Mark Passio, thank you so much for joining,
for Meet the Expert this week.
We're gonna be talking about natural law.
And it was your work that I came in contact with,
I think like 10 years ago,
when you gave your eight hour seminar on natural law,
that it just locked in and gave me a moral framework
for me to use that was easy to understand,
easy to course correct
and to like gain the experience
of putting it into action into my life to then fine tune it.
And so it's been able to guide me for the last 10 years
and I'm a much better person because of it.
Thank you so much for joining me today
and I'm excited for this discussion.
Joshua, thank you so much for the opportunity
and inviting me.
And I really appreciate those kind words, thank you.
Well, let's get into it because Mark,
if you had 30 seconds to just define natural law
for somebody brand new, how would you go about it?
I would give the working definition
that I generally gave in my natural law seminar
that natural law is a set of universal non-manmade,
binding and immutable conditions
that govern the consequences of the behavior of beings
that possess the capacity to understand the difference
between right and wrong or in other words,
non-harmful behavior versus harmful behavior.
That's my basic working definition of natural law.
It has nothing to do with man's law.
It has nothing to do with Darwinism
or any concept associated with Darwinism.
It is not a religion, it is not a belief system.
It is a behavioral science
that explains how human beings
or any given civilization for that matter
garners the results of the behavior
that they collectively put out into the universe.
So how is this different than just a belief
that like, oh, I shouldn't do that
because I believe that's wrong?
There is the objective component to behaviors
because behaviors exist in the natural 3D world
and therefore their characteristics
are not just subjective.
They have actual objective results in nature.
That's how I would define it from a belief system.
Beliefs just say it's because we were told this
or because we said so.
And natural law, we are actually defining
what constitutes harmful behavior
and why it is harmful.
It's demonstrable. It's observable.
It's objective.
It is not subject to someone's interpretation
because it actually diminishes from a being
or the property of another being.
And that's what delineates it from a belief system.
It has objective effects in nature.
And we'll break that up more here in a second.
But if I go and just Google natural law right now
I end up coming across all this confusing stuff from.
Damia from lawyers and like it gets really wish washy
when I start to like trying to understand it
from their perspective.
How is this different than those systems?
Search engines are absolutely wretched these days.
They really can't truly give you the results
that you're actually typing in and looking for.
And they'll often present very conflicting results.
So what you'll always encounter when you type in natural law
is you'll come across a very religious or Christian perspective
usually from Thomas Aquinas.
You may come across a completely
differing definition of natural law
that is trying to talk about it from the perspective
of animal behavior or, you know,
what would be called the law of the jungle.
And again, that's absolutely not
what I'm talking about when I talk about the term natural law.
Quite simply, natural law is the laws of the creator
of the universe regarding behavior of intelligent beings
of beings with the capacity for holistic intelligence,
whether they're utilizing actively that intelligence or not.
They have the capacity for it.
They have a brain and central nervous system
that is actually capable of processing the data
that leads to the accurate understanding of right versus wrong.
This is karmic law, essentially.
It is not about a religious connotation.
It is not about the interpretations of any given religion
or the church of the modern day or of the past.
And again, that's what you'll often encounter
when you search for the term.
What we would really define this as
is the laws of consequentialism, the laws of cause and effect.
It is what happens when we behave in certain ways
toward other beings, what results societally
for us in the aggregate.
So it is the law that governs the behavior
of all intelligent civilizations of beings.
And that's what I would say delineates it
from any other definition or variant
that may pop up during an Internet search
on a given search engine.
We have to understand that these are simply universal karmic laws.
They are laws that govern what we essentially receive
as a result of what we do.
And if our behavior is in alignment with natural law,
we receive order and prosperity and freedom.
And if our behavior is in opposition to natural law,
we receive very negative consequences such as disorder,
chaos, enslavement and ultimately death and extinction.
So let's define a couple of key concepts here.
You said immutable law, like what is that exactly?
Sure. So I gave a pretty, you know, big mouthful
for a working definition.
Some of the adjectives that I use to describe natural law
were universal.
That means that it's in effect anywhere in the universe.
Anywhere you go, this law is still in effect.
That's the definition of universal.
It exists everywhere at all times and all places
for as long as the universe exists.
So once again, we're not talking about anything that's manmade.
So that's the second definition, non-manmade.
So these are inherent conditions.
They are not made by us.
They are pre-existing to human beings and will exist there.
If human beings go extinct, they will it will exist
after human beings existed is not contingent upon anything
human beings do.
It's non-manmade.
It's made by the creator of the universe.
If you have a problem with that term or you have a problem
with the term God, you have a problem with the term creator,
I personally don't even really care much about that.
It's this it's made by whatever the same force
and intelligence that created all of the other physical laws.
So if you believe in the physical laws
and they had to have some type of prime source,
they didn't just magically manifest.
They didn't just come from zero and nothing in nowhere.
There has to be some type of universal underlying intelligence
that created these laws because they are not random.
They actually have very rigid guidelines
that they operate by just like any physical laws
like gravity, electromagnetism, etc.
So they're non-manmade.
They're created by whatever force or intelligence
created all the other laws of nature.
They are binding.
That's another adjective that I use.
So binding means that they're in effect, whether we like it or not,
and they actually are governing dynamics.
They are the governing dynamics of human behavior
and consciousness ultimately.
So binding means they have an effect,
whether we believe in it, whether we understand it,
whether we know about it, doesn't matter.
I liken this to a child walking off a small child
of, let's say, two years old, a toddler,
walking off a 3,000-foot cliff or ledge
in a national forest or something, a national park.
The laws of gravity do not take into consideration
that the child is ignorant of them.
It is just in effect and horrible as it may be.
If the child goes over the edge, it's going to die.
It's going to hit the ground and die
just like an adult would that knows about the law of gravity.
So it's not a personal force.
It's just a law of nature.
This is why I say it's not contingent upon belief
and it's not a religion.
It's not a religious notion.
It is simply a law within the natural universe.
And they are immutable,
which means that there is nothing humanity can do
to change them or take them out of effect, these laws.
So immutable means incapable of being changed
by anyone or any other force.
It is simply inherent to the fabric of creation itself
and the underlying intelligence and dynamics of creation.
We can do nothing to take them out of effect.
Those are the general adjectives that I used to describe it
in my basic definitions for, you know, those descriptors.
Thanks, that's really helpful.
Now, how would you define right versus wrong?
So a right is an action
that does not initiate harm against another sentient being.
So again, I've given what is called an apophatic definition,
meaning I'm defining a right in the negative of what it is not.
A right is an action
that does not initiate harm against another sentient being.
A wrongdoing is an action
that does initiate harm against another sentient being.
So we can categorically define what objectively constitutes a wrong
or what are the wrongdoings that actually create a violation
against someone's rights under natural law.
So if there's no initiation of harm,
all behaviors are reserved as rights.
If there is initiation of harm, that is against natural law
and will garner negative consequence.
So we can define what what rights are by knowing the actions
that constitute transgressions against rights,
which are transgressions against natural law.
Those seven wrongdoings are what I in my work
call the real seven deadly sins,
because I try to delineate them from the absolutely incorrect
and obfuscating religious notions of what transgressions are.
I like the word transgression more than the word sin,
which carries a heavy religious connotation,
but for people who are trapped in the mentation of religion
and religious traditions, which obfuscate morality
instead of giving true morality and the definitions of it,
they just arbitrarily make up what they find
are some things that they don't like or find deplorable.
And they then say this is this is morality and this is immorality.
And it's an arbitrary definition chosen upon women preference.
Instead, we have to understand what the objective harms are.
So if we understand what the objective harms are,
we're going to understand how natural law actually operates.
And what we simply must stop doing
if we don't want to keep creating chaos in our lives and in our world.
So the seven natural law transgressions,
or if you want to call them the seven deadly sins,
the real ones instead of the religious ones are murder, assault,
rape, theft, trespass, coercion and deception.
These are the seven things that actually diminish
another being in their person or property.
So murder is the theft of life without the right to do so.
It's not self-defense.
It's not killing in self-defense.
It's murder and killing in self-defense are two different behaviors.
So murder is taking life and you initiated the taking of life without right.
That's murder. So it's a form of theft, OK,
as we're going to see all of the transgressions are simply forms of theft.
Assault is the initiation of the taking of physical well-being without right.
Again, not self-defense, but pure aggression.
OK, so that's what assault is based upon.
So it is the theft of well-being without right.
Rape is the theft of free will sexual association without right.
It's also a form of coercion, obviously.
Theft is simply the stealing of property with that wasn't yours to take.
So obviously that's self-explanatory.
Then we have trespass.
That's the the stealing or taking of someone's safety
in their own living domain or their own layer without right.
So you're initiating violence in that capacity.
Then we have coercion.
This is the taking of someone else's free will,
their right to make an informed decision of their own free will.
So that's a form of theft.
And this is one of the biggest ones coercion.
It's everywhere.
That's what basically all government is all claims of authority
are backed by coercion and duress.
And then we have deception,
which is taking someone's ability to make an informed decision
because you're deliberately inserting misinformation,
disinformation, outright lies to take someone away from the truth
so that they can't make an informed decision.
So these are all forms of theft.
All of them have the one commonality that you're stealing
something from someone else that you have no right to.
That is not your property is someone else's property.
And you're simply taking it.
So all of natural law could be boiled down to a very simple phrase.
Don't steal.
Natural law is the prescription against all forms of theft.
It is basically attempting to relay the message to human beings
that you are here to learn what your property is
and what your property is not and do not take that,
which does not belong to you to take.
So utilize your own property, exercise your own rights,
do not transgress against someone else's rights, life rights and property.
It really can't get any simpler.
It's so simple.
It is unbelievable that people still cannot understand these dynamics
this late in the game, in the whole process
of which we find ourselves ensconced in this entire
dynamic of tyranny in which we find ourselves.
And that is because people do not understand the real true objective
difference between right behavior and wrong behavior, sad as that is to say.
Yeah, that that simple concept is what anchors into my mind
so that in real time, right, I can make informed decisions
of how I want to operate here in reality.
And having this natural law and and and being able to, you know,
really set into some complex scenarios and be able to like simplify it is really helpful.
I got a personal scenario that I'm going to bring up that I that I did
what ran into a couple of weeks ago.
But first, I'll throw a couple softballs at you.
So say you're an employee and you're asked by your manager
to manipulate some client data to make some performance metrics look better.
What do you do?
Definitely against natural law, a form of deception.
You're basically lying to people who are relying on accurate data.
So definitely in opposition to natural law.
Pretty clear cut, as far as I'm concerned.
See, a neighbor repeatedly trespasses on your land to dump yard debris.
You politely ask them to stop when they continue.
You set up a simple fence and post a respectful warning note.
Is that a good way to handle the situation?
I would say it is.
That's your your first line of trying to set up boundaries
when they're not respected, when, you know, simply politely asking
when they should really be understood and respected from the beginning.
So yes, that is that's an acceptable way of beginning setting up boundaries.
And in this case, it's actually a physical one.
So what's step one for somebody who wants to build a natural law base
inter compass, like how do they, you know, put install this?
I would say one of the first things is you have to understand how this
behavioral governing dynamic works in all of our lives collectively.
This is what I refer to as the law of freedom.
It's one of the biggest parts of natural law.
This will solidify it in people's mindset and mental framework
such that they can begin to align their behavior to it.
The law of freedom is very simple as morality increases in the aggregate
of any given civilization or population, freedom increases.
And as morality declines in the aggregate in any given civilization,
the aggregate freedom declines.
So this is the actual dynamic that is directly related to how human freedom
either grows or shrinks.
Are we living free or are we living enslaved?
Are we living free according to our natural rights?
Are we living in tyranny?
So that's the law of freedom as collective morality increases,
collective freedom increases as collective morality declines,
collective freedom declines.
Once you really understand that basic governing dynamic in the universe,
then you can use that as a guidepost or as a compass to set
your direction for your behavior in life.
That's how I would say people should really gauge what is really going on
in our society at large and ultimately set their own moral compass.
Morality is the actual defining dynamic.
It is a governing dynamic for human freedom.
Now, I was going to weigh this a bit deeper into the pool
and in simple terms, how does knowing and living by natural law
empower you against corrupt or centralized system?
Very important because what you will do in ignorance of natural law
is you won't even really understand what true corruption is.
You won't understand evil.
See, the ignorance of natural law and objective morality
ultimately equates to naivete for evil in the world.
And if we are aware of these dynamics and how they work
over all of society, all of human society,
then we will become street wise to the corruption and the tyranny
that is going on all around us.
It will be easier to see once we really truly understand
the objective and true difference between right and wrong.
And this unfortunately is why religious institutions
were ultimately created.
They were created by the ruling class and the the the tyrants
of our societies to obfuscate what is the actual real world
difference between right and wrong.
And that's why so few people really know the difference
between right and wrong truly and objectively.
They're operating according to either secular definitions
of right and wrong or they're operating according to religious
definitions of right and wrong.
Both are inadequate.
This is a universal spiritual base of law that exists
in the cosmos.
It has nothing to do with man made laws and it has nothing
to do with man made religions.
It is simply the governing dynamics of the universe when
it comes to behavior of civilizations that have the
capacity for holistic intelligence.
So that is how I would say people can really understand
these dynamics and begin to align their behavior to them
to see what's going on around them, you know, geopolitically
and socially and spiritually and then align their behavior
to the true right, which will absolutely increase human
freedom and the order of human civilization.
There's a lot more to that, but everybody needs to just
just start walking the road in order to, you know, see the
direction that that hits.
I have a real time scenario.
So a couple of weeks ago, I went and saw my favorite
band Rising Appalachia.
It was an incredible concert and they made an announcement.
Hey, we've got some merch at the table in the back and
you know, we'd love it if you support us and I turned
around and there was this massive line to the merch
table, right?
I ended up talking to people and found myself right next
to the front of the merch table and they had these killer
hats and they only had like five of them.
This line was like, you know, went far and I took out
$20 and just kind of scooted over to the table and
hand put my put my $20 out.
The lady grabbed it, gave me a hat.
I said, yes, I love this hat.
I love this band and then I sat with it for a while afterwards
and Mark, according to natural law, did I violate it?
I would say the closest violation would be trespass upon
other space in line, which they sort of took rightfully
and you bypassed.
So that that is it's, you know, it's a light transgression,
but I would say it's a transgression.
I thought you were going to tell me that you offered people
to switch places with you in line with the money, but just
going up cutting the line.
Yes, it's a it's a light form of trespasses.
What I would have to say.
It was easy to justify in the moment because of how much
I wanted this hat and then upon thinking about it,
I reached the same conclusion that I stole the opportunity
from somebody that was, you know, agreeing to the social
agreement, which I didn't really agree to, but, you know,
that's kind of how lines work.
And so taking I'd have to agree with that assessment.
Yes, but taking the scenario, right?
Once you realize, you know, you're out of alignment
with natural law, what do you do next?
Like, how do you fine tune your compass?
You know, in a scenario like that, it would be difficult
because you don't know who the people are.
But really what it ultimately amounts to is you have to
rectify the situation.
So if you analyze that in the moment and you said,
well, you know, who were the people in line?
Were you going to buy a hat if you went through the line
and said this was your opportunity, not mine and give
that give them the opportunity to purchase it?
That's rectifying the situation in the moment post something
like that.
You really can't can't truly rectify that scenario.
So recognizing that you did do something that was in
violation of natural law, if you simply make amends with
it within yourself and agree not to do it again.
That's a form of, you know, basically bringing about
what needs to happen from an internal perspective to
write that situation.
You're not in a position to write it physically,
but you can write it mentally, at least in the sense
that you will not do that again.
That was the same conclusion that I came to.
Like I figured it out.
I came to that conclusion post after the event and really
that's all that I could do is just fine tune my compass,
which is an ongoing process, right?
Like we're never perfect.
No one's perfect at all in any way.
All we can do is strive to be better than the person
we were the day before.
That's it.
That's who we're competing with.
We're not competing with anyone externally.
We're competing with ourselves from yesterday.
So that is, you know, I would say, you know, a the
only thing that you can do at that point, you know,
that that's what you're going to do.
What you can do to improve your own understanding of it.
We all give in to certain temptations.
We all give in to certain, you know, throws in the moment.
That's going to happen.
None of us are perfect.
So that that's a again, a light transgression, but yes,
definitely not in alignment with it.
And your understanding of that makes you much less likely
to repeat that transgression in the future.
I thought that was a good scenario to bring up, right?
I was going to tell Mark Passio that I violated natural
law and yeah, there are consequences and it's an opportunity
though for one for me to be real and vulnerable with myself
to actually like examine is the first step and then got to
be honest with yourself.
Definitely.
That's the first step.
Yep.
And then and then there's an embarrassment, right?
Like, oh, I did something wrong and it's tip like
human nature to kind of like hide those things of, you
know, when you were not correct and right.
I just could call real confession.
It's not it's not the religious notion of it.
You just told people you did something wrong, recognize that
and then you make a commitment not to repeat it.
And I have a seven year old daughter who I'm teaching
these things to.
So this is a great opportunity for me to like pass down
this knowledge and fine tuning of my compass down to her.
So I have, you know, gained good benefit from it
and thought it was a great thing to share with everybody.
In closing, Mark, you know, what's one practical step
that our audience can take today like right now?
What I always tell people is what you really have to do
is change your own worldview and your own thoughts.
If in the aggregate, the worldview and the thoughts
that we have had collectively as a species have led
to the current human condition.
And if you don't understand that that slavery and tyranny
you're not awake.
You're not paying attention.
You're not very conscious.
So if you understand that the current mindset and worldview
and thought processes have led to the current human condition,
then you understand it's ultimately your responsibility
to reevaluate your worldview and your thought processes
and come to a better understanding of how things really
work in nature and in our reality and in our society.
So to those ends, I always recommend people to go to
my website, waddlenerthishappening.com and listen
to my podcast series and watch my podcast series in order
and you'll see a very natural stepwise progression
that I designed to help move people's worldview
along in the right direction.
It's very deliberately set up that way.
And if people take the time, again, that's one
of the spiritual currencies, time and attention.
If they utilize those currencies, their time
and their attention and really truly spend the time
with that material and truly pay attention to it and attempt
to integrate it into their own consciousness.
Their worldview will change for the better.
They will have a better grasp and understanding
of the dynamics that have led humanity into the current
situation that it's in and they'll have a much clearer
notion of what the true solutions are to get
out of the human condition of slavery.
So that's waddlenerthishappening.com.
Click on the podcast tab.
Start from number one.
Don't skip around.
Go in order at your own pace.
That's my best recommendation.
Anybody and then, you know, check out my presentation
series and my my lectures, my videos.
I've had short documentary on natural law.
Well, it's like full length.
It's like over an hour, about an hour and 10 minutes.
I recommend that one to people too called Mark Pascio
and the science of natural law.
So those are my recommendations for people just
getting started with this material.
And those are my resources for a much better
understanding of it.
Mark, thanks so much for your time today.
My life has greatly improved since coming across
natural law the way that you were able to, you know,
simply share it.
I will have also a link to the eight hour natural law
seminar that I originally saw and thank you again
for your time.
Joshua, thank you so much.
Thank you for all the great work that you've done
over the years, my friend.