(0:01 - 0:08) Hi everybody, I am Madison Holmes. And I am Maycee Holmes. And you're watching Holmes Squared. (0:09 - 0:23) Let us know when you guys get tired of it because we certainly have. Like I said, even if you do, it doesn't matter. Actually, that's not true. If they ever had feedback, I'm sure we could take it up, honestly. Yeah, no, it's fun. It's a good picture. (0:24 - 0:43) So I was saying to Maddie before we press record, I was like, it feels like it's been a while since we've, you know, done a Holmes Squared sit down. And that's because we and we do interviews, they kind of, especially the one we did with Chris Scott, which is two parts, they come out, and then it's like two weeks later. And we just haven't sat down in this room to have a discussion. (0:43 - 2:09) Yeah, normally, if we had a backlog, you know, we'd be, we'd be smart with our time. And then we'd record on a couple in advance, but things have been busy. So we actually haven't had time to record things in advance. Yeah, lots of good lessons, though. Lots of good hard work is too, that we've been putting into some projects. So we'll start, I guess, in chronological order. So I mean, I guess, actually, it might be good to talk about the AGM in general before we kind of go because it gives context as to why we were doing this in the first place. But so Maddie and I signed up for a regional debate that was for that the UCP party came out with it was like a cute little email saying it's me. And it was basically every region were for Calgary region was going to compete and then whoever wins gets to go on to have a final debate battle at the AGM this year. And so Maddie and I signed up for it. And apparently 14 other people signed up for Calgary region. And only five people showed up, three of which were me, Maddie and our friend, yeah, Cyril. It is a sign of the times, my guys. Sign of the times because, I mean, who is it that always says what's the hardest thing to do? Show up. A lot of people in the groups that we go to say literally just showing up physically seemingly is the hardest part. (2:10 - 2:49) And what was weird is that this debate was online. Yeah, so it wasn't even physical. It wasn't physical. Like there were no consequences. They did it as convenient as possible. And yet certain majority of the people that signed up still didn't show. It's funny though because Maddie and I have debated in real life as well. We actually debated at the last year's AGM, not on the main stage. It was just, or actually I guess it won't be on the main stage either. I found the logistics. We did it at the AGM because we were trying to set a president. We were kind of like, oh, we have an idea. And a lot of CA presidents also had this idea. They're like, let's do a youth debate at the AGM. And so we signed up for it as kind of like the guinea pigs. (2:49 - 3:37) Not a lot of kids were aware that it was going to happen at all because just the advertising was not on par. But so we did it and it was interesting because not a lot of kids knew. So when they watched it, they're like, oh my gosh, that seems like such a good idea. I would totally be into that. And then I just kind of like find it funny that maybe it was just a bad advertising or something. But just again, not a lot of people show up and this time it's online. Like it's not, there's not much you're going to lose from doing this. However, I say that, but even our friend Cyril can attest that I get like obsessively obsessed when it comes to stuff like this. I think it's because it's, I know that like I get that way if something's really important to me. (3:37 - 6:48) So to him, he was like, why are you getting so stuck on this? And I thought, oh, I'm not, but I totally was. I was denying it because it was important to me because me and Maddie, we signed up for the debate because we want to encourage kind of like bigger picture thinking. Not that we don't think that the people that we're competing against won't do bigger picture thinking because I was actually like pleasantly surprised when we did the regional as compared to even last year. Cause last year was, I mean like a little bit like, well, not too hard. Like that wasn't a hard win to be completely honest. But, but we want to do it in the first place because we want to encourage, I guess, critical thinking in the sense where a debate supposed to get you thinking about four sides and against sides. And maybe you're not sure which one you're going to take, but you could find yourself debating a position that initially you didn't agree with, or at least you think you didn't. Then you're going into it and you're like, well, I actually might even had persuaded myself into thinking something different. That's one of the things that the judges, and the judges were from the UCP party themselves because they're the ones that hosted it this year. And they said one thing they enjoyed about the debates was not knowing the positions of the kids that were debating because the challenge was you have to know both sides and then regardless of your personal opinion, advocate for it. Which is also funny coming from our family because we've done episodes in the past on the four to one rule where you can find a little bit of truth and a little bit of most people's arguments. So even with the debate, I personally didn't find it difficult to argue one side versus the other. Yes, you have a little bit more of a leaning where it's like, in principle, obviously you agree with this, but as for actually just thinking of the logistics of how to pick both sides, I didn't find it too difficult because I could see both sides. And I think that's just how our family thinks generally. So even for example, I guess we can share the debate topic since we're on it. Yeah. You can list off all three and then we can pick at them. Yeah. So the first one was no cell phones in school, providing a school ban. Banning cell phones in school. Yeah. A phone ban in school. That was policy one, whether you're for or against it. Number two was the ATA. So that's the Alberta Teachers Association. If teachers should have a opportunity to opt out of the ATA. Yes. And so that's in Alberta, the ATA is not only the single regulatory body of teachers, it's also one of the big unions to advocate for the teachers. And it's kind of a monopoly. Honestly, it's one of those big bureaucracy organisations that really ought not exist. So opting out of it was the second policy. And then the third and final one was to protect women, female spaces, biological female spaces. Like change rooms, bathrooms, dormitories. (6:48 - 6:49) And sports. Shelters. Yeah. (6:50 - 7:05) Yes. So those were the three policies that we had to go for and against. And I believe we had about a week's notice. Yep. We only had a week. A week's notice to prepare for it. Hence Maycee's obsessiveness. I know. If you had given me a month, I would have been like, okay. (7:05 - 7:26) It would have been worse. I don't think you would have taken it. I think it would have been giving you more time to fester. That's probably true. I think a week was good because it provides, it forces you to only take it so seriously. Because you shouldn't take, we've talked about the UCP and politics and it's not going to save us. (7:26 - 8:06) And even if we, you and I and our mode of attention was to lead by demonstration, show kids that there's a bigger way of thinking. We think culture is going to save us. Yeah, culture. So that's why we, that's why I think the debate meant so much to me because I do like the idea of some, I guess it comes down a bit to when you're talking about leaders and they had debates and they had to be diplomatic and they had to, I'm like, I feel like there's something there that like culturally it just feels right where I'm like, yeah, you should have discussions. And now I know that there can be tailored debates and tailored false debates, false dichotomies. Yeah. (8:06 - 8:48) Yeah. Like the Darwinism when they were doing the evolution, evolutionary theory. Yeah. They had someone, they had Thomas Huxley debating off of Darwin's behalf against people that they set up to be, it's like boxing. We were watching the Rocky movies and it's basically like you have your champion and he just keeps staying the champion because all of the people that are going up against him, the challengers are pre-set up to be purposely worse than you. Like you're not actually, you're not fighting anybody who's a challenge to you really, truly. And so then, yeah, there can be fake debates for sure. Especially if you're doing public eye and stuff like that. Political debates. (8:49 - 9:10) Exactly. But at least like, I like the fact that this one's just straight up, whoever just feels like they can come to the, come to the plate. It's kids. Yeah. There's like no. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. The only thing that's riding is your own reputation and as if that's anything. And it's, it's just funny though too, because even some of the kids, like you don't know whether or not you're going to go up against a kid that's trying to become a politician, right? Like. (9:11 - 9:14) That's true. I have no desire to become a politician. But we've met kids. (9:14 - 9:37) But we've met kids and we've debated kids that I feel like, oh, I'm inclined to think that you would probably want to, you know, be seen in the eye so that way you could be a politician and debate on the, on the real estate. And there's something different about that mode of attention. If I just want to debate you so that way we can try and show that you can think things through on a different level versus I want to debate you so that way I can look good and. (9:37 - 9:40) Climb a ladder. Propel myself. A corporate ladder. Yeah. Career wise. Yeah. (9:41 - 11:07) Yeah. And I think that mode of attention is what made both you and I stand out and then what made you win in the end. Cause she, yeah, won our regional debate. And so we're going to prep for the, the AGM coming up. Did we explain what an AGM was? I think, I don't know if people know. I think that we've probably talked about in future episodes, but I'm not sure. So it doesn't. If people don't know our sub stack in order to encourage youth in Calgary and generally some other people to come, we did a little. Maddie and I did a little video explaining youth civic call to action AGM 2025. It's on our sub stack. We did this video to kind of explain it, how CAs, how you can get in contact with your CAs. So that way you can ask them if they're reimbursing some do. And if they're not to put a little pressure on them to do so, because it's a, it's something that we think is valuable. Yeah. And I don't, that's not, that's for Alberta, but it's also for each province. Cause you know, the UCP is our provincial party and every provincial party, I'm pretty sure holds an AGM every year. It may not look the same because parties are run differently. And I have heard that too. People that were formerly NDPs at the way that the UCP does their AGMs are more grassroots and they're more inviting than some other parties AGMs. They're not as inclusive of the members. So we are fortunate there. (11:07 - 13:19) Well, yeah, we like the AGM because again, it's not, not necessarily because we think that politics is going to save us, but I like the fact that you have a bunch of people that are coming from all across Alberta to attend if they can, like there's logistics in terms of the prices is expensive. They only happen in Red Deer, Edmonton and Calgary. So there's logistics reasons as to why maybe not everybody can get to it, which is unfortunate. But what we like is the fact that when they, when the people show up, you get to debate things like policies and you like, literally adults, it doesn't matter what age you are old, young, they come up to the mic, the yes and the no mic, and they start to talk about these ideas of what, why this is a good idea, why this is not a good idea, why maybe some people are very semantical and they get caught on literally how the policy is phrased. I mean, to me, I'm like, okay, we're kind of splitting hairs here, but like. Well, and you saw the same thing in our youth debates too. You get, and that's the interesting thing about mode of attention in debates is that you can get the very, and that, if you're like that, it can make it difficult even to pick a side. So if you're not morally aligned with whatever policy it is that you're supposed to debate, then you find some sort of semantical thing because you can't think outside of your, I don't even want to call it a bias because like having morals is needed and everybody has them. Sometimes it's just hard for you to tap into it or you don't know how to express it, whatever the case may be, but they don't understand that most sides have a little bit of a part truth. So then you see the semantics come in, which makes the argument initially flawed because then you, that's when you hear people repeating themselves because they have nothing new to add. And that was something that luckily we didn't come across. Like it was very easy regardless of what we were, because I believe, which ones did you argue for and against? Um, so I had to argue against spanning phones in schools. (13:19 - 13:24) Which were four. Yes, but I did a great job. Because we found the nuance. (13:24 - 13:37) Because I found the nuance. And then I had to argue, you did the ATA. I didn't even get a chance to argue that one. And then I had to argue for protecting female spaces, which that was kind of easy. But, um. And yet also not. (13:37 - 14:15) But also not. Yeah, exactly. Well, so also to keep on the bigger picture path before we get into the gritties of what we were talking about with the specifics and why we're bringing even the AGM, the policies and why we like them in the first place, because when you're at the AGM and you're actually putting it through of what you want, then the Danielle Smith and the, her UCP team, if they're doing their jobs right, they're actually take what's put in the book in the sense of this year, this is what Albertans are kind of targeting and this is what they want to focus on. She might actually do something, which would be good, that listening to what it is that Albertans wanted. So that was the case with which bill was it? It was. I believe bill 24. (14:16 - 14:18) 24. Or it might have been 26. I think it might have been 26. (14:19 - 14:37) And that bill was the one where she came out saying, okay, like children that I think are under 16 or. Yeah. Yeah. Can't do treatments or surgeries or anything like that. For gender affirmation or gender affirming any alterations. Yeah. (14:37 - 15:04) There was age caps that she put for hormonal treatment and surgeries, which is a policy, a couple of policies actually, I think that was AGM 2022 or 2023. Yeah. I think it was two. I think that a bunch of policies were trying to protect kids. So a bunch of people put in those policies saying, however you need to do it, you know, stop gender affirming a lot of DEI stuff that they wanted removed. And so that bill was a result of the people's mandate. (15:05 - 16:15) It's not like, like, it's not like they're going to necessarily hit every single one, which is kind of suckish, right? But at least there's some where they're doing some things. Now, granted, do the people necessarily get to have a say as to how they would have wanted it to be done? Like maybe some people thought, oh, maybe Danielle didn't go far, far enough. And I was one of those people. I was like, I don't really think she went far enough, but I mean, I'm not going to complain about some incremental steps forward, but granted, what you can do though in the policies, if you're a part of, you can write policies yourself literally and send them to your CA office and they will vet them through for you. We had someone do that and we vetted some of their policies. And then the board kind of gets to vote on which ones they want to send through. And it just depends on maybe it wasn't worded entirely, or maybe you had a double and it was like, oh, I think we have it here and blah, blah, blah. But you can write policies and in the rationale or in the policy itself, you can write down how, the mechanism of how you would like to see this done. And that can still potentially get through to the AGM. Because we did policy ranking. Like our whole family sat down and there was like 300 and something, something policies. And then there was 57 governance. (16:16 - 16:45) So we sat down and read every single one and ranked every single one on, in terms of which ones we thought were important versus which ones we were like, to bring forward to the AGM. Actually, now that you mentioned that, that's probably another reason why, the reason that I also signed up for the debate is because I think our family debates on a daily basis. Like I know we're a family, so people can say, oh, you have an echo chamber, but the reality Well, we'll get to that once Matt, I tell, we tell how Maddie kicked my ass in terms of teaching me a lesson after I won that debate. (16:46 - 16:50) I did no such thing. We negotiated. Anyway. (16:50 - 21:32) It was a very humbling, good kick in the ass. But our family isn't necessarily an echo chamber because we push pull with ideas on a regular basis where you think that, oh, we're all on the same, on many things. You'd almost look at us and we're that nattering, chattering household where it's like, look, can you just agree on the overall, it's like, okay, even if we do, how things manifest. And I think it's because we do that anyway with everything on life, everything we read, everything we hear. I think the debate also came a bit more intuitively, you and I, because it's what we do in our household. It's all, it's really critically thinking is all that is. So even for the female spaces, even though we're inherently morally agreed with protecting female spaces in sports, things like how that manifests is super important because the policy didn't say. The policy had nothing in it really that said how you want them to be protected. So that was the hardest part was trying to figure out, well, well, what mechanism are we going to be doing exactly? Are taxpayer dollars going to go towards creating the spaces for the transgender? That way they can, they have a space and then the female washers are going to create a system like mechanism where you kind of base it off of principles. And then that creates a comp, a competitive system based off of principles that protect women, like actual biological women. Like, do you stay true to the fact that it's like at conception, like this is what we're doing, not necessarily pandering to 0.74% of the population, right? Exactly. So all of that is stuff we considered in order to argue against, but also even not even without the debate. Cause I recall when we first saw that policy as a, as a family and we still went, we agree with this, but how? Because if it's taxpayer dollars going to words, any sort of validation of the transgender community in order for them to stay away from the female spaces that still validates the potential affirmation, the positive affirmation that has been starting to creep into and infiltrate the therapy. Well, we were, so it's funny. We're friends with Matt Ehret. So I like immediately tell him, Hey, we're going to do a debate. He's like, Oh, cool. So what are you guys going to do it on? And I tell him about the female spaces one. He said, man, I hate it when the system slash the institution gets to pick what it is that you, what they deem is important for a debate. Right. And I did agree in that sense where it's just like, we don't actually get to, we didn't get to pick what we were going to debate. Right. Because when he was in school and he always uses this example, and it's a good example is that when he was in school, what his teachers would do is, okay, guys, we're going to have a discussion. If you were stranded on an island and you had to, I don't know, kill or do something awful to one of this person, this person or that person, or if you had to do this, this, this to survive. And most of the time they were just awful solutions to survival, right? What would you do? And why? And they set the parameters of the entire scope of thinking. And there was one student in his class and Matthew was so envious of this student. And the student was just like, why couldn't I just work with so-and-so, so-and-so, and work together and we just cooperate and then we survive together. And Matthew was just like, oh, I wish I thought of that. Right. Right. And so that's what he, when he heard the, the female spaces one, he was just like, oh my gosh, like, they're going to get you to debate on like this. Because what Maddie was mentioning is like a part of you then has to kind of, kind of go like, oh, like we have to deal with this problem that shouldn't even be a problem. You know what I mean? Like, that was something that I kind of mentioned in that debate is one of the questions that we were kind of asked and it was cute. Our judge was kind of like, I know this isn't really on par with the debate, but because, and I thought it was a good question because I thought he was trying to problem solve. I was like, ooh, you're problem solving brains on and you're actually talking to young people thinking we know something, which is actually quite kind of you. Thank you. And he was like, so what do you guys think? I know this is kind of off of the debate policy you're talking about. He said, but what do you guys think we can do to try and mitigate and fix the transsexual issue? Because it, and I was like, oh yeah, like, cause it is an issue because it's technically a mental illness. Like, yeah, like you're not wrong. (21:32 - 25:43) And then he was like, so what do you guys think we should do? Right. And it kind of turned into a debate, but I actually like would have agreed with some of the stuff that my opponent was talking about. I'm doing quotation marks for those of you listening. Yeah. But I was like, yeah, like this is, this is good. This is how do we problem solve this? And I was like, screw gender affirming treatment. That is not, that is not where I would go at all. Well, echo chamber, like the point of, we already know the incentive as to why they do gender affirming anyway. Well, and then, you know, if you guys haven't read Abigail Shrier's book, Irreversible Damage, it's a great book. Highly recommend for how we understand a bit more the problem, especially you see where you see with young girls. But I think when you read that book, you actually can really, truly target it to just young people in general. And even, even like older in the sense where it's like, I have no problem with like maybe older, you want to make that decision because your brain's developed to whatever capacity you choose to do the thing. But at the same time, I am the type of person where it's like, whatever decision you've kind of made for yourself that honestly, if you feel like it's going to help you, you feel like externally, like becoming this thing is going to help you. I'm like, I believe in willpower. I believe in this in the sense that you can, you have a choice over your existence and that you are stronger than you think. Now wait until we get into what Maddie taught me because I kind of don't embody it as well as I should. But I still do think that when it comes to things like for me, my personal experience was when I was younger and before I learned Gilchrist work, I thought I was like, I had OCD. I just learned it was just my left hemisphere. But I, at the time I had OCD and it was pretty bad in the sense where it's just like, I was young, teenage brain, constantly worried about the future, constantly worried that I wasn't going to turn out the way that I wanted, constantly worried that there was no fixing me. I was just a person caught in stasis and that I was never going to change. And literally, I know everything that I did was me trying to get out of that cycle. But that was, that was me trying to cognitively work my way through though. Like, and I eventually got to a point where I figured it out. Right. But that's where I am the type where it's just like, okay, if you feel like something's maybe not right, maybe it has nothing to do. And I said this in my debate, I was like, maybe it has nothing to do with the fact that you're a guy or a girl, or, you know, like you need to change yourself in terms of your gender because you're, you're not feeling right. It's like, figure out how you want to be a good human being first. Like, and I mean, I'm just also the type where it's just like, you kind of got to work with what you got. And so trying to play games like that, where it's like, you're spending so much time like my, with my OCD, I spent so, so much time thinking I should read books on how to conquer OCD. I should, and the thing that kind of helped me out of it was the minute I started kind of making it less of a problem than I was making it. It was like, oh, maybe I should stop thinking I'm so fricking broken that I need to be fixed. And then maybe I might just get fixed in the sense where it's like, stop obsessing so much, getting OCD about OCD, getting OCD about gender identity. And just, that might snap you out and kind of go like, maybe this isn't as big of a deal as I think it is. Maybe this whole idea of, oh, like I feel in the wrong body. It's like, maybe if I just stop for a minute and not make it as big as I'm making it, the problem might get solved. And I might find it's something completely different. Maybe it's my home life. Maybe it's something that's, I'm ignoring the context that's surrounding why I might be the way I am. Right. Well, that's interesting. I was just talking to Kyle and we were talking about health and it's like, when people are unhealthy, they have one problem, one, get healthy. But when people are healthy, they have so many other problems because the world is much bigger than us. (25:44 - 26:18) And when you're in an unhealthy position, you're in survival mode trying to figure that one thing out. So same thing with all of the, with the gender dysphoria mentality. When you start shifting, even me, so when, if we're talking about our development as teenagers, I grew up a very large liar. It was, it was perfect. Cause I was really afraid of getting in trouble, like terrified. Somebody would look at me angry and I'd cry instantly. And I'd tattle on myself. Yeah. We were total opposites. (26:18 - 26:37) That's because my hemisphere proclivity and then Maycee's got left, which is why we're better together. Cause even the debate, we tag teamed it. Both of our arguments, Macy kept saying in between, she's like, I'm really worried they're going to put us up or we're going to end up debating, you know, they'll debate the same topic because then we have the same argument. (26:37 - 26:51) I was afraid that they'd make us do like, Maddie has to do for this same topic and I have to do for the same time. I'm like, oh, they're going to realise that we helped each other. Well, yeah, because all our arguments were so sound, but that's because where I didn't think of something, you would think of something and then vice versa. (26:51 - 28:39) And then we just put it together cause we don't, we're not going to compete. Good ideas are good ideas. Yeah. And literally the point was just to show people some strong critical thinking skills. But so when I was developing as a kid, I wanted to, to stop becoming a liar and not being so agreeable because those kind of come hand in hand when you're afraid of, afraid of conflict. And I was afraid of being prideful so much so where I was just, yes, man, yes, man. I was very, very agreeable and it was hard to embody or have my own personality at that point. I was, everybody loved me as a kid. I was the favourite child, but that's because I didn't stand on anything. I didn't have any, I didn't have any of Madison Holmes. I hadn't built that yet. Yeah. And I was just described as the disagreeable one because all I did was yell at adults and said, you're not the boss of me. Right. So as a kid, um, as when I started getting out of the really tumultuous adolescence part, I, my goal was, okay, become more honest, become more disagreeable and try and become more consistent. I had, I had five or seven, five to seven things that I really wanted to focus on and I didn't know how to tackle them all at once. So I thought, okay, what if I start with one? And so I believe I started, was it honesty? I don't know, man, that's on you. I think it might've been that one honest. And yeah, I think that was the main one because I, I thought that was, I didn't want to lie anymore. I just, it felt the worst, like being agreeable, having people kind of walk on me. I can kind of tackle that over time, but being a liar, I thought, no, I'm doing a disservice to everyone that I love, including myself. (28:39 - 29:01) So I think I started with honesty and that's the, that's the only thing. And then every, all other seven things that I wanted to fix including agreeability came downstream. And that's why I bring that up is because sometimes what you think is the problem, like you said, it could be a different surrounding context, focus on something a bit bigger. (29:01 - 30:05) That includes big world problems. Something that you think is, oh, it's me. There's something going on in my world. And then maybe you find out, oh shoot, what if it's something there's the, even financial problems? Well, some things you can only do so much. We can work harder, but because of the economy, people, financialists, some oligarchs that are in bad bureaucratic positions, they implement policies you had no idea about, which is why it's important to look at big picture because politics happens to you on a daily basis. We were talking with a girl today that we met a new friend of ours. And we were saying, cause she was like, how would you tell somebody to get involved in politics? I know so many apathetic people. And she said, what do I, what do I tell them to, to their apathy? And it's like, well, politics goes on. Politics is other people's intentions. It'll never go away. And so if you don't input your intentions, other people's intentions will be put upon you. Those are the two options. (30:06 - 32:10) So even with these problem solving things, we got involved and started looking at big picture things, understanding that sometimes the problems that are going on in your life, it's not all on you because the reality is you are in a much bigger context and cultural problem. And so that goes with relationships, dating, parenting, schooling. It's like if you were, it's like you're swimming across a great lake thinking that there was like an end to the shore on the other end. You just can't see it. Right. But then as you're swimming and your endurance is getting better and you're swimming harder and you're making sure you're taking those breaks and you're doing everything you can to reach that end. It's like you're not realising that somebody is expanding the lake on the other side and it's just going to keep expanding. So you're swimming and you're just like and you're not understanding that there's something happening on the other side that you just, you're not paying attention to and you can't see. Yeah. So that's something that even directly problem solving sometimes. And I think, again, that's why the debate was so easy for us and negotiating ideas was so easy because we didn't look at the specific semantics of what this policy was about. We immediately went to why does this policy even have to come up? What's more important about than others? Those are the things that we consider about everything on a daily basis. And then we also just brought into this little debate. That way we could showcase some other things. Yeah. So, I mean, I kind of want to touch a little bit on them. So for the cell phone one, for the banning it, Maddie, do you want to kind of give a spew on what you said when you had to argue for banning cell phones? Oh, yeah. The general one of the distractions in school, me and Macy did some research to figure out what were some, are there countries out there that have already implemented phone bans and how is their success going? Then we found out, yes, actually the top academic performing schools in the world all have some sort of phone ban or restrictions. (32:10 - 32:47) So stuff like that, we brought in those statistics to understand. I brought in, because there was a Q&A period, which of course is like super, super fun. It was fun. You get the live. It's also fun to think about how some of the questions were dumb. It was also kind of funny. I was like, that's a terrible question, but I'll answer it. Right. Yeah. Like I could have thought that one better than. Yeah. Bringing in the brain work, we did a little bit too for the development of children and why phones and even the hormones and the positive feedback loop, why not having that distraction is a good thing. Hitting the mic every time. I know. It was funny. (32:47 - 34:49) Mark Spark, Mark Spark put it in one of the comments, because you get mad at me every time I do it. There was an episode, you did it. And he put, you hit the mic, Maycee. We heard it. Oh, I love that. Keeping me humble. I love it. That's so good. Okay. Yeah. So for the one that I had to do for the, again, cell phones, I thought I, I did pretty good because like, I'm, I'm for it because I know like, this is the fun part is the four to one and it applies to both arguments is the fact that we were, sometimes people are so caught on looking for motivation to go and do a thing instead of just, you might just learn your motivation while doing the thing. So it's like, first you should step into it before you even know why. And then maybe when you're in it, you'll understand why. And so for the banning of the cell phones, I'm like that, that concept applies where it's like, I think I said that when it comes to institutions, right? Like school, I just was kind of like a gym is an institution is goal is for fitness. So it's, it's should be orientated. If it's good business towards fitness, you're not going to see vending machines with cats and junk food and all in there. You're going to see vending machines with protein bars and probably shakes or energy drinks. Right. And then you're not going to see an entire room dedicated to like gaming chairs and PCs and Xbox that you're going to see fitness equipment. Why? Cause that's the goal of the institution. And that's what it wants to accomplish. And I'm like, if school's goal is for education and for like making sure that children are paying attention and blah, then it's like, okay, ban the fricking cell phones. It's not going to help much if they got, if they need something to research on, you got a laptop. Okay. And then a lot, a part of it was also eliminating the social media aspect of it. Right. And so it's like, if you're going to do it, let like, again, you might learn the value after being in it first. (34:49 - 39:13) So trying to force the value into the kids, they might just see it come by it not even being a factor in their, in their learning. But however, I thought that one of the biggest things was I was like, why are kids not interested in paying attention in school? Right. And I was like, that is to me, one of the biggest problems. And I'm glad we're kind of talking about this because I know that a lot of, I see all the time heart signs that are like, I love public education. And I'm just like me and Maddie are going to homeschool all the fricking way, because I think we do not have a good education system. And it's not even because of the fact that it's necessarily like political with LGBT. I didn't think we had it before that stuff was starting to come into schools. It was just like, you start learning things about history and you're realising you're just not getting taught it at all. And most of the people in our community, they're like, man, I never taught, I was never taught this in school. And even in our last interview with Chris Scott, it was like, oh, I didn't even learn about the fall of the Roman Empire, the Greek Empire. It's like, these aren't things that were taught. But they were taught back in the day when like America was first founded. When America was first founded, they were teaching things like the fall of the Roman Empire and things like tyranny, because they had just conquered tyranny. And they wanted to make sure that that was ingrained into the hearts and the minds of the students, because it was like, don't forget how hard we had to fight for this and what we were fighting against. Like, that's why they put that into the educational system, because it was for a cultural thing. And I feel like the education system, there's no one really coming out of it feeling like there's any cultural, moral elevation, like whatsoever. No one's going to be reading the works of like Benjamin Franklin or Socrates or McGilchrist. None of that's happening. And so I was, I was coming in with the against argument. And the sense where I was just like, we need to be out competing the cell phones and the distraction. And we need to be actually making it so that kids are interested in paying attention. It's like something's wrong fundamentally with our system. And then some of the examples that I gave was in Finland and Estonia, they have something that's called like phenomenal based learning. And so what they do is they try to integrate. First, you start young and you don't even touch the cell phones. And you're just kids being kids playing. Like you're learning social interaction. You're learning how to cooperate. You're learning, hey, don't be a dick and steal the ball. Give it back. Like, you know what I mean? Just stuff like that. And then, and then later on, they kind of integrate phenomenal based learning because it's like, okay, class, I don't want to just throw at you. Let's learn chemistry and then kind of like be bored out of your minds or let's learn biology and be bored out of your minds. It's like, let's apply it to something, something in the phenomenal world. Okay, maybe we want to talk about climate change or something, right? We're going to do a bit of this deep dive into the political discussion, but also the scientific discussion. And so now you're integrating the sciences in a practical reality that's happening. And now we're going to do some research. And now we're going to understand the mechanisms here, right? But you're applying it to something that they feel like they can actually use in terms of understanding the world around them because it's an actual thing going on, right? And so that's where some of those countries, they do this thing. And it was funny because my opponent was zero. And he was just like, but that would require like the teachers to have almost like their foot in every door where it's like, they should know a little bit of math, science, but I'm like, that's a lot. That's a good argument. And I just said, I just said, though, I was like, anything worth like a damn takes hard work. So he's not wrong. Yeah. Because it's a testament to where teachers today, they're not, which is sad, but it's the reality. Another part for the against was the fact that, okay, banning cell phones because addressing in China, one of the things that they wanted to do with all of those restrictions on the internet stuff, they really wanted to tackle gaming addictions because the online realm is an addiction for men and women because women are addicted to online shopping and scrolling, scrolling, social media. I mean, now it's everybody actually, not just women, but, but men are also addicted to online gaming. So it's like the cell phone thing in the media that is an addiction and to break a habit. (39:15 - 39:42) You got, there's so many factors that go into it, but for the against the cell phones, that argument works saying the fact that banning it doesn't address the problem. These people need to work on their, on the core problem, which is this cultural problem. They need to work on their, they need to learn their brain and their biology because getting rid of the phone won't teach them why the phone is bad or what it even does to them in the first place. (39:42 - 39:49) It just removes the thing, but it doesn't get to the root. So doing that argument, because we also believe that's the case. You can't just remove a distraction. (39:50 - 40:02) You have to address the distraction. Well, what I said as well was when he was, when, um, the judges were kind of like, it was so fun because they were getting into problem solving mode. Some of the questions I got was like, Oh, you're trying to problem solve it. (40:02 - 41:40) Now you're speaking my language. So when they were talking, um, they were like, okay, so how do we kind of like, I think it was, I think it was me. And he said like, but I know this question is not necessarily the best, but he was just like, but are you like, do you think that cell phones should be banned in school? Right. And one of my arguments kind of, because I still was like, I thought it was a test. So I was like, I have to stay on my foot. I was like, Oh yeah, but that's not what we're talking about. So I said on my point, I was like, I said something to consider is when you are banning the cell phones and the teachers are deciding to take this initiative and the school board is deciding to take this initiative. I'm like, I think that it kind of also takes away a bit from the parents. And I said, I feel like that's one of the fundamental things though, is if you don't, you know, ban the cell phones or whatever, but you start developing what I'm talking about, which is culture. And you're getting kids excited about their learning. Cause they're actually feeling like they can apply it to the real world around them. And it also feels like if they fail, right. It's because maybe the system failed them. Right. But also because maybe they failed themselves. And I feel like, I feel, I felt like one of the main solutions for banning or not banning was parents should figure out their, their own psychology first. They should figure out their own flaws. And of course they say they do, but then later on, it's going to be somebody's job to make sure that they pointed out to them. (41:40 - 43:21) So that way they can see what it is that they were missing, but they should learn it. So that way they can try and figure out how to teach it to their kids and then try and teach their kids, their own psychology, or at least get their kids to think through why it is that they're doing what it is that they're doing. Right. But if you yourself don't even know as a parent, why your kid is going to pick up that cell phone for either distraction for seeking attention, maybe dad's not statistically, maybe dad's working as far away job. And so she's looking for attention from other men. Oh, she got catfished. You know what I mean? It's like, these are things that happen though. And if you don't even know the psychology of what's going on with the brain of a child or with the brain of just anybody, of every human being, the insecurities, the fear, the left hemisphere, frankly, if you don't know these things, then you're not going to be able to help your kid help themselves. And so then what also is important is the ability for the child to be able to understand why they don't need it, why they don't need to rely on this thing in order to make their life whole. Right. And I said, for one of the banning things, I said, banning is like, if I didn't do my chores at home and my mom, because I was on my iPad and my mom decided to take away my iPad because I didn't do my chores. I said, that's terrible because now she's, I'm as the kid going to attribute a reward system mechanism towards my iPad because, oh, punishment, takeaway reward. What is reward? iPad. Then it starts to further entrench a codependency mindset, whether you knew subconsciously you were doing that or not. And now the child's like, no, don't take away the thing I value, which is a device. (43:21 - 44:56) Like, you know, and so. Until the kid learns to value something else. Exactly. Which I've been seeing things funny enough while scrolling because sometimes I do that. And I saw something though, that was helpful. And it was parents that were saying, instead of doing this with your child, which is like, you leave your child on the couch to go watch a movie while you go do the dishes. It's go do the dishes with your child. Like have the kid come do the thing with you, make it fun, make it mute, play some music, make it a game, whatever, but teach them the same. And I'm like, if your child is not even doing the chores, taking away the devices, I mean, it's a way you could do it, but you could also teach them the value of why should they do the chore in the first place? Like, why should they do that? Mom needs help in the kitchen. Can help me out. And that's, that's another thing too, because even in our household, I learned to value the chores because I felt like I was helping and I still do. You know, I associate chores not with, not just with the simple, oh, it's my duty. It's my obligation. But there's also half of me that literally looks at it as an, if I don't do this thing, the household is a little bit lacking for it. You know, there's a little bit of that. You're not simply expendable. You have value, which is why you do this skill. And that's also very important because it brings a sense of confidence to whatever you're doing and to take that win and apply it to other things, which actually kind of relates a little bit to, um, the lesson that you continually alluded to. The aforementioned lesson where I kick your ass. Oh yeah. Okay. (44:56 - 47:18) We'll go to that. Did you want to talk about the ATA one at all? We're at 45 minutes, so I think we should. Okay. Okay. So, well, I mean, I didn't care. Short attention span, but anyways, I'm just kidding. Thank you guys for staying this long. Um, um, so the lesson that I learned was after I won the debate, I was happy. I was like, oh wow. But I honestly was very surprised. Um, because it was down to me, Maddie, and this girl named Stella. All three did great in their own ways. Um, I was included in that when I said all three. And I thought genuinely either Stella or Maddie was going to win. Like I did not think I was going to win. And I'm not even saying that as like a humble bullshit fucking gaslight. I mean, I literally didn't think I was going to win. You said that before you even met the candidates. You said, well, we were making the debate. You were saying, oh, it's going to be Maddie or the other people. Yeah. Like I was helping and we were doing a lot of heavy lifting to make sure we did good arguments. We had some good facts. We made sure it was just stayed to more of a philosophical cult cultural argument because I sometimes get a little bit like about facts because conservatives love facts, but I'm like, I just, I like everything. Yeah. I like perspective. Um, and so, um, I didn't think I was going to win even before the debate even started. I just thought, okay, we're going to do the thing. We're going to do great. And I said, if either me or Maddie win great, because then it means that one of us gets to go kick ass at the AGM. And then I thought it was going to be Maddie. I literally did. And then I won and I like was shocked. I was like, I'm sorry, can you say that again? Like, and then the whole, everybody's laughing and I was genuinely like, oh, really? And then, um, I said, I was coming up with excuses. I was coming up with excuses as to why I won. I was trying to think I was formulising. I was like, oh, maybe it's just the criteria. Maybe, you know, they prioritise people with more of a left hemisphere kind of proclivity. Cause like, and I didn't mean this to be a degration of Maddie. I actually, I saw it as a compliment because I think very highly of Maddie. I think in the art of argument, she kicks butt. Like she's so good at arguing in the sense of like standing her ground, giving good context. (47:18 - 48:47) If you move towards her, she won't, she won't move. Like, she's like, no, I know this is where like, I've found the core moral thing that I am standing on. And I know exactly why I'm upset or why I think you're wrong. And I'm not going to be shoved. I'm a very shovey person. Like sometimes I get swayed and it's to my own detriment because I'm like, oh, maybe they have a good point. And right. So I, I think highly of Maddie. So I thought she was going to win. And then I started giving excuses as to why she did and why I won, because I was like, oh, well, you know, debates are very left hemispheric in the sense where it's like in the Q and A it's quick answer. You have to think quick on your feet, which sure you could say is right hemispheric adaptability, which it is like, I was just literally ignoring that fact, but I thought it doesn't give enough context. So like for one question, you really don't get to take the time to really get like a good discussion on a round table. It's, it's competition, which we also know is left hemisphere. So I was kind of, and all of this, I'm not necessarily wrong. Like even when I'm bringing this forward, I'm not necessarily wrong in my assessment of the left hemisphere dynamics of debate. I also know the right hemispheric, what we were just literally talking about this whole time. It's what you bring to the table in the end, because even what you can bring is, even though the rules say you should never bring up new arguments within the Q and A or within your closing statements. I broke every single rule. Exactly. Well, that's why. And they loved it. (48:47 - 49:39) Exactly. Because of it. And that's why I was like, oh, maybe you lost because you brought up a new argument. They liked it. But I thought, oh, maybe the criteria is because it said you can't bring up new arguments, which again would be a right hemispheric thing to do is, hey, there's more context. There's more, there's more, there's more. You can expand. Right. I thought, oh, maybe that's why she, she lost and I won. And so it's like, regardless of those things that we can, that I was considering wrongly or rightly, Maddie was kind of like noticing that she was like, why are you making up excuses for why you won though? Right. Cause like, even if you're maybe right about the format, like, why can you not just accept the fact that you did a good job? Like you, I couldn't give myself credit. Like afterwards I was like, well, yeah, I know I did a good job, but like, and then I just go down my, uh, I just go down my stupid ranting thing. (49:39 - 54:47) But, and so at first I would not budge. Like, I was like, I'm trying to compliment you. I'm trying to say that it's, it's, it's below you. And it's like, I'm, I just, you know, did the thing because I'm basically just said I was below. And I said that she was above. And even by me saying that though, it was degrading her because it's, there's nothing below. Well, I mean, there is some, but like not everything is below it. It's a still an honourable thing. Just try and pursue and to do and to challenge and to put yourself out there and, and try and think things through and debate it well. Um, so, and I also, because of all the feedback of the judges and my own, like I've been in debates before, even in school, I, when we did debate, um, class and we had those curriculums, all my teachers asked me to go against students from other classes cause they liked me. So I knew I w I know I'm good at debate and I knew I did a good job. Like I just had that feeling. I'm like, I, I checked all the boxes and they said that I did good. So I was like, I, I'm, I'm happily losing right now. I don't like, I feel like I can walk away proud. Yeah. And yeah. And Maddie thought that I was trying to maybe ease her off, which I wasn't trying to ease her. Like, I wasn't like, Oh, it's like, I'm trying to make you feel better, Maddie. It was actually more so like, I just, it was more so I'm not initiating as something I want to see happen. It was just something was happening. Is it a, as a response to something good happening for me that I actually accomplished? Like I was not being able to do something actually. And so, um, she, we kind of established that I had a little bit of a self deprecation. Like I was kind of not accepting the fact that I thought well, and then when Maddie said that, she was like, you, when she said that to me, she said like, you can think well, like you need to stop using and making up all of these excuses for why you did a good job. You did well. And I need, like, you should be able to admit that, that you thought, and I started crying because I was like, Oh man, like, I just, I can barely, like, she said to me that I went around kind of telling people, Hey guys, like I wanted, I won the debate. Like I'm going to go represent Calgary at the AGM. Like, that's kind of cool. But it was hard. Like a part of me was like, yeah, I guess I didn't realise how hard it was to actually gloat, gloat about the fact that I did a good job on something. I was like, Oh man. And so I was fighting her a little bit, but I feel like that was the lesson that I learned like a week or so ago. Cause I was like, Oh, I need to be able to kind of admit that I can do a good job whole, like I didn't, I didn't see it. And then eventually I kind of learned that I think I might've gotten that from my parents, but yeah. Well, everybody's got, everybody's got their demons and you watch, you do enough watching you watch. And that's why, what you said earlier, Macy held so much ground about parents needing to know their psychology. Every human being needs to know their psychology, especially as parents, because you were going to get mimicked. Your kids are going to take the good from you, which we did for both our parents. We went all dad's really cool here. Mom's really cool here. And we wanted the best of both worlds, but subconsciously you're also going to mimic the bad. And so because you think it's, you think it's good. Like you think like me, no, me, not exactly. You might not even know for sure, but also man, like I could go down a hole. Like my brain goes so schism when I start to actually start to see what it is that I've gotten from my parents and like good and bad, good and bad. But when it comes to even the idea though, of like not thinking, who am I, right? Like, Oh, well, who am I to, you know, take credit for this thing or who am I to, you know, have a good idea. Well, and yeah, as a thinking, like we've always grown up thinking about psychology and stuff and looking at other people's demonstration. But as, as that is our thing, there's also that fear of arrogance. And so that's why even for you, sometimes you get swayed too much. People would say something, you just adopt their argument, even if they're worse. Yeah. Like I was so, when I learned about the left hemisphere, it was so funny. Cause again, you can get OCD by OCD, you can get left about left. So I got left about being left hemisphere in the sense of being dogmatic, where it's like you, you get ideological and you're kind of like, you're not, you're not, you're not being, you're not moving. Right. But being, saying I'll never be dogmatic is still a dogma. So like me trying to go like, Oh, I'm not going to get ideologically possessed. Well, then I, then it's, it's basically where it's like, well, there's no position from nowhere. So you have to still be standing on something. So you need to figure out what that is. It doesn't mean you can't get persuaded to change your mind, but it means that you still need to have a spine like, and be able to be able to own something that's yours. And the real own something that's yours. And the reality is some things are better than others. (54:47 - 55:08) Like there are higher keys of, of value in life. So even, even for our example with you and I, I growing up with, you know, my agreeability, you were known as a disagreeable kid. So even for being, and yet I'm the one that shifts on my, I'm like, Oh, I got really agreeable really fast. (55:08 - 55:21) Yeah. With certain things where you're a little bit more uncertain. I mean, you can be certain that a lot of the adults when we were growing up, they really had no place bossing us around in the first place, but I digress. (55:23 - 59:33) I look to you when I, when I started to realise what my proclivities were and where my weaknesses were, I saw that you were strong in them, even though you hadn't maybe honed it in or sharpened that strength yet and hadn't noticed it, that it was a strength yourself. I mimicked you cause I went, Oh no, she's got it and I need it. So that's even growing up why I've never thought myself better than you. And sisterly competition wasn't really something that I had because I knew where I wasn't from the start. And then I saw you and you had what I needed. And that's why I always say that you and I are better together cause you do really, you have made me a better person literally cause I mimicked you. And then you also just brought stuff out of me that frankly, I didn't think I had in the first place. Well, that was another reason why I was so shocked at one of the debates though, too, because like I said, it's like, I know Madison, like I learned a lot from her because, and I am now like lots because she's funny enough, like standing her ground on things and like not really getting, allowing herself to get too shoved because, and I'm like sometimes the exact opposite. And so I'm like, Oh, I really need to own this as my own and be confident in my knowledge that this is mine and that I've thought this through and earned it. You worked. Yeah. And it's going to like, I'm, I feel like to me, I got to trust the fact that it's not hard for me when I'm sitting down with the person I'm challenging to really, truly consider what they're saying. And like, cause like if that's what I'm afraid of as an, Oh no, what if I'm like not, if I'm being dogmatic, it's like, I'm naturally inclined now at this point where it's habit for me to just be like, Oh shit, that's a pretty good point. You know what I mean? It's like, I feel like I'm actually less inclined to be like, this is what I think. And I'm, I'm staying here and that's why I need to, why I need to practise it. Then I need to have the, the conflicts, I guess. Yeah. And that'll T that with that experience will come also confidence. Cause you'll watch things that, again, what you taught me is that there were things I was capable of that I didn't realise. And then that made me, I was so uncertain, certain about certain dynamics of my character until I saw repeatedly that with you, they, they were there, you know, there would be things where I'm like, Oh, am I really like this? And then I'd just watch my demonstration with you or you'd say something. I'm like, shoot. No, like with you, I actually, I got it. And you taught me how to do it. And so that time showed you really can have that confidence enough to own your decisions and get out there and do something. Cause you need enough confidence to own your decision, embody it, really reflect upon it. Cause you can't reflect accurately. If you're only holding it half in your hand, you need to, you need to really look at it. That's why the left hemisphere is also good to really map out that experience and then you can let it go. But if you're only, if you're in partly denial, then that don't work. Yeah. I feel like that might be a good place to end cause we are at 58 minutes. So speaking of holding my ground, I think we should end here. Yes. This has been a very interesting episode. It's been good. It's been kind of fun, actually. I'm like, Oh, you guys are getting to know a little bit more about how we're trying to think things through even in ourselves. I actually, I think a nice way to end it is even as we were mentioning like parents, you know, their psychology for their children as well. So that like for themselves and then it's like, you're still going to keep doing that. Like, and then you shouldn't stop. Like you, once you feel like, you know, it's like what we were talking about that, that constant being able to like hold things, like go things, hold things, like go things, hold things. And it doesn't mean fully let go of what you were holding. It just means expanding almost like if you could go wah, wah, wah, wah. So for those of you not seeing, I was doing an expansion thing with your hand. So that would be the point. Always expand. Yeah. Even when you're supposedly on the opposite side. And taking out is still expansion. It adds to the whole. Omitting is absolutely, that is, that is a good, that's a good differentiation. (59:34 - 59:43) Okay. Well, thank you guys for staying with us for 59 and 36, 37 seconds. This has been Holmes Squared.