Science

#26: From Crisis to Meaning with Shinzen Young

Welcome to our season one finale! On this episode, we talk to Shinzen Young about mindfulness within the context of the modern meaning crisis. Shinzen is a renowned meditation teacher and neuroscience research consultant. We met with him in Toronto after he had just finished leading a meditation retreat. Shinzen first became fascinated with Asian culture as a Jewish teenager growing up in Los Angeles in the 1950s. As he likes to describe himself: 

“I’m a Jewish-American Buddhist teacher who got turned on to comparative mysticism by an Irish-Catholic priest and who has developed a Burmese-Japanese fusion practice inspired by the spirit of quantified science.” 

We discuss happiness, enlightenment and his current new project which involves using brain stimulating technology that may dramatically accelerate meditation gains. He is the author of The Science of Enlightenment: How Meditation Works

Highlights:

  • Why is Mindfulness everywhere?
  • Meditation to Optimize Happiness
  • Co-evolution of Science and Mindfulness

Resources:

Listen:

Poem Inspired by This Episode

Full Transcript

Thal:

Welcome Shinzen to the show.

Shinzen Young:

Thank you.

Thal:

Thank you for agreeing to come on. Thank you.

Adrian:

I think a neat place to begin this conversation is to ask how you see your role as a meditation teacher within, what we’re calling the meaning crisis, within the context of the modern meaning crisis. How do you see your role and how that relates to the bigger scale problem that we are, you know, sort of experiencing as a collective.

Shinzen Young:

So I like to answer questions by first asking a bunch of questions and I appear on, you know, a number of podcasts and usually they have a direction or an interest. And so by finding out how the person that’s interviewing me sees the theme, the broad theme of the podcast, I apply my dimensional analytic skills to getting an idea of what they’re talking about and then I can relate it to my areas. So I’ll begin by asking you folks a question. There’s three words: modern, was it meaning?

Thal:

Meaning

Shinzen Young:

And crisis. I’m interested in how you think of what those words mean. Um, when does modern start? What is a crisis in meaning? Uh, so I’ll let you folks talk first.

Thal:

Wow.

Adrian:

Yeah, no, that’s… Yeah, I love it.

Thal:

Yeah, sure. I’m, the way I see it is, um, sort of maybe the breakdown of the old way of seeing things, thinking about the world. Old paradigms. Um, it’s very hard. It’s not that black and white, it’s not really breaking down, but there’s this energetic shift that’s happening where just the old way of doing things is no longer working. And so we’re seeing that institutions, religion, politics, it’s just no longer working, the old way of doing things. And so then all these questions are coming up and they’re, um, along with those questions, there’s this anxiety around what’s going to happen and um, and sort of being lost in a way and grasping for meaning and a worldview.

Shinzen Young:

And would this be among the younger people? A certain generation? Do you have an age demographic that tends to listen to your podcast? And be in the meaning crisis?

Adrian:

I would say yeah, to a degree. It’s relating to a generation that we belong to. Sort of that millennial generation that I would consider myself part of.

Shinzen Young:

That would be called millennials part of, yeah. How old do you have to be? What’s the range of millennials?

Adrian:

I don’t know what the hard cutoff is. I mean, I was born in the mid eighties.

Thal:

I was born in ’82. I think. I think I’m like the older side of the spectrum.

Shinzen Young:

Well, I was born a long time before that. So, I actually belong to, um, some would say Boomer, but I’m at the very earliest part of the boomer. Boomer was supposed, I believe is taken to be post World War Two when the Vets came back. But I was born while my father was off fighting the Japanese in the Pacific. I was born during World War II. Um, as I, you know, that’s, that’s a long time before Boomer. Uh, okay..

Adrian:

For me, the meaning crisis at an individual, personal level was when I, towards the mid twenties was when I started really recognizing just a lack of fulfillment in my life. You know, having success from a career perspective, but just not feeling like this is what I’m supposed to be doing. I’m not fulfilled. I don’t feel, I don’t feel happy. I, you know, and the chasing doesn’t seem to be filling that, that experience that I was expecting…

Shinzen Young:

So that’s fulfillment.

Adrian:

To me it is, yeah.

Shinzen Young:

So what I’ve got so far is old things, the old ways of working. Um, and there’s rapid change. And there’s fear and a sense of unfulfillment. So yes. And maybe particularly for the millennial type, but of course it’s a Zeitgeist or spirit of the time kind of thing that would apply to any age demographic. Yeah. Well there’s a lot of relevance. Um, so you described me as a mindfulness teacher, which is an accurate description. Although the fuller description I would say is that I am a teacher of, but also a researcher in the field of what I would call Modern Mindfulness. So I’m all about dimensional analysis and careful use of words. Um, I think you guys speak Chinese, right?

Adrian:

Cantonese.

Shinzen Young:

Not so good.. [chuckle] in Cantonese. But Confucius said this idea of “Cheng-ming”, which is translated rectified names, I’m sure it’ll be pretty similar in Cantonese. So that was an early influence. It’s like, “oh yeah, it’s important to be careful about how we say things”. So I’m all about careful definitions and axial, you know, dimensional analysis of phenomena. So for me, Modern Mindfulness is a set term. I define it in a certain way. Obviously other people may use “mindfulness” or other related words in different ways. But for me, Modern Mindfulness is what some people call “secular mindfulness” or some people call “mainstream mindfulness”. But I don’t like either of those words for various reasons, but we need a name for it. And what the “it” is, is a contemplative practice co-evolving with science. So the reason that mindfulness is found all over the world now within the therapy setting, within the corporate setting, within the medical setting, even within the military. The US trains mindfulness. When Jon Kabat-Zinn and Saki Santorelli, who are sort of the heads of the MBSR approach, when they went to Beijing, there were members of the PLA, the Chinese national army there. And Saki told me that he thought the reason that they were there taking the seminar on MBSR was that they knew that the US military was using it. And I don’t know if that’s really true or not, but I think if you pardon my French, is pretty fucking amazing right?

Adrian:

Competitive advantage.

Shinzen Young:

I mean, are we gonna have um… Yeah, I don’t mind a Mindfulness Arms Race! Okay. That’s like a cold, that’s a Cold Peace as opposed to a Hot War. [Chuckling] Uh, but anyway, why is this everywhere? Okay. How did this happen? Well, Jon was able, Jon Kabat Zinn, spelled J-O-N, was able to put this South-east Asian Buddhist practice within the framework of clinical science. And okay. You know, you have pain, we give you these techniques. It may not make the pain go away, but youy perceived suffering goes way down. And we can use different psychometrics to make that a credible claim. So modern he linked it with science. Jon was originally a molecular biologist, which is pretty hard-nose quantitative science, but he was also a long time practitioner. So doctors started to send chronic pain patients to him because that’s a huge problem in clinical medicine. It’s an intractable problem, really. I mean everyone talks about this opioid epidemic or whatever, but I mean it has various causes, but one of them is, you know, these painkillers have these bad effects. So in any event, he got results and then it took off. So if we generalize what… MBSR stands for mindfulness based stress reduction. So if we sort of generalize what he did, um, which would have come online just about the time you folks were getting born. I would say he did two things. He abstracted the attentional skill training from the cultural doctrinal, religious, philosophical matrix of Asia. So that you didn’t have to believe in reincarnation or whatever, uh, you know, in order to do these practices. And then what he also did is he validated it by the standard cannons that are used in medicine. And it worked. It performed. It outperformed. So to me, what that represents is taking the spirit of science and modifying, in this case an essentially South-east Asian contemplative practice, um, making something that’s culturally universal and logic and evidence-based. But we can generalize that further because South-east Asian Buddhist practice is a proper subset of World Buddhist practice, but World Buddhist practice, in other words, quote “Buddhist Meditation” is a proper subset of world contemplative practice. As you folks know. There’s Christian, you have a Sufi path you have a Muslim name. So I’m guessing Muslim. Yeah, there’s contemplative tradition in Islam and Judaism, Christianity. So I’d like to take an even larger view. I talk of contemplative practice worldwide. So if we take contemplative practice, we can improve it by bringing in the spirit of science. But it works the other way. The science is… yes, it’s a cultural meme, but it’s also a human experience. It’s the experience of doing science. Whether it’s high school science or whether it’s professional level you’re shooting for a Nobel prize science. There is the doing of science, which is a human experience and experience of thought and emotion. And if the scientists take on a contemplative practice, they will be much happier human beings and therefore much more effective scientists. Um, so we can imagine a positive feedback loop moving forward in time.

All we need to do is somehow get past the next century or so, I would say without a catastrophic collapse of civilization, if we could somehow squeak through. I would expect that as contemplative practice becomes improved through interaction with science and as the scientists become improved through taking on contemplative practice, which then allows them to do better science, et Cetera, that a positive feedback loop could develop where they co-evolve. It’s a notion of course, from evolutionary biology. Sometimes species co-evolve. Sometimes they co-evolve to fight each other, but sometimes they co-evolve to cooperate with each other. And I see that as a viable possibility. Now, the reason that Buddhism sort of plays a big role is that of all the contemplative traditions of the world, or of all of the religions of the world, contemplative practice is most central in Buddhism. It’s what it’s all about really. Secondly, in the Buddhist tradition, there’s been very systematic and comprehensive analysis of what meditation practice is. It’s already proto-scientific in the way that it has been described historically. So there is a reason why Buddhism is central to this, but I see it as really a broader thing. But if we think of Buddhism or meditation practice as done in Asia, to me that represents the pinnacle of Asian civilization. It’s what Asia did better than anyone. And therefore the whole world should pay attention to that in a little bit of a special way because they did it right. They did it proto-scientifically, actually. Um, so if we wanted to somehow say, well, modern science is sort of a European thing. I mean, before the renaissance, other parts of the world, including the Islamic world actually was the center of science, but in the modern period, it’s been the west that took off. So my thing was, well, what might happen if the best of the East and the best of the West cross-fertilized? There would be some hybrid vitality. Some “wunderkind”, some wonder child perhaps born from that. So to get back to how I think about myself, so I’m essentially a researcher in Modern Mindfulness. So you need to know about two things. Since it’s these two worlds. You have to have an experiential background in contemplative practice. And you have to have scientific chops. You have to be good at math and a bunch of other things that make you a good scientist. So I decided to devote my life to developing those two directions within one person so that I could be in an ideal position to help the modern mindfulness movement. So I would say that’s how I think about myself.

So you’re asking a teacher and a researcher of Modern Mindfulness what about this rapid cultural change? What about the fear of the future? What about the sense that the old things aren’t working? Uh, what about this pervasive unfulfillment? And yeah. Hell yeah!

Thal:

[Laughing]

Shinzen Young:

A modern mindfulness researcher would have a lot to say about that. Actually it’s pretty much just a couple of things that cover all of the above actually. Um, if I had to pick, of the different things, if I had to pick the first dimension that I would respond to in terms of how you define the modern existential crisis, I would say unfulfillment or not broadly, deeply and intensely happy. A lack of being broadly, deeply and intensely happy might sum it all up. In the sense that fear is a form of being unhappy. It’s an uncomfortable inner state. So it’s a form of suffering. And certainly part of happiness is reducing suffering. The sense of the difficulty managing change and particularly unpredictable change. Um, well that’s actually a form of suffering also. Um, so really that managing change is part of being happy. So I still put it under the rubric of Happy. It’s interesting when you said the first thing that Thal said was the old ways aren’t working anymore. So, you know, the first thing that came to my mind is “the old ways never worked”. That was the first sentence that came up in talk space. The old ways never worked. Ever, actually. East, west, ancient, modern, they sort of worked. And sort of worked is okay, but I think we can do a lot better in the modern era, the information era. I don’t want to say things that might offend people, but I seem to end up doing it anyway.

Adrian:

Do it anyway.

Thal:

Please, go ahead.

Shinzen Young:

A lot of the old ways, not all, but at least the old ways in terms of post Neolithic humans, maybe Paleolithic or whatever proceeded that. That may be a different conversation, but, and this isn’t all of the old ways, but a lot of the old ways were ways of being happy. So they sort of worked. I mean they sort of make you happy. Um, you’ll notice I mentioned three dimensions of happiness, for an individual. How broadly happy they are, how deeply happy they are and how intensely happy they are. There could be a fourth dimension, which is the scope of happiness. How many individuals are to what degree broad, deep and intensely happy? And that would be of course a universal metric for happiness on this planet. Without loss of generality. Well, actually maybe with some loss of generality. So we’re going to just limit the conversation to human happiness. Happiness of nonhuman species is important, but that’s complicated to say nothing of speculations about other types of sentient beings in the Verse, the multiverse, whatever, however big this thing really is, which is I’m guessing probably much bigger than we can currently imagine. But in any event that’s speculative. So just limiting to humans on this planet. Basically we’ve got four dimensions to happiness. And so I warned you I have this dimensional way of thinking about things. By the way, that’s an example of what happens when you’re thinking process is profoundly informed by the spirit of science. That’s one of the skills you learn as a scientist is how to look at a complex phenomenon. And diagonalime the Matrix, find the eigenvalues, find the basic atoms, components, primes, canonical dimensions, whatever you want. These all mean the same thing essentially in science. Well prime is in number theory, but it’s analogous. So in any event, the goal is to optimize happiness. And I would claim that Modern Mindfulness as I describe it, is key to optimizing happiness. So that means the greatest number of people with the greatest intensity, breadth and depth of happiness, that’s what we want. So I mentioned that “Cheng-ming”, I try to be very precise about names. So I have a Periodic Table of Happiness Elements. You can find it on the Internet, although I revise it from time to time. It’s not as big as a periodic table of chemical elements, but it is actually amazingly similar in some ways. So one dimension I call how broad your happiness is. And there’s five sort of basic columns and then there’s four rows and they measure what I call depth of happiness. But as with any technical term, you shouldn’t associate breadth, depth, intensity with what they may mean elsewhere. They have to be defined, you know, within the particular scientific theory.

Adrian:

Contextual.

Shinzen Young:

So easiest to understand how broad your happiness is by specific example. So my sort of five pillars of heaven are “relief from suffering”, “increase in fulfillment”, um “understanding yourself at all levels” and we’ll get into the levels in a minute. “Mastering behavior, mastering actions” that could be sort of performance skills. But in the Buddhist tradition, they have an interesting thing. They use the word “skill” to refer to a one’s character. You have skillful character skills, or you have a skillful character, unskillful character. It’s what other traditions would call good and bad. A good actions, bad actions. But another way to think of it is skillful unskillful. It’s ort of the same thing. So I riff on the Buddhist ambiguity of skill to include both things like academic skills, performance skills, artistic skills. Um, those are forms of mastery of action. And there are how you, there’s how you carry yourself in the world. What kind of person you are in your interpersonal interactions. Were you an admirable person by your own cannons or the canons of the culture that you identify with. So all of those are mastery of object of actions. You’ll notice that the first three pillars sort of represent experience, right? Uh, experiencing physical, mental, emotional pain with less suffering. Experiencing physical, mental, emotional pleasure with more fulfillment. Um, understanding yourself at all levels from the biographical to the transpersonal. These are all sort of might be described as on the sensory side of experience. But I believe that how we act in the world is also a valid dimension of happiness. I have a lot of backup on that starting with Aristotle and actually most of the religions of the world. So acting skillfully or mastery of action, that’s dimension number or that’s column number four. Column number five is “service”. Maybe not everyone thinks of that first. Uh, you know, if you’re in chronic pain, all you think about is the first aspect of happiness. It’s all you care about. That’s why people get, have problems with drugs. Problems with drugs are action in the world. Now that’s mastery of behavior. So in any event, um, service, if you’re in chronic pain, being of service to others may not be the first thing that jumps up unless you’re really an extraordinary person. And every once in a while you get that. Someone that you know, that’s how they cope with it. But as people mature, they will come to see that it’s quite natural for a human being to derive immense happiness from serving others, in various ways. I would want for myself and for anyone else that we can check off all those columns that we couldn’t give them a way of reducing suffering, elevating fulfillment, understanding themselves at all levels, and making positive behavior changes. And ultimately a happiness based on a larger identity that one serves. So that’s the dimension of how broad, it’s a kind of qualitative dimension in a sense. Um, and I believe a complete positive psychology needs to take into account all those aspects. What I call level is not what you might think. It’s not how strong. It is how obvious a certain form of happiness is. The most obvious form of relief from suffering it is get rid of the condition that’s causing the suffering. But what if you can’t do that? Well, maybe I can cover over the symptoms somehow. So without loss of generality, uh, if I have pain, it’s caused by a disease, well, cure my disease. Good. We’ve taken care of the situation. Oh, you can’t cure my disease. Okay, well then give me palliative care that covers it over. Good. Now, no problem. Still still have the object of condition, but my perception of uncomfortable body-mind experience has been removed. Oh, the drugs cause addiction and eventually don’t work. Doc, what can you do for me? I’m afraid what they’re going to say is learn to live with it. Which may not be a very satisfying answer. Try not to get addicted and learn to live with it. Um, there are deeper levels of relief that are not obvious to people and entail mindful awareness skills. You have to have mindful awareness skills to get those less obvious forms of relief.

Analogously, there are less obvious forms of fulfillment, less obvious forms of self knowledge, uh, less obvious forms of service, et cetera, et cetera. So the deepest part of my grid is the least obvious. Those also happen to be the ones for which mindfulness skills are critical. Can’t get them without mindfulness skills. And they also are the ones that work when nothing else works. It’s the heavy guns. So how intense a person’s happiness is, well if you imagine this sort of two dimensional grid, then each box, you know, as a certain height, creating a three dimension, uh, sort of a two dimensional, um, profile. Right? How happy am I? How intense is my happiness? Oh, I should back up just to make it tangible with what I mean. The deepest level of relief is the ability to escape into the pain, be it physical, emotional, mental, or all three at once. The ability to escape into it is the ability to experience it with perfect concentration, clarity, and equanimity. And we can train you to that ability. By you, I mean anyone who’s willing to put in the time and energy. We can train you to a level where, even if the discomfort is very intense, the suffering is manageable. So it’s not obvious to the general public that that’s a viable option. But Modern Mindfulness says absolutely. And it’s just a click away. Well, maybe I’m not in pain, but I’m not deeply fulfilled. Well, the obvious, uh, if I want more fulfillment, what’s the obvious? Well, more wealth, more power, reputation, sexual prowess, just you name it. Something in the object of world, um, status, the mate and rate. Now that’s a legitimate dimension of happiness. There’s nothing in my value system that says it’s wrong to passionately pursue success in the world. So these are obvious. Of course what happens? I see this all the time because being in the science field, we interact with wealthy people of the Silicon Valley ilk. And the reason they’re interested in people like me is they’re millionaires, sometimes billionaires, and it really didn’t make them that much happier. And it’s like what’s next? So there’s a next! But it’s not obvious. And mindfulness skills to it, concentration, clarity, equanimity, trainable attentional skills, turn out to be key to that deeper aspect of fulfillment. So the normal paradigm is, what I want is intensity, variety, and duration of pleasure that’s going to fulfill me. So actually that’s not entirely incorrect. It’s just not complete. What you really want is to have complete experience of pleasure. Um, I’m going to define complete experience of pleasure to be completely analogous to complete experience of pain. Just a different category of sensory phenomenology. So when you escape into the pleasure, um, you bring so much concentration, clarity and equanimity to it that it provides you with the maximum perception of fulfillment. So I sometimes talk about the Imelda Marcos phenomenon. So she was, uh do you know?

Adrian:

No.

Shinzen Young:

So interesting generation thing. She was the wife of the president of the Philippines who was a dictator that was president for a long time. Marcos. I guess set up after World War 2 by the U S. Anyway, his wife was named Imelda and she became an object of ridicule. It’s really sad, um, because it’s not just her, it’s, it’s everyone. She just was extreme and it got out and, um, therefore it became sort of a thing. But, but she had thousands of pairs of shoes. All of them of the, you know, most expensive worldwide, you know, kind of thing. Um, so if I have some nice thing, uh, maybe I’m a guy, so it’s not going to be the shoes probably, but something I really liked, uh, well let’s just say, an expensive meal. So the tastes are, the actual sensory event is putatively worth a lot of money. How much fulfillment I derive from that intensity, duration and variety of pleasure that is this banquet. How much fulfillment I derive is not just a function of the sensory experience, it’s a function of how completely present I am to that sensory experience. Well, for that you need concentration, clarity, equanimity skills. You have to distinguish things. You have to stay, keep your attention on the tastes and whatever. And you have to not grasp on moment by moment to the pleasure. Because if you grasp on microscopically, you won’t be fully present for the next moment and the next moment and the next moment. So the key to fulfillment, yes, in part it relates to circumstances. Yes, in part it relates to intensity, variety and duration of pleasure. But let’s say that you have very mild pleasures. Um, good news. With mindfulness skills, you can derive enormous fulfillment from that. Bad news, if you conspicuously lacked those skills. If one pair of expensive shoes doesn’t fulfill you. So pleasure times mindfulness. If the mindfulness is zero, fulfillment equals pleasure times mindfulness to a linear approximation. It’s a much more complicated function. No doubt. I don’t want to sound mathematically illiterate. That’s my ego, my pride. To a linear approximation. We could say that fulfillment equals pleasure times mindfulness. Unfortunately, if mindfulness is at zero, that means one pair of expensive shoes gives you zero fulfillment. 10 times zero is still zero. 2,000 times zero is still zero. So there’s a bad news thing and that’s the Imelda Marcos phenomenon, which is no one taught her how to be fulfilled systematically. So for the deeper version of fulfillment, um, mindfulness skills are critical, then there’s understanding yourself. Well what’s the self? There’s the biographical self, there’s the archetypal self. You mentioned some influence of depth psychology? Would that be Freudian and Jungian idea of depth psychology?

Thal:

Mostly Jungian.

Shinzen Young:

Jungian Depth Psychology. Yeah. Okay. So that deals with what I would call the archetypal self.

Thal:

Yes.

Shinzen Young:

Or the collective unconscious. What have you. That’s a deeper level of self than the surface biography self. But I would distinguish two more levels of self understanding that are not obvious, that critically involve mindfulness skills. One is to understand yourself as a sensory system. That’s the path to enlightenment done in Theravada practice, south-east Asian practice Then there’s understanding yourself as a kind of primordial perfection. That would be your “Soulspace” to riff on the name of the podcast. So that would be the deepest level. Now that’s the paradigm for enlightenment that you get in Chan or at least some forms of Chan. Aka Zen, Tzun, Tien, different names in East Asia. Tien is the Vietnamese pronunciation. A lot of that deals with what they call the “huo-xing”, the Buddha-nature, uh, “Gou zi yuo huo xing”. You know, “gou zi” is a dog. “Yuo”, have. “huo xing”, the Buddha nature. “Yo”, or. “Wu”, not have. Would be pretty similar in Cantonese, I’m thinking. That was a famous Koan or a Zen question. Yes or no, dog have Buddha nature? So what did the Buddha nature is the Mahayana formulation for a kind of primordial perfection that is literally our soulspace. That is the deepest and broadest sense of self. So in the Mahayana and extending from that Vajrayana like Tibet, the “mi jiong”, you know, the Esoteric Tantric Buddhism, in those traditions, enlightenment, not always, but often is formulated, not in the sense of something you achieve, but something you notice. That that nature was always there. So that’s your deepest level of understanding. So we, if you untangle yourself as a sensory experience, that leads to a liberated experience of the space of self. It becomes a place to live, not a place where you are imprisoned. So that’s a South-east Asian paradigm. And we could take a Trans-himalayan slash East-Asian paradigm of well. But below that, all along there was never any need to train, um, because of the nature, the deepest sense of self. But the problem is, although there’s no need to train, there’s still a need to train because it’s just an idea until you notice it. The “it” meaning this primordial perfection. So in any event, to summarize, if we think of Modern Mindfulness, so you asked me and I’m a Modern Mindfulness researcher slash teacher. So I guess you call it faculty. I’m part of the Modern Mindfulness faculty. I teach and I do research the research. Yeah. So in any event, um, you, you asked me as a Modern Mindfulness teacher, researcher how would I respond to the crisis of meaning, etc. And then you gave me the meaning of the crisis of meaning for you. So I would summarize it by saying, um, that the old ways sort of work and we don’t even have to get rid of the old ways, but there’s a larger way that either replaces the old ways or is in some sort of detente with the old ways or maybe even a complementarity, depending. So the new way… Well we’ll contrast with the old way. The old way is, here’s a list of beliefs. Here is a list of social customs. Here’s a list and in some cases and amazingly elaborate list of what’s right and wrong. Now keep your nose clean. Follow this list. And depending on the tradition, it will be general guidelines or it could control literally every moment of your life. My background is Jewish.

Thal:

Same.

Shinzen Young:

You’re Islamic, you know.

Thal:

Yeah.

Shinzen Young:

You know what that is. So here’s the rules, here’s the customs, here’s the beliefs, join up and you’ll be happy. And it actually sort of works. Some people are freaked out by fundamentalist religion. I’m not freaked out by it. I think I understand it. To be honest, I may not like it, but I do think I understand it. Um, it sort of works. And it probably works better than the angst of the modern crisis in meaning. Okay. Relative to that, those people are happy, but it’s happiness at a price to be honest. Um, first of all, they’re not as happy as they could be. Secondly, the way they found to be happy in some cases precludes them being happier in a broader way. In some cases, not always, but the worst is, the list of rules don’t agree. The list of customers don’t agree. The list of beliefs don’t agree. So I trot out my Tanakh, the Old Testament, you trot out your Quran. The Mormons trot out the book of Mormon, which is later than both and in their claim. Therefore, the final revelation. [Chuckle] On the other hand Nichiren Shōshū will trot out the Lotus Sutra. And Pure Land Buddhism will translate and we’ll trot out the Maha-Saccaka. What is it called? Maha-Saccaka sutra anyway. It’s not just the Abrahamic religions that have scripturally based fundamentalism. You can find it in certain forms of Buddhism and it pervades Hinduism. Um, anyway, be that as it may, that sort of works. But the biggest problem is, besides the problems I mentioned, is it sometimes doesn’t agree with science and it caught, it causes an us versus them mentality. Um, that then leads to say, jihads what have you. And a lot of other problems. So it’s sorta worked and we have to respect it for working in the way that it works. But to be honest, I see a broader paradigm of happiness that number one, works better, and number two, does not necessarily preclude the old ways. Uh, I have born again, Christians. I certainly have a lot of Catholics. I have practicing Orthodox Jews that come to my retreats. I do retreats in Israel. And we have a lot of orthodox Jews that come. And no one has any problem with anything. Because it’s Modern Mindfulness, it’s not “Stealth Buddhism”. Um, so in any event, if you want to follow the old way’s fine, but if they really don’t work for you, well we’ve got a larger broader paradigm.

So the new paradigm or perhaps the extended paradigm, if we want to include the old ways, uh, it’s so cool because if the old ways really don’t work for you, then okay, well there’s another dimension and it’s consonant with science. In fact, it can coevolve with science. Um, but it doesn’t involve these lists of norms. It has some conceptual baggage, but minimum. The minimum conceptual baggag is there’s an attentional skill, or you could call it a “mind power” if you want. But that’s mind is a very ambiguous word. When I present this stuff in Chinese though, one of the…I see you have my book, the Science of Enlightenment. So we’re translating it into Chinese now. By we, I mean me and a couple people born in China. So it’s a very interesting conversation because how do you say mindfulness in Chinese? Okay. Um, for modern China, right? Uh, anyway, one of the words, we were thinking, one of the terms that we were thinking of using his “Shin Li”, which is like “Shin”, “Sum” luck? I’m guessing Cantonese here, something like that, right?

Adrian:

Yeah.

Shinzen Young:

Like consciousness strength, right? You could think of it that way, but we call them attentional skills. So there are these attentional skills and they are cultivatable. We do ask you to believe that, but that’s not a big stretch because just try and you’ll see you get better and better. And it’s just like any other strength. You do exercise, your muscles get big. You concentrate and your concentration power elevates. So there are these attentional skills: concentration, sensory clarity, equanimity. The’re cultivatable and in fact, eminently cultivatable you can, you can only get maybe twice as strong, I don’t know. But you can get 10 times as mindful. So there are these cultivatable skills and they are relevant to all types and depths of happiness. Everything on my happiness grid is impacted positively. In other words, happiness is optimized at all levels, not just the deepest level, but the mindfulness skills are related to the surface level of happiness. Also because if being a success in the world in some way is on your happiness checklist, we can show you how systematically cultivating and applying mindfulness skills will make it probable that you will be successful. So the main message here is, in a sense what might be called a bigger way to be happy or if the old ways really don’t work for you, then you would think of it as an alternative way to be happy. And what we ask is that you allocate a certain amount of time and energy to developing these attentional skills and that you also apply those skills in daily life to achieving your happiness goals. If a person does that, we can’t guarantee, but we could be like a doctor. We can say, if you establish the structure of practice, retreat, practice life, practice, you get support, you give support those are sort of my four pillars of practice. If you establish that structure in your life, it’s like a health, it’s like a fitness regimen except it’s a psycho-spiritual fitness regimen. But it’s no more demanding than a fitness regimen. That’s why you can be hopeful because there was a time when no one worked out. No one jogged. I remember the transition. I can remember buying my first pair of running shoes because as people say, everyone’s jogging now, what the hell is jogging? Well, you just run. Well, what’s the point? And then well, turns out there’s a big point to it. And no one was doing it, but then people were talking about it and so it’s like, oh, okay. I got some running shoes and I can remember running around the block and getting winded instantly. It’s like, this sucks. I don’t want to do that. But then no, you just keep doing it. You get better at it. And sure enough, in a month I was running a couple miles. Now I was in my twenties. And you can do the math on that one when that would have been, um, so there was a time when no one had systematic fitness training. Now a lot of people do. Um, it’s not unreasonable to think that there’ll be a time in the future when a lot of people have systematic mind strength training or a “mindfulness training”. Uh, so, um, the hopeful news is that if you’re willing to establish a sort of psycho spiritual fitness regimen and I would say that the single most important factor for that is to have a competent personal mindfulness coach.

Um, if you want one, just go to unifiedmindfulness.com. Go to support. Send an email to my main trainer, Julianna Raye, and she’ll get you set up. Um, now of course, that’s not the only game in town. There’s many, many, many mindfulness programs. But as I say, I, one of my great sources of joy is that I can say, if you want to have a personal mindfulness coach, now you may have to pay for that. You pay for a therapist, you pay for a competent workout coach. Now her people do a lot of pro bono work because this isn’t a for-profit industry, but the most important pillar is a competent personal coach. You give them your happiness list. Here’s my checklist. Here’s my sources of suffering. Here’s where I want to be more fulfilled. Do I want to understand myself psychologically? Okay, do I want to go a little, a little deeper? Okay. Um, here are the behavior changes I want, et cetera. You give them your laundry list for happiness. And then they guide you in the process of achieving that goal. Now, just as a personal health regimen, you have to keep it up your whole life. I just came from the gym. I’m 75 years old. I mean my body is very deteriorating, you know, relative to when I was 25 years old. But you keep it up for your whole life as, as best as you can. Now, the thing about physical health though is it deteriorates with time. It’s an up an uphill battle, right? That eventually you lose. You get injured, you get sick, you die. But the psycho spiritual dimension of growth works exactly the opposite. The older you get, and the more feeble your mind and body become, the more powerful your underlying spiritual vitality. Thank God because if it didn’t work that way, I’d be up Shit Creek without a paddle. So the good news is that if you’re willing to do that, and as I mentioned, you know, if I had to say one thing is get a coach because the coach knows the model, knows the turf and if they’ve been, at least, if they’ve been certified by my organization, they’re certified to a certain level. And if they can handle the levels of happiness you want, then they refer you to a coach that can. Let’s say you want classical enlightenment as per the path of purification described in Sri Lanka in the sixth century. It’s like, that’s my happiness. I want stream entry. Well, I’m not saying every, every unified mindfulness coach has the confidence to lead you there, but plenty of them do.

But that’s probably not on your happiness list. It’s probably “I just want to have less mental turmoil and less emotional distress” or “I want to do better in school” or “improve my tennis game”. So that’s where we start. We start there. But the paradigm, the perspective that we give you and the attentional skills that we impart and the focusing strategies that you can apply as you go about daily life. All of that is the same essentially, regardless of what your goals are. So you can, the incredible thing about modern mindfulness is it is a upaya for the modern age. Upaya is a Buddhist concept. How do you reach people? Most people don’t care about enlightenment. Actually, a lot of people may not even care about being a good person.

Thal:

That’s true.

Shinzen Young:

I’ve actually had students that were criminals. Professional criminals. Now I can’t, um, you know, I couldn’t affirm their lifestyle, but I taught them. I will teach them and because I’m setting the stage for possible lifestyle changes, I’m, I’m, I’m fine with that. Um, not everyone even wants to be a good person, but everyone has something they want. And whatever it is, a competent mindfulness coach… we can’t guarantee that they’ll deliver it. But we can say with time, if you keep up the regimen for the duration, it’s likely at some point in your life, likely that in fact, yeah, you’ll sort of get that. But as if that weren’t powerful enough, the same attentional skills and the same focus strategies that you would use to deconstruct your back pain, you can also use that to deconstruct your anxiety or your confusion. And so a Modern Mindfulness teacher is a kind of a device that transforms the world’s small concept of happiness as a goal to this huge concept of happiness. But the same skills and techniques are applied for all types and levels of happiness. So by the aesthetic canons of science, it is an extremely powerful and elegant system.

Adrian:

Shinzen, we’d love to hear some of the latest research that you’re involved in. You mentioned the research side. So how that blends into your current work and also just, I mean it’s the name of your book, the Science of Enlightenment. We want to hear about the path of Enlightenment. Is it for everybody? And how is that connected to the work that you’re currently doing?

Shinzen Young:

Well, enlightenment means different things to different people. I mean, if you just go to Wikipedia disambiguation page, you’ll see how many things have been called enlightenment. I mean, there’s a period in European history that’s called the enlightenment. But this is a different meaning. Um, so if we take enlightenment to mean understanding yourself at the deepest level, then I’m going to say that it’s probably relevant for most people. In the sense that if understanding yourself at all is relevant than understanding yourself at the deepest level would be relevant, I would think as a natural consequence. Because most people want to understand themselves, at least at some level, I’m just extrapolating from that. Then if we take enlightenment to simply mean the deepest level, then that’s relevant to most people because that’s just the next step after the next step of understanding yourself. It’s also relevant because sooner or later everyone dies. And you might die quickly. Like, you know, just die in bed or you know, something, an accident just takes you out. But a lot of people aren’t going to die quickly. They’re gonna go through a dying process and all the structures that they use to cope will eventually be broken down and stripped away by that dying process or at least a lot of them. In other words, a lot of the surface stuff that constitutes our identity, the surface self that’s getting ripped away in the dying process, I mean like hour by hour, day by day, minute by minute. So a lot of people are going to go through that and there’s a natural.. In all the humans that don’t die quickly really quickly. Anyone that dies consciously is going to have to go through all of the surface levels of self being majorly fucked up and stripped away. So if you have some sense of the part of you that is so deep that it is immune to that. If you have some sense of that before the dying process, then your mortality, the mortality of everyone you care about has a different context. Furthermore, of course, once you understand yourself at that level, you’re able to fully participate in life for the first time as nothing blocking. The doingness of the personality, the somethingness of the self is gone. But the underlying doingness, the verb, the dynamics space, that is the soul that is deeper than an individual’s life and death. So if you are able to have that way before you physically die, well, that’s really the deepest and most central dimension of human happiness. So I would say, yeah, it’s relevant and it’s feasible. So it’s important to realize, I repeat, enlightenment is used in different ways by different people. So here what I’m talking about is what in the Southeast Asian tradition is called stream entry. And what in East Asia is called seeing your nature “jian shin”. Could the average householder, average might not be the word, but, uh, generally a householder, someone that has family that had that has a career, job, is it feasible that in their lifetime, that level of enlightenment, uh, could be achieved? Yeah, it’s feasible. But you have to establish and maintain the psycho-spiritual health regimen that I mentioned. See as I mentioned, for physical health. It’s a losing battle. But for psycho spiritual health that older you get that the more experience you have, the closer you get to this liberation. And you can call it liberation or enlightenment. They call it enlightenment because there’s a kind of intuitive understanding that arises. But you can call it liberation because there’s a freedom from the limited identity. So first levels of liberation enlightenment are feasible and relevant for most people, I would say. Now, full enlightenment, full liberation, that’s actually a very different critter. So I expect that a significant proportion of people that participate in my version of this training and keep it up for their whole life will get at least that initial level, but maybe not quickly and maybe not suddenly, but with time, gradually it’s probable. So that gives you a little bit of a reality check. Now, there’s full liberation. That means the full braking of the identity with the mind body process. That is a different critter. So stream entry, it’s all over the place. Uh, you’ve met, all of you have met or interacted with people, whether you knew it or not, that were stream enterers by my criteria in any way. The problem is different teachers have different criteria, right. Arhat, I mean, I spent my life in this field and I lived where it came from. Asia. Yeah. I met a few Asian masters that I think we’re in that ballpark. But that’s in 50 years and it was just a few. If you’re interested, I can give you the names, you can look up. Look them up and so forth. But complete liberation, that’s a whole other thing. But an initial taste that satisfies you for the duration, that’s feasible. Problem is, uh, you remember, I only said it’s probable and I said it might take quite a while. Um, so most people’s experience, initial experience of meditating is “I can’t do this, my mind wanders, I can’t concentrate”. Um, and very quickly they just give it up because there’s not a quick reward, in many cases. So it takes a lot of maturity to stay with it until it all starts to make sense. And you start to get some tangible… I mean, people obviously get some benefits or no one would stay with it. So we were talking about like the opioid epidemic. It’s on my mind because some of our research is probably going to be directed towards that clinical population. We’re at the University of Arizona. But we’re partnering with the major addiction recovery center in the state of Arizona. So it’s on my mind. So, heroin, man, I mean, try it two times…you know, two, three times, I guess you’re hooked, right? That’s instantly addictive. And it changes your whole life for the truly horrible in a truly horrible way. So the idea would be, well, what’s the diametric opposite of that? Something that very quickly gives you fulfillment, independent of conditions. And now, oh, I want more of that, but this isn’t an addiction. This is actually a freedom from addiction. It’s equanimity. It’s a non-grasping around pleasure. So the idea is that if we could enhance the training protocol that currently exists, which is, as I mentioned, retreat practice, life practice, get support, give support. If people want details on that, they can go to my web resources. What I mean by those things.

But if in addition to those components, people often when we start to talk about technology enhanced, whatever, they think, “oh you guys think that you can just zap people into enlightenment?” No… Not exactly. Um, but what we think is it may be possible with technology to enhance the training so that people start to get more dramatic results quicker. A lot quicker so that anyone that has an interest in this tries it a few times and it actually works. It works the way. Maybe not the way it works after 50 years. Because I’ve got 50 years. That’s, that’s a bittersweet experience. The sweet part is this shit works and yeah, everything they said would happen happened. The bitter part is you look out at the world and how many people put in 50 years of that kind of training. So if in five months, five weeks, people could get a taste of what this can really deliver, that would change the course of history precipitously for the better everywhere. Particularly if what I’m describing is folded into standard medicine. So my plot, so to speak, what is a good plot. Okay. in other words is my strategy is, uh, to um, use neuromodulation technology to not zap people into mindfulness but to induce a state of neuroplasticity where in the mindfulness training becomes more efficient and therefore the rewards are more immediate. And then it’s a global viral meme and you get it just because you visited a doctor at a hospital stay. Or you got addicted to opiates and now you’re in a recovery program. But the recovery program after we’ve detoxed you, provides you with a techno boosted mindfulness training regimen and then you maintain that to maintain sobriety. That would be one example. So what we want to do is take all of the, any major area of clinical medicine, create a techno boosted training program. Not, not some zap that we claim is going to take you into some state, but something that creates an environment wherein you can train more effectively. Um, and you get that by contact with medicine. In other words, science. Wherever you are in the world. And since medicine is medicine everywhere, it doesn’t matter whether it’s in the People’s Republic of China or under the Ayatollahs in Tehran, medicine is still medicine. And since these interventions don’t have any religious component to them, there shouldn’t be any pushback. So the idea would be to weave…to sort of enlarge what medicine does from relieving suffering by curing diseases or relieve suffering by palliating symptoms. That’s what medicine now does. So a larger view of medicine is medicine cures suffering. Or medicine allows you to be happy at the deepest and broadest formulation. Uh, and that’s what medicine delivers. So this would then make optimal happiness part of all human cultures. So that’s the dream. That’s the holy grail. Now, the trick is, are there neuromodulations that can do this? A lot of people claim that they have that. To which I say bullshit. And here’s why. If we really had that or if we have had that for a while, see, one of the things about sciences is that causes have consequences. So the kind of technology of enlightenment that I’m envisaging would dramatically change the world for the better. Look around at everything that people are offering that says, hey, this is it. I’m going to microdose you with the psilocybin. But we’re gonna do this new expensive neurofeedback. We’re going to blah, blah, blah. Okay, fine. Is it a reasonable hypothesis that knowledge of this intervention will in the next century, fundamentally change the name of the game on this planet from competition for limited resources to… Well, yeah, there’s that, but there’s also how much fulfillment you get from what you got and turns out that’s even more important. Will these technologies end war, more or less. Will they end social injustice, more or less? Will they end violence? Well I said wars, crime. Okay. Is that, it’s this super neurofeedback or this microdosing of psilocybin. Is this all we need? This plus a hundred years essentially this planet is now Heavan on earth? Extrapolate. I don’t think so! Not even remotely. I don’t know. But maybe, that plus mindfulness plus a hundred years, but maybe we don’t have a hundred years. Um, so I’m asking for something more dramatic. A lot more dramatic. We don’t know if it exists, but it’s certainly worth looking for. And if you were to ask me to make my best candidate and best candidate doesn’t mean I think this is gonna work. It’s just the best out of everything I’ve seen so far. But I’m not claiming it will work. And I’m also not claiming it’s safe, by the way. So very careful about claims because people make claims. Irresponsible claims. It really frosts my buns. But my best guess for where to start is ultrasonic neuromodulation. Low intensity focused ultrasound directed to ego hubs, grasping hubs that could perhaps relax that a little bit and create the situation where people can get dramatic results fairly quickly. That would be my best candidate. But that’s not saying Shinzen Young thinks it’s a good candidate. It’s just the most promising I’ve seen so far. We have a lab called SEMA lab at the University of Arizona that stands for Sonication Enhanced Mindful Awareness training lab. Um, and that’s what we’re looking into at this time.

Adrian:

Thank you for sharing that.

Thal:

Wow.

Shinzen Young:

Uh, you guys should have Jay on too. He’s my PI. He’s the director of the lab. I’m in charge of a protocol development.

Adrian:

It feels tangible too because you’ve also identified a timeframe, right? Like the goal of within the next century, you know, would be ideal. Um, and then also the imminent like needing to accelerate this too. There’s a sense of urgency of finding that technology to speed up what has a proven track record, the methodologies and, but then to augment it with the modern…[chuckling] We started this conversation with what modern means. But it sounds like it’s, you know, yet to be discovered. So there’s an excitement to this type of work.

Shinzen Young:

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, yeah, if people are interested, they can go to youtube and find Jay Sanguinetti. And he talks about the, what the work that we’re doing.

Thal:

Um, I’m still thinking about the word enlightenment. An, is it for everyone? And is it a goal that we should all aspire to? Um, I think it’s just, I don’t have a specific question around enlightenment, but maybe how is it relevant for our generation? Uh, I really don’t have a specific question. What I’m thinking about is thinking about some friends who would listen to the word enlightened and be like, “pfff” like really? I mean, do I have to sit… Yeah.

Shinzen Young:

Hence, you don’t have to call it enlightenment and maybe we shouldn’t call it enlightenment. I called it enlightenment because that’s just what I called it. Right. But, um, when I go to the People’s Republic of China, probably this year, I’m going to just call it understanding yourself at the deepest level.

Thal:

Yes. I think that answers my question. Yeah. Understanding ourselves is part of the meaning crisis really.

Shinzen Young:

Sure.

Thal:

Absolutely. Yeah.

Shinzen Young:

So there’s your answer, right. And this word is used to translate certain Asian terms, but we can get you there without calling it enlightenment.

Thal:

Right.

Shinzen Young:

Um, I would just call it understanding yourself at the deepest level and that makes, that makes it normal. That normalizes it. So you’re right. Uh, enlightenment, even though it’s on my book is actually not a good word moving forward.

Thal:

Anything else you want to ask?

Shinzen Young:

Well you got a lot more than 70 minutes. But use it as you wish, you know, chop it up. Parcel it out.

Thal:

Yeah. The way I see it. This is an opportunity. So anything you say is our gems really. So thank you. Thank you.

Adrian:

Are there, are there any teachers like currently that you have a relationship with? Dead or alive? I was actually curious because, you know, I see you…

Shinzen Young:

Do you mean that they function as a teacher.

Adrian:

Yeah, you’re a student to them. Yeah having that relation.

Shinzen Young:

Not at this time, no. But we’re sort of co-teacher’s to each other. So in that sense, I would think the dialoguing that I do with other teachers, we’re all sort of teaching each other at this point. Um, but I don’t have a formal relationship with anyone. Neither do I think of the people that utilize my programs as being my disciples or, I mean we call them students, but, um, it’s really more of a, yeah. I don’t, I don’t have that, uh, Asian lineage thing. That is very important for cultural reasons in that part of the world. But you know, I’m not going to have successors and I encourage people to just utilize any resources that are available that are competent in this area. So I guess because I don’t look upon myself as a teacher in the sense of, you know, um, do what I say because you know, you have to sorta in some way surrender to me as your teacher. I don’t think of my students in that relationship. So I guess I don’t think I need that relationship with someone else at this point.

Thal:

Actually I have, The Science of Enlightenment in an audio book and I’ve like been listening to it on and off. And there was a story that you mentioned speaking again of, and I love the word enlightenment. You, uh, one of your teachers, you asked him to, um, I hope I’m getting this right. You asked him to teach you an advanced form of meditation. I really loved that story and maybe you can share that and, um, like the experience of like enlightenment moment.

Shinzen Young:

Um, can you, uh, refresh me on the details of the story?

Thal:

I think you were in, I don’t know, I think you were probably in Japan, I’m not sure. And and it was a zen teacher and you ask them to give you an advanced…

Shinzen Young:

Is this like I was doing breath than I wanted…

Thal:

Yes! And you wanted something more advanced and he’s like, really? There are people who have done breath for years.

Shinzen Young:

Well, there’s several parts to that story, but yeah, I was doing the breath and I was going to be leaving Japan. So oh wait, no, I’m conflating the past. Hold it just second. That’s what happens. Um, okay. No, it was not when I was about to leave. I’ve been… Yes. I’d been practicing for several months. Uh, the standard Chan breath counting. And then yeah, I went to him and I asked for a more advanced practice and because he was in, you know, there’s sort of, some of the Zen masters are ferocious. It sounds, uh, sort of, I don’t know, um, romantic or somehow interesting culturally that there would be masters who are ferocious, but I can tell you it gets old really quick, right. Really quick. But that’s a whole other thing. So anyway, yeah, he was like “there have been people who have done 40 years of zen practice…” Yes. In Japanese so it’s even more macho.

Thal:

[laughing]

Shinzen Young:

Yeah. Try to remember the original Japanese. But anyway, it was like, “who do you think you are kid? You just begun to begun to begun”. And it’s true. Now I’ve met people that spent 40 years at the tip of their nose and it worked that, that, that, you know, that did it. Um, but did you want me to say what would the more advanced practice was?

Thal:

Yes.

Shinzen Young:

Well, it wasn’t really a more advanced practice. That’s sort of the whole point. It was a different practice.

Thal:

Yes.

Shinzen Young:

It was self inquiry in the Buddhist form. Answer this question: who are you? Which is of courses, you’re being asked to understand yourself at the deepest level. So it all comes full circle, right?

Thal:

Absolutely. Yeah. It’s, um, it’s interesting because when you said it, there’s this romantic idea and it gets old really fast. I just went to a 10-day Vipassana and going through the practice everyday, they today is not romantic at all. It’s painful. So I admire your dedication and those years that you spent, I mean…

Shinzen Young:

Yeah, but I hope that you continue with formal practice or with systematic practice. You may or may not want to work in that tradition.

Thal:

Right.

Shinzen Young:

I actually lived at Mr. Goenka’s Center in India and it’s a wonderful, powerful way of working.

Thal:

Yeah.

Shinzen Young:

Okay.

Adrian:

It’s a real pleasure.

Shinzen Young:

It’s a wrap.

Thal:

Thank you.

Adrian:

Thank you.

#25: Raising Consciousness Through Sound with Alexandre Tannous

So many elements of our human experience affect our consciousness, including sound. Classical music, indigenous forms of drumming, African desert blues, or the mere sound of silence produce different feelings and thoughts. It can shape our inner life in significant ways — in fact, awareness around how we consume sound shapes the way we create meaning and how we live our life.

Alexandre Tannous has been active as a musician, educator, composer, and an ethnomusicologist. For the past 13 years he has been researching the therapeutic and esoteric properties of sound. He has developed a protocol he calls “Sound Meditation” which uses specific sounds to help people tap into the self-healing capacities that we all possess. We discuss Gnosticism, the physics of sound, and how music is weaponized and used to hijack consciousness for religious and capitalistic agendas. Alexandre holds a Bachelor of Music in Theory and Composition, a Master of Arts degree in Music Education as well as a Master of Arts and a Master of Philosophy degrees in Ethnomusicology from Columbia University. His works are frequently performed in the United States, Europe, and in Asia. He currently works as a sound therapist, researcher and educator. 

Highlights:

  • How Sound Hijacks Consciousness
  • Therapeutic Properties of Sound
  • How to Incorporate Sound into Your Spiritual Practice

Resources:

Listen:

Poem Inspired by This Episode

Full Transcript

Adrian:

Welcome to the show.

Alexandre :

Thank you. Very good to be here.

Adrian:

Yeah, maybe a good place to start… just give us a bit of a background of how you first fell in love with all these subjects that you’re so passionate about. Sound and consciousness. And all the things that you’re involved in.

Alexandre:

Yeah. Well, ever since I was a teenager I was attracted to esoteric knowledge, occult knowledge. And I have to define occult here because most people think automatically of evil and dark staff. No, not necessarily. Occult is simply the hidden that which is around but hidden in a way because people don’t have the right tools to perceive and understand it. And interested in meditation and eastern philosophies and the psyche and why the human experience is going on and so on and so forth. And one thing will always lead to another. And, but the most important element here is curiosity. I’ve always had the curiosity to know things. I didn’t know that they’re there to be known. Uh, of course it’s a long and tricky journey, treacherous sometimes. It’s part of the learning process. Uh, making mistakes is important that these mistakes should be perceived as a stepping stone toward betterment and deeper understanding, realizations and, seeking the truth. Yeah. And this grew over the years and still growing. I’m still a student of variety of different things that most people don’t give attention to. The things that informed me a lot and have been really fascinating for me are certain fields such as hermeticism, the knowledge of Hermes Trismegistus. Gnosticism, the body of knowledge that the Gnostics, those who sought Gnosis experiential knowledge. Nonintellectual knowledge. Embodied knowledge. Knowledge that come out of experience. That’s really important because, um, it also appears in other cultures, ancient cultures and systems. The Gnostics were the people who lived around the time of Christ, um, and sought knowledge. The prototype Gnostics were the scenes. But it’s also something talked about in Kabbalah, Da’ath, is intuitive knowledge as opposed to Yeda, learned intellectual knowledge. And Jnana in Hinduism and Rigpa in Tibetan Buddhism and so on. Other subjects I was interested in and still interested, theosophy the school of Madame Blavatsky. Anthroposophy, the school of Rudolph Steiner, even though he started as an Anthroposophist. Eastern philosophies as well especially specific schools, for example, the Vedanta schools in Hinduism and Dzogchen in Tibetan Buddhism and other esoteric and called philosophies and practices. And Rosicrucianism as well and certain secret societies. Although these have been, or it seems for the most part that they’d been hijacked by other entities and derailed because the fight at the end is about knowledge. Knowledge is the ultimate power. And then absence of knowledge is the absence of power. And as humans wake up, they realize the level of deception and trickery and corruption that’s going on on all levels, especially political and religious, just the usual hypocrisy that’s part of the human condition. And they’re waking up because they’re gaining this knowledge and this knowledge belongs to people and the knowledge went underground, it was preserved in a lot of these fields that I mentioned, but it was preserved up into a point where consciousness is ready to handle this knowledge and people are aware. And I think this is the time where this knowledge is coming back little by little but you need people to be less distracted and to pay attention to it instead of pop culture and stupid media that’s trying to frighten people and to create the inner instability because the manipulation is through entrainment. We can talk about entrainment later on. Yeah. So the search is still going. I love what I explore and it’s now became part of my life’s work. Um, I quit the things I used to do. I’m trained in music. Four degrees over 12 years. I wore different hats when it came to music. Making I studied composition and conducting performance music, education, ethnomusicology. But now I focus all my efforts to do sound research and scientific studies and fieldwork. And I work as a sound therapist, bringing this knowledge to people where one is being awakened from within. One experiences different non ordinary states of consciousness to understand the self. And meditation, contemplation, mindfulness also go hand and hand with working with sound. Yeah.

Thal:

You know, of course, it’s amazing. Your interests are so varied. But kind of two questions come to mind as you were talking. First, you know, when you’re talking about the esoteric knowledge, sort of the experiential knowledge, it’s like hidden in plain sight and as you said, there are a lot of distractions, I guess. I don’t know if we can answer it or I’m just thinking about like what holds us back? Sort of peeling away the layers of the veil. What is it essentially that’s holding back people, you know? Like I know I’m thinking about fear, but I would like to hear your thoughts around that. That’s one question. And the other one is, um, you know, the fact that you are so multifaceted and interested in all these different types of knowledge. What early experiences in your life, was there a certain moment or like an insight that came to you at a young age or an experience that you’d like to share that sort of initiated you in a way?

Alexandre :

Yeah. Um, so yes, fear is the number one element that holds people back. Um, but also fear manifests in various ways. There’s some reticence and some holding back in us realizing who we are ever since the quote unquote fall out of Eden, whatever that story is really about. Where humanity, the human being lost the God, the connection to God, God within, not God outside. I completely disagree with the Abrahamic understanding of the divine. There is no divine outside. It’s a trick. So there’s something within us that does not want us to realize who we are. There is a fear. There is hesitation, but there’s also attachment to the material world. Um, in Hinduism and Buddhism, they talk about Maya, which is the state of infatuation with the material world, with the changing world. And um, we lost who we are in the dream. It’s very important to start to create an analogy here. A dream is like this reality when we fall asleep, for the first few moments we are aware that we are falling asleep and we starting to dream. And some people can control that by doing lucid dreaming on demand. It happens to every person let’s say the person wakes up in the middle of the night, then they go to the bathroom and if they stay latched on that dream, they can hop back on it and continue it. But in the first few moments, few seconds or a minute or two, they’re aware that they’re dreaming. But then as they go on, they lose the self in the dream. They lose who’s having the dream. They lose the fact that this is a dream and it’s not consensual reality and they’re not aware of to what extent and how this dream replaces completely consensual reality up until they wake up again. Whether to go to the bathroom again or to wake up in the morning. And then they realize, oh, that was a dream. This is consensual reality. This reality seems to be working in a similar way where, um, we don’t really understand what reality is. We don’t understand how the psyche, the mind, can create reality, that is, uh, similar to the stream and sometimes could be even more powerful than the dream itself. And, um, when people do Shamanic experiences and take psychedelics, exactly the same process happens, is that they live through a dream, the visionary state that is, that can have an aspect that makes it seem more real than reality itself. So this requires some attention. How can this happen? What is reality? So we become deeply engaged in the dream and invested in, especially when we take our emotions, feelings, and thoughts seriously. And this is where the suffering comes from, is that we’re taking things too seriously. People who are experiencing depression or severe anxiety or PTSD, there’s a different flow of chemicals that happen in their body and that becomes the new trip. And there will be great attachment to the new trip, if we can call it, which is, well I should preface here that feelings, emotions and thoughts and sensations all are induced by chemicals and endogenous chemicals that are secreted in the body. And we run on chemicals. It’s really the human experiences is a human trip and all we do is change it. So we can become addicted to certain things. And that’s why you find a lot of people who are angry all the time. They don’t enjoy being in group and they’re attached to being angry or being sad or feeling self-loathing and so on because of the attachment to the chemicals that their bodies secreted. So the chemicals in the way we invest our energy and we pursue them, that ends up by creating form of reality. And uh, we become attached to that. And that’s the only thing we know and we tend to shy away from that which we don’t know. So if you consider all of these things, then uh, you realize to what extent it’s easy to perpetuate this sense of loss of the connection to the divine that’s within and carry on with life as it’s being fabricated through form of entrainment. Entrainment is when we’re playing music and music starts to affect us and we start to move and sync with it even when we’re not dancing. Entrainment is when people watch a film. And the music in the film is affecting people’s reception to the visuals and the dialogue. It’s very, very important. I wrote for film music and I know how important that is. And also in commercials. Why? Because it changes the inner processes, the brainwave cycles, the heart rate variability, the subtle energy and every aspect of being. Sound, music is immensely powerful when it comes to entrainment because you’re dealing with physics. And the universe is ruled by the laws of physics. We don’t give so much attention to the extent in which consciousness is ruled by the laws of acoustics, a specific branch in physics that deals with the study of sound and vibration. And that’s why within sound and music and all sorts of ceremonies, whether they’re religious, Shamanic, traditional, spiritual, mystical fields and so on and so forth. So we can be kept in this dimension and not have to follow to what we came here to do, which is to unravel the nature of being and to understand who we are. That’s something that people used to do in matriarchy. Um, and they understood this complexity that’s within nature. And there was no science back then. There was natural philosophy. Schools of natural philosophy, which science came out from that. Science suffered a huge setback, became reductionist, materialistic. And then we lost this connection to understanding the value of the mathematical systems that we use to understand the nature of being Fibonacci Series, fractal geometry, the relevance and the importance of Phi. And the most important one is the harmonic overtones series that has always been associated with the creation of the universe. With the tool which gets you to find what God is and where God is. We can talk about this later. So when you consider all of these things, then we can on a deeper level why we’re so attached to being in this dimension to being in this reality. And especially that’s being perpetuated. There is media and everyone’s trying to sell us something and trying to get us to buy things that we don’t need. Consumerism is big and you know, it’s easy to become addicted to these things. Why? Because of the literal dopamine reward when people buy something and you know. Shopaholics do exists and there’s a reason why they exist. Um, mostly because of altering this human experience. Our actions, feelings and thoughts alter the way the body runs on chemicals and that’s what constitutes reality. So, um, we are afraid of realizing the self. There is a sense of fear, hesitation, but also there’s a sense of manipulation and loss and that’s contributing to this. Now what’s changing in people is that they’re getting more and more clues and there’s something growing within us that is creating this more serious than ever a paradigm shift, I believe. And it’s, uh, coinciding with things falling apart on political level, religious level. People are losing faith in book religions. People are resorting to archaic revival, you know, Shamanism and traditions and uh, eastern philosophies, meditation, Yoga or working with sound, taking psychedelics and so on and so forth. Uh, I have to say that not all the time is being used in an efficient, thorough and sensible way, but that’s the human condition. You know, it’s not always optimal and, and uh, we can still be manipulated even though we have serious endeavor to achieve these things. Nonetheless, consciousness has the power to circumvent all of that and still gain a higher and higher ground. But one needs thorough attention to the energy that’s being used to the attention to will awareness to curiosity. The totality of the mindset, what we bring to every experience and to pay attention to the phenomenological aspect of the experience.

Because that is at the end what is needed. The individual’s faculty, resources being invested in something that’s going to make a difference. There is cognitive dissonance though that can hold the person back. And for the people listening, if they don’t know what cognitive dissonance they should look at it, which is basically, if someone tells me something that’s so far outside of what I believe in, what I’ve known, uh, even though that’s a more accurate truth or an upgraded version of the truth, I may reject it because it makes me few so threatened. So that’s serious. And these techniques that are used in a weaponized psychology, weaponize anthropology, weaponized sociology, weaponized music, weaponize faith, and all these things that people tend to become interested in are being used against them because of cognitive dissonance and other faculties that are based on ignorance. And what is the ultimate point here? Well, we’ve derailed because we started prioritizing profit over consciousness and that caused us to become attached to money. Money is a symbol of power, a symbol of survival and safety. And when you have cultures that are promoting reptilian brain interaction, that is, they do that because that makes money. And keeping the, keeping people on the couch, watching the news and the reptilian brain, which is the inner most part of the brain that’s responsible for fight or flight and running the body as a machine without the person having to have the awareness to do that. Then the body becomes a slave to the reptilian brain that wants to protect the person and they become addicted to news because they think that the more they watch, the more they’re being informed in keeping themselves safe and money sings well to that. So at the end we ended up by having completely different relationship with the hardware in the body, pardon me for using these terms, but I do that on purpose. So the computer is now not using the entire parts, but focused on specific parts were mostly left hemisphere these days. We rely so much on education and intelligence and less so the imagination, which is what the right hemisphere deal with, um, imagination and inspiration, the feminine side of the brain versus the left brain being the masculine. So we’re mostly running on left brain with a lot of reptilian brain action. And that creates different reality. And this is what’s causing the big fork on the road now where humanity is starting to become split in two halves. And it will become more and more so. In one part, humanity is waking up and resorting to things that really reveal the true nature of the self, of reality, of the divine within. The archaic methods to seek holistic experience, integral discovery, um, and um, you know, pro-organic farming, permaculture and no GMOs and all of the stuff. And then the other part, the other part of the fork in the road is people are going on with the status quo and think that, oh, things are improving because now we have technology and AI is gonna make things much easier and cheaper. And not thinking of the consequences of how much the dehumanization is going to happen in the Trans-humanistic agenda behind all of that. And, um, the, the danger of having AI that you cannot control and it’s going to upgrade itself and design itself. So it’s a very, very, uh, critical time in humanity. Um, and we can go deeper into this if you want at a later point.

The second question, what made me become interested in all of this? Well I grew up in war in Beirut and parents who immigrated to the states. So I lived through a lot of violence and terror and that made me ask questions that you know, a young person would not usually ask from an early age. And to demystify and the nature of suffering and the madness that can, um, affect people and people start to kill each other over either who’s God is more merciful or which way is best to worship that same God. That’s basically why book religions and the denominations and sect within them, whether Protestant and Catholic, Sunni and Shiites and so on and so forth, kill each other. Basically they’re killing each other over who has the better method to worship Jehovah. And the level of fingers go so far that they think that Christians or Muslims like, oh, these Muslims, I mean Christians or Jews think that, uh, let’s say, Allah, the name of God in Islam is a different God. No, it’s not a different God. It’s the same Jehovah God. So there’s a very deep level of ignorance. Basically what’s what I see happening here is that the same old methods is being used but on steroids and rocket boosters because finding God, understanding what God is, where God is is something that we are encoded. Then we need to find that. We came here to understand that. Well that is being used against people and their emotions are involved. And of course then if we have a person who is ignorant enough and passionate enough, of course this person is capable of killing him or herself, uh, blowing up themselves to kill a few people, few innocent people, uh, they come from a good place, but it’s causing terror. So who’s at fault? It’s not the person’s ignorance. I mean ignorance is ignorance. Uh, it’s those who are manipulating these people and fuelling divide because that’s how you bring humanity to it’s knees. Divide and conquer.

Thal:

Yes.

Alexandre:

In any method, whether religious, socio-cultural racial, and sports teams and you know, people kill each other over at the end of certain football games in England for example. Right? Being trampled and hitting and beating each other. So, obsession!

Thal:

It’s such a, like as you’re talking, I’m just, the word paradox keeps coming up. It’s such a paradox. Our human condition. Um, and just, you know, speaking about like your background and I’m just thinking about the Quran. Like there is a verse in the Quran that talks about “Al-‘Ilm Al-Ladunni” which is the experiential knowledge and that that knowledge you can, it’s something that you just is that is just placed in the heart. It’s not an intellectual, quantitative thing. And it’s funny because that same book is used for other interpretations and the more dogmatic like fear based interpretations or whatever. Um, I’m also thinking about like music and sound and the therapeutic aspects of sound, which is, you know, the main part of your work. And similarly, you know, it’s, you know, I’m just going to share this like a lot of the dogmatic interpretations of Islam, some of them have actually said that music is just not allowed at all. Like just avoid music completely, which is insane considering even historically within the Islamic culture, um, you know, there’s someone like Al-Farabi. And there’s the hospitals in Andalusia where the mental health institutions where they were playing music as a, as a form of therapy. So yes, please dig in, go deeper, whatever you’re saying, I’m enjoying it.

Adrian:

And maybe at the same time, if you can share with listeners how, how is sound therapeutic? Like how if someone’s just hearing this for the first time, can you share what’s happening to consciousness and what is sound? Are we talking about instruments and singing? Like there’s, I’m sure there’s a lot of difference in between, you know, within that category.

Alexandre :

Yes. Yeah. Well, this is all stuff I can talk about for the next 10 hours.

Adrian:

Amazing.

Alexandre:

So I’m going to make it succinct and but yet packed with info. So yeah Islam uses music, but it does not call it music. That’s the curious part. And Adhan, the call to prayer, is not considered to be music. Um, and um, well what’s music again? So, um, I can’t tell you why it’s not called music, why it’s considered to be blasphemous to call it music. But, book religions did use music tremendously. And if I may say, this may sound blasphemous to a lot of people, especially religious ones. I don’t mean any offense to anyone. I respect people’s faith but I also know that in this faith they’re being tricked to believe that they’re on the right track where actually not completely so. Well Abrahamic religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam and all the denominations, they do offer wonderful teaching and things that can help humanity. But at the same time, at the end, it’s about hijacking consciousness and misleading people. Whether this came to be out of ignorance, out of deliberate action or both combined, I can’t tell you. There’s evidence of all the above. So music is used to unravel consciousness when you go inside any church, especially Greek Orthodox Church because in Christians, the Greek Orthodox Church use music the best. Why? Byzantine chants that are used in Greek Orthodox church are a mixture of classical Arabic and classical Turkish music. It’s when Constantine invaded Istanbul and became Costantinople book, um, he used the music that was going on around which was Arabic and Turkish and they’re both very similar on the classical level at least. And used as part of the church. When you listen to this music in a secular environment, it gives you an altered state. Why? Because… This is a lot better. I’m going to say it shortly… Because the notes that are being used in the modes, modes are like scales, succession of different notes, have different mathematical ratios between them. They have different frequencies and these frequencies are closer to the tuning of the notes in the harmonic series. We’ll talk about that later. Harmonic series is the blueprint for sound production. Um, and it’s responsible for the tone color or timbre. All harmonic systems come from the harmonic series, the place from where the concept of harmony came up from, which is mathematics at the end. Tt’s considered to be the most sophisticated of all of these intelligences, uh, that, that we measure using mathematics. Pythagoreans told us that it’s not mathematics that created the universe, mathematics is what we use to measure that intelligence. What’s there is fields and phenomena systems and patterns. So talking about Pythagorean knowledge here, the knowledge that Pythagoras brought to Europe and Plato and Aristotle and Socrates were his followers, a little over a hundred years later. In Byzantine chants, and the notes that I use. And similarly also in Quranic chants, adhan, call for prayer, you’re using frequencies that are closer to the tuning of the harmonic series notes, which is the place where harmony came from. And harmony is a concept that exists in mathematics at the end when we listen to music or the harmonic series, when you listen to a gong being played or singing bowls, you’re listening to the audible side of mathematical ratios. The mathematical ratio lays between two notes in the musical interval. If you take C and G, for example, that’s an interval of a fifth because it’s C, D, E, F, G, one, two, three, four, five. It’s a three to two ratio. C to D is a nine to eight ratio and so on, so forth. So harmony is audible mathematics, audible mathematical ratios to be precise. When you create a musical system or a chant that is based on these pure tones, uh, it’s going to alter consciousness, just like a normal sound bath or a sound healing… two terms, I avoid using because they’re gimmicky and they don’t give justice to what is being done here. I like to call it Sound Meditation or some therapy sound journey, whatever it is. Something that would indicate that the individual is doing something. Healing is not happening just like that. So, um, they create transcendental, introspective, euphoric state psychedelic states sometimes. So they alter consciousness. These are the same notes that are being used in church, in Judaism, in Cathedral, in mosques. And if you take this out of context, you have a very powerful use of music that is being used in a specific place along with incense and church bell, which has all overtones and golden mean, golden ratio in iconography, in fractal geometry in the ceiling in the mosque and all of these things that lure people deeper into the faith thinking that God is here. Well these are things that humans looked for and understood in matriarchal period. Matriarchy to me, is not that women were more dominant than men. That’s a caricaturesque understanding of it. It’s basically where people, men and women lived in harmony, in equilibrium with nature, with all living things and they understood the power that nature has to ultimately understand who they are to nature, what is nature to humans and where God is and what God is. This was appropriated by Patriarchy and by book religions. And they were expropriated. We know that the early Christians, which is the Roman Empire really continuing to exist under the guise of Christianity. Again, no blasphemy here to the good believers but this is what it is. Seems like it’s a business that hijacks consciousness by using very powerful tools to lure people into deeper faith thinking that God is here. It’s just the labeling that’s wrong. When you expose someone to these things in a church or any other Holy House on these big book religions, you’re going to get the same thing that you do as if you’re doing it in the cave or out in nature or in any other context because everyone does this except here it’s being done in a specific set and setting and the label is different. So people leave the church, the cathedral, the mosque, the temple, feeling elated. The problem is that someone put it as “this is God here. God is here. Come back again.” You get a repeat customer because we’re programmed to understand who we are through music and unravel the nature of being because of what sound, harmony and music does to every aspect of being. It alters your consciousness. It puts you in elated states through entrainment basically. So there is a trickery here. Is that something that happened through ignorance or deliberate action or both? Again, there’s clear evidence to me that all the above are true and it’s not just ignorance. Um, so, um, so sound is often used in a very particular way to get a specific result. That’s what you do when you create music for commercials or when you go inside a store and you hear a specific music that put this type of the prototype clientele to spend money to be in a good mood, to spend money. If you go to teenage clothing store, you’re going to hear different music, then you go to Jewellery store or so on. That’s functional music. It’s used all the time in commercials, to put people at ease through what? Through form of entrainment so that there can be more in the mood to spend money and to spend more time to feel in the mood, uh, as opposed to when you leave. They leave the store and there’s the hubbub of the city and the noise. And so there’s a level of deception here that’s being used without people knowing that you can go very, very far with this because that’s what a Shamanic experience is about. To give you an example, if you do an experience with a Shaman in any tradition, they’ll give you a plant, usually psychedelic that knocks you off of baseline reality. And with you surrendering, allowing, trusting, accepting, you believe that this Shaman who is a professional who’s job is to hear you using plants, spirit, quote unquote. And using their ancestors and they’re guiding spirits and the power animals. This is all stuff that we in the west talk about and we call the subconscious mind, the collective unconscious, the psyche, you know, and the unconscious, the conscious, all of these things. In the East, they call the Shiva, the Shakti, the Atman, the Brahman. It’s the same thing. So you see how ignorance manifests to a level where it creates different reality to the individual without the person knowing that. Now as the person is going through the Shamanic experience, experiencing that sacrament, whether it’s Ayahuasca or San Pedro or you know, Iboga or mushrooms or Peyote and so on, whatever grows around in the region, um, they receive visions and sound is being played to guide them in the process and the olfactory stimuli is used. Um, so could be Palo Santo or sage or kopa and other, you know, olfactory agents to help the person surrender and let go so that they, they allow the work to happen. But what it is causing here is an unfolding of the nature of consciousness in the visionary state. So a similar version of that happens in church when the priest gives you a wafer or sacrament, it’s like handing you the Ayahuasca cup, the Shaman, and sound is played in a church to put you in the mood, the congregation, electromagnetics between people. The music played in a perfectly acoustical space because there’s connection between the architecture of the space and sound. Because sound reverberates on walls and ceilings, and so the space has to be, has to be optimal for the acoustics to be great. That’s a known thing in concert halls and so on. So and there is a iconography. There’s dazzling visuals that communicate the mathematics of uh, of God. If I can see the math of God is divine mathematics that we’re attracted to. We’re interested in. It communicates something defined, something sacred because of where it takes us. To me, that’s where sacred is. It’s not the sacred outside of us. It’s what that sacred thing, whether it’s a mushroom or sound, where it takes us, that’s really what’s sacred. And now people are being so flippant with saying sacred, this sacred that, and then the next thing, they lose the true definition of what sacred is. At the end, everything is sacred. But when people are distracted, they’re lacking the knowledge, then they’re not going to have the deep understanding what is really, truly sacred? Why is it sacred? What’s in it that is sacred? So people don’t have the time, the energy or the skill to really investigate these things by being scrutinizing and being persnickety about the meaning of a word. The power of word, which is sound. Again, language creates reality. So I hope I covered your questions Thal did I? And Adrian.

Adrian:

I just wanted to mention just speaking of acoustics, so there’s a little bit of, um, I don’t know if there’s another mic that’s rubbing on a shirt. It, we’re just getting a lot of, um, friction as you’re speaking.

Alexandre:

Oh really?

Adrian:

Yeah. Yeah. So I don’t know where it’s coming from.

Alexandre:

The mic is not touching anything. Maybe the cord? Is this, maybe it’s the cord perhaps?

Adrian:

Yeah, maybe the cord is also picking up. Is there a mic in the cord as well or?

Alexandre :

No.

Adrian:

Oh, okay. Okay. It sounds better right now. Yeah, it was just while you were speaking.

Alexandre:

I’ll be immobile then.

Thal:

[Laughing] No. Because you are so, um, uh, connected with what you were saying and I think your hands was moving and the cord was moving into the microphone is very strong and it was picking up. Yeah. But um, yeah, we’re enjoying the depth of the conversation. I mean, um, what an honor. Like I, yeah, I I want to know more like about the Fibonacci, about the like all of it, really.

Alexandre :

Yes. It’s very important and that’s, this is something that’s surfacing more and more again, this interest in sacred geometry. Um, uh, the way intelligence manifests in mathematics. We measure intelligence by measuring the value of this mathematical systems. Phi or the golden mean or the golden ratio, Fibonacci series or numbers, fractal geometry. The harmonic overtones is the one that has been considered to be the most important and often associated with creation with God. Now you asked another question, Adrian, it was about sound what is sound?

Adrian:

I was just also curious the difference between like instruments that produce those harmonic overtones versus singing. If someone’s chanting, I imagine there’s another way of producing the sound through vocal cords. Is there a difference on consciousness when it’s listening through the instrument or, or is produced through yeah. Through, through singing or chanting or mantras or…

Alexandre:

Yes, certainly. So I’m going to move around to get some instruments to demonstrate a concept. But, uh, so the overtone system is one that is so important, as I said earlier, because that’s the system that gives us, um, the tone color or a timbre, which is the difference between our voices. Um, the difference between various notes also is caused by various notes played on different instruments caused by overtones. So when you listen to a note, that note is not just one thing, it’s predominantly one thing, one note, one frequency. We call that the fundamental tone or fundamental frequency. In it, there are tiny auditory pixels that they’re not always audible, but their job is to color the tone. If the three of us sing one note the same note “ahhhh” and it’s going to sound different because every person has different overtones. So the overtone series, harmonic series is one that goes on to infinity and has specific intervals and it builds on the fundamental frequency. So “ahhh” is a fundamental tone. If you were to use specific software to analyze the spectrum of my voice, you will find various horizontal lines. Um, the lowest one, the fundamental tone would be the thickest most pronounced that within it there’s the overtones they’re so faint that they may seem to be completely inexistent, but they actually are there except the fundamental tone is greater and it overshadows these overtones. And, um, the value here is that when we use instruments such as gong, singing bowls, discs, bells, overtone singing, I’ll demonstrate in a bit to bring out this overtones to level where they’re clearly audible. And that changes everything. Why? Because the individual now is hearing this magic that’s in sound, although they’re listening to notes, but they’re being exposed to pure mathematical ratios. What binds the notes and the harmonic series together is an infinite series of harmonic, mathematical ratios. So, uh, to bring out the overtones in my voice from this note “ahhh”, I would have to sing it out, but creating a different conditions of physics inside the buccal cavity. The buccal cavity is the area that starts right above the vocal cords up into my lips. And this is a specific size and we have different tone colors because we all have different variables. Let’s say Thal your vocal cords are smaller than mine and Adrian and for sure they will be smaller. This is why women have higher pitched voice. You know, women can sing in soprano, mezzo soprano, alto and men have tenor, baritone and base, sometimes counter tenor, which is made out to song in falsetto, because the vocal cords are thicker or thinner, bigger or smaller. But the throat might be wider, um, the uvular is more protruded than usual. The soft palate is bigger than usual than someone else. If the tongue is bigger and the teeth, all of these create different conditions that eventually give the individual his or her specific tone color.

Right? And um, now I’m going to sing that same note, but I’m going to move my tongue inside the buccal cavity to open and close this space so that I can naturally amplify the overtones that are in my voice. By doing that, I’m creating different conditions of physics called Helmholtz resonance and then I can amplify naturally these overtones that are in my voice but one cannot hear them because the fundamental tone is so loud, it overshadows them. And when I do that, you will hear the fundamental tone, which tend to be most pronounced and upper notes that would be changing one at a time based on what I do with my tongue to open or close it more. And that’s what people do when they play Didgeridoo. They play brass instruments, trombones, trumpets, flugelhorns, and tubas and French horns and also wind instruments. It’s the movement of the tongue also embouchure which is the totality of that. How wide or small the opening of the lips are, the velocity of the air and the position of the tongue inside the mouth. That’s very important for music playing. And people use that as well when they’re doing any form of overtone singing, throat singing. It’s done in a variety of different ways. The Tibetan Buddhist monks do it in a more guttural way. Tuvans do it different ways and Mongolians and so on and so forth. So it sound like this: “hmmmmmm”.

Adrian:

Wow.

Alexandre:

This is what I believe the primordial Om or Aum is trying to communicate. Om is not “om” even though it’s often chanted and written like that, it’s “aum”. But it’s not aum either. It’s what “aum” is referring to. “Aum” is referring to the opening and closing of the buccal cavity. “Aaauum”. You start with open and you close the mouth. By doing that you’re going through all the vowels. And the shades between them and these change the formants, that’s concept in physics. People can look it up. It’s too long to explicate here. Basically when we speak, we speak in vowels and then consonants come and add another layer, another action to the vowel. An example of that is Eee. E. And if you say “D” Dee. There’s the tongue is being involved now touching the back of the upper teeth. And the little bit the gum. And “T” tee would be slightly different interaction. Pee, now “P” is involving involving lips. So all of these are variations with slight addition to what “E” is. So what you’re doing here, you’re creating various packages of overtones, very specific dimension of the package of the overtones that’s coming out. The vocal cords are buzzing and the buzzing is being amplified in the buccal cavity and it’s coming out as language, but it’s at the end overtones. So “Aum” is pointing the finger, “Aum” the primordial “Aum” that created the universe is pointing the finger toward sound once again. But that’s not anything new. We’ve heard that from a variety of different places. You know, aborigines in Australia tell you that the universe was created with two songs. And Ancient Egypt will tell you the universe was sung into being. The word that created, you know, in the first sentence of Gospel of John and the word was God.

The word here is a mistranslation of the concept of Logos. Logos is what the word was when the Bible was brought to Ancient Greece. Logos is a ratio, is reason. So Genesis is not telling you how God created everything a day at a time and rested on the Shabbat, the seventh day. On the first day, God said, let there be light and there was light. What I interpret this now is that you become God when you learn how to create with your words. That’s really what the message is. So this comes from variety of different angles. Sound creates reality. Sound is the creator of the universe. Sound therefore is God. Or you can use sound to understand where the God is within. And that’s why music is used in all Shamanic traditions and all mystical sects, in eastern philosophies and religions book religion, ceremonies. Why? I’m going to demonstrate the concept here. So I’m going to play chimes, two different times with different tuning. These are called Koshi wind chimes, which is fire, but the notes and the harmonies involved have nothing to do with these elements that are just arbitrarily named like that. So when I play the chimes, you’re going to hear different notes. The chime itself is the logos. The logos is the unknowable. The logos is um, the metadata that language expresses. The logos is the feelings, emotions and thoughts that are within us that are in sensations and visuals. Whatever we communicate via language. First it’s in an abstract form. And then when you speak about it using words, in this case, when I played the chimes, you’re going to hear notes. The notes become… and that is the harmony in the logos become the ethos. Ethos is the distinguishing quality, the personality, the character, the beingness, the allure, all of these things of an instrument or person of the company or whatever entity we’re talking about. When we listen to the ethos of this chime or any speech, it creates reality within us. And that is Pathos. Now keep in mind that this is not how these words are defined in, you know, various traditions. I’m defining them with a twist here based on my own research and own understanding, because you can read the whole, the entire book about ethos and logos and still not know what ethos and logos are about. We’re talking about big words that are part of the fundamental structure of reality along with pathos, I mean along with mythos. But we’re not going to address mythos now. We’re just going to concentrate on logos, ethos and pathos. So words creates reality in the ears of the listener. It creates reality inside of you. Just like now I’m talking about things, and the listeners are fathoming internalizing, visualizing, but they’re communicating information. It’s a form of reality. So I’m going to play this logos and ethos coming out of the logo is going to create specific sounds. And then we’re going to talk about this later. And these sounds that people feel inside of them best is to listen to it with eyes closed to focus on the auditory aspect. That would be the pathos.

[Koshi Wind Chimes] So many people describe the sound as being lighthearted. There’s a sense of awe, curiosity, happy, um, whimsical, looking outward, it’s joyful and so on and so forth. So that’s, that’s the pathos that was created in people. It’s pretty universal. People, various traditions, people with musical experience or not all tend to use these words. Compare it to the second chimes, which is a different logos. And when it speaks, it has a different ethos. And when people listen to it, it creates a different reality. A different pathos.

[Second Koshi Wind Chime] So this has more of pensiveness, of introspection, the sense of yearning and nostalgia. Um, gentle but healing, sadness.

Adrian:

Mystery for me.

Alexandre:

Mystery, contemplative, and we can add more and more words or visuals and sensations. It doesn’t have to be just words, but you see what creates reality. You see how sound can create reality. If the person is very attentive and getting their mind out of the way and not quickly labeling things. But wait, wait, wait, feel it, feel it. And then choose carefully the words. And this is where miscommunication happens. That people are not always careful with how they speak to really bring their ethos out. And, and we’re becoming more and more sloppy now with words. And there’s a lot of speech disfluency um, and inaccurate words. And even people using the wrong inflections, we sing the words differently now. A lot of redundancy, repetition or even, um, talking in an ascending tone, like that and repeating it over and over. And you know, this is so common these days. It’s not really singing the words correctly. We don’t just speak words, we sing words all the time and this is the most important part. And that is something we’re losing because of the high reliance on texting and emailing. So you see how technology, when it’s mishandled. I’m not against technology. I’m against technology being used in a way that can jeopardize the existence of a human being and modify humanity and take away the humane elements that are within us. We sing language, the inflections, the changes in the tempo, the articulation, the emphasis on words, syllables, the changes of the tempo of the speech, the dynamics, how loud or soft, the silence between the words, how gestures and grimaces and body language in general aligns with this. All of this is adding to the context and emojis are not going to replace that at all, at all. We’re losing a very important part of speech that creates reality. And the speech disfluencies especially “like”, and of course when I mentioned these things, I have no judgment to people who use it, but it’s indicating a lack of self awareness. There’s really no need for 10 or 20 “likes” a minute. We’re making great effort in doing something, saying something that has absolutely no value. On the contrary, it’s causing the person listening to sift out all the likes that are not needed for meaning to come to place. So we should take this stuff very seriously because that can change the human being. This is trans-humanism, which has a very old agenda is didn’t just start now. There’s clear evidence that it started in the forties. So, um, so sound is very, very important and what human beings are resorting to is sound as we know, you know, sound therapy or sound gong bath and sound healings, vibrational healing, whatever people choose terms.

I highly encourage people not to use any gimmicky terms, but use something that indicates that the individual is doing something. That’s why I use Sound Meditation, which is not term that I coined. Yes my website is soundmeditation.com. That was gifted to me because I had soundmeditation.us and anyway, uh, but I’m not promoting it. No, because it’s indicating that, well, if we don’t talk about anything, uh, you know that you’re doing something if you come to Sound Meditation. And, but we should say some things, we should give people the tools and create a protocol so that people are tapping into the self healing capacity within us. It’s about that. It’s about using sound and other stimuli to create the conditions for healing to happen. That’s also entrainment. Except here we’re doing it in a positive way.

Thal:

Yeah. Um, you know, as you’re talking, I’m thinking about a few things. Um, so I’m thinking about noise pollution.

Alexandre:

Oh yeah.

Thal:

And I’m thinking about the distraction of… In fact, we have so many sounds right now, like you said, and um, you know, like pop music, you know, and I’m trying hard, like this is not to be judgemental. I’m just really, um, trying to, um, uh, connect to what you’re saying. Like I’ve, I went to a 10 day silent meditation, the one time I went in my life and it was so amazing to be able to sort of, um, go on a fasting from the noise pollution.

Alexandre:

Yes.

Thal:

And I remember when they would, they would beat the Gong for lunch time, the sound of that Gong was everything. It was, um, sorry, something happened to Skype. Okay. Yeah. The sound of the Gong was so delicious and it was so like, it was, it tasted like honey and

Alexandre:

[Chuckle]

Thal:

Yes. And then at that point I was like, wow. Like we do need discernment when we’re choosing who even to listen to.

Alexandre :

Yes,

Thal:

And the artists that we’re connecting with, like the music that we’re listening to. The state and the condition of the artists that singing will transfer through what they’re producing. I mean, what, what are your thoughts around that?

Alexandre :

Yeah, that’s very important. So this is called synesthesia. When you hear something and another sense becomes involved in what you’re listening to. The senses are bleeding into each other. Some people are natural synesthete. They see hues and colors when they listen to pieces in particular keys. D minor versus g major and B flat minor and so on. Some people see shapes when they hear numbers. Um, some people smell things when they hear specific words or see colors and so on and so forth. And when people take psychedelics, uh, this happens where the psychedelic that they’re taking causes them to see visuals in their mind’s eye with eyes closed, uh, upon hearing specific sounds. And that’s what triggers the visionary state. Why? Because the brain that does a variety of different things involved in reality. The brain is a transducer of consciousness. It receives consciousnesses. Transduction is when you change the state of something. For example, when you turn on a radio and you hear music, clearly the musicians, I’m not in the radio. The radio, the transceiver is transforming a transducing frequency to audio. A TV set gives you audio and video. So the brain transducers consciousness consciousness is not all made in the brain. It’s non-local. That is from locality, Bell’s nonlocality. Um, and uh, the brain also filters reality because there’s so much information out there. It needs to be confined to specific things so it filters a lot of things out. And also indoctrination and conditioning has a lot to do with what is being filtered out. And this is how a lot of nascent capacity within us becomes dormant or inexistent. Uh, the brain also, um, uh, tweaks reality, judges it. So sound affects the brain, the entire body that is involved in the creation of reality. That’s what really is at the end. That’s what music does to us. And that’s how entrainment can be effective. Human being is not a completely autonomous person. It’s always imbued by external sources. So that’s why people must always pay attention to their diet. The diet to me is not what people eat, it’s what they listen to. Music or speech or news is what the films that they watch, documentaries, they watched the commercials they watch or they become exposed to even just, um, commercials in the street, the noise pollution, all of that becomes part of who we are. And it wreaks havoc on our awareness and especially when you deal with noise pollution. It’s so detrimental. Noise ,sound is also used in military application. We’re not going to cover that because it’s a whole thing by itself. So, um, people think that they’re sovereign, that they can decide. No. It’s always, we are product of who’s around us, friends, acquaintances, colleagues. Other people’s electromagnetics. Um,EMF’s and all of this stuff becomes part of the human consciousness because of how it secretly, inconspicuously impacts the individual. And we are being changed by these things more and more. So we’re losing sovereignty. We’re losing, uh, so many things because of entrainment. So we need to be extremely careful. Inform ourselves of these things and not to dismiss them as woo woo and conspiracy stuff. No, no, no. There’s a lot of stuff that’s really valid and impactful.

Adrian:

Yeah. There’s so much I want to ask, but I’m also realizing that we don’t have all the time in the world. So, um, at this point though, I’m considering just for people who want to start intentionally incorporating sound into their practice, if they’re regular meditators or they have other forms of spiritual practice, where do they begin? If sound is a new element to their practice, where would you direct them?

Alexandre :

Yeah, various things. First, the voice. Just toning with lips closed to experience the vibration. And when we, when we speak or tone, we experience a lot of our voice through bone and tissue conduction and not only the auditory part. An example of that is when people close their ears and they speak, that is bone and tissue conduction. Uh, so experience sound in two different ways. So toning vocalization is very powerful because gets the body to vibrate. Um, if they want to go deeper into it, they can learn overtone singing. Uh, there are many youtube videos now that can teach people can take lessons with some of these experts on youtube. Um, and to sing. Singing is for everyone, not only singers, but if they don’t want to deal with the voice, then… Well even if they want to deal with it, I highly encourage them to get some instruments that would be great. Singing bowl or two. Small handheld gong, tuning forks, any of these instruments. And I have a list of them on my website soundmeditation.com they can get a few things and these are very easy to play instruments. They don’t need to practice for years. Like people practice, you know, playing guitar or a piano. No, it’s, it’s easy to handle them and to make them part of their practice or listening to recordings of singing bowls, gongs or the above. I’ve made six albums. Uh, some tracks are available on my soundcloud that if you are interested, they can contact me to purchase them directly from me, um, at some point soon and they’re going to be released along with eight other albums that I recorded recently, uh, sounds for meditation. They’re very, very effective. They’re not the same as listening to these instruments in person and acoustically, but they’re very powerful. Why? Because acoustically you feeling sound, you’re not just listening to it. There’s a lot of information that cannot be captured using microphones. So to receive more of the sound therapy sessions that are happening more and more and realize that there’s certain knowledge required to how to still the mind. I always talk for at least half an hour before I facilitate the sound meditation to give people the tools of understanding why these instruments are powerful, how to listen in a very particular way, judicious, attentional, intentional. Um, and how to get the mind out of the way. How to use a contemplate of state versus a mindful state versus a meditative state. How to work with discursive thinking and how to disengage from that instead of trying to fight it. But to involve sound in their life. And also to keep ear plugs on them when they’re walking in the streets and there’s noise pollution or uh, in subway stations or whatever to really at least block their ears. Because the ringing in the ear and people losing hearing. Just very, very delicate. We have 20,000 Cilia hearing cells in each ear that they start dying, the day we’re born. They die more when people are exposed to loud sound and they don’t grow back. This is a really tiny number compared to the over 120 millions photoreceptors we have in each eye. So hearing is so important on a variety of different levels. So it’s very important to protect the hearing. And also when people are listening to music, using headphones or airpods to not blast the volume loud to heighten the mood to get the body to secrete more of you know, chemicals, endogenous chemicals that can heighten the mood or to raise the volume so loud to drown out the external noise pollution. In this case it’s not the noise pollution that’s causing the hearing loss. It’s the music that they’re listening to and they love. So there’s a great level of unawareness. So protecting the hearing and using sound in a correct way to affect the vagus nerve, the autonomic nervous system to switch from sympathetic to parasympathetic. The parasympathetic state is not state that we often go to, which is when the body is not doing anything based on the fact that there’s nothing happening outside of us around us to do something. Sympathetic is when we are concentrating, we’re doing something and that can cause fatigue. And these days that’s also becoming epidemic. People work for many hours and they go home and they need to do more things, answer emails or do domestic work, cook or watch TV. There’s not enough of a state of relaxation to get the body to be in a parasympathetic state. And that’s why people start to have problems sleeping or taking pills to sleep or having to smoke weed or having to take alcohol to fall asleep. That’s forcing the body to shut down. So the people need to learn about the sympathetic state in the parasympathetic state and how the autonomic nervous system runs the body as a machine. And deeper research that’s coming out now on the vagus nerve, the central nerve that runs the body house, slow, deep breathing exercises, toning, vocalization, working with sound are great ways to massage and tone down the vagus nerve. Vagus, spelled V-A-G-U-S which in Latin means vagrant meandering. So the, the body is full of various elements. These are the hardware. And if we start to misuse the hardware, then there’s a different operating system that’s gonna be happening. And different software and reality becomes different. And that’s what we’re going through right now. The reality that we going through, this awkward point in the history of humanity is the result of what’s going on in people’s hearts. It’s a consciousness crisis. It’s all projected out. So to change that, we need to go inward and change the way we’re feeling because the inner world is the same as the outer world. That’s what the hermetic principle is really about. As above, so below. As within, so without. It’s the biocentric nature of reality that we’re now starting to hear about from coming from science. That consciousness is not a product of the universe. The universe is a product of our consciousness. Great book to read about this is called Biocentrism by Robert Lanza.

Thal:

Amazing.

Adrian:

Alexandre, I know you’ve gotta go in like one minute, so yeah, I just want to thank you for that really rich conversation. Um, maybe we’ll do a part two. And that was really beautiful. We covered a lot of ground.

Thal:

Yeah. I feel that this is an introduction. Definitely would love to have you back. Thank you so much for sharing all that knowledge. Thank you.

Alexandre :

Great pleasure. Happy to be here. Thank you.

#23: What Is It Like to Be a Vampire with L.A. Paul

“Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—  I took the one less traveled by,  And that has made all the difference.”

Robert Frost, “The Road Not Taken”

Indeed, you may, one day, find yourself at a crossroad in your life. You are, possibly, once again, faced with a big decision, whether it is at work, or in a relationship, or shifting your ideological orientation. You play out different scenarios. What-ifs and maybes. Deep down you know that your choice will inform your experience, and based on the value of your experience, you may learn something new, grow, and transform.  

L.A. Paul is a professor of philosophy and cognitive science at Yale University. Her main research interests are in metaphysics, cognitive science, and the philosophy of mind. In this conversation, we look at how certain types of life decisions that involve transformative experiences, like having a baby or becoming a vampire, cannot be made based on evidence and rational thought. We discuss the value of exploring these philosophical questions and the wisdom that can come from embracing uncertainty. Laurie is the author of Transformative Experience, Causation: a user’s guide, and Causation and Counterfactuals

Highlights:

  • Metaphysics and Cognitive Science
  • Transformative Experiences
  • Limits of Rationality

Resources:

Listen:

Poem Inspired by This Episode

Full Transcript

 

Thal:                

 Welcome Laurie to the show.

Laurie:              

Thanks for having me.

Thal:                 

Thank you.

Adrian:             

Laurie, we wanted to ask you, let’s say you were at a dinner party with a bunch of non-academics and they asked you to describe what you do for work. What would you say to them?

Laurie:              

I would tell them about the notion of transformative experience, which is something that I’m working on. Transformative experiences are big life experiences, in other words, they are experiences that change us, how we think it makes us make sense of the world and who we are personally. I’m super interested in these kinds of experiences because I think first they teach us a lot about the world, but they also teach us about ourselves. I also think that we can use them to construct ourselves in particular when we’re making certain kinds of decisions involving transformative experiences, what I would call transformative decision. They’re actually really important to us and they form us, inform our preferences and all kinds of interesting ways. Now I’m gonna use an example, one of my favorite examples is choosing to have a child because that’s an example where I think it’s a big life experience. It’s actually something that you have to undergo to really understand how it’s going to change you and that it does often change you, and it changes you in a very kind of permanent way. That’s an ordinary example of a transformative experience that a lot of people will contemplate. Some people undergo it. This sort of gives people a grip on the sort of ideas I want to explore.

Adrian:            

 When we were looking through some of the research you’ve done, I noticed there was an interesting convergence that it seems to overlap between, on the one hand there’s metaphysics that you’re interested in, and on the other hand there’s cognitive science. I’d love to hear how you describe, first of all, what is metaphysics?

Laurie:              

Yeah, I do not know what metaphysics is but I’ll give it a stab. I mean this is something that’s probably been debated well for a long time, but very roughly. I would think of it as an attempt to understand the way we think about what there is, which includes how we think about the (inaudible) and the internal world. And it’s a way of doing it that sometimes goes beyond the science, both the physical and natural science as well as a science of mind. When I say it goes beyond, I just mean that some of the questions that metaphysicians explore just aren’t things that admit of empirical assessment or maybe they’re more foundational. There are decisions or things you have to think even to undertake empirical assessment. There’s not just some answers your find in the lab or whatever and figure out what the answer is. You know, sometimes you have to think about, what do I take causation to be? Or what is a self? Or you know, what’s the nature of rationality? And you have to lay down some foundational answers to those kinds of questions before you can even kind of formulate an experiment.

Thal:                

 I mean these are very important questions that you’re exploring in an academic setting and it’s the same kind of questions that we also explore in depth psychotherapy and depth psychology. I’m just thinking about words that can be problematic like spirituality and soul. These are all slippery words. How can we talk about metaphysics without slipping into dogma on one side or words that don’t have a firm footing. Does that make sense?

Laurie:              

Yeah. I don’t think it’s easy to do that. I mean, the way that I approach it is by partly trying to proceed clearly and carefully and then anchoring a lot of what I’m interested in it too in empirical work. So when I think about causation, what is causation? I might say causation, maybe very basically, something that happens between events, when one of it brings about another event and we can measure it to some extent when we think about dependence relations. In other words, while if something hadn’t happened, if this person that hadn’t happened in the second one wouldn’t have happened and we seem to experience causation in our life so we can point to it in ordinary context and say, oh look, when the bat hit the ball and the ball was hit out of the park, well that the bat hitting the ball caused it to go out of the park.

When you play pool, like if you sink the eighth ball in the corner pocket, it was hitting the cue ball into the eighth ball at the right angle that caused it to sink into the corner pocket. When we start trying to use specific examples and also talk about things in ways that are related to measurement that that can help.The other thing, I think, that can help is just to sort of anchor some of these discussions to history of philosophical discussion. Especially over maybe from me over the last hundred years or so, but there’s a much longer history, you know what I mean? Contemporary Western philosophy at least 2,500 years, and so kind of embedding, embedding these discussions in a richer context also helps to define them. Just using the words like, especially the way they get thrown around in ordinary conversation or in a metaphysical way or in a metaphorical way. I think can be, unhelpful.

Thal:                 

Absolutely.

Adrian:             

On a more personal level, I’m curious, where this interest came from for you. How did you end up in philosophy and particularly these these domains?

Laurie:              

I mean I always wanted to think more about how we understood ourselves in the world and about the process of discovery. What I think of as epistemic or mental conceptual revelation, like how we respond to new things in the world and discover new kinds of properties or new ways of being or, and make ourselves in various ways. Like, I think this rushed in on me when I was in high school. I grew up in a, you know, pretty vanilla upper middle class suburban environment and didn’t have a lot of experiences. Then what happened was when I was sort of, you know, 18 and escaped that environment, I moved to the city and then I started discovering culture and I went to, to university and I discovered, all kinds of ideas that I had never really had access to in different kinds of people.

It was so incredibly exciting and amazing that I think having those experience and starting to have more and more of those experiences like over the years that followed made me feel that this is something that I need to spend my life understanding better. There’s a way in which I see a lot of people sort of have a grip on these ideas in the ordinary sense, but that they don’t get studied too much in the academy I want to study it in the academy because I think that’s the way to deepen our, our grasp on the meaningfulness of these mental changes and understand how to use them, as I said, in the decision making context and how to under the world of rationality and discovery and learning in a precise way as possible.

Thal:                

That’s something I struggled with, my background is in English literature and one of the things that I was struggling with at the time was, okay, so here we are studying English literature and it’s, but it’s also about the soul. Instead here we are just drowning in critical theory and all of that. It sounds to me that you are reconciling between the world of cognitive science and the metaphysical, which is a hard thing to do and you’re doing it in an academic setting. When you’re talking, I’m already seeing the connections between cognitive science, transpersonal psychology and metaphysics. It’s just exciting. I don’t even know what the question is, but I don’t know if you have more to say about that.

Laurie:              

So something that’s going on. One thing that I have really been doing, and I think I’m not the only one, but not that many people have been doing is bringing together in particular metaphysics and contemporary, so called analytic metaphysics, like the study of causation, the nature of time. What we take the self to be constituted by, right, and also a formal epistemology together with cognitive science. I’m doing that here at Yale. I’m doing it both by collaborating with people who work in kind of congnitive vision science, social psychology, and behavioral economics. I’m also doing it in the classroom. Next year I’m going to be teaching a Grad level seminar with a vision scientist on basically temporal and causal perception where we explore the metaphysics along with contemporary cog-sci in a very kind of robust empirical, but also theoretical kind of way.

No one’s ever actually taught a class like that at Yale, especially not at the graduate level. I don’t know if anyone’s taught it anywhere in, to be honest, in the world. It’s exciting to do it here because there are a lot of psychologists and lot of philosophers and others who do a lot of research in related areas. I think it is a pretty exciting new cross-divisional graduate level course, and it also fits in, we’re building actually a quite special dual Phd program in the same areas. I think it’s in philosophy, it’s opening up to be sort of a new area of research and philosophy and psychology. Yale, is opening up, I think, new areas of graduate study to do the research. We’re doing all of that kind of at once together. There’s more, there is sort of conferences plans, and that kind of thing. It’s a new and opening up area of search is the way to put it.

Thal:                 

Yeah, I mean, just one of the things that we struggle with in the transpersonal psychology field is…okay…we’re always arguing against the mainstream psychology. Transpersonal psychology is not quote unquote recognized by mainstream psychology. There is a shift right now that’s going on and the fact that it’s happening at Yale is so exciting for me to hear.

Laurie:             

I think you’re right, the challenge is to try to be clear about the topics and the terms.

Thal:                 

That’s true, the terms.

Laurie:              

I view it as the philosophers teaching the psychologist and the psychologist teaching the philosophers at the same time, and as we’re doing this, we’re trying to kind of establish, communicate like new kinds of communication and new ways of understanding each other’s work.

Thal:                 

I’m just thinking like at the root of it and if we’re going to think about sort of ancient knowledge, philosophy and psychology have always intersected and it’s really, psychology was born out of philosophy. Going further back, I’m thinking about mystics and sages of different traditions, have talked about the law of causation. I’m specifically thinking about a Sufi philosopher from the Andalusian times, Gazzali, he talked about causation and how sometimes it’s not linear and sometimes a cause doesn’t produce an effect, so then what do we do? This is showing up in quantum physics.

Laurie:             

I think especially before the 20th century, most philosophy eastern and western basically was tied to if not mysticism, various kinds of faith-based orientations. That was important, actually, because it was important to allow the mind to kind of range as freely as possible and explore lots of different avenues. There are many ways in which you can allow the mind to explore freely. (Inaudible) limits on what you have to constrain yourself to like what you can test in the actual world. You know, what you can kind of materially put your hands on. Although now I think, if we blend those more historical perspectives with the kind of contemporary focus on the empirical, you get a really interesting way to take bits from the earlier work, and from the earlier ways of thinking and then follow like the follow a line of thought, but then develop it maybe in an empirical way. So it’s a new way to explore the older ideas that we find in some of the history.

Adrian:             

Laurie, I would love to go into the weeds a little bit with regards to transformative experiences and maybe for listeners to lay a little bit of groundwork. I’d love to hear you explain the vampire thought experiment as a way to kind of frame these big life decisions. I know, I’ve heard you speak about these before.

Thal:                 

To go back to the empirical

Laurie:              

So one of my favorite thought experiments to illustrate first the idea of transformative experience and then second, the way that that can be important for big life decisions is to think of a fictional case because it’s like idealization in physics, you sketch an ideal situation, think about how to make sense of that and then you move to the more real life case and take the structure that you isolated in the fictional case and see if you can apply it in practical ways. I like to imagine that you were somewhere in Eastern Europe exploring a castle, and you’re down in the dungeons kind of checking out all these kinds of cool interesting rather scary bits at the dungeon.

Suddenly Dracula comes to you and he says, okay, I’m going to offer you a one time chance to become a vampire, and then he says, you know, it’s going to be irreversible. You have to make a decision. You’ve got until midnight tonight to make your decision to go back to your hotel room and think about it. If you want to become a vampire, I will come to you at midnight, leave your window open. Okay? This is obviously very exciting. No matter what you think, you will probably go to back your hotel room and think about it. So you go back to your hotel room and you start texting your friends, you call your mom, and say, look, you tell them about this opportunity. You say, what should I do, and as you start asking them questions, it turns out that they’ve already all become vampires.

This is surprising. I think it’s right to say, mom, why didn’t you tell me? Right? Then there’s some surprise there, but then you start asking the questions. What does it like for you to be a vampire? How am I supposed to make this decision? As you ask these questions, they start telling you things like, it’s incredible, it’s amazing. You get these amazing new sensory powers, strength and you know, fluidity and you look fabulous in fashion clothing. You can even make ugly clothing look fabulous, but there are some negatives. You have to live in a coffin. You can’t roam aound by daylight without kind of special thick sunscreen, that’s really awful to put on. You have to drink blood or at least artificial blood, and you keep asking questions to try to find out more about like what it’s going to be like because if you want to do it, right, the way that you would make this decision very naturally, think about what is it like to be a vampire and do I prefer or what I prefer to be a vampire to be human. You then ask more about it and say what should I do? They start to say things like, well, actually I don’t think I can really explain it to you. I can’t really explain it. There’s a lot of things that are there to explain. I couldn’t explain to you what it’s like to see the color blue if you’ve never seen the color blue and being a vampire is like that, but don’t worry, it’s amazing. It is something that you can’t understand until you have become one. But once you do become one, you will realize that only now does your life have true meaning. It’s just nothing like being a vampire. What are you going to do with that, right? You’re basically told, it’s going to be fabulous, but it’s not something you can understand in the relevant sense. You don’t know what it’s going to be like until you actually become one. So should you just do it?

I think there are, that’s the way, in other words, what’s going on is that the empire experience is as I would put epistemically transformative. It’s a kind of experience that you have to have in order to fully grasp that the nature of that experience, and it’s also going to change you profoundly, right? It’s going to change you so much that in some sense you’re going to be a new kind of being. A new kind of person. You want to say [inaudible] people, but it’s going to change some of your kind of core preferences, like what you really care about, how you want to live your life.

Okay? So that’s a transformative experience, and the problem is that if you’re going to make this decision, right, you have to make it in the absence of a certain kind of information, and in particular, you don’t know what it’s going to be like to be a vampire. All you have is a bunch of testimony from other people, and the it’s the way I described it, everybody thought it was fabulous, but if there were any naysayers, let’s say some people who you talk to [inaudible] I actually didn’t work out for me, but I’m trapped in this, then things got even harder. Right? So if you have diverse testimony, then you can be in an even more difficult position. There’s something else too, and that is when thinking about whether or not to become a vampire, if you just wanted to listen to the testimony or just to rely on what your mother said, there’s another factor to take into account and we can describe that as the endogeniety of the preferences involved.

In other words, what if there’s something about becoming a vampire that makes you want to be a vampire. What if, in fact, there’s a kind of Stockholm Syndrome that occurs, right? So that of course once you become a vampire, that biological process converts your preferences into wanting to become a vampire. But if that’s the case and it doesn’t seem like this incredibly unlikely to be honest, from what we know about vampires, then, the way that you evaluate their testimony is also is going to be corrupted. It’s going to be affected in some sense. If you want a real life example, let’s say that you were thinking about having children, but you’ve actually decided you didn’t really want to become a parent, but all of your friends told you, oh no. You might not want it now, but once you become a parent, it’s going to be amazing.

Right? So there’s a question there, right? Well maybe they’re right. Maybe they’re right. Maybe you wouldn’t really be happy, but what’s the ground truth for what makes you happy? Is it because right now you want to become a parent? Or is it just because there’s something about becoming a parent? It’s kind of Stockholm like so that you know, the process of becoming a parent makes you also really happy to have produced the child that you produce. I guess what I’m saying is the vampire thought experiment describes a certain kind of situation. It involves undergoing a transformative life experience, but it is a particularly difficult kind of decision because you don’t know what you need to know or to make the decision in a way that you ordinarily would if you were making an informed choice. So there’s a decision problem or how do you decide, and it isn’t as simple as just evaluating the testimony because there’s this endogenous element that makes even the testimony sort of mysterious.

So if you can’t look within yourself and know what kind of process it is that you are, how you’re going to change in certain kinds of ways from the inside, and if the testimony is also complicated by that fact, how are you supposed to make the decision in an informed way? How are you supposed to do it rationally, right? I mean like choosing how it’s going to maximize your expense value. As I hinted, maybe even more than intent, I think there are other life decisions like this and choosing to have a child in some sense can be really like this. I mean, maybe you don’t really, you’re not going to make it up. Maybe you just want to have a kid because your parents did, or you, anyone participating in this. But if you want to think about it in the way that I was describing, do I want this kind of life is this the kind of person I want to become, there’s a certain sense in which…there’s all kind of variables that you can’t pull aside.

Adrian:             

It sounds like you’re pointing at the limits of reason and logic, like we cannot rely purely on those faculties to make a decision like this so like changing jobs or other identity changes that are dramatic. So how do you suggest people approach these decisions if that’s not a reliable way?

Laurie:              

I guess what I want to say is I think we need to look at evidence. We need to look at testimony. It’s very important to do everything that we ordinarily do. The problem is that we shouldn’t think that that’s going to give us the answer. It doesn’t give us the answer, not because we haven’t thought hard enough. It’s not like, well, just think a little harder, try a little bit more, read more information, then you’ll finally find that missing piece. I don’t think it works that way. So I think instead you have to recognize that there are some things that language and testimony and other people can’t teach us. There are some things you just have to experience in order to know how they’re going to affect you. It turns out maybe some of the most important things in our lives are like this.

I’m not giving you an answer. I mean, it may be that there’s a kind of humility and a kind of wisdom that we gain by recognizing, using rationale, you using logic and assessment and maybe empirical information to discover that that’s the situation we find ourselves in, and then there’s a kind of acceptance and understanding that I think should come next. With that understanding other people and the decisions that they, when they have to make those decisions as well. I think this also ties to thinking about responsibility and blame and basically not blaming people in certain contexts when they make decisions when they couldn’t possibly have known. Somebody tells that they discovered after that experience.

Thal:                 

What you’re describing seems like a struggle for our modern mindset, to have to make a decision, despite the plethora of information that we have. I mean every time, I know personally, every time I want to make a change in my life, the first thing I do is I hit the bookstore. I’ve been in situations where the more I’ve read, I’ve, I was more confused and that I had to just take that quote unquote leap of faith and just make that decision. Then going through the experience was the learning and then whatever information that I collected was either confirmed or some of it was not. So…

Laurie:              

Yes. In some ways it’s a distinctively modern problem. So first we’re encouraged to think that various kinds of science are going to give us the answers. And again, I’m a big fan of both natural, social, and psychological science. It gives us lots of information, but there’s this assumption that, well, we’re going to actually get all the answers that way. Well then if we just go out there, so much information available to us. Right. And the Internet. And also just because now so much has been kind of recorded and written down and you know, several hundred years ago, obviously many people, you know, they didn’t have any access to the information even if they have the ability to maybe write and whether they need to. And so now we have so much available to us. There’s this thought that well this is, we have everything that we need somehow and that we’re only limited by our own laziness or our own inability to search everywhere that we should. And I think that’s a mistake and it comes from misunderstanding the way that we work as humans. You know it’s, there are some ways we get information that come from experiences and experiences alone, and understanding that I think really changes the way that we should think about certain constraints. A leap of faith. Well, sometimes I do think because experiences, they only answer, you either leap into the experience to buy the ticket or you don’t.

That’s the choice, the choice is to discover what that experience is like or not. Let me draw a parallel that I find interesting. So there’s a way in which you know, we can understand at a deep level that we can’t understand another person’s first person perspective. We can to some extent, I can learn, you can talk to me about your life. I can think about it. We can empathize and various kinds of ways. But there’s another sense in which, I don’t know, I can’t know really what it’s like to be you, either of you and you can’t know in a deep way what it’s really like to be me. There’s a lot you can do, but you can’t know everything. Okay. Once we understand that it’s, I think then we can take that and apply that insight into thinking about who we might have been, our other possible (inaudible) of ours.

The problem of other minds and there was really understanding someone else’s mind can come into play when you think about understanding your own mind, if it were changed in certain important ways, like through these experiences. So, you know, the, I have two children, the possible self who never had children. My children are 11 and 15. It’s been a while. I really don’t have, I can’t jump into the mind of the possible person, Laurie, who never had children. She’s just too different from me now. She’s like another person. I think recognizing that, that this person, this thing we know about other people’s minds can also apply to ourselves. Kind of helps put this other discussion to context about how it looks. Sometimes there’s just some things that we can’t know and the wise response is to understand that and work with it. I’m not trying to pretend otherwise.

Thal:                 

It sounds like, in some ways, understanding ourselves deeply helps us then understand other people’s minds too to a degree and inform our decisions that are transformative. As you had mentioned…

Laurie:              

I guess I would emphasize like understanding what we can know, what we can’t know, helps us to understand both ourselves better and also, that’s right, other people. Going back to parenting, which is a really useful example, it helps me to realize that there are things about my children that I can’t know and at this isn’t a failure. I mean it would be nice to know, I suppose when I have to make decisions for them about their lives. As they get older this is not important, but when they’re small, there’s a that you cannot know and you have to take chances, and sometimes you make mistakes.

Adrian:             

It just reminded me of a very sort of zen thing, like the don’t know mind. It’s sort of cultivating, being okay with not knowing, which is hard, you know, and the uncertainty that people have to learn to sit with.

Laurie:              

Yes. Well, epistemic humility. So a kind of humility in like what we expect ourselves and others to know and then becoming comfortable with uncertainty and not just uncertainty but unknowablility. So it’s one thing when I walk out of a room to be uncertain about what scene I might see, well, is it going to be, am I going to face a scene with some books in it or with a computer or with some trees? I could be uncertain which of those I’m going to face, but know that those are my three options. It’s a different kind of thing when I say if I open the door, I don’t know what’s going to be out there. So that’s an unknowability like let’s say I could be opening a portal to another world, right? Let’s go with that term, like that to kind of a radical kind of unknowability. Some of what I’m most interested in involves basically, if not as radical as like opening a portal to another world, a certain kind of unknowability like when you’ve never seen color, and all of a sudden you see colors and before you’ve seen the color, you just don’t know what it’s like to see color. It’s not about uncertainty in that case, and then you have to be comfortable even with unknowability.

Thal:                 

I was just thinking as you’re talking about that that there are aspects to that like opening the door and looking at the unknown. There are aspects that are hard to quantify from our human experience, like fear, guilt, shame, and these things can be associated with a decision, and there are also gut feelings. Sometimes you want to buy a house, everything looks good, but there’s a gut feeling that’s telling you not to buy the house. What can you say about that?

Laurie:              

I think what I would say is feelings and emotions matter, I think as much as the kind of facts about something. So I assigned value to the nature of an experience. Right? Part of what I’m saying is that what it’s like to live one’s life after the fact, the value that one assigns, which should actually incorporate this kind of subjective character. The other thing I would say is that part of what what you’re talking involves for me stuff about motivation. It’s one thing to know various kinds of outcomes like you might know how to map out all the different outcomes and what weights to attached to how likely those outcomes might be. Yet you might not be motivated but you might be afraid or you might have other kinds of emotions that come into play that would affect the way that you make a decision. I think that’s a place where rationality straws.

Adrian:             

What are your thoughts on using visualization? Is that sort of reliable to imagine with your mind using images or scenarios to imagine the home that you’re contemplating to buy in and sort of watching maybe perhaps how your body’s responding as information. How does that fit into your model?

Laurie:              

Good. Yeah. I think there are lots of different ways we make decisions. In one way we’d like to make decisions involves some kind of visualization that you imagine yourself in a situation. Sometimes what you’re doing is putting yourself in that situation messily and then trying to figure out what should I do, like what are my preferences. Sometimes though in virtue of imagining yourself in a situation you form your preferences, right? You might not even have had preferences until you actually are in that situation. The way this comes back to a transformative experience is that part of what I’m saying is that we use that tool often when we’re trying to figure out what to do, but if you don’t have the information you need, if you say, well, I want to decide, do I want to like put them on enchroma glasses and be able to see colors in the world or don’t I, maybe I will find it overwhelming and frightening and in disruptive or maybe I’ll think it’s fabulous.

Well, if you’ve never seen color, you don’t have the ability to imagine in an accurate way what that’s going to be like. So you can’t discover your prefrences. I think the same thing happens. Take somebody who’s been in prison for 25 years who’s never used the internet, who’s never used a cell phone. They’re up for parole. They have to go and face the parole board and describe how they’re gonna respond to and preparing themselves for various kinds of difficult situations to convince the parole board to let them out. There’s a way in which we’re asking you to do something impossible. It’s just, they can say things. I think people do say things, you get prepared and hopefully obviously they’re there and prepared enough to answer the questions, but I think often we’re actually putting a quite an unfair burden on this person because the (inaudible) changes so much in ways that they’ve had no experience. They can’t possibly perform from the kinds of visualizations that they would need to be able to assess what they’re going to face in the outside world and make the right decisions.

Adrian:             

Yeah. For some reason, I am thinking about Elon Musk and the mission to Mars, it’s like, if that was an option, would you like to move to Mars? That’s one of those scenarios where you just have no reference.

Laurie:              

Exactly. I think parallel cases are, say someone is thinking about emigrating, right, and there might be political reasons forced you to leave, and so maybe you don’t have a choice, but even then it’s a kind of opening a door to like another world. People will go because maybe they have to, but if you’re making the decision, maybe you have to make a choice between moving to one country that’s very different from the one that you’re in. Again, you faced this sort of problem, like it’s an unknown really how all the things you’re going to experience and how you’re going respond to how you’re going to change. What do I want to discover, what it’s going to be like or do I want to pass up that chance because even though there are opportunities there, it’s also going to change me and I value who I am now, and I think it can be totally rational to pass up the chance like that.

Thal:                 

One of the main reasons we started this podcast was to sort of address or walk around the issue of the meaning crisis that we’re going through right now. We feel like your work around transformative experiences can offer an answer or a prespective to that crisis. Is there anything you’d like to speak to about that?

Laurie:             

I’ve said a few things about revelation and what I think of as wisdom rather than truth. In other words, I think that first recognizing that experience is something where we, that we can use to learn about ourselves in the world in virtue of having the experience. There’s a way in which something is revealed to you. What’s revealed to you is in a sense how you respond to the world, right? So when you go out into the world and see color for the first time, what you really discovering is how you respond to various kinds of (inaudible) things like that. The way that you’ll experience beauty and so what beauty is then for you. I think parenting is like that as well. I don’t think there’s a right choice or wrong choice with respect to parenting. I think, often, becoming a parent carries as much suffering with it as joy. In fact, it probably carries more suffering with it, than it carries joy and the decision to undergo these kinds of experiences aren’t simple calculations and I don’t think they’re specially informed calculations when it comes to thinking about like pluses and minuses or how much joy or satisfaction or sadness you experienced.

It’s just rather, look, this is what it is to live it is to undergo some of these experiences. It’s not wrong to try to control them as much as you can because you want to have a say over them even if you don’t know what’s going to happen even if there’s both unknowability and uncertainty. So what you’re seeking is a kind of discovery and revelation and opportunity, not necessarily knowing what the truths are and then judiciously choosing the ones that are right for you and rejecting the ones that are wrong for you. That sometimes is what we do, but in many other kinds of context, that’s just the wrong way to think about the trick does that we’re making in the way that we’re understanding things, and all that then goes back to like philosophy and going back to what we said in the beginning about natural, like empirical sciences, like often empirical sciences are about uncovering truths, uncovering like what the road is like in, in various ways and getting answers to questions. Philosophy isn’t about that. Philosophy is about asking questions, discovering questions, and then sometimes recognizing that there are things that … that we can’t know or understanding like how we’re supposed to kind of face and understand the place of a person in the world, and that’s kind of what wisdom involves. There’s a contrast there and that’s fine.

Adrian:             

I’m reminded of our conversation with John Vervaeke and he mentioned the term existential inertia. There are these moments in our lives where there’s this stuckness because it feels like you just, you just can’t get going or can’t move. It sounds to me just hearing you speak, there’s a wisdom in continuing to just keep treading, like to not reach a point of stillness where you’re just not moving, and it could be because it’ll be really hard to get going again.

Laurie:              

I think that’s right. This goes back again and accepting unknowablitiy and uncertainty and not feeling like you have to act in order to eliminate in order to create certainty because sometimes maybe you do, but sometimes that’s the wrong impulse. Instead of thinking that you must eliminate all the unknowns, you must eliminate all the uncertainty, you can just allow it to be. Even when you do make choices, you don’t have to think about your self as always making the right choice as much as I’m just discovering basically a way that the world’s going to reveal itself to be more evolved in various kinds of ways and not thinking that we have to be in control in all respects of our life.

Thal:                 

What you’re saying too is like, it really just goes in line with a lot of the mystical language that I’ve explored in my life and just you saying that just allowing and surrendering and these are very important concepts. Sometimes we don’t, we can’t just tread along. Sometimes we just have to sit with the unknown, with the paradox and just allow things to unfold.

Laurie:              

I’m going to say it’s not giving up either. I think people feel anxiety when they feel that they have to try to create certainties and just kind of being and not controlling is actually a way of a kind of establishing a kind of control at a higher level. Being at ease with the way that things change is a response that shows kind of stability and a kind of understanding. In some ways the right way to approach the kind of anxiety of like all the different ways. It seems like we’re supposed to construct and control things.

Thal:                 

Yes, I mean it’s so easy to talk about, but really anxiety is like, we’re all struggling with it and I’m just thinking like someone listening to this and like, okay, I will sit with it but it really is about that and you know, trusting and allowing.

Laurie:              It’s incredibly hard and it can be really unpleasant. It is not like, “oh, I’ll just be uncertain. Let it all sit and everything will feel wonderful.” No, I think usually it often, I mean maybe things feel wonderful after awhile or maybe you get a reduction of anxiety in some ways, but that doesn’t mean that there are no unpleasant things to the endure.

Thal:                 

That’s part of the experience. I mean, it comes with the positive and it comes with a negative and it’s experiential work essentially.

Adrian:             

What can you tell us about, we noticed the book that you’re currently working on is called Becoming, I feel like this is a good time to bring that word. What do you mean by Becoming?

Laurie:              

I don’t actually know if that’s going to be the title. I hate to say this expression because apparently Michelle Obama wrote a book that has that title. I can’t compete with Michelle. Another title that I have sort of played around with is, “Who will I become?” What I’m trying to get at there is again, how we construct ourselves sometimes how we construct ourselves through making decisions to have experiences and sometimes we’re just constructed by experiences. I want to explore that in the book. I talk about transformative experience but I also talk about how, actually I talk a good bit about how embracing various ways in which we dispense with old selves and parts of ourselves and new selves can surface sometimes unexpectedly, through choices that we make or life experiences that we have to undergo. Sort of understanding that kind of ebb and flow of one’s own kind of first personal perspective, especially oer the span of a lifetime, and the other thing that I spend some time talking about is how we often I think make judgments about, whether we think it would be better or worse to be a certain kind of person. I think when we make those judgments, sometimes they’re good judgments, but sometimes they’re born out of ignorance and a failure to remember that kind of self can really be impenetrable and we have to respect again, we can’t know about other people and about who we could become after various kinds of experiences.

Thal:                 

And with that judgment, really, is rigidity and the black and white thinking and it’s not a good place to go to.

Laurie:              

We can uncover certain kinds of truths, but there’s a kind of humility that’s really important to recall and to say, well, look, I can think I know some things, but to assume that I know all the information that’s necessary, in these kinds of context when we’re talking especially about knowing other human minds and knowing other ways our own line could be, I think is just naive. There’s a kind of self-change that can be so dramatic that you simply can’t put yourself in the shoes of another version of you. If you think about yourself 15 years ago, for example, when I think about myself, there’s, I remember things about what it was like to be me then, but there is way where I can’t put myself back in those shoes 15 years ago, I had just changed too much. When I think about myself 15 years from now, or myself, 35 years from now, descending into dementia. Right? I mean, maybe not even 25 years, but let’s, let’s not go there.

Thal:                 

That’s black and white thinking right there.

(Laughter)

Laurie:              

I think it’s like reasonable to say there’s a way in which I can’t both put myself in those shoes as that future self and still be who I am now. There’s a kind of incommensurability in our mental lives that has to be recognized. So just assuming, oh yeah, I know enough about what I’ll be like then to make choices for that future self with full knowledge and full certainty is just wrong. We shouldn’t try to put that burden on ourselves because that’s the wrong way to approach the changes in the ways that life bring us and the ways that we teach our own lives.

Thal:                 

I have to say, I mean, I find your work fascinating, which takes me to the question I’m thinking about, what philosopher inspired you or continues to inspire you or what kind book that you’ve read that sort of transformed your life or changed your perspective and is there anything you specifically would recommend?

Laurie:              

Edna Ullmann Margalit is a political philosopher who wrote about various kinds of life changes and she talked about opting, drifting, and converting. There’s a paper that I would recommend. I’m also a fan of some of Cass Sunstein’s work on nudging and self change. Those are useful things to read. The philosopher that motivated me the most was someone David Lewis. He w,as a technical philosopher. He wrote hard to read and hard to understand books, so you really have to be committed if you want to read David Lewis, and his work, in particular, he wrote a paper called “What Experiences Teaches” and he’s written other work on decision-making and the metaphysics of selves that I love. You could read Thomas Nagel’s paper, what it’s like to be a bat, and you could read. I think I’ll stick with that. Yeah. A lot of my work, even though I’ve been talking about it in ways that I hope are accessible to non-philosophers. A lot of the work really is based on academic work in metaphysics and epistemology. My own book, transformative experience was written for philosophers, although lots of non philosophers have read it, and that makes me really happy. The book that I’m writing now is actually written for non-philosophers. So my hope is that people would read that book, to get a kind of a glimpse onto some of the philosophical issues, and then if they were really interested, they could read like my philosophical books or other works of other philosophers that I cite.

Thal:                 

When you mentioned that title, is how to be a bat? (inaudible) I’m reminded of Kafka’s Metamorphosis, and waking up as a beetle. That’s my literature mind, but I’m like, to make those connections between the different fields is fascinating.

Laurie:              

Great and actually in my new book, I talk about a number of different works of art in literature and connections. Another thing that you could read, philosophical discussions of Plato’s cave and how…which is an old dialogue where you have Socrates talking with Glaucon about people who are in a cave who are just looking at shadows on the wall and they think they’re seeing reality because they have never been allowed to kind of escape the cave, but actually there’s the way in which everything you’re seeing is an illusion. I don’t want to say that the external world is an illusion or anything like that. What I think is great about that example is that it’s a way of understanding how…what we see and experience is a reflection in some sense of how the outside world is affecting us. I think it is a really good mental exercise to engage.

Adrian:             

One final question, Laurie. If you could say one thing to your future selves, what would you like to say?

Thal:                

 I like that.

Laurie:              

I would say that I need to pay attention to what I’ve learned from my past selves to not forget about epistemic humility.

Thal:                 

Awesome.

Adrian:             

It was a real treat. Thank you very much, Laurie.

Laurie:              

Yeah. Nice to talk with you guys. Thank you.

#19: Revisioning Transpersonal Psychology with Jorge Ferrer

The central premise of Transpersonal Psychology is that mental health encompasses more than just the physical matter of the brain or the behavioural ailments attached to personality structures. The transpersonal approach addresses issues that arise from beyond the limitations of psychopathology. Before the birth of the field, it was only mystics and sages who grappled with transcendent or spiritual experiences. Transpersonal psychology may be one of the doorways for mainstream psychology to negotiate a more holistic approach towards mental health.

Jorge Ferrer is considered one of the main architects of second-wave transpersonal psychology and is best known for his participatory approach to spiritual knowing and religious pluralism. He is an international lecturer and professor at California Institute of Integral Studies. He teaches courses on transpersonal and integral studies, comparative mysticism, participatory theory, embodied spiritual inquiry, and spiritual perspectives on sexuality and intimate relationships.  We explore non-ordinary states of consciousness, embodied spirituality or “body fulness”, plant medicines, and the need for more cross-pollination between spiritual traditions. 

Jorge is the author of Revisioning Transpersonal Theory: A Participatory Vision of Human Spirituality and Participation and the Mystery: Transpersonal Essays in Psychology, Education, and Religion, as well as the co-editor of The Participatory Turn: Spirituality, Mysticism, Religious Studies.

Highlights:

  • Spiritual Bypass vs Embodied Spirituality
  • Participatory Approach to Transpersonal Psychology
  • Collaboration Between Indigenous and Modern Communities

Resources:

Listen:

Poem Inspired by This Episode

Full Transcript

Thal:                

 Welcome to the show, Jorge. Thank you for coming on.

Jorge Ferrer:               

Thank you very much it is a pleasure to be here and to be here with you.

Adrian:             

Yeah, so Jorge, I think a great place for us to start this is to just hear a bit about your, the spiritual orientation of your childhood. We want to hear some of your early experiences that put you on this path of Transpersonal Psychology.

Jorge Ferrer:               

Thank you. I think I can say a few things about that, I was born in Barcelona in 1968. It still is, but it was even more of a Christian Catholic country. I did go to a Catholic school. I think I was lucky enough that the school was run by a brotherhood of educators, Armanos Maristas and the object of devotion was not God the father it was the Virgin Mary. In a way they were much less dogmatic and strict like the Jesuits for example. The education was very good but also there was something about that kind of devotion to Virgin Mary that I think kind of influenced my approach to spirituality from day one, like a more feminine and more organic in many ways. We will talk later about it I am sure but in many ways this participatory spirituality it could be seen as a much more feminine approach than let’s say other more classical Transpersonal paradigms.

In addition to that what I would say I also went through a kind of non-ordinary states of consciousness and experiences when I was a child. I think probably when I was 11 or 10 years old. In the school, several times I would go into what I later learned to identify as a trance state. The Buddhists call it the Jhānas, the first absorption in the Theravada path where everything in the room and everything around me will be completely blank. I would have my eyes open, but I would lose complete contact with the environmental context and I would be in a space of peace and light and just beauty. The teacher would wake me up and then I would start crying.

After a few times they took me to the school psychologist concerned that I could be epileptic, and they run some tests and they didn’t find anything and just let it go. That was one experience and the other was when I was pre-adolescent I started having out of body experiences and at first I was very scared of them and at first I really didn’t know what was going on and was not sure if I will come back to my body so it was pretty scary and later throughout my life, you know, I had them in different places and by then it became something else. At that point I was concerned, those experiences plus my personal of some kind neurotic things that I was experiencing in adolescence and early adulthood took me to the study of psychology and I was trying like many people who go into psychology, I believe they go for personal healing and also understanding those states, of course, mainstream psychology or the university did not provide for either of those. Those states were pathologized by mainstream psychology, as depersonalization or dissociation and all sorts of stuff and of course mainstream psychology could not provide any healing for my neurotic loops. I started a personal search for different paradigms that ultimately led me to find transpersonal psychology first through the books and then also start meditation, like also practicing with some kind of psychedelic substances and many, many other things, and ultimately led me to CIIS, to study my PhD there. I’ve been teaching there for the last 20 years.

Adrian:             

I wanted to ask you about the out of body experience, when you said that my body kind of got a reaction to it, so I want to kind of press a little bit, do you mind sharing what that first out of body was like? What was happening phenomenologically?

Jorge Ferrer:               

Sure. Basically, all the of out of body experiences that I have had follow a very specific phenomenology to begin with later they can change. They normally happen, at least to me, when you’re in that space, in between a wakefulness and sleep, your mind is completely awake and lucid. You are as awake as the three of us right now and most of our audience, I’m sure. At some point you find your body completely paralyzed. Then you feel some kind of energy, you can hear it in waves. Voom. Voom. Suddenly you find yourself out of the body. At first it can be extremely disorienting because you have not learned, especially when you’re like 12 or 15 years old to navigate those states. It could be scary, you find yourself out there, you see your body in bed? You are in a kind of different body like what is called the astral body, but you don’t know how to make it work so it could be very disorienting. It took me many years and many out of body experiences to actually learn through experience to navigate those worlds much better.

Thal:                

 I think we’re just going to move to the next question. One of your major contributions to Transpersonal Psychology is the participatory approach, maybe if you can share with us how you arrived to that perspective. Personally and academically.

Jorge Ferrer:               

They are intertwined, of course. It was part of my personal process. It was part of my intellectual challenge, and my spiritual unfolding all at the same time. What I would say is that when I first arrived to California in the early nineties, Transpersonal psychology was dominated by the neo-Perennialist approach, authors like Ken Wilber and Stan Grof, people I really admired a lot, and they have contributed tremendously to the field. They were like the fathers of the field and I learned so much from them, and at the same time there were ways in which I felt they were providing this kind of neutral language, like this categories that claimed to be transcultural for all spiritual paths, all spiritual traditions.

But by doing so, inadvertently, in most cases, especially in the case of Stan Grof, in the case of Wilbur it’s a different story. I think they were kind of like situating the spiritual goals of some traditions above all others, either absolute consciousness or non-duality and by doing that they were relegating spiritual goals and spiritual traditions that did not share those goals. For example, most of Christian mysticism does not share non-duality, it is about cultivating the presence of God, a loving God in your life, you know, not to speak about Daoism or indigenous traditions. Theistic traditions, for example, were kind of relegated to a kind of a lower level of a spiritual insight and understanding. That was part of my initial reaction to that and at the same time there was a lot of emphasis in the Transpersonal psychology movement about reaching states of consciousness, right?

The subconscious was the panacea, you know. We need to understand that for many decades spirituality in the States, the Transpersonal movement had been dominated by very problematic forms of Christianity. In the late 50s and mid-60s, the psychedelics came in and Eastern traditions and Eastern gurus came in to the West, you know, and at the same time it was humanistic psychology speaking about peak experiences and farther reaches of human nature. I think the conference of different factors gave birth to the Transpersonal movement with its emphasis on higher states of consciousness.

Most of Transpersonal psychology at that time were busy mapping those states and they still are many of them and it is still a very valuable task. But for me, the participatory movement, is not a substitution of that first wave. It’s kind of an expansion. It’s bringing it all down to earth. It’s about relationship with other human beings, with societies, cultures, diversity, the ecological crisis or political situation and so forth. It’s really about the democratization of spirituality, like really framing a plurality of spiritualities. There is no single sequence or paradigm model that is going to encompass all traditions in a way that is not ideological, especially when you situate them in a evolutionary continuum or developmental continuum as all those Transpersonal psychologists were doing. The participatory movement is like an embodiment, and also it is about relatedness, and creative inquiry in dimensions of spirituality. It’s not so much about rediscovering the tools that were already found by the old sages and teachers, but also it is about co-creating your own spiritual path.

Thal:                 

I think what you mentioned is very important because I mean, personally, I found when I was going through my own crisis and asking all those questions, and just the complexities of the world felt overwhelming, I found solace in reading Ken Wilber and just, you know, everything hierarchal and organized, and that has its place. But also, like you said, the participatory approach is not to eclipse that, but to enrich that approach. Can you speak more about how it can serve in our current global climate?

Jorge Ferrer:              

 I feel you are totally right because with those early years (in Transpersonal psychology), there was an influx of all these different spiritual traditions and people were having these psychedelic states. There was this chaos and so maps such as Ken Wilber’s and Stan Grof really put order to some extent. People say, “oh, wow, now at least I have a map that I can make sense of my experience.” But of course, like any human experience, especially when you go beyond your own experience and you start relating to many many other people who have different experiences. It’s much more complex and messy and interesting than any kind of conceptual can encompass.

Anyway, coming back to your question. I think it is important that with our ecological crisis, you can try to persuade people about being pro environmentalist in many different ways, and many people are doing that because they have an intellectual understanding of the problem. There are people who are doing that because of survival reasons, and that’s very important, not only for themselves but for their progeny. They really want to make sure that their grandsons and granddaughters have a world where there are trees and there is air that can be breathed.

There are a variety of reasons. I think with the participatory approach, or the eco-psychological and transpersonal movements what they can bring forth is more important because take for example the emphasis on embodiment. The more embodied you are…which the body is really part of nature in a way that the isolated mind can be more disassociated. The more embodied you are, the more naturally empathic you are to the pain and the joy of nature. Therefore, it becomes something more of an existential imperative is not so much about the survival of your granddaughters or because you know it’s right. It’s because you care in the flesh of your body that that is the right thing to do.

Adrian:             

Jorge, I love to ask you personal practices that have helped you become more embodied. I love that we’re bringing this up because I feel that seems to be a very relevant thing within today’s spiritual climate. That word embodiment comes up a lot, but the practices I feel are helpful. If we could go into that a little bit to share with our listeners.

Jorge Ferrer:               

Yes, this is a great question and thank you. Well, I spent almost 15 years of my life in the Buddhist tradition meditating and at some point I quit. I value meditation and I incorporate it in many aspects of my life and I still meditate sometimes, but at some point, even some Buddhist teachers today, like Reggie Ray and many others have brought this critiques of meditation as a potentially disembodied practice. It all depends how you meditate, right? There is a way in which people can really spend a lot of time in their minds and consciousness. Of course in many of the traditions like Buddhism, you know, the body was something to leave behind, not to speak about sexuality, and of course cultivating the more subtle dimensions of the heart and essence of consciousness. In India and the Indian Matrix, liberation was understood as something to escape Samsara, to escape the body, to escape this phenomenal natural reality.

But it doesn’t leave you many resources for environmentalism, but that’s a different issue. For me, after many years at that practice I was already experimenting with some sacred plants like Ayahuasca, Mushrooms, and San Pedro that is my main plant teacher and San Pedro in particular brought this very strong dimension of embodiment. San Pedro, in particular, is not a plant that takes you on this kind of inner journey or some different world spaces and subtle worlds that could be very fascinating and important, but it is a plant that teaches you how to be embodied here and now. When you are then embodied here and now you can open the windows and doors of your home, and a such your body without leaving your body sort to speak.

Another important practice for me is interactive embodied meditation it comes from a word called holistic transformation that I used to co-facilitate in Esalen institute, and in another places. It is a basically people coming together and practicing meditation in relationship with each other, and in physical contact with each other where you bring the mindfulness practice into physical contact with the body? I think that’s very powerful. My sense is that there is a lot of work that is very cutting edge. The most work that is cutting edge is the work that integrates somatics (body) with spiritual consciousness mindfulness. In the last couple of years, a few books came out about a bodyfullnes. This is a term that I coined myself in 2006 to speak about not so much the mindfulness of the body but a kind of awareness that emerges from the body itself. It might be like the big cats of the jungle. They are not intentionally trying to be alert but they are extremely alert much more than human beings. I can say a bit more or I can leave it here and go where you guys want me to go.

Thal:                 

Actually, just comparing the word mindfulness to the word bodyfullnes is interesting because mindfulness can be a way where people become even stuck more in their mind and forget their body. I’m thinking about the term spiritual bypass and how, you know, instead of using spirituality to become more integrated and aware, we can use it to just escape our body, our humanity. If you can speak more about that for sure, that would be…

Jorge Ferrer:               

The mindfulness that has become popularized today in the States and in Europe is a some more cognitive approach to mindfulness that is quite mental and that’s not even necessarily the mindfulness that was cultivated in Buddhism and has many differences as many Buddhist scholars have pointed out today. In any case, in terms of spiritual bypass, I will explain the terms for the audience. Spiritual bypass means, in particular, when one goes into a kind of like spiritual practice or teachings in order to avoid facing psychological issues. and to give a couple of examples. Say someone who has a lot of issues about anger, say anger towards their parents or anger towards the world can be very drawn to practice Buddhism. They emphasize the no expression of anger, equanimity, and being super peaceful all the time or someone for example that has like sexual blocks or issues around their sexuality they can become drawn to a tradition that emphasizes celibacy. Is that a solution? I don’t think so. In the best cases, they can transform some of those energies in positive ways and that can help. However, following the path of doing the psychological work, the psychosomatic psychoenergetic work to heal those sexual blocks to really clean the anger within yourself and to forgive your parents and to forgive the world, or whatever you are angry against, and then from that solid foundation build your spiritual practice.

Thal:                 

Definitely, the psychological growth and the spiritual growth go in tandem. We can’t separate both that’s a mistake that I’ve done in my life so I’m learning slowly.

Jorge Ferrer:               

Ideally they should go in tandem, but many times they don’t. We see this all the time, for example, spiritual teachers, you know, they are awake or they have a certain awakening for example in their consciousness or even in their hearts. They get into all sorts of sexual scandals, unethical behavior, and power games, right? So I just want to speak to the fact that while ideally they should go in tandem, very often they do not. I know many Shamans who are masters of the psychic realm and they can be tremendously gifted healers. They are real shamans, now don’t get me wrong. This is very important. They’re real shaman, they are elders in their communities, and at the same time they start doing ceremonies with Western women, but they also have transference towards them. It could be mutual and a two way street energetically, but they then lose it and start sexually harassing them or worst case scenario abusing them and abusing their own power. That is very unfortunate. This is why it is so important that we affirm and we encourage this kind of integrated spiritual growth that includes not only just the heart and consciousness, but the body and sexuality in particular. It is not the same to become mature mentally or emotionally than to become mature somatically and sexually.

Adrian:            

I love that. I want to ask you if someone’s earnestly trying to develop spiritually, they’re involving in practices, learning from different people, reading books. What are some helpful signs that they might be on an disintegrated path? Right? So what might that look like? We’re all vulnerable to it. I don’t want to sit here pretending like, you know, that we can just talk about these things as if we’re outside of it. You know, I think we’re the first to admit that we are all susceptible to disintegration or disembodiment. What does that look like? What are some telltale signs?

Thal:                 

The work never ends really. It’s constant. It’s something that we were talking about, too, before starting the podcast with you. I’m thinking about the Jungian concept of the shadow and it’s like the more you work on your spirituality, your “light”, you still have to be aware of your “shadow” and the dark.

Jorge Ferrer:               

I have a qualification around that because as the saying goes, the greater the light the greater the shadow, I don’t totally believe that. This is the case when development has not been integrated. The lack of development happens when there is a lot of spiritual consciousness and a lot of light but there has not been depth psychological work going together, if a person is developing spiritually and also has been doing a lot of depth psychological work: “I don’t think that the greater the light, the greater the shadow,” even though the saying makes a lot of intuitive sense because light and shadow go together.

Thal:                 

It is a clean box, Jorge, why break it open?

                        (Laughing)

Jorge Ferrer:               

Unfortunately, a lot of times this is the case, I think that is a sign of this kind of a more dissociated forms of spirituality in which people are just developing in some areas and not in others.

Adrian:             

I mean this is kind of related. Since we brought up altered states, this is something that we’re experiencing right now in today’s renaissance of psychedelics both in research as well as just exploration, you know, more and more people that are turning towards these tools. What excites you about this renaissance and maybe perhaps also what worries you at the same time with this current trend?

Jorge Ferrer:               

Yes, many things are exciting and many things are disturbing or concerning. I think there are two levels to this path, of course, it works on the individual level for people who are experimenting and then more on the cultural level, I think there’s two sides of the question. On an individual level, I am a San Pedresta and I do believe in the transformative power of many of these plant medicines. On the other hand, there is a lot of caution too. To proceed with caution is very important. I think we all know people who have done a lot of psychedelic work and you know their egos are not smaller, they are bigger, you know, and sometimes they have really weird ideas. They become conspiracy theorists. They are not becoming better persons. So what is going on? I think there are several factors. There is someone’s baseline kind of character. If it is someone with a lot of narcissistic wounding and let’s say a borderline personality, in a way doing the psychedelic work without doing the psychological healing work, there are more chances that something can go wrong. There are more chances that you become inflated or messianic or just not a good person as you could be. Another factor is community and integration. When indigenous people do these plants, they do it in the jungle, in nature, around a whole community and rites of passage. There is a whole social matrix that supports integration. Even in those cases, there is no warrant that the shaman is not going to be ethical or he is not going to be a sexual harasser. Things are very delicate. The importance of community of peers and friends who are going to tell you frankly. Jorge, you have been doing San Pedro all these years but don’t see you becoming more available for life. You are even a bit more self-centered than you are before. I think that mirroring is crucial. If it’s just one person telling you, yeah, but if it’s like a community telling you then that’s really powerful.

The power of community is really important. On a cultural level and social level, the renaissance of psychedelic research is important. It is legitimizing and it going to help in a few years when it becomes legal, like the psychotherapeutic use of MDMA and probably psilocybin as well. This is good because it will reach more people instead of doing the work underground and in illegal ways. It will open the doors for people who do not want to go that way. There is immense healing that can take place and a lot of suffering can be eliminated or minimized. There are also a plethora of challenges such as big Pharma.

On the other hand, there are corporate interests that are trying to put their teeth on all this research. They are donating a lot of money to all the research. No one believes that they do not want anything back. People who are in those organizations, especially MAPS are very aware of those things. There is also the cultural dimension, shamans and people from different cultures, like the Mazatec who have been using mushrooms for many years, when they hear that the medical establishment is going to take that sacrament and medicalize it and sell it without credit or without honoring the wisdom behind the tradition then of course they are not going to be happy about it and with some good reasons.

Thal:                 

I’m thinking when you’re talking about the plant teachers…and bringing the plant teachers over here…can we still have the element of the sacred or are we also appropriating yet another indigenous method of healing? I mean, what are your ideas around that?

Jorge Ferrer:               

I do work with the plant medicine, after spending 12 years working in Peru, I do belong to a lineage but I am not a native or am I Peruvian. San Pedro is a bit different since it does not have such an old lineage such as the psilocybin.

Thal:                 

Sorry, we lost you for a minute. When you said something important about San Pedro. Can you repeat that please? Thank you.

Jorge Ferrer:               

With San Pedro in particular the tradition is lost. It’s more disseminated, but with other plant teachers it is different. I think it’s a very delicate thing because on the one hand, I would love for as many people as possible in the world to benefit from those teachers. I believe that the plant teachers themselves, they want also that, they want to give. They don’t care if they are giving it to the natives or to other persons, they are sentient intelligences from earth. They just want to benefit all sentient beings. On the other hand, there is the perpetual issue of colonialism. When a culture has been colonized, when their women have been raped, where their lands have been taken, by Western people and now they are taking their sacred medicine.

That is of course will always be a contested area, but I think in the best case scenario, some kind of a dialogue from those traditions should and could take place, and some kind of compensation. Many of those people are just living in misery. It will be something that will make them happy and they will also be more willing to share their wisdom. Their willingness to share their wisdom is their own right but also I think the plant themselves are for all humankind. I don’t think that some people have a sacrosanct right to them and not others because they happen to be born in that area of the world. That’s my opinion but other people will think differently.

Thal:                 

That is true. I actually agree with that opinion. I really think it is the fine line. It’s like the middle way of how can we bring these plant teachers and gift from the Earth. How can we bring them but without appropriation, without the colonial baggage? It’s easier said than done. But yes, absolutely.

Jorge Ferrer:               

You know as a Spaniard and living in the States for 23 years, I never had any issue when I saw Americans cooking piaya but American people did not come to my country to destroy it or decimate it, and rape the women of my ancestry and take our things. The greater the issue of colonialism, the more delicate the approach. The other issues is money. Who is benefitting from this? When a world famous musical band, who I won’t mention their name, uses music from the indigenous people of Africa and makes million without giving back then that is a problem. Money, the history of colonialism and no dialogue with those people, I think are three factors that are very important.

Adrian:            

 I’ve heard you use this term and it’s actually a beautiful plant analogy is cross-pollination. You know, perhaps as a more harmonious way of seeing some of these practices and traditions being shared is the idea of cross-pollination. Can you share what that looks like or your vision for that type of spirituality?

Jorge Ferrer:               

I think I used that term to explain the cross-pollination of mystical and religious traditions. I think this is what is happening today. I used that word to describe what is already happening with the inter-religious dialogue, different monks, and exchanging different practices and different teachings. At the same time I used that word to show that this is where we should be going. Different traditions are good at cultivating different potentials. Some traditions are good at cultivating meditation mind and consciousness, other traditions are good at cultivating harmoniousness with nature and seeing nature as sacred, and other traditions are good at cultivating charity and social action. I think traditions have too much to learn and to teach.

At the same time this can be applied in conversation with indigenous traditions and Western traditions. I think there is a way in which people from both camps approach the other tradition with certain pride. The Western people go like this is primitive, we can take the wisdom from them and we can use it in this way because they are using it in this limited way, while we can use it in these amazing ways and reach many people. We actually know better what these plants are than they know because we have analyzed them in our laboratories. There is also the pride of the indigenous people. They actually come forward saying that we are better, we are the spiritual people. You people are not spiritual and you don’t know shit with what is going on with the plants.

In part, they know much more than we do about the power of these plants. I think there are possibilities of integration with a more dialogical approach in which doctors, psychologists, neuroscientists come together with shamans, indigenous people having worked with those plants and they come together as equals and they share knowledge. They not only share knowledge but they also inquire together. I think that is the future of research that I would like to see. This is not happening in the big universities. Let us come together, let us journey together, and let us inquire together, and let’s do an experience together and then let’s contrast our viewpoints. How do you understand what happened and listening to our different epistemologies and our different methodologies, and our world-views. A kind of multidimensional and multicultural dialogue and inquiry and science! This has not been happening, and I would like to see that happening in the future.

Thal:                 

In a way that is the true work of authentic scholarship, really. When you say that the big universities are not doing that then it’s really sad. The true work of academics and scholarship is to exchange and to meet as equals. When you describe the doctor of psychology meeting the shaman both are inquiring about the spirit but they are just coming at it from a different perspective. Speaking of talking about the same thing but from different perspectives, I am thinking about mysticism. I also know that you are a student of mysticism, and the world itself, a lot of modern minds might cringe when they hear that word. What does it mean to you?

Jorge Ferrer:               

It is a trick question. For me it means many things. I am a student of mysticism, I have also been teaching comparative mysticism for many years. I know the history of the word. I know the different meanings of the word. I know the different meanings the word took throughout many centuries, coming from the Greek matrix through Christianity. Something that is important to consider as preface, and I will go back to what the word means in a second, is the word mysticism is a Western construct. It is a Western term. It was later exported by Western scholars, Christian scholars to understand other traditions talking about access to spiritual entities of realms. For instance, many Buddhist scholars would not like their traditions to be called a mystical tradition.

D. T. Suzuki, one of the most famous Buddhist scholars who popularized Buddhism in the West was completely against the use of the word mysticism and to qualify Buddhism. Most indigenous people I know they would say, mysticism, what is that? That is not what we do here, what about healing, about balance, and about something else. Nothing mystical here. With that being said, the term mystical has many different meanings and it is a contested category. Generally speaking what mysticism means is about direct contact or direct access to a reality that is beyond our senses or we go down to a deeper dimension of this world that we can see. This is the nature of mysticism like the dimensions of consciousness or contact with the divine God in theistic traditions and so forth.

With that being said, my personal take on mysticism is like an integral experience of life, the cosmos, in all of its multidimensionality. So not only the dimension of the natural world but also the different kinds of the subtle realms as well everything that is encompassed by the word cosmos. Different mystics from different traditions would access different dimensions. It is not only a question of access only but it also a kind of creative enactment. This is also part of the participatory paradigm. It is not only about accessing realities that already exists and they do. It is also about cocreating with the kind of generative mystery.

By the term mystery, I mean that kind of creative force that is behind the unfolding of creation. I think we participate as human beings because we are part of that creation and that creative force. In connection with that creative force we can cocreate spiritual insights and practices and even perhaps new realities. I think this has been happening from the beginning of history of humankind.

Thal Ferrer:                 

In a way that’s bringing it to the practical, right? Like even when we’re talking about the plant teachers, they do take us into those “mystical experiences.” But really the true work is after the ceremony, like it’s not just to access those different realms as you said, it’s to bring it back to the everyday.

Adrian:             

I want to ask you, maybe not so practical question, purely just for my own curiosity. I know you’re not a fan of putting things into hierarchy, so I’m going to preface by asking, this is purely just for my own interest here. Is there a mystical experience that you’re comfortable to share that really stands out as the most confusing thing that doesn’t kind of fit, you know, a lot of rational understanding? Maybe actually there is a practical element that sort of brings humility, you know, it kind of brings you back to a place where like, I don’t know what the heck just happened. Is there something you can kind of share on that note?

Jorge Ferrer:               

Yes. My sense is that this is the paradox of knowledge. Genuine scientists talk about this…the more you know the more you realize the little you know. The more mystical experiences you have, the more explorations, the higher consciousness you can access, the more you realize the infinite dimensions that are out there. The more we realize the little that we know or the little that I know, in particular. Many of the experiences have deconstructed certain belief systems that I have had. They also impacted my work and certain theories. I have changed my minds about a few things.

For example, I used to hold that many of the entities that some traditions talk about like angels or sages that people would encounter. I would see it as cocreated by human consciousness until I had my own encounters with sages, astral doctors, and different types of disembodied entities made of energy and consciousness that really persuaded me that they are autonomous. They were so much wiser than I was and they were so much more benign and benevolent than even my deeper self. Most importantly, they had a tangible effect on my experience. I had an encounter with a Daoist sage and I could see him right in front of my face and he was bringing gifts on a purely energetic exchange, a shaktipat.

Therefore, there was this effect on my embodied organism. With ayahuasca it was the same, there were astral doctors moving in the room and healing people by putting their hands on their heart centre. They were performing these energetic spiritual surgeries and aligning the centers. It just makes you want to cry and be so thankful to them. I have had these experiences that helped me reframe my views. It could be some ascended masters or post-mortem scenarios. I do not believe that there is just one post-mortem scenario. I think there are many possibilities.

Some people say that religious pluralism is nice and beautiful but when you die you will see who is true. I don’t think so? I think the post-mortem existence can be much more complex and diverse than this one and different people can go to different places. While some entities could be ascended masters or people who have died, but there could also be independent realms with their independent entities made of energy and consciousness that are probably not connected to humanity.

The thing is that a lot of the entities that are encountered be it angels or others, they are usually very cultural shaped. There are different interpretations, here, where some say is that just an archetypal manifestation that becomes cultural with encounter but the essence is unknowable? The same entity would appear as angel to a Christian or a Buddhist teacher to another. I am not sure that that is how it works because the qualities are different and the energies are very different and the teachings are different, but who knows, the questions are endless, many possibilities and so much mystery. It is very exciting that we are all co-inquiring together into all of these dimensions these days.

Thal:                 

Amazing! Thank you for sharing that. I was transformed into another realm listening to you. Thank you. Yeah.

Adrian:             

Jorge. You mentioned at one point just bringing together a group of people from all the scientists, the Western minded as well as the indigenous and co-journeying. I think that really is sticking as a nice final remark is the idea that perhaps we should all, you know, find opportunities to co-journey with the other, you know, to step out of our comfort zones are familiar tribes and to really connect with the other, to find maybe not common ground, but to find the cross pollination. What gifts do we each have to exchange with one another?

Jorge Ferrer:               

With that being said, that does not mean that everyone has to do psychedelics. There are many ways to co-inquire and to co-journey through meditation and through different practices together. The importance is to include people from very diverse backgrounds and worldviews, different cultures, different worldviews, different epistemologies with humility and openness. I think this will be the challenge of our times.

Thal:                 

Absolutely. Thank you, Jorge.

Adrian:             

Thank you so much for your time today.

Thal:                 

Thank you so much.

Jorge Ferrer:               

My pleasure. Thank you. Thank you very much.

#15: From Ecstasy to Remedy – MDMA Therapy with Anne Wagner

As the so-called third wave of psychedelic renaissance unfolds, the notion of self-improvement has taken a new and deeper meaning. After a long slumber, the field of mental health is waking up to the therapeutic potentialities of these powerful tools in relieving symptoms of depression, PTSD, addiction, and fear surrounding terminal illness. Targeted towards beginners, Michael Pollen’s book How To Change Your Mind, published in the summer of 2018, propelled the conversation around psychedelics to the forefront. Whether it is MDMA, LSD, psilocybin, ayahuasca, or others, the potential for consciousness expansion and psycho-spiritual growth is immense.

The FDA recently granted “Breakthrough Therapy” Designation to MDMA for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and is currently in phase 3 clinical trials. Popularly known as a recreational drug, and as the main ingredient in ecstasy, MDMA is paving the way for the possible near-term legalization of psychedelic therapy.

On this episode, we talk to Anne Wagner, a clinical psychologist and one of the lead investigators involved in the MAPS funded clinical trials of MDMA + cognitive-based psychotherapy for PTSD. Anne tells us how she ended up working in the cutting edge of psychedelic science and what these studies offer for the future of mental health. In her clinical practice, Anne applies a cognitive-behavioural and mindfulness-based approach to therapy and she also offers preparation and integration of psychedelic and non-ordinary state experiences. We got to connect with Anne at her new clinic, Remedy in Toronto. 

Highlights:

  • MDMA + Cognitive Based Conjoint Therapy for PTSD
  • Leading Psychedelic Research
  • The Future of Mental Health

Resources:

Listen:

Poem Inspired by This Episode

Full Transcript

Thal

Welcome Anne to the show.

Anne Wagner

Thanks so much for having me.

Thal

Thank you.

Adrian

Yeah, we’re sitting in your space, Remedy in Toronto. No, actually that’s one of the things we do want to ask you about is to learn more about the work that you’re doing here. Um, but before we dive into your current work. We tend to like to go backwards and just learn about your journey and how you got interested in the intersections between psychology, psychedelic science and specifically the MDMA studies and how did that all come together for you?

Anne Wagner

Sure. So it was not a planned path, that’s for sure. Adding these things together. So I knew pretty early on that I wanted to pursue psychology. So within, you know, the first two years of my undergrad degree, I decided that psychology was something I found really interesting. And the thing that I liked the most about it was just the breadth and depth that you could have within one field. So you could be, um, learning how to run studies. You could be seeing clients, you could be investigating all kinds of different things that have to do with the human psyche and our experiences in the world. So, uh, that to me, the ability to be able to have a life where I got to ask lots of questions and be constantly learning and changing seemed really appealing. So I started that in my undergrad and then decided that, you know, clinical psychology was probably the right route for me. And I started Grad school at Ryerson in Ryerson University in Toronto and I started that in 2007 so I started my master’s and my PhD at Ryerson and then my internship at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. And then I went back to Ryerson and did a five year post doc and it was during that post doc that I really, uh, developed a really strong love and interest in working with trauma. And that would have been something that I had always been interested in. And I’d done work in my PhD, uh, working with my mentor Candice Monson, uh, around treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. And then in my postdoc that really got honed into how do we work with and improve the treatments that we have or potentially make new treatments for PTSD. So, and the reason why I found that so compelling was that the treatments we have, they worked for some people some of the time. And that’s amazing. When they work, you see such incredible change for folks, especially with PTSD. Feeling like that feels permanent or like people are totally changed from how they were before. And, um, the idea that someone can really have their world open up and be able to have a new future after that to me was absolutely compelling. And, um, you know, I tell the story sometimes that my, I think my interest really started in that given my grandfather was a World War II vet and he worked with Veterans Affairs Canada as an under administer of veterans affairs. And, um, he really, really believed in supporting the veterans in terms of their experiences. And at the time, you know, we didn’t have a word for PTSD after World War II, but he knew that there were lots of people who were struggling after their experiences. So I kind of grew up understanding that this was after really challenging and traumatic experiences oftentimes that people have no choice whatsoever in the circumstances in which they’re placed, um, that we owe our brothers and sisters, you know, the ability to help work through, move forward and heal in different ways. So, um, that all kind of started to resonate and coalesce when I was in my post doc and, uh, I was working with Candace on some studies around this treatment that she developed a called Cognitive Behavioural Conjoint Therapy for PTSD. And so it’s a couple’s treatment and that to me was so interesting and fit with my values in terms of being able to work interpersonally with folks and seeing the impact not just on the person, but on their relationships, on their families, on their communities, in terms of how trauma impacts us. So we were doing work with CBCT and testing that in various ways when Candice was approached by the team at MAPS around it, which is the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies about potentially collaborating. And the MAPS team had been looking at the use of MDMA for the treatment of PTSD, uh, for many years at that point, over a dozen years. And, uh, with, you know, the steps before that having taken, you know, another 15 before that. So there was some conversations and I was really lucky to just kind of parachute into this conversation right at the beginning with Candice and we decided to be open minded and give it a go. And so, um, the really exciting piece for me was that I have no idea about psychedelic use in psychotherapy at that point. Like zilch.

Adrian

What year was this?

Anne Wagner

Uh, this would have been in 2013. So I went from literally no knowledge to now running clinical trials with MDMA. And it’s been the most impactful transition for me, um, in terms of my own trajectory and growth and as both a person but also as a researcher and a clinician. So a lot has changed in six years, that’s for sure. And, uh, yeah, at that point, that’s when we started to work on this pilot study of Cognitive Behavioural Conjoint Therapy plus MDMA for the treatment of PTSD. And that started off by Candice and I getting to have our own MDMA therapy experiences through a study for therapists that gave them the experience of understanding what that feels like. And that for me was the thing that convinced me that this was going to be worth my time and energy and putting a lot of love behind this work. So yeah, that was the starting point. That session would have been in spring of 2014 and it’s been kind of history since then in terms of getting this going. So, yeah.

Thal

Um something I’m thinking about when you’re talking about PTSD, um, a lot of people connect it only with veterans. Granted veterans have, you know, they go through a lot and they see all kinds of horrible scenarios. But there are also different types of PTSD, complex PTSD. Um, there are people that, you know, due to childhood trauma have PTSD. So maybe we can, if you can just talk about PTSD a little bit.

Anne Wagner

Sure. Yeah. So PTSD arises from a whole number of different traumatic experiences in people’s lives and they can be, it can be for repeated experiences like a childhood abuse experiences. It can be from repeated exposure to adverse details. For example, first responders are prime for that experience. It can be from single incidents, like it could be from an assault or an accident or witnessing something really traumatic happening to somebody else. Um, and it can be, as you said, for veterans from the experiences of war. It can be from displacement, it can be from all kinds of different aspects of conflict. So yeah, the idea behind PTSD is it can come from all these different things. Um, but it often looks the same in terms of its presentation in terms of what it looks like and people feeling like their need to avoid things that remind them of the traumatic experience. Whatever that experience is. There’s the re-experiencing of thoughts and memories associated with the event or events. There’s a hyper arousal that goes alongside of it. So that feeling in your body of being constantly on alert or constantly activated in some way. And then there’s numbing that goes alongside of it as well. So you may have either really strong emotions and really challenging cognitions or you may end up having a numbed out experience where you’re not feeling much at all. And so all of those, that constellation of symptoms, if you will, or things that happen, they all form to make up PTSD. And, uh, the differentiation, you know, between complex PTSD and PTSD, um, is, you know, it’s one where I think people find it really helpful to talk about complex PTSD, to think about the extent of the experience that they’ve had. Um, and what would I find in the research is actually that the treatments that we have for PTSD as just PTSD work for complex PTSD as well. So I think that, um, for me, I, I would get questions around complex PTSD and what I think about that, and you know, I’ve, I’ve done some publishing actually around challenging the construct.

Thal

That there is no real difference.

Anne Wagner

Right. Yeah. And it’s simply because if we really whittle it down, what matters most…

Thal

Is the experience.

Anne Wagner

Is experience. But it’s also, if we’re going to differentiate, it’s usually because we want to figure out how to best help and best treat. And so therefore, if how we treat would be the same, why would we differentiate between the two? I mean, I’m a fan of parsimony, so.

Thal

I like that. Yeah.

Anne Wagner

Yeah. So he was very open to however, however you want to interpret your experience, 100%, that’s, that’s in your hands. Um, but how it guides how we formed treatment, I think is a different way.

Thal

I think the main thing is that because a lot of people who are suffering from PTSD and they’re not veterans, they don’t legitimize their, you know, they feel like, you know, or, or they perceive like, “do you really have PTSD?” Like you, yeah, we’re not in a war zone or something like that.

Anne Wagner

Yeah, yeah, exactly. And I do think that helps in terms of, or can I notice it more actually in terms of, uh, folks having a broader understanding of their experience if they feel like they identify with one term another and yeah. I think whatever means to be able to own and accept the experience is useful. Yeah.

Adrian

I put a flag down when you mentioned, um, having that experience with, with Candice the first time you were sort of, sort of convinced that you wanted to do this research.

Anne Wagner

Yeah.

Adrian

Are you comfortable sharing what that experience was like?

Anne Wagner

Sure. Yeah. Um, so yeah. Okay. So the experience of having an MDMA therapy session, uh, so the way it was designed in that first, the thing I participated in, we had one active session and then one placebo session of course that you don’t know which one you’re going to get first and uh,

Adrian

But you’ll pretty quickly know which one… [laughing]

Anne Wagner

Yes. Well, I figured it out, although it was pretty funny about an hour in, I wasn’t, I was not perceiving any effect at that point. And I thought to myself, I was like, “you know, this is probably placebo. All right. Like I’ll have to wait.”

Thal

“Oh, no it’s not!”

Anne Wagner

Oh yeah, exactly. Yeah. Like within 10 minutes. You know, it’s funny, everyone else had seen my blood pressure spike, but I had not seen the, um, the recording side. I had eye shades on and they were all, you know, waiting. And then I’m like, wow. Yeah. Um, so that experience for me was, uh, it was so interesting. It was the most impactful therapeutic experience I’ve ever had. It felt like I was able to check in and all these areas in my life really quickly where without any extra layers on top of it. Like it took away my own judgment and shame and guilt around things. And it let me literally just go through all the areas of my life and go, what do we think about this? What do we think about this? How about that? And it felt like I wasn’t particularly intending to check in these areas, but it allowed me to do that. And it felt like I reached my conclusion easily and readily. And even if that conclusion was ambivalence about something, I was like, great, I’m ambivalent about that. That’s the answer. So it let me not second guess a lot of things that were happening in my internal world. Um, and I found that, that the effects of it lasted for a really long time. I mean, it, it literally that session I felt like I was integrating and processing for, you know, weeks if not months later. But the overall impact for me has been, yeah, well it really, it changed my life and a lot of ways, not just because of the therapy, but also what it had then led to. And I think that that sense of that deep investigation and exploration can really help to shape your trajectory. So, um, yeah, so that was, and I was actually great, really grateful to have a placebo session next. Cause then I just got to integrate the whole experience a few days later. Talk about it going like, wow. All right, so all this stuff happened in that session. I get to chat about it. Now.

Adrian

I guess at that point then, um, what were the next steps after having the experience and then you can ask to go go ahead with the research. Was that the deciding point to, to move along and then to move ahead.

Anne Wagner

Yeah, it, yeah, it certainly was for me, I think we went in pretty open minded, like, you know, curious to explore it, but using that as a, uh, a test to see did we think that this might have value or could you see this working? Um, and so after that we ended up.. Initially we were thinking a lot about, okay, so we’ll go into the experience. So she had these questions in mind and we should think of that. And then as soon as I got into the MDMA experience, I was like, forget it. I’m just having my own experience. I’m not thinking about methodology for study. Right. We basically, we both chose to use that week just to have our own experiences and think through that. And then with time, you know, I quickly made the decision that I wanted to use this as a tool for therapy, but we then gave ourselves a bit of space to then actually start thinking up what that would look like in terms of a treatment and a protocol and things.

Thal

So, so you guys combined the MDMA therapy with uh, you said CBCT. That’s right. It, can you talk to us about that please?

Anne Wagner

Sure. So, um, we use, so CBCT Cognitive Behavioural Conjoined Therapy for PTSD is a 15 session treatment that’s designed for two people to go through the treatment together and uh, those two people could be in any way in relation with each other. It’s generally speaking, is romantic couples who choose to go through treatment together, but it doesn’t mean it has to be. Um, and so within that treatment folks are taken through kind of three main phases of therapy. The first phase is really understanding PTSD. Um, doing some psychoeducation about what PTSD is, what it might look like in your relationship, how it’s impacting you as well as talking about, uh, how anger and aggression can impact the relationship and just beginning to understand what those look like in the relationship and building some skills to counteract that and cope with. And then moving into phase two, we go more specifically into other skill building. So communication skills, like paraphrasing and some problem solving skills and beginning to approach things that the couple has been avoiding. And so we designed these approach tasks with the couple to help them be able to live a life of approach where they’re, you know, engaging together and doing things that they may not have been doing otherwise. And then the third phase specifically moves into making meaning of the traumatic event. And so thinking about areas where each of them, and together they may be stuck around the trauma, um, and thinking through some core themes that are related to trauma. So acceptance and blame are a big one. A control, power, trust, esteem, intimacy, um, post-traumatic growth. So using those. And then, uh, so that’s the framework of CBCT. And then what we did when we added MtMDMA to it was, we put it in strategic places in the protocol where we thought, uh, you know, if we were going to want to boost the effect of what we’re doing, we’d maybe want it in these two places. So one was in right after they’ve learned the communication skills. And so being able to have those skills as a bit of a template to be able to work with the experience together, both during and after. And then again, we placed one right in the heart of the trauma processing. So they’d started some and then we put the MDMA session to allow them to see what else could unravel in that moment and then work with them to integrate it after.

Thal

I think he had mentioned that it’s not only romantic couples, right. Have you guys had different types of dynamics?

Anne Wagner

So in the pilot with the MDMA, it was only romantic couples. Uh, we were open to, the recruitment was open for any type of diet, but it was only couples who came in. Um, but then in case studies that we’ve worked with outside of that study, we’ve seen, um, parent-child, we’ve seen, um, good friends go through it together and trying to think who have had siblings. Yeah. So there’s been a few different constellations.

Thal

And, and do you think the impact of the therapy would be different if it was just singular? Like, just like the person that’s suffering from PTSD without the conjoint.

Anne Wagner

So, I mean there are other therapies…

Thal

Yeah, cause I’m just thinking about the difference between both. Yeah. Um, but I, I do see the benefit of the relational aspect.

Anne Wagner

It’s definitely a different frame in which to conduct the therapy and, um, you know, the individual treatment. Um, for example, Cognitive Processing Therapy, which is going to be the next pilot study that we’re running with MDMA. Um, it is an individually delivered.

Thal

Oh, so you’re going to do that okay.

Anne Wagner

Yeah and the work that’s been done up until now, so, uh, that the MAPS team has been running, has been an individually delivered treatment and it’s with an inner directive supportive psychotherapy for PTSD. So not, uh, specifically one modality, but kind of allowing what comes up. Uh, so partly one of our goals with doing the know the CBCT and now the CPT plus MDMA was to use treatments that have already been tested for treatment for PTSD. And to see when we add MDMA, do you have even broader or stronger effect? Uh, so they’re giving us a different starting point in terms of the evidence in which to see if it’s effective.

Adrian

I wanted to ask if the subjects who were part of that first pilot that you were involved in, were they diagnosed as treatment resistant PTSD? Have they tried other forms of treatment prior to the study?

Anne Wagner

Yeah, so in this, in the pilot we ran, they didn’t specifically have to be treatment resistant, but they all were. Um, so it was, it just so you know, it people are not necessarily jumping the gun to do this without having tried many different things. So yeah, everyone had had lots of different treatments in the past.

Adrian

I’m so curious. Um, yeah, there’s so many, so many questions. Yeah. I’m thinking a juicy place to dive into is their first experience, you know, if you can share with us perhaps maybe what their experiences were leading up to it and, and the, what the day looked like, when they had it for the first time?

Anne Wagner

Sure. So, um, so folks had some preparation ahead of time, so obviously they’d gone through a consent process. And lots of conversation about what this whole treatment was going to look like. And then they’d had some intensive days or a day and a half, basically of CBCT. So we squished the equivalent of five sessions into a day and a half of CBCT. Um, and so, and some of that day was in the morning of their MDMA session. So they were, uh, mostly quite nervous before their MDMA sessions. Especially a lot of them were either psychedelic or entactogen naive or the experiences they had had where like 20, 30, 40 years ago and you know, university at some point. Um, so never in this context and never with the presumption that they’re going to be talking about trauma. So, uh, yeah, so there was definitely anxiety ahead of time, which we work with and a lot of the partners were quite anxious too, cause you know, they really, okay,

Adrian

They’re coming along for the ride.

Anne Wagner

So yeah. And everyone went through with it and did it. And, uh, so the way the room is designed, when we were doing the sessions, uh, there would be two recliner chairs. And so the couple would sit in those recliner chairs and be able to either have the option of sitting up or lying back, not completely flat, but you know, quite reclined. And then the two therapists would be in the room with them and facing them. And then if people were feeling really activated and they want some support from the therapist, we had like small camper chairs that we would sit beside them on the recliner chairs. So, um, they could have, it’s a little bit space or closeness and, uh, they were close enough to each other that if they reached out, they could touch hands or hold hands or can choose not to if they wanted to as well. And so the way the day was, there really was no structure to the day other than, um, you know, we would encourage them to spend time as we deemed it inside, which means, uh, with headphones on, eyeshades on and just reflecting internally and that experience and other times where they’d be talking with us, talking with their partner in sharing the experiences that were coming up or reflections. Um, so, you know, we’d go through different periods of time inside time outside, and we learned how to better orchestrate interaction between the couple in terms of, you know, at some point someone’s ready to talk and the other one’s deeply in process with something else. So we would, um, we learned how to kind of check in with one or the other, maybe jot down a note and say we’d hold that, that thought for them. And they could go back inside and we’d raise it again when everyone was, you know, out in the room. Yeah. So that’s basically what it looked like.

Thal

What about the role of music.

Anne Wagner

Music plays a very important role and kind of assisting the process. So, you know, allowing for an arc in the experience and having, um, supportive music kind of at the beginning. And then active music as you kind of getting peak effect and then, uh, music that helps with resolution and closer to the end. Um, but you also need to, you know, we had, we were flexible with the music within it. So, um, Annie Mithoefer who is one of the investigators and she’s a great Dj. So she was our DJ for all the sessions, which I’m going to have to learn how to do when I’m running the sessions here and, uh, yeah, so both members of the dyad would have earphones on and we’d also have it playing in the room so everyone could hear the music. And so we had splitters to do that and then at times we turn the music off when they’re talking and yeah.

Thal

I was going to ask like do you turn off when they’re talking?

Anne Wagner

Yeah or turn it down. Just mostly so it’s easier for everyone can hear each other.

Adrian

How many couples were there in total in that study?

Anne Wagner

Yeah, so it was a small number. So we ran six couples through it and it’s really, originally we were thinking of going up to 10, but, uh, for a number of different reasons, including time and money. And, uh, but also the main reason was because our effects were looking very good. We decided to stop at six. Um, to be able to kind of had enough evidence to show we can do it. It’s feasible, it’s safe, people tolerate it and people improve. And as enough of a signal to say, we need a larger study. So in designing the larger study that would have a control condition.

Adrian

I imagine all the internal experiences vary greatly between participants. But were there any commonalities you guys noticed, um, in, in those, uh, in the six that you, you were sitting with.

Anne Wagner

Uh yes. I mean, one thing that I think was very interesting as someone who does a lot of trauma therapy with folks outside of a MDMA work is just how consistently people would go into their trauma memories and recount the experiences unprompted with MDMA. And so that was fascinating and I’d heard that that had been the case, uh, with the other studies, but that it, like clockwork would happen every time. And um, you know, it was no priming no asking people to go into the memory. We don’t even actually require that at all if people in CBCT to actively go over the memory. But it happened for everyone.

Thal

It’s like they went through the files of…yeah, amazing.

Anne Wagner

Yeah. That analogy is used a lot actually like putting files in a row and you know, I had that experience myself of like checking in. It’s like checking all the files and then other people with PTSD when they’re going through this you know, checking through the files, the memories. And so then the role of the therapist, um, is really the major role is pre and post the experience. Like during the experience of course you’re holding the space for the, for the clients, but it’s, it’s, it seems like from what you’re saying that it’s like, um, self guided in a way. Yeah. The MDMA session itself, we’re definitely there to hold space and to help when people are stuck. And so I think that piece is also very important. Um, and you know, sometimes when we think about like being non directive, in fact there’s moments where we’re actively working with folks in session to help the experience or if people are feeling particularly stuck in a thought or a memory we’re there to help them work through that and you know, gently, you know, be socratically questioning, you’re asking different things or exploring. But the massive chunk of that work is before and after.

Adrian

So what happened after the first session? What’s the next stage in the protocol of the study?

Anne Wagner

Yeah, so they’d gone through equivalent to five sessions of CBCT before and then they had the MDMA session and then the next morning we would talk about experience, integrate it a bit and set them up with out-of-session work for the following week. And then they would do the equivalent of four sessions of CBCT. In this case we did it over video, um, simply pragmatically, cause we’d all didn’t live in the same place. And then they came back together about three weeks later, I had another day where they did two sessions of CBCT and then they had a second MDMA session. Integrated that and then finished out the protocol, which was four more sessions of CBCT. So they received MDMA twice this whole thing. Yeah. It took about two months to get through everything.

Adrian

What were the results? Sort of dying to hear the summary of the findings.

Anne Wagner

So they are not published yet, but I can let you know. So we actually published a case study last week. Um, so that has the first results are out in the world.

Adrian

Congrats.

Anne Wagner

Thank you. Very exciting. It’s in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, so that’s good. Um, so yeah, overall the results were very strong. We had really good results for PTSD, both from the report of the person with PTSD, so their self report as well as the clinician rated report. And so that’s an independent rater. So not the people who treat them, it’s from someone who doesn’t know where they are in treatment and whatnot. And they also, we saw significant improvements in relationship satisfaction as well. And that was really interesting because not all the couples were distressed coming in. And I think that’s important because a lot of the time, you know, we think about actually how PTSD lives in relationships. People have to make sense of it and therefore, oftentimes they accommodate the other person as we all do in our lives. We accommodate the people we love. So it’s, you know, you’re trying to make it okay and especially when something’s not okay in a system, it creates a very difficult system. But that works for some people. And so that can be a challenge sometimes when things change, the system disrupts because everything’s been, you know, trying to hold tight to keep it together. So the fact that we saw improvement for folks who even already we’re starting okay. Which meant there might’ve been some accommodation was really interesting. Yeah. So more to come.

Thal

So it’s not really couples therapy, it’s, it was, it’s conjoined therapy, but um, that the, you know, the couple’s therapy is like that bonus part that came.

Anne Wagner

Yeah. Yeah, exactly. I mean the way we structure it, I mean it really, it is a couples therapy. Yeah. It could be any version of couple that you think of. Um, but the idea is the relationship is actually the client in CBCT. So it’s not the person with PTSD, it’s not the partner. It’s the couple or the relationship. And having that be the focus is really useful. So that one person doesn’t feel like the other person is their other therapist or that they’re responsible for the person, they’re doing it together.

Adrian

Are you, are you able to share any of the self reports by the subjects, um, things that they shared with you, whether it’s during the study or afterwards that you might want to share with listeners?

Anne Wagner

Sure. So, um, I mean, people spontaneously had really incredible, you know, things that they wanted to say or share. And, um, I’m, you know, feeling like they’d gotten their lives back or that they felt renewed hope for the future. And, um, you know, in the session itself, you know, I had people say that, you know, this is really, it felt like they had gotten their marriage back or that they now have a sense of feeling connected. Um, I got an email a few months ago, which marked like a year since one of the couples had started the study and it was just a reach out of gratitude and thanks. And reporting that they felt like they had a completely different life and they were very grateful and that they just thought it was all really cool. So that was a really neat thing to receive.

Thal

It’s amazing. How rigorous was it for you like to go through the daily experience of going through the study and, yeah.

Anne Wagner

Yeah. It’s a labor of love doing the clinical trial, that’s for sure.

Thal

I can imagine.

Anne Wagner

It’s, you really have to want to do it. And, uh, I remember, you know, Candice once told me, this is not for the faint of heart. I’m like, no, it was very, very true. It’s a lot of details and a lot of planning. Um, it a ton of work for a little bit of data, but it’s in my mind, so worth it. And you know, the days when you sit in the sessions with folks, um, and you see them change right there in front of you and you were like, wow, this idea we had, I think it’s working like this. That’s unreal. Um, that feels, that feels pretty cool. And, uh, so yeah, it’s, it’s, I found working on this particular study to be incredibly inspiring and so that certainly helps drive all the rest of the work and is now shaped what I’m doing going forward,

Adrian

If I remember correctly, most of the subjects, if not all, had improvements in their symptoms of PTSD. How, how did they do afterwards? Post study? What was the timeframe for the follow up and checking in on them?

Anne Wagner

Yeah, so the vast majority, well, I mean, there’s only six couples. The majority, not everyone, uh, a resolution their PTSD, but most did and those gains were maintained through six month follow-up. So that’s the, the most, the furthest data we have. Yeah.

Adrian

That’s really cool. Yeah. I mean, one of the things that we often hear a lot in psychedelic research and, and, and, um, just discourses the integration after these experiences. Can you share any wisdom that you might have gained from this study about how to better integrate or, or to tie back to their daily lives?

Anne Wagner

For sure. I think a big piece is that integration isn’t just like your next session with your therapist. Integration happens over time as you begin to put the lessons you’ve learned into action and it might shape your approach to something or how you feel in general. Or you might have an echo of it, you know, a year later and go like, oh, yeah, so it’s, it’s being open to that being the case, I think is the key thing with integration as you go forward. And we certainly saw that, you know, in some cases we saw people continue to make gains over the six months afterwards. And that for us was really interesting because that means that they’re still learning and growing. And that is ideal because you’re basically setting people up for a new baseline, a new place to start from. And that happens often when people find success with treatment without MDMA. Um, but it was particularly highlighted for me when the use of a psychedelic or entactogen.

Thal

I’m thinking about a psychotherapist listening to this wondering when will legalization happened. When can I start training?

Anne Wagner

It’s a good question. Um, so what is looking like right now? So all of the movement to have MDMA legalize as a treatment for PTSD? It’s, it started in the US because that’s where all of the studies have happened so far. It’s looking, we’re hopeful that it will be within the next few years that it will be legal. Because right now there’s a phase three study, which is a drug development study happening in multiple different sites across North America, uh, sponsored by MAPS. And they at that point they will, after phase three, it’s possible that MDMA will get the indication to be a treatment for PTSD. So that’s the doorway to it being legal. Um, and so the hope is we would quickly follow suit in Canada using the evidence for the US. So, I mean my fingers are crossed that it’s going to be within the next few years. Um, there is also in the states there’s something called Expanded Access where when things are demonstrating strong effect and people are at risk for death, that you can potentially be using um, a medication that’s still being investigated for specific cases to be used. So, uh, the training that’s happening right now for folks to become MDMA assisted psychotherapist is for this idea of Expanded Access or those of us who are studying it you doing through the research. Um, so that, I mean, could be as soon as later this year we’re expanded access could be available in some places, uh, in Canada. We’ve different regulations around that. So it may not be as straight forward, um, but potentially could still be a possibility. And then of course, I mean the psilocybin work is another area where, um, you know, we’re seeing fast movement in terms of potentially there being indications for treatment-resistant depression and other things. So that might be another area where we might be seeing the potential legal use of psychedelics and treatment.

Adrian

Yeah. I know everyone’s got their fingers crossed, right? It’s like, it’s, you know, it seems like this is the opportunity but also not to mess it up. And so it definitely, you know, important that this time around this renaissance that’s happening is to do it properly so that it is sustained.

Anne Wagner

Exactly. It’s extremely important that we don’t squander this opportunity over here. Uh, this, there has been so much work that has gone to this place and so many have been paving the way for this to be the case. And, um, I’m very conscious of just how measured we need to be and just how careful and thoughtful around all of this use.

Adrian

Can you talk about the other studies so that with the CPT plus MDMA that is.. Is it currently underway?

Anne Wagner

It’s in development right now. So I’m just finishing the protocol for it. Uh, so our hope is that we’ll be recruiting in the fall for that study, but that’s pending a bunch of different approvals that need to go through. Um, so that study design is very similar to the couple’s study. Um, it’s going to be, but it’s an individual treatment and using CPT. So cognitive processing therapy, which is one of the most widely used and most widely researched and has some of the strongest evidence for the treatment of PTSD. And it’s usually 12 sessions. And so right now we’re just, you know, we’re finding exactly where we’re going to place the two MDMA sessions within the protocol. Um, but it will likely have a similar structure in terms of having a masked dosing of treatment before the first time. Do you may session spread out over three weeks, second MDMA and then finish it out. And this time, not over video cause we’ll do it here in person.

Adrian

How is, um, how’s the recruitment for that? So how do people, uh, if they’re interested in joining the study or being a participant, how does that happen? How does that work?

Anne Wagner

So right now we’re not, we don’t have open recruitment since the study isn’t approved yet. Um, but if people are interested in it, uh, if it will be for PTSD. So it is specifically for PTSD and people don’t have to already have a diagnosis of PTSD because it will end up, you know, they will have to go through assessment through the study. Um, but they can always contact us at Remedy and, we have a contact us button on our homepage and can be added to a list to learn more. And so that would, uh, it doesn’t guarantee anything, but it just would allow folks to get updates as to, for example, when the study is starting to recruit or updates along the way as we get going.

Thal

Awesome. So maybe, um, then talk to us about Remedy?

Anne Wagner

Sure. Okay. So Remedy, um, it’s where we’re sitting right now. So Remedy is a center for mental health, innovation in Toronto. And, uh, the idea behind remedy was to have a home where research and practice really live together. And the idea that we want to be continually open to growth and exploration as clinicians, as researchers, as people who are working in mental health. And that includes our own growth as well as the growth of the field. Um, so the idea here at Remedy is everyone who’s involved as invested in the idea of innovating mental health. And that can be in a whole host of different ways. So, uh, for example, one of the ways we do that is going to be through MDMA research here. Uh, but also we have folks who are innovating how we manage a practice, how, um, you know, we run trauma-informed Yoga, how we do care for folks that’s integrating different types of treatments together. We have all kinds of different things. Someone is going to be writing, you know, pop psychology book based on evidence. So it’s innovating how we think about an access, mental health and, and thinking about it in a broader way so that we don’t feel stuck or stymied in how we do that. So we offer a clinical services, but also we do research here and we collaborate with different likeminded group to create a community who are all with the same vision.

Adrian

I imagine it’s part of the vision, um, to consider post legalization and what that might look like. Can you share a little bit about your vision for once it’s legal, what the clinic might look like and how it’s offered to the public?

Anne Wagner

Yeah, absolutely. So my vision for that will be, we’ll have basically two tracks. We’ll have our research stream, which will be running and testing interventions, uh, which you know, is where my love is there and that I’m also a clinician and I want to be able to offer this in terms of people being able to come in and receive MDMA psychotherapy for PTSD in the practice here. So it will be either people can participate through research or through being able to come in. And you know, have that treatment. So, uh, yeah, we’ll be set up here to be able to offer that given that war already going to be set up to run the research. And so we’ll be ready and opening our doors to that the minute it’s legal. So yeah, we’ve got a team here who, uh, actually I just took a team down to Asheville, North Carolina for the most recent MDMA therapist training and so we’ve got a team who are raring to go.

Thal

That’s awesome.

Adrian

I’m just imagining if, if you had infinite funding and resources from a, from a research side, what would excite you as far as future research studies that you might want to explore and go into?

Anne Wagner

I’ve already designed my next big one. So it would be a randomized controlled trial for the couples study. So it would be, um, CBCT plus MDMA in one condition and then with a placebo control and the other maybe a crossover design at the end. So, but that would be the, we really need to test it out with more people and more diverse sample. I think that was a massive thing is, you know, in the pilot study it was heterosexual Caucasian folks in that sample. And that is not representative of …

Adrian

The globe.

Anne Wagner

The globe. We are here in Toronto. And um, you know, I think particularly, I’ve done a lot of community work in queer communities here and I think, you know, expanding especially what that looks like in terms of our, you know, constellations of folks participating in the treatment and as well as the therapists that they, we have, uh, we’re really excited about what that’s gonna look like. And when we test it on a bigger scale, like what’s it gonna look like for everybody.

Thal

Yeah. It’s going to look very different. Hopefully it’s going to be legal very soon. It’s going to look different when it’s, you know, out there and different people are accessing it.

Anne Wagner

Yeah, yeah, exactly.

Thal

Can’t wait. Yeah.

Adrian

Yeah. We’re super stoked for your work. I mean, you’re right in the trenches, so it’s, it’s a real honour actually. Yeah. To be, to be in your space and to get a glimpse of the journey so far.

Anne Wagner

Aww thank you.

Thal

Any more questions? Feel pretty good there. Yeah. Is there anything that you’d like to add, something that you have not been able to share in other lectures or other interviews?

Anne Wagner

Um, that’s a great question. I think, you know, it’s a really exciting time for this work. Um, I think it’s the, the possibilities for growth and exploration are also huge when it comes to psychedelics and entactogens and I don’t want to lose sight of that. And I think oftentimes when we are focusing so much on the clinical work and the clinical indications, that sometimes feels like maybe gets pushed to the side when, you know, there’s so many cultures around the world who’ve used psychedelics as forms of ritual, as forms of growth and learning and healing that, um, you know, this is not new. This is not new at all. I want to honor that.

Thal

In fact it’s ancient.

Anne Wagner

Exactly, exactly. Yeah. Just so happens that we’re conceptualizing, it’s used right now with how we understand this particular version of how we present …

Thal

And in our modern context, which is fine.

Anne Wagner

Yeah, exactly. Yeah. So I think I want to make sure we know that, that this, you know, while it feels “cutting edge” it is completely ancient. And this, we’re not, uh, coming up with new ideas particularly, but, uh, but really honored also to bring it forward into the here and now. So there’s that piece. Um, yeah, I think that’s a biggie. That’s on my mind.

Thal

Yes. And, uh, hopefully that will, you know, um, rev revolutionize mental health, which is, you know, the thing, you know, coming up now.

Anne Wagner

Yeah, I think so. Yeah. And I think we have so much possibility there. You know, I do think we’re at a time where folks are far more reflective about their own internal world and the possibilities for that and that this might be one tool to really assist in that.

Adrian

I guess just one final thing to a, I’m reminded of, um, the way Michael Pollan shared just the excitement beyond the pathological use or, you know, addressing pathological, um, experiences and just for the betterment of, well-people, I think it was the way that he was putting it and I think yeah, starting to redefine mental healthy on sort of the, the sort of, the highly stigmatized, um, cultural perspectives that we have.

Anne Wagner

For sure. Yeah. I have hope that one day we’ll be able to offer, um, you know, MDMA assisted psychotherapy for couples, right? Just not because there’s PTSD, but because you know, people want to explore and grow together and understand the relationships and their dynamics or for individuals and you know, still thoughtfully and with precaution and all the good context of set and setting and a good container. But the idea that that would be a tool would be lovely.

Adrian

Thank you so much for your time today.

Anne Wagner

Thanks so much.

Thal

Thank you.

#8: Cognitive Tools to Wisdom With John Vervaeke

The meaning crisis that is currently unfolding in our culture is producing a form of existential angst that is gnarly, messy, and very real. There is a palpable collective low-grade anxiety that can be felt on all levels. We may turn to various distractions or succumb to a silent form of apathy.

On this episode, we interview John Vervaeke. Speaking to the meaning crisis, John’s work is centred around bridging the gap between science and spirituality. He talks to us about psycho-technologies such as meditation and psychedelics as tools to help us overcome self-deception and move towards wisdom. We also navigate the world of altered-states and transformative experiences. John has been with the University of Toronto since 1994 as an Assistant Professor teaching courses in the Psychology department, Cognitive science program, and the intersections between Buddhism and Mental Health. He has won numerous teaching awards. John is the first author of the book “Zombie in Western Culture: A 21st Century Crisis”. You can find his most recent series on YouTube titled “Awakening from the Meaning Crisis.”

Highlights:

  • Knowledge vs Wisdom
  • Overcoming Self-Deception
  • Meditation and Psychedelics as Psycho-technologies
  • Convergence of Cognitive Science and Spirituality

Resources:

Listen:

Poem Inspired by This Episode

Full Transcript

Adrian

John, welcome. Thank you for coming on the show.

John Vervaeke

Great. Glad to be here.T

Adrian

I was sitting and thinking about all the different things we could really explore with you. At a basic level, I see all the stuff that you’re doing, all the research and lectures that I’ve watched seem to be trying to bridge or unify science and spirituality.

John Vervaeke

I think that’s very fair representation of what I’m trying to do. I see the situation that we’re in culturally in the West right now is one that I’ve called the meaning crisis. Many people are converging on this topic, and you see increasing number of books even talking about this. The Malaise of Modernity by Taylor or the Crisis of Modernity. These kinds of books are proliferating. I don’t just mean quantitatively, the quality of somebody like Charles Taylor is bringing to bear his enormous philosophical acumen on this, it tells you that something central is going on. He followed that up in The Secular Age. So I think all of us are concerned with what do we do with our spiritual heritage. So I mean, we come from this period. I’ll often do this with my students in class. They’ll say, how many of you read anything from the bronze age? How many of you read the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Egyptian myth. Nobody reads that. I’ll say, well, how many of you read Plato? A lot of people put up their hands or the Bible. A lot of people, you know, Confucius, lot of people. why are those people sort of ours and the people before the Bronze Age clubs aren’t? There’s some controversy about this, but I think I agree with many people like Bella and Karen Armstrong that around 600 to 300 BCE. We went through this radical transformation, right? That laid the foundations many of the foundations for what we call Western civilization. That axial revolution gave us kind of a grammar, the fundamental grammar for our spirituality and what had happened is before the bronze age collapsed and then the axial revolution that follows it during the bronze age you had a much different view of the cosmos so that there was a lot more continuity. It was like a continuum between the natural world, the human world and the world of the gods. Right? It was much more sort of a continuum of differences in power. So it wasn’t strange for a very powerful human being to be godlike or even a god perhaps like in ancient Egypt. Then what happens when the bronze age civilization collapses is that continuous Cosmos tends to be to be challenged. Sorry this is a bit of a speech, but I need to lay some groundwork here. What happens is there’s a dark age and then there’s an invention of a bunch of psycho-technologies. We can talk a little bit later about what a psycho-technology is. One of the most important is alphabetic literacy. Another one is coinage and what they both do is they are invented for very practical reasons, but the thing about alphabetic literacy is it makes literacy available. The thing about literacy, you think about how much it empowers your cognition. If I were to take literacy from you, most of the problems you try to solve most of your information processing, collapse and look around you. Everybody is using literacy. The other thing they’re using is numeracy. And that’s what coinage does. Advanced numeracy, advanced abstract, symbolic thought. People get these psycho-technologies and they, they internalize them because they’re using them everyday and automatically. See the thing about technology is it, it spreads beyond where you originally use it. What happens is people’s cognition is suddenly amazingly bootstrapped and they’re seeing the world, right? They’re getting what Bella called second order cognition. They’re getting much more critically and self aware. And this is what seems to be prototypical of the age. It’s the rise of what’s called theoretical man. Sorry for the sexist term, but that was the traditional way of talking about it.

Thal

It can also be noise.

John Vervaeke

Uh what? The psycho-technology?

Thal

Well yes, being bombarded with text and numbers and all that, and a lot of people become disenchanted with being bombarded.

John Vervaeke

Well, that’s part of what I want to talk about. Part of what I want to talk about is the fact that when we got the axial revolution, when we had that bootstrapping and people became much more self critical. What happened was they create this sort of legacy and when we’re in danger of losing the legacy precisely because of what it has given us. What happened to us before there was this continuous cosmos, but as people became very critically self aware, they, they gained a tremendous sense of responsibility that they were responsible for the violence in this suffering in the world. It wasn’t just a natural part of the world because they have become very aware of how self deceptive the mind was. this is where you get this emerging awareness of how much the mind can create illusion and self deception. So what happens, right, is before the axial revolution, wisdom is about fitting into this continuous cosmos. It’s kind of like you know, the, the, the vulcan way of life, living long and prospering, right kind of thing. After the axial revolution, people are like, they’re really aware of their capacity for self deception, but there are also simultaneously because these two go together, aware of their capacity for self transcendence, right? What they do is they change the notion of wisdom. It’s not about fitting in because you don’t want to fit into this everyday world because this is the everyday world of illusion and self deception and suffering. Instead what you want to do, wisdom is about transcending, rising above, freeing yourself from those self deceptive processes and what happens is right and the degrees to which this is taken literally and it’s understood philosophically or mythically like Plato, but nevertheless you get this. You get this grammar of two worlds, the everyday lower world of illusion and suffering into which we have fallen and then there’s an upper world or the real. The really real world and wisdom is about getting there. What develops is people start developing entire sets of psycho-technologies for trying to enhance. You can see it in Buddhist mindfulness. You can see it in a platonic theoria. There’s all these psycho-technologies that are developing and think about how a lot of this way of thinking right has just become natural to you. It’s becoming your grammar. Now the problem is we have this tremendous heritage that gives us all these psycho-technologies for dealing with how we can deceive ourselves and get enmeshed in foolishness, but they’re bound up with this two world mythology, this two world grammar and the problem is for a lot of historical reasons that dovetail with the emergence of the scientific world view. We don’t have that two world mythology anymore. Very few people, and I don’t mean to step on anybody’s religious toes, but very few people believed that there is a supernatural world or an other world above and beyond the scientific worldview. What happens is all of these psycho-technologies that are still effective because of the way they work with cognition are now orphaned. They have no world view that legitimates them. That legitimates them to into a systematic set that really helps you cultivate intellectually and existentially respectful manner like this wisdom and self transcendence we’ve been talking about. So people thrash around and they try to cobble together little bits and pieces of discarded world views and they play with alternative realities and they alter their state of consciousness to try and get an alternative metaphysics. And they’re struggling to try and get back something that we’ve lost because there’s a deep sense, right? That the psycho-technologies were almost essential or at least indispensible to dealing with these deep issues of foolishness and flourishing. As our lives become more foolish and as flourishing becomes more and more difficult, our sense of connectedness to ourself, to the world and to each other is being radically undermined. That’s what I mean by the meaning crisis.

Adrian

It looks to me that part of your work is to actually come up with a new grammar that helps to unify this fragmentation that’s happening where everybody’s trying to claim, you know, that their version or their techniques are better, you know. Maybe that’s a nice place to actually lay down some understanding of how you view the mind. What are you talking about when you mention cognition?T

John Vervaeke

That’s a great question. The central idea is to try and understand cognition in terms of our capacity for problem solving. This is the initial and profound insight that goes back to Binet. When we started studying intelligence and that’s why we test it. We test it by giving people problems to solve and what has been found or repeated over and over again is that there seems to be a general factor. So if you’re solving a set of problems here, like it tends to be predictive of how you will solve. So spearman founders, right? Like he noticed that, you know, how kids were doing in math was weirdly predictive of how they were doing in English and how they were doing in art contrary to a lot of the cultural stereotypes we have. There’s variation in talent. I don’t want to, and personality and I’m not dismissing that.

Thal

Separation is an illusion. Part of separating between the different ways we perceive, separating between Math and English and how we perform is illusory.

John Vervaeke

Well. I mean there are some aspects that don’t transfer it.

Thal

Right

John Vervaeke

But there does seem to be a general factor. Yes. Underlying all of them are. People don’t like this because they tend to think of intelligence as sort of some sort of death sentence. In fact, we’ve got quite a bit of research coming out of Carol Dweck lab and others. How you think of your intelligence has a dramatic effect on how you’re living your life. The main idea is that you are a general problem solver. This mic that I’m talking into is a special purpose problem solver, it solves basically one problem, doesn’t really well in fact it does it way better than I could do it. Right? And this class is a special purpose problem solving. The thing about you is you solve a wide variety of problems in a wide variety of domains across many contexts, throughout a very long lifespan. What’s impressive is that capacity, we can measure that capacity. People don’t want to hear this, it’s the single best measure we have in the life sciences for human beings. If I can only get one thing from you, one variable in order to try and predict as much of you as I could, I want to know your general intelligence because that will give me the best set of predictions for you better than anything else. Personality variables come second. Self regulation abilities perhaps. Right? I wanted to understand like what’s the center of this? And initially I was just interested in this scientifically because I thought of this as the core of our cognitive agency and I came to the conclusion with the help of a lot of great people like Tim Lillicrap, like Richards, Leo Ferraro, Anderson Todd, Richard Woo. Just a whole bunch of people that I’ve just been so lucky to work with and continue to work with. The core, and this is convergent with other people’s works. So it’s not just my conclusion, but the core of this ability to be a general problem solver is your ability to zero in on relevant information and ignore the irrelevant information. That sounds sort of trivial because your brain devotes so much energy and effort to it that at the, at the level of your personal ego, you’re just taking for granted, you know, what’s standing out for you, what salient, what’s grabbing your attention because technically, scientifically, the amount of information available to you in this room is astronomically vast. All the possible ways in which you could put together your behavior patterns to interact with it, also explosive, and then all the information you have in your long term memory and all of the possible combinations, overwhelmingly vast. So this is what you don’t do. You don’t search it all because you can’t. You can’t search it all and yet, and this is what you don’t do either, you don’t look at everything and determine if it’s important to you or not because that would take the lifetime of the universe. So somehow, and this is sounds like it sounds like a magic thing or miraculous, you brain ignores most of the information and those three domains and somehow zeroes in on the relevant information in a way that fits you to your environment so that…and this is not a static thing, so you have to stop thinking of the mind and this is part of third generation cog-sci as something in your head, think about the mind more like Darwinian fittedness, like what makes an organism fit is not something in the organism or in the environment, but how the organism and the environment fit together. That’s what relevance realization is. It’s your evolving cognitive fittedness to your environment. I’ve done a lot of work on that and trying to understand that. And like I said, there’s just increasing convergence like sort of this is not meant to be self promotional meant to be the opposite. Many people are coming to similar ideas about this being a central thing and that it’s, it’s a dynamic self organizing self optimizing process. The insight I had. I suppose. Is that I came to the conclusion and I have a lot of argument for it, that that cognitive connectedness that makes us an intelligent agent is also the same sort of connectedness to ourself and the world and other people that’s at the core of spirituality so that your relevance realization machinery is inherently interested and invested because it’s a self organizing, self optimizing process, thinking about when you have insight, that’s the relevance realization process, feeding back on itself and restructuring itself. It’s inherently interested in and invested in this because it’s just foundational and it precedes you egoically. Relevance realization is there from the beginning, fitting your brain to the world and then your sense of self and how meaningful your world is co-emerge out of this ongoing evolving fittedness and that’s why it has this sort of primordial, mysterious depth to it. There’s so what I’m trying to get at, although there’s some hard brain science, I think emerging and dynamical system, self optimization, to point your listeners to so many things, right. There’s all these deeply spiritual aspects of this relevance realization that seemed to line up with a lot of the traditional stuff and then here’s the final gem and then let you guys talk. What if, what we’re doing when we’re overcoming foolishness and self deception and becoming wise is enhancing that capacity for relevance realization so that the wise person is the super insightful, super connected, super able to make meaningful connections person. Well that sounds both scientific and spiritual at the same time.

Adrian

What I want to ask you about is at the practical level, the practice of spirituality. You’ve mentioned psycho-technologies. How does that activate or get this process of relevance realization going or evolving?

John Vervaeke

I mean, we’re doing it already, but here’s where I think, the work of Keith Stanovich and others has had like a profound impact on me. Keith, I think he’s emeritus now, but he was also at U of T, at OISE, for the center of applied cognitive science. Really brilliant worker researcher and he’s just a amassed all this work. So remember I told you had an, and this will directly answer your question, it is directly pertinent. Remember how he remember how I said we have this general measure of intelligence, right? So what he showed is like you can also give people all these, all these experimental tests for how rational they are. So let’s say rationality is about using your intelligence best. Remember I mentioned earlier that how you relate to your intelligence has a big impact on how adaptive it is, right? What he was showing you, is that right? I think he’d be okay with me. This is my language, but I think I don’t think it’s imposing on him. That’s why I’m being a little bit cautious here. But I would say this, those very processes that make us so adoptive are our general intelligence are also the ones that really drive and enhance our self deception and make us vulnerable to self deception. I recently gave a talk about this on how as we’re making ai more like us, we’re making it more and more capable of foolishness. You can give people all kinds of rationality tasks and what’s going on in these rationality tasks, for example, I’ll give you a proposition you tend to agree with very deeply like, and I’m not taking a stance on this issue just using an example. Abortion is right. Okay. So you find people who either agree or disagree with them and then what you do is you give them two arguments. One is a valid argument that leads to the opposite of what they believe, you know, so let’s they believe abortion is right and here’s a valid argument that leads to the conclusion that it’s wrong. Then you give them a very bad argument that leads to the conclusion they like and you ask them to evaluate the argument, right? People vary on that because you can imagine what happens is a lot of people find super salient the product or the result of their cognition and they’re not stepping back and caring about or paying attention to the process. If you don’t pay attention to the process, you just go to the conclusion and right, and then so your ability to evaluate arguments is very, very poor. Now that’s very, very dangerous, right? Because it means we can’t use rational persuasion to alter people’s beliefs. That’s an example of many kinds of tests. So you can do all these many varied kinds of tests on how rational people are and what you he found was just like the measures for intelligence. They form a general factor of reasoning. They form a positive manifold. So then he asks, and this is what makes him so brilliant, right? He then asks this really straight, this really profound question. I mean he is a great scientist that makes complex things simple, right? He asks this profound question, so simply. Are the measures of intelligence identical with the measures of rationality? The answer is no. Overwhelmingly, no. On average, the correlation between the measures of your intelligence and the measures of your rationality are point three where, where it varies from none, which is zero to one, which is maximum. Intelligence is necessary but nowhere near sufficient for being rational. So what’s the difference? This is now the core of your question, what the psycho-technologies are doing is that there are ways of internalizing, practices and skills and ways of training your attention that get you to best applying intelligence to paying attention to how you’re using your intelligence. That sounds so trivial, right? But people, it takes a lot of practice and effort. So one thing he talks about is he, which is directly relevant to the ancient practice of stoicism and modern psychotherapeutic work in cognitive behavioral therapy. He talks about Jonathan Barron’s active openmindedness. This is a psycho-technology that makes you more rational. It helps you overcome the ways in which your intelligence makes you deceptive. So let me give you an example. I just flew back from Cuba. I told you that. Okay? So here’s what people. Your loved ones take you to the airport, right? You’re about to get on the plane and they’re oh safe trip and text me when you’re there. Basically what you’re doing is saying, don’t die, don’t die, don’t die because you’re terrified that they’re going to die on this airplane. Now, why are you terrified? Well, think about it. Your brain is trying to calculate the probability of things. Remember when I talked about that explosion? If you were to use pure probability theory, trying to calculate the probability of events is vast (inaudible). You can’t do it. So your brain does these two short cutting technique. It uses like a couple of what are called heuristics. It uses this availability heuristic. If I can easily imagine or remember something, I think of it as highly probable. Well, I can remember airplane crashes because they’re on the news and I could easily imagine it because my homo erectus brain goes” a big metal in the sky…no it will fall.” The other is how representative, how much does it sort of stand out? Then again, when there’s a plane crash, people make it super salient. They call it a tragedy a disaster and so you go in and the availability heuristic, which is very adaptive for you and the representative heuristic, very adaptive, this sort of frontline relevance realization, and they tell you this person’s going to die in a plane crash. This is self deception because you worry about them. Then without a second thought, you get, you go into the garage and you get in your car..

Adrian

Chance of dying goes up.

John Vervaeke

…which is the North American death machine, right? So active open mindedness is about learning to see how these heuristic processes that are central to our adoptive intelligence can be present in our day to day behavior. What you do is you look for…you actively try to look for these heuristics misfiring. How often do you look for evidence that disconfirms one of your beliefs as opposed to just finding evidence that confirms it.

Thal

I just have to say I’ve been enjoying what you’re saying and it’s in line with the questions that I have been sitting with prior to my own awakening in a way. My background is more literature. I also come from the Sufi background.

John Vervaeke

Excellent.

Thal

The way you’re talking for me is just giving language to questions that I’ve had in my mind for a long time. Your wording and everything you’re expressing is just answering very deep questions that are probably even pre language for me, so I don’t even have any question right now, but maybe more like..

John Vervaeke

You don’t know how often I get that comment. It always takes me a little bit aback and I get it informally and student evaluations in my courses, but I get it like in spontaneous situations, like, just happened now. People often talk about me giving them a vocabulary even for before, and this is like an or a grammar like we were talking about earlier before they could articulate it itself, but nevertheless, it resonates very deeply with us.

Thal

It excites me because I just started my journey as a doctoral student in Transpersonal Psychology. Right. That’s where I’m like, okay, I want go into that space where science and spirituality meets. I’ve been in the spiritual space for a long time, but because using your words, a lot of the way my cognitive space was working, I didn’t have the language to explain what was going on. I’m hoping that with the recent work that you’re doing. I’ve had experiences in the psychedelic space where now I have the language. I get it.

John Vervaeke

I think that’s excellent. I think that’s a great point because I want to be clear the active open mindedness that I mentioned is just one psycho-technology. We step back and become aware of another important one, our mindfulness practices. So whereas active openmindedness is about paying attention to how your adaptive process can mislead you when you’re making inferences. Mindfulness is about how can those how could this salience machinery cause you to basically deceive yourself at an attentional level? So what you want to do is you want to find as many of these, what I would say scientifically validated psycho-technologies and try to see how we can align them together and, and so there’s a lot of work right now and my lab is involved with it and I’m just involved with a lot of really great people about it. Daniel Craig is doing this great work. I want to continue to make it clear that I’m privileged belong to and to some degree lead a community. So we’re really interested in this question of what’s going on in both psychedelic experiences and spontaneous experiences that are similar. What I’m particularly interested in and what it aligns with the most is the aspect of the psychedelic experience with the mystical experience where the awakening experiences that align most with what we’re talking about is when people get a particular kind of experience. The Griffith lab did the same thing on this. There’s a difference between a psychedelic experience and a mystical experience and I think there’s a difference between a mystical experience and what L. A. Paul calls…if there is a book I can recommend to you L. A. Paul’s book on transformative experience is literally the book. I got to meet Lori and lecture in her class, I was very privileged to lecture in her class on transformative experience. So what I’m interested in, and Steve Taylor does this, talks a lot about this in his book and sort of Andrew Newberg. Normally when people have an altered state of consciousness, they do the following thing. They go into that altered state of consciousness. Let’s consider a typical one. You dream, you come out of your dream and you say, oh, that was weird, that wasn’t real. This is real. And why do you say that? You say that because, well, it doesn’t fit together very well. It doesn’t make sense and it’s not coherent with the rest of your life. Right? So this sort of coherent intelligibility that people sometimes have, there’s a subset of altered states of consciousness, higher states of consciousness, which can sometimes occur in psychedelic experiences. I don’t want to talk about when and where but they’ll have an experience and they’ll say that is more real than this. It’s that hyper-realness what I called onto-normativity, because it’s not why I call it that is, it’s not just, it’s more real. They feel like an obligation that they have to transform their lives and their identity so they can stay in contact. Remember that sense of connectedness. So they can stay in contact with that deeper realness. It struck me. I mean this is a really good scientific problem. Why? Here’s this bizarre experience. It doesn’t fit into the rest of their life. They often come back and they say it’s ineffable. I can’t tell why it has no content to it and yet they say it’s more real. It should be discarded. I was trying to get at what’s going on in these experiences that, right. Why are people experiencing them as more real? And secondly, is that a legitimate experience? Like because they’re changing their lives, right? And so you want to know, do those kinds of experiences, can they be ultimately enmeshed.

Thal

Practical.

John Vervaeke

That’s it. Can they be integrated with these other psycho-technologies? Could we, I mean, this sounds ridiculous, but could we come up with a set of psycho-technologies for these higher states of consciousness that would be nicely systematically working with active openmindedness and mindfulness. Could we create this systematic sap and so that’s, yeah, I’m really interested in it. The thing I would really tell your listeners and I’m not telling you what to do or anything, but I just, I just feel a responsibility. The transformation isn’t in the drug, right?

Thal

This is important to mention.

John Vervaeke

The drug isn’t, this…So like higher states of consciousness are tools, they’re not toys, right? If you’re using them in a situation where you have not put them within a set of psycho-technological practices in which you’re cultivating wisdom, you’re really looking for ways in which you are prone to self-deception. If you stick that into those, there’s a great chance you’re just gonna bullshit yourself.

Thal

Perpetuate that self-deception at a deeper level.

Adrian

I’m reminded of what Jack Kornfield who wrote first the ecstasy then the laundry because there is a real trapping in the pursuit of peak experience. So you have a glimpse and then you want to go back to it because it’s not sustained. You’re bringing this important point of the mundane everyday practice to bridge that.

John Vervaeke

What you see in ancient traditions like in the neoplatonic tradition, which greatly informs Sufism by the way. You see this tremendous philosophical endeavor to, in a deeply integrative fashion, create a worldview that tries to articulate this enhanced sense of meaning and intelligibility, the cultivation of all of these practices, right? And then, and then they’re integrated with these existential moral practices. So the idea of being rational and mystical are not oppositional. They’re supposed to be deeply intertwined, mutually constraining and mutually informing each other.

Thal

This was the split too in Sufism between the orthodoxy and the ecstatic poets. Where, in my opinion, the ecstatic poets were to mesh the rationality and the mystical, but because they were talking about the ineffable then the orthodoxy were unable to accept them and were considered as heretics.

John Vervaeke

I think this is a very important point. I think that pattern gets repeated. It gets repeated. I think also within Christianity, I mean, Meister Eckhart is almost, you know, he’s pretty much, he dies before he gets condemned as a heretic.

Thal

Even within science, there are those who would consider what we’re talking about as heretical in scientistic or scientism.

John Vervaeke

There’s all kinds of orthodoxies, right? And this goes towards your point, and this is another point I would want to make this is a broader issue about the ways in which I want to speak very carefully here because I’m not, I’m a scientist and I love science, but there’s ways in which the culture at large has been misled by science. What I mean by that? What science does, right? Is Science, and this is what the scientific revolution when it, it actually, it actually comes out of and then sort of solidifies and exemplifies a trend that had been growing in western civilization since the, around the beginning of the 13th century. What am I trying to get at? What science does is enhance your capacity for propositional knowledge, right? So propositional knowledge is your knowledge of what we call facts and people. You know, what a lot of the people that are, um, you know, rationality, this, on Youtube, and they talk about facts. Ask them what a fact is, is it made out of matter…What is a fact, what do you mean by that? What’s the metaphysics of a fact? Well, they’ll say, well, things are true. Okay, well what do you mean by true? What they’re basically talking about is propositional knowledge is knowledge of that something is the case. So what they’re talking about is that they have propositions that they consider are well-evidenced and well-argued, right? And that’s propositional knowledge and so that is a form of knowing that is centered on belief, that is why belief has become so central in our culture. We understand everything in terms of belief, why ideology is so powerful, because what ideology is…it is the attempt to replace spirituality with sets of beliefs that are supposed to be doing, but the problem is for all the terrific importance of propositional knowledge. It’s not the only kind of knowing we have.

Thal

It can be dogmatic.

John Vervaeke

Well not only it is dogmatic, which is true. I don’t deny that, but I think what’s happening in the case of the teachers you’re talking about, right, is that they try to represent another kind of knowing that has to a very large degree, been sort of quashed in our culture. Let me give you some examples. In addition to knowing that something is the case you have, you have what’s called procedural knowledge. You know how to do things. For example, you know how to ride a bike, which isn’t the same thing as having a bunch of beliefs like you know how to ride a bike. In fact, you’ll find a great deal of difficulty and actually putting into effective words what it takes to ride a bike. This is one of the gifts of the work in ai because we thought, you know it’s all about propositional knowledge. Getting computers to do propositional knowledge it’s hard, but we’ve gotten really good at that. Getting computers to skills like knowing how to catch a baseball. That turned out to be way harder than we thought because that procedural knowledge is much more embodied. It’s much more about that direct online fitting of the brain to the world, but in addition to that, because you’re a conscious being and consciousness is not the same thing as belief at all, right? Because most of your beliefs are unconscious. You, for example, believe that Africa is a continent. You don’t have to hold it in your mind or consciousness, right? Because you’re a conscious being. You have perspectival knowing. You know what it’s like to have this experience right now. What it’s like, what does water here? I’m having a drink right now. You know what it’s like to drink water and notice how ineffable that is. How would you explain that to somebody.

Adrian

The direct experience. That’s been directly experienced.

Thal

The embodied experience.

John Vervaeke

It’s a perspectival knowing. It’s how is your salience landscape being shaped and altered and what’s standing out to you and then what state of consciousness are you entering into and this is all not captured by your beliefs. Then finally, and overlapping with the procedural and the perspectival is participatory knowing this is the knowing you have not by altering your beliefs or even alter your state of consciousness. You have it by altering your identity. It’s the knowing you get by binding your identity to something and letting your identity being transformed in conjunction with how that thing is transforming. Hopefully this is why this metaphor was used in the mystical traditions. This is hopefully how you know the person you love, right? You don’t just have beliefs about them, that’s kind of creepy. You don’t just have skills about how to work with them. You should have skills, you know what it’s like to be with them, but there’s something deeper. You have become a person you could not have been or become other than in your relationship to them and also they have become in their relationship to you. So you know them by how differently you know yourself and the world in knowing them. Does that make sense?

Adrian

It reminds me of sort of that Buddhist notion of the dissolving in self and other.

John Vervaeke

Yes, it’s so. It’s very much that it’s knowing by identifying, its knowing by being at one, it’s knowing by sort of being dynamically coupled to something so that you’re getting reciprocal revelation and this goes to like what’s at the core of what is called third generation cog-sci and sort of it’s Heideggerian framework. Is this notion of a deeper kind of truth. Sorry, that’s going to make the wrong people in California happy. What I mean by that is like there’s propositional truth which is can be deep and profound like e=mc squared, but there’s also Aletheia, which is a Greek word that Heidegger uses. There’s a sense of, right before I can make sure my beliefs correspond to the world, I have to be connected to the world in the right way. There’s this irrelevance realization stuff again, so that right as the world discloses itself, it draws something for me and right and then that draws something from the world. They’re mutually growing from each other. And this is all part of what’s right and, and this can also be put into very scientific language about complex, complex systems and dynamical systems. But the basic philosophical idea is there’s this reciprocal, a revelation, reciprocal revealing of self and world. Now what’s interesting is my good friend Mark Lewis recommend his work highly, by the way. He’s one of the people that brought this whole dynamical systems approach into neuroscience. Also at UofT, he’s one of the. He wrote memoirs of an addictive brain. He’s one of the foremost people on addiction and what’s interesting, he’s got a theory of addiction that’s the opposite, which is what he calls reciprocal narrowing. So instead of addiction being thought of as just biological, by the way, that’s just not true. We have this model that addiction is this biological craving that your system has and that’s just insufficient amount. I like. I was at a conference in July, the Society for Philosophy and Psychology and they’re just one, one…That’s the wrong model of addiction, right? Because it doesn’t explain a lot of things. It doesn’t explain the fact that a lot of people would just spontaneously.

Thal

It is disempowering.

John Vervaeke

It doesn’t explain again that like a lot of people will just spontaneously stop being addicted when they enter their thirties. People will like, you know, all the people that were using heroin when, during Vietnam and then they returned to North America and they just stopped. They don’t have to go to treatment, they don’t have to go through Rehab. So he has instead this sort of what you may call anti-Alatheia model of addiction. What happens is right, because the addict’s salient landscape is being altered by the drug. The options in the world narrow a bit and because the options in the world narrow a bit, their right, their sense of self gets a little more rigid and you see what’s happening. It’s like this vicious cycle and as the self becomes more rigid, the world narrows and as the world narrows, the self becomes more rigid and you get this reciprocal narrowing.

Thal

Their cognition becomes impeded.

John Vervaeke

Yeah. It becomes you lose cognitive flexibility and and that’s exactly what’s happening in the things like PTSD and things like that. Right, and that’s why the psychedelic experience can be so liberating because what it can do is it can throw the brain into a state that it’s not normally in and break that vicious cycle, but it’s gotta be. It’s gotta be coordinated with therapy. It’s got to be coordinated with cognitive restructuring. Flexibility is great, but it has to be. It has to be. That engine has to be tapped in insight and a change in the sense of identity. Look we’re continuously in a process of co-identification. Look, I’m here right now. I’m assuming that identity, either professor or a scientist and I am assigning identities to you. Here’s a glass, I’m assuming identity as a glass grabber. This object is a water holder for me, even though it’s a million other things, scientifically molecules and all kinds of electromagnetic field. We’re always, always, always in this agent arena relationship. We’re constantly in this, you know, bi-directional fashion, creating identities in the world.

Thal

Assigning meaning.

John Vervaeke

It’s not in your beliefs, it’s in the way in which your world is either reciprocally opening up because your sense of agency is being opened up and the world is being opened up or it’s narrowing down in a self deceptive self destructive fashion.

Thal

I was enjoying like when we first started our talk like you, you gave some amazing historical context, but I was also thinking about what about those people that their cognition is so impeded and their sense of self is so rigid and so small and you know, they’re unable to break free from whatever cycle that they’re stuck in.

John Vervaeke

That’s a really, really important question and I’m hesitating precisely because I have so much to say about it.

Thal

That was the one question that was sitting me when you were talking in the beginning… I was like…how can I bring that in?

Adrian

It’s that inertia, right when you’re stuck like existentially with midlife crisis, quarter life crisis, whatever you want to call it.

John Vervaeke

I call it existential inertia, by the way. Let’s talk about. Let’s talk about this. Let’s devote some time to it if you’re okay with that, because I think this is. This is where these broad issues about wisdom and transcendence and the meaning crisis. This is where it comes to people when people get this fundamental stuck-ness, this barrenness, emptiness, voidness, futility, right? And by the way, Thomas Nagel is right. All the arguments people give for meaninglessness, none of them are logically valid. All right, well oh I’m so insignificant to time and space. So what…If I blew you up to the size of the galaxy are you better? Like, does that do anything for you? It’s not helpful. It’s not…what I’m doing does it matter a million years from now? Well, the argument is symmetrical. What they’re thinking of you a million years from now does it matter to you? He, he points out that all of these arguments are not actually logically valid. They don’t, they don’t lead to. So it’s not that people’s reasoning is actually leading them into this, but I think that’s basically a form of rationalization. I think you guys would put your finger on the actual issues. What are like, what’s going on in this existential inertia? I would say there’s another thing, there’s an existensial indecisiveness. So let’s talk quickly about both. We were talking about that agent arena. I was talking about this in one of my talks, but right, there’s a thing where like there’s a difference again because of the participatory perspectival, there’s a difference between believing something and actually it being something you live within.

Thal

Lived experience.

John Vervaeke

I want to really deepen that. I appreciate how you’re introducing it. I have some criticisms of how some people use that. I think that gets used often romantically as a way of…you have to be careful here because I’m not saying that everybody uses it this way. I’m not saying that I am not saying that, but what I am saying is some people use this as a way of doing what you mentioned earlier, Adrian, right? What they’re doing is they’re collecting important experiences of suffering or you know, or, or peak, you know, people look for tail ends of the distribution that will guarantee their uniqueness, right? There’s their narcissism by special, special uniqueness, right?

Thal

Thats the word, narcissism.

John Vervaeke

It is a response to the meaning crisis. That’s why narcissism is becoming such a problem for us. I want to deepen that notion. Let’s say like, sometimes this will happen to me like you’re reading a novel perhaps, or like for me, I’m reading like a particular philosopher, like Whitehead or something and I’m finding the arguments very persuasive and I’m getting all kinds of beliefs. Right? And it’s very propositional, you know, but then there’s this thing and it goes from being like propositional to being adverbial. I start seeing the world in a Whiteheadean way. I start feeling it, experiencing it, and I start to understand and experience myself in a Whiteheadean fashion. Now I’m living the worlview. It’s viable to me as opposed to. Right. And so I’m really interested in what makes, because it’s relation to the meaning crisis, what makes a worldview viable like that. And I think Harry Frankfurt’s work is really helpful here. He talks about um, whether or not something is, he calls it unthinkable. I don’t like that word, but that’s his term. So let me give you an example. My son, my oldest son, lives with me right now, right? So I can imagine kicking him out and I can make all kinds of inferences about what I would pay. Say more money. The apartment would be cleaner, right? So in one sense I can imagine, I can make an inference, but it’s unthinkable to me because I can’t make it a viable option. I can’t get myself into that process of identifying the world and I, I can’t get my identity and the identity of the world to be resonant in such a fashion that I could be the kind of person that would kick my son out the fittedness. So it just doesn’t work. It’s not viable for me. Now that’s positive. Right, and that has to do with love because it can think about it because you know when I was talking about that reciprocal revelation in Alethea though as the world is revealing its self to me, I’m revealing myself to it and those are deeply interpenetrating processes. That’s also, that’s also love. That’s why love has been used as a metaphor for this kind of participatory knowing. Right? In fact, if you do that with people, that’s what Erin’s work show. If you get people to do mutually accelerating revelation about each other, disclosure, you start to disclose a bit about yourself and that I disclose a bit more about me and then that makes you, and if we start getting into that, then that’s how you get people to fall in love. Whether it’s sexual or friendship, right? So there’s that love element that that reciprocal connectedness right now, that’s a positive version of it. And I remember talking to asking Laurie Paul about this, and she thought it was a good a good point. I said, but isn’t there a negative version of that? Where like, and I remember bringing it uo to Mark. I said, Mark, you’ve got the negative version. Where’s the positive insight? Because also say to Frankfurt, you’ve got the positive versus the negative. Can’t that reciprocal relationship. So bind you in, and this was your point, Thal, so binds you in that you can’t write. You can believe what you need to believe and you can imagine it, but you can’t unfold. You can’t, you can’t, you know, reverse the direction of the reciprocal relationship in that’s existential inertia. You get locked into a world that’s the existential inertia.

Adrian

Which is different from indecisiveness?

John Vervaeke

Indecisiveness is another thing. So let’s call it, let’s call that an existential to inertia and I want you to think about how important that is to therapy. Because when people come into therapy, they know they have to. They know what they have all the right beliefs about where they should be and they can imagine it. They could make mental images of where they need to be.

Thal

They can probably see their patterns too.

John Vervaeke

But they can’t get there, they don’t have the know how they don’t have the perspectival and the participatory knowing. Okay, let’s do the existential indecisiveness. Adrian, and this goes to the heart of Lori’s work. L. A. Paul’s work and transformative experience. She talks about transformative experiences and they’re, and they have this following kind of characteristics. She had this wonderful gedanken experiment. Philosophers do this, right? They put you in bizarro world and you play with it, and then once you sort of agree with, oh, that makes sense. Then they say, Aha, so this is what she does. She says, imagine the following. Your friends come up to you and they give you indubitable evidence that they can turn you into a vampire. Do you do it? And you go, what? And she says, well, here’s the problem you face. You don’t know what it’s what it’s going to be like. Remember the perspectival knowing to be a vampire until you’re a vampire so you don’t have that perspectival knowing, right, and you don’t have the participatory knowing, you don’t know who you’re going to be because when you become a vampire, your priorities and your sense of identity and your sense of agency, all that coin and all that’s going to be changed. So here’s the problem. You face, you’re ignorant. You’re deeply ignorant of the perspectival knowledge that you don’t yet have ahe participatory knowledge that you don’t yet have. So what do you do? What do you do? Well, I don’t do it, but then you don’t know what you’re losing. You don’t. No you don’t. No, sorry. You don’t know what you’re missing. You don’t know what you could be missing the best thing ever. Well then I will do it. Ah, but then you don’t know what you’re losing. You don’t know what you’re going to. You don’t know what you’re going to see. The thing is you can’t, you can’t do. So we typically, what we thought is, well, what we do in situations of uncertainty is we go we are bayesian in, right? We calculate the probabilities, we calculate the utilities, but you can’t calculate the probabilities. You can’t calculate the utilities because you’re absolutely ignorant. So what do you do, and so she said this is the thing is this is what she calls a transformative experience. When you go through this radical transformation of your perspectival and your participatory knowing. So people also face that when they’re in therapy, they face this existential indecisiveness, which they’re stuck in inertia, but they’re also contemplating changing. They don’t know how that’s part of the problem. But the other part of the problem is, well, what will I be losing when I go over there? What will I don’t know what I’m missing and I don’t know what I’m going to be. So they’re, they’re existentially indecisive. And you see, we used to have, you mentioned the Sufis. We used to have these broadly powerful traditions in which we had institutions and traditions and communities that gave people support and guidance and structure to transformative experience.

Thal

So that they plunge into the unknown…

John Vervaeke

But they don’t, like we sad, with the psychedelic, they don’t plunge into it like in an autodidactic fashion. Autodidactism is, uh, you know, it’s the worst way to do science. It’s the worst way to make literature. It’s the worst way to do poetry. It’s also the worst way to do spirituality. Right? Laurie sort of does that and she really wrestled her point, which is the brilliant point of the book is like our normal notions of standard rationality just don’t apply to transformative experiences. Laurie’s no romantic or like she’s a hardline.

Thal

It is funny that you use the word autodidact because I consider myself an autodidact and that’s what hindered me from my own progress. Absolutely.

John

You only have most of your cognitive flexibility comes from your ability to internalize the perspective of others and to internalize psycho-technologies from your culture at large. Right? And if you’re an autodidact, that’s often that self organizing adaptive intelligence just runs in its own echo chamber. So I got really interested in this problem, the transformative experience problem and how psychedelics and mystical experiences. So I started thinking, okay, Laurie’s right, you can’t sort of logic or probability or theory your way through it. So what do people do? Do they do the Kierkergaard’s leap of faith?

Thal

I was about to say that. Kierkegaard’s leap of faith.

Adrian

Do a test drive where they, they do little micro experiments.

John Vervaeke

Excellent. Exactly. So this is so, so let’s do this. So the point about the gedanken experiment, right, is you’re not going to vampire, but then Laurie says, but you face real decisions like this in your life. Here’s one, have a child, and if you haven’t had a child and I have had to two, you don’t know what it’s like until you’ve had one and you don’t know who you’re going to be because you’re going to be a different person after you. If you’re a good parent, right? Or you decided to enter into a romantic relationship with somebody. If all that participatory knowing we talked about, it’s going to happen. You’re going to be a different person in a different world. You don’t know what you’re losing. You don’t know what you’re missing, and then I pointed something out to Laurie, which she, she agreed with. I said, you know what? Every developmental change that the brain’s going through into all of our cognitive development, we’re facing these transformative things. She said, yeah, it’s that pervasive. So let’s go back to Adrian’s point because I think it’s excellent. What did people do when they think about having a child? He said like, they do the test run, so I looked around and so what people do is they get a pet and they do weird things with the pet like they get, they’ll take family pictures with it and they’ll take it on vacation with them. So they do this, they do this thing or in, you know, uh, my, my partner and I were talking about this when we we’re away going to Cuba. It’s like one of the things people do, but in order to decide to get a relationship as they go on a trip with somebody and I thought, okay, what’s going on here? What’s going on here? And I thought, oh, this is really interesting. So what people are doing is they’re engaging in a very serious kind of play, right? So think about like how a play object is, has two identities, the plastic sword, it’s a sword but it’s not a sword so you can play with it to see what it’s like, but it doesn’t have the danger. So same thing with the pat, same thing with the trip, right? So it’s this, it’s this, it’s an analogy, but it’s not a propositional analogy, it’s an inactive analogy. You’re acting it out and it, and it takes tremendous skill. Like a good analogy. It’s gotta get. It’s got to get the balance between the two worlds, right? It’s got to get. It’s got to keep you in contact with the world you’re in right now because you know you don’t want to lose it without right, without being able to judge, but it’s got to give you enough. It’s got a trigger, enough of that perspectival and participatory knowing so you get a real good taste and think of the word we use taste. A taste of that world and you and you got to get it perfectly balanced. And I realized that’s one of the things that was going on with the ancient gnosis. Gnosis was this participatory knowing that was supposed to bring about transformation by trying to get. Give people these inactive analogies, this symbolic way of interacting so that you could play right now. You need it to do one other thing. Let’s go back. So that’s going to deal with the indecisiveness by giving you the test run. What about the inertia? Well, here’s an idea that comes from sort of the central Plato, platonic tradition, but we talked about it already, right? Giving people psycho-technologies that get that, that process of reciprocally opening the world up. Plato had a word for this anagogie the ascent, right? And what you do is, and Plato had this great insight that if you get the psycho-technologies lined up in the right way, they will become mutually reinforcing. So what I want is I want psycho-technologies that reduce my inner conflict because it’s the different motivational centers are what skew my salience landscape and make me self deceptive. So here’s a typical one. You have, you have hyperbolic discounting. You tend to find presence stimuli, very salient and future ones, very non-salient. That’s why people procrastinate. That’s why dieting is such a failed industry, right? Recidivism rate is 95 percent. They only have a five percent success rate and they rake in billions of dollars, right? What you want to do is you want to make sure, and this is what was lacking, what Stanovich was noting was people was lacking. See, your intelligence makes things quickly, salient, to you. Remember the airplane crash, right? You’ve got to retrain your salience landscape so that it will tend to zero in on the real patterns as opposed to the illusory or false patterns and that takes a lot of practice. One of the ways you do that, plato saw is by working to try and get an optimal relationship between what you find salient, but also what you find true, right? So trying to get that part of you that urgently connect you to the world, talking to the part of you that can pick up on more abstract but real patterns. What Plato saw right is as that internal conflict goes down, my self-deception goes down. Because if my salience landscape isn’t radically skewed away from my truth landscape, if they’re much more talking to each other and consonant then I’m much less likely to engage in self-deceptive practice. But here’s the. Here’s the insight, as I reduced my self-deception by achieving inner peace, and that’s what was behind the stupid hallmark card, right? And we want inner peace with the idea that what I want, right? I have this meta drive to try and optimize these various adaptive ways of interacting with the world so that I get an optimal grip on the world. Right? But what plato saw as I get better at reducing this inner conflict, I start to see the world more clearly.

Adrian

What does that look like in practice? So I’m having a hard time what’s the exercise that Plato was referring to? Is it inner dialogue and like how do you.

John Vervaeke

That’s the thing, you’re not gonna find it in Plato because Plato is enormously. You’ll find it more on Plotinus and you’ll find it also like in the Sufi tradition, you’ll find it all these practices. So one of the things that you should be going to a mindfulness practice for is not relaxing, not feeling better. I’m actually going to be on a TV show for the fall The Beaverton, where I represent a scientist talking about mindfulness as opposed to people who are sort of practicing mindfulness to feel good.

Thal

I’ve heard people actually refer to mindfulness as…oh, this is bullshit now.

John Vervaeke

That’s right and that’s because mindfulness should be about education. It’s not a vacation, right? You should be going into mindfulness. To reduce. You should see a significant reduction reported to you by others in your self deception. That’s what it starts to look like and you start to see situations and people differently. Now as you start to see people and situations differently, you know what that means. You start to do, you start to understand yourself better and differently, so you now start to get better at aligning the psyche, which then means it’s better for you to see and understand. That’s how you can start to get that positive feedback cycle going. Does that make sense?

Thal

I’m just also thinking about spirituality also that some people even use that as a self deception mechanism. Totally. It just becomes a bypass and don’t go into the like your inner world and to reduce that inner conflict.

Adrian

I think part of it is how it’s sold to us. I mean, for me, I started diving into meditation practice only about three years ago, so I consider myself very early on the path, but the way that it’s often taught or the way I interpreted it is escapist version of meditation.

Thal

It has been my journey for seven years, Adrian.

John Vervaeke

It’s part of this sort of crypto romanticism. I mean that as a philosophical cultural project not romantic love although that where it came from too. Like romanticism with the idea, right? How can I put it here? Here’s how I would put it in a somewhat simplistic slogan, the idea that you have a true self, not at, not in a Buddhist sense or like the the inner machinery but you have an autobiographical self that you have to be true too, right, and this is, this is the opposite of the axial revolution is the aspirational self. Socrates was trying to help us realize and cultivate and through wisdom and transformation come to our true self. You are not born with it as a finished identity that you constantly have to harken to and then your project is to show to the world how unique and special right that inner self that you’re born with. The project isn’t the project shifts from how do I realize and become my true and better self to the project of how do I continually demonstrate to the world myself and what it is and how unique it is. And so what people do, I think is they collect spiritual experiences and then they’re like, they’re these bejeweled glamorous that they put on their narcissistic shelf and um, yeah, I think, I mean I think that’s just a disaster, but if you go back to what we were talking about, if you, if you get a community that gives you this serious play and that gives you the tools.

Thal

The cognitive tools.

John Vervaeke

That serious play, that inactive analogy, that enacted anagogic transformation, then you can bring about a transformative experience and people are doing this spontaneously and they’re doing it and they’re doing it. Let them. Let me give an example because this is so bizarre, right? So what are some of the most secular countries in the world? The Scandinavian countries. So in Scandinavia there’s a role playing a style of jeep form that has emerged. And so the point about this is like a you know what a role play game is, right? Dungeons and dragons, and then you have larping where you live action role playing, right? Larping I should say. Right? And then this is one thing more or so what you have is you have a bunch of people, they come into a situation, they’re given a situation, they have to act out, and then the dungeon master is actually like a director and what to do like a movie set director. He’ll cut a scene or they’ll say switch or switch roles, or I’ll give you a prop and say this is a sword now use it and what you’re doing is you’re acting out scenes and you’re acting on scenes that are actually real life scenes and this is what you actually are striving for. You’re trying to get a phenomenon called bleed, so what you want is you want the senior acting out to be similar enough analogically similar enough, but open you up and do enough flexibility in play that you’ll the line between what you’re playing and your real life bleeds so that you can do. Now if you would ask the people or even religious, they go, what are you talking about? But you said, but why are you pursuing this? I mean, from the outside. This looks to me like a spiritual practice. This is a radical practice that started a highly ritualized situation with a community of support and desire and you know, and it’s not escapist this like it’s often like deeply disturbing and troubling to these people, but they’re seeking genuine release from this indecisiveness, existential indecisiveness, and existential inertia, that’s the kind of thing.

Adrian

Is this unconscious, you suspect they’re not going and knowing that that’s what they’re doing it for?

John Vervaeke

I think it’s semiconscious. It’s sort of like it’s mythologically aware to them they, they got, they know that this is meeting, look like. Think about it. When we were talking about that inner peace, you have played this Plato’s great insight that in addition to whatever you want, you want to, you want to experience it with inner peace. If I said to you, I’ll give you tremendous fame, but it will rip you apart inside. Do you want it? You go, no, I don’t think so. Right? But there’s another one. Remember, in addition to any piece, I want to be in contact with the real patterns. Same thing. People have a metta desire to whatever they have, right? They want it to be real. So I’ll do this in class with my students. So I’ll say, how many of you I’ll probably have I do this too much. I’m going to spoil it because they are students and they’ll start just screwing around with me but generally I’ll say, how many of your in like deeply satisfying personal relationships right now put up your hand. Surprisingly, a lot of them put up their hands contrary to all the complaining we hear. And then I’ll say, now the following, I want you to imagine it’s like Laurie’s Gedanken experiment. Imagine that your partner is cheating on you and finding out that they were cheating on you would absolutely end the relationship that you have right now. How many of you want to know if your partner is cheating on you? Keep your hands up. 95 percent of the people keep their hands on it. They’d rather have the real suffering that the fake happiness. Right? And so I think the same thing’s going on with this jeep forming this. They’re, they’re finding that they’re getting, they’re getting a bit of that analogic play, they’re getting a bit of that anagogic, you know, reciprocal revelation. They’re getting that opening up, right? They’re getting that, that, that transformation and their perspectival and participatory knowing they’re getting that gnosis and they’re feeling deeply connected to themselves and to each other into their world. Now they don’t think of that as the hallmark of spirituality and I think that spirituality is about believing in supernatural entities and seeing strange lights, but I think that’s the key is spirituality because they’re going through these radical transformations of consciousness and cognition, community and communing with others, designed to bring about enhanced relevance, realization, enhanced insight, wisdom, cognitive flexibility, changing. They’re very patterns of co-identification, how they identify others and their world and themselves.

Thal

It is like that awareness expansion. To go back to that question you mentioned, is it, is it religious? No, it’s not because there’s no dogma.

John Vervaeke

I make a distinction between religion and religio. So religio is a Latin word and it is one of the two contenders for the edible, logical origin of the word religion but religio actually means connectedness this to connect things, to bind things together. So that sense of binding I think was crucial. Now I think what, what goes on in religion is you also get credo, I believe, right? And you get these propositional statements. Now the point of the propositional statements is to originally is to, is to create a community and to create practices and psycho-technology, literatures about psycho-technologies to help people. But the problem is like you can get a creedal oppression where the credo crushes the religio.

Thal

Brings about rigidity and increases inner conflicts…

John Vervaeke

Right and so what we get is we get, we get another thing that is a terrific sign. So we talked about narcissism and these two are related, although most people won’t see them initially is related, but. Oh well good. Okay. So the narcissism, the meaning crisis. And then here’s another thing that’s connected to the meaning crisis and also connected to narcissism and that’s the rise of fundamentalisms. Beliefs not enough. So what I’ll do is I’ll just believe even more, like I’ll, I’ll pour everything into belief and I’ll make credo absolutely like the complete identity. When I talk to people from a religious background. I’ll often say … when I get into discussion and I do this respectfully because I really respect people who belong to a religious traditions because I understand like what, sorry, that sounds arrogant. I don’t mean it to be, I’m trying to say I understand in an appreciative fashion what they’re doing, what they’re trying to do, but I’ll often say to them, don’t tell me what you believe…tell me what you practice and tell me how those practices are making you more wise and more compassionate or capable of self transcendence and more capable of transforming the world to deal with the situations we’re dealing with. Don’t tell me what you believe. Tell me about your practices.

Thal

This is an important distinction. Just because I come from a, like I was brought up in a more religious environment and that’s the struggle. Growing up, a lot of young people are just given all these dogmas and instructions and it’s so divorced from the reality of everyday and so the young generation becomes so disenchanted, so they either turn to complete nihilism or the other side is fundamentalism.

Adrian

Yes. The interesting move for me coming from pretty secular, um, you know, upbringing towards a more open mystical, you know, explorer. I think the move for me was to shift away from asking what’s true to how is this useful, right. It is literally the bring it to the practical ground to get in practice. Was, was the move that helped open me to something that was uncomfortable and different and scary and start to experiment.

John Vervaeke

Well, I think that’s the key. I mean, I think the summit of propositional knowledge is what we call knowledge scientific knowledge. I think the summit of the procedural perspectival participatory stuff is what we call wisdom. And those are not the same thing. You don’t get wisdom by getting a lot of knowledge. Knowledge is relevant to wisdom, but it’s like the relationship between intelligence and rationality. It’s a necessary but not sufficient. I would say useful, but you want useful again and I’m hoping this is helpful to you. I’m not trying to step on your toes, right? But you want useful to be broadened in the sense of useful for helping you overcome patterns of foolishness and useful for helping you engage in patterns of flourishing, things that are useful for the cultivation of wisdom. Are you getting better at seeing when you’re in messy situations do you have sets of practices that help you zero in on what’s relevant and what’s real. So I understand what, what, what true, but if we talk about real in that athletic sense, that sense of I’ve got a connectedness to the world that’s opening up me and the world in an ongoing fashion. A fashion that in which I can. There’s good reason and good evidence to believe that, you know, I’m, I’m becoming wiser, more compassionate, more engaged and effective person. Right. Then that’s what I’m saying…usefulness means…I hope you find that helpful because of the problem with the word useful is it’s, broad and, it can be sucked into that narcissistic project. It could be useful for promoting myself image and then it undermines the very, the very thing we’re trying to talk about here, I think.

Thal

Useful in a more meaningful, profound way.

Adrian

In a relational sense.

John Vervaeke

I would say existential and sapiential sense. Yeah. So if you’re, if you, if you have sets of practices that take you through the unavoidable and indispensable transformative experiences that you need to encounter and to go through there are unavoidable in your life. Someone dies, you leave, right? You lose your job, you decide to enter into relationship. All these things we’re talking about like do you have right cognitive practices, consciousness practices, community practices, character building practices that reliably take you through the in a way in which the field of flourishing life is expanded for you and the lives you touch. That for me is what I would say usefulness is so I’m a little bit critical of people who have some points where have a little bit critical of Jordan Peterson. I wish Jordan would get a little bit clearer on his pragmatic theory because I have. I want to debate him again at some point.

Adrian

It brings it back to the narcissistic tendency of I think a lot of spiritual circles. That pursuit of selfing it keeps defining it actually making the self more rigid.

John Vervaeke

This is why, again, like you’ve got to so, so the struggle, Thal, that you’re going through. For example, as where do I go to get like a community because you need, you need many people committed together to this like the jeep formers, regular, reliable meeting and getting together. Where do I find a community? Where do I, that it has as systematic set of psych-technologies and exemplar role models that are at different developmental stages in life so that as I moved through those developmental stages, I have a narrative understanding of what’s going on. Where do you have that? Well, the only place where we’ve typically had that up until now are religion, right, and when we tried second or alternatives, we tried ideologies in the 20th century and that drench the world in blood. Right? So we don’t want. We know that that’s not right. That’s not working and many of us, the traditional religions don’t work for a lot of the reasons we’ve articulated, but we need something very much like what they did. This is why I’m critical of people like Dawkins and Harris, right? Because yes, I think, I mean I consider myself a non-theist that, that I think both the theist and the atheists have presuppositions that are shared that I reject and at some point I’d like to talk about that agree not today but at great length, but see the thing about people like Dawkins is they concentrate on the false beliefs. It’s like, yes, okay, great, but you know, and this is what I sometimes point this out, you know, you have to get what Nietzsche talked about, like what he said, God is dead, right? The madman runs into the marketplace and he’s telling them who’s he talking to? He’s not talking to the theist, he’s talking to the atheist. He says, you don’t know what you’ve done. You’ve wiped away the sky. We’re forever falling. You don’t know what you’ve done by killing God. You don’t know. You’ve thrown away all this axial legacy, all this machinery and you and you don’t know how to replace it.

Thal

It is the most misunderstood statement.

John Vervaeke

Yes. So I mean Nietzsche’s great project is to try. But the problem is he was too much of an autodidact, right? And that’s my great criticism of Nietzsche. His project was, I mean he’s, he’s a great prophet of the meaning crisis, and his project was to try and create an alternative form of spirituality and then alternative mythology, the mythology of the Ubermensch. I have lots of criticisms of that, but people need, you need to see, what he was, what he was on about, wasn’t that people had silly false beliefs he was on about. No, no, we’re facing the meaning crisis and we’ve got to do something about this because if we don’t, it’s just going to get worse and it’s gonna get worse and people are going to turn to fundamental systems at the totalitarianisms and ideologies at escapisms and we’re going to get kind of the situation we’re in now today.

Adrian

So I’m just being mindful of time. I want to ask you personally, what are you working towards in moving towards the middle thing that we, you know, you mentioned about, you know, not religion but also not, not the secular ideology. What, what are you doing currently to support?

John Vervaeke

So in addition to the academic study and teaching of this material, I also try to teach people extracurricular that some of these psycho-technologies, mindfulness practices, I teach classes on meditation, Tai-chi and contemplative practices. I used to run a wisdom sanga. I’d like to start that up again. When you’re an academic your schedule changes all the time and it’s because it’s difficult. What Im doing also is I’m trying to…I’ve just, I’m just coming off sabbatical, like I have another one in a half a year. It’s a weird situation. With other people, not on my own, but with other people. A lot of these people I’ve mentioned colleagues, RAs, and fellow professors try to examine a lot of these psycho-technologies and trying to salvage what was going on when people are practicing this practice or that practice or that practice or that are trying to what we do in cognitive science, we reverse-engineer the mind. We tried to reverse engineer the mind, right. That’s what we’re trying to do in AI. I’m trying to reverse engineer what, like there’s all these oftern these creepy wonky metaphysics and weird beliefs and crazy superstitious. Right? But thinking about what Nisha said is, can we reverse engineer what were the psycho-technologies, what was going on in neoplatonism when people were doing theorgia, what was going on in, you know, when the gnostics were doing all their weird strange stuff, what’s going on when the Tibet and Buddhist and you can’t be, you can’t just dabble, right? You have to like, you have to like seriously read and study and practice and go through that transformative challenge, right? Yeah. So you have to guinea pig yourself to a degree, but you can’t autodidact. So doing a lot of that and trying to integrate that practical in a deep sense. It’s an insufficient word, that practical knowledge into a lot of this theoretical knowledge. I’m about to release a video series on my youtube channel. I’m awakening from the meaning crisis. It’s a series of hour long videos. I’m basically trying to lay out all this argument and that also talk about, right, how do we respond to the media crisis culturally, how is it enmeshed and interacting with other crises we’re facing. We were facing sociopolitical socioeconomic environment, socioeconomics, socio ecological crises, how, how is it Intermesh, right? And trying, but also individually giving people, okay, well what are, what are psycho-technologies you can practice, how can they be systematically related? Trying to give people, again, not on my own, but with many other people. Like what does wisdom mean? What does, how, what’s the theoretical structure that you could use? Right and trying to set that up for people. Sorry, that sounds pretentious and I don’t mean it to be, but I’m trying to answer your question.

Adrian

I appreciate it because there’s a sense of urgency. We can’t, we can’t wait for the perfect product, we just have to start doing it. We have to. Everybody has to try their best and, and collaborate and not, you know, not one person is ever going to solve this whole thing.

John Vervaeke

Exactly. Totally. And we are facing individually, collectively, and culturally we’re facing like we have to go through the greatest transformative experience with like and all those levels in some coordinated fashion that we’ve ever gone through because, you know, as I said, these crises are all mutually interacting with each other, like the meaning crisis and the ecological crisis. Like they talk to each other, they resonate with each other and you know, in, in this sort of nasty fashion. I talked about this with Christopher Mastropietro and Filip Miscevic and the book we wrote on Zombies as a current mythology that the culture is produced for trying to give expression to the meaning crisis, but also right? The idea of, uh, you know, have a devastated ecology because the interesting thing with zombies, they’re not super natural, right? Monsters, they’re just us diseased…decadent, right. What’s weird is that they’re mindless. They lack the capacity to make meaning and they’re like us. They’re the only communal monster. They move and horns, but there’s no culture.

Thal

There’s no real connection.

John Vervaeke

Right? And they consume, they consume, but to no purpose to no end, right. They represent like the meaning crisis and the way it has a both metaphorically like did the destruction of our spiritual ecology when, how that is intermeshed with the destruction of our biological ecology.

Thal

Just in closing, like the things that you’re mentioning is in line with why we even started this podcast. Adrian and I we’re having coffee together and we were talking about the crisis of meaning and how that’s affecting us on a daily basis and our generation. Today you just gave us a lot of food for thought a lot.

John Vervaeke

Thank you for the opportunity. I mean I really do that. There’s so much here. Sorry every academic says this, but we’ve really just scratched the surface in so many ways. There’s just so much going on. There’s so much going on and I’m like I said, you know, there’s going to be the video series.

Thal

Your language…to me is very mystical and scientific!

John Vervaeke

Well, that’s the thing. I would hope it’s both I find one of the things I find gratifying was when I teach courses like this, I’ll have people from both sides of the aisle who are usually yelling at each other and come up and say that was really good. Absolutely. Yes. I mean that’s obviously appeals to my egotism and acknowledging that, but I think I can, if I can put myself aside to some degree, but you also mentioned that you’ve worked with a lot of people. There are a lot of people that are talking this language now. That’s right, and that’s what I think. That’s what I’m trying to say. That’s what I try to tell my students that, and again, in this, the people say this and this could also be a twisty narcissist thing. Really focus on the work and focus on what was happening with the idea is don’t focus on me. Right. But really there’s…It’s simultaneously a terrifying and exciting time.

Thal

It is. Absolutely, yes.

Adrian

John to be continued. It was a pleasure.

John Vervaeke

Great. Thank you very much, guys. Really enjoyed this a lot.