What is the difference between ethics and morals?
How can we build an ethical society when we don't agree on moral principles?
How can we trust our own opinions when we can't trust our sources of information?
These and many other profound and urgent questions are addressed when the rabbi, Yonason Goldson, changes chairs from host to guest on the Rabbi and the Shrink.
https://www.yonasongoldson.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/yonason-goldson/
https://www.yonasongoldson.com/ethics-ted-talk
1:30 Are compassion and intellect split, or can they be reconciled?
The difference between compassion and kindness
4:00 Is giving an impulse or a choice?
We unlearn our natural wiring to be kind and compassionate
6:30 What are ethics? Are they different from morals?
Where does wisdom come from?
How do we build an ethical society when we don’t agree on moral axioms?
11:00 Why are universal ethical principles so elusive?
Why did Albert Einstein regret publicizing the theory of relativity?
What’s the difference between facts, truth, and reality?
17:00 How do we apply ethics to COVID vaccinations?
We can arrive at different conclusions through intellectual integrity.
Is unethical behavior a kind of virus?
23:00 Can oversensitivity cause us to become increasingly oversensitive?
26:00 How do our beliefs and proclivities influence our perception of truth?
How do we make allowances for our own unconscious biases?
How my willingness to challenge my own stereotypes changed the course of my life.
30:00 Why constructive disagreement is the way of wisdom and unanimity is dangerous?
32:00 Why is the best lie closest to the truth?
How do we have confidence in our own opinions when we can’t trust our sources of information?
When we try to score points by compromising truth, we end up harming our own cause?
38:00 How does ego promote confirmation bias?
Why do people complain about being disillusioned?
Embrace the tension between urgency and equanimity
Greed, speed, laziness, and haziness are the source of most of our problems.
42:00 The word of the day: anucleate: lacking a cell nucleus
We need a sense of self and center, but just as ego leads us into much folly, humility allows us to be flexible to adapt, like red blood cells fitting into capillaries because they lack a nucleus
46:00 Sometimes we just need to be a good member of the audience.
We get so caught up in ourselves that we forget to do the obvious.
What is the difference between ethics and morals?
How can we build an ethical society when we don't agree on moral principles?
How can we trust our own opinions when we can't trust our sources of information?
These and many other profound and urgent questions are addressed when the rabbi, Yonason Goldson, changes chairs from host to guest on the Rabbi and the Shrink.
https://www.yonasongoldson.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/yonason-goldson/
https://www.yonasongoldson.com/ethics-ted-talk
1:30 Are compassion and intellect split, or can they be reconciled?
The difference between compassion and kindness
4:00 Is giving an impulse or a choice?
We unlearn our natural wiring to be kind and compassionate
6:30 What are ethics? Are they different from morals?
Where does wisdom come from?
How do we build an ethical society when we don’t agree on moral axioms?
11:00 Why are universal ethical principles so elusive?
Why did Albert Einstein regret publicizing the theory of relativity?
What’s the difference between facts, truth, and reality?
17:00 How do we apply ethics to COVID vaccinations?
We can arrive at different conclusions through intellectual integrity.
Is unethical behavior a kind of virus?
23:00 Can oversensitivity cause us to become increasingly oversensitive?
26:00 How do our beliefs and proclivities influence our perception of truth?
How do we make allowances for our own unconscious biases?
How my willingness to challenge my own stereotypes changed the course of my life.
30:00 Why constructive disagreement is the way of wisdom and unanimity is dangerous?
32:00 Why is the best lie closest to the truth?
How do we have confidence in our own opinions when we can’t trust our sources of information?
When we try to score points by compromising truth, we end up harming our own cause?
38:00 How does ego promote confirmation bias?
Why do people complain about being disillusioned?
Embrace the tension between urgency and equanimity
Greed, speed, laziness, and haziness are the source of most of our problems.
42:00 The word of the day: anucleate: lacking a cell nucleus
We need a sense of self and center, but just as ego leads us into much folly, humility allows us to be flexible to adapt, like red blood cells fitting into capillaries because they lack a nucleus
46:00 Sometimes we just need to be a good member of the audience.
We get so caught up in ourselves that we forget to do the obvious.
Welcome to the rabbi in the shrink a podcast about everyday ethics unscripted. I am Dr. Margarita Gurri CSB doctor red shoe, and my favorite Rabbi Yonason Goldson. So today's a special episode, after much begging, the rabbi agreed to be the sole guest, because I wanted him to be highlighted when I started you, huh? Yes. Oh, ul. Yo, funny man. When I started this podcast idea a while ago, I guess they get came in November around my Thanksgiving table. And I thought I have to do something to help people think better, and act better in America. And maybe globally. We want global domination for ethics, ethics and graciousness in the Civil War. Doctor, you're the one that make it out. Thank you, sir. So I thought I'm gonna do this. And I thought, you know what, if I'm going to have any partner in the world, it's going to be rather young symbols. So I'm here to say I am delighted and honored that not only do you say yes, to joining vote we've, we've made this ago, we've, we're now in double digits. We've done around 26 episodes now. And I am just delighted. Rob, I wanted to start off by saying, The thing I love about you the most is that you have this clarity and wisdom. And we're living in a time when compassion and intellect seem to be split, especially in the world of ethics. And I think you have made it a beautiful connection. So Robin, take it away. We talked about you what you wanted to start, I want to make this the rabbi show. What do you want to talk about today, sir? Well, before we start, I would like to just get on the record that at some point before too long, I intend to do to you what you're about to do to me. So we will turn about is fair play. But I'd like to maybe just riff on on what you just said this, this distinction between compassion and intellect. I think there's actually a deficit of both in the world right now. But I'm actually actually just worked on an article about the difference between compassion and kindness. What is kindness, kindness is free giving, without calculation, without structure, without limits. And therefore kindness is more of an impulse that we want to develop in ourselves. But at the same time, we want to temper that impulse with judgment. And that's really what from a Jewish point of view, that's what compassion is, it is a response to a need. It is kindness that is filtered through sound judgment and discipline. So for instance, if I'm walking down the street, and passing a liquor store, had a fella steps forward, doesn't look like he's very good shape, smells of alcohol and says, could you give me $10 for some food. So to give him $10 is an act of kindness, to take him and getting him a meal is an act of compassion. Because giving him the money, there's no guarantee he's going to use it in his own best interest. And so having both of those components, cultivating our natural impulse to be kind. And alongside that, developing the judgment and the discipline, based on intellect to know what the compassionate response is, that's what really enables us to make the best contribution we can to a healthier, more vibrant, more integrated society. Oh, see, that's why I picked him. I think the whole idea of compassion, though, as an impulse, some people say, Well, if it's an impulse, does that mean it's an instinct, we're born with it? What do you say to that? I think we are born with it there. There's actually a fascinating study I heard where they they had little children, I forget maybe like four or five years old. And they had different exercises with them, where they could get rewards and have candies, which they could eat. Or they could feed those candies to puppets and they and they videoed them and then they started Their expressions and go to the software now for processing emotions. And they found that the children registered more joy feeding the puppets than eating the candy themselves. And it just goes to show that we are hard wired to be kind to be compassion, we take more joy from giving others joy than we do from keeping it for a spouse. And we we unlearn that as we grow up. So why one thing we have is society with fear, what are we doing that is, is uprooting that impulse or or or quashing that impulse? And what can we do to get it back? Alright, so what I'm going to say is, first off, if you want to read what the good Rabbi has to offer, go to Yasin golson.com. I'm going to put some links here for y'all. He's got a TED talk, he's got what you've you've only written six books Is that it? published six are read, only published six. All right, and he's got a bunch on the deck, I'm teasing him because he's always writing. He's a natural born writer. He's written white papers and all that I'm gonna put all the links in there, you got to check it out. So let's do it at the beginning. It we're gonna work on not I'm teaching compassion, and help people learn how to think and teach thinking, in business and at home. Let's start with the basics. What are ethics? And how does that relate to morality and legality? you addressed that beautifully in your writings? Let's just start off from that. Yeah, that's it gets us into the weeds a little bit. I'm good at the weed sir. You know, weed whacker. So from from a purely technological point of view, in terms of the development of language, the word ethics and the word morals come from the same place, one comes to the Greek one comes through the Latin. So if you go back to the origins, there's really no distinction between them. However, in terms of contemporary usage, particularly with respect to a word like moralizing, the way I would like to frame it is that morality is a set of values that is handed down from a higher authority. Certainly, in Jewish tradition, by the way, you complimented me on my wisdom, and I appreciate the compliment. It's not my wisdom. And Aren't you wise to recognize the ages of learning? Yeah, well, I was fortunate to be able to study for many, many years and teach for many, many years. And of course, you've learned much more teaching than you do. Studying. That's a that's another topic. Yes. But I'm simply communicating the reservoir of wisdom that I've just sipped from. There, there's a whole ocean out there, beyond anything I'm capable of communicating, but it's not my wisdom. It's just, I'm just channeling it as best I can. I will respectfully disagree, but I accept your honest and humble opinion as wrong. We'll go ahead and we're gonna fight this out. Later, we will go ahead. The Jewish Judaism teaches that wisdom is something that is handed down from above. And, and that's really a critical principle in of itself. Because if you say that wisdom, and values and principles are things that we can develop on our own, then you may come to your conclusions, I may come to my conclusions. And there's really no way of resolving them. As long as we can defend our positions from from a place of logic and, and intellectual consistency. There's no way to really determine who's right, who's wrong, who this was, what was a higher moral ground. But the problem is, we don't all agree on the higher authority. We're living in a world where you have different religions, you have no religions, you have different interpretations of religions. And so we simply have to deal with that reality. And that's why I think that ethics is really of primary importance, because whereas morality in this formulation is something that's handed down from on high ethics, I see is something that we try to generate upward from those common sensitivities. You know, Emmanuel Kant basically talked about taking what is personal to me, my intuitions, my moral ethical intuitions and then trying to extend them extrapolate into the universal from the personal. And while that system doesn't work 100% I think it's a useful model for us to come together to have these kinds of conversations, which is why we're having this podcast, so that we can try to find that common ground, we can try to articulate common values, and work together to create a kind of ethical discipline that will serve all of us, do you think you're muted? I am my dogs barking, but I get the reaction sometimes. My dog was excited by your wisdom, what can I say? I'm just teasing you now. I mean, no disrespect when I disagree on the wisdom, but I still think you have at least some of that on your own. I think that what you speak so very well, why is it that we can't come to the basic agreement on ethics, though? I mean, if it's come down through the ages, why are we not listening? What's missing? Um, three letters, to complex that we all suffer from. That's called e. g. o. There's truth. There's wisdom. And then there's what I want truth to be and what I want wisdom to be. And I know from you know, I grew up in the 70s, which was called the me generation. And I think everybody thought that was such a good idea that we never really changed from that. We are obsessed with ourselves. relative truth is a term that was very popular when I was in college. And that, that just handicaps us. Because if we don't believe in absolutes, then we can spin anything to be the way we want it to be. You know, the alternative facts wasn't even me. Fake News. And we were living in a world where people are less and less concerned with reality. With factuality, I mean, it's very difficult for us to come together as a society, if we can't agree on any kind of moral or ethical axioms, if we can't even agree on what reality is. And, you know, one of the most fascinating I talked about this in my book, proverbial beauty that Albert Einstein, years after he had published the theory of relativity, his theories of relativity. He expressed a he expressed a, um, what's the word I'm looking for? he regretted that he had actually promoted this philosophy because he saw what was happening, that once the world saw that physical reality is relative, it was only a short step towards moral relativism. And even though Einstein was not religious, in a conventional sense, he believed in a higher truth, he believed in a higher power. And he saw the way things were headed. And how many decades ago was that? I see in the in the, in the node keeps asking, Is there a difference between fact and truth? That's a really fascinating question and reality fact, truth and reality? Yeah. You know, certainly, there's a, an example one of the one of the great thinkers of the last generation, Rabbi Eliot Eliyahu, dessler. He talks about how the, the Hebrew word, Emma's which we translate as truth is not does not literally translate. Any and, and one of my rabbis uses this example, if you're standing on a street corner, and somebody comes flying past you running breakneck speed. and a moment later, somebody else comes by holding a knife and says, Which way did that guy go? What do you say? Well, if the guy turned right, the proper thing to say you went left. Why? Because I don't want To be I don't want to contribute to the murder the violence. So I told a factual lie. But philosophically the answer I gave was true. Because ultimately, we are supposed to protect people, we are supposed to propagate good in the world, we are not supposed to contribute to violence or harm. So in this particular case, the factual answer was the false answer. Because it takes the world in direction that is not the direction we should be going. The non factual answer is the true answer. Now, of course, you have to be very careful with this. Because this can lead to the kinds of rationalization where the ends justify the means. And we don't really believe that either. So, there's a tremendous amount of nuance, and this is why we've said again, and again, there's no app for being ethical. Every situation is different. And we have to develop our moral muscles, and our ethical mindset so that we can grapple with these gray areas, because that's what it means to be ethical. Wow. Where do you go from that? I think that as a psychologist, I know how easy it is for us to twist facts. And to see things from our own, not only bias are desperately needed way of looking at the world. That is not my fault. It wasn't my mistake, that it was all mom's fault, or dad's fault or whatever. I do believe that it takes a lot of courage. And I love the idea of you, encouraging us all to have better ethical muscles. What can we do to get stronger in this post COVID return as we mourn morphing. Kimmy had a specific question, determining how to handle co workers or associates, well varying degrees of commitment to social community infection protection. That's a reality. But it's based on facts and science. What do you suggest people do about that? that's a that's a big dilemma. Yeah, it is. And, you know, in my home, my my wife and I got vaccinated at the earliest opportunity. My 29 year old son, who is with us for a few more weeks, he has not gotten back to me. And he has made a, I believe, responsible, researched, informed decision based upon the comorbidities based on his age based on his health, based on the unknowns of the vaccine, which I mean, let's be honest, we don't know what might happen years down the line from having received a vaccine. So I can't really fault him for his decision, because he hasn't made it emotional. He's looked at his situation. And while I wouldn't necessarily come to the same conclusion, I can respect the way he got there. And he's still, you know, he's so cautious. He, he goes indoors and public places, he definitely wears a mask, even though that's been relaxed, least for the moment. It's the you people who who arrive at different conclusions, but get there through intellectual integrity. We can respect it even if we disagree. It's what I draw from kivus question is really, how do you deal with people who don't make their decisions rationally? And I'm not sure I have a good answer for that. Some people can be educated, some people don't want to be educated. And then we have to make decisions. When people do we let into our circle to the extent that we can control that, how much should we live in our own interactions, maybe I'm not going to go places where I'm gonna have to encounter people who are doing things. And this really extends beyond masks beyond vaccinations because if you think about a lack of ethics, as is a kind of virus you know, how do we how to protect our own ethical immune system, if we have to deal with people who are basically unethical. You know, Jim Rohn says you are the average of the five people you spend the most time with. And I think that's just a wonderful insight, that we have to choose our associations, and this is in person. And it's also online. It's the it's the media we consume. We have to be selective about the people we let into our lives and let into our bubble. Because we will be influenced by them. And of course, sometimes we don't have complete control, we just have to do the best we can. Well, Sue has a question in an IRA. Sue says, What about your son's roles a carrier that can or will infect others? And I think that's one of the questions that I'm sure he researched. So what what what about that? Well, then that goes to how communicative is the virus, in what settings mean? outdoors, there seems to be minimal danger indoors, there's more danger. And, you know, again, I'm not, I'm not advocating his position. I am merely using him as a an example of someone who worked his way to a decision, and based upon his understanding of all the variables. And there's certainly room to debate whether it's the right thing to do or not. And sometimes we simply have to accept that other people are going to read reach conclusions different from our own. And what we want to do with that, maybe, maybe, even though I can respect the way you got there, maybe I simply can't accept that I'm going to be in contact with somebody who made that decision. See, and I'll speak to that in our, in my life, I got the vaccine right away, my daughter got it when she could, she was younger, so not as eligible. You know, being old I was on a top list is one of the lists you don't want to be a priority for. But I was, I think that some of our dearest friends have chosen not to be vaccinated. They also choose not to wear masks. And so my granddaughter who has an immune system that is not as strong as it could be, we then wear masks Wherever we go, and have to be careful about who we introduce her to and how we introduce her to these things. And our friends have been really lovely about having these discussions, why they've made their decision. And they understand that means that we can't see them. And it's been really nice being able to have these discussions, and the why. And so luckily, there's something in the world called zoo. And so we're able to communicate and my granddaughter can still be with her best girlfriend in the world. But you don't have to wear a mask on zoom. I'll do That's right. So it's interesting. I'm in Israel, and this is sort of tangential but i think it's it's related. In Israel, peanut allergies are virtually unknown. Because they one of the most popular kids snack there is called bomba, which is it looks like a Cheeto, but it's peanut based. I like Mama. Every, every Israeli kid is eating Obama the moment they can get a hard food in their mouth. So what's happened, what's different in America is that because of the fear of peanut allergies, we eliminated peanuts, which prevented little children from developing the Indians immunity, which perpetuated an increase in yield allergies. So there's this peculiar phenomenon where over protecting ourselves ends up putting us more dangerous, but then you've got the added problem is now every airline every restaurant, every food service provider, is now operating under an onus of added restriction and, and limitation because of increased sensitivity. That started from what was, I think, really a misguided attempt to protect people And yet I went flying the other day. And in line to get onto the airplane, there was a whole family eating peanut butter jelly sandwiches. And there had already been an announcement do not bring it into the plane because we have a peanut allergy on the plane today. So, you know, everyone saw the meeting it so I'm assuming maybe as long as it's not an employee? I mean, I don't know what the sphere of of harm is. I mean, How close do you have to be? Is it just? Yeah, I don't know. So I think it's interesting, the airline did nothing, several people pointed it out. And they were all they were all in up in arms. And mind you, some of those people were up in arms wearing the mask like this not covering their nose. So sometimes I think we're busy, not being sure and being half compliant. And before we go to your thing about complaints, I has an interesting issue to address for that. Do facts and truth relate to our assumptions and beliefs? Or how do they relate to facts and fiction, fiction and truth relate to our assumptions? So she gets into a really a really interesting discussion. Here, Jordan Peterson talking about this that, you know, we have so much sensory input coming at us every moment, that if we would have to process everything, our brains would simply shut down. We couldn't help. And so how do we handle our subconscious mind, based upon our experience, based upon all our past, subconsciously, we chose what to filter out and what to pay attention to. And that means that we aren't seeing everything we are perceiving, we are processing everything that's coming at us. And maybe there's something really important that our subconscious has chosen, not to recognize. So we literally can't see or can't perceive. What's in front of us that might be very important. And that we're basing our decisions are assumptions on perceptions that are inadequate, and perhaps, very inaccurate. So it's really the the willingness to hear to see to listen, to expose ourselves, to ideas, to input that takes us outside of our comfort system, comfort zone that that challenges our preconceptions. I mean, this is all why it's so important that people with from different political points of view, talk to each other. And don't simply shut one another down, because you're one of those. I'm one of these, we can't talk to each other. I'm right, you're wrong. Again, you might my own origin story of graduating college with a degree in English going hitchhiking cross country, backpacking across Europe, ending up through a strange series of events in a religious seminary, and discovering that this rabbi who, who looked like an anachronism from 18th century Europe, sounded like a Professor of Philosophy at Johns Hopkins University, which turned out that he was and he shattered my stereotypes. And he forced me to consider a whole worldview that I never would have chosen to look at, if not for being put in that situation, or ending up in that situation. And at least having the willingness to consider ideas and points of view that were very much opposed to my own. And that changed the whole trajectory of my life. And I discovered that that's essential to the whole Jewish tradition. We have two great schools of of learning 2000 years ago, and they had very different perspectives. And history says that when they when they debated in the study hall, they became so passionate, it was as if they fought with swords and spears. But when they left the study hall, they were friends. Because they respected each other. They understood one another because they made the effort to understand one another. And so we still study their debates. And it, it has direct relevance to our way of life because of the intellectual integrity that they both have. And that's what lays the moral foundations of our whole system. Well, I am makes a comment in terms of science. This reminds me of logic from the proof of contradiction. Logic from the proof of contradiction? Well, I'm sure I mean, the, the term that I encountered recently is constructive disagreement. Right? That when that when the High Court would rule on a capital case, and you had 23, sages, 23 judges, and you needed a super majority, because we want to be very careful before we give anybody the Death Note. But if every single member they had unanimous consent, that the that the defendant was guilty, they would not give the death down. Because they have nobody can find an argument in this person's favor. We don't trust our own objectivity. We suspect some unconscious bias in ourselves, and we would rather let a likely person go free, and then take that tiny, tiny chance that we have overlooked something, and would be condemning an innocent person to them. Wow, that's a whole different point of view, isn't it? When I was some, I'm Catholic. So as getting confirmed, the priest father wants Sosa made us all go out in the community and find somebody that we disagreed with him at least on one topic, and then interview them and come back to class and present it lovingly. He said, because you cannot be part of the Catholic Christian community. Unless you can speak lovingly about someone. opinion that is 100% opposite from yours. He said, 1,000%, it doesn't matter. Find someone that you feel like you want to silence and get to. And I think that he might have been Jewish in another life. Who knows? Right? That was pretty good. All right. So from Jenny, we have please talk about how the untruths or partial truths that were fed by government, government agencies or the media affect us when trying to determine how to grapple with ethical decisions. Yeah, that's really powerful question. Because every the best Why? As an ethicist, I'm going to teach you now how to best lie stays as close to the truth as possible. In fact, the best lie is when you actually say the truth in a way that makes it sound like you don't mean it. So if somebody accuses me of stealing, you get to take it, you steal that? Oh, yeah, I stole that. That's the best. Why? Because I told the truth. But I made it sound like I didn't. If something is too far fetched, it is too far from the truth. And it's easy to it's easy to disprove. It's easy to dismiss. But when you pick when you cherry, cherry pick the truth, when you only take those facts and those arguments that support your position. Yeah, this is this is why we have these passionate debates about what's best for the planet to take us into climate change. Well, there, there's a What's his name? Michael Shellenberger think he's one of the most prominent and passionate advocates for addressing climate change. And he says, the people who are doing the most harm to the climate change movement, or climate change zealots, because they are overstating the case, they're, they're misrepresenting the facts. They're, they're not authentically making the argument that's going to convince people and so what they do is they discredit the entire movement. So you really end up doing more harm than good. Even if maybe I can win this argument in the short term. Maybe I can, I can make my my agenda look like there's more to it. But it's like anything else in ethics. You can win a small battle by being unethical, but chances are you going to lose the war. And that the short term gains are generally going to be dramatically offset by long term losses. Whereas what's your ethical it's just the opposite. might appear that you're that you're sacrificing something in the short run. But you're going to gain so much more in the long run? And how are we to keeping with her comment? How are we to make decisions based on information that we're not sure is factual, or even true? That's, that's hard. And it's getting harder, because the media outlets are getting increasingly unreliable. For years, I, my my conservative friends gave me grief because I listen to NPR. And my liberal friends gave me grief, because I listen, I watch Fox News. And I said, it's the best I can do to try to get some kind of a balance. Well, now I hardly listen to either one of them. Because it's like the reporting on two different planets, you can't even recognize the same story. I mean, I, I posted a video a couple of weeks ago, about three headlines from three different news outlets on the same event, that sounded like three to date with three different places three different times. I mean, it's, it's, you know, there is some hope, in alternative media, it takes a lot of time and effort to seek out the podcast. So seek out the independent sources that are reliable, and do invest the time and actually following them. But either we do that, or we simply have to reserve judgment. Because we can't be confident in the information that we're being fed. Let's do had a good solution. Find some people you've got to respect, listen to them. Yeah, I mean, that's, that's Thank you, Sue, is that so I should have said it simply is that it's all about trust. Again, this is another element of ethics. If I'm seen as being ethical, I will be trusted. And as long as I continue to earn that trust, then I have the opportunity to positively influence others. And if I find people I trust that are trustworthy, then I can listen to them, I can accept what they have to say, in good conscience and base my decisions on them. But that requires a certain amount of continual reassessment. Because some people can start out with good, they can start out trustworthy. And they may not always stay that way. And it can happen to all of us that that zealot kind of thinking is amazingly blinding. And sometimes it's insidious. We don't know what's happening. So it goes on to say, we've gone from recording what happened, deciding how to support the interpretation of what we want to see as what happened. And I think that we often want it's confirmation bias. We want to confirm that what we think believe in one is real. Yeah, and it's, you know, our again, it goes back to the ego, once I make a commitment to believe in something, especially once I've said it, and once I've defended it, I mean, have you ever been in the situation where you're having an impassioned Debate or discussion or argument? And you're, you're getting a little heated? And suddenly it dawns on you, that you're wrong? Yes. happen to me? Yes. And what happens in that moment? It's very likely, we double down. And we start arguing your case even hard. Because I don't want to look so foolish. And I made this impassioned case for something. And now suddenly, I'm saying, You know what, I got it wrong. It's that it's that fear of being seen. As flawed, as mistaken, as on the wrong side of things. We just don't like to admit it. When we've made a mistake. And as my college professor, Max Byrd said, and I remember this for 40 years. He said, I don't understand people who complain about being disillusioned. I would like to be relieved of my illusions. I mean, what do you want? Do you want to find out you were wrong, or do you want to continue to be wrong? Yeah, I got this vision. And we're right back where we started. I think everyone needs to have someone say really, really used to gonna stick to that. You know, we need people who are going to disagree with that. I think you're missing the boat there. So. So Jenny says she had liked her answer from earlier. I think the rabbi and the shrink, have to start a news podcast and teach them how to report ethically. Well, I think I would love to have a chance to have a discussion with them on how to do that and how to keep yourself honest because sometimes I think it comes from passion and from good intentions that it gets steered wrong. Sue says Ironically, the same logic and purpose of movie critics find a critic or rating system you agree with in general, let them guide your time. commitment to viewings. That's a really interesting part right? There it is, you ever watch a five star rated movie that you thought was just awful? all the time? So, I mean, apparently some people liked it. And that's fine. We don't all have to agree because this is a matter of taste. It's a matter of personal predisposition, personal opinion, but to be able to separate that, from fact. That's, that's what ethics is all about. I think that keeping ourselves honest for the need for speed. You know, George van said, greed speed, haziness and laziness. So the main reasons why we misbehave as Sue was pointing out charge, we need to do things quickly. I add, since I lived in Miami, craziness, that frenzied something not mental illness. I'm talking about just that, that senses, you know, now we've got to do this. And I want to be right. And it's, I think that we can have a culture that supercharged with following. You know, swimming down, not up to the surface. I mean, I think that becomes a cultural phenomenon. It's very funny to say that because I grew up in Southern California. Yeah, it's just the opposite. Is this chick fil a bagger, that's fine. You go too far that direction. That doesn't work, either. But you know, what's interesting is, there's always going to be this tension. And there should be that's the point there should be a tension between being charged and being shown. And when we try to eliminate that tension, that's where we really get into trouble. I certainly am receptive, embrace it, manage it, and deal with it. Alright, well, I think, I mean, we could talk to you forever, I think it's time for the word of the day. And since you're the guest, and the Word of the Day guy, take it away, Rob on it. Okay, well, it actually fits very well into our conversation, it is timely, a nuclear. So everybody knows what a nucleus is. It's the it's the center, it's the core. Some things don't have a nucleus. And a nucleus, it means lacking a nucleus, a nucleus. And it's, it's interesting, because in biology, the red blood sessile one cells, red blood cells in our bodies, and Ma'am, in mammalian bodies, they lack a nucleus. And that's actually beneficial. Because our capillaries are so narrow, that if there were a nucleus, the blood red, the red blood cells wouldn't be able to fit through them. Because they lack a nucleus, they can stretch out, they can long gate and they can they can slip through. So once that nucleus, at the heart of most human beings, it's we're back to the ego. It's that sort of hard core, that makes us inflexible, that prevents us from adapting, that gets us stuck so that we can't get through those, those narrow or those those difficult passageways. So while it is very important to have a sense of self, it's also important to understand how we are a part of something bigger than ourselves. And that the flexibility to play my part, whatever it is, sometimes I'm going to get out in front and be the be the the first violinist in the orchestra. And sometimes I'm just going to be the member of the of the choir, adding my 2% so that we can all together create beautiful music, and the ability to be flexible, to accept the role that's the right role for the right person the right time. That's really how we make the greatest contribution and ultimately fulfill our own self. Potential and sense of purpose. I was muted again, sorry, as my mother used to say, and sometimes the best way we can contribute is to be a good member of the audience. Hayward well and to let them do their thing without the noises and distractions. And I think that sometimes we feel that if we're not front and center, that we don't have a role, but everyone, as you pointed out, he has a role. That was terrific rabbi, by the way, that I love the way you just said that, because it It took my point a step further. That what's the point of performing if there's no audience? Absolutely. And Sue has a question. That is a topic for another day. And I think it's a good one. How do you know what role is right for you? You asked that it was brilliant. I think we should do that again. How do we know what role is right for us? And in what contexts? Right? Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. He does an important question. And we will we will pursue it well. Alright. So now by I think, faster. Wisdom, sir. I was gonna say it's up to you to get the last word. Well, what? Yes. And I will say something. But these are some last thing you want to say. We don't want you to end on the word of the day. And the reaction to that. What's one thing you want everyone to go home with takeaway? Well, I'll fall back on one of my favorite quotes. Mark Twain said, always do a good job, gratify some and astonish the rest. I love to know if sometimes, when you see somebody do something that is really selfless, really pure. Maybe that's something really dramatic. You know, and I've told this story in our in our show before, but I just love the story that the Simon Sinek tells he was walking down the sidewalk talking to a friend and they saw this guy in front of them it had torn his backpack and stuff was falling out. And so as they talk, they reached down, they picked it up, they caught it, but then said, hey, you've lost this stuff and watch out, you're leaving, lose more. And he said, Thank you. And they walked on their way that the next traffic light, somebody came up to them and said, Hey, I saw what you did for that guy back there. That was really cool. And you know what, why would anybody not do that. But sometimes we just get so caught up in ourselves that we just don't think about doing the obvious. And every time someone does something just a little bit above and beyond. That reminds us that we can do the same thing. And we can expect more from ourselves. We tend to expect more from others and less from ourselves, we'd be a lot better off, we'd expect more from ourselves, and maybe a little less for lunch. Well, that was beautiful. So then, you have a last word. Always Always, I've never short that opinion, sir. That's a joke between my twin sister nine, because we're never shorted opinion. I think that other than the fact that I was brilliant to have chosen you as a partner, and to have the wisdom, to invite you to be a perpetual contributor to the podcast, I could talk to you all day. My bottom line is kind of where you started. And I'm going to ask all the listeners everywhere. Where are your ethics? What's feeding them? How are you sharing them? How are you making the world a better place? In the various roles that you play? Are you the leader right now? Or a good member of the audience? So I asked yourself to do a little thinking, what are your morals, your ethics? How are you handling the law, even if it doesn't make sense? So that's my my final word. And we look forward to seeing you all, we have a very faithful audience. And we look forward to seeing you next Tuesday. And even when the rabbi is not there, I'm still going to meet and then we'll we have some times we're going to ask questions of y'all and get your input and those will not be publicized. Oh, and Malcolm says this session ever Yeah, it's all run by you know, and Kimmy says Have a lovely week. Everyone, many blessings be safe. And as the rabbi always says, ethically or take care