Brian Greene in To Unweave a Rainbow: Science and the Essence of Being Human
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 พ.ค. 2024
- As long ago as the early 19th century, the poet Keats bemoaned the washing away of the world’s beauty and mystery in the wake of natural philosophy’s reductionist insights-its tendency to “unweave a rainbow.” Two centuries later, the tentacles of science have reached far further, wrapping themselves around questions and disciplines once thought beyond the reach of scientific analysis. But like Keats, not everyone is happy. When it comes to the evaluation of human experience-passion to prayer, consciousness to creativity-what can science explain, and what are the limits of its explanatory powers? What is the difference between science and scientism? Are the sciences and the humanities friends or foes? Join an animated discussion on science, reductionism, the mind, the heart, freedom, religion, and the quest for the human difference.
This program is part of the Big Ideas Series, made possible with support from the John Templeton Foundation.
Original Program Date: June 2, 2016
PARTICIPANTS: Brian Greene, Joanna Kaczorowska, Pablo Lavandera, Miguel Nicolelis, Leon Wieseltier
Subscribe to our TH-cam Channel for all the latest from WSF.
Visit our Website: www.worldsciencefestival.com/
Like us on Facebook: / worldsciencefestival
Follow us on twitter: / worldscifest
Brian Greene Introduction 00:00
Participant Introductions 4:15
Leon Wieseltier: A militant unconstructed humanist 6:40
Will understanding the brain make reality meaningless? 12:42
Different brains, different reality? 17:00
The Extent Which Perception is Involved In Our Understanding of Objectivity 22:30
Is there anything more beyond the physical? 27:34
Biology can not be the responsible for loving your wife 35:55
Why do we want to believe there is more that the physical? 45:05
To what extent is the history vital to the function 51:10
Does science have values? 1:03:30
The description of the human experience vs the numbers of what is happening. 1:13:53
Early religion predetermining science 1:21:10
Science and the spiritual quest 1:25:38
Experiencing awe 1:29:20 - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Hello, TH-camrs. The World Science Festival is looking for enthusiastic translation ambassadors for its TH-cam translation project. To get started, all you need is a Google account.
Check out 'Brian Greene Hosts: To Unweave a Rainbow: Science and the Essence of Being Human to see how the process works: th-cam.com/users/timedtext_video?ref=share&v=SD8fokI-pyo
To create your translation, just type along with the video and save when done. Here is the master link to check out the full list of programs that you can contribute to: th-cam.com/users/timedtext_cs_panel?c=UCShHFwKyhcDo3g7hr4f1R8A&tab=2
The World Science Festival strives to cultivate a general public that's informed and awed by science. Thanks to your contributions, we can continue to share the wonder of scientific discoveries with the world.
I have noticed that every educational thang on the enternet takes a shot a republicance
@@SimMaverick It definitely is that way. I think it's because the right very often comes from the religious perspective because the church reflects the moral and ethical values of the right. Science always likes to take shots here and there at religious beliefs because so much of the bible is unprovable and cannot simply be put under a microscope.
If you took notice they still gave religion it's due, but not like they would if it were quantum physics
or something measurable so it can be proven and quantified. Personally I try not to get involved in such matters and my belief system is my own. I wouldn't last two minutes in a debate with any one of these fine Gentleman, and not because I lack.the knowledge but because I lack the patience. Still I enjoy to watch listen and hopefully learn.
Have a nice day Mr.Jason Brooks.
@@SimMaverick yes, good isn't it?
@Gus Erland people who faint when they hear the word socialism, usually american. and usually know fuck all about what it actually means
@Gus Erland I see no evidence of any proof
I feel so lucky for finding this channel....and I must confess, I am in love with Brian Greene..
Bianca Voda you're not the only one.
👌😎🍄
Thats because of the Rainbow subject
@Gus Erland what? We know each other?
TYSVM❤😉🖤
I fall asleep to this channel and end up dreaming about what the guests are saying and wake up smarter
I do exactly the same thing. Not sure I wake up smarter though
Love the way Brian conducts his speeches with his hands:)
"I don't want my fellow citizens to think that they're all just matter." - I found this comment to be the most illuminating of the entire talk. His perspective is not based on philosophy or science, it's based on emotions and an innate desire to have external purpose. Personally, I find life extremely fulfilling and filled with purpose despite thinking that I'm nothing but matter.
Well said
Yes that nice but what is that really is all you are…..what Brian is saying is that that if that’s all you are it’s ok too. Where as the white haired guy can’t accept that possibility zd
Its based on all of it but he recognizes the complexity and drastic variety of the human individual and their systems.
I just love the depth of the conversation and it is amazing how we are capable to be so obsessed with how we work and there is much more than physical beings.
The unattributed piece of music is the first movement of the Schumann Sonata No. 1 Op 105.
The best talk in this channel this year.
What a tremendous setting and debate!! And the ending, so beautiful and so fitting honoring us as humans. Damn!!
Comments below on "beardless santa", Leon Wieseltier are so far away from my experience it amazes me how it can be so far apart. I think Leon Wieseltier is so thoroughly discussing naturalist reductionism and is willing to go to the core of the issue. It is a beautiful respectful debate on such a detailed level that I loved every minute of it. And maybe because he seems more right brain dominant which resonates more with me, he has a more holistic view beyond the reductionist view which requires more of an acceptance of uncertainty than in science (even though I know that not to be so absolute)
Reason and Grace, baby. No contradictions there. The temporal and the transcendent are only in conflict in the simplest of minds. Bring in the science and behold the power of its revelations of truth. Bring in the grace and bask in its whispers of meaning. This panel proves that every once in a while humanity can be brilliant and fearless. Bravo!
I thought this was a wonderful opportunity for people like myself to listen in, and enjoy interesting back and forth conversation from very impressive minds. I'm looking forward to more of the same.
Such a wonderful episode! Love to sit and watch intellectuals have a conversation.
thank you very much! many inspiring, thoughtful, and philosophical possibilities! and the ending was beautiful ;)
Completely fascinating. I love the WSF debates ,discussions.
Wow, great episode... haven't heard a better discussion in a while, thanks for this. Both Wieseltier and Nicolelis described their points of view in a very articulate and coherent manner. Brain food!
I love all of these videos. This one was spectacular, one of the best without doubt.
agreed
You know what the world needs now? Ripe for the intellectual picking would be a debate between a man and a woman as to, "just what the hell do you want?" And no, you can't answer, "money!" Soon, whether AI superintelligence, nuclear war, sun eruption, or asteroid impact, we will all need to ask why we are here and where are we going. Let, where we came from die its pitiful death. We know now that we are in the here and now. Burn that dogma crap and let's put our thinking caps on.
@@CandidDate hahah man, he is just saying he liked the episode, that's all. Are you ok, my friend?
brian greeñe and others, thank you beyond añything consequences on self doesnt matter, i appreciate not being alone. that the truth is there,and known my heart,my life is full of gratitude. still reaching and climbing . God bless the truth the light and hope
I’m glad that I’m not the only one who thinks that the guy in the middle has no clue what he’s talking about and shouldn’t have been invited to this conversation.
The beardless Santa sitting in the middle is so intolerable with his arrogance. He was having a conversation with himself the entire time.
Hmmmm. So ridicule his appearance? I thought this channel was about the search for something deeper than high school taunts. I found his perspective evocative.
I must admit, I had a difficult time following his long sentences. I tried very hard, but after so many "ands" , I had to wonder if he was able to follow himself.
He got set up.. This is sad. There are 2 people that have spent a lot of time studying and working within this field and the guy in the middle doesn't have close to the same knowledge about the subject. And the subject they picked didnt leave enough room for his side of knowledge and so on. They basically bullied him.
Can before I make a probably overly self important statement I'd like to say thank you for the informative and entertaining content and all the amazing people. As I laid in bed half asleep listening a notion dawned on me. It seems both the physical and metaphysical are valid and right. I think our personal realities are Based on 2 major pillars discovery and reaction. So what 1 fundamentally discovers about themselves or the world around them can often have common concepts easily relatable to another. The reactionary portion is the seemingly chaotic Aspect that makes all the flavors Of life. So I propose the achievements and limitations There are often relatable on scale, Are also the mechanisms the bring us the highest highs and lowest lows of humanity.
I'm still fascinated in 2022!
My word, what a lovely talk they held on the 53d anniversary of Doctor Who!
Also, to me as both a scientist and a religious person this talk was so relatable!
the ending music made me cry
This was great. The only thing we need to take away, which I've learned not to long ago, is that our intentions can and do effect the physical, the biological, and the spiritual parts of life, which pretty much covers everything(extra dimensions, or life at the quantum level)
Also, Leon is completely arrogant in his absolute belief that he is right, to the point that he doesn't listen to anything that's even said. All he wants to do is get in the last word, this guy is insufferable.
They disgrace the art of war.
it all comes together
It’s almost like I want part 2
I love him as a host !!!
hes arrogant
Have you played the album
“Hemispheres” by Rush?
🧠🏆An oscar for my brain : EXTRAORDINARY CONVERSATION , 🙏THANK'S MR.GREENE.
The subjective appreciation of Art is based on the experiences that a particular brain has had. Once we simulate an actual brain, we will be able to create gross categories of behavior responses based on different experience sets. But it may be impossible to predict with 100% accuracy any particular brain's response. Like predicting the weather too far in advance. Too many variables.
FlyingMonkey Why should we even simulate a brain. Once we have a machine strong enough to do that our brains will be irrelevant.
Leon is a typical philosopher in my humble opinion. Contemporary philosophers often exhibit a sense of over zealous grasping for relevance in a world once dominated by their bread. But now, with the invention of neuro science and other advancements in our understanding, they are being relegated to the margins and no longer hold much relevance in modern debate about the subject at hand. Leon seems to be no exception and leaves a bitter after taste by the end of the discussion.
Just two words I'd like to ponder: context and self-grasping.
What is the context of the physiology, physics, chemistry, and biology of an experience?
What does it mean to self-grasp, that is to understand what it means to understand?
Perfect
thanks you for : never forget art !
that's is question also, for what we need the art ?
Does anyone know the work performed at the end? Late Romantic - its title was not announced. A Brian bad.
Brian Greene is simply awesome!
what did brian greene discover?...oh ya...not a damn thing
i can read a book too...that make me awesome?
@@gerryb7859 maybe you should read one of Brian's books.
This sounds like a similar approach comparing the behaviorist in "The Ghost in The Machine" like the physicalist.
What they're really talking about is the emergent property we call "consciousness".
That is to say, we can clearly and scientifically define the brain and all it's multiple systems, (neurons, chemical, electrical, etc.), and as science progresses, our instruments and models will become even more accurate and complete, but it does not explain the "experience" we all have as individuals. It does not explain the emergent property of "consciousness" and the perception that we, and other individuals around us, are more than the sum of our parts.
The real question is whether this is just an illusion created by complex information processing, or if there is something deeper and more random to our experience, that cannot be quantified by mere numbers.
Wow, i cried how it finished :_)
The person that this discussion should have had on the panel is Robert Sapolsky
I would be very interested in a Scientific discussion with Dean Radin and some quantum physicists. Dean has some very interesting experiments which show an influence of consciousness on quantum behaviour.
Isn’t Brian Green the best educator ever! He’s incredible erudite, articulate and moreover, so interesting in everything he says!.. If our kids had lecturers like him in our schools and Universities, we would be a nation of geniuses. Love him! He could teach chimpanzees quantum physics! America brace him and acknowledge his talent! And I’m English😀
20:50
Thanks 🙏
Towards the end of this video I started to just skip whenever the white-haired guy was speaking. He is annoying in his dominating the conversation without giving any valuable information!
I love Brian's World science Festival and I enjoyed (for the most part) this discussion. However, there should have been a psychologist in this panel, and preferably a specialist in social psychology. (P.S. There are few hosts as intelligent, gracious, and nice as Dr. Brian Greene).
Brian is a superb host.
Pashyanti the greatest
Wonderful discussion. The word condescending was mentioned more than once. The only taint to it all.
i love how miguel is rockin those nikes' lol
Prof BGreene, I agree w the Neuroscientist saying that even if we are 99.9%, we may be 0.01% Human, in my opinion meaning the limit of Mind when it knows its own self, that the rest of the information is in another Dimension, above the say 11TH Dimension. I completely agree with you that had say, if Newton allocated understanding to non scientific, we would not be where we are now. The discussion is not to break the back of science, but admire it, it is through Newton, Bohr, Einstein, Quantum Physics, Quarks, String Theory, etc., that Mind will, say may, realize that it had its limit, and limit is not a shame, if limits were a shame, those Function whose limit is, Fixed Constant, would be Shameful Functions, I call “SF”. Your Pupil , Mike Saghai.
Are memories part of biology? Memories can be inaccurate with witness reports usually differing. There are many instances people love a personal ideal of a certain person rather than the actual person. Does love really feel any different whether it's a metaphysical bond or just an operation of biology on inaccurate memory, projections, and copying?
(there are deep limitations to our "theories" and "understanding". we are limited to know it all.)
when you are picking teams, these are the guys you pick first.
Missing behavioural science, it would blow up this talk! There is a scientific reason a flower is beautiful or horrific depending on who you ask.
? You mean environmental development right ..?
sole boot, soul,heart
I think if you think of the chemicals comprising the painting as by necessity being inclusive, sustainable and coexistent there is a deeper beauty than the beauty that is visible to our senses, both levels of perceiving are beautiful and are both enforcing.
Now that was top. Will have to review at least 3 times for the parts I missed while I was reflecting on the others. So rich. The science part was mindblowing and went near the out of orbit to religion but did not make it. The part on religion was decieving. Splash in the water with parachutes. Not easy for a scientist to leave objectivity and to look the subject, as a painter does, as it tells you it is instead of what you have been thaught it is. Dogmas and myths are powerfull on both sides.
I think one of the reasons so many people posit that consciousness of an illusion reducible to causes and effects in the brain, and that we therefore lack true free will, is a combination of the fact that (A) we don't see any other systems that can ignore cause and effect in the world around us and (B) to accept that somehow the brain/mind alone can "self-cause" a certain behavior is for some a hard pill to swallow. What are the limits of this? A slime mold lacks a brain, but it can creatively solve problems despite that (in effect it has a non-neuronal version of an organ granting it a kind of intelligence). Does it have the ability to "choose" to violate cause and effect too and therefore have free will? If not, could a slime mold evolve free will without a brain? If so, what else might have that power? Could a "non-living" (whatever that means) complex system do it?
It is a simpler world if we all are equally bound by cause and effect, and there is some comfort in that that is attractive to certain people.
That middle guy made me miss Heidegger lmao.
mary's room, illustrates that experience is knowledge, but it is only knowledge of experience. she doesnt learn anything new about tomato's or the color red. she only learns how it feels to experience it.
I think both kinds of knowledge are valuable in their own. I wouldn't care much of the structure and biology of a tomato if I am not able to experience it in any way.
Say this was great but could you guys have gotten a social psychologist or a philosopher of self instead of Leon Wieseltier? i think he made the conversation advance in an unnecessarily slow peace.
What is the white hair guy talking about? Is he trying to prove that random words have a meaning also?
Lmao
He doesn’t like that possibility that science may be all there is. He wants to make a case for religion
9:47 he is keep on looking down to his notes.
Why was Brain speaking with the cadence of William Shatner in his introduction?
Well, even if we are just biological machines but we can think, create, appreciate beauty, explore the universe, being unique from each other and not duplicable (no-cloning theorem), than do we really need "something more", a "soul"? This form of existence itself is enough to be defined as soulful for me.
Leon did a great job of defending the humanistic perspective, what it means to be human. He was debating two scientists who are moderate and rational and likeable. There were no rabid reductionists here. But they do exist. Whether the nature of reality can be known through reason; a function of intelligence is debatable and time will tell.
What's the piece they are playing at the end?
I also want to know. That was beautiful! It made me tear up a bit.
It’s the first movement of the Schumann Sonata No. 1 Op 105.
@1:19 no Double-spending Eisenstein
1:13:28
محاضرة العالم المصرى الكبير الاستاذ محمد النشائى بامريكا The Universe as a Golden Supercomputer
Scorpion300100
346 views
3 weeks ago
1:03:05
Steven Weinberg: To Explain the World
World Science Festival
150K views
2 years ago
21:50
كيف تصبح مصر دولة عظمى؟ 23-7-2017
sabahelkheirofficial
1.3K views
3 months ago
46:16
الدكتور محمد النشائى وبرنامج أبناء نهر النيل
Scorpion300100
219 views
5 years ago
1:13:28
The Universe as a Golden Supercomputer
Claregate Metaphysics Group
339 views
1 month ago
1:06:30 Brian Green really shows his scientistism, an ideology. His perspective escapes the spoke of science in the wheel that makes the human experience and understanding.
1:16:00 there may be nothing else required for understanding says Green. Again, scientism.
Going too far away from the center is to lose your humanity.
1:58 Ignorance is bliss. A bag of particles governed by math...
You are matter and consciousness not just matter.
Science studies the category.
The human being identifies the category for the scientists to study.
Science identies facts within the categories.
Those facts in themselves cannot tell you which is more valuable than the other.
We will get back to discovering the logos, that is the center with which we experience the world and chose to aim to the source of the logos.
It's like arguing with homer Simpson for an hour and half
35:46 wubba lubba dub dub?
Look at work on emotions and asthetic in architecture
47:46 classic argument from ignorance. Because you can't answer my question and do not have all the explanations, my mumbo-jumbo (by default) makes sense.
Brian is getting to a very interesting point (around 36:00): "I want to believe that and I want you to convince me of that. ... I live in a tension between my scientific knowledge and that 0.1 percent. Charles Darwin held that humans are not the only self-aware beings. I agree and we can show many experiments that prove it, but humans are the only species that show self preponderance - a higher value of themselves - compared to other species. Darwin asserted that the differences among species come in degree rather than kind (Marc Bekoff, Colorado). I agree again. Brian is simply asking for help: I want to be convinced of some transcendental meaning of life, despite my scientific background knowledge. I believe that all human beings want that and need that, because they don't like "uncertainty". But when Neils Bohr says: If you think you understand particle physics then you don't understand particle physics - He states that "we do not and will most likely never know the 0.1 %, because if we did, we would not be human.
I think Brian has carefully pointed to the problem via self-analysis. I think Brian is right to say "like everybody else", but he is the first person I have ever heard express this:
Science cannot give us 100% certainty, it can only guide our thoughts. But "conclusions" depend on our very personal "information processing". If there is a hidden reality and science would be able to detect it - it would no linger be a hidden reality. The best example that "we all" are searching to find that hidden particle is probably this: We called the Higgs Boson the "god particle" and since god is supposedly everywhere - we invented the Higgs Field.
At 12:00, but we can analyse it from the mathematical point (geometry) and look for patterns among most well received pictures as it probably follows the normal distribution among the population's perception of the painting.
The reason for why people like those pictures is a different story, but probably also stems from the fact that human brain always seeks to discover and understand the pattern it can observe.
At 57:00 it seems that his objective is not the prevention of the collapsing of the human horizon understanding human beings being unique and not a collection of atoms. Rather he preaches the bliss of ignorance and tries to caress humans as children who are not ready for this information.
Due to being brought up in the military style home and a Christian believe that anything that I do is simple I will go to hell is the reason that I became terrified of doing anything simple and thinking I was going to go to hell and having so many phobias. Do you do the experiment I am not scared of anything now I can see the difference from what you guys have made but I still think it’s absolutely gorgeous and I still appreciate the earth for what it is. Especially the day that I got to see string theory little strings in the sky dancing is absolutely beautiful. I honestly do not think that you should bring your children up in a Christian home scaring them thinking that if they do anything that they will go to hell keeping them from growing or exploring. I still like to believe that there is a guard something bigger than me but I understand every single thing that you guys have said and I put all of it together and still like to believe that there is still about it and have that part of the imagination. Do you to all the chaos is the reason that made me so confused already knew what I wanted but when you have a partner who will not communicate with you or even tell you what they want and everybody telling you different things become to the point that you feel like you’re doing something wrong or maybe they just are not into you anymore. It is what it is I know we are up and put on this earth to live and die. And whatever things that we are good at you’re supposed to do love people do good things for others be there for our friends and family and help each other out and unfortunately I’m a hopeless romantic with a very big ♥️. I found out I was more spiritual and that way I can use spirituality with science.
Brian looked pissed with the cotton hair dude
why was the word ethos not mentioned... they struggled to describe exactly what ethos is, the unique experience that each brain goes thru! ...including anything inherited.
The fear of being just a regular speck of this reality have rendered that illusion of divinity in the first place, I reckon. Came from dust, turned to dust.
Well, then you should just think of something that will guarantee you that there is something after this life. Not reality, but hope. Welcome to Christianity
nathaN Fuck afterlife, hope and christianity.
brock hamper You like my point of view, don't you? You just can't admit it in public :). I never knew christians are suicide advocates. You've got a pretty messed up religion guys, I must say.
"Are we nothing but the physical processes that make us up." I think the problem there is not the statement, it is instead the 'nothing but'. If you really take time to think about it, the fact that we are this rather queer system of physically processes which goes on with all the other physical processes is quite exquisite! I love science, and the insight it provides, but I don't think science will ever get to the fundamental nature of the world, for the simple reason that the knower can never be the object of it's own knowledge.
I hate it when they say ‘in other words...’ when they’ve already described it perfectly adequately.....get on with your point!
Our Science can explain somethings, but not all things
afraditiss is that what lets you sleep at night?
Dr. Greene's argument [39:10 - 39:29] is acceptable if it can also be used that: ONCE the brain of humans in about 1000 years from now are able to mathematically and richly write better Quantum Laws of Physics & beautiful mathematics that may explain why a man loves a particular woman meaning his wife, ALL humans later realize from Quantum laws' revelations as to why that man who REASONS NOT to LOVE the CAUSE of him to possess the capability to love at all; alongside NOT loving his wife is an unintelligent human...Worst case scenario divorces his wife! Afterall marrying a woman he doesn't love once he's able to have a better knowledge or wisdom of love via experience described by Quantum Physics would be considered FOOLISHNESS... LOVE ❤️ this kind of fair arguments 👏
It would have been great if these guys put their egos aside to allow for a more constructive convo to take place.
Does he or does he not speak the same cadence as Capt. James T. Kirk?
i really love them 3 all very much indeed; but I believe that sir. miguel nicolelis (neuroscientist) seems to get a bigger portion of my things (thinks), be all blessing peace, love and successes 💕.💕.💕.'
1:13:28
محاضرة العالم المصرى الكبير الاستاذ محمد النشائى بامريكا The Universe as a Golden Supercomputer
Scorpion300100
324 views
3 weeks ago
21:50
كيف تصبح مصر دولة عظمى؟ 23-7-2017
sabahelkheirofficial
1.3K views
3 months ago
Is it just me or does Brian Greene sound a little like William Shatner with his cadence in the intro? XD
in a non-standard idealistic VR model where Consciousness itself is thE computer(as a "natural" digital information field/thingy of which we are instantiations/partitions/nodes of) morality can be defined by; what lowers the Entropy of the Bits at hand......if an act/choice creates more overall randomness/causes less structure its bad........if it increases structure complexity(which usually equates to simplify at a bigger scale)/optimizes functionality its good......if its in the best interest of the whole/about others/involves cooperation its good.......if its about me me me, how can I get, & how can I keep its bad etc.....love vs. fear/morality as a measure of entropy in computer science/digital physics terms.
17:36 ... LMAO .. HAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA
Fractals.
the unending impossible possible infinit one sided universe
Almost. More random and surreal. Codding enough for cellular automata to bounce about a more probabilistically apt inference.
Esoteric inscrutable critical periods, in so far as a formal transactional account can attempt.
Yeah, after the How and Why question bit, it's clear the writer holds these positions very firmly due at least in part to his scientific ignorance.
Second...
law of thermodynamics...
Lost me at about 2:00. See ya.
CHAOS THEORY, SOMEONE SAY CHAOS THEORY ALREADY!
An over-excited host, Brian Greene, drops an F-BOMB at 11:39
think he's on drugs.
This is quite frustrating. All the points against science could be taken to task. Take for example the soldier diving on to a grenade to save their comrades.
The argument is that science WILL NEVER be able to explain why they did that.
So we don’t need to explain exactly why. But we do need to envisage a possible reasoning.
There are many possibilities.
1. The soldier was “programmed” to do that. This may be by training. As all soldiers, police officers or anyone trained to be in conflict often say when asked about a moment of high courage by a baffled onlooker, their training “took over”. This doesn’t necessarily mean they were ordered to. They may have been self-trained, or group-trained via a pact. The fact is, if they survived, they may well say it was due to training. This provides evidence for humans being able to perform out-of-the-ordinary actions given sufficient conditioning.
2. The soldier was acting on instinct. It is well known that humans and other animals have a set of instinctive actions when faced with a sudden moment of danger. The old simplification of this is “flight or fight”. If this instinctive reaction occurred, the soldier had no other choice. So there must be a good chance that moving toward the danger was likely due to instinctive reaction.
3. There are underlying evolutionary mechanisms for self-sacrifice. This assumes that the soldier was not subject to any instinctive or preconditioned action, but consciously made the decision to self-sacrifice. There are well-reasoned arguments that explain biological altruism. One can easily imagine a scenario where the soldier has acted in order to further a common cause and, via several reductive steps, theoretically benefit his/her genetic continuation. It may be that, as a result of their action, their family would be more likely to thrive. This is impossible to fully develop in a comment here, but the point is that non-kin biological altruism has a well-founded scientific rationale.
So there are three possible scientific reasons why the soldier did that off the top of my head.
Higher unemployment should equal free education and more art, or creativity.
If that happened you would then have a sophisticated population...No one would be dumb enough to shine the shoes but just bright enough to operate the drudge jobs in such a world...The powers would never allow it.
7Earthsky... the robots could shine shoes haha. The idea is for people to live life, not work to live. Developing skills takes time. With an autonomous labor industry and free education, there could potentially be more physicist, neurosurgeons, artist, etc. we're already seeing a glimpse. Just watch a people are awesome video. People are gaining ridiculous skills because they have the time to do it, but most importantly they enjoy doing it and in general, their skill enriches the lives of others. I understand though. The fact that high unemployment takes on negative connotation implies that the powers that be would find some other way to keep people's minds enslaved. #thehumancondition
kuntamdc I know that..I agree with that...But look how all countries are run in the world...Governments will never allow such freedom for people...There would be no need for government if people didn't need to be freed from something.
A world where robots are doing everything is a world without government.
7Earthsky I agree, however, to me it seems politicians are scapegoats for some individuals and corporations. The worst case is, robots take over labor and poverty increases. I like to think, generally speaking, if robots took over labor, everyone's quality of life would increase. I'm an optimist and an advocate of the latter.
kuntamdc Yes, the whole technology, including robots taking over the world bullshit has been said for a very long time now...They're mostly manginas with families that are scared of change and having to adapt..People to like to blame the world for everything. Including improvements.
string thread sewn evidiençe