De Botton Links Romantic Idealism to Escalating Mental Health Crises

德波顿：浪漫主义理想化加剧现代心理健康危机 对无条件之爱的不切实际期待以及精英崇拜式的自我苛责正在加剧现代人的心理困境，这使得接纳自身缺陷成为维系亲密关系与实现情感康复的关键。 在本期内容中，Alain de Botton探讨了现代个人主义、精英崇拜以及浪漫神话如何导致焦虑、抑郁的上升和人际关系的破裂。他指出，现代人的孤独和心理困扰往往源于童年时期未被消化的情感模式、对浪漫完美的脱离实际的期待，以及一种忽视运气成分、将失败完全归咎于个人的文化。为应对这些压力，德波顿提倡培养自我认知、积极倾听，接纳自身虽有缺陷但“足够好”的本质，并将爱视为一种需要后天习得的技能而非本能。最终，他将心理康复描述为一个在同情心、自我修正与人际联结的帮助下，将痛苦转化为自我洞察的过程。 人类大脑每天产生约70,000个想法，但多数人缺乏处理机制，导致抑郁、焦虑和易怒等未解决的情感债务在体内不断积压。 (0:00) 现代社会将个人幸福奉为终极目标，并倡导能力主义（Meritocracy），往往将失败完全归咎于个人而非运气，加剧了存在的无意义感和自杀率上升。 (14:14) 浪漫主义误导人们将爱视为天生的直觉本能与命中注定的灵魂伴侣，而健康的亲密关系本质上是一门需要后天系统学习与练习的技能。 (21:07) 无意识的童年依恋模式会让成人在择偶时重蹈覆辙，本能地寻找能重现童年痛苦模式的伴侣，将原本聪明的童年防御机制演变成当下的关系障碍。 (26:18) 真正的心理成熟并非毫无瑕疵，而是能够清楚认识到自身的“疯狂”与缺陷，提前向伴侣预警，并践行类似柏拉图式将关系视作共同成长‘教室’的相处模式。 (36:07)

Alain de Botton argues that pervasive modern anxiety, loneliness, and relational failure stem from the combined dogmas of secular meritocracy and Romanticism, which impose unrealistic standards of self-sufficiency, perfection, and effortless compatibility. Instead of treating emotional life as an unguided instinct, he contends that psychological health and enduring partnerships require conscious emotional education, the unlearning of childhood defense mechanisms, and the candid acceptance of human flaw. The Psychological Toll of Secular Meritocracy (16:45) De Botton argues that modern secular culture has exacerbated existential distress by shifting how society explains suffering. Historically, traditional religions and concepts like original sin or the Roman deity Fortuna offered cosmological humility: failure was attributed to misfortune, and human brokenness was considered a universal baseline. In contrast, modern meritocracy asserts that individuals author their own destinies. This ideological transformation replaces the empathetic term "unfortunate" with "loser," convincing individuals who face career stagnation or personal heartbreak that their agony is wholly self-inflicted. This internalized responsibility carries severe psychological consequences. Discussing the link between individualism and suicide identified by Émile Durkheim, host Steven Bartlett cites UK figures from the charity CALM indicating that a suicide occurs every 90 minutes, with males comprising 76% of victims. Suicide remains the leading cause of death for men under 45 and individuals aged 15 to 49, alongside an accelerating incidence of suicidality among young adults and women who internalize total accountability for distress. Deconstructing the Illusions of Romantic Love (21:07) De Botton asserts that relationship culture has been distorted for two centuries by Romanticism, which promotes unrealistic ideals: finding a predestined soulmate, experiencing instinctual alignment between sex and love, and expecting effortless wordless comprehension. When partners fail to intuit unexpressed wounds, individuals retreat into sulking—an aggressive withdrawal rooted in the myth that true love requires mind-reading. Furthermore, unvoiced daily slights create subtle contempt that blocks intimacy, consistent with a 2022 UK Relate study showing that 26% of couples have sex fewer than 10 times a year and 8% have none at all. To counter these illusions, de Botton contrasts Romanticism with Plato's view of love as a "classroom," in which couples practice mutual, structured self-improvement with patience. Incorporating psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott's concept of the "good enough" parent, de Botton suggests couples should seek a "good enough lover" rather than an unattainable ideal. Sustainable partnership also depends on selective editing rather than raw total transparency, alongside reflexive listening—mirroring a partner's distress without immediately offering unrequested solutions or defensive anecdotes. Childhood Scripts and the Illusion of Sanity (26:18) Adult romantic choices, according to de Botton, run along emotional tracks established in childhood. People are frequently drawn not to partners who make them happy, but to those whose behaviors feel familiar—even when that familiarity involves neglect, criticism, or emotional volatility. Dating candidates who do not mimic early wounds are often rejected for lacking a "spark," because safe love threatens unexamined expectations of suffering. Meanwhile, childhood survival defenses, such as compulsive joking or total emotional closure, persist into adult life as severe relational obstacles. Overcoming these unconscious scripts requires tools like sentence completion exercises and therapeutic inquiry to identify embedded relational assumptions. De Botton maintains that true maturity does not mean achieving total sanity, which he considers an impossibility. Instead, it entails recognizing one's specific eccentricities, warning prospective partners in advance, and accepting that both parties in a relationship are inherently flawed individuals trying to co-exist. Processing Emotional Debt and Navigating Mental Breakdown (2:17) With the human mind generating an estimated 70,000 thoughts per day, de Botton contends that unexamined emotions accumulate into psychological debt, manifesting as depression, bodily aches, or 3:00 a.m. insomnia—which he reframes as the "school of night" for subconscious processing. Drawing from his book A Therapeutic Journey, he outlines how mental breakdown collapses normal cognitive order: self-compassion disintegrates, past and present stressors merge without chronological perspective, and internal critics demand non-existence. De Botton asserts that psychological suffering fundamentally stems from cruelty or a lack of love, and recovery requires an external mind—such as a therapist or friend—to recalibrate distorted self-perceptions. True resilience, he argues, is not rigid stoicism or constant peak performance, but the capacity to accommodate regression and acknowledge that human consciousness moves through seasonal cycles of darkness and renewal that require patient, repetitive self-care. While de Botton offers constructive therapeutic frameworks such as reflexive listening, modest self-warning, and seasonal acceptance to alleviate psychological and relational friction, his model presumes both partners possess sufficient introspection to examine childhood defenses. The discussion leaves unaddressed how individuals can navigate relationships when a partner refuses to acknowledge their underlying neuroses or engage in mutual vulnerability.

作家兼哲学家阿兰·德波顿（Alain de Botton）指出，现代人普遍面临的孤独、关系破裂与抑郁困境，本质上源于未消化的童年创伤、浪漫主义对亲密关系的误导，以及精英体制剥夺“运气”后造成的极度自我归咎；唯有打破完美主义幻想，将爱视为可习得的技能与共同成长的“教室”，并在自我审视中接纳脆弱，才能实现真正的心理疗愈。 功利主义时代的心理负债与自我归因代价 (2:17) 人类大脑平均每天产生约7万个念头，但现代社会高度崇尚外在生产力与持续行动，导致个体严重缺乏向内反省与消化情绪的工具。德波顿指出，抑郁往往是未能理解自身的悲伤，焦虑则是找不到源头的担忧；未被正视的痛苦会转化为心理负债，在凌晨三点的失眠中以情绪反扑形式爆发，或沉淀为背痛、胃部不适等躯体化症状。更深层的社会学动因在于现代世俗文化的转向与宗教框架的瓦解——传统文化借助命运或原罪概念限定了人对完美的预期，而现代精英体制（Meritocracy）则宣称个人需对其社会阶层与命运负全责。 德波顿强调，古英语曾将穷人称为“不幸者”（源自罗马命运女神Fortuna），而现代美国文化则将其蔑称为“失败者”；当社会坚信成功者全凭个人实力时，也必然推定失败者全因自身无能。社会学家涂尔干（Émile Durkheim）早在1900年的《自杀论》中就发现，从传统农业社会迈向个体化现代都市伴随着自杀率的飙升，因为人们无法将自身痛苦从强烈的个人羞耻感中剥离。播客主持人Steven Bartlett补充了英国慈善机构CALM首席执行官Simon Gunning提供的数据：英国每90分钟即有1人死于自杀，男性占自杀总人数的76%，且自杀已成为45岁以下男性及15至49岁人群的首要死因，每次自杀身亡背后平均伴随25次自杀未遂，反映出极度自我苛责带来的毁灭性心理代价。 浪漫主义神话与童年创伤的强迫重复 (21:07) 现代人对亲密关系的理解普遍受到约两百年历史的浪漫主义哲学误导。浪漫主义宣称世上存在唯一的命定伴侣，主张爱与性必须完全严丝合缝，并将爱视为一种自发的情感直觉而非需要练习的教育技能。这种观念催生出致命的预期——认定相爱之人应当具备“读心术”。当伴侣未能凭直觉洞察自己未曾言说的伤痛时，个体便会陷入报复性的“生闷气”（sulking），通过反锁房门与冷暴力拒绝沟通，苛求对方穿透障碍猜透自己的心思。 更具破坏性的是，成人的择偶偏好往往牢牢绑定在童年期铺设的情感轨迹上。德波顿指出，“人们会不断重复自己未能理解的创伤”，并试图通过在成年后寻找具有类似缺陷的伴侣，去潜意识地给童年故事改写一个完美结局。若个体的童年经历将关爱与暴力、暴怒、忽视或抑郁纠缠在一起，健康的伴侣反而会因无法带来这种“熟悉的痛苦”而被其判定为缺乏“火花”。童年时期为求生而建立的防御策略（例如面对抑郁父母时彻底封闭情感，或强行扮演逗乐小丑），在成年后转变为阻碍建立真实联结的心理负累。 爱情是共同学习的教室而非无条件接纳 (36:07) 德波顿反对浪漫主义关于“真爱必须无条件接纳对方一切好坏”的教条，认为没有任何人理应在不致力于成长的前提下被全盘接纳。他重申柏拉图对爱的定义：爱是一个“教室”，双方应当以仁慈和慷慨帮助彼此成为更完善的人。寻找健康伴侣的关键不在于幽默感或外在成功，而在于个人的谦逊度——即敢于承认自己并不容易共同生活，并能坦率告知对方自己的“疯狂”所在。援引精神分析学家唐纳德·温尼科特（Donald Winnicott）关于“足够好的母亲”的论述，德波顿提出伴侣并不需要完美，一个兼具优缺点的“足够好的伴侣”才是长期关系的现实基石。 在日常维系中，德波顿主张“有选择的编辑”而非毫无保留的彻底坦白，适度过滤内心的负面噪音是对伴侣的保护。针对关系后期的性生活停滞（英国Relate机构2022年数据显示，26%的有伴侣人士每年性行为少于10次，8%完全没有性生活），德波顿分析指出，卧室障碍主要源于微小的日常失望长期积压而成的隐秘愤怒，唯有定期坦诚排解琐碎摩擦，才能打通亲密通道。此外，伴侣应练习“反思性倾听”（reflexive listening），即准确复述对方的委屈感受而非急于给出建议；在遭遇摩擦时，借助善意的戏谑将对方从“蠢人”转化为“可爱的蠢人”，遵循哲学家叔本华的主张，主动将生活中的眼泪转化为认知洞见。 心理崩溃机制与顺应心灵季节的真正韧性 (72:47) 在探讨其著作《治愈之旅》（A Therapeutic Journey）时，德波顿拆解了心理崩溃的内在机制。正常心智具备复杂的自我保护机制，能够维持自我同情并将事件按时间与重要性分层归档；而在崩溃状态下，时间秩序全面坍塌，多年前的旧伤会与眼前的琐事同等剧烈地冲击大脑，严厉的内部批评彻底压倒了自我宽恕。更严重的是，人们只能看到外部世界展现出的从容表象，却必须独自承受自身内心的混乱，这种巨大的“认知差距”极易滋生深刻的耻辱感与孤立感。 德波顿指出，严重的精神痛苦往往源于爱的匮乏与残忍经历，因此心智校准必须依赖于另一个充满同情的外在心灵（无论是朋友、治疗师还是医护人员）来温柔地挑战歪曲认知。真正的心理韧性绝非强行咬牙坚持或迅速反弹的冷酷坚毅，而是宽容地接纳心智中必然存在的脆弱、破碎与倒退。人类心理如同自然界的四季交替，必然会经历滑入黑暗的秋冬阶段，理解并顺应这一心智节奏，才能在危机中真正实现复原与成长。 德波顿从哲学与心理学交叉视角为现代人的孤独与情感困境提供了系统的病理诊断，呼吁以反思性技能与自我宽容取代浪漫主义幻想；然而，该论述高度依赖个体进行长期、自觉的心理反省与外部专业治疗资源，对于身处极端现实压力或缺乏心理支持网络的群体而言，如何低成本地落实这些理念仍是一个有待解答的现实难题。

## Background 本期内容由 YouTube 知名播客频道 The Diary Of A CEO 于 2023 年 12 月 28 日发布。节目中，主持人史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）与畅销书作家、“人生学校”（The School of Life）创办人阿兰·德波顿（Alain de Botton）展开深度对谈，围绕现代人深陷孤独、缺乏爱意与抑郁的真实根源，探讨了心理健康、两性关系误区及德波顿的新书《A Therapeutic Journey》。 ## TL;DR 阿兰·德波顿剖析了现代性与精英主义叙事如何通过剥离宗教慰藉、将成败过度归咎于个人，从而诱发了普遍的焦虑与精神危机。他尖锐解构了浪漫主义对亲密关系的毒害，指出寻找‘命中注定’与期待无言默契会导致毁灭性的‘生闷气’和性冷淡，而真实的爱需要承认自身疯狂、进行必要的‘自我剪辑’并后天习得沟通技巧。德波顿进一步提出将眼泪化为知识、接纳心理上的‘四季轮回’与倒退，倡导人们以宽容与幽默拥抱彼此的不完美，在借由外部心智校准与深度倾听中实现长久的心理疗愈。 ## Atmosphere & style 整场对话沉静、从容且充满智识的微光，阿兰·德波顿以其标志性的诗意语言与深邃洞察，将沉重的精神危机与情感困境拆解得极其温和通透。史蒂芬·巴特利特带着强烈的求知欲与共鸣适时追问，两人在快节奏的商业播客语境中营造出了如深夜长谈般安全而专注的场域。聆听体验如同经历一场温暖的心灵抚慰，既有撕开现代生活虚妄幻象的清醒与阵痛，又在对人性脆弱的释怀与幽默自嘲中，获得了被彻底看清与接纳的深层安宁。 ## Bulletin - [14:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=856s) 现代社会以功绩主义和完美主义取代了传统宗教叙事，导致个体将失败全盘内归因，自杀率与心理危机显著上升，英国数据显示男性自杀占比高达76%。 - [21:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1267s) 过去250年由浪漫主义主导的恋爱观树立了‘心有灵犀’与‘爱与性绝对统一’的毒害迷思，催生了以‘生闷气’和沟通封闭为代表的情感破坏模式。 - [42:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2537s) 无性关系的核心诱因往往不是生理吸引力下降，而是日常微小挫折与怨恨未被排解，导致卧室亲密通道被潜意识愤怒彻底阻断。 - [04:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=288s) 失眠与心身疾病本质是白天刻意压抑思绪的情绪反弹；真正的心理韧性并非硬撑反弹，而是坦然接纳心智的倒退与‘季节性低谷’。 ## Key takeaways - [04:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=288s) 现代人的精神困扰本质上多源于‘未经处理的情绪’，白昼逃避的杂念会在夜间以失眠或身体躯体化疼痛的方式报复性浮现。 - [09:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=599s) 传统宗教通过‘原罪’设定承认人性生来残缺，而现代世俗社会消解了这一缓冲，迫使个体背负‘必须现世圆满’的精神枷锁。 - [16:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=964s) 功绩主义将胜败归因从不可控的‘运气’转向全然的‘个人能力’，使得失败者从古时的‘不幸者’沦为全盘自责的‘输家’，加剧了现代自杀危机。 - [23:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1424s) 成人的恋爱冲动往往不是自由选择，而是受童年痛苦相处剧本的驱使，人们容易将复刻童年创伤的熟悉感误当成恋爱中的‘火花’。 - [27:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1664s) 成年人在亲密关系中的自我封闭与讨好等破坏性行为，在童年恶劣家庭环境中往往是保护幼小自我的聪明自救机制，需温和觉察并主动替换。 - [36:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2167s) ‘无条件接纳’是现代文化毒药，健康的爱正如柏拉图所言‘是一间教室’，双方应共同致力于指出不足、彼此教育并实现人格完善。 - [39:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2373s) ‘生闷气’是浪漫主义读心幻想的典型恶果，指望伴侣凭直觉洞察委屈只会摧毁关系，耐心地用言语平实解释才是成熟的解药。 - [40:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2444s) 为了维持长久伴侣关系，必须学会出于善意的‘自我剪辑’，过度毫无保留地宣泄阴暗杂念反而会给关系带来灾难性破坏。 - [42:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2537s) 长期关系的无性僵局多因微小不满累积成潜意识愤怒，维系身体亲密的前提是在餐桌上主动坦陈并排解彼此引发的不快与委屈。 - [49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2968s) 日常极度舒适与温馨会唤醒童年抚养记忆，无意识中扼杀性的冲动，因此适度引入距离、陌生环境与共同幽默有助于重拾性能量。 - [52:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3141s) 防止伴侣倦怠的关键在于‘反思性倾听’，克制好为人师出谋划策和喧宾夺主的冲动，通过精准复述对方感受赋予其被看见的体验。 - [56:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3376s) 一段持久关系的核心支柱是双方承认自身固有脆弱与‘轻度疯狂’，并能觉察彼此情绪爆发往往是把童年剧本错误投射到眼前的伴侣身上。 - [01:05:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3902s) 世上不存在绝对完美契合的‘对的人’，健康的关系应借鉴温尼科特的‘足够好’理论，寻找并成为一个‘足够好的伴侣’。 - [01:15:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4556s) 心理崩溃的本质是失去站在自己这边的宽恕机制以及思维排序能力，治愈需要依靠外部健康心智的校准与爱的善意体验。 - [01:20:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4839s) 重新定义韧性：韧性并非咬牙硬撑与永不倒退，而是深刻理解心灵的四季轮转，对处于低谷和倒退的自己报以宽厚与接纳。 - [01:25:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=5144s) 失眠是‘夜晚的学校’，接纳午夜浮现的未解心绪并倾听其真实关切，能够让人从焦虑烦躁转变为一个‘更好的失眠者’。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=0s) 关系预告与现代爱情的误区 节目开篇以快节奏的精彩集锦切入。畅销书作家、现代恋爱哲学代表人物阿兰·德波顿（Alain de Botton）指出，人类平均每天会产生 70,000 个念头，但核心问题在于我们根本不懂得如何去处理和利用它们。在两性关系中，人们总是倾向于相信世界上存在命中注定的“唯一”（the one），然而这种信念反而催生了更多的愤怒与失望，因为我们在现实中并不能随意爱上任何人——我们的爱往往深受童年经历的回响所牵引，而过去的经历并非总是幸福的。 德波顿进一步拆解了浪漫主义对亲密关系的毒害：许多人常以“遇到这个人时我们甚至无需多言，彼此心有灵犀”为最浪漫的标志。然而，这种思维往往导致极具破坏性的“生闷气”（sulking）。当伴侣察觉异样询问“怎么了”时，受浪漫主义浸泡的人会执拗地隐瞒，寄希望于对方拥有超自然的超能力，能够直接看透自己受伤的灵魂并明白问题所在，可伴侣毕竟只是凡人。随后话题触及亲密关系中的核心习惯与性生活困境：数据显示有 26% 的伴侣每年性生活少于 10 次，性问题背后隐藏着彼此未曾觉察的深层阻碍。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 浪漫主义爱情迷思的恶性循环 accDescr: 展示从迷信默契到沟通受阻、最终产生怨怼的演变过程 subgraph RomanticMyth["浪漫主义迷思"] A["寻找唯一 (The One)"] --> B["追求不言自明的完美默契"] end subgraph Breakdown["沟通断裂与情绪积压"] B --> C["伴侣无法看透内心"] C --> D["陷入极度委屈的生闷气 (Sulking)"] end subgraph Consequence["关系困境"] D --> E["亲密感流失 / 性生活停滞"] E --> F["对伴侣与自我产生愤怒与失望"] end ``` - 主持人史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）穿插向观众呼吁：后台数据显示，频道有高达 69.9% 的常客尚未点击订阅，他承诺只要观众订阅支持，团队将全力以赴让节目制作与嘉宾质量越来越好。 --- ### [02:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=137s) 阿兰·德波顿的人生使命：探究现代社会的不幸根源 史蒂文询问德波顿，虽然他创作涉猎广泛，但他始终贯彻的核心使命究竟是什么。德波顿回答道，他的目标是系统性地剖析生活在现代世界中所引发的种种不幸与痛苦。虽然现代文明解决了物质匮乏与诸多实际难题，但也在许多领域制造了人类历史上前所未见的棘手挑战。 德波顿重提人类大脑每天产生的 70,000 个碎片化念头。它们并非深思熟虑的宏大构想，而是稍纵即逝的零碎思绪。我们常常任由经历如流水般从身边呼啸而过，却从不在一天结束时停下脚步问自己一些能够平复心神的问题——“我今天究竟在生谁的气？”、“是什么让我感到兴奋？”、“今天到底发生了什么？”。德波顿指出，那些未经充分消化的体验，往往会在日后以恶毒的方式反噬我们；许多所谓的精神困扰，本质上都是“未经处理的情绪”（unprocessed emotion）在作祟。 - 抑郁往往是“尚未理解自身的悲伤”。 - 焦虑或易怒通常是“未找到根源的隐忧”。 --- ### [04:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=288s) 心理疾病的根源与身体的“未解之音” 德波顿阐述道，人类天生是朝向外部、注重行动的生物，这种生理机制从演化角度来看极具优势，却导致我们并不擅长自我觉察。如今现代人的生活更加久坐不动，且不仅要求生存与行动，更追求“自我实现”（fulfillment），这就要求必须有大量的内省时间，但现代生活节奏却完全挤压了内省的空间。德波顿建议每个人在夜晚抽出时间，坐在半暗的房间里静下心自省：“我的内心浮现了什么？里面到底发生了什么？” 那些未被正视的情绪不会自行消失，它们会在潜意识深处敲击我们的良心，并被迫寻找出口——往往转化为躯体化障碍（psychosomatic disorders）。为了避免情绪演变成身体重疾，可以通过与身体对话来进行自我疏导： - “如果我的后背能说话，它想告诉我什么？” - “如果我的肩膀有发言权，它们试图表达什么？” - “如果我的胃能发出声音，它想要倾吐什么？” 谈到失眠与焦虑时，德波顿提出一个极富洞察力的观点：“失眠，是对你在白天精心回避的一切念头的复仇。”白天为了逃避痛苦，人们精心设计日程转移注意力；但情绪良知需要被倾听，如果在下午 3 点拒绝倾听它们，它们就会在凌晨 3 点将你彻底唤醒。睡前进行一场深度自我对话，才是换来安稳睡眠的钥匙。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 未消化情绪演变为心身困扰的机制 accDescr: 描绘白天压抑思绪导致失眠与躯体疾病的路径 subgraph Suppression["白天回避"] A["白天刻意回避负面念头"] --> B["情绪良知未获满足"] end subgraph Manifestation["夜间与躯体反弹"] B --> C["凌晨 3 点失眠报复"] B --> D["背部/肩膀/肠胃躯体化疼痛"] end subgraph Healing["对策：主动内省"] E["睡前昏暗环境对话"] --> F["释放情绪积压"] end ``` 童年创伤（trauma）也是同样的逻辑。德波顿举例，一位 50 多岁受过良好教育、拥有丰富资源与伴侣朋友支持的朋友在经历丧亲之痛后，依然被抑郁击倒、卧床不起。然而成年人是幸运的，因为拥有理解时间与倾诉的工具；试想一个 3 至 6 岁的幼童经历重大丧失，他们既没有可以促膝长谈的朋友，也没有能重读的书籍，更缺乏对时间的认知。童年无法消化的痛苦会直接卡在身体系统里，“堵塞我们的整套运转机制”。 --- ### [08:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=505s) 幸福是现代人的错觉？宗教消逝带来的精神重负 史蒂文由此提出疑问：追求“幸福”究竟是人类天生应有的目标，还是现代人自行建构、反而带来巨大精神痛苦的新枷锁？古代先祖可能只考虑生存与繁衍，而现代人却深陷自我实现的焦虑中。 德波顿赞同这是现代性的核心悖论之一，而其中最关键的变量是“宗教的消亡”。许多地区的现代人是人类历史上第一批试图在没有宗教指引下过上美好生活的人。过去，宗教为人类体验构筑了时间尺度： - 信徒会立刻感知到，当下这一瞬间比起此前与此后绵延千百乃至数百万年的历史长河微不足道，眼前的时刻不过是时间中的一粒微尘。 - 宏大叙事让个体在尺度上感到自身的渺小，这种对自身渺小位置的顺服与释怀，正是通往内心平静与和谐的途径。 与之相反，现代社会不断鼓动每个人成为“大人物”、在世界上留下不可磨灭的印记，这种急于膨胀自我的渴望，恰恰成了通往现代精神疾病的“特快列车”。 ### [09:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=599s) 崇高的渺小感与宗教对“人类缺陷”的宽恕 在现代社会中，“让人觉得自己渺小”往往带有一种被贬低、被羞辱的负面意味，比如在奢华酒店里遭遇冷眼；但阿兰·德波顿指出，世上其实存在一种让人感到渺小的“良性方式”。当你捧起一本三千年前用古老文字写就的典籍，漫步于风沙雕刻的荒漠巨石之间，或者面对一只对你的社会地位、成就光环和宏大叙事毫不关心的动物时，那种庞大的时空感会瞬间抚平现代人被虚荣驱使的焦虑，让你看清自己在宇宙中真实的位置。传统宗教的核心功能正在于此：它将个体嵌入到一个更宏大的叙事中，并不断提醒人们——生命和你本身，生来就是不完美的。 德波顿借用天主教中的“原罪”（original sin）概念解释道，尽管原罪教义派生过许多糟粕，但其底层逻辑却蕴含着惊人的心理慰藉：它假定“每个人从一开始就是残缺不全、带有瑕疵的”。这一认知是通往脆弱与真正友谊的大门。如果承认自己有所欠缺，而他人亦是如此，大家不过都在残缺中竭尽所能，彼此的期待就会降低，防御也会随之瓦解。相反，现代社会的成功人士往往极难交到真心朋友，因为他们将成功等同于“无懈可击”，财富和地位越高，就越不敢承认一个普遍的人性真相——在坚强的外表下，每个人在某些时刻都只是一个惊恐、无助的孩子。 宗教通过设定一个仅存在于彼岸的“完美世界”，把完美从现实生活的重压中抽离。无论是在比弗利山庄、新加坡还是悉尼的豪宅区，人间根本不存在绝对的圆满，痛苦与残缺才是常态。德波顿举了一个相亲的生动比喻：一个人若是宣称“我很完美，且致力于达到极致”，只会让人敬而远之、感到压抑；但如果对方坦诚地说“我有很多缺点，但我正学着如何与它们共处”，旁人立刻会觉得松了一口气。宗教在神圣意志面前压低了人类的自我膨胀，反而让个体能以更宽容的心态接纳自身，不必在这个世上强行建造一座无可挑剔的“新耶路撒冷”。 ### [13:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=796s) “追求完美”的现代诅咒与涂尔干的自杀悖论 现代人抛弃了彼岸世界的退路，陷入了“唯有此时此刻最重要”的执念。现代文明灌输了一种苛刻的信念：你不仅必须在现世取得圆满，而且你本身是“可以被塑造成完美”的；一旦生活受挫，就意味着你辜负了这种完美标准。更残酷的是，现代文化将“追求快乐”定为人生至高无上的终极目标，取代了追求意义、精神充实或利他奉献。这种将个体快乐绝对化的美丽愿景，恰恰酿成了当代最沉重的精神灾难。 德波顿提到了法国社会学先驱埃米尔·涂尔干（Émile Durkheim）及其在1900年前后出版的名著《自杀论》（*Suicide*）。涂尔干敏锐地发现了前现代社会与现代社会之间一个令人不安的鸿沟：在依赖宗教纽带的传统农业村落中，自杀率相对较低；而在技术进步、财富充盈、崇尚个人奋斗的现代都市里，自杀率却显著攀升，且往往吞噬的是群体中最有抱负的人。这种“物质极度丰富与精神极端痛苦并存、社会飞速进步与心灵加速沉沦”的现代悖论，正是催生社会学研究的核心命题。 主持人史蒂芬·巴特利特补充了英国反自杀慈善机构 CALM（Campaign Against Living Miserably）首席执行官西蒙·冈宁（Simon Gunning）提供的一组令人震惊的严酷数据，佐证了现代精神危机的蔓延： - 在英国，平均每 90 分钟就有一人死于自杀。 - 自杀身亡者中，男性占比高达 76%。 - 每发生一起自杀身亡事件，背后平均对应着 25 次自杀未遂。 - 自杀是英国 45 岁以下男性以及 15 至 49 岁人群的单一最大死因。 - 19 至 35 岁人群报告陷入心理危机的几率是其他年龄段的两倍。 - 16 至 24 岁年龄段是历史上自杀意念增长最快的群体，且年轻女性自杀倾向激增已成为近期极其严峻的爆发性趋势。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 现代主义与心理危机演变逻辑 accDescr: 展示从前现代的命运归因到现代绝对自我归因导致的心理崩溃过程 subgraph PreModern ["前现代社会（命运与缺憾视角）"] A["承认人类生来残缺 / 原罪观"] --> B["信仰彼岸完美，降低现世预期"] B --> C["外归因：命运女神（Fortuna）与运气"] C --> D["失败者为'不幸者'（Unfortunate）：免于全然自责"] end subgraph Modern ["现代社会（精英主义与完美视角）"] E["个人主义叙事：你主导一切"] --> F["现世即全部，追求绝对快乐与完美"] F --> G["内归因：唯才主义（Meritocracy）"] G --> H["失败者为'输家'（Loser）：全面羞耻与自我否定"] end D -.->|历史观念演变| H H --> I["绝望之渊：将痛苦视为个人全责，导致自杀率激增"] ``` ### [16:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=964s) 从“不幸者”到“失败者”：责任归咎与精英主义陷阱 德波顿深刻剖析了现代人走向自我毁灭的深层心理机制：人们不会仅仅因为处境糟糕就选择自杀，只有当他们身陷绝境、且“坚信这一切全是自己的过错”时，自杀才会发生。个体无法将遭遇的痛苦与强烈的个人责任剥离开来，这种绝对的归因随即催生了毁灭性的羞耻感。在高度个人主义的世界里，社会灌输了一种逻辑——你的境遇是你自身能力与选择的直接投射，你全权掌控着自己的人生脚本。 在长达数百年的历史中，人类并未受到这种苛刻评价体系的审判。在古英语中，贫困贫苦的人被称为“不幸者”（unfortunate），这个词根源于罗马神话中的命运女神“福尔图娜”（Fortuna）。古罗马人频繁向命运女神献祭，实质上是承认人生的起落很大程度上取决于不可控的外部机缘；然而在当下极度个人主义的美国，陷入贫困窘迫的人被轻蔑地统称为“输家”（loser）。从“不幸者”到“输家”的词义演化，记录了四百年间人类对“命运责任归属”的认知变迁——社会不再愿意将任何空间留给运气。 德波顿用生活场景进行了尖锐的对比：如果今天有人对朋友倾诉自己被解雇、新书惨遭滞销，即便嘴上说着“只是运气不好”，身为现代人的听众内心也会暗自揣测“他肯定做错了什么”；反之，若主持人的播客收听量破了纪录并谦逊地归功于运气，听众也只会觉得这是客套，潜意识里认定是他本领过人。现代人笃信“行为导致成败”，将一切归结为个人因果，这直接将绝境中的人逼入了死角：当失败降临时，他们找不到自身以外的任何解释来分担绝望。 这种心态被现代社会最具蛊惑力的口号——“精英主义”（Meritocracy，唯才主义）进一步固化。无论是左翼还是右翼政客，都在极力描绘一个只要努力就能跨越阶层、完全按才能与贡献分配回报的理想国度。这一叙事表面上打破了特权垄断，代表着巨大的社会进步，但它的黑暗镜像却极具破坏性：如果一个社会坚信成功者全凭自身才能胜出，那么逻辑的另一面必然是——失败者完全是咎由自取。 ### [20:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1204s) 功绩主义的隐性心理代价 在深入探讨人际情感前，阿兰·德波顿（Alain de Botton）剖析了功绩主义（Meritocracy）对当代人心理造成的深远重创。如果社会坚信“站在顶层的人理应位于顶层”，那么潜台词便是“跌落底层的人也活该沦为底层”。功绩主义世界观将个人的成功与失败从不可控的“运气或偶然”，彻底定性为不可推卸的“必然宿命”。这种意识形态让获胜者变得冷酷无情、缺乏同理心，他们会理直气壮地认为：“我是靠自己单打独斗走到这里的，我不需要感谢任何人，为什么还要交税？”与此同时，处于底层的人则被这种“失败是自己无能所致”的观念彻底击垮。现代社会构建的这套复杂意识形态，背后潜藏着极其沉重的心理代价。 ### [21:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1267s) 浪漫主义如何误导了我们对爱情的理解 当话题转向“什么是浪漫之爱（Romantic Love）”时，德波顿坦言全世界在爱情这件事上已经迷茫困惑了大约 250 年。现代人并非天生不懂爱，而是在过去两个半世纪里，全人类都生活在一种名为“浪漫主义（Romanticism）”的思想庇护与束缚之下。浪漫主义树立了一套极其特殊、严苛且不切实际的假设： - **命中注定的唯一灵魂伴侣**：认为世界上总有某个人在等待着你，并且你们会以一种近乎神秘、通灵或天注定的方式相遇——比如在超市收银台排队时，仅仅惊鸿一瞥，甚至对彼此一无所知，你就能感受到强大的宿命引力，认定对方就是降临人间的“天使”。 - **无需言说的绝对默契**：浪漫主义者深信，无需过多了解与沟通就能读懂彼此，话说得越少，灵魂连接反而越深邃。 - **爱与性绝对不可分离**：浪漫主义将爱与性彻底捆绑，不允许两者之间存在哪怕一毫米的脱节。在旧世界里，性与爱的疏离或许只是婚姻中的“现实困难”；而在浪漫主义语境下，不忠与通奸直接被升级为摧毁灵魂的“毁灭性悲剧”，这也是近现代小说与电影不断书写通奸悲剧的根源。 - **爱是本能情绪，而非可学技能**：当代人倾向于认为爱是一种只需感受的情感，而不是一项需要系统学习的技能。如果你提议“我们应该去爱情学校认真研读如何去爱”，对方往往会皱眉反驳“这太不浪漫了”。德波顿指出，现实中每当有人说出“这不够浪漫”时，警报声就该拉响了——绝大多数听起来不够浪漫的事情（如理性沟通、学习相处）往往是极其明智的，而那些看似极具浪漫色彩的行为（如在拉斯维加斯与相识五分钟的人闪婚），往往走向灾难。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 浪漫主义爱情迷思与现实的冲突 accDescr: 对比浪漫主义的核心假设与其在现实生活中造成的困境 subgraph RomanticMyths["浪漫主义的核心迷思"] M1["灵魂伴侣与超市一瞥的天定宿命"] M2["无需沟通言说的神圣默契"] M3["爱与性的绝对捆绑"] M4["爱纯属本能直觉，无需后天学习"] end subgraph RealityImpact["现实中的情感危机"] R1["忽视理性磨合与人格审查"] R2["沟通停滞，期待对方读心"] R3["将伴侣间的问题直接上升为存在性背叛"] R4["缺乏相处技巧，视婚姻教育为不解风情"] end RomanticMyths --> RealityImpact ``` ### [23:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1424s) 本能的陷阱与童年铺设的爱情轨道 现代人最大的误区之一就是迷信所谓的“恋爱直觉”。旧时代实行包办婚姻，两个人的结合完全由家族利益和现实条件决定，个人没有选择权；现代人名义上获得了爱任何人的绝对自由，但这种自由其实是种幻觉。人们无法随心所欲地去爱，因为成人的爱情完全建立在童年铺设的轨道和写好的剧本之上。 问题的症结在于，许多人在童年时期体验到的“关爱”，往往混杂着扭曲而病态的动态：可能为了获得父母的关注，孩子必须忍受对方的暴怒、暴力、抑郁、贬低，或是面对父母偏心其他手足的冷落。带着这种烙印步入成年，人们会被那些散发着“熟悉感”的爱情故事深深吸引。这种吸引力并非源于幸福，而是因为它精准复刻了童年的创伤体验。 现实中常见的一种讽刺现象是：你热心给单身的好友撮合一位性格温和、条件匹配的优秀对象。约会结束后你兴致勃勃地询问进展，朋友却含糊其辞地说：“感觉还行吧，但好像缺了点火花（Spark）。”德波顿直言，对方口中缺失的“火花”，翻译成内心深处的真实潜台词其实是：“这个人完全没有展现出会用我童年熟悉的方式让我痛苦的迹象。”换句话说，这段关系居然有可能会让人获得真正的平静与幸福，反而让人感到陌生甚至危险，于是他们选择仓皇逃离。 ### [26:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1578s) “原生家庭问题”与给剧本改写结局的执念 主持人史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）探讨了坊间常说的“恋父情结/原生家庭问题（Daddy Issues）”：当一个人早年与父亲或重要男性抚养者相处受挫（例如遭遇抛弃或形成焦虑型依恋），是否就会在成年后不断寻觅有缺陷的男性，以此重温那种与爱捆绑在一起的痛苦？ 德波顿对此表示认同，强调“凡是我们无法理解的，我们终将不断重复”。只要对童年潜移默化植入的剧本缺乏自觉，人就会在成年后一次次重新上演它。但这种强迫性重复的背后并非纯粹自虐，往往潜藏着一种执念：**渴望给童年的剧本一个完美的结局**。例如，一个人的父亲生前可能冷漠刻薄，却也偶有人格闪光点；成年后，当事人会本能地寻找一个与父亲特质极度相似的人，潜意识里幻想着：“只要这一次我能赢得对方全心全意的爱，这段悲伤的童年故事就能画上圆满的句号。”然而在现实中，这种救赎幻想极少能够如愿以偿。 ### [27:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1664s) 曾经聪明的童年防御，成年后破败的牢笼 德波顿提出了一种富有同理心的心理学观察视角：成年人身上许多看似荒谬、疯狂的自我毁灭行为——爱上无法给予幸福的人、亲手破坏职业前途、面对伴侣筑起心墙——在童年时期往往曾是极度聪明、甚至救命的防御机制。 - **封闭情感以求自保**：如果一个孩子在五岁时面对的是一位有自杀倾向的父母，此时选择彻底关闭内心情感、绝不信任任何人，是一种“极其聪明的自救举措”。因为在那种环境下敞开心扉，脆弱的幼童心理会被彻底撕裂。 - **扮演小丑以缓解压抑**：如果孩子生长在一个极度压抑、充斥着严重抑郁情绪的家庭中，他通过疯狂讲笑话、扮演“狂躁搞笑的小丑”来调节家庭气氛，也是孩童在恶劣环境中演化出的超凡适应能力。 然而，十几年、几十年过去，当年用来抵抗痛苦处境的绝妙护盾，在成年世界里却彻底毁掉了当事人的幸福可能。那个童年关上心门的成年人，即便遇到了极具安全感、无比真诚的伴侣，依然会无意识地启动防御机制，甚至觉察不到自己的心早已冰封；那个靠搞笑生存的人，成年后无法应对任何严肃深度的交流，在朋友眼中沦为一个情感塑料、永远无法真正连接的玩偶。德波顿建议，走出这种困境的关键，首先是带着感恩之心对童年的自己说一声：“谢谢你，当年为你设想出了如此聪明的生存策略；但现在已经足够了，那套策略保护了童年的我，却不再适合我当下的生活，我想要换一种方式活下去。”听到这里，史蒂芬深有感触地指出，人群往往因此分化为两类：一类是能够清晰觉察到自己深陷破坏性循环的人，另一类则是茫然无知、浑浑噩噩在循环中反复受锤的人。 ### [30:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1810s) 自我意识的觉醒：造句填空与照亮潜意识的杠杆 许多人深陷破坏性的情感轮回却浑然不觉，每当重蹈覆辙，往往只会无奈地感叹一句：“唉，这就是我的命（That's just my luck）。”针对如何打破这种盲目、提升对自身行为模式的觉察，阿兰·德波顿指出，其实有非常简便却极具穿透力的方法。心理学中有一种经典工具叫做“造句填空测试”（Sentence Completion Test）。操作方式很简单：给出一句未完成的话头，后面跟着省略号，并告诉测试者“不要思考太多，凭直觉把句子写完”。 这些句子往往极其寻常，比如： - “男人是……” - “女人是……” - “我是……” - “生活是……” 一旦让人不假思索地落笔，潜意识深处那些惊人的信念便会瞬间浮出水面。有人会写下：“男人都是独裁的恶棍。”写完之后连自己都会震惊：这种念头究竟从何而来？还有人会写下：“我是一个活该被践踏的小人物。”在动笔前的那一分钟，当事人很可能根本没有意识到自己内心背负着如此严苛、灰暗的自我认知。德波顿强调，人们往往需要借助这种微小的认知杠杆，才能将光亮照进潜意识的幽暗角落，窥见那些暗中操纵行为的既定剧本。 --- ### [31:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1886s) 心理治疗室的“培养皿”效应：投射与被看见 除了自我测试，寻找一位优秀的心理治疗师同样是提高自我觉察的关键途径。现实生活中的互动充满了干扰：在职场或恋爱中，每个人都忙于应对自己的事务，带着各自的心思和防备，甚至陷入勾心斗角的博弈。然而，心理咨询室却创造了一个截然不同的环境——它就像一个隔绝嘈杂的“无菌培养皿”（Petri dish）。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 心理投射在现实与咨询室的机制对比 accDescr: 对比现实生活中的情绪盲区与心理咨询室中的显影与觉察过程 subgraph RealLife["日常现实情境（高噪音、互为盲区）"] A["童年经历与未解创伤"] --> B["向外投射假定<br/>（如：他人必定在评判我/我必须照顾别人）"] B --> C["防御性行为与冲突模式"] C --> D["对方卷入博弈，加剧破坏性死循环"] end subgraph TherapyRoom["心理咨询室（培养皿环境）"] E["当事人向治疗师展现相同投射"] --> F["专业治疗师保持中立并不予反弹"] F --> G["当场指认模式并溯源童年因果"] G --> H["瓦解投射故事，建立全新自我意识"] end ``` 在日常生活中，一个人可能只要面对男性就会不自觉地认定对方在评判自己，从而选择退缩、放弃竞争；或者一接触女性，就预判自己会遭受虐待。当走入咨询室，面对一位专业治疗师时，当事人不可避免地会把这套惯用剧本原封不动地搬出来。但与日常伴侣或同事不同，治疗师不会被卷入这场戏码，而是能清晰洞察当事人的举动： - 当患者脱口而出“我知道你很讨厌我”时，治疗师不会愤怒辩解，而是温和回应：“我完全没有讨厌你，但我很好奇，你为什么会有这种坚不可摧的信念？” - 当患者习惯性讨好地说“我觉得你很累，你平时工作太辛苦了，我真想好好照顾你”时，治疗师会敏锐地指出：“你不需要照顾我。但在你的成长经历中，是不是曾经必须去照顾某个人？是不是那种沉重的内疚感，让你至今在每段关系里都觉得别人的需求永远比你自己的更重要？” 正是脱离了办公室与亲密关系的喧嚣，在这样一个受控的安全空间内，人们才第一次有机会看清自己为了维持旧日创伤所投射出的虚构故事，以及这些假定让自己付出了多么惨痛的代价。 --- ### [33:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2008s) 接纳自身的“疯狂”：相亲时最该问的问题 斯蒂芬·巴特利特提出疑问：当我们终于觉察到源自童年的破坏性循环后，究竟该如何克服那种几乎被“硬编码”（hardwired）在体内的重复冲动？德波顿给出了充满宽慰却又清醒的回答：能够辨认出这种模式，本身就已经是了不起的巨大成就。人类永远无法达到全然的完美，亲密关系所需要的，仅仅是人们能够清楚知晓自己的不完美之处，并在造成破坏之前，及时向伴侣发出预警。 德波顿幽默地建议，在约会相亲时，最值得抛给对方的一个绝妙问题其实是：“你有多疯？你的疯狂表现在哪里？”（"How are you mad?"）如果对方自信满满地回答“我一点都不疯，我完全正常、理性”，那么最好的选择就是“拔腿就跑”。因为没有人是全然理智的，人性深处皆有荒谬与偏执。所谓日常生活里尚可容忍的“心智健全”（tolerable sanity），本质上是在我们自身疯狂的领域插上警示旗，时刻保持自知之明，并在失控犯错后迅速真诚地道歉。 同样的道理也适用于所谓的“好相处”。在寻找伴侣时，很多人声称想要一个“幽默风趣”的人，但实质上需要的并非讲笑话的才能，而是一种对自己缺点的谦逊。如果在相亲时遇到有人标榜自己“脾气极好、非常容易相处”，那绝对是一个危险信号。真正相对安全的人，是那些敢于举手坦白“其实我有些时候非常难搞、很不好伺候”的人——他们虽非无懈可击，但至少已经踏上了通往自知与自我克制的道路。 --- ### [36:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2167s) 驳斥“无条件接纳”的神话：柏拉图与“爱是一间教室” 斯蒂芬补充道，仅仅意识到自身的破坏性习惯还不够，伴侣更希望看到的是一个人正在积极努力改变、试图向前迈进。德波顿对此深表赞同，并尖锐地批判了现代文化中最具毒害性的信条之一：真正的爱就是全盘接纳对方的本来面目，无论好坏（accepting somebody for who they are）。 现实中常能听到失恋者抱怨：“我的前任根本无法接纳真实的我。”周遭的人往往随声附和，感叹前任有多糟糕。然而德波顿反问道：“我们当中真的有任何人配得上被全盘、毫无保留地爱着吗？这种期待真的公平吗？”人类本身就是一件件未完成的“半成品”（works in progress）。渴望在爱中变得更好，不仅丝毫不违背爱的真谛，反而是爱的核心动力。 古希腊哲学家柏拉图很早就参透了这一点。在柏拉图看来，“爱是一间教室”（love is a classroom）。在这间教室里，两人怀着极大的善意与慷慨，共同致力于帮助彼此成为更优秀、更完善的自己。爱是一场为了成长而展开的双向修行。但在浪漫主义盛行的今天，这种理性的教育观被严重曲解；如果某人对伴侣说“我读了柏拉图，认为爱是一所学校，所以接下来我要用40分钟讲讲你的缺点，随后你也用40分钟讲讲我的缺点”，现代人只会觉得这大煞风景、极其“不浪漫”（unromantic）。然而，爱本质上是一门需要后天学习的技术，绝非仅仅是一种被动感受到的情绪。 --- ### [37:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2270s) 冲突解决的障碍：浪漫主义与致命的“生闷气” 斯蒂芬结合自身的情感经历反思道，亲密关系的成败几乎完全取决于双方解决冲突的能力（conflict resolution）。过去的关系破裂往往是因为彼此都不擅长处理争端，而一段成熟、健康的关系，核心就在于双方具备更高效、更理性的解纷机制。 德波顿指出，现代人在冲突解决上的无能，并不完全是个人过错，很大程度上要归咎于浪漫主义文化的误导。浪漫主义灌输了一种极其荒谬的迷思：最崇高的爱应当是心有灵犀、无需言语传达的默契。人们常常沉醉于这样的桥段：“我们刚认识时甚至不需要开口说话，就能完全懂对方的心思。”这种对心电感应式沟通的崇拜，直接催生了亲密关系中最具破坏性的灾难行为——生闷气（sulking）。 生闷气的心理机制极为微妙且讽刺： - **本质定义**：当事人在没有说出任何诉求的情况下，因为对方未能读懂自己的心思而感到狂怒与受挫。 - **内在逻辑**：信奉浪漫主义的人会在心底认定：“如果你真的爱我，你就应该凭直觉、不着一字地看穿我的委屈；既然你看不出来，就证明你根本不爱我，那我凭什么还要告诉你？” - **典型场景**：伴侣两人参加聚会归来，一方明显面带愠色。当另一方关切地询问“亲爱的，有什么不对劲吗？”时，生闷气的一方往往只会从鼻腔里冷冷地挤出一声“哼，没事（Mhm）”。明明满腹怨气，却坚决闭口不言，将沟通的通道彻底封死，任由冰冷的猜忌在沉默中迅速发酵。 ### [39:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2373s) 生闷气与浪漫主义的“读心”幻想 许多人在亲密关系中陷入僵局时，最典型的反应往往是躲进洗手间、反锁房门，把痛苦深藏起来。伴侣在门外焦急地敲门恳求：“亲爱的，求你告诉我到底怎么了？”而门内传出的只有一声冰冷决绝的“没事”。阿兰·德波顿笑着指出，我们几乎每个人都曾扮演过门后那个赌气生闷气的人。这种行为的深层根源在于我们骨子里都是不可救药的“浪漫主义者”——潜意识里固执地认为，真正相爱的人应该具备某种近乎外星人般的特异功能，能够隔着厚厚的浴室门板，一眼洞穿我们那千疮百孔、扭曲受伤的灵魂，心领神会所有的委屈。 现实却是残酷的：伴侣只是普通的人类，不是读心者。人们往往需要经历漫长的痛苦才明白这一点。发生冲突时，我们首先应当自问的反而是：“我把这件事告诉对方了吗？”答案往往是否定的。浪漫主义的幻觉让我们拒绝平淡的沟通，但维系关系的真正解药恰恰需要我们去做那件极其枯燥、毫不浪漫的事——耐心地把词语一个个码起来（"painfully stack up words"），直白地向对方解释：“我之所以有些敏感易怒，是因为……”这种缺乏诗意与激情的解释过程，往往正是关系迈向成熟的健康信号。 ### [40:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2444s) 真爱与完全坦白：以爱的名义进行“自我剪辑” 面对伴侣，我们是否必须毫无保留地袒露一切？针对 Steven Bartlett 提出的“真爱是否必须伴随彻底坦白”的疑问，德波顿直言，渴望向对方倾倒脑海中的所有念头，虽然出发点美好，但本质上是一种带有破坏性的乌托邦幻想。每个人的内心深处都潜藏着动摇、怀疑、矛盾以及不可言说的游离念头。爱情的职责绝不是把伴侣的脸反复按在自己内心最混乱、最阴暗扭曲的深渊边去摩擦。 这并非鼓励撒谎或欺瞒，而是在呼吁一种必要的“自我剪辑”（editing）。正如成熟的父母绝不会将自己遭遇的所有焦虑、恐慌与负面情绪全盘倾倒给年幼的孩子一样，伴侣之间也不必时时刻刻面对彼此最不加修饰、最原始宣泄的全貌。在亲密关系中，适度过滤和隐藏某些过于伤人的心理杂音，并不是为了阴谋诡计或虚伪做作，而是出于对伴侣的保护——这种审慎的克制，本身就是爱的一种高级形式。 ### [42:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2537s) 无性关系的心理死结：积压的愤怒与微小挫折 这种“剪辑”与压抑最常爆发的战场便是卧室。Steven 引用了英国咨询机构 Relate 于 2022 年发布的一项调查数据：有 26% 处于恋爱或婚姻关系中的人每年性生活少于 10 次，更有 8% 的人完全过着无性生活，这一比例相比 2018 年有了显著上升，现代社会似乎正变得日益“无性化”。针对这一现象，德波顿将焦点从身体层面转移到了心理机制上：为什么一段关系在刚开始时性欲高涨，到了长期相处中却往往陷入停滞？最核心的元凶正是潜藏的“愤怒”（anger）。 人在对自己心怀怨恨的对象面前是很难产生性冲动的。在绝大多数长期关系中，都沉淀着大量双方甚至未曾意识到的微小失望——对方该打电话时没有打、该笑的时候没有笑、本该展现大度时却显得吝啬。这些微小挫折不断累积发酵，最终演变为深层的轻蔑与愤怒，锁死了身体接触的欲望。因此，与其花费大量金钱去购买昂贵的香薰蜡烛或高级亚麻床单，不如带伴侣去吃顿坦诚的晚餐，直白地问一句：“我们最近到底在哪里惹恼了彼此？”唯有在餐桌上把积攒的委屈排解掉，才不至于让情绪的阻碍堵死卧室的亲密通道。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 无性关系的心理成因与化解路径 accDescr: 展示从日常微小失望到卧室无性僵局的演变，以及通过餐桌坦诚沟通化解阻碍的过程。 subgraph Frustration["微小挫折的积压"] A["未接电话 / 缺乏回应 / 吝啬冷漠"] --> B["潜意识愤怒与怨恨累积"] B --> C["心理闭锁与潜意识轻蔑"] end subgraph Bedroom["卧室的无性僵局"] C --> D["身体抗拒与欲望熄火"] D --> E["错误归因：买蜡烛、换床单（徒劳）"] end subgraph Solution["破解之道：餐桌排毒"] F["共进晚餐，主动复盘挫折"] --> G["承认微小荒谬的触发点"] G --> H["疏导愤怒，重建安全感"] H --> D end ``` - **英国 Relate 机构 2022 年数据**：26% 的伴侣每年性生活少于 10 次；8% 的伴侣完全没有性生活；整体无性比例较 2018 年大幅攀升。 - **排毒法则**：没有任何一段亲密关系能在持续一小时的相处中完全不产生挫折感；餐桌上的及时倾诉是卧室恢复生机的先决条件。 ### [44:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2678s) 内心的小孩：荒谬触发点的合法化 伴侣之间之所以难以及时宣泄愤怒，是因为那些引发不满的导火索说出来往往显得荒诞不经。例如：“我之所以生你的气，是因为你刚才跟我母亲讲话时，把‘真的’（really）这个词的尾音拖得太重了。”这种抱怨一旦出口，极容易招致对方指着鼻子嘲讽：“你是不是疯了？”为了避免沦为笑柄或被视为无理取闹，人们选择将情绪深埋心底。 然而，德波顿强调，在爱情中的每一个人，内心深处都住着一个极易受惊的小孩。小孩子常常会因为极其不可理喻的事情大哭大闹——比如别人挪动了一颗纽扣，或者铅笔摆放的角度偏了一点。成年人虽然在职场和社会生活中成熟干练，但在亲密关系里，同样极易被微不足道的细枝末节所触发（triggered）。社会教条让人误以为成年人不该有如此幼稚的反应，但真正的成熟恰恰是抛弃这种羞耻感，勇敢地承认：“是的，作为一个成年人，我确实会因为微不足道的小事感到委屈。”只有当双方都能宽容地接纳彼此内心那个脆弱的小孩时，真正的沟通才有可能发生。 ### [46:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2767s) 性意味着什么：脆弱的亲密与“他者感”的消解 当人们因性生活匮乏而痛苦万分时，他们真正在意的往往不仅是生理层面的满足，而是性所承载的沉重象征意义——“我的伴侣依然爱我”。许多人在心理上根本无法承受这样一种事实：伴侣可能深爱着自己，但此刻就是单纯不想发生性关系。性本质上追求的是极致的“亲密感”（intimacy）与“不设防”（without guards）。在残酷冷漠的现代生活中，能够卸下所有盔甲、以最脆弱的状态与另一个人类赤诚相对，是一种巨大的解脱。但性绝非实现这种脆弱交融的唯一途径。 Steven 联想到性学专家 Tracey Cox 的观点：长期关系中阻碍性吸引力的另一个关键因素是“他者感”（otherness）的丧失。当两个人朝夕相处，整天穿着松垮的运动裤在对方面前晃悠，伴侣逐渐变成了类似家庭成员甚至亲生兄妹一样的存在，早期那种伴随着陌生感、新鲜感和冒险刺激的性能量便会彻底冷却。浪漫主义文化灌输了一种神话，坚称爱与性必定高度统一、水乳交融；然而现实常常是残酷的，爱与性有时甚至处在天平的两端。面对这一悖论，伴侣之间最需要的不是互相折磨和道德审判，而是抱持好奇心坦诚沟通，共同探索维持亲密的全新平衡点。 ### [49:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2968s) 童年温情的投射与酒店床单的哲学 成年人在亲密关系中常常遭遇一个隐秘的困境：成年之爱在本质上欠了童年极大的“债务”。在生命最初阶段，我们感受到的爱全部来自抚养者，而在一切正常的情况下，这种关系是不包含任何性元素的。这就导致了一个棘手的难题——在成年后的恋爱关系中，随着两个人相处得越来越舒适、温馨（cozy），那种氛围会潜移默化地唤醒幼年时在父母身边感受到的温情。这种情感上的极度贴近，反过来却会抑制甚至扼杀性的自由与冲动。 这正是许多伴侣热衷于去酒店度假来重燃激情的深层心理机制。酒店的家具不认识你，窗帘也不记得你们的过往；在那个被精心挑选的瞬间，两个人得以暂时卸下沉重的历史，成为“没有过去的人”。恰恰是共同生活的历史，在将彼此紧紧编织在一起、建立极高情感亲密度的同时，给性的自由施加了沉重的心理枷锁。阿兰·德波顿指出，理解这一点后，人们大可对自己宽容一些，不要因激情消退而苛责自己。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 童年依恋模式对成年性亲密的影响机制 accDescr: 展示了童年无性关爱经验如何转化为成年舒适感，进而抑制性冲动的逻辑回路。 subgraph Childhood ["童年早期经验"] A["抚养者无私关爱"] --> B["安全、温馨感（Cozy）"] B -.-> C["严格排除性元素"] end subgraph AdultLove ["成年亲密关系"] D["伴侣间日常共处与依赖"] --> E["唤起类似童年的温馨安全感"] E --> F["潜意识启动禁忌抑制"] F --> G["性冲动与自由受阻"] end subgraph Solution ["打破沉重历史"] H["陌生环境（如酒店空间）"] --> I["切断记忆与家庭投射"] I --> G end C ===> F ``` ### [50:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3045s) 幽默与善意嘲弄：化悲剧为喜剧的亲密艺术 面对性与激情的困境，斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）笑着追问：“那我该怎么做？需要经常去订酒店房间吗？还是得花大把时间彼此分开？”德波顿注意到斯蒂芬在提问时露出的笑容，并强调这抹笑容本身就是解决问题的关键线索。生活中的绝大多数死结，都需要借助包容心与共同的幽默感来化解。 如果一对伴侣能够把性生活中的挫折与挑战从一场“道德悲剧”转化为一出“轻喜剧”，那将是一项了不起的情感成就。日常相处中难免会有让彼此抓狂的毛病，但如果伴侣之间学会带着爱意去互相嘲弄（teasing）——例如喊对方一个专属的亲昵外号，打趣道“斯蒂芬，你又犯那个老毛病了”——烦躁的情绪就被升华为了温柔、宽容的理解。这种默契代表着双方看透了彼此的笨拙，并从心里把对方从一个“不可理喻的蠢蛋”转变为一个“可爱的傻瓜”（lovable idiot）。德波顿幽默地感慨，哪怕不信上帝，从空间站俯瞰地球，全人类八十亿人本质上都是可爱的傻瓜；接纳彼此的荒唐与不完美，是解决亲密危机的大前提。 ### [52:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3141s) 避免厌倦的真正秘诀：学会倾听，而非提供建议 针对斯蒂芬提出的“相处几十年后，如何防止伴侣对自己感到厌倦甚至出轨寻找新鲜感”的疑问，德波顿给出了一个直击本质的建议：所有关系变得枯燥无味的根源，往往始于双方停止了真正倾听彼此。社会上有无数教人如何做公众演讲的课程，却几乎没有人系统地教人如何去“倾听”。大多数人在他人倾诉时，要么急不可耐地打断并插播自己的奇闻逸事（“这让我想起我姑姑上次……”），要么立刻好为人师地罗列一二三四条建议。 真正有效的倾听需要极度克制，并采取心理治疗中常用的“反思性倾听”（reflexive listening）： - **忍住给出解决方案的冲动**：不在对方脆弱或抱怨时急于充当导师，不轻易给出自以为是的建议。 - **避免用自己的经历喧宾夺主**：克制分享自身类似琐事的倾诉欲，把对话焦点完全留给对方。 - **换用轻微不同的词句复述对方的核心感受**：例如当伴侣抱怨工作一团糟时，不要急着出谋划策，而是回应：“我听出来了，你最近在公司压力确实非常大，尤其是来自老板的压力让你很难受。” - **赋予对方被看见的体验**：这种复述会让倾诉者立刻感到被真正理解与接纳，从而更清晰地厘清他们自己的内心。我们在某些人面前感到枯燥乏味、无话可说，在另一些人面前却滔滔不绝、觉得自己极富魅力，核心差异就在于对方是否具备这种深度倾听的能力。 德波顿分享了几个月前在度假村目睹的一幕：一个三四岁的小孩歇斯底里地大哭大叫，喊着“我讨厌这里！整个地方都有一股屎味，我想回幼儿园！”带他的大人（可能是母亲）试图安抚他，却说道：“别傻了宝贝，我们可是在度假，度假多好玩啊！况且这个酒店花了很多钱呢！”这位家长虽然心怀善意，却完全没有在倾听。孩子真正想传达的是“我今天糟透了，一切都像灾难一样，请帮帮我”。在成年人的世界里同样如此，当我们遭遇挫折时，最反感的就是听到别人廉价的劝解“生活多美好、阳光多灿烂”；我们唯独渴望有人能看着我们的眼睛说一句：“我听到了，你现在的处境真的非常糟糕，你有些撑不住了，你很难过。” ### [56:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3376s) 长久关系的底层基石：承认脆弱与看清童年投射 在探讨一段能跨越数十年风雨、维持健康性与浪漫体验的长期关系时，德波顿认为除了沟通之外，更应从意识形态的源头寻找核心支柱。一段持久伴侣关系的核心在于两项至关重要的心理认知： 1. **承认人性的脆弱与固有的“轻度疯狂”**：双方必须共同承认，大家都是脆弱、不完美甚至带着一点神经质的人。这种特质并非因为某个人本质恶劣，而是生而为人的必然宿命。伴侣双方在接纳彼此注定会犯错的前提下，依然愿意借助泛心理治疗的方式，竭尽全力去理解和修补这种人性缺陷。 2. **警惕无意识的情感投射（Projections）**：清醒地意识到，伴侣在日常关系中所爆发的大多数激烈情绪，往往与眼前的这个人毫无关系。人们总是不自觉地把童年时期与父母、抚养者相处留下的剧本和预设，生搬硬套到当下的伴侣身上。正如依恋理论（Attachment Theory）所揭示的那样，一个人的不安全型或焦虑痴迷型依恋，根源在于早年抚养者的行为模式，而非眼前伴侣的过错。 一段成熟关系最珍贵的能力，就是能够优雅且坦然地承认：“对不起，我刚才把眼前的人搞混了。我把不属于当下的愤怒与恐惧，带进了我们当下的关系里。”德波顿直言，人类天生是疯狂的投射机器，只有看清当下的现实其实远比我们脑海中童年的阴影更为无辜，并真正掌控自己的投射机制，亲密关系才能获得长久的救赎。 ### [58:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3532s) 童年时习得的“情感语言” 阿兰·德波顿指出，当人到了三四十岁甚至五六十岁时，总被告知“必须解决童年遗留的问题”，这听上去极其枯燥，甚至让人厌烦。然而，直面童年绝非出于某种怀旧狂热，其唯一目的就是把这些陈年旧账彻底厘清并妥善封存，不再受其困扰；否则，那些未解的情绪就会在内心深处持续作祟。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 童年情感习得与成人学习过程对比 accDescr: 对比童年在无意识中习得语言与情绪模式，与成人阶段有意识重构信任与脆弱性的艰难历程 subgraph Childhood ["童年阶段（无意识吸收）"] A["自然生活环境<br/>（翻跟头、画花草）"] --> B["母语语法与词汇"] A --> C["情感语言模式<br/>（信任、自尊、安全感）"] end subgraph Adulthood ["成年阶段（有意识重构）"] D["认知到童年底层模式"] --> E["漫长刻意练习<br/>（重学信任、展现脆弱）"] E --> F["获得深层亲密关系能力"] end ``` 德波顿用语言的习得过程作为类比：每个孩子在成长过程中，没有刻意用功，仅凭在花园里翻跟头、在厨房里画毛茛花，就能自然而然地掌握一门带有完整语法、句法和复杂词汇的语言。情感的习得完全相同：我们在童年不知不觉吸收了一整套情感语言——关于什么是信任、什么是自尊、自己是谁、信任他人会招致何种后果，以及做真实的自己是否安全。正如我们不知道自己是如何掌握母语的一样，我们也不知道自己吸收了这套情感逻辑，但它同母语一样深深烙印在体内。到了成年时期，重新学习健康的情感模式（例如建立信任或展现脆弱），其难度不亚于突然被要求去精通芬兰语或韩语。 - 史蒂芬·巴特利特补充道，面对学芬兰语这种要求，常人的第一反应往往是“这得花上一辈子”以及“这有什么意义”。 - 很多人之所以不愿打开内心的衣橱去审视童年，是因为他们未曾意识到，童年的叙事就像一个“幕后提线木偶师”（puppet master），在暗中操控着他们现在的职业发展、人际关系乃至生活的方方面面。 --- ### [01:01:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3673s) 治愈并非速成：现代人的浮躁与宗教的重复智慧 针对成长与疗愈的速度，德波顿强调必须理解时间维度的重要性。许多现代人听了几期播客（例如史蒂芬的播客节目），便困惑于自己为何仍未痊愈。这好比只上了三节芬兰语或韩语课就妄想变得流利，实际上可能还需要再上150节课。心理上的转变需要极长的时间与反复的练习。 在这方面，传统宗教早已洞察人类心智的弱点——人的大脑就像筛子一样存不住东西。以伊斯兰教为例，它要求信徒每天祈祷数次来记念神明；在许多宗教里，信徒需要不断屈膝下跪。这些制度的设计正是因为宗教明白“话从左耳进、右耳出”，哪怕是人们最信奉的真理，也极难长久保持在心中。相比之下，现代人总幻想只听一次观点、读一本好书，人生就能彻底翻盘。经典经文（如《圣经》、《古兰经》或佛经）之所以被要求日日诵读，原因就在于关乎生命本质的核心智慧极难被长久持守。 --- ### [01:02:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3752s) 从“生存”走向“繁荣”：为何现代人需要清理心理隐患 史蒂芬提出了疑问：当下盛行的这种“无休止疗愈”文化是否存在风险？人们似乎永远把自己视作残缺的受害者，没完没了地试图修复童年时期哪怕一颗糖被抢走的微小创伤。德波顿表示理解这种想要抛开心理包袱、径直去过日子的疲惫感，但他指出关键的时代背景转变：人类已经告别了仅求果腹免死的“生存时代”（age of survival），迈入了追求“繁荣与自我实现”（thrive and fulfillment）的时代。 德波顿以饮用水系统的演变为喻：在人类历史的大部分时间里，人们对饮用水并不讲究，只要水里没飘着青蛙这类显眼活物，就会直接大口喝下，这种漫不经心导致数百万人因病丧生。直到19世纪末，当西格蒙德·弗洛伊德在维也纳开始探索人类潜意识时，巴黎、伦敦、纽约等主要城市也同时掀起了供水系统的大改造。人们震惊地发现，一杯肉眼看起来清澈透明的水里，潜藏的微观微生物足以毒杀整座城市。心理层面的创伤同样如此：童年残留下的隐蔽机制就像心理上的“微生物”，它们或许不会直接要人性命，却会悄然堵塞一个人获得幸福感与发挥全部潜能的能力。 - 现代人的寿命预期已由过去的活到30岁、未死于战火便心满意足，提升至希望活到80至85岁且活得充实而有意义。 - 追求高层次的生命满足，必然要求人们付出先辈未曾付出的心理清理成本。 --- ### [01:05:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3902s) 将眼泪转化为知识与“足够好”的伴侣 对于人是否能彻底治愈创伤，德波顿引用德国哲学家阿图尔·叔本华的名言指出，人生的真正目标是“把眼泪转化为知识”（turn tears into knowledge）。眼泪掉在枕头上毫无作用，但如果能从中抽取出关于自我、人性与心理学的深刻领悟，苦难便拥有了意义。美好的人生绝非没有问题的人生，而是一个学会在不可避免的痛苦中不断汲取养分的人生。 谈及两性关系，史蒂芬提到德波顿在书中写过的观点：“你永远也找不到对的人”（You will never find the right person）。德波顿解释这是对浪漫主义者的善意调侃。深信世上存在一个完全契合的“对的人”，往往是关系中无尽愤怒、失望与沮丧的罪魁祸首。一旦树立了这种完美幻象，只要双方发生一次激烈的争吵，当事人就会认为对方“不是对的人”。 德波顿借用了英国精神分析学家唐纳德·温尼科特（Donald Winnicott）提出的“足够好”（good enough）概念。温尼科特曾指出，孩子根本不需要完美的父母，拥有一个带来适度挫折的父母反而更有益，能促使孩子走向独立；同理，在亲密关系中，没有人需要完美的伴侣，我们所需要的仅仅是一个“足够好的爱人”。 ### [01:07:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4029s) 空间与距离的力量：重获对伴侣与世界的惊奇感 在探讨完做个“足够好的父母”与“足够好的伴侣”之后，Steven Bartlett 提出了一个关于亲密关系的实际疑问：伴侣之间是否应该适度拉开距离、分开一段时间？这种做法能否缓解此前讨论过的长期关系中的“无性”困境？Steven 坦言，当自己的伴侣离开一段时间后，重聚时往往会带来强烈的兴奋感与新鲜感。 Alain de Botton 对此深表赞同。他指出，物理上的距离最关键的作用，是提醒我们“没有任何预设的理由表明某人必须和你在一起”。能有另一个人选择与复杂的我们共同生活，本身就是一件近乎奇迹的事，而距离能让这种奇迹感重新展现出应有的力量。他借用生病的经历打比方：当你大病初愈走出家门来到公园，突然看到一棵长着树叶、爬着昆虫的树，看到地上的青草与砖墙，整个人会像一个三岁孩童一样，内心重新充满对世界的敬畏与惊奇。人生的巨大挑战之一，正是如何防止这种惊奇感被“习惯”彻底吞噬——习惯会让人麻木地认为“这不过是棵树，我知道它是什么样”。 这正是艺术存在的意义所在。美术馆和博物馆里陈列的作品，本质上是艺术家们用一种“初次见面的目光”重新审视世界的记录： ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 习惯麻木与重拾惊奇的心理路径 accDescr: 展示从习惯化导致审美疲劳，到通过距离与艺术重获感知的完整心理循环过程。 subgraph Habituation["麻木循环"] A["长期共处 / 熟悉日常"] --> B["习惯化吞噬感知"] B --> C["失去惊奇感与吸引力"] end subgraph Renewal["复苏机制"] C --> D["引入距离 / 艺术凝视视角"] D --> E["像第一次看见一样重新审视"] E --> F["恢复温柔、同理心与生命敬畏"] end ``` - **儿童的感知力**：带着幼童去公园常常要花上一个半小时，因为一路上所有的微小事物都能吸引他们；成年人自以为看懂了世界，实则丢失了这种深刻凝视的能力。 - **重新审视伴侣**：艺术家画自己的伴侣时，笔触间充满温柔与好奇；同样，长期关系破除倦怠的秘诀，在于学会像“生平第一次见到对方”那样去端详伴侣。 --- ### [01:09:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4177s) 习惯化的陷阱与佛教的“凝视”训练 Steven 翻开书本第 75 页指出，解决长期性倦怠的方案正是学会“像从未见过伴侣一样去看待他/她”。但 Steven 产生了一个现实层面的困惑：人很容易对事物产生适应（habituation）。随着财务逐渐自由，人们可以出入高级餐厅、购买奢侈品、享受豪华度假和头等舱飞行，但伴随而来的却是敬畏与惊喜的悄然流逝。 Alain de Botton 认为，抗衡这种麻木是一种需要刻意练习的心理技能。他引用了中国宋元时期传入日本的禅宗水墨画传统——著名的南宋牧溪法师所作的中世纪佛教画卷《六柿图》（Six Persimmons）： ```text +--------------------------------------------------------------+ | 《六柿图》的禅宗凝视哲学 | +--------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | 画面仅有六枚并列的柿子，质朴无华。 | | 禅宗修行者被要求静静端坐，凝视这六枚柿子一小时，甚至一整天。 | | | | 普通人看一眼就会烦躁：“能换个频道吗？能看点别的吗？” | | 但禅宗揭示的真相是：刺激的累加永远无法解决内心的麻木。 | | | +--------------------------------------------------------------+ ``` 他强调，生命的刺激体验是有极限的，感官的麻木无法通过“更多的刺激”来修复。如果一个人的感知力已经损坏，连一个柠檬的美妙都体会不到，那么给他一千个柠檬或一辆跑车也无济于事。人生的目标应当是学会深入欣赏我们已经拥有的事物。这就像去健身房锻炼肌肉一样，专注审视并汲取生活滋养是一种必须长期磨炼的技巧。 --- ### [01:11:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4311s) 播客赞助：Huel Daily Greens 英国上市 在对话间隙，Steven Bartlett 插入了一段赞助信息。作为健康营养品牌 Huel 的早期投资人兼董事会成员，他宣布该品牌备受期待的产品“Daily Greens”即日起正式进入英国市场（此前未在英国本土销售，预计将于次年一月发售）。 - **营养配方**：该冲剂旨在帮助人们补充肠道微生态与身体健康所需的大量绿色营养，每勺含有 91 种源自天然全食物的维生素、矿物质及综合营养素。 - **口感与发售**：Steven 评价其口感极佳，是他个人最喜欢的 Huel 产品，由于市场呼声极高，预计首批库存将迅速售罄，听众可通过节目简介中的链接申请购买。 --- ### [01:12:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4361s) 精神崩溃与疗愈之旅：《A Therapeutic Journey》的写作初衷 回到对谈，Steven 指着 Alain 的新书《A Therapeutic Journey: Lessons from the School of Life》（疗愈之旅：人生学校的治愈课）发问。作为写过数十本书的高产作家，Alain de Botton 为什么要在当下写这样一部聚焦心理疾病与康复的作品？ Alain 解释道，这本书完整记录了一场“精神崩溃”（mental breakdown）或心理危机从爆发、击溃日常，到逐步走向康复的全过程弧线。在突如其来的精神危机面前，人们往往陷入巨大的茫然与失控——“昨天我们还无忧无虑，今天就瘫在床上无法动弹；昨天我们还能勉力支撑，今天嘴里说出的一切就全无条理”。这本书旨在以充满同情与温柔的语调，为人们在最黑暗、最孤立无援的时刻提供一份长久的陪伴，帮助读者理解自己身上正在发生什么，以及如何让心灵重新获得安全感并走向愈合。 针对 Steven 提出的“为何当今社会如此迫切需要这本书”，Alain 指出了现代人深层痛苦的核心根源： - **孤独感与认知不对称**：心理危机袭来时，几乎所有人都会认定“我是唯一的异类，我正在独自承受这一切”。然而真相恰恰相反——这些痛苦极为普遍。 - **内省与外在表现的鸿沟**：人类对他人的了解仅仅建立在“对方选择展示的内容”之上，而对自己却有着赤裸裸的内省。当内心的狼狈对比外界的光鲜时，巨大的“认知缺口”便滋生了深刻的羞耻感（shame）。 - **去污名化与救赎**：社会至今依然对精神疾患讳莫如深。全书的核心意图是“平反（rehabilitate）、教育与抚慰”——不仅承认崩溃、失落与意义丧失的真实性，更要为痛苦的心灵指明重拾掌控感、找回爱与温暖的重建之路。 ### [01:15:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4556s) 心理健康崩溃的本质：丧失自我宽恕与思维排序能力 阿兰·德波顿（Alain de Botton）指出，人们平时常说的“我很正常”（I feel normal）其实是一种极其珍贵且被低估的心智天赋。在一个健康运转的头脑中，有一种机制会让人本能地“站在自己这一边”。尽管每个人都有无数对自己感到绝望的理由——做错过事、性格不完美、留有遗憾，但在健康状态下，人们会在清醒的一天告诉自己：“虽然我不完美，但我还可以，我能继续往前走。”然而，一旦心理健康崩溃，这种包容自我的机能就会彻底失效。人会变得无法忍受自己、无法宽恕自己。例如，有些患病的人会为一个在17年前说错的一句话而耿耿于怀、无法自拔，无论外人怎么劝慰“那已经是17年前的事了”，他们也无法释怀。疾病的本质，正是人沦为了自己最凶狠的敌人，再也无法放下攻击自己的武器。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 心智健康与崩溃状态对比 accDescr: 对比健康心智的自我支撑、思维排序与崩溃状态下的自我敌对、思维坍塌 subgraph HealthyMind["健康心智 (Healthy Baseline)"] H1["自我接纳：站在自己这一边"] H2["思维分栏：按时间与优先级有序排序"] H3["友善内音：鼓励尝试与冒险的温暖回声"] end subgraph MentalBreakdown["心智崩溃 (Breakdown)"] B1["自我敌对：沉溺陈年旧账，无法宽恕自己"] B2["层级坍塌：过去创伤与当前急务无序冲撞"] B3["惩罚内音：充斥自我否定与存在的负罪感"] end HealthyMind -.->|"机制丧失"| MentalBreakdown ``` 健康头脑的另一个关键能力是对思维进行“隔离与排序”（bracket and sequence thoughts）。健康时，人可以把脑中的事情一件件排好：此时此刻做专访，明天去纽约，之后处理祖母的事情，再联系朋友——这些念头被有序排列，不会在同一时间全部爆发。然而，当心理防线崩溃时，所有的思绪会从各个角度疯狂涌入，思维失去了层级与先后顺序。一件发生在十年前的事会突然以极端强烈的紧迫感向此刻施压，与当下的紧急事务挤撞在一起，导致理性彻底瘫痪。更可怕的是，脑海中内化的友善声音（那些来自生活里关怀过我们的人的鼓励：“你可以的”、“大胆尝试吧”）全部被恶意声音所取代，脑海里只剩下一声声无休止的斥责：“你不配留在这里”、“你犯了大错，没人要你”、“你最好不存在”。 ### [01:18:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4707s) 举起白旗：爱与他人心智的校准力量 德波顿强调，现代人往往太擅长“硬撑”（keep going）了，甚至已经半死不活了才意识到自己出了大问题。学会停下来“举起白旗”、承认自己撑不下去，恰恰是寻求救助的开始。当一个人的心智陷入混乱时，最需要的是借用“另一个人的心智”来进行现实校准（calibration）。当一个人陷入“所有人都恨我、一切都完了、我做的事情毫无价值”的绝望漩涡时，唯有另一个心智走上前温和地回应：“我明白你的感受，但我们一起想想，事实真的是这样吗？这真的是你吗？” 这种拯救过程的核心正是“爱”（广义上的关怀）。德波顿指出，所有心理疾痛回溯到源头，几乎都能找到“爱的匮乏”或者某种形式的“残酷对待”（cruelty）；同理，能够治愈心灵的也必然是爱的体验——它可以来自朋友、心理治疗师或专业人士。当人遭受不可承受的残酷对待时，内在无法消化的痛苦往往会向外投射，发展到极端的精神病性状态（psychosis）时，人甚至会坚信全世界或中情局（CIA）都在密谋对付自己。拯救与赎回灵魂的解药，始终是以最宽广概念去理解的爱与善意。 - **硬撑的代价**：许多人把忍耐当成美德，直到崩溃前夕都不肯承认问题，而懂得认输、向外界呼救才是治愈的起点。 - **心智校准机制**：失控的头脑无法自我纠偏，必须依靠健康、包容的外部心智提供现实检验与情绪缓冲。 - **爱与残酷的循环**：心理病痛往往始于不可承受的残酷对待与爱的缺位，而疗愈的核心则是通过外来的温暖善意重构信任。 ### [01:20:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4839s) 重新定义韧性：接纳精神层面的“四季轮回” 主持人史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）向德波顿提问，探讨其新书《治疗之旅》（*A Therapeutic Journey*）中反复出现的关键词“韧性”（resilience）。巴特利特指出，现代社会常把韧性误解为咬紧牙关硬挺（tough it up）。德波顿完全赞同这一反思，他表示真正的韧性恰恰与外表看起来极其脆弱、卑微、破碎的状态完全兼容，而不是斯多葛式的“遭遇挫折后立刻反弹”。真正的韧性，是对“即使在健康人生中，疯狂与低谷也拥有其合法地位”的宽厚接纳。 德波顿在新书末尾用大自然的“四季轮转”作比喻：人们在经历心理困境时往往有一个误区，一旦状态好转便立刻宣告“我彻底好了，黑暗已经成为过去”。然而，这种绝对化的乐观往往是危险的，因为它让人对任何“倒退”（regression）零容忍。德波顿指出，正如寒冬之后是春天、春天之后又会入秋一样，倒退本身就是进步的一部分。心灵拥有属于它自己的季节；越能坦然接受在某些时期不可避免地滑向黑暗，就越不会在低谷期与自己无谓地搏斗。 ### [01:22:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4962s) 一本作为“朋友”的书：对抗孤独的温暖慰藉 在谈及希望读者读完《治疗之旅》最后一页能获得什么时，德波顿表示，他最希望读者能对自身心智的复杂性抱有深刻的同情与理解。成为一个人从来都不是一件容易的事，“自我探索与自我疗愈”绝非矫情或放纵，而是一项虽然有时枯燥却关乎生存的必修课。书中既提供了应对心智破碎的实用工具，更倾注了极大的温情。德波顿指出，知识界在讨论心理健康时常常过于智识化，以为痛苦的人仅仅需要一套理论，但深陷泥潭的人更需要的是温暖、善意与真诚的陪伴。 德波顿坦言：“我许多最好的朋友都是书。”他深信书籍完全有能力充当读者的挚友，向那些在暗夜中挣扎的灵魂轻声说一句：“你并不孤单。”巴特利特对此深表共鸣，称赞这本书最动人的地方就在于化解了疏离感——它没有居高临下地炫耀智慧，而是让读者明白，自己经历的痛苦绝非懦弱或无能的证据，而是作为普通人再正常不过的经历，从而在被理解的释怀中获得站起来的力量。 ### [01:24:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=5087s) 表达的艺术与赞誉 斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）总结了阿兰·德波顿（Alain de Botton）的新书《情绪急救：来自人生学校的疗愈课》（A Therapeutic Journey: Lessons from the School of Life），称其深刻揭示了每个人在人生不同季节都会面临的境况，正因如此它才能引发广泛共鸣并被众人传阅。斯蒂芬对德波顿的语言表达能力赞叹不已，坦言自己在倾听时由衷感到震撼，直言德波顿拥有用言辞吸引并留住听众的超凡力量。在他眼中，德波顿的表达舒缓从容、充满启发又富有智慧，叙述方式更带着一种诗意的美感，堪称一种令人向往的“超能力”。尽管德波顿谦逊地回应斯蒂芬同样具备这一特质，斯蒂芬仍坚持认为德波顿的语言境界独一无二。 ### [01:25:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=5144s) 前任嘉宾的提问：“夜不能寐的思绪”与失眠的哲学 随后，斯蒂芬引入了播客的保留传统——由上一位匿名嘉宾给下一位嘉宾留下一个未知问题。本次留给德波顿的问题是：“最近一次让你深夜无法入眠的想法是什么？”（What was the last thought to keep you awake at night?）德波顿听后先是轻笑，随后坦白道出真实情况：昨晚他就失眠了，原因正是因为今天不得不来录制这档节目。面对斯蒂芬打趣地问“我们这么友善，你在紧张什么”，德波顿借用了两人此前探讨过的“期待”概念：如果斯蒂芬的播客只有一个听众，或者斯蒂芬临时打电话说取消录制直接去酒吧喝酒，他昨晚绝对能“睡得像个婴儿一样安稳”（slept like a baby）；但面对巨大曝光量带来的沉重心理预期，难免会心生波澜。 德波顿进一步分享了自己对待失眠的哲学转变。他承认自己的睡眠一直相当脆弱，但他逐渐意识到，午夜时分会浮现出在其他任何时间都无法产生的想法，这些思绪往往揭示了平日里未曾察觉的隐秘关切。他将其形容为“夜晚的学校”（the school of night）。过去他是一个极度烦躁且不耐烦的失眠症患者，醒来只会怨天尤人；如今他则会静下心来倾听内心：或许自己的心智正试图教会自己某些事，哪怕它听起来微不足道——可能只是突然意识到“原来我深爱着这件事物”、“我应该远离那个东西”或是“这真的很美好”。德波顿总结道，自己或许并没有变成一个“更好的睡眠者”，但却成为了一个更为重要的角色——“一个更好的失眠者”（a better insomniac）。斯蒂芬由衷感谢他的真诚分享，并赞扬德波顿的表现远远超出了所有预期。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 失眠心态的转变过程 accDescr: 展示阿兰·德波顿从过去不耐烦的失眠者转变为能够接纳夜晚思想的更好失眠者的心路历程。 subgraph Past["过去的状态"] A["深夜醒来 / 脆弱睡眠"] --> B["不耐烦与焦虑抱怨<br/>('真烦，怎么还醒着')"] end subgraph Present["现在的哲学 ('夜晚的学校')"] C["倾听午夜的特殊思绪"] --> D["察觉白昼忽略的隐秘心声<br/>(发现所爱之物 / 远离消耗之事)"] D --> E["心态升华：成为'更好的失眠者'"] end Past -.->|"认知转变"| Present ``` ### [01:27:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=5272s) 播客尾声与商业寄语 访谈结束后，斯蒂芬·巴特利特在节目尾声对其商业项目进行了介绍： - **Flight Fund 投资动态**：斯蒂芬介绍了自己在 2023 年发起的私募股权基金 Flight Fund，该基金专注于投资有望成长为欧洲下一批独角兽的高增长企业，投资人涵盖欧洲诸多成功的企业家；目前该基金正式向寻求融资的初创创始人以及合格投资人开放申请通道（可访问 flightfund.com 了解详情及提交申请）。 - **风险合规提示（Disclaimer）**：根据英国金融行为监管局（FCA）监管要求，该基金仅面向成熟投资者，投资属于高风险类别，本金可能全额亏损，且不构成财务推广或投资建议。 - **下期推荐**：斯蒂芬向喜爱本期内容的听众推荐了往期同主题对话（如与瑞安·霍利迪 Ryan Holiday 探讨生活哲学的访谈），并提示相关链接已放置于节目简介中。 ## Notable quotes > [04:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=288s) 失眠，是对你在白天精心回避的一切念头的复仇。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [16:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=964s) 人们不会仅仅因为处境糟糕就选择自杀，只有当他们身陷绝境、且坚信这一切全是自己的过错时，自杀才会发生。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [26:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=1578s) 凡是我们无法理解的，我们终将不断重复。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [33:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2008s) 你有多疯？你的疯狂表现在哪里？ — 阿兰·德波顿 > [36:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2167s) 爱是一间教室。 — 柏拉图 > [37:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2270s) 如果你真的爱我，你就应该凭直觉、不着一字地看穿我的委屈；既然你看不出来，就证明你根本不爱我，那我凭什么还要告诉你？ — 阿兰·德波顿 > [40:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=2444s) 适度过滤和隐藏某些过于伤人的心理杂音，并不是为了阴谋诡计或虚伪做作，而是出于对伴侣的保护——这种审慎的克制，本身就是爱的一种高级形式。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [50:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3045s) 从心里把对方从一个‘不可理喻的蠢蛋’转变为一个‘可爱的傻瓜’。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [01:05:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3902s) 把眼泪转化为知识。 — 阿图尔·叔本华 > [01:05:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=3902s) 你永远也找不到对的人。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [01:15:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4556s) 疾病的本质，正是人沦为了自己最凶狠的敌人，再也无法放下攻击自己的武器。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [01:22:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=4962s) 我许多最好的朋友都是书。 — 阿兰·德波顿 > [01:25:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE&t=5144s) 我或许并没有变成一个‘更好的睡眠者’，但却成为了一个更为重要的角色——‘一个更好的失眠者’。 — 阿兰·德波顿 ## Mentioned 阿兰·德波顿 (Alain de Botton), 史蒂文·巴特利特 (Steven Bartlett), 瑞安·霍利迪 (Ryan Holiday), 埃米尔·涂尔干 (Émile Durkheim), 《自杀论》 (Suicide), 西蒙·冈宁 (Simon Gunning), CALM (Campaign Against Living Miserably), 柏拉图 (Plato), 特蕾西·考克斯 (Tracey Cox), Relate, 唐纳德·温尼科特 (Donald Winnicott), 阿图尔·叔本华 (Arthur Schopenhauer), 西格蒙德·弗洛伊德 (Sigmund Freud), 牧溪法师, 《六柿图》 (Six Persimmons), Huel Daily Greens, 《A Therapeutic Journey: Lessons from the School of Life》（疗愈之旅：人生学校的治愈课）, 人生学校 (The School of Life), Flight Fund ## Video description If you enjoy hearing about the philosophy of life, I recommend you check out my conversation with Ryan Holiday, which you can find here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PafvhTSC4yE 0:00 Intro 02:17 What Mission Are You On? 04:48 Mental Illness & Where It Comes From 08:25 Is Happiness Something We Be Should Chasing? 14:14 How The Modern World Is increasing Suicide Rates 21:04 The Modern World Is Shining A Light On Our Own Wrong Doings 21:07 What Is Romantic Love 26:18 Why People Have Daddy Issues 29:57 How Do We Become Aware Of Our Own Destructive Cycles? 37:56 Conflict Resolution 40:49 True Love & Total Honesty 42:17 Sexless Relationships & How To Navigate Them 46:12 Why Does Sex Matter? 52:26 How Do We Stop Our Partners Getting Bored Of Us? 55:19 Core Habits A Long Last Relationship Needs 01:05:08 Can We Ever Truly Heal From Our Traumas? 01:07:18 The Power Of Distance In A Relationship 01:11:54 Ads 01:12:47 Why Did You Write A Book Called The Therapeutic Journey 01:20:44 What Is Resilience? 01:22:42 What Do You Hope People Will Learn From This Book? 01:25:44 The Last Guest's Question You can purchase Alain’s most recent book, ‘A Therapeutic Journey: Lessons from the School of Life’, here: https://amzn.to/4aFi9fd Get tickets to The Business & Life Speaking Tour: https://stevenbartlett.com/tour/ FOLLOW ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/steven/ Twitter: https://x.com/StevenBartlett?s=20 Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/steven-bartlett-56986834/ Sponsors: Huel: https://my.huel.com/daily-greens-uk Flight Fund: https://bit.ly/48dvgCq [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI7BxBNp1uE)

[4:48] 阿兰·德波顿: 失眠，是对你在白天精心回避的一切念头的复仇。 [16:04] 阿兰·德波顿: 人们不会仅仅因为处境糟糕就选择自杀，只有当他们身陷绝境、且坚信这一切全是自己的过错时，自杀才会发生。 [26:18] 阿兰·德波顿: 凡是我们无法理解的，我们终将不断重复。 [33:28] 阿兰·德波顿: 你有多疯？你的疯狂表现在哪里？ [36:07] 柏拉图: 爱是一间教室。 [37:50] 阿兰·德波顿: 如果你真的爱我，你就应该凭直觉、不着一字地看穿我的委屈；既然你看不出来，就证明你根本不爱我，那我凭什么还要告诉你？ [40:44] 阿兰·德波顿: 适度过滤和隐藏某些过于伤人的心理杂音，并不是为了阴谋诡计或虚伪做作，而是出于对伴侣的保护——这种审慎的克制，本身就是爱的一种高级形式。 [50:45] 阿兰·德波顿: 从心里把对方从一个‘不可理喻的蠢蛋’转变为一个‘可爱的傻瓜’。 [65:02] 阿图尔·叔本华: 把眼泪转化为知识。 [65:02] 阿兰·德波顿: 你永远也找不到对的人。 [75:56] 阿兰·德波顿: 疾病的本质，正是人沦为了自己最凶狠的敌人，再也无法放下攻击自己的武器。 [82:42] 阿兰·德波顿: 我许多最好的朋友都是书。 [85:44] 阿兰·德波顿: 我或许并没有变成一个‘更好的睡眠者’，但却成为了一个更为重要的角色——‘一个更好的失眠者’。

[2:17] Alain De Botton: Depression is often sadness that hasn't understood itself. Anxiety or irritability is worry that doesn't know its own cause. [8:25] Alain De Botton: The graceful acceptance of your minuscule position in the cosmos is the gateway to calm and harmony. [36:50] Alain De Botton: Love is a skill to be learned, not just an emotion to be felt. And some of that means that we might need to go back to school. [46:08] Alain De Botton: The really exciting thing about sex is not the sex bit, it's the intimate bit... the idea that someone is without their guard. [67:18] Alain De Botton: If your senses are wrecked, if you're unable to draw benefit from one lemon, having a thousand lemons or a sports car isn't going to make you more of an appreciator. [72:47] Alain De Botton: Yesterday we were happy-go-lucky, now we can't get out of bed... it's supposed to be a companion through what might be some of our loneliest hours.

[0:00] These are very valuable lessons that we [0:01] need in our relationships. So, lesson [0:04] one. [0:04] Alain de Botton [0:05] Best-selling author [0:07] The modern philosopher of love [0:08] His goal [0:09] To help you live a better, more [0:11] meaningful life. [0:12] The average human has 70,000 thoughts a [0:14] day. The problem is that we don't know [0:16] how to use them. For example, we tend to [0:18] believe we'll find the one, but that [0:21] belief has led to more rage, more [0:23] disappointment, cuz we're not free to [0:25] love just anyone. What's problematic is [0:28] that we're drawn to love stories that [0:30] are echoing our childhoods. And this is [0:32] something that troubles so many people [0:34] because our past was not necessarily [0:36] happy. [0:38] We are all confused about love. You [0:40] know, the most romantic sentence [music] [0:41] that people will say is, "I met this [0:42] person and we didn't even need to speak. [0:45] We just felt on the same page." Well, [0:47] this leads to a catastrophic outbreak [0:49] [music] of sulking. They say to you, "Is [0:51] anything wrong?" Of course there is, but [0:52] you're not going to tell them. And the [0:54] reason is that you're a romantic and you [0:55] believe that your partner should have [0:57] alien capacities to look into your [0:59] wounded soul to understand what the [1:01] upset is, but of course they can't [1:03] because they're just human. So, what [1:05] would you say are the core habits of two [1:07] people who have a really successful [1:09] relationship? What we need is [1:12] Let's talk about sex. Goodness me, does [1:14] it cause problems. 26% of people in [1:17] relationships are having sex less than [1:19] 10 times per year. So, the question is, [1:22] what are we getting wrong? One of the [1:24] leading answers that neither party knows [1:26] is there is that [1:28] Ding ding, that's normally a sign of a [1:30] problem. [1:33] Quick one. This is really, really [1:34] fascinating to me. On the back end of [1:36] our YouTube channel, it says that [1:37] [clears throat] 69.9% [1:39] of you that watch this channel [1:41] frequently over the lifetime of this [1:42] channel haven't yet hit the subscribe [1:44] button. I just wanted to ask you a [1:45] favor. It helps this channel so much if [1:48] you choose to just subscribe. Helps us [1:50] scale the guests, helps us scale the [1:51] production, and it makes the show [1:53] bigger. So, if I could ask you for one [1:54] favor, if you've watched this show [1:55] before and you've enjoyed it and you [1:57] like this episode that you're currently [1:58] watching, could you please hit the [1:59] subscribe button? Thank you so much, and [2:02] I will repay that gesture by making sure [2:04] that everything we do here gets better [2:06] and better and better and better. That [2:07] is a promise I'm willing to make you. Do [2:08] we have a deal? [2:10] [music] [2:14] [music] [2:16] Alain, [2:19] you write about so much. You produce [2:22] content about so many different subject [2:24] matters, but what is the overarching [2:26] mission that you [2:28] are on? [2:29] I'm trying to look almost systematically [2:32] at a variety of causes of unhappiness [2:35] created by the world we live in. [2:38] Um you know, obviously the world we live [2:40] in has solved many, many problems, but [2:41] it's also generated in a host of areas, [2:44] particularly [2:46] um difficult challenges that have not [2:48] really struck humanity before. And I [2:51] like to think, both personally and on [2:53] behalf of others, [2:55] um about what these problems are and how [2:56] we might steer through them. The average [2:58] human has 70,000 thoughts a day, right? [3:01] Not huge elaborate ones, but just stray [3:04] little fragmentary thoughts, 70,000 of [3:06] them, pass through consciousness every [3:08] day. [3:09] And the problem is that we don't know [3:11] how to process them or use them. It's [3:14] part of the reason why we end up with [3:15] such, [3:16] you know, busy and troubling minds. We [3:18] haven't stepped back in order to ask [3:21] ourselves, at the end of the day, some [3:23] of these questions that can calm us [3:24] down, like, you know, [3:26] who am I angry with? Who What am I [3:28] excited by? What's really happened [3:31] today? You know, we let experiences rush [3:34] past us. [3:35] And then, of course, experiences that [3:37] haven't been digested properly have a [3:39] nasty habit of coming to sting us in the [3:42] tail. Um and I think you can look at a [3:44] lot of mental [3:46] troubles as essentially the outgrowth of [3:49] unprocessed emotion. [3:51] Um [3:52] you know, depression is often sadness [3:56] that hasn't understood itself. Anxiety [4:00] or irritability is worry that doesn't [4:03] know its own cause. And so, often what [4:07] we need, particularly in the modern [4:09] world, is occasions on which we can [4:13] get to know our own minds. It's It's a [4:15] It's a strange thing. Surely we know our [4:17] own minds. Surely we No. No. The way [4:19] that we're built is obviously not [4:23] prioritizing a full awareness of [4:25] ourselves. We're outward-facing [4:26] creatures. We're action-focused [4:27] creatures. Which is all to the good and [4:29] has many advantages. But, because of the [4:32] way we live now, [4:34] more sedentary lives, lives that call [4:37] upon us not merely to be active, but [4:39] also to be fulfilled, [4:41] um those lives require periods of [4:43] introspection that our [4:46] routines often don't allow for. [4:49] So, I'm always trying both for myself [4:52] and advising others, you know, take that [4:54] time in the evening [4:56] and just sit down in a semi-darkened [4:58] room and just ask yourself, what's [4:59] coming up for me? What's really happened [5:02] inside me? Because it can take a little [5:04] while to realize what you're really [5:07] upset by, what you're really excited by, [5:09] etc. We're not obvious [5:11] to ourselves. And as I say, [5:14] so many of [5:16] things that we call mental disorders or [5:18] mental illnesses are really stored [5:21] emotion that hasn't found a way out. [5:25] Emotions that haven't been acknowledged [5:28] have a nasty habit of um stirring our [5:32] conscience, demanding to be heard. They [5:35] might want to tell our spines. They [5:37] might want to tell our stomachs. Uh you [5:39] know, and again, a useful exercise [5:41] so's not to be struck by so many of [5:42] these psychosomatic disorders is to ask [5:45] the body what it's trying to tell you so [5:47] that it doesn't need to tell you in the [5:48] more dramatic forms that end up as [5:50] illnesses. So again, if you, you know, [5:52] if you lie down you simply say to [5:53] yourself, [5:54] "If my back could speak, what does it [5:56] want to tell me? If my shoulders could [5:59] have their say, [6:00] what are they trying to say? If my [6:03] stomach could have a voice, what might [6:05] it be trying to utter?" [6:06] Can you apply that same rationale to [6:08] things like anxiety? [6:09] Absolutely. You know, if you think of [6:12] take something like insomnia, right? You [6:14] wake up at 3:00 in the morning. [6:16] The way I like to think of it is [6:17] insomnia is if you like a kind of [6:19] revenge for all those thoughts that you [6:22] were so careful not to have in the day. [6:25] You very carefully schemed not to have [6:28] those thoughts in the day [6:29] because of our emotional conscience, [6:31] they want to be heard. And if you're not [6:33] hearing them at 3:00 p.m., you're going [6:35] to be hearing them at 3:00 a.m. [6:37] And so, you know, one of the best ways [6:38] to sleep is to make sure you're having a [6:41] little bit more of an in-depth [6:43] conversation with yourself [6:45] before you enter sleep because that will [6:48] allow you that kind of deeper rest. So, [6:51] as I say, [6:52] we have this [6:54] emotional conscience that requires that [6:57] the key things about us have a chance to [7:00] be heard. And look, let's not forget, I [7:01] mean, this is the whole theory of [7:03] trauma. You know, what psychotherapists [7:05] have very usefully over the last 20, 30 [7:07] years [7:08] informed us about is that um events in [7:12] our past, especially in our early [7:13] childhood, that we have not had a chance [7:15] to properly understand, and how much can [7:18] a three, four, five, six-year-old [7:19] understand? [7:21] Events that we can't understand, um it [7:23] doesn't mean that they haven't [7:24] registered. They've registered all the [7:26] more deeply, and they haven't had a [7:27] chance to be processed. [7:29] You know, I I was thinking, [7:31] friend of mine recently lost a parent. [7:33] He's in his 50s, well-educated, got [7:35] resources, got friends, spouse, etc. He [7:38] was telling me he was laid low by [7:40] depression. He just couldn't get out of [7:42] bed, completely stunned by his loss. [7:46] And I was thinking, [7:47] in a way he's lucky [7:49] because he's got all those resources of [7:51] adulthood. Imagine a five-year-old child [7:54] who suffers a bereavement. They've got [7:55] no friends that they can have those sort [7:57] of dialogues with. They've got no books [7:58] that they can reread about this. They've [8:00] got no capacity to process. They've got [8:02] no understanding of time, etc. [8:04] Um emotions that can't be had lodge [8:07] themselves in us and gum up our systems. [8:10] And um [8:12] I think so much of the work that we need [8:14] to do on ourselves is to process pain [8:17] that has not been properly understood. [8:19] Not because anyone's evil, but because [8:22] we've lacked the resources to do so. [8:25] You got me thinking about this concept [8:27] of happiness as you're speaking and [8:28] whether it's a natural thing for our [8:31] species to be aiming at or whether it's [8:33] a new [8:34] more modern thing that we've decided to [8:36] focus upon. And are we causing ourselves [8:38] immense distress in this pursuit of this [8:40] thing that maybe our ancestors didn't [8:43] didn't ever think about. This whole you [8:44] know, we think about self-actualization [8:46] and they were probably thinking about [8:48] survival and reproduction more. [8:50] Look, these all belong to the sort of [8:51] paradoxes of modern times. Modern times [8:53] have obviously brought us enormous [8:55] advantages, but they've also brought us [8:57] particular complexities that I think [8:59] we'd be wise to to realize. And one of [9:01] them is the disappearance of religion. I [9:03] mean, we are still among the first [9:04] generations in many parts of the world [9:07] to be um trying to live good lives [9:10] without the support of religion. Think [9:12] of how religion structure [9:14] time and human experience in time. As a [9:17] religious person, you immediately feel [9:21] that the present moment is not as [9:22] important as a hundred, two hundred, two [9:25] thousand, million-year history that has [9:28] come before and that will continue [9:29] after. The present moment is a speck in [9:31] time. [9:32] And and there's a whole narrative of [9:34] which you're part of that immediately [9:37] diminishes you in scale. [9:39] Now, nowadays, all of us want to be [9:41] rather large, don't we? We want to be [9:42] big big people. We want to make a big [9:44] impression. [9:45] But, um [9:46] arguably, this is a fast route to mental [9:48] illness because the graceful acceptance [9:52] of your minuscule position in the cosmos [9:55] is [9:56] the gateway to calm and harmony. [9:59] And when people say, you know, "I went [10:01] into this hotel, [10:03] you know, the person made me feel [10:04] small." [10:05] That's a bad way of being made to feel [10:06] small, but there's a good way of being [10:08] made to feel small. Pick up an ancient [10:10] text, read words that were written by [10:12] someone in a [10:13] foreign tongue 3,000 years ago. That'll [10:15] make you feel small. Go into the desert, [10:17] notice the the age of the rocks [10:19] inscribed in, you know, time inscribed [10:21] in sand. That'll put you in your place. [10:24] Um spend time with an animal that has no [10:27] concern for your status, your sense of [10:30] importance, your foiled narrative of [10:33] your own success. All these things that [10:35] drive modern humans mad. These are not [10:38] present in an older kind of religious [10:41] sphere. And as I say, what religions do [10:44] is they tell us you're part of a bigger [10:45] story. They also tell us, many faiths [10:47] tell us, [10:48] that life and you particular are [10:51] imperfect. Um you know, think of [10:54] Catholicism and its notion of original [10:56] sin. Now, lots of lots of bad stuff [10:58] associated with original sin. I'm not, [11:00] you know, a huge fan of many aspects, [11:01] but let's look at the good side, right? [11:03] What it what Catholicism tells us is [11:04] that everybody's broken. Everybody is [11:07] flawed. It's quite a helpful starting [11:10] point, right? Because, um [11:13] if you think, well, all right, I'm a bit [11:14] broken, but so somebody else, so [11:16] somebody else. So, we're all doing our [11:18] best. That's the gateway to [11:19] vulnerability, to friendship, if you [11:21] like. [11:22] Lower expectations. [11:23] Lower expectations, but also to to [11:25] connection with others, you know? [11:27] So often people who become successful [11:29] find it really hard to make friends. [11:31] Why? Because they associate success with [11:33] invulnerability, and the more successful [11:35] they get, the harder it is for them to [11:37] admit to the real truth about being [11:40] human, which is that we're all helpless [11:42] children some of the time at least, [11:44] frightened helpless children. And it [11:46] becomes harder to make to keep up the [11:48] contact with that, let alone admit that [11:51] to somebody else. So, again, religions [11:53] handily reduce our expectations and our [11:56] sense of ourselves. We are merely flawed [11:58] humans. There is a perfect world. It [12:00] doesn't exist in Beverly Hills. It [12:02] doesn't exist in, you know, the fancy [12:04] parts of Singapore or or Sydney. It [12:07] exists up there in a in another world. [12:09] In other words, [12:11] um the human realm is inherently [12:13] imperfect. Quite a good starting point. [12:15] I mean, even if you went on a date, [12:17] right? Imagine two characters you might [12:19] go on a date with, right? First one [12:20] tells you, [12:21] "Yeah, I'm kind of perfect, and I'm [12:23] achieve I'm aiming to achieve total [12:24] perfection." [12:25] Think, "Wow, good for them, but slightly [12:27] scary." Next is somebody else who goes, [12:30] "I'm kind of flawed, but I'm sort of [12:32] managing my flaws, and I'm interested in [12:34] how to get to know my flaws and work [12:35] with them." Instantly one thinks, "Hmm, [12:38] life might be easier around such a [12:39] person." There's There's something about [12:42] the pursuit of perfection which makes [12:46] day-to-day life extremely hard, and [12:48] religions, slightly by the by, tick that [12:51] box. They were able to reduce us in our [12:54] own eyes while raising us in the eyes [12:56] of, you know, a divine being. Um and [12:59] [clears throat] and that has helped us [13:00] to have an [13:01] have an easier relationship with with [13:03] ourselves. And And the notion also was, [13:06] "You cannot perfect this life." You [13:08] know, life becomes perfect in another [13:10] realm. We'll build Jerusalem somewhere [13:12] else, not on this earth, in the next [13:14] world. Again, it takes the pressure off [13:16] us. We moderns, we modern people, we [13:19] think the present moment is supremely [13:21] important. Now is important. Everything [13:23] that's going on right now is supremely [13:24] important. It doesn't matter remember [13:25] 100 years ago or 1,000 years ago. now is [13:28] the only criteria of time. You are [13:29] perfectible, right? So, if there's [13:31] something wrong with you, you're failing [13:32] against an ideal of perfection. Again, [13:36] very, very hard. Um [13:37] and that you are made I mean, the [13:40] biggest the biggest challenge of all, [13:42] you're made to be happy as you [13:44] suggested, that the true goal of every [13:46] human is happiness. Not fulfillment, not [13:49] uh you know, the realization of a grand [13:51] scheme, not living for others, your own [13:53] happiness. [13:54] And again, it's a beautiful idea, [13:57] but goodness me, does it cause problems. [14:00] Goodness me, you know, think of Emile [14:02] Durkheim. [14:04] Beginning of the 20th century, French [14:06] sociologist, writes this book um so [14:10] contrasting the differences between [14:12] ancient societies and modern societies. [14:15] And he identifies one troubling [14:18] difference between ancient societies, [14:20] the pre-modern agricultural [14:22] village-based societies where religion [14:25] plays a role, and modern urban [14:27] technologically driven success-oriented [14:30] individualistic societies, and that's [14:32] the suicide rate. [14:34] He realizes in his book on suicide, [14:36] published in 1900, that modern [14:39] societies, for all their advantages, [14:42] leads their members of a share of their [14:44] members, often the most ambitious of [14:47] their members, to take their own lives. [14:49] Why? What's going on? And this becomes [14:52] Well, it's the birth of modern [14:53] sociology, really. It's It becomes a [14:56] major inquiry into what modern times [14:59] does to the soul. And I'm deeply [15:01] fascinated by that. I can't let that one [15:03] go because what's this paradox? What's [15:06] this paradox of suffering amidst plenty, [15:10] of regress amidst progress? This [15:13] fascinates me. [15:15] I spoke to the CEO of Calm, Campaign [15:18] Against Living Miserably, Simon Gunning, [15:20] and he shared some stats with me about [15:22] exactly what talking about about [15:23] suicide. He said someone dies by suicide [15:25] in the UK every 90 minutes. 76% are [15:28] male. There's 25 attempts for every [15:30] death. [15:31] Um the single biggest cause of death for [15:32] men under 45 is suicide. Single biggest [15:35] cause of death for 15 to 49-year-olds is [15:38] suicide. That 19 to 35-year-old category [15:40] are twice as likely to report being in [15:42] crisis than any other group. And 16 to [15:44] 24s is the fastest growing group in [15:47] history to exhibit suicidality. And more [15:50] recently, there's a big conversation [15:52] emerging now around young women [15:55] and suicidality, which is um a fairly [15:58] recent unfortunately exploding trend. [16:01] This trend of young women now [16:02] experiencing suicidality. [16:04] And look, [16:06] people don't just commit suicide when [16:09] things are bad. People commit suicide [16:12] when things are bad and they think [16:15] it's a delicate point. They think it's [16:16] their fault. They cannot [16:19] disassociate the trouble they feel from [16:22] an intense sense of responsibility, [16:24] which then also entails shame. Now, [16:26] what's going on there? You see, when I [16:28] say that we live in a individualistic [16:30] world, what that really means is we live [16:33] in a world where people feel that they [16:35] control their own narratives. That that [16:37] what happens to them is very tightly a [16:40] reflection of who they are and what [16:44] they've done. [16:45] And this was not always the case. You [16:46] see, [16:48] for long periods of history, um people [16:51] were not necessarily tightly held to the [16:55] observable outcomes of their lives. This [16:57] happened with money, for example. Um [17:00] in Old English, [17:02] a poor person was known as an [17:05] unfortunate, right? Um what is an [17:08] unfort- Let's unpack that word [17:09] unfortunate. There's the word Fortuna in [17:12] there. What was Fortuna? For the Romans, [17:15] Fortuna was the goddess of luck, the [17:16] goddess of fortune. And the Romans were [17:19] therefore all the time sacrificing [17:20] things to the goddess of fortune as a [17:22] way of saying, you know, please, you [17:24] know, it's not me, it's, you know, this [17:27] outside agency. Nowadays, this sounds [17:29] completely weird. I mean, what do we [17:31] call [17:33] in the most individualistic country in [17:34] the world, United States, what are poor [17:37] people called? It's not a nice term, [17:39] they're called losers, right? You say, [17:40] that's a loser. So, we've gone from [17:42] unfortunate to loser. That's a [17:44] trajectory of 400 years. What's happened [17:46] in that time is a story about who's [17:50] responsible for people's fate. And [17:54] nowadays, you know, if I said to you, [17:55] "Stephen, things have not been going so [17:56] well for me. I just been sacked. Uh, you [17:59] know, my my book hasn't sold, you know, [18:01] there but it's not me. I've just had a [18:03] bit of bad luck." [18:04] You, very nice [clears throat] person, [18:06] but a modern person, inside of you you'd [18:08] be thinking, "Hmm, he must have done [18:10] something wrong." Right? You'd be [18:11] thinking he must have done something [18:12] wrong because that's how we think. We [18:14] don't allow people [18:16] the [18:17] benefit of luck, right? Similarly, if [18:20] you said to me, "Oh, you know, my [18:22] podcast be doing brilliantly. We now got [18:24] 8 million million million billion I [18:26] don't know how many you've got nowadays. [18:27] Um, um, and you and you said and you [18:29] said to me, 'Oh, I just just a bit of [18:31] good luck.'" Right? I think, "Oh, [18:32] Stephen's really, you know, he's very [18:34] modest, but, you know, it's not true. [18:36] He's done something." We believe that [18:38] people do things and that that action [18:41] leads to results or failures. And that's [18:43] why people take their own lives because [18:45] in extremis, people think there is [18:47] nothing other than me to explain what [18:49] happens to me. Of course, the reality is [18:51] much more complicated. I'm not saying [18:52] that's the truth, but that is the [18:54] perceived truth. You know, look, we live [18:56] in a world that is [18:59] meritocratic, [19:01] right? That word, meritocracy, [19:04] is on everybody's lips. If you take [19:06] politicians, left and right, in the [19:08] United States or of the world, everybody [19:11] wants to create a world that is [19:13] meritocratic. Some people think we've [19:14] already got there. [19:15] What does that word mean? I don't know. [19:17] Meritocratic is the concept of [19:19] meritocracy is [19:21] a world in which um [19:24] people's [19:26] outcomes are dependent on their merit [19:29] rather than on who their parents were, [19:32] um [19:33] some corrupt class in society, the [19:35] influence of whatever. So, you know, a [19:38] left-wing politician and a right-wing [19:39] politician say, "We want to make a [19:41] meritocratic world where your kids will [19:44] go to where they deserve, where if you [19:47] work hard, you can get there, and um you [19:51] know, where everyone has a chance to [19:52] succeed." We You know, you know that [19:54] kind of rhetoric, yeah? It's It's the [19:55] rhetoric of modern times. [19:58] Now, [20:00] it sounds great, and in many ways it's [20:02] an enormous advance, but again, let's [20:04] just focus on the psychological toll of [20:07] that, because if you really believe in a [20:10] world in which those who get to the top [20:13] deserve to get to the top, by [20:15] implication, you are also positing the [20:18] existence of the world in which those [20:20] who are at the bottom deserve to be at [20:22] the bottom. In other words, a [20:24] meritocratic worldview turns success and [20:28] failure from chance to a necessary fate. [20:33] And that's why it makes the winners [20:36] quite [20:37] hard, potentially quite heartless, [20:40] because they're thinking, "Well, I got [20:41] there on my own. You You know, don't [20:42] need to thank anybody. Might not need to [20:44] pay many taxes. Why Why pay taxes, you [20:46] know? It's It's fine." [20:48] And similarly, those at the bottom are [20:51] kind of crushed. [20:52] So, [20:53] we've we've created this very [20:56] complicated ideology where um [21:00] there's a hidden toll. [21:01] What is love? Let's If we're talking [21:03] about Let's talk about romantic love. [21:05] What is that? [clears throat] [21:08] Well, can I just first start by saying [21:10] we're a bit confused about it? And and [21:13] so I can't give you an immediate answer, [21:15] but I want to register that not just me, [21:18] but the whole of the current world is [21:21] confused about love. And I think we've [21:23] been confused for about 200 years. And [21:25] and let's let's go easy on ourselves [21:27] here because [21:28] the way in which we approach love now is [21:31] a never-before [21:33] um approached philosophy. You know, for [21:36] about the last 250 years, we've been [21:38] loving under the aegis of a philosophy [21:40] we could call romanticism. [21:43] And romanticism is is a vision of love [21:46] with very particular assumptions. [21:49] Let me run through a few of them. [21:51] Um [21:52] there's one soulmate for everybody. [21:54] You're going to find this soulmate. Um [21:57] you're going to find them through [21:58] slightly mysterious ways. [22:00] Possibly through almost something almost [22:01] quasi-divine. Like you'll feel pulled. [22:03] You'll meet them at the supermarket [22:04] checkout line, the and without even [22:08] knowing too much about them, you will [22:10] sense that they're your destiny. So [22:12] you'll feel impelled towards somebody [22:14] that you don't necessarily know too much [22:15] of. [22:16] A force will pull you and you will feel [22:19] this is the one. And they will be an [22:21] angel, literally a sort of descended [22:23] being from from another another world. [22:25] Um the romantics were very very keen on [22:28] the notion that you didn't have to know [22:31] someone too well to understand them. [22:33] Even speaking not very much, the [22:36] connection will be even deeper. Um the [22:38] romantics also thought that love and sex [22:40] absolutely belong together. And that [22:42] that that you couldn't have a millimeter [22:44] of disjunction between the two. Love and [22:46] sex had sometimes drifted apart in the [22:48] old world and that'd been sometimes a [22:50] problem, but it became a tragedy. So [22:53] adultery moved from a difficulty to a [22:55] tragedy. That's why all modern novels [22:57] and films are all about the tragedy of [22:59] of of adultery. So look, these are some [23:01] of the difficulties that the modern [23:03] world has created. We we tend to believe [23:06] nowadays that love is an emotion that we [23:10] should feel, never a skill that we [23:13] should learn. You know, for example, if [23:15] I said to you, "We should probably study [23:18] love. We should probably go to a school [23:20] of love." You know, "That's not very [23:21] romantic." Now, every time every time [23:25] that someone says, "That's not very [23:26] romantic." Ding ding, that's normally a [23:29] sign of a problem. Like most things that [23:31] don't sound very romantic are a good [23:32] idea, and most things that are romantic, [23:34] like marrying in Vegas after you've met [23:37] someone for 5 minutes, is not so great. [23:39] Now, [23:40] what are we getting wrong? [23:43] One of the things we're getting wrong is [23:44] this whole business of instinct, right? [23:48] So, [23:50] we tend to believe [23:51] that love will pull us instinctively [23:56] towards marvelous people that will be [23:58] correct for us. You know, [24:00] the old world, people were set up in [24:02] relationships. You'll marry this person [24:04] because of this reason, you know, that [24:06] person goes well with with what my [24:07] family, blah blah. In other words, [24:08] nothing to do with you. You you're put [24:10] together with somebody. Nowadays, we're [24:11] nominally free to choose anyone. Hooray! [24:14] Fantastic! Aren't we going to make great [24:15] choices? Uh no. Why don't we make great [24:18] choices? Cuz we're not free. Why are we [24:20] not free? [24:21] We need to go to a psychotherapist to [24:23] tell us why we're not free. We're not [24:24] free to love just anyone. [24:27] We love in tracks laid down for us by [24:33] our childhoods. [24:35] Adult love sits on top of tracks and a [24:39] script laid down for us in childhood. [24:41] You might go, "What's wrong with that? [24:42] So what?" Well, what's problematic is [24:45] that many of us had childhoods in which [24:47] affection was mixed in with more [24:49] problematic dynamics. That maybe in [24:51] order to derive love in childhood, we [24:54] also had to encounter somebody who was [24:55] in a rage, someone who was violent, [24:57] someone who was depressed, someone who [24:59] put us down, someone who preferred [25:00] another sibling, whatever it was. And we [25:02] go into adulthood and we find that we're [25:06] drawn to love stories that feel familiar [25:10] because they're echoing some of [25:11] childhood dynamics, but they don't [25:13] necessarily for that matter lead to [25:15] happiness. And you know, [25:17] sometimes we have situations where [25:20] yeah, you set up a friend, let's say. [25:22] You have a really good friend and you [25:23] know another friend. You think these [25:24] people would really go well together. [25:26] Set them up on a date and then you call [25:28] them up afterwards. You say, "So, how [25:29] did it go?" You know, [25:31] it must have gone really well. [25:33] They say, "I'm not sure. Maybe something [25:34] was lacking, a little spark." What [25:37] they're really trying to get at is [25:38] they're not going to put it this way, [25:40] "Your friend, this date, [25:43] did not show me signs that they would [25:45] make me suffer in the way that I need to [25:48] suffer [25:49] in order to feel I'm in love." [25:51] In other words, this relationship [25:52] threatened to be happy. [25:54] That's why I had to go away. So, we are [25:56] paradoxical creatures because our past [25:59] was not necessarily happy. We're not [26:01] necessarily that happy that our future [26:04] romantic lives should be happy either. [26:07] And this is something that, [26:08] you know, they they weren't thinking [26:09] about that when love was reinvented 250 [26:12] years ago. When people say they have [26:14] daddy issues and things like this, [26:17] are you saying then that there's [26:19] often truth in that because they had a [26:21] early experience with a father figure, a [26:23] male figure in their life that might [26:25] have left them or might have, you know, [26:27] created a anxious attachment style or [26:29] something. So, they then end up pursuing [26:31] dysfunctional men and relationships [26:34] because that's the suffering that they [26:36] associate with love. [26:39] Sure. I mean, we repeat what we don't [26:41] understand. And so long as we're unaware [26:44] of the stories that we've grown up with, [26:46] we will enact them in our adult lives. [26:49] So, we're not compelled to do this [26:51] forever, but and and look [26:54] I think a lot of us have a desire to [26:56] give the stories of our childhood a [26:58] different ending. Our father might have [27:00] been a distant and [27:02] you know, mean-spirited creature, [27:04] but also had some good qualities. [27:06] The dream is to find somebody a bit like [27:08] that, but to make sure that the story [27:10] has a good resolution. So, it's not [27:12] merely a desire to repeat, it's a desire [27:14] to repeat and give a better ending. [27:16] But frequently, you know, we don't get [27:18] there. [27:19] And I think that [27:22] look, the thing about psychology is we [27:26] see all around us people doing [27:29] so-called crazy things. You know, [27:31] falling in love with people who are not [27:32] going to make them happy, sabotaging [27:34] their careers, [27:36] not able to open up to people, and we [27:38] think we can step back and go, "Why are [27:40] they doing that stuff? What's going on?" [27:43] Now, one way to look at it, [27:44] and it's a kind of compassionate way to [27:46] look at it, a lot of the stuff that [27:48] looks crazy now, [27:50] once made a lot of sense. [27:53] It was once, probably, a really clever [27:56] thing to do. If you were growing up, [27:58] let's say, in an environment in which, [28:01] let's say, a parent was suicidal, right? [28:03] A parent was suicidal. [28:05] And you shut down your emotions totally [28:08] and decided you would never trust [28:09] anyone. Fantastic. That's a [28:11] fantastically clever thing to do when [28:13] you're 5 years old and you've got a [28:15] suicidal parent, right? Because that [28:17] will get you through to the next stage [28:18] of life. If you open your heart at and [28:21] there's a parent who's suicidal, it'll [28:23] tear you apart. So, good for you. You're [28:25] you're doing something brilliantly [28:27] clever, right? Or imagine somebody who [28:31] um [28:32] is a becomes a clown as a child because [28:35] there's a very sad atmosphere and [28:38] there's a depression and all they can [28:39] have time for is jokes. They're just a [28:41] manic joker, right? Brilliant. What What [28:44] a fantastic thing for a kid to work out [28:46] that they need to be quite a kind of [28:48] manic joker. But what happens 10 years [28:51] later, 20 years later, 30 years later, [28:53] is that what used to be a fantastic [28:56] defense against an intolerable situation [28:59] has turned out to more or less ruined [29:00] people's chances because the person, you [29:03] know, with that difficult father will [29:05] end up never being able to open their [29:07] heart to anyone, even a very safe [29:09] person. They won't even know their [29:10] heart's closed. But they will be acting [29:13] out the same defensive strategy. Or the [29:15] person who, you know, it was a great [29:17] idea to be a bit of a joker early on, [29:19] but now they have no time for anything [29:21] serious and their friends feel that [29:23] they're a slightly plastic person, can [29:25] never connect with them. That's a real [29:27] toll in in in the in the adult world. [29:30] So, [29:31] you know, very often what we need to do [29:33] is to say thank you to our younger [29:35] selves for having devised strategies [29:38] that really work clever. But at the same [29:40] time say, "Thank you. [29:43] It's enough. I want to I want to live in [29:44] a different way. That was a fantastic [29:46] strategy then. It may no longer be [29:49] the right way for me to live now." [29:52] I was thinking as you were speaking [29:53] about that that there's kind of two [29:54] groups of people. I was bouncing through [29:56] different people that I know to see how [29:58] it fit with them and I identified in my [30:00] mind that there's basically two groups [30:02] of people there. The ones that are aware [30:04] of their cycle, [30:05] you know, and whether they've [30:07] acted to change it or they're just [30:09] reliving it, [30:10] who knows. And the ones that are totally [30:12] unaware that they're in this cycle and [30:13] they just think, "Oh God, that's my [30:15] luck." You know, they say phrases like, [30:17] "That's just my luck." [30:19] How does one increase their awareness of [30:21] their own cycle? Do you think there's a [30:22] way? [30:23] Yes. Um [30:25] so much that can be done. Let's imagine [30:27] the very simplest exercise. [30:29] Psychologists have these things called [30:32] sentence completion tests where you [30:34] start with a stub of a question and then [30:36] you end it with an ellipsis, a dot dot [30:37] dot, and you say to somebody, "Don't [30:39] think too much. Just finish the [30:41] sentence." [30:42] And typical ones are men are dot dot [30:45] dot. [30:46] Women are [30:47] dot dot dot. [30:49] I am dot dot dot. [30:51] Life dot dot dot. [30:54] If you give somebody that sheet of paper [30:56] and say to them, "Don't think too much. [30:57] Just write it down." [30:58] All right? Amazing things bubble up. Men [31:01] are, you know, authoritarian villains. [31:04] Wow, where did that come from? Right? [31:06] You're carrying out, you know, women [31:07] are, you know, whatever it is. Life is, [31:10] you know, I am, [31:11] you know, a nobody who deserves to be [31:13] stamped on. Did you know a minute ago [31:16] that you have that in you? Not [31:17] necessarily. In other words, sometimes [31:20] you need these little levers to shine a [31:24] light. Now, the thing that [31:26] really helps, and I'm not, you know, [31:29] for your viewers, um, [31:31] many therapists, many psychotherapists [31:33] are not what they should be, [31:35] but some are great. If you find yourself [31:37] with a good psychotherapist, they can [31:38] also increase your level of [31:41] self-awareness. I think that's what [31:42] we're talking about, increasing level of [31:43] self-awareness. [31:44] And and [31:46] the reason is very simple. You know, [31:48] there's stuff that we all do. Let's [31:49] imagine, I don't know, when you're [31:51] around a man, you think that person's [31:54] judging me, therefore I'm going to [31:55] withdraw and not enter into competition [31:57] with them. I'm around a woman, I think [32:00] I'm going to have to, you know, I'm [32:01] going to be treated badly, therefore I [32:03] must, you know, whatever it is. [32:04] Something from your past is projected [32:06] onto it. You end up in a therapy room [32:08] with a man or a woman. [32:10] And lo and behold, what do you do? [32:12] You bring out that thing, and you bring [32:14] out that thing that you're doing [32:15] normally. Except this time, you're not [32:17] doing it in the office, you're not doing [32:19] it in a relationship, you're not doing [32:20] it in a context where people are busy [32:21] and have got their own stuff going on, [32:23] and they're doing their own games. [32:24] You're doing it with somebody, a trained [32:26] professional, in a quiet room, and they [32:29] can see. It's like a petri dish. They [32:31] can see the stuff that you're doing. And [32:34] so suddenly you'll be saying to your [32:35] therapist, "I know you hate me." [32:38] And the therapist will be going, [32:41] "I really don't think so, but I'm [32:43] interested that you have that conviction [32:45] that you do." [32:46] Um or someone will be going to the [32:49] therapist, "I need to look after you. I [32:51] think you're quite tired, and I really [32:53] you know, you you've been doing such [32:54] great work. I feel I want to look after [32:56] you." [32:57] Maybe you'd be doing that all your life, [32:59] and the therapist will be going, "You [33:00] don't need to look after me, but was [33:02] there someone in your past that you [33:04] needed to look after and that made you [33:06] feel guilty and that has meant that [33:09] every time you're with somebody, you [33:11] feel that their needs are more important [33:13] than your needs?" And there's a chance, [33:15] therefore, to see more clearly than ever [33:18] before, outside of the kind of hubbub of [33:20] relationships or office life, the kind [33:23] of stories that you're projecting onto [33:25] reality to your huge cost. So, I'm now [33:28] aware [33:29] of my cycle that originates from my [33:31] childhood. [33:32] The next step is doing something about [33:33] it. How do I [33:35] overpower that sort of [33:38] hardwired urge to [33:41] repeat the cycle that comes from my [33:42] childhood? [33:43] Well, look, Stephen, let's not minimize. [33:45] That's already an enormous achievement. [33:47] Yeah. [33:48] You know what I mean? I mean, that's [33:49] that's it [laughter] you know, if you're [33:50] there that you have a handle on Look, [33:54] we don't need people to be perfect, [33:55] right? We don't need pe- people perfect. [33:57] At best, [33:59] we need people to know how they're [34:01] imperfect and that they can have a [34:03] chance to warn us of their imperfections [34:06] in good time before they've done too [34:08] much damage. There's an enormous [34:09] difference. I mean, look, again, take [34:11] the take the dating idea. Let's imagine, [34:13] you know, [34:15] I I often say, [34:17] "Don't do this to me cuz we're not um [34:18] we're not on a date, but um but [34:22] a great question to ask somebody on a [34:23] date is how are you mad? [34:26] How are you mad? Right? If the person [34:28] says, 'I'm not mad. I'm completely [34:29] sane.' Run away because, you know, [34:32] everybody has folly inside them. And [34:35] we're approaching a measure of everyday [34:37] tolerable sanity when we've put some [34:40] flags [34:41] in the areas of our madness. So, total [34:44] sanity is not a possibility for any [34:46] human being. [34:47] Um but the awareness of where the [34:50] insanity lies and a little bit of [34:52] warning and prompt apology, you know, [34:54] after um an incident goes a huge [34:59] long way. You know, [35:01] People often say, "I'm looking for a [35:02] partner with a good sense of humor." [35:04] No one needs jokes. It's not It's not [35:06] about jokes. It's really about modesty [35:08] about oneself. Right? Somebody who's [35:10] able to go, [35:11] "I think I mean look, take the other [35:13] thing. [35:13] If you meet somebody who thinks they're [35:15] easy to live with, run away. [35:17] No one's easy to live with. And someone [35:18] who thinks they're easy to live with is [35:20] really trouble. So, somebody who can put [35:22] up their hand and go, "You know what? [35:22] Yeah, I'm a bit of I'm I'm pretty tricky [35:24] to live to to live with." [35:26] Great. That person is safer, not [35:28] necessarily totally safe, but they're [35:29] safer because they've started on the [35:31] road to self-awareness. [35:33] And so, ultimately, the best we can do [35:37] in this world is self-awareness, prompt [35:39] apologies when we slip up. Um yeah. [35:42] And a [35:43] genuine and intention to [35:46] uh make progress, I guess. [35:48] Is that Is that important as well? So, [35:50] like me being aware that I I have [35:52] certain habits in my relationship is one [35:54] thing, but then I think my partner would [35:57] like to know that some of the [36:00] destructive cycles I might have, I'm [36:02] working on them. [36:04] I'm tr- I'm I'm at least trying to make [36:06] forward motion. [36:07] Yeah, totally. I mean, I think one of [36:09] the most destructive ideas in the modern [36:10] world is the idea that [36:13] true love means accepting somebody for [36:15] who they are [36:17] in all of their [36:18] you know, all of their good and bad [36:20] sides. [36:21] It's a It's a lovely dream. And you [36:23] know, sometimes when you hear of [36:24] breakups, they'll go, "You know, my ex, [36:26] you know, they just didn't accept me for [36:27] who I was. And everyone would go, "Oh, [36:28] yes, God, what a terrible person, you [36:30] know, how awful." [36:31] You know, politely one wants to go, [36:33] "Hang on a minute. Do any of us really [36:35] deserve to be loved for the whole of who [36:37] we are? Is that really a fair [36:39] expectation? Or isn't, as you suggest, [36:42] isn't it fair to suppose that all of us [36:44] are works in progress? And that, [36:48] you know, there is nothing contrary to [36:50] the spirit of love in a desire to [36:53] improve. The ancient Greeks had this [36:55] right. You know, for the ancient Greeks, [36:57] Plato saw love as a classroom. Beautiful [37:00] idea. That love is a classroom in which [37:01] two people, in a spirit of generosity [37:04] and kindness, I mean, we're not talking [37:05] about shouting here. We're talking about [37:07] generosity and kindness. Two people [37:09] endeavor [37:10] to help each other to become the best [37:12] version of themselves, of each other, [37:14] right? That that that love is is geared [37:17] towards progress and working on [37:19] yourself. That sounds very odd nowadays. [37:21] You know, if you if you went around [37:22] saying, "I've read some Plato and he's [37:24] kind of guiding me towards uh the idea [37:25] that love is a classroom. So, therefore, [37:27] I'm going to give you a 40-minute [37:28] lecture on some of your flaws. And then [37:30] I'd like you to give me a 40-minute [37:32] lecture on some of my flaws." This would [37:33] be considered, ding ding ding, [37:35] unromantic, right? That's not very [37:37] romantic, is it? Doesn't mean it's a bad [37:39] idea. As I say, love is a skill to be [37:42] learned, not just an emotion to be felt. [37:45] And some of that means that we might [37:48] need to go back to school. [37:50] I I've been thinking more recently that [37:53] most relationships the success of most [37:55] relationship comes down to this idea of [37:57] like how good you are at conflict [37:58] resolution. [37:59] Because I've had a previous relationship [38:01] where [38:02] I we both can take the the blame, per [38:04] se. We were just not good at conflict [38:06] resolution. And then I've had a more [38:07] recent relationship where we're very we [38:09] seem to be much better, not perfect, but [38:12] much better at conflict resolution. And [38:14] it makes all the difference. [38:16] And but I think it's even, you know, [38:18] it's not if you were bad at conflict [38:20] resolution, it's not just your fault. [38:22] It's It's partly the way our society [38:24] works. Come back to the idea of [38:25] romanticism, right? Romanticism gives us [38:27] this extraordinary idea that love is [38:31] something that should be felt and [38:33] communicated without words, right? So, [38:35] the most romantic people think the most [38:37] romantic sentence that often people will [38:39] say is, "I met this person and we didn't [38:41] even need to speak. We just felt on the [38:44] same page." Everyone goes, [38:45] "Oh, how romantic." Ding ding, danger. [38:48] Um because it's, you know, well, this [38:51] leads to a catastrophic outbreak of [38:54] sulking, right? What is sulking, right? [38:57] A What is a sulk? A sulk is a [38:59] fascinating pattern of behavior where [39:02] you get very angry with someone because [39:04] they have not understood you [39:07] without even though you haven't said [39:08] anything. They've not understood you and [39:10] you get offended because you think, [39:12] because you're a romantic person, you [39:13] think, "They can't possibly love me [39:15] because true love means understanding [39:17] somebody, you know, intuitively, um [39:19] wordlessly. And therefore, I'm not going [39:21] to speak." And so, you know, you come [39:23] back from a party with your with your [39:24] partner and uh they say to you, "Is [39:26] anything wrong, darling?" And you go, [39:28] "Mhm." [39:29] Of course there is, but you're not going [39:30] to tell them. And then they start [39:32] saying, "Come on, you can tell me. [39:33] What's wrong?" And And the sulking [39:35] person goes, "No." [39:37] And this can go on and on and on. I [39:38] mean, you know, [39:40] we're all We've all been at it sometime. [39:41] [laughter] You know, you you go home, [39:43] uh you you go straight upstairs, you go [39:45] to the bathroom, you shut the door. And [39:46] then your partner's kind of knocking at [39:47] the door going, "Please, darling, just [39:49] just tell me what's wrong." And you go [39:51] from behind the door, "No." And And the [39:54] reason is that you're a romantic and you [39:56] believe that your partner should have [39:58] miraculous, [39:59] almost alien capacities to look through [40:02] the bathroom door into your gnarled and [40:05] wounded soul to understand what the [40:07] upset is. But of course they can't [40:09] because they're just human, you know. [40:10] Takes us a long time to realize that [40:12] other humans are not mind readers. You [40:14] know, one of the [40:15] first thing we should always ask is, [40:17] "Have I told them this?" I I know I'm [40:19] upset, but did I tell them this? And so [40:21] often the answer is not quite, because [40:24] we're romantics. And so we have to do [40:25] that really, I mean, you know, [40:28] we can accept it's really boring. We've [40:30] got to use words. We've got to painfully [40:32] stack up words and go [40:34] "The reason that I'm getting a little [40:36] touchy is because [40:38] and you've got to explain yourself." [40:39] It's not very romantic. [40:41] But that is normally a sign it's a good [40:43] idea. So, honesty, [40:45] I [40:46] I've struggled at times to be completely [40:48] honest in my relationships when I felt [40:50] like the honesty might hurt them. [40:52] So, [40:54] can we have true love and total honesty? [40:59] I believe that the the wish to tell [41:02] someone absolutely everything is is both [41:05] beautiful and ultimately utopian in a [41:09] problematic way. Because [41:12] we all of us have within us [41:15] ambivalences, doubts, [41:18] unfaithful thoughts, etc. And it isn't [41:21] the work of love to rub your partner [41:24] constantly up against the most [41:27] troubling, disturbed sides of your [41:29] psyche. Now, we're not talking This is [41:30] not an advocacy for sort of total [41:32] mendacity and lies, but it is an [41:35] advertisement for editing. [41:38] You know, [41:39] we should hope that we don't meet the [41:42] fullest version of each other all the [41:45] time. You know, I know it sounds [41:47] romantic, but sometimes it's as parents [41:50] know, is it is it that great as a parent [41:53] to tell your child absolutely everything [41:55] about what's going through you? Well, [41:56] sometimes, you know, is there a role for [41:58] saying "I'm just going to edit myself" [42:01] not in the name of subterfuge or deceit, [42:05] but in the name of love? [42:07] That love could be compatible with an [42:09] editing of certain aspects of your [42:11] reality. One [snorts] of the areas where [42:14] a lot of editing happens is in the [42:16] bedroom. [42:17] In relationships, in sex, in sexless [42:20] relationships. [42:22] Um I was looking through some statistics [42:24] earlier on because I know that you've [42:25] talked quite um extensively on [42:28] relationships and sex and sexless [42:29] relationships. I found this stat that [42:31] says a 2022 study by Relate, a UK-based [42:35] uh counseling network, found that 26% of [42:38] people in relationships were having sex [42:41] less than 10 times per year and 8% were [42:43] having no sex at all. This is a stark [42:46] rise from 2018 [42:49] um where the numbers were [42:51] quite significantly lower than that. It [42:53] seems like as a society we're getting [42:55] increasingly sexless. [42:58] Yeah. So, the question is where's the [43:00] problem? Is the problem in the body or [43:02] is the problem in the mind? Now, you [43:04] know, being the kind of guy I am, I'm [43:06] going to shift us to the mind. I'm sure [43:07] sometimes there are bodily issues and [43:09] you know, they deserve attention too. [43:10] But if I can talk about the mind, um [43:14] why is it that sex is easier at the [43:16] beginning [43:17] than in a long-term relationship? [43:19] One of the leading answers is anger. [43:24] It's not very easy to have sex or want [43:26] sex with someone that you're angry with. [43:28] And in many relationships, there's a lot [43:32] of stored anger that neither party knows [43:34] is there. [43:36] And that anger has come from micro [43:39] incidents of disappointment. Someone [43:41] didn't quite call when they said they [43:42] would. Someone didn't laugh when they [43:45] might have done. Someone didn't show [43:46] generosity when it might have been [43:48] required. Um and these things get stored [43:51] up and the result of too much of this is [43:54] that you don't want someone going [43:55] anywhere near you. Contempt. Because [43:56] you're you're because you're furious. [43:57] You're essentially furious. But in the [43:59] way of these things, you don't know you [44:01] are. You don't know you're furious. [44:03] Again, as it you know, the mind is not [44:05] obvious to itself. So, [44:07] you know, if you want to have more sex, [44:09] don't just invest in candles and fancy [44:12] linen. [44:12] Um [44:13] a quite useful thing to do is to go and [44:15] have dinner with your partner [44:16] and say to them, [44:18] "We're both going to ask each other how [44:20] we've annoyed each other." Cuz we have [44:22] annoyed each other, not because we're [44:24] evil people, but because we're human and [44:25] we're in a relationship. And no [44:26] relationship can survive more than an [44:27] hour without a build-up of frustration. [44:30] And the more we can let out the [44:31] frustration at the dinner table, the [44:33] more it won't you know, create a [44:35] blockage in the bedroom. And so, the [44:38] chance to discharge frustration and you [44:41] know, often the reason why we don't tell [44:43] our partners what our frustrations are [44:46] is that they sound ridiculous. It's [44:48] like, "Well, hang on. You're upset with [44:50] me because I used the word really in [44:53] what you thought placed too much [44:54] emphasis on the why when I was speaking [44:56] to your mother." [44:58] Are you crazy? Right? You could you are [45:00] laying yourself open to your partner [45:02] pointing to you going, "Are you crazy?" [45:04] But I think that we're all in love, very [45:08] small children, at least a small part of [45:09] us is. And [45:11] um as we know, small children get upset [45:13] about really weird, tiny things. You [45:15] know, you'll you'll move a button and [45:16] they start wailing and you go, "What's [45:17] happened?" And they go, "You moved the [45:18] button." And you go, "I did? Uh and why [45:21] does that matter?" But but for them it [45:22] matters. Or you know, a pencil has [45:23] slightly changed direction. So, we [45:25] should learn we should remember what it [45:27] felt like to be a child. And we should [45:29] acknowledge that there remains, even in [45:30] an adult who's very competent in all [45:32] sorts of areas, [45:33] a small child who is liable to be [45:36] getting very upset about small things. [45:38] Triggered. [45:39] Triggered. But because they're an adult, [45:42] this is the problem, we we think, "Well, [45:44] an adult can't possibly be having such [45:47] childish reactions." Again, we need to [45:49] just um [45:51] cast aside our fears of shame and say, [45:53] "You know what? Yes, an adult can get [45:56] very upset about tiny things. An adult [45:58] probably is upset about tiny things." [45:59] And we're doing [46:01] ourselves an honor when we can dare to [46:03] reveal this to our partner and they can [46:05] do likewise. [46:06] So, if I'm if [46:08] if I'm someone listening to this now and [46:09] I'm in a relationship where I don't [46:12] think cuz it's it's interesting even [46:14] when I say I don't think I'm having [46:15] enough sex, [46:16] the idea of how much sex is enough sex [46:18] has probably come from movies, which is [46:20] a bit of a trap as well, right? Um but [46:22] if I'm in a relationship and we are in a [46:24] sexless relationship by whatever [46:25] definition, [46:27] solution one you presented there is try [46:29] and resolve the anger, the underlying [46:31] contempt. Um [46:33] are there anything else that you think [46:35] is [46:36] effective ways of solving for that? [46:38] Look, I think we I think one useful [46:40] thing to do is to go why does sex [46:41] matter? What is this thing called sex? [46:43] Why why does it matter? And when people [46:46] get very upset, I think the answer tends [46:48] to be that sex is a symbol of something [46:51] very poignant and very delicate, which [46:53] is [46:55] my partner loves me. [46:57] And they can't The reason why it becomes [46:58] such an acute issue is that they cannot [47:00] hold onto the idea that the partner [47:02] might love them and might not want sex. [47:04] This is psychologically impossible. Now, [47:07] it is important to say [47:09] it is possible. It is possible that your [47:11] partner both loves you and doesn't want [47:13] to have sex. There could be other [47:14] reasons. They're feeling unwell, they're [47:15] So, [47:17] and and then we can ask ourselves what [47:18] does sex really aim at? Sex aims at [47:21] intimacy. Yeah, [47:22] even we'll say they you know, in in in [47:25] in people so polite language they say [47:26] they became intimate, which means they [47:28] had sex. So, what what we know about sex [47:30] is that the really exciting thing about [47:32] sex is not the sex bit, it's the [47:34] intimate bit. Um it's the idea that [47:37] someone is without their guard. You [47:40] know, most of the time we approach other [47:41] people without guards on. And um in this [47:45] very rare and unusual thing we do, we [47:47] meet another human being in a vulnerable [47:49] state. And this is such a relief from [47:53] the normal limitations of life. And [47:56] there are other ways of doing this. You [47:58] know, sex is not the only way of doing [48:00] it. So, [48:01] by understanding better what sex is, we [48:04] can also have a chance to get some of [48:07] what we get in sex in things that are [48:09] not sex, if that makes sense. [48:11] I had Tracey Cox on the podcast and she [48:12] said something to me which really stuck [48:14] with me because I hadn't noticed it [48:16] until she said it, which is this idea I [48:19] believe she called otherness, which is [48:22] when your partner almost becomes like a [48:24] family member or you start seeing them [48:27] as like a a sibling because they are in [48:30] their sweatpants around you. And she [48:32] made the claim which I think I've read [48:34] in your books as well that in many [48:36] respects that's the very opposite of [48:39] the [48:40] the spice that makes sex so appealing in [48:42] those early days when it's new and novel [48:45] and risky, you know, and so [48:47] [clears throat] she kind of alluded to [48:48] the fact that love and sex are actually [48:50] sit on two different ends of a pole. [48:52] Right. And again, to come back to my [48:54] theme, um what does a romantic say? A [48:56] romantic romanticism tells us sex and [48:59] love belong entirely together. But I [49:01] think what you're saying and you know, [49:04] what many of your viewers will know is [49:05] that the relationship is is trickier. [49:08] And again, let's not torture ourselves [49:11] about this. Let's let's get curious and [49:14] then let's communicate about this. [49:17] And I think that look, [49:19] a growing child has a paradox to deal [49:23] with. And this is what Freud famously, [49:26] doesn't matter what you think of Freud, [49:28] very useful observation really, that um [49:33] the child experiences love [49:36] in the first instance, at the beginning [49:37] of life, we all experience love [49:40] at the hands of people who, everything's [49:42] gone right, we will have no sexual [49:45] connection with. Right? So, given the [49:48] debt that adult love owes to childhood, [49:51] Um, that sets us up with a problem. When [49:53] we as adults start to fall in love with [49:55] people and start to build up [49:57] relationships, which is that the more we [50:00] get cozy with someone, the more we feel [50:03] like we did a little bit with our [50:04] parents when things were really cozy. [50:07] Which is oddly why um, [50:09] people like going to hotels. Why do [50:11] people like going to hotels? To revive a [50:13] relationship. It's cuz the furniture [50:15] doesn't remember you. The curtains don't [50:18] remember you. You are You're allowed to [50:21] be for a a chosen moment somebody [50:23] without the history. And it's the [50:25] history that is making intimacy hard [50:28] because that history, while it's [50:29] knitting you together and making you [50:31] emotionally close, is also rendering [50:36] sexual freedom problematic. And I think [50:40] it's just we need to go very easy on [50:42] ourselves for the fact that this [50:44] happens. And um, [50:45] What do I do about it, though? [50:46] Um, [50:47] Do I need to book a lot of hotel rooms? [50:49] Do I need to spend a lot of time away [50:50] from my partner? [50:51] I notice even that you're laughing. [50:52] You're smiling as you say that. And I [50:54] think that's partly the clue. You know, [50:55] when we come up against the hardest [50:57] conundrums in in life, um, [51:00] having the tolerance of a sense of [51:02] humor, a shared sense of humor, you [51:04] know, if a couple can turn the sexual [51:07] challenges from a tragedy into [51:09] something, you know, closer to um, [51:12] a comedy, it's an enormous achievement. [51:14] Think of you know, think of teasing, [51:16] right? There are sides of couples that [51:19] they find [51:20] really, really hard. [51:21] Isn't it wonderful when a couple learns [51:23] with affection to tease one another? [51:25] They go, "Ah, Stephen, you there's that [51:26] thing that you do." Gives you a little [51:27] nickname, calls you whatever it is, you [51:30] know, a little affectionate nickname. [51:32] That's a wonderful moment because it [51:34] means that irritation has been [51:36] sublimated into tender, compassionate [51:40] understanding for why someone is [51:41] difficult as they are. So, the best [51:43] thing we can do with our irritations [51:44] with our partners [51:45] is to be able to tease our way out of [51:48] them. [51:49] Um and we may need to do this in [51:50] troublesome areas like I say, it's an [51:53] enormous achievement if your partner can [51:54] call you, you know, can go from thinking [51:56] that you are an idiot to smiling at you [51:59] and thinking, "You're a lovable idiot." [52:01] Right? [52:02] We're all in the end of the day a [52:04] lovable idiot. We don't need to believe [52:05] in God, but if God was watching us from [52:08] up there in the space station, um [52:10] we are all, you know, 8 billion lovable [52:13] idiots. And once we can have that sort [52:15] of compassionate relationship to [52:17] ourselves, that's the beginning of a big [52:19] bit of the big bit of the solution. [52:21] I often think, you know, I've been in my [52:23] relationship now for a couple of years. [52:24] I I think, "How do I stop my partner [52:26] getting bored of me?" Will there become [52:28] a day? Sometimes it does cross my mind. [52:30] Like, is she just going to get like [52:31] bored of me? And also, you know, vice [52:33] versa, you think of being with someone [52:35] for like 40, 50, 60 years. I'm sure some [52:38] people listening have been with their [52:39] partners for multi-decades. Is there a [52:42] risk of us getting bored of our partner [52:44] and then seeking the sort of, you know, [52:46] the novelty in affairs? And how do we [52:48] prevent that? [52:50] Okay, well look, here's one suggestion. [52:53] Um [52:54] the thing that becomes very boring in [52:55] all relationships is when people cease [52:57] to listen to each other. Now, [53:00] you know, when you when you say the word [53:00] listen, you've got to think, "Oh yeah, [53:01] yeah, I know what that means." Hang on. [53:03] Let's complicate this issue a little bit [53:05] usefully. Um [53:07] to you know, most of us have never been [53:08] listened to properly. It's not something [53:10] that normally we know how to do. We know [53:12] how to speak. You know, there are there [53:13] are there are lessons in how to become a [53:15] good public speaker, not very many [53:17] lessons in how to become a good [53:18] listener, right? So that's that's [53:19] telling us something. Um so [53:22] what is it to listen? Imagine a [53:24] situation where someone says something [53:26] to you and rather than you jumping in [53:27] and going, "Oh, that reminds me of, you [53:28] know, something happened with my [53:29] auntie." Or "That reminds me of a" or [53:31] you know, starting to give advice and [53:32] going, "The thing that you need to [53:33] remember is 1 2 3 4." Right? Which is [53:35] normally what we do when people speak. [53:38] It's to simply hold back. And therapists [53:40] are good at doing this. And simply do [53:42] what they call reflexive listening. So, [53:44] you know, you say to somebody, um I'm [53:46] really annoyed. I've had such a [53:47] difficult day at work. This happened, [53:48] that happened, that happened. And then [53:50] you simply [53:51] repeat back to them using slightly [53:52] different words the essence of what [53:54] they've said. And you say, [53:56] I'm hearing that life's quite difficult [53:57] for you at the moment at work and that [54:00] you, you know, coming under pressure [54:01] from your boss. And the person, you [54:03] know, it'll be Try it because the person [54:05] will immediately feel, I'm being heard. [54:07] And then they will have they'll feel [54:09] more they understand more about [54:11] themselves. You know, why is it that in [54:13] the company of some people we feel [54:15] really interesting and have lots to say [54:17] and in company of others we kind of feel [54:19] a bit bored we don't we don't have [54:20] anything to say with the same people. [54:22] It's because we feel we intuit that [54:24] we're in the presence of a listener. [54:25] And the best way to listen is literally [54:28] to not give advice, not um [54:31] give out anecdotes, but repeat back to [54:34] somebody what they've said in slightly [54:36] different words. And I mean, [54:38] you know, parents, bless them. I've been [54:40] a parent, we've all been parents, been [54:42] parents. Um [54:44] parents are often quite bad at listening [54:45] to their children. They think they're [54:46] listening. I I was in a holiday resort [54:50] um a few months ago and there was this [54:52] kid, little kid, must have been three or [54:55] four, and it was having a bad day. It [54:57] was really screaming. And the parent, [55:00] the mother, was say might might be the [55:01] mother, someone, was saying, um [55:04] What's What's wrong? Um and the kid was [55:07] saying, I hate it here. The whole place [55:10] smells. Um it's a poo and I want to be [55:13] back home at kindergarten. [55:15] And the caregiver said, Don't be so [55:18] silly, darling. We're on holiday. [55:20] Holidays are fun. And what's more this [55:22] hotel has cost a lot of money. [55:25] And you want to go, Okay. [55:26] I get it. This woman was trying to help. [55:28] She was trying to, you know, calm down [55:29] this this distressed child. Was she [55:31] listening? Not really. Cuz basically [55:33] what the kid was saying is, I'm having a [55:35] really bad day. Everything feels [55:36] absolutely disastrous. Help me. Ah. [55:39] Right? And we're all we all have a [55:40] version of those days. [55:42] And we don't want to be told, "Come on, [55:45] you're living in really wonderful times. [55:46] The sun is shining, you know, there's [55:48] lots to celebrate." We want someone to [55:50] go, [55:52] "I hear things are bad for you. [55:54] I'm hearing things are bad for you. [55:56] Um [55:58] I'm hearing you're not coping very well. [56:01] And you're pretty sad. [56:04] And if you do that, [56:06] don't rush them. Don't give advice. [56:08] Don't give, you know, you will get a [56:10] great response back. [56:12] We can put money on it. [56:14] [snorts] [56:15] Listening. [56:16] What are the the other core components [56:18] then? Cuz I really want to close off [56:19] this topic on love and sexless [56:21] relationships. What would you say are [56:23] the core components or the core habits [56:26] of two people who have a really [56:28] successful, long-term, enduring [56:31] sexual and romantic relationship? If we [56:34] just focus on the the the sex side of [56:36] things first. What are those core [56:38] habits? So, [56:40] communication's one that's come through [56:41] quite loudly. [56:43] Look, I'd [56:44] I'd I'd start a little bit further [56:45] upstream and go like, overall, what do [56:47] these guys need to do? And I think [56:49] overall, they both need to acknowledge [56:51] that they are frail, fragile, slightly [56:55] crazy people because, not because they [56:58] are them, but because they're human. And [57:00] there's no other option for a human [57:01] being than to be slightly crazy. [57:03] And nevertheless, against that [57:05] background, [57:06] they're attempting to do their best. [57:08] Right? So, that the combination of an [57:10] acknowledgement of their fallible nature [57:12] mixed in with a dedication to trying to [57:15] understand it through broadly [57:17] therapeutic means. So, this is a very [57:20] crucial thing. [57:21] The other absolutely crucial thing is an [57:23] acknowledgement that a lot of what [57:25] people will be getting up to in [57:26] relationships will have nothing to do [57:28] with the person in front of you. [57:30] That you will be importing from [57:32] different periods of your life, [57:34] scenarios and assumptions that owe [57:36] nothing to the here and now and owe [57:38] quite a lot to mom, dad, caregivers and [57:40] other scenarios. And the capacity to [57:43] acknowledge that with grace, to say, [57:46] "Okay, I'm sorry. I'm, you know, I'm [57:49] getting confused about who's in front of [57:51] me, right? I'm importing into this [57:53] situation an energy that doesn't belong [57:55] there." We all do this. The whole basis [57:57] of attachment theory, let's remind [57:58] ourselves, is that your attachment style [58:00] is governed by your first attachment, [58:03] the attachment that you had with a [58:05] parental figure. And therefore, you [58:07] know, you will be, let's say, insecurely [58:10] preoccupied, attached to somebody, um, [58:14] not because they deserve that quality of [58:16] attachment, because your early caregiver [58:18] did. That's That's what they mandated [58:20] through their own behavior. [58:22] But your partner may be someone [58:24] completely different, is someone [58:25] completely different. So, if I can put [58:27] it this way, getting on top of your [58:29] projections, we project wildly as human [58:32] beings, and being able to have at least [58:35] a sense that the person in front of you [58:37] may not be entirely who you think they [58:39] are, and that reality in the here and [58:41] now may be slightly more innocent, [58:43] um, [58:44] and I think, you know, you owe it to [58:46] yourself. It's Look, it's so boring. I'm [58:49] sorry, Stephen. I'm sorry to your [58:50] listeners. [58:51] You have to get on top of your [58:52] childhood. It's so boring to be told [58:55] this, to be to be 30, 40, 50, 60, and to [58:58] be told that you have to get on top of [59:00] your childhood. I mean, my goodness, [59:01] this is not a nostalgia fest. The only [59:04] reason is so you can put the damn thing [59:06] to bed and never have to think about it [59:08] again, but it's going to be rattling [59:09] around unless you have done so. And I [59:12] think it's so Look, think of language. [59:15] All of us, when we were kids, we were [59:17] put in an environment where without us [59:19] doing anything, we learned an entire [59:22] language with syntax, grammar, [59:24] complicated vocabulary, etc. And this [59:27] happened while we were doing handstands [59:28] in the garden, drawing buttercups in the [59:30] kitchen, etc. We absorbed an entire [59:33] language and we had no idea. [59:36] The same thing was going on emotionally. [59:38] We learned an emotional language, not a [59:40] language about grammar and vocabulary, [59:42] but a language about trust, a language [59:44] about self-esteem, a language about who [59:46] we are, a language about what will [59:48] happen to us when we trust someone, a [59:50] language about whether it's safe to go [59:53] with someone, to be ourselves, etc. We [59:55] learned that whole language and we had [59:57] no idea we learned it, just that we had [59:59] no idea we ever learned our language of [60:01] birth. It just happened. But it's inside [60:04] us, no less than the grammatical [60:06] language. And what we have to do, and [60:09] it's just as difficult as learning in [60:12] adulthood, you know how difficult it is. [60:14] Imagine if I said to you, learn Finnish [60:15] now. Now you're going to learn Finnish. [60:17] Or next week we're going to go off and [60:18] we're going to learn, you know, I don't [60:20] know, Korean, right? You'd be like, in a [60:23] week? [60:24] Uh well, it's going to take a long time, [60:26] isn't it? We're going to have to do this [60:27] for a long time. [60:28] Do you know what I'd say? There's two [60:29] things I'd reply if you told me to learn [60:30] Finnish. First one is, God, that's going [60:33] to This is what I think. That's going to [60:34] take forever. And the second one is, [60:36] what's the point? [60:38] But I'd also say, let's say we're not [60:40] trying to learn Finnish, we're trying to [60:41] learn trust. Let's say we're not trying [60:43] to learn Korean, we're trying to learn [60:45] the lesson of vulnerability, safe [60:48] vulnerability, right? These are very [60:49] valuable lessons. Very valuable lessons [60:52] that we need in our relationships. [60:54] I say that because I I point at the [60:55] childhood patterns that you're talking [60:57] about. And I think one of the reasons [60:58] why people don't open up that closet and [61:00] do the work there is because they don't [61:02] realize that that is the puppet master [61:04] dictating their career, relationships, [61:06] and everything in between. So, I think [61:07] step one is like them understanding the [61:10] impact that that childhood narrative is [61:12] having today. [61:13] Yeah. [61:13] And and then also realizing, you know, [61:15] this is where language can be a useful [61:17] metaphor, is is about time. Because [61:19] sometimes people say, okay, so I I I [61:21] understand I saw I listened to podcasts. [61:24] a Great great guy, [61:26] Steven, you know, really [61:28] gets on top of it. Listen to many of his [61:30] podcasts. Problem is, after three [61:32] podcasts, I'm not healed." And you want [61:34] to go, "Look, how many lessons of [61:35] Finnish your career did you do?" "Oh, [61:37] three." "Are you fluent?" "Not quite. I [61:39] might need another 150." Right? So, in [61:41] other words, [61:41] You need 150 [laughter] more. [61:42] Well, in other words, we need to take it [61:44] slowly and we need to repeat these [61:46] things. You know, what we're talking [61:47] about religion earlier. One of the [61:48] things about religions is they [61:49] understand that our minds are like [61:51] sieves. You know, take Islam. Islam [61:53] wants us to remember their God three, [61:56] four, five times a day. In many [61:58] religions, you're on your knees [61:59] constantly because they know these [62:02] religions know that it goes in one ear, [62:03] it goes out the other. It goes you know, [62:05] that that we're not very good at holding [62:07] on to the even the truths that we are [62:09] most attached to. [62:10] And I think part of the problem with the [62:11] modern world is we tend to think, "I'll [62:13] just listen to that idea once. I'll just [62:15] read an interesting book. Say say [62:17] something to me once and and and I'm [62:19] going to change my life." You want to [62:20] go, "No. No." You know, again, think of [62:22] the holy books. How many times are you [62:23] supposed to read the Bible, the Quran, [62:24] the Buddhist text? Every day because [62:27] we're not very good at holding on even [62:30] to the things on which our lives depend. [62:32] Is there a risk though in this sort of [62:34] healing culture where we're all just [62:36] healing forever and we're all kind of [62:38] like [62:40] broken and trying to recover from [62:42] [laughter] [62:43] our early years where someone snatched [62:45] candy out of our hands or something. Is [62:46] there I read an article a couple of [62:48] weeks ago and it said there was a bit of [62:49] a bit of a risk to this long-term [62:51] ongoing healing mentality that we're [62:54] Look, I I sense your frustration and I [62:56] share it. It would be so nice if we [62:59] could just get on with life without [63:02] having to bother with all this stuff. I [63:04] I I understand. But I think, Steven, the [63:06] thing you have to bear in mind is we are [63:08] no longer merely trying to survive. [63:11] We're trying to thrive. Right? The age [63:13] of survival is behind us. [63:15] You know, we're not just looking to [63:16] reach the age of 30 and then collapse [63:18] into bed and thinking, you know, it's [63:19] been fantastic life. I've not been [63:20] butchered by an enemy, right? You know, [63:22] we want to reach 80, 85, and we want not [63:27] just survival, we want fulfillment. And [63:30] if we want that, we're going to have to [63:32] pay attention to things that previous [63:33] generations didn't. Again, let me use [63:35] another metaphor, right? Um for most of [63:38] human history, people here I am drinking [63:40] a glass of water, right? Um people [63:41] didn't pay much attention to water. If [63:43] it looked like there wasn't anything [63:44] actively floating in it like a frog or [63:46] something, they'd think it's clean [63:47] water, right? They'd just gulp it back. [63:49] And through such nonchalance, if I can [63:51] put it that way, millions of people [63:53] died, okay? And then towards the end of [63:55] the 19th century, at about the very same [63:57] time that Sigmund Freud in Vienna was [63:58] getting going helping us to think about [64:00] certain things in the psyche, various [64:02] people got very interested in water [64:04] supply. And all the main cities, Paris, [64:07] London, New York, got a complete [64:09] overhaul of their water supplies because [64:10] it was suddenly discovered that [64:12] microscopic organisms could kill [64:15] hundreds of thousands of people. In a [64:18] glass of water that looked completely [64:19] clear, you might have enough to kill a [64:21] city, right? And this is deeply [64:22] perplexing. You think, "Hang on a [64:23] minute, it's just a glass of water, must [64:25] be fine." And, you know, I don't want to [64:27] be hard on you, but in that tone of [64:29] like, "Really? Is it Can we be bothered [64:31] with that old childhood stuff? Why don't [64:33] we just get on with it?" You want to go, [64:35] unfortunately, [64:36] we have to take care because there are [64:38] macrobiotic [64:40] organisms, as it were, in our lives that [64:43] are gumming up our capacities for [64:45] fulfillment. And it's not that it's not [64:48] necessarily they're going to kill us, [64:49] but they will hamper our capacity to be [64:53] you know, to exploit our full potential. [64:55] And after all, you know, this is what [64:56] this podcast is about. This is what many [64:58] people are concerned about, and it's [65:00] going to require work. [65:02] Can we ever truly heal from those [65:04] things? Can Or will they always be there [65:06] in the back room just exerting less [65:08] power over us? [65:09] Um look, wonderful German philosopher [65:12] Schopenhauer, he says that uh the goal [65:14] of life is to turn tears into knowledge. [65:17] Wonderful progress. Tears, what are you [65:19] what are you going to do with those? [65:19] They just end up in your pillow. They [65:21] might end up, you know, being uh things [65:23] you can learn from. So, I think the best [65:25] we can do is to learn to turn so many of [65:29] the troubles that afflict us. You know, [65:30] no life is without affliction. But that [65:32] moment when we go, "You know what? I've [65:35] learned something from this torment. [65:37] This was a total nightmare, but I've [65:38] pulled out of it something about myself, [65:40] about human nature, about psychology." [65:43] Then we're really learning. Then we're [65:44] really on the path to a good life. [65:46] Because a good life is not a [65:47] problematic-free life. It's a life in [65:49] which we've found a way of learning from [65:53] our inevitable pains. [65:55] You will never find the right person. I [65:57] read that sentence and that sounded a [65:59] little bit [66:00] um [66:01] negative. I think I read it in your [66:03] book. You will never find the right [66:04] person. [66:05] Well, I was teasing gently our old [66:08] friends, the romantics, who tell us that [66:11] of course we will find the right person. [66:13] And the belief in the right person has [66:15] led to more rage, more disappointment, [66:18] more frustration than any other. You [66:20] know, if you tell people, "You will find [66:22] the right person." If you build up a [66:24] model of what it will mean to find the [66:27] right person, you will be dooming people [66:29] to disappointment. If, for example, they [66:31] meet somebody who's really good, in many [66:34] ways very, very good, but they've had an [66:36] argument with them. Well, "Oh, I'm not [66:37] supposed to argue with somebody that is [66:39] the right person. We're supposed to be [66:40] bliss blissful." So, I'm teasing really [66:42] the concept of rightness. Rightness can [66:46] include a lot of wrongness. And that's [66:47] why, you know, wonderful English [66:49] psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott, who came [66:50] up with this phrase, [66:52] "a good enough" applied to parenthood. [66:55] He he argued that no child needs a [66:57] perfect parent. Indeed, quite dangerous [66:58] to have a perfect parent cuz you never [67:00] leave home. Quite good to have a parent [67:02] who causes you few frustration. It'll [67:04] It'll get you out there. Um, but he [67:05] argued no one needs a perfect parent. No [67:08] one needs a perfect lover. They need a [67:09] good enough parent, a good enough [67:11] lover." [67:12] Do you think um that people that are in [67:14] relationships, romantic relationships, [67:16] should spend time apart? [67:18] Do you think that's healthy for the [67:20] stuff we've talked about with [67:20] sexlessness and stuff? Cuz I think I I [67:23] tend to get more excited about sex with [67:25] my partner when she's been away for a [67:27] while. [67:28] And there's a real novelty to it. [67:30] Yes. Look, I think one of the things [67:31] that distance can do is to remind you [67:34] that there is no preordained reason why [67:37] someone should be with you. I mean, it's [67:39] one of the most miraculous things that [67:41] anyone should choose to be with anyone, [67:42] cuz anyone is a quite complicated [67:44] proposition. And some of the mystery of [67:47] that um can kind of [67:50] you know, it achieve its necessary force [67:53] after a a period away. Look, it's like [67:55] being very ill. Imagine being ill for a [67:57] while. You've been you not been in the [67:59] world for very long um [68:01] for a while. Suddenly, you're feeling [68:03] better. You go out into the world. You [68:04] go to the park. And suddenly, oh my god, [68:06] there's this thing called a tree. It's [68:07] amazing. It's got leaves. There are some [68:09] bugs crawling all over it. There's this [68:11] thing called grass. There's a brick [68:13] wall. You are suddenly like a [68:14] 3-year-old, full of appreciation and [68:17] wonder. And one of the great challenges [68:19] of life is how to keep being people who [68:22] have wonder in in their life. Because [68:25] habit swallows everything up. You go, [68:26] "Oh yeah, tree. Yeah, I I I I know what [68:28] those are. I know what a tree's like." [68:30] That's why we need art, you know, for [68:31] example. I mean, what's the point of [68:32] art? Small topic. Let's bite that one [68:35] off, too. What's the point of art? Well, [68:37] one of the things that happens when you [68:38] go to one of these places called [68:39] galleries or museums is they're full of [68:42] paintings by people who look at the [68:44] world as if they've never seen it [68:45] before. Maybe it's their wife or [68:47] husband. They look at their wife or [68:49] husband as if they've never seen them [68:50] before. And lo and behold, quite an [68:52] amazing thing. Wow, it's kind of [68:53] amazing. It's full of tenderness and [68:55] beauty and compassion and interest. Wow, [68:57] I could, you know, I could like this [68:58] person. They look at a tree. They They [69:00] at a cloud. They look at the grass. And [69:03] you know, we are [69:05] Part of what makes children, small [69:07] children, so fascinating but also [69:08] frustrating is you suggest a walk to the [69:10] park, it takes them an hour and a half [69:12] to go to the park. Why? Because [69:14] everything's interesting. What have we [69:16] done [clears throat] [69:17] with those layers of interest that we [69:18] also used to possess? We think we know [69:22] what's going on. [69:23] But we don't. Um [69:25] and one of the wonderful things that [69:27] children can remind us is the [69:28] foreignness, the true foreignness of a [69:31] world that we feel we know, we feel [69:33] we've seen, but we haven't actually [69:35] looked at. [69:37] You say on page [snorts] 75 of that book [69:39] that the solution to long-term sexual [69:41] stagnation is to learn to see our lover [69:42] as if we had never laid eyes on him or [69:45] her before. Feels so natural though that [69:47] through this process of sort of [69:49] habituation everything in our lives [69:51] becomes less yields less joy than it [69:53] once did. And I and I I often fight with [69:56] that because as, you know, as things get [69:59] financially more [70:01] as you get more financially free in [70:02] life, you're able to experience the the, [70:05] you know, the nice restaurants and the [70:06] nice things and the nice holidays and [70:07] the nice planes, all those kinds of [70:08] things. Um but with that, the awe and [70:11] the surprise escapes you. [70:14] Absolutely. And I think we need to work [70:16] at it. The Buddhists were onto this. [70:18] Um the wonderful Buddhist scroll from [70:19] the Middle Ages, medieval scroll, uh six [70:23] persimmons. You know, a persimmon a kind [70:25] of fruit. Um it's kind of like an apple. [70:27] Um [70:28] uh [70:29] and it's just six persimmons on a on a [70:32] canvas, beautiful rendition. [70:34] And the idea is that the Buddhist sage [70:36] is meant to look at those six persimmons [70:37] for an hour. [70:39] The true one could could keep going for [70:41] even a day, right? Just six persimmons, [70:44] right? And you might go, "Hang on a [70:45] minute. Can I change the channel, [70:46] please? Can I look at something else?" [70:49] The capacity to stare [70:51] intensely at something and draw benefit [70:54] from it is absolutely something that we [70:57] lose as especially life gets more more [71:00] dizzying. [71:01] The The thing to bear in mind is life [71:03] can ever only be so exciting. It's not [71:06] by more stimulation that you're ever If [71:08] your senses are wrecked, if you're [71:11] unable to draw benefit from one lemon, [71:14] having a thousand lemons or a sports car [71:16] isn't going to make you more of an [71:17] appreciator. The goal is to learn to [71:19] appreciate more of what we've already [71:21] seen. And that is [71:23] you know, we talk about gym and [71:24] exercises and and and workouts. It's [71:27] something we need to do. I mean, it's [71:29] it's literally learning to see and to [71:31] appreciate is a skill. Um and you can [71:33] dial it up or dial it down. As I say, [71:36] one of the good things about works of [71:37] art is they are records of careful [71:40] looking by people. They might not be [71:41] looking at things you're looking at, but [71:43] it's less about what you're looking at [71:45] that it's a method of looking that you [71:47] can learn from. As you'll know if you've [71:49] listened to this podcast before, I'm an [71:51] investor in a company called Huel. I'm [71:53] on their board and they sponsor this [71:54] podcast. And I have a very exciting [71:56] announcement to make. [71:57] This product called Daily Greens is one [71:59] of the most highly requested products at [72:01] Huel, but it's never been sold in the UK [72:03] before. [72:04] Until [72:05] now. It's often difficult to get all of [72:08] the greens into our diet that we need to [72:09] have a healthy gut microbiome and a [72:11] healthy body. And with Huel's Daily [72:14] Greens product, with one scoop every [72:16] morning, a very very delicious scoop, [72:18] you can get 91 vitamins, minerals, and [72:20] whole food-sourced nutrients into your [72:23] diet. The most important point here is I [72:25] genuinely believe it tastes delicious. [72:27] It's maybe my favorite Huel product ever [72:30] for all the reasons I've described. So, [72:32] if you want access to this product, you [72:33] can sign up right now. The link is in [72:35] the description below. It launches in [72:36] the UK in January. Because of the [72:38] demand, I'm pretty sure it's going to [72:40] sell out. [72:41] A therapeutic journey, lessons from the [72:43] school of life. The Sunday Times [72:45] best-selling author of The School of [72:47] Life. I've seen this book everywhere. [72:48] Um I walk into bookshops all the time [72:51] and I just wish my book had the [72:53] prominence. [72:54] [laughter] [72:56] It does. [72:56] No, I I saw it in I Yeah, I was in a [72:58] Foyles the other day and I think you've [72:59] got some signed copies in there. I [73:01] picked up one, yeah. Um why why did you [73:03] write a book called A Therapeutic [73:05] Journey? [73:06] Um cuz I have to say [73:10] you you have written [73:13] Lots and lots. Bit too much. [73:15] A lot of books. I mean, this is not even [73:16] half of them. [73:17] No. [73:17] There's about 70 of them. [73:18] Yeah. This book, A Therapeutic Journey, [73:20] um it's really following the arc of [73:25] what one could call mental breakdown or [73:28] um mental a mental crisis from the [73:31] moment of its inception, the moment it [73:33] strikes us, through to the moment of [73:35] recovery. And then I go into lots of [73:37] byways and lots of you know, lots of [73:39] digressions, but essentially it's saying [73:41] how can we keep our minds safe? How can [73:45] we help them to heal? Um what can we do [73:48] when we are in a mental crisis? It's [73:50] written in a tone, I hope, of sympathy, [73:53] um of kindness, and [73:56] also trying to give people a sense of [73:58] what's happening to me. Cuz very often, [74:00] you know, when when there is a [74:01] breakdown, we don't know what on earth's [74:03] going on. You know, yesterday we were [74:05] happy-go-lucky, now we can't get out of [74:06] bed. Yesterday we were able to hold it [74:08] together, now everything that comes out [74:10] of our mouth makes no sense. So, I think [74:13] that the um [74:14] uh it's it's it's supposed to be a [74:16] companion through what might be some of [74:17] our loneliest hours. [74:19] Why do we need this book right now, do [74:20] you think, in society? [74:22] I think because Look, I hope that people [74:25] will think, "Hmm, okay, this is written [74:27] from a place of somebody who probably [74:29] gets what what they're saying and what [74:31] I'm feeling." I think we need companions [74:34] through things that probably feel very [74:37] personal, but are actually, this is the [74:39] good news, very general. But I think, [74:42] you know, at The School of Life we see [74:43] so many people who are going through [74:45] these things. And the thing that each [74:47] one thinks is, "I'm alone." [74:50] And the best thing you can say to people [74:51] is say, "No, you're not." And the reason [74:53] they think they're alone is that you [74:55] know, it's a paradox of human beings. We [74:57] only know people from what they choose [74:59] to tell us. But we know our own minds [75:01] from introspection. And so there's a [75:03] massive sort of cognitive gap between [75:06] self-knowledge and knowledge of others. [75:08] And in that gap, shame develops, right? [75:11] And um there's so much shame around [75:14] mental illness because it's still, as we [75:17] know, so rarely spoken about. And so the [75:19] book aims to rehabilitate, to educate, [75:22] and to comfort. [75:25] [snorts] [75:25] This is a book about getting unwell, [75:28] imagining that we have let everyone [75:29] down, and losing direction and hope. [75:31] It's also a book about redemption, about [75:34] regaining gaining the thread, [75:36] rediscovering meaning, and finding a way [75:38] back to connection, warmth, and joy. [75:43] What are the ways in which we're unwell? [75:46] Increasingly. [75:47] Well, you know, it's very hard. When [75:49] your mind is operating well, you almost [75:51] don't notice what it's doing because [75:53] it's doing so many things to keep you [75:56] feeling, you know, you know that word, [75:58] normal, right? You know, "How do you [75:59] feel?" "I feel normal." You know, [76:01] "That's That's my baseline. That's just [76:03] That's just how I am." [76:04] It's It's the result of what we call it [76:07] gifts because when those gifts are taken [76:09] away, [76:10] goodness me, do you notice, right? So, [76:12] for example, there's something in our [76:14] mind in a well-functioning mind that [76:16] more or less keeps us on our side, [76:20] right? There would be so many reasons [76:22] for all of us to despair of who we are. [76:24] You know, "Why would I be on Why would I [76:25] be on my side? I've made mistakes. I'm [76:27] not perfect, etc." But most of us, you [76:30] know, on a on a good day, you still will [76:31] go, "Look, I'm not perfect, but you [76:32] know, I'm okay. I can keep going." When [76:35] you're mentally unwell, that that [76:36] faculty breaks down. And suddenly, you [76:38] can't abide your own self. You can't [76:40] forgive yourself. You know, there are [76:42] people who are unwell who will say, "17 [76:44] years ago, I said something to someone [76:46] and I can't forgive myself." And you [76:48] want to go, "That's 17 years ago. It's [76:50] okay." And they can't let it go. That's [76:52] what illness is. Illness is not being [76:54] able to let go of an argument against [76:57] yourself because you've turned into your [77:00] own worst enemy. [77:01] Um [77:02] the other thing that that people manage [77:04] to do um in a in a healthy mind is [77:06] bracket things so that not all the [77:09] things that could be in your mind are [77:11] active in your mind at any point. All [77:13] right, so you're able to sequence [77:14] thoughts. So you think, you know, [77:16] [snorts] [77:16] "Well, you know, I've got this to do. [77:17] I'm I'm interviewing this guy now. [77:19] Tomorrow I'll be in New York. Uh there's [77:21] also thing with my granny and there's [77:22] also thing with a friend etc." But those [77:24] thoughts are sequenced. You're able to [77:26] line them up in in a coherent order. [77:29] When health breaks down, all of these [77:31] things come at all angles. There's no [77:34] order anymore. There's no hierarchy. So [77:36] something that happened 10 years ago is [77:37] expressing something's happening right [77:39] now. Um something that's deeply urgent [77:41] collides with something that, you know, [77:43] by rational means is not that urgent, [77:45] but it seems as urgent. And so [77:47] everything coherent breaks down. You can [77:49] no longer order things. There are voices [77:52] that start coming in, not friendly [77:54] voices. All of us have voices in our [77:56] minds, not necessarily, you know, [77:58] they're not I'm not talking about [77:58] psychotic voices, but there are voices, [78:00] voices of encouragement often. You can [78:02] keep going. Just just, you know, do it. [78:04] Or it's okay. You could dare to take [78:05] that risk. Often kindly voices that [78:07] we've incorporated from kind people [78:10] around us. [78:11] When mental health breaks down, we can [78:13] only hear the worst voices. The voices [78:15] that are telling us, "You don't deserve [78:16] to be here. You've made a mistake and we [78:19] don't want you here anymore. [78:21] Better thing would be if you didn't [78:22] exist." Those voices. And those voices [78:24] don't let up. And then we're in trouble. [78:27] And [78:29] we need to raise the white flag [78:31] because things are not well. And [78:33] sometimes we keep going. We're so good [78:35] at keeping going that it's terrible. [78:37] Half the problem is that we keep going [78:39] so well. You know, we're we're half dead [78:41] before we realize there's a problem, [78:42] right? And so, the ability to go, "Hang [78:45] on. Hang on. I can't take it anymore." [78:47] That is the beginning [78:48] of being knowing how to get help. [78:51] Because when the mind is in trouble, [78:53] what it most needs is another mind. It's [78:55] like calibration, right? When you've [78:58] lost the correct calibration, you need [79:00] somebody else to go, you know, when you [79:02] go, [79:03] "Everyone hates me and it's all terrible [79:04] and nothing I've done is of any value." [79:06] Just have another mind that says, [79:08] "Okay, I know how you feel. Let's think [79:11] about this. Is Is that Is that really [79:13] who who it you are, who that that is?" [79:15] And then, you know, gradually, with [79:17] love. And let's remember, people always [79:20] get mentally unwell because of love. I [79:22] don't mean romantic relationships, but [79:25] all mental unwellness stems somewhere. [79:28] If you If you [79:29] scroll back, there's always a deficit of [79:32] love, always. There's always an [79:34] experience [79:35] of cruelty [79:37] in some way that breaks the mind. And [79:40] when people get well, [79:42] there is also always an experience of [79:44] love that heals. And it could be love, [79:46] you know, not about romantic love, love [79:47] from a friend, love from a therapist, [79:49] love from professionals. But it's [79:51] essentially an act of love. An act of [79:52] love saves us, redeems us. [79:55] So, the problem and often the antidote [79:58] is love. [79:59] Or at least the cause and the antidote [80:01] is often love. [80:01] Yes, imaginatively understood, not [80:04] merely romantic love. In its broadest [80:05] sense. And, you know, because mental [80:07] breakdown is often emerges from a [80:10] build-up of cruelty, an unbearable [80:13] cruelty, which makes life unbearable for [80:16] the person, and they then have to, [80:19] you know, project it outwards. I mean, [80:20] in when when illness becomes very severe [80:22] and you have a psychosis, you know, what [80:23] can happen is that people become [80:25] obsessed with the idea that everyone is [80:26] against them, the CIA is against them, [80:29] other people are plotting against them. [80:30] Really, what this is [80:32] an outgrowth of is an unbearable inner [80:35] negativity that hasn't found any way of [80:37] being handled. [80:39] You use the word resilience in this [80:40] book, and I think the word resilience is [80:42] often misunderstood because we think of [80:44] resilience as like tough it up and, you [80:46] know, take it. What is your definition [80:49] of resilience, and why is why is that [80:50] such a prominent word in this book? [80:52] Look, I think true resilience [80:54] should be compatible with things that [80:57] don't look resilient at all, things that [80:58] look very desperate, very humble, very [81:02] broken, indeed. So, [81:05] um [81:06] yes, I mean, I like you, I'm suspicious [81:08] of the use of that word resilience as as [81:11] really just meaning a kind of stoic um [81:14] bouncing back from all problems [81:15] immediately. Um I think it means a [81:18] generous understanding of how much [81:20] madness has a legitimate claim on even a [81:23] healthy life. [81:24] Um [81:25] towards the end of the book, I have a [81:27] little thing I riff on about the [81:28] seasons. Some of it is understanding [81:31] that is normal. This is part of the [81:34] natural cycle, not railing against it. [81:37] Some of what What does that help? [81:38] Understanding that it's normal. [81:39] Sometimes when people have mental [81:41] troubles, uh they will have ups and [81:43] downs, right? And sometimes people can [81:45] box themselves in and they'll go, "I [81:47] suffered. Now I'm better again, you [81:48] know, I'm I'm I'm better." [81:50] And the advice is always, "Mm, careful, [81:52] careful." That belief that you're [81:54] better, the rigid belief, "The past is [81:55] behind me, the darkness is behind me," [81:58] can itself start to see kind of start to [82:00] see [82:01] that can itself start to seem like a [82:02] problem because it means that you'll be [82:05] intolerant towards any regression. And [82:08] regression belongs to progress, just [82:10] like dark days belong to good seasons. [82:12] You know, we need some of that. And And [82:14] the natural world has a wonderful way, [82:16] if we're attuned to it, of telling us [82:17] about cycles. Really, what we're talking [82:19] about cyclicality. Darkness is followed [82:21] by light. Autumn is followed by winter [82:23] is followed by spring. The mind has its [82:25] own seasons, and the more we can accept [82:28] the legitimacy of those seasons, the [82:29] less we'll rail against some of the [82:32] necessary sliding into darkness, which [82:35] for many of us is simply going to be [82:37] unavoidable. If someone chooses to [82:40] pick up this book, and they get to the [82:42] final page, what do you hope they'd [82:45] learned or taken away from them [82:48] by getting to the end of this book? [82:49] Mhm. [82:50] Um [82:52] real sympathy for the complexity of [82:54] their minds, a real understanding that [82:57] um it's not easy being human, that there [82:59] is nothing indulgent about, you know, [83:02] working on oneself, as you put it, that [83:04] that this this is a a boring but alt- [83:07] very necessary task, um some tools in [83:10] there about how to do it, from the very [83:12] practical to the more theoretical. It's [83:14] a practical book about how you can work [83:18] on the most broken bits of yourself and [83:20] find a kind of equilibrium. Um but it's [83:23] also very deliberately a warm book. It's [83:26] a book of comfort, and I think that [83:28] something that we often miss, we can get [83:30] we can get a little too intellectual in [83:31] this topic, thinking that people who are [83:33] in trouble um mentally and just [83:36] psychologically, that all they need is [83:37] some ideas. You know, get some ideas. [83:40] And yeah, sure, we need ideas, but you [83:42] know what we also need is uh warmth, [83:46] kindness, um friendship in in a way. [83:48] Now, you could say, "Well, how how could [83:49] a book be a friend?" Well, [83:51] I you know, many of my best friends are [83:53] books, let me tell you. And um I think [83:56] it's absolutely in the remit of of a [83:58] book to act as a friend and to [84:03] say to you very simply, "You are not [84:05] alone." [84:06] You said earlier that a good [84:08] conversationalist, a good friend, a good [84:11] romantic partner is someone that makes [84:13] you feel heard and understood. And I [84:14] think that's exactly what you achieve in [84:16] this book. It is [84:18] a very difficult thing to do because [84:20] books can often feel quite exclusive, [84:22] especially when the author is as smart [84:24] as you are. [84:25] Um but this book does a wonderful job of [84:28] first and foremost [84:31] making you realize that the thing you're [84:33] going through in the way that you are [84:34] isn't evidence of your inadequacy. It's [84:36] actually evidence that you are perfectly [84:38] human and that you are like everybody [84:39] else and through that lens you can offer [84:42] support and some very practical tips [84:43] about how to, [84:45] you know, endure or rise rise from the [84:47] situation that we all find ourselves in [84:49] in the different seasons of life that [84:50] you describe. And that's why it's such [84:52] an important book and that's why it's [84:53] done so tremendously well um and it's [84:55] being passed around by so many people. [84:58] Alain, [84:59] thank you so much for for your time [85:00] today and thank you for all your wisdom. [85:02] You're a remarkable talker. I was [85:03] learning I was watching you and I was [85:04] just thinking, "Fucking hell." You know, [85:06] um [85:07] you've got a wonderful way to hold [85:09] people with the way that you articulate [85:11] yourself that is so unbelievably [85:13] powerful. [85:15] And uh speaking and the art of speaking [85:17] is such a [85:18] important incredible talent to have and [85:21] you have that in such a wondrous way. [85:22] You [85:23] it's so soothing and engaging and [85:26] intelligent and there's a real poetry to [85:28] the way that you frame things which I [85:30] think is just a superpower that I would [85:31] love to have more of. [85:32] You do, Stephen. You do. [85:33] No, but no not like you have it. So, it [85:35] no it was wonderful just to learn from [85:37] the way that you speak. We have We have [85:39] a closing tradition on this podcast [85:40] where the last guest leaves a question [85:41] for the next guest not knowing who [85:42] they're leaving it for. [85:43] And the question that's been left for [85:44] you is [85:48] Ah, interesting. [85:51] What was the last thought to keep you [85:53] awake at night? [85:55] Mm. [85:57] The last thought to keep me awake at [85:58] night. [86:00] Um [86:01] Well, last night I was quite worried [86:02] about coming here. [86:04] [laughter] [86:04] So, I was I was kept up. But um [86:08] you know, I'm often kept up. I I I do I [86:11] do I do sleep in a in quite a [86:13] fragile way. And I think that [86:16] one of the ways of thinking about it is [86:18] that there are thoughts that happen in [86:19] the middle of the night that can't [86:20] happen at any other time. That they're [86:22] actually some quite important thoughts. [86:24] Often they're to do with [86:26] things that you didn't even know you [86:27] were concerned about, but the night [86:29] teaches you. There is the school of [86:31] night, you know, and and and I used to [86:33] be very very impatient um [86:36] uh insomniac. So, I used to wake up and [86:38] think, "Oh my goodness, I can't believe [86:39] that I'm still awake. How how annoying." [86:41] etc. Now I'm thinking, "Maybe there's [86:43] something to learn here. Maybe my mind's [86:46] trying to teach me something." Um and it [86:48] might not be anything sort of totally [86:49] earth-shattering. It might not sound [86:50] completely earth-shattering, but it [86:51] might just be something might just be [86:52] like, "Oh, I really love this thing." or [86:55] "I think I should really steer away from [86:56] that." or "This is really beautiful." or [86:58] whatever it is. Something a a kind of [87:00] acknowledgement of the night. And so, [87:02] I'm I've become a better [87:05] not a better sleeper, but something [87:07] perhaps even more important, a better [87:08] insomniac. [87:11] Why were you uh nervous staying up about [87:14] coming here? We're all friendly people. [87:16] I know you are. Um I think, you know, [87:18] we've spoken a lot about expectation, [87:20] haven't we? Um and you know, if if your [87:23] podcast had one listener, um and we were [87:26] just going down to the pub, that'd be so [87:27] lovely. If you called me up and said, [87:28] "Anna, we're canceling the show, but [87:30] we're just uh going to go to the pub." [87:32] Uh [87:32] I would have slept like a baby. [87:34] [laughter] [87:35] Well, you've certainly exceeded all my [87:36] expectations and it's a real honor and a [87:37] privilege that you chose to come. So, [87:39] thank you so much for that. And your [87:40] wisdom, I'm sure, has impacted countless [87:42] people not just for the last couple of [87:44] decades, but even in this conversation [87:46] that I guess you'll never get to see. [87:47] So, on behalf of them, thank you so [87:48] much. [87:49] Thanks, Steven. [87:51] [music] [87:52] In 2023, I launched my very own private [87:56] equity fund called Flight Fund. And [87:58] since then, we've invested in some of [87:59] the most promising companies in the [88:01] world. My objective is to make this the [88:03] best performing fund in Europe with a [88:05] focus on high-growth companies that I [88:07] believe will be the next European [88:09] unicorns. The current investors in the [88:11] fund, who have joined me on this [88:13] journey, are some of Europe's most [88:15] successful and innovative entrepreneurs. [88:17] And I'm excited to announce that today, [88:20] as a founder of a company, you can pitch [88:22] your company to us. Or, if you are an [88:25] investor, you can also now apply to [88:28] invest with us. Head to flightfund.com [88:33] to gain an understanding of the fund's [88:34] mission, the remarkable companies we [88:36] proudly support, and to get in touch [88:38] with me and my team. Legal disclaimer. [88:40] Flight Fund is regulated by the FCA, so [88:42] please remember that investing in the [88:44] fund is for sophisticated investors [88:45] only. Don't invest unless you're [88:47] prepared to lose all of the money you [88:48] invest. This is a high-risk investment, [88:50] and you are unlikely to be protected if [88:52] something goes wrong. There is no [88:53] guarantee that the investment objectives [88:55] will be achieved, and as with all [88:57] private equity investments, all of the [88:58] investment capital is at risk. This [89:00] communication is for information [89:01] purposes only, and should not be taken [89:03] as investment advice or a financial [89:05] promotion. [89:07] Do you need a podcast to listen to next? [89:10] We've discovered that people who liked [89:11] this episode also tend to absolutely [89:14] love another recent episode we've done. [89:16] So, I've linked that episode in the [89:18] description below. I know you'll enjoy [89:20] it. [89:26] [singing]