So do we need to abandon the search for, and advocacy for, the single definition of the problem, the single diagnosis, the single vision?

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

pretty much every human language that's been tried ends up fitting in a kind of universal human meaning shape 00:15:40 which I think is just so profound especially in this time of such deep division that there is a universal hidden structure underlying us all

I understand some people that if they say 00:07:47 "no, no, this is a science thing, "it's not for us, that's the province of God, we shouldn't go there." I can hear that view, but I really don't think it's what I see in scripture. What I see in scripture is, c'mon, I wanna to show it to you. I want to reveal myself to you. I don't see science as challenging my faith. In fact, I see it as affirming my faith.

Scientists, philosophers and in fact humans in general—we all assume there is a common ground to everything, a common reality. Without it, there would be no possibility of even understanding each other, no way to make sense of what we are experiencing and in fact no memory, individual or collective.

I don't know how this will look like. What I do think is it will come to cultural identity. What is the cultural identity? And that's what we will all gravitate to, and we'll gravitate.

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

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

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

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

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

Climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe stresses the need for finding shared values, rather than trying to change someone’s mind, as a basis for productive conversations