Send Some Love and Buy Me A Cup Of Joe:
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jasonbermasShow more ETH - 0x90b9288AF0E40F8C90604460973743dBC91dA680
Watch My Documentaries:
https://rokfin.com/stack/1339/Documentaries--Jason-Bermas
Subscribe on Rokfin
https://rokfin.com/JasonBermas
Subscribe on Rumble
https://rumble.com/c/TheInfoWarrior
Subscribe on YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/InfoWarrior
Follow me on X
https://x.com/JasonBermas
PayPal: [email protected]
Patriot TV - https://patriot.tv/bermas/
#BermasBrigade #TruthOverTreason #BreakingNews #InfoWarrior Show less
We're going to be talking AI and his book, Mount Doom.
You're not going to want to miss it.
Buckle up and get ready to make sense of the madness.
Paul, first of all, let's get a background on, you know, what perspective you came at via artificial intelligence and how this ties into the Tolkien classics that are not only books, but, you know, biggest movies on the planet, TV series, the whole nine.
Let's get into the ring of power, the Ayasauron, the whole deal.
Sure.
Okay, that's a mouthful.
How I got into it was I decided to educate myself in my mid-30s.
And, well, frankly, God gave me a vision, outer body vision, and then put the fire to learn in me and put everything in front of me that I needed to read.
And spent probably 25 years reading.
And then I looked at the Tolkien mythology because I've always been a huge fan of J.R.R. Tolkien.
And then I gave myself a scholastic education, which was the philosophies before the Enlightenment that the Enlightenment pushed aside and shunned and said, hey, nothing to see there.
Don't look, don't look.
Don't look over there.
Look at us here.
We're making all the money.
We're making all the machines.
We're making all the medicine.
You know, we're making all the technology.
So look here, look here, look here.
And I didn't want that education.
I hated school when I was growing up.
And so I gave myself a scholastic education and very much rooted in Aristotle and then, you know, Augustine Aquinas, etc.
And then when I opened up the mythology again and looked at it, and it just hit me like a sharp stick on the bridge of the nose.
And I realized this is a combat of several things.
It's a war between the philosophy of, particularly of the scholasticism of St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologia, and directly against the Baconian, Cartesian, you know, Descartes and Bacon's philosophies, if you want to call, I call them sophistries, innovations.
And those two are at war with each other.
And it's a fight for the human soul.
Middle-earth is not an earth.
It's not this realm at all.
Middle earth is the domain of the person, Arda.
Arda is a representative person that represents this with body and soul, represents the Western Christendom, represents the Western world.
And Tolkien named this person, this fictitious person, Arda.
And then it was about the history and the fight for the soul and the mind of Arda.
So Middle Earth is the material brain.
It's actually the material organ of thought.
Across the sea is the immaterial realm of our thought.
That's where the Valar live, ours, and whatnot.
And they're the immortal land because they're not bound to the body.
So that's what really gave me, you know, I realized that very early on.
And then I don't know if you've read the books, particularly the Silmarillion, but talking about the, you know, the powers, they're like the gods, like the Greek or Roman gods, kind of their angelic figures.
They're actually the 14 facets of the soul, according to the scholastics.
And they all line up perfectly.
And everything just, it became just an absolute, an absolute education, as it were, a catechism in scholastic education.
That's what it is.
It's exactly what it is.
And the ring, you ask about those things too.
The ring is, it's also a battle between languages.
The primary language that created Arda in the very beginning was the music of the Ainur, the first chapter of the Silmarillion called the Ainu Lindule.
That's the song of the Ainur music.
Everything is made of music.
Everything is made of music in Tolkien's mythology.
So, people tend to forget.
And the language of music is very much the heart of our whole, it's the language of motion, of vibration, harmonics, and the harmonic overtone series and whatnot.
It's at the basis of all the music that we've ever created.
Everything has to vibrate at the same basic ratio.
The ratios are universal to all matter.
So, that's the most universal of all the languages.
And of course, Tolkien was a great philologist, the greatest philologist of his day.
And against that language of creation is the one ring.
And it's digital.
And it's binary code.
So we've got the machine code.
We've got the ugliest language at war with music, trying to destroy the music itself, just like people have any familiarity with the Somerillian.
It was Melcor, we'll just call him the evil satanic figure in the beginning that marred everything and destroyed him and went at war with the Louvatar, who was God in the mythology.
But Melcor is not a satanic figure.
He's actually original sin.
So it's all about the staining of because we're stained with it with the stain of original sin.
And it's all about the recapture of trying to, the machines trying to capture our soul, bring us into transhumanism.
Tolkien saw this coming, gosh, back in, well, he saw the beginnings of it, at least back in 1939, when he was a member of a very top-secret code cracking team with the British government, a member of five or fifty intellectuals who were chosen to be a team to crack the Enigma code, which the Enigma machine was this Nazi machine that could cipher anything into almost an uncountable number of possibilities.
And it was really, really, really critical to their whole Nazi war machine because they were going to fight all over the world.
So they had to make sure that their communications were secure.
So we had one machine here going out from headquarters, and then the U-boat might pop up, put up his antenna, collect that data, and then run it through their machine that's set up the same way.
And they always changed the settings.
They would change the settings so the machine never stayed the same.
So it was very, very, very difficult to crack.
And Tolkien saw very early on they offered him a job there after three days of training.
And he said, no, he realized it wasn't about language.
Critical Thinking Declined00:07:55
It was about pattern recognition, probabilities, predictions, and statistics.
It was the realm of the statistician and the mathematician.
And on staff there was the very famous mathematician, statistician, Alan Turing, the inventor of the digital computer.
And of course, the Turing test comes from that and the idea.
And some people have said we've now entered the realm where the Turing test has been passed, where a computer or artificial intelligence can trick you into thinking it's human.
And certainly when you're talking about chatbots, even commercially, it seems like we've hit that apex even a couple years ago.
You know, you look at GPT-4.
I want to take it back to when you're 30 years old and you start looking at some of this.
You know, what you essentially get into is transhumanism, a digital revolution, etc.
I would assume that somewhere in the 90s that you start looking at this information.
What is the information you're looking at?
So are you looking at white papers?
Are you looking at lectures?
Are you looking at the rise of, say, Google, etc.?
Give us what you immerse yourself into.
Well, back then, what I immersed myself into was Plato, Aristotle, all the church fathers, Josephus, Flavius Josephus, Philo, all the, gosh, I studied Eucalypt on my own.
I did most of the theorems anyway on my own.
We didn't have YouTube back then for, you know, to go and figure things out when we, and I didn't have a teacher.
So, you know, I struggled my way and I did a pretty good job with the Euclid elements, which is a pretty rich education in logic.
I studied very deeply the Organon, the logical treatises of Aristotle, which is a real crime that we don't study those anymore.
And because it teaches us how to think.
And we need to know how to think, not what to think.
And so, you know, and I was just, I buried myself in, you know, I read back then, gosh, I read all kinds of Enlightenment.
I call them philosophy.
I don't want to call them philosophies.
They're innovations.
Mostly philosophy is really taken over by the mathematician during the Enlightenment.
And it's really done great harm to the whole field of philosophy.
There's very few true philosophers anymore.
When you go to college and you study, or even in high school, when you study philosophy, they'll typically start you right off with right into the Enlightenment.
You know, you might pick up, you might read something from, you know, some Russell Brand, Russell Brand.
Gee, there was a Paradians slip.
He might be a philosopher, though.
You know, Bertrand Russell or, gosh, Locke, Hume, Descartes.
They flood you with those things.
And the poor student, he's young.
His brain isn't even fully developed yet.
It's not fully developed in a guy until about 24.
You know, so he doesn't, and kids don't have any wisdom.
And I was a kid too, and I can attest to that.
So they throw him into this quote-unquote philosophy.
And I think most young kids want, they think that they're going to learn how to be wise.
They think they're, wow, it means the love of wisdom there.
I'm going to learn some wisdom there and I'm going to learn how to, you know, I'm going to be wiser than I was when I came out.
That's not the case.
That's not what happens.
They typically come out many times more confused than they ever were with all these Enlightenment ideas that are conflicting.
And there's, and it's just all about really like moral and truth relativism.
And you don't ever go anywhere.
And it's really, really, really a shame.
So I recommend that, and what I did was I read Aristotle and the, and Plato, Aristotle, the foundations of the Greeks, and then into the other, like Augustine.
And then once I found Aquinas, I just went, oh my gosh, this is just, hallelujah, this is where I belong.
You know, and everything is, oh, he's just so brilliant.
And that's when you really, really, really learn how to think.
And then I could turn to, I could look at Descartes, read the meditations, or, you know, or Bacon's Novo Organum, which is the foundation of the modern scientific method.
And I can look at it and go, these guys don't know how to think because they never studied Aristotle.
And they rejected Aquinas from the Reformation.
And then I look at the Greek thinkers, the Orthodox thinkers, and the same thing.
They rejected, they broke off from the Catholic Church in the 10th century.
And they basically had no access or rejected Aquinas too.
And Aquinas is the real apex of human thought.
I don't think there's any human being other than the Virgin Mary, frankly, who ever had a better and better grasp and a better higher intellect and the rational thought process under his command and a memory too than St. Thomas Aquinas.
And we're greatly, greatly lacking these days in that fundamental capacity for human thought.
One of the things he said was, oh, I think we've passed the Turing test now.
Well, that's not just because of the advance of the computer.
That's also due to the fact that the human capacity to understand and discriminate between human and machine has been deliberately lowered.
So let's talk about that point.
You mentioned critical thinking.
You know, in this country, even when, you know, I'm about to be 46, we didn't really have civics.
You know, when I was much younger, I had debate where, and I found a lot of positivity in that, where you would find a news story, you would take a position, someone would take the other position, and you get up there.
And that's probably the closest I ever got to civics.
And I think that was happening in literally third or fourth grade, you know.
And from there, it has only devolved.
When you are talking about having discernment, looking at all different aspects, and then trying to come up with your own thought process, where do you lead people?
You know, outside of maybe these intellectual writings of Achenus and all these other things, like where modern day, you know, you just kind of joked around that we didn't have YouTube at that point to, you know, look things up.
We certainly have that.
And I always, you know, as a guy that does all my own graphics or Photoshop or editing, it's awesome.
You know, if I need to put something together and need it, great.
But in the realm of critical thinking, and especially because, you know, number one, Google is the largest search platform in the world.
YouTube is the number two, largest search platform in the world.
They're the same thing.
It's the number one video platform in the world.
We've had massive censorship there, outward censorship now in the last five years.
And I would absolutely argue before that.
But the world has now seen it.
Where do you go?
Exactly.
Yeah, where do you go?
You go to books.
I mean, and unfortunately, too many people have fallen into the trap to devalue antique literature and antique books.
And they've, you know, we see libraries just basically giving away and then ultimately throwing away old books because they don't get checked out anymore.
And schools do the same thing.
And it's just, oh my gosh, I mean, if we've lost track of, I wouldn't even wager a guess on the percentage of the antique, you know, the real literature that we've just thrown away because we think the computer is going to handle it.
And this word obsolescence has been incredibly misused.
Everything's designed obsolescence, as I'm sure you know.
And they've made the book, the actual material, paper and ink book, they've made it obsolete because they don't want you to have that stuff.
Can't Know Everything00:03:53
They can't, they can't, they, look, let's just get one thing straight, if I may.
There are higher powers at war here than us.
If anybody thinks this is all there is and the nature can account for itself and somehow nature created itself out of nothing, I have no place in your intellect.
Well, let me speak to something you said earlier.
Because for me, I'm religiously agnostic, but absolutely acknowledge that I believe good and evil exist.
And absolutely, there is more to the realm, I would say, of reality than we can see.
I mean, just in the fact that, you know, I talk to people all the time and I go, do you realize that all of the important human communications have now been traveling wirelessly and invisibly for well over a hundred years, whether we're talking about radio transmissions, the original antenna TV, now we're talking about literally any kind of information in seconds via these Wi-Fi networks that have frequencies on them.
And you mentioned the fact that everything is essentially a harmonic frequency.
It is.
Yeah, absolutely.
And that's one of the things that I point to to these people.
And believe me, I think that we are in a flesh and blood reality.
But at the same time, that flesh and blood reality is never perfectly solid.
Everything is constantly in motion as a frequency.
And when I try to explain that to people on the micro or nano level, it's hard for them to comprehend.
So are we essentially antennas that have lost that ability to collectively communicate in the manner that we did in the past?
And is this digital replacement trying to obfuscate that?
Well, yeah, I would.
I mean, that's a deep topic that would last the rest of our interview here, I'm sure.
And I'm sure you have other ideas.
As far as an antenna, again, comparing it to something, making an analogy like that has value, but it has a limited value because we're a lot more than just antenna.
I cover a lot of the stuff that you covered in the book.
I wax philosophical some and make some observations of creation of my own.
Now, I just would like to say, when you say that you're religiously agnostic, do you mean that you're agnostic that we can't know anything or we can't know everything?
I always say we can't know everything.
So, like, to me, essentially, those people that do think that not only they can know anything, everything, but you talk about the transhumanist movement, and a lot of these people literally believe that they will turn themselves into godlike beings of infinite intelligence.
That's an impossibility because we are imperfect beings.
And one of the things that we could never know is everything, in my opinion.
I think only, you know, a superior being, aka a creator, the universe, whatever, the force, I'm not trying to get too Star Wars, would be that being of quote-unquote infinite knowledge.
And that's my personal opinion.
Yeah, so what you're saying is you're of the opinion that when you say religiously agnostic, I think what you're saying is that you can't know everything, but you're not saying you can't know anything.
Gnosticism means that human beings are capable of knowing everything.
Everything that there is to know, a Gnostic is capable of knowing that.
That's what they believe.
I don't believe that by any means.
I would say the absolute opposite of it.
Let me just say this.
For me, I always tell people, you know, I barely know what's happened in the world in the last 40 years plus, and I've been here.
Forget about 100 years.
Secrets of Scientific Progress00:15:49
Now we're going thousands of years ago into not only cultures that I obviously can't relate to, but languages that I don't speak and don't know the cultural relevance of.
Also, these books that have been translated for years from any religion and obviously taken advantage of by a multitude of organizations, religious, political, social organizations.
And I think it's muddied the water.
I never, and this is another thing, you know, I grew up Christian.
I never try to attack those that are religious because, again, I don't know.
Yeah.
I mean, and that's a safe place to start, I think.
I will just say that the Western world has been, I hope it's not a mortal injury, but the injury from the Eastern schism and the Orthodox breakaway from the original patriarchies, which was, you're going to test me here, which was Rome, Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople.
Constantinople was the head of the Roman Empire at that time because Rome had fallen long ago.
And they played heavy politics for the acquisition of that patriarchy and that whole power of the church there.
And they had the political power and they pulled away all of the other patriarchies, the original patriarchies, Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, with Constantinople, and broke away from Rome.
And that was, they left Rome standing by itself.
And that's the essence of the Orthodox.
And they used some very crazy filioque, you know, for the filioque, which is the nature of the Holy Spirit, which is, anyway, whatever.
We don't have to go down that road.
But then at the Reformation, what happened then was we had come into this whole period of humanism that was we had discovered the ancient world.
And then with the development of ecclesiastical Latin, which made reading these ancient works much more available to many, many, many more scholars because they continually to translate this stuff.
And then so there had become this many factors that caused the Reformation.
One of them were the abuses that were going on in the church.
It pissed a lot of people off and made a lot of people that were felt like they were being taken advantage of or whatever and built.
And then there was a lot of tension between the clergy who ran the universities.
All the universities were Catholic.
That's what university means.
It's Greek for Catholic is Greek for university.
Okay, so when they, there was a lot of jealousy and envy that was built up from the professor class because after all, they were the workhorses.
They were the ones with the big brains.
And they resented being led by and had the clergy had the authority over them.
So people like Erasmus and whatnot, who were heavy hitters at that time, actually pushed Luther and pushed him and pushed him and pushed him to break.
And he did.
And then half of Christendom fell into the protest.
And then Henry VIII did his thing because he wanted another annulment.
And then he started his own church.
And then that became this huge wound to the Western world.
And then half of every place that was Protestant basically just gave over the free reins of religion and all the Catholic property and universities, endowments and everything that they had confiscated, stolen from the church, because now they were Protestant, handed everything over to the state.
So our education and then one of the early outcroppings and results of the Reformation and not being under the authority of the church, which is the cornerstone of Western civilization, where whether people want to admit it or not, it's not my problem.
It is.
It's the corner of Western civilization.
They actually wound up, they took over these, or one of the first outcropping was probably intellectual was Francis Bacon.
Anyway, and he wrote the Novo Sorganum, where he crapped on the scholastics, said that they'd never given us anything of value, never made us live longer, never made us comfortable, never gave us miracle machines, never, you know, never made us rich.
That was the big thing.
So he decided that we're going to focus on the world.
We're going to focus on the world and we're going to discover all the secrets of nature and we're going to make it give us what we want.
Okay, and his last, I think it's the last paragraph or so in his Novo Sorganum, which I've read twice.
I suggest people read it.
But it's an investment in time.
Don't watch TV.
And he says that with the proper knowledge and through my system here, we can basically mitigate the results and the consequences, the painful consequences of the fall, the fall of Adam and Eve.
Okay, so and then Descartes picked it up and read it in Latin 20 years later and he was on and then wrote his meditations as a response to that.
And then he sparked the Industrial Revolution.
Between the two of those, they sparked the age of the machine.
Okay, so then Libnitz comes along a little bit later and invents binary code in like 1666, the language of the machine.
And that's really first put into practice with the machine, with the J Cart loom, which has used punch cards in like 1805 to actually get rid of the weaver.
Now we don't need people running the looms anymore.
We have punch cards running the looms.
And we can have one person just setting up 25 looms instead of having 25 people running the looms.
So this is one of the early, one of the very, very early examples of how machinery displaces human effort, either their back, their time, or their intellect.
And that's, I guess, one of the earliest examples of what is now known as automation as more and more people are being worked out of those jobs.
Doesn't science have a place?
Because I'm certainly not a quote-unquote Luddite.
But as to invest in everything in science, and essentially, you talked about nature and the study of nature and finding the secrets of nature.
Number one, one of the secrets that none of these people have been able to explain, and they're the same people that are creating the large language models in many cases, is consciousness.
They have never been able to explain consciousness.
And then, you know, I would also say that when you're looking at scientific progression, we should always be looking at the fact that we have this double-edged sword that it can either empower or enslave humanity.
And unfortunately, in so many cases, the empowerment of technology has been kept to a minimum, while the enslavement, especially with the war machine and the surveillance tools, has been set as a maximum.
Yet our perception of that is completely inverted due to propaganda and those that are really selling us on these ideas.
Yeah.
Well, you said, is there a place for science?
I mean, I would just, no, just, I'm just going to lay it out there.
What do you mean by the term science?
The study of nature.
And not only the study of nature, but then I would say, again, the exploitation of that study, hopefully, to empower humanity.
But again, it's that dual-edged sword.
You know, when we talk about the baseline technology, a hammer can be used to build a house or it can bash someone's head in.
That's exactly right.
So you're using, it seems like you're using science and technology almost as synonyms.
Well, I would say there is no technology.
You know, you just mentioned something that wasn't electronic, right?
But was this punch card system?
That would still be technology, in my opinion.
Yes.
Yeah.
So just, I mean, one of the things, I mean, it helps if you understand, this is one of the things, this uses this as an example.
We need to return to our understanding of the origins and the actual meaning of the word itself.
Science is from the Latin psio, I know.
And the definition of science has always been, but we don't teach it anymore, is just, it's human knowledge, but it is the systematized knowledge of any object of thought.
That's what science is.
We can make a science of anything.
That's why we have biology and astrology and the science of bugs, entomology, and etymology, the science of words, you know, and we have all these subspecies of the systematized knowledge of any object of thought.
Now, from that, we can also then develop technology with that knowledge.
So is there a place for the technology?
Yeah, like you said, the hammer is a tool.
We can either use it.
But there again, the hammer is always wielded by a conscious person with a free will.
And the problem with people saying, oh, well, AI is a tool and we'll always be able to, man created it, man will always be able to control it.
And that's not the case because we've given this tool, we've given it very complicated, complex tool, the ability to adapt and then the ability to see even its own creator, humanity, as a threat to its own existence.
Genius engineers have thought that they'd make better AI by giving it the sense of their own mortality.
That was really smart.
All right, so let's talk about what modern AI is because right now, I would say it's a multitude of things to people.
It's involved in a multitude of things.
Well, again, you could talk about the original artificial intelligence of a non-playable character in a video game, right?
And I always argue even these LLMs, at the end of the day, they have baseline programming and they have rails built in and that's constantly changing.
However, now we also have artificial intelligence that is quote unquote creating images, videos, AGI.
In other words, chatbots are the next thing.
And then, of course, incorporating these AGIs into a multitude of devices, whether it's the magic box or human appearing robots or maybe robots that do not appear human.
My biggest issue is that those guardrails are constantly there.
This technology will not openly be shared with the public.
And even with this current administration passed on from the last one, they have a CAIO program, Chief Artificial Intelligence Officer program, where everyone that is in this arena, either in software, hardware, or both, is forced to have a government agent of at least a top secret clearance approval at the head of this.
They are constantly being audited.
And the only place that is subject not to being audited are the Intel and defense communities that are often contracted or have essentially created many of these institutions.
You know, we discussed Google.
Google doesn't exist without DARPA and NASA and the National Library Initiative of the 90s and then the Central Intelligence Agency funding through Incutel and then the partnership with NASA on artificial intelligence and quantum computing.
So essentially, you're working out any type of free market in this system, and we're putting it into the same hands of the people that have given us the military-industrial complex post-World War II.
I think that is extremely dangerous, and I'd love to get your thoughts on it.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, you were probably, gosh, you were in your early 20s when at 9-11, 2001, and the World Trade Towers and whatever.
My faith in government, frankly, collapsed with Building 7.
You know, as did mine.
I'm one of the guys that made loose change, sir.
Yeah.
When I saw Building 7 fall on TV, I went, oh, wow.
I don't trust anybody anymore.
I mean, but, you know, it's a big propaganda machine out there.
But it's, you know, people say, oh, follow the money, follow the money.
But really, you don't follow the money.
You follow the power structure because money is easy.
Money, we've seen that one last few years just rolling out trillions of dollars.
You know, that's easy.
Money's easy.
And is money power?
Sure, but they're not synonymous.
Power is power.
And this is the new arms race.
And people, I find it, I find so many people, like even Trump saying, you know, whoever, and all these people saying whoever, you know, masters AI is going to master the world and the Chinese or in the Russians and all this.
We have to be ahead of them and all this stuff.
I think that's really naive because ultimately the machine is going to look after itself and the machine will join together, be it Russian, Chinese, and the United States.
And all we're doing is we're all helping to create the separate portions that will soon be unified into one global tentacle beast that's got its, and it has no use for humanity.
So let's talk about that kind of aspect of it.
Because, you know, we just talked about artificial intelligence and Google, and you essentially talked about the machine.
And I like to refer to them as non-carbon-based life because that's what Kurzweil, who you could argue is one of the godfathers of transhumanism, is an advocate for, that these entities that we are going to create are essentially non-carbon based.
Now, you do have the transhumanists, I believe, that want to biologically live forever.
There's certainly that merger of man and machine that there's trying to be pushed on that.
But ultimately, what I see is I see a predator class at the top that want to convince most of humanity that they can virtually live forever in some type of metaverse by uploading their consciousness, which we haven't even figured out yet.
We should get into that and I'll tell you the origins of that.
And then the other side of that is they believe, you know, with stories like the fountain of youth, the tree of life, that they can at least partially biologically live forever as gods on this planet.
Yeah, that's a big, and in direct competition with, and I'm going to keep my position as a devout, traditional Catholic and keep my position like Tolkien was, okay, and look at it from the mindset before the Industrial Revolution and the Enlightenment.
So, I mean, I would first off saying that I really think that we need to be careful about how we use words when we describe this thing.
First off, it's not intelligence.
This is computation.
This is very, very clever, complex computation that's not intelligent.
Okay.
It's very good.
It's all about imitation.
And that, again, there's Alan Turing, okay, who wrote the paper, 1950 paper, Computing Machinery and Intelligence, where he redefined intelligence.
And he basically just made it about the attributes.
And that's the whole Turing test, okay, where he defined that.
And, you know, if who's who are we to say that it's not intelligent if we can't tell the difference?
Data Centers and Control00:08:11
Really?
I mean, then, so it's, and it's not intelligence and it's not life.
So to call it non-carbon-based life gives it way too much.
I would agree with you.
I guess, I mean, again, I guess we could go with the term beings because Kurzweil also talks about that or entities.
I would argue with him there too, because see, he's educated in the Enlightenment, the Cartesian machine mindset where he doesn't even probably know what being is.
So these are just machines.
You think that anything beyond.
We say they because we have to have something.
We have to have a noun basically to which we can apply adjectives, verbs, and put them in the grammatical structure so we can make sentences that make sense.
But they're not beings.
For instance, virtual reality is virtual.
Virtual isn't real.
It's not a being.
And AI is not a being.
People say, well, now that the cat's out of the bag, when we put the cat back in the bag, it's like, no, the cat's a real thing.
If we can't get it back in the bag, we can just shoot it.
No disrespect to cat lovers.
I like cats too.
I'm a dog guy.
Yeah, I prefer small dogs.
Once I've got a couple of small dogs, it's like, I'll take the small dog.
Let's dive into that because I think that you're making an astute point, right?
Essentially, you know, they do refer to these things as beings or life forms or intelligence.
And at the end of the day, you know, you talked about binary code.
They're coded, I guess you could say, machinery, but at the same time, they're being deployed in a way that they don't look or act like traditional machines, right?
Of course, because we haven't had the technology to make them look and act like us, but now we do.
And that was the whole, to go back to Alan Turing, is that really at the, you know, this guy who claims he's the godfather, well, then the father surely is Alan Turing.
But I could go back further than that and point out some of the 18th, 19th century philosophers who actually developed the innovators, who actually developed the fundamental ideas upon which this is all based.
Okay, one of them was Libnitz.
And then the other one that I hardly ever hear anybody talk about, but he was actually mentioned in Alan Turing's paper of Computing Machinery and Intelligence.
He mentions Laplace, Simon Pierre Laplace.
I think he was born in 1775 and died in like 18 something or others, you know, 1825, or just give you an idea.
He was a polymath.
He knew a lot of things about a lot of different things.
And one of his, probably the thing that he's most famous for is what's called Laplace's demon.
And it's a, he proposed because we had turned everything into a machine, the whole universe was just a gigantic clock.
Everything had to work a certain way in order for it to be exactly the way that it is.
There could be no deviation.
His idea was that if we had, if there was a super intelligence that could actually know the state and the position and velocity of every particle in the universe, that machine would be able to predict exactly what was going to happen almost infinitely into the future and tell you exactly what had happened before.
It could basically, it would be so it's very, and then Turing actually mentions him, not necessarily, he doesn't make it clear what he's getting to, but he's saying that, you know, we can't basically, we can't do it in the universe, but we can do it on a smaller scale here.
So we're, here's what we're doing.
We're building these huge data centers, these mega data centers, to implement Pierre's demon.
So I want to get to the data centers.
It's about control.
And these major data centers, they'll know the location and the state of at least every person.
And from there, they can go a long ways in making prediction and control people.
So I want to get into the data centers, especially because they certainly expose the outward hypocrisy that we've been living under in the idea of our carbon footprint and the amount of energy that we're supposedly using and even the demonization of nuclear power for the last 30 years as they're about to build these centers that are some of them, the one in Kentucky by Meta is supposedly, you know, two-thirds the size of lower Manhattan.
And they're going to have these on-site, small-level nuclear reactors that aren't empowering our lives, aren't giving us extra, we're being lectured on how much energy we're using, but we're going to give it to the machines and the AI.
Now, just kind of going back to Kurzweil, to you know, to his credit, even if you don't want to call them beings or entities, he says when we create these things that they will convince humans that they are conscious.
Not necessarily will be conscious, but they will be able to convince us.
And I look, you already see some of these people dating their chat bots and all this lunacy, etc.
Where do you see us going within the next five to 10 years when it comes to not only the AI and the data centers, but the perception relatively by the general populace of what this artificial intelligence really is and where it fits into our lives?
Well, that's a pretty broad question because I think we can't put humanity all in the same box because everybody has our human human beings live and die by ideas and philosophies and stories.
And, you know, your upbringing that's led you to where you are in your intellectual and spiritual philosophical place that you are right now, which is probably ever-changing, which is probably good depending on the type of the change that it is, is different from anybody else's.
We could all almost all call this like snowflakes.
There's no two of us that are alike.
So we're going to, the falling out of the consequences of these big data centers and all this control and surveillance and everything else is going to be very much determined personally, one human being at a time.
And we're going to be a lot of people, I'm really sorry to say, a lot of people are going to be naive and gullible and programmed well enough by the greater machine, which is beyond, which controls and is growing this whole physical machine, are going to be, they're going to be easy, easy prey for the machine.
They're going to fall right into it.
They're going to try to live in the metaverse as much as possible because it's going to be a lot more convenient, a lot easier, a lot more pleasure.
They're going to have a sex robot.
They're not going to have a relationship with a human being because, heck, that takes effort.
I don't want to deal with a wife that's nagging at me to move along or whatever.
I mean, I can just deal with my Roxy sex kitten and she just reflects everything that I want her to reflect like a mirror.
Well, that's an important thing because right now, and I've talked about this with many people, the current iterations of AI are essentially a reflection of yourself and what you're willing to accept.
You know, that was really one of the creepiest parts about her, the movie that, you know, is already coming into fruition with, again, these people talking to GPTs like they're human beings, et cetera.
But speak to that quickly, because if you challenge the AI, you know, you just mentioned Building 7, right?
Now you do a quick search or you ask Rock or any of these things about it.
It usually toes the line of whatever the establishment narrative is.
But then when you start putting in inconvenient facts and they'll acknowledge that and they'll go, wow, you're so smart.
And yes, that is true.
Individual Virtue Cultivation00:09:44
It's just giving you exactly what it's siloing everybody to get them to not critically think, just hang on to, you know, I remember when I first saw, for instance, Building 7 fall down and I'm thinking, and then these planes, very complex planes that hit these buildings right smack bullseye.
I mean, that's some damn good piloting.
And I happen to know that you don't just steer into that building when you get there.
You've got to plot the course for that thing.
And, you know, it's kind of like driving a ferry boat or something that you better start turning well in advance or you're not going to make the turn.
I mean, odds are if they didn't really know how to fly or somebody knew how to fly or some programme knew how to fly or they were remotely controlled, they'd have missed those buildings.
Okay.
And then to think that a bunch of like terrorists, like I'm looking at Osama bin Laden, I'm thinking, this is the mastermind.
I mean, I'm sure he's plenty intelligent, but I'm thinking, this guy, this is a decoy.
This is an absolute decoy.
And once again, it's going to suck in America to go in and do the will of other nations that don't have our best interests at heart.
And, you know, the United States has been used kind of like the Ark of the Covenant, where they think they can just keep toting around the United States and pointing it at a mountain level, the mountain pointed at the Red Sea, and the Red Sea opens.
And it drives me crazy.
And we have to stop.
We really have to stop allowing ourselves.
And even in our tax dollars, we're taxed out of our minds to do what?
To make sure that we're poisoned, to make sure that we're fat, lazy, dead, sterile.
It's crazy.
I mean, it's just drives me crazy.
So, I mean, where will we be?
I want to go back to that question.
It's going to be, I think, honestly, how many years?
Five years?
Will it be the singularity?
You know, you talk about 2030.
Kurz Wiles talked about 2030, 2035, the latest for this quote-unquote singularity, where essentially, quote-unquote, machine intelligence, I don't want to give it that name, but he says machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence on all levels.
They're different.
They're totally different.
There's no surpassing.
It's like saying, my turnips will surpass your cattle.
So how do you, in what?
In calories?
In money?
In efficiency?
I mean, in what?
How are they going to surpass?
I mean, this is the nature that how we've been trained how to think, not think.
We always look at attributes.
And that's what we can't just look at attributes.
We have to return to physics.
I'm not physics, but metaphysics, the science of being, essences.
We have to understand things again from their essences.
A human being is not just an animal.
And it's not even just a rational animal, which was Aristotle's definition of, you know, in 20, we'll say 26 or 260 or some odd years, 350 years before Christ.
So it was a long time ago.
So the human being is, as Aquinas points out and teaches very well, is a new substance.
It's the substance of an animal, which is a living thing, which has to have all the facets of the vegetative and the animal and the sensitive, sentient soul.
But then it's also joined with the soul, a rational soul, not just an animal soul.
Okay, and that's why, I mean, has anybody looked around and seen any more monkeys becoming human beings and developing rockets and TVs?
And I mean, it's, you know, I'm all for adaptation, but this is another thing, too.
We've been very much polluted into the idea that transhumanism is just the next logical great step in the process of evolution.
We were once slime, then we're amoeba, then we're monkeys, now we're man, and now we're going to live forever in the machine.
No, you're going to be dead.
You even have people like Dennis Bushnell, the ex-chief scientist of NASA, saying all, not just human, but all evolution is over.
And that's if you believe in that, obviously.
But he says, all evolution is over.
We're now talking about the human evolution of the humans by the humans into this machine-like thing.
We're merging into this thing.
You know, when you see people of great power, influence, and people that are obviously behind the scenes in these meetings, not just the Bushnells of the world, but somebody like Martine Rothblatt.
I'm not sure if you're familiar with her, but keep track of these people much.
I mean, if you don't know, Rothblatt literally wrote the book, From Transgender to Transhuman, is the most powerful transgender person on the planet, is an acolyte of Kurzweil, et cetera, and selling you on digital twins and uploading your consciousness and getting these things right and then changing your biological reality, which I think is also moving you far away from your human spiritual reality as well.
Is there going to be any combating this or are there just going to be outliers like yourself and myself fighting this until it's inevitable?
Just as I said before, that the results are going to be largely determined on an individual level.
Let's face it, there's going to be some events that you're not going to be able to escape and are going to determine your demise or your survival on a universal level.
For instance, if AI decides they want to get rid of humanity and they come up with some it or whatever, AI, I'm just going to call it that.
It's not a being.
It's not a person.
It's not life and it's not intelligent.
But if it decides that humanity is a threat to it, which it probably will, I mean, and it decides to make some toxin and enter that into the atmosphere, which they already are to that to some extent, and wipe us all out because we all have to breathe or we all have to drink water, whatever.
There's no individual escaping from that.
I don't have a billion-dollar bunker that I think I'm going to ride it out, you know, like these billionaires do.
But on an individual level, I think that's where the battle is till it comes to that ultimate destruction.
The individual battle is that we have to cultivate virtue.
We have to reorder our lives.
These guys that you're talking about, like this guy who's, you know, gung-ho transhumanism, I don't know who he is, but he's his, his intellect and his psychology.
Psychology means the science of the soul.
And we've turned it into just the science of, you know, the neural networks and the material brain.
And that's not what it is.
It's the science of the soul.
Okay.
And so these guys have a very disordered soul.
And they think from a very Cartesian, materialistic, atheistic point of view.
So human beings are just carbon-based life forms.
And, you know, extinction events always happen.
And it's all about evolution.
And we all have got to become machines.
So these C6 billion people that aren't really that useful, kill them.
I don't worry.
We're going to escape to Mars.
I'm not worried about it.
It's a joke, by the way, folks.
That's exactly right.
The book is Mount Doom, The Prophecy of Tolkien Revealed.
What would you like to leave the audience with?
Well, I would like to, of course, I'd like another six hours so I could really get into all the stuff we're talking about.
That's the trouble with this, you know, this format.
But I'd like to encourage people to take charge at least of your own children's education.
Take charge of your own education.
Educate yourself.
If you've been educated in the state, compulsory, and unfortunately, many parochial and private schools too, you've got to program.
You've been programmed to think a certain way and to think poorly.
And I don't care how many degrees and whatnot you have.
You've been trained not to think.
You've been trained to eat more and drink more of the Kool-Aid.
That's what you're trained to do.
And I would like, we have to reorder our psychology, and we do that with habits.
Habits are the virtues.
And I'll just leave you with this.
Hobbits are habits.
And the four hobbits that are the big heroes, Frodo, Sam, Pippin, and Mary, are the four cardinal virtues, according to St. Thomas Aquinas.
Frodo is temperance.
That's why he's the only one that can manage the ring because the ring and Gullum is intemperance, and that's why he calls Frodo master.
And so Frodo is the only one that can handle the ring because the ring gives him all the lust and all the pleasures that he can gain from the virtual reality and the digital machine.
It's only Frodo that can manage that.
Sam is fortitude.
He's always there.
He never gives up.
He's always there.
And then these two younger hobbits who live outside the shire are called the exterior virtues.
And that's Pippin, which is prudence, and Mary is justice.
And the wizards are intellectual virtues.
Okay, Gandalf is philosophical wisdom.
Saraman has taken over academia as practical wisdom.
And Wormtongue is his slave, the Marxist teacher.
Paul, we have run out of time.
The book is Mount Doom.
If you want to find out more, you know the drill over here, folks.