here audio, video, transcript, with about 30 minutes of audience questions, was filmed in Miami. Here is the synopsis of the episode:
Tyler and Peter Thiel delves deep into the complexities of political theology. For example, why political theology is still a necessary concept today, why Peter opposes Calvinism (and rationalism), why the Old Testament should lead us to awakening, why Carl Schmitt's revival For example, are you accomplishing the following? , whether we're entering a new era of millenarian thinking, the one existential risk Peter thinks we're overlooking, and why everyone is just messing around and ending up in disaster. The role of catecheons, Shakespeare's political vision, and how AI will impact the world. The influence of word cells, Strauss' message in the Bible, Peter's worries about Miami, and more.
An excerpt is shown below.
Cowen: Suppose we are trying to track the probability that the Western world and its allies will be in trouble in some way, and just continue to be in trouble. What variables do you look at to track or estimate it? What do you look at?
Teal: Well, I don't think that's really an empirical question. If you can convince me that it's empirical and say, „These are the variables we should pay attention to,“ and if I agree with that framework, you've already made the argument. That means you've won half of them. It's like a variable. . . Well, the sun rises and sets every day, so it probably always will, so there's no need to worry. Or maybe Greta is wrong and we shouldn't pay too much attention to her because the Earth has always been in a mess. I feel sorry for her for not giving her her attention, but I don't think this is a big argument.
Of course, if you think about the globalization project after the end of the Cold War, in a sense globalization is just happening, there's more movement of goods and people and ideas and money, and this is what we're going to end up with. A more peaceful, more integrated world. There's no need to worry about the details. I'll try to get by somehow.
And in my story, there was a lot of very confusing stuff surrounding that story.Simply put, relations between the United States and China are not going well. Fukuyama And all these people envisioned it in 1989. I think people would have realized this sooner if they hadn't been told, „You're just going to have a hard time.“ The alarm bells should have sounded sooner.
Perhaps globalization is moving towards a neoliberal paradise. Perhaps it is connected to the totalitarian state of the Antichrist. Let's say it's not a very empirically based argument, but I would very much be so if people like you didn't ask questions about working through the mess. Stop asking questions about getting through the mess like you optimistic boomer liberals are. I feel more at ease and more hopeful.
Cowen: Are you saying that it is, after all, a metaphysical rather than an empirical question?
Teal: I don't think it's metaphysical, but somewhat analytical.
Cowen: And morally too. By talking about getting things done, you are imposing an obligation.
Teal: Well, it ties into all of these big questions. If we had a single world state, I don't think that would automatically be the best. Applying a classic liberal or libertarian intuition to this, perhaps it's the one-world state, which may or may not be absolute power that will absolutely corrupt. I don't think libertarians have been critical enough on this issue over the last 20 or his 30 years. So there was a reason why they didn't believe in their theory. I wasn't tying things together enough. I don't know if you could call it a moral failure, but there was a failure of imagination.
Cowen: Multifaceted skepticism about moving past the mess — do you think that’s how you really feel? genuine If we were to get to the bottom of this issue, would political theology be the answer?
Teal: Anytime people think you can just get by, they're probably preparing for some kind of disaster. That's fair. It's not as positive as the agenda, but I always think about it. . .
One of my chapters is zero to one The book was „You are not a lottery ticket.“ The basic advice is that if you are an investor, you can think like this: I don't know what to invest in. There are only people like this. I can't pay attention to any of them. I'm just going to write everyone a check and let them leave. I'm going to set up a desk somewhere here in South Beach, and I'm going to give a check to everyone who comes to the desk. It doesn't have to be everyone. It's just writing a lottery ticket. ”
It's just a formula to lose all your money. This is where we react violently to chaos, but again, we just don't think about it. It could be a Calvinist. They can also be rationalists. It's anti-intellectual. It's not thinking about things.
It's interesting throughout and I definitely recommend it. You may remember that the first episode of CWT (in 2015!) was with Peter. here.