there's the famous quote from David Foster Wallace about you know the story about the two fish

I 00:47:39 haven't heard any suggestion from anywhere in the world uh for a better order than the besmed liberal order which is based again on the very basic 00:47:52 understanding that all humans share the the same basic experiences and therefore we all share some common interests that the pain of as it's 00:48:05 biological that pain and and and despair and sadness they are the same in Israelis and Palestinians in Russians in ukrainians and this simple realization is the basis for the liberal Glo Global 00:48:18 Order

Beware the person, party, or project that claims to be the incarnation of the common good. The common good is imminent within the polis in all its possibility, but it is never the embodiment of any one version of the polis. That way of thinking, always tempting, often deployed, never ends well. The common good is not something extra added on to what other practices of right recognition provide for a society. Instead, the common good shifts the frame and changes the subject of political life from the declarative as is to the subjunctive as if—the corrected fullness of equality, justice, and interdependent mutuality that are already but not yet.

no matter what we've looked at so we've studied everything from you know again what you mean by a successful life uh your our aspirations for the future of the country um 00:16:09 what how do we want to treat one another uh what do you want out of our key institutions like education and the workplace criminal justice these things and it's just like we've got so much more in common i know it's so easy to say right and people try 00:16:22 to say across all demographics we share a lot in common what i think collective illusions help us understand is why doesn't it feel like that and i think this is important because 00:16:34 you know there's an old in social psychology there's a thomas theorem right which is if it's real in our imaginations it becomes real in its consequences so it doesn't matter that we actually share so 00:16:47 much common ground if we believe we are divided then our behavior will act accordingly right and the consequences become self-fulfilling so i think this is a critical time for us to understand a concept like collective illusions 00:16:59 because not only does it mean perhaps there's actually some common ground for us to build a free and and flourishing society together but that the way we would deal with some of our problems is different like if we 00:17:12 really are divided so be it right there are ways to bridge honest differences and still get somewhere but if it is a collective illusion then what we do next is different and sometimes leaning into an illusion as if it's 00:17:24 private opinion can literally make the illusion stronger [Music] yeah i i would rather people have a kind of best self bias and the other person like see the best in them and be biased 00:17:37 and be wrong than the other way or that other kind of error because you you're you're so right it's true that when you actually lead with the bias of we're divided you take ambiguous stimuli and you're 00:17:49 more likely to view negativity in that it's like why why are you angry at me and it's like no i actually just have a neutral face right now you know like do you know you're hitting on a really important point right which is 00:18:02 despite what most people think most situations are pretty pretty ambiguous right like and so we are projecting a lot of assumptions in interactions and so if i am coming into it thinking all out 00:18:15 sequel someone i'm just meeting probably disagrees with me on really important things and in fact i might not even think their their view might be i might think is even immoral or whatever i am i am the way i'm engaging with them 00:18:29 is likely to produce the very outcome that i didn't want and so it matters that we get this right and you know i think what's so unfortunate and we can talk more about this but like it's really dangerous when you know 00:18:42 two-thirds of americans admit to self-silencing right now and you know i know kato had done that research we've we've replicated that it's it's it's a thing and it cuts across all demographics it's just like 00:18:53 we're we're just not being honest with each other about what we think in part because we believe most people don't agree with us right like and so if we can get back to just having conversations treating one another with respect i think we'll be shocked at the 00:19:06 common ground that we find when we have those conversations

What prospects are there to reconfigure great powers’ approach to geopolitical security in a way that aids containment of the hyperthreat? Possible angles include:

Given wide-ranging concerns about globalization, the performance of international organizations, and perceptions that the so-called “liberal rules-based order” holds lingering colonial power dimensions, an overarching conclusion is that the post-World War II global architecture, designed before the advent of CEC or the internet, is outdated and ripe for redesign.16 A new neutral rules-based order could be established, one that is based on ecological survival and safe Earth requirements. Akin to the 2015 Paris Agreement, this might be acceptable to all nations because all are threatened by the CEC hyperthreat. It is an approach that builds on environmental peacekeeping rationale.

Operation Sapiens Star, explained below, which focuses on humans as a species with common interests and an inevitably shared future. This may help overcome other national, cultural, social, gender, religious, or ethnic divides.

You know, when you look at the real power balance, if the Europeans stick together, if the Americans and the Europeans stick together and stop this culture war and stop tearing themselves apart, they have absolutely nothing to fear -- the Russians or anybody else.

it was assumed that rational thought was value free it was just you know about what was true in the world and so 00:26:06 on and it's not because you're concerned with empathy and morality when you're thinking and and with emotion rational thought is really value-based 00:26:19 now whoa let's go back one there's a further view Descartes assumed that all rationality was the same for everybody that it was universal that what made us 00:26:34 human beings was being rational and logical and that therefore everybody had the same mode of reasoning now if that's true then all you have to do let's say 00:26:47 in politics is tell something somebody to facts and everybody will reason to the same conclusion right sure not true that is if enlightenment reason were 00:27:01 right that would happen it doesn't happen it turns out that it is not the case that all concepts are you are universal and that all of them are 00:27:13 accessible to everybody and then there's another view of you coming out of the postmodern thought that says no concepts are universal they're all arbitrary that's also false many concepts are 00:27:26 universal and many are not a very and it's an empirical question which is which and they vary from language to language and that's important you need to know that it is not the case that 00:27:41 everything with all thought is universal and it's not the case that that's all language particular or particular that is you need to know empirically what part is shared with other people who 00:27:53 speak other languages and come from other cultures and what part is not and that is an important empirical study so the big myth is this but there is some objective rational structure to the 00:28:07 world out there and that human reason can fit it directly and characterize it literally without frames or metaphors and reason about it adequately with formal logic alone that's just false the 00:28:21 world is real that is whatever it is our bodies and brains provide understandings of the world which depend on frames metaphors image schemas prototypes narratives all of those things and it is 00:28:35 that that permits us to create

A recent survey found that only 14% of people they surveyed in the United States talk about climate change. A previous Yale study found that 35% either discuss it occasionally or hear somebody else talk about it. Those are low for something that over 70% of people are worried about.

For a talk at one conservative Christian college, Dr. Hayhoe – an atmospheric scientist, professor of political science at Texas Tech University, and the chief scientist for The Nature Conservancy – decided to emphasize how caring about climate change is in line with Christian values and, ultimately, is “pro-life” in the fullest sense of that word. Afterward, she says, people “were able to listen, acknowledge it, and think about approaching [climate change] a little differently.”

I was speaking in Iowa, and I was asked, “How do you talk to people in Iowa about polar bears?” I said, “You don’t; you talk to them about corn.” If we begin a conversation with someone with something we already agree on, then the subtext is: “You care about this, and I care too. We have this in common.”