2025-06-03 - Defining Empathy

Edwin Rutsch1h 22min

Edwin Rutsch00:00

Different projects. I've been getting very much into this, this AI generated video.

Jodie Jenson00:11

So been getting into it because you've been, yeah, generating

Edwin Rutsch00:15

a bunch of little videos and stuff that's fun for promotional wanting to do promotional videos for the empathy, you know, for the empathy circle and so, yeah, that's great.

Jodie Jenson00:29

Have you seen any of those AI generated stuff of like Donald Trump in the Gaza Strip? No,

Edwin Rutsch00:37

there's so many. Yeah, Baby Trump, all that, yeah,

Jodie Jenson00:41

yeah. There's some really terrifying things on the internet these

Edwin Rutsch00:44

days. It's crazy, yeah.

Jodie Jenson00:47

How was the summit, or the it wasn't the summit, but it was a conference.

Edwin Rutsch00:51

Yeah? That went well, you know, I gave 30 minute presentation on the definition, and I've been, oh yeah, kind of more on our topic. And I've been working on the the the the the cognitive, affective, you know, concern model, you know, really studying that, going through AI, getting quotes. Just really trying to, I went through all the different search engines, and you can see it's on our website, just asking, you know, you know about, about that model, to really understand it and to break it down. So break down the cognitive part. What are the what are people really meaning by cognitive empathy. What do they mean by affective empathy? And then trying to create a, then start addressing, you know, each aspect is, and I'm really seeing, you know, it's such a mess. I mean, is just, it's just, it's a, it's a power of Babel and I think the whole thing needs to be scrapped, you know, I think what we're doing is really needed. And so, yeah, I'm glad to we'd like, love to talk more about it. I did the presentation there. They didn't make a separate video of it, and then they also didn't they? They had a big you know, if you don't, if you don't close your your windows, you know, of your audience windows, then that comes on to the recording. So it wasn't very good recording that they made of that presentation. So I'm thinking of maybe doing again, maybe we could even do it together sometime, and record the that's

Jodie Jenson02:42

the great thing about you recording. Everything that we say to each other is we know that you're going to be recording so, yeah, I think that's great. Um, and did well. We

Daniel Hirtz02:55

had a we had a pretty good meeting. One time, we had a good start going, and one person joined in, and then the whole recording, she had shared an issue with the recording, and so the whole recording of that meeting could not be used.

Unknown03:10

Oh, darn it. So

Daniel Hirtz03:12

we're really we gotta, gotta be careful with that. You know, also always announcing it, yeah, yeah, like this. People were very touchy around that.

Jodie Jenson03:21

Yeah, that's fair. And did you have like, a Q and A session after your presentation?

Edwin Rutsch03:27

There was no Q and A that was, there was various different presentations. It was really interesting. I don't know if I had talked to you since about that. Kevin Waltman, who wrote his article in the Chicago times, he's talking about radical empathy. And, you know, he was critical of it. And I hadn't even heard much about radical empathy in terms of as sort of a gateway to woke philosophy. And somebody there at the at this at the conference, actually gave a talk on it, and it was all about that. And, you know, I did reach out to her want to have a dialog about it, because they're sort of, they're sort of critic. I became more aware of this, this split, you know, from sort of a pure empathy, you know, approach, which is just, you know, everybody being heard, kind of like what you see in the empathy circles versus seeing victim that that empathy is a gateway to a victim perpetrator worldview, right where I think real empathy doesn't see victims or perpetrators. It sees humans and tries to hear empathize with them, and tries to bring them together and empathic connection. And then also with the interview, I did an interview with a guy, Alan Rolfs, who's been doing active listening work since the 70s, early 70s, he started with G. Gendlin, you know, at University of Chicago, and has been involved with most of the teachers who have, who have done, you know, this active listening, empathic listening work. And he said, even in the nonviolent communication community, I don't know if you're familiar with, he says, there's that split too. There's a community kind of doing more what we're doing of, you know, empathy is the core. It means listening to everyone, versus sort of a people who are using empathy as sort of a gateway to woke activism, which is sort of based on, you know, again, people being victim, perpetrator, and you got to fight the power, the social justice kind of so it's an interesting lit to kind of address, yeah, that would be something for the definition, too. I think the definition would be to, would that'd be another pro, you know, aspect of defining what empathy is holistic empathy versus that sort of model? Yeah, yeah,

Jodie Jenson06:05

the one sided empathy. The thing that makes it so tricky is we're talking about something that is an ideal, right, where we all empathize with all sides of things. But I think what they're I wonder if what they're getting at is it's not common that people are able to do that, so they end up falling into the trap of of victimization and like, just really empathizing with who they see as the victim, because it's it's an easier version of empathy. Mm, hmm, than trying to listen to both sides. So

Edwin Rutsch06:43

I would say even the it's not even empathizing with the victim. As soon as you turn them into a victim, you're turning it into sort of a sympathy feeling sorry for someone. Yeah, you're, you're, you've kind of shifted from from the empathic to more of a sympathetic feeling sorry, which becomes sort of a self, oh, it's I have to do something in the sense that, you know, I feel sorry for these people. So those are all things to kind of explore and be able to articulate.

Jodie Jenson07:12

Yeah, I think you're right, because I don't think that they would have an issue with the kind of empathy that we're talking about. It's just the, maybe the the less mature version of it. And I know I've mentioned this before, I think Edwin, you're much more mature than other people, than the rest of us. Daniel, maybe you are as well.

Daniel Hirtz07:37

Well. I mean, what we're trying to do is become mature around this word, you know, around what it actually? What are we actually talking about? You know, because, and, and ultimately, I see it a little bit as, I don't know if you familiar with like the saying from Lao Tzu the great tower cannot be put into words. Like every attempt to put it into words will make it diluted more and so as people go at the word empathy, if you go at it from from a mental point of view, and only from a, from a, from a from a mental point of view, word kind of access to it, then you're missing, In my estimation, the real core of empathy, which is not in words, it's, it's, it's a we touched on that before. It's like a relationship to life, that you choosing an empathic relationship to life. And when you do that, you become like an open how they say that parachute like, you know, everything gets caught. You can no longer say, Oh, I only listen to these people because they're my people, and so they are not my people. So my empathy only goes to them. That's not empathy. Real empathy is, for me, more like like this, what you call holistic empathy, that's that's spanning, but that to define that only through words is, I'm not sure if it's possible,

Jodie Jenson09:12

yeah, and and that I that brought a couple of things to mind. One of the projects that I hope to do with with the dance department at my university is do an empathic dance event where it's like a mirror dance, and there's no words involved at all. So if we're just talking about words and in terms of what empathy is, we're missing something that's more primal and something that is more human to human more emotional, right? So there, there are. I still do think that there are different versions of what empathy can be, because I I have seen that happen, where you can connect with a person. Um. Um, like, across a room, you make eye contact, and there's a connection. There's no words exchanged. You can connect with somebody on stage when you're watching them perform or dance or or play the piano. I have a strong connection. See, my piano is right here. That's I am into music. Yeah, that's that. And I know we talked about that with your drum circles, right where there's there's an intense connection that I feel with the music. And by connecting with the music, I'm connecting with the person receiving, who's listening, or I'm also connecting with the person who wrote the music. And if I'm the person who wrote the music, I'm I'm conveying something to the people who are going to play the music. And so it connects the composer, the instrument, the the performers, the audience. We're all connected in that. And there there's no words involved in that. Another thing that I think potentially makes intergroup empathy. Difficult is because we're not just talking about empathizing. It's not just about empathy. We also have to factor in the fact that there are group identities and there, there's this within social psychology, we talk a lot about in group versus out group biases, right? We are just intensely biased toward people who are like us, and so it's really, it's actually quite difficult to do the kind of empathy that we're talking about, where we're actually completely open to learning from both sides, because there's a threat avoidance that we get into, and we have to, we feel like we have to protect our own identity. And if somebody's attacking, if, if we, if we view somebody else's attacking our identity, or our group, our group's identity, then our walls go up and empathy goes away, right? And so it's that's why I'm saying Edwin, I think that you're a much more mature, emotionally intelligent human because you're able to see past those group identities. But I think that most of us, and I'd like to think that I'm able to see past that as well, but I think that that's just a human tendency is to, and there's lots of research to back this up, that we have the tendency to give in to those group identities and let go of empathy like we choose, we choose empathy for our group, and we choose not to empathize with people who are different, because it's a threat. So it's challenging. It really is,

Edwin Rutsch12:43

yeah, I think you can. It's just, you could say that when you're young children, maybe have that mindset too, right? You say to begin with, so,

Jodie Jenson12:55

like, we're all just the same. Is that what you're saying? Like, yeah,

Edwin Rutsch12:58

you could, you know, you kind of learn, you learn, it's a block to empathy that you know your tribe, so it's a block, and it can be overcome. So if, if you can't, it could become a social norm. You know, it's so we have sort of tribal I think, you know, so I

Daniel Hirtz13:18

think this is, sorry, but this is so important. I mean, that is the core, I think what we're talking about that we're in the process, that we're not, you know, that

Jodie Jenson13:29

empathy stay in the process. Sorry, I missed what you said. We

Daniel Hirtz13:33

are in the process. So I'm like, I can recognize the moments where I get triggered and I contract, and I want to go with a certain person and push out to somebody else. I can start noticing that me doing that, and then I can do what, you know, what I hear you do, Edwin all the time, and say, let's, well, let's put this into a circle and talk about it and talk about it empathically. So where, where, where my moments are, where I fall on my face, and I cannot respond empathically, and I contract that shouldn't be a failure, that should be more like that's how I learn. You know, when I learn music, I cannot learn music without making mistakes. It's impossible. In fact, the mistakes guide me to the way of making music, it's not possible. It's literally impossible to learn music without making mistakes. And the same thing, I think, is true for this living thing of empathy. It's a trajectory that we took. It's a directional thing that's where we're going and and as we develop a definition that, to me, feels like makes empathy more more like this wholeness thing like you say, holistic, uh. Empathy that carries within sort of like an a response protocol that I may fulfill or sometimes I miss, but that doesn't matter. I'm moving in that direction. Does that make sense? Yeah,

Jodie Jenson15:17

I think you're right that we do tend to choose. We choose empathy, or we choose to contract. This past weekend, the reason I've been so unavailable is there was a sports camp that we were putting on to help help kids to improve their character, as well as notice that it doesn't. They don't have to choose between character development and performance development, because a lot of times we think that it's one or the other, where it's, you know, you have to be win at all costs. You have to denigrate the other team. You have to be your it has to be Winning is everything, but bringing it back into this context of what you're talking about with pulling people into an empathy circle, like, if you're if you're thinking about two different teams, they are on opposite sides of the volleyball net or opposite sides of the soccer field, right? They they interact with each other, but it's in a very confrontational way, right? They are, right, by nature of the game that they're in, they are opposite. And so in order for one to win, the other has to lose, yeah. And so the challenge with that, excuse me, is by getting into that milieu, it's automatic that there's a difference between my side and your side. So anytime we have identity on the line, so we put on jerseys, you know, so we have our colors. Or this extends to politics, you know, I'm on this side of the aisle, or on this side of the aisle, or I'm from this country, or from this country. I'm from this religion or this religion. There are so many things that divide us that it's, it's so easy to choose, that it's so easy to choose my team, right? And yes, and there's, I don't think that that's necessarily bad to choose your team, because there's a good there's a lot of good that comes from team unity as well. And so if you are constantly going to the other side, like if you were to go to the other side of the net and and actually spike it, you know, on on your team, you're actually harming your team by helping the other team. So in that context, you can't get into a metaphorical empathy circle, right? But I think what matters is noticing that when that context is gone, that's when we can still be friends with each other. We can still connect with each other. On a much more fundamental level. It's not to say that you should let the other side win, because you empathize with them so much that you should just stop trying to perform at your highest level. But one thing we talk a lot about in the sports literature, excuse me, I'm I wish I had some Oh, I do have something to drink. Hang on in the sports and character development, literature, something called contesting orientation, where you notice how, how do you view your opponent? Do you see them as somebody who needs to be vanquished? They need to be destroyed in order for you to get what you want? Or do you view it as we're we're in this together. We're partners, and I help you to be better, and you help me to be better. And so, I mean, I think we can take that metaphor and apply it to all areas of life, and just recognize there are different teams, and the fact that there are different teams actually can help us all to be better, where, if we didn't have right and left in politics, then we wouldn't have something to balance us out. So it actually so by empathizing with the other side, it doesn't mean that we're saying that their side is right and our side is wrong. We're saying that we're we're partners in this process, and, you know, adapting it to the the empathy circle. If we are just empathizing and we're not being heard, that's not that's not holistic empathy, right? And if we're just talking and we're not empathizing with the other, that's also lopsided. So we have to be partners in the process. And I think that's, that's one of the mindset shifts that that could really benefit society as well, is just noticing we're all in this together. We have common humanity at the core, at the basis, of all of us. We are all part of the human race, and that's what unites us. And we have divisions, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Mm. Those divisions can help us to be better and balance each other out.

Edwin Rutsch20:03

There's kind of like the social structure, you know, what is? What is the structure that we're relating on? Is it? Are there competitive social structures? Are there more empathy based social structures? So for example, there was the finish with this, that in terms of the family, you know, there's that the work that I don't know, if you've seen, the parent effectiveness training book by Thomas Gordon, so he's talking about this right, in the family, typical is the parents win in the argument. So the kids win, you know, so there's this competition of of power that happens, and that that his, his thing is, well, use empathy, you know, active listening, to negotiate, to come up with, with an approach where you don't have a winner and a loser, it's like, you know, you're kind of like, working through those kind of issues. So it's a no lose method. So, I mean, that's a whole the social structure is a big yeah question. And I

Jodie Jenson21:17

think we come we become better than we would be if we didn't have somebody who sees it differently from us.

Daniel Hirtz21:23

Yeah, well, I one of the things that occurs to me in the development of what we right now have in our political sphere is that, you know, if you trace it back historically, then the what you describe as the right and left balancing each other out, that came out of that whole political orientation and the development of democracy came out of being solidly rooted in Commons. That's where we come from. Humans came from a world that was completely integrated and and, and so the human mind has done what we even now do, which is create more and more distinctions in its understanding of the world. But you know, it used to be that I heard these stories, were in my childhood that the politicians would go for drinks after they leave Congress right and then hash out what they're really going to do. They're enemies in Congress, but they're meeting in the commons afterwards. That has eroded, that's no longer existing. And it's to me, it's like a sign of the human mind, the divisive human mind, infringing itself more and more and more, not only on the on the social structure of humans, but all the way into nature. And you know, Naomi Klein calls it end time fascism. It's a form of fascism that doesn't even have a vision anymore. It's just destructive for the sake of the people who are in power. That's what we're seeing now. That's why it's important to stand up to that. And what I hear when you say holistic empathy is that we bring back a conscious model of what the commons used to be and say, this is, you know, if we competition is good, but only as long as it is in an overall environment of cooperation. If competition becomes the only doctrine, it leads to complete destruction. And because and so like that, you know, let's say in the context of sports, I remember I watched like a documentary on basketball in New York before it became a pro. It was all about local people having their their people playing against each other, representing districts of New York City. And it was a cultural event. It was not just and so they all understood, yes, of course, we're here to beat the other guys. Of course, that's what we do. But when we lose, we still go to drinks with each other. Maybe we fight or so, but it is our fight, of our city together. There is that wholeness. We're we're all New Yorkers, and we are competing here for who is the best team. But we identify, we all are New Yorkers. And it was so different. What happened right after when people got paid and the whole sports got disconnected from the natural environment, from the city, from the groups, it all disappeared, that whole culture that's like for me, this similar description for the wholeness to be deleted or be erased from consciousness, and all that's left is competition anymore. And who does it serve? It only serves the owners. It only serves a whole different agenda. It's no longer. Anything to do with the people, and we have the same issue right now in the world. You know, it only serves as handful of people what's going on, and we have allowed that the common space has been eroded so much that we can't even agree on it anymore. So that's what I feel like bringing back with empathy, with the culture of empathy, to me, means a culture of wholeness that we propose for all voices, and it's sort of like a conscious bringing back of the commons. I'm

Edwin Rutsch25:33

hearing from Jody. You think the competition is beneficial? Part? Is there something?

Jodie Jenson25:40

I mean, we can even look at it as, you know, capitalism, maybe this is a capitalism versus socialism philosophy that maybe we don't want to go get too deep into it. But in theory, if there's competition in a market, it makes the products from from those multiple companies even better, right? Because they're competing to to win the interest of of their consumer, right? So competition isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just what I think is a bad thing is when we give in to the mindset that the other team, whatever that team is needs to be destroyed, like if, if we want to win at all costs. There's a quote that that I found in the sports literature. It's when, let's see, how does it go? Exactly? When winning, I don't remember it exactly, dang it. But when winning is the only thing that matters. It's worth doing anything to win. And so that's that's where we have to be so careful with the competition. Is that it's so easy to fall into that mindset. So I'm definitely not saying that I would take competition over Commons. I think that the Commons and the the culture of empathy actually are better, but I'm not I'm also saying that competition is not inherently bad

Daniel Hirtz27:14

or destructive. It depends in the context competition shows up in. So let's say there is a university that puts out a contest to all the students to say, we got a scientific problem that we need solving. And we have five groups. You all get go at it, or there was a huge project of an actual project, an international project, who comes up with the best ocean cleaning plastic removal system. It was an X Prize with billions of dollars connected to it. And I think seven teams, international teams, competed in the Australian won, won a huge prize, and now they're building this extensive ocean cleanup project through that technology. Now that was good competition, but it was held in a context. So the competition was going somewhere. Had meaning and directionality when Microsoft bought up every little small software company on the way to their fame. That's not competition, right? That is destruction.

Jodie Jenson28:26

Yeah, that's exactly the difference. I think those two examples are perfect examples, because the first example had a higher purpose. There was something that was beyond just the competition itself, right? It was for the greater good of all of humanity, right? But then the Microsoft example that is that is getting into that mentality of win at all costs, and the competition itself is what matters. So it's a matter of like, what you're focusing on, if you're focusing on the trophy, or if you're focusing beyond the trophy. And if, if you're focusing on the trophy, that's when, that's when competition is a problem, but if the competition itself is for the greater good, that's when it's a positive thing.

Daniel Hirtz29:15

Edwin, what are your thoughts competition is well positioned in an overall culture of cooperation, open overall culture of you know, you can take this as like cooperatives, worker owned cooperatives that I studied, and we were deeply involved in trying to develop one And and so what the people have to go through to create a worker owned cooperative is sort of like an internal cleansing of both the owner mindset and the employee mindset. Both of them don't work in a cooperative, and for people, that's a very. Very hard process in general for people, especially if they come from employment, ideas, right, all of a sudden, have to take responsibility. That's very uncomfortable, and a lot of them really, really struggle with that. And when they come from ownership to become one with everybody else and not have just the power to change. That's hard, right? So this process is super hard, but it's mainly hard because outside of the cooperative is only competition, so they have to behave internally cooperative and externally competitive. And that's very difficult. It should be the other way around. Externally. Should be an all cooperative environment, which I think is what nature is. This is what the cosmos is. It's a big wholeness model that's not broken. It's held together by wholeness, and in that, corporate competition is a tool to develop, then it makes perfect sense, and it dissolves, sort of like the tension of competition always dissolves into like, you know, the kids come home after the game, and they get, they get, they get good food, and everybody says, Hey, it's okay that you guys lost and so on, that the competition is is gone, and they can relax. You know, if that, if the competition is their life, life or death,

Jodie Jenson31:31

yeah, and that, if that's where your identity is placed, if you only find that you have worth when you win, then like it's worth doing anything to win, because you're worthless without that right, you can get into that mindset. And the reason that I think that this is relevant to the conversation about empathy is talking about blocks to empathy, because if we can view our in our Okay? So first of all, step back. We are all part of the human race, so we all are connected. But we also have to recognize that there are divisions, there are differences between us, and if we're focused on those differences rather than our similarities, and if we're focused on winning rather than something that's a higher purpose than winning, then there's no empathy. We won't allow ourselves to get into a mode where we'll have holistic empathy. We'll have to find some way to divide us, right? And so it's it's a tricky balance between this, this view of the commons, where we're all working together for the common good, and recognizing that, because we live in different groups, different communities, different societies, we are going to have differences. It's just, it's inevitable because we, I mean, I don't understand all of the nuances of the the cultural aspects of communities in, you know, in in rural Africa, as as much as I tried, when I worked there, there was a language barrier and there was a history barrier. I didn't fully understand their history. So I didn't understand why their their society worked the way that it did. And so as much as I tried and I had compassion, I had a lot of compassion. I really wanted to help people become the best versions of themselves, there still was an empathy barrier there because I couldn't communicate with them. And I honestly believe that no matter how hard I try, I will never fully understand where somebody else is coming from. And Edwin, I know that you've, you've when I've said that before, it seemed, it has seemed like you have not fully agreed with me when I've said that. And I would love to hear some more of your thoughts on that, because my my view of it is everything that I view in a relationship, in a conversation, it's always going to be filtered through my personal lens, and so that that objective empathy, which is what I think we're All hoping to work toward, is is actually impossible. But what are your thoughts on that well, with

Edwin Rutsch34:24

the in terms of the empathy circle, you know you're sharing your thoughts right now. You know sharing that you you feel it's impossible to really understand. You know someone else, and you're running it through, through the your own personal filter, and it looks like you need to do something.

Jodie Jenson34:48

Sorry. Just a second, sure. Go ahead, please.

Jodie Jenson35:11

Okay, sorry. My husband's gonna go pick up our twins from their little summer camp that they're doing.

Edwin Rutsch35:16

So, so I'm listening to you, and you're saying you feel it's it's impossible for you to know someone else you know fully. You're always filtering it through your through your your own experience, and that's why you feel you can't understand someone but it's like now I think when I listen to you, I think I understand your concern that you can't filter, that you filter things to your own view. And you know, as I can say, did you do you feel heard and understood? You know, I mean,

Jodie Jenson35:50

yes, I do feel heard and understood, but to to the extent that, I mean, it's, it's always going to be, you're on that side of the screen, you're in California, your community is different from mine. You know, you were on a different call than I was on right before this meeting. So I'm what I'm bringing to this conversation is, I mean, my thought processes are all connected with the other events that I've been experiencing the last so, I mean, I'm bringing up sports examples, right? Because that's something that was, it was everything for the last month for me, was these sports examples. And so when I say something, it's, it's surface level, right? But you don't see the experiences that I had with the kids at the sports camp, right? So

Edwin Rutsch36:39

we spent enough time together, I'd get more. It's sort of a process, right? That's empathy is a process of sensing into and it's kind of like never, sort of ending your con. It's more of the process,

Jodie Jenson36:52

yes, oh, I like that. I like that distinction, because totally think of it as a destination, like I've got it, you know, I empathized. I can check that off of my list. It's not, that's not what it is. That's how

Edwin Rutsch37:05

we do the process is also fresh, yeah? Keeps it very alive,

Jodie Jenson37:11

yeah, so we have to continue doing it throughout our lives, which

Edwin Rutsch37:15

from moment to moment too, right? It's a moment to moment and it's sort of how we do it is, am I saying no, you're full of shit. You're this or that, judging you, or trying to control you, or, you know, all the other things that block empathy, or am I just trying to sense into who you are and what, what's sort of going on in your life that process? Yeah,

Jodie Jenson37:38

I think I understand more fully your approach to it, if I've understood, it's more of a I know you've said this before. It's a way of being, and I don't think I fully understood before what you meant by that, but correct me, if I'm wrong, are you saying that it's it's more of a process that you it's the way you approach the conversation that you're you're wanting to empathize, not that you're seeing it as I have empathized, right?

Edwin Rutsch38:08

It's an ongoing process, yeah, yeah, I like that. Even Rogers talks about it's a moment to moment. You know? It's like it's already you've some things have already changed in you from a second ago, right? So I'm so, I'm sensing into, so it's more this the process of sensing into, and the qualities of how we do the sensing into. So, yeah, so that's, I think that's, and that's what happens with all these definitions, that the definitions get very confused in terms of, it's a lot of are the my reaction to sensing into right? The whole effective empathy, most of it is a large there's, yeah, there's, there's two parts of it. One is they're trying to describe the process of sensing into that. I'm sensing maybe your frustration about something, or your excitement about something, and how that, how those feelings get conveyed from you to me, that how I'm sensing those and then the other part with effective empathy is the my reaction, and for me, the reaction part is, pretty much, you could throw that out, Is, is not part of the as part of empathy. But the thing is, is the reaction comes from the empathy part. So there is an empathic part to the reaction. Does that make sense? Yeah, I'm saying I'm not if I sense into your experience, you know, I'm just bringing it into the the model, the affective, cognitive empathy model, because that's what I've been trying to look at. You know, to describe that is I'm sensing into your experience, and maybe you're feeling frustrated, right? The feeling of frustration about something, and I sense that frustration, and are now. Maybe I'm sensing your curiosity, maybe a little confusion, right? I'm sensing that you have and how do I send you know, I sense it, and it's like I do I become confused, right? Or, for example, through the three year, feeling that I'm sensing into do I be have the feeling of confusion? Do I become totally confused, to get lost in my confusion. So there's sort of that dynamic that they're trying to describe, and then they're describing the reaction like, it's like, maybe my reaction is, oh, you're feeling confused. I feel so sorry for you, right? The sympathetic. And then it becomes about me and my sympathy, or I'd be have distress like, Oh, I'm all worried and distressed about this personal distress, what they want to call empathic distress. So I don't know those are two. I'm just trying to describe what they're describing as affective empathy. And so, yeah,

Jodie Jenson40:57

and so you're saying that the response, or the reaction after you've sensed into another person. It's not actually part of the empathy process, right?

Edwin Rutsch41:07

And, but, but that, but when they're trying to describe that response, part of it was empathy to to they the person empathize. So there's actually empathy is mixed in there, but it's also mixed in with the response to right it started, and then they might even stop your response. You might even stop empathizing and just get absorbed in your own response.

Daniel Hirtz41:33

What something occurred to me in thinking about AI and how I had a conversation with one tool saying, so you're not really responding. There's nobody responding here, right? And it wrote back, yes, you're right. I all I do is choose the next word predictive from what you input. So it's like, really nobody there. And that is something really strange to think about. You know, you're talking to something. There is nobody there. But then something showed up in me, that in the empathy circle, I see people, including myself, struggle sometimes with like, oh, how should I listen? How should I reflect? Am I good at this and so on. I realized that to try to listen to somebody completely means that I suspend my inner process temporarily, and I become that wholeness, if I can, you know, and if we see this as a process, so I become more and more like, almost like, an impersonal reflection of you, and in that there is this form of liberation, because I could just really repeat what you say, and that wouldn't be wrong. It wouldn't be out of touch. It wouldn't be not empathetic to just repeat what you say, because I just did the biggest Act, which is suspend me in order to completely listen to you. And that, to me, is the empathetic act. Yeah,

Edwin Rutsch43:15

the one thing, it's the act where I

Daniel Hirtz43:17

go like I want to hear you completely so that. And I cannot do this if I'm too busy inside of myself.

Edwin Rutsch43:26

The one thing with the suspending sometimes that's seen as being neutral. What I would say is that we're not just suspending ourselves. We're bringing our empathy forward. You know, I'm saying right when you're when you're listening. So you're bringing your empathy forward. It's not like you're just suspending yourself, your your your being, no, you're actually bringing a deeper part of yourself forward. So, and it's not neutral beautiful, yeah, it's not a neutral approach. It's a very, you know, it's a very active part. The other part too is, you know, we do have reactions, right? No matter what, there's going to be reactions coming up, but it's that the empathy sort of takes precedent, takes the biggest space, right? And then I kind of have those. And I just said, Okay, well, I'm having a reaction. I'm feeling sad about this. I'm feeling happy about it, but it doesn't kind of take up the the empathic space. But then when it's my turn to be the speaker, then I can share, well, all these things came up for me. So I can have that self empathy. We could say that that is you're sensing into yourself. You're having self empathy into the feelings that arise in you, and then then you can share your feelings or thoughts with the other person. So, so there's sort of that dynamic. I

Daniel Hirtz44:53

just want to say back what you said on the way I heard it. I am not. Spending myself just because I do this, because I have an an intention. I have my intention is to be fully there for you, and that's what I'm giving and a

Edwin Rutsch45:13

value in order to be a value of it too, like I value that, that I value that space, that the feeling of empathy. It's like I enjoy it, I value it, that warms my heart, that opens my soul, you know, it expands, kind of expands me to Yes.

Daniel Hirtz45:35

And then you could say that the listening then goes both ways. I listen to you completely and also listen to me, right? Yeah, I'm and if I do the same type of listening to myself that I do for you, I don't get involved into the reactions that come up and, yeah, I just listen to what comes up in me, and then I have, I have, actually, most of the time, if it's honest and not judged, that's a little piece that's probably important to everybody in part the conversation. The more we weave together, the more those reactions are also part of the whole weaving, of our connection, of the whole, yeah, I was just having the direction is this opening is like this, this wider and wider space I feel like that that's maintained, and it's also is like when that space is trying to be hijacked by emotions, by contractions and everything. Then, if I come from a definition of wholeness, holistic empathy, I I recognize it, and I say, No, I'm not going to go with it. I stay, I try to, I do my best to stay in that listening mode. Sorry,

Jodie Jenson46:56

I have to take a phone call from my husband. I think he's lost.

Edwin Rutsch47:00

Okay, yeah, so there's a there's, I think one of the benefits of that too, is you have a bigger space of reference too, yes, right? You have more insights, more you have a bigger space so into this when you make decisions, you're making it more of an inclusive decision making process too, which it actually contributes to the all the relationships of everyone and is going to is going to reduce kind of frictions and, and, and, you know, conflict too.

Daniel Hirtz47:36

Yeah, that's what I mean. What you're describing is, really, is a response to a culture that is essentially exactly the opposite

Edwin Rutsch47:46

kind of a mixture. Yeah, it's kind of a mixture of everything. There's a lot of empathy, you know? I mean, I just meet people, and there's a lot, but there's also, oh yeah, no more. I mean dysfunction,

Daniel Hirtz48:00

yeah, I mean, in the political realm, like the narrative in all political discus discussion is not a narrative of inclusion, but a narrative of exclusion right now, yeah,

Jodie Jenson48:15

sorry, I've got to go. My husband is hopelessly lost, so

Edwin Rutsch48:20

we'll pick up next week is that, yes, we'll see you next week. Okay, thank you. Yeah. So that's it, that the whole topic of competition versus empathy, power over power with you know that the whole call it's, we're kind of looking at how society is, is sort of structured and, and I'm not quite sure what the you know, what the solution is To the the competition aspect, you know, and empathy. I um, you could say that you empathize everybody, empathize with everyone else, and you decide, hey, competition is a good source. Is a good energy. Let's, let's have some competition. But there's still the overall space is an empathic space, right? So,

Daniel Hirtz49:21

right. So that would mean, like in our political discussion, not that one side or the other side is right, but that the conversation always includes all perspectives, yeah, and, and that that's our mandate, that that we say we want to live in the world, not where my doctrine is lived or yours or anybody's, but in a world where all people are listened to and heard and

Edwin Rutsch49:51

and structurally, you could set it up where the different parties have empathy circles with each other, but there's regular empathy circles or. Across the divide too, right? The politicians. So we have a structure empathy circles. Is a structure that can build that empathic energy, that empathic way of being. And I'm sure there's a lot of other structures. You and Jody were talking about music, and there's all kinds of other dance,

Daniel Hirtz50:22

yeah, yeah, exactly, and that provides really, that that kind of just makes really, really sense, because, like, we're talking about the culture of empathy, not an ideal ideology of empathy. And that's important distinction to me, because culture is made up not just by a body of word or a book, but it's also made up by the music and by the general attitudes into small things. And you know all, all the different things that belong there and and it's also an answer to, I don't want to convince the other side to be like me. All I want to do is create a foundation for our connection that allows for all sides to

Edwin Rutsch51:24

be heard. Yeah, I

Daniel Hirtz51:27

don't want to push my doctrine onto you. I have ideas about life, but what do I know? I I'm, first of all, I'm not interested to have everything just like I want it. But

Edwin Rutsch51:38

there is, there is an aspect that if we want to empathic culture, you know, how do we bring that about in the sense that that is the structure that I'm advocating for? It's like I'm not advocating for just everybody do whatever they want. I'm advocating for an empathic structure and usually, and a relationship sort of an invitation to others, and I'm willing to empathize first, right? It's like, okay, I'm willing to listen to you, to empathize with you, and model the process. So you know, having attacking people, be it left or right, is not helping. You know, it's like listening to them and then saying, Hey, I'm willing to listen first. Would you be like to have a, you know, a mutually empathic relationship? And you know, quite often, after people have been heard, they're they're more open to listening, you know, to to to you, and then, but then there's also, like, the legal system, you know, there are structures that use force, right? And I think you kind of need that too, like, you know, you can't just that, you know, somebody who's committing a crime, they, they're forced to come into the legal system and and then so I kind of look at that question, what's the relationship within a society of power?

Daniel Hirtz53:12

Yeah, well, the there is, like right now, especially in America, there's several examples that blatantly clear, say that we're not an empathetic culture here, very clearly, when you have an election system that goes, Winner takes all, then that means I take my position and I force this onto everybody. I'm not listening to the other side, because I don't have to. I live in a democracy that's defined by if I win by just 1% that's understood as a mandate that's 100% and that's not empathetic. That is not a reflection of an empathetic culture. It

Edwin Rutsch54:04

seems, if I see is if we have a highly authoritarian, pure dictatorship, and not, you know, an empathic society, that there's sort of a spectrum. And I think that democracy is trying to move towards a more empathic right, you know, so you divide the power, you know, there's a division of power so that people have to talk to each other to negotiate So, but, you know, it, it can be, you know, it is very it is on the authoritarian, sort of, maybe direction, with a direction versus highly empathic. So I don't know where it falls on that spectrum.

Daniel Hirtz54:45

The trouble with a dualistic model like that, it would mean that empathy is on one side and authoritarianism, or whatever it is, is on the other side. But that's where the confusion is. Then we have a. Then we can have an argument that we should have this, or we should have that. I see empathy as being so if authoritarianism shows up in our world, the answer is to be empathetic with it, even with that, and still a phenomenal authoritarianism works. Uh huh. Authoritarianism works by 100% of the cases by excluding, oftentimes very specific group from that empathetic view and use them as as cannon fodder for whatever the political agenda or the war agenda that's going on, and so it's, it's to begin divisive. And so I don't, I don't want to see empathy just sort of be like as an alternative model. No, we need to be so strong in our empathy culture that we can work through the sentiments that are generated through authoritarianism, particularly here in the United States. How come that people, all of a sudden lean toward that? What's going on? Why? Why is so hateful for other people? That's not going to be solved top down, that's going to be solved also by listening to them. But you know, for that, we got to get strong enough. That's my how I kind of look at it. In a nutshell,

Edwin Rutsch56:28

it is still authoritarian. There's still a certain need to be able to describe the the approach, you know, and and then there is another approach. And right we have, you know, we

Daniel Hirtz56:46

in the judicial judicial system, as you say, you know, there is now almost in all States of America, in in all, in all the the states in America is an restorative, just of option offered for for people, if they want to, they can go a different route. They can go not the punitive route, but they can go the restorative route, which means that the victim says, I want to know my perpetrator. I want to understand why they did what they did. I want to heal that, no matter how difficult it is. And so there is that, to me, would be an expression of an empathetic culture in in the judicial system, and it's already existing, yeah? And

Edwin Rutsch57:29

that would move towards the towards the empathic side, the restorative is how I would see it. It's, I mean, there's going to be degrees right, of of an empathic approach, and that's moving in sort of that empathic direction,

Daniel Hirtz57:51

yeah. And I wonder a lot about that. How would a world look like that is sort of like at least 51% empathetic, yeah. Is that even possible? Or is there something like, maybe we're in front of a massive evolutionary shift that, you know, because I think we, right now, we live in an overall, global competitive culture. The doctrine of the globe right now is competition. And why am I saying that? Because we have the warning signs of global warming now for 50 years or longer, and at least from the 70s on, we started knowing that there's something going on. We have not changed direction at all. Because, just like with AI, the people even warned about the dangers of AI, and then in the backside, they invested everything they had into it, because they're afraid to lose the competition. Because the overall doctrine of our world is whoever wins first will have the most and so I don't know if that can gradually be turned back.

Edwin Rutsch59:14

I think that's where, like the empathy circle comes in. You know, if you're creating space for the dialogs to happen. You know, it can be, we could say, you know, if all families were using empathy circles to have more empathic dialogs, if political parties had internal empathy circles, and they had circles, you know, across the party lines. So it seems like it can be expanded. So it's a mindset that an approach. And I think, I think there is, is a lot of it would be a moment

Daniel Hirtz59:51

though, there would be a moment though, because I just heard a speech of one of these guys in the town hall, very, very bright. I. A person speaking to the governor and says, Are you ever getting tired of always being part of the party that once prevent human good from happening if it's Social Security, if it's Medicare, Medicaid, every good policy in this country, you fought to the nth degree, and then finally you gave up when the culture shifted, and now you moved on to fight against the next perpetrators that you define, and you're always holding back history. So I feel like there's, there is a need to for a fundamental shift that sort of goes like, if you're a politician that only can divide people, and you don't, you're not capable of keeping the people at the table and negotiate, then you're useless. You're not useful as a politician. You cannot exclude 50% of the people just simply because you feel like that. No, you have to, you're representing us. You got to listen to everybody.

Edwin Rutsch01:01:04

Well, that's creating social, social structures that support it. So we know that the empathy circle creates the social structure that supports and then can, can politics be redesigned to support a more empathic, you know? I think that, you know, democracy was an attempt to move in that direction. You know? Yeah, totally

Daniel Hirtz01:01:27

No. All I'm saying is, I just kind of think that there will be a moment where the whole world says, Okay, we're done with this. We can't do this any longer, because it's, it's destroying us. It literally is destroying us. I think that's what she's observes in in the interviews he she makes that these rich, powerful people right now that are in power, they have no vision for the future. They're not talking about a positive humanity. They all they talk about is extending the power to the nth degree. And ultimately, what that means is the destruction of our biosphere and of humanity, and they don't care. They just are on this automatic trajectory into more and more power, and they don't look, they don't consider and so we got to stand up to that in a really big way. But I see, I've This is my personal take. Empathy. Circles are not small. They are huge. And what I do with my work, the seeding that we have done in the world, is gigantic because it's ultimately in partnership with nature and with with where the planet wants to go. It is embedded in what Bill calls the universal, empathetic field. That's not just human made. We're leaning into the nature of things, the nature of the cosmos, and it wants to shift into something else. Humanity has to, it has to become a cooperative species. You know, there's even this scientist, Elizabeth Satoru. She's an evolutionary biologist, very big name in that realm. She says, Every species first competes and then shifts into cooperation because it has to, and humanity hasn't done that step yet. We still are hungry and eating more and consuming more, and just that's what every species kind of does. And then it comes to a moment where it has to adjust, otherwise it will self destruct. And we are in this moment, I think, and empathy circles are a major piece of that. That's why,

Edwin Rutsch01:03:39

I think that's what we need, is you're talking about division, creating an alternative vision. And I think that's really our contribution, is creating that vision. And part of that vision is to have clear definitions, you know? And that's, yeah, say you're able to differentiate the experience, because people get muddled in what empathy is like. You know, we were talking about this sense of sensing into versus your reactions or your judgments, right? All that and people, it seems to be they, they need a map, the mental map, as well as some tools and practices. Speaking of, I agree, little bit different topic. I've been playing a lot with heavy we're done, I think with VO three,

Daniel Hirtz01:04:30

no, let me just complete one thing. I think what's important in this attempt to define empathy, that we come out of this with something very simple, at least on the surface, that you know something like you are in your best empathy by just listening to somebody, and even if you just repeat back what they're saying, you are. Are perfect in your empathy, that it doesn't become sometimes I feel this in the circles that people struggling with their reflection because they're now in this internal I don't know, self talk while they're reflecting. Am I doing this good? I should sense into the other person, but I don't feel anything. What should I say? Is he feeling that? Is he feeling this? And I get internally so busy concerned about doing this the right way, that I lose touch with the simplicity of this. The simplicity has to be protected, because our world is suffocating from complicated, endless pages of information. I feel like, you know, it's really, really important, you know, I call this, yeah, we gotta root it in simplicity so we can handle the craziness of the world.

Edwin Rutsch01:05:59

It'd be a good topic for empathy Summit. Talk about not getting what happens when you get all wrapped up in your own thoughts and anxieties and so forth, and how to keep it simple? Yeah. How do you keep it simple? That'd be a good topic. There's a I did, if you're wanting to play around, you know, sure. VO three, you can sign up for a one month trial,

Daniel Hirtz01:06:28

Gemini Pro, trial, yeah, I'll do that today. Oh,

Edwin Rutsch01:06:32

and like, here's a, you know, I made, like, for example, this is a video I just made. I so this is Jesus, Buddha, Confucius and Krishna. And they're, they're in an empathy circle up in the mountains. And here, let me see how the volume is on this. Yeah,

Speaker 101:07:02

empathy circles are better than enlightenment, better than heaven, more divine than the music of my flute. Empathy circles are

Edwin Rutsch01:07:13

anyway, I'm just kind of playing around, you know. So, just fun. Yeah, Buddha says, If you heard of empathy circles are better than enlightenment than Jesus, and they all kind of say better than heaven. And then that's Krishna, you know, he's got the magic flute. I don't know if you know, right, right, right? And it's better, better

Daniel Hirtz01:07:31

than my flute. I love it. So, yeah, I, you know, I heard the back end of the conversation, and I somewhat agree with the sort of the cautiousness that I heard there. But I also, I also, you know, I've done a bunch of things in my life where I knew this is not going to sit well with the people. It's going to stir up some stuff. And I said, Okay, let them comment right? Then I can talk to them about it and and that opens up a conversation. That's how I feel, how you kind of approach it. You

Edwin Rutsch01:08:09

have fun with it, too. And let's let the reaction react, right?

Daniel Hirtz01:08:13

We can handle it.

Edwin Rutsch01:08:16

Did you hear the audio? We were hearing the audio. Okay, yes, I was. Oh, because here's another one I'm wanting to this is,

Speaker 201:08:27

if only humanity had valued mutual empathy,

Speaker 301:08:31

yeah, they would still be around like us,

Unknown01:08:36

if only humanity had value,

Edwin Rutsch01:08:39

yeah, and then I'm making a little thing that there's a, you know, the humanity, at least this version of humanity, has gone to hell, like you're, you know, has blown itself up and that. And then I want to, you know, then go from the future, this possible, you know, humanity has killed itself to the present, where people are against empathy, and then the alternative, like a discussion, do we go empathic and not? And part of that first theme is this, this is the other part is, after the robots, there's an overview of the flyover of the city, and then this robot,

Speaker 301:09:26

they had a choice. They didn't choose. Well, you still have a choice. Choose wisely,

Edwin Rutsch01:09:36

you know. So it's like you've got a choice. Choose wisely. And then, you know, I go into the, you know, a scene going to the modern times, the preacher against empathy. And, yeah, right, right, you saw those. But then, then, then the counter, and then a dialog between them. But then the preacher joins the empathy circle, so trying to. To make something like that. So I'm open to any sort of ideas. It could be a little, you know, we got eight seconds for a little, eight second, you know, promotional piece, something like, like the the Buddha one. That's like, a separate piece could just be posted. And, you know, I did put the ones of, you know, the I A so if you have any ideas, glad to let me think about that a little bit. Yeah, and sometimes you just gotta breaking

Daniel Hirtz01:10:31

sort of so the ideas, that's the that's a new one. Empathy

Speaker 401:10:39

circles are a great way to listen to each other, and we use them for conflict resolution. Come and join us.

Edwin Rutsch01:10:47

Yes, I have two of those, one with the gorilla and one with the pansies. So yeah,

Daniel Hirtz01:10:54

right. So the idea is, yeah, I get it. I get it. So if this keeps going, then we end up here, but we could make a different choice, and we still have that choice right now, and then also create a little bit of a vision. I think that's I I've asked a question in a lot of different environmental groups. I asked, when it came to like a feedback session, I asked, So where are we going? And because I hear a lot of criticism of Where we at, but so where are we going? Is anybody really talking about that? And it's surprising, like even in the movie world, we have this was like a post on substack, somebody wrote about that, saying that both in the animated and in the featured movies, kind of thing we have about in the last I don't know what this time span of 30 years, 40 years, whatever movies, 85% of the movies are dystopian, or 90% there's hardly any utopian. Yeah, movie the side of Star Trek. And you know those where it's not even it's just mentioned that society has shifted into a global society, and that there's no more war on the world and so on. That's the context for Star Trek, and that was early on. It's a while ago when they started that nobody dares to go there anymore. And that's weird. It is really weird to think about that. We talk about a million things, but we're not talking about the future much, yeah.

Edwin Rutsch01:12:40

Why do you get there in a positive way?

Daniel Hirtz01:12:45

Yeah, Ezra Klein could become a person for us. He wrote the book abundance, and just just released it, and he is one of the few people who talks about, you know, what could we do with the money we have in this world today. How could it look like, you know, desalinization everywhere, and and, and, you know, like all these possibilities that right now are available to us, but we're not doing them

Edwin Rutsch01:13:17

so and so we're trying to have positive vision though? Yes.

Daniel Hirtz01:13:24

And I see empathy almost like the and the circles as the the viral spare tip into humanity, yeah. Now we have to, we have to be very careful with what spins out of that right now, I'm dealing with this thing with Michael Chara in Africa, and I have to be very sensitive to this whole situation. It's not easy, but I think ultimately it doesn't stay in the empathy circle. It's got to go somewhere, and that's something we really need to talk about, you know, because if we don't create that vision, I doubt that we grow much, you know, we the more the definition of empathy and out of that, the culture that we project from that.

Edwin Rutsch01:14:21

Well, that's sort of the building.

Daniel Hirtz01:14:24

The more body we give to that. You know, I think

Edwin Rutsch01:14:27

we need a good foundation. I think that's, that's the purpose of the definition is, here's the basic foundation. We've got some basic practices, and how do we then flesh out that basic so at least we have a good kernel. I think just having people listen to each other and dialog with each other is just the is just the core, you know.

Daniel Hirtz01:14:51

And there's one thing that has come up for me at times, a little bit, I don't know if you see this sometimes, but I. Uh, one time when I shared Carl Rogers definition, where he uses the word without any material mixed in from you, right? You know what I mean, yeah, somebody had an issue with that. She was saying, I have to get half my guards up for male toxicity, or, you know, or I have an agenda that I bring into my listening, because that makes sense to me, and to me that's a little troublesome. I not that I I'm, like, super alarmed by it, but that I see as a potential. You know, we had to, sometimes, the first training I attended to people started talking about how you should talk when you share in the circle that you that we should develop a catalog of guidelines of how to how to share, and so that is in the background, sort of something that I would feel is infringing of on this whole holistic definition of empathy, where It wants to sort of put in some gender sensitive or, you know, with good intention, I understand, but,

Edwin Rutsch01:16:29

yeah, I've resisted that too. Just made it really clear that it's free speech is at the core. So yes, you see that I we were talking about, in the previous in the previous meeting, just how sort of woke ideology has taken over NBC. Just that person, I interviewed, Alan Ross. He's he was in he was started with the active listening with Gene genlin In the early 70s, when he was a student, and he was like friends with, you know, Marshall Rosenberg. And he was saying he was with Marshall Rosenberg before he even had the concept of needs, right? So it was like a newer concept, but he said in NBC that there's a sort of the woke ideology, you know, victims, we have to help the victims. And it becomes a sort of an us and them anti, you know, you're against racism, against the patriarchy, against, you know, all this. And he said that that group has actually become, they've been voted in to the board. So the board now is sort of a woke oriented group, and I've seen conflicts like over five years ago, I even mediated a conflict is between someone who wanted more The Empathic approach, versus this sort of woke, you know, for ideology. And so it's been a term, you know, a con. And he's in the empathic, I would say, the more pure empathy approach. And he's very dismayed by what's happening with NBC that's sort of gone woke and and I offered to hold some empathy circles on the topic, if he wanted to, you know, to have a dialog about it, which I think is the way to approach it. So anyway, it's, it's a little bit what you're talking what you're talking about that person is in that sort of woke we have the enemy, the patriarchy, racism is the enemy. Colonialism is the enemy. Enemy. All these people are the enemy, and we have to fight the power versus, uh, you know, we want to bring those people into an empathic mindset. And the way to do it is to model our empathy towards them. And then, you know, so there's a, there's a, you know, there's a and then there's actually the I did in that conference. There was a person who was talking about radical empathy, and it's kind of what they're trying to take empathy into a woke mindset. And this was a chart she had about traditional empathy, conventional empathy, versus radical empathy, which I would say is awoke empathy. And that's what that interview I did with Kevin, you know, Waltman was about, you know, he's, he's on the side seeing this so called Radical empathy. And was kind of, you know, kind of battling. So that's, it's a dynamic that is, is out there. So you can see how she was breaking it down, you know, for so it's it again. That's why the definition, I think, is important and to be able to address. Knows, yeah,

Daniel Hirtz01:20:00

this, see, this is, that's why I feel words will ultimately fail, because we can discuss this until the cows come home. This creates distinctions between things that, yeah, you can make those distinctions, but all you're going to do is create a split in our in our mind, conventional empathy versus radical empathies. You know, you can see how this struggle supports the status quo unintentionally. Well, I would, you know, I have

Edwin Rutsch01:20:43

issue with that, right? Me too. It's not this, it's not the status quo. Yeah, that

Daniel Hirtz01:20:49

it's like so you describe what another person shares from their heart as the status quo, and I'm not supposed to listen to it. I'm not if I don't have a filter that judges what they say, I'm supporting the status quo. What? What are you talking about? This is very limited, yeah, and it's very, you know, that's the problem with wokeism. And I can so clearly see how this political camps always balance, them to each other. They can't, you know, one goes into this direction too much. That means they got to go into that direction. Too much. Yeah, that's why we always said 5050, because nobody is making a step into the wholeness, right where they're saying, wait a second, we got to listen to all people, and we got to govern for our people. That's our mandate. You know, I don't get it. Or like, the socialistic movement is now about speaking, right? And you completely forgot that it is about economic equality. You completely abandoned the core of socialism. What you're doing, I don't get it. It's empty. It's so

Edwin Rutsch01:22:00

these are all things that need to be addressed. And, you know, so and create good explanations. And I think again, the you know it, the we have the empathy circle. So it's like, bring the woke in. Bring the anti woke bring the bring them all in. You're all welcome.

Daniel Hirtz01:22:18

They're willing to show up, right? That's, yeah, that's the

Edwin Rutsch01:22:21

thing is they will, they show up or not. That's, that's another thing. Probably better when it been added for two and a half hours. My butt's hurting,

Daniel Hirtz01:22:29

right? So before I make any steps with with that donation thing, I shared some things with Ingrid, and I don't know, we can talk about it some other time. When, when, when you have some time. Maybe I can be separate meeting for that. Okay?

00:0000:00