Peter Thiel

And so – or the fall of the Roman Empire was, again, this pretty cataclysmic thing where there were diseases and then there were political things that unraveled. But somehow it was a massive regression for four, five, 600 years into the Dark Ages. And – And the sort of naive, the progressive views, things always just got monotonically better.

And there's sort of this revisionist, purely progressive history where even the Roman Empire didn't decline. And even, you know, one sort of stupid way to quantify this stuff is with pure demographics. And so it's the question, how many people lived in the past? And...

And there's sort of this revisionist, purely progressive history where even the Roman Empire didn't decline. And even, you know, one sort of stupid way to quantify this stuff is with pure demographics. And so it's the question, how many people lived in the past? And...

And there's sort of this revisionist, purely progressive history where even the Roman Empire didn't decline. And even, you know, one sort of stupid way to quantify this stuff is with pure demographics. And so it's the question, how many people lived in the past? And...

And the rises and falls of civilization story is there were more people who lived in the Roman Empire because it was more advanced. It could support a larger population. And then the population declined. The city of Rome maybe had a million people at its peak. And then by, I don't know, 650 AD, maybe it's down to 10,000 people or less. You have this complete collapse in population.

And the rises and falls of civilization story is there were more people who lived in the Roman Empire because it was more advanced. It could support a larger population. And then the population declined. The city of Rome maybe had a million people at its peak. And then by, I don't know, 650 AD, maybe it's down to 10,000 people or less. You have this complete collapse in population.

And the rises and falls of civilization story is there were more people who lived in the Roman Empire because it was more advanced. It could support a larger population. And then the population declined. The city of Rome maybe had a million people at its peak. And then by, I don't know, 650 AD, maybe it's down to 10,000 people or less. You have this complete collapse in population.

And then the sort of alternate... purely progressive view is the population has always just been monotonically increasing because it's a measure of how, in some sense, things in aggregate have always been getting better. So I am definitely on your side that population had great rises and falls. Civilizations had great rises and falls. And so that part of it, I agree with you.

And then the sort of alternate... purely progressive view is the population has always just been monotonically increasing because it's a measure of how, in some sense, things in aggregate have always been getting better. So I am definitely on your side that population had great rises and falls. Civilizations had great rises and falls. And so that part of it, I agree with you.

And then the sort of alternate... purely progressive view is the population has always just been monotonically increasing because it's a measure of how, in some sense, things in aggregate have always been getting better. So I am definitely on your side that population had great rises and falls. Civilizations had great rises and falls. And so that part of it, I agree with you.

or even some variant of what Hancock or Fundana can say. The The place where I would say I think things are different is I don't think, I don't think, and therefore it seems possible something could happen to our civilization. That's always the upshot of it. If it had been monotonically always progressing, then there's nothing we should worry about. Nothing can possibly go wrong.

or even some variant of what Hancock or Fundana can say. The The place where I would say I think things are different is I don't think, I don't think, and therefore it seems possible something could happen to our civilization. That's always the upshot of it. If it had been monotonically always progressing, then there's nothing we should worry about. Nothing can possibly go wrong.

or even some variant of what Hancock or Fundana can say. The The place where I would say I think things are different is I don't think, I don't think, and therefore it seems possible something could happen to our civilization. That's always the upshot of it. If it had been monotonically always progressing, then there's nothing we should worry about. Nothing can possibly go wrong.

And then certainly, certainly the thing, the sort of alternate Hancock, von Däniken, Joe Rogan, history of the world, tells us is that we shouldn't take our civilization for granted. There's things that can go really haywire. I agree with that.

And then certainly, certainly the thing, the sort of alternate Hancock, von Däniken, Joe Rogan, history of the world, tells us is that we shouldn't take our civilization for granted. There's things that can go really haywire. I agree with that.

And then certainly, certainly the thing, the sort of alternate Hancock, von Däniken, Joe Rogan, history of the world, tells us is that we shouldn't take our civilization for granted. There's things that can go really haywire. I agree with that.

The one place where I differ is I think, I do think our civilization today is on some dimensions way more advanced than any of these past civilizations were. I don't think any of them had nuclear weapons. I don't think any of them had, you know, spaceships or anything like that. And so the failure mode is likely to be somewhat different from these past ones.

The one place where I differ is I think, I do think our civilization today is on some dimensions way more advanced than any of these past civilizations were. I don't think any of them had nuclear weapons. I don't think any of them had, you know, spaceships or anything like that. And so the failure mode is likely to be somewhat different from these past ones.

The one place where I differ is I think, I do think our civilization today is on some dimensions way more advanced than any of these past civilizations were. I don't think any of them had nuclear weapons. I don't think any of them had, you know, spaceships or anything like that. And so the failure mode is likely to be somewhat different from these past ones.

I'm not sure I would anchor on the technological part, but I think the piece that is very hard for us to comprehend is what motivated them culturally.