Hair color is inherited, but the information that is stored in brains isn't. Each individual (human or animal) has to learn the basics of life from the birth on again. But the ability to learn seems to be already there.
Ineteresting author, based on his book titles - The Metaphysics of Biology, The Disorder of Things. I look at evolutionary psychology as being a pseudo-scientific extension of cognitive science. Why pseudo? because nothing they say can be proven/disproven.
Robert Lawrence Kuhn seemed rather muted or just very tired in this interview. Just read his Wikipedia page and discovered that he is an apologist for china, very interesting. Trying to layer that onto his filter bubble.
I’m disappointed by his sycophancy to the Chinese leadership as well, but honestly it doesn’t seem to affect his work on this show. I think he does a decent job.
→ Simon I just don’t know what to make of it. I guess he see things differently than others. I prefer to understand a bit of the general outlook of a person to be able to gauge / filter his filter. As you say, probably irrelevant in this context but …
Approach evolutions it is senseless because unpredictable consciousness picture life is nil evidence . However experiences approach to possible true evidence. Guys keep out experiences is wortheless and rambling experiement.
In the end it is not clear what his proposal is. He is simply talking about what it is not. Secondly, the issue is that consciousness is not a thing and a specific phenomenon. There are may phenomenon we call conscious and therefore the explanation of each distinct phenomenon will be different. It is appaling that the discussion seems to assume only humans are conscious. There is a varying degree of consciousness in living things. Of course humans have higher level of consciousness - recursive self consciousness, self refection, abstract thinking and planning are unique human traits. And it is incorrect to attribute them to genes and biological evolution in the first place. It is true that humans evolved enough to the point whereby cultural evolution ( which does not require generations by generation slow evolution like biological evolution) could take hold. And since then, as far as humans are considered, the cultural evolution has exponentially taken off and has completely change and subsumed how humans and human societies evolve.
Julian Jaynes' brilliant book, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind", sketches an *extremely interesting story* in which those aspects of human mentality lacking in all other organisms have arisen almost entirely as a consequence of cultural evolution (genes playing an extremely minor role *after* the emergence of culture).
@@Brunoburningbright Only a metaphysician could make up a sentence like that. How smug and dismissive. “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts”. - Richard Feynman Wolfgang lacks epistemic humility.
Idea: clone 2 humans from DNA ~10,000 and 20,000 years ago and see how they learn, adapt and respond to current stimuli to get an idea on mental-emotional evolution.
Different human populations became separated from each other in that time frame, for example it’s possible native Americans colonised the Americas around 20,000 years ago so if there could be significant evolutionary change in that time we’d expect those changes to be divergent on different continents. We don’t see that. There are some genetic changes, but they are far too minor to cause significant behavioural changes. We’d probably have to go back 50,000 years or 100,000 years, or even more.
Коментар на підтримку відео та каналу.
❤❤❤❤❤
Hair color is inherited, but the information that is stored in brains isn't. Each individual (human or animal) has to learn the basics of life from the birth on again. But the ability to learn seems to be already there.
Ineteresting author, based on his book titles - The Metaphysics of Biology, The Disorder of Things. I look at evolutionary psychology as being a pseudo-scientific extension of cognitive science. Why pseudo? because nothing they say can be proven/disproven.
How then do they predict accurately human behavior?
Robert Lawrence Kuhn seemed rather muted or just very tired in this interview. Just read his Wikipedia page and discovered that he is an apologist for china, very interesting. Trying to layer that onto his filter bubble.
I’m disappointed by his sycophancy to the Chinese leadership as well, but honestly it doesn’t seem to affect his work on this show. I think he does a decent job.
→ Simon
I just don’t know what to make of it. I guess he see things differently than others. I prefer to understand a bit of the general outlook of a person to be able to gauge / filter his filter. As you say, probably irrelevant in this context but …
@ To be fair when he started with that it did seem like China was on a path towards more openness, but Xi has put a stop to that.
Approach evolutions it is senseless because unpredictable consciousness picture life is nil evidence . However experiences approach to possible true evidence. Guys keep out experiences is wortheless and rambling experiement.
Maybe all living things are evolving to live in a vacuum of space ?
Why would they? What environmental pressure would cause that when all life we know of lives on one huge biosphere?
In the end it is not clear what his proposal is. He is simply talking about what it is not.
Secondly, the issue is that consciousness is not a thing and a specific phenomenon. There are may phenomenon we call conscious and therefore the explanation of each distinct phenomenon will be different. It is appaling that the discussion seems to assume only humans are conscious. There is a varying degree of consciousness in living things. Of course humans have higher level of consciousness - recursive self consciousness, self refection, abstract thinking and planning are unique human traits. And it is incorrect to attribute them to genes and biological evolution in the first place. It is true that humans evolved enough to the point whereby cultural evolution ( which does not require generations by generation slow evolution like biological evolution) could take hold. And since then, as far as humans are considered, the cultural evolution has exponentially taken off and has completely change and subsumed how humans and human societies evolve.
Science will improve when it accepts theres more than the physical
Thats what Tesla said.
John dupre has very well given a blue print for understanding evolution of cognition and consciousness. Not many philosophers would adopt such model.
Julian Jaynes' brilliant book,
"The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind",
sketches an *extremely interesting story*
in which those aspects of human mentality lacking in all other organisms
have arisen almost entirely as a consequence of cultural evolution
(genes playing an extremely minor role *after* the emergence of culture).
Smug and incurious. Can't listen to anti-Science.
I'm anti bad science. As Wolfgang Pauli complained in another context:"It's not even wrong."
@@Brunoburningbright Only a metaphysician could make up a sentence like that. How smug and dismissive.
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts”. - Richard Feynman
Wolfgang lacks epistemic humility.
@@nuqwestrPauli was one of the finest physicists of the last century.
@@simonhibbs887 my bad mistake on Pauli. I'll keep this post for a few hours then delete my comment. My humble apology.
@ It’s all good. Cheers.
Idea: clone 2 humans from DNA ~10,000 and 20,000 years ago and see how they learn, adapt and respond to current stimuli to get an idea on mental-emotional evolution.
Different human populations became separated from each other in that time frame, for example it’s possible native Americans colonised the Americas around 20,000 years ago so if there could be significant evolutionary change in that time we’d expect those changes to be divergent on different continents.
We don’t see that. There are some genetic changes, but they are far too minor to cause significant behavioural changes. We’d probably have to go back 50,000 years or 100,000 years, or even more.