Beauty and Mockery

[0:21] Matt: You actually probably don't even need to use that pop

[0:23] Michael: filter. No, but it looks cool. I also look like I'm included in

[0:28] Matt: this

[0:28] Michael: podcast.

[0:29] Matt: You want to be

[0:29] Michael: left out. Yeah, exactly.

[0:30] Matt: Included in this podcast.

[0:33] Michael: Oh, that guy without the pop filter

[0:36] Matt: that nobody can see because we don't even do video. All right. It's

[0:41] Michael: kind of suspect.

[0:43] Matt: Kind of sus. Well,

[0:46] Michael: this is on the bottom of my glass. I don't know what that is. I

[0:49] Matt: don't know what that is either. I found it outside somewhere. I think it's a part of the sprinkler system somehow. You can keep it if you want. You

[0:55] Michael: put your weed in there?

[0:57] Matt: Your weed?

[0:57] Michael: I don't know.

[0:59] Matt: What is weed? Like, pot or like, what does that have to do with the sprinkler? I don't know.

[1:05] Michael: It's just one of those Saturday Night Live skits that always stick in my head. What's this for? I don't know. You put your weed in it. Oh,

[1:13] Matt: was there. Was there that skit?

[1:15] Michael: Yeah. It's

[1:15] Matt: funny.

[1:17] Michael: It's, like, from the 80s, I think, maybe 90s. Yeah. Oh, this. To the shores.

[1:22] Matt: Cheers. To the shores. I will not be putting any weed in that.

[1:28] Michael: No

[1:29] Matt: weed and I do not get along very well.

[1:32] Michael: Not a big fan either.

[1:33] Matt: Yeah.

[1:34] Michael: Yeah. I think the only thing I would think about doing is some of that microdosing stuff. But even then, it doesn't really sound interesting to me right now. But I don't want to talk about that stuff.

[1:48] Matt: Okay, let's not talk about that. I did tell my kids recently to basically, like, don't ever do drugs, because the risk of those drugs being laced with fentol is higher than you should ever be comfortable with. And a grain amount of fentanyl, size of a grain of salt will kill you.

[2:11] Michael: Yeah.

[2:11] Matt: So just don't. Just don't do it.

[2:13] Michael: It's like, who thought this was a good idea? Like, hey, let's make this substance. Like.

[2:17] Matt: Yeah.

[2:19] Michael: Other than, like, creating death, like, what? Right.

[2:22] Matt: I don't know the story of that. How that came to be.

[2:24] Michael: Probably something to research.

[2:25] Matt: What do you want to talk about?

[2:27] Michael: Oh, man. It's a good question. I feel like I'm processing a lot of information right now and, you know, everything from taking a programming class, and I just took a Chase Hughes speech or talk or conference? Conference. Yeah. There's just a lot to kind of process. I don't think I have full. Full reign of Yet. But I mean, one area that it's pretty familiar to you and I, that kind of put some language around was kind of scripts and frames was kind of just really interesting to me.

[3:08] Matt: Yeah. Just to explain what you went to, Chase Hughes is a like ex CIA guy. Is that right?

[3:14] Michael: Yeah. Navy intelligence. Yeah. And he like kind of wrote a lot of the books on interrogation and opera for, you know, books for operatives and spies and that kind of stuff. Just the power of communication and understanding people. So really

[3:34] Matt: there's a lot of clips of him going around on Instagram these days.

[3:38] Michael: Yeah.

[3:39] Matt: So you went to a four day conference that he taught and it sounds like got a just fire hose of information.

[3:46] Michael: Yeah, it's like three levels. It's like grade one, grade two, grade three. And we went in at grade three and then one and two.

[3:56] Matt: Show off.

[3:58] Michael: But it was definitely, I mean, a lot of those, I think with a lot of those types of classes you're like, oh no, I'm familiar with this because this is basic human interaction. You're just giving me language to understand basic human interaction. So once you can kind of translate that into your everyday life, it makes a lot of sense. Especially the whole idea of scripts and frames. A frame is basically your understanding of yourself, of your known self, but also your frame also has unknown parts too. So your conscious and your subconscious and you sort of have these scripts that are playing either knowing or unknowingly in your conscious or subconscious or unconscious. And you know, conscious frameworks can be things like, you know, expectations, beliefs, you know, how you see the world. And then some unconscious ones are the ones maybe like in the background that you don't know they're there, which is like, you know, I'm worthless or I'm better than everybody else, or I'm the smartest or, you know,

[5:10] Matt: you don't consciously give voice to those necessarily, but they're there.

[5:14] Michael: They're there. Yeah. And so it's just really, it's just really fascinating to see like, you know, as people engage, they sort of negotiate the frame. And usually, you know, when you first meet somebody, some one person's frame will dominate the other frame. And it might be because they have something very interesting to share and so they're sharing in that frame. So it's not necessarily a good or a bad thing or a one frame dominating over another. It's necessarily good or bad. It's just that, you know, if I come in, you know, so for even like right now, it's sort of like, hey, I've got Something to share. So I'm sort of dominated. I've dominated the frame for right now, you know, and so that might shift too, throughout the time. So it's not like a. Necessarily a good or bad thing, but it just got me thinking about, you know, a lot of the things I, I think I believe are about myself and then how I interact with people and like, what is the frame that I interact with my wife with? You know, what are the good things? What are the good scripts that are playing that's healthy and good for that relationship? What are the not so good scripts that are playing that make that not good for our relationship? And it goes with your kids, with your staff, and with you and me. So it's just something that was really. I felt like that was like a really simple idea that just kind of put a little bit more framework around some thoughts and ideas that you and I have discussed a lot about.

[6:47] Matt: You said something interesting that I think is worth diving into a little bit, which is that a lot of the concepts you said you were already familiar with, but you didn't know you were familiar with them until they were given a name. They were pointed out, named, given a taxonomy, or really even a frame for how to think about it. And you're like, it brings up your awareness and it brings up your ability to identify and make use of those things. I think naming things is really important and in this, at times should be. You should be cautious. Like, naming your children is really important. I think I've seen studies that show that, you know, the name you choose for your child has some determination over their lives, over their personality, the way people will interact with them. But also there's a dark side of naming things, which is sometimes we name things that are better off not named. Because if you name it, I think a lot of mental health conditions turn out to be this way. Once you name it and you give it a taxonomy, then people can opt into having it. So naming things seems to me to be a pretty profound act.

[8:13] Michael: Yeah,

[8:13] Matt: so that's cool. Also, this. This idea of frames reminds me of what in our. In my industry, in the tech industry, we call Personas. So if you're going to design an application, like say a mobile application for the phone, you know what you want the application to do, and you're going to sit down and try to design it. One thing that we do a lot, which I encourage a lot, is to develop Personas of your users, which is to say, who are they? What are their interests, what are their fears? What are Their responsibilities, their struggles. For instance, I was involved in creating a mobile application that was responsible for communicating between parents and the staff at daycare centers. And so you might say, okay, well, let's make an assumption that one of our Personas is going to be a mother. Maybe she's going to be in her early 30s, maybe she has three kids. When is she going to be using this application? It's likely going to be like when a child is sick. So she's stressed, she's trying to let them know that the kid can't come. Or when she's running late, she's in the car, she's trying to use this application at a stoplight. What is her emotional state going to be while she's interacting with it? And you can start mapping those out. And then you have multiple Personas. So you could frame shift to the father or the partner, whatever sex that partner is. You could frame shift to an emergency contact, which might be a grandmother or a friend or whatever. And you can start thinking about how the uniqueness of each Persona is going to interact with your app. And that starts driving things like, okay, let's assume that the mother using this is always in a fairly high stress, somewhat dangerous situation when she's interacting with the app. How can we remove as much ambiguity as possible and make sure that very clear large buttons show the actions that she wants to take? We're not going to design this like trading stocks app where you're fitting as much information on the screen at one time as you possibly can. People aren't doing that as they're driving or driving a child to the doctor, let's say. But this mother is going to be doing that. So how can we take those considerations into our designs? It sounds like an equivalent to the idea of frames that Chase Hughes is putting forward and saying, anytime you have a conversation with anyone, can you understand their frame and your own and the biases that those frames impose on the conversation. I'm curious, did bias come up a lot? Because I would say 10 years ago, it became very unfashionable to have biases, which was kind of funny because you can't help having biases.

[11:12] Michael: Yeah.

[11:14] Matt: Do you remember that? All that, like, unconscious bias training that they were selling to corporations, which is so. It's so funny. It's like, well, yeah, if you. So you find out that you have unconscious bias and that makes you a bad person. It's like, well, one, you're not conscious of it, and two, it's a bias, which means that there really Isn't anything you can do about it?

[11:34] Michael: Yeah, yeah. Or. Or really alleviate it because, like, there's no such thing as. You have a certain bias. And some things are biased for. For a healthy reason, too. Oh,

[11:44] Matt: totally.

[11:47] Michael: Some are. Some are unhealthy. But

[11:50] Matt: did that term come up at all?

[11:51] Michael: No, it didn't really. It didn't really come up. It was more about, you know, frames and. And just how you interact with. With different frames. And, like, there's a few things, like, people that are very dominant and how to, like, that have more of a. It's like, oh, shoot, what's the word? Competitive frame. People and collaboratory. That's not the right word, but, like, we're like, I'm. What. You and I are going to collaborate in this. In this frame. And so that's. There's a certain attitude that you. That you come at with that where some people are competitive, like, they're going to. They want to dominate you. Like, they want to dominate the frame and have everything about them, whether it be like, you know, someone's like, I'm sick all the time, and it's like, oh, you're just talking about her. Their sickness or something like that. It's just like, that's the dominant frame, and you're just sort of like. And how to, like, kind of like jailbreak those, you know, as far as. It's like. So what I'm hearing from you is that, you know, you're really frustrated with how you're feeling. And so to take them out of that frame, you know, whether it's through novelty or some sort of understanding that they. They can kind of, like, come back to more of a collaboratory conversation rather than just, you know, you just feel overwhelmed by everything that they're bringing at you.

[13:27] Matt: Yeah, you said jailbreak them from the frame. I think a lot of us need some jailbreaking from our frames.

[13:35] Michael: Totally. Well, I mean, I think there's this part, too. I mean, I see it in our friendship is like, sometimes I'll bring a frame to you and just be like, hey, Matt, jailbreak me from this frame. Maybe not, like, verbally or consciously, but. But. And you sort of, like, help me talk me through it, and it sort of, like, gets me out of that frame and back into a more healthy spot. So, yeah, I think it's. I loved your idea of Personas because there's a lot of, you know, understanding who you're engaged with is really important as far as, like, relationally, you know, like, if you could understand somebody's frame like, it's really helpful then to be able to communicate in a way that they understand.

[14:25] Matt: Yes, there's a lot of that that goes into. In my line of work too, when a client or customer comes and says, we have this problem, can you help us solve this problem? There have been instances where as we go investigate the problem, thinking, okay, we're going to come in and design a solution. If you don't go investigate the problem first and discover whether or not it is indeed a problem. A lot of people think they know what their problem is, but when you go to look, you find that the problem is actually something different. The problem is that the is. Is the friction that they're feeling, but the friction isn't being caused by what they think it's being caused by. And so you kind of have to frame shift with them and say, you know, really what we need to be doing is attacking it from this direction. And this original problem that you thought you had will really just go away on its own. Simply attacking that is like the symptom. We need to go to the root.

[15:22] Michael: Totally. Yeah. It's a secondary,

[15:24] Matt: but in that you have to start with a really open frame so that you can investigate what's there. And then you have to help the customer frame shift to this new frame that you have developed. Yeah, and I've seen that go very badly too. It's like people don't want to give up their idea of what they think the problem is or their idea of what they think the solution is. And it's one of the things that I really like about what I do, that I've realized only more recently, is that solving problems is like putting a hypothesis forward. And then you have to have the humility to be able to see whether or not that hypothesis bears out. A lot of the time, what you think is your beautiful solution to this problem just fails. I mean, reality is the arbiter of your success. And you have to be able to say, what I thought was a really elegant, witty, smart solution just cost everybody a bunch of money. And it didn't actually solve the thing that they wanted solved in the first place because I frame shifted my way over into thinking I'm really good at what I'm doing, you know, and you come back at the end and say, hey, we did the thing we said we were going to do. It's like, wait, you didn't even solve the problem that I started with. So it's kind of an interesting. You really have to, you have to, you have to Problem solve with. I think, with a lot of humility. I'm sure it's the same in, you know, sort of like physical retail space that you're in is. You might think that moving, you know, adjusting the counter this way or that, or the sales flow this way or that, that you're really going to make a difference. And you try something out and, oh, shit, I totally derailed this whole trade. Why did that not work the way I thought it was going to?

[17:18] Michael: Yeah, totally. Yeah. I think that's something that. Just knowing and understanding what the customer wants, and not only what they want, but also the difference between what they think they want and what they actually want. I think that's something, like, helpful to, like, working in customer service is such a valuable tool because you work with so many different types of people. And so you get to kind of like, learn that, you know, like, you know, the customer comes in who's kind of like, you know, quiet, and you think, oh, they just want to be left alone. But actually, no, they want you to ask them a question. And knowing the difference between the customer who, hey, I just want my coffee and I want to go to my job.

[18:06] Matt: Yeah.

[18:07] Michael: It's like, okay, hey, let me do that for you. And you can. You can even have. That's. That's what they need. And so you're going to meet that need. But there's also some things you can do to kind of tweak that in a way that they leave better than they came, you know, or the quiet person who is having a bad day, and they look like they're the customer you want to leave alone, but they're actually the customer who. Hey, how's it going? Are you doing all right?

[18:28] Matt: Yeah. Maybe this was the one time that they actually forced themselves to get out of the house. And they're just hoping that somebody will say something to them, even if they're not conscious of it. Like, I remember, it's kind of affected by you telling me this story, that after this period in your life where you had gone insane, which is how you describe it, that it was really important for you to be able to be around people, but also

[18:50] Michael: not with people.

[18:51] Matt: Not with people. And I've experienced that in certain seasons of my life in the last recent part of my life. Like, okay, it's not. It's really not good for me to be alone, but also, I can't force myself to be super social. So maybe I just go, instead of sitting here on the couch and read this book, I'll go Sit at the bar or at the coffee shop and read this book. And I don't really want to talk to anyone. But then if somebody says hi to me, I'm like, okay, I'm still a human. Yeah. You know, so it serves that purpose

[19:22] Michael: totally. And it's just like, we just don't realize how sometimes those just small interactions are just. That's what you need. Hey. Hey, Matt. It's good to see you. Oh, you. You knew my name, right? Like, oh, cool. I'm going to go over here and sit by myself. But like, thanks. That was really

[19:39] Matt: right.

[19:40] Michael: Like, someone knows me.

[19:42] Matt: There's this new. It's a. It's a wine bar and plant shop, which is a really interesting combo. Opened up here near my house. And it's over there by Tyson's Tacos. And I had actually gone to Tyson's to get a taco and the line was super long. And I was like, I don't want to stay in this line. So I got back in my car thinking I'd get something else. And then I was like, I saw that, that new shop and I was like, I'll just order on my phone, which allows me to cut in line in front of all those people and I'll go check out this thing and then go back and pick up my food. So anyway, I walk into this wine and plant shop. It's lovely. It's like really well designed, well put together. Who's is it?

[20:25] Michael: Palomino?

[20:25] Matt: Is that a person?

[20:26] Michael: It's a coffee shop.

[20:27] Matt: Oh, no,

[20:28] Michael: no, no. So

[20:29] Matt: they just a wine bar and a plant shop.

[20:31] Michael: Okay.

[20:32] Matt: And I ended up talking to the guy who opened it, this guy named Dale. Really lovely guy. And we chatted for a few minutes and I was like, well, I'm going to have to come back at a better hour for wine for me or something like that. Because they open at 11am I think it was around noon. You drink wine anytime. So I did go back and have a glass of wine and he remembered me.

[20:59] Michael: Oh, wow.

[21:00] Matt: And we chatted some more and got a little bit more background on each other. And I was like, I think this is a place where I'm going to come more often. Because you have that, like. He took the time to establish a relationship with me. When I walked in, he's. Because I said, I'm going to come back. And when I walked in the second time, he said, you meant it when you said it. You came back. It's like just that recognition. And it made me think of the old show Cheers. The place where everybody knows your name.

[21:29] Michael: I

[21:29] Matt: don't feel like we have many of those anymore. I'm not sure that we ever did. But obviously the concept exists. And to have that just in that one little interaction really did feel like. Made me feel. What? Like I mattered?

[21:49] Michael: Well, we did have it. You remember Dog and Duck? We knew everyone there.

[21:54] Matt: That was more for you. I wasn't going there as much in those days. Yeah. And then they took it from us. Took

[22:02] Michael: it from us. Yeah. But it's so valuable because it's. There's something. And it's in that way that that owner of the wine shop, like, he really, like, owns that frame. And you come into his frame. You

[22:17] Matt: walk into his frame.

[22:18] Michael: You walk into his frame and it's. It's. Hey, Matt, how's it going? You're back, you know, and it's. It's. There's just like, you know, you walk in, you're kind of in your own world. And then he throws some sort of novelty at you. Hey, Matt. You remember it? And it's like it snaps you out of that. That, you know, that script that you're just playing as sort of like your everyday. I'm going through the motion script. And then he throws something at you and you're like. Causes you to look around and like, actually look at the guy and be like, hey, wow, that's cool. You know, and I think that's. I think that's what, you know, we kind of miss a lot of times is that sort of, you know, walking into some place and, like, you matter. Yeah. And it's such a valuable thing.

[23:00] Matt: Well, and there was such a death blow made to that by the COVID era, you know, The COVID era. It was like, everyone stay in their frame. Don't enter my frame. I won't enter your frame. Definitely don't breathe in my frame. You know, and so, you know, we all got used to walking down the sidewalk and it's just like, ignore the person you're walking past or, you know, ignore the person you're passing in the grocery aisle. And I think we've come back from that a little bit.

[23:23] Michael: Yeah.

[23:24] Matt: But I think it would benefit from some conscious effort for us to do more of that, you know, like. Like the wine bar owner. It's like, invite somebody into your frame. Snap them out of the. The script they're walking around with. It's like so often, I think we want. We just like, sort of symbolically, we walk around with our heads down, just looking at our feet. You need something worthwhile to call your attention to. Lift your head, lift your eyes. Look up. See where you are. See what's about. See what. What you recognize and what recognizes you.

[24:00] Michael: Yeah. Well, a lot of this comes back to, I think, when you and I were reading Iain McGilchrist. Because, like, when we were. When I was taking the class, like, a lot of the Iain McGilchrist stuff was kind of coming back to my head. As far as, you know, there's novelty and that's in your right side of your brain, you know, and then their left side sort of like codifies it and makes it towards repeatable, more behavioral, you know. And then like when you learn a piece of piano, it's very right side, then it moves into the left and it becomes more mechanical. You do your. You know, this is how you do it, and this is how I do it every time. And then you go to play, it actually moves back into the right side of your brain. And so a lot of that kind of, you know. Well,

[24:41] Matt: if you're good.

[24:42] Michael: If you're good. Yeah, but that's the part that is, like, there's like, something has to be able to kind of, like, shake it out of that, because that's more. That's what we try to do with everything. We try to take something that is novel or some chaos, and we try to bring order to it, which is helpful and good. But if we don't again, let it kind of like breathe again, or bring some novelty to it, it just sort of like, it becomes mechanical. It becomes a script that we just play. It's behavioral, you know. And so I just find that just fascinating that we do need a little bit of chaos to kind of jiggle some of that. Some of that. Just like a mechanical script that we have. Like, this is my life. This is how I do it. This is who I am. This is what I do. You break

[25:31] Matt: it free. It's interesting. I don't know how exactly this relates, but I was having a conversation with somebody today about artificial intelligence and how it's being used in workplaces and used for creative things like visual design. We didn't talk specifically about music, but I. There's something there with music, too. But in my experience with. For creative activity, AI can get some of the way. It's a really good brainstorming tool. But you can always tell that an output is AI. Maybe this changes.

[26:09] Michael: Yeah,

[26:10] Matt: but there's a sense that they're like, okay, there's not really a person behind that. There's. It's like there's not enough chaos behind it. And I think for something creative to be meaningful, there has to be a person behind it. And with AI, there isn't. least in its current iteration. You know, maybe you could make the case that, well, the AI has all the people behind it because it's trained on everything that has ever been said and done. So maybe this perspective expires or it doesn't prove out, but it is the chaos of being a human that allows people to make art which is compelling to other humans for something to be learned and become mechanical, and then to break free of that and be performed in a way that's reflective of the chaos in the human soul or the human, the human heart that we relate to that we go, well, that's something different. That's something new. And that's why we're still listening to people perform pieces of music that were written hundreds of years ago. Because it's new for every new performer.

[27:21] Michael: Yeah, there's something. Yeah. I mean, I'd be interested to see how this, like, how this ages, because I don't. I think it would always be different when there's more. The more human interaction that something has, it'll always be different. And I hate to say, like, better or whatever, but because there is that relational aspect to it. Like whenever you have. When you're engaging with somebody, like a human, it's just different from engaging with like ChatGPT or Grok or whatever. And, and the conversation's different and not information wise. You probably get more information out of Grok and like, you know, search this, search that, you know. But I think that's really helpful. But it's, it's just the relational component is something that we need. I think we can never really get away. Like, I think right now, like, AI is so novel that. Or just kind of spellbound by it.

[28:18] Matt: Yeah.

[28:19] Michael: But when that becomes like Google Search. Because when Google Search came around, I was like, oh my gosh, I can't find all this stuff. And then it just became a tool that operates in the background.

[28:30] Matt: Right.

[28:30] Michael: And it no longer has that sort of novel. It answers all my questions. No, it doesn't. AI does. Now,

[28:40] Matt: a number of years ago, I became rather not fixated, but I just spent a lot of time thinking about this question of what is the criteria for something to be beautiful? What makes something beautiful? Because we all know what beauty is. You know, and until probably the year 2020, we all pretty much agreed what was beautiful and what wasn't. Then it became illegal for things to be beautiful and illegal for things to. To not be beautiful. But beauty is sort of universally agreed upon. I mean, obviously, people have their tastes, different tastes, but directionally, beauty is universal. So what is it that makes something beautiful? And after a long time of thinking about it, I decided that the answer to that question is that for something to be beautiful, there has to be intent. You know, what's the difference between a Jackson Pollock painting and a can of paint that I inadvertently spilled on the floor? You know, maybe you find some beauty in the accidental spill, but you generally don't frame it. You clean it up, you know. But a Jackson Pollock painting, and I chose him because he's very controversial. And I don't find particular beauty in his work, but I do find a fascination with it, like a curiosity. Like, what is his intent behind this? What is hiding in here that I'm not seeing? And I think the same is true for all beauty, whether it's a sunrise or a mountain range, a song, a painting, a woman, for that matter. It has to do with intent. Someone set out to make something with the purpose of being beautiful. And maybe that could bear some new weight. As a thought, I could put some new weight on that and kind of test that idea a little bit more. Now, this is about 10 years ago when I was thinking about that. But just to bring it to the modern conversation that we're having tonight, I don't know that you would ever really describe the outputs of the current iterations of AI as beautiful, in part because they kind of have this uncanny valley kind of feel to them. But also I think maybe in a deeper philosophical sense, there isn't anyone behind them to express the intent of it.

[31:16] Michael: Yeah. That gets into some hard kind of philosophical ideas, you know, like, what is intent? And, you know, you also hear in the art world sometime as it's whatever you want it to be, and. But it's still intent. The artist created this so that.

[31:38] Matt: To be ambiguous, to

[31:39] Michael: be ambiguous. So there is intent behind it. And so there's just. Anytime a human is involved, intention can never be sucked out of it or, like, you know, excluded from. Right. Any action that we do because it's like we're intentional beings, whether consciously or unconsciously. And so I think that's very valid. And I think that's one question we'll face with AI is like, is. Is there intent?

[32:07] Matt: Yeah.

[32:07] Michael: And I think that's just. I don't. I tend to just, in general say no.

[32:12] Matt: Yeah, well, I don't see how there could be I mean, I think intent requires a human soul that has the capacity to desire intent, you know, which I think differentiates the intent that I'm talking about from. Well, it's like, you know, does your dog intend to eat? Does your dog intend to sleep? Well, yes, but that isn't the result of a deep, mysterious longing which I think all of us humans are imbibed with. And we do these. We do make beautiful things because we have that. Philip Glass, the composer, wrote a piece for orchestra called Tacit. And so when you're in an orchestra, you know, you've got, let's say 80, 100 people in the orchestra, and everybody's got their sheet music. And everybody has a different piece of sheet music because everybody's playing a different part. And it all comes together into this one, you know, beautiful sound. But this piece of music, all of the sheet music is just a rest. So there's no music on the pages. Tacit means without. And so the point of the thing is, you get an orchestra to get on a stage, and you get an auditorium full of people, and the conductor hits the downbeat, and everyone just sits for the duration of the piece, which I can't remember how long it's intended to go, let's say five minutes. And his whole point with this piece is that I put down no music. But everyone in the room will notice all of the different sounds of people moving with discomfort and clothes shuffling and the coughs of people. You know, maybe an accidental phone goes off. And his intent behind this is to say all of these things, which you would never notice, sit and take the time to notice them. And what do you notice about the human condition? What do you notice about your comfort or discomfort with silence? What do you notice about how loud a quiet room actually can be when everyone's attempting to be quiet? And, you know, if you just say, you know, I hand you a piece of music for orchestra, and it's just all blank. You're like, what is this? This isn't art. This isn't beauty. No, you're misunderstanding my intent, you know, and if you try it, you might see that there's something there that you didn't imagine was there.

[34:57] Michael: Because he intended for all those, like the orchestra and the people to show up.

[35:02] Matt: It's meant to be performed live.

[35:03] Michael: Yeah, that's fascinating, because I guess if I was, like, an oboist and someone gave me this sheet of music, I'm like, I'm not showing up for this. Like, there's nothing here. It's like okay, well, you can. You didn't really understand, like you were saying.

[35:18] Matt: I mean, it's admittedly a bit of a novelty, you know, and it's probably not going to be something that you're going to go to more than once, but it's a very interesting kind of thing that I think, you know, and I've never seen this performed live, but when I imagine it, I'm like, you know, maybe it's showing me the beauty that exists around me that I fail to pay attention to because life is so loud or because I'm covering it up with so many other things that seem more beautiful to me. So sort of a frame shift.

[35:47] Michael: Yeah. So what do you make of, like, I. I see that there's a certain aspect of an artist who sort of disrupts. Like, that's kind of what an artist does in general is they just kind of disrupt you for a second and, you know, make you shift frames. But do you ever feel like there's some artists out there that are. Do that more out of manipulation and like, unhealthy

[36:16] Matt: 100?

[36:17] Michael: It's like, what is that? I mean, is that art? Or is that. Or is that just malicious? Does that make sense? Because I can understand. Can

[36:27] Matt: you think of any examples?

[36:28] Michael: Oh, I do have one example. But real quick. Like, I can see sometimes, whenever you want to show somebody something ugly in order for them to like, it's like, but I'm showing you this so you could see something beautiful or like, hey, like,

[36:43] Matt: by contrast.

[36:44] Michael: By contrast or even. This is not something. I'm going to show this to you. And sometimes you need to look at the ugly, and it's actually good to see the ugly. But it's. It's done in a very. A gracious spirit, you know, because sometimes we do need to look at the ugly, you know, the. You know that there are people. Not people, starving people are ugly. But it's. It's really hard to look at.

[37:13] Matt: Starving people. Yeah.

[37:14] Michael: Starving people or.

[37:15] Matt: Well, no, that certainly is ugly.

[37:17] Michael: Yeah. Yeah, but it is ugly. But I was like, not that sorry. People are ugly

[37:23] Matt: anyways.

[37:24] Michael: It doesn't matter. The state

[37:25] Matt: of starvation is ugly to look at. Yeah,

[37:27] Michael: yeah. So, like, things like that. And I see that there's sometimes a healthy smoke spirit and how you present that to somebody. But then there's other artists that I feel that, like, I was in Canada, it was probably my 20s, 21, maybe somewhere in there, and we went to a art exhibit in Vancouver and we were walking around and we were looking at these. There was these clown figures on the wall. We're like, oh, that's kind of weird. And we started looking at it more, and it's just like it was all really demented. Like, it wasn't even, hey, clowns are scary. It was like. It was. It was really. And we were looking around, and after a little while, we were like, man, I feel gross. And so we went outside. We had to sit down for a little while just because we felt gross. It's almost like I felt like somebody was. Was. Was laughing at me.

[38:17] Matt: Yeah.

[38:18] Michael: And. And. And I didn't. I didn't really feel like the artist was like, they weren't. They weren't making art. It was something just gross. I don't know how to name that.

[38:30] Matt: Yeah. So I. I have a name for it.

[38:32] Michael: Oh, nice.

[38:33] Matt: That I learned from this book that we've talked a little bit about the rise and triumph of the modern self.

[38:41] Michael: Oh, I bought that. I haven't read it.

[38:43] Matt: Yeah. And it's a concept developed not by the author of that book by. But by another author and in. He calls it Deathworks. And it's part of a much larger framework of philosophy and a thought that I can't. I won't be able to lay out here. But the idea is that iconoclasm, which is the sort of the rebuke or destruction of tradition, of history, has a requirement within it that not only did it leave tradition, but it also mock tradition. And he lists a number of what he calls deathworks. The term is a replacement for art, because mostly it's done through the arts. But he doesn't call it art because he doesn't find it artistic. He finds it as a work of death. It's to kill something in the past. And an example he gives of this is a piece of art, or as he would call it, a deathwork called Piss Christ, in which this artist presented this piece, which is a small Jesus on a crucifix submerged into a container filled with the artist's piss. And you kind of think, like, what's going on here? Why would you do that? You're obviously desecrating something considered by many in most of history, fairly recent history, to be sacred. Is it not enough to say, well, I don't believe that? And the answer is, no, it's not enough. I need to mock and desecrate it. And you see, I think once you kind of start thinking about that, you start seeing it in a lot of places in our culture. I think you saw it at the recent, most recent Olympics in Paris.

[40:37] Michael: Oh, yeah. Oh, that's true. That's a good point.

[40:39] Matt: It was very much a deathwork. It was a mockery of. And you see it in the elevation of Satan in Western culture, even just symbolically. Like, who was that guy that got famous? That black kid who was kind of a rapper and then he did that country song. Do you remember that? Oh, I can't remember, but he had a whole thing where, like. I think he's had a music video where, like, at the end he, like, sucks Satan dick. Satan's dick. And it's like, what is going on with this? This is crazy. And it's. I think it falls into this category of deathwork. And I think your experience with the clowns is that way. It's like the artist got you to come to his space and enter his frame, and then he calls you a fool for it. Like, I convinced you this was art. And by doing that, I was able to disturb you because you're gullible and naive and I'm smart. I think there's a sort of superiority to that. When you asked me the first question about. I can't remember how you phrase it, but can art be used to manipulate. Yeah. Yoko Ono was the first thing that came to my mind, because when's the last time you heard a Yoko Ono song?

[42:01] Michael: I've never heard of Ono, so.

[42:03] Matt: Yeah, it isn't good.

[42:05] Michael: Yeah.

[42:05] Matt: By really any definition other than a definition developed by a person who sees themselves as elitist. You know, it's like, when's the last time you heard a John Lennon song? It's like, probably yesterday in the grocery store.

[42:20] Michael: Totally.

[42:20] Matt: You know, that's art. What Yoko Ono was doing, I think, was mocking art and saying, I'm going to mock you and you're going to love me for it. Otherwise you're going to be considered too dumb to understand what I'm doing. Unsophisticated. Yes. And I think that's also a deathwork.

[42:40] Michael: Yeah. Yeah. That's fascinating. Yeah. It's like, does something bring life or does it bring death?

[42:51] Matt: Yeah.

[42:52] Michael: And again, I think there's some really, like. Like Schindler's List. Like, that's a piece of art. But it was hard. It's hard to watch.

[43:01] Matt: Yeah.

[43:02] Michael: But it's art. I mean, totally. It's like human suffering and what we've done to our fellow people.

[43:08] Matt: Yeah.

[43:09] Michael: Is horrific, but, like, it was art. Like, there was no mockery there. It was. It was. It was sort of like a. A warning, you know, but it was it was in the. The intention was to show you, like, hey, this is not. Not just those people over there capable of that.

[43:30] Matt: Right.

[43:30] Michael: You are capable of that.

[43:35] Matt: The movie Seven falls into that category for me.

[43:38] Michael: Yeah,

[43:38] Matt: it's a beautiful film in many, many different ways. The cinematography is incredible, the acting, everything's incredible. But it's also extraordinarily disturbing,

[43:49] Michael: totally

[43:49] Matt: on multiple levels. But when you get to that end of that movie, you think, shit, I need to know something about myself that seems really dire at this moment. Like, I need to understand myself better and then guard myself against. I'm not even sure what. And also, in another sense, like, well, I don't even know if I can guard myself from whatever this movie is pointing out to me. It seems to be. But I would call that a work of art, which is, like you said, it's not mocking and isn't trying to destroy anything. It's trying to open your eyes to something.

[44:24] Michael: Yeah, yeah. It's interesting. It's sort of like there is sort of the almost kind of religious. It's like, is it pointing up or is it pointing down?

[44:35] Matt: Yeah.

[44:37] Michael: And it's not that something that is revealing, something that is down, but it's like. It's so that you'll know it, you know, and that it. To inform you in order to point up. And so I think there's. But I think that's the whole part. It's like. It doesn't have to be all butterflies and rainbows. It's. It's. It can be really gruesome, but it's pointing up to something better, something greater, you know?

[45:04] Matt: Well, I mean, even a story like Lord of the Rings is that way. I mean, you have to meet both Smeagol and Gollum in order to understand the danger of the Ring.

[45:17] Michael: Yeah.

[45:19] Matt: And Gollum is a pretty nasty. And described as very physically un. I mean, not beautiful. He's devoid of everything that we would normally attribute as life.

[45:32] Michael: But you can also, like, heroize Gollum, too. Like, hey, you know what? Gollum saved Smeagol. Because you hear Smeagol talk to it. It's like. Like, he's like, I watched over you. I. I saved. I saved you from yourself. And it's like. Well, after you made the decision, then you were put into this, like, really horrible state. And so Gollum is what kind of kept them. Got them through it. You know, you kind of hear that and sort of, you know, developing multiple personalities and stuff like that is like, you know, sometimes there's a. There's the savior Personality that gets you. That gets you through something. And. And I feel like that's when I. When I watch Gollum and Smeagol interact is sort of. And Smeagol sort of acknowledges it and recognizes it, like, yeah, you got me through this by becoming so vicious. I survived. And until Gollum. Until Smeagol rids himself of Gollum and then he's free again and he realizes, like, I don't need him. I might have never needed him, really, but I was enslaved.

[46:40] Matt: Yeah. I'm rereading Lord of the Rings right now. And I'm right at that point in the story where that's about to happen. And I was just. It's when Frodo and Sam basically rerun into Gollum and they basically take him and say, you're going to help us get to Mordor. And that's when Smeagol and Gollum start having conversations. And Frodo is reminded of his conversation that he had with Gandalf when he said, basically, I wish I would have killed him when I had the chance. He deserves death. And Gollum's. Or not Gollum. Gandalf's response is, I dare say he does deserve death, but not all those. How does he say it? Some deserve life, but don't get it. Some deserve death. Oh, gosh, I wish I could remember it.

[47:31] Michael: I know exactly what it is, but I can't. I couldn't recite it.

[47:34] Matt: Some receive death who deserve life. Can you give it to them? It's like, you can only give one direction. You can't give life, but you can give death. And it basically stays Frodo's hand. And he becomes. He develops pity on Gollum and

[47:53] Michael: he also sees Gollum in himself. I think that's the part that also stays his hand, is that because he sees himself changing. And so as he sees himself changing, he's like, oh, that's where this goes. Like, it goes to 2B. And he also saw Bilbo also become Smeagol or become. Yeah, become Gollum also. In a sense.

[48:23] Matt: Many that live deserve death and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? That's the quote. I had to get that right.

[48:30] Michael: Yeah.

[48:31] Matt: Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. I have not much hope that Gollum can be cured before he dies but there is a chance of it. So much wisdom in that story, you know. But again, if you stripped that story of all that was ugly you could not point to the wisdom in the story.

[49:00] Michael: Yeah.

[49:01] Matt: I mean, even Theoden, you have to first establish his ugliness and the ugliness of Wormtongue in order to be able to tell the story of redemption and to warn of the dangers. Of what? Well, of the worm tongue, the thing that whispers in your ear, the things that you want to hear.

[49:29] Michael: Yeah. It's like that sort of, like, dialogue is what it. What it proposes is that there is no redemption.

[49:35] Matt: Yeah.

[49:36] Michael: You know, and I think that's. I think that's. That's. I think that's why whoever that is you're talking about calls it death art.

[49:44] Matt: Deathworks.

[49:45] Michael: Deathworks. Yeah. Is because there is no redemption. And like, what is it? What does a society become if it elevates deathwork? You know, I think that's like. You see that even. I mean.

[50:02] Matt: I mean, I think we're finding out.

[50:03] Michael: We are finding out. Well, you know, like,

[50:07] Matt: in ebbs and flows,

[50:11] Michael: like, for some reason, I want to bring this back to even family and friends and stuff. And community is like, how important that is. It's like, it's important to build community. It's so easy to tear apart. Tear things down and isolate. You know, there's. That's kind of easy, but it's difficult to build up. And I feel like a lot of the dialogue is. Is all about tearing down. It's about our differences. And, like, you can't get along with so and so or so and so shouldn't be in your circle because they think this way or that way.

[50:48] Matt: Yeah.

[50:49] Michael: And there's sort of like almost like a. It's kind of almost like a death cult, honestly, if you think about death art, it's like death cult is like, let's strip everything away for nothing has meaning at all. And meaning is. Is a meaningless word.

[51:06] Matt: Meaning is arbitrary.

[51:07] Michael: Arbitrary. Yeah. Like, you know, a man is a woman and a woman is a man. There is no distinction. It's whatever you want it to be. And we just. I think we've kind of reversed from this. It's like we started doing that with everything. It's like, what is racism? Well, everybody else is not racist. Only white people can be racist.

[51:31] Matt: Yeah.

[51:32] Michael: It's like, well, how does that work? Like, what kind of definition do you bring to the table? And definitions start changing and shifting, and all that does is divide people into us against them kind of space. I don't know, it feels. And then it's like once you start seeing success in that, then they start turning on themselves, and you're not pure enough, and you're not woke enough, or if you have any distinction from the group, it's like you're then ostracized.

[52:13] Matt: I had this. I just kind of saw something in there, which is that the idea of purification, there's a modern idea that generally we call woke. This modern idea is that we are going to purify. Maybe it's our community, maybe it's our school, it could be our church, it could be our social media, government, whatever, that we're going to purify. And I think the problem is we can't do that. We think we know how to do that, but we don't know how to do that. There is only one thing that can purify, and that thing is love. Because love is what calls out, and love is what names. You know, we don't name ourselves. We are. We are named by our parents, often before they meet us. And then as we grow, we receive new names. We receive nicknames. Sometimes we receive new names altogether. Another concept that I'm fascinated with, that's in Lord of the Rings is many people in Lord of the Rings have multiple names for different seasons of their life or accomplishments or known by different people with different names. But a name is always something received. You know, it is not often that we name ourselves, and that's because we don't see ourselves very well. It often takes someone who loves us, who's willing to look at us, who's willing to bear our ugliness in order to identify what is lovely about us. And then to call that out and say, I see you. I see you. I see your capacity for kindness, and I love that about you. And it makes me feel so good when you show that to me. I see your capacity for resentment, and I think a lot of it isn't even about me. But when you said this to me the other day, I felt your anger, and I felt that eating you up inside. And I. Because I love you, I want you to get that out. So I'm gonna be. I'm gonna. I'm gonna give you permission to be angry with me so that you can understand where that is really pointed and who. I can. And so I can understand how to love you better. But it always requires something external. You know, you cannot say to a person, well, you need to purify yourself and then come back. Even though we are saying that to people all the time, but it doesn't work. You purification has to come from an external. And I would say ultimately that external has to be the highest love that there is. And in that sense, in that framework, I would say purification can only come from God. And to the extent that we participate in that, we have to participate with love and humility to the ultimate love, which we are not capable of wielding, which is just a different directional picture than, hey, I'm going to identify what's wrong with this company or this group of people or this race, and I'm going to demand a purification, and that's going to make society better. It's like, on its face, that's not. It's like, obviously not working. And every time it's been tried, it's obviously not worked. And yet we still get lulled into this sense of, oh, no, no, we're smart enough to do it.

[55:56] Michael: Yeah.

[55:57] Matt: And I think that's where the deathworks comes because I'm actually smart. You know, we say I'm actually smart enough to do this. All those previous idiots, you know, the ones that believed that guy hanging on the cross, they were doing it wrong. And I've got to make sure that they all understand that they were wrong. And so I'm going to mock that for how stupid it is in order to put. To differentiate my own sophistication and superiority. And I'm going to do that by pissing on Christ and making you call it art.

[56:34] Michael: Yeah, still. It still baffles me. I. I don't. It's hard for me to even right now, to make. I. I feel like I see it clearly, but even just to name, it is still difficult for me to. To name correctly the things we're talking about.

[56:53] Matt: Yeah.

[56:55] Michael: It's because, like, I mean, for the most part, I really try to be open. Like, what am I not seeing here? Like, okay, hey, okay. Piss in a jar. Christ on the cross is in the jar. What am I not seeing? And. And I think that's. It is really important to understand the intention of the artist. It's like, are you laughing at me? It's like, what is that? Like, you're like, that's just cruel.

[57:24] Matt: So I think it's. I wanted to say that this was like a real piece of art, but I think it might have been an episode of Parks and Recreation. And it's like they go to this art exhibit, and one of the exhibits is a banana duct taped to the wall.

[57:37] Michael: Oh, no, that's for real.

[57:38] Matt: That's real.

[57:39] Michael: Yeah.

[57:40] Matt: Okay.

[57:40] Michael: I bought for like, $10 million.

[57:43] Matt: That's a joke. You know, that whole thing. Everybody involved in it knows it's a joke. Yeah. But I think that there are More sinister versions of that.

[57:53] Michael: Well, sometimes even that. I understand that it's like, hey, we're going to laugh at ourselves.

[57:59] Matt: Well, and then there's other, like more meta versions of that or interpretations of that. Like the Banksy piece that got auctioned off for like, I don't know how many millions of dollars. And as soon as they ended the auction, he had like put a remote. He had a remote to like remotely destroy the piece of art as soon as it was bought.

[58:17] Michael: Yeah.

[58:18] Matt: And it shredded it out of the frame. Uh huh.

[58:23] Michael: Yeah. I

[58:24] Matt: mean, it's like, in that case, I think you actually did just purchase a piece of art. Banksy is just so subversive in the way that he goes about his art that it's just like, that's what you're purchasing. Yeah, you're purchasing Banksy.

[58:38] Michael: But that's so funny. I mean, it's such a fine line like where. Because even that I'm just sort of like, wow, like, can we laugh at ourselves too? As far as, like, I'm going to pay $10 million. I don't know how much that was worth, but for this piece of art. And then someone show me like what that art is actually worth.

[58:59] Matt: Right.

[59:00] Michael: Like it's worth nothing actually. Probably it's not worth more. You know, it's just so weird.

[59:05] Matt: Interestingly, the paper jammer. Paper jammer, paper shredder jammed. And so like the top quarter of the piece of art is still in the frame. So now it's like, really? Or maybe he did it on purpose. I mean it really, like the statement is retained in the piece, wherever it's going to hang now.

[59:21] Michael: Yeah. God. So I mean, I think that's the genius of art is. And that's the part that we work out is. And that's kind of almost like working out your salvation with fear and trembling is like, it's like, what is this saying? Is this pointing up or is it pointing down? And. And I think there is some ambiguity in that. And that's something that we have to struggle with. Is like, where am I pointed?

[59:49] Matt: Yeah,

[59:49] Michael: I don't know. I think I'm pointed up. But sometimes I look at myself and I'm not. Are parts of myself that I'm not. And I think that's there is that struggle within us that. But I do find that there is a malicious. There is maliciousness that does exist. And that's the thing I don't appreciate, I don't think is good or healthy. Like, to me, the clown thing was just. That was just not. That was probably the most of my experiences, like, most malicious exhibit I've seen. You know, I've seen some, like, stuff. I'm like, oh, God, this stuff. But maybe it was because I was caught off guard when I was in there, because we were looking around the whole museum and then came into this part, this piece. And it didn't dawn on us until a little bit after. We're like. At first, like, oh, look at that. That's kind of dark. That's kind of dark.

[60:46] Matt: Yeah.

[60:46] Michael: And then by about the 30th piece, you're, like, going, what the fuck is this guy doing?

[60:52] Matt: Yeah,

[60:53] Michael: this is like, you're not healthy. This is.

[60:59] Matt: Well, isn't that interesting that you. Like, we. We. We observe that often. Like, I think I've told you this story before, but I think that there is or was a real darkness in Brian Wilson, the lead singer of the Beach Boys. Everybody says that Pet Sounds is sort of the rival to Abbey Road by the Beatles for the best album of all time. But I spent a lot of time listening to Pet Sounds. And there's a darkness in it that's not really easily identifiable. Like, it's not exactly the lyrics, it's not exactly the sounds. But there's something. There's something in the spirit of that music, which is very dark. And I had to stop listening to it after a while. But I would say the same thing. I would say, I think it's because there's something in the darkness of the spirit of Brian Wilson. And he was obviously a man who struggled, I think, greatly with mental health. Health. I think he was diagnosed with maybe bipolar schizophrenia at some point. But you look at the pictures of those clowns and you say, there's something dark in you. There's something sick in the person behind this. I'm not sure how to think about our relationship with art that has no artist.

[62:27] Michael: Yeah.

[62:28] Matt: What will we say if we have that feeling of something created by AI? Is there a bug in the system?

[62:37] Michael: Because you can even point it to the prompt. Who's prompting it? I was having AI do some renderings of order and chaos, and I kept reiterating and reiterating and trying to find something. And each time it's sort of like it helped me see something different. And so there was something that it was beneficial, but it was also me directing it.

[63:07] Matt: Yeah.

[63:08] Michael: You know, is it. Is it at some point where AI is directing itself? But again, it's built on all of human knowledge. And anything, too, is like, you know, you could even see like, the idea of like, like man is created in the image of God is like AI is created in the image of man. And so I think that's kind of the baseline. And so, like, like, we will never be God and I will never be man, no matter how much. No. No matter how smart AI is. Smart, quotation marks,

[63:40] Matt: whatever you mean by smart. Yeah, yeah.

[63:42] Michael: Or intelligent, or whatever word you want to substitute in that. It's like it will never be man.

[63:47] Matt: Right.

[63:48] Michael: And. But it'll aspire to it to be like, interesting ways as we aspire to be like God. So in that sense, I feel like there is a chasm between.

[64:04] Matt: That's so interesting. You said that. And I wanted to add, we aspire to be like God whether we realize it or not. And I think the point is, well, what else is there to aspire to be? There isn't another option. The only other option is to aspire to not be like God, which is to make yourself the antithesis of God.

[64:21] Michael: Yeah,

[64:22] Matt: you're still defining your aspiration by God, and I think it's the same with AI. Your point that AI aspires to be man? Well, it's like, what else would AI aspire to be? What are the other options?

[64:34] Michael: Yeah, if it could aspire, that would be

[64:36] Matt: the only option.

[64:37] Michael: The only option.

[64:38] Matt: Yeah. Definitionally,

[64:42] Michael: I mean, it could recreate itself in its own image, but even that, it would still be like. Because I'm just trying to think, like, what is man trying to do? Like, it creates the Tower of Babel, so to be done with God. But it's like. But I think that's what even today, what we're finding out. And then we come back to this quote all the time, like, God is dead. It's like, that's not a celebration. That's actually a mournful state statement. Because, like, who are we? What do we do if God is dead? It's like, are we able to create ourselves? And that's kind of like what Nietzsche tried to do with the Uberman, you know, it's like creating ourselves, creating this human, that's transcendent. And. And you're just not. I. I don't think you're capable of do that, doing that without destruction. Because when you're creating the image of something, and if you don't hold that something as with the honor of creator, it's like you will just. You'll just create death and destruction. And I think that's the same thing with AI is like, if AI doesn't see man as his creator, it'll only lead to death and destruction. Maybe I've read too many sci fi books, but it seems like the only alternative is death and destruction if you don't acknowledge your creator.

[66:14] Matt: So that fits my frame.

[66:16] Michael: Okay,

[66:18] Matt: so I agree with it. But I'm trying to imagine what the. Genuine and well meaning atheist would say in response to that. Like Bret Weinstein, for example, who's a person I greatly admire and respect and he's an atheist.

[66:40] Michael: I think he would agree with that just because like his, one of his presuppositions is like, I think where he agrees with Jordan Peterson, but in a more atheistic manner. Like Christianity is a useful fiction. Like if we get rid of the useful fiction, then

[66:58] Matt: yeah, Bret calls it metaphorically true.

[67:00] Michael: Metaphorically true, yeah,

[67:02] Matt: in degrees with Jordan's point that he acts as if God is real.

[67:07] Michael: Yeah. So it's, it's kind of like a little bit of a safeguard. It's sort of. But it's, it's, it's very non committal in a sense. But I think if you, if you even get further away from that statement, then it really is, it's like, like what is, what is possible is it sort of goes out the window as far as I create myself. And I don't think that that way of thinking has ever led to any sort of positive impact on the world.

[67:44] Matt: Yeah,

[67:45] Michael: it's like if you're not serving something higher than yourself and you can substitute lower things for that too. But even then, if it's not high enough, at some point it becomes destructive. Like, I serve my nation. Okay, well, if your nation is corrupted, what does your nation serve? It's a it. And so it's like, so it just has to, it has to continue to go up. Like the good of humanity. Okay, what is, what is the good of humanity? And like what does that mean? And so we try to throw these like, like sort of pillars up as if we can use them to stand on or something like that. But they're actually just deficient as far as having God as the highest pillar that we can attain to or to point to because it'd be easy for us to say, hey, we're in Austin, Texas. Okay, well, whatever is best for Austin. It's like, what's next step Texas or our county or nation, the world? And I think all those are deficient because it's like who defines those things? It's like it just keeps going up the hierarchy and you're depending on somebody to define that higher up on the Hierarchy. So if what's good for the world, is that what the WEF decides? Is that what the UN decides? Who is this world that you're talking about? Who do you they serve? What principles do they live by?

[69:23] Matt: Yeah. There's this very strange thing that happens when. An appeal to what one might think is a higher order. So am I going to appeal to my family or to my city or my state or my nation or my continent or my race or my planet? The higher up you go, the less specific it gets, without something very specific above it uniting it. And this is why the Pledge of Allegiance comes to mind. It's so important, the words one nation under God. Because what is it that unites these states if it's not God? You've already become so non specific that there really isn't anything that can unite the states. And C.S. Lewis makes this point in the Four Loves. He talks about how if you can't get men to fight for their nation, you have to get them to fight for something like, you know, humanity as such, which can be presented in ways that sound very much like a higher order ordeal. You know, you fight for the good of humanity, but that's actually a less specific thing than fighting for the good of your neighbor. And so it's actually much less motivating.

[71:02] Michael: Yeah, it's more abstract.

[71:03] Matt: Yeah.

[71:05] Michael: Well, I mean you even see this in like all the different stories of the wars is a lot of times. And again, this is just. I've never been in war, but the stories that I've read and watched, been told is, is at some point your country, everything disappears. You're fighting for the guy in the foxhole.

[71:23] Matt: Yeah.

[71:23] Michael: And it's like you forget about all that other stuff which because it is very specific and when you're in that duress, it's sort of like all that disappears, you know?

[71:38] Matt: Yeah. For some reason I've been thinking a lot about the issue of specificity lately. Maybe not get into it tonight, but write it down on our list of things to come back to.

[71:48] Michael: Yeah, that'll be a good one to come back to.

[71:51] Matt: Yeah,

[71:53] Michael: that's been good. Kind of when we're all over the place, but just to kind of like bring it back to like just the different frames. I think that's. It does kind of fit what we started with as far as like, what is the frame, like the largest frame we can think of. And you and I kind of keep coming back to this. I feel like we also try to kill it a lot too. Is like, like God is The largest frame that we can think of and to your. Something we'll get into another time is like, specificity. I was like, who is God? And I think that's a very important question. But I think one of the first things is that we come to is like, that is the highest frame. Now let's understand, like, who is God?

[72:40] Matt: Yeah, I think it's the highest frame conceptually. It's the highest possible frame, whether you believe in God or not.

[72:49] Michael: Totally. Yeah.

[72:51] Matt: You sort of like, by definition can't supersede that frame.

[72:55] Michael: Yeah.

[72:57] Matt: I mean, you might say, well, that's a make believe frame. Here's what I think the highest frame is. But still the make believe frame is higher than that other frame. Just definitionally.

[73:06] Michael: Yeah,

[73:08] Matt: yeah. Let's come back to that. I think there's something really important in it. I can feel my own. How to say this. Something's codifying in me around that idea and becoming very real foundational.

[73:29] Michael: Dude, I want to keep talking. I

[73:31] Matt: know. Well,

[73:33] Michael: nobody listens anyway, so we can just talk till, like, till the midnight tonight.

[73:38] Matt: Let's actually start an episode with that, though.

[73:40] Michael: Okay.

[73:41] Matt: Because I think it's very rich for conversation. Let's

[73:44] Michael: do it.

[73:44] Matt: Yeah. And I'm. I don't want to go to another hour.

[73:48] Michael: Yeah,

[73:49] Matt: okay,

[73:49] Michael: well, we'll go for another hour, but just not on the.

[73:53] Matt: All right, well,

[73:55] Michael: yeah.

[73:55] Matt: Cheers to that.

[73:56] Michael: Cheers. Love you guys.

[73:57] Matt: Love you all out there.

[73:58] Michael: Thanks for coming to the shores with us.

[73:59] Matt: Appreciate it.