Data/transcripts/6I5I56uVvLw_20241225194801.txt

ANDREW HUBERMAN: Welcome to
the Huberman Lab podcast,
where we discuss science
and science-based tools
for everyday life.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
I'm Andrew Huberman,
and I'm a Professor
of Neurobiology
and Ophthalmology
at Stanford School of Medicine.
Today, my guest is
Dr. Lex Fridman Dr.
Lex Fridman is an expert
in electrical and computer
engineering, artificial
intelligence, and robotics.
He is also the host of the
Lex Fridman Podcast, which
initially started
as a podcast focus
on technology and
science of various kinds,
including computer
science and physics,
but rapidly evolved to include
guests and other topics
as a matter of focus,
including sport.
For instance, Dr. Lex
Freedman is a Black Belt
in Brazilian jujitsu.
And he's had numerous
guests on who
come from the fields
of Brazilian jujitsu,
both from the coaching side
and from the competitor side.
He also has shown
an active interest
in topics such as chess
and essentially anything
that involves intense activation
and engagement of the mind
and/or body.
In fact, the Lex
Fridman podcast has
evolved to take on
very difficult topics
such as mental health-- he's
had various psychiatrists
and other guests on that
relate to mental health
and mental illness, as well as
guest focused on geopolitics
and some of the more
controversial issues
that face our times.
He's had comedians, he's had
scientists, he's had friends,
he's had enemies on his podcast.
Lex has a phenomenal, I would
say a 1 in an eight billion
ability to find these people,
make them comfortable,
and in that comfort, both
try to understand them
and to confront them and to
push them so that we all learn.
All of which is to say that
Lex Fridman is no longer just
an accomplished scientist,
he certainly is that.
But he has also become one of
the more preeminent thought
leaders on the planet.
And if there's anything
that really captures
the essence of Lex
Fridman, it's his love
of learning, his desire to share
with us, the human experience,
and to broaden that experience
so that we all may benefit.
In many ways, our discussion
during today's episode
captures the many
facets of Lex Fridman,
although no conversation, of
course, could capture them all.
We sit down to the
conversation just days
after Lex returned from
Ukraine, where he deliberately
placed himself into the
tension of that environment
in order to understand the
geopolitics of the region
and to understand
exactly what was
happening at the level of the
ground and the people there.
You may notice that he carries
quite a lot of both, emotion
and knowledge and understanding.
And yet in a very
classic Lex Fridman way,
you'll notice that
he's able to zoom out
of his own experience around
any number of different topics
and view them through
a variety of lenses
so that first of all, everyone
feel included, but most of all,
so that everyone learned
something new, that
is to gain new perspective.
Our discussion also ventures
into the waters of social media
and how that
landscape is changing
the way that science and
technology are communicated.
We also get into the topics of
motivation drive and purpose,
both finding it and executing
on that drive and purpose.
I should mention that this is
episode 100 of the Huberman Lab
Podcast.
And I would be remiss
if I did not tell you
that there would be no
Huberman Lab Podcast,
were it not for Lex Fridman.
I was a fan of the
Lex Fridman Podcast
long before I was ever invited
on to the podcast as a guest.
And after our first
recording, Lex
was the one that suggested
that I start a podcast.
He only gave me two
pieces of advice.
The first piece of advice
was, start a podcast.
And the second
piece of advice was
that I not just make it me
blabbing into the microphone
and staring at the camera.
So I can safely say
that I at least followed
half of his advice, and that
I am ever grateful for Lex,
both as a friend, a
colleague in science,
and now fellow podcaster for
making the suggestion that we
start this podcast.
I already mentioned
a few of the topics
covered on today's podcast.
But I can assure you that
there is far more to the person
that many of us
know as Lex Fridman.
If you are somebody interested
in artificial intelligence,
engineering, or robotics,
today's discussion
is most certainly for you.
And if you are not,
but you are somebody
who is interested in world
politics, and more importantly,
the human experience,
both the individual
and the collective
human experience,
Lex shares what can
only be described
as incredible insights
into what he views
as the human experience and what
is optimal in order to derive
from our time on this planet.
Before we begin, I'd
like to emphasize
that this podcast is separate
from my teaching and research
roles at Stanford.
It is however, part of
my desire and effort
to bring zero cost to
consumer information
about science and
science-related tools
to the general public.
In keeping with
that theme, I'd like
to thank the sponsors
of today's podcast.
Our first sponsor is LMNT.
LMNT is an electrolyte drink
with everything you need
and nothing you don't.
That means the electrolytes,
sodium, potassium,
and magnesium are in LMNT
in the correct ratios.
But it has no sugar.
As I mentioned before
on the podcast,
electrolytes are
critical to the function
of every cell in the
body, and especially
the cells in your brain,
meaning neurons or nerve cells.
Indeed, the ability
for nerve cells
to be active and communicate
with one another critically
depends on sodium,
potassium, and magnesium.
You can get electrolytes
from a variety of sources.
But it's often hard to get
them in the proper ratios,
even from food.
So if you're somebody who's
exercising a lot and sweating,
or if you're somebody
following, for instance,
a low carbohydrate or even a
semi-low carbohydrate diet,
that will cause you to
excrete electrolytes.
I tend to have my
LMNT first thing
in the morning when I wake up
or within the first few hours
of waking, any time while
or after I'm exercising,
or I've sweat a lot, such
as exiting the sauna.
If you'd like to try LMNT
you can go to drinkLMNT--
that's LMNT..com/Huberman to
claim a free element sample
pack with your purchase.
Again, that's drinkLMNT,
LMNT.com/Huberman to my free
sample pack.
Today's episode is also
brought to us by Levels.
Levels is a program
that lets you
see how different foods affect
your health by giving you
real-time feedback on your
diet using a continuous glucose
monitor.
Now blood glucose or blood
sugar is a critical aspect
of your immediate
and long term health,
and indeed, your
feelings of vigor
and mental clarity and
well-being at any moment.
One of the key things is to know
how different foods and food
combinations and
timing of food intake
is impacting blood glucose.
And with Levels,
you're able to assess
all of that in real time.
I tried Levels.
And what it taught
me, for instance,
was that I can eat certain
foods at certain times of day.
But if I eat them at
other times a day,
I get a blood sugar crash.
It also taught me,
for instance, how
to space my exercise
and my food intake.
It turns out for me, exercising
fasted is far more beneficial.
That's something I
learned using Levels.
And it's completely
transformed, not
just the spacing and timing
of my diet and exercise,
but also use of things like
the sauna and other activities.
It's been a tremendous
learning for me
that's really shaped an enormous
number of factors in my life
that have led to me feeling
far more vigorous with far more
mental focus and physical
strength and endurance.
So if you're interested in
learning more about Levels
and trying a continuous
glucose monitor yourself,
go to levels.link/Huberman.
Again that's levels.link,
L-I-N-K/Huberman.
Today's episode is also
brought to us by Eight Sleep.
Eight Sleep make smart mattress
covers with cooling, heating,
and sleep tracking capacity.
I've talked many
times on this podcast
about the critical relationship
between sleep and body
temperature.
That is in order to fall
asleep and stay deeply asleep
throughout the night,
our body temperature
needs to drop by
about 1 to 3 degrees.
And conversely when we
wake up in the morning,
that is in large part,
because of our body heating up
by 1 to 3 degrees.
Now people have different
core body temperatures.
And they tend to run colder or
hotter throughout the night.
Eight Sleep allows you
to adjust the temperature
of your sleeping
environment so that you
have the optimal temperature
that gets you the best night's
sleep.
I started sleeping on
an Eight Sleep mattress
cover about eight months ago.
And it has completely
transformed my sleep.
I sleep so much deeper,
I wake up far less
during the middle of
the night, if at all,
and I wake up feeling far
better than I ever have,
even after the same
amount of sleep.
If you want to try
Eight Sleep, you can go
to eightsleep.com/Huberman to
save up to $400 off their sleep
fit holiday bundle, which
includes their new Pod 3 cover.
Eight Sleep currently
ships in the USA,
Canada, United Kingdom,
select countries in the EU,
and Australia.
Again, that's
eightsleep.com/Huberman.
And now for my discussion with
Dr. Lex Fridman, welcome back.
LEX FRIDMAN: It's good
to be back in a bedroom.
This feels like a porn set.
I apologize to open that way.
I've never been in a porn
set, so I should admit this.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Our
studio has being renovated.
So here we are for the
monumental recording
of episode 100--
LEX FRIDMAN: Episode
100 of the Huberman Lab
Podcast, which was inspired
by the Lex Fridman Podcast.
Some people already
know the story.
But I'll repeat it again
for those that don't.
There would not be a
Huberman Lab Podcast,
were it not for Lex Fridman.
Because after recording
as a guest on his podcast
a few years ago, he
made the suggestion
that I start a podcast.
And he explained
to me how it works.
And he said, "You
should start a podcast.
But just make sure
that it's not you
blabbing the whole
time, Andrew."
And I only sort of
followed the advice.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah,
well, you surprised me,
surprised the world, that
you're able to talk for hours
and cite some of the
best science going on
and be able to
give people advice
without many interruptions
or edits or any of that.
I mean, that takes an
incredible amount of skill
that you're probably born with.
And some of it is developed.
I mean, the whole science
community is proud of you, man.
Stanford is proud of you.
So yeah, it's a beautiful thing.
It was really surprising.
Because it's unclear
how a scientist can
do a great podcast
that's not just
shooting the shit
about random stuff,
but really is giving very
structured, good advice
that's boiling down the
state of the art science
into something that's
actually useful for people.
So that was impressive.
It's like holy shit, he
actually pulled this off.
And doing it every week
on a different topic--
I mean, I'm usually
positive, especially
for people I love and support.
But damn, I thought,
there's no way
he's going to be able to pull
this off week after week.
And it's been only getting
better and better and better.
Had a whole rant on a recent
podcast, I forget with who,
of how awesome you are
with Rana el Kaliouby.
She's a emotion recognition
person, AI person.
And then she didn't
know who you were.
And I was like, what
the hell do you mean?
And I just went on this whole
rant of how awesome you are.
Is hilarious.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, I'm
very gratified to hear this.
I'm-- it's a little
uncomfortable for me to hear
but listen, I'm just really
happy if people are getting
information that they like
and can make actionable.
And it was inspired by you.
And look right back at you.
I've followed a number of
your structural formats.
Attire, I don't wear a tie.
I'm constantly reminded
about this by my father.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Who says
what-- he'd saw my podcast.
And he was like, why
don't you dress properly
like your friend Lex?
He literally said that.
And it's a debate that
goes back and forth.
But nonetheless--
LEX FRIDMAN: How does it feel?
Episode 100.
How does it feel?
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
You know, I think.
LEX FRIDMAN: Can you
imagine you're here?
You hear after so many
episodes and done so much.
I mean, the number of
hours is just insane.
The amount of
passion, the amount
of work you put into
this, what's it feel like?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It feels great.
And it feels very much
like the horizon is still
at the same distance
in front of me.
Every episode, I just try
and get information there.
And the process that we
talked about on your podcast.
We won't go into it of
collecting information,
distilling it down
to some simple notes,
walking around,
listening to music,
trying to figure out
what the motifs are,
and then-- as just like you,
I don't use a teleprompter
or anything like that.
There's very minimal notes.
So it feels great,
and I love it.
And again, I'm just grateful
to you for inspiring it.
And I just want to keep
going and do more of it.
And I should say
I am also relieved
that we're sitting here because
you recently went overseas
to a very intense war zone,
literally, the Ukraine.
And the entire time
that you were there,
I was genuinely concerned.
The world's a unpredictable
place, in general.
And we don't always get the only
vote and what happens to us.
So first of all,
welcome back safely,
one peace, one alive peace.
And what was that like?
I mean, at a broad level,
at a specific level,
what drew you there?
What surprised you?
And how do you think it changed
you in coming back here?
LEX FRIDMAN: I think
there's a lot to say.
But first, it is
really good to be back.
One of the things
that when you go
to a difficult part of the world
or a part of the world that's
going through
something difficult,
you really appreciate how
great it is to be an American.
Everything.
The easy access to food.
Despite what people think, the
stable, reliable rule of law.
The lack of corruption in that
you can trust that if you start
a business or if you take
on various pursuits in life
that there's not going to
be at-scale manipulation
of your efforts such
that you can't succeed.
So this kind of
capitalism is in it's--
the ideal of capitalism is
really still burning bright
in this country.
And it really makes you
appreciate those aspects.
And also just the ability to
have a home for generations,
across generations.
So you can have your
grandfather live
in Kentucky in a certain city.
And then his children lived
there, and you live there,
and then it just
continues on and on.
That's the kind of thing you can
have when you don't have war.
Because war destroys
entire communities.
And it destroys
histories, generations,
like life stories that stretch
across the generations.
So--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah yeah.
I didn't even think about
that until you said just now.
But photographs, hard drives
get destroyed or just abandoned.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Libraries.
I mean, nowadays, things
exist in the cloud
but are still a lot of--
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
--material goods
that are irreplaceable, right.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, even in rural
parts of the United States,
they don't exist in
the cloud, right.
A lot of people still, well,
even in towns, they still
love the physical photo
album of your family.
A lot of people still
store their photographs
of families in the VHS tapes and
all that kind of stuff, yeah.
But I think-- there's so many
things I've learned and really
felt the lessons.
One of which is nobody gives a
damn when your photos are gone
and all that kind of
stuff, your house is gone.
The thing time and time
again I saw for people
that lost everything is how
happy they are for the people.
They love the friends, the
family that are still alive.
That's the only thing
they talk about.
That, in fact, they
don't mention actually
with much dramatic sort
of vigor about the trauma
of losing your home.
They're just non-stop saying
how lucky they are that person X
person Y is still here.
And that makes you realize
that when you lose everything,
it's still--
it makes you realize
what really matters,
which is the people
in your life.
I mean, a lot of people kind
of realize that later in life,
when you're facing mortality,
when you're facing your death,
or you get a cancer
diagnosis, that kind of stuff.
I think people here in
America, in California,
with the fires, you you
can still lose your home.
You are going to
realize, like, nah.
It doesn't really matter.
It's a pain in the ass
but what matters is still
the family, the
people, and so on.
I think the most intense thing--
I talked to several hundred
people, some of which
is recorded.
I've really been
struggling to put that out
because I have to
edit it myself.
And so you're talking about 30,
40 hours of footage, and it--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Is
emotionally struggling?
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
It is extremely difficult.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Are you
like emotional struggle?
LEX FRIDMAN: It's
extremely difficult.
So I talked to a
lot of politicians.
The number two in the
country, number three.
I'll be back there to
talk to the president
to do a three-hour conversation.
Those are easy to edit.
They're really heartfelt
and thoughtful folks
from different perspectives
on the geopolitics of the war.
But the ones that
really hard to edit
is like grandmas that are
in the middle of nowhere.
They lost everything.
They still have hope,
they still have love.
And some of them have--
some of them, many of
them, unfortunately,
have now hate in their heart.
So in February, when
Russia invaded Ukraine,
this is the thing I
realized about War.
One of the most
painful one lessons
is that war creates
generational hate.
We sometimes think about war
as a thing that kills people,
kills civilians, kills
soldiers, takes away lives,
injures people.
But we don't
directly think about
the secondary and
tertiary effects
of that which lasts decades.
Which is anyone who's lost
the father or a mother
or a daughter or a son,
they now hate not just
the individual
soldiers or the leaders
that invaded their country but
the entirety of the people.
So it's not that they
hate Vladimir Putin
or hate the Russian military.
They hate Russian people.
So that tears the
fabric of a thing
that, for me-- my half
my family's from Ukraine,
half of my family
is from Russia.
But there is--
I remember the pain the
triumph of World War two
still resonates through
my entire family tree.
And so, you remember when
the Russians and Ukrainians
fought together against
this Nazi invasion.
You remember a lot of that.
And now, to see the fabric
of this peoples torn apart
completely with hate is really,
really difficult. For me,
just to realize that
things will just never
be the same on this particular
cultural, historical aspect.
But also, there's so many
painful ways in which
things will never be the same.
Which is we've seen that
it's possible to have
a major hot war in
the 21st century.
I think a lot of people
are watching this.
China is watching this.
India is watching this.
United States is watching this
and thinking we can actually
have a large-scale war.
And I think the lessons
learned from that.
Might be the kind that lead
to a major World War III
in the 21st century.
So one of the things I realized
watching the whole scene
is that we don't know
shit about what's going
to happen in the 21st century.
And it might-- we kind of have
this intuition like surely
there's not going
to be another war.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Like
we'll just coast.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, pandemic.
Yeah--
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
And back to normal.
LEX FRIDMAN: Back to normal--
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Whatever that is.
LEX FRIDMAN: But you
have to remember,
at the end of World War I,
as Woodrow Wilson called it,
the war to end all wars.
Nobody ironically,
in a dark way,
it was also the roaring 20s
when people believed this.
There will never be
another World War.
And 20 years after that,
the rise of Nazi Germany.
A charismatic leader
that captivated
the minds of
millions and built up
a military that can
take on the whole world.
And so it makes you realize
that this is still possible.
This is still possible.
And then the tension.
You see this-- the media
machine, the propaganda
machine, that I've gotten
to see every aspect of.
It's still fueling that division
between America and China.
Between Russia and India.
And then Africa has
a complicated thing
that's trying to figure
out who are they with,
who are they against.
And just this tension is
building and building.
And like it makes you
realize like we might--
the thing that might
shake human civilization
may not be so far off.
That's a realization
you get to really feel.
I mean, there's all
kinds of other lessons.
And one of which is propaganda.
Is I got to--
I get a lot of letters, emails.
And some of them are full
of really intense language,
full of hate from
every side toward me.
Or, well, the hate is
towards me as representing
side X. And X stands as a
variable for every side.
So either I'm a Zelensky
show, or I'm a Putin show,
or I'm a NATO show,
or I'm an America--
America show--
American empire show.
Or I'm a Democrat
or a Republican.
Because it's already been,
in this country, politicized.
I think there's a sense of
Ukraine is this place that's
full of corruption.
Why are we sending money there?
I think that's kind
of the messaging
on the Republican side.
On the Democratic side--
I'm not even keeping track
of the actual messaging
and the conspiracy theories
and the narratives,
but they are-- the
tension is there.
And I get to feel it directly.
And what you get to
really experience
is there's a large
number of narratives
that all are extremely
confident themselves that they
know the truth.
People are convinced,
first of all,
that they're not being lied to.
People in Russia think
there's no propaganda.
They think that,
yes, yes, there is
like state-sponsored
propaganda, but we're all
smart enough to ignore the lame
propaganda that's everywhere.
They know that we can think
on our own, we know the truth,
and everybody kind of
speaks in this way.
Everybody in the
United States says,
well, yes, there's
mainstream media,
they're full of messaging and
propaganda, but we're smart.
We can think on our own.
Of course, we see through that.
Everybody says this.
And then the conclusion
of their thought
is often hatred towards some
group, whatever that group is.
And the more you've
lost, the more
intense the feeling of hatred.
It's a really
difficult field to walk
through calmly and
with an open mind
and try to understand
what's really going on.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
It's super intense.
That's the only words that
come to mind as I hear this.
You mentioned something that
it seems that hate generalizes.
It's against an entire
group or an entire country.
Why do you think it is that
hate generalizes and that love
may or may not generalize?
LEX FRIDMAN: I've
had-- sort of one,
as you can imagine, the
kind of question I asked
is, do you have love
or hate in your heart?
It's a question I
asked almost everybody.
And then I would dig
into this exact question
that you're asking.
I think some of the most
beautiful things I've
heard which is people
that are full of hate
are able to
self-introspect about it.
They know they shouldn't feel
it, but they can't help it.
It's not-- they know that
ultimately the thing that
helps them and helps everyone
is to feel love for fellow man,
but they can't help it.
They know.
It's like a drug, they
say like hate escalates,
it's like a vicious spiral.
You just can't help it.
And the question I
also asked is, do you
think you'll ever be
able to forgive Russia?
And after much thought almost--
it's split, but most
people will say no.
I will never be able to forgive.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And because
of the generalization
you talked about earlier, that
could even include all Ru--
LEX FRIDMAN: All Russians.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
In that statements,
they mean all Russians.
LEX FRIDMAN: Because
if you do nothing
that's as bad or worse
than being part of the army
that invades.
So the people that are
just sitting there,
the good Germans, the people
that are just quietly going
on with their lives, you're
just as bad, if not worse,
is their perspective.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Earlier, you said
that going over
to the Ukraine now
allowed you to
realize just so many
of the positives of being
here in the United States.
I have a good friend.
We both know him.
I won't name him
by name, but we've
communicated the
three of us from
tier-one Special Operations.
He spent years
doing deployments.
Really amazing individual.
And I remember when the pandemic
hit, he said on a text thread
you know, Americans aren't used
to the government interfering
with their plans.
Around the world,
many people are
familiar with governments
dramatically interfering
with their plans.
Sometimes even in a
seemingly random way.
Here we were not
braced for that.
I mean, we get speeding
tickets, and there's lines
to vote and things like that.
But I think the pandemic
was one of the first times,
at least in my life, that I
can remember where it really
seemed like the government was
impeding what people naturally
wanted to do.
And that was a shock
for people here.
And I have a what might
seem like a somewhat
mundane question,
but it's something
that I saw on social media.
A lot of people were
asking me to ask you,
and I was curious about too.
What was a typical
day like over there?
Were sleeping in a bed, were
you sleeping on the ground?
Everyone seems to want to know.
What were you eating?
Were you eating once a day?
Were you eating your steak?
Or were you-- were you in fairly
deprived conditions over there?
I saw a couple photos
that you posted out
of doors in front of rubble.
With pith helmet on in one case.
What was that typical
day like over there?
LEX FRIDMAN: So
there's two modes.
One of them-- I spent
a lot of time in Kyiv,
which is much safer than--
it may be obvious to state
but for people who don't know,
it's in the middle
of the country,
and it's much safer
than the actual front.
The word the battle
is happening.
So much, much safer
than Kyiv even
is Lviv which is the
Western part of the country.
So the times I
spent in Kyiv were
fundamentally different than
the time I spent at the front.
And I went to the
Kherson region,
which is where a lot of really
heated battle was happening.
There's several areas.
So there's Kharkiv.
It's in the Northeast
of the country.
And then there's Donbas region,
which is East of the country.
And then there's Kherson
region, which, by the way,
I'm not good at geography, so
is the Southeast of the country.
And that's where, at
least when I was there,
was a lot of really
heated fighting happening.
So when I was in
the Kherson region,
it's what you would imagine.
The place-- I stayed in a
hotel where all the lights
have to stay off.
So the entire town,
all the lights are off.
You have to navigate
through the darkness
and use your phone
to shine, and so on.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: This is
terrible for the circadian
system.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
LEX FRIDMAN: That's exactly--
I was this-- how can I do this?
Where's my element
and Athletic Greens?
How can I function?
No.
There's I think it was balanced
by the deep appreciation
of being alive.
[LAUGHTER]
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Right now I-- mean,
this is the reason
that I asked--
LEX FRIDMAN: Stress-wise.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
This is the reason
I ask is we get used to all
these creature comforts.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And
we don't need them,
but we often come
to depend on them
in a way that makes us
feel like we need them.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah,
but very quickly,
there's something about
the intensity of life
that you see in people's
eyes because they're
living through a war that makes
you forget all those creature
comforts.
And it was actually--
I'm somebody who hates
traveling and so on.
I love the creature habits.
I love-- I love the
comfort of the ritual right
but all of that was
forgotten very quickly.
Just the intensity of
feeling, the intensity of
love that people have for
each other, that was obvious.
In terms of food--
so there's a curfew.
So depends on what
part of the country.
But usually, you basically have
to scamper home like 9:00 PM.
So the hard curfew in a lot of
places is 11:00 PM at night.
But by then, you
have to be home.
So-- in some places, it's 10:00.
So at 9:00 PM, you
start going home.
Which, for me, was
kind of wonderful
also because I get to spend--
I get to be forced to spend time
alone and think for many hours
in wherever I'm staying.
Which is really nice.
And everywhere there's a
calmness and the quietness
to the whole thing.
In terms of food, once a day.
Just the food is incredibly
cheap and incredibly delicious.
People are still--
one of the things
they can still take pride
in is making the best
possible food they can.
So meat-- but they do
admire American meat,
so the meat is not as great as
it could be in that country.
But I ate borsch every day,
all that kind of stuff.
Mostly meat.
So spend the entire day--
wake up in the
morning with coffee,
spend the entire day
talking to people.
Which for me is very
difficult because
of the intensity of the story.
It's one after the
other after the other.
We just talk to regular
people, talk to soldiers,
talk to politicians,
all kinds of soldiers.
I talked to people there who
are doing rescue missions, so
Americans.
I hung out with Tim Kennedy.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh, yeah?
The great Tim Kennedy.
LEX FRIDMAN: The great
Tim Kennedy, who--
also him and many
others revealed to me
one of the many
reasons I'm proud to be
an American is how trained
and skilled and effective
American soldiers are.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I guess for
listeners of this podcast maybe
we should familiarize
them with who
Tim Kennedy is because I
realized that a number of them
will know, but--
LEX FRIDMAN: How do you do that?
How do you try to
summarize a man?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Right.
We can be accurate
but not exhaustive,
as any good data are
accurate but not exhaustive.
Very skilled and accomplished
MMA fighter, very skilled
and accomplished former
Special Operations member,
American Patriot, and
podcaster too, right?
Does he have his own podcast?
LEX FRIDMAN: Maybe.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: OK.
LEX FRIDMAN: Maybe.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: We know Andy
Stumpf has his own podcast.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
LEX FRIDMAN: Which is
an amazing podcast.
Yeah, Andy's great.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
Clearing Hot podcast
with Andy Stumpf.
LEX FRIDMAN: But
also Tim Kennedy
is like the embodiment of
America to the most beautiful
and the most ridiculous degree.
So he's like what you imagine--
what is it, Team America?
I just imagine him
shirtless on a tank rolling
into enemy territory
just screaming
at the top of his lungs.
That's just his personality.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
But not posturing.
He actually does the
work, as they say.
LEX FRIDMAN: So
this is the thing.
He really embodies that.
Now, some of that is just
his personality and humor.
I'd like to sort of comment
on the humor of things,
not just with him.
There's very one other
interesting thing I've learned.
But also when he's
actually helping people
he's extremely good
at what he does,
which is building
teams that rescue, that
go into the most dangerous areas
of Ukraine, dangerous areas
anywhere else, and
they get the job done.
And one of the things I
heard time and time again,
which what's really
interesting to me,
that Ukrainian soldiers said
that comparing Ukrainian,
Russian, and American
soldiers, American soldiers
are the bravest, which was
very interesting for me
to hear given how
high the morale is
for the Ukrainian soldiers.
But that just
reveals that training
enables you to be brave.
So it's not just about how well
trained they are and so on,
it's how intense and ferocious
they are in the fighting.
And it makes you realize,
this is American army,
not just through the technology,
especially the special force
guys.
They're still one of
the most effective
and terrifying
armies in the world.
And listen, just
for context, I'm
somebody who is, for the most
part, anti-war, a pacifist.
But you get to see some of the
realities of war kind of wake
you up to what needs to get
done to protect sovereignty,
to protect some of the values,
to protect civilians and homes
and all that kind of stuff.
Sometimes war has to happen.
And I should also
mention the Russian side
because while I haven't gotten
to experience the Russian side
yet I do fully plan to travel to
Russia, as I've told everybody.
I was very upfront with
everybody about this.
I would like to hear
the story of Russians.
But I do know from the Ukrainian
side, like the grandmas--
I love grandmas.
They told me stories that
the Russians really--
the ones that entered their
villages, they really, really
believed they're saving
Ukraine from Nazis,
from Nazi occupation.
So they feel that
Ukraine is under control
of Nazi organizations
and they believe
they're saving
the country that's
their brothers and sisters.
I think propaganda and I think
truth is a very difficult thing
to arrive with in that war zone.
I think in the 21st
century one of the things
you realize that so much of war,
even more so than in the past,
is an information war.
And people that just use Twitter
for their source of information
might be surprised to know
how much misinformation there
is on Twitter, like real
narratives being sold,
and so it's really hard
to know who to believe.
And through all of that you
have to try to keep an open mind
and ultimately
ignore the powerful
and listen to actual
citizens, actual people.
That's the other
maybe obvious lesson
is that war is waged by
powerful, rich people,
and it's the poor
people that suffer.
And that's just visible
time and time again.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: You mentioned
the fact that people still
enjoy food or the
pleasure of cooking,
or there's occasional humor
or maybe frequent humor.
I know Jocko Willink has
talked about this in warfare
in that all the elements of
the human spirit and condition
still emerge at various times.
I find this amazing,
and you and I
have had conversations
about this before,
but the aperture of the mind.
The classic story
that comes to mind
is the one of Viktor
Frankl or Nelson Mandela.
You put somebody into a
small box of confinement
and some people break
under those conditions
and other people
find entire stories
within a centimeter
of concrete that
can occupy them, real stories
and richness or humor or love
or fascination and surprise.
And I find this so interesting
that the mind is so adaptable.
We talked about creature
comforts and then lack
of creature comforts and
the way that we can adapt,
and yet, humans are
always striving,
it seems, or one would hope,
for these better conditions
to better their conditions.
So as you've come back--
and you've been here
now back in the States
for how long after your trip?
LEX FRIDMAN: Depends
on this podcast
release but it felt
like I've never
left, so practically
speaking, a couple months.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: OK.
Yeah.
And we won't be shy.
We're recording
this mid-September.
LEX FRIDMAN: We actually
recorded this several years ago
so we're anticipating
in the future.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
This is where we're
going to start telling you this
is a simulation, you and Joe.
I'm still trying to figure
out what that actually means.
I'd like to take a quick
break and acknowledge
one of our sponsors,
Athletic Greens.
Athletic Greens, now called AG1,
is a vitamin mineral probiotic
drink that covers all of your
foundational nutritional needs.
I've been taking Athletic
Greens since 2012
so I'm delighted that they're
sponsoring the podcast.
The reason I started taking
Athletic Greens and the reason
I still take Athletic Greens,
once or usually twice a day,
is that it gets
me the probiotics
that I need for gut health.
Our gut is very important.
It's populated by
gut microbiota that
communicate with the brain, the
immune system, and basically
all the biological
systems of our body
to strongly impact our
immediate and long term health,
and those probiotics
in Athletic Greens
are optimal and vital
for microbiotic health.
In addition, Athletic
Greens contains
a number of adaptogens,
vitamins, and minerals
that make sure that all of my
foundational nutritional needs
are met, and it tastes great.
If you'd like to try
Athletic Greens you can go
to athleticgreens.com/huberman
and they'll give you five free
travel packs that make it really
easy to mix up Athletic Greens
while you're on the road, in the
car, on the plane, et cetera,
and they'll give you a year
supply of vitamin D3, K2.
Again, that's
athleticgreens.com/huberman
to get the five free travel
packs and the year supply
of vitamin D3, K2.
I know I speak for
many people when
I say that we are very
happy that you're back.
We know that it's not going
to be the first and last trip,
that there will be
others, and that you'll
be going to Russia as well
and presumably other places
as well in order to explore.
And I have to say, as a
podcaster and as your friend,
I was really inspired at
your sense of adventure
and your sense of
not just adventure,
but thoughtful,
respectful adventure.
You understood what
you were doing.
You weren't just going there
to get some wartime footage
or something.
This wasn't a kick or a thrill.
This is really serious
and remains serious.
So thank you for doing it,
and please, next time you go,
bring Tim Kennedy again.
LEX FRIDMAN: I feel like
Tim Kennedy gets you into--
will take you because
he really loves
going to the most dangerous
places and helping people.
So I think he'd get me into
more trouble than it's worth.
And I should mention
that, I mean,
there's many reasons I
went, but it's definitely
not something I take
lightly or want to do again.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Right.
LEX FRIDMAN: So I'm doing
things that I don't want to do,
I just feel like I have to.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
You're compelled.
LEX FRIDMAN: So I
don't think there's--
now I'll definitely talk
about it, as we all should.
There's different
areas of the world that
are seeing a lot of suffering.
Yemen.
There's so many atrocities
going on in the world today,
but this one is just
personal to me so I want to--
I feel like I'm qualified
just because of the language.
So most of the talking,
by the way, I was doing,
it was in Russian.
And so because of the language,
because of my history,
I felt like I had to do
this particular thing.
I think it's, in many ways,
stupid and dangerous, and that
was made clear to me.
But I do many things
of this nature
because the heart
pulls towards that.
But also there's
a freedom to not--
I'm afraid of death, but I
think there's a freedom to--
it's almost like,
OK, if I die, I
want to take full advantage of
not having a family currently.
I feel like when you
have a family there's
a responsibility for others
so you immediately become
more conservative and careful.
I feel like I want to
take full advantage
of this particular
moment in my life
when you can be a little
bit more accepting of risk.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
you should definitely
reproduce at some point.
Maybe before next time you
should just freeze some sperm.
LEX FRIDMAN: I--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Really, that--
LEX FRIDMAN: Is that what
you do with ice baths?
Is how that works?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: You
know, it's interesting.
There's always an opportunity
to do some science protocols.
You know that there are
products on the internet,
and there are actually a few
decent manuscripts looking
at how cold exposure can
increase testosterone levels,
but it doesn't happen
by the cold directly.
Good scientists, as the authors
of those papers, were and are,
realized that it's the
vasoconstriction and then
the vasodilation.
As people warm up again
there's increased blood flow
to the testicles,
and in women it
seems there's probably
increased blood flow
to the reproductive organs as
well after people warm back up.
So that seems to cause some
sort of hyper nourishment
of the various cells, the
Sertoli and Leydig cells
of the testes that
lead to increased
output of testosterone and in
women testosterone as well.
So the cold exposure in
any case is obviously a--
do you do the ice bath?
Are you into that?
LEX FRIDMAN: I've
not done that yet.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: As a
Russian you probably consider
that a hot tub.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, exactly.
Yeah.
It's a nice thing to have fun
with every once in a while
to warm up.
No, I haven't done that.
Been kind of waiting
to maybe do it together
with you at some point.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Great.
LEX FRIDMAN: Because
we have a guide.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
We have one here.
It'll be
straightforward for you.
I always say that the
adrenaline comes in waves,
and so if you just
think about it walls,
like you're going through a
number of walls of adrenaline
as opposed to going for time,
it becomes rather trivial.
With your jujitsu
background and what
you'll immediately recognize
the physiological sensation.
Even though it's
cold specifically,
it's the adrenaline
that makes you
want to hop out of the thing.
LEX FRIDMAN: And
you've seen Joe's.
So Joe set up a
really nice man cave--
or it's not even a cave
because it's so big.
It's like a network
of man caves.
But it has a ice bath and
a sauna next to each other.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: We have one of
those here, ice bath and sauna.
So we'll have to get you
in it one of these days.
LEX FRIDMAN: Sounds
like trouble.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Maybe
tonight, maybe tomorrow.
No, although there is a--
I don't know the underlying
physiological basis
but there does seem to
be a trend toward truth
telling in the sauna.
Some people will refer
to them as truth barrels.
Mine's a barrel sauna
shaped like a barrel.
Who knows why?
Maybe under intense
heat duress people just
feel compelled to share.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, I have
a complicated relationship
with saunas because of
all the weight cutting.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh.
LEX FRIDMAN: Some of
the deepest suffering--
sorry to interrupt--
I've done was in the sauna.
It's very-- I mean, I've gone
to some dark places in a sauna
because, I mean, I wrestled
my whole life, judo, jujitsu,
and those weights cuts
can really test the mind.
So you're-- truth telling.
Yeah, it's a certain
kind of truth
telling because
you're sitting there
and the clock moves slower than
it has ever moved in your life.
Yeah.
So I usually, for
the most part, I
would try to have a bunch of
sweats, garbage bags, and all
that kind of stuff, and run.
It's easier because you
can distract the mind.
In the sauna you can't
distract the mind.
It's just and all the excuses
and all the weaknesses
in your mind just
coming to the surface,
and you're just sitting there
and sweating-- or not sweating.
That's the worst.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And talk
about visual aperture.
You're in a small box so it also
inspires some claustrophobia
even if you're not
claustrophobic.
That's absolutely true.
And the desire to just
get out of the thing
is where you get a pretty
serious adrenaline surge
from in the sauna as well.
Now, the sauna actually will--
it won't deplete testosterone
but it kills sperm.
So for people that--
sperm are on a 60
day sperm cycle
so if you're trying
to donate sperm--
because that's what
got us on to this--
or fertilize an egg or
eggs in whatever format,
dish or in vivo, as we say
in science, which means--
well, you can look it up, folks.
The 60 day sperm cycle.
So if you go into
a really hot sauna
or a hot bath or a
hot tub, in 60 days
those sperm are going to be--
a significantly
greater portion of them
will be dead, will
be non-viable.
So there's a simple solution.
People just put ice pack down
there or a jar, not this jar,
but a jar of cold fluid between
their legs and just sit there,
or they go back and
forth between the ice
bath and the sauna.
But you probably-- if you're
going to go back over there
you should freeze sperm.
We're going to do a couple
episodes on fertility when
it's relatively inexpensive.
And you're young so
you probably do it now
because there is a association
with autism as males get older.
It's not a strong one.
It's significant but it's
still a small contribution
to the autism phenotype.
LEX FRIDMAN: As you age
don't sperm get wiser or no?
There's no science to back that?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: No, but men
can conceive healthy children
at a considerable age.
But in any case--
but no, they don't get wiser.
What happens is interesting--
LEX FRIDMAN: Finely aged steak.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, it's a
little bit like the maturation
of the brain in the sense
that some of the sperm
get much better at swimming
and then many of them
get less good.
Motility is a strong correlate
of the DNA of the sperm.
LEX FRIDMAN: This is
probably a good time
to announce that I'm
selling my sperm as an NFTs.
I wanted to see how much that--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh my goodness.
LEX FRIDMAN: Riding
the crypto wave.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, your
children, your future children
and my future children, are
supposed to do jujitsu together
since I've only done
the one jujitsu class
so I'm strongly vested
in you having children.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: But only
in the friendly kind of way.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, yes.
Friendly competition
kind of way.
Yeah.
Dominance of the clan.
Yep.
For sure.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: So moving
on to science, but still
with our minds in the Ukraine.
Did you encounter any scientists
or see any universities?
As we know, in this country
and in Europe and elsewhere,
science takes infrastructure.
You need buildings, you need
laboratories, you need robots,
you need a lot of equipment,
and you need minus 80 freezers
and you need incubators
and you need money
and you need technicians.
And typically it's been
the wealthier countries
that have been able to
do more research for sake
of research and development
and prioritization.
Certainly the Ukraine had
some marvelous universities
and marvelous scientists.
What's going on with science
and scientists over there?
And gosh, can we even
calculate the loss of discovery
that is occurring as a
consequence of this conflict?
LEX FRIDMAN: So science goes on.
Before the war Ukraine had
a very vibrant tech sector,
which means engineering
and all that kind of stuff,
and Kyiv has a lot of
excellent universities
and they still go on.
The biggest hit, I
would say, is not
the infrastructure
of the science,
but the fact, because
of the high morale,
everybody is joining
the military.
So everybody is
going to the front
to fight, including you, Andrew
Huberman, would be fighting,
and not because you have
to but because you want to.
And everybody you know
would be really proud
that you're fighting,
even though everyone tries
to convince, Andrew
Huberman, you
have much better
ways to contribute.
There's deep honor in fighting
for your country, yes,
but there are better ways to
contribute to your country
than just picking up a gun that
you're not that trained with
and going to the front.
Still, they do it.
Scientists, engineers,
CEOs, professors, students--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Men and women?
LEX FRIDMAN: Actors--
men and women.
Obviously, primarily
men, but men and women.
Much more than you would
see in other militaries,
women are-- everybody.
Everybody wants to fight.
Everybody's proud of fighting.
There's no discussion
of pacifism.
Should we be fighting?
Is this right?
Is this-- everybody's
really proud of fighting.
So there's this
kind of black hole
that pulls everything,
all the resources,
into the war effort that's
not just financial but also
psychological.
So it's like if you're a
scientist it feels like what--
it feels almost like
you're dishonoring humanity
by continuing to do things
you were doing before.
There's a lot of people that
converted to being soldiers.
They literally watch
a YouTube video
of how to shoot
a particular gun,
how to arm a drone
with a grenade.
If you're a tech
person you know how
to work with drones so
you're going to use that,
use whatever skills you got,
figure out whatever skills
you got and how to use them to
help the effort on the front.
And so that's a big hit.
But that said, I've talked
to a lot of folks in Kyiv--
faculty primarily in the
tech economics space,
so I didn't get a chance
to interact with folks who
are on the biology, chemistry,
neuroscience side of things,
but that still goes on.
So one of the really
impressive things about Ukraine
is that they're able to maintain
infrastructure like road, food
supply, all that kind of stuff,
education, while the war is
going on, especially in Kyiv.
The war started
where nobody knew
whether Kyiv was going to be
taken by the Russian forces.
It was surrounded.
And a lot of experts from
outside were convinced that
Russia would take
Kyiv, and they didn't.
And one of the really
impressive things as a leader--
one of the things I
really experienced
is that a lot of people
criticized Zelenskyy
before the war.
He only had about
30% approval rate.
A lot of people
didn't like Zelenskyy.
But one of the
great things he did
as a leader, which I'm not
sure many leaders would
be able to do, is when Kyiv
was clearly being invaded he
chose to stay.
He stayed in the capital.
Everybody, all the American
military, the intelligence
agencies, NATO, his own staff,
advisors all told him to flee,
and he stayed.
And so I think that was a
beacon, a symbol for the rest,
for the universities,
for science,
for the infrastructure
that we're staying too,
and that kept the
whole thing going.
There's an interesting social
experiment that happened,
I think for folks who
are interested in gun
control in this
country in particular,
is one of the decisions
they made early on
is to give guns to everybody.
Semi-automatics.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Early on in the war?
LEX FRIDMAN: Early
on in the war, yeah.
So everybody got a gun.
They also released
a bunch of prisoners
from prison because
there was no staff
to keep the prisons running.
And so there's a
very interesting
psychological experiment of,
like, how is this going to go?
Everybody has a gun.
Are they going to
start robbing places?
Are they going to
start taking advantage
of a chaotic situation?
And what happened is
that crime went to zero.
So it turned out that
this, as an experiment,
worked wonderfully.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: That's a
case where love generalized.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Or
at least hate did not.
We don't know if it's
love or it's sort of lack
of initiative for common
culture directed hate.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
I don't-- right.
I think that's very correct
to say that it wasn't
hate that was unifying people.
It was love of country,
love of community.
It's probably the same thing
that will happen to humans when
aliens invade as well.
It's the common effort.
Everybody puts everything
else to the side.
Plus just the sheer amount
of guns is similar to Texas.
You realize, well,
there's going to be
a self-correcting mechanism very
quickly because the rule of law
was also put aside, right?
Basically the police
force lost a lot of power
because everybody else
has guns and they're
kind of taking the law
into their own hands.
That system, at least
in this particular case
in this particular moment
in human history, worked.
It's an interesting
lesson, you know?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It is.
I had an interesting contrast
that I'll share with you
because you mentioned Texas.
So not so long ago
I was in Austin.
I often visit you or others
in Austin, as you know.
And many doors that I walked
past, including a school,
said no firearms
past this point.
It was a sticker on the door.
You see this on
hospitals sometimes.
I saw this at Baylor College
of Medicine, et cetera.
Relatively common
to see in Texas,
not so common in California.
And then I flew to the
San Francisco Bay Area,
was walking by an elementary
school in my old neighborhood,
and saw a similar
sticker and looked at it
and it said, no peanuts
or other allergy
containing foods past
this point on the door
of this elementary school.
So quite a different
contrast, guns and peanuts.
Now, peanut allergies,
obviously, are very serious
for some people, although
there's great research out
of Stanford showing that
early exposure to peanuts
can prevent the allergies.
But don't start rubbing yourself
in peanut butter, folks,
if you have a peanut allergy.
That's not the best
way to deal with it.
In any case, the
contrast of what's
dangerous, the contrast of
the familiarity with guns
versus no familiarity.
In Israel and elsewhere you see
machine guns in the airport.
In Germany, Frankfurt, you see
machine guns in the airport.
Not so common in
the United States.
So again, I feel like there's
this aperture of vision.
There's this aperture of
pleasures versus creature
comforts and lack of
creature comforts,
and then there's this
aperture of danger, right?
People who are
familiar with guns
are familiar with people
coming in and setting
their firearm on the table
and eating dinner, you know?
But if you're not accustomed
to that it's jarring, right?
LEX FRIDMAN: I should mention--
people know this
throughout human history--
but the human ability
to get assimilated now,
get used to violence
is incredible.
So you could be living
in a peaceful time,
like we're here now, and
there would be one explosion,
like a 9/11 type of situation.
That would be a huge shock.
It's terrifying.
Everybody freaks out.
The second one is a huge drop
off in how freaked out you get.
And in a matter of
days, sometimes hours,
it becomes the normal.
I've talked to so many
people in Kharkiv,
which is one of the towns that's
seen a lot of heated battle.
You ask them, is it safe there?
In fact, when I went to the--
closer and closer to the
war zone you ask people,
is it safe?
And their answer's usually,
yeah, it's pretty safe.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It's
all signal to noise.
LEX FRIDMAN: Nobody has told
me except Western reporters
sitting in the West
Side of Ukraine,
it's really dangerous here.
Everyone's like,
yeah, it's good.
My uncle just died yesterday.
He was shot.
But it's pretty good.
The farm is still running.
How do I put it?
They focus on the
positive, that's one.
But there's a
deeper truth there,
which is just get used
to difficult situations
and the stuff that
make you happy
and the stuff that
make you upset
is relative to that new
normal that you establish.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
I grew up in California
and there were a
lot of earthquakes.
I remember the '89
quake, I remember
the Embarcadero
Freeway pancaking
on top of people and cars.
I remember I moved to
Southern California,
there was a Northridge quake.
Wherever I move there
seem to be earthquakes.
I never worry about
earthquakes, ever.
I just don't.
In fact, I don't
like the destruction
they cause, but every once
in a while an earthquake will
roll through and it's
kind of exciting.
It sounds like a
train coming through.
It's like, wow, like
the Earth is moving.
You know?
Again, I don't want
anyone to get harmed,
but I enjoy a good rumble
coming through nonetheless.
It's signal to noise.
But if I saw a
tornado I'd freak out,
and people from the Midwest
are probably comfortable with--
Dan Gable, the great
wrestler from the Midwest
that you know and I've
never met but I have
great respect for, he's
probably-- sees a tornado
and is like, ah, yeah.
Maybe.
Yeah.
You know?
So I think signal
to noise is real.
Before I neglect,
although I won't
forget, speaking of signal
to noise and environment,
you are returning
to or have gone back
to one of your original
natural habitats,
which is the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology which
is--
LEX FRIDMAN: Natural
habitat, yeah.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It's actually
difficult to pronounce in full.
MIT, right?
So you've been spending some
time there teaching and doing
other things.
Tell us what you're up
to with MIT recently.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, I'm
really glad that you,
being on the West Coast, know
the difference between Boston,
New York.
I feel like a lot of people
think it's like the East Coast.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It's
very different, especially
the Bostonians and New Yorkers.
LEX FRIDMAN: They
get very aggressive.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh my goodness.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, I love it.
I gave lectures there in
front of a in person crowd.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: What
were you talking about?
LEX FRIDMAN: For the
AI, so different aspects
of AI and robotics, machine
learning-- machine learning.
So for people who know the
artificial intelligence field
they usually don't
use the term AI,
and people from outside AIs.
The biggest breakthroughs
in the machine
learning field with some
discussion of robotics
and so on.
Yeah.
It was in person.
It was wonderful.
I'm a sucker for that.
I really avoided teaching
or any kind of interaction
during COVID because people
put a lot of emphasis
on but also got comfortable
with remote teaching,
and I think nobody enjoyed it.
Except there's a notion
that it's much easier to
do because you don't
have to travel.
You can do it in your
pajamas kind of thing.
But when you actually
get to do it,
you don't get the
same kind of joy
that you do when
you're teaching.
As a student you don't get the
same kind of joy of learning.
It's not as effective and
all that kind of stuff.
So to be in person together
with people, to see their eyes,
to get their excitement, to
get the questions and all
the interactions,
that was awesome.
And I'm still a sucker and a
believer in the ideal of MIT,
of the University.
I think it's an
incredible place.
There's something
in the air still.
But it really hit--
the pandemic hit
universities hard because--
and I can say this.
This is not you saying it.
This is me saying it.
That administrations--
as in all cases
when people criticize
institutions,
the pandemic has given more
power to the administration
and taken away power from
the faculty and the students,
and that's from
everybody involved,
including the administration.
That's a concern
because a university
is about the teachers
and the students.
That should be primary.
And whenever you have
a pandemic there's
an opportunity to increase
the amount of rules.
One of the things that
really bothered me,
and I'll scream from
the top of the MIT dome,
about this is they've instituted
a new temp ticket system.
Which is if you're a visitor
to the campus at MIT,
you have to register.
You have to, first of all,
show that you're vaccinated,
but more importantly, there's
a process to visiting.
You need to get
permission to visit.
One of the reasons I loved MIT,
unlike some other institutions,
MIT just leaves the
door open to anyone.
In classrooms you can roll
in the ridiculous characters.
The students that
are usually doing
business stuff or economics
can roll into a physics class
and just-- you're
kind of not allowed
but it's a gray area
so you let that happen,
and that creates a flourishing
of a community that
was beautiful.
And I think adding extra rules
puts a squeeze on and limits
some of the
flourishing, and I hope
some of that
dissipates over time
as we kind of let go of
the risk aversion that
was created by the pandemic.
As we kind of enter
the normal return back
some of that
flourishing can happen.
But when you're actually
in there with the students,
it was magic.
I love it.
I love it.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, some
of your earliest videos
on your YouTube channel were
of you in the classroom, right?
That's how this all started.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
Yeah.
That's how YouTube--
putting stuff on YouTube
is terrifying, right?
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Well, especially
at the time when you did it.
Again, you're a
pioneer in that sense.
You did that, Jordan
Peterson did that.
Putting up lectures is--
yeah.
I teach still.
Every winter I teach--
direct a course, and I'll
be doing even more teaching
going forward.
But the idea of those
videos being on the web is--
yeah, that spikes my
cortisol a little bit.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
It's terrifying
because you get--
and everybody has a
different experience.
For me being a junior
research scientist
the kind of natural
concern is like, who am I?
And when I was giving
this lecture it's like,
I don't deserve any of this.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: That's your
humility coming through,
and I actually
think that humility
on the part of an
instructor is good
because those that think that
they are entitled, and who else
could give this lecture?
Then I worry more.
I once heard-- I don't
know if it's still
true-- that at Caltech,
the great California
Institute of Technology
not far from here,
that many of the
faculty are actually
afraid of the students.
Not physically
afraid, but they're
intellectually afraid because
the students are so smart.
And teaching there can
be downright frightening,
I've heard.
But that's great.
Keeps everybody on their toes.
And you know, I've been
corrected in lecture
before at Stanford
and elsewhere.
When my lab was at UC San
Diego where someone will say,
hey, wait, last lecture you said
this and now you said that--
or on the podcast.
You know?
And I think it's that
moment where you sometimes
feel that urge to defend and
you go, oh, you're right,
and I think it depends
on how one was trained.
My graduate advisor was
wonderful at saying,
I don't know, all the time.
And she went to Harvard,
Radcliffe, UCSF, and Caltech.
Brilliant woman.
And had no problem
saying, I don't know.
LEX FRIDMAN: I don't
have that problem either.
So I usually have two guys
that somebody speaks up,
grab them, drag them out of
the room, never see them again.
So everybody is
really supportive.
You don't understand that the
amount of love and support
I get is--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Especially when
the last few students are there
and everybody seems to be
nodding as you're going.
No, I think that I'd love to
sit-in on one of your lectures.
I know very little about AI,
machine learning, or robotics.
But--
LEX FRIDMAN: Have you
ever talked at MIT?
Have you ever given lectures?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh, yeah.
When I went on the job market
as a faculty member my final two
choices were between
MIT Picower--
I had an on-paper offer.
Wonderful place.
Wonderful place to
do neuroscience.
And UC San Diego, which is a
wonderful neuroscience program.
In the end it made
sense for me be
on the West Coast
for personal reasons,
but there's some amazing
neuroscience going on there.
Goodness.
And that's always been true
and is going to continue.
It's been a long time since
I've been invited back there.
Oddly enough when I started
doing more podcasting--
and I still run a lab but I
shrunk my lab considerably
as I've done more podcasting--
I've received fewer
academic lecture
invites, which makes sense.
But now they're
sort of coming back.
And so when people
invite now I always
say, do you want me to talk
about the ventral thalamus
and its role in
anxiety and aggression
or do you want me to
talk about the podcast?
And my big fear is
I'm going to go back
to give a lecture about
the retina or something
and I'll start off with
an Athletic Greens read
or something like
that just reflexively.
Just kidding.
That wouldn't happen.
But listen, I think
it's great to continue
to keep a foot in both places.
I was so happy to
hear that you're
teaching at MIT because
podcasting is one thing,
teaching is another, and
there's overlap there
in the Venn diagram.
But listen, the students
that get to sit-in
on one of your
lectures-- and you
may see me sitting
there in the audience
soon when I creep
into your class.
LEX FRIDMAN: In sunglasses.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: That's right.
Wearing a red shirt.
You won't recognize me.
Are certainly
receiving a great gift.
I've watched your lectures on
YouTube, even the early ones,
and listen, I know you to
be a phenomenal teacher.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah,
there's something about--
so I'm also doing--
I stayed up pretty
late last night
working for a
deadline on a paper.
One of the things
that I hope to do
for hopefully the rest of my
life is to continue publishing,
and I think it's really
important to do that
even if you continue the podcast
because you want to be just
on your own intellectual
and scientific journey
as you do podcasting.
At least for me, and especially
on the engineering side
because I want to
build stuff, and I
think that keeps
your ego in check,
keeps you humble
because I think if you
talk too much on a microphone
you start getting--
you might lose track
of the grounding that
comes from engineering
and from science
and the scientific process and
the criticisms that you get,
all that kind of stuff.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And how
slow and iterative it is.
We have two papers right now
that are in the revision stage,
and it's been a very long road.
And I was asked this recently
because I met with my chairman.
He said, do you want to
continue to run a lab or are
you just going to go
full time on the podcast?
And Stanford has been very
supportive, I must say,
as I know MIT has been of you.
And I said, oh,
I absolutely want
to continue to be involved
in research and do research.
And when you start
talking about these papers
and we're looking over my--
this was my yearly review
and looking back
I'm like, goodness,
these papers have been in
play for a very long time.
So it's a long road but
you learn more and more,
and the more time you
spend myopically looking
at a bunch of data the more you
learn and the more you think.
I totally agree.
Talking to these
devices for podcasts
is wonderful because it's fun.
It relieves a certain itch that
we both have and hopefully it
lands some important information
out there for people,
but doing research is the--
I guess if you know, you know.
There's the unpeeling
of the onion,
knowing that there could
be something there.
There's just nothing like it.
LEX FRIDMAN: I mean, you do--
especially with the pandemic.
And for me, both
Twitter and the podcast
have made me much more
impatient about the slowness
of the review process because--
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Twitter will do that.
LEX FRIDMAN: Twitter will.
But even with podcast
you have a cool--
you'll find something cool
and then you have ideas
and you'll just say them and
they'll be out pretty quickly.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Then we do a
post right now about something
that we both found interesting
and it's out in the world.
Yep.
LEX FRIDMAN: And
you can write up
something, like there
is a culture in computer
science of posting stuff
on arXiv and preprints
that don't get annual review,
and sometimes they don't even
go through the review process
ever because people just
start using them if it's code.
And it's like, what's
the point of this?
It works.
It's self evident that it works
because people are using it,
and that I think applies
more to engineering fields
because it's an actual
tool that works.
It doesn't matter if-- you don't
have to scientifically prove
that it works.
It works because it's
using for a lot of people.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, sorry
to interrupt, but I just--
for point of reference,
the famous paper
describing the
double helix which
earned Watson and
Crick the Nobel Prize
and should have earned Rosalind
Franklin Nobel Prize too,
of course, but they got it for
the structure of DNA of course.
That paper was never
reviewed at Nature.
They published it because its
importance was self evident,
or whatever.
They decided--
LEX FRIDMAN: So the editors.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It was that
purely editorial decision,
I believe.
I mean, that's what I
was told by someone who's
currently an editor at Nature.
If that turns out
to not be correct
someone will tell us in
the comments for sure.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, I think--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: That's
pretty interesting, right?
LEX FRIDMAN: That's
really interested.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Perhaps the
most significant discovery
in biology and
bioengineering which
was leading to
bioengineering as well,
of course, of the last
century was not peer reviewed.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, but--
so Eric Weinstein,
but many others
have talked about
this, which is, I mean,
I don't think people understand
how poor the peer review
process is.
Just the amount of--
because you think peer
review it means all the
best peers get together
and they review your
stuff, but it's unpaid work
and it's usually a
small number of people.
And they have a very
select perspective
so they might not be the
best person, especially
if it's super novel work.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And it's
who has time to do it.
I'm on a bunch of
editorial boards still.
Why, I don't know, but I
enjoy the peer review process
and sending papers out.
Oftentimes the best
scientists are very busy
and don't have time to review.
And oftentimes the
more premiere journals
will select from a kind
of a unique kit of very
good scientists who are
very close to the work,
sometimes the people are
very far from the work.
It really depends.
LEX FRIDMAN: And both
have negatives, right?
If you're very close
to the work there's
jealousy, and all those
basic human things.
Very far from the
work you might not
appreciate the
nuanced contribution,
all that kind of stuff.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And
there's psychology.
Sorry to interrupt again, but
a good friend of mine who's
extremely successful
neuroscientist,
Howard Hughes
investigator, et cetera,
always told me that they--
I won't even say whether
or not who they are.
They select their
reviewers on the basis
of who has been publishing
very well recently because they
assume that that
person is going to be
more benevolent because
they have been doing
well so that the love expands.
LEX FRIDMAN: That's a good
point to that, actually.
But the idea is that
editors might actually
be the best reviewers, so that
was the traditional-- that's
the thing I wanted to mention
that Eric Weinstein talks
about, that back several
decades ago editors had
much more power.
And there is something to be
made for that because editors
are the ones who are responsible
for crafting the journal.
They really are
invested in this,
and they're also
often experts, right?
It makes sense for
an editor to have
a bit of power in this case.
Usually if an idea is truly
novel you could see it,
And so it makes
sense for an editor
to have more power
in that regard.
Of course for me,
I think peer review
should be done the
way tweets are done,
which is crowdsourced
or Amazon reviews.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Let
the crowd decide.
LEX FRIDMAN: Let
the crowd decide,
and let the crowd add depth
and breadth and context
for the contribution.
So if the paper overstates
the degree of contribution,
the crowd will
check you on that.
If there's not enough support
or the conclusions are not
supported by the evidence, the
crowd will check you on that.
There could be, of course,
political bickering
that enters the
picture, especially
on very controversial
topics, but I
think I trust the
intelligence of human beings
to figure that out.
And I think most of us
are trying to figure
this whole process out.
I just wish it was
happening much faster
because on the important
topics, the review
cycle could be faster.
And we learned
that through COVID
that Twitter was
actually pretty effective
at doing science communication.
It was really interesting.
Some of the best
scientists took to Twitter
to communicate their own
work and other people's work,
and always putting
into the caveats
that it's not peer reviewed and
so on, but it's all out there
and the data just moves so fast.
And if you want
stuff to move fast,
Twitter is the best medium
of communication for that.
It's cool to see.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I'd like
to take a brief break
and thank our sponsor,
InsideTracker.
InsideTracker is a
personalized nutrition platform
that analyzes data
from your blood and DNA
to help you better
understand your body
and help you reach
your health goals.
I've long been a believer in
getting regular blood work done
for the simple reason that
many of the factors that impact
your immediate and
long term health
can only be analyzed from
a quality blood test.
The problem with a
lot of blood and DNA
tests out there, however,
is that you get data
back about metabolic
factors, lipids, and hormones
and so forth, but you don't
know what to do with those data.
InsideTracker
solves that problem
and makes it very easy
for you to understand
what sorts of nutritional,
behavioral, maybe even
supplementation
based interventions
you might want to
take on in order
to adjust the numbers of those
metabolic factors, hormones,
lipids, and other
things that impact
your immediate and long
term health to bring
those numbers into the
ranges that are appropriate
and, indeed, optimal for you.
If you'd like to try
InsideTracker you can visit
insidetracker.com/huberman to
get $200 off an ultimate plan
or 34% off the entire site as
a special Black Friday deal now
through the end of November.
Again, that's
insidetracker.com/huberman,
and use the code
Huberman at checkout.
I'm now on Twitter
more regularly,
and initially it
was just Instagram.
And I remember you and I used to
have these over dinner or drink
conversations where I'd say,
I don't understand Twitter.
And you'd say, I don't
understand Instagram.
And of course, we
understand how it worked
and how to work each
respective platform,
but I think we were both
trying to figure out
what is driving the psychology
of these different venues
because they are quite distinct
psychologies for whatever
reason.
I think I'm finally starting
to understand Twitter and enjoy
it a little bit.
Initially I wasn't
prepared for the level
of reflexive scrutiny.
It sounds a little
bit oxymoronic,
but that people pick
up on one small thing
and then drive it
down that trajectory.
It didn't seem to be happening
quite as much on Instagram,
but I love your tweets.
I do have a question
about your Twitter account
and how you-- do you have sort
of internal filters of what
you'll put up and won't put up?
Because sometimes you'll
put up things that
are about life and reflections.
Other times you'll put up
things like what you're
excited about in
AI, or of course,
point to various podcasts
including your own,
but others as well.
How do you approach
social media?
Not in how do you
regulate your behavior
on there in terms of how
much time, et cetera.
I know you've talked
about that before.
But you know, what's your
mindset around social media
when you go on there to either
post or forage or respond
to information?
LEX FRIDMAN: I think
I try to add some--
not the sound cliche, but some
love out there into the world
into, as OJ Simpson
calls it, Twitter world.
I think there is this viral
negativity that can take hold,
and I try to find the right
language to add good vibes out
there.
And it's actually
really, really tricky
because there's something about
positivity that sounds fake.
I can't quite put
my finger on it,
but whenever I talk about
love and positive and almost
childlike in my curiosity
and positivity, people
start to think, surely he
has skeletons in the closet.
There's dead bodies
in his basement.
This must be a fake--
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
No, it's the attic.
LEX FRIDMAN: It's the attic?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: The attic.
LEX FRIDMAN: I keep
mine in the basement.
That's the details.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I was
referring to your attic.
I don't have an attic or a
basement, nor dead bodies.
I just want to be very clear.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
I do have an attic and actually
I haven't been up there.
Maybe there is bodies up there.
But yes, I prefer the basement.
It's colder down there.
I like it.
No, but there's an assumption
that this is not genuine
or it's disingenuous
in some kind of way.
And so I try to find the
right language for that kind
of stuff, how to be positive.
Some of it I was really inspired
by Elon's approach to Twitter.
Not all of it, but
when he just is silly.
I found that silliness--
I think it's Hermann Hesse
said something to paraphrase--
one of my favorite writers--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah, same.
LEX FRIDMAN: I
think in Steppenwolf
said, learn what is
to be taken seriously
and laugh at the rest.
I think I try to be
silly, laugh at myself,
laugh at the absurdity
of life, and then in part
when I'm serious, try to
just be positive, just
to see a positive perspective.
And also, as you said,
people pick out certain words
and so on and they
attack each other,
attack me over certain usage
of words in a particular tweet.
I think the thing I try to do is
think positively towards them,
like do not escalate.
So whenever somebody's
criticizing me and so on,
I just smile.
If there's a lesson to
be learned, I learn it
and then I just send
good vibes their way.
Don't respond, and
just hopefully,
through karma and through the
ripple effect of positivity,
have an impact on them and
the rest of the Twitter.
And what you find
is that builds--
your actions create
the community.
So how I behave gets me
surrounded by certain people.
But lately, especially Ukraine
is one topic like this,
I also thought
about talking to--
somebody who reached out
to me is Andrew Tate,
who's extremely controversial.
From the perspective of a lot
of people is a misogynist.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
I've heard his name
and I know that there's a lot
of controversy around him.
Maybe you could familiarize me.
I've been pretty nose
down in podcast prep
and I tried to do this
vacation thing for about three,
four weeks.
LEX FRIDMAN: I've
heard about that.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
And it sort of worked.
I did get some time in
the Colorado wilderness
by myself, which was great.
I did get some downtime.
But in any event, it mainly
consisted of reading and--
LEX FRIDMAN: And nature?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Reading
and nature, sauna, ice bath,
working out, good food,
a little extra sleep,
these kinds of things I
really felt I needed it.
But I am pretty
naive when it comes
to the kind of
current controversies
but I've heard his
name, and I think
he's been deplatformed
on a couple of platforms.
Do I have that right?
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, he's
been-- so I should also
admit that while I might
know more than you,
it's not by much.
So it's like a
five-year-old talking
to a four-year-old right now.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Is he
an athlete, a podcaster?
LEX FRIDMAN: So basic summary,
he used to be a fighter,
a kickboxer, I believe.
Was pretty successful.
And then during
that and after that
I think he was on
a reality show,
and he had all these programs
that are basically pickup
artist advice.
He has this community of
people where he gives advice
on how to pick up women, how to
be successful in relationships,
how to make a lot of
money, and it costs money
to enter those programs.
So a lot of the criticism
that he gets is kind of--
it's like a pyramid scheme
where you convince people
to join so that they
can make more money
and then they convince others
to join, and that kind of stuff.
But that's not why I'm
interested in talking to him.
I'm interested because
one of the guests--
maybe I should mention who, but
one of the female guests I had,
really a big scientist, said
that her two kids that are 13
and 12 really look up
to Andrew to entertain--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Is it male
children, female children?
LEX FRIDMAN: Male.
And I hear this
time and time again.
So he is somebody that a lot of
teens, young teens, look up to.
So I haven't done
serious research.
I usually try to avoid doing
research until I agree to talk
and then I go deep.
But there is an
aspect to the way
he talks about women that, while
I understand and I understand
certain dynamics in
relationships work for people
and he's one such
person, but I think
him being really disrespectful
towards women is not what I--
it's not how I see what
it means to be a good man.
So the conversation I
want to have with him
is about masculinity.
What does masculinity
mean in the 21st century?
And so when I think
about that kind of stuff,
and because we're
talking about Twitter,
it's like going into a war zone.
I'm a happy go
lucky person, but--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: You're
like, send me to Ukraine,
but I don't want to have
this conversation on Twitter.
LEX FRIDMAN: Because
it's a really, really,
really tricky one because
also, as you know,
when you do a podcast,
everybody wants you to win.
It's everything
you do is positive.
Maybe you'll say the wrong
thing as inaccurate thing
and you can correct yourself.
With Andrew Tate, with Donald
Trump, with folks like this,
you have to--
I mean, it's a
professional boxing.
I think you have
to push the person.
You have to be really eloquent.
You have to be also empathetic
because you can't just
do what journalists
do, which is talk down
to the person the entire time.
That's easy.
The hard thing is to
empathize with the person,
to understand them, to
steel man their case,
but also to make your own case.
So in that case about what
it means to be a man, to me
a strong man is somebody
who is respectful to women.
Not out of weakness, not out
of social justice warrior
signaling, and all that kind
of stuff, but out of that's
what a strong man does.
They don't need to be
disrespectful to prove
their position in life.
He is often-- now, a lot of
people say it's a character.
He's being misogynistic.
He's being a misogynist as a
kind of-- for entertainment
purposes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
So like an avatar.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
But to me, that avatar has a
lot of influence on young folks
so the character has impact.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Oh, I don't think
you can separate the
avatar and the person
in terms of the
impact, as you said.
In fact, there are
a number of accounts
on Twitter and Instagram and
elsewhere which people have
only revealed their first
names or they give themself
another name or they're
using a cartoon image.
And part of that, I
believe, in at least
from some of these individuals
who actually know who they are,
I understand as an attempt to
maintain their privacy, which
is important to many people.
And in some cases so that
they can be more inflammatory
and then just pop up
elsewhere as something
else without anyone knowing
that it's the same person.
LEX FRIDMAN: Some of--
this is the dark stuff.
I've been reading a lot about
Ukraine and Nazi Germany,
so the '30s and
the '40s and so on,
and you get to see how
much the absurdity turns
to evil quickly.
One of the things I worry--
one of the things
I really don't like
to see on Twitter
and the internet
is how many statements
end with LOL.
It's like you think just because
something is kind of funny
or is funny or is
legitimately funny,
it also doesn't have a
deep effect on society.
So that's such a
difficult gray area
because some of the best
comedy is dark and mean,
but it reveals some important
truth that we need to consider.
But sometimes comedy
is just covering up
for destructive
ideology, and you
have to know the line
between those two.
Hitler was seen as a joke in
the late '20s and the '30s
in Nazi Germany until the
joke became very serious.
You have to be careful
to know the difference
between the joke and the
reality and do all that.
I mean, in a conversation--
I'm just such a big
believer in conversation
to be able to reveal something
through conversation,
but I don't know.
One of the big--
you and I challenge
ourselves all the time.
I don't know if I
have what it takes
to have a good, empathetic,
but adversarial conversation.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I need to learn
more about this Tate person,
or not learn about them.
Yeah.
It sounds like maybe
it's something to skip.
I don't know because, again, I'm
not familiar with the content.
But I was going to
ask you whether or not
you've seeked out
or whether or not
you would ever consider
having Donald Trump as a guest
on your podcast.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, I've
talked to Joe a lot about this
and I really believe I can have
a good conversation with Donald
Trump, but I haven't seen many
good conversations with him.
So part of me thinks--
part of me believes
it's possible,
but he often effectively
runs over the interviewer.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: You could
sit him down, give him
an element in Athletic Greens.
LEX FRIDMAN: Just relax.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
That nice, cool, air
conditioned black
curtain studio you've got
and a different
side might come out.
Context is powerful.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, Joe's
really good at this,
which is relaxing the person.
Like here, have a drink.
Smoke a joint, or
whatever it is.
But this energy of
just, let's relax,
and there's laughter and so on.
I don't think-- as
people know, I'm just
not good at that kind of stuff.
So I think the way I could have
a good conversation with him
is to really understand
his worldview,
be able to steel
man his worldview
and those that support him.
Which is, I'm sorry
to say for people
who seem to hate Donald Trump,
is a very large percentage
of the country.
And so you have to really
empathize with those people.
You have to empathize with
Donald Trump, the human being,
and from that perspective,
ask him hard questions.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
So who do you think
is the counterpoint
if you're going
to seek balance in your guests.
If you're going
to have Trump on,
then you have to have who on?
LEX FRIDMAN: Well,
that's interesting.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Anthony Fauci seems
to be strongly associated
with counter values, at least
in the eye of the public.
I think he's retiring soon, but.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah,
he's retiring.
So that's really
interesting, Anthony Fauci.
Yeah, definitely, but I don't
think he's a counterbalance.
He's a complicated,
fascinating figure
who seems to have attracted
a lot of hate and distrust,
but also--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And
love from some people.
LEX FRIDMAN: And love.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And
love from some people.
I mean, I know people, not
even necessarily scientists,
who have pro-Fauci shirts.
I've seen people with anti-Fauci
shirts, excuse me, certainly,
but who adore him.
There are people who adore
him in the same way there
are people that adore Trump.
It's so interesting that
one species of animal
you get such divergent
neural circuitry.
LEX FRIDMAN: It
almost feels like it's
by design and every single topic
we find tension and division is
fascinating to watch.
I mean, I got to really witness
it from zero to a hundred
in Ukraine, where there is
not huge significant division.
There was in certain parts of
Ukraine, but across Europe,
across the world there
was not that much division
between Russia and Ukraine,
and it was just born
overnight, this intense hatred.
You see the same kind of stuff
with Fauci over the pandemic.
At first we were all
huddled in uncertainty.
There is a togetherness
with the pandemic.
Of course, there
is more difficult
because you're isolated.
But then you start
to figure out--
probably the politicians and
the media try to figure out,
how can I take a side
here and how can I
now start reporting on
this side or that side
and say how the
other side is wrong?
And so I think Anthony Fauci
is a part of just being used
as a scapegoat
for certain things
as part of that kind of
narrative of division.
But I think-- so Trump is
a singular figure that,
to me, represents something
important in American history.
I'm not sure what
that is, but I think
you have to think-- you
put on your historian hat,
go forward in time,
and think back.
How will he be remembered 20,
30, 40, 50 years from now?
Who is the opposite of that?
You have to--
I would really have
to think about that
because Trump was so singular.
I think AOC is an
interesting one,
but she's so young it's
unclear to know how--
if she represents a legitimately
large scale movement or not.
Bernie Sanders is an
interesting option,
but I wish he would be
30, 40 years younger.
The young Bernie
would be a good--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: There are
scientists working on that.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, I think so.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Not
him specifically, but--
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, yeah.
Maybe him.
We never know.
There is a big conspiracy
theory that Putin is--
that that's a body double.
It's no longer him.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Bernie is Putin?
LEX FRIDMAN: No, no, no, no.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I'm having a
hard time merging that image.
LEX FRIDMAN: The conspiracy
theory is-- no, no, no.
That the Putin we see on
camera today is a body double.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
one thing that in science,
and in particular,
in anatomy, there's
a classification scheme for
different types of anatomists,
which they either say you're
a lumper or a splitter.
Some people like to call a
whole structure something,
not necessarily
just for simplicity
but for a lot of reasons.
And then other people like
to microdivide the nucleus
into multiple names.
And of course, people used to
be able to name different brain
structures after themselves.
So that would be the nucleus of
Lex and the Huberman vesiculus
or whatever.
Less of that nowadays.
And by the way, those structures
don't actually exist just yet.
We haven't defined those yet.
I was making those names up.
But what's interesting is it
seems like in the last five
years, there's been
a lot of trend--
there's been a trend, excuse
me, toward a requirement
for lumping.
You can't say-- it seems that
it's not allowed, if you will,
to say, hey, yeah, you know--
and here I'm not stating my--
I will never reveal
my preferences
about pandemic related things
for hopefully obvious reasons.
Some people will say
vaccines, yes, but masks, no.
Or vaccines and masks,
yes, but let people work.
And other people will say,
no, everyone stay home.
And then other people will
say, no, no vaccines, no masks.
Let everybody work.
No one was saying no vaccines,
no masks, and stay home,
I don't think.
So there's this sort
of lumping, right?
The boundaries around
ideology really
did start to defy science.
I mean, it wasn't scientific.
It was one part science-ish
at times and sometimes
really hardcore science.
Other times it was
politics, economics.
I mean, we really
saw the confluence
of all these different
domains of society
that use very different
criteria to evaluate the world.
I mean, as a
scientist, I remember
when the vaccines
first came out and I
asked somebody, one
of the early concerns
I had that was actually
satisfied for me was,
how does this thing turn off?
If you start generating
mRNA, how does it actually
get turned off?
So I asked a friend, they
know a lot about RNA biology.
And I said, you know,
how does it turn off?
They explained it to me and
I was like, OK, makes sense.
I asked some other questions.
But most people aren't
going to think about it
at that level of
detail necessarily,
but it did seem
that there was just
kind of amorphous
blobs of ideology
that they grabbed on
to things and then
there was this need for
a chasm between them.
It was almost felt like it
became illegal, in some ways,
to want two of the things from
that menu and one of the things
from that menu.
I really felt like I
was being constrained
by a kind of like
Bento box model
where I didn't get to define
what was in the Bento box.
I could either have Bento
box A or Bento box Z,
but nothing in between.
LEX FRIDMAN: And I
think on that topic
and I think a lot of
topics, most people
are in the middle with
humility, uncertainty,
and they're just kind of
trying to figure it out.
And I think there is just
the extremes defining
the nature of this division.
So I think it's the
role of a lot of us
in our individual
lives, and also
if you have a
platform of any kind,
I think you have to try to walk
in the middle with the empathy
and humility.
And that's actually what science
is about is the humility.
I'm still thinking about
who's the opposite of Trump.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
maybe there is none.
I mean, maybe Fauci is
orthogonal to Trump.
I mean, not everything
has an opposite.
I mean, maybe he's
an n of 1 maybe
he's in the minority
of one because he
was an outsider from Washington
who then made it there.
LEX FRIDMAN: But also I wonder--
you have to pick your battles
because every battle you fight
you should take very seriously.
And just the amount
of hate I get,
I got, and I still get
for having sat down
with the Pfizer CEO, that was
a very valuable lesson for me.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh, that
one got you a lot of heat?
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, it
still does because--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Because you
had some pretty controversial
guests on from time to time.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, that one--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Is he
still the Pfizer CEO?
LEX FRIDMAN: I believe so.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: CEOs
turn over like crazy.
This is the thing
I didn't realize.
In science if somebody moves
institutions it's a big deal.
Most people don't have more
than two moves in their career,
maybe.
But they often move to the
next building is a big deal.
But it in biotech--
it's like have a former
colleague of mine
from San Diego and
he's been a CEO here,
then he's a CEO there.
He went back to a company
he was a CEO before.
He's probably back
at the university
we worked at for all I know.
It's amazing how much
moving around there.
It is a very
itinerant profession.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah,
I think they're--
in certain companies, I guess
in biotech would be the case,
the CEO is more of like a
manager type so you can--
jumping around benefits
your experience
so you become better and
better being a manager.
There's some leader
revolutionary CEOs
that stick around for
longer because they're
so critical to
pivoting a company,
like the Microsoft
CEO currently.
Sundar Pichai is
somebody like that.
Obviously, Elon Musk is
somebody like that that
is part of pivoting a company
into new domains constantly,
but yeah.
In biotech there's a machine.
In the eyes of a lot of people,
big pharma is like big tobacco.
It's the epitome of everything
that is wrong with capitalism.
It's evil, right?
And so I showed up
in the conversation
where I thought with
a pretty open mind
and really asked what I
thought were difficult
questions of him.
I don't think he's ever sat
down to a grilling of that kind.
In fact, I'm pretty sure
they cut the interview short
because of that, and
I thought literally it
was hot in the room
and we're sweating
and I was asking
tough questions.
For somebody that half the
country or a large percent
of the country believes he's
alleviated a lot of-- he
helped, through the financial
resources that Pfizer has,
helped alleviate a lot of
suffering in the world.
And so I thought for
somebody like that,
I was asking pretty
hard questions.
Boy, did I get to
hear from the side--
usually one of the sides is
more intense in their anger.
So there are certain
political topics--
like with Andrew
Tate, for example,
I would hear from a very--
it would probably be
the left, far left,
that would write very angrily.
And so that's a group
you'll hear from.
The Pfizer CEO, I didn't
get almost any messages
from people saying, why
did you go so hard on him?
He's an incredible human,
incredible leader and CEO
of a company that helped
us with the vaccine
that nobody thought would be
possible to develop so quickly.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: You did not
get letters of that sort?
LEX FRIDMAN: I did not.
I mean, here and there,
but the sea of people
that said everything
from me being
weak that I wasn't able
to call out this person,
how do you sit down, how do
you platform this evil person,
how do you make him look
human, all that kind of stuff.
And you have to deal with that.
You have to-- of
course, it's great.
It's great because I have to
do some soul searching, which
is like, did I?
You have to ask
some hard questions.
I love criticism like that.
You get to--
I had some low points.
There's definitely some despair
and you start to wonder,
was I too weak?
Should I have talked to him?
What is true?
And you sit there alone
and just marinate in that.
Hopefully over time
that makes you better,
but I still don't know what the
right answer with that one is.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, I feel
that money plays a role here.
When people think
big pharma, they
think billions of dollars--
maybe even trillions
of dollars, really.
And certainly people who make a
lot of money get scrutiny that
others don't.
Part of it is that they are
often not always visible,
but I think that there is
a natural and reflexive--
and I'm not justifying it.
I certainly don't
feel this because I
know some people who
are very wealthy,
some people who are very poor.
I can't say it scales
with happiness at all.
People are always
shocked to hear that,
but that's what I've observed
in very wealthy people.
But that people who
have a lot of money
are often held to a
different standard
because people resent
that, some people resent
that, and maybe there are
other reasons as well.
I mean, among people
who are very wealthy,
oftentimes the wish
is for status, right?
Not money.
You get a bunch of
billionaires in a room,
and unless one of
them is Elon, who
also has immense status
for his accomplishments,
typically if you put a
Nobel Prize winner in a room
with a bunch of
billionaires they're
all talking to that person.
Right?
And there are many very
interesting billionaires.
But status is something that is
often but not always associated
with money, but is a much
rarer form of uniqueness
out there, a
positive uniqueness--
if one considers status positive
because there's a downside to.
So I wonder whether or not the
Pfizer CEO caught extra heat
because people
assume, and I probably
assume also, that his
salary is quite immense.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
So because I have a
lot of data on this.
I can answer it.
It's a very good hypothesis.
Let's test that scientifically.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: He's about to
tell me it's a great hypothesis
but it's wrong.
I know the smirk.
I know the smirk.
LEX FRIDMAN: I honestly
think it's wrong.
That effect is there
for a lot of people,
but I think the distrust
is not towards the CEO.
The distrust is
towards the company.
One of the really
difficult soul searching I
had to do, which is just having
to interact with Pfizer folks
at every level, from
junior to the CEO,
they're all really nice people.
They have a mission.
They talk about trying
to really help people
because that's the
best way to make
money is to come
up with medicine
that helps a lot of people.
The mission is clear.
They're all good people, a lot
of really brilliant people,
PhDs.
So you can have a system
where all the people are good,
including the CEO.
And by good, I mean
people that really
are trying to do everything.
They dedicate their
whole life to do good.
And yet, you have to think
that that system can deviate
from a path that does good
because you start to deceive
yourself of what is good,
you turn it into a game
where money does come into
play from a company perspective
where you convince yourself
the more money you make,
the more good you'll
be able to do.
And then you start to focus
more and more and more
on making more money, and then
you can really deviate and lose
track of what is actually good.
I'm not saying necessarily
Pfizer does that,
but I think companies
could do that.
You can apply that criticism
to social media companies,
to big pharma companies.
One of the big lessons for me--
I don't know what the answer
is, but that all the people
inside the company
can be good, people
you would want to
hang out with, people
you would want to work with,
but as a company is doing evil.
That's a possibility.
So the distrust I don't think
is towards the billionaire
individual, which I do
see a lot of in this case.
I think it's Wall
Street distrust,
that the machinery of this
particular organization
has gone off track.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It's the
generalization of hate again.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
And then good luck
figuring out what is true.
This is the tough stuff.
But I should say
the individuals--
individual scientists
at the NIH and Pfizer
are just incredible people.
They're really brilliant people.
I never trust the administration
or the business people--
no offense, business people.
But the scientists
are always good.
They have the right
motivator in life.
But again, they can
have blinders on.
Too focused on the science.
Nazi Germany has a
history of people
just too focused on
the science and then
the politicians use the
scientists to achieve
whatever end they want.
But if you just look narrowly
at the journey of a scientist,
it's a beautiful one
because they're ultimately
in it for the
curiosity, the moment
of discovery versus money.
I mean, prestige probably does
come into play later in life,
but especially young scientists.
They're after the--
it's like they're
pulling at the
threat of curiosity
to try to discover
something big.
They get excited by
that kind of stuff,
and it's beautiful to see.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: It
is beautiful see.
I have a former
graduate student,
now a postdoc at
Caltech, and I don't even
know she had a cell phone.
She would come in the lab, put
her cell phone into the desk,
and she was
tremendously productive.
But that wasn't why
I brought it up.
She was productive as a side
effect of just being absolutely
committed and
obsessed to discover
the answers to the
questions she was
asking as best she could, and
it was-- you could feel it.
You could just feel the
intensity, and just incredibly
low activation energy.
If there was an experiment to
do she would just go do it.
You're teaching at MIT.
You are obviously
traveling the world,
you're right on the podcast
a lot of coverage of chess
recently, which is interesting.
I don't play chess but--
LEX FRIDMAN: Oh, I have
some scientific questions
to you about that.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh, OK.
Sure.
Let's get to those for sure.
And then--
LEX FRIDMAN: You're
not going to like it.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh, no.
OK.
And then also some very--
do I have to spell
Massachusetts again?
LEX FRIDMAN: Of course.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Also you still seem
to have a proclivity for finding
guests that are controversial,
right?
You're thinking about Tate,
we're talking about Trump,
we're talking about the Pfizer
CEO, we're talking about Fauci.
These are intense people.
And so what we're
getting folks is a--
we're not doing
neuroimaging here
in the traditional sense of
putting someone into a scanner.
What we're doing
here is we're using,
as the great Karl Deisseroth,
who was on your podcast--
LEX FRIDMAN: Thank you for that.
Thank you for connecting us.
He's an incredible person.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: He's an
incredible psychiatrist,
bioengineer, and human
being and writer,
and your conversation
with him was phenomenal.
I listened to it twice.
I actually have taken notes.
We talk about it
in this household.
We really do.
His description of
love is not to be
missed, I'll just
leave it at that,
because if I try and say
it I won't capture it well.
But we're getting
a language based
map of at least a portion
of Lex Fridman's brain here.
So what else is going on
these days in that brain
as it relates to robotics, AI?
Our last conversation
was a lot about robots
and the potential for
robot-human interaction.
Even what is a robot, et cetera.
Are you still working on robots
or focused on robots, and where
is science showing up in your
life besides the things we've
already talked about?
LEX FRIDMAN: So I
think the last time
we talked was before Ukraine.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yes.
You were just about to leave.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes.
I mean--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: So
that's why I went on.
I was like, you
know, this might be
the last-- you said you
wanted to come out here
before or after.
I was like, come
out there before.
I want to see you before you go.
But here you are in the flesh.
LEX FRIDMAN: So a lot of--
just a lot of my mind has
been occupied, obviously,
with that part of the world.
But most of the
difficult struggles
that I'm still going through
is that I haven't launched
the company that
I want to launch
and the company
has to do with AI.
I mean, it's maybe a
longer conversation,
but the ultimate dream is
to put robots in every home.
But short term I see
there a possibility
of launching a
social media company,
and it's a nontrivial
explanation why that
leads to robots in the home.
But it's basically
the algorithms
that fuel effective
social robotics, so
robots that you can form
a deep connection with.
And so I've been really-- yeah,
I've been building prototypes
but struggling that
I don't have maybe,
if I were to be critical,
the guts to launch a company.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Or the time.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well,
it's combined.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I think
you've got the guts.
I mean, it's clear if you'll
do an interview with the Pfizer
CEO and you're considering
putting this Tate
fellow on your podcast and
you've gone to the Ukraine
that you have the guts.
It means not doing quite
a lot of other things.
LEX FRIDMAN: That's what I mean.
It does take-- the thing
is, as many people know,
when you fill your
day and you're busy,
that busyness becomes an excuse
that you use against doing
the things that scare you.
A lot of people use
family in this way.
You know, my wife,
my kids, I can't.
When in reality some of the most
successful people have a wife
and have kids and have
families and they still do it.
And so a lot of times we can
fill the day with busy work,
with--
yeah, of course, I have podcasts
and all this kind of stuff.
And they make me happy and
they're all-- they're wonderful
and there's research,
there's teaching, and so on.
But all of that can just serve
as an excuse from the thing
that my heart says is
the right thing to do,
and that's why I don't
have the guts, the guts
to say no to
basically everything
and then to focus all out.
Because part of it is
I'm unlikely to fail
at anything in my life
currently because I've already
found a comfortable place.
With a startup it's
mostly going to be--
most likely going to
be a failure, if not
an embarrassing failure.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
the machine learning data
that I'm aware of--
I don't know a lot
about machine learning,
but within the realm
of neuroscience,
say that a failure
rate of about 15%
is optimal for
neuroplasticity and growth.
Whether or not that translates
to all kinds of practices
isn't clear, but getting
trials right 85% of the time
seems to be optimal
for language learning,
seems to be optimal
for mathematics,
and it seems to be optimal
for physical pursuits
on average, right?
I'm sure I'm going--
you have more machine
learning geeks
that listen to your podcast
than listen to this podcast,
but it doesn't mean you have
to fail on 15% of your weight
sets, folks.
I mean, it could be 16%.
No, I'm just kidding.
It's not exact, but it's a
pretty good rule of thumb.
LEX FRIDMAN: I think a
lot of startup founders
would literally murder
for 85% chance of success.
I think given all the
opportunities I have,
the skill set, the funding,
all that kind of stuff,
my chances are relatively
high for success.
But what relatively high
means in the startup world
is still far, far below 85.
You're talking about
single digit percentages.
Most startups fail.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
I think it means--
the decision to focus on the
company and not on other things
means the decision to close
the hatch on dopamine retrieval
from all these other things that
are very predictable sources
of dopamine.
Not that everything is
dopamine, but dopamine
is, I think, the primary
chemical driver of motivation.
If you know that you can get
some degree of satisfaction
from scrolling social media
or from that particular cup
of coffee, that's what
you're going to do.
That's what you're going to
consume unless you somehow
invert the algorithm
and you say,
it's actually my
denial of myself
drinking that coffee that's
going to be the dopamine.
Right?
LEX FRIDMAN: Oh, interesting.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And
that's the beauty
of having a forebrain is that
you can make those decisions.
This is the essence,
I do believe,
of what we see of David Goggins.
There's much more there.
There's a person that none
of us know and only he knows,
of course.
But the idea that the pain
is the source of dopamine.
The limbic friction, as I
sometimes like to call it,
is the source of dopamine.
That runs counter to how
most nervous systems work,
but it's decision based, right?
It's not because his
musculature is a certain way
or he had CRISPR or something.
It's because he decides that.
And I think that's
amazing, but what
it means in terms of
starting a company
and changing priorities is
a closing the hatch on all
or many of the current
sources of dopamine
so that you can derive
dopamine from the failures
within this narrow
context, and there's
a very reductionist view
and neurocentric view
of what we're talking about.
But I think about this a lot.
I mean, the decision to choose
one relationship versus another
is a decision to close down
other opportunities, right?
So I think that the
decision to order one thing
off the menu versus others
is the decision to close down
those other hatches.
So I think that you
absolutely can do it.
It's just a question of,
can you flip the algorithm?
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
Remap the source of
dopamine to something else.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Right.
And maybe go out there
not to succeed but make
the-- the journey is the
destination type thing,
but when you're financially
vested in your time--
and as far as I
know, we only get
one life, at least
on this planet
and you want to spend
that wisely, right?
LEX FRIDMAN: And a lot of the
people that surround you--
people are really
important, and I
don't have people around me that
say you should do a start up.
It's very difficult to
find such people because--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Is Austin
big startup culture right now?
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, it is.
It is.
But it doesn't make sense
for me to do a startup.
This is what the people
that love me my whole life
have been telling me,
it doesn't make sense
what you're doing right now.
Just do the thing you
were doing previously.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Why
do I get the sense
that because they
are saying this
you're apt to go against them?
LEX FRIDMAN: No.
Actually, I was never
that, unfortunately.
Unfortunately, I need--
I've talked to people I love,
my parents, family, and so on,
friends.
I'm one of those people that
needs unconditional support
for difficult things.
I know myself coaching
wise is good--
so here's how I
get coached best.
Let's say wrestling.
I like a coach that says,
you want to win the Olympics?
They will not-- if
I say I want to win
the gold medal at the
Olympics in freestyle
wrestling I want a coach that
doesn't blink once and hears me
and believes that I
can do it, and then
is viciously intense and
cruel to me on that pursuit.
If you want to do
this, let's do this.
Right?
But that's support.
That positivity, I don't--
I'm never-- I'm not energized,
nor do I see that as love,
a person saying--
basically criticizing that.
Saying, you're too old to win
the Olympic gold medal, right?
Or all the things
you can come up with.
That's not helpful to me
and I can't find a dopamine,
or I haven't yet, a dopamine
source from the haters.
Basically people that are
criticizing you, trying
to prove them wrong.
It never got me off.
It never--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Whereas some
people seem to like that.
I mean, David Goggins
seems to come to mind.
He seems driven by many sources.
He has access--
I don't know because
I've never asked him,
but if I were to
venture a guess,
I'd say that he probably
has a lot of options
inside his head as how to
push through challenge.
Not just overcome pain,
but he'll post sometimes
about the fact that
people will say
this or people will do this
and talk about the pushback
approach.
He'll also talk
about the pushback
approach that's purely
internal that doesn't
involve anyone else.
Great versatility there.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
There's literally
like a voice he
yells that represents
some kind of devil that
wants him to fail,
and he calls them
bitch and all kinds of things
saying, you know, fuck you.
I'm not.
There's always an enemy and
he's going against that enemy.
I mean, I wish--
maybe that's something.
I mean, it's really interesting.
Maybe you can remap it this
way so that you can construct--
that's a kind of
obvious mechanism.
Construct an amorphous
blob that is a hater that
wants you to fail, right?
That's kind of the
David Goggins thing.
And that blob says you're
too weak, you're too dumb,
you're too old,
you're too fat, you're
too whatever, and getting you
to want to quit and so on.
And then you start getting
angry at that blob,
and maybe that's
a good motivator.
I haven't personally
really tried that.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, I've
had external challenge when
I was a postdoc, very
prominent laboratory--
several prominent
laboratories, in fact,
were working on the
same thing that I was,
and I was just
this lowly postdoc
working on a project
pretty independent
from the lab I was in.
And there was
competition but there
was plenty of room for everybody
to win, but in my head--
and frankly, I won't
disclose who this is.
And because there was some
legitimate competition there
and a little bit of
friction-- not too much,
healthy scientific friction--
yeah, I might have pushed
a few extra hours or more,
a little bit.
I have to say, it
felt metabolizing.
It felt catabolic, right?
I couldn't be sustained by it.
And I contrast that with
the podcast or the work
that my laboratory
is doing now focused
on stress and human performance,
et cetera, and it's pure love.
It's pure curiosity and love.
I mean, there are hard
days, but I never-- there's
no adversary in the picture.
They're the practical
workings of life that--
LEX FRIDMAN: That was the thing
that Joe really inspired me on,
and people do create
adversarial relationships
in podcasting because you get--
YouTubers do this.
They hate seeing somebody
else be successful.
There's a feeling of
jealousy, and some people even
see that as healthy.
Mr. Beast is somebody, some
of these popular YouTubers,
how do they get 100 million
views and I only get 20 views?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Mr.
Beast devoted his entire--
according to him,
his entire life
he's been focused on becoming
this massive YouTube channel.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, that,
he's inspiring in many ways,
but there's some
people that become
famous for doing much less
insane pursuit of greatness
than Mr. Beast.
People become famous and
on social media and so on,
and it's easy to
be jealous of them.
One of the early things
I've learned from Joe just
being a fan of his
podcast is how much
he celebrated everybody.
And again, maybe I ruined
my whole dopamine thing
but I don't get energized by
people that become popular.
In the podcasting
space and YouTube,
it doesn't-- it's awesome.
All of it is awesome and
I'm inspired by that.
But the problem is that's
not a good motivator.
Inspiration is like, oh,
cool, humans can do this.
This is beautiful.
But it's not--
I'm looking.
I'm looking for a
forcing function.
That's why I gave away
the salary from MIT.
I was hoping my bank
account had zero.
That would be a forcing
function to be like, oh shit.
You know?
And you're not allowed
to have a normal job,
so I wanted to launch--
and then the podcast
becomes a source of income.
So it's like, goddammit.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, and here I have
to confess my biases.
You are so good at what you
do in the realm of podcast--
and you're excellent at
other things as well,
I just have less
experience in those things.
I know here I'm taking
the liberty of speaking
for many, many people
in just saying,
I sure as hell hope you
don't shut down the podcast.
But as your friend
and as somebody
who cares very deeply about
your happiness and your deeper
satisfaction, if it's
in your heart's heart
to do a company, well then,
damn it, do the company.
LEX FRIDMAN: And a lot
of it I wouldn't even
categorize as happiness.
I don't know if you have
things like that in your life,
but I'm probably the happiest
I could possibly be right now.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
That's wonderful.
LEX FRIDMAN: But
the thing is there's
a longing for the
start up that has
nothing to do with happiness.
It's something else.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
That's that itch.
That's that itch.
LEX FRIDMAN: I'm pretty sure
I'll be less happy because it's
a really tough process.
I mean, to whatever degree
you can extract happiness
from struggle, yes, maybe.
But I don't see it.
I think I'll have some
very, very low points.
There's a lot of people
who find companies--
found companies know about.
And I also want to
be in a relationship,
I want to get married,
and sure as hell
a startup is not
going to increase
the likelihood of that.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: We
could start up a family
and start a company.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, that's a--
I'm a huge believer
in that, which
is get in a relationship
at a low point
in your life, which is--
[LAUGHTER]
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Sorry.
I'm not disputing your stance,
nor am I agreeing with it.
It's just every once
in a while there's
a Lex Fridmanism that hits a
particular circuit in my brain.
I have to just laugh out loud.
LEX FRIDMAN: I just
think that it's
easy to have a relationship
when everything is good.
The relationships that become
strong and are tested quickly
are the ones when
shit is going down.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, then
there's hope for me yet.
Before we sat down I was
having a conversation
with my podcast
producer, who is a--
I wouldn't say avid, rather he's
a rabid consumer of podcasts
and finds these amazing
podcasts, small podcasts
and unique episodes.
Anyway, we were talking
about some stuff
that he had seen and read
in the business sector,
and he was talking about
the difference between job,
career, and a calling, right?
And I think he was
extracting this
from conversations of CEOs
and founders, et cetera.
I forget the specific
founders that
brought this to light for him.
But that this idea that
if you focus on a job
you can make an income, and
hopefully you enjoy your job
or not hate it too much.
A career represents a
sort of, in my mind,
a kind of series of
evolutions that one
can go through-- junior
professor, tenure, et cetera.
But a calling has a whole
other level of energetic pull
to it because it
includes career and job
and it includes this
concept of a life.
It's very hard to draw the line
between a calling in career
and a calling in the
other parts of your life.
So the question,
therefore, is, do
you feel a calling
to start this company
or is it more of a compulsion
that irritates you?
Is it something you
wish would go away
or is it something that
you hope won't go away?
LEX FRIDMAN: No, I
hope it won't go away.
It's a calling.
It's a calling.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
That's beautiful.
LEX FRIDMAN: It's like
when I see a robot--
when I first
interacted with robots,
and it became even stronger the
more sophisticated the robots
I interacted, with
I see a magic there.
And you're like,
you look around,
does anyone else see this magic?
It's kind of like maybe
when you fall in love,
like that feeling.
Does anyone else
notice this person
that just walked in the room?
I feel that way
about robots, and I
can elaborate what that
means but I'm not even sure I
can convert it into words.
I just feel like the
social integration
of robots in society will create
a really interesting world.
And our ability to
anthropomorphize
when we look at a robot and
our ability to feel things
when we look at a robot is
something that most of us
don't yet experience,
but I think
everybody will experience
in the next few decades.
And I just want to be
a part of exploring
that because it hasn't been
really thoroughly explored.
The best roboticists
in the world
are not currently working
on that problem at all.
They try to avoid human
beings completely,
and nobody's really
working that problem
in terms of when you
look at the numbers.
All the big tech companies
that are investing money,
the closest thing
to that is Alexa
and basically being a servant
to help tell you the weather
or play music and so on.
It's not trying to
form a deep connection.
And so sometimes you
just notice the thing.
Not only do I notice the magic.
There's a gut
feeling, which I try
not to speak to because
there's no track record,
but I feel like I can be good
at bringing that magic out
of the robot.
And there's no data that
says I would be good at that,
but there's a feeling.
It's just a feeling.
Because I've done
so many things--
I love doing playing guitar,
all that kind of stuff, jujitsu.
I've never felt that feeling.
When I'm doing
jujitsu I don't feel
the magic of the genius
required to be extremely good.
At guitar I don't
feel any of that.
But I've noticed that in
others, great musicians,
they notice the magic
about the thing they do
and they ran with it.
And I just always thought--
I think it had a different
form before I knew robots
existed, before I existed.
The form was more about
the magic between humans.
I think of it as love, but
the smile that two friends
have towards each other
when I was really young.
And people would be excited
when they first know each other
and notice each other,
and there's that moment
that they share that
feeling together.
I was like, wow, that's
really interesting.
It is really interesting
that these two
separate intelligent
organisms are
able to connect all of a sudden
on this deep emotional level.
It's like, huh.
It's just beautiful to see,
and I notice the magic of that.
And then when I started a
programming-- programming,
period, but then programming
AI systems, you realize, oh,
that could be--
that's not just between
humans and humans.
That could be humans and
other entities, dogs, cats,
and robots.
And so I-- for some reason
it hit me the most intensely
when I saw robots.
So yeah, it's a calling.
But it's a calling that I can
just enjoy the vision of it,
the vision of a future world, of
an exciting future world that's
full of cool stuff, or I can
be part of building that.
And being part of
building that means
doing the hard work
of capitalism, which
is like raising funds from
people, which for me, right
now, is the easy part, and
then hiring a lot of people.
I don't know how much you know
about hiring, but hiring--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Hiring
excellent people.
LEX FRIDMAN:
Excellent people that
will define the
trajectory of not only
your company, but your whole
existence as a human being.
And building it up, not
failing them because now
they all depend on you,
and not failing the world
with an opportunity
to bring something
that brings joy to people.
And all of that
pressure, just non-stop
fires that you have to put out.
The drama, the having
to work with people
you've never worked with like
lawyers and human resources
and supply chain.
And because this is
very compute heavy,
the computer infrastructure,
managing security,
cybersecurity, because you're
dealing with people's data.
So now you have to understand
not only the cybersecurity
of data and the privacy, how
to maintain privacy correctly
with data, but also the
psychology of people trusting
you with their data.
And how, if you look at Mark
Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey
and those folks,
they seem to be hated
by a large number of people.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Jack seemed--
I didn't--
LEX FRIDMAN: Much less so, yes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I think I
always think of Jack as a loved
individual, but--
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, yeah, you
have a very positive view
of the world, yes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I like Jack a
lot and I like his mind and I--
someone close to him
described him to me
recently as he's an
excellent listener.
That's what they
said about Jack,
and that's my
experience of him too.
Very private person so
we'll leave it at that.
But listen, I think
Jack Dorsey is
one of the greats of
the last 200 years
and is just much quieter
about his stance on things
than a lot of people.
But much of what we see in
the world that's wonderful,
I think we owe him
a debt of gratitude.
I'm just voicing my
stance here, but--
LEX FRIDMAN: And the person.
This is really important.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
LEX FRIDMAN: A wonderful
person, a brilliant person,
a good person,
but you still have
to pay the price of making
any kind of mistakes
as the head of a company.
You don't get any extra bonus
points for being a good person.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: But his
willingness to go on Rogan
and deal directly and say,
I don't know an answer
to that in some cases.
But to deal directly with some
really challenging questions
to me earned him
tremendous respect.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes.
As an individual.
He was still part of him--
you've said-- OK,
and I love Jack too,
and I interact with him often.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: He's
been on your podcast.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes.
But he's also part of a
system, as we talked about,
and I would argue that Jack
shouldn't have brought anyone
else with him on that podcast.
If you go--
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Oh, that's right.
He had a cadre of--
LEX FRIDMAN: Oh, he had I
guess the head legal with him.
And also it requires a
tremendous amount of skill
to go on a podcast
like Joe Rogan
and be able to win over
the trust of people
by being able to be
transparent and communicate
how the company really works
because the more you reveal
about how a social
media company works,
the more you open
up for security,
the vector of attacks increases.
Also, there's a lot of
difficult decisions in terms
of censorship and
not that are made
that if you make
them transparent
you're going to get an order
of magnitude more hate.
So you have to make all
those kinds of decisions,
and I think that's one of
the things I have to realize
is you have to take that
avalanche of potentially
hate if you make mistakes.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, you
have a very clear picture
of this architecture
of what's required
in order to create a company.
Of course, there's
division of labor too.
I mean, you don't have to do
all of those things in detail,
but finding people that
are excellent to do--
to run the critical
segments is obviously key.
I'll just say what
I said earlier,
which is if it's in your heart's
heart to start a company,
if that, indeed,
is your calling,
and it sounds like it
is, then I can't wait.
LEX FRIDMAN: Does the
heart have a heart?
I don't know.
What's that
expression even mean?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Probably not.
LEX FRIDMAN: We
romanticize the heart.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: In my lab
at one point, early days
we worked on cuttlefish, and
they have multiple hearts,
but they pump green
blood, believe it or not.
Very fascinating animal.
Speaking of hearts
and green blood,
earlier today
before we sat down I
solicited four questions on
Instagram in a brief post.
LEX FRIDMAN: Do you want to--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: If you'll--
LEX FRIDMAN: --look
at some of them?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yes, let's
take these in real time.
My podcast team is always
teasing me that I never
have any charge on my phone.
I'm one of these people that
likes to run in the yellow,
or whatever it is.
LEX FRIDMAN: An iPhone?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
LEX FRIDMAN: It's funny
how always the iPhone
people are out of battery.
It's weird.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
I just got a new one.
LEX FRIDMAN: So weird.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I mean, this
one has plenty of battery.
I just got a new one so
I have different numbers
for different things,
personal and work, et cetera.
I'm trying that now.
All right.
Get into the--
LEX FRIDMAN: I have a chess
thing too to mention to you.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Oh, yes, please.
Will I insult you if I look up
these questions as you ask me?
LEX FRIDMAN: No, no.
But I will insult you by asking
you this question because I
think it's hilarious.
So there's been a controversy
about cheating where
Hans Niemann, who
is a 2,700 player--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh, yeah.
LEX FRIDMAN: --was
accused of cheating.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I saw that
clip on your clips channel.
By the way, I love
your clips channel,
but I listen to
your full channel.
LEX FRIDMAN: The big accusation
is that he cheated by having--
I mean, it's half
joke but it's starting
getting me to wonder whether--
so that you can cheat by having
vibrating anal beads so you
can send messages to--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well, let's
rephrase that statement.
Not you can, but one can.
LEX FRIDMAN: One can.
One can.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Yeah, thank you.
LEX FRIDMAN: That was
a personal attack, yes.
But it made me realize, I mean--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I'm just going
to adjust myself in my seat
here.
LEX FRIDMAN: I use
it all the time
for podcasting to
send myself messages
to remind myself of notes.
But it's interesting.
I mean, it--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I'm not
going to call you again.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, that's
exactly where I keep my phone.
It did get me down this
whole rabbit hole of, well,
how would you be able to
send communication in order
to cheat in different sports?
I mean, that doesn't even have
to do with chess in particular,
but it's interesting
in chess and poker
that there's mechanisms
modern day where
you're streaming live
the competition so people
can watch it on TV.
If they can only send
you a signal back, they--
it's just a fun little
thing to think about
and if it's possible
to pull off.
So I wanted to get your
scientific evaluation of that--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: To
cheat using some sort
of interoceptive device?
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah.
Vibrating of some kind.
Yeah.
Or no, no.
That's one way to send
signals is, like, Morse code,
basically.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
So there's a famous--
I believe there's
a famous real world
story of physics students--
I'm going to get
some of this wrong
so I'm saying this in
kind of coarse form
so that somebody
will correct this.
But I believe it was physics
graduate students from UC Santa
Cruz or somewhere else,
maybe it was Caltech--
a bunch of universities
so that no one associates
it with any one university
that went to Vegas
and used some sort of tactile
device for card counting thing.
This was actually
demonstrated also--
not this particular
incident, I don't think--
in the movie Casino
where they spotted a--
I remember Robert
De Niro, who you
have a not so vague resemblance
to, by the way, in Taxi Driver.
LEX FRIDMAN: God, I wish I had
a De Niro impression right now.
Travis Bickle.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Look it up, folks.
Travis Bickle is if Lex ever
shaved his head into a Mohawk.
LEX FRIDMAN: I would.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: So he had a
tapping device on his ankle
that was signaling.
Someone else was counting
cards and then signaling
to that person.
So yeah, that could be
done in the tactile way.
It could be done,
obviously, earpieces
if it's deep earpiece.
I think there are ways
that they look for that.
Certainly any kind
of vibrational device
in whatever orifice provided
someone could pay attention
to that while still
playing the game.
Yeah, I think it's
entirely possible.
Now, could it be
done purely neurally?
Could there be
something that was--
and listen, it wouldn't have
to even be below the skull.
This is where whenever people
hear about Neuralink or brain
machine interface
they always think,
oh, you have to drill
down below the skull
and put a chip below
into the skull.
I think there are people
walking around nowadays
with glucose monitoring devices,
like Levels-- which I've used
and it was very informative
for me, actually,
as a kind of an experiment.
Gave me a lot of interesting
insights about my blood sugar
regulation, how it reacts to
different foods, et cetera.
Well, you can implant
a tactile device
below the skin with
a simple incision.
Actually, one of the
neurosurgeons at Neuralink
I know well because he
came up at some point
through my laboratory
and was at Stanford,
and he actually has put in a
radio receiver in his hand,
and his wife has it too.
And he can open locks
of his house and things
like that, so he's been doing--
LEX FRIDMAN: Under the skin?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Under the skin.
You can go to--
LEX FRIDMAN: How does that work?
So how do you use--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: A piercer.
You go to a body
piercer type person
and they can just
slide it under there,
and it's got a battery
life of something
and some fairly long duration.
LEX FRIDMAN: How do you
experience the tactile--
the haptics of it?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Oh, no.
That just allows him to
open certain locks with just
his hand, but you could easily
put some sort of tactile device
in there.
LEX FRIDMAN: But does it
have to connect to the nerves
or is it just like--
just vibration?
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
No, just vibration.
LEX FRIDMAN: And
you can probably
sense it even if it's
under the skin, I wonder.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: And
it can be by-- it
can be Bluetooth linked.
I mean, I've seen--
there's an Engineering
Laboratory at the University
of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana,
that's got an amazing
device which is
about the size of a Band-Aid.
It goes on the
clavicles and it uses
sound waves pinged into the
body to measure cavitation.
Think about this for a moment.
This is being used in
the military where,
let's say, you're leading
an operation or something.
People are getting shot,
shot at, and on a laptop
you can see where the
bullet entry points are.
Are people dead?
Are they bleeding out?
Entry, exit points.
You can get-- take it out
of the battlefield scenario.
You can get breathing, body
position 24 hours a day.
There's so much that you can
do looking at cavitation.
So these same sorts of
devices on 12 hour Bluetooth
could be used to send
all sorts of signals.
Maybe every time you're
supposed to hold your hand--
I'm not a good gambler
so I only play roulette
when I go to Vegas because
you just long, boring games,
but you get some good mileage
out of each out of each run,
usually.
But maybe every time
you're supposed to hold,
the person gets a
stomach cinching
because this is stimulating
the vagus a little bit
and they get a little
bit of an ache.
So it doesn't have
to be Morse code.
It can be yes, no, maybe.
Right?
It can be green, red,
yellow type signaling.
It doesn't have to be very
sophisticated to give somebody
a significant advantage.
Anyway, I haven't thought
about this in detail
before this conversation
but, oh, yeah,
there's an immense landscape.
LEX FRIDMAN: I don't
know if you know
a poker player named Phil Ivey?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: No, I don't
follow the gambling thing.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well,
he's considered
to be one of the
greatest poker players
of all time legitimately.
He's just incredibly good.
But he got-- there's
this big case where
he was accused of
cheating and prove--
and it's not really
cheating, which
is what's really fascinating.
Is it turns out--
so he plays poker.
Texas Hold'em, mostly,
but all kinds of poker.
It turns out that the grid
on the back of the cards
is often printed a
little bit imperfectly,
and so you can use the
asymmetry of the imperfections
to try to figure
out certain cards.
So if you play and you remember
that a certain card is, like--
I think the 8 in that deck that
he was accused of-- an 8 and 9
were slightly different
symmetry wise.
So he can now ask
the dealer actually
to rotate it to
check the symmetry.
So you would ask the dealer
to rotate the card to see that
there's-- to detect the
asymmetry of the back
of the card, and now he
knows which cards are
8's and 9's or likelier to be
8's and 9's, and he was using
that information to play
poker and win a lot of money.
But it's just a
slight advantage.
And his case is-- and
in fact, the judge
found this, that he's
not actually cheating,
but it's not right.
You can't use this kind
of extra information.
So it's fascinating that you
can discover these little holes
in games if you pay
close enough attention.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yeah.
It's fascinating.
And I think that I
did watch that clip
about the potential of a
cheating event in chess,
and the fact that a
number of chess players
admit to cheating at some
point in their career.
Very, very interesting.
LEX FRIDMAN: Well,
it was online.
So online cheating
is easier, right?
When you're playing
online cheating
in a game where the machine
is much better than the human,
it's very difficult to
prove that you're human.
And that applies, by the
way, another really big thing
is in social media, the bots.
If you're running a
social media company
you have to deal with the
bots and they become--
one of the really
exciting things
in machine learning and
artificial intelligence, to me,
is the very fast improvement
of language models.
So neural networks
that generate text,
that interpret text, that
generate from text, images
and all that kind of stuff.
But you're now going to
create incredible bots that
look awfully a lot like humans.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Well, at least they're
not going to be those
crypto bots that
seem to populate my comment
section when I post anything
on Instagram.
I actually delete those
even though they add
to the comment roster and if--
they bother me so much.
I spend at least 10, 15 minutes
on each post just deleting
those.
I don't know what
they need to do
but I'm not interested
in those, whatever
it is they're offering.
Speaking of nonbots,
I'm going to assume
that all the questions
are not from bots.
There are a lot of
questions here--
more than 10,000 questions.
Goodness.
I'll just take a few,
working from top to bottom.
What ideas have you been
wrestling with lately?
And I think about
the company as one,
but as I scroll to the
next, what are some others?
LEX FRIDMAN: Well, some of
the things we've talked about,
which is the ideas of how
to understand what is true,
what is true about a human
being, how to reveal that,
how to reveal that
through conversation, how
to challenge that
properly, that it leads
to understanding not derision.
So that applies to
everybody from Donald Trump
to Vladimir Putin.
Also another idea is there's
a deep distrust of science
in trying to understand-- the
growing distrust of science,
trying to understand what's
the role of those of us
that have a foot in the
scientific community,
how to regain some
of that trust.
Also, there's-- as we talked
about, how to find and how to--
yeah, how to find and how to
maintain a good relationship.
I mean, that's really been--
I've never felt
quite as lonely as I
have this year with Ukraine.
It's just like, so many
times I would just lay there
and just feeling so deeply alone
because I felt that my home--
not my home literally
because I'm an American.
I'm a proud American.
I'll die an American.
But my home in the
sense of generationally,
my family's home, is now going--
has been changed forever.
There's no more being proud of
being from the former Russia
or Ukraine.
It's now a political
message to say--
to show your pride, and so
it's been extremely lonely.
And within that world, with
all the things I'm pursuing,
how do you find a
successful relationship?
It has been tough.
But obviously-- and
there's a huge number
of technical ideas
with the startup of,
like, how the hell do
you make this thing work?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Well,
the relationship topic
is one we talked a
little bit about,
and last time we touched on
in a little bit more detail.
We're going to come back to
that, so I've made a note here.
What or who inspired
Lex, you, to wear
a suit every time you podcast?
That's a good question.
I don't know the answer to that.
LEX FRIDMAN: So there's two
answers to that question.
One is a suit and two is
a black suit and black tie
because I used to do--
I used to have more variety,
which is like it was always
a black suit but
I would sometimes
do a red tie and a blue tie.
But that was mostly me
trying to fit in to society
because varieties-- you're
supposed to have some variety.
What inspired me at first
was a general culture
that doesn't take
itself seriously
in terms of how you present
yourself to the world.
So in academia,
in the tech world,
at Google, everybody was wearing
pajamas and very relaxed.
In the tech.
I don't know how it
is in the science,
in the chemistry,
biology, and so on.
But in computer science
everybody was very--
I mean, very relaxed in
terms of the stuff they
wear so I wanted to try
to really take myself
seriously and take every
single moment seriously
and everything I do
seriously, and the suit
made me feel that way.
I don't know how it looks,
but it made me feel that way.
And I think, in terms
of people I look up
to that wore a suit that made
me think of that is probably
Richard Feynman.
I see--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: He was
a wonderful human being.
LEX FRIDMAN: I see him as the
epitome of class and humor
and brilliance, and
obviously I could never
come close to that kind of--
be able to simply explain
really complicated ideas
and to have humor and wit,
but definitely aspire to that.
And then there's
just the Mad Men,
that whole era of the '50s,
the classiness of that.
There's something
about a suit that
both removes the importance
of fashion from the character.
You see the person.
I think not to--
I forgot who said this.
Might be, like, Coco Chanel
or somebody like this.
Is that you wear a shabby dress
and everyone sees the dress.
You wear a beautiful dress
and everybody sees the woman.
So in that sense it was--
hopefully I'm quoting
that correctly, but--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Sounds good.
LEX FRIDMAN: I think
there's a sense in which
a simple, classy suit
allows people to focus
on your character and then do
so with the full responsibility
of that, this is who I am.
Yeah.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I love
that, and I love what
you said just prior to that.
My father, who, again,
is always asking me
why I don't dress formally
like you do always
said to me growing
up, if you overdress
slightly, at least people know
that you took them seriously.
So it's a sign of respect for
your audience too in my eyes.
Someone asked, is there an AI
equivalent of psychedelics?
And I'm assuming they
mean is there something
that machines can do
for themselves in order
to alter their neural circuitry
through unconventional
activation patterns.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yes, obviously.
Well, I don't know exactly
how psychedelics work,
but you can see that with
all the diffusion models
now with Dali and the
stable diffusion that
generates from text, art.
It's basically a small
injection of noise
into a system that has
a deep representation
of visual information.
So it is able to convert text to
art in introducing uncertainty
into that noise into that.
That's kind of maybe.
I could see that as a
parallel to psychedelics,
and it's able to create
some incredible things.
From a conceptual
understanding of a thing,
it can create incredible
art that no human, I think,
could have at least
easily created
through a bit of
introduction of randomness.
Randomness does a lot of work
in the machine learning world.
Just enough.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: There are
a lot of requests of you
for relationship,
a lot of requests
about statistics about you,
data about you specifically.
Flipping past those,
what was the hardest belt
to achieve in jujitsu?
I would have assumed
the black belt,
but is that actually true?
LEX FRIDMAN: No.
I mean, everybody has
a different journey
through jujitsu, as people know.
For me, the black belt
was the ceremonial belt,
which is not usually the case,
because I fought the wars.
I trained twice a day for I
don't know how many years--
seven, eight years.
I competed nonstop.
I competed against people
much better than me.
I competed against many
and beaten many black belts
and brown belts.
I think, for me personally,
the hardest belt
was the brown belt because,
for people who know jujitsu,
the size of tournament divisions
for blue belts and purple belts
is just humongous.
Like Worlds, when I competed
at Worlds it was, like,
140 people in a division,
which means you have to win--
I forget how many times,
but seven, eight, nine times
in a row to medal.
And so I just had to put in a
lot of work during that time.
And especially for competitors,
instructors usually
really make you earn a belt.
So to earn the purple belt was
extremely difficult.
Extremely difficult. And then
to earn the brown
belt means I had
to compete nonstop against other
purple belts, which are young.
You're talking about-- the
people that usually compete
are, like, 23, 24,
25-year-olds that are shredded,
incredible cardio.
They can, for some reason, are
in their life where they can--
no kids, nothing.
They can dedicate
everything to this pursuit
so they're training two,
three, four times a day.
Diet is on point.
You're going-- and for me,
because they're usually bigger
and taller than me and
just more aggressive,
actual good athletes, yeah, I
had to go through a lot of wars
to earn that brown
belt. But then--
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I got to
try this jujitsu thing.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, you should.
But it's a different--
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Well, I tried it.
I did the one class, but I
really want to embrace it.
LEX FRIDMAN: As you know,
many pursuits like jujitsu
are different if you're doing it
in your 20s and 30s and later.
It's like it's a different--
you're not-- you can have a
bit of an ego in your 20s.
You can have that
fire under you,
but you should be more
zenlike and wise and patient
later in life.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Well, one would hope.
That's the wisdom.
LEX FRIDMAN: I think
Rogan is still a meathead.
He still goes hard and
crazy and he's still
super competitive on
that, so some people can--
Jocko is somebody like that.
ANDREW HUBERMAN:
Well, whatever they're
doing they're doing something
right because they're still
in it, and that's
super impressive.
There were far too many
questions to ask all of them,
but several, if not many, asked
a highly appropriate question
for where we are in the
arc of this discussion.
And this is one, admittedly,
that you ask in your podcast
all the time, but I
get the great pleasure
of being in the question
asker seat today.
And so, what is your
advice to young people?
LEX FRIDMAN: So I just
gave a lecture at MIT
and the amount of love I
got there is incredible.
And so of course, who
you're talking to is usually
undergrads, maybe young
graduate students, and so there
one person did ask for advice
as a question at the end.
I did a bunch of Q&A. So my
answer was that the world will
tell you to find a work-life
balance, to explore,
to try to--
try different fields
to see what you really
connect with, variety,
general education, all
that kind of stuff.
And I said in your
20s I think you
should find one thing
you're passionate about
and work harder at that than
you worked at anything else
in your life.
And if it destroys
you, it destroys you.
That's advice for in your 20s.
I don't know how universally
true that advice is,
but I think at least
give that a chance.
Sacrifice, real sacrifice
towards a thing you
really care about,
and work your ass off.
That said, I've
met so many people,
and I'm starting to
think that advice is best
applied or best tried in
the engineer disciplines,
especially programming.
I think there's a bunch of
disciplines in which you
can achieve success
with much fewer hours,
and it's much more
important to actually
have a clarity of
thinking and great ideas
and have an energetic mind.
The grind in certain disciplines
does not produce great work.
I just know that in computer
science and programming
it often does.
Some of the best people ever
that have built systems,
have programmed systems are
usually like the John Carmack
kind of people that drink
soda, eat pizza, and program
18 hours a day.
So I don't know actually.
You have to, I think, really
go discipline specific.
So my advice applies
to my own life
which has been mostly
spent behind that computer,
and for that you really, really
have to put in the hours.
And what that means
is essentially
it feels like a grind.
I do recommend that you should
at least try it in your own.
That if you interview some of
the most accomplished people
ever, I think if
they're honest with you
they're going to
talk about their 20s
as a journey of a lot of pain
and a lot of really hard work.
I think what really
happens, unfortunately,
is a lot of those successful
people later in life
will talk about
work-life balance.
They'll say, you
know what I learned
from that process is that it's
really important to get, like,
sun in the morning,
to have health,
to have good relationships.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Hire a chef.
LEX FRIDMAN: Yeah, a chef.
Exactly.
But I think you have
forgot-- those people have
forgotten the value
of the journey they
took to that lesson.
I think work-life balance is
best learned the hard way.
My own perspective.
There are certain things you
can only learn the hard way,
and so you should learn
that the hard way.
Yeah, so that's
definitely advice.
And I should say that I
admire people that work hard.
If you want to get
on my good side,
I think there are the
people that give everything
they got towards something.
It doesn't actually
matter what it
is, but towards achieving
excellence in a thing.
That's the highest thing that
we can reach for as human beings
I think is excellence
at a thing.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I love it.
Well, speaking of
excellent at a thing.
Whether or not it's teaching
at MIT or the podcast
or the company that
resides in the near future
that you create--
once again, I'm speaking for
an enormous number of people
that excellence and hard
work, certainly, are woven
through everything that you do.
Every time I sit down with
you I begin and finish
with such an immense feeling
of joy and appreciation
and gratitude, and it wouldn't
be a Lex Fridman podcast,
or in case of Lex even
being a guest on a podcast,
if the word love weren't
mentioned at least 10 times.
So the feelings of gratitude
for all the work you do,
for taking the time here today
to share with us what you're
doing, your thoughts,
your insights, what
you're perplexed about and what
drives you and your callings.
LEX FRIDMAN: Can I read a poem?
ANDREW HUBERMAN: Yes, please.
He was trying to
cut me off post.
That was getting a little long.
LEX FRIDMAN: No.
No, no, no.
I was thinking
about this recently.
It's one of my favorite
Robert Frost poems, and I--
because I wrote several
essays on it, as you do,
because I think it's a
popular one that's read.
Essays being, like, trying
to interpret poetry,
and it's one that
sticks with me.
I mean, both its calm beauty,
but in the seriousness
of what it means because I
ultimately think it's the--
so "Stopping by a Woods
on a Snowy Evening."
I think it's ultimately
a human being, a man,
asking the old Sisyphus, the
old Camus question of, why live?
I think this poem,
even though it
doesn't seem like it is a
question of a man contending
with suicide and
choosing to live.
Whose woods these
are, I think I know.
His house is in the
village, though.
He will not see me stopping
here to watch his woods fill up
with snow.
My little horse
must think it queer
to stop without a farmhouse near
between the woods and frozen
lake, the darkest
evening of the year.
He gives this
harness bells a shake
to ask if there's some mistake.
The only other sound's the sweep
of easy wind and downy flake.
The woods are lovely,
dark, and deep,
but I have promises to keep
and miles to go before I sleep,
and miles to go before I sleep.
The woods representing
the darkness,
the comfort of the woods
representing death,
and he's a man choosing to live.
Yeah, I think about that often,
especially my darker moments
is you have promises to keep.
Thank you for having me, Andrew.
You're a beautiful human being.
I love you, brother.
ANDREW HUBERMAN: I
love you, brother.
Thank you for joining me today
for my discussion with Dr. Lex
Fridman, and special thanks to
Dr. Lex Fridman for inspiring
me to start this podcast.
If you're learning from
and/or enjoying this podcast,
please subscribe to
our YouTube channel.
That's a terrific zero
cost way to support us.
In addition, please subscribe
to the podcast on Spotify
and on Apple, and on
both Spotify and Apple
you can leave us up
to a five star review.
If you have questions
or suggestions
about topics and
guests you'd like
me to include on the
Huberman Lab podcast,
please put those in the
comments section on YouTube.
I do read all the comments.
In addition, please
check out the sponsors
mentioned at the beginning
of today's episode.
That's the best way to
support this podcast.
During today's episode we
did not discuss supplements,
but on many previous episodes
of the Huberman Lab podcast
we do discuss supplements
because while supplements
aren't necessarily
for everybody,
many people derive
tremendous benefit from them
for things like enhancing
sleep and focus and hormone
augmentation and so forth.
The Huberman Lab
podcast has partnered
with Momentous
Supplements because they
are of the very highest quality
and they ship internationally.
In addition to that, they have
single ingredient formulations
that allow you to devise the
supplement regimen that's
most effective and most
cost effective for you.
If you'd like to see the
supplements discussed
on the Huberman Lab
podcast, please go
to livemomentous.com/huberman.
If you haven't already signed
up for the Huberman lab podcast
zero cost neural
network newsletter,
we invite you to do so.
It's a monthly
newsletter that has
summaries of podcast episodes
and various protocols distilled
into simple form.
You can sign up
for the newsletter
by going to hubermanlab.com,
go to the menu,
and look for Newsletter.
You supply your email, but we do
not share it with anybody else.
And as I mentioned
before, the newsletter
is completely zero cost.
And if you're not already
following us on social media,
we are @hubermanlab
on Instagram,
@hubermanlab on Twitter, and
@hubermanlab on Facebook,
and at all of those
sites I provide
science and science related
tools for mental health,
physical health, and
performance, some of which
overlap with information covered
on the Huberman Lab podcast,
but often which is distinct
from information covered
on the Huberman Lab podcast.
So again, that's @hubermanlab
on Instagram, Twitter,
and Facebook.
Thank you, again, for joining me
for the discussion with Dr. Lex
Fridman, and as
always, thank you
for your interest in science.
[MUSIC PLAYING]