Latest / UK Column Radio / What Does it Mean to be Human? | Jerm Warfare

Transcript

What Does it Mean to be Human? | Jerm Warfare · UK Column Radio

• 0:04
  Speaker 1: Thank you. My name is Jerm. This is Jerm Warfare,
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: the battle of ideas.
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: So the last time you were on my show, Todd,
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: my second child, I don't think had been born yet. No, no.
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: It was right before.
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: So he is now born. So I've got two boys
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: and my wife. He's definitely born.
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: Yes.
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: And my wife now has a lot of testosterone in
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: the house. Yeah, that's right. Are you done or are
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: you going to keep manufacturing? No, we're done. We're done.
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: But the globalists will be happy because depopulation obviously is
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: about reducing the amount of people in the world. And
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: in order to reduce the number of people in the world,
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: you need to have fewer kids. And in order to
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: have fewer kids... That cutoff, I think, is two kids
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: because two is effectively just replacement. Three technically would be
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: increasing the population again.
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: Is that what you got when you went to China?
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: Is that the information you got? Because that's their whole
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: thing of having just one child.
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: China is very interesting because of that one child policy.
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: It changed the wiring of the society. I mean, it's
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: a huge population, but most people I met either had
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: no kids or just one kid, which I think invariably
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: is going to negatively impact them later on. Well, I
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: would think so. I mean, I told you when I
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: was there, I saw almost no pregnant women and very
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: few kids.
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: Really?
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: Very few kids. That's interesting.
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: And the fact you're having boys too, I mean, doesn't
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: that affect the ability to keep procreating as a race?
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: Because if you don't have girls, you're not going to
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: have any containers to create babies.
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: Well, I mean, that's kind of weird because if you
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: have a boy and a girl, they're not going to
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: procreate with each other, or at least they shouldn't.
• 2:40
  Speaker 2: You mean your children, right? Well, I mean, if everybody
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: just had boys... then obviously there wouldn't be any more people.
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: But if everybody just had girls, there wouldn't be any
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: more either because it does take two.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but that doesn't happen. So, I mean, we've got
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: two boys, but there'll be somebody else nearby who has
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: two girls.
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: Hopefully. It always somehow kind of averages out to 50-50.
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: It's weird that, isn't it? Yeah, well, it was kind
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: of designed that way.
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: You know, but we keep screwing around with the design. So,
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: it's like, not supposed to do that. We're supposed to
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: just live like out in the woods somewhere. And then
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: if the tiger gets us and eats us, then that's.
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: I do have for a while, lots of sort of
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: existential questions around that. I'll throw, I'll throw one or
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: two at you. Um, but like, what are your views
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: on IVF? For example, I think like what, 50 years ago,
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: it wasn't really possible. Uh, now it is. And, Some
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: people will argue that it's playing God. I don't know
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: if that is, but I do start asking at what point,
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: you know, are we crossing the line?
• 3:54
  Speaker 2: Well, isn't that the whole thing these days is what
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: point do we cross the line? Because anything that is
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: beyond what we naturally are born into, like an animal,
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: like a dog, is beyond the line. I mean, you know,
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: you could put it that way. And then as you advance,
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: you go, okay, will our toilets be on the line?
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: Is plumbing be on the line? Is, you know, blah, blah, blah.
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: You can just go on and on and on with that.
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: So where that line is, is really the question. You know,
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: like IVF, it's like, is it okay to like destroy...
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: You know, little embryos, if they if they're not matching up,
• 4:34
  Speaker 2: you know, I mean, what was there was some there
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: was some Carter Carter. What am I? There was some
• 4:41
  Speaker 2: Tucker Carlson interview he had with some guy. He was
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: like going to be interviewed about his great new book.
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: service or product or whatever. And in fact, it was
• 4:53
  Speaker 2: the other way around. And I don't know if the
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: guy had ever seen Tucker Carlson before.
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: I had no idea. But but he was I don't
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: know what he was.
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: I don't know if he was just the head of
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: a company or if he was actually a doctor or whatnot.
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: But he was talking about how now with IVF that
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: they can that they can screen to see if if
• 5:10
  Speaker 2: the embryo that they're nurturing or that they have in
• 5:14
  Speaker 2: storage or whatever actually has Down syndrome or or any
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: of these, you know, genital or whatever, not genital, genetic
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: aberrations and faults and whatnot.
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: And then they can just get rid of them if
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: they do.
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: And Tucker Carlson, of course, was losing his cookies over
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: that and really putting this guy down. And it was
• 5:37
  Speaker 2: it was kind of interesting. But, you know, where is
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: that line? Is that playing God? Is IVA is birth
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: control playing God? I mean, the Catholic Church kind of
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: thinks so.
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: I mean, you know. I don't know. Well, I mean,
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: the Catholic Church go all the way down to the
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: sperm itself, which I don't agree with because that's not
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: the human entity. It's only knock off of it. But
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: as a Catholic Church, what do they say about the sperm? Well,
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: I mean, for example, they don't like contraception. Yeah. Oh, yeah.
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: Well, you're not supposed to spill your sperm on the
• 6:15
  Speaker 2: ground either.
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but what I mean is the embryo has the
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: sort of DNA or the chromosomal structure required for a
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: human being. Sperm or an egg on their own don't. No, no,
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: they don't.
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: And that is the big abortion right to life argument
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: is that once conception happens, once the sperm and the
• 6:39
  Speaker 2: egg come together, then it becomes a person, because it
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: has a DNA structure.
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: But, I mean, the transhumanist agenda then becomes a bit blurry,
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: because what ultimately is transhumanism? Let me give you another example.
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: I've had this discussion before, and I can't remember what
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: the guest said, but we had an Olympic athlete in
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: South Africa, years ago by the name of Oscar Pistorius
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: he lost his legs young when he was very young
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: just under the knee and so he had blades made
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: for him so he became known as a blade runner
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: and he would run and win a lot of races
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: and there were a lot of sort of sports science
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: conversations around whether or not he had an unfair advantage
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: actually over people with legs. Because he ultimately could beat
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: many people with legs. And it had to do with
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: the spring and the sort of the architecture of the
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: blades themselves. Anyway, the point is that... Is that... to
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: some degree, transhumanism. Imagine if somebody has no legs and
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: then they have blades and they have no arms and
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: they have robotic arms. At what point do we lose
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: our humanity? Well, I don't know.
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: That's a strong term, lose our humanity. We lost our
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: humanity the moment we... You've crept out of the cave,
• 8:12
  Speaker 2: you know, essentially. And if we define it that way,
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: and I'm not saying I do by any means. I
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: think the question with that, with the legs that are
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: the blades, is more about should that person be competing
• 8:29
  Speaker 2: in a sport or should they be denied having the
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: fake legs in order to survive as a human being
• 8:38
  Speaker 2: and have a decent life? I think that's the real question.
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: I don't know if it's fair to put the question
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: of whether it's gone too far in transhumanism and destroying
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: humanity by having prosthetics or having, you know, almost anything. Although,
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: you know, that that like heart surgery or any of
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: these things that are technologically based in order to prolong
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: life or to improve life. This is where the transhuman
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: question gets complicated. And you can't just say, just like
• 9:14
  Speaker 2: with anything, you can't just say, oh, this is black
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: and white. Anything that is beyond natural human development is
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: transhumanism and is destroying humanity. I don't think you can
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: say that. But it's tough. I mean, I don't know
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: where I would stand if I had to make a claim.
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: You know, I never do. I never claim almost anything.
• 9:40
  Speaker 2: There are a couple of things I do I'm willing
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: to claim, like I'm willing to claim that I think
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: atheism and a disbelief in God actually has more of
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: a down effect and negative effect than the other way,
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: believing in something. And there's a couple of things. Obviously,
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: I don't believe in murder. I don't believe in war, blah, blah, blah.
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: There are things that I do go black and white with,
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: but something like that, I wouldn't even attempt to.
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: It is quite existential because we love talking about transhumanism
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: on my show. And I, in principle, obviously oppose it.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: But if you actually come down to brass tacks, what
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: is it? So some people I know have argued that
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: having fake legs or fake arms or whatever is not transhumanism.
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: That is just... What's the word? It is.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: An accompaniment, it is medical help or something along those lines.
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: It's the same thing as, I suppose, gym equipment. In
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: some ways, it's helping you achieve a way of existing
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: that is not really natural. You don't really, in the
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: natural world, lift a barbell, but you do lift weights
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: in the form of boxes and whatever else. But then
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: the whole thing just becomes very fuzzy. Because we're talking
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: about IVF and how artificial that is.
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: Well, IVF falls in the class of a moral, ethical
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: kind of area.
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: You know, just like birth control, abortion, whatever.
• 11:28
  Speaker 2: It falls into this difficult area where prosthetic legs does not.
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: It doesn't really fall into a moral class.
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: Consideration where IVF could, I don't even think of it
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: that way, but it certainly could, you know, with the
• 11:43
  Speaker 2: way that it's processed. And I don't know enough about
• 11:45
  Speaker 2: it to say.
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: No, but Todd, the counter argument that you could make
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: to favor IVF as well, it helps those who can't
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: fall pregnant. And then someone might say, oh, but if
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: you can't fall pregnant, that's your body saying that it
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: can't fall pregnant. However, you might not be able to
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: fall pregnant because you have been taking birth control pills
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: your whole life and it's messed up your hormonal structure.
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: Or you consume too many toxins and it's messed up
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: your biology. And so we can go back and go
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: back and go back. And we're left with the same
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: question then. At what point.
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: You know, are we stepping over that line? I don't
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: know the answer. And I don't know if there is
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: a binary answer because I don't think it's the right
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: thing to tell somebody who's got no legs that he
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: can't have prosthetics. I think that's wrong.
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't think there's anything that, you know, just
• 12:43
  Speaker 2: the phrase you made, you can't tell someone. No one
• 12:46
  Speaker 2: can tell anybody anything. I don't think that's the issue.
• 12:50
  Speaker 2: And I think where things are controlled by the state...
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: Whatever that is, if it's transhuman, you know, I think
• 13:00
  Speaker 2: we're running into major, major issues. And again, going back
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: to the IVF thing, it's the process that's questionable. It's
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: not it's not the idea. I mean, you could wave
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: a magic wand over somebody and they would have a child.
• 13:15
  Speaker 2: you know, or if you would be able to pray
• 13:18
  Speaker 2: for it, or even if there was some elixir you
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: could drink that would cause you to have a baby
• 13:24
  Speaker 2: whereas before you wouldn't be able to. I don't think
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: there would be anything transhuman about that. I think the
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: ethical moral issue is how Those embryos are created and
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: the ones that are cast off and whatever becomes the issue.
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: Not so much transhumanism, but just the moral issue of
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: whether IVF is a moral process. Transhumanism, it's definitely transhuman.
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: In the sense that it's technology doing something that the
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: natural human body is not capable of doing.
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: And that would almost be anything.
• 14:06
  Speaker 2: I mean, you know, that's like, like I said a
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: minute ago, having a toilet is a transhuman device. Because
• 14:14
  Speaker 2: otherwise you would go crap in the woods somewhere. It's
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: like now whether that changes things. Well, yeah, sure it does.
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: You know, good plumbing allows people to live in very
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: dense populations, which is not natural. You know, humans are
• 14:30
  Speaker 2: not supposed to.
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: Yes. And so you could get into that argument. Yeah,
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: but then ultimately most people... if we're being honest with ourselves,
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: actually support transhumanism to some degree. Because like you just said,
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: like you just said, it really is pushing what it
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: means to be human to its limit. And just about
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: everything we do in the year 2026 is pushing what
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: it means to be human to its limit, whether it's physical, medical, philosophical,
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: doesn't matter. And then you left with the same question again,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: what is natural?
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but what is also natural for a human, which
• 15:17
  Speaker 2: has the capacity and the capability of transcending material limitations?
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: you know, by creating plumbing or, you know, surgery, brain surgery.
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: What about medicine? What about medicine? All of that. Totally, totally.
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: The difference is, and this is the easy solution or
• 15:43
  Speaker 2: comment to make about this, and I know it's going
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: to sound strange, but I think, again, it's a bottom-up,
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: It's a bottom up consideration where if we were decent
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: people through a belief, and I know this is going
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: to sound very black and white, but a belief in
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: a creator, you know, as cliche as it sounds, belief
• 16:07
  Speaker 2: in God, whatever that is, it doesn't have to fit
• 16:12
  Speaker 2: some certain because I think it's ineffable. I don't think
• 16:15
  Speaker 2: it's possible to define what God is. and whatever, so
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: it doesn't have to fit a religion, although religions are
• 16:21
  Speaker 2: better than nothing, most of them, not all of them,
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: that if you believe in that and you believe in
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: the purpose and meaning of life beyond a material extension
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: of life or a material, whatever the belief you have
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: in materiality, believing that the whole point of being a
• 16:47
  Speaker 2: human being is to be physically present, to be in
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: a material realm where the length of your life matters,
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: your suffering is, I shouldn't say matters because it always
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: will matter, but that it's the most important thing. I
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: always use the term the end all, that the end
• 17:03
  Speaker 2: all is how long you live and how well you live,
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: how much crap you can accumulate and whatever. If we
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: lived in a human culture where that was not the
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: end game, that the end game was love and belief
• 17:22
  Speaker 2: in nature, belief in, you know, whatever. I mean, you
• 17:25
  Speaker 2: know what I mean when I'm saying that. I'm sure
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: all your listeners do too. Okay, if we lived in
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: that and conducted our everyday movement in that realm, in
• 17:38
  Speaker 2: that paradigm, we would not do anything or create anything
• 17:43
  Speaker 2: that would be considered transhuman. I mean, look at look
• 17:47
  Speaker 2: at where the limit is already. I mean, it used
• 17:50
  Speaker 2: to be that we weren't going to destroy half of
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: the world with nuclear weapons, that we actually knew we
• 17:59
  Speaker 2: could create things that would kill people really easily. And
• 18:03
  Speaker 2: we didn't do that, you know, at a time. It
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: wasn't even something that crossed our mind. And yet now
• 18:09
  Speaker 2: it's beginning to be something that crosses the minds of
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: people that have the power to do that. So we're
• 18:14
  Speaker 2: moving further and further away. I mean, the best example
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: of this is to read C.S. Lewis's That Hideous Strength,
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: the last book in his space trilogy.
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: And this was written in like 1948 or something. I mean, he.
• 18:29
  Speaker 2: Just like Orwell writing 1984 when he did. I mean,
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: the insight of some of these people is just amazing.
• 18:36
  Speaker 2: But the whole point of this last book is really
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: where humanity has shifted into this, or is attempting to
• 18:43
  Speaker 2: shift into this, this sense that the material world is
• 18:49
  Speaker 2: the world. It has nothing to do with love and
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: human connection and God. whatever, and that world will destroy itself.
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: Anyway, that's my rant. Well, think about this, right? No, no, no.
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: I mean, I completely agree with you. I want to
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: add to what you were saying. In terms of transhumanism,
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: you could strictly argue that, I mean, I mentioned medical earlier,
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: curing disease is transhuman. Yeah, it is. Yeah. Repairing an
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: injury to your arm is transhuman. Restoring sight would be transhuman.
• 19:35
  Speaker 2: I mean, if you put that line there, technically, it is.
• 19:42
  Speaker 2: Anything that is beyond the natural function. I mean, look
• 19:46
  Speaker 2: at an animal. I mean, that's the best way to
• 19:48
  Speaker 2: look at it.
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: You know, my dog. they're not trans dogs. Okay.
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: I mean, they are to a degree because they live
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: with us. So we take care of them and we
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: force them.
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: They're trans. Do they identify as anything else? Yeah, right.
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: Right. But, you know, if they injured themselves out in
• 20:06
  Speaker 2: the wild, I mean, look at a wolf, okay, or
• 20:08
  Speaker 2: a squirrel or anything. If they injure themselves in the wild,
• 20:12
  Speaker 2: they generally will be dead. And they can't fix themselves.
• 20:16
  Speaker 2: They can't fix each other within a certain realm. If
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: they're hungry, they don't starve to death because they know
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: how to forage for food and find food. So that's
• 20:26
  Speaker 2: not trans, you know, transcending their natural state. But humans,
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: there's nothing we do that isn't transhuman. It's like we
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: don't live out in the woods somewhere in a cave
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: and we wear clothes even. I mean, clothes are transhuman
• 20:46
  Speaker 2: to protect our skin and our body. And so, you know,
• 20:51
  Speaker 2: that argument is pointless. And I think that it's easy
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: for people that are anti-transhumanism, you know, they don't believe
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: in it and think it's silly and stupid and whatnot.
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: That's the argument that they can make. They can, like, say, well, what,
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: are you not going to go to the hospital if
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: you're in a car accident? Well, you wouldn't be in
• 21:10
  Speaker 2: a car, first of all, if you were fully human.
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: And that's the other argument going the other way. If
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: we live naturally, like an animal does, There would be
• 21:21
  Speaker 2: a fraction of things that happened to us that would
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: cause us to die out. Because, you know, what would happen? Sure,
• 21:36
  Speaker 2: a saber-toothed tiger could rip you apart or whatever. But
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: if you're living as humans in packs, and of course,
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: that's all transhuman, too. You know, if you have a
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: spear to kill the saber-toothed tiger with. You're already transcending
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: what you're naturally born with. So, you know, but humanism
• 21:55
  Speaker 2: is also having intelligence and having the ability to create
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: the things we create, like medicine or like any of
• 22:03
  Speaker 2: these things we're talking about. That is a human act.
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: To be able to do these things to take care
• 22:10
  Speaker 2: of ourself and mend ourself if we get sick or
• 22:13
  Speaker 2: break our.
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: Bone or whatever.
• 22:15
  Speaker 2: So, you know, you get into that argument. It's like, well,
• 22:18
  Speaker 2: what is humanism? What is being a human? What exactly
• 22:22
  Speaker 2: is that? Humans have always transcended humanity. And their animal capabilities,
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: you know, they've worn clothes, they've gathered food, they learn
• 22:32
  Speaker 2: how to plant seeds and protect themselves with devices like
• 22:39
  Speaker 2: spears and swords and whatever. So, I mean, you know,
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: what is human? You've got to answer that question first.
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: But I think where it becomes uncomfortable is where we
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: hold up a mirror, you know, extending life using technology.
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: machines or medicine. Everybody wants to live longer. That ultimately
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: is transhumanism in its kind of most primal sense. So,
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: I mean, what I'm worried about here is that our
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: conversation now might appear that we're becoming apologetic for transhumanism,
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: and that's not the case at all. I'm trying to
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: understand what it is and what it means when we
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: talk about it. I think it's what Yes? No, no,
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: go ahead. I interrupted you.
• 23:27
  Speaker 2: No, no, no.
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: I was going to say I don't know if there
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: is a binary answer to this. I suspect it has
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: to do with how we at this particular point in time,
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: how we define what it means to be human and
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: what it means to be post-human. And I think if
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: you are no longer in my You know, from my perspective,
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: if you are no longer what I deem to be
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: human or, you know, or contain the characteristics or the
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: essence of what it means to be human, perhaps that
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: is where the line gets crossed. And I don't know
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: how to define that. You know, something that is an
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: obvious cyborg, like what they're building now, those robots that
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: walk around your house or whatever, that's obviously not human.
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: But you with no legs and with no arms, but
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: those limbs being replaced with prosthetics is still human, if
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: that makes sense.
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it makes perfect sense. It is a quandary. You
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: have people out there now that are saying, say, AI
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: or robots that contain AI that also have a physical
• 24:49
  Speaker 2: presence where AI, most of us relate to AI more
• 24:54
  Speaker 2: from a computer perspective or software perspective, like the LLMs
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: or whatever it might be. We don't relate every day
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: to AI as a robot, as a thing that walks
• 25:04
  Speaker 2: around or the stuff that that'll come. But. Today, we're
• 25:09
  Speaker 2: not really relating to that the same way as we
• 25:12
  Speaker 2: will one day. And there are people that believe that
• 25:16
  Speaker 2: those beings, whatever you want to call them, a robot
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: that possesses AI and has the computing power, brain power that, say,
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: an LLM has, a chat GPT has or whatever. are sentient,
• 25:30
  Speaker 2: that they actually are not human, but they possess the
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: same qualities that humans possess, the same values, whatever. And
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: this is where you get into the whole atheist versus believer,
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: because those things will have the capability of doing whatever
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: humans do, but they are not created by a divine creation.
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: Now you could argue that too to say that we
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: made them. So why don't they possess whatever, you know,
• 26:13
  Speaker 2: like a pantheistic kind of thing?
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: I can jump in here and tell you immediately based
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: on a conversation I had with Jorbs Lundgruber about a
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: week ago where, in fact, I've got his book here
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: where he argues why machines will never take over. And
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: it's very simple. We cannot engineer intelligence. So therefore, we
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: cannot create artificial intelligence in any meaningful way. All we
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: are creating is machines with algorithms. That's what he argues.
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: And algorithms that have no will or desire. And that's
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: also the essence of being human, isn't it? Yeah, I
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: would totally agree with that. I don't know the details
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: of it because I haven't read this guy's book. or
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: seen him, but just on a very basic level, like
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: you just said. I think that's the difference. And the
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: thing that I said a minute ago, is that human
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: beings have the capability to know their creator. And that's
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: a very simplistic phrase to say it that way. I
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: don't mean that some entity out there is putting together
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: animals and humans. It's just the essence of what that is.
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: What is that? That is what makes us human. That's
• 27:29
  Speaker 2: what makes animals animals. That's what makes nature nature.
• 27:32
  Speaker 1: Whatever it is.
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: It's a divine intelligence, for lack of better words, that
• 27:38
  Speaker 2: put this together. And we have the ability and capability
• 27:42
  Speaker 2: of knowing that and being aware of that. And if
• 27:48
  Speaker 2: we drift away from that awareness and become beings that
• 27:54
  Speaker 2: are not aware of that, yet have the capability to
• 27:58
  Speaker 2: create the things that we create, we'll destroy ourselves. Ultimately,
• 28:04
  Speaker 2: we'll create something, whether it's a pathogen or if it's
• 28:09
  Speaker 2: a Terminator type machine world, whatever it is, we will
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: create something that will destroy ourselves. And if we did not,
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: if we were aware of this divine truth, we wouldn't.
• 28:25
  Speaker 2: We wouldn't do that. And this is the thing that
• 28:28
  Speaker 2: people say, well, why not? That doesn't make any sense.
• 28:31
  Speaker 2: Just we wouldn't. Just like we're at this stage now
• 28:35
  Speaker 2: where we don't go out into the world in our
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: community with a gun and just kill our neighbors to
• 28:43
  Speaker 2: get their stuff. We don't do that yet. Some people do.
• 28:48
  Speaker 2: But as a general thing, we don't. And the reason
• 28:51
  Speaker 2: is because Generally, we haven't slipped completely into unawareness of
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: the divine nature of reality. We haven't been, I mean,
• 29:02
  Speaker 2: maybe we're six, no, it's not even that. Maybe we're
• 29:07
  Speaker 2: 40% there.
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 29:09
  Speaker 2: And we used to be 70% or 60%. Maybe not
• 29:16
  Speaker 2: used to be.
• 29:18
  Speaker 1: Maybe not. I don't know.
• 29:20
  Speaker 2: I mean, I'm not going to compare us to what
• 29:21
  Speaker 2: we were like in 1600s or whatnot. I think the
• 29:25
  Speaker 2: ancient Egyptians, they were pretty close to being aware, but
• 29:30
  Speaker 2: they did a lot of stupid crap too, just like
• 29:32
  Speaker 2: every culture has. But anyway, that's a point that I
• 29:37
  Speaker 2: would make with it. I don't think we need to
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: define it. I think it's defined for us if we
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: are aware of our divine origins and aware of the
• 29:48
  Speaker 2: divine energy or whatever. These are all bad words, energy, whatever.
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: It's not what it is. And you just said a
• 29:58
  Speaker 2: minute ago, it's like nobody wants to die. That's true.
• 30:02
  Speaker 2: Nobody wants to because we're in a material form to
• 30:05
  Speaker 2: express love and God in a material form. That's what
• 30:09
  Speaker 2: our duty is when we're beings like this.
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: But we also know that ends.
• 30:15
  Speaker 2: You know, there's no human form that lasts forever forever.
• 30:21
  Speaker 2: And therefore, we shouldn't focus on that. It's like if
• 30:24
  Speaker 2: our time comes, then it comes. And understand that we're
• 30:29
  Speaker 2: all part of a cycle and part of a unity
• 30:31
  Speaker 2: and all of this kind of crap. But we don't.
• 30:35
  Speaker 2: We just focus on what do I need to do
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: to stay alive? Just hook me up to these machines
• 30:41
  Speaker 2: and I'll just sit there in a coma state, a
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: zombie state, as long as I'm alive, that's what I'll do.
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: And then you've got the other end of that going
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: with the medical system wanting to kill everybody with the
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: homemade program. And in Canada and elsewhere, I'm sure it's like, well,
• 31:01
  Speaker 2: where is all this?
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: This is nuts. I mean, I think if we come
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: back to transhumanism and what it means, the term itself,
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: I think... can mean different things based on who's looking.
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: I don't think it existed before Huxley. I think Huxley
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: or his brother coined the term. And it's more of
• 31:29
  Speaker 1: a sort of project, an agenda, a philosophy to try
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: and change what it means to be human. That is
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: a little bit different to the idea that we're trying
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: to improve ourselves. And I don't think there's any harm
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: in going to the gym. No, no. Or in the prosthetics. No.
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: Like I said when you started up with that, that
• 31:57
  Speaker 2: I think the only question is an ethical question about
• 32:01
  Speaker 2: whether somebody should compete with other people who are limited
• 32:07
  Speaker 2: by their biological means. I mean, I think that's a
• 32:11
  Speaker 2: legitimate question. But whether that person... should improve on themselves
• 32:15
  Speaker 2: if they lose their limbs and they can actually become
• 32:18
  Speaker 2: bionic people with artificial stuff, great. I mean, I don't
• 32:23
  Speaker 2: think that's a... Yes, that would be defined as transhuman,
• 32:27
  Speaker 2: but at the same time, it's not the same.
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: And, you know, you've got two flows going on here.
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: You have a normal.
• 32:36
  Speaker 2: human flow of what it is that we do that
• 32:41
  Speaker 2: pulls us out of the divine awareness and reality. And
• 32:45
  Speaker 2: you've also got an agenda going on from the higher
• 32:48
  Speaker 2: powers that are attempting to actually force a transhuman perspective.
• 32:56
  Speaker 2: on the population for their own means and their own benefit.
• 33:00
  Speaker 2: And most of the study or reading or whatever that
• 33:03
  Speaker 2: I do around transhumanism is focused on that idea, not
• 33:09
  Speaker 2: so much what just we do just in our normal life.
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: You know, if you get in a car accident, you're
• 33:14
  Speaker 2: going to go to the hospital and have transhuman technology
• 33:18
  Speaker 2: work on you. I mean, that's a different thing than
• 33:21
  Speaker 2: what the agenda is accomplishing.
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: This is.
• 33:24
  Speaker 2: again, is a reason why I think if people are
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: interested in this, they should check out C.S. Lewis's That
• 33:30
  Speaker 2: Hideous Strength, because that's the focus in that, that it's
• 33:34
  Speaker 2: an agenda driven.
• 33:36
  Speaker 1: Now, of course, with C.S.
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: Lewis, the agenda, the top of the agenda is Satan,
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: is the devil, whether it's an entity or whether it's
• 33:44
  Speaker 2: a concept or a paradigm or whatever. It is a
• 33:49
  Speaker 2: destruction of God, the destruction of God's creation. That is
• 33:55
  Speaker 2: really the agenda. Now, whether the agenda we're dealing with
• 33:58
  Speaker 2: is that or not, I don't know. It could be.
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: Well, I would argue that the agenda that you and
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: I are actually talking about and what most on my
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: show are talking about.
• 34:09
  Speaker 2: Mm-hmm.
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: Is the business plan. It is the desire to upload
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: our brains to the matrix. It is to create a
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: new kind of existence that is profoundly disconnected and yet
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: weirdly connected to how we are now. I think it
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: was Elon who said that he would love to upload
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: his mind to the internet. In other words, the people
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: involved with the transhumanist agenda are not the doctors and
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: the scientists. No, no, no, no. But it's the technocrats.
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: It's the billionaire class. It's Silicon Valley. It's Bill Gates.
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: And it's under a disguise.
• 34:57
  Speaker 2: And this is where you get into the Satan evil idea,
• 35:00
  Speaker 2: because it's under the disguise of globalism. because there's a
• 35:05
  Speaker 2: lot of people, at least a lot of people I know,
• 35:07
  Speaker 2: that are super liberals, that have no problem with this
• 35:12
  Speaker 2: idea of global control. It's like, oh, well, we've come
• 35:16
  Speaker 2: to a point in the world where we're all interconnected
• 35:19
  Speaker 2: with the internet, with trade, with whatever.
• 35:22
  Speaker 1: So we're all one thing anyway.
• 35:24
  Speaker 2: There's no point in having sovereignty of nations or borders
• 35:27
  Speaker 2: or or local elected government or health care or whatever
• 35:36
  Speaker 2: it might be. This global idea is great, you know,
• 35:39
  Speaker 2: and that's the disguise. This globalism is the disguise because
• 35:44
  Speaker 2: there's something about it that a lot of people think
• 35:48
  Speaker 2: makes sense. You know, the global agenda, the 2030, the UN,
• 35:54
  Speaker 2: you know, sustainable development and all of that. It looks
• 35:57
  Speaker 2: good on paper. It's something like, oh, wouldn't it be
• 36:01
  Speaker 2: nice to have clean water all over the world? Wouldn't
• 36:03
  Speaker 2: it be nice to have no poverty and whatever? And
• 36:06
  Speaker 2: there's a nonsensical element to it, the utopian paradigm that
• 36:13
  Speaker 2: always has major faults in it of individualism, of individual
• 36:18
  Speaker 2: freedoms and all this, because you can't do any of that.
• 36:21
  Speaker 2: You can't do any of those sustainable development ideas without
• 36:25
  Speaker 2: having complete control. Over the citizenry.
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: Of the world.
• 36:30
  Speaker 2: It's like it won't work that way. So you have
• 36:33
  Speaker 2: to give that up. And like you're saying, the way
• 36:37
  Speaker 2: they do that is through this PSYOP kind of operation
• 36:42
  Speaker 2: of essentially removing individualism, removing humanism. from the individual and
• 36:49
  Speaker 2: turning it into something that's easy to control and easy
• 36:52
  Speaker 2: to manipulate and move around. And that's transhumanism. And that's
• 36:57
  Speaker 2: where my concern is with it. Not with whether somebody
• 37:00
  Speaker 2: can have their legs replaced and be able to run
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: a race, but it's just like what you're saying. It's
• 37:06
  Speaker 2: not the individual doctors or the technology. That's human driven,
• 37:11
  Speaker 2: you know, passion and and believing and being able to
• 37:16
  Speaker 2: do something, you know, and create something. That's all human driven.
• 37:21
  Speaker 2: Yet the agenda doesn't see it that way. It's trying
• 37:24
  Speaker 2: to control people and it's trying to strip them of
• 37:26
  Speaker 2: their humanism in order to control them or kill them,
• 37:31
  Speaker 2: get rid of them because there's too many of us,
• 37:34
  Speaker 2: you know, blah, blah, blah, the same old thing.
• 37:36
  Speaker 1: I don't think we'll ever wake up one morning And realize,
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: all right, we have reached transhumanism. I don't think it's
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: a black or white scenario like that. I think it's
• 37:50
  Speaker 1: a process. It's an ongoing journey. And it probably goes
• 37:57
  Speaker 1: back thousands of years, in fact. And I think that
• 38:00
  Speaker 1: is why we say things like, go back to... natural
• 38:06
  Speaker 1: ways of doing things. Instead of injecting your kids more
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: and more and more with vaccines, go the other way.
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: Inject them with no vaccines. Go outside. Go camping. Spend
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: time in the bush. Feel the sun on your back.
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: Go draw a picture under a tree in nature and
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: feel what it means to be alive.
• 38:31
  Speaker 2: Now, are you saying that this is what people are
• 38:34
  Speaker 2: doing now?
• 38:35
  Speaker 1: No, that's what I'm saying. We often talk about what
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: we need to do. Or is that what people are
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: actually doing? Probably that too. I mean, my kids are
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: not vaccinated. I see no reason to have them vaccinated.
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: For example, at the same time, you have people thinking
• 38:53
  Speaker 1: that vaccines are amazing and we need to give kids
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: 70 vaccines and just keep injecting them. See, that's the agenda.
• 39:01
  Speaker 1: That isn't transhumanism. No, no, no, no, no. Wait, wait, wait, wait.
• 39:05
  Speaker 2: What I'm saying to you is that it's... No, I'm
• 39:07
  Speaker 2: not arguing with you. I'm just making that point.
• 39:10
  Speaker 1: Right. I'm saying that the constant push... Okay, wait, let
• 39:15
  Speaker 1: me rephrase it. In other words, how we are now,
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: you and I, Todd, we are incomplete and we need
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: to achieve completion. And in order to be complete, we
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: need to have 70 injections in our arm.
• 39:30
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but that's a lie. Yes, that's an agenda created lie.
• 39:35
  Speaker 2: If there was, I mean, just hypothetically, because I guess
• 39:39
  Speaker 2: this does exist in some ways. Let's say there is
• 39:43
  Speaker 2: a disease that we can catch and there is a medicine,
• 39:48
  Speaker 2: an injection or whatever that we can take that will
• 39:50
  Speaker 2: keep us from getting that disease. And it's real and
• 39:54
  Speaker 2: it's true. And the downside to the injection is minimal.
• 40:00
  Speaker 2: It doesn't do anything else to us. It doesn't change
• 40:02
  Speaker 2: our DNA. It doesn't do anything else. I don't think,
• 40:06
  Speaker 2: and of course, this is an argument and I'm just
• 40:08
  Speaker 2: talking off the top of my head. I don't think
• 40:10
  Speaker 2: that would be considered the negative aspect of transhumanism that
• 40:15
  Speaker 2: we're talking about.
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: No, because that's helping you. That's helping you.
• 40:19
  Speaker 2: It's helping you be a better human so that then
• 40:24
  Speaker 2: you can bring good into the world and love into
• 40:27
  Speaker 2: the world because you're still alive and you're still functioning. Now,
• 40:32
  Speaker 2: there are people, and I kind of waffle around with this,
• 40:35
  Speaker 2: that would say, well, what about the disease that you're preventing?
• 40:40
  Speaker 2: Maybe that is part of the system, the human system,
• 40:44
  Speaker 2: the divine system that keeps things in check and keeps
• 40:48
  Speaker 2: too many humans from being on Earth. And sucking up
• 40:52
  Speaker 2: its resources. I mean, you could argue that. And I
• 40:55
  Speaker 2: would argue that.
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know.
• 40:57
  Speaker 2: I'm like, well, but see, what I keep saying is
• 41:01
  Speaker 2: the underlying thing is that if that human that's being
• 41:04
  Speaker 2: saved is a decent human. that understands what is really
• 41:11
  Speaker 2: true and real in the world as being a human being,
• 41:15
  Speaker 2: to be loving and to be caring and to make
• 41:18
  Speaker 2: a better world for people, whatever, whatever all those cliches are,
• 41:23
  Speaker 2: that if you knew and you were aware of your
• 41:26
  Speaker 2: essence as a creation of a divine idea, you are
• 41:32
  Speaker 2: going to do the right thing. You are going to
• 41:36
  Speaker 2: have a purposeful life, a meaningful life, and bring meaning.
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: I mean, you know, you can wrap it all up
• 41:42
  Speaker 2: in one word and just say love. You can wrap
• 41:45
  Speaker 2: all this up in that, that you would be an
• 41:48
  Speaker 2: expression of love in the world, whatever that means, whatever
• 41:54
  Speaker 2: that is, going out and looking at nature, loving animals,
• 41:57
  Speaker 2: taking care of people, you know, whatever that looks like.
• 42:01
  Speaker 2: And if that can extend that with a shot, then OK,
• 42:07
  Speaker 2: that's not transhuman because what you're doing is a human thing.
• 42:12
  Speaker 2: You're being an expression of love in the world in
• 42:16
  Speaker 2: a way that other animals cannot do. And you are
• 42:19
  Speaker 2: coming up with ways to make that possible and to
• 42:23
  Speaker 2: make that extended by keeping your body healthy and taking
• 42:28
  Speaker 2: a shot that will keep that disease from killing you, blah, blah, blah, whatever.
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: It might be. If you believe that.
• 42:33
  Speaker 2: Having a toilet and having plumbing in your house, okay,
• 42:35
  Speaker 2: whatever that might be. That you are in essence an
• 42:39
  Speaker 2: agent of God, an agent of love. And if you
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: can keep yourself alive, then fine. That's not transhuman. Does
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: that make any sense?
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: I don't know. I'm just kind of babbling. Well, I mean,
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: this whole topic is quite complicated. So, yes, it makes
• 42:57
  Speaker 1: sense and no, it doesn't. I was thinking we were
• 43:01
  Speaker 1: talking about all those vaccines in your arm, right? Now,
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: I don't see a need for any vaccine whatsoever, and
• 43:07
  Speaker 1: I'm sure you'll agree with me. There might not be.
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: There might not be. That is probably from a medical
• 43:15
  Speaker 1: or a scientific position where it comes to transhumanism. From
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: a philosophical perspective, Todd, we could also talk about ethics
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: and what it means to enhance our humanness. Perhaps from
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: a CIA or Intel agency perspective, perspective or from Palantir,
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: it could be a soldier that doesn't ever get tired
• 43:40
  Speaker 1: and doesn't need to sleep.
• 43:41
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but see, and this is the argument that I
• 43:47
  Speaker 2: would make that's kind of the opposite of what I
• 43:49
  Speaker 2: just said.
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: I also believe that.
• 43:52
  Speaker 2: We are governed by whatever this power is, and call
• 43:56
  Speaker 2: it God, whatever you want to call it, that essentially
• 43:59
  Speaker 2: we come into the material form as spirit into material
• 44:03
  Speaker 2: form in order to accomplish a calling. Now, it doesn't
• 44:09
  Speaker 2: have to be, oh, I'm here to like, you know,
• 44:12
  Speaker 2: save the world or whatever. The calling could be anything.
• 44:15
  Speaker 2: I mean, it could be creative. It could be my
• 44:17
  Speaker 2: calling is to make bracelets for people that they find pretty,
• 44:21
  Speaker 2: you know, whatever. It doesn't there's no like like high
• 44:25
  Speaker 2: level of calling. There could be, but it doesn't have
• 44:28
  Speaker 2: to be. And I also believe I have faith that
• 44:33
  Speaker 2: what I'm doing here is in alignment with that calling.
• 44:38
  Speaker 2: And that faith then says that I am not going
• 44:42
  Speaker 2: to be taken down. by a disease unless I'm done
• 44:48
  Speaker 2: with my calling. Now, of course, I don't live that
• 44:51
  Speaker 2: way because that's that's very esoteric. And that's like, oh,
• 44:54
  Speaker 2: you know, I'm not going to I do take care
• 44:56
  Speaker 2: of myself. I do it to some degree, you know,
• 45:02
  Speaker 2: but and you know, I will take medicine or whatnot
• 45:05
  Speaker 2: if I need to.
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: But It's like, if I need to, what does that mean?
• 45:09
  Speaker 2: You know, you get into this kind of Christian science
• 45:12
  Speaker 2: idea that there is no disease that God is not
• 45:16
  Speaker 2: willing and able to fix. You don't need a vaccine.
• 45:22
  Speaker 2: You don't need medicine. You don't need anything. If you
• 45:24
  Speaker 2: get in a car accident and get killed, that's your calling.
• 45:27
  Speaker 2: That's just the way it is. If you get in
• 45:29
  Speaker 2: a car accident and lose your legs, it's just the
• 45:31
  Speaker 2: way it is. And that's what you have to deal with.
• 45:33
  Speaker 2: I mean, you could go that extreme on the other
• 45:35
  Speaker 2: side of that. But what people do is they go
• 45:38
  Speaker 2: to the other extreme, that they are constantly in fear
• 45:43
  Speaker 2: that something's going to get them. that they're gonna get COVID,
• 45:47
  Speaker 2: they're gonna get this, they're gonna get that, they're gonna
• 45:50
  Speaker 2: get anything, and they have to constantly intervene. And of course,
• 45:55
  Speaker 2: whole industries are based on this idea, this fear, that
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: what if I get sick, what if I die, or
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: just suffer? Where the other side could say, you don't
• 46:07
  Speaker 2: have any faith in the body that was given to you,
• 46:11
  Speaker 2: that has an immune system in it, You know, you
• 46:14
  Speaker 2: don't even need to believe in God. You can just
• 46:16
  Speaker 2: believe that, you know, I have a pretty good machine here.
• 46:20
  Speaker 2: And as long as I take care of it, I'm
• 46:23
  Speaker 2: not going to suffer from these things that everybody is
• 46:25
  Speaker 2: terrified of. And that used to be basically the way
• 46:29
  Speaker 2: people operated until medicine, the technology of it, became so
• 46:34
  Speaker 2: transhuman that, you know, it keeps people alive forever when
• 46:38
  Speaker 2: they probably shouldn't be alive. because if they were natural
• 46:43
  Speaker 2: in their natural setting, there would be time for them
• 46:46
  Speaker 2: to go for whatever reason. But anyway, I mean, it's
• 46:51
  Speaker 2: a very complex topic.
• 46:54
  Speaker 1: I would argue that trust to the science is, for example, transhumanism,
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: because it is faith. It's faith that the science will
• 47:04
  Speaker 1: perfect humanity. And it has become its own god. Yeah, exactly.
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: No question. Eugenics. Eugenics is another example. Absolutely. It's about
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: breeding a better human. We are incomplete. Therefore, we need
• 47:20
  Speaker 1: to find a way to completion. When you say transhuman,
• 47:25
  Speaker 1: that is exactly what I think of. And yes, one
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: that's going to lose me some followers, but I would
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: even argue libertarianism. Because it's the idea, if you think
• 47:35
  Speaker 1: about it, it's the idea that the individual should be
• 47:38
  Speaker 1: free of all restraint, which would include biological restraints. It's
• 47:42
  Speaker 1: your choice, Todd.
• 47:44
  Speaker 2: No, yeah, I agree. But see, that's where God is
• 47:48
  Speaker 2: taken out of it. And, you know, you don't have,
• 47:52
  Speaker 2: in fact, I just wrote an article or I'm writing one.
• 47:56
  Speaker 2: About that, that is essentially, can we be anything that
• 47:58
  Speaker 2: we choose to be or want to be or desire
• 48:02
  Speaker 2: to be?
• 48:02
  Speaker 1: And no, we can't.
• 48:04
  Speaker 2: We shouldn't. We should have restrictions. There should be things
• 48:08
  Speaker 2: that that within the law of of the universe or
• 48:13
  Speaker 2: whatever doesn't allow us to to have that freedom to
• 48:21
  Speaker 2: to do and be anything that we we just on
• 48:23
  Speaker 2: a whim choose to be. And we have to be
• 48:28
  Speaker 2: the one that follows that. It's like there isn't it's
• 48:31
  Speaker 2: not like electricity where if you stick your finger in
• 48:34
  Speaker 2: a wall socket, if it's high enough voltage, it'll kill you.
• 48:38
  Speaker 2: And and that's just the way it is. I mean,
• 48:40
  Speaker 2: there's not a lot of things that are in the
• 48:43
  Speaker 2: rules that are like that, obviously, because people break those
• 48:48
  Speaker 2: rules all the time and they live a very long time.
• 48:51
  Speaker 2: They can be very wealthy and fill with and, you know.
• 48:56
  Speaker 1: There's a difference here, though, I just realized, with regards
• 49:01
  Speaker 1: to medicine and even certain injections. For example, if you
• 49:05
  Speaker 1: break your leg and they need to work on it,
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: obviously you need various injections because otherwise it's just really sore.
• 49:11
  Speaker 1: I don't have an issue with it. This isn't one
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: or zero. This isn't no medicine at all or all
• 49:18
  Speaker 1: the medicine itself. the world it's about uh determining what
• 49:25
  Speaker 1: best fits your scenario and and also kind of avoiding
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: the over medicalization of everything right uh so i was
• 49:32
  Speaker 1: thinking of it like this if you take medicine and
• 49:35
  Speaker 1: generally speaking i don't take Any medicine, really. I think
• 49:39
  Speaker 1: we've got hardly any medicine in the house. Maybe an
• 49:43
  Speaker 1: aspirin for severe headaches. I get migraines from time to time,
• 49:48
  Speaker 1: and they are unbelievably destructive. I can do nothing. You're
• 49:54
  Speaker 1: a transhuman. But, I mean, we haven't taken antibiotics for years,
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: for example, right? And, of course, no vaccines. Now, where
• 50:06
  Speaker 1: am I going with this? There's a way in which
• 50:10
  Speaker 1: you respond to something and there's a way in which
• 50:14
  Speaker 1: you proactively do something. So, for example, vaccines are prophylactic
• 50:18
  Speaker 1: in a way. It's about something that could happen in
• 50:20
  Speaker 1: the future. In a way, that's also what I see
• 50:24
  Speaker 1: transhumanism as. It's a way to try and adjust the
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: future as opposed to responding to an incident right now.
• 50:31
  Speaker 1: I broke my elbow, so I need some medical aid
• 50:34
  Speaker 1: for that. Yeah, that's a good distinction.
• 50:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 50:38
  Speaker 1: Yeah. It's like, what do they call that? Preemptive.
• 50:43
  Speaker 2: It's like you're treating something that actually hasn't happened. And
• 50:48
  Speaker 2: then when something does happen, you treat it. So there's
• 50:52
  Speaker 2: two ways of dealing with things. I mean, you generally
• 50:55
  Speaker 2: don't take cough medicine until you're coughing. But most vaccines,
• 51:00
  Speaker 2: like you said, are preemptive.
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: This is why... This is not related at all, but
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: it's also why I really hate anxiety, because anxiety is
• 51:08
  Speaker 1: always about something that hasn't happened. It's about the future.
• 51:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: Well, I mean, that's what they that's what they say.
• 51:15
  Speaker 2: Anxiety is about the future or or and depression is
• 51:19
  Speaker 2: about the past. Now, you can have stress that's based
• 51:24
  Speaker 2: on circumstance, but people want to get rid of that, too.
• 51:27
  Speaker 2: I mean, I have so many clients that come in
• 51:29
  Speaker 2: that are telling me they're really anxious or they're really depressed.
• 51:32
  Speaker 2: And I'll say, well, what's going on? And they'll tell
• 51:34
  Speaker 2: me that they just lost their dog of 14 years
• 51:37
  Speaker 2: and they're depressed about it. And I go, and you're
• 51:39
  Speaker 2: coming into therapy for that. It's like, you know, unfortunately,
• 51:44
  Speaker 2: now if it's been going on for two years, sure,
• 51:47
  Speaker 2: there might be something going on. That is a causal
• 51:52
  Speaker 2: element for that. But most of the things that we
• 51:56
  Speaker 2: experience as humans are, we're not tolerant of we just
• 52:01
  Speaker 2: we just decide i shouldn't have to feel this way
• 52:04
  Speaker 2: and whether it's whether it's psychological or even physical it's
• 52:10
  Speaker 2: like you take a pill if you have an ache
• 52:12
  Speaker 2: in your arm and you know you take a tylenol
• 52:16
  Speaker 2: or whatever and where we refuse to tolerate anything that
• 52:23
  Speaker 2: isn't on this baseline um You know, which is unfortunate.
• 52:31
  Speaker 2: I think it has a lot to do with why
• 52:33
  Speaker 2: we have such a problem in general with stuff. But,
• 52:37
  Speaker 2: you know, there's an awful lot of circumstance out there
• 52:40
  Speaker 2: that causes negative things that we have no direct control over.
• 52:47
  Speaker 2: We have overall control over many, many years. generations even
• 52:52
  Speaker 2: over certain things that we're dealing with now were set
• 52:56
  Speaker 2: in motion, you know, 100 years ago or 50 years
• 52:59
  Speaker 2: ago or 30 years ago. And we can't really control
• 53:03
  Speaker 2: those things. But but there's an awful lot. In fact, geez,
• 53:08
  Speaker 2: I don't know. I want to put a metric on
• 53:09
  Speaker 2: a number like 90 percent or something. I mean, most
• 53:12
  Speaker 2: of the problems that people come in with that I
• 53:15
  Speaker 2: see in therapy for anxiety or depression is based on
• 53:19
  Speaker 2: the craziness of what's going on in the world, which
• 53:23
  Speaker 2: shouldn't be there. I mean, we're not supposed to have
• 53:26
  Speaker 2: to deal with these kinds of things that we're dealing with.
• 53:31
  Speaker 1: And, uh, it is a huge burden. It is for
• 53:35
  Speaker 1: that very reason. I'll tell you, because I know you'll
• 53:38
  Speaker 1: appreciate it. Uh, I find ways to as best as
• 53:42
  Speaker 1: I can to disconnect. Now I am no, uh, I'm
• 53:48
  Speaker 1: not an example of how anybody should live, right? We
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: all have our own hurdles to jump. But I have
• 53:55
  Speaker 1: found that, speaking of jumping hurdles, I have found that
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: getting into the gym is a great way to de-stress.
• 54:08
  Speaker 1: I have found that writing in a journal is a
• 54:13
  Speaker 1: great way to also disconnect from the matrix. Actually using
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: a pen.
• 54:18
  Speaker 2: Yep.
• 54:20
  Speaker 1: And writing on paper. Do you write in cursive? This
• 54:24
  Speaker 1: is a question I was asking somebody else the other day,
• 54:27
  Speaker 1: and yes, I do. I deliberately try and write in
• 54:31
  Speaker 1: cursive as much as I can because it's a very
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: intentional way of writing.
• 54:37
  Speaker 2: Well, there's a lot that's been discovered about that because
• 54:41
  Speaker 2: it's analog. It's not digital. We're printing as digital. There's
• 54:46
  Speaker 2: a different way your brain works when you write in cursive.
• 54:49
  Speaker 2: And the fact that you journal, the fact that you
• 54:52
  Speaker 2: actually do it with a pen, and the fact that
• 54:54
  Speaker 2: you do it in cursive, I mean, you've got the
• 54:57
  Speaker 2: slam dunk there.
• 54:58
  Speaker 1: Those are... Those are the things. With a fountain pen,
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: I might add.
• 55:02
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: There you go.
• 55:04
  Speaker 2: I mean, I haven't heard anything about that, although I
• 55:06
  Speaker 2: wouldn't be surprised if there's something to that.
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: It just feels great. Yeah.
• 55:12
  Speaker 2: The fact that the ink is flowing and comes out
• 55:14
  Speaker 2: and isn't on a ball, you know, some technological invention
• 55:18
  Speaker 2: of a little tiny ball.
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: I'll go one step further. Um, I, I don't, I
• 55:23
  Speaker 1: don't use a quill pen. Do you dip it in
• 55:25
  Speaker 1: an ink? Well, I actually do, but not in my journal.
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: I also carry around with me, um, a sketchbook in
• 55:34
  Speaker 1: which I physically draw. And although I don't carry the,
• 55:38
  Speaker 1: the dip ink with me, that's just too complicated. I
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: do have that on my, you know, in my studio.
• 55:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 55:42
  Speaker 1: And I sometimes do it from time to time. It
• 55:44
  Speaker 1: really is very good for you, man.
• 55:47
  Speaker 2: I mean, you make a perfect client for me because
• 55:49
  Speaker 2: those are all the things that I tell. I mean,
• 55:51
  Speaker 2: not that specific, but the things journaling is a big,
• 55:54
  Speaker 2: intervention and therapy. And I don't even need to ask
• 55:58
  Speaker 2: you this, but I'm sure you spend a lot of
• 56:00
  Speaker 2: time in nature.
• 56:01
  Speaker 1: No, not as much as I would like to. But
• 56:05
  Speaker 1: you do, because you've talked about it a lot. Yeah,
• 56:07
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's relative. I mean, I think, I don't
• 56:10
  Speaker 1: think I do, and neither does my wife think that
• 56:13
  Speaker 1: we do. But somebody who lives in the center of
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: London might think that we do. Yeah, right. It's based
• 56:20
  Speaker 1: on who's looking.
• 56:22
  Speaker 2: Well, even if you take walks outside and not necessarily
• 56:25
  Speaker 2: along a busy road or sidewalk, if your if your
• 56:29
  Speaker 2: feet touch ground and you see trees and whatever and squirrels,
• 56:36
  Speaker 2: whatever it might be, you know, that's that's very therapeutic.
• 56:40
  Speaker 1: Well, that's exactly what we did. That's what we did
• 56:43
  Speaker 1: on Sunday. So, for example, and I mean, this weirdly
• 56:46
  Speaker 1: connects to the transhumanist. discussion because it's about going in
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: the other direction. Uh, it's so silly, but we just
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: went for a, well, I went for a walk with
• 56:56
  Speaker 1: my little boy, my, my, my, my eldest, um, on
• 57:01
  Speaker 1: Sunday afternoon, just to walk around the farm and, uh,
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: we're the little farm roads and he's got a little,
• 57:08
  Speaker 1: he's got a little plastic bike. And so he was,
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: he was riding it and I was walking next to him. And, uh,
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: one of our neighbors, uh, came outside with his wife
• 57:19
  Speaker 1: and she's like, no, no, no, we just need to ground,
• 57:22
  Speaker 1: take off our shoes. And so that's what they were doing, right?
• 57:25
  Speaker 1: So they came outside and of course we were barefoot too.
• 57:28
  Speaker 1: And then we started chatting and then he brought out
• 57:31
  Speaker 1: a whiskey and then more friends came out from their houses.
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: And so within 30 minutes, it was a whole bunch
• 57:37
  Speaker 1: of us all sitting and chatting and the sun was
• 57:40
  Speaker 1: setting and it was great fun. And then my wife
• 57:42
  Speaker 1: joined and That's perfect. It's community. Couldn't be better. Couldn't
• 57:49
  Speaker 1: be better.
• 57:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the barefoot thing is interesting. I've never done that
• 57:53
  Speaker 2: because my feet are such wimp feet.
• 57:57
  Speaker 1: But you can practice that. Yeah, I know.
• 57:59
  Speaker 2: You know, when I was a kid, when I was
• 58:01
  Speaker 2: like from 10 until I went to, you know, like 16,
• 58:07
  Speaker 2: 17 for those seven years or so, I lived in
• 58:09
  Speaker 2: a very rural country in Virginia. And all my buddies,
• 58:14
  Speaker 2: we did everything barefooted. I mean, we'd walk for miles
• 58:17
  Speaker 2: and miles. We'd go fishing and whatever, and we were
• 58:20
  Speaker 2: always barefooted, which, of course, he had better feet than
• 58:23
  Speaker 2: me because they were like pure callus, and I couldn't
• 58:26
  Speaker 2: walk on gravel. But I could walk everywhere else, and
• 58:31
  Speaker 2: we actually fished with bamboo fishing rods.
• 58:36
  Speaker 1: It was great. Walking barefoot is something you should do
• 58:39
  Speaker 1: without even thinking about it. I don't ever wear shoes
• 58:42
  Speaker 1: when I'm at home, ever. Yeah, we don't either. Yeah, Canada, typically,
• 58:46
  Speaker 1: you don't wear shoes in the house. And normally, I'll
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: try and not wear shoes. you know, outside and whatever,
• 58:56
  Speaker 1: but it just depends on the, on the ground or so,
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: you know, not, you know, that's great. But I mean,
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: my friend Angus, uh, otherwise known as farm Angus, he
• 59:06
  Speaker 1: almost never wears shoes, even on the farm. I mean,
• 59:08
  Speaker 1: you will drive around, uh, you know, on a tractor
• 59:12
  Speaker 1: or whatever. I mean, the guy is fantastic. I went
• 59:18
  Speaker 1: to visit him a few weeks ago and he was
• 59:21
  Speaker 1: standing in a wooden vat In it, you're squashing grapes. Yeah.
• 59:33
  Speaker 1: There you go.
• 59:34
  Speaker 2: Well, it's interesting you're bringing these kinds of things up
• 59:38
  Speaker 2: because these really are... things we, we, for the most
• 59:42
  Speaker 2: part have given up and don't think they're important. Yes. And,
• 59:47
  Speaker 2: you know, maybe they're subtly more important or important in
• 59:50
  Speaker 2: a subtle way, but, but this is going, just like
• 59:53
  Speaker 2: you said a minute ago, it's going the other way.
• 59:55
  Speaker 1: Well, exactly. More human. Yeah.
• 59:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: Let me jump in there quickly. I was just thinking
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 1: as you, as you were talking, it sounds silly that
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 1: we bring these things up, but, I've had so many
• 1:00:08
  Speaker 1: conversations over the last few years where people just talk
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 1: about the advancements in science and how this injection and
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 1: that injection is fantastic and take this supplement. And almost
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 1: nowhere do I see any discussion around just improving your diet,
• 1:00:27
  Speaker 1: just sleeping better, just the normal things that make you human. Right.
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 2: Well, they're trying to bypass those things with the technology.
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 2: I think that's one big effort. And, you know, what
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 2: we've been basically talking about is the material, really satisfying
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 2: a material dictate, like, you know, your health with vaccines
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 2: or your avoidance of getting hurt or whatever. They're all
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 2: materially focused, whereas you taking the walks, barefoot, journaling, whatever,
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 2: even though they're material acts because we're material beings. They're
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 2: still nurturing the soul. They're nurturing something that isn't physical.
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 2: That's what they nurture. And that's why everybody has a
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 2: tendency these days to just dismiss it and to say, well,
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 2: I don't care about that. I mean, they don't necessarily
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 2: literally say that. Just in their mind, they're going, what
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 2: is the point in this? You know, the point in
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 2: science is a material effect. It is something that manipulates
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 2: the physical world in any way. That's what science is about.
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 2: It's about the study of nature and nature meaning material.
• 1:01:40
  Speaker 2: That's the definition in science of nature. It's not anything ethereal.
• 1:01:44
  Speaker 2: It's not soul. It's not whatever. It's material. And so
• 1:01:49
  Speaker 2: we've been brainwashed into believing that material consideration is the
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 2: only consideration we need to make. is to consider the material,
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 2: is to consider. And just think, if you think about it,
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 2: that makes perfect sense. That's what all medicine is about.
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 2: Medicine now didn't used to be this way, but now
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 2: the only thing medicine is concerned with is manipulating the
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 2: material world, removing a disease, fixing a bone, whatever it
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 2: might be. There is no bedside manner. There's no sense
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 2: of a deeper healing. There used to be, and maybe
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 2: there still is in some places. I don't know. But
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 2: I think the closest it gets is the placebo effect.
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 2: In science, medicine does pay attention to the body's ability
• 1:02:40
  Speaker 2: to heal. on its own, like a homeostatic process. But
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 2: there's not a lot of emphasis put on that. It's
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 2: more put on the material. And as we move into
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 2: AI and move into this, we move even deeper and
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 2: deeper and deeper into this. And everything that you're talking
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 2: about is nurturing the soul. It's not nurturing the material body.
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 2: It does that too, but that's not its focus. Its
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 2: focus is to talk to neighbors and and to feel
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 2: the earth under your feet and to hear the bird
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 2: fly overhead and look at the clouds in the sky,
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 2: you know, whatever it might be, or move your pen
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 2: so that you're expressing something through a fluid movement as
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 2: you write in your journal, whatever, those are all soul-nurturing acts.
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 2: And this is what transhumanism is doing. It's moving us
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 2: further and further away from that. And that's, that's to me,
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 2: the definition. And that's where we will come in for
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 2: the landing, Todd. How can I follow your work?
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 1: Cool. Yeah.
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 2: Shrew views is really the best place. www.shrewviews.com. It's my
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 2: sub stack and I have a, you know, go on Amazon.
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 1: And look at my name.
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 2: I have a bunch of books out. Uh, I just
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 2: released one on couples, uh, the archetypal approach to couples
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 2: therapy or improving your relationship through an archetypal mindset. And
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 2: it's quite an, I think, because I wrote it, it's
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 2: quite an interesting book.
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 1: I mean, I didn't write the idea of it.
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 2: Of course, it's been around forever, but it deals with kings, queens, and,
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 2: you know, just these archetypal systems that we deal.
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 1: With every day in and out. So it might be
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: interesting to check out. Todd Hayden, thank you for joining
• 1:04:32
  Speaker 1: me in the trenches. Thank you, sir.