 Why was the world ready for the Enlightenment then and not Objectivism now? Well, that's a really good question. It's a really good question. Okay, so let me try to answer it because it's not a simple question. The Enlightenment was a consequence of a certain sequence of ideas. Well, let me give you the superficial answer first. Not the superficial, it's true, but it's shallower in a sense. The Enlightenment demands less. The Enlightenment was not atheistic. It was deist in many respects. Some Enlightenment thinkers were atheists, but they didn't kind of demand atheism. And it wasn't egoistic. It didn't demand a numerality. So in a sense, it was easier. Even that took hundreds of years to get to the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment starts, I mean, not starts, the causal chain of events that leads to the Enlightenment starts with the discovery of Aristotle by the church, if you will, in the 14th century, maybe even in the 13th century. First in the University of Paris, and then it gets to Thomas Aquinas, who really takes the ideas of Aristotle seriously and embeds them into the church. In a sense, it makes it part of what the church teaches, educates, facilitates. And he brings the idea, there was to tell you an idea of the importance of this world. The importance of living in this world. The importance of maybe even pursuing what's happiness in this world. The importance of reason as dealing with this world. He brings that into dark ages culture, middle ages culture. And that starts chain of events that within about 150 years, and maybe I'm getting my dates slightly wrong, but in about 150 years, leads to the beginning of a renaissance. A discovery now of more of Greece, primarily Greek ruins, Roman sculpture, Greek sculpture, Greek plays, a whole now view of life starts to emerge that is very Greek. And you get the artists embracing these ideas note that art that in a sense is consistent with the Enlightenment predates the Enlightenment. The artists come first in many respects, in some respects. The culture comes second. The artists are thought leaders for the culture. So the idea of an individualistic man is reflected in Michelangelo's David, even in Michelangelo's pietà at the Vatican. Man having free will man man determining his own fate is in the David. It's in Leonardo's works. It's it's there. The beginning of science is in Leonardo's work in Galileo's work in this Renaissance and late Renaissance period is this rediscovery of art of science. And the beginning of a humanism, a humanism which is attempting philosophically attempting to secularize Christian morality to try to come up on morality that doesn't require God and doesn't require a pope. And, you know, it's reasonable to believe that somebody like Leonardo da Vinci was an atheist. So you're starting to get these ideas in in the culture then you get more scientists and you get more science. And I think the key figure that that brings us to the Enlightenment is now new to two key figures are Newton and Locke, right Newton Locke. Newton provides us with the efficacy of reason with the ability of reason to explain the physical world Locke is the philosopher who takes that and ultimately gives us individual rights. So there was a sequence of events that took 450 500 years from Thomas Aquinas to the Enlightenment that led to the Enlightenment. But before the Enlightenment could go all the way. Before the Enlightenment could fully understand itself before the Enlightenment could fully understand what it was really about and what was important about it and present a fully articulated comprehensive philosophy to defend itself before any of that could happen. It came under massive attack. And that attack came from basically two places from France and Germany from so and from Kant and we saw and can't completely undermine the Enlightenment they undermine the ideas they undermine the confidence and people in these ideas. And as Kant says in his introduction to the critique of pure reason, they make room for faith. They reintroduced mysticism into our thinking. And in that sense they save Christianity they save religion from being annihilated by the Enlightenment the enlightenment was on the verge of secularizing society completely. And these anti Enlightenment thinkers save it. So even though we have an industrial revolution which is a consequence of enlightenment afterwards. There's no philosophy to justify it there's no philosophy to explain it. And as the industrial revolution is happening. It's undercut by all kinds of philosophers on the left on the right in the middle. Conservatives hate capitalism because it sends people to cities and it liberates women and it does all these things that conservatives don't like. They want people to stay in the villages and small communities and collectives. It upsets the collectivist that you know and then you get Hegel and Schopenhauer and Marx and Nietzsche and you get on you know you get every front and in America you get a resurrection of religion. So the Enlightenment is blasted for a hundred and something years, 150 years, 60, 70 years before Atlas Shrugged is published. Iron Man is the first thinker post Enlightenment to really present an Enlightenment philosophy for people and complete the project of the Enlightenment in my view secularize it completely get God out of it completely. Establish reason on firm epistemological ground present a theory of concepts that is consistent with with with the idea of reason as man's basic means of survival. So show how reason actually contributes to human life. Defend capitalism defend individualism defend a morality of egos and defend the pursuit of happiness the way to pursuit of happiness. So when completes the enlightenment but by then it's late by then the enlightenment has been crushed at least philosophically. Now I think objectivism will win the culture could be receptive to objectivism but to do that what you need is what the Enlightenment had. You need artists and scientists and business people and lots and lots and lots of intellectuals all having integrated these ideas and applying them in their work. Advocating for them in when they talk when they when they when they speak. Think about, I mean, Harry Binswanger gave this example I think it's a great example imagine a scientist winning a Nobel Prize in physics standing up there and saying I couldn't have done this without a deep understanding of iron rands epistemology that those epistemological concepts are what led me to the great discoveries that I have made. That would change the world right now imagine if you had a scientist doing that in science if you had businessman who said we're very successful Steve Jobs Bill Gates is of the world. One Buffett it's not just saying I like at the strong but saying what John Allison has said a deep understanding of iron rands ideas made me a bit of businessman made me succeed in business enabled me to achieve what I have achieved. And then people did that in the arts just projected these views projected these ideas, and maybe some of them attribute him to iron man. Then the culture would be fully ready. So think about art. And I know art is not what people first thing about when they think about cultural change but I do, because I see it as so indicative. At the show was published in 1957. What was the art world like in 1957. It was worse than in 900 AD. At 900 AD, artists were making what they call a gargoyles little sculptures are monstrous little beings and thinking dragons and crazy stuff right, which is disgusting and awful. But that's like a million times better than a urinal framed in a museum or white on white or kandinsky spashing paint or Jackson Pollock, the non artist if there ever was one the anti artist right spashing paint and being worshipped for it. I don't know how you recover from that. So, as long as there's a culture that respects modern art. As long as modern art is something that people think has any value, and that businessmen spend gazillions of dollars buying and putting up in their homes and putting up in their businesses. As long as we have this garbage that goes as art dominating the aesthetic culture we live in. I don't hate modern art. Modern art is not art, objectively just not art. As long as they people stop buying this stuff. Objective has no chance. That reflects such an anti intellectualism, such a rejection of reality, such a second handed second added mean going by what other people think. It's a mentality that we have no hope in a sense people today have a mentality that's lower than the people in suddenly in the 1700s but but maybe even lower than in the 1200s. All these guys are awful. I mean, they're not art. There's nothing else is to that's why the world is not ready. The world is not ready because it's going to be corrupted by conscious been corrupted by Hegel it's been corrupted by who so and it's being reinforced in educational system and as sophisticated as we are technologically when it comes to our spirit when it comes to our ideas when it comes to our psychology. When it comes to our emotional well being when it comes to any spiritual thing that is of the consciousness of spirit of mind. We are 500 years backward in spite of the technological advances that we have made. And that's why the world is not ready for objective that would make a Christian if you're watching this that would make a good video. What we need today what I called a 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, women 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.