Bret Weinstein - The Greatest Prediction in Evolutionary Theory | Eric Weinstein
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ส.ค. 2024
- In this Portal podcast clip, Eric Weinstein and Bret Weinstein discuss Richard (Dick) Alexander and his crazy prediction of the existence of Eusocial mammals.
Please give this clip a LIKE and SUBSCRIBE for more clips every Saturday.
This episode of The Portal was initially released on the 18th of January, 2020.
--LINK TO THE MAIN EPISODE:
• Bret Weinstein on "The...
Clip Start: 00;37;16 (bit.ly/3fbv5vS)
Clip End: 00;46;37 (bit.ly/2Zv8Ryk)
--SEND US A CLIP SUGGESTION
forms.gle/RtGu...
--CLIP SUGGESTION CREDITS:
afke.
--WEBSITE:
ericweinstein....
--TWITTER:
/ theportalclips
--INSTAGRAM:
/ theportalclips
We're trying to share important messages in bite-sized packets. If you enjoyed this clip, please share the video, it really does help a lot.
--SHARE THIS VIDEO:
• Bret Weinstein - The G...
--QUOTES FROM THIS VIDEO:
"This is like one of the great moments in modern science."
"I once heard a story about a graduate student who predicted that the breeding protocols of laboratory rodents would compromise the laboratory system in terms of its relationship to so-called wild type versions of the same species."
#BretWeinstein #RichardAlexander #EricWeinstein
![[TH] VALORANT Champions Seoul - Grand Final - EDG vs TH](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/WvObMc9VelI/mqdefault.jpg)
Such a sweet exchange at the end. Eric so proud of his brother Bret and thinks it’s a travesty that he’s not recognized as he should be.
Imagine the conversations at the dinner table when they where kids
I started to imagine it. Then I learned that they're not that smart, so I quit.
Garry Coates I imagine their Father screaming, “Get to bed!!”, many hours after dinner was over.
@yaggle fraggle I can't tell if that's an insult to Tim or not lol
@yaggle fraggle if they're not then who is?
yaggle fraggle they have IQs way beyond yours I can assume that from your ignorant comment. Have you not watched Eric on joe rogan? He knows a lot about a lot of different subjects. They are both intuitive thinkers and are speaking at a frequency far beyond anyone I talk to on a daily basis, maybe your ego is too fragile to admit they’re smart
Clever clip with a hint at the end
Actually it was cringy af
the ending gave me chills
I'm not ashamed to say but I absolutely love you guys. Its a breath of fresh air having smart, inquisitive and knowledgeable humans talking with each other. So good. Thank you
fascinating stuff. I like this "clips" format - makes the highlights of the discussion very accessable and shareable. Thanks Bret and Eric !
Heard an analogy about Eric and Brett being compared to Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes. Rang true to me
👍👍
Who is whom? Which one is Mycroft?
@@enkibumbu Eric is clearly Mycroft.
They're not lazy enough, nor are they interested in fighting.
@@altruisticscoundrel True. A best analogy would be Christopher Hitchens and Peter Hitchens
Can feel the love from Eric so much in that last sentence. It's quite beautiful.
It’s very sweet.
Two of the most modest, humble, selfless, egoless speakers of knowledge and intelligence
"I don't know of another example in evolutionary theory of something that clean and that obscure."
"I know one!"
"...oh yeah? 😳😳😳"
Here we go...
I love the way Eric always let's Bret finish his sentences.
OMG I had no idea Brett was the one who brought attention to the possible serious problems with the bred rodents for experiments programs. IMPRESSIVE, to say the least.
I also just realized you two are brothers. This is amazing because I have always been so impressed by both of you!
I love how overtime watching these and studying I can come back and understand things I didn’t the first time. Way better than overtime spotting the coffee cup in Game of Thrones
It's interesting how Bret's experience at Evergreen catapulted him into the limelight where he's now on Rogan, all over the podcast lecture circuit... He's certainly insightful in conversations on Evolution. (I went to Evergreen in the late 90's. Critical thinking was valued as foundational. I blame the internet, social media & it's effect on that particular generation)
When you have a brother like that you can fight the world 😘
Like Germany did, twice!?
@@dragons_red Norm MacDonald finds his way into every comment section in my feed somehow
I've got to listen to this again. I saw that moth! 2006 in Yogyakarta.
Indonesia stand up!
Clarence Garay - if I reply to you, like this, will I be famous too.
You both inspire me, thank you for your work and effort!
Delicious food for thought, gentlemen! Wise & witty...the dynamic duo! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼🌹
i feel like i'm too stupid to listen to this podcast but i still do...
Nonsense keep stimulating the mind
LOL! I was thinking the exact same the other day - and here I am again.
that just means you want to learn, and anyone who wants to broaden their knowledge is not stupid.
Reading is better for breaching into new topics because u can take your time. Evolution is a great topic explains a lot about how to live and the forces that pull us around.
It's good to listen to things a bit beyond your understanding. Forces your mind to stretch to accommodate.
Is anyone else confused how this prediction demonstrates that these systems are the products of natural selection working on random variation?
I think the randomness starts at a specific point and if that randomness is successful for that environment, the gene mutations that continue down that path become more and more defined where it no longer seems random because you’re randomizing genes that have already bounded themselves to the success of the environment.
The way you can think about it is when the evolutionary “branches” start happening is when true RNG seems to exist whereas once a “selection” has been made, the genes now randomize to further that selection.
The mentioned prediction could have been made by a creationist as well. Creationists and evolutionists both believe nature consists of generations of systems that differ slightly from their predecessors. Both can make predictions by observing holes in a known system. The reproductive system of a flower consists of not only the flower itself but also the insects or the wind that disperses their seed. So if you find a new flower you have found only part of the system, and you can fill in the holes. A creationist could have made the same prediction because he shares these assumptions: everything in nature is functional for reproduction, DNA determines a significant part of a biological system, everything is subject to change. The controversial claims are about origins of life and different biological systems, not about present functional biology.
Well, in the most basic sense, what they are inferring (yes they did not directly connect the dots) is the scientific idea that a prediction made from a theory that comes true strengthens the validity of that theory. Making good predictions with evolutionary theory is difficult though, it requires one to know alot of specifics about biology as it has evolved on Earth, the specific environments here, and quite a bit of the history of the Earth biome.
Otherwise, random mutation and natural selection are just open ended processes that could virtually lead to anything. You need a context for them to make predictions.
The unfortunate situation here is they made it sound like this guys prediction was never put to paper, just an offhand comment, so the scientific community may never know what methods he deduced this principles by, which is key for it's usefulness in Science.
Yes the probability alone that he could have predicted this and accidentally matched real world is so low that Scientists may consider that proof enough, but I am one to hold them to their own rules, less they drift more and more into the religious or bias confirmation types of thinking that they were a response to in origin.
There is great difficulties with Sciences like evolution, global warming, diet/nutrition because the don't lend themselves well (or at all) to some of the basic tenents of the Scientific method like prediction, reproducibility, null hypothesis, variable control. Global warming is probably the worst of these, and Scientists over the years have made "accommodations" unfortunately to allow some of these theories to hold weight despite their shortcomings (which I think has more to do with an epistemological crisis arising as Science is showing it's limits to what it can inform us on, as previously the West had embraced it as the savior of man with all the great, and not so great, technology it has given us).
Anyway, I personally believe evolutionary theory is more or less correct, but likely genetics will reveal some even more bizarre stuff going on than we know yet that factors into the big picture. The gap between atoms and molecules obeying the laws of physics to self organization of molecular chains is the biggest gap to explore IMO.
I also think the divide between creationism and evolution is an illusion. To use Eric's phrase from an interview I saw him in recently "they are just describing things using different coordinate systems". Not to say that helps things, just highlighting one of the biggest roadblocks humans have as "reasoned, thinking" creatures.
I find the prediction about the flower and the long-tongued moth incoherent. Is "selection" working on the plant or on the moth. How could the flower even exist and duplicate itself without the moth to begin with. The two species (plant and moth) would have to spring up together.
umiluv So I guess my question is: how do we know that the phenomenon we’re observing is the product of a series of random, but bounded, gene mutations, as opposed to some other mechanism? I’m having trouble with the causal link.
It has always puzzled me how did the orchids get pollinated before the “pollinated” come along.
What I really want to know is who mom loved the most!
That’s a very nasty question in a narcissistic parental framework. I hope their parents did not have favorites but appreciated them for the differences.
@@umiluv Someone has never heard of the Smothers Brothers.
so the orchid and moth evolved together.
Slade The Original - nope. God made 'em at the same time silly
Steve McCormick lmao
Genius.. I hope you don't get corrupted by this fisherman technic but the double delivery it's just genius.
Liviu Mircea Vomir - but Dick Alexander was a bigger genius.
Eric needs to take care of his health. He's an important historical figure and generally a voice for progress.
I wish he was history.
Karl P - you love Eric, admit it.
As someone with much experience with fitness I suspect that Fit Eric would be far more boring than the real Eric. Being fit is like having a clean desk, it seems a small thing but can put a hard limit on the difficult business of real progress.
Y'all ever buy pants that fit?
Freaking scientists can theorize evolution but can’t find the right pant size
@@user-fo4wd7hy4b AAAAAAHHAHAHAHAH GET OUTTA MY FACE RIGHT NOW
Bradley Bohus it’s a banner of pride for nerds.
The worst part is, what Eric is wearing aren't even trousers that are too short, they're shorts which are too long.
Spinoza very good observation
Which came first? The moth or the flower?
That was awesome
Watch the captions at the 3:58 mark on Xbox TH-cam... Hilarious mistranslation.
Anyone know why the captions vary from device to device?
What effort was made to test the theory at the end?
Every time I watch these guys I spend hours on wikipedia just to understand the words they are using.
The idw should revive itself with a channel of its own that aggregates the best of clips from its members for an hour long presentation each week. Maybe something to feature on thinkspot to help drive the development of a mobile app
Shout out to Kim Possible
What was Weinstein doin at Evagreen? Dude shoulda been at Hahvad.
He and his family prefer the PNW. It would have been nice to have him at the UW though.
No no no. Evergreen is an agenda driven educational machine driven by the oligarchy. Check it out.
I'm all like, "bread rats?"
It would be interesting to know about multiple examples, if any, of genetic modifications that are dead end imminent failures of poor adaptations. If anyone wants to support the idea of randomness of adaptations, then finding examples of one of the arguably far more examples of failed changes should be the easiest thing to find.
Imagine being the person who designed these flowers and insects that
work together in cooperation from the start. Then somewhere in the
future, listening to this conversation. What would you think?
I'm very rapidly getting totally fckn sick of the Weinsteins.
you guys have some awesome bass in your mix
i have a system that picks it up
Can't help seeing someone else when I look at Bret and that is the actor Jon Bernthal who played the Punisher on netflix.
"Yeah... I did that"
Y’all need heard by anyone that hasn’t learned independent thinking and how it happens. Curiosity is key. But challenging all ‘truths’ , in one’s on head or written, to exhaustion is our human duty.
i never realised these two were different people before
I love these guys!
How does evolution know what it's doing better along the way? Like how does evolution know what's working and what's not?
if something doesn't work then the organism probably won't live to breed
@@sidarthur8706 Totally that makes sense.
The organism dies off if their mutation is bad but survives and BREEDS if it bis a good mutation!
I"m embarrassed that I still don't fully understand evolution, even after watching several videos on the topic. I think I will just go back to believing in creationism, so much simpler!!! And god said "let there by moths with long tongues" and there was, and they were good.
@Pecu AlexAnd God said "Let there be Troll's" and there was, and they were bad.
@Jack. Love your humor.
Grey Dyvr - I don’t think you understand what the term “theory” means in science.
The story about carol makes me extremely angry. Something similar happened to me with a proposed business model.
Love this content
When a room with two people in it hits an average of 300-350 iq.
They're both somewhere between 120-150 a pop. Anything above 150 is usually highly correlated with communicative and behavioral disorders, and high IQ doesn't necessarily make someone a good scientist/speaker, although once again, it's highly correlated between certain ranges
The brother is like "got'cha"
Very interesting clip ♥♥♥! As a fellow TH-camr, I am always looking for fresh ideas! Good Job!
🤣🤣🤣 exactly, so cringy btw and not at all smart
Explain the Cambrian explosion.
They cant
that's not that mysterious, it's a very long period of time over which hard bodied animals emerged and diversified. i'll tell you something that's infinitely more interesting and mysterious. have a read about the francevillian snd ediacaran biota
this is adorable. I wish I had this kind of relationship with my sibling.
Evan Nagel - first you gotta be this smart. Kidding!
magic can be helpful
drwestlund - no shortage of that in today's scientism.
Hellstrom's Hive by Frank Herbert
1973
Wow, have not heard that name in a while.
Is that the one where a maniac scientist made people thar comnunicated like ants?
@@ineversleep9715 ,
That's the one.
@@markwac247 a few years ago, i found a used bookstore that had lots of his out of print stuff.
The Eyes of Heisenberg is also very good.
😬 the subtitles on this are very flawed, it labeled the pronunciation of a type of hawkmoth as inaudible and it misinterpreted the word find as the “f” word
Didn't Darwin say black people just came down from the trees, as brilliant as you might think Darwin was he was living in 19th century in a world built on colonialism and the idea that the Anglo-Saxon or Aryan were superior, he turned that mindset into to thinking Aryan were the most evolved, we really should re-evaluate our evolution and how we came to be.
great rug
great hug
I love the input from the guests, but I wish the host would just shut up and let them complete a thought without all the interjections.
They claimed to be wise but became fools
Do you think they color their hair? And if they do why?
How many Weinsteins does it take to stain my wine machine? Say it 6x
Not hard, stain needs to be closer to Weinstein and machine isn’t a hard word to say
My Movers wasn’t supposed to be hard, just to waste your time
Weinstein washes wine clean with brine steam
Sean Heywood just saying, there’s an element to tongue twisters that this doesn’t achieve
My Movers Inc Moving I Didn’t realize I was talking to such an expert in tongue twisters
The twist. ^^
This example is deeply unimpressive I must say, for it does not in any convincing way provide evidence for evolution to the contrary of alternative hypotheses. Just on a basic level, so long as the flower requires pollination in some way would necessitate that a something out there has the ability to pollinate it, for otherwise the flower would simply not exist, regardless of whether or not the trait was evolved through deep time. Furthermore the design hypothesis would predict much the same thing: as a simple analogy one would expect that a deep screw hole would be accompanied by a long screw, if then the natural world were to be intelligently designed one would expect much the same relationship between the flower and the moth. It instead seems much less likely that an evolutionary process would lead to such exclusivity, for two distinct species to simultaneously evolve specialized symbiotic traits over deep time would be an incredibly fragile method with little resilience to environmental pressures.
The power of language. People call the ways that organisms have evolved in relation to survival pressures and opportunities survival strategies, but a strategy is predicated on an intelligence or consciousness planning something out and executing that plan. But current evolutionary theory is based on a non directed, non intelligently designed process. So using that language leads the mind into a contradictory theory according to most scientists who study evolution. what if we called them evolutionary niches, or emergent niches due to evolutionary processes.
They foundation of evolutionary discussion is built on ambiguous and vague definitions. His “prediction” wasn’t and could not be empirically verifiable. Behaviors are not solely determinable by DNA (evolutionary theory employs environmental causes). So the guy guessed and someone else found a match. Hardly a prediction.
Great minds
The monarch butterfly is left alone by predators because it puts out a chemical that makes it taste horrible. The viceroy butterfly looks just like the monarch so it will be left alone by predators. These little critters on our planet are smart.
Which came first, the moth or the flower?
Why does one have to be first? Why not co-evolve?
Comments are censored FYI
I see. Why? We're watching because we like to, then sticking around for a little light hearted needling. That's not so bad. They're getting the bump from the view count. Careful Mr. Censor, you'll be losing money if you keep it up.
No mathematical evolutionary dynamics No science
Highly Improbable? Not Impossible?
I predicted then sensed contrivance.
Then found it in your own comment, no less.
Superb.
Love this show
Anyone else feel kinda stupid while watching this?
Quite the opposite
Not at all ,I'm proper clever me.
How then can non-haploid species behave eusocially? I wouldn't have thought it was possible
Anything goes in bug land.
Very charming couple!
Eric really showed off his vast intellect with the formation of the last sentence. #EndBoss
Mycroft & Sherlock
The hair
Moths are so bad ass
The second smartest guys on the planet - thx mel
Adorable brothers
Until we start mssing with human genomes seriously its hard to predict our evolution
0Guiltyone0 - that'll be interesting. As we're all under house arrest at present we can clearly see the boundaries of science. Seems to go toward Murphy's Law for the most part. Trust me, these (not these two literally) egg heads and the other bone heads that are their friends will fuck it up royally. You'll end up with pig people on drugs, smiling all the while. Ta, ta!
I like these guys.
Where does the…point of evolution actually happen? Over the course of our lives, basically? It kind of seems like evolution theory requires intelligent design to be accurate, doesn’t it? How does the intelligence work? Two things evolved side by side? A long tongue and an orchid? It’s obvious things evolve, but I struggle with the point of change. And what happens to the infinite creatures between two creatures? Oh, they die off basically?
Random mutations are the change and yes the less successful thing dies off.
3:56 English Subtitles, the word find is f***
Haha. It kind of sounds like that's what he said, I can understand why the subtitles got confused
Weinstein washes wine clean with brine steam
Y'all need to figure out them haircuts.
These men are brilliant the last thing they care about is what their hair looks like open your ears Buddy not your eyes
Love it
#WriteInAndrewYang
they totally party
Dolphins and whales
Balance your brain and watch these guys talk daily along with social media junk food
You can say hive mind, fellas.
META Make Einstein True Again
Sex allocation theory makes quantitative predictions about male/female sex ratios. These predictions have been tested and supported and it’s a minor scandal that the results have been ignored or forgotten by evolutionary biologists. Bret almost got to it the haplo-diploidy discussion but that’s as far as anyone ever takes it. Shame. W. D. Hamilton would be so disappointed.
I read about sex allocation theory in my undergrad evolutionary psychology class. And it's the only class on evolutionary theory I've ever taken. It's an interesting phenomenon but I wouldn't say it's particularly underrepresented. There's A LOT of different ways to think about evolution -- everyone attributes greater significance to their favorite field
Dillon Walker Evol psych is pop science. Pick up a text on evolutionary theory and see what you find.
@@gomertube lol whatever bro
Geometric UNity 2020
Hmm, I find this clip both shocking and pedantic