Eric Weinstein: The State of American Science, Breakthrough Coverups, and the Danger of Physics

**Eric Weinstein** (0:00)
We have become a **** nation when it comes to science.

**David Friedberg** (0:02)
You were called a fringe scientist.

**Eric Weinstein** (0:04)
I keep saying fringe.

**David Friedberg** (0:05)
Yeah.

**Eric Weinstein** (0:06)
I totally disagree with the narrative of the field. I want to blow a giant hole in the Civil Rights Act. The stagnation of physics may have led to the survival of the human species. When we make this jump, the world will become unrecognizable.

**David Friedberg** (0:25)
As your wealth grows, have you noticed how much more complex things get? Between investments, tax strategy, and estate planning, managing it all is a full-time job you didn't ask for. Creative Planning can help. Their coordinated team of investment managers, CPAs, and affiliated estate attorneys can do much of the heavy lifting so you don't have to. Creative Planning, where wealth works together. Go to creativeplanning.com/all-in.
Eric Weinstein, mathematician, physicist, economist, PhD in mathematical physics from Harvard, National Science Foundation postdoc, and our fellow at Harvard published a proposed mathematical framework and speculative unified field theory called Geometric Unity in 2021 Formally with Thiel Capital, podcast host and guest. Welcome to the All-In interview.

**Eric Weinstein** (1:17)
It's great to be here. Now, where are the besties?

**David Friedberg** (1:19)
They declined the opportunity because this is an extended science corner that-

**Eric Weinstein** (1:25)
I can't believe that Jason has turned Thiel and ran.

**David Friedberg** (1:29)
No, you and I, I mean, just for the audience, you and I both happen to be in DC right now. So we're in a rented studio during this interview, but good timing. What brings you to DC?

**Eric Weinstein** (1:41)
Opportunity. I'm really excited. I'm meeting with the Department of War and took the opportunity to stay a couple extra days. Been talking to Director Kratzios over at OSTP and the White House Science Advisor. Fantastic meeting. Been talking to Jay Bhattacharya, who's an old friend over at NIH. About to talk to Jim O'Neill, who's hopefully coming into NSF.

**David Friedberg** (2:04)
Yeah.

**Eric Weinstein** (2:04)
And really just taking a look at the first major proposal to reform American science since Vannevar Bush at the end of World War II. So this couldn't be more exciting.

**David Friedberg** (2:16)
Did Kratzios tell you that I just interviewed him on this topic?

**Eric Weinstein** (2:18)
No.

**David Friedberg** (2:19)
Okay. Well, I did. Okay. You guys are old colleagues, right?

**Eric Weinstein** (2:22)
Yeah. Michael's great. And so that came up. He said, you know, here I am in this new role. And I guess I was sort of worried at this report. You know, obviously he's filling huge shoes.
And I was worried that it was going to be a disaster. And I was stunned at how good it was. I mean, it wasn't perfect, but never is. And then I told you that. And you said that, well, you and I had been talking and that you had been conveying a lot of these issues to him. I feel like he's really grown into this role, trying to become a student of the American Science Project. And I couldn't be happier at hearing him say things like, we know that we don't know everything. We're just at the beginning. We're just getting started. So it looks like a great blueprint.

**David Friedberg** (3:08)
Government-driven science has played a fundamental role in the success of the Republic, at least over the last 100 years, the last 50, 75 years. Prior to that, there's an argument to be made in Science and the Golden Age that Kratzioth published and that others have been making. I've heard you make it, that science has really stalled in America. Can you make that case for us now?

**Eric Weinstein** (3:28)
Well, it's a question of which science has stalled.
So one of the great things about what Michael is saying is that science is a big place and it's not being done in one way.
So what I really think is the biggest, if you wanted to sort of fly over and give an idea of what's at risk, it's the absolutely courageous science that we can afford to do as a rich, ruggedly individualistic nation that no one else can afford to do. And so more or less, when I see us doing incremental research and doing things that are incredibly careful with low variance and calling it excellence, I get depressed because my feeling is that what we should be taking on is the bets no one else can afford to take on. It's also the case that our chief geopolitical rivals, China, has a problem with freedom. And quite honestly, freedom is a weapon. It is a serious advantage that we can afford to look at ourselves and say we don't do everything perfectly. And we want to know the truth. I want to know whether Fauci killed 10 million people. I should be able to investigate that as a virologist, as an epidemiologist. I should be able to get answers and go through the process of justice. When we have a situation which our scientists are hamstrung because the conclusion is known ahead of time, we limit our own ability to use cowboy science to drive the rest of the world. And quite honestly, we're giving away our biggest advantage, which is the middle finger. The American ability to say screw you to a supervisor tells you what is true and what isn't true. A young person should be able to say, hey, I think my field is going in entirely the wrong direction and I'm willing to bet my career on it. Don't interfere.