Philosopher on Why Being Nice is Selfish, Is Incest Bad? &, Testing our Ethics! | Alex O'Connor

Summary

---

Flagrant Podcast with Andrew Schulz & Akaash Singh

Episode: Philosopher on Why Being Nice is Selfish, Is Incest Bad? Testing our Ethics! | Alex O'Connor

Date: August 20, 2025
Featured Guest: Alex O’Connor (Oxford-educated philosopher, “Cosmic Skeptic”)

---

Overview of Episode

This episode dives into the wild world of moral philosophy, featuring intense debates and hilarious moments. Oxford-educated philosopher Alex O’Connor joins Andrew Schulz, Akaash Singh, Mark Gagnon, and AlexxMedia to dissect ethical hot takes. The crew embarks on philosophical thought experiments, grapples with uncomfortable moral questions (incest, bestiality, utilitarianism), and exposes the hidden selfishness behind empathy—all with the Flagrant trademark blend of humor and brutal honesty.

---

Major Discussion Points & Insights

1. What Is Empathy, Really? (00:00–09:00)

• Debate: Who on the Flagrant crew is actually the most empathetic?
• Alex’s Take: Empathy is ultimately self-serving.
  • Quote: “Empathy is essentially self-serving, though. This is the thing. Like, if you're the most empathetic, it means that you're the most selfish.” – Alex (07:03)
• Crew Response: Mix of agreement, defensiveness, and jokes about accents and cultural empathy.
• Breakdown: The notion that performing good deeds for others is inextricably linked to the satisfaction or emotional reward one receives, challenging the idea of true altruism.

2. Testing Moral Foundations: Ethics Are Just a "Fugazi"? (09:00–13:00)

• Topic: Are good and bad objective facts or evolutionary byproducts?
• Alex’s Argument: Morality is an evolved social instinct, not an objective reality.
  • We care more for children than cousins due to genetic closeness, not reasoned ethical principles.
• Quote: “In my view, it's essentially an evolutionary byproduct... how much genetic sharing we have with people just happens to line up with how much we think we have a moral duty to care about them.” – Alex (10:29)

3. Incest, Bestiality, and the Limits of Moral Taboos (13:00–26:00)

• Prompt: Schulz brings up Alex’s public ‘incest debate’ reputation.
• Alex’s Approach: Clarifies that philosophy interrogates the reasoning behind taboos, not the practice itself.
• Notable Quotes:
  • “I'm not actually making an opinion here... I’m throwing out views and ideas... If you think incest is wrong, I’m gonna ask why.” – Alex (04:49)
• Thought Experiment: Is consensual, non-reproductive incest “wrong”?
• Bestiality Parallel: Is it really worse than eating animals?
  • Quote: “But the moment I take my dick out, suddenly it’s like this horrible problem. So what is that?” – Alex (24:28)
• Analysis: The difference in moral disgust is more about knee-jerk emotional reactions than reasoned arguments.

4. The Nature of Moral Instincts: Evolution, Biology, & Overcoming Bias (26:00–33:00)

• Insight: Many of our moral taboos (against incest, bestiality, outgroup suspicion) are hardwired evolutionary traits.
• Progress: “All the proud moments of human history are characterized by overcoming animalistic baselessness.” – Alex (27:09)
• Alex & Schulz: Wrestling with which instincts should be retained or transcended in modern society.

5. Thought Experiments: Trolley Problem & Utilitarian Dilemmas (36:16–49:00+)

• Classic Trolley Problem: Do you pull the lever to save five, at the cost of one?
  • Most crew members say “no” (they won’t pull), to avoid direct responsibility.
• Variations Explored:
  • Numbers game (what if it’s 1 vs. 100?)
  • Fat Man variation (will you push one person to save five?)
  • Considering relatives vs. strangers (selfishness vs. utilitarianism)
• Emotional vs. Rational Brain (48:04):
  • Quote: “People who said that they would pull the lever but wouldn’t push the fat man... the part of their brain that deals with emotion was lighting up... people who would pull the lever and push the fat man... the part of their brain that deals with rational thinking was lighting up.” – Alex (48:04)
• Underlying Lesson: Most people feel their way through moral judgment more than they realize.

6. Philosophy's Role, Intellectual Masturbation, & Limits of Logic (31:31–33:00, 49:28–52:02)

• Alex’s Critique: “Philosophy is... arguing for the sake of arguing. Philosophical mass debating.” (30:47)
• Real Impact: Philosophy rarely changes what people actually do in practical moments; it more often exposes psychological foundations for existing beliefs.

7. Emotivism: Morality Is Just Emotion (66:48–69:00)

• Alex’s Position: “I’m what’s called an emotivist about ethics. I think that all ethical statements are just expressions of emotion.” (66:48)
• Philosophers as Mirror: We think someone is wise if they articulate what we already feel. True intellectual mind-changing is rare—agreement is drawn out, not deposited.

8. Personal Identity, Consciousness & Split Brain (73:08–79:57)

• Split-Brain Patients: Raises questions about whether humans are “one” mind or two cooperating hemispheres.
• Thought Experiment: If your atoms were reassembled into two people, which one is “you?”
• Philosophical Mindfucks about memory, identity, and the continuity of self.

9. Radical Honesty, Therapy, and Living With Philosophy (99:09–109:15)

• Alex’s Personal Code: Has a philosophy of “radical honesty,” struggles to compartmentalize and sometimes over-analytical in real life.
• Therapy/Self-Audit: Philosophy enhances but sometimes complicates living; self-reflection comes in waves and can be emotionally taxing.
  • Quote: “If you want to do [self-analysis] properly, it can be soul-crushing.” – Alex (109:16)
• Balance: Both overthinking and simply “living” have their roles; it’s healthiest to oscillate between the two.

10. Psychedelics, Experiences, and the Limits of Analysis (111:13–118:46)

• Psychedelics: Profoundly shape perception, highlight the “guide rails” in ordinary consciousness.
• Striking Moments: Reflections in mirrors (seeing one’s older or younger self), acceptance of primal emotions, the value of feeling.

11. Final Reflections: Living Authentically

• Alex: Tries not to let philosophical detachment dull happiness or human connections.
• Big Picture: Pursuit of knowledge and self-awareness ideally enriches, rather than replaces, lived experience.
  • “It's really fun to chew on the fat... But it's also... you can just live your life and still have a really good life by any philosopher's standard of what good means without ever, like, realizing that that's what you're doing or thinking about it in that way.” – Alex (118:55)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Empathy: “If you’re the most empathetic, it means you’re the most selfish.” – Alex (07:03)
• On Ethics: “Morality and good and bad in my view is all just...a smokescreen, it’s a fugazi.” – Alex (09:03)
• On Bestiality: “I can take a pig...force that pig into a gas chamber, choking to death...But the moment I take my dick out, suddenly it’s like this horrible problem.” – Alex (24:28)
• On Utilitarianism: “If you’re a utilitarian...suppose it’s not you, suppose it’s someone else who’s going to pull that lever and you know for a fact that they will get some pleasure out of pulling that lever and killing that person. It might not just be permissible...it might be a duty.” – Alex (41:14)
• On Philosophy: “Philosophy is not how people actually make big life decisions.” – Alex (94:31)
• On Therapy and Honesty: “I have a kind of...philosophy of radical honesty...I will volunteer this information to people that I care about.” – Alex (105:12)

---

Key Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:00–08:30 – Crew debates empathy: is being nice actually selfish?
• 13:00–16:00 – Incest, consent, and the philosophy of taboos.
• 24:00–26:00 – Bestiality, eating animals, and where moral disgust comes from.
• 36:16–49:00 – Extended trolley problem and variations; emotional vs. rational decision making.
• 48:04–49:04 – MRI studies show ‘feelers’ and ‘rationalists’ process the trolley problem differently.
• 66:48–69:41 – Emotivism: morality is just emotion, not fact.
• 73:08–79:57 – Split brain and personal identity: mind-bending thought experiments.
• 99:09–109:16 – Philosophy, radical honesty, and the emotional cost of overthinking.
• 111:13–118:46 – Psychedelic experiences and their impact on perception and self-reflection.

---

Tone & Style

• Language: Candid, irreverent, quick-witted, often profane.
• Atmosphere: Unfiltered “greatest hang”—a mix of high-level philosophy and raunchy stand-up energy.
• Alex’s Presence: Deeply intellectual while open to jokes; acts as both foil and collaborator in the crew’s wild thought experiments.

---

For Listeners: Why You Should Care

If you’ve ever wondered why you feel the way you do about controversial moral issues, or wanted to hear a philosopher go toe-to-toe with comedians on the big questions of life (with plenty of laughter and no sacred cows), this episode is a pitch-perfect masterclass in both ethical reasoning and the art of thoughtful conversation—with a big, highly entertaining Flagrant twist.

---

Transcript

[A]

You gotta help Alex figure out his moral position through a series of questions to figure out if he's a piece of. I think I'm the most empathetic out of the form. There's no way out of the four of us. I don't know. This guy's a crazy person. He's the most sensitive people he does. He's never met before.

[B]

I have a switch.

[A]

Yeah, but like, if they're.

[B]

If they're real, that's not real empathy.

[A]

No, I love every. I love everybody.

[B]

You start so easy.

[A]

You start good, and then you gotta it up. Everybody starts bad for you. What do they? Hari Krishna. That's the. You know what I mean? Like, trying too hard. The people. You're saying you're Hindu.

[B]

No, Hari Krishnas are not Hindu.

[A]

What are they?

[B]

Frauds.

[A]

They worship Krishna.

[B]

Yeah, frauds, dude. I tried reading one of that, like, the leader's books, and this is what I immediately tapped out.

[C]

He.

[B]

The guy interviewing him goes, you preach not having, like, a material leading a materialistic life, but you will accept, like, gold gifts from people and whatever. And the guy goes, well, if you're giving me the gift, it's like giving it to God. And I was like, all right, this guy, dude. This guy all the way.

[A]

I like him now. It's a mean thing not to accept the gift. They went, you have the most empathy. I just hear the way you guys talk sometimes, and you guys are. What are you performing for?

[C]

It's not real.

[A]

Honest people you don't know honestly feel that way. You think that we lack empathy for whom, though? No, I don't think you lack empathy. I think I have the most empathy. You're the most sensitive. Yes. Okay, let me. Okay, ready? Let's just do it. No, we're not starting to pop. We're just going to do a test. Can you just speak in an Indian accent? And let's just see how much empathy you have. No, but that's love. He knows I'm not laughing at him. No, no, you are.

[B]

He used to make the jokes and it would hurt my feelings more the way you laughed, because I was like.

[A]

Oh, he really feels that way. You think they sound funny? If I knew any of your films, I wouldn't laugh. Do you think they sound funny? Yes, we all think they sound funn. Yeah, that was good. Okay, so they think Chinese people sound funny. We think accents are funny.

[B]

Syllable word. An Indian says better than you say perspiration.

[A]

I'm not saying they don't. That's the thing. I just think that would be the.

[C]

Word you would ask.

[A]

Listen, we're going to get to the bottom of it today by the end of this podcast, I promise you. Alex, you didn't know this is why you were going to be brought here, right? You thought we were going to talk about the Gnostic Gospels.

[C]

Y. I got to speak to my manager, man.

[A]

But reality is, is we're going to talk about Alex Media and his lack of empathy. And there's nothing crazy, there's nothing more annoying than someone who has no empathy that thinks they have the most. Honestly think I have the most empathy. Like, maybe Mark comes close.

[C]

Can you.

[B]

Can you help us?

[C]

Can you figure this out?

[A]

No. Like.

[B]

What are you talking about?

[A]

Mark just started having feelings when he had a kid. He. He's told us about this. I know, but he could do it wrong. He doesn't want to, like, hurt any problem.

[B]

That doesn't make you a good person. He's afraid of going to hell. Everything makes you a good self.

[A]

I don't care what's the reason.

[B]

No selfless deed.

[A]

I don't care what's the reasoning. But he doesn't do anything wrong. You make enemies when no one has done shit to you. But it could be justice. It could be justice. That's crazy. I never do that.

[B]

I see people. And I see you. You lack empathy. I see you, dog.

[A]

We agree to disagree. I see you guys. Today our guest is an Oxford educated philosopher whose debates have amassed hundreds of millions of views. He argues that incest. Fine. Okay, Alex, this is on your Wikipedia. I just want to point that you can kill people if you have a brain tumor and that democracy is immoral. We have Alex o' Connor on the pod. We're very excited about this. I mean, the first one hit me hard. This is a real. This is a. This is on your Wikipedia. I just snagged this from your Wikipedia. No big deal.

[C]

Yeah, the pleasure is yours. I think something might have got lost in translation there. Perhaps we can go through them.

[A]

Why, yes. I didn't say you believe it.

[C]

You seem to bring it up. You started with what? Incest.

[A]

It's because I've been watching White Lotus, man.

[C]

You're asking for a mate.

[A]

I do have a brother. I do have a brother, Alex.

[C]

It's just like, I have a brother.

[B]

But I could do better. I have a brother, but I could do better.

[A]

Yeah. No, this is obviously some of the debates that you've had where you're arguing intellectually if these things have, like, what? Negative repercussions. In society. What is the idea? Why even entertain this? You're not a comedian like us. This is all. We argue all the time.

[C]

That's right. That's the funny thing, and not funny in your sense, is that I'm not actually making an opinion here. What I'm basically doing is like throwing out views and ideas if you think there's something up with it. And that's gonna help you work out, like, what you think about the world, it doesn't matter whether you're right or wrong. The thing that matters is if you think, like, incest is wrong. I'm gonna ask why you think that.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

And try to get to the bottom of what's actually motivating your ethics. And most of the time, people are more confused about it.

[A]

Define wrong. Cause one could argue that it would probably fit the most perfect.

[C]

That's right.

[A]

You use that argument.

[C]

I haven't, actually.

[A]

I saw a great comment that you look like the kid from adolescence. And now that you're here. And now that you're here, I can't not see it. Why'd you say that? It worked out for him. A little bullying turned him into a real proper intellectual. You know what I mean? Like, this is.

[B]

You're the best case scenario.

[C]

It really is.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

That is what bullying at school does. It turns you into someone like me.

[A]

But you were never bullied. You're a tall, handsome kid. You're smart. Did you go through any bullying?

[C]

Well, I am now, yeah. Most of it was from the teachers though, unfortunately, because I.

[A]

Were you a pain in the ass? Yeah.

[C]

But then people. People like, really, like, celebrate this, you know, when people, like, try to really self indulgen say, like, you know, I was the kid who was always debating the. Debating the teachers and giving it back. And it's. It's like, that doesn't make you clever. That just makes you a pedant. It just makes you like this. This annoying ADHD kid that's like holding up the rest of the class.

[A]

In America, we have a way of getting them out of here.

[C]

Medicine, School shootings.

[A]

Bullets of medicine.

[C]

Yeah, we can talk about the ethics of that too.

[A]

Have you. Have you ever thought about defending that in some way?

[C]

I've thought about the ethics of defending school shooters. However, I have thought about the concept of children as child soldiers. See, I do a. I do a. A series called philosophical Hot takes where I get people to submit, like, their philosophical hot takes, and I rank them on a scale that goes from, like, mild, spicy. And I was at an Indian restaurant once. And one of the options was Indian spicy. So that's the top option and the opposite of spicy.

[B]

He's a monster.

[A]

He is a monster. You're legitimately autism.

[B]

What are you talking about?

[A]

You're the most empathetic man.

[C]

Empathy is essentially self serving, though. This is the thing. Like, if you're the most empathetic, it means that you're the most selfish. What is empathy?

[A]

We knew it. We've been saying this for a decade. He is the most selfish. So you are saying I'm the most empathetic. Let's see.

[B]

That's why. I didn't say that.

[A]

Why does empathy make you the most selfish?

[C]

What is empathy? What do you think empathy is?

[B]

Caring about other people.

[A]

Yeah. We just call it gay.

[C]

It's okay.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

It'S that. And that definitely is self serving to some degree. Caring about other people, like caring. It's essentially taking suffering in other people's suffering. It's like, if I have empathy for you, it means that when you suffer, I kind of suffer for it. Right. I don't want you to suffer.

[B]

I don't believe I suffer for it. About me, I understand what you're going through, and that must be hard.

[C]

I can, I can understand what you're going through and think that that's great, like awesome. I'm really happy that you're going.

[B]

Sociopathy.

[C]

So the only thing that, the only thing that makes you empathetic is when you understand what someone else is going through and you feel bad for it, you get upset about it. Look at like when we get heroes, like, imagine somebody like the firefighter who runs into the, into the burning.

[A]

Just trying. Sorry. Al just fixed his posture, looked at the distance and was like, I don't even know where I am right now. I'm still on a selfish thing. I'm like, it is kind of selfish because it makes me feel good that I'm caring for others. No, but what he's saying is that you are taking on their struggle. So you actually feel bad for them. Yeah, like it's about your feelings.

[C]

If the firefighter runs into the burning building and they come out and someone says, oh, you're such a hero. And the guy says, I just, I couldn't not. I had to. You know, like when I saw someone in that area, I just had to do it. I couldn't live with myself if I didn't. It's like, what are you saying, man? You did it for yourself. You did it for your own so that you can sleep at Night. Empathy is essentially self serving. This is the thing.

[A]

Like, but is that necessarily bad?

[C]

No, no, it's a good reward. There is no good and bad. I think that morality is all a.

[A]

What? I mean, good and bad is like, is it beneficial for society that I get rewarded for doing a quote unquote benevolent.

[C]

Oh yeah, but that's, that's why we think it's good, because it's beneficial for society.

[A]

So it's almost like the idea of.

[C]

Morality and good and bad in my view is all just. Is a smokescreen. It's a fugazi, as they say. Seriously, is it just like people talk about ethics as if it's objective.

[A]

Right. So for example, can you define ethics?

[C]

No.

[A]

Usually asthma, just not just for everybody watching. What exactly is ethics study?

[C]

It's broadly the idea of like right and wrong, like good and bad. And depending on who you ask, you might be like human flourishing. So what gives you the good life? You know, what is that all about? So for a Christian it might be living in accordance with God's will, or for an atheist, it might be what's beneficial to society. Right. If you're a moral objectivist and you believe that ethics is like a real thing, it means you think that there are actually just good and bad things in the world. There's right and there's wrong. Yeah, I don't believe that. Most people's intuitions say that there is such a thing. In my view, it's essentially an evolutionary byproduct. For example, is it just a coincidence that generally speaking, we think that you have a duty to care for your children? Right. You also have a duty to care for your cousin.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

But you probably have less of a duty to care for your cousin than your child. Like if your child is starving and your cousin is starving, you're gonna help the child and your cousin. And we think that that is like the right thing to do in that circumstance.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

Is it just a coincidence that you happen to share proportionally exactly the same amount of genes with the child versus the cousin? You share more genes with your child than with your cousin. You should share more genes with your cousin than with a distant cousin or a stranger or then again even someone.

[A]

In a different country, so taking care of your child.

[C]

It just so happens that how much like genetic sharing, how much genetic we have with these people just happens to line up with how much we think we have a moral duty to care about them.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Isn't that a strange coincidence?

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

If I saw a starving kid and my cousin who's 23, couldn't eat. I'd tell my cousin to get a job and I'd give the kid food. I don't need to be related to them. Am I crazy?

[A]

You might be right, man. You might be right about archives. Got a lack of empathy. That was crazy.

[C]

I forgot we wouldn't marry.

[A]

No, no, no, no, I understand.

[C]

What you're saying about ethics to an American is that if you sort of, if you give some kind of thought experiment about drowning child or to someone who's like in poverty. Well, just get a job, man.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, get a job. Bring yourself up by the bootstraps, invest.

[C]

In the S and P. And just like you get like wait like 20 years and you'll be able to buy yourself some lunch. Yes, it does.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

I think the problem with, that's the idea. The problem with thought experiments is that people often pick up on like totally the wrong thing. My least favorite thing that people do.

[A]

I don't want to move on from the thing you just, just brought up. I thought it was really interesting.

[C]

Yeah, we'll keep going on that.

[A]

No, specifically like, okay, let's say humans are bound.

[C]

He's like back to incest. I just really need to know, Please.

[A]

Help me out here, man, what the motivation for a behavior is. Doesn't really matter as long as it pushes society forward. Now what is pushing society forward? I mean, just like propagating the world with more of our DNA. Is that the idea?

[C]

Well, unless you think that having children is immoral. This is the thing.

[A]

I don't think it's immoral. But is it a bad thing?

[C]

You can just say like, oh, well, you know, what's good is like what benefits society. And it's like, well, you have to tell me what benefiting society.

[A]

And we have to define society.

[C]

Exactly. There are people in this world who think that the best thing we could do for the planet would just be to destroy all human beings. Yeah, right. And so for them, better for society means whatever is the most self deleterious behavior that you can possibly.

[A]

How much of. When you're doing these debates, is it like defining vocabulary all the time?

[C]

Most conversations that people have is just a matter of definition.

[A]

Yeah, it really is.

[C]

Like, so it's like you think you're arguing, but you're actually not. Put it this way, right? If I said a sentence and I, and I sincerely meant it. If you understood every single word that I was saying in the same way as I did, like you find it with this in the same way with the same connotations. I think by definition you would just agree with me. Yeah, I think there can be no disagreement if you're just saying the same thing. So most of the time it's a. It's a linguistic dispute.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. An emotional reaction to certain words, a perception of what those words mean.

[C]

And so a lot of the time, what we're actually doing is defining terms. So when we're like, oh, is this thing right or wrong?

[A]

Did you do that before? Like, let's say you're going to have a big public debate where you go back, hey, let's just decide what these different things mean so we don't get bogged down.

[C]

You have to some degree. But most of the time, the debate will sort of focus on what a word means. So if we're debating whether something's good.

[A]

Or bad, that's annoying.

[C]

It is. But you're trying to work out what good actually means. Because you say that. You say that incest is great. I say that incest is terrible.

[A]

Why are you putting that part of me. Because it could have been anything. Right. It's a hypothetical. It's a weird way that you position it. What does that have to do. What are the ethics in that?

[C]

Now you know how it feels. I'm gonna put it on your Wikipedia page. Right. Anytime you edit Wikipedia, we had to.

[A]

Start the episode off with a banger. I had to introduce everybody.

[C]

My whole toss now my whole task now literally bang her. I want to box you into an ethical corner where you have to admit that according to your worldview, incest is okay, just so I can then go and put it on you.

[A]

Well, let's define what.

[C]

Okay, you know how it feels.

[A]

Can we define okay?

[C]

Depends what you mean by okay. I mean.

[A]

Yes. Does anybody get harmed? I think I've actually heard the incest argument before, and I think that, like.

[C]

You think that incest is wrong.

[A]

Yeah, I think I have like a knee jerk reaction to say it's wrong 100%. But if the idea of wrong is like, does it hurt anybody? As long as you're not making a retarded kid, I guess it doesn't hurt anybody. And if both parties are consenting, then it's fine.

[C]

Well, this is. But this is part of the problem.

[A]

This is like, is gay incest wrong?

[C]

Yes. People often say, like, well, you know, same sex incest. And I'm like, why do you specify same sex incest? No, like, because. Well, otherwise there's a risk of having a child and the child will be Disabled. And I'm like, what's wrong with having a disabled child?

[A]

Well, we know.

[C]

Hold on. Suddenly, is that just like. Is that just like immortal?

[A]

You have to make them a TikTok. That's a lot of work. That's a lot of work.

[B]

I was going to jerk off to it.

[A]

It's going to be like a whole bro. Did you guys watch what I posted?

[C]

I'm sorry?

[A]

Did you watch what I posted on Instagram about the guy? It's gotta be a TV show or something. But the specials. Is that from the specials?

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[A]

Where they go to the. They go to Thailand and he doesn't believe in ladyboys. His retarded or his special needs or whatever. Brother doesn't believe in lady boys. He goes, listen, they have willies. And he goes, no they don't. And he goes, I'm not gonna do the accent, but you can imagine it. He goes, yeah, he'd hit with exactly. He goes, no they don't. He goes, they have willies. And then they take him to a ladyboy show and he's got like a beer in his hand and he is having the time of his life. And at the end of the show, this theatrical experience, part of it is the lady boy exposes her true self, takes off all her makeup, takes off the wig and then he stands out there on stage. Tada. And the audience is going crazy. They're like, what a performance. And then just pants to this kid. And he's just sitting there going.

[C]

Well, we've all been there, haven't.

[B]

Guys, tour dates. This weekend I'm going to be in Cincinnati, Ohio. Liberty Township specifically. I'm going to be there Thursday through Friday at the funny bone. Then September 11th through the 13th, I'm going to be in Dania Beach, Florida. That is far from any. Who wants to blow up Florida? What kind of person would do such a thing? So it's a safe show to come through. Be there September 25th and 27th. I'm rounding out my Ohio tour in Cleveland. October 5th, Dubai. Hurry up and buy those tickets. Think it's they're selling out. We might have to move to a bigger venue or figure something out. But right now we're about to sell out. And then all those dates and more. Akash Singh.com. we got big things getting announced soon, guys.

[A]

Big things.

[B]

Also Mark has tour dates you can suck his dick in Montreal, Toronto or Detroit. Those dates respectively are August 22, August 23 and December 6. Why is there such a big gap? I don't Know tour bookers, get your shit together. Comedy clubs, get your shit together. This guy got three open months. What is that? September, October, November. Book the man. Mark gagnon, live.com.

[A]

Can we do some thought experiments, ethical dilemmas, to test everyone's internal code?

[B]

I love this.

[C]

Yeah, of course we can. I mean, firstly, the. Like, when we do a thought experiment, it's worth pointing out that people often get, like, really, like, picky with it. So, like, if I say, you've heard of the trolley problem, right?

[A]

Yes.

[C]

Like, someone's tied to a track, whatever, and people will always say, like, well, why can't I just untie them? Or try and, like, come up with outside.

[A]

This is not that shock.

[C]

My least favorite thing that people do.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[C]

Is when, like, you know, if you're watching Star wars and there's like a plot hole and you say, well, that doesn't make sense, you know, why does he kiss his own sister or something?

[A]

Well, this is two for two, right? Now we're two for two.

[C]

I'm getting a bit of a reputation.

[A]

Do you have siblings?

[C]

I do. I have a brother. We. Yeah, we tend not to talk too publicly about that.

[A]

Can we just facetime him and see what he's wearing? He's probably handsome.

[C]

He's probably handsome. Well, I mean, he must be handsome. I mean, if he's my brother. Actually, I had a friend once who is a homosexual and he. On two separate occasions, he's like, I.

[A]

Need to point out, it only happened one time.

[C]

He told me on two separate occasions. On one occasion, he says, you know, Alex, you really look like your brother. And on a separate occasion, without thinking about it, he said, you know, Alex, your brother's quite hot. You know, like, I think I. I knew it. And I was thinking, that's where this comes from.

[B]

You noticed.

[A]

So what do you think it is? That he's not into you personality or.

[C]

I'm starting to see between the lines and think that maybe may he was sort of.

[A]

Oh, your brother and this guy.

[C]

No, no, no, no, not that. I just think, you know, if you sort of independently say that you look like your brother, and then on another occasion say, like, you know, I kind of fancy your brother, you're thinking, oh, here's the thing.

[A]

You think that gay men care about looks. They just care about holes. So as long as there was one available, they're men. Yeah.

[C]

We haven't all been there, but I'm. I'm.

[A]

Wait, you what?

[C]

I guess you know, from experience.

[A]

What? Homosexual act. Thanks.

[C]

Yeah, no, if you Want to talk about immorality? That's where it really gets off the ground. You know, incest is fine, but homosexuality is.

[A]

Why is that such a big deal?

[C]

But this is the thing, right? Seriously.

[A]

We were gonna give a thought experiment and then we derailed.

[C]

Seriously though, when you say like, oh, like, okay, incest. Yeah. I can't think of a reason that's wrong. I've just got this knee jerk emotional reaction. A lot of people feel that way about homosexuals, man.

[A]

I don't.

[C]

And so you open the door to condemning basically anything that you think.

[A]

Actually, I think that, that, yeah, that makes sense.

[C]

Which is a problem.

[A]

Right.

[C]

But anyway.

[A]

No, no, it's not a problem. I actually, I think that like, there's probably something biologically wired in to feel that way. Because when I see like two dudes making out and somebody said maybe it was a Bill Burber with like one of them's got a beard, you're just like, whoa.

[C]

Yeah. Like obviously you're going to be wired to like find it kind of gross.

[A]

I also feel that way about like ugly people doing it. So maybe it's a thing.

[C]

Yeah, but is it immoral? Is it wrong?

[A]

I don't think the answer is no. But I never said there's anything about morality. I just said I had this knee jerk reaction. You put morality into it.

[C]

Yeah. You don't think homosexual people should procreate? I don't think you're going to have.

[B]

I don't think they can much of.

[C]

A problem getting that.

[A]

No. I think that they should probably get off the ground. I mean, how do we get more of them? They're sneaking some cummins, somebody.

[C]

That's actually, that's actually a really interesting evolutionary question.

[A]

Where do they come from? Clearly God wanted them here. If he keeps making them, but they can't make more of them.

[C]

That might be true.

[A]

They're like gremlins.

[C]

They're made to become priests. Yeah.

[A]

Say again?

[C]

God needs priests.

[A]

God needs priests. We're so close. We're so close. Now he spins some say swallowing.

[C]

Especially in Catholicism where you're not allowed to get married, what do you do? If you are a devout Catholic who realizes you're a homosexual and so has to commit to celibacy as a point of morality, what is your only option? Well, you have to pick something which turns that celibacy into a virtue and that is the priesthood. Wow. Hence ending up with loads of gay priests.

[A]

Wow. Do you think that's the reason Mark's mom has a different conspiratorial reason.

[C]

The. The two Catholic priests get pulled over by the police. The police walk up to the car and say, I'm so sorry to disturb you gentlemen. We're out here. We're out here looking for two child molesters. And the priests go, we'll do it.

[A]

Do they do it in England too? Do the priests get after the kids in England as well? Is that.

[C]

It has been known to happen, but a lot of my Catholic friends informed me that that sort of pederasty is just as much of a problem in other Christian denominations too. And so recently our Church of England, the head of the Church of England, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was involved in a scandal. Not him doing anything himself, but not responding properly to a scandal involving sexual abuse. And my Catholic friend texted me and was like, finally, thank goodness somebody else wants it.

[A]

Happens everywhere.

[C]

But the Catholic priests have more of a reputation for it, I think because of the institutional nature of it, but also because these priests are forced to be celibate, they're not allowed to marry. It's like, okay, yeah, let's just get a bunch of like horny, sexless, like essentially involuntarily celibate, except for the sense that they're voluntarily priests. Put them all into a room together and put loads of children under their care and see what happens. What a great idea that is, you know.

[A]

All right, well, just because you're gay doesn't mean you're a pedophile. Doesn't mean you want to fuck kids. That's a weird jump. You made a big jump.

[C]

No, because they're gay. They're not having any sex.

[A]

Yeah, but not having sex doesn't make you want to fuck kids.

[C]

Perhaps not.

[A]

We got them.

[C]

But it, but it does mean.

[A]

Now I will be honest if I, if I want to be honest. If I'm going to be honest with you. Yes, I once didn't have sex for 16 years and then I had sex with a 16 year old. Whoa. So you might be on a second, you might be on. That's a great point. You might be onto something, Alex.

[C]

Yeah, when Was that?

[A]

From 0 to 16. We gotta clear that up immediately. But yeah, there is a little bit of a leap there. This idea. If you don't have sex for a long period of time and then all of a sudden you're, you know, attracted to children, you would hope that that's not the reality.

[C]

But the thing is, I think that a lot of, a lot of strange sexual behavior is, is due to repression. Opportunistic. Let's say, so this is the thing. There is. There's an important distinction to be made here between. There's. There's a great essay that was written, written by an old tutor of mine called Amir Srinivasan, called what Does Fluffy Think? And it's about bestiality. And she carefully distinguishes between zoophilia and bestiality, because zoophilia is sexual attraction to animals. Bestiality is just having sex with an animal. And they're different things. You can, like, be specifically sexually attracted to something and have sex with it for that reason, or you could be, like, sexually attracted to anything and everything, but you just have sex with this because it's, like, the opportunity.

[A]

Have you seen the guy that's fucking the donkeys before?

[C]

I've not seen that, actually.

[A]

That's. You didn't see that Vice document?

[C]

You see that casual thing?

[A]

There's this Vice document. Back in the day, before Vice became what Vice is now, they would. They were into, like, edgy, almost like kind of like a British punk culture. I think a lot of it was derived from. You're familiar with Vice?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

And he went to, like, Colombia, and he was just like, you know, videotaping dudes who would, like, get behind donkeys and the shit out of them. Yeah. Why is bestiality immoral?

[C]

That's a great question.

[A]

Because the beast can't consent.

[C]

Riddle me this. If it's okay to eat animals, why is it not okay?

[A]

I say that too. I say that, too.

[C]

He's like, yeah, what kind of.

[A]

We're doing something crazier, you, Honor. You know what I mean? I can't just tenderize it.

[C]

Seriously. I was a vegan for a number of years, and I think factory farming is, like, the greatest moral emergency that we're currently facing. It's absolutely unbelievable what we're doing to animals. But the interesting thing is, people have such a hard line against bestiality. It's like, okay, I can take a pig, I can raise it in a cage, and if it's too sick to be profitable, I can take it by the hind legs and cave in its skull against the bars of the cage that its mother is being held in. I can force that pig into a gas chamber, choking to death on carbon. Carbon dioxide. But the moment I take my dick out, suddenly.

[A]

Suddenly it's like this horrible problem. So what is that?

[C]

Well, I think it goes to show that people aren't thinking about ethics in the way that they think they are. Because they'll say, like, oh, well, because it harms an animal or the animal can't consent and it's like, well, okay, but you're okay with eating animals.

[A]

Okay, real quick.

[C]

And suddenly the ethical position shifts.

[A]

Yes, yes, yes, yes. If we're discussing it in like a thought experiment.

[C]

Yeah, the thing I was hypothetically, if we were having sex with animals.

[A]

Yeah. No, no, no, no, no. I guess what, I mean, like, there's this like impulse, this like knee jerk reaction thing I was talking about earlier.

[C]

Yeah, sure.

[A]

And okay, I guess base level is how much do we think that is, like learned or taught? And is there any of it that just exists within us?

[C]

Yeah, I mean, there's gotta be like an internal biological sense.

[A]

And is it not dissimilar from like the reaction to like being close to fire? We're like, oh, that burns. Do we have that reaction to having sex with an animal? And is that baked into us so we don't waste our cum on animals?

[C]

Is that how you feel when you're near a homosexual?

[A]

You said it, not me.

[C]

It starts to get hot and sweat.

[A]

And they just like, they're so handsome.

[C]

Yeah, you know they are.

[A]

And we have so much in common. We could just talk about things.

[C]

Starting to get a bit hot under the collar.

[A]

When you sex is only 15 minutes a day. What are we going to do with the rest of the day?

[C]

I think that there is definitely an evolutionary instinct. But the thing is what ethics probably is, broadly speaking, you asked for a definition, and I think a good definition of ethics is the continual process of trying to overcome our base animalistic material drive. Lives to act in accordance with what we sort of rationally think is the right thing to do.

[A]

And why would something rational be better than what our base instinct is?

[C]

Because our base instincts evolved in a totally different kind of organizational structure. We evolved like running around in tribes on the savannah. Right. So for example, tribe.

[A]

You don't have to look at Al for that. Nah, he was fucked up. Nah. He looked at Marking. Horrible. He saw Mark's forehead. He's like, you know, some of us are more evolved than others. I do smell the most tribal. Probably gonna walk out of here on his knuckles.

[C]

You noticed that I've been looking at you every time I said I'm sexual too.

[A]

It's the mustache.

[C]

The thing about evolving in that situation is that, like, you're gonna be suspicious of anybody from a different tribe. Right? And that makes sense. It makes sense to be suspicious of anyone who doesn't look like you because there's like no reason to trust them. You're not doing like trade with them. That doesn't exist.

[A]

Sure, sure, sure.

[C]

You're just fighting each other. And so you just evolve this knee jerk reaction to be distrusting of people who don't look like you. Then like, you know, agricultural revolution, boom, all of that kind of stuff. And now we live in a society and everybody is like mingling altogether. And we think racism is just awful and terrible and really, really bad.

[A]

So how do we overcome some of these knee jerkins?

[C]

Because of the change of our circumstances, we've developed this thing which like every single, all of the proud moments of like human history are characterized by, by like overcoming animalistic baselessness. You know what I mean? Like that's always the case.

[A]

So you call it animalistic baselessness or animal basis or whatever that is. But let's just use that as like, you know, bare minimum. Now some of those still apply and are probably good. The ones that don't fit in modern society are the ones. I'm attracted to a beautiful woman. We get along. The feeling is great. I want to mate with her and create a family.

[C]

Sure.

[A]

I want to protect my kids because I have more DNA in those kids than I do my cousin.

[C]

You also have have rational reasons to think those things.

[A]

Yeah, sure.

[C]

So there are still. It's not like sometimes you are just listening to your base instincts. You still are rationalizing. It's just that sometimes that rationalizing it links up with what your base desires are. And thank goodness this will be an easy one. But sometimes it doesn't. And we're constantly just trying to act what we rationalize.

[A]

I'm not against the rationalization of it, but sometimes we are putting that rationalization on posthumously. Is that the term after the fact? Right. And then like. But it doesn't mean that that knee jerk instinct is still useful in society. Yeah, there are certain things that work.

[C]

If you've, if you've. Yeah, like it will still be useful when you've rationalize something and think that this is actually the right thing to do and you happen to still have a knee jerk reaction to do it. That's really helpful.

[A]

That's helpful. Got it.

[C]

But the problem is that we've got knee jerk reactions to all kinds of things. It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was criminal.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

And you could be thrown in jail for doing so.

[A]

And then what do you get to do? It's kind of like a gift. I know, right? What a punishment with these guys that work out all day and they're locked in a room with Me, what if it was benevolent? What if that punishment was like, hey, now you're kind of talking that right. Putting them in the jail is much better than like lighting them on a fire or throwing them off a building or.

[C]

That's probably true because, because some, some people do that as well. But even the very way that we punish people has evolved. It used to be like if you commit suicide a few hundred years ago, there are places where you would have your body dragged through the street. Your inheritance would not go to your family. You could not be buried in a grave because it was thought immoral. Because we have a knee jerk reaction to stay alive. Of course we do.

[A]

I don't know if that's the reason why they would punish.

[C]

It makes perfect evolutionary sense for us to think that whatever is going to cause our own death will be a bad thing.

[A]

But why do you think that they put that punishment on top of it?

[C]

To discourage people from committing suicide.

[A]

But why? What is like the downstream effect of that?

[C]

Well, because self preservation is an evolutionary important thing, right?

[B]

I think maybe the numbers of the tribe you need to protect the tribe.

[A]

Or like your family is now the burden of the tribe and now they disproportionately have to take care of the.

[C]

All of that kind of stuff.

[A]

Yeah, there are rational reasons that they put even back in the day, but.

[C]

Of course it's not like we've just worked out in the past 50 years all of these rational reasons that they've always been there. It's just they've sort of come up against this moral feeling that people have had.

[A]

So is that like the justification at the university level for looking into ethics? You're like, we've done so much rationalization of our behavior throughout history, we should continue to do it. And then we will continue to. We're not going to evolve at the same rate as society, but we can create behaviors that would be more harmonious with society.

[C]

No. The reason for doing it at an academic level?

[A]

No, immediately not.

[C]

Because there's like no way to make money with a philosophy degree except for teaching people philosophy. That's it. They just invent stuff like this.

[A]

So you think it's something built in the world.

[C]

It was probably a philosopher who first tied the man to the tracks, essentially keep him in a job. I think, yeah, like, I think a lot of it is just as, as I like to call it. Well, people are just sort of arguing for the sake of arguing. Philosophical mass debating you might want to call it. And it is essentially just this self indulgent like, thinking. And a lot of the time it's kind of useless. Like, there's this whole video, I think, of someone, like, on a plane, and they're like, I don't know, choking or they're having some medical issue and they're like, is there a doctor on board? And a guy gets up and he's like, yeah, I'm a doctor of philosophy. And he sort of walks over and they're like, what should we do? He's like, well, according to utilitarianism, we should use the resources. Deontology says that we can't take the property without. And the guy just dies.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Because, like, on a real level, like this, this doesn't make a difference to a lot of people in terms of the way they actually live their lives.

[A]

In the immediate moment.

[C]

Yeah. It's just a point for a lot of people, it's just a point of, like, you're already living how you're living. You already think what's right is right and what's wrong is wrong. You're not going to change. We're just trying to work out, like, as a point of interest, what's the foundation for that. But philosophy goes in two ways. It either digs downwards, which is what we do when we try to figure out what good means, and we do these experiments and it's like, well, let's dig downwards and see what's in there. What's the basis? There is the philosophy that works upwards too. It's like, well, what should we do? That's the constructive stuff. That's like, well, here's what I think is good and here's how it should change your life.

[A]

But it's not always constructive because, as you said, sometimes it's self indulgent.

[B]

And that's when I get frustrated, is when it gets. And I understand the reason for it, but when it gets. How do you define this? How do you define this? That it's like, I think we all have a fairly standard definition of empathy or whatever the word is. Then it feels less productive to me.

[C]

Yeah. And you sort of sat around, like, arguing about trolleys on tracks for, like, no reason, but it is useful to work out, to do the other thing, to go the other way and work out what you think, to then build up. CS Lewis said that the purpose of philosophy is not to cut down forests, but to irrigate deserts. We're supposed to be actually building something up. That's why I like doing the trolley problem memes, because they help people work out what they Actually think, and then you've got some more clarity on that. So then go and take that and build a philosophy out of it. You know, you've got to actually use it to then go and do something.

[A]

So let's do one. What's an example?

[B]

All right, guys, we got to take a break real quick because we got to talk about this fantastic caffeine sponsor that we have. Hey, look, you guys know this. Andrew is filming a movie. We've had to do a lot of work on flagrant to make sure that we don't fall behind while he's filming. You know how we stayed Caffeine. Caffeinated Black rifle coffee. That's right. America first coffee. Much like the Democratic socialists of America. Hey, did you guys notice that once Zoron won, I suddenly started being allowed to do the black rifle reads? I noticed because they know America's caffeine matters. Black rifle is America First Caffeine. This energy drink right here, which they always hand me. Jamil made it a point to hand me this one again. Project Mango again, that does feel a little racial, but I. Either way, it's fantastic. 200 milligrams of caffeine to get you through your day and be America First. You want to deport a couple of illegals, maybe some green card holders who are saying things about the government of Israel that you don't like. You could have the energy to do that. I'm not saying you should. I'm just saying you would have the energy to do that if you were black rifled up. Black rifle coffee. Black rifle energy drinks. They got the best premium coffee sourced from award winning forms, then roasted right here in America. America first roasting. But you don't want to get the beans from America. That. That would be dog coffee. So you get the beans from the brown people, then you bring it over and you roast it here. These guys are military vets. I met tj, the guy who started this company that is as American as it gets. Can I tell you a story about tj? He had a gun and a silencer. I said, hey, man, how much does that silencer really silence the gun? He goes, let's find out. And then shot three bullets. Tell me that's not black Rifle energy right there. And if you go to blackriffle.com and use the code of flagrant, you can get 30% off today. And they want me to say, this America, your energy. I frankly think that sounds goofy, but it tells you where their heart is. It's in America. Hey there.

[A]

Noodle dick.

[B]

I'm talking to you and I'm looking at me because I know both of us are dick game some part. I honestly. You think I'd work this hard if I was good at.

[A]

No, I wouldn't.

[B]

I'm not good at it. You're not good at it. It's good to own your weaknesses. I've learned that in therapy on a product that I will name later. But the point is, you need bluechew for this specific problem. It can address your weak dick needs Blue Chew. That's all you got to do. Blue Chew. Same active ingredients as in those other drugs. But this is the one we rock with because it works. And they have been with us since the beginning. I have literally, I swear to God, had people come up to me at shows and be like, yo, I'm with this girl. I chew her the fuck out. They say that to me. It's a little weird, but they say it and it works. And if you don't believe me, try it for yourself. And the same beautiful offer as always stands. Your first month is free. All you got to do is pay $5 for shipping. You go to bluechew and use the code flagrant at checkout, and you get your first order for free. You just got to pay $5 for shipping. Also, go to the website, check out the details, safety information, etc. But if that. If you check out there and you want to step your dick game up, which should be every Guy out there, bluetooth.com promo code flagrant, get your first order for free. Just pay $5 for shipping. Let's get back to the show.

[C]

Okay, so the classic trolley problem is that the trolley is running out of a track and there are five people either tied to the track or they're workers and they don't know the troll race. Jewish.

[A]

Run them off. No, no, no. Go. Five people are tied to the track.

[C]

You've got. You've got one on the other side.

[A]

One on another track because the track splits, I presume.

[C]

Very clever.

[A]

Gotcha. Thank you.

[C]

And. And they've got. They've got a lever that you can. Is kind of next to you, and you can pull the. The lever. And if you pull the lever, five people are saved and the trolley runs over one person.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

And the question is simply, would you pull the lever? I don't know. Would you pull the lever?

[A]

I don't think you pull it. No, I don't think so. Because now you're responsible for death. Yeah. Because then you are letting five people die rather Than making one person die. And I think letting versus actively doing changes it. Can we ask a question? Okay, go, go. What about you, Al? I don't pull the leaver. Same reason. Can we. Are we allowed to ask questions about the people or does that destroy the whole. You, like, age, for example, might be.

[C]

Important in this circumstance. You don't know. Right. Or you assume that they're all like 25, but.

[A]

Got it. There are equals.

[C]

But what you can then do once you work out whether you pull the lever or not is then start changing these variables.

[A]

Okay, give me the toughest one. You pull the lever.

[C]

That really helps. Yeah. Would you pull the lever?

[A]

No. Wait, what is it? It's going to hit five.

[B]

And if you don't pull the lever, it hits five. If you pull the lever, it hits one, but you pull the lever.

[A]

Will they all follow me on Instagram? Yeah, I don't think that I could be responsible for it.

[C]

Okay, so then here's the thing, right? So one way you could adapt this to say, because at least the three of you think that you wouldn't pull the lever. What if it was 100 people on that, on that, on that track? What if it was a thousand people on that track?

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Eventually you get to, what if it's like a city? Or what if it was like your own mother? You know, like, surely there is, there is some circumstance in which you would kind of be okay with.

[A]

I feel this, this way about abortion.

[C]

Right?

[A]

Like, you know, one or two or four is fine, but like a thousand. Yeah, you got to pull the lever on that girl. Right? Like, like if one person had a thousand. Yeah, like there's a lever where you're like, all right, sew it up or something. Yeah, yeah, but, but okay, I joke. I'm being hyperbolic, but at the same time you're like, wait, what is going on?

[C]

You can work this out. Like, like you can figure out what you think about abortion. So take, take a, take a, like a one year old child and take like a thousand fertilized zygotes and put them on the other side of the track and ask what someone would do, which would they run over?

[A]

Child.

[C]

And I think it's. Well, like some people actually would say that. And that's fine. It helps you work out what you actually believe. Because a lot of people will look at that and be like, if I'm being honest with myself, what I would probably do is I would probably run over those zygotes. You can't even see them. They're like dust on the floor. Right. And that's probably what I would do. So you adapt it in such a way as to. And you can apply it to specific.

[A]

And that doesn't mean that you don't think it's wrong. Those people might think it's really wrong.

[C]

But in this figure out what's so here. What we've just pulled out is the difference between doing and allowing, which is like a really important ethical distinction. Is there a difference in doing and allowing? And it doesn't mean that allowing people to die is always right. It just means that it's less bad than proactively killing people.

[A]

Right.

[C]

So then. Okay, so take an example where one of my favorites is the trolley's going down a track and there's one person tied up and there's another track where there's also just one person tied up. But you think you'll really get a kick out of killing someone. You think it's going to be like great fun. Is it wrong to pull the lever? Yes.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Why?

[A]

Because wanting to kill people for fun is bad.

[C]

Why?

[B]

I assume this is an impulse that once you. Once you break that seal, it's quite possible you break it.

[C]

But suppose we just. Suppose we just know that this person is a perfectly well integrated member of society who recognizes that this kind of kick they get out of. Out of the thought of killing someone is totally immoral and they'd never act in accordance with it. Look, I've got this opportunity, so this is.

[B]

To me, doing is worse than allowing to enact. What's interesting with the first one, this is Dexter.

[C]

And be like, guilt free.

[A]

Are you familiar with the show?

[C]

I haven't seen it.

[A]

He's a serial killer that, like, finds a way to kill Justin. Oh, cool.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Right.

[A]

So this is the Charlie problem.

[C]

It's not even that they're bad people. It's not like, oh, they deserve this. It's literally like somebody's gotta die. Somebody's gotta die.

[A]

Here I get to scratch my itch.

[C]

Exactly. And here's an interesting consideration is that. Have you ever heard of utilitarianism?

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

So the view.

[B]

The greatest good for the greatest number of people.

[A]

Right.

[C]

And that's usually cashed out in terms of maximizing pleasure or minimizing suffering. Right. This is. This is what morality is about. That's what it is for the utilitarian. And pleasure is defined very broadly there.

[A]

It doesn't just mean it's not a brothel.

[C]

Yeah, exactly. It's like anything which is, well, being Exactly.

[A]

Food, shelter.

[C]

And so here's the thing, right? If you're a utilitarian, then suppose it's not you. Suppose it's someone else who's going to pull that lever and you know for a fact that they will get some pleasure out of pulling that lever and killing that person. It might not just be that it's permissible for them to pull the lever. If you're a utilitarian, it might be a duty. They might. Might have to because that will maximize pleasure. Same number of people die, except one extra person is now going to get an equal. You actually got an obligation.

[A]

So if we have these people, let's say we have these serial killers, right?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

And we are utilitarian in our philosophy. I think you know where I'm going with this. Like, do we make them be the people that flip the switch for the electric chair?

[C]

There you go, man.

[A]

We can give them jobs. Exactly. And is that what it works. Abortion doctors are. No, no, no. Now we're getting too crazy. But I do right back. I do. No, no, no, I'm teasing, obviously. But like, I do think these ethical dilemmas present themselves in, in it's a. Like even vaccinating your kid. Right. And again, I'm not going to talk about like whether vaccines work or don't work or plus or negative for society, but like the fear as a parent, when you have a brand newborn baby you love more than anything. It's so amazing. And like, you hear, you watch one video where you're like, this could cause harm to you.

[C]

It makes sense to be terrified. Yeah.

[A]

Because now you have the lever, right? Yeah. You go, do I want to be the person who takes responsibility for causing the harm or do I not pull it? And then God forbid they get measles or mumps or whatever that shit is.

[C]

And now not my fault. So. But this is the thing, like a.

[A]

Lot of is that parents trying to not be the responsible partner.

[C]

Exactly. But a lot of people look at that. A lot of people look at that and they say, but that's bad parenting. And if that's bad parenting, then maybe there's something more going on. It's not just as simple as like, well, doing is bad, but allowing is kind of fine. It's like, no, there's something more complicated going on.

[A]

So how would you handle that? Like, what are the.

[C]

What are the.

[A]

What are all the different ways to think about?

[C]

I think something important there is like the probability because there's no certainty involved. The trolley problem. You have certainty. So you need a version where you're uncertain. So say, for example, there is a track that's got one person on it and there's another track that's got a big sort of box that you can't see and it's got a 99% chance of having nobody in it, but a 1% chance of having 100 people in it. Same expected value, right? Exactly the same expected value. Because you've got a 1% chance of. Of 100. Expected value is 1. Yeah, you've got 100% chance of 1. Expected value is 1. So would you take that chance?

[A]

I might be inclined to pull it. I would probably pull it.

[C]

Oh, wow.

[A]

What does that tap into? There's got to be some positive thinking.

[C]

If most people say that they would pull the lever, it tells us that expected value doesn't actually work properly. Because you should. If you're being rational, you should say, well, I have no preference whatsoever.

[A]

I bet a poker player would have to do. But the rest of us who aren't doing these calculations, maybe it'd be more difficult.

[C]

I think what it shows is that expected value is a bad way of thinking about stuff because this is how you work something out. If you've got a gamble, like you sort of do the expected value and work out which is higher, but that's not actually how people think. You know the game Deal or no Deal?

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

My friend Phil Halfer pointed this out to me that like, if you're playing Deal or no Deal and you've got a box to say one of the boxes is like zero and one of the boxes is like $500,000, right. If somebody. If you're then offered $150,000.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[C]

Like, are you taking that?

[A]

Fuck no. Give me that $500,000.

[C]

The thing is, it probably depends on who you are, right? If you've got a lot of money and that life changing to you, you're going to think, oh, expected value. So.

[A]

And if you have nothing, you're taking that one.

[C]

You're perfectly rational to take $100,000.

[B]

I have a different answer than all these guys on everything.

[C]

Even though expected value says that you should obviously like take the risk for the $500,000 because the expected value is $250,000 there and you've only been offered $150,000.

[B]

Wait, can I. Selfishly, because I'm the only person that answered the trolley thing that way, I don't look at it as doing and letting. Well, I guess I look at it as doing, but I'd be saving five people. That's the way my brain goes.

[A]

Oh, that's your due.

[B]

Your due is my doing is I'm saving five people.

[A]

And a. It.

[B]

It. One person had to die for me to save five people. And I think if I was that one person on the track, I, I think I would understand. I wouldn't be like, hey, let him go. I'm not some saint.

[A]

What about the fat man variation real quick, before the fat man. Just on that, like, I think there are these.

[C]

Hey, that's no way to speak about your friend.

[A]

Just trying to get these. I forget the type of like hedge fund it is, but essentially what they do is they buy up businesses, they restructure them, they lay off, you know, 10,000 people, but there's still 40,000 people that are work there. And I think Mitt Romney was one of the guys who owned Bane Capital and this is one of the things they did. And he was like a devout religious dude. I think he was Mormon. He was Mormon, but he, and, and I think someone asked him is like, how do you deal with that? Like, how do you handle the fact that you're like letting 10,000 people go? And his answer was, Akash's answer is like, I saved 40,000 people's jobs.

[C]

Yeah. Yeah. And it's literally just a case of how you, how you think about it.

[A]

Yeah. And I don't know if what he's done is immoral at all. I think if you're focusing on those 10,000. But he pulled a lever to save.

[C]

For, in my view, it depends how you feel.

[A]

Like, I like outside of, outside of, like the thought experiment. Like, what is your, what did you say? Like, Basic Instinct.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

What is yours?

[C]

About what? Oh, about like the, the lever.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Like, I think pulling the lever feels right. Right. It feels like that's a good thing.

[A]

To do just to save more people.

[C]

Save the five to kill. To kill one. But like it's, it's uncertain. Right. And the point is it's supposed to be difficult, but the real utility in the trolley problem is whatever you say, you then adapt it. So you said you wouldn't pull the lever because, you know, you don't want to kill someone versus five. And then you just up the ante and make it 100,000 people. And suddenly I didn't actually ask, would you pull the lever then? If it were 100,000 people, I would pull the lever. Then it's like the whole city of New York, you know, so at least in your case, it does Change the scenario. You said that you would pull the lever, you would kill one person to save five, because you're saving five, even though you have to kill one. So as you point out, a famous sort of next variation of this is like, the trolley is going towards five people. You're stood on a bridge, and there's a fat man on the bridge. And if you push the fat man off the bridge, he'll crash into the train and the train will stop and he'll kill the fat man. But it will stop it from running over the five people who are tied to the track. Would you push that fat man off the bridge? You would?

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

So. No.

[A]

No.

[B]

Good.

[A]

Good.

[C]

This. That means you seem to be. You seem consistent.

[A]

Very rationally. I'm consistent. You would actually push a fat guy? I don't know if I'm strong enough.

[B]

Because I. I can't really lift much weight.

[A]

I don't get the physics. If you push him off the bridge.

[C]

Yeah, because the train's going under the bridge.

[A]

Oh, the train's going under the bridge. I'm like, I thought the train's going under the bridge. I need diagrams.

[C]

The train was going over the bridge.

[A]

I thought the train is like, you know one of the Western movies where the people are running. You've never seen Stand By Me?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Right. Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. One of the guys is fat. I'm like, okay, stop the train blankly.

[B]

I'm still saving five people.

[C]

It's the same thing.

[A]

But you would kill someone you're with.

[B]

That's completely pulling the leg lever is killing. So I've made that decision. Now I'm just shoving.

[C]

Instead of pulling a lever, you would just shove this guy off the bridge.

[B]

I mean, again, I'm not strong, but I would try.

[A]

But he's on the edge.

[C]

It's your friend.

[A]

And he's looking at. He's like, oh, my God, these people are gonna die.

[B]

My friend is different.

[A]

My friend is different. Why?

[B]

Because then I am inconsistent.

[A]

No.

[B]

Then I am inconsistent. If my mom is on the bridge or five strangers, I'm not pulling the lever. I'm not shoving my mom. That is. Now, if it's my dad. But, yeah, that's. My inconsistency will stop at my wife, my kids, my mom, my best.

[A]

Sure.

[B]

But in general, if I'm saving five people and they're all strangers, I'm saving five people.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

And I am. I'm not. Utilitarianism to the absolute. That's crazy. At a certain point. But Like, I do largely have that idea. Like it's saving more people. What are we doing?

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

So here's something funny. They put people in an MRI scanner and ask them about the trolley problem. And the people who said that they would pull the lever but they wouldn't push the fat man, which is most people, by the way. I think that's weird. People who, who would pull the lever but wouldn't push the fat man in the MRI scanner, the part of their brain that deals with emotion was lighting up. Whereas the people who said that they would pull the lever and push the fat man, the part of their brain that deals with rational thinking, that's me, was lighting up pure logic. It was an indication that a lot of people just think emotively about this and don't realize. They think that they're considering an ethical consideration, but really they're just feeling it out. And so it's interesting. So people like you seem to be thinking like rationally about it and you're trying to sort of put it in like very, very sort of non emotive terms. But then you said like, you'd be inconsistent when it comes to like your, your family. And the question is, like, why? Or is it inconsistent? Or do you just have an ethical worldview which says that it's okay to prioritize your own family?

[B]

I have a love for those people that's overwhelming to the point that ethics is not a concern of mine. Morality is not a concern.

[C]

Maybe that's just what ethics is. Maybe ethics is about like, love. And maybe ethics just permits you to care more about your family. Yeah, sure, you know what I mean.

[B]

But again, this is where I'm not saying it's to dismiss what you do. This is where my brain jumps to like, yeah, whatever it is, I'm fine with it. I understand there is inconsistency and I'm okay with that level of inconsistency.

[C]

And that's another thing when I was saying about like the philosophical masturbating. Most people, they have their ideas, but like, if you, if you're like, oh, I think torture is always wrong. And I think that, you know, we should minimize suffering and harvest organs in this circumstance. But if someone like holds a gun to your dog daughter's head, yeah, that just goes out the window. Nobody is sat like, nobody, except maybe like Peter Singer. He's probably the kind of person that would actually sit there and do a calculation on his little sheet of paper, but nobody's thinking in this way. That's not.

[A]

How have you read that Jonathan Haidt book, the Righteous Mind?

[C]

I haven't actually read it.

[A]

You're familiar with the idea that we're emotional beings and retrofit this logic afterwards. So that's probably what we're getting to about all this. But maybe his emotion is to protect as many people as possible, and our emotion is more selfish. Maybe you have more altruistic emotions. Everybody's a stranger. I'll protect those five strangers over that one. And the rest of us are like, I don't want to be a killer.

[B]

The guilt of letting five people die, to me would be overwhelming.

[C]

So say there's a track this time. The track is like a circle, and there's a person tied on that end. And you'll sit here with the lever, and the trolley's going around, and the lever only changes the direction of the trolley. So you can just sort of make it go back and forth. How many times do you pull that lever before you let it run over the guy?

[B]

Oh, I would like to think in a vacuum, infinite. But if everybody in the train is saying XYZ to me, who knows?

[C]

At a certain point, you just sit there, like. And you can just. You're pulling this lever back and forth. I mean, the guy's gonna. He's just tied to a track. He's just gonna die anyway.

[B]

I wait for him to die and then I go. Once he dies of starvation, you would.

[C]

Stand there for like a week. Yeah, like, staying awake, pulling out, doing my best.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

To watch him. To watch him.

[B]

If my body gives out, my body sucks.

[C]

To watch him slowly die.

[A]

You gotta do it a little bit. You gotta do it at least five. You can't just let it go and then explain five times. This is what you would do.

[C]

No, no, man.

[A]

No, no. You would go back and forth. Right.

[B]

I actually understand your logic now that.

[C]

You'Re saying I don't know, because, like.

[B]

What Euthanasia, basically, allow this guy, you.

[C]

Just got to terrify.

[A]

Oh, he's gonna die no matter what.

[B]

Maybe the ethical thing is just letting him.

[C]

Like, how long are you gonna.

[A]

I think you gotta start explaining that to how you're dying.

[B]

Realize that that's how many times I've come.

[C]

You just said that you want to watch him, like, starve to death, which is like a horrible. I'd rather be hit by a trainer.

[A]

He didn't say he wants to watch him starve to death. It to death. Well, that's what that would happen. But that's how many wants.

[C]

That's what that that is what you do in that circumstance.

[A]

He wants to not be responsible for his death, him starving.

[C]

Then don't pull the lever at all. Because like, remember a moment ago we.

[A]

Were talking about not pulling the lever at all.

[C]

You said that, well if I pull the lever then I'm involving myself. It's like, well then don't.

[A]

Who invented this lever thing? This is great. What did you guys do before training, before trains? What did, what did you have to talk about? Atlantis and. Yeah, what is it? The green tablets of Oath. They're running trains on children. I mean not all philosophers, but the invention of the train really changed your guys whole life.

[C]

Yeah, that's right.

[A]

Like what would you talk about before you're like, should we be communists? People, people need to eat. People, people, people are hungry. People would debate and the fucking trade was event. You're like, yeah, this is good.

[C]

People would debate weird and wacky stuff like, like famously Plato def defined a human being as a featherless biped. That was his definition of what a human being. And then biped walk on two. So two. So an animal has got two feet and doesn't have any feathers. So then I think it was Diogenes who like took a chicken and plucked all of its feathers and like ran into the, into the room where Plato was teaching and held it up and went behold, Plato's man. You know. And so they would just debate shit like that, that all the time and it was just essentially definitional.

[A]

And why was this supported? Like who was funding this back in the day? Are you, are you?

[C]

Education, I suppose used to be just a privilege of people who could afford.

[A]

It, but this could be a job. Like back in the day there are people that were just waxing poetic on philosophy and the king was like, yeah, keep doing that shit.

[C]

I don't know about like back in ancient times, I don't really know how they were making their money.

[A]

You have students as well, wouldn't they?

[C]

Yeah, they'd have like students, students. But then I think some philosophers would probably have students that didn't pay. They just like had a school of people, Jesus of Nazareth style. Yeah, but, but yeah, like you'd have students. I mean famously Aristotle shooted Alexander the Great. You know, like there, there are some pretty high, high clientele that want some philosophical wisdom. And so they're probably making money through that. Do we have another thought experiment? There are, there are, there are endless.

[A]

Or even a heartache. How were they viewed societally real quick? Like how would Aristotle be viewed societally at the Time, it depends on what.

[C]

Kind of philosopher they were. Like, Socrates was a nuisance. People didn't like him.

[A]

Yeah. Is there some revisionist history on these people as we look back?

[C]

How do you mean?

[A]

Like, do we look at them as almost deities? Right. They're brilliant, they're genius.

[C]

Yeah. At the time, a lot of these philosophers, if you read their biographies, they're like depressed, miserable people who couldn't get laid.

[A]

Seriously, it's like Van Gogh.

[C]

Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's the same kind of thing where, like, you wouldn't want to be these guys. Like, why do you think, like, Immanuel Kant had the time to like, sit around writing like the longest treatise on, like.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[C]

On like objective ethics that the world's ever seen? Because he's a loser, you know, Nothing else going on. Like, seriously, you know, like, what are you going to do? Like, Arthur Schopenhauer wrote an essay on. About women where he just like talks about how women are just inferior to men and he just goes on and on and on.

[A]

Akash left at the wrong. Yeah, yeah.

[C]

And you read it and you're sort of like this sort of hyper rational guy and you're like, but this is.

[A]

Clearly just because, like, he can't get laid.

[C]

You can't get. Apparently he was like a bit of a womanizer. But I think he might have, like, had some trouble. Like, people like rejected his proposals and stuff. And so actually I was speaking to a friend earlier who said that any idea that anybody has, anytime, like you say, like a policy is come up with by a politician or anything of that sort, they should have to undergo like a psychological analysis to find out how much of that is due to the fact that they're like, dad didn't care about them as a kid or something. You've got to make sure that there's none of that going on, don't they?

[A]

Just with detectives, they're like, you're too close to this case. You knew one of the people that were hurt. You're going to be too emotional. We take you off of it. This is what they would hope, but.

[C]

We should probably do that with politicians too. It's like, you know, I think, yeah, you shouldn't essentially just be using your rage to write about this kind of stuff. And I think that's clearly what's happening with Schopenhauer writing about women, for example.

[A]

How many other philosophers you think this is happening to? Like, are there people that you're reading? You're like, oh, you actually have some deep issues that are you are emotionally reacting to and then just retrofitting your brilliance onto it.

[C]

That might be true of most philosophers. Most people have motivations that aren't always immediately obvious. I've heard this about Charles Darwin. What about him?

[A]

That his brother died of some type of malignant cancer or something to that effect and he was told that he.

[C]

Was going to go to hell and.

[A]

So he took it upon himself to scientifically prove that God doesn't exist or something like that.

[C]

I think Darwin's child died. Maybe that's what it is. Darwin's. I think his youngest child might have died. And it does seem to sort of have an effect. I'm not sure if that motivates the biology of the Origin of Species, but it will motivate his like religious views. Darwin actually, interestingly, at the end of the Origin of Species there's a beautiful little epilogue where he says there is grandeur in this view of life. It's a famous piece where he talks about from so humble and simple a beginnings endless life and endless forms most beautiful have been and are being evolved. And that's how it ends is this beautiful thing. And he talks about how life having originally been breathed into a few forms or into 1:1. And there was such a backlash from the religious that in the second edition of the Origin of Species there is an addition. It's breathed by the Creator into few forms or into one because he felt the need to add in this reference to God. And it's probably due to the backlash but it may also just reflect his own like flip flopping on religion because by the third edition it was gone again. This happens quite a lot like people like defacing their books. Like Peter Singer recently did this for animal Liberation, the father of the animal rights movement who wrote in 1975 the greatest defense of animal ethics that has probably ever been written. I mean it's just phenomenal and very confronting. And he was using all of these arguments that in the most recent updated edition he had to he felt the need to take out because they were like not politically correct anymore even though they were really useful philosophical arguments. He like he looked at. So for example, when he talks about giving animals rights, a lot of people say well we can't give animals the same rights as humans. You know, we're not going to give them the right to vote and stuff like that. And Peter's Singer is, is like well to give people equal consideration doesn't mean you literally give them the same rights. For example, you wouldn't give men abortion Rights. And that's not an inequality thing. You give them the same consideration, but it doesn't mean you give them literally the same rights. It just means that you give them the same consideration. So you wouldn't give men abortion rights, you wouldn't give animals voting rights, but you give them same consideration.

[A]

Special needs people vote.

[C]

They, they literally can. Yeah.

[A]

They are allowed to vote.

[C]

Oh, I, I, yeah, I mean, I assume so. I don't know if there are some.

[A]

Is that a crazy thing to ask?

[C]

No, but.

[A]

No, I, it's not. I'm asking based on the same, you know, it's the same hypothetical, like if, if, if we deem a, an adult 18 years old and they have the mental capacity of an 18 year old and a. Yeah, I don't, I guess we don't do that with iq. There's no mental capacity.

[C]

It's totally arbitrary because like, voting is like the justification for voting is always like, well, you know, like it will lead to a better society and people. But, but really people feel like they have a right to vote. It's not that voting isn't supposed to be like, this is obviously the best way to always get to the right answer. It's like, no, it's just, it's principle that if you're going to tax me, I have a, I have a say.

[A]

Even if that is taxed and if they have the wherewithal to register to vote, then, then they should be able to.

[C]

It is completely arbitrary. Like the, the age limit on voting is completely arbitrary.

[B]

I feel it's way too loose. We let too many people vote.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, a lot of people feel that way, man. Like, and like Aristotle thought the same. John Stuart Mill thought that different people should have different, like, numbers of votes. So like, people who had a university education should get more votes than someone who didn't and stuff like this.

[A]

All right, guys, let's take a break for a second. If you're looking for an easy way to take care of your mental phys. Emotional wellness, make Cornbread Hemp CBD gummies a piece of your wellness plan. Obviously you've tried cbd. If you haven't, you know the positive effects that come with it. Cornbread Hemp CBD gummies are made to help you feel better with it, whether you're dealing with some stress, some discomfort, or you just need a little bit of relaxation. They only use the best part of the hemp plant, the flower for the purest and most potent cbd formulated to help relieve discomfort, stress and sleeplessness. Pop one before you go to bed, get a nice sleep, have a great next day. All products are third party lab tested and USDA organic to ensure safety and purity. Can't tell you how crucial that is. And right now, flagrant listeners can save 30% on their first order. Just head to cornbreadhemp.com flagrant and use the code FLAGRANT at checkout. That's cornbreadhemp.com Flagrant and use the code flagrant at checkout. Now let's get back to the show.

[C]

Voting systems are never perfect because people have an idea that you just sort of vote and whoever gets the most votes wins. And that's what democracy is. But it's never quite like that. I mean, like in the United Kingdom there's a big debate over whether we should keep our so called first past the post system of voting.

[A]

What does that mean?

[C]

It means that if you get like a majority of votes, if you sort of, it's the first person to reach a certain number of votes is why they call it first past the post. First person to get that wins. Right. And so if you've got like five different parties and say like 50% of people like vote for, vote for one of those parties, they're going to like win the election. But the rest of the voter base is spread across all these different parties and so they all just like lose. And there's no like proportional representation of the different amount of votes the different parties got. It's just like if you get the most, then you win. And because people often like split their votes from different parties, like if you don't want to vote for the Conservative Party, maybe you'd vote for Labour or maybe you'd vote for Green or maybe you'd vote for this. Like you end up sometimes with a party winning who most people actually you didn't vote for. And had they run the, had they done it in stages where you sort of knock out the lowest contender and then vote again, they wouldn't have won the election because all the people who voted Green, now they're out, would have gone and voted Labour. So Labour would have won the election.

[A]

But what's the cost of that?

[C]

Well, the cost of that. So people say we should. So you get the smaller parties in the UK saying we should have proportional representation because you have like millions and millions of votes, but you get like no seats or two seats in the House of Commons. And so they say we should, we should have it proportional. The problem with that is that nothing gets done because you just got like 15 different parties, all different ideas and absolutely nothing gets done. Yeah, but if your view is like, well, okay, sure, it'd be more democratic to have more parties in government, but nothing actually gets done.

[A]

But it's not functioning.

[C]

Why bother with the democracy thing at all?

[A]

So this is a two party nothing that's done. So is there like a principle in philosophy where you just reach a limit where you go, we gotta get shit done, so you stop before you extrapolate it to the end of the trolley problem?

[C]

Yeah, it's called authoritarianism.

[A]

No, no, no, I'm not saying in government, I'm just saying like in philosophy, like do you get where you're like, okay, we all kind of agree on this. Yes, there are some holes in it, but this is 70% or this is 80% that everybody kinds agree. Let's just use this as a model for society. But we can have these thought experiments.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, you could be like a pragmatist in utility.

[A]

Is that what that's called?

[C]

Well, in utilitarianism there's a, there's a particular sort of version of this called rule utilitarianism. So utilitarianism says that you should, any action, you should basically do a calculus and figure out whether it's going to have more or less suffering and pleasure for, for people. But the problem is that doing that every time is itself not maximizing pleasure.

[A]

Right. So now you're not. Yeah. And now you're not being utilitarian.

[C]

Yeah, like being utilitarian is not utilitarian, so you sort of undermine yourself. So they come up with this thing called rule utilitarianism, which broadly is attributed to John Stuart Mill. And he's like, look, okay, we come up with these rules, like broadly speaking, murdering people minimizes pleasure. And sure, there will be circumstances where it doesn't. But like for the, you know, for the sake of being practical, we'll just call that a rule and we'll abide by that. And so it's still justified by the minimization of suffering. But in practice we'll just follow these broad rules. Yeah, and that sounds really great. Right. Until you realize that sometimes there will be obvious counterexamples, like if you don't murder this person, New York City is going to get like decimated. You might still think you shouldn't murder the person, but the utilitarian definitely thinks you should kill that person. Save New York City. Right. And so there are obvious cases where.

[B]

They would go, okay, I'd let New York go. That's one city actually.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, Maybe we should change it up.

[A]

This is like the bombing the Yemeni wedding.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

There's one terrorist in the Yemeni wedding. They're like, do we bomb it? And then we save America from a possible terror attack?

[C]

Yeah. And if the circumstance is obvious enough, then even the rule utilitarian has to look at it and be like, yeah, okay, in this case, I'll break my rule. But then you've got this problem of, like, in every circumstance, you've then got to figure out whether it's an obvious enough example to apply the rule or not. And then you're just back to, like, to just looking at every single individual.

[A]

Circumstance, like Luigi Mangioni kind of beer example of that or not.

[C]

Yeah. So, I mean, you might. You might kind of think that generally speaking, it's bad to murder people, but people are like, oh, but in this case it's like an exception. Like, maybe with. Maybe some people would think that. Yeah, that seems like the cultural response. But what you.

[A]

Cultural response is we got more pleasure. Not we, but people got more pleasure. And because they got more pleasure, does it justify them?

[C]

Why did they. Why did they get pleasure out of it?

[A]

Because they think these healthier companies are evil and all the people involved are complicit.

[B]

And I think if you do it enough, maybe they'll. They'll.

[C]

But specifically evil. Evil, why? Like, what is it that they're doing?

[A]

They're undermining pleasure. Pleasure for the most people.

[C]

Exactly. So it's kind of. There's this sort of underlying assumption of a utilitarian principle for these people that, like, well, okay, it's bad to kill somebody, but if they're going to cause more people to suffer and die, is this a utilitarian gas?

[A]

This is a justification for war, I imagine.

[C]

Yeah. I mean, sure, yeah. War is. Well, at least ostensibly, it'll be like, this will be. This is. This is what's good. But war tends to have a more sort of like the family thing. It's not just because if you were utilitarian and like, a country declares war on you, and you're like, what's their population? Is it bigger than us? Okay, you know, let them. Let them have it. Right. That's not what you do. It's more like the family thing. You're like, to hell with that. I'm going to, like, defend my. My own. My home, my own principles, you know.

[A]

Okay, so Brexit, for example.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Good. No, this idea that there are people that feel like they're losing their. Their cultural identity and we don't have to argue whether it's right or wrong. But I'm just saying that idea, if we're taking utilitarian principle and we're just plastering our top of that, do they feel less pleasure as culture becomes more diverse and then their specific culture becomes, in their perception, diluted?

[C]

For sure.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

I mean, that seems to be the motivation behind Brexit. It was essentially an immigration vote, in my view. That's.

[A]

A lot of people seem to feel.

[C]

Like, yeah, okay, a lot of people were talking about the economy and sort of, they're getting up on their talk shows and they're like, well, you know, like in Brexit and the GDP and four point, it's like no one can. Yeah, some, some people care, but you know what I mean, that's not what it was about. Yes, and yeah, like, but the thing is, I mean, I've been talking about utilitarianism. Like, I'm not a utilitarian. Most people aren't utilitarians. They think they are until they come across an example, like where they've got to tie their own child to a trap or something. And they're like, to hell with that. And it's like, okay, well then you're not actually utilitarian like you thought you were.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Instead you're something else. And in my view, people are just emoting. I'm what's called an emotivist about ethics. I think that all ethical statements are just expressions of emotion. I think that's actually all I think is going on.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

And so in this instance, like, if you were utilitarian, you could say, well, it's complicated because, yeah, more people get pleasure if they can immigrate into a country. But then the amount of suffering that comes with like losing a sense of identity, that might balance it out. Or you just be like, you're just, you're just sort of vibing, man. You're just trying to feel it out.

[A]

I think that there's an emotional reaction to that too. I mean, they're emotivists. Is that what you said? Yeah, it makes them feel better to have, to have a, a technical justification for their emotional response.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

And so they're calling it utilitarian, but it's really not that.

[C]

Exactly. People want to stick a label on there. That's what a lot of philosophy is. It is essentially hyper rationalizing of your emotive feelings.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

That's why you have all of these clever people who agree with each other. It's also why I could say like, name some of the most famous philosophers in the world, like Nietzsche or Immanuel Kant or John Stuart Mill. And a lot of people get this idea that because they're great philosophers, if I just pick one at random and sit down and start reading it, I'll be like, wow, this guy's amazing. But if you try that, go into a philosophy department, pick some, pick up like John Paul Sartre and just read it. And you'll be like, what, what is this? Because the great philosophers are people who you kind of already know that you're like on the same wavelength as them. And you read it and they just put it into words and you're like, yes, yeah, man, that's, that's, that's what it is. That's, that's the feeling of like thinking someone's smart is sort of looking at and going like, yeah, yeah, they put that. But because they've just rationalized what you're already thinking. Education. I think that the Greek word that that comes from, I can't remember what the word actually is. Like, you know, educratos or something like this means to draw out. Education is not like the so called bucket theory of the mind, which is like you're just a bucket and a teacher comes and just chucks stuff in there. It's a more like two way relationship. And to educate someone is to draw out of them because there's something already inside them that you are like pulling out. Education has to, to be something, which I don't mean like as a moral thing. This is how we should be educating our kids. I mean, this is literally what happens in many people's view. It's like a two way relationship. You have to. The person who's learning has to sort of take a guess at the world and then like test ideas against the guess that they're making and then the teacher sort of helps them with that. So it's a, it's a, it's a drawing out, you know, that's what philosophers do. So you're reading a text and it's not just like you're getting information. Somebody is, is sitting systematizing the way that you feel. You know, like when you read Chopin Howe's essay about women, you'll probably have this experience of thinking like, yeah, yeah, he gets it. Yeah, guy, yeah, but, but no but on a serious level, like if you read that essay, like most people read that and they're sort of like, what the hell is he going on?

[A]

Yeah, you might think he's a Maniac.

[C]

And it's like. And it's, it's. So that's a great example to show that, like, what you're doing is you're bringing your. If you are, like a genuine sexist and you read this, should be like, yeah, man, he's so smart. And your assessment of how, like, intelligent. Intelligent he is has to do with.

[A]

How much you agree with will just.

[C]

Be basically like how much you sort of already agree with him, you know?

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

And to what level he sort of resonates with you. Now, sometimes there will be people who come along and change your mind, so you don't already agree with them, you know, well, that's really smart. That changes my mind. But it's because you've already got some kind of surface level agreement on something and they've taken that assumption and said, well, that should lead you here rather than there.

[A]

Yeah. I wonder if changing your mind has to do with this feeling of, like, guilt or shame. Like, a lot of times I'm sure you've heard, like, Shapiro go on and on about, like, facts don't care about your feelings. Whatever we spoken a lot about, like, people don't care about your facts. We say it all the time. They don't care about your facts at the fuck all. So I wonder if sometimes you're presented with facts and they make you feel this guilt or shame that you believe this thing that was wrong and now you feel stupid, now you feel silly, you feel misled, and it's that personal feeling. You're not going, oh, I will follow the facts. Now you're like, I don't want to be an idiot. I don't want people to think that I'm an idiot. I, I've changed my philosophy.

[C]

Yeah. I think a lot of thinking is just feeling like when you become convinced by something. For example, what is at the basis of our epistemology, how we know things? I can see a water bottle here, and I think this water bottle exists. That doesn't seem like an emotion. Feels like a rational thing that I believe. It's like something that's true or false. Right. But why do I believe that this water bottle exists? Because I can see it. But why do I believe that? Because I can see it. It's really there. Well, because I think that my sense data is accurate, you know, And I'm not like a brain in a vat somewhere. It's like, well, why do I think that? Because, like, if, if I didn't, I would just be in this skeptical hellhole and I Wouldn't know anything. Like so yeah, so what? At root you just have these, what we call intuitions, which is the philosopher's fancy word for like the way you feel, man. It's like, well, I have a very strong intuition that the external world. World exists. But you just feel that way.

[A]

Comfort to trust our senses. Yes.

[C]

You just can't help but feel right.

[A]

Have you ever met somebody with schizophrenia?

[C]

I don't think so.

[A]

It's really interesting because the things that they're seeing or hearing do not exist.

[C]

Yeah, right. And they feel, they hold up an important mirror to our, to our own philosophies. It's the same thing with like a lot of people like to talk about how you know the person. If someone who was acting rationally would never like indulge in this behavior like pulling the lever that's bad. And everyone knows it's bad. It's like, well, psychopaths exist. They're people who just don't care. Right. And you have to deal with the fact that not everyone's brain works in the same way that yours does. And they're really interesting test cases. I mean like people who have some kind of mental disorder can be really interesting, like philosophically.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

You've heard of split split brain patients. You know, the brain is in two hemispheres. You've got left and the right brain. Ian McGilchrist writes about this in the Master and His Emissary. It's, it's phenomenal. And they are famously responsible for different things. So like the right side of the brain moves your left arm and the left side of your brain is your right arm, broadly speaking. And this has an effect on, on behavior like the, the, the eye that animals choose to like, look at. Their prey will, will, will be determined by which hemisphere that they're sort of using. People who have, who have damage to the left hand side of their brain will often have uncontrollable movements in their right arm and likewise with the right and the left arm. But people who have damage in the right brain and the right brain broadly speaking is supposed to be like the creative one.

[A]

I thought that's left.

[C]

No, the left brain is. The left is more like 90 kind of brain. So.

[A]

Oh, that's why they say the left handed people tend to be more creative because it's right side of the brain is more developed.

[C]

They say that it's unclear whether there's actually a connection there. But that's the kind of thing that people, that's why they say that. Right. And people who have the damage to the right hand side of their brain. If they have uncontrollable left hand movements, they tend to be like feeling movements. They'll sort of feel things without being able to control it. Whereas if they got damaged to the left hand side of the brain, their right hand will grab things. Because the left hand side of the brain is more like. Is more numerical and it's more. It's more like precise and practical. So it's more grabby.

[A]

Right.

[C]

And so the two hemispheres are connected by something called the corpus callosum, which. Which is the connective tissue. And the tissue actually seems to do more to inhibit communication between them than to facilitate it. As if there's some evolutionary benefit to kind of having two brains. But some people have what's called a corpus callosotomy, which is where they sever the connection. This used to be a treatment for extreme cases of epilepsy. It was one of the only ways you could treat it. And in these patients, there is this strange phenomenon which has been observed called alien hand syndrome. It was first reported when a woman in, like the 80s, 1800s, her left hand just started attacking her, started trying to choke her to death, and she had to fight off her hand with the rest of her body. And there are people who, like, they'll pour a cup of coffee and then their other hand will just pour it out again. People who will get dressed, they'll put their trousers on, and then the other hand will take it off again. And.

[A]

Mr. Bean.

[C]

And the most common place where this has cropped up is in cases of people who've had a corpus callosotomy. And so it seems to suggest that you might literally have sort of two consciousness.

[A]

Whoa.

[C]

That are like, battling it out constantly. So a lot of our decision making, and this might be where, like, freedom of the will comes in. It's like your brain is sort of battling against itself to figure out which one's going to win out or something.

[A]

You're a determinist, right?

[C]

I don't believe in free will, if that's what you mean.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

But the thing that terrifies me is to think like, okay, so say you've got this left hand that's trying to kill you. If there is some kind of consciousness attached to it, that's not the consciousness that's attached to your, like, your awareness, your eyes, your mouth, your ears and stuff, because otherwise it would say something. And so if there is a separate consciousness that's somewhere trapped inside you, with no mouth, no eyes, no ears, the only way it has to communicate is by like controlling the arm. What if it's like trapped in there trying to tell you something? Maybe that's why it's trying to kill you because it wants jerking off.

[A]

All the. Who knows what's in there. You gotta gape. Consciousness. Trying to grab my dick all the time.

[C]

Yeah, maybe that's what the choking is about. It's terrifying to think though, right?

[A]

Is it possible there's not just like a subconscious feed that's getting put into.

[C]

Your muscles that then is giving an electrical impulse? Yeah, I mean, I mean that's possible. But to see it just seems like a strange coincidence, doesn't it, that like when you split the two hemispheres of the brain, you increase the probability of like people's limbs acting of their own accord, you know, it seems to be. We don't know exactly, but people who undergo these experiences have really interesting, like, examples of, of how like our philosophy can just completely shift or change based on the way people behave. I mean, your idea about theory of mind and what mind is and whether it's attached to the brain or whatever can be altered by the existence of split brain patients. Because what if there are two people? Like in the philosophy of mind, a really important question is it's called personal identity. Like, what makes you the same person you were five minutes ago? What is the actual connection? Like, what's going on there? And one important question people ask is, like, if I cut your brain in half and I take the two parts of the brain, I put them into new individual bodies and wake them up, like, which one is you? And some people say neither of them, in which case you've just died. That seems a little bit weird. Some people say, well, they're both you, but if they're both you now, then five minutes ago they must have both been you as well. But like in one person. So it's like for the, for your whole life you were two people living together. That doesn't seem quite right either.

[A]

Have you seen the show Severance?

[C]

No, but I've, I've, I've, I've heard about it. I started watching the first.

[A]

Are you familiar with the premise of the show?

[C]

No, I'm actually not really. So no spoilers?

[A]

No, no, I'm not going to give away, but the idea is, is that you could sever the brain in a way where when you go to work and you enter this space at work.

[C]

You like don't remember or something.

[A]

Yeah, you are you essentially, but you have limited knowledge of things in the outside world.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

You speak, you know, fluently. I think you have, like, some words you don't know. You don't understand, like what Bermuda is or whatever. But, like, you are you. You kind of have the similar personality, but you have no connection to who you are in the outside world. So the ide could just go to work and then clock out.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[A]

And it sounds good on paper. You know, a lot of people have shitty jobs. You're like, I'd like to. You know, for eight hours I even think about how horrible my job is. And then you leave. And the show is this interesting experiment because it's like, well, how much autonomy and agency do those people have at work? And then once they find out that there's a life outside of work that might be better and they don't have control of existing outside of it, do they fall in love? And what if that person decides to quit their job? They're dead if they quit their job. And I'm curious on, like, how much rights you think those people would have. It still is you, but now they're a completely autonomous human being.

[C]

The important question to me is whether that is the same person. And that's when you have to ask, what makes you the same person?

[A]

I don't want to give away anything from the show, but let's continue asking.

[C]

Literally, what makes you the same person that you were when you were a child?

[A]

It's not collection of memories, because your twin might have the exact same experiences. Yeah.

[C]

And also you could have false memories. I could take your memories and implant them to someone else and they wouldn't become you. It can't even be that physical matter that you're made out of, because, like, your. The atoms in your body are constantly, like, replenishing and changing. And after enough time, it's like no physical part of you. So suppose, for example, that's true.

[A]

Your skin isn't you, because your skin replaces itself.

[C]

Exactly. So like, they say that every seven years, every atom in your body replaces itself. I don't know if that's actually entirely.

[A]

True, but let's assume.

[C]

But yeah, I mean, so say somehow I took. After seven years, I took all of the atoms. I managed to find all of the atoms that had been part of you but floated off or change. And I put them all together again and made another. And made another version of you. Like, which one is you in the sense of being continuous with. With your. Yourself, like, 10 minutes ago. I mean, it kind of has to be you now because you've got this continuous.

[A]

Sure.

[C]

But then that. This is the same atoms, this is like the same being. And it like, it's actually kind of an impossible question to answer.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

You know, which one, which one is you? And which one would you. Would you rather be? So say, for example, that like, in 10 years from now I'm going to do this. I'm going to take the atoms that make up you right now, the atoms that are in your body right now. I'm going to collect them in a jar and in 10 years from now, I'm going to reconstruct them next to wherever you are in 10 years. And then I'm going to torture one of them. Which one do you want me to torture? Which one? Which one do you choose?

[A]

That's severance.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Literally. I mean, not exactly, but. But which one would you want that Torture him.

[C]

The atoms in a jar.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

That's you right now.

[A]

I know.

[C]

So you make that decision.

[A]

I know.

[C]

And then like click my fingers. Suddenly you're like next to your future self and you're like, wait, I've messed up here now.

[A]

It wouldn't be my future self because it didn't go through the experiences that I went through. Right. Which made me who I am now.

[C]

You just suddenly wake up with all these memories you've got now.

[A]

Oh, you're saying in this.

[C]

Because all the atoms that make up you right now include your brain, include your memories and stuff. Right. So what I'm going to do is I'm.

[A]

Oh, you recreate them at the exact same time and then let them live their own life.

[C]

I' Taken whatever, whatever. Whatever atoms you have in your body right now. Yeah. I'm just going to put them back together again in 10 years, like. Exactly.

[A]

But then they haven't went through what I went through over the 10 years.

[C]

That's right. But it will.

[A]

I have another thing with this.

[C]

The experience will feel as if you're talking to me right now.

[A]

And as the exact same person suddenly click.

[C]

Yeah, you're now 10 years into the future.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Because I'm just taking all of the atoms that you've got right now as you are right now, and I'm just. I'm just putting them back together again.

[A]

But they would be devoid of the experiences I had over the last decade.

[C]

That's right. From. From the experience of that person that I create. They would remember five seconds ago being sat here talking to me.

[A]

This is severance, right? To a certain extent, yeah.

[C]

Yeah. So that's the thing. It just feels like you're just suddenly there.

[A]

The reason why I would feel more agency is because, hey, I've had these last 10 years of memories, right? So I believe I should have more agency than you. I've lived my life. But, but, but, but, but what if you had a debilitating neurological disorder that stripped you of your ability to create. Create new memories? Dementia, Alzheimer's. Now you're not creating new memories. Now you don't have these experiences. So I can't say I have more agency than that body because we have the same amount of new. Of new memories.

[C]

Yeah. Yeah. Well, say, say, for example, like, I.

[A]

Put more work in, bro.

[C]

Suppose that, like, suppose that you. I'm gonna, like, take all of your memories and I'm gonna swap it with a guy over there. It's called Joe. And tomorrow you're going to wake up and you're going to have all of Joe's memories. Joe's going to wake up and he's going to have all of your memories. So you're going to wake up tomorrow.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

You're going to wake up tomorrow and you are literally going to remember being. Being Joe.

[A]

Yep.

[C]

Going to sleep. Waking up and being like, what the flip? I've got this game stash. I got this.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. You keep talking about my mustache, I'm going to think you're flirting. I am not your brother.

[C]

You keep talking.

[A]

You do not talk about me like him. Keep going, keep going. So who.

[C]

Well, no, but it's more than just who. Who are you? It's. It's again, I'm. Because I'm a bit of a sadist here. I'm going to talk to one of these guys tomorrow. Yeah, after you wake up.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Which one do you want me to torture?

[A]

Which one has a bigger dick? Are you subjectively still now working with your own body and perceptions, but with Joe's memories?

[C]

That's right. So. So you, you would wake up and like, literally, like the physical being that you are, you're gonna, you're gonna wake up and you're just gonna remember. Remember being Joe. Likewise. Joe is going to wake up and he's going to remember sat here having this conversation with me. That's what he's going to remember. So intuitively to me, I'm like, well, I want Joe to be tortured tomorrow, Right. Because, like, I'm still me. And even if I've got all of his memories.

[A]

Absolutely.

[C]

But there's this weird feeling that. Okay, so. So I say, okay, I'm going to talk to Joe. Then tomorrow, Joe wakes up and he remembers last night making the decision that he was going to be tortured. Do you know what I mean? Because he's got all of my memory. So he was. Wakes up and he's like, crap. Like, I look a lot like Joe now. And last night, what did I do? Oh, I told them to torture Joe. And now I'm Joe. And you'd feel like you totally messed.

[A]

Up, but you would remember why you'd said that, though.

[C]

Yeah, but you would probably feel like you wanted to reverse that decision then, wouldn't you? Afterwards, you'd be like, hold on.

[A]

Yeah, before, no, but afterwards. Absolutely. And I'd rather experience the remnants of torture than experience.

[C]

But if you know that you're about to regret a decision, doesn't that tell you the decision's wrong? If you're making a decision and you know for a fact that in one day's time you're going to go, damn, I wish I choose the other.

[A]

Have you ever been to a bachelor party?

[C]

I don't know if you would regret it.

[A]

I don't know if you would regret the like, because you don't have the.

[C]

Memory being experienced or you don't.

[A]

Yeah, you don't have the. The. The memory of the torture.

[C]

Yeah, but from your experience, this is the way it would. This is the way it would feel is you sat here having this conversation, going, let's talk to Joe tomorrow, closing your eyes, waking up as Joe and being like, crap, why did I tell him to torture me?

[A]

Oh, I see.

[C]

You know what I mean?

[A]

But I think having the memory of.

[C]

The torture is better than. Yeah, because it's actually. It's actually Joe that wakes up with your memories. So you wake up with Joe's memories, But the continuity of experience goes from you sat on this chair to waking up as Joe about to be tortured. And you remember, you're like, five minutes ago, I was Alex, and I told them to torture me. Now why that hell did I do that? You know? And you'd probably want to reverse that decision. Yeah, it's just like a bit of a. It's a bit of a weird one.

[B]

Okay, guys, I'm gonna take a break real quick because we got to talk about these. These are fantastic. I probably eat too many. I'm not gonna lie to you, because they taste delicious. And look, when it comes to supplements, there's a lot of misinformation, there's a lot of fake claims, there's a lot of bullshit stuff going around, but groons actually took the time to understand proper dosing and ensure that their products are optimized and safe. If you're taking a daily supplement, a multivitamin, a green powder and a prebiotic, it's a lot. This right here combines everything. It's a fraction of the price. And most importantly, it tastes fantastic. I've already had two today. I would eat one more. Fuck it. Being healthy guys has never been convenient or tasted better. You put these in your beach bag, you toss them into your carry on whenever you travel. They're fantastic. Honestly, they sounds like six boxes. They're already almost gone. That's all you need to know. You want a supplement you can enjoy that isn't a chore. This is the one you look forward to. Go to www.groons.co CEO and get up to 52% off if use a code FLAGRANT. All right? Www.groons.co up to 52% off if you use the code flagrant. Now let's get back to the show.

[A]

All right guys, let's take a break for a second. You need protein, okay? And it's hard to eat chicken breast every single meal. Trust me, it is boring. So you probably also need a little protein powder. And the most trustworthy pre or protein in the game is made by TR Transparent Labs. It's this thing right here. Their whey protein isolate is sourced from grass fed cattle raised humanely and without the use of growth hormones or hormonal agents and contains absolutely no artificial sweeteners, food dyes or fillers. I can't tell you how important that is. A lot of you guys are getting these protein powders, you don't even know where they're from. You don't even know if it's actual protein in there. You get them from some crazy country, you're ordering it online, you can't trust anything with it. This the exact opposite. Heavily split, scrutinized, the best in the business. Every batch of their isolate protein is tested by a third party lab for purity and potency. And you can find all their test results in the footer of their website so you know they're not bullshitting you. It's also certified by Informed Choice and Informed Protein to meet the highest standards for athletes and consumers. And once you try and love their protein, which you will get their other supplements because every single Transparent Lab supplement features science backed ingredients in clinically effective doses. So go to transparentlabs.com use the code flagrant, you're going to get 10 off any purchase. That's transparent labs.com. use the code flagrant, supplement smarter and make the switch to transparent labs. Now let's get back to the show. Vives expedia. Vivimos paraviajar. What makes you happy?

[B]

This.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

What makes me happy.

[A]

Yeah. What was like, the happiest moment you had in the last 12 months?

[C]

I. I enjoy discussing theology with people.

[A]

It brings you joy.

[C]

I like debates and discussions about philosophy and theology. My happiest moments are spent sort of sparring with somebody in a way that a boxer might spar with an opponent, knowing that they're not really trying to kill each other, but they're essentially doing a kind of sport which does have an undertone of genuine.

[A]

Like, have you ever, ever box before?

[C]

No. Only in a.

[A]

It's not really enjoyable. Sparring is not enjoyable. It's scary. It hurts.

[C]

So why do it?

[A]

Because you want to get better at something, and it gives you confidence knowing that, like, the things you practice, you can actually execute.

[C]

Yeah. So that's. That's true of philosophy, too.

[A]

But the act thereof, especially if you're losing, and a lot of times when you're sparring against, like, better guys, it's. It's costly. Certainly some boxers like sparring. Yeah.

[C]

They must be.

[A]

The guy who's. Floyd is. Fighting is not like, this is the best thing I've ever done in my entire life.

[C]

Yeah. It's not like you enjoy it. Like, you don't, like, enjoy getting punched in the face, but you enjoy the.

[A]

The thrill of being.

[C]

A thrill of what you're doing.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

And it's a similar kind of thing. Mistakes with debate and discussion. Yeah, it's great. So I enjoy debates. I enjoy. I enjoy discussions. I do think debates are a bit sort of useless. They're kind of just. They're just theater. They are just. I always compare them to boxing matches where.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

A boxing match will tell you.

[A]

People who've never boxed often do that. Comedians do that all the time. But, like, it's just like boxing and it's like.

[C]

What I mean specifically is that, like, a boxing match tells you who's the better boxer, but it doesn't tell you who's the better fighter.

[A]

How so?

[C]

Because, like.

[A]

Oh, do you find fighting is like, I could grab a tool and I. Exactly right.

[C]

So it's like, you could outbox somebody because you're a professional boxer, but if you meet them in a bar and they just want. And you want to kill, Totally different scenario. You might have slightly, like, better predictive odds if they're better at boxing. But you don't know that for sure. And it's kind of the same thing with debate. It's like, if you have a debate with someone, you're going to find out who's the better debater. Like Ben Shapiro can. Can crush. But, like, is there actually any substance there? It doesn't mean he's a great thinker.

[A]

You know, I guess it depends on, like, what he's talking about.

[C]

Yeah. And so it's not. There's not an obvious link. So for me, a debate is essentially like theater.

[A]

So you enjoy this showcase of. Of debate and you get to use the skills that you've worked.

[B]

It's like stand up, to be honest, more than boxing.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. You're probably. You're probably right. Yeah.

[A]

Yeah. Because stand up is really fun.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

When it's going well and when it's not going well yet.

[C]

What's the worst, worst experience you had? I've had so many.

[A]

It's just infinite.

[B]

Part of me getting better is just bombing over and over again. His. His learning curve was actually shorter than anyone else's I've ever seen. Mine was not.

[C]

You ever done, like, therapy, like rejection therapy sort of thing where you, like, bomb on purpose just to, like, toughen yourself up for it?

[B]

I did that subconsciously. I was.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. Very smart. The reason I ask. The reason I ask is because, like, it so much focus on. On. I don't think you. You're focusing on specifically yourself, but, like, breaking down. Like, what is life? What is existence? What are the reasons for our behavior? What do they say? I think it was Chris Rock was like, you know, if ignorance is bliss, I'm the opposite of that. I'm constantly aware and acutely aware of everything I'm doing and why I'm doing it. And, like, that's tough. And I imagine, like, as you go through these thought experiments, you're definitely reflecting on your own life. And I wonder if there's a moment where like. Yeah, you just go get drunk and you're like, I'm not even going to worry about why this is true.

[C]

It's like, like I don't have an interesting answer to your question because I'm the same as anybody else. I enjoy spending time with my friends and my family and the people I care about. I enjoy listening to music. I enjoy watching tv. I. I listen to a little, like, sad boy indie music.

[A]

It's not working out. Yeah. No. But, like, can you separate? Is there, like, is there something. Can you turn it off?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Not even, like, yeah, yeah, maybe that is. Yeah, yeah, that's.

[C]

That's the thing.

[A]

Can you just, like, let's say. And I'm sure you're able to do this, but like, when you're watching a movie, like, if we're watching comedy, it's probably harder for us to turn it off, right? We're like, more analyzing it, et cetera. And I imagine you're doing that with, like, life, human interaction and decision making. How do you like, let's say you're talking to a girl at a bar and she starts talking about astrology. Like, can you indulge her as any guy would just meeting a new girl? Or do you have to be like, this girl's retarded. Like, there's nothing about Mercury in retrograde. And this is.

[C]

I think that it doesn't make it any more difficult. Like, having done philosophy, if you think astrology is bullshit, you think it's bullshit. Right, Right. And the reason why I probably wouldn't, like, entertain it isn't because, like, I'm a philosopher and I care about what's truth, but just because I don't. I don't like lying in the sense of, like, if I know I'm not going to get on with you in two weeks because we're going to have this different way of viewing the world, then I better just be upfront and be like, actually, I don't believe in any of that.

[A]

So that's a deal.

[C]

Good luck to you.

[A]

That's a deal breaker.

[C]

Deal breaker. But it depends on how they react to it, right? Like, if.

[A]

Look, I love it.

[C]

And that's also quite important. It's been real for a bit. If they sort of say, like, oh, I'm really into astrology, and like, well, I think that's bullshit. And they're like, oh, cool. Yeah, I know a lot of people think that way, but, like, here's why I think it's true. Then, cool, great. We're off to the races.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

But if it's obviously like a sort of like.

[A]

Oh, you know, is there a moment where, like, you find yourself specifically turning it off because it inhibits your joy for that? Yeah, for that, like, bachelor party or that birthday or whatever.

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[A]

Or are you analyzing, like, well, it's.

[C]

Funny, I don't tend to get invited to many, so I don't know, Jord.

[B]

I'm not trying to get you in comparing to Michael Jordan.

[C]

But he.

[B]

There was an interview with him at 50 where he's like, I, God gave me this gift, which was Competitiveness. And I can't turn it off. Now I'm competing in fucking Sudoku or whatever. Like, whatever thing he picks up. He is obsessively competitive and he's not that happy about it. He's like, this was awesome, but now I don't need it and I can't turn it off. Can you do that at a birthday party? Can you turn off that part of you that's like, what is a birthday even? Or whatever? You know what I mean?

[C]

Like. Like, not exactly, but in practice, yeah. Like, I'm.

[A]

What is this scenario? Like, is there a concert? Like, what makes you just cry? And you're like, I'm not going to analyze why I'm emotional right now. I'm just going to let this happen and have this genuine human experience without thinking about it.

[C]

I try very hard to allow experiences to be what they are. And I think more than most people who are interested in philosophy, I do kind of see through it a bit. Like, I think that a lot of the syllogistic reasoning and premise this and premise that.

[A]

What's syllogistic reasoning?

[C]

Syllogism is like a form of argument that goes premise, premise, conclusion, and, like, trying to formalize everything into those terms is just not how people, like, actually interact with the world.

[A]

Right.

[C]

Like, and philosophy is not how people actually make big life decisions. I used to have this bit where I'd talk about a guy who's about to throw himself off a bridge. He's about to kill himself, and someone comes up to him and he's like, what are you doing doing, man? Like, gosh, like, do you have a family? And the guy's like, oh, yeah, no, I suppose I do have a family, actually. And they care about you, right? It's like, yeah, you know, my wife, she doesn't even know I'm here. Oh, goodness. And he's talking, he's like, you know, I've been in that situation. Start sharing his experience and all of this kind of stuff. And then he's like, you've got a cross on your neck. Are you a Christian? He's like, yeah. He's like, well, you know, Jesus loves you, and I'm a follower of Christ, too, and talking him around. And he really, like, emotionally finally decides, like, okay, fine, I think I can. And he starts climbing back over the bridge. And then he suddenly remembers that, like, the 14th premise of the modal ontological argument for fails because of some philosophical, like, logical fallacy. And so he throws himself off the bridge.

[A]

How do you stop Yourself.

[C]

It's just like, it's just. But it's. You don't have to, because that's not how people.

[A]

That's not how you operate or anybody else.

[C]

The moment is actually emotional enough like that. I mean, it can be interesting. Like, if you, if you've had a music concert and you're, like, getting goosebumps, and instantly you're thinking, like, whoa. And you do think, like, isn't that an interesting evolutionary trait? Like, why do we get goosebumps? Whatever. But you're still feeling the goosebumps, man. Like, it's not gonna. And you kind of. Kind of don't want to switch it off because you find it. You find it quite fun. Like, you're comedians, right? Yeah, so I'm. So I'm told. And you, you, you, presumably, if I ask you something about, like, your love and your profession, like, do you ever turn off being funny? It's like, well, yeah, I mean, kind of, but, like, not, not. It's not like I'm. I, like, get home and like, okay, I'm gonna intentionally now turn off being funny.

[A]

Right.

[C]

It's just that sometimes you're just not in the mood for it. You know, you're tired or whatever. You're not in the mood for it, and then you just. Then you don't have to turn it off.

[A]

It's just there are certain comedians that. Yeah, you, like, I wish you would just turn it off because it seems like. I'm sure, I'm sure we've done it even on the pod today, but, like, you know, you're just trying to have maybe, like a thoughtful conversation, and then if something organically becomes funny, you do it, but.

[C]

Oh, yeah, you haven't done that at all.

[A]

No, no, no, no. But, but, but meaning more like, maybe, like sometimes you're talking to someone, it's like it just feels like they're waiting to say the bit instead of, like, actually listening to what you're saying and, like, thinking about it.

[C]

Yeah, that's right.

[A]

And that is a balance on a comedy.

[C]

Like, there'll be times when you do turn off the comedy. And, like, if you're at a funeral or something, you're not going to start cracking.

[B]

I found as I got. As I did comedy more. Got better at it, got more acclaim at it. That part of me that needed that validation is much quieter. So off stage, I don't feel the need to do it. And you can tell when someone wishes they could have done comedy or isn't where they want to be and Then they're really forcing that, and I get a little irritated. I also have empathy and I'm like, oh, I probably, like, we would go to diners early in our career and make the biggest scenes, and it's probably just we needed that attention because we weren't getting.

[C]

And it's the equivalent of. Of that in philosophy when it's like when you sort of say to somebody like, oh, hey, happy birthday, man. And they're like, birthdays are arbitrary, man. Like, yeah. So, like, even if you actually think that, like, yeah, okay, it shouldn't. You shouldn't, like, be sort of. You can tell when someone's, like, putting it.

[A]

Not.

[C]

Not even putting it on, but, like, they're enjoying the fact that that's who they are.

[A]

Right?

[C]

But that's the thing is when you switch it off, like you're at a funeral and you're not cracking jokes.

[A]

If.

[C]

If, like, you know, if. If the guy at the. At the front, if the priest or whatever looks at the coffin and says, you know, just looking at her now, you know, like, in the coffin, it just. It's just. Just makes it so hard. You're not going to not think of the joke. You're not going to not find it funny, but you're just not going to say it, right? And so there are situations in which you turn it off in the sense where you decide, I'm not going to, like, start talking about this. But it's still, like, there, obviously. It's still, like, you still think, but.

[A]

You can still process the motion in an authentic way without analyzing the.

[C]

I'm interested in philosophy, right? But everybody does this. You've been at parties and you suddenly are sort of like, man, what's everyone doing? Like, you start thinking about, like, social interactions and how weird. Like, everybody does this, right? Like, I'm not some. Like, I just.

[A]

It's a very normal thing that people do. I feel like you probably just do it more and then I'm wondering what the emotional cost of that is.

[C]

Yeah, well, that's the thing. I mean, it's got it. It will have an emotional cost.

[A]

I'll give you an example. I have a daughter, right? And I love making her laugh. Definitely makes me feel good. And she's just awesome when I make her laugh. And. But I have to remind myself that, like, she might get just as much enjoyment of just walking around the house and, like, playing with things and me just watching her and me just being around. And I have to constantly remind myself because I have this thing built in where it's like, oh, I'll feel good and they'll feel good if I'm providing some sort of laughter. So I'm, like, fighting my. My neediness or whatever it is to just be a better dad, which is sometimes just, like, being there supporting and observing. I have to fight it. And I'll talk to my wife about. I'm like, yeah, yeah, she. And my wife's like, she had a great time and she was bouncing around with gymnastics. I was like, okay, all. I wasn't, like, acting like an animal to make her laugh. I was just there supporting her, make sure she didn't fall. But I have to work on that.

[C]

Yes.

[A]

Is that something that you feel like you have to work at?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Have normal human interactions with someone who.

[C]

Yeah. Actually it comes up a lot when somebody has, like, a moral dilemma or.

[A]

Like, yes, they come. They really want to share something with you. Get your advice.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

And you're taking them through these thought experiments.

[C]

It's like, it comes. It kind of comes to mind, like, if somebody's going through something, like a personal experience or they don't know what to do, and it can be very serious or something. And. And you have just read, like, 15 different papers on this. And there are. There are thought experiments and there are ways which actually, genuinely could be quite in like. Like, useful ways to think through, but it just doesn't feel appropriate. But that is the equivalent of, you know, the meme about, like, the girlfriend who sort of comes to you and says, I've got this problem. You're like, oh, here's how you solve it. And they're like, I don't. I don't want you to give me solutions. I just want you to listen to me. There's a lot of that going on.

[A]

That's all humans.

[C]

I saw a version of that. There was, like, a woman who was talking to her boyfriend, and it was like, on an online video where she's sort of like, you know, I just feel like she's got this headache all the time and, like, it just won't go away. And I feel, like, a lot of pressure. And then it cuts out. She's got this, like, nail in her head. And the guy's like, well, you have got a. You have got a nail stuck into your head. And she's like, oh, you're always looking for solutions, aren't you? You never just want to listen to how I feel.

[A]

That's all people want is right, is to feel questions on that whole area. Do you. Do you have A therapist or someone that you like go towards, I imagine. Once again, I don't want to over intellectualize you or put you in a position where it's like, I don't know.

[C]

But I do and his name is Jesus.

[A]

I was wondering, do you have someone that like, if you have a moral dilemma, do you find yourself or a dilemma or any problem in your life, do you find yourself having a hard time over intellectualizing it and do you go to a therapist?

[C]

Yeah, like I'm incredibly indecisive. I haven't done therapy, like not, not, not consistently anyway. I think I probably should. I think everyone should. It's probably a good thing in some ways. It might be a sort of a perversion of the Catholic confessional though. It's sort of like, you know, let's, let's take this thing which is rightfully God's and give it to, to human beings. But honestly, this actually is more to the point that like, if I've got some kind of genuine like moral problem, if I've got like an issue with a friend or something like this, I am not, not going to go to like my philosophy tutor. I'm going to speak to my friends, I'm going to speak to my mum. Because there is something about not being caught up in all of that. Like Thomas Jefferson said something like, if you've got a moral problem, he'd just as sooner give it to the plowman as to the academic or the philosopher. Now you're going to Thomas Jefferson.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

But you know what I mean. Because they're not going to get like.

[A]

Give us a moral problem.

[C]

We're going to help you out in artificial rules.

[A]

Tell us something you're going through. This is good. We're going to depilosophize.

[C]

You're going to be the therapist?

[A]

No, we're going to be your boys.

[C]

Thing is, man, like, I think it's more fun to talk about the sort of weird, wacky, ridiculous like ethical dilemmas.

[A]

You don't like talking about yourself?

[C]

No, because then when the real ones come up, like it's.

[A]

Why don't you like talking about yourself?

[C]

It's easier to work through them. Because I'm quite uninteresting, you know. I am a. I am a.

[A]

Now we're getting somewhere, bro.

[C]

I am just a mouthpiece for other people's ideas. That's what I do do on the Internet, you know.

[B]

You think that reflects a low self worth?

[C]

I don't think so, because I think I know what I'm good At. And I stick to it, you know, Like, I don't think.

[A]

Would you be worth something if you weren't good at it?

[C]

I don't know. I mean, I.

[A]

Why not? Because.

[C]

Because I don't think that worth exists. I'm not an.

[A]

So if worth doesn't exist, then, yeah. Be worth just as much as anybody else.

[C]

Yeah, I think so. That's the thing.

[A]

And just as interesting.

[C]

Well, maybe, but I mean, like, depending on the thing.

[A]

Like, clearly, you're interesting to us.

[C]

But the thing is, man, like. Like, when I say that that's. That's what I think I'm good at, or that's what I'm interesting.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Like, oh, that's what I can talk about. That's not, like, the doubt. Because you say, like, well, if you. If you didn't have that. That interesting thing about you, would you still be interesting? It's like, well, no, but in the same way I could say, like, if you weren't funny, would you still be funny?

[A]

It's like, well, it depends who you're talking to, I guess. What I might find the most interesting thing about you is your hesitation to talk about yourself.

[C]

Right.

[A]

Like, that's what I really want to know about.

[C]

But I mean, like, what do you want to know?

[A]

I want to know the last moral dilemma that you've been in.

[C]

Well, genuinely, the reason why I hesitate to answer that is just because I struggle to remember exactly. Like, the last time I had, like, a serious moral quandary.

[A]

But what about not serious? What about just, like, a disagreement? You got into interpersonal conflict. Yeah. Your girl's mom was saying something annoying.

[C]

Honestly, man, like. Like, I don't know. You know, like, p. What was the last.

[A]

Don't put it on me. Put it on me.

[C]

I don't think I can remember. Oh, I think. I think. Oh, I remember now.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

So I was booking a train. Up to. Up to.

[A]

It's all about trains, isn't it? Up to D.C. there's five people. No talk to us. This is so good. I mean, there's so much analysis of.

[C]

I was on a train once, and I saw a bunch of, like, workmen, like, on the tracks, and I. I posted a picture because I was like, man, I have trained for this moment. I'm like, I am so ready. You know, who's cool? I was getting on a train or I was booking a train, and I thought to myself, I was trying to choose between which, like, class of seat.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

Because I wanted to get some work done. I was like, should I get the like the fancy first class thing where you get the space and stuff. And I was like, it'd be like an extra like 100 or 200 bucks. And I'm thinking I could take that 200 bucks and I could like donate it to charity. I could like deworm about 15 children somewhere else in the world. Yeah, that's a moral dilemma.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

And that's something that I do actually think about quite a lot.

[A]

Really?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

In terms of spending money, how you could spend it more.

[C]

I think about it and then I spend the money, you know. But I do think, I do think about it sometimes.

[A]

That's all. All we need to be good people think about it.

[C]

So. Yeah, I mean, I really was just struggling to think of something. But that's an example, you know, I will think about that.

[A]

Are you a good friend?

[C]

I like to think of myself as one in particular. I have a kind of. I guess I sort of have a philosophy of radical honesty. Like, I genuinely, I can't stand when I'm like keeping something from someone.

[A]

So does that make it hard to build friendships?

[C]

It can do. Because it's sometimes it's like to appoint a pedophile. Like, if I feel like I've, I've, I've done something that I shouldn't or like, or something that I like, I will like volunteer this information to people.

[A]

That I care about. Sometimes selfish.

[C]

Right, and that's exactly. Yeah, that is definitely sometimes pulling that lever every time.

[A]

Maybe that's what's drawn you to philosophy because it's made you feel more normal. Right.

[C]

Like, well, I don't know, like you're.

[A]

Looking for justification for.

[C]

I genuinely just find it interesting.

[A]

Yes, well, of course you wouldn't, you wouldn't follow something.

[C]

The kind of stuff that's like, like life applicable stuff about, like whether it's always wrong to lie or this kind of stuff I actually find really uninteresting.

[A]

Right.

[C]

Like in my, in my personal life, that's the stuff that I, that I wrestle with the most. Moments like that, like, is it okay to lie in this circumstance? But like in like doing academic philosophy or whatever, it's the least interesting thing.

[A]

In the world to me whether, whether one should lie or shouldn't.

[C]

Yeah. I want to talk about trained. It's probably just all autism, isn't it?

[A]

Like it. Would you say, like it's trained and.

[C]

It'S, it's like academic.

[A]

Like you've dedicated so much time to your life to this and like you're obviously an expert and masterful in debate and all this stuff. And like, is there time? I find myself, even anytime I talk to a therapist, I find myself avoiding talking about myself. And, and I, I'm like, why? What am I doing?

[C]

Why do you think that is?

[A]

I don't know. Yeah, and I, I, I think you're, you're being condescending a little bit right now. But, but there is something that's like, what am I, am I avoiding? Am I like, have I retrofit justifications for all my behaviors? And those are fine to me and it feels good enough so I don't want to fix it, or am I scared of what I might find and how that could like, shatter my foundation? I don't know, but I find myself doing that. So. But I wonder if you've done so much analysis on the human condition and maybe really just your own and why you don't have like a strong feeling about a certain thing. So you're like, why is that normal? Because I imagine you could indulge both sides in a lot of these arguments and that's normal for you where like, the average person is like, you can't pull the lever. What are you, psychopath?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

You were probably made to feel pretty weird that you could indulge both sides. So you're like, I need to find justification for why I can do that.

[C]

That's true. I also, like, I spent a lot of time like, like really, really thinking about this before. Like, really trying to get to know myself in, in a way, like, spent. I spent a long time where I sort of took some time off of making YouTube videos. And it's kind of. Everyone has that moment where they're like, they're in the pits for a bit and they don't really know what they're doing.

[A]

And like, career wise, you didn't know.

[C]

Like, like just in my life, it was just like a bad, it was just like a bad time.

[A]

How old were you?

[C]

There was lots going on. I was probably like 20, 21. Maybe. Something, something like.

[A]

So you're studying at this time?

[C]

No, it was just afterwards. I can't, I can't remember the exact, the exact date or whatever, but like, it was just like a period of, of just thought, just straight thought. I used to just sit at home and do nothing and I was smoking a lot of cannabis.

[A]

That time induced thought.

[C]

Yeah, just like just thinking basically. And I would like wake up and I would like, watch a TV show and I would, I would, I would, I would just think about it and I was writing in my diary. And that period in my life was this. With this essentially, like a long period of realization of things that I think about the world. And it was a kind of psychoanalysis. It was a sort of like looking into myself and thinking, why do I think this? What's actually going on? And really. And that's why now I'm much more comfortable saying, like. Well, I think I have a philosophy of, like, radical honesty, whatever. Because I realized that was something that I was doing. I didn't notice it before, so I had, like, been through that. It's just that, like, right now. Yeah, I. I don't know.

[A]

I feel like not indulging in that way.

[C]

That's something that. That's something that I've done. That's something that I've explored. And I think that maybe in five years I might need to do it again. It's like a little audit, little philosophical audits, you know, every now.

[A]

And you avoid bro.

[C]

But right now I'm really.

[A]

You're gonna think about yourself once every five years.

[C]

Well, to that level of depth. Yeah. Because if you want to do it properly, it can be soul crushing.

[A]

Yeah, that is. That's what I'm saying.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

It can be soul crushing because you.

[C]

You have to. If you understand, do it. You've got to do it properly.

[A]

Well, I mean, a lot of people probably avoid it.

[C]

Yeah. I think.

[A]

And then what if there's societal benefit to kind of avoiding and finding other distractions? And I'm not trying to, like, make you religious or anything right now. I was raised with no religion, but, like, I wonder if that's how some people cope with the potential nothingness of life and what is better.

[C]

Yeah. Because a lot of people don't spend enough time thinking about it. Like, people who. Who realize that they're going to die or whatever. It's like, when was the last time you just stopped and thought. I'm talking, like two hours straight, just thinking about the fact you're gonna die until, like, it clicks. Until, like, you actually, like, scary recognize it. It's not just an abstract idea. I remember, like, the first. The first time I ever. Seriously. I remember, like, being in my bed as a. As like a. Probably like a teenager or child or something. The first time when I was. I thought about, you know, everyone knows that they're gonna die or stuff, but I just seem to remember this one time when I was thinking about death to it, and for some reason it just clicked. It was like. I got it. It was like the difference Difference between, like, you know, people often think about, like, how, oh, I'd love to be rich one day, right? And then you win the lottery and you're like, oh. And it's a different feeling. You're like, it's actually happening.

[A]

Right.

[C]

And I had that kind of feeling about death, about death when I was a teenager, and I was just like, oh, like, I'm. And I was. I was just, like, overcome with. With sort of. It, like, shuddered, you know, like the shiver down the spine, everything. I was just like, whoa. Like, I suddenly realized what it actually meant to. To. To think that you're gonna. That you're gonna die one day. And even now, like, we're talking about death, we're having a discussion about it, but none of us are seriously. Right.

[A]

Isn't that crazy?

[C]

You have to. You have to seriously sit with it for, like, a long time and really.

[A]

Think about what it means on Instagram. Like, the amount of times you'll see your parents again.

[C]

Oh, yeah, yeah.

[A]

Have you seen this?

[C]

Yeah. If you can work it out.

[A]

Somebody calculated. It's like.

[C]

I think Jordan Peterson definitely talked about this. He was like, if I see my grandparents once every two months or something, and they're this age, how many? I'm going to see them 14 more times ever, you know, Shockingly low. Yeah.

[A]

Have you ever dabbled with, like, psychedelics?

[C]

Yes.

[A]

And has that changed your thought process or anything like that?

[C]

I think yes. I mean, it's hard to say because, like, my experience with psychedelics came around the time in one's life when they tend to sort of grow up a bit anyway and start, like, changing the way they see the world. So I'm not sure if it was because of it or if it just coincided with it, but certainly, like, literally, like my enjoyment of art, for example. I mean, like, literally the visual arts, like painting and stuff, just did not exclusively exist. It just wasn't a thing until I.

[A]

Feel that way now.

[C]

I'd taken some drugs and not just psychedelics, but also cannabis. It seems to just open. It seems to just open something. Something up. I'm not entirely sure what it did, but I think it did something. I think it shows you that you're, like, mode of thinking is the, The. The. The most interesting thing about taking a psychedelic drug is not what you see. It's the fact that you've seen it. It's the fact that you realize that your brain is so usually on, like, guide rails that you didn't know existed, and suddenly you're sort of out of it. And now you're back and you can remember how it felt. And it's very. It's very sober, you know? It's not like waking up from being drunk and being like, oh, man, what happened? That was crazy. I was so stupid. I said that thing, and I didn't mean that. Like, you remember, and you're like, no, I saw this thing, and that's what I felt. And I still. I can still, like. I can still account for that. So I was thinking at various times, it depends on the experience. Sometimes it was just like, a very emotional experience, experience with, like, a friend. But other times it's like I'm thinking about stuff and I start having, like, realizations and. And that. That stuff, like, does stay with you, you know?

[A]

Have you ever done ayahuasca?

[C]

Never ayahuasca.

[A]

It's like, a lot of people. Well, some people take it and they say they see God or now they believe in a higher power or something like that. I'd be curious if.

[C]

Have you heard of that kid? Is his name Josh Bassett? The. The Disney star kid? I think he's the guy who became a Christian. He told the story. I think it was ayahuasca, where, like, he sees this Disney kid and he went to one of these places, and you have to, like, go somewhere, and you're with all the people, and there's all the shamans and stuff, and you're like, out in the rainforest or something. And like, he starts tripping, I guess, and he looks around and he just sees everyone as demons, these demons on their faces. And he's like, what the hell is going on? So he gets up, he's like, I need to get out of here. And the woman tries to, like, stop him from going, so you can't. You got. You got to stay in here. And he looks at her and just sees a demon, and he's like. And so he, like, pushes past her and runs outside, and he looks up to the sky and he's like, are you. You've got to be fucking kidding me. Because he's. He looks up and he just, like, sees Jesus and he's like, you know, like, seriously, like, oh, my God. Come on, this is two on the night. Yeah, that's what happened. And he saw Jesus, and now he's a Christian. And it's weird because for people who've done psychedelics, I don't know if you've all done psychedelics before. I don't know how, you know, dabbles.

[A]

In mushrooms, but you ever had Any.

[C]

Have you ever had, like a serious visual? No. So you know how people say, like, oh, like, dude, I did psychedelics and like, you know, like, I saw a chameleon or something? Yeah, yeah. It's not like you're literally seeing like a chameleon run to the room and climb up. It's hard to explain. The best explanation I've ever found of what I experienced at least was, you know how, like, when you see something that looks a little bit like a face, but it's not really a face, and the human tendency to see faces in things.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

So when I look at like, you know, two drainpipes and a line underneath.

[A]

Right.

[C]

Oh, I saw a face. I don't literally think I saw an actual face in the wall. What I'm trying to say is for some reason that presented itself to me as a face.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

That was what a lot of the psychedelic visuals were a bit like. Like when I see a community chameleon on a tree, I meant to see that the tree, in some sense, for some reason, like, presented itself as a chameleon to me. But I wasn't. I was under no confusion about what I was actually seeing.

[A]

I felt the same way, like doing mushrooms. Seeing trees move.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

It was less the visual of seeing the trees moving and more the feeling.

[C]

That the trees moving made sense. Yeah. And breathing and shifting and that I.

[A]

Wasn'T concerned about it and that I wasn't like. It's less like, for me at least, psychedelics was less the visual, but it's more the feeling that the visuals make complete sense.

[B]

I had the feeling of bliss and like being thankful to God and then thinking, oh, the closer I get to God, the more I feel this just generally. And then I looked in a mirror. We were at Mercer Labs, which is like this visual play. There's like this wall of mirrors or whatever. I looked into a mirror one time and I was really tripping. And I saw myself aging into like a 70 year old, 80 year old.

[A]

It was insane.

[B]

Like, I saw my eyes already kind of sunken in. It sunk in more. I saw more grays, I saw more wrinkles. And I remember taking from that. I was like, oh, you're tired. You're not taking good enough care of yourself. This is like six months ago.

[A]

I'm with Jordan.

[B]

Chow on them. And I was like, I need to take better care of myself.

[A]

But it wouldn't be the same as seeing a filter of yourself as an old man. Right. Like if you saw a filter of.

[B]

Yourself as a Snapchat Thing that made you an old man. It wasn't that.

[C]

Right.

[B]

Crisp. But it wasn't far from.

[C]

You, like, see it in yourself, right?

[B]

Yeah. You're looking at the mirror and the mirror is looking. It's 70 year old me.

[C]

I had a similar experience on a drug called 2C B where I looked into a mirror and I had the exact opposite. I saw myself as a child. I literally, like, just saw. And again, it wasn't like I suddenly shrunk, but I just. It's like sometimes you catch yourself in the mirror and you and you. And you realize you're the same person. You kind of see your features and how it all resembles. And it was like.

[A]

It was kind of like the kid from adolescence. So wait, what. So what happens? You see yourself as a kid, this innocent kid. Oh.

[C]

And I was just sort of like. I think it was just this realization that I'm the same person.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

So like. And I remember, like, seeing myself as a kid and as a kid, like, you know, everyone. Everyone goes through a lot as a kid. You're working out the world and stuff. And I kind of. You're kind of just looking at this kid. And it was almost like I could. I couldn't actually communicate with the kid, but it's like I wanted to.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

Sort of want to look at the kid and be like, it's okay, man. Like, it's gonna be all right.

[A]

Oh, wow. Yeah.

[C]

So cool.

[A]

You're gonna figure this shit out.

[C]

Very sort of. Very sort of therapeutic moment. But then I remember just before that, I'd looked in the mirror and I can't remember this very well, but I'm sure that I like, I looked into the mirror, which you're kind of not supposed to do on psychedelics because it can go wrong. But I was like. I was looking at my hair or something, and then I looked down at my eyes and I saw like a delay. Like, I looked down at my eyes and I saw in the mirror, my eyes come down. Have you tried mdma? Yes.

[A]

And was it a similar experience? Because when I did mdma, I did sort of the overanalyzing thing the entire time. Anytime I've ever done any illicit substance. Yeah. I keep a ledger.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

You gotta, like, write it down.

[A]

I write down the experience as it unfolds, like moment by moment, so I can reflect on it and then make an assumption. Assessment if I want to do it again.

[C]

Yeah, I think that's wise.

[A]

What did you find this is for? In the Hamptons?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Basically every time I Do Molly. I, like, keep a letter.

[B]

And what did you say in Mexico City? Had this. I was. I was the only one sober.

[A]

Yeah, I just, like. I just, like, check in every, like, hour or two and just.

[B]

I remember you were like, I feel good, but I could get the same feeling from X, Y, and Z. And I was like, well, you're taking. These guys are having way more fun.

[A]

Well, you got to follow me in two hours from that moment because I changed my. My tune immediately. But there's a perfect example of, like, that, like, hyper analysis of that moment might restrict the joy, which it does and doesn't. It's tricky to give you a ton of credit when we've done Molly together. I was overanalyzing at the beginning, and you said, hey, don't look for it, don't wait for it. It's going to happen. Just relax, enjoy. Put sunglasses on and whatever.

[C]

And I had a way better time because of that.

[A]

It's interesting to see that, like, you're able to. Is that life in a microphone?

[C]

I was going to say such is life, man. Like, stop. Stop overthinking. Like, it can be interesting in the same way that you might be interested in drugs, because drugs are fascinating.

[A]

Right.

[C]

Like, why does taking a tiny little pill or something have this crazy effect on your mental. Yeah, that's really interesting. Right. But that is a separate kind of fun. The fun of, like, looking into the brain chemistry to the experience of the drug. That is a great analogy. You're right. For, like, philosophy and life in general. Like, they're enjoyable for two different reasons. But you should not confuse them.

[A]

And you should make enough time for both, probably.

[C]

Yeah, that's right.

[A]

It's really fun to chew on the fat. I love it. But it's also.

[C]

Yeah, in the same way that you can. You can. You can take MDMA and never be interested in the brain chemistry and still have a good time.

[A]

Yes.

[C]

You can just, like, live your life and still have a really good life by any philosopher's standard of what good means without ever, like, realizing that that's what you're doing or thinking about it in that way. And I think that's kind of the.

[A]

Aim that is religion.

[C]

Otherwise, you're doing the wrong thing.

[A]

That's God, bro. Otherwise, you.

[C]

Well, maybe. But God can make people do all kinds of different things.

[A]

So can drugs. That's what I'm talking about. Yeah, that's my boy.

[B]

If we're wrapping up.

[A]

No, no, we're not wrapping up the train.

[B]

Would you pull the lever I don't know if we got that.

[C]

Oh, yeah, Maybe we didn't ask. I think I would probably. Well, I don't know if I. Because one thing we haven't actually pulled out here is the difference between what you should do and what you would do. Like, I think it's probably permissible to pull the lever, but would I actually do it? It's really difficult to imagine a circumstance in which you are actually certain that you know everything the lever is going to do. Because of course, in practice, like, you have no idea if it's going to run down different trails. Dragon kiln people or whatever. So like I said earlier, you've got to. In a thought experiment, you've got to assume that. But it's actually very difficult to do that. And so I don't know what I would do. But you should, with certainty. But I think I'd probably pull the.

[B]

What about pushing the fat guy?

[C]

No, wouldn't do it. But I recognize that that is just that in any of these circumstances, I'm just doing what I think feels right, you know, and there's something about like, you know, Michael Sandel has taken people who say, who are in my position, they said, okay, what if the fat man's walking across the bridge and you can pull a lever and the lever, like, opens a trap door and. And the man falls down, so you're still like pulling a lever and you can just keep making the situations more and more similar to point out that there's an inconsistency. But I'm happy to just admit that, yeah, I'm not being rationally inconsistent because I'm not being rational, like, I'm an emotivist. I'm just feeling a particular way about these trolley problems.

[B]

All right, guys, if you enjoyed that episode with Alex o', Connor, you are in luck, because we have a second episode coming and it's all about God. Not my God, your cracker ass gods. We're talking about if Jesus was the Messiah for was actually John the Baptist. He talks about Joseph Smith and Mormonism and he talks about our boy Wes Huff. It's a little Bible beef going on. What does he really think of Wes Huff and his arguments? I think he thinks they ain't shit. Check it out.

[C]

Paquette vivies paradis frutar de la musica.

[A]

Contodos tu sentidos.

[C]

Expedia BB mos paraviajar.