Randolph Nesse Interview (5/5) - Richard Dawkins
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- RichardDawkins.net -
This is the uncut interview with Randolph Nesse from the 'The Genius of Charles Darwin' presented by Richard Dawkins. Randolph Nesse is the author of 'Why We Get Sick: The New Science of Darwinian Medicine" ( www.amazon.com/... )
RichardDawkins.net will soon be releasing a collection of all the uncut interviews from The Genius of Charles Darwin, so be sure to check out our store ( richarddawkins.... ) for that title and other exclusive DVDs, t-shirts, and more.
The Genius of Charles Darwin won "Best TV Documentary Series of 2008" at the British Broadcast Awards.
My favorite interview on this channel! So packed with layman-friendly info about health and Randy Nesse is very interesting.
This series was just brilliant.
Thank you for sharing this with us.
Richard & Randolph:
Thank you for an outstanding interview & very practical education on some very basic health issues. I am sharing the links to this interview this with many friends!
This is the kind of interview with positive interaction I'd like to see more of, where 2 intelligent people exchange knowledge and experience. Rather than confrontation and insults, both parties benefit as do we all
Fabulous interview. Thank you so much for sharing!!
Thank you for posting this interview, was very enlightening.
Another great conversation with Richard Dawkins.
Thank you
What an INCREDIBLE talk. I've never been persuaded to read a book this quick. The topic is very interesting.
Wow, such a great conversation, all my doctor friends need to see this.
Thanks for posting this interview - very interesting and thought provoking
What an awesome interview! So much great ideas and thoughts shared here. RDF rocks!
Absolutely fascinating interview
What a great series!
Amazingly insightful interview.
Excellent interview!
That's so great these uncut interviews are posted for us, especially that one is really valuable, thank you, it was truly noteworthy : )
Awesome interview!
The best sequence of videos between two human beings I have had the pleasure of watching & listening to brilliant stuff :)
One of the most profound and interesting videos I have ever seen. I am a sophomore undergraduate studying BCMB for premed and I learned more useful information in this video than all my classes so far!
Great interview.
Why am I learning this stuff now? Why aren't we teaching a simplified version of this in schools? (I'm a big fan of Randolph Nesse.)
Thank you for sharing!
great videos thanks for uploading
I can't remember when I learned so much in so little time. I'm going to be buying more books it seems.
Every doctor / potential doctor needs to watch this
Wonderful stuff!
Every high school student should be required to watch this in science class!
excellent videos.. great stuff.
lol at the skeleton staring at the doctor's neck :D
Great talk i learned alot
Really excellent interview!
Great interview, very interesting.
Agreed
thank you richard
Amazing Interview!! i wish i could meet Randolph Nesse.
Makes so much sence!
sad that this discussion got over
Fantastic interview. I wish Dawkins would focus more on what aspects of science he likes as opposed to attacking the aspects he doesn't like.
Totally awesome.
Great discussion
I couldn't agree more... fascinating
I'm reading that right now and it's quite good. I highly recommend it if you found this interview interesting.
oh I know, i'm rather a master of tangents. all subjects must inevitably generalize when one is isolating any principle to observe.
The sickle cell is sometimes seen as a disadvantage because it causes serious complications in certain people. However, this mutation brought about malaria immunity which is survivally advantageous. As the doctor says 'its a trade off' but a species always get the better deal!
Truly informative and interesting conversation ... he really does seem to like that skeleton though.
Speaking of MJ, I have yet to hear anyone modify the old saying: 'Cut off his nose to spite his race!' (Might this be politically incorrect?)
Fascinating discussion. I had to keep pausing to take notes.
There's thousands of questions left unasked. but that doesn't mean it's a weird conclusion IMO.
They simply can't pack all that information in an hour of conversation. That's what books are for.
Totally with PicklesReallySuck on this! Incredible concepts.
What I mean to say is that long before we were on the brink of extinction, natural selection would again be the main mechanism for future generetions. Whatever genes we've allowed intentionally that is "dangerous" would mutate and not be as dangerous or even all of a sudden a really good trait.
Fascinating
For anyone interested the website Dr. Nesse is referring to is actually evolutionandmedicine(dot) org not evolutionmedicine(org).
thanks!
You can't post your opinion on them being stupid without justifying your opinion. What they say makes absolute sense, and I'd like to hear how you think it doesn't.
Great interview, i think many of the creationists would understand natural selection better if we lived in nature, fascinating it is for sure.
@Kozaack Most of us choose to believe the things that we are most comfortable believing in.
I've personally always had a strong interest in science, yet I choose to live by much more abstract beliefs because it makes my life more beautiful, enjoyable and easier to manage.
If we talk about design metaphorically, then I don't see the problem of talking about the whole body metaphorically as a systems 'machine.'
I hear ya, this is the type of study inwhich "BELIEVERS" will benefit ;) Kinda ironic. But to go on this interview is brillant and has given me a new angle to study evolution as well ill be buying his books.
Even without evidence evolution makes such a perfect sense. I can't really understand, especially that there is lot of evidence, how some people can deny it.
@bacaralo infertility tends to be merely harmful mutation (or injury) erectile dysfunction is often associated with growing older, and well, cancers are again, systems behaving erratically.
They are not schooled in biological nutrition. They are just trying to give a general overview to keep it in the context of the subject.
i think absolutely the same about this video as PicklesReallySuck.
this series was brilliant!
I read "Survival of the Sickest" which included a lot of the same stuff.
Dear Naeux, I will pray for You.
@BlizBob. It has probably heard it all before and thinks "change the bloody subject or I will die of boredom".
Great interview, but somebody should fire the editor.
This is so much more interesting than the garden of eden.
Man, I thought Dawkins lecturing those religious fanatics was entertaining, but this is way better.
I watch it all the time, thank you!
How come there is no living evidence of alot of inbetween species so that we can see a clearer picture of how we evolved?
e.g the species inbetween ape and human, species inbetween fish and amphibian etc.
There should be clear species today that if you lined them up would almost be a poster for the evolution process.
Im interested and im not putting down the theory of evolution.
Please respond.
Thanks
smart people rule!
And to think 99.99% of people out there are watching "Kitten Waking Up" on UA-cam
They have no idea what they are missing
Dang, I was hoping Dawkins would ask him why our species became it's own most effective parasite and whether we know of any other multicellular life that "preys on it's own."
Awesome debate !!! Some things I'd like to discuss about (like "why do we age ?") involving more recent discoveries but these subjects are tricky. To make it short : new studies show that the theory of vital space, according which we die to make room for new generations is wrong and has no evolutionary support in the genome.
sorry - that was in context of one sentence -- the conslusion to that sentence..made sense last night in context... but in any case - great exchange - I'd love to see a lot more of this - instead of all the back and forth between creationists and everyone else - This is so much more interesting...
Skin color differences among people are a result of the spread of the species to different parts of the world. For example, Ancient Africans on the savannah were under harsh sunlight conditions. There were not many shady trees to protect them from sunburns and other sun-related injuries while hunting/gathering. As a result, People whose genes caused their skin to be darker tended to reproduce more often, and pass on those genes. Darker skinned individuals tend to be able to lst longer in sun
exactly
@Ricki145 so what's the "correct" solution to this problem. or IS there such a thing AS a correct solution. it almost seems as if for EVERY action positive or negative there seems to be an equal reaction in the opposite direction :(
so how do we win? is cruelty a solution? and is kindness an enemy? :(
"fat" and "sugar" are too broad terms I think. both are energy dense foods, but also the types of each have bearing on our health. certain types of fat are good for us, while other types are bad. the matrix these nutrients occur in is very important.
conventionally, the reason we crave fats and sugars in junk foods has largely to do with all manner of glutamate & fructose corn syrup additives which compel us, in a manner similar to addiction. food companies are well aware of this property.
That would be the case if the environment changed dramatically over a short period of time, but then again, a diverse gene pool would increase the likelyhood of some of the specimens already having some survivability in the new harsh environment. So trying to have one pure race or similar would not be good for survival anyway. And to have the most diverse gene pool is to not mind who gets kids or not.
@quasim0do I don't get it. What kind of abstract beliefs are you talking about?
I have a love/hate relationship with my genes.
They are a big player in bringing me here, but they only "care" about me spreading them.
I have to admit, i'm stymied for a link to the actual passage, but Dawkins's argument runs along the lines that to imagine a being as complex as "god" (as imagined by religious people) springing up out of nowhere is ridiculous. The only natural process we understand that could bring about such an eventuality is natural selection, ergo to suggest "god" as existing outside of evolution , as an "intelligent designer" is obviously contradictory to St Thomas Aquinas's concept of an uncaused causer.
...and thanks to our scientific understanding of bacterial culture, we can now have every conceivable form and flavor of cheese.
now i suppose the question would be... which cheese?
Everyone didn't die young, just most of em. And the ones who managed to survive into old age continued to affect the choice of natural selection by helping their own offspring survive.
New to this evolution thing. I fund Richard Dawkins a very smart and rational thinker that's easy to listen to. Randy Nesse is no different. The subject fascinates me. I was educated in England at a comprehensive school in the 90s and evolution was never mentioned in science let alone taught🤷♂️ seems strange🤔
@alvisc2002 The problem is; you're going in with the assumption that Evolution in some way cares about what we think is good or bad. It is merely indifferent, mainly based upon reproduction. "De-evolution", as can be seen in movies like Idiocracy (at least I think that's what it was called), is merely another of the myriad forms of human chauvinism.
Gods who give out free cheese would get my worship.
7Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.
8It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones.
Proverbs 3: 9Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase:
Hebrews 12
1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,
Why do we suffer ? Its called "shit happens xD"
Right, some explanations are necessary, i think... Humanism is a doctrine that states that human interests are paramount. Nothing more. It's less of a belief system and more just stating the bleeding obvious. We're humans, so we should worry about looking after humans. No-one is praising Darwin like a god... i'm admiring a fellow man's logical argument... something tfyfe could do with brushing up on, as well as basic reading comprehension.
i agree with idea though not the execution.
Islam does not NOT teach the opression of women, Men do.
the tool can not be blamed for the craftsman's work.
Tim 2:12- 13
do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.
this argument was used for a long time, preventing women teachers.
and even teaching women, or even during the "enlightenment" preventing women researchers and lectures
Beatrix Potter's first work was actually about plants..
@barcalo our gene pool is probably not that diverse that we could find superior inhabitants of altogether new planets. It isn't an argument for why diversity is less superior trait in our species though, since that can't be improved with eugenics.
Evolutionary medicine is the most important research that may solve that problem. Same with baldness. I have to agree sexual selection is weak in human population, and baldness is neutral in other ways than perhaps not selected traits by the female.
Science makes religion seem like a cheap scam. Which it is. Science gives much more fulfilling answers to our questions, and a much richer view of our history.
That skeleton keeps on trying to get Randolph's attention... didn't notice it until 5.45 I think it might not only be a Victorian skeleton but a skeleton of a Victorian woman!
@BlizBob LOL.
I guess they're referring to the skeleton.
@SpidermanInLondon
I agree, I so do-fucking-agree, why aren't we taught this?
didn't quite got the idea of reproduction selected against better health. i think I would have to read that 1957 paper : )
@alvisc2002 This is entirely correct and is a problem we face on many levels. It's called genetic degeneration.
Too bad that some people who are educated about evolution aren't too bright.
Even if our variation won out over the other variations, there should still be evidence of them.
My theory is that we simply haven't discovered the remains of them yet. Early humans lived in groups and were also nomadic. It is a safe assumption that there are tons and tons of undiscovered early-human remains.
I AM NOT TRYING TO BE RUDE OR RACIST! I am genuinely interested in evolution.
Did white people come from albino people?
Also how are different species formed? If we all evolved from 1 life source then how come for example humans can breed amonst eachother but not with apes? How come amphibians can breed amongst theselves but not with fish? etc etc you get my point.
thanks.