Wisdom in fragments

The most important thing to me is that wealth has allowed me to live a full life, rich with experiences. I see wealth more as a means to experience than a way to acquire things. It has also given me control over my own time.

I've always felt like a natural-born Stoic. When I first read Stoic philosophy, I thought, Oh my God, this is exactly how I've been thinking since childhood. It wasn't a revelation so much as a way to organize the responses that already came naturally to me.

For me, it wasn't about creating a traditional business plan but rather channelling my 1960s mindset—I aimed to amaze and captivate people. I wanted passersby to wonder, 'Have you seen that? What's going on there?' Ultimately, this desire to make an impression has been the connecting thread in everything I've undertaken.

I see myself as someone who seeds ideas well, but others execute them far better. I learned this the hard way; if I'd continued running everything, neither business would have survived. So, my approach was simple: spend three years as a controlling megalomaniac, then completely let go.

I recall attending an annual event at the Albert Hall hosted by the Institute of Directors. The chairman, at 75, admitted he'd changed his mind—success, he concluded, truly lies in your ability to connect and resonate emotionally with people, thereby inspiring them to action.

My goal was simply attracting large numbers of customers because mass appeal guarantees profit. I often advised not to obsess over immediate profits but to prioritise popularity. Like Amazon or Apple, success comes from creating something that garners mass recognition and love.

I don't believe there's a universal formula for success—I can only share what worked for me, which was driven by enthusiasm for new ideas. What I value most in people is enthusiasm—not passion, which I find overused—but genuine enthusiasm to see opportunities and act upon them.

Our body operates both quantumly and classically, and the quantum computation within us is far more sophisticated than any quantum computer we could imagine building—so we already possess that capability. Yet consciousness does not reside in our body, however quantum or classical it may be; it resides in the field that we are. This field communicates with the body and, through it, exerts control.

Co-Inventor of the Microprocessor & Founder of Zilog

We are fields endowed with consciousness and free will, existing in a reality deeper than the familiar realm of space, time, and interacting objects—precisely the view scientism asserts: that we are merely bodies, properties of physical matter. But scientism is mistaken. Consciousness exists independently of any physical form; it resides in the underlying field that instantiates the matter and energy we measure in space and time.

Co-Inventor of the Microprocessor & Founder of Zilog

They described, for example, taste as if it were just electrical signals in the brain, but there's no way such signals alone can produce the sensation of taste. That's the hard problem of consciousness: qualia—the sensations and feelings through which we know the world and ourselves—bear no resemblance to electrical impulses, and physics offers no explanation for how one could give rise to the other.

Co-Inventor of the Microprocessor & Founder of Zilog

Consciousness lies beyond the framework of quantum mechanics. It must be regarded as a primitive of the universe itself, not merely of brains. If consciousness is a universal primitive, then the entire totality of what exists is conscious and desires self‑knowledge. That offers the best way to understand evolution and why we can know: we are parts of a greater whole, we are fields—not bodies. The body is simply the creation of the field, enabling the field to have experiences in a reality collectively constructed by a multitude of fields.

Co-Inventor of the Microprocessor & Founder of Zilog

There's a considerable correlation between symbols and meaning—especially given how we train modern computer networks these days with unbelievable amounts of data and trillions of parameters. Each parameter is a number representing a probability, but with so many parameters, the answer you get—if you can't follow the vast number of steps—seems unpredictable, much like flipping a coin and not knowing heads or tails. But if you could view all the information, you could determine with certainty which side lands up—that's classical physics. Only in quantum physics does probability acquire a different meaning.

Co-Inventor of the Microprocessor & Founder of Zilog

Fusion – or 'identity fusion' to be more precise – is basically a form of group alignment in which essential features of your personal identity are felt to be shared with the group. What this means is that there are basically two ways of becoming fused. One is to undergo an experience that becomes a core feature of who you are – such as a painful or frightening ordeal.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

The power of routinization is that it allows you to spread a shared set of identity markers to a large population—and to do so very quickly. All you need is a handful of proselytizing leaders willing to travel from village to village, spreading the same ideas and behaviours, and you can soon create a vast tradition encompassing hundreds of communities.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

Social synchrony is a big feature of human behaviour—it's a weird thing if you think about it, but we do things like marching in time and parading and singing in choirs in ways that are highly coordinated and synchronised. One of the psychological effects of that is it can blur the boundaries between self and group and create this feeling that you are the group, and the group is you.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

I'm particularly interested in the human propensity to copy behaviours that lack any kind of knowable causal structure. This is how we learn arbitrary conventions—and I think it originates in a distinctively human way of building group identities. I describe ritual actions as causally opaque. We engage in this kind of behaviour even more enthusiastically when we're anxious about being excluded or left out.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms