Podcast Summary

Podcast: New Books Network
Host: Michael Simpson
Guest: Dr. Jon Mills, author of “End of the World: Civilization and Its Fate” (Rowman & Littlefield, 2024)
Date: September 22, 2025

Overview

This episode features a thought-provoking conversation between Michael Simpson and Dr. Jon Mills, a distinguished psychoanalyst, philosopher, and professor. The discussion revolves around Mills’ latest book, "End of the World: Civilization and Its Fate," which investigates the collective psychological, philosophical, and sociological factors influencing humanity’s potential decline—or even doom. Through integrating psychoanalysis, philosophy, animal behavior studies, and contemporary concerns like technology and climate change, Mills provides a sweeping diagnosis of humanity’s predicament and possible future.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Foundations: Hegel, Freud, and Psychoanalysis

• Philosophical Background
  • Mills’ roots in both Freud and Hegel shape his interdisciplinary approach.
  • “I was very much drawn to the German idealist tradition... When I discovered the metaphysics of Hegel, I tried to expand my thinking to find ways of engaging psychoanalytic discourse.” (Mills, 03:12)
• Interweaving Philosophy and Psychoanalysis
  • Mills explains his ongoing effort to synthesize psychoanalytic discourse with philosophical traditions (notably Hegel).

Metaphors for Societal Collapse: The Rat Study

• The John Calhoun Rat Study
  • The famous “rat utopia” study is used as a metaphor for human overpopulation and collapse.
  • Mills agrees with host Simpson that human civilization may be on a similar trajectory as the rat colonies—driven by overpopulation, aggression, and collapse.
  • “Given human nature, the more people there are, the more tendencies for human aggression to flourish. And when that happens, we could easily see a future scenario that leads to some type of societal decline, if not collapse on some level.” (Mills, 04:58)

The Doomsday Argument & Population

• The Doomsday Argument Explained
  • Avoiding mathematical complexity, Mills summarizes: if humanity’s existence is plotted on a cosmic timeline, our current population boom suggests we’re closer to existential risk than to indefinite continuation.
  • The world’s exponential growth increases existential hazards—aggression, resource depletion, and compounded risks.
  • "The trajectory is that if we continue on that pace, the existential risks ... are going to compound the notion that we're closer to doom than we are, than we're not." (Mills, 06:11)

Technological Innovation & Its Limits

• Can Technology Save Us?
  • Mills acknowledges the counterpoint that technological advances (especially in agriculture) have so far staved off Malthusian disasters.
  • Raises concern about technological anxiety—especially regarding AI—but does not see AI as an imminent existential threat in the sense of machines gaining consciousness.
  • “I personally don't think machines are going to acquire anything close to what we call as human consciousness, let alone emotions, let alone self-reflexivity.” (Mills, 08:28)

The Unconscious and Civilization's Self-Destruction

• Psychoanalytic Definitions
  • Mills defines the unconscious as the realm of mental processes and desires beneath the surface of awareness.
  • "The mind operates on unconscious levels that then infiltrate consciousness in very disguised ways." (Mills, 10:03)
• Unconscious Self-Eradication
  • Asserts that humans have unconscious tendencies toward self-destruction, citing Freud’s "death drive" and unprocessed internal conflicts.
  • “There's a tempestuousness to the psyche that we cannot deny... One of the things I think is coming out here... is that we have a death drive, and it's spewing out in all these different ways and it's very self-destructive.” (Mills, 11:55-15:56)
• Nature vs. Nurture
  • Mills argues these destructive tendencies are both evolutionarily ingrained and socially conditioned—they are mutually reinforcing.
  • “Both are operative… We have certain degrees of freedom, certain degrees of freedom of will and choices... But nevertheless, people do bring about their own destructions in very unconscious ways.” (Mills, 16:35)

The Nature of Evil: Individual and Institutional

• Defining Evil
  • Mills treats evil not as supernatural but as extreme forms of harm and negativity, instantiated in daily social environments.
  • “In that way, one can say that we're all evil. It's just a matter of degree.” (Mills, 18:37)
• Institutionalized Evil vs. Institutionalized Good
  • Mills focuses primarily on institutional evil (e.g., harmful policy, economic exploitation), but acknowledges that positive institutional forces and human goodness also exist.
  • “There are also certain structural forces, institutionalized forces that can… inhibit, hinder, prevent, or even exacerbate current states of suffering... and when that happens, it can unleash certain evil tendencies...” (Mills, 20:51)
  • He cautions against seeing evil as superhuman; it’s a human (and institutional) phenomenon.

The Human Capacity for Empathy and the Limits of Good

• Counterpoints: Empathy, Compassion, and Altruism
  • Mills acknowledges the role of empathy, altruism, and humanistic values in supporting civilization.
  • However, he warns that social and developmental deficits (trauma, systemic invalidation, etc.) often undercut these positive tendencies, leading to widespread “dysrecognition” and acting-out of rage and anger.
  • “We would not be here if it wasn’t for all these positive aspects... That’s the good aspect of who we are. I’m just a bit worried about people who… can’t recognize others.” (Mills, 23:58)

Why Don’t Humans Use Their Superior Foresight?

• Human Future-Planning vs. Self-Destruction
  • Simpson prompts: humans are uniquely advanced at planning, so why do we fail at protecting our future?
  • Mills replies that despite human capacity for self-reflection and planning, powerful social-psychological forces (denial, bystander effect, short-sighted self-interest) impede collective action.
  • “I’m struck by what I call a collective bystander effect… we don’t seem to be stepping up our game to deal with the climate crisis despite all the legitimate sources, all these scientists… the empirical evidence… What explains that? Well, there’s so many different possibilities.” (Mills, 32:38-35:39)

The Politics of Science and Knowledge

• Scientific Bias and Authority
  • Mills highlights the influence of political and economic pressures on scientific research and publication.
  • Data can be suppressed or manipulated for self-interest, funding, or publishing goals.
  • “There are many different motivations that go into why people want to construct a certain scenario or a narrative that they want others to validate or buy into... The politics of academia and publishing is its own show, so to speak.” (Mills, 36:14-38:36)
  • He connects this micro-level politics to broader ideological manipulation (e.g., by nation-states, political parties).

Calls to Action and Concluding Thoughts

• What Should Listeners Take Away?
  • Mills doesn’t advocate a specific program or ideology, but calls for increased awareness and individual/collective engagement against existential threats.
  • “I’d be happy if people started to think about the systemic threats… What can they do to contribute to ameliorating these problems… through organizations, through scholarship, through... academic or grassroots kind of interventions—it’s better than sitting back and watching the world burn.” (Mills, 39:35)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

| Timestamp | Speaker | Quote | |-----------|---------------|-------| | 03:12 | Jon Mills | “I was very much drawn to the German idealist tradition... When I discovered the metaphysics of Hegel, I tried to expand my thinking to find ways of engaging psychoanalytic discourse.” | | 04:58 | Jon Mills | “Given human nature, the more people there are, the more tendencies for human aggression to flourish... we could easily see a future scenario that leads to some type of societal decline, if not collapse on some level.” | | 06:11 | Jon Mills | "The trajectory is that if we continue on that pace, the existential risks ... are going to compound the notion that we're closer to doom than we are, than we're not." | | 08:28 | Jon Mills | “I personally don't think machines are going to acquire anything close to what we call as human consciousness, let alone emotions, let alone self-reflexivity.” | | 10:03 | Jon Mills | "The mind operates on unconscious levels that then infiltrate consciousness in very disguised ways." | | 11:55 | Jon Mills | “There's a tempestuousness to the psyche that we cannot deny... we have a death drive, and it's spewing out in all these different ways and it's very self-destructive.” | | 16:35 | Jon Mills | “Both are operative… We have certain degrees of freedom, certain degrees of freedom of will and choices... But nevertheless, people do bring about their own destructions in very unconscious ways.” | | 18:37 | Jon Mills | “In that way, one can say that we're all evil. It's just a matter of degree.” | | 20:51 | Jon Mills | “Certain structural forces, institutionalized forces… can unleash evil tendencies in people...” | | 23:58 | Jon Mills | “We would not be here if it wasn’t for all these positive aspects... That’s the good aspect of who we are. I’m just a bit worried about people who… can’t recognize others.” | | 32:38 | Jon Mills | “I’m struck by what I call a collective bystander effect… we don’t seem to be stepping up our game to deal with the climate crisis...” | | 36:14 | Jon Mills | "There are many different motivations that go into why people want to construct a certain scenario... The politics of academia and publishing is its own show..." | | 39:35 | Jon Mills | “I’d be happy if people started to think about the systemic threats ... it's better than sitting back and watching the world burn.” |

Key Timestamps by Topic

• 03:12 – Mills on merging Freud and Hegel
• 04:58 – Rat studies and population metaphor
• 06:11 – The doomsday argument explained
• 08:28 – Technology’s limits and AI
• 10:03 – The unconscious defined
• 11:55 – Unconscious self-destruction and death drive
• 16:35 – Nature vs. nurture in destructive tendencies
• 18:37 – The definition of evil
• 20:51 – Institutionalized evil (and absence of institutional good)
• 23:58 – Empathy, compassion, dysrecognition
• 32:38 – Collective bystander effect and climate inaction
• 36:14 – Scientific bias and knowledge politics
• 39:35 – Mills’ hope for awareness and engagement

Final Takeaway

While Mills’ worldview is sobering—emphasizing the “death drive,” institutionalized evil, and humanity’s capacity for self-ruin—he nonetheless urges awareness, self-reflection, and proactive engagement. The future may hold daunting existential risks, but collective consciousness and action, whether by scholars, activists, or ordinary citizens, offer a path away from passivity and doom.