Speaker 1: H m hmmm, dire wave the scientific method.
Speaker 2: You cannot justify the scientific method. All right? Welcome John,
Speaker 2: can you hear me?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 2: Welcome everybody. This is Jay's analysis and I have author
Speaker 2: with me tonight. We are joined by John Claizek. Is
Speaker 2: that right? John?
Speaker 3: Oh Man? You broke up for a second. I got
Speaker 3: a brand new, brand new computer with a bunch more
Speaker 3: gigs in the old one, and I didn't hear you.
Speaker 3: I'm sorry. You introduced me.
Speaker 2: Can you hear me now?
Speaker 3: Yeah? I can hear you now, So you know it's cool.
Speaker 2: I just started. So John Klaizak joins me. Is that
Speaker 2: how you pronounce it?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 3: You got it?
Speaker 2: Okay. And he is a young pup like me. I
Speaker 2: thought he was going to be an old, crusty dude,
Speaker 2: but he is a young guy like me. And he
Speaker 2: is going to talk about his book. And he wrote
Speaker 2: the book school World Order the Technocraticalization of Corporatized education.
Speaker 2: School World or the Technocraticalization of corporatize Education it almost rhymes.
Speaker 2: And he's going to talk about the occult academic history
Speaker 2: intertwined together, how this leads to transhumanism, the control of
Speaker 2: everybody through education, and you get into some really interesting
Speaker 2: philosophical theological concepts here at natural law, ten commandments, the logos.
Speaker 2: Where do you want to start with? By the way,
Speaker 2: I have the link to your Amazon pages, there is
Speaker 2: there a different pages rather me put in there.
Speaker 3: You can go to my website and then that'll link
Speaker 3: to Trying Day to get the book. But you know,
Speaker 3: Amazon's fine with me. I mean, you know, you know
Speaker 3: that we make more.
Speaker 2: Actually Trying Day would be better, that's.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, yeah, you know that.
Speaker 2: So yeah, let me I'm sorry, let me find that,
Speaker 2: but I'll add that. What before we get into the book,
Speaker 2: why don't you tell us about how you came to
Speaker 2: write this book?
Speaker 3: Okay, So how I came to write this book was basically,
Speaker 3: there was a little issue in Illinois where the governor
Speaker 3: was stalling on the budget UH several years ago, and
Speaker 3: basically I saw it as a ployee to privatize the
Speaker 3: education system. And this particular governor had money in privatized schooling,
Speaker 3: so through charge schools, vouchers and things like that, he
Speaker 3: actually has a charter school that he owns. And I
Speaker 3: also saw a bunch of buzzwords pop up. In addition
Speaker 3: to the privatization stuff, so that would be like the workforce, training,
Speaker 3: school to work, cradle to career or different terms they use,
Speaker 3: and then the terminology the buzzwords they use for public
Speaker 3: private partnership, so P twenty councils P sixteen council, which
Speaker 3: is another name for merging the private and the public,
Speaker 3: basically the corporate and the government. And it was basically
Speaker 3: all the stuff that Charlotte Israbet talked about in delivered
Speaker 3: Guming Down of America, and then she did an addendum
Speaker 3: to it where she got into the charter schooling mar
Speaker 3: So basically, I saw all that stuff kind of happening
Speaker 3: at once, and I'm a teacher, didn't didn't ever really
Speaker 3: plan to write about education because you know it, didn't
Speaker 3: want to poo poo where I work, try to keep
Speaker 3: a buffer there. But since since one of the departments
Speaker 3: where I work got shut down, I said, well, hey,
Speaker 3: I guess I'll just voice my opinion here. Charlotte saw
Speaker 3: the art basically said you're right on, and then I
Speaker 3: just I just kept building on it and it became
Speaker 3: a book basically awesome.
Speaker 2: So I've got the better link in there to trying
Speaker 2: today directly, So if youbody's interested to get the book there.
Speaker 2: And also I have stream labs that set up so
Speaker 2: you see the link. Therefore, stream labs if you guys
Speaker 2: want to send a super chat comment. But let's so,
Speaker 2: you dove into philosophy. You went down the route of
Speaker 2: the pheelosoph and you talk about the trivium. You talk
Speaker 2: about the philosophy of education. Right, so everything has a
Speaker 2: philosophy behind it. There's a philosophy of art, there's a
Speaker 2: philosophy of mechanics, there's a philosophy of everything. And you
Speaker 2: got into the philosophy of education and the presuppositions of education.
Speaker 2: Tell us about the trivium and the logic behind education.
Speaker 3: Okay, so maybe maybe I'll tell you how I how
Speaker 3: I even got to that, because you're probably way more
Speaker 3: schooled officially in philosophy. I took a few undergrad courses. Uh,
Speaker 3: but you know my background is in rhetoric in literary studies,
Speaker 3: so I don't have the same philosophical background. Actually delved
Speaker 3: into a lot of it when I got to the
Speaker 3: conclusion part, and that was partially thanks to Chris. I
Speaker 3: was gonna end it with just the problems laid out
Speaker 3: and Chris is like, this is you know, you got
Speaker 3: to give some solutions here, man, this is scary stuff, like,
Speaker 3: you know, what should we do to solve this? And
Speaker 3: so basically what I it was it was kind of
Speaker 3: stunt me. I hadn't thought about that. But but what
Speaker 3: I basically sought the at the crux of everything was
Speaker 3: that it's the algorithm. They want the algorithm to be God. Okay,
Speaker 3: you could use that metaphorically or literally, uh, but basically
Speaker 3: that means if you want the algorithm to God to
Speaker 3: be God, you want empiricism to be God. Well, there's
Speaker 3: there's two problems with that. One is that, uh, you know,
Speaker 3: measurements are only as good as is the categories or
Speaker 3: the presuppositional categories that you start with, okay, and then
Speaker 3: the measurement can only go so far, so you can't
Speaker 3: measure every single variable okay. So at that point you
Speaker 3: have to take what your reguard called the leap of
Speaker 3: faith okay, into hopefully something that is what called the
Speaker 3: categorical imperative, right, something a priori that's there before you
Speaker 3: measure stuff. So this is where I started looking into metaphysics.
Speaker 3: The other thing is that you know, uh, some people
Speaker 3: will tell you that morality can be empirical, but I
Speaker 3: don't see how you can make that argument. Morality has
Speaker 3: to be a priori right, so they have values are presuppositional.
Speaker 3: You don't, you know, Jay, I don't have to measure
Speaker 3: you to know that, you know, I should treat you
Speaker 3: with the same deference to the Bill of Rights as
Speaker 3: another human being. So you know, it was at that
Speaker 3: point that I that I started digging into the to
Speaker 3: the metaphysics.
Speaker 2: And you're a long ruler if you're gonna measure me, dog.
Speaker 2: So I'm in a silly mood tonight. I hope you
Speaker 2: don't mind.
Speaker 3: Don't have fun man.
Speaker 2: Make money though here the audience here doesn't send any
Speaker 2: money unless you're act silly, So.
Speaker 3: Go ahead, you'll have to. And I'm long in the tooth,
Speaker 3: so if you can jump in with some jokes occasionally,
Speaker 3: will balance it all out here. Yeah. So the funny
Speaker 3: thing was that when I, you know, when I looked
Speaker 3: into cont I dug up metaphysics morals off my shelf,
Speaker 3: and you know what was funny was underneath it was
Speaker 3: was at least Strobels case for christ C. S. Lewis
Speaker 3: Mere Christianity and something by Saint Benedictine. I just thought
Speaker 3: that was interesting at the time, so I didn't have
Speaker 3: time to read all of it. So I started looking
Speaker 3: through this guy, Bruce Gore's lectures. He's a Presbyterian guy.
Speaker 3: He teaches high school. He's a lawyer and a psychologist,
Speaker 3: but he teaches high school kids using the classical method.
Speaker 3: And he's got a lecture series. If anyone wants to
Speaker 3: see it, it's uh, just go Bruce Gore on YouTube.
Speaker 3: History of Philosophy and Christianity together. And that was when
Speaker 3: I stumbled on this idea of the logos, that it's
Speaker 3: you know that that that you know the first John right,
Speaker 3: you know. I always was like, in the beginning was
Speaker 3: the word, and it's like, so in the beginning was
Speaker 3: the book or the Bible, but you know, we know
Speaker 3: that that's right. We know that the tank commandments in
Speaker 3: the Bible, the Torah things came later. So I was
Speaker 3: like that always confused me. But then when I realized
Speaker 3: that the Greek interpretation had to do with this concept
Speaker 3: of the logos, which is this idea that there was
Speaker 3: a metaphysical principle that is the order to the universe.
Speaker 3: I also realized that basically Christianity had you know, it
Speaker 3: wasn't just about faith and the prophecies and the law.
Speaker 3: It also won philosophical arguments, and it basically synthesized Greek
Speaker 3: philosophy with revelation and the law. And that's yeah, and
Speaker 3: so that's what basically that's when you started popping up
Speaker 3: on my feed and I started looking at more of
Speaker 3: your stuff. But you know, for the sake of the book,
Speaker 3: I tried to defend public education. You might have critiques
Speaker 3: of this, uh, but so I tried to as best
Speaker 3: as I could, steer everything back in the direction of
Speaker 3: at least trying to have have an agreement that we
Speaker 3: have to have some a priori metaphysics before we start
Speaker 3: using any algorithms, whether it be for learning or elsewise.
Speaker 3: And so that was that was where what led me
Speaker 3: to the trivial method as the means to do that.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's interesting. I mean I don't think that, uh,
Speaker 2: there's anything inherently magically better about something being privatized or
Speaker 2: something being public, because you can have corruption and either
Speaker 2: either sphere. So I don't I don't necessarily think one
Speaker 2: or the other is automatically, you know, prima facia going
Speaker 2: to be better than the other the other, but definitely
Speaker 2: when something is completely controlled by either one, you know,
Speaker 2: it becomes kind of a an indoctrination system. So we
Speaker 2: know that US education has gone down the route of
Speaker 2: becoming and doctrination system. And you're throwing an interesting angle
Speaker 2: on this and saying that it's not just like a
Speaker 2: government to quote unquote problem that education is going to
Speaker 2: be privatized in terms of the high school or also
Speaker 2: grade school or everything, or what are you saying.
Speaker 3: From start to finish for what un calls lifelong learning.
Speaker 3: You know, if you looked at it's a blend of
Speaker 3: what I would call communitarian philosophy with basically techno fascism, right,
Speaker 3: so that corporate arm with sort of this collectivist or
Speaker 3: communist philosophy underneath it. So if you've looked at those
Speaker 3: documents for the World Economic Forum just did the Great Reset,
Speaker 3: and one of the things they tweeted was they're talking
Speaker 3: about corporate governance is going to help out, But in
Speaker 3: the same time they're talking about equity and they're using
Speaker 3: all this communitarian language. So you have the merger of
Speaker 3: the communitarian philosophical language with basically using big corporations to
Speaker 3: facilitate it. As far as education goes, what we you
Speaker 3: have the actual privatization of the school itself through charter schools. Okay,
Speaker 3: but by the way, it's not that's let's say corporatization,
Speaker 3: because you could have a private school, like you said,
Speaker 3: we're like a parochial school, and you could have a
Speaker 3: church school. It's much different than a charter school. Charter
Speaker 3: school is a private corporation that also takes public dollars, right,
Speaker 3: so it's subsidized by the government, and there's this incestuous
Speaker 3: relationship and so it so corporatized it is probably a
Speaker 3: better yeah, and and so that's the first layer. And
Speaker 3: then the second layer is basically through the partnerships that
Speaker 3: all the schools are going to be conducting with big tech,
Speaker 3: and that goes all the way through the college level.
Speaker 3: And right now after the lockdown, you know, and everybody
Speaker 3: can't go to school, that's that stuff is all accelerating.
Speaker 3: So the other one is through the tech companies and
Speaker 3: through things like adaptive learning software, socio emotional learning, biofeedback, wearables.
Speaker 3: And then there's another movement called precision education. It wants
Speaker 3: to scan your DNA. But these are always the private
Speaker 3: companies will basically blur the lines between a public, government
Speaker 3: funded school and basically a private marketing venture.
Speaker 2: Wow. Okay, so this is like the new phase. Right,
Speaker 2: So what Charlotte Iserbit wrote about was kind of dated
Speaker 2: because that's an older book, and you're saying that this
Speaker 2: is an update to that, like the new phase of
Speaker 2: where they've where they've taken this stuff now, right, because
Speaker 2: she's writing about how skull and bones secret societies out
Speaker 2: of Yale, right, Cia, they had a big role in
Speaker 2: this stuff back in the day, and now it's moving
Speaker 2: over into the technocratic phase of things, right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, But I would say that it actually is just
Speaker 3: a continuation of the stuff that she talked about. And
Speaker 3: you know, one of the things that kind of happened
Speaker 3: later after the deliberate dumbing down of America was relatively
Speaker 3: popular entirely, but especially in the conspiracy crowd, right, But
Speaker 3: you know, when she started talking about the charter schools,
Speaker 3: there was a lot of people that kind of didn't
Speaker 3: like that, and so that's part of the reason why,
Speaker 3: you know, it wasn't part of the deliberate comming down,
Speaker 3: but the updated reprint, she basically said, this is the
Speaker 3: next thing to look out for, and that was how
Speaker 3: it came on my radar. And actually it ties into
Speaker 3: something that she called it was Project Best, and this
Speaker 3: is why she got fired from the Department of Education.
Speaker 3: Basically she leaked the documents and Project Best was called
Speaker 3: Better Education Skills through Technology. It was part of the
Speaker 3: Reagan Private Sector Initiative, which was in charge of public
Speaker 3: private partnerships, and basically she found that it was a
Speaker 3: plan to privatize the schools through public private partnerships facilitated
Speaker 3: through technology companies that would use the adaptive learning software
Speaker 3: or at the time it was basically the skinner box. Okay,
Speaker 3: so operating conditioning stuff. So. And at the time THH.
Speaker 3: Bell was the Secretary of Education. Okay, well, he hands
Speaker 3: it off to somebody called Bill Bennett. Okay, Secretary of
Speaker 3: Education Bill benn.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 3: He set up this company called K twelve, Inc. And
Speaker 3: it's a virtual online charter school. It's one of the
Speaker 3: largest virtual online charter schools. There are the current Secretary
Speaker 3: of Education, Betsy de Vos. She also was a large
Speaker 3: investor in this company. Peter Field, who was Builderberg Group
Speaker 3: was the speech writer for Bill Bennett and Peter Fiel.
Speaker 3: I have Foya documents to show that he met privately
Speaker 3: with DeVos during her first education tour to discuss we
Speaker 3: don't know, but he is also invested in the Adaptive
Speaker 3: Learning software, which is a fancy name for the digital
Speaker 3: version of Skinner's Skinner Box, and some of those companies
Speaker 3: he's either invested in Clever or Newton K N E
Speaker 3: W T. And I can't can't remember which one. He
Speaker 3: might be both actually, but it's one or the other
Speaker 3: the pre citations in my book. So basically, what you're
Speaker 3: in all of these companies are getting a big injection
Speaker 3: of CARES money right now, that's basically the stimulus money.
Speaker 3: And so you know it's a direct line of companies
Speaker 3: and people from Project Best, which which Charlotte. So I
Speaker 3: would say it's pretty much in line with what she
Speaker 3: talked about. If I updated something, it would be my
Speaker 3: look at the actual technology and the eugenics part and
Speaker 3: the transhumanist stuff. That would be the part that I
Speaker 3: added to it.
Speaker 2: So go into that. What's your update in that in
Speaker 2: that arena?
Speaker 3: So basically it's on a scale, you know, gradual scale.
Speaker 3: Uh you know, incremental push towards brain computer interfaces. Okay,
Speaker 3: so the adaptive learning software is the first part. Okay.
Speaker 3: Basically with the adaptive learning software is it's based on
Speaker 3: like I said, the Skinner box case of be of
Speaker 3: Skinny is Harbard psychology professor, and you know he uses
Speaker 3: it's basically pav lobs dog stuff. It's fancy term for it.
Speaker 3: He's got four quadrants instead of two, et cetera. Uh
Speaker 3: So you know there's a stimulus and a response. Okay,
Speaker 3: natural stimulus for Fido is salivation or I'm sorry, it's
Speaker 3: a natural response to the natural stimulus of the foo. Okay.
Speaker 3: If you associate something artificial with the food, it's like
Speaker 3: a bell. You can get the dog to salivate in
Speaker 3: response to the bell stimulus.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 3: So basically take that concept and put it on more
Speaker 3: complex algorithms, make the stimulus the lesson, make the response
Speaker 3: to student outcome, put it on a machine. Skinner had
Speaker 3: analog stuff, so he didn't have digital windows and computers.
Speaker 3: Yet what you had was you know, like years and wheels.
Speaker 3: Now you remember the old view Masters when we were kids,
Speaker 3: said the Disney stuff on it so you know, it's
Speaker 3: got some pictures in it, and you push this button
Speaker 3: and it turns the wheel and you see a different picture.
Speaker 3: So instead of pictures on a wheel, put questions on
Speaker 3: a real tape. Might be multiple choice, might be short answer.
Speaker 3: It can only go one way. You turn the gear,
Speaker 3: you describe your answer response to the stimulus, and then
Speaker 3: based on how well you do, it might give you
Speaker 3: a more challenging curriculum next, or it might remediate you. Okay,
Speaker 3: you actually had some that were designed to dispense chocolate
Speaker 3: if you've got a correct answer, so that they actually
Speaker 3: wanted to add the reward and punishment system to it.
Speaker 3: You take that, you change the gears and the wheels
Speaker 3: and the tape and put it on digital windows. You
Speaker 3: got adaptive learning software. The idea is that it personalizes
Speaker 3: your learning by tracking your stimulus response algorithms. Right, and
Speaker 3: so in order to personalize that, it's basically data mining
Speaker 3: the thinking part of your brain. Well. To supplement that,
Speaker 3: they've got something called socio emotional learning. So this is
Speaker 3: where we're going to data mind the feeling part of you.
Speaker 3: They're gonna use these galvanic skin response monitors that were
Speaker 3: funded by Bill Gates, or they're going to use something
Speaker 3: called Effectiva, which can use look at EEG's or facial
Speaker 3: recognition brain codes a Chinese company. It puts little headbands
Speaker 3: on you and it measures your EEG. This is telling
Speaker 3: the teachers are you paying attention? Do you like the lesson?
Speaker 3: Do you not like it? Things like that, and so
Speaker 3: that's the feeling part. Then the third part is what
Speaker 3: I mentioned is the precision education where they want to
Speaker 3: look at your DNA and then before you even get
Speaker 3: on the adaptive learning or the socio emotional learning, they
Speaker 3: want to say, well, your DNA says you're really gonna
Speaker 3: go X far. So you know, we're all gonna give
Speaker 3: you the remedial program to begin with. We're not gonna
Speaker 3: spend money on that other one, right because.
Speaker 2: You're stay in that short bus class. You're gonna be
Speaker 2: running the short bus, but you're not gonna be riding
Speaker 2: the bus. Because is this all at home? Is this
Speaker 2: like I mean, is this for a class room or
Speaker 2: other classrooms going away?
Speaker 3: The classrooms are going away, dude, because I know that
Speaker 3: they're not letting us go back anytime soon.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 3: And you know if we do like this is what
Speaker 3: I think that if they let us go back, you know,
Speaker 3: if we can't, we can't push back against all this stuff.
Speaker 3: They're they're gonna basically alternate days and you'll only come
Speaker 3: to class basically for labs and things that you'd have
Speaker 3: to be hands on in person for. So anything else
Speaker 3: that you can read, write, or you know, any other
Speaker 3: exercises you can do, it would have been on paper
Speaker 3: and pan or digit otherwise digitally. They're going to do that,
Speaker 3: basically do what they call distance learning online.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, I had a when I read Jacques Attalie
Speaker 2: and my Global Elite book series. He said in his
Speaker 2: book that there would be no more classrooms, but basically
Speaker 2: maybe not right now, but in the near future, there
Speaker 2: would be basically just a little bitchy robot rolling around
Speaker 2: your house bitching at you, and that little bitch bot
Speaker 2: would be teaching you everything as well as being your
Speaker 2: may and your butler and who knows what else, probably
Speaker 2: something worse. But it's gonna be educating your kids too,
Speaker 2: So you're gonna have a little bitch bot teaching your
Speaker 2: kids who knows what, brainwashing your kids. And I mean
Speaker 2: he was basically saying that there would be no more classrooms.
Speaker 2: You're not gonna go to some university or some school.
Speaker 2: You're just gonna be sitting in your home, you know,
Speaker 2: home learning, distance education for everybody. And I noticed when
Speaker 2: I was doing graduate work a few years ago, they
Speaker 2: were already implementing that in the university. They were like,
Speaker 2: you know, phasing out people actually going to classes, and
Speaker 2: they were constantly encouraging people just sign up online, just
Speaker 2: take this class online. Just do it online. Don't even
Speaker 2: do the you know, the traditional model of classes.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and that that goes along with something called competency
Speaker 3: based education. Okay, so the traditional model of school is basically, well,
Speaker 3: we largely use semesters. Okay, it might be sixteen weeks,
Speaker 3: you might be blocked, might be you know, eight periods whatever,
Speaker 3: but you had semesters, and by the time you get
Speaker 3: semester ended, you had to have all of your stuff
Speaker 3: completed and relatively mastered at an academic level. So competency
Speaker 3: based education says basically two things. One is that you know, uh,
Speaker 3: based on all the stuff I just told you about
Speaker 3: data mining and algorithms, right, some people just let them
Speaker 3: get competent. Don't worry about them getting really smarter. Or nothing.
Speaker 3: Just let them get good enough to pull some gears,
Speaker 3: push some buttons, you know, and do their you know,
Speaker 3: mop some floors, whatever it might be. The other one
Speaker 3: is that you know, some people require different amounts of
Speaker 3: time for their competence, right, and so what they want
Speaker 3: to do is eliminate the semester period, okay. And so
Speaker 3: what that means is maybe you take a little bit longer,
Speaker 3: maybe you take maybe you're faster, right, maybe you finish
Speaker 3: it quickly. And this is where they're talking about it's personalized.
Speaker 3: It's personalized. This is the pitch that they give for
Speaker 3: all of it. In addition to you know, the data
Speaker 3: mining of the other technologies, the CBE competency based education
Speaker 3: is saying that that basically, you know, take your time, okay.
Speaker 3: And so it's on something called subscription basis. Well, who
Speaker 3: can do a subscription basis? It's not a building because look,
Speaker 3: if we've got limited amounts of classes, you know, with
Speaker 3: limited amounts of seats, and you want to take three years,
Speaker 3: you can't be in here for we want to get
Speaker 3: a new thirty people in this room or whatever it
Speaker 3: might be. So the CBE facilitates that and the distance
Speaker 3: learning facilitates the CBE, and they're basically encouraging it now
Speaker 3: because look, I argued, I'm trying to you know, I'm
Speaker 3: a teacher and I'm trying to do what I can
Speaker 3: to at least slow this stuff down, you know, And
Speaker 3: I'm I'm trying to tell the department that, look, let's
Speaker 3: have let's have synchronous virtual if we if we have
Speaker 3: to do distance, let's have synchronous like me and you
Speaker 3: are doing right now, Jay, Like the students would have
Speaker 3: to all be logged in and I do get my
Speaker 3: let you know, I have hiteboard back here or something,
Speaker 3: questions and you know, same exact model, except you know,
Speaker 3: we're just through through a screen until hopefully until you
Speaker 3: get back. They say no, everybody wants to say no, no,
Speaker 3: just make it easier on the kids, let them, let
Speaker 3: them take their time, and let them just you know,
Speaker 3: they want to turn it in late, turning late. They
Speaker 3: want to turn it in early, turn in early. So
Speaker 3: the problem with that, though, is this, I can't keep
Speaker 3: up with that, like you know what I mean, Like,
Speaker 3: you know, if I had stuff turned in on time,
Speaker 3: I know, okay, I gotta get this many papers created
Speaker 3: by the end of the next two weeks before the
Speaker 3: next papers come in, and I can manage the flow.
Speaker 3: I got people turning it extra stuff. I got people
Speaker 3: turning it like, I mean, it's constant flow. And some kids,
Speaker 3: you know, they're night ourls. They want questions midnight. I
Speaker 3: can't answer questions at midnight. So the adaptive learning software
Speaker 3: is right, also goes along with it, because that's what's
Speaker 3: going to facilitate twenty four hour instant feedback at your.
Speaker 2: Wow. But I'm sure they're selling that like that's a
Speaker 2: good thing, Like, oh, it's adaptive and so it's going
Speaker 2: to help you learn better and quicker and all this stuff.
Speaker 2: But I mean this is all just totally for control.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's the thing is that I think they
Speaker 2: had to they I think my view is that they
Speaker 2: did a public education thing for a long time so
Speaker 2: that then they could turn around and privatize everything. Right,
Speaker 2: you see this with pretty much everything else, Like they'll
Speaker 2: do a public phase quickly talks about this with the
Speaker 2: banking phases, they'll do like a phase of FDR socializing things,
Speaker 2: and then they'll privatize it and then they'll go back
Speaker 2: to the socializing and they'll privatize. It's like this back
Speaker 2: and forth step that they do for more and more control.
Speaker 2: So I'm not disagreeing with the thesis of your book, but
Speaker 2: why don't we step back a little bit and because
Speaker 2: you mentioned some interesting philosophy that I do take interest
Speaker 2: in here. You mentioned the natural law, metaphysics, Mortimer Adler's
Speaker 2: approach to the Great Books and C. S. Lewis uh
Speaker 2: And then we want to get to the Daoist stuff,
Speaker 2: because that's your that's your title you use is Dallas professor.
Speaker 2: How do you how was there connection to to Taoism
Speaker 2: and the logos here? There's actually a famous Orthodox book
Speaker 2: by saraphrom Rose, The Dow of Christ, where he connects
Speaker 2: the logos to the doll. But can you talk a
Speaker 2: little bit about that.
Speaker 3: I can do my best, you could probably do better,
Speaker 3: but I doubt that. What thing is?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sure, I'm sure you're good.
Speaker 3: Uh So, I mean, I know the one is that
Speaker 3: you correct me if I'm wrong, you know, But in
Speaker 3: I believe the Chinese interpretation is in the beginning was
Speaker 3: the dow. So, I mean, that's one of the first
Speaker 3: literal ways. But you know I should say that before
Speaker 3: I went through different phases. Uh, I went through kind
Speaker 3: of a New Age fate. I went through a couple
Speaker 3: of New Age phases. Okay. And I was really into
Speaker 3: the e ching and that's not Dallas.
Speaker 2: I right, I never went that route. So you can
Speaker 2: you can tell me about that stuff, okay.
Speaker 3: Okay. So so with so so with Dallas and you know, okay,
Speaker 3: so with the eaching, you've got like show my tattoos.
Speaker 3: When I did this because I'm a martial artist as well.
Speaker 2: I watched that show Lost, remember Lost, and they had
Speaker 2: the eaching that was the Dharma project.
Speaker 3: I've never seen a lot of Lost.
Speaker 2: Okay, you didn't miss anything, but go ahead.
Speaker 3: Uh so. So so that's so, it's so yeah, So
Speaker 3: the Dallas Professor is a couple of things. I had
Speaker 3: a friend that used to say he was into Bruce
Speaker 3: Lee and he was like, that's you. You're the Dallas
Speaker 3: You're the Dallas Priest. And I was like, you know
Speaker 3: that he's the one that got me into the ea ching.
Speaker 3: Uh And then I'm into martial arts still, and then
Speaker 3: you know it worked for you know the Christian things.
Speaker 3: I was like, okay, I like this, you know, and
Speaker 3: then you know, the idea of the low the logie.
Speaker 3: You know, there there is truth in the dow, in
Speaker 3: the eaching, and and you know, even the New Age stuff,
Speaker 3: you know it might come to a wrong conclusion. There's
Speaker 3: lots of truth in that. So so I also want
Speaker 3: to use the Dallas Professor as a bridge. You know,
Speaker 3: not each you medical like, you know, everything's the same,
Speaker 3: but in building a bridge from the log yeah, and
Speaker 3: so so with the EA ching. You know, the idea
Speaker 3: is this, if you ever seen the Yin yang, the
Speaker 3: ideas you know that the universe is created of two
Speaker 3: opposing forces is you know, kind of dialectical hegelion. It's
Speaker 3: the idea of uh. You know, Yin is anything that's weak, soft, passive,
Speaker 3: et cetera. Yang is anything it's hard, strong, active, Okay, right, uh.
Speaker 3: And in martial arts, you know there's soft styles based
Speaker 3: on yin and then there's hard styles based on yong. Okay.
Speaker 3: And neither principle is necessarily right or wrong. You can
Speaker 3: be using for different things, but underneath it all, there's
Speaker 3: there is an understanding that there is an order to nature.
Speaker 3: So around the yin yang you'll have eight elements. Okay,
Speaker 3: there's three side lines that's having three broken lines as Earth.
Speaker 3: Then there's I won't explain that, the combinations, but it's
Speaker 3: the rest is fire, water, uh, wind, thunder lake and mount.
Speaker 2: Right the magic, the gathering stuff right throwing down them
Speaker 2: cards win fire, magic may just I'm just just you
Speaker 2: know what's.
Speaker 3: Funny is I had a card system of it, like
Speaker 3: it was. It was cool. I still have it. It's
Speaker 3: it's so it had visual So so each of these you're.
Speaker 2: Like the only you're the only magic the gathering dude
Speaker 2: who fights in the octagon. I can tell you that
Speaker 2: right now.
Speaker 3: Yea, no magic the gathering though, but uh and I
Speaker 3: never no, it's all good. So so with those with
Speaker 3: those cards or okay, so the cards have images and
Speaker 3: they represent the symbol like what it means Heaven interacting
Speaker 3: with Earth or water interest something like that. So it
Speaker 3: helps you visualize and meditating stuff like that. But they
Speaker 3: used to just cast these yarrow stocks to get like
Speaker 3: what they call divination. So what's what's interesting about it
Speaker 3: is there's a there's a rational component, there's an anti
Speaker 3: rational component. So the rational component literally becomes a basis
Speaker 3: for binary code. As a German mathematician by the name
Speaker 3: of Ludwig Vond something I always forget it, but he
Speaker 3: basically took the idea of broken lines and slide lines
Speaker 3: and just made zeros and ones. And that's the concept
Speaker 3: of binary code, and that you can basically express anything
Speaker 3: with bionary. That's the rational component. The non rational or
Speaker 3: mystical component is you could cast those stalks, you could
Speaker 3: get the symbol of whatever, the mountain and lake, and
Speaker 3: you could sit there and there's a little oracle poem
Speaker 3: that goes and that you meditate on that, you know,
Speaker 3: based on what your question is, what should I do
Speaker 3: with my marriage or my money or something, and then
Speaker 3: it's supposed to give you this this on this this
Speaker 3: secret massacre.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the characteristic universalis right. That's the lib Nets the
Speaker 2: philosopher leib Nets looked to the I chain to help
Speaker 2: develop this idea of a universal characteristic language that would
Speaker 2: later be influential on computers.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, And you know, I sometimes think of you know,
Speaker 3: because I teach rhetoric. I've I've tried to come up
Speaker 3: with ways that it parallels, you know, Aristotelian logic, which
Speaker 3: has to have a subject, you know, anything coherent has
Speaker 3: to have a subject. In a predicit or it has
Speaker 3: to have reasoning and evidence, it has to have general
Speaker 3: and specific, it has to have right every otherwise it's
Speaker 3: just an abstraction or it's just a data point, right,
Speaker 3: And so for for meaning to come there is so
Speaker 3: you know, that's kind of a digression. Uh, but I
Speaker 3: I've been I've wanted to, and one of these days,
Speaker 3: I hope I will write an article called uh Bruce
Speaker 3: Lee or a gee kund argument against post modernism, and
Speaker 3: so brucely he wrote one of one of the most
Speaker 3: famous things he wrote was the Dow of g kun do. Okay,
Speaker 3: what it means is the dow is the way and
Speaker 3: then ge kuhn basically is the intercepting fish. It was
Speaker 3: intercepting fist. It's a type of technique. It's a stop.
Speaker 3: It's it's not important to what I want to make here.
Speaker 3: The last word is dough, which is the way. So
Speaker 3: if you take that literal transition to English, it's the
Speaker 3: way of the intercepting fist of the way, or it's
Speaker 3: the way of the way of the intercepting fists. And
Speaker 3: it's like, why are there two ways in it? Because
Speaker 3: dow is like logos, the order of the universe and
Speaker 3: Doe is like your individual expression of it. Bruce was
Speaker 3: all about saying breaking tradition and classical tradition with kung
Speaker 3: fu and saying, look, you don't have to just do
Speaker 3: it this one way. You could mix it with boxing.
Speaker 3: And he was largely the founding father of mixed martial
Speaker 3: arts because he was always mixing the style the people. Yeah,
Speaker 3: Bruce Lee, Yeah, you know, he never actually fought or anything,
Speaker 3: but you know he was his philosophy, his Brusley's fighting
Speaker 3: message was very influential, and he was a philosopher by
Speaker 3: the way. He was into Spinoza Washington State. He was
Speaker 3: like he was.
Speaker 2: He was a yeah, yeah, interesting, see you're teaching me.
Speaker 3: Okay, you would be interested just to read the philosophy section. No, no,
Speaker 3: he's got a philosophy section. And you probably have just
Speaker 3: wonder just reading that part. Oh dude, did I did
Speaker 3: it go out?
Speaker 2: Did you just for a second there, What were you
Speaker 2: saying about philosophy?
Speaker 3: I was I was just saying that, you know, you
Speaker 3: would you would be interested to read his doll jeep
Speaker 3: wundo if you can get your hands on it. It's
Speaker 3: a quickly not necessarily there's a bunch of fighting uh
Speaker 3: manuals in their diagnams. But the first small section is
Speaker 3: his philosophy relates. But so what he's saying is this,
Speaker 3: Bruce was all about you can do your own thing,
Speaker 3: you know, and tall guys gonna do stuff different than
Speaker 3: the short guy. And that makes sense. But it makes
Speaker 3: sense because they're using the natural presuppositional order of their body.
Speaker 3: There's a natural order to it. That's the doll part.
Speaker 3: Bruce said, you can't just do whatever you want to
Speaker 3: say that's my style because I made it up. It
Speaker 3: should it has to actually align with the physics and
Speaker 3: the geometry of the human body relative to leverage and
Speaker 3: distancing and speed. Right, And so it's still as much
Speaker 3: as he was, you know, very you know, I guess
Speaker 3: in some ways you might say postmodern because he was
Speaker 3: all about mixing everything together. He still was very classical
Speaker 3: in the sense that there is and there is some
Speaker 3: basic a priori metaphysical principles to fighting that everybody is
Speaker 3: going to have to follow, regardless of how creative you
Speaker 3: want to get.
Speaker 2: That's interesting. Yeah, I've never even thought about that. Uh
Speaker 2: so is the five finger death punch that Beatrix Kiddo
Speaker 2: does to kill Bill. Is that real or not?
Speaker 3: I don't. You know, there might be some esoteric people
Speaker 3: that will tell you, but I've never seen anything like that.
Speaker 2: You see those YouTube videos of like shollling masters like
Speaker 2: doing this and people fall over like Benny hen or something.
Speaker 3: Oh man, some of that stuff just totally fake stuff.
Speaker 3: I want to say, it's the omen right, here's the
Speaker 3: one thing. I can't remember the guy. But you know,
Speaker 3: let's put it this way. Most of the people that
Speaker 3: are really into that stuff, they don't spark a lot.
Speaker 3: They don't like getting punched in the face, you know
Speaker 3: what I mean. It's up a bunch of a bunch
Speaker 3: of conn right, A little bit a little bit some
Speaker 3: of them. You know, I don't want to say there's
Speaker 3: nothing to cheat or my you know, over matter.
Speaker 2: But well, I watched a bunch of videos talking about
Speaker 2: how in the martial arts world there's a lot of conment.
Speaker 2: So I don't know, those videos made a good argument
Speaker 2: that there's a lot of like, uh, the story of
Speaker 2: Frank Duke's remember the story is that is that made up?
Speaker 2: Do you think he's making all that stuff up?
Speaker 3: It's pretty verifiable that he's making it all he's contradicted himself.
Speaker 3: He said things about his Kuma te It was like
Speaker 3: if he fought that many people's like that, you couldn't
Speaker 3: fit it into that many days, like even the number
Speaker 3: of times, you know, minutes in a day, and you
Speaker 3: couldn't do it. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I beat up as many dudes as there are minutes
Speaker 2: in a day.
Speaker 4: Yeah, you know, I'm not into beating people up or whatever,
Speaker 4: but it is, uh, what you get out of getting
Speaker 4: punched in the face and being in that is does
Speaker 4: teach you about natural law?
Speaker 3: Because you can't. I mean maybe some people do, but
Speaker 3: I don't know how you can lie to yourself after
Speaker 3: you get in the face. You know what, you know what?
Speaker 3: You got punched in the face, right, so it teaches
Speaker 3: you that, right.
Speaker 2: Well, let's bring it back to philosophy.
Speaker 3: So now, sometimes what did you have to submit to?
Speaker 2: What got you looking at natural law? Ten Commandments, Old Testament?
Speaker 2: How did that tie into this?
Speaker 3: So I so natural law I kind of pulled in
Speaker 3: as basically the government its expression in our constitutional government
Speaker 3: read it didn't go natural law old testing necessarily, although
Speaker 3: obviously those conds that do derived from that. But I
Speaker 3: was largely trying to synthesize some system of a priori
Speaker 3: metaphysics with or or grounded in how we see it
Speaker 3: expressed in the Bill of Rights basically, right, and so
Speaker 3: this idea of you know, property, self defense expression, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but and you see that that's tied to you
Speaker 2: think the trust the trivium actually is intimately connected to that,
Speaker 2: you think.
Speaker 3: Well, I I found that it was the the method
Speaker 3: that Christians used to teach not just the philosophy but
Speaker 3: also the civics right during the time of the Apostolic
Speaker 3: Fathers and things like that, or not that they wouldn't
Speaker 3: call it the trivium yet, but you know, some people
Speaker 3: would have said it goes back to Isocrates and play.
Speaker 2: Yeah, ancient pedagogy, right.
Speaker 3: So well, but the idea of using grammar, logic and
Speaker 3: rhetoric and that there is truth, that the names you
Speaker 3: give to the categories of reality actually means something, right,
Speaker 3: And so you know, I find that to be maybe
Speaker 3: implicit in the trivian in the ways that it has
Speaker 3: always been used, whether you know, before Christians after.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, modern philosophy is all predicated on there being
Speaker 2: no metaphysics. So for the most part, I mean ninety
Speaker 2: five percent of it is predicated on that. So I
Speaker 2: think you're stumbled onto one of the key components of
Speaker 2: what I've tried to stress for a long time, which
Speaker 2: is that there's absolutely a priori assumptions about metaphysics in
Speaker 2: anybody's worldview, because it's impossible, it's impossible to have a view,
Speaker 2: even if your view is anti metaphysics, that's still a
Speaker 2: version of metaphysics. There's no way to have a completely neutral,
Speaker 2: completely agnostic position. It's just not possible when people trick
Speaker 2: themselves into thinking that they can have these kinds of views.
Speaker 2: So you said in your email that you were curious
Speaker 2: to hear my thoughts on your historical analysis, which is
Speaker 2: why I'm asking those questions. And yeah, I think this
Speaker 2: is really this is fascinating what you're saying. I never
Speaker 2: would have thought to tie it into the world of
Speaker 2: martial arts and all that, but yeah, I mean what
Speaker 2: we see is that all over this world, you know,
Speaker 2: really operates at whatever branch or level of reality that
Speaker 2: we're talking about, it all operates on consistent patterns and principles.
Speaker 2: And that would be the true. That would be true
Speaker 2: for warfare as much as for education, as much as
Speaker 2: for debate, right, I do a lot of debates. Debate
Speaker 2: works on the same principles like you might find in
Speaker 2: the octagon that's never been in the octagon. But I
Speaker 2: do know how to win a debate. So what's next.
Speaker 2: Let's see, let's talk about tell us about the what's
Speaker 2: the argumentation of the book? Like, is it like a
Speaker 2: giant book? Is it a short book. I've not read
Speaker 2: the book, so I don't know what's in there yet.
Speaker 2: I do look forward to reading the book. You piqued
Speaker 2: my interest. But take us through the flow of the book,
Speaker 2: if you would, Okay.
Speaker 3: So I mean basically it is two components. One is
Speaker 3: I guess you could say three or maybe you can
Speaker 3: say four. Now I sound unclear. So there's two big components.
Speaker 3: One is the privatization corporatization of education. We kind of
Speaker 3: touched on that. And the second one is how big
Speaker 3: tech is going to facilitate that and move us towards
Speaker 3: something called transhumanism or posthumanism. Okay, And so it basically
Speaker 3: walks through Well I should I should have mentioned, you know,
Speaker 3: you said earlier about how they privatize. They go big
Speaker 3: government first in order to privatize later. That was basically
Speaker 3: what I had said about. I used the Hegeleyan dialectic
Speaker 3: to say, you know, because the reason why my department
Speaker 3: got shut down was it was ninety percent funded by
Speaker 3: federal funds, and we couldn't get federal funds because we
Speaker 3: can't get your federal funds if you don't pass a
Speaker 3: state budget. Well, if we had had ninety percent of
Speaker 3: our money come from thee we could have you know,
Speaker 3: we could have done our own thing. So you know,
Speaker 3: you make them dependent on the government, then later you
Speaker 3: can go, oh you take that away. Yeah, and then
Speaker 3: they come in right, uh, and then your idea about
Speaker 3: you know how that's the cycle. You know, that's a
Speaker 3: back and forth cycle. That's something else I talked about recently,
Speaker 3: which is, you know, some people called disaster capitalism or
Speaker 3: creative destruction, which Joseph Stumper called his idea of economics. Okay,
Speaker 3: but I walked through that, and then I look at
Speaker 3: how that is geared into changing academics to workforce training, okay,
Speaker 3: and I talk about how the different technologies will facilitate
Speaker 3: that through the data mining of the thinking with the
Speaker 3: dept of Learning, software feeling with socio emotional learning, and
Speaker 3: then basically the body, the genetics with precision education, and
Speaker 3: you might find it interesting, and I see that that
Speaker 3: has an analog with right your ethos, logos, pathhouse, right,
Speaker 3: you're will, you're you're feeling, and you're thinking. Okay, And
Speaker 3: then after that, basically they'll take all of that data,
Speaker 3: feed it into machine learning and deep learning to build AI.
Speaker 3: And when I can teach you and learn faster than
Speaker 3: than the student and the teacher combined, then we'll have
Speaker 3: to merge with it, like like Elon Musk says, you'll
Speaker 3: have to get his neural link, you know. And that's
Speaker 3: why he's doing it, because you know, he's trying to
Speaker 3: take care of he doesn't, you know, don't just not
Speaker 3: build the stuff that's gonna take over he's you know,
Speaker 3: we'll build this other thing and it'll all be great
Speaker 3: as if it's not the goal. So that's that's where
Speaker 3: the book ends. And then the solutions has to do
Speaker 3: with well, there's five points. One is you know, local control,
Speaker 3: public control. That means, you know, keep public separate from private,
Speaker 3: keep corporate separate from government. You know. The second one
Speaker 3: was abolished the psychological method of conditioning as a pedagogy
Speaker 3: as a philosophy of education. The third was student data privacy,
Speaker 3: to the extent that you have to actually use these
Speaker 3: technologies or any kind. I mean, we're using TEX so
Speaker 3: I'm not a lud height necessarily I might become one,
Speaker 3: if you know, if they keep going in this other direction.
Speaker 2: Can be dressed so like an Amish dude.
Speaker 3: I'll dig a dirt hole and sit in. And my
Speaker 3: friend used to say, what do you want me to
Speaker 3: live in a dirt hole? You know, if the option is,
Speaker 3: you know, some of the stuff I talked about and
Speaker 3: my book dirt hole, please, I'll take a dirt hole please.
Speaker 3: So uh then then the last you have to do
Speaker 3: with the metaphysics, so one is you know, actually looking
Speaker 3: at the philosophy of metaphysics, you know, and you know,
Speaker 3: I'm happy to have a debate about that in the
Speaker 3: academic sphere. At least let's talk about it instead of
Speaker 3: doing deconstructionism and skepticism and phenomenology and performance identity and
Speaker 3: write everything. It's anti logos literally right when they call
Speaker 3: the deconstruction and you know, they say you're logo centric,
Speaker 3: like that's some kind of pejorative or something, and and
Speaker 3: and then grounded and the method for that would be
Speaker 3: classical trivium, right, because you know the trivian presupposed is
Speaker 3: look that if you name something, that the logic follows
Speaker 3: based on the name you gave it, Meaning there is
Speaker 3: a real relationship between the name you give something, uh,
Speaker 3: and what's that and the object that it refers to,
Speaker 3: the thing in itself? Right, it's not just nominalism, right,
Speaker 3: Otherwise you know the low the logic part can be
Speaker 3: ad hoc. Okay, And so that that's that's how I
Speaker 3: that's how I saw that go to air. But that's
Speaker 3: that's the arc of the book. It's about three hundred
Speaker 3: and fifty pages, and then there's another one hundred some
Speaker 3: pages of citations, a couple of diagrams, stuff like that.
Speaker 2: So let's back up to the genetics DNA part. How
Speaker 2: does this gonna play This sounds like gatica. How is
Speaker 2: this going to play into it?
Speaker 3: Okay? So obviously this is the eugenics part. This is
Speaker 3: this is the beginning of the eugens you know, I
Speaker 3: see you know, so eugenics used to have this part
Speaker 3: would be called race hygiene. There was also mental hygiene,
Speaker 3: and you could put that under the category of the
Speaker 3: adaptive learning software and the social emotional learning stuff. Okay,
Speaker 3: but it basically comes out of the Bell Curve stuff.
Speaker 3: It largely refers to IQ. There's a guy named Robert Kloman,
Speaker 3: and he wants to give you quote a learning chip
Speaker 3: that basically tells you what your you know, IQ propensity
Speaker 3: is maybe do you have learning disabilities? And he's gonna
Speaker 3: cap you based on that. Well, Robert Kloman is just
Speaker 3: one of many people cited in the Bell Curve, Okay.
Speaker 3: And you know, if you've ever actually read the Bell
Speaker 3: Curve or you ever just skimmed through the citation, there's
Speaker 3: a big there's a big host of people there that
Speaker 3: not only basically cite the old eugenic statistics, but I
Speaker 3: mean they basically say stuff like you should sterilize black people,
Speaker 3: you should sterilize brown people, et cetera. Uh. And so
Speaker 3: that's literally the data that the stuff is based on,
Speaker 3: or it's certainly the philosophy that it's based on. So
Speaker 3: h it ties it. So where's the corporate aspect come in?
Speaker 3: How does the precision education come to? Well, the way
Speaker 3: that they're refining those algorithms is basically through companies like
Speaker 3: twenty three in me, right, so when you go to
Speaker 3: twenty three and me, you know, when you give them
Speaker 3: your DNA, they do your little ethnic lineage or whatever.
Speaker 3: They also have other things that if you've ever seen commercials,
Speaker 3: they're like, oh, they've got new tests for this disease
Speaker 3: and that disease, and one of them has to do
Speaker 3: with IQ okay. And you know if you look at
Speaker 3: if you actually look at what they find and what
Speaker 3: people you know, it's not the ratio or the correlation
Speaker 3: or probability is not that high, okay. And what I
Speaker 3: mean is this this gets us back to the problem
Speaker 3: of empiricism. All this stuff is based on induction, which
Speaker 3: is based basically correlation. If you look at stuff like
Speaker 3: skin color and hair and eye color, you know that
Speaker 3: stuff's pretty easy. There's almost you know, there's a very
Speaker 3: high correlation between how you can predict it. You know.
Speaker 3: So like Mendel did this thing with the p's. You know,
Speaker 3: if you ever remember the Punnett square, right, you had
Speaker 3: a different little square with big letter, little letter the
Speaker 3: different genes and oh, this is the this is the
Speaker 3: percentage or the rate at which these genes will be
Speaker 3: passed with certain phenotypes. They can do that pretty accurate.
Speaker 3: Okay with IQ, I A would get the number mixed up.
Speaker 3: It's either fifty or five hundred. Either ones big to
Speaker 3: me that they say refer to your genetic IQ. And
Speaker 3: then the percentage of the efficacy it's not ninety percent,
Speaker 3: like you know, some of that stuff is can be
Speaker 3: upwards to ninety percent. Some of this other stuff is
Speaker 3: in the fifties, sixties, forties, right, you know IQ was
Speaker 3: in that range. So you know, I know there's some
Speaker 3: people that have strong feelings, but I'm not saying that.
Speaker 3: You know, there's no physiological capacity to intelligence. Obviously there's
Speaker 3: people on the spectrum and you can have brain damage.
Speaker 3: You're not saying that, But you know what they kind
Speaker 3: of like with some of the other models we've been
Speaker 3: seeing lately. I know you like to be careful about
Speaker 3: what's your reference on your show. People know what I'm
Speaker 3: talking about, right, Those models can be very inaccurate and
Speaker 3: they might change right in the meantime, they've been treating
Speaker 3: you based on an inaccurate model. So so that's that's
Speaker 3: the DNA precision ed park.
Speaker 2: Wow. So they would have basically uh stored in terms
Speaker 2: of the data on you what your propensities and possibilities
Speaker 2: and potentialities are from the outset, and that would determine
Speaker 2: the specific feedback loop that they put you into. Is
Speaker 2: that what you're saying.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, not just for you know, so it
Speaker 3: was right for workforce training.
Speaker 2: Oh, this is education for anything.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and also for pre crime and things like that.
Speaker 3: So you know, they got to discipline you while you're
Speaker 3: in school. So one of the things that you have.
Speaker 2: A propensity to be a damn thief?
Speaker 3: Yeah, you act up.
Speaker 2: Horses. You are going to be stealing crayons and.
Speaker 3: Ship or jay. You're too much of a class clown.
Speaker 3: You can't. We can't give you the academic route. You're
Speaker 3: cracking too many jokes.
Speaker 2: I was clown. I won. Yes, I was clown.
Speaker 3: I was too. I was also class uh, suspensions and
Speaker 3: other stuff not good in school until I went to college.
Speaker 2: Interesting.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, I was gonna mention real quick, was that?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: So with through the public private partnerships, what I saw
Speaker 3: was when you see some of these counsels, it's like, well,
Speaker 3: there was a mental health counselor on here, there was
Speaker 3: a there was a health and Human services director, or
Speaker 3: there's criminal justice person or you know, in addition to
Speaker 3: work for the Chamber of Commerce. And you're going like, oh,
Speaker 3: so they're going to take all the data from the
Speaker 3: student learning and they're going to use it not just
Speaker 3: for education meaning workforce training, they're going to use it
Speaker 3: for health care, and they're going to use it for
Speaker 3: criminal justice basically pre crime and uh, you know, eugenics, right,
Speaker 3: I mean that's you know, you're talking about big data
Speaker 3: controlling your health. Yeah, yeah, go ahead, Sorry, no.
Speaker 2: It's okay. We got a statement from Conway. He sends
Speaker 2: ten dollars. He says, if you could read only one
Speaker 2: book on the new world order, technocracy, transhumanism, what would
Speaker 2: you recommend. You can't just read one book. You gotta
Speaker 2: read two. You gotta read John's book, and you got
Speaker 2: to read my book because part two of my book
Speaker 2: is all about transhumanism in Hollywood and how Hollywood has
Speaker 2: promoted that. But aside from John's book, in my book,
Speaker 2: is there a book that stands out to you that
Speaker 2: really enlightened you to the transhumanist stuff.
Speaker 3: To the transhumanists stuff, Ray kurthwell stuff, I all three intelligent,
Speaker 3: age of intelligent machines, Age of spiritual machines and the
Speaker 3: singularity is near. You can you can do it, you know,
Speaker 3: you can just dig through the index. You know, they're
Speaker 3: pretty thick books, I mean, and you can see though
Speaker 3: that it's a consistent message throughout and you can see
Speaker 3: that most a lot of those predictions are pretty accurate.
Speaker 3: I mean, as far as the timelines the game, right, yeah,
Speaker 3: if as far as transhumanism, that's that's what I would
Speaker 3: say for those.
Speaker 2: Well, we've gone for a while. Do you want is
Speaker 2: there any other aspects of the book you want to highlight?
Speaker 2: We've gone for about an hour. I've been keeping my
Speaker 2: interviews to about an hour now, So is there anything
Speaker 2: else you want to hit on?
Speaker 3: Oh? Man, I think we hit everything pretty good. Yeah,
Speaker 3: it's good.
Speaker 2: Well, education is key. I mean that's where they really
Speaker 2: focus on, you know, younger age to brainwash them into
Speaker 2: the system, I mean, from womb to tomb basically. So
Speaker 2: you're not just talking about, like, you know, education at
Speaker 2: a youth stage. You're talking about full on lifetime education,
Speaker 2: which I think a lot of people don't understand and
Speaker 2: that I totally forgot that was a u n things
Speaker 2: to you know, lifelong education and all that and so
Speaker 2: that's what we're looking at. Here is all the stuff
Speaker 2: that I cover in the Global Elite book series. John
Speaker 2: is looking at here in terms of his education background
Speaker 2: and saying that this is what this is what's coming right,
Speaker 2: it's literal brave, new world level stuff. So, do you
Speaker 2: have a website you want me to direct people to
Speaker 2: or is it just to get the book?
Speaker 3: Oh? So so it's school World ordered dot info is
Speaker 3: my website, and okay, let me have that. It's got
Speaker 3: my interviews and links to my articles. Oh, it's got
Speaker 3: all my it's got basically my entire bibliography online. Uh,
Speaker 3: you know with all the links everything that I could
Speaker 3: link gotcha.
Speaker 2: Yeah, here it is. Let me add that. I'll add
Speaker 2: it to the show description and the here to the
Speaker 2: chat for everybody. So yeah, we got up to almost
Speaker 2: three hundred live tonight. So we had a good audience.
Speaker 2: Thank you everybody, and again the link is there to
Speaker 2: get the book. Uh to let me add his website
Speaker 2: and you guys can reach out to him if you
Speaker 2: want to ask him questions or if you want to
Speaker 2: do you have do you want to take some questions
Speaker 2: from the audience if we have any questions.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'll be happy to do that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, anybody we have one super chat, go ahead.
Speaker 3: No, I was just gonna throw on my Twitter and
Speaker 3: we'll do it at the end. Go questions please, Yeah.
Speaker 2: You might have any questions. We'll let him field your questions.
Speaker 2: He's the Taoist professor and his book is School World Order,
Speaker 2: The Technocraticalization of Corporatized Education. It rolls off the tongue
Speaker 2: like molasses. Hey Jay, my grandma's cousin was Rosemary woodruff
Speaker 2: Leary's wife. Wow, well, I just covered Tim Leary in
Speaker 2: the last Elite book Talk. So I hope that y'all
Speaker 2: aren't offended. I hope that y'all still love me, because
Speaker 2: I love y'all. Don't get offended. Everybody gets so offended
Speaker 2: so easily. What's the quest? All right? So we got
Speaker 2: some questions coming in just at me. If you want
Speaker 2: to ask a question for me or John, y'all are
Speaker 2: cheap tonight. We only got one super chat from our
Speaker 2: friend what was his name, Conway Twitty's Conway Twittys Glider,
Speaker 2: and we gave him a book recommendation. So a bunch
Speaker 2: of cheap o's who don't want to ask no questions,
Speaker 2: what is wrong with you? I'm just kidding, you know.
Speaker 2: I love y'all. People saying stupid names in the chat.
Speaker 2: We love you too. I love y'all. I don't see
Speaker 2: any questions. Well, no questions, John, Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: It was an awesome interview. Well, here's a question. Do
Speaker 2: you mind some questions? Here's the rolling in.
Speaker 3: Do you mind.
Speaker 2: This guy says, are you a Christian?
Speaker 3: Yes, sir, yes, sir. I mean I you know I
Speaker 3: this is not me trying to say, you know, I
Speaker 3: what happened was well, like I said, I went through
Speaker 3: some New Age phases, even a Christian new ag face.
Speaker 3: But at the end of this, yeah, I don't know
Speaker 3: if I'm kind of like sitting and I'd like to
Speaker 3: talk to you more about Orthodoxy because I'm sitting between
Speaker 3: that and I'm looking at the Roman Catholic stuff Charlotte's
Speaker 3: Charlotte recently went back to the traditional Catholic way. I
Speaker 3: just know that whatever whatever Christianity I want to officially
Speaker 3: name should be browned in the Apostolic fathers and all
Speaker 3: of that. So I like the idea. Well, mean, I
Speaker 3: don't know, me and you could talk more about Orthodoxy
Speaker 3: because I I do think that the Protestant Reformation. I mean,
Speaker 3: I mean the pope was.
Speaker 5: Doing some right, some non Christian stuff. So it's like,
Speaker 5: you know, but I see that the Protestants kind of
Speaker 5: that kind of in some ways is the beginning of
Speaker 5: the move towards all this skepticism and things.
Speaker 3: In some ways, you know, it's it's severed the philosophy
Speaker 3: from the devotionalism and so so I don't so you know,
Speaker 3: I'm kind of like, you don't think I want to
Speaker 3: be anything Protestant. So I'm looking at I'm leaning towards orthodoxy,
Speaker 3: but I want to talk to you about some of
Speaker 3: the principles that distinguish.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well yeah, I'd be glad to send you some
Speaker 2: you know, videos whatever on that. We got a lot
Speaker 2: of guys in the discord too. I got about two
Speaker 2: thousand people in the Discord that are into that stuff.
Speaker 2: So you're welcome in there as well. Somebody talking about
Speaker 2: the I mean, there are superchats that you have to
Speaker 2: go to stream labs, guys. I got Demonta's so superchats
Speaker 2: are only through stream labs. There was another question where
Speaker 2: to go? Where can I take an online Hellenic philosophy. Course,
Speaker 2: I don't know, bro, but you could go to Father
Speaker 2: Deacon doctor Anonysis channel because he has extensive lectures on
Speaker 2: Aristotle and I have in my archives, of course, lectures
Speaker 2: throughout the entirety of play those republic and many of
Speaker 2: the dialogues. So that's the best that I could give
Speaker 2: you on Hellenic philosophy. I don't know any Hellenic experts,
Speaker 2: so sorry, I can't be more help there. Yeah, so
Speaker 2: superchats are separate now, it's you have to go to
Speaker 2: stream labs. Stream labs is a separate service from YouTube.
Speaker 2: But anyway, well, all right, thanks John, everybody go to
Speaker 2: his website. Get that book. I'm sure it's going to
Speaker 2: be great. I will read it, and I'm sure that
Speaker 2: John and I will be talking in the future if
Speaker 2: he wants to. Would you like to do that, John?
Speaker 3: Absolutely?
Speaker 2: Awesome? Man, Well, thank you very much and thank you
Speaker 2: for coming on. And it was a great shot and
Speaker 2: I'm glad to see the track that you're on.
Speaker 3: Thank you, sir. And real quick, that Twitter handle is
Speaker 3: Dallas professor at professor Dallas.
Speaker 2: Hold on, all right, let's say that again.
Speaker 3: Dallas professor at Professor Dallas.
Speaker 2: At Professor Dallas T A O I S T.
Speaker 3: It's inverted like Begin and the Yang. Man.
Speaker 2: You know what I'm saying, dude. So I'll add your
Speaker 2: Twitter to the show descriptions so people can follow you
Speaker 2: on Twitter too.
Speaker 3: Very cool. Yeah, let's keep in touch, man.
Speaker 2: I'm moving forward to absolutely have