Absolutist Philosopher Explains Human Bias

Added: 2026-05-07

[00:00:08]Wait.

[00:00:23]He Okay. So, today I'm going to discuss a couple different things. So for example, the way that people often discuss things is always from like an initial, you know, biased perspective like what you want to be true, right? For example, you would see this with religion or something else like morality or something like oh so are you saying that you want immoral things to happen or are you saying that oh you want there to be no, you know, like a god or whatever. It's not about what you want, although that's how people often frame it. That's the whole problem, right? There's a difference between what people want and that's often what belief and ideations are is like we want the world to revolve around people. Uh, right? Everything to be like humanentric, but it's not. So, we keep trying to fight with that. So, that's the contradiction you see a lot with belief systems is like, well, there's this all powerful god that says basically in short that, oh, the world revolves around people. like, oh, killing people is bad and it's a sin.

[00:02:50]Even though throughout all of human history, people have killed each other.

[00:02:53]So, it's like supposedly they're all powerful and supposedly they want this thing, right? Certain things and behaviors, but yet they created people with the ability to do other behaviors and they don't strike people down with the bolt of lightning or stop you from doing them. Hey, hey, Mitch. How's it going? Right? So, there's a lot of contradictions with that. So, really all it is is just a narcissistic humanentric perspective that um Hey Darren, how are you? um right that we want that. So that's why we make laws, right? This is the problem with often it's used as like this fake mic drop type of thing. Right?

[00:03:26]There's that one clip that really triggers me where it's like Charlie Kirk uh rest in peace, but the I think it was Charlie or Michael Nolles maybe where they say like, "Oh, is the Holocaust or actually no, it might be a preacher or somebody who was doing it, but whatever." Like is the Holocaust objectively objectively wrong? And it's like see you get like in this weird gotcha kind of thing. It's just the problem is it happened right? So if something happens it wasn't you know on it wasn't God who stopped it from happening. So right you can't really use that. So the human beings either make something bad happen or they u they stop it from happening. So it's up to us is the point. So we make laws. We try to be socially responsible.

[00:04:15]Uh but this notion of these absolutes just doesn't make sense because so many things that defy those absolutes happen anyway, right? So instead of that weird petty way of looking at it like oh gotcha mic drop kind of thing, realize like okay people aren't objective.

[00:04:31]Everything doesn't revolve around us.

[00:04:33]And in practice, in effect, we acknowledge that anyway, right? Like you can go pray at your church, but you still pay taxes. you still rely on the police. So like, you know, I'd love to see that alternative. Okay, let's concede that, okay, your God does exist or whatever belief system you have. Then you shouldn't need the cops anymore. You shouldn't need law and governments and judges and stuff because, you know, God would just strike you down with the bolt of lightning if you committed a sin or did something he didn't want you to do or he wouldn't have created you with the ability to do it in the first place.

[00:05:06]So, I'm not picking on religion necessarily. I'm just using this as an example, but it's the very narcissistic view that people have of the world that like everything revolves around people. And if it doesn't, it's your fault. Not that you know that's just the reality of the world and the universe. And there is a deeper meaning to it. Because then if you see it that way, which just is objective reality, that's framed as an outward position, uh that doesn't give people comfort and it even frees people too much. Like, well, if it's not God saying it and if it's not an absolute and it's just laws, then laws have been wrong throughout human history, right?

[00:05:47]There have been laws that protect mistreatment of others and uh whatever.

[00:05:52]The the governments have been fuserious and wrong all throughout history by our standards. So you wouldn't take that too seriously, right? You would say, well, it's a it's a law, but it's subjective.

[00:06:02]Anybody can just break it whenever they want if you're good enough to get away with it. So it creates that issue of like the subjective versus the subjective, right? That's why that false elevated level is introduced like, oh no, it's not just your word against mine. It's, you know, God or something else and their word against yours. Oh, because in that subjective framework then it's impossible to win that argument because then it's like well anybody can just say anything you know the law or people can say oh that's wrong and then you could just say oh that's right and you might think oh that's you know social Darwinism but it doesn't really matter and unfortunately that's how actions work too like anybody can just decide to go out and do something right and even the law in that sense is reactive like if they're really dedicated committed I I always had that expression like if I'm walking down the street and somebody really wanted to just come behind me and hit me in the head and you know whatever they could do it, right? I wouldn't be expecting it.

[00:06:56]That's how society is. Like if somebody really wants to do something, they can do it. But so you live in a society that kind of has a two-faced perspective.

[00:07:06]Like you trust you have to trust the people around you, your neighbors and stuff, but you also don't trust them because you lock your door and stuff like that. So like there's this weird middle ground where you have to kind of rely that oh you're walking down the street and somebody isn't just going to run you over whatever but also deep down you don't really trust them. So that's a constant contradiction that people are fighting with.

[00:07:32]Hey Vy, how's it going?

[00:07:35]Um so yeah the thing is that it's important sometimes even I have this expression too that I always used to use right you have to realize that everything doesn't revolve around people or you even to best achieve that same self-interest that's not exactly how I said it but so like even if your only goal is to serve human interest it would still benefit you and behoove you to not see things from that perspective and pretend like everything already does revolve around us just because we want it to. So then we won't take all the necessary actions to actually make it so. Right? So it's like oh that sometimes that's the issue with belief systems. It's like a lzair attitude. Well if if there is a god and he's looking out for you then you won't try as hard and reach your potential because you'll you know you'll just assume that he'll take care of it, right? where people try to pass out their own powerlessness that way too.

[00:08:34]You'll focus on astrology and superstitions and all these kind of insignificant things. Meanwhile, your whole life you're deferring to big corporations and authority figures and government and letting nature all be monopolized. Like all the things of significance, you're letting uh all the things of significance you're kind of letting them be controlled and deferring them and acting like that's default to do with no real good reason. and it'll be done in the name of some pretense of like for the greater good. But it's kind of like some random dude goes out in the woods and and does the same thing a corporation is doing and they're in the wrong but the corporation isn't like that's kind of stupid but it's kind of like yeah I'm going to Montreal by the way like what why is it treated like this? I love some of these signs that are like so longwinded. It be oh yeah New York City this way and it's like 300 miles away.

[00:09:26]Like in a general sense, yes, it is that way. But nobody gives a [ __ ] about all the tabs in between, I guess. But no, it's like the point is that Yeah. Do do we do this? I'll stream going through the border of like I just wonder what they'll do. Or I'll try to do a sneak like I'll stream going through the border. check at the thing uh at Canada, which I've never actually been in Canada. I've been like Niagara Falls and like the border area, but I don't think I've ever been over um so yeah the thing is that basically yeah even to best achieve your own self-interest it's sometimes beneficial icial to be objective. Take a step back and see how the world really works. So you can actually achieve it instead of pretending it already is that way. So then you are powerless. And again people focus on or you don't reach your potential. And so people focus on like all those innate insignificant things like superstitions and horoscopes, astrology and and like some metaphysical stuff. But you're ignoring all the unnatural things we do, all the unnatural foods we put in our bodies, all the you know monopolization over nature that we give to corporations, all the like we conceded all that basically we can see the mind and so then people attribute it to all these things like oh if you do this EFT tapping or what like all these things no how about if you just use your brain and you actually think for yourself which you're not used to doing that opens up a lot of possibilities right it's not about the specific thing you'll say oh use this do this do that it's about the cosmic contrivance that you're exposed to and so some sometimes you can um you know be free of that. So being objective would be a pathway to you know would be a pathway to open a lot of those things. So you can look at that from the lens of science, right? Science won out over religion. Even if you want to you keep pointing to that because religion would just keep repeating itself throughout history like oh it's just right it's just this that you could say oh it makes people uh behave in a certain moral ordered way. So you could say it compliments it, but people can do that without and whatever. But the point and you still rely on laws and stuff anyway. But the thing is that um but there's this weird law that when you're in a work zone, you have to like have your lights on, which nobody ever does, but I feel like that could be weird sometimes. Um, Yeah, like the objective way that science works like you could use that process and then decide what to do like you know then still use it to achieve human interest. But in order to do that, you would have to see the objective reality that oh, the world doesn't revolve around people obviously because it just is. And you know, science works how it does. Like we could go extinct at any time and like there's no real special meaning to it. But right, if if you look at it objectively, like what makes people so special? Our intelligence evolved a little more.

[00:13:42]We're a little more self-aware, right?

[00:13:45]It's only a couple, you know, a speck of time in the sands of time. Like, it's not really that long that we've been around. So, on one hand, it's impressive how much we've accomplished. On the other hand, it's not that big of a deal.

[00:13:56]Like, we went extinct now, right? We'd be forgotten about pretty quickly in the, you know, big picture of um except our plastics and [ __ ] that will remain in the ocean forever. But no, it's like there's nothing uh that big of a deal.

[00:14:12]you know, dinosaurs ruled the world for millions of years and then they they went extinct. So, I don't know. It's just this arrogance that we have that actually ends up being our undoing that's not really even useful is the point, right? Assuming that human interest is the go end goal, you still have to see things outside of it. So, be objective. See that it doesn't revolve around you. See all the things you don't want to see so you can try to counteract them.

[00:14:46]So you can see the same thing on a personal level like you want to ignore all the things about yourself that you don't like or or whatever flaws and stuff you have or do you and you want to be all positive and overcompensating but or do you want to acknowledge them and then you can kind of counteract them or or even like in the reality around you you try to overcompensate for the subversive process which people often do in like superficial ways. For example, you know, the the way you dress and things like that is how you express yourself, but in ways that don't have an impact to make up for the fact that you don't have control or choice in the ways that do have an impact, right? Like again, monopoly over nature itself, corporations and government and whatever, right? Your impact there is limited and stripped away.

[00:15:35]And then um you make up for it by overcommenting in all the ways that don't matter. You'll get a certain clothing, tattoos, piercings, right? That's what that represents is like even like I'll use entertainment, escapism as as an example. Like why would you take it's a twofold problem, right? What I call folly favoritism. Why do people value escapism, entertainment, movies, TV, games and stuff, right? On one hand, it would hurt the credibility of a person like why would you spend your time on something that has no impact on your life? It's a psychological thing the same way like like oh it could be positive psychologically but anything could be positive psychologically including something that actually has an impact on your life. So it shows you a subversive state that like that means you don't really value your life and you're kind of just uh it would hurt the credibility of any sort of structure empirical basis that you have because you're doing something that has no impact at all and that's not even real and yet you're still valuing it. And it's like you know I made that analogy to religion. I actually am sort of in favor of religion one for once. Like how can you value something that's not real? But I even offered it up myself like you know if God's not real but well we value entertainment and that's not real and we know it's not real. So it's kind of the same argument like so you're doing it for psychological reason you're doing it for peace of mind whatever the case may be. So like even if you don't believe in that you still value things that don't that aren't real. Like think about a life that would only be focused on things that have real tangible physical real world impact. Um, and you're not allowed to really even do that in society because you have all these overcompensations for the fact that you're going to have mess state, you know, monopolized by corporations, nature itself, etc. But the point because you're deferring all of that would be part of your natural potential.

[00:17:32]And so what it means is that you're trying to cope with that contrivant state. Um, but the second part of the favoritism angle is the fact of why do people prefer or or desire that? Because there they can actually be free and uninhibited. It's like and it's always there for you kind of.

[00:17:54]Yeah, sure. Hey Jeremiah, happy birthday to Sarah G.

[00:18:00]Yeah, sure.

[00:18:05]So the thing is that yeah no problem. Um, let's see. The point is that yeah, people can actually be free in fiction. You know, there's more truth in fiction than in reality because there's no incentives and it can by you can do whatever you want that you can do in real life that you could do in real life, but you're not allowed to do in real life. And so there's something to that where, you know, that's why people prefer it.

[00:18:45]they'd rather be free in a simulated sense than, you know, take seriously their contrivment state. Uh, and yet they still do. And so what happens is a second conflict here which I call um well it's kind of the credibility issue because again the same people that need to distract themselves from the lives that they live would indignantly insist upon those same lives and like act like they have credibility to uphold the structure that controls them too.

[00:19:15]Whereas you you would say you know what your society is good and your life is sound and logical and you know you have credibility. Meanwhile, you distract yourself with entertainment and escapism. Meanwhile, you drink and smoke. And again, it's not putting oneself above that. It's just saying like so nobody really has credibility because you can't even cope with the reality of your own existence without distracting from it. So there would be no basis for empirical structure and authority. And the only appearance thereof would be like through uh kind of myopic framing and propaganda like you know people in power are really better but they just curate themselves their image more and people eat it up because they're stupid right like they're being carefully curated by the media by whatever other aspects. So, so you let it come down to like a contest of popularity and appearances rather than just realizing, okay, people can be a useful tool, a useful idiot. Um, because this is the other problem is like when you go with that cult of personality basis, it's like, oh, you the public thinks this person is good and then they turn out to not be good.

[00:20:21]So then you're at their mercy of like, oh, we voted for them and then something bad happens. It's like would you rather be at the mercy of somebody being good or bad and that's all it takes for something bad to happen or would you rather say okay just assume everybody is bad or whatever potentially. So then don't give anybody too much power and always be skeptical, right? Limit power in general. But that's not how we live.

[00:20:43]Like and the main driver of that is just population. Like oh the more people there are the more that's used as a pretense to control people because then oh one person does something and then that's used to control everybody else.

[00:20:57]Right. So that that makes no sense because it's like you're guilty until proven innocent.

[00:21:03]you know, everybody is punished for for the wrongdoings of a small number. So like not only did the government fail to stop the one person who did something bad, but then they they don't take accountability and blame, but they blame the public who didn't do it and say, "Oh, it's your fault now and we have to be punish you, right?" Like, so it's a twofold fallacy. Like think about, okay, 9/11, for example, you should blame the government and say, "That's their fault.

[00:21:29]How could they allow that to happen?"

[00:21:31]And that should be an indictment against the government and say they're no good and we need to impeach George Bush and stuff like that. But instead, it's used the opposite way to say no, they need more power. That's the issue. Like imagine that like you make some catastrophic failure and allow something bad to happen on your lodge, but you're rewarded by more power as a result.

[00:21:53]That's how government basically works, right?

[00:21:57]You're not held accountable like, "Oh, you know what? maybe we should give you less power because you've messed up and let that happen and we'll handle it ourselves or we'll do it, you know, some other way, but instead, you know, you're obviously not to be trusted. So, and that that creates the incentive of the false flag thing like, oh, was it an inside job or it's done on purpose? Even if that wasn't, the point is that's all it would take, right? Some tragedy happens and then now the government can use that as a pretense to increase its power, which happens a lot throughout history, right? So just the concept of that even is the point. Whether it's like it's used that way either way. Even if it wasn't an inside job, it was used to increase the government's power, right, to this day. And then and then everything's like a temporary measure, but it never goes away. Like airport security is still like that to some extent. Like you know, so once the power increases, even emergency power, you never get that back. When do you ever hear that? right? Like, oh, we're we're giving up the government's giving up their power. That was just a temporary thing today.

[00:23:06]So, the thing is that people are basically stupid is is the basic element. But even as they're stupid, it's like that they lack credibility. And the reason why they lack credibility is because they're upholding. It's like the false absolute default outward state. They lack credibility, but then you um but then they still would indignity insist upon the state that they're in, right? Kind of like full of sound and furious signifying nothing where they'll do it just because they're doing it, not because there's actually any standard behind it.

[00:24:06]This is kind of cool. It turns into like a travel log with how much I'm driving now where like you get to see all these other areas. I don't know how interesting that really is, but it mixes it up. I mean, the alternative being I can just do it like showing a notepad on my thing. So, like this is at least more interesting than that, but it's fun seeing like people try to guess to where I am. Like looking at this just visually, this could be anywhere. This could be like anywhere in the northern United States kind of. It almost looks like fall though with some of the tree uh the way some of these trees look. But yeah, I wonder what people's first guess, but then the signs kind of give it away. Like geogesser IRL, do do a real life geogesser. Even I can do that to an extent. Like not so much generally where I am, but like where exactly am I?

[00:24:54]Like what's the next exit? Exit 13 is what town? I have no idea. Right.

[00:25:01]So 13s is Saratoga Lake, Saratoga Springs.

[00:25:27]S target casino. And this also acts as like a dash cam in case something does happen, I guess, because I don't use those. So, or like one time a cop, I don't know if I have that still. One time a cop pulled me over and I didn't really do anything wrong. My car was just kind of bouncing around and [ __ ] cuz the road was kind of rough or my tire was a little winded. So, it's like then you get to hear in the background of the stream the cop and me talking like it's kind of a funny thing to incidentally accidentally catch cuz it's just already running. So, I'm not going to, you know, that's one of the bad habits that people sometimes have. I've done that before.

[00:26:06]Like, you get pulled over and I've never gotten a ticket or anything, but you get pulled already stopped and I'm going to reach in my glove compartment or something and you get a registration or whatever. Like, that's such a dumb thing to do. You're going to take off your seat belt as soon as you get pulled over, right?

[00:26:33]This isn't going to be too long of a drive, but you know, whatever. It's still good.

[00:26:41]It's always a good excuse to stream whenever I'm driving. I try to stream at least like once a day. Although, I've wanted to play some games lately, but I, you know, I'm going to be a mobile gaming streamer at this point because I don't have the greatest setup to do when I'm traveling. Obviously, that makes it harder, but um I don't know.

[00:27:07]Let me think. How else can I describe this thing? Like how people look for confirmation bias everywhere they go.

[00:27:12]So, it's kind of like, do you watch Fox News because you're a Republican or are you're a Republican because you watch Fox News or like, you know, you seek out what you already want to hear versus you think something because of the influence that you experience. Now, when you're young, you're more impressionable. So, you have to be careful about that. Like your parents and stuff like that would would influence you that way. But then there's also the concept I talk about of opposite interpret. Yeah, trying to say that three times. Kayadero sauce, whatever this [ __ ] place is. Um, the point is that um, like opposite interpretation, somebody could show you something or tell you something and that can draw you towards it or draw you away from it.

[00:27:58]Just because you're exposed to something doesn't mean you automatically believe it. So, it's kind of like, oh, you grew up in a Christian household or something. For some people that could draw you towards it. Some people that could push you away and be like, "No, I don't want you know it." So you make your own decision. So people can control what you're exposed to but not what you think about it. Right? So that's the difference. It's like you can have two different interpretations of the same thing. So like like what is the telltale example of that that I use? like basically like showing somebody what not to be.

[00:28:37]It's like, oh, will you grow up to be like your parents because that's how you were raised or or will you um or will you basically do the opposite? like they were showing you how not to be or that's what you decide that you know you don't want to be like them without that or even like seeing something on the news or like violence or something like that, right? One person could be drawn to like the way that people sometimes say that like something has to be censored.

[00:29:41]But if it's really bad, right, and you're so confident in it being bad, then why does it have to be censored?

[00:29:47]It's like people could see it and they would see for themselves that it's bad.

[00:29:50]So, I have an expression like that, you know? Oh, if your if your opponent or somebody says something bad, then you shouldn't hide it. You should censor it.

[00:29:58]You should hang it on your wall and use that to show people look how bad they actually are. If you're confident in that, right? So, censorship is only necessary when you may want to make that decision for other people. It's bad and it's so bad that you don't even get to see it for yourself. So, we're going to save you from the exposure to how bad it is. Like, that's a trick to try to control people. like no, you should be able to you can see it for yourself and see how bad it is and then you'll decide what to do.

[00:30:24]And so one of the things is that you know you would see um like let's say something violent or negative behavior, right? Then again people would be repulsed by it potentially or they would be drawn to it.

[00:30:48]And the reason why is because that would say more about to blame the influence and say oh see that's why we should have censored it because for some people they use it as motivation or inspiration. It's like, but that says more about them than it does about it, right? Like you can't blame the influence. Again, not not withstanding a very young age of people where they're impressionable.

[00:31:15]That part I get. Although to some extent you could argue against that too if you wanted. Like you shouldn't have to censor reality from people, right? Period. That people should be able to see anything at any age. And what would it do, right? If it's bad, they would see for themselves that it's bad. So what is it that we're really censoring in that case? who are sensoring that oh people wouldn't behave a certain way unless we kind of force them to and sensor reality like with the stimuli acne or even what I was just saying not just the children are impressionable they might try to imitate that but it's more that they would see that basically they would see the totality of existence in reality and human potential in nature instead of just some of it you try to sense reality and create like this curated framing that is false You're li you basically have to lie to people and lie to yourself. You might think the end result is positive, but should it be necessary to do that is the question.

[00:32:15]You might think, oh well, it's just children or whatever, but that's part of the problem too. It's like what gives you the right to censor reality from people before they can even think for themselves? Why should you need to do that? And it's only to create a curated state that is artificial and has along with that the conflict of contrivance.

[00:32:33]And so you know you you may say it's worth it somehow but there would be a certain perspective that it shouldn't be necessary.

[00:33:06]For example, the stimuli acne like why would you have to censor things to do with that? What's the worst that can happen? It's like people will freely do things then and they won't be restricted to one person and stuff like that. So when you talk about something like oh the birds and the bees and stuff like that, you're trying to create this contrived curated behavior that not everybody would uniformly want to do and they still don't do. Uh so you're trying to create that like it's an absolute or it's like something you know that you're forcing on people and so you know that has a problem because you could point oh that's bad but it doesn't matter if it's bad you shouldn't have to for what's worse like the result of not censoring reality and curating it or the act of doing it in the first place that you shouldn't have to do that, right? And what gives you the right to do that even if again the end justifies the means. But like you're assuming the intent, you're assuming the outcome unless you live in some perfect utopian state which you know clearly people have conflict and problems themselves. Um what gives it what gives anybody the credibility to really do that and they obviously don't have that. That's what why so many things are so [ __ ] up.

[00:34:30]It's like, you know, there's no basis for it, but yet people keep pumping out kids about, you know, preserving the simuling curated reality itself. And so I don't know What other angles could I look at this from? like the fact that you know like all the prerequisites of either a belief system or a contrived state that would be like it's absolute but you have to do this this this this and this first. You have to censor reality. You have to dominate people before they can think for themselves.

[00:35:30]You have to have constant social contrive stigma. This and that and then it's validated. Well, guess what else is validated if you do that? Literally everything else. in existence because like every other society would seem validated in that curated perspective.

[00:35:46]So you have to be careful to let the general moral standard or general humanentric ide ideation be used to support a problem of a specific contrivment state, right? Like the one that you're in. So they would all use that as a pretense. Oh, it's for the general good, you know, it's for the collective mass. It's for this, it's for that.

[00:36:09]Right?

[00:36:13]They'll all use that as a pretense, but that doesn't justify a specific a specific thing, right? I like you don't think China would be using the same rhetoric like oh we have to censor things because otherwise people do bad things and it leads to deviant behavior which in some weird way of course I wouldn't defend it but you know it's easy to say that's bad but when they have so many people there you would say oh maybe that just like it's the same rationale that anywhere else uses based on the number of people you would be less free because that would be used as a pretense to say okay we need this control that control because of how many people there are again if the world was a village of 100, right?

[00:37:09]There'd be less basis to control people.

[00:37:11]There'd be less need to control people.

[00:37:14]There'd be less means to control people, right? it would just be okay. You know, that's often what history rewards, which is ironic compared to the modern day is like, you know, somebody would just take something by force. That's what we reward or that's what's impressive to us. Like, what about the alternative?

[00:37:40]Like, it's not that like hypothetically, let's just look at it like this. Not saying Native Americans and such didn't fight against amongst each other's tribal warfare and stuff, but like what if from a certain point of view, and I actually write a line like this in one of my short stories, like this minimalistic commune group that there is. It's like it's not that they lack the ability to do what society does or it's not like they aren't smart or couldn't do that. It's that they are at peace with less. So the same society that you live in that glorifies, oh, we got to recycle or we got to do this for global warming, right? But yet you still live an overextended techn technological based life in excesses and conveniences and stuff like that. So you really don't care. You're just using as a pretense to feel gratified about yourself. Uh compared to the one who is living a minimalistic lifestyle, you won't do that, which would solve the problem right there, just like in human history.

[00:38:37]But you would, you know, you would glorified in pretense, but you still keep your own way of life going.

[00:38:50]And then You know h how else can I explain that just cuz they're doing what you pretend to care about and it's like oh they lack the ability or they're savages or this or that. What if they're just at peace with less?

[00:39:36]They're not as greedy and selfish as you, right? They're not as petty and materialistic as you. So, you're selfish and greedy and you value all those over compensations. They they don't require those things, but then you force it on them and then act like, "Oh, you're better." Or that's like a form of Darwinism, but it's really not because it's not that they lack the ability to do something. It's that they were in peace without doing it. Right? and you're assuming your zero sum over compensated ways are are better. But it's kind of like it comes to the same thing. If they're at peace with that, sleeping on the ground, on the grass, and picking berries, and you know, whatever, living a minimalistic life. If they're at peace with that, then so what? It's like you don't have to do that, but you force it on them and the whole world, you know, takes after it's like none of that is really necessary. This seems like, oh, it's a zero subdarbatistic process, but it really isn't based on anything because even if you say longevity process, there's a half mass hiddenism.

[00:40:39]People drink, people smoke, people do unhealthy things. So, people don't even know what they want. They're just mindlessly reacting and indignally insisting upon it almost not because it is validated, but but because it's just kind of random. So, they're doing it from a place of ego to insist upon their state that they're already in, but it's it's not based on anything. It's not credible.

[00:41:00]Um, so the thing is that everything becomes like a permission.

[00:41:29]permission basis fallacy of like you have to justify or have permission for everything that you do rather than the opposite, right? That you would and again there really is no basis for it. It's like collective standards for collective sake because there's so many people. You all have to be treated like animals. You have to be trained. It might not apply to you but you're supposed to be gratified still dealing with that. And then you know where was like oh the inability to acquies to a wait it's a rest stop but it like a playground is that really a it's not like one of those highway throughway rest stops.

[00:42:12]Um but no it's like you need permission. So so it's like you cut out a slice of reality like let's defer and let everything be monopolized and then we'll get like a little piece of it back. You give up control and power over everything in the world that otherwise would be free to everyone and you know whatever and then you get a little bit of it back and that falsely validates it. Like especially when you look at it from like when you're growing up in a society like that, does that validate it? Because it's like it was already established before you were born. So you didn't have a choice. You didn't create it. you didn't vouch for it. You were subject to it. It'll be like, "Oh, you benefited from it, but you were subject to it, right? You tolerated it. You deferred to it." That doesn't validate it at all, right? There was no basis for it in the origin point. Um, so that that hurts the credibility of the past generation because it's like they'll feel gratified for it, but they've deferred the monopoly over nature itself and everything and they've just let it be. So at some point, right, you would have to undo that or hold that accountable because they didn't. So they were weak and lazy just like every other time. Like it's always like the conquered people who or even the conquerors themselves and their descendants who who behave like that like oh we feel gratified in our half mass state that was achieved through immorality in the past but now we're just going to forget about that.

[00:43:51]And so like again that that would be exposed justification. So by the same logic that you're living it now. It's like, oh, you can go out and do something horrible right now and then hundreds of years from now. You'll be glorified or you know the descendants there will will be living as a that way as a result of your actions. So it's kind of like it maybe it's a machio sort of thing. So it doesn't really matter because people don't have standards.

[00:44:23]So you would say like you know just if if you did something by force and I hate to say that but like that's how history is done like oh that would be bad you would say now because what's established is good and what anything else would be bad but if you were to let's say you were to do that some Robin Hood type dude they you know steal from big corporations give to the poor, the third world countries, equalize, level everything out, you'd be condemned in the short term, but in the big picture, it would be uh you know, it would be relevant. So, I don't know.

[00:46:21]I hate doing the right turn on red even if you're supposed to.

[00:46:35]But no, like there's always this assumption of a nonvalue subversive state in the sense that like nothing could be valuable or um nothing could be valuable or uh it's assumed like there could be no measure, there could be no absolute potential that you're trying to do. And the reason why is because really like I don't know how to explain it. Like nothing you're doing could be important. It's all zero sum self-interest. So like that's used as a basis to control people that there is no measure at work. I became a chef today at the age of 21. Be happy for you. Wow, that is nice. What kind of chef?

[00:47:44]That is a tough job.

[00:48:06]It's a weird looking town. It seems like both big and small at the same time.

[00:48:12]I This seems like maybe the only big center that they have.

[00:48:20]I don't think I've ever been here before.

[00:48:24]Like I've been in this region but not this exact town.

[00:48:35]I guess we'll never find out. He said, "Yeah, that's pretty." Doing anything by the age of 21 is impressive given how much society restricts you from doing anything at a younger age and tries to curate the outcome. But it's kind of like People are very like getting back to the main point. People are like very arrogant or egotistical and stuff and then they, you know, indignantly insist and everything like that. They don't think about what they're doing.

[00:49:28]But no, they're they're trained and tamed like animals in the way that um the way that uh you you know, by the stimulus that you always have to appeal to human interest that way. Kind of like, you know, just you have to appeal to human interest in the way that, you know, how do you get people to not do something right? Like hurting each other, killing each other. How do you get people to not do that? You don't just say, "Oh, it's morally wrong and oh yeah, it is. So then we're not going to do it." That'll be the pretense, but oh no, you have to do it by appealing to their own self-interest. The same reason why they might do it in the first place, which is to say, we're going to punish you. We're going to put you in jail, right? So that's a real reason why people wouldn't do it. And then the same thing here is like, you know, you control people by appealing to stuff like the stimul, the possession, the sexual, you know, element there. So like you have to appeal to their own interest. You can't just even like run the circuses.

[00:50:47]Okay, I'm done.