Speaker 1: In this episode, we continue on the character of the
Speaker 1: cult and first points to make Cults are always hierarchical,
Speaker 1: but I don't want you to think of like a
Speaker 1: ladder with a top and a bottom. The hierarchy here
Speaker 1: is concentric. So there is a profit not at the center,
Speaker 1: but closest to the center, and your value within the
Speaker 1: cult is then determined by your proximity to the center.
Speaker 1: And what is at the center itself, well, that's a secret,
Speaker 1: and we'll get to that. But the closest person too,
Speaker 1: the secret is the profit. And whether or not the
Speaker 1: prophet wants the belief of his disciples or not, that's
Speaker 1: just how it shakes out. So to recap what I've
Speaker 1: been saying, religion and everything that constitutes religion is a
Speaker 1: metaphor for society. So to be religious is just then
Speaker 1: to have faith in society, and it doesn't necessarily mean
Speaker 1: that you have faith in society as it is. In fact,
Speaker 1: most religious movements all the time say society as it
Speaker 1: is is not working in one respect or another, so
Speaker 1: we have to change it, we have to reform it.
Speaker 1: But in principle, the promise of a future for society
Speaker 1: is the thing that draws the belief from people and
Speaker 1: transforms it. Even if we have to clean some stuff up,
Speaker 1: even if we have to purge some aspects of the
Speaker 1: status quo that are causing problems. Still, to be religious
Speaker 1: is to believe in society in some way ritually, and
Speaker 1: usually some reformation is required. You don't want to you
Speaker 1: don't want to destroy society itself. That's basically impossible to
Speaker 1: believe to destroy society itself. But purgations this is a
Speaker 1: common way to fix societies, to get rid of the
Speaker 1: bad stuff and return to the past that was good,
Speaker 1: or move to the future where the Golden Age is
Speaker 1: waiting for us. So in a sense, we are all
Speaker 1: cultists too. Knowledge itself is cultic in structure, I'll argue,
Speaker 1: and that'll be a future musing, not this one. But
Speaker 1: they are also anti cults. They are still cults, but they,
Speaker 1: like I said, want to reform the cult in some way.
Speaker 1: And every prophet too, is against religion in some way.
Speaker 1: They speak on behalf of God usually or the truth,
Speaker 1: against what is, against what the world looks like right now,
Speaker 1: the world as is, because the world is corrupt, and
Speaker 1: the prophet has a knowledge or a revelation of the
Speaker 1: secret and the method for how to return the world
Speaker 1: to justice for those who follow him. And if we
Speaker 1: analyze the prophet, the teacher of the New Wisdom, we
Speaker 1: can basically see that they use metaphor, that is their language,
Speaker 1: and they rely on like archetypes or tropes to especially
Speaker 1: and I mean tropes, not as in like medieval philosophy,
Speaker 1: and not tropes as in just figurative language, but trope
Speaker 1: as in the cliche as a meme, the way Dawkins
Speaker 1: used to talk about memes as a meaning unit. This
Speaker 1: is how prophets speak, and even prophets today they speak
Speaker 1: in terms of war and battle and light and darkness
Speaker 1: and hero against the mob. So as tropes, these are
Speaker 1: extremely simplified metaphors. They're just associations between two things. They're
Speaker 1: extremely simple. They're understood immediately, which is why profits in
Speaker 1: search of crowds to follow them deploy language this way.
Speaker 1: Like h. Trump. Trump is a prophet for many, and
Speaker 1: he speaks in memes basically exclusively. It's superlatives. This is
Speaker 1: the best, that is the worst. These people love me,
Speaker 1: these people hate me. And then all the epic words
Speaker 1: like destroy we will destroy them. They are destroying us.
Speaker 1: They are invading us. I will usher in the golden age.
Speaker 1: There's nothing here to be misunderstood because there's no nuance,
Speaker 1: because it's dualities and associations that are immediately understood. And
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna say anything like, well, society is at
Speaker 1: bottom real and metaphors are illusion. And there's a good
Speaker 1: reason that I cannot say that, And it's because the
Speaker 1: language that I would use to say it is itself metaphoric.
Speaker 1: Like the only way we arrived at this point where
Speaker 1: what I'm saying makes sense to you, where we can
Speaker 1: think the thoughts that we think, is through a long
Speaker 1: history of abstraction and language exactly like religion is a
Speaker 1: process of abstraction. One of my favorite things that nietzscha
Speaker 1: Ever said was we are not yet rid of God
Speaker 1: because we still have faith in grammar. Now, the coherence
Speaker 1: of God as that being that knows, still expresses itself
Speaker 1: psychologically as our faith in language. This is a faith
Speaker 1: that even if you criticize language, even if you're a specialist,
Speaker 1: like when linguists and philosophers go home and they just
Speaker 1: like anyone else, educated non educated, who's thought about life,
Speaker 1: which who hasn't thought about language, just like anyone else,
Speaker 1: they say to their spouse, how is your day? Now?
Speaker 1: Even asking that question belies their faith in what language is.
Speaker 1: For here, the question itself presumes faith in what the
Speaker 1: question is doing. And I phrase it that way because
Speaker 1: the question how was your day? It's not really seeking
Speaker 1: out information that you don't know. It's more establishing communication
Speaker 1: or re establishing communication after an absence. But like everyone else,
Speaker 1: even specialists of language who might criticize it professionally or
Speaker 1: have some special theories about it professionally, but they go
Speaker 1: home and continue to act just like they have faith
Speaker 1: in it. And basically, I'd say that is what faith
Speaker 1: really is. It's your actions that demonstrate your belief ritually, repeatedly. Now,
Speaker 1: this is exactly how religion works too. Just like you
Speaker 1: can study language critically and I can still guarantee that
Speaker 1: you believe in it, you can criticize society and claim
Speaker 1: all sorts of things. You can claim it's fundamentally unjust,
Speaker 1: or claim that the apparent world is a lie, or
Speaker 1: that we live in some sort of cave, and whatever
Speaker 1: you claim about it, it doesn't matter, because I know
Speaker 1: you're still going to act like you believe in it,
Speaker 1: which is what I'm saying, believe it is, and sociologically,
Speaker 1: what I'm saying is that religion is a grand metaphor
Speaker 1: for society, and no matter the religion, it always seems
Speaker 1: to end up in tropes like good versus evil, what
Speaker 1: a good father is and a good son, and the
Speaker 1: corrupted world versus the true world, And then what you
Speaker 1: are owed as a member of society or as a
Speaker 1: member of a cult that should be benefit to you,
Speaker 1: because otherwise you wouldn't be in it. And that's why
Speaker 1: in times of crisis, when the future looks worse than
Speaker 1: the past, the cult is not okay with the status quo.
Speaker 1: It has to be reformed in some way. And prior
Speaker 1: to having the cosmic categories of good and evil, or
Speaker 1: the good in itself as it's sometimes called, what is
Speaker 1: good is pretty simply what accidentally but practically happened to
Speaker 1: work out at some time in the past. Cleanliness is
Speaker 1: good for society because that society gets less sick than
Speaker 1: the other society down the road who doesn't value cleanliness.
Speaker 1: By extension, dirtiness is bad for society because you get
Speaker 1: sick more. And realizing this wasn't as a result of
Speaker 1: science or germ theory. It's just the knowledge of experience
Speaker 1: and then habit that was built upon that experience. But
Speaker 1: then we get immediately into the realm of metaphor and
Speaker 1: the metaphors of cleanliness. So to say what a metaphor is,
Speaker 1: I'll say it briefly here and I'll probably have to
Speaker 1: talk about it a lot more. But what a metaphor
Speaker 1: is is a translation, and what it translates is often
Speaker 1: a familiar relationship that is known to the listener and says,
Speaker 1: this other thing is like that thing that I described.
Speaker 1: So you translate an existing and understood meaning to elucidate
Speaker 1: the relationship between two other things. So you say this
Speaker 1: is like that, this is to this as that is
Speaker 1: to that. And why this matters is that certain metaphors
Speaker 1: work and certain metaphors don't. You can definitely have bad
Speaker 1: metaphors in the sense that they don't hit, they don't
Speaker 1: land on their object the way that you hope they would,
Speaker 1: or the way that you expect them to, or the
Speaker 1: listener doesn't understand. But you also have metaphors that work.
Speaker 1: And prophecy in parts particular depends on the ones that work,
Speaker 1: which means they have to be pretty universalizable and pretty simple.
Speaker 1: That's why I'm focusing on this health stuff because everybody
Speaker 1: understands it. So with that in mind, that something's being
Speaker 1: translated from one zone of experience to another zone of experience,
Speaker 1: let's get to some examples, examples of some that are
Speaker 1: downstream or the effects of these concerns for cleanliness, reasonable
Speaker 1: rational concerns for cleanliness, like sin is filthy until you
Speaker 1: are washed by the blood of the lamb, or America
Speaker 1: was clean until it was corrupted by the woke mind
Speaker 1: virus and the parasitic immigrants, or communism is the future
Speaker 1: cleansing of the earth from the parasitic landlords and greedy capitalists.
Speaker 1: And of course Israel, irrespective of whether it's a country,
Speaker 1: it's a religious object. Exterminating Palestinians is an autoimmune project,
Speaker 1: just like the Holocaust was an autoimmune project. The world
Speaker 1: is infected. And what's the source. Well, if you can
Speaker 1: get people to believe in a source, you can point
Speaker 1: to basically anything you want. It depends upon the distinction
Speaker 1: of the pure body from the corrupting parasites, the corrupting germs,
Speaker 1: the negative influences that they may live in society, but
Speaker 1: they do not have society's best interests at heart. They
Speaker 1: have secret, nefarious interests at heart. And anytime you hear
Speaker 1: about the corruption of children, or the corruption of the youth,
Speaker 1: or the corruption of the spirit of the nation sin purgation.
Speaker 1: There we are in the territory of religious metaphor. And
Speaker 1: all this religious metaphor goes back to the inarguable fact
Speaker 1: that a society with some basic rules for cleanliness gets
Speaker 1: sick less often. Now, COVID was a profoundly religious event,
Speaker 1: perhaps the religious event of my lifetime, or it's on
Speaker 1: par with maybe nine to eleven, another very religious event.
Speaker 1: But in COVID we have religion displayed in its originary
Speaker 1: sense here and then we also immediately see what happens
Speaker 1: to religion in its original sense. So the first rule
Speaker 1: in the early days is people can die from this,
Speaker 1: especially old people, especially your grandparents. So wash your hands,
Speaker 1: don't go out with friends. I know you want to,
Speaker 1: but for the good of society, to keep them and
Speaker 1: everyone else safe, just stay at home. Then almost immediately
Speaker 1: you have sin emerge from that social rule, which is
Speaker 1: a pretty good rule, but it becomes if you go
Speaker 1: out in public or you're not wearing a mask. Now
Speaker 1: you are sinful, and you'll be reprimanded or just socially
Speaker 1: punished for it. And then in the next stage you
Speaker 1: have anti vaccine or drinking bleach or using horse dwarmer stuff. Well, actually,
Speaker 1: let's separate those into their own categories. To be anti
Speaker 1: vax is rational from this perspective, because you don't trust
Speaker 1: that the government is going to mandate good things for you,
Speaker 1: and why would you write it doesn't seem that they have.
Speaker 1: But the next step after that is to say, well,
Speaker 1: the government is evil and it's full of evil people
Speaker 1: who are now demanding that you take a syringe of
Speaker 1: the evil substance and put it through the sacred barrier
Speaker 1: that is the only thing that protects you from them.
Speaker 1: They want you to put evil inside your body. Now,
Speaker 1: horse to wormer. Why does this make more sense than
Speaker 1: a vaccine, because it's a de wormer. It's a thing
Speaker 1: that kills the bad thing. Like bleach. We have ingrained
Speaker 1: into our unconscious as people who have watched TV and
Speaker 1: seen commercials, we have ingrained the purifying effects of soaps
Speaker 1: and bleach and cleaner. If you ever saw a commercial
Speaker 1: growing up, you see the evil germs being purged, and
Speaker 1: you get your towels and blankets and white shirts pure
Speaker 1: white again, white as snow, washed in the blood of
Speaker 1: the lamb. So this is the effect of a de wormer.
Speaker 1: It goes in and kills the bad thing. A vaccine,
Speaker 1: on the other hand, it puts the bad thing inside you.
Speaker 1: And because you can't trust the government, the government is evil,
Speaker 1: it has in its mind to corrupt inside past the
Speaker 1: barrier of your skin, straight into your soul. That's what
Speaker 1: they seek to do. Now. Another example came from a
Speaker 1: comment that I thought was very apt, So thank you
Speaker 1: will for this. But Trump proposing that we nuke a hurricane,
Speaker 1: Now this is funny. It's inarguably funny. It's in arguably
Speaker 1: stupid if you believe in what the scientists say about
Speaker 1: what would happen if you try to drop a nuclear
Speaker 1: missile into a hurricane. However, it is perfectly logical if
Speaker 1: your mind is part of the cosmic war between good
Speaker 1: and evil. Because hurricane is on the evil side, we
Speaker 1: can use violence to purge it. Because the hurricane is evil,
Speaker 1: we can literally irradiate it. It is a perennial trope
Speaker 1: of religion in general that evil wants to get inside
Speaker 1: your body. And of course we need like sexual discipline
Speaker 1: to protect society from corruption. And it's why sexuality is
Speaker 1: a top priority for the pious. And it's not like
Speaker 1: this is without reason. The institution of marriage as a
Speaker 1: sacred bond obviously has nothing to do with love. That's ideology.
Speaker 1: That's a story that comes after the fact. But what
Speaker 1: but marriage has to do with what worked? Like society
Speaker 1: won't work very well if men get women pregnant and
Speaker 1: then fuck off women in any culture of any time,
Speaker 1: unless they're rich, of course, but if they're not the
Speaker 1: upper cross of society, they're gonna have a very hard
Speaker 1: time both taking care of an infant and find some
Speaker 1: way to provide for herself and for the infant. So
Speaker 1: who can we put this responsibility on? Well, what about
Speaker 1: the other? What about the guy? So we need someone
Speaker 1: to pin this responsibility on as a social responsibility so
Speaker 1: that we have a next generation, because fundamentally, that's what
Speaker 1: society really is about, creating the next generation. So every
Speaker 1: society basically independently invents marriage because that makes it so
Speaker 1: Dad has to stick around or face either social judgment
Speaker 1: or ostracization or legal punishment punitive measures. And it doesn't
Speaker 1: need to be the case that all humans at some
Speaker 1: point in time universally recognized that this was a better
Speaker 1: way to do things than the alternative. It just needs
Speaker 1: to be the case that for societies to reach higher
Speaker 1: levels of complexity, you need stability at this basic level.
Speaker 1: So the societies that we observe, they all did this
Speaker 1: because it happens to be the best way to organize
Speaker 1: society in order that there can be at least stable population.
Speaker 1: And every sexual purity, obligation and ritual come from the
Speaker 1: need to protect this institution. Marriage. Why, because it worked
Speaker 1: very well, and that's why every society that made it
Speaker 1: this far has some sort of marriage agreement, marriage ritual,
Speaker 1: marriage contract. Anyway, Sorry, that's a little off topic. Evil
Speaker 1: wants to get inside your body. We know what religions
Speaker 1: say when they mean that, but it also means this
Speaker 1: Bill Gates wants to chip you, or they the shadowy
Speaker 1: they are putting chemicals into the water trying to make
Speaker 1: you gay, or musicians in their music videos are trying
Speaker 1: to hypnotize children into worshiping Satan. That's another way to
Speaker 1: get past the barrier of the skin is to the
Speaker 1: mind using hypnosis, and of course evil doctors are doing
Speaker 1: operations on children, they're cutting past the skin barrier. And
Speaker 1: all of this is sickness and health metaphors, and the
Speaker 1: surface of those metaphors is something we're all familiar with
Speaker 1: the body, So immediately we go from healthy body equals
Speaker 1: purity to sick body equals corruption. And the reason I
Speaker 1: think this makes so much sense and why it pops
Speaker 1: up everywhere is that it's pre rational and it's absolutely logical.
Speaker 1: From a religious perspective, it is. It's logical. Logical, of course,
Speaker 1: does not mean correct from all perspectives. Like I'd say
Speaker 1: that germ theory is a better explanation than measma theory
Speaker 1: about what causes sicknesses. Similarly, I'd say that an economic
Speaker 1: account of inequality driving up the prices of assets explains
Speaker 1: a declining standard of living better than parasitic immigrants who
Speaker 1: are sent to destroy America by lizards or something. But
Speaker 1: from its own cult perspectives, these explanations are logical, and
Speaker 1: it has to have something to do with the fact
Speaker 1: of common experience that metaphors find purchase, that metaphors even
Speaker 1: get picked up. Only the ones really that work get
Speaker 1: picked up. Only the ones that are recognizable can be used.
Speaker 1: Like every human knows what it means to get a cut,
Speaker 1: every human knows that your skin breaking hurts. Every human
Speaker 1: knows what it means to eat something that's bad, like
Speaker 1: it's too hot or it stinks, or something that can
Speaker 1: make you sick from the inside. This pain, this bad
Speaker 1: These stuff that's too hot, these stuff that stinks, the
Speaker 1: stuff that makes you sick and hurt. This is simple
Speaker 1: badness that becomes evil. And not just historically in the
Speaker 1: history of civilization or whatever, but even in your own life.
Speaker 1: When you're a child, hurt and pain are just hurt
Speaker 1: and pain, and as you grow up, these become abstracted
Speaker 1: and the causes of those pains and hurts are categorized
Speaker 1: along with evil, particularly as either individual people as evil
Speaker 1: or groups of people that take on the burden of
Speaker 1: being evil. And so with this example on the previous one,
Speaker 1: we see something that systems theory would predict here, which
Speaker 1: is distinct realities that no longer affect each other directly.
Speaker 1: They are closed off. Original religion here was a metaphor
Speaker 1: that solved a material or physical social problem. So original
Speaker 1: religion institutes sexual purity rules, laws even to defend the
Speaker 1: marriage ritual, and people like prostitutes are ostracized and adulterers
Speaker 1: or sexual deviance are punished, and this is done for
Speaker 1: the good of society. But something else happens here, which
Speaker 1: is the metaphor or the abstraction of the original use
Speaker 1: case now spins off and becomes a new reality, the
Speaker 1: reality of the law and morality with its symbols and
Speaker 1: rituals that are completely disconnected from the circumstances that gave
Speaker 1: rise to those laws in the first place. Now we
Speaker 1: have a wholly distinct reality from the first one, where
Speaker 1: changes in the base no longer have any effect on
Speaker 1: the superstructural reality, or at least not immediately. So, for example,
Speaker 1: you could invent a bit of rubber or a pill
Speaker 1: that prevents pregnancy as the effect of sex, and once
Speaker 1: that occurs, you know, if these two systems were connected,
Speaker 1: you could tone down the slutshaming a little bit, because
Speaker 1: the problem that sluts shame emerged to deal with in
Speaker 1: the first instance, it's no longer a problem. But that's
Speaker 1: not what happens, of course, And the reason that slut
Speaker 1: shaming continues to exist after birth control is that at
Speaker 1: a certain point, these become distinct realities that no longer interact.
Speaker 1: It is separate from the world that spawned it, and
Speaker 1: now has its own signs and own symbols that continue
Speaker 1: to say, No, what is good is that your soul
Speaker 1: stays pure. This is the highest priority. And now this
Speaker 1: symbolic universe gets mapped backwards onto the material reality that
Speaker 1: spawned it in the first place, a reality wherein vaccines
Speaker 1: produce immunity to contagions. No, fuck that, because it's not
Speaker 1: only our bodies that are on the line. Here, our souls,
Speaker 1: which are now at a certain point of complexity. Our
Speaker 1: souls are distinct from our body and it's those that
Speaker 1: are on the line. And you know what, that's the
Speaker 1: reality we're going to go with. So you can fuck
Speaker 1: off with your bas scenes. Now. This story about original
Speaker 1: religion and the metaphysical spinoff reality of say the Catholic Church,
Speaker 1: this is paralleled in the etymology of the word religion.
Speaker 1: What religion or religio meant the first time it was
Speaker 1: used has nothing to do with what we now think
Speaker 1: it means. So religio the Latin I don't No one's
Speaker 1: really sure what the root is, but there are some
Speaker 1: candidates for what the root of religion means. The first
Speaker 1: is that the lidge in religion, which is lig in religio,
Speaker 1: is to care or to care for. This etymology is
Speaker 1: probably the most commonly cited because the root of religio
Speaker 1: if it's to care for and recare for, that's what
Speaker 1: the re means. Then it's easy to arise at something
Speaker 1: like to venerate. So the origin of religion in this
Speaker 1: etymology is to venerate something and venerate it repeatedly, and
Speaker 1: there you get ritual. Not too difficult now. Option two
Speaker 1: is that the lig in religio comes from the verb lego,
Speaker 1: which basically means to go over something again, to to
Speaker 1: recite it again or to reread it again, just to
Speaker 1: go over go over the thing that you already went over.
Speaker 1: This also makes sense as as an origin point because
Speaker 1: it would point to the recitation of you know, wisdom,
Speaker 1: chance or story or sacred sayings or whatever it is.
Speaker 1: If you religio, it is to go over that thing repeatedly.
Speaker 1: An option three for where religion the word religio comes
Speaker 1: from is the lig could mean to bind, as in
Speaker 1: to tie something or to tie two things together. So
Speaker 1: if you are tying yourself to something. I suppose that's
Speaker 1: what's being pictured here. The lig in obligation a different word,
Speaker 1: but the lig in obligation means to tie yourself to something,
Speaker 1: and obligation is something you are bound to, and religion
Speaker 1: is to rebind yourself to something repeatedly. So we could
Speaker 1: pick one to go with. It doesn't matter which because
Speaker 1: they all do something cool. But whatever the lig is,
Speaker 1: it's the re that's most important. Religging religioning means the repetition,
Speaker 1: and that repetition might be caring for something, or going
Speaker 1: over something, or continually tying yourself to something. But ritual
Speaker 1: is the origin here. It's something that is repeated regardless
Speaker 1: of what the lig means. And rituals, of course, began
Speaker 1: as pragmatic things to do, and they become increasingly metaphoric. Now,
Speaker 1: metaphorizing something isn't in itself bad. Our language is just
Speaker 1: layers of metaphor that we forgot our metaphors, so there's
Speaker 1: no good and bad. But you can see from our
Speaker 1: perspective that the metaphorization of sickness and health can lead
Speaker 1: us down some harmful trails to certain people that are
Speaker 1: singled out as the source of the corruption or parasites. Now,
Speaker 1: real estate religions, which are the big religions. They are
Speaker 1: religions that are old enough to own real estate. Christianity, Scientology, Islam, Mormons.
Speaker 1: Real estate religions are our stacks, mountains of metaphors erected
Speaker 1: on the original accident that happened to work. And today
Speaker 1: I wanted to focus on the personas of religious belief,
Speaker 1: the prophets, the gurus, the wisdom teachers, and mostly focus
Speaker 1: on the similarities between them. And I'm also going to
Speaker 1: do something that's wholely well, it's not very academic, okay,
Speaker 1: but whatever, it's my podcast. You can deal with it
Speaker 1: or you can turn it off. I'm going to say
Speaker 1: that there are true prophets and false prophets. Most are false.
Speaker 1: And I'm sorry to tell you this because I know
Speaker 1: that we have a big overlap in audience. But Andrew
Speaker 1: Tate is a false prophet. Jordan Peterson is both a
Speaker 1: true and a false prophet, and Jesus Christ is mostly
Speaker 1: a true prophet but could be interpreted as a false prophet.
Speaker 1: And of course Buddha is a true prophet. Now, every
Speaker 1: prophet is anti religious in some dimension. They arrive on
Speaker 1: the scene in their day and say, look, you guys
Speaker 1: fucked all this up, but there's a way to fix it.
Speaker 1: And true and false prophets are difficult to distinguish because
Speaker 1: they are identical in structure. Sure, and that's the structure
Speaker 1: right there. They show up in a religious context and
Speaker 1: say I know the secret. Either I have discovered the
Speaker 1: secret or it has been revealed to me, and I'm
Speaker 1: going to teach it to you so that we can
Speaker 1: fix this corrupted world that we happen to find ourselves
Speaker 1: in here. So when someone says that, I repeat, you
Speaker 1: don't know just because they say that, you don't know
Speaker 1: whether they are a true or a false prophet because
Speaker 1: they both say the same thing. And whether a profit
Speaker 1: goes on to become a fully fledged real estate religion,
Speaker 1: well that's entirely dependent on the circumstances. These circumstances produce profits,
Speaker 1: and suffice it to say, you don't really need profits
Speaker 1: to show up when everything is going well. Profits show
Speaker 1: up with a new revelation because the old revelation is
Speaker 1: not really doing its job of addressing or producing a
Speaker 1: socially cohesive system using metaphors, So when they do show up.
Speaker 1: Religious reformers or teachers are profits which just encompasses them.
Speaker 1: They come on behalf of the secret. The same program
Speaker 1: goes it's something like the world. This world as it is,
Speaker 1: apparently with its current regime and its current leaders, it's
Speaker 1: fallen into corruption and immorality. And I have the insight
Speaker 1: now by which I've seen through this corruption to either
Speaker 1: what the world truly is, or I know what has
Speaker 1: to be done to replace this sham and then restore
Speaker 1: the correct order of things and profits. Every profit is
Speaker 1: created by believers. They're created by the flow of belief.
Speaker 1: But what really creates the profit is that they're needed
Speaker 1: at that time. A social crisis, a world that is
Speaker 1: not getting better, needs a profit to address the right
Speaker 1: problem at the right time. So you really don't need
Speaker 1: profits when everyone has a full belly and a bright future.
Speaker 1: You believe in the future that teachers present when the
Speaker 1: actual future isn't looking so hot, so when you're in
Speaker 1: a state of decline. So none of this, most of
Speaker 1: it is old hat. I only have really one unique
Speaker 1: thing to say, and that's if belief is the one
Speaker 1: thing that distinguishes a profit in the religious sense from
Speaker 1: just I don't know someone who's a popular speaker or
Speaker 1: a smart and funny guy that you like listening to.
Speaker 1: It's different from that because the profit here has spiritual authority,
Speaker 1: and I wish there was a different word that I
Speaker 1: could say that invoking the spiritual realm. But hey, I'm
Speaker 1: sorry to say it's real. It's not to say it exists,
Speaker 1: but it's it's real. And the way that they are
Speaker 1: believed in is that they are a channel or near
Speaker 1: in proximity at least to what is the true object
Speaker 1: of all belief. And the true object of all belief
Speaker 1: is a secret and it's and it's not a secret
Speaker 1: in the in that I'm not going to tell you
Speaker 1: what it is, but it's the secret of the truth
Speaker 1: of the world, or the code that gives rise to
Speaker 1: the rest of the world with all of its illusions
Speaker 1: and corruptions. That secret code of the world exists somewhere,
Speaker 1: but as a regular dude, you're not going to know
Speaker 1: where it is. The prophet is the one who has
Speaker 1: the best idea of where it is. So the secret
Speaker 1: is going to be my technical term that I used
Speaker 1: for a while, and I think the first time I
Speaker 1: mentioned it was my analysis of Warhol cultists in a
Speaker 1: YouTube video. Warhol cultists can simply not accept that Andy
Speaker 1: Warhol's art is about whatever meaningless stuff he had in
Speaker 1: his studio and made his assistants produce, because they believe
Speaker 1: that he is a guru and that there's a secret
Speaker 1: that can uncode this banal work and give you the
Speaker 1: key to really understanding it. Of course, I argue there's
Speaker 1: no point in understanding it because the meaning is the surface. Similarly,
Speaker 1: the prophet, in a religious sense, it's almost always a he,
Speaker 1: So I'm just gonna say he. But he has proximity
Speaker 1: to the secret, the secret knowledge, or the secret truth,
Speaker 1: or the secret relationship with the gods. And it's because
Speaker 1: of the proximity to the secret the prophet's feet leave
Speaker 1: the ground. In a sense, it's a sort of deification,
Speaker 1: and it is why if people believe in a prophet,
Speaker 1: or if you believe in a profit, you will defend
Speaker 1: him to the death. Any criticism of your profit is
Speaker 1: unjust persecution. That unjust persecution can also be proved that
Speaker 1: the message is correct, that the secret is true, because
Speaker 1: the elites of the world do not want the secret
Speaker 1: getting out, and because of this, the standards of argument
Speaker 1: for a profit, they disappear. The profit can get away
Speaker 1: with stuff from his followers that they would never tolerate
Speaker 1: from any other normal person in their life. Because the
Speaker 1: standards have shifted. The standards of behavior, what you should do,
Speaker 1: what you expect of people, they don't apply to the
Speaker 1: profit because the prophet has the secret that is beyond
Speaker 1: the simple rules of religion. It's why although profits tend
Speaker 1: to be a part of a religion or co out
Speaker 1: of a religion, they're fundamentally anti religious in a sense.
Speaker 1: So if the society's in crisis, that means religion in
Speaker 1: its status quo current state is also in a crisis.
Speaker 1: And this is when you're going to allow the profits
Speaker 1: to emerge and present the new secret, the secret about
Speaker 1: what's really going on. So the prophet has a very
Speaker 1: different structure from just an intelligent person who's a compelling speaker.
Speaker 1: He also has a different structure from what a priest
Speaker 1: is and what a priest does in a society. So
Speaker 1: someone like this is start with intelligent person. People like
Speaker 1: to listen to intelligent people, they want to learn from them,
Speaker 1: and they respect their intelligence. But there's no difference in
Speaker 1: nature or there's no difference in principle between you and
Speaker 1: a person who you respect for being smart. They might
Speaker 1: have more experience, they might i have read more, they
Speaker 1: might have had more time, but you listen to them
Speaker 1: not out of their knowledge of the secret, but simply
Speaker 1: their knowledge of things that you have not yet had
Speaker 1: time to figure out. So the intelligent person is not sacred.
Speaker 1: You still listen to them, but they are not infallible.
Speaker 1: Now the priest. Maybe prophets can be priests, or priests
Speaker 1: can be prophets, but their structure is different. I'm saying
Speaker 1: the priest is a normal person with normal knowledge, and
Speaker 1: they become sacred only for the purpose of a ritual
Speaker 1: when they put on their vestments and so on. And
Speaker 1: they are important, having been chosen to do this, whether
Speaker 1: God gave them a calling or whether society just said, here,
Speaker 1: this is the job that you're going to do. Priests
Speaker 1: still can be wrong as people, but they can't be
Speaker 1: wrong in their office as a priest. However, they're not
Speaker 1: a prophet because they are normal people that have a
Speaker 1: sacred job. The prophet now is not a normal person.
Speaker 1: The prophet is to the believer a sacred person, which
Speaker 1: means you hang on every word they say. And this
Speaker 1: is not because the prophet is doing his job well,
Speaker 1: because that's the priest. The priest is a normal person
Speaker 1: with a job. And the priest takes off his special
Speaker 1: clothes and now he's on the same side of the
Speaker 1: sacred profane divide as you are. You're profane. But the prophet,
Speaker 1: because of the secret he has access to, he basically
Speaker 1: becomes the holy man. And this is the structure of
Speaker 1: every cult. The leader of the cult, the profit of
Speaker 1: the cult, the guru. He is near the center and
Speaker 1: however close you can get to him is how much
Speaker 1: of his sacredness rubs off onto you. And now when
Speaker 1: I say that the secret is at the center of
Speaker 1: the cult and the prophet is closest to it, obviously
Speaker 1: this is why I chose the secret to explain this.
Speaker 1: Because secretness and sacredness the two words, they have the
Speaker 1: same etymology, They mean different things, but they come from
Speaker 1: the same place. So the prophet is a sacred office
Speaker 1: because he's the closest one to the secret. Now, for
Speaker 1: a cult, outsiders, they're not in on the secret. They
Speaker 1: don't know that there's a secret there. They just distrust it.
Speaker 1: That's why they look at your cult and laugh. But
Speaker 1: they are the ones who are deceived because they don't
Speaker 1: understand that the secret is there. This is also why
Speaker 1: if when you hear people talk about getting out of
Speaker 1: a cult, they kind of say, I don't know why
Speaker 1: I believe that. Holy shit, I have no idea why
Speaker 1: I believe that. Well, guess what. Being social and intersubjective
Speaker 1: is our cult state that we can't get out of.
Speaker 1: You can never see yourself from an outside perspective, and
Speaker 1: you can't ever say, holy shit, I can't believe I
Speaker 1: believed all that because you will believe it until you die.
Speaker 1: And that's what death is. Death is finally when you
Speaker 1: can stop believing in society. Religions of course can't have that.
Speaker 1: They can't let you end belief in society, which is
Speaker 1: why they don't let you believe that death is really death.
Speaker 1: It's a portal to the next stage, which they have
Speaker 1: power over to. Anyway, when it comes to being believers,
Speaker 1: we're all believers in some people in some way. I
Speaker 1: don't know that we all believe in prophets. I think
Speaker 1: I don't know. It must be a sliding scale, but
Speaker 1: we do all believe that there are some especially capable
Speaker 1: people who I guess we don't worship, but you know,
Speaker 1: the lower form of that admire respect. Like everyone listening
Speaker 1: to this has a favorite writer or philosopher. I'm sure
Speaker 1: probably someone who's dead, and other people, normal people, they
Speaker 1: have their favorite author, their favorite band or intellectuals, celebrities, whatever.
Speaker 1: You send your belief to them by reading, listening to
Speaker 1: watching them, and they don't know that they're getting your belief,
Speaker 1: but there's you know, this is how communities fandoms form,
Speaker 1: and most normal people believe in priests, someone with a
Speaker 1: sacred office. So of course there's the priest. Who's the
Speaker 1: priest or the pastor or I mom or shaikh and
Speaker 1: some other people the libs, let's just say the libs.
Speaker 1: They believe in politicians this way, as someone who holds
Speaker 1: a sacred office. They're a normal person. But when they
Speaker 1: put on the special clothes or they go on the
Speaker 1: special TV show, now there's someone with a sacred office.
Speaker 1: Successful business people sometimes take this image that might be
Speaker 1: a sort of sacred office. Now, when it comes to
Speaker 1: belief in a prophet, like above, a priest, a prophet
Speaker 1: is far more than a priest. A priest is a
Speaker 1: normal person who puts on the sacred clothes. The prophet
Speaker 1: himself is sacred, and it's much easier to see what
Speaker 1: a prophet can do if you don't believe in the
Speaker 1: prophet that you're talking about, because if you're not within
Speaker 1: the cult, the profit does things that are inexplicable. They're
Speaker 1: the acts of a crazy person. And part of the
Speaker 1: job of the cult around the prophet is then to justify.
Speaker 1: They can't help but justify to themselves that what appears
Speaker 1: to be crazy is not in fact crazy, and they
Speaker 1: have to do this in so far as they are
Speaker 1: members of the cult, because if they did believe that
Speaker 1: crazy things were crazy, then they would not be in
Speaker 1: the cult. And as soon as you're outside of the
Speaker 1: cult member, as soon as you're outside the boundary there,
Speaker 1: then everything that goes on inside seems particularly insane. But
Speaker 1: within the cult, all that crazy amounts to something divine.
Speaker 1: If it's inexplicable, then it's accounted to the mystery of
Speaker 1: the secret that has been given to the prophet. And
Speaker 1: prophets do do crazy things. They have to because they
Speaker 1: are coming from out of time into time. A prophet
Speaker 1: does not become a prophet by being nice and being
Speaker 1: polite given the statards of the society. They become a
Speaker 1: prophet by breaking and disrupting the standards of the society.
Speaker 1: True and false prophets. Now, of course it's not difficult
Speaker 1: to come up with examples of crazy cults or crazy
Speaker 1: cult leaders or doing crazy things within cults. But even
Speaker 1: with the examples of our real estate religions, founders like
Speaker 1: Jesus Christ was crazy. He was in this sense he
Speaker 1: was willing to die for what he talked about. And
Speaker 1: not only that, but hanging out with the dregs of
Speaker 1: society like prostitutes and tax collectors and counting these among
Speaker 1: his friends. Oh and like he's supposed to be, this
Speaker 1: rabbi right, it's it's the most disrespectful job to do
Speaker 1: is to wash people's feet. That's what slaves do. But
Speaker 1: he goes down and does it. That's that's crazy. And
Speaker 1: with Buddha, I mean in any culture, to sit under
Speaker 1: a tree for fifty days, not to mention shirking your
Speaker 1: responsibility to your father and your family name by by
Speaker 1: leaving all your giving all your stuff away, and leaving
Speaker 1: your family. These are these are crazy things to do.
Speaker 1: And now in a sort of post hawk justification. The
Speaker 1: followers of those religions will tell you how those were
Speaker 1: not crazy things to do. They were they were totally
Speaker 1: reasonable given what they were attempting to do. But in
Speaker 1: that context, if your brother or sister decided to go
Speaker 1: do that, you would say, yeah, no, uh, that's not
Speaker 1: who they are. This is really weird. They should stop.
Speaker 1: And so this brings us to the contemporary example of
Speaker 1: the prophet who can do no wrong, Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: trump Ism. Now, not everyone believes that Trump is a prophet,
Speaker 1: not even people that like him, but some people that
Speaker 1: like him, uh the trump pisted, perhaps not to mention
Speaker 1: the Qanonist, but they do believe in Trump, not as
Speaker 1: a priest, not as in an inspiration, but as a prophet.
Speaker 1: The cult exists. The trumpst cult exists literally to justify
Speaker 1: anything that the prophet does. Now, if you go too crazy,
Speaker 1: if you get too wacky, yes you'll lose members. But
Speaker 1: as long as there's even one member still in there,
Speaker 1: the purpose of that member, insofar as he or she
Speaker 1: is a cult member, is to trust the plan to
Speaker 1: send belief sending belief like we send thoughts and prayers.
Speaker 1: And if you're not on the inside. This justification makes
Speaker 1: no sense to us. It's mysterious. But the real answer
Speaker 1: for why all of this craziness can be justified is
Speaker 1: because the prophet has special awareness of the secret, whatever
Speaker 1: that is. And the cultists, with their purpose is here,
Speaker 1: is to spin all the craziness into winning. They have
Speaker 1: to do that for themselves. It's not that they want
Speaker 1: to justify something that they know is wrong. It's that
Speaker 1: they have to because if they didn't, they wouldn't be
Speaker 1: in the cult. That's what their identity is at this moment.
Speaker 1: Now you can leave the cult, but that hurts to
Speaker 1: do a lot. It hurts to lose faith, it hurts
Speaker 1: to lose ritual, it hurts to lose your friends and family,
Speaker 1: you know, depending on the cult. And if you've ever
Speaker 1: talked to a trump Is, you'll know that contrary evidence,
Speaker 1: Like if you try to count it with science or economics,
Speaker 1: this is entirely futile. It's useless because those are not
Speaker 1: the correct metaphoric systems to fit in with this metaphoric system.
Speaker 1: This is part of this version of the Trumpists called
Speaker 1: is winning business deals. Don't let people take advantage of you,
Speaker 1: get rid of the parasites. If we are in a
Speaker 1: trade deficit, that means we're losing. So using contrary evidence,
Speaker 1: if it comes from a different metaphoric system, like hey,
Speaker 1: look at what happened to the Nasdaq, this doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: It's useless because to the trumpest Trump is a prophet.
Speaker 1: He knows the secret and the job of the member,
Speaker 1: the job of the disciple or the cult member, is
Speaker 1: to trust the plan. Now this is taking longer than
Speaker 1: I thought, but I do want to look at another fave,
Speaker 1: the profit who seems crazy to any one outside, but
Speaker 1: is either an intellectual or a prophet if you cross
Speaker 1: the line. Let's talk about Jordan Peterson. Now, Jordan Peterson's
Speaker 1: star has certainly dimmed. I don't hear much about him anymore.
Speaker 1: I think you still going on TikTok. Though five years ago, man,
Speaker 1: he was everywhere. That's when we saw the cult firing
Speaker 1: on all cylinders. I'm just using him because we all
Speaker 1: know who he is, so it's a good example. Now,
Speaker 1: he used to have more believers, true believers, hanging on
Speaker 1: every word he said. But Jordan Peterson, depending on who
Speaker 1: you're asking, might fit any of these roles. He might
Speaker 1: just be a guy who's pretty admirable, pretty smart. He
Speaker 1: might be a priest who's a regular guy but doing
Speaker 1: the holy work of combating trans Marxists. Or he can
Speaker 1: be the prophet who is ushering a new world for
Speaker 1: poor abandoned teenage boys and their parents that are happy
Speaker 1: that they're cleaning their room instead of just playing video
Speaker 1: games all day. Now, not many people can be profits because,
Speaker 1: first of all, the conditions have to be right. There
Speaker 1: are times when we need profits and times when we don't.
Speaker 1: But when we do, you need to see zealous, blind
Speaker 1: devotion before you can say that someone has ascended to
Speaker 1: the status of a prophet. So Trump in QAnon, Trump
Speaker 1: in trump Land, those are basically two different figures. One
Speaker 1: is combating satanic pedophiles and one is just the boss
Speaker 1: who wins. Who's other examples Andrew Tait, he seems to
Speaker 1: be someone who can do no wrong according to his followers.
Speaker 1: Maybe Bernie Sanders ten years ago, maybe Taylor Swifts Marx Marx.
Speaker 1: For some people, you get the creation of cults of
Speaker 1: the prophet where if you can find like an echo chamber,
Speaker 1: an echo chamber where contrary opinions or criticisms of the
Speaker 1: prophet are just immediately shut down. So these are just
Speaker 1: like famous people. They are the modern examples of faith
Speaker 1: in the prophetic. There's probably much smaller ones. You know,
Speaker 1: there might be a cultic faith in the church down
Speaker 1: the road and you would never know because there's only
Speaker 1: twenty people in it. But yeah, let's look out. Let's
Speaker 1: look at Peter Sen circa five years ago when his
Speaker 1: star Wars at its apex. His general teaching follows the
Speaker 1: pattern of prophecy. If you ask what he's teaching today,
Speaker 1: though I don't know that it fits so well. It's
Speaker 1: a confusing question because it depends on the day. They
Speaker 1: have the woke over lords. Of course, they never go anywhere.
Speaker 1: They're teamed up with the transgender Marxists feminists, and they
Speaker 1: are making teenage boys feel bad, and also Justin Trudeau
Speaker 1: and Elmo, who he really hates for some reason. So Trudeau, Almo,
Speaker 1: transgender Marxist. All this is tied up into what the
Speaker 1: world that Peterson enters as profit, which is the corrupted world.
Speaker 1: The prophet always enters the corrupted world, and the corrupted
Speaker 1: world is not the everyday world, but it's the toxicness,
Speaker 1: the poisons, the parasites, the things that if you got
Speaker 1: rid of them, we could live in utopia. So for Trump,
Speaker 1: there are a lot of parasites. There's an endless list
Speaker 1: of parasites. Immigrants, China's sending disease, other countries that are
Speaker 1: profiting off of American winningness. Those are parasites. This is
Speaker 1: why we are not able to arrive at our destiny
Speaker 1: until we go to war. So Peterson and Trump, of course,
Speaker 1: because we're not members of the cults, it seems very
Speaker 1: obvious they're following the prophet playbook. There is a good world,
Speaker 1: and in the good world you would be happy because
Speaker 1: there you would have what you are owed. You would
Speaker 1: have the good life, in this case because you're an American,
Speaker 1: or in Peterson's case, because you are a disciplined young man.
Speaker 1: For Peterson, what you're owed is a good life of
Speaker 1: self respect, dignity, freedom of speech, especially freedom to work hard,
Speaker 1: to put your nose down, to not complain, to raise
Speaker 1: a family. But this good world has been corrupted by lazy,
Speaker 1: anti family, parasitic leftists who blame everything on racism. Now,
Speaker 1: if you remember from last time, it's actually the same
Speaker 1: as the cargo cult profits in the Pacific islands now
Speaker 1: another they have a much broader religious system and the
Speaker 1: cargo cult plays a role in that. But the initial
Speaker 1: cargo cult profits, they were censured from society at large,
Speaker 1: but they grew in followers, and there's more than one,
Speaker 1: there's many islands. But they were preaching because they're trying
Speaker 1: to deal with a civilizational crisis. They the islanders saw
Speaker 1: airplanes that they didn't know existed, and then they saw
Speaker 1: American and Japanese soldiers who didn't have to work for anything.
Speaker 1: So this caused a crisis, a social crisis, and these
Speaker 1: profits had the answer, and their lesson was your birth
Speaker 1: right is cargo. And these sneaky whites are changing the
Speaker 1: tags on the cargo so that you don't get it.
Speaker 1: But follow me. I have the secret, and if you
Speaker 1: follow me, you're going to get all the cargo you want.
Speaker 1: This is a metaphoric universe because they know what cargo is,
Speaker 1: they know where it came from. And yet there's some
Speaker 1: of them who still believe in this anyway. I'm sure
Speaker 1: there are, you know, communist profits past and present too.
Speaker 1: They'll tell you that we're just a little bit of correction,
Speaker 1: a little bit of organizing away from the revolution, and
Speaker 1: then there will be the non capitalist world that you
Speaker 1: deserve as long as you defend your leader from criticism
Speaker 1: in YouTube comments, and then the world will become ushered
Speaker 1: in that you are destined. Don't worry. The rapture is soon.
Speaker 1: Capitalism is in its death throws. We're almost there. But
Speaker 1: how does Jordan Peterson, I'm trying to focus here, sorry,
Speaker 1: how does he see through the corruption? This is confusing
Speaker 1: because you can see what he says, or you can
Speaker 1: see what he does, and they don't. They don't really align.
Speaker 1: What he says in twelve Rules for Life is extremely
Speaker 1: normal for a religious teacher. There he says like take
Speaker 1: take responsibility, improve yourself a little every day, don't be
Speaker 1: too negative, and don't be too arrogant. This is good advice,
Speaker 1: very normal advice. You could take this advice and be
Speaker 1: perfectly in line with original religion, which is be a
Speaker 1: good member of society. Don't be too greedy. You can
Speaker 1: be a little bit greedy, but don't be too greedy.
Speaker 1: Don't steal, don't hurt people, and act predictably. We can
Speaker 1: find this again just in the phrase like be a
Speaker 1: good man. And what is good is almost all the time,
Speaker 1: defined as what society needs from its members to keep
Speaker 1: it going, and metaphorized to be good is just what
Speaker 1: God wants of you, which is what society needs of
Speaker 1: you to continue to improve, to create a better life
Speaker 1: for your children than you have, And in that sense,
Speaker 1: a lack of selfishness is quite important. However, however, let's
Speaker 1: not be stupid about why JBP is famous and known
Speaker 1: and recognized as a prophet by some now trigger warning.
Speaker 1: In this sense, Jordan Peterson is a true prophet. I mean,
Speaker 1: the advice in this book is totally blase. I'm sure
Speaker 1: it's good for some people to hear it. They could
Speaker 1: pick up any self help book. It's the same stuff,
Speaker 1: be a good member of society. True prophets, especially Jesus,
Speaker 1: notably say that these these labyrinthine rules that you have
Speaker 1: created for society are not for the good. Jesus says, well,
Speaker 1: we'll get to him, I think. But Jesus says, there's
Speaker 1: only two rules. I got two commandments. Peterson says, there's twelve,
Speaker 1: which maybe he could have reduced a bit, but I
Speaker 1: can I can tell you from experience. The thing that
Speaker 1: he's reacting to is coming from the speech codes in
Speaker 1: the university. These aren't legal, they're just like what everyone
Speaker 1: else does. Then you feel like you have to do them,
Speaker 1: the codes of how you show respect to people. And
Speaker 1: I don't know if it's like this anymore. This was
Speaker 1: how it was like ten to five years ago. And
Speaker 1: in certain cases I have to admit they're weird. Like
Speaker 1: there's six people in the room for a comp exam
Speaker 1: for a doctoral student and you have to do a
Speaker 1: land acknowledgment, like you know all these people. You go
Speaker 1: for coffees with these people, and you're doing a land acknowledgment,
Speaker 1: which which is in principle a useless speech act. And
Speaker 1: everyone in the room studies the same thing, so they
Speaker 1: all agree with that. And look, I'm an I'm not
Speaker 1: an anti woke guy, like I'm generally pretty woke. But
Speaker 1: if you're at like a department meeting and you have
Speaker 1: to go around in a circle and announce what your
Speaker 1: third person pronouns are, this is a real example. This
Speaker 1: is not something I'm making up, but being compelled to
Speaker 1: announce your third person pronouns in a meeting where you
Speaker 1: know everyone in there, it's a very weird, surreal thing
Speaker 1: to do. Even if like just by sight. Let's say,
Speaker 1: even if just by sight there's a person who's pronouns like,
Speaker 1: you wouldn't want to have to guess because they're ambiguous.
Speaker 1: Why the fuck anyway would you be referring to a
Speaker 1: person in the third person in a meeting that they
Speaker 1: are in Like that would be more culturally disrespectful anyway
Speaker 1: than getting their pronouns wrong if they are ambiguous looking.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is some bullshit, like you can't have
Speaker 1: you can't have two different you can't have a fish
Speaker 1: and a bird on the plate at the same time.
Speaker 1: But bullshit aside, Peterson's audience has never been in that meeting.
Speaker 1: I have, and I bet Peterson has because he got
Speaker 1: famous off of whining about pronouns. However, that is not
Speaker 1: what twelve Rules for Life is about. Twelve Rules for
Speaker 1: Life is not about university department mandated speech codes. Twelve
Speaker 1: Rules for Life is just about take responsibility, do your
Speaker 1: best to be good, improve yourself a little bit every day,
Speaker 1: don't complain too much, and don't be too negative, and
Speaker 1: good salt of the earth. Advice like this is very appealing,
Speaker 1: especially in a civilizational upswing, a civilization where people feel
Speaker 1: an affection or love or duty towards society. Now, this
Speaker 1: happens because you feel effervescent to society out of gratitude,
Speaker 1: because it's benefiting you. This is what I really want
Speaker 1: to harp on. Everything changes about belief. When you no
Speaker 1: longer believe that the belief is benefiting you, That's when
Speaker 1: all the crazy stuff starts happening. That's when you get profits.
Speaker 1: That's when you get apocalypticism in religion. And I have
Speaker 1: to admit here, I may be dumb, but I never
Speaker 1: realize this about Jordan Peterson until now, is that in
Speaker 1: his public persona, he's an apocalyptic end of times. Armageddon
Speaker 1: is nigh kind of manic. And when you read Twelve
Speaker 1: Rules for Life, and if he or whoever wrote that,
Speaker 1: it's kind of a grandpa telling you to stick cardboard
Speaker 1: under your hockey pads kind of advice. It's saying, whatever's
Speaker 1: happening in society, focus on you, keep your head down,
Speaker 1: follow this good advice, and I don't know, dot dot
Speaker 1: dot everything will be okay, not percent sure, but following
Speaker 1: the Twelve Rules for Life is not at all what
Speaker 1: Jordan Peterson himself actually does or says. That advice didn't
Speaker 1: work for him because he's out there combating the evil
Speaker 1: forces in society and in public and calling them evil
Speaker 1: and fitting things into his duality of chaos and order,
Speaker 1: but calling Justin Trudeau a Nazi and lashing out at Elmo.
Speaker 1: You know, from his perspective, from this perspective of his cult,
Speaker 1: he's warring for the future of civilization, which of course
Speaker 1: is a civilization purged of the corrupting influences Marxism, transgenders
Speaker 1: and Elmo. Now there's two completely different characters here, because
Speaker 1: we have Jordan Peterson, the self help Salt of the Earth,
Speaker 1: keep your head down and everything will be okay for you.
Speaker 1: And then we also have the other kind of prophet,
Speaker 1: the apocalyptic doom fire Brimstone, the world's going to end.
Speaker 1: Turn your eyes towards God and beg for forgiveness because
Speaker 1: he's coming. We have that kind of Jordan Peterson too.
Speaker 1: So these are two kinds of prophets. There is the
Speaker 1: Salt of the Earth. Here's some good advice. This is
Speaker 1: the kind of advice that's good for all people of
Speaker 1: all times because it's just pro social behavior advice. And
Speaker 1: then there is the end times prophet. This is exemplified
Speaker 1: by the Old Testament, the second half of the Old Testament,
Speaker 1: those prophets who are always preaching at Assyrian or Persian
Speaker 1: kings and saying, woe to you, you have offended God.
Speaker 1: God shall bring destruction upon you and salt your fields
Speaker 1: and send plagues on your head. This is an apocalyptic
Speaker 1: prophecy because it says the world that you've created here,
Speaker 1: especially if it's directed at Xerxes or whoever they're directed at,
Speaker 1: the world you've created here is so corrupt that nothing
Speaker 1: can change it, that nothing can repair it except for destruction.
Speaker 1: And now that's a different message from the put some
Speaker 1: put some cardboard under your hockey pads type of advice,
Speaker 1: don't take religion so seriously kind of advice. What we're
Speaker 1: gonna keep saying, what we're gonna see more often as
Speaker 1: the threads of society continue to come apart for whatever reason.
Speaker 1: You know, I think I think we got a pretty
Speaker 1: good explanation. But whatever the reason, as they continue to
Speaker 1: come apart, you see more apocalypticism, which is to say,
Speaker 1: if the world continues to get worse, there's nothing to
Speaker 1: do here anymore. We have to wait for the end.
Speaker 1: The end will be ushered in. And I do want
Speaker 1: to note that I'm much more afraid of apocalyptic profits
Speaker 1: because they get people to do some really crazy shit.
Speaker 1: They can get people to do really crazy shit. Hitler
Speaker 1: is an apocalypse prophet. Many Christians too. Their religion is
Speaker 1: also apocalyptic because this world has to end for the
Speaker 1: good one to start. But Christ himself, now this is
Speaker 1: a harder question, and I'll have to cover it at
Speaker 1: some point in the future. But Christ, a majority of
Speaker 1: his ministry is saying that your religion is corrupt and
Speaker 1: then demonstrating how to fix it, which is to not
Speaker 1: just follow the law for the law's sake, but to
Speaker 1: address the particulars, address the outsiders. And he says, this
Speaker 1: is what the law was meant to do, But you guys,
Speaker 1: the Pharisees and the Sadducees have corrupted it and skewed
Speaker 1: it and followed legalistically all these sets and mazes of rules,
Speaker 1: and they believe that they're good for following that. And
Speaker 1: Christ basically tells those people, no, you're not good for
Speaker 1: doing that. You're a show off and a fraud. And
Speaker 1: the secret that Christ follows, or that Christ is adjacent to,
Speaker 1: is this thing that he calls his father. That is
Speaker 1: this violently loving, compassionate, forgiving, but also very powerful kind
Speaker 1: of force. So Christ as religious reformer, this is kind
Speaker 1: of where I think he's the true prophet. But he
Speaker 1: also just says many apocalyptic things like I come to
Speaker 1: bring a sword, and I come to cause wars, and
Speaker 1: I come to separate the sheep from the goats, and
Speaker 1: if it were up to me, I could call a
Speaker 1: thousand legions of angels to wipe out this city. So
Speaker 1: he has these moments in the record of him as
Speaker 1: saying apocalyptic things, like when he's dying, he says to
Speaker 1: the guy, the guy next to him, today you will
Speaker 1: see me come into my k kingdom. He's always talking
Speaker 1: about his kingdom. So there's definitely a thread of apocalypticism
Speaker 1: in there. But Christians only took the apocalyptic part. Basically,
Speaker 1: they forgot the don't follow religious rules for their own
Speaker 1: for their own sake, because they're not made for their
Speaker 1: own sake. They're made to, you know, help you be
Speaker 1: a better member of society. So that's where i'd say,
Speaker 1: you know, Christ can be interpreted as an apocalyptic prophet,
Speaker 1: but he's morey. I'd say most of His message falls
Speaker 1: on the side of let us return to original religion.
Speaker 1: We're going to follow the secret. The secret is my father.
Speaker 1: My father made the original law. And the way to
Speaker 1: repair society is to take down all this shit that
Speaker 1: you put up to go back to basics. Right, we
Speaker 1: only need two rules. That actually doesn't make practicing your
Speaker 1: religion easier. It actually makes it very hard because you
Speaker 1: have to think at all times, how in this moment,
Speaker 1: in this way, do I serve society as best I
Speaker 1: can now, and then the next moment and then the
Speaker 1: next moment. Whereas religions they make it so people can
Speaker 1: get by with minimal effort, which is go to your church,
Speaker 1: volunteer at your church, give money to your mosque on
Speaker 1: the holidays, and try to pray at least once a day.
Speaker 1: And then you're in what I'm calling the true prophet.
Speaker 1: They arrive onto the scene where religions like that are
Speaker 1: happening and say, no, you don't understand. The religious life
Speaker 1: is very difficult. It's so difficult that if you do
Speaker 1: it properly, they're going to kill you at thirty three
Speaker 1: years old. And what the true prophet says, in so
Speaker 1: far as he's a true prophit is we need to
Speaker 1: go back to basics. We need to take all this
Speaker 1: stuff off. We need to go back to what made
Speaker 1: society important in the first place. And that's what you
Speaker 1: have to do. And it's hard, and you're gonna have
Speaker 1: to get up every day and do it. But that's
Speaker 1: what actual religion is. False prophets, they don't say that.
Speaker 1: False prophets they offer you the easy way out. So
Speaker 1: armageddon is the easy way out. It doesn't take any
Speaker 1: effort on your part. True prophets say that real religion
Speaker 1: is going to take all of the effort and all
Speaker 1: the energy you have for the rest of your life.
Speaker 1: And if you do it right, people are going to
Speaker 1: try to kill you. But if you don't do it,
Speaker 1: you may as well be dead already because your life
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. So beware false prophets who make things easy
Speaker 1: for you. Just because Christ replays the law with only
Speaker 1: two commandments doesn't mean that it's easier to keep those
Speaker 1: two commandments than all the rest of the law. In fact,
Speaker 1: it's easier to just follow the law for their own
Speaker 1: sake than to try to love your neighbor as yourself.
Speaker 1: So all this is why I began with trying to
Speaker 1: systems theorize how we get from basic rules that are
Speaker 1: good because they work, to metaphor metaphor a metaphor universe
Speaker 1: of rules where the rules are good because they are
Speaker 1: the rules. The true prophet, on the other hand, he
Speaker 1: arrives to de metaphorized to return us to what was
Speaker 1: good in the law in the first place. Is that
Speaker 1: which is that it keeps people together with a purpose.
Speaker 1: So the message of a reformer, and basically every religion
Speaker 1: has one, some of them become their own religions. But
Speaker 1: the message of the reformer is, let's get back to basics.
Speaker 1: Don't pay attention to all these rules, don't pay attention
Speaker 1: to the labyrinthine mazes of morality that people put you in.
Speaker 1: Just get back to basics, and the basics are clean
Speaker 1: your room, take responsibility, and be nice to cats. For Christ,
Speaker 1: it is uh love God, just loves society. And then
Speaker 1: love your neighbor, which means don't love society in general,
Speaker 1: but love the particular parts of society that are in
Speaker 1: front of you. And he demonstrates in this Midustry by
Speaker 1: hanging out with the ostracized and the outcast, but just
Speaker 1: to maybe wrap this up. I want to. I want
Speaker 1: to look at one more apocalyptic preacher by the name
Speaker 1: of Andrew Tate, because this is yeah, this is frightening
Speaker 1: for every high school teacher that I've talked to, and
Speaker 1: I thought we thought we might be rid of him,
Speaker 1: but that was too optimistic for me to have believed.
Speaker 1: And there really isn't anything that explains Andrew Tate except religion. Okay,
Speaker 1: so for him and the sort of trend of red
Speaker 1: pill red pill content people, this is perfect here because
Speaker 1: the matrix where the red pill comes from, it's a
Speaker 1: gnostic pair. This too, is a gnostic parable, but it's
Speaker 1: for guys who tell other guys that you have a
Speaker 1: right to be frustrated by women because women only care
Speaker 1: about appearances. They're just like moths if you make money
Speaker 1: and work out. In red pill philosophy, women are repulsed
Speaker 1: if you give off the wrong appearance, and the wrong
Speaker 1: appearance is of course to be poor, but also to
Speaker 1: be too nice, because if you're too nice to a woman,
Speaker 1: then you're signaling that you're a pushover, or if you
Speaker 1: are a cock who is vulnerable or sensitive around females.
Speaker 1: This causes females to revert to their original form, which
Speaker 1: is like a sort of emotional vampire who use men
Speaker 1: and then discard them. So in this religious teaching that
Speaker 1: you have to dominate and be strong and make a
Speaker 1: lot of money and not be sensitive because then you'll
Speaker 1: cause women to feed off you. This is, of course,
Speaker 1: in this religious story, the apparent world, and the profit
Speaker 1: comes to overthrow this apparent world. Now, how is Andrew
Speaker 1: Tate going to help you do this? I'm not an
Speaker 1: expert on Entwtaate, but I think i've heard him answer
Speaker 1: this before. You can overthrow the matrix, the false world
Speaker 1: by not letting females get the upper hand. You treat them,
Speaker 1: you don't treat them like you want them. You want
Speaker 1: cars and money. And if you get cars and money,
Speaker 1: then women will follow after you too. And if you
Speaker 1: keep women on their toes, then they can't ever return
Speaker 1: to their natural vampire form and you can do whatever
Speaker 1: you want with them. So this in red pill religion
Speaker 1: is the utopian heaven. And this is not just heaven
Speaker 1: for you, but it's also heaven for the women, because
Speaker 1: this is what they unconsciously want as well. All of
Speaker 1: this freedom and feminism stuff. You know, this is confusing
Speaker 1: for them. They're confused, and if you set them back
Speaker 1: to their natural state, then we'll all get what we want.
Speaker 1: But Andrew Tate converse to the twelve rules for life
Speaker 1: of Peterson. Andrew Tate is more like the other Peterson.
Speaker 1: This is an end of the world cult. We have
Speaker 1: to end this world so that it can be reborn.
Speaker 1: And the correct world for Andrew Tate is that feminism
Speaker 1: is everywhere. It has to be destroyed. And how is
Speaker 1: it going to be destroyed? Well, you have to tell
Speaker 1: the truth on YouTube. Tatism as a religion is apocalyptic
Speaker 1: because the world in its current form has to end,
Speaker 1: and when it ends, he will, he will come into
Speaker 1: his kingdom. And until such a time arrives the job
Speaker 1: of the tatist. This is as far as I can gather.
Speaker 1: The job of the tatist is to spread the teachings
Speaker 1: of the Tates and to pay him. And you can
Speaker 1: pay to be in the inner circle. So I opened
Speaker 1: up with saying that cults are concentric. The secret is
Speaker 1: Tate's red pill. He is the prophet, and then there's
Speaker 1: an inner circle that receive his wisdom directly, I think
Speaker 1: in the form of YouTube videos or something like that.
Speaker 1: The rest of the followers, the rest of the flock,
Speaker 1: the parishioners, their job is to go out and defend
Speaker 1: asw Tate from the matrix that seeks to undermine and
Speaker 1: destroy him. The reason that they're undermining and undermining and
Speaker 1: destroying him and trying to put him in jail is
Speaker 1: because what he says is the truth. It's because he
Speaker 1: has the secret. Now I know what it means to
Speaker 1: run a rye of a cult, because when the Boys
Speaker 1: and I released an episode on mega communism that I
Speaker 1: thought was quite thorough in analyzing an argument, the cult
Speaker 1: was unleashed on us. And of course, when you're arguing
Speaker 1: with the members of a cult, reason arguments care. None
Speaker 1: of these things matter, because the problem is that you
Speaker 1: are attacking the leader, and the leader is the sole
Speaker 1: person in the universe that has access to the secret.
Speaker 1: And by attacking the secret, or by declaring that the
Speaker 1: prophet is a false prophet and does not have access
Speaker 1: to the secret, you are coming against history itself, history
Speaker 1: in terms of its social purpose. You are coming against
Speaker 1: society itself, and that can't happen. You have to repel invaders,
Speaker 1: you have to defend the leader because otherwise the world
Speaker 1: is not going to change, the world's going to stay
Speaker 1: the same. And it's bad as it is, because otherwise
Speaker 1: would need a profit, and because the leader has access
Speaker 1: is the only one with access to the secret of
Speaker 1: how to change it. This must be defended at all
Speaker 1: costs if we are to have a future logical. It's
Speaker 1: a logical position from its own perspective, all right. So
Speaker 1: with these two pillars of wisdom, there's something, there's something
Speaker 1: of a similar cloth in their apocalyptic mode that they
Speaker 1: both point to. They both point out that the social
Speaker 1: code is indecipherable, and it's indecipherable if you're a man
Speaker 1: and not a minority or something. You can't win unless
Speaker 1: you're a minority or a woman, and women don't know
Speaker 1: what they want. Postmodernists don't know what they want. Feminist
Speaker 1: feminist neo Marxists want the power that was meant for you.
Speaker 1: And when you tell someone that who feels disempowered, this
Speaker 1: becomes a perfect metaphoric structure to hang a religion. Not
Speaker 1: so these four, the postmodernists and the feminists, of course,
Speaker 1: they have aligned to force you to play their weird
Speaker 1: little word games to try to advance in society, and
Speaker 1: the reason that you're not advancing in society is because
Speaker 1: you teenage boy. The game isn't fair for you. The
Speaker 1: game's not fair for you because the code is indecipherable.
Speaker 1: But that's what the red pill is for, right, That's
Speaker 1: what Neo did to be able to decipher the code,
Speaker 1: to see through the apparent code into the secret world.
Speaker 1: And Peterson and Tate will be the profits that enable
Speaker 1: you to see why you're really losing. And of course
Speaker 1: the answer is uh, feminism. Now the red pill, I
Speaker 1: mean with the matrix as analogy, because in the Matrix
Speaker 1: and gnosissism, society is an illusion. And if you take
Speaker 1: the red pill, you can see the source code that's
Speaker 1: in this case the prophet's secret knowledge. The Matrix is
Speaker 1: a gnostic parable because in narcissism, the world has been
Speaker 1: generated by a deluded God who thinks he's all powerful,
Speaker 1: but he's very insecure, so he built a prison world
Speaker 1: for us so that we would worship him instead of
Speaker 1: the true truth. Now you'll see parallels here with Christ's
Speaker 1: message because his the Gospel of Christ is basically the
Speaker 1: same in structure to our two wisdom teachers. Here, the
Speaker 1: content's not the same. But the structure is now one
Speaker 1: thing that all prophets do or say that they are doing.
Speaker 1: They have to break the code. They have to say
Speaker 1: you have heard it said this. Now I'm coming to
Speaker 1: you to say this. The code that is being broken,
Speaker 1: just like with Peterson, just like with Tate, the code
Speaker 1: that is being broken is the code of the corrupt world.
Speaker 1: And so this is the Jesus red pill. Okay, Christ says.
Speaker 1: Christ says multiple times, especially when he's in debates with
Speaker 1: the religious leaders, he says, you have all these laws,
Speaker 1: you have all these abstractions, and you have all these prophets. However,
Speaker 1: you can reduce all of those teachings to two commandments
Speaker 1: boiled down. Those two commandments are respect God and respect others.
Speaker 1: And what is respect God and respect others? These are
Speaker 1: just statements of the original religion. These are anti cartoon religion.
Speaker 1: And this is what prophets often say. Basically, you have
Speaker 1: made this way too complicated. Time to go back to basics.
Speaker 1: This is to respect the general whole, the first commandment,
Speaker 1: and then to respect others. This is to respect the
Speaker 1: particulars of the whole. Now, this is really revolutionary. If
Speaker 1: you're within a religious legal system because respect society in general,
Speaker 1: which is to honor God. Now everyone already does this
Speaker 1: by functioning in public properly. Everyone respects society in general
Speaker 1: if they're if they're able to, you know, and if
Speaker 1: they're not able to, we lock them up in asylums.
Speaker 1: But this is what every religious law abstracts, and not
Speaker 1: just religious law. This is what law is, the general
Speaker 1: at a general level. When you write laws, you can't
Speaker 1: have particulars in mind because there's just too many things
Speaker 1: that could happen. Literally, what a law is is a general,
Speaker 1: a generality. But to respect society in particular, to respect
Speaker 1: your neighbor. Jesus is saying. This is the flip side,
Speaker 1: or the corollary of the commandment to honor the general.
Speaker 1: And this is what today's Christians, if you look around,
Speaker 1: they're terrible at this generally speaking. Of course, like the
Speaker 1: Chrysto fascist wing, they're entirely focused on the honor God commandment,
Speaker 1: which is to honor society in general, just like the
Speaker 1: parasitic lawyers are trying to do. And this is what
Speaker 1: Christendom is right. Christian law in this world, Jesus is
Speaker 1: really adamant, though that his kingdom is not of this world.
Speaker 1: I guess they took that. I took that as a challenge. No,
Speaker 1: we're going to turn you into a religion despite your
Speaker 1: anti religious teachings. But if you look at Christ's actual ministry,
Speaker 1: he breaks the general law all the time. Yes, he participates,
Speaker 1: he's debating theology, he's following the Jewish commandments and festivals,
Speaker 1: but he also breaks the law. I guess he breaks
Speaker 1: the code by washing his follower's feet. That's the opposit
Speaker 1: of what's supposed to happen. He defends prostitutes and adulterrostes,
Speaker 1: and he eats with the rats of society, like the
Speaker 1: tax collectors, because they're betraying the Jewish community to the Romans.
Speaker 1: So Christ as a guy is against religion in order
Speaker 1: to show what real religion is about, which is to say,
Speaker 1: you respect the general, but you also respect the particular,
Speaker 1: which means the prostitutes and the guy who's running around
Speaker 1: naked saying that he's a demon horde. So the Christian religion,
Speaker 1: Jesus as a prophet. This was revolutionary for like ten minutes.
Speaker 1: So let's get back on track here. Sorry. The message
Speaker 1: of Christ is to honor the code that allows society
Speaker 1: to function i e. God, but also to break the
Speaker 1: code when necessary. Some people want to be told what
Speaker 1: to do, though, that's the purpose of religion in their
Speaker 1: life is just to make sure they squeak by. They're
Speaker 1: in heaven, their kids are in heaven. Hallelujah. What Jesus
Speaker 1: is saying makes religion a lot harder because you can't
Speaker 1: just follow the rules. You have to respect the code
Speaker 1: and break it when it is good to do so.
Speaker 1: This is religion on hardest difficulty. But this gets what
Speaker 1: actually matters here. True prophets. They realize that what matters
Speaker 1: is the good life, and that the good life is
Speaker 1: a hell of a lot of work. The good life
Speaker 1: means that a the rules are good, respect God, but
Speaker 1: b that breaking the rules can be good too, respect people.
Speaker 1: This is the opposite of how real estate religions function.
Speaker 1: That being good is not easy, that getting into heaven
Speaker 1: is impossible. It's not easy. You don't just follow the requirements.
Speaker 1: You have to be thinking about being good all day
Speaker 1: all the time. Being good is exhausting. Actually so the
Speaker 1: false prophets. The self help gurus the red Pill pick
Speaker 1: up artists on YouTube, they say all the same thing
Speaker 1: in structure to Christ, but with the opposite effect. Christ says,
Speaker 1: there's no secret, it's just a hell of a lot
Speaker 1: of work. There's a similarity here. They had a false
Speaker 1: prophet and a true prophet. They both have a secret,
Speaker 1: or they are both believed to have a secret. The
Speaker 1: false prophet and the priests as well. They make being
Speaker 1: good pretty easy for you. You pay the profit, your money,
Speaker 1: you buy the book, you commit to the teachings, you
Speaker 1: defend the leader, or you pay your tithe, volunteer in
Speaker 1: the community, whatever it is. You're good if you just
Speaker 1: do these few things. Now, a good person basking in
Speaker 1: the light of the truth that radiates out from the
Speaker 1: center the secret. That's the secret of the false prophet.
Speaker 1: Whether that is a red pill influencer or a wisdom teacher,
Speaker 1: or the founder of a religion or a president, they
Speaker 1: are all believed in because their believers believe there's a secret,
Speaker 1: the secret of the true prophet. Conversely, that there is
Speaker 1: no secret that the laws of society are made up.
Speaker 1: They are conventions. They're not immutable, and they're not eternal.
Speaker 1: In fact, you have to break them. Sometimes you have
Speaker 1: to beat up people. If they are selling things in
Speaker 1: the temple. Sometimes you can give away all you have
Speaker 1: to the poor, but even that's not a guarantee that
Speaker 1: you're going to get into heaven. That might be what
Speaker 1: it takes to get one person to heaven, but another
Speaker 1: person might have to give up something else for the
Speaker 1: sake of God or for the sake of others the society.
Speaker 1: Maybe you have to give up your life, maybe you
Speaker 1: have to wrought in prison for the rest of your life.
Speaker 1: Because he realized that the good thing to do was
Speaker 1: to gun down a CEO of a health insurance company
Speaker 1: in New York City. Yes, this is extremely disrespectful to society,
Speaker 1: and he has to be punished, but that doesn't mean
Speaker 1: it wasn't a good thing to do. I'm also not
Speaker 1: saying it was a good thing to do, but it
Speaker 1: is the sort of crazy things the prophets do. So
Speaker 1: Christ has to believe in the Father's power as his secret.
Speaker 1: He references it all the time. But for Christ to
Speaker 1: really be a Christian like the Buddha, the Buddhas are
Speaker 1: the real Christians. That that is, unless you unless you
Speaker 1: take the doctrine of reincarnation literally, because then it's just whatever.
Speaker 1: But Christ should have to do everything that he does
Speaker 1: still except not believing in the invisible person called God.
Speaker 1: And I don't know if he did or not, but
Speaker 1: based on what we have recorded of him saying, it
Speaker 1: seems to be what he says. If you believe that
Speaker 1: God is an invisible person who is going to reward
Speaker 1: you for doing good things, and that's why you're doing
Speaker 1: good things, then you're not good. You're doing that for
Speaker 1: some advantage. Later. You're only good if you do good
Speaker 1: things and do not believe in God the person, but
Speaker 1: God as the metaphor of society, which is of course
Speaker 1: all made up, but it is still the social world
Speaker 1: that makes being unselfish, sacrificing things that you want, breaking
Speaker 1: the law to defend the weak. That's what being good is,
Speaker 1: and that takes everything you have all the time, because
Speaker 1: you constantly have to be negotiating in your mind. Is
Speaker 1: this the time that I follow the law or the
Speaker 1: time that I break it. So the secret of true
Speaker 1: prophets is that there is no secret. The secret of
Speaker 1: false prophets is that they think there really is a secret,
Speaker 1: that they have figured it out. So send them your
Speaker 1: belief and money, buy the books, and then they on
Speaker 1: your behalf will end this world and create the new one,
Speaker 1: the utopia, purged of evil, and you can just watch
Speaker 1: them do this on TV and YouTube. This is easy
Speaker 1: for you, This is easy for the believer. Ending the
Speaker 1: world is easy. Improving the world, on the other hand,
Speaker 1: that takes everything you have, That takes sacrificing up everything
Speaker 1: you want for the good