A philanthropist describes how funding solutions to hunger and homelessness works until it doesn't, because the same problems keep returning. Real change requires addressing the hidden beliefs and assumptions underneath the dysfunction, not just the symptoms.
The past few years I have been sort of moving around the world of philanthropy a lot. And one thing I've noticed is that a lot of philanthropists with a lot of means who are sincerely trying to help enable positive changes in the world, that there are a lot of rich people with pure hearts, more than I thought. I thought Earlier that money would corrupt more than it actually does based on my experience now. But what a lot of these people realize after a lifetime of philanthropy is that they can solve a lot of practical problems. They can feed the hungry, they can shelter people who don't have a home, they can help solve certain conflicts, but then over the years they realize that all these problems return. That they seem to be sort of built into the way we deal with each other in the world because of our metaphysical prejudices and unexamined assumptions. And then they grow frustrated because they think that they spend all that effort, all that money, and here we are again. All the problems repeat themselves. And several of them have concluded that the only way to enable sustainable change, change that abides, um, is to address metaphysics.
I'm glad to hear it. I have some, some contact with some of those as well, actually, as well.
And they are not philosophers. They came to this conclusion from their practical experience in trying to, to deal with the problems of the world.
Right. Interesting. I mean, it relates, I suppose, to a lot of, um, philanthropists in psychedelic research, because ultimately it's for— I would see psychedelics as a gateway drug to metaphysics, really. So essentially, you know, they're kind of interested in the same things, you know, different ways of understanding consciousness. But yeah, no, I mean, philanthropy is a very interesting art as well and sort of discipline. And, um, I'm glad to see that people are shifting the depth of their contributions, but we'll see how far it goes. Um, so I mean, one, one, one example of that is, um, Bruce Damer, who I, I just, uh, you mentioned, I think, in your, your book that I've just read, which is a very handy little outline of your philosophy just before this, uh, this podcast, but Bruce Damer started the Center for Minds, which is a kind of a hub for philanthropists to give to research involving psychedelic-induced creativity. So there's a great, perhaps one great example of what you're talking about.
