Cinemorphosis

Category: culture

  • The Demon Named Part X

    The Demon Named Part X

    To show my students the power of negative thinking, I tell them how I lost my first girlfriend. Convinced she was dissatisfied, I kept asking every ten minutes, “You’re leaving me, aren’t you?” or “Are you leaving me?” After three days of this, she finally did. My paranoia became prophecy, and I smugly congratulated myself: “Nothing gets past me!”

    In Lessons for Living, therapist Phil Stutz explains how negative thinking snowballs into catastrophe, giving paranoia the illusion of truth. This is the self-fulfilling prophecy, the negative feedback loop. “Your mind is broken,” he writes. “If you bought an appliance that worked this poorly you would be at the store demanding a refund. But there is no return policy for your brain.”

    Repair, Stutz insists, begins by naming your adversary: a virus lodged in your psyche he calls Part X. This “inner demon,” he writes, “is part of your psyche, and it has an agenda all its own.” Its goal is to stop you from living in reality, to trap you in stillness, fixation, and spiritual death. The universe is always in motion; Part X hates that. It wants stagnation, dullness, nihilism.

    Here lies the trap: nihilism flatters you into thinking you’re special—outside the flux of life, aloof from change. You cling to helplessness, self-pity, resentment. The deeper you sink, the more Part X convinces you that your paralysis proves your uniqueness. You become skilled in negative thinking until, as Stutz puts it, “You no longer respond to the world, you merely react to what X tells you about the world. Spiritually blinded, you are totally alone.”

    How to break free? Gratitude. “You must find a force in your soul that is even stronger than the power of negative thinking. The force is gratefulness.” Gratitude anchors you in reality; it cuts through the fever swamp of negativity. Addicts illustrate the opposite: whether it’s cocaine, alcohol, or endless Internet porn, their obsession isolates them from the universe and community. Addiction is the triumph of Part X. Negative thinking itself is a kind of addiction.

    The antidote is connection—to reality, to others, to the larger universe. Gratitude means humility: admitting you’re not an island. Unlike “positive thinking,” which projects fantasies into the future, gratitude keeps you rooted in the present. Stutz urges immediacy: “Try this. For about thirty seconds, think of things for which you’re grateful. Not just the big things; focus on everyday things we often take for granted.”

    I’m grateful for organic coffee beans, for my morning ritual of brewing coffee beside my radio tuned to classical music. I’m grateful I can digest my buckwheat groats and protein powder before my hour-long kettlebell workout, then shower, shave with fragrant cream, eat a clean lunch, and nap before “Part 2” of my day. These are not small things. They are the fabric of a life.

    The more gratitude you practice, the stronger your defenses against Part X. Gratitude trains your mind into motion, aligned with the universe’s own flux. Stutz even calls it prayer: “Independent of your personal spiritual beliefs and practices, you have led the mind beyond itself, making it a bridge into a higher place.”

    Here Stutz blends psychology with the language of religion—gratitude, humility, prayer, liberation from Jonah-like isolation inside the belly of the Leviathan. His message: escape the solitary prison of negative thought by opening yourself to a reality larger than you.

    I write about Stutz with ambivalence. His wisdom feels real, his tools practical. Yet part of me suspects a New Age sleight of hand: a watered-down religion that borrows sin (Part X), prayer, and humility while dodging the harsher demands of faith—judgment, accountability, sacrifice. Is his system merely the good parts of religion without the bite? Or am I letting my own negative thinking sneak in through the back door, looking for reasons to resist his wisdom?

  • From Dopamine to Divinity: The Case for Transmutational Motivation

    From Dopamine to Divinity: The Case for Transmutational Motivation

    In Lessons for Living, Phil Stutz recounts his refusal to prescribe Prozac to a patient. The patient wanted the pill as he wanted everything else—romance, fame, applause, alcohol: all shortcuts to happiness. Stutz wasn’t buying it. He writes:

    “Believing that things outside you will make you happy is a false hope. The Greeks considered it the ‘doubtful gift from the gods.’ In reality, there can only be two outcomes. Either the hoped-for thing does not happen, or it does and its effect quickly wears off. Either way, you are worse off than before because you have trained yourself to fixate on outer results.”

    When the outer world filters through imagination, it becomes a chimera. We don’t pursue things for what they are, but for what we fantasize they’ll be. I feel this pull myself: I’m nearly sixty-four, inching toward retirement, and browsing real estate in Orlando—dreaming of a second life in a faux-tropical paradise. A $600K “mansion” with a community pool, an hour from the beach, safe from hurricanes (mostly). Yet what I imagine as paradise may in fact be a barcalounger-sized sarcophagus—3,000 square feet of embalmed leisure.

    Stutz warns against such chimeras. They must be replaced by action—behavior that connects us to our true nature: the spiritual self. He writes:

    “We are spiritual beings and can be emotionally healthy only when we are in touch with a higher world. We need higher forces just as we need air. This is not an abstract philosophy, it is a description of our nature.”

    But here’s the rub: staying in touch with higher forces requires constant work, and it’s in our nature to avoid work. Life, then, is a perpetual battle with ourselves. Stutz’s description amounts to the purpose of religion: the angel conquering the demon. Yet in our therapeutic age—where religion is dismissed as a fairy tale—misalignment between spiritual thirst and materialist fixation manifests as depression. Conventional psychiatry treats depression with drugs. Stutz reframes it as a teacher, a reminder that the answer is spiritual life:

    “This awareness is the first step in overcoming depression.”

    His point calls to mind Katie Herzog’s mention of Laura Delano’s memoir Unshrunk, a story of misdiagnosis and drug therapy that deepened rather than cured suffering. It also echoes Philip Rieff’s famous distinction in The Triumph of the Therapeutic:

    “Religious man was born to be saved; psychological man is born to be pleased.”

    Stutz insists that pleasing ourselves with material trinkets is a false and destructive path. Real responsibility means behaving in ways that connect us with our spiritual core. Judaism frames this as God meeting us halfway; Pauline Christianity insists we are helpless, depraved, and must be remade entirely. I’d be curious to know where Stutz lands on this divide.

    Either way, his therapy unsettles his patients. A man clinging to Prozac, money, and fame stares at Stutz as though he’s lost his mind. Why? Because society has brainwashed us into believing happiness comes from external outcomes.

    So what’s the alternative? Relentless self-monitoring. Stutz writes:

    “Taking responsibility for how you feel isn’t an intellectual decision. It requires monitoring yourself every moment. This is the most freeing thing a person can do, but also the most tedious. Your connection to the higher world must be won in a series of small moments. Each time you become demoralized, depressed, or inert, you must counteract it right then.”

    This isn’t entirely secular advice. Proverbs tells us to hang wisdom notes around our necks. Today, that might be post-its urging us to choose virtue over distraction. Still, Paul’s lament in Romans—that his darker nature sabotages his noblest intentions—remains apt. If Paul were not a Christian convert, would he be able to successfully use Stutz’s tools to connect with his Higher Powers, or would his dark side undermine the mission over and over? 

    Stutz’s counsel is pragmatic: notice when you sever your connection to the higher world, and fight back. If I’m meant to write or practice piano but instead scroll the Internet’s dopamine-drenched rabbit holes, that’s the moment to act. As Stutz puts it:

    “If your habit is to look outside yourself for stimulation or validation, then each time you fail to get it, you’ll become depressed. But if you assume inner responsibility for your own mood and take action to connect yourself to higher forces at the moment you feel yourself going deep into a hole, you will develop habits that put you on a new level of energy and aliveness.”

    In darkness, we don’t have to surrender. The “inner tools” give us armor. Stutz writes:

    “The only way to achieve this confidence is to take a tool and actually experience how it works. Only then will you be willing to do what is required, which is to use it over and over, sometimes many times within one day.”

    One such tool is “transmutational motivation.” The exercise: picture yourself demoralized after indulging temptation. Then imagine a higher power above you. Visualize yourself taking forward motion—meditation, writing, exercise—and rising into “the jet stream.” Stutz writes:

    “Now you are going to fly straight up into this picture by feeling yourself take action and imagining this feeling causes you to ascend. Tell yourself that nothing else matters except taking the action. As you feel yourself rise, sense the world around you falls away. There is nothing except the action itself. Rise high enough to enter the picture. Once inside, tell yourself that you have a purpose. You will feel a powerful energy. To end the exercise, open your eyes and tell yourself that you are determined to take the pictured action. This time you will feel the picture above you pull you effortlessly up into itself. You will feel expanded and energized.”

    With practice, the ritual takes fifteen seconds. Done daily, it rewires despair into life force.

    But is this just Part X renamed? Steven Pressfield’s Resistance? Pauline sin? Or all of the above? Does Christianity accuse Stutz of diluting prayer into self-help? Do secularists argue his method is religion without the dogma? The questions multiply.

    Anna Lembke’s Dopamine Nation frames it as neuroscience. Charles Duhigg’s The Power of Habit frames it as cognitive-behavioral reprogramming. Stutz straddles both: science and soul. And looming above it all is the Internet—the Great Temptor of our age. A bottomless pit of pornography, consumerism, and status-chasing, piped directly into our dopamine circuits.

    And here’s the meta-question: what’s the point of rewiring your habits without a greater frame of meaning? Is Stutz peddling spirituality without religion—or is he smuggling in a stripped-down religion we secretly crave? Would Sam Harris nod approvingly at this secularized toolkit? Or would Dale Allison, the careful Christian scholar, recoil and insist that while Stutz offers clever strategies for habit change, he misses the essence of true spirituality—the self-giving sacrifice patterned after Christ in Philippians?

    Unanswered questions aside, Stutz’s message is stark: life is high-stakes. We are fighting, every day, between dark and light forces. We don’t just change habits to “optimize” our brains. We change them to keep our souls alive.

  • Weight Loss as Blood Sport: The Dark Legacy of a TV Hit

    Weight Loss as Blood Sport: The Dark Legacy of a TV Hit

    I just finished Netflix’s docuseries Fit for TV: The Reality of The Biggest Loser, and let’s be clear: what passed for “inspiration” was little more than a gulag in spandex. Vulnerable, overweight contestants were paraded into a sadistic bootcamp where caffeine pills stood in for nutrition, starvation was the weight-loss plan, and bleeding urine was treated as a milestone. Their bodies were ground down in training regimens that no orthopedic surgeon in their right mind would sanction.

    The cruelty wasn’t a side effect; it was the business model. NBC made hundreds of millions while America shoveled popcorn, mesmerized by the weekly spectacle of people being berated, broken, and publicly humiliated—all in the name of dropping a few pounds on a scale. It wasn’t education. It wasn’t health. It was Schadenfreude masquerading as wellness, a moral strip show where the only thing thinner than the contestants was the producers’ conscience.

    Of course, the spin was that the show “raised awareness” about obesity. The reality? Obesity rates ballooned from 25% to 45% since its debut. The real awareness raised was that Americans harbor a deep hostility toward fat bodies and an insatiable appetite for televised cruelty. We got our fix of humiliation, and then went straight back to our drive-thru dinners.

    Two decades later, the docuseries hands the microphone back to the scarred veterans of that circus. Some regained the weight. Others shed it with Ozempic and other GLP-1s. What unites them isn’t their waistline but their clarity: they now see the show as the exploitation racket it always was. Listening to their hard-won wisdom—painful, sardonic, and damning—was the main reason the docuseries was worth watching.

  • Rising Above the Wreckage: Finding Meaning in the Broken Phase

    Rising Above the Wreckage: Finding Meaning in the Broken Phase

    For the last several years, I have been haunted by the lines of Yeats’s poem The Second Coming: “the center will not hold; anarchy is loosed upon the world.” A.I., deepfakes, the social media fever swamp, and deranged populists seem to have splattered into a chaotic universe. It’s tempting to surrender to nihilism, declare it all over, and use that declaration as an excuse to live with reckless disregard—eat chocolate cake three times a day and go completely to pot.

    But I know that impulse is folly. Viktor Frankl is right: we don’t get to choose the meaning of our lives. Life presents challenges within our particular circumstances that force us to rise up, stand to attention, and embrace the meaning laid before us. To live this way is to live in kairos—meaningful time.

    So what does it mean to rise above? What are the circumstances we now inhabit? These questions animate Alana Newhouse’s essay “Everything Is Broken.” Written ten months after the pandemic, in January 2021, Newhouse and her husband know something is wrong with their newborn son but cannot get answers from the medical establishment as they undergo what she calls a “Kafkaesque medical mystery journey.” By sheer luck, they finally discover their son’s rare disease. When they ask a family friend, physician Norman Doidge, why so many medical “experts” failed to diagnose it, he delivers the following diatribe:

    “There are still many good individuals involved in medicine, but the American medical system is profoundly broken. When you look at the rate of medical error—it’s now the third leading cause of death in the U.S.—the overmedication, creation of addiction, the quick-fix mentality, not funding the poor, quotas to admit from ERs, needless operations, the monetization of illness vs. health, the monetization of side effects, a peer review system run by journals paid for by Big Pharma, the destruction of the health of doctors and nurses themselves by administrators, who demand that they rush through 10-minute patient visits, when so often an hour or more is required, and which means that in order to be ‘successful,’ doctors must overlook complexity rather than search for it . . . Alana, the unique thing here isn’t that you fell down so many rabbit holes. What’s unique is that you found your way out at all.”

    After diagnosing the ills of medicine, Norman pivots to journalism. Aware he is speaking to two journalists, he asks: “Now, can I ask you two something? How come so much of the journalism I read seems like garbage?”

    Realizing the truth of Norman’s rant, Alana wonders if not just medicine and journalism, but everything, is broken. She resists the thought as hyperbolic, even doomsday, but after reflection she concludes: the center isn’t holding; anarchy has indeed been loosed upon the world. The institutions that once gave us sense, order, and trust are fractured.

    When did the fracturing begin? She traces it back to the 1970s, when business lowered labor costs with “labor-saving technology” and offshore jobs. The tech revolution followed, making the American Dream more precarious than ever. As workers were paid less and less, they entered what she calls a condition of flatness—a hollowed uniformity in which institutions persist yet fail in eerily similar ways.

    We now live in an age of commodified experience—flat, Uncanny Valley-like, predictable. In a state of flatness, critical thinking atrophies and people can be led to believe almost anything: that Iran is trustworthy, that there are no biological differences because gender is purely social construction, or that tech lords can transfer massive assets to themselves and polarize society without consequence. She writes, “Seduced by convenience, we end up paying for the flattening of our own lives.” Stupid ideas proliferate because flatness produces stupidity.

    Newhouse reserves most of her ire for the Woke as the source of stupidity, which to my consternation means she leaves equally idiotic Right-wing trolls comparatively unscathed. Still, her central thesis—that we are in a Broken Phase, that cycles of collapse are part of the human condition, and that our current state is not permanent—gives me a measure of comfort. It reminds me to be strong, to rise up, and to embrace a life of meaning.

  • Stepford Dreams and Other Diseases

    Stepford Dreams and Other Diseases

    “Our culture denies the nature of reality,” therapist Phil Stutz declares in one of his chapters from Lessons for Living. In denial, we drift through a fantasy world—a frictionless utopia where everything turns out perfectly with minimal effort, unpleasantness is airbrushed away, and immediate gratification flows like tap water. If you fail to thrive in this Instagram-ready Eden, well, clearly it’s your fault.

    Reading Stutz’s dissection of this mythical paradise—one that entitlement and cleverness supposedly guarantee—I’m reminded of family vacations to Hawaii. The trip’s curated perfection feels ripped straight from pop culture’s catalog of false realities. I start imagining myself as a minor Polynesian god, which makes returning home to laundry, bills, and chores feel like divine demotion.

    Stutz’s mission is to break our addiction to the idea that life is a permanent Hawaiian vacation. His blunt truth: life is pain and adversity, the future is uncertain, real accomplishments require sweat and discipline, and—brace yourself—you are not special enough to escape these rules. These principles don’t expire.

    This is not, Stutz insists, a gospel of misery. Love, joy, surprise, transcendence, and creativity are woven into life’s fabric—but so are conflict, loss, and uncertainty.

    Why, then, do we cling to the fantasy? In part, because the media keeps showing us people who appear to have escaped reality’s terms. Movie stars and influencers are lit like Renaissance portraits, perfectly curated, radiating supreme happiness. Their romances are operatic, their sex lives cinematic. They seem universally adored and gracious enough to share the “secrets” of their bliss. They look as if they’ve broken free of pain, adversity, and doubt—and they promise we can do the same if we just buy the right products and mimic their lifestyle.

    It doesn’t matter where you sit in the social pecking order; the fantasy assures you can ascend to the influencer’s Olympus.

    This is a mass delusion. Stutz writes, “When everyone acts as if a fantasy is real, it begins to seem real.” But for you, it never arrives. Your bank account wheezes. Your waistline ignores your best intentions. Your body refuses to flatter you. Your parenting is a gamble at best. Your life often feels like it’s running you.

    Because you believe in the fantasy, you think you’re defective. You look in the mirror and mutter, “Loser.”

    That’s the invoice for believing in perfection: when it inevitably collapses, you’re left with self-loathing. Stutz warns, “The problem is that the other group has become the standard, and self-esteem starts to depend on being like them. An adverse event feels like something is happening that is not supposed to be happening. The natural experiences of living make you feel like a failure.”

    His solution? Total reorientation. Replace the static images of perfection—what I call “Magical Moments Frozen in Time”—with the truth: life is a messy, moving process. Stutz explains: “The ideal world with the superior people is like a snapshot or a postcard. A moment frozen in time that never existed. But real life is a process; it has movement and depth. The realm of illusion is an image, dead and superficial. Still, these images are tempting. There is no mess in them.”

    If media has brainwashed us into aspiring to be perfect Stepford spouses, how do we reject these static ideals and embrace life in its raw, dynamic, and inconvenient fullness? Stutz says we must accept this: “Life is made up of events. The only real way to accept life is to accept the events that comprise it. And the flow of events never stops. The driving force of the universe reveals itself via the events of our lives.”

    This flow connects us to life’s energy, making us fully alive. The downside? It leaves us feeling small, exposed, and out of control. The false paradise promises to free us from that vulnerability, but in doing so, it severs our connection to life’s current and leaves us in “spiritual death.”

    Mental health, Stutz argues, depends on accepting this unstoppable flow of events. He compares it to good parenting: “It is not good enough to just show up. You need a point of view and a set of tools. It is impossible to deal with events constructively without being prepared.” If you’re clinging to Magical Moments Frozen in Time, you’re unprepared when reality slaps you.

    The preparation, he says, is a philosophy—one that lets you redefine negative events. Stutz writes, “Preparing yourself with a philosophy enables you to change the meaning of a negative event. With a specific philosophy, you can aggressively change your perception of events.” That philosophy rests on three pillars:

    • Adverse events are supposed to happen; they don’t mean you’re broken.
    • Every negative event is a growth opportunity.
    • Spiritual strength matters more than positive outcomes.

    When you accept life as a series of crises, you stop throwing toddler-level tantrums every time something goes wrong. People addicted to Magical Moments tend to overreact to challenges—often making their reaction worse than the original problem.

    Reading this, I recall when my wife and I had twins fifteen years ago. She handled meltdowns with calm; I met a child’s tantrum with one of my own. A therapist told me, “When you get angry, you go zero to ten in under a second, and your body chemistry changes in a way that fills the room with toxic energy. That escalates your children’s tantrums. Your wife, on the other hand, stays calm. She has a calming effect on the twins. You need to learn how to calm down in a crisis.”

    Stutz is right. Being a spiritual person means maturing as a parent. Being a devotee of Magical Moments Frozen in Time means being a spoiled child yourself—an extra in Idiocracy. A society enthralled by fake perfection can’t sustain itself; it’s destined for regression, chaos, and entropy.

  • Will Optimization Kill the Joy of Mechanical Watches?

    Will Optimization Kill the Joy of Mechanical Watches?

    Sometimes I wonder how technology might assassinate my love for timepieces. Picture this: a $200 spool of 3-D printer feedstock spits out your $10,000 grail watch. Eight years later, when the mechanical movement needs servicing, you don’t take it to a watchmaker—you print another.

    If watch-printing is as easy as making pancakes, I’d have thousands. Would I be happy? No. I’d be the spoiled rich kid sulking in his palatial bedroom because Mom and Dad bought him every toy but a bazooka.

    “Son, I bought you everything.”
    “But I want a bazooka.”
    “They’re illegal.”
    “I don’t care!”

    When everything is instant, the “holy grail” becomes an inside joke. The magic dies in the flood of abundance. Just ask the diamond industry. Lab-grown stones are flawless, cheap, and undetectable to the human eye—obliterating the romance of bankrupting yourself for an engagement ring. Watches could be next.

    And that’s just one front. On another, tech billionaires are funding biohackers to keep us ticking for 900 years. If I’m going to live to 85, time feels urgent. If I’m going to live to 900, time is a leisurely brunch. Chronological time starts to matter less than biological time—the wear and tear written in my cells.

    In that world, your Rolex Submariner won’t tell you what matters. Your doctor-prescribed smartwatch will, tracking cardiovascular vitality, antioxidant levels, and the sorry truth of your lifestyle choices. Refuse to wear it, and your insurance premiums explode tenfold or you’re cut off entirely. Privacy? Gone. Your vitals are known to your insurer, employer, spouse, dating app matches, and the guy at your gym checking your actuarial risk.

    When the mechanical watch dies, so does your privacy. And somewhere, Dale Gribble from King of the Hill is finding the conspiracy angle.

    Give it five years. Our “watch collector meet-up” will look more like group therapy for mechanical-watch dinosaurs funding their therapists instead of their ADs. But fear not—obsession never dies, it just changes costume. Post-watch, your new drug will be optimization.

    You’ll strap on your OnePlus Watch 3, buy a $2,600 CAROL resistance bike, and simulate being chased by a saber-toothed tiger because “hormesis”—that holy word—demands mild ordeals to make you live forever. Resistance intervals, intermittent fasting, cold plunges. Goodbye winding bezels; hello gamified cell stress.

    Our poster boy? Bryan Johnson—the billionaire fasting himself pale, zapping his groin nightly to maintain the virility of a high school quarterback. Critics say he looks like a vampire who’s just failed a blood test. I say he’s the future. Picture him at 200, marrying a 20-year-old and siring a brood. Male Potency and Reproductive Success: the distilled recipe for happiness.

    Except I’m kidding. The truth: peer-reviewed science says we might beat the big killers before 90—heart disease, cancer, stroke, Alzheimer’s—but the biological ceiling is still ~100. Eventually your organs quit. All the optimization in the world won’t rewrite that.

    As a watch obsessive, I know the tyranny of time. The biohackers are fixated on biological time as if it’s the only kind that matters. But the Greeks knew a third: kairos—the moment saturated with meaning, purpose, connection. All the Bryan Johnsons in the world can’t 3-D print that.

    Live 200 years without kairos and you’re not a winner; you’re a remake of Citizen Kane with a garage full of exotic cars and no friends.

    A long time ago, a friend told me about the night cocaine hollowed him out so completely that he didn’t care his best friend was kissing his girlfriend. Then a voice in his head said, “Dude, you should care.” He went to rehab the next day. That’s soul work.

    And that’s what’s missing from the longevity cult: soul work. Without it, all the tech, watches, and optimized mitochondria in the world are just a shiny grift.

  • Will Living Forever Affect Your Timekeeping?

    Will Living Forever Affect Your Timekeeping?

    Like most people, I want a long life. Every morning, no matter my mood, I spring from bed eager to make dark-roast coffee and buckwheat groats with vanilla protein powder, soy milk, and berries. The more miles on my life odometer, the better—so long as those miles are smooth: no bureaucratic migraines, no addictions, plenty of income, spiritual ballast, connection with others.

    That’s why I read Tad Friend’s essay “How to Live Forever and Get Rich Doing It” with interest. Friend profiles 64-year-old Peter Diamandis, an optimist convinced we’re on the brink of breakthroughs: blood filters to block cancer, sound waves to detect strokes, mood-zapping tech for depression. He calls Diamandis “an emissary from the realms of possibility.”

    Tech billionaires have practically built vacation homes in the land of eternal youth, wiring obscene sums into anti-aging startups like it’s Monopoly money. Sure, the wealthy already get a 12-year head start on the poor, but most scientists insist the afterparty ends around 90. We’ve smacked into the “biological ceiling.” As for the 900-year marathons of Noah and Methuselah—please. They were breathing alpine air untainted by lead, cadmium, or mercury, not commuting through rush-hour smog in a Tesla.

    Diamandis and his circle press ahead anyway, bankrolled by billionaires who can’t resist the dream. Along the way, I learned a new term: hormesis—mild ordeals that supposedly trigger cellular resilience. Exercise? Fine, because it comes with endorphins. Semi-starvation? No thanks—I’m not interested in being hungry and cranky for decades. Cold plunges? Too much Instagram posturing. I’ll splash my face with cold water. That’s good enough for me.

    Some biohacks drift so far into self-parody they could headline at a comedy club. Take CAROL, a resistance bike that has you pretend a saber-toothed tiger is on your tail, all in the name of channeling your inner Neanderthal sprinter. As Tad Friend drily notes, Neanderthals weren’t exactly poster children for longevity—they usually tapped out before 30.

    Then there’s Bryan Johnson, the longevity poster boy, on a semi-anorexic diet, flexing for the camera, and blasting sound waves through his loins to reclaim teenage virility—an evidence-free vanity project if ever there was one.

    Friend notes that many biohackers avoid the news entirely; Diamandis calls it “amygdala-stimulating dystopian clickbait.” Conveniently, this shields him from rebuttals—odd, since science supposedly thrives on them.

    Some predictions verge on male fantasy: 100-year-old moguls marrying women half their age and siring fresh broods as proof of potency. Joe Polish, a former collaborator, nails the pitch: “A compelling offer is ten times more powerful than a convincing argument.” Translation: they’re selling a dream, not a reality.

    Don’t get me wrong—I want research that crushes heart disease, cancer, stroke, and Alzheimer’s. But even if we slay those dragons, organ and metabolic failure will still get us before 100. Immortality, as marketed here, is mostly grift, mostly ego.

    The essay veered into timekeeping, which I track as a watch obsessive. Longevity researchers distinguish between chronological time—the calendar—and biological time, measured through DNA methylation, blood biomarkers, organ imaging, and physical function. Dave Asprey claims his 52-year-old body is 18. I doubt it. Maybe 40 on a good day.

    Still, biological age matters. Functional strength predicts survival: slow-walking 85-year-old men die sooner than the fast walkers; those who can bathe themselves outlive those who can’t.

    But what does a long life mean? Picture a greedy, paranoid recluse with 5,000 luxury watches, 12 cars, and a private jet, living to 200. That’s not winning—that’s a remake of Citizen Kane.

    In the end, spiritual rehab beats the obsessive tinkering of physical micromanagement. Back in the ’80s, a friend told me how cocaine had sandblasted his capacity to care—about his life, his girlfriend, even himself. One night, he woke up under a heap of half-conscious bodies in a party’s stale, smoky gloom. In the corner, through a haze of spilled beer and burnt-out joints, he saw his glassy-eyed girlfriend making out with his equally blitzed best friend. He felt nothing—no jealousy, no rage, just a numb vacancy. Then, from somewhere deep inside, a voice cut through the chemical fog: “Dude, you should care.” The next morning, he checked into rehab and began the slow, grueling work of putting his soul back together.

    That’s the missing piece in the longevity movement: not more years, but more humanity. Health matters. Exercise matters. But without soul work, you’re just buying time for an empty vessel.

  • Trees Bent by the Wind

    Trees Bent by the Wind

    In An Abbreviated Life, Ariel Leve recounts the shadow her mother cast across her existence—a narcissistic, volatile presence who trailed her daughter across continents. Her mother blurred boundaries, confiding adult affairs, romantic escapades, and private fantasies to her child, then lacing those disclosures with guilt trips and psychological sabotage.

    At eleven, Ariel was told she was going blind—a lie without evidence, a mix of cruelty and madness. This was not an isolated cruelty but the common cadence of her mother’s speech. At six, Ariel’s caretaker, Kiki, died of a stroke mid-flight, with Ariel in the cabin. Ariel stopped speaking for six months; a psychiatrist prescribed Valium.

    Her mother, often wearing a nightgown even to school functions, could deliver barbed declarations without breaking her routine. “When I’m dead, you’ll be all alone because your father doesn’t want you,” she told her young daughter, pausing only to reapply makeup. “Just remember that and treat me nicely.”

    Her father, in Bangkok, refused to take her in. Ariel lived in grief that he wouldn’t rescue her from the chaos. Decades later, a therapist told her that growing up with such a mother caused neurological damage—her brain, shaped by constant stress, had developed like a tree twisted by relentless wind. Trauma was not a lightning strike; it was climate. The result: a life stripped of adventure, self-acceptance, and trust. Ariel’s default mode became hypervigilance and retreat.

    Her partner, Mario, an Italian with no literary ambitions, no awareness of New York publishing, and no taste for bagels, embodies the opposite—balanced, unselfconscious, open to life. He steadies her, if only temporarily.

    In one conversation, her father asked if she could let go of the past. Could she destroy her demons? Ariel was unsure. A novelist told her discipline could harden one’s “emotional arteries,” making childhood wounds less decisive. Ariel countered: some are “front-loaded with trauma,” not victims but soldiers—scarred, but still standing.

    Neuroscientist Martin Teicher affirmed her point: childhood abuse alters brain wiring. Adaptive coping mechanisms in childhood turn maladaptive in adulthood, creating an adult mismatched to their world. The traumatized blunt emotion not with a scalpel, but a sledgehammer—shielding themselves from joy as well as pain.

    For Ariel, this explains a life “within brackets.” She sees herself in the patterns Janet Woititz described in Adult Children of Alcoholics: mistrust, emotional volatility, self-loathing, and a skewed sense of normalcy.

    Her chosen remedy: EMDR therapy for PTSD. Nine months of “the light saber”—eyes tracking a green light, headphones delivering sound, memories replayed until they lose their grip. Sessions leave her exhausted. There is progress, measured in patience with Mario’s daughters, in small openings toward joy. But she does not present herself as cured—only as a permanent convalescent.

    Her memoir probes the ethics of trauma. How accountable are the wounded for maladaptive behavior? Can faith or philosophy save them, or does failure deepen self-blame? Are they sinners, soldiers, or something in between?

    Leve’s life raises a tension between two extremes: the nihilist’s surrender—“nothing can be done, so I’ll live recklessly”—and the motivational credo—“discipline and positivity conquer all.” The truth lies somewhere in the messy middle.

  • The French Toast Zone and Other Dangerous Places

    The French Toast Zone and Other Dangerous Places

    Recently, I watched the new King of the Hill, where the gang has aged into the gentle patina of later life. In one scene, Hank, Peggy, and Bobby are seated at the kitchen table, devouring what looked like French toast or chocolate chip pancakes—something golden, sweet, and unapologetically bad for you. It was an ordinary family breakfast, the kind you imagine smelling from three houses away. Watching it felt like slipping into a warm bath of contentment. These were normal people, enjoying themselves, at ease in the sacred space I call the French Toast Zone.

    The French Toast Zone is the place where life is easy, breakfast is decadent, and you’re at peace with your waistline, your arteries, and your eventual mortality. But step into the biomarker minefield—calories counted, protein ratios calibrated, insulin spikes plotted like military campaigns—and you’re in the Restriction Zone. The mood shifts. Every bite is an act of negotiation with your cholesterol, your bathroom scale, and the grim actuarial math of your lifespan.

    Real life, of course, is not an all-inclusive stay in either zone. Most of us shuttle back and forth—half saint, half sinner—forever bargaining between the delights of German chocolate cake and the promise of three extra years of foggy-eyed longevity. Too much denial, and you die having lived as a monk in a bakery you never entered. Too much indulgence, and you’re trapped on the hedonic treadmill, sprinting after pleasures that get smaller the closer you get.

    Some people manage this dance effortlessly. They live in homeostasis, exercising moderation as naturally as breathing. I have never been one of these blessed creatures. As a teenage bodybuilder who saw biceps as salvation from low self-esteem, I learned early that moderation was for other people. My internal wiring is a one-way circuit from obsession to burnout and back again. I am, in short, Extreme Man.

    Extreme Man has his own archetype—a tragic, sweaty figure charging at his chosen folly until he mutates into something grotesque. Then comes the epiphany, the Damascus jolt that scrambles his molecules and sends him hurtling into a new life mission. It could be religion, music, bodybuilding, stamp collecting—doesn’t matter. Once the lightning strikes, moderation becomes an obscenity. He must convert the world.

    When I was a teenage Olympic weightlifter, I preached squats with the fervor of a street-corner prophet, convinced proper form could change lives. My audience—bewildered, politely nodding—failed to share my revelation. Some Extremes get written off as harmless cranks. Others, gifted with charisma, build religions followed by millions.

    The homeostatic types are often immune to these evangelists. They are already content. But for those of us who never knew balance, the siren call of radical change is intoxicating. We cling to the hope that the right transformation will lift us out of our malaise.

    Neither camp is wholly admirable. The balanced can model moderation—or smug mediocrity. The Extremes can inspire reinvention—or display unhinged egotism. The truth is in the messy middle, where both tendencies collide, and if you’re lucky, you learn from both without being consumed by either.

  • Your Brain Is the Checkout Aisle Now

    Your Brain Is the Checkout Aisle Now

    Recently, Sam Harris told Josh Szeps something obvious but still worth repeating: since around 2009, social media has been conducting a mass psychological experiment, and the results have been, in a word, catastrophic. The rise of conspiracy junkies, rage-peddling charlatans, and democracy’s steady unraveling isn’t a glitch—it’s the inevitable outcome of letting the world’s worst instincts marinate in an algorithmic stew.

    Just now, while scrolling through YouTube, I found myself wading through a sewer of clickbait: miracle diet hacks, steroid-fueled fitness influencers, and close-up footage of animals devouring each other in 4K. And in that moment, I was struck by a flash of analog nostalgia: the checkout aisle at a 1970s grocery store.

    Remember those? Lined with The Star, The National Enquirer, and Weekly World News. Aliens abducting Elvis. Ten-minute abs. The Pope giving interviews to ghosts. They were grotesque, hilarious, and disposable. Everyone knew they were trash. They were meant for the brain-dead—gossipy or gullible folks who had nothing better to read while waiting for someone to bag their iceberg lettuce.

    But now? Now the tabloids have gone digital, evolved, and metastasized. The checkout aisle never ends. It follows us everywhere, lives in our pockets, and demands not just our attention but our belief. The zombies from the Enquirer covers have entered the bloodstream of public discourse. They’ve traded their tinfoil hats for YouTube channels, Substacks, and monetized paranoia.

    And here we are—standing on the edge, wondering if the culture can somehow hit the brakes, or if we’ve already gone over the cliff in a flaming minivan full of QAnon bumper stickers.