Lex Fridman Podcast - #357 - Paul Conti: Narcissism, Sociopathy, Envy, and the Nature of Good and Evil

The following is a conversation with Paul Conti,

a psychiatrist and a brilliant scholar of human nature.

My friend, Andrew Huberman,

told me that Paul and I absolutely must meet and talk,

not just about the topic of trauma,

which Paul wrote an amazing book about,

but broadly about human nature,

about narcissism, sociopathy, psychopathy,

good and evil, hate and love, happiness and envy.

As usual, Andrew was right.

This was a fascinating conversation.

As the old meme goes,

one does not simply doubt the advice of Andrew Huberman.

Allow me to also quickly mention

that I disagree with Paul a bunch in this episode,

as I do in other episodes, even with experts,

in part for fun and in part because I think

the tension of ideas in conversation

is what creates insights and wisdom.

My goal is to always empathize, understand

and explore ideas of the person sitting across from me.

Disagreement is just one of the ways

I think it’s fun to do just that,

as long as I do so from a place of curiosity and compassion.

And now, a quick few second mention of each sponsor.

Check them out in the description.

It’s the best way to support this podcast.

We got NetSuite for business management,

Indeed for hiring, and InsightTracker for bio-monitoring.

Choose wisely, my friends.

Also, if you want to work with our amazing team,

we’re always hiring.

Go to lexfriedman.com slash hiring.

And now, onto the full ad reads.

As always, no ads in the middle.

I find those annoying.

I try to make these interesting,

but if you skip them, please still check out our sponsors.

I enjoy their stuff.

Maybe you will too.

This show is brought to you by NetSuite,

an all-in-one cloud business management system.

They take care of all the messy

but critical things that make a business run.

It’s kind of incredible.

Human civilization, together,

has been able to collaborate,

first in a small village for hunting and gathering,

and therefore agriculture,

then to build and build and build

into more and more complex entities

where each individual human is operating,

doing each different roles,

like the mitochondria in a cell.

Together, the cells make up organs,

and the organs make up the human body.

In the same way, humans together come together

to make a company.

It’s incredible.

Those companies build gigantic physical architectures.

They build gigantic software architectures.

They connect us.

They give us services.

They enable the quality of life

that is observed in the developed world

and that the developing world is reaching towards.

I mean, this is just incredible.

Of course, it’s not just the idea.

It’s not just the engineers or the product people

that make a company work.

It’s the whole thing.

Everything is needed, just like in the human body.

There’s a lot of messy things.

There’s a lot of things like human resources,

management of inventory and e-commerce,

if you have an online presence of selling your products,

all of that, the financial stuff, that whole mess.

You should use the best tools for the job for that,

and NetSuite is just that.

For the new year, NetSuite has a new financing program

for those ready to upgrade at netsuite.com slash Lex.

That’s netsuite.com slash Lex.

This show is also brought to you by Indeed,

a hiring website.

Like I mentioned, we’re always hiring.

Indeed is part of the toolbox that I use.

It’s the main service I use

outside of my own putting together crappy webpages.

When I actually want to use a tool

that does a lot of the work for you,

that’s when I use Indeed.

You can post jobs there.

They have the instant match tool.

It gets the high-quality candidates right away,

so that first stage.

But it takes you through all the stages.

And ultimately, of course, in the end,

the most important, the most difficult stage

they can’t help with, that’s when you’re really

just the face-to-face conversation

between two human beings,

trying to understand if there’s a fit.

But the most important thing is to get you there

as quickly as possible, and that’s what Indeed does.

Indeed knows when you’re growing your own business,

every dollar counts.

That’s why with Indeed, you only pay

for quality applications that match your job requirements.

Visit indeed.com slash Lex to start hiring now.

That’s indeed.com slash Lex.

Terms and conditions apply.

This show, finally, is also brought to you

by InsideTracker, our old friends at InsideTracker.

Old friends that represent the distant future.

A big step towards the amazing future

when everything we do is based on data

that comes from our own body.

So InsideTracker tracks biological data

from blood tests that give you all kinds of information,

and then they use machine learning algorithms

on the blood data, DNA data, and the fitness tracker data

to give you recommendations for diet, for lifestyle.

And like I said, in the future,

there’s going to be all kinds of really high-resolution,

high-bandwidth recommendations.

First of all, the data is going to get bigger and bigger

and bigger coming from your own body.

And second of all, you’re going to be able

to have all kinds of recommendations.

First of all, high-resolution recommendations

on lifestyle changes, which is the backbone

of a happy life, right?

Diet, lifestyle, just getting your sleep right,

getting your exercise, all of that,

figuring that whole mess out in a data-driven way,

that’s super powerful.

I’m excited for that future.

Get special savings for a limited time

when you go to InsideTracker.com slash Lex.

This is a Lex Friedman podcast.

To support it, please check out our sponsors

in the description.

And now, dear friends, here’s Paul Conte.


Do you see psychiatry as fundamentally a study

of the human mind and not just a set of tools

for treating psychological maladies?


I think psychiatry is our best way

to understand who we are as people.

I mean, it looks at our biology.

How does our brain work?

How does it connect the parts with one another?

How does the chemistry in it work?

It’s the very foundational aspects of who we are,

and then it manifests as psychology.

What do we think?

What do we feel?

What are our strivings?

What are our fears?

So, yeah, I think psychiatry provides tools

that we can use to help each other,

but those tools come through it being

a discipline of understanding.

So, with every patient you see,

with every mind you explore,

are you picking up a deeper understanding

of the human mind?

I think I’m trying to.

I think we should learn,

should be able to take something away

from everything we do,

every interaction to some small degree.

Every conversation.

It doesn’t have to be a patient.

Just anywhere.

At Starbucks, getting a coffee.

You can learn something from that little experience.

Yeah, even if you just reinforce

sort of gentle kindness and gratitude

and decent human interaction,

there’s a reinforcement of that,

that even if we don’t take away memories

or lessons, so to speak,

we can reinforce who we choose to be.

So, understanding ourselves from those interactions, too.

Not just the general sort of philosophical human mind,

but understanding our own mind.

Introspect on how our own mind works.

Yeah, because everything we understand

about anyone or anything else

is coming through here, right?

So, yeah, we’re understanding others

and we’re also understanding ourselves.

It’s all feeding through us.

Yeah, but it’s a tricky thing to step away

and look at your own mind

and understand that it’s just a machine.

You can kind of control the way the machine processes

the external environment

and the way that machine converts

the things it perceives into actual emotions.

Like how it interprets the things it perceives.

You just sort of step away and analyze it in that way

and then you can control it.

You can oil the machine.

You can control how it actually interprets the perceptions

in order to generate positive emotions

and be like a, what is it,

like a mechanic for the gears in the machine.

I mean, I think to some degree.

To some degree, but the difference, I think,

at least as I understand,

I think of machines as not being inscrutable, right?

That if there’s enough study,

there’s enough acumen applied

that we can understand whatever it is

we’re trying to figure out.

Whereas part of understanding ourselves

is understanding that there are things we can’t understand.

And I think that’s indispensably important

to health and happiness

and also to having enough humility

to see how people can be different from us,

how we can be different from ourselves at times.

So knowing that we don’t know a lot

and having some idea of what that might be,

I think is an indispensable part of the process,

which I think is different from machines, I think.

Yeah, the machines, you’re basically saying

machines generally because they’re engineered from a design,

they’re usually going to be simpler,

therefore understandable.

And you’re saying the complexity of the human mind

is, at least from our perspective, nearly infinite.

Is there a meta-phenomenon?

What sometimes gets described

as sort of levels of emergence

where at increasing levels of complexity,

you have novelty evolve that you can’t predict

from lower levels of complexity,

like for example, atoms to molecules,

it’s just one example.

I think neurons to consciousness, consciousness to culture,

that there are meta-phenomenon

that separate from the phenomenon underneath of them

and thereby add an entire aspect of novelty.

So I think we are, I mean, I really think this is true,

that we are all infinitely fascinating

because these levels of emergence, of novelty,

that are inscrutable because you can’t predict

from one level to the next or understand fully

are what make us, and not just us,

but I think sentient creatures, human beings,

but sentient creatures, inestimably more interesting

than creatures that aren’t sentient.

And I don’t know, I think when we think

about machine learning and artificial intelligence,

I think it’s that that we’re trying to create,

the levels of emergence that now

we don’t fully understand anymore,

which I guess is both exciting and maybe scary too.

Yeah, so you start at the physics of atoms,

quantum mechanics, go into chemistry, go into biology.

From the biology, you have the functional phenomenon,

especially as manifested in the human brain,

and then multiple brains connecting together

through consciousness and intelligence

creates civilizations.

It’s pretty interesting.

Where do you think the magic is?

At which layer of the cake?

Every layer, because every time you emerge

from one thing to another, I see it as an analog,

like the concept of the dialectic, right,

where I think it was Hegel, right, who realized,

hey, when you have like thing A and thing B

and they’re complicated and they come together,

you know, you don’t get a hybrid of A and B, right?

You end up getting something that’s new, that’s novel.

And I think that describes to some degree

what emergence is, except there’s a whole new,

it’s a universe of novelty, right,

that comes at each layer of emergence

that allows infinite possibilities

that weren’t possible before.

And I think that’s why we’re so complicated,

that we’re, our functional neuroscience, right,

which I think is psychology, right,

our ability to think about ourselves,

about others, to be reflective,

is sitting on top of so many layers of emergence,

like the idea of standing on the shoulders of giants,

that we’re, you know, each of us,

our consciousness is standing on the shoulder

of a giant of many, many, many levels of emergence,

of novelty, so many of which we don’t understand.

I mean, that’s subatomic particles,

everything that quantum physics means,

you know, when does time become important, right,

as opposed to things happening outside of time

and outside of space,

when do we slot into one temporal perspective,

and then the complexity just, I think,

grows and grows and grows.

Yeah, the interesting word you use is novelty.

If true, this really blows my mind.

In some, either shallow or deep sense, it is true.

I’m trying to figure that out.

I don’t know if you know something about cellular automata,

is this very simple mathematical objects

where you have rules that govern each individual little cell

and they interact locally, and that, you know,

you understand the very simple operation

of those individual cells,

but at another layer of abstraction,

when you just kind of zoom out with blurry vision,

these meta-objects starts appearing,

that function, you can build a Turing machine with it,

you can build an arbitrary complexity of computation

on top of this kind of very simple object.

It’s an interesting question whether that was always there.

The atoms somehow know about love, right?

Like, about consciousness,

about war and violence and evil and hate and all that.

That’s already laden in the possibility of that,

the capacity for that, it’s already in the atoms.

It’s already in the physics, it’s already in the,

in all the different chemistry that builds up.

Like, even the origin of life, still a mystery.

That’s known, that’s in the physics.

That’s known to the universe,

the basic background physics in the universe.

Because if that’s not the case,

it’s like, where does that come from?

Where’s that magic?

And how many layers can the cake possibly have?

How many are we gonna keep building?

If it’s all, if there’s,

if we’re constantly through this process of abstraction,

of adding a layer to the cake, adding novel things,

like, where’s the ceiling?

As we expand out into the cosmos,

if we successfully can do that,

are we gonna keep building, like,

more miraculous, complex objects?

And then the brain is just, like, a middle layer thing?

We tend to think of ourselves as truly, truly special

manifestations of what’s possible in the universe.

But maybe we’re just, like, the basic, like,

tiny building block of something much, much, much bigger.

We’re in the early days of being a brick

in a very large building.

Sure, I think that’s entirely possible.

I mean, I think the only emergent thing, so to speak,

that we build is culture, right?

The aggregation of us.

So you have individual human minds,

which are entirely unique.

I mean, even the fact that time is different

for you and me, right?

It may be by picoseconds, right?

But we can engage because our perceptions of time

are parallel enough.

They’re close enough, right?

That we can share a reality, right?

But we’re all living in a different dimension of time,

right, I mean, we know that, right?

So we’re unique in that way.

And then the unique individuals that we are,

just like the cells, right, start to create

not just one thing, not just a culture,

but culture on top of our individuality, right?

Our uniqueness, our even dimensional uniqueness

of time and experience and consciousness.

So we create cultures on top of us,

but what could be beyond culture, right?

And what is different from us,

either on underlying levels, like quantum physics

or chemistry or biology,

or entirely different and unconceived, I think is,

it’s an immense question.

And I think it’s one that should create humility in us,

right, that look how much we don’t know

and then how reckless we are with ourselves,

with our resources, with human life.

And I think there it’s important to say,

I mean, think about how entropy rules

the universe around us.

I mean, how over selected are we?

How many, not just hundreds or thousands of times,

but how many millions of times

does there have to be a selection branch point

before we get into a sort of eddy pool of counter entropy,

where you can begin to create,

which I think is why you say,

okay, do the atoms know about love, right?

The fact that anything is being created

means there’s this over selection for counter entropy

where there can be a building of greater complexity,

of ultimately of novelty.

And we don’t often think about that,

of how far removed we are, maybe light years, so to speak,

from any other location,

temporally, physically in the universe

where this could happen.

And we don’t think about what does that mean?

Everything that you said, love,

everything is a counter entropy,

goes against the way, the basic physics of the universe.

So maybe actually the atoms

really don’t like what we’re doing.

They want us to stop.

They’ve been trying really hard to stop.

And despite that, we somehow started this whole bacteria

thing for like a billion years, and now we’re here.

I actually think of it kind of the other way.

I don’t think there’s any purpose to purposelessness, right?

So why would anything be here

if the drive weren’t towards creativity, right?

If the drive weren’t towards those subatomic particles,

not being nothingness that blips in and out of existence,

right, like we think is going on in empty space,

for light years upon light years, right?

But is there a design, either natural or intentional,

for a schema, right?

A scenario that allows for the incredibly rare,

but not non-existent eddy pool of counter entropy

where good can happen, right?

Where creativity can happen,

where ultimately something can grow,

something novel can happen.

There’s no novelty in the vastness of space,

even though there’s not nothing there.

There’s novelty here,

because I think the layers of emergence

start stacking very, very, very high

when we’re in a place of counter entropy,

which then could provide even thoughts

about like good and evil, right?

The idea that creating, that preserving is good, right?

It’s what we build upon.

It’s how we get to the eddy pool of counter entropy, right?

So then destruction is not good.

What good comes of aggression and destruction, right?

Unless we’re protecting,

or even you can think of outlying cases,

but just think in general concepts, right?

Destruction destroys.

It brings us towards a state of entropy,

towards a state of nothingness,

whereas goodness, commonality, collaboration, right?

Nurturing, right, brings novelty.

It brings new existence into the universe.

And I think we don’t think about that.

We’re in the middle of something so vast

and built on top of so many layers,

and I think it leads us to be cavalier

with human life, including often our own.

So you think there’s an underlying creative force

to the universe that might even have

a kind of built-in morality to it,

where creating is better than destroying,

and then that somehow maps onto our society,

where we kind of try to figure out

what that actually means in terms of good and evil.

So something is there like that,

but it has to be, it’s like so nice,

it’s so perfect, because it’s rare.

It’s sufficiently rare where we have our own space,

like you can close the door,

and it’s like, I need to be alone right now,

as our human civilization, to work on my thing.

So it’s sufficiently rare

that there’s not other alien civilizations

that are just constantly knocking on our door,

destroying us, but it still exists.

That’s weird.

It’s so fantastically improbable

that I think we should be very respectful of it.

And I think you said there’s a creative force

that values creativity.

Things would be, well, sure,

if it’s a creative force, its existence,

its ability to exist and to create

comes from something other than entropy,

something other than so much dispersion

that there’s nothingness.

So the creative force will value the sanctity of things,

keeping things together, not destroying things,

building novelty, including novelty of knowledge,

novelty of sentience.

I mean, it fits with the idea that we’re not nothing,

that that’s incredibly improbable,

and that there are these many, many layers of emergence

that we’re standing upon.

And I think it tells us something

that we’re not doing ourselves a service to ignore.

It’s not just a jump to saying,

oh, there’s a religious answer to everything.

No, it’s saying science isn’t a god either, right?

So if we think of science as a tool

and not as an endpoint in and of itself,

what is the science telling us?

I remember showing up at medical school,

and it really is true.

I mean, I knew so little about the human body.

I’d only been in hospitals to visit people.

I’d taken pre-med classes,

but sort of intensely at once

after I didn’t take any and I was working in business.

I knew next to nothing.

And I had this idea that was so naive in retrospect

that I was gonna learn so much, right?

I was gonna answer these questions

because I was gonna learn what’s going on in the body.

What are these organs doing?

What are these cells?

And what I learned was there was so much more

that was amazing and mysterious and seemingly impossible,

like even how a cell functions, right?

Like what is going on inside of a cell,

the transport mechanisms and energy functions

and diffusion functions.

And then you can go down to smaller levels than that.

But when you come back out and you say,

how will those cells make a kidney?

It’s not explanatory.

I remember asking the OB who had delivered my first child.

I was so amazed.

And I asked him like, what do you think?

Like, what do you know?

You do this, right?

You’re seeing this life created.

And his thought was nothing.

I just marvel.

I mean, I get to do this, but I just marvel at it.

And I think the more we know about us,

the more we respectfully marvel.

And we should do that.

We should proactively marvel at every aspect,

at every layer that where the novelty emerges.

Yes, we’d be a lot less likely to say,

hey, I don’t like you because of something,

whatever it is, race, religion, culture,

sexuality, gender identity, whatever it is.

Or I wanna say, I want rights that you don’t have, right?

Or I want what you have, right?

I mean, there’s so much of this.

And I understand it’s driven by scarcity

and by human insecurity and envy and all of these things

that I think drive us towards destruction.

But all of that recklessness comes from

not having this initial appreciation and respect

that you’re referring to and just marveling at.

Like, wow, okay, we’re here.

That’s amazing.

Let’s start with that.

But if we marvel at this whole thing,

the human project, the human condition,

all the different kinds of human beings that are possible,

what do you then make of that

some humans do evil onto the world?

First of all, are all human beings capable of evil?

If we’re in the process,

now we’ve got a little bit of momentum

in terms of marveling the layers of the cake.

Should we also marvel at the capacity for evil in all of us?

Is that capacity there?

I believe that it is, yes.

So what do we understand about the psychology of evil?

Where does that originate in the human mind?

Is it there in the neurobiology?

Is it there in the environment, in the upbringing?

Can I clarify first?

I think the capacity for evil, I do believe, is in all of us.

There’s a difference between enacting evil

and a sort of preset, followed, developed plan of evil.

I don’t believe that all of us are capable of doing

what the people who perpetrate the most evil do.

But I do believe that we’re capable of perpetrating evil.

And the thought, one thought would be

that there are drives in us.

I mean, there certainly seem to be drives in us

towards survival, towards gratification,

in some ways towards pleasure.

And that can get very complicated

because pleasure inside can be relief of distress.

So if I feel very badly about myself

and I can feel a little better about myself

by making you feel worse about yourself,

which that plays out in a lot of human beings,

is that an indirect way of bringing pleasure?

So it gets very complicated what’s going on inside of us.

And sometimes the perpetration of evil things

can be through misunderstandings, anger, impulsivity.

I mean, there are things that we can have in us.

And other times there can be other things going on

which are through the lens of unhealthy human psychology.

So for example, the psychology of envy,

which I think drives the lion’s share

of the orchestrated evil, right?

There’s a difference between impulsive, reflexive evil

and highly orchestrated evil,

which I think is driven by envy.

Highly orchestrated evil,

are we talking about a scale of societies

like totalitarianism?

So if we’re thinking about somebody like Hitler?

So at scale, orchestration of evil, envy driving that.

So I mean, that’s really interesting to think about.

I’d love to hear more about it.

So there might be some psychological forces

that are in tension with each other.

So one is, if you look at somebody like Hitler,

it’s difficult to know what was going on in his mind,

but it’s possible to imagine

if you just look at dictators throughout history,

that he thought he was doing good,

not just for himself,

but for the people he believed have value.

So one way you can achieve what we consider as evil

is by devaluing some group of people.

And that could be all group of people.

So it could have sort of a narcissistic type of idea

that you basically don’t care about other human beings.

That’s one.

Envy is different.

I mean, maybe they can collaborate together,

or even like you mentioned,

you can actually enjoy doing bad to others.

That’s almost like different

because if all it is is like narcissism,

you disregard, you don’t care how others feel,

then you can just make cold, calculated,

military, almost economic decisions.

And you don’t care if a million people die here or there.

But if you actually enjoy some aspect of that,

or there is like a resentment that fuels it,

it’s not just cold calculation.

It’s like fueled by some kind of personal

or cultural resentment.

It’s different.

I think it’s all fueled by that.

You think so?

I think it’s all fueled by that.

I think the idea that say,

Hitler thought he was doing good, right?

It is like that is such a thin facade

that it flies away like a handkerchief in a hurricane, right?


Okay, yeah.

Thank you.

That’s wow, that’s beautiful.


It’s built upon, like it says,

I’ll explain, logical lies, right?

Because people can build lies upon specious logic, right?

So the idea that, okay, I am doing good

because I believe that this ethnicity of people is good,

and this is bad, and now I’m going to do this,

and I’m gonna make the world different,

and it’s gonna bring better to the world,

and now I’m raising armies,

and I’m building concentration camps,

and I think this is all in the service of good,

is I don’t think anyone ever thinks that, right?

Or they think that, but with,

because they’re living in the surface patina, right?

Like they’re not allowing the hurricane in

that blows away the handkerchief,

and says like, this is all evil, right?

I mean, how do you decide that some group of people is good

and some is bad?

And like, what is it that you take upon yourself

to play God or make decisions about the world?

And I think what really is going on

is that people are not doing that, right?

There’s something cobbled together to say like,

why this is right, and this is okay, right?

And this is even good, right?

But it is all a lie, right?

It’s a lie that’s adorning the,

what I believe is the fact, I believe,

that what’s going on is the gratification of envy

inside of the person.

And whether someone says, oh, I think this is good,

and it’s okay if a million people die,

or I’m gonna enjoy that a million people die,

I think is the same.

I think the enjoyment, the gratification

of the orchestrated evil is there,

and that it all comes from vulnerability and insecurity.

It all comes from deficits in the sense of self, right?

I’m gonna have to process that.

My slow penny and PC is processing that,

so envy underlies all of it.

The psychological concept of envy, what is that?

I keep putting myself in the mind of Hitler, I guess.

That has nothing to do,

it doesn’t have to do with Jews or Slavic people.

Does it have to do with specific amorphous other

in his mind that he’s envious of?

I think it has all to do with him, all to do with him.

There’s not a love of the people with whom he allied,

or even a sense of the people who he persecuted

were worse than him.

It’s all projections out of what was going on inside of him,

which was an intense sense of inadequacy,

a rage at being someone he perceived as lesser than.

That’s the difference.

We can define words in different ways,

even within psychology,

but let’s say we take the definition here

of jealousy as being sort of benign, right?

The idea that, oh, I might see something

that you have that I don’t,

and I might think, I’d like that.

Maybe I’ll work harder to get it, right?

Or maybe I can’t get it.

Maybe it’s that you’re younger than I am.

I say, okay, you have that and I don’t.

I mean, I have other things too, I’m okay anyway.

But I might want those things.

But it’s very benign, the jealousy.

I’d like to be younger, I’d like to be richer,

whatever it is that we people think, right?

But it’s just a thought,

and it’s a thought that can result in strivings

or acceptance, right?

It’s very, very different.

It’s completely different than envy,

which is destructive.

It’s a thought of, I see something that you have

that I don’t have, right?

And instead of me working for it

or accepting that I don’t have it,

what I’d like to do then is bring you down,

take you down to where I am,

and then I’ll feel better, right?

Because from the perspective of envy,

it is all relative.

So is jealousy a kind of,

is it because he said completely different,

but is jealousy potentially like a gateway drug to envy?

Is it a slippery slope?

I think no, I think that jealousy is a natural,

just part of the human phenomenon that we go through life,

and we see like, oh, I’d like to have that.

I think it’s probably part of our incentives, right?

If I’m farming and I have one row of crops

and I look over and I see that you’re working harder

and you have two and I’d like to have two,

that can make me work harder to have two.

You don’t think it’s a slippery slope

from one to the other to,

at first you’re like, I’d like to work harder,

but then you keep failing and the weather sucks

and you keep failing and the other person

becomes more successful, plus he’s got a new hot wife now,

there’s a nice tractor, there’s a field that’s all working,

and then you get this idea that, you know what,

I’m gonna steal all this stuff, I’m gonna murder him,

and that, don’t you think that’s just like a leap

of the same phenomenon?


No, because I think there are things

that are in us as humans, right?

So the things that just by being human,

like we can, for example, feel,

we can feel compassion, right?

We can feel interest, right?

We can feel jealousy in that benign sense,

like it’s all part of just being human.

If we start going from, hey, you have more crops

than I have and now it seems like I actually

have a better life in a lot of ways than I have,

I’m gonna kill you, that’s not,

that is not a progression of something benign, right?

That is.

But wait a minute, but that is a human leap

of the same thing, isn’t it?

Because you’re drawing a line, stuff,

you’re saying like, this human stuff,

it’s regular life, it’s benign,

but it feels like this benign thing

is just a low magnitude thing,

version of the thing that’s not benign.

Like there’s probably a gray area

where it stops being, but like jealousy,

you can have like healthy jealousy,

you can have a little bit, slightly unhealthy,

there’s a, I think Jealous Guy,

this John Lennon song that I love,

it’s just beautiful.

I mean, there’s like, this jealousy inside relationships

can make you feel like, you know,

you could take your minds in all kinds of silly directions,

and it’s crazy, but like it feels like that,

that’s a next door neighbor to like,

being really crazy and toxic

and all that kind of stuff inside relationships.

And then that feels like a next door neighbor,

it’s like an apartment building,

that feels like a next door neighbor

that eventually gets to Hitler

with envy and resentment of an entire population of people.

You’re right in that there’s a causal,

there can be a causal chain, right?

Like if I’m not feeling jealous,

maybe I won’t ever feel envious, right?

So you can see, okay, so it can kind of lead,

it can open gates to, huh,

like how much do I dislike

that you have things that I don’t have, right?

So yes, in that sense, but,

and I think this is the part that I think is so important,

that I think there is a disjunction, right?

There’s an asymptotic shift, right,

from one thing to another, because it is very-

Now you’re speaking my language, mathematically.

Yeah. Asymptotic leap, yep.

Yes, that’s, it’s a way to convey, right,

something that’s entirely different,

because if I start thinking, you know,

I’m not gonna try and make things better, right,

I’d like instead to harm you,

that’s qualitatively different.

Oh, it’s almost like, you know what it is?

It could be, I don’t know what you think about this,

but it’s in which direction your motivation is pointing.

So if in the response to the feeling of jealousy,

your sort of, the motivation says,

okay, I understand this feeling,

I wanna do less of it.

I think there must be a threshold

to which you actually wanna do more of it,

like it becomes a vicious downward cycle.

So that’s what envy becomes.

Like the first feeling, this idea

that I’m gonna kill the farmer,

turns into like more and more and more,

and you can’t sleep, and you’re visualizing the farmer,

and he becomes the devil, and like you have this very,

you know, it’s basically a thing

that builds into the negative direction,

versus returns to the stable center.

Now a person is cultivating evil, right?

They’re saying, hey, there can be seeds of evil

in all of us.

Let me take that seed out, dust it off,

plant it, nurture it, right,

and then grow that seed of evil,

which will affect all other parts of the person’s life,

right, they won’t behave the same

towards others in their life.

They’ll become different as they nurture fantasies of evil,

as they begin to create inside of themselves

the motivation and the will, right, to enact evil.

The Hitler analogy would say,

look, you take someone who had a bad childhood, right,

who was not loved, who was taught and told

that he was less than.

Okay, like that, we know that happens.

I mean, that’s why child abuse is so evil, right?

It’s telling children the worst possible wrong lessons,

right, they’re not good enough, they’ll always be hurt,

you know, they can’t keep themselves safe,

they don’t deserve safety, right?

So then you take someone who then nurtures

that seed of evil, which is a choice,

and this is why I can’t paint well enough,

and no one appreciates me, and I don’t like how I look,

and I don’t fit in with the people I wanna fit in with,

and then, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on,

and there’s a hatred of self through that lens of misery,

of just being repulsed by the self,

but that’s unacceptable to the self.

So, oh, it has to be someone else’s fault, right?

It’s not my fault, whose fault is it, right?

And then you see en masse the inaction of evil

towards groups of people who somehow,

in this person’s mind, right,

are responsible for his misery,

and there’s the justification of evil,

and then all the, you know, whether it’s,

this will be better for the economy,

this will be good, this will be that,

like that’s all lies built to justify the evil.

Those are surface-level narratives.


And the envy is the deep-down mechanism that enables.

And that’s the endpoint that’s being served.

What’s being served is destruction, right,

which is why it always brings more destruction, right?

I mean, how many times do wars that were started

for purposes that we would look and say,

like, those were evil purposes,

like how many times does good come of that?

Even if we look at the modern world,

what comes of it is more evil, is more destruction.

You know, Hitler’s outward destruction

eventually came inward, and, you know,

you see pictures of what Berlin looked like

after the Second World War, right?

It wasn’t just destruction perpetrated outward,

as awful as that is, it’s catchy, right?

Like people used to worry if you, you know,

before the, during the time of the Manhattan Project,

right, if you start this chain reaction,

you know, will you blow the whole world up, right?

Or will it stop within this bomb or not?

And we see, okay, the chain reaction of evil

hasn’t yet blown the whole world up,

but look at the, look at how the catastrophe spreads.

And you think 50 to 60 million people

dead in the Second World War,

what truly was a world war,

what destruction was spread around the globe.

And this is something that can’t be stopped

once the chain reaction starts.

Like if Hitler was successful,

like it would just keep going.

If he had been, think about it.

On his personal psychological level, I mean.

Right, because if we think

from the perspective of destruction,

success would have needed,

led to the need to conquer more,

then there’s factions and infighting,

and then eventually you get the same mass destruction, right?

And never does the inaction of evil

satisfy what the person is initially seeking.

Like people want to feel better about themselves, right?

We, you know, like Winnicott,

who was a British pediatrician

who wrote about children and adults

from very deep perspectives.

He wrote about the idea of good enough, right?

And then you can sort of extrapolate that

to like we all want to feel good enough.

Like not just limp over the line good enough,

but I want to feel good enough

that I’m a decent person in the world,

and like what I do matters,

and you know, I can have an impact on people,

and you know, people can like me and care about me.

There’s a simplicity there that people want

that when people don’t have,

and there’s certain other factors,

maybe there are temperamental factors

or historical factors,

can lead to trying to soothe that deficit, right?

Through envy, and I think it starts with that,

and it often starts in childhood, not always,

but it often starts in childhood

when the child’s brain and psychology are so vulnerable,

and you know, you see salient child abuse.

If you look at what was Hitler’s background

and what was Stalin’s background,

and I mean, you could look at almost anyone

who’s perpetrated evil,

whether they’re serial killers or whatever it may be.

The majority, not everyone,

but the majority had these lessons in childhood

that said you’re not good enough,

you can’t keep yourself safe,

no one cares about you,

and in a subset of people,

that’s gonna generate envy,

and you know, that seed of evil

then gets planted and nurtured.

As a fighter jet roars above us.

The sound of a fighter jet above us.

Been good if I had orchestrated that.

You forget, you quickly forget

the comfort of being in a peaceful place.

That’s one thing I saw in Ukraine,

is, hey, you quickly get comfortable here.

The whole trip back,

I was thinking it’s so damn good to be in America.

Just the whole like, it’s like a three-day trip back.

It’s so good to be American.

We might take that for granted as a population,

but I do agree.

So the destruction never alleviates the envy.


Are all humans capable of envy?

I believe the answer is yes.

If you think, do we all have the possibility of evil in us?

I think the answer to that is yes.

But we have free will, we have choice.

We can choose what we do with that.

Which is why, just because someone is a sociopath,

you know, for example,

doesn’t mean that they’re not responsible.

I mean, our medical legal jurisprudence

has absolutely borne that out,

that legally, medically, we think,

okay, we’re responsible,

presuming we’re healthy.

We’re not unhealthy in other ways

that eliminates our ability to be circumspect,

but that we’re responsible for what we do

and don’t nurture inside of us.

I mean, there are plenty of things

we could decide to nurture anger and hatred about.

You know, I could think of slight difficulties,

whether it’s something someone else has done to me,

or I could blame fate,

or I could be mad at God or the world.

We can all make those choices

and we’re responsible for them,

or for recognizing things in us that are like,

oh, you know, I too have that in me,

but I don’t want to nurture that,

I don’t want to foster that,

or do I choose to nurture and foster that?

And I think ultimately,

you know, our subject of Hitler as evil,

if Hitler had kept winning and winning, right,

I think ultimately,

he would have been the only person on earth.

Right, and I really do believe that.

Ultimately, everyone, everything else would be killed

because it’s such destruction, right?

Destroy everything, right?

And probably when that didn’t work,

then there’s the destruction of the self, right?

Because nothing soothes envy

that is stoked by the sort of flames of evil.

And what you see is more and more anger

and more and more frustration,

which is why I really do believe someone like that,

who nurtured evil in themselves that way,

ultimately would destroy.

They’d be like him and one other person,

then he’d kill the other person.

I think that’s really powerfully said.

But even just to return to the jealousy versus envy,

I still think that it’s the same flame.

And envy is just the bigger version of it.

So I think, I just, in my own personal life,

I’ve felt jealousy towards others.

Like you said, like, oh, this person has a,

I don’t know, a cooler thing, trinket,

whatever trinket I cared about.

And usually it’s when somebody’s really close

to the trinket you’re building.

And I, early on, like in my teens,

I realized that just empirically speaking,

that jealousy over a period of a week

just doesn’t feel good.

And it’s not productive.

It doesn’t help me build a better trinket.

Or it does if I turn it not into jealousy

towards another person,

but into a love for building a better trinket.

It’s like, oh, cool.

Almost, you know what, like proactively speaking,

and later in life, people like Joe Rogan

actually have been really powerful in this for me

just as a fan of his, to celebrate other people.

So it’s almost as opposed to ignoring

that other person with a cool trinket.

It’s like celebrating their awesomeness, in my mind.

Just saying how awesome that humans are able to do that.

And actually just how awesome is that exact person

at being able to do that?

And that somehow made me more capable

to build my own trinket better.

And it feels good also.

Like it makes me feel happy.

And now you’re not jealous anymore.

You’re not jealous anymore.

Right, so that’s why I think jealousy is different, right?

Because you’re saying there’s a week of jealousy.

Like, I don’t like this, right, I don’t like.

But if you take that in a way that says,

wait a second, actually, this is awesome.

This is fabulous, and this person did this.

That person’s awesome, right?

Then you’re not raining on anyone’s parade, right?

And in not doing that, even inside your own mind,

you gain a greater cognizance of your own capability, right?

Well, if he can do that or she can do that, why can’t I too?

Like I wanna make the better trinket too, right?

Now you’re thinking creatively.

Nowhere in there was the emergence of evil.

I just disagree with that.

I think there was a choice made,

where I looked at my, if my life was darker,

more difficult, I think it has nothing to do

with the actual little flame of jealousy I felt.

I think it has to do a lot more with the other context.

If I, if my life were more difficult,

there was more abuse, there was more challenges,

I think that decision, I could have made that decision

in a different direction.

I don’t know, you’ve written brilliantly about trauma.

If there’s a bit more trauma as the background noise

of my decision-making, I’ll be more likely

to not be able to pull away from the gravitational field

of that jealousy and it would build and build

and build and build.

So I think, not to disagree with a brilliant person,

but I feel like that flame has the capacity

to engulf the whole world.

I guess the initial flame of jealousy,

the little bit, like especially the younger you are,

it’s almost like a habit that you get to build

in either direction.

Because I’ve early on built the habit of saying,

I’m going to channel that jealousy into productivity

and into celebrating other people

and that jealousy disappears.

That was like a little discovery for me.

I discovered that.

I get it, that doesn’t come, nobody tells that to you.

You kind of discover that little thing.

I could have easily not discovered it.

I could have easily discovered that it kind of feels good

to mess with that other person,

to think shitty thoughts, think negative thoughts,

do negative things to that other person.

Because that could also, I just think the capacity

in that initial feeling is there.

And I think it’s a decision we make.

Because otherwise, I think it dissolves responsibility

like, well, surely I’m not Hitler.

Therefore, this jealousy is normal.

No, I just feel like every jealousy

is the capacity to turn into, maybe not Hitler,

but a toxicity that destroys, in a small way,

in your own little private life, but it could destroy.

I agree that jealousy brings us,

can bring us dangerously close to envy.

I mean, maybe, let’s see if a heuristic we could agree on.

Right, let’s see.

So let’s say, okay, if we look at the terrain

of the mind as geography, right?

So if I’m feeling happy, satisfied, proud,

like I’m pretty far from envy land, right?

But if I’m feeling jealousy now,

I’m coming kind of closer to that border, right?

And I still, I think there’s,

it’s a big thing to go over the border, right?

That the border isn’t a gray area, right?

There’s a border to go over.

And I think that you’re, I agree completely,

one, certainly about trauma,

that the more trauma there is,

because then the more misunderstandings there are

about self and feelings that I’m not good enough,

and then that can be anger about why,

and who might be oppressing me,

and, you know, I hate myself,

and everyone else who seems to be better.

Like, so trauma can drive us in these negative directions,

but we’re still crossing over something, right?

So if you have the trinket, and I think, that’s awesome,

I want that, I wanna work harder.

You know what I could do, though,

is I could sneak in tonight when no one’s around,

and I could move something, right?

No, no way, I don’t wanna do that, right?

But it’s like, I came over the border a little bit,

and I thought, maybe that’s a better way,

but then I came back, right?

And we’re responsible for that, right?

Because it is a choice to say, I don’t wanna work hard,

I’m already working how hard,

I don’t wanna make my trinket better,

I wanna think mine’s the best one,

I could destroy yours, right?

And, you know, we’re letting our mind go over that border,

and do we say, right, run that forward, right?

Let’s run that forward, and put people around us

who feel the same way, and start doing it

so we think less of ourselves, and we debase ourselves.

Do we run headlong in, or do we come over that boundary,

and that’s maybe the capacity for evil in us,

that we come over that boundary, all of us, right, at times.

But do we come over it, and then say,

no, that’s not my choice, that’s not my self-definition,

and I’m coming back.

But I’m trying to justify,

maybe there’s certain other sociological forces

that help us cross the border, too.

So in Nazi Germany, we’ve been talking about Hitler,

but then there’s also the German people.

And so maybe when there’s a bit of a mass hysteria,

so all these effects of, like, combination of propaganda

with the small jealousies and resentments

of the people that don’t cross the border,

together they can, with great charismatic leaders

that sort of really fuel that fire

that we feel when we’re part of the crowd.

So maybe those individual kind of psychological barriers

we have to take that leap from jealousy to envy,

those can be made easier.

The leap can be catalyzed through this mass hysteria.

100%, 100%.

I think that, to me, is a massive point.

We’re talking about layers of emergence, right?

So if there’s individual consciousness,

then there’s culture, right?

And we’re products of the soup we swim in, so to speak.

People would say that when I was growing up, right?

We’re products of the soup we swim in.

So if the soup that we’re swimming in

is the soup of hatred, right?

Then it’s gonna foster all of those things.

So then you think about,

just in a painting with a very broad brush,

the culture created in Germany prior to the Second World War

and what was the impact of the reparations

after the First World War, right?

Of the punishing reparations, impoverishment,

and basically humiliation that people were feeling.

Okay, there were a whole bunch of decisions

that impacted that cultural perspective, right?

Then there must have been aspects,

just like I see in many ways parallels in America now,

of what are our standards

for what we’re communicating to others, right?

How is the media deciding what’s real and what’s not real?

What’s true, what’s not true?

What’s hatred that is only gonna do evil

versus what’s hatred that’s okay

because I might sell something by putting it out there?

I mean, we know that was going on in Germany

during the rise of the Nazis.

And I think there’s a parallel to,

do we value truth?

Can we stand together and say,

no matter how much I might disagree with you politically,

we can still understand that there’s right and there’s wrong.

There’s truth and there’s lies, right?

So I think those are just two examples

of determinants of culture.

And then the culture is a determinant of,

is someone like Hitler marginalized?

It’s like, that’s a crazy evil person.

Oh my goodness, like, whoa, right?

Or is that someone who gains a greater following

and more adherence and then there starts to be a momentum?

Because why?

Because what do demagogues do?

I think they have a giant lasso

and they harness the envy

of thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people.

That’s right, you feel worse about yourself too?

Doesn’t matter what the reasons are.

Maybe it’s your childhood.

Maybe it’s not.

Maybe it’s job failings.

Maybe it’s professional.

Maybe it’s personal.

Doesn’t matter.

You have envy too?

Let’s put it together and do some destruction

because that’ll make us feel better, which is a lie.

So we’ve talked about envy.

Where does, from the leader perspective,

things like narcissism or sociopathy,

psychopathy come into play?

What can you make of the world we live in,

maybe the leaders that run the world

from the perspective, from the lens of narcissism?

So I am struck, 20 years of doing what I do now.

I’ve been a psychiatrist for 20 years

and I practice in so many different settings

and I consult in different settings.

I’ve been fortunate to have a very wide purview

of what’s going on in people and in the world around us.

And I am struck with amazement

that of all the things I see that are, say, abnormal,

let’s say, from the mental health perspective,

this could be depression, panic attacks,

hearing voices, addiction,

there’s so many things that cover everything

that narcissism is not frequent

compared to a lot of other things.

So it’s small in terms of, say, a narcissistic diagnosis.

It’s much less than many other things.

But it causes the lion’s share.

I don’t just mean the most compared to anything else.

But I think more than 50%, the majority of bad things,

evil things, destructive things

that I see in the world around us.

I think narcissists are wildly destructive

because they are driven completely,

they are lodged completely in the lane of envy.

Can you try to sneak up,

and we don’t wanna be lost in definitions,

but can you try to sneak up to a definition,

non-clinical definition of narcissism

that we’re talking about?

So narcissism is a deep,

pervasive and unquestioned sense of inadequacy

in the self that comes along with anger

and fear and vulnerability,

fear of destruction, fear of annihilation

that is compensated for by aggression,

by the mechanics of envy,

by trying to make the self

seem better at the expense of others,

by taking from others,

by being completely cavalier

to the thoughts and feelings of others,

that narcissism is not arrogance.

Narcissism is the opposite of arrogance.

There is such a deep sense of inadequacy

and incompetence in the self

that the defensive structure around that

becomes dominated by rocket-fueled envy.

So the machinery of narcissism is envy,

but what do you make of the kind of

more popularly discussed kind of symptom of narcissism,

which is a seeming not caring about other people,

sort of a very inward-facing focus

in terms of the calculation you make

when making decisions about the world?

Narcissistic people definitely care about other people.

People who are schizoid say that

don’t necessarily register other people.

But narcissism, people care about other people,

but it’s entirely vis-a-vis the self.

If I’m schizoid, I don’t really notice

or care much who you are.

But if I’m narcissistic, I absolutely care,

because I’m watching every last detail of you.

What might you have that’s better than me?

It’s an incredibly intense focus

upon individuals and demographics of people,

but the priority, the goal is entirely about the self,

which is why it can become easy to say,

well, I don’t care if a million people die.

How different is that from going out

and destroying one person or a million people?

It’s in the same category of those people only,

their existence is only meaningful in how it relates to me.

But it’s still meaningful.

It just seems like a very difficult leap to take

that I don’t care that a million people die

that seems to be, even with envy,

that seems to be a big feeling and thought to have

if you at all care about them.

Are other people, I guess,

tools for alleviation of your sense of inadequacy?

Right, I mean, I don’t even care about

in that being caring at all.

I mean, caring about in that noticing

that a person exists, right?

I mean, someone who wants money

and notices that there’s a $100 bill out cares about that.

They don’t care about the $100 bill

and that doesn’t mean anything to them.

It’s their thoughts and feelings,

but it’s gonna attract attention.

They care about it because it’s something that they want,

right, the same way people will care about others,

but only from the perspective of

do you have things that I want

or can I feel better about myself

by taking something from you,

by making things worse for you?

People often talk about narcissism

as like the opposite of empathy.

But sort of empathy, again, depends how you define it,

but is a careful consideration

of the mental space of another person,

of how the other person sees the world.

And so you’re kind of saying that narcissistic people

would also be very good at that

in order to understand how maybe the other person

can be manipulated or something

to alleviate your sense of inadequacy.

Right, so there’s a difference

between the mechanics of empathy.

So let’s say, and we can define things different ways,

but let’s say empathic attunement

is the ability to be attuned and to think,

okay, what’s going on in you?

What might you be thinking?

What might you be feeling?

There’s some people who have a lot of empathic attunement,

but we could look at that as mechanistic, right?

It doesn’t equate to care, right?

An empathic attunement can come along with empathy or not.

Right, so yes, people who are narcissistic,

they can mentalize well.

So you mentalize, meaning the ability to understand

or to consider thoughts, feelings, motivations

in other people, right?

So people who are narcissistic

can have empathic attunement or mentalization,

depending upon how we want to describe those things,

but that has nothing to do with care,

with actual empathy or kindness or consideration.

So in that sense, empathy, usually popularly used,

means that you care, like your happiness is aligned.

There’s this, I need to read this book.

I’ve read so little science fiction.

That’s been one of my goals for this year,

to catch up on some science fiction.

So Robert Highland from Stranger in a Strange Land

has this quote about love, which is,

love is that condition where another person’s happiness

is essential to your own.

So that’s a good definition, I guess, of empathy,

where you’re very sensitive,

so mechanistically very sensitive

to the state of another person’s mind,

and your goal is to maximize their happiness.

It’s like essential to your own happiness.

So the happinesses are aligned,

and when that’s elevated to its highest forms,

you can call that love, romantic love,

friendship, and so on.


There’s one more thing about the narcissist.

Some people can be sort of benign narcissists,

where they want great things for themselves,

but if they have enough great things,

they can sort of tolerate others being happy too.

And these are people who sometimes

are actually quite highly liked,

because they have to have the most money,

the most power, the most of anything,

anything more than anyone else could challenge.

But as long as I have that,

it’s okay that you have some too,

and then that can make you happy

and can make you like me.

So benign narcissists can be well-liked

from that perspective,

but it’s still all about them,

and that can change if, for example,

there’s a scarcity of resources now, right?

But they’re generally,

they’re not people who are being overtly destructive,

although that, they’re over the border

into the envy territory, right?

Malignant narcissists are very different,

where they then want to have everything.

So even if I have 1,000 times more than you,

do I still envy you what you have,

because I want to have,

I don’t think I can feel good enough about myself

unless I have everything.

And once I have everything,

I won’t feel good enough about myself either,

and I don’t have to have more, right?

It’s like, that’s malignant narcissism,

which we think of as sociopathy, right?

We can define these words in different ways,

but they’re very, very negative concepts.

You know, that’s profound sociopathy,

malignant narcissism, you know, envy writ large.

So sociopathy is malignant narcissism.

That’s a convenient way to think about it.

No, because we can do sort of sociopathic things,

but not be sociopathic,

like, well, you know, you tell a white lie.

It’s like sort of sociopathy on steroids, right,

is then, you know, envy writ large is malignant narcissism.

Well, just like you’re saying,

like there’s empathic attunement, as you said.

So there’s the mechanistic aspect of empathy and sociopathy,

and then there’s the big label you get attached

if you’re just doing that thing regularly, I guess.

Living your life through that lens, right?


And is there a nice spectrum

that’s like narcissism, sociopathy, and psychopathy?

Is it all the same kind of nice stroll

through the woods off the cliff, or?

Not really, because the words don’t have clear definitions

like psychopathy and sociopathy.

There’s no real definition of psychopath or psychopathy,

or does that mean someone’s sociopathic but psychotic?

Like, there’s really not a,

we end up using those words colloquially, right,

which is why, you know, concepts that we can define,

like envy, empathic attunement, narcissism,

even though there might be nuances and definitions,

like we can define them in ways that are widely accepted,

including within psychology and psychiatry.

So it’s nice to just think about this broad umbrella

of narcissism and the levels to which it’s benign

or malignant, and then also separating

into the different mechanisms,

like interaction by interaction,

which sometimes can be narcissistic,

but broadly speaking, do you do everything

through the lens of malignant narcissism

that makes you a sociopath or a malignant narcissist?

Yes, and the thing I would add to that

is the thought about culture, right?

It’s like, how does the cultures we’re in,

whether it’s the culture of a household, right,

the culture of a community,

the culture of a nation or the world,

how does that impact what unfolds in that person,

and then how does what unfolds in that person

impact that culture?

Well, that’s the question is,

what unfolds in that person,

yeah, how does culture affect it,

but how does your own psychological development unfold that?

Because narcissism in leaders

is the most impactful thing, right?

Who are the most impactful individuals?

Well, what is the most impact of individual psychology?

We have, it’s usually leaders of countries

or leaders of major organizations and so on.

And one of the things you mentioned with benign narcissism,

that seems to be aligned with success, right?

If you care about your own success,

that’s going to be,

you’re more likely to have narcissistic tendencies,

I suppose.

And so my question is,

when you follow that thread of narcissism

to become the leader of a country,

now you have a lot of new,

interesting psychological complexities to deal with,

like power, that old cliche that power corrupts.

Is it possible for power to corrupt the human mind

to where it pushes you farther and farther

into malignant narcissism,

into this destructive envy?

What are your thoughts on power,

like the effect of power in the human mind?

Yeah, I think power is,

let’s say an accentuator, right?

An intensifier, right?

So I think it is true that there are people

who can be sort of in a gray area

where there are malignant narcissistic tendencies

and behaviors, but there are also ways

in which that person can think outside of themselves

and think in a broader way

and think sort of kindly about others.

And they’re sort of trying to navigate,

whether they’re aware or not,

that they’re trying to navigate between one and the other.

And then the allure of power is,

well, just look, just exercise that power

and you’ll feel better, right?

It’ll show you that you’re good enough.

Look at the power you have.

And whatever may be going on in the person’s mind,

that then power, yes, can corrupt, yes.

I think that’s why we have to have checks and balances,

because we don’t, we’re all inscrutable to ourselves,

let alone to others, so we must have checks and balances

and we should always have them on ourselves

as well as on others.

We should want that for the health of ourselves

and the world around us.

So I think all of that is true,

but there are also people who don’t necessarily

become corrupted by power, right?

There can be an understanding and a grounding

that they’re a steward of power, right?

You know, a shepherd.

I mean, there are ways people describe utilizing power

and utilizing it in a benign way

that then fosters the healthy aspects of self, right?

Gratitude and humility, right?

I mean, if we could add a healthy dose of gratitude

and humility to everyone or to our society,

there would be a sea change, right?

But how do you feel gratitude?

How do you feel humility?

Those things are incompatible with narcissism, envy, right?

With really the bad pole of things that we’re talking about.

And part of the reason I’m so focused in my work

and in really what runs through all of my thoughts

about life is the impact of trauma, right?

Because trauma creates these false lessons

and it walls us off from truth.

And it starts to point towards the unhealthy ways

of trying to feel better about ourselves.

But we have the health in us too.

We have those seeds of health too

that can grow into being a steward of power

and sharing power, being considerate and kind.

And we see a lot of that in the world too, right?

It’s not all just the evil.

We see plenty of people who do good

and who are generous of spirit.

And we have both in us, and it is,

I think you’re talking about our culture

and the seeds that we sow and the climate that we set,

including putting governors and boundaries around.

How do we rein in or say that the more aggressive,

the more envious or destructive is unacceptable, right?

How do we foster the part that’s kind

and considerate and reflective and slow to judge?

Of like, hey, let’s learn a little bit more.

How do we foster that?

And I think a lot of that comes back

to early childhood education.

I mean, I think we don’t do nearly enough

to protect children.

And as a corollary to that,

we don’t do nearly enough to educate children.

I mean, say I wanna write a book.

Second book I write is gonna be

everything I needed to know about life

I learned as a second year postgraduate psychiatry resident.

It’s like, why?

Why then did I learn so much about unconscious motivation,

about the impact of trauma,

about how we can be envious and how we can act out,

even about how our emotions trump logic in us?

Like, why don’t we teach these things

when we’re young enough to understand?

Like, why is that other kid bullying me, right?

Or why, just because I’m a little bit bigger,

do I wanna go thump that other kid on the head?

Like, what’s going on that we don’t do those things?

You know, we’re tripping ahead of ourselves

and we don’t stop and think.

How are we using our resources?

How are we shepherding forward the next generation,

which, by the way, is a generation

that’s gonna determine our fates too, right,

as we get older, but we don’t do that.

I often think of, like, in the Olympics,

you know, you see these great sprinters, right,

and they’ve gotta come out of the blocks perfectly, right?

So if they come out of the blocks a little bit too fast,

they’re gonna fall over, right?

They’re gonna just fall forward,

and I often see that in my head about us as humans

and as a culture, that we’re rushing so far forward,

we don’t stop and say, wait, let’s keep the basics here,

the basic techniques of, like,

how are we navigating forward in life?

Or do we just throw all those away

because I can get some benefit by saying that you’re bad

even though what’s being leveled against you is wrong, right?

Like, why, do I take that?

Or do I say, no, there’s something more important here

that we wanna shepherd forward in ourselves as a culture,

and I think preventing childhood trauma

and changing the ways that we educate children and adults

could, again, make a sea change

and maybe set us on a course towards,

you know, even towards a greater likelihood

of survival as a species.

Yeah, so talking to, like, people in elementary school

about human nature and teaching them

so how people can be resentful and envious

and how to deal with your emotions,

how to, yeah, these basic interaction things

about human relationships, about friendships,

about betrayal, about love, about all those things.

Like, it just, it’s actually strange that we don’t,

we kind of hope the parents talk about that kind of stuff.


But then the parents often, you know,

need therapy themselves.

The parents didn’t learn it.

Yeah, the parents didn’t learn it.

I mean, I’m not joking that I was mad,

you know, second year after medical school,

like, how is it?

Like, I think of even things in my own life,

and, you know, how I, you know,

how much shame I felt after my brother’s suicide.

Like, I was already an adult, right?

I was a young adult, but I felt so much shame.

I didn’t, like, I had no understanding that,

that, oh, it’s a reflex to trauma, right,

to feel guilt and shame,

and that, of course, I was feeling that.

It didn’t mean it was true because I felt it,

but I mapped the fact that I felt ashamed

to the fact that I should have felt guilty and ashamed,

and it, like, led to some very negative things in my life

that I had to sort of pull myself back from

and recover from, and, like, I didn’t know that, right?

I didn’t know the automaticity of the reflex

and how pervasive it can be

and how it can put blinders on us,

and, I mean, it’s just one example,

but, you know, it’s an example of something big

that happens to people that we don’t learn about,

and I find myself sometimes

having conversations with a person.

So, you know, I still do a lot of clinical care

of having conversations with a person after a tragedy

and, actually, I can’t believe, right,

again, I’m saying the things that this person didn’t learn

in elementary school because, like, none of us did, right?

And then look at the misery and the suffering,

and then I think this is one person

among how many millions among us

who, you know, try and go about their way

without knowing things that are easily knowable

because they don’t even know that they’re knowable

because we don’t teach them to ourselves.

So, how to deal with trauma,

that trauma happens, first of all,

that suffering can happen,

and small trauma and big trauma, all of it can happen,

and there’s natural ways to deal with it.

So, in the case of trauma, as you write about,

and we can also just talk about

some more of the details of that,

but it’s good to bring it to the surface,

to talk about it, to not be ashamed,

to hide it inside, to be some kind of secret,

that it’s actually,

I mean, there’s a lot of positive things to say here,

at least from my perspective.

One is it’s discussing trauma

and dealing with trauma together with other human beings

by talking about it is a path to deep friendship

and intimacy with those people.

There’s a dark aspect to trauma, to war,

that communicating it or sharing it bonds you.

So, like, the other side of trauma is, like, love,

you need that hardship, not you don’t need it,

but hardship and trauma can often be a catalyst

for a deep human connection,

if you bring it to the surface,

as opposed to kind of hide it on the inside.

I mean, if we can just linger on it,

because you’ve been through a few

very traumatic events in your life.

When you were 25 years old, as you mentioned,

your brother committed suicide.

What did that event teach you about life,

about death, and about the human mind?

What certainly brought me face-to-face

with the truths of life and death,

because I had not had a major trauma before then,

so there wasn’t a major trauma

sort of in my developmental years,

that what can carry forward

is a sort of omnipotence defense, right?

I mean, the thought is that when we’re toddlers,

we all have, like, an omnipotence defense,

which is like, I can just try and get up

and run and move, and if I run into something,

I’ll get up and do it again, right?

That we kind of have to,

and it’s partly the protection of the parent, et cetera,

but we think we can get out there in the world

and do things, and we just do,

and if we don’t have major traumas,

we can sort of carry through the,

oh, like, bad things aren’t gonna happen to me, you know?

Like, I know that they’re there,

and I know they happen to people,

but they don’t happen to me, right?

And sometimes what will happen

is being confronted with such a tragedy

wipes that away very, very quickly,

and then the person feels extremely exposed,

like, oh, I thought that I was gonna be okay,

and now I know that I’m not,

and that can start to lead to, well, what does that mean?

And now, is this all coming for me now?

You know, did I get so lucky for 25 years,

nothing bad happened,

and now nothing but bad things are gonna be happening?

Am I cursed?

Is my family cursed, right?

And I think that leads to, you say,

what the learning about the human mind,

in retrospect, I think I understood at the time

to some degree, but not like I do now.

I can put words to it now, right,

of how incredibly important, powerful,

powerfully important negative emotion is, right?

That how a sense of guilt and shame and vulnerability

can just pervade our entire life perspective.

So all of a sudden, we’re swimming in a very different soup,

and it’s a frightening soup, and it’s a toxic soup,

and I’m most struck by that,

and that goes along with the idea

that we’re not taught that emotion always beats logic.

You know, like I think the idea of Descartes,

Daniel, the idea that we’re rational creatures,

you know, that kind of comes down to us

through Western thought, is like completely not true.

Like, we’re rational creatures

only if there is an emotion grabbing for our attention,

right, like, you know, we’re attending to one another,

we’re being very logical, right, what we’re doing now.

If we heard a frightening noise right outside the door,

like, we’d be entirely different, right?

The emotion would trump everything.

It’s like, stop paying attention to this, right?

Now safety is at stake, and we’d think differently,

feel differently, behave differently, right?

And this is what happens to us, not just in situations

where something yanks us from one emotional state

to another, but it can be very, very pervasive.

So my sense of anger, frustration, inadequacy,

and then soothing in unhealthy ways,

you know, soothing by drinking too much,

and then kind of hating myself in the first place,

and then hating the world around me,

and then, you know, starting to think,

well, who cares, you know, what happens?

Like, you know, there’s some very dark thoughts

and choices that came from a changed perspective

of self in the world.

So what do you do when that, because of trauma,

again, small or large, you find yourself swimming

or drowning in a soup of negative emotion.

What do you do?

What do you do with that emotion?

I mean, we don’t have to even talk about trauma.

I think the interesting thing is, you know,

any one of us throughout the day can find ourselves

taking a bit of a dip in the pool of negative emotion.

What do we do with that?

The first thing is to separate how we feel

from what’s true.

Because we don’t do a good job of that as humans.

If I feel bad about myself, it’s very easy to,

then I conclude, like, I’m bad, right?

If I feel ashamed of myself, I conclude

I’m a terrible person who’s shameful, right?

This is the, you know, there’s an old psychodynamic concept

of what they used to call an observing ego.

It still gets called that.

It’s not ego in the sense of arrogance, right?

It’s the ability to step outside and to see ourselves, right?

So that’s what lets us keep the difference

between our feelings, right, and what we know to be true.

Like, we can be very angry at someone.

So I think that person’s terrible.

I think that person’s stupid.

I think that right now because, like,

something negative just passed between us.

This inside of me, it’s just because of how I feel.

Like, when I can separate that,

how do I actually think about that person, right?

And, you know, we get driven so, so frequently

by how we feel because how we think,

therefore what we believe, right,

just kind of comes on its heels

as if the feeling is dragging it along.

And I’ve been struck by that.

It’s one of the things that has struck me so,

the most, right, among the very most

in 20 years of working as a psychiatrist

is how we are led by our feelings, our emotions,

as if they are truth.

And then they create truth

because we embrace what they’re telling us as true.

And that is, I think, incredibly,

I think it’s how people learn prejudice.

I think it’s how people learn self-hatred.

I think it’s how we learn so many destructive behaviors.

And then the blinders on us come in

more and more and more and more.

So separate, you know, we’re driven by what we feel

unless we understand that what we feel

is different from what we know to be true

or what we can decide on one way or another.

And that requires realizing

and catching the emotions themselves,

realizing that it’s an emotion.

A feeling comes into your mind, overtakes you,

a feeling of anger, dislike, hatred, all of that,

it just comes in.

It’s like, why did that person just cut me off in traffic

or something like that, that feeling.

So what, you just kind of take it as a feeling

and realize it’s a feeling that doesn’t represent

some deep reality about the world that’s fundamental,

or you, that you just kind of watch it and let it pass,

which is the natural way of things.

Or decide if it means anything.

You know, if I’m mad, right, someone cut me off

and I feel hatred and I want to destroy them, right,

to stop and think, look, I’ve got that in me.

Are the stressors running too high in my life?

Like, is it really good?

Should I be on this road 10 minutes behind schedule?

Like, what am I really doing?

So we can learn, but yes, it’s an observation skill, right?

And it’s an observation skill that we can develop.

I often think of something called the tapestry theory,

which I think initially was a theodicy of explaining,

I believe this is true, I’m not sure of this,

but the idea was that, oh, we don’t see God’s plan

because we’re up too close to it, right?

Like, as if there was a beautiful tapestry on the wall

and we’re standing right up it,

we’re only gonna see one part of it.

We need to stand back from it.

And I remember learning that in a religion studies class,

being really fascinated with that at the time.

And I think that there are a lot of things

we do that about, right?

And in training ourselves to have an observing ego,

what we’re saying is, hey, just the busyness of life

or my own impulses or the pool of emotions

are trying to pull me up right close

to whatever tapestry there is there.

And I want to sort of resist that.

I mean, I’m better off if I really stay further behind it,

and then I make a choice if I want to come close to it.

If there’s some really positive emotion,

it’s friendship or it’s love or it’s nurturing,

you know what, let me come right up to this, right?

But I want to choose when I’m doing that.

I don’t want some drive I didn’t decide

to take me by the back of the head

and put me up against that tapestry.

So the interesting exercise for me,

and I think for a lot of people in modern civilization

is the internet with social media,

that it’s almost like going to the gym

or something like that.

At least that’s the way I see it.

Because there’s a bunch of forces on social media

that are trying to make you feel things.

Most of it is kind of in the negative space of feelings.

Because there is actually a strong gravity pull

to negative feelings for some reason.

And so the, and the brain notices them more.

I don’t know what that pull is, but it’s there.

And you get to observe it on social media.

Like if you actually just scroll through social media,

you feel the gravitational pull of negative emotions.

And I just see it as a kind of exercise of like,

you feel the pull, just like when you go to the gym,

there’s a resistance.

And I practice like stepping away

to look at the tapestry, right?

And there’s different mechanisms

I think all of us have to learn.

For me, there’s a kind of,

you mentioned gratitude and humility.

So like if somebody, if it’s me personally,

I’ve recently gotten attacked a few places here and there.

You know, if they’re saying

that they’re much smarter than me,

I practice kind of humility, like you mentioned.

And I kind of imagine that they are smarter than me.

Those things like help me to kind of like pull away.

Like, and then maybe they have a lesson to teach me.

Like I don’t take their sort of negative comments to heart,

but I imagine the human being

and like that they might have a lesson to teach me.

And in general, when it’s more amorphous

kind of negative feeling,

I think the other thing is the gratitude.

Just like different versions,

almost meme-ifiable versions of like,

oh, this is pretty cool.

Like we got a thing going here.

There’s like human civilization,

like bickering and having a little fun,

like lunch, food fight.

And it’s kind of cool.

Like we get to interact in this way.

And there’s a bit of humor.

There’s, it’s like Thanksgiving dinner.

Like if you, like Thanksgiving dinner,

if you’re arguing about politics,

it can feel like really intense.

Like, I can’t believe you said this,

but if you zoom out, it’s like family.

This is like, this is amazing.

So that kind of feeling really helps.

But it’s like, it really is like going to the gym.

It’s like building up a muscle

to be able to pull away from those emotions.

I don’t think I get to practice that kind of emotion

in regular day-to-day life.

Because like, you can’t, it’s hard to get those reps.

On social media, you can really get the reps in.

It’s kind of cool.

Like that’s the way I see social media

is a chance to sort of practice that stoicism

of like, of gratitude, of humility,

of loving other people in the face

of this negative emotion, all that.

Yes, and, you know, there’s a certain kind of psychotherapy

that talks a lot about this idea that like,

oh, everything is as it should be, right?

Which doesn’t mean from some moral or justice point.

It’s just that often if you look at things,

one thing leads to another to another to another

in a way that’s actually very, very predictable,

even though we might be surprised about it, right?

And so an example, so I would say that gratitude

often does come along with a healthy pride, right?

So you could say, in the example you gave,

hey, I’m being assailed on social media, okay?

So you could say, well, you know,

there was a time I sat at, I set forth to impact people,

to be able to reach people and to impact them, right?

And look, I feel a sense of both gratitude and pride

that I’ve done that, right?

Because look, you did it because of your effort, right?

Your work, your intelligence, your thoughts.

Like, you’re responsible for it, right?

But also you feel gratitude because any one of us

who’s here and has any opportunity

has reason to feel immense gratitude, right?

So then you can say, okay, what’s actually going on here

is something successful.

I set out to do something and I’m doing it, right?

And what it brings with it

absolutely includes being assailed.

There’s no surprise there, right?

That because people who have anything good

serve as lightning rods for envy.

So then, yes, there will be people who wanna make up lies

or whatever they wanna do

because you become a lightning rod for envy

by having succeeded at the thing you set out to do

about which you can feel a healthy pride and gratitude,


And then I think that kind of puts it in its place.

I mean, you’re still gonna make decisions about it,

but it makes sense then.

Like, you have a mechanism of understanding it

that not only makes sense to you,

but reflects the truth of what you actually have done

and achieved and what’s going on in the world around you.

Well, I wonder if we’re all kind of

a little bit unique in this.

Because for me, I mean, maybe it’s useful

to kind of talk through my own experience of it,

is for me, I try to avoid,

especially in those situations, to feel pride

because I’m just looking empirically.

I feel way happier if I focus on humility.

If I ever think of like, oh yeah,

when you do something meaningful

or you become more popular,

you’re going to experience these kinds of,

I feel the attacks more.

It’s like me versus the world.

That’s the feeling that you start getting.

And that does not create a pleasant feeling.

So to me, the pleasant feeling is like stepping away,

like kind of laughing at it all,

like with a smile and not like in a negative,

like laughing at people,

but just like laughing at the theater of it,

the circus of it,

like this whole absurd existence we’ve got going on.

And then just having a humility in like,

everybody has a lesson to teach me.

It just makes me feel good.

The pride thing, I do like feeling

when in a positive pool of emotion.

So if I’m building a trinket and I finish it,

I’m like really happy with myself.

Like I finished this thing.

And I usually actually like to do that alone.

Like I don’t need an audience for pride.

I like to sit there and just like,

ooh, this is cool.

I did that, you know?

But I just, I find that in social interactions,

pride is just a danger.

It’s a dangerous drug for me

because it’s such a small,

it’s a small step away from then losing all the humility.

And then you start getting very defensive

and that’s not going to,

that’s just, it starts you on a spiral of negative emotion.

But I also, I mean, with everybody,

you’ve mentioned this,

we’ll probably sneak up to it in different directions.

I do think there’s different brains that we all have.

My brain is exceptionally self-critical,

like nonstop.

It’s like an engine that’s always there.

But at the same time,

I’m able to zoom out and have gratitude.

And it’s just, there’s like two brains

and they’re like cohabitating happily.

And I can, the better I get at this,

the more I can use the one that’s self-critical

when I’m trying to be productive

because naturally I’m super lazy.

So I’m trying not to be less lazy.

I’ll be self-critical.

And then when I’m not being lazy,

when I just, there’s a special moment,

I want to enjoy that moment,

I’ll turn on the gratitude engine.

I feel like generic advice that people would give,

if your brain is self-critical, that’s not a good thing.

Like you should probably get rid of that.

I don’t know about that.

Because it seems to be working.

Like I kind of like it.

I kind of like this grumpy old man that’s in there

that’s like, that thing you did, that really sucked.

I was like, and I kind of,

there’s a movie, Grumpy Old Man.

I like that grumpy boy, the grumpy cat is in there.

And it’s nice, but yeah, it can have bad effects

on relationships and on maybe my wellbeing,

maybe as you get older and all that kind of stuff.

So you have to monitor all this kind of stuff.

But I don’t know, I don’t know which one,

it’s like, because you’ve kind of highlighted,

it’s good to have gratitude and humility,

but it’s also good to have a little bit of pride.

I wonder what that like set of ingredients

for a healthy life looks like for each of us.

Whether we have to customize and figure out what that is.

Some of the cake is already baked is the problem.

And because of the trauma, like if I was like eight years old

maybe I could be a little more flexible.

But at this point, like you got the thing you got

and it’s hard to like fix it.

You could do a lot with it.

You could.

It may not be easy, but there’s a lot of plasticity

and a lot of pliability there across all ages.

Again, people are different and there may be idiosyncrasies

of why one person is in a different place.

But as a general rule, I think the answer is absolutely yes.

I mean, people have evolved and I’ve worked with people

who’ve really changed themselves

and broadened their conception and understanding.

You know, they’re in their 80s or,

I think we can do it at any stage of life.

And I would make a case for intrapsychic.

So not between people necessarily, right?

But inside of oneself for the feeling of pride.

And maybe if we call it self-esteem, right?

Let’s say we call it self-esteem, right?

Or we could call it healthy pride.

We could put either word to it.

But if you think about what we’re trying to avoid,

is say a sense of inadequacy,

then it is good to sort of own what’s ours.

We can put ourselves a little bit out of balance

either in terms of building up resentments

or in terms of decreasing self-confidence, right?

If we’re not owning everything that’s ours, right?

So a thought I would have about,

let’s say about some pride or some self-esteem, right?

Is it can work against vulnerability, right?

Which we know can also in some situations

push us towards jumping the boundary into envy

and all of that.

So just think about vulnerability.

If you conceive, okay, people are assailing me

and you just go to a place of gratitude,

it can send a message that, okay, I’m just lucky

and I hope I continue to get lucky

as opposed to like, that’s not true, right?

Like there’s ability inside of me

and discernment inside of me that tells me

I can have a greater sense of confidence

that I’ll navigate what comes my way, right?

So because the pride or the self-esteem part

is owning what we’ve contributed

to the goodness we’ve created, right?

Which does in a sense helps us feel better about ourselves.

And it also helps us feel armed against, say,

the slings and arrows of whatever outrageous fortune

may come next.

I don’t know, I don’t know, I don’t know.

Again, disagreeing with an expert here.

Yes, I think that’s generally good advice

but I think you mentioned vulnerability.

I think it’s like, I’ve just been doing a lot of research

on rocket engines and rocket fuel.

And speaking of fuel, I just think I get a lot

from being vulnerable.

Because vulnerable leads to intimacy

in friendships and relationships.

I get a lot from being intimately close with human beings

just on a friendship, on like a ideal level

in conversations and so on.

And so I would rather err on the side of vulnerability.

To me, pride is destructive.

I think I already,

I already have a pretty good engine that says like,

life is awesome.

I don’t need help for that, it’s fine.

That one is working.

I just feel like the way to face the world

that’s full of uncertainty, that could be full of cruelty

is with humility and gratitude.

I don’t know, this pride thing, it feels like,

I know that for a lot of people,

it’s really important to really work on pride

to make sure they don’t crumble under the pressure

of like, they don’t give in to this insecurity

that destroys them.

But I just, for me, empirically speaking,

I seem to be happier facing the world with humility

and just being grateful.

The pride, I’m really worried about.

It feels more destructive than anything.

See, what I think, as you’re telling me that,

and I don’t wanna be presumptuous,

but I make some thoughts or some conclusions

that tell me, hey, you’re in a pretty healthy place, right?

And the reason I say that is because

I agree completely about vulnerability.

I mean, think about humility and gratitude

make us vulnerable, right?

If you’re like, wow, I’m grateful, thank you,

I’m grateful for you, we could get shot down

or something bad could happen,

something could make us feel bad.

So yes, we need vulnerability.

If we try and eliminate vulnerability,

we’re living miles into the envy land, right?

So you’re describing a healthy vulnerability,

but then my brain says that’s because

on the other side of the seesaw, so to speak,

has to be a healthy sense of self,

whether we call it self-esteem or healthy pride.

And then I’ll cite what I think is the evidence for that

is you described the negative voice

as like the grumpy cat, right?

But that’s a good negative voice to have, right?

Because it’s telling you like, hey, that wasn’t your best.

Like, come on, do better, or, right?

Like, you can do better.

Like, there’s a negative voice in some ways,

but it believes in you, right?

Where that voice could be,

it could be a negative voice that says,

you didn’t do that well because you suck.

You don’t deserve anything good, right?

Why should you even be alive, right?

I mean, that’s the negative voice

that can gain so much force

if there isn’t a balance of healthy self-esteem.

So I think because you’re well-balanced,

you have what you need,

and then having more of it seems like,

oh, that’s not so good.

But there are people whose negative voice

isn’t the grumpy cat.

It’s hateful, right?

And then that’s a person who needs

to bring that into greater balance.

Yeah, I think my negative voice is like a grumpy cat

that’s like a French existentialist,

maybe a little bit of a nihilist,

but it’s just kind of-

Sartre’s cat.

Yeah, Sartre’s cat, so it doesn’t get hateful.

It’s not like a Hitler cat, so it’s a little more,

yeah, I guess there is kind of like this line

that we’ve come across a couple of times

between the benign and the malignant.

But of course, you have to monitor that line.

I think you have to be careful

when you face really difficult situations

of as you go on through life, more and more difficult,

so you face a lot of loss and suffering,

especially later in life.

You have to be careful with that voice.

That grumpy cat can get awfully confident,

and then if you don’t have any source

of positive emotions in your life,

you can become too heavy of a burden.

Yes, which I think this leads us to,

what I think is a really important fact,

that there are some people,

like a significant subset of people,

who get happier as they get older.

They have more contentment, a stronger sense of self.

You might think, how could that ever happen?

We’re getting closer to death.

We’re accumulating insults.

Everything hurts a little bit more,

and we have less energy,

and we accumulate losses and traumas.

Why would anyone be healthier across time,

be happier across time?

And what we see is it’s linked

to the things that we’re talking about.

It’s linked to, let’s say, vulnerability versus pride.

There’s a good balance there.

There’s a lot of humility.

There’s a lot of self-esteem.

The person is spending a lot of time

standing back from the tapestry and looking at it.

And what can come into people

is in sort of a sense of equanimity.

I sort of understand.

I’m being the best person I can be.

And that’s not always even great.

And there are things that I don’t feel great about,

even while I’m trying to do that.

But look, I’m being who I’m choosing to be.

And that doesn’t have to be in some big way.

I’m not saying that means any one specific thing.

That can mean the person who’s taking care of their cat

and tending their garden.

That’s enough.

We have to have love,

the ability to put good things out in the world,

and to put our ability to work

to make things different out into the world

and make things better.

And if we’re doing that,

we get happier across time

because we come to a sense of peace with ourselves.

I’m not supposed to be everything.

I’m not supposed to do everything.

I’m not supposed to fix everything.

I’m also not supposed to suffer all the time

for the things I haven’t gotten right.

You know what?

I guess I’m kind of, and it leads back to Winnicott,

the British physician, I’m good enough.

And that seems to help people feel happy,

you know, contentment,

and be generative and productive into later life.

It’s like, that’s what we all should be wanting.

But it’s even, it’s kind of an afterthought,

though, some people are like that

as opposed to, wait a second, right?

Like, what’s going on with them?

And let’s do all of that.

Albert Camus writes in Myth of Sisyphus, quote,

there’s only one real serious philosophical problem,

and that is suicide.

Deciding whether or not life is worth living

is to answer the fundamental question in philosophy.

All other questions follow from that.

So basically, to be or not to be.

Do you think there’s a truth to that statement?

This question of why live at all?

Do you think there’s truth to that statement

being a really, really important question for us to answer?

Yes, yes.

And what’s the answer?

I think the answer is yes.

And I think Camus answered it, yes, too.

I love his writing, and I think there was

a streak of nihilism that I think grew

in his writing over the years,

and the thought is, I think, that Camus died by suicide.

I think we’re not sure of that

because it was a car accident.

But I’ve always read that as the primary scholarly opinion.

And I think it’s interesting that after his death,

a book called The First Man was published,

which I don’t know if he had intended to publish.

I don’t remember the specifics about it.

But it’s about him as a child, right?

And it’s interesting, the first man.

He was the first man in his existence, right?

The most, the one that felt and experienced everything.

And there’s sadness and distress and all in that book,

but there’s a beauty of life and living and experience.

And I think to compare that beauty, like that’s life,

even if something’s difficult and scary and sad,

like there’s something beautiful around the corner

and here’s a kind person and a new discovery,

you know, more what was in him as a child.

And I think that we can get jaded,

as you and I were just talking about a few minutes ago.

We can accentuate the negative and foster the negative

and come to a place where we’re looking

for some in-depth philosophical answer,

you know, some thick book, you know,

that’s gonna explain all that to us

instead of the simplicity that we’ve been talking about.

I think humility, gratitude,

helps us have just simple positive experiences,

feelings of contentment, feelings of connection

with another person, learning, discovery.

And I think the answer to Caymu’s question is yes,

and I think it lies in his writing

about when he was a child,

which I think he saw as less important

than his later writings and the intellectual heaviness

when I think maybe he had lost his way a little bit

from the things he understood when he was younger.

So another way to talk about it,

and I’d love to hear what you think,

is about these broad categories,

let me be started with Kierkegaard,

of existentialism, absurdism, and nihilism.

And I think Caymu considered himself an absurdist,

not actually an existentialist.

It’s kind of a middle ground where I think existentialist,

I don’t want to characterize it in the wrong way,

and there’s a lot of different definitions,

but I think existentialists ultimately do think

that there is meaning in pursuing the passion of life,

like pursuing the, in living life.

That’s where you discover the meaning

at that individual level of fully embracing life.

And I think nihilism is, again, it’s kind of like a spectrum

where nihilism basically says there’s no meaning,

and it doesn’t matter, nothing matters.

I don’t even know, but somehow that lands you

in a place that’s totally uninspired.

Maybe nihilists would disagree with that.

Maybe there’s a way to live a creative life

in a nihilistic mindset.

And I think absurdism is somewhere in the middle

where pursuing meaning at all is not a good idea.

So kind of, I think existentialists say

you should be looking for meaning,

and it’s to be discovered in your own actions,

in your own life, in the moment.

And absurdism says life is absurd, nothing makes sense.

Don’t look for the meaning, just live, just be.

I think that’s kind of the later Caymu kind of philosophy.

I don’t know if you can sort of comment

on these kind of nuanced ideas here.

If there is no religious guide to your life,

what do you think about this kind of search for meaning?

Do you see that there’s some wisdom

in the existentialist perspective of discovering it

in your own life, in this passion,

in this kind of day-to-day existence,

in the moments of your life that bring you joy,

that kind of thing?

You’re bringing different sort of perspectives

and trying to tease apart, like,

well, wait, what are the differences

in those perspectives, right?

And I think what it points out is that,

okay, we tend to conflate things as human beings, right,

and to take two different things

and try and make them into one,

but we also, I think, on the other end of the spectrum,

get very overly reductionist.

And I think that when we get too overly reductionist,

we lose the ability to learn from anything

or to generate meaning, right?

I mean, think about Sartre,

who the thought of existentialism

is so consistent with him, right,

who, on the one hand, wrote about very clear terms,

like this is what it is and this is what it isn’t,

and here’s how you’re gonna make your meaning

in a very academically proscribed way,

but he also wrote short stories like The Wall, right,

where there’s something totally absurd happens, right,

as part of the story, right?

So I think what ends up happening

is people either reduce themselves

or get associated with something

that, by being overly reductionist,

takes us away from meaning, right?

The idea that, look, we don’t know

if there is an overarching religious meaning

or what we call a religious meaning or purpose,

like we don’t know that, right?

So, okay, if we take that as a given

that people who say that they know are having faith,

like how Spinoza described faith, right?

Faith is that you don’t know, but you believe anyway, right?

It’s not because you have faith now you know something,

right, because I think that’s a slippery slope

to the persecution of others, right?

So if we say, okay, we don’t know,

then we’re left either deciding,

okay, well, then to hell with everything,

you know, like there’s that movie,

A Strange Brew, right,

that Bob and Doug McKenzie were like,

the brakes don’t work on the car,

and one of them says, oh, why bother steering, right?

So if we don’t know that there’s meaning,

like why bother steering?

Let’s just give up the ghost, right?

And I don’t think that’s even what the nihilists said.

I mean, I think Bakunin said we should get rid of everything

that we’ve ever created except Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony

and start over from there.

But so even people who are very nihilistic

or associated with that,

a lot of them were just not liking what we had built, right?

So if we accept that a lot of what we have built

as humans inside of us and outside of us

is really counterproductive and doesn’t help us,

and that absurd things happen in the world, right?

And that often the way social structures

and systems build up,

you build themselves up is absurd.

I think our healthcare system

operates in a way that’s absurd, right?

So if we accept that there are absurdities

that we don’t know if there’s truth,

then what are we left with?

But like, well, let’s try and make meaning, right?

Ortega y Gasset said,

yo soy yo en mi circunstancia, right?

I am myself in my circumstances, right?

Which is like, look, we can’t control everything.

We live in circumstances around us,

but within those circumstances,

we can make decisions and define ourselves.

And I think the brilliance of that,

and I think tying it all together, right,

in a way that’s not trying to be,

in a sense it ties it all together

by not trying to answer everything concisely,

that yes, we can make meaning.

Like we see that if someone trips in front of me,

I could walk around them or I could help them up.

I mean, no one can tell me that it doesn’t matter what I do.

I absolutely reject the idea that,

oh, I could step over them or on them,

or I could help them up and it doesn’t matter.

Oh yeah, try being the person on the ground, right?

So we create meaning, but we live in our circumstances,

and there are absurdities both within us

and outside of us in our social structures.

And there are a lot of things

that pretend to have meaning that don’t.

And there’s the shades of nihilism,

but ultimately there’s something going on here

that’s doing the best we can

in the context of just not knowing.

Yeah, I tend to see, I don’t know if it’s genetic,

I think I tend to think just observing the internet,

the number of memes there are.

I think many other people are like me.

I tend to see the humor in the absurdity.

I tend to enjoy it from that kind of angle.

I see the Kafkaesque nature of society,

of different aspects of society,

and just kind of notice the magic with a smile.

And just laugh at the circus of it all.

Because it is magical that the circus all comes together.

It’s like a little bit out of sync,

and then there’s a guy playing trombone,

but overall it’s pretty good, it’s pretty good.

And we can look at that and just kind of marvel,

and go, huh, which I think is a relation

to at least a lot of what we, in the Western world,

think of as Eastern, as non-attachment.

Because then if there’s something absurd,

and it’s not good for me, then I accept that too,

instead of getting angry about it, and railing about it,

or seeing some cosmic meaning in it.

I think there’s also a healthy non-attachment

in what you’re saying too.

So there’s, you mentioned Eastern thought,

there’s Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, but also Buddha,

have kind of spoke of life as suffering.

Do you think there’s truth to that,

that suffering is a fundamental part of life?

I think it is a fundamental part of life.

I don’t think that means that life is suffering, right?

If we say, well, life is suffering, then what am I doing?

That I’m trying to erase from my mind

the birth of my children, right?

Things that were filled with joy, right?

Life is not entirely suffering,

but life brings a lot of suffering.

And for some people, it brings such disproportionate

suffering, and the people don’t survive the suffering.

And I think when people are conscientious and empathic,

that really bothers us, right?

The suffering in our own lives,

and the fact that others at times could seem

to be so overwhelmed by suffering

that they don’t even get a chance to see good.

And I think that there’s, I do think there’s truth to that,

and there’s sadness and distress to that,

but to say, therefore, life is suffering,

I think is just completely untrue.

And it ignores the fact that someone even made a trombone,

right, let alone that there’s a little bit out of sync,

and someone’s playing the trombone.

That’s cool, there’s elements of the absurd

that you said are neat and interesting.

And if we start accepting that we can’t understand

or control everything, then we can accept,

and I think really love and foster the beauty in our lives.

Yeah, I think the word suffering

is doing a little bit too much work,

because I think it’s probably referring

to the philosophical concept of that,

yeah, that it’s absurd, the absurdity,

that stuff just happens randomly.

Evil people succeed, good people fail.

There’s a seeming random injustice on occasion,

and on occasion there’s justice in, yeah,

all of it that feels like,

and maybe because often there’s a lot of loss,

and then there’s a kind of matching complimentary aspect

to any good feeling that all comes crashing down,

like every hello from a physics perspective

ends in a goodbye.

That’s a really sad thing.

You know, all the amazing people I get to meet in my life,

all the amazing experiences, eventually they have to end,

and that’s part of what makes them amazing.

But why is that sad?

Is it because we’re taught to think?

And it’s like, look, at some point

you and I are gonna say goodbye today.

Like, I hope we’re richer for it,

and then we take that goodness off with us.

Like, I wanna celebrate that,

because it’s all part of the goodness.

I think we’re taught to think, oh, that’s so bad,

and it equates to death and misery,

and I think it’s often not that way.

I think there is a sadness to it,

but I also don’t think that sadness is a negative thing.

It’s a different way to celebrate a beautiful thing.

So there’s a melancholic nature to it,

something passing of it leaving.

I mean, it’s that old Louis C.K. thing

that I go back to over and over from his show, Louis,

where he was all heartbroken that he just broke up

with somebody he loved,

and he told about that to an old man,

and the old man said, you’re a fool.

That’s the best part.

I miss that part, where you sort of are lingering

in that loss.

You’re feeling the pain of that loss,

because that lasts the longest.

It’s the most intense.

It’s the most reliable,

and it’s a kind of celebration of the love you had.

Losing the love is still a celebration of the love.

I think you don’t want to over-romanticize that,

but there’s some aspect of truth to that.

That melancholic feeling of remembering a beautiful time

that’s no longer there is a kind of celebration of it,

and is a kind of joyful experience,

even though it’s very easy to experience it

as a negative emotion.

I think it’s just like you said.

I mean, it’s up to our mind to determine

how that emotion is really felt,

but it’s a tricky one,

because it’s like heartbreak to experience that

as a positive thing.

People can reminisce at funerals and laugh,

because people can be very, very, very sad

and perceive that this person has died

and perceive the sadness of it,

but in perceiving that and really living in it,

then you can have people who want to remember that person

by telling a funny story.


Because each of those people carries that with them,

so I think what you’re saying is consistent

with healthy function as human beings,

because we’re gonna encounter sadness and loss.

What do we do with that,

and do we do things that ultimately create some redemption

or even reparation inside of us?

Reparation’s a big word in psychology.

It’s how we repair damage and loss,

so if we lose someone and we’re sad,

can we, by telling funny stories about that person,

remind ourselves that, hey, they’re still inside of us.

Whether they’re out there looking at me, I don’t know,

but I can call that person to mind inside of us,

and then we have something that’s good and beautiful

that comes of that, too.

In the introduction to your book on trauma,

Lady Gaga wrote it.

She wrote the foreword, the intro.

She said this about you, quote,

“‘I can now say with certainty

“’that this man saved my life.

“‘He made life worth living.’”

This goes to our discussion

about the mythosisyphus Camus question

about why I live.

So I think, at least to me,

she’s one of the most brilliant and unique artists ever,

so it’s a difficult question, but a question of creativity.

What role does trauma play in somebody like that,

in this artist that has created some incredible things?

What positive, constructive role does trauma serve,

and what limiting role does it serve

in preventing that person from flourishing more?

Trauma can certainly drive us to creativity,

even to push against or to protest against

what the trauma tells us.

Trauma tells us lessons, like nothing matters,

and you don’t matter, and nothing will ever be good,

and nothing is beautiful.

And we can push against trauma.

They know there is life in me,

there’s something, there’s goodness for me

to spread in the world, to express and spread.

So I think trauma fuels creativity in many, many, many ways.

Trauma also shuts down creativity, right?

The people who are, it’s one example,

trauma that escalates to the point

where now the person is soothing it with alcohol.

It’s one example.

And now the impact of the alcohol

shuts down any creativity.

So can people be creative

and outward-thinking without trauma?

I think sometimes, if I remember correctly,

people will use Immanuel Kant as an example,

someone who I think hadn’t traveled much

and didn’t have trauma, and like, look at what he knew.

So okay, there are gonna be exceptions, right?

But a lot of our creativity is in some ways

fueled by our suffering, although it’s complicated

because it comes from generative places in us, right?

So those places are there, they’re not created by suffering,

but maybe suffering makes an incentive

or a passion inside of us.

And a person, Stephanie, who you referred to,

is just such an incredible, astounding creative force.

And sure, some of that comes from trauma,

some of it comes from trauma

fueling the generative, creative places in her.

But what I helped her to do,

she’s very generous with her words,

but what I helped her to do was to see

all that she is and all that the creativity in her is

and all that there is to create through love

and caring and compassion and to, again, see that.

I mean, a lot of time, that’s what I’m doing clinically.

I think it’s what good psychiatrists

or mental health professionals do

is we help people see the beauty that is there, right?

Because oftentimes, we’re way too close up to that tapestry

and what brings us close is often the sad thing.

So we’re up close and all we see is the negative.

I mean, it’s easy then to get classically nihilistic,

but by helping someone take a step back

and to see who they are and what’s in them,

that’s how people get better

and it’s how people re-engage in life.

It’s such a difficult thing

because if you were to, from studying human beings,

it seems like the optimal trajectory

is having some trauma that doesn’t destroy you

that forces you early in life to really struggle

with the intricacies of the human condition

and then later in life, as you form

and you build an expertise around and mastery,

start to do exactly what you said,

which is step back and look at the tapestry.

So if you don’t have the trauma,

it seems like, just empirically speaking,

there’s, of course, just a huge amount of data

and all kinds of anecdotal evidence,

and I wanna be careful here

because maybe I’m romanticizing hardship,

but it does seem that hardship in childhood,

if it doesn’t break you, can be constructive.

It’s like you said, having that trauma,

one of the ways to fight it is to say,

I am worth something.

David Goggins talks about this.

It’s like, this is, I am somebody.

I can be somebody special, and I’m gonna prove it to you.

I’m gonna do this.

I’m gonna do this big thing.

It’s this engine that drives you forward.

Yeah, comment on that because from a parent’s perspective,

you want a child to have an easy life, right?

You want them to not have hardship,

certainly not have trauma, but that’s such a difficult dance

because in some ways, a little bit of hardship

and a gradually increasing amount of hardship

that doesn’t break you can really develop you

into a really interesting, complicated person,

and it helps you flourish as a creative being.

I don’t know if there’s a question.

I just keep saying random things.

No, look, I think it makes good sense to me.

I think what you’re trying to get at,

we need trauma, and how are we defining it, right?

Because we say trauma, hardship, difficulties.

I mean, we could set aside, we could set apart, say,

and differentiate things that are difficult

but that are overcomable, right?

Versus things that we could use trauma,

the word trauma this way if we chose to,

that are just entirely negative,

like someone saying, oh, you can’t do that,

and you’ll never succeed because what?

And then they tell you something about yourself,

because you’re from here, or you’re this race, religion,

whatever it is, right?

We think, well, that could make someone say,

hey, I’m gonna show you, I’m gonna overcome, right?

But then they’re overcoming something bad, right?

Like there’s nothing good or helpful about that, right,

if someone’s saying that.

So the person has to overcome it.

That’s different than something

that is placed in front of a person

where the whole conception of it is something positive

that you can make through effort, right?

So I remember, I don’t know, I think I was 15 years old,

there was some rule where you could then go,

I don’t think it was picking raspberries or blueberries,

right, and I think, and my parents wanted me to see,

like, hey, go see how that works,

and now you got 50 cents at the end of it, right?

And then you think about that

when you wanna buy baseball cards,

or you think about it, and you work hard.

And I can remember it was hard,

and I was sweating, and I was tired,

but I learned from it.

I mean, it’s the reason I remember it today.

So yes, parents might want their kids

to have, like, a good life, right,

but not necessarily an easy life, you know?

And I think that was done, they took me to do that

so I’d have a greater sense of responsibility

and a sense of, like, hard work is meaningful,

and it’s important.

And I think that that kind of thing is good,

but if we separate that from something

that’s just denigrating, prejudicial,

like, I think those things aren’t good,

but they’re unavoidable.

So it’s not necessarily that, oh, is some trauma good?

I would look at it more that some trauma’s unavoidable.

I mean, it’s hard to, how do you go through life

and not have any losses or anything negative

or anything sad?

And then people are people.

There may be people who have not a lot of that,

and then there’s a sort of complacency,

and they don’t do as much as they could

or feel as good as they could.

You know, then there’s other people

who have a highly attuned emotional,

so there’s people with very highly attuned

emotional compasses for which a little bit

of trauma becomes so intrusive.

So it’s so much of it is person-driven,

but I do want to distinguish between things

that are just purely bad, that we might overcome

or find some fire in our belly about,

or whatever the case may be,

and things that may be boundaries or barriers,

either purposely placed or not,

that in a sense invite us or inform us

of the possibility of striving and overcoming.

Finally, attuned emotional compasses.

It’s so true that there is, that’s a component of it, too.

It’s almost genetic, how sensitive you are

to a particular trauma, so little things

can have a huge impact, or gigantic things,

serious abuse in childhood can be,

by some people, overcome more easily.

It’s so interesting.

It’s not just what’s the trauma,

because what’s the trauma that makes certain problems?

You have to match the trauma to the person,

and a big part of what you’re matching to

is that genetically-based characteristic

of how finely attuned is that

empathic attunement to that compass.

So when you think about, let’s just return to childhood.

When you think about trauma in childhood,

what can we say about the impact of child abuse

on the development of a human being?

I think the impact of it is so disproportionately

bad and hurtful compared to things

that happen when we’re not children,

and I want to be very careful about how I’m saying that,

because people can, through their strength

and resilience and human interconnectedness,

can overcome that.

I don’t mean to say that anyone who’s experienced

those things can’t make it through it or over it.

That part is not true, but it is true

that the impact is so disproportionate

to anything else that can happen,

because the brain is formulating, right?

So if we say psychology is like applied neurobiology,

and we look at both of those as different ends,

even though there’s a lot of gray in the middle,

the neurobiology is changed.

So just one example of a much greater salience

of vigilance mechanisms, of mechanisms of self-protection,

mechanisms that can make a person feel more fear

and more insecurity and hide themselves away from the world

and not trust the world.

And I mean not trust the world even enough

that, oh, I’d like to have a better job,

and another one is here that I could take,

but maybe it could be worse,

and then being afraid of that, right?

There are all sorts of ways in which the changes

to those pathways impact someone,

and that’s just one of, we could bring trauma experts

together that could talk about that for days, right?

What is the impact upon the brain biology?

So that then gets changed inside the person,

and from the perspective of those changes,

the psychology on top of it changes.

Like what do I think about myself?

Do I think that I’m worthwhile?

Even in my mid-20s, without formative traumas

and a pretty strong sense of self and some achievements,

there’s a big trauma then with the death of my brother,

and I start questioning, am I cursed?

Am I worth anything?

I mean, I was 20-something years old

and doing reasonably well at the time.

You know, how does this impact a child

of six, seven, 10, 12 years old, right?

We’re sending such powerful messages

that then change conception of self,

and that negatively changed conception

sits upon the negatively changed neurobiology,

and I think if we really thought,

hey, let’s do the best we can just for humans in general,

for the human race, for species in general,

is we would handle children

and caring for children so much differently

in terms of protection mechanisms, intervention mechanisms.

How many times do you see where,

where like now there’s been some tragedy

and the child gets a little bit of support,

and they had some therapy that was provided

by some insurance carrier that they got once a week

for 16 weeks or whatever.

I mean, we should be wrapping our societal resources

around children, but we don’t use our resources well.

You know, I was just reading, it’s a little bit of an aside,

but about 300 and something billion dollars a year

in cost to the U.S. economy just from schizophrenia.

And you think, it costs a fraction,

what do we actually put into caring

for people who have schizophrenia?

So first there’s a moral imperative,

but let’s say we put that aside,

and we only care about the economy, right?

Because there are mechanisms of thinking

that look at it that way.

How could we not amend that, right?

But we are so reckless with our resources,

and we’re tripping ahead of ourselves

that we don’t think, oh my goodness,

there is no better place on God’s earth

for prevention than here,

prevention in terms of human suffering,

and also where do people like that go?

I mean, more often, people like that go

to a place of increased suffering,

inability to take care of themselves,

or to be in supportive relationships.

Okay, we know there’s a higher prevalence of that,

but we’re also creating the pool of people

through which the envy, the narcissism,

the sociopathy, the destruction arises.

So again, if we care about people,

we would be so focused on that.

If we don’t care about other people,

and just ourselves, or just economic costs,

we would still be so focused.

But we’re not, and we tend to just kind of call it good

because we don’t see anything disastrous

happening at the moment.

And I think there’s a societal negligence there,

to the shame, really, of all of us,

when child abuse and the impact neurobiologically

and psychologically is potentially

the greatest cause of suffering directly

and indirectly on the face of the planet.

How much does trauma of that kind,

and later in life affect your ability

to love another human being, say, inside a relationship,

connect with another human being?

It can impact it a lot.

And again, I wanna say, can people overcome

and be as loving to a partner, or a child,

or anyone else, yes.

But we’re talking across society, right?

How are we setting the odds, right?

We’re setting the odds towards a higher sense of vigilance,

a decreased sense of self-confidence,

an increased sense of vulnerability, right?

A decreased comfort interacting with others, right?

What we’re doing is we’re pushing towards isolation

and misery and depression and resentment.

I mean, those factors push towards that.

We know that the research is so strong

that adverse childhood experiences,

that these things that happen,

the more the worse, the more prolonged,

the more that person is up against

as they try and navigate life.

And I suppose one of the elements of intimacy,

like what we’re talking about, is vulnerability.

And maybe there’s a, is there a fear of being vulnerable,

of being hurt again?

Is that ultimately the barrier to intimacy?

Yeah, if you’re taught a lesson that says,

the world is not safe,

and you’re not good enough for someone to keep safe,

and you’re not strong enough to keep yourself safe,

that’s a final common pathway

of the vast majority of child abuse,

is telling those lessons to people.

Then how can that not change the lay of the land

against openness, against the ability

to rationally consider trust and mutuality

and to protect oneself, but also take chances

and do the things that we have to do

to create the greatest happiness in our lives?

We set the odds so much against that.

There’s another pathway,

which I think is really interesting

because I’ve seen it in people,

is this kind of ability to detach yourself

from feeling any emotions, to protect yourself.

It’s almost like you’re not quite there.

There’s a word for it, isolation of affect.

It’s a defense mechanism.


Isolation of affect.


Is that a common way, another common way

to deal with trauma?

Well, isolation of affect can cut both ways.

So if there’s been a major trauma,

let’s say someone has seen something terrible

and they’re isolated from their affect.

At one time, it was thought, well, maybe that’s good.

They’re not hysterical, they’re not distraught,

but we see that is not good

because what needs to be held, processed,

we need to get our arms around in some way, shape or form

has just been separated off.

So we know that is not good,

but isolation of affect can also serve us very well.

When I think back to being an intern,

a medical intern in the hospital,

and you might have to go and pronounce someone dead

with hysterical family members,

and then 10 minutes later, five minutes later,

maybe two minutes later, really,

you have to go to another room

and you’ve got to maybe do some procedure

that involves having your focus on a certain thing

and making sure your hand movements are the right way

or talking to a person in a way

that’s very different than where you just came from,

that’s very hopeful.

So then you have to isolate the affect

of what’s going on around you.

And it happens not just in, it’s just one example,

but we have to do it in life

so that we can put affect aside to process later

or not feel the full weight of affect

where we know the meaning.

Like I knew the meaning of the tragedy

of the person I just pronounced dead,

but I want to separate that from myself

because I’m also aware that it’s not my tragedy

so that I can then, okay, put that affect aside

and go do the next thing that I have to do.

So that, I think, can cut both ways.

Right, but then you have to reattach it,

understand that it’s good to be close with emotion,

even painful emotion, right?

Because that’s the human experience.


It’s, I feel like if you build up a skill

that you can detach yourself from emotion,

I think that can become its own kind of,

yeah, it becomes too easy to do it.


Right, and to reinforce.

That’s when people are suffering too much

over too long a period of time,

then, you know, we’re creatures of habit, right?

And even though our brains are,

you talk about our brains are sitting on the shoulders

of the giant of the maybe thousand levels of emergence

that come underneath of them,

our brains are also,

also work in very simple habit-based ways.

Like if you and I chose a word right now

and said it 500 times,

we would know it’s just a silly experiment,

but we’d both be saying it tonight, right?

Because our brains are also creatures of habit.

So if you over and over and over

have to isolate yourself from affect

and you develop those mechanisms,

well, you develop those mechanisms

and they don’t go away any easier

than if we said the word 500 times and decided to forget.

We won’t forget no matter what we decided.

So how do we find our way back?

How do we overcome trauma?

What are the different pathways?

The first thing, the very first thing

is to acknowledge to ourselves and often to others,

which might be one other person,

it might be in words, spoken, it might be written,

what the trauma has been, right?

Because the lessons of trauma,

the evil lessons of trauma,

and I’ll use the example of my own life,

the lesson that told me that I was shameful,

cursed, and hopeless, right?

It’s a very evil lesson, right?

But my brain will say it over and did say it

over and over and over to me.

And if that just sits inside, that’s how trauma festers,

that’s how trauma hijacks our thoughts, our emotions.

So being able to say to ourselves and to another,

like, this is what’s happened, right?

Okay, this is what’s happened.

We’re built to massage words

and to create meaning through words, right?

Like, we don’t massage pictures, right, images.

We talk and massage meaning with words.

So when I finally went to see a therapist

and I could say, you know,

my brother, whatever words I would have said,

like, he killed himself and I can’t accept it

or I can’t imagine it and like, I let it happen.

Like, so I had to say those things, right?

So then I could begin to bring some sense of truth to it,

you know, and it was a long time ago,

but the therapist probably said something like,

okay, probably sees on you, you let it happen.

It’s your fault, right?

Because you got to get at those things

so that one can begin to bring into focus

what does the trauma mean and what does it not mean?

I mean, a classic example is the,

what would you say to someone else example?

You know, you’ll say, well, I,

now, how many times have I,

it’s just, I could cry if I stop and think about it enough.

Stop and talk to someone who is sexually assaulted

through no fault of their own,

who comes in and tells the story

they’ve been telling themselves about how it’s their fault.

They should have walked home a different way,

they should have dressed differently,

they should have left earlier, right?

I wrote about it in the book over and over and over.

Now, you have a person who,

let’s say you take a person who’s intelligent,

engaged in the world, who’s capable of understanding

lots and lots and lots of things,

but doesn’t understand that, right?

If it were someone else,

that person would understand in a moment

that’s not that person’s fault, right?

So what you wanna do is overcome the fact

that the negative emotions,

the hijacked emotion systems of trauma

are telling that person a lie,

and they’re telling them so strongly

and so awfully, so meanly,

that the person just takes it inside

and starts to see it as true, right?

So you begin to hold that up to the light of day.

And again, one example could be,

okay, so someone, the person who’s coming in next

has actually been through something similar, right?

And do you mind, can you stay

and just tell her how it’s her fault, right?

And like, oh my God, no, oh,

because I could never, like, then they see, right?

And again, this is not always how you do it,

but sometimes you can get a person to see,

like, well, that would be the most horrible.

How could you do that?

Right, and the person can maybe commit

they’re doing it to themselves.

So you begin to put words in a structure

and say, okay, let’s look at what’s going on inside of you.

Like, you don’t have to be scared

of anything you’re thinking and feeling.

In fact, the fear is in not exposing it

to the light of day.

That’s where it gets the best of us.

And now, like, everything is different.

And whether that involves use of medications

for intrusive thoughts and depression,

or there’s no medicines needed, but it’s all reframing.

Like, whatever it may be that comes next,

the whole world has changed

when the person has acknowledged what’s happened,

exposed it to themselves and to trusted others around them,

and begun to look at it in some way

other than the stuffed-in-an-evil-box place

that the trauma initially puts us

through the refluxes it creates in us.

It’s interesting that there’s power

to just saying it out loud.


So first, saying your perception of it out loud.

Then in that case, that might be your fault.

And then working out loud,

working through that it may not be.

Any experienced therapist will tell you this,

that every now and then it will happen

that someone will come, and they’ll say something.

Usually it’s very early on in the process.

They’ll say something they’ve never said before,

and they immediately are in an entirely different place,

and they may have been for decades.

Right, and I can remember a person saying

that a coach had raped him, and just saying it.

This was decades before, and everything was different.

I’m not saying everything is now as perfect,

but his life was in a different place.

As soon as he said it, he could see.

How dare, he thought that person did that to this child.

The child was me.

He never thought it until he said it out loud,

because his mind was going over and over

with why it was his fault, what he did to deserve it,

how he kept going back, so it must be his fault.

It was in it.

As soon as he put words to it, he saw the truth of it,

and it was a bifurcation in the path of life then.

And any therapist has stories like that,

which just shows the immense power

that it can even be that just uttering the words

makes just a cascade of change all at once.

Just saying those words to another human being,

it makes you wonder about that compulsive loop

that happens in our heads,

until it’s brought to the surface.

It’s so interesting.

Entirely nonproductive, the loops,

and sometimes even if we put, what would I say to another?

Let me write it down, it can get rid of those loops

in our brains.

Any even thought of outward expression

is the enemy of those internal,

persecutory negative thought loops.

How do you find a good therapist?

I tend to think of, listen, I’m a fan of podcasts.

I’m a fan of conversations.

It feels like a, it’s like finding a good friend

or something.

It feels like a difficult journey.

Maybe I’m wrong in that, but it just feels like such a,

it feels like a partnership, a journey together

versus like some very simple clinical procedure.

Well, the first thing I would say is

to change the entire paradigm.

Like most people, like okay, I need a therapist.

So people feel often like they’re in a weakened position

because they need, you know, quote unquote, a therapist.

Then therapists are rationed, right?

I mean, you hear how many insurance panels

have lists a mile long of qualified therapists

who could be on that insurance panel,

but there’s a certification process.

Like these just make no sense, right?

The state’s already certified the person, right?

But there’s so many barriers to entry

that now we’re rationing this resource,

which we should all stop and pause for a second

and think like we’re okay with that as a society.

And by the way, everything else is like that too

when we’re trying to get help for our health.

So let’s step back from that for a second.

Now it’s a resource that’s not in great supply.

And then a person begins to think, you know,

essentially I’ll take what I can get.

Like I just gotta get somebody

and I don’t know enough to know anyway, right?

And those are very disempowering thoughts

as opposed to saying, look,

I’m gonna be an empowered consumer

and I need to choose someone who gets over

just some basic hurdles of what I think

are reasonable human interaction, right?

So like is the person making eye contact?

Do they seem interested, right?

Like these are basic points about any human interaction,

including a therapist, right?

Then you can say, okay, is there word of mouth?

Anyone else who has something good?

There’s nothing better than a word of mouth recommendation

from someone you trust, right?

Or anybody can have a good website,

but you say, let me look at the website.

What is it saying if there is one, right?

Does it resonate with me or not, right?

But after all of that, then you go to see the person

with the idea that you’re interviewing them, right?

The idea that, yeah, I hope this person can help me

and if so, great, I’m with the program,

but I’m thinking about it.

Do I want this person?

Do I feel heard?

Do I feel cared for?

Which doesn’t mean, is it easy, right?

It might mean, is it hard?

And I leave and I feel like emotional for a couple of days,

but I see that I’m facing new things.

No, this process of assessment

so that one isn’t settling for something

that is formulaic, over-packaged,

and I’m not trying to be overly critical of therapists.

I mean, there are people everywhere who do their jobs well

and people who don’t do their jobs well,

but most therapists are working in systems

that push against doing the job well, right?

Because they’re rationing care

and there’s a lot of number of sessions

and there’s enough and such time before a person can return.

And so often it’s an uphill battle

because we’re trying to be helped

within systems we’ve created and tolerate

that are pushing against helping us.

Yeah, but that interview process is tricky.

I mean, if you’re in a rough place mentally,

just like with any kind of interview,

it’s hard not to think that a failed interaction,

failed interview, there’s something wrong with you.

Sure, right.

There is an authority to a therapist, I think,

where you think like, they’ve got it all figured out.


And I’m a mess and therefore if there’s something off,

it’s all my fault, right?

So it’s a very tricky and it’s easy to then give up

because that step to try to get a therapist,

the first step to get help, forget therapist,

like any kind of help, that’s a big leap to take,

especially when you’re in a rough place.

I agree completely.

We should not make people swim against such a strong current

to get their needs met.

I mean, we see this in such obvious places

where an elderly homebound person

who can’t get their medicine

because, oh, there’s been some change

and they didn’t put the new number into the form

or Lord knows what.

I mean, it’s incredible how we force people

to swim against strong currents

to get things that are just basic

at times for their survival.

And with that in mind, I don’t have a lot of respect

for where healthcare is at or where mental health is at.

The field that I work in has accepted

all sorts of aspects of how things go.

Someone else controlling how long the interaction can go on,

how the interaction is bounded,

what can be said and done,

what medicines can be prescribed.

There’s so many external controls in the systems we work in

that we, and I say me included,

like all of us in the field,

have let it get to a place

where it’s obscenely difficult to get help,

obscenely difficult.

And we should say that’s not okay.

I think psychiatrists and therapists

and master’s level social workers, psychologists,

and you name it, I think we should all say this is not okay.

And then we as a society should be saying this is not okay.

Otherwise, what you’re saying,

which is I think completely true,

will only become worse as there’s more and more barriers

to getting the help a person needs.

And each time a person isn’t helped,

it sets the odds against them getting more help.

I should say here that when I started working,

there were times I would send people to an emergency room,

if there was some emergency in their mental health

and they were at risk.

And there were times I’d send somebody to an emergency room

where if you stopped and looked,

it would have been malpractice not to do that.

Now, it’s not just me who has an incredibly high threshold

for sending someone to an emergency room

because you send someone who’s in a lot of distress

and oftentimes they’re sitting on a gurney in a hallway

or they’re locked in a small white room

and all they had was depression.

They’re just scared when they go in

and 36 hours later, oh, they’re feeling a little better.


Because they’re desperate to get out of there

and someone sends them home.

I mean, so our systems have shifted so much

that we tolerate now en masse

what is egregious to the individual.

So you are a psychiatrist.

In terms of doing therapy, psychotherapy,

what does the successful interaction look like?

Perhaps a fun question.

Perhaps not.

What do you think of the psychiatrist

Sean and Goodwill Hunting played by Robin Williams?

So what is the full range of interesting interactions?

Can there be an intimacy, a friendship,

a kind of varied interaction that kind of blends the lines

of 30 minute session once a week or whatever

versus like a really kind of deliberate long-term project

that cares about the wellbeing of a person

across the months and years?

Or what can you say about a successful interaction

between therapist and patient?

I think we’re much better served by the latter.

Right, and again, it doesn’t have to be over years.

I mean, maybe a person might need that over weeks.

They might need it over months.

They might need it over years.

But if I’m understanding correctly,

you’re describing something that is

like a real human engagement.


I work in a field that for years and years and years,

the patient didn’t get to see,

the therapist was sitting in a place,

sitting behind the person, right?

So that’s not, of course, the only tradition

and there are aspects of that tradition

that can be very humanized.

But the idea that we’re supposed to not be human,

I mean, this medicine is shot through with this, right?

That the doctor’s supposed to be God

and it protects the doctor.

And that makes its way into therapy.

And the idea of the superiority,

the therapist knows more.

I mean, in some ways, yes,

but the idea is to know more about mechanical things,

right, to know more about facts and knowledge,

not as a human being, right?

If we approach therapy as a collaborative human endeavor,

right, where if we’re gonna do it together,

of course I’m gonna learn from you too, right?

I mean, we’re two human beings

and we’re talking about things that are deep

and personal and intimate and I’m not gonna participate

in a way that makes it about me as much as it’s about you,

but we’re two humans and what’s going on in me

may have relevance and sharing it may have relevance.

And at times, you doing something back for me

may have relevance.

I’ll give you an example of a person

who would not let me help him.

It was a young man.

So when I was in training, he was very, very sick

and needed to change certain choices and habits

or he was not gonna survive.

And I had no ability to help him whatsoever.

And I went and I saw a supervisor

who was existentially trained,

where here it’s different from existentialism

in the classic sense,

but it’s about really human connection, right?

And the guy was always wanting to teach me something, right?

Because I can get by in Spanish,

but he was fluent in Spanish.

And he wanted, oh, you traveled here

and he’d say a word to see if I knew.

And I was always directing back

to what I was supposed to do, right?

And the supervisor, I’ll never forget,

he said, let him teach you Spanish.

Like, okay, come on.

So we had a couple sessions where if you look

from the outside, you say, what is going on there?

Like, right, like they were Spanish lessons to me, right?

And then at some point he brought in his mother

and we hadn’t brought her in yet.

And he was in part showing off

that he taught me something, right?

And I said a couple things and he felt more powerful.

Like he was younger than me

and he felt sick and disempowered,

but he didn’t feel that way once he taught me something

and we showed it off to his mother, right?

And his behavior started to change.

He started taking better care of himself.

He could see a little more what I was saying.

It was like, you’re a wonderful person.

Look, you love your mother and your aunt and they love you.

And like, he could start seeing that about himself.

But that came from humanness.

And I think that’s the way we help people.

I don’t understand why we don’t do everything that way.

It’s like, we’re two humans,

but if you’re doing something for me,

then there’s something, you have an expertise and I don’t,

that’s why you’re doing it for me.

The reverse could be true,

but it doesn’t mean we’re not just two humans

doing something together.

And the healthcare system and the legal system

should not get in the way of that.

I mean, there’s liability and all these kinds of things

that can get in the way of the humanness.

I mean, some of that is justified.

You have to be careful.

You have to make sure there’s irresponsible,

but a little too much can destroy the humanness.

I’ll use it where I don’t usually say something is insane.

Like, it’s not consistent with sanity.

And the presence of the legal system,

I’m all for, of course, physicians have to be held,

we have to be responsible and everybody makes mistakes

and people have to be accountable for their mistakes.

I understand all of that.

But what we see now, it’s so absurd that,

oh, like everyone is frightened, right?

Everyone is frightened and just looking to like,

how do I slot into the box,

check the boxes of what I’m supposed to do

and not get in trouble.

People get sued because someone was at that hospital

and that doctor touched their care.

This happens in the VA system.

It happens in other systems too.

So you might’ve touched their care

and no one’s even saying you did anything wrong,

but they say the next person did.

Oh, someone settled on your behalf

and now you have a malpractice.

Ding and maybe you can’t get a license somewhere else.

Like doctors are terrified and they’re terrified for good,

they’re terrified for good reason

because the same society that has given doctors

in many ways too much power over time

and treated doctors maybe too much like gods,

now is I think enacting some of society’s anger

and envy out on the physicians.

Even the idea that like a person would know what medicine,

like I saw a couple of TV commercials, give me this.

Like it’s interesting, right?

Because even if, let’s say I take myself out of it,

it doesn’t feel good, obviously,

but it’s like, wow, I went to school

for like eight years for this

and you don’t even want to hear my opinion, right?

You’re not taking good care of yourself, right?

It doesn’t mean you should think my opinion is gospel

because I said it, but people then don’t have

an understanding of like, what is expertise?

What do people learn?

How can people help us understand

and make better decisions?

It kind of goes out with the wash

and then the position of the expert,

I mean, a lot has been written about this, right?

Gets diminished over time very much to our own peril.

And then often with aggression in the medical world

coming back towards the alleged expert.

Yeah, expertise is a tricky one.

It’s such a tricky thing because

coupled with expertise, the attention is this arrogance

that can come with expertise.

The arrogance can make the expert feel

like they’re more of an expert and it’s a vicious cycle.

And then the arrogance in the current, in the 21st century,

especially with the internet,

the arrogance can completely force the public

to distrust the expert

because all they see is the arrogance versus the expertise.

So ultimately you have to have,

I think the greatest experts and masters I know

are the ones that have complete humility.

Right, humility and gratitude.

And gratitude.

Leads us back.

Which is usually a really good sign

that somebody is at the top of their field.

Right, and they’ll acknowledge

that they don’t know everything.

Right, which is hilarious, right?

So the best experts I know are the ones

that will say that they don’t know.


They will not call themselves an expert.

Right, right.

It’s very confusing.

Or know that they know a lot

but don’t know the answer to this.

You see that a lot in medicine.

That person knows they’re an expert surgeon

but they also acknowledge they don’t know

if this is the right time to operate.

That’s how you get to the best answer

instead of someone who is an expert

and always knows the answer.

Yeah, if we actually rewind

to the beginning of our conversation,

we talked about, you mentioned something

I wanted to return to.

So there’s layers that are,

there’s an emergent novelty.

And you mentioned that we as human beings

and we introspect on our own mind,

we really can’t know most of it.

Which of course makes me think of this,

the unconscious mind, subconscious mind,

and Carl Jung.

How much is hiding there in the shadows?

You’ve investigated a lot of trauma.

How much is there in our mind

that’s not directly accessible to us?

Like what can you say maybe philosophically

about how much is there lurking in the Jungian shadow?

I think there’s a tremendous amount there.

But I wouldn’t, I don’t immediately go to

an ominous perspective, right?

Because if it’s lurking there, right,

it can come get us, right?

And to some extent, that’s true, right?

So the seeds of evil are there

if we want to plant and nurture them.

You think good things can’t lurk?

I guess so.

I was being poetic.

But you’re right, you’re absolutely right.

And the Jungian shadow is supposed to

not just be dark things, it’s supposed to be everything.

It’s supposed to be a lot of positive things as well, yeah.

Right, which I think brings us to self-knowledge,

to truth, where I think the opposite of envy,

narcissism, sociopathy, I do think

is all rooted in truth.

It’s both the truth of the good things about us

or the ways we’re not blameworthy

for the things we’re blaming ourselves for, et cetera.

But the self-knowledge and the truth

and getting away from the reflex of anger,

frustration, envy, shame, what I think happens then

is all of that underneath the surface.

If we look at the consciousness as the top of the iceberg,

you know, outside the top, outside the water.

So is what’s underneath like shifting

and it can pull the top under, right?

Or is it supporting the top?

And really I believe is honesty, truth,

self-knowledge, humility, gratitude, all this simple stuff.

Good mental health is always consistent with simplicity.

You know, humility, gratitude are easy things to say.

Like we know what that is, right?

We understand what that is.

Soothing envy by having immense power

and subjugating others is getting very, very complicated.

What that is and how that plays out.

So if we are in touch with ourselves,

if we’re honest with ourselves, if we own what’s ours,

we don’t try and own what’s not ours, right?

What happens then is something isn’t waiting inside of us

to sort of jump us with some new fact of self

or challenge of self, right?

Then I think what happens are phenomena

like intrinsic learning,

like the way that so much happens inside of us

automatically, right?

How people who have high levels of expertise

know the answer to complex questions more rapidly, right?

It doesn’t take them longer to think through it,

but they have more knowledge to think through.

It’s that more happens rapidly and unconsciously.

So they know the more complex answer

more quickly and readily, right?

And we can build that in ourselves,

not just in terms of factual knowledge,

but in terms of how we respond to things, right?

If I make a mistake, do I respond with reflexive shame, right?

If I see someone has something I’d like,

how do I respond?

We’re more in accord with ourselves

and then the automaticity in us is serving us better.

So that’s in the positive.

Do you think, do you draw some wisdom

from the early pioneers of psychotherapy

like Freud and Jung?


That there’s some repressed,

there’s some stuff to work through

that is in the unconscious mind.

Yes, I think there’s always like 100% of the time,

if you have a living human,

you have things to work through in the unconscious mind,


There’s too much that goes on around us

that we might find unacceptable and suppress, right?

There can be smaller but important examples, right?

Someone who feels that they’re not a good enough parent

and they, I don’t know, they drop the child’s plate, right?

And there’s a feeling about that of badness in them

that the person can’t tolerate and pushes away, right?

And maybe they become a little bit less confident,

a little bit less assertive.

Those small examples are important

because they may be low valence

but there can be many, many, many, many, many of them, right?

Then you can look at the opposite end of the spectrum

where someone, for example, feels,

or they’re repressing their sexuality, right, unconsciously.

There’s something that is so important,

say, to how a person feels about themselves,

to whether they can seek fulfillment,

to how they feel about their ability to interact

and engage with others in ways that are loving

and generative over time.

So from smaller things that accumulate often at rapid pace

to really big things,

we are pushing things into the unconscious

because they’re not acceptable and we need to explore,

like, well, why is that not acceptable?

Maybe there’s an unacceptable urge

because it’s really not acceptable to me, right?

Like a violent urge.

Maybe there’s an unacceptable urge

because I’m actually listening to the lies

society is telling me about what’s okay

and what’s not okay, right?

So in exploring those things,

yes, we become happier and healthier

and that could mean if we’re already happy and healthy,

it gets better.

We get more insulated against the negative

or it can mean the person who’s really nurturing

some of those seeds of evil and envy

does that less or steps away from it.

So whether it’s good or it’s bad,

it’s in there inside of us

and we benefit from understanding

that idea of the observing ego, right?

Like you said, the part that can stop and say,

hey, this is what’s, I see what’s going on in me.

What have you learned about exploring the human mind

about the art of conversation?

Because ultimately, therapy is conversation.


Is there something you can put into words?


Like what makes a good conversation?

I think language is among the most amazing gifts we have

and it’s also one of the most like clunky routes

to misunderstanding, right?

I think of like, there’s a concept of facticity,

you know, things that are like, I guess,

unnecessary evils and from the religious perspective,

I think is where the word started,

but of language being like a facticity, right?

That we need to communicate with one another,

we wanna communicate, so we develop words

and we have these amazing brains that can have language

and that’s all well and good,

but our fantasy would be more like Mr. Spock, right?

You know, the Vulcan mind meld was like,

I communicate with you

because we put our hands on one another

and we know, you know, by doing this,

what we’re thinking and what we’re feeling

and we won’t have misunderstanding.

So because I think we can approximate that,

we can come kind of close with language, right?

Or we can be so far away from it

that we can say the same word and have opposite meanings

and have it generate immediate animosity, right?

That we need to be very, very careful with language,

with communication, with conversations.

And I’ve come to understand that much, much more

as I’ve gotten older, both in terms of how hurtful,

you know, reckless speech is,

which is why I’m horrified by so much of what we see

in our political discourse, right?

The slurs, the negativity that’s attached to something,

to some word, you know, how one can utter something

and it can go into another person’s just into the ear,

but then goes through so many parts

of the meaning of the brain

that that person feels a pervasive sense of shame

or beleagueredness, right?

So yes, reckless language absolutely hurts people

and we see that all the time in ways

that I think are just atrocious.

And also how bad miscommunication harms us.

I mean, I really learned that through a lot

of different ways, but in the work as a therapist

of like really wanting to make sure

that I’m really understanding you

and you’re really understanding me.

And a lot of work goes into that communication.

I think people, we can get into a rhythm of it

and then it happens more easily.

But I think it’s like, it’s a life and death difference

at times, you know, lots of times, right,

in the world around us between clear

and accurate communication.

And just so I said a word because like,

I think you know what I mean or something like that.

Yeah, so to that, I mean, there’s the Camus quote

that I like, as much unhappiness has come into the world

because of things left unsaid.


So that has to do with clear communication.

But there’s also a dance to a conversation,

a poetry to it.

There is ambiguity to language.

And if you have a kind of awareness of that ambiguity

and you play with it, that’s where wit and humor come in.

That allows you to sneak up to difficult topics

without sort of trampling on them.

I don’t know, there’s an art to it as well.

There’s an art to the silence, you know,

just allowing both human beings.

One of the most intimate things you can share

with a human being is silence.

Yeah, that’s communication.

It’s a different communication,

but at times more powerful.

Yeah, giving a person space to accumulate,

to integrate, to make sense of their thoughts,

enough to say a word.

Maybe a memory sparks so they can think about that memory

and process that memory.

So it’s not just words, right?

It’s not just words, right?

Because now you’re talking about communication

as it’s body language, it’s expressions of empathy,

it’s movements, it’s pauses, right?

The communication process is very,

very complicated and deep.

Yeah, and some of that is building trust,

but also challenging a person.

I wonder about that whole process

with strangers, for example.

Of how you do that successfully.

Like you and I just met today,

but I think a lot of our interaction is very free.

We can get to know each other in any way we want.

There’s a few conversations I have coming up in general

where there’s a lot of other pressures and constraints

on those conversations.

There’s a danger to it, there’s risks,

there’s political forces involved.

Not from my perspective, but probably from my,

as well, of how do you say this thing?

What are the words that are going to offend?

And you’re learning that about a stranger at the same time,

you know, and you don’t.

It’s an interesting dance because you have to walk

carefully but deliberately, right?

Carefully because, I’ve learned this about myself,

about others, there’s certain words

that can trigger a person,

that can make a person feel poorly.

Like, shitty about themselves.

So you can push, you can challenge a person about something

and they’re totally okay with it,

but if you use a certain word to do it,

it’s gonna, maybe it maps to some childhood thing

that their father or mother used to say

or something like this.

And I mean, part of the art of conversation

is actually being a little bit free in using those words,

but being extremely sensitive in detecting

when a person reacts to a particular word

and, like, storing that away.

It’s like, okay, we might want to return to that later

because there might be an interesting,

that could be a tip of an iceberg

that’s actually representing something beautiful.

Or you might want to just, it’s a nothing word

that you just want to avoid because it’s a distraction.

And so all of that kind of has to be integrated

into the dance of language.

This is really interesting,

especially when the stakes are really high.

When you get one conversation,

when you sit down, you have one conversation,

and it makes the difference between,

like, say you had one conversation with a patient.

This is the only conversation you get to help.

Sometimes it is the case, yeah.

Like, this is pretty high stakes.


Oh, man.

Yeah, it’s tough.

I guess you get over, and like, over time,

I guess you get used to the high stakes nature of it.

When you develop an ability,

and all that unconscious processing, right?

Right, right.

All that part of the iceberg that’s underneath the surface

is doing all of that, right?

It’s reading behavioral cues, verbal cues,

and recognizing the primacy of emotion over logic, right?

If it were all logic, it’d be different.

Okay, we’re gonna talk about this thing.

I’ll say things, you say things back,

even if it’s politically contentious sayings.

Okay, we’re just gonna talk logically.

But you know, that’s not the case, right?

There could be a word that raises a certain emotion,

and you know you don’t wanna tread there

because the emotion will color

the person’s ability to engage.

And so, you’re aware of all of this.

And then, I think, from the perspective of all of that,

I mean, it’s like standing on the shoulders

of your own internal giant, right?

That understands language, and emotions,

and body language, and attunement,

and history, and triggering, and all of that.

And then, on top of that,

as you’re standing up on those shoulders,

you’re trying to be effective, right?

And then, I think that’s where effectiveness

can be unilateral, or it can be together.

I mean, I think some of what emerged

from Viktor Frankl’s writing after the Second World War

was how much shared humanness means to us,

how much of that can be an incentive

for survival beyond all others, right?

So, the idea of are we doing something,

if we’re communicating unilateral,

like I want information from you,

or I want you to do a certain thing

when we’re done talking, right?

Right, done communicating.

That’s a very unilateral type of effectiveness,

which can make sense.

Sometimes, I want information out of a patient

because I want to know what to do next, right?

So, it doesn’t have to always be negative,

but it can also be a tool of manipulation, right?

If someone is coming from envy or narcissism,

I want to communicate with you in a way

that makes you do what I want you to do, right?

Different from that is where it’s a shared communication,

where there’s like an umbrella, so to speak, over us,

and we’re doing something that can only happen together

because we’re us, we’re each person, right?

And we come together to do something

that’s a shared effectiveness,

like I think we’re doing now of elucidating

and pursuing thoughts and getting ideas out.

And I think the best situations

are shared effectiveness situations

because you call upon the resourcefulness

and the internal resources of both people.

But you, especially with strangers,

especially when it’s not labeled a therapy session,

you kind of actually stumble into that cooperative state.

Like, you have to organically develop a trust together

and almost lose yourself.

Ultimately, I do, I think you put it really nice.

I think successful conversations,

even when it’s with, like, even if it’s like

with world leaders or logicians,

people that operate in the space of reason,

the most successful conversation will ultimately be

in the layer, in the landscape of emotion.

Like, that’s where the interesting stuff will happen.

That’s where you’ll discover anything.

And that’s where you get to actually meet,

to start getting an understanding of each other,

or what you actually mean, even by the statements

that are supposed to be kind of rationally based.

You lose yourself.

You lose yourself in the way you do

when you’re children and you’re just shooting the shit

about whatever topic, and you just forget yourself,

forget the things you’re supposed to say.

You lose yourself in the context, right?

Yeah, where you kind of plug

into the unconscious mind a little bit,

and you get to speak, maybe indirectly,

but to the things that really drive you,

to the thing that really, to the things,

to the emotions, I suppose, that underlie your worldview.

I feel like that’s where productive conversation

can happen, whether it’s a patient

or just a stranger you’re talking to at a bar

about geopolitics.

You mentioned Viktor Frankl.

What do you make of his work, Man’s Search for Meaning?

What are the lessons you draw from his work,

of him as a psychologist, but also from that,

very powerful work that reflects on his experience

in a Nazi concentration camp?

Yeah, I think that it was almost a profound,

reinvention of humanness, right?

After something so awful, so bleak, and so despairing,

to speak anew about shared humanness, human connection,

meaning, compassion, that I think it was

an intellectual direction that was adorned

with all of the emotions that we need

to adorn the logic with in order

to make real change in the world.

And I think that his work has fueled so many branches

have come from his work, the existential psychotherapy

and its place in helping human activities today, right?

A trend away from the idea that we’re all quite isolated

and that what’s going on between us

is all very transactional, right?

I’m putting something out and you take it in,

you put something out, I take it in, right?

The idea that no, there’s a difference,

there’s a shared humanness that creates a meaning

beyond the transactional, kind of like you were just saying,

the logical stuff isn’t really that interesting

because the logic is, there’s an answer

to whatever logic is, we can do math, right?

It’s where does the surprises come in, right?

Either in terms of wonderful behavior

or destructive behavior, right?

They’re coming from people’s emotions,

so that’s what we want to understand,

and that occurs in the context of a person

and other humans, even if it’s the conception

of someone and other humans as enemy,

or it’s the conception of two people sitting together,

the idea that there’s a shared humanness

and it’s not all transactional

and that he could take that out of

a pinnacle of human tragedy and utilize it

in a way that informs us being better

as a species going forward,

that I think is really monumental.

What do you think is the role of emotion

in the human mind, in the human condition?

Because we’ve talked several times in different ways

that emotion matters and it’s a big part of who we are,

but why is it there?

Why is it useful?

What’s good about it?

We’ve almost said it’s almost like a negative thing

that we just have to live with,

but why is it also maybe a beautiful thing?

Yeah, well I think you said, what’s the role of emotion?

Emotion is the king, if we want to use that analogy.

It’s the CEO, if we want to use that analogy.

Emotion rules all.

We’re taught that we’re logical creatures,

but we have innumerable pieces of data,

even over the course of just a day,

let alone a human experience,

to tell us that is not the truth.

Is it ever logical to run into a burning building?

No, right?

I mean, logic’s never gonna tell one to do that.

Okay, someone you love is in the building.

The person’s already sprinted halfway to the building.

Emotion rules us, and so the thought, a thought,

is some of that is evolutionary,

that strong negative emotion stays with us

very, very profoundly.

So example I’ll give is if we’re hunter-gatherers

and I find a new berry and it tastes good

and it seems nutritious, and it is.

It’d be good to remember that, right?

But if I find a new berry and it tastes good

and it seems nutritious and we both eat it

and almost die of sickness, we better remember that, right?

So the primacy of emotion is in us

for reasons that are about survival,

that the emotion of it’s my child in that building

or my loved one is why I don’t give a damn about logic

and run into the building, right?

The emotion of I thought that was good

and I got really sick and I better never forget

is also about survival.

And the same applies to humans.

If we’re from different tribes back then,

and in my tribe, when you put your hand out,

it’s a greeting.

In your tribe, if someone puts their hand out,

it means, hey, I’m gonna attack you and take your stuff.

Then I put my hand out and you slug me, right?

Then it’s like, I better remember that, right?

But you see how that can lead into

are the constructs around that.

I say, oh, people in your tribe are violent, right?

We start then to make stories around that.

But the primacy of emotion, whether it’s berries

or it’s humans who might threaten us

or it’s humans we love, I think it’s hard

to even look at that anthropological,

psychological literature, to look at what’s out there

and I think the face validity, that’s part of survival,

right, it’s part of survival.

It’s so cool that you get also things like love,

which are not often rational or grounded in logic and so on.

If you look from a transactional perspective,

a lot of times falling in love or whether it’s with friends

or friendship or romantic love, it doesn’t really make sense.

I still don’t, I’m still not sure what the hell it is

because it’s like, I mean, it’s the thing that,

it’s one of the things, or love for your kids

when they’re born, like that love, the parental love,

what is that?

That’s so cool that we get to have the,

like if you’re looking for the, in the menu of items

that give life meaning, that seems like a pretty good one.

Yeah, so my response, you said that it gives life meaning.

My response initially was gonna be,

it’s the meaning of life, right?

Because saying, okay, emotion is about survival,

that’s one part, right, and it’s a very important part,

right, if we don’t survive, then we’re not there

to have emotions, right?

So yes, it’s about survival, but as important as that is,

that’s the small part of it, right?

I think it is about the meaning of life

because it’s about the beyond self,

and I think it relates back to what we talked,

we were talking about at the very beginning

and the sort of levels of emergence, right?

And when we feel love, we feel happiness

because that person feels happiness, right?

There’s something that’s so generative,

so creative about that, like we wanna bring order to things

and happiness is consistent with simplicity, right?

If we’re healthy, there’s nothing negative

to say about our health, right?

If we have health problems, there’s a lot to say, right?

And it’s emotion that pushes us towards the goodness

that I think makes all the meaning for us.

I mean, it’s interesting, actually I was wondering

your thoughts about this as a scientist, right?

Because we accept it by and large that we have free will,

right, we feel that we have free will,

but then we get upset that there’s not justice, right?

But how is it like if we have free will,

I could act in an unjust way and then you’re surprised

or vice versa, why, right?

We have these thoughts because I think

because we’re rooted, we want logic to rule,

like there’s a way in which I can understand logic,

I can manage it, I can manipulate it,

we sort of want it to be that way,

so then we glorify logic and then we misapply it,

like ideas like, oh, I know we have free will,

but I’m now shaking my fist at the heavens

because there’s no justice, right?

And I think maybe what we’re looking for is

we should go back and look at the givens,

like why is there there’s only goodness if there’s justice?

I mean, that doesn’t make, I think the goodness,

why does the goodness have to be tied to that, right?

Maybe it goes back to the counter entropy

and the fact that when there is something,

there is not nothing, right?

And where there is something, there can be awareness,

there can be goodness, there can be compassion, right?

Is it that what’s really going on is not about justice?

Yes, we have free will, but it’s that goodness,

creating, shoring up, making better,

that is the meaning, that is the good, right?

And that the evil is the destruction

as evidenced by the fact that it’s overdetermined

probably a million times that we’re in this eddy current

of counter entropy and we could destroy that quite readily,

right, and then we’re nothingness like everything else

that we know of that’s not us,

that doesn’t have the ability to do something

that’s creative or constructive.

I mean, I think that that’s the answer

and I think that our science really tells us

that that’s the answer.

And I think it beckons us with ideas,

like we know that things happen outside of space and time,

right, I mean, they’re physics experiments, right?

Like we know this from the science of it,

yet we don’t stop and look and say, wait, is that?

The magic of the idea, Einstein said,

God doesn’t play dice with the universe.

I think, okay, maybe God doesn’t play dice with the universe,

that quantum indeterminacy and all of that

is not just a flip of the coin, so to speak,

but maybe it’s in that indeterminacy

that we’re given the opportunity to assert ourselves,

right, to make something one way or another.

Maybe it’s not God playing dice with the universe,

but it’s God loading the dice in our favor

if we’ll only listen to truth,

the truth that being destructive

doesn’t help pursue anything,

even in the person who thinks it will for themselves,

and that creativity and generativeness

and kindness and compassion,

like this is, doesn’t that seem sort of analogous

to the eddy current of counter-entropy

that has us here in the first place?

And I think that’s where I pin meaning,

and that meaning then, going back to the initial question,

right, is generated in us through emotion,

through what we feel that leads us to feel something

that is mysterious, I don’t know why I feel it.

Yeah, in some sense, emotion is kind of the fuel

of that creative imperative we have.

But if you step back and look at the tapestry a little bit,

it does seem that the destruction,

the creation and the destruction

are the yin and yang of life,

that it all works only if the main engine

is towards creativity,

but destruction also makes way for new things.

So that’s the, this kind of struggle,

it seems like life is struggle

between the different forces

that make up the individual human,

that make up society, all these tensions

are necessary for growth, for development,

this kind of inner conflict and outer conflict

are necessary for growth.

It’s not just, I mean, in some sense,

it’s from the logic aspect,

you kind of want everything to be perfect and just,

for nobody to suffer, for everything to be perfect,

but just like we talked about with trauma,

it just seems like it’s such a big, giant mess.

What is it, Bukowski said,

find what you love and let it kill you.

There’s some aspect of,

the negative aspect of passion and pursuit and obsession

and the turmoil of the pursuit of happiness,

of the creative pursuits and all of that,

I mean, that’s part of life as well.

And I don’t know what to do with that

from an individual perspective

in terms of figuring out how do you live a good life?

How do you live a healthy life?

Because it does seem that a bit of hardship

or sometimes a lot of hardship

can make a pretty interesting life.

I think it brings us back to the discussion

that we were having sort of before

about like what does it mean,

like the challenges of trauma, right, and of overcoming.

And I think here we gotta be careful with the language,

because I would then say,

let’s take destruction and separate it into two things.

One is, you say destruction is like the breaking down,

the tearing down of something,

versus a process that has malice in it.

So just like when we were talking about trauma

and setbacks, things to overcome,

we might say, okay, if you say,

hey, you have it harder than the next person

and you have more to overcome,

or someone put a barrier in front of you

for you to overcome,

that there can be a lot of growth in that,

including the times when you don’t know,

gosh, can I do this, right, can I get over it, right?

We’re saying like that’s challenge

and something to overcome that’s very positive.

But we’re saying, but there’s no benefit

of like throwing a racial slur in there, right?

We’re saying because that’s all bad.

Like that’s not, even if the person says,

I’m angry about that and I’m gonna overcome that,

it’s like that didn’t need to be,

that didn’t make anything better.

If the person sees that and says,

I’m gonna overcome that,

it makes things less worse, right?

But there’s no good to something

that’s created as destructive.

We might look at forest fires,

like look, controlled burns.

You say there’s a forest burning down,

but that’s, okay, there’s some destruction there,

there’s a tearing down there,

but it’s in the service of the next fire

not running through the community,

the town that’s on the other side of it.

That’s very different than a forest fire,

say, started by arson, right?

So you might say they’re both a tearing down,

they’re a tearing down of the forest,

but one is in the service of goodness

even though it’s hurting the animals

and the plants, it’s not all good, right?

But it’s in the service of something

as opposed to something else that’s wantonly destructive.

I think there’s no good to the racial slur,

there’s no good to the arson, right?

That’s destruction in a way that’s incorporating,

I think, the malice of envy,

something that’s really purely,

if there’s a yin and yang,

that’s the destructive, that’s the badness end.

So racial slurs is a surface wave of a deeper thing.

And so, I mean, the reason I bring that up is like,

all right, well, you have these discussions of censorship,

but what good does allowing racial slurs

in public communication do, right?

And it’s like, our communication would surely be better

if we don’t say bad things to each other.

But it’s like, it seems like the truth is

our communication will be better

if the amount of bad things

is a small fraction of communication.

That seems to be more true.

Because another aspect of human nature with power,

the moment you start censoring and removing bad words

that everyone agrees are bad words,

then the people at the top that are doing the censoring

start getting greedy, it starts expanding.

And this is the giant mess of human civilization

where we can’t, the nice piles you created

are kind of overlapping.

That’s the gray area, that’s the problem with it.

No, I agree completely, the control of language,

there are slippery slopes there,

I think there’s a very big problem there.

So I agree, I think, again, split parsing out the language,

I’m not saying, hey, we shouldn’t have racial slurs

as if like, let’s stop saying the words.

I mean, the idea is the premise behind it, right?

Like, you know, the prejudices,

if we could eliminate the prejudice behind it.

I was struck, as I said, I do almost nothing about medicine.

I get to medical school and start with anatomy, right?

And it’s remarkable as, you know,

to see as the bodies are being dissected

that we’re all humans, it doesn’t matter

any of these things on the outside.

And that’s true, not just in our bodies,

but in our minds, part of the person that’s not there,

right, because now we’re trying to learn from the body.

And, you know, it shows how ridiculous it is

if you think that we’re 99 point how many nines,

you know, percent all alike genetically.

And by the way, it’s only like take another 10th off

and we’re all orangutans, right?

But somehow we have to see these differences between us,

right, and where does that come from?

And I think that I believe that all comes from envy

in that classical sense that if I don’t feel good enough,

I’m gonna want someone to feel better about.

And sure, there can be visual things

that that person looks different, right?

Or you think about the, you know,

I spent some time in Great Britain

and where there’s a lot of conflict

between Northern Ireland and Ireland, right?

And you thought, wow, there’s not even a look difference,

right, it’s the same general religious umbrella,

same ethnicity, right, but now there’s

some religious difference.

And I thought, it’s not me trying to be denigrating,

you know, around the Irish conflicts,

like that’s human of, oh, there’s no actual difference

between us, if I don’t feel good about myself,

I’m gonna find one, right?

It’s that that I believe could go away.

It’s driven by maybe the trauma of just being alive

in the world and things can happen to us,

but we certainly promote in the human-created trauma,

people feeling not good enough, finding differences,

there’s a place for the envy to attach,

and we’re off to the races of, you know, wars.

I mean, we’re talking about the Second World War

and we think, well, what have we learned since then?

It’ll take us a day to map out all the wars since then,

right, let alone, for goodness sakes,

everything that’s salient right now.

So we’re not pretty, we’re not good at learning

from what seem to be some very salient lessons.

I should mention one thing is that I also know

that you’re interested in Russian culture a little bit.


Churchill said, I cannot forecast to you

the action of Russia.

It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery

inside an enigma.

So what to you are some interesting differences

between, so this Eastern part of the world

of Russia, Ukraine, the Slavic countries,

the former Soviet Union, all of that,

versus sort of the U.S. culture?

What stands out to you from the literature,

from the music, from the science, all that kind of stuff?

I think there’s so much intensity.

Intensity, and I guess I would say fearlessness

of expression that I see in a Slavic culture,

maybe it’s across cultures,

because there’s a different way that expression occurs.

We say, oh, it’s different in the French than the Spanish,

or it’s different than in parts of Africa.

And I think when you take that part of the world

for whatever reason, and maybe it’s just totally random,

or maybe it’s aspects of geography and experience

and migration, but there’s such an intensity.

And I remember listening to Tchaikovsky very early on,

maybe not for the very first time,

but early on in my life, or reading Dostoyevsky,

and feeling like, oh, Dostoyevsky’s willingness,

his ability, and his willingness to express

and create such powerful, aberrant states

of human experience.

Tchaikovsky in his music, the depths of suffering

that it expresses, has always stood out to me

as a way that if that’s the brightest light,

so to speak, communicating information,

that that’s a place to look.

And it’s also a place that resonated with me so strongly,

because I think for some people who are informative years

and having very difficult feelings, right,

of a depth of feeling, of fear,

and how’s the world gonna be?

Am I gonna be annihilated?

What do I even want?

What do I feel inside of me?

To encounter that being expressed so intensely,

I found to be very, very moving.

So I don’t know if that’s a good answer or not,

but I think there’s an intensity of expression

and a fearlessness.

You know, Dostoyevsky wrote about terrible things.

You know, what happens in the person?

Is there a person who is brilliant intellectually

and very persuasive and very capable of being effective

who also just chooses to be a child rapist, right?

I mean, he wrote about that.

He wrote about the truth of this is what we can be

as humans, and I think there’s so many lessons,

including the truth.

Like, people will tend to think,

oh, evil’s not very bright or not very intelligent.

That’s a way to let evil propagate, right?

Evil can be effective and attractive and very compelling,

but evil nonetheless.

And I just think there’s a fearless willingness

to look at that and to describe it

that I see primarily I’ve studied in Russian culture.

Yeah, the fearless exploration of this whole human drama,

definitely Dostoyevsky and others

since in the 20th century and the 19th century

have done an incredible job of that.

Some of that, just like you said,

is the language, the culture.

I think that intense romanticism is there.

That is almost an overdramatic exploration of human nature.

It can err on the side or falter

when it goes into a kind of cynical view of life.

You know, life is suffering.

I think that also has to do with the way you deal

with the trauma of the World Wars and so on.

This is something the different nations throughout Europe

had to deal with that in different ways.

Some of them have channeled into envy and resentment.

Some of them channeled into a kind of nihilism

or a cynicism, and ultimately,

the intensity of feeling is there,

which is sort of interesting to see

and interesting how that manifests itself

in the kind of governments it builds up.

You know, there’s more authoritarianism

in that part of the world versus the Western world

that’s more focused on the individual versus the collective,

and when more focused on the individual,

you have a propensity to value individual rights

with democracy and so on.

It’s interesting to watch and, yeah,

to reconstruct how that all came to be.

Is it in the blood?

Is it in the mind?

Is it in some kind of thing that’s more ethereal,

a collective set of ideas that we pass

from generation to generation between each other,

sort of the collective of it?

Yeah, it’s fascinating to see, but now reinvigorated

because there’s conflict in that part of the world.

You’ve also thought about the Cold War.

What lessons about the human mind,

about psychiatry, psychology,

and about looking at the Cold War

can we take forward in the 21st century

so that we can avoid World War III,

a major cold or hot war in the 21st century?

Well, I think unspoken animosities

are very, very, very dangerous.

I mean, right, it was a Cold War.

There was fighting through proxies, right?

The superpowers were fighting surrogate wars through proxies,

which, of course, in and of itself causes immense suffering,

but it becomes the opposite of an exchange of ideas

or an exchange of thought.

You know, I remember even Khrushchev, right,

not believing that the kitchen could look like it did

at the World’s Fair, right?

And some of the misconceptions here

of like what things were like in Russia, right?

It was an utter, it was a thought

that those other people are not actually people, right?

There’s an enemy society of evil,

which then paints with a broad brush

in a way that makes it easy, too easy for the Cold War,

for the war to go from being cold, right,

to having boiling over into utter destruction.

And, you know, I wrote, it was really a true story

that when I was in, it was still the Soviet Union,

but it was right around the time

of the Soviet Union coming to an end,

and I had gone on a trip for students from England,

and we got to go places that people hadn’t gone.

You know, foreigners hadn’t gone in many, many years.

It was just kind of the right timing to experience that,

and it really is true that someone said on short notice

to these poor kids that these group of Americans

were coming, and I have a picture somewhere

of the kid in a gas mask, like as they went under their desks

and put on a gas mask, and they felt right.

That’s what, I mean, that’s what,

they’re taught to think about us,

and we’re taught to think about them,

and like now we’re back in an us-them, right?

When, you know, we’re all trying to survive,

and we’re all such, human life is so delicate, right?

You know, let alone human happiness,

and we make these divisions, and we create this aggression,

and latent aggression.

I mean, during the Cold War, we developed, right,

the ability to destroy the Earth, right?

And then just sat looking at one another, you know,

with further growing misunderstanding,

and the opportunity for the proxy fights,

like when they said the Cuban Missile Crisis,

which I know wasn’t a war, but it’s an aspect of that,

where we just have ourselves wildly, you know,

at risk of destruction without any mutual understanding.

And again, I would argue that that is the opposite

of the counter-entropy, right?

Like we are setting everything up for less,

lack of communication, lack of understanding.

How do those feelings of love and shared humanness happen?

They don’t, right?

If you separate people, and then we push ourselves

more and more and more towards reinstating

the state of entropy that’s present

in the rest of the universe.

What advice would you give to young people

that are fighting entropy with all their might?

So young people, and people that are wondering

how to find their way in life,

what advice would you give, how to have a career,

how to have a life they can be proud of?

I think starting off with sort of first principles.

Oh, okay, what are my values, right?

How do I want to live life?

Because, you know, I’m in my early 50s,

and when I was a kid, you know, we waited for the,

the newspaper came in the afternoon,

and then, you know, and then we’d see something.

Okay, what’s going on in the world?

We’d learn something.

I’d get the West Coast baseball scores, right?

And learn about, oh, here’s what happened

in different parts of the world.

And by and large, I and everyone else there,

adult or child, were like living in a reality

that was largely, our conception was largely

what was around us, right?

And now, in many ways, it is,

I’m not saying it’s entirely negative, of course,

that we have more information.

We can sort of think globally, so to speak, right?

But the other side of that is so much

of the world’s problems are on us all the time, right?

Like here’s this awful thing that happened.

How many awful things happen each day,

and they’re right in front of us,

and there’s such an immediacy to it all

that I think it can be, it can like paralyze us

with terror, right?

And for someone who’s young and trying to make their way,

it’s like, how do you figure your way out in this world

that you’re worried isn’t even gonna exist, right?

And then you see how profligate

the generations before you are, right?

In so many ways, and there can become, I think,

a push towards extremes, either nihilism,

or I’m gonna change everything, right?

And it’s like, how about, let’s start from

how do I wanna behave in my own community, right?

Which starts with how do I wanna behave in my household,

what kind of neighbor do I wanna be?

I mean, it might seem like things like that

are silly or small in comparison to the big things,

but I don’t think they are.

I think that’s how we start building foundations

that lets us tackle the big things.

And then I do find myself saying,

when I’m working with, sometimes doing therapy

with younger people, of helping them

kind of bring back their thoughts, their strivings,

their decisions more to themselves,

and living with and around themselves more

instead of in something that becomes very theoretical

and therefore very threatening and unnerving.

So focusing on the people around them,

taking one small step at a time

to form deeper connections to build something locally.

Yeah, how do I wanna be today?

If I go into the grocery store

and the person in front of me drops something,

I can scowl, because I’m in a rush, right?

And I can be like that, right?

I can be like that.

I’ve been that way many, many times in my life, right?

And it’s never done anyone a damn bit of good,

including me, right?

Or I can realize, like,

the 10 seconds aren’t gonna matter.

Can I help pick that thing up?

Or just smile.

These are the seemingly small things

that I think make the tenor of our lives.

Yeah, I moved, I think I mentioned to you offline,

one of the, really the main reason I moved to Austin, Texas,

I just remember deciding it when I went to Walmart

and a lady said,

you look handsome in that tie,

or in that suit and tie, whatever.

Like, I don’t think anyone’s ever,

it’s an older lady, she was very sweet,

there’s kindness in her eyes,

she said that, I don’t think anyone ever said

anything like that to me in my entire life.

And it was just, I don’t know,

it was like, wow, there’s kindness in this world.

I know it sounds ridiculous, but like-

Does not sound ridiculous to me.

And it’s like those, you could be that for somebody.

Go walk around in Walmarts.

Right, the thing about, you remember that?


And it’s pivotal, you’re citing it as,

hey, that was a big part of me moving here.

So the thing about the branch point in your life

that comes from the simple kindness, right,

of a person who had goodness to give, right?

And wasn’t scared that you’re gonna be upset by it,

or whatever, right?

Took the risk.

Right, right.

She probably didn’t have the thought

that you could be assailing, right?

Probably she looks at you, she’s got goodness to give,

it’s simple to give it.

It’s that simple, and it’s beautiful,

and it’s worth more to you than like,

how many studies would be on where’s the right to live,

or this and that.

None of that matters.

What mattered was-

It was just that.

The freedom to be kind.

And that’s emotion.

That’s not logic at all.


That’s purely just human emotion,

and a little bit of humanness,

that little bit of connection.

And then that’s what makes life great.

Which is why it’s not a bad idea, right?

That you moved here that way, instead of,

one could say, well, I can’t believe you did that,

instead of looking at all the data,

and hiring consultants of what’s the best place to live.

But that would be wrong, right?

Like, you made a good decision, right?

Like, that was good data.

It was impactful data,

even in your thoughts about how you’re happy living here.

Right, it’s not that, oh, you discount,

you shortchange yourself by not relying

on all the logic, right?

You felt something about the place,

and you felt it as symbolized in a person,

and that made the choice for you.

It’s a balance, of course,

but you also have to know yourself a little bit.

Sometimes you can find stability and comfort

in kind of reasoning things out a little bit.

Maybe, as people close to me have sometimes criticized,

in that I’m a little bit too romantic,

where I’ll just follow the feeling.

And, you know, life, you know, there’s physics.

There’s a reality to this world.

Sometimes reality doesn’t allow you to flourish,

if you just follow your feelings,

but there’s a dance there.

And happiness is ultimately found in that landscape

of feeling and emotion versus facts and reason and logic.

As you said, have their place, right?

Everything, yeah.

They have their place,

but they’re not the be-all and end-all.

You’re an incredible person.

Andrew Huberman is a friend of yours.

He said, you absolutely must talk.

Karl Deisseroth, the number of people you know,

they’re just incredible people.

There’s just this group of folks

that somehow helped each other flourish and grew together,

and I’m just, I’m so happy you exist.

I’m so happy you’re doing the work you’re doing.

I can’t wait for your second book.

Thank you.

And thank you for talking today.

This was really cool.

Thank you so much.

I’m proud to be among the group of people that you cited,

proud to be their friend,

and proud that you’ve had me on today.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Paul.

Thanks for listening to this conversation with Paul Conte.

To support this podcast,

please check out our sponsors in the description.

And now, let me leave you with some words

from Viktor Frankl.

Everything can be taken from a man,

but the last of the human freedoms,

to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances.

Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.


comments powered by Disqus