Majority of media, especially social media, are using negativity biases to create viral loops. Algorithms are designed to accelerate negative comments as it becomes extremely sticky and WINS in the ATTENTION ECONOMY. People will not stare at a rosebush as they pass it on the road, yet an accident creates a great deal of rubber necking. Great Talk! Leo, I just purchased Subliminal and Emotional as I received a gift card to Barnes and Noble for Christmas. Thank you both for this amazing talk!
Late to listen, and barely halfway in, yet wished to thank each of you for today’s discussion. I’m lying here in a resonance field of clearer understanding of myself. This is one episode I feel as though I’ll process more than once. All the best! 🤙
Fantastic interview. Leonard would love to hear my story of anxiety and fear ,became alot worse since a mental breakdown 2 years ago . recently I've had mice and dealing with has been awful ,I wasn't this scared before.i can't even look at a snake now ,ile hyperventilate. I want to donate my brain for research. my inner critic pushes me to do things. detrimental to my health through my life . I would of died as a toddler if it wasn't for medicine but it has its draw backs,parents need to be thought how to raise a sick kid with serious trauma .the majority of kids don't go through what I did . It took years to find all my answers myself .
The problem with the "dog barking" example is that the reaction is not just emotional annoyance......Michael reacted by referencing that the dog was named Hitch, and further made an ironic joke about a dog named Hitch barking at a debate about God. Michael didn't just feel one emotion, but an entire world of emotions.....including sentimentality, irony, intellectual humor, probably some emotions in reference to the dog himself, a bit of annoyance etc etc etc. Furthermore, all of this emotional background is informed by the ineffable phenomenon of being human. We should stop talking about creating robots that will mimic this.....as the only way that would be possible is by narrowing our definition of consciousness to encompass whatever tech we invent. Let's make robots with robot intelligence that serves human needs.....that seems far more pragmatic.
i was greatly disappointed by this conversation especially as i just watched shermer's interview of anil seth. although i'd read "being you," the book was a bit beyond my capabilities so the interview and the scientific rigor which suffused seth's responses was very helpful to me. i have been a great admirer of mlodinow's work, particularly "subliminal" and "the drunkard's walk," both of which i think are "hard" (that is data based) science. in this conversation mlodinow (abetted by shermer's "reason"/anthropromorphic/humanistic/sometimes anecdotal approach) is really sloppy in the language that he uses, failing to distinguish between feelings, emotions, thinking, reasoning, autonomic brain function , etc. i find it hard to reconcile mlodinow's position now with what he wrote in "subliminal." i am reading frans de waal's book "our inner ape," having recently finished his newist book, "different." as a consequence i was very sensitive to the fact that shermer & mlodinov totally ignore our nature as primates in their approach. i want to say that alhough i may not always agree with professor shermer's approach, i am very grateful to him for presenting me with a wide spectrum of speakers who challenge me to think, to learn more and to be open to new ways of understanding myself, my species and the world in which the luck of my birth has placed me. i am impressed w/ the breadth of his interests and knowledge and w/ his prodigeous memory.
Could it be that emotion , the different interpretation in same situation is the foundation of what we value, depends on what we believe or accept in our subconscious mind,how we value is,what we are , is what comes out naturally as emotion , distinct emotion in every one of us
It struck me as ironic that you implied that the Dehumanization of witches and Jews ought to be seen and discussed through a lens of Empathy and emotion, yet Immediately following, implied that that the dehumanization and eradication of certain children in utero ought to be discussed through a lens of rationality.
@@SailorDoggo Expound a bit more please; From my point of you, it matters because when discussing questionable bio ethics for a perceived greater good (eugenics, ethnic cleansing, abortion are some examples), it Does not seem objective or impartial to discuss one exclusively From a rational perspective while another from an emotional??
@@itsfonk it’s possible…That’s why I mentioned it…I can’t read his mind and I don’t want to presume. I kind of gave him the benefit of the doubt and assumed he meant because Nazis and Inquisitors we’re able to see & hear people writhing in pain, Yet they proceeded anyway, Seemingly unempathetic, Whereas killing a child a new dryer with a sonogram and suction tube is less personal?
Evil. Is there such a thing? is it only that people survive in ways that are not acceptable in our society, for whatever reasons based on their genes, and their upbringing? Who knows?
People’s opinions are mainly designed to make them feel comfortable; truth/facts, for most people is a secondary consideration.
Majority of media, especially social media, are using negativity biases to create viral loops. Algorithms are designed to accelerate negative comments as it becomes extremely sticky and WINS in the ATTENTION ECONOMY. People will not stare at a rosebush as they pass it on the road, yet an accident creates a great deal of rubber necking.
Great Talk! Leo, I just purchased Subliminal and Emotional as I received a gift card to Barnes and Noble for Christmas. Thank you both for this amazing talk!
Late to listen, and barely halfway in, yet wished to thank each of you for today’s discussion. I’m lying here in a resonance field of clearer understanding of myself. This is one episode I feel as though I’ll process more than once. All the best! 🤙
This was quite stimulating! Wonderful! 😊
Thank you. This was illuminating and entertaining! 🤔😎
Wonderful discussion never disappoint, 🙏🏽
[04:09] Sponsor
[06:49] Start
Fantastic interview. Leonard would love to hear my story of anxiety and fear ,became alot worse since a mental breakdown 2 years ago .
recently I've had mice and dealing with has been awful ,I wasn't this scared before.i can't even look at a snake now ,ile hyperventilate. I want to donate my brain for research.
my inner critic pushes me to do things. detrimental to my health through my life .
I would of died as a toddler if it wasn't for medicine but it has its draw backs,parents need to be thought how to raise a sick kid with serious trauma .the majority of kids don't go through what I did .
It took years to find all my answers myself .
Good to hear Hitch weighing in on the God thing around the 1:35:00 mark. LOL
Good conversation.
The problem with the "dog barking" example is that the reaction is not just emotional annoyance......Michael reacted by referencing that the dog was named Hitch, and further made an ironic joke about a dog named Hitch barking at a debate about God. Michael didn't just feel one emotion, but an entire world of emotions.....including sentimentality, irony, intellectual humor, probably some emotions in reference to the dog himself, a bit of annoyance etc etc etc. Furthermore, all of this emotional background is informed by the ineffable phenomenon of being human.
We should stop talking about creating robots that will mimic this.....as the only way that would be possible is by narrowing our definition of consciousness to encompass whatever tech we invent. Let's make robots with robot intelligence that serves human needs.....that seems far more pragmatic.
i was greatly disappointed by this conversation especially as i just watched shermer's interview of anil seth. although i'd read "being you," the book was a bit beyond my capabilities so the interview and the scientific rigor which suffused seth's responses was very helpful to me.
i have been a great admirer of mlodinow's work, particularly "subliminal" and "the drunkard's walk," both of which i think are "hard" (that is data based) science. in this conversation mlodinow (abetted by shermer's "reason"/anthropromorphic/humanistic/sometimes anecdotal approach) is really sloppy in the language that he uses, failing to distinguish between feelings, emotions, thinking, reasoning, autonomic brain function , etc. i find it hard to reconcile mlodinow's position now with what he wrote in "subliminal."
i am reading frans de waal's book "our inner ape," having recently finished his newist book, "different." as a consequence i was very sensitive to the fact that shermer & mlodinov totally ignore our nature as primates in their approach.
i want to say that alhough i may not always agree with professor shermer's approach, i am very grateful to him for presenting me with a wide spectrum of speakers who challenge me to think, to learn more and to be open to new ways of understanding myself, my species and the world in which the luck of my birth has placed me. i am impressed w/ the breadth of his interests and knowledge and w/ his prodigeous memory.
Could it be that emotion , the different interpretation in same situation is the foundation of what we value, depends on what we believe or accept in our subconscious mind,how we value is,what we are , is what comes out naturally as emotion , distinct emotion in every one of us
This conversation makes me mad it can’t possibly be as you say- oh wait I just proved your point never mind 🤣
It struck me as ironic that you implied that the Dehumanization of witches and Jews ought to be seen and discussed through a lens of Empathy and emotion, yet Immediately following, implied that that the dehumanization and eradication of certain children in utero ought to be discussed through a lens of rationality.
Nothing ironic about it.
Could it be that he simply flipped the coins?
@@SailorDoggo Expound a bit more please; From my point of you, it matters because when discussing questionable bio ethics for a perceived greater good (eugenics, ethnic cleansing, abortion are some examples), it Does not seem objective or impartial to discuss one exclusively From a rational perspective while another from an emotional??
@@SailorDoggo sorry for the typos and bad grammar I’m trying to work and use speech to text. Hopefully you get the gist
@@itsfonk it’s possible…That’s why I mentioned it…I can’t read his mind and I don’t want to presume.
I kind of gave him the benefit of the doubt and assumed he meant because Nazis and Inquisitors we’re able to see & hear people writhing in pain, Yet they proceeded anyway, Seemingly unempathetic, Whereas killing a child a new dryer with a sonogram and suction tube is less personal?
Evil. Is there such a thing? is it only that people survive in ways that are not acceptable in our society, for whatever reasons based on their genes, and their upbringing? Who knows?
There is darkness here, emotions are walking behind, the stucture can not be known by man
Ugh Is there a single video where Shermer doesn't remind his guest that he lives in Santa Barbara? SMH
🇺🇳1:02:16