20. Aggression IV
Вставка
- Опубліковано 31 січ 2011
- (May 17, 2010) Professor Robert Sapolsky completes his fourth and final part of a discussion about aggression and violence. He discusses how hormones and evolution have shaped this behavior into the way humans interact today.
Stanford University:
www.stanford.edu/
Stanford Department of Biology:
biology.stanford.edu/
Stanford University Channel on UA-cam:
/ stanford
I work at a photoshop where I print film. The work is monotonous, and for a while I felt like my brain shut down when I started it and was slow to boot up into gear when I got back home. It honestly felt like my intelligence was slipping away.
I found these lectures and have been listening to them everyday at work for the past couple weeks, and I can't tell you how much faster it makes the day go by and how much happier I am. I'm not wasting away at work anymore, so thank you so much!
the boudries of humans being, normal life, your thoughts and being unique and at somepoint you may think,
should i go isolate and be alone.
enjoying talking of, basic terms like science.
some common knlowledge of a normal educated person, not knowing basic ideas like dna only being part of the a "general" term
of general "Recently!!" "Obsevered" events. the
nothing being able to process things like which came first in cronological order of hormones and neroepeniferion, hypohylseim, but
possible pluassable talk of still being able to alter dna and become "super man" or "cancer Proof" if we want to even if we dont have a way to, scientificly
get proved wrong, to gaurrentte "something" "a product" to the public. that is 100 percent a product of " a + b = ... ".
this is the time line i think science "could " and "does" and "might" lead humans.
1. animails talking/ curing cancers...
2. heads in jars like "tv show future drama", that can talk and live for ever..
3. floating cars.
my question is, if moms are to busy for their kids, and dont want to be bothered by them playing or fighting like i see,
alot of dog moms act, and we learn to lie some where?, where do we really learn behavoir? the answer probabbly goes something like.
we all try to be good people and show empathy. we wish we all had a job and a apartment to think, "im okay" but my point is be at that level for you
to be where you want in life to make the desicsion for what you want in life and "be okay" to make the better descion for yourself.
to be "okay", but can do 1 step and get 1 good thing for it.
@@halfsnaps environment and genetic predisposition did you not listen to a word he said?
@@ScattMatt3000 twitch /halfsnaps . I stream me make counter strike maps from 1997. And I study.
I just discovered your comment by accident, since I don't really watch the lectures, I listen to them while doing photoshop . LOL ! I feel blessed too.
I listen while cleaning houses. Fascinating lectures, so fluent and coherent, I thank R Sapolsky and Stanford for enriching my mind!
These lectures are absolutely first rate, and well done to Stanford for making this content free to the world.
the boudries of humans being, normal life, your thoughts and being unique and at somepoint you may think,
should i go isolate and be alone.
enjoying talking of, basic terms like science.
some common knlowledge of a normal educated person, not knowing basic ideas like dna only being part of the a "general" term
of general "Recently!!" "Obsevered" events. the
nothing being able to process things like which came first in cronological order of hormones and neroepeniferion, hypohylseim, but
possible pluassable talk of still being able to alter dna and become "super man" or "cancer Proof" if we want to even if we dont have a way to, scientificly
get proved wrong, to gaurrentte "something" "a product" to the public. that is 100 percent a product of " a + b = ... ".
this is the time line i think science "could " and "does" and "might" lead humans.
1. animails talking/ curing cancers...
2. heads in jars like "tv show future drama", that can talk and live for ever..
3. floating cars.
my question is, if moms are to busy for their kids, and dont want to be bothered by them playing or fighting like i see,
alot of dog moms act, and we learn to lie some where?, where do we really learn behavoir? the answer probabbly goes something like.
we all try to be good people and show empathy. we wish we all had a job and a apartment to think, "im okay" but my point is be at that level for you
to be where you want in life to make the desicsion for what you want in life and "be okay" to make the better descion for yourself.
to be "okay", but can do 1 step and get 1 good thing for it.
@@halfsnaps mall m
Llzwwswz
@@halfsnaps what the hell did you say?
They'd mever release this nowadays tho. Its still only here because we would complain if it was taken down..
@@cheech460 he's been spamming the same bs everywhere
Sapolsky is so great at teaching critical thinking with the way he structures things that I caught myselft doubting his own conclusions.
I agree, and I think he's achieved one of his major aims in this course if we don't take anyone's statements as the final word on a subject...even his own. What a wonderful teacher!!!
@@gmaharriet true
both of you
are true
and not
but you got that by now...didn't you.
hèhèh
there is more to love i think
about humanity
than there is to not love
i love humanity
see how i made that choice...
You should doubt his own conclusions because many studies that he quotes in his lectures didn't replicate and he is leaving out others - that did not match his world view - that did.
Never trust that just one person holds all the truth. Everybody has their shortcomings.
@@Dfd_Free_Speech Do you have sources to back your affirmation please? I'm very interested.
@@isntitabeautifulday1648 For a start read this article:
www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/psychologys-replication-crisis-real/576223/
If you got the time then check out the articles that all did not replicate. Sapolsky quoted many of them in his lectures.
The particular finding is that studies that overweigh the role of environment in human behavior did replicate less than studies that overweigh the role of genetic inheritance.
Also, epi-genetics is extremely rare and plays almost no significant role. There are also some recent studies on this.
Sapolsky also massively overstates the role of epi-genetics. That's sad when genetic inheritance outweighs epi-genetics by something like a million to one.
Ah, fuck. Why do they have to cut so abrutely each time ? The end of this part was really really interesting. I really like when he mixes personal experiences with facts/science.
SpyMonkey3D well...he finished his story, and then he made a conclusion of sorts for the aggression lectures. I don't think we were cut off.
This guy is the Bob Ross of biology
This guy has him beat as a Bob Ross wannabe --> ua-cam.com/video/uqU9lmFztOU/v-deo.html
It's a neuroscience lecture at Stanford by Patrick House
He's so good at teaching biology, you forget that you're in a class. Just observing correlation, causation. correlation non causal characteristic . Taking you down a logical path, and it's a dead end. I'm glad to live in an age where I stimulate my mind with such a rich lecture while processing grape juice at Welch's.
.......and who's Bob Ross?
@Alejandro Adriel cant find it. link?
Correction, bob ross of neuroendocrinology
The ending is so great and wiseful. Made me tear up a little bit.
You have much progesterone
I can genuinely say every one of these lectures continues to enrich my wonder at the world around me!
the boudries of humans being, normal life, your thoughts and being unique and at somepoint you may think,
should i go isolate and be alone.
enjoying talking of, basic terms like science.
some common knlowledge of a normal educated person, not knowing basic ideas like dna only being part of the a "general" term
of general "Recently!!" "Obsevered" events. the
nothing being able to process things like which came first in cronological order of hormones and neroepeniferion, hypohylseim, but
possible pluassable talk of still being able to alter dna and become "super man" or "cancer Proof" if we want to even if we dont have a way to, scientificly
get proved wrong, to gaurrentte "something" "a product" to the public. that is 100 percent a product of " a + b = ... ".
this is the time line i think science "could " and "does" and "might" lead humans.
1. animails talking/ curing cancers...
2. heads in jars like "tv show future drama", that can talk and live for ever..
3. floating cars.
my question is, if moms are to busy for their kids, and dont want to be bothered by them playing or fighting like i see,
alot of dog moms act, and we learn to lie some where?, where do we really learn behavoir? the answer probabbly goes something like.
we all try to be good people and show empathy. we wish we all had a job and a apartment to think, "im okay" but my point is be at that level for you
to be where you want in life to make the desicsion for what you want in life and "be okay" to make the better descion for yourself.
to be "okay", but can do 1 step and get 1 good thing for it.
That story at the end really spoke to me. Standing there, at the nile, in the middle of a conflict, looking at a tortured dead body in the water. That conflict of emotions of it being justified, but not, and was going to happen anyways, but could have been prevented - it's a lot.
The ending part of the lecture was very personal and moving, too bad the editor cut it off short... :( I only could hope the class gave Professor Robert Sapolsky a round of applause after this lecture (which he deserved for every lectures) for his dedication of the eduation with the purpose of making this world a better place. :)
I❤️🐐
They do that to him all the time.
I didn't think it had been an actual "editor--:". I thought the recorder was set automatically to shut-off at a pre-set time--; or whoever might be sitting next to it, might have had instructions from the Stanford Channel, to hit the off-switch as soon as the official time was reached--.
I clearly agree, though--; that this creates such an unseemly effect for the viewer both as somebody who's trying to absorb the information in the video, and through the viewer's obvious empathy with Dr. Sapolski through how much hypnotic connectiveness he puts into his lectures--.
Thank you for making this highly pertinent observation, which I'm sure most other viewers likely also shared--.
I was also incredibly disappointed when this cut lecture short
@@nickopeters Are there more such lecture series like this? If yes then please nudge me in that direction.
@@tippitytop Aww, I wish I knew, so I could tell you. Best of luck in finding out whatever way you may be able to.
It's fascinating how he finished this lecture. Almost reminds me his famous speech about "the harder something is to do, the more should be you moral imperative to do it no matter what"
That ending was intense. Robert is such a good guy man... Regardless of political bias, he truly just wants to educate people until they're smart enough to be nice to one another, and even though he realizes it's probably impossible, he just can't help himself... A true role model, just for that!
the boudries of humans being, normal life, your thoughts and being unique and at somepoint you may think,
should i go isolate and be alone.
enjoying talking of, basic terms like science.
some common knlowledge of a normal educated person, not knowing basic ideas like dna only being part of the a "general" term
of general "Recently!!" "Obsevered" events. the
nothing being able to process things like which came first in cronological order of hormones and neroepeniferion, hypohylseim, but
possible pluassable talk of still being able to alter dna and become "super man" or "cancer Proof" if we want to even if we dont have a way to, scientificly
get proved wrong, to gaurrentte "something" "a product" to the public. that is 100 percent a product of " a + b = ... ".
this is the time line i think science "could " and "does" and "might" lead humans.
1. animails talking/ curing cancers...
2. heads in jars like "tv show future drama", that can talk and live for ever..
3. floating cars.
my question is, if moms are to busy for their kids, and dont want to be bothered by them playing or fighting like i see,
alot of dog moms act, and we learn to lie some where?, where do we really learn behavoir? the answer probabbly goes something like.
we all try to be good people and show empathy. we wish we all had a job and a apartment to think, "im okay" but my point is be at that level for you
to be where you want in life to make the desicsion for what you want in life and "be okay" to make the better descion for yourself.
to be "okay", but can do 1 step and get 1 good thing for it.
I'm Ugandan and that story at the end took this man from being a king to god, in my eyes, cue the Conway
It's so touching to watch a razor-sharp-minded intellectual to open up emotionally like he does at the end... What a man.
1:33:46 My Great Grandfather, who was a Lieutenant in WW1, did something similar to this about 3 times on the Austria-Hungary/Russian front, only his version was to round up the best singers in his squad and they'd sing songs to the Russians in the evening. At any time they could've opened fire on them and probably killed them, they never did. In one case they also responded in kind with their singing.
I do landscaping and am so grateful to be able to listen to such quality content while I work.
Sapolsky is a national treasure!
Wish I knew Prof. Sapolsky in person. What a brilliant mind!
D Dee you make him sound like he is no longer with us. he is very much alive and well.
D Dee I had the pleasure to meet him 3 months ago. Very humble man. He might be in your town you would never know. Check out his book signing schedule.
@@Turquoise_kryptonite I don't see anything she said that indicates he's no longer alive ?
I listen to the lecture series while hitting golf balls at the driving range every day. My ball striking has improved immensely while playing a rounds of golf since I started.
I used to listen to music.
I have been listening to these lectures while doing my manual labor job. It is helpful to learn and keep up some mental acuity.
I just watch these for fun, they're so enlightening (and entertaining).
A certain Ghork 2019 still entertained ....
1:08:14 Professor Sapolsky is not only teaching behavioral biology, but also the correct use of swearing.
I have been watching all these lectures, better than Netflix . I'm hooked Professor Sapolksy is a legend!!
A legend unto himself. Just ask him, it's funny how a long winded 1960 looking .reject can impress someone. He actually suggests over throwing a country through computers. So when you support extremism to that degree then keep your legend
You just can't go wrong with this guy, type in his name and whatever lecture you get is gonna blow your mind.
Except for the contradictions, errors and occasional hypocrisy. The ideological bias can be pretty annoying too, though I expect that's part of Stanford's culture. But yeah - kind of what you'd expect a male liberal version of Ayn Rand to sound like.
DrCruel I just love the litres of venom oozing out of your every word, a good reminder that there still are Mr.s Know-It-All willing to share their invaluable insight into how wrong contemporary science is. Just go on and bust some magic tricks on UA-cam, apparently people like you thrive on stuff like that. Don't stumble on your ego though. It's quite enormous.
ShatteredEquilibrium I'm sorry you think that errors and contradictions have something to do with science, contemporary or otherwise. You seem to be confusing scientists with academicians.
I certainly mean no ill will towards your choice of god-worship. Just telling it like it is. Although I should warn you - your petulant anger is similar to what one might expect from an Objectivist who hears the name "Nathaniel Branden" brought up in conversation.
+DrCruel
It is possible that neither Stanford nor Sapolsky is ideologically biased to the extent that others with less training and greater bias, would have themselves believe.
Stanford Med has been where I recommend many people with neurologiccal problems and injuries.
It is rather unethical to claim bias merely because one has refused to have exposed oneself to a sufficiently rigourous education and criticism.
Rand was a fiction writer, with some severe psychological problems, somewhat visible in extant interviews, and is not comparable to rigorously scientifically educated individuals, who have been career-long subject to intense criticism.
The comment to which I respond is indicative of common failure of rigor or criticism, psychological biases and heuristics which are severely weeded out in social sciences. This failure is increasingly documented in populations and individuals now unrelievedly stressed by mixtures of overdensity, . Ours is a species that becomes rather violently heirarchical when exceeding the natural evolved social capacities of the organism.
I hope Sapolsky will have elaborated more on the hyaenid social phenomena witnessed over in the Berkeley Hills. Humans are no less subject to analogous strictures on behavior in spite of relatively little research done from objective viewpoints on the primate species. Comparative social psychology has some validity; some specific primate research has exposed roots of the volatility exhibited in the comment.
Sufficiently strong background in psychology, anthropology, and biopsychology will help one understand the problematic nature of the outgrouping intended by the commentor.
+DrCruel
Branden was a therapeutic psychologist of the prescientific era of psychology, who was intimately involved with Ayn Rand, and spent his career under the sway of her personal social-status-tracking fiction and philosophy, if such a word can be accurately applied to her rather limited views of personality.
She was of course biased to an extreme , very limbic and visible through the lens supplied by such as Jonathan Haidt for studying sociological bias.
There appears to be a spectrum of asociality, or even antisociality shared by Rand and her apologists. It is pretty inappropriate to bring up the person in scientific discussion, unless as a clinical subject in abnormal psychology observation. There is no such thing as "objectivist" in scientific literature - this is a philosophical construct developed by some suffering at less empathic distances of the spectrum.
By far the most watched series I have watched. :)
So glad I don't have to take the exam, however, least boring lectures ever. I feel compelled to listen to all of them.
I am enthralled by these lectures. Thank you!!!!
The self reflection at the end of this clip made me really tear up. Robert, you went through some really nasty stuff in your life. Glad that you can at least teach others about all these things. God bless you, sir.
I❤️🐐
He does openly say he is an athiest 🤔😝
The most amazing two hours ever - brilliant!
These lectures are helping me to understand the world around me little by little , and the ending was really amazing and it made be a bit emotional . This lecture series is by far the best lecture series in the internet that you can find .....
Great content! Love these lectures. It is a great way to stay current on the newest scientific advances on a subject.
Thank you so much Robert for posting these lessons. This information is priceless.
Why systems thinking is the right approach.
Systemic phenomena cannot be reduced to their constituent parts.
Theses are emergent behaviors that must be understood before they can be addressed. First there is meaning, next would be relationships, and finally context, (story, actors, and stage). The geometry and dimensions are some variation of emergent properties, repeated at all scales. We can say that nature has an intent that creates the actors. The behavior at one scale is dependent on the scales below it, and creates context. Process starts with intent.
Sapolsky is great! Thanks for recording these lectures, they are amazing!
the boudries of humans being, normal life, your thoughts and being unique and at somepoint you may think,
should i go isolate and be alone.
enjoying talking of, basic terms like science.
some common knlowledge of a normal educated person, not knowing basic ideas like dna only being part of the a "general" term
of general "Recently!!" "Obsevered" events. the
nothing being able to process things like which came first in cronological order of hormones and neroepeniferion, hypohylseim, but
possible pluassable talk of still being able to alter dna and become "super man" or "cancer Proof" if we want to even if we dont have a way to, scientificly
get proved wrong, to gaurrentte "something" "a product" to the public. that is 100 percent a product of " a + b = ... ".
this is the time line i think science "could " and "does" and "might" lead humans.
1. animails talking/ curing cancers...
2. heads in jars like "tv show future drama", that can talk and live for ever..
3. floating cars.
my question is, if moms are to busy for their kids, and dont want to be bothered by them playing or fighting like i see,
alot of dog moms act, and we learn to lie some where?, where do we really learn behavoir? the answer probabbly goes something like.
we all try to be good people and show empathy. we wish we all had a job and a apartment to think, "im okay" but my point is be at that level for you
to be where you want in life to make the desicsion for what you want in life and "be okay" to make the better descion for yourself.
to be "okay", but can do 1 step and get 1 good thing for it.
Interesting topic. Great coverage. Thanks for sharing.
Amazing lectures, is incredible and amazing that these are free and open for anyone to look up! Very interesting topics and great teacher!
This was one of the best lecture
Wow I really enjoyed this whole series! Heals my attention 100% STANDING OVATIONS 👏
best overload i ever had
This is one the most important lectures in the entire course
I agree completely! I wish everyone in the world could watch the second half of this one.
Would love a follow up series to see what he says today
i alawys loved science.. i could watch these all day....
Wonderful Lecturer!
He is totally amazing... lucky are the students who get to sit in his class..
These videos are excellent. I'm learning a lot about my brain and I love it.
Keep making the world a better place!
I never thought about Winkings as subject to (cold/wet) resource deserts and treating ships like their livestock but the parallel is at the top of my mind.
Damn . . . all this time . . . my whole life I've understood my behavior in terms of having an extra Y chromosome. To find out now . . . at this late date . . . leaves me unmoored :-(.
Haven't heard Richard Speck's name in a long time . . . I recognized it but couldn't remember from where . . . until he reminded me. Also, his observation about deserts producing monotheism rings so true once it's been stated. This particular lecture is just so densely loaded with truisms that ring true simply because he states the record, the information. What's so striking from these lectures is just how mechanical/reductionist and so overwhelmingly boring human behavior turns out to be when dissected as he does. Brilliantly.
Another great lecture, although I'd think that the topic of warfare deserves its own special lecture because of its distinctive important in both human biological and cultural evolution and all of the controversy that's surrounded it.
Fantastic! Thank you, from Guyana South America!
Well he does come out at the end of this, that story about him in Uganda.
You're right, we can't help but have our world views influence our interpretation of facts. The best we can do is to be aware of this and try to listen to opposing points of view.
I think that he's doing quite a good job at showing this sort of thing happening.
1:39:44 onwards till the end is the best ending for aggression and yeah...given the fact that violence is complicated...we should all work towards peace
it's alwys the hardest to put my like on a YT video but here I can give easily to this supreme lecture
I love you Professor Sapolsky
Brilliant stuff. Confirms that dynamics of the biology of group consciousness goes beyond biology/psychology. It can be completely understood when one develops the 'singular consciousness' (transcendence), where the structure is recognised as being greater than the sum of its parts. In other words, one has to have self realization (know thyself) before one can observe the interactions that led you to that state.
Ending gave me goosebumps
i think that incident made him to go on studying about human behavior even till this day
This is gold
Brilliant
Good job
Gracias Sapolsky.
1:17:54 that Robert axelrod part is amazing
very interesting topic
Why am I tearing up the entire time though?
That last 15 min ! Wow
48min so far and this is incredibly interesting.
WHY! WHY would you cut it short. My god can you not tell he is not finished. PAY ATTENTION!!
PAY TUITION
"Is this the type of person that likes coke or pepsi?"
The amygdala of dr. pepper enjoyers activates.
The ending of this lecture left me frozen while I was washing the dishes
Fascinating!!!!! I waste so much time on my lunch hour watching this guy.
Watching this on COVID ERA and all these people coughing is freaking me out! LOL
glad youre honest :-)
the end of this lecture made me so sad
+Enid Nunez particurily if you think of how our lawmakers and criminal justice system makes a point of not ever attempting to understand the REASON behind violence.
+ElevenHundred Sounds
Just a short response:
You will have noticed Sapolsky's previous references to males = greater justice orientation, females = greater empathic (mercy) orientation findings. I once presented something on the Stanford Forgiveness Project, which later developed into somethings Sapolsky vaguely referred to in this series.
Your lawmakers and criminal justice system only galicially follows psychologicla findings, and is beset with primate vengefulness, a characteristic of a brain mistakenly perceived by its possessors as "intelligent", when in fact the forebrain is a social organ.
+george mira
absolutely brilliant short response. thank you. would love to see your presentation.
+ElevenHundred Sounds
Glacially following differs from pursuing like Spanish or Polish partisans - I don't type glacially, or with Frontal Lobe modulation!
But Enid's response to the young Sapolsky explanation of his lecture focus on aggression, stimulates mention of some variable human psychosocial/emotional response:
Although familiar with Dr. S. references in most spheres (neuroscience & epigenetics require much catchup, as they are moving fast, and it is six years after these lectures), yet other findings he was unable to address in detail could be added in comment:
Good hypotheses have been made for depression, to which I subscribe; not a Gouldian spandrel, but in Sapolsky's own disciplines having evolutionary validity, sadness and depression have a protective benefit in social species.
It stimulates focus on the event and its relationship to what is understood by the one who experiences the shock and consequent sadness, as well as some social withdrawal and affiliative seeking (this varies in individuals and species). Fred Luskin must have been well-known to Bob Sapolsky there, and the cultural characteristic of prominent release of vengefulness the two researchers experienced is not shared by many traditions.
From Siberia down through hugely contrasting pre-islamic "honor-killing" cultures, to buddhistic and Jainist to the ancient 60,000-year-separated Aboriginal exo-social rituals, across to Native North American cultures, we find such a huge variability in cultural response to violence, that anthropological exploration for possible answers to vengefulness can be of abiding value.
Traditions of long-persisting cultures, and ecological bases for them offer answers unavailable to those bound by their own cultural views and violence.
Traditional humans created superior within-group cohesiveness through social normative pressure. As I mentioned to a psych mentor when studying Siberian peoples, they had no need for modern psychology,
medicine, and other technologies (getting myself totally cut off! ), because they had superior - wiser - social traditions.
The Algonquian people now known as Yurok understood that violence and rage-murder resulted from both the perpetrator's and the victim's failures. Thus the murderer had a social debt to the family of the victim (intragroup murder being essentially a male phenomenon there on the Klamath) .
Olekwo'l (Yurok) tradition taught that both parties failed to resolve differences, and were equally at fault. The gifts of work or supplies to the victim's family was equivalent to their estimation of what the family member/victim would have been. It seems that no defection (game theory term) by the victim's family was socially appropriate. Remember, this small distant fragment separated by half a continent from its relatives, was a tightly-knit community of relatives.
Yet it is instructive to those who would change larger societies of the present. I submit this to you and Enid, should she return, for hope
( both depression - including PTSD, which appears in more socially isolated individuals - and rage when dealt with through 120,000 to 200,000 or more years of wisdom still available, are tractable in our kind).
Another superior social tradition: I really liked to be licked by a free and choosy Wolf, a powerfully meaningful affiliative expression in that wild, emotionally brilliant species!
You are very interesting.
Wish i could like this again
That one girl has been coughing for 10 lectures in a row. Someone study her to find whether she harbors some sort of mutated virus.
The Shitty Activist I know I would like to listen to this to fall asleep but I’m so irritated with the coughing that I can’t. I wonder if she knows how annoying she is??
She probably eats her boogers
I've given some thought to why this coughing girl is a common comment on these videos. A large reason is coughing in a large and quiet audience is common: I don't think it's a single girl doing all of the coughing. Coughing is a contagious behavior (similar to yawning). She might be the first cougher, and then everyone else (100 people in that room) coughs, swallows or clears their throat with her.
Another reason you're all brutally aware of the coughing people is the microphone. It's an omnidirectional microphone. This mic picks up the sound of the entire room. We're more used to professional level of sound in videos: now you hear why unidirectional mics are important for great sound quality in a lecture environment.
coronavirus
COVID Patient Zero!!!
25 min to 33 min about climate/culture/agression connections were very interesting
Watched so many of these videos - I’m eligible to put on a Stanford alumni license plate 😄
The close cropped framing, and constant movement of the speaker make this hard to watch. Great to listen to though.
Wow... what an ending
more contact equals more conflict ... competition for territory an resources
Does anyone have a reference list / reading list for this lecture? I'd really, really love to see it.
There are three books he refers to throughout the series are: Chaos by James Gleick, Behave by Robert Sapolsky, and Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers by Robert Sapolsky. As for the articles he refers to... I haven't been able to find them myself.
I found a pdf googling Sapolsky Handouts.
@@peshawajalal2492 Thanks!
@@peshawajalal2492 awesomE! Thanks!!
Very complicated must repeat
Confounding factor re: cooperating vs non cooperating small business: Tax Structure that favors one group over the other.
I have a confused cortex, frontal, perhaps.
The way I heard this statement about the damaged frontal cortex, the experiment with 1 m&m to 5 m&ms seems like the damaged individual made the right choice. 1 m&m and you get five.
Or five m& m's and you get 1. It still adds to 6.
Thats the first proof I've had that someone actually reads what I write in this forum. Thanks for a brief moment of something more than self- awareness!
Just like in High School I space out on some part of the discussion, and when I come back half of the time is gone. Now I can just rewind. Nothing missed. Just didn't use my time wisely. How do I fix this? Or is it to late for me? Age 52.
If categorization of individuals is detrimental to empathy and social cohesion, then the American trend of using all kinds of suffixes for nationalities of ancestral origin is probably detrimental to widespread social cohesion (and prone to self-segregating cohese communities). Even though I've always thought that just "American" was better, I've underestimated how bad the prefix standard could be, thinking it was just innocuous politically motivated etiquette. Well intended most of the time, but it probably backfires in ways most people underestimate without knowing of this neurological stuff.
Divida et impera ;)
1:10:00 seeing people as individuals prevents fear response
Go sapolsky
Very interesting studies being spoken about here. We seem to be at a point in the course however where completely different interpretations of the data are likely to emerge due to various ideological factors. Sapolsky is careful, but not careful enough to avoid hinting at his particular Weltanschauung. I'd love to know more about his political opinions and in what way they have been influenced by his work in this field.
I'm super curious what male cortex wiring he's talking about at 12:50. Does anyone have more information on this?
Hand raised on Richard Speck, but I'm only a few years younger than Dr. Sapolsky.
Did anybody catch what is the missing piece from the hiatus in 40:31?
The Professor mentions a story where Australian aborigines used pseudo kinship to avoid conflict at water hole s,traditionally .Today ,every Australian aboriginal uses the same system of identification when first meeting another aboriginal ,In every city ,camp and suburb ,it is done .However the two folk establishing a kinship will quite soon ,find a mutual, actual relative.
As someone from the American South, I would interpret the section around 31:00 as Southerners being easily offended and less rational. Sometimes I feel like the only person in a 5 mile radius who would ever watch a video like this and educate myself.
It's basically saying men from the north are weak...
Standing up for themselves really didnt enter their minds, they probably said, 'sorry' and kept walking.
-While the guys from the south, were ready to fight if need be. Thats why their blood pressure and cortisol levels were elevated.
@Ismael barrera Oh Yea? Well I'm pretty sure _you'rrre_ the weak one!! - lol... no need to get sassy, besides, was "Holy_Cannoli" not putting down southerners in his original post? I'm just providing a little pushback against the elitist portrayal of those "uncultured, blue-collar southerners." (I mean, most of them have never even heard of a grande double triple double venti soy latte with skim milk... pfft)
-Anyway, I disagree. The fact that they had lower cortisol levels indicates to me that the fight or flight response wasn't triggered. They kept their head down and kept walking... Submission. They had no intention of standing up for themselves. - and I'm from NY.
▪︎I think a lot of people try to convince themselves that they're "just more nonchalant", or that they're too civilized for that sort of thing... When in reality they're petrified of confrontation and the possibility of having to physically defend themselves or their loved ones.
If you dont possess the mental & physical ability to do harm to someone, then you're not honorable for walking away from an altercation... you're just impotent and lack any other option.
@Ismael barrera and if that fact is correct... I assume those homicides are mostly gang related shootings, which really just demonstrates a lack of respect for human life more than anything else..
For those not from the Uk. The Xmas truce that he mentions was made as a Xmas advert by a company called Sainsburys. Check it out, it is poignant and beautiful.
at 1:16:55 he says "don't forget about that kibbutz (?) study"
what's the study he's referring to?
+Jude Miller
Children with strong familial ties, close interaction before age 6 (the response appears to extend as far as close to age 9 in some cases, suggesting, of course, that developmental stages are somewhat more distributed) is correlated with sexual nonattraction. It has been interpreted as a natural/genetic/epigenetic incest avoidance trait. It occurs in other animals sharing early development. The rule is not set in stone when there is NO chance for outbreeding, though.
The absence of attraction appears in species whose primary sensory social input is more olfactory, leading right into Sapolsky's recognition of neurohormonal information theory.
Over 100 years ago, the phenomenon was proposed by Edvard Westermarck, but the two studies within kibbutzim were quantitative, and discussion seems to have isolated a reduction in sexual attraction, but not repulsion/aversion. In the larger study something like .05% - a bit over one-half of one percent married/reproduced together.
Other studies of early childhood social intimacy seem to support the validity.
As I mentioned, other, nonprimate, species also share the phenomenon. I have not followed primatology (the Rhinencephalon is heavily repurposed and subsumed by other social/cognitive perceptions in primates, although it is clearly connected to conscious/choice response in other animals. There is more to say about Anterior Cingulate and Posterior Cingulate Cortices in cognition than was intimated in this series. Some brains far larger than human have large CCs, and although we cannot measure activity in other animals without inducing inordinate stress, we may expect that structure and near-identical transmitters and hormones may indicate very similar cognitions), but am also interested in incest avoidance and kin recognition occurrence in many species, as humans have severely, genocidally, taken many, many wild species populations down to 5% to 1% of original numbers, fragmenting their habitat so much that isolated subpopulations have become the norm.
I note that in many of these persecuted species, that social interaction is relatively unknown, and many complex social interactions are reappearing in some slightly rebounding populations. Insofar as those studying human psychology are concerned (I regard it as a necessary prereq for understanding other species, as more thoughtful and intimate study has been done on the human social animal), it points to the massive aberrance from, or extinguishing of, evolved behaviors under stress, analogous to the "unwanted children" theory mentioned in earlier lectures.
Wow, I really appreciate you taking the time to write such a detailed response. It gives me much to think about. Thank you.
30:00 around about there speaking about honor and agression, i wonder if a difference in generational socialization in cities vs the great wide out doors has more to do with honor and agression. Slights are taken with a grain of salt as a built-in necessity of city life. So in contrast, if you walk across an entire prairy to mess with me there is no way to take that aggression except personal..... And hence if this is the only way one can take aggression, then maybe this person or culture is via habbit conditioned to take slights in a very personal way.
Abraham, the father of monotheism according to some, was a city dweller in Ur, not a desert nomad. In Canaan he stuck largely to the Terebinth trees at Mamre, very fertile, so he didn’t roam the desert.
I don't know of a single step-parent family where life wasn't a veritable nightmare.
Is there a way to undo stress and abuse in earlier life?
YEA✊🏼
Stanford University
Lecture 20. Agression IV
Professor Robert Sapolsky
35:42 min ... 36:20 min ... "antisocial punishment"
41:10 min ... "terrorism"
59:51 min ... 1:01:00 min ... "it never happened"
😶
Looks like I'm going to to to get into Stanford...
Ending the video with the word and in the middle of a thought. Where is the rest?