I could have written that. I have had all those thoughts at one time. We have a lot in common, Joe Rogan and I. People that know me have a hard time reconciling my love for eclectic Spirituality, the UFC and...uh...how should I say? South Park and Dave Chappelle type comedy? Is that "off color" comedy? I mean I think its brilliant. I like comedy that is composed of brilliant cultural commentary mixed with fart jokes, or preferably queef jokes. Extreme violence is good too, in comedy.
If you have just seen "Fear Factor" you don't know the whole story. Joe is deeper than that. He is really into Terrence Mckenna style experimentation with Psychadedelics and things like that. He has had some pretty deep spiritual insights.Maybe some type of Genetic determinism has caused us to have similar insights. Or maybe having a similar Phenotype causes you to have similar interests and arrive at similar conclusions.
I do notice one thing: A lot of intellectual people into spirituality, are kind of skinny. Skinny and introverted.
There is a theory about that where peoples builds influences their personality. So it would stand to reason that two people that are the same size and build, say a fairly muscular 5'8" would have a similar personality. Plus another weird thing is until recently, we both had deviated septums.
In Eastern religions breathing is very important and related to consciousness. Mouth breathing all the time while pursuing spirituality may have warped us in a similar way.
Anyway, its kind of a red blooded, working class, yet fairly intellectually sophisticated and "out there" spirituality we have in common, combined with baudy andjuvenile,yet smart sense of humor, and a fascination with violence and also conspiracy theories involving aliens.
Another writer that comes to mind (Is Joe a Writer?) is Jack London. Jack London was also a rather "red blooded" intellectual. Was he possibly rather mesomorphic and fairly short?
He does seem to have a similar facial structure. The interesting thing about Jack London is that he was an autodidact, that lived as a tramp and a pirate and eventually became a successful writer, a novelist and also an essayist.
Here are some quotes by a review of Jack London's writings by George Orwell, from "In Front of Your Nose, 1945-1950 Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell":
"He was a writer who excelled in describing cruelty, whose main theme, indeed, was the cruelty, of Nature; or at any rate the cruelty of contemporary life. He was also an extremely variable writer, much of whose work was written hurriedly and under low pressure; and he had in him a strain of feeling, which Krupskaya is probably right in calling "bourgeois"-at any rate a strain that did not accord with his democratic and socialist convictions."
"but on several points London was right, where nearly all other prophets were wrong, and he was right because of just that strain in his nature that made him a good short story writer and doubtfully reliable socialist...
...London's understanding of the nature of a ruling class--That is the characteristics a ruling class must have if it is to surrvive, went very deep. According to the conventional left wing view the "capitalist" is simply a cynical scoundrel, without honor or courage, intent simply on filling his own pockets. London knew that this view is false. But why, one might justly ask, should this, hurried, sensatalional, in some ways even childish writer have understood that particular thing so much better than his fellow socialists? The answer is surely that London could forsee fascism because he had a facsist streak within himself: or at any rate a marked brutality and an almost unconquerable preference for the strong man against the weak man. He knew instinctively that American businessmen would fight when their possesions were menaced, becauase in their place he would have fought himself. He was an adventurer and man of action as few writers have ever been. Born into dire poverty, he had already escaped it at sixteen, thanks to his commanding character, and powerful physique; His early years were spent among pirates, gold propectors, tramps and prizefighters, and he was ready to admire toughness wherever he found it. On the other hand he never forgot the sordid mysteries of his childhood, and he never faltered in his loyalty for the exploited classes...His outlook was democratic in that he hated exploitation and hereditary privelidge, and that he felt most at home in the company of people who worked with their hands: But his instinct lay toward an acceptance of a "natural aristocracy" of strength, beauty and talent."
Orwell goes on commenting about How in London's prodigious writings, his conflicting sentiments sometimes kill each other off but at his best they interact. Often he suspends judgement or moral commentary, drawing attention to the fatalistic absurdity of life.
I can really relate to that, because I have a love of nature and empathy for my fellow man, and the ability to see the absurdity and cruelty of life for what it is.
I have noticed Joe Rogan making similar commentary with insights into the minds of elites. You really have to have a knack for understanding how animals think, to understand the ruling class. There is some really primal energy there and a nobility, tempered with cruelty. You have to have kind of an animalistic, yet empathic nature to see it.
But also life is just plain funny and tragic. Anyway I am doing 'shrooms tonight. I'll let you know how it turns out.