What's the value?

Jahanzeb (JZ) is one of my favorite people in the world and this conversation reminded me why. We met as classmates at Harvard Business School, coming from very different backgrounds and perspectives, but we were connected by a love for knowledge, philosophy, and meaningful conversations about life. 

As way of quick background, JZ is from Pakistan and has spent much of his life trying to give back to his country. He has worked in the government, financials sector, entrepreneurship, given TedTalks, and many other things. These days he is focused on his start up, Hoopoe, an EdTech start up with a mission to teach millions of Pakistani children to speak English. As you will hear, JZ believes there is a huge need to teach this skill to better the lives of so many people, which ties directly to his value of "making a difference in the world that he can see." 

We spent much of the first half of the episode talking about that value, his vision for his company, and why he feels it is so important. I always love these discussions because I find it fascinating to hear people articulate their passions. There is so much to be learned in understanding how they identified their passion and what drives them to overcome all of the inevitable obstacles. It was great to also learn more about Pakistan specifically and the opportunities and challenges they face as a country.

The second half of the conversation was a a dream come true for someone like me who loves talking about big, messy, philosophical topics. JZ and I have had countless conversations like this over the years (usually over some hookah and delicious food), so we picked right up where we've previously left off. Much of this discussion centered around the idea of conviction, by that I mean how we can ever have conviction about anything if we don't know anything for certain. We went back and forth on the limits of the human mind, the role emotion/faith play, and if life actually has any meaning at all. I really hope you enjoy this discussion as much as I did.

Mike reminds me a little bit of the philosophers version of the "most interesting man in the world" (sorry if that old Dos Equis ad reference doesn't land). He has managed high-end restaurants, taught English, was the vice principal of a private language school, indexed books, published five novels, played in a professional rock band, visited all fifty states and more than 30 countries-- among many many other things. I was excited to talk to Mike because it is one thing to study or talk about philosophy, it is another thing to actually live it in its pure form. Mike is a philosopher through and through.

That became apparent very quickly in our conversation as he explained his value of integrity, which he defined as acting in accordance with your own standards. Mike believes most, if not all, of the problems we have in the world today are because most people either 1. don't define what their standards for living are, 2. don't act consistently in accordance with them, or 3. don't do both of those two things. That thesis opens the door to so many fascinating discussions, and Mike and I tried to get into all of them. We talked about how you figure out your standards, why it is so hard to act in accordance with them, what happens when your standards conflict with others, if the "golden rule" actually works, and lots more.

In short I think I may have found a new best friend. Mike has spent much of his time on earth searching for more understanding of himself and the world we live in. He thinks and writes about topics like murder, suicide, love, astrology, drugs, and the environment; not because they are trendy or lucrative, but because he is genuinely curious about them. This was one of the most intellectually and philosophically enjoyable conversations I've had in a while; and hopefully through all the philosophical ramblings and bromance, you guys find some insightful nuggets that might help you have a better day today than you had yesterday.

Rachel started the show with a really interesting value; "understanding we are all spirits having a human experience." This was interesting because I have heard phrases like this before, but rarely do we get to dig into what it means and its implications. Given Rachel's background as an author ("Celebrating Solitude: How to Develop and Honor Your Highest Self"), holistic psychotherapist, and transformational life coach she brought a lot of in depth thinking on the topic. She was more than game to work through my logical approach to trying to understand a really spiritual topic.

The entire conversation was insightful as we worked through the implications of her value, but maybe the biggest take away was Rachel's view that we are all going through a human experience to learn as much as possible about existence and the universe, so that we could use our collective knowledge to get to a better world. There is so much to unpack in that, not least of which is, what is the "better" world we are working towards and how do we know that is actually our intended purpose? Interestingly, as you start to press on it, it starts to sound a lot like organized religion. We can't ever fully understand it, but there is a plan, and we should have faith that it will work out.

All of this made for a fascinating discussion where we explored the reason for human suffering, the limitations of formalized religions, the apparent randomness of the universe, as well as more practical issues--like what does all of this mean for our every day lives? It is one thing to believe that we are spirits working towards an improved collective consciousness, but what does that mean for you on a random Monday morning in July? Rachel's ability to discuss big picture philosophical topics but also their every day implications made her a really great guest to have on.

Sam just finished his junior year of high school but has already dedicated a lot of his time to politics. He is the host of a conservative podcast, Northeast Director for High School Republican National Federation, and has worked on 7 political campaigns (Presidential, US Senate, State Senate, Governor x2, Board of Supervisors, Sheriff). What I found super impressive and interesting about Sam is that the reason he got into politics was that at a young age he noticed a lot of people liked to complain about the country and the political issues we faced but weren't doing much about it. So rather than join in on the complaining, he decided to get involved and try to do something to make things better. It speaks directly to his value of passion and dedication for what you believe in.

Many people, myself included at times, judge younger kids for getting involved in politics. The thought being they don't have enough perspective or aren't qualified to have an opinion. But I think there is a lot us older folk can learn from someone (at any age) who sees a problem and decides to take action to try to solve it. I was also really impressed by Sam's perspective. He is a conservative but he truly understands the importance of engaging in healthy dialogue with people who have different views. He believes in making his own decisions not just following party lines, even if that means some people in his own party might not like it.

We did spend some time towards the end of the conversation getting into some specific political issues too. We thought it would be good to try to model some of that healthy dialogue and explore topics like the Russia/Ukraine situation or gun control from different perspectives. I think it is obviously true that younger people can see the world in a simplified way (but to be fair so can a lot of adults), but I was really encouraged and impressed by Sam's willingness to listen to other perspectives and ultimately try to let the truth "win out" vs. a personal agenda or political beliefs. I really hope he keeps this approach as he continues his career in politics, as it is much needed.

Elizabeth is a Professor of Sociology and Chair of the Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work at Nassau Community College. She is also Senior Strategist for Woodhull Freedom Foundation, the nation’s only human rights organization working full time to protect sexual freedom as a fundamental human right. This experience and background made for a really interesting discussion, as Elizabeth had a ton of knowledge about the history of humanity and how we interact from a sociological perspective.

The value she brought to the discussion was "openness", as in openness to consider other perspectives, explore things we don't understand, and generally just be curious about life. Elizabeth's belief is that there is a very direct and logical correlation between openness and well-being. Maybe the most interesting case study of this is Elizabeth's own story (covered in her recent book: Bound: A Daughter, a Domme, and an End-of-Life Story) of how being open to explore her own mother's sexuality allowed her to help significantly improve her mother's quality of life. 

We also spent some time delving into how openness plays out with the social issues we face today. We touched on topics like teaching kids about sexuality, religious freedom, and the impact of capitalism on society. One of the most interesting insights across all of these topics was the advantage "openness" provides. If the goal is to get to the truth then logically openness gives you the best chance to get there. Being open and curious gives you the chance to find the best solution, whereas closed-mindedness becomes extremely limiting. It doesn't mean your perspective or viewpoint is wrong, it just means you wouldn't know if it was because you've never actually been open to challenging it. 

I really enjoyed this conversation and think it touched on some fundamental aspects of human nature. Being open to other people's views, no matter what they may be, is hard for all of us--but that doesn't mean we stop trying. We have to challenge ourselves to care more about the truth than our personal agenda or ego.

Doug is focused on serving fellow man and to do that he has focused on a concept known as the "Tall Poppy Syndrome." Doug wrote a book on the topic and has been studying it for over 10 years. Through that work he believes the "Tall Poppy Syndrome" is a human condition that has been present since the beginning of time and it explains why humans always seek fairness and justify our actions by cutting others down (analogy being, when someone looks at a field of poppy plants, their inclination is to cut the highest ones so that they can all be even).

A concept like this is ripe with philosophical and societal questions, which Doug and I dove into throughout the show. Doug's main thesis was around the ideas that 1. we should celebrate tall poppies as they are necessary to make society thrive and 2. the approach of cutting down or "cancelling" tall poppies is counter productive and wrong. As we discussed though, there are numerous counterpoints to consider to that view; what if the playing field isn't even for all poppies to grow, what if a tall poppy exploited smaller poppies to get to their level, what if once a tall poppy reached their level they abused their power, etc. 

What became clear to me in this discussion is that there is a lot of validity to this concept and likely it explains a good bit of the cancel culture we see today. But, we have to be very careful to not apply the concept in an overly simplistic way. It would seem wrong to say any time you cut a tall poppy it is a bad thing, just like it would seem wrong to say any time a poppy grows too tall it should be cut. What I appreciated about Doug's thoughts as we probed all of this, is that he acknowledged the most important take-away from his work is that people (all people--the cutter, the cuttee, and anyone observing) need to be more thoughtful and self reflective before they jump to conclusions. Human nature seems to push us to assume our assessments are accurate, leading us to rash actions. Doug, myself, and hopefully those listening all need to be better at challenging our own assessments in search of a greater good.

Honestly, I have been sitting on this episode for a while. I even went back to my guest, Will, and did a part 2 recording because I wasn't sure how I felt about the first session we did. I'm not sure I can completely explain why I had reservations, but for some reason I did. I decided to err on the side of transparency and "showing my work" though, rather than editing or not sharing. 

To step back for a minute, Will is a friend of mine who I've know for over 25 years. We grew up together and have been close for a long time. Will is one of those friends who always brings the energy and when he is around you know it is going to be a good time. He is genuine, full of passion, and has a really unique way about him-- his nickname in high school (and beyond) was "Da Machine." What is interesting about that is I think that is part of the reason I didn't feel great about the first recording. I realized that I fall into a certain groove when I interact with Will. I don't always take him as seriously as I should, I don't expect to get into deep conversations, and I think I let that impact the episode.

We talked about this a bunch in the second part of the show, but it was a really interesting reminder for me. As thoughtful and reflective as I think I am, I still have some blind spots. I still have work to do. You never know where biases might pop up. What it made me realize though is how closed minded we can be about wisdom. We get this idea that wisdom should look, or sound, or be presented in a certain way. If it doesn't fit the mold of how we traditionally think about it, then we often dismiss it. Will helped remind me of that because throughout both sessions his approach to life consistently impressed me. He lives in the moment, he speaks from his heart, he tries not to overthink things, he understands there is a time to put in work and there is a time to enjoy yourself, etc.

I appreciate Will a ton for being on the show and allowing me to try to work through my shit to get to a good, authentic discussion. I'm not sure I hit it completely, but I did learn a lot about myself and about life, so a big thanks to him for that.

Mark is an attorney, social justice advocate, award-winning author of the Zachary Blake Legal Thriller Series, and co-host of the "Justice Counts" podcast. All of this centers around his passion for "social justice, safety, and fairness." Mark was also one of the first attorneys to sue the Catholic Church over sexual abuse by clergy, an experience that inspired his first book. His hope is that his books, which deal with an array of social issues (e.g., police shootings, immigration, etc.) through the lens of the legal system, will help provide a fair view of the issues we face today and drive people towards change.

What I loved about this conversation was that we were able to discuss a number of social issues we face from a deeply philosophical perspective. We tried to explore the aspects of human nature that give rise to these issues and also make them extremely complicated to solve. For example we discussed if racism is unique to white people or a general human tendency or if those who support gun control by definition have a moral high ground? Any time I get to explore topics like this and try to learn how we can be better as a society, I feel like there is something good in that. And Mark's willingness to look at these issues from all perspectives allowed for a really rich conversation.

This actually led us to an important, yet simple insight. When we think about topics like these, it is important for us to not lose sight of the point. The point being to remember the humanity in it all. Sure, we should discuss and debate if more gun control is required, or if police need to be better trained against racism to stop black men from dying, or if stricter immigration laws are a good idea. It's even OK to get passionate if you feel like someone is seeing it wrong. But remember what that passion should be rooted in-- a desire to make the world a better place. A desire to help those in need and minimize unnecessary suffering-- not just to win or prove we were "right." As Mark said, that might sound idealistic-- and if so, good. We should strive for the highest ideals. 

Gwendolyn is a PhD and professor of Philosophy at Cal Poly Pomona, an author (Tips from The Professor A Guide to College Success), and has a super successful podcast, Good is in the Details, which directly ties to her commitment to the art of dialogue and passion for discovering ideas. Gwendolyn's knowledge of philosophy and her ability to use it to try and improve her life made her a really interesting guest. She was able to straddle the line between the academic and the practical, in a way that allowed us to explore a lot of interesting topics.

This was evident from the start when Gwendolyn spoke about how her value system changed after she had a daughter a bit later in life. Previously life was about work, productivity, and accomplishments. After having her daughter, it was not that she no longer cared about those things, it was just that how she viewed and measured them changed. As she put it her definition of a "good day" was different now. We used this as a jumping off point to explore some of the more interesting and complex questions in philosophy. 

Perhaps the central thread of the discussion revolved around Aristotle's concept of "eudaimonia." Most people interpret this concept to mean that life is ultimately about finding happiness. But as Gwendolyn explained, it is actually more nuanced than that. Eudaimonia is "rational activity for the soul, for its own sake." There are certainly aspects of happiness in it, but it is also about satisfaction, growth, well-being, and living in alignment with your purpose. As I said, it is a complex topic, but so is philosophy and life for that matter. Many people are frustrated by that. They want simple answers and believe it is a failure of philosophy to not provide them. I understand that view, but I think as Gwendolyn articulated: philosophy's goal is to try to make sense of life, so it's output has to be as complex and subjective as life itself.

"Grace is giving people permission to be human...and it provides people the opportunity to have dignity, regardless of their circumstances." Insights like these make all the time I spend doing this podcast worthwhile. The opportunity to take a concept like "grace", that we all hear all the time, and to force ourselves to reflect on what it actually means. To challenge ourselves to understand why it is so important but also why it is so hard to practice. That is what it is all about for me.

Decoteau, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and founding member of Derute Consulting Cooperative (where he focuses on  how to create and sustain organizations that ensure Black people’s self-determined well-being), had such an interesting and thoughtful perspective on the topic. Through the discussion we started to uncover that grace is a bit of a "numbers game." Often the challenge people have exhibiting grace is that it is too scary. They are worried that they might get burned or end up worse off. And the truth is, they very well might. But what Decoteau explained is from a long-term, portfolio view, we are net better off as a society if we exhibit more grace. So the challenge becomes how do we change the conditions and systems that exist today to allow people to realize the long-term advantages of grace?

As we discussed across multiple topics, housing insecurity, racism, reconstruction, the prison system; human nature seems to lean away from grace. We are engrained with a coding that pushes us towards safety and security. So in many ways it might be unrealistic to expect individuals at scale to evolve to embrace a mindset of grace. Philosophically that becomes a really interesting dynamic, because it suggests we might need to push people towards grace, even if they don't want it. "We", who believe grace is the answer, need to find ways to influence society to buy into it. But anytime we "push" people towards something we believe is "right", it creates an opportunity for exploitation and abuse of power. I loved the opportunity to get to explore these types of topic with Decoteau and hope you guys enjoy it as much as I did.