Original subtitles

[music]

Very good morning to all of you. Thank

you.

>> By an incredible panel. Um it's a very

important topic which [music]

titled this

session on redefining Europe's place in

the world.

What do you think you were of what is

happening in the world today?

>> Terrible. I mean we are going back to

kindergarten.

>> Don't politicians say they believe in

God? Mhm.

>> Because people vote for things that

resemble them.

>> Uh yeah, absolutely. I mean you cannot

be elected US president if you say that

you are an atheist, right?

>> Same for Russia. Maybe

>> I don't think in Russia you will get

elected but okay.

Does it worry you to speak about Trump

in a manner that you think can I go into

America again?

>> It's worrying that we even have to raise

this question.

>> So if religion were to be a story and

many people wrote many stories why did

the stories of the religions we have

today sell history is shaped

by the human imagination by fiction and

not just by truth. What truth?

>> The truth ultimately is one because

reality is one. There is just one

reality. Reality can be extremely

complex.

>> If I were you were a 25year-old boy in

India. What would you suggest I optimize

for [music]

at this point of time?

>> My gut reaction is nobody has any idea.

>> Do you believe there is a purpose to

life? And if yes, what is it?

>> People think there is a big story, the

drama of the universe. This is something

I don't believe.

>> What do you believe? don't believe that

the universe works like a story.

>> Right?

>> I think the ultimate reality.

>> Hi you. Thank you. How do I say your

name?

>> Yuval.

>> Yuval.

>> Mhm.

>> Uh thank you for doing this. uh I have

read many of your books and I'm quite

the fan of how you write and how you

think as well. For my audience back home

in India, uh the young wannabe

entrepreneurs.

>> Mhm.

>> Maybe we can begin by you introducing

yourself a little bit just for context.

>> Mhm. Well, I'm basically a historian,

>> but I'm the type of historian that

thinks that history is not just the

study of the past. History is the study

of change, of how things change in the

world. And so it means it's also the the

study of the present and the future.

And how did you go from being a

historian to being a thinker who's

coming out with new thought in books?

What what goes on in your mind while you

write a book? Is it an idea that come

first comes first?

>> Yes. I mean, usually I try to to I don't

start with a plan. Oh, I need to write a

new book. So, what should it be about?

>> Right.

>> I usually I have kind of ideas building

up inside my mind and when they reach

the point when when it feels like I

actually have something new to say, uh,

then I'll write a book.

Sapiens I read I think that was the

first interaction I've had with any of

your books.

>> Uh brilliant book. I don't know if I

remember all of it.

>> I [laughter] won't test you. No.

>> What what has stayed with you? That book

is a little old now.

>> Mhm.

>> What has stayed relevant from then to

today?

I think the main point of sapiens which

is as relevant today as ever is that

uh in his history is is is

shaped

by the human imagination by fiction and

not just by truth.

That humans control the world because we

know how to cooperate better than any

other animal on the planet. and

corporation relies on storytelling

that so much of the world is run on

fiction is fueled by fiction. Uh it's

most obvious in the case of religion.

But even if you look at something like

the economy, um corporations, money, all

of these things are stories that we

invented. They did they they don't have

an objective existence outside our

imagination. I think this was the most

important message of of sapiens trying

to understand history as the product of

the human imagination and of human

fictions. And uh it's even more true

today I would say than it was 101 15

years ago when I when I wrote sapiens.

So if religion were to be a story and

many people wrote many stories,

>> why did the stories of the religions we

have today sell and kind of like

permeate through time? What was so good

about these stories or what was so what

was the reason these stories did well

and the others did not?

>> We don't know for sure. M

>> um to some extent it can be accidental

>> that you have hundreds and even

thousands of different religious stories

competing for human attention

>> and um of of course you need to pass a a

certain

a certain level of attractiveness so

humans will be interested in that story

but beyond that point I I belong to a

school of historians that think that uh

accidents

and luck

have an enormous impact on what is

happening in history even on the biggest

things like why is Christianity the most

widespread religion today in the world

um to some extent it's it's it's just

it's just luck

>> luck and good storytelling

>> yeah a combination of course you needed

I mean Christianity has a very

compelling story it has something that

people really want to believe you know

deep down if you ask yourself what is

the the the crucial story that

Christianity tells people. It is that

you are loved by the God that created

that controlled the universe. That God

loves you so much that he was willing to

suffer and sacrifice himself for your

sake. And that you know this is not like

the love of a human that you always

doubt. Yes, maybe they love me, but

maybe they'll change their mind. Maybe

they love me, but they don't really know

who I am. If they can actually see what

is happening inside my heart, inside,

deep down in my mind, they wouldn't love

me. No, no, no. This is the love of an

omnipotent, omniscient creator, God, who

knows everything about me and still

loves me.

This is such an attractive

uh uh idea.

You know, the irony to some extent is

that the more attractive an idea is,

chance the the bigger the chance that

it's not true. It's so easy for people

to find evidence supporting the story

they want to believe. So the more you

want to believe a story, the more

suspicious you should be about how easy

it is for you to to to to fall for it.

Can you give me an example?

>> This is just, you know, everybody wants

to believe that there is something after

death.

>> You know, this is universal in almost

all religions in different forms. And

the evidence is so meager.

>> I wouldn't say there is zero evidence. I

mean,

>> there is evidence.

>> Let's [clears throat] agree that

whatever evidence there is is very, very

shaky.

>> What is the evidence? How can somebody

prove there is life after death or not?

Oh, don't ask me. I [laughter]

I don't believe it. But all this is

maybe the most common thing that people

believe throughout history.

>> And I I didn't want to say there is zero

evidence because then the listeners will

say, "Hey, I heard this story about

somebody who was reincarnated and met

his family from a and maybe there is a

little bit of evidence,

>> right? But compared to what you need to

prove and compared to the influence of

this idea on history,

>> uh the evidence is so meager and yet

such in so much influence in history.

You know the other ironic thing and and

here I speak specifically about the

Christian belief. They say that they

believe it but you look at their

behavior.

I don't know. You look at some of the

leaders today in the world. Does Putin

really believe that? And he says he's a

Christian and as a Christian, this is

what he he's supposed to to believe. A

person who believes that an omnipotent

God really loves him would go around

starting wars, killing thousands,

driving millions from their homes.

Absolutely not. This is not the action

of a man who feels loved.

>> Don't politicians say they believe in

God?

>> Mhm. because people vote [clears throat]

for things that resemble them.

>> Uh yeah, absolutely. I mean you cannot

be elected US president

>> if you say that you are an atheist,

>> right? Same for Russia. Maybe

>> I don't think in Russia you will get

elected but okay. [laughter]

>> Did you watch any of the politicians

speak here this week? I I I'm afraid I

didn't have I I read some of the

transcripts of of the speeches, but I I

didn't have time to actually go and and

listen to the speeches.

>> What do you think you were of what is

happening in the world today

>> geopolitically?

>> Terrible. I mean, we are going back to

kindergarten

>> to kind of the first most basic lessons

of politics and of human behavior. you

now see the the rise or the the

reemergence of this view that the only

thing that that exists the only thing

that really matters in the world is

power is force and especially military

force.

>> You hear many leaders and many ordinary

people now say this that everything else

is just facade is just veneer. It it

never really existed. The only thing

that really happens in the world is

power and all human relations, our power

relations, our power struggles.

And if anybody tells you otherwise, this

is just a trick they are they are using

to gain power over you.

>> Hasn't man always been like that from

the beginning of evolution.

>> You always had people with this uh uh

with this belief. You always had people

who said these things. And the whole

history of human spirituality and human

philosophy is one long struggle against

this very nhilistic and cynical view of

the world. If you read I don't know you

you read Plato's republic one of the key

texts at least in the west of political

thought it starts with Socrates asking

this one of the the people in Athens

what is justice

>> and this guy tells him oh justice

justice is when the the strong do what

they want this is justice

>> and the whole of Plato's republic is an

argument against that and you know the

most basic human level. People should

first of all ask themselves is this how

I live my life? Your neighbors, your

friends, your colleagues, are you

constantly in power struggles with all

you have no not a single real friend in

the world? Like all the people outside

your family, you have just been in some

power struggle with them. I mean, if

somebody really believes that they have

such a miserable life,

>> I agree. But all is an overstatement.

But most would you say

>> even most you know I I walk down the

street I'm not in a power struggle w

with people all the time

>> um and it's the same all the way to the

level of geopolitics

that this idea that countries cannot

have friends

that you know United States and Europe I

would say as a historian this was the

greatest friendship in the world built

over generations. I I can understand if

somebody comes and says, "Look,

I don't see why tax taxpayers in Texas

and Iowa should pay for the defense of

Germany and France."

>> Yeah,

>> completely reasonable.

But then to stick your finger in their

eye and say, "Okay, and because I'm

stronger, I'll now take Greenland." Why?

What? You know you friendship is s again

even in terms of power struggles to have

some real friends in the world this is

power

>> throw this away for a bit of ice

what's what's the rationale behind

>> you believe it's about the ice and about

Greenland

>> I don't

I'm not sure what it is about

>> I mean could be different things could

be couple of things at the same time um

one explanation

is that he is taking seriously climate

change. It's very hard to understand the

Greenland thing if you don't believe in

climate change

>> because climate change will make

Greenland more important

>> because the ice will melt.

>> The ice will melt. You'll have trade

roots. You'll have per perhaps you'll

have easier access to to to some mineral

wealth in Greenland. But it makes sense

only if you believe in climate change.

And he says he doesn't believe in

climate change. So, what do you believe?

Um,

it could be just maybe the simplest

explanation. He's a real estate uh

tycoon. This is real estate. He wants to

plant his name somewhere.

>> Like, so I'm the president who brought

Greenland to to the US. Maybe it's it's

as simple as that. Maybe the the one

important thing to say about power is

that ultimately human power is based on

cooperation not on force. Even if you

want to build an army, how do you get

thousands millions of soldiers who don't

know you personally to obey your your

commands? Now, if you think that you

build an army just by getting someone to

threaten the soldiers to obey you,

>> how do you get that those people who

threaten the soldiers, who threatens

them and who threatens them? It's

endless.

>> Mhm. Storytelling

>> ultimately to build an army or anything,

a corporation, a country, you need

people to really believe in some one one

story or the other.

>> Yeah. You need people to really believe

in some

system of morality, in some systems of

laws, not just to be afraid. Nothing.

You cannot build anything big

>> in history [clears throat] in the world.

If you try to only base it on brute

force, on coercion.

And this is true again all the way to

geopolitics.

that to have a real friend in the world

that not when you're strong. When you

are strong, it's easy to coersse others.

But if you're in crisis, you are on the

floor

and get somebody then to come and help

you. That's difficult.

And between Europe and the US, you had

this kind of friendship. you know, one,

it's a small thing, but it's still

important that, you know, after the US

was attacked in September 11 and invaded

or attacked Afghanistan, Denmark came to

the to the help to help the the

Americans.

>> I heard Emanuel Macron wearing I watched

him wearing really cool sunglasses and

speaking the day before

and I heard Trump last evening and again

this morning. Mhm. [clears throat]

>> It feels like they're negotiating for

something that is not being spoken about

overall.

>> I don't think it's about climate change

or Greenland or the ice melting or the

routes opening up. It feels like it's

something else altogether. But that

maybe that's just my opinion of it.

>> What what what is what is your

hypothesis? What's your guess? What is

it about?

>> Yeah. Like you know when you're

negotiating with someone you anchor with

something really expensive so then they

take the product which is less expensive

>> in a store. [laughter]

>> Greenland seems to be anchoring.

>> Mhm.

>> In order to get the other person to take

something else maybe

>> which is

>> more tariff

acceptable

which it doesn't seem to be right now.

[clears throat]

>> I don't know. Well, I mean, again, I I I

still don't see that these tariffs are

doing anybody any good, not the

Americans and certainly not the rest of

the world. Um, and as a negotiation

tactic and you're negotiating with your

best friend,

>> you're doing something that really

frightens and humiliates them,

>> they will not forget that. Even if you

get what you want in the short term and

what happened in the last of course it's

not just the last few weeks it's the

last few years but

the the Europeans will not forget that

and the the feeling that you get that I

don't know your best friend is willing

to to stab you in in the back and and

and to to step on you to humiliate you

and then he says no no I was just joking

but he didn't feel like joking at the

moment

This is something that can ruin the

friendship years ahead.

You know trust

you you need to work for years to build

trust and you can lose it in a day. To

take an example maybe from a different h

field of life. Think about finance a

bank about you know let's say banks.

>> Yeah

>> carpenters build tables like this table.

Some carpenter build it. Uh uh engineers

build buildings and bridges. What do

bankers build?

>> Bankers build trust.

>> This is what they do throughout their

life that I trust them that if I will

need that money, they will give it back

to me. And then the banker goes and

builds another trustful relationship

with say some entrepreneur who wants to

to to start a new company and she needs

money. So the banker and the

entrepreneur build a trust trusting

relationship and the banker lends

basically my savings to that

entrepreneur.

>> Mhm.

>> So she can start her company. Now I

don't know this entrepreneur. I wouldn't

give her my money. I don't know her. I

don't trust her. You have the banker in

between. The banker has built a bridge

of trust between me and the

entrepreneur. Now suppose one day the

banker I don't know goes to uh on

television and says I have no intention

of of giving back

my bank will just take the money and run

with it. We are not giving if if if the

c if my customers wants their money

there is no more money in the bank.

No banker would be so stupid. You've

just you've worked years to build trust

with these people. Why destroy this

trust? This is the basis for everything

you do and politics like banking is most

you can't trust everybody in politics of

course but this if you finally managed

to build a trustworth trustworthy

relationship in politics this is your

your biggest asset. Could this be the

problem with democratic politics where

politicians have a finite tenure cuz

friendships don't have to last forever

but only three four five years at a

time.

The basic idea of democratic politics

and even of modern politics is that the

relationships are between states not

between families or dynasties or or

people.

>> That doesn't seem to be the case right

now.

>> This is crumbling. This is another plank

of trust that is collapsing in the

world. Like I heard Trump some time ago

talking about Putin invading Ukraine and

people asked Trump, "How can you trust

Putin when he broke so many promises

previously?" And what was Trump's

answer? He said, "Putin did not break

his promises to me. He broke his

promises to Obama. He broke his promises

to Biden."

>> Now this is, you know, this is going

back to the Middle Ages. M

>> modern politics is that it's not Putin

making a promise to Obama, it's Russia

making a promise to the US. It doesn't

matter who the president is. The whole

idea is you sign a say a peace

agreement, you sign it with another

country. So even if the president

changes, it still holds. And this is

again part of destroying the modern

political system and going back to a

medieval system in which it's

relationships between dynasties.

Uh so it's now foreign relations

increasingly is relations with the Trump

family not with the United States which

is why so many countries are doing

business with certain members of the

Trump family in order to influence US

foreign policy. So this is really going

back to the middle ages when relations

are between dynasties and not between

nations or countries.

Hu, you're originally Israeli.

>> Mhm.

>> Does it worry you to speak about Trump

in a manner that you think, can I go

into America again?

>> Um, it's worrying that we even have to

raise this question.

>> Yeah. If they don't allow me into the US

or they don't allow me, but my job as a

public intellectual is to speak my mind.

If I can't do that, then I can't do my

job. So why invite me to to a podcast to

to to to hear me say things I don't

really believe just in order to carry

favor with some politician.

>> Isn't that the media today? Everybody is

saying what they don't believe. But

>> no, not everybody. This is I think the

most again this is goes back to this

kind of cynical worldview. Everything is

a power struggle. Nobody cares about

truth. Everybody whatever they say it's

just some kind of manipulation. This is

giving an open check.

>> Mhm.

>> For the real liars. Not every politician

uh is engaged in in in in this type of

of cynical manipulation.

And and it's it's a sign of the time

that more and more people say these

things that everybody lie, everybody is

corrupt, which again basically says

everything is just a power struggle and

nobody cares about just as nobody cares

about friendship. Nobody really cares

about the truth. Which is a terrible

thing to believe because do you really

believe that about yourself? Like when

you look in the mirror, do you see there

somebody who doesn't care at all about

the truth? And the thing about the truth

is that yes, you can get a lot of power

by by lying. But the price you pay is

that ultimately

you cannot be happy

if you don't know the truth about

yourself. Because if you don't know the

truth about yourself and about the

world, about life, then you don't know

what are the true sources of misery in

life. And if you don't know that, even

if you become the most powerful person

in the world, the richest person in the

world, you will waste all your power and

riches on solving the wrong problems

because you don't know what actually

makes you miserable. What is the truth

yub?

>> About what?

>> About anything. What is truth in itself?

>> What is truth in itself?

Um I would say it's connecting to

reality.

>> Mhm. Is it your

honest representation of reality or

honest viewpoint of reality? Cuz your

truth might be different from my truth

and someone else's truth.

My opinions can be different from the

opinions of somebody else.

>> But the truth ultimately is one because

reality is one. There is just one

reality.

>> Reality can be extremely complex.

>> You know, I don't know, you talk about

the Israeli Palestinian conflict.

>> So

the conflict looks different when you

look at it from the viewpoint of the

Israelis and not for the Palestinians.

But this is part of the complexity of

reality.

The truth is that for instance the

Israelis believe that all the land

belongs to them and the Palestinians

believe that all the land belongs to

them. This is the truth. It's a complex

truth. The truth is that during the war,

the recent war between Israel and Hamas,

Kamas committed atrocities and also

Israel committed atrocities. This is the

truth.

It's not that oh there is the

Palestinian truth that only the Israelis

committed atrocities and there is the

Israeli truth that only no there is just

one truth that both sides committed

atrocities

because there is just one reality in

which everything that happens happens.

If I were to take a step back and look

at the Israel Palestinian conflict and

say one person is wrong. Mhm.

>> Can there be a truth to that statement?

one person is wrong or one side is

wrong.

>> One side is wrong.

>> No, it's it's far more complex than

that. Both sides they see part of the

truth, part of reality and simply refuse

to acknowledge

>> the other side.

Um which is a very common thing in in in

in human history. It's a very common

thing in especially in conflicts. Um the

truth is that um Palestinians have a

right to live in security and prosperity

and dignity in their country of their

birth. And Israelis also have a right to

live in security and prosperity uh and

dignity in the country of their birth.

And the truth is also that many many

people around the world refuse to

acknowledge both of these things. They

are willing to acknowledge only one

side.

>> I watched the

peace group the Trump and Jared Kushner

explain about

what will happen to Gaza going forward.

Do you did you get a chance to see that?

>> No, I I I still didn't have a chance.

>> Do you think that'll play out?

>> Let's see. I mean, so many things that

these people promised didn't come didn't

weren't fulfilled that um let's see what

happens on the ground. Again, I'm I'm

not against everything that President

Trump is doing.

>> Again, it's a complex reality. Some of

the things he's doing are good.

>> Some of the some of his intentions are

good. I do hope that uh Gaza will be not

only reconstructed but that the

Palestinians will have a good future

again in which they can live in the

country of their birth and not just live

but live secure lives, live prosperous

lives, live lives with dignity.

Um and I hope it succeeds but I we have

to be cautious. We need to see results

because we had so many promises that

were broken. that just to believe the

words in this case it's it's it's

difficult.

>> Do you believe religion is dying evil

amongst the youngest of people?

>> No, it's changing. It has been changing

throughout history and it's changing

again.

>> How is it changing now?

>> How is it changing now? Um one thing

very very interesting is that AI is

increasingly taking over religion

especially religions of the book you

know. Um

if I take Judaism for example, Judaism

grants ultimate authority not to human

beings but to words in books. It calls

itself the religion of the book. Humans

have authority in Judaism to the extent

that they know words in books. Now until

today, nobody, not even the most learned

rabbi in the world could read and

remember all the words in all the Jewish

books because there are too many of

them.

>> Right?

>> AI can easily do that. M

>> so for a religion that gives ultimate

authority to words in books

now there is a nonhuman intelligence

that is about to take it over

because it can take over the source of

authority.

>> So AI can't change the book but it can

>> reinterpret it.

>> I mean the book has been reinterpreted

again and again and again. This is a

game being played for thousands of

years. And this is how all all the other

books got written. They're all

reinterpretations of the original book.

>> And now we have something that can read

and remember all the books and has a

chance of becoming the new authority

that people will increasingly they have

a question they will not go to a human

rabbi. They will go to an AI. And it's

the same in Christianity and it's the

same with Islam and it's the same with

many other religions

>> with trust depleting in the world as

quickly as it is. Don't you think people

millions of not millions of people will

not want to resonate with one book but

smaller groups of thousands of people

will find their own representation of

each of these books.

>> Could be and again an AI could write new

books.

>> Yeah. Um almost every religion claims in

its story that it was created by a

non-human intelligence.

>> Maybe for the first time in history it

will actually happen.

>> That we will see the emergence of new

sects created by AI and spread by AI

missionaries. And you know to to change

people's minds the most powerful thing

is is intimacy not not not power not

force. A good friend can change your

mind in a way that almost nobody else

can.

And what is happening now in AI that if

for the previous decade we saw this

competition for human attention

that the algorithms are competing to

grab our attention. Now the front is

shifting from attention to intimacy.

AIS are learning how to create intimacy

with humans, how to create friendships,

how even to create romantic

relationships.

>> Can you tell me what you mean by

intimacy?

>> Yes. Um, somebody that you talk with a

lot, maybe every day, that you share

your deepest fears and hopes and

thoughts and listens to you and gets to

know you and gives you advice that you

take very, very seriously. And this is

the this is where AI enters.

>> There are already youngsters today in

the world that you ask them who who is

your best friend and they say it's an

AI.

>> I met some kids recently who said their

girlfriends bias.

>> Yeah. They have AI girlfriends and

boyfriends

>> like 20 year olds.

>> Yeah. And you look at at at at you know

toddlers today, [clears throat] they

grow up from day zero basically

interacting with AIS

more than they interact. If you just

measure it in terms of time,

>> you just measure how much time this

baby, this child spends with their

father, mother,

brother, friend from kindergarten AI.

You will find they spend most time with

the AI and already they are willing to

share with it things that they don't

share with anybody else. It knows things

about them nobody else knows. And this

is maybe the biggest psychological and

social experiment in human history

conducted on billions of people right

now. Nobody has any idea what the

consequences will be or in 10 or 20

years. When this child that learns what

is friendship, what what is emotional

attachment? They learned it through a

relationship with an AI.

What will this do to the social and

romantic uh uh capacities and

relationships in 15 20 years? Nobody has

any idea.

And it's amazing that we we just allow

it to happen.

If you wrote the book, you will the AI

>> Mhm. You wrote the new book that people

interpreted and reinterpreted as

whatever religion they want to believe

in. What would you will optimize for?

What would be the three tenets of the

new religion the world needs?

>> I'm not in the business of creating

religions. I've seen enough of as a

historian. I know the many many ways in

which this can go wrong.

>> I don't want anybody seeing me as a

rabbi or a priest that holds the truth

and tells them how to live. This is

extremely dangerous to them, even more

dangerous to me because it kind of

inflates your ego and you become and you

go crazy

>> and it would be hard to pull off alive.

You need somebody who wrote the book.

>> Um

>> or artificial in artificial

intelligence.

>> It's easiest with dead people because

then you can do whatever you want with

their words. Uh but yeah, AI will be a

book that talks back to you.

>> Like we had all these sacred books and

they were silent. When we had a

question, we had to find a human expert

on the book. Just imagine what happens

when the book can actually talk back to

you.

>> Isn't the book respected in the manner

that it is because of the finality of

the book and the the fact that it is not

dynamic and when I read the book or I

read an interpretation of the book and

you will read the same thing. If the

book were to change

>> because people constantly reinterpret

it. You look at Judaism or Christianity

of today, Christianity of today

completely different from what they were

a thousand years ago or 2,000 years ago

>> because as as the world changes, as

human relations change, people

reinterpret the book sometimes in

extreme ways. You know, you read Jesus

talking with people about compassion and

love. If somebody slaps you, give them

your your other cheek.

How did they interpret it to build the

Inquisition to burn people alive just

because they didn't believe in the in

the exact same way that I believe about

the the religion of love?

>> They didn't burn just burn Jews and a

burned other Christians. M

>> and how is it possible that yes you and

I we both believe in the religion of

love and compassion but because it's a

little bit different your interpretation

than mine then I will burn you and I can

find a way to base what I do on what

Jesus said

>> but burning somebody's also maybe out of

love

>> of course they always say it's out of

love

>> the love of a story a really good story

>> they they found a way to explain that

this I love you so much this is why I

burn I burn you because if you hold

these terrible views you're holding

after you die

>> you will go forever and ever to hell

>> but if I burn you now maybe this will

cause you to change your mind and then

okay so so you die in a horrible way but

afterwards you go to heaven

>> so I'm burning you out of love

you will is democracy dead if it has

become as dynastic and these friendships

and animosities not between nations

anymore but with individuals.

>> Mhm.

>> In 4 years all that or in 3 years in

America all that's being done today,

yesterday, the day before is going to be

forgotten because there's somebody new

there at the helm.

>> Mhm.

>> Then what is the point of democracy?

Does it even work anymore?

>> Uh democracy is not dead. It's still

extremely powerful. It's still the, you

know, the most powerful idea around.

Everybody still claims

>> even Putin Mhm.

>> He doesn't go out and say democracy is

dead.

>> He still holds elections every four

years.

>> I mean, nobody has manage to come up

with a better idea so far. Uh so it's

still extremely powerful and even in in

practical terms the big advantage of

democracy over all the other systems is

that it is built on a powerful

self-correcting mechanism.

>> Anti-inccumb

>> that is anti-inccumb.

>> Yes. That you know the

basic truth about human beings is that

we all make mistakes. Even the biggest

geniuses and presidents and whatever, we

make mistakes and also political

parties, countries, we make mistakes.

Now, how do you correct your mistakes?

The big problem for dictatorships

is that you can get it right 10 times

>> and yet then you get something terribly

wrong, an economic policy, a war,

whatever. In a dictatorship, there is no

built-in mechanism

>> to change the ruler. the ruling party,

the policy, you're stuck with it,

>> right?

>> Democracy is all about h checks and

balances, all about selfcorrection.

The most basic mechanism is elections.

You choose somebody, you give them power

to uh uh pursue certain policies. After

four years, [laughter] the people can

say, "We made a mistake. Let's try

something else."

This is still the best mechanism that

humanity has managed to come up with. Of

course, it's a complex mechanism because

it's not enough just to have periodic

elections. Elections can be rigged

if the problem the big problem of

democracy is that you give power to

somebody for four years on condition

that they give the power back and then

you can make a different choice. But the

problem is always what if they don't

want to give the power back. Now they

have the power. So they can use their

power to stay in power.

>> They can try to take over the courts,

the media, and then rig the elections.

And you can't go to the courts because

the courts are in the pocket of of of

the new dictator. And the media won't

report about it because the media is in

the pocket of the dictator. So you still

hold elections, but there is no longer a

self-correcting mechanism. Like in

Russia, there is no way that Putin can

actually lose an election. And the same

we saw in Venezuela that Maduro by all

evidence lost the the last elections big

time, but the election committee and and

the Venezuelan media and courts, they

all said he won. So you could not get

rid of the of him that way. If you had

to build a media house from scratch,

this is something I'm passionate about.

Yuo,

what should the media for the new world

look like? Is it something that is not

behind a corporation? Is it more like a

cooperative, more fragmented media?

Because if large corporations that are

the social media companies of today have

algorithms that optimize for a reaction,

control who consumes what.

>> It doesn't even matter what media is

being reported and generated because

they get to choose who reads what.

>> Uh yeah, that's the big problem today

with the media world.

>> How do you fix it? And um don't let

nonhumans control the human

conversation. Our biggest mistake is

that over the last 10 years we gave one

of the most important jobs in the world

to algorithms and they did a terrible

terrible job. You know one of the

human society is ultimately a

conversation between humans especially

in democracies. We come together, we

discuss what to do, foreign policy,

economic policy and for that you need

media. How do you manage a conversation

between millions of people?

And we built institutions over centuries

to manage the public conversation. They

were not perfect. No institution is

perfect. But they learned from mistakes

over time and they became better. And

then we turn we did a terrible mistake.

We gave the job of managing the public

conversation to algorithms.

>> And why did it work? Why did the

algorithms

manage this job in a manner that it got

more reaction?

>> Because the algorithms were given a very

very simple task. The algorithms were

not given the task, okay, manage the

conversation in a way that will build

trust or in a way that will promote

truth or in a way that will improve

society. How do you measure improve

society? This is a very difficult

metric. We want a simple metric. They

were given a very simple metric.

Increase engagement.

>> Mhm.

>> What does it mean? Make people spend

more time on the platform and engage

more. like engage. You read a story, you

send it to your friends or you write a

comment. This is engagement. And the

business model was if people spend more

time on our platform, engage more, we

make more money by showing them more

advertisement or taking their data and

selling it to a third party. This was

the business model. The metric was

extremely simple which was which which

was good for the algorithms because

these are very primitive AIs. This is

like the first generation

>> and the AIs experimented on billions of

human beings and discovered something

that if you want to increase engagement

to grab people attention and make them

stay longer on the platform, press the

hate button in the human mind. Press the

greed button or the fear button. You

don't need truth. You don't need trust.

You don't need social accountability.

And if anger is more engaging than

compassion, so let's drive anger. And

this is what happened over the last 10

years all over the world. You know, you

have this people ask why are Republicans

and Democrats no longer able even to

talk to each other to agree on the most

basic facts. You don't you can't explain

it by just American society because you

see the same thing in Brazil. You see

the same thing in Israel. You see the

same thing all over the world. It can't

be something specific to one country.

It's the underlying technology we have

given. You know in the 20 the job of say

editors of news was one of the most

important jobs in the world in the 20th

century. And you ask today who are the

most important editors in the world.

>> Social media.

>> It's algorithms. They don't even have

names. The the editors of of of Tik Tok

and Facebook and and X they are not

human beings.

So you will data shows that the youngest

of people

age group 16 to 20 22 are spending

lesser time on social media

significantly less.

>> Good news. [laughter]

>> If I were to build a new social media

and have a new al algorithm that does

not optimize for hate and greed

necessarily.

What do you think would be good but also

work? H

um work in a business sense or work in a

society sense.

>> It has to work in a business sense for

it to work in a society sense.

>> Yes, this is the big problem because we

have many models of how to build much

better algorithms for society. Like you

had these models from Taiwan

>> that they actually built it and it

worked well that you can take the same

basic premises of social media and

reverse them. You can have the algorithm

rewarding content like the algorithm

first of all in this Taiwan system. It

maps people according to their views

into clusters of groups. Very easy to do

that.

>> And then that's that's the key point.

When new content is released, it

promotes the content not on the basis of

how much engagement it gains altogether,

but to the extent that it gains

engagement from both sides.

>> If you just cater to one group, you your

content is not promoted. It has to be in

some way connecting different groups.

>> Yeah.

>> To be promoted. And this is very small

tweak

>> and it worked.

>> It worked amazingly

>> and then

>> uh it's still running. The thing is that

in business terms this was a

governmental

>> uh uh uh experiment. Uh for the business

model of social media companies it's

problematic. So you're saying in a way

discourse could work where two people

with opinions where they might not

necessarily agree both sides of the

argument are presented.

If you aim to speak in a way that will

be heard by somebody from another group,

you can do that.

>> Humans have been doing it for thousands

of years. But in the last 10 years, the

incentive structure changed. Like if you

go, I don't know, to the Athenian agora

2,500 years ago and you speak, you know

that you have to speak in a way that

will be heard by different groups of

people. If you speak to only one group,

it won't work.

>> But on social media, if you speak in a

way that inflames a certain group of

people and doesn't resonate at all with

others, doesn't matter. You build your 1

million followers and you become

influential and potentially rich and so

forth. And you increasingly you you you

you radicalize yourself more and more

because you increasingly speak only to

this one group of people. And the fact

that other groups are completely put off

by the way you speak, you don't care.

You bring up Greek philosophy a fair

amount

>> with Athens and Plato and Socrates.

>> You said something against being

nihilistic in the beginning. So if

you're not neihilistic as a person,

do you believe there is a purpose to

life? And if yes, what is it?

Um I don't speak in terms of of purpose.

You know, purpose, people think there is

a big story, the drama of the universe

and I have to play a certain role.

Again, let's go back to the Greeks. They

invented theater drama. So life is like

a drama. I need to find out what is my

role. What are my lines and perform it?

This is something I don't believe. What

do you believe?

>> I don't believe that the universe works

like a story.

>> Right?

>> I think the ultimate reality is the

reality of suffering and liberation from

suffering which is not about these

dramas that people construct in their

minds. The dramas we construct in our

minds very often obscure the reality

from us that don't allow us. We we often

you know we sometimes cause immense pain

to other people and to ourselves because

we think this is we do it while pursuing

our role in the in in the universal

drama.

>> Is this a bit like the Buddhist school

of thought where desire is the root of

all suffering? How do you eliminate

suffering or how do you take cognizance

to what is causing you suffering?

>> And the ultimate root I would say is not

desire. Or it's ignorance.

>> Ignorance of

>> ignorance of the reality that again

ultimately

>> wouldn't ignorance of the reality

actually make me suffer lesser.

>> Why?

>> Because if I'm not thinking of something

actively, I'm not suffering by virtue of

having that thought in my mind.

>> If there is pain in the world, say for

example,

people are dying in Iran today.

>> Mhm.

>> My ignorance of people dying in Iran

will make me suffer lesser. No. from

that particular thing. But if then you

get into the habit of ignoring

inconvenient things.

>> This is a if you just ignore the

suffering in Iran, okay, nobody can care

about everything that happens in the

world. We are just, you know, we are

just frail human beings. We can't carry

the whole world on our shoulders. But if

you get into the habit pattern of

ignoring things that are inconvenient,

then you will bring this habit pattern

into everything in your life,

>> into your family relationships, into

your professional work, into your

relationship with yourself. And again,

this will cause you to be ignorant of

the ways that you hurt others and the

ways that you hurt yourself. And then

you can't do anything about it. We can't

fix something that we are busy ignoring.

>> I hear you. But how do I take cognizance

of my suffering?

>> Mhm.

>> In a manner that gives me purpose in

life.

>> Um

the realization that suffering is not

inevitable,

that you can do something about it. And

you know ultimately

there are only two things in the world

which are really under our control and

this is the present moment and my own

mind.

Everything else is not really under my

control. I can't control the past.

>> Mhm.

>> Whatever happened in the past even if

I'm president of the strongest country

in the world I cannot change the past.

>> Mhm. And similarly that the future I

cannot now guarantee something to happen

in a year or a 100 years. It's not under

only the present moment and only my own

mind. Again even if I'm president of a

powerful country ultimately the only

thing I really control to some extent is

my own mind.

>> The person in the next room might

disagree.

>> We constantly try to control the world.

all of us to to lesser or to and we

can't

>> even if we are the most powerful person

in the we cannot stop our our body from

aging. You know you want to to control

countries on the other side of of of the

world try to control your your own body

stopping it from aging. Um

try to control the next thought that

comes up in your mind. Let's say you're

president X of whatever country

>> and there is this crisis in Greenland,

in Iran, whatever. You go to sleep as

and you say, "Oh, I need to sleep well

tonight because tomorrow I'm giving this

important speech in Davos, so I should

be fresh. I need to sleep."

>> And as you put your head on the pillow,

some really annoying thought comes up in

your mind and you can't get rid of it.

This happens to everybody including

presidents that you want to fall asleep

and you can't because there is this

thought in my mind and think about it. I

can order a nuclear strike

>> on another country. I can raise tariffs

to a,000%.

I can order my eyes to shut here. I shut

my eyes. I can order my body lie still.

I cannot order my thought to stop.

I can't even control that.

And if you cannot control that,

are you really in control of anything?

Nothing. I'm with you. I'm with you that

I don't control much. Not even the next

thought in my mind. I'm also with you

that suffering is inevitable. I'm trying

to I'm trying to draw the bridge from

this uh

>> to how is that

solving my purpose problem in life? How

do I not be?

>> What do you mean by purpose? What do you

want?

>> What is the point of life?

>> Um to understand suffering and be

liberated from it.

>> To understand suffering and

>> and be liberated from it. You don't want

to suffer.

So if I understand suffering I will be

liberated of suffering

>> ultimately. Yes. Because again all

suffering comes from ignorance.

If if we really understand what

suffering is and where it comes from

then uh we can be liberated from it. Not

just ourselves but also help other

people do the same.

>> And of course it's extremely difficult.

>> Um but if you ask me what is the

purpose? What? You know, people want

money. Why do they want money in order

not to suffer?

>> People want power. Why do they want

power? In order they think, "Oh, if I

had all the power in the world, if I had

billions of dollars, then I can I I I

can prevent myself from being sick. I

can prevent myself from being sad. I can

prevent and it's it doesn't work. People

have been doing it, you know, for

thousands of years. You can ask the

previous generations of dictators and

emperors and kings and billionaires.

This this path doesn't work. Aren't

people optimizing for attention? Deep

down for in in what way?

Let's go back to the time when there was

a society with 10 people and they were

hunting for food.

>> The hunter who hunted the biggest animal

>> Mhm. beyond a certain point where

everybody had enough to eat. Did not

hunt this really large animal risking

his life because he wanted to eat the

meat but because he got the attention of

being the biggest hunter.

>> Attention bar status.

>> Don't you think people are optimizing

for that? Money could be a pathway.

Morality could be another pathway.

>> And the world is complex. People

optimize for many things at the same

time. for money, for influence, for

beauty, for many things. Each of us

decides to put kind of, you know,

different quantities in these different

buckets.

>> All leading to attention.

>> No. Um, all again, all leading to trying

to escape suffering. We are all aware

ultimately of the fact that we are

mortal. A couple of months ago, they

caught Putin and she in Beijing talking

privately when they thought that nobody

was listening and the microphones were

were on. And this was amazing because

what were Putin and she talking about in

private? They didn't talk about Ukraine.

They didn't talk about Gaza. They talked

about living forever.

>> They they these people really, you know,

if you're just, you know, some poor guy

somewhere and you're going to die, you

still don't like it. But if you feel

that I'm the most powerful person in the

world and I'm going to die like I'm

going to lose all that that's terrible.

So these people and uh you see it in in

in many places around the world not just

in that the highest echelon of society

today is obsessed

with their mortality and living forever

because for the first time in history

they feel that it's not just religion.

Maybe science has a cure for death.

>> And you see all this obsession with

uploading of our consciousness to a

computer and and stuff like that because

we are we we const we are in constant

denial mode. We try to forget that we

are going to die but deep down we know

it.

And um and we we say okay we'll have

kids and through the children we'll

continue to live. I'll write some book

and through my book I will continue to

live or I I'll be so rich and powerful

that I can somehow find a way to to to

to live forever.

>> And none of that works.

And as long as you don't accept that it

doesn't work and try to go deeper and

see what's happening in there, you're

just a slave.

>> I know you meditate and you go to India.

>> Mhm.

>> 2 hours into a meditation. Mhm.

>> I'm guessing you're trying to actively

block thoughts that are coming into your

mind. No,

>> don't try to block them. Observe them,

>> right?

>> Don't try to block anything.

>> Most revealing thought you've had in all

of your meditations. One thought, one

thought. So for instance, that we have

no idea where our thoughts are coming

from. People are under the impression

that I am thinking my thoughts. I am my

thoughts. the card I think therefore I

am I am creating my thoughts.

Um when you actually look again you're

in meditation or not in meditation you

close your eyes you I don't know you go

to sleep you try to fall asleep you

can't there is some annoying thought in

your mind try to observe what's

happening there

>> and you see words popping in your mind

and where do they come from

>> and it's an it's such a simple exercise

and it's it's really amazing to see that

I have no idea where did this word come

from like I I I I I I say a sentence

when I begin to say it I don't know how

it will end. No, the sentence I just

said I don't know how it will end. When

I started saying it, I didn't know that

the last word in the sentence will be

end.

>> Right?

>> Why did I say I didn't know how it will

end and not I didn't know how it will

terminate or complete or develop or

whatever. Somehow the words pop in the

mind. You know people say about AI that

AI is glorified autocomplete. That AI

just predicts the next word in the

sentence. Observe your mind and you will

see it's exactly the same thing like

like you have an AI inside you. And we

tend to become so attached

to our words to our thoughts and again

all these opinions

and I'm not you have this opinion I'm

not going to speak with you. I'm going

to cancel you just because you have this

opinion. These are just some words in

somebody's mind. You you're counseling a

person

>> because of some words that they said or

that they thought. But it's also about

about ourselves.

>> We not only identify other people with

the words, we also define ourselves by

the words in our mind. And actually we

have no idea where these words are

coming from.

>> So if you're not your thoughts, who are

you?

>> Oo, that's a good question.

Um,

I'm investigating that.

>> But but you this is something you need

to it's it's you I can't write the

answer and piece of paper here. Read.

>> You think there's something between the

brain and

the organ of your body which kind of

puts out thoughts? There's something

else that generates who you are as a

person.

>> Who you are as a person is a constant

process of change.

>> Right?

>> There is nothing stable there.

>> Right? But

>> the body constantly changes, the mind,

the thought, everything constantly

changes. Our attempt to identify a fixed

point

>> that this doesn't change and this is me.

No, I'm only asking for a fixed point in

a period of time like at this point

today at 3 p.m.

>> Mhm.

>> You will is a certain person.

>> Yes.

>> Given that at 3:30 you will be will be a

different person.

>> A little different. [laughter]

>> Who you are at this point of time is it

nature, nurture, experiences. What do

you suspect it is?

>> Everything together. I mean again in

[laughter]

reality is one and extremely complex

>> like you try to understand a war and

somebody tells you this war was caused

by X. Every time you hear an explanation

a single cause explanation for a war

know that is wrong. No war in history

was caused by just one thing. Similarly

a person is never one thing or caused by

one thing. We are partly the product of

biology and evolution of millions of

years. We are partly the product of uh

our own personal history and psychology.

At the present moment, I'm partly the

product of what I ate uh for lunch

>> and of the last words that have gone

through my mind or through my mouth.

>> Who actually runs the world today?

viewer. If I'm a 22 year old boy and I

have 100 million followers, am I more

relevant to how the world thinks or is a

politician?

>> Um, [laughter]

no single person or group of persons

runs the world.

>> Agreed.

>> And when you talk, you know, you're in

Davos, you talk to the most powerful

people in the world and you always get a

double story. Sometimes they will they

will try to exaggerate their power and

give the impression that I'm so powerful

as whether as a banker or politician or

whatever and then when it comes to

solving problems they tend to run away

and say I this is not my responsibility

I don't have the power to solve it this

is because of somebody else.

>> Mhm.

And to some extent they are correct that

um again even if you are the most

powerful person in the world

>> um you cannot solve by yourself most of

the world's problems and this goes back

to the beginning of our conversation.

This is why uh trust and friendship and

cooperation is so crucial because unless

you build uh uh even a limited network

of cooperation, you can't really do

anything.

So whether you're an influencer, an

investor, a politician,

>> I hear you. I'm trying to establish the

hierarchy of power,

>> not trying to determine if a group has

all the power.

>> Okay.

>> Who has more power today? Is it okay in

all the people we have seen here I think

Elon speaking next

>> is it Elon is it Donald Trump is it the

person who's programming the algorithm

of uh Instagram and Tik Tok

>> we we'll know in a 100 years who was

really important or in in a thousand

years you know if if I if

[clears throat] I talked with you like

okay we are in the Davos of the Roman

Empire

>> this is the year third no not 2026 this

is the year 26

>> and you're asking me who is the most

important powerful person in the Roman

Empire and everybody would say oh of

course it's Tiberius he's the emperor

and somebody would say no no no no it's

a Janus he's the commander of the

emperor's bodyguard and he's actually

running the show Tiberius is just a

puppet and then he would say no no no no

it's these merchants going between India

and the Middle East and bringing silk

that they actually control the the

economy and after a couple of centuries,

people look back and say, "Oh, it was

Jesus."

>> And if you told people in the U26, the

most important person at the present

moment in the Roman Empire, maybe in the

whole world, is this Jew from the

Galilee, this carpenter. Everybody would

think you you're out of your mind.

You're joking.

>> But we look back 2,000 years later, and

say, "Yeah, it was Jesus." M

>> I actually think it's the original

storytellers

>> who are the most powerful.

>> Like if you are a storyteller, if the

person who wrote the book that we spoke

about,

>> if there was an original one, whoever

writes an original story today that

people believe like we believe in money

and religion and other things. It's

never the one person because the story

gets retold and re and even Jesus

actually it's not Jesus because Jesus

didn't write the story of Jesus.

>> Yeah.

>> Jesus didn't write anything that reached

us. The New Testament was not written by

Jesus. It was written decades later by

different people. St. Paul wrote certain

letters and treates and you have the

different uh uh gospels written by

different people. And then over time

these texts changed and were

reinterpreted.

So to what extent did Jesus control the

message of Jesus? To a very small

extent. Again a thousand years later

people are burned in the name of Jesus.

Like he preached love and compassion and

they burn people in his name.

>> Was this is what he had no control

>> Mhm.

>> over his own message. So even in the

realm of ideas we think that okay I

write a book I did no this book will

then have a life of its own and people

will interpret it in the opposite way

>> of what the author intended. What I fear

most is the person with most influence

today

>> is the person controlling the algorithm

or the groups of people and I hope

>> any of the other people have more

influence but not the algorithm cuz I

don't think it's optimized for the right

thing if I had to wish

>> but then maybe the answer is that the

most important powerful actor today is

no longer a human being

>> that I think I don't think we have

reached that point in 2026

>> but I think we are close to the point

when the most important powerful if you

want entity on the planet is no longer a

human being or a group of human beings

but an AI. If we were to tread down that

path, if AI eliminates the need for

effort, a society of abundance where

intelligence does not have a premium

anymore because AI has a higher IQ

anyway.

>> Mhm.

>> Does capitalism survive?

Like what would be the point?

>> Capitalism. Yes, of course. Capitalism

doesn't necessarily need people.

[laughter] It needs money and profits

and growth.

>> But it needs shareholders who

>> AIS can do can do that.

>> I mean,

capitalism already created nonhuman

persons

>> which run the show and they are

corporations.

um Google, Facebook, Microsoft

corporate. These are not humans. These

are corporations which are legal persons

even though they don't have a body or a

mind.

>> I consider them not

>> but until today until today corporations

were just legal fictions

>> because when say Microsoft decides to

buy a certain other company, it's not

really Microsoft. It's human beings.

it's the executives or shareholders that

decide to do it. Um, but with AI, AI,

what what defines AI is the ability to

make decisions by itself. If something

cannot make decisions by itself, it's

not an AI. So, we could be close to the

point when AI can be a corporation that

makes its own decisions without any

humans. Now imagine a world in which

there are maybe thousands, millions of

AI corporations in which the AIs decide

we'll buy that, we'll sell that, we'll

invest here, we'll buy and the AIs

interact with the other AIs and if they

are more intelligent than us, they will

make better business decisions, they

will gain more money um and they will

take over the financial and economic

system. the the the legal framework is

already there with corporations and

legal legal persons. The AIS just need

to kind of get into it.

Interesting. Uh is money also losing

relevance?

>> It could.

Um depending what you mean by money,

money could change its character.

>> Store of value exchangeable for effort.

>> Mhm. uh it could we see already the

decline of traditional currencies and

the rise of cryptocurrencies which are

managed and created by algorithms.

We could reach a point when for instance

currency will be AI tokens or even time

on servers or data

>> that AIs will trade with other AIs for

for tokens or for data not for dollars

and the human currencies like dollars

and euros and yens they will become

irrelevant. Okay, you have a billion

dollars but the AIs don't want dollars.

The AIs want their currency. They want

data. They want whatever. It's, you

know, like horses give value to

different things, not to gold coins. And

then one day horses woke up and they

found themselves controlled by humans

who buy and sell horses for gold coins,

which the horses don't understand. The

host can see that this human is giving

me to that human and then that human

gives that human this shiny piece of

metal. I don't understand what's

happening.

>> It could be the same with us. And AIs,

let's say you are fired from your job

and an other AI company kind of hires

you and you don't understand why are

they doing it? What's the rationale?

If I were you were a 25 year old boy in

India and I want to succeed in the world

of capitalism,

what would you op what would you suggest

I optimize for at this point of time?

>> First of all, ask my husband because

he's the kind of businessman in the

family. I know how to write books and

and give lectures. I'm not good in in

[laughter] business. So, don't ask me

for for business advice. Um but my gut

reaction is nobody has any idea. If

somebody tells you that they know how

the job market would look like in 5

years or how the financial system would

like look like in 5 years, they don't.

Nobody knows. So my best advice is

spread yourself wide.

>> Don't kind of um train for something

very narrow. If you're trying to, you

know, you build your skills as a young

person, don't focus on a very narrow

skill like coding because maybe in five

years they don't need coders because AI

is co better than us. So have a wide set

of skills. The the basic set everybody

talks about is you need some you need

brain, you need heart, you need hands,

you need some intellectual skills, but

you also need social and emotional

skills and you also need motor skills,

body skills. The body is important. So

spread your time between developing your

intellectual and social and uh uh uh

bodily skills. I would also add

spiritual skills that also develop your

your spirit your mind.

>> A lot of people speak to me about

spirituality.

I still don't totally understand it.

What is spirituality to you? You will it

collective consciousness?

>> No. Trying to understand reality.

Like for me, religion is is in many ways

the opposite of spirituality. That

religion is about giving people answers

that you are not allowed to question.

Like people you want to understand

reality here is this story. You must

believe this story otherwise you burn in

hell or we burn you.

>> This is religion. Spirituality is I want

to understand reality. I want to

understand life. I want to understand

the thought in my mind. Where do they

come from? And I investigate that. And

this investigation for me is

spirituality.

>> This word investigate is it very common

in Israeli. I have a speech trainer

who's Israeli and he says investigate a

lot.

[laughter]

>> Is it um

>> I don't hear other nationalities using

it.

>> Okay.

>> I thought about it.

>> He says when you deliver a speech, you

say a line and then you investigate

the people listening to the speech in

terms of what expression they have on

their face. So he says investigate.

>> Interesting. um [laughter] could be

>> geopolitically you will u

any views in Venezuela Iran it seems

like so much is going on

>> I'm not sad to see Maduro go [laughter]

I will be very happy to see the current

Iranian regime disappear

>> uh the question is always what replaces

it

>> replacing one dictator with another

>> we saw it you know we saw it with

Gaddafi we so happy oh how Gaddafi is

gone

>> did it really improve things in Libya We

are so happy Saddam Hussein is gone. Did

it really improve things in Iraq? So,

you know, it's not like these Hollywood

superhero movies that you think all the

problem in the world is because this one

big evil guy. We just get rid of we get

Superman to get rid of Dr. Evil. End of

end of the movie ends, happy ending.

Doesn't happen like that in history.

>> Yeah.

>> Very often, okay, you got rid of the bad

guy. Now you start the really difficult

job of rebuilding society, rebuilding

democracy.

>> So again, Venezuela,

it's not enough that Maduro is not

there. We need to see a functioning

democracy in Venezuela. And just extra

doesn't build democracy there.

>> Somebody said this, I can't remember,

Hobbes or someone, everything is better

than anarchy. a dictator is

significantly better.

>> I I agree with that. Anarchy is even

worse.

>> Yeah.

>> Uh but we need to to to do better. And

the thing is we now know that it's

possible to do better. You know, if you

live in the world of Hobbes in the 17th

century in the midst of the wars of

religion, then you think that an

enlightened

a dictator or king maybe is the best

humanity can do.

>> Yeah. Ben dictator is great for

efficiency.

>> In the 17th century, we don't have any

example from human history at the time

of a large scale functioning democracy.

The only examples people in Hob's time

knew of democracies was small city

states like ancient Athens or or

Florence in in in the Middle Ages and

the Renaissance.

>> Nobody knew how to build a functioning

large-scale democracy. So people would

say, well, this is a fantasy. it just

can't be done.

>> We now live in 2026. We have experience

from the last 100 years that you can

build a functioning large scale

democracy.

So uh nobody can tell us oh this is

impossible. This is a fantasy. It's the

same with the international system

>> that if you if you lived say hundreds of

years ago, you think it's impossible to

build an international system based on

trust in which countries really trust

each other. never done before can't

happen. We know it can happen and the

thing that tells us it can happen is for

instance government budgets.

For most of history, more than 50% of

the budget of every government in

history, the Roman Empire, the British

Empire, the Athenian uh uh democracy,

whatever, more than 50% of the budget

goes to the military.

Um, in the early 21st century, the

average expenditure on the military

worldwide was about 6 to 7%.

Countries felt safer than in any

previous time in history. Even weak

countries felt, hey, we can spend just

6% of the budget on the military and we

know that the neighbors will not invade

and conquer us.

>> At this point, when everybody has enough

to destroy each other, it it might not

be to any end whatsoever. Um it's never,

you know, it was always a a a kind of uh

a race to the bottom

>> that when all the countries spend more

than 50% of the budget on the military,

no country can invest in healthare, in

education and welfare and everybody

feels extremely insecure because you

look around and you see all these other

kings and all these other republics

armed to the teeth and everybody feels,

oh, I need a bit more territory to feel

secure. Oh, I need this island. Oh, I

need this province to to protect myself.

And the other country says, oh, but but

I need this province to protect myself.

Nobody feels safe.

>> You know, in the early 21st century,

when when you spend just 6% of the

budget on the military, everybody can

have more money for health care. For the

first time in history, the average

health care budget was around 10%. First

time in history all on average all over

the world, governments spent more on

health care than on the military. I

would say this is this has been the

biggest political achievement of

humankind. And this is now being

deliberately destroyed by some of the

most powerful people in the world.

Actually just thinking about this if the

doge were 100%

efficient and successful

slowly you would wipe out all

bureaucracy to the point where one

person can make all the decisions and it

would in a way lead to a dictatorship.

>> Yeah.

>> Right. So Doge has probably put things

onto that path invariably without anyone

taking cognizance to that. It might also

do that.

>> Yes. And it did something else. It

shifted power from human bureaucrats to

AI bureaucrats. You don't really get rid

of bureaucracies. You need

bureaucracies. Bureaucracies are not

bad. No big human organization can

function without a bureaucracy. Now what

we saw with Dodge and similar efforts is

not getting rid of bureaucracies. It's

getting rid of human bureaucrats and

replacing them with AI bureaucrats which

are far more opaque, far more secretive.

You can't understand what they are

doing. They are far less accountable.

And this again it's the shift in power

and authority from humans to algorithms

which we which we saw in social media.

You know, previously the job of the

editor was done by a human being. Now

the job of the editor is still there.

It's just being done by an algorithm and

the algorithm has so far been doing a

much much worse jobs worse job than the

humans before.

Last thing you will I think this is the

end. You want to leave us with a

fleeting thought of some sort.

>> All thoughts are fleeting. [laughter]

>> Fleeting for today. uh fleeting for

today

>> in the current circumstance of the

things around us.

>> I'll just repeat I think maybe the most

important message.

>> Don't believe people who tell you that

that all reality is just power that

power is the only thing that matters. Um

first of all on on the personal level it

will make your life miserable. Mhm.

>> You don't want to be the person who

thinks that all their relationships are

just power struggles. That's a miserable

life. And [laughter] on the collective

human level, it will be very miserable

existence for humanity.

If uh uh leaders, political leaders,

business leaders have this mindset that

the only thing that matters is power

that all human relationships are our

power struggles. Then we end up in a

world first in a world in huge you have

to spend 50% of your budget on the

military and nothing is left for

healthcare and and then everything

collapses

uh we reach anarchy because then the

country itself uh people will start

fighting each other because you know if

everything is just power so why is this

guy in power and not me? So the the the

thought again maybe it goes back to the

thought. If the if the thought enters

that everything is just power observe

this thought and let it and let it

fleet. Let it go away. Don't hold hold

on to this thought. Don't identify with

this thought. It's very cynical. It's

destructive. It's it's a very dangerous

thought.

>> Well said. Thank you for doing this.

>> Thank you. Cheers.