 Good day May 40 here listening to a podcast on Richard Spencer's sub-stack Radex journal dot sub-stack the AI illusion recorded December 8, 2022. This is Mark Brumman speaking. I understand your point. I mean it's, yeah I mean again I think I think Christianity and Judaism they are mystery religions but implicit. Mystery religions has a meaning. It means that you have to be an initiate to gain access to the mysteries of the religion. The Judaism is like the opposite of a mystery religion. It says the Torah is not far from you. It's very close to you and yes you can do it. So mystery religion refers to Hellenic and Greek religions and Christianity has taken on some aspects of mystery religion. You get taken into the mystery of salvation when you believe in Jesus. Judaism is not a mystery religion right? They're positing a kind of breeding ideal. So in other words Yahweh is effectively, you know when you read the Hebrew Bible Yahweh is a very, you know he's certainly not Aryan. He's a very kind of Jewish character. He's a very kind of Jewish personality and character and so that has a kind of race or ethnic forming consequence right? Yeah but more than more than the Jewish conception of God you know formed the Jews. The Jews formed their religion from the culture and the talents of the Jewish people. It wasn't a particular conception of God that formed the Jewish people. When you worship a God, when you worship a God like Yahweh you sort of form a race to that type. So in other words... No you don't form a race to that type. That type resonates with certain conceptions of the world. Judaism is not primarily a faith, primarily a tribal identity. This might also be getting... be sort of what Richard's getting at is that you know it's not it's what we're talking about also is that the religion produces the type as opposed to the race as opposed to the religion being a kind of excretion of the race. Yeah I would say the opposite is much more true. Like a particular people will develop a particular understanding of reality. So that's a positive religious faith statement that God came down and gave the Torah to the Jews. But what the Jews then do with the Torah and how they implement it, how they study it, how they practice it, right, how they make it real and concrete in their lives then have a whole lot to do with the proclivities and talents and gifts of this particular people rather than theological conceptions that are shaping this particular race. Yeah the idea that the old DR trope that culture comes from race, right, we're actually saying the reverse. Yeah I would say the old DR trope then is much more accurate. Culture forms race. Now it may... you could argue that there's a kind of chicken and egg relationship there, right, because part of what we're trying to form, we're trying to recapture on some level we're trying to recapture an ancestor or founder type but we're trying to even improve on that, right, because we want a type that is able to sustain civilization, sustain itself, and even improve itself, right, you know, yes. Not something that JF would like I don't think because it seems like he's anti... JF got a repeat. Yeah he does seem to be a very subcurious way. But we're gonna have to compete with the AI, right, have to coexist and compete with the AI. I need to actually read his book, yeah. The revolutionary phenotype. I am a huge skeptic of the power of AI, I think this is... I don't think we should underestimate it but I don't think that we should, you know, start preparing for the end of mankind or anything, you know, right. I have an interesting thought I've been throwing around in my head, I'll put it to you, Gents, is about the AI. Just the fact that, I mean, when these sort of, I don't know what it's called, conspiracy theories, like Doomsday, prophecies, dystopian visions of quite and quite artificial intelligence, it's a very... that concept itself is a very liberal, like it is a product of liberalism in that it reduces, because liberalism in its scientific materialism cannot understand consciousness. And I say this as a materialist. It is something that I do and think about. It reduces consciousness and describes agency as sort of being able to come from a mechanistic causal system. And all of that is to say, if human beings are a programming determinator, by... it cannot go beyond unless there is some type of moment of transcendence, then even in itself cannot have agency. Like it can have error, which might, like, if you put all my, you know... Yeah, it sounds like a traditional theorist's argument. How can something without consciousness create consciousness? You know, instead of bombing under the harms of Russia, it might end up on a kindergarten, God forbid, but that in itself is not agency of the system that human beings have birthed. So I think that at the heart of it is misnomer and a very sort of scientism, quite and quite as much as I hate that word, understanding all consciousness and agency. Well, let me put it to you this way, because this is a new topic and it's big and it's something that I agree with quite a bit of what you're saying and not all of it. And let me try to kind of reformulate it in some way. So we have actually used language for a shorter amount of time than we would imagine. And you know, dogs can understand words. I'm not sure a dog quite has a grammar, but I think a dog knows its name. A dog knows, if he hears the word walk or dinner, and it's, you know, he perks up and is going to look at you and be like, oh, walk. Yeah, that sounds great. Yeah, let's do it. You know, so he understands language to some extent, but there's no there's no actual grammar or logic. Exactly. Now, you know, we're homo sapiens. So, you know, wise man, let's say, and we kind of have this notion about ourselves that we are the rational animal or something like that. That is actually extremely incorrect fish. I actually just saw something about this today. There was an experiment in Germany in which fish have a sense of numbers. They have a sense of a larger and a smaller number. And they can actually engage in a sort of addition to some extent. So, and they don't have a frontal brain anywhere close to the extent that we have one. So, like, you know, there's so much we might even overestimate like the head as the seat of reason or something. We have reason in our spinal cord. And I've used this metaphor quite a bit. And so I apologize if you are getting bored of it. But like, there is no literally no time to think if you are standing at a baseball plate and someone is throwing 70, 80, 90, 100 miles per hour, you cannot think in that one second when you determine what pitch is it a curve and the fastball is a change up. Is it? Yeah, I think this is really good analysis from Richard. Is this the pitch I want to hit? You have absolutely no time to think that. And yet you do. The idea that some of these baseball players could explain to you like how a curveball curves, they can't. But they just do it and they know it in their bones. Maybe kind of literally in their bones. A outfielder, he hears a crack off the bat. The audible level of the crack gives him information. He sees it. He sees the ball maybe even kind of peripherally to some degree and he sees it travel like 50 feet and he estimates exactly where he should run. And he hops to the exact spot, opens up his glove and then a laxie days of a man or cash. There is reason, mathematics, rationality in our spinal cord. And we kind of don't grasp this. And you're thinking consciousness when you're using language. Right, so what's going on with your body? It's going to have a profound effect with your cognition, your mood, your hormone levels, how much at ease you are in your body. If you're in pain, if your muscles are tight, if you're at ease, if you're free. What's going on with your muscle tension level is going to profoundly affect your thinking. You're not going to be free in your thinking and your emotions if your body is tight and compressed. You're not going to feel anxious if your body is free. You're not going to feel depressed if you've got upward direction flowing through your body. When you feel depressed, your body is going to sag and be depressed, concave, collapsing in and down on itself. So some pretty good analysis here from Richard. It's kind of almost like a late stage of this. And there are also half many experiments. I think I've mentioned these to other people, and I'll mention two. One of which is that your muscles will engage before you think to pick up your coffee. Now, does that mean that we're all pre-determined? No, it does not mean that at all. What it means is that you are telling yourself in your mind using language, I want coffee as a kind of host facto rationalization of what you are instinctively doing. Another thing. Yeah, your body and your reflexes and your instincts that often kick in way before your cognition. Your body instincts, reactions, wants something, desires something, move towards something, and then you use your reason to justify what you want. There's an experiment that's done where they tell people to pick up their blinded and they tell people to pick up objects and they say, we want you to judge the texture of these objects. And so you'll pick one up that will be like furry and you'll pick up another one that will be slick. And then they'll say, which object was heavier and people will get it. What that indicates, that might sound like dumb or obvious? No, it's not dumb or obvious. What that means is that not only are they engaging in reason, they're engaging in judgment unconsciously. Do you understand what I just said or do I need to repeat that? Yeah, we have certain basic instincts. We have evolutionarily evolved reactions to life that predisposes to certain psychological reactions, certain verbal reactions, certain political reactions. And these are evolutionarily adaptive. The reason we have these instincts and reactions is that they have served our ancestors for hundreds of thousands of years. And so some people are predisposed towards a left-wing perspective on life, others towards a right-wing. Some people are predisposed towards traditional conceptions. Others are more open to innovative ways of organizing families, communities, civilizations. The left-wing approach is to be more open to new ways of organizing people and families. The right-wing approach is to stick with time-tested traditional ways of organizing people.