I hate this, because the idea comes from Hermetic spirituality, but from a very cherry picked version of it that basically says “Be as shitty a person as you want, give into your natural inclinations and vices”
I know because I’ve seen this A LOT!
Because the actual Seventh Principle of Hermeticism does not say to do this, it actually says to balance the masculine and feminine within yourself to acknowledge both as being geniunely within you. It also encourages that the two shouldn’t be seen as opposites but rather two endpoints on a vast spectrum, the same way we see hot and cold.
But sadly too many “Gurus” somehow warped this into
“Reject femininity, see it as weakness, and be a massive chauvinistic asshole.”
When that couldn’t be further from what it’s saying.
Technically speaking, Zuckerberg emphasizes the need for balance. He on multiple times either emphasizes that both men and women should feel comfortable in corporate environments, and explicitly says something like “there has to be a balance” on at least two occasions.
The issue is that other parts of the interview don’t really match that idea of balance. Zuckerberg and Rogan spent like a third of the entire interview talking about bro culture stuff. I’m not even talking about “bro culture in the context of corporate America”. Rogan spends like a full ten minutes lecturing Zuckerberg on the proper way to bow hunt.
Overall I think the media is focusing outrage bait while ignoring the serious implications of the interview. Zuckerberg is clearly lobbying the Trump administration to prevent meta and other US tech companies from being subject to EU regulatory security. It has serious implications both as a consumer and in terms of geopolitics.
I hate this, because the idea comes from Hermetic spirituality, but from a very cherry picked version of it that basically says “Be as shitty a person as you want, give into your natural inclinations and vices”
I know because I’ve seen this A LOT!
Because the actual Seventh Principle of Hermeticism does not say to do this, it actually says to balance the masculine and feminine within yourself to acknowledge both as being geniunely within you. It also encourages that the two shouldn’t be seen as opposites but rather two endpoints on a vast spectrum, the same way we see hot and cold.
But sadly too many “Gurus” somehow warped this into
“Reject femininity, see it as weakness, and be a massive chauvinistic asshole.”
When that couldn’t be further from what it’s saying.
So I watched the entire three hour interview.
Technically speaking, Zuckerberg emphasizes the need for balance. He on multiple times either emphasizes that both men and women should feel comfortable in corporate environments, and explicitly says something like “there has to be a balance” on at least two occasions.
The issue is that other parts of the interview don’t really match that idea of balance. Zuckerberg and Rogan spent like a third of the entire interview talking about bro culture stuff. I’m not even talking about “bro culture in the context of corporate America”. Rogan spends like a full ten minutes lecturing Zuckerberg on the proper way to bow hunt.
Overall I think the media is focusing outrage bait while ignoring the serious implications of the interview. Zuckerberg is clearly lobbying the Trump administration to prevent meta and other US tech companies from being subject to EU regulatory security. It has serious implications both as a consumer and in terms of geopolitics.