All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 28, 2008 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:49:38
996 Podcast In Reverse Part 2 - The Problem
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Alright, thanks. Okay, so this is just an introduction to a few of the ideas behind this MECO system thing that I'm trying to work on, which is really around listening to yourself.
And I'm going to use an economics metaphor that hopefully will make some sense and defreakify what is in essence a sort of I am a haunted house feeling, which is kind of disconcerting for people, which of course I totally understand.
And the economics metaphor that I would use...
Is that in a situation, in a tyranny, in a dictatorship, in a totalitarian system where economic activity is directed from the top down, what happens is the system only survives because economic activity goes into the black market.
So, I mean, Russia would have starved to death very quickly if there was no black market in food and of course we can see with something like the drug trade or prostitution or gambling and so on that when you pass a top-down resolution it does not eliminate the activity but what it does is it pushes it out of sight and then what happens is it creates a self-regulated bubble of interactions so it just causes people to disappear And so what happens is you create a series of parallel self-regulating economies.
And this doesn't always mean in the economic sense self-regulating economies.
In a great way, but if you make immigration illegal, then you don't get rid of immigration.
All that happens is you get millions of people pouring into the country who work beyond the visibility of the authorities.
So you're just creating a huge parallel underground economy.
In the same way within the personality, this approach that I take goes, in the same way within the personality, when we grow up in authoritarian structures within the family and within the school, what happens is our independent thought,
our independent critical evaluation, our independence, our creativity, our spontaneity, all of the things that Parents and family, and school in particular, seems expressly designed to crush out.
Those things don't disappear, they just go underground, right?
They just go into a kind of black market of the self, so to speak.
So they still exist, and they still, just because we suppress or repress something doesn't mean it goes away.
That, of course, is the fundamental insight from Freud onwards.
So, if we can look at these various, quote, personalities within ourselves that we can have an exchange with, I think the best way to understand them is to look at grey or black market aspects of ourselves that we're simply not allowed to function, right? But what happens is that they go underground, they go into the unconscious, and And they become sort of self-regulating, isolated things.
They still occur. They show up in dreams.
They show up in impulses.
And they show up in emotional blocks and so on.
But it's really hard to get a read on them, right?
It's sort of like trying to compile statistics for the black market.
Well, the whole point of the black market is it's designed to get things done without being visible to authorities.
And the same thing can be imagined in terms of these personality structures that I have found to be...
Christina has worked through this process.
I've worked through this process.
A couple other people are working through it.
And it seems to be a pretty common phenomenon.
And I don't believe that it is innate to the human personality.
Like, I don't think that we are a sort of, quote, haunted house or a multiplicity of separate and opposing perspectives.
Anymore than it's natural for human economic activity to operate in the black market without contract and without access to visibility.
But this is what happens when the personality is subjected to the extraordinary pressures of most families and just about all schools.
I don't think it's natural, but I do believe that it is the default position for the personality at the moment.
Of course, the cost is that we lose a lot of vitality, we lose a lot of spontaneity, we lose a lot of joy.
A lot of our capacity for love and self-trust doesn't occur.
So, If you can look at...
imagine sort of the ideas that we're dismantling the centralized command and control economy, we have to kind of lure, right?
I mean, because it could be a trap, right?
I mean, we all know about the cultural revolution in the...
I guess it was in the 70s, in Mao's China, where he said, you know, let a thousand flowers bloom and so on, and people began to sort of come out of their hidey holes and speak their minds...
And this was, of course, considered to be a great excuse and was acted upon as a great excuse to identify people who were problematic and kill them, right?
So the idea of being lured out is kind of challenging.
If the government legalized all drug trade tomorrow, drug dealers would not exactly start forming corporations and come out into the open because they would be afraid that the government was only, quote, legalizing the drug trade in order to identify them and throw them in jail, right?
So it's a process that takes some curiosity and some patience to kind of lure these buried aspects of ourselves out and reintegrate.
The personality as a whole, right?
As what I call the mycosystem, which is that we are a multiplicity because of the dictatorial pressures that we face as kids.
So does that sort of make sense?
Does that demystify it at least to some small degree?
I think that makes perfect sense.
And I've sort of just intellectually, I've been on board with that whole concept all along.
It makes perfect sense that...
I mean, we just know this empirically from the...
From the discipline of psychology, right?
All this stuff, like you say, it doesn't go away.
It just becomes subterranean and will end up presenting itself in other ways.
Yes. Yes, for sure.
But I don't think... I mean, the stuff that's relatively new is this idea that you engage these personalities as distinct personalities.
Because now, the pathology that is in the realm of psychology is considered to be only the result of more extreme and obvious forms of abuse.
So most psychologists would not say that the human personality is fundamentally distorted by public schools.
They would say, well, yes, if you were beaten or whatever, then yes, you're going to...
But they would view the default democratic public school Western statist mentality as, quote, healthy.
And, of course, I wouldn't, right?
For me, I moved the bar quite a bit from where things are.
Right, and where they do that, though, they're jumping ship from empiricism in order to conform.
Well, yeah, for sure. Because, I mean, when we have the kinds of, you know, over 50% of marriages fail and it's not like all the rest are successful, then the default position is not healthy, right?
So anyway, I just sort of wanted to go over that a little bit just to demystify the process a little bit.
And, of course, because we're all pretty aware of economics, we can understand that from an economics perspective, this sort of black market as a result of tyranny.
And that can help us, I think, understand the energy that's down there.
Because, of course, in many ways, in Russia, the most like under the Soviets style of command economy, a lot of the most entrepreneurial and energetic people would have ended up in the black market, right?
And typically did.
Right. And the same thing is true, of course.
This is why it's so important to reclaim these aspects of the self.
And Nathaniel Brandon talks about this a little bit in his book, The Disowned Self.
But the technique that I sort of developed, or rather, I shouldn't even say it was developed, the technique that...
What erupted in me during therapy was to engage these personalities as people and to see what comes from there because it is the most energetic, powerful and creative aspects of ourselves that go underground and we know that because when we think back to the dismal boredom of sitting in rows watching a teacher scrape shit on a blackboard with chalk we know that that was not an environment where creativity,
spontaneity, challenge, rationality, empiricism could have I think?
That we have within us was simply, I mean, was lived in a dictatorship, right?
The conformity and frightened aspects of ourselves don't live in a dictatorship, right?
Because they're free to not express themselves, so to speak, right?
But it's the most vital and creative aspects of ourselves that live in a dictatorship.
And this process that I went through of engaging these various aspects of myself, which I still do from time to time, I think had a lot to do with generating the creativity of Free Domain Radio, this conversation and so on.
So again, I'm not guinea pigging.
I am the guinea pig and it works for me.
So I just wanted to put that sort of out there as a brief introductory thing.
And so Greg, your experience of this process has been spotty or somewhat frustrating, right?
Yeah, it has been.
I mean, I've been trying on and off.
Actually, from way before this, too, this whole idea of the personality as an ecosystem.
I remember we talked about this last summer.
And I was sort of toying with it in my journal a little bit.
And it just always felt kind of manufactured to me.
And especially after reading your book, I mean, I can really see what you're talking about, because a lot of those...
A lot of the narratives in that book are surprising even to you.
That's what catches me off guard because every time I try that, it just feels to me like I'm writing a fictional narrative.
You feel like you're manipulating the responses and so on.
Yeah, and in the places where, even in the places where I'm not, it still feels manipulated, in a sense.
Like, well, you know...
You pick some voice to argue with, right?
And then as soon as they agree with each other, you're like, oh, well, we're supposed to be arguing, so I'm just going to take the contrary position here.
And it ends up where even where they're arguing, it's kind of synthetic, if that makes any sense.
Right. It does make sense.
And generally, you know, one of the reasons that I suggest this is a very strong way of building up the strength of the self, the ego as a whole, is that oftentimes we're afraid to give these, quote, other voices.
We're afraid to give them real energy.
Because we feel that that's crazy, right?
So what we do is we try to manage them, right?
In the way that a debate would be managed.
Like in the way that when you have presidential debates on television, there's just...
It's so managed, right?
There's no spontaneity, there's no energy, there's no...
It's very controlled and contrived, right?
And that's... That's the experience that you have in this process.
And I would say, you know, a man is measured in a sense by the size of his opposition, by the size of his enemies.
And I think that the more energy we pour into these opposing voices within our head...
The stronger we will become, right?
Because the more opposition we have, the more our inner voices argue with us, and the more credibility we give them, and I was just saying this to Nate with regards to his own posts of that, the stronger we become.
But that process is very counterintuitive, and that process really feels...
Like you're losing control.
And again, this doesn't mean like you're sprouting feathers and attempting to fly to Zurich or anything, but it's a very disorienting process.
And the empirical evidence for all this kind of stuff is...
I mean, I sort of go to two things, even other than contemporary psychology.
The first, and in a sense most obvious, is that we have debates in our head all the time.
That's how we make decisions, right?
Well, that's... That's true.
That's true. I don't deny that at all.
I mean, I'm constantly...
I'm forevermore debating with myself, so to speak.
Well, but at the second level, what happens is we are surprised by thoughts and feelings that erupt within us, right?
So sometimes we can read something, like an email someone says, that's critical.
And we're surprised by the strength of our reaction, right?
Yeah, yeah, I could see that.
And when we're surprised by aspects of ourselves, that means that we have non-integrated parts of ourselves that are kind of operating in an independent black market state.
But the second piece of evidence that I would provide for this multiplicity of personality thing is movies and plays, right?
I mean, we have a guy sitting down Writing different characters, right?
And, I mean, as somebody who's written novels and plays, and I guess a little movie, I mean, we just know that, right?
I mean, as Tennessee Williams said about A Streetcar Named Desire, when somebody said, how could you write Blanche DuBois so effectively?
He said, well, because I am Blanche DuBois, right?
And he said that I am a neurotic southern woman.
He was gay, right? And he'd been raised in a sort of a homophobic family and so on.
But he also was Stanley Kowalski, right?
Because he also was kind of macho and, as he writes about Stanley Kowalski, a gaudy seed bearer, like an alpha male.
So we know, simply from the evidence of movies and plays, that people have a multiplicity of, quote, characteristics or personalities within them.
And I think it is a tragedy when a resolution isn't made.
I think it causes a lot of energy to be lost.
And that of course is paralleled in the life of Tennessee Williams and other people and so on.
So yeah, I mean there's lots of evidence that this kind of stuff occurs.
But I think that if we engage these aspects of ourselves philosophically, then we can achieve integration and unity and strength.
And the reason for that of course is that when people oppose us, like real people outside of our own minds, when real people oppose us, We will react to them as we react to ourselves.
As I've always said, the state is an aspect of the family, but interaction with others is merely a reflection of our interaction with ourselves.
So I can take a lot of criticism and I can take a lot of disagreement because I'm open to criticism and disagreement from within myself.
If you clamp down on criticism and disagreement within yourself, then you will clamp down on criticism and disagreement within others.
And you will be unable to see others as independent people with their own agendas because they will trigger your relationship to yourselves, so to speak.
So, I just think it's really essential.
In terms of setting other people free, we first of all fundamentally have to take the top-down approach to our own personalities off the table, right?
Which is a hard thing to do as you're finding out because it feels sort of manufactured.
It feels like you're just kind of debating with a conscious part of yourself and making up responses, right?
Right, right. You said earlier about the You were saying loss of energy or...
like that.
And I guess – and you were talking about this fear of loss of control.
And to me it just feels like there's no control to be lost.
Well, but there is control to be lost if you feel that you are manufacturing responses.
If you feel like I'm arguing with some aspect of myself, but I'm manufacturing responses, then there is still control to be lost.
Because you're controlling the responses.
Well... If you are, right?
Maybe there is no...
Maybe there's nothing... This would be the theory, right?
Again, we can't prove it at the moment, but that would be the theory.
Well, I feel like, well, whenever I'm doing this, it feels to me like I've just busted into a cemetery, thrown open the crypt doors, and said, Fly!
Be free! Go!
Go! And the skeletons are just staring back at me.
Well, sure. Well, sure, but that's because you are the only one acting, right?
Um... Like, it's not a negotiation, and you're also not approaching these skeletons with humility, right?
You're in control of the situation.
You're saying, look, you're in a prison, and you need to be free.
I'm going to throw open the doors.
I'm managing the whole situation.
I'm in control. I'm setting you free.
Like, it's an ego-driven exercise, right?
Oh, I see what you're saying.
And you're also portraying them in yourselves as dead, right?
But here's the important thing to understand.
You think that these skeletons are in a prison or in a crypt, right?
Entombed or enclosed in some manner.
But to these skeletons, you are the one who is in a prison.
That's the surrender of ego that I'm talking about.
Where you don't say, I am going to descend in my chariot of fire with my keys of liberty and set you free.
But rather to say, set me free, please.
Because if you look at, to return to our economic metaphor, if you look at...
Somebody running the department of whatever-whatever in the Stalinist era versus somebody who's a freewheeling black market guy.
The freewheeling black market guy could very reasonably look at the top-level bureaucrat who's in fear of being thrown into a gulag and say, talk about setting me free, how about I set you free?
That makes sense.
That makes sense. And you've, of course, seen this in my book Crazy Talk, right?
But the humility that we think we are bringing the gift of liberty to our poor, benighted aspects of the self, but in many ways, they're far more free than we are, right?
Like, they know stuff that we don't know, right?
That's the important thing, not this magnanimous gesture of going down the staircase to unlock the dungeon, right?
Well, and that's the part that I really don't...
I don't understand how...
I mean, I can't know more than I know.
What do you mean? Right?
This is all...
Oh, sorry, sorry to interrupt.
I think I understand what you mean. Like, how can I have knowledge within me that I could reveal to myself?
Right. That I don't know.
Right. Well, we have two pieces of evidence for that, right?
And the first is dreams, right?
That's true. Right.
Dreams provide us incredibly accurate and amazingly etched views of our real life, right?
And I dream all the time, too.
Right, and the times that we have dipped into your dreams, the plus four dream, the ape dream, the times that we have dipped into your dreams have been amazingly illuminating, right?
Yeah, yeah, that's true.
I would also submit FDR as evidence of that, too, because...
After you de-spam-binned me, right, and started listening, I think read an article or two, or I think this was even prior to, I can't remember if podcast, I think this, but yeah, this is my podcast.
I mean, you started listening, and you grabbed it, right?
Oh, yeah. Well, how could you know?
Couldn't get enough of it.
Right, how can people know within a minute of listening to my podcast that this is it, right?
There's no evidence for it.
It's just a few minutes of a podcast.
But we also know from this idea of thin slicing, right, the blink thing, that people can process an incredible amount of information in a very short period of time, even if they're not consciously aware of it.
Yeah, yeah, that's true.
So we do have knowledge within us that we do not have conscious awareness of.
And this, of course, is inspiration as well, right?
When you are surprised by inspiration, that is a part of you that is working away that you're not even aware of, that's kicking up stuff.
Yeah, to be fair, that's exactly right.
I didn't mean to imply that you were suggesting some astral source of knowledge or anything like that.
That's certainly not...
I just hadn't...
Or I guess I was ignoring the...
Right. And this does have a lot to do with ignoring the obvious.
And what that means, of course, is that we were punished for not ignoring the obvious in the past, right?
That's a good point. And, I mean, but by far the biggest example of why this is a valid process is religion, right?
Oh, sure. Right, because people pray for answers.
Now, of course, God does not heal amputees, God does not give you equations, but that, of course, is not really what the unconscious is for, right?
But people pray to an omniscient being and get answers that work for them.
I mean, if the answers never worked, there'd be no such thing as religion.
Never. Never. Right.
If people said, you know, oh God, what should I do with my life?
I throw myself upon a higher power.
I throw myself upon your mercy.
You know, I let Jesus take the wheel.
I put myself in your hands, right?
If that had no validity whatsoever, then religion would not exist.
Well, except for the coercive enforcement of it.
Well, no, I understand, but the coercive enforcement of it does occur in part because there's something valuable in it.
In the same way that the 12-step program does actually work in terms of getting people off drugs and whatever, right?
Off alcohol. Okay...
And what then, of course, one of their first steps is surrender yourself to a, quote, higher power, right?
Yeah, that's true.
Now, we know that that higher power doesn't exist.
We know that when people are praying, that they're not going to anyone else, right?
And you had a podcast around somewhere in the 270s that was pretty much...
That exact same point, and I was in total agreement with that.
Right, and so God is within us, right?
I mean, this idea that there's a source of knowledge and wisdom that is within us that we can only access by asking questions of ourself and surrendering to the answers, that has efficacy, in my view, right?
Again, nothing can survive without any efficacy whatsoever.
And yes, it's inflicted upon people and so on.
But that's people attempting to control the definition of God, right?
I mean, the reason that denominations work so hard is that they want to control the money, the definition of this God thing, right?
But Buddhists have the same approach as well, that there is wisdom within you, that this is an enormously common aspect of all spirituality, of all superstition, of all religion.
The idea, too, that when you...
If you look at just about any of the sort of supernatural fairy tales, I think there are aspects of this, right?
That Socrates goes to...
Well, this is a semi-supernatural fairy tale, but Socrates goes to the oracle of Delphi and says, who's the wisest person?
And the oracle replies, you are.
And he says, that can't be right, because I don't know anything.
And then he goes around questioning everyone and finds out that everybody else is just pretending to know something.
So obviously there's no oracle at Delphi, right?
So Socrates was asking himself and got the answer back that he disagreed with, right?
Right, so that's fascinating.
That whole story is kind of a metaphor.
Yeah, that Socrates knew the answer.
But disagreed violently with the answer and spent years, decades, cross-examining the sophists around the ancient world to find the truth, right?
Yeah. Which he already knew at the beginning.
Yeah. Yeah, that's really interesting.
We can also look at the idea or the argument that a murder victim will haunt the vicinity until...
The murderer is brought to justice, and then the ghost leaves in peace, right?
I'm not sure I follow that metaphor.
You know the metaphor, right?
If you kill someone, then the ghost haunts the place until the murderer is caught, and then the ghost can depart in peace?
Right, right, right. I'm familiar with that.
I'm not sure how it applies here, though.
What it means is that there is a knowledge of a murderer, and also the knowledge of a murderer, that is in everybody's mind.
And they can't rest easy until justice is served.
Because obviously there are no ghosts, right?
There's just ideas in people's heads, right?
Right, right.
So they know that there's a murderer.
They know that there's a murderer.
And until they admit that fact and justly deal with the perpetrator, they can't sleep easy, right?
They can't rest. Yeah.
So this idea that there's knowledge within us that we just don't know, which can be shocking, surprising, annoying, right?
All that kind of stuff. And Socrates, of course, talked about this quite openly, right?
that he had a demon on his shoulder who would always be calm and quiet if he was doing the right thing and yet would become restive and tense and he would feel frustrated or irritated if he was doing the wrong thing.
And he learned to trust that demon on his shoulder, as he called it, to guide his actions.
Yeah.
Of course, there's no demon on his shoulder.
This is the same part of him that had the answers, right?
exactly. Yeah, that's exactly right.
So, we have, and again, this is not clinchy evidence, right?
This is just some supporting evidence that it's not that bizarre an idea.
But we have astounding levels of wisdom and insight and intelligence within us, but we can't make it.
You know, they're not puppets we can stick our hands up their butts, right?
We actually have to surrender to what is, quote, called a higher power or whatever, right?
Well, I mean, just...
My own experience over the last three or four weeks or so, I mean, it's kind of...
It's just been a kind of empirical validation of all of that.
That whole concept.
And so I'm totally, totally on board with the whole concept that you kind of have to pay attention to To every aspect of yourself.
Well, but you see here, this is where I would say that you get it and don't get it, right?
And you are a guy who's not unfamiliar with the concept of self-control, right?
So the reason that say you get it but don't get it is that you still think that you're going to free the dead, right?
That's true. Right?
So, there's not a vitality and a surrender.
Like, you're bringing them to life.
You are like Frankenstein creating life.
Be free, come back from the dead, and so on, right?
Which is not, I would say, surrendering yourself to a, quote, higher power.
But you're still in control of the process, and you are the hero, and you are the one with the energy, and you are the one who can magically bring people to life, and so on, right?
Well, but I just, I mean...
I mean, sorry, let me just sort of frame why I would view that as distinct.
If you had said to me, "I'm dead locked in a tomb and my voices are coming to free me," that would be pretty powerful and quite different, right?
Yeah.
That would be a whole different perspective.
I'm not saying that would be a totally right perspective.
I don't know what the right perspective is, except that I know that what you're saying about is not humility, right?
Well, I guess I'm...
I'm...
I'm trying to be humble, if that makes any sense.
So, sorry, the idea that you're able to raise the dead and set them all free, would that be a textbook definition of humility?
No, no, no. What I meant by that metaphor was that I think I'm coming to a prison and all I find are just these lifeless mannequins that I'm sort of Right,
but if you're going in search of a life force and you find only bodies, you're in the wrong place, right?
And I can guarantee you, and again, I apologize for all the freaky shit that we're talking about, totally in advance.
I recognize how lunatic it sounds, but let's just play with it and see what happens, right?
But I guarantee you that the bodies that you think you're looking at, which are your other aspects of the self, the bodies are in fact how you look to them.
You're looking into a mirror with their eyes, right?
I'm trying to...
If we assume...
We'll just call them the daemons, right?
After Matt Damon. No.
Let's have a word that just makes it...
We don't have to keep talking fragments of the self.
We'll call them the daemons, right? Well, to them...
And you've read some of Crazy Talks, so...
You know that to my daemons...
I looked small and weak and pitiful, right?
Yeah. And ignorant and vain and petty and all this, right?
Right, so I looked trapped and small to them, right?
And what's interesting, too, is that you didn't have a whole lot to say.
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, there's a conference table where we think, like this is what Nate was saying, I'll invite them to the conference table.
The big secret is that you're lucky to get invited to the conference table.
Because I would sit down there, and as you've read in this book, I would sit down and have a conversation with these daemons...
And they would then argue with themselves and they would actually tell me to shut up so they could keep talking, right?
Yeah, yeah, that's exactly right.
I mean, you would just like throw one question out and then they would go on for pages and then you would try to interject and they'd be like, who the hell are you?
Right. And they said quite rightly, look, you got us to this mess.
So, like now's the time for you not to talk, right?
Right. Right.
Now's the time for you to listen.
Right. So, that's just a shift in perspective, and I find that generally the best approach, like if I had to do it over again, and wasn't inventing the plane as it was taking off, if I had to do it again, it would be to approach these daemons with bended knee, with respect, with apology, and say, tell me what I don't know.
Well, and I keep trying that and nothing happens.
Right, but that's because you have the inner image of you being the one in control who's going to set them free, right?
It's very relaxing when you allow yourself to be buoyed up by these daemons.
Like, when you're trying to control and manage and direct, I mean, it's exhausting, right?
It's like trying to herd cats at gunpoint, right?
Like, it's really stressful. But when you relax and you say...
And, you know, this is also the evidence that I've had, which has been reinforced through this whole process of FDR. Right now we're up near a thousand.
That there has been some conscious plan, but a lot of it has been instinct.
And the instinct, I think, has been bang on about what to talk about and when and so on.
Right? So when I can't make a decision that...
Or when there's this gray area, it's only gray to me.
It's not gray to... The daemons, right?
So then I say, well, what should I do?
What do I feel like doing? And we'll have the debate, we'll have the negotiation, or sometimes it comes right away.
And I just trust that, right?
I can delegate, so to speak, right?
And that is very helpful, right?
That is to have aspects of yourself that know stuff that you don't, which you can trust and rely upon.
Is really, really helpful.
So in the podcast, Helpless, with the crying girl, I know all there is to know about the crying girl.
But the part of me that got irritated, I didn't say, well, this is just an unsympathetic part of me and I can't believe I'm getting irritated at somebody who's so sad and vulnerable and so on.
I'm just like, okay, what do you have to say?
She's annoying us.
And it turned out to be just the right thing.
So when you allow that sort of free play to occur, then it's kind of relaxing, right?
You don't have to think everything through.
You don't have to overanalyze everything and so on, right?
There's amazing power in these instincts.
But the challenge is, of course, how to get them to talk to you, right?
And in order to get them to talk to you, they have to trust that they're not being lured out of prison in order to be attacked, right?
Right, right. No, that's right.
Which means that you have to approach them respectfully, right?
I mean, that was the transition that occurred for me during this process, was when I began to approach these aspects of myself with, you know, hat in hand saying, I'm really sorry I screwed everything up, so to speak.
You know, I was doing the best I could.
But you tell me what the next thing is, what the next step is, and I will do my best.
Like, you know what I mean? Yeah, I know exactly what you mean.
Yeah. And you don't know how to do it, right?
Because it doesn't work for you.
Well, I think I'm doing it, and obviously I'm not.
I mean, because nothing ever happens.
Okay, well, what is the daemon's name, or what can we refer to him or her as?
At the moment, that is the depressing one.
Is it self-criticism guy?
Who is it? Well,
Well, I guess that would be a good one to start with.
I can't think of one offhand.
and Okay, so there are a couple of things that I would assume to start, right?
This is sort of things, because if you think you know, then nobody's going to respond, right?
Like, if you think you know what people are going to say to you, you don't really listen, and they don't really tell you, right?
So, the first thing that I would stress is that we'll call him self-criticism guy, right?
Or do you have a better name or a name that's more emotionally resonant?
I don't have names for any of these guys.
Okay. So, self-criticism guy.
Actually, that's going to be kind of awkward, right?
We'll just call him Critic, right?
Mr. Critic. Okay.
So, the first thing to understand is that you don't know what Mr.
Critic is really criticizing.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that.
Well, you think that you have an understanding of what Mr.
Critic is saying, right? When you think of your own self-criticisms, you think that you understand where they're coming from and what the content is, and then you oppose, right?
So when Mr.
Critic attacks you, you provide evidence to the contrary, right?
Yeah. Is that generally how it works?
So somebody says, Mr.
Critic says, you're doing everything wrong, right?
And you say, no, I'm not, right?
Yeah, basically, yeah.
Yeah, well, that doesn't work, right?
Well, no, because it always, it just ends up, just, no you're not, yes you are, no you're not, yes you are, kind of.
So what's happening is that you're dealing with the surface level of the criticism, right?
So, Mr. Critic says, you send an email to the wrong person or whatever and says, well, how come, why don't you check things more carefully before you just up and down?
It's like, well, I do, accidents happen, blah, blah, it doesn't matter, right?
All this kind of stuff, right? So, you're dealing with the surface level of the criticism.
So, you're like a married couple who are fighting about dishes who doesn't get that it has nothing to do with dishes, right?
Yeah, that's an interesting way to put it.
But it's somewhat valid, right?
And as long as they keep fighting about dishes without understanding that it's not about dishes, the fight will never end, right?
Right. What I usually do is I just...
Well, and what I... I mean, the criticisms are usually valid, so I just...
I just do that.
Right. So, okay, well, I'll be more careful in checking the emails and so on, and then something else comes up, right?
Right. Yeah.
There's a Windows noise that's kicking around in the background.
I don't know who's got that, but if you could turn your mic up, that'd be great.
And this is what I talk about in the RTR book, about a fixed topic that couples will fight about rather than getting to the root of the problem, right?
So you think that you know what Mr.
Critic is criticizing, but I guarantee you that you don't.
Because if you did, he wouldn't be doing what he's doing.
Okay. So, for instance, when a mother nags her children, it's never about the specifics of what she's nagging about.
She's expressing loneliness or frustration or rage.
It's always something completely unrelated that's just bubbling up in that manifestation, right?
Sure. Well, you say sure like I'm not sure you're sure.
Uh, no, I mean...
I'm agreeing with it.
Yes, but it sounded more like a concession to move the point.
Just to me, right? I could be wrong.
it sounded more like a concession to keep the point moving I could be wrong We can just keep moving anyway.
That was my thought. Yeah, I mean, I agree with that, that typically those...
Although I don't...
I don't have a specific example in mind of what else it could be, but I mean...
Okay, sorry, give me something that you've criticized yourself for over the last day or two.
All right.
Well, that's a good question.
Well, um...
Do you want me to give you one if you can't remember?
Sure. Okay.
Well, I think that what you've criticized yourself for over the last day or two is your strong reaction to troll fests.
Like you get mad and then you say, well, I shouldn't get mad or this kind of stuff, right?
Well, it's more like, why can't I?
I don't really...
Why can't I what?
Get mad. Why can't I get mad?
So I should get mad, but I'm not mad.
No, more like...
More like, I'm gonna get mad whether you like it or not.
Am I the you in that sentence?
Um Man this is really confusing Um You're making it confusing, right?
I mean, because you're normally a very clear communicator, but here is where things get a little bit naughty for you, right?
Yeah. So there's some funk here, which is good, right?
Because when we approach the fog, we're approaching the black market, right?
Yeah, I suppose that's true.
I mean, the drug dealers have lookouts, right?
But, alright, so, I guess what I'm saying is I'm not convinced that that was really a self-criticism.
Okay, but see, here's the strange thing, that you claim that you're consistently self-criticizing, but when I ask you for one, you can't think of any, right?
Does that seem strange to you?
Yeah, it's completely strange.
Okay. And that means that it's useful, right?
Well, and also maybe I'm just...
I don't know, maybe just sort of...
I mean, I could just be self...
claiming that I'm self-criticizing just to...
As a me-too kind of a thing, right?
Like you don't think that you really do self-criticize, but you're saying that you do for some reason?
Yeah. But that would be an act of self-criticism, right?
I'm not good enough if I don't self-criticize, or I'm missing something if I don't self-criticize?
Like if you self-criticized out of the sake of conformity or feeling that that was what was necessary as part of this particular process, that would be an act of self-criticism, right?
I'm missing something if I'm not self-criticizing.
I'm not doing the right thing if I'm not self-criticizing.
Oh, that's an interesting point.
Yeah. Because conformity is avoiding self-criticism.
It's not avoiding the requirements of others.
It's avoiding self-attack, right?
I mean, whenever we're outside the power of our parents or the teachers or whatever, when we become three, young, and 21, then it's ourselves that we're...
That we're avoiding the criticism of, right?
Other people don't have any direct power over us.
Right, sure. So, yeah, so I think that the problem may be that the whole thing is fogged for you, right?
Not that you ask questions of these aspects, of these daemons, and you don't get responses, but you don't even know what questions to ask, right?
Consciously, right? That's absolutely true.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, when I sit down and I try to write this stuff out, it's just like, okay, you know, where to begin, right?
So I would just...
Well, see, but that's the thing, is that you think that you begin.
Okay. All right, so you're like the cop...
You're like the DEA agent running down the drug neighbourhood shouting, it's safe to come out, right?
I suppose. I suppose.
So here we are back in Switzerland, right?
There are many people in Switzerland, right?
Well... And see, this is the rigidity of your self-control, right?
Because we can't even get to a role play, right?
Because you have an enormous investment.
This is just my thought, my theory, whatever.
It doesn't mean anything other than it's my thought and my theory.
But you have a lot invested in self-control.
And you have a lot of tension, I think, fear and anxiety around a loss of self-control.
And that diminishes you, I think, as a human being, right?
In the same way that...
I mean, this is the funniest thing, right?
Is that you're an anarchist, right?
And we say, look, if we stop the government from providing education, education will flourish, right?
If we relax centralized control over the ecosystem of the economy, that ecosystem will flourish, right?
Right. But then the only way that you approach your ecosystem is...
With a sense of control, right?
Or some sort of directedness, anyways.
Some sort of directedness, right.
So you experience a lot of self-criticism, but you have no conscious knowledge of that self-criticism, right?
Like when asked later, what do you self-criticize, you don't know, right?
Yeah, that would have to be the case.
I mean, if I actually am self-criticizing, but Sorry?
But, I mean, it could be the case that I'm...
I don't know, maybe not.
Well, look, we all self-criticize, and that's healthy.
Everybody self-criticizes, that's healthy.
And I think that if we were to ask just about anybody who's known you for any period of time, does Greg criticize himself?
What do you think they'd say?
Probably yes. You mean probably they would say yes or yes, Greg probably does self-criticize?
Both. Okay.
Both answers are basically the same, aren't they?
No, no. One is a probable knowledge of a certainty that Greg does self-criticize and the other is a certainty of a probability.
I'm certain that there's a probability that Greg self-criticizes.
But it doesn't really matter. I mean, you're saying that there would be Some uncertainty.
So we can break radio silence with the other people on the call.
if you have a mic and you want to speak about your experience of Greg or interacting with Greg, do you think that Greg is self-critical or not?
I'm just typing this into the chat window as well.
Just to see what...
Yes, says one person.
Yes, says another person.
We're just waiting for...
And then there's laughter, as if the question is not particularly sensible.
Yes, yeah.
Is there any doubt, any ambiguity in this area?
No, no, not really.
Nope. Not a bit. None.
Zero. Zilch.
No. Laughter.
So there may be a little bit less ambiguity in other people's perception of this than you have, right?
Right. Sorry, just continuing.
So empirically, again, this doesn't mean anything other than this is just what people's experience is, right?
It doesn't mean anything.
But other people experience you as self-critical without any doubt.
Okay. Again, this is nothing other than this is other people's.
So you had a prediction of other people's experience, right?
Sure, sure, sure. Which turned out to be...
Oh, sorry, Greg's inner voice has sabotaged the Skype apparently.
But, sorry, someone got dropped.
But you had a prediction of other people's responses to your levels of self-criticism, which turned out to be not accurate, right?
Well... That doesn't mean that they're right.
Sorry, that doesn't mean that they're right.
And it doesn't mean that you do self-criticize, but in that specific prediction, you weren't.
No, I'm perfectly okay with accepting the verdict of the group, absolutely.
But what I'm saying is that I wasn't making any kind of prediction.
Yes, you were. Because if I said if you were to guess how other people would judge your level of self-criticism, there was ambiguity in your prediction of their response.
Or you predicted that their response would be somewhat or to some degree or whatever, right?
Right. And...
I mean, the thought that came up was sort of...
I don't know, like it doesn't...
This is going to sound, I guess, callous, but the thought that came up was that it didn't matter to me one way or the other how they answered.
Right, okay. Okay, so let's talk to this part of you that's callous, right?
Because this is the part that's floating up, right?
Okay. Okay. So, Mr.
Callis, or whatever we want, we can just call him Greg, Greg C, rather than Greg G. But, so, we just say, and just try and let this part of you answer, right?
Because it's a perfectly valid and healthy part of you, right?
So, you don't care that people think you're self-critical.
Yeah. Okay.
Yeah, that's right.
And tell me a little bit more about that.
Just...
What do you want to know?
Well, tell me more about...
that you don't care about these people that you have some relationship with, right?
I mean, these people aren't your enemies, right?
No, they're not my enemies, certainly not.
Okay, so, and it's not like you have no relationship, right?
It's not like something came into your spam bin from some place in China that says you are self-critical.
No, right, right, right, right.
Okay, so when you say that you don't care that these people say that you are self-critical, Does that mean that you don't care about them as a whole, or you don't care about this opinion of theirs?
This opinion.
But you care about other opinions that they have.
Because clearly, if you don't care about any of their opinions or thoughts or emotions, then you don't care about them, right?
So if you care about them, then you must care about Some of their opinions, to some degree, right?
That would have to be true.
Well, I don't want to sort of fence you in here, like I'm just asking.
I mean, if I'm not right, then just tell me, right?
No, I'm just thinking about that, and I mean, either I do or I don't, right?
Well, no, you could care.
I mean, I could care about your opinions on everything except jazz, right?
Right, sure. So, Mr.
Acoustic, what was it?
Cold, I can't remember the word, right?
Mr. Callas.
Mr. Callas guy, right?
So, is it that you don't care about these people's opinions in general, or is it just this particular area of self-criticism that you don't care about their opinions?
Now, here's the problem, is that when you heard other people role-play, and this is just a comparator, right?
They actually role-played, right?
Because what you're doing is you're trying to process the response, right?
You're trying to think out a response.
Oh, yeah. Whereas if you just pretend, just pretend, and if you lift the self-censorship and you just say, I don't care what comes out, Let's see what happens, right?
But this is the self-control aspect, right?
Because you're like, input, analyze, analyze, right?
Analyze, manufacture, run through the process, run through the ticker tape, you know?
This is written in basic, and it needs to be converted to assembler, and put it out and scanned in, and then OCR will provide the response back, which I can then convert from Pascal to Turtle to Assembler to Response.
Right, see, that's not particularly role-playing.
Okay. Yeah.
Right? So this is just funsies, right?
We can throw this whole recording away.
It doesn't matter if you end up speaking in tongues.
Who cares, right? Okay, so is it, Mr.
Callis, that you don't care about these opinions in general, or is it just this opinion that you don't care about?
Oh, I don't care about these opinions in general.
Okay, so there are these people who you've interacted with, or, I'm sorry, I shouldn't even assume, have you not interacted with these people on the board?
board?
Like, do you never get the hands to type?
Um...
Uh... Um...
Okay, let me ask it another way, because I can sense interference from Mr.
Blocker. Let me ask it another way.
If you don't care about these opinions in the chat window, I would assume that you've never particularly talked to them, right?
Well, that would have to be true if...
Well, see, I'm not asking whether it would have to be true.
I'm asking about you, Mr.
Kalas' direct experience.
Have you ever talked with the people in the chat window?
Have you ever raised your head and glared at them and said, I don't care about any of you people?
No. Okay, good.
I mean, that would sort of make sense, right?
Because if I don't care about people's opinions, I don't interact with them, right?
Right. Okay, so you believe that these people are not worth listening to, right?
You'd have to if you don't care about their opinions, right?
Yeah. Okay.
Now, is it just these people in the chat window or is it everyone?
Oh, it's everyone. Everyone.
See, now we're getting somewhere. This is good.
All right. So nobody's opinions are worth listening to, right?
Right. Yeah.
Okay, that's fantastic.
And can you tell me why that is the case?
Let's assume that you're totally correct, that everyone's an idiot or manipulative or whatever, and I'm totally willing to accept that as a premise.
Maybe you're completely right, and this is the one thing that we've been missing to live an even happier life, right?
Why is it that nobody's opinions are worth listening to?
What is the nature of those people that makes them dismissible?
Well, because... See, you know.
Don't pause. Just tell me. Just let it all out.
All the disgust with people!
Because everybody just wants something from you, I guess?
I'm sorry, that didn't sound very callous.
I mean, callous people don't ask if their opinions are okay, right?
So, dredge up the dyspeptic titanic, right?
The misanthropic Vesuvius, the Atlantist of antagonism, right?
So, Mr. Callas, tell me why people should not be listened to.
What is it that they're trying to do that makes them so unworthy of being listened to?
Because they all suck.
Excellent. They all suck.
Okay? Tell me about their suckiness.
Maybe you're completely right.
I'm totally open to this thesis.
Tell me about the depths and n-dimensional multitudinous of their suckiness.
Because... Okay, I'm sensing a little bit of interference from Mr.
Blocker, right?
Who doesn't want to offend people.
But Mr. Blocker...
Mr. Callous doesn't care about offending people, so let him talk.
And maybe he's right.
Maybe everybody does suck.
We'd better listen. Well, of course he's not right.
Ah, see, why are you talking?
Mr. Callis has got the microphone.
Mr. Callis, tell me about how everybody sucks.
Well, because...
Yeah, because...
Because...
Oh, Mr.
Callous, I cannot tell you how disappointed I am.
Because you came across so strong, and now you're like, uh, uh, and I don't think that's you, right?
I think that you're running things through the committee, right?
Through the censor, right?
But I think that you have very strong opinions about why people suck, and I think you really want to tell us.
Doesn't mean we're going to do anything, we don't even have to publish this as a podcast, but tell me, why do people suck?
What do they do to you? What is their agenda?
What is it that makes them so sucky?
Manipulative.
cynical self-important
deluded closed-minded
closed-minded people Hateful. Excellent. Okay, I appreciate that.
I think that's damn good.
Okay, so people are manipulative, cynical, self-important, deluded, closed-minded, and hateful.
So, why do they seek to interact with you if this is who they are?
What is their goal? What is their purpose?
What do they want? And I'm not saying this because I know the answer.
I genuinely don't know the answer.
Yeah, that's a good question.
If this is who people are, why do they interact with you?
Why do they ask you questions?
And you have every reason to believe what you're believing.
Let's go with that. Right, so I'm not asking you why they interact with you as a way of deflating this perspective, but of illuminating it further.
If it is true that people are manipulative, cynical, self-important, deluded, close-minded, and hateful, what is it that they're after when they interact with you?
Whatever they can get from me.
What is it that they want from you?
That's a good question.
Well, you have a belief about that.
Mr. Cynical has a belief about that, which he genuinely believes and which might be true.
So what does Mr. Cat Calus perceive these hateful people as after when they interact with him?
Or we can ask him what I Sorry, to do harm, right? To do harm?
Okay. Well, is that a question?
Are you asking Mr...
No, that's the thought that came up.
So tell us about the harm that they want to do us, these people.
And we know that you, Mr.
Callas, are entirely right.
Because we know these people.
These people do exist, and they have had a lot of power over us in their life, and you know them down to a T, and you are right.
So tell us what the agenda is and how it is that they're trying to hurt us, these people.
They want basically to...
To humiliate, really, I think.
Now, what is the process, when I ask that question, what is the process that occurs?
Are you introspecting to find the answer?
Are you relaying the question, seeing what thoughts and feelings come up, and then seeing if that's right or wrong, and then communicating it back?
Yeah.
Well, yeah, I mean...
But that's not how this works.
Again, this is just my theory.
It doesn't mean anything, right? But the thought is, or the idea, or the approach is, and what you've heard other people in terms of the roleplay do, right, is they just answer, right?
They don't relay. They don't figure it out.
They just hear and answer, right?
Yeah, but I don't have an automatic answer.
I think that you do. I think we should work with, since it's worked so universally with other people, I think that you do.
Alright. And I think you're putting a lot of strain, in a sense.
Oops. What?
Are you there? You cut out for just a hair of a second there.
I think that you're putting a lot of strain on yourself to try and do all of this relaying, right?
This is the overthinking part, and this is the pauses, and this is the...
If you relax control over yourself, and you assume that you have the answers already, but you don't know them, and you need to relax instead of...
Because you're working harder to come up with these answers, right?
Than you would if you were just in a resting stage, right?
Yeah, that's true. Right, so then we know it's not genuine, right?
We know it's not authentic.
Right, but when I go into a resting state, there's nothing.
No, that's not true.
If there's nothing, it's not a resting state.
So let's just, again, pretend that you're in an acting studio.
Pretend that you're playing a character.
Pretend that anything that you want, that means that you don't have to analyze these responses.
Pretend that we're just doing an improv, right?
And you're playing a guy called Mr.
Callus, right? Alright, but then I'm just going to be making up answers.
Well, you don't know that.
Okay. Let's switch characters.
Let's talk to Mr. Resistor.
Because he's the guy who's got the helm right now, right?
Yeah, pretty much.
Okay, so this is kind of pissing him off, right?
This whole process.
Yeah. Yeah, it is.
Right. Okay, so tell me how this process is stupid.
And ridiculous. And maybe even manipulative.
And maybe even completely psychobabbly.
Give me the whole negative spiel on this process.
Alright. Well, because...
Well, because everything that's in my head is in my head.
I mean I have a consciousness and I mean it can't be any other way I mean, what I say goes, right?
The idea of just...
To me, a state of complete relaxation is I go to sleep.
Okay, but how does this process make you feel, Mr.
Resister? So when I say, you do have these voices...
Frustrated. Frustrated, okay.
Frustrated, because...
Well, the more I'm pushed to find these voices, I guess, the more the frustration rises to anger, of course.
Okay, and tell me about the anger.
Because I can't make it work.
Right, so you've kind of been asked the impossible, right?
Yeah. Because I'm saying that not making it work is what makes it work, but the only thing that you know how to do is to make it work, right?
Whoops, now you confused me.
Well, if I say that the only way to get control is to lose control and all you know how to do is to turn the dial of control up, then I'm asking from you the impossible, right?
Oh, yeah, I guess that's true.
In his case, it would...
Okay, so from the perspective of the guy who totally hates this process, and maybe completely right, maybe this process is total bullshit, right?
Maybe. Maybe everybody else is playing along.
Maybe it's... I'm totally open to that thesis.
Maybe it's complete nonsense.
Or maybe... This is where...
Sorry, go on.
Well, and see, this is where I... I guess this is where the disconnect is, because I don't think it's total bullshit, but at the same time...
I mean, I don't think it's total bullshit.
I mean, obviously it works, and when I've seen it played out, it seems to...
It seems to work, but...
So, sorry, what happened to the guy who...
Mr. Resister, who didn't...
We were just talking to him, right?
And now this other guy's come back, or you've come back, right?
Because you keep cutting off these conversations with people, right?
So these demons, these aspects, right?
You're like, okay, I'm going to lift the lid, you can have a sentence or two, right?
I'm going to come back in and take over, right?
Alright, alright. Does that make sense?
You have the talking stick for a grand total of eight seconds, and then I'm going to take it back.
Well, all that's really happening is I'm just...
Putting a wig and some clothes on my own doubts, right?
And propping it up as a separate person.
And that just, to me...
I don't know.
Maybe I just don't get this.
Oh, you totally get it.
Because this is the one thing that you won't do.
Right? Because, I mean, in terms of following this philosophy, you've kind of thrown yourself into it heart and soul, right?
Yeah. Right, so this is the one thing that, for you, would be the costliest part of the conversation.
And everybody has that part, right?
So if this process were to work for you and you were to fluidly be able to converse in these different defenses or aspects of yourself...
What would it cost you?
What would it cost me?
What would it cost me?
Like, what would I be giving up?
Yeah, what would it cost you, right?
What would I lose?
What'd I have to spend?
Um...
Well, I mean, I have everything to gain from I have everything to gain from it, right?
Well, but that can't be the case, right?
Because if you had everything to gain from it and nothing to lose, right?
See, again, you're avoiding the topic that there's something to lose, right?
There must be something to lose for you because you're heavily resistant to this process, right?
You keep jumping out of it.
You keep, you know, like a sort of voice comes up and then you sort of jump in and manage it and so on.
So you have a strong resistance to this process.
And again, the process may be complete nonsense and so on, but we all have the capacity to roleplay, right?
I mean, everybody that I've talked to can do it and I know that you can do it too because you debate with yourself all the time and you have a multiplicity of perspectives and opinions within you, right?
That's true, but they don't have their own identity, if that makes any sense.
But they have voices. I'm not saying that they have full histories and you know where they went to school and stuff, right?
They have voices, right?
We're not looking for a Stanislavski acting exercise, right?
But you have arguments with the voices in your head, right?
We all do. And I'm not saying that they have accents and one of them is a Jewish schoolgirl.
I'm not saying anything like that, right?
But you have arguments with people and yourself, right?
Or with aspects of yourself.
I have competing thoughts.
No, they're not competing, they're opposing.
Okay. I'm not sure I understand the distinction.
Well, a competing thought is, we want to go north, what's the best way to get there, right?
An opposing thought is, I want to go north, no, I want to go south.
Yeah, that's true. Well, it depends on the subject matter, too.
Sometimes they're competing, sometimes they're opposing.
Oh my god, you're such a hair splitter, Greg.
Well, that's true, but there's a little distinction here I'd like to understand.
Yeah. Right?
And what you're trying to do is frustrate me, right?
And I guess I'm succeeding.
Well, for sure, right? And again, that doesn't mean anything.
It just means that I am experiencing frustration, right?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Which means that you're experiencing a lot more frustration, right?
Tons of it. Right.
So you feel kind of really frustrated and mad about this particular conversation or process, right?
Well, and mad at myself because, I mean, I should get this by now.
Well, but you see, if you're mad at yourself, you're not RTRing with yourself, right?
Because all this is is RTR with the self.
That's all it is. Yeah, you're right.
That's all this is. And in terms of opposing thoughts, you don't have competing thoughts about whether you want a girlfriend.
You have opposing thoughts about whether you want a girlfriend, right?
Yeah. So, the fact that you get mad at yourself and frustrated and don't think to say, I'm curious as to why I'm frustrated, right?
I wonder why I'm frustrated.
Let me ask myself and see what I say.
It just means that it's going to cost you something to do that.
I'm frustrated because I can't figure this out.
But it's not something that you figure out.
That's why it's frustrating.
This bypasses all of your considerable intellectual and analytical defenses, right?
This is around direct experience, trust of the self, trust of your instincts, and spontaneous response, right?
Sure.
And spontaneous response for you is about as real as an elvish fairy.
Yeah, I don't even know what it would look like.
Right, right, right, right.
And that's the fundamental self-criticism, right?
I must vet everything before it goes out.
Yeah. Right.
That's why you can't see the self-criticism.
Editorial staff. Well, it's not editorial.
It's more like the Gulag censorship review board.
Because an editorial board would be, this might be slightly more polished if, right?
But you operate under a lot more stress than that.
If you get it wrong, X, right?
Maybe that's why I pause all the time.
Yeah, it would seem to me that would be the case.
And that's very frustrating for you, right?
I mean, it would be great to be spontaneous and whatever, right?
It would be more satisfying and richer for you to live and experience interactions in the moment, right?
And to trust that your responses were going to be perfectly appropriate, and you didn't need to censor, and you didn't need to think through.
And that doesn't mean that you never think, but it would be nice to have that freedom, right?
Sure, sure.
Yeah, that's exactly right.
There would be.
Right, right.
Amen.
Right. So how do I get there?
Well, I can't answer that right now.
I mean, I have no idea, right?
Because the defense against it is so strong.
I don't know. I don't have to mull it over.
I don't know what, right?
Because anything that I give you, you're just going to block me, right?
I don't want to.
Oh, look, of course you do.
Right? Come on, own that, right?
Of course you do. I'm not saying that all of you does, right?
I'm not saying that all of you does, right?
Yeah, you're right, you're right.
But you absolutely, completely, totally want to, right?
Yeah, if I didn't, I would just do it.
Yeah, and you'd maybe get it wrong, right?
Maybe it would be like completely, but you won't let yourself do it, right?
Well, but there's, you can't get it wrong, right?
There's no getting it wrong.
Yes, but that's not what part of you thinks, right?
I mean, a pretty dominant part of you, right?
That there's some disaster that will occur if this clicks, right?
If this works. Right.
Right, that something's gonna...
Like, I'm gonna end up saying something that's gonna really be not good.
Right, that you're going to burn some bridges, that you're going to say to me, Steph, you know this manipulative, cynical, self-important, deluded, closed-minded, and hateful person is actually you, Steph, who's pushing me to do this, who's not listening to me.
Like, you know, you might burn bridges with me.
There's some disastrous scenario that will occur if this happens, right?
Yeah. So that's the censorship, right?
That's the self-control.
That's the self-management, right?
Or self-censorship. Well, I mean, because what does it say about me that I think those things about people?
Right. You're assuming that everybody doesn't already know?
Say again? Well, you're assuming that people don't think that you're cynical about people.
Like, we all think we have these big secrets, right?
That if I hide these things, right?
If I don't say these things, then nobody knows, right?
Yeah, that's true.
And, you know, talk about hiding in plain sight, right?
Yeah, yeah, that's true.
Self-censorship never works.
In fact, we broadcast what we want to hide all the more when we want to hide it.
That's a good point. Well, you know that with other people, right?
When people are acting tough, do you believe that they're tough?
No. Of course not.
Yeah, you're right about that. You're right about that.
Remember when Bo came on and said, I'm such a player, I'm so confident around women?
Did you really feel that he was confident around women?
Not when you have to do that, no.
No, of course, right? So, that which we're trying to hide, we reveal.
Completely, all the more so, right?
When Nate was talking about how great Rachel was...
Oh...
That was pretty obvious.
Yeah, well, tell me one that's not.
Including yours. I don't want people to know that I'm cynical and skeptical of people.
Hmm. Right.
So the hiding is just a sham, right?
You're hiding things from yourself.
You're totally revealing them to everyone else.
That's the funniest thing, right? You think that you're revealing them to yourself and hiding them to other people, but the complete opposite is true.
And I'm not asking myself why I'm like that, because I think that...
because I don't think that needs to be questioned.
No, it's because you hate yourself for thinking that.
It's because you think that only a really bad, dyspeptic, nasty person would think these things.
Well, and that's true.
It's true that that is the case or it's true that you think that?
Well, my mom was very much like that.
Right. So you identify the cynicism and hostility with your mother, and so you're like, damn it, I'm never going to let myself do that, right?
Well, that's exactly right.
Right. So basically I'm asking you to become your mom, right?
Which is why you said a hat and a dress earlier.
A wig and a dress or something like that.
That's a good point. Right, right.
Well, so that's the disaster, right?
That you become a hateful human being, right?
Hateful, destructive, violent, controlling.
Yeah, all those things I said, I was actually saying about myself.
Well, I think that you were saying about your mom, right?
But there's sort of a confusion here, right?
Oh, there's a big confusion, I guess.
Right. So, obviously, if what you get is that I'm saying, become your mom, then you might have a certain amount of resistance to that, right?
Possibly. Yeah, well, the dirty little secret is that I already am, right?
Well, yeah, I mean, you're either it unconsciously and it runs your life, or you're not, right?
I mean, either it's unconscious, in which case you don't have any control over it, Or it's conscious, in which case you can negotiate with it and bring that wisdom to the table.
Yeah, but is that wisdom?
It's wisdom about your mom, I'll tell you that.
But when it's unconscious, it gets extrapolated to everything.
It's not specific.
So there's a genuine part of you that feels this is femininity, this is womanhood, this is people.
Because it's not conscious and attached to its proper object, which is your mom, right?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And you still quake before this in the same way that you quaked before your mom, right?
You don't feel strong enough to say, I can take this on.
I'm bigger than this.
Well... I think I am.
Well, no, but because when I asked you to give voice to the callousness, you wouldn't do it, right?
Yeah, I couldn't do it.
You're right. Well, I think you could.
We don't have to do it now, but you could, right?
But the block is that you feel that it's bigger than you.
And that's how it always looks when it's unconscious.
We look down...
And the water of the unconscious magnifies everything.
We think, my God, if I let this demon out, he's going to take me over.
I'm going to lose myself. He only looks big because he's underwater.
Bring him up, he fits in your hand.
Yeah, that's a good point.
That's a good point. Yeah.
And that's why I say, like, we can only be bigger, as big as our biggest enemy, right?
That we're willing to take on, right?
So, if you take this on, and the how, I don't know.
I don't know, it's not going to mull it over, right?
The how is going to be a trick, right?
It's going to be tricky, right? It could be writing, it could be conversation, I don't know.
But being comfortable with the hatred that you have for people is essential.
It's essential. Because otherwise it's the mafia, right?
When stuff's underground, it's violent, right?
The mafia is violent because it doesn't have courts, right?
If you legalize drugs, it's no longer violent, right?
Yeah, but...
If I... If I legalize my misanthropy, what's the consequence of that, right?
It's no longer misanthropy.
How so?
Well, in the same way, you say, well, God, the mafia is violent enough when it's illegal.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Imagine if we legalize it.
Well, then it's no longer violent because the mafia fades away and is replaced by efficient capitalist free market corporations.
Right. So if you say, if you integrate your hatred of people, it will no longer be hatred of people, because what will happen is you will identify the particular characteristics that you hate in people, and you will only hate those people who exhibit those characteristics, which means it turns from an attack on everyone to a defense against bad people.
Oh, that makes sense, I guess.
But I guess I'm trying to follow the logic or the process here.
So I have this compulsion to dislike everyone around me.
No. Unconsciously dislike everyone around you.
I don't know about compulsion. You do already.
It's not a compulsion too. You already have a part of you that dislikes everyone.
Okay. Okay.
And it's not a compulsion too.
It comes from a genuine and very real time in your history when everyone around you was...
Shitty.
Yeah, dislikable.
Thank you.
You think it's prejudicial, but it's empirical.
for certain times in your life.
Oh, yeah.
Actually, uh...
Yeah, that's true.
Right. It's not a compulsion.
It wasn't just adults either, it was everyone.
Classmates, teachers, extended family, parents, siblings.
Everybody was hateful, right?
Yeah, at the time it was, yeah.
Right. Right.
So it feels crazy to say that everyone is hateful, but you've had direct experience of that.
But I also realize that, you know, situations change, right?
People don't stay that way.
What do you mean people don't stay that way?
No, I mean, what I mean is, I mean, I don't, I'm not living at home and going to school now.
Great. This is what you've got to do.
You've got to stop making shit up.
You've got to surrender your story-making facility of making up excuses for yourself.
Because not half an hour ago, not 45 minutes ago, you said, part of me doesn't care what the people in the chat window say.
So don't give me this story about how you know people change.
That's bullshit. At some level, right?
And with all due respect.
Don't just pull this shit out of your air, right?
Well, I know that people change, right?
Because it doesn't mean anything based on what you actually said, what you actually experienced.
You work empirically. Instead of pulling the quote right answer out of the air and saying, well, yes, intellectually, I mean, look and say, well, how did I actually experience when I got feedback from other people?
Well, part of me said, I don't care.
They're hateful. Right?
That's the actual reality of your experience.
That's the empirical facts that you have to work with.
And you can choose to make up stuff and say, well, intellectually, I know this, that, and the other.
Or you can actually say, what is my experience?
Right, but it's not my experience. But it's not the empirical experience now.
Yes, it is the empirical experience now.
Because when I gave you the feedback that came from the chat window, you dismissed it.
By saying, well, people are hateful and manipulative and this and that.
that.
And I know it was a role play in this and that, but that was what your empirical experience was.
That was my...
wait a minute. You didn't say, wow, that's interesting, people.
Tell me more. That's not where the conversation went, right?
You never asked anyone about their experience of you.
Well, because I was trying to roleplay.
Why wasn't your roleplay, tell me more?
That's where you went, right?
It's just empirical facts.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth.
This is where it went, right?
No, and you're absolutely right about that.
Right, so you can make stuff up and say, well, intellectually, I understand this, and I was trying to roleplay, but you're just resisting the basic facts, right?
Yeah, but what I'm saying is that it wasn't...
That wasn't empirical, that was an interpretation on my part, right?
To call everyone in the chatroom a hateful bastard for agreeing with you that I'm cynical, besides being self-referential and self-confirming...
Look, you've got to just stop making this stuff up, right?
This was your experience.
You got feedback that was counter to your predictions, right?
And you said a part of me wants to, or a part of me feels that I don't care about their opinions.
I'm callous about them.
Yeah, that's true.
We're just working with the facts here, right?
That's all we do, right?
Right. Right.
You didn't say, you know, I just had a part of me called RTR CuriosityBot that wants to know more.
That's also true.
This is just where you went. And you can either make up a bunch of stuff, like, well, intellectually I understand and it was just a role play and I didn't...
Right? You can either just make up a bunch of stuff or you can just work with the facts and say, that's where I went.
That's where the current is, right?
Right. And that's just a fact, right?
Instead of making stuff up, excuses and stories and this and that, you can just say, well, that's an interesting fact for me to know.
Doesn't mean you're a bad person, doesn't mean you're an evil guy, doesn't mean anything.
It's just, hey, this is an interesting fact about myself.
Yes. Yes, and it's interesting why.
Because... Because... Because...
Well, because... One, because...
It's a disconnect, obviously.
I'm going to go...
Well, this is what I'm going to suggest.
I think that, because you're trying to think through it again, right, which is sort of going back to the same place we started.
I don't know how not to.
Well, sure you do, because you know exactly what to block, right?
But if you say, I don't know how to cross a minefield without triggering a mine, and you've just walked across a minefield without triggering a mine, then I'm going to say you probably do, right?
But this is what I'll suggest, right?
I mean, I would say, have a listen to this recording or this conversation or whatever.
And just note down the facts of your experience, right?
Without judgment, without stories, and just say, okay, well, what does this tell me about where I'm at at the moment in terms of certain aspects of my thinking?
And this is good, right?
I mean, you had a block about RTRing with yourself or around these daemon chats or whatever you want to call them.
And we have confirmed that you, in fact, have a block, right?
Yes. That's good, right?
I mean, because if you've been working at this for some time and not made any progress, then it would be not particularly good if you could make amazing progress in 10 minutes, right?
So, I'll stop here, have a listen to the conversation, and see, right?
I mean, maybe this is all nonsense, right?
Maybe it doesn't work for you. Maybe there's a problem with the theory and this and that.
Fantastic, right? Sorry, I... No, don't apologize.
This is what it is, right?
This is what it is. Nothing wrong with it.
It's exactly where it is.
It's exactly where it needs to be.
This is the next step. Everything you're doing is right.
Just, you know, there's nothing wrong with what you're doing.
doing.
You're being honest about your defenses.
And the fact that the role play didn't work does not mean that there's anything wrong with you.
It may be that there's something wrong with the theory of the roleplay.
Doesn't matter, we're just trying to work with the facts, right?
Yeah, but...
I mean, like you said, everybody knows how to roleplay, right?
So I should have been able to do...
Well, no, that's the theory.
It's worked so far with everybody, but that doesn't mean that it's universal, right?
Maybe you're less conformist than the people who are pretending to roleplay.
I mean, look, there could be a million and one explanations, right?
But the important thing is just have a listen to this recording again.
And, you know, sort of note how you feel and note if you're feeling defensive or if not, or if I'm being defensive, whatever.
I just will go through and look at the content of the conversation and see what occurs.
Yeah, so far throughout this whole process, it's been a steady oscillation of fear and frustration.
Right. These are good things to know about yourself.
And you can RTR with that if you want or not or whatever.
Right. I mean...
I mean, what to think about that, though?
I mean...
Gathering the facts is easy, but...
Identifying some sort of hypothesis about them is where I get stuck.
Right. Right. And you will be stuck there until you don't want to be stuck there, right?
That's up to you. And again, this is all nonsense because you say, well, how do I become unstuck and so on.
But the very question, of course, assumes that there's a trick which you can manage and control, right?
That's around relaxing. Anyway, that having been said, let's stop and we can have a listen to this again and we can revisit this question or issue if you want and see if there's a flaw in the theory or in the application or something like that, which is totally fine and absolutely possible.
But I will send you a copy of this so that you can have a listen.
Alright, thanks, man. Alright, man.
Talk to you soon. Alright.
▲
Export Selection