what extent is the reforming of oneself after kids actually very time tested and conforming to millennia plus of evolutionary pressure, where it's the basis of instincts. And in so being, is it, I mean, this is going to sound like a really naive question, but sort of a safer bet with respect to transformative experience than some of the others going to war or otherwise?

I also know people who have had kids and in some cases they were very clear that they did not want kids, they weren't ambivalent and their partner really wanted kids and that I've not seen always turn out very well. So it's not a guarantee. But are there different species of transformative experiences within the category of transformative experiences? Do you think about say kids differently than you'd think of some of the others? I'm sure there are different species of transformative experiences. So what I heard you asking me, part of that question involved, well, look, you know, maybe we can rely on biology in a certain way, or we should, this is a time tested solution. So you can pick transformative experience one, transformative experience,

two, transformative experience three, behind door one is having a child behind toward two is traversing, you know, like you're traveling the world, seeing, you know, all the wonders, whatever, exploring, you know, having lots of money to spend on travel and satisfaction, that kind of thing. Behind door three is pursuing your intellectual passion, let's say, you know, to the fullest degree, devoting all of your time to that. I can go on, but there's three options there. And I do think that choosing one of those involves

trade-offs on the others as much as some people might say, I'll do it all, I'll have a child and we'll cross the plains of Siberia together. And it very rarely works out that way, right? So, and if you do cross the plains with the baby, you're slower. So, when the wolves follow you.

All right. So you might say, well, these are different risky choices. And if you want to maximize your expected utility in some sense, maybe you should choose door one. I actually think that seems kind of reasonable to me in a certain way. If you're truly indifferent between these different options, I think people rarely are indifferent. But the further problem is they're not indifferent, and yet there's a sense in which they don't really know what they're choosing between. That's the further

complication. So again, going back to what I was saying is it's more like, which life do I want to find out about? Which one feels more appealing to me? I don't know in many of the most salient ways what any of these lives could be. Like, I don't even know how it's gonna fill out because there's so many chancey things about each of those. You could have a child that's disabled. Sure. And that could be a beautiful thing, but it can also be a very time consuming,

very painful thing, right? And I don't know, you could pursue your intellectual passion and it could fall flat, or it could just turn into this amazing opportunity. So there's just a lot of chance involved in any of these choices. Yeah. I don't think you either have children or find God because I think there's so

many other really interesting things people can do with their lives. And I look at the person who I try to look at the person who I would have become if I had not had children. That person is very different from who I am now along some dimensions and very much the same with who I am. But I can't really get into her head. I don't really know what she would have been like. But I'm also sure she would have lived like a super fun,

interesting life. Let me ask if this is, I'm going to turn this into, going to make you the philosophical therapist for a second here, but- You already were, you already asked me. I know, I know, I know. The toothpaste is out of the toothpaste too. But if you could, and maybe you put it back on,

but if you take off the philosophy professor hat for a second and just reflect on your personal experience, two things, like was the decision to have a child hard for you? Did you go back and forth and vacillate or was it pretty straightforward? And then secondly, if there was some back and forth, how much of that was having or not having a child and what that experience would be like versus for instance, for me, I feel very confident that I would enjoy being a parent and that I'd be pretty good at it. I'm sure I'd fuck up every which way you can imagine, but like above average, I think I'd have pretty good go of it. But then the concern for me has always been, well, if things don't work out with the partner,

what does that look like? It's more of like a possible separation after having kids that has been the concern for me, not so much the parenting, which has a bunch of embedded assumptions, right? But what was that decision like for you personally? It was complicated because on the one hand, it's funny when I was younger, I never wanted children. And then when I hit my twenties, I think I thought, Oh, that's a real possibility. Like I would love to be happily married and have a family, but it seemed a bit

remote to like, I liked, I thought that seems like an option for me and it would be a good option, but I also really want to, you know, study philosophy and spend as much of my time as possible doing philosophy. This is the kid, I guess I was still a kid then, you know, reading people's books and writing like, you know, basically 60 to 70 pages of material over every two weeks.

This took a lot of time because I had to read it, I didn't have any training and I would write all this stuff and I was just obsessed. I was also doing other things at the same time like I was still reading Being in Time. So I spent all of my time doing philosophy and I didn't want to change that. So on the one hand, I had a desire to have children. Some people just feel like their life wouldn't have meaning with that. I never felt that way. I just thought this would be one interesting, good way to live one's life. But then I had this desire to spend my time doing philosophy.

And also philosophy is a male dominated field. And it certainly was back in the nineties. And there was definitely a professional cost to having a child. And I think there still is. It's not as bad as it used to be, but I don't think people think you're less serious now, although I think they used to think that.

But you still have like less time and you have less money. There are clearly like professional implications, maybe for women in particular, but I think everybody, you're not solely devoted to your projects anymore. Somebody else is more important. So there was a kind of ambivalence. And so I thought, well, being a rational thinker, I'm going to evaluate it,

right? I'm going to think about what it's going to be like, I'm going to make my choices, and that was where it all fell apart, right? That was where I was betrayed by what you could expect, what you're expecting, and so many other parenting things that I looked for. I mean, I tried to do it, I couldn't do it, but I didn't know I couldn't do it until I actually had the children. Then I was like, oh, this is nothing like what I was going to expect. And then that was when I had this moment before my son was born when I was like, wait a minute. Actually, my daughter was only very young. I was like, wait, this actually was really when after I'd recovered from giving birth and started getting enough sleep so I could think clearly again, I was like, wait, this was an utterly bizarre, strange,

metaphysical experience. And I mean, metaphysics not in the aura shaping way, but like metaphysics, like I do, like the nature of reality seemed to change for me in certain ways. And also epistemologically, you know, did change so much about how I experienced and represent the world.

This is just so foundational, but philosophers never talk about this. No philosophers talked about this, at least not in my tradition. And I thought, I have to talk about this. No philosophers talked about this, at least not in my tradition. And I thought, I have to talk about this, which by the way, I think Alice talked about this, was very scary because I built up this reputation as being a serious philosopher,

talking about the nature of causation and time. And then I was gonna talk about babies. I had to steel myself. So yeah, so to answer your question, there was a lot of ambivalence, but then my husband at the time wanted to have children. So that sort of tipped the balance. I'm not sure what I would have done if he had been equally ambivalent. So many different directions that we can go. I want to ask you, and I know you said earlier,

don't ask me to explain it or that you'd have trouble explaining it, but I'm still curious about this move from chemistry and you know, this the so called hard sciences to philosophy and that you knew you wanted to do that. Now you jokingly said you may not want to drop acid and explore some of these other questions. I'm just wondering what precipitated this itch that you had to scratch with philosophy. There's got to be something. I mean, I can't imagine there's nothing as far as inputs that affected that. I mean, I honestly don't know where I formed the idea that this was going to be the thing for me. I love to read. And when I was in high school, I read, um, but Herman Hesse,

like the glass bead game, I read other kinds of interesting books. I remember I read, I read Herman Hesse, like The Glass Bead Game. I read other kinds of interesting books. I remember reading Alexander Solzhenitsyn's work. And these are like philosophical texts, and maybe not class, not analytic philosophy, but there's a lot of philosophy in there. And so I do think that this reading and other things I read led me to realize that a certain kind of quasi-philosophical take on the world was congenial to me. When I say quasi-philosophical, it was truly philosophical, but at the time I wasn't able to kind of recognize it as such, I just knew I had this yearning

to try to understand things, and philosophy seemed like the right way to go. I really can't really give you more than that. My parents really wanted me to be a doctor. I went on med school visits. I took the MCAT, I did everything. You know, I failed out of philosophy, I didn't fail out of philosophy classes.

I just failed to progress in philosophy classes. Like all the signs were pointing away from philosophy and I still did it. There's no explanation. I'm going to push a little bit. I'm going to push it up because I would just say, maybe there were one way to frame it would be what drew you to philosophy.

Another one, another angle would be what didn't satisfy you of the explorations of chemistry, et cetera, et cetera. So maybe you could take a stab at the latter. Here it comes for the naivete. I was extremely good at the theoretical side of chemistry and extremely terrible at the lab side of chemistry. So I thought, well, maybe I want to be a chemist. I loved solving problems in organic chemistry.

I loved it. And part of my major, I had to take a class called gravimetric analysis, I think it was called. And this consists of an entire semester doing incredibly minute measurements and cooking. There were little clay pots we had to cook at high temperatures that were filled with the compound that we were analyzing. And we're supposed to like, you could cook it and you would measure these tiny things. And you spent the entire semester on one project. And it was the kind of thing where like you know if you touched it oil from your finger would get onto the clay pot and would destroy all of your work. So what happened after a semester probably the last three weeks of hours and hours in the lab and then I brush because I'm like physically just it's just I brush the side

of the pot and it's gone all of my work. I was devastated. Now we're getting somewhere. Yeah. Okay. So I went into an existential crisis basically and I was like, I cannot do chemistry. I can't do it. And so, you know, no, it's not for me. Now, if I were more sophisticated, I would have learned, oh, no, you can run the lab and like other people do that part of, if you're physically inept in certain ways. But I didn't know that and I didn't realize how many more options there would be.

Anyway, and I was destroyed by it. It wasn't just that, but I never enjoyed lab. I wasn't good at it. It wasn't my thing. And I felt that natural science, it does require a certain, you know, you run a lab, even if you're doing highly theoretical work. And so I needed something a little bit more pure. That combined with, like I said, like being drawn to some of these, you know,

literature and art that had this conceptual dimension that involved the role of experience, again, in understanding like who you are. When I moved out of my parents' house and moved to Chicago, I found myself immersed in like art and literature and my friend like I was working at a bar and a lot of the people working at the bar were like doing theater or were artists and it was just a whole new way of being that I loved. And so I knew there was something out there that my natural science education wasn't connecting

with. Yeah. Okay. That makes perfect sense to me. Thank you for doing the digging. I appreciate it. Love that story. Oh, the finger oil in the lab. Even now. Oh, the pain. Sorry. Yeah, brutal. You mentioned, I think, semi philosophical works and you mentioned Hermann Hesse. And my next question is for someone who is on some deep level interested in the types of questions that attracted you to philosophy, right? But they have had some trepidation or maybe mild allergic reaction around philosophy as such when they've tried to dig into it. Maybe they went to a

philosophy section at bookstore and picked up three books and they're like, wow, I'm too dumb to understand this, or this is just too impenetrable, I don't know what to do with this. What entry points might you suggest if you wanted to get, if you had 100 undergrads, fresh blank slates, and you're like, okay, I wanna have the highest

kind of conversion rate as possible, meaning I wanna get as many of these people deeply interested in any aspect of philosophy. Are there certain books that you might recommend? They don't have to be philosophical texts as such, if that makes sense. LW – Quentin Smith wrote this very weird book called The Felt Meanings of the World, which I always loved. It's weird. The felt meanings of the world?

Yeah, the felt meanings of the world. It captures something for me even when I was kind of just trying to approach philosophy. So I think a lot of fiction can be very philosophical. I would read Ted Chiang. He's really, really good. Oh, so good. So good. Yeah. Everybody should read Ted Chiang. He's really, really good. Oh, so good. So good. Everybody should read Ted Chiang. Everybody should. And a lot of his work is just deeply philosophical and explicitly so. I mean, he's interested in counterfactuals and in metaphysics in particular in these really

beautiful ways, right? In the nature of time. Could you, just because that term has come up a few times, could you just take a sidebar define counterfactuals? Yes. So counterfactuals involve, even the word tells you like counter to fact things. So if I say, if I had wings, I would fly across my office. Now I don't have wings, so I can't fly across my office. But if I did have wings, I certainly would, because that would be super cool. And we can understand like counterfactuals in terms of like other possible worlds. So in a world where I have wings, right, I would fly across the room. Or what if the third rank dominated the world after World War II or something like that?

Exactly, exactly. It turns out like counterfactuals can be, you need what's called a preferred semantics for them, like a rule book for understanding how to interpret them. And my supervisor, David Lewis at Princeton was like the person who developed the primary rule book for that, which is what the foundation of much of his work involved.

But they play a role like in natural science. So when people are doing tests, let's say, of some new kind of treatment, you wanna find out whether or not a new drug will cure a disease or something like that, right? So what you wanna do is you wanna treat a population and see what happens, and then you compare it to the counterfactual, well, what if they hadn't been treated? Now the complication is in these kinds of contexts, you can't move to a possible world,

but you can establish a control group, which is basically supposed to be matched to that treatment population. And then you see how the control group evolves without the treatment and compare it to the treated population who gets the medicine. So the role of a counterfactual can sometimes be to sort of identify ways the world could be and also like ways the world could have been if you hadn't changed it, something like that. Mm-hmm. Ted Chiang is good at weaving counterfactual scenarios. Exactly. He's good at exploring other possible worlds in some ways. And when I start talking about other possible worlds, the way that it relates to my work is I think about like other possible selves, right? So if I had chosen differently and not chosen to have a child,

well, there's another possible world out there where I don't have any children. And so then the question is, well, how do I make sense of that other possible world? And one thing I can't do, as I said to you before, because the real world involved me transforming myself into a parent, means there's a kind of lack of understanding across that barrier. I can't really understand who I would have become. And Chang exploits that kind of notion all the time. Like, well, what if, you know, time were different or what if aliens, you know, came to us and we had to kind of interpret what they were saying and the process of interpreting what they were saying changed

our conception of how time worked and what we could understand. Super cool, you know, all kinds of stuff. If people want a light lift, and it is different from the short story upon which it's based, but watch the movie Arrival and as a linguistics nerd also, my God, that really is as a linguistics nerd also, my God, that really is an unbelievably good movie. I think it's 95 plus percent on Rotten Tomatoes. And then he has collections of short stories. It's always hard for me to remember the first one. It's like stories of our lives and other short stories, something like that. And then his second collection came out, Exhalation. And I was like, ah, there's no way it can match the first collection. And lo and behold, I was like, okay, you went to check. So good. All right. Any other fiction that comes to mind?

Borges also, I just love Borges. I mean, I just feel like he's always exploring. Borges is amazing. Yeah. Yes. Yes. Where would you suggest people start with Jorge Luis Borges? Any favorites? The Garden of Forking Paths is an excellent one. If we're talking about possibilities, the Garden of Forking Paths is like, it's a beautiful one. The Aleph, I would suggest. I don't know. I mean, I just, I actually think the Garden of Forking Paths and I think it's the Aleph are two really excellent things to read. These are incredibly philosophical texts. Okay. And what I love about them is you can get the

intuitive idea without having to go through all the philosophy, but to extract it precisely, you get it, it's beautiful the way they express these ideas. But if you want to extract it with precision in a way that you can then take the idea and use it in other ways, you need the analytic philosophy to do that in my view. Literature just doesn't, it doesn't lend itself to getting some kind of precise thing extracted from it in a straightforward way. That's just not what it's for. To develop the chops with analytic philosophy seems to require a lot. It doesn't seem to be a light lift. For somebody who's listening who doesn't have any exposure to it, is the juice worth the squeeze? And if so, what is the juice that

makes it worth the squeeze? I mean, well, look, I devoted my life to it. So obviously I think the juice is worth the squeeze. No, I know. But just like if you're going to study like material science to develop new surgical techniques as an orthopedic surgeon, like doing that deep dive could very well be worth it for that person. But if someone hasn't done medical school, maybe not. Right, so I'm just curious to what extent

you'd recommend a lay listener try to develop the toolkit of analytic philosophy. I think for some people they're fine with like literature, sci-fi or reading, or I think you can get a lot of philosophy through kind of like listening to Bach or you know reading Darwin's biography or doing mathematics. So I think the first question is if you engage with the philosophical ideas in a non-technical way, if that satisfies you then you're good, but if it leaves you wanting more, if you start asking questions, well wait a minute how does this work? Or you know you're good. But if it leaves you wanting more, if you start asking questions, well, wait a minute, how does this work? Or, you know, you watch a time travel film. I

recommend Primer or L'Agite or Twelve Monkeys. I'm going to write these down. Oh, Twelve Monkeys is a great one. Okay. Primer. Something in French that I didn't catch. If you love Twelve Monkeys, dude, you need to watch L'Agite because Twelve Monkeys just plagiarized L'Agite. Oh, okay. Well, then I'll you need to watch the Lajete because 12 monkeys just plagiarized Lajete. Oh, okay. Well then I'll read the or watch the original. It's like 35 minutes long.

You could, it means the jetty in French L A L and then jetty J E T E E. Okay. And so you can watch it online. There's a huge, it's a beautiful film. It's actually, it's a kind of artwork film and it's very artsy and the story that it tells was retold by 12 monkeys. It's the same. It's French and artsy. I'm kidding.

Oh, what do you mean? Yeah. How could it be? Yeah, exactly. But what's great about it is it's entirely consistent and primer is consistent, except until the end, they get a little, they got a little carried away. This, I forgive them the last five or 10 minutes of the film, but, um, and primer is a beautiful, super cool film, kind of cult classic type of movie. Anyway, if you watch these things and you're like, well, wait a minute, or if you watch Back to the Future and you're like, well, wait a minute, how can you change

the past? Seems like that might be, there's some kind of logical problem there. Well, then my friend, you are a philosopher at heart in various ways and you should put the time in. It's worth it. If you really work out some of these questions, you can use them for other things. And if nothing else, forcing yourself to kind of work through some of these puzzles, I think kind of just sharpens your reasoning capacities generally. I'm not saying it's easy. Remember that bit about suffering, right? There's definitely some suffering, but it can pay off.

And the joy of like, there's a kind of joy just in problem solving or puzzle solving that I feel like I get out of thinking through these things. Lewis Carroll, another excellent thing to read. Oh, yeah. Lewis Carroll. So what a master. I have some collectors editions of old copies of Alice in Wonderland. Not exactly that title, but Lewis Carroll, man, also just the bio on that guy was wild. Okay. So if somebody was willing, they watch whatever it might be primer or another back to the future, they start asking questions. You're like, hey, you might be a philosopher. And they say, okay, given that I want to pick up the ABCs of analytic philosophy, but in terms of suffering,

I don't want my face ripped off more like a smile. Where would you suggest they start? I started with being in time, which isn't really what normal people would start with. Yeah, you're like, I like hiking. Let me start with Everest. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. I mean, well, you can read my book. There you go. That's the podcast. That's fine. Yeah. Yeah. The book, Transformative Experience was not written for non-philosophers. And so I go over arguments more than once, right? I mean, so I am picking it apart in a way that because I was aiming the book towards professional philosophers, but the first hundred pages of the book is not technical.

And then the first chapter is only four pages long. And I wrote the first chapter thinking, look, people might put it down, but maybe if they just read the first four pages, they'll at least see what the idea is. So yeah, you could look at my book and read the first four pages and see what you think. Yeah. So, yeah, you could look at my book and read the first four pages and see what you think.

Yeah. And then if you're like, wow, you know, I can digest more technical aspects, then you can dig into the footnotes too, especially after the first hundred pages. Exactly. The second half of the book switches into much more technical argumentation. And then a great resource. It's written for other professional philosophers, but also really good for the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It's online, it's free, all the entries are written by professional philosophers. It's not written to be accessible

to non-philosophers, but it's absolutely fantastic. You can get a sense of it. Take an entry, run it through Chat Shippee Tea for the, you know, and get a sense of things. Can you translate this from the Latin of the high priesthood into something I can understand, please? Exactly. Yeah, write it for a 12-year-old's perspective. And you'll probably, I think you would get something interesting. There are also various epistemology, a very short introduction.

I think Jennifer Nagel wrote that. Could you define that term also for folks? Oh, epistemology is the theory of knowledge. So if I use the word epistemic, like an epistemic transformation, what I mean is it's changing what you know or how you kind of conceptualize or make sense of the world. Okay, so I interrupted you trying to thought that you were saying for epistemology, you might start with?

There's a series of very short introductions. It's Oxford. They're written by experts in the field. They're just really nicely done. Again, they're not written to be entertaining, but they're written to be clear and accessible. So if you're willing to put in a little bit of work, you'll get something out of it for sure. Let's just say you're advising a student, could be undergrad grad, they come to you. This is within the context of philosophy department. They're feeling kind of lost, maybe a little

apathetic nihilistic, although nihilism we could probably define more precisely, but in the modern sort of pop culture sense. Are there any recommendations for reading or self-inquiry or anything like that that you would recommend to them? It could also just be general life advice, but I'm curious how you might tackle a situation like that. First, we interview with Borges where he goes through this kind of process, especially he

has a book about where he talks about going blind. And see, it's not like I wasn't that kid, okay? The problem is the reason why I'm not coming up with things for you is because I was that kid in lots of ways, and I'm fascinated by philosophy, and I knew there were questions that I wanted to ask, but I wasn't finding anything in the literature. The reason why I started out with causation as a graduate student was partly because I found an intellectual, like a deep, close intellectual friend in David Lewis. We just really kind of hit it off intellectually. We could talk to each other in ways that were, I mean, always metaphysics, but you know, we just kind of understood each other's

minds in a way that I didn't connect with really anyone else when I was doing my PhD. And I felt that the tools of philosophy were beautiful tools. I could see that in the history, what little I knew of the history of philosophy, deep basic questions had been asked, but they were solved in very different ways, especially because often God played a role and like at that time, and that really wasn't for me, I'm not a religious person. Although I find religious belief really interesting and kind of fascinating in various kinds of contexts.

I have this paper called The Paradox of Empathy, where I talk about the kind of divide between the atheist and the believer, because there's this kind of fear, like if you really open your mind to the other person, that it's gonna convert you in a way that you don't wanna be converted, it's gonna change you into that alien self.

I think the atheist feels that way and I think the believer feels that way. And so I argue like it's actually perfectly reasonable to be, nobody ever argues someone into like religious belief or losing it. It's all about like kind of occupying a different kind of conceptual space. And that just fund it foundationally changes the way you understand the world.

So I knew that philosophy had these tools and I thought that they were excellent tools. I'm still was, you know, I loved solving problems. Remember in this really rigorous way in organic chemistry, exploring mechanisms. That's what all of the exams are always about. My goal in college was to set the curve, but I wasn't finding what I wanted. I just, I couldn't find the kinds of texts I wanted to address these questions. So I don't really have a lot for you. I mean, I think Thomas Nagle's work is really, really great. The view from

nowhere is a, is a beautiful book that might be a place to go. I just did a little searching on the Borges piece. So it looks like Jorge Luis Borges wrote and spoke about his experience with blindness in a number of different contexts. One was Seven Nights, Siete Noches, a collection of lectures that he gave in Buenos Aires in 1977, covering nightmares, Buddhism, poetry,

and his own progressive blindness. So that might be another place to start. Yes, I think so. Reading Proust is also good, but these are not easy reads, and they're not going to train you in philosophy, but they will put you into contact with the ideas that I think are beautiful and worth studying. And then you have to sweat through

the training of your mind to get there. It's not like you start reading and you're going to get sucked in. No, it's more like training for a marathon. You have to kind of slowly agonize when you're completely unfit and it sucks. Okay. Like it's not like it's just going to, you just run a little bit and it feels great. And then you run a little bit more and it feels great.

Then somehow you get to 26, you know, no, it doesn't work that way. So I do think there's more work out there where people are starting to address these questions, but I'm finding myself at a little bit of a loss because it was my dissatisfaction with what I was finding that led me to start working on this topic, even though I felt like it was kind of deeply risky. Yeah. I mean, it makes me wonder also if the, I don't want to say solutions, but maybe if the life rafts for someone who's feeling those things might fall outside of philosophy.

I don't know. Are there any particular philosophical ideas or philosophies that you find consistently misrepresented or mistranslated in modern media or by self-help, broadly speaking, things that get co-opted? I mean, I'm sure physicists could have field day answering this, right? Because their stuff gets grabbed by every kind of woo woo self help book that tends to come along. Okay, so first thing is, it's super important to distinguish between our experience of time and time itself. So some people

might not think there is any such thing as time. But it's just really important to like think about this way, the easiest way to see the difference is imagine you're in a really boring lecture, and you're sitting there like, oh, this is lasting forever. And you look at the clock and you realize you're only 15 minutes in. Okay. Right there, your experience of times passing has departed from like the objective measurement of time as measured by the clock. Okay. So there's just two different things. And I think this gets conflated all over the place and it gets really hard and really complex to think about these two different ways of kind of talking about time. But it's

important. Or like sometimes people talk about, you know, and they have a like they have a car, this happened to me, actually, I had a car accident. And I remember everything seemed to be going in slow motion. I didn't actually have a car accident, my car spun out of control late one night when I was driving on Michigan Avenue, because I hit a patch of ice. And I went around and around and like in Lake Shore Drive, like it's got like four lanes going each way. And I was like, whoa, but it was like three o'clock in the morning and no one else was there. So I just like in slow motion,

I watched myself go around and around. And I was like, well, this is bad. Oh, but there's no one else here. And then I was able to kind of correct the car come out of the spin, but it felt like it happened over like two, three minutes and it was probably like 10 seconds, right? 20 seconds, something like that. And there it's just, it's a very common phenomenon. The way that we perceive time just changes, comes apart from like the passing of time.

Second thing, free will. Just kill me now. Every non-philosophist, it's a big one. And people are really fascinated with it and I totally get it. It's not my own favorite topic, but I think you should distrust. It's just a favorite topic of particular neuroscientists and they're all going to solve free will. And I respect an engaged discussion of free will from a scientist if they've read some of the philosophy, but a lot of times they haven't read the philosophy and it's like they don't know what they don't know. So that's a killer. Related to free will is like fatalism, like thinking everything's determined, slightly different from free will. And I love existentialism as a topic and I love continental philosophy and phenomenology.

I recognize the phenomenology because I'm involved with a lot of scientific research with, say, psychedelic compounds, the term phenomenology comes up a lot. What is continental philosophy? Is that anything to do with continental breakfasts? I don't know. Yeah, actually sort of. So, okay, so it's a sort of disputed phrase. So I also describe what I do as like analytic philosophy. And there's this rough, it's not really a very good way of describing things, but it's the best one I have. Traditions like say, like Heidegger and Foucault and Derrida come from like that kind of,

I think Gisac might count as this. Like there's a kind of a style of philosophy that kind of originated at least arguably on the European continent. And it's very different from the kind of class you took with Gideon Rosen at Princeton, which is like, you know, classic, like analytic philosophy, which kind of originated in the UK, arguably with people like Bertrand Russell and Wittgenstein and people like that. And also I think with the positivists who kind of came over to the US

particular around trying to escape the Nazis in World War II. And so continental philosophy also can have strong connections with psychoanalysis, whereas analytic philosophy has many more connections to contemporary science or very empirically grounded psychology, that kind of thing. And I like both traditions a lot. I don't super like the methods of continental philosophy. I was trained as a natural scientist, at least early on, and I really like the approach, but I love the topics. And it's pretty hard to talk about the very deep things that continental philosophers talk about,

like the nature of being, or who we are in some fundamental sense, or how do we understand time using analytic techniques? But that's what I try to do. What are some of the ways that you think philosophers will be most important in the broader world outside of academics, outside of the journals and so on? Where do you think these philosophical explorations and toolkits will most intersect with applications in the broader world, whether it's related to certain technologies or otherwise.

When I went back before and I said like when the work on transformative experience that I'm doing tries to address this kind of situation we find ourselves at certain foundational shifts that we undergo and certain life choice points, whether we choose them or not actually like, you know, let's say I'm diagnosed with early onset Alzheimer's, you know, confronting that and making sense of that. So I think thinking philosophically is a really good tool for living one's life. And that's what Agnes talks about by the Agnes Callard in her new book, I think it's called Open Socrates. And so I do think that philosophy has a role there, but I also think it has applications, for example,

like important applications in bioethics, important applications with artificial intelligence, in particular, thinking about ethics questions and value alignment with machines, like trying to design machines that, you know, kind of if they don't have human values, kind of respect human values and, and how we're going to really be able to do that in the context of actually undergoing these

kinds of scientific and conceptual revolutions where we don't know what's coming down the pike, transformative in my view. I think there's lots of application also just with the kind of policies and thinking about, for example, like, precision in terms of how, for example, we want like say certain kinds of policies to affect people. There's a lot of work like in political philosophy and philosophy of law and ethics, I think that that matters.

That's not just bioethics, you know, and bioethics is its own kind of thing, which I think philosophers have made and should be making and continue to make make really important contributions. So I wanted to give Agnes a shout out here. So Agnes Callard's newest book is Open Socrates, subtitled The Case for a Philosophical Life, which just recently came out, January 14th, 2025. And you've invoked her name a number of times. She also wrote Aspiration,

the Agency of Becoming in 2018. Where would you say your positions or thinking most differ, you and Agnes? Agnes has this view that if we want to change ourselves, we can aspire to change in various ways. The new book is more about like living a philosophical life and it's written for non-philosophers, so it's very accessible. So I was thinking, you know, it's something that people could try. The other book, Aspiration, is a technical book and she thinks, oh, well, you can just

aspire to be someone different and that's how you can just train yourself up into kind of being that way. I'm simplifying radically. And I think there's a kind of incoherence in that because if I find somebody like being a parent or being an opera singer or something like just fundamentally alien to who I am, there's no coherent way for me to aspire to do that.

So our big difference is that, and I've said this to her and she's like, yeah, but I just think like that our rationality model is broken so that, you know, I don't mind if there's a kind of incoherence in my view. And we're just really different in that way, in the way that we approach these questions. Agnes does the history of philosophy.

She's like, she works on the classics and work in maybe metaethics. And I approach things very much from a kind of philosophy science, kind of metaphysics, epistemology, more mathematical views. So we come from different perspectives that way too. All right. So we'll link to Agnes' Open Socrates book in the show notes as well for everybody. You have written on Reddit,

this was not sure exactly when this was, but you find Aristotle's work, especially inspirational. Now, can't believe everything you read on the internet. So please feel free to fact check that. But if that is a true statement, why is that the case? I said that about Aristotle? That's what I have here. It's attributed to you.

This is why I'm saying. This is the Reddit ask me anything. Right. Yes, exactly. I can't remember. I have no idea. I love that AMA. It was so fun.

I thought you were going to ask me about drugs because that ended up being half the conversation. Okay. Well, let's go to drugs. Let's talk about that. I'd rather talk about drugs than Aristotle, I'm afraid. Yeah, I know more about drugs than I do about Aristotle. So let's go into drugs. All right. So one of the cool things is that I've given a couple

of talks on this, the framework that I was articulating is useful when we're thinking about things like psychedelics because the conceptual framework of a transformative experience, which changed, like opens your mind in a certain way, because you have a new kind of experience. And then at least in some contexts that epistemic shift is so profound that it changes like how you understand yourself in the world.

Yeah. Ontological shock is something they use in the literature for a moment. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And I mean, that applies to becoming a parent, I think, or a terrible thing like becoming quadriplegic, but it also can happen when you take psychedelics for the first time. So the idea being, the way that I think about it is, whatever neurological changes that taking

your preferred type of psychedelics induces, it changes the nature of our perceptions. And this is super interesting because in particular perceptual experience or sensory experience is already like not amenable to description. Like when I said, hey, if you're colorblind and I tell you, oh, I'm going to describe what it's like to see red,

you just haven't got enough to go on. And that's something about the way that we can't use testimony to communicate certain types of experiences, okay? And psychedelics change the way that we experience the world through changing the character of our perceptions. And I'm fascinated by this. I'm not sure exactly how I want to make sense of this philosophically, but I think it teaches something about how our minds connect with the world.

We learn somehow that actually the world is in some sense a world of representation because we can now discover a different way of representing the world. And we realize, oh, when we go back to our old selves, just how much the brain was doing to kind of contribute to like everything that we're seeing. I think that that's one of the lessons that people can get when they take psychedelics. Let's put it this way. That's the lesson that I drew from it and I do think that people can draw this in more or less technical ways.

But the other thing that this kind of, you know, experience can do is can kind of shift us epistemologically so that we can be change how we kind of understand ourselves as beings in the world, I think that does this partly like neurochemically, obviously, the kind of neuroscientific, I guess, way of explaining this is to think, well, maybe for some reason, there are certain different pathways that are activated in the brain, at least for a few weeks after taking various kinds of psychedelics that can especially help people with like clinical depression or facing terminal illness. But I think it's not just like that. I think it's actually like you get this enriched sense of how here we are, human beings, like taking in through our senses and responding and constructing a world. And it gives you a kind of clearer understanding of how we build ourselves. And I feel like this makes us kind of attend more

than to the relationship we have, like with the world in general and the relationships we have with other people. And the transformative experience stuff kind of really fits that, so it's kind of cool. And I definitely tried psychedelics before I ever wrote about transformative experience, but it wasn't what I was thinking about.

I think you were asking me leading questions earlier when I mentioned like dropping acid and and not thinking about certain kinds of logical puzzles, but it wasn't what led me to the stuff on transformative experience. It was really having babies that was really shocking. Oh, I wasn't implying that the acid led to the book on transformative experience. When you kept saying, I really can't explain how I got into philosophy, I was like, you just made like a passing comment related to acid and like there's a non-zero chance

that that could have opened Dora's box of all sorts of questions. I guess it could have. I think it was more like, I definitely had a lot of these experiences in college. I was like, wow, I really like a lot of these experiences in college. I was like, wow, I really like kind of thinking these different kinds of thoughts. But, you know, reading literature also did that.

Sure. They're not mutually exclusive, but the experiences with, they don't need to be with psychedelics, but in altered states, sort of non-ordinary states of consciousness, can, of consciousness can, as you said very well, illustrate in a very felt first person way how much of our reality and how much of our conception of the self is constructed. And then when you come out of it, you're like, huh, okay. Just like metaphysics is examining in some cases these underlying assumptions that maybe physicists take for granted. When we're walking around being our skin encapsulated ego, there's a lot we take for granted. And then when suddenly you're like,

hmm, I had this complete dissolution of the self and yet there was still a felt experience, but there was no I, what the fuck does that mean? Right? Exactly. The thing is you can get, read all the theory in the world, but when you experience it, it gives you a different way of understanding. And that's what I'm saying. Just like seeing red for the first time, you can hear all about red, but when you see it, you're like, whoa,

wait, there's something there that's more or that just wasn't the theory, the words aren't sufficient to express all of the content. It's just how human minds are. Yeah, well, it's like one of the cornerstones of mystical experience, at least according to the assessments from say Johns Hopkins and so on is ineffability, which makes it very hard to describe someone else. Yeah, exactly, it's a problem.

It's like, oh, well, it's ineffable. Well, that's not helpful, you know? Yeah. But again, go back to like, this is what I was trying to capture with like the vampires. I'm going to say, look, life has meaning and a sense of purpose that you can't possibly understand as a human. One of the interesting things about human minds is that we can discover new kinds of experience. And before we know about those new kinds of experience, they're just ineffable. There's just a conceptual

problem there. You have, I believe a quote in your book from Conrad's Heart of Darkness and the quote I'm going to read and you can again fact check me as needed but, watching a coast as it slips by the ship is like thinking about an enigma. There it is before you, smiling, frowning, inviting grand, mean, insipid or savage and always mute with the air whispering come and find out. We ultimately need to ask we're willing to plunge into the jungle of the new self, as you put it. So before we go, are there any transformative experiences that you are sort of looking forward to

with trepidation, with fear or excitement or decisions that you'll need to make? Or it could just be broadly experiences like you mentioned, for instance, cognitive decline and so on. I'm not saying you'd look forward to that. Actually, no, no, that's the one. So basically, I think that, I mean, all of us face death, okay, and you don't know how it's gonna come in. Frankly, I'd be perfectly happy to like have a heart attack

in the middle of great sex. Like that's obviously the best way to go. But most likely, it's to be pretty physically healthy. It's going to be a long, slow decline. Alzheimer's is extremely common or some other kind of dementia. And as an academic, especially someone who's like, I mean, I love my intellectual project and losing my abilities love my intellectual project and losing my abilities is something that I certainly fear and I need to come to grips with that. I think it is a transformative experience and I think like becoming quadriplegic, it needs to be grappled with. And the solution to the extent that I have one, it relates to the Buddhist point about suffering, namely a certain kind of attachment is what causes suffering.

I've been thinking about it a lot actually, and I guess I hope when the time comes and I don't expect it to be for a while, but you never know. Kind of hoping I've got, you know, pretty good chunk of time, but you have to reset yourself. You have to change who you are in a certain way and enjoy, find other sources of enjoyment. And I don't mean something like sour grapes or adaptive reasoning. I think you actually have to reconfigure what you care about. And that is in a sense what the Buddhist teaching suggests. In other words, you detach yourself from some of the kind of passions of regular life and in virtue of detaching yourself, then you truly actually change your preference structure.

It's not that you secretly still want them and if you could get them, you would, right? That's adaptive in various ways. It's rather that you reconfigure what you care about. And I hope if and when I experience cognitive decline that I will learn how to make sure I retain the things that I like the most basic things that I value, like joy in art and in music,

like being a consumer of music and art and really good food. And I wanna try to treat that as you see how I'm describing it as permission to like let go of things that I value, but cause me stress. Like, you know, what causes stress and anxiety? Obligations, things that I need to do, accomplishments I want to kind of get to. When that's inaccessible, like permanently gone, I want to be able to return to other basic sources of happiness and pleasure, loving my children and, you know, having friends, even if they're just everybody else in the assisted living facility

or whatever. I think there's a big senior dorm, like back in college, only a bunch of people who in the eighties and nineties. And I want to be able to like understand how to reconfigure myself to enjoy that. I've decided that is my task. I'm not sure I'm there yet, but that's how I'm thinking about it. And I think I want to, I want, I want to write about this a little bit, but I don't see people approaching the issue in this way at all. Yeah. I think it would be incredibly valuable for a lot of people for you to write about that and to explore that.

Laurie, thank you so much for the time. People can find you and all things at laPaul at laPaul.org and certainly we'll link to all of the books and everything else in the show notes. Is there anything else you would like to say to my audience? Anywhere else you would like to point them? Anything at all that you'd like to add before we land the plane? Well, two things. One is I do have a book that's coming out.

It's going to be ages. It's going to be like two more years, but a lot of the themes that we've been talking about are going to come back and it's going to be written for non-philosophers. So I hope it'll be the kind of thing that people would turn to if they want to get a sense of some of these discussions. And I understand that philosophers are weird and that we do weird things and that we can be kind of annoying back to you know and I and maybe I just want people to like forgive us for that we're sometimes not very good at

representing ourselves but I think in general it's a worthwhile activity for people who have a taste for it and even if you don't it's kind of worthwhile to think about some of these questions sometimes. And so maybe I'm asking for a little bit of indulgence and patience. Yeah. And curiosity folks. I mean, there are toolkits and even if you can't get into really definitive satisfying answers, there are a lot of good questions worth asking also. And in and of themselves, maybe like a co--on they can lead interesting places. So Laurie thank you for the time and thank you for your work. Really really appreciate it and for everyone

listening we will put everything in the show notes as per usual at tim.blogs.com podcast and until next time be just a bit nicer than is necessary to others but also to yourself. Thanks for tuning in. Hey guys, this is Tim again. Just one more thing before you take off and that is Five Bullet Friday. Would you enjoy getting a short email from me every Friday that provides a little fun before the weekend? Between one and a half and two million people

subscribe to my free newsletter, my super short newsletter called Five Bullet Friday. Easy to sign up, easy to cancel. It is basically a half page that I send out every Friday to share the coolest things I've found or discovered or have started exploring over that week. It's kind of like my diary of cool things. It often includes articles I'm reading, books I'm reading, albums perhaps, gadgets, gizmos, all sorts of tech tricks and so on that get sent to me by my friends,

including a lot of podcasts, guests, and these strange esoteric things end up in my field. And then I test them and then I share them with you. So if that sounds fun, again, it's very short, a little tiny bite of goodness before you head off for the weekend, something to think about. If you'd like to try it out, just go to tim.blogslashfriday, type that into your browser, tim.blogslashfriday, drop in your email and you'll get the very next one. Thanks for listening. This episode is brought to you by 8 Sleep.

Temperature is one of the main causes of poor sleep and heat is my personal nemesis. I've suffered for decades tossing and turning, throwing blankets off, pulling the back on, putting one leg on top, and repeating all of that ad nauseum. But now I am falling asleep in record time. Why?

Because I'm using a device that's recommended to me by friends called the PodCover by 8 Sleep. The PodCover fits on any mattress and allows you to adjust the temperature of your sleeping environment, providing the optimal temperature that gets you the best night's sleep. With the PodCover's dual-zone temperature control, you and your partner can set your sides of the bed to as cool as 55 degrees or as hot as 110 degrees.

I think generally in my experience, my partners prefer the high side and I like to sleep very, very cool. So stop fighting, this helps. Based on your biometrics, environment, and sleep stages, the PodCover makes temperature adjustments throughout the night that limit wakeups and increase your percentage of deep sleep. In addition to its best-in-class temperature regulation, the PodCover sensors also track your health and sleep metrics without the need to use a wearable. Conquer this winter season with the best in sleep tech and sleep at your perfect temperature. Many of my listeners in colder areas, sometimes that's me, enjoy warming up their bed after a freezing day. And if you have a partner, great, you can

split the zones and you can sleep at your own ideal temperatures. It's easy. So get your best night's sleep. Head to 8sleep.com slash Tim and use code Tim to get $350 off of the Pod 4 Ultra. They currently ship to the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia. Coffee, coffee, coffee. Man, do I love a great cup of coffee. Sometimes too much. Then I'll have two, three, four, five cups of coffee. I do not love the jitters that come from that or how even one really strong cup of coffee can impact my sleep Which I measure in all sorts of ways which HRV and blah blah blah blah blah But more recently I have downshifted to something that feels good

I have been enjoying a more serene morning brew from this episode sponsor Mudwater with only a fraction of the caffeine found in a cup of coffee Mudwater gives me all the energy I need without fraction of the caffeine found in a cup of coffee. Mudwater gives me all the energy I need without the crash, without the fidgety crawling out of my skin kind of feeling, and it's delicious. It tastes as if cacao and chai had a beautiful love child. I drink it in the morning, and sometimes, right now I'm exercising in the mountains and running around, sometimes I'll also add some milk and ice for a 2 pm, maybe 1 pm if I'm behaving, iced latte pick me up type of thing. Mudwaters Original Blend contains four different types of mushrooms, Lion's Mane for focus,

cordyceps to promote energy, I used to use that when I was competing in all sorts of sports, and both chaga and reishi to support a healthy immune system. I also love that they make and have for a long time donations to support psychedelic therapeutics and research, including organizations like the heroic hearts project, which I encourage people to check out in the UC Berkeley Center for the science of psychedelics. You my dear listeners can now try mud water with 15% off plus a free rechargeable frother and free shipping by going to

mudwater.com slash Tim now Now listen to the spelling, this is important. That's M-U-D-W-T-R.com slash Tim. So one more time, M-U-D-W-T-R.com slash Tim for a free for author 15% off and a better morning routine.