 Alright, Paleo, I want to talk about Paleo. So this is a question from one of the guys in the audience here. So he has taken on this view that Paleolithic man basically had it right in terms of because basically it evolved in a particular way, right? So we evolved in a particular environment, and so from a biological perspective we evolved to eat the food that was available to us at that time. We evolved as hunter-gatherers, so that would suggest the food we evolved to eat is meat berries and nuts, something like that. Maybe some fruits and maybe a little bit of grass or some kind of vegetable, but basically that's it. Our feet evolved to walk barefoot. They didn't evolve to have heels for women or any kind of like soles like in a shoe should be just flat because that's how we evolved, right? What else? We evolved not to wear clothes. So you shouldn't wear clothes because you're not getting enough vitamin D because we evolved to be basically pretty much naked, so we can absorb as much vitamin D as we can, but he is wearing a shirt, so he obviously doesn't take his Paleo too seriously. And he's sitting in an office away from the sun, which is not good. What else? It's food, shoes, yeah, I mean, we evolved to only wear animal skins, right? It's a cotton should be out, shouldn't wear any cotton, and certainly not vaccinate yourself or get any medicines because we certainly didn't evolve to that. Okay, so I'm character, I'm making a character out of this because he doesn't actually believe all that, but I'm trying to extrapolate, right? So look, this is my view of Paleo because I read some stuff on Paleo and I eat a moderate form of a Paleo diet, not really, but because I got into this diet before I knew what Paleo was. So I arrived at the conclusion I should eat this diet before I knew what Paleo was based on scientific evidence, not based on Paleo, which I don't think is based on science. To the extent that there's something to be learned from Paleo man, we should learn it. But the idea that evolution evolves us to be optimal is just unscientific. You're evolved to survive, not to thrive, not to flourish, not to live to be 100, not to be optimal. Evolution is not about optimization. Evolution is about your ability to reproduce at minimal cost. That's it. So at minimal amount of energy, how much can you reproduce? And if that means you only live to be 49, that's fine. Like women, once they reach menopause, are useless for evolution. And I know they tell just so stories about being grandmothers and the importance of that, but that's bullshit, right? Evolution doesn't work that way. So women are useless after 49 according to Paleo. So men should just have multiple wives or serial young wives, and the younger the better, because then you can have more kids. And all you should do is reproduce. So you're wasting your seed by not constantly reproducing from an evolutionary perspective. And it's probably unhealthy. You should probably have more sex and probably have more kids, because I just don't buy the whole thing. Again, it goes back to this idea that evolution is not about optimization. It's not an optimization, Mikado. It's optimizing around what you don't want to optimize. It's not optimizing about your flourishing. It's not optimizing about you as an individual's life, extending your life. It's optimizing about around your ability to reproduce at the lowest cost from a biological perspective possible. I don't want to optimize around that. I'm not interested. I had two kids not having any more. I've got a wife who's over 40, maybe I shouldn't say, but over 40, and I have no intention of marrying a younger woman or not marrying a young woman, just having kids with a younger woman. No interest in any of that, right? So I'm not, I don't want to be an animal, right? I've divorced myself from being that kind of animal. We have free will, which means we are free to optimize. And there's no reason we cannot use science to optimize to make ourselves better. Now shoes is a good example, right? You know, you evolve barefoot, which means you didn't walk flat. You walked on rocks and stones and ground and sand on many, many pretty bad surfaces. You didn't walk in concrete, on tile and carpets. So why should you apply that, which you don't have anymore, gravel and sand and dirt and all that, to the modern world where you work on carpets and on concrete? The question is, not what a paleo man do. The question is, what is best given a biological structure to weigh when walking on concrete? Or, and what if it is, do we walk up? And I don't know, I like those Nike shoes that weigh almost nothing, that are shaped to fit your foot perfectly. They give you no, what do you call it, impact to hurt your back, because when you wear completely flat, thin shoes, every time you hit that pavement, your back is going, which is not true a paleo man, because he didn't, he walked differently, walked on different surfaces. Everything was different. They say you should eat meat, right? Only eat meat today. You shouldn't eat anything else, but the meat today is completely different than it was the paleo man. The animals were different. We basically, I mean, no cow today is genetically the same as a cow from 15,000 years ago. Almost no animal. And as you literally go hunting in the wild, and what's wild anymore? Most of the wild is being cultivated by human beings, so most of the wild is controlled. But all the cows are different. So you say, okay, but it should be grass fed. It doesn't matter, the cows different, the genetic makeup, the cows different. We basically genetically engineered cows to be different than they, what used to be, right? So you can't recreate paleo anything. So the question is not what did paleo man do. The question is what's best for you. Now, I happen to believe that, and this is a very weak belief because I don't think there's enough science to justify this or anything else. I think diet is something we know very little about. I happen to think that meat is not the enemy. Meat is probably your friend. Eating fat is probably good for you, not bad for you. That the damage, health is probably done more by sugar and by simple carbs than anything else. But I don't claim this as scientific knowledge, and that's why I don't advocate for it because I don't know. I eat that way. I try to minimize my sugar intake. I try to minimize simple carbs because I feel better when I eat that way and because I've been doing it for a long time and it seems to work and I keep the weight off and I'm basically healthy. So that's why I do it. And it seems like there's some scientific evidence to suggest that, but it's not hugely strong, right? It's not massively strong. The Mediterranean diet seems to do very, very well in studies and Mediterranean diet is not a fat-centric diet. It's much more a vegetable-centric diet. So you've got to follow the science. And that's true in all aspects of life. The idea that Paleo got it right and we've been spoiling it since then is just simply wrong. It's strong evidence that Paleo Man had real bad cases of arthritis, that all that walking on rocks was probably not good for their knees and not good for their, you know, and all that lifting and moving stuff around was not good for their elbows. And their life was not as happy and wonderful and successful. And then there's the whole issue that Mark raises here about the spiritual side of life, right? They didn't have Beethoven. So I'm willing to give up a few years of life in order to have Beethoven and Michelangelo and Hugo and have that spiritual side of life that they didn't, right? Because it was still pretty primitive. So I think that you have to step away from these ideas that, again, this idea that evolution is optimal, it's not. This idea that nature cannot be improved upon, which is an idea that exists out there. Why can't nature be improved upon? In what respect can't nature be improved upon? If I could take a drug to make me live an extra hundred years, of course, I would take it. We're taking the vaccine, right? If somebody tells me I need, you know, if I think I need more vitamins, then I'll take the vitamins, even though I'm not getting them naturally. I don't want to recreate Paleolithic life. I think it's horrible. I mean, I couldn't zoom. I couldn't talk to you guys. You know, I couldn't do all the things I do on my computer. You know, I love modern life. Why would we think that our clothes, our food, everything around us wouldn't change given that our environment is changed? We changed our environment. So when we changed our environment, wouldn't we also have to change the way we eat, the way we sleep, all of that to accommodate the fact that we changed our environment? I think it negates the whole idea. I mean, a lot of the Paleo stuff negates the whole idea of free will. This idea that we can change our environment. We don't just have to give in to our environment. And so we can change our environment. And therefore, we can change, for example, we build concrete. We build streets. So now we can wear nikes. So once we change our environment, we have to change how we as a biological entity interact with that environment. Because if we treat concrete as a tree, that's not going to work well, right? That's a contradiction. So I just don't, I guess my conclusion is I don't buy it. Shaz butter asks, I gather that grass-fed beef is a bit better because cows are better able to digest grass. Healthier animals equals better meat. Is there any truth to this? I think so. I think there's truth to it. Do I know so? No. So the idea is that because cows evolved to eat grass, they're healthier. The composition of the fat that cows have is healthier. I think there's more omega-3 in the fat of cows when they're a grass-fed than there is when they're grain-fed. When they're grain-fed, they tend to have more omega-6s. Does that mean we should only eat grass-fed beef? Does it mean we can eat non-grass-fed beef, but also supplement with omega-3? I don't know, and the problem is that not enough science is devoted to figuring these things out because there's too much, I don't know, what is it, mythology and there's too much religion associated with diet, the religion of various diets. And you have to just look at it all from the perspective of fact and science. What work? What actually is going on? And the problem with nutrition is we still have a very primitive knowledge of how our bodies work as amazing as that sounds. If you know anything about medicine, they still don't know how our body actually works, how things interact. They know very little about cell biology, how cell biology is impacted by diet, how different nutrients affect things. We're still, I don't know, decades away from having a good understanding of physiology, just the basic physiology, like the whole idea of all this bacteria in the gut and the bacteria in the gut actually having an impact on hormones and having an impact on all kinds of metabolic systems in the body is new. It's just in the last few years, and yet it's a major discovery and has major implications, and we don't understand them yet. That's just one example, but there's tons of stuff we don't know, which makes me just think, you know, how ridiculous things like evolutionary psychology are. We know so little about the easy stuff, i.e. our body. We know even less about our brain and how it works and the structure of it and how it deals with different things. We know a lot less about that than we know about the body. So, yet people make very strong claims about both the body and the mind. So, Bué, about biological claims, strong biological claims about things we don't know enough about yet. There goes my late again. So, I'm suspicious. You know, you need to make strong claims, you need strong evidence, and there's just, biology's hard, because it's complex systems that interact with one another. They have what do you call it, properties that the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. That is, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. They have properties that are unique to the whole, right? Consciousness, for example, free will, that you can't pinpoint as just the sum of the parts. So, there's a lot of complexity here and there's a lot to think about. Okay, James asked, do you think that meat will continue to rise in price? What do you think made people want to start the grass-fed boom? Do you eat poke belly? I love poke belly. Hard to get in Israel, but no, you can get in Israel, but poke belly is delicious. It's like, why would you want to live and not eat poke belly? That's the question. Belly, generally, is pretty tasty because it's fatty. Fat is where the taste comes from. So, yes, I do eat poke belly. I love poke belly. But, and I eat it in many different forms. What do you think made people want to start the grass-fed boom? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know if it must have started before paleo. But I think it's the paleo movement and the anti-carb movement that really, you know, they're going back to nature, the organic movement. All of that kind of spurred the grass-fed, the grass-fed stuff. Do you think- What we need today, what I call the new intellectual, would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning, any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, wins or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism and impotence and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist, broods. All right, before we go on, reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now, 30 likes. That should be at least 100. I figure at least 100 of you actually like the show. Maybe they're like 60 of the Matthews out there who hate it. But at least the people who are liking it, you know, I want to see a thumbs up. There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this. And you know the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego. It's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. So you know, if you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes. But if you like it, don't just sit there, help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share and you can support the show at your own book show dot com slash support on Patreon or subscribe star or locals and show you support for all, for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this. And of course, don't forget, if you're not a subscriber, even if you just come here to troll or even if you're here like Matthew to defend Marx, then you should subscribe because that way you'll know when to show up. You'll know what shows are on, when they're on. They'll get notified, right? So yes, like, share, subscribe, support, like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one or all of those, please.