Philosophers, Kings, and Mystics in Cultural Ecosystems

We discuss an alternative framework for categorizing men based on ideological aspiration - knights, kings, philosophers and mystics. We define knights as followers with integrity, kings as natural leaders focused on consequences, philosophers as knowledge creators, and mystics as supernatural communicators. We explore the tensions but also symbiosis between these groups in a functional society.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Like in the world of like alpha beta sigma and everything like that, they, they act like not being able to follow someone is a sign of. I don't know what it is. Superiority. No, it's being a bad knight. It's being unable to swallow my pride and just do what needs to be done for the good of my community because I'm not the one making the orders.

That is not a sign of being extra manly or anything like that. Knights are not less masculine than kings. Let's be clear about that. Actually, kings are generally, like a good king is generally more effeminate than a good knight.

 So you can see that both groups are submitting in some ways, Kings need to submit in so far as.

They need to efface their pride for the good of their community,

would you like to know more?

Simone Collins: Now I know we are here to discuss alpha beta nights. However, I want to first give a shout out to you. Perfect husband and show people that husbands are not always the stereotypes of people see them as. So, you know, the stereotype and [00:01:00] the meme of like the boyfriend walking hand in hand with a girlfriend down the street.

And then he's like looking back at some other really hot girl and the girlfriend, it is like a stock photo is looking horrified at him. You know that meme, right? Yeah. So you and I are like that, except what are you craning your neck at? When we're on our morning walks. Oh, toys, you know me. Toys for the kids!

Yes, you're always like, oh, can I like, you know, even if we're like in a grocery store and there's like a ton, just hanging somewhere from like the middle of a shelf like one of those little like, you know, little matchbox cars or bouncy balls or Anything that's like remotely kid, like, you're like, you have, like, you have to take a close look at it.

Like, will the kids like it? Would this make them happy? Would this make their eyes light up? And you were just so constantly looking for ways to make their lives better and to bring just more joy into this household. And I. I mean, one, you are singular and amazing and I don't think you're actually human because you can't [00:02:00] possibly be because only like not even characters are like you because it's not believable, you know, you're just too perfect.

However, I do want people to know that I think there are probably more marriages like this where, you know There, there aren't like these constant feelings of like jealousy and resentment and what about me and what, you know, but, but, but delight in things that couples care about jointly although you're better at caring about everything and you're way better at showing your love for everyone in this household.

So I just want to. I want to point that out. I want people to know that

Malcolm Collins: I have to add a caveat to this because it actually reminds me of something that happened to me. So this is a result. I don't know if it's a result of me caring about my kids, but one of my optimization functions right now, like background optimization, because it gives me a lot of happiness, right?

Um, uh, something that gives me happiness is giving my kids something that makes them happy when I see them happy. That's like one of my core sources of happiness in life today. And as a result, I am constantly on the lookout for things that I can use [00:03:00] to vampire this happiness for my kids, right?

You know, I'm, I'm just completely selfish action. And it reminds me of how you have these different optimization functions at different ages. I remember for a while after I left the age where like I was having sex all the time was like everyone I wanted to have sex with that I would sometimes just be driving and be like randomly, like a part of my brain that had learned to be passively looking for these things.

Like, that's a good parking lot to have sex in. If I needed to have sex with somebody that's a good back area there where I don't think people would find me because, you know, when you're in like late high school, college, you know, you need to be able to sneak around. You need to find private areas. And and then for a long time after that, I had so trained this like set of like, these are things, which is actually kind of sad, like if my kids ever died, I still think the thing would be running in my head of this is an optimization function around the type of toys that would make this kid happy or would make that kid happy.

And I imagine it must be devastating to people who lose a kid. They walk through a [00:04:00] store or. Older me, I reach an older age and I see things that trigger the, you know, the kids are out of the house now. Oh, the Octavian would have loved this when he was younger.

Simone Collins: This is why hopefully we're having our last kid right around the time Octavian's about to have his first kids.

Malcolm Collins: Oh God, I hope so. But I the topic today is one that I actually find really interesting because it came, you know, one of our listeners was asking about the concept of alpha and beta men and like more of our thoughts on this subject. And I was like, you know, I really don't know if that's the right way to categorize men.

It's not that there are not subordinate And dominant men in the world, because there are, there are men who are, and we talk about this in other episodes, the alpha beta dichotomy is a bit of a misunderstanding when you're talking about primates. What you have was the true alpha was in primate tribes.

is what we call the astronaut Mike Dexter stereotype which is a smart, [00:05:00] competent individual who everyone admires and wants to follow. And is like your captain of the football team, but he's also nice to the nerds because this is what chimpanzees often do. You need to recruit the support of those around you.

And that is how you maintain your brutal oppression of those who would oppose you. It is not the group of dickish guys who are slightly antisocial. That's actually much closer to, in the great apes, what you would call a roaming bachelor group. This is common within some ape groups the unsuccessful.

I

Simone Collins: think even like adolescent lions, this is not just an ape thing,

Malcolm Collins: right? Yeah. But I mean, I try to look at apes for models of human behavior more. Yeah. So with adolescent lions, you'll get this phenomenon, or lions, apes, whatever. You see this in different mammal species where unsuccessful males get kicked out of a group.

Like these are males who think that they're more dominant than they really are within their social circle. And so the dominant males kick them out and the women don't want anything to do with them. [00:06:00] And so they go around and basically in a group of all men act extra macho all the time. And their goal is to try to take over another healthy group so that they can become the new dominant males of that group.

Now, it doesn't often happen. It's sort of a sign of genetic failure. So if you are going around with a group of. Unmatched men acting extra macho I would look at and try to understand the phenomenon of roaming bachelors because that's a better explanation and it is definitely nothing to be proud of.

It is a sign of genetic failure. And it's something that has been common throughout our ape ancestors. Now these roaming bachelors, like if you were going to have a group of males attack you and take over your tribe, it was the most common way that would happen. It's not that that never happened.

That happened. But usually the fate of roaming bachelors is dying alone in the woods without ever finding anyone who wants to be with them because that's not the actual status game that's played within the tribe. These are people who couldn't understand their actual position within the tribe.

But I started to think of how do [00:07:00] men actually differentiate in our society in a meaningful way, right? Like, because I think that these alpha beta dichotomies are not as useful to me because they don't describe ideological aspiration. As it differentiates between communities and is predictive of meaningful behavior and world perspectives.

So my dichotomy will make more sense to people. So I do think that this exists, but it's a background thing. This alpha, beta, sigma, whatever thing, right? I think the core way that I would differentiate men, and this is an evolving theory. So I might do another video that expands on this theory in the future, is knights, kings, philosophers, and mystics.

Hmm.

Simone Collins: Interesting.

Malcolm Collins: Knights are men who follow a leader. They are men who are followers to like, like followers, but not in a subordinate way. What I mean by that is when people hear like [00:08:00] beta men, Right. They think submissive men. Yeah.

Simone Collins: They don't think people who are like fanboys of Jordan Peterson or Elon Musk.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Knights are not submissive in a cucky way. They're not submissive in a I will subordinate myself to anything that comes along that proves it's more powerful to me. They are submissive to a tribal identity and often a tribal leader that has proven an amount of natural superiority to them in some way.

These individuals are defined by their integrity. And something that's really interesting about knights, and I think they're the most common group of successful males, you know, a lot of women want to date a knight, they want this big strong being of honor that stands for the tribe and the community and that is fighting for justice and honor and everything like that, right?

And if

Simone Collins: they've chosen [00:09:00] a tribe or, and, or leader, it's probably because that person has pretty decent ideas. So they've also chosen to, to fight for probably fairly good and well vetted ideas that are respectable and that a woman can get excited about.

Malcolm Collins: Right. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The woman likes him because of their honor and integrity, which is what defines a knight, but also their steadfastness, bravery, in the face of their tradition.

And what judges the quality of one group of knights over another group of knights is who they've chosen as their leader. Who are they following? Is this an individual that deserves following or not? And this now comes to a problem with knights. Knights make terrible leaders of other knights. And it has to do with the fact that their world framings are very different.

So for a knight to be a good knight, they must be a dentologist. Whereas Deontologist? Like D E O N [00:10:00] T. They must be a deontologist. I don't, I

Simone Collins: mean, I may not be pronouncing it right,

Malcolm Collins: but. But for a, a, a leader to be a good leader, they must be a consequentialist. So now we're going to talk about why Knights need to, well, first let's talk about Deontology versus Consequentialism.

Consequentialism means that you judge, no, no, we'll talk about the leader, leaders are leaders because they are individuals who often, and sometimes this is genetic, sometimes they have some level of ability to choose this, but they will not accept any role within a group other than a leadership role.

Okay. If they lack the natural ability to draw knights to them, i. e. they, they are able to prove themselves as good leaders. Then they become what in the alpha beta system is called a sigma male. These are not mysterious lone wolves. These are natural born leaders who unfortunately didn't have the gifts needed to draw a following.

Or weren't in the right

Simone Collins: [00:11:00] place at the right time, et cetera.

Malcolm Collins: Well, I won't say always the right place at the right time. It might just be that they lacked the qualities. They weren't smart enough. They weren't ambitious enough. They weren't hardworking enough. They weren't fit enough. Whatever the case may be, they didn't draw the knights to them.

Because knights typically, you know, you're going to have 80 knights for every one king, right? Like they, they do not And so, so when a person has the personality profile of a king, but is not deserving of following, they become what is called a stigma male, which is a king that just refuses to submit to anyone else.

And, and we can talk about the negative consequences of that in a second. So the two philosophies here are uh, consequentialism believes that The consequences of your decisions or actions judge the morality of those actions.

So if I order troops to war and all those troops die, it doesn't matter how just it was that I decided to send them to war, doesn't matter how much I was following the [00:12:00] rules of my position when I sent them to war, what I did was evil and feckless and pointless. Because as a leader, I was expected to win that war and I don't get to make excuses as to say, but I followed the rules or I did what was honorable as a leader.

If I antagonize another tribe because I decide to follow the rules of honor and that leads to a war between our two tribes, I am responsible for all of those deaths. It does not. matter that I acted according to the rules of honor, the rules of my culture, or the rules of society. And this is also true with logic.

I can think logically this was the best outcome. If I fail in my logical interpretation, I must take responsibility for that failure. I can't say what I was doing. was, after all, I was trying to do what was right, I didn't know it would end up terribly, right? Knights [00:13:00] must have the exact opposite perspective.

If a knight is a consequentialist, then they ignore their leader flippantly based on un Total information. They don't have a total view of the picture of the world. They don't have all the information that their leader has. And so they may act in a way that is unpredictable. That makes them a very ineffective knight.

Because when the leader is making a decision, when the king is making a decision, and he aligns the knights on the battlefield in a certain way, and a few knights decide, I know better. They can end up dooming all of their brothers in arms for thinking that they know better. And this is a really, really big problem.

And, and, and, and, so knights must be deontologists. They must say, look, I follow the rules because following the rules is in itself a just thing to do. But these are two completely different personality optimization profiles. And they cluster within different [00:14:00] communities and they can cause different problems.

So one of the problems you get was knight communities. So one of the most common knight communities, a, a cultural group that I think over, I won't say over cultivate knights, but it has a lot of knights. Like it really does a good job of producing good knights is the Catholic cultural group. And this is part of why one of the things we constantly mentioned is.

Catholic immigrant groups to the US are the most likely immigrant groups to form large organized crime organizations. You know, whether it's the Irish mob or the Italian mafia or the Hispanic groups you have right now, and then other groups that use similar night, like structures, like the Orthodox, where they have this deferral to authority strategy for determining what's true.

They also form large organized crimes syndicates like the Russian mob and stuff like that. So the question is, is why do you see this? It's because you have this one deferral to authority mindset within the masculine population of the community but this, then the, the leaders are also born Knights, [00:15:00] which means that they have sort of an honor code.

In terms of how they interact with the world, but they also believe that they're in the position of a king, which causes them to one, ignore the rules of the land much more readily and to get into conflict with anyone else who's in this localized king or leadership position, but it's really a knight.

Whereas real kings don't do that. Like people who are born kings don't get into flippant fights over their honor and stuff like that. That is, they understand that the, the, the wellbeing of their subjects is more important. Then their own honor or pride or anything like that. What matters is the ultimate outcome.

So what do you think, first of all, of this framework that I'm laying out?

Simone Collins: This makes sense so far. Let's go to what

Malcolm Collins: happens when you get an overabundance of Kings within a population, the overabundance of Kings within the population means that you have a bunch of people who can't find followers, but also can't submit to others and [00:16:00] these individuals then often go to the outskirts of society.

So it was in our modern day world that might be something like working in a firewatch or going and living in the woods and, you know, securing a little bunker in hopes that you get an apocalypse and then you could exercise your kingly abilities. So it's very Aragorn y,

Simone Collins: right?

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, but historically what it means is population clusters that overproduce kings have usually been most disproportionately represented on the frontiers of society.

These were the individuals who, if they were in New York or Boston during the frontier period and they couldn't acquire a group of followers and stuff like that, they'd just say, screw it, I'm gonna go live on my own. And they'd go get in a wagon and they'd go to the edge of society. And within America, there's some population clusters in America that you can find that just kept moving and kept moving and kept moving.

Like, it's not like one immigration wave. It's like they had to keep finding some reason to move over and over and over again. What's [00:17:00] causing this is because this is like an ultra king population. But it also means that they're going to be much more individualist, much less likely to unite under a single leader or do anything truly meaningful in a social structure.

So it's kind of like

Simone Collins: your family and my family, if I'm thinking about like past behaviors. Yeah, our

Malcolm Collins: family would be heavy producers of the king archetype. Yeah. People who led groups, led rebellions, stuff like that.

Simone Collins: Or just disappeared into the wilderness to become like local sheriffs or circus performers.

Exactly. And

Malcolm Collins: my family. Yeah, they're like, I can't, I can't take over this group. I'm leaving. Bye. Yeah. That's the way I was when I was a kid. When I would hang out with social cliques, if I wasn't in charge of a clique, I'd say, screw it. I'm going to go do my own thing. Yeah. And so often for like my freshman and sophomore year, I was often kind of seen as a loner.

And then I would seen as like, the head of a social clique, generally my junior, senior year of things. Because people. It would accumulate around me and we'd have our own community and stuff like that. Anyway so, and this is not like a holistically good thing. This is [00:18:00] a personality flaw. Not being able to follow people.

I need to be clear about that. Like in the world of like alpha beta sigma and everything like that, they, they act like not being able to follow someone is a sign of. I don't know what it is. Superiority. No, it's being a bad knight. It's being unable to swallow my pride and just do what needs to be done for the good of my community because I'm not the one making the orders.

That is not a sign of being extra manly or anything like that. It is being a failure at being one type of man and being successful at being another type of man. But that is not like knight, knights are not less masculine than kings. Let's be clear about that. Actually, kings are generally, like a good king is generally more effeminate than a good knight.

They, they are generally more open to compromise. They are generally more open to like effeminate ways of acting. They are likely more like, like there's many things about a good King that involves self [00:19:00] effacement for the good of their community, but not for the good of an individual leader. So you can see that both groups are submitting in some ways, Kings need to submit in so far as.

They need to efface their pride for the good of their community, and they need to efface their value system for the good of their community. Well, and

Simone Collins: they are nothing without the loyalty of their community. And as soon as they lose that, they have nothing, whereas a knight at least has a certain amount of, like, choice in his vote and personal agency in a way that a king kind of doesn't.

Malcolm Collins: Exactly. And now philosophers and mystics are interesting as well. Philosophers and mystics typically only appear within male varieties when they get large urban clusters within cities. Hmm. These are the two groups that is most overly produced within the Jewish population. Or really any urban Muslim groups have urban specialization to an effect as well, which we've talked about, not all Muslim groups, but some Muslim groups, [00:20:00] and the Muslim groups that do also overproduce philosophers and mystics.

Now when you're in a multicultural ecosystem, philosophers and mystics are of very high utility. Philosophers aren't just philosophers, they're people who Learn and produce knowledge for the sake of learning and producing knowledge. And these individuals are extremely high utility to any large community, right?

Because they, they just like learning and talking and debating and coming up with the best ideas. This is not like a beta thing or anything like that. These are just people whose lives is dedicated to the pursuit of self betterment through education and through educational pursuits. The problem is, is that when you get an overabundance of the philosopher type male you get sophists.

And you get bureaucrats and that is very, very bad. These are individuals who are learned for the sake of being learned. They basically create pyramid schemes of learnedness. Um, well, no, it's,

Simone Collins: it's not like [00:21:00] vortexes of intellectualism that, that can ultimately. Draw a culture down and prevent it from advancing and focusing on worldly things that the culture kind of needs to stay alive, right?

Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, and this is what sophists are. These are people who debate for the sake of debate and they have forgotten that Learning and education has an end purpose, which is real world industry and utility. When philosophers follow kings, they do very well because kings understand consequentialism, and they live by consequentialism, and they understand how their philosophers should be deployed.

Simone Collins: Yeah, kings are like, well, okay, what are we going to do about this? Okay, I'm going to take this thing that you've learned, and I'm going to do this with it, or we're going to change our policy as a result. Whereas in isolation, all of that high caliber thinking is just high caliber thinking.

Malcolm Collins: The philosophers generate the knowledge that informs the king, which guides the knights.

That is a healthy cultural ecosystem, which is why multiple cultural groups can work really well together and outcompete [00:22:00] solo cultural groups. And one of the really interesting things you have about Israel now, which we talk about in our book, is a group. The modern Jewish population, this isn't true of the ancestral Jewish population, we talk about this in the group, it was really an urban specialist group, you know, outside of Israel, something like 98 percent of Jews live in urban centers.

And before the Holocaust, that was true as well now need to take on urban roles, which is why you get really interesting looking Jewish urban settlements. Like the well, I need to look up the names of them, but I'll put some pictures on the screen, but they look like little micro, if you've explored the settlements in Israel.

They look like little micro cities and not like regular suburbs. They're incredibly dense and weird. Like there'll be like little circles of, of, of community. And there's other reasons for this, like the way you choose spray, but it's a long story here. But then the other group and this is produced across community.

So the mystic mystics are generally dangerous overall. If you've seen our video on what we think of witchcraft, you can see why, but it is one of the male specializations. This is why I believe [00:23:00] you have rates of, or one of the evolutionary factor, facture, one of the evolutionary factors that has led for a selection cross culturally for Schizophrenia in populations is that your classic mystic, the best mystic, is your tribal shaman.

Who, whether you are, you know, a British people in the far north or in Africa, you know, all of these groups had tribal shamans. These were individuals who heard voices, that communicated with the land of spirits and then they shared this information with their community. And I'm sure they played some historic role of utilization for communities, but today I think they serve more a role of just errant information because the information that they are gathering, while it used to, so, so the true role of the shaman in a community historically was to assure the loyalty of the stupidest individuals within the community, [00:24:00] or the most susceptible to mystical hoodoo.

In mystical manipulation to the king which is they did what today like cults do and stuff like that, which is to say some individuals just cannot be motivated by higher order ideas like honor and integrity or a love of knowledge or the love of desire to follow a just ruler, they can only be motivated by threats in the world of the supernatural.

And the mystics kept these individuals in line and following the king. The problem is, is that now we live in a society, like, especially as we enter a space faring age, where these individuals that cannot be motivated by honor and integrity and stuff like that, are just not particularly A useful use of food and life support systems.

So, that makes the shamans less useful than they would have been in a histomerc context. Unless we find some different way of utilizing them. Which is going to be hard given our views around things [00:25:00] like witchcraft.

Simone Collins: Yeah, so you're just like, drop them.

Malcolm Collins: Drop them. I don't see a high utility for them.

I think individuals. So, I mean, there's two types of shamans, right? One type of shaman is genuinely like thinks they're hearing voices and everything like that. And they are the schizophrenic type shaman. These individuals are not going to, they are not the type of person you want on a spaceship where a single mistake can kill everyone.

The other type of shaman. Is the type of shaman that is actually more like a, like a philosopher type, but they have slotted themselves into a shamanistic role because they level of arbitrage within that role. And these individuals can, if, if they can close themselves off to the realms of the unprovable, as we talked about in our witchcraft video, which I would suggest you watch to understand our full views on this.

Yeah. Can become of utilization and can move into a philosopher group, but a philosopher [00:26:00] group that specialized on human manipulation and understanding how humans think and act. So long as they do not promote. Chaos cults on, on the spaceship or the colony or anything like that. You know what I'm thinking?

Distant human future. When I say chaos cults, what I mean is you know, genuine mysticism and the belief of alternate systems that govern the physical reality within which we live, because that is what mysticism is. It's a hypothesis that there is an alternate explanation for how physics and reality works, but a hypothesis that you are unwilling to have tested and disproven.

So what do you think of this framework? Any other groups you would add to it?

Simone Collins: I mean, in modern society, we also have to consider And this is not a gendered thing, so maybe it doesn't count, but the people who are just completely, like the hikikomori in Japan, the people who've become shut ins and [00:27:00] completely

Malcolm Collins: I guess I'd call them blanks. These are the people who the shamans are meant to control.

Hmm. I mean, they could be NPCs, they could be whatever you want to call them. Yeah, I

Simone Collins: guess, yeah, maybe, maybe NPCs is the right word for them, but yeah, that is like sort of one segment that I feel like is growing and is, Increasingly a risk to society that, that is not addressed by this model.

Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, I mean, because this model is looking at the people who we want to take with us and judging, you know, who is the best people to take with us.

Simone Collins: So it sounds like you want to bring like two Kings, a ton of Knights, three philosophers, and no mystics. No,

Malcolm Collins: you're creating an enabled breeding population of Kings. We would talk about how this works in, in, but yeah, but the vast majority you need are nice and philosophers as well. I mean, if you're in space, you need people who are dedicated to learning and, and knowledge and truths, but are guarded against.

And the mystical arts.[00:28:00] So you need these individuals who are not going to be susceptible to external and alternate frameworks for physical reality, but that can push science forwards. And they can study populations and provide useful information to those within ruling positions. But the, the problem is that these groups all seem to hate each other when they're just acting randomly.

Like, they all think that every one of their, one of the groups is an enemy because they, they see that they're different and they have different values. Like, the individuals who are like, you guys are such consequentialists, like, that's so evil. And it's like, well, you don't want somebody who's not a consequentialist running your society or your group.

Simone Collins: Right. I mean, because, I mean, well, some, I think, view consequentialism as very evil because they view it as the mindset of the ends justify the means. Meaning that they focus on atrocities that could take place. We focus on the, is this evidence based? Will there be an ROI? Is this effective element of consequentialism?

Malcolm Collins: Which we think is Sometimes the truth is unnecessary. The consequentialist is the person who, as a leader You [00:29:00] are trusting, you know, I was playing Rogue Trader recently, right, which is a game that takes place in the 40k universe and there's a planet that's being overcome by a chaos cult, right? And you have a few options.

You can try to save as many people as you can from the planet. But you know, a cult spreading there and it will become a demon world where people will end up being tortured and for, for eternity, the hundreds of years, thousands of years, right? Everyone on the planet will live in a state of constant pain and fear, or you can basically set a detonation that destroys all life on the planet.

But you're not going to have time to do that if you try to save a bunch of people. The obvious right decision is to detonate all life on the planet. Yeah. If you are optimizing for anything like good in the world or anything like that, but it is also a horrifically individually evil decision that a denatologist would never take.

And so, that is part of the, the The pain of being a consequentialist, you just need like the logic and people need to [00:30:00] understand that you are logically aligned with what their goals are as well, because some consequentialists, if they're fighting for something like human purity or something like that, then they're going to come up with genuinely evil things like trying to prevent people like us from breeding because they see our.

use of, of genetics in terms of our breeding patterns as, as perverting human purity. And so they are angry about that and they want to sterilize us. And they want to sterilize disabled people who are the other people who need this technology to have kids. And that leads to genuine evil.

So it's important that you know, the people who are in a consequentialist group was in society have some level of. Higher order thinking capacity. And that's also why it's important that you have smart knights in a society because dumb knights follow dumb consequentialists.

Simone Collins: Yeah, dumb knights just go ahead and execute on atrocities.

There's plenty of historical precedent for this.

Malcolm Collins: Don't take it out. But I'm sure there's some other groups that I can add to or expand this system with eventually, but [00:31:00] I love you to death. I'd love

Simone Collins: to, you know, in the future to hear your thoughts on how women break out. Because yeah, that would be interesting.

Yeah. Like if this is what men are, then what are women? That'll be a fun conversation.

Malcolm Collins: I'm sure some women fall into this category as well, or this, this framework. But the question is, is, is what role are they taking within society? Which, which may be different. And I also love that you point out about the blanks.

Most people are blanks. But blanks aren't alphas or betas or sigmas or anything like that. They're just people who are not doing anything. Almost sort of automatically reacting to their reality. They almost behave like particles just reacting on the forces around them.

Simone Collins: Yeah. Kind of like, just consuming air, wasting space.

That's very

Malcolm Collins: well. And a lot of them are, well, I mean, they're vectors for infection. They're vectors from a medic infection because they can spread my medic infection to otherwise non blank individuals. But my medic infections spread very, very fast among blanks, like woke ism, but also other forms of my medic infection.

Like [00:32:00] the perversion of stoicism and Calvinism that I think is represented was in some aspects of the red pill community that we talked about in the pragmatist guide to crafting religion.

Simone Collins: Right. Yeah, absolutely. Love you. I love you too. You're amazing. I'm looking forward to time with our kids tonight.

Cause it's going to be a special night. Right. See you downstairs.