I dont consider myself intellectual but i always find podcasts like these really interesting and Richard Dawkins is such a treat to watch , listen, and to learn from. Thank You
The bible/god also condones slavery and the selling of your daughters off to "please their masters" as written in Exodus 21...So it's obvious who the deceived ones are here....anyhoo, hope you guys get saved from your delusion soon so you can atleast enjoy your 1 and only life before it's too late 😊@@thevoiceofamerica2389
I remember despising the man for years when I was a believer who didn't do my own research other than confirmation bias. Now I could listen to the man talk about the weather and would find it far more intellectual than most out there.
RD seems to be answering these questions off the top of his head without any preparation, very impressive ( not to mention interesting and entertaining).
Which domain are you referring to? The scientific wisdom is growing at such an exponential rate, with high accuracy, and the information is overwhelming. If you want to go live in a hole in Africa ...... You may find peace and happiness, but become less intelligent and become stupid. I could recommend hundreds of videos from intelligent individuals that I assume you are unaware of. Stop watching TH-cam videos about being kicked in the balls.
Thank you Richard. Every minute we get from you , it is a blessing. Haha I wonder if the world blessing is religion monopoly. But I am as a man that is against any religion still going to use it.
@@99NOFX Science is a great thing, a gift to humanity. The problem is that prominent scientists, excellent in their day job, are out-of- touch idiots outside of their science. Dawkins praised the warmonger John McCain as a "good man", condemned Julian Assange and has now joined the ranks of the foul pro-Israelis even while Israel is slaughtering thousands of Palestinian children. Respect them for their science...and nothing more.
- False or not, my beliefs make me feel better - Well, if you're being attacked by a lion, yes, it may feel better to think it's a rabbit, but the reality is you're being attacked by a lion. Love it!
And this brings us to those many heroic men who went (so reported) to their brutal deaths by lions for sport in order to defend their faith and Lord - “SMILING”- knowing they were going through death into eternal life because of this Faith in Christ… Supreme Morality, human excellence and eternal beauty comes to Earth from Christianity - through GOD’s own visit here and his brutal murder and suffering as a mere man to become this human beacon… to teach us precisely how we are to “evolve” INDIVIDUALLY as real men. Atheism brings the very opposite force - it brings us darkness, hopelessness, despair and death… It is a cult of mortality and fear. We each get to decide who we choose to be. As Jesus Christ said very plainly “I do not come to unite you - but to divide”.
I'll give the music question a go. When you pluck a string or strike an object, it resonates at a particular pitch. This is the "shockwave" bouncing back and forth within the object. I hit the object on one side, displacing its surface atoms, which push and displace their neighbours, which push and displace their neighbours... creating a wave through the object. When the wave hits the other side of the object, it rebounds (well, some of the energy displaces air atoms - that's what we ultimately hear as sound - but some of it also bounces back into the object, in an elastic way). And, because of this, every object has a resonant frequency (though it need not be within the range of human hearing). The interesting thing with this resonant frequency is that you also find all its harmonics. So if I strike the bell, it might ring out at 440Hz. But we'll also hear its multiples too - 880Hz, 1320Hz, 1760Hz, 2200Hz, etc. - ring out (albeit more quietly so). As well as the root frequency - which will be the main frequency - we're also getting that frequency times two, times three, times four, times five. Because as the "shockwave" resonates through the object at a set frequency (the time it takes for the shockwave to bounce back and forth through the object's shape and density), we can also fit, naturally, standing waves that match two or three or four or five times that frequency. These aren't as loud as the root frequency, but these secondary "shockwaves" can also travel through the object as well. If you know your music theory, then this "harmonic series" actually maps out fifths, fourths, minor thirds, major thirds, etc. - the ratios are neat fractions of each other. And we humans find these neat integer ratios to sound "harmonious" to us. The underlying evolutionary reason why - because of this harmonic series. If you're hearing frequencies that are all neat ratios and multiples of each other, then they're likely coming from the same object. Because, as we established, that's how objects naturally resonate. The root frequency, double it, triple it, quadruple it, etc. So to have a ear / brain that detects these ratios in the sounds we hear, is a ear / brain system that can pull sounds out of a cacophony of background noise. There might be traffic noise, there might be dogs barking - a whole random mess of frequencies - but I can hear the 440Hz bell loud and clear. Because my brain detects the 440Hz, 880Hz, 1320Hz, 1760Hz, etc. frequencies and pulls them out, and associates them together. "They must", the brain reasons, "all be coming from the same resonant object". Being able to do this has obvious survival advantage. I can differentiate sounds. I can hear and understand what someone is saying - social - even with a lot of loud background noise going on (think of talking to someone in a night club, where loud music is being played - but you can still make out their words through the noise, albeit shouting at one another). I can differentiate a growl - maybe from a predator - from a rustling leaf. Our brain responds to the harmonic series (which is a perfectly natural phenomenon of resonant frequencies), because that's how it pulls one sound apart from another, when there are multiple sounds going on simultaneously. These frequencies sound "harmonious" to us. And what music is doing is a deliberate "super-stimulation" of this mechanism. We have musical instruments that resonate precisely, so we can produce exact notes. Then we have two instruments both play a 440Hz note. Ah, this is interesting. Because we're kind of confounding this mechanism. We're deliberately mixing two different sounds, so that their resonant frequencies collide with each other. The brain is trying to pull the sounds apart by their harmonic series, because we're producing sounds that deliberately collide with each other. All these violins playing together overlap and phase in their frequencies. The cello is playing a harmony against that - which has some shared harmonic frequencies and some not shared, with the violins. We're creating this complex "puzzle" of frequencies for the brain to pull apart. Sometimes colliding, sometimes conflicting. The part of the brain tasked with pulling out resonant frequencies is working overtime here. It's being over stimulated. It's being given quite the complex "puzzle" to solve. And this is pleasurable to us. Just like solving other puzzles - like doing a crossword or codeword puzzle. Just like when we're being creative - which is "play fighting" for an intelligent species like us (as dogs and cats will "play fight" to hone their fighting / hunting skills, we humans love to play game and tell stories because this is "mental play fighting". We're honing our mental skills. Because as an intelligent species, these are the skills we need to refine. Where a cat enjoys practicing its hunting skills - climbing and hiding and sneaking up on its owner). Music is a deliberate over-stimulation - a "play fighting" puzzle to give us practice and exercise our brains - of a basic mechanism for pulling out resonant frequencies, which is how the ear / brain makes sense of different sounds. All these frequencies here go together to make up one sound source, all these other frequencies go together to make up another different sound source. Our brain does this to make sense of the soundscape around us, to differentiate noises from each other - which has the survival advantage of being able to hear someone shout "HELP!", despite the loud traffic noise. To make out a rustling of the bushes - which might have a predator hiding inside - from the sound of a howling gale. Music is an over-stimulating "play fighting" with this mechanism. Creating a complex puzzle of frequencies - sometimes colliding, sometimes conflicting - for our brains to pull apart. And this feels pleasurable to us. Which is the same sort of reward system as why sex feels pleasurable, or solving puzzles is enjoyable. Evolution has bred these "rewards" into us, for performing our survival instincts successfully. And music is playing that game sonically, where - for example - a horror film or rollercoaster is playing the same game but with other survival instincts. The horror movie or rollercoaster gets our "fight or flight" instincts going - makes us feel like we're in danger - and then we can enjoy the "happy chemicals to the brain" reward afterwards, that evolution gives us for having survived our terrifying ordeal. The rollercoaster or horror movie is designed to make us feel endangered - even though, really, we aren't - so that we get the "well done for surviving the ordeal" reward that evolution has bred into us. A nice burst of dopamine and endorphins to the brain, which feels good. Music is playing a similar game but with a different mechanism. It's over-stimulating the part of our brains that deal with processing sounds, as a horror movie over-stimulates the part of the brain that senses danger. And then we crank this all the way up to 11. A really complex mess of frequencies in a symphony, a really terrifyingly fast rollercoaster ride, a very scary horror movie indeed. The more you stimulate these things, the bigger the "happy chemicals" reward for surviving / solving the puzzle. Indeed, when a scientist does their maths, pulls apart a problem and finds a solution, they're also playing the same game. Like solving the crossword. You give yourself the challenge of a complex puzzle, to enjoy the "happy chemicals" reward when you finally solve it. Evolution giving us a "well done for surviving" reward. Just like, more obviously, an orgasm is the reward for "doing your duty" of attempting to reproduce. When you do the right thing, in evolutionary terms, evolution says "here, have a cookie" (this, of course, is itself another example - we get a chemical reward for eating, as evolution wants to encourage the survival instinct of not starving ourselves to death). (Admittedly, in the above, I focused on frequencies. Music also has rhythm too. But I leave it as an exercise to the reader to work out how that also plays a part. It should be noted that frequencies - 440Hz - are, in fact, a rhythm too. Play a click 440 times a second and it starts to sound like a note. Frequency and rhythm are really the same thing, but when rhythms get real fast, we stop hearing them as individual sounds and they start to sound like notes to us.)
Wow! 😮 Thank you for sharing! ❤ I’m a huge “Succession” fan and I’ve always found the opening score *intoxicating,* but couldn’t quite put my finger on why I loved it so much. I found this video by the composer on TH-cam, 👇explaining how the discordant notes work so well to ultimately reflect the theme, tone and motifs of the show. Would love your thoughts on how discordance works in music theory to counterintuitively entice our brains. 🤔 And if you haven’t watched Succession, do yourself a favour and watch it! 👌😅 www.google.ca/search?q=Succession+music+composer+youtube&client=safari&sca_esv=581462066&hl=en-ca&biw=375&bih=635&sxsrf=AM9HkKlNxWt7KLrBLI8zgQnnAaDDbKEqOQ%3A1699690800556&ei=MDlPZfC1IemU0PEPsdOJkAI&oq=Succession+music+composer+youtube&gs_lp=EhNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwIiFTdWNjZXNzaW9uIG11c2ljIGNvbXBvc2VyIHlvdXR1YmUyCBAhGKABGMMESMV7UJJAWIZwcAF4AZABAJgB7wagAb4QqgEIMTMuMS42LTG4AQPIAQD4AQHCAgoQABhHGNYEGLADwgIHECMYsAIYJ8ICBRAAGKIEwgIHEC4YDRiABMICCBAAGIoFGIYDwgIFEC4YgATCAgYQABgIGB7CAgoQIRigARjDBBgK4gMEGAAgQYgGAZAGCA&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:d9324e16,vid:X0WzqanwlG0,st:0
Thank you for your elaboration on the subject of how the brain processes music. I was born with a love of music. As a newborn I only slept when music was playing. I’m still drawn to most genres of music and have extensive music files on my computer. Yet, some types of music and particular songs do not move me at all, even repulse me. Is this because my brain is unable to process the elements of the song? Or is it just personal preference? 😊Brenda
@@zombiekilla7463 Which priest has praised the unabashed warmonger John McCain as a "good man"? Which priest has condemned Julian Assange? Which priest allies with Israel even as they slaughter of thousands of Palestinian children?
A truly knowledgeable and awesome human being, I love listening to Prof. Dawkins. I love the part of gravity vs the probably size/height of aliens. I never thought of it that way. Pretty fascinating.
Got to wait almost a year, apparently in the UK! Why so long when Dawkins has already finished writing it! I really want to read The Genetic Book of the Dead! Also📚
Dawkins is a great writer, and presumably a very good scientist, it's when he leaves science and comes out into the real world, that he exposes himself as a fool. Praising the bloodlusting warmonger John McCain as a "good man", condemning Julian Assange and now siding with Israel even as they slaughter thousands of Palestinian children.
A question for professor Dawkins: I'm intrigued by the genetics of male pattern baldness. It's commonly understood that the baldness gene is inherited from the mother's side. However, it's interesting to note that many sons experience baldness when their fathers are also bald. While the scientific consensus emphasizes maternal transmission, the observable evidence suggests paternal influence as well. Could you share your insights on this apparent discrepancy and help clarify the role of both maternal and paternal genetics in male pattern baldness?
What a joy to hear this man riff on all things. All things. Rif with style, education, wisdom, and discretion. I’ve never thought of myself as someone who appreciates poetry (as I am a pretty left brain evidence-based person) but I stand corrected. I’m loving poetry today is spoken by the great Dr. Hawkins. Again, I stand corrected - the greatest, Dr. Hawkins.
@@DavidHarrison-js3ji i wouldn’t know, because I am not the one here interested in subverting truth. ‘My book’ is the only repository for sheer Truth ever written - so powerful is it that it actively exudes a living light… And this is why I cannot but balk at seeing loudmouthed liars called “intelligent” as they seek to scare children (spreading their own spineless fear) with grim horror stories of imminent extermination and extinction for all life when the very opposite is True.
On the point of music from an evolutionary perspective: Ian Cross has written about this. If I remember correctly the idea is that music functions as an aid to group cohesion and unity. The first musical instrument was the voice, and music was a participatory activity. By providing a unique, coordinated and shared experience, a tribe’s music would foster a sense of group unity and belonging, helping to build a mindset geared towards cooperation and acting for the good of the tribe as opposed to pure self-interest. In addition, music acts as ‘social lubricant’. Whereas arguments in a group inevitably flare up periodically about concrete matters, eg the objects of ‘language’, musical information is more abstract and therefore harder to disagree about. This goes for pitch, rhythm etc, and even sung words are usually an abstraction of sorts compared with everyday speech, since any repeated song by definition cannot be about the specifics of the here and now. This means music may have provided something a tribe could universally agree on, acting as a counterweight to any differences revealed through the sharper semantic tool of language, and was likely self-reinforcing as a favoured activity allowing individuals to participate in feeling connected to each other.
I haven’t read Cross, though I’m sure he makes valid points, and I agree with your hypothesis. I can imagine wolves howling together and thus creating a “unity” or “tribe mentality” that favours communal participation. But what of those that howl or sing off-key? Would that be grounds for shunning a wolf or cave-person out of the group? Actually now that I think about it… I guess we’ve evolved to have Nickleback… and, I’ve answered my own question. 🫤
So somehow certain winning tribes of mankind began humming and grunting because by doing so in just the right way (which happened by sheer chance supposedly ) they created social cohesion out of sheer chaos and chance after generations of this musical humming slowly taking effect (whereas those tribes that by chance stopped doing this dropped out of the evolutionary chain) making the survival of this particular more musically attuned unit secure by being ‘tight’ together the better to hunt or fight or run for survival… at the same time those individuals who slowly by freak of nature were born over successive generations with GOOD birth defects of the thumb until all the offspring who also slowly generated a trait of this deformity in just the right blind direction to such a time by chance that now they had reversible thumbs (probably taking by count of probability something in the order of hundreds of millions of years)…. This is utter BALLS!!! Are you seriously all this dim?? It could never have happened “by chance out of random probability” - it would at the very least have taken some Law - some unifying bonding agent inside the mystery of DNA to steer this process to the successful outcome for life and intelligence in the first place. Ask which came first out of the sludge Light or Sight - the eyeball or the need for it - and the BILLIONS of years (if this flagrantly impossible hypothesis is to be entertained) necessary to go from “basic enzymes” (don’t dare ask where they were magicked out of BY CHANCE) to animal and plant life… It takes a singularly minded refusal to even entertain that some kind of intelligence was steering this process from within or without. Or even - as mad as it sounds - an intelligent life so determined to disguise itself that it throws out all manner of red herrings and diversions to prevent EVER it’s rational detection. For this reason - to be an “atheist” can never be to position of a true scientist. To claim knowledge of such things before they are KNOWN is anti-scientific - and makes such an individual, plausibly, a human being (ape?) purposefully employed by certain still unknown “forces” to steer Mankind and the potential “purpose” for life in a certain way in order to prevent a quite ulterior reason for said life to flourish into Eternity. Atheistic scientists today are a single-minded self-obsessed lot - zealously loyal to an absurd credo that claims knowledge that only a much greater force and power can possibly “know” - or steer. No human being can “know” there isn’t a God. Some human beings may very well KNOW the precise opposite.
My friend raised a fox cub from birth because his mother was killed , it was more dog like than most dogs ! , its about nurturing as much as nature . Be kind folks its amazing what happens.
I was surprised that Richard didn’t have a response for the question on why animals were bigger in the past. I can’t remember verbatim, but the way it was taught to me in my college geology class was that the higher levels of oxygen, nitrogen, etc and plentiful living space for creatures at that time drove this. Great episode as always!
Oxygen has nothing to do with it, more how they used it. Dinosaurs had different breathing systems and lighter bones for example and spiders have never been much bigger than today.
I was really hoping he would answer the resurrect question with his good friend Hitch. Miss his debate style, vast vocabulary, wit and just pulling references, dates, historical events, geographical locations like from a constantly updating encyclopedia. True legend
In order of enjoyment, starting with my favorite: The Greatest Show on Earth The Selfish Gene Climbing Mount Improbable The Extended Phenotype The Blind Watchmaker A Devil's Chaplain Science in the Soul Books Do Furnish a Life The Magic of Reality Unweaving the Rainbow The God Delusion Outgrowing God A River Out of Eden Brief Candle in the Dark An Appetite for Wonder Flights of Fancy The Ancestor's Tale But they're all terrific.
It's nice to hear him finally talk about something other than God and religion. After all, he's not just an atheist, but a professor of evolutionary biology and zoology!
His knowledge of religion is absolutely poor apart from christianity islam and maybe ancient greek mythology. He has said almost nothing on buddhism daoism etc. and he thinks hes an expert.
@@John76125 all religions are equally nonsensical therefore there is nothing to learn about them when there’s 0 evidence to validate them. Buddhism isn’t really a religion either, it’s spiritual but has no religious dogma to speak of.
His first book the selfish gene was written 1976, and he’s published a lot of other books about biology since. He does talk a lot about religion etc, but if you want to hear him talk about science/biology there are plenty of stuff to choose from over the past 50 years
What’s all this Dr, Dawkins, or Mr Dawkins? Must be Americans, they’ll be using that ‘sir’ nonsense as they tend to too, I suppose. Richard has been Richard to us Brits for so long now, we just expect the world audience to be just as knowledgeable of his work as we are. Always great to see and hear Richard’s viewpoint, his year’s of knowledge are an absolute pleasure to behold. Thank you Richard.
What are the error bars, or sensitivity analysis of the constants of the universe that are the limits of what they need to be to create the universe as we see it, or at least close to it?
Logical thinking is at an inherent persuasive disadvantage because it leaves open the position "I don't know" (41:00), which for those who believe in certainty is never enough and may be taken as an admission of a failure of argument. The humility of science is to be praised.
Re music, and the arts & sciences - my thought is that they developed as a consequence of consciousness. So not really evolutionary in the sense that they helped us to survive, but we developed those things because we could, and of course the spin off with technology especially, really did help us to survive. Tools - the wheel - textiles - building - and sitting around the fire at night humming, creating stories about the day's hunting, drawing pictures on cave walls - and eventually sending men to the moon and beyond. Breathtaking.
Lovely! I would like to hear Professor Dawkins evaluate the life forms in the series "The Expanse", especially the "Protomolecule" that plays such an important role. The series is renowned for taking science very seriously, which makes it a hugely enjoyable read evem for one who at present would prefer the gravity of Mars or the Belt!
While a great series which did space travel physics well its treatment of medicine/biology was actually sub Star Trek. Ships carried magic medical boxes that could treat just about anything without even requiring a doctor. The magic box for some reason was carried on space craft that were never more than a few days from hospitals. I believe the authors did this as there wasn't room for a doctor character in the plot. If you look at a modern aircraft carrier it will have a full hospital on board but its not going to have faculties to treat cancer as you would just stabilise the patient and get them treated on shore.
On animal size, largeness is a protection from predation. There are other defences such as speed, sense acuity and intelligence, but quite possibly evolution amongst dinosaurs was slower in these characteristics.
Love the Q&As. I have a question on evolutionary biology and "aliens". Q: How do we arrive at a conclusion that intelligent alien life is predictable by evolution? From my understanding, evolutionarily development does not predict intelligent life. It seems to me that evolutionary development does not lead to a single global optimum, but rather to some local optimum at a certain time depending on the environment and chance and you do not need intelligence in the equation for survival.
Here is my question. Do you think that we will ever learn how life began from chemicals? If we do, will we be able to create life? Would that make us, in a sense of the word, a god? Similarly do you think we will ever learn how to recreate the big bang? I love your insights.
I would suggest that music was first developed as a cry to ward off predictors - especially during the preparation of food and more so at night. This would eventually become a playful thing, by the nature of teaching children - to learn the method of self-preservation. Further developments would most certainly be as a form of cross cultural communication, as music has no boundaries. This would more likely be in the form of war cries and the like, then evolving into a base form of communication for different tribes who's language differs from one another. 🤔 Instruments will certainly have developed to support all of the above and the drum is most certainly the first of such instruments. 🪘🥁😊
The Harvard scientist Hopi Hoekstra has worked based on your theoretical work in the book The Extended Phenotype. I think she is an excellent scientist. It would be great if you invited her to your Podcast. It would be a good idea for you to recommend following some prominent scientists who could be good representatives in the future. of scientific and skeptical thought, who will continue your legacy? We want to know about people that you can recommend to us as promoters of rationalism. I wish you many more years of life, but after you, which scientists do you recommend us to follow?
From this episode, would it make sense to pause technology development until humans have caught up with the current technology? Tik Tok, video games, plastic and gmo technology for example.
Very interesting! I really enjoy this format. Since i know Dr. Dawkins appreciates science fiction i'm curious whether he is familiar with the field of speculative evolution/biology as a subgenre of the field. There are several nice books and online projects on the topic such as "After Man: a zoology of the future" by Dougal Dixon or "Serina: a natural history of the world of birds". "Expedition" by Barlowe looks at how life on an alien planet might look like using fascinationg illustrations.
Take A Moment My fellow fish 🐟 1:10 Beaten until they did. 2:26 ❤ Genius at play 2:39 🎉🎉 I have a nice coat ☺️ Stay Safe and Stay Free 🌐 3:14 It's a dog's life 3:33 cats too 🎉 4:06 😂 1. 😂😂 not mythical, reality is all we need
I remember reading somewhere about three Christians ... hundreds of years back in time ... discussing the idea that after three days being dead in such a hot climate ... and then rising from the dead with his body intact ... one of them saying, "Jesus MUST have stinketh." Even back then, those men figured out that the story itself ... was anti-scientific.
@@BrendaPenepent lol Stinky Jesus. My perception is that the earliest of theologians claimed that gods were talking to them ... but that story was not as effective as the theologians expected. So they created stories that humans were SO evil ... and SO disobedient to the gods, that the gods felt impelled to send their own sons to earth ... to in turn warn the evil humans that they MUST repent of sin TO these sons of gods ... or spend eternity in the "afterlife" suffering. The supposed savior of souls of Christians, was just the most recent savior-myth story. Example as follows, and please note how Chrishna was spelled, before the Christians came up with the word Christ, and how the Hindus then changed the spelling of their supposed savior to "Krishna." From the book … The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors … Christianity before Christ, by Kersey Graves … first published in 1875. and finally these twenty Jesus Christs (accepting their character for the name) laid the foundation for the salvation of the world, and ascended back to heaven. 1. Chrishna of Hindostan. 2. Budha Sakia of India. 3. Salivahana of Bermuda 4. Zulis, or Zhule, also Osiris and Orus, of Egypt. 5. Odin of the Scandinavians. 6. Crite of Chaldea. 7. Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia. 8. Baal and Taut, “the only Begotten of God,” of Phenicia. 9. Indra of Thibet. 10. Bali of Afghanistan. 11. Jao of Nepaul. 12. Wittoa of the Bilingonese. 13. Thammuz of Syria. 14. Atys of Phrygia. 15. Xamolxis of Thrace. 16. Zoar of the Bonzes. 17. Adad of Assyria. 18. Deva Tat,aud Sammonocadam of Siam. 19. Alcides of Thebes. 20. Mikado of the Sintoos. 21. Beddru of Japan. 22. Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, of the Druids. 23. Thor, son of Odin, of the Gauls. 24. Cadmus of Greece. 25. Hil and Feta of the Mandaites. 26. Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico. 27. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls. 28. Ischy of the Island of Formosa. 29. Divine teacher of Plato. 30. Holy One of xaca. 31. Fohi and Tien of China. 32. Adonis, son of the virgin Io of Greece. 33. Ision and Quirinus of Rome. 34. Prometheus of Caucasus. 35. Mohammud, or Mahomet, of Arabia. These have all received divine honors, have nearly all been worshiped as Gods, or sons of Gods; were mostly incarnated as Christs, Saviors, Messiahs, or Mediators; not a few of them were reputedly born of virgins; some of them filling a character almost identical with that ascribed by the Christian’s bible to Jesus Christ; many of them like him, are reported crucified; and all of them, taken together, furnish a prototype and parallel for nearly every important incident and wonder-inciting miracle, doctrine and precept recorded in the New Testament, of the Christian’s Savior. Surely, with so many Saviors the world cannot, or should not, be lost.
Great stuff! I will however say, Dawkins, please don’t get ahead of yourself with a statement like ‘Nobody really has any idea but Steven Pinker has come the closest to it’. 7:37 I would highly recommend looking up Jacob Collier, or Adam Neely’s philosophies on rhythm and why it’s important to humans. Even they are referencing thoughts that many a drummer is deeply familiar with. The Rhythms of life 😃
Sir, what is technology in an evolutionary sense? We're at a point where we can, but dont, genetically engineer ourselves to extend out livespan. Is technology just a part of evolution? Is it similar to the extended phenotype in a sense that we modify our surroundings to increase our survival chances? Or is it just a side effect and us interfering with natural selection of sorts?
I'd like to hear where Dawkins stands to multilevel selection which includes group selection along with individual and kin selection's role in evolution. I particularly think that group selection could explain a lot about human evolution. Groups with better cooperation and communication would seem to have an advantage when competing against other groups. Chimpanzees appear to have warfare. Early homo or earlier could have had some type of warfare where the winning group imposes their genetics on the losing group (rape in warfare is common today). This would seem to be a case for group selection as well as an expiation for why warfare between groups is so common among all humans and we can't seem to overcome it with intellect.
Because our palsm and soles have an additional layer of skin - a distinctive five, compared to the four everywhere else - that provides extra protection against solar radiation, combined with the fact that our palsm and espescially soles are habitually far less exposed than any other body part to the sun, means that the high level of melanocyte cells required to produce dark skin are not needed. Indeed, even white people have paler palms and soles (though it is much less obvious) and these parts do not tan. They are also les slikely to to sunburn depsite this.
The argument about belief in God, 'because it makes me feel better!' always makes me laugh because I've heard a few people say that to me. But it's very pathetic, really, and sadly, it's how many people seem to live their lives. Much respect for Dawkins, my favourite science author!
@frilansspion One of my relatives said it to me, he said I think you would get on better In life with a belief in God! I believe in God because it makes me feel better! How lame is that? 😆🤣😂😆😁
@@glykera going to church and doing charity with the local community, getting married quite early and staying married, family values, very limited partying, not dressing like a clown, not convincing your kids that theyre transgender, that sort of thing...
I heard of a Russian woman that bred foxes to be tame and others to be aggressive. The "tame" foxes became more dog-like while the agressive ones would try to bite the hands of their handlers.
I'm pretty sure that I didn't quite get the distinction between epigenetics that Richard mentioned. I think he only briefly touched on epigenetics in his books, I forget which one it was, but it would be really nice to have him update the world on modern understanding of epigenetics, and my question would be if he and J. Craig Venter are in agreement or not about how our "junk DNA" is now perceived vs the paradigms of the 80s and 90s, when Richard wrote those books, and what has changed. If I'm confused, I'm sure others are also confused, as well.
When we are racing to the precipice in terms of climate change and there is no political will to stop burning fossil fuels, how long does Richard Dawkins think human beings, and indeed all other species, have left? What will come after us, if anything? With only one known example this is less of a question and more of a musing, is intelligence a fatal mutation and could this be why we see no ET's? Has intelligence just made us more effective killing machines?
I dont consider myself intellectual but i always find podcasts like these really interesting and Richard Dawkins is such a treat to watch , listen, and to learn from. Thank You
Always a pleasure to listen to Dr. Richard Dawkins
I hope he lives for another 20 years!
Nice man, but he is deceived. The bible warns us of false prophets like him.
@@thevoiceofamerica2389 I agree!!! Never liked his snake-oil salesman philosophy. God bless you. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
@@americanpatriots4868 Thank you for your service! SEMPER FI!
The bible/god also condones slavery and the selling of your daughters off to "please their masters" as written in Exodus 21...So it's obvious who the deceived ones are here....anyhoo, hope you guys get saved from your delusion soon so you can atleast enjoy your 1 and only life before it's too late 😊@@thevoiceofamerica2389
MUCH Love & RESPECT for DR. DAWKINS 💯.
… Much dislike and disrespect for what rubbish he speaks from some of us, too.
Love hearing Dawkins talk about anything
@gerardmoloney433You insignificant scunm seethe hard with your useless comments on TH-cam lmao
@gerardmoloney433 Lemme guess, Christian? I could tell by that kind remark.
I remember despising the man for years when I was a believer who didn't do my own research other than confirmation bias. Now I could listen to the man talk about the weather and would find it far more intellectual than most out there.
I learn something new from Richard Dawkins all the time. That goes for this time.
Thank you professor for your generosity. I’m enjoying your talks :)
I love to listen to Dr. Dawkins, his voice, his intelligence, his proper delivery.
Extremely interesting, succinct, accurate and with may references to others in various fields. A big thankyou from Australia.
love this man , he is a treasure of humanity
RD seems to be answering these questions off the top of his head without any preparation, very impressive ( not to mention interesting and entertaining).
It’s sad that our culture does not as yet have greater appetite for your wisdom across so many domains. Please keep teaching us.
Which domain are you referring to? The scientific wisdom is growing at such an exponential rate, with high accuracy, and the information is overwhelming.
If you want to go live in a hole in Africa ...... You may find peace and happiness, but become less intelligent and become stupid.
I could recommend hundreds of videos from intelligent individuals that I assume you are unaware of.
Stop watching TH-cam videos about being kicked in the balls.
You have one hour with such an icon..... And you spend it asking about aliens and stuff..... What an absolute waste of time
Indeed, it's really sad. We will never reach our potential with this attitude.
Thank you Richard. Every minute we get from you , it is a blessing. Haha I wonder if the world blessing is religion monopoly. But I am as a man that is against any religion still going to use it.
@@99NOFX Science is a great thing, a gift to humanity. The problem is that prominent scientists, excellent in their day job, are out-of- touch idiots outside of their science. Dawkins praised the warmonger John McCain as a "good man", condemned Julian Assange and has now joined the ranks of the foul pro-Israelis even while Israel is slaughtering thousands of Palestinian children. Respect them for their science...and nothing more.
- False or not, my beliefs make me feel better
- Well, if you're being attacked by a lion, yes, it may feel better to think it's a rabbit, but the reality is you're being attacked by a lion.
Love it!
And this brings us to those many heroic men who went (so reported) to their brutal deaths by lions for sport in order to defend their faith and Lord - “SMILING”- knowing they were going through death into eternal life because of this Faith in Christ…
Supreme Morality, human excellence and eternal beauty comes to Earth from Christianity - through GOD’s own visit here and his brutal murder and suffering as a mere man to become this human beacon… to teach us precisely how we are to “evolve” INDIVIDUALLY as real men.
Atheism brings the very opposite force - it brings us darkness, hopelessness, despair and death… It is a cult of mortality and fear.
We each get to decide who we choose to be.
As Jesus Christ said very plainly “I do not come to unite you - but to divide”.
Atheism is the opposite of a cult by definition. You live in a cult if it please you good for you.
You’re a living Legend, Mr. dawkins!!
Mr. Dawkins is a rare gem. He is just unbeatable.
Rubbish have you not seen him try to debate John lennox
It is always such a joy listening to you.
I'll give the music question a go.
When you pluck a string or strike an object, it resonates at a particular pitch.
This is the "shockwave" bouncing back and forth within the object. I hit the object on one side, displacing its surface atoms, which push and displace their neighbours, which push and displace their neighbours... creating a wave through the object. When the wave hits the other side of the object, it rebounds (well, some of the energy displaces air atoms - that's what we ultimately hear as sound - but some of it also bounces back into the object, in an elastic way).
And, because of this, every object has a resonant frequency (though it need not be within the range of human hearing).
The interesting thing with this resonant frequency is that you also find all its harmonics. So if I strike the bell, it might ring out at 440Hz. But we'll also hear its multiples too - 880Hz, 1320Hz, 1760Hz, 2200Hz, etc. - ring out (albeit more quietly so).
As well as the root frequency - which will be the main frequency - we're also getting that frequency times two, times three, times four, times five. Because as the "shockwave" resonates through the object at a set frequency (the time it takes for the shockwave to bounce back and forth through the object's shape and density), we can also fit, naturally, standing waves that match two or three or four or five times that frequency. These aren't as loud as the root frequency, but these secondary "shockwaves" can also travel through the object as well.
If you know your music theory, then this "harmonic series" actually maps out fifths, fourths, minor thirds, major thirds, etc. - the ratios are neat fractions of each other. And we humans find these neat integer ratios to sound "harmonious" to us.
The underlying evolutionary reason why - because of this harmonic series. If you're hearing frequencies that are all neat ratios and multiples of each other, then they're likely coming from the same object. Because, as we established, that's how objects naturally resonate. The root frequency, double it, triple it, quadruple it, etc.
So to have a ear / brain that detects these ratios in the sounds we hear, is a ear / brain system that can pull sounds out of a cacophony of background noise. There might be traffic noise, there might be dogs barking - a whole random mess of frequencies - but I can hear the 440Hz bell loud and clear. Because my brain detects the 440Hz, 880Hz, 1320Hz, 1760Hz, etc. frequencies and pulls them out, and associates them together. "They must", the brain reasons, "all be coming from the same resonant object".
Being able to do this has obvious survival advantage. I can differentiate sounds. I can hear and understand what someone is saying - social - even with a lot of loud background noise going on (think of talking to someone in a night club, where loud music is being played - but you can still make out their words through the noise, albeit shouting at one another). I can differentiate a growl - maybe from a predator - from a rustling leaf.
Our brain responds to the harmonic series (which is a perfectly natural phenomenon of resonant frequencies), because that's how it pulls one sound apart from another, when there are multiple sounds going on simultaneously. These frequencies sound "harmonious" to us.
And what music is doing is a deliberate "super-stimulation" of this mechanism. We have musical instruments that resonate precisely, so we can produce exact notes. Then we have two instruments both play a 440Hz note.
Ah, this is interesting. Because we're kind of confounding this mechanism. We're deliberately mixing two different sounds, so that their resonant frequencies collide with each other. The brain is trying to pull the sounds apart by their harmonic series, because we're producing sounds that deliberately collide with each other.
All these violins playing together overlap and phase in their frequencies. The cello is playing a harmony against that - which has some shared harmonic frequencies and some not shared, with the violins.
We're creating this complex "puzzle" of frequencies for the brain to pull apart. Sometimes colliding, sometimes conflicting.
The part of the brain tasked with pulling out resonant frequencies is working overtime here. It's being over stimulated. It's being given quite the complex "puzzle" to solve.
And this is pleasurable to us. Just like solving other puzzles - like doing a crossword or codeword puzzle. Just like when we're being creative - which is "play fighting" for an intelligent species like us (as dogs and cats will "play fight" to hone their fighting / hunting skills, we humans love to play game and tell stories because this is "mental play fighting". We're honing our mental skills. Because as an intelligent species, these are the skills we need to refine. Where a cat enjoys practicing its hunting skills - climbing and hiding and sneaking up on its owner).
Music is a deliberate over-stimulation - a "play fighting" puzzle to give us practice and exercise our brains - of a basic mechanism for pulling out resonant frequencies, which is how the ear / brain makes sense of different sounds. All these frequencies here go together to make up one sound source, all these other frequencies go together to make up another different sound source.
Our brain does this to make sense of the soundscape around us, to differentiate noises from each other - which has the survival advantage of being able to hear someone shout "HELP!", despite the loud traffic noise. To make out a rustling of the bushes - which might have a predator hiding inside - from the sound of a howling gale.
Music is an over-stimulating "play fighting" with this mechanism. Creating a complex puzzle of frequencies - sometimes colliding, sometimes conflicting - for our brains to pull apart.
And this feels pleasurable to us. Which is the same sort of reward system as why sex feels pleasurable, or solving puzzles is enjoyable. Evolution has bred these "rewards" into us, for performing our survival instincts successfully.
And music is playing that game sonically, where - for example - a horror film or rollercoaster is playing the same game but with other survival instincts. The horror movie or rollercoaster gets our "fight or flight" instincts going - makes us feel like we're in danger - and then we can enjoy the "happy chemicals to the brain" reward afterwards, that evolution gives us for having survived our terrifying ordeal.
The rollercoaster or horror movie is designed to make us feel endangered - even though, really, we aren't - so that we get the "well done for surviving the ordeal" reward that evolution has bred into us. A nice burst of dopamine and endorphins to the brain, which feels good.
Music is playing a similar game but with a different mechanism. It's over-stimulating the part of our brains that deal with processing sounds, as a horror movie over-stimulates the part of the brain that senses danger.
And then we crank this all the way up to 11. A really complex mess of frequencies in a symphony, a really terrifyingly fast rollercoaster ride, a very scary horror movie indeed. The more you stimulate these things, the bigger the "happy chemicals" reward for surviving / solving the puzzle.
Indeed, when a scientist does their maths, pulls apart a problem and finds a solution, they're also playing the same game. Like solving the crossword. You give yourself the challenge of a complex puzzle, to enjoy the "happy chemicals" reward when you finally solve it.
Evolution giving us a "well done for surviving" reward. Just like, more obviously, an orgasm is the reward for "doing your duty" of attempting to reproduce.
When you do the right thing, in evolutionary terms, evolution says "here, have a cookie" (this, of course, is itself another example - we get a chemical reward for eating, as evolution wants to encourage the survival instinct of not starving ourselves to death).
(Admittedly, in the above, I focused on frequencies. Music also has rhythm too. But I leave it as an exercise to the reader to work out how that also plays a part. It should be noted that frequencies - 440Hz - are, in fact, a rhythm too. Play a click 440 times a second and it starts to sound like a note. Frequency and rhythm are really the same thing, but when rhythms get real fast, we stop hearing them as individual sounds and they start to sound like notes to us.)
Wow! 😮 Thank you for sharing! ❤ I’m a huge “Succession” fan and I’ve always found the opening score *intoxicating,* but couldn’t quite put my finger on why I loved it so much. I found this video by the composer on TH-cam, 👇explaining how the discordant notes work so well to ultimately reflect the theme, tone and motifs of the show. Would love your thoughts on how discordance works in music theory to counterintuitively entice our brains. 🤔 And if you haven’t watched Succession, do yourself a favour and watch it! 👌😅
www.google.ca/search?q=Succession+music+composer+youtube&client=safari&sca_esv=581462066&hl=en-ca&biw=375&bih=635&sxsrf=AM9HkKlNxWt7KLrBLI8zgQnnAaDDbKEqOQ%3A1699690800556&ei=MDlPZfC1IemU0PEPsdOJkAI&oq=Succession+music+composer+youtube&gs_lp=EhNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwIiFTdWNjZXNzaW9uIG11c2ljIGNvbXBvc2VyIHlvdXR1YmUyCBAhGKABGMMESMV7UJJAWIZwcAF4AZABAJgB7wagAb4QqgEIMTMuMS42LTG4AQPIAQD4AQHCAgoQABhHGNYEGLADwgIHECMYsAIYJ8ICBRAAGKIEwgIHEC4YDRiABMICCBAAGIoFGIYDwgIFEC4YgATCAgYQABgIGB7CAgoQIRigARjDBBgK4gMEGAAgQYgGAZAGCA&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:d9324e16,vid:X0WzqanwlG0,st:0
Thank you for your elaboration on the subject of how the brain processes music. I was born with a love of music. As a newborn I only slept when music was playing. I’m still drawn to most genres of music and have extensive music files on my computer. Yet, some types of music and particular songs do not move me at all, even repulse me. Is this because my brain is unable to process the elements of the song? Or is it just personal preference? 😊Brenda
Nutcheck😂
I cannot recommend this Q&A series enough. Please do this every week
Always fascinating and enlightening.
Thank you mister Dawkins for your excellent contributions to society
agree, the quite opposite of priests
The only thing he contributed is misery. Why would I listen to an antichrist?
Professor,not Mr.😁
@@zombiekilla7463 Which priest has praised the unabashed warmonger John McCain as a "good man"? Which priest has condemned Julian Assange? Which priest allies with Israel even as they slaughter of thousands of Palestinian children?
@@Michael-yd5ry hes's a man, Mr also works
A truly knowledgeable and awesome human being, I love listening to Prof. Dawkins. I love the part of gravity vs the probably size/height of aliens. I never thought of it that way. Pretty fascinating.
Dawkins, I LOVE all your books! I can't wait for the Genetic Book of the Dead 😊
Got to wait almost a year, apparently in the UK! Why so long when Dawkins has already finished writing it! I really want to read The Genetic Book of the Dead! Also📚
If Richard Dawkins was to talk about how paint dries.
I would still listen.
He's an amazing scientists. ❤
😂👏🙌
He's so amazing (magical) that he's more than just one ;-)
Great to listen a man with a lot of knowledge an humble attitude.
Thank Mr. Dawkins and Taryn😘
I have purchased all his books. He is the best writer ever since Bertrand Russell.
So have I. I would much rather read the Bible to be honest!
@@thevoiceofamerica2389 why not Koran?
Dawkins is a great writer, and presumably a very good scientist, it's when he leaves science and comes out into the real world, that he exposes himself as a fool. Praising the bloodlusting warmonger John McCain as a "good man", condemning Julian Assange and now siding with Israel even as they slaughter thousands of Palestinian children.
Amazing. I heard oxygen had to do with bugs being bigger. Excited for the new book!!!
I love his deadpan reading of his hate mail. Hilarious!
A question for professor Dawkins: I'm intrigued by the genetics of male pattern baldness. It's commonly understood that the baldness gene is inherited from the mother's side. However, it's interesting to note that many sons experience baldness when their fathers are also bald. While the scientific consensus emphasizes maternal transmission, the observable evidence suggests paternal influence as well. Could you share your insights on this apparent discrepancy and help clarify the role of both maternal and paternal genetics in male pattern baldness?
And also female baldness?
Really enjoy these videos, would love to see more, perhaps even some sort of schedule like once a fortnight or once a month
What a joy to hear this man riff on all things. All things. Rif with style, education, wisdom, and discretion. I’ve never thought of myself as someone who appreciates poetry (as I am a pretty left brain evidence-based person) but I stand corrected. I’m loving poetry today is spoken by the great Dr. Hawkins. Again, I stand corrected - the greatest, Dr. Hawkins.
Thank you for correcting me. Of course, Dawkins. Again, thank you.
Science is made of FACTS & sir. Richard Dawkins explains everything scientifically & comprehensively. Can't question FACTS
Its such a pleasure to listen to such an intelligent human being .
Albeit a completely errant one
@@matthewstokes1608 the word that covers that is bollocks
@@DavidHarrison-js3ji suits you perfectly from where I’m sat
@@matthewstokes1608 ow that was a very sad come back , is that the best your fairy story book could.come up with ???
@@DavidHarrison-js3ji i wouldn’t know, because I am not the one here interested in subverting truth.
‘My book’ is the only repository for sheer Truth ever written - so powerful is it that it actively exudes a living light… And this is why I cannot but balk at seeing loudmouthed liars called “intelligent” as they seek to scare children (spreading their own spineless fear) with grim horror stories of imminent extermination and extinction for all life when the very opposite is True.
On the point of music from an evolutionary perspective: Ian Cross has written about this. If I remember correctly the idea is that music functions as an aid to group cohesion and unity. The first musical instrument was the voice, and music was a participatory activity. By providing a unique, coordinated and shared experience, a tribe’s music would foster a sense of group unity and belonging, helping to build a mindset geared towards cooperation and acting for the good of the tribe as opposed to pure self-interest.
In addition, music acts as ‘social lubricant’. Whereas arguments in a group inevitably flare up periodically about concrete matters, eg the objects of ‘language’, musical information is more abstract and therefore harder to disagree about. This goes for pitch, rhythm etc, and even sung words are usually an abstraction of sorts compared with everyday speech, since any repeated song by definition cannot be about the specifics of the here and now. This means music may have provided something a tribe could universally agree on, acting as a counterweight to any differences revealed through the sharper semantic tool of language, and was likely self-reinforcing as a favoured activity allowing individuals to participate in feeling connected to each other.
I haven’t read Cross, though I’m sure he makes valid points, and I agree with your hypothesis. I can imagine wolves howling together and thus creating a “unity” or “tribe mentality” that favours communal participation. But what of those that howl or sing off-key? Would that be grounds for shunning a wolf or cave-person out of the group?
Actually now that I think about it… I guess we’ve evolved to have Nickleback… and, I’ve answered my own question. 🫤
@@Jennifer_7600 lol
😂😂😂
So somehow certain winning tribes of mankind began humming and grunting because by doing so in just the right way (which happened by sheer chance supposedly ) they created social cohesion out of sheer chaos and chance after generations of this musical humming slowly taking effect (whereas those tribes that by chance stopped doing this dropped out of the evolutionary chain) making the survival of this particular more musically attuned unit secure by being ‘tight’ together the better to hunt or fight or run for survival… at the same time those individuals who slowly by freak of nature were born over successive generations with GOOD birth defects of the thumb until all the offspring who also slowly generated a trait of this deformity in just the right blind direction to such a time by chance that now they had reversible thumbs (probably taking by count of probability something in the order of hundreds of millions of years)….
This is utter BALLS!!! Are you seriously all this dim??
It could never have happened “by chance out of random probability” - it would at the very least have taken some Law - some unifying bonding agent inside the mystery of DNA to steer this process to the successful outcome for life and intelligence in the first place.
Ask which came first out of the sludge Light or Sight - the eyeball or the need for it - and the BILLIONS of years (if this flagrantly impossible hypothesis is to be entertained) necessary to go from “basic enzymes” (don’t dare ask where they were magicked out of BY CHANCE) to animal and plant life…
It takes a singularly minded refusal to even entertain that some kind of intelligence was steering this process from within or without. Or even - as mad as it sounds - an intelligent life so determined to disguise itself that it throws out all manner of red herrings and diversions to prevent EVER it’s rational detection.
For this reason - to be an “atheist” can never be to position of a true scientist.
To claim knowledge of such things before they are KNOWN is anti-scientific - and makes such an individual, plausibly, a human being (ape?) purposefully employed by certain still unknown “forces” to steer Mankind and the potential “purpose” for life in a certain way in order to prevent a quite ulterior reason for said life to flourish into Eternity.
Atheistic scientists today are a single-minded self-obsessed lot - zealously loyal to an absurd credo that claims knowledge that only a much greater force and power can possibly “know” - or steer.
No human being can “know” there isn’t a God.
Some human beings may very well KNOW the precise opposite.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge Dr Dawkins.
No matter what your area of expertise and how much knowledge you already have, you'll always be a bit smarter after listening to Richard.
My friend raised a fox cub from birth because his mother was killed , it was more dog like than most dogs ! , its about nurturing as much as nature . Be kind folks its amazing what happens.
Richard Dawkins, is like James May
i could listen to him explain how to lick an envelope and still be fascinated..
His face when she said auras and vibrations was priceless 😂😂
I was surprised that Richard didn’t have a response for the question on why animals were bigger in the past. I can’t remember verbatim, but the way it was taught to me in my college geology class was that the higher levels of oxygen, nitrogen, etc and plentiful living space for creatures at that time drove this. Great episode as always!
Oxygen has nothing to do with it, more how they used it.
Dinosaurs had different breathing systems and lighter bones for example and spiders have never been much bigger than today.
Oxygen has hell of a lot to do with the size of the animals
ריצארד דוקינס היקר. תמשיך להאיר את האפלה. כל הכבוד על ההתמדה . הינך מודל לחיקוי. שמעתי את דבריך באקדמיה הישראלית למדעים בביקורך בארץ. תודה רבה לך.
חופש לפלסטין
אני פלסטיני ואני רוצה שלום@@1eV
@@1eV
תשכיל ותתפתח במקום לדקלם סיסמאות. ותדרוש מהמנהיגות הערבית לסייע לכם. במקום לתרץ שבגלל היהודים מצבכם. פשוט שקר!
I was really hoping he would answer the resurrect question with his good friend Hitch. Miss his debate style, vast vocabulary, wit and just pulling references, dates, historical events, geographical locations like from a constantly updating encyclopedia. True legend
Goddamn I miss Hitch.
Question - can a universe be observed as an organism or a cell? Are there any similarities that could support this view?
In order of enjoyment, starting with my favorite:
The Greatest Show on Earth
The Selfish Gene
Climbing Mount Improbable
The Extended Phenotype
The Blind Watchmaker
A Devil's Chaplain
Science in the Soul
Books Do Furnish a Life
The Magic of Reality
Unweaving the Rainbow
The God Delusion
Outgrowing God
A River Out of Eden
Brief Candle in the Dark
An Appetite for Wonder
Flights of Fancy
The Ancestor's Tale
But they're all terrific.
Oh, I don't know the last one, 'But They're all Terrific'. I must look out for it.
Richard you inspired me! Thank you.
I admire everything about Prof. Richard. It is my dream to meet him.
It's nice to hear him finally talk about something other than God and religion. After all, he's not just an atheist, but a professor of evolutionary biology and zoology!
Or you finally caught up lol
His knowledge of religion is absolutely poor apart from christianity islam and maybe ancient greek mythology. He has said almost nothing on buddhism daoism etc. and he thinks hes an expert.
@@John76125 all religions are equally nonsensical therefore there is nothing to learn about them when there’s 0 evidence to validate them. Buddhism isn’t really a religion either, it’s spiritual but has no religious dogma to speak of.
@@John76125nobody needs to know about all religions. They are all crap.
His first book the selfish gene was written 1976, and he’s published a lot of other books about biology since. He does talk a lot about religion etc, but if you want to hear him talk about science/biology there are plenty of stuff to choose from over the past 50 years
Really entertaining to listen to. Thankyou
What’s all this Dr, Dawkins, or Mr Dawkins? Must be Americans, they’ll be using that ‘sir’ nonsense as they tend to too, I suppose. Richard has been Richard to us Brits for so long now, we just expect the world audience to be just as knowledgeable of his work as we are. Always great to see and hear Richard’s viewpoint, his year’s of knowledge are an absolute pleasure to behold. Thank you Richard.
What are the error bars, or sensitivity analysis of the constants of the universe that are the limits of what they need to be to create the universe as we see it, or at least close to it?
Logical thinking is at an inherent persuasive disadvantage because it leaves open the position "I don't know" (41:00), which for those who believe in certainty is never enough and may be taken as an admission of a failure of argument. The humility of science is to be praised.
I feel like tiptoeing out of the presence of such erudition. The final answer was a gem
So curious to know more about how AI “mutations” work! Could you elaborate on this in another video?!
Great podcast
Re music, and the arts & sciences - my thought is that they developed as a consequence of consciousness. So not really evolutionary in the sense that they helped us to survive, but we developed those things because we could, and of course the spin off with technology especially, really did help us to survive. Tools - the wheel - textiles - building - and sitting around the fire at night humming, creating stories about the day's hunting, drawing pictures on cave walls - and eventually sending men to the moon and beyond. Breathtaking.
Lovely!
I would like to hear Professor Dawkins evaluate the life forms in the series "The Expanse", especially the "Protomolecule" that plays such an important role. The series is renowned for taking science very seriously, which makes it a hugely enjoyable read evem for one who at present would prefer the gravity of Mars or the Belt!
While a great series which did space travel physics well its treatment of medicine/biology was actually sub Star Trek. Ships carried magic medical boxes that could treat just about anything without even requiring a doctor. The magic box for some reason was carried on space craft that were never more than a few days from hospitals. I believe the authors did this as there wasn't room for a doctor character in the plot.
If you look at a modern aircraft carrier it will have a full hospital on board but its not going to have faculties to treat cancer as you would just stabilise the patient and get them treated on shore.
Yeah, yeah I bet Richard LOVES❤️🔥 being interviewed by Taryn, haha gold.
The idea, I guess we credit Pinker, that 'simple' sounds (as in music), are why we love music, is fascinating.
Survivability and/or Pleasurable/Pain avoidance.
You are great professor!
On animal size, largeness is a protection from predation. There are other defences such as speed, sense acuity and intelligence, but quite possibly evolution amongst dinosaurs was slower in these characteristics.
Love the Q&As.
I have a question on evolutionary biology and "aliens".
Q: How do we arrive at a conclusion that intelligent alien life is predictable by evolution?
From my understanding, evolutionarily development does not predict intelligent life. It seems to me that evolutionary development does not lead to a single global optimum, but rather to some local optimum at a certain time depending on the environment and chance and you do not need intelligence in the equation for survival.
I wrote a novel called "Atropos" that deals with the issues that Richard alludes to when he discusses rejuvenation...
Music may have had its origin in using the beating of drum like objects or other sound producing devices to communicate over distances.
Thank You,
Simply Thank You ✌🏻&❤️
Here is my question. Do you think that we will ever learn how life began from chemicals? If we do, will we be able to create life? Would that make us, in a sense of the word, a god? Similarly do you think we will ever learn how to recreate the big bang? I love your insights.
How can I send a question to Dr. Dawkins?
What is consciousness? How can atoms feel pain and pleasure? What is sense?
I love you Richard! Like a friend, like a friend..
I would suggest that music was first developed as a cry to ward off predictors - especially during the preparation of food and more so at night.
This would eventually become a playful thing, by the nature of teaching children - to learn the method of self-preservation.
Further developments would most certainly be as a form of cross cultural communication, as music has no boundaries.
This would more likely be in the form of war cries and the like, then evolving into a base form of communication for different tribes who's language differs from one another. 🤔
Instruments will certainly have developed to support all of the above and the drum is most certainly the first of such instruments. 🪘🥁😊
The Harvard scientist Hopi Hoekstra has worked based on your theoretical work in the book The Extended Phenotype. I think she is an excellent scientist. It would be great if you invited her to your Podcast. It would be a good idea for you to recommend following some prominent scientists who could be good representatives in the future. of scientific and skeptical thought, who will continue your legacy? We want to know about people that you can recommend to us as promoters of rationalism. I wish you many more years of life, but after you, which scientists do you recommend us to follow?
Sounds like an awesome idea
Ohhh a new richard dawkins book!
Where do I send my tithe for Dawkins' ministry?
I recall it only took 6 generation of fox breeding to get that tame result. Respect and pleasure when I hear Dr Dawkins talk.
From this episode, would it make sense to pause technology development until humans have caught up with the current technology? Tik Tok, video games, plastic and gmo technology for example.
Fascinating, thank you
Very interesting! I really enjoy this format.
Since i know Dr. Dawkins appreciates science fiction i'm curious whether he is familiar with the field of speculative evolution/biology as a subgenre of the field. There are several nice books and online projects on the topic such as "After Man: a zoology of the future" by Dougal Dixon or "Serina: a natural history of the world of birds". "Expedition" by Barlowe looks at how life on an alien planet might look like using fascinationg illustrations.
Beautiful, beautiful and absolutely beautiful! ❤
Take A Moment
My fellow fish 🐟
1:10
Beaten until they did.
2:26 ❤
Genius at play 2:39
🎉🎉
I have a nice coat ☺️
Stay Safe and Stay Free 🌐 3:14 It's a dog's life 3:33 cats too 🎉
4:06
😂
1. 😂😂 not mythical, reality is all we need
I love this discussion
Simply the best!
I remember reading somewhere about three Christians ... hundreds of years back in time ... discussing the idea that after three days being dead in such a hot climate ... and then rising from the dead with his body intact ... one of them saying, "Jesus MUST have stinketh."
Even back then, those men figured out that the story itself ... was anti-scientific.
😂😂😂Oh my! Now I have a picture in my head of a stinky Jesus! 😂😂😂
@@BrendaPenepent lol Stinky Jesus.
My perception is that the earliest of theologians claimed that gods were talking to them ... but that story was not as effective as the theologians expected. So they created stories that humans were SO evil ... and SO disobedient to the gods, that the gods felt impelled to send their own sons to earth ... to in turn warn the evil humans that they MUST repent of sin TO these sons of gods ... or spend eternity in the "afterlife" suffering.
The supposed savior of souls of Christians, was just the most recent savior-myth story. Example as follows, and please note how Chrishna was spelled, before the Christians came up with the word Christ, and how the Hindus then changed the spelling of their supposed savior to "Krishna."
From the book … The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors … Christianity before Christ, by Kersey Graves … first published in 1875.
and finally these twenty Jesus Christs (accepting their character for the name) laid the foundation for the salvation of the world, and ascended back to heaven.
1. Chrishna of Hindostan.
2. Budha Sakia of India.
3. Salivahana of Bermuda
4. Zulis, or Zhule, also Osiris and Orus, of Egypt.
5. Odin of the Scandinavians.
6. Crite of Chaldea.
7. Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia.
8. Baal and Taut, “the only Begotten of God,” of Phenicia.
9. Indra of Thibet.
10. Bali of Afghanistan.
11. Jao of Nepaul.
12. Wittoa of the Bilingonese.
13. Thammuz of Syria.
14. Atys of Phrygia.
15. Xamolxis of Thrace.
16. Zoar of the Bonzes.
17. Adad of Assyria.
18. Deva Tat,aud Sammonocadam of Siam.
19. Alcides of Thebes.
20. Mikado of the Sintoos.
21. Beddru of Japan.
22. Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, of the Druids.
23. Thor, son of Odin, of the Gauls.
24. Cadmus of Greece.
25. Hil and Feta of the Mandaites.
26. Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico.
27. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls.
28. Ischy of the Island of Formosa.
29. Divine teacher of Plato.
30. Holy One of xaca.
31. Fohi and Tien of China.
32. Adonis, son of the virgin Io of Greece.
33. Ision and Quirinus of Rome.
34. Prometheus of Caucasus.
35. Mohammud, or Mahomet, of Arabia.
These have all received divine honors, have nearly all been worshiped as Gods, or sons of Gods; were mostly incarnated as Christs, Saviors, Messiahs, or Mediators; not a few of them were reputedly born of virgins; some of them filling a character almost identical with that ascribed by the Christian’s bible to Jesus Christ; many of them like him, are reported crucified; and all of them, taken together, furnish a prototype and parallel for nearly every important incident and wonder-inciting miracle, doctrine and precept recorded in the New Testament, of the Christian’s Savior. Surely, with so many Saviors the world cannot, or should not, be lost.
Great stuff!
I will however say, Dawkins, please don’t get ahead of yourself with a statement like ‘Nobody really has any idea but Steven Pinker has come the closest to it’. 7:37
I would highly recommend looking up Jacob Collier, or Adam Neely’s philosophies on rhythm and why it’s important to humans. Even they are referencing thoughts that many a drummer is deeply familiar with. The Rhythms of life 😃
Sir, what is technology in an evolutionary sense?
We're at a point where we can, but dont, genetically engineer ourselves to extend out livespan.
Is technology just a part of evolution?
Is it similar to the extended phenotype in a sense that we modify our surroundings to increase our survival chances?
Or is it just a side effect and us interfering with natural selection of sorts?
Genius ❤
Those foxes after 7 generations even looked like border collies. Dogs have owners, cats have staff
I'd like to hear where Dawkins stands to multilevel selection which includes group selection along with individual and kin selection's role in evolution. I particularly think that group selection could explain a lot about human evolution. Groups with better cooperation and communication would seem to have an advantage when competing against other groups. Chimpanzees appear to have warfare. Early homo or earlier could have had some type of warfare where the winning group imposes their genetics on the losing group (rape in warfare is common today). This would seem to be a case for group selection as well as an expiation for why warfare between groups is so common among all humans and we can't seem to overcome it with intellect.
Thank you for making this poetry of reality. The best line from this episode was "I don't know".
Dr. Dawkins, what would be a great way to educate people more efficiently about embracing the scientific method or atheism ?
Why do people of African descent have light skin color on the palms of their hands and soles of their feet? soles 4:01
Because our palsm and soles have an additional layer of skin - a distinctive five, compared to the four everywhere else - that provides extra protection against solar radiation, combined with the fact that our palsm and espescially soles are habitually far less exposed than any other body part to the sun, means that the high level of melanocyte cells required to produce dark skin are not needed. Indeed, even white people have paler palms and soles (though it is much less obvious) and these parts do not tan. They are also les slikely to to sunburn depsite this.
Thanks. However I do not see the artificial or natural selection associated with this explanation.
@@2mesense Natural selection tend to weed out traits that are not needed. Generally speaking, these cost energy to produce and maintain.
The argument about belief in God, 'because it makes me feel better!' always makes me laugh because I've heard a few people say that to me. But it's very pathetic, really, and sadly, it's how many people seem to live their lives. Much respect for Dawkins, my favourite science author!
actual believers say that? Ive not heard that
@frilansspion One of my relatives said it to me, he said I think you would get on better In life with a belief in God! I believe in God because it makes me feel better! How lame is that? 😆🤣😂😆😁
@@ABloodyEyeFull the "because" is a little lame, yes. You might get on better in life living a Christian lifestyle though, who knows.
@@frilansspionWhat's a "Christian lifestyle"?
@@glykera going to church and doing charity with the local community, getting married quite early and staying married, family values, very limited partying, not dressing like a clown, not convincing your kids that theyre transgender, that sort of thing...
Awareness is known by awareness alone.
27:00 blade runner for hire 😅
Love is the greatest tamer
I heard of a Russian woman that bred foxes to be tame and others to be aggressive. The "tame" foxes became more dog-like while the agressive ones would try to bite the hands of their handlers.
It was a Russian man.
@@xy4489 The man was a different case. The video I saw was a Russian woman.
I'm pretty sure that I didn't quite get the distinction between epigenetics that Richard mentioned. I think he only briefly touched on epigenetics in his books, I forget which one it was, but it would be really nice to have him update the world on modern understanding of epigenetics, and my question would be if he and J. Craig Venter are in agreement or not about how our "junk DNA" is now perceived vs the paradigms of the 80s and 90s, when Richard wrote those books, and what has changed. If I'm confused, I'm sure others are also confused, as well.
Resurrecting Jesus would be wonderful for Arsenal FC right now
When we are racing to the precipice in terms of climate change and there is no political will to stop burning fossil fuels, how long does Richard Dawkins think human beings, and indeed all other species, have left? What will come after us, if anything? With only one known example this is less of a question and more of a musing, is intelligence a fatal mutation and could this be why we see no ET's? Has intelligence just made us more effective killing machines?
Resurrecting jesus is assuming that he was a real person in history, the evidence or lack of, for his existence is minimal to nothing
Question: Could/can you be close friends with a truly religious person while thinking they are wrong about that?
Yes. Unless to they believed I would burn in hell for not believing. That would be a deal breaker right there.
To paraphrase Freud, sometimes a cheesecake is just a cheesecake.