Dominant Narrative:
The dominant narrative in 2019 is that we live in a world of rapid scientific and technological progress, with steady improvements and occasional dystopian risks due to the speed of technological advancement.

Peter Thiel’s Perspective:
Thiel believes the dominant narrative is fraying and has been for some time, particularly after the 2008 financial crisis. He questions the value of higher education, highlighting the rising cost of college and the questionable return on investment. Thiel suggests that the narrative of a bright future for educated children in a dynamic society is no longer entirely accurate.

Eric Weinstein’s Perspective:
Weinstein agrees that the dominant narrative is incomplete and needs to be reexamined. He acknowledges that certain areas, such as technology and finance, have continued to experience growth, but argues that these areas are exceptions rather than the norm.

Areas of Agreement:
Thiel and Weinstein share a belief that the current state of science and technology is characterized by stagnation and a lack of meaningful progress. They acknowledge that certain sectors have continued to grow, but these are seen as exceptions rather than representative of the overall picture.

Conclusion:
Thiel and Weinstein recognize that the dominant narrative of continuous progress is flawed and needs to be reevaluated. They both see evidence of stagnation in science and technology, with only a few areas continuing to experience growth. This recognition sets the stage for a discussion on the causes and potential solutions to this stagnation, which they explore in subsequent episodes of their podcast.

Historical Context:
The era of stagnant progress and slowed development began in the 1970s. The world of bits, including computers, the internet, and mobile internet software, has been an exception to this trend, experiencing remarkable growth and progress. Fields related to atoms, such as nuclear engineering, aerospace engineering, chemical engineering, and mechanical engineering, have faced significant challenges and slow growth during this period.

Silicon Valley’s Decoupling and Its Effects:
Silicon Valley’s focus on digital technologies and rapid progress in the world of bits has led to a decoupling from other industries and sectors of the economy. This decoupling has resulted in a sense of being left behind among those working in industries related to atoms. The narrative surrounding technological progress has been perceived as exclusive and not inclusive, leading to a feeling that not everyone is benefiting from advancements.

The Star Trek Analogy:
Peter Thiel uses the analogy of the Star Trek computer to illustrate the current state of technological progress. While we have made significant advancements in computing and communication technologies, we have not achieved the same level of progress in other areas such as warp drive, teleportation, or matter re-engineering.

Break in the Economy:
Eric Weinstein suggests that the break in the economy occurred around 1972-1974. Peter Thiel agrees and notes that the narrative of progress seemed intact in 1968 but had changed significantly by 1973.

Potential Scientific Factors:
Eric Weinstein raises the possibility that the structural change in the economy may have been influenced by scientific factors rather than solely mismanagement. He cites the discovery of quarks in 1968 and the implications it has for our understanding of the proton and neutron. This discovery has had no apparent impact on industry, leading to questions about whether we have exhausted one orchard of low-hanging fruit and need to find new avenues for technological progress.

Nature Versus Culture:
Possible reasons for scientific and technological stagnation include limited discoveries in nature and cultural factors that hinder progress.

Chemistry and Biology Interface:
There is potential for significant advancements at the interface of chemistry and biology, but cultural institutions and regulations may impede progress.

Optimism for Improvement:
Despite challenges, Peter Thiel believes that progress is still possible in areas beyond the digital realm.

Difficulties in Convincing People:
Eric Weinstein notes the difficulty in convincing people of the lack of progress, as rapid changes in technology may obscure the underlying stagnation.

Economic and Generational Indicators:
Economic data and generational trends suggest that progress may be lacking, but these indicators can be challenging to interpret.

Hyper-Specialization and Authority:
In modern times, extreme specialization leads to narrow subsets of experts who lack the authority to assess the overall state of progress.

The Challenges of Specialization in Understanding Complex Systems:
Modern specialization in academia and other fields has created a knowledge gap, making it harder to evaluate complex systems. This specialization allows for easier lying and exaggeration, leading to a culture of dishonesty in institutions.

The Expectation of Growth and Its Consequences:
The belief in continuous growth has led to embedded growth obligations in universities and other institutions. The failure to meet these expectations has resulted in a pathological or sociopathic state in many institutions.

The Difficulty of Honest Reset and Institutional Derangement:
Institutions have chosen to maintain the illusion of growth rather than honestly resetting expectations. This dishonesty has led to derangement and lying within institutions.

Potential Solutions and the Challenges of Honesty:
Adjusting institutions to function without growth, such as selective PhD programs and fairer law firm structures, could have been implemented. However, the dishonest institutions could outcompete honest ones, leading to a self-extinguishing strategy.

The Illusion of Growth and Its Impact on Perception:
Economic bubbles and volatile growth cycles have created a sense of dynamism that masks underlying stagnation. California’s extreme economic volatility has been interpreted as dynamism, obscuring the lack of real growth.

The Universal Institutional Narrative and Its Challenges:
Many individuals within institutions promote a universal story that can be easily invalidated but is difficult to challenge due to career consequences. This creates a disconnect between the collective incentive for honesty and the individual incentives for self-promotion.

The Parallel Systems of Institutional and Unscripted Narratives:
Institutional narratives are often gated and separate from unscripted narratives like podcasting experiments. This allows institutions to maintain their dishonest narratives without acknowledging the growing unscripted narrative.

Conclusion:
The expectation of growth and the difficulty of honest reset have led to dishonesty and derangement in institutions. The challenge lies in bridging the gap between the universal institutional narrative and the unscripted narrative that is increasingly reaching more people.

Tech Stagnation and the End of the Truman Show:
Peter Thiel and Eric Weinstein observe a widespread sense of stagnation and disillusionment within the tech industry. Thiel believes that the institutional narrative of constant progress is incorrect and will ultimately fail. Weinstein highlights the shift from optimism and abundance to pessimism and self-doubt among tech workers.

Economic Indicators and Market Sentiment:
Thiel notes the contrast between the strong stock market performance and the negative sentiment in Silicon Valley. He attributes this disconnect to a lack of clarity about future growth prospects within the tech industry.

The Need for a New Narrative:
Thiel argues that the current economic narratives of “new economy,” “great moderation,” and “secular stagnation” are all bullish narratives that fail to address the underlying challenges. Weinstein emphasizes the need for a new narrative that acknowledges the limitations and challenges facing the tech industry.

Historical Parallels:
Thiel draws parallels between the current situation and the economic conditions of the 1920s and 1930s, highlighting the need for skepticism and careful management of financial indicators. He points out that despite the challenges, there was significant scientific and technological progress during the 1930s, which ultimately helped drive economic recovery.

The State of Physics and Biology:
Eric Weinstein argues that physics has powered the world economy, leading to atomic devices, nuclear power, semiconductors, and the World Wide Web. In contrast, biology has not seen similar progress despite breakthroughs like the three-dimensional structure of DNA and the genetic code.

Challenges in Biology:
Peter Thiel suggests that biology is a more challenging field than physics, leading to slower progress. Thiel proposes a cultural explanation, suggesting that less talented individuals are drawn to biology, while those with strong math skills tend to pursue physics or related fields.

The Decline of Polymaths:
Thiel emphasizes the decline of polymaths in academia, where narrow specialization is encouraged. He believes that polymaths, who have broad knowledge and interests, can connect dots and challenge institutional norms.

Institutional Pathologies and the Suppression of Dissent:
Weinstein argues that institutions predicated on growth often tell pathological stories to maintain their narrative. When things are not growing, smart individuals who question the status quo become dangerous to the institution.

The Case of Professor Bob Laughlin:
Thiel shares the story of Professor Bob Laughlin, a Nobel Prize winner in physics at Stanford University. Laughlin questioned the validity of research in other departments, particularly in biology, leading to negative consequences for his career.

Julian Schwinger’s Experience:
Weinstein mentions Julian Schwinger, a Nobel Prize winner in physics who fell out of favor with the physics community for questioning its assumptions.

The Role of University Presidents:
Thiel suggests that university presidents should be able to think critically about the progress and health of the entire university. However, he notes that university presidents are often not selected based on their ability to critically assess these issues.

The Declining State of Universities:
Peter Thiel believes that universities are not doing well and that their problems have been exacerbated by the ever-increasing student debt, which burdens students with debt early in their careers and limits their freedom of action. Thiel points out that the current system forces universities to tell lies about how great the system is to justify the high debt levels, creating an unsustainable situation.

The Impact of Student Debt:
Thiel argues that the high level of student debt discourages students from pursuing more creative and dynamic career paths, as they are forced to prioritize higher-paying jobs to pay off their loans. This debt burden can also lead to moral hazards, such as students resorting to gray areas like sugar daddying and sugar mommy arrangements to alleviate their financial burden.

The Lack of Intellectual Diversity in Academia:
Thiel observes that there is a lack of left-wing professors who are critical of the university structure, with most older professors ignored or dismissed and younger professors avoiding such criticism to protect their careers. This lack of intellectual diversity stifles dissent and prevents the university system from addressing its problems.

The Need for Alternatives:
Thiel and Weinstein agree that there is a need for alternatives to the traditional university system, as the current system is failing students and society as a whole. They discuss the possibility of creating alternate tracks for students, such as hiring software developers based on their coding skills rather than requiring a computer science degree.

Challenges in Creating Alternatives:
Thiel acknowledges that creating viable alternatives to the university system is challenging, as individuals still find it advantageous to attend elite universities despite the problems. He emphasizes the need to come up with alternate tracks that can work effectively and be widely accepted, especially in fields other than software development.

The Need for a Common Vision:
Thiel and Weinstein highlight the importance of finding common ground and working together to address the problems in higher education, despite their political differences. They believe that by creating the right preconditions, people can start dreaming about better futures in various aspects of life, including technology, family formation, and civil society.

College Debt:
Thiel suggests considering bankruptcy for college debt and holding universities accountable for a portion of the debt. He proposes a left-wing approach of socializing the debt and exempting universities from liability.

Inequality:
Thiel highlights stagnation as a primary issue, rather than just inequality. He emphasizes the problem of runaway housing costs, particularly the impact of strict zoning laws on housing affordability.

College Equivalency Degree:
Weinstein introduces the idea of a College Equivalency Degree (CED) that allows individuals to demonstrate knowledge equivalent to a college degree through online delivery mechanisms. Thiel agrees with the concept but acknowledges the challenges in implementation due to resistance from individuals who value the exclusivity of their college degrees.

Stockholm Syndrome:
Thiel discusses the phenomenon of “Stockholm syndrome” among individuals who resist changes that could devalue their college degrees. He emphasizes the difficulty in broadening hiring practices to include individuals without traditional college degrees due to the self-interest of those in hiring positions.

Teal Fellowship:
Thiel mentions the Teal Fellowship program, which provides funding for young people admitted to prestigious colleges to pursue their dreams outside of traditional higher education. He highlights the program’s success but acknowledges its limited scalability and the challenge of replicating its prestige and exclusivity.

Alternative Education:
Weinstein proposes skipping college altogether and transitioning directly to graduate school, potentially granting individuals a master’s degree even if they do not complete a PhD. He suggests that this approach could save students time and provide them with a stipend during their studies.

The BA and PhD Degrees:
Thiel believes the BA degree is not as valuable as it appears, and the PhD degree is also not as valuable as it seems. He views the current state of higher education as problematic across the board.

The Difficulty of Reforming Elite Universities:
Thiel acknowledges the challenge of reforming top universities, where the BA degree is more prestigious than the PhD. He points out that these universities have more PhD students than undergraduates, many of whom have made questionable choices and may face psychological breakdowns in the future.

The Tribble Problem:
Thiel compares graduate school to the Tribbles in Star Trek, emphasizing the expendability and lack of perceived value of PhD students. He contrasts this with the undergraduate conceit that everyone is special and valuable, which is often not true either.

The Teleology of Higher Education Programs:
Thiel questions the purpose and ultimate goals of higher education programs, asking where they lead and what their intended outcomes are.

Junior High School Football Analogy:
Thiel compares elite undergraduate education to playing football in junior high school. He argues that while it may not be harmful in itself, it does not lead anywhere and can have negative consequences if pursued further.

Motivational Structure:
Thiel reflects on his undergraduate experience in the 1980s, when professors were seen as cool role models and potential future aspirations. He contrasts this with the current motivational structure, which he finds less inspiring.

Declining Teleology in Education:
Peter Thiel criticizes the current education system for lacking a clear teleology or purpose, resulting in a lack of motivation and direction among students.

High School vs. College:
Thiel recalls being more academically motivated in high school due to the clear goal of getting into a good college. However, as he progressed through Stanford and law school, the teleology became less apparent, leading to a decline in his motivation.

Post-Doc-a-Loops:
Thiel criticizes the endless cycle of post-doctoral research, referring to it as “post-doc-a-loops,” which he sees as a symptom of a broken system.

Pathological Institutions:
Thiel argues that the university system, along with other institutions experiencing fake growth, has become sociopathic and pathological.

Low-Hanging Fruit in Research:
Eric Weinstein expresses concern that without people pursuing fields like molecular biology and bioinformatics, it will be challenging to uncover important discoveries in those areas.

Need for a Meaningful Teleology:
Weinstein emphasizes the need to find a way to make exploring scientific questions meaningful and purposeful for individuals’ lives.

Lack of Diversity in Institutions:
Eric Weinstein observes that most institutions are carbon copies of each other, with very few truly innovative ones. Peter Thiel agrees, noting the low diversity of institutions.

Limiting Training in Certain Fields:
Thiel emphasizes the need to limit the number of people trained in fields with limited job opportunities. He uses the example of Stanford’s economics department, where only the top three or four PhD graduates secure good academic positions. Thiel argues that pretending to be kind by training more students than there are good positions is actually cruel.

Malthusian Struggle and Overcrowding:
Thiel warns against a Malthusian struggle for resources in overcrowded fields. He compares it to a situation where 10 graduate students in a chemistry lab compete for limited Bunsen burners and beakers. Thiel believes this overcrowding is unhealthy and leads to an environment where political correctness can be weaponized to exclude individuals.

Dangers of Power Laws:
Eric Weinstein brings up the concept of power laws, which are distributions with thick tails and a small number of outliers that dominate activity. Thiel acknowledges that discussing power laws is dangerous but considers it an important topic.

Power Laws and Inequality:
Power laws are prevalent, particularly in relation to talent, where a small number of individuals contribute significantly to innovation. Recognizing endowment inequality, which includes varying levels of ability, is crucial for addressing social issues.

Historical Context:
Peter Thiel presents the example of the United States in the 19th century, where a wide-open frontier and less pronounced power laws contributed to a healthier society.

Education and Stagnation:
Thiel emphasizes the need for growth in the entire society rather than solely focusing on education and academic research. Stagnation poses a significant challenge, leading to a situation where many individuals lack opportunities and may engage in unproductive activities.

John von Neumann’s Abilities:
Eric Weinstein highlights John von Neumann’s exceptional abilities, illustrating the vast differences in skills and talents among individuals. Acknowledging and accommodating these variations is essential for addressing social problems.

Diversity and Integration:
Peter Thiel expresses his desire for a society with great mathematicians and concert pianists, emphasizing the value of diversity in talents and skills. He criticizes the current societal pressure on parents to expect their children to excel in specific fields, leading to an unhealthy environment.

Deregulated Capitalism and Rare Skill Sets:
Eric Weinstein advocates for deregulated capitalism, allowing individuals with rare skill sets to integrate across various areas and contribute effectively. He praises Peter Thiel’s ability to think in multiple idioms, demonstrating his exceptional talent in integrating different concepts and directing research and work.

Concern for the Median Individual:
Eric Weinstein expresses concern about the median individual’s ability to benefit from market advancements in the face of technological progress, such as machine learning and automation. He questions Peter Thiel’s optimism regarding runaway automation and the potential for robots to surpass human capabilities.

Automation and Productivity:
Peter Thiel challenges the idea that automation is the primary cause of slowing productivity growth. He argues that most jobs in the early 21st century are non-tradable service sector jobs that are not easily automatable. As a result, even significant productivity growth in manufacturing and agriculture has a smaller impact on the overall economy.

Amazonification and Retail:
Eric Weinstein asks if there are aspects of retail that resist Amazonification, such as the desire for human contact, information exchange, or recreational aspects.

Specialized Neural Nets:
Weinstein points out that many tasks previously thought to require artificial general intelligence can be accomplished by specialized neural networks.

Retail Under Pressure:
Thiel identifies retail as a sector that is particularly vulnerable to automation and technological disruption. Amazon, as a major player in e-commerce, poses a significant threat to traditional retail businesses.

GDP Growth:
Peter Thiel believes that achieving a sustainable 3% GDP growth rate is necessary for the implementation of various social programs. Thiel emphasizes the importance of authentic productivity numbers, avoiding any manipulation or falsification. He warns against initiating social programs in the absence of economic growth, as it could lead to economic instability.

Hyper-Capitalism and Hyper-Socialism:
Eric Weinstein proposes the idea of “hyper-capitalism” coupled with “hyper-socialism” as a potential solution. Hyper-capitalism would involve deregulation and experimentation, while hyper-socialism would recognize the challenges faced by individuals in securing family-supporting positions.

Automation and Productivity:
Thiel questions the extent of automation’s disruptive impact, highlighting the lack of significant shifts in job descriptions. He emphasizes the need for concrete evidence of automation’s effects, rather than relying on assumptions. Thiel points out that the current level of automation may not be sufficient to drive substantial productivity improvements.

Social Programs and Redistribution:
Weinstein criticizes the desire for redistribution without addressing the underlying economic issues. He believes that social programs should not undermine market functionality and individual accountability. Weinstein views redistribution rhetoric as a means to manipulate the lower middle class, convincing them that upward mobility is unattainable.

Conversation between Left and Right:
Weinstein calls for a more transparent and genuine dialogue between the left and right, avoiding cryptic and manipulative communication. He suggests that redistribution rhetoric often targets the lower middle class, fueling feelings of hopelessness and preventing progress.

Social Welfare as an Insult:
Eric Weinstein strongly opposes welfare programs due to their inherent insulting nature, emphasizing that recipients perceive them as belittling.

Redistribution Challenges:
Weinstein expresses skepticism about discussions surrounding redistribution, suggesting that wealthy families target middle-class individuals for wealth redistribution. He highlights the inability of middle-class professionals, such as dentists, orthodontists, and accountants, to shield assets and protect themselves from redistribution efforts.

Uncovering Schemes of the Powerful:
Weinstein emphasizes the need for a good-faith conversation between left and right to uncover schemes employed by the powerful to manipulate society for their own interests. He suggests reframing redistribution as an attempt by the powerful to redistribute from the powerful to the powerless, questioning the logic and effectiveness of such an approach.

Fake Redistribution and Shell Games:
Peter Thiel critiques common redistribution efforts, describing them as complicated shell games that often fail to achieve their intended goals. Thiel suggests that these efforts may result in fake redistribution, where the appearance of addressing inequality is created without addressing the root causes.

Correlation between Left-Leaning Societies and Inequality:
Thiel draws attention to the correlation between societies that lean further to the left and increasing inequality. He cites California as an example, where despite its democratic leanings and middle-class orientation in the past, it has become a highly unequal state.

The Puzzling Correlation:
Thiel acknowledges the complexity of causation in societal issues, but highlights the puzzling correlation between left-leaning policies and increasing inequality. He emphasizes the need to investigate and understand this correlation, suggesting that it may require a fundamental shift in perspective.

The Relationship Between Social Ideas and Violence:
Start with an appealing social idea. Ask the minimum level of violence necessary to accomplish the idea. Add this to the original idea to see if it is still attractive. Many propositions are flipped into undesirable territory.

Communism and Violence:
Communism’s redistributive tendencies are not its main problem. Extreme violence and killing are necessary to achieve communism. Rene Girard observed that communism among Western intellectuals became unfashionable after Stalin’s death in 1953. They were communist because of the millions of people killed, not in spite of it. The violence was seen as charismatic and inspiring, but also undesirable.

Communism and Useful Idiots:
Some intelligent people were fooled into supporting communism, hoping for a racially more equal society. Communists were early advocates for interracial marriage, open support of homosexuality, and female access to birth control. Peter Thiel argues that these people were “useful idiots” who never gained power in communist countries.

Violence in Revolutionary Movements:
Eric Weinstein argues that the violence in revolutionary movements is excessive. He believes the package of revolution, including violence, is not worth it. Peter Thiel agrees that the violence in revolutionary movements is too much.

Growth and Reduction of Violence:
Peter Thiel believes growth is necessary for the functioning of societies like those in Western Europe and the United States.

Growth and Democracy:
Peter Thiel believes that democratic systems, such as parliamentary republics, function well when the economy is growing because they can distribute benefits to various groups. However, when economic growth stops, these systems become zero-sum, where gains for one group come at the expense of others, leading to legislative gridlock and potential societal instability.

Historical Example:
Thiel cites the 1930s as an example of what can happen when growth stops. During this period, the global economy experienced a severe downturn, leading to the rise of fascism and communism as governments struggled to address the economic crisis.

Consequences of Stagnant Growth:
Thiel warns that a prolonged period of economic stagnation could result in various negative consequences, including: Increased violence, both by the state against its citizens and in the form of global conflicts. Social unrest and deformation, such as widespread drug use, as people seek ways to cope with the lack of economic opportunities.

Growth and Violence:
Thiel emphasizes that economic growth alone cannot solve all societal problems, including violence. However, he believes that growth provides a better chance for a positive future compared to a world without growth.

Public Perception:
Thiel acknowledges that some people view him negatively, portraying him as a villain. He suggests that this misunderstanding arises from a lack of understanding of his focus on reducing violence and promoting economic growth.

Violence as a Deep Human Problem:
Peter Thiel views violence as a central and profound problem in human nature. He emphasizes the mimetic element in human behavior, where people copy and desire what others have, leading to potential conflict. Thiel challenges the notion that humans are inherently good and peaceful, arguing that violence is not just a problem caused by a few bad individuals but a deeper issue rooted in human nature.

Christian and Machiavellian Perspectives on Human Nature:
Thiel draws upon Christian anthropology and Machiavelli’s insights to highlight the darker aspects of human nature. These perspectives acknowledge that humans can be dangerous and prone to violence. Thiel contrasts this with the softer anthropological biases of late modernity and the Enlightenment, which tend to view humans as inherently good and peaceful.

The Horrors of World War II and German-Jewish Reconciliation:
Eric Weinstein brings up the shared experiences of Thiel (with a German background) and himself (with a Jewish background) in relation to the horrors of World War II. They both recognize the profound impact of the Holocaust on their respective communities. Weinstein suggests exploring the possibility of a deeper German-Jewish reconciliation, given that the original participants are now elderly or gone.

Mimetic Competition and Healing the Wounds:
Thiel and Weinstein discuss the concept of mimetic competition, where two communities with similar thought processes may come into conflict. They see this as a potential factor in the historical tensions between Germans and Jews. Weinstein proposes that the twilight of living memory of the Holocaust presents an opportunity for healing the wounds between these communities.

Historical Context:
Peter Thiel highlights the unique integration of Judaism in late 19th and early 20th century Germany, which led to a synergistic and generative environment. The social democratic response to the Holocaust and Hitler’s era, emphasizing egalitarianism and equal value, fails to address the loss of exceptional individuals during that time.

Ongoing Impact:
Despite the egalitarian approach, Thiel suggests that Germany has lost its dynamism due to the absence of Jewish people and their contributions. Thiel acknowledges the discomfort and taboo surrounding this topic in Germany, hindering open discussion and resolution.

Jewish Cultural Loss:
Eric Weinstein emphasizes the loss of Yiddish culture and language, particularly in Germany. Weinstein’s personal experiences in Germany, such as hearing his last name pronounced in impeccable German and requesting a fork in Yiddish, evoke mixed emotions of discomfort and a sense of belonging.

Recognition and Opportunity:
Weinstein recognizes the urgency of addressing this dual wound before it’s too late, as there will be no one left to remember the past. There is an opportunity to acknowledge and commemorate the loss of Jewish culture and vibrancy in Germany.

Peter Thiel’s Personal Background:
Thiel’s unique background of being born in Germany but emigrating at a young age provides a different perspective on these issues.

Jewish Culture and Germany:
Peter Thiel had a unique perspective on Germany as he grew up in Africa and attended a German-speaking school. Thiel observes the contrast between California and Germany, with California being optimistic but desperate and Germany being pessimistic but comfortable. Eric Weinstein believes that Jewish culture is also changing and losing some of its dynamism as it becomes more comfortable. Thiel and Weinstein both feel that something has been lost in both Germany and Jewish culture and wonder how to address these losses.

Preference Falsification:
Eric Weinstein introduces the idea of preference falsification, where people keep one set of public preferences and a hidden set of private preferences. Weinstein and Thiel believe that Trump’s election was more likely than the general population expected due to preference falsification. This theory suggests that people were more likely to vote for Trump in private than they would publicly admit.

Preference Falsification and Hidden Trump Support:
In the 2016 US election, there was widespread preference falsification, with people lying about their voting intentions due to social pressures. An example was given of a prominent angel investor in Silicon Valley who admitted to lying about voting for Gary Johnson instead of Trump. The sudden collapse of Gary Johnson’s support in the month before the election suggested that many of his supporters may have switched to Trump.

Polls and Subconscious Awareness:
There was an unusual emphasis on polling data in the 2016 election, with people constantly checking sites like Nate Silver’s 538 model. This suggests that even though people were publicly stating that Trump had no chance of winning, there may have been a subconscious awareness that the race was closer than they wanted to admit.

Anti-Elitism and Class Reactions:
The election was also seen as a class reaction against the perceived elitism of the political establishment, with Trump representing a rejection of the educated class. Many voters were shocked by Trump’s victory, but Thiel questioned why they were so heavily reliant on polling data if they were truly confident in a Clinton win.

Surprise and Political Shock:
There was widespread shock among left-leaning individuals and commentators after Trump’s victory, even though there were signs of dissatisfaction with the status quo. Thiel argues that the reliance on polling data may have been a subconscious indication that people sensed the potential for an upset.

The Significance of Poll Results:
Despite Hillary’s potential victory over Trump, the fact that Trump secured 20% of the vote is concerning. Such results suggest the existence of preference falsification and the need for alternate perspectives to understand societal phenomena.

Preference Falsification and Economic Models:
Preference falsification challenges the assumption that private and public preferences are the same in economic models. Recognizing preference falsification can lead to a different worldview and prevent surprises like revolutions.

The Problem of Political Correctness:
Political correctness is viewed as a significant political issue in today’s society. It creates an environment where people feel pressured to conform and avoid expressing their true opinions.

Silicon Valley as a One-Party State:
Silicon Valley’s political landscape is characterized as a one-party state. This can be interpreted in two ways: genuine agreement or widespread pretense.

The Wisdom of Crowds and Political Correctness:
The concept of the wisdom of crowds is challenged when political correctness becomes extreme. The shift from democratic truth to totalitarian insanity occurs when a super majority holds a belief.

Political Correctness and Societal Shifts:
Political correctness has become more acute in recent decades, leading to the creation of the intellectual dark web concept. The goal of this concept is to foster a bipartisan coalition of thinkers to address these issues.

Speaker’s Perspective on Public Discourse:
Eric Weinstein highlights the prevalence of fear among people when it comes to speaking out publicly, particularly in professional settings. Individuals often express gratitude to Weinstein for expressing views they are unable to voice due to fear of repercussions. The topics that cause such apprehension are often ordinary and non-threatening.

Suspicion of Suppressed Dangerous Truths:
Weinstein suggests that individuals enforcing political correctness may be driven by a suspicion that they are concealing dangerous truths. This concern is exemplified by the fear of data revealing variations in IQ among groups, which is attributed to the belief that IQ equals intelligence. Conversely, those who do not equate IQ with intelligence are less apprehensive about such data, as they recognize intelligence as a multifaceted concept.

Silicon Valley’s Hidden Bigotry and Misogyny:
Weinstein asserts that Silicon Valley harbors significant bigotry and misogyny, which is evident in the discomfort with acknowledging the perception that women are less capable programmers. He proposes that this perception stems from a Fisherian equivalence perspective, which suggests that males and females possess different forms of intelligence and cognitive strengths. Weinstein emphasizes the importance of intellectual conversations that openly address these perceptions without excessive concern for intellectual differences.

Peter Thiel’s Response:
Peter Thiel acknowledges the various points raised by Weinstein but suggests that they may serve as a distraction from more substantial issues. He expresses a desire for debates on various topics but emphasizes the importance of focusing on topics with meaningful consequences rather than engaging in superficial discussions.

Political Correctness and Important Questions:
Peter Thiel believes political debates are a low form of discussions compared to questions in science, technology, philosophy, and religion. However, political correctness about politics can freeze out more important discussions in these other areas.

Distraction from Stagnation:
Thiel suggests that political correctness, identity politics, and American exceptionalism may distract us from more significant issues like stagnation in society. Thiel believes people are distracted from addressing problems because of a lack of solutions and a desire to avoid difficult conversations.

Newspeak in Politics:
The Orwellian new speak in politics, represented by zombie politicians like Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush, serves to avoid discussing real issues. Thiel suggests that these politicians have a bad conscience and see themselves as bad people, leading to silence about pressing problems.

Productivity and Growth:
Eric Weinstein proposes that if people believe productivity and growth are over, they may de-emphasize issues of merit. This can lead to a focus on ensuring that every group has a share of wealth rather than recognizing individual merit.

Progress through Technology and Information:
Weinstein believes that most progress comes from technological and informational advancements, leading to more knowledge, capabilities, and improved care for people. He expresses concerns about breaking with some progressives who may prioritize group identity over technological progress.

Peter Thiel’s Criticism of Bad Faith Acting in the Media:
Thiel asserts that bad faith acting in the media, especially to gain clicks, is a problem and that people are increasingly aware of this. He mentions Gawker as an example of a powerful hate factory that became less influential once its methods were understood. Thiel believes people are more critical of media attacks and discounts their criticisms, leading to a better understanding of the media’s game.

Thiel’s Ethical Concerns During the Gawker Lawsuit:
Weinstein highlights Thiel’s ethical considerations during the Gawker lawsuit, ensuring that the litigation was narrowly focused and did not harm innocent parties. Thiel’s internal struggle to balance the need for action against potential collateral damage demonstrates his concern for ethical boundaries.

Thiel’s Support for Trump:
Weinstein acknowledges Thiel’s support for Trump, despite their opposing political views, due to Thiel’s belief that Trump would reduce violence and interventionism. Thiel’s speeches at the Republican convention and Washington press club emphasized his desire for a break from the interventionist foreign policies of previous administrations. Thiel views Trump’s presidency as a shift away from neoconservative and neoliberal policies, although not as far as he would prefer.

Thiel’s Assessment of Trump’s Foreign Policy:
Thiel emphasizes the importance of foreign policy in assessing a president’s performance. He sees Trump’s actions as a step away from interventionism and believes it is unlikely that the Republican Party will return to the Bush foreign policy. Thiel cites Trump’s opposition to the Iraq war during the primaries as a significant moment.

Eric Weinstein’s Concerns About Trump’s Impact on Cultural Standards:
Weinstein expresses concern that Trump’s presidency has degraded certain cultural and oral Torah aspects of the United States. He worries that Trump’s behavior as president has lowered expectations for presidential conduct and made it difficult to recover from the damage to societal norms. Weinstein acknowledges the need to break out of established norms but feels Trump’s approach was uncomfortable.

Thiel’s Views on Trump:
Thiel acknowledges that Trump’s unconventional behavior and breach of norms are departures from traditional presidential conduct. He suggests that Trump’s election highlights underlying problems that need to be addressed. Thiel believes that Democrats need more than just criticism of Republicans and should focus on creating a compelling agenda.

Political Identity and Distraction:
Thiel argues that identity politics on the left and American exceptionalism on the right have been distractions from addressing stagnation and other issues. Identity politics involves focusing on parts of the country rather than the whole, obscuring larger questions. American exceptionalism, the belief in the unique superiority of the U.S., prevents critical examination and self-awareness.

Exceptional and Great:
Thiel distinguishes between “exceptional” and “great,” emphasizing that greatness is more measurable and comparable across countries. Exceptional implies incommensurability and inhibits self-reflection and improvement. He believes that the U.S. has become exceptionally unself-aware due to its exceptionalism.

Hopes for the Future:
Thiel expresses hope that the right has moved beyond exceptionalism and that the left will eventually move beyond identity politics. He acknowledges that identity politics may seem strong now but suggests it could be in its final stages.

Rene Girard’s Theories:
Thiel mentions Gerard’s theories as a new and interesting perspective that he credits for his success in business. He is asked to elaborate on his personal relationship with Girard’s theories and how they have influenced his worldview, but this question is not answered in the provided text.

René Girard’s Mimetic Theory:
Girard’s theory of human psychology emphasizes imitation and desire as central aspects of human behavior. Mimetic desire leads people to imitate others, including their desires, which can lead to mass violence and insanity. This theory challenges the idea of individual autonomy and highlights the interconnectedness of human beings.

Impact on Thiel’s Thinking:
Thiel’s encounter with Girard’s theory was a powerful corrective to his libertarian and classic liberal biases. It led him to question his motivations and the social norms that shape his behavior. Girard’s theory has provided Thiel with a framework for understanding preference falsification and the dynamics of mass movements.

Girard’s Theory as a Portal:
Girard’s theory is a comprehensive and transformative perspective on various aspects of human existence. It offers insights into psychology, anthropology, history, and the future. It presents both a sense of danger and hope for the future, as humanity grapples with the potential for violence and the possibility of transcendence.

Cult-Like Following and Dynamism:
Girard’s theory attracted a dedicated following, with a sense of exclusivity and a belief in having discovered a profound truth about the world. This dynamism and exclusivity can be both generative and unhealthy. It can lead to a heightened awareness of the potential for deception and alternative perspectives.

Scapegoating and the King:
Weinstein’s initial exposure to Girard’s theory focused on scapegoating and the role of the king as a potential scapegoat. This concept challenged conventional notions of leadership and power. It resonated with Weinstein’s experiences of being scapegoated for his individuality.

Universal Relevance and Applicability:
Thiel believes that Girard’s theory has universal relevance and applicability, addressing fundamental problems of violence and scapegoating. While certain individuals may be more prone to scapegoating, the theory offers insights into these dynamics for all individuals. Girard’s theory provides a framework for understanding human behavior and its potential consequences.

Scapegoating and Its Dynamics:
Scapegoating involves selecting a person or group to represent and absorb the blame for a community’s problems. This process is arbitrary, as the scapegoat is simultaneously seen as radically different and yet emerges from within the group. Scapegoating often targets individuals with extreme contrasts, such as Abraham Lincoln, who was both an orator and grew up in a log cabin. The dynamics of scapegoating can be dangerous, as no one is entirely safe from the potential for violence.

Scapegoating and Understanding:
Scapegoating only works when people do not fully understand it. As understanding of scapegoating increases, its effectiveness diminishes, leading to the unraveling of related political and cultural institutions. One way to counter scapegoating is to scapegoat the scapegoaters, adding a layer of complexity that makes it less effective.

Violence and Its Role:
Violence is both a disease and a cure, serving to drive out violence. Societies need violence to function, but the appropriate level and context of violence remain unclear. The left tends to focus on the unjustified nature of violence, while the right emphasizes the necessity of some violence for societal functioning. Nation-states contain violence by limiting and channeling it, but the balance between containment and necessity is complex.

Political Dynamics and Excitement:
Political speeches often focus on going after the “bad guys” and stopping them, as these messages generate excitement and energy. The left’s focus on ending oppression can be less energizing than the right’s focus on going after the other side. The excitement of politics often stems from the entertainment value of the conflict rather than the ultimate goals or progress. Technological and scientific progress, along with the formation of families, can be more genuinely exciting and progressive than political conflicts.

The Role of Violence in Scientific Progress:
Technological progress can lead to a more abundant world with less struggle and violence, but historically, scientific and technological advancements have often been used to develop more advanced weapons. The pursuit of violence has been a significant driver of scientific and technological progress.

The Stagnation of Technological Progress:
The development of the atom bomb and the subsequent arms race led to a point where further scientific advancements in the military sphere became absurd. The Apollo-Soyuz docking in 1975 marked a shift away from the space race and raised questions about the motivation for continued technological progress.

The Need for a Non-Violent Narrative for Progress:
Challenges exist in finding a narrative that motivates sacrifice, hard work, and deferred gratification for future progress that is not inherently violent.

Public Perception of Technological Progress:
Some people deny the stagnation of science and technology, while others question the pace of progress and express concerns about the potential dangers of rapid advancements.

Fears of Technological Advancements:
Fears exist that technological progress will make dangerous technologies like AI, biological weapons, and runaway nanotechnology cheap and accessible. The concern is that these advancements will lead to a loss of control over violence.

The Fear of Stagnation:
Peter Thiel expresses greater concern about the stagnation of technological progress, believing it will ultimately lead to an apocalyptic scenario.

Climate and War:
Focusing excessively on climate change while neglecting economic growth could lead to war. Slowing growth to address climate change might require trade-offs and different solutions than those usually discussed.

Balancing Economy and Environment:
An economy cannot exist without an environment, but an environment might not be sustainable without an economy. Solutions to both climate change and economic growth should be considered simultaneously to avoid solving one problem at the expense of the other.

China and India’s Role:
China and India are rapidly developing, leading to increased carbon emissions and ecological consequences. Western Europe has a relatively low carbon footprint compared to developing countries. Addressing climate change requires more than just carbon taxes and expecting developing countries to follow suit.

Alternative Energy Sources and Geoengineering:
Exploring alternative energy sources with low carbon dioxide emissions is necessary. Researching carbon sinks and geoengineering techniques might be valuable. Considering nuclear power as a potential solution should be on the table.

Government and Nationhood:
A government is defined as a monopoly on violence (Weber). A nation is a group of people who have agreed to forget something in common (unattributed French political philosopher).

Transparency-Privacy Trade-off:
Transparency and privacy are often seen as opposing concepts, with greater transparency leading to reduced privacy. In theory, full transparency could prevent violence, but it might also lead to a more totalitarian state. Transparency can be weaponized against individuals or groups, leading to selective exposure and potential abuse of power. The assumption that people can pay attention to everything equally and that increased transparency automatically leads to better outcomes is flawed.

Institutional Betrayal:
Institutional betrayal occurs when people are betrayed by institutions that have a responsibility to care for them, such as hospitals or newspapers. This betrayal can lead to a universal fear of society’s infrastructure and a sense of hopelessness. Waking up from institutional betrayal should involve re-energizing society and offering alternative paths forward rather than promoting nihilism and inaction.

Re-energizing Society:
Basic science and radical life extension are areas that could benefit from institutional support. Reforming institutions to prevent political influence over scientific research is crucial for effective progress. Encouraging bold ideas and experimentation in various fields can lead to innovation and societal advancement.

Waking Up Gracefully:
Society should avoid waking up in a way that de-energizes and demotivates people, leading to a sense of hopelessness. It is important to balance the exposure of institutional failures with offering alternative paths and opportunities for progress. Re-energizing society involves identifying and supporting people and programs that can contribute positively to institutional reform and societal advancement.

Thiel’s Impact on the Department:
Eric Weinstein, the podcast host, admires Peter Thiel’s ability to energize and solve problems within a department.

Thiel’s Potential Return:
Weinstein suggests that bringing Thiel back to the department would be beneficial in addressing various challenges.

Invitation for Future Discussion:
Weinstein expresses his desire to have Thiel return to the podcast to delve into specific topics of mutual interest.

Podcast Host and Guest:
The podcast is hosted by Eric Weinstein, and the guest in this episode is Peter Thiel.

Call to Action:
Weinstein encourages listeners to subscribe to the podcast and share their thoughts in the comment section on YouTube.